|
Return
to: |
|||
Edition: 10 March
2008
(R) REVISED
DIRECTIVES FOR EXTERNAL AUDITING OF STUDENT, STAFF AND ACADEMIC PROGRAMME
DATA: FEBRUARY 2008
1.1 The 1997 Higher Education
Act requires the council of a public higher education institution to provide
the Minister of Education with data on its students, staff and academic programmes. These audit directives deal with the auditing
of these three data sets.
1.2
The annual student, staff and academic programme
data submissions of public higher education institutions are used by the
Department of Education for a number of overlapping purposes. These include (a)
monitoring the performance of the public higher education system, (b) planning
its future development, and (c) distributing state funds to institutions. The
Department undertakes regular checks on the reliability of the student, staff
and the academic programme data submissions of public
higher education institutions, and in particular those data required for
monitoring and planning. The Department’s reliability and reasonableness checks
inevitably include the state subsidy data, but its subsidy checks, as far as an
individual institution is concerned, cannot be as detailed as those of an
external, independent auditor.
1.3
Since data collection and data reporting are the responsibilities
of the council of each public higher education institution, the main purpose of
these audit directives is to assist councils in ensuring that institutional
data required for the allocation, or potential allocation, of state subsidies
are realistic and correct. The submission of an audit report to the Department
of Education by the due date of 31 July of each year is the responsibility, not
of the auditor, but of the council of the public higher education institution.
2.1
The student, staff and academic programme
data of public higher education institutions have to be consistent with various
national policies approved by the Minister. Auditors must be acquainted with
these policies, which include:
¨
current
national policies on university and technikon
academic programmes;
¨
current
policies on the reporting by institutions of their qualifications and major
fields of study, and of the courses included in the curricula of
qualifications;
¨
current
policies on the reporting of student enrolments and student outputs;
¨
current
policies on the reporting of staff.
2.2
A list of the
publications containing these policies is included in the Annexure to these
directives.
2.3
In the audit report,
auditors must certify that the data in certain fields of relevant VALPAC files
are realistic and accurate representations of the institution’s student
records, staff records and of its academic programme records. The Department realises that it is not always
possible to keep the hard copies of registration forms due to space
constraints. The Department therefore
will accept for audit purposes as proof of registration a scanned electronic
version of the signed registration form.
However, the format of the scanned document must be such that
alterations and additions cannot be made to the forms subsequent to initial
processing.
2.4
The Department requires the
auditors to verify that the data going into Valpac is
correct, that means checking that the data extracted from the institutional
database into the ascii files is correct. This is to ensure
that there is consistency between the institution’s database and Valpac. Manual
changes in Valpac should only be done with the
agreement of the Department of Education.
If students are added to Valpac manually this
will have an effect on the funding calculations.
The following VALPAC files are
essential to the generation of data used for the allocation of state subsidies
to public higher education institutions:
3.1
Qualification and qualification CESM files
3.2
Course file
3.3
Credit value file
3.4
Student file
3.5
Course registration file
3.6
Staff profile file
The checks, which auditors must
make on the data within these files, are discussed in the subsections that
follow.
4.1 The table below
sums up some of the initial checks, which must be made in the audit. The notes
below the table describe in more detail certain aspects of these checks.
|
Item to
be checked |
Checks to be made |
|
Coding of courses |
Each subject matter offering considered to be a course has a
unique code in the course file |
|
Course census
date |
Provision has been made for an appropriate census day,
consistent with policy to be assigned to each uniquely coded course |
|
Active students |
The institution has in place mechanisms designed to ensure that
only students active in a course are reflected as registered for the course
on the census day. |
|
VALPAC error reports |
No fatal data errors are listed in the latest run of the VALPAC
detailed validation reports except where approved by the Department of
Education. Institutions should submit
a list of their errors to the DoE and an indication
will be given of which fatal errors may be ignored. |
|
VALPAC reports |
Reports/tables generated (a) by VALPAC and (b) directly from the
institution’s student database are identical.
These checks should not necessarily be done against the old sapse reports.
There should be consistency between the reports generated in Valpac and those generated from the main database/ascii files. |
4.2
The census dates of courses must be determined as the midpoint of
the academic period for a course. The
start date for the set period is the first teaching day for the course and the
end date the last teaching day before the examination. The start date for the set period must not be
the date of registration.
4.3 If a course is regarded as an annual
course and crosses two reporting periods the student must be reported in the
year of the census date. For example, if
students are registered in July 2008 and complete the course in July 2009 and
the census date is determined to be in December 2008, these students will form
part of the 2008 reporting year.
However, if the census date is determined as January 2009, the students
must be reported in the 2009 reporting year.
4.4 Acceptable evidence of student activity
is left to the discretion of the external auditors, and auditors are expected
to report on the criteria they employed to determine activity. Auditors should however note the following
specific points:
¨
The mechanisms for determining whether or not a student was active
on the census date of a particular course could include any one of the
following: The student (a) had submitted
course assignments, or (b) attended lectures, seminars, tutorials or practicals, or (c) had written class tests, or (d) had
raised study queries with an academic staff member, or (d) had made use of a
learning centre.
¨
The Department will accept proof of activity after the census date
provided that the student is registered on census date and the proof of
activity is before the final examination and the activity is one of the
transactions listed in the first bullet.
¨
What would not be
acceptable as sole evidence of activity is the writing of the final
examinations in a course or merely some form of administrative process such as
a financial transaction, change of address, etc, the activity must be a
teaching or learning related activity.
If no acceptable evidence of activity can be found, the course
registrations of the students concerned should be excluded from VALPAC.
4.4 The error reports
in VALPAC are designed to indicate whether there are either gaps or
inconsistencies in institutional data. If these error reports are ignored, then
the subsidy data generated by an institution could contain serious flaws. The auditors are to confirm with the
institution where the Department has given approval to ignore certain fatal
errors such as postal codes.
4.5
The check that the
reports/tables generated by VALPAC and by the institution’s student database
are identical will confirm whether data adjustments made in the institution’s
production database have been transported into VALPAC. There should not be a substantial difference
between the student numbers generated from the institution’s production
database and those that are generated in Valpac. The only difference should be that of the
persons who are doing non-formal qualifications.
5.1 The table below
sums up the main checks, which must be made in the audit of these two files.
The notes below the table describe in more detail certain aspects of these
checks.
|
Data
element |
Checks to be made |
|
004 Approval status |
The qualification under the name employed by the institution has
been approved for state funding purposes by the Minister of Education. Qualifications indicated for occasional
students must be coded “N” |
|
005 Qualification type |
The qualification has been placed in the correct category by the
institution |
|
006 Major field CESM |
The Minister of Education has approved for purposes of state
funding the major field or fields of study linked to the qualification. The PQM refers |
|
053 Minimum time: total |
The correct total time in years has been recorded for the qualification
|
|
054 Minimum time:
experiential |
The correct experiential time in years has been recorded for the
qualification |
5.2 A formal
qualification is one which has been approved by the Minister of Education for
state funding. The “approved” indicator must therefore not be set against any
qualification which has not been approved by the Minister. These non-formal
qualifications can be recorded in VALPAC, provided that the “not approved”
indicator has been set.
5.3 Auditors should
ensure that qualification has been approved, accredited and SAQA
registered. However, due to the delays
in registration, the department will accept proof of the application to
register the qualification with SAQA as sufficient.
