Questions and Replies

Reply:

Umalusi Council is a statutory body that is formed in accordance with the National Qualifications Framework Act No 67 of 2008 and the General and Further Education and Training Quality Assurance Act No 58 of 2001 and has jurisdiction over NSC external moderators reports, therefore the question has been referred to Umalusi and the response will be forwarded as soon as it is received.

Reply:

Umalusi Council is a statutory body that is formed in accordance with the National Qualifications Framework Act No 67 of 2008 and the General and Further Education and Training Quality Assurance Act No 58 of 2001 and has jurisdiction over the NSC Examinations processes including Standardisation of the NSC Results therefore the question has been referred to Umalusi and the response will be forwarded as soon as it is received.

Reply:

Umalusi Council is a statutory body that is formed in accordance with the National Qualifications Framework Act No 67 of 2008 and the General and Further Education and Training Quality Assurance Act No 58 of 2001 and has jurisdiction over external moderators, therefore the question has been referred to Umalusi and the response will be forwarded as soon as it is received.

Reply:

Please see table below.

Province	Name of Districts with School for Deaf	No. of Schools with Professional Audiologists	No. of Assistive Devices Provided to Deaf Learners	(3)(a) No. of Speech Therapists who are SASL Conversant	(3)(b) No. of Occupational Therapists who are SASL Conversant	(3)(c) No. of Audiologists who are SASL Conversant	(3)(d) No. of Psychologists who are SASL Conversant
EC	Maluti	0	110	0	0	0	0
	Mthatha	0	228	0	0	0	0
	King Williams Town	0	220	0	0	0	0
	Port Elizabeth	0	95	0	0	0	0
FS	Motheo (Bartimea)	0	20	0	2	0	0
	Thabo Mofutsanyana (Thiboloha)	2	50	0	1	2	0
GT	Johannesburg East (St. Vincent School for the Deaf)	1	321	1	0	2	1
	Johannesburg West (Sizwile School for the Deaf)	1	180	0	0	1	0
	Johannesburg South (MC Kharbai)	1	161	0	0	2	1
	Ekurhuleni South (Ekurhuleni School for the Deaf)	1	108	0	0	2	0
	Tshwane South (Transoranje School)	1	312	1	0	1	0
	Tshwane North (Dominican School)	1	93	0	0	1	0
	Tshwane West (Filadelfia School)	1	60	1	1	1	0
KZN	Pinetown District VN Naik School	2	14	2	0	2	0
	Pinetown District Fulton School	1	46	1	0	1	0
	Pinetown District Kwathintwa School	3	90	0	0	3	0
	Umlazi District Kwavulindlebe School	0	10	0	0	0	0
	Umlazi District Durban School	1	10	0	0	1	0
	Umgungundlovu District Indaleni School	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Ugu District St Martin’s School	1	20	1	1	1	0
	King Cetshwayo District Vuleka School	0	0	0	0	0	0
LP	CAPRICON	1	To be attached	0	0	0	0
	MOPANI	0	0	0	0	0	0
	WATERBERG	0	0	0	0	0	0
	SEKHUKHUNE	0	0	0	0	0	0
	VHEMBE	0	0	0	0	0	0
MP	None	0	471	0	2	0	0
NC	Frances Baard	1	0	1	5	0	0
NW	Bojanala	1	R 158 524.00 allocated for assistive devices	0	0	0	0
	Dr Kenneth Kaunda	0	R 128 090.00 allocated for assistive devices	2	2	0	0
WC	Metro Central	1	150	1	1	1	0
	Metro Central	1	142	0	0	0	0
	Metro Central	1	89	1	0	0	0
	Cape Wineland	1	153	0	0	1	1
	Cape Wineland	1	285	1	1	1	2
	Metro East	1	70	0	0	0	0
	Metro North	1	205	0	0	0	0
National		27	3713	13	16	23	5

 

Reply:

The responses below are provided as per:

(a) province and (b) district, (i) in number of (aa) public ordinary schools, (bb) full service schools and (cc) schools for Learners with Special Educational Needs that have and have not made use of the South African School Administration System (SA-SAMS) since its inception

(a)(b)(i)(aa)(bb)(cc)

