ATC150623: Report of the Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training on its oversight visit to Mpumalanga and Gauteng, dated 17 June 2015

Higher Education, Science and Innovation

REPORT OF THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING ON ITS OVERSIGHT VISIT TO MPUMALANGA AND GAUTENG, DATED 17 JUNE 2015

The Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training having conducted an oversight visit to higher education and training institutions on 03 – 06 February 2015, reports as follows:

1. Introduction

The Portfolio Committee undertook an oversight visit to the University of Mpumalanga (UMP), Ehlanzeni Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) College, Tshwane University of Technology (TUT) Soshanguve Campus and Tshwane North TVET College. This report provides a brief summary of the presentations made by the universities and colleges. Furthermore, the report includes the observations and recommendations made by members.

2. Background

The oversight visit formed part of the Portfolio Committee’s in-year monitoring of the post-school education and training institutions across the country to monitor these institutions on their governance, administration, financial management and progress with regard to implementation of government policies relating to the sector.The oversight visit was mainly informed by the Portfolio Committee’s desire to obtain insight on the challenges affecting the afore-mentioned institutions and to assist where possible.

The purpose of the oversight visit was to:

• Assess progress on registration processes at universities and colleges and implementation of enrolment targets;
• Monitor progress made by the University of Mpumalanga and DHET in implementing the Presidential pronouncement on the construction of the new University of Mpumalanga;
• Monitor governance and administration of the institutions;

• Assess financial viability of the institutions;
• Monitor academic performance of students in relation to national targets;
• Assess research development and innovation of the institutions;
• Monitor effective use of infrastructure development grants by universities for increasing access and success to education and training;
• Monitor and assess administration of NSFAS bursaries and loans;
• Assess progress made in reducing student housing challenges, and
• Assess progress made by institutions in partnering with industries.

In addition to the above mentioned focus areas of the oversight visit, the Portfolio Committee invited stakeholders such as Council, Student Representative Council (SRC), Institutional Forum (IF) and Labour Unions of the institutions to make inputs on behalf of their constituents. The Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET), National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) and Office of the Auditor-General South Africa (AGSA) officials were also part of the meetings.

3. Delegation list

3.1 Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training

Ms J Kilian (ANC), Ms S Mchunu (ANC), Ms M Nkadimeng (ANC), Ms Y Phosa (ANC) Chairperson, Mr E Siwela (ANC), Prof B Bozzoli (DA), Mr Y Cassim (DA),  Mr S Mbatha (EFF) and Mr M Tshishonga (AGANG).

3.2 Parliamentary support staff

Mr A Kabingesi: Committee Secretary, Ms M Modiba: Content Adviser, Ms T Majone: Committee Assistant Mr L Komle: Researcher and Mr E Moholola: Media Liaison Officer.

3.3University of Mpumalanga

Management: Prof T Mayekiso: Vice-Chancellor, Mr S Lekgodi: Registrar, Prof R Howard: Deputy Vice-Chancellor Planning, Prof R Bernard: DVC Academic Affairs,Prof J Shongwe: Coordinator StakeholderLiaison, Dr M Maminza: Dean of Students, Ms N Mnisi: Deputy Director Human Resource Management and Mr S Mabuza: Deputy Director Committee Secretarial Service.

Council: Prof S Ripinga: EXCO Member, Ms H Thrush: Member, Ms L Mohlala: Member and Prof C De Beer: Member.

SRC: Mr K Mabuza: President, Mr M Mulaudzi: Deputy President, Ms S Maphelule: General Secretary, Mr P Mashaba: Treasurer, Mr M Khambule: Academic Officer, Mr K Khosa: Member and Ms V Mgiba: Social Transformation Officer.

Unions:Mr S Mbuyane: Branch Chairperson National Education and Health Allied Workers Union (NEHAWU), Mr R Hlangwani: Shop Steward Marapyane Branch NEHAWU and Mr J Mathabe: Shop Steward NEHAWU.

3.4 Ehlanzeni TVET College

Management: Dr T Dhlamini: Principal, Mr M Lukhele: Acting Campus Manager Mapulaneng Campus, Mr G Sibuya: Campus Manager Mlumati Campus, Mr M Gondwe: Campus Manager Nelspruit Campus, Mr K Makgamatha: State Accountant, Ms T Sithole: Risk Health & Security Manager, Mr M Moloto: Campus Manager, Mr J Chiloane: Campus Manager KaNyamazane Campus and Mr O Mazibuko: Student Support Manager.

Council:Mr L Mbuyane: Chairperson,Mr J Mbenyane: Deputy Chairperson and Ms L Mkhonza: Secretary.

Unions:MsE Wallace: Site Shop Steward NEHAWU.

3.5 Tshwane University of Technology

Management: Prof L van Staden: Acting Vice-Chancellor & Principal, Dr E Moraka: DVC Student Affairs and Extracurricular Development / Acting Senior DVC, Dr P Mokgobu: Executive Director Human Resources and Transformation, Prof M Mothatha: Registrar, Dr S Mukhola: Acting DVC Teaching Learning & Technology, Mr I Tlhabadira: DVC Institutional Support, Prof L Makhubela: DVC Postgraduate Studies Research & Innovation, Prof A Mji: Campus Director Soshanguve Campus, Mr S Mphai: Director Campus Protection Services, Mr T Madurai: Acting Chief Financial Officer andMr J De Villiers: Director Financial Aid and Mr T Bhengu: Acting Executive Director Strategic Operations.

Council:Prof J Grobbelaar: Ministerial Appointee, Mr J Coetser: Member and Prof M Hay: Ministerial Appointee.

SRC:Mr T Modise: President-General, Ms M Mothatha: Deputy President-General, Ms N Mazibuko: Student Affairs and Operation Officer, Ms M Riba: Education and Transformation Officer, Mr Y Majola: Treasurer General, Mr L Mojapelo: Secretary Polokwane Campus, Mr O Maluleke: President Soshanguve Campus and Mr O Mokoena: Deputy Secretary Soshanguve Campus.

Unions:Mr G Xaba: Branch Secretary NEHAWU, Mr S Maloka: Branch Chairperson NEHAWU and Mr P Nemangaani: Shop Steward NEHAWU.

Institutional Forum:Mr M Maloka: Member, Mr G Tshabalala: Member, Mr M Magoshoa: Member, Mr P Hlatshwayo: Member, Dr Y Senne: Member, Mr P Hlatshwayo: Member and Mr T Moeti: Member.

3.6 Tshwane North TVET College

Management: Mr S Sethusha: Acting Principal, Mr C Pule: Deputy Principal Academic Affairs, Ms K Maakwe: Acting Chief Financial Officer, Ms L Mathabathe: Campus Manager Temba Campus, Mr W Mogale: Campus Manager Mamelodi Campus, Mr J Toba: Campus Manager Pretoria Campus, Ms E Masemola: Manager Student Support Services, Ms M Itani: Curriculum Manager, Ms S Dorfling: Marketing Manager and Mr E Mbokane: Campus Manager.

Council:Mr D Nkomo: Chairperson, Mr J Malebye: Member, Mr R Mmutlana: HR & Remuneration Sub-Committee, Mr G Seane: Stakeholder Sub-Committee and Ms L Tlou: Academic Board.

SRC:Ms M Tlotlo: Secretary and Ms B Ntivana: Public Relations Officer.

Unions:Mr T Baloyi: Branch Deputy Chairperson NEHAWU, Ms V Sehoole Branch Secretary NEHAWU,Ms B Dumzela: Shop Steward NEHAWU, Ms K Mazibuko: Branch Secretary (NEHAWU), Ms P Thobela: Shop Steward Public Service Association (PSA), Mr P Magane: Branch Deputy Chairperson PSA, Ms L Mathe: Shop Steward, Mr N Rabothatha: Branch Chairperson National Professional Teachers Organisation of South Africa (NAPTOSA) and Ms A Niewoudt: Site Representative NAPTOSA.

3.7 Department of Higher Education and Training

Dr D Parker: Acting Deputy Director-General University Education, Dr E van Staden: Chief Director Academic Planning & Management Support, Ms N Pote: Chief Director Examinations, Ms P Garza: Project Manager, Ms V Mafilika: Director Youth Development Programmes, Mr J Mogale: Deputy Director, Dr P Vukea: Deputy Director Institutional Support, Mr R Mediroe: Deputy Director, Ms N Rasmeni: Parliamentary Liaison Officer (PLO)Minister’s Office and Ms P Sekgobela: PLO Director-General’s Office.

3.8 National Student Financial Aid Scheme

Mr M Daca: Chief Executive Officer, Mr M Cele: Senior Manager Student Relations, Mr K Mamabolo: Senior Manager Communications, Ms A Ndiki: Cordus Specialist and Ms I Madindi: Executive Assistant Stakeholder Engagement.

3.9 Office of the Auditor-General South Africa

Ms S Cele: Senior Manager.

4. Summary of presentations

4.1 University of Mpumalanga

a) Overview

Background and governance

The presentation was made by Prof T Mayekiso: Vice-Chancellor. In relation to the background and brief history of the UMP, the Universitywas a multi- campus comprehensive University with the main campus in Mbombela and the other Campus in Siyabuswa (former Ndebele College of Education). The other sites of delivery were Marapyane (until December 2015) and Mpumalanga Regional Training Task(MRTT) (until December 2016). The University offereda range of formative and technology focused undergraduate programmes that catered for articulation from TVET College’s National Certificate Vocational NC(V) and Report 191 programmes as well as the National Senior Certificate (NSC). The establishment of the University was firstly explored by then Member of the Executive Council (MEC) of Education, Mr D Mabuza who set up a committee to explore the possibility of a University in the province. Subsequently, the National Institute for Higher Education (NIHE) Mpumalanga was established to coordinate the provision of higher education in the province. On 25 March 2010, the Minister of Higher Education and Training, Dr B Nzimande appointed two Task Team members (Prof De la Rey and Prof Mthembu) to investigate the feasibility of establishing new universities in Mpumalanga and the Northern Cape. On 22 August 2013, the Minister published the Government Gazette establishing the University of Mpumalanga as a juristic person, in terms of section 20 of the Higher Education Act, 1997 (as amended). The Interim Council of the University was appointed in August 2013 under the leadership of Dr D Mabuza. The University was officially launched on 31 October 2013. The Vice-Chancellor was appointed on 01 November 2014 and the filling of other senior critical posts was an ongoing process. The Lowveld College of Agriculture (LCA) was incorporated to theUniversity on 01 January 2015.The Universitywas in the process of developing a strategic plan to guide its plans and objectives for the next five years. The University targeted to finalise its strategic plan before the end of June 2015 and consultations with other Universitystakeholders were under way. The Universitywas committed to offer its students a life changing experience through high quality curricula and co-curricula programmes. The governance and management structures of the University were established and they were functional with the exception of the Institutional Forum (IF) which was yet to be established and the University Chancellor to be nominated.

 

Staffing

With regard to staffing data for 2014, the University had 14 percent academic staff with PhD qualifications, 14 percent Masters and 71 percent had other qualifications not classified. The racial profile of the academic staff was mixed integrated with 55 percent African, 30 percent White, 10 percent Indian and 5 percent Coloured. The ratio of support staff to academic staff was 59 percent to 21 percent. The gender profile was 59 percent male and 41 percent female.  82 percent of the staff were South Africans with 11 percent Zimbabweans. In February 2015, the ratio of support staff was 72 percent compared to 27 percent academic. The increase in support staff resulted from inheriting the agricultural support staff through the incorporation of LCA. The qualifications of academic staff in 2015 was 4.2 percent PhD, 29.2 percent Masters, 11 percent Honours, 33 percent Bachelors and 22 percent other qualifications.

Programme offerings

In 2014, the first undergraduate students of the University were enrolled into three qualifications, being the Diploma in Hospitality Management, the Bachelor of Agriculture in Agricultural Extension and Rural Resource Development and the Bachelor of Education (B.Ed) in Foundation Phase Teaching. In 2015, the University launched a new qualification, the Diploma in Information Communication Technology (ICT), in Applications Development, and enrolled first students into the Diploma in Agriculture in Plant Production that had previously been offered by the Lowveld College of Agriculture.

Student enrolment and pass rates

The headcount enrolment would increase from 169 students in 2014 to 1823 students by 2017. The total number of students registered for the 2015 academic year was 777 students. 98 percent of the student population was African and 52.2 percent was female compared to 47.9 percent males. 99 percent of the students were South Africans compared to 1 percent Swaziland nationals. Majority of the students in the Universitywere from within the Mpumalanga Province, 96 percent in total. The average pass rate of the University in 2014 was 93 percentage inclusive of all programmes offerings. 

Student support

To increase access with success, the Universitywould ensure that teaching is theoretically well informed and that teaching practice is excellent. Thiswould be achieved by providing a set of workshops, seminars and short courses on all aspects of teaching and learning especially for the academic staff. Student support services would be enhanced to identify students at risk.

Research and innovation

The University currently offered undergraduate qualifications only. To improve its research output, the University planned to have 50 percent of newly appointed staff with PhD and the current staff with Masters would be supported to complete doctoral studies. Funding and facilities would be provided to support active researchers and the research focus areaswouldbe identified. The Universitywould introduce awards to recognise and celebrate research excellence.

Student housing

The Universityhad four residences at the Mbombela Campus, six residences at Siyabuswa Campus, one residence block at Mpumalanga Regional Task Team (MRTT) Site and two residences at Marapyane Site. Of the 777 students enrolled in 2015, 389 were accommodated in the University residences. The Universitywas in the process of finalising the policy on the accreditation of off campus accommodation. The policy wouldassist and support students with properly accredited off-campus accommodation which meets the DHET norms and standards for student housing.

Budget

The University was allocated R3.5 million from NSFAS for study loans and bursaries for 2015. The total budget of the University for 2015 was R184 million and R113 million of the total budget was from the DHET subsidy. R87 million of the total budget was for compensation of employees, 50.5 million for support services, R516 014 for residences, R95 million for supplies and services and R1.4 million depreciation. The total expenses of the Universityamounted to R184.3 million with a surplus of R307 563.

Challenges

The Universityhad challenges although it was still new. The allocation from NSFAS was inadequate and could notassist all the needy students. The process of accreditation of a qualification couldtake up to 18 months which can delay the introduction of new qualifications. The Universityneeded to attract academics with PhDs to improve its research capacity. The incorporation of the LCA into the Universityhad impact on staff benefits because LCA was incorporated from government and staff were government employees covered by government pension scheme and medical aid which proved to be a challenge to shift them as these benefits were applied differently in a university employ.

b) Infrastructure Development

The presentation was made by Mr L Hansen:  Urban Planner / Architect. The choice of the site for the University was based on assessment of site specific factors such as land area and other environmental factors. The spatial planning took into consideration the principle issues, selecting auniversity within a town, performance qualities and other site specific analysis. The Lowveld College of Agriculture (LCA) was chosen as a suitable site for the main campus of UMP based on its location and 240 hectares of land available for further expansion of the University. The site was located adjacent to both the Route 40 (R40) and National Road (N4) corridors which made access easier for road transport. However, there was an issue of safety for the University community since there were no traffic lights or raised interchange to regulate traffic flow at R40/D475 intersection. The site was also located close to the Mpumalanga Provincial Legislature and retail facilities. An underground bridge would be constructed which would make the nearby shopping mall easily accessible to the University staff and students.

The Siyabuswa Campus which was approximately 293 kilometers from the main campus in Mbombela had undergone a massive infrastructure revamp and maintenance. The campus was on80hectares of land and hadsix residences for students. The residences were refurbished and computer laboratories were fully equipped with computers in each residence. Wi-Fi connectivity was available for students in the residences for easy access to the internet.

The spatial planning of the Universitywas informed by its academic mission, desirable performance qualities and inputs from academic leaders. An area of 476 457 square meter (m2) would be for the infrastructure development for the University. The long term sustainability of the Universitydependedon the development of infrastructure and access to the Hill Campus portion of the University. The Universitywould have two main campuses in its 240 hectares plot, the Hill Campus overlooking the city and the Provincial Legislature and the Lower Campus where the current LCA buildingswere located. The orchards within the Universitywould not be affected by the infrastructure development and would be preserved for research purposes and agricultural studies. The approximate infrastructure budget for phase 1 of thedevelopment of the University to be completed in 2016 was R375 million.

