e-Government and the e-Readiness of NPOs in the Western Cape

1. e-Government and the e-Readiness of NPOs in the Western Cape Steve Vosloosteve@molotech.org.za

2. Background • Definitions: NPO, PGWC • Context of study • NPOs recognised as important stakeholders and intermediaries between govt and citizens • “Digital divide” exists • NPOs at different levels of ICT-enablement • e-Govt in the WC: holistic approach requires the building of information society / knowledge economy • What are ICT adoption levels among NPOs? • Where do you start? e-Readiness assessment

3. RealAccess to ICT

4. Research Objectives • Determine if location of NPO (inside/outside CT Municipality) influences real access factors • Determine constraints to greater ICT-enablement of NPOs • Make recommendations to PGWC regarding the improvement of NPO e-readiness levels

5. Research Design • Target pop: 2328 registered NPOs in WC • Random sample: 500 NPOs • Stratified on location: inside / outside CT Municipality (250 / 250) • Collection method: posted questionnaire • Response: 100 NPOs • Descriptive & inferential statistical analysis

6. Demographics Location of respondent NPOs • Inside CT: greater annual income • 66% of NPOs have < 10 permanent staff

7. Research Limitations • NPOs outside CT Municipality are not all equal (George vs Bitterfontein) • NPOs inside CT Municipality are not all equal (Khayalitsha vs Constantia) • Didn’t include informal / unregistered NPOs • Questionnaire only in English • Not all 12 real access factors considered

8. Findings …

9. Physical Access to ICT • Based on contact details of NPOs

10. Physical Access to ICT • Based on question of access: yes/no?

11. Physical Access to ICT • No. of computers

12. Physical Access to ICT • Sharing email/Internet information with non-connected stakeholders • Much more commonplace inside CT • How is info shared? • Hardcopy distribution, e.g. circulating printouts, via fax or via post (46%) • Forwarding emails (to NPOs who don’t have WWW access) (42%) • Verbally, e.g. discussions, debates or telephonically (31%) • Reports, documented research, newsletters, etc. (15%)

13. Affordability • Source of computer equipment: • Self-funded (48%) • SA donations (36%) • International donations (16%) • No bank loans taken

14. Affordability • Constraints to increasing computer use (in order of importance): • High cost of computers or other information technology • Internet charges • Lack of training on how to use computers • Lack of knowledge of what computers can do for the organisation • Theft / insurance / cost of security • Faulty equipment • Computers not seen as valuable for the org.

15. Affordability • Do benefits of using computers outweigh the costs? Yes • Saves time & money • “Must have” • Internet banking • Communication • Electronic record keeping • Professionalism No • “Not our priority”

16. Capacity and Training • Employee skill levels and use of computers

17. Capacity and Training • Does your organisation provide computer training (in-house or outsourced)?

18. Capacity and Training • What type of training is given?

19. Relevant Content • Do you access Govt information on the WWW? • Yes: 52% • Most commonly visited sites: • www.gov.za • www.sars.gov.za • www.labour.gov.za

20. Integration into Daily Routines (Options: daily, weekly, monthly, less than once a month, never)

21. Trust in Technology • Organisations thought it safe to use a computer to: • Send messages to colleagues or stakeholders • Pay an account • File government forms • Purchase goods or services

22. Public Support and Political Will • Who should take responsibility for improving access to computers in your organisation? • The organisation itself (74%) • Funders (38%) • Provincial government (36%) • Local government (24%) • Businesses (16%) • National government (15%) • Individuals (15%) • Community organisations (12%)

23. Public Support and Political Will • Has the government (local, provincial, or national) influenced your organisation's use of computers? • Yes: 12% • Main influence: by providing documents, proposals, contracts, etc. electronically (email or on Web)

24. Public Support and Political Will • Rank the importance of the following activities for the PGWC: • Make computers (and Internet access) more affordable • Improve access to computers or the Internet for local communities • Provide training on how to use computers • Make the Internet safer • Make it easier to interact with government online, incl. filing forms • Make access to government information easier

25. Public Support and Political Will • Interested in working with the PGWC to provide input to its future technology initiatives? • Yes: 61% • Types of support/roles: • Assist in computer training communities (capacity & facilities) • Vocalise the needs of communities • Liaise with communities and other NPOs • “Guinea pigs” (pilots, feasibility studies, etc.)

26. Conclusion • Influence of location of NPO

27. Conclusion • Constraint 1: High cost of ICT • TCO: hardware, software (+ upgrades), internet access, maintenance, training, theft & insurance! • Compounded by: • Post-94 non-profit economic dynamics • IT not core function of NPOs • Constraint 2: Lack of training • Too expensive • Low budget allocation • Constraint 3: Lack of basic ICT (outside CT)

28. Conclusion • Author’s Recommendations to Government • Play a supportive role – create a framework for self-help ICT enablement: • Reduce costs (subsidize equipment, training, etc.) • Reduce Internet charges (e-rate) • Promote e-literacy / Push ICT training • Work with NPOs, PPPs, accredit, train the trainers • Popularise ICT and its benefits

29. Centre for e-Innovation Projects • Cape GatewayEasy access to government info and services • Cape AccessICT access for rural communities • Cape Skillse-Literacy programme

30. Questions??? Steve Vosloo steve@molotech.org.za www.molotech.org.za