ATC201125: Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report (BRRR) of the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education on the performance of the Department of Basic Education for the 2019/20 financial year, dated 24 November 2020.

Basic Education

logoBudgetary Review and Recommendation Report (BRRR) of the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education on the performance of the Department of Basic Education for the 2019/20 financial year, dated 24 November 2020.

 

Annual Report on the Performance of the Department of Basic Education in Meeting its Objectives for 2019/20

 

The Portfolio Committee on Basic Education, having considered the performance of the Department of Basic Education, reports as follows:

 

1. Introduction

 

  1. Purpose of the BRRR

 

In terms of Section 5 of theMoney Bills Amendment Procedures and Related Matters Act, No. 9 of 2009 the National Assembly, through its Committees, must annually compile the Budgetary Review and Recommendation Reports (BRRR) that assess the service delivery performance of departments given available resources. Committees are also expected to provide an assessment of the effectiveness and efficiency of the Department’s use of available resources, and may include recommendations on the forward use of resources. In this regard, the BRRR is a source document for the Committees on Appropriations when considering and making recommendations on the Medium Term.

 

1.2 The role and mandate of the Portfolio Committee

 

The Portfolio Committee on Basic Education as an extension of the National Assembly is mandated by sections 55 and 92 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (Act 108 of 1996) and the Rules of Parliament to oversee the activities and performance of the Department of Basic Education and its two statutory bodies, namely, the Council for Quality Assurance in General and Further Education and Training (Umalusi) and the South African Council for Educators (SACE). In this context, the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education focuses its work within the five constitutional mandates of Parliament, which are to process and approve legislation, conduct oversight, ensure public participation, process international agreements and facilitate co-operative governance. In addition to performing these constitutional mandates, the Committee engages in various activities and programmes focussing on the development and delivery of quality public education to all South Africans. The Committee also deals with matters referred to it by the Speaker or the National Assembly.

 

1.3 Core functions of the Department of Basic Education

 

The Department of Basic Education (DBE) derives its mandate firstly from the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (1996), which requires education to be transformed and democratised in accordance with the values of human dignity, equality, human rights and freedom, non-racism and non-sexism. The Constitution guarantees access to basic education for all, including adult basic education.  Secondly, the National Education Policy Act, 1996 Act 27 of 1996 (NEPA), inscribes into law the policies for the national system of education, the legislative and monitoring responsibilities of the Minister of Education, as well as the formal relations between national and provincial authorities. In terms of the NEPA, the DBE’s statutory role is to formulate national policy, norms and standards as well as to monitor and evaluate policy implementation and impact.

 

In line with its mandate, the Department has a vision of a South Africa in which all people will have access to lifelong learning, education and training opportunities, which will, in turn, contribute towards improving the quality of life and building a peaceful, prosperous and democratic South Africa.

 

In fulfilling its mandate over the next five years, the Department is guided by the 2014-2019 Medium Term Strategic Framework (MTSF) designed to reflect the actions outlined in the National Development Plan (NDP).

 

1.4 Processes followed by the Portfolio Committee in arriving at the report

 

In compiling its BRRR, the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education assessed the performance of the Department of Basic Education with reference to the following:

 

  • The strategic priorities and measurable objectives as set out in the 2019/20 strategic plan.
  • Expenditure trends drawn from the reports of the National Treasury;
  • The June 2019 State of the Nation Address priorities;
  • The reports of the Auditor-General of South Africa and the reports on the 2019/20 Budget Vote;
  • The financial statements and annual report briefings, in terms of Section 65 of the Public Finance Management Act No. 1 of 1999, which requires the Ministers to table the Annual Reports and financial statements for the Department and public entities before Parliament.
  • Findings of the Portfolio Committee’s oversight visits, including quarterly briefings.
  • External sources assessing the performance of the Department.

 

The briefings on the annual performance and financial statements of the Department and its statutory bodies took place on 10 to 13 November in a virtual meeting 2020 in Parliament.

 

2. Overview of the key relevant policy focus areas

 

2.1   The National Development Plan (NDP), Vision 2030

 

The NDP’s vision for 2030 is that South Africans should have access to education and training of the highest quality, characterised by significantly improved learning outcomes. The NDP sets out, inter alia, priorities, targets and actions to improve the quality of basic education. Key targets for 2030 include improved retention of learners and improved learning outcomes. Quality targets cover areas such as literacy, numeracy and the number of learners passing Grade 12 at Bachelor level.

 

2.2   The Medium Term Strategic Framework

 

The strategic goals of the Department of Basic Education (DBE) in 2019/20 were anchored on the 2014 – 2019 Medium Term Strategic Framework (MTSF) and the sector plan, Action Plan to 2019 - Towards the realization of schooling 2030. In terms of the MTSF, the DBE is responsible for Outcome 1 (Quality Basic Education) and collaborates with other Departments on Outcome 7 in respect of Infrastructure and the National School Nutrition Programme (NSNP), Outcome 13 with regard to Early Childhood Development (ECD) and Outcome 14 in respect of Fostering Constitutional Values and Promoting Social Cohesion. The overarching goal of the education sector remains to improve learner performance across all grades. The Action Plan outlined 27 goals which the Department aims to accomplish.

 

The MTSFoutputs for the sector and the Department’s plans are aligned to and guided by the National Development Plan. The sector also has non-negotiables to focus on other areas inadequately covered in the MTSF.

 

The Department’s Strategic Outcome Oriented goals per programme are aligned to the following six MTSF sub-outcomes:

 

  • Improved quality teaching and learning, through the development, supply and effective utilisation of teachers;
  • Improved quality teaching and learning, through the provision of adequate, quality infrastructure and learning and teaching support materials;
  • Improving assessment for learning to ensure quality and efficiency in academic achievement;
  • Expanded access to ECD and the improvement of the quality of Grade R, with support for pre-Grade R provision;
  • Strengthening accountability and improving management at the school, community and district levels;
  • Partnerships for education reform and improved quality.

 

Given that basic education is a concurrent function requiring a cooperative and more integrated approach, a significant part of the Department’s work is the alignment of the work of the Provincial Education Departments (PEDs)’ Strategic and Annual Performance Plans with the sectoral mandate articulated in the NDP and the MTSF.

 

2.3  State of the Nation Address (SONA) (2019/20)

 

      The 2019 SONA outlined policy objectives pertaining to Basic Education, as follows:

  • The President announced the Early Childhood Development (ECD) migration from department of Social   Development to the Department of Basic Education;
  • The Coding and Robotics programme was also announced;
  • The continuation of the priority to build modern schools replacing mud structures and other inappropriate buildings through the Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative (ASIDI), to give learnersdignity;
  • The extension of basic services such as water, sanitation and electricity;
  • Increased focus on Mathematics and Science; and
  • The provision of digitised material for learning on a tablet device, focusing on the most disadvantaged schools which are in the poorest communities, including multi-grade, multiphase, farm and rural schools. 

 

In line with National Treasury appropriations, the Department of Basic Education was allocated

R24 464 531 billion for 2019/20.  Spending on infrastructure especially after took up most of the Department’s budget over the medium term. The bulk of the money went to planning information and assessment, R12 586 411.

 

2.4 Strategic Goals of the Department of Basic Education for 2019/20 and 2020/21 financial years

 

Key priorities of the Department for 2019/20 included improving school infrastructure as per the minimum norms and standards for public school infrastructure; improving curriculum delivery through high quality learning and support materials (LTSM) and provision of support and resources to improve skills in critical subjects such as Mathematics, Science and Technology; increasing the number of learners completing Grade 12; providing support to learners with severe to profound intellectual disabilities through a newly introduced conditional grant; ensuring the adequate supply of quality teachers; assessing the quality of teaching and learning; strengthening learning and teaching in the early grades; improved accountability across all levels of the basic education system; continuing to provide meals to learners; and, improving access to and the use of ICT in basic education.

 

The priorities for 2020/21 remain largely unchanged, with notable additions being to increase priorities to focus on Rural Education through improving literacy, numeracy and reading skills as well as striking a balance in curriculum, books and curricular activities to improve learner performance. The Department also aims to focus on the monitoring of the implementation of lesson plans by teachers.

 

3. A summary of key Performance Recommendations of the Portfolio Committee in the 2018/19Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report 2018/19

 

3.1 Audit findings and responses of the Department of Basic Education

 

In the 2018/19 Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report (BRRR), the Portfolio Committee recommended that the Department provide Parliament with a comprehensive Action Plan with timeframes to address the 2018/19 Auditor General of South Africa (AGSA)’s audit findings. The Portfolio Committee noted in particular the following recurring challenges:

 

  • The need to intensity support to the relevant Provincial Education Departments to ensure effective and efficient utilization of conditional grants
  • The need to strengthen support for  Learners with Severe to Profound Intellectual Disabilities conditional grant which continues to underperform

 

 

3.2        Progress report on the implementation of the Action Plan to address the AGSA audit findings

 

Intensify the support to the relevant Provincial Education Departments to ensure effective and efficient utilization of conditional grants, particularly the Learners with Severe to Profound Intellectual Disabilities conditional grant which continues to underperform.

 

Issue

Progress Made

In intensifying support to relevant Provincial Education Departments to ensure effective and efficient utilization of conditional grants,

1.The Department’s intervention was mediated through a coterie of officials from Directorate: Financial Planning, and Provincial Budget Monitoring; Directorate: Budget Analysis and Directorate: Grant Management working in tandem with Department of Basic Education line function unit officials where the conditional grants are overseen (national conditional grants managers). This multi-disciplinary team was further complemented by the addition of officials from the Department’s Human Resources Management as well as Finance. This Department of Basic Education multi-disciplinary team’s objective converged around supporting PEDs to achieve optimal conditional grant implementation and performance through joint identification and removal of bottlenecks that inhibit conditional grant performance.

1.1 To ensure the attainment of this objective it was crucial that systemic readiness in all nine (9) PEDs be facilitated before and throughout the implementation cycle to enhance the PEDs’ absorptive capacity of conditional grant resources. To this end the DBE multi-disciplinary team of budget analysts, economists, conditional grant programme managers and human resources specialists planned three (3) series of meetings with each PEDs at various stages of the conditional grant implementation cycle. These were:

  1. Monitoring per PED of the approved conditional grants business plans versus the annual procurement plan of that PED (done in the fourth quarter of 2018/19 to the 1st quarter of 2019/20). This exercise was to ensure that the PEDs’ conditional grant activities and milestones are properly aligned and in complementarity with the procurement plans of the PEDs. This was done so that grant activities that are the biggest cost drivers are executed early in the financial year to avoid instances where protracted procurement processes delay implementation. The exclusive monitoring of business and procurement plans assisted in normalising and improving the performance of conditional grants as unresponsive procurement modalities and lack of proper alignment and sequencing of business plan activities have been blamed for poor performance.
  2. Two-day Budget Monitoring Meetings that took place in the 1st and 2nd quarter of the current financial year and all PEDs were visited for monitoring and support.  PEDs that had experienced challenges in conditional grants’ performance in the 2018/19 financial year, had a special all-day meeting focused on conditional grants with discussion being held under the auspices of the PEDs’ Chief Financial Officer, Procurement, conditional grants managers and Human Resources Management officials interacting with the DBE multi-disciplinary team. Recovery plans that each of the PEDs’ conditional grants had prepared were interrogated to ensure successful delivery of milestones. Bottlenecks that inhibited performance were identified and solutions agreed to with timeframes and responsibility persons indicated.
  3. The third series of monitoring scheduled for November to December 2019 had to be postponed. The budget standard exercise meetings were postponed to January 2020 due to the delay by the Provincial Treasuries to provide PEDs with the second allocation letters and non-submission of the Estimate of Provincial Revenue and expenditure documents to the Department of Basic Education.

 

Specific Support given to Learners with Severe to Profound Intellectual Disabilities Grant

 

The performance of this grant in the current financial year has improved with expenditure being within the norm for the period. This grant had previously been affected by the challenge of attracting the required therapists whose salaries comprised 65% of the grant allocation to PEDs. A turning point seem to have been reached with all PEDs successfully recruiting almost full complements of therapists thus enabling them to successfully absorb the grant resources allocated to them. To retain these therapists, the sector agreed (with the concurrence of National Treasury) to permanently appoint the therapists. HEDCOM Subcommittee: Human Resources Management mandated DBE (Directorate: Grant Management, Chief Director: Human Resources, and the LSPID grant managers) to coordinate the permanent appointment of therapists.

 

On a practical level this has entailed DBE with the support of PEDs’ Human Resources Senior Managers meeting with Provincial Treasuries to ensure their buy-in and support for the modalities to be followed in ensuring that the funds for the continued employment of LSPID therapists are earmarked and guaranteed beyond the life-span of the grant. To date Northern Cape and Mpumalanga have successfully converted therapist posts from temporary to permanent. Similarly, North West and Gauteng have been supported in meetings with their Provincial Treasuries with clear consensus reached on the permanent employment of therapists. Five PEDs still need to be visited.

 

 

4.         Overview and Assessment of Financial Performance

 

4.1        Allocation against Actual Expenditure per Programme for the 2019 /2020 Financial Year

  •  
  1.  

Expenditure as % of Appropriation

  1.  

ACTUAL EXPENDITURE

  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  

Administration

518 342

509 389

8 953

98.3

Curriculum Policy, Support and Monitoring

1944 506

1 880 880

63 626

96.7

Teachers, Education Human Resources Development and Institutional Development

1 383 888

1 367 945

15 943

98.8

Planning, Information and Assessment

13 106 706

12 586 411

520 295

96.0

Educational Enrichment Services

7 511 089

7 506 938

4 151

99.9

Total

24 464 531

23 851 563

612 968

97.5

 

Thetotal budget   allocation (AdjustedAppropriationbudget)oftheDepartmentforthe2019/20financialyearamounted toR24.465billion, which  represented a nominal increase of R764 948million or 3,23 % Percentage from 2018/19. The bulk of the budget (82,2%) amounting to R20.122 billionconsisted  of transfers and subsidies, mainly to public entities, conditional grants, provinces and municipalities. This means that the Department had available budget of R4,343 billion for compensation of employees, earmarked funds, office accommodation, departmental operations and other projects.

