MEXICANOS PRIMERO

Board of Directors
Claudio X. Gonzlez Guajardo
President
Alejandro Ramrez Magaa
Vice President
David Caldern Martn del Campo
General Director
Jos Ignacio valos Hernndez
Bruno Ferrari Garca de Alba
Pablo Gonzlez Guajardo
Sissi Harp Calderoni
Fernando Landeros Verdugo
Alicia Lebrija Hirschfeld
Antonio Prida Pen del Valle
Roberto Snchez Mejorada
Donors
Emilio Azcrraga Jean, Jos Ignacio valos Hernndez, Alejandro Baillres
Gual, Agustn Coppel Luken, Antonio del Valle Perochena, Jos Antonio
Fernndez Carbajal, Carlos Fernndez Gonzlez, Claudio X. Gonzlez
Guajardo, Pablo Gonzlez Guajardo, Carlos Hank Gonzlez, Sissi Harp
Calderoni, Fernando Landeros Verdugo, Laura Diez Barroso de Laviada,
Alicia Lebrija Hirschfeld, Alejandro Ramrez Magaa, Ignacio Deschamps
Gonzlez, Alejandro Legorreta Gonzlez, Marcos Martnez Gavica, Carlos
Rahmane Sacal, Daniel Servitje Montull, Eduardo Tricio Haro.
Academic Council
Miguel Basez Ebergeny, Gustavo Fabin Iaies, Bernardo Naranjo Piera,
Roberto Newell Garca, Harry A. Patrinos, Federico Reyes Heroles, Lucrecia
Santibez Martnez, Alberto Saracho Martnez.
Staff
Cintya Martnez Villanueva
Associate Director
Adriana Del Valle Tovar
Director of Communication and Mobilization
Norma Espinosa Vzquez
Media
Jennifer L. ODonoghue, Manuel Bravo Valladolid,
and Fernando Ruiz Ruiz
Research
Alfonso Rangel Terrazas
Design
Alejandro Ordez Gonzlez
Digital Communications
Miroslava Flix Sariana
Public Affairs
Alberto Serdn Rosales
Citizen Activation
Mara Teresa Aguilar lvarez Castro
Legal Studies
Francisco Melndez Garca
Operations
Paulina Martnez Rivera
Events
Iliana Martnez Oate
Assistant to the President
Laura Castillo Carro
Assistant to the General Director
Maricruz Dox Aguilln
Liaison and Operations Analyst
Miriam Castillo Ramrez, Raquel Cervini Pauln,
and Alicia Caldern Ramos
Analysts and Assistants
Esther Reyes Nieves
Administrative Support
Gabriel Escobar Lpez, Ernesto de Santiago Corona
Logistical Support
First edition: September 2013.
(Mis)Spent:The State of Education in Mexico 2013.
Executive Summary
Copyright MEXICANOS PRIMERO, VISIN 2030 A.C.
Av. Insurgentes Sur No. 1647, piso 12 Torre Prisma
Col. San Jos Insurgentes,
C.P. 03900, Del. Benito Jurez. Mxico, D.F.
+52 (55) 55 98 64 98
www.mexicanosprimero.org
http://www.facebook.com/MexPrim
http://twitter.com/#!/Mexicanos1o
http://www.youtube.com/mexicanosprimero2030
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38062135@N05/

(Mis)Spent:The State of Education in Mexico 2013.

Executive Summary
David Caldern and Jennifer L. ODonoghue
Editors
Mxico Evala, Marco A. Fernndez, David Caldern, Jennifer L.
ODonoghue, Manuel Bravo Valladolid, and Fernando Ruiz Ruiz
Contributors
Jennifer L. ODonoghue
Translation
Jennifer L. ODonoghue, Manuel Bravo Valladolid, and Fernando Ruiz Ruiz
Technical Review
Itzel Ramrez Osorno
Editorial Coordinator
Alfonso Rangel Terrazas and Itzel Ramrez Osorno
Cover and Interior Design
Jorge Ramrez Chvez and Graciela Iniestra Ramrez
Copy Editing and Proofreading
Itzel Ramrez Osorno and Rafael Tapia Yez
Design
Alfonso Rangel Terrazas, Yadn Xolalpa, and Sofa Gonzlez
Photography
Rafael Tapia Yez, Alejandro Ordez Gonzlez, and Alfonso Rangel
Terrazas
Illustration
Printed in Mexico/Impreso en Mxico
We appreciate the willingness and openness of officials, teachers,
students, and parents in Guanajuato, Guerrero, Hidalgo, Mexico City, the
State of Mexico, Oaxaca, Sonora, and Yucatan who, under condition of
anonymity, shared with us their experiences and perspectives, as well as
their views on education and education spending. We also would like to
acknowledge the support and guidance offered at various times in this
work by: Edna Jaime, Lucrecia Santibaez, Rosa Maria Giorgana, Diego
Martinez, and Hector Robles. We appreciate the participation of Lucia
Gamboa Sorenson (Chapter 6) and Lorenzo Gomez Morin, Edward
Guise, and Javier Patino (Chapter 5) as research assistants. We recognize
the availability of the staff of the Directorate General for Policy Evaluation
(DGEP) of the Ministry of Public Education and the National Institute for
Education Evaluation (INEE) to respond to our requests for information
and relevant statistics.
No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or
by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or
by any information storage or retrieval system, without the prior written
authorization of the publisher.

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

Introduction

Spending to learn and learning to spend

n our series of studies on the State of

Education in Mexico, we aim to shed
light on crucial aspects of the national
education system. This year, our fifth,
we take up the topic of education
spending, focusing on the extent to which
public spending, a principal public policy
instrument, contributes to the realization
or not of the right to a quality education.
The exercise of this right remains but a pleasant
thought, a mere rhetorical commitment, if material
resources are not made available to effectively
support education actors and processes that
facilitate learning, within a system that ensures
equity, par ticipation, efficiency, transparency,
and honesty.
The constitutional reform ratified in early 2013
defines quality as a central feature of education and
emphasizes the obligation of the Mexican State to
guarantee it. However, if economic resources
are not aligned to the new requirements arising
from Article 3 of the Constitution, we will find
ourselves facing a failed reform: a vision
inspiring in its ends, but lacking the means to
fulfill its purpose.
In the various chapters of this book, accompanied
by the contributions of researchers, public officials,
teachers, and parents, we take up the task of

THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

formulating a diagnosis and launching a series

of recommendations that would contribute to
making education spending a tool to transform
both processes within and results of the
national education system. We do not claim
to be exhaustive, but rather seek clarity in our
analyses, with two principal objectives in mind:
1) set a precedent of evidence, demand,
and correction, from the very definition and
allocation of the budget through to its use, in
order to guarantee the exercise of a fundamental
human right; and 2) firmly establish the topic
in public opinion, taking it beyond specialized
bodies of experts and exposing a problem that
adversely affects millions of Mexicans.
In the multiplicity of voices included in this work
one message is conveyed loud and clear : in
order to ensure true investment in our
children and youth, education funds must
cease to be misspent. Although the urgent
transformation we need is legal and administrative,
the impetus for this change must be political
and ethical: political forces must take
responsibility for reordering education
spending, safeguarding it from the rampant
capture of resources that currently ails the
education system, and citizens must abandon
their position as spectators to become
decisive participants, demanding accountability
for the use of public funds.

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

1. S

pending as a Key Public

Policy Instrument
David Caldern

hree paradigms should guide

public policy linking economic
resources to the right to
education: 1) focus on
spending rather than just
budgeting, 2) follow a progressive logic,
redistributing opportunities, and 3) develop
vigorous, transparent public institutions,
held accountable by citizens.

Spending, in Addition
to Budgeting
Our decision to give preference to spending
over budgeting was mainly due to the fact that
the budget cycle in Mexico is incomplete:
the actual distribution and use of the official
budget is subject to a cycle of capture, distortion,
and diversion by formal and informal actors; in
short, formal allocation does not mean
that resources reach schools. Per student
spending should not be interpreted as real and
effective spending on that student.Throughout our
report, then, we concentrate on trying to answer
how our use of resources relates to the
learning opportunities and outcomes for
the children and youth of Mexico.

Spending and the

Redistribution of Life Chances
The universal right to education implies the
collective commitment to consistently promote
the development of the maximum potential
of each individual, providing broadly equivalent
opportunities, beyond what may be expected
due to origin or current situation. We use the
term life chances to refer to occasions
that allow individuals to take charge of their
own lives and to define and express themselves;
in short, to pursue their self-proposed goals.
Education is a life chance par excellence;
it represents the possibility to take
advantage of opportunities, to unleash
the full potential of each of us and all
of us together. In this sense, education is the
master strategy for development: it is itself to
be universally enjoyed, by everyone with
equal entitlement, and its effect enables the
enjoyment of other rights, which in turn
promote equity and individual decision.
However, in Mexico mere access to schooling
does not necessarily close the opportunity gap,
but rather may crystallize it. Formal education
should provide the opportunity for a decent
and well-paid job, but this only occurs when
education pathways are complete and
successful; that is, it depends on the amount
and the quality of education going hand
in hand. If funding processes continue to be
distorted, increased spending will not enhance
THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

equity, but precisely the opposite: accelerate the

capture of public resources by private interests.
We must instill, culturally and with regard to
the budget, the conviction that education
spending ought to be an explicit instance
of the redistribution of life chances for
the next generation. Compensation should
be directed towards both schools (and their
teachers) as well as families with lower income
and education levels. It is outrageous that public
schools are not provided explicit and sufficient
funds to finance their everyday operation, leaving
parents the burden of collecting fees to pay for
basic supplies or services. The step that would
truly make these fees unnecessary has yet to be
materialized in public policy: the establishment
of a budgetary minimum to be allocated
and delivered to each and every school.
A symmetric spending scheme same spending
per student across the country which does not
consider the elevated costs caused by distance
and population dispersion, and which does not
provide necessary compensation for low cultural
capital, is simply a simulation of equality. Brutal
inequality exists between as well as within
states, and it increases year after year. For education
spending to achieve its purpose, which is to finance
the redistribution of life chances, it must be
progressive, activating the power of desegmentation that is at the heart of its mandate.

Spending and State

Stewardship of Education
True State stewardship of education and
its corresponding finances is not characterized by
stifling and opaque paternalism, nor does it imply
abandoning government responsibility to ensure
equity in public schooling. Rather, it is distinguished
by its ability to use spending according to
its democratic mandate.
The right to quality education is hindered by lack
of foresight or destination and by improvisation,
THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