 

c) National Institute for Higher Education (NIHE) Mpumalanga

The presentation was made by Prof C De Beer: Administrator. The mandate of the NIHE MP was provision of services to higher education within its scope and application, advance learning by ensuring collaboration and co-ordination of the work of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and NIHE within its scope and application andadvising the Minister and any other duty as prescribed by the Minister.

With regard to the disestablishment process, the board submitted its disestablishment plan to the Minister and the board was dissolved on 30 November 2014.  The usual operations of NIHE were terminated on 31 December 2014 and the legal closure of NIHE as a legal persona would be on 31 March 2015. The disestablishment process was managed by way of anaction plan.

In so far as operations were concerned, all usual operations were terminated with effect from 12 December 2014. The rental agreement and offices were evacuated, except for three offices required by the Administrator and his support personnel to conclude the disestablishment process. The operational and management support at Siyabuswa Campus was terminated on 31 December 2014. Service provider agreements were transferred to the UMP with effect from 31 December 2014.

The staff of NIHE MP were retrenched in accordance with section 189 of the Labour Relations Act No 66 of 1995 with effect from 31 December 2014. The employees received their benefits and salaries on 12 December 2014 including severance packages as determined by the board. The total cost of severance packages was R2.3 million. At the Siyabuswa Campus, contracts of temporary staff deployed in that campus were transferred to UMP with effect from 31 December 2015. The academic staff were not affected as they were employed and supervised by the University of Johannesburg (UJ) and UMP. Eight members of staff from the total of 15 that were employed at the NIHE Head Office were offered employment with UMP, resulting from processes agreed between NIHE MP and UMP. The remaining five retrenched staff not placed with UMP were currently employed by the Administrator on a fixed term contract ending on 31 March 2015 to assist the Administrator with finalisation of NIHE audits. The staff at Siyabuswa Campus were not affected by retrenchments.

The governance structures of the former board of NIHE MP were functional which made the work of the Administrator less complicated for the remainder of the disestablishment process. The Audit and Risk Committee was fully compliant with the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) prescripts. The planning for closing audit report and statements for the 2014 financial year werein an advanced stage. The Annual Report and Audit Financial Statements would be finalised by end of May 2015 the latest.

The asset verification process was completed by the internal auditors of Price Waterhouse Coopers (PwC). The report was submitted to the Audit and Risk Committee in January 2015 and the Committee was satisfied with the outcome and the account given of assets. The movable and financial assets would be transferred to UMP as per the verified asset register.  NIHE MP did not have immovable assets and the property it used was leased.

The finances of NIHE MP were managed responsibly by the previous board. The remaining funds would be sufficient to meet all financial obligations required for the remainder of the disestablishment process. The Administratorwas responsible for overseeing the management of funds and the outstanding payouts. An amount of R20 million would remain after the disestablishment process had been completed. The disestablishment process would not have a negative impact on continuing students at Siyabuswa Campus.

d) Student Representative Council (SRC)

The presentation was made by Mr K Mabuza: President. The SRC was concerned with the allocation of NSFAS bursaries which did not assist all the eligible students. The late payment of book, meal and transport allowances to students remained a challenge since the majority of students in the Universitycame from poor family households and were fully dependent on NSFAS to study. The varying bursary allocations of Bachelor of Education (B.Ed) students at Siyabuswa Campus was a cause of discomfort among students owing to stipends paid by Funza Lushaka and European Union (EU) bursaries. The students urged the management of the University to create part time job opportunities for students so that they can sustain themselves.

The absence of Automated Teller Machines (ATMs) within the University precinct was a serious concern for students. The SRC complained that the University did not have its own Kiosk or Restaurant and studentswere compelled to buy food from outside the University which was expensive and not subsidised. The public transport from the University to nearby residential areas and villages was a challenge andthis made it difficult for off-campus students to daily commute to the University.

The SRC was concerned with thelong hours allocated for academic work in the University. Students wanted more time for social and other recreational activities. It was noted that the library at Siyabuswa Campus was not well resourced and did not have adequate support staff to assiststudents. The library also closed at 6 pm and students were unable to utilise its facilitiessince classes finished at 5:30 pm. This also affected students negatively as they were unable to conduct their research in the library after tuition time. The SRC urged management to extend the library hours and even promised to voluntarily assist in the library if there was a shortage of staff.

The SRC urged management to increase the number of faculties in the University to expand its programme offering. Management was requested to consider the appointment of tutors to improve student support services and to assist students that were struggling academically. The SRC was seriously concerned that non-Ndebele speaking students were not accepted to register at Siyabuswa Campus though the province had seven official languages.

The management of the University was requested to develop an academic support programme specifically for the SRC members. The SRC complained that their honorarium were paid per semester and they requested that it be paid monthly so that the SRC can use it responsibly. The SRC submitted a proposal for a policy summit to review all the University’s policies with all the Universitystakeholders present. It was noted that the recently refurbished student residences at Siyabuswa Campus had notable defects. The SRC pleaded with management to develop self-catering units in the residences as students want to cook their own food since the outsourced catering was expensive.

With regard to the University marketing and branding, the SRC advised management to establish a Campus Clothing Store which would sell the Universitymerchandise to generate additional income and to promote the brand of UMP. The SRC was concerned that the Merit bursary promised by University of Johannesburg (UJ) for students who achieved a pass mark above 70 percent was not honoured. The SRC requested management to increase the sport facilities within the University so that the students of UMP can compete with other universities at national level.

The SRC was satisfied with the safety of students within the campus. However, it noted that students were not safe when they have to travel to the nearby residential areas especially for social activities at night. The students requested that management considers providing a sort of café where students would be able to buy alcoholic beverages on Campus rather than risking their lives to go to nearby townships. The management of the University was requested to develop a student portal service so that student can easily access their results online. It was noted that infrastructure development should be equal among all the campuses of the University.

 

e) Unions

Mr S Mbuyane: Branch Chairperson of NEHAWU made the presentation. The union was concerned that due diligence was not properly done prior the incorporation of the Lowveld College of Agriculture(LCA) to UMP. The change management processes were not implemented to equip staff personnel with the requirements of the new University and its vision. The staff members of the former LCA were not even introduced to the management of UMP and there wasprejudice from the Universityagainst staff from the LCA in relation to filling of new posts. The union was concerned that there was no organised labour involvement during staff recruitment and the appointment process of new staff was not transparent. With the closure of NIHE on 31 March 2015, there was currently no clear indication of the whether the remaining employees would be employed by the University or not.

The union was concerned about non-implementation of agreements entered into prior incorporation process and that certain tools of trade like cellphones and transport given to LCA staff attached to agricultural extension were withdrawn by the University. The union demanded for the intervention of the DHET to evaluate the process of the incorporation to establish whether it was followed properly. The union would like proper consultations to be followed to ensure that issues of conditions of service and benefits are properly communicated to the former LCA employees so that the University does not begin to operate with labour unrests. The union threatened to take the matter to court for annulment of the incorporation if all the grievances were not amicably resolved. The management was given a period of 6 months to complete harmonisation and matching for all employees. The union requested the Minister to address the University stakeholders so that there could be stability within the University to avoid labour unrest.

f) Site visit

The site visit was led by Mr L Hansen: Architect. The Portfolio Committee was taken on a campus tour to view the 240hectares  of land earmarked for infrastructure development for the expansion of the University as well the infrastructure projects that were already underway in preparation for 2016/17 student intake. During the tour, the Portfolio Committee was informed that the executive officesin the interim would be located at the Lower Campus. The Portfolio Committee was shown the current construction sites which included the construction of new student residences aimed to be completed by 2016. Other construction projects which were under way included; new library, auditorium and laboratories. The current projectsto be completed in 2016 were budgeted at approximately R375 million.The orchards would not be affected by the construction in the medium term of expansion of the University. The Hill Campus would have sport and recreation amenities, including soccer fields and hard surface courts. The University had adequate land to expand its infrastructure in the medium to long term. The construction of infrastructure and new buildings would respect the existing topography and natural beauty of the property.

4.2 Ehlanzeni TVET College

a) Overview

Background

The presentation was made by Dr T Dhlamini: Principal. The Collegewas situated in the Ehlanzeni DistrictMunicipality and it had 8 campuses namely; Barbeton, Mthimba, Mlumati, Mapulaneng, Nelspruit, KaNyamazane, Matsu and Lydenburg. The Hoxane Satellite Campuswas on planning phase. The College offered education and training programmes in the National Certificate Vocational NC(V), Report 191, Learnerships and Skills Programmes.

