Department of Social Development on 1st quarter 2015 progress on programmes 1 and 5

Social Development

16 March 2016
Chairperson: Ms N Capa (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The Committee received a presentation from the Department of Social Development (DSD) on its quarterly performance in the 1st quarter of the 2015 financial year, in relation to Programmes 1 and 5. The focus was on the implementation of the Ministerial priorities as set out in the Department’s Annual Performance Plan, with a focus on the Early Childhood Development (ECD) programmes and Food for All, both of which aimed to address food security and poverty alleviation in poor and rural communities. The DSD recognised the need to strengthen planning and monitoring services to assure that resources and services were delivered to their rightful beneficiaries. It highlighted the Project Mikondzo initiative which was set to identify service delivery gaps and then improve service delivery, working together with poor and rural communities. The collaborative efforts between the DSD and other institutions were stressed.

For many areas, a comparison of targets and achievements showed substantial over-achievement. Overall, 58% of targets were achieved, with 15% partially achieved and 27% not achieved. Various key challenges included, in the Special Projects area, the failure to create at least 10 000 work opportunities as projected. There was a detailed focus on the status of the filling of posts on the approved establishment of the DSD. The vacancy rate was high, and the attempts were hindered by more terminations than appointments, resignations and internal promotions.

Committee Members were generally pleased with the presentation and said that the DSD was doing some good work. However, a number of Committee Members wanted to comment or ask questions on the HR issues, asking about the high rate of termination, the exit interviews and causes of resignation, the organogram and funding and strategy. They also discussed the freezing of certain vacancies as mooted in the Budget 2016, and asked if the DSD would be affected by this. Another point made quite strongly by a number of Members related to whether the targets were SMART – if so, then why was there such substantial over-achievement on some of the sub-programme targets, but variance overall. Members felt that the Department was under-targeting, and also were concerned when they were told that not all of the work was funded from the Department's own budget, with some money coming from provincial equitable shares. The Chairperson raised several key concerns, especially on the issue of Community Development, what this actually meant and what programmes fell under this budget. Members asked if the funding had followed the function in respect of the posts that were taken over from the former Department of Women, Children and People with Disabilities and wanted to know more about the organisational structure. They were also worried about non-payment to NPOs since they carried out the majority of the statutory functions. Members were particularly concerned that it had been said that correct numbers could not be captured in the Special Projects sub-programme for this seemed to negate the whole purpose of having this Project. The Chairperson highlighted the need for proper planning to cut out the inconsistencies, for instance in planning the placement of the ECD centres and outreach to children, and in the agencies.    

Meeting report

Department of Social Development (DSD): 1st quarter 2015 Performance Report, with focus on Programmes 1 and 5
Dr Wiseman Magasela, Deputy Director General:Social Policy and Research, DSD said that his presentation would cover specific queries and concerns previously raised by the Committee. It was noted that both the Deputy Director Generals who oversaw Programmes 1 and 5 were present, as well as Mr Thabani Buthelezi, Chief Director: Monitoring and Evaluations, DSD. 

Mr Buthelezi outlined what would be covered by the presentation, noting that Programme 1 covered Administration, and Programme 5 related to Social Policy. This presentation was to provide a summary and analysis of performance and the implementation of the Ministerial priorities as reflected in the Department’s Annual Performance Plan (APP) for the 2015/16 financial year.

He noted that there were nine key priorities for the MTSF 2014-2019:
- To expand Child and Youth Care services through the Isibindi Programme
- To deliver better services through the Social Welfare Sector Reform
- To deepen social assistance and extend the scope of Social Security
- To strengthen community development interventions
- To attempt to combat substance abuse
- To attempt to combat gender-based violence
- To increase household food and nutrition security through the Food for All Programme
- The protection and promotion of the rights of older persons and people with disabilities
- To establish social protection systems to strengthen coordination, integration and the monitoring and evaluation of services.

