Continuing Education and Training Act, 2006 (Act No. 16 of 2006)

Notices

National Norms and Standards for Funding Technical and Vocational Education and Training Colleges

D. Formula Funding of Programmes

34 - 37. What the funding system is designed to do
Purchase cart Previous page Return to chapter overview Next page

 

34.Formula funding of programmes as captured in the formula funding grid is designed to promote particular goals in service delivery. The intention is for the formula funding grid to be only as complex as is necessary for the promotion of these goals. The goals are as follows:

 

(a)To promote transparency and easy comparability in colleges in terms of what programmes are being offered, the number and categories of people reached by programmes, how programmes are funded and success rates.

 

(b)To promote  predictability over the medium term whilst providing the necessary space for flexibility. It is important to interpret the formula funding grid together with the paragraphs in this policy that allow for flexibility in the implementation process, particularly during the transition to the new system. The funding system should promote good planning, whilst not stifling effective management.

 

(c)To promote equity through the provision of bursary funding to colleges for students who are academically capable but cannot afford to pay college fees.

 

(d) To promote quality and efficiency in a manner that is sensitive to historical inequities through an incentive system that takes into account both absolute success rates and improvements over historical success rates.

 

35.Formula funding of programmes is intended to cover the recurrent costs of delivering TVET programmes, but also certain capital costs associated with those programmes, specifically costs is intended to cover college overhead costs, specifically those relating to administration and student support. Overhead costs have been incorporated within the formula funding of programmes based on the understanding that most overhead costs are sensitive to college size. The approach taken in the policy is aimed at encouraging efficient practices with respect to the organisation of administration, student support services, college marketing, management and other activities associated with overhead costs.

 

36.The funding system does not envisage a different level of funding for distance education. This position is in line with White Paper 4, which stipulates that funding should not be differentiated by mode or locus of training. Where the offering of distance programmes by a college results in financial savings, this should be adequately reported on, and the alternative utilisation of the funds should be made clear in the relevant reports. A priority should be given to distance education, e-learning or any other online education students in the alternative utilisation of funds by providing for learning devices such as laptops or tablets as well as provision of data.

 

37.It is recognised that delivering services to special needs students may entail a higher unit cost. This additional cost is not explicitly linked to enrolment figures by special needs categories and per college, partly because of the information difficulties associated with such an approach. Instead, the cost of an expected level of special needs coverage is incorporated within the funding rate referred to in paragraph 90 and used where enrolment targets for these students are set. Moreover, attainment of enrolment targets by colleges, including enrolment targets for special needs students, receives explicit attention in the annual joint DHET-college planning process referred to in paragraphs 95 - 100.