Governance and management

The College Council was appointed and functional with two members’ posts still to be filled. Its sub-committees were established. The College had a College Management Board (CMB) comprising of College Executive Management (CEM), Campus Managers and Portfolio Managers. The key function of the CMB was mainly to respond to possible risks that may affect the core mandate of the College. The Academic Board comprised of the Principal as the Chairperson, Deputy Principal Curriculum as Deputy Chairperson. The SRC comprised of 9 members per campus and the Central SRC had 16 members. The College did not have a legitimate SRC in place since the elections were to be held in mid-February 2015. The College’s Chief Financial Officer resigned.

Budget

The College had a total budget of R222 million in 2014 and R125 million of the total budget was allocated by the DHET’sCollege subsidy. The College’s own generated income for 2014 was R97 million. The College spent R85 million of its totalbudget on compensation of employees in 2014, R106 million on goods and services and R5.9 million for maintenance and repairs.

Student enrolment

The total number of students enrolled for the 2015 academic year as at February 2015was 5128 as compared to 8020 students enrolled in 2014. Enrolment in the Collegewas still ongoing especially for trimester programmes and the Collegewas expecting an increased enrolment for 2015. In partnership with the Department of Social Development, the College enrolled 17 deaf students in the Nelspruit Campus and it was in the process of employing more Interpreters for these students. The Collegehad a total of 210 employees spread across its eight campuses and 22 part-time lecturing staff.

Academic performance

The Collegehad an average of 49 percent certification rate for the NC(V) programme. The College management was not pleased with the academic performance of the College especially at the Mapulaneng Campus where thecertification rate was 25 percent. The management board of the Collegehad set a target of 80 percent certification rate for the 2015 academic year. The College average for the Report 191 programme was 23 percent.

Infrastructure development

The Collegehad embarked on various infrastructure development projects to increase access to occupational and skills programmes across Ehlanzeni District. The objective of the Collegewas to increase its enrolment and infrastructure in line with the priorities of government. The Collegewas preparing to have one workshop per site accredited as a Trade Test Centre by 2017 to improve artisan training.

Administration of NSFAS funding

The College was allocated R34 million from NSFAS in 2014. The allocation from NSFAS was not sufficient to meet the demand of students requiring financial aid and the College had a shortfall of R19 million. Inadequate financial aid led to student protests in 2014. Other challenges of the Collegeincluded; shortage of student residences, shortage of qualified lecturers for trades and inadequate student support services.

b) Unions

The unions of the College were concerned with the recognition of support staff in the College. It was noted that more attention was given to academic staff as compared to support staff. Consultation with the support staff on activities of the College was reported as being inadequate. The unions requested management to improve the conditions of service of contractual staff and for the SRC to be included in the governance structures of the College.

 

 

4.3 Tshwane University of Technology

a) Overview

Background

TUT was established on 01 January 2004, through the merging of the former Technikon Northern Gauteng, Technikon North-West and Technikon Pretoria. It comprised up to six satellite campuses, located in Pretoria, Soshanguve, Ga-Rankuwa, Mbombela, eMalahleni and Polokwane. The University catered for approximately 54000 students and it had become the largest residential higher education institution in South Africa. The Universityaimed to have 65000 students by 2019 in line with government agenda of increasing access to higher education.

 

Management and governance

The Universitywas headed by the Acting Vice-Chancellor & Principal, Prof L van Staden after Prof N Ogude resigned in November 2014. Below the VC & Principal, there was one Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor followed by 4 DVCs and Executive Directors of various directorates. The council of the Universitywas chaired by Dr B Masuku and the Executive Committee of Council (EXCO) hadsix committees reporting to it, and ultimately to the University Council.

 

Strategic priorities for 2015

The strategic priorities of the Universityfor 2015 were aimed at improving teaching and learning which was the core business of the University. Finalisation of performance management system for employees was still underway. The Universitywanted to fill the vacant post of the Vice-Chancellor & Principal during the course of 2015 and this formed part of EXCO’s main priority. Majority of senior management posts were not yet filled and the Universityaimed to address thischallenge. The Universitydid not have an adequate resource allocation strategy to manage its R3.4 billion budget. As a result, the Universityspent 70 percent of its budget on compensation of employees while the threshold was 63 percent for universities. The plan of the Universitywas to manage its budget effectively so that employee costsdo not exceed the current percentage. The effectiveness of the Mbombela and Polokwane Campuses wouldbe reviewed to determine their future.

 

 

 

 

Programmes and faculties

The Universitywasorganised into seven faculties – Engineering and the Built Environment (offered at the Pretoria Campus); Humanities (Soshanguve Campus); Management Sciences (Pretoria Campus); Information and Communication Technology (Soshanguve Campus);  Arts (Arts Campus, Pretoria CBD); Economics and Finance (Ga-Rankuwa Campus) and Science which incorporates Natural Sciences, Health Sciences and Agriculture (Arcadia Campus, Pretoria CBD). The University’s Arts Faculty was one of the best in the African continent.  The Engineering Faculty of the Universitywas accredited by the Engineering Council of South Africa (ECSA).  Although the schooling system did not produce students who were good in maths and science, the Universityhadadopted schools around Gauteng and Limpopo to assist learners with maths and science. This programme yielded positive results for the University as the pass rate in maths and science in these schools improved significantly. The Universityhad more than 200 employers in its database who advised on the curriculum and played a key role in offering Work Integrated Learning (WIL) opportunities for students who were enrolled in the occupational skills programmes. A recent Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed with employers and the Universityaimed to have a 100 percent WIL placement for students. The Universitywas the only UoT that had an accredited Master of Business Administration (MBA) programme in the country.

 

Staffing

The Universityhad a total of 1871 academic staff and 6247 non-academic staff. Most of the faculties weredominated by white staff members especially at middle management level. The annual success rate for undergraduate students in 2013 was 76.2 percent. The Universityaimed to increase the undergraduate success rate to be above 80 percent annually. The graduation rate of undergraduate studentswas 20 percent and throughput rate 33 percent. The Universitywas concerned with the drop-out and throughput rates.

 

Post-Graduate Studies, Research and Innovation

The Universitywas ranked number 1 among the UoTs in terms of its research output as calculated by the Department of Higher Education and Training. The researchers and innovators of the Universityproduced amazing products that sought to alleviate poverty and unemployment. The niche areasincluded natural products in Drug Development, Electric Power and Industrial Systems. The Universityhad a total of 9 Research Chairs. The Universityhad 51 National Research Foundation (NRF) rated researchers (biggest among UoTs). Losing NRF rated researchers to other institutions was a serious challenge for the University. The low success rate of postgraduate students, particularly South Africans remained another challenge for the University.

 

Budget

The Universitywas heavily reliant on government subsidy as its main source ofincome since it catered mostly for students coming from the poor family households. 53 percent of the University’s total budget came from government subsidy and the third stream incomewas very low. The salary costs of the Universitywas excessive at 70 percent of its distributable budget (i.e. total budget of R3.4 billion less earmarked funding). This resulted in insufficient funding available for good and services expenditures, capital expenditures and maintenance. The student debt had increased from R134 million in 2013 to R247 million in 2014, an increase of 83 percent.

 

Administration of NSFAS funding

Since the majority of the students in the Universitycame from the poor family households, the Universitywas the biggest recipient of NSFAS allocation among all universities in the country. The University received R463 million for the 2015 academic year. In excess, 24000 students were eligible for NSFAS bursary and the University could only assist 14000 students with an average allocation of R32000 and had to apply ranking and cut on allowances. A total of 10304 students were unfunded for the 2015 academic year and 7402 were first years. There was an additional amount of R300 million required to assist these students specifically. The Universityhad set aside an amount of R6 million to assist the unfunded Bachelor of Technology (B.Tech) students who were not funded by NSFAS.

