1 / 39

29 February 2012

Joint Meeting of the Standing Committee on Appropriations & Select Committee on Appropriations Department of Basic Education Presentation on the Division of Revenue Bill (Government Gazette No. 35022 of February 2012). 29 February 2012. Response of the Bill to Priorities.

dotty
Télécharger la présentation

29 February 2012

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Joint Meeting of the Standing Committee on Appropriations & Select Committee on Appropriations Department of Basic EducationPresentation on the Division of Revenue Bill(Government Gazette No. 35022 of February 2012) 29 February 2012

  2. Response of the Bill to Priorities • The conditional grants create space for the Department to favourably address some of the priorities in the Basic Education Sector, in line with the intent of Action Plan to 2014: Towards the Realisation of Schooling 2025. • Much consultation has ensued amongst the Department, Provinces and National Treasury in the development of inputs to the current Division of Revenue Bill. In some instances grant allocations were revised and plans adjusted in accordance with the revised grant values.

  3. Vote 15 Allocations • For the 2012 financial year, the DBE, through Vote 15, has been allocated 5 conditional grants for implementation of programmes in provinces. • The grants are allocated over three schedules, viz. Schedule 4: Education Infrastructure Grant; Schedule 5:Dinaledi Schools Grant; HIV and AIDS (Life Skills Education) Grant ; the National Schools Nutrition Programme Grant and the Technical Secondary Schools Recapitalisation Grant and Schedule 7:School Infrastructure Backlogs Grant.

  4. Vote 15 Allocations (cont’d) • The total value of all the grants, excluding the Schedule 7 grant, allocated for Vote 15 activities is R 11 246 587 000.00 (excluding Schedule 7) • The Schedule 7 grant makes provision for an additional amount of R 2 315 000 000.00 , bringing the gross value of grant allocations to R 13 561 587 000 .00 • The Value and Purpose of each grant is captured in the following slides:

  5. Schedule 4: Education Infrastructure Grant • Type of allocation: General conditional allocation to provinces • The total value of this grant is R 5 822 389 000.00 • The purpose of the grant is • to help accelerate the construction, maintenance, upgrading and rehabilitation of new and existing infrastructure in education; • to enhance capacity to deliver infrastructure in education; and • to address damage to schools infrastructure from disasters.

  6. Schedule 4: Education Infrastructure Grant (cont’d) • Provincial disbursements: • Eastern Cape: R 883 403 000 • Free State: R 459 635 000 • Gauteng: R 512 866 000 • KwaZulu-Natal: R 1 247 477 000 • Limpopo: R 942 091 000 • Mpumalanga: R 530 711 000 • Northern Cape: R 307 609 000 • North West: R 507 200 000 • Western Cape: R 431 397 000

  7. Schedule 5: Dinaledi Schools Grant • Type of allocation: Conditional allocation • The total value of this grant is R 99 000 000.00 • The purpose of the grant is • to promote Mathematics and Physical Science teaching and learning ; • to improve learner performance in Mathematics and Physical Science in line with Action Plan 2014; • to improve teacher’s content knowledge of Mathematics and Physical Science.

  8. Schedule 5: Dinaledi Schools Grant (cont’d) • Provincial disbursements: • Eastern Cape: R 11 964 000 • Free State: R 7 179 000 • Gauteng: R 20 139 000 • KwaZulu-Natal: R 17 547 000 • Limpopo: R 10 169 000 • Mpumalanga: R 9 172 000 • Northern Cape: R 3 391 000 • North West: R 10 568 000 • Western Cape: R 9 571 000

  9. Schedule 5: HIV and AIDS (Life Skills Education) Grant • Type of allocation: Conditional allocation • The total value of this grant is R 208 665 000.00 • The purpose of the grant is • to support South Africa’s HIV prevention strategy by increasing sexual and reproductive health knowledge, skills and appropriate decision-making among learners and educators; • to mitigate the impact of HIV by providing a caring, supportive and enabling environment for learners and educators; • to ensure the provision of a safe, rights-based environment in schools that is free of discrimination, stigma and any form of sexual harassment/abuse .

  10. Schedule 5: HIV and AIDS (Life Skills Education) Grant (cont’d) • Provincial disbursements: • Eastern Cape: R 35 252 000 • Free State: R 12 491 000 • Gauteng: R 29 147 000 • KwaZulu-Natal: R 46 806 000 • Limpopo: R 29 942 000 • Mpumalanga: R 17 416 000 • Northern Cape: R 4 579 000 • North West: R 15 616 000 • Western Cape: R 17 416 000

  11. Schedule 5: National School Nutrition Programme Grant • Type of allocation: Conditional allocation • The total value of this grant is R 4 906 464 000.00 • The purpose of the grant is • Provide nutritious meals to targeted learners.

  12. Schedule 5: National School Nutrition Programme Grant (cont’d) • Provincial disbursements: • Eastern Cape: R 903 644 000 • Free State: R 261 367 000 • Gauteng: R 548 690 000 • KwaZulu-Natal: R 1 151 644 000 • Limpopo: R 879 338 000 • Mpumalanga: R 474 560 000 • Northern Cape: R 113 136 000 • North West: R 329 301 000 • Western Cape: R 244 784 000

  13. Schedule 5: Technical Secondary Schools Recapitalisation Grant • Type of allocation: Conditional allocation • The total value of this grant is R 209 369 000.00 • The purpose of the grant is • to recapitalise up to 200 technical schools to improve their capacity to contribute to skills development and training in the country.

  14. Schedule 5: Technical Secondary Schools Recapitalisation Grant (cont’d) • Provincial disbursements: • Eastern Cape: R 30 000 000 • Free State: R 19 870 000 • Gauteng: R 25 000 000 • KwaZulu-Natal: R 40 490 000 • Limpopo: R 26 700 000 • Mpumalanga: R 25 678 000 • Northern Cape: R 12 500 000 • North West: R 17 867 000 • Western Cape: R 11 264 000

  15. Potential Challenges to Grant Implementation

  16. Implementation Capacity • Members of the Select Committee visited Provinces in January 2012. One challenge noted from the Northern Cape visit, was inadequate human resources to effectively implement programmes. • The Department has established a dedicated Conditional Grants Management office in the Strategy, Research and Communication Branch at DBE, to monitor and evaluate delivery more efficiently. • This unit will make recommendations to Senior Management, HEDCOM and CEM on the utilisation of the 5% allocated per grant for administration and to appoint dedicated personnel to monitor and track progress on each of the grants.

  17. Limited Monitoring • The NSNP cites the following as some of the challenges: • Lack of cooking equipment at some sites; • Non-compliance with menu guidelines by some service providers; • Lack of involvement of educators in the feeding of children; • No allowance for Subsistence and Travelling (Monitors travel short distances and neglect far flung areas – Northern Cape).

  18. Some mitigating measures • Provinces are allowed an annual allocation to purchase cooking equipment and have to report on this, providing evidence of procurement; • Meal planning workshops have been held with SGBs and educators to enhance compliance with menu guidelines and to advocate for more educator involvement; • Presentations have been made to Provincial Budget Monitoring meetings, raising the importance of making allowance for S & T for NSNP monitors.

  19. Schedule 7: School Infrastructure Backlogs Grant • The total value of this grant is R 2 315 000 000 • The purpose of the grant is • for the eradication of school infrastructure; and • provision of water, sanitation and electricity to schools. • The grant is in its second year and is also referred to as the ASIDI (Accelerated School Infrastructure Delivery Initiative).

  20. Schedule 7: School Infrastructure Backlogs Grant(cont’d) • Provincial allocations: • Eastern Cape: R 1 526 635 000 • Free State: R 160 730 000 • Gauteng: R 45 540 000 • KwaZulu-Natal: R 159 089 000 • Limpopo: R 144 368 000 • Mpumalanga: R 141 519 000 • Northern Cape: R 14 590 000 • North West: R 109 469 000 • Western Cape: R 13 060 000

  21. Inappropriate Structures The budget allocation for the ASIDI programme over the MTEF period is R8.2 billion and allocated as indicated in the table below:

  22. ASIDI Targets The targets are as follows: Specialist classrooms were not part of the original scope on ASIDI but have now been included.

  23. 2012/13 ASIDI INAPPROPRIATE SCHOOLS 50 Schools in the EC to be implemented in the 2012/13 financial year are listed per district below. Assessments have been completed.

  24. 2012/13 ASIDI BASIC SERVICES BACKLOG PER PROVINCE A breakdown of the 2012/13 financial year basic services backlog per province is below:

  25. DORA CONDITIONS FOR THE SCHEDULE 7 (ASIDI) GRANT • Grant-in-kind administered by the national Department of Basic Education (DBE). • DBE must submit a Programme Management Plan which includes detailed project plans, procurement strategies and procurement strategies, projected cash flow schedules and plans detailing the monitoring and evaluation of project implementation of projects funded through this grant to National Treasury for sign off, before requesting the first drawings on this grant.

  26. DORA CONDITIONS • Provincial departments must appoint Programme Planning and Monitoring Teams (PPMTs) that will assist the DBE plan and oversee the implementation of projects. • The DBE must submit monthly project cash flow reports to National Treasury 7 days after the end of each month that show how actual payments and cash flow reconcile with the projected cash flow schedule and explain any deviations from the original projected cash flow. • Provincial departments of education must report on the progress of projects funded through this grant in their annual report and describe how the schools have been considered in their future planning.

