IMPROVEMENT OF SCHOOL INFRASTRUCTURE AND LEARNING RESOURCES

1. 1 IMPROVEMENT OF SCHOOL INFRASTRUCTURE AND LEARNING RESOURCES Portfolio Committee on Education 15 August 2006

2. 2 PRESENTATION OUTLINE Legislative framework Spending and budgets Capital Non- personnel recurrent (non-personnel, non-capital) Initiatives and progress

3. 3 National Education Policy Act and South African Schools Act the overall framework to �fund public schools �on an equitable basis �to ensure the proper exercise of the rights of learners to education and the redress of past inequalities in educational provision� South African Schools Act MEC to provide sufficient learning places School funding norms regulate More equitable allocation of non-personnel expenditure (pro-poor allocation) Managing of school allocations (cost centres) & greater autonomy where appropriate (S21 Schools) Removing barriers to learning through no fee schools and regulating fee exemptions

4. 4

5. 5

6. 6

7. 7

8. 8

9. 9

10. 10

11. 11

12. 12

13. 13 Provincial Infrastructure Budget Allocations

14. 14 Amendment of SASA Act and school funding norms: Formal introduction of no fee schools Refinement of fee exemptions In 2006 7,687 no fee schools (2,6 million learners) on voluntary basis In 2007 Equally poor learners to experience equal minimum funding standards, regardless of province Provinces in position to afford no fee threshold (R554 per learner) anticipate substantial increase in no fee schools & no of learners covered

15. 15 Quality Improvement, Development, Support and Upliftment Programme � �Qidsup� Directs provinces to provide a resource based intervention in poor schools Identify poorest schools and resource gaps Dinaledi Schools

16. 16 Major increases in spending on NPNC Average non-personnel school allocation increased by 80% from R240 to R435 during 2002-2005 (2005 prices) Personnel Progression system agreed Amendment of post-provisioning norm to support poor schools

17. 17 Coverage (Stats SA , General Household Survey) Continuing high coverage and tending improvements: 97,9% of 7-15 year olds attending an educational institution in 2005, compared to 96,3% in 2002 70% of 5-year olds attending in 2005 compared to 40,2% in 2002 85,9% of 6-year olds attending in 2005 compared to 59,6% in 2002 25% increase in full-time equivalents in FET colleges between 1998 and 2004 Good progress on removing school fees as obstacle to access Decline in proportion raising school fees as obstacle, from 39,6% in 2002 to 35,4% in 2005 (GHS 2005) Latest complete info on fee exemptions not available but evidence that system is working � high proportion of exemption applications grant (82% in 2004) 7 687 no fee schools with adequacy benchmark funding introduced on voluntary basis in 2005, affecting 2,6 million learners

18. 18 Key drivers of quality and planning Need to be able to assess learner achievements to prioritise interventions, support teachers and to promote accountability Good progress Systemic evaluation institutionalised; critical feedback to the system & need to expand (included in 2007 priorities) Integrated quality management system operational for teacher performance assessments Significant roll-out of SA-SAMS (electronic schools management system) � important basis for roll-out of learner tracking system Western Cape introduction of learner identification & tracking system; design and tenders for a national system proceeding Audit of school conditions (update of School Register of Need) as base for asset registers and facilities planning and management proceeding. More than 15,000 institutions assessed by end July 2006

19. 19 > Utilisation of earlier funding � 2004 Priorities 2004 Budget saw: Increases in overall provincial equitable share (about R20 billion) partly motivated for in terms of curriculum implementation (especially FET); prioritising of non-personnel non-capital expenditure in public ordinary school education); capital expenditure in education Provincial infrastructure grants increases (R1,5 billion) Transfer of PSNP Result Successful transfer of PSNP & good progress in building & widening the programme Saw strengthening of NPNC & capital budgets

20. 20 2005 saw Additions to overall provincial equitable share (R7,5 billion) FET college recapitalisation (R1 billion from 2005/06, R0,05 billion for preparation & initiation) Educator remuneration (R6,9 billion) Result Growth in additions to education slowed Strong planning for FET recap; money being transferred to colleges Remuneration agreement only reached in 2006

21. 21 The Department of Education having monitored and evaluated the infrastructure delivery method, have identified the challenges and are in the process of have developing a strategy to address these: Joint meetings will take place with PED , the implementing agent to review the progress of all projects. A meeting with National Public Works to review the delivery chain with regards to infrastructure delivery. The Department will strengthen its participation in the Infrastructure Delivery improvement Programme (IDIP) of National Treasury in order to develop an infrastructure development model. The department is currently reviewing various alternative building technologies and building materials The development of a comprehensive audit to establish base line information will also be undertaken Development of minimum infrastructure packages for new and existing

22. 22 The department will cost engineer the current designs in relation to effective delivery by implementing agents Alternative financing models are also being reviewed The department is currently developing a preventative maintenance strategy, that would deal with the day to day maintenance, emergency maintenance, preventative maintenance. The development of Public Private Partnerships will be investigated to ensure that cost effective AND speedy delivery can take place. The schools Register Of Needs (SRN) will be updated in line with the national schools audit and the infrastructure monitoring system.

23. 23 The Minister will meet jointly with the MEC�s for Education and Public Works to discuss issues of service delivery and to agree to a turnaround strategy. The roles and responsibilities of all role players will be clearly be outlined and their performance will be monitored. Clear targets and timeframes will be set after consultation with Cabinet.

24. 24 April 2005 Joint MinMec met in April 2005 to iron creases in service delivery between Public Works and PEDs A joint task team was set up to deal with blockages in delivery PEDs and PDPW � Mecs and Hods to collaborate � service leave agreements to be finalised National Treasuries Infrastructure Delivery programme adopted DoE to received monthly reports on targets and new incidents � driven by MECs > Process undertaken April 2005-April 2006

25. 25 April 2006 - Joint task team reports. Finds poor planning and alignment of planning cycle perpetuates roll-overs leading to poor quality spending Lack of capacity and skills Inefficient processes for the procurement of professional services Poor relations and lack of effective communication within departments > Process undertaken April 2005-April 2006

26. 26 April 2006 - Joint task team reports. Significant progress on IDIP A proposal on alignment of budgeting and planning � adopted Capacitation plans and planning toolkit developed for PEDs by IDIP Service delivery agreements entered into Appointment of technical assistants National Audit of schools underway and on track > Process undertaken April 2005-April 2006

27. 27 While needs remain huge some progress in planning, budgeting and provision Infrastructure Development Improvement Programme (IDIP � National Treasury) Assessed infrastructure capacity and plans for capacitation Technical support Implementing better alignment of planning and budgeting and hence spending National Education Infrastructure Management System (NEIMS) Update of School Register of Needs Strengthen through more refined assessment, more detailed information, accessibility of data, GIS mapping and school level information (including photographs) Completed April 2007. Nearly 20,000 school institutions assessed to date Strengthened basis & information for asset registers, facilities management systems and planning & budgeting

28. 28 2005/06 5,222 classrooms added to existing schools 987 schools provided with water 2,259 school provided with sanitation 488 schools provided with electricity While needs remain huge some progress in planning, budgeting and provision First 3 months of 2006/07 8 new schools completed (target 168) 901 classrooms at existing schools completed (target of 5,827) 179 schools provided with water (target 597) 294 schools provided with sanitation (target 2,211) Little progress reported on electrification but coordination and information problematic

29. 29 Status of needs, targets and progress �

30. 30

31. 31 Strong legislative framework in place to drive adequacy and equity to improve learning outcomes & quality Legal framework being strengthened to ensure access and resourcing for quality While variety of resource pressures, budgets improving to improve capital and non-personnel recurrent resourcing Key initiatives and monitoring in place to drive further planning and provisioning Need to assess whether there is a need for a national building programme to effect economies of scale especially in light of pressures on infrastructure needs in the economy

32. 32 Once the client department has approved the IPIP submitted by the implementing agent the implementing agent is able to continue with detailed project designs, followed by the project tendering process. These phases should take up most of the following year resulting in very detailed business plans with associated realistic costing, timeframes and cashflows for each project. From these business plans and cashflows it can be established exactly how long each project should take and, if a project is to span a financial year, what portion of the project will be completed within each financial year. Therefore project implementation for projects planned in Year 0 of the MTEF would typically start in year 2 of the MTEF as opposed to Year 1. However, the detailed planning and design now undertaken would assist in establishing exactly what multi-year commitments are required to be made to complete the projects that would span financial years. Multi-year commitments must be funded from the year in which they are to be implemented and should not be funded from rolled over funds.Once the client department has approved the IPIP submitted by the implementing agent the implementing agent is able to continue with detailed project designs, followed by the project tendering process. These phases should take up most of the following year resulting in very detailed business plans with associated realistic costing, timeframes and cashflows for each project. From these business plans and cashflows it can be established exactly how long each project should take and, if a project is to span a financial year, what portion of the project will be completed within each financial year. Therefore project implementation for projects planned in Year 0 of the MTEF would typically start in year 2 of the MTEF as opposed to Year 1. However, the detailed planning and design now undertaken would assist in establishing exactly what multi-year commitments are required to be made to complete the projects that would span financial years. Multi-year commitments must be funded from the year in which they are to be implemented and should not be funded from rolled over funds.

33. 33 By virtue of the fact that the Infrastructure Delivery Cycle spans a period of 4 years it is clear that in any 1 year an official will concurrently be dealing with different activities of 4 budget cycles, viz: Completing the implementation of planned multi-year projects whose implementation started the previous year; Starting the implementation of new projects which were designed & tendered in the previous year; Starting the design of new projects which have been identified in the Infrastructure Programme Management Plan (IPMP); Updating the Infrastructure Plan and preparing the Infrastructure Programme Management Plan (IPMP) & Infrastructure Programme Implementation Plan (IPIP) The question arises; �Do departments have the required capacity to effectively manage all these concurrent infrastructure delivery activities?�By virtue of the fact that the Infrastructure Delivery Cycle spans a period of 4 years it is clear that in any 1 year an official will concurrently be dealing with different activities of 4 budget cycles, viz: Completing the implementation of planned multi-year projects whose implementation started the previous year; Starting the implementation of new projects which were designed & tendered in the previous year; Starting the design of new projects which have been identified in the Infrastructure Programme Management Plan (IPMP); Updating the Infrastructure Plan and preparing the Infrastructure Programme Management Plan (IPMP) & Infrastructure Programme Implementation Plan (IPIP) The question arises; �Do departments have the required capacity to effectively manage all these concurrent infrastructure delivery activities?�

34. 34 THANK YOU