Home

Teaching & Education

A Comprehensive Guide to School-Based Management (SBM)
Teaching & Education

A Comprehensive Guide to School-Based

Management (SBM)
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

WHAT ARE THE ADVANTAGES?

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 schools 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-BASED MANAGEMENT (SBM) AFFECT THE ROLES

OF THE SCHOOL BOARD AND THE SUPERINTENDENT 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 boards 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 districts 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
office 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 DECISIONS MADE?

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 needed 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 into 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 over 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 LEVEL?

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, andat the
secondary levelstudents. 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.

WHAT IS NECESSARY WHEN IMPLEMENTING SCHOOL-BASED

MANAGEMENT (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 districts
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 adjust
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 authority with teachers and parents.

WHAT ARE THE LIABILITIES 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 matters. 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 benefitsgreater involvement in making decisions and making better
decisions.

WHERE HAS SCHOOL-BASED MANAGEMENT BEEN 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
structure 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 critical 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 systems 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 School-Based Management (SBM) practices?
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 Practices Manual
Guide key players in:

assessing their SBM practices

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

Matrix of Scale of Practice

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 tools?

SBM Dimension
1. School Leadership
2. Internal Stakeholders
3. External Stakeholders
4. School Improvement
Process
5. School-Based Resources
6. School Performance
Accountability
Respondents
School head, asst to the SH, master teacher, dept. head
Parent assoc. Representative, teacher assoc. Chair, head of student
council
Parent assoc. Representative, LGU/Brgy representative, SGC chair /
rep, chair of other active groups
School head, parent assoc rep, teacher assoc chair, head of student
council
School head, person in charge of School funds, SGC chair /rep, PTCA
chair/reps, LGU
School head, parent assoc rep, teacher assoc chair, head of student
council, SGC chair, LGU / Brgy.

ADMINISTRATION of SBM ASSESSMENT

STAGE 1: School Heads 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)
Matrix of Scale of Practice

View this document on Scribd

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

Prev Article
Next Article

About The Author

Mark Llego
He is the brain of TeacherPH. Growing up being surrounded by educators, a passion for education has
grown in him. Mark spends his time writing and spreading online articles about the educational world.
He likes emphasizing important political issues that involves issued on the educational system of the
country. Read more..