1. law, govt and politics
2. government
3. state and local government

EPWP 2012 Summit
Resolutions
CJ Abrahams
Chief Director: EPWP Partnership Support
National Department of Public Works
Introduction
 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.
 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:
 report on the progress of the 2012 summit resolutions;
 accelerate the implementation of EPWP by all implementing bodies;
 improve the delivery of work opportunities through the EPWP; and
 promote EPWP Phase 3 to all implementing bodies.
 At the 2012 Summit, 11 Resolutions were made. This report will present the progress
achieved against the resolutions.
2012 Summit Resolutions…(1)
 Resolution 1: Protocols: Summit notes progress made in signing of protocols. Protocols
should be monitored and reports sent to Councils on a quarterly basis.
 Resolution 2: Summit notes progress made on development of EPWP policies. The
summit resolves that all policies must be endorsed by 30th June 2012. NDPW is to
provide technical support.
 Resolution 3: Summit resolves that municipalities must have dedicated officials for
EPWP at appropriate level of seniority.
 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.
 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)
 Resolution 6: Municipalities must continue to prioritise EPWP in their Integrated
Development Plans (IDPs).
 Resolution 7: Municipalities must design EPWP projects to optimize labour-intensive
methods. NDPW will provide technical support on the design at projects.
 Resolution 8: NDPW will streamline training process to ensure that quality training is
provided to beneficiaries.
 Resolution 9: NDPW will continue to provide technical support to municipalities across
all sectors to promote implementation of the EPWP.
 Resolution 10: NDPW to strengthen coordination between municipalities, non-profit
organisations (NPOs) and implementing agents.
 Resolution 11: EPWP Summit to be held every two years.
Resolution 1: Protocols: Summit notes progress made in signing of protocols.
Protocols should be monitored and reports sent to Councils on a quarterly basis
 Background to EPWP Protocols
 Protocols were first introduced at the 1st EPWP Summit in 2010.
 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.
 The initial Protocols covered the period 2009/10 – 2014/15.
 Roles and Responsibilities of the Minister of Public Works, the Premier of the province
and the Executive Mayor/Mayor were provided.
 Targets in terms of work opportunities and FTEs were also included.
 Governance structures were also specified.
 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 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
GP
•
•
Specific template has been developed and municipalities report
progress during District Steering Committees.
•
Monitored quarterly and municipalities are required to report
progress during the District Forums & Municipal Steering
Committees.
Reports presented to MuniMEC and MinMEC. These reports
highlight progress of the municipalities. I
Improvements will be introduced.
12 out 12
•
KZN
61 out 61
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.
•
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
LP
30 out 30
MP
14 out 21
NC
NW
Explanatory notes
•
•
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
•
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 all policies must be endorsed by 30th
June 2012. NDPW to provide technical support
 Background to EPWP Policies
 It was agreed at the 2011 Summit that EPWP municipal policies would be
developed and endorsed by Municipal Councils.
 NDPW has provided technical assistance in providing guidance/template for the
EPWP policies.
 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 all policies must be
endorsed by 30th 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 all policies must be endorsed by 30th 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.eDumbe, 4.Amajuba; 5. Zululand 6.Ugu, 7.Mtubatuba,
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.
uMshwati; 30 Umgungundlovu 31. Sisonke; 32. Indaka; 33. Imbabazane; 34. uMlalazi;
35. uThungulu; 36. uMngeni; 37. uMzinyathi
Resolution 2: Summit notes progress made on development of policies.
The summit resolves all policies must be endorsed by 30th 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.BaPhalaborwa, 10.Mutale, 11.
Ephraim Mogale, 12. Greater Letaba, 13. Makhado, 14. Thabazimbi, 15. Blouberg,
16. Vhembe, 17. Thulamele ; 18. Modimole; 19. Bela Bela; 20. Lephalale
MP
12 out of 21
NC
28 out of 32
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
1. Richtersveld LM, 2. Namakhoi LM, 3. Kamiesburg LM, 4. Hantam LM, 5. KarooHoogland 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 policies must be
endorsed by 30th June 2012
Prov.
NW
14 out 23
WC
27 out of 30
Names of compliant municipalities
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
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 appropriate level of
seniority
Context:
 Dedicated EPWP officials at appropriate levels of seniority will champion the prioritising
and implementation of EPWP projects.
Progress:
 There has been progress registered in this resolution
 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 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. ThaboMofutsanyana; 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 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.
BaPhalaborwa, 10. Mutale, 11. Ephraim Mogale, 12. Greater Letaba, 13.
Makhado, 14.Thabazimbi, 15. Blouberg, 16. Vhembe, 17. Thulamele ;
18. Modimole; 19. Bela 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. KhaiMa
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 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 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:
 Intensify the coordination and implementation of EPWP by all municipalities within a
District;
 Improve the understanding and coordination of the Programme;
 Promote best practices in the implementation amongst municipalities within the district;
 Provide aplatform to share challenges experienced by EPWP role-players including best
practises and solutions to those challenges;
 Identify and resolve challenges with regarding to EPWP implementation; and
 To ensure that EPWP targets for the District are met.
Resolution 4: Summit resolves District forums / similar
structures should be established by 31 March 2013.
Progress:
 There has been steady
progress
in
the
establishment
and
maintenance of EPWP
District Forum structures in
most districts across the
country.
 Out
of
44
District
municipalities, 41 District
Forums are operational
which represent about 93%
of districts.
 The table summarises the
progress to date.
No of
Districts District Forums
Province
per
operational
province
EC
FS
GP
KZ
LP
MP
NC
NW
WC
Total
6
4
2
10
5
3
5
4
5
44
% Progress
6
4
2
8
5
2
5
4
5
41
100%
100%
100%
80%
100%
67%
100%
100%
100%
93%
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:
 The attendance of such meetings by relevant officials in provinces are poor;
 District reports do not find expression in mayors offices in some provinces; and
 In some provinces, meetings are cancelled with short notice.
Resolution 4: Summit resolves District forums / similar
structures should be established by 31 March 2013.
Province
EC
Number of
municipalities
with District
Forums
6 out6
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:
 May 2014 forum meetings: 7-Fezile Dabi; 9-Xhariep; 14Lejweleputswa and 21-Thabo Mofutsanyana
 August 2014 forum meetings-: 27-Fezile Dabi; 14-Xhariep;13Lejweleputswa and 20-Thabo Mofutsanyane
 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.uThungulu, 3.Amajuba, 4.uMkhanyakude, 5.Ugu, 6.
Uthukela, 7. uMgungundlovu, 8.uMzinyathi
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 with audit requirements of the
Auditor General
Every worker must keep a written
record of at least the following:
 the workers name and
position;
 copy of an acceptable worker
identification;
 in the case of a task-rated
worker, the number of tasks
completed by the worker;
 in the case of a time-rated
worker, the time worked by the
worker;
 payments made to each
worker.
Determined from 214 site visits in 2014/15
22
Compliance
to Ministerial
Determination
Expanded
Public Works
Resolution
5: Summit
resolved
that proper4:
record
management
system
Programmes:
Keeping
be developed to ensure
compliance
withRecords
audit requirements of the
Auditor General
Determined from 214 site visits in 2014/15
23
Resolution 6: Municipalities to continue prioritise EPWP in
their Integrated Development Plan Projects
 Officials from the Regional Office of Public Works (EPWP) are
members of the IDP Appraisal Committees to Influences EPWP
Project.
 On approval of IDP Projects, EPWP projects are sifted for the
purpose of registering on the system.
 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 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%
100%
100%
100%
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%
100%
100%
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.

