| Abstract: | The purposes of this paper is to collect graduates’ opinion on cost-sharing, assess its
implementation and identify the challenges and problems encountered in the implementation
of cost – sharing program, and suggest some ways of solving the problems. To these ends,
case study design was followed as a principal method of study. University stakeholders
including Addis Ababa University and Adama University management and administrative
bodies (offices of the registrar, student cost- sharing, finance, and human resource and
personnel offices), 51 graduates of universities who came to term with their former universities
on cost- shaming and working in different governmental and non governmental organizations
in Arada Sub-city and Adama district administration; 2 municipalities, 2 zonal and 2 woreda
finance offices; 10 human resource and personnel government offices; 2 branches of inland
revenues and customs authorities; 5 government and private banks; 1 telecommunication
office; and 3 private higher learning institutes were considered as respondents for this study.
The study used Snowball sampling method to collect data from graduate respondents. The
research instrument used to collect data included four types of unstructured questionnaires
administered to the study participants. Interviews were also used to gather data particularly
from the Federal Ministry of Education, Inland Revenues and Customs Authorities, and
Finance and Economic Development. Items in the questionnaires were developed based on
the powers, duties, responsibilities and obligations given to different stakeholders of higher
learning institutes through the proclamation number 154/2008 on cost sharing by Council of
Ministers ratified on 1 August, 2008 and published on Negarit Gazeta. The date collected were
organized, analyzed and interpreted both quantitatively and qualitatively and the following
results were found as the basic stumbling blocks and bottlenecks to the implantation of costsharing
scheme; lack of specific policies, directives and implementation guidelines; negative
perception, lack of awareness on the rationales of cost-sharing, lack of confidence and belief
in the scheme and being negligent by the respondent graduates; frequent changes in a rarely
available cost- sharing regulations; and lack of responsible independent organ that follows up
and supervises the implementation. Moreover, the majority of the graduate respondents
(76.50) have not yet started paying their graduate tax. Conversely insignificant percentages
(2%) of them have passed through paying the recovery cost. 72% of them had negative
perception about the program. |
