Skills Development Provinces and SETAs 2006 – 2007 - 2008

1. Skills Development Provinces and SETAs 2006 – 2007 - 2008

2. AGENDA

3. Situation Analysis Where from ? Where to? No of Years S/C Skills / ESSA NQF / QCTO ASGI-SA/JIPSA NIPF / IPAP SDA-Bill NSDS3 SETA3 NSDS2 SETA2 SDA-A NSDS1 SETA1 SDLA SDA Past Future Footnote: Refer Acronyms Handout

4. SETA Performance Management Framework • Policy/Mandate: Skills Development Act • Strategy : NSDS {Current =2005-2010} • Regulations : Service Level Agreement • Performance Assessment Scorecard • ESSA based Performance and Governance Management System

5. Performance AssessmentScorecard • 5 x KRAs endorsed by the National Skills Authority • NSDS 2005 - 2010 Success Indicators • 16 out of 20 apply to SETAs • 2005 – 2006 could only measure 7 out 16 • 2006 – 2007 could only measure 14 out of 16 • 2007 – 2008 will only measure 15 out of 15 {16} • SI 2.4 National Standard in Good SD Practice – Now Annulled • SI 5.3 Quality of Learning dependent on SAQA- • NSDS 2005 - 2010 Equity Principles • NSDS 2005 -2010 Governance • NSDS 2005 - 2010 Funds Management • NSDS 2005 - 2010 Provincial Linkages • Reported for 2005 – 2006 • Measured for 2006 – 2007 onwards

6. NSDS 2005-2010: SUCCESS INDICATOR 1.1 Target: Signed updated SSP (annual) is submitted to DoL on the 31 August 2007: a) Signature of SETA Board Chairperson appended to the SSP b) Signature of the SETA agreed growth, development and equity strategy drivers and skills development bodies at national levelappended to the SSP c) SETA SSP to be evaluated and approved by DoL Executive Manager responsible for quality assurance. Performance Status: All SETAs submitted their SSPs timely and have loaded the OFO Coded Scarce and Critical list onto ESSA as required and the list is published on the DoL Website. 19 SETA SSPs were approved outright with additional 3 SETAs having received conditional approval of their SSPs.

7. NSDS 2005-2010: SUCCESS INDICATOR 1.2 SETA Collective Target = 8847 SDFs and/or Sector Specialists (SS) SETA Collective Achievement = 16850 SDFs and/or SS Trained Collective Over Achievement = 8003 SDFs and/or SS Trained The following four SETAs CETA, HWSETA, THETA and TETA underperformed due to lack of Sector Guides and/or SDFs and Sector Specialists not trained in accordance to minimum required standards. Figure 1.2 (A): Number of SDFs and Sector Specialists trained in 2005/2006 – 2006/2007

8. NSDS 2005-2010: SUCCESS INDICATOR 2.1 SETA Collective Target = 3270 Large Firms and 4279 Medium Firms SETA Collective Achievement = 4385 Large Firms and 5380 Medium Firms Collective Over Achievement = 1115 Large Firms and 110 Medium Firms Only Services SETA has under performed on this indicator in terms of supporting medium firms in terms of the minimum required standards requireddue to non participation in the mandatory grant process by medium firms in the sector Figure 2.1 (A): Number of Large and Medium Firms Supported 2005/2006 – 2006/2007

9. NSDS 2005-2010: SUCCESS INDICATOR 2.2 SETA Collective Target = 21882 Small Levy Paying Firms to be Supported SETA Collective Achievement = 26553 Small Levy Paying Firms to be Supported Collective Over Achievement = 4671 Shortfall of Small Levy Paying Firms The following nine SETAs CHIETA, CTFL, CETA, HWSETA, LGSETA, MQA, THETA, TETA and W&RSETA have under performed in terms of the minimum required standards due to non participation of small levy paying firms in the mandatory levy grant process Figure 2.2 (A): Number of Small Levy Paying Firms Supported 2005/2006 – 2006/2007

