******************************************************
Following is a question by the Hon Cheung Kwok-che and a written reply by the Secretary for Education, Mr Eddie Ng Hak-kim, in the Legislative Council today (December 4):
Question:
The authorities have been subsidising schools in implementing the School-based After-school Learning and Support Programme (the Programme) since the 2005-2006 school year to provide suitable after-school activities for primary and secondary students receiving the Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (students on CSSA) or full grant under the Student Financial Assistance Schemes (full-grant students). Schools also have the discretion to offer no more than 10% of the places of each activity to other students in need (discretion-based students). Since the 2006-2007 school year, the authorities have revised the funding mode by apportioning the funding of the Programme into School-based Grant and Community-based Projects. Schools offering the Programme will be provided with the School-based Grant while non-governmental organisations (NGOs) organising district activities under the Programme may apply for the Community-based Projects grant. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the respective numbers of primary and secondary students benefiting from the School-based Grant and Community-based Projects (including students on CSSA, full-grant students, discretion-based students and non-eligible students) and the respective numbers of schools and NGOs subsidised in each school year since the 2006-2007 school year (set out by school year in tables of the same format as Annex 1);
(b) in respect of the School-based Grant in various District Council (DC) districts in each of the past three school years, of the following
(a) the total amount of grants,
(b) the number of schools granted the School-based Grant,
(c) the number of paid activities,
(d) the number of non-paid activities,
(e) the number of students on CSSA who benefited from the School-based Grant,
(f) the number of full-grant students who benefited from the School-based Grant,
(g) the number of discretion-based students who benefited from the School-based Grant,
(h) the number of non-eligible students who benefited from the School-based Grant,
(i) the total number of students involved,
(j) the number of students on CSSA in the district,
(k) the number of full-grant students in the district,
(l) the total number of students in the district,
(m) the number of eligible students who did not benefit from the School-based Grant in the district, and
(n) the average amount of School-based Grant expended on each student (set out by school year in tables of the same format as Annex 2);
(c) of the respective numbers of primary and secondary schools retaining the unspent amounts under the School-based Grant and the total amounts retained, as well as the respective numbers of primary and secondary schools returning the unspent amounts to the authorities and the total amounts returned, in each school year since the 2006-2007 school year, and set out the relevant figures in Annex 3;
(d) whether the authorities have rejected any application for the School-based Grant and the Community-based Projects grant since the 2006-2007 school year; if they have, of the number of the applications rejected in each school year and the general reasons for refusal, and set out the relevant figures in Annex 4;
(e) of the total amounts of Community-based Projects grants allocated to NGOs in various DC districts, the number of students joining the activities organised (including the numbers of eligible and non-eligible students), the numbers of NGOs required to return the unspent amount of the approved grants to the authorities and the unspent amounts clawed back by the authorities in each of the past three school years (set out by school year in tables of the same format as Annex 5);
(f) whether the authorities have conducted any review and consultation on the School-based Grant and the Community-based Projects; if they have, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
(g) as some organisations have proposed that the Education Bureau should adopt a funding mode of "money-follows-the-user" which enables eligible students to choose and participate in the after-school activities they need by using vouchers, whether the Government will consider implementing such a mode of funding; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
Reply:
President,
Public sector schools are provided with various types of subsidies (e.g., the block grant) and other resources annually. Schools may deploy flexibly the subsidies and resources in accordance with the underlying principles of school-based management to support students' learning and provide after-school activities for students to facilitate their whole-person development. Besides, schools may apply for participation in the School-based After-school Learning and Support Programmes (the Programme). The Programme has been apportioned into two components, viz. the school-based grant (SBG) and the community-based project grant (CBG). The SBG is complementary in nature and the amount of funding for individual schools is based on the number of eligible needy students. The purpose of the SBG is to provide after-school activities to meet different needs of students concerned. Under the CBG, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) may apply for funding to provide after-school activities for needy students. Apart from participating in after-school activities under the school-based programmes and community-based projects, needy students may also join after-school activities organised by other Bureaux/Departments and charitable trust funds.
In formulating the implementation details of the Programme, we have considered and balanced the views of different stakeholders bearing in mind that labeling effect on participating students should be avoided and teachers' additional workload be alleviated. When recruiting students for activities under the SBG, apart from eligible students (including students in receipt of Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA) and full grant under the Student Financial Assistance Scheme (SFAS)), schools are given the discretion to offer no more than 10% of the places reserved for the eligible students to needy students other than those in receipt of CSSA or full grant under the SFAS. To avoid labeling effect on students, schools normally do not identify participating students by the categories of CSSA, SFAS, discretionary quota or other students participating at their own expense (i.e. the non-eligible students mentioned in question (a)). As such, we cannot provide the details of the participating students in this regard.
