1. 1 Early Childhood Development Conditional Grant Monitoring System Khulisa Management Services Jennifer Bisgard Tender EDO 222 Adapted from 13 April 2004; Presented 14 August 2014

2. 2 Provincial Implementation: Overview Conditional Grant: Selected sites (target 4500); Administered financial support in the form of subsidies / practitioner salaries; Disbursed resource kits; Created advocacy; and Supported training practitioners.

3. 3 Introduction: Background This report is a snapshot of implementation, not impact.

4. 4 Introduction Training of Provincial and District Officials: Were provincial and district officials satisfied and did they show relevant learning following the Khulisa training programme? Implementation of Monitoring and Support Systems: How well has the monitoring and support systems been implemented? Provincial Conditional Grant Implementation: How effectively have the provinces delivered the conditional grant?

5. 5 Introduction Conditional Grant Implementation: How has the conditional grant affected the sites? Advocacy Campaign Issues: What level of awareness do the officials involved in this project have of the advocacy campaign? Broader ECD issues: What are the findings related to the following broad ECD issues: Social Development Registration? Grade R Learner Admission Policy? Social Grant Disbursement? Primary School Nutrition Programme? South African Council of Educators (SACE) Registration?

6. 6 Caveat This is a monitoring not a research project from June 2003 to March 2004 Monitoring visits cannot be generalised to a province or to a district Monitoring visits may have been (unconsciously or consciously) biased Once most sites are monitored twice a year then the results will be more representative

7. 7 Reliability of Results Very reliable but slight deviations in the interpretation of findings occur. Officials sometimes feel “sorry” and inflate scoring so as “not to penalise” sites. Despite four quality control measures, inaccuracies still occur.

8. 8 Training of Provincial & District Officials Were provincial and district officials satisfied with the training and did they show relevant learning following the Khulisa training programme?

9. 9 Provincial Outcomes To be able to analyse and write up the data into quarterly monitoring reports To set up conditional grants monitoring and support systems To be able to hold staff accountable for the monitoring and support process To ensure use of monitoring and support system on all Grade R sites To be able to train staff in the monitoring and support process Unit 1 – General Overview of the Monitoring and Support System Unit 2 – Monitoring and Evaluation Unit 3 - Support Unit 4 – Quality Control Unit 5 – Logistical Planning Unit 6 – Training Officials in your Province Data Analysis and Report writing workshops

10. 10 Training of Officials: District Outcomes Unit 1 – General Overview of the Monitoring and Support System Unit 2 – Monitoring and Evaluation Unit 3 - Support Unit 4 – Quality Control Unit 5 – Logistical Planning To be able to plan and conduct monitoring of conditional grants and other Grade R sites To be able to provide support which results in the performance of sites improving To be able to quality assure monitoring data

11. 11 Kirkpatrick Training Evaluation Model

12. 12 Training of Officials: Summary Findings Were provincial and district officials satisfied and did they show relevant learning following the Khulisa training programme? High degree of satisfaction with the training process (level one). Evidence of learning – both theoretical and practical (level two). Most participants had good attitude but when attitude was negative, evidence that the attitude improved (level two). Completed forms and the participation rates indicate levels three and four partially achieved Not all provinces are equal in their performance but some embraced the monitoring system enthusiastically.

13. 13 Implementation of the Monitoring & Support System How well has the monitoring and support system been implemented?

14. 14 Productivity: Officials Monitoring Average sites monitored per official 6.4: LP officials most productive (10.7 visits) NC least productive One Mpumalanga official with 64 sites! Low average of 6 visits over 8 months, raises questions about the support model

15. 15 No. of Sites Monitored Possible Sites Nr. visited at least once % Visited once Nr visited twice or more % Visited twice or more EC84122326.5%101.2% FS29017460.0%4314.8% GP55839069.9%8815.8% KZN103522922.1%151.4% LP71135850.4%142.0% MP34118654.5%216.2% NC17212773.8%84.7% NW1706337.1%21.2% WC43922350.8%133.0% Total4557197343.3%2144.7%

16. 16 System Implementation: Officials’ Comments Greater sense of structure / focus: “I didn’t know what to do when I get to the ECD site but ever since I was trained on how to monitor and quality control… I don’t have problems.” Opportunities: “I have learned that there is a team working together to improve the standard of ECD in our province.” Improved quality of site visits: “Our school visits are much more focussed.” Improvement at the sites: “I can see the differences at the sites after the visits and they have been improved.”

17. 17 System Implementation: Officials’ Comments Positive attitude: “My attitude towards site practitioners has totally changed. The amount of effort they put in managing those sites and the eagerness to learn from mistakes made [impressed me].” “I have a different approach now when giving feedback to the educators that I am working with.” Impact on their workload: “It has made some changes, although I feel I’m not doing justice to this monitoring process due to the overload of my work.”

18. 18 System Implementation: Officials’ Comments Work is easier: “It makes my work as specialist easier. I know exactly what I will do at a site and what I would like to achieve.” Sense of purpose with this system: “It changed the way I work with sites because now there is a country-wide tool being used which assists with monitoring and which provides direction with regards to what is monitored.”

19. 19 Provincial Conditional Grant Implementation How effectively have the provinces delivered the conditional grant?

20. 20 Provincial Implementation: Summary Findings How effectively have the provinces delivered the conditional grant? Target: 4500 sites, 4396 supported Of those 2/3rds received subsidy on time 2600 received the kits, but 48% could show them Since Khulisa was not given the training database, no report on the RPL or training process

21. 21 Level of Implementation at Conditional Grant Sites How has the conditional grant affected the sites?

22. 22 Implementation Level: Introduction Sites categorisation “red”/ requires extensive assistance, “yellow” requires support, “green” requires less support and “purple” / outstanding Progress data based on the 214 sites that were visited twice.

23. 23 Implementation Level: Finance & Admin

24. 24 Implementation Level: Finance & Admin Potential support strategies: Provide templates, exemplars and guidance; Identify practical management tips; Motivate use of good financial and administrative records; Champion ECD issues; and Promote Social Development registration.

25. 25 Implementation Level: Healthy Development

26. 26 Implementation Level: Healthy Development Possible support: Identify and communicate areas where support is required with practitioner; Encourage sites to register with Social Development; Supply resources; and Provide Knowledge / Skill Support.

27. 27 Implementation Level: HIV/AIDS

28. 28 Implementation Level: HIV/AIDS Possible support strategies: Raise HIV/AIDS awareness; Provide information regarding how to deal with HIV/AIDS at site level (blood injuries, orphaned children, nutrition); Supply first aid training and resources (including cheaper substitutes); Work with other stakeholders to build referral and support networks.

29. 29 Implementation Level: Active Learning

30. 30 Implementation Level: Active Learning Support strategies Build awareness and active learning skills; Hold Training tenderer accountable through monitoring system; Focus on follow up and reinforce training (partly through accessing Training database); Minimise contradictive messages (Training tenderer vs. province); Promote “communities of practice”.

31. 31 Implementation Level: Training

32. 32 Implementation Level: Overall Performance Category Nr. of sites% Total Strong (Purple)47524% Average (Green)114358% Needs support (Yellow)33817% Needs intensive support (Red)171% Total sites1973100%

33. 33 Implementation Level: Progress ProvinceImprovedSameWeakened Nr. of Sites EC60%0%40%10 FS70%0%30%43 GP68%1%31%88 KZN47%0%53%15 LP57%0%43%14 MP43%0%57%21 NC50%0%50%8 NW50%0%50%2 WC69%0%31%13 Total63%0%37%214 *Note: Only 214 sites were visited more than once

34. 34 Broader ECD issues What are the findings related to the following broad ECD issues: Social development registration Grade R Learner Admission Policy Social Grant Disbursement Primary School Nutrition Programme SACE Registration

35. 35 Soc. Dev. Registration Not Registered Conditionally RegisteredFully Registered EC%25.9%13.7%60.4% FS%3.8%92.4%3.8% GP%27.6%31.0%41.4% KZN%32.4%8.8%58.8% LP%59.7%13.2%27.1% MP%42.3%37.1%20.6% NC%37.0%21.9%41.1% NW%25.9%46.6%27.6% WC%25.0%53.7%21.3% Total%34.2%31.8%34.0% *Note: Only sites that were indicated to be community based are included in this table. About 43 of the sites did not provide any information on this aspect.

36. 36 Child Support Grants UnawareAwareTotal EC31%69%100% FS27%73%100% GP50% 100% KZN29%71%100% LP18%82%100% MP19%81%100% NC16%84%100% NW15%85%100% WC67%33%100% Total33%67%100% * Note: 112 Sites did not provide information on this aspect. Province Receiving Grants Not Receiving Grants EC14.8%85.2% FS27.3%72.7% GP26.5%73.5% KZN12.9%87.1% LP19.5%80.5% MP48.3%51.7% NC22.7%77.3% NW27.1%72.9% WC22.7%77.3% Total24.3%75.7% *Note: This table only contains responses for practitioners that indicated that they were aware about social grants disbursement.

37. 37 Broader ECD Issues: Summary Findings What are the findings related to the following broad ECD issues: Social Development Registration: Required for community-based sites, a third of the sites monitored are not even conditionally registered Grade R Learner Admission Policy: In 13.3% Grade R classes, practitioners admitted to over-age learners

38. 38 Broader ECD Issues: Summary Findings Social Grant Disbursement: Practitioners’ pastoral role is increasingly important due to HIV/AIDS, but 1/3 do not know if their learners are receiving their social grants Primary School Nutrition Programme: According to practitioners, only 59% of school-based sites are actually receiving PSNP food/support SACE Registration: Only 13% Grade R teachers are registered