Table 1: Number of schools using SA-SAMS, by district, in 2016

Source 1: 2016 LURITS

Source 2: PED submissions

Province	District	Special Schools	Full-Service	All Ordinary Schools	Total number of schools using SA-SAMS
		Using SA_SAMS	Not Using SA_SAMS	Using SA_SAMS	Not Using SA_SAMS	Using SA_SAMS	Not Using SA_SAMS
	BUTTERWORTH	0	0	1	0	391	0	392
	COFIMVABA	0	0	1	0	273	0	274
	CRADOCK	0	0	1	0	75	0	76
	DUTYWA	0	0	1	0	347	0	348
EC	EAST LONDON	6	0	1	0	300	1	307
	FORT BEAUFORT	0	0	2	0	240	0	242
	GRAAFF-REINET	0	0	1	0	77	0	78
	GRAHAMSTOWN	2	0	0	0	73	4	75
	LADY FRERE	0	0	1	0	157	0	158
	LIBODE	0	0	1	0	422	0	423
	KING WILLIAMS TOWN	4	0	0	0	389	0	393
	LUSIKISIKI	1	0	2	0	353	0	356
	MALUTI	1	0	0	0	224	0	225
	MBIZANA	3	0	1	0	217	0	221
	MT FLETCHER	0	0	0	0	184	0	184
	MT FRERE	1	0	1	0	251	0	253
	MTHATA	3	0	0	0	370	0	373
	NGCOBO	1	0	1	0	216	0	218
	PORT ELIZABETH	13	0	1	0	248	1	262
	QUEENSTOWN	1	0	1	0	164	0	166
	QUMBU	1	0	0	0	244	0	245
	STERKSPRUIT	2	0	1	0	156	0	159
	UITENHAGE	3	0	0	0	165	1	168
	Total	42	0	18	0	5 536	7	5 596
FS	FEZILE DABI	3	0	36	0	172	0	211
	LEJWELEPUTSWA	4	0	24	0	213	0	241
	MOTHEO	12	0	33	0	253	0	298
	THABO MOFUTSANYANA	2	0	44	0	356	0	402
	Xhapier	0	0	18	0	52	0	70
	Total	21	0	155		1 046	0	1 222
GT	EKURHULENI NORTH	9	5	4	1	138	102	151
	EKURHULENI SOUTH	6	4	5	0	135	74	146
	GAUTENG EAST	6	2	5	0	132	39	143
	GAUTENG NORTH	2	0	5	0	43	18	50
	GAUTENG WEST	7	2	5	0	140	31	152
	JOHANNESBURG CENTRAL	9	2	5	0	200	24	214
	JOHANNESBURG EAST	7	6	5	0	133	152	145
	JOHANNESBURG NORTH	13	9	5	0	146	80	164
	JOHANNESBURG SOUTH	5	3	5	0	158	43	168
	JOHANNESBURG WEST	4	5	4	1	119	53	127
	SEDIBENG EAST	7	1	4	0	68	25	79
	SEDIBENG WEST	5	1	5	0	124	15	134
	TSHWANE NORTH	4	2	5	0	111	40	120
	TSHWANE SOUTH	11	5	5	0	163	127	179
	TSHWANE WEST	7	2	4	1	122	45	133
	GT	102	49	71	3	1 794	868	1 967
KZ	AMAJUBA	6	0	3	1	225	9	234
	ILEMBE	2	0	7	0	411	8	420
	PINETOWN	11	0	5	0	463	54	479
	SISONKE	2	0	7	0	435	5	444
	UGU	3	0	2	1	458	35	463
	UMGUNGUNDLOVU	8	1	4	0	479	44	491
	UMKHANYAKUDE	2	0	9	0	532	0	543
	UMLAZI	18	3	3	0	384	127	405
	UMZINYATHI	2	0	9	0	481	12	492
	UTHUKELA	3	0	4	0	440	6	447
	UTHUNGULU	8	0	8	0	640	18	656
	ZULULAND	3	0	10	0	733	4	746
	Total	68	4	71	2	5 681	322	5 820
LP	LEBOWAKGOMO	3	0	4	0		0	7
	MOPANI	4	0	3	0	691	17	698
	CAPRICORN	11	0	0	0	924	6	935
	SEKHUKHUNE	6	0	4	0	923	4	933
	VHEMBE	6	0	3	0	973	5	982
	WATERBERG	5	0	3	0	432	16	440
	Total	35	0	17	0	3 943	48	3 995
	BOHLABELA	1	0	40	0	390	7	431
	EHLANZENI	3	0	30	0	383	27	416
MP	GERT SIBANDE	7	6	30	0	482	23	519
	NKANGALA	8	0	40	0	478	56	526
	Total	19	6	140	0	1 733	113	1 892
NC	FRANCES BAARD	8	0	1	0	122	1	131
	JOHN TAOLO GAETSEWA	1	0	2	0	171	1	174
	NAMAQUA	1	0	0	0	73	1	74
	PIXLEY-KA-SEME	0	0	1	0	88	2	89
	SIYANDA	1	0	0	0	94	2	95
	Total	11	0	4	0	548	7	563
	DITSOBOTLA	0	0	4	0	42	0	46
NW	GREATER DELAREYVILLE	1	0	4	0	83	1	88
	GREATER TAUNG	2	0	4	0	113	3	119
	KAGISANO MOLOPO	1	0	6	0	88	0	95
	KGETLENG RIVER	1	0	5	0	46	2	52
	LETLHABILE	1	0	4	0	67	0	72
	LICHTENBURG	1	0	1	0	31	5	33
	MADIBENG	4	0	4	1	70	8	78
	MAHIKENG	0	0	5	0	88	1	93
	MAQUASSI HILLS	2	0	5	0	52	2	59
	MATLOSANA	2	0	10	3	76	24	88
	MORETELE	2	0	4	0	103	0	109
	MOSES KOTANE EAST	2	0	5	0	62	0	69
	MOSES KOTANE WEST	0	0	4	0	64	0	68
	RAMOTSHERE	0	0	6	0	81	1	87
	POTCHEFSTROOM	2	0	0	0	0	0	2
	REKOPANTSWE	3	0	5	0	89	1	97
	RUSTENBURG	4	0	6	1	121	13	131
	TALEDI	0	0	5	0	87	2	92
	TLOKWE	0	0	4	0	67	9	71
	ZEERUST	2	0	0	0	0	0	2
	Total	30	0	91	5	1 430	72	1 551
WC	CAPE WINELANDS	0	11	0	25	0	294	0
	EDEN AND CENTRAL KAROO	0	7	0	27	0	244	0
	METRO CENTRAL	0	22	0	12	0	265	0
	METRO EAST	0	12	0	16	0	184	0
	METRO NORTH	0	17	0	22	0	250	0
	METRO SOUTH	0	12	0	10	0	217	0
	OVERBERG	0	3	0	15	0	98	0
	WEST COAST	0	3	0	17	0	141	0
	Total	0	87	0	144	0	1 693	0
National	328	146	567	154	21 711	3 288	22 606

(ii) The measures in place to ensure that more schools apply SA-SAMS as their primary reporting tool are as follows:

• From 2017 onwards, all paper surveys are phased out and data are collected through SASAMS only. The operational data will be collected and submitted with a signed off principal report.
• Schools using 3rd Party systems are to run SASAMS parallel to their existing systems.
• New schools are provided with the SA-SAMS software.
• Some has managed to secure the support of EDUPAC, SMART Software, Principal Primary, and Pencil Box to provide with an SA-SAMS database. The Principal Group would then assist their clients to “export” data from the primary application into SA-SAMS and thereby generate an SA-SAMS database. The created SA-SAMS database needs to be data cleaned and then can be deployed. Once deployed successfully, the database will run the locally developed extractor tool to upload the deployed database into the provincial warehouse.
• Recruitment and training for SASAMS personnel will be carried out.
• Some provinces have already issued circulars to schools to provide data in SA-SAMS format.

The inputs below were sourced from Western Cape:

• Currently 11 Western Cape (WC) schools are using SA-SAMS to varying degrees (8 of these schools attended a training session last year convened jointly by WCED and DBE).  
• The WCED utilizes a provincial administration management system, CEMIS on a wide-scale to facilitate data collection for the various provincial business processes and to meet the requirements of gazette 29757.  In the Western Cape, all public schools use CEMIS (primarily for maintaining learner tracking) and most schools use a mix of bespoke and proprietary Schools Administration Management Systems (SAMS) to manage their day to day operations.  

Reply:

The responses below are provided in the table below:

Number of learners in the schools for the deaf in each (a) province and (b) district were enrolled in each grade from Grade 1 to 12 in the (i) 2014, (ii) 2015, and (iii) 2016 calendar years.

(1)(a)(b)(i)(ii)(iii)

Table 1: Number of learners in schools for the deaf, by district and grade, in between 2014 and 2016

