Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

Outcomes of the latest local government audit a predictable surprise

02 September 2024 Photo Supplied

Opinion article by Dr Harlan Cloete, Centre for Gender and Africa Studies, University of the Free State.

In the 2022-2023 Local Government Audit, the Auditor-General (AG) notes inadequate skills and capacity, a culture of no accountability and consequence, together with governance failures, as the main weaknesses impeding progress in municipalities. But this is not new, we have heard this before. A predictable surprise, argues Michael Watkins, Canadian-born author of books on leadership and negotiation, arises out of failures of recognition, prioritisation, or mobilisation – when leaders inevitably had all the information about an imminent disaster but failed to act.

In April 2024 the University of the Free State (UFS) handed over a report commissioned by the Local Government Sector Education and Training Authority (LGSeta) titled: “An evidence based human resource development (HRD) assessment to measure and manage its implementation in South African municipalities”.

HRD not effectively measured and managed

This was not smooth sailing, and it was a mission to convince municipalities to participate, as expressed by one official. “Good morning Dr Cloete. I am glad that you are finding a breakthrough elsewhere. Unfortunately, where I am, politics and laziness have been the biggest stumbling blocks. I have even tried to convince them to invite you to our next steering committee meeting and I was told to wait. It just shows these people do not care about improving and changing the status quo through this collaboration. I am just sad.”

Drawing from the responses of a research sample of 572 participants (managers, non-managers and HRD professionals) in 17 municipalities across five provinces, the report concluded that HRD is not being effectively measured and managed, despite a 26-year-old enabling policy framework (Skills Development Act, 1998 and the Employment Equity Act, 1998). The evidence points to a lack of understanding, application and integration of evidenced-based HRD, which if addressed, would increase municipal capability.

Ethical values are poorly practised, evident in the lack of managerial commitment to equal opportunities for the development of people. People development is not a priority and performance management is not taken seriously. The competencies and contributions of staff to service delivery are not fully recognised. The implementation of HRD policies is poor and employees lack insight into these policies. They stand in isolation and fail to connect with the Integrated Development Plan (strategy) and internal transformation (employment equity and performance management).

Because skills development audits are poorly conducted, HRD interventions are not undertaken in line with employee development plans. The municipalities do not apply a variety of approaches, such as formal and informal development, and employees are not presented with sufficient opportunities to practise new competencies and post-skills development interventions. Recognition of prior learning is poorly implemented.

HRD in municipalities

The organisation of HRD in municipalities is problematic and line managers are not equipped to manage the implementation of projects. HRD outputs are not included in the key performance areas for line managers and interventions are not monitored by the department managers. Line managers, HRD professionals and non-managers are also not collaborating effectively to achieve the objectives.

Councillors and shop stewards (key internal stakeholders) do not understand their roles and responsibilities and senior managers are not supportive of HRD programmes for employees. This, despite people management being identified as a key competency for senior managers. The LGSeta, the South African Local Government Association (Salga) and the Department of Cooperative Governance (DCoG) and Department of Traditional Affairs (DTA) (Cogta) could be collaborating better, as the evidence suggests, but are not doing it.

Employees are not aware of the potential impact of the municipal staff regulations on municipalities. The Municipal Staff Regulations (2021) place municipalities on a new trajectory with a renewed emphasis on increasing organisational capabilities through linking organisational structure and strategy and focusing on performance and development. In the process potential new organisational capabilities and knowledge that could benefit the municipalities are developed but not applied. There is also a glaring absence or awareness of change-management plans.

Recommendations

From the research findings it is further concluded that key indicators in support of knowledge management are not implemented effectively. More than half the participants indicated that they do not know about knowledge management, indicating a clear lack of communication. The performance and development system is not being implemented effectively and data analytics are not used to inform HRD decisions. It is also not known among the research participants whether HRD systems integrate with existing municipal ICT systems. What is more worrying is that the work skills plan evaluation report is the only tool used by the LGSeta to evaluate municipal HRD performance (capability) and is not applied consistently across the provinces.

Our report made a number of recommendations. One being that the LGSeta, as the authority on HRD, should align with the office of the AG through auditing the management performance of HRD in municipalities. Evidenced-based HRD practices provide municipalities with an institutional model to ensure that the performance of managers is included as part of material irregularities reporting (Public Audit Act). An increase in HRD management controls will ensure solutions to the many challenges (financial and human resources) facing local government. Human resources (people) are the most important strategic resources in municipalities and their effective management will foster trust and increase municipal implementation capabilities. This will place local government on a completely new trajectory with effective and efficient management of human resource development and knowledge at the centre of the transformation efforts of local government. This will contribute to Sustainable Development Goal 16 (strong institutions) and hasten the professionalisation of local government as advocated by Salga and the office of the AG. The AG concludes that municipalities should strive for a culture of performance, accountability, transparency and institutional integrity, which will ultimately result in a better life for our people. We agree with the AG. The UFS, as a knowledge partner to local government, is committed to not just produce knowledge for understanding, but for action. If we are to turn around the fortunes of local government then we must act on the recommendations. Phantsi politics and laziness! No more predictable surprises.

News Archive

Important message to UFS students on NSFAS and financial aid in general

2013-02-01

31 January 2013

Dear Students

There remains some uncertainty as well as misinformation within the student body concerning NSFAS and financial aid in general. This communication is intended to provide the facts on the state of student funding at the University of the Free State (UFS). I hope you find this information helpful and that it would guide you in your decisions as you wait to hear from, or hopefully receive funding from NSFAS or any other source.

Every year the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) determines how much funding is available to fund students at all universities in South Africa; this is determined in part by the student numbers. Universities do not ask for, or determine the DHET allocation and are instructed by government that “NSFAS will ensure that the universities comply with the processes, procedures…for the allocated funds.”
On 14 December 2012 the UFS received notice from the DHET that our total allocation would be R108,331,215.66 and that this amount must be apportioned in the following categories:
General NSFAS Funding R85,174,275.07
Teacher Training R2,291,940.59
Disability Funding R1,265,000.00
Final-Year Programme R19,600,000.00
The UFS received 5 952 applications for NSFAS funding and with the available funding we can only finance up to 3 000 students on the Qwaqwa and Bloemfontein Campuses, provided that those students satisfy the stringent criteria, e.g. the so-called “national means test” determined for all universities in the country. If we funded more students that the available monies allow, the university would be held accountable by the NSFAS Board and the DHET and this would threaten future funding.
Students apply in the previous year and therefore late applications are less likely to receive funding.
Academic merit also counts, therefore students who fail one or more modules are less likely to receive new or ongoing support from NSFAS. The combination of academic standing and financial need are among the important criteria in decision-making on NSFAS funds.
The UFS is one of the few universities with a very efficient record in using every cent made available to support poor students; we are proud of this record. No money is sent back to NSFAS, except small amounts not claimed by students in the disability category. The university is not allowed to shift funds between categories as described in point #2 above.
Allocations are not based on campus, but need.
The UFS sets aside an additional R35,7 million (in 2013) from within its own budget as bursaries so that we can accommodate as many students as possible. We spend every cent of this funding on students.
The UFS also raises millions in bursaries from the private sector to support poor and promising students, though these funds are often linked to the industry granting the money, e.g. Investec for Accounting students and SASOL for Chemistry students. This recruitment of bursaries is a 24/7 commitment of the Marketing Office and the Faculties and Heads of Departments are also active in raising funds from government agencies, parastatals and the private sector for students in their units.
After almost all our 2013 funds were allocated in favour of students, we calculated a shortfall in the NSFAS allocation of approximately R51 million. We are in the process of making an urgent submission to NSFAS to consider this additional allocation, but we cannot guarantee that this plea can or will be met.

Finally, I want all our students to know that the University of the Free State works very hard to raise every cent we can to provide poor students with funding for their studies. Many of my colleagues, including support staff, who do not earn very much, use some of their meagre personal resources to help a student with money for registration or clothing or food. In fact, the No Student Hungry Campaign that raises more than R600,000 by UFS volunteers annually, is another mechanism for trying to assist students who might have money for studies, but not much else.

We do this because we care, and because this is what The Human Project at Kovsies is all about.

I therefore ask for your patience as we continue our labour of raising the funds that enable every deserving student to continue their studies at the University of the Free State.

Should you have any further questions about NSFAS, please leave an email inquiry on choanet@ufs.ac.za or mallettca@ufs.ac.za and we will endeavour to provide you with the information you require.

Sincerely Yours

Jonathan D Jansen
Vice-Chancellor and Rector
University of the Free State

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept