Complete Book PDF (4.12MB) - World Bank eLibrary

Education Sector Corruption in Ethiopia 101
Theft and resale of supplies or equipment—risk: medium. A theoretical
possibility of this form of corruption also exists because of the low level
of monitoring and controls in place in some woredas. Although controls
are perceived to be stronger at the level of city education offices, there
are indirect indications that this risk may in some cases occur. One such
indication relates to the alleged illegal sale of education facilities, with
related allegations of nepotism. A city education office is alleged to have
sold valuable heritage buildings in a secondary school to a private developer
and then to have requested land to rebuild the school facilities.
Such allegations remain unproven and anecdotal, but the fact that
stakeholders consider them to be plausible does suggest broader shortcomings
in the systems of monitoring and control of supplies, equipment,
and facilities.
Misappropriation of assets—risk: low. This form of corruption relates to
the misuse of supplies or equipment intended for educational purposes.
The general risk of this form of corruption is considered to be low,
although isolated cases were reported of the misuse of telephones.
(Technicians tapped office telephones to make international calls, and
Internet service providers paid bribes for this access; the WOFED
received a bill for Br 12,000 when the regular fee did not usually exceed
Br 300.)
Summary of supplies and equipment risks—In light of the above, the overall
perceived risk of corruption management, procurement, and service
delivery concerning educational supplies and equipment is considered to
be low to medium, as shown in table 3.7.
Buildings and facilities. Facilities development requires tendering and
contracting processes similar to any public works procurement, construction,
and ongoing operation and maintenance. It is therefore likely that
corrupt practices in nonteaching functions will be influenced by experiences
in other sectors.
Corrupt practices related to procurement of buildings and facilities
can reasonably be expected to be similar in nature, but more pronounced,
than those related to procurement of supplies and equipment. This is
because of the nature of the construction sector, which can involve high
expenditures and heavy reliance on the maintenance of high professional
standards in all aspects of construction, including design and site supervision.
An additional cause for concern is the absence of any independent