Further Education and Training Colleges Act, 2006 (Act No. 16 of 2006)National Norms and Standards for Funding Further Education and Training Colleges (NSF-FET Colleges)I. Transition to the new system |
| 120) | The transition from the various outgoing systems, some national, and some specific to individual provinces or even colleges, to the new system established by this policy, implies a number of key challenges, and possible solutions. A successful transition depends on a solid understanding of recent trends and practices, and the building of a common understanding of and commitment to the new system. |
The transition challenges and solutions
| 121) | Historically, staffing at public FET Colleges has involved the attaching of large post establishments to colleges. These post establishments have been prescriptive with respect to the mix of employee types. They severely limit the ability of colleges to respond to changing demands in the training market, and hence to generate the quantity and type of skills needed by the country's youths and adults. This funding policy envisages a situation in which the staffing of colleges occurs within the ambit of the formula funding of programmes described in this policy. This goal must be realised in stages, however, partly through careful negotiation with the relevant employee organisations. Given that the college sector is an expanding one, and given that the new service delivery system brings with it exciting opportunities for college staff, a collaborative partnership approach between the employer and the employee is envisaged. Specifically, it is envisaged that as a first step, the monetary value of the existing post establishments will be brought in line with the formula funding of programmes. By means of careful analysis of existing employment modalities and negotiation with relevant stakeholders, and guided by the need to address the skills needs of the country, the DoE and PEDs will assume a leadership role in dealing with this challenge. |
| 122) | Average spending on each full-time equivalent student, as well as the breakdown of spending across the three economic categories referred to in paragraph 88, varies greatly from college to college. The same applies to fees charged, and the way in which private and public funding is combined. Much of the variation is related to the fact that spending is inadequate in some colleges, and inefficient and excessive in some other colleges. Inadequate spending is associated with poor quality training, but even colleges with high spending levels are, in some cases, delivering a service below an acceptable level. The challenge is to bring spending in colleges in line with what it actually costs to delivery a quality service. Changes in spending levels that are too abrupt can result in instability in the sector, and an inability to spend new funds efficiently. It is thus important that the normalisation of spending levels should occur gradually, yet as rapidly as circumstances permit. It is envisaged that the per spending levels implied by the formula funding of programmes will be made clear from the outset, but that the convergence of historical spending patterns with the new spending patterns will take some years. During the transitional period, then, certain provinces or colleges may on average spend more or less per full-time equivalent student than what is implied by the new policy. The DoE and PEDs will develop and manage plans that will align the system with the funding norms of this policy. Moreover, there will be engagement with Treasury by the DoE and PEDs aimed at ensuring that the programme 5 MTEF budgets relating to FET Colleges are harmonised with the readiness of the sector to implement the new funding norms, and to increase student enrolment levels. |
| 123) | The clawback mechanism referred to in paragraph 105 is intended to promote efficiency in the system. It should not cause undue instability in the public funding of FET Colleges. For this reason, the clawback mechanism should be phased in over some years, in keeping with the sector's adjustment to the new funding system. Careful in-year monitoring by the PED and colleges of enrolments, and spending should act as an early warning system that can prepare colleges for the possible application of the clawback mechanism. |
Trial runs and implementation dates
| 124) | White Paper 4 outlines the need for colleges to begin the transition to the new system by running the outgoing system at the same time as they implement trial runs of the new system. Trial runs mean the drawing up of plans and budgets in accordance with the new policy, even if the outgoing system is still used to determine funding and resourcing in general. From 1 January 2010, all colleges, in collaboration with PEDs, should start performing trial runs of the new system. |
| 125) | From 1 January 2011, the annual cycIe referred to in the paragraphs beginning with paragraph 110 will apply. |
| 126) | The DoE and PEDs will jointly manage a dynamic implementation schedule which will monitor all aspects of the use of the funding norms and where necessary apply transitional measures. As part of this process a joint Task Team consisting of the DoE, NT and other stakeholders will be established to provide oversight and the additional support that may be required to ensure that the norms are effectively implemented. |
| 127) | The implementation date for these norms will be on the date as determined by the Minister in the Gazette. |