Continuing Education and Training Act, 2006 (Act No. 16 of 2006)NoticesNational Norms and Standards for Funding Technical and Vocational Education and Training CollegesH. The Annual Joint DHET-College Planning Process107 - 110. Review of past formula funding |
| 107. | The review should include an assessment of the deviation between the economic category breakdown of previous allocations, and the economic category breakdown reflected in accounts of actual expenditure. It is not a requirement that colleges must comply with the economic category breakdown of the allocation calculated in the formula funding grid. However, a substantial deviation should be analysed to assess whether the funding weights in the register of nationally approved TVET College programmes are inappropriate, or whether a college is allocating funds inefficiently across the three economic categories. In particular, the review must assess whether the college is investing sufficient funds from the formula funding stream into the maintenance and replacement of capital equipment and facilities given that the funding weights cover this cost. |
| 108. | Though not explicitly linked to the formula funding grid, representatively of students in terms of gender, race and . disability must be considered in terms of the redress principles described in paragraph 27. The level of compliance with past targets should receive attention, and reasons for non-compliance should be assessed. |
| 109. | A clawback mechanism must be applied where the following has occurred: Less training took place in the previous year, in terms of FTE students, than was planned for in the formula funding grid applicable to the previous year. In this case, under-enrolment in certain programmes can be compensated for by over-enrolment in certain other programmes. However, under-enrolment where actual enrolment is less than 97% of the planned enrolment in terms of full-time equivalent students, must lead to the enforcement of the clawback mechanism. Where the college has been over funded and the Department cannot recoup the funds, DHET, should calculate the clawback amount applicable, and should deduct this amount from the funding of the first year of the next MTEF. |
| 110. | DHET must assess prices to determine fee-for-service income of colleges and determine whether there is evidence of cross-subsidisation of privately offered services through the use of funds intended for public services. Financial accounts with a separation between public and private services, as specified in paragraph 82, should also be scrutinised to assess whether cross-subsidisation has occurred. If this has occurred, plans for the future should correct this and continual and deliberate cross-subsidisation by a college can result in a financial clawback using the mechanism referred to in paragraph 109. |