He highlighted that Project Mikondzo was important to programmes 1 and 5. It is a collective sector-wide service delivery improvement initiative that is targeting the most deprived and rural poor communities. Through this, the DSD had been able to:
- Identify service delivery gaps at the local level as well as between policy formulation and implementation through various programmes
- Increase the DSD foot print and visibility in communities, especially in poor communities
- Increase the DSDs understanding of the service delivery challenges and backlogs through direct interaction with local stakeholders, such as ward councilors and Civil Society Organisations.

These had assisted the DSD in drafting a Service Delivery Improvement Plan. The DSD had been able to provide some services directly to the public, including improving the the registration of Non- Profit Organisations (NPO), as well as other services which had been provided in partnership with other departments and institutions.

He noted that in the slides presented, three colours were used to indicate progress made towards meeting pre-determined targets and objectives; the green colour indicated that no major actions were required, amber indicated that there were some issues and as a result the target may not be achieved in the planned time frame, whilst red showed that major remedial action and urgent intervention was required.

The overall DSD performance of 2015/16 showed that for the first quarter, 58% of targets set were achieved, 15% were partially achieved and 27% progress were not completely achieved. The DSD had spent 24.3% of its annual expenditure in this quarter, which was in line with what had been projected.

The presentation (see attached document) showed a breakdown of expenditure in each programme. For example, programme 5 for example exceeded its target. He noted that the Chief Financial Officer was present to provide any further clarity on finance matters.

He then moved on to describe the programmes. Programme 1: Administration aimed to provide leadership, management and support services the DSD and to the Social Development Sector. The 11 sub-programmes were listed (see attached presentation). The following slides provided a detailed analysis of how each of the sub-programmes had performed in the first quarter (Q1).

The slides which had followed dealt with how each sub-programme had performed in the first Quarter. In Strategy Development and Business, targets achieved included reporting on the number of social development facilities, visits to two offices in Eastern Cape as part of the appraisal of provincial plans, and a substantial over-achievement on the target for capacitation of 37 officials on gender mainstreaming, with 61 officials actually being trained on gender sensitisation, across the DSD, the South African Social Security Agency (SASSA) and National Development Agency (NDA). interns were trained on gender sensitisation.

In the Monitoring and Evaluation sub-programme, an M&E framework was developed and explained in consultative workshops with other relevant departments.

Quarterly targets in legal services were fully described with an indication that most were met or over-achieved. In Communications, the target to reach more people through marketing and advertising was over-achieved, with 10 times the target being reached. More than 87 000 people were reached via the DSD website and social media. Nine public participation events were hosted for the Minister and five for the Deputy Minister.

The Internal Audit sub-programme had performed ten reviews, and there were follow ups in several areas.

A more detailed presentation would be done on human capital management. However, DSD reported that posts were not filled, as expected, within eight months, because of the various challenges, which meant that the posts were more likely to be filled only within 16 months. A detailed status report on the 95 existing vacant posts was provided. Similarly, the DSD did not achieve the target to reduce the vacancy rate to 8%, and it was currently 13% on PERSAL. Factors influencing this were that 20 posts below SMS level needed to be either job evaluated or abolished, due to the implementation of the reviewed organisational structure during the first Quarter, and 34 Administrative Assistant posts were in the process of being filled. However, the DSD managed to almost double the target of sending employees on identified skills development courses. It did not achieve the target of finalising all grievances, complaints, disputes and disciplinary cases within the prescribed time frames, only managing to finalise 30% of complaints and grievances and 42% of disciplinary cases.

The Information Management Technology (IMT) managed to define the requirements for . The target was not achieved as 30% of complaints/grievances received were finalised and/or were in the process of being finalised; 42% of disciplinary cases received were finalised and/or in the process of being finalised.

Information Management Technology achieved its targets to define and develop user requirement specifications, and define integration requirements. It was noted again that the financial programme had managed to spent 23.4% of budget, with the highest spending in the Ministry, relating to travelling, and accommodation incurred for the Minister and Deputy Minister as part of the DSD's outreach programmes and in support of the core business operations.

Mr Buthelezi then described the performance in Programme 5. This programme aimed to support community development and promote evidence-based policy-making in the DSD and the Social Development Sector. He set out the five sub-programmes (see attached presentation) and their targets, and reported that achievements included the provision of a synthesis report under the Population and Policy programme, conducting 16 Adolescent Sexual Reproductive Health Rights (ASRHR) campaign dialogues, and registering 26 bursary holders at Walter Sisulu and North West Universities. All of the NPO targets were achieved, in respect of applications processed, reports processed and conducting of roadshows in 15 local municipalities, and training of more than 900 NPOs on norms and standards.
Similarly, training was provided to over 600 community development practitioners, double the target an there were sector consultations in eight provinces (excluding Northern Cape) and information sessions in four. Other targets related to profiling of households, communities and reaching wards through Project Mikhondzo, as well as outreach programmes and development of community based plans. There was not achievement on the target to conduct 100 dialogues, with only 34 being conducted.

However, there was substantial over-achievement on support to cooperatives, with 162 cooperatives supported during the first quarter. Nine Food Development Centres (FDCs) were supported and 161 Community Nutrition Development Centres (CNDcs) also received support. In all, 234 042 people accessed food through the Food for All Programme led by the DSD. 15 000 people were reached through mobilisation programmes, 180 community based organisations were supported and 135 community based plans were developed.

Spending in Programme 5 in the first quarter amounted to 23.4% of annual expenditure, with the highest spending in the Population and Policy Promotion subprogramme, whilst Community Development spent the least at 9.22%.

Mr Buthelezi said that although there were many positives highlighted in this description, the fact remained that there were some targets not achieved. The target in Programme 1 for the Minister to form partnerships with eight stakeholders in support of DSD initiatives and projects was not achieved, and the reasons for this would appear from the fourth quarter reports. The target to develop Entity Oversight Performance Management Systems (OIMPS) for public entities was not met. The DSD did not manage to achieve its target of an unqualified audit report with no material adjustments. The Social Policy directorate did not manage to reach its target to train 50 officials and also to develop and review one social policy. Although the Special Projects aimed to create 10 000 work opportunities, and 2 271 full-time equivalent jobs, neither target was met. Although work opportunities were created through the Department of Public Works (DPW) the correct numbers could not be captured.

Mr Daven Chinnappan, Chief Director: Human Resources, DSD, described the total establishment as 838, of which 725 were filled in the first quarter and 113 were vacant, or 13%. The total post establishments and vacancies were:
Programme 1: Administration had a total of 386 posts of which 60 were vacant and 326 were filled. Programme 3 in Social Security Policy and Administration filled 80 posts with 14 vacant from a total of 94. Programme 4: Welfare Services Policy Development and Implementations Support, had a total of 27 posts vacant and 190 filled from a total of 217 posts.
Programme 5: Social Policy and Integrated Service Delivery had a total of 141 posts with 12 vacancies and 129 filled posts.

In all, there were 113 vacant posts across all programmes.

He set out the vacancy rate changes; in April it was 11%, in May it was 14% when the DSD took over the functions for children, it dropped to 13% in June.

The Chairperson interjected to ask if social worker posts were included in the data or calculated separately.

Mr Chinnappan replied that social workers employed in the national Department were counted; he also emphasised that these figures related to national Department.

He noted that there were key challenges in the comparison of appointments and terminations, also referred to as the turnover rate. In April, there were eleven appointments and six terminations, in May this had decreased as there were five terminations and one appointment. In June there was a total of two appointments and five terminations, this all led to a total of 14 appointments and 16 terminations. At the end of the quarter, it was found that the number of terminations was greater than the number of appointments, which made it impossible to reduce the vacancy rate.

