Get documents about "Banja_luka
Document Sample
TEMPUS UM-JEP-17004-2002
ANALYSIS OF THE CURRENT STATE OF
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND THE INSTITUTIONAL QUALITY
ASSURANCE MANAGEMENT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF BANJA LUKA
Current state of financial management of higher education
The existing Law on Higher Education in the Republic of Srpska requires the
government of RS to finance public (state) institutions of higher education from
its budget. There are two universities in RS, the University of Banja Luka and the
University of Serb Sarajevo, composed of a total of 29 faculties altogether. The
Law was passed in 1993. In RS there is also a Law on Advanced Schools, which
regulates the work and financing of the three public (state) advanced schools that
exist in RS. Advanced Schools are also financed from the RS budget.
The above-mentioned laws define in principle that institutions of higher education
are financed from the budget on the basis of certain criteria and conditions. It is
clearly stated that all the expenses of the functioning of higher education should
be financed: salaries of employees, material expenses of functioning, equipment,
development, scientific work, education and training of teaching staff. Higher
educational institutions can also generate income from their own activities.
The criteria and conditions for the allocation of funds are defined by certain legal
acts. These are most frequently regulations on criteria for the financing of higher
educational institutions. These criteria as well as the conditions for the
distribution of financial resources are outlined here in detail. The criteria and
conditions take into consideration: the number of students, the number of study
groups, the number of courses, the number of teaching hours, the number of
professors and assistants. The funds for financing each institution of higher
education on annual or monthly bases are allocated according to this data.
However, in reality these regulations and criteria are not in use in the whole
country. Due to a lack of resources during the war it was not possible to finance
all costs associated with higher education, and hence only salary expenses were
covered. Since even now insufficient funds are allocated from the budget to
finance all costs, the government continues to only finance the salaries of
employees in public higher educational institutions, and from time to time a part
of the basic running costs as well.
As it was already noted, the respective laws and regulations define criteria and
procedures for financing and the allocation of funds to higher educational
institutions. The budgetary resources are transferred each month to the accounts
of faculties and they then pay salaries to their employees and other expenses.
However, since the funds still only cover salaries every month from the budget
2
are transferred to the accounts of faculties only money allocated to the salaries of
employees. Faculties then pay the relevant amounts to their staff. Taking into
consideration this minimal financing, the existing procedures for the allocation of
funds to the institutions of higher education are connected with the number of
employees and their engagement. For all non-teaching employees salaries are
paid according to their position salary scales. For teaching staff, salaries depend
on their title and the number of teaching hours they have. Other criteria and
conditions do not have any impact on the total amount of money allocated to
certain institution, i.e. they do not influence the distribution of funds. It does not
depend on the number of students enrolled on certain institution. Moreover, no
money is allocated to scientific work or teacher training.
As it was mentioned above, public funds available for institutions of higher
education are only from the Republic’s budget. No other public funds are
available for these purposes. In the RS about 15% of the republic’s budget is
allocated to education, around 3% of which is allocated to higher education.
The money available from public funds (budgets) is not sufficient for the financing
of all the needs of the institutions of higher education. They are not even
sufficient for the financing of the most essential needs, such as the salaries of
employed staff. This is why the payment of salaries is regularly late, and why
salaries in higher education are still very low. It is estimated that the money
available from the public funds currently covers about 65% of the needs of the
institutions of higher education in the RS.
Institutional financial management
The legal basis for financial management at the RS institutions of higher education
is defined by the Law on Universities and the statute of the institution of higher
education. The Law on Universities gives only basic elements, which are further and
more precisely defined in detail by the statute of the institution.
The level of autonomy in the field of financial management can be seen from two
aspects: in the process of defining and providing of financial resources and in the
process of distribution and spending of the allocated funds. In reality, a higher
educational institution has very limited or hardly any impact on the process of
defining the amount of money to be allocated from the budget for higher
education in general, as well as the institution itself. The whole process takes
place within the framework of the RS Government and its Ministry of Education
and Culture, with very little input from the universities themselves. In the process
of the division and spending of the allocated funds the input of the institution is
also small, because funds are limited and strictly restricted (intended only for
salaries of staff) the institutions of higher education have only a limited influence
on distribution. They influence the division and spending to a certain extent and
every month jointly prepare the lists of people employed or engaged, and thus
3
correct them partially in accordance with the changes that have taken place at
certain institutions.
The Statute of the University defines the existing institutional structures of
financial management. The managerial organs in charge of financial
management at the university level are the Rector, the Vice-Rector for Finances
and a Head Accountant. At the faculty level the people responsible for financial
management are the Dean, the Vice-Dean and the Head Accountant. The most
important person in financial management at universities is the Rector. He makes
all the relevant decisions. He prepares and proposes the annual financial plan
and the annual report to the University Council. The University Council adopts
and passes those documents. The Vice-Rector for Finances, if he exists at a
university, deals with general things connected to finances, mostly in their
preparatory phases, and he makes decisions together with his Rector or he
prepares them for the Rector to make. Accounting and bookkeeping departments
deal with every-day operational and financial matters of universities. The Head
Accountant runs the department and he reports to the Rector. He or she carries
out the Rector’s orders, but that person is also responsible for ensuring legality in
the implementation of financial transactions and obliged to warn the Rector if
necessary.
The distribution of funds within a university is carried out every month. When the
financial resources from the RS budget are approved the university distributes
them to its faculties. During that process the information collected from all the
faculties on the people employed or engaged and their workload for the
corresponding month are used. When it comes to the money distribution within
the Rector’s Office itself the same principles relevant for the faculties are applied.
The salaries of each employee are determined on the basis of its position and
workload, and in accordance with certain coefficients that are defined by law.
Since they usually do not have any additional incomes, they do not have a need
to distribute them as well. If eventually some additional incomes are due for
distribution, the same procedures are always respected.
Each institution of higher education is responsible for its own financial
management. In RS that responsibility lies at the faculty level. Each faculty is still
a completely autonomous and independent institution, which has total autonomy
in all its activities, including financial. The faculties are directly responsible to the
RS Ministry of Education and Culture. At the university level only certain
coordination is being done, since the university is still a loose association of
faculties.
As we have already mentioned an Accounting and Bookkeeping Department
exists at each University. They consist of a few workers, such as a Bookkeeper,
a Cashier and a Head Accountant. A similar structure also exists at the faculty
level. They are independent from their counterparts at the University and only a
certain level of coordination exists among them.
4
Only teaching expenses are covered from public funds. No public funds for the
financing of research exist so far. Faculties and universities pay their own
research expenses from some resources (scientific and professional projects for
enterprises and other institutions). Salaries cover only teaching expenses and
their distribution has already been described in detail. Funds for scientific
research provided by faculties’ and universities’ own projects, are divided
between the participants in the project and a certain part is held for the needs of
faculties or universities. That percentage varies between 10-30% depending on
the faculty and the type of project.
Institutions of higher education supplement their financing with other funds
besides public budgets. They come from several sources: fees from self-financed
students, projects for enterprises and institutions, services for citizens and
factories. These revenues are mostly generated at a faculty level, where they are
then distributed. These amounts are at the disposal of faculties for their own use.
On the other hand, those incomes that are the products of certain activities at the
university level (the Rector’s Office) are distributed at an institutional level.
In the Republic of Srpska both universities and faculties are legal entities. Both of
then have their financial management, financial transactions and bank accounts.
The Rector is responsible for the financial management at the university and their
financial transactions. The Rector prepares a university financial plan every year
for the coming year, which then goes to the University Council. The Council
discusses and accepts the plan. The Rector is responsible for the implementation
of the financial plan. He is responsible to the University Council. At the end of
each calendar year the Rector prepares his report on the financial management
for the University Council. The Council then again discusses and accepts it. Each
Dean is responsible for the financial management at his university. Similar to
what we have at the University level at the beginning of each year the Dean
prepares a faculty financial plan for the following year. Then the Faculty Council
discusses and accepts that plan. The Dean is responsible for the implementation
of the financial plan to the Faculty Council. At the end of the year the Dean
prepares his report on the financial management for the Faculty Council. Than
the Faculty council again discusses and accepts it. The financial management at
the universities and faculties must be done in accordance with corresponding
laws, which regulate that area. Corresponding departments at the Ministry of
Finances of the Government of Republic of Srpska control the financial
management.