Actual expenditure in 2019/20 was R23.852 billion or 97.5 percent of the allocated budget compared to 98.8 percent in 2018/19. The unspent balance of R612.97 million or 2.5 percent at the end of 2019/20 was more than in 2018/19, when R284.8 million was unspent. The main contributor to the under-spending in 2019/20 was Programme 2 that had spent 96.7 percent and Program 4 that spent 96.9 percent.Programme 1spent 98.3 percent and Programmes 3 and 5 spent 98.8 and 99.9, respectively.

 

  1. Reasons for Deviation in the above Programmes
    1. Programme 1: Administration – (Underspent: R8 953million or 1.7 percent)

The remaining balance in this programme is due to underspending on Compensation of Employees as a result of non-filling of vacant positions due to the moratorium occasioned by the restructuring of the Department.

  1. Programme 2: Curriculum Policy, Support and Monitoring – (Underspent:  R63 626million or 3.3 percent). The remaining budget allocation on this programme is due to funds withheld for Learners with Profound Intellectual Disability conditional grant and other projects reprioritised after workbooks savings was identified.
  2. Programme 3: Teachers, Education Human Resources Development and Institutional Development (Underspent: R15 943 million or 1.2 percent) – The remaining balance in this programme is due to underspending on the IQMS as well as Compensation of Employees.
  3. Programme 4: Planning, Information and Assessment (Underspent:  R520 295 million or 4 percent) – The bulk of the remaining budget is due to underspending on the School Infrastructure Backlog Indirect Grant and National Assessment. The tender for the procurement of a service provider to conduct the National Assessment was cancelled due to non-responsiveness by bidders.
  4. Educational Enrichment Services (Underspent:  4 151 million or 0,1 percent) – There were no material variances in this programme in 2019/20.

 

 

4.2     Allocation against Actual Expenditure Per Economic Classification for the 2019/20 Financial Year

Economic Classification

  1.  

Expenditure as % of Appropriation

  1.  

ACTUAL EXPENDITURE

  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  

Compensation of Employees

546751

521 576

25 175

95.4

Goods and Services

1 996 191

1955 994

40 197

98.0

Interestand rent on land

50 628

50627

1

100.0

Transfers and Subsidies

20 122 337

20 110 535

11 802

99.9

Paymentfor Capital Assets

1 748 386

1 212 591

535 795

69.4

Payments for Financial Assets

238

240

(2)

100.8

Total

24 464 531

23 851 563

612 968

97.5

 

  1. Deviations per Economic Classification
    1. Compensation on Employees: Underspending on Compensation of Employees is as a result of non-filling of vacant positions due to the moratorium occasioned by the restructuring of the Department.
    2. Goods and Services: (Under Expenditure) Theunderspendingon Goods and Services was due to delays in delivery of the IT equipment including tablets for schools as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak as well as delays in invoices for travelling and subsistence.
    3. Transfers and Subsidies: The underspending on transfers and subsidies was due to funds to the Free State being withheld for underspending on Learners with Profound Intellectual Disabilities Conditional Grant.
    4. Payment of Capital Assets: The bulk of the allocation on this item in respect of the ASIDI project. The underspending on the building and fixes structures was due to high construction costs that the contractors were charging the Department on water and sanitation projects which resulted in delays on the project. Furthermore, there were disruptions by business forums.

 

 

4.3        Allocation against Actual Expenditure for the 2019/20 Financial Year

Economic Classification

  1.  

Expenditure as % of Appropriation

  1.  

ACTUAL EXPENDITURE

  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  

Compensation of Employees

463 154

451 930

11 224

97.6

Examiners and Moderators

21 437

21 489

(52)

100.2

Transfers to Public Entities

155 063

155 063

-

100.0

Other Transfers

1 398 290

1 394 454

3 836

99.7

Conditional Grants

18 569 231

18 560 771

8 460

100.0

Schools Infrastructure Backlogs Indirect Grant

1 985 760

1 473 693

512 067

74.2

Earmarked Funds

1 194 742

1 163 859

30 883

97.4

Departmental Operations

201 096

199 950

1 146

99.4

Office Accommodation

206 451

203 695

2 756

98.7

Projects

269 307

226 659

42 648

84.2

Total

24 464 531

23 851 563

612 968

97.5

 

4.4        Details of Earmarked Allocations/Conditional Grant for the 2019/20 Financial Year

Service

 

Expenditure as % of Appropriation

  1.  

ACTUAL EXPENDITURE

  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  

Earmarked Funds:

1 194 742

1 163 859

30 883

97.4

Workbooks

1 079 311

1 055 628

23 683

97.8

MatricSecond Chance Programme

85 308

80 250

5 058

94.1

Maths,Science and Technology Oversight grant

6 197

4 770

1 427

77.0

National School Nutrition Programme Oversightgrant

20 926

19 736

1 190

94.3

Learners with Profound Intellectual Disabilities Oversight grant

3 000

3 475

-475

115.8

Conditional Grants:

18 569 231

18 560 771

8 460

100.0

Education Infrastructure Grant

10 514 478

10 514 478

-

100.0

HIV & Aids (LifeSkills) conditional grant

256 951

256 951

-

100.0

Maths, Science and Technology conditional grant

391 302

391 302

-

100.0

National School Nutrition Programme conditional grant

7 185 715

7 185 715

-

100.0

Learners with Profound Intellectual Disabilityconditional grant

220 785

212 325

8 460

96.2

 

 

4.5        Details of Transfers against Actual Expenditure for the 2019/20 Financial Year

Service

 

Expenditure as % of Appropriation

  1.  

ACTUAL EXPENDITURE

  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  

Transfers to Public Entities

155 063

155 063

-

100.0%

UMALUSI

134 634

134 634

-

100.0

ETDP SETA

429

429

-

100.0

SACE

20 000

20 000

-

100.0

Other Transfers

1 398 290

1 394 454

3 836

99.7%

NSFAS: Fundza Lushaka Bursaries

1 224 271

1 224 271

-

100.0

UNESCO Membership Fees

16 295

13 611

2 684

83.5

ADEA

150

151

(1)

100.7

Households

5 244

4 997

247

95.3

Childline South Africa

69

69

-

100.0

Guidance Counseling & Youth Development Centre: Malawi

186

173

13

93.0

SACMEQ

3 480

2 587

893

74.3

NECT

148 595

148 595

-

100.0

           

4.6        ­­Auditor-General Report

The audit outcome of the Department given by Auditor-General of South Africa (AGSA) was a qualified report based on the following:

  1. Capital Commitments – The Department did not disclose the capital commitment in accordance with MCS chapter14, Provisions and contingents. Items were disclosed as capital commitments, despite not meeting the definition of a commitment. As a result, capital commitments as disclosed in note 20 to the financial statements were overstated by R190,309 million (2018-19: R104,043million). It was therefore not possible to quantify the resultant misstatement amount of the ASIDI capital expenditure provision as the Department did not make a reliable estimate of the amount of the liability.
  2. Irregular expenditure – The Department did not include all irregular expenditure in the notes to the financial statements, as required by section 40(3)(b)(i) of the PFMA. This was due to payments made in contravention of the supply chain management requirements, which resulted in irregular expenditure of R41,305 million not being disclosed. Furthermore, as the Department did not have adequate internal controls in place to identify and report on all irregular expenditure, which did not meet the requirements of legislation, it was therefore not possible to determine the full extent of the understatement of irregular expenditure for the current and previous year, as it was impracticable to do so.
  3. Emphasis on Matters:
  4. Uncertainty relating to the future outcome of legislation (note19): TheDepartmentisthedefendantinanumberoflitigationmatters.Theultimateoutcomeofthematterscouldnotbedeterminedandnoprovisionforanyliabilitythatmayresultwasmadeinthefinancialstatements.
  5. Restatement of corresponding figures (note36): The corresponding figures for 31March2019 were restated as a result of an error in the financial statements of the department at, and for the year ended, 31March2020.
  6. Irregular and fruitless and wasteful expenditure (notes25and26): The Department incurred irregular expenditure of R695,767 million and fruitless and wasteful expenditure of R76,992 million. The irregular expenditure was mostly as a result of proper tender process not followed and the fruitless and wasteful expenditure mostly as a result of stopped immovable tangible capital asset projects as a result of school mergers and rationalisation processes.
  7. Restatement of corresponding figures: Asdisclosedinnote36tothefinancialstatements,thecorrespondingfiguresfor31March2019wererestatedasaresultofanerrorinthefinancialstatementsofthedepartmentat,andfortheyearended,31March2020.
  8. Subsequent events:Attentionisdrawntonote31inthefinancialstatements,whichdealswithsubsequenteventsandspecificallythepossibleeffectsofthefutureimplicationsofCovid-19ontheDepartment’sfutureperformancewithregardstoschool infrastructure delivery.Theopinionisnotmodifiedinrespectofthis matter.
  9. Fruitless and wasteful expenditure: Asdisclosedinnote26to thefinancialstatements,theDepartmentincurredfruitlessandwastefulexpenditureofR76,992million.Thefruitlessandwastefulexpenditurewasmostlyasaresultofstoppedimmovabletangiblecapitalassetprojectsasaresultofschoolmergersandrationalisationprocesses.Asdisclosedinnote26tothefinancialstatements,fruitlessandwastefulexpenditureofR65,968millionthatwasincurredwasstillunderinvestigation.
    1. Responses on COVID-19 Related Procurement by the Department: The Auditor-General found that the national department procured PPE items at prices higher than those prescribed in the instruction notes to an amount of R219 829,60 (as identified by AGSA) through its private party as part of the public-private partnership contract. To remedy the situation, the Department commissioned an investigation on the matter. In future, the PPP would not be used for the procurement of goods and services that fall outside the PPP contract.

 

 

  1. Financial Report: First Quarter Expenditure 2020/21

 

The total Appropriation budge of the Department for the 2020/21 financial year before the Special Budget Adjustments amounted to R25.328 billion. The revised budget will be reflected in the Second Quarter or once the Bill has been approved. A total of was allocated to transfer payments as follows:

  • Conditional Grants: R19.564 billion;
  • Transfers to Public Entities: R157.4 million; and
  • Other Transfers: R1.429 billion.

The remainder of the budget (R4.178 billion) was allocated to the following:

  • Compensation of Employees: R509.9 million;
  • Examiners and Moderators: R24.8 million;
  • Earmarked Funds: R1.284 billion;
  • Office Accommodation: R220.2 million;
  • Specifically, and Exclusively Appropriated: R1.736 billion;
  • Departmental Operations: R189.1 million; and
  • Departmental Projects: R213.9 million.

The total actual expenditure of the Department for the 2020/21 financial year first quarter amounted to R7.261 billion. Expenditure amounting to R7.400 billion was made up of transfer payments as follows:

  • Conditional Grants: R6.031 billion;
  • Transfers to Public Entities: R39.2 million; and
  • Other Transfers: R1.330 billion.

The remainder of the expenditure (R221.0 million) was made up as follows:

  • Compensation of Employees: R107.1 million;
  • Examiners and Moderators: R1.1 million;
  • Earmarked Funds: R9.1 million;
  • Office Accommodation: R35.7 million;
  • Specifically, and Exclusively Appropriated: R29.9 million;
  • Departmental Operations: R20.1 million; and
  • Departmental Projects: R17.9 million.

4.7.1     Allocation against Actual Expenditure per Programme for the 2020/21 Financial Year

  •  
  1.  

Expenditure as % of Appropriation

  1.  

ACTUAL EXPENDITURE

  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  

Administration

519 401

90 436

428 965

17.41%

Curriculum Policy, Support and Monitoring

2 025 646

147 249

1 878 397

7.27%

Teachers, Education Human Resources Development and Institutional Development

1 437 738

1 312 761

124 977

91.31%

Planning, Information and Assessment

13 355 974

3 443 769

9 912 205

25.78%

Educational Enrichment Services

7 989 473

2 627 024

5 362 449

32.88%

Total

25 328 232

7 621 239

17 706 993

30.09%

 

In comparing 2019/2020, the appropriation budget for the department for 2020/2021 financial years amounted to R25. 33 billion. The expenditure for the First Quarter amounted to R 7.6 billion or 30.9% of the available budget, compared to the spending of 33,9 percent in 2019/2020. The 2019/2020 First Quarter spending ofR8 .3billion was higher comparedwith the DepartmentFirst quarter spendingof 2020/2021, which amounted to R7.6 billion.The revised budget will be reflected in the second quarter once the bill has been approved.

 

4.7.1.1        Reasons for Programmes Expenditure

  • Programme 2: Curriculum Policy, Support and Monitoring: The bulk of the allocation on this programme is Conditional Grants (Mathematics, Science and Learners with Profound Intellectual Disabilities), Workbooks and Matric Second Chance.
    • Conditional Grants - The transfers scheduled during the quarter under review were made as per approved payment schedule. It should be noted that the first quarterly transfer for Mathematics and Science was only 10 percent. The reason for low transfer on the grant is due to the fact that provinces begin their procurement processes (tender bids, etc.) during the third to fourth quarter. For the first and second quarters provinces are busy with Supply Chain processes.
    • Workbooks - The low spending on workbooks is attributed to the timing of the printing and distribution. The printing of Grade R to 9 workbooks volume 1 for 2021 academic year will be completed before the end of August 2020. The invoices for the printing are expected at the end of August 2020.  The picking and packing for delivery to schools will start from 18 August 2020.
    • Matric Second Chance - The low spending on this programme is mainly due to the impact of lockdown as implemented in March 2020. The cost drivers of the project emanate from payment of claims for Educators who are providing face to face teaching. The face to face teaching will resume on 1 September 2020. Should the face to face method of teaching not give the desirable outcome, the Department will look into other methods that can reach learners under the current restricted circumstances.
  • Programme 3: Teachers, Education Human Resources Development and Institutional Development:
    • NSFAS Transfer – The high spending in this programme is due to the once off transfer payment to NSFAS for the Funza Lushaka Bursaries of students who choose teaching as a career in various universities.

 

4.7.2     Allocation Against Actual Expenditure Per Economic Classifications for the 2020/21 Financial Year

ECONOMIC CLASSIFICATIONS

  1.  

