1. PRESENTATION ON CONDITIONAL GRANTS (Land Care) AND COMPREHENSIVE AGRICULTURAL SUPPORT PROGRAMME (CASP) 4 th May 2006

2. Land Care

3. Projects 2004 – 2005 Klipspruit River and wetlands clean – up (Soweto) Mamelodi LandCare Resource Centre – Permaculture training Mobilisation of civil society (Klipspruit) 2005 – 2006 Dinokeng Alien Invasive plants removal

4. Land Care: Trends Project NameAllocation ZAR X 10 3 Expenditure ZAR X 10 3 Variance explanation 2004-5 ( Total allocation = R 1 785 000) Klipspruit1 452 - Mamelodi1480Delays in signing of MoUs & BP by Tshwane Civil society1850Province informed on additional funding in end of 2004

5. Land Care: Trends 2005-6 (Total allocation = R 2 000 000) + R 333 000 roll over Dinokeng2 000 Mamelodi148 Civil society185 Total Landcare spending for 2005/2006 = 100%.

6. Non-financial outputs KlipspruitMamelodiDinokeng ActivityRemoval of waste Permaculture training Removal of alien vegetation No of jobs/ beneficiaries 51 jobs created25 people trained per year 135 jobs created No of women employed 3060%81 PartnersDoA, JDA, Ward councilors DoA, City of Tshwane DoA, DWAF-WfW Other outputs40-50 tons removed pm Skills dev training Part of bigger initiative Value adding secondary industry

7. Challenges 2004-5 Expenditure for the “mobilisation of civil society” only undertaken in 2005-6 due to the fact that the Department was informed during latter part of the 2004-5 year of additional funds Non-alignment of provincial and local municipality process – delays in implementation of Mamelodi project to 2005-6 2005-6 Delays in signing of MoUs and Business Plans with Working for Water.

8. Monitoring Weekly Site visits to monitor progress on operations. Declared Weeds and Invader Plants (DWIP) committee meetings on a monthly – monitors progress and financial expenditure. Expenditure reports (DoA)– monthly. DORA (DoA) reports – quarterly basis. EPWP reports (to GPTRPW, DEAT, DoA)- quarterly basis.

9. Compliance with monthly reporting Challenges of getting monthly reports are addressed in DWIP forums and project steering committees. Cooperative governance – partnership with DoA as funders, GDACE as managers and DWAFF who assist with operations.

10. Business plans Submitted to the National Department of Agriculture. Signed in Nov/December.

11. CASP

12. PURPOSE To provide a status report to the Select Committee on Finance in respect of the on-going Land Care and CASP projects undertaken by GDACE. To update the select committee on Finance about the implementation of the 2005/06 Land Care and CASP projects. To highlight the challenges faced by the province with regards to the preparations for the project plans and ensuring compliance with DORA and the funding agreement.

13. BACKGROUND - CASP The budget for the 2005/6 financial year was R 5 727 000. The grant per farmer is limited to R150 000.00. The grant can be higher or lower provided that a feasibility study by the Agricultural Economists in the Department indicates that the beneficiary can generate an equal net income in a reasonable time span with the produce from the commodities for which the infrastructure is intended. The purpose with the CASP conditional grants is to provide grants to individual beginner farmers for on-farm infrastructure and training. 70% is spent on LRAD and 10% on Household Food Security and 20% on other small and emerging farmers.

14. Expenditure pattern 2004/2005 Provincial CASP Expenditure. No rollover. 2005/06 Provincial CASP allocation Total Applications received Total Submitted for Procurement Total Committed (For which Orders were issued) Actual payments Total Amount to be Rolled over R4,582,000 R 5,727,000 R 6,692,916R 5,901,403R 4,860,751R 1,330,300 R 4 396 700

15. CHALLENGES 1 During 2004/2005 our main challenge was capacity constraints. (Agriculture has since been elevated to a Chief Directorate with three Directors and capacity has been expanded by 25%). Lack of positive collaboration with certain service provider who demand upfront payment before they can deliver the goods.

16. CHALLENGES 2 Lack of positive collaboration with certain service provider who demand upfront payment before they can deliver the goods. Service providers are reluctant to responsibility for delivery of goods. Shortage of service providers in Gauteng with specialized services as required by applicants. The demand for on & off-farm infrastructure by emerging farmers is more than the available budget.

17. EXPLANATION OF THE ROLLOVER 1 The first quarter of the financial year focussed on rounding off activities of the 2004/05 CASP financial year thus resulting in the delay in the commencement of activities for the 2005/06 financial year. Actual procurement commenced in the third quarter as we streamlined processes of farmers’ needs identification, identifying compliant service providers, sourcing quotations and placing orders.

18. EXPLANATION OF THE ROLLOVER Coordination and cooperation with service providers negatively affected service delivery as most service providers requested for upfront payment while holding on to orders. This is against procurement procedures. The delays caused by the service providers who mailed invoice resulted in delayed payments.

19. PROPOSED REMEDIAL ACTIONS1 As on 03-05-06 50% actual payments have gone through the system. The DLA (Department of Land Affairs) provided a list of all restitution and LRAD projects in Gauteng which should be considered for funding. The Department is currently identifying a dedicated manager whose focus will be the unlocking of the procurement bottlenecks.

20. PROPOSED REMEDIAL ACTIONS 2 The branch is optimistic that upon unlocking these bottlenecks we will be able to disburse the grants. The department will not only focus on Gauteng service providers but will also source quotation from other provinces.

21. Monitoring Weekly Site visits by extension officers to monitor progress on operations. Expenditure reports (DoA)– monthly. DORA (DoA) reports – quarterly basis.

22. Conclusion.