Government-funded programmes and services for vulnerable - Unicef

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Department of Basic Education At a more basic level, many schools are hampered by insufficient desks and chairs for both learners and educators. 84 The average class has 38 learners. 85 Although the teacher to learner ratio is, on average, below the official norm of 40 to 1, ‘overcrowded classrooms and high learner-to-teacher ratios remain a dominant feature in pockets of South Africa’s schooling system, especially in schools catering to children from disadvantaged communities’ (Pendlebury 2009: 27). Large class sizes and overcrowding are particularly problematic in the early foundational years of schooling, and especially so in rural areas. A survey of schools in a selection of rural districts in Limpopo, KwaZulu-Natal and the Eastern Cape revealed that a typical foundation phase (Grades 1–3) class accommodated more than 45 learners in a classroom, with an average of 62 children per classroom in the rural sites in KwaZulu-Natal (Presidency 2009: 92). There are significant backlogs in the provision of water, sanitation and electricity to schools housing poor learners. For example, in 2009, almost 15 per cent of ordinary public schools (3 603) had no electricity supply; 10 per cent (2 444) had no water supply and 3 422 had no sanitation facilities, while 11 231 still made use of pit latrines (DoE 2009b). No-fee school policy The current ranking system which determines no-fee status appears to be flawed. At present, the key factor determining no-fee status is the physical location of the school, rather than the levels of poverty among the children accommodated at the school. As such, there are a number of schools housing a majority of poor learners that deserve no-fee status but that do not qualify because they fall into quintiles 3, 4 or 5. In addition, they have no recourse to effective, evidence-based, consultative procedures to apply for a re-ranking based on their circumstances (Giese & Koch 2008b). The complexity of the no-fee policies requires effective administration, communication, monitoring, support and capacity building by the provincial DoE to allow for the proper and accountable implementation of the no-fee policies at school level. This does not appear to be happening, especially in schools in communities where effective implementation of the policies is most urgently needed to address the needs of large numbers of poor children. School fee exemption policy A significant number of schools are, often deliberately, failing to implement the school fee exemption policy. They are not advising parents of their school fee exemption rights, they are refusing legitimate exemption applications and, when parents default on school fee payments, the schools are ignoring their duty to investigate whether parents qualify for an exemption before suing them for payment. In addition, there are widespread unlawful discriminatory practices against learners who cannot afford to pay school fees. For example, learners’ report cards are withheld and they are refused admission to the school at the start of a new year if fees are outstanding from previous years. The reason for the widespread abuse of these rights appears to be because the school fee exemption policy is not funded by the DoE. Individual schools are obliged to honour the policy, but to find the funds within their own resources/reserves to cover the costs of the exempted learners. 84 2006 National Assessment Report (Public Ordinary Schools), in Presidency (2009: 93) 85 Annual School Survey, 2010 173
Government-funded programmes and services for vulnerable children in SA The only source of funds for many schools, especially those with a significant number of poor learners, is the school fee revenue, which leaves them little option but to pursue this revenue aggressively (Giese, Hombakazi et al. 2009). The DoE has recognised this problem and identified the development of appropriate policies and plans to address funding of the school fee exemption in its 2009–2013 Strategic Plan. The most vulnerable children whom the current school fee exemption policy seeks to protect are not spared the impact of the policy failings. Despite the fact that the law expressly provides for an automatic exemption from paying school fees for the caregivers of children receiving the CSG and the FCG, this is not happening in practice. Schools are charging these parents school fees and not advising them of their rights in this regard. The majority of children receiving the CSG are not getting an automatic full school fee exemption. Instead, they are paying their school fees with their CSG income, resulting in one department cross-subsidising another department’s legal obligations, at the expense of the children requiring support (CASE 2008). 86 The extent of the government’s funding per learner at fee-paying schools is less than the ‘adequacy’ benchmark for providing a quality education. In the context of operating in poor communities, many of these schools are unable to make up the difference through fundraising or fees (most notably the poorer schools). As such, the ability of these schools to deliver a quality education and provide an environment conducive to learning is compromised (Hall & Giese 2009). School uniform assistance policy The assistance provided at a policy level to poor learners to make uniforms more affordable does not provide material relief. There is no obligation in terms of the current guidelines to actually provide uniforms for free or to subsidise the cost of uniforms for poor learners. The guidelines go no further than obliging the school governing body to take measures, within its available resources, to make uniforms more affordable. Schools with significant numbers of poor learners will in all likelihood not have access to resources to make uniforms more affordable, other than perhaps establishing a secondhand school uniform shop (Roussel 2007). The burden of implementation of the guidelines rests with the school governing bodies. The guidelines have little or no legal force and therefore it is not possible to compel action by these bodies, which means that the implementation of the guidelines depends on their voluntary compliance. Evidence in the report by Roussel (2007) shows a tendency by school governing bodies not to act proactively in the implementation of the guidelines. The guidelines are at times contradictory. For example, in an effort to prevent the lack of a school uniform becoming a barrier and excluding learners, the guidelines prohibit the exclusion of a learner from school on the basis that they do not have a uniform. At the same time, the guidelines allow not wearing the appropriate uniform to constitute a disciplinary offence. 86 In a study of 2 700 primary caregivers of children aged 0–13 in low-income areas in the CASE study, it was found that two-thirds of the CSG recipients were paying school fees. This was confirmed in a study conducted by Giese, Hombakazi et al. (2009). 174
Page 1 and 2:
Government-funded programmes and se
Page 3 and 4:
Commissioned by the Principal Inves
Page 5 and 6:
Chapter 4 Department of Health Intr
Page 7 and 8:
Chapter 11 Department of Police, So
Page 9 and 10:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The US National In
Page 11 and 12:
PCR PEP PMTCT SAPS SASSA TB UNCRC U
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
CHAPTER 2 Department of Home Affair
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
CHAPTER 4 Department of Health Intr
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134: Government-funded programmes and se
Page 147 and 148: CHAPTER 5 Department of Basic Educa
Page 183: Government-funded programmes and se
Page 187 and 188: CHAPTER 6 Department of Labour Intr
Page 207 and 208: CHAPTER 10 Department of Human Sett
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
show all

Government-funded programmes and services for vulnerable - Unicef

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?