2017|18 · — gregg braden the epg committee the epg comprises prominent personalities, men and...
TRANSCRIPT
Published in the Republic of South Africa by SRSA
Regent Place Building66 Queen StreetPretoria
Private Bag x 896, Pretoria, 0001Tel. 012 304 5000www.srsa.gov.za
EMIN
ENT
PER
SON
’S G
RO
UP
20
18 S
PO
RT
TRA
NSF
OR
MA
TIO
N S
TATU
S R
EP
OR
T O
VE
RV
IEW
epgEminent Persons Groupon Transformation in Sport
TransformationCommission
EPG Sport Transformation Status Report Overview
2017|18
TOKOZILE XASA, MPSport & Recreation South Africa
“The remainder of this political administration must be about, school sport, active nation and transformation. South Africans must see themselves in all our national teams.”
“The key to our transformation is simply this: the better we know ourselves the better equipped we
will be to make our choices wisely.”— Gregg Braden
The EPG Committee
The EPG comprises prominent personalities, men and
women of good standing in society:
Mr Happy Ntshingila, the Chair of the EPG
Ms Ria Ledwaba
Dr Willie Basson
Mr Louis von Zeuner
Mr Maxwell Moss
Prof Marion Keim-Lees
Mrs Wimpie du Plessis
Mr Mark Williams
Mr Songezo Lubabalo Nayo
Mr Fezile Gobizembe Sipamla
Ms Nomsa Mahlangu
Mr Tebogo Selesho, and
Ms Nizenande Machi
2 | SRSA – Emminent Persons GroupSport Transformation Status Report Overview 2017|18
For different reasons, major political and economically-
driven transformation processes are sweeping across the
globe, resulting in a need for effective responses from
nations and organisations, in order for them to survive and
prosper. South Africans are not alone in coming to terms
with the realities of having to adapt to the rapidly-changing
multi-dimensional environment in which they operate.
Inequality has many dimensions. There is inequality at
the top, where the share of income is grabbed by a small
percentage of people, and inequality at the bottom, which is
reflected in the number of people in poverty and the depth
of poverty. There is also inequality in health and in access
to education, as well as gender inequity and childhood
deprivation - all of which lead to ‘inequality of opportunity’.
High levels of inequality of opportunity simply mean that
those who weren’t born of parents of means have little
chance of living up to their potential. This is, of course, a
disaster, not only for these individuals but also for society,
because it not using its most important asset fully, i.e. its
people.
Ongoing exclusion of people from opportunities to develop
to their full potential will have consequences for all people in
society at large. We leave others behind at our peril. If we want
a society of people with a vested interest, everyone should
feel that being part of that society and complying with its
rules is a rewarding experience. Today, many are increasingly
being left behind, with no hope of social mobility. Too many
people are living lives devoid of human dignity due to abject
poverty, which is at 64% among Black people, and 55% in
the population as a whole. Poverty prevents people from
entering “the race” and even when they do, they carry so
much baggage that the odds of excelling are small. Social
injustice, particularly when it involves unfair distribution
of opportunities, is a huge factor underlying a fractured
society. The battle between the haves and the have-nots is
the essence of our fractured society.
Social justice is a constitutional imperative, as it is about
the fair and just distribution of opportunities, resources,
privileges and burdens in society. The preamble of our
Constitution promises to provide a foundation “to heal
the divisions of the past and establish a society based on
democratic values, social justice and fundamental human
rights”. It further promises “to improve the quality of life of all
citizens and free the potential of every person”.
Advancing social justice, therefore, is about delivering
on our constitutional promise. At an indaba held in
2011, the way forward for sport was defined, with the
adoption of a Transformation Charter, the establishment
of a transformation commission and the EPG, and the
introduction of annual transformation audits.
Transformation CharterSport’s structured response to the changing environment
was the adoption of a Transformation Charter at a National
Sport and Recreation Indaba held in November 2011, 17 years
after the first democratic elections were held in 1994..
The Charter is based on the non-racial, non-sexist and
democratic principles as enshrined in the Constitution; the
legal framework of the National Sport and Recreation Act
of 1998; the White Paper on Sport and Recreation of 2013;
the Department of Sport and Recreation of South Africa’s
Strategic Plan and the long-term imperatives of the National
Development Plan.
The Charter describes a multi-dimensional process, with
the purpose of bringing about a sport system within which
the majority of South Africans are provided with equitable
opportunity to participate and excel in sport, both on and
off the field of play. The process is based on two sets of
drivers. The first is based on altruistic or social justice moral
principles and is seen as the ‘right thing to do’, because of
social injustices committed in the past. The other is based
on strategic considerations, because of their direct impact
on longer-term sustainability and the competitiveness of
organisations.
The purpose of the transformation Charter is to increase the
number of people who participate in sport, based on fair
and equitable access to participation opportunities on and
off the field of play.
The Transformation Charter acts as a beacon that guides
the sport system’s journey to bring about systematic
change in key strategic areas (dimensions), as part of sport’s
social contribution; these are: participation opportunity;
Overview
Sport Transformation Status Report Overview 2017|18SRSA – Emminent Persons Group | 3
development of skills and capabilities; representative
demographic profiles on and off the field of play; improving
and optimising performance quality; governance and
economic empowerment.
