Western Cape Education Department: Audit outcomes and 2019/20 Annual Report; with Minister

Meeting report

*The session between the Committee and the AGSA, at the beginning of the meeting, was closed to the public.

Department’s audit outcomes: Discussion

Mr K Sayed (ANC) wanted to know about some of the internal control deficiencies that the Department had identified. What was the Department’s reaction and way forward on some of the findings made by the Auditor-General (AG) on page 192 of the report? What work was being done to address the AG’s finding on the collection of reliable information on textbooks and learners attending classes?  What were some of the challenges to the quality of teaching and learning at schools? How was this being resolved?

What measures did the Department have in place to ensure that the same findings did not recur? How would it avoid having the same personal protective equipment (PPE)-related findings again? He wanted details on the cases that had been forwarded to the SAPS.

Ms D Baartman (DA) congratulated the Department on underspending by less than 1%. She asked about the reliability and usefulness of textbooks. The finding regarding reliability had specifically mentioned that the planned target was not specific in clearly identifying the nature and required level of performance. In the 2019 audit report, the finding had been simply that there was an inability to obtain sufficient and appropriate audit evidence. This year’s planned target had been 99.8%, and the actual target achieved was 94%.  She wanted to know why the AG’s office had been able to use data samples, while the Department could not.

What had been the specific recommendations of the AG, and why had they not been implemented? She wanted to know if the textbook indicator had been set by the National Department of Basic Education. What process was undertaken to check whether an indicator had been met? She felt the answers were not being specific, and this raised concerns that the same questions would be asked next year, wasting peoples’ time, because there was no clarity on how the indicator would be measured.

Ms L Botha (DA) asked about the open cases mentioned on page 138. She asked the Department to elaborate on the roles and functions of those implicated in the cases.

Mr P Marais (FF+) said the focus should not be on technicalities, but rather on the millions of people who ‘swarmed’ into the Western Cape. The demands on the Department kept increasing, while the budget kept being cut.  He asked what the Department had learned from the COVID-19 pandemic -- were they still going to rely on actual teachers being present, or could the Department go virtual? What was the thinking at the Department? He added it seemed that Members of the Committee were more interested in ‘catching out’ the Department, instead of looking at the bigger picture.

Department’s response

Mr Brian Schreuder, Head of Department: WCED, said a lot of the challenges faced by the Department were the result of the need to raise the quality of education delivery for all learners in the country, especially those from disadvantaged and poorer backgrounds. Even though the Western Cape schools were among the best-performing, this was not a reason for complacency, as the quality of education was a concern for all learners in South Africa.

The inclusion of predetermined objectives was meant to get departments to deliver and be measured on certain delivery aspects. He said it was a signal to try to get everyone to strive to improve on those indicators. The challenge was that it was left to the Department of Basic Education, nationally, to define those outcomes for education and then write them in. A problem during the audit process had been that the Department had very little time to implement recommendations.

Mr Leon Ely, Chief Financial Officer: WCED, said the bulk of fraud cases were unfortunately at the school level. They ranged from fraud to corruption, non-compliance, and in some cases, to nepotism. Two cases that had been reported to the South African Police Service (SAPS) dealt with fraud and corruption at two schools. The Provincial Forensic Services follow up with the SAPS on progress, and report back to the Department and the audit committee.

The bulk of closed matters were also due to fraud and corruption, but unfortunately the Department was not able to check everything at the school level. All the controls to deal with teacher absenteeism had been implemented. There were still challenges related to learner absenteeism. An undertaking had been made for schools to have physical learner registers that needed to be updated on a daily basis. Circuit managers would check the registers on a weekly basis.

Mr Schreuder said the Department employed an additional person at the assistant director level to sharpen the monitoring controls. The Department had instituted accountability letters for managers who managed financial programmes, as well as for those who managed the predetermined objective programme. Instructional letters had also been sent out.

It had become clear that physical registers were not being kept at all the schools. He added it was important to note that the WCED was not an implementing department, and was bound by the decisions made by the national Department.

Ms Warda Conrad, Director: Business Strategy and Stakeholder Management, WCED, said that halfway through the year, there had been a change from the “all learners, across all grades” approach, to a sample-based approach. The auditors had been correct in their finding regarding the sample approach. In the past, schools had not maintained a record of textbooks and held on to that information. A directive had been sent to schools regarding textbooks.

Mr Schreuder said the vision of the Department was ensuring quality education for every child in every classroom, and in every school in the province. It recognised that quality was not necessarily present in every classroom, and communities needed to join hands with the Department to address the issues.

He said e-learning would be the best way to bridge the gap between affluent and poorer learners. The most valuable -- and expensive -- resource in the Department were the teachers. The quality of the teachers and teaching had to be geared towards developing learners that were global citizens. He said children were being battered socio-economically, and by crime. They needed hope.

The Western Cape was working hard to retain learners, but this was proving difficult due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Excess PPE had been provided to schools in 2020, and all schools had sufficient to carry them over the next few months. However, going forward, schools would have to use their norms and standards funding to augment their supplies.

He said the challenge of the indicator definition had been indicated. The issue involved the monitoring and evaluation.

He added that the WCED was under siege, as the budget was not able to cope with the influx of learners. There needed to be a focus on blended learning that included art and digital learning. Virtual classrooms had been implemented so that a large number of learners could access lessons.

The Chairperson wanted to know if there had been any recommendations from the Auditor-General (AG).

Mr Schreuder said AG’s view was that the indicator was predetermined, and the Department reported on the indicator. The AG then sought evidence from the Department to ensure that the reporting on the indicator was accurate.

Further discussion

Ms Baartman wanted to know if the AG made the recommendations to the National Department of Basic Education regarding this indicator, the evidence and the measurements. What had the response from the Department been? Did this mean that no provincial education department in the country would get a clean audit, because the AG did not agree with the department regarding the indicator? Was it a foregone conclusion that the WCED would not get a clean audit?

Mr Marais said the questions from Ms Baartman were bogging the meeting down. She had already received three answers, and he was unsure what response she was looking for.

Mr Sayed wanted clarity on whether the AG was using the same standard for the rest of the provinces when it came to the textbook indicator.

Ms Sharonne Adams, Western Cape Business Executive: Auditor General of South Africa (AGSA), said the same methodology was used across all the provinces. She would not be able to confirm whether or not there would be a particular audit finding.

The Chairperson asked about the School Improvement Plan, and whether school governing bodies (SGBs) had been involved in the initiative? What had been the criteria used to select the 24 schools that were evaluated in 2019? What were the results of the evaluation?

Mr Schreuder said there was often a breakdown between SGBs and school management teams, where either party might overstep their respective marks. He said the School Improvement Plans must also be signed off by SGBs. It was clear that school managements and SGBs had to engage collectively. The SGBs also ought to get reports from school managements regarding school development.

He said the 24 schools that were evaluated were included in a pilot project for the Schools Evaluation Authority (SEA). The feedback informed the SEA, which was now a fully functioning entity.

Mr Sayed asked why funds were surrendered to the Revenue Fund, and why that specific amount. He asked about foreign travel, requesting a cost breakdown for each trip. He also asked for details on debts that had been written off.

Ms Baartman asked about the Payables Clearing Account. The medical aid and income tax had almost tripled, while other amounts had remained relatively the same. She sought clarity on this.

The Chairperson wanted clarity on the Special Investigating Unit’s (SIU’s) investigation into COVID-19 procurement processes. He sought an update on this.

The Committee’s Procedural Officer said the information related to foreign trips had already been sent to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts (SCOPA).

Mr Ely said the amount surrendered to the Revenue Fund had been due to underspending, which had been a result of the inability to fill posts. With regard to the amounts that had been written off, these were written off after due process had been followed. The debt usually involved a salary overpayment, and this happened when a person claimed incapacity, and this was not approved. The Department tried to recover the money.  

He said the payables fluctuated from month-to-month, and was a technical matter as far as accounting was concerned.

The SIU did not report to the Department -- they only got evidence from it. The understanding was that the Unit would report to the Premier, and the Department would then act appropriately.

Mr Schreuder said the finding from the AG did not question whether Departments kept records, but rather the appropriateness and credibility of the process. The Department cooperated fully with the SIU, and had had no adverse comments from the Unit.

Ms Baartman asked about the funds that had been surrendered. Was there a particular law or regulation that dictated how money from a department was surrendered? What were the types of engagement that took place before the money was surrendered?

Mr Schreuder said the financial year did not suit the Education Department. Sometimes it surrendered funds with the view that they would be re-allocated in the next financial year.

Mr Ely said there were Provincial Treasury regulations and national legislation that governed issues of surrendering funds.

Ms Debbie Schafer, Western Cape MEC for Education, said it would be better if the Department could divert funds to a project that already existed. However, the money had to be surrendered instead, and the Department got the funds back with certain conditions attached, and this took away the Department’s discretion.

Mr Sayed asked why the Department did not apply for roll-overs. Was there any control that the Department had over the funds?

Mr Ely said a roll-over would be approved if there was proof that there had been a prior commitment from the Department. The Department had received all the roll-over funds they had requested.

Committee resolutions

The Committee considered the following resolutions:

• The Standing Committee on Education should have a session regarding the indicators in the Department, and how indicators were set in general.
• The Budget Committee should have a session regarding the process of surrendering funds. SCOPA should be part of that session.
• It requested information on the setting of targets, monitoring, and how to strengthen the Department in terms of adhering to targets.
• It requested the total amounts that had been surrendered since 2014.
• It requested a meeting with the Auditor-General regarding the Department’s spending on PPE.
• It requested a meeting to discuss the deviation process, and how manipulation of the process could be reduced.

The resolutions were unanimously adopted.

The meeting was adjourned.