PRESENTATION ON CONDITIONAL GRANTS (Land Care) AND COMPREHENSIVE AGRICULTURAL

SUPPORT PROGRAMME (CASP)

4th May 2006

Land Care

Projects

2004 – 2005 Klipspruit River and wetlands clean – up

(Soweto) Mamelodi LandCare Resource Centre –

Permaculture training Mobilisation of civil society (Klipspruit)

2005 – 2006 Dinokeng Alien Invasive plants removal

Land Care: Trends

Project Name Allocation

ZAR X 103

Expenditure ZAR X 103

Variance explanation

2004-5 ( Total allocation = R 1 785 000)

Klipspruit 1 452 1 452 -

Mamelodi 148 0 Delays in signing of MoUs & BP by Tshwane

Civil society 185 0 Province informed on additional funding in end of 2004

Land Care: Trends

2005-6 (Total allocation = R 2 000 000) + R 333 000 roll over

Dinokeng 2 000 2 000

Mamelodi 148 148

Civil society 185 185

Total Landcare spending for 2005/2006 = 100%.

Non-financial outputs

Klipspruit Mamelodi Dinokeng

Activity Removal of waste Permaculture training

Removal of alien vegetation

No of jobs/ beneficiaries

51 jobs created 25 people trained per year

135 jobs created

No of women employed

30 60% 81

Partners DoA, JDA, Ward councilors

DoA, City of Tshwane

DoA, DWAF-WfW

Other outputs 40-50 tons removed pm

Skills dev training

Part of bigger initiative

Value adding secondary industry

Challenges

2004-5 • Expenditure for the “mobilisation of civil society” only

undertaken in 2005-6 due to the fact that the Department was informed during latter part of the 2004-5 year of additional funds

• Non-alignment of provincial and local municipality process – delays in implementation of Mamelodi project to 2005-6

2005-6• Delays in signing of MoUs and Business Plans with

Working for Water.

Monitoring

Weekly Site visits to monitor progress on operations.

Declared Weeds and Invader Plants (DWIP) committee meetings on a monthly – monitors progress and financial expenditure.

Expenditure reports (DoA)– monthly. DORA (DoA) reports – quarterly basis. EPWP reports (to GPTRPW, DEAT, DoA)-

quarterly basis.

Compliance with monthly reporting

Challenges of getting monthly reports are addressed in DWIP forums and project steering committees.

Cooperative governance – partnership with DoA as funders, GDACE as managers and DWAFF who assist with operations.

Business plans

Submitted to the National Department of Agriculture.

Signed in Nov/December.

CASP

PURPOSE To provide a status report to the Select Committee on

Finance in respect of the on-going Land Care and CASP projects undertaken by GDACE.

To update the select committee on Finance about the implementation of the 2005/06 Land Care and CASP projects.

To highlight the challenges faced by the province with regards to the preparations for the project plans and ensuring compliance with DORA and the funding agreement.

BACKGROUND - CASP

The budget for the 2005/6 financial year was R 5 727 000. The grant per farmer is limited to R150 000.00. The grant can be higher or lower provided that a feasibility

study by the Agricultural Economists in the Department indicates that the beneficiary can generate an equal net income in a reasonable time span with the produce from the commodities for which the infrastructure is intended.

The purpose with the CASP conditional grants is to provide grants to individual beginner farmers for on-farm infrastructure and training.

70% is spent on LRAD and 10% on Household Food Security and 20% on other small and emerging farmers.

Expenditure pattern

2004/2005Provincial

CASPExpenditure.No rollover.

2005/06Provincial

CASP allocation Total

Applications received

Total Submitted for Procurement

Total Committed (For which Orders were

issued)Actual

payments

Total Amount to be Rolled

over

R4,582,000 R 5,727,000 R 6,692,916 R 5,901,403 R 4,860,751 R 1,330,300 R 4 396 700

CHALLENGES 1

During 2004/2005 our main challenge was capacity constraints.

(Agriculture has since been elevated to a Chief Directorate with three Directors and capacity has been expanded by 25%).

Lack of positive collaboration with certain service provider who demand upfront payment before they can deliver the goods.

CHALLENGES 2

Lack of positive collaboration with certain service provider who demand upfront payment before they can deliver the goods.

Service providers are reluctant to responsibility for delivery of goods.

Shortage of service providers in Gauteng with specialized services as required by applicants.

The demand for on & off-farm infrastructure by emerging farmers is more than the available budget.

EXPLANATION OF THE ROLLOVER 1

The first quarter of the financial year focussed on rounding off activities of the 2004/05 CASP financial year thus resulting in the delay in the commencement of activities for the 2005/06 financial year.

Actual procurement commenced in the third quarter as we streamlined processes of farmers’ needs identification, identifying compliant service providers, sourcing quotations and placing orders.

EXPLANATION OF THE ROLLOVER

Coordination and cooperation with service providers negatively affected service delivery as most service providers requested for upfront payment while holding on to orders. This is against procurement procedures.

The delays caused by the service providers who mailed invoice resulted in delayed payments.

PROPOSED REMEDIAL ACTIONS1

As on 03-05-06 50% actual payments have gone through the system.

The DLA (Department of Land Affairs) provided a list of all restitution and LRAD projects in Gauteng which should be considered for funding.

The Department is currently identifying a dedicated manager whose focus will be the unlocking of the procurement bottlenecks.

PROPOSED REMEDIAL ACTIONS 2

The branch is optimistic that upon unlocking these bottlenecks we will be able to disburse the grants.

The department will not only focus on Gauteng service providers but will also source quotation from other provinces.

Monitoring

Weekly Site visits by extension officers to monitor progress on operations.

Expenditure reports (DoA)– monthly. DORA (DoA) reports – quarterly basis.

Conclusion.