Source: 2014-16 SNAP Survey for SNE schools

2014	Province	District	Pre-Gr. R	Gr. R	Gr. 1	Gr. 2	Gr. 3	Gr. 4	Gr. 5	Gr. 6	Gr. 7	Gr. 8	Gr. 9	Gr. 10	Gr. 11	Gr. 12	Other	Total
	GT	EKURHULENI SOUTH	11	18	33	40	33	31	23	19	27	14	24	0	0	0	0	273
		JOHANNESBURG SOUTH	12	9	15	10	13	16	13	10	21	15	10	0	5	2	250	401
		JOHANNESBURG WEST	13	25	28	19	21	23	16	15	21	21	18	17	8	6	30	281
		TSHWANE NORTH	15	28	32	42	36	32	23	23	24	24	26	0	0	0	78	383
		TSHWANE SOUTH	10	13	24	16	24	16	10	10	11	6	6	5	8	3	39	201
		Total	61	93	132	127	127	118	85	77	104	80	84	22	21	11	397	1 539
	KZ	EMPANGENI		34	26	34	25	19	19	22	24	24	30	39	27	14	0	337
		PINETOWN	13	58	24	50	36	37	29	24	23	23	21	20	39	11	16	424
		UMGUNGUNDLOVU		14	21	12	25	9	12	9	5	6	36	0	0	0	0	149
		UMLAZI	15	59	53	39	28	26	12	11	10	8	6	0	0	0	49	316
		Total	28	165	124	135	114	91	72	66	62	61	93	59	66	25	65	1226
	NW	MAQUASSI HIILS	0	0	0		0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	70	70
		RUSTENBURG	0	13	27	17	30	35	42	18	30	0	0	0	0	0	118	330
		Total		13	27	17	30	35	42	18	30	0	0	0	0	0	188	400
	WC	METRO SOUTH	12	10	11	14	15	12	7	15	7	7	10	0	0	0	220	340
		METROPOLE SOUTH	27	9	12	15	15	11	5	11	7	15	11	10	4	0	74	226
		Total	39	19	23	29	30	23	12	26	14	22	21	10	4		294	566
	National		128	290	306	308	301	267	211	187	210	163	198	91	91	36	944	3 731
2015	GT	EKURHULENI SOUTH	12	18	32	36	28	31	29	26	16	22	24	0	0	0	0	274
		JOHANNESBURG SOUTH		22	6	18	6	8	9	8	6	14	37	0	0	0	0	134
		JOHANNESBURG WEST	23	17	20	25	15	22	19	15	18	15	18	27	9	4	26	273
		TSHWANE NORTH	12	26	33	23	45	26	31	26	22	31	16	0	0	0	71	362
		TSHWANE SOUTH	15	18	19	17	29	12	18	9	8	5	6	5	8	2	37	208
		Total	62	101	110	119	123	99	106	84	70	87	101	32	17	6	134	1251
	KZ	UMLAZI	14	0	9	7	9	8	9	8	17	17	9	0	0	0	0	107
		Total	14	0	9	7	9	8	9	8	17	17	9	0	0	0	0	107
	NW	MAQUASSI HILLS	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	63	63
		RUSTENBURG	11	12	18	26	18	19	36	43	23	0	0	0	0	0	47	253
		Total	11	12	18	26	18	19	36	43	23	0	0	0	0	0	110	316
	WC	METRO EAST	11	10	13	13	16	15	4	9	9	3	7	0	0	0	34	144
		METRO SOUTH	18	17	13	16	11	12	11	4	13	10	13	11	0	4	74	227
		Total	29	27	26	29	27	27	15	13	22	13	20	11	0	4	108	371
	National		116	140	163	181	177	153	166	148	132	117	130	43	17	10	352	2 045
2016	GT	EKURHULENI SOUTH	0	30	29	25	35	33	27	23	21	22	22	0	0	0	0	267
		JOHANNESBURG SOUTH	8	9	15	6	18	5	8	10	11	7	12	0	0	0	15	124
		JOHANNESBURG WEST	6	23	17	18	23	20	18	18	15	14	17	31	14	7	39	280
		TSHWANE NORTH	0	23	40	24	27	44	27	26	32	34	20	0	0	0	62	359
		TSHWANE SOUTH	18	4	22	19	13	21	15	16	11	3	5	5	3	5	37	197
		Total	32	89	123	92	116	123	95	93	90	80	76	36	17	12	153	1 227
	KZ	PINETOWN	8	34	37	38	16	49	38	34	30	19	21	43	13	8	0	388
		UMLAZI	26	21	22	27	80	27	16	18	13	11	11	5	14	4	0	295
		UTHUNGULU	0	49	21	22	14	30	22	10	23	22	16	21	25	35	0	310
		Total	34	104	80	87	110	106	76	62	66	52	48	69	52	47	0	993
	NW	MAQUASSI HILLS	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	74	74
		RUSTENBURG	17	17	25	16	28	18	22	36	34	0	0	0	0	0	42	255
		Total	17	17	25	16	28	18	22	36	34	0	0				116	329
	WC	METRO EAST	10	8	12	13	16	18	11	5	10	8	4	0	0	0	42	157
		METRO SOUTH	8	17	16	9	12	8	13	11	3	12	5	4	6	0	100	224
		Total	18	25	28	22	28	26	24	16	13	20	9	4	6	0	142	381
	National		101	235	256	217	282	273	217	207	203	152	133	109	75	59	411	2 930

(2)

Data on dropout rate for learners in special schools is not available.

Reply:

A response was received from SACE that this question will only be responded to after its first Council Meeting of 2017 scheduled for 17 February 2017.

“Neutrality of the Ministerial Task Team”

Following allegations published in the media in 2014 that some members of teacher unions and department officials were involved in illegal activities involving the selling of educator posts, the Minister of Basic Education, Mrs AM Motshekga, MP, held meetings with various stakeholders including teacher unions as well as the Associations of School Governing Bodies.

Consensus was reached on the need to investigate speedily the allegations and it was thus agreed that an Independent Ministerial Task Team (MTT) instead of a Commission of Inquiry be established by the Minister to probe these allegations.

Because of the sensitive nature of the matter, the Minister found it appropriate to appoint an independent Chairperson, an independent educationist and members drawn from different Government Departments:

The Chairperson, Prof John Volmink;

1. Mr Michael Gardiner, Educationist;
2. Mr Siyabonga Msimang, - Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA);
3. Mr Paul Nel - Department of Justice and Correctional Services (DoJ);
4. Ms Amelia Moleta - Department of Justice and Correctional Services;
5. Mr Gerhard Scholtz - Deloitte Forensics; and
6. Mr Tommy Prins - Deloitte Forensics.

Reply:

The teachers who are involved in the Grade 3 English First Additional Language improvement programme being administered in partnership with Zenex Foundation are participating in a teacher development and support programme. The assessments they underwent were voluntary processes to establish baseline information. The programme will offer teachers an opportunity to participate in another assessment towards the end of 2017 to assess what progress was made.

Reply:

The current contract with SAB&T Ubuntu was extended to September 2017 due to the fact that the campaign is coming to an end at the above mentioned date. The matter went through all departmental procurement processes and the Department was advised by its Bid Adjudication Committee that it would not be cost effective for the Department to appoint a new service provider for such a short period.

The irregular expenditure that occurred was not created by the current service provider but happened due to a disagreement between the Department and the Auditor-General on a technical point in the procurement process. The matter was then submitted to a technical team at the Auditor-General which then ruled against the Department. This matter was however addressed in a previous response to the Honourable Member.

Reply:

(1) and (2) On 02 December 2016 the Department of Basic Education (DBE) requested the Gauteng Department of Education (GDE) to provide a response. The DBE will provide the necessary response once the information is made available by the GDE.

 

Reply:

(1)

(a) The Department has advised the North West Provincial Department to institute legal action against the implicated individual with a view to determining whether the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act 12 of 2004 has been violated as well as to implement the recommendations of the NEXUS report.

A progress report has been received from North West where one case has been investigated and finalised.

(b) (i) & (ii) The matter is still under investigation.

   (iii) The North West Provincial Department has been requested to further investigate whether there are other officials involved in the appointment of the official alleged not to meet the requirements.

2. The Head of Department has been advised to implement the recommendations of the MTT report as well as the NEXUs report.

3. The Minister will make the report available to the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education as soon after she has received and analysed it.

Reply:

The information has been requested from the Limpopo Department Education and will be provided as a soon as it is received.

Reply:

The information has been requested from the Limpopo Department Education and will be provided as a soon as it is received.

