The Western Cape's provincial housing waiting list is as good as non-existent.
This is the view of Human Settlements MEC Bonginkosi Madikizela after the department finished assessing the housing data collection and management systems of 12 non-metro municipalities.
The investigation, which is part of the department's municipal housing demand data improvement programme, found that the systems used were so poor that duplication was common; information supplied by housing applicants could not be verified or checked for accuracy and completeness.
The assessment, the results of which have now been compiled in a report, also found that while municipal housing officials appeared to have adequate capacity to manage housing demand data and the related allocation of houses, municipalities used very basic systems and processes for handling housing registration data.
"This results in the integrity of data being dependent on the proper functioning of manual processes and controls," it said in the report.
These processes and controls had not been properly designed and there were few internal controls in place to ensure that, when selection occurred, the data could be relied on.
Key results for the 12 assessed local municipalities included that:
"Considering that registration date is the most common basis for beneficiary selection, this is a concern," it said in the report.
The investigation also found that nearly 10 percent of records captured by the 12 municipalities were duplicates. Four municipalities had five percent or less duplicate records; three had 6-15 percent, four had 16-20 percent and one municipality had 25 percent of records duplicated.
Only six percent of applicants had an unknown application date; 20 percent were registered prior to 1998; 20 percent were registered between 1999 and 2002; while 54 percent have been registered since 2003.
Eighty percent of applicants' ID numbers were valid; two percent had no ID numbers; one percent were not South African residents and the rest had invalid ID numbers.
Madikizela said the findings confirmed the problems he had raised about housing allocation.
"It is fundamentally flawed."
He said loopholes allowed people to get houses when they should not.
- Cape Argus
This is the view of Human Settlements MEC Bonginkosi Madikizela after the department finished assessing the housing data collection and management systems of 12 non-metro municipalities.
The investigation, which is part of the department's municipal housing demand data improvement programme, found that the systems used were so poor that duplication was common; information supplied by housing applicants could not be verified or checked for accuracy and completeness.
The assessment, the results of which have now been compiled in a report, also found that while municipal housing officials appeared to have adequate capacity to manage housing demand data and the related allocation of houses, municipalities used very basic systems and processes for handling housing registration data.
"This results in the integrity of data being dependent on the proper functioning of manual processes and controls," it said in the report.
These processes and controls had not been properly designed and there were few internal controls in place to ensure that, when selection occurred, the data could be relied on.
Key results for the 12 assessed local municipalities included that:
- Only five municipalities had a council-approved housing policy, another five were working according to a draft policy and two had no policy at all.
- Nine were using registration date to select beneficiaries; two were using a weighted point scale while one was using community profiling.
- In terms of Information Technology used, only two municipalities had an advanced system; three had a "progressed" system (able to control access to the data, but beneficiary selection is performed manually) and the remaining seven had basic systems (no access controls, all data related processes performed manually).
- The report also revealed that only one municipality had system-automated quality control to capture registration information; one other municipality used manual quality controls prior to capturing and the remaining 10 municipalities had no quality controls, meaning duplications and inaccuracies were captured.
- Only two municipalities stored and controlled access to their registration information; a further nine stored but did not control access to their registration data and one retained no documentation.
- Only the name, surname and ID number of applicants were consistently captured across all municipalities, while an address was captured against at least 80 percent of applicants in 11 out of 12 municipalities. The date was captured more than 80 percent of the time in nine out of 12 municipalities, while 50 to 80 percent in one and less than 50 percent in two.
"Considering that registration date is the most common basis for beneficiary selection, this is a concern," it said in the report.
The investigation also found that nearly 10 percent of records captured by the 12 municipalities were duplicates. Four municipalities had five percent or less duplicate records; three had 6-15 percent, four had 16-20 percent and one municipality had 25 percent of records duplicated.
Only six percent of applicants had an unknown application date; 20 percent were registered prior to 1998; 20 percent were registered between 1999 and 2002; while 54 percent have been registered since 2003.
Eighty percent of applicants' ID numbers were valid; two percent had no ID numbers; one percent were not South African residents and the rest had invalid ID numbers.
Madikizela said the findings confirmed the problems he had raised about housing allocation.
"It is fundamentally flawed."
He said loopholes allowed people to get houses when they should not.
- Cape Argus
No comments:
Post a Comment