SOUTH AFRICA EDUCATION BUDGET - SOUTH AFRICA - UNICEF
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
South Africa
© UNICEF South Africa
Education BUDGET
SOUTH AFRICA
2017/2018
1
17%
Budget for school children
remains at 17% of total
© UNICEF/L Marinovich
government expenditure
Preface
This budget brief is one of four that explore the extent to which Composition of spending: The higher education and
the national budget and social services sector budgets address training vote is projected to grow by 3 per cent on average
the needs of children under 18 years in South Africa. The briefs in real terms over the present Medium-Term Expenditure
analyse the size and composition of budget allocations for the Framework (MTEF). This far outpaces corresponding growth
fiscal year 2017/18, as well as offer insights into the efficiency, in the consolidated basic education budget. The government is
effectiveness, equity and adequacy of past spending. Their main thus encouraged to:
objectives are to synthesise complex budget information so 1. Ensure that children benefit from increased higher education
that it is easily understood by stakeholders, and to present key spending by increasing the number of Mathematics, Science
messages to inform financial decision-making processes. and English teachers to be trained at tertiary institutions;
2. Convince the national and provincial decision makers that real
Key Messages and
cuts to expenditures in school education should not be an
option.
Recommendations Decentralisation and the equity of spending: Per-pupil
spending in the poorest provinces remains a concern. The
government is encouraged to:
Overall spending trends: Spending on the combined 1. Reform the provincial education allocation formula so that it
national and provincial basic education (or consolidated basic explicitly considers the poverty of learners, given the high
education) budget for school children remains at 17 per cent costs of educating poor learners;
of total government expenditure, but there are concerns about 2. Build understanding among stakeholders that changes in
the lack of growth in education expenditures over the medium national allocation formulae do not automatically translate into
term. The government is encouraged to: better funding for basic education services.
1. Protect spending on priority programmes such as early
childhood education, the national school nutrition programme, Financing the education sector: There is growing
the no-fee school allocation, support for public special evidence that the government is making progress to tackle
school education, and infrastructure spending in the most financial barriers to poor children’s education. Nonetheless, the
disadvantaged areas; government is encouraged to:
2. Keep key stakeholders informed about plans and actions to 1. Investigate whether the present per-pupil allocation (inclusive
spend existing resources in the most effective manner. of personnel), especially for poor learners and schools, is
‘adequate’ to improve the quality of education;
2. Support more in-depth research to better understand variable
academic outcomes among similarly poor schools.
2
Section
1.
Introduction
The responsibility for providing and delivering education © UNICEF South Africa quantitative goals for the schooling sector and the DBE’s
services is shared between the national and provincial own strategic plan, namely Action Plan to 2019: Towards
government. The schooling system (public and private) caters the Realisation of Schooling 2030.3 The latter document
for children between the ages of 5 and 17 years,1 which includes contains the actual learning outcomes to be achieved and the
a Reception Year (prior to Grade 1) and a final formal schooling processes for achieving these goals. Some of the key goals to be
year (Grade 12). The Department of Basic Education (DBE) is the realised by 2030 include:
national department responsible for policy-making and coordination • Ensure universal access to one phase of Early Childhood
for the schooling sector, while nine provincial education Development (ECD), namely Grade R (Reception Year prior to
departments finance and implement national policy for this sector. Grade 1);
The Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) provides • Ninety per cent of children in Grades 3, 6 and 9 achieve 50
post-schooling opportunities at the tertiary level (universities), adult per cent or more in Annual National Assessments;
education programmes, and technical and vocational qualifications • Improve South Africa’s ranking in international comparative
that straddle the schooling and post-schooling levels. standardised tests by providing performance benchmarks;
• Eradicate all infrastructure backlogs by 2030;
The two central documents that guide the development • Ensure that all schools are funded at least at the minimum
and implementation of basic education policy are the per-learner levels determined nationally, and that funds are
National Development Plan 2030 (NDP), 2 which sets utilised transparently and effectively.
Table 1: Key indicators on the health of the education system, 2014–20164
Pupil-teacher ratio, 2016 32.5
Gender parity index (primary and secondary school attendance), 2014 1.0
Average performance in Grade 9 Mathematics in TIMMS at the low performance benchmark level (set at 400–475
372
points), 2015
Average performance in Grade 9 Science in TIMMS at the low performance benchmark level (set at 400–475
358
points), 2015
Percentage of learners who benefit from the no-fee school funding policy, 2016 65.3%
Percentage of schools who benefit from the no-fee school funding policy, 2016 87.5%
Percentage of learners with access to the national school nutrition programme, 2015 80.2%
3
Figure 1: Basic education sector performance, 2013 to 2015 (%)
% of learners attending public schools who 76.2
benefited from the school nutrition 75.6
programme 74.5
64.6
% of learners who did not pay school fees 65.4
62.4
12.2
% of 7–15 year olds walking to school for
12.0
more than 30 minutes
13.5
45.7
% of 0–4 year olds attended ECD 48.3
44.7
Percentage 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
2015 2014 2013
Source: DBE 2017 and General Household Surveys 2015 and 2016
Takeaways:
• The number of learners who attend no-fee schools of poor children. This programme should be gradually
should be maintained and expanded where possible, extended to all poor secondary schools.
but this should not supersede quality considerations. • The DBE needs to capitalise on the existing favourable
• The school nutrition programme has achieved policy environment to promote and universalise early
impressive coverage and is benefiting large numbers childhood education.
© UNICEF/Bart de Ruigh
4
Section
2.
Education
© UNICEF/Bart de Ruigh
Spending Trends
Size of Spending
Table 2 shows that the national Department of Basic 3 per cent of these overall resources for school education. In
Education and the nine provincial education budgets addition to the conditional grant transfers to provincial education
are projected to spend more than R230 billion on basic departments, the Department of Basic Education invests in
education in 2017/18. When transfers to provincial education spending that goes directly to schools in provinces (for example,
budgets are removed from the budget of the national Department the national workbooks), although the magnitude of this spending
of Basic Education, the national department consumes less than is substantially smaller than the conditional grants.
Table 2: Summary of nominal national and provincial basic education budgets, 2017/18 (ZAR’000)
Department National Provincial % of total
National Basic Education 23,408,700 2.7%
National Basic Education transfer to provinces -17,154,300
Combined provincial education budgets 223,892,357
Eastern Cape 32,989,054 14.3%
Free State 12,739,378 5.5%
Gauteng 40,843,869 17.7%
KwaZulu-Natal 47,444,706 20.6%
Limpopo 28,783,149 12.5%
Mpumalanga 19,322,742 8.4%
Northern Cape 5,857,848 2.5%
North West 15,281,697 6.6%
Western Cape 20,629,914 9.0%
Consolidated Basic Education Budget 230,146,757 100.0%
Source: Estimates of National Expenditure 2017 and Estimates of Provincial Revenue and Expenditure 2017
Consolidated basic education as a share of consolidated period, consolidated basic education expenditure constitutes
government expenditure is set to decline from 17.7 per between 4.7 and 4.9 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product
cent in 2016/17 to 16.7 per cent in 2019/20. Over the same (GDP).
5
Figure 2: Consolidated basic education expenditure as percentage of consolidated government expenditure5 and the
Gross Domestic Product (GDP), 2013/14 to 2019/20
20
17.8 17.7 17.7 17.4
18 17.1 17.1 16.7
16
14
Percentage
12
10
8
6 4.9 4.9 4.9 5.0 4.9 4.7 4.7
4
2
0
2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20
Outcome Outcome Outcome Revised estimate MTEF MTEF MTEF
Basic education as a % of government expenditure
Basic education as a % of GDP
Source: Estimates of National Expenditure 2017, Estimates of Provincial Revenue and Expenditure 2017 and Budget Review 2017
Spending Changes
The historically high level of spending on basic education budgets are projected to decline in real terms by 0.1 per cent
is declining, as can be seen in Figure 3 below. Expenditure on average. The aggregate trends convey an accurate sense of
on consolidated basic education budgets is not projected to grow the squeeze on basic education spending and allocations and
above inflation over the present medium term. Over the present warrant a closer examination of isolated growth areas in the basic
MTEF period (2016/17 to 2019/20), consolidated basic education education budget.
Figure 3: Nominal and inflation-adjusted consolidated basic education spending and allocation trends, 2013/14 to 2019/20
(ZAR billion): 2016/17=100
300
258
243
250 218 218 230
209 211 215 217 216 217
202
189
200 177
ZAR billion
150
100
50
0
2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20
Outcome Outcome Outcome Revised estimate MTEF MTEF MTEF
Basic education (real) Basic education (nominal)
Source: Estimates of National Expenditure 2017 and Estimates of Provincial Revenue and Expenditure 2017
6
Figure 4: Social service sectors as a percentage of consolidated government expenditure, 2013/14 to 2018/19
100
Percentage of consolidated government expenditure
90
80 34.4 34.3 34.6 35.0 35.7 36.5 37.3
70
60 10.0 9.8 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.2 9.0 Other
50 11.2 11.2 12.6 10.6 10.2 10.1 10.1 Public order and safety
40
13.4 13.5 13.4 14.1 13.8 13.6 13.4 Economic affairs
30
13.2 13.4 13.4 13.5 Health
13.0 13.5 13.4
20
Social development
10
17.8 17.7 17.1 17.7 17.4 17.1 16.7
Basic education
0
2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20
Outcome Outcome Outcome Revised MTEF MTEF MTEF
estimate
Source: Estimates of National Expenditure 2017 and Estimates of Provincial Revenue and Expenditure 2017
The Priority of Basic Education in the Budget Figure 5: Consolidated basic education as a percentage of
Figure 4 shows that while the consolidated basic education GDP, 2013
share of consolidated government resources is set to
decline from 17.8 per cent in 2013/14 to 16.7 per cent by 6
the end of the MTEF, the shares of the social development
and health functions remain stable over the period above.
5 4.9 4.9
In 2017/18 alone, the three largest social service sector votes
4.4
account for more than 44 per cent of consolidated government
Basic education as a % of GDP
expenditure. The stability of the key social services sectors 4
enabled the government to expand provision for higher education 3.4 3.5
and training, especially the university sector due to the Fees Must 3
Fall campaign. 2.7
2
Figure 5 demonstrates that basic education as a percentage
of GDP is high when comparing South Africa to other middle-
1
income countries and global averages. This demonstrates
that the government has a strong commitment to investing in
education, but that more should be done to ensure that the sector 0
is achieving value for money, as well as equity.
Source: Estimates of National Expenditure 2017, Estimates of Provincial Revenue
and Expenditure 2017 and Budget Review 2017 and OECD Education Indicators6
Takeaways:
• Basic education commands a substantial slice of • There are no indications in the present budget or
overall government expenditure. in any official policy documents that the existing
• Compared to the social development function, the spending trends are likely to change soon, which
rate of growth of the basic education budget over the will constrain spending on children’s services in
medium term is stagnant. education.
7
Section
3.
Composition of
© UNICEF South Africa
Education Spending
Composition of Spending by Department
Figure 6 shows that apart from a spike in spending in at a real average annual rate of almost 4 per cent. Given the
2014/15, the budget of the Department of Basic Education large annual increases in expenditure on higher education and
was relatively flat over the six-year period and grew at training programmes, the rather low projection for this function
a real average annual rate of 1.6 per cent. Expenditure at the end of the present MTEF (2018/19) does not portray any
on consolidated provincial education achieved a much lower accurate planning assumptions, but reflects the uncertainty of the
real average annual rate of 0.9 per cent over the same period. outcome of discussions and bargaining in this sector, especially
Expenditure on the higher education and training vote increased the university sector.
Figure 6: Inflation-adjusted spending trends in education departments,7 2013/14 to 2019/20 (2016/17=100)
8.7
2014/15 Outcome 0.3
3.3
1.3
2015/16 Outcome 2.7
2.7
-2.2
2016/17 1.8
Revised estimate 6.5
1.8
2017/18 MTEF -1.3
0.3
Department of Higher
0.2 Education and Training
2018/19 MTEF 1.2
7.9
Consolidated
0.0 provincial education
2019/20 MTEF 0.5
0.9 Department of
Basic Education
Percentage -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10
Source: Estimates of National Expenditure 2017 and Estimates of Provincial Revenue and Expenditure 2017
Note: Real annual percentage changes are only indicated for consolidated provincial education budgets.