He then listed the 113 vacancies and the process followed to fill them. Some posts were held in abeyance because they had to be first evaluated or/and re-designed. In the breakdown of the processes and programmes it was noted that 31 posts were to be job evaluated, 26 were waiting approval to advertise and 13 had been advertised, 9 were at shortlist stage and eight interviews were finalised. 20 submissions were approved (but the DSD was waiting for suitable checks to be carried out) and six posts were held in abeyance.

He summarised that in this quarter, the ratio of appointments to terminations was almost 1:1. The DSD had taken over 23 posts, some of them being vacant, from the Department of Women. A new departmental structure was approved in May 2015, with additional posts to be created, but these would not have a positive impact on the vacancy rate. As part of the Public Services Regulation, jobs were to be evaluated within three years. If a post became vacant then there was a need to establish when it was last evaluated, and if that had not been done within three years, the process would have to be restarted which often led to delays. Vacant SMS posts normally resulted in duplicated vacancies, although these were prioritised. Internal promotions were positive but this did leave vacancies at lower levels.

The initiatives proposed in the first quarter to address the challenges would include:
- Focus on filling SMS posts. A monthly report showed that this had lowered the vacancy rate from 15% to 11%.
- Delegated authorities would be held responsible for filling posts on salary level 2-12
- If no attention was given to posts becoming vacant within a month of advertising, then it would be assumed that the post was not needed and should be abolished
- Because of the budget constraints faced by the DSD, a new process by the DSD was to freeze posts or put them into a pool to avoid delays
- Service providers were appointed to conduct suitability checks in house, which usually produced reports within 48 hours, meaning that there was not a need to go through the Department of State Security
- DSD had appointed a Director, Organisational Design, who was to take responsibility for job evaluation processes and manage the post as a project, to establish when posts became vacant, and the time periods involved.

The status report in April 2015 showed that in April 2015 there were 26 vacant posts but only 22 in June. Projections were being set as to how the 8% target might be achieved, which was explained.

Discussion
Ms B Abrahams (ANC) congratulated the DSD on its achievements, but noted that the Committee had previously asked why the DSD seemed to set targets that were too low. She used the Access to Food as an example and said that if the target was too low in the first place there would be substantial over-achievement. She asked how incorrect targeting would influence the budget.

Ms Abrahams understood the point about vacancies arising through internal promotions but wanted to know about the cause for resignations. She asked if the DSD conducted exit interviews and if so, what these had found and how they were handled to ensure that there would be an improvement.

Ms H Malgas (ANC) also commented on the over-achievements, saying that there were no baseline figures in place because there was a need for effective measurements to be considered. There was a balance between over and under-achievement, but the budget showed underspending, particularly in the sub-programmes. Because funding was allocated for specific programmes, there were contradictions if there was under-achievement. She too wanted to know about the exit process and whether there was a definite human resources strategy in place. She noted the new organogram and 16 new posts, largely as a result of taking over functions from the former Department of Women, Children and People with Disabilities, and asked if the funding had followed the functions.

Ms V Mogotsi (ANC) said the presentation contained a lot of detail. She asked about the organisational structure, and asked about the comment made on integration with other departments, saying that if there were organisational structures also covered in the finance presentation, that might affect the financial position. She agreed that there had to be a strong focus on human resources, which was key to the organisational structure, but noted that DSD was not doing well in filling vacancies from levels 2 to 12.
Ms Mogotsi noted that the presentation had said that the posts must be revisited if not filled within a certain time. However, any HR specialist would be able to say that not much would change on a monthly basis in terms of the job evaluations, but would change when necessary, so that she did not feel it was correct to use the evaluations as a new incoming challenge. She commented that 60 vacancies in Programme 1 was far too high, and those posts must, as stressed by the President, be filled. She did not understand the significance of the pie chart to this discussion.