Expenditure as % of Appropriation

  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  

Compensation of Employees

584 252

116 854

467 398

20.00%

Goods and Services

2 042 142

67 291

1 974 851

3.30%

Interest and rent on land

42 418

7 191

35 227

16.95%

Transfers and Subsidies

21 150 175

7 400 317

13 749 858

34.99%

Payment for Capital Assets

1 509 245

29 586

1 479 659

1.96%

  •  

25 328 232

7 621 239

17 706 993

30.09%

 

4.7.2.1  Reasons for Economic Classifications Expenditure

  • Compensation of employees: The low spending on this item was influenced by the moratorium on filling of posts that was put in place pending the finalisation of the Department’s revised organisational structure. The Department has submitted the proposed organisational structure to DPSA and is awaiting a response.
  • Goods and services: The low spending is as a result of Workbooks, Matric Second Chance and reduced travelling and accommodation for oversight monitoring visits to Provinces due to the effect of COVID 19 lockdown regulations.
  • Transfers and Subsidies: The high spending is due to the once off transfer payment to NSFAS for Funza Lushaka Bursaries. Other transfers (NECT, SACE and UMALUSI) were made as projected.
  • Payments of Capital Assets: The spending on this item is driven by the School Infrastructure Backlog Grant. Due to the impact of COVID-19, most of the construction companies were closed and no constructions was taking place. However, due to the easing of some lockdown regulations, the construction has resumed and expenditure will accelerate from the second quarter of the financial year.

 

4.7.3     Allocation against Actual Expenditure for the 2020/21 Financial Year

ECONOMIC CLASSIFICATIONS

  1.  

Expenditure as % of Appropriation

  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  

Compensation of Employees

509 942

107 077

402 865

21.00%

Examiners and Moderators

24 774

1 131

23 643

4.57%

Transfers to Public Entities

157 363

39 228

118 135

24.93%

Other Transfers

1 428 533

1 330 185

98 348

  93.12%

Conditional Grants

19 564 279

6 030 904

13 533 375

30.83%

Schools Infrastructure Backlogs Indirect Grant

1 736 413

29 941

1 706 472

1.72%

Earmarked Funds

1 283 628

9 137

1 274 491

0.71%

Departmental Operations

189 126

20 072

169 054

10.61%

Office Accommodation

220 177

35 655

184 522

16.19%

Projects

213 997

17 909

196 088

8.37%

Total

25 328 232

7 621 239

17 706 993

30.09%

 

4.7.3.1  Challenges (Deviations) and Mitigatory Measures

  • Examiners and Moderators: The expenditure of this item accelerate in the 3 and 4 quarter after the Grade 12 examinations have been completed. However, due to the revised examination of 2020 for Grade 12, it is anticipated that the expenditure will probably accelerate in the last quarter of the financial year.
  • Schools Infrastructure Backlogs Indirect Grant: The spending on this item is driven by the School Infrastructure Backlog Grant. Due to the impact of COVID 19, most of the construction companies were closed and no construction was taking place. However, due to the easing of some lockdown regulations, the construction has resumed and expenditure will accelerate from the second quarter of the financial year.
  • Earmarked funds: This allocation includes Workbooks and Matric Second Chance. As indicated in previous slides, the spending on these items is expected to improve in the second and third quarter of the financial year. It should also be noted that due to travel restrictions, oversight and monitoring visits could not take place.

 

4.7.4     Details of Earmarked Allocations/Conditional Grants for the 2020/21 Financial Year

  1.  
  1.  

Expenditure as % of Appropriation

  1.  

ACTUAL EXPENDITURE

  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  

Earmarked funds:

1 283 628

9 137

1 274 491

0.71%

Workbooks

1 191 884

2 107

1 189 777

0.18%

Matric Second Chance Programme

60 805

1 739

59 066

2.86%

Maths,Science and Technology Oversight grant

6 538

770

5 768

11.78%

National School Nutrition Programme Oversightgrant

21 236

3 983

17 253

18.76%

Learners with Profound Intellectual Disabilities Oversight grant

3 165

538

2 627

17.00%

Conditional Grants:

19 564 279

6 030 904

13 533 375

30.83%

Education Infrastructure Grant

11 007 967

3 302 389

7 705 578

30.00%

HIV & Aids (LifeSkills) conditional grant

246 699

24 668

222 031

10.00%

Maths, Science and Technology conditional grant

400 862

40 083

360 779

10.00%

Nat School Nutrition Progconditional grant

7 665 887

2 590 904

5 074 983

33.80%

Learners with Profound Intellectual Disabilityconditional grant

242 864

72 860

170 004

30.00%

 

4.7.4.1  Challenges (Deviations) and Mitigatory Measures

  • Workbooks - The low spending on Workbooks is attributed to the timing of the printing and distribution. The printing of Grade R to 9 workbooks volume 1 for 2021 academic year will be completed before the end of August 2020. The invoices for the printing are expected the end of August 2020. The picking and packing for delivery to schools will start from 18 August 2020.
  • Matric Second Chance - The low spending on this programme is mainly due to the impact of lockdown as implemented in March 2020. The cost drivers on this project emanate from payment of claims for Educators who are providing face to face teaching. The face to face teaching will resume on 1 September 2020. Should the face to face method of teaching not give the desirable outcome, the Department will look into other methods that can reach learners under the current restricted circumstances.
  • Conditional Grants - All the conditional grants transfers were made as scheduled.

 

4.7.5     Details of Transfers against Actual Expenditure for the 2020/21 Financial Year

SERVICE

2020/21

Expenditure as % of Appropriation

APPROPRIATION

ACTUAL EXPENDITURE

VARIANCE

R’000

R’000

R’000

Transfers to Public Entities

157 363

39 228

118 135

24.93%

UMALUSI

139 172

34 793

104 379

25.00%

ETDP SETA

453

-

453

0.0%

SACE

17 738

4 435

13 303

25.00%

Other Transfers

1 428 533

1 330 185

98 348

93.12%

NSFAS: Fundza Lushaka Bursaries

1 291 606

1 291 606

-

100.00%

UNESCO Membership Fees

17 091

-

17 091

0.00%

ADEA

158

-

158

0.00%

Childline South Africa

73

0

73

0.00%

Guidance Counseling & Youth Development Centre: Malawi

196

0

196

0.00%

 SACMEQ

3 671

-

3 671

0.00%

NECT

115 738

38 579

77 159

33.33%

 

4.7.5.1  Reasons for Transfers and Subsidies

  • Other Transfers: Most of the transfers are done in the last quarter of the financial year. The expenditure for this item will escalate in the last quarter.
  • Funza Lushaka: Transfers to Universities are done as scheduled as this transfer is a once off payment.
  • Transfer to Public Entities: These transfers were processed as scheduled.

 

  1. Portfolio Committee Observation

 

4.8.1   Technical Issues overall performance   and reporting

The Committee queried the low targets set for certain Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) and questioned the importance of some of these KPI’s.

It was also queried whether the Department would consider specific legislation for Learners with Special Education Needs (LSEN) – could this be incorporated into the BELA Bill.

 

 

4.8.2   Audit Outcomes

The Committee agreed that the year was not easy and there were targets that the Department could not reach. Members were concerned with issues pertaining to Fruitless and Wasteful Expenditure reported and queried the status of investigations by the Department. Members requested that the Committees be kept abreast of the developments.

 

 

4.8.3 Financial Issues

The Committee noted that the financial controls of the Department did not improve much and queried the plans in place to improve on this as per the AGSA findings. Further to this, the Committee ordered that the Department ensure adequate consequence management was in place to deal with errand officials.

 

 

 

4.8.4 Performance   Per Programme

  • Programme 2:

It was noted that many learners returned from the Spring Camps and may have contracted the virus there. The Committee queried whether the Department was able to test all learners for possible infection.  Regarding the Matric Second Chance Programme, the Committee queried whether the Department was looking to grant an extension of the programme. Also

queried was the status of the General Education Certificate and when it would be implemented.

The Committee queried whether the Department would consider automatic promotion of learners to the next Grade if they failed to pass their examinations.

The Committee also requested that the Department considered a toll-free line for anyone to report matters in respect of COVID-19.

Clarity question was raised on the powers of the SGBs in respect of the appointment of school principals. The Committee cautioned that the Department investigate schools who had not distributed learners 2nd and 3rd term report cards.

 

  • Programme 3:

The Committee raised a concern that many Funza Lushaka Bursars were not studying the Stem Subjects. Also queried was how bursaries were being awarded.

The Committee noted the appointment of the HOD in the Western Cape Department of Education who was over 65-year-old. Members queried how this could be allowed and what steps could the Department take on the matter.

Committee also queried the engagements with Organised Labour in relation to teachers having to invigilate learners who may be positive to the Corona virus.

 

  • Programme 4:

The Committeequeried the progress in respect of water and sanitation projects and the backlogs being addressed by the Department. In respect of Full Service Schools, Members queried the number of schools, to date, that have been converted to functional Full Service Schools.

 

 

 

 

4.9   Responses from the Department of Basic Education

DBE mentioned that as a Department, they had visited over 200 schools over the nine provinces to gage the readiness and Curriculum Coverage of schools. The Department was encouraged that all schools indicated 100 percent Curriculum Coverage. Officials from the Department further engaged and motivated learners for the upcoming final examinations. Learners had the availability of psychosocial services if they felt anxious about the examinations. The Department ensured there were school-based and district-based support teams to assist and support learners. The Department was of the view that since the June exams did not occur, schools were required to make available third-term report cards to learners. DBE had been in engagements with the University Forum on the matter of report cards to be submitted with university applications.

 

The Department had the use of two toll-free hotlines – one within the Department and one linked to the Presidency toll-free hotline. DBE also explained the powers of SGBs in that they only made recommendations in respect of appointment of principals – it was the HOD who looked at the recommendations and made appointments.

 

The Department, according to the AGSA Report, had done all the necessary investigations and consequence management meted out were applicable. DBE agreed that there were weaknesses in financial controls and explained some of the fruitless and wasteful expenditure that may have occurred as well as current/ongoing investigations by the Department. The Department was looking to ensure all taxpayers money could be recovered.

 

The Department was aware of Funza Lushaka Bursars who may change their respective study fields in the course of their studies. The Department was closely monitoring all Funza Lushaka Bursars – and bursaries could be withdrawn if bursars changed course.

 

Although the Department was due to present to the Committees in the near future on issues of the Matric Second Chance Programme, DBE indicated that programme would be extended into the new year.The department did not agree that there was a need for specific legislation for Learners with Special Education Needs (LSEN) as this was sufficiently catered for in the SA Schools Act. There was a need to relook at the Norms and Standards for funding LSEN. The Department would also be presenting to the Committee in respect of Inclusive Education to include Full Service Schools.

 

The department gave a broad overview of the current and future ASIDI projects in respect of water and sanitation in collaboration with the SAFE Programme.

 

4.10 Portfolio Committee Recommendations

During the interaction on above,the   Committees ordered  that the Minister of Basic Education should ensure that the Department of Basic Education consider these recommendations:

 

  • Ensure that Fruitless and Wasteful expenditure be investigated and monies be recovered where possible. Harsh consequence management be meted out to those errand officials within the Department. The Department should   keep the Committees abreast of these developments.
  • Ensure that Internal Control measures and Financial Controls are strengthened.
  • Ensure that backlogs in respect of water and sanitation are addressed as a matter of urgency.
  • Ensure that the Matric Second Chance Programme is granted an extension to continue support to learners.
  • The Committeesmust be kept abreast of developments in respect of the implementation of the General Education Certificate.

 

5.  Summary of Programme Performance in the Budget Review and Recommendations Report

 

5.1        Overview of overall programme performance

The Department’s Programmes, with their related achievement against the performance targets (direct outputs and system targets) for the 2019/20 financial year, are shown in Table 3. Overall performance for the previous financial years is shown at the bottom of Table 3.

 

Table 1: The Department’s programme performance for the 2019/20 financial year

PROGRAMMES

Number of Indicators per Program

APP Targets 2019/20

Achieved

Not Achieved

% Achieved

%

Budget Spent

1. Administration

2

1

2

 

100%

98.3%

2. Curriculum

14

9

12

2

86%

96.7%

 

3. Teachers Education

HRD and

Institutional Dev

10

4

10

 

100%

98.8%

4. Planning Information and Assessment

12

8

8

3

66%

96%

 

5. Educational Enrichment Services

5

2

5

 

100%

99.9%

 

TOTAL

43

24

37

5

86%

97.5%

 

During the year under review, the Department had a total of 43 predetermined targets, and 24 Annual Performance targets. The  system   targets were spread across the five delivery programmes as follows: Administration: 2, Curriculum :14, Teachers Education Human Resource and Institutional Development: 10, Planning and Information :12, and Educational Enrichment:5. The Department achieved 37 of 43 direct outputs, translating into 86% achievement. Annual Performance improved by 1%   from 85% in 2018/19 to 86% in 2019/20. Programme :2: Curriculum   achieved 86% slight regression compared   to 89,5% achieved in 2018/19. Programme 4:  Planning Information and Assessment has recorded a significant regression in performance on direct outputs from 72% in 2018/19 to 66% in 2019/20. In relation to system targets, the Department achieved 37 of the 43 targets, translating into 86% achievement.

 

            5.2        Performance Per Programme

5.2.1     Programme One: Administration – This Programme is responsible for the managing the Department and the providing strategic and administrative support services. Within this Programme, the Department had one quarterly and one annual performance indicators as follows:

  1. Quarterly Performance Indicator
  • Percentage of service providers within the procurement unit paid within 30 days - The target was set at 100 percent but the Department actual achievement was 99.55 percent. A negative deviation of 0.45 percent. The deviation was due to project managers not signing off invoices on time.

 

  1. Annual Performance Indicator
  • Number of reports on misconduct cases resolved within 90 days - The target was set at four reports annually and the Department achieved this target with no deviation.

The Department reported on further progress made in the key focus areas in Programme One for 2019/20, which included the following, amongst others:   

  • Human Resources;
  • Strategic Planning and Reporting;
  • Strategic Planning, Research and Co-ordination;
  • Media Liaison and National and Provincial Communication;
  • Internal Audit; and
  • Office of the Director-General.

 

5.2.2  Programme Two: Curriculum Policy, Support and Monitoring – This Programme is responsible for the development of curriculum and assessment policies and monitor and support their implementation. Within this Programme, the Department had 14 performance indicators – four quarterly, one bi-annual and nine annual targets as follows:

 

  1. Annual Performance Indicators
  • Number of schools per province monitored for utilisation of ICT resources - The annual target was set at 27 schools per province and the Department’s actual achievement was 27 schools with no deviation.
  • Number of off-line digital content resources developed - The annual target was set at 10 resources developed and the Department’s actual achievement was 10 resources developed with no deviation.
  • Percentage of public schools with Home Language workbooks for learners in Grades 1 to 6 - The annual target was set at 100 percent and Department’s actual achievement was 100 percent (17 236 of 17 236) with no deviation.
  • Percentage of public schools with Mathematics workbooks for learners in Grades 1 to 9 - The annual target was set at 100 percent and the Department’s actual achievement was 100 percent (16 317 of 16 317) with no deviation.
  • Percentage of public schools with workbooks for Grade R - The annual target was set at 100 percent and the Department’s actual achievement was 100 percent (16 317 of 16 317) with no deviation.
  • Number of schools monitored on the implementation of the reading norms - The annual target was set at 20 schools and the Department’s actual achievement was 20 schools with no deviation.
  • Number of schools monitored on the implementation of the Incremental Introduction to African Languages nationally - The annual target was set at 20 schools and the Department’s actual achievement was 20 schools with no deviation.
  • Number of underperforming schools monitored on the implementation of the Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) - The annual target was set at 100 schools monitored and the Department’s actual achievement was 100 schools monitored with no deviation.
  • Number of Children/ Learners with Severe to Profound Intellectual Disability (C/LSPID) using the CAPS Grade R-5 for SID and Learning Programme for C/LSPID – The annual target was set at 3 327 and the Department’s actual achievement was 8 855 (4308 PID + 4547 SID). This was a positive deviation of 5 528.

 

  1. Quarterly Performance Indicators
  • Number of training sessions of CAPS for Technical subjects monitored - The annual target was set at five quarterly and the Department’s actual achievement was only three with a negative deviation of two. The deviation was due to the Limpopo and North West provinces cancelling the training sessions due to Service Level Agreements (SLAs) not signed with the service providers, hence the planned monitoring could not take place.
  • Number of Technical schools monitored for implementation of CAPS - The annual target was set at 18 quarterly and the Department’s actual achievement was 18 with no deviations.
  • Number of schools with Multi-Grade classes implementing the Multi-Grade Toolkit monitored - The annual target was set at 72 quarterly and the Department’s actual achievement was 72 with no deviations.
  • Number of advocacy campaigns conducted on the Rural Education Policy in the provinces - The annual target was set at nine quarterly and the Department’s actual achievement was only six campaigns conducted – a negative deviation of three. The deviation was due to visits to the Eastern Cape and Western Cape being scheduled for Quarter Four, but due to continued postponement on request of the provinces, they could not happen and were eventually cancelled due to lockdown.

 

  1. Bi-Annual Performance Indicators
  • Number of learners obtaining subject passes towards a National Senior Certificate (NSC) or extended Senior Certificate, including upgraded NSC per year – The planned target was set at 30 000 bi-annually and the Department’s actual achievement was 40 531 learners. This was a positive deviation of 10 531as more learners registered for the programme and support/resources were provided.

The Department reported on further progress made in the key focus areas in Programme Two for 2019/20, which included the following, amongst others:     

  • Learning and Teaching Support Materials;
  • Mathematics, Science and Technology;
  • Curriculum Innovation and e-Learning;
  • Rural Education;
  • Quality Provisioning of Early Childhood Development;
  • Further Education and Training;
  • General Education and Training;
  • Inclusive Education; and
  • Second Chance Matric Programme.

 

 

5.2.3      Programme Three: Education Human Resources and Institutional Development – This Programme is responsible for promoting quality teaching and institutional performance through the effective supply, development and utilization of human resources. Within this Programme, the Department had 10 performance indicators – four annual and six quarterly targets as follows:

 

  1. Annual Performance Indicators
  • Percentage of School Governing Bodies (SGBs) that meet minimum criteria in terms of effectiveness - The annual target was set at 80 percent of 2 000 sampled SGBs and the Department’s actual achievement was 97.05 percent (1 941 of 2 000). This was a positive deviation of 17.05 percent.
  • Percentage of schools producing the minimum set of management documents at a required standard - The annual target was set at 90 percent of 2 000 sampled SGBs and the Department’s actual achievement was 98.3 percent (1 966 of 2 000). This was a positive deviation of 8.3 percent.
  • Number of Funza Lushaka bursaries awarded to students enrolled for initial teacher education - The annual target was set at 13 000 bursaries awarded, and the Department’s actual achievement was 12 954 bursaries awarded. A negative deviation of 46. The deviation was due to bursary holders that have either failed to register, cancelled the bursary of became deceased during the reporting period.
  • Number of PEDs that had their post provisioning process assessed for compliance with the post provisioning Norms and Standards - The annual target was set at nine PEDs and the Department’s actual achievement was nine PEDs with no deviation.

 

  1. Quarterly Performance Indicators
  • Number of English First Additional Language (EFAL) diagnostic analysis reports produced - The target was set at four quarterly reports and the Department’s actual achievement was four reports with no deviation.
  • Number of Physical Science diagnostic analysis reports produced - The target was set at four quarterly reports and the Department’s actual achievement was four reports with no deviation.
  • Number of Accounting diagnostic analysis reports produced - The target was set at four quarterly reports and the Department’s actual achievement was four reports with no deviation.
  • Number of Mathematics diagnostic analysis reports produced - The target was set at four quarterly reports and the Department’s actual achievement was four reports with no deviation.
  • Number of PEDs monitored on implementation of IQMS - The target was set at six quarterly and the Department’s actual achievement was seven, a positive deviation of one.
  • Number of PEDs monitored on implementation of PMDS - The target was set at six quarterly and the Department’s actual achievement was seven, a positive deviation of one.

The Department reported on further progress made in the key focus areas in Programme Three for 2019/20, which included the following, amongst others:        

  • Educator Performance Management and Development and Whole School Evaluation;
  • Education Human Resource Planning, Provisioning and Monitoring;
  • Filling of teacher posts;
  • Funza Lushaka Placements 2019;
  • Education Labour Relations and Conditions of Service;
  • Initial Teacher Education;
  • Curriculum Research;
  • Education Management and Governance Development;
  • Continuing Professional Teacher Development;
  • Learning and Teaching Support Materials Policy Development and Innovation; and
  • Teacher Development Implementation.

 

5.2.4     Programme Four: Planning, Information and Assessment – This Programme is responsible for promoting quality and effective service delivery in the basic education system through planning, implementation and assessment. Within this Programme, the Department had 12performance indicators – eight annual, three quarterly and one biennial indicators as follows:

 

  1. Annual Performance Indicators
  • Number of General Education and Training (GET) Test items in Language and Mathematics for Grade 3,6 & 9 developed – The annual target was set at 250 and the Department’s actual achievement stood at 3 461 – a positive deviation of 3 211.
  • Number of National Senior Certificate (NSC) reports produced - The annual target was set at four reports and the Department’s actual achievement was four reports with no deviation.
  • Number of question papers set annually for NSC and Senior Certificate (SC)- The target was set at 290 question papers and the Department’s actual achievement was 292, a positive deviation of two question papers.
  • Percentage of public schools using the school administration system, South African School Administration and Management system (SA-SAMS) for reporting - The target was set 98 percent and the Department’s actual achievement was 98.2 percent, a positive deviation of 0.2 percent.
  • Number of provinces monitored by DBE officials for implementation of Learner Unit Record Information and Tracking System (LURITS) annually - The target was set nine provinces and the Department’s actual achievement was nine provinces with no deviation.
  • Number of officials from districts that achieved below the national benchmark in the National Senior Certificate (NSC) participating in a mentoring programme - The target was set 30 and the Department’s actual achievement was 40, a positive deviation of 10.
  • Percentage of district managers assessed against developed criteria - The target was set 90 percent and the Department’s actual achievement was 100 percent, a positive deviation of 10 percent.
  • Percentage of underperforming schools visited at least twice a year by district officials for monitoring and support purposes - The target was set 60 percent and the Department’s actual achievement was only four percent, a positive negative deviation of 56 percent. The negative deviation was due to the low response rate from provinces. School visits were only reported in four provinces i.e. Eastern Cape, Free State, Mpumalanga and North West. In the majority of cases received data/evidence were not properly packaged in line with the Technical Indicator Descriptor.

 

  1. Quarterly Performance Indicators
  • Number of new schools built and completed through Accelerated School Infrastructure Delivery Initiative (ASIDI) - The target was set at 40 quarterly and the Department’s actual achievement was only 26, a negative deviation of 14 schools. The negative deviation was due to the underperformance by contractors appointed by Implementing Agents (IA)and due to the poor SMME component in their contracts.The disruptive actions of the Eastern Cape Black Contractors Association (ECBCA) delayed projects that were targeted to be completed in this period.
  • Number of schools provided with sanitation facilities through ASIDI - The target was set at 717 schools and the Department’s actual achievement was only 103 schools, a negative deviation of 614 schools. The negative deviation was due to delays in obtaining approval for use of National Education Collaboration Trust (NECT) and Department of Environmental Affairs as implementing agents on Sanitation Appropriate for Education (SAFE) projects.
  • Number of schools provided with water through ASIDI - The target was set at 225 schools and the Department’s actual achievement was only 89 schools, a negative deviation of 136 schools. The negative deviation was due to the procurement process by the IDT, Eastern Cape to establish a database of contractors for a period of three years under their Contract Development Programme (CDP) for the appointment of replacement contractors for 136 projects that was found to be non-compliant with SCM prescripts, with the result that contractors could not be appointed to implement the projects as this would have been irregular.

 

  1. Biennial Performance Indicator
  • Percentage of school principals rating the support services of districts as being satisfactory - The biennial performance indicator had a nil report.

The Department reported on further progress made in the key focus areas in Programme Four for 2019/20, which included the following, amongst others:    

  • Examinations and Assessment in School;
  • Grant Management;
  • Educational Management Information Systems;
  • Financial Planning and Provincial Budget Monitoring;
  • Economic Analysis;
  • Project Management;
  • Partnerships; and
  • International Relations and Multilateral Affairs;
  • South African National Commission of UNESCO;
  • District Level and School Level Planning and Implementation Support; and
  • National Education Evaluation and Development Unit.

 

5.2.5    Programme Five: Education Enrichment Services – This Programme is responsible for developing policies and programmes to improve the quality of learning in schools. Within this Programme, the Department had five performance indicators – three quarterly and two annual indicators as follows:

 

  1. Quarterly Performance Indicators
  • Number of schools monitored for the provision of nutritious meals - The quarterly target was set at 110 schools and the Department actual achievement was 146 schools, a positive deviation of 36 schools.
  • Number of learners, teachers, officials, SGBs and community organisation members participating in social cohesion and gender equity programmes - The quarterly target was set at 7 500 and the Department actual achievement was 7 510, a positive deviation of 10.
  • Number of Hot Spot Schools monitored towards Implementation of the NSSF - The quarterly target was set at 48 hot spot schools and the Department actual achievement was 79 hot spot schools. This was a positive deviation of 31 hot spot schools.

 

  1. Annual Performance Indicators
  • Number of professionals trained in SASCE programmes - The annual target was set at 900 professionals and the Department actual achievement was only 884, a negative deviation of 16 professionals. The negative deviation was due to Limpopo not hosting the capacity-building workshops.
  • Number of PEDs with approved annual business plans for the HIV/Aids Life Skills Education Programme - The annual target was set at nine PEDs and the Department actual achievement was nine PEDs with no deviation.

The Department reported on further progress made in the key focus areas in Programme Five for 2019/20, which included the following, amongst others:   

  • School nutrition;
  • Psychosocial support;
  • Health promotion;
  • Safety in Schools;
  • Partnerships in Education; and
  • Social Cohesion and Gender Equity.

 

6.         Assessment of the 2019/20 performance of the Statutory Bodies and Other Entities

 

  1.  

 

The role and function of the FFC, is to look at the infrastructure and educational outcomes as well as the policy and service delivery context.

 

  1. Apart from other key determinants of educational outcomes such as: household and individual characteristics (parental education, socio-economic status, age of learner), teachers, classroom resources as well as community and district factors (geographical area, poverty levels), school infrastructurehad an essential role to play in addressing issues related to access and educational quality.
    • The quality of school infrastructure, especially in respect of the physical conditions of school buildings could influence attendance and drop-out rates
    • Good school infrastructure could also impact teacher motivation 

Generally, in South Africa, social infrastructure such as schools, hospitals, housing were funded mainly by the government through different conditional grants. In the education sector, the Education Infrastructure Grant and the School Infrastructure Backlogs Grant were the key intergovernmental tools that fund basic education infrastructure.

6.1.2     Minimum Norms and Standards for School Infrastructure - The norms and standards stipulate the basic level of infrastructure that every school must meet in order to function properly. The norms and standards provide timeframes within which school infrastructure backlogs must be met. The regulations require the Provincial MEC to report annually to the Minister of Basic Education on plans to address backlogs at district level in the province and thereafter to report on its implementation. The regulations also specify that these provincial plans should include short, medium and long term plans with targets to reduce backlogs and the proper costing thereof. Based on the essential role that school infrastructure plays in addressing issues related to access and educational quality, the Commission’s view is that regulations on norms and standards for school infrastructure will go a long way in enhancing teaching effectiveness and improving student learner outcomes.

6.1.3     Targets around School Infrastructure

Dimension of Infrastructure

Implementation Timeframe

Anticipated Date for Achievement of Milestone

All schools built entirely from mud or asbestos or metal or wood

3 years from date of publication (end 2013)

2016

All schools that do not have access to any form of power supply, water supply or sanitation

Availability of classrooms, electricity, water, sanitation, electronic connectivity, perimeter security

7 years from date of publications (end 2013)

2020

Libraries and laboratories for science, technology and life sciences

10 years from date of publication (end 2013)

2023

Compliance with all other norms and standards

before 31st December 2030 (end 2013)

 

 

6.1.4     Progress in Respect of Targets on Infrastructure - In terms of access to basic infrastructure such as water, sanitation, electricity, improvements were noted. For example, in 2018, the NIEMS reported 37 schools in the Eastern Cape had no sanitation facilities – according to the 2019 report there are no schools without some form of sanitation. The quality of basic infrastructure requires attention – 16 percent of schools in SA record pit latrines as their only source of ablution facility. A majority of schools did not have laboratory and library facilities and to a lesser extent sports facilities. The continued neglect in provision of this type of infrastructure would impact other outcomes for example: promotion of healthy lifestyles, improving literacy levels, building of skills required for the knowledge economy. The extent to which schools lack these facilities varied by province:

  • In terms of sports facilities: 65 percent of schools in Eastern Cape and 54 percent of schools in KwaZulu-Natal did not have any sports facilities;
  • In terms of laboratory facilities: 94 percent of schools in Limpopo and 93 percent of schools in Eastern Cape did not have laboratory facilities; and
  • In terms of library facilities:  92 percent of schools in Eastern Cape, 84 percent of schools in Limpopo did not have library facilities.

 

6.1.5     Expenditure Patterns in Respect of the Main Education Infrastructure Programmes

6.1.5.1  Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative (ASIDI) – The Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative (ASIDI) was introduced in 2011/12 and aimed at:

  • Eliminating backlogs in school infrastructure;
  • Upgrading schools to meet the standards prescribed by the Norms and Standards for Schools Infrastructure; and
  • Eradicating inadequate, unsafe and poor physical infrastructure by using allocated funds properly.

Funding for ASIDI flowed to the DBE through the Schools Infrastructure Backlog Grant (SIBG) allocations. The SIBG was established with intention of being a high impact, temporary intervention and was scheduled to end in 2017/18. In 2018/19 SIBG merged with Education Infrastructure Grant (EIG) and would continue running in order to complete projects underway or in the pipeline. The SIBG was an indirect grant i.e. it was spent by the National Department of Basic Education on behalf of provincial education departments. Since inception, R16.8 billion was allocated in respect of SIBG which was used to fund the ASIDI programme. On average 70 percent (R12.7 billion) of the allocated amount has been spent. Eight years since establishment of ASIDI, progress in meeting targets was slow and variable across the nine provinces. Some of the challenges that relate to ASIDI were as follows:

  • SIBG was an indirect grant, i.e. it is spent by the National Department of Basic Education on behalf of provincial education departments;
  • The Development Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA) and Eskom were the appointed implementing agents for the management of ASIDI projects. DBSA in turn utilised subcontractors who in turn relied on numerous small, medium and micro enterprises (SMMEs) to roll out the school building project. This arrangement complicated and weakened the accountability chain and there was strong oversight required.
  • Some of the challenges that arise due to the nature of indirect grants include:
  • poor communication and sharing of information;
  • disincentives related to implementing agents not being the owner of a project;
  • longer and more complex supply chain management processes which increased the risk for irregularity; and
  • Considering the poor performance of this grant alongside money being invested to establish the requisite built environment skills within provincial education departments, it was time to reconsider this delivery model which relied heavily on implementing agents.

6.1.5.2  Education Infrastructure Grant (EIG) – The Education Infrastructure Grant (EIG) was introduced to:

  • Accelerate the construction, maintenance, upgrading and rehabilitation of new and existing infrastructure in education;
  • Enhance capacity to deliver infrastructure in education;
  • Address damaged education infrastructure; and
  • Assist in ensuring that targets set out in the minimum norms and standards for school infrastructure were met.

The EIG was a Schedule 4 conditional grant to provinces. It was therefore meant to supplement provincial allocations and provinces were required to make contributions from PES. Over the past few years the allocations to EIG had been cut due to fiscal consolidation efforts. Further to this, due to the constrained education budgets, provincial allocations have also come under pressure with the result that provinces were generally relying solely on the EIG and not allocating towards this item from their own revenue. As at 2019/20 data showed that of the total provincial education infrastructure spending, 86 percent came from EIG whilst 14 percent came from provincial contributions – significant variations existed across provinces. The Eastern Cape allocated 0 percent from its PES, Limpopo and North West allocated 0.2 percent from PES and Northern Cape and Free State allocated 1.2 and 1.9 percent from PES respectively. At the other end of the spectrum, Western Cape allocated 36.9 percent and Gauteng 24.4 percent of PES towards total infrastructure spending.

A total of R77 billion was allocated to EIG between 2011/12 and 2019/20. Relative to general spending performance of infrastructure conditional grants, EIG had performed well with actual spending averaging 97 percent between 2011/12 and 2019/20. Improved spending performance notwithstanding, it should be kept in mind that any underspending reflects unproductive use of scarce resources. There should be alignment between financial and non-financial performance. Reasons for underspending include:

  • Capacity constraints in terms of lack of capacity to implement projects, difficulties recruiting;
  • Procurement delays;
  • Poor planning and late payments to contractors;
  • Delayed delivery due to poor contractor performance;
  • Insufficient budgets to meet backlogs; and
  • Vandalism.

 

6.1.5.3  Challenges with the Existing Infrastructure Delivery Model - The status quo for delivering most provincial infrastructure projects separate the planning, budgeting and implementation functions between sector departments and implementing agents, thus distorting incentives and weakening the accountability chain. As an example, projects were often over budget and time overruns were frequent because provincial departments of public works and other implementing agents appointed consultants to design and oversee infrastructure projects, but were not incentivized to properly manage them as the Auditor General did not hold implementing agents accountable for infrastructure spending. Accounting treatment runs contrary to what happens in practice and should be further considered by National Treasury and Accounting Standards Board. The analysis of the infrastructure value-chain revealed that a lack of oversight at key delivery points were increasing incentives to engage in fiscal misappropriation. The FFC noted the disconnect between using implementing agents alongside financial investments to develop internal built environment skills in education departments (in line with the Infrastructure Delivery Management System).

6.1.5.4  Expenditure Patterns in Respect of Non-Infrastructure Conditional Grants - The largest conditional grant was the National School Nutrition Programme Grant and was allocated just over R7.2 billion in 2019/20. The smallest grant was the Learners with Profound Intellectual Disabilities Grant which was allocated R234.8 million in 2019/20. Generally, spending was aligned to allocations but the Maths, Science and Technology (MST) Grant saw significant underspending in 2019/20. About 80 percent of schools did not have access to laboratory facilities. The MST Grant played an important role in terms of providing support and resources to embed the use of ICTs across the Curriculum and grow Maths, Science and Technology. Reasons for underspending had to be addressed.

There was improvement in spending with respect to Learners with Profound Intellectual Disabilities Grant which saw teething problems over the past 2 years. Spending performance was important but more important was whether spending resulted in improved outputs/outcomes.

 

6.1.6     Equity in Education

6.1.6.1  Equity and the National Norms and Standards for School Funding – Through the National Norms and Standards for School Funding, a quintile-based funding approach has been implemented. A five-tiered system was used with Quintile 1 including the neediest schools whilst Quintile 5, the most affluent. Learners in quintiles 1, 2 and 3 did not pay school fees.  This approach aimed to achieve redress and equity through directing greater funding to needier learners. Each year DBE set the target per learner amount for each quintile, which provincial departments of education should adhere to. KwaZulu-Natal had been funding all quintiles below the national threshold amount since 2014. Mpumalanga was funding all quintiles below national threshold since 2016 and the Northern Cape was funding Quintiles 1 to 3 below national threshold since 2015.

6.1.7     FFC Research on Access to Inclusive Education - As part of its submission for the 2021/22 Division of Revenue that was tabled with Parliament in July 2020, the FFC looked at issue of inclusive education. The FFC concluded the following findings:

  • There was a lack of accurate assessment of need and data on inclusive education. Accurate information was needed on the number of learners with special needs and the type of special needs intervention required. The availability, accuracy and quality of financial data on inclusive education was a challenge.
  • Incomplete policy process and emphasis on special needs education. The policy process was incomplete. The Education White Paper 6 was published in 2001 yet no legislation was enacted to give effect to policy aspirations. White Paper 6 tends to conflate inclusive education with special needs education.
  • Capacitating teachers for inclusive education. Ongoing teacher training was needed to assist in determining the need for special needs education. Learners must be assessed in terms of the 2014 Policy on Screening, Identification, Assessment and Support (SIAS). The policy aimed to guide officials/teachers in assessing learners for special needs. The SIAS policy was not yet implemented universally and without proper assessment, schools were unable to adapt their post provisioning to reflect the educator needs of their learners.

The FFC shared their recommendations in respect of Inclusive Education as follows:

  • Alongside finalising legislation to underpin the roll-out of inclusive education, the DBE should take the lead in developing a detailed, time-bound and costed implementation plan that promotes awareness of what inclusive education entails.
  •  As a matter of priority, the DBE together with relevant stakeholders, need to determine the extent of learners with special educational needs. This will assist in ensuring more evidence-based policy-making and implementation. The assessment should be aligned to the 10 domains of support identified in the Education White Paper 6 and all three levels of support.
  • To support the implementation of inclusive education in South Africa, the DBE must spearhead the development of a holistic funding framework to ensure a uniform approach to funding learners with special educational needs, irrespective of the type of school they attend.
  • The DBE must take steps to adjust reporting in order to allow for disaggregation of funding and performance information related to the roll-out of inclusive education.
  • With respect to inclusive education, the DBE and the Department of Higher Education and Training must prioritise the development of teacher capacity at higher education level and as part of ongoing professional development initiatives.

 

  1. Office of the Auditor-General of South Africa (AGSA)

The role as the AGSA was to reflect on the audit work performed to assist the portfolio committee in its oversight role of assessing the performance of the entities in its portfolio, taking into consideration the objective of the Committee to produce a Budget Review and Recommendation Report (BRRR).

 

  1. The audit outcomesfor the portfolio improved as result of Umalusi being unqualified with no findings. The audit of SACE was still ongoing.Financial statement preparation remained a concerns as material adjustments were effected to the annual financial statementssubmitted for audit at DBE. The uncorrected materialmisstatements resulted in the financial statements receiving a qualified audit opinion. The qualified audit opinions for the DBE was mainly dueto control deficiencies regarding monitoring and accounting of the infrastructure programme (ASIDI). The qualification on capitalcommitments was due to items not meeting the definition of commitments included in the balance disclosed. School projects that have already reached practical completion and were in use were still reflected as commitments. In addition, the controls to prevent and detect instances of non-compliances when procuring goods and services were inadequate, as a result the irregular expenditurebalance was incomplete.

 

  1. There was an improvement in financial statements submitted without errors as well as quality of final submission after auditing. There was a regression in respect of the submission of financial statements by the legislated dates.  The analysis excluded SACE for which the audit was still ongoing at the time of reporting. The Umalusi financial statements contained no material errors. DBE obtained a qualified opinion because not all material misstatements identified during the audit could be corrected. Qualification areas for DBE were Capital commitments disclosure and Irregular expenditure disclosure.

 

  1. There was an improvement in performance report submitted without errors as well as quality of final submission after auditing. As management subsequently corrected all of the misstatements, AGSA still reported no material findings on the usefulness and reliability of the reported performance information after auditing. Percentages excluded SACE for which the audit report was still outstanding and was based on two entities in the portfolio where the audits have been finalised.

 

  1. The Department incurred fruitless and wasteful expenditure to the value of R 76.992 million while Umalusi incurred fruitless and wasteful expenditure to the value of R 6.981 million. This was caused by contractor invoices not having been paid timeously, stopped projects, remedial work and fraudulent payments.

 

  1. – The potential fruitless and wasteful expenditure relates to cost incurred for school infrastructure projects that were subsequently discontinued, for example due to schools no longer being viable and rationalisation processes and mergers. Included for both years was R10,689 million relating to the Kha Ri Gude project currently under investigation by the Hawks (stipend payments to volunteers). The investigation into potential fruitless and wasteful expenditure was still ongoing as at 31 March 2020 and the expenditure did not form part of the main note of fruitless and wasteful expenditure.

 

  1. The 100 percent Irregular Expenditure (IE) in the current and previous year was as a result of contravention of SCM legislation. The Department received a qualification on the completeness of IE. The full extent of the understatement of IE for the current and previous year could not be determined, as it was impracticable to do so.

 

6.2.7     Potential Irregular Expenditure (DBE – R 165.246 million) – The potential IE relates to costs incurred for school infrastructure projects in excess of the approved and contracted amount. Included in the amount for 2018-19 is R379 million relating to ten (10) school infrastructure projects under investigation by the SIU regarding allegations of procurement and contracting irregularities, of which the investigation was concluded during the 2019/20 financial year.

 

6.2.8     Supply Chain Management (SCM) – There was an improvement in SCM compliance for 2019/20. AGSA was of the view that all SCM findings should be investigated. The most common SCM findings included:

  • Regulation on procurement of commodities designated for local content and production was not followed; and
  • Repeat conflict of interest not identified due to weak internal controls.

 

                  6.2.9     Fraud and Lack of Consequence – In Respect of allegations of financial and/or fraud and SCM misconduct there was a 33 percent where investigations too longer than three months. A total of one(1) investigation by external parties (Hawks) were ongoing at year-end with regards to allegations of financial misconduct and/or fraud. These investigations have been ongoing for a period exceeding 12 months. Investigations into instances of prior year potential irregular expenditure commenced, however were still ongoing as at 31 March 2020, similarly to the status reported as at 31 March 2019.

 

      6.2.10   Material Irregularities Identified – Payments were made for construction work that was not of the required quality standard as there was a lack of proper professional service provider supervision by the department in the execution of the work. Effective internal controls, that should have prevented the payments for the defective work, were therefore not in place when the payments were approved and processed, as required by treasury regulation 8.1.1. Further payments had to be made to another contractor appointed to perform remedial construction work, which resulted in a material financial loss for the department. The project was funded by the Accelerated School’s Infrastructure Delivery Initiative (ASIDI) Backlog Grant.

 

  1. Root Causes
  • Slow or No response to improving key controls and addressing risk areas – Action plans implemented by management did not adequately address the root causes of previously raised audit findings. This resulted in inadequate remedies for internal control shortcomings previously reported and repeat internal control deficiencies. Management (accounting officer and senior management), the political leadership (executive authorities) and oversight bodies (SCOPAs and portfolio committees) do not respond with the required urgency to our messages about addressing risks and improving internal controls.

 

            6.2.12   AGSA Recommendations (DBE):

  • The accounting officer should ensure timeous implementation of the action plan drawn up to address internal control deficiencies identified by our reports. The action plan should focus on the underlying root causes. This will prevent recurrence of audit findings in future.
  • The accounting officer should ensure that non-compliance findings are investigated to determine whether there was misconduct in the SCM processes. Disciplinary hearings should be held where misconduct was confirmed. All irregular as well as fruitless and wasteful expenditure (including potential IE and FW) should also be investigated timeously to determine whether such expenditure should be recovered from the responsible official. In order to improve the performance and productivity of officials, the leadership should set the tone by implementing sound performance management processes, evaluating and monitoring performance, and consistently demonstrating that poor performance has consequences.
  • Controls should be in place to ensure that transactions are processed in an accurate, complete and timely manner, which will in turn reduce the errors and omissions in financial and performance reports. Such controls include (i) the daily capturing of financial transactions, supervisory reviews of captured information, and independent monthly reconciliations of key accounts, (ii) the collection of performance information at intervals that are appropriate for monitoring service delivery targets and milestones as well as the validation of recorded information and (iii) confirming that legislative requirements and policies have been complied with before initiating transactions.
  • Strengthen oversight over financial reporting and compliance with laws and regulations.

 

            6.2.13   AGSA Recommendations (Portfolio Committee):

  • Ensure that quarterly reports submitted have been verified by internal audit and the audit committee.
  • Evaluation of the quarterly reports, action plans and measures for consequences and details of how the department and its entities will resolve issues raised that will not result in recurring issues should be monitored.
  • Use information in the audit report on material irregularities for accountability and oversight purposes, insisting on timeous implementation of recommendation and use the reports tabled on progress with material irregularities to oversee and influence progress made with the implementation of the actions.

 

            6.2.14   COVID-19 Special Audit - The outbreak of the global coronavirus pandemic has demanded an extraordinary response from government. The Auditor-General of South Africa (AGSA) has made a commitment to the President to assist government in dealing with the financial management risks posed by the emergency measures taken. As part of the special audit, AGSA was in the process of auditing the transactions that would be included in the financial statements for the next financial year, as well as the controls implemented to prevent any fraud, misuse, non-compliance or misstatement. The focus of the audit was on:

  • COVID-19-related account balances and classes of transactions; and
  • Compliance with key legislation applicable to the COVID-19-related transactions, funds and processes.

 

            The focus area of the COVID-19 Special Audit Report 1 was as follows:

  • Provisioning personal protective equipment (PPE)to learners, educators, and support staff so that they would be ready when schools reopened:
    • Needs analysis of PPE, bulk warehousing and distribution of PPE schools, PPE record/stock management at schools and rationale, safe use and disposal of PPE;
    • Procurement and contract management; and
    • Internal control weaknesses.
  • Providing emergency water and basic sanitation services to selected public schools:
    • Procurement and contract management; and
    • Internal control weaknesses.

 

Key Audit findings included the use of available systems to determine demand and need for PPEs as well as the inconsistent supply of PPEs to schools by provinces resulting in insufficient PPEs being distributed to schools. In respect of PPE procurement AGSA key audit findings included the following areas:

  • general supply chain management non-compliance;
  • non-compliance with disaster management instructions note;
  • internal control weaknesses in the ordering, delivery, invoicing and payment processes; and
  • Non-compliance with the implementation protocol agreement.

 

       6.2.15  Addressing Shortcomings -  AGSA would continue to engage with the accounting officers on key findings noted and assess the impact of these findings on the sector's outcomes. AGSA would also share the procurement findings with the fusion centre for immediate follow-up and investigation.The agreed-upon responses should be implemented and monitored to prevent the identified shortcomings from recurring.

 

6.2.16 Portfolio Committee Observations (FFC + AGSA)

  • The Committee   noted that there were PEDs who used the centralised procurement method for PPEs during lockdown. Members queried whether AGSA was able to identify any loopholes/weaknesses in the different models of procurement to avoid a repeat of mistakes.
  • The Committee   noted that some of the remedial steps were in the hands of PEDs – and Members queried when such reports would be made available.
  • The Committee also queried how FFC was able to support and assist the Department in ensuring that regulations and policies were implemented within specific timelines. Many schools lacked the minimum norms and standards e.g. libraries, laboratories and sporting facilities. Norms and Standards signed-off by the Minister was legally binding and MECs were obliged to report to the Minister in respect of progress in implementation of these regulations and policies. How could the Department assist PEDs in ensuring that regulations were implemented and enforced?
  • The Committee queried what assistance the National Department was offering PEDs in respect of PPE procurement in general – an obligation of the National Department. In cases where irregularities were identified, errand official’s/service providers/contractors needed to be held accountable and there had to be consequence management against them.
  • The Committee also noted that ASIDI was launched in 2011/12 to eliminate backlogs in school infrastructure – Members queried whether there had been any meaningful change since then.
  • The Committee also noted the issues of conflict of interest identified in the North West in respect of the procurement of PPEs - and requested more information.
  • It was important that the Department was able to recover wasteful and fruitless expenditure as determined by AGSA.
  • The Committee noted with concern that issues of infrastructure and Norms and Standards targets not being met –  needed to be addressed. Members queried whether the Department may consider revising targets to meet current needs. It was worrying that budgets were allocated but targets were not being met by PEDs – and Members queried the monitoring and oversight by the National Department in this regard.
  • It was noted that there was underachievement and a decline in the number of learners registering for Mathematics and Science and queried whether this may be due to a lack of teaching capacity for Mathematics or lack of Laboratories. The Department needed to look at schools with laboratories collaborating with those who did not have any.
  • The Committee also queried the levels of capacity building training provided to departmental officials, especially accounting officials.
  • The lack of service delivery could not be disregarded and Members queried how the Department was planning to ensure improvements in oversight and monitoring at all levels in the basic education sector.
  • The Committee requested that the Department also submit a detailed report on Inclusive Education and Learners with Special Education Needs (LSEN).
  • In respect of school fees, the committee noted that some parents at quantile 4 and quantile 5 schools   were having difficulty paying school fees due to negative impact of the lockdown on finances. Members queried the assistance to parents from the Department in this regard.
  • The Committee noted that the National Department had performed much better than PEDs and it was queried how this could be replicated to improve performance in PEDs.
  • The Committee further queried the effectiveness of the internal audit committees in PEDs.
  • It was also noted that issues of vandalism had plagued the Department with much money and resources being lost. Committee queried whether PEDs were monitoring schools for the utilisation of maintenance budgets for its intended purpose.

 

6.2.17      Responses (DBE, FFC + AGSA)

6.2.17.1            Department of Basic Education –  appreciated and accepted the views expressed by Members on the reports from the FFC and AGSA – and took full responsibility for this and committed to taking all views seriously. This was specifically for non-compliance with laws and regulations. It was agreed that there was a need to ensure accountability and consequence management to be implemented. DBE committed to   pay attention to strengthen investigative processes and procedures. There had been investigations by the department’s internal audit and a report was being finalised – and errand officials are being engaged on the report. DBE also commented on the FFC presentation in respect of the contemporary views on infrastructure. There was a move towards virtual platforms for laboratory work and not use physical laboratories any longer. The Department was moving away from certain Norms and Standards targets.

In respect of Inclusive Education, the Department had presented a comprehensive report to the Committees on progress with Inclusive Education. The SA Schools Act provided for the Norms and Standards for Inclusive Education and LSEN. The Department respected the work of the FFC and offered further interactions with the Department going forward. The department also mentioned that PEDs had been coming to present to the Committees on matters pertaining to PPE procurement amongst others. The issues of infrastructure delivery were much bigger than Basic Education with challenges in respect of capacity involving the line-function departments. It needed to be noted that the DBE findings had been reduced from five audit findings to two audit findings. The Department continued to work towards a clean audit opinion in future. The department mentioned that, although some PEDs allocated below the national threshold, they actually covered more learners than others. The Minister had corresponded with MECs pertaining the issue of threshold in respect of Norms and Standards – to correct the situation.

Regarding the decline in registered Mathematics and Science learners, the department indicated that the figure was proportional to learners who registered. Moving forward DBE   revisit targets on this indicator.  In response to   learners who achieved NSC yet sitting at home, the department responded that NSC held immense value in the country. There could be reasons in the labour market that needs certain expertise, that is why graduates were sitting at home. Regarding school fees, the Department had a school-fee exemption policy in place to assist parents struggling to pay schools fees.  

 

6.2.17.2            Financial and Fiscal Commission (FFC) - TheCommissioner agreed that the education sector remained a complex and dynamic sector. There was a need to expand on the scope of understanding Norms and Standards and possibly look at revisit set targets. There was a need to evaluate the successes and ensure that the service delivery model was adequately working. It may be necessary that the National Education Infrastructure Management System (NEIMS) needed further updating.

 

6.2.17.3            Office of the Auditor-General of South Africa (AGSA) -  indicated that the Director-General had made certain commitments in respect of the matters raised in the AGSA Report. AGSA would look to share their observations in respect of other PEDs procurement contracting. Further to this, the remedial action of accounting officers would also be shared. AGSA continued to engage government departments on mechanisms that may be of assistance. AGSA was asking that auditees ensured a controlled environment to prevent loopholes for errand official’s/service providers or contractors.

 

  1. Council for Quality Assurance in General and Further Education and Training (Umalusi)

 

  1.  

Umalusi is the Quality Council for General and Further Education and Training (GFET), which was constituted in terms of the National Qualifications Framework Act 68 of 2008. Umalusi develops and manages a sub-framework of qualifications for GFET; quality assures and benchmarks curricula, monitors and moderates assessments at exit points, and certificates of learner achievements. The Council also quality assures provision, and accredits private providers of education, training and assessment to deliver and assess qualifications.

 

The Mandate of Umalusi is about:

  • Developing and manage a framework of qualifications for general and further education and training (GFET) that is benchmarked internationally;
  • Quality assuring qualifications and curricula;
  • Confirming that assessment is fair, valid and reliable;
  • Quality assuring the provision of education and training, and assessment providers; and
  • Grounding its work in research to ensure informed positions and approaches.

 

  1. Umalusi Performance Trend 2019/20

Umalusi in the 2019/20 financial year was able to meet all of its targets set against each of the Programmes Indicators. This is because of the compliance of the Entity to recommendations made from time-to-time by Auditors.

 

  1. Status of achievement per programme

 

  1. Programme 1: Administration - Programme 1 covers the following sub-programmes:
  • Strategy and Governance (S&G);
  • Public Relations and Communications (PR&COMMS);
  • Information Communication Technology (ICT);
  • Human Resource Management and Development (HRM&D); and
  • Finance and Supply Chain Management (F&SCM).

 

Programme 1 Performance

Performance Indicator

Annual Target

Annual Output

 

 

 

Annual Performance Plan approved by 31March each financial year

2021 APP approved by March 2020

2021 APP was approved by March 2020

 

 

 

Quarterly reports submitted to National Treasury and Department of Basic Education 30 days after end of quarter

Four quarterly report submitted to DBE and NT

Four quarterly reports were submitted to NT and DBE 30 days after end of quarter

 

 

 

Number of communication platforms used to communicate to stakeholders clusters within the GFETQSF to access information

7

7

 

 

 

Percentage compliance against the requirements of the ICT Governance Framework

98%

 98%

 

 

 

Average of performance agreements and assessment reports submitted on time

98%

 99.9%

 

 

 

Percentage of valid invoices of creditors and  suppliers paid within 30 days

99%

100%

 

 

6.3.3.2  Programme 2: Qualifications and Research - Programme 2 covers the following sub-programmes:

 

Qualifications, Curriculum and Certification

  • Ensuring and enhancing the status and quality of qualifications on the sub-framework, which Umalusi develops, manages and reviews;
  • Evaluating curricula to ensure that these are of acceptable quality;
  • The certification of candidate performance for all qualifications on the GFETQSF; and 
  • Verifying all qualifications Umalusi and its predecessor, SAFCERT, have issued since 1992.

 

Statistical Information and Research

  • Conduct research that is informed by the emerging needs of the education system so as to engage stakeholders towards innovative thinking;
  • Report on the key indicators of quality and standards in general and further education and training;
  • Establish and maintain databases; and
  • Lead research and analysis and provide statistical support and information across Umalusi.

 

Programme 2 Performance

Performance Indicator

Annual Target

Annual Output

 

 

 

Number of reports produced on the management of qualifications in the sub-framework

1

1

 

 

 

Number of curricula evaluated annually

2

4

 

 

 

Percentage of error-free  learner records for which a certificate is printed annually

100%

100%

 

 

 

Percentage of verification requests received that are completed within service level agreement (two working days)

95%

98%

 

 

 

Number of research reports completed

3

3

 

 

6.3.3.3  Programme 3: Quality Assurance and Monitoring - Programme 3 covers the following sub-programmes:

 

Quality Assurance of Assessment - This function entails the following:

  • External moderation of question papers;
  • External moderation of internal assessment;
  • Verification of monitoring of the assessment system;
  • Monitoring of the conduct, administration and management of assessment and examinations processes;
  • Management of concessions, assessment and examination irregularities; and
  • External moderation of marking processes.

 

Evaluation and Accreditation - Quality assurance of provision and assessment through evaluation and accreditation of private education institutions and private assessment bodies. This entails ensuring that:

  • Standards of provision are determined, maintained and strengthened;
  • Systems are in place to quality assure the capacity of the private education and training institutions seeking accreditation to implement qualifications registered on the GFETQSF through an accreditation and monitoring process;
  • Systems are in place to quality assure the capacity of private assessment bodies seeking accreditation to assess qualifications registered on the GFETQSF.

 

Programme 3 Performance

Performance Indicator

Annual Target

Annual Output

 

 

 

Number of quality assurance of assessment reports published for qualifications registered on the GFETQSF

  1.  
  1.  

 

 

 

Percentage of question papers approved per assessment body per qualification per examination cycle

  1.  
  1.  

 

 

 

Number of assessment bodies audited for their state of readiness to conduct examinations

  1.  
  1.  

 

 

 

Number of subjects where verification for which verification of making is conducted

80

90

 

 

 

Number of offerings where moderation of SBA and ICASS is conducted per assessment body per qualification per examination cycle

150

208

 

 

 

Percentage of accreditation outcomes for private education institutions finalised within 12 months of site visit

82%

89%

 

 

 

Percentage of private education institutions monitored after being granted accreditation

92%

95.7%

 

  • Reasons for Improved Performance
  • Management of performance information has improved. There were no audit findings on re-determined objectives.
  • All APP targets have been achieved for the year.
  • The Performance Information Verification Committee (PIVC) enables management to identify challenges and determine corrective measures.
  • The oversight role of the Audit and Risk Committee and Council or EXCO holds management responsible for internal controls and under-performance.  

 

  • Human Resources - The Council gave a detailed breakdown of the current employment and vacancies within the organisation. In total the following was submitted:
  • 2018/19 approved posts – 129;
  • 2019/20 approved posts – 141;
  • 2019/20 number of employees – 136; and
  • 2019/20 vacancies – 5 (percentage of vacancies was 4 percent).

 

 

  • Financial Matters
  • Audit Report – The Council received an Unqualified Audit Report with no material findings with submitted financial statements free from material misstatements. There were no instances of material non-compliance with requirements of applicable legislation. Overall, the financial viability was assessed as good and officially, the Council had the required skills and competencies.

 

 

6.3.4     Statement of Financial Position

 

Table 1: Statement of Financial Position (Assets)

 

2020

2019

Assets

 

 

Current Assets

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

43 232 315

52 305 745

Accounts Receivables

7 148 775

5 439 375

 

50 381 090

57 745 120

 

 

 

Non-Current Assets

   

Property, plant and equipment

60 298 872

34 737 049

Intangible assets

13 119

20 329

 

60 311 991

34 757 378

 

 

 

Total Assets

110 693 081

92 502 498

 

Table 2: Statement of Financial Position (Liabilities)

 

2020

2019

Liabilities

 

 

Current Liabilities

 

 

Accounts Payable

14 943 233

16 610 579

 

 

 

Non-Current Liabilities

 

 

Operating Lease

40 577

10 375

Employee benefit obligation

7 820 000

4 661 000

 

7 860 577

4 671 375

 

 

 

Total Liabilities

22 803 810

21 281 954

 

 

 

Net Assets

87 889 271

71 220 544

 

 

 

Reserves

 

 

Revaluation reserve

34 804 310

8 484 261

Accumulated surplus

53 084 961

62 736 283

 

 

 

Total Net Asserts

87 889 271

71 220 544

 

6.3.4.1  Notes to the Statement of Financial Position

  • Note 1 – Property Plant and Equipment: The fixed property was revaluated by independent valuers as per the policy every four years Umalusi building 41 was valued at R 31 million, Umalusi building 37 was valued at R 25 million resulting in a total increase in book value of Land and Buildings of R 26,32 million.

 

  • Note 2 – Employee Benefit Obligation: The Council offers continuation members (pensioners) the opportunity to continue belonging to a medical aid after retirement, while in service at Umalusi. The liability was calculated by an actuarial valuator at year end. The increase in the potential liability is R 3,159 million. Umalusi is currently advertising for a third party to take over this liability and remove the item from our balance sheet.

 

  • Note 3 – Revaluation Reserve: The Revaluation Reserve increased by R 26,32 million due to the revaluation of Land and Buildings see Note 1 above.

 

Table 3: Statement of Financial Performance (Revenue)

 

2020

2019

 

 

 

Revenue

 

 

Grant DBE

134 634 000

128 543 000

Own Generated Revenue

22 218 803

26 191 523

Other Revenue

5 539 508

5 790 277

Investment Revenue

4 532 233

4 576 277

Total Revenue

166 924 544

165 101 077

 

 

 

Expenditure

 

 

Certification Expenses

9 714 642

8 183 342

Communication Expenses

1 450 866

1 044 341

Consulting & Professional Fees

3 071 402

5 861 070

Depreciation and amortisation

3 578 279

3 218 644

Cost of Employees (COE)

81 449 835

73 617 488

Moderator and Verifier Costs

39 125 152

41 542 669

Printing and Stationery

1 635 634

1 438 026

Travel and accommodation

17 282 233

18 040 573

Other Operating Expenses

16 800 823

27 141 045

Actuarial loss

2 467 000

-947 000

 

 

 

Deficit for the Year

-9 651 322

-14 039 121

 

            6.3.4.2  Cash Surplus – In Respect of committed funds, Umalusi approved a tender amounting to R36,420,108 for the renovations of 41 Van Reyneveld Street, adjacent to the current building. The tender specifications have been completed and the project is planned to start in February 2021.The Department assisted with the request to retain the cash surplus to be utilised and has been granted by National Treasury. A revised budget for 2020/21 was submitted to the Department to incorporate this amount.

            6.3.4.2  Fruitless and Wasteful Expenditure – A late payment of PAYE deductions to SARS resulted in a penalty of R 290 180. Corrective measures have been implemented to ensure no repeat and disciplinary steps have been taken against all staff involved. The payment made in 2018/19 to the joint venture for the cancelled renovations project of R 6,690 million is disclosed. The parties involved have agreed to take the matter to arbitration and this is ongoing.

 

            6.3.5     Portfolio Committee Observations

                       

  • The Committee queried the status of the General Education Certificate (GEC) accreditation processes with the Council
  • The Committee queried whether the Council had done any research into future virtual examinations – was this a consideration.
  • Regarding research done by students for the Council, Members queried from which Universities these students hailed from – and the type of research activities they were involved in.
  • The Committee applauded the clean audit of Umalusi but queried how they would maintain this with the looming budget cuts and reductions in allocations.
  • Regarding the vacancies, Members queried how these vacancies would be resourced and what the financial impact would be on the work of Umalusi.
  • In respect of the Joint Venture, Members queried the status of the legal case - and whether Umalusi was able to recoup any monies.

 

            6.3.6     Responses from Umalusi

The Council was engaging the Department in respect of the GEC and had provided feedback to the Department regarding weakness, strengths and possible amendments. The Department needed to consider these and resubmit to Umalusi before the Council could approve registration of the qualification. The Council had not done any research in respect of virtual examinations as yet, however, Umalusi was of the view that it be the Department that does this research and Umalusi to quality assure this new regime. Regarding research by student, Umalusi did not have any research being done by students on its behalf – although there were students who approached Umalusi for data/material they may require for their own research studies.

 

Umalusi appreciated the commendation from Members and promised to sustain the progress made. The Council was concerned with possible budget cuts to continue fulfilling its mandate. The Council had raised the issue of budget cuts and requested additional funding but to no avail. Umalusi reminded Member that their mandate was being extended as the Department was introducing additional subject as well as introducing the GEC – outing further strain on Umalusi meeting its obligations. Recommendations had been made to council to recall any new positions, not filling vacancies and freeze some positions. Umalusi gave a detailed background and overview of the issues surrounding the Joint Venture. Umalusi was awaiting the arbitration meeting where decisions would be binding on all parties.

 

  1. South African Council for Educators (SACE)

 

  1. Background and Mandate

The South African Council for Educators (SACE) is a Schedule 3A public entity, established in terms of Act No. 31 of 2000, as amended, to enhance the status of the teaching profession. The Basic Education Laws Amendment Act (2011) has amended the South African Council for Educators Act No. 31 of 2000 to enable the Council to manage the Continuing Professional Teacher Development System, and to allow the Council to request for additional funding from the public fiscus when necessary.

 

The South African Council for Educators is accountable to the Department of Basic Education (DBE) and fits into the Minister of Basic Education’s Delivery Agreement and Action Plan towards schooling 2030, which speaks to “improving the quality of teaching and learning” through the improvement of teacher capacity and practices.

 

The key business of SACE is topromote professionalism, empowering educators through development and ensuring that educators are committed to the teaching profession such that they adhere to the ethos as enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa.

 

The Annual Performance Plan summarised the priorities of SACE as outlined in the Strategic Plan 2015/2020. The activities of SACE have been structured into five programmes as follows:

  • Programme 1: Registration;
  • Programme 2: Ethics;
  • Programme 3:Continuing Professional Teacher Development Management (System);
  • Programme 4:Professional Standards; and
  • Programme 5: Policy and Research.

 

6.4.2     Performance Delivery Environment

During the year under-review, the teaching profession saw the introduction of the SACE online registration system, in moving in line with the 4th Industrial revolution. The system has been used largely by the student teachers in various Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), as new provisional registration applicants. SACE strengthened processes of regulating entry into the teaching profession through effective partnerships and collaboration that:

  • Enhanced systems and processes of acquiring police clearance more efficiently and timeously, as well as, fingerprints for screening applicants against the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development’s National Register for Sexual Offenders;
  • Commenced processes with SAQA to ensure the protection of the status of the teaching qualifications, along with, curbing fraudulent qualifications in the profession in line with the National Qualifications Framework Amendment Act of 2019;
  • Worked continuously with Umalusi to ensure that the independent schooling sector employ fit-to-practice qualified teachers that are professionally registered with SACE; and
  • Ensured support by the Department of Home Affairs in verifying foreign nationals’ documents for legal entry into the country and work permits.

 

The Council successfully signed up almost all educators in the profession for participation in the Continuing Professional Teacher Development System as lifelong learners. Therefore, council has decided to focus on the sign up of the final-year students from the next final year onwards. SACE continues to enforce the Code of Professional ethics. During the period under review, 26 educators were removed from the roll of educators due to violation of the Code. A total of 17 of these 26 educators were submitted to the Department of Social Development for inclusion into the National Child Protection Register in order to be declared unfit to work with children. As part of SACE’s continued contribution into the school-based violence and violence on teachers in particular, the produced SACE Handbook on Teachers’ Rights Responsibilities and Safety was taken back to the teachers for their final comments and voice, through the 9 provincial round tables, prior to its finalisation.

In a move to increase its capital investment, SACE is intending to move away from rentals and to use the accumulated surplus reflected in the financial statements, to acquire provincial administrative buildings in the Western Cape, Free State, Kwazulu-Natal, Eastern Cape and Limpopo within the current MTEF period. The property acquisition process in Limpopo and Kwazulu-Natal would be concluded in the third quarter of 2020/21 financial year, while the Eastern Cape and Western Cape will be concluded in the fourth quarter of the same financial year.

SACE had received, once again, an unqualified audit report. However, there were some misstatements identified in the audit report. A remedial action plan and the necessary consequence management have been put in place to address them.

 

6.4.3     Programme and Sub-Programme Plans

For the 2019/20 pre-determined objectives, SACE had a total of 11 indicators of which eight were achieved (72 percent). The performance indicators not reached were as follows:

Performance Indicator

Annual Target

Annual Output

Difference

Number of new educators registered

35 000

30 164

-4836

Percentage of cases finalised

75% of 550 cases received                      (413)

68,74% (284)

31.24% (-129)

 

Number of Professional Development Providers approved

130

79

51

 

  1. Programme 1: Registration - The purpose of this programme is to register qualified educators and create sub registers for special categories, maintain and update educator database, and enhance the quality of the registration of teachers by introducing standards. Within this programme, SACE had two performance indicators as follows:
  • The number of new registered educators – The target was set at 35 000 and SACE reached a total of 31 769. A negative deviation of 3 231.
  • The number of educators updating and renewing their registration status – The target was set at 40 000 and SACE was able to reach a total of 47 315. A positive deviation of 7 351.

SACE presented on some of the Programme 1 highlights in respect of the following:

  • Registration applications;
  • Provisional and full registration status;
  • ECD registrants;
  • Screening against SAPS clearance processes; and
  • Update on the Impact of COVID-19 on Professional Registration processes.

 

Programme 1 – Strategies to Overcome Areas of Underperformance

  • SACE has the revised professional registration scope and the accompanying criteria and requirements. These will be advocated and communicated more robustly to the teaching profession and prospective teachers in particular, to ensure that the registration process is done without any barriers and challenges.
  • The introduction of the online registration system across all the higher education institutions will ensure that registration on new educators takes place seamlessly throughout the country.
  • Data integration and clean up processes will continue to ensure data integrity and enhanced data management processes.
  • Strengthening collaboration with the South African Police Service (SAPS)’s Criminal Record Centre to improve the police clearance issuing process, Department of Home affairs for verifying documents, and SAQA for qualification verifications processes.

 

  1. Programme 2: Ethics - The purpose of this programme is to promote ethical conduct among educators through the development and enforcement of the code of ethics as well as facilitate interventions and support for schools, educators and school communities on ethical matters. Within this programme, SACE had only one performance indicators with achievements as follows:
  • Percentage of cases finalised -  The target was set at 75 percent of 550 cases received (413) and SACE was only able to 68.74 percent (284) – a negative deviation of 31.24 percent (129).

 

SACE presented on some of the Programme 2 highlights in respect of the following:

  • Failure to achieve its 2019/20 target on percentage of cases finalised;
  • Focus on cases carried over from 2018/19, 2017/18 and 2017/16;
  • Employment of additional personnel;
  • Distribution by Register of Complaints of Educators’ Ethical Misconduct;
  • Nature of Professional Misconduct Allegations against Educators;
  • Breakdown of finalised disciplinary cases with verdicts; and
  • Finalisation of 2019/20 cases and ones carried over.

 

Programme 2 – Strategies to Overcome Areas of Underperformance

  • The 2020- 2025 strategic plan has ensured that, all the APPs for the five-year period, have indicators that ensure that both the rollover cases and the particular financial year are processed simultaneously, as reflected in the next slide.
  • Council has appointed additional staff to deal with investigations and disciplinary hearings.
  • Additional panellists will be capacitated to process cases in the coming financial period. This will bolster the capacity of the Legal and Ethics Division to conduct more cases.

 

6.4.3.3  Programme 3: Continuing Professional Teacher Development (CPTD) Management System - SACE has a responsibility to manage a system for continuing professional development with the support of the Department of Basic Education and the nine Provincial Education Departments. In line with this, SACE will:

  • Ensure that educators engage in life-long learning throughout their career.
  • Ensure that educators’ classroom practice and professional competence are improved through the provisioning of quality SACE approved providers and endorsed professional development programmes.

