Financing for equity in pre-primary education

PEER Icon on Finance - pre-primary

Countries allocate responsibility for pre-primary education in a variety of ways. In the majority of cases (76%), oversight is vested in the ministry of education. Approximately 21% of countries share this responsibility between the education ministry and other governmental bodies, while in a small minority (3%), a non-education ministry assumes full responsibility.
The provision of free pre-primary education increases access, particularly for children from low-income families. Presently, public pre-primary education is offered free of charge in roughly two-thirds of countries (67%). Regional disparities exist: for example, 81% of countries in Europe and Northern America provide free pre-primary education, compared to only 48% in sub-Saharan Africa.
Beyond eliminating fees, countries employ additional measures to reduce costs associated with pre-primary education. Slightly more than half (54%) channel funding directly to schools and centres, often targeting support for children with disabilities (59%). Moreover, many countries extend financial assistance to families; 26% do so through the education ministry, while 55% rely on other ministries—primarily those responsible for social protection. The majority of this support aims to mitigate poverty (92%), thereby facilitating access to pre-primary education for children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds.

Explore the policies in your country using the menu on the right.

Countries pursue different routes of varying form and intensity to mitigate the education impact of factors such as poverty, gender, ethnicity, disability or remoteness. As part of its 2020 edition on inclusion and 2026 edition on access and equity, the GEM Report compiled information on the extent to which education and social financing policies are designed to address disadvantages in pre-primary education. The profiles were primarily prepared through desk review by the GEM Report team, complemented by commissioned research to add subnational examples for selected countries with complex institutional structures. For all profiles on the website, when they are drafted, countries are invited through their delegation at UNESCO to review and update the information. When this step of the process is complete, it is indicated on the website on the relevant page of the country’s profile with a blue tick.

Available countries: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, P.S., Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Republic of Cook Islands, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechia, D. R. Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Estonia, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Islamic Republic of, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kiribati, DPR Korea, Republic of Korea, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao PDR, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia, F. S., Republic of Moldova, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nauru, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Niue, North Macedonia, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Palau, the State of Palestine, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Türkiye, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales), United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, B. R., Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

CONTENT: FINANCING FOR EQUITY IN PRE-PRIMARY EDUCATION

The profiles on financing for equity in pre-primary education aim to describe the efforts of countries in improving equity and ensuring access to quality education to all by looking at four categories of financing policies:

1. Education resources to subnational governments

This section captures resource allocation mechanisms from the central government to the lower tiers.

2. Education resources to institutions

This section includes policies or programmes that compensate institutions for being in a disadvantaged area and/or have disadvantaged students. They tend to be block grants, in addition to the capitation grants, and may be nation- or region-wide.

3. Education resources to students and families

The section refers to education ministry policies and programmes that directly benefit disadvantaged students and their households as the final defined beneficiaries. These may be in the form of cash, exemption from payment or in-kind.

4. Social policies and family support programmes

The section is about other ministry policies and programmes that directly benefit disadvantaged students and their households. These tend to be social protection programmes, such as conditional cash transfers or child grants with an education component that aim to address poverty occasionally with a gender dimension.

Related resources

The Profiles Enhancing Education Reviews (PEER) platform has moved to a new website, https://www.unesco.org/gem-report/peer, where it now provides updated, indicator-based analysis and continuous monitoring. The current website, https://education-profiles.org/, remains available for reference but will be progressively archived; its profiles, linked to earlier GEM Reports, are no longer being updated.