Reply:

(a)(b) Deloitte was contracted to serve as a member of the Ministerial Task Team (MTT) and to work alongside the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (DoJ) to investigate all the cases reported to the Department and through the media for the duration of the first phase of the MTT.

Deloitte was not contracted to work on the second phase of the forensic investigation, the services of the forensic team from the DoJ have been rendered pro bono, except for the payment of the subsistence and travelling allowances as and when required. It made a sound financial sense to use the human resources drawn from a Government Department such as the DOJ to complete the work rather than to enter into a new financially binding contract with a service provider for another six (6) months.

Reply:

a) With regard to 66 remaining schools without sanitation, all the schools are currently at different stages of implementation and will be completed during the current 2016/2017 financial year.

b) With regard to 81 remaining schools without water, all the schools are currently at different stages of implementation and will be completed during the current 2016/2017 financial year.

c) With regard to 571 remaining schools without electricity, all the schools are currently at different stages of implementation and will be completed during 2017/2018 financial year.

Reply:

1. The information has been requested from the South African Council of Educators (SACE) and regular follow-up on this has been done with them. To date, we have not received this information from the SACE.

2. The SACE has provided the DBE with the following information:

The total number of educators struck-off the roll during (aa) 2011-12, (bb) 2012-13, (cc) 2013-14, (dd) 2014-15 and (ee) 2015-16 is as follows:

2011/12

Educators struck off indefinitely: 31

Educators struck off but may re-apply after a certain period: 01

2012/13

Educators struck off indefinitely: 27

Educators struck off but may re-apply after a certain period: 01

2013/14

Educators struck off indefinitely: 03

Educators struck off but may re-apply after a certain period: 06

2014/15

Educators struck off indefinitely: 10

Educators struck off but may re-apply after a certain period: 18

2015/16

Educators struck off indefinitely: 25

Educators struck off but may re-apply after a certain period: 05

The information received from SACE does not give a provincial breakdown of cases, nor does it indicate the nature of the cases that have been struck-off the roll.

 

RESPONSE TO NATIONAL ASSEMBLY QUESTION 2669

COMPILED BY:

MS S GEYER

CHIEF DIRECTOR: EDUCATION HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

DATE:

MR T KOJANA

DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: TEACHER AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

DATE:

MR HM MWELI

DIRECTOR-GENERAL

DATE:

QUESTION 2669: APPROVED / NOT APPROVED / AMENDED

MR ME SURTY, MP

DEPUTY MINISTER

DATE:

MRS AM MOTSHEKGA, MP

MINISTER:

DATE:

Reply:

1. The time frames have not been met in every case. ASIDI is a multi-year programme and the building of a school takes, on average 12 to 15 months. Prior to that is the process of procurement, which must follow laid down procedures, and design, planning and construction. A project cycle does not necessarily follow a financial year.

2. Implementing agents blacklist non performing contractors and send the list to Construction Industry Development Board.(CIBD).

3. The expenditure on the programme to date is detailed below:

Inappropriate Structures
			2011/12	2012/13	2013/14	2014/15	2015/16
Eastern Cape		63 984 913	643 912 612	790 329 040	1 358 016 195	976 037 703
Free State		-	17 746 043	146 775 703	518 183 195	187 121 154
KwaZulu-Natal		-	-	1 000 000	13 994 772	7 033 233
Limpopo			-	-	32 188 714	89 036 857	12 415 992
Mpumalanga		-	-	32 188 714	89 036 857	18 139 438
Northwest		-	-	8 349 205	86 219 551	15 062 193
Northern Cape		-		3 960 685	15 751 841	6 439 904
Western Cape				533 019 000	396 697 000	262 049 000
			63 984 913	661 658 655	1 547 811 061	2 566 936 268	1 484 298 617
Water & Sanitation
			2011/12	2012/13	2013/14	2014/15	2015/16
Eastern Cape		7 843 987	35 431 692	265 153 466	140 788 186	98 471 455
Free State		1 232 657	10 760 350	3 355 713	831 166	-
KwaZulu-Natal		-	34 441 881	64 772 375	120 082 396	33 512 363
Limpopo			-	36 542 858	67 409 852	29 322 070	5 818 007
Mpumalanga		-	-	-	43 236 964	29 025 376
Northwest		-	-	-	17 378 852	-
Northern Cape		-		3 960 685	10 869 214	-
			9 076 644	117 176 781	404 652 091	362 508 848	166 827 201
Electricity
			2011/12	2012/13	2013/14	2014/15	2015/16
Eskom (All Provinces)	-	22 900 834	3 334 927	53 202 521	24 806 781
Total Capital Expenditure	73 061 557	801 736 270	1 955 798 079	2 982 647 637	1 675 932 598
TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENDITURE SINCE INCEPTION WITHOUT WC		7 489 176 141

4. The programme is amended in keeping with performance cycles and implementing agent capacity. Implementing Agents have agreed to bolster their internal capacities and are geared to complete the programme by the proposed new completion dates.

5.The ASIDI programme is now planned to be completed at the end of the 2017/18 financial year. 126 schools are at different phases of implementation and 216 schools are the subject of a completed rationalisation and mergers exercise. The DBE will now go in to a period of procurement, planning and design before construction can begin in earnest.

RESPONSE TO NATIONAL ASSEMBLY QUESTION 2643

COMPILER:

MS J MODIPA

EXT: X 4272

DATE:

MR T KOJANA

DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: SECTOR INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT

DATE:

MR HM MWELI

DIRECTOR–GENERAL

DATE:

QUESTION NA 2643 APPROVED/NOT APPROVED/AMENDED

MR ME SURTY, MP

DEPUTY MINISTER

DATE:

MRS AM MOTSHEKGA, MP

MINISTER

DATE:

Reply:

1. (a) (i) It takes about 30 to 45 days to finalise the deregistration process of an educator found to be in possession of fraudulent qualifications. The final decision to deregister an educator is taken by the SACE Council. (ii) & (iii) It takes on average three (3) months to finalise cases of sexual misconduct and physical assault. Some cases may take longer depending on the prevailing circumstances of each case.

(b) The total number of educators struck off the roll during (aa) 2011-12, (bb) 2012-13, (cc) 2013-14, (dd) 2014-15 and (ee) 2015-16 is as follows:

2011/12

Educators struck off indefinitely: 31

Educators struck off but may re-apply after a certain period: 01

2012/13

Educators struck off indefinitely: 27

Educators struck off but may re-apply after a certain period: 01

2013/14

Educators struck off indefinitely: 03

Educators struck off but may re-apply after a certain period: 06

2014/15

Educators struck off indefinitely: 10

Educators struck off but may re-apply after a certain period: 18

2015/16

Educators struck off indefinitely: 25

Educators struck off but may re-apply after a certain period: 05

Reply:

(i) Only 7% of newly appointed principals were subjected to competency tests because the tests were not mandatory yet. Provincial Education Departments had not commenced with the development of such tests. The Western Cape and Gauteng were the only provinces which have developed competency tests but did not apply the tests for the appointment of school principals. The DBE had to first put systems in place to prepare for the implementation of the tests across all provinces. The preparations involved the development and the promulgation of the policy on the South African Standard for Principalship which had to serve as the basis for the developments of the assessment test and consultation processes at the Education Labour Relations Council (ELRC).

(ii) The Western Cape was the only province that implemented competency tests in the 2015-16 financial year but made it optional for schools to utilise the tests in making appointment recommendations for principals, hence the low 7% average.

RESPONSE TO NATIONAL ASSEMBLY QUESTION 2592

(2) (a) Consultation on Principal Competency Testing has commenced with all unions. The first meeting took place on 23 August 2016 at the Education Labour Relations Council (ELRC) offices where all unions were present.

(b) SADTU is of the view that Competency Assessment for principals is a matter of mutual interest and must be a subject of collective bargaining in the ELRC rather than consultation, while CTU-ATU is willing to have bi-lateral meetings with the Department before the matter could be finalised. A follow-up meeting was scheduled for 30 November at the ELRC but has to be postponed due to the commitment of the parties to the ELRC and the ELRC to a Portfolio Committee engagement meeting with education stakeholders.

Reply:

a) The service provider that was appointed to analyse data for the 2014 National Education Evaluation Development Unit is the Underhill Corporate Solutions.

b) R198 117.80 was paid to the service provide.

c) Three companies submitted proposals in response to the Terms of Reference that were advertised.

d) The delay was in supply chain management processes which took too long to appoint the service provider. This had a negative impact on the time frames for the service provider to conclude work.

Reply:

Yes, in line with the implementation of the Department of Basic Education’s (DBE) Integrated Strategy on HIV, STIs and TB, 2012-2016, the DBE reviewed the 1999 National Policy on HIV/AIDS, for Learners and Educators in Public Schools, and Students and Educators in Further Education and Training Institutions and developed a new DBE National Policy on HIV, STIs and TB that aims to provide comprehensive sexuality education programme in schools. In addition, the Policy also seeks to create access to Sexual and Reproductive Health services to learners.

Sexuality education is implemented through Life Orientation as a subject in the curriculum, other programmes include HIV and AIDS Life Skills Education Programme and Peer Education Programme which support and strengthen the content of Life Orientation; as well as, Keeping Girls in School Programme - targeting mainly girls, and the Integrated School Health Programme which is conducted in partnership with the Departments of Health, Social Development, development partners and non-governmental organisations. In addition, the DBE is working with UNESCO to explore the online educator training on comprehensive sexuality education. Training is currently implemented in the Eastern Cape province and will be rolled out to other provinces in subsequent years.

Reply:

(1) (a) (i) (ii) (iii)

The Department of Basic Education is in no position to give the exact disaggregated numbers on these statistics. However, as part of the review of the Memorandum of Understanding with the Department of Sport and Recreation South Africa, provinces are undertaking a sports facilities audit in all public schools, including schools for children with special educational needs.

(b)

The Department of Basic Education has no programme of twinning advantaged and disadvantaged schools. However, provinces such as Gauteng have taken the initiative to twin schools in order to share the facilities. The Gauteng Department of Education has three pairs of schools which have been gazetted Section 17GB (Twinning Programme). The three pairs are:

• • • Bovet Primary and Lyndhurst Primary;
    • Cultura High and Zithobeni Secondary; and
    • Alexandra Secondary and Sandown High.

During the respective strategic planning sessions, per pair of schools, each pair identified transport and transport cost as a major risk pertaining to learners accessing the resources at the urban school.

In the case of Bovet and Lyndhurst, both schools have procured a Combi which transports learners / educators in order to access the facilities at Lyndhurst.

Cultura and Zithobeni have conducted inter-school athletics, soccer, netball and hockey. This however, is limited due to transport costs.

Alexandra and Sandown are in a similar position to that of Cultura and Zithobeni. Initially, Alexandra Secondary secured a sponsorship, but this unfortunately has ended.

(2) (a) The Department of Basic Education is in no position to provide statistics on the number of schools with sporting equipment. Every school receives a Norms and Standards budget allocation, which covers a variety of needs, including equipment. Over and above the Norms and Standards allocation, sporting equipment is provided to schools by the Department of Sports and Recreation South Africa (SRSA) as part of the Memorandum of Understanding. A summary of sporting equipment distributed to schools as indicated by SRSA is as follows:

 

2013/14	2014/15	2015/16	Target 2016/17
6 520	1 693	3 000	2 500

(b) A recent situational analysis of the state of Physical Education in South Africa revealed that Physical Education is taught by Life Orientation (LO) Educators who do not necessarily have formal training in Physical Education. As a short-term plan, the Department undertook educator training on Physical Education nationally. The Department is now finalizing a Physical Education qualification framework, developed with the Physical Education Institute of South Africa (PEISA).

(c) The Department provides training to educators through the national federations and school sport codes so that schools are self-reliant for training. There are some instances where schools are supported by local clubs and private entities. The Department has further engaged with the South African Universities on the implementation of Physical Education in schools including support for the educators. This has led to the establishment of the South African University Physical Education Association (SAUPEA). The Association will undertake a national on-site research project within the selected public schools in South Africa in all nine provinces. The Universities that will be part of this research are:

• University of Johannesburg;
• University of Witwatersrand;
• University of Zululand;
• University of KwaZulu-Natal;
• University of Free State;
• Stellenbosch University;
• University of Western Cape;
• Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University;
• University of Pretoria; and
• North-West University.

The rationale is for each participating University to select a sample from the primary and secondary school representative of:

• Ex-Model C schools;
• Township schools;
• Rural schools; and
• Schools for children with physical disabilities.

In addition to the on-site research visits, an in-depth research based on a multi-method approach will ensure the capturing of qualitative and quantitative data from decision-makers, HODs, educators and learners (Grades 7 and 11 respectively), parents (represented on the School Governing Body) and service providers offering Physical Education or physical activities in the Life Orientation or Life Skills Curriculum.

(d) Every school receives a Norms and Standards budget allocation, which covers a variety of needs, including school sport equipment/amenities.

Reply:

(a) The Department of Basic Education has not spent on advertising on (i) ANN7, (ii) SABC Television and Radio Channels, National and Commercial Radio Stations, Community Television and Radio Stations during the 2015-2016 financial year or since 1 April 2016.

(b) SACE has not spent on advertising on ANN7, SABC Television and Radio Channels, National and Commercial Radio Stations, Community Television and Radio Stations during the 2015-2016 financial year or since 1 April 2016.

Umalusi has not spent on advertising on ANN7, SABC Television and Radio Channels, Community Television and Radio Stations during the 2015-2016 financial year or since 1 April 2016.

However, Umalusi has spent R212, 106.35 on National and Commercial Radio stations during the 2015-2016 financial year.

Reply:

(a)There are 24 reported cases of allegations from the Public Service Commission relating to the Provincial Education Departments (PEDs), and one (1) for the entity, South African Council for Educators (SACE). The Department is following up with the relevant PEDS and SACE for feedback on their investigation process.

Reply:

(a) What (i) are the names and

(ii) is the total number of schools that provide sanitary towels for learners,

After the President declared in his State of the Nation Address (SONA) in 2011 that the Government should make available sanitary dignity packs to deserving young girls and women, three provinces, namely: Limpopo, Mpumalanga and Gauteng, formed partnerships with Protector and Gamble to distribute sanitary towels to girl learners in selected schools. Currently, there is no available data on the names and number of schools to respond to question (a)(i) and (a)(ii) above. The information has been requested from the three provinces whose schools have implemented the programme.