Ms E Wilson (DA) raised concerns on the budget, referring to slides 13 and 41. She was particularly concerned about the fact that NPOs, Higher Education institutions and Province and Municipality figures were showing only 1% of payments received. She pointed out that the NPOs conducted around 75% of social work, particularly in statutory services, and many were having to close because of late payments; the DSD presentation was now highlighting that the problem lay with this Department also. She asked for an explanation on the deviance column. She noted that slide 41 was also worrying. She asked how the Community Development subprogramme was exceeding its targets, although it was under-funded. She asked if the intention to freeze certain vacancies in government, as announced in the Minister of Finance's Budget Speech would affect the DSD. 

The Chairperson said people should not be subjected to constraints arising from global pressures, drought and high food prices.

Ms B Masango (DA) asked also about the under targeting, using the example of targets to visit 37 wards and achieving 300 visits. She asked what would happen for the rest of the year. Were the targets then to be extended so something was being done in this field also until the end of the year?

Ms Masango noted that the Mikondzo project identified some gaps, but asked for more detail on this. She too wanted to hear more on the exit interviews, and asked at what level were the 60 posts to be filled.

Mr S Mabilo (ANC) also wanted to speak to the targets. He noted the figures for the Community Development sub-programme and access to food through DSD programmes. He said the outcomes were good, but he wanted to know whether the targets set were SMART. He also wanted to raise concerns about the low spending, of 9.22%, in the Community Development programme. He knew that the explanation was the delay in transfer payments for the Food Relief programme, and said that this was fundamental, as it related to poverty relief. If there was a delay with the transfer of payments, then this was a human resource issue, and he asked how that was handled. Delayed transfers meant that poor communities would suffer and there was no mention of a contingency plan to address the delay in payments.

Mr Mabilo also questioned the Special Projects sub-programme, where it was said that the correct numbers could not be captured. He said this was not acceptable for it negated the whole idea of having a Special Projects to create jobs, and he wanted to know what would be done to address this problem, and ensure that it did not recur.

The Chairperson highlighted that firstly, the Committee was told that the programmes were not subjected to the oversight, but the Committee insisted that all programmes should be specified and be subject to oversight and scrutiny, as this was the only way to drive the programmes through. The national Department must be able to do things also in the provinces; national oversight was not limited geographically. Her second point was that if 65% of the budget was taken and given to NPOs in provinces spoken of, then the unit for Monitoring and Evaluations became critical to ensure that work was being done on the ground. Members had raised the issue that the DSD was not responding to recommendations and this must change. She asked that Mr Peter Netshipale, Deputy Director General: Integrated Development, DSD, must give more detail on what was meant by community development, and what programmes fell under his budget. She wanted to know what food security meant – food packages, or opportunities to produce food.

Mr Chinnappan firstly addressed the causes for people resigning and reasons for the high rates of termination. He pointed out that the public services, including the provincial and national departments, was a large working environment, and so promotion within the services would usually mean that the official promoted was leaving a national department – this was described as a termination – so most of the terminations were in fact promotions within the public service. However, there were also resignations, where people would leave to join the private sector, and that could not be stopped as people had their own reasons, including pursuing private and personal interests or to get better remuneration. There was an exit interview process and policy, for all those who were leaving and were willing to participate. The exit interview took the form of structured questions covering:
(i) work environment
(iii) job satisfaction
(iv) leadership
(v) culture and values.

The results of these could be summarised and provided to the Committee, if it wished. Some issues raised were confidential but others that were relationship, training or development would be picked up and followed through by the Wellness Unit. He added that some terminations were of fixed-term contracts and these could not be subject to review.

He added that there was a Human Resources plan in place, in line with the Public Services regulations, and included in the DSD's five-year plan were strategies on how to train and develop staff/

He reported that the 60 new posts were not included in the report, but would be accounted for and this would impact on the vacancy rates. The concentration of the posts ranged from Deputy Director Generals to Chief Directors and Directors, including levels 2-12. There were trade-offs highlighted; filling some posts would mean that others had to be held in abeyance.