  27. LESSONS FROM 2011/12 FINANCIAL YEAR • The programme has been approached through a number of relationships entered into with implementing agents specific to delivery requirements viz. DBSA for the Mud Schools; Mvula Trust; and IDT (through a sanitation programme of the Department of Human Settlements) for Water and Sanitation and Eskom for Electrification. • In the 2011/12 financial year, 50 schools were allocated to DBSA as implementing agent. • The outcomes and outputs of the various implementing agents have not been logically related to an overall ASIDI programme plan. • In those instances where Programme Implementation Plans have been submitted by implementing agents, they have been limited to the projects allocated and have not been adequate to determine if and how they will complete the targeted number of projects within the time and budget parameters.

  28. LESSONS FROM 2011/12 FINANCIAL YEAR (cont’d) • The PEDs and previous initiatives have adopted a practice of handing over project lists to implementing agents and consultants, without adequate control and decision gates. • The consequence has been a loss of control and inadequate control on the programme. • The DBE has noted that all implementing agents have been surprised by the level of monitoring and accountability and, in most instance, have had difficulty in meeting requirements. • Cost of school infrastructure is exorbitant with hidden costs. DBE insisting on renegotiation of price.

  29. IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH • DBE is considering the following implementation measures and principles in 2012/13: • Work Packages be adopted as a mechanism to manage the work breakdown structure but, retain the economy and scale required to accelerate delivery. • The Project Cycle turnaround time can be reduced to accelerate the programme and minimise bottlenecks. • Procurement bottlenecks be minimised by using a range of procurement strategies and expanding the resource pool beyond DBE. • Adopt a mix of delivery modalities increasing the number and diversity of implementing agents. • In addition to traditional procurement and procurement through implementing agents, it is proposed that the DBEenter into strategic relationships with those PEDs who have already established their own resources panels. These rosters would be made available to the programme in the procurement of professional service providers and contractors.

  30. IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH (cont’d) • DBE will negotiate with other National Departments and Department of Public Works in relevant provinces where their rosters are constituted of the relevant built environment skills sets and may already have a geographic focus. • The DBE has initiated a process to implement a framework agreement procurement model. • Implementing Agents, Professional Service Providers and Contractors are pre-qualified. The services can be secured through their inclusion in a pre- approved panel. DBE and the implementing agents have access to the panel appointed through the framework agreement, thus reducing procurement through traditional open tender routes. It has the possibility of attracting larger contractors and professional teams. Project Teams will be assembled from the framework agreement.

  31. PROGRAMME DELIVERY CYCLE • The traditional project cycle is linear and stages are dependent on each other. • Any interference or challenge experienced in the process has a significant impact on the delivery time frame.

  32. PROGRAMME DELIVERY CYCLE (cont’d) • The shorter cycle is proposed whereby: • Undertaking of assessment, scoping and briefing and design steps are completed independent of procurement, construction and closeout. • It will be possible to release different work packages in a diverse range of programmes in response to the available capacity and performance.

  33. REQUIRED CAPACITY TO DELIVER • The current capacity within the DBE and PSU has been tailored to an implementation model that assumed that the programme will be managed through a limited number of strategic relationships with implementing agents. • Further, it had been assumed that the DBE will be able to focus its efforts at the portfolio level relying on the programme and project management capability of its implementing agents. • It has become apparent that the DBE will need to become more hands-on and have a greater degree of control at a project level. • A revised approach that aims to accelerate implementation to the extent that it is able to manage 20 Teams implementing 10 Project each. • Provides a production capacity to manage 200 projects at any time. It should be noted that project duration can be long where EIAs, land availability issues and Geotechnical conditions are encountered. It is therefore imperative to increase the number of active projects at any one time.

  34. REQUIRED CAPACITY TO DELIVER Project Teams (20) • Project Manager (principal agent) • Quantity Surveyor • Architect • Engineer Supplementary DBE Resources (estimates) • Design Supervision Team (4 Architects, 2 quantity surveyors and 2 Engineers) • Contract Administration (4 Administrators + increased legal resource) • Procurement Capacity (1 lead and 4 admin) • Monitoring and reporting (4)

  35. TIME FRAMES

  36. ESTIMATED BUDGETS

  37. RISKS AND MITIGATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION

  38. RISKS AND MITIGATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION

  39. Conclusion • The Department supports the promulgation of the Division of Revenue Bill as an Act of Parliament. Thank you

More Related