Description

Monitoring, evaluation, and implementation of plans and processes have evolved over the years in all sectors and organisations. However, in South Africa, monitoring and evaluation were first formally implemented by the Department of Land Affairs, where the first Monitoring and Evaluation Directorate was established in 1995. The study is focused on various facets of monitoring and evaluation, including the evaluation process, cost-benefit, return on investment, social return on investment, and value for money, to gain more insight into the history and development of monitoring and evaluation. Definitions of key concepts are provided for clarity about the meaning of and extent to which these concepts are used in the study. The study reviewed current monitoring and evaluation practices adopted by the participating sector education and training authorities and explored typical potential obstacles encountered in the execution of systematic monitoring and evaluation. The researcher used a qualitative method to investigate the problem statement.
The research findings highlight a set of challenges that have generally contributed to the poor implementation of monitoring and evaluation in recent times. Findings indicated the extent to which planned monitoring and evaluation activities were conducted and were linked to the project monitoring together with risk management activities to mitigate the corruption risks that might materialise and disturb the proper implementation of the skills development. The findings further revealed that the existence of the monitoring and evaluation framework provided a structured measure on which projects were monitored as a process to curb negative events such as project failure or, in a worse case, corruption regarding the funds paid to learners in the form of stipends.
There is a strong relationship between monitoring and evaluation and good governance within the participating sector education and training authorities, namely the bank sector education and training authority, the insurance sector education and training authority, and the wholesale and retail sector education and training authority. To this end, the study recommends that the approved monitoring and evaluation framework and policy in the sector education and training authorities be further used to enhance accountability and transparency in all participating sector education and training authorities. In addition, the study recommends that more efforts be made to advocate for the utilisation of the reports that were produced by these business units.
The efforts will ensure that monitoring and evaluation of the discretionary grants accurately account for the money spent and also enhance good governance, accountability, monitoring, and evaluation of activities relating to the quality of the learning experience for learners in various disciplines offered by relevant sector education and training authorities.