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 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:
 Noticed that not all the Incentive Projects are on the IDP’s for Municipalities.
 Not all the Municipalities are reporting on Monthly expenditure reports as required by
section 12(2)(a) of the Division of Revenue Act.
 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.
 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 to beneficiaries

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:

R200 million for Short Courses, R110 million for Skills Programmes, R52 million for
Artisan Development and Learnerships and R7.1 million for NECSA training.

The EPWP received the largest allocation from the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET)
through the National Skills Fund (NSF).
The EPWP through further engagements with the various Sector Education and Training Authorities
(SETA”s); also managed to source R1,7 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).
The EPWP also received funding of R31 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 to beneficiaries




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.
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.
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.
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.
AgriSETA, CATHSSETA, CETA, EWSETA, ETDPSETA, FPMSETA, FOODBEVSETA, HWSETA,
LGSETA, merSETA, MICTSETA, MQASETA, SASSETA & SERVICES SETA.
Resolution 8: NDPW will streamline training process to
ensure that quality training is provided to beneficiaries




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.
As per the NSDS III initiative, the EPWP Training using the NSF Funding, has partnered with 3
various SETA’s up unit the 31St 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 AgriSETA, CATHSSETA and MerSETA. 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.
The AgriSETA 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.
The merSETA will implement the Artisan Development Programme on various trades i.e. electricians,
diesel mechanic, boilermakers etc.; to 109 EPWP participants. The merSETA 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 to beneficiaries

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.
 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
 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.
Context :
The Non-State Sector comprises 2 components i.e.
 the Community Work Programme (CWP) managed by COGTA, and
 NPO programme managed by NDPW.
Progress:
 The municipal strategy for the implementation of the NPO programme was presented at
the Cities Network workshop and Provincial roadshows.
 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.
 Municipalities are involved in the selection of the contracted NPOs through the provincial
programme management teams (PPMT).
 The Non-State Sector (NSS) projects implemented are in line with the IDPs of the
municipalities.
 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:
 At the previous Summit it was decided to repeat the Summit every 2nd year in order to
allow Reporting Bodies time to implement projects and make progress towards reaching
their WO and FTE targets.
Progress:
 The 4th EPWP Summit is held two years after the 2012 EPWP Summit.
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
(Q4 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

221 of 226 local municipalities reporting (98% of local municipalities).

All 8 metros reporting (112 433 WO reported by metros which account for 43% of the 262 441 WO
reported by municipalities).

All districts municipalities reporting (100% of districts). 22% of WO reported by municipalities are reported
by districts.

Sector representation:
 Infrastructure 67% of work opportunities
 Environment & Culture Sector at 27%; and
 Social sector at 6% .
36
Spatial distribution of work opportunities
1 Apr 2013 – 31 March 2014
 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.
 Top 10 municipalities:
Munic code
ETH
CPT
JHB
TSH
EC157
NC091
BUF
EC441
EC442
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 12th place and Mangaung Metro in 24st 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 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
EC104
KZN285
MP302
KZN241
MP322
MP307
MP311
FS181
LIM362
FS195
MP303
KZN433
KZN225
MP323
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
DC10
DC28
DC30
DC24
DC32
DC30
DC31
DC18
DC36
DC19
DC30
DC43
DC22
DC32
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
KN
MP
MP
MP
FS
LP
FS
MP
KN
KN
MP
FS
Average
duration
138
134
119
118
110
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 reported. This
increased to 98% in Year 4 (274 of 278) and 5 (273 of 278).
Summary components:
 As structures such as the DSC improve and mature, then these resolutions
should be more actively monitored
 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!