Скачать презентацию EPWP 2012 Summit Resolutions CJ Abrahams Chief Director Скачать презентацию EPWP 2012 Summit Resolutions CJ Abrahams Chief Director

6e4beb68180a65e661a848f2ee217ecc.ppt

  • Количество слайдов: 42

EPWP 2012 Summit Resolutions CJ Abrahams Chief Director: EPWP Partnership Support National Department of EPWP 2012 Summit Resolutions CJ Abrahams Chief Director: EPWP Partnership Support National Department of Public Works

Introduction q Since 2010, the National Department of Public Works has hosted three (3) Introduction q Since 2010, the National Department of Public Works has hosted three (3) EPWP Summits (i. e. 2010 – Durban ICC, 2011 – Gallagher Estate and 2012 – St Georges Hotel) to raise awareness, increase stakeholders’ participation and foster exchange of information through knowledge sharing and participative involvement. q The 2014 summit seeks to ensure that municipalities and provincial and national government departments seamlessly achieve EPWP phase 3 targets by 2019. Theme: “EPWP Phase 3: Towards increased participation and developmental impact”. The summit will: q report on the progress of the 2012 summit resolutions; q accelerate the implementation of EPWP by all implementing bodies; q improve the delivery of work opportunities through the EPWP; and q promote EPWP Phase 3 to all implementing bodies. q At the 2012 Summit, 11 Resolutions were made. This report will present the progress achieved against the resolutions.

2012 Summit Resolutions…(1) q Resolution 1: Protocols: Summit notes progress made in signing of 2012 Summit Resolutions…(1) q Resolution 1: Protocols: Summit notes progress made in signing of protocols. Protocols should be monitored and reports sent to Councils on a quarterly basis. q Resolution 2: Summit notes progress made on development of EPWP policies. The summit resolves that all policies must be endorsed by 30 th June 2012. NDPW is to provide technical support. q Resolution 3: Summit resolves that municipalities must have dedicated officials for EPWP at appropriate level of seniority. q Resolution 4: Summit notes progress made in the establishment of District Forums and summit resolves district forums/similar forums should be established by 31 March 2013. q Resolution 5: Summit resolves that proper record management will be ensured to comply with audit requirements of the Auditor General’s Office.

2012 Summit Resolutions. . (2) q Resolution 6: Municipalities must continue to prioritise EPWP 2012 Summit Resolutions. . (2) q Resolution 6: Municipalities must continue to prioritise EPWP in their Integrated Development Plans (IDPs). q Resolution 7: Municipalities must design EPWP projects to optimize labour-intensive methods. NDPW will provide technical support on the design at projects. q Resolution 8: NDPW will streamline training process to ensure that quality training is provided to beneficiaries. q Resolution 9: NDPW will continue to provide technical support to municipalities across all sectors to promote implementation of the EPWP. q Resolution 10: NDPW to strengthen coordination between municipalities, non-profit organisations (NPOs) and implementing agents. q Resolution 11: EPWP Summit to be held every two years.

Resolution 1: Protocols: Summit notes progress made in signing of protocols. Protocols should be Resolution 1: Protocols: Summit notes progress made in signing of protocols. Protocols should be monitored and reports sent to Councils on a quarterly basis q Background to EPWP Protocols q Protocols were first introduced at the 1 st EPWP Summit in 2010. q The key aim of the protocols are to ensure effective inter-governmental relations and cooperation amongst the three spheres of Government in relation to EPWP. q The initial Protocols covered the period 2009/10 – 2014/15. q Roles and Responsibilities of the Minister of Public Works, the Premier of the province and the Executive Mayor/Mayor were provided. q Targets in terms of work opportunities and FTEs were also included. q Governance structures were also specified. q In phase 3, a process is underway for having protocols signed for the period 2014/15 – 2018/19

Resolution 1: Protocols: Summit notes progress made in signing of protocols. Protocols should be Resolution 1: Protocols: Summit notes progress made in signing of protocols. Protocols should be monitored and reports sent to Councils on a quarterly basis Prov. No. of Municipalities monitoring protocols & sending it to Councils Explanatory notes • EC 45 out 45 FS 24 out of 24 • Monitored through Provincial Steering Committees (PSCs) that meet quarterly and Regional Steering Committees (RSC) that sit on bi-monthly. Bi-laterals through technical support teams to individual municipalities. Specific template has been developed and municipalities report progress during District Steering Committees. • GP • Monitored quarterly and municipalities are required to report progress during the District Forums & Municipal Steering Committees. Reports presented to Muni. MEC and Min. MEC. These reports highlight progress of the municipalities. I Improvements will be introduced. 12 out 12 • KZN 61 out 61 •

