Info on the QCTO 3


I have heard rumours that small private training service providers are no longer going to be able to provide training according to the new National Skills Development Strategy and that this issue was tabled to be discussed in Parliament from the 14th until today (the 18th) of June. Does anyone have any clarity on this issue? Also will the QCTO now be in charge of the SETA’s instead of SAQA? Who do we contact if we have problems with the SETA?

Share on Social Media

Leave a comment

3 thoughts on “Info on the QCTO

  • Alan Hammond

    Hi Linza, Sylvia addresses the NSDS issues below. The discussion you refer to are public hearings of the National Skills Authority and the Dept of Higher Ed and Training that are happening outside Pretoria. They will then advise the Minister based on the inputs and their own thoughts. The QCTO will take over the accreditation and ETQA functions from Setas, but they won’t be in charge of Setas. If you have problems with a Seta you should approach the CEO first, then the Chair of the Seta, then the Minister of Higher Ed and Training. Alan

  • sylvia hammond

    Linzi, I’m glad you joined and asked this question – especially since your concern is really misplaced.
    No this is absolutely not true at all that there is no role for private training providers.

    What has been taking place this week is part of the consultation with the public on both the draft NSDSIII and the proposed new Seta landscape.

    A draft NSDSIII was published by the department of Higher Education and Training (DHET). This ministry under Minister Nzimande and Director General Mary Metcalfe are now in charge of all higher education, that is: universities, FET colleges, other post school institutions, Setas, and ABET. So that is where you complain about Setas.

    The NSDSIII is not a continuation of the NSDS I and II strategies. The draft NSDSIII is now part of a comprehensive set of documents of policy and implementation: first the national Human Resource Development Strategy is raised to a higher level of importance and is the responsibility of the Deputy President, and there is also the key objectives of the Medium Term Strategic Framework.

    What is required is that the skills needs to meet the MTSF must be identified. In the past Setas have been very erratic in the quality of Sector Skills Plans that they have provided. The draft NSDS III addresses this. There is a clear outline for Setas to follow to identify the skills needs for their economic sector.

    We also have a clear need to reduce poverty, reduce unemployment and train youth appropriately for employment or to start their own businesses. The draft NSDSIII aims to increase the capacity of public providers to meet the vastly increased numbers of youth to be accomodated.

    However, the draft NSDSIII specifically refers to private providers. I have attached the draft NSDSIII document. Please refer to the following page numbers to confirm this:
    On page 9 of the Draft NSDSIII there is discussion of the benefits of all the various higher education institutions under one department. Although public providers have been “junior partners”, they are now “centre stage”. “This does not mean that private provides no longer have a role to play”. It points out that there is more than enough work to be done with millions of young people requiring training, but priority will be given to public providers to meet this requirement.

    There will be a new classification of types of training:
    1. programmes to facilitate access: career guidance, RPL, and ABET
    2. PIVOTAL occupational programmes – professional, vocational technical & academic learning
    3. Skills programmes and other non-accredited short courses – these include:
    a. workplace specific training for the employed (traditionally included in Workplace Skills Plans) funded by Seta discretionary grants, and
    b. short courses for the unemployed traditionally funded by the National Skills Fund and
    c. programmes that build the academic profession and develop innovation (researchers)

    Under Programme delivery partners, p 20, it repeats the rationale for investment in public providers to accommodate a major increase in learners, but again: “This should not be read to infer that there is no role for private providers – however it does signal that a special emphasis is to be paid to uplifting public providers and where private providers can assist with this task their contribution will be highly valued.”

    On the same page describing all the areas required for improvement: “Facilitation of partnerships between public and private providers.”

    In describing access to NSF grants – where government departments have priority skills programmes (from 12 point MTSF), they could receive NSF funding and on page 22
    “….. priorities would have to be set before Non-government/Non-profit organisations as well as the for-profit sector could be invited to apply.”

    In conclusion, private providers are specifically mentioned and there appear to be many openings for them to participate. They are being encouraged to work with public providers to raise the level of access of millions of unemployed youth to training to prepare them for employment and also for them to start their own business ventures.

    As a private training provider, I would suggest that you read the document and consider how you could work with public providers – to me there are many openings for creative and constructive service providers who have a positive approach and are keen to make a constructive contribution to alleviating our problems.