10. NSDS 2005-2010: SUCCESS INDICATOR 2.3 PSETA is the only SETA that is required to conclude a Service Level Agreement with DoL on this Success Indicator. • Target = 138 National and Provincial Government Departments spend at least 1% personal budget on training • 92 National and Provincial Government Departments reported on the expenditure of 1% personal budget on training PSETA has performed below average in terms of accessing information from Government Departments as required due to lack of support from some Government Departments. ```Note: A process has been established by PSETA in which detailed information is being collected for this purpose outside the normal WSP/ATR submissions process

11. NSDS 2005-2010: SUCCESS INDICATOR 2.5 SETA Collective Target = 2571 BEE Firms and BEE Co-Operatives to be Supported SETA Collective Achievement = 1293 BEE Firms and BEE Co-Operatives Supported Collective Underperformance = 4671 Shortfall of BEE Firms and BEE Co-Operatives The following eleven SETAs; BANKSETA, CHIETA, ESETA,FOODBEV, HWSETA, INSETA, LGSETA, MQA, SASSETA, THETA and TETA have under performed in terms of the minimum required standardsdue to amongst other things lack of policies in the SETAs to ensure support is provided to BEE Firms and BEE Co-Operatives. Figure 2.5 (A): Number of Small BEE Firms Supported 2005/2006 – 2006/2007

12. NSDS 2005-2010: SUCCESS INDICATOR 2.7 SETA Collective Target = 60652 and 43612 Learners to Enter/Complete ABET Learning Programmes SETA Collective Achievement = 46095 and 12748 Learners Entered/Completed Learning Programmes Collective Underperformance = 17040 and 33347 shortfall of ABET Learners not Entered/Completed Learning Programmes The following ten SETAs; BANKSETA, CHIETA, CETA, ESETA, LGSETA, MAPPP, MERSETA, SASSETA, THETA and TETA have under performed in terms of the minimum required standardsattributed by amongst others, lack of participation by employers in ABET initiatives and participation by workers as ABET is mostly implemented after working hours. Figure 2.7 (A): Number of learners who entered and completed ABET programmes 2005/2006 – 2006/2007

13. NSDS 2005-2010: SUCCESS INDICATOR 2.8 SETA Collective Target = 32479 and 17672 Workers to Enter/Complete Learning Programmes SETA Collective Achievement = 57577 and 21423 Workers Entered/Completed Learning Programmes Collective Over Achievement = 32479 and 17672 Workers Entered/Completed Learning Programmes The following four SETAs; CETA, MAPPP, SASSETA and THETA have under performed in terms of the minimum required standards due to various factors including in some SETAs the effect of governance related problems and lack of/or inadequate systems Figure 2.8 (A): Number of workers entered and completed learning programmes 2005/2006 – 2006/2007

14. NSDS 2005-2010: SUCCESS INDICATOR 3.2 SETA Collective Target = 2585 Small NLPEs, NGOs, CBOs and CBCs to be Supported SETA Collective Achievement = 4204 Small NLPEs, NGOs, CBOs and CBCs Supported Collective Over Performance = 1619 Small NLPEs, NGOs, CBOs and CBCs Supported The following six SETAs; CETA, ESETA, FIETA, LGSETA, TETA and W&RSETA have under performed in terms of the minimum required standards due lack of policies and strategic interventions to support Small NLPEs, NGOs, CBOs and CBCs. Figure 3.2 (A): Number of NLPEs, NGOs, CBOs and CBCs supported 2005/2006 – 2006/2007

15. NSDS 2005-2010: SUCCESS INDICATOR 4.1 SETA Collective Target = 30258 and 15129 Unemployed Learners to Enter/Complete Learning Programmes SETA Collective Achievement = 41011 and 12251 Unemployed Learners Entered/Completed Learning Programmes Collective Over Achievement = 25098 and 3751 Unemployed Learners Entered/Completed Learning Programmes The following two SETAs; CETA and W&RSETA have under performed in terms of the minimum required standards. Figure 4.1 (A): Number of unemployed learners entered and completed learning programmes 2005/2006 – 2006/2007