8
© UNICEF South Africa
Composition of Spending by Programme: Provincial Education Budgets
Table 3 shows that consolidated provincial education by the introduction of a conditional grant to assist provinces in
spending is projected to grow from R213 billion in 2016/17 expanding special needs services for children with disabilities.
to just more than R254 billion in 2019/20 at a real average Another key programme, Early Childhood Development (ECD), is
annual rate of 0.1 per cent. Spending on public ordinary schools, projected to increase its spending by an average 1.5 per cent in real
which constitutes roughly 80 per cent of total provincial education terms over the MTEF. In order to facilitate reductions in baseline
spending, is projected to grow by less than 1 per cent in real terms spending, the education infrastructure grant was reduced, thus
on average over the MTEF. The largest positive real growth rate explaining the large real dip in infrastructure allocations over the
is reserved for public special school education, in part facilitated MTEF.
Table 3: Programme expenditure in the consolidated provincial education budget, 2013/14 to 2019/20 (ZAR’000)
Real change Real average
2016/17
between annual
Programme Revised 2017/18 MTEF 2018/19 MTEF 2019/20 MTEF
2016/17 and change over
estimate
2017/18 (%) MTEF (%)
Public Ordinary Schools 167,936,232 178,210,713 191,178,743 203,699,081 -0.2 0.7
Independent School 1,087,702 1,175,713 1,272,801 1,341,341 1.8 0.5
Subsidies
Public Special School 6,796,818 7,372,919 8,031,496 8,565,769 2.0 2.0
Education
Early Childhood 3,867,873 4,179,881 4,501,606 4,794,846 1.7 2.0
Development
Infrastructure Development 13,391,601 11,657,896 11,893,210 12,143,116 -18.1 -8.3
Other 20,260,868 21,295,235 22,519,687 23,468,918 -1.1 -0.8
Total 213,341,094 223,892,357 239,397,543 254,013,071 -1.3 0.1
Source: Estimates of Provincial Revenue and Expenditure 2017
9
Composition of Spending by the Type of Expenditure: Provincial Education Budgets
Basic education is a labour-intensive sector and Figure 7 etc.) are reflected across the ‘goods and services’ category (for
shows that compensation of employees consumes about schools whose budgets are managed by provincial education
80 per cent of available provincial education resources. departments) and ‘transfers to NPOs’ (schools that can self-
While there are provincial variations, on average the sector is manage their budgets). These shares appear stable across the
doing much better compared to previous years (not represented period represented above. The share of expenditure on large
in the graph above), where compensation squeezed out other capital projects, however, is projected to decline from 5.3 per
critical expenditures. South African public schools are classified cent in the present financial year to 4.0 per cent in 2019/20. In
as Section 21 schools (high level of managerial autonomy) line with earlier observations all the chief expenditure categories
and Non-section 21 schools (school budgets managed by the are projected to grow by less than 1.0 per cent in real terms
provincial education department) and hence expenses for on average, confirming the constraints on expenditure on basic
critical school-level items (books, utilities, small maintenance education in the present MTEF.
Figure 7: Expenditure by type in the consolidated provincial education budgets, 2013/14 to 2019/20
100
4.9 4.6 5.2 5.3 4.3 4.0
6.8 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.8 6.7
90
8.6 8.4 8.9 8.8 8.9 9.0
Percentage of total allocation
80
70
60
50
Compensation of
40 78.7 78.9 77.7 77.7 79.0 79.3 employees
Goods and services
30
Transfers to NPOs
20
Buildings and
10 other fixed structures
Other
0
2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20
Outcome Outcome Revised MTEF MTEF MTEF
estimate
Source: Estimates of Provincial Revenue and Expenditure 2017
Takeaways:
• Spending on higher education and training at the ECD and special needs programmes.
programmes far outpaces that of corresponding • Children at public ordinary schools should see most
spending in the basic education sector. of their resources gains preserved (rather than
• While the higher education and training sector does expanded) over the medium-term.