The Chairperson asked if the staff who were to focus on children and women were included in the figure of 60, and Mr Chinnappan replied that they were not. Initially, those dealing with the functions of women, children and rights of persons with disabilities were to be put into structures to ensure continuity, and then to align those to the DSD mandate. The functions relating to children, women and persons with disabilities were taken over in May, and this included 24 posts. The funding did follow the function. There were engagements in terms of funds for functions. In terms of funds for disabilities, compensation was received. In respect of the Deputy Ministry, it may have not been the appropriate amount of funding to accommodate the function, as the Deputy Ministry was later found to be larger than what had been set out in the organogram.

Mr Chinnappan wanted to confirm that the pie chart was not part of the organisational structure and he apologised to Ms Mogotsi if it had caused any confusion. It was not intended to conflate the issue of job evaluation, but rather to highlight that the job evaluations must be done and they would have an impact on the end results. This was now being done by a Director in the DSD.

He said that the vacancy rate at level 2-12 is an issue, and with the transfer of the functions it was said that there would be a focus on the top, rather than focusing on the 2-12 grades. While they were not being ignored, the funding for those posts would first have to be secured. He confirmed that the DSD would be affected by the cuts in compensation but the impact was being dealt with at the Director General and Executive Managerial levels. If more posts here were to be filled, there would be budgetary challenges.

Mr Magasela said that the 13% vacancy rate took into account the acting posts, such as the Acting Deputy Director General for Corporate Services, Acting Deputy Director General for Strategy and Organisational Development. Whether or not those would be filled would be a political process and the Chief Director would not be able to speak to that issue.

He agreed that, as Ms Wilson had pointed out, there was a moratorium on recruitment for administration assistants because when projections were done on the budget as allocated, it was realised that some posts could not be filled without going over budget.

Mr Clifford Appel, Chief Financial Officer, DSD, commented that the DSD's budget for 2016-19 was cut quite significantly so that the DSD could not afford to fill vacancies in the next financial year. The moratorium was imposed, pending a reprioritisation of the entire structure in the DSD, and in order to ensure that the most critical positions were filled. DSD also carried some mandatory internships from the Compensation of Employees budget, and this impacted on whether the DSD could also afford to fill vacancies. When the Deputy Minister was appointed to the DSD, there was only partial funding but the posts could not be put on to the structure as they fell outside the normal structure.

The Chairperson said that all other explanations on vacancies were given, and what was now being given was a short cut. The information on budget cuts should have been given earlier. 

 

Mr Peter Netshipale responded to queries on Community Development. He said that the targets were SMART, but that Community Development was the only unit that measured what was happening in the provinces. Community Development entailed going to communities and profiling them in order to see who was in these communities and what services were needed, then mobilising these services by referring them to various departments. Immediate services were provided by his unit, which included ECD services and all welfare services, poverty alleviation projects and food, together with Department of Agriculture and others. The unit had concurrent functions with the provinces. Data would be submitted, but provinces delivered, for instance, training services from their own provincial budgets and they might add other aspects in a larger report. For 2016/17 all indicators relating to provincial responsibilities had been removed. The unit would henceforth focus on what needed to be done nationally, and not on a provincial level. Previously, it had tried to align functions but had found that it could not control some aspects but would still have to report on them, and that had created problems.

Community Development expenditure was not only for food. R51 million was allocated towards food security, but this was a medium-term project, to be transferred in September, and the budget would stand over until all other processes had been completed in the provinces; which explained why there was only 9% expenditure in the first quarter. This was likely to be used completed in the following quarter so there was something of an anomaly. NPOs were given tenders and National Treasury might transfer before the end of the twelve-month period.

He said that Community Development operated in terms of poverty alleviation projects in most of the target areas, as well as food security.   The indicator for the number of people accessing food through DSD programmes would increase as more people came on to ECD programmes. Community Development would deal with the food security programme which supplemented that already running under ECD and other poverty alleviation projects. He reported that all projects had supervisors and people who monitored how services were rendered at the local level. Some gaps in monitoring were found, but there was supervision. This unit would, at a national level, train supervisors and introduce Community Development Nutrition Centres, where meals were standardised to provide a full meal that was nutritious.

 

Mr Netshipale explained the Mikondzo Project. When the Committee visited some provinces it found gaps and so the Project aimed to set a better footprint for the DSD, with people from the national office actually going out to do assessments and analyses to address the gaps. A lot of problems were found following the analysis, and so Mikondzo was now to ensure that checks were done from childhood level to senior citizens, to identify gaps. He highlighted some examples. In one large area, there was no ECD creche. In other areas there might be 4 000 children but only 200 in the ECD creche, and the Project Mikondzo would identify those who were not being reached and identify the causes of that. It was essentially all about increasing the DSDs footprint and developing community based plans to assist communities in addressing their key challenges themselves – such as helping them to produce their own foodstuffs instead of buying them. A new policy was being looked into in Community Development.

The Chairperson noted that the DSD showed some good performance but there were some glaring inconsistencies highlighted by Members. Many of these were still the result of the past. Although the DSD was a national Department, the interventions must take place at grassroots level. She asked where the DSD was when one street happened to be set up with four ECD centres, with none in other streets. Because the DSD was dependent on the right information being fed through to it, in order to use the budget wisely, she suggested that there should be some sort of guideline outlining each ECD and its budget to isolate where there was congestion of spending in one area, and nothing in others. She asked if there were any investigations whether food actually delivered was in line with what was ordered, and whether the deliveries targeted those most in need, or was it being hijacked so that some people always benefitted and others did not? If this did happen, there would be complaints and questions to the Minister and President. It was not good enough for DSD to do the work; it had to be well monitored. Programme 1 was the “engine” that drove the evaluation process and it had to have the right people in place. 

The Chairperson asked what happened to children who were found not to be accessing early childhood facilities, and she pointed out that many pre-schools were charging exorbitant fees which was why children were not attending. Funding might be given, but there was no policy that said that it had to transform and use money given by government in a manner that targeted the poor.

The Chairperson also commented on the use of agencies by DSD and the Department was asked to explain, in a separate presentation, how it would turn around the situation. The NDA was supposed to have its own Board to appoint, and even though the NDA reported directly to Parliament, this did not absolve the DSD of responsibility.

She also emphasised Mr Mabilo's point that even if data was to be received from outside, targets should be properly indicated to also include other sources, for some appeared to have been double or triple-achieved, if funding was received from elsewhere. The DSD had to be more specific when reporting on the targets – both descriptors and numbers were needed. The DSD must ensure also that the organogram was fully reported so the Committee could help in identifying gaps, such as failures on the part of Heads of Departments, which must be reported since this would have an impact on the DSD.

The Chairperson then addressed Mr Netshipale, and said that good stories were often included in business plans, but when it came to implementation, excuses may be offered. Those applying for funding might claim to have no employment, yet be supplying other businesses far away. She emphasised the need to be strict with how funding was used, to avoid claims that the DSD was failing the people. Objectives needed to be followed. Cooperatives would also need to be looked into. She had, on a visit to iMikhondzo, seen that a child was sent to pick up a uniform, and it was quite obvious that the uniform handed over did not belong to that child, so there was a need to select and check beneficiaries properly. The Department of Agriculture was saying that the DSD had money and must partner in projects. However, the DSD was not there to support the Department of Agriculture, who had its own budget; DSD's budget was geared to ensuring food security. She noted the costs of basic food and said that the R300 provided to people was clearly not sufficient for food purchases. She stressed that any expenditure must be geared to improving the quality of people's lives.

The meeting was adjourned. 

Share this page: