NSFAS, CHE, SAQA & QCTO 2022/23 Annual Performance Plans

Meeting report

National Student Financial Aid Scheme Annual Performance Plan 2022/23
 
Mr Andile Nongogo, Chief Executive Officer, NSFAS, presented the annual performance plan of the entity for the 2022/23 financial year. The presentation covered the usual NSFAS mandate; updated situational analysis; strategic outcome-oriented goals over the five years; outcomes, outputs, indicators, baselines, annual targets and projections.

NSFAS updated the Committee on disbursements to universities and colleges. On 1 April, it received the first tranche of its allocated budget from the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET). The entity had immediately announced in a circular communication to institutions that funds would be disbursed to universities and technical and vocational education and training (TVET) colleges by 8 April. Institutions were reminded to submit registration data for processing by no later than 6 April, as NSFAS was unable to disburse to students /institutions where registration data had not been submitted.

The planned disbursement for 8 April was the first in the 2022 academic year, given the lack of cash reserves that had made it possible for NSFAS to provide upfront payments to institutions at the start of the academic year. NSFAS could only accommodate a tuition upfront made to colleges in February 2022. Some colleges used the tuition upfront to disburse student allowances, but others did not. There were no upfront payments to universities. All universities had used their resources to advance allowances to NSFAS-funded students.

As for registration data, universities had submitted registration data for 459 141 students out of 597 700 provisionally funded students. NSFAS had made payments to 416 577 students whose registration data had been successfully linked and complied with the funding criteria. 35 372 registration data records were not processed because they did not comply, mainly with the qualification rules, as well as the N+ rules for universities. These would be shared with the universities to correct before reprocessing. The challenge with this was that students whose registration data was submitted and was not successfully verified may not receive allowances until these issues are resolved. In addition, it was evident in the data submitted that there was a possible 145 751 outstanding registration data from institutions, as compared to funded students and 2021 registration statuses.

Regarding university disbursements, all universities were paid allowances only (books, accommodation, transport, disability, personal care and living allowances). The first tranche received was not sufficient to cover tuition and allowances in one disbursement. Tuition would therefore be prioritised in the next payment. Total payment to universities was R7.189 bn. Universities submitted claims for 451 949 students, 416 577 were disbursed, 35 372 were non-compliant, and those were not paid pending remediation.

TVET colleges had submitted registration data for 147 041 students out of 359 195 provisionally funded students. NSFAS had made payments to 103 432 students whose registration data was successfully linked and complied with the funding criteria. It was evident in the data submitted that over 200 000 registration data files were outstanding from colleges. NSFAS had identified TVET colleges that required assistance, and servicing support would be deployed to institutions throughout April to assist with the loading of registration data at colleges. Thereafter, NSFAS would also be making weekly payments until the backlog was cleared.

An upfront tuition payment of R562 million was made to TVET colleges in February 2022. A system-based disbursement was made to the value of R717.6 million, based on registration data received from the TVET colleges. Four institutions received payments from NSFAS directly and paid students; these colleges received only tuition and college residential fees. The allowances were paid to the students directly.

As an update for the close-out project, all 26 universities had responded with the files, while 41 out of 50 (82%) of TVET colleges had responded with the files. Non-responsive TVET colleges had received a legal letter, stating the NSFAS position on their non-compliance with the close out process and the consequence of their action. NSFAS had concluded the reconciliation process based on the data available at its disposal.

Lastly, the tender for the laptops was awarded to four service providers, and all were successfully tested by NSFAS. The laptops include Microsoft Windows, tracking software and a laptop bag which was 100% locally manufactured. The awarded service providers were Pinnacle Micro (R3 863.56 cost per unit), CEOS Technologies (R5 290), MLO Distinctive Solutions (R5 300) and East Side Group (R5 750).
 

Council for Higher Education Annual Performance Plan 2022/23
Dr Whitfield Green, CEO, Council for Higher Education (CHE), presented the APP and strategic plan, describing the mandate of the Council, its legislative framework, and the strategic outcomes of the entity. Its focus areas for the current financial year included preparing for the implementation of the new quality assurance framework; implementation of a national round of institutional audits; growing the research, monitoring and advice functions; taking forward the new CHE mandate for higher education transformation oversight; building the image and profile of the CHE, and strengthening its regional and international networks.

See attached for further detail.

South African Qualifications Authority Annual Performance Plan 2022/23

Dr Julie Reddy, CEO, South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA), took Members through the presentation, which outlined the funding requirements for the 2022/23 financial year; the process of restructuring the entity, its status and its financial sustainability. These were matters that had been requested by the Committee in its previous engagements with SAQA, to provide an update. The rest of the presentation outlined the strategic plan until 2025. The strategic plan outlined the focus areas and priorities over the medium term. Among its challenges, the financial stability of the entity was the key focus area, with a financial sustainability plan to address it and five-year targets and outputs.

See attached for further detail.

Quality Council for Trades and Occupations Annual Performance Plan 2022/23

Mr Vijayen Naidoo, CEO, Quality Council for Trades and Occupations (QCTO), presented the APP and strategic plan of the entity. The presentation covered the entity's vision, mission and values; governance; senior management structure; legislative mandate; accounting authority statement; situational analysis and strategic imperatives.

In terms of the restructuring of the entity, it was noted that the revised QCTO-approved structure provided for 246 permanent posts to be filled in phases, based on the availability of funds. Furthermore, the revised structure gave effect to a cluster model with a total of six clusters. Of the six clusters in the approved structure, only two had been implemented -- Cluster 1 (Engineering and Trades), and Cluster 2 (Business and General). The number of clusters would increase incrementally over the years as the QCTO continued to build its capacity. The current budget was R73.9 million and from that amount, not more than 114 posts could be filled. Given the limited funding available, accompanied by extreme budget cuts throughout the medium term expenditure framework (MTEF) period that the QCTO experienced, not all approved 246 posts could be filled.

The business case had been presented to the DHET on 15 February 2017 and work-shopped with the Department in July 2017. The DHET's legal view was that while it was true that the QCTO was not adequately funded, the fact was that such funding resided in the Sector Education and Training Authority (SETA) budgets. The argument being made was that funding must follow function. At a workshop convened by the DHET on 21 July 2019, it had been agreed that the QCTO would enter into service level agreements (SLAs) with SETAs, which would execute the functions while the QCTO remained in terms of its mandate responsible overall for quality assurance. This meant that the SETAs would report to the QCTO, and the QCTO would monitor and report on the SETAs. This currently presented the most sustainable way of revoking the quality assurance functions previously “delegated" to the SETAs. Once perfected, this approach would be most suitable, as the SETAs were in proximity to industry. The QCTO's revised strategic plan and APP were designed to give effect to this position. The QCTO continued to receive 0.5% of the skills levy, despite the provisions of the National Skills Development Plan (NSDP).

Lastly, on the procurement of the QCTO premises, all the documents required were obtained and the new council had approved the offer of R84.5 million. An application, together with all the required documentation, had been submitted to the Minister of Higher Education, Science, and Innovation. The QCTO was currently waiting for a response from the Minister, and once received it would apply to the Minister of Finance. This process was expected to be completed by June.

Discussion

Ms C King (DA) referred to NSFAS and said it was known that further engagements were outstanding on the funding model. The Committee hoped that the time would come to give their input on that. With the information communication technology (ICT) challenges, NSFAS had provided a report on a five-year and long-term plan -- how far was it in ensuring that most of the commitments made to the Committee about the ICT system would be achieved?

She had experienced a student accommodation with a few students in the missing middle category, who had been put out of some of the university accommodations. The SMSes they had received indicated that they were not NSFAS-funded. Had NSFAS come across those incidents? The risk with this was that most TVET colleges and universities would focus only on NSFAS-funded students, leaving the missing middle students by the wayside.

Were there any plans in place to decentralise some of the NSFAS offices to institutions for ease of access? Most students had been calling for this to assist in the challenges that they were experiencing.

She read to the CHE the statement regarding the Walter Sisulu University (WSU) and five outstanding matters that needed to be taken care of. Could the CHE provide an understanding of the accreditation issues that were in the media? Secondly, how sustainable were the entities (CHE, SAQA and QCTO) and what levels of engagement had been held with the Minister to ensure that extra funding was given to them? SAQA had received some additional funding, but one must be mindful of its sustainability as more retrenchments seemed to be looming in the entity. She was pleased that all three entities had mentioned digitisation and an automation system -- by when would they implement that system?

Ms J Mananiso (ANC) congratulated the entities for achieving some of their targets and their innovative ways of doing the work. She acknowledged the progress made by NSFAS regarding the applications in 2022. A deadline for the finalisation of appeals had been given, and one hoped that NSFAS would abide by it.

NSFAS needed to have a strategic programme on public education on the issue of appeals. It appeared to be one of the recurring challenges for the entity, as students did qualify for funding. NSFAS should also rethink its marketing strategy and perhaps it could provide, in writing, mentorship for management and capacity building programmes.

She was pleased with the CHE's performance, but asked about its role in the matter of accreditation and assisting students who had been affected by this process?

She applauded SAQA on its financial sustainability in the short term, but wanted to know about the status of the 2019 National Qualifications Framework (NQF) Act, and whether the President had proclaimed its implementation. What was SAQA doing about the delays in its proclamation? Were there any mitigation strategies if the President decided not to proclaim the NQF Act of 2019?

She was pleased that the restructuring by SAQA would accommodate those who had been retrenched and that they would be prioritised for employment. The recruitment must be inclusive and represent the demographics of South Africa.

Stakeholder relations should improve in the post-school education and training (PSET) system. It could not be correct that some stakeholders were performing exceptionally, while others had good stories to tell. The last thing the Committee should hear about today was issues of ICT and the decentralisation of the NSFAS system. However, she applauded the scheme for dealing with matters swiftly as they arose.

To QCTO, she asked to what extent were colleges, universities and private skills development providers implementing the occupational qualification, part-qualifications and skills programme. How was it adapting its training offering to technological advancements? Lastly, did the QCTO have a programme to assist its beneficiaries to get exit opportunities?

Ms D Sibiya (ANC) asked the CHE about its programme administration, which constitutes about 44% of the total goods and services budget -- why was the percentage so high?

SAQA had said that the new structure would take some time to operate and that there was a challenge -- what challenge was being faced?

Since the QCTO's establishment, much progress had been made with its implementation. She was unhappy at the fact that 246 permanent posts were to be filled in phases due to a lack of funds. Were the posts ever going to be filled?

Ms K Mahlatsi (ANC) said that SAQA was a strategic entity, and it had to be efficient and self-sustainable, otherwise it would run the risk of being overtaken by events and competition within the market environment. In the presentation, it indicated that it would work towards building a footprint nationally, but how did the strategic plan intend to do that? One was unable to see it in the presentation. Looking at the process of automation, it would assist in building a sustainable entity and a footprint, but which new indicators had been introduced to work towards this goal? Secondly, what impact would the automation have on the currently approved organogram? Were there possibilities of job losses? Were the current staff members going to be up-skilled or re-skilled? What were the potential revenue growth opportunities due to the automation process, and how would it address the backlogs in terms of its core mandate? What were the risks posed by online learning, and what impact did it have on qualifications?

For the sector to operate seamlessly there must be collaboration between the QCTO, SAQA and the CHE -- was this happening? If not, what were the impediments? Were there APP plans or targets that also sought to address this issue?

She asked how the CHE had been able to shape the curriculum and qualification review in the sector to be in line with its transformative mandate. There was a need for the Committee to engage on whether the output of institutions of higher learning made a direct impact on the economy of the country. Did the presentation take cognisance of that reality?

One of the presentations made by NSFAS to the Committee was that it had received more than 500 enquiries at its call centre; had this changed since the improvement of the online registration system was implemented? How did the entity monitor the institutions to ensure that the NSFAS funds were not used for other things? Lastly, on appeals and the close-out project, what had been the benefit of the latter so far?

Dr W Boshoff (FF Plus) said that the PSET system was important, and people who had less insight into the system did not distinguish between the roles of SAQA, the QCTO and the CHE. It was striking how little knowledge people had of the system of these entities. Was it possible to have an inspectorate in the Department, because if a training institution promised something and did not deliver what it promised and presented, it was not easy for someone who was relatively ill-informed?

As for NSFAS, the entity worked with huge numbers, but was it realistic to still pursue the loans in the pre-grant time? Was it realistic to think that anything more would be collected? There was steady progress at NSFAS, and this was acknowledged and welcomed.

He asked the CHE about transformation in the sector, and whether more information could be provided on this. It seemed as if it could be as explosive as the language policy, which was an old document but had found new traction with new enemies in recent times.

To SAQA, one nearly wanted to say condolences, especially because of the institutional memory that had been lost with the retrenched employees.

Ms N Marchesi (DA) asked NSFAS about students who had dropped out of university or college, and whether it looked at the budget loss it incurred from that. How had the decrease of R2.2 billion impacted the funding of students? What was the plan to deal with the budget cuts? During Covid-19, there had generally been a decline in travelling, but the savings from that had not been realised. There were budget cuts all over instead. The cost of this meeting could have been enormous because the officials and the Members would have had to fly to attend the meeting, but the meeting had been held via the Zoom platform.

She was also concerned about the turnaround time for queries at NSFAS. She had one query that she had submitted to NSFAS, but to date, there had not been any correspondence. One tended to wonder what happened to the students out there who had to wait for responses.

A very small amount of the budget had been allocated to the community education and training (CET) colleges, and they had learnt that the CETs had to pay rent for basic education; how much was paid for rent? Infrastructure was not something that was being considered for the CETs, yet rent had to be paid.

SAQA had lost so many employees and was now filling 82 positions. Was it going to ensure that the people who had been retrenched were going to be re-employed to fill these positions? Why did the entity have to retrench and give retrenchment packages, only to have vacancies in the entity? There was also a concern about compensation -- what was the plan to mitigate this?

The Chairperson thanked the Members for all the questions and comments. She asked NSFAS to provide some clarity on the changes that the Auditor-General (AG) was saying should be made to the plans, and by when they should anticipate that it would have interacted with the observations made by the AG. Secondly, on slide 26, the figures were consistent, but there was one involving the University of the Free State where it said the ‘potential exception' was 18 118 students -- could Members get an understanding about this? Thirdly, on the student allowances that have been paid, did this also apply to student accommodation? Fourthly, regarding the challenges that NSFAS continued to face to make transfers for fees, could the Department indicate its role in assisting NSFAS with data for the close-out projects and ensure that institutions that had not yet submitted the data for the close-out projects did so? Some letters had been written to these colleges -- had NSFAS received responses and what was their nature? Those nine colleges were not assisting the sector, and there must be some form of consequence management.

NSFAS responses
 
Mr Ernest Khosa, Chairperson, NSFAS board, said NSFAS was not aware of the missing middle students who had received SMSes about their funding decisions. The observation was quite astonishing, and he requested Ms King to share this information with the management. NSFAS students in some universities were being disadvantaged due to late funding decisions that were taken and never benefited from the first come, first serve principle. Secondly, in educating people on appeals, NSFAS was in the process of establishing more intense communication strategies to communicate with stakeholders, not only on matters of appeals but policies, processes and the achievements of NSFAS. The communication strategy would be bumped up.

Mr Nongogo said that there was a report that had been requested by the Committee on the status of the ICT challenges at NSFAS. One needed to talk about the process of funding when one referred to the NSFAS system, from the application to the funding decision. They had done enhancement on the application process and were finalising the system that dealt with the calculation of allowances for students. On the side of the support, the work had not begun yet, but it was mainly the accounting system that recorded the transactions that were processed. The biggest expenditure was on the underlying infrastructure. This subject of ICT challenges would be best explained or detailed in the session that NSFAS had requested with the Committee.

In decentralising the scheme, one must remember its history. NSFAS had been decentralised before and had then become centralised because of the number of issues around inconsistencies in the application of the funding criteria. Rightfully so, the call for decentralisation had come because of students not being able to be dealt with properly through the call centre. The feasibility study done to assess whether the Scheme should be centralised had recommended a blended model, where they would have had some elements of both. However, it was important to note that the underlying systems were dealt with first before decentralisation. Management was studying the feasibility report and would implement the recommendations.

In the blended learning question from Ms King, blended learning spoke to the fact that there was an aspect of learning that took place online and in the classroom. In essence, it had not changed. Students still left their homes, and the cost of fees still had not changed, so they still required accommodation and allowances. Management had therefore not seen the need to change the model. As part of the ministerial task team (MTT) study on the sustainability of the Scheme, such matters had been considered.

On the improvements to the system so far, there were no correlation between the number of calls in the call centre and the improvements made on the system so far because the improvements made dealt only with a specific cohort of students -- for example, South African Social Security Agency (SASSA) beneficiaries. The calls varied, and some students called for various and different reasons. At the beginning of the year, they had delayed funding decisions, and NSFAS would have had more students enquiring about their status, which could not be released as NSFAS was still waiting for funding.

The question around quality assurance may have been missed, but in terms of what was spent, NSFAS did provide monthly reports to the Department and Treasury. The internal audit team also conducted audit assurances in terms of processes and spending. Ultimately, the AG did provide reasonable assurance based on the audit that was done.

The issue raised by the colleges over time was that the financial aid offices in institutions had limited capacity in the TVET colleges. There would be one person assigned to perform the role of a financial aid officer, which affected the speed at which applications were processed. Due to these limited numbers when people left or changed roles, there was no capacity to support this service. Another main issue at colleges was non-compliance in terms of the progression rules and the change in courses that students make. NSFAS had identified the ones with the slow rate of submission, and teams had been deployed to those colleges to assist.

On TVET college dropouts and the impact thereof, as part of its research agenda, NSFAS wanted to conduct a learner-tracer study for all beneficiaries to assess if those funded had found jobs upon graduation, and to quantify the value of those who could not complete their courses. The impact of the decrease in the budget had been evident in the last two academic years and had resulted in delays in funding decisions. This would persist in the next three years if nothing significant changed in terms of the demand. The government had confirmed the funding, which meant that the underlying shortages had now been dealt with.

Regarding the issue of the turnaround, the query sent to him had been acknowledged and it had been indicated that the matter was handed over to the chief operating officer (COO) to deal with. Perhaps they could improve by dealing with the students directly, and closing matters directly with the institutions as well. Feedback on the matter would be provided to the Committee. The matter had been related to reconciliation, and the institution was under the impression that NSFAS had underpaid for that student and that the student was not allowed to register. NSFAS had engaged the institution and it turned out that there was more than one student affected by the matter, and the issue was resolved.

At the beginning of the year, the AG performed value-added assignments to review APPs and strategic plans of institutions at the request of the institution. This request was given to the AG, and it was indicated that it would undertake this as part of the planning for the new audit cycle. The AG had done a desktop review of the APP and strategic plan of NSFAS, but it had not shared the findings with the NSFAS. Hopefully, these would be shared in the coming days to assess whether they would necessitate any key changes in the APP. All protocols as outlined in the Department of Performance Management and Evaluation (DPME) framework would be followed if there were any changes to the APP.

The 18 118 which appeared as an exception for the University of Free State was related to a protest by students, where that institution had to intervene before processing the payments in the system to avoid loss of life or destruction of property. All allowances had been paid to students, including accommodation, living allowances and book allowances. The point they were making was that many students had not received their allowances due to unsubmitted registration records or non-compliances between NSFAS and the institutions.

NSFAS had engaged the nine TVET colleges and had sent several requests to provide the necessary information, but had received no response. After the last engagement with the Committee, it had a session with the college principals, who had undertaken that data would be sent by these colleges. To date, this data had not been submitted and NSFAS had concluded by sending letters to the colleges informing them that NSFAS would decide, based on the information available at its disposal.

NSFAS had 1.6 million university students who were affected by the close-out, but it had managed to clear about 1 033 000 students. These were students that NSFAS and the colleges had agreed should be cleared. There were about 52 000 students whose data NSFAS did not have, and the institutions still had to prove that those students must be funded. For TVET colleges, there were 1.3 million affected students, but NSFAS had managed to clear about 764 000. There were about 34 000 whose records were missing on NSFAS’s part.

CHE responses
 
Ms Koketjo Magongoa, CHE Council member, referred to the accreditation issue involving the WSU and said the CHE had issued a response, but in collaboration with SAQA and the DHET, the current records had been reviewed and it could be confirmed that the programmes referenced in the article met the requirement for the offering. This included that they were part of the qualification mix of the university, and were accredited and registered on the NQF. The CEO would provide more details on this.

On the sustainability of the CHE concerning funding, the Council had engaged with the Minister, and he acknowledged challenges that had been brought to his attention. Additional funding had been secured, and more information on this could be provided.

The timelines to implement the digital transformation programme had been approved by the Council, and it was aligned with the five-year strategic plan. The implementation had commenced, and some of the prioritised programmes have been implemented, including alignment and adoption of the IT governance framework to strengthen ICT governance, and the establishment of a Chief of Information Security role to ensure IT resources were capacitated. This would be a continuous journey that would lead up to 2027, and the programme had been scheduled accordingly.

Dr Green added that the WSU matter had been grappled with and discussed before the leak to the media. The WSU had identified that they had questions about some of their programmes, and it had engaged the Department and CHE on them. While they were working with the institution, there was that leak to the media that had resulted in a sensational article that had spoken about thousands of WSU qualifications that were not accredited, which was a complete fallacy. They had worked with SAQA and the DHET to understand the status of the 26 qualifications that were referred to in that article. Most of them had full status in terms of the programme qualification mix (PQM), accreditation and registration. Five of them were legacy qualifications, with a history. They were qualifications that were aligned to the previous version of the Higher Education Qualifications Framework (HEQF) but did not conclude the complete process for re-alignment with the Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework (HEQSF). This was where their focus on working with the institution was. The HEQC had approved that the CHE would undertake and put an evaluator in place to unpack the full history of these five qualifications and why they had not moved completely through the HEQSF alignment process. Recommendations would be made on how the matter would be addressed. The recommendations would take the interests of the students into account. Further, the CHE would do a full audit of the WSU qualifications programme offerings to ensure that there were no more surprises such as the recent issues, and this was happening in parallel with dealing with the five qualifications.

On financial sustainability, the Minister and Treasury had listened to the CHE's pleas over the years, and they had an increase in the baseline over the MTEF. They were in a better financial position, but there was still a greater need for funding, especially as it introduced the quality assurance framework and digital transformation framework. The CHE would consider a cost-sharing model for the services that it provides.

The process and approach had not yet been formalised for the transformation mandate of the CHE, but this would be done in consultation with the sector. The CHE would be taking over the role that the transformation oversight committee played over the last ten years, and would take a deep view of transformation and how it could be promoted and monitored in the sector going forward.

Mr Thulaganyo Mothusi, CFO, CHE, said that the current administration of the entity represented 44% of the total cost of goods and services, of which 23% was for active fixed and variable contracts. This was because the CHE was in its own building and there were a lot of contracts that were active. The administration budget would be less than the core programmes if it were not for the contracts.

SAQA responses

Dr James Keevy, Deputy Chairperson, SAQA Board, said that Members ought to bear in mind that the board was still new, and a new CEO would be coming in a few months. They were trying to balance continuity with change. The sector was in a lot of flux, and one needed to be careful about this. Under the guidance of Dr Lolwana, the board chairperson, SAQA was currently focusing on the operational plans, trusting that these would cascade upwards into the revised strategy using the existing processes. There was enormous change when it came to the digitisation of learning, and the NQFs around them were changing, so the agility needed in the system had to be improved.

Dr Reddy assured the Committee that despite the difficult year, SAQA's staff had managed to deliver on all its APP targets except for two that were time-bound. They had started the digitisation in January this year when they found out that their income had improved during the Covid-19 pandemic, and they had been able to realise some savings amounting to about R5 million. Any savings they had were directed to the automation project. It was a three-year project costing approximately R25 million. A funding proposal for R20 million was sent to the Department. They had found R5.5 million in the budget to fund it and had started immediately in January, and had started seeing the returns. An additional grant of R9.8 million from the Department would enable them to fast track and complete the project in two years. The automation project would be implemented incrementally. It would not reduce the current structure. They anticipated a need for specialist expertise in the IT field in order to grow the capacity in that area.

SAQA would like the NQF Amendment Act to be proclaimed, and the DHET had been vigilant about putting it on the agenda of the President’s Office to ensure that it got proclaimed because it had serious implications for the verification function. They were doing that work without any mandate because the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) had withdrawn the directive under which SAQA functions. The big issue was to get all the remaining manual data digitised, and that was a project they were constantly seeking funding for to improve their service delivery and produce electronic certificates for their clients.

The new structure would take time. They had brought back some of their retrenched staff, and they were being used as contractual workers.

On SAQA's national and international footprint, he said most of their work was done as one of the leaders of NQF in the world, and a lot of their work involved the promotion of NQF internationally.

They did not anticipate further job losses, but these things could not be predicted. SAQA operated as a very manual-intensive entity. Automation was always on the cards and before retrenching, the idea was to re-train the staff and re-skill them, but events took over and it could not be done. They had retrenched 89 people and hired 81. Every staff member at SAQA had had to compete for their jobs. Over 78 of the 81 jobs were filled by internal applicants.

Currently, they were deliberately employing staff on a contractual basis because they did not know after the automation the type of skill sets that they would need. They had already announced that the retrenched people would be preferred for the new job positions.

QCTO responses

Mr Naidoo referred to the sustainability of the organisation, and said the QCTO had a good standing as a going concern, but they had to make the entity sustainable. In their APP and strategic plan, there was so much more than the entity would like to do, but was unable to because of the funding. There was a need to review the funding.

The digitisation referred to earlier was the digitisation of the historical records, but QCTO’s working environment was almost completely digitised and it seemed that staff would be able to work from home on a full time basis. These were processes that they had going on.

The funding model had been a challenge for a long time, where TVET colleges were funded for the N4 to N6 and the N courses. The vocational side was not funded, and there was limited uptake. The uptake started with the centre of specialisation programme, where the Department took 13 incubational trade qualifications, which was a pilot. However, in their recent work in TVET and CET colleges, they had 30 accredited Community Learning Centres (CLCs) with uptake of about 13 different qualifications. The CET colleges had come on board in the last month or two in a big way. They had credited over 50 TVET campuses so far. There was an appetite now for the vocational qualifications, and with the additional funding to TVETs and CETs, there would be more demand for QCTO qualifications.

There were now 246 posts that needed to be filled. These posts were based on the mandates of the QCTO if it was to take up all the quality assurance work undertaken by the SETAs. This was closely linked to the business case, which had not been approved. This meant that those posts would not come to fruition, but they had sufficient funding for 114 posts, of which 17 were still in the process of being filled. The rest had been filled.

There had to be collaboration between the QCTO and SAQA because the qualifications they developed must be registered by SAQA, and they had a conversation about dealing with the skills programmes that the QCTO had put in place. The QCTO had a high level of collaboration with the SETAs because of their proximity to the industry.

Department’s closing remarks

Dr Nkosinathi Sishi, Director-General, DHET, said that the presentations demonstrated some integration that was taking place in the sector in comparison to the previous years. The presentations were also linked, and one could see how the priorities found expression in the plans of the entities. From the presentations, one needed to focus more on the monitoring of the outcomes, targets and indicators for the achievement of broader priorities within the medium-term strategic framework, as identified by the government. It was also important that the entities recognise that the MTEF was both an implementation plan but also an integrated monitoring framework. Therefore, it was crucial that stronger monitoring mechanisms were established to ensure that the implementation of the plans translated to service delivery.

There was a need to do better in the promotion of alignment amongst various entities in terms of set targets. They needed to improve on coordination programmes and work harder towards ensuring that there was full integration of all their development planning instruments. They had to ensure that an integrated framework bore results and eliminated duplication and ensured better coordination through various models that promoted service delivery. The DHET was excited about the Presidential District Development Model because it was bringing all of the government together to ensure that their programmes were focused on the attainment of those strategic objectives.

The Chairperson noted that funding seems to be the biggest challenge in the education sector, but this was evident across government. It was a massive concern for many of the stakeholders. Funding for the NSFAS administration was also limited. The demand for funding was increasing exponentially in the sector. The Committee would continue to be a force to advocate for more funding for the Department and the sector. However, they needed to ensure that the funds were effectively and efficiently used. They had to be confident that the funds would be used for their intended purpose.

The Committee implored NSFAS to work on improving its turnaround time. It was a concern shared by Members of the Committee and the public. This was linked to the administrative capacity of the entity. They also needed NSFAS to improve its communication strategy to ensure public education on the appeals process, to make sure that no student was left behind. As they had plans to meet with the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education, they needed to look into how they could raise the concerns about the applications of students into TVET colleges as alternative institutions of higher education learning.

The challenge of the pandemic should force them, as stakeholders of the sector, to introspect and reflect on how they could use the ‘new normal’ to their advantage as a sector in all aspects such as accommodation, learning and teaching, among others.

The Department must apply consequence management to the nine colleges that had failed to comply and created a barrier for the sector. She asked NSFAS to resolve the 35 000 potential expectations on NSFAS and said that any changes that were made to the APP must be shared with the Committee.

The Committee noted the inadequate funding for the CHE and how it had attempted to continue doing its work, and its plans to implement the digitisation of the process.

The Committee noted that some of the SAQA's 2022/23 targets were based on whether the President would proclaim the NQF Amendment Act. It was concerning that there could be delays in the implementation of that target. The Committee urged the Department to liaise with the Office of the President to enquire about this. It commended the SAQA board and management for steering the entity during difficult times, and Members were pleased that the entity was financially stable in the medium term. The Committee also urged SAQA to expedite the automation process to ensure sustainability in the medium to long term. Furthermore, the Committee welcomes the additional funding for SAQA for the digitisation and automation of systems and processes. Members would like to encourage the entity to ensure that automation and digitisation did not lead to a further loss of jobs.

The Committee was of the view that the Minister should expedite the appointment of the QCTO board chairperson. They had also noted that the business case had not been approved. The Department should ensure that the QCTO was adequately funded and capacitated, as quality assurance demand would increase due to the uptake of occupational programmes by the TVET and CET colleges. The purchase of the premises had taken far too long, and it was a legacy matter that they had inherited. The Committee therefore recommended that the Minister expedite the consideration of the documentation submitted by the QCTO.

The meeting was adjourned.