The underlying ambition of fee-free education is to increase school access. This study reflects on decentralisation in the decision-making process and implementation of fee-free policies. We compare two policies at the high school level in Ghana to evaluate the differences and commonalities in how they responded to school access. We used interviews and secondary sources of data for qualitative content analysis. Haddad and Demsky’s rationality framework of education policymaking served as the analytical guide. The results show that Free Senior High School policy (FSHS) increased access to education by responding to the existing problem of low rate of transition from lower secondary to upper secondary education, unlike Progressive Free Senior High School policy (PFSHS). However, the desirability of access is over-prioritised in the current FSHS – unlike in the PFSHS, leaving gaps in administration, educational facilities and resources: challenges attributable to the concentration of centralised administrative decisions during policy formulation and implementation. We propose remedial measures to address these challenges.

The study compares two fee-free policies at the upper secondary level in Ghana on how they responded to access and the policymaking processes in education. Secondary sources of data were used, while Haddad and Demsky’s framework of education policymaking served as the theoretical basis for textual data analysis. The results show that Free Senior High School policy responded to the program output of an increase in access, unlike Progressive Free Senior High policy. However, the inconsistent release of funding and limited stakeholder consultation are common features of the policies. It is further observed that the desirability of access is over prioritised in the current Free Senior High School policy, leaving gaps in educational facilities and resources during policy decision. To address these challenges, sources of funding must be re-assessed for possible policy redesign that invites consumers of the policy who opt for boarding status to absorb a proportion of boarding fees.