not benefit children in the same way as the basic • The attempt to eliminate infrastructure backlogs must
education sector, increased spending could benefit be supported and rigorous poverty targeting should
children indirectly, especially if an assumption is made determine the priority schools that deserve immediate
that more resources will be spent on the training of attention.
school teachers. • The focus on improving the quality of learner
• Key service delivery programmes for children at the performance is commendable, but the Department
provincial level barely manage to increase spending of Basic Education should resist adopting a punitive
when factoring in inflation. stance for ‘underperforming’ schools because of the
• Very young learners and children with disabilities complexity of school performance in South Africa.
should benefit from the additional spending targeted
10Section
4.
Decentralisation and
© UNICEF South Africa
Equity in Education
Spending
The Provincial Equitable Shares Formula (PES)
Table 4 shows that the education component of the PES of over-age learners.8 From an equity point of view, it is generally
carries the largest weighting (48 per cent) and is made up recognised that it is more expensive to educate learners from
of two factors, namely the size of the school-age cohort socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds, and arguments
(5–17 year-olds) and the actual school enrolment. The have been made that the education component should consider
distribution of the school-age cohort data is based on Census the poverty of the different regions more explicitly and not rely
2011 data, while updated school enrolment numbers provided by exclusively on demographic data. The National Treasury is
the DBE are used. The fact that the two factors are weighted undertaking consultations with a view to changing the education
equally, assists poorer provinces that have a larger percentage component of the provincial equitable shares.
Table 4: Distributing the equitable shares by provinces, 2017
Economic
Education Health Basic share Poverty Institutional Weighted
activity
(48%) (27%) (16%) (3%) (5%) average
(1.0%)
Eastern Cape 15.1% 13.5% 12.6% 16.3% 7.6% 11.1% 14.0%
Free State 5.3% 5.3% 5.1% 5.2% 5.0% 11.1% 5.6%
Gauteng 18.0% 21.8% 24.1% 17.3% 34.3% 11.1% 19.8%
KwaZulu-Natal 22.3% 21.7% 19.8% 22.2% 16.1% 11.1% 21.1%
Limpopo 13.0% 10.3% 10.4% 13.6% 7.1% 11.1% 11.7%
Mpumalanga 8.4% 7.3% 7.7% 9.1% 7.5% 11.1% 8.1%
Northern Cape 2.3% 2.1% 2.1% 2.2% 2.1% 11.1% 2.7%
North West 6.5% 6.7% 6.8% 8.0% 6.5% 11.1% 6.9%
Western Cape 9.1% 11.3% 11.3% 6.1% 13.6% 11.1% 10.1%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Source: Budget Review 2017
Note: Green represents the highest value, while red represents the lowest value for each component and the total weighted share by province.
11Box 1
Let’s imagine how this formula works in practice. If R100 billion was available to be spent on provinces,
then the Eastern Cape provincial government should receive 14% of R100 billion (or R14 billion). Almost
half of this money (48%) would have been decided using the education component. That means of the
R48 billion decided through the education component, the Eastern Cape government would have received
15.1% of R48 billion (or R7.2 billion). For the health component, the Eastern Cape is entitled to 13.5% of the
R27 billion (or R3.6 billion). The formula assumes that the cost of running government is the same for all
provinces and the Eastern Cape will receive 11.1% of R11.1 billion (or R1.2 billion). The same calculation is
done for all the components; these are tallied and the final shares will be paid over in quarterly instalments
during the financial year.
Spending and Allocations on Provincial Education Budgets
Table 5 demonstrates that the slow overall growth achieve average positive gains over the MTEF. Spending and
in provincial spending is reflected across most of the allocations reflected in the table below are inclusive of personnel
provinces’ budgets and only the Eastern Cape (1.5 per cent spending, transfers to public schools, and expenditure on large
on average) and the North West (0.9 per cent on average) and small infrastructure projects.
Table 5: Spending and allocation trends in provincial education budgets, 2016/17 to 2018/19 (ZAR’000)
Real change
Real average
2016/17 revised between
2017/18 MTEF 2018/19 MTEF 2019/20 MTEF annual change
estimate 2016/17 and
over MTEF (%)
2017/18 (%)
Eastern Cape 30,291,514 32,989,054 35,097,333 37,587,452 2.5 1.5
Free State 12,794,331 12,739,378 13,614,009 14,586,931 -6.3 -1.3
Gauteng 39,590,028 40,843,869 44,378,271 46,754,956 -2.9 -0.1
KwaZulu-Natal 45,648,635 47,444,706 50,631,848 53,791,211 -2.2 -0.2
Limpopo 27,512,859 28,783,149 30,440,345 32,194,772 -1.6 -0.5
Mpumalanga 18,136,250 19,322,742 20,921,129 22,095,256 0.2 0.9
Northern Cape 5,574,233 5,857,848 6,139,973 6,496,564 -1.1 -0.6
North West 14,262,562 15,281,697 16,261,250 17,398,783 0.8 0.9
Western Cape 19,530,682 20,629,914 21,913,385 23,107,146 -0.6 -0.1
Total 213,341,094 223,892,357 239,397,543 254,013,071 -1.3 0.1
Source: Estimates of Provincial Revenue and Expenditure 2017
Spending Disparities in Provincial Education Budgets
From an equity lens, the KwaZulu-Natal provincial education had per-pupil spending rates that were lower than the national
department has the largest budget in absolute terms, but average. These are the Eastern Cape (R15,400), KwaZulu-Natal
when service delivery burdens are factored in (number of (R15,800) and the Limpopo province (R15,500). The Northern
learners), it ranks among the lowest per-pupil spenders. Cape provincial education managed to spend almost R4,000 more
Figure 8 shows that in 2016, consolidated provincial education than the national average.
spending per pupil was approximately R16,500 and three provinces
12Figure 8: Real per-pupil expenditure in subnational education budgets, 2016 (ZAR): 2016/17=100
National average 16,496
Northern Cape 19,122
Free State 18,587
Western Cape 17,492
North West 17,172
Gauteng 17,016
Mpumalanga 16,881
KwaZulu-Natal 15,864
Limpopo 15,583
Eastern Cape 15,443
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000
Per pupil expenditure, ZAR
Source: Estimates of Provincial Revenue and Expenditure 2017 and EMIS data from Department of Basic Education
The three poor provinces spent 5 per cent less on average Table 6: Inequality measures summarising differences
on school learners in their respective provinces (Table 6). in per-pupil expenditure among subnational education
Given that these provinces have inherited massive infrastructure departments, 2013 to 2016: 2016/17=100
backlogs, their consistently below-average per-pupil spending
Inequality measure10 2013 2014 2015 2016
is cause for concern. Furthermore, in a comparative analysis of
provincial education spending on personnel by quintile, Gustafsson Coefficient of variation 0.074 0.075 0.067 0.075
(2016) 9 found that learners in the poorest quintiles in KwaZulu- Mean absolute deviation 998.7 975.7 864.4 955.9
Natal have worse learner:educator ratios than their counterparts (ZAR)
in the richest quintiles. This is a classic example of intra-provincial Per-pupil expenditure in 0.97 0.96 0.95 0.95
inequality, which does not get the same analytical exposure as poor provinces as a factor
the extra-provincial inequalities in inputs. For the remaining six of the national average
provinces, the financing picture is one of convergence on per-pupil Source: Estimates of Provincial Revenue and Expenditure 2017 (own calculations)
Note: The Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal and Limpopo were defined as ‘poor
spending, although the aggregate picture may hide important provinces’.
differences at district and school level within provincial education
departments.
© UNICEF/Hearfield
13Spending and Outcomes in Provincial Education Budgets
Schools in the poorest quintiles are exempted from corresponding number for the Western Cape is 21 per cent).
paying school fees. Figure 9 compares schools in the two However, there are schools in both provinces that have a large
poorest quintiles in the Eastern Cape and Western Cape on percentage of their learners achieving university-endorsed
their respective university-level passes achieved in 2016. What passes ranging from 50 per cent to as high as 86 per cent. While
is notable, is that schools in both provinces have relatively low quality is still an issue for most schools, some schools perform
university-level endorsements (the median university-endorsed above the general expectation.
passes in the Eastern Cape are less than 10 per cent and the
Figure 9: Examining the relationship between per-pupil spending and academic outcomes (percentage university-passes
by 9schools) in two provinces in 2016 (schools in national quintiles 1 and 2)
Fig
Eastern Cape Western Cape
80
80
60
60
40
40
20
20
0
0
Source: National Senior Certificate database provided by the Department of Basic Education, 2017
Note: The line inside the box represents the median (or 50th quartile), while the lower line of the box represents the 25th quartile and the upper line of the box represents
the 75th quartile. The size of the box measures the overall range or spread of university-endorsed passes among schools in quintiles 1 and 2.
Takeaways:
• Per-pupil spending has become less variable, even poverty of the school communities they serve.
though concerns remain that some provincial • The focus on improving the quality of learner
education departments continue to spend performance is commendable, but the Department
considerably below the national average. of Basic Education should resist adopting a punitive
• The formula used to allocate resources to provinces stance for ‘under-performing’ schools because of the
for education services incorporates an equity complexity of school performance in South Africa.
perspective, but could go much further by reflecting • A diagnostic tool like a Public Expenditure Review
the cost of educating poor children. (PER) could be very useful to identify underlying
• School performance in the poorest schools remains bottlenecks and improve the effectiveness of
a concern, although there is evidence that some poor spending in poor and vulnerable districts and
schools continue to exceed expectations, despite the schools.
14Section
5.
Financing the
© UNICEF/Bart de Ruigh
Education Sector
Financing Basic Education at the Subnational to be strengthened on two fronts: one, there is a need to better
Level understand whether the per-pupil allocations at no-fee schools
Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) in South Africa is are adequate; and two, there is a need to understand that the
small in the context of social service sector budgets, and focus should be not only on inputs, but also on the outcomes and
funding for school education is financed exclusively from overall quality of the system. The answer to the first question will
available State revenues. Figure 10 below makes it clear that provide an indication of whether the rapid expansion of the no-fee
over time, a larger percentage of students are benefiting from system has overcome the challenges of removing cost barriers
attending no-fee schools. This is a progressive effort that needs for poor children.
Figure 10: Percentage of those aged 5 years and older who attended schools and who do not pay tuition fees, 2002–2016
70
65.4 64.6 65.3
62.1 62.4
59.3
60 57.5
50 46.7
Percentage of learners
40
33.4
30
21.4
20
10
2.9
0.4 0.6 0.5 0.7
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Source: General Household Survey, 2015 and 2016 (official GHS reports)
In a recent report on the impact of the no-fee school compulsory grades. They do conclude, however, that poor
allocation, Branson et al. (2017)11 conclude that they could schools need more years of increased funding to address the
not find proof of any impact of the no-fee policy on learners’ historical funding shortfalls and to more reliably establish the
school attendance or educational attainment in the post- impact of these resources on school performance.
15Financial and Cost Barriers in Provincial Education
The emerging narrative that the cost of schooling is no barriers. It is also noteworthy that a much smaller percentage
longer the main reason for dissatisfaction among learners of learners regard ‘poor teaching’ as a problem, even though
attending public schools, is given credence by the results scores of quantitative studies into the performance of the
in Table 7. Nationally, high school fees are listed as a barrier for system often attribute poor quality outcomes to poor teaching
only 3.5 per cent of learners. However, these views represent and unprepared teachers. One should regard some of the data
learners who are attending school and do not include those with circumspection, given the limited experiences of young
who have dropped out of school because of socio-economic children.