discontinuity and lack of educational grounding

in education spending decisions. However,
even more serious is the damage inflicted
when government lacks the power or the will
to prevent the capture of public resources. It is
a gross contradiction that our appointed
administrator generates revenue based upon
the authority resulting from our collective decision
only to lose our common resources to a
particular faction.
The new federal administration has taken up
the slogan, originating in the demands of civil
society, of recovering State stewardship of
education. Their spokespeople have expressed
it thusly, and the speed and force with which
they have enacted constitutional changes are a
first step in the right direction. However, State
stewardship is an exercise of authority,
not of authoritarianism, and it should not
be interpreted as exempting proposals made by
the Executive Branch from criticism and open
discussion. The current government, and its
subnational counterparts, now have the enormous
responsibility to ensure that spending reform
follows regulatory reform: if public education is to
be reshaped in light of the constitutional guarantee
of its quality, spending cannot be left as it is, let
alone allowed to be privatized in practice through
the unlawful diversion of resources.
Learning is not a simple production function, in
which regular inputs and standard processes generate
identical results: more money in does not necessarily
translate into more points on standardized tests.
Increasing the amount we spend is not
enough; we must know on what, how and
in benefit of whom ourresources are to be
spent.The Mexican government must assure
its citizens of the wise and equitable use of
funds, as well as their honest and vigorous
protection against looting.The school system
must be sufficiently resourced and adequately and
equitably compensated; education financing must
be efficient, transparent, and correctable, with the
joint participation and co-responsibility of both
federal and state governments. Only an education
system characterized by quality spending can
produce quality learning.

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

2. T

he Meaning of Education
Spending: Guaranteeing
the Right to Learn

Jennifer L. ODonoghue

he right to education is
internationally recognized and
nationally guaranteed by law.
The recent reform of Article
3 of the Constitution establishes
the Mexican States responsibility to ensure
education quality the maximum
achievement of learning in compulsory
education.This approach represents a major and
important shift: we can now understand the right
to education as the right to learn, and the States
obligation extends beyond simply providing access;
it implies promoting the development of effective
learning environments, which provide the
conditions necessary for teaching and learning.
Likewise, the right to quality education never
refers to exclusive excellence, but rather
inclusive learning. In short, without equity,
there can be no quality, and thus no guarantee
of effective access to this basic human right.
Guaranteeing the full realization of the right to
education, therefore, means suppor ting the
comprehensive development of each and every
child and young person in Mexico.

What Would Education

Oriented towards the Right
to Learn Look Like? Towards
a True School
The defining elements of the right to learn have
been (and remain) a topic of debate. In this

chapter, we follow a line of international work that

seeks to identify the characteristics of a learning
environment that promotes the full exercise of
the right. The question that guides us is: from
the point of view of the rights of children,
what and how should a school be?
Beyond a building with certain infrastructure
or a Work Center Code (Clave de Centro de
Trabajo, CCT)1 with particular administrative
arrangements, a true school, oriented towards
the full exercise of the right to learn, should be
a learning community characterized by
social relationships and material conditions
that enable the people participating in
it to develop fully, beyond what would be
expected given their social, economic and
cultural background. A school is formed by
people (students, teachers, and parents) who
develop relationships and social processes in the
context of physical conditions that support them
in their efforts to teach and learn (see Figure 2.1).
This school is situated at the intersection of a local
community, a national school system, and a global
world; as such, it should develop as a space apart
from and, at the same time, part of these multilayered contexts, able to withstand the pressures
and navigate the opportunities they present.
We propose three classifications for
current CCTs:
1) Non-school: fails to ensure the minimum
necessary to undertake the process of teaching
1

The current mechanism for identifying schools in Mexico, a payroll

distribution center, even if it does not have walls or a ceiling.
THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

7
FIGURe 2.1
School

and learning. Does not provide opportunities

for students to overcome their current
condition. The non-school is a mere
simulation of education.
2) School in development: features the
minimum characteristics necessary for the task
of education, but does not yet consistently
guarantee the right to learn. A school in
development encompasses some of the
relationships and conditions necessary for
people to teach and learn, but there is
more work to be done to guarantee the
realization of the right.
3) School: has features that clearly support
the exercise of the right to learn. In schools,
in the true meaning of the word, we see
THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

comprehensive and full development of

all members of the learning community.
Within these classifications, although we can
establish a minimum, there is no maximum; every
school can and should aspire to be
even better.

The School
People: Students, teachers, and parents in
the center.

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

One of the main ingredients in the development

of children are other people. Our conception
of school, therefore, begins with people, the
participants in the teaching and learning process:
children, teachers, and parents. It is clear that
without the regular and positive presence of
these people, we will have no effective learning.
Relationships: processes, structures, activities,
and a climate that support learning.
Learning, thinking, and knowledge grow out of
relationships between people who collaborate
together on specific activities and tasks in the social
world. Learning occurs best when done within
a community with high standards for learning
and opportunities for interaction, participation,
and feedback.
Material conditions: infrastructure and
materials at the service of teaching and learning.
To be effective, people and their relationships
should be supported by material conditions,
including buildings, equipment, and supplies,
that favor the work of the learning community.
This dimension is critical and should always be
at the service of people and their relationships
and processes.
Institutional framework: a system that
supports the development of schools.

No school is, or should be, isolated from or

completely independent of the broader education
system. The system must ensure favorable
conditions for people to build and maintain
relationships and provide adequate material
conditions for the realization of the right to
learn. On the one hand, this implies extinguishing
practices that distract young people, teachers, and
parents from their task teaching and learning;
on the other, it requires positive action on the
part of the system to promote this work. If we
do not create change at the system level,
the obligation of the State will remain
unfulfilled; some will have access to a real
school, while others will continue mired
in mere simulation.

Spending for the Right

to Learn
The conceptualization of school that we present
here has important implications for the way we
spend on education. It requires strategic use of
economic resources: spending oriented toward the
full realization of the right to a quality education
must fund people's presence and time, in
addition to material concerns, so that all
people can learn and develop to their full potential.

THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

3. T

he Design of Education
Spending in Mexico:
Obstacles and Limitations

Mxico Evala

he Mexican government must

currently provide its population
over 15 years of instruction,
from preschool and primary
through to lower and upper
secondary education. The compulsory-schoolaged population (from 3-19 years) accounts for
about 33% of the total population in the country,
although almost one in four young people does
not receive formal instruction. The national
education system caters to 33.5 million students,
is comprised of around 250,500 schools, and
manages a staff of 1.8 million teachers (SEP, 2012).
The greatest demand is concentrated at the basic
education level (pre-, primary, and lower secondary
school), representing more than 75% of spending,
over 90% of schools, and 65% of teachers.
The education spending that supports this
system comes mainly from the public
sector, specifically the federal government,
which contributes around 62% of financial
resources. Federal government spending has
presented an increasing trend in the last two
decades in both absolute and comparative terms.
Mexico leads the countries of the Organization
for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) in terms of spending as a percentage
of total public expenditure. However, this figure
presents only a partial picture of education funding:
the country ranks second to last in terms
of per student spending.

A substantial disconnect exists between

the goals of education spending and its
impacts.The logic of increased funding is that the
allocation of additional resources would improve
educational services, and that these, in turn, would
have an effect on the quality of education. In the
Mexican case, this simply does not happen.

The Route of Spending in

Basic Education
The current structure of education spending
is the result of the decentralization process
implemented in Mexico in the nineties. The
federal government transferred the administration
of schools, including teacher training, to state
governments. The General Education Law (Ley
General de Educacin, LGE), formulated in 1993,
defined the new educational functions of each
order of government and established shared
responsibility for public education funding and
services among the Federal Government, the states,
and municipalities. However, these regulations
did not establish to what extent each
order of government should participate.
The structure of educational funding is
concentrated in three budget items (Ramos):
Ramo 11: grants funding to the Ministry of
Public Education to provide education services

Source: Ministry of Public Education (SEP, 2012). Sistema educativo de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos, Principales cifras del ciclo escolar 2011-2012, Mexico. Available at:
http://www.sep.gob.mx/work/models/sep1/Resource/1899/2/images/principales_cifras_2011.pdf [consulted: February 2013]
THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

10

and carry out the operational, regulatory, and

compensatory functions of the federal education
authority.
Ramo 25: has two components: 1) basic
education ser vices in Mexico City; and
2) estimates to cover cost increases based on
teacher salary negotiations.
FAEB: resources for personnel costs for
early childhood, basic, indigenous, and special
education, as well as normal education and
local teacher training. Distribution is based
on: the common registry of schools, staffing,
budgetary resources of the preceding fiscal year,
and operating expenses (other than personnel
and maintenance). After the 2007 Tax Reform,
allocation depends on: (1) a compensatory
component for those states in which per
student spending is beneath that of the national
average, (2) an enrollment index, which seeks

to link resources with education demand, (3) an

education quality index, which has yet to
be published as of 2013, and (4) local effort
to contribute state or municipal resources to
education financing.
Planning, programming, and budgeting of these
resources is the responsibility of the federal
government, through the Ministry of Finance
and Public Credit (SHCP) and the Ministry of
Public Education.The Federal Executive delivers a
draft budget to the legislature for discussion and
approval. During months of negotiations in the
legislature, the education budget is immersed in a
constant process of lobbying and fighting
for resources by various interest groups and
state governments. In this process, it is clear that
legislative decision making about the education
budget does not follow a strategic logic
that emphasizes the quality of education.

THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

11

After lawmakers approve changes and increases in

federal government spending, the Executive issues
an official Decree of the Expenditure Budget of the
Federation, and delivery schedules and spending
responsibilities are published.The Federal Budget
and Fiscal Responsibility Law establishes evaluation
procedures for federal resources and requires
that states and federal dependencies that
receive federal funds submit quarterly
reports on the application, destination, and
outcomes of public expenditure to the SHCP.
Finally, control of these budget items is the
responsibility of the State Control Organs,
the Internal Control Organ of the Ministry of
Education, and the Superior Audit Office of Mexico
(ASF, Auditoria Superior de la Federacin).

Obstacles and Limitations of

Public Education Spending
in Mexico
a) Openings in the education spending budget
cycle permit the capture of resources.
The institutional framework of the education
sector is not solid enough to warn of
improper practices in the management and
implementation of the education budget or
to avoid opening spaces for resource capture.
b) There is little flexibility in the use and
application of education spending. Any increase
in resources directed toward education is
almost entirely absorbed by teacher payroll,
yet education authorities do not have proper
control over teacher hiring, training, or
promotion.
c) Limited responsibility of local governments
for financing education.The current system of
federal transfers to support state education
generates a high level of dependence; it
is a worn out system of coordination and
decentralization that does not satisfy any party.
d) Limited resources for improving school
infrastructure, equipment, operation, and
maintenance. Not only are schools faced with
the problem of operating with insufficient
THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

resources, they do not participate in the

planning process.
e) Current allocation mechanisms increase
education gaps. Resource allocation does
not consider the type of school, its conditions,
or the cost of education in each region; a small
group benefits from this distribution.
The current structure of education spending
in Mexico is onerous for both federal and
state authorities, unbalanced, and unlikely
to produce positive effects on learning. The
persistence of an inertial budget and inflexible
education spending offers very limited leeway to
the actors responsible for exercising this fund of
resources. Education finance requires a spending
design that breaks the cycle of inefficiency, capture,
and deviation from the objectives of education
policy. A paradigm for improving education must
not only involve the provision of greater resources,
but must direct them towards priority areas.

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

12

4. T

he Budget Cycle and

Recurrent Misspending

David Caldern

mong the many ills that

characterize education
spending in Mexico is the
fact that the majority of the
stages in the Budget Cycle
used by the Federal Public Administration (see
Figure 4.1) are not successive, but rather
simultaneous, while others are delayed or
even omitted. As a general rule, one stage
does not feed into the next, with grave real
world consequences.

