Twelve years of scottish school public private partnerships: Are they better value for money?

Abstract

This research evaluates the value-for-money (VFM) obtained from public-private partnership (PPP) schools in Scotland, based on headteachers questionnaires, local authority interviews and Scottish School Estate Statistics. The period covered is 2000-2012, when 395 new schools were commissioned. The PPPs were better in building condition and maintenance standards and conventionally-financed schools were better in terms of teacher access and improvement in staff morale. There was transfer of knowledge whereby the high standards of the PPPs then became the new standards for the conventionally-financed schools. Concerns about PPP VFM relates to the high cost of unitary charges and contract inflexibilities. A higher percentage of headteachers of conventionally-financed schools (63.64%) considered their new schools resulted in good VFM compared to PPP schools (42.86%).

20 Years of Performance Measurement System (PMS) Implementation in Indonesian Local Governments: Why is Their Performance Still Poor?

“…The recorded data were then transcribed using verbatim. The interview guide shown in Table 3 Performance Measurement System (PMS) Implementation in Indonesian Local Governments was adopted from Koh, Mohan, and Tan (2015) and Yaya (2017).…”

Scotland’s school grounds: playful and play-full learning environments?

“…Scotland also has a school estate strategy (COSLA and Scottish Government 2009), and over time has used a range of finance instruments to improve the fabric of Scotland's schools (Yaya 2017). Although this strategy acknowledges the existence of playgrounds, the value of school grounds as a learning resource, and factors in the quality of school grounds quality when appraising the overall suitability of schools, there is very little reference to school grounds in the original strategy, the appraisal of it and the refreshed Schools for the Future Programme (Scottish Futures Trust 2018).…”

The performance advantage of public-private partnerships: does it exist or not?

“…These are no small questions, and they require our constant attention. The performance question of PPPs is a lingering one (Hodge & Greve, 2007, 2017Palcic et al, 2019).…”

“…Core motivations of governments to develop and manage the delivery of infrastructure through PPPs used to focus on increasing the efficiency of public service delivery, the transfer of risks to the private sector, and on reducing the budget and borrowing constraints of governments by using private sector funds (McQuaid & Scherrer, 2010). In many developing countries, these are still core motivations for PPPs (World Bank, 2014, 2017e.g., Debela, 2019;Kavishe & Chileshe, 2020;Osei-Kyei et al, 2014). 2 However, in general and for developed countries in particular, McQuaid and Scherrer (2010) predicted that "issues concerning the efficiency and effectiveness of PPPs, compared to their alternatives, are likely to increase in importance while budget enlarging motivations decrease" (2010, p. 27, emphasis added).…”