presentation on conditional grants land care and comprehensive agricultural support programme casp n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
4 th May 2006 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
4 th May 2006

4 th May 2006

101 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

4 th May 2006

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript


  2. Land Care

  3. Projects 2004 – 2005 • Klipspruit River and wetlands clean – up (Soweto) • Mamelodi LandCare Resource Centre – Permaculture training • Mobilisation of civil society (Klipspruit) 2005 – 2006 • Dinokeng Alien Invasive plants removal

  4. Land Care: Trends

  5. Land Care: Trends

  6. Non-financial outputs

  7. Challenges 2004-5 • Expenditure for the “mobilisation of civil society” only undertaken in 2005-6 due to the fact that the Department was informed during latter part of the 2004-5 year of additional funds • Non-alignment of provincial and local municipality process – delays in implementation of Mamelodi project to 2005-6 2005-6 • Delays in signing of MoUs and Business Plans with Working for Water.

  8. Monitoring • Weekly Site visits to monitor progress on operations. • Declared Weeds and Invader Plants (DWIP) committee meetings on a monthly – monitors progress and financial expenditure. • Expenditure reports (DoA)– monthly. • DORA (DoA) reports – quarterly basis. • EPWP reports (to GPTRPW, DEAT, DoA)- quarterly basis.

  9. Compliance with monthly reporting • Challenges of getting monthly reports are addressed in DWIP forums and project steering committees. • Cooperative governance – partnership with DoA as funders, GDACE as managers and DWAFF who assist with operations.

  10. Business plans • Submitted to the National Department of Agriculture. • Signed in Nov/December.

  11. CASP

  12. PURPOSE • To provide a status report to the Select Committee on Finance in respect of the on-going Land Care and CASP projects undertaken by GDACE. • To update the select committee on Finance about the implementation of the 2005/06 Land Care and CASP projects. • To highlight the challenges faced by the province with regards to the preparations for the project plans and ensuring compliance with DORA and the funding agreement.

  13. BACKGROUND - CASP • The budget for the 2005/6 financial year was R 5 727 000. • The grant per farmer is limited to R150 000.00. • The grant can be higher or lower provided that a feasibility study by the Agricultural Economists in the Department indicates that the beneficiary can generate an equal net income in a reasonable time span with the produce from the commodities for which the infrastructure is intended. • The purpose with the CASP conditional grants is to provide grants to individual beginner farmers for on-farm infrastructure and training. • 70% is spent on LRAD and 10% on Household Food Security and 20% on other small and emerging farmers.

  14. Expenditure pattern

  15. CHALLENGES 1 • During 2004/2005 our main challenge was capacity constraints. • (Agriculture has since been elevated to a Chief Directorate with three Directors and capacity has been expanded by 25%). • Lack of positive collaboration with certain service provider who demand upfront payment before they can deliver the goods.

  16. CHALLENGES 2 • Lack of positive collaboration with certain service provider who demand upfront payment before they can deliver the goods. • Service providers are reluctant to responsibility for delivery of goods. • Shortage of service providers in Gauteng with specialized services as required by applicants. • The demand for on & off-farm infrastructure by emerging farmers is more than the available budget.

  17. EXPLANATION OF THE ROLLOVER 1 • The first quarter of the financial year focussed on rounding off activities of the 2004/05 CASP financial year thus resulting in the delay in the commencement of activities for the 2005/06 financial year. • Actual procurement commenced in the third quarter as we streamlined processes of farmers’ needs identification, identifying compliant service providers, sourcing quotations and placing orders.

  18. EXPLANATION OF THE ROLLOVER • Coordination and cooperation with service providers negatively affected service delivery as most service providers requested for upfront payment while holding on to orders. This is against procurement procedures. • The delays caused by the service providers who mailed invoice resulted in delayed payments.

  19. PROPOSED REMEDIAL ACTIONS1 • As on 03-05-06 50% actual payments have gone through the system. • The DLA (Department of Land Affairs) provided a list of all restitution and LRAD projects in Gauteng which should be considered for funding. • The Department is currently identifying a dedicated manager whose focus will be the unlocking of the procurement bottlenecks.

  20. PROPOSED REMEDIAL ACTIONS 2 • The branch is optimistic that upon unlocking these bottlenecks we will be able to disburse the grants. • The department will not only focus on Gauteng service providers but will also source quotation from other provinces.

  21. Monitoring • Weekly Site visits by extension officers to monitor progress on operations. • Expenditure reports (DoA)– monthly. • DORA (DoA) reports – quarterly basis.

  22. Conclusion.