The circle in Figure 4.1 supposes that, in Phase 2,

education authorities have relayed a forecast of
their needs to the Ministry of Finance and Public
Credit (SHCP), and that this forecast comprises an
initial budget for the Executive to submit to the
Legislature taking into account the amount of
income available (from Phase 1) and the results
of evaluation and accountability (Phases 6 and 7).
The Executive, for its part, adds new programs of
its own or additional spending amounts to this
projection. During the approval process (Phase
3), the House of Representatives tends to further
increase the amount of certain items and to make
changes in implementation rules.

FIGURe 4.1

Budgetary Cycle
according to the
Federal Public
Administration

1
Income/revenue
7
accountability

2
budget
preparation

6
evaluation

3
approval

5
monitoring

4
implementation
(spending and control)

Source: SHCP, 2012: 13.

THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

13

Implementation (spending and control; Phase 4)

is delayed for many programs, and disruptions
are common in payment accounts. Monitoring
(Phase 5) is conducted through quarterly reports
produced by implementing entities (primarily the
states), which generally simply record the progress
of actual expenditure against defined indicators
and seldom receive feedback.

function as a virtuous cycle, but rather a

vicious one.

Evaluation (Phase 6) tends to be produced long

after funds are spent, and in the case of the
education sector has little substantive grounding,
especially with regard to the relation between
expenditures and the quality and equity of learning
conditions.There is generally a two-year time lag
between implementation and accountability (Phase
7).The contradictory result is that the next cycle
has already begun without rectifying the
problems identified by the auditors; as a
result, needed corrections are not applied.

The yearly reports of the ASF expose a litany of

abuses in education spending across the country:
more than three billion pesos in irregularities
were identified in 2010 (see Table 4.2). We are
confronted with practices that are not occasional,
but recurrent and widespread: we face a
systemic problem that requires an equally
structural solution.

The temporal break in the budget cycle translates

into incongruity: the Superior Audit Office of
Mexico (Auditora Superior de la Federacin, ASF)
identifies gross irregularities that are repeated
year after year. The budget process does not

Irregularities in FAEB
detected by the ASF

The rules regarding the use of FAEB funds, in

place since 1998, were more recently reinforced
by Agreement 482, published in 2009. There is,
therefore, no legal pretext for deviations from the
stated purpose of this fund, but the fact that state
officials prefer to incur observations
from the ASF about misuse of funds rather
than put a definitive end to such practices,

Table 4.2
Summary of illegal
payments detected
in the ASFs 2010
Report of Results
(in thousands of pesos)

Union commission

1,474,188.7

47%

Payment to personnel assigned to AGS Centers

584,737.4

19%

Transfers to the National Education Workers

Union (SNTE)

841,400.1

27%

Payment to personnel assigned to AGD Centers

200,818.1

6%

Commission to perform duties of popularly elected

office and in other government dependencies

22,721.4

1%

Leave of absence with undue pay

25,791.1

1%

3,149,656.8

100%

TOTAL

Source: Compiled by author with information from ASF, 2012.

THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

14

gives us much to think about. It seems that, at the

state level, the existing dynamic of public discredit
has done little to curb misspending.
To think that the role played by the Superior Audit
Office of Mexico should be reduced to that of a
mere pen pusher, registering each year the severe
embezzlement that characterizes education
spending, would be disheartening for citizens, at
best. Instead, we are convinced that the ASF is
endowed with legal powers that go beyond simply
recording irregularities or preparing statements
of observations and general recommendations.

Accountability and the

restoration of the budget cycle

destination, becoming salaries for those to whom

they do not correspond, or used to pay for goods
and services that do not serve children, but rather
use them as a pretext.
Questioning inefficiency and asking to punish the
misuse of funds does not imply a call to decrease
taxpayer contributions to free public education:
rather, what we demand is precisely that
those funds be allocated effectively
and distributed equitably and that the
patent illegality within the system be
punished so as to prevent repeated
offense. Evaluation without improvement,
detection without consequences, reports without
serious accountability are no longer an option. If
the circle continues to be broken, it will continue
to be a vicious cycle.

The human right to quality education is violated

when public funds are diver ted from their

THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

15

5.T

he Political Economy of
Education Spending in Mexico

Marco A. Fernndez

The National Education

Workers Union (SNTE) and
Education Decentralization

ducation decentralization
in Mexico fr agmented
government authority, without
doing the same to the teachers
union. In this way, the staunchest
opponent of decentralization reform became its
primary beneficiary.

Contrary to what is claimed by SNTE leaders,

the economic benefit for Mexican teachers of the
1992 decentralization of the education system
has been substantial. Over the past two decades,
teachers revenues have grown in real terms every
year, with the exception of 1995 (see Figure 5.1).

FIGURe 5.1

Annual Salary of a Public Primary School Teacher,

1972-2012

10

Prior to decentralization

9.8

After decentralization

9
8
7

6.7

5.1

5
4

4.3

3.6

3
2

2.7

2.5

2.2

2012

2010

2008

2006

2004

2002

2000

1998

1996

1994

1992

1990

1988

1986

1984

1982

1980

1978

1976

1974

Presidential
Election Years

7.9

1972

Annual Minimum Wage in Mexico City

Minimum
wage in
Mexico
City

Source: Author calculations, based on information from Arroyo Garcia, 2011; Banxico; National Minimum Wage Commission;
OECD, 2011; and an exhaustive review of national and state periodicals for the period 1992-2012.

THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

16

To this we must add the additional revenue

teachers obtain: yearly bonuses, vacation pay,
bonus days and subsidies, as well as the additional
salary received by a teacher belonging to the
incentive program Carrera Magisterial (CM).
Teachers who belong to the first level of CM,
for example, receive a salary bonus of 36%,
while those who make it to level five earn 294%
more. On average, considering salary and
benefits, public school teachers in Mexico
receive the equivalent of 513.6 days of
wages for 200 days actually worked.

a) Disruptive actions, such as marches, sitins, strikes, building seizures, roadblocks, and
even the lynching of authorities.

The strength of the SNTE lies in its extensive

territorial presence, its sizeable number of
affiliates, the influence that many teachers
have in their communities, and the economic
resources it receives (member dues plus
government transfers).

The SNTE uses its mobilization capacity

effectively to express labor demands without
their confrontational behavior resulting in
negative consequences. Given the number
of children and young people they serve,
the disruptive effect of teachers actions
immediately place parents in a difficult
situation.

This strategy has been effective for the

union during both the era of one-par ty
rule and during the more recent period of
democratic competition. Between 1992 and

The SNTE: A Strategic Actor

in the Definition of Education
Spending
The SNTE has managed to act strategically to
influence education policy and the definition
of spending in this area, making use of three
instruments:

THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

17

2008, basic education teachers engaged in

more than 4,800 disruptive actions. Such
acts, condemned for their negative effects
on student achievement, have been profitable
for those who carry them out.

Despite the existence of a formula for the

distribution of federal funds to the states,
their allocation has been determined more
by political criteria than technical guidelines;
with each disruptive action, the amount of
FAEB funds states receive per student rises.

b) Colonization of the institutional

education apparatus, both federally
and in the states.

The SNTE has gained control of multiple

positions in the official structure of education
systems across the country. At the school
and district level, it has been stalwart in its
resistance to competitive selection processes
for school directors and supervisors, ensuring
that they are instead rewarded for their
loyalty to the union. In several states, union
control extends from the directorates of
basic education to the coordination of Carrera
Magisterial, the primary teacher incentive
program, as well as teacher promotion
systems, and even into the state secretariats
or institutes for public education.

c) Incorporation into the politicalelectoral sphere, in its own political party

and through legislators that represent union
interests in other parties.

The unions collective action capacity has

converted it into an effective agent of electoral
mobilization. Where once their services
were provided to the only potential buyer
in the electoral market, increasing political
competition has allowed the union to diversify,
forming political and electoral alliances with
various political forces in the country. The
electoral capital commanded by the SNTE
allowed it to create its own political party
in 2005.

THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

Final Thoughts
The continuance of the negative status quo in
public education in Mexico is the result of the
ability of the SNTE to influence education policy
in the country, coupled with the inability of federal
and state authorities to coordinate their actions.
Education authorities, both federal and state,
have made concessions and granted generous
benefits to teachers in the country due to political
pressure, threats of strikes, demonstrations, sit-ins,
and, in extreme cases, violence.
The political incentives arising from the
terms of education decentralization hinder
the collaboration needed between levels of
government in order to curb union pressure
on education spending. As long as the funding
responsibilities of each level of government are
not clearly established, authorities will continue
to blame each other, and their inability to
coordinate effectively opens spaces in which the
union can maintain its influence over education
policy decisions.
Conflict between government and teachers is
not unique to Mexico. Countries such as Ecuador
and Peru were also confronted with recurring
teacher protests, but the governments of these
countries have taken decisive steps to confront
resistance to key proposals to improve
education quality head-on. Mexican
authorities could consider similar routes.
One of the main challenges in implementing
constitutional education reform and its
corresponding secondary legislation will be
to dismantle the current structure of
capture and replace it with mechanisms
that promote education quality. The right
of teachers to demonstrate and maintain job
security has taken precedence over the right of
Mexican children to a quality education.

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

18

6. I

n Support of Schools?
Spending and Education
Quality in Mexico

Jennifer L. ODonoghue

n Mexico we face not just a gap, but

a yawning chasm in our knowledge
about how the current education
finance system impacts schools and
learning.This chapter aims to contribute
to closing this gap by analyzing more deeply the
relationship between spending and education
quality, in order to discern the effectiveness (or
not) and the equity (or not) of current spending
on basic education and identify potential
opportunities for improvement. The goal is to
spark a conversation about how our
analysis of spending would change if we
began in the core of education: with
students, teachers and schools.

Teachers Who Show up,

Know How, Can, Want to,
and Are Supported
Mexico heads the international list in terms of
teacher absenteeism and tardiness. Of the
more than 200,000 public schools at the basic
education level, about 26,000 (13%) are closed
more than one scheduled school day each
month as a result of union activities. (The states
of Michoacan, Guerrero and Oaxaca are the
most affected, losing one, two, and three months
of school in the 2012-13 academic year).
Teacher turnover poses a serious problem
for the development of relationships and
processes that foster learning. In Mexico, more
than one in 20 teachers, or almost 68,000
people, changed schools between the first and
second quarter of 2011, and more than three

out of four teachers who did so moved towards

an urban school, leaving students in some of the
most vulnerable conditions without teachers.
Seven out of ten principals in Mexico report
that the lack of adequate educational
preparation of teachers impedes student
learning.
For many years Mexico has lacked a
standardized evaluation that would allow us
to diagnose teacher professional competencies
and to build an effective continuous development
program.The limited information available from
the Universal Evaluation applied in 2012, points
to alarming trends, including the inequitable
distribution of teacher competence
between general and indigenous schools.
The lack of relevant and effective professional
development represents an additional challenge
for Mexican public education. Mexico leads
OECD countries in terms of unmet demand
for ongoing teacher training.The country
continues to promote a standardized teacher
development model centralized and based
on generic courses and irrelevant workshops,
rather than involving teachers in the types of
development that they report most impact their
professional practice. In addition, investment in
professional development is inequitable, with
teachers in rural schools, for example, receiving
significantly less than their urban counterparts.