 

Infrastructure development and student housing

The expenditure on capital projects since 2007 was R1,2 billion and most of this funding came from the DHET infrastructure grant. The University’s completed buildings and power projects since 2007 were 24. The Infrastructure & Efficiency Funding (IEF) budgetwas R302 million and 14 construction projects were completed. The Universityhad 11 projects at the design stage. The University accommodated a total of 11669 students in residences (22 percent of the total headcount enrolment). The number of students accommodated in the University owned residences was 67 percent and 33 percent in leased privately owned accommodation.

 

 

 

Student protests

The student protests in 2014 costthe University an amount of R4 million. The main cause of the student protests was inadequate NSFAS funding for 2660 students and other issues were related to shortage of residences, transport, catering and security. At the Soshanguve Campus, 18 cars were burnt on 19 September 2014. Council approved R46 million for loans to assist 2660 in line with NSFAS rules. A Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) was signed between the management and CSRC to prevent student protest from recurring.

 

b) Central Students’ Representative Council (CSRC)

The CSRC noted its concern with the skewed infrastructure development approach towards the township located campuses. It was noted that since the merger of TUT in 2004, the infrastructure at the University’s five campuses was inadequate as compared to the infrastructure at Pretoria Campus. At the Garankuwa Campus, there was a shortage of lecture halls. Although the students in the Universitypaid similar fees, the Pretoria Campus had the best facilities and infrastructure as compared to the other campuses. The CSRC complained about the conditions of residences at the Soshanguve Campus as compared to Pretoria Campus. The Soshanguve Campus residencesdid not have laundry services and security was not adequate. It was noted that the Polokwane Campus had 2000 students and the residence could accommodate only 170 students. This campus did not have a library and other recreational facilities for students.

On the contentious issue of student funding, the CSRC complained that NSFAS funding in the Universitywas inadequate for the number of students who wanted financial assistance. The CSRC requested the DHET to increase the NSFAS allocation in particular for TUT since majority of the students came from the poor family households and NSFAS was their only hope to access higher education. The students were of the view that government spending towards higher education in general should be reviewed and UoTs should be more prioritised than TVET Colleges. They proposed that government should bail out higher education as it did with Eskom and South African Airways (SAA). The CSRC further proposed that students should be allowed to register although they owe the University outstanding fees from the previous academic years.

c) Unions

The Portfolio Committee was informed that majority of employees in the University belonged to NEHAWU. The union noted that instability was the biggest challenge of the University. The union urged the management of the University to prioritise the roll-out of infrastructure and maintenance at the township campuses of the University. The union noted that transformation remained a serious challenge in the University. In supporting this statement, the union requested the management of the University to send the Employment Equity Plan (EEP) of the University to the Portfolio Committee. The union noted that the numerical targets of the EEP had not yet been achieved by management for transformation. It was noted that the number of women at senior management posts of the University was very low.

The union was concerned that the agreements reached at the bargaining forum were not implemented by the University. The union proposed that the University should have a stakeholder’s forum to discuss the priorities of the University. It was noted that the salary gap among employees was wide and management should develop a remuneration policy that is feasible. The union complained about the weak security at the Universityand underpayment of security personnel was cited as serious concern that compromised the safety of the University community. The union accused the outsourced companies of underpaying their employees and flouting rules when submitting bids for tenders. The union was concerned that the council of the University took a resolution to develop Setswana as a scientific language in 2005 and there had not been progress since then.

d) Institutional Forum (IF)

The IF of the University was seriously concerned that its role of advising council on transformation agenda and other critical issueswas lacking in the University. It was noted that the Universitydid not give IF adequate space to exercise its mandate effectively. As a result, IF was not consulted on key major decisionstaken by management of the University. IF was concerned with transformation especially at senior management posts of the University. IF noted with concern the decline in the number of white students over the years since the merger and the fact that these students were not willing to study at the campuses in the township areas. Of major concern was the role of IF in transformation of the universities because in its current form there was actually no impact made by IF and it proposed a national review of the organisation by the Department.

e) Site visit

The Portfolio planned to conduct site visit to assess progress made by the University in infrastructure development and refurbishment. There were delays in finishing the meeting as scheduled due to disruption by protesting students of Soshanguve Campus. The site visit could not take place because the meetings finished later than expected and the students demanded to be addressed by the Portfolio Committee after the meeting.

4.4 Tshwane North TVET College

a) Overview

Background

The Collegewas a product of the 2002 merger of three former Technical Colleges namely; Mamelodi, Soshanguve and Pretoria Technical College. The Collegewas managed from its corporate offices situated in Pretoria’s Central Business District (CBD). The Collegehad six service delivery sites namely; Mamelodi Campus, Pretoria Campus, Temba Campus (inherited from Orbit TVET College after the merger of Colleges), Rosslyn Campus, Soshanguve South Campus and Soshanguve North Campus. The Collegehad been under administration for about 19 months from August 2012 till end of March 2014. Amongst other, the reasons for administration were; dysfunctional council, outstanding policies that needed to be approved, absence of delegation of authority within council and management and retarded claims of NSFAS money. The new College Council was appointed in 2014 under the leadership of Mr D Nkomo. The council was in the process of appointing a council member from the business sector.

 

Governance and management

The College appointed the Acting Principal in October 2014 and the filling of other critical posts was underway. The DHET was also developing a Human Resource Manual that wouldassist the College during the recruitment of new employees. The Collegeprioritised the approval of all outstanding policies after consultation with various stakeholdersforthe short to medium period. The Collegeoperated with an Ad-hoc SRC since the elections of the new SRC had been scheduled for mid-February 2015. The constitution of the SRC was to be finalised during the course of the year. The conflict among employees was rife during the administration period and management had reinstated seven employees that were dismissed through the appeals process. The Collegewould appoint a labour specialist that wouldassist the College in its HR activities. The Collegedid not have its own Chief Financial Officer (CFO) and this post would be filled by June 2015.

 

Budget

In relation to its finances, the College had a backlog of outstanding audits since 2012. The outstanding audits had been completed and would be submitted to the DHET. The Collegewould be audited by the AG for the 2014 financial year. The Collegeutilised a decentralised management system where each College Campus had its own budget. The estimated total budget of the College for 2015 was R450 million. The Collegewas reporting to the DHET on a monthly basis on its finances. The College experienced a challenge of late payment of salaries to some employees. The finance division of the Collegeneeded to be capacitated. Debt collection from students was a serious challenge for the Collegebut Financial Clerks were recently appointed in each campus to assist with student finance issues including debt reconciliation and collection.

 

Staffing and academic performance

The total number of employees in the Collegewas562 with 41 Interns. The Collegehad 21 vacant posts for lecturers that had to be filled. In terms of academic performance, the College’s average success rate for the NC(V) programme was 63 percent in 2014, 58 percent for the Report 191 Engineering Studies and 46 percent for Business Studies. The Collegeaimed to improve its academic performance during the 2015 academic year. The College expected all staff to migrate to the DHET on 1 April 2015 without challenges.

 

Administration of NSFAS funding

The allocation of NSFAS fundinghad grown from R1.8 million in 2007 with 171 beneficiaries to an allocation of R69 million for 7703 beneficiaries in 2014. The total NSFAS allocation for 2014 was R69.9 million and the amount claimed was R62.4 million. An amount of R7.4 million was not claimed by the College. The Collegehad a challenge with Proban which was appointed to assist with bursary administration. Proban was refusing to give the College access to student’s accounts and the matter was before the court. The Collegewould appoint a Bursary Manager to oversee the administration of bursaries.

 

Outstanding certificates, partnership with industries and student housing

Since 2011, most NC(V) students didn’t receive their certificates and statements of results were used during graduations. The Collegewas working closely with the DHET in resolving the challenge of outstanding certificates. The Collegehad appointed an employee who was responsible for facilitating partnerships between the College and industries. The Collegehad a good partnership with nearby industries and Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs). The College provided accommodation to students at Soshanguve South Campus only. Students in other campuses who needed accommodation made their own arrangements.

b) Student Representative Council (SRC)

The SRC was concerned that the management of the College did notrecogniseit as a legitimate governance structure as contemplated in the Continuing Education and Training Act No 16 of 2006 as amended. It was reported that management did not consult with the SRC on key major decisions affecting the College. The late elections of the SRCremained a serious challenge for the students since they did not have their legitimate structure to report their grievances during the beginning of the academic year.  The SRC complained that management regarded it as a department under the Student Support Services and it had to get permission from the Student Support Services to conduct its activities and functions. The SRC appealed to the DHET to ensure the South African Further Education and Training Student Association (SAFETSA) was functional so that the SRCs may have a national platform for consideration of student grievances. 

With regard to results and student enrolment, the SRC appealed to the management of the College to ensure that students get their results in December of each academic year just like Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). The SRC complained that management used them during registration period to assist new students and this was not part of their work.

On infrastructure, the SRC reported that only two percent of the student population could be accommodated in College owned residences.  Of the 6 campuses of the College, it was noted that only two have sport facilities and they were in bad condition. The SRC appealed to the management to improve the sport facilities of the College and appointdedicated sport coaches that would nurture the talent of students in certain sport codes. The SRC complained that only three campuses out of the six have resource centres and they closed at 16h00 and studentswere unable to conduct their research and access them after closure. Furthermore, there was no Wi-Fi at these resource centres for student to access the internet.

With regard to administration of NSFAS funding, the SRC was concerned with the poor management and administration of NSFAS bursaries. Poor management of NSFAS bursary contributed to student drop-out and some students were owed meal and transport allowances dating back to 2011. The SRC appealed to the management to expand cafeterias within the precinct of the College campuses since studentsdid not afford to buy expensive food from other off-campuses outlets.

 

 

c) Unions

i) National Health and Allied Workers Union (NEHAWU)

With regard to workplace challenges, the union complained of the lack of feedback on forensic reports that were concluded, no feedback on suspension of the previous Principal that was placed on special leave pending the outcome of a disciplinary hearing case, wasteful expenditure by paying attorneys to deal with internal disciplinary cases, victimisation of union members for exposing corruption and blowing the whistle, appointment of the previous Administrator as a consultant, poor communication with staff on key decisions made by management, employment of incompetent managers, salary and claims not paid on time and many other related staff grievances.

ii) Public Service Association (PSA)

The PSA was concerned with the absence of approved policies by council which often led to maladministration and corruption. The union appealed to the management to send all policies to the stakeholders of the College so that they can submit their inputs. The union was concerned with improper management of the Performance Management Development System (PMDS) and Integrated Quality Management System (IQMS) for College-paid staff membersas these systems were not used for personnel to get extra income or for career development.

The union appealed to the management to treat staff equally and fair with regard to promotions and recruitment. It was proposed that managers and officials who continued with this practice should be disciplined. The union accused management of promoting staff without following properrecruitment processes. The union appealed to management to appoint a permanent CFO and terminate the services of the South African Institute of Chartered Accountants (SAICA) Support CFO. It was noted that the College procured a new alarm system and, since it was installed by the service provider, it had never been functional. Furthermore, the Plasma Television sets that were recently procured by the Collegewere also not functional. The union was concerned with the wasteful expenditure incurred from procurement of these goods. The union demanded from management to release the forensic report as promised. The union was also concerned that management did not implement agreements reached in the bargaining councils.

 

 

 

iii) National Professional Teachers Organisation of South Africa (NAPTOSA)

The union raised the following concerns; absence of the audited financial statements since 2012, lack of feedback on the forensic audit report, absence of a College organogram, poor feedback on the migration process and other employee grievances.

5. Observations

5.1 University of Mpumalanga

5.1.1 Governance

• The Portfolio Committee commended the University for having a fully constituted council which was also functional.
• It emerged that the University operated with a Standard Institutional Statute, which was subject to section 33 of the Higher Education,1997 (Act No 101 of 1997), as amended. The legislative framework governed the University until its Statute has been promulgated.
• The Universitywas in the process of developing a Strategic Plan that would guide its activities for the next five years and it aimed to finalise it before June 2015.
• The process of establishing an Institutional Forum (IF) was underway including the nomination of a University Chancellor.
• The Portfolio Committee commended the University for having a fully constituted SRC and its inauguration was planned for mid-February 2015.

5.1.2 Student Housing

• The University’s plan was to have 60 percent of the student population at on-campus residences and the expansion of the University infrastructure wouldtakecognisance of this plan.
• The Universitywas in the process of developing accreditation policy for off-campus private accommodation since the current on-campus residences could not accommodate all the students.
• The students complained about the student residences at Siyabuswa Campus which were not in good condition although they were recently refurbished by the DHET.
• The Universitywas in the process of refurbishing most of its existing residences in preparation for the 2016 student intake.
• Students proposed that the new student residences should make provision for self-catering facilities since the outsourced catering servicewas expensive.
• The Portfolio Committee was seriously concerned with the criteria followed for the determination of student residence fees which were expensive. The University noted that the review of the costing model for residence fees would be undertaken by the Finance Committee to determine the real cost drivers of student accommodation fees and the report would be submitted to the Portfolio Committee.
• The Portfolio Committee appealed to the University to ensure that the DHET norms and standards for student housing were followed during the refurbishment of student residences.

5.1.3 NSFAS funding

• It emerged that there was no determined NSFAS allocation from the DHET for UMP for 2014 and NSFAS had to allocate R10 million over three years from its recoveries. The Department was yet to make a determination for allocation of NSFAS funding for UMP.
• The students complained of late payments of their allowances and the University acknowledged that lack of understanding of the NSFAS loan application system and inadequate capacity were the main challenges it experienced.
• It emerged that varying financial aid benefits from different donors (European Union, Mpumalanga Department of Education and Funza Lushaka Bursary Scheme) resulted in discomfort amongst students who were not getting stipends at the Siyabuswa Campus.
• The Portfolio Committee was concerned that for the 2015 NSFAS bursary allocation, 75 percent was earmarked for continuing students and only 25 percent would fund first time entering students. Thiswas a serious challenge since the Universityhad only R3.5 million for 2015 and cannot assist all the needy students.
• It emerged that the University of Johannesburg (UJ) committed to offer merit awards to students who passed with more than 70 percent at Siyabuswa Campus.However, the Universityhad not yet fulfilled its commitment.

5.1.4 Staffing

• The Portfolio Committee welcomed the DHET’s commitment to urgently facilitate a stakeholder’s forum between the University management and labour representative to resolve all the outstanding employee grievances.
• The Portfolio Committee proposed the establishment of a Harmonisation Committee which would deal with staff grievances of the former LCA which was incorporated to the University.
• The Portfolio Committee requested the University to seriously consider the allegations of unfair recruitment processes and the absence of labour representatives during recruitment processes. 
• It emerged that a breakdown in communication between management and unionswas the cause of instability among the incorporated employees. Nevertheless, the University continued to engage with the employee representatives on matters affecting the staff and would be embarking on human resource processes that would include change management.
• The Portfolio Committee appealed to the University to expedite the recruitment of academics with PhD qualifications.
• The University was requested to prioritise the process of developing an Employment Equity Plan (EEP).

5.1.5 Infrastructure

• The Portfolio Committee commended the University for its Infrastructure Development Plans which were in place and the construction of buildings to accommodate the 2016 intake which was underway. The cost for the infrastructure development for this phase was R375 million.
• The University was commended that four units within the infrastructure plans were earmarked for student with disabilities.
• The DHET was requested to prioritise the development of a raised interchange at the R40/D725 intersection.

5.1.6 Student academic support

• The Portfolio Committee requested the management to ensure that the library hours wereextended to allow students more time to study and conduct their research.
• The University was requested to consider the proposal by the SRC to have tutors who would assist students that were not coping with their academic work.

5.2 Ehlanzeni TVET College

5.2.1 Governance

• It emerged that the College Council had two vacancies that had to be filled.
• The Portfolio Committee was concerned that the SRC was not yet elected though the elections would be completed by Mid-February 2015.

5.2.2 Student Housing

• The Portfolio Committee was seriously concerned with the acute shortage of student housing in the College. It emerged that of the five Campuses, only two have student residences with 450 beds.
• The College noted that it had no plans currently to build new residences owing to inadequate funding.

5.2.3 NSFAS funding

• The Collegehad a challenge of inadequate NSFAS allocation to assist all eligible students who qualify for the NSFAS bursaries.
• It emerged that the DHET Bursary Guidelines for TVET Colleges posed a challenge for students who livedwithin 10 kilometres radius owing to long walking distance and challenges of safety.
• The College noted that the Guidelines contributed to the student protests in 2014.

5.2.4. Staffing

• The Portfolio Committee was concerned with high concentration of staff members at the Central Office.
• The plan to conduct skills audit of staff at the Central Office to match the skills and positions was welcomed.
• The Portfolio Committee was seriously concerned with the percentage of women especially at the senior management level of the College. Furthermore, the racial demographic of the College staff was highly questionable and did not reflect the demographics of the province.
• The Portfolio Committee welcomed the College’s plan to implement the Employment Equity Plan as per the legislation requirements.

 

5.2.5 Infrastructure

• The Portfolio Committee commended the College for embarking on an infrastructure expansion through buying unused buildings to increase access to occupational skills training programmes for the young people of the Province.
• The DHET cautioned the College not to expand satellite campuses which were not accredited by Department.

5.2.6 Outstanding certificates and pending results

• The Portfolio Committee was concerned about the outstanding certificates and pending results which adversely impacted on student’s employability and progression.

5.2.7 Student academic performance and support

• The Portfolio Committee was seriously concerned with the low throughput rate in the NC(V) programmes especially at Mapulaneng Campus.
• The College was requested to develop an Academic Improvement Plan that would assist in improving the academic performance of students.

5.3 Tshwane University of Technology

5.3.1 Governance

• The University acknowledged that for the past five years it had serious challenges of governance and leadership which affected the stability of the institution.
• Although the council of the Universitywas functional, there werestill some positions that had to be filled within the structures of council and, council committed to fill soon.
• The Portfolio Committee urged council to prioritise the appointment of a permanent Vice-Chancellor & Principal which would assist to bring stability and leadership to the institution.
• The Institutional Forum of the University accused council of undermining its role and that it was not given space to perform its mandate effectively.

5.3.2 University finances

• The Portfolio Committee was seriously concerned that 70 percent of the University’s budget was allocated for compensation of employees which was way above the average threshold of 63 percent for HEIs.
• It emerged that the excessive salary costs of the University had a detrimental impact on goods and services including the maintenance of infrastructure.
• It was noted as a concern that the Universitywas heavily reliant on government subsidy (53 percent of the budget) for its operations and its third stream income was relatively low.
• The increase in student debt from R134 million in 2013 to R247 million in 2014 (83 percent) was noted as a serious threat to the University’s financial sustainability. The University management was requested to find measures to address thisirregularity. 
• The University was requested to seriously review its resource allocation strategy to improve its financial management and growth strategy.
• It emerged that the 2014 student protests cost the University R4.2 million and the disciplinary hearings have not yet been concluded.
• The University was concerned that the allocation of government subsidy at the beginning of the new financial year (April each year) leaves the institution in a very difficult financial position since the Universityhad to fund all its expenditures from its reserves for three months (January – March).
• The commitment by the DHET to approach SETAs to assist the University with additional funding was welcomed by the Portfolio Committee.
• It emerged that the University received 23 percent of the R1 billion from the National Skills Fund (NSF) allocation to assist with student historic debt and this once-off allocation created expectations from students that it would be continuous.

5.3.3 Staffing

• The Portfolio Committee was seriously concerned with the high student-lecturer ratio of 55:1 as this might impact negatively on teaching and learning.
• It emerged that the Universityhad a high number of non-academic staff as compared to academic staff and half of the University employees were not permanent.
• The high number of unfilled posts especially at senior management level of the University was a concern for the Portfolio Committee.
• The Employment Equity targets in some faculties of the Universitywere skewed and there was a high number of male academic staff.

5.3.4 Infrastructure

• It emerged that though the Universityhad spent R1.2 billion to date on Capital Projects and, there was still a shortage of sport facilities and adequate infrastructure especially at the township located campuses.
• The University acknowledged the support it had been receiving from the DHET’s Infrastructure Grant to expand its infrastructure and 15 building projects had been completed to enhance teaching and learning.
• The University stakeholders such as the SRC and Unions complained that the University did not communicate its Infrastructure Master Plan to the stakeholders.

5.3.5 Student housing

• The University acknowledged that it had a serious shortage of student housing for its student population (22 percent of the total headcount enrolment were in residences).
• The SRC complained of the living conditions in the student residences especially at Soshanguve Campus.
• It emerged that the shortage of student residences also contributed to the outbreak of the 2014 student protests.
• The SRC complained of inadequate security especially at the female student residence at Soshanguve Campus.

5.3.6 NSFAS funding

• The Universitywas not in a position to assist all eligible students with financial aid owing to inadequate funding. In excess of 24000 students, the University could only assist 14000 students with an average allocation of R32000 and it had to cut on certain allowances. While the shortage of NSFAS funding was acknowledged, the top-slicing of the award would aggravate a challenge of historic debt and protests at the beginning of 2016.
• It emerged that 7420 first year undergraduate students were not yet funded with NSFASfunding although they qualified.
• The Portfolio Committee observed student protest during and after its meeting with the management and the cause of the protest was inadequate NSFAS funding to assist the returning and new students.
• The University acknowledged that inadequate student financial aid was a continuous cause of student protests which posed a serious threat to teaching and learning. The University noted that it was not in a good financial position to constantly supplement the shortage NSFAS funding to qualifying students owing to its low third stream income and rising student debts.
• It emerged that the late allocation of NSFAS funding particularly for accommodation, food and transport allowances affected students in a negative manner since most of these students were reliant on government support to study.
• It emerged that council approved R46 million in 2014 to assist 2660 needy students from its coffers owing to the high demand of student financial aid. The University also contributed R19 million for student bursaries. Despite all these efforts, the demand for financial aid in the Universitywas a challenge.
• The non-funding of the B Tech programme by NSFAS created serious challenges for the University since it had to assist these students as they were neither classified as undergraduates nor postgraduates. The University planned to contribute R6 million from its coffers to assist these students.
• The SRC of the University demanded that all students who owed the University be allowed to register without paying their outstanding debts. The Portfolio Committee cautioned against this approach as it might contribute to a total financial collapse of the institution which just came out of administrationand the student debt had already increased by 83 percent in one year.

5.3.7 Student drop-out / throughput rate

• The Portfolio Committee was seriously concerned with the high drop-out rate of undergraduate students that had increased from 23 percent in 2010 to 65 percent in 2014.
• It emerged that the University offered students a maximum opportunity of six years to complete their undergraduate qualifications. The University was cautioned against this approach as it might impact on funding of new entrants.
• The Portfolio Committee urged the SRC to advise students to put more emphasis on their academic work to improve the success rate of the University and decrease the drop-out rate.

5.3.8 Other matters

• Despite the challenges of governance and administration, the Portfolio Committee commended the University for its research output and innovations.
• The University was requested to measure the impact of its research output and innovations especially for community development.
• The University was encouraged to expand its school adoption programme to assist in alleviating the shortage of maths and science students.
• The management of the University was requested to be pro-active in dealing with student grievances to prevent student protests from recurring.
• It emerged that most of the SRC members were linked with political organisations at national level and outside influences of these organisationswas often manifested in the SRC which at times contributed to misbehaviour.
• The Portfolio Committee requested the University to submit its Institutional Transformation Plan that was approved by council on 2013.

5.4 Tshwane North TVET College

5.4.1 Governance

• The new council of the Collegehad been in existence for the past nine months and therewere still outstanding positions that had to be filled in the council.
• The legitimate SRC of the College was not yet appointed during the visit of the Portfolio Committee.
• The Portfolio Committee urged the new council to ensure good governance and prioritise the approval of key policies to ensure stability in the College.

5.4.2 Budget

• The Portfolio Committee was seriously concerned that financial policies had not yet been approved by council. This often contributed to maladministration and non-compliance to the Public Finance Management (PFMA) Act regulations as reported by the College stakeholders.
• The Portfolio Committee was concerned with the alleged fruitless expenditure as a result of procuring non-operational Plasma television sets and alarms in the College.
• The College acknowledged that itwas struggling to collect debts from students who were not funded by NSFAS and this affected its revenue collection.
• The College anticipated a disclaimer opinion from the AG for its 2014 financial audit. The Portfolio Committee urged management to improve its financial management systems to improve the outcome of its audits.
• It emerged that there was a miscommunication between the College and DHET on the approval of the College’s Operational Plan.
• The Portfolio Committee urged the College to allocate sufficient money for the maintenance of infrastructure as this was a directive from the Minister.