Resolution 1: Protocols: Summit notes progress made in signing of protocols. Protocols should be Resolution 1: Protocols: Summit notes progress made in signing of protocols. Protocols should be monitored and reported sent to Councils on a quarterly basis Prov. No. of Municipalities monitoring protocols & sending it to Councils Explanatory notes 30 out 30 MP 14 out 21 NC NW All 30 Municipalities signed protocol agreements in both Phase 2 & 3. Quarterly performance appraisals done through PSCs and District Steering Committees (DSCs). • Non-compliant municipalities are aware that monitoring is not taking place • LP • • Non-compliant municipalities are aware that monitoring is not taking place • • DSC in all four district used Quarterly letters on progress sent municipalities specifically underperforming municipalities. All municipalities have indicated that protocols are monitored and reported on a quarterly basis. Improved mechanisms still to be developed for oversight of this. 25 out 32 23 out 23 • WC 30 out 30 TOTAL 264

Resolution 2: Summit notes progress made on development of EPWP policies. The summit resolves Resolution 2: Summit notes progress made on development of EPWP policies. The summit resolves all policies must be endorsed by 30 th June 2012. NDPW to provide technical support q Background to EPWP Policies q It was agreed at the 2011 Summit that EPWP municipal policies would be developed and endorsed by Municipal Councils. q NDPW has provided technical assistance in providing guidance/template for the EPWP policies. q EPWP policies indicate how EPWP will be implemented within a municipality, specifies the targets, socio-economic conditions within the municipality, governance structures and roles & responsibilities.

Resolution 2: Summit notes progress made on development of EPWP policies. The summit resolves Resolution 2: Summit notes progress made on development of EPWP policies. The summit resolves all policies must be endorsed by 30 th June 2012 Context: Municipalities are expected to endorse EPWP policies stipulating implementation of EPWP projects. Progress: Out of 278 municipalities, 188 EPWP policies were endorsed which represent 68%. The table illustrates progress made towards endorsement of EPWP policies by municipalities per province. Province EC FS GP KZN LP MP NC NW WC TOTAL No. of Municipalities per Province No. of Policies approved to date 45 24 12 61 30 21 32 23 30 278 25 18 10 37 20 12 28 12 27 189 % Perf. 56% 75% 83% 61% 67% 57% 88% 52% 90% 68%

Resolution 2: Summit notes progress made on development of EPWP policies. The summit resolves Resolution 2: Summit notes progress made on development of EPWP policies. The summit resolves all policies must be endorsed by 30 th June 2012 Prov. EC 25 out 45 FS 18 out 24 GP 10 out 12 KZN 37 out of 61 Names of compliant municipalities 1. Buffalo City Metro; 2. Nelson Mandela Bay Metro; 3. Blue Crane; 4. Makana; 5. Ndlambe; 6. Sundays River Valley; 7. Baviaans; 8. Kouga; 9. Koukamma; 10. Cacadu; 11. Mnquma; 12. Great Kei; 13. Amahlathi; 14. Ngqushwa; 15. Nkonkobe; 16. Tsolwana; 17. Elundini; 18. Senqu; 19. Maletswai; 20. Nyandeni; 21. ORTambo; 22. Matatiel; 23. Umzimvubu; 24. Ikwezi; 25. Emalahleni 1. Mangaung Metro; 2. Kopanong; 3. Mohokare; 4. Naledi; 5. Xhariep; 6. Masilonyana; 7. Tokologo; 8. Tswelopele; 9. Lejweleputswa; 10. Setsoto; 11. Nketoana; 12. Maluti-A-Phofung; 13. Phumelela; 14. Mantsopa; 15. Thabo Mofutsanyane; 16. Moqhaka; 17. Ngwathe & 18. Fezile Dabi 1. City of Tshwane, 2. City of Johannesburg, 3. Midvaal; 4. Lesedi, 5. Sedibeng, 6. Randfontein, 7. Westrand, 8. Mogale City, 9. Merafong City, 10. Westonaria 1. Richmond, 2. Newcastle, 3. e. Dumbe, 4. Amajuba; 5. Zululand 6. Ugu, 7. Mtuba, 8. Uphongolo, 9. Emadlangeni, 10. Jozini, 11. Umkhanyakude, 12. Endumeni, 13. Okhahlamba, 14. Ingwe, 15. Mfolozi, 16. Sisonke, 17. Uthukela, 18. Mandeni, 19. Ubuhlebezwe, 20. Umzumbe, 21. Ezinqoleni, 22. Umuziwabantu, 23. Hibiscus Coast, 24. Impendle, 25. Msunduzi, 26. Ntambanana, 27. Kwa Dukuza; 28. Vulamehlo; 29. u. Mshwati; 30 Umgungundlovu 31. Sisonke; 32. Indaka; 33. Imbabazane; 34. u. Mlalazi; 35. u. Thungulu; 36. u. Mngeni; 37. u. Mzinyathi

Resolution 2: Summit notes progress made on development of policies. The summit resolves all Resolution 2: Summit notes progress made on development of policies. The summit resolves all policies must be endorsed by 30 th June 2012 Prov. Names of compliant municipalities LP 20 out of 30 1. Maruleng, 2. Polokwane, 3. Musina; 4. Makhuduthamaga LM; 5. Molemole; 6. Sekhukhune DM; 7. Fetakgomo; 8. Waterberg DM , 9. Ba. Phalaborwa, 10. Mutale, 11. Ephraim Mogale, 12. Greater Letaba, 13. Makhado, 14. Thabazimbi, 15. Blouberg, 16. Vhembe, 17. Thulamele ; 18. Modimole; 19. Bela; 20. Lephalale MP 12 out of 21 1. Mbombela LM, 2. Bushbuckridge LM, 3. Steve Tshwete LM, 4. Thaba Tshweu LM; 5. Umjindi LM, 6. Govan Mbeki LM, 7. Ehlanzeni DM, 8. Dr Pixley Isa Ka Seme LM; 9. Chief Albert Luthuli LM, 10. Msukaligwa LM, 11. Victor Khanye LM, 12. Mkhondo LM NC 28 out of 32 1. Richtersveld LM, 2. Namakhoi LM, 3. Kamiesburg LM, 4. Hantam LM, 5. Karoo. Hoogland LM, 6. Khai Ma LM, Namakwa DM, 7. Ubuntu LM, 8. Umsobomvu LM, 9. Emthanjeni LM, 10. Namakwa DM, 11. Renosterberg LM 12. Thembelihle LM, 13. Siyathemba LM, 14. Khai Ma LM, 15. Pixley Ka Seme DM, 16. Dikgatlong LM, 17. Magareng LM, 18. Frances Baard DM, 19. Joe Morolong, LM, 20. Ga Segonyana LM, 21. Gamagara LM, 22. John Taolo Gaetsewe LM 23. Mier LM 24. Khara Hais LM 25. Kheis LM 26. Kgatelopele LM 27. Tsantsabane LM. 28. Kai Garb LM

Resolution 2: Summit notes progress made on development of policies. The summit resolves all Resolution 2: Summit notes progress made on development of policies. The summit resolves all policies must be endorsed by 30 th June 2012 Prov. Names of compliant municipalities NW 14 out 23 1. Moretele; 2. Kgetleng; 3. Ratlou; 4. Tswaing; 5. Mafikeng; 6. Ramotshere 7. Moiloa; 8. Mamusa; 9. Lekwa Teemane; 10. Dr Kenneth Kaunda DM; 11. Ventersdorp; 12. City of Matlosana; 13. Maquassi Hills, 14. Moretele WC 27 out of 30 1. City of Cape Town, 2. West coast DM, 3. Eden DM, 4. Overberg DM, 5. Cape Winelands DM, 6. Theewaterskloof, 7. Bergrivier, 8. Swartland, 9. Matzikama, 10. Witzenberg, 11. Swellendam, 12. Saldanha, 13. Cederberg, 14. Mosselbay, 15. Bitou, 16. George, 17. Kannaland, 18. Prince Albert, 19. Beaufort West, 20. Laingsburg, 21. Langeberg, 22. Breede Valley, 23. Stellenbosch, 24. Overstrand, 25. Cape Agulhus, 26. Oudtshoorn, 27. Hessequa

Resolution 3: The Summit resolved that municipalities must have dedicated officials for EPWP at Resolution 3: The Summit resolved that municipalities must have dedicated officials for EPWP at appropriate level of seniority Context: q Dedicated EPWP officials at appropriate levels of seniority will champion the prioritising and implementation of EPWP projects. Progress: q There has been progress registered in this resolution q However, all municipal staff are expected to contribute to EPWP, irrespective of whether officials are within the EPWP unit

Resolution 3: The Summit resolved that municipalities must have dedicated officials for EPWP at Resolution 3: The Summit resolved that municipalities must have dedicated officials for EPWP at appropriate level of seniority No. of Municipalities with dedicated EPWP officials Names of compliant municipalities 27 out 45 1. Buffalo City Metro; 2. Nelson Mandela Bay Metro; 3. Blue Crane; 4. Makana; 5. Ndlambe; 6. Sundays River Valley; 7. Baviaans; 8. Kouga; 9. Koukamma; 10. Cacadu; 11. Mnquma; 12. Great Kei; 13. Amahlathi; 14. Ngqushwa; 15. Nkonkobe; 16. Tsolwana; 17. Elundini; 18. Senqu; 19. Maletswai; 20. Nyandeni; 21. ORTambo; 22. Matatiel; 23. Umzimvubu; 24. Ikwezi; 25. Chris Hani; 26. Lukhanji, ; 27. Emalahleni 16 out 24 1. Masilonyana; 2. Tswelopele; 3. Managaung; 4. Setsoto; 5. Xhariep; 6. Thabo. Mofutsanyana; 7. Letsemeng; 8. Tokologo; 9. Dihlabeng; 10. Matjhabeng; 11. Mantsopa; 12. Fezile Dabi; 13. Mohokare; 14. Kopanong; 15. Ngwathe and 16. Mafube GP 12 out 12 1. City of Tshwane, 2. City of Johannesburg, 3. Midvaal; 4. Lesedi, 5. Sedibeng, 6. Randfontein, 7. Westrand, 8. Mogale City, 9. Merafong City, 10. Westonaria; 11. Emfuleni and 12. Ekurhuleni KZN 61 out 61 All municipalities comply Prov. EC FS