Material Learning Conditions

The Mexican educational system falls
short (severely) in its financing of the
infrastructure, equipment, operation,
and maintenance needs of schools.
THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

19

Access to basic services in Mexican

schools is plagued by inequities. Almost
one out of every two rural primary schools has
no bathroom, and more than half of indigenous
preschools have no running water.
Investment in academic infrastructure, the
material factor most associated with learning,
is insufficient and (again) inequitable. Four out of
ten Telesecundarias lack any learning support
area (computer room, laboratory, library, or
multipurpose room).
Access to technology is still far from being
widespread and presents significant gaps. At
the national level, about 50% of primary and
70% of lower secondary schools report having
at least one computer for educational use;
coverage is less than 20% in indigenous and
community schools.

(In)equity in the Distribution of

Resources at the System Level
Most schools in vulnerable contexts indigenous,
community, and multigrade schools, as well as
those in highly marginalized communities lack
the minimum necessary for the development
of quality education.
The distribution of education resources
does not follow a logic of equality or
equity. Great variation exists in per student
spending; in 2011, seven states spent more than
25,000 pesos per student per year, considerably
more than another eight that invested less than
18,000 pesos.
This variation has its roots both in federal
government resources as well as those that
come from the states. Some states make a
notable effort to invest more state resources
in education, and contrary to what we might
think, a states level of development
does not always determine its financial
contribution.
An analysis of school-level spending shows
the limitations of aggregated data, which hides
troubling discrepancies in funding based
on school and community characteristics
(see Figure 6.4).
THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

Working Conditions: Injustice

for Mexican Teachers
Our study of teachers salaries finds
significant variation depending on their
geographic location, employment status
(number of teaching posts, participation in
Carrera Magisterial), and the characteristics of
the schools in which they work. Some teachers
earn less than 10,000 pesos per month, while
others take home more than ten times that.
The current system rewards non-educational
factors seniority, loyalty, and the accumulation
of teaching posts and other benefits with
brutal results in terms of inequity both for
teachers and for the right of children to learn.
The structure of opportunities for teachers
to advance economically in their profession
almost requires that they abandon schools
with the greatest needs; the system drives
teacher turnover, leaving behind children and
communities in the most vulnerable contexts.

Towards Spending for

Education Quality
Given the current structure of education finance,
we cannot expect the consistent development
of schools oriented towards the right to learn.
Instead, we identify a system riddled with
corruption, irregularities, and injustice that does
not provide even the basic conditions necessary
for teaching and learning in every school. More
effective education spending, directed towards
the creation of true learning communities,
would finance the presence and time of
education actors, in addition to material
conditions. To do so requires an honest and
complete diagnosis of where we are at the
present moment. Our analysis represents only a
first step in what we hope will be a movement
of increasing participation by teachers,
parents, and students to identify whether
or not we have schools in the true sense
of the word in Mexico.

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

20

FIGURe 6.4
PeR student spending / primary / guerrero
(first quarter 2012)

THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

21

7. T

owards Good Spending:

Conclusions and Recommendations

David Caldern

ow did we let ourselves get

to this level of misspending?
Are we trapped in a dead
end with no way out? We
say: no. To instill meaning
into our administrative and financial maneuvers,
we must see education spending as fuel for the
engines of growth and equity that schools are, or
could be. But where to begin? How can we put
an end to the misuse of our resources?

Effective Spending
The education system should be viewed as a
network of learning communities, and spending
should be designed from the bottom up, favoring
the presence of people (students, teachers, and
parents), providing necessary educational inputs,
and anchoring the establishment, consolidation, and
daily operation of schools with concrete material
conditions and a corresponding support system.

Equitable Spending
Public spending on education cannot fall into the
contradiction of being a system that generates
more inequality than already exists. Children
with greater need attend non-schools, and this
must end.
THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

Participatory Spending
The solution to the capture of the funding system
is participation.The Mexican State is now looking
to recover large sections of education policy it
had historically ceded to private interests, primarily
the teachers union. State stewardship must be
carefully protected, not just in rhetoric, but in the
sense of broad accountability for eliminating private
capture: the burden of proof is not on citizens,
but on the federal government and the states.

Efficient Spending
Spending efficiency begins with sufficiency and
involves prioritization, clarity, and timeliness.
Efficiency in spending involves agility, the ability
to move quickly and avoid obstacles to achieving
its ends.

Transparent Spending
Transparency does not only mean not hiding
information, but also providing enough clarity so
as to allow citizens to appraise what is presented
to them and to hold authorities accountable.
Spending reports are relatively recent in the history
of the Mexican education system, and it is fair to
say that an effort has been made by the Ministry

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

22

of Finance and the Superior Audit Office to open

the education sector to the light.The same cannot
be said, however, for the Ministry of Education,
which has shown a lack of development in this
sense. At the state level, the inequality in the level
of transparency is notorius.

Honest Spending
Misspending in education that involves corruption
is particularly outrageous, as it goes against the
best interests of the child, which international
human rights agreements state should be placed
above all other considerations. The offensive
misuse of money that corresponds to children
and youth to provide for the development of
their full potential should summon righteous
indignation and be translated into decisive action.

More Research and More

Action
A compelling preliminary agenda for reversing
misspending in education would include, at the
very least:
Change to the regulatory framework for
education funding, in line with Article 3 of the
Constitution.
Inclusion in the 2014 budget of a designated
fund to provide a minimum guaranteed level of
resources to each school (effectively ensuring
free education), as well as a compensatory fund
for schools with the greatest need to allow
them to attract and retain teachers.
Rigorous application of the law in terms of
programming, approval and monitoring of
spending (responsibility of the SHCP, the
Legislature, and the ASF).
Diagnosis of non-schools and schools in
development, to establish a plan for regularizing
them.

Reordering economic incentives for teachers

upon the elimination of Carrera Magisterial
and the current teacher promotion system, as
part of a new Teacher Professional Service.
In a sample of full-time schools (6.5 hours/day),
provide extended class time as well as time
for teachers to meet with parents, work with
students, plan lessons, grade student work, and
collaborate with other teachers; promote the
extinction of double teaching posts (doble plaza).
Establish an explicit mandate to assess learning
associated with budgetary programs using
guidelines established by the new National
Institute for Education Evaluation (INEE).
Organize, on behalf of citizens, an independent
group to monitor education spending in each
state, seeking the support of the Accountability
Network (Red de Rendicin de Cuentas).
Establish Transparency and Accountability Days
in every school in all levels of compulsory
education.
Clarify the justiciability of the right to learn and
its corresponding financing through research,
dialogue, and strategic litigation.
Reestablish, as part of the Expenditure Budget
of the Federation, the state obligation to provide
regular reports on teaching posts; include
provisions for the timely administration of
resources, as well as for rectification of misuse,
with punitive measures for officials who do
not comply.
Effectively redress and penalize misuse of funds
detected in the latest Review of the Public
Accounts conducted by the Superior Audit
Office of the Federation.
There are elements within many current public
policies that must be disputed and corrected in order
to combat illegal or harmful patterns of behavior
and move us closer to good spending that is:
effective, equitable, participatory, efficient, transparent,
and honest. We all have a responsibility for
ensuring that our misspending come to
an end. School should be a laboratory for a new
society; our economic relations will be more just
and decent in the future if we can apply ourselves
fully in the present to share the conviction that we
must spend to learn and we can learn to spend.

THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

23
Good spending and misspending

Good spending is

In Mexico we misspend

To spend well

Effective

Ineffective

Oriented toward the

maximum achievement
of learning.
Sufficient to guarantee
basic conditions necessary
for full development of
schools and people.

Spending is not designed

nor applied so that
children learn.
Basic school needs are
not met.

Equitable

Inequitable

Distribute it justly

Give more resources

to students, teachers,
and schools in contexts
characterized by
disadvantage.

Children with greater

needs attend non-schools.
There is offensive inequity
among teachers.
The distribution of
resources is unjust.

Change the formula

for distribution of FAEB.
Strengthen administrative
capacities in the states.
Do away with practices that
produce inequity.
Align teachers opportunities
with those of the most
marginalized schools.
Strengthen the school by
providing operating funds.

Participatory

Captured

Recover it as a public good

Mechanisms to promote
broad participation
throughout the process.

The SNTE and the

CNTE have captured a
disproportionate share
of spending.
This capture concentrates
benefits among union
leadership and does not
reach the teachers who
labor day after day in
schools.
Schools, teachers, parents,
and citizens have no
voice in the process; their
participation is limited
and lacks necessary
orientation.

Eliminate system capture

by private actors.
Give teachers tools to
audit funds designated for
their wages and benefits,
to prevent the diversion
of resources distributed
in their name.
Create spaces for and
multiply the participation
of parents and the general
public to take part in the
definition and monitoring
of education spending.

THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013

Direct it towards what is

central
Diagnose the problem.
Reorder the application
of spending (bottom-up,
not top-down).
Plan for and implement the
development of non-schools.
Apply existing rules and
eliminate corrupt and
inefficient practices.
Evaluate the education
system.

MEXICANOS PRIMERO

24
Good spending and misspending
(CONTINUED)

Good spending is

In Mexico we misspend

Efficient

Inefficient

Long-term budget
prepared with adequate
information and a
transparent process.
Timely, orderly, flexible, and
transparent implementation.
Monitoring and evaluation
of resource use and of
learning conditions in
schools.
Internal and external
auditing, with
consequences.
Sufficient, relevant, orderly,
accessible and transparent
information.

Short-term (yearly), inertial

budget prepared with
incomplete information
and an opaque, political, and
captured process.
Delayed, disorderly,
rigid, and opaque
implementation.
Insufficient or nonexistent
evaluation conducted
without public knowledge
and having little consistent
impact on decisions.
Delayed monitoring, not
leading to correction.
Lack of reliable data.

To spend well
Establish order
and follow up
Reconstitute the budget
cycle.
Improve implementation.
Create effective systems for
monitoring and evaluation.
Impose consequences
(penalty and correction).
Collect and publish
sufficient data for evaluation
and planning.

Transparent

Opaque

Make it public

Transparency in budget
process and in distribution
and use of resources.

Lack of publically
available, transparent
data.
Citizens lack sufficient
elements to intervene,
and their participation is
discouraged.
Lack of accountability in
schools and at the state
and national level.

Disclose and develop means

to contest negotiations
with the union.
Publish consistent, reliable, and
easily accessible information
about the education and
finance systems.
Develop systems and
standards for accountability
at each level (school, district,
state, country).

Honest

Corrupt

Set and enforce clear rules

Fair and reliable use of

funds designated for the
development of children
and youth.
Funds are not diverted
for the benefit
of individuals or
private groups.

Systemic looting of
education resources.
Impunity and repeated
acts of corruption.

Reinforce and clarify

the legal framework.
Develop mechanisms
of shared responsibility,
participation, and
transparency.
Create and promote a
system for denouncing
and investigating spending
irregularities.
Advance from simply
registering corruption
to fully penalizing it.

THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN MEXICO 2013