Sport’s multi-dimensional transformation approach
supports steady and deliberate progress towards the
establishment of an accessible, sustainable and competitive
sport system that is based on systematic change in the
participation demographic profiles, which approach
is rooted in the vision of providing equitable access to
infrastructure, resources and participation opportunities,
in tandem with skill and capability development on and off
the field of play.
The access, skills and capability dimensions of the Charter
are central to the achievement of the ultimate goals and
objectives of the Charter. Linking activities in cause and
effect relationships associated with these two dimensions
to the top and bottom ends of the participation pyramid
are key to the process. The better the quality of this linking,
the greater the impact will be at the top end. The access
dimension will ultimately impact on the representativity of
sport’s demographic profile, while the quality of the skills and
capability dimension will contribute to the competitiveness
of the overall sport system.
Each component dimension of the Charter is quantifiable in
terms of the measurable outcomes of actions that are aimed
at ultimately bringing about changes in the sport system,
which will, in turn, produce breakthrough results in key
areas. Achieving breakthrough results involves embedding
transformation principles in day-to-day operations, so that
everyone’s job is permeated with these.
The transformation measurement system represents a
framework of measures that monitor and track the impact/
outcome of selected activities identified as the key drivers
of transformation. Performance measures described in
the Charter establish and monitor transformation status
in a prescribed and one-size-fits-all format, which treats
all federations on the same basis, regardless of the unique
differences between some of these. Non-achievement of the
predetermined targets is not subject to the imposition of a
penalty.
Eminent Persons Group (EPG)At a sport Indaba held in 2011, it was recognised that
implementation of the Charter could be problematic and
that an independent verification agency is critical to the
veracity of the true measure and pace of change. This led
to the appointment of an independent Transformation
Commission, the Eminent Persons Group (EPG), by
the Minister of Sport and Recreation, to review, make
recommendations and report on sport’s transformation
status on an annual basis. This, the 2016/17 transformation
status report, is the 6th since establishment of the EPG.
The EPG mandate includes the ‘establishment of a
management system to monitor, evaluate, advise and
report on sport’s transformation status and the effectiveness
of implementation of the Transformation Charter and
its associated scorecards. The purpose of the EPG is to
make recommendations and to ensure the sport Ministry
has adequate information and understanding to assess
transformation and, where necessary, to intervene in
improving the rate and effectiveness of transformation in all
areas of South African sport.
Federation Transformation Status 2017/18The 2017/18 transformation audit report is the sixth since
the introductory audit pilot that included athletics, cricket,
football, netball and rugby in 2011. A further five reports
followed from 2012 onwards, which included an additional
14 federations. This report further expands the window into
the current transformation status of South African sport,
based on the analysis of data submitted by the 19 audited
federations, namely: amateur boxing, athletics, basketball,
baseball, bowls, chess, cricket, football, gymnastics, hockey,
jukskei, netball, rowing, rugby, softball, swimming, table
tennis, tennis and volleyball.
It also provides further insight into and understanding of two
factors that impact the rate and extent of transformation:
the ‘state of school sport’ and ‘the impact of population
demographic change’. These are highlighted in Volume 3 of
this report, i.e. the annexure to the report.
Federation transformation status is reflected in two
scorecard structures. One is based on achievement of the
prescribed and one-size-fits-all targets of the Transformation
Charter (introduced in 2011); the other is the ‘Barometer’
introduced in 2016/17, which is based on the achievement of
a federation’s self-set and forward-looking projected targets
that form part of the MoUs entered into with SRSA and
SASCOC.
Unlike with previous reports, the 2017/18 Status Report
comprises three separate volumes.
The first volume, titled, ‘EPG: Individual Federation
Barometer and Sport Transformation Charter Scorecards’,
covers individual federation transformation status in
Sport Transformation Status Report Overview 2017|184 | SRSA – Emminent Persons Group
selected Transformation Charter categories in scorecard
format. The scorecard reflects federation transformation
status based on:
a. The percentage of predetermined, one-size-fits-all
Charter targets achieved.
b. The percentage of federation self-set and forward
projected MoU based ‘Barometer’ targets achieved.
The non-achievement of predetermined, one-size-fits-
all Transformation Charter targets, are not subject to the
imposition of a penalty - unlike with non-achievement of
self-set Barometer targets. Transformation progress in this
instance is dependent on the voluntary implementation of
corrective action by federations, in response to the findings,
comments and recommendations captured in annual EPG
transformation status reports.
However, non-achievement of 50% or more of a federation’s
self-set targets could lead to the imposition of one or more
of the following penalties: suspension or withdrawal of any
funding from government; revoking of authority to bid for
international tournaments; withdrawal of opportunity to
award national colours, and/or withdrawal of recognition as
national federation in terms of the National Sports Act.
As experienced by the five pilot federations, athletics, cricket,
football, netball and rugby in the last year, because of the
Barometer, transformation audit processes are no longer
without consequences which makes data reliability, quality
control and data verification processes and leadership
accountability non-negotiable.
The second volume of the report is titled, ‘EPG: Comparative
Transformation Status Dashboard and Narrative’, reflects
federation transformation status on a comparative basis in
dashboard and summary narrative formats. These are based
on the achievement of predetermined, one-size-fits-all
Transformation Charter targets.