Resolution 3: The Summit resolved that municipalities must have dedicated officials for EPWP at Resolution 3: The Summit resolved that municipalities must have dedicated officials for EPWP at appropriate level of seniority Prov. No. of Municipalities with dedicated EPWP officials LP 20 out 30 MP 14 out 21 NC 26 out of 32 - the highlighted ones the EPWPPI’s are embedded in the technical/PMU manager’s performance agreement. Names of compliant municipalities 1. Maruleng, 2. Polokwane, 3. Musina; 4. Makhuduthamaga LM; 5. Molemole; 6. Sekhukhune DM; 7. Fetakgomo; 8. Waterberg DM , 9. Ba. Phalaborwa, 10. Mutale, 11. Ephraim Mogale, 12. Greater Letaba, 13. Makhado, 14. Thabazimbi, 15. Blouberg, 16. Vhembe, 17. Thulamele ; 18. Modimole; 19. Bela; 20. Lephalale 1. Nkangala DM, 2. Steve Tshwete LM, 3. Emalahleni LM, 4. Victor Khanye LM, 5. Dr JS Moroka; 6. Ehlanzeni DM, 7. Mbombela LM, 8. Nkomazi LM, 9. Thaba Chweu LM, 10. Umjindi LM, 11. Gert Sibande DM, 12. Chief Albert Luthuli LM, 13. Govan Mbeki LM and 14. Pixley Ka Seme 1. Joe Morolong LM, 2. Ga-Segonyana LM, 3. JTG DM LM, 4. Gamagara LM, 5. Frances Baard DM, 6. Sol Plaatje LM, 7. Phokwane LM, 8. Magareng LM, 9. Dikgatlong LM, 10. ZF Mgcawu DM, 11. !Kheis LM, 12. Kai!Garib LM, 13. Kgatelopele LM, 14. Mier LM, 15. Richtersveld LM, 16. Namakwa DM, 17. Karoo Hoogland LM, 18. Hantam LM, 19. Khai. Ma LM, 20. Kamiesberg LM, 21. Pixley ka Seme DM, 22. Siyathemba LM, 23. Thembilihle LM, 24. Siyacuma LM, 25. Ubuntu LM, 26. Umsobomvu LM

Resolution 3: The Summit resolved that municipalities must have dedicated officials for EPWP at Resolution 3: The Summit resolved that municipalities must have dedicated officials for EPWP at appropriate level of seniority Prov. No. of Municipalities with dedicated EPWP officials NW 23 out 23 WC 29 out 30 TOTAL 228 out of 278 Names of compliant municipalities 1. Bojanala DM; 2. Moretele; 3. Madibeng; 4. Rustenburg; 5. Kgetleng; 6. Moses Kotane; 7. Ngaka Modiri DM; 8. Mafikeng, 9. Ratlou; 10. Ramotshere Moiloa; 11. Tswaing; 12. Dr Ruth. Mompati; 13. Naledi; 14. Mamusa; 15. Lekwa Teemane; 16. Greater Taung; 17. Dr Kenneth Kaunda; 18. Ventersdorp; 19. City of Matlosana; 20. Tlokwe; 21. Ditsobotla; 22. Maquassi Hills, 23 Kagisano Molopo 1. City of Cape Town, 2. Cape Winelands DM, 3. Eden DM, 4. Overberg DM, 5. Central Karoo DM, 6. West Coast DM, 7. Martzikama, 8. Saldanha, 9. Swartland, 10. Cederberg, 11. George, 12. Oudsthoorn, 13. Knysna, 14. Bitou, 15. Mosselbay, 16. Overstand, 17. Cape Agulhus, 18. Breede Valley, 19. Drakenstein, 20. Stellenbosch, 21. Lainsburg, 22. Beaufort West, 23. Prince Albert, 24. Langeberg, 25. Swellendam, 26. Witzenberg, 27. Hessequa, 28. Theewaterskloof, 29. Bergrivier.