Recommendations for improving financial management in higher education
institutions
The knowledge and experience acquired during the TEMPUS retraining session are
certainly welcome and extremely important. They will help a lot to further the
5
processes of reform, reorganization and modernization of higher education in
Republic of Srpska and our University as well. We will use the experience in the
preparation of strategic papers for our University, as well as for the development and
modernization of our University’s organization and operations. Financial
management is very important for all of these processes and activities.
In order to improve our institutional strategic management the following activities
will be undertaken:
– Maximize share of funds from the budget,
– Find new financial resources,
– Cooperate intensively with the external environment (state, society),
– Generate funds from student fees,
– Generate funds by means of research and service provision,
– Increase autonomy including financial autonomy,
– Increase the percentage of funds obtained via scientific and research
activities,
– Decrease dependence on the RS budget,
– Increase efficient exploitation of available financial resources,
– Take part in strategic research at the entity and state level.
An institutional plan of action for implementing the recommendations
Aim Activity Deadline (year)
- To provide new financial - Secure the maximum 2003
resources amount of funds from the
budget
- Increase the percentage
of funds obtained
through scientific and
research activities
- To achieve more intensive - Generate funds from 2004
cooperation with the external student fees
environment (state, society) - Create new financial
resources
- Increase the efficient
exploitation of available
financial resources
- To increase autonomy - Generate funds by 2005-2010
including financial means of research and
autonomy services offered
- To increase the - Generate funds from
percentage of funds student fees
obtained via scientific - Create new financial
and research activities resources
- To decrease the
dependence on the RS
budget
- To increase the efficient
exploitation of available
financial resources
6
Overall national framework for quality management
Bosnia and Herzegovina is a complex country. It is compound of two entities
Republika Srpska (RS) and the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FBiH).
Republika srpska is a united, centralized country. The Federation of Bosnia and
Herzegovina is a complex country, compound of ten cantons.
According to its constitution the education in Bosnia and Herzegovina is not
regulated at the BH level, but it is set at a lower level. In Republika Srpska
education is legally regulated at the entity level. On the other hand in the
Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina education is at even lower level, at the
level of cantons. In accordance with that, the situation with higher education is
identical. It means that the functioning of higher education is regulated at that
level, at the entity level in RS, and in FBiH at the level of cantons. The legal basis
for that functioning and thus the questions connected to the quality of higher
educational management are found in corresponding laws connected to higher
education.
In FBiH universities do not exist in all the cantons. In those cantons where there
is a university the Law on University or the Law on Higher Education exists as
well. Those laws regulate functioning and also the questions of quality
management at universities.
Corresponding RS, Federal or cantonal laws define in principle that the
institutions of higher education are obliged to provide the quality of education and
the quality of management. It is said that for the purpose of providing the quality
of education and the quality of management the institutions of higher educations
are responsible, i.e. the faculties and universities. In these laws it is also defined
that the corresponding ministry controls the quality of education and the quality of
management at the institutions of higher education as well. In Republika Srpska
the corresponding departments of the Ministry of Education and Culture of the
Republika Srpska Government do that quality control at the higher educational
institutions.
The criteria and conditions for the providing and control of quality are defined by
certain legal acts. Those are most frequently regulations on standards and
criteria for the providing and control of the quality of higher educational
institutions. Those standards and criteria as well as the conditions for the
providing and control of the quality of higher educational institutions are
developed in detail there. The quality assessment in higher educational
institutions is done on that bases. But in reality those regulations and criteria are
not in use in the whole BiH in general. Due to the lack of resources during the
war we did not have possibilities to finance all those activities. Since even now
7
we do not allocate sufficient funds from the budget for financing of all the
activities planned in higher education, but as we have already said here we still
finance from the budget only the salaries of employees in public higher
educational institutions. It means that we do not invest enough into the quality
assurance in the sector of higher education and the quality management, so they
are relatively neglected.
We in RS and FBiH do not have any quality assurance or accreditation agencies.
The ministries in charge of education deal with all the issues related with quality
control and quality assurance in education and its management, as well as the
accreditation of higher educational institution. In RS it is the Ministry of Education
and Culture with its educational departments.
Material and human resources available in higher education for the quality
management are not satisfactory. Due to the lack of funding available for the
functioning of higher education we do not have almost any investments in
equipment or the education of staff needed for the quality management. It causes
the poor state of equipment at the institutions of higher education and insufficient
vocational training of the staff from the field of the quality management in higher
education.
Institutional framework for quality assurance
Measures from the Institutional Development Plan of the University of Banja Luka for the
Period 2002-2010 dealing with quality assurance and management
Goal Activity Deadline (year)
To educate the existing To provide appropriate 2003
managers and advance training and respect its
their work results
To reorganize the Effective and efficient 2004
University according to management of human,
the new Law on Higher financial and other
Education resources
To increase efficiency and To undertake self- 2005-2010
introduce a quality evaluation
assurance system To apply for external
To have quality and skilful evaluation (EUA)
personnel To achieve accreditation
To become corporate at all levels
university according to the To centralize decision
models of European making at the University
universities To make faculties
integrated parts of the
University not the
8
members with special
legal status
To strengthen
departments and chairs at
the University
The legal basis for quality assurance and quality management at the RS
institutions of higher education is defined by the Law on University and the
statute of the institution of higher education. The Law on University gives only
basic elements, which are further and more precisely defined in detail by the
statute of the institution.
The Statute of the University defines the existing institutional structures of quality
assurance and quality management. The managerial organs in charge of quality
assurance and quality management at the university level are the Rector, Vice-
Rectors and General Secretary. At the faculty level the people responsible for
financial management are the Dean, Vice-Deans and Faculty Secretary. The
most responsible person for the financial management at universities is the
Rector. He makes all relevant decisions in that respect and his Vice-Rectors and
General Secretary are responsible to him. For the sake of the providing of the
quality of education the Rector is responsible to the Academic Council, and for
the providing of the quality of management he is responsible to the University
Council.
We in the higher education in Republika Srpska do not have sufficiently
developed mechanisms, procedures and processes for quality assurance. They
are neither defined enough, nor prescribed by the corresponding documents.
Academic standards and the indicators of achievements are still underdeveloped.
We rarely undertake self-evaluations or external evaluations. When it comes to
the level of subjects its quality assurance and quality management depends on
the teacher himself, and it is controlled by the faculty organs (Dean, Vice-dean,
Faculty Council) but only very formally. At the level of study groups and faculties
the assurance and management of quality is monitored and controlled by the
faculty organs, university organs and ministries. But, in practice, it is also done
rather formally. At the university level the assurance and management of quality
is controlled and monitored by the university organs and ministries.
For the University of Banja Luka we can say that its advantages and strong
points connected to quality assurance and management are: inheritance, ethics,
leadership, communications, innovations, interdisciplinary work, responsibility,
international cooperation and international reputation. The university of Banja
Luka is the best university in Republika Srpska, it leads positive changes in the
society and it is concentrated to the international recognition of its quality by
means of external evaluation and accreditation of all of its activities. The basic
disadvantages and weak points of the University of Banja Luka in connection
with quality assurance and quality management are mainly bound to the lack of
9
sufficient financial resources for the investment in equipment and also for the
better motivation and education of our staff for the purpose of the development of
quality culture, quality assurance and management. Another very serious
problem lies in the fact that according to the existing legal acts the university is
disintegrated and without any real power. Each institution of higher education is
responsible for its own quality assurance and quality management. That
responsibility lies at the level of faculty. Every faculty is still completely
autonomous and independent institution, which totally autonomously and
independently leads every activity including the ones connected to quality. The
faculties are directly responsible to the Ministry of Education and Culture in
Republika Srpska. At the level of university only certain coordination is being
done, because the university is still a loose association of faculties.
Policy recommendations for the development of quality culture at the
University of Banja Luka
The knowledge and experience acquired during the TEMPUS retraining session are
certainly welcome and extremely important. They will help a lot further processes of
the reform, reorganization and modernization of the higher education in Republika
Srpska and our University as well in the respect of quality assurance and
management. We will use that experience in the process of preparation of strategic
papers of our University, as well as at the course of the development and
modernization of our University organization and functioning. Quality assurance and
quality management are very important for all those processes and activities. All of
the above-mentioned will help to develop the quality culture at the University of
Banja Luka.
In order to improve our quality assurance and management and develop our
quality culture the following activities will be undertaken:
– Vocational training of the staff from the field of quality assurance and
management,
– Introduction of the system of quality according to the European principles
and standards,
– Integration of the university according to the model of an efficient European
university.