The third volume of the report - the Annexure – summarises:
the ‘implementation status of EPG recommendations’;
the ‘effect of the ‘current school sport status on sport
transformation’; the impact of ‘population demographic
change on federation sustainability profiles’; and the impact
of selected issues on transformation progress’.
Federation Data InputMonitoring sport’s transformation status is based on annual
EPG processes that involve the regular, systematic collection
and analysis of data and information related to action that
drives change in key areas, as defined in the transformation
charter. The outcome of these activities provides evidence
for the following:
a. The extent to which the transformation programme is
being delivered as intended.
b. Whether or not predetermined Charter and self-set
‘Barometer’ targets are being achieved.
c. Whether or not there is enough progress being made
towards the achievement of Charter objectives.
d. Whether or not changes and/or adaptations to the
approach to transformation are required.
Evaluation of transformation status enables appropriate
questions to be asked and judgement calls to be made,
based on specific criteria. The intention is not to simply
assess what impact has been seen, but also why the impact
has occurred, what lessons can be learnt, and how the
programme might be improved.
Change occurs when people start looking at things
differently. Nothing will create change in organisations
quicker than changing the lens of performance
measurement, as measurement and target setting are
crucial enablers of change.
Integral to the annual transformation audit processes is
the quality of data collected, formatted and submitted
by federations. Although much improved since the first
transformation audit that was conducted in 2011/12, it is not
yet to the required standard. In most instances, this is due
to: a lack of finance and human resources; below standard
data collection and data management processes;
ineffective support from affiliate structures; sub-optimal
federation leadership support and accountability.
A subjective process of evaluating data sheet quality and
reliability was introduced in 2016 and repeated in 2017. It was
based on the following criteria: timeliness of submission;
perceived completeness and reliability of data packages;
leadership commitment to the process; support received
from affiliated entities.
Based on these norms, an average data quality score of 49%
for all federations was calculated. Thirteen of the nineteen
federations audited were at the top end of the scoreboard
and scored between 78% and 50%, in the following order:
cricket, rugby, netball, gymnastics, rowing, softball,
swimming, bowls, hockey, jukskei, tennis, table tennis and
football. The remaining six federations were at the bottom
end and scored between 10% and 30%, in the following
order: volleyball, athletics, baseball, amateur boxing, chess
and basketball.
The quality of data submissions received from some
federations (notably cricket, netball and rugby) have
improved consistently over time and have become
benchmarks for the process.
Sport Transformation Status Report Overview 2017|18SRSA – Emminent Persons Group | 5
Data Quality Input 2016 and 2017Eleven of the nineteen federations showed an improvement
of between 48 and 3 percentage points in terms of the
quality of data submitted from 2016 to 2017; these were:
softball, volleyball, cricket, netball, rugby, swimming, rowing
and boxing. In contrast, the data packages received from
athletics, bowls, hockey, jukskei, football, tennis and chess,
showed a decline in quality, ranging from 3% to 33% over the
same period.
Factors impacting data quality and reliability include:
suspect administrative support structures; financial
resource limitations; uncooperative affiliate structures and
leadership commitment to the process; and inadequate
database and data collection structures and processes.
Transformation Charter (prescribed, one-size-fits-all) Target Achievement The rate of progress and the extent of achieving the
transformation objectives of the Charter are influenced by
factors affecting different federations differently, because
of the unique and dissimilar circumstances. These factors
include:
• level and extent of inequality, particularly ‘inequality of
opportunity’ among constituent members;
• culture and value differences as a result of imbalance in
demographic profiles in federation leadership structures,
which influence decision making;
• sustainability and competitiveness consequences as a
result of the changing national population demographic
profile, which impacts the future shape of organisations;
• the state of sport in schools, particularly at the majority of
the 25 000 public schools and a changing previous model
C school environment.
The 2017/18 audit report showed that the best performing
Charter categories, i.e. those in which the highest percentage
of federations achieved the predetermined, ‘one size fits all’
Charter targets, included:
Presidents - 63%; CEOs - 62%; board members - 53%; senior
male national teams - 47%; female board members - 42%;
and female referee/umpires - 42%.
The worst performing Charter categories, i.e. those in
which the lowest percentage of federations achieved the
predetermined Charter targets, included:
Male coaches, male underage team managers and
senior team selectors, as only 37% of federations achieved
the Charter’s generic Black targets; followed by 32% of
federations achieving the predetermined targets for senior
national female teams, female coaches, male referees/
umpires, and senior national team managers.
All are categories in which performances need to be
improved.
Of concern is the small number of federations - only 21% -
that achieved the predetermined 60% Charter target for
generic Black and Black African targets for both male and
female underage national teams, as this is the foundation
of future demographic and competitive profiles of senior
national entities.
Only four federations - football, table tennis, netball
and baseball - achieved the male underage national
representative team predetermined Charter generic Black
target of 60%. And only four federations - football, table
tennis, volleyball and amateur boxing - achieved the generic
Black target for female underage national representative
entities. From a transformation perspective, these figures
signal significant pipeline challenges (male and female)
for many of the federations audited - a formidable strategic
weakness in the sport system.
Compared to pre-1994 and the 20-year period immediately
thereafter, the current situation reflects a much-changed
sport transformation scenario. This is largely due to the
introduction of the Transformation Charter and the EPG in
2011, the Barometer project in 2016/17 and the regularity of
EPG transformation audits since 2011.
Overall, transformation status in terms of individual
federation prescribed, ‘one-size-fits-all’ Charter target
achievement is reflected in the following table:
FEDERATION % OF PRESCRIBED CHARTER TARGETS ACHIEVED
Football 89
Volleyball 67
Table Tennis 67
Amateur Boxing 61
Cricket 61
Basketball 56
Softball 50
Athletics 50
Netball 50
Chess 44
Rugby 28
Baseball 22
Gymnastics 17
Swimming 17
Tennis 17
Hockey 11
Jukskei 6
Bowls 0
Rowing 0
Sport Transformation Status Report Overview 2017|186 | SRSA – Emminent Persons Group
The table shows that nine of the nineteen federations
audited (47% of the total) achieved 50% or more of all
prescribed Charter targets as follows football, with 89%; table
tennis, 67%; volleyball, 67%; amateur boxing, 61%; cricket,
61%; softball, 56%; basketball, 56%; netball and athletics, 50%.
One federation (chess - with 44%) was the only federation
to achieve between 40% and 49% of all prescribed Charter
targets.
The ten federations at the bottom achieved between 28% and
0% of all predetermined Charter targets. These federations
were: rugby with 28%; baseball, 22%; gymnastics, 17%; tennis,
17%; swimming, 17%, hockey, 11%; jukskei, 6%, bowls, 0% and
rowing 0%. All are experiencing difficulties, but some more
than others, in achieving the predetermined, one-size-fits-
all Charter targets adopted in 2011.
As shown in the table above, the transformation performance
gap between the top group of federations achieving 50%
or more and the bottom group of federations achieving
between 28% and 0% of predetermined Charter targets,
is substantial. The split between the two groups suggests
a two-component sport system from a transformation
perspective. The one component demonstrates good
transformation progress measured in terms of achievement
of the predetermined and one-size-fits-all Charter targets,
while the other half reflects slow progress has been made
since 1994.
The light at the end of the transformation tunnel for some
federations in the bottom half of the table may be dimming.
This is mainly due to what appears to be slow or ineffective
change in the demographic profile, particularly in the
following areas: senior and underage male and female
representative teams; high performance groups; coach;
referees/umpire; medical/scientific; leadership structures.
Most of these federations seem to be characterised
by structures that are predominantly White. In this
instance, ineffective response to the impact of national
and regional population demographic changes and
small demographically non-representative participation
footprints in the lower age groups, could lead to longer term
sustainability (and competitive) challenges.
The historic human resource base of several federations
are in the process of changing because of the impact of an
ageing White population and the decline in numbers.
Federation Self-set and Forward Projected Barometer Target AchievementBased on the experience and lessons learned on how to
improve the rate and extent of transformation, the 2011
predetermined, one-size-fits-all Charter scorecard was
supplemented by a self-set target Barometer process in
2015/16. With this process, participating federations set
and project forward their own targets in selected Charter
dimensions, based on a Memorandum of Agreement with
SRSA and SASCOC.
In terms of the MoA, failure of a federation to achieve 50%
or more of its self-set targets could lead to the imposition of
one or more of the following penalties:
suspension or withdrawal of any funding from government; revoking of the authority to bid for international tournaments; withdrawal of opportunity to award national colours, and/or withdrawal of recognition as a national federation in terms of the National Sports Act.
The Barometer process involves 5 federations - athletics,
cricket, football, netball and rugby – and was successfully
piloted in 2016. This led to the project being expanded to
include the remaining 14 federations, in 2017.
The purpose of the ‘Barometer’ is to address the inherent
weakness of the prescribed, one-size- fits-all federation target
system of the Charter, in order to: encourage more focused
and greater leadership transformation accountability within
national and provincial sport federation structures; and to
promote a more informed strategic and forward-looking
approach to bringing about change.
The Barometer process has had a major effect on federation
attitude and support, because of: the added responsibility of
setting and projecting forward own transformation targets;
and the threat of a penalty imposition for non-achievement
of 50% or more of the self-set targets.
The process highlighted the challenges faced by most
federations to set and project forward their own targets in
the selected Charter categories. This was, in some instances,
due to insufficient knowledge and insight into a federation’s
current situation, and understanding of how those factors
shape its future. This was evident in the mechanistic and, at
times, guesstimating way in which many federations set and
projected transformation related targets forward. The quality
Sport Transformation Status Report Overview 2017|18SRSA – Emminent Persons Group | 7
of federation longer-term thinking with respect to possible
future positions was often vague and uncertain. Additionally,
season to season planning and budget processes appears to
dominate thought processes in many federation structures.
Federation self-set ‘Barometer’ targets differ from
prescribed, one-size- fits-all Transformation Charter targets,
in that the latter is not necessarily aligned to an individual
federation’s specific situation or circumstances nor does it
involve the potential imposition of a penalty.
Individual federation Barometer and Charter target
achievement in selected Charter areas are dealt with in
scorecard format in Volume 1 of this report, under the
following headings:
• Number and percentage of self-set Barometer targets
achieved in selected Charter categories.
• Percentage of predetermined, one-size-fits-all targets in
all Charter categories achieved.
• Subjective evaluation of federation data input quality.
• Comparison between Barometer and Charter target
achievements in the following Charter categories:
- Administration
- Senior, Junior, Youth, Underage Male and Female
National Representative Entities
- High-performance Pipeline Demographic
- Coach Demographic Profile
- Umpire Demographic Profile
- Sport Medicine and Scientific Support Structure and
- Schools and Clubs (‘footprint’ data).
Each scorecard in Volume 1 concludes with general remarks,
observations, conclusions and recommendations related to
the achievement of Barometer and Charter targets for each
federation.
Barometer Target Achievement 2017|18The Barometer scores achieved in 2017 are shown in the
table below.
FEDERATION% OF SELF-SET AND FORWARD PROJECTED BAROMETER TARGETS ACHIEVED
Table Tennis 76
Football 73
Gymnastics 73
Tennis 65
Rugby 60
Cricket 59
Netball 54
Baseball 50
Swimming 39
Jukskei 39
Hockey 37
Softball 35
Volleyball 33
Athletics 31
Chess 27
Basketball 23
Amateur Boxing 10
Bowls -
Rowing -
As in 2017, four of the five federations that participated in the
2016 Barometer pilot achieved 50% or more of their self-set
and forward projected Barometer targets.
The 50% or more Barometer self-set target achievement
performance was as follows in 2017 and 2016: football - 73%
and 57%; rugby -60% and 60%; cricket - 74% and 52%; netball
-54% and 58%. Therefore, they will not be subject to any
penalty imposition, as was the case last year.
Despite several interventions to address the issues involved,
athletics submitted data reflecting achievement of 31% of
the required 50% of its 2017/18 self-set targets. This compares
with last year’s 43% achievement which could again lead to
the imposition of a penalty in the 2017 cycle.
Sport Transformation Status Report Overview 2017|188 | SRSA – Emminent Persons Group
The table above shows that of the fourteen federations
newly introduced into the 2017/18 Barometer cycle, four
federations achieved 50% or more of their self-set Barometer
targets, i.e.: table tennis (76%), gymnastics (73%), tennis (65%)
and baseball (50%).
The remaining federations all achieved well below the
required 50% of their self-set Barometer targets. These
federations include: swimming (39%), jukskei (39%), hockey
(37%), softball (35%), volleyball (33%), athletics, 33% (part of
the original pilot), chess (27%), basketball (23%), amateur
boxing (10%). These performance levels place them in the
potential penalty territory, based on the Barometer MoUs
agreed with SRSA and SASCOC.
Bowls and rowing have completed agreements and have
submitted Barometer forecasts for 2019 onwards.
As was the case with the pilot Barometer project involving
athletics, cricket, football, netball and rugby, in 2015, the
first data provided in 2016/17 by most federations newly
introduced into the process proved to be fraught with
difficulties and uncertainties. This was due mainly to some
federations setting and projecting forward questionable
Barometer targets, based on what appears to be
guesstimates and conservative ’safety first’ approaches,
in order to avoid a penalty. The absence of appropriately
structured and planned human resource pipelines and
inadequate understanding of the impact of changes in
population demographics and under-developed school
sport on structures, further complicated the situation for
some federations.
In the initial pilot Barometer (2015), the participating
federations involved - athletics, cricket, football, netball
and rugby - experienced similar difficulties and were given
an opportunity to review, correct and adapt their original
set of Barometer MoU based targets, before a penalty
was considered. The revision process was followed by
resubmission and re-evaluation of barometer targets before
the imposition of a penalty was considered and applied.
For this reason, the 14 newly introduced federations
(including athletics) will also be given a similar opportunity
to review, correct/ adapt and resubmit their Barometer
targets before the imposition of a penalty is considered,
as indicated in the recommendations applicable to each
federation in this report.
Therefore, based on the federation specific discussions,
observations and recommendations included in Volume
1 of this report, a conditional Barometer pass was given
to all federations (except for cricket, football, netball and
rugby, which have all passed), with the proviso that all MoU
barometer targets are revised, corrected and resubmitted on
or before 30 June 2019 for final evaluation and consideration.
Failure to comply with this requirement could lead to the
imposition of a penalty, as per the agreed MoU.
Comparison - ‘Prescribed One-Size-Fits-All’ Transformation Charter and Self-Set MoU Based Barometer Target AchievementsAs can be expected, Barometer self-set targets differ from
Transformation Charter prescribed and one-size-fits-all
targets, in that Barometer targets are determined and
projected forward by federations themselves, whereas
Transformation Charter targets are prescribed as part of the
Charter adopted in 2011.
As indicated, non-achievement of Barometer self-set targets
is subject to the possible imposition of a penalty, whereas
non-achievement of prescribed Transformation Charter
targets are not. A comparison between the two sets of
targets is shown in the following table:
FEDERATION
% PRESCRIBED ONE SIZE FITS ALL CHARTER TARGETS ACHIEVED
% SELF-SET AND FORWARD PROJECTED BAROMETER TARGETS ACHIEVED
PERCENTAGE POINTS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CHARTER AND BAROMETER TARGETS ACHIEVED
Football 89 73 16
Table Tennis 67 76 -9
Volleyball 67 33 34
Cricket 61 59 2
Amateur Boxing 61 10 51
Softball 56 35 21
Basketball 56 23 33
Netball 50 54 -4
Athletics 50 31 19
Chess 44 27 17
Rugby 28 60 -32
Baseball 22 50 -28
Gymnastics 17 73 -56
Tennis 17 65 -48
Swimming 17 39 -22
Hockey 1 1 37 -26
Jukskei 6 39 -33
Bowls 0 - -
Rowing 0 - -
The comparison provided above between federation
Barometer self-set and prescribed Transformation Charter
target achievement shows good agreement for only two
federations: cricket and netball.
The self-set Barometer target achievement reported appears
to be significantly higher than the predetermined one-size-
fits-all Charter target achievement for: gymnastics, tennis,
jukskei, rugby, baseball, hockey and volleyball. This suggests
the possibility of more conservative (easier to achieve) and
possible safety-first Barometer target setting by federations,
Sport Transformation Status Report Overview 2017|18SRSA – Emminent Persons Group | 9
in order to avoid a penalty. However, the self-set Barometer
target achievement was notably lower than that of the
predetermined Charter target achievement for: amateur
boxing, volleyball, basketball, softball, athletics and football.
This suggests the possibility of more demanding target
setting.
The overall transformation status, in ranking order, for 2017
is provided in the table below, with the statistics based on
the following:
1. The % achievement of prescribed one-size-fits-all
Transformation Charter targets adopted in 2011.
2. The % achievement of the self-set Barometer targets
that form part of the MoU Barometer entered into with
SRSA and SASCOC.
FEDERATION TRANSFORMATION CHARTER TARGET RANKING
BAROMETER TARGET RANKING
Football 1 2
Table Tennis 2 1
Volleyball 3 13
Amateur Boxing 4 17
Cricket 5 6
Basketball 6 16
Softball 7 12
Athletics 8 14
Netball 9 7
Chess 10 15
Rugby 11 5
Baseball 12 8
Gymnastics 13 3
Swimming 14 9
Tennis 15 4
Hockey 16 11
Jukskei 17 10
Rowing 18 -
Bowls 19 -
Rowing and bowls are completing MoUs with SRSA and
SASCOC, but are only submitting forward projected
Barometer targets as from 2018.
The Barometer ranking order indicated above will be
reviewed once federations have revisited and re-submitted
their self-set targets and forecasts, based on the comments,
observations and summaries provided in Volume 1.
The scorecards show positive progress in sport transformation
since 1994, in about half of the federations audited, largely
due to the introduction of the Transformation Charter and
the EPG in 2011 and the Barometer process in 2016/17.
The current situation reflects a two-component sport
system that is based on the reported demographic profiles
of federation structures. Football, table tennis, volleyball,
cricket, basketball and softball are all transforming at a
steady rate. Additionally, athletics, netball and rugby are
showing promise, although they are marginally behind the
leading group. However, baseball, gymnastics, swimming,
tennis, hockey, jukskei, rowing and bowls are lagging, mainly
because of ineffective and delayed response to the impact of
population demographic changes, insufficient interaction
at underage level and facility constraints. There is reason to
believe that some of these federations could increasingly be
faced with sustainability challenges in the future, if creative
solutions are not forthcoming.
Factors that Impacting the Rate and Extent of TransformationTwo factors impact the pace and extent of sport
transformation: school sport, and population demographic
changes nationally and regionally.
School Sport
To support effective longer-term sport planning initiatives,
reliable data on school sport is essential. Over the past
5 years, the quality of data related to the number of sport
participating schools sourced from different role players was,
with few exceptions, sub-standard and unreliable. There is,
furthermore, little correlation between the number of sport
participating schools reported by sport federations, DBE
and SRSA. Attempts to extract more detailed information
on school sport are problematic. Such information includes:
number and demographics of underage participating
teams and leagues, interschool competitions, teachers/
organisers, accredited coaches, referees/umpires, and
facilities at municipality, district and provincial level.
There is a strategic need for a reliable and regularly updated
centralised school sport database for use by all role players,
as part of forward planning and resource sharing, as well
as implementation of the revised MoU between DBE and
SRSA. Appropriate sport related data in each province,
district, local municipality and main town is a prerequisite for
modelling and implementing an appropriate school sport
system. Most codes have significant difficulty in obtaining
school sport related data from their provincial, school and
government sport structures, which reinforces the need for
a professionally administered central database.
Data on sport participating primary schools that is provided
by federations are, with a small number of exceptions,
unreliable. However, in the absence of any dependable data
sources, school related data provided by federations remains
the only source of information for reasonable scoping of the
primary school environment.
Effective underage sport participation and skills
development for most learners remains inadequate,
because of the relatively low percentage of schools that
provide structured sport participation opportunity – an
Sport Transformation Status Report Overview 2017|1810 | SRSA – Emminent Persons Group
average of about 12%. Facility constraints, teacher reluctance
to be involved in organising, administering and coaching
sport activities, and ineffective implementation of MoUs
between DBE and SRSA remain major constraints.
A declining historic human capital resource base for sport
(because of a changing national population demographic)
is beginning to impact codes that are without a meaningful
footprint in the school environment. This will affect the
longer-term sustainability and competitiveness of several
codes. Both primary and senior school sport participation
profiles are dominated by what appears to be sub-optimal
and unconfirmed sport participating schools: 14 773 primary
and 5 918 senior schools.
In addition to the school participation footprint data that
was submitted, federations also submitted data on the
following: number of participating township and non-
township schools; number of accredited coaches; number
of township and non-township based high-performance
participants; number of schools that have girl participating
teams; financial support provided to schools.
