Accounting for needs? Formula funding in the UK schools sector

Author:

Agyemang Gloria

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to analyse whether the development of a needs‐based funding formula for resource allocation incorporates the needs of funders or the needs of the service providers.Design/methodology/approachThe paper analyses interview data and documentary evidence gathered from a UK local education authority about the creation of a “needs‐based” formula for sharing resources to schools. It employs and extends a framework developed by Levačić and Ross to evaluate needs‐based formula funding.FindingsAlthough formula funding is purported to be a more objective method of resource allocation, the paper finds that as with other resource allocation methods the power relations between the funder and the service provider impacts on the extent to which service provider needs are incorporated into the funding formula.Research limitations/implicationsThis paper considers only the funding of schools. Further work is needed to investigate formula funding for other public services.Practical implicationsDebates between funders and service providers should be encouraged by policy makers to ensure that allocations based on the funding formula are acceptable to service providers.Originality/valueThe paper provides a useful analysis of a needs‐based funding formula for resource allocation in schools and whether this incorporates the needs of funders or the needs of the service providers.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous),Accounting

Reference47 articles.

1. Ahrens, T. and Chapman, C. (2006), “Doing qualitative field research in management accounting: positioning data to contribute to theory”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 31 No. 8, pp. 819‐41.

2. Angulin, D. and Scapens, R. (2000), “Transparency, accounting knowledge and perceived fairness in UK universities' resource allocation: results from a survey of accounting and finance”, British Accounting Review, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 1‐42.

3. Astley, G.W. and Sachdeva, P. (1984), “Structural sources of intraorganizational power: a theoretical synthesis”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 104‐13.

4. Berry, A. and Otley, D. (2004), “Cased based research in accounting”, in Humphrey, C. and Lee, B. (Eds), The Real Life Guide to Accounting Research: A Behind the Scenes View of Using Qualitative Research Methods, Elsevier, Oxford.

5. Broadbent, J., Laughlin, R., Shern, D. and Dandy, N. (1993), “Implementing local management of schools: a theoretical and empirical analysis”, Research Papers in Education Policy and Practice, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 149‐76.

Cited by 12 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3