Newsletters


2020-04-26
Newsletter 273 - Reports on School & General - The Auditor-General of SA - PART 6


AG Report 2018/2019

Full service schools

WHAT IS A ‘FULL-SERVICE SCHOOL’?

Full-service/inclusive schools are first and foremost mainstream education institutions that provide quality education to all learners by supplying the full range of learning needs in an equitable manner. They should strive to achieve access, equity, quality and social justice in education DBE, 2010

TO PROVIDE SCHOOL BASED SUPPORT FOR LEARNING

The essential feature of the Full Service School is the co-ordinated and structured provision of support to accommodate a wide range of learning needs. Together, the School Management Team (SMT) and the School Based Support Team (SBST) should:

  • identify institutional, teacher and learner support needs
  • develop strategies to address these needs
  • draw in needed resources for support provision
  • work collaboratively with educators to assess individual learners’ support needs and the development of support plans for these learners
  • co-ordinate involvement of parents in decision making and planning for support for their children
  • liaise with the District Based Support Team (DBST) to strengthen the school’s support provision.

The PED have not [number of provincial reports]

  • properly planned the roll-out of FSSs, including the resourcing and conversion of the FSSs-2/9
  • adequatelyguidedandcapacitatededucationdistrictsandFSSsontheimplementationofinclusiveeducationatFSSs-2/9
  • effectivelymonitorandsupportinclusiveeducationprovisioningbytheeducationdistricts-2/9
  • adequatelyreportedonthefunctionalityofFSSsintheprovince-3/9
  • 17(77%)ofeducationdistrictswerenotsufficientlyresourcedand/ordidnotproperlyplantosupportFSSs-3/9
  • 14(64%)ofeducationdistrictsdidnotadequatelyandtimelyguideandcapacitate/trainFSSstoprovideinclusiveeducation-0/9
  • 20y(91%)ofeducationdistrictsdidnotmonitorandsupportFSSs’processestosupportlearnerswithmoderatelearningbarriers-1/9
  • 20(91%)ofeducationdistrictshavenotappropriatelyreportedontheestablishmentandimplementationofinclusiveeducationprovisioningatFSSs-2/9
  • 69(79%)offullserviceschoolsdidnothavethenecessaryresourcestocreateasafeandaccessibleenvironmentforeffectivelearningtotakeplace-1/9
  • 60(69%)offullserviceschoolshadclasssizesinexcessofthenormof40learnersperclassand/ordidnothaveinclusiveeducationeducatorstoprovideadditionalsupportprogrammes-0/9
  • 68(78%)ofSchoolBasedSupportTeams(SBST’s)atfullserviceschoolsauditedwerenotestablishedand/ordidnotadequatelyfunctiontoensurethatinclusiveeducationisplanned,implemented,recordedandreported-1/9
  • 44(51%)ofSBST’sandeducatorsatfullserviceschoolsdidnotreceiveadequatefullserviceschoolandinclusiveeducationtraining-0/9
  • 78(90%)offullserviceschoolsdidnotadequatelyimplementtherequiredSIASprocessestoscreenlearners,identifyandassesslearningbarriersandprovidethenecessarysupport-2/9

 

SCHOOL INFRASTRUCTURE [number of provincial reports]

A number of 5 projects were evaluated in each province

Planning and budgeting for the project

Project commenced as planned                                                                                                                                                      6/9

Project completed within defined duration                                                                                                                                    1/9

Execution of the project

Significant over-or under-spending on budget available for the year                                                                                                                                     6/9

Significant over-or under-spending on total project budget (multi-year)                                                                                   6/9

Findings identified on the procurement of goods and services for the project                                                                                                                    3/9

Overall quality of the project management was poor or not acceptable                                                                                                                              4/9

Quality of infrastructure

Goods and services delivered on project of poor or sub-standard quality                                                                                2/9

Commissioning of the completed project and accounting

Findings on commissioning of the completed project                                                                                                                   4/9

Findings identified on accounting for the project (financial statements)                                                                                    8/9

Money used for intended purpose

Spending not aligned to stage of completion                                                                                                                                8/9

Budget spent but project milestones not achieved                                                                                                                       8/9

Findings identified on grant spending                                                                                                                                              0/9

Findings identified on fruitless and wasteful exp. in relation to the project                                                                                 7/9

Infrastructure not utilized for intended purpose                                                                                                                              7/9

Infrastructure not utilized at all or under utilized                                                                                                                              7/9

Infrastructure not utilized for intended purpose                                                                                                                              7/9