Nyikyaa Miriam Nguavese1 Rufus Ishola Akintoye2
The support given to education by the Nigerian governments (both past and present) seems relatively low. All the resources required for education production process seem to be in short supply. Lecture halls, laboratories, students’ hostels, library space, books and journals and office spaces are all seriously inadequate. The study evaluated the impact of Government budgeting, execution and implementation on Nigerian tertiary education. This study measured the impact of budget figure, cash backing and project implementation on development in tertiary institutions in North central zone, Nigeria. The study adopted an ex-post facto and descriptive research designs. The population of the study comprised Federal Universities, Polytechnics and Colleges of Education in the North Central region of Nigeria. Purposive/judgmental sample technique was used to select three higher institutions and the Federal ministries of education and finance. 65copies of self-design questionnaire were retrieved out of 84 distributed. The secondary data were Budget Figure, project implementation, naira value of new classroom and laboratories, salaries of lecturers, cash backing and research grant obtained from the federal ministry of education between the periods of 2010 to 2014.The findings revealed that Budget figure, cash backing and project implementation have a positive significant impact on value of new classrooms (P=0.000<0.05, P=0.001<0.05, P=0.036<0.05) and an R2 of 0.99. The findings also revealed that Budget figure, cash backing and project implementation have a positive significant impact on value of laboratory equipment (P=0.013<0.05, P=0.002<0.05, P=0.015<0.05) and an R2 of 0.098. Also Budget figure, cash backing and project implementation have a positive significant impact on Research Grant (P=0.020<0.05, P=0.002<0.002<0.05, P=0.016<0.05) and an R2 of 0.98. It also revealed that Budget figure, cash backing and project implementation have a positive significant impact on the salaries of lecturers on higher degree R2 (P=-.018<0.05, P=0.013<0.05, P=0.001<0.05) and an R2 of 0.98. The study concluded that there is a significant positive impact of government budgeting, formulation and expenditure on the development of tertiary schools in the north central zone of Nigeria. The key recommendation among others is that government must set up a budget monitoring group comprising of all stakeholders to oversee the formulation and expenditure of educational budgetary funds.
Keywords: Budget, cash backing, tertiary schools, project implementation, laboratory equipment, research grants.
Education is widely accepted as a major instrument for promoting socio-economic, political and cultural development. Education is a life-long process that has interpretation in purpose, type and level. It is a means of socializing people into the community, for upholding customs and traditions as well as for the modification or changing of same in conformity with existing ideologies, ideological expansion or reformation (Gore, 2010). Tertiary education aims at generating national development. It should not only be to seek to develop the intellectual capacities of individuals to understand and appreciate their environment, but should endeavour to equip recipients with requisite physical and intellectual skills fit for life in the society.
The underlying rationale for public funding of education is to equip people with the requite knowledge, skills and capacity to enhance the quality of life, argument productivity and capacity to gain knowledge of new techniques for production, so as to be able to participate evocatively in the development process. Ukeje (2002) explains that public sector funding of education in Nigeria is anchored on the notion that for society to continue in perpetuity, the new generation must be given the appropriate access to knowledge that previous generation have accumulated. Education sector supposed to be given a high priority in budgetary allocations because it produces the skilled manpower for other sectors of the economy. The role of education as an instrument for promoting the socio-economic, political and cultural development of any nation can never be over-emphasized.
Education, as a key component of human capital formation is recognized as very important in increasing the productive capacity of people. Education, especially at the higher level, contributes directly to economic growth by making individual workers more productive and leading to the creation of knowledge, ideas, and technological innovation. An investment in education is beneficial to the society, both at micro and macro levels and affects the system both directly and indirectly. Education is basic to development and is also regarded as an instrument through which the society can be transformed.
As a salient factor in transition programme, education equips human resources with the needed knowledge, skills and competencies, which would make them functional, and contribute to the all-round development of the nation. It does not only help to supply the essential human capital which is a necessary condition for sustainable economic growth but it is also a key to poverty reduction and a major vehicle for promoting equity, fairness and social justice (Okeke, 2007). The budget is increasingly recognized as the key tool for economic management (Scott, 2000). It is nevertheless also recognized that a country can have a sound budget and financial system and still fail to achieve its intended targets. This suggests that the rules of the game by which the budget is formulated and implemented are equally important and that they do influence outcomes. This recognition has led to a series of budget reform systems that have a broader focus on public expenditure management.