(b) what is the total number of learners that have been provided with the specified towels in the specified schools

Currently, there is no available data on the number of learners that have been provided with the specified towels in the implementing schools to respond to question (b) above. The information has been requested from the three provinces whose schools have implemented the programme.

(c) how many times in a given school calendar were the towels provided?

Currently, there is no available data on the number of times in a given school calendar that the towels were given to learners in response to question (c) above. The information has been requested from the three provinces whose schools have implemented the programme.

Reply:

(a) The main difference between the National Education Evaluation and Development Unit (NEEDU) and the Office of Standards and Compliance for Basic Education (OSCBE) is that through a Bill, NEEDU would be established as a statutory body whereas pursuing the new legal pathway (i.e., establishing NEEDU as the OSCBE) will create a ‘component of government.’

Where NEEDU is established as a statutory body, it would be governed by a board whereas the OSCBE will be governed by a Governing Advisory Council to oversee, guide and monitor its activities. The process of nominating and appointing members of the Board or the Council, to ensure that the functions of NEEDU or the OSCBE are performed according to the highest professional standards, is the same, and so are the functions of these bodies.

Except for these differences, where NEEDU is established as a statutory body (through a Bill) or as a component of government (in terms of section 7(5)(c), read with section 7A(1) of the Public Service Act,1994, NEEDU and OSCBE are basically the same in all respects, including governing principles, vision, strategic objectives, functions, authorities, and requirements to report to the Minister of Basic Education on the activities and outcomes of their work.

(b) The Bill no longer has any status following the advice by the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) to pursue a new legal pathway. It was argued that, the most appropriate organizational form for NEEDU will be that of an independent government component, established in terms of section 11 of the National Education Policy Act, 1996 (Act 27 of 1996) read with section 7(5) and section 7A of the Public Service Act.

(c) In terms of the Administration and Operations clause in the Business Case and Business Plan for the Establishment of the OSCBE, the OSCBE founding document, the Head of OSCBE will be the accounting officer of OSCBE and will report and account on progress and the achievements of functions to the Minister of Basic Education.

(d) OSCBE will be established when all the prescribed processes have been completed. The process entails the following:

• Approval of the Regulations for the establishment of the OSCBE by the CEM.
• Declaring the establishment of OSCBE through the promulgation of the Regulations (via the Government Notice) by the Minister.
• Submitting the updated business case and promulgated Regulations and Government Notice to the DPSA [by NEEDU].
• Arranging a meeting of the Interdepartmental Assessment Committee to make recommendations on the organizational form for the OSCBE—with NEEDU participating as a member in the Committee and making a presentation to the members [by DPSA].
• Preparing a submission to inform the Minister for Public Service and Administration and the Minister of Finance of the Committee's recommendation and obtain the concurrence of the said Ministers for the establishment of the OSBE as a government component [by DPSA].
• Preparing (following concurrence from said Ministers) a presidential proclamation to list the OSCBE in schedule 3 of the Public Service Act so as to establish the OSCBE as a government component [by DPSA].

Reply:

(a) & (b)

Yes, the Minister will make the teacher union reports available to the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education (b) before the end of the financial year 31 March 2017.

Reply:

1. The meeting between the Minister and the NEEDU management took place in July 2016. There was no meeting with the Minister in August 2016. The meeting was to brief the Minister on the work of the Unit in the first five-year cycle of systemic evaluations (2012-2016), and, second, to present the plan for the Unit in the second five-year cycle (2017-2021).

After the briefing, the Minister asked the NEEDU to conduct deeper investigations on the areas that continue to cause concern in the system. The Minister’s request or ‘directive,’ is in line with section 6 (1) (h) in the NEEDU Bill and section 7(1) in the Regulations for the Establishment of the OSCBE, another NEEDU founding document.

2. The Minister raised concerns on how findings made by NEEDU find their way into the Department quickly enough for remediation to take place.

3. In the July meeting between the Minister and the NEEDU management, the Minister encouraged a “close” working relationship between the Ministry and NEEDU. This relationship is envisaged in all NEEDU founding documents. To safeguard the independence of the OSCBE, the Business Case and Business Plan for the Establishment of the OSCBE provides as follows:

“Two factors must be present in the structure of OSCBE: independence from the Department of Basic Education (DBE) and the requirements to report to the Minister of Basic Education on the activities and outcomes of its work. These two factors are not in contention with each other, as the need for independence is related more to location, internal processes and a perceived separateness from the DBE whereas the need to report to the Minister is quite clear in terms of hierarchical accountability.”

4. The NEEDU Bill was shelved following advice by the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) to establish NEEDU, not as a statutory body, but as an independent government component called the Office of Standards and Compliance.

Reply:

No one has been suspended pending any investigation. Provincial Education Departments have indicated that there was no need to take such steps. “Precautionary suspension” is an interim measure imposed, not as a disciplinary sanction, but for reasons of orderly administration. The employer must have valid and fair reason for imposing a precautionary suspension or transfer against an educator.

In the case of serious misconduct in terms of Section 17 of the Employment of Educators Act, the employer may suspend the educator on full pay for a maximum period of three (3) months. In the case of misconduct in terms of Section 18 of the same Act, the employer may also suspend an educator in accordance with the procedure contemplated in item 6 (1) of Schedule 2 of the Act or transfer the educator to another post if the employer believes that the presence of the educator may jeopardise any investigation into the alleged misconduct, or endanger the well-being or safety of any person at the work-place.

Reply:

1.  With reference to her reply to oral question 117 on 24 August 2016, (a) why was the Ministerial Task Team provided with an extension of six months to continue with the forensic investigation of cases reported during the finalisation of the report and (b) have the specified forensic investigations been completed at the end of August?

(a) The Report of the Ministerial Task Team (MTT) indicated that there were 22 cases that still needed to be finalised. In addition to these cases, there were some additional cases that were received while the MTT was busy finalising the report. This necessitated that an extension of six (6) months be granted to the MTT Forensic Team in order to allow them to complete all the investigations and prepare a final forensic report.

(b) The Chairperson of the MTT, Prof J Volmink, has established that due to the mammoth task faced by the forensic team and the complexity of the investigation, it was not possible for this team to finalise its work by the end of August 2016 as was initially anticipated.

The Chairperson requested a further one month extension until 30 September 2016, to allow finalisation of all the cases at hand, as well as the consolidation of the Final Forensic Report. The request is being processed for the Minister’s consideration.

(2) Whether the specified forensic investigation was initially undertaken by Deloitte and Touche SA and now undertaken by the Department of Justice and Correctional Services; if so, why was the decision taken to transfer the forensic investigation from the company to the department?

The Ministerial Task Team comprised of the Chairperson, Prof J Volmink, Independent Educationist, Mr M Gardiner, members from the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA); Department of Justice and Correctional Services (DoJ & CS) and Deloitte and Touché SA.

The service of forensic investigation was not transferred. The DoJ & CS and Deloitte worked very closely as members of the MTT. The services of the forensic team from the DoJ & CS have been rendered pro bono, except for the payment of the subsistence and travelling allowances as and when required.

