LINDA BIERSTEKER

Scaling up a preprimary year (Grade R) in South Africa

Africa ECCD Initiative Workshop Cape TownJuly 2010

research@elru.co.za

Outline

South African context (history, indicators, service access)

Brief description of the Reception Year Programme scale up

Successes and challenges

History of neglect and inequity of ECD services

Disparities in both quality and access by population group, age, rural/urban divide, few children with disabilities in ECD programmes

Very limited public funding and provisionService fragmentationLack of accredited training opportunities for ECD

workersAbsence of minimum standards and guidelines for

registration of service providers

Some key indicatorsPopulation 0 – 4 years approximately 5 million

5 years approximately 1 million

Infant mortality rate 45.7 per 1000Under 5 mortality rate 68 per 1000

66% of under 5s are poor

23% of 1- 3 year olds stunted, 11% underweight

28% of pregnant women HIV +

University of OxfordCentre for the Analysis of South African Social Policy

Scaling up Grade R

ECD White Paper 2001

Reception year for five year olds as first year of schooling system by 2010 under Department of Education (in 2009 revised to 2014)

85% in public schools, 15% in community schools

Approved training for all educators without a specialised qualification for Reception Year

Funding from provincial education departments – poverty targeted

Drivers

Attempts to fix bottle necks, poor schooling outcomes and drop outs in early primary schooling (started pre-democracy)

Strong child rights commitment of the new democratic government

Strong community based ECD sector to build on, some of whom moved into key government ECD posts

Champions in and out of government

What worked

Period of piloting interim policy, development of accredited training programmes and national audit

Selling Grade R on basis of savings within system and incremental scale up on a lower cost model

Conditional grant (ring-fenced funding) to kick-start programme

Legislation of funding norms and standards – pro poor funding formula

High political will seen in budget increases

Expansion in ECD Budgets 2001/2 – 2010/11

Year R’000

2001/2 263 3342002/3 306 9772003/4 377 1952005/5 458 1542006/7 683 3792007/8 932 480

2008/9 1 463 044

2009/10 2 048 663

2010/11 3 241 780

Key Challenges – access but especially quality

Lack of infrastructure, learning materials and insufficient qualified ECD teachers

Provincial budgeting process (and variation in salaries and subsidies)

Insufficient officials in provinces and districts to administer, monitor and support

Grade R is not fully part of formal schooling – due to different funding model and teachers not yet falling under norms and standards for educators

Resources and interventions to address challenges

Teacher training opportunitiesInfrastructure provision in budgetNorms and standards for funding –minimum inputs

specified, provide for monitoring outputsDraft standards for quality learning programmeModel schools, curriculum guidance and additional

national monitoring of provincial programmes

Infrastructure and Materials

Programme

Lessons

A clear policy intention that Grade R was the first year of compulsory schooling and legislated public funding provision make the programme sustainable in terms of access

Location within the established schooling system with some available infrastructure and existing curriculum but also built on community sector and NGO training providers

Grade R is a single service and targeting is simple

Lessons cntd

Only one department is responsible, so while there needed to be alignment across two levels of government, there was no need to draw in stakeholders with very different service mandates

Value of accredited training system with multiple pathways

Challenge of adding to an already stretched and challenged primary school system

Need to create sufficient capacity and numbers of government officials as well as teaching staff

Need for an advocacy/communication strategy

Summary

Service package A single child directed serviceTarget All five year olds (1 m) (underage enrolments a problem)Policy and legislation Constitutional commitment to a year of compulsory

schooling and legislated norms and standards prescribe public funding

Funding Committed public funding and funded start up process

Summary ctd

Infrastructure Located within schooling system with some available

infrastructureHuman resources Insufficient trained staff both to offer the service and to

provide departmental support and monitoringData systems for M&E EMIS system which captures data regularly which is

helpful for planning and monitoring but needs more information on programme quality