National Lotteries Board strategic plan 2013 and selection criteria for funding: briefing

Sports, Arts and Culture

04 June 2013
Chairperson: Mr M Mdakane (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The National Lotteries Board highlighted its selection criteria for funding together with its strategic plan. The strategic plan included promoting social cohesion and nation building through sport, promoting healthy lifestyle, providing a platform for the historically disadvantaged communities to achieve their sporting potential through gender integration, funding of vulnerable groups, and partnerships with stakeholder, clubs, schools, non-government organisations, municipalities and organised structures. The strategic plan focused on transformation and development programmes, which would incorporate talent identification, basic facilities, sport equipment, and local leagues, provincial and national competitions and capacity building. The strategic plan also focused on infrastructure and capacity building.
The Board also discussed what the different federations could apply for. Examples included the National Federations who could apply for capacity building, high performance programmes, including training camps, international participation and hosting of international events, national competitive school sport tournaments for the purpose of talent identification, participation in international school sport competitions, and attendance at International Conferences/ General Assemblies. National Federations might also apply on behalf of their affiliates. The other federations included schools, clubs, tertiary institutions and the South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (SASCOC).

The Board also stated its challenges, such as demand, which exceeded available resources, applications-based funding model, and lack of impact measurement. There were fraudulent applications and fund use, and inequities in the spread of provincial allocations. There had been emotive publicised threats of downsizing operations and services or closure because the National Lottery Distribution Trust Fund had not allocated a grant.
Members asked about capacity building, how the structures were not enough, and what the Board planned to do for rural areas and people with disabilities. Members also asked how much the Gidani Consortium made and how much the Board obtained from it.
 

Meeting report

National Lotteries Board strategic plan 2013 and selection criteria for funding: briefing
Professor Alfred Nevhutanda, Chairperson: National Lotteries Board (NLB), explained the Board Structure. He said that the Board was the central applications office for funding requests. There was emphasis on how the board dealt with illegal lottery.  Functions of the Board involved collecting revenue and then distributing the funds. The National Lottery received 34% from Gidani which then went back to the National Lottery Distribution Trust Fund (NLDTF). The NLDTF would make sure the money went to non-profit organisations and non-governmental organisations.
 
The presentation highlighted strategic objectives and these included to improve impact of NLDTF, review regulatory practice, sustain organisational capability, and ensure stability and business continuity. The presentation also highlighted the National Lotteries Board functions. The functions included the National Lottery. Operated by Gidani, the NLDTF distribution processed applications and made payments. The Distributing Agencies adjudicated applications and made grants in line with the criteria.

Mrs Thabang Mampane, NLB CEO, presented on the Grant Funding: Sports Distributing Agency.  The presentation highlighted the fact that the Grant Funding division consisted of independent members appointed by the Minister of Trade and Industry in consultation with the Minister of Sport.  The role of the Distributing Agency as per legislation was to adjudicate on all applications received. No allocations were made without an application as per legislation. The role of the Grant Funding Division of the NLB was to provide administrative support.

The presentation highlighted the strategic plan. The strategic plan included to promote social cohesion and nation building through sport, promote healthy lifestyle, provide a platform for the historically disadvantaged communities to achieve their sporting potential through gender integration, funding of vulnerable groups and partnerships with stakeholder, clubs, schools, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), municipalities and organised structures. The strategic plan focused on the transformation and development programmes, which would incorporate talent identification, basic facilities, sport equipment, local leagues, provincial and national competitions and capacity building. The strategic plan also focused on infrastructure, capacity building which meant that funds has to be disbursed, including to courses for clubs, and for regional, provincial and national facilitators, technical officials, administration and coaches, life skills and generic training.

The presentation discussed the strategic plan with regards to capacity building and it focused on the international accreditation of coaches, international accreditation of technical officials, facilitation and coordination all technical courses to be South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) accredited, translation of course training manuals or materials, production or development of training material for respective courses and reasonable accommodation for people with disabilities. The strategic plan included high performance and this would incorporate sport- specific research equipment, medical, nutrition and international participation.

Mr Jeffrey Du Preez, NLB Senior Executive Grant Funding, presented the selection criteria for funding programs. (See presentation document, slides 12-18). He then reported on current funding programmes and capacity initiatives.  (See slides 19-22). He also reported on grant allocations (see slides 23-25) and projects (see slides 26-29). 
The presentation also highlighted the different challenges (see slides 31-32) which included demand exceeding available resources, the applications based funding model, lack of impact measurement, and the expectation of recurrent and permanent funding potentially crowding out new entrants. There were cases of fraudulent applications/ fund use, provincial allocation / spread inequities; there had been emotive publicised threats of downsizing operations and services or closure because the NLDTF had not allocated a grant.
The NLB was hopeful that the imminent amendments to the Lotteries Act would address most of the fundamental structural impediments for the more effective and efficient distribution of funds from the NLDTF.
Discussion
Mr M Rabotapi (DA) appreciated the work that the NLB was doing. He asked about what the NLB was doing in rural areas.
Prof Nevhutanda replied that the NLB was supporting building many schools in the rural areas. The legislation only enables it to give money. Its role was to fund only. It wanted to make sure that its provincial offices had people in the field who would work closer to the people.

Ms T Lishivha (ANC) asked the Board if it covered people with disabilities

Prof Nevhutanda responded by saying that the CEO had looked at the disability problem and was attending to it.

Mr T Lee (DA) asked if people had to have the backing of a union or federation?

Mr Lee asked if the Board checked how the municipalities used the money from the Board. He told of his experience in the Nelson Mandela Metro with the regard to the money to build a golf course but from which it did not build one.

Prof Nevhutanda responded by saying that once they get money the municipalities were ‘subject to it’. He added that lottery money should bring immediate change but if municipalities used it for other things there was no change.

Mr G Mackenzie (COPE) added that the general complaint was that there was not enough money for sport. He asked why there were no financial slides in the presentation. How much did Gidani make?

Prof Nevhutanda responded by saying that money collected from Gidani was put into a trust.

Prof Nevhutanda responded by apologising for not including the financials in the presentation.

Mr Mackenzie suggested that the Board should have roadshows in municipalities to teach people how to apply for funding

Prof Nevhutanda responded by saying that the Board had done roadshows and it was difficult to cover one province at once. He added that the Board wanted to be a point of contact. It was signing memoranda of agreement with traditional leaders as they would pass information to the people.

Mr M Dikgacwi (ANC) added that some facilities needed to be renovated. Rural people did not have all the fancy things; it was necessary to reach out to people.

Ms G Tseke (ANC) appreciated the work that the Board was doing.

Ms Hajeera Kajee, Chairperson: Distributing Agency said that the emphasis was on rural areas but there were poor people in the urban areas and the NLB addressed them too.
The Chairperson added that roadshows would create high expectations and people would apply. What would happen if they did not get the funding? People who were educated always benefited because they knew how to read and write.
Mr Lee asked where the provincial offices were located so that Members could go and check on projects. Municipalities should be accountable. He asked a list of municipalities that the NLB gad helped.

Mr Mackenzie said that if the NLB gave funds to schools, the provincial department of education and the Department of Trade and Industry should sign off on those facilities.
Mr Dikgacwi asked if the Board had already funded people for the upcoming sporting events. What could be done to hold people who misused funds responsible?

Prof Nevhutanda added that as a funding body the NLB needed to be proactive. He also said that NLB would make a plan to see which provinces were performing well and which were under performing. He promised the Committee that his staff members would look into the file that they were given by Mr Dikgacwi.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting.
 

Present

  • We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: