Question NW1358 to the Minister of Social Development
06 June 2022 - NW1358
Matiase, Mr NS to ask the Minister of Social Development
What impact has the COVID-19 virus had on the total number of persons who have been included in the social welfare programme since the outbreak of the specified virus?
Reply:
The COVID-19 pandemic that has spread rapidly and extensively around the world since March 2020, has had profound impact on the delivery of social development services to citizens especially community mobilisation, sustainable livelihoods, food security, registration and funding of non-profit organisations services. The unfolding crisis has affected these services and threatened people’s access to services and food. The country has witnessed not only a major disruption to food supply chains in the wake of lockdowns triggered by the global health crisis, but also a major global economic slowdown.
These crises have resulted in lower incomes and higher prices of food, putting food out of reach for many, and undermining the right to food and stalling efforts to meet Sustainable Development Goals. The Department (DSD) has been providing food and nutrition services to combat the growing challenge of malnutrition and hunger amongst poor and vulnerable communities therefore Covid-19 pandemic disrupted the provision of such very important commodity.
Prior to the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic, the department developed a system of service delivery that empowered communities with economic empowerment projects, mobilisation and dialogue, food distribution and registration and funding of NPOs. South Africa has experienced an increase in the levels of food insecurity and vulnerability during this pandemic and the necessary lock-down to prevent the spread of the virus. Prior to lock-down the percentage of households with inadequate access to food was at 20.2% (3 347 342 people) in 2018. The lock-down exacerbated the magnitude of the need for food as more poor people living below the food poverty line found themselves with limited resources to sustain food supplies for their families.
The number of people accessing nutritious foods through DSD Food Programmes increased to 9 244 072 and 2 264 325 households, whilst the target set was 3 300 000 people and 1 million households. There was an increase in the number of persons accessing Psychosocial Support Services in 2020 as opposed to 2019. The increase can be attributed to the trauma resulted from the overall COVID-19 situation in the country.
The DSD through the Gender Based Violence Command Centre (GBV CC) mended by Social Workers dealt with all forms of trauma. There are number of reasons to the increase in the number of persons accessing psychosocial service via the GBV CC. For e.g. during the hard Lock down of March 2020, many people found themselves in confined spaces, with threatened job losses/security, this meant more people needed psychosocial support services. The Command Centre as a 24/7 telephonic service and was easily accessible under lockdown restrictions. Below table indicates over 50% increase on the comparison of number of persons who accessed the Centre for the period under review (2019 Vs 2020).
- Above indicates exponential increase of over 50%
- The below is the reflection of number recorded cases that have since remained stable in 2021 as the situation of COVID-19/restrictions have been eased:
|
GBVCC Statistical Report |
||||
|
Date |
Telephone call Receive |
USSDs Received |
SMS’s Received |
Total |
|
Jan - Dec |
73 829 |
3484 |
2843 |
80156 |
Some of the impact of COVID 19 on shelters for victims of crime and violence are as follows:
- Beneficiaries of services in social welfare facilities which amongst other include older were negatively impacted by restrictions imposed by the Disaster Regulations and Directions which did not allow any visitation to these facilities during COVID 19. The closure of community-based programmes also created a burden to families who were strained and were not prepared to care for their individual members during that period.
- There was also a sudden increase in the number of persons who used the anti-substance abuse services. The following table illustrates number of persons reached through Anti-Substance Abuse programme during the 2020/21 and 2021/22 financial years:
|
Level of services |
2020/21 |
2021/22 |
|
Prevention |
217 9218 |
5 085 296 |
|
Treatment |
32 575 |
44 332 |
|
Aftercare |
7 557 |
10 032 |
|
Total |
2 219 350 |
5 139 660 |
In general, the social welfare programme has been partially negatively impacted to render services as expected as the result of the outbreak. Some of the programmes that are customised to be delivered physically were compromised and delivered using the hybrid model and not all provinces and persons are having excess to the technological infrastructure.
The Department of Social Development (DSD) along with its agencies (South African Social Security Agency – SASSA and the National Development Agency - NDA) have initiated a Social Sector Research, Monitoring and Evaluation Technical Working Group for COVID-19 related projects. The studies which included three (3) rapid assessments were conducted to gather robust evidence on high priority strategies implemented in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The table below summarises the findings of the three studies.
|
TITLE OF STUDY |
KEY FINDINGS |
|
1. Rapid Assessment on the Implementation and Utilisation of the Special R350 COVID-19 Grant |
The findings indicates that: a) Communication about access, application process and criteria as this was misunderstood by those in need and this area requires improvement. b) The beneficiaries of the Special R350 COVID-19 grant are most likely in rural areas, less educated, less tech-savvy, and heavily reliant on word of mouth communication. c) Reach was subsequently hindered as those that qualified did not have the means and/or knowledge of how to apply. d) There is also a strong need to find ways to mitigate and bridge the digital divide in the administration of social security. This is supported by majority of the respondents (88%) who maintain that the grant to be accessed by all poor individuals that apply as there are many poor people in South Africa (as explained by 77% of respondents). |
|
2. A rapid assessment of key monitoring indicators of measuring the impact of Covid-19 lockdown on child wellbeing in South Africa |
a) General observations: The responsibility to care for children predominately rest on single parents. There are variations in family dynamics and support structure in different districts with possible implications for wholesome childcare and protection. This supposition is illustrated in various findings and should be considering in developing community specific interventions. Most households are headed by unemployed females who predominantly depend on child support grants. The high burden of childcare on single parents may be an impediment to pursue opportunities to improve their material circumstances and possibly break the circle of poverty and impoverishment. b) Child Protection and Psychosocial Domains: A higher proportion of children feel unsafe even if they have never been hurt. This may be reflective of the internal and external environment they find themselves. Exposure to adult violence was high in most of the districts and children in most cases reported being hurt, highlighting child safety and protection issues. Sexual abuse rates are high and affects children of all ages, with risk increasing by age group. The long-term psychosocial health implication of this may require attention and the integrated school health programme can be leveraged. c) Food Security and Anthropometric Findings: Rates of experience of hunger are concerning and vary considerably across districts. These variations are potentially due to prevailing socio-cultural, environmental, and economic dynamics. Anthropometric findings indicate that among vulnerable children targeted by this study, the prevalence of malnutrition is very high as reflected by the high proportions affected by stunting and underweight. d) Education and Economic Wellbeing Domains: A concerning proportion of children of school going age are not attending school especially among the younger age groups. Special programmes to ensure greater school attendance are essential as a path to true self-reliance. High proportions of children reported having limited or no support with schoolwork and also many don’t have access to stationery. A portion of the household heads reported not being able to provide basic needs such as food, water, and clothing despite the grants. Higher proportions of children from households with other income sources access basic needs compared to those that are solely dependent on social grants. Families that reported being able to provide basic needs had higher proportions of children who attend school regularly and their daughters are less likely to miss school due to not having sanitary pads. e) Health and HIV/AIDS Domains: There are varying levels of poor health among children across districts, with high rates of recent illness reported in the same districts that also had the lowest health seeking rates. Overall findings indicate high rates of recent illness reported among vulnerable children. Poor health seeking observed in some districts may indicate systemic challenges related to access to healthcare which require more investigation. |
|
3. Synthesis evaluation of Social Development sector’s response to food relief mechanism during Covid-19 |
a) Relevance: The study found that the DSD food relief intervention was relevant for SA government needed to continually address the root causes of poverty, hunger and unemployment through policy initiatives and safety nets such as social grants to economically disempowered persons. There is a need for a systematic and consolidated approach to address the haphazard nature of government response to hunger and unemployment due to the lack of an integrated strategy to assist vulnerable people during crisis periods. b) Cohesion: The relief effort was targeted at reaching the vulnerable families, experiencing severe food insecurity during the lockdown period and was designed to be a stopgap measure to allow time for the more systemic government grant solutions to come on stream, and the resumption of government feeding programmes at schools and DSD centres. c) Effectiveness: The department was able to reach the most deserving vulnerable people through its partnership with SASSA. DSD and SASSA worked on a digital method for people to apply for grants as well as for the R350 Social Relief of Distress grant. This digital method applied to both smart and non-smart mobile phones to allow for others to apply on behalf of people who did not have a mobile phone or were not comfortable using one. d) Efficiency: There was resource efficiency given that most of the Fund’s disbursement went directly to beneficiaries, with very limited funding covering intermediary distribution costs. On average, the distribution costs were 6% of the total disbursement, with remote areas incurring higher distribution charges. e) Sustainability: Collaboration between the various levels of government and non-state actors in providing food relief response proved the potential of effective intergovernmental relations in responding to the needs of the poor. The use of hybrid food distribution (food parcels, cooked food and e-Voucher) model. The use of other stakeholders (multi-stakeholder approach to food distribution) will in future provide a working model for implementing food relief for future disasters. The disaster also assisted the capacity development of DSD internal systems for planning for disasters. |