Resolution 4: Summit resolves District forums / similar structures should be established by 31 Resolution 4: Summit resolves District forums / similar structures should be established by 31 March 2013 District forums should be established to ensure awareness of EPWP and promote the implementation of EPWP projects. The objectives of EPWP District Forums are to: q Intensify the coordination and implementation of EPWP by all municipalities within a District; q Improve the understanding and coordination of the Programme; q Promote best practices in the implementation amongst municipalities within the district; q Provide aplatform to share challenges experienced by EPWP role-players including best practises and solutions to those challenges; q Identify and resolve challenges with regarding to EPWP implementation; and q To ensure that EPWP targets for the District are met.

Resolution 4: Summit resolves District forums / similar structures should be established by 31 Resolution 4: Summit resolves District forums / similar structures should be established by 31 March 2013. Progress: q There has been steady progress in the establishment and maintenance of EPWP District Forum structures in most districts across the country. q Out of 44 District municipalities, 41 District Forums are operational which represent about 93% of districts. q The table summarises the progress to date. No of Districts District Forums Province operational per province EC FS GP KZ LP MP NC NW WC Total 6 4 2 10 5 3 5 44 % Progress 6 4 2 8 5 2 5 41 100% 80% 100% 67% 100% 93%

Resolution 4: Summit resolves District forums / similar structures should be established by 31 Resolution 4: Summit resolves District forums / similar structures should be established by 31 March 2013. Challenges: As much as most district municipalities have established EPWP District Forums, there are some challenges when it comes to the functioning of these structures, such as: q The attendance of such meetings by relevant officials in provinces are poor; q District reports do not find expression in mayors offices in some provinces; and q In some provinces, meetings are cancelled with short notice.

Resolution 4: Summit resolves District forums / similar structures should be established by 31 Resolution 4: Summit resolves District forums / similar structures should be established by 31 March 2013. Province EC Number of municipalities with District Forums 6 out 6 4 out 4 FS Names of municipalities with District Forums All 45 EC municipalities are covered and participate in the 6 RSCs covering 6 districts of the EC The Province has functional District forums convened as follows: q. May 2014 forum meetings: 7 -Fezile Dabi; 9 -Xhariep; 14 Lejweleputswa and 21 -Thabo Mofutsanyana q August 2014 forum meetings-: 27 -Fezile Dabi; 14 -Xhariep; 13 Lejweleputswa and 20 -Thabo Mofutsanyane q. November 2014 forum meetings: 5 -Xhariep; 7 -Thabo Mofutsanyane; 12 - Lejweleputswa and 19 - Fezile Dabi 9 Internal The following municiplaities have Internal Forums: Municipal EPWP 1. Tswelopele; 2. Setsoto; 3. Dihlabeng; 4. Mohokare; 5. Kopanong; forums 6. Ngwathe; 7. Mafube; 8. Mangaung and 9. Xhariep GP 2 out 2 Sedibeng & West Rand KZ 8 out 10 1. Zululand, 2. u. Thungulu, 3. Amajuba, 4. u. Mkhanyakude, 5. Ugu, 6. Uthukela, 7. u. Mgungundlovu, 8. u. Mzinyathi

Resolution 4: Summit resolves District forums / similar structures should be established by 31 Resolution 4: Summit resolves District forums / similar structures should be established by 31 March 2013. Prov Number of municipalities with District Forums Names of municipalities with District Forums LP 5 out 5 Waterberg, Mopani, Capricon, Vhembe and *Sekhukhune MP 2 out 3 NC 5 out 5 NW 4 out 4 WC 5 out 5 Ehlanzeni DM, *Nkangala Namakwa, Frances Baard, John Taalo Gaetsewe, *Pixley Ka Seme, *ZF Mgcawu Ngaka Modiri Molema; Bojanala; Dr Ruth Mompati and Dr *Kenneth Kaunda Eden District Forum, Central Karoo District forum, Overberg District Forum, West Coast District forum and Cape Winelands District forum Total 41 * DSC that have not met this year

Resolution 5: Summit resolved that proper record management system be developed to ensure compliance Resolution 5: Summit resolved that proper record management system be developed to ensure compliance with audit requirements of the Auditor General Every worker must keep a written record of at least the following: q the workers name and position; q copy of an acceptable worker identification; q in the case of a task-rated worker, the number of tasks completed by the worker; q in the case of a time-rated worker, the time worked by the worker; q payments made to each worker. Determined from 214 site visits in 2014/15 22

Compliance to Ministerial Determination record management system Resolution 5: Summit resolved that proper 4: Compliance to Ministerial Determination record management system Resolution 5: Summit resolved that proper 4: Expanded Public Works Programmes: with audit requirements of the Auditor be developed to ensure compliance. Keeping Records General Determined from 214 site visits in 2014/15 23

