A COMPREHENSIVE GUID E TO SCHOOL -BASED

MANAGEMENT (SBM)
By Mark Anthony Llego Leave a Comment

Share

Tweet

ABOUT SCHOOL-BASED MANAGEMENT (SBM)

School-based management (SBM) is a strategy to improve education by transferring significant decision -making
authority from state and district offices to individual schools. SBM provides principals, teachers, students, and
parents greater control over the education process by giving them responsibility for decisions about the budget,
personnel, and the curriculum. Through the involvement of teachers, parents, and other community members in
these key decisions, SBM can create more effective learning environments for children. Reference: Office of
Research Education/ConsumerGuide

WH AT ARE THE ADV AN TA GES?

 Allow competent individuals in the schools to make decisions that will improve learning;

 Give the entire school community a voice in key decisions;

 Focus accountability for decisions;

 Lead to greater creativity in the design of programs;

  Redirect resources to support the goals developed in each school;

 Lead to realistic budgeting as parents and teachers become more aware of the school’s financial status, spending
limitations, and the cost of its programs; and,

 Improve morale of teachers and nurture new leadership at all levels.

HOW DOES SCHOOL -B ASED M AN AGEMENT (SBM) AFFECT THE

ROLES OF THE SCHOOL BOARD AND THE SUPERI NTENDENT
AND DISTRICT OFFICE?
The school board continues to establish a clear and unifying vision and to set broad policies for the district and
the schools. SBM does not change the legal governance system of schools, and school boards do not give up
authority by sharing authority. The board’s role changes little in a conversion to SBM.

The superintendent and his or her district office staff facilitate the decisions made at the school level, and provide
technical assistance when a school has difficulty translating the district’s vision into high -quality programs.
Developing student and staff performance standards and evaluating the schools are also the responsibility of the
district staff.

The district office will generally continue to recruit potential employees, screen job applicants, and maintain
information on qualified applicants from which the schools fill their vacancies. The district off ice may also specify
curricular goals, objectives, and expected outcomes while leaving it up to the schools to determine the methods
for producing the desired results. Some districts leave the choice of instructional materials to the schools,
whereas others may require schools to use common texts.
HOW ARE BUDGET DECIS IONS M ADE?
In most SBM systems, each school is given a “lump sum” that the school can spend as it sees fit. As outlined by
JoAnn Spear (1983), the district office determines the total funds nee ded by the whole district, determines the
districtwide costs (such as the cost of central administration and transportation), and allocates the remaining
funds to the individual schools. The allocation to each school is determined by a formula that takes i nto account
the number and type of students at that school.

Each school determines how to spend the lump sum allocated by the district in such areas as personnel,
equipment, supplies, and maintenance. In some districts, surplus funds can be carried ove r to the next year or be
shifted to a program that needs more funds; in this way, long-range planning and efficiency are encouraged.

HOW ARE DECISIONS MADE AT THE SCHOOL LEV EL?

Most districts create school management councils at each school that include the principal, representatives of
parents and teachers, and, in some cases, other citizens, support staff, and –at the secondary level–students. The
council conducts a needs assessment and develops a plan of action that includes statements of goals and
measurable objectives, consistent with school board policies.

In some districts, the management council makes most school-level decisions. In other districts, the council
advises the principal, who then makes the decisions. In both cases, the principal has a large role in the decision -
making process, either as part of a team or as the final decisionmaker.
WH AT IS NECESS ARY WH EN IMPLEMENTING SCHO OL-B ASED
M AN AGEMENT (SBM)?
From the beginning, the school board and superintendent must be supportive of school -based management. They
must trust the principals and councils to determine how to implement the district’s goals at the individual schools.

It is important to have a written agreement that specifies the roles and responsibilities of the school board,
superintendent and district office, principal, and SBM council. The agreement should explicitly state the standards
against which each school will be held accountable. James Guthrie (1986) states that each school should
produce an annual performance and planning report covering “how well the school is meeting its goals, how it
deploys its resources, and what plans it has for the future.”

Training in such areas as decision-making, problem solving, and group dynamics is necessary for all participating
staff and community members, especially in the early years of implementation. To meet the new challenges of the
job, principals may need additional training in leadership skills.

In summary:

 SBM must have the strong support of school staff.

 SBM is more successful if it is implemented gradually. It may take 5 years or more to implement SBM.

 School and district staff must be given administrative training, but also must learn how to adjus t to new roles and
channels of communication.
  Financial support must be provided to make training and time for regular staff meetings available.

 Central office administrators must transfer authority to principals, and principals in turn must share this aut hority with
teachers and parents.

WH AT ARE THE LIABILI TIES OF SBM?

Participitory decision-making sometimes creates frustration and is often slower than more autocratic methods.
The council members must be able to work together on planning and budget matter s. This leaves principals and
teachers less time to devote to other aspects of their jobs. Teachers and community members who participate in
the councils may need training in budget matters; some teachers may not be interested in the budget process or
want to devote time to it.

Members of the school community must also beware of expectations that are too high. According to the
AASA/NAESP/NASSP task force, districts that have had the most success with SBM have focused their
expectations on two benefits–greater involvement in making decisions and making “better” decisions.

WHERE H AS SCHOOL -BASED M AN AGEMENT BEE N

IMPLEMENTED?
Hundreds of school districts across the country have experimented with aspects of SBM.

School-Based Management (SBM) System will focus efforts in strengthening support systems of the DepED on
School-Based Management through improved educational planning and management. This has sub -components
created to attain this goal.
Objectives:

Strengthen the support systems of DepED, three Regional Offices, selected Divisions and schools for School
Based Management through improved educational planning and management .
Development of a functional management support system for continuing school improvement at regional, division
and school levels.

School Based Management (SBM) or Component 1 of STRIVE is a response to BESRA KRT 1 – enabling and
empowering school stakeholders to manage its own affairs for improved delivery of educational services in a
sustainable manner. As such, this component is focused on the strengthening of support systems including
governance, advisory and partnership mechanisms for SBM through practical experience in application activities
in the three regions. The application experience will be further enhanced through a range of capability building
activities.

SCHOOL-BASED MANAGEMENT (SBM) SUB-COMPONENTS:

Policy & Planning System

Under this sub-component, STRIVE aims to enhance/develop structures, processes and tools associated with
policy /planning systems at the school, division, and regional levels

Participatory Mechanisms in Education Governance

This sub-component is dedicated to identifying existing participatory mechanisms in education governance at the
school, division and region

Human Resource Development of Education Management

This sub-component focuses on developing and piloting the appropriate regional organizational str ucture to
ensure that the divisions actually support the implementation of school -based management as mandated by the
Education Act of 2001. In order to help the regions perform this function, the sub -component has developed the
technical assistance mechanism that will systematize the provision of professional help and guidance by the
region to the divisions, and by the divisions to the schools.

Quality Assurance & Accountability System

This sub-component offers a mechanism for insuring quality in the criti cal systems, processes, outputs, and
outcomes of DepED at various management levels to bring about improved learning outcomes, continuous school
improvement and better technical and management services. It is supported by the interlocking processes of
monitoring and evaluation that systematically provide educators timely information useful for planning and for
making decisions and adjustments.

Programs to Improve Access

The focus of this sub-component is to establish the appropriate mechanisms that will increase the number of
effective initiatives undertaken by the region/division/schools to improve access. The approach is to determine
and pilot appropriate support options for basic education. It specifically aims to:

 Pilot test numbers of effective initiatives directly undertaken by the Target Access Schools and Community Learning
Centers to improve access.
  Develop and pilot test support systems/mechanisms at the division level to render direct technical assistance support
to the Target Access Schools and Community Learning Centers.

 Develop and pilot test support systems/mechanisms at the regions to facilitate policy compliance, effective programs
delivery and ensure quality assurance and accountabilities.

Unified Information System

The Regional UIS is the ICT-enabled support to the process and information requirements of SBM, T&D and
LRMDS. It aims to strengthen information management at the target regions and divisions to enable data -driven
decision-making and provide a venue for connecting people to people and people to knowledge they need to
effectively respond and create new and relevant information. Specifically, the system aims to (1) streamline and
efficiently render the collection and processing of education data from the schools and field offices, (2)
institutionalize Quality Assurance and M&E processes at every level of the education management system, and
(3) support information requirements of school-based management, planning and policy formulation at all levels.

The UIS shall consist of integrated databases, automated processes and technologies that are to be implemented
on enhanced organizational structures and improved workflow processes at the target divisions and regions.

Consistent with the overall strategy of building on existing DepED system s and structures, the solution system
aims to establish effective linkages with currently functional systems.

ASSESSMENT OF SBM PRACTICES: SCHOOLS INITIATED

ASSESSMENT FOR SELF- DIRECTED IMPROVEMENT
WHY ASSESS THE SCHOO L-B ASED M AN AGEMENT (SB M)
PR ACTICES?
 Determine the level of SBM practices in school

 Provide basis on which to establish it plan of action

 Improve the SBM support systems through interventions that the school and other admin levels of Deped

 Determine effectiveness of SBM practices in the delivery of basic education services

ASSESSMENT OF SBM PR ACTICES M ANU AL
Guide key players in:

 assessing their SBM practices

 identifying their needs for technical support that ought to be given by the support system

M ATRIX OF SC ALE OF P R ACTICE

THE WHAT of the ASSESSMENT TOOL

The instrument contains INDICATORS regarding the six (6) dimensions of SBM Practices

 Each INDICATOR has REQUIRED EVIDENCES as proof of the level of SBM practices

 Each SBM DIMENSION is to be responded to by a different group of school stakeholders. (Thus, responses to be
considered as group answer through CONSENSUS )

TABLE on the NUMBER of ITEMS per DIMENSIONS

DIMENSIONS LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3

1.School Leadership 31 35 47
2.Internal Stakeholders 23 28 36

3.External Stakeholders 34 15 18

4.School Improvement Process 31 27 25

5.School-Based Resources 18 15 20

6.School Performance Accountability 23 14 18

Total 149 137 168

WHO ANSWERS THE TOOL S?

SBM Dimension Respondents

1. School Leadership School head, asst to the SH, master teacher, dept. head

2. Internal Stakeholders Parent assoc. Representative, teacher assoc. Chair, head of student council
 3. External Stakeholders Parent assoc. Representative, LGU/Brgy representative, SGC chair / rep, chair of
other active groups

4. School Improvement Process School head, parent assoc rep, teacher assoc chair, head of student council

5. School-Based Resources School head, person in charge of School funds, SGC chair /rep, PTCA chair/reps,
LGU

6. School Performance School head, parent assoc rep, teacher assoc chair, head of student council, SGC
Accountability chair, LGU / Brgy.

ADMINISTRATION OF SB M ASSESSMENT
STAGE 1: School Head’s Orientation by the DO

STAGE 2: Responding to the Instrument by the School Stakeholders

Phase 1: Orientation of School – Stakeholders as Respondents

Phase 2: Actual Inventory of Evidences
Phase 3: Summarizing the Responses

STAGE 3: Focused Group Discussion (FGD)

M ATRIX OF SC ALE OF P R ACTICE
[scribd id=306828323 key=key-sAkoYz4GKTj0vLB6Kd85 mode=scroll]

Read: DO 55, s. 2011 – Guidelines on School-Based Management (SBM) Grants