School Specific Budget

The School Specific Budget (SSB) was introduced to bring financial resources closer to schools and enable Head Teachers (HMs) to address their schools' immediate needs. In January 2026, the Sindh Education and Literacy Department (SELD) released approximately Rs18.63 billion to public schools for repairs, maintenance, furniture, washing facilities, stationery, plantation and co-curricular activities.

Giving financial authority to Head Teachers can be a positive reform. The person managing a school understands its problems better than an officer sitting far away. But authority must bring responsibility, transparency and accountability.

The first phase of SSB raises an important question: Are funds being spent according to the actual priorities of children, or are visible improvements receiving greater attention than essential facilities?

The Vendor Question

One concern emerging from field observations is the role of vendors.

The purpose of devolving SSB was to empower schools—not vendors.

A vendor has a commercial interest in selling goods or services. The Head Teacher, however, has a responsibility to identify the school's actual needs and ensure that public money is spent in the best interest of students.

There are concerns that in some cases vendors have influenced what should be purchased and how expenditure is carried out.

If a vendor effectively tells a school what to purchase, prepares paperwork or influences the purchasing process, the purpose of school-level financial empowerment is weakened.

The HM should identify priorities according to the school's needs and applicable rules. Vendors should provide goods and services, not determine priorities.

Where Are the Priorities?

The important question is not simply whether SSB money has been spent. The real question is what it has been spent on.

Sindh's public schools face non-functional toilets, inadequate drinking water, unreliable electricity, insufficient furniture and poor maintenance. These should be among the first SSB priorities.

Yet field observations from some schools indicate that considerable attention has been given to colouring and painting buildings while essential facilities remain incomplete.

A freshly painted school looks impressive and produces good photographs.

But a painted wall does not provide drinking water.

A painted classroom does not make a non-functional toilet usable.

A painted building does not operate fans during hot weather.

This raises a fundamental question:

Should SSB money make schools look better, or make them function better?

The answer should be clear: functionality must come first.

Toilets and Drinking Water Must Come First

A school cannot be considered functional if children cannot use safe toilets. This is particularly important for girls, for whom privacy, sanitation and dignity are essential.

Drinking water is equally fundamental. Children spend several hours at school, often in extremely hot weather. Safe drinking water should therefore be among the first SSB priorities.

If a school receives SSB funds while washrooms remain unusable and children still lack drinking water, the expenditure plan needs to be questioned.

Electricity is another major concern. Where electricity is unreliable, an appropriate solar solution could help operate fans and improve the classroom environment. Such expenditure may not look as attractive as painting, but its value to children can be much greater.

The First Tranche and Unfinished Priorities

Field observations also indicate that in some schools the first tranche of SSB funds has reportedly been utilised without completing important basic facilities.

In some cases, solar panels have not been purchased or installed, washrooms for boys and girls remain non-functional, and drinking-water arrangements have not been provided.

At the same time, buildings have been coloured and photographs uploaded showing improvement.

This raises questions about monitoring.

A photograph can show that a wall has been painted. It cannot establish whether drinking water is available, whether a toilet is functional or whether solar equipment has actually been installed and is operating fans.

SSB monitoring should therefore move beyond photographic evidence and focus on functional verification.

A Clear Priority System Is Needed

Painting and beautification are not wrong. The problem arises when visible work takes priority over essential work.

A school with old walls but functioning toilets, drinking water, fans and basic learning facilities is serving children better than a beautifully painted school where basic facilities are missing.

SSB should follow a clear hierarchy

The principle should be simple: Painting should not come before drinking water. Beautification should not come before sanitation.

School Committees Must Become Meaningful

Where the SSB procedure requires a school committee, it should not exist merely to sign documents.

The committee should identify needs, establish priorities, review expenditure, monitor implementation and verify completed work.

Before expenditure, the committee should ask: What is the most urgent problem facing our students?

After completion, it should ask: What has actually changed because this money was spent?

If a school spends significantly on painting while its toilets remain unusable, the committee should be able to explain why that priority was selected.

Accountability should therefore be shared. The HM should not carry responsibility alone, but the committee must not become a rubber stamp.

Don't Judge SSB by Photographs

SELD should reconsider how SSB expenditure is verified.

Photographs are useful, but should support, not replace, physical verification.

A better monitoring chain would be:

Budget received ? Priority plan ? Procurement ? Amount spent ? Work completed ? Physical verification ? Committee certification ? Functional status.

If a solar system is reported as installed, verification should establish whether it exists, is properly connected and actually operates the intended equipment.

If toilets have been repaired, verification should establish whether they are usable and supplied with water.

If drinking water has been provided, the question should be whether children can actually access it.

The objective should be to measure outcomes, not merely expenditure.

What About the Quality of Painting?

Even where painting is considered appropriate, quality must be monitored.

Field observations suggest that in some schools newly applied colour has deteriorated considerably within a short period, reportedly within around two months.

This raises questions about the quality of material, quantity, rates and workmanship.

If public money is spent on painting, the department should verify whether the work meets a reasonable standard.

Public money should not repeatedly be spent on the same work because poor-quality material or workmanship caused it to deteriorate quickly.

SSB Should Be Improved, Not Abandoned

The answer is not to take financial authority away from Head Teachers.

Giving schools greater control over resources is sound, but decentralisation needs safeguards.

HMs should receive practical training in procurement, financial management and SSB procedures. School committees should be functional. Vendors should not control decisions. Procurement should be transparent, and monitoring should focus on results rather than photographs.

There should also be consequences where public funds are misused or procedures are deliberately ignored.

Honest and committed Head Teachers should be supported, not treated with suspicion simply because they manage public funds.

The Real Test of SSB

SSB success should not be measured by schools painted, bills processed or money spent.

It should be measured by what children experience when they enter school.

Can they drink safe water?

Can girls and boys use functional toilets?

Can they wash their hands?

Can they sit comfortably?

Can fans operate when electricity fails?

Have essential repairs actually been completed?

Have learning conditions improved?

These are the real indicators of SSB success.

Sindh doesn't just need better-looking schools. It needs better-functioning schools.

A freshly painted school without drinking water cannot be considered a complete success. A colourful school without functional toilets is still failing to meet a basic need. A school that has received money for solar equipment but has not installed it has not achieved the intended outcome.

The School Specific Budget provides Sindh with an important opportunity to bring financial decision-making closer to schools. But decentralisation must be accompanied by responsibility, transparency, monitoring and measurable results.

Every rupee spent should address an identified need, and every completed activity should be capable of physical verification.

The principle should be simple:

First make the school functional. Then make it beautiful.

For a child, a clean wall is welcome—but safe drinking water, a functional toilet, a cool classroom and a proper learning environment matter much more.

SSB should not produce photographs alone. It should produce schools where children learn, teachers teach and basic facilities work.