Evaluation of the Monyetla Work Readiness ... - Business Trust

More documents

Recommendations

Info

• Second visit – Verification of PoEs• Third visit – project closure and final check on whether all contractual stipulationswere met. A consortium checklist and payment request form had to be completedwhich checked for the following:o Internal moderation of PoEo External moderation of PoEo Number of learners allocatedo Number of learners dropped outo Number of learners replacedo Number who gained 60 credits (3 month employment)o Number who gained 54 credits (6 month employment)o Evidence of NLRD uploado 70% placed in employmento Supervisors trained in ratio of 6 Monyetla learners:1 Supervisor48
5 CONCLUSIONS5.1 Project Management (Project Office) EvaluationThe Project Office’s ‘lean and mean’ project management approach played a big role in ensuringoptimal project rollout and the current success rates achieved. The evaluation found that a passionto see the project succeed, a flat communication structure, pro-activeness, project transparency,quick responses to inquiries, expert project management skills and an acute understanding of theproject at ownership and governance level by the Business Trust Project managers instilledconfidence into Consortia members and contributed to their passionate involvement and thecurrent success rates.5.2 Project Governance and Stakeholder PartnershipsThe partnership between government and the private sector was a big driver of the success of theprogramme. The will displayed by these important stakeholders demonstrates that partnerships atthe strategic level and that demonstrate the necessary leadership for the advancement of the sectorplay a key role in displaying to potential investors and companies within the sector that the countrytakes the sector seriously and is willing to put considerable resources into making this happen.It is important to also mention that the individuals that were delegated by the state and business toimplement the programme showed enthusiasm and consistency throughout the project and therewas no chop and changing of representatives in the governing structure as well as the AdjudicationPanel. This ensured smooth implementation of the project.5.3 Piloting the Employer-Led ConsortiumThe issue of consortia leadership needs to be more contextualised. Whilst the project office viewedleadership from a signatory perspective, consortia members identified it in a project managementand administrative context. The two views brought out different approaches to projectimplementation and need to be contextualised. There was a higher participation of employers atsignatory leadership level at 65%, but this reduced markedly to 29% at project management andadministrative level. In contrast there was an 18% participation of training providers at signatorylevel, and this increased markedly to 47% at project management and administrative levels.Employer led consortia achieved high placement rates. All the consortia that had a 100% placementrate were employer-led. Of these, 71% were led by host employers and 29% by lead employers. Theparticipation of host employers led to more favourable placement outcomes and this is increasedwhen the host employers play a participatory role in the recruitment of learners.The participation of training providers that provided administrative and project management servicesalso contributed significantly to successful placements. One hundred percent (100%) of the consortiathat achieved more than an 80% placement rate had training providers leading them from a projectmanagement and administrative perspective.The importance of training providers needs to be recognised going forward. This can be done byincluding them as signatories for the provision of project management and administration services.This role has been shown to be ceded to training providers by contracted employers. By recognisingthe broader role that training providers could play, it is envisaged that their commitment will beincreased significantly thereby giving them an incentive to drive higher placement rates withemployers. Training providers are also the focal point of the training provision, and this is becauseinteraction between consortia and the project office was mostly centred on learner issues,particularly around the quality and standard of this training. As a result, they ended up becoming theinterface between the project office and consortia and had to see to the project management andadministrative issues.49
Page 1 and 2: An evaluation of the Monyetla WorkR
Page 3 and 4: 4.3.10 Further Training 444.4 Train
Page 5 and 6: ACRONYMSList of AcronymsAsgiSABPO&O
Page 7 and 8: • 178 learners (13.6%) not succes
Page 9 and 10: Nature of Employment Contracts Ente
Page 11 and 12: The following is a brief outline of
Page 13 and 14: 2 THE MONYETLA WORK READINESSPROGRA
Page 15 and 16: The training of unemployed people t
Page 17 and 18: Table 1: Training CurriculaCoreID U
Page 19 and 20: 2.10 Evaluating the ModelThe approa
Page 21 and 22: It was also indicated that access t
Page 23 and 24: 3 APPROACH TO THE CASE STUDY3.1 Int
Page 25 and 26: 4 FINDINGSThis section presents the
Page 27 and 28: Organisational Planning and Team De
Page 29 and 30: • Were relationships with trainin
Page 31 and 32: Table 6: Consortia MembersNo. Conso
Page 33 and 34: Lead members who also operated at t
Page 35 and 36: 4.2.3 Provincial SpreadThe Monyetla
Page 37 and 38: 4.3.4 Accreditation and Quality of
Page 39 and 40: Insert 3: The Matlejoane Staffing E
Page 41 and 42: Please refer to the following table
Page 43 and 44: Table 12: The “100% Club” Place
Page 45 and 46: 4.4 Training Provider Perceptions o
Page 47: the training provider had not paid
Page 51 and 52: and Outbound debt collection enviro
Page 53 and 54: 6.1 Consortia Interview Schedule:6
Page 55 and 56: 7 ANNEXURE 27.1 Consortia Discussio
Page 57: Training ProvidersStructure of Cons

Evaluation of the Monyetla Work Readiness ... - Business Trust

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?