Within this programme, SACE had six performance indicators as follows:

  • Number of educators signed up for the CPTD system per year (Disaggregated by Cohort) The target was set at 35 000 educators and SACE was able to reach a total of 52 586 educators. A positive deviation of 17 586 educators.
  • Number of Professional Development providers approved - The target was set at 130 providers but SACE was only able to reach a total of 79 providers. A negative deviation of 51 providers.
  • Number of new Professional Development Activities endorsed -  The target was set at 700 new Professional Development activities processed in a year. SACE was able to record 1 009 activities achieved. A positive deviation of 309.
  • Number of educators supported on Professional Development - The target was set at 10 000 educators supported and SACE was able to reach a target of 20 757 educators. A positive deviation of 10 757 educators.

 

SACE presented on some of the Programme 3 highlights in respect of the following:

  • Educator reporting; and
  • Teacher details – signed up.

 

Programme 3 – Strategies to Overcome Areas of Underperformance

  • A revised strategy to approach accredited and non-accredited private providers operating in the ETD sector. to consider participating in the CPTD space as providers. This will be done through provider forums run in all the provinces to ensure a wider catchment.
  • An invitation will be sent to other government departments who might have something to offer to education especially the departments of Sports Arts and Culture, Safety, Health and Social Development to contribute to CPTD provisioning.
  • Establish stronger partnerships with the ETDPSETA provincial offices in order to ensure that funding is only benefitting the SACE endorsed activities and SACE approved providers, furthermore to access database on available providers in the province. The database will assist in extending invitations for provider forums and the write up programme sessions for private providers.
  • The private providers will be invited for programme writing workshops and forums so as to increase advocacy and recruitment of category C providers. The same programme that has been conducted in the period under review in various provinces.
  • The revamping the CPTD-IS to include service providers as end users, this will allow direct communication with providers through the self – service portal. This will increase communication channel between Council and providers. Strengthening the APP that is currently under construction to include areas of CPTD self-service portal.

 

6.4.3.4       Programme 4: Professional Standards – The purpose of this programme is to:

  • To develop a set of professional standards for teachers’ practice that is theoretically informed, contextually appropriate and widely accepted by stakeholders;
  • Develop various strategies and processes of assisting and supporting educators with regard to professional matters and needs;
  • Improve and maintain the status and image of the teaching profession;
  • Facilitate processes of ensuring that more and better teachers join the teaching profession; and
  • Ensure the quality of initial teacher education and ongoing professional development through quality assurance mechanisms and standards. 

 

Within this programme, SACE had only one performance indicators as follows:

  • Set professional practice standards for teachingThe target was set at ensuring that professional practice standards are approved and gazetted. This target was achieved as Professional Standards were approved by Council for implementation.

 

SACE presented on some of the Programme 4 highlights in respect of the following:

  • Development of Professional Teaching Standards (PTS); and
  • Processes to implement PTS.

 

6.4.3.5         Programme 5: Policy and Research – The purpose of this programme is to:

  • To enhance policy and research coordination within SACE.
  • To strengthen the SACE advisory role and service that is informed by policy, research, and consultative processes.
  • To promote research on professional matters and any other educational matter relevant to SACE.

 

Within this programme, SACE had three performance indicators as follows:

  • Percentage Number of research Reports produced in line with the SACE Research Policy and Agenda - The target was set at two reports produced and SACE achieved this target with no deviations.
  • Number of provincial Practitioner based Research conferences/seminars held - The target was set at nine held and SACE achieved this target with no deviations.
  • Establish the SACE resource centre and virtual library – The target was to ensure a resource centre was established and equipped. SACE was able to reach this target with no deviations.

 

SACE presented on some of the Programme 5 highlights in respect of the following:

  • Research activities embarked on; and
  • Teachers’ Rights Responsibilities and Safety which informed the production of the Handbook for Teachers.
  • Collaborative research activities with UNISA and University of KwaZulu-Natal; and
  • Establishment of the SACE Resource Centre.

 

6.4.4     Annual Financial Statements

 

Table 1: Statement of Financial Position

 

2020

2019

Assets

   

Current Assets

 

 

Receivables from exchange transactions

962 657

2 855 933

Cash and cash equivalents

107 894 193

96 869 381

 

108 856 850

99 725 314

Non-Current Assets

 

 

Property, plant and equipment

63 528 667

63 040 338

Intangible assets

2 145 128

2 656 763

 

65 673 795

65 697 101

Total Assets

174 530 645

165 422 415

Liabilities

 

 

Current Liabilities

 

 

Payables from exchange transactions

14 037 453

11 280 406

Unspent conditional grants and receipts

3 836 832

2 669 765

 

17 874 285

13 950 171

Total Liabilities

17 874 285

13 950 171

Net Assets

156 656 360

151 472 244

Accumulated surplus

156 656 360

151 472 244

 

 

Table 2: Statement of Financial Performance

 

2020

2019

Revenue

   

Revenue from exchange transactions

   

Revenue

87 701 723

85 424 449

Other income

839 956

7070 893

Interest received

4 629 426

3 922 820

Gain on disposal of assets and liabilities

4 785

4 410

Total revenue from exchange transactions

93 175 890

90 059 572

 

 

 

Revenue from non-exchange transactions

 

 

Government grants

18 832 932

14 877 878

Total revenue

112 008 822

104 937 450

 

 

 

Expenditure

 

 

Employee benefit costs

(56 223 424)

(44 491 354)

Depreciation and amortisation

(2 765 423)

(2 476 530)

Lease rentals on operating lease

(1 262 496)

(980 304)

Debt Impairment

(2 119 421)

(563 978)

Operating Expenses

(44 453 940)

(31 324 264)

Total expenditure

(106 824 704)

(79 836 430)

Surplus for the year

5 184 118

  1. 101 020

 

 

Notes: Financial Performance:

  • Revenue from Operating Transactions increased by 3 percent due to an increase of subscriptions full year compared to the previous year. There was an increase of 27 percent on CPTD subsidy spending.
  • There was a Total Revenue increase of 7 percent due to CPTD funding and the increase of collection of subscription and registration fees.
  • Personnel Expenditure increased by 26 percent as vacant positions were filled with inflation related increases.
  • Operating Expenditure increased by 42 percent due to inflation and legal consultations.
  • Total Expenditure increased by 34 percent due to operating costs and personnel expenditure.
  • SACE operated within its collected revenue of 112 million.
  • A surplus of R5,2 million was realised and approval has been obtained to retain surplus for contingency and increasing client provincial contact points.

 

 

 

Table 3: Statement of Changes in Net Assets

 

Accumulated Surplus

Total Net Assets

Balance at 01 April 2018

126 371 224

126 371 224

Changes in net assets

 

 

Surplus for the year

25 101 020

25 101 020

Total changes

25 101 020

25 101 020

 

 

 

Balance at 01 April 2019

151 472 242

151 472 242

Changes in net assets

 

 

Surplus for the year

5 184 118

5 184 118

Total Changes

5 184 118

5 184 118

 

 

 

Balance at 31 March 2020

  1.  656 360

156 656 360

 

Notes: Changes in Assets:

  • Total Net Assets increased by 3 percent due to retained surplus for the year
  • The was no acquisition of material non-current assets.

 

Table 4: Statement of Cash Flow

Figures in Rand

2020

2019

Cash flows from operating activities

 

 

Receipts

 

 

Membership, registration, reprints and other receipts

88 541 418

85 577 878

Grants

20 000 000

16 000 000

Interest received

4 629 426

3 922 820

 

113 170 844

105 500 698

Payments

 

 

Employee costs

(55 954 947)

(43 692 808)

Payment suppliers and others

(43 453 752)

(31 294 741)

 

(99 408 699)

(74 987 549)

Net cash flows from operating activities

13 762 145

30 513 149

 

 

 

Cash flows from investing activities

 

 

Purchase of property, plant and equipment

(2 673 335)

(1 504 328)

Proceeds from sale of property, plant and equipment

19 144

6 201

Purchase of other intangible assets

(83 141)

(1 918 456)

Net Cash flows used in investing activities

(2 737 332)

(3 416 583)

 

 

 

Net Increase in cash and cash equivalents

11 024 813

27 096 566

Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the year

96 869 381

69 772 815

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the year

107 894 194

96 869 381

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Notes: Cash Flow:

  • Cash inflow into SACE increased by 7 percent due to subscription fees and the CPTD Grant.
  • Net cash flows from operations decreased by 55 percent due to an increase in operating cost(outflow).
  • Net cash flows increased by 11 percent due to an increase revenue (inflow).
  • Cash and Cash equivalents on the 31st March 2019 was R107.9 million – and the necessary approval has been obtained.

 

6.4.5     Auditors Report

A few misstatements of information were identified and corrected on the spot. Emphasis of matter was raised on Irregular Expenditure of R174 000 and corrective measure were underway. SACE received an Unqualified Audit opinion for 2019/20.

 

6.4.6     Portfolio Committee Observations

  • Members raised concern over the cases of sexual harassment against educators in the profession – and how these educators would be struck from the educators roll if found to have transgressed.
  • Regarding the 300 000 teacher assistants to be employed by DBE, the Committee queried how these assistants were being accommodated by SACE.
  • The Committee were curious to know how SACE managed those educators found to have proposed/approached learners first where it came to sexual harassment/abuse. Many of these teachers victimised affected learners in many ways.
  • The Committee also noted that witnesses did not always cooperate with SACE in respect of cases to be heard, and also queried what reasons there could be for non-cooperation.
  • The Committee generally raised the matter of educator ethics – and queried the steps taken to assist/support educators with upholding the ethical standards and instil good behaviour.
  • The Committee noted the targets not achieved for registration of new educators and queried the challenged faced by SACE in this regard.
  • The Committee queried whether SACE had the necessary capacity to meet its set targets.
  • The Committee noted the over-achievement on certain targets (e.g. development of teachers) and queried what SACE did differently in these cases and also which provinces may have benefitted from the improved targets.
  • The Committee noted the figures presented for issues of racism and queried the type of surveys used for reporting.
  • Those educators with criminal records, Members queried how SACE was assisting/supporting these educators with behavioural challenges – to better themselves.
  • Members  noted the discrepancies in respect of being academically qualified and professionally qualified – and queried how SACE was accommodating both.

 

6.4.7     Responses from SACE

The Committee was given a detailed overview of the academically qualified and the professionally qualified educators in the system. SACE was of the view that all educators also be professionally qualified. This was part of the SACE initiative to professionalise the teaching profession. SACE recognised educators who were academically qualified but there was a need that they also be professionally qualified. SACE was also collaborating with the Department when independent schools were being accredited. In respect of the 300 000 educator assistants, these required Grade 12 qualification – and therefore not accommodated by SACE as they were not educators. SACE also noted that provinces were employing teacher assistants and there was a need to engage provinces on the status of these teacher assistant within the system. For those educators with criminal records, SACE was ensuring they be screened and assisted them with teaching programmes and assess their rehabilitation into the system.

 

SACE did not offer CPTD in terms of Curriculum coverage and related programmes but dealt in the main with educator support for professional aspects. SACE ensured that educators completed ethics programmes to strengthen ethical standards. To this end, SACE worked closely with Organised Labour on educator ethics. SACE had capacity constraints on dealing with the number of cases before it. SACE was in the process of training more panellists to increase capacity. Where witnesses did not co-operate in cases, it was mainly the fault of parents who received bribes from accused educators – and refused to testify. SACE was of the view that such parents needed to be dealt with. Further to this, educators suspected of wrongdoing remained in the classroom until proven guilty. This opened for learners to be intimidated by these educators.

 

7.         Overall Portfolio Committee Recommendations

Based on the observations made from inputs received, the Portfolio Committee ordered that the Minister shouldensure that the Department consider the following recommendations:

7.1        Recommendations to the Department of Basic Education

7.1.1     Underspending on Infrastructure – The Department should ensure that Provincial Education Departments utilised budgets for their intended purpose and avoid having to return money to National Treasury. The Departmentmust ensure that there was renewed commitment to manage matters pertaining to infrastructure.

7.1.2     Irregular Expenditure – The Departmentshouldstrengthenits oversight over financial reporting and compliance with laws and regulations as well as strengthen internal controls to identify and report irregular expenditure.

  • Where non-compliance or misconduct of Supply Chain Management is identified, the Departmentmust ensure that there is harsh consequence management and sanction.
  • The Departmentshould ensure that leadership set the tone by implementing sound performance management processes, evaluating and monitoring performance, and consistently demonstrating that poor performance has consequences.

7.1.3     Early Childhood Development – The Department must ensure that Early Childhood Development (ECD) migration   from Social Development to the Department is prioritisedand the Department should improve on its communication with all affected stakeholders.

7.1.4     Technology – The Department should ensure that Robotics, Coding and Technology be prioritised to prepare learners for Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR). The Department must ensure that learners are provided with e-Learning Technology and resources to enable learners to connect and access virtual learning platforms to improve learning outcomes - as well as connectivity to interact with counterparts across the region and globally. 

 

7.1.5     Pit-Latrines and Sanitation – The Department must ensure that:

  • Pit-latrines in all schools across the country are eradicated with immediate effect and be replaced with permanent structures.
  • All unsafe pit-latrine structures be demolished.
  • Issues of sanitation and water reticulation to schools  also be prioritised
  • There is commitment from implementing agents to complete infrastructure projects and address infrastructure backlogs.
  • Consideration of user-friendly ablution facilities for learners with disabilities and special needs.

7.1.6     Norms and Standards – The Department should strengthen its oversight and monitoring to ensure thatProvincial Education Departments utilise budgets for building laboratories, libraries and sporting facilities at schools.

7.1.7     Learner Transport – The Departmentshould ensurethat there are necessary interventions to improve scholar transport and must consider uniformity of the principles contained in the scholar transport policy of Provincial Education Departments.

7.1.8     Transfer of Indicators – The Department should consider the possible transfer of the infrastructure indicators for schools to the Department of Public Works sothat it can focus on its core business of teaching and learning.

7.1.9Inclusive Education - The Department should submit a detailed report on Inclusive

                  Education and Learners with Special Education Needs (LSEN). The Department

must provide an updated, reliable data on (LSEN) and must improve spending to

                  support Learners with Profound Intellectual Disabilities (LIPD)

 

Report to be considered.

Documents

No related documents