II Statement of the Problem
The support given to education by the Nigerian governments (both past and present) seems relatively low. Even many years after independence, it is stunning to know that the adult illiteracy rate is still at seventy four percent (74%) and the gross enrollment rate is as low as 38% (William, 2010). It is worrisome to note that Nigerian tertiary institutions are fast decaying. All the resources required for education production process seem to be in short supply. Lecture halls, laboratories, students’ hostels, library space, books and journals and office spaces are all seriously inadequate. This study was designed to measure the impact of budget formulation and execution in figure, cash backing and project implementation and the development in federal tertiary institutions.
III Objectives of the study
The main objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of Government budgeting, execution and implementation on Nigerian tertiary education. The specific objectives are to:
1. examine the effects of budget figure, cash backing and project implementation on Naira value of new classroom;
2. assess the effect of budget figure, cash backing and project implementation on Naira value of laboratory equipment;
3. determine the effects of budget figure, cash backing and project implementation on research grant and
4. evaluate the effects of budget figure, cash backing and project implementation on salaries of lecturers supported by the government on Higher Degrees.
IV Research Questions
The following are the research questions which this study provided answer to:
i. To what extent have budget figure, cash backing and project implementation affected the Naira value of New Classroom?
ii. What are the effects of budget figure, cash backing and project implementation on Naira Value on Laboratory Equipment?
iii. What relationship exists between budget figure, cash backing and project implementation on Research grants?
iv. What are the effects of budget figure, cash backing and project implementation on salaries of Lecturers supported by the government on Higher Degrees?
V literature Review
Education and Economic Growth
According to Ejiogu, Ihugba and Nwosu (2013), education has been regarded as one of the leading determinants of economic growth since the times of prominent classical and neoclassical economist such as Adam Smith, Romer, Lucas and Solow. They emphasized the contribution of education in developing their economic growth theories and models. The main theoretical approaches of modeling the linkages between education and economic performance are the neoclassical growth models of Solow (1957) and the model of Romer (1990). Investment in education leads to the formation of human capital, comparable to physical capital and social capital, and that makes a significant contribution to economic growth Obadan (2010). Education as an investment secures returns in the form of skilled manpower that geared to the needs of development, both for accelerating economic development and for improving the quality of the society Yogish ( 2006).
Apart from the theoretical aspects, numerous empirical studies have focused on the issue of education and economic development. According to Odior (2011), several of the issues in the financing of education in Nigeria are embedded in the virtually endemic problems of fiscal federalism in particular, the so-called vertical and horizontal fiscal imbalances. The first of these deals with the balance between financial responsibilities and financial resources at each level of government: federal (or central), state and local. The second deals with equity across the sub units of each specific level of government such as state or local governments Hinchliffe (2001). Compared to the older political federations such as the United States, Australia and Canada, as well as younger ones such as Brazil and India, in Nigeria the lower tiers of government are funded more through revenue sharing arrangements than through locally collected taxes (Hinchliffe, 1995).
A budget is a financial statement prepared and approved by authorities for a period of time for achieving the stated objectives (Bammeke, 2008 cited in Ndayizeye 2014). Every government or organization requires a budget to carry on its business. Heiling and James (2012) contend that, government budget is a powerful tool which management utilizes to allocate scarce resources towards achievement of objectives planned. Aiyepeku (2009) opined that, government budget is an instrument by which allocation is done financially to the different department. Any successful project for any country, organization, education, hospitals or a group of people is as a result of a well- planned budget. A budget provide a focus for an organization, help in coordinating activities in the organization, it also facilitates control and good planning yield good results.
According to Abagun and Temitope (2012), budget is a document that can be prepared yearly, quarterly, monthly and weekly. It can even be daily or other periods according to the organization set goals. Bammeke (2008) argued that, it is a financial statement prepared and approved by authorities for a period of time for the purpose of achieving stated objectives and also government uses budget to plan, control and evaluate the performance of a government unit for a period.
According to Norton & Elson (2002) requirements for understanding budget process done by the government includes: the use of the budget process for the understanding of accompanying processes of policy and planning, the process of allocation of resources to different institutions and purposes is essentially a political rather than purely technocratic one, the problem of budgeting allocation cannot be abstracted from macroeconomic and revenue issues and efficiency or effectiveness in the use of funds, budgeting on its own is a political tool for determining sectoral allocation between the various ministries, departments and agencies (MDAS). Holistic understanding of public expenditure systems, institutional cultures are important in order to formulate strategies for change and improvement and lastly it should never be automatically assumed that allocations translate accurately into spending. In the budgeting process, it is given that what money actually gets, which spent the money, on what items and for what purpose is often determined during the process of budget execution and budget evaluation.