Schools receiving the SBG, similar to other initiatives being implemented, have to comply with the School Development and Accountability Framework. Schools in receipt of the funding have to include the relevant school-based implementation plan for supporting eligible students under the Programme in their school development plan. Schools are also required to conduct an annual evaluation with findings in their school report for uploading on to schools' homepage. Both school-based plan and evaluation report have to be endorsed by the School Management Committee/Incorporated Management Committee. We therefore do not require schools to provide other information, such as the number of activities with and without charges, average amount of grant for each participating student, etc. As such, we cannot provide some of the information raised in question (b).
The replies to questions of Hon Cheng Kwok-che are as follows:
(a) The number of participating students and number of schools as well as NGOs receiving the SBG and CBG respectively since the 2006/07 school year are at Annex 6.
(b) The funding of the SBG by district over the past three school years (from 2010/11 to 2012/13) is at Annex 7.
(c) Schools may retain the unspent amount of the SBG subject to its not exceeding the total provision of the SBG for the current year with excessive amount to be clawed back by the Education Bureau. We have not input the information on the unspent amount of the SBG retained by schools and clawed back by the Education Bureau for the school years before 2010/11 in our database. As such, relevant information is not available. The situation of the 2010/11 and 2011/12 school years is at Annex 8 for reference.
(d) Public-sector schools (including special schools) and schools under the Direct Subsidy Scheme (DSS) are eligible to apply for the SBG. The Education Bureau will not refuse any application from eligible schools. On the other hand, we will ask the non-participating schools (note) for reasons of not applying for the SBG. The main reason is that these schools have had other sources of funding to organise after-school activities for needy students. As regards the CBG, the number of projects not approved with funding from the 2006/07 to 2012/13 school years is at Annex 9. The main reasons for not approving the projects with funding include withdrawal of applications by NGOs, applicant NGOs not eligible for the Programme, proposed projects failing to meet the objectives of the Programme and duplicate applications (i.e., overlapping with another application in terms of the proposed activities and eligible students), etc.
(e) The funding of the CBG is approved according to the applications submitted by the NGOs. In the course of implementing the community-based projects in the respective year, the Education Bureau would allow the NGOs to revise the arrangements of the projects according to the progress reports and/or separate applications for adjustment from NGOs so as to facilitate better utilisation of the approved funding. Under the CBG, the reason for the unspent amount is mainly due to the difference in the estimated number of participating students and expenses, etc. in the proposal and the actual amounts. The total amount of CBG approved, the NGOs involved, number of participating students and unspent amount of the grant by district in the past three school years are shown at Annex 10.
(f) Since the implementation of the Programme in the 2005/06 school year, we have annually collected feedback from stakeholders and conducted supervisory visits to examine the implementation of the Programme with a view to refining its arrangements. In the 2006/07 school year, after taking stakeholders' views into consideration, we have revised the implementation mode of the Programme by having two components, viz. the SBG and CBG, with a view to achieving synergy through collaboration between schools and NGOs in supporting needy students. Starting from the 2010/11 school year, the annual provision was increased from $75 million to $175 million to provide needy students with more opportunities to participate in after-school activities. In the 2011/12 school year, the provision has been further increased to about $208 million upon relaxation of the income threshold under the means test mechanism of the SFAS which in turn increases the number of eligible needy students.
(g) As regards the proposed funding mode of "money-follows-the-user", for example providing eligible students with coupons to participate in after-school activities, stakeholders have diverse views. We hold the view that provision of funding to schools and NGOs for organising the activities will better ensure the usage of the funding for supporting students' participation in after-school activities when compared with provision of direct subsidy to individual students. Moreover, after-school activities cover a wide spectrum and the expenses to be required for each grade or individual students vary. The mode of providing funding to schools and NGOs would achieve better synergy and be more targeted and effective for sustaining the development of the activities.
Note: About 90% of schools have participated in the SBG in each school year from 2006/07 to 2012/13. In the 2012/13 school year, 116 schools (including 40 DSS and special schools) did not participate in the SBG.
Ends/Wednesday, December 4, 2013
Issued at HKT 18:52
NNNN