Primary enrollment rates in Indonesiaare near 100 percent for all students, but students frompoor and vulnerable households have a difficult timecompleting higher levels of education. Poor households mostoften have heads of households with primary school educationor lower while rates of illiteracy among households belowthe poverty line are approximately double that of non poorhouseholds. For the most recent cohort (with completedelementary and secondary education) less than 50 percent ofthose from poor households who enrolled in first grade madeit to junior secondary and less than 20 percent made it tosenior secondary (compared to 90 and over 75 percent,respectively, of those from the richest 20 percent ofhouseholds who enrolled in first grade). Poor householdsalso state that if higher education has to be rationed intheir household because it is too expensive, it is moreoften male children who will be sent and female childrenkept back. The Bantuan Siswa Miskin (BSM) program, whichprovides cash transfers for school attendance, could providethe right solution for poor households facing rising costsand increased risk of low education. The BSM programprovides transfers from central education agencies directlyto students or schools in which students sit. The BSMprogram is actually 10 independently-run initiatives thattogether cover all levels of education (including vocationaleducation) at secular and religious public schools. Unlikeother household-based transfers, the BSM initiatives haveneither a central coordinating unit nor a unified budget.Within each institution, separate units independently manageand execute initiatives for students from each level ofschooling and for vocational education. The Kemenag-run BSMinitiatives for university scholars are further fragmentedby religious affiliation (of partner universities). Intotal, there are 10 BSM initiatives, each with its ownmanual, fund flow structure, and implementing procedures.There is little coordination between initiatives, even thoselocated in the same institution. This note assesses theoperation and implementation of the BSM program to determinehow well poor households are served. It providesquantitative analysis of the coverage, incidence, andaverage benefit levels of BSM to determine both theprogressivity of the program's targeting and theadequacy of benefit levels. Qualitative information onprogram delivery and program operations will also shed lighton areas for reform. A review of the program's designand operating guidelines will offer enhancements to theprogram's effectiveness and relevance.
PDF
download
878987797
028-85220240