Resolution 6: Municipalities to continue prioritise EPWP in their Integrated Development Plan Projects q Resolution 6: Municipalities to continue prioritise EPWP in their Integrated Development Plan Projects q Officials from the Regional Office of Public Works (EPWP) are members of the IDP Appraisal Committees to Influences EPWP Project. q On approval of IDP Projects, EPWP projects are sifted for the purpose of registering on the system. q Once the Projects are on the system they then follow-up on beneficiaries working on those Projects and report them on the system. 24

Resolution 6: Municipalities to continue prioritise EPWP in their Integrated Development Plan Projects The Resolution 6: Municipalities to continue prioritise EPWP in their Integrated Development Plan Projects The table below indicates the number of municipalities that have incorporated the EPWP in their IDP per province: Province No. of Municipalities per Province EC 45 FS 24 GP 12 KZN 61 Number of municipalities including EPWP in their IDP projects 45 (100% compliance) 24. (100% compliance) IDP forums are held and used as a platform to engage and support municipalities on the integration of EPWP on their Municipal Service Delivery Budget Implementation Plans or IDP 12(100% compliance) 61 (all projects contain elements of EPWP) (100% compliance) % Performance 100%

Resolution 6: Municipalities to continue prioritise EPWP in their Integrated Development Plan Projects The Resolution 6: Municipalities to continue prioritise EPWP in their Integrated Development Plan Projects The table below indicates the number of municipalities that have incorporated the EPWP in their IDP per province: Province No. of Municipalities per Province Number of municipalities including EPWP in their IDP projects % Performance LP 30 30 (100% compliance) 100% MP NC NW WC TOTAL 21 32 23 30 278 21 (100 compliance) 32 (100% compliance) 23 (100% compliance) 30 (100% compliance) 278 85% 100%

Res: 7 Municipalities to design projects using EPWP guidelines and optimize labour intensity. NDWP Res: 7 Municipalities to design projects using EPWP guidelines and optimize labour intensity. NDWP to provide technical support on the design of projects. Res 9: NDPW to continue to provide technical support to municipalities and provinces across all sectors to promote implementation of the EPWP. q NDPW, together with the Provincial Departments of Public Works/Transport (KZN) have partnered in terms of the provision of technical support to ALL provinces

Res: 7 Municipalities to design projects using EPWP guidelines and optimize labour intensity. NDWP Res: 7 Municipalities to design projects using EPWP guidelines and optimize labour intensity. NDWP to provide technical support on the design of projects. Res 9: NDPW to continue to provide technical support to municipalities and provinces across all sectors to promote implementation of the EPWP. Challenges ito incentives: q Noticed that not all the Incentive Projects are on the IDP’s for Municipalities. q Not all the Municipalities are reporting on Monthly expenditure reports as required by section 12(2)(a) of the Division of Revenue Act. q About 90% of the Municipalities are not submitting the quarterly non-financial performance reports as required by section 12(2)(c) of the Division of Revenue Act. q Municipalities are encouraged to evaluate the financial and non-financial Performance of Provinces and Municipalities and submit the reports at the end of the respective financial years as required by section 12(5) of the Division of Revenue Act

Resolution 8: NDPW will streamline training process to ensure that quality training is provided Resolution 8: NDPW will streamline training process to ensure that quality training is provided to beneficiaries q The EPWP received funding from the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) through the National Skills Fund (NSF) to provide training. The DHET approved funds in 2009 from the NSF for the period of 2010 - 2016 with a target of 40 000 (head count) participants to be trained. The breakdown of the approved NSF funds is as follows: q R 200 million for Short Courses, R 110 million for Skills Programmes, R 52 million for Artisan Development and Learnerships and R 7. 1 million for NECSA training. q The EPWP received the largest allocation from the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) through the National Skills Fund (NSF). q The EPWP through further engagements with the various Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETA”s); also managed to source R 1, 7 million from the FPMSETA discretionary grants for training of 763 EPWP participants on FPMSETA skills programmes i. e. chainsaw, brush-cutter, forestry etc. in Mpumalanga (124) and Kwazulu Natal (639). q The EPWP also received funding of R 31 million, from the Department of Labour (DOL) through the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) to provide training to EPWP participants in the form of the following EPWP training programmes i. e. Skills programmes (600) and Learnerships (100).