5.4.3 Staffing

• The College acknowledged that ithad capacity constraints especially in its Finance Division.
• The Portfolio Committee was concerned with the number of outstanding vacancies that hadto befilled especially at senior management level. The College partly blamed the moratorium placed by the DHET on the high number of unfilled posts.
• It emerged that there was inadequate communication between the College management and its employees on key activities of the College.
• It emerged that the suspended Principal of the Collegestill received her salary from the College’s budget although she was moved to the DHET.
• It emerged that the Collegehad a number of unresolved disciplinary cases although it did not provide the exact figure to the Portfolio Committee.
• The College had a lot of policies that were yet to be approved by Council.
• There seemed to be lack of confidence on how the College Management implemented the recommendations of the Forensic Report.
• There were outstanding issues pertaining to migration and unions were concerned about lack of feedback from management.
• The Portfolio Committee was concerned with the delays by management in the payment of PMDS benefits to employees.
• There was a misunderstanding by the Unions on the role of SAICA Support CFO which was clarified by the DHET.

5.4.4 Student housing

• The Collegehad a serious shortage of student housing and only 2 percent of the total headcount enrolment could be accommodated in its residences.
• It was noted with concern that the living conditions at the College’s student residences were in appalling state and management was requested to prioritise refurbishment of all its residences.
• The College reported that it was not in a good financial position to sign contracts with external private accommodation providers and students had to make their own arrangements for private accommodation.

5.4.5 Other matters

• The Collegehad a challenge of outstanding NC(V) certificates which affected students negatively when they seek employment opportunities.
• The Collegehad a challenge of inadequate NSFAS funding to assist all the needy students.
• The Portfolio Committee was seriously concerned that the College provided students with incorrect information on promotion requirements for the NC(V) programme in its booklet.
• The DHET reported that some of the outstanding results were as a result of incorrect capturing of year marks by lecturers and, in certain cases the Collegedid not adhere to the due date in submitting marks.
• The Portfolio Committee welcomed the DHET’s commitment to assist the College to fill the senior management posts.
• The Portfolio Committee was seriously concerned with the poor student performance for both the NC(V) and Report 191 programmes.
• The DHET committed to assist the College to improve its ICT system to improve the management of examinations.

6. Summary

The four days oversight visit of the Portfolio Committee to the Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and TVET Colleges provided members with an opportunity to directly engage with these institutions on their challenges in order to provide assistance where it was required. The Portfolio Committee was pleased with the increase in access to post-school education and training opportunities as observed during its deliberations with the institutions visited. Although there had been a steady increase in access to post-school education and training, the demand for financial aid by eligible students remained a serious concern which needed to be addressed urgently not only by the DHET, rather by involvement of other government departments including the private sector.

The progress report presented by the University of Mpumalanga and DHET was commended by the Portfolio Committee especiallythe infrastructure expansion plan. The Portfolio Committee was fully aware that a growth of a new University required massive investment on infrastructure and the University was encouraged to enhance its human resource capacity to ensure that teaching and learning continuously improves as the institutions expands. Despite the labour grievances as a result of the incorporation of the Lowveld College of Agriculture (LCA) and grievances from the SRC, the Universitywas a beacon of hope not only for the people of Mpumalanga but for the country as whole. The envisaged infrastructure layout of the Universitywould be the first of its kind for this country and it was hoped that thisUniversitywould be among the best in the country. The Portfolio Committee urged the new leadership of the University to continuously engage with the stakeholders of the University so that teaching and learning was not compromised.

The interaction with the council, management and various stakeholders of Tshwane University of Technology (TUT) afforded an opportunity tothe Portfolio Committee to identify loopholes in the manner in which the institution was governed and managed. The absence of stable leadership and governance remained a serious concern for the University and it was hoped that the new council and the appointment of a new Vice-Chancellor & Principal would bring stability to the institution. The shortfall of financial aid to assist eligible students was a continuous threat to the University’s sustainability and a threat to teaching and learning which was often disrupted by continuous student protests. The reality of thisUniversitywas that it attracted students from the poor family households and the allocation from NSFAS was not adequate despite it being the biggest recipient of this fund.  The Portfolio Committee acknowledged that the Universityrequired continuous support from the DHET and its management should prioritise the finalisation of its strategic priorities which would improve the manner in which the institution was currently managed.

The TVET Colleges faced similar challenges which had been affecting the sector for a while. The challenge of outstanding certificates and pending results wassomething that the Portfolio Committee had been condemning for a while and there had been noticeable progress by the DHET in addressing this challenge. The Portfolio Committee commended the DHET for its concerted effort to improve the overall perception of TVET Colleges through its various interventions aimed at improving governance and administration of these institutions. It was commendable that both Colleges visited by the Portfolio Committee had functional councils which met regularly. The academic performance of students in the Colleges was a serious concern for the Portfolio Committee and both institutions were encouraged to develop an accelerated academic improvement plan.

7. Recommendations

The Portfolio Committee recommends that the Minister consider the following:

7.1 University of Mpumalanga

• The DHET should prioritise the establishment of a stakeholder’s forum to deal with all the outstanding employee grievances as a result of the incorporation of the Lowveld College of Agriculture (LCA) to the University of Mpumalanga (UMP).
• The DHET should assistthe Universitywith additional funding to recruit academic staff with post-graduate qualifications since there was a current shortage of academics with PhDs in the University.
• The DHET should consider increasing the NSFAS allocation (R10 million over 3 years) to the University which at present was not adequate to assist the first year students (25 percent of the R3.5 million in 2015).
• The review of the residence and tuition fees by the University’s Finance Committee should be prioritised since the University charged students expensive residence fees.
• The DHET should provide information to the University on the possible government buildings that can be donated for its benefit just like in the Northern Cape where the Provincial Government donated buildingsto the Sol Plaatje University (SPU).
• The University should consider reviewing its language policy so that non-Ndebele speaking students may also be enrolled at the Siyabuswa Campus.
• The DHET should finalise the engagements with the Provincial Department of Public Works, Roads and Transport for the development of a raised interchange at the R40/D725 intersection.
• The University should enhance its Student Support Services to assist students that have difficulty with their academic work.
• The approval of the University’s policies and strategic plan should be prioritised by the council.
• The University should consider the proposal of developing a student portal so that students may easily access their results online and the distribution of tablets to students for e-learning.
• The DHET should submit quarterly progress report on infrastructure expansion of the University to assist the Portfolio Committee to monitor progress.
• The DHET should assist the University with a change management workshop which would assist management in dealing with employee grievances going forward.

7.2 Ehlanzeni and Tshwane North TVET Colleges

• The DHET should prioritise the issuing of outstanding NC(V) certificates and results as thisremained a serious challenge in this sector.
• The increase in student numbers in TVET Colleges should be accompanied by increased funding to address the serious challenge of shortage of funds in Colleges.
• The DHET should consider the possibility of reviewing the Bursary Guidelines for transport and accommodation allowances as these guidelines contributed to instability in the sector.
• The DHET should allocate additional funds to assist TVET Colleges in alleviating the shortage of student housing which affected the entire sector.
• Additional support should be provided to the Tshwane North TVET College in particular with capacity building in management.

7.3 Tshwane University of Technology

• The DHET should closely monitor the progress of the new council and support the management in its course to finalise its strategic priorities. There is an urgent need of improving management and governance of the University to maintain stability.
• The appointment of the new Vice-Chancellor and Principal should be prioritised by council and completed before the end of 2015.
• The management of the University should be proactive in dealing with student grievances to prevent recurrence of student protests.
• The management should establish a stakeholder’s forum which would provide a platform for consideration of all differences between management and the Universitystakeholders on quarterly basis.
• The DHET should prioritise the review of the role and mandate of the Institutional Forums (IFs) in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) since their existence was generally overlooked by University Councils.
• The enrolment target of 65000 students by 2019 in the University should be reviewed given the current financial status and high student debt of the University which poses a threat to its growth sustainability.
• The University should instill a culture of discipline especially to its SRC leaders and disciplinary action should be finalised against the students who damaged the University property and infrastructure.
• The University should enhance its academic support programme to minimise the drop-out rate of undergraduate students and improve its throughput rate which was declining.
• The decline in the number of students from other racial groups other than Africans should be closely monitored by the University to avoid skewed racial demographics among the student population.

Report to be considered.