Table 7: Percentage of learners who attended public schools experiencing specified problems per province, 2015
EC FS GP KZN LP MP NC NW WC RSA
Lack of books 2.8 4.3 3.8 4.0 1.5 7.0 3.5 2.9 2.5 3.5
Fees too high 3.1 3.1 6.8 2.9 0.7 2.7 1.6 3.9 4.8 3.5
Classes too large 3.6 1.0 4.4 3.7 1.4 4.2 4.2 6.9 9.8 4.2
Lack of teachers 5.9 0.9 1.8 1.6 0.9 1.2 2.8 5.0 2.1 2.4
Poor teaching 0.8 1.2 2.0 1.9 0.5 1.3 2.4 1.8 1.5 1.4
Source: General Household Survey, 2016 (official GHS report)
Despite these reservations, the growing storyline seems A UNICEF-commissioned study into fiscal space in South
to be that government has done well to encourage poor Africa12 has highlighted several issues. Some of the salient
children to attend and stay in school. However, further findings include: (i) Levying taxes on the consumption of luxury
analyses have also suggested that the government may not have goods and introducing the much-discussed sugar tax could lead
the same financial muscle to continue the necessary changes, to a sizeable amount of new revenue that could be used to finance
and so a focus on the overall fiscal space available to poor children priority expenditures in the social services sector; (ii) Building on
is of paramount importance. the ongoing efforts to achieve cost savings, such as reducing
unnecessary travel, curbing the use of external consultants and
generally decreasing spending on non-priority areas that have a
poor spending record.
Takeaways:
• The government is achieving success in reducing expenditures for children (including basic education)
private costs and financial barriers to basic is constrained and will force education authorities to
education. be more effective at delivering education services to
• To validate this narrative, further investigation is poor children.
needed on the adequacy of funding allocations to the • There are several options that can be pursued by the
poorest schools and much more needs to be done to South African government to increase fiscal space for
understand the performance equation in poor South priority expenditures for children, but it is unclear how
African schools. local political dynamics will affect such transactions
• Fiscal space that once existed to expand priority and inevitable compromises.
16Endnotes 1 The reality is that although the school-age population is 7 To clearly demonstrate the three departments that are defined as including 5–17 year olds, the system caters for and involved in education provisioning in South Africa, we have includes those who are 18 years and above. not netted out the provincial transfers from the budget of 2 The Presidency, The National Development Plan 2030: Our the national Department of Basic Education. We have done future – make it work. Pretoria, Government Printers, 2011. that in our presentation of ‘consolidated basic education’. 3 Department of Basic Education, Action Plan to 2019: Towards Our purpose with this graph was to graphically represent the the Realisation of Schooling 2030. Pretoria, Government overall squeeze on basic education funding. Printers, 2016. 8 Earlier versions of the education equitable shares formula 4 Data for this textbox were taken from The Department of assigned the school-age population component twice the Basic Education, Revised Five-Year Strategic Plan: 2015/16– weight of the school enrolment component, thus penalising 2019/20. Pretoria, Government Printers, 2016. The TIMMS provinces with a large percentage of older learners (above 17 data were drawn from the HSRC TIMMS 2015 reports listed years old). on [accessed 18 July 2017]. 9 Gustafsson, M. Teacher supply and the quality of schooling Gender parity school enrolment data were drawn from the in South Africa: Patterns over space and time. Stellenbosch, Department of Basic Education’s Education Statistics in University of Stellenbosch, 2016. [accessed August 2017]. Data on learners who benefited from the no-fee school 11 Branson, N, Lam, D and Hofmeyr, C. The impact of the system were drawn from the General Household Survey no-fee school policy on enrolment and school performance: 2016. evidence from NIDS Waves 1–3. Pretoria, the Department for 5 Our definition of consolidated government expenditure does Performance Monitoring and Evaluation. not include provision for (interest on) public debt, excludes 10 The coefficient of variation measures the degree of any public entities, but includes provision for the unallocated dispersion of data points around the mean, while the mean contingency reserve over the present MTEF. Excluding debt absolute deviation does something similar but ignores the service costs provides a more accurate estimate of the sign of the deviation. Per-pupil expenditure as a factor of quantity of resources available for service delivery. the national average takes the average per-pupil spending of 6 Data for countries other than South Africa were obtained from the ‘poorest’ provinces and expresses this as a factor of the the OECD Data site [accessed 18 July 2017], which 12 UNICEF, National political economy analysis and fiscal space allows the user to compare any number of countries on profiles of countries in Eastern and Southern Africa: fiscal different dimensions of education spending. space analysis – South Africa. Rotterdam, UNICEF, 2017. 17
United Nations Children’s Fund Equity House 659 Pienaar Street Brooklyn Pretoria 0181 www.unicef.org/southafrica
You can also read