Resolution 8: NDPW will streamline training process to ensure that quality training is provided Resolution 8: NDPW will streamline training process to ensure that quality training is provided to beneficiaries q The EPWP has facilitated the capacitation of Training Providers to ensure that there are sufficient training providers in all provinces through its training provider capacity building programme. In 2010, fifty (50) training providers were capacitated to attain accreditation with SASSETA, LGSETA, SERVICES SETA, HWSETA and CETA. In 2014, seven (7) training providers were capacitated and accredited to provide the Health and Welfare SETA (HWSETA) Thogomelo Psychosocial Support for Community Caregivers skills programme. q In total 27 Public FET Colleges were contracted to conduct training in Phase II of the EPWP. In Phase III another approval to utilize accredited TVET Colleges was granted in April 2014. q The EPWP has ensured that appropriate qualifications are available for EPWP participants through engagements with the Quality Council for Trades and Occupations (QCTO) and SETAs. In total 30 EPWP Sector Priority Courses were submitted to QCTO for alignment, 13 programmes are finalized and 2 programmes are now registered i. e. Plumber and Electrical. q The EPWP has engaged the 14 (SETA’s) to ensure that quality training is provided to EPWP participants, workplaces are approved, EPWP participants receives statement of results and competency certificates after successful completion of training. The SETA’s engaged are i. e. Agri. SETA, CATHSSETA, CETA, EWSETA, ETDPSETA, FPMSETA, FOODBEVSETA, HWSETA, LGSETA, mer. SETA, MICTSETA, MQASETA, SASSETA & SERVICES SETA.

Resolution 8: NDPW will streamline training process to ensure that quality training is provided Resolution 8: NDPW will streamline training process to ensure that quality training is provided to beneficiaries q The EPWP has ensured that all the training programmes offered are recognised, pre-defined covering both soft and technical skills interventions and accredited by the various SETA’s and by the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA). The EPWP further ensured that all the appointed training providers for actual implementation of training are fully accredited by the various SETA’s. q As per the NSDS III initiative, the EPWP Training using the NSF Funding, has partnered with 3 various SETA’s up unit the 31 St March 2016, to assist with the rollout of the EPWP various training programmes i. e. Learnerships, Skills Programmes and Artisan Development Programmes. The various SETA’s partnered with are the Agri. SETA, CATHSSETA and Mer. SETA. This partnership will ensure that quality training is provided to the EPWP participants as the SETA’s are the recognised experts in skills development and quality assurance of training. q The Agri. SETA will implement Learnerships to 120 EPWP participants on i. e. animal production, poultry production etc. ; and Skills Programme to 2 521 EPWP participants on i. e. horticulture, plant production etc. The CATHSSETA will implement skills Programme to 1 170 EPWP participants on i. e. public area cleaning, culture site guide, craft production, sports coaching etc. and the logistics preparation of the implementation has already commenced. q The mer. SETA will implement the Artisan Development Programme on various trades i. e. electricians, diesel mechanic, boilermakers etc. ; to 109 EPWP participants. The mer. SETA has identified well established companies where the learners have already been placed for the duration of the training in i. e. VW SA, Toyota SA, Mercedes Benz etc.

Resolution 8: NDPW will streamline training process to ensure that quality training is provided Resolution 8: NDPW will streamline training process to ensure that quality training is provided to beneficiaries q The EPWP training has developed processes and procedures, guided by the various applicable training legislatives and this has assisted the EPWP training in receiving Zero (0) audit findings from all the previous financial years. The procedures manuals in place are: 1. The EPWP Training Framework. 2. The EPWP Training Standard Operating Procedures Manual. q The main purpose of the EPWP Training Framework is to provide a policy directive to the EPWP sectors and implementers regarding Training within the EPWP context and it is aligned to the: 1. National Skills Development Strategy (NSDSIII), 2010 -2015. 2. Quality Council for Trades and Occupations (QCTO) principles, 2010. 3. New Growth Path, 2010. 4. Ministerial Determinations and Code of Good practice, 2012. 5. FET Act , amended, 1 of 2013 q The EPWP Training Standard Operating Procedures Manual provides the key processes for actual implementation of training; available on the EPWP website www. epwp. gov. za; and it is aligned to the: 1. 1. EPWP Training Framework; 2. 2. EPWP NSF Eligibility Guide; 3. 3. National Skills Development Strategy 3 (NSDS); and 4. 4. Ministerial Determinations and Code of Good Practice, 2012.

Resolution 10: NDPW to strengthen coordination between municipalities, Non-Profit Organisations (NPOs) and implementing agents. Resolution 10: NDPW to strengthen coordination between municipalities, Non-Profit Organisations (NPOs) and implementing agents. Context : The Non-State Sector comprises 2 components i. e. q the Community Work Programme (CWP) managed by COGTA, and q NPO programme managed by NDPW. Progress: q The municipal strategy for the implementation of the NPO programme was presented at the Cities Networkshop and Provincial roadshows. q Most municipalities utilize NPOs for the implementation of the municipal projects , for example in North West province one NPO was contracted to assist with the revitalization of Mafikeng for the financial year 2013/14. q Municipalities are involved in the selection of the contracted NPOs through the provincial programme management teams (PPMT). q The Non-State Sector (NSS) projects implemented are in line with the IDPs of the municipalities. q The implementation of the CWP projects in a municipality is based on the municipal council resolution. Community participation is a critical requirement in site level decision making (through Local Reference Committees)

Resolution 11: EPWP Summit to be held every two years (biennially) Context: q At Resolution 11: EPWP Summit to be held every two years (biennially) Context: q At the previous Summit it was decided to repeat the Summit every 2 nd year in order to allow Reporting Bodies time to implement projects and make progress towards reaching their WO and FTE targets. Progress: q The 4 th EPWP Summit is held two years after the 2012 EPWP Summit.

Municipalities reporting per Province 1 Apr 2013 – 31 March 2014 (Year 5) Prov Municipalities reporting per Province 1 Apr 2013 – 31 March 2014 (Year 5) Prov No of munics in Prov (18 May 2011 munic boundaries ) No munics reporting WO target (1314) WO reported (Q 4 13 -14) WO progress against targets (%) EC 45 42 68 541 35 471 52% FS 24 24 27 987 8 831 32% GP 12 12 75 967 52 534 69% KZN 61 61 91 681 57 753 63% LP 30 30 56 393 31 751 56% MP 21 21 29 309 17 053 58% NC 32 30 8 826 7 535 85% NW 23 23 36 727 13 148 36% WC 30 30 27 656 38 365 139% 278 273 423 087 262 441 62% TOTAL 35

Municipalities reporting 1 Apr 2013 – 31 March 2014 q 221 of 226 local Municipalities reporting 1 Apr 2013 – 31 March 2014 q 221 of 226 local municipalities reporting (98% of local municipalities). q All 8 metros reporting (112 433 WO reported by metros which account for 43% of the 262 441 WO reported by municipalities). q All districts municipalities reporting (100% of districts). 22% of WO reported by municipalities are reported by districts. q Sector representation: q Infrastructure 67% of work opportunities q Environment & Culture Sector at 27%; and q Social sector at 6%. 36

Spatial distribution of work opportunities 1 Apr 2013 – 31 March 2014 q 7 Spatial distribution of work opportunities 1 Apr 2013 – 31 March 2014 q 7 of the 8 metropolitan municipalities in the top 20. This expected as their targets are the highest, so they need to report high numbers to qualify for incentives. q Top 10 municipalities: Munic code ETH CPT JHB TSH EC 157 NC 091 BUF EC 441 EC 442 EKU Munic name Ethekwini Metro City of Cape Town Metro City of Johannesburg Metro City of Tshwane Metro King Sabata Dalindyebo Sol Plaatjie Buffalo City Metro Matatiele Umzimvubu Ekurhuleni Metro Prov KN WC GP GP EC NC EC EC EC GP Nelson Mandela Bay in 12 th place and Mangaung Metro in 24 st place NMA = 14 716 WO and MAN = 8 241 WO Projects 346 1 067 501 438 140 141 140 25 48 222 WO 64 957 49 142 47 253 37 381 17 808 17 094 16 976 16 562 15 813 15 032 38

Spatial distribution: Average duration 1 April 2013 – 31 March 2014 • • Average Spatial distribution: Average duration 1 April 2013 – 31 March 2014 • • Average duration does not follow the same spatial pattern as the number of work opportunities, i. e. the longest average duration does not occur in the metropolitan areas. 18 municipalities have an average duration > 80 days with the following numbers per prov: • EC 4 FS 4 • KZN 9 LP 2 List of top 15 munics: • MP 9 GP 5 Munic code EC 104 KZN 285 MP 302 KZN 241 MP 322 MP 307 MP 311 FS 181 LIM 362 FS 195 MP 303 KZN 433 KZN 225 MP 323 MAN Munic name Makana Mthonjaneni Msukaligwa Endumeni Mbombela Govan Mbeki Victor Khanye Masilonyana Lephalale Phumelela Mkhondo Greater Kokstad The Msunduzi Umjindi Mangaung Metro District code DC 10 DC 28 DC 30 DC 24 DC 32 DC 30 DC 31 DC 18 DC 36 DC 19 DC 30 DC 43 DC 22 DC 32 MAN District name Cacadu Uthungulu Gert Sibande Umzinyathi Ehlanzeni Gert Sibande Nkangala Lejweleputswa Waterberg Thabo Mofutsanyane Gert Sibande Sisonke UMgungundlovu Ehlanzeni Mangaung Metro Prov EC KN MP MP MP FS LP FS MP KN KN MP FS Average duration 138 134 119 118 110 108 104 102 96 95 93 93 91 40 91

Conclusion: In year 3 of EPWP Phase 2, 87% (265 of 303) of municipalities Conclusion: In year 3 of EPWP Phase 2, 87% (265 of 303) of municipalities reported. This increased to 98% in Year 4 (274 of 278) and 5 (273 of 278). Summary components: q As structures such as the DSC improve and mature, then these resolutions should be more actively monitored q Some of the resolutions are difficult to measure, for example no of projects designed in a LIC manner. There are indirect measurements such as increased LIC.

Thank you! Thank you!