When the extension was granted, it made financial sense to use the human resources from a Government Department to complete the work they have started, as members of the MTT, rather than to enter into a new financially binding contract for another six (6) months.

(3) (a) What amount has been budgeted for the forensic investigation and (b) what is the breakdown of the budget?

(3)(a & b) The breakdown for the forensic investigation is as follows:

Deloitte contract amounted to: R 951 946

Subsistence and Travelling for DoJ & CS R 212 492

Total R 1 164 438

(4) Whether she will make the report, that will be handed over to her at the end of August 2016, available to the public; if not, why not; if so, on what date will she make the specified report available to the public?

(4) The Report of the MTT will be made available to the public after the Minister has received and analysed the Forensic Report.

(5) (a) When was the deadline for provincial departments of education to take action on the identified cases and provide progress reports to her, (b) which of the specified provincial departments have provided her with progress reports and (c) when will the specified progress reports be made available to the public?

(5) (a) The affected Provincial Education Departments (PEDs) were given a period of three (3) months from the 16 August 2016 to complete their work.

(b) None. The PED’s will submit the final report by end of November 2016.

(c) The Minister will determine, after considering the Provincial progress report, whether to make it available to the public.

Reply:

(a)(i)(aa)(bb)(cc)

The detailed response on overaged learners who were enrolled at each school for learners with special educational needs in the 2013/14; 2014/15 and 2015/16 is attached as Annexure A.

(a)(ii)(aa)(bb)(cc)

The detailed response on overaged learners who were enrolled at each school for the visually impaired in the 2013/14; 2014/15 and 2015/16 is attached as Annexure A.

(a)(iii)(aa)(bb)(cc)

The detailed response on overaged learners who were enrolled at each school for the school for the hearing impaired in each district of each province in the 2013/14; 2014/15 and 2015/16 is attached as Annexure A.

(b) Response attached at Annexure B.

(c) Response attached at Annexure C.

ANNEXURE A

(a)(i)(aa)(bb)(cc)

Table 1: Number of over-aged (19 and above) learners in special schools, by district, in between 2013 and 2015

Province	District	2013/14	2014/15	2015/16
EC	EAST LONDON	128	100	82
	GRAHAMSTOWN	27	35	30
	KING WILLIAMS TOWN	202	176	166
	LUSIKISIKI	21	18	30
	MALUTI	6	16	13
	MBIZANA	124	126	120
	MT FRERE	55	120	136
	MTHATA	202	260	208
	NGCOBO	51	39	38
	PORT ELIZABETH	183	112	92
	QUEENSTOWN	0	4	0
	QUMBU	50	59	58
	STERKSPRUIT	25	34	38
	UITENHAGE	326	99	115
	Total	1 400	1 198	1 126
FS	FEZILE DABI	103	100	91
	LEJWELEPUTSWA	98	117	133
	MOTHEO	321	305	271
	THABO MOFUTSANYANA	98	81	59
	Total	620	603	554
GT	EKURHULENI NORTH	405	364	378
	EKURHULENI SOUTH	211	256	270
	GAUTENG EAST	624	522	581
	GAUTENG NORTH	47	61	41
	GAUTENG WEST	243	250	213
	JOHANNESBURG CENTRAL	223	289	346
	JOHANNESBURG EAST	211	196	186
	JOHANNESBURG NORTH	264	281	314
	JOHANNESBURG SOUTH	173	237	204
	JOHANNESBURG WEST	135	158	179
	SEDIBENG EAST	94	94	91
	SEDIBENG WEST	113	202	173
	TSHWANE NORTH	60	58	14
	TSHWANE SOUTH	218	196	152
	TSHWANE WEST	330	352	328
	Total	3 351	3 516	3 470
KZ	AMAJUBA	317	385	277
	EMPANGENI	132	168	144
	ILEMBE	75	41	67
	OBONJENI	0	43	0
	OTHUKELA	105	131	136
	PINETOWN	213	196	171
	PORT SHEPSTONE	0	19	0
	SISONKE	20	37	35
	UGU	29	0	30
	UMGUNGUNDLOVU	264	257	239
	UMKHANYAKUDE	82	30	62
	UMLAZI	301	380	423
	UMZINYATHI	61	66	60
	UTHUNGULU	18	0	0
	VRYHEID	79	78	43
	Total	1 696	1 831	1 687
LP	CAPRICORN/Polokwane	876	954	777
	LEBOWAKGOMO	143	0	146
	MOGALAKWENA	4	0	8
	MOPANI	175	215	219
	SEKHUKHUNE	177	188	189
	TZANEEN	10	13	8
	VHEMBE	483	396	376
	WATERBERG	81	89	62
	Total	1 949	1 865	1 785
MP	BOHLABELA	241	253	5
	EHLANZENI	0	0	5
	GERT SIBANDE	0	0	111
	NKANGALA	0	0	94
	Total	241	253	215
NC	FRANCES BAARD	277	80	91
	JOHN TAOLO GAETSEWA	0	12	21
	JOHN TAOLO GAETSEWE	9	0	0
	NAMAQUA	0	0	0
	SIYANDA	0	2	2
	Total	286	94	114
NW	BRITS	0	24	0
	GREATER DELAREYVILLE	48	38	75
	GREATER TAUNG	75	69	73
	KAGISANO MOLOPO	20	23	18
	KGETLENG RIVER	23	12	11
	KLERKSDORP	0	6	0
	LETLHABILE	39	51	26
	LICHTENBURG	101	24	65
	MADIBENG	43	52	84
	MAFIKENG	85	88	0
	MAQUASSI HIILS	52	46	39
	MATLOSANA	11	3	9
	MORETELE	26	37	25
	MOSES KOTANE EAST	67	47	89
	POTCHEFSTROOM	115	76	126
	REKOPANTSWE	85	47	106
	RUSTENBURG	268	96	113
	ZEERUST	27	21	12
	Total	1 085	760	871
WC	CAPE WINELANDS	51	50	45
	EDEN AND CENTRAL KAROO	40	57	50
	METRO CENTRAL	118	142	176
	METRO EAST	161	116	92
	METRO NORTH	91	108	77
	METRO SOUTH	105	88	84
	OVERBERG	15	7	10
	WEST COAST	36	27	27
	Total	617	595	561
National		11 245	10 715	10 383

Source: 2013-15 SNAP survey for special schools

(a)(ii)(aa)(bb)(cc)

Table 2: Table 1: Number of over-aged (19 and above) learners in special schools with visually impaired, by district, in between 2013 and 2015

