Report Summary:

This report assesses the state of Nigerian public universities on transparency, accountability, citizen participation and access to information, as regard their financial spending. Through such assessment, the report will galvanize coherent feedback which would inform policy, facilitate openness in universities financial governance and facilitate service delivery. It’s also geared toward discouraging impunity, corruption, misappropriation of funds across these universities. This report is divided into three segments.

1). A sweeping reportage of corruption and spending opacity in the sector, linking it up with the need for enhanced openness 2). Infographical illustration of TetFund financial intervention to public universities from 2009 – 2016. 3). Ranking of the universities on the level of disclosure and access to information, following Freedom of Information oriented correspondences with the universities, as well as the level of openness on their websites or in public domain as concerns annual budget breakdown, Internally Generated Revenues analytics and TETFUND intervention project proposals.

This report is aimed at driving conversations in universities spending and level of openness, and creating citizens awareness on funds going into these institutions for effective public oversight and holding the management of universities accountable. Through this, voices of citizens will be amplified in the demand for quality learning.
Methodology for FOI Rankings

The public universities listed were ranked based on benchmarks for disclosure within the Nigerian Freedom of Information Act, 2011. Specifically, these benchmarks are:

Proactive disclosure:
The rankings is based on an assessment of the state of 72 Nigerian public universities on transparency, accountability and access to funding and spending related information following the level of openness on their websites or in public domain as concerns Annual Budget breakdown, Internally Generated Revenues analytics and TETFUND intervention project proposals.

This is further divided into
Full proactive disclosure- Green (22 points)
Partial proactive disclosure- Yellow (17 points)
No proactive disclosure- Red (o point)

Full proactive disclosure is obtained where information on the TetFund intervention project proposals, Annual Budget breakdown, Internally Generated Revenue of a public tertiary institution is found on their website. Where a part of this information is found, partial disclosure applied. Where there is no disclosure of funding related information on the website of the public tertiary institution, there is no proactive disclosure.

Responsiveness to requests for information:

Ranking of the universities on access to information, following Freedom of Information oriented correspondences with them. Where there is no full proactive disclosure, a request for information is made. Responsiveness to requests for information is ranked based on:

Response within 7 days – Green (20 points)
Response within 14 days- Blue (15 points)
Response within 15 days and beyond – Yellow (10 points)
No response – Red (0 points)

Level of disclosure of information: This is based on the following:
Full disclosure – Green (22 points)
Partial Disclosure – Yellow (17 points)
No Disclosure – Red (0 points)

The aim of the rankings is to drive conversations about and promote the accessibility of funding related information going into tertiary institutions. Such information should be made open and in a way that enables the more efficient public oversight and service delivery.

HOW IT WORKS:

Score weights are assigned to the parameters for ranking based on a response parameter, a score will be given that will ultimately determine an institutions total score, this total score will then determine an institutions standing on the ranking table. It is important to note that the higher an institution scores, the higher their position on the ranking table. Scores assigned to each parameter are used to calculate the ranking score for each institution
Therefore a perfect score would be:

22pts (x3) + 20pts (x1.5)+ 22pts (x2) = 140 points;

Notice that each number is multiplied by a certain number, this is done to assign a higher value to the various parameters.

Proactive disclosure being the highest because our aim is to promote proactively disclose of information to the public rather than the public request for that information.

An institution with Full Proactive Disclosure, Responded within 14 days and Partial Disclosure:

22pts (x3) + 15pts (x1.5) + 17pts (x2) = 122.5 points;

So an institution with a perfect score of 140 points would have a higher ranking on the overall ranking table compared to an institution with a total score of 122.5 points.

Download here Higher Education Situation Report 2017:

Leave a Comment