At a primary school level, codes with the highest number of
reported participating primary schools - in decreasing order
- were: volleyball (8 948), chess (6 092), cricket (5 590), netball
(4 744), table tennis (2 977), rugby (2 410), swimming (1 690),
hockey (1 096), tennis (802), gymnastics (314), athletics (308),
softball (198), baseball (192), jukskei (162) and bowls (73).
Football’s reported number of participating primary
schools (11 000) is questionable. Football’s school structures
do not compare with the organised school structures of,
for example, rugby, cricket, hockey and netball. This is a
significant strategic weakness for football that has remained
unresolved for some time now.
Likewise, Volleyball’s 3 948 primary schools are also
questionable, given the absence of any additional primary
school data being provided.
Boxing, for regulatory reasons, and rowing and bowls,
because of resource constraints, do not have primary school
participation in their codes
Few federations (6) have reported primary schools have
reported high performance programmes. Hockey reported
the highest number (512), followed by cricket (253), rugby
(170), tennis (136) and gymnastics (127).
Netball (understandably) reported the highest number of
primary schools with girl teams (3 665), followed by hockey
(896, of which 100 are township schools), rugby (514, of
which 309 are township schools), cricket (459, of which 360
are township based), and softball (216, of which 208 are
township based). Basketball, boxing and rowing did not
report any involvement at primary school level.
The highest number of coaches at primary school level were
reported by: rugby - 5 990; cricket - 3 139; gymnastics - 1 385;
hockey - 940; bowls - 649; netball - 396; swimming - 329;
athletics - 308.
Cricket reported the highest level of financial support to
primary schools (R6 675 141), followed by rugby (R2 508
615), hockey (R800 000), chess (R530 000), tennis (R263
596), gymnastics (R184 167) and jukskei (R45 000). None of
the remaining 10 federations have reported any financial
support for primary schools.
At a senior school level, football and basketball did not report
any senior school involvement. Football’s school structures
do not resemble the organised structures of rugby, cricket,
hockey and netball. This is a significant strategic weakness
that may have to be corrected if performance at senior level
is to be improved. Volleyball also did not provide any senior
school participation data. For regulatory reasons, boxing
does not have any participation at senior or primary school
levels.
Chess reported the highest number of participating senior
schools (6 092), followed by netball (2 528), rugby (1 977),
table tennis (1939) cricket (928), hockey (793), athletics (710)
and tennis (543).
Ten federations reported schools with high performance
programmes. Cricket reported the highest number of
schools participating in high performance structures (489),
followed by: rugby (469); hockey (300) and tennis (169). Other
codes with senior school high performance programmes
include: gymnastics - 55; rowing – 54; swimming - 44;
baseball - 10; jukskei - 9. Basketball and football did
not report senior school involvement. The remaining 6
federations did not provide any data on senior school high
performance related data.
As expected, netball reported the highest number of senior
schools with girl teams - 2 494 (primary schools 3 665),
followed by: hockey - 813 (80 of which are township schools);
athletics - 710 (of which 672 are township based schools);
rugby - 230 (186 township schools); cricket - 239 (87 township
based); softball - 220 (131 township based senior schools);
jukskei - 112 schools (58 township based). Basketball, bowls,
gymnastics, rowing, swimming, table tennis and volleyball
did not report any schools with girl teams at senior school
level.
Sport Transformation Status Report Overview 2017|18SRSA – Emminent Persons Group | 11
The highest number of coaches at senior school level were
reported by: rugby - 4 826; cricket - 2 250; hockey - 1 100;
gymnastics - 875; bowls - 649; swimming - 363; athletics -
321; netball - 321; jukskei - 193; rowing - 192. Whereas chess,
football, basketball, softball and volleyball did not report
any coaches at senior school level.
Cricket reported the highest level of financial support (R8
895 233) to its senior school structure, followed by: rugby (R6
326 856); tennis (R763 555); rowing (R706 741); hockey (R440
000); chess (R370 000); gymnastics (R149 017). No financial
support to senior schools were reported by: athletics;
baseball; basketball; bowls; netball; softball; swimming;
table tennis; volleyball.
National Population Demographic ChangeThe impact of population demographic changes requires
careful consideration if future sport leadership structures are
not to be left with an uncomfortable legacy of challenges.
From a sustainability (in some instances perhaps even
survival) perspective, codes with a predominantly White
demographic profile need to quantify and understand the
impact of demographic change on their sport and make it
an integral part of the planning process. Equally important
is the implication of these changes on the shape of a
federation’s forward projected self-set demographic targets
that form part of the Barometer MoUs recently entered into
with SRSA and SASCOC, as well as the associated penalties
for failing to achieve the self-set targets.
Population demographic changes, nationally and regionally,
coupled to the suspect state of school sport, do not allow the
luxury of forward projected self-set Barometer targets based
on extrapolating the past into the future, some guesswork
and a ‘safety first’ approach to avoid the risk of penalties
being imposed, when completing a federation’s forward
projected Barometer.
In most instances, federation forward, projected Barometers
reflect small, incremental and slow change in selected
Charter categories, which may reflect insufficient insight
into the complex socio-economic and political environment
in which they operate. If not understood and dealt with,
only a small number will escape the consequences of these
changes.
The demographic factors influencing the age structures
of different population groups differ over time. From a
planning perspective, the size and composition of and
change in different population categories - nationally and
regionally - are becoming increasingly important.
Three key processes or components of population
growth have a considerable effect on the age and gender
composition of populations, namely: mortality; fertility;
and the movement of people in and out of specific areas
or regions. These factors are the most important causes of
the existing differences in the age and gender structures of
different population groups in the country.
When mortality rates in a population decline faster in the
lower age categories than in the higher age categories, it
leads to juvenation of the age structure of the population
concerned. Based on scales developed by the United Nations,
the Black African population in South Africa is classified as
a young population, the Coloured and Indian populations
as mature, and the White population as aging. The black
African population is characterised by high and fairly
constant fertility, with a large proportion of small children
and a small proportion of people in the productive ages.
Fertility rates in the Indian and Coloured populations have
only recently started to decline and are in an intermediate
position between those of Whites and Black Africans.
The population demographic profile as at mid-year 2018,
according to Stats SA, was: total population - 56.5 million;
Black African - 41 million (89%); Coloured - 4.6 million (8.9%);
Whites - 4.49 million (8.9%); Indian (2.5%).
The White population group is the only population group
whose mortality rate has exceeded its birthrate (around
2010). Based on data extracted from Stats SA, this means
that the White population - currently about 4.5m - will
decrease (the only group to do so) by about 1 million over
the next 25 years. Contrarily, Black Africans are estimated to
increase by about 14m, Coloureds by 400,000 and Indians by
300,000 over the same period.
The changing population demographic and socio-
economic and political environments since 1994 have had
a major impact on the rate and extent of sport’s efforts
to change from a pre-1994 predominantly White sport
system. The 5 transformation audits conducted to date
have demonstrated the potential impact of these changes,
particularly on the longer-term sustainability of some
federations. These changes will have a major impact on
structures with a predominantly White demographic profile
and low rates of demographic change.
Sport Transformation Status Report Overview 2017|1812 | SRSA – Emminent Persons Group
The total under 18-year-old component of the population -
about 20 million (male plus female) - is a reservoir of future
human capital and is therefore important from a planning
perspective. The U18 Black male African group - about 9m - is
projected to increase by 20% over the next 20 years; however,
there will be a decrease in the Indian (8%), Coloured (19%)
and White (31%) groups.
The need to focus on the large black African component
- which is under-developed, as shown in audit reports - is
obvious. Sport’s historic resource base is declining. The
challenge facing existing predominantly White sport
structures, therefore, is the need to balance the rate of
decrease in the White population and subsequent decline in
sport participant numbers, with an increase in the number
of U18 Black Africans.
This will require well-developed and effective primary and
senior school sport structures, if South African Sport is to
strengthen its position in the premier leagues of world sport.
Dominant White demographic participant demographics
are linked to low Black African representation, which
enhances long-term sustainability risks. Codes in this
category include, particularly, tennis, hockey, swimming,
rowing, jukskei and bowls.
Table tennis and baseball’s high Coloured and low Black
African demographic could also translate into sustainability
challenges in the longer term.
The profile of the 66-year-old and higher population age
group category for Whites explains bowls’ sustainability
dilemma. Its 90%+ White membership structure, with an
average age of 74, is in decline, resulting in club structures
closing down and the absence of a meaningful underage
pipeline. This has seen this sport moving into what can
become survival mode.
The predominant White profile of the tennis, swimming,
rowing and jukskei representative entities, will increasingly
feel the effects of declining numbers in all White population
age categories. Rugby, netball and cricket (to a lesser extent),
although actively involved in re-shaping the demographics
of their representative entities, may have to step up
exploration and involvement of the significant Black African
population group.
Re-shaping a sport’s demographic profile may, in some
instances, need to be more assertively pursued, if future
leadership structures are not to be left with difficult
challenges to resolve.
Sport Transformation Status Report Overview 2017|18SRSA – Emminent Persons Group | 13
TOKOZILE XASA, MPSport & Recreation South Africa
“The remainder of this political administration must be about, school sport, active nation and transformation. South Africans must see themselves in all our national teams.”
“The key to our transformation is simply this: the better we know ourselves the better equipped we
will be to make our choices wisely.”— Gregg Braden
Notes
Sport Transformation Status Report Overview 2017|1814 | SRSA – Emminent Persons Group
TOKOZILE XASA, MPSport & Recreation South Africa
“The remainder of this political administration must be about, school sport, active nation and transformation. South Africans must see themselves in all our national teams.”
“The key to our transformation is simply this: the better we know ourselves the better equipped we
will be to make our choices wisely.”— Gregg Braden
SRSA – Emminent Persons Group | 15Sport Transformation Status Report Overview 2017|18
Published in the Republic of South Africa by SRSA
Regent Place Building66 Queen StreetPretoria
Private Bag x 896, Pretoria, 0001Tel. 012 304 5000www.srsa.gov.za
EMIN
ENT
PER
SON
’S G
RO
UP
20
18 S
PO
RT
TRA
NSF
OR
MA
TIO
N S
TATU
S R
EP
OR
T O
VE
RV
IEW
epgEminent Persons Groupon Transformation in Sport
TransformationCommission
EPG Sport Transformation Status Report Overview
2017|18