Province	District	2013/14	2014/15	2015/16
EC	KING WILLIAMS TOWN	0	1	2
	LUSIKISIKI	0	0
	MALUTI	0	0	2
	MBIZANA	41	38	39
	MTHATA	47	51	46
	PORT ELIZABETH	40	29	25
	STERKSPRUIT	0	0	1
	Total	128	119	115
	FEZILE DABI	1	0	0
	LEJWELEPUTSWA	1	3	2
	MOTHEO	30	27	30
FS	THABO MOFUTSANYANA	15	16	11
	Total	47	46	43
	EKURHULENI NORTH	9	2	0
	EKURHULENI SOUTH	0	0	1
	GAUTENG EAST	6	6	12
	GAUTENG WEST	6	5	4
	JOHANNESBURG CENTRAL	3	2	2
	JOHANNESBURG EAST	2	3	5
	JOHANNESBURG NORTH	1	1	0
GT	JOHANNESBURG SOUTH	0	1	1
	JOHANNESBURG WEST	7	3	2
	SEDIBENG EAST	7	6	4
	TSHWANE NORTH	1	1	0
	TSHWANE SOUTH	2	1	1
	TSHWANE WEST	91	102	99
	Total	135	133	131
KZN	AMAJUBA	5	6	4
	EMPANGENI	3	0	1
	OTHUKELA	2	3	3
	PINETOWN	3	1	1
	UGU	0	0
	UMGUNGUNDLOVU	23	21	30
	UMLAZI	13	12	10
	UMZINYATHI	1	2	1
	VRYHEID	1	1	1
	Total	51	46	51
LP	CAPRICORN	84	73	46
	LEBOWAKGOMO	5	0	5
	SEKHUKHUNE	2	4	5
	VHEMBE	40	38	36
	WATERBERG	0	0	0
	Total	131	115	92
MP	GERT SIBANDE	1	1	2
	NKANGALA	2	0	0
	Total	3	1	2
	FRANCES BAARD	4	13	17
NC	JOHN TAOLO GAETSEWA	0	1	0
	Total	4	14	17
	BRITS	0	1	0
	GREATER TAUNG	40	38	30
	KAGISANO MOLOPO	1	3	3
	LETLHABILE	0	0	1
	LICHTENBURG	14	1	0
NW	MADIBENG	0	4	3
	MOSES KOTANE EAST	3	0	0
	REKOPANTSWE	0	10	0
	RUSTENBURG	10	0	5
	ZEERUST	0	0	1
	Total	68	57	43
	CAPE WINELANDS	7	9	11
WC	METRO NORTH	32	30	24
	Total	39	39	35
National	606	570	529

Source: 2013-15 SNAP survey for special schools

(a)(iii)(aa)(bb)(cc)

Table 3: Table 1: Number of over-aged (19 and above) learners in special schools with hearing impaired, by district, between 2013 and 2015

Province	District	2013/14	2014/15	2015/16
EC	EAST LONDON	0	1	0
	KING WILLIAMS TOWN	108	97	88
	LUSIKISIKI	0	0	1
	MALUTI	6	16	10
	MTHATA	59	81	89
	PORT ELIZABETH	2	3	4
	STERKSPRUIT	0	1	0
	Total	175	199	192
FS	LEJWELEPUTSWA	0	0	1
	MOTHEO	40	35	27
	THABO MOFUTSANYANA	48	37	31
	Total	88	72	59
GT	EKURHULENI NORTH	6	1	2
	EKURHULENI SOUTH	6	8	7
	GAUTENG EAST	6	6	6
	GAUTENG WEST	9	4	3
	JOHANNESBURG CENTRAL	1	4	4
	JOHANNESBURG EAST	38	29	31
	JOHANNESBURG NORTH	1	2	0
	JOHANNESBURG SOUTH	6	20	29
	JOHANNESBURG WEST	31	41	37
	SEDIBENG EAST	3	1	2
	TSHWANE NORTH	27	23	6
	TSHWANE SOUTH	34	34	31
	TSHWANE WEST	79	96	81
	Total	247	269	239
KZ	AMAJUBA	7	7	3
	EMPANGENI	93	104	90
	ILEMBE	4	3	3
	OTHUKELA	1	0	1
	PINETOWN	77	51	56
	PORT SHEPSTONE	0	18	0
	UGU	22	0	27
	UMGUNGUNDLOVU	16	15	17
	UMLAZI	26	15	49
	UMZINYATHI	0	2	1
	VRYHEID	3	0	0
	SISONKE	1	0	0
	Total	249	215	247
LP	CAPRICORN/POLOKWANE	185	179	171
	GREATER SEKHUKHUNE	12	15	7
	TZANEEN	4	13	4
	VHEMBE	1	5	6
	WATERBERG	2	4	6
	Total	204	216	194
MP	BOHLABELA	1	0	1
	EHLANZENI	6	0	1
	GERT SIBANDE	1	1	0
	NKANGALA	6	4	0
	Total	14	5	2
NC	FRANCES BAARD	4	17	16
	JOHN TAOLO GAETSEWA	0	0	1
	Total	4	17	17
NW	GREATER TAUNG	0	2	1
	KAGISANO MOLOPO	2	0	0
	LETLHABILE	0	1	2
	LICHTENBURG	6	0	1
	MADIBENG	0	0	3
	MAFIKENG	1	0	0
	MAQUASSI HIILS	47	43	39
	MOSES KOTANE EAST	1	0	0
	POTCHEFSTROOM	0	1	0
	RUSTENBURG	17	19	19
	Total	74	66	65
WC	CAPE WINELANDS	13	15	16
	METRO CENTRAL	6	4	8
	METRO EAST	6	8	5
	METRO NORTH	0	1	1
	METRO SOUTH	27	20	33
	OVERBERG	0	1	0
	Total	52	49	63
National		1 108	1 279	1 078

Source: 2013-15 SNAP survey for special schools

Annexure B

(b) Number of learners that were incorrectly placed because mainstream schools did not have space to accommodate them

Provinces	Districts	Number of incorrectly placed learners in Special Schools (SSs)	Number of incorrectly placed learners in Special Schools (SSs) for Visual Impairment	Number of incorrectly placed learners in Special Schools (SSs) for Hearing Impairment
GP	15	All learners placed in Special Schools in Gauteng are placed in line with provincial admissions circular for learners with barriers to learning (Circular 31 of 2009)	0	0
EC	23	Nil report	Nil report	Nil report
FS	5	25	0	0
KZN	12	150	0	0
LP	1/5	5	106	0
MP	4	68	0	0
NC	1/5	0	0	0
NW	3/4	6	0	0
WC	8	0	0	0
TOTALS		98	106	0

Source: Provincial Reporting

Annexure C

c) Learners on Waiting Lists

Provinces	Districts	Number of Learners on waiting lists in Special Schools (SSs)	Number of Learners on waiting lists in Special Schools (SSs) for Visual Impairment	Number of Learners on waiting lists in Special Schools (SSs) for Hearing Impairment
		2013/14	2014/15	2015/16	2013/14	2014/15	2015/16	2013/14	2014/15	2015/16
GP	15	3902	3338	1785	0	0	46	0	0	45 not all hearing impaired, school has an MID section
EC	23	-	3691	3244	Nil report	Nil report	Nil report	Nil report	Nil report	Nil report
FS	5	266	452	621	0	0	0	0	0	0
KZN	12	3091	2190	1636	110	76	37	255	183	138
LP	4/5	582	508	568	203	1	2	9	15	10
MP	4	699	1022	850	4	10	8	20	18	17
NC	1/5	119	67	87	1	101	0	1	4	1
NW	3/4	573	658	803	-	7	-	-	11	1
WC	8	-	-	-	0	0	0	0	0	0
TOTALS	63	9232	11926	9606	419	195	47	285	231	167

Source: Provincial Reporting