Through the budgets, a business wants to know clearly as to what it purposes to do during an accounting period or a part thereof. The technique of budgeting is an important part of management accounting. However, the greatest aid to good management that has ever been devised is the use of budget formulation, where organisations planned and control their budget. It helps managers to cope with the problem of inflation (Yang, 2010; Mc Wolf, 2007).
Budget is formulated to ensure the achievement of organisation’s objectives, to compel planning, to communicate ideas and plans, to coordinate activities (CIMA, 2005). The basic role of the budgets is planning and control, these two can be called dual purposes. Henceforth, budget process can be divided into budgeting planning and budgetary control.
According to Oseni (2012), the passage of the final budget, however it is arrived at, is not the end of the budget process, as there remains the implementation and execution of that budget, which may or may not go as planned. Discrepancies between the approved budget and the executed budget can come in the form of leakages. The discrepancies can also occur because of a lack of capacity to execute, or because of a mid–fiscal year change in priorities. Such shifts, and a continued climate of fiscal uncertainty, can present problems for ministries and politicians and can lead to difficult work circumstances for public agencies and officials and to failure to achieve policy objectives.
So, where do countries fall short in fully executing the budget that was approved? To answer this question, we must look at what should constitute proper budget implementation and where the lapses can occur. Omole (2012) opined that, budget execution is generally comprised of five tasks: assignment of expenditure authority to the appropriate agencies and units, adjustment of work plans to fit the new budget allocations and objectives, scheduling of procurement, monitoring of the new work plan implementation and performance, and monitoring the disbursement of funds.
If these steps are not carefully followed, budget execution can fall short of allocated budgets, and when the failure to fully execute does not occur proportionally across sectors, resource allocation can be significantly affected by execution problems. Akpotu , (2008) is of the opinion that, multiple reasons exist for differences between the budget passed and the one executed, including misjudged allocations, readjustments in budget allocation, revenue shortfalls that lead to the prohibition of the release of approved funds, and the use of funds for other, contingent uses. There are numerous examples of breakdowns in the tight link between approved budgets and executed budgets in developing countries. Even a well-planned budget that is approved by the legislative branch of a country is not necessarily guaranteed proper execution (World Bank, 1998).
According to Geri (2002), Government spending is an important component in influencing the growth of any country’s economy. It is obvious that government expenditure must be handled systematically and wisely in order to stimulate the effectiveness of the expenditures, especially in the sub-Saharan African where many countries are operating on deficit budget. Responsibility accountability in utilizing well government expenditure will definitely improve the basic needs of any country’s citizens; it can create many problems in the country at the end.
The Keynesian and the Wagnerian approaches represent two alternative points of view towards the causality between government expenditure and aggregate income. The former approach, views public spending as a behavioral variable, since it is considered as an exogenous policy instrument for aggregate demand management. Wagner’s law is divided into two versions which the first one is emergence of industrialised societies from traditional agricultural societies. The basis of this law rests on the industrial revolution and its ensuing demographic changes. As society moves towards modernization with its attendant urbanization, a steadily greater quantity and diversity of public goods are provided by government. Consequently, the need for government to manage urban planning for infrastructure development also increases steadily (Jones and Wildavsky 2010).
The second version of Wagner’s law draws heavily on the nature of publicly produced goods and services like education, medical care and infrastructure. Hence this law holds that these goods and services are generally income elastic. Thus the demand for these goods and services will rise faster than National Income. As the nation’s income increases, society desires more resources to be used in the provision of public goods relative to private goods. Bammeke (2008) concluded that most public goods can be considered as luxuries and total government expenditure will be income elastic, also, economic development is deemed to breed market failure Ebong (2007). Hence the budget is employed as a tool of resource allocation in order to meet the needs of the citizenry. Resources are therefore allocated to the educational sector in order to meet the demands for the sector and to consequently provide more efficient services.
Resource Wastage in the Nigerian Public School System
Various studies have established that even with shortages in the provision of educational resources, the education system in Nigeria records enormous resource wastage, especially in the areas of human resources and technical science education equipment. Most of these wastages occur as a result of over-utilization while others can be attributed to under-utilization.
Asuka and Paulley (2008) examined the teaching of vocational, prevocational, introductory technology, science, and technical subjects in the 6-3-3-4 system of education in Nigeria’s Cross River State. Their study focused on the availability of workshop equipment and manpower. Fifty three teachers were randomly sampled as respondents to a twenty-item questionnaire. The results of their data analysis revealed a minimum teacher-pupil ratio of 1:262 and a maximum of 1:772 (in cases where every student in the school was offered science and technology subjects). The study also showed that in 33.3% of the cases, workshop equipment was either unavailable or grossly inadequate, while 2.56% had equipment that was not installed. The study identified the causes of these inadequacies as poor funding; manpower shortage and wastage from over-utilization; and facility wastage from over-utilization due to resource inadequacies. They concluded that poor workshop equipment and the inadequacy of allied facilities constitute major constraints in the teaching of science and technology based-subjects in Nigerian schools.
VI Identification of Variables and Indicators
Dependent variable – Development in the tertiary institutions
Independent variable – Budget Formulation and budget implementation
Indicators of Tertiary Education Enhancement
University Education Enhancement
Polytechnic Education Enhancement
Indicators of Budget Formulation and Budget Implementation
VII Research Hypotheses
The following hypotheses formulated in their null form were empirically tested:
Ho1: There is no significant impact of budget figure, cash backing and project implementation on the Naira value of new classrooms in Nigerian Tertiary institutions.
Ho2: Budget figure, cash backing and project implementation have no significant relationship with naira value of laboratory equipment in Nigerian Tertiary institutions.
Ho3: There is no significant impact of budget figure, cash backing and project implementation on research grant in Nigerian Tertiary institutions.
Ho4: Budget figure, cash backing and project implementation have no significant relationship with salaries of lecturers on Higher Degrees in Nigerian Tertiary institutions.
VIII Research Method and Data Collection
The study made use of both primary and secondary data. The secondary data were collected from the budget monitoring unit of the federal ministry of education and the ministry of finance which have the details of the allocation from the federal government and the disbursement to tertiary institutions. The primary data was collected with the aid of the questionnaire. The questionnaire is of the modified likert scale form and divided into three sections. Section A was designed to elicit information on the demographic characteristics of respondents. Section B was designed to test the impact of budget formulation in university and polytechnic education while Section C was designed to test the impact of budget execution in university and polytechnic education.
For the purpose of this study, the sample frame consists of Federal University, Lafia; Federal Polytechnic Nasarawa; and University of Agriculture Makurdi. The sample frame was chosen using convenience as a criterion because of insecurity in other states of the North Central. Chosen purposively, the Internal control unit, Physical Planning Unit and the Budget unit of the Bursary departments of each of these institutions were used for gathering data because they are involved at one stage or the other in receiving allocation, approving expenditure and disbursing funds where needed. They also monitor, assess and ascertain the execution of the project. Also the Budget unit of the federal ministry of education and Federal Ministry of Finance were sampled because they are in charge of collecting the allocation from the federal government and the subsequent disbursement to various tertiary institutions. Hence, a total of 84 (Eighty four) respondents formed the sample size for the study.
Thus a total sample of eighty four respondents made up of the staff of internal control, physical planning and budget unit of the three tertiary institutions and the staff in the Budget unit of each of the Federal ministry of education and Federal ministry of finance was used for the purpose of this study.
IX Data Analysis
The statistical tools used are multiple regressions and linear regression. Linear regression analysis was used to determine the effect of each of Budget formulation and Budget execution on tertiary education. The multiple regression analysis was used to determine the extent to which each of independent variables contributes to the dependent variable. R2was then employed to know the degree to which the independent variables combined explains the effect on tertiary education. The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) was used to analyse the retrieved questionnaires.
1 Hypothesis Testing and Analysis of Research Question
base on Secondary data
In order to answer the research questions and achieve the objective of the study. The level of significant was set at P=0.05 for all statistical procedures.
In testing these hypothesis, the multiple Regression statistics was applied with a cut off of p=0.05 for all statistics. The decision rule applied is that if the p-value computed is less than 0.05(P<0.05) then the null hypotheses will be rejected in favour of the alternative hypothesis otherwise we fail to reject the null hypothesis.
The R2measured the goodness of fit of the regression model and showed the explanatory power of the model. In the analytical summary on table 4.7a, the coefficients of determination R2= 0.998. This implies that about 99.8% of the total variations in Naira value of new classrooms are explained by budget figure. The result reveals that any increase in budget figure will bring about an increase in naira value of new class room to about 99.8%. While the remaining 0.2% could however be attributed to the stochastic variable µ (error term) which includes other variables not explained in the model.
Based on the stepwise analysis, enter selection methods was used. From Table 4.7a &c the block of variables with stepwise selection for the regression model was significant at 5% (0.05) confidence level F -1,3 = 1850, R = 1.00, R2 = 0.998, p= 0.000< 0.05. The P value for the model summary for the enter method was 0.036<0.05. But for the stepwise model summary it was p= 0.298 since the significance values in the output are based on fitting a single model. Therefore, the significance values are generally invalid when a stepwise is used. However, the stepwise analysis showed that budget figure alone has the predictor contributed to the value of new classroom as can be deduced from the regression weight of p<0.000, b= 0.026, t= 43.018, f= 1850.
Based on the ANOVA Table of 4.7b, prob. (F – stat), it is obvious that the simultaneous influence of the independent variables is significant (prob. F – stat. = 0.036< 0.05), (prob. F – stat. = 0.001 < 0.05), (prob. F – stat. = 0.000 < 0.05)
The result shows that budget formulation and execution have a significant positive relationship with the naira value on new classrooms. Therefore H01 is rejected, the research question 1 answered and objective 1 is achieved.
The R2measured the goodness of fit of the regression model and showed the explanatory power of the model. In the analytical summary on Table 4.8a, the coefficients of determination R2= 0.974. This implies that about 97.4% of the total variations in Naira value of laboratory equipment are explained by cash backing. This reveals that any increase in cash backing will bring about an increase in naira value of laboratory equipment to about 97.4%. While the remaining 0.26% could however be attributed to the stochastic variable µ (error term) which includes other variables not explained in the model.
Based on the stepwise analysis, enter selection methods was used. Enter method is used for comparison. From Table 4:8a & c the block of variables with stepwise selection for the regression model was significant at 5% (0.05) confidence level (i.e.: F (1. 3) =, R = 1.00, R2 = 0.974, P = 0.002< 0.05). The P and F value for the model summary was 0.335 and 1.584. Since the significance values in the output are based on fitting a single model; therefore the significance values are generally invalid when a stepwise is used. However, the stepwise analysis showed that Cash backing alone as the predictor contributed to the Naira value of Laboratory Equipment. Cash backing in table 4.8c has a regression weight of p<0.002, b= 0.014, t= 10.607, f= 112.3.
Based on the ANOVA Table of 4.8b, prob. (F – stat), it is obvious that the simultaneous influence of the independent variables is significant (prob. F – stat. = 0.013 < 0.05), (prob. F – stat. = 0.015< 0.05), (prob. F – stat. = 0.002< 0.05). The result shows that budget formulation and execution have a significant positive relationship with the naira value of laboratory equipment. Therefore H01 is rejected, the research question 2 answered and objective 2 is achieved.
The R2measured the goodness of fit of the regression model and showed the explanatory power of the model. In the model summary on table 4.9a, the coefficients of determination R2= 0.974. This implies that about 97.4% of the total variation in Research grant is explained by Cash Backing. The result reveals that any increase in Cash backing will bring about an increase in research grant to about 97.4%. While the remaining 2.6% could however be attributed to the stochastic variable µ (error term) which includes other variables not explained in the model.
Based on stepwise analysis, the enter selection method was used. Enter method is used for cross checking but the work is fully based on stepwise method. From table 4.9a - c the block for cash backing variable was analysed with stepwise selection method for the regression model was significant at 5% (0.05) confidence level (i.e.: F (1. 3) = 111.04, R = 1.00, R2 = 0.974, P = 0.020< 0.05). Furthermore, the P and F value for the enter model summary was 0.160, 0.386 and 20.551 respectively. Since the significance values in the output are based on fitting a single model; therefore the significance values are generally invalid when a stepwise is used. However, the stepwise analysis showed that Cash backing alone has the predictor contributed to research grant. Cash backing in table 4.9chas a regression weight of p<0.020, b= 0.013, t= 10.536, f= 111.04.
Based on the ANOVA Table of 4.9b, prob. (F – stat), it is obvious that the simultaneous influence of the independent variables is significant (prob. F – stat. = 0.020 < 0.05), (prob. F – stat. = 0.016 < 0.05), (prob. F – stat. = 0.020< 0.05)
The result shows that budget formulation and execution have a significant positive relationship on research grants in Nigerian tertiary institutions. Therefore H01 is rejected, the research question 3 answered and objective 3 is achieved.
The R2measured the goodness of fit of the regression model and showed the explanatory power of the model. In the model summary on table 4.10a, the coefficients of determination R2= 0.981. This implies that about 98.1% of the total variation in Salaries of Lecturers on higher degree is explained by Project implementation. The result reveals that any increase in project implementation will bring about an increase in research grant to about 98.1%. While the remaining 1.9% could however be attributed to the stochastic variable µ (error term) which includes other variables not explained in the model.
The analyses used are stepwise and enter selection methods. Enter method is used for cross checking. From table 4.10a – 4.10c the block of variables with stepwise selection for the regression model was significant at 5% (0.05) confidence level (i.e.: F - 1, 3 = 151.404, R = 0.990, R2 = 0.981, P = 0.001< 0.05). The P and F value for the joint model summary was 0.170 and 18.226. This resulted in a value that could not fit a single model; however, the significance values are generally invalid when a stepwise method is used. Consequently it can be observed that the stepwise analysis showed that Project implementation alone has the predictor contributed to the Salaries of Lecturers. Projected implementation had a regression weight of p<0.001, b= 0.047, t= 12.305, f= 151.404.
Based on the ANOVA table of 4.10b, prob. (F – stat), it is obvious that the simultaneous influence of the independent variables is significant (prob. F – stat. = 0.013 < 0.05), (prob. F – stat. = 0.018 < 0.05), (prob. F – stat. = 0.001 < 0.05). The result shows that budget formulation and execution have a significant positive relationship on salaries of lecturers on higher degree in Nigerian tertiary institutions. Therefore H01 is rejected, the research question 4 answered and objective 4 is achieved.
2 Descriptive Statistics of the Primary Data Variables
From table above, the maximum scale at which budget formulation was measured was 78 and budget execution was measured was 90. The scale of 78 and 90 was derived by aggregating all the questions under budget formulation and budget execution on the questionnaire. The questions (all) were coded SA= 6, A= 5, PA = 4, PD = 3, D = 2, SD = 1. Consequently when the level of the variables was analyzed it revealed that the level of Budget formulation was 55.3 with a standard deviation of 8.2; while the level of budget execution was 53.86 with a standard deviation of 12.2. The mean score of 55.3 translates to 70.9% and the mean score of 53.9 translates to 58.9%.
The deduction from this analysis was that the level of input from the tertiary institutions in the budget formulation process was high but the level of this input being translated is average.
Figure Level of Budget Formulation
Figure Level of Budget Execution
Empirical analysis of primary data
The test of hypothesis in this section (primary data) is intended to corroborate the result of the secondary data. To achieve this, the hypothesis is tested on the general objective of the study which is to determine the effect of government budgeting and expenditure in the selected tertiary schools in North central zone, Nigeria.
To predict the effect of government budgeting and expenditure in the selected tertiary schools in North central zone, Nigeria a Pearson regression analysis was carried out on the model below to see if there was any relationship between the variables or parameters.
BUE = b0 + b1BUF+Ut
From Table 4.13c, b0 intercept when regression line crosses Y axis (Constant) is 41.878 when X = 0. Hence, the following equation result was obtained:
BUE = 41.878 + 0.217BUF. The estimated unstandardized coefficient model shows that, the estimates of model parameters in their natural units is consistent with prior expectations for b1. The coefficients (parameter estimate) of b1 (0.217), the regression weight for the model is predicted, holding other variable constant. There was no relationship (b= 0.217, β = 0.145 P = 0.286>0.05) between Budget formulation and budget execution implying that government budget and expenditures had no significant impact on the selected tertiary schools.
Because there was no significant relationship the model is not suitable for further analysis. Thus base on the hypothesis put forward we fail to reject (accept) the Null hypothesis following statistical test of significance that government budgeting and expenditure have no significant effect on the selected tertiary schools in North central zone, Nigeria.
Discussion of Findings
The regression analysis in Table 4.7c using the stepwise analysis shows that although budget formulation with budget figure, cash backing and project implementation acting as proxies had a joint significant effect on budget execution going by enter method, only budget figure drives the relationship significantly. The result of the stepwise multiple regression analysis test showed that budget figure impacted on the value of new classroom but cash backing and Project implementation did not have any significant effect on the value of new classroom (F- 1,3 = , R = 1.00, R2 = 0.998, p= 0.000< 0.05).
Similarly, the stepwise regression method indicated in Table 4.8c showed that only cash backing impacted (f – 1, 3 =, R = 1.00, R2 = 0.974, P = 0.002< 0.05) the laboratory equipment positively. The study as indicated by Table 4.9c showed that there is no impact of Budget Figure and Project implementation on research grant. But the result of the stepwise multiple regression analysis test showed that there was a significant positive relationship between Cash backing and research grant (F -1, 3 = 111.04, R = 1.00, R2 = 0.974, P = 0.002< 0.05). The result of the stepwise multiple regression analysis test in Table 4.10c showed that there was only a significant positive relationship (F - 1, 3 = 151.404, R = 0.990, R2 = 0.981, P = 0.001< 0.05) between project implementation and Salaries of lecturers. In addition, Budget Figure and Cash backing did not have any significant impact on the salaries of lecturers whether jointly or individually. The outcomes of the primary data analysis sync with the outcome of the secondary data analysis on stepwise analysis. Both data showed that budget formulation did not translate to budget execution. Budget execution tasks or steps if not carefully followed can fall short of allocated budgets, and when the failure to fully execute does not occur proportionally across sectors. Resource allocation significantly affects executions which may lead to fewer new classrooms, fewer laboratory equipment, delay or poor lecturer salaries and few research grants.
X Conclusion and Recommendations
Based on the findings from the analysis, this study concludes that there is no significant joint contribution of government budgeting formulation and expenditure on the development of tertiary schools in the North-central zone of Nigeria. The only impact government budgeting processes had on classrooms infrastructures, laboratory equipment, research grant and salaries of lecturers on higher degrees were on the disjointed yearly and intermittent effect of cash backing, budget figure and project implementation. Similarly apart from the monetary disclosure of poor funding, the staff of tertiary schools and the public are aware of the dilapidating classrooms, outdated laboratory equipment, poor research facilities and inadequate salaries despite the huge, impressive and well-articulated budget design at each financial year. Although data shows large sums of budget figure, cash backing and expenditures yet the schools wear marks of negligence and signs of abandonment. Budget for tertiary schools is still what it is known for in the entire country “nothing but addition of figures only to be read to the ears of the public” (William, 2010).
Based on the findings, the following recommendations are hereby made:
Government need to set up a budget monitoring group comprising of all stakeholders in the ministry, schools and members of the public. This group will ensure that budget processes that have a noticeable effect on classrooms and laboratories, salaries of lecturers and research grant are built upon while areas that have little or no effect are revised, terminated or improved.
The Program Assessment Rating Tool (P.A.R.T.) should be adopted as a core instrument to measure and assess the effectiveness of federal review programs, purpose, design, strategic planning, program management, and program results and accountability.
When it comes to budgetary trade- offs, a situation where policy makers are faced with a number of decisions that requires them selecting out of scale of preference, salaries of lecturers on higher degrees, classrooms and laboratory equipment should be given higher preferences.
Findings from primary data revealed that amount allocated to education is not enough to cater for infrastructure, research grants and salaries of lecturers in higher degrees Therefore, the researcher recommends that, government should look into the funding of higher education and if possible, consider other means of generating funds apart from the budget allocations.
Secondary data reveals that, there is a lot of money allocated on training of staff to higher degree. But primary data disagree that in most cases, staff are sent to school on training without cash backing. The research recommends that, budget monitoring committee be set to monitor budget performance and staff be release to go to school with cash backing to support them.
XI Benefits of the Study
The study is of great value to the university, polytechnic and colleges of education authorities in knowing how the budget given to the institutions is being formulated and how execution is done. Through that they can improve on the institution they are supervising. It could also help them in controlling employment and planning for the future. The study is also of great importance to the Government in helping her to know if there is need to increase or reduce the budget given. It also showed clearly whether the budget is being utilised in the designated areas which is also a useful way in controlling embezzlement. It also revealed the conditions of the tertiary institutions to the government in terms of teachers training, student learning conditions and infrastructures.
The results of this research could be very useful to researchers who are very much interested in delving into the Impact of Budget Formulation and Budget Execution on Tertiary Education in Nigeria. Finally, the result of this study could be of great contribution to the additional body of knowledge in the literature and other countries especially in Sub-Saharan Africa.
The study have pointed out some of the differences between budget passed and budget executed and shows the effect of breakdowns in the link between approved budgets and executed budget. This information can provide resource to the Budget monitoring units, internal control units, physical planning units and audit units of the tertiary institutions and other government parastatals, Ministries, Departments and Agencies on how readjustments in budget allocation, revenue shortfalls, prohibition of the release of approved funds, and the use of funds for other, contingent uses can impact on physical and human infrastructures.
Abagun, S. and Temitope, O. F. (2012). The efficacy of budget as a control measure in developing economics: A study from Nigeria. Asian Social Sciences, 8(1), 7-10.
Aiyepeku, T. F. (2009). 6-3-3-4 system of education in Nigeria. Lagos-Nigeria: NPS Educational Publishing
Akpotu, N. E. (2008). An assessment of classroom adequacy in Delta state. African Journal of Educational Research and Development (AJERD), 2(1), 115-122.
Akubue, A. U. (2001).Classroom organization and management: A 5-point strategy. Ibadan, Nigeria: Wisdom Publishers.
Anders, D. and Bård, K. (2010). Exploring the relative and combined influence of mastery-approach goals and work intrinsic motivation on employee turnover intention. Personnel Review, 39(5), 622 – 638.
Asuka, T. T.and Paulley, F. G. (2008). Universal Basic Education (UBE) programme and the revitalization of MDGs in Bayelsa state of Nigeria. African Journal of Education and Development Studies, 5(1), 1-21.
Bammeke, S. A. (2008). Public sector accounting and finance for decision making. Lagos, Nigeria: Sapes Associated limit.
Ebong, J. M. (2007). Time management techniques for the avoidance of time wasters in education. Journal of Education in Developing Areas, X(1), 13-19.
Ejiogu, U., Ihugba, O. A. and Nwosu, C. (2013). Causal relationship between Nigerian government budget allocation to the education sector and economic growth. Journal of Education Research, 1(8): 54 - 64.
Geri, L. R. (2002). Federal user fees and entrepreneurial budgeting. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting and Financial Management, 9, 127–142.
Gore, Al. (2010). From red tape to results: Creating a government that works better and costs less. A report of the National Performance Review. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Heiling, J. and James, L. C. (2012). Servant master? On the evolving relationship between accounting and budgeting in the public sector.Yearbook of Swiss Administrative Sciences, 23-28.
Hinchliffe, K. (1995). International experiences in financing education in federal countries. New Delhi: NIEPA.
Hinchliffe, K. (2001). Public expenditures on education in Nigeria: Issues, estimates and some implications. An Africa Region Human Development Working Paper Series.
Jones, L. R. and Wildavsky, A. (2010). A man and scholar for all seasons. Public Administration Review,55, 3 - 16.
Kis, v. (2005). Quality assurance in tertiary Education: current practices in OECD countries and a literature review on potential effect.
Ndayizeye, G. (2014). Government budgeting and its impact on education in the Republic of Burundi. Babcock Nigeria (unpublished)
Norton, A.and Elson, D. (2002). What is behind the budget? Politics, rights and accountability in the budget process. London (U.K): Overseas Development Institute.
Obadan, M. I. (2010). A review of the 2009 Federal Capital budget implementation experience: issues and way forward. Retrieved from http://www.budgetoffice.gov.ng/Budget_implementation.
Odior, E. S. O. (2011). Government spending on education, economic growth and long waves in a CGE micro-simulation analysis: The case of Nigeria. British Journal Economics, Finance and Management Science, 1(2), 74 - 87.
Omole, B. (2012, November 13).VCs can’t succeed solely on government funding for Universities. Business day Newspaper, p. 44
Oseni, M. (2012). Adequacy of budgetary allocation to educational institutions in Nigeria. Pakistan Journal of Business and Economic Review.
Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), S71-S102.
Solow, R. M. (1957). Technical change and the aggregate production function. Review of Economics and Statistics, 39(3), 312-320.
Ukeje, B. O. (2002). Educational administration. Enugu: Fourth Dimension Publishers Ltd.
William, M. (2010). The American heritage dictionary of English language (New College ed.). Hopewell, New Jersey: Houghton Mifflin.
Wolf, P. (2007). Why must we reinvent the federal government? Putting historical developmental claims to the test. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 353–388.
World Bank (1998). Knowledge for development: World development report, 1998/1999. Washington D. C: World Bank.
Yang, Q. (2010). The impact of the budgeting process on performance in small and medium- sized firms in China. Enschede (China): Partners Impskamp
Yogish, S. N. (2006). Education and Economic Development. Indian Journal of Social Development, 6(2), 255-270.