16. NSDS 2005-2010: SUCCESS INDICATOR 4.2 SETA Collective Target = 9454 and 8695 Learners to be Supported to Gain Work Experiential Learning and be Placed SETA Collective Achievement = 6618 and 3 Learners Supported to Gain Work Experiential Learning and be Placed Collective Underperformance = Shortfall of 2836 and 8692 Learners not Supported to Gain Work Experiential Learning and be Placed The following twelve SETAs; CHIETA, CTFL, CETA, ESETA, HWSETA, INSETA, MQA, MERSETA, AGRISETA, PSETA, SERVICES SETA and THETA have under performed in terms of the minimum required standardsdue to lack of appropriate Sector agreements and inadequate support by the companies to ensure that learners are supported accordingly. Figure 4.2 (A): Number of learners gained work experiential learning and placed 2005/2006 – 2006/2007

17. NSDS 2005-2010: SUCCESS INDICATOR 4.3 SETA Collective Target = 2207 and 1544 NVC Learners to be Trained and Mentored to Establish Sustainable Businesses SETA Collective Achievement = 3287 and 755 NVC Learners Trained and Mentored to Establish Sustainable Businesses Collective Over Achievement = 1080 NVC Learners Trained and Mentored Collective Underperformance = Shortfall of 789 Sustainable Businesses Established The following eleven SETAs; CHIETA, CTFL, CETA, ESETA, INSETA, LGSETA, MERSETA, SASSETA, THETA and TETA have under performed in terms of the minimum required standards due to number of factors including the lack of partnerships with relevant stakeholders to ensure learners trained and mentored can ultimately establish sustainable businesses Figure 4.3 (A): Number of learners gained work experiential learning and placed 2005/2006 – 2006/2007

18. NSDS 2005-2010: SUCCESS INDICATOR 5.1 SETA Collective Target = 296 ISOEs to be Supported SETA Collective Achievement = 476 ISOEs Supported Collective Over Performance = 189 additional ISOEs Supported The following eight SETAs; ETDPSETA, ESETA, LGSETA, MERSETA, AGRISETA, PSETA, THETA and TETA have under performed in terms of the minimum required standards due to lack of policy guidelines and it is expected that the ISOE policy developed by DoL will provide a framework that will assist to improve the current situation for the future. Figure 5.1 (A): Number of ISOEs supported in 2005/2006 – 2006/2007

19. NSDS 2005-2010: SUCCESS INDICATOR 5.2 SETA Collective Target = 94 accredited providers to manage the delivery of NVC qualification to be Supported SETA Collective Achievement = 476 accredited providers to manage the delivery of NVC qualification Supported Collective Over Performance = 39 additional accredited providers to manage the delivery of NVC qualification Supported The following eight SETAs; CHIETA, CETA, ESETA, HWSETA, MQA, MERSETA, SASSETA, AGRISETA and PSETA have under performed in terms of the minimum required standards due to lack of policy guidelines on accreditation of NVC providers could be inhibiting good performance in some SETAs. Figure 5.2 (A): Number of NVC providers supported 2005/2006 –2006/2007

20. NSDS 2005 – 2010 SETA PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT RATING SCALE

21. KRA 2: NSDS 2005-2010: EQUITY PRINCIPLES The SETAs are being measured against all learners participating in skills development supported by SETAs against a target of 85% Black, 54% Women and 4% People with Disabilities. The following ten SETAs; CHIETA, CETA, ESETA, INSETA, MERSETA, SASSETA, SERVICES SETA, THETA, TETA and W&RSETA have underperformed in terms of the minimum required standards to measure performance of SETAs. Lack of participation and support by firms in different sectors has attributed to the underperformance of some SETAs to meet and perform according to performance requirements.

22. KRA 3: NSDS 2005-2010: GOVERNANCE Performance of SETAs is measured against governance related issues including Audit Reports by the Auditor General incorporated in SETA Annual Reports, compliance to PFMA reporting requirements to DoL on Financial and Non Financial issues, and the status of operation of Audit Committees in SETAs. The following two SETAs; LGSETA and PSETA have underperformed in terms of the minimum required standards to measure performance of SETAs.

23. KRA 4: NSDS 2005-2010: FUNDS MANAGEMENT • Performance of SETAs is measured against the level of expenditure of the: • 10% Administration Funds • 50% Mandatory Levy Grant Funds • 20% Discretionary Grant Annual Funds + Grants Surplus Reserves. • Only HWSETA has performed poorly in terms of the minimum standards required due to lack of participation by firms in the mandatory levy grant process and lack of capacity within the SETA.

24. KRA 5: NSDS 2005-2010: PROVINCIAL LINKAGES • The KRA requires SETAs increase their visibility and participation in all provinces through: • Physical and/or indirect permanent presence in the provinces • Indirect temporary and/or non physical presence in the provinces • Active participation in the PSDF coordinated by DoL in the provinces • Active participation with the PGDS coordinated by offices of Premiers in the provinces. • During the financial year under review the following five SETAs; FIETA, INSETA, SASSETA, PSETA and THETA have underperformed in terms of the minimum required standards which may have been attributed by lack of resources and adequate planning to ensure visibility in provinces.

33. Two Year Comparative Analysis

34. SETA “specific” Performance Management Action Plans implemented by DoL • Encourage/Reward SETAs that performed well and ensure continuous improvement to sustain benchmarks • Engage with individual SETAs regarding specific deficiencies and ensure implementation of remedial action • Implement ESSA based Performance and Governance Management System

35. ESSA based Performance and Governance Management System Phase 1 13 Steps Phase 2 8 Steps Phase 3 11 Steps Monthly Operational Processes Ministerial Instruction Process SETA Administration rocesses SDA Section 10A SDA Section 14A SDA Section 15/9A SLA + M&S Management Improvement Management Crisis Management 20 SETAs 1 SETAs 2 SETAs

36. AGENDA

37. Current SETA Legislated Governance & Funding Model • Section 9 (2) of SDA requires SETAs to be established within discrete sectors (economic) Nationally not Provincially • Result is that funding model is a national economic sector funding model • Raised as a Scope and Mandate issue in NEDLAC SETA Review Report

39. How can SETAs be required to Legislatively allocate and report on spend per province? No of Years S/C Skills / ESSA SDA-Bill NQF / QCTO ASGI-SA/JIPSA NIPF / IPAP NSDS3 SETA3 NSDS2 SETA2 SDA-A NSDS1 SETA1 SDLA SDA Past Future Footnote: Refer Acronyms Handout

40. SDA Amendment Bill 2008Section 36: Regulations • Addition to empower for provinces: • The Minister may, after consulting with the NSA, make regulations regarding the establishment of skills development forums in respect of each provincial office and specifying the operation, composition and functions of the forums;

41. National Skills FundSocial Development Funding Window 2010 Target 450 000 trained (90 000 per year) 70% placed 25% accredited training 2005/06 Trained 103 168 = 114% Placed 55 376 = 54% 10% accredited training 2006/07 Trained 118 153 = 131% Placed 90 691 = 77% 36%accredited training Total trained: 221 321 (49% of 2010 Target) Total placed: 146 067 (46% of 2010 Target)

42. National Skills FundStrategic Projects • Aim • To support skills development initiatives from provincial governments in line with their Provincial Growth and Development Strategies (PGDS)’s to drive and sustain provincial macro economic, social and development strategies • Progress • A total of 7,400 learners have been recruited and are in training in the various provincial strategic projects during the reporting period. The total amount of R141 m was spent against the allocated R886 million • Key Challenges • Provinces have continued to be challenged by the task of setting up the projects. These included inter alia setting up project management structures, appointing providers and negotiating workplaces for learners. • Recommendations • High level intervention that can be also linked to future plans

43. AGENDA

44. SETA Learning Programme Audit 82% Completion Rate 19% Completion Rate

45. Learnership Impact Evaluation • Study 1 – December 2004 • 77% placement of unemployed learners • 73% placement at actual learning places • Study 2 – About to be completed by HSRC • Broader scope, 8000 learners across all SETAs • In depth analysis by age, race, gender, province • Detailed presentation to be shared with Parliamentary Committees in near future • Integral to Economic Cluster PoA & APEX Project 9 • Recommendations on the Learnership impact evaluation report implemented by 31st March 2009

46. Thank You