6.1 The table below
sums up the main checks which must be made in the audit of the VALPAC course
file. The notes below the table describe in more detail certain aspects of
these checks.
|
Data
element |
Checks to be made |
|
031 course approval
status |
The course appears in the curriculum of at least one
qualification approved for state funding by the Minister of Education |
|
033 course CESM |
The course has been assigned to the correct second order CESM
category |
|
034 Course level code |
The course has been placed in the correct course-level category |
|
062 Experiential training
indicator |
The “experiential” indicator has been set if the course has been
approved for experiential training only |
|
091 Foundation course |
The “foundation” indicator has been set if the course is a
foundation course as defined in the policy document “funding for foundation
provision in formally approved programmes: 2007/08
to 2009/10” |
6.2
The “approved” indicator cannot be set for any course which does
not count as a credit towards a formal qualification which has been approved by
the Minister of Education for state funding. This implies that courses such as
(a) remedial or bridging offerings or (b) those included only in programmes offered as part of an institution’s community
service activities cannot be flagged as approved for state funding.
6.3 The assignment of
an incorrect CESM category code or course-level code to a course can have a major
impact on the amount of state subsidy which students registered for that course
will generate. Particular note must be taken of any changes made to the CESM or
course-level classification of courses across two consecutive reporting years.
6.4 Particular note must be taken of the
requirement that any postgraduate course offered at a number of course-levels
for different postgraduate qualifications must be classified at the lowest
course level in all the qualifications for which it may be taken. For example,
a course offered in a postgraduate diploma as well as a masters degree must be
coded as preparatory postgraduate (and not as intermediate postgraduate or
masters level).
6.5 In the case of
undergraduate qualifications, this requirement applies only to courses which
are offered at higher undergraduate level. If any course is offered at higher
undergraduate level in one qualification and at either intermediate or lower
undergraduate (or lower prediplomate) level in
another, then it must be classified at one of these two lower levels.
6.6 Courses approved
for experiential training only do not generate state subsidy. The required
indicator must be set for all experiential courses.
7.1 The table below
sums up the main checks, which must be made in the audit of the VALPAC credit
value file. The notes below the table describe in more detail certain aspects
of these checks.
|
Data
element |
Checks to be made |
|
036 course credit value |
The institution has calculated course credit values in
accordance with the procedures prescribed in the VALPAC help files, Report
005 and Report 020(U) in Annexure A, and HEMIS circulars. |
|
050 completed research
course credit value |
The institution has assigned the correct fraction of the total
formal time for the relevant qualification to successfully completed research
courses. This element is used in the
calculation of success rates and no longer for subsidy purposes. |
7.2 A general point to
note is that the credit value of a course is dependent on the curricula of the
qualifications in which it appears. The credit value of a course indicates what
fraction it constitutes of the standard curriculum of a specific qualification. It follows that a course which appears in a
number of qualifications must have, possibly different, credit values specific
to each qualification.
7.3 Ensure that the
graduation test (former 2% test) has been undertaken by the institution and
that it has been done so according to the requirements stated in the Valpac Help files.
See also Hemis circular 4 of September
2004. All credits, subject to Faculty
regulations, must be passed for students who have changed qualifications,
otherwise the graduation test will compute incorrect credit values for the
subjects within the curriculum. Please
note that these credits awarded for a subject passed under a different
qualification or for completion of the course at another Institution must not be
reported in Valpac, as exam only, as they would have
already been reported either by the other institution or in a prior reporting
year.
8 VALPAC STUDENT FILE
8.1 The table below
sums up the main checks which must be made in the student file. The notes below
the table describe in more detail certain aspects of these checks.
|
Data
element |
Checks to be made |
|
001 qualification code |
VALPAC data correspond with student’s signed registration forms |
|
013 race |
VALPAC data correspond with student’s signed application and or
registration forms |
|
014 nationality |
VALPAC data correspond with student’s signed application and or
registration forms |
|
010 entrance category |
VALPAC data correspond with student’s signed application and or
registration forms |
|
022 secondary education |
Documentary proof exists that student has satisfied statutory
entry requirements for admission to the formal qualifications and courses for
which she/he has registered |
|
026,027,028, 029 areas of
specialisation |
VALPAC data correspond with student’s signed registration forms |
|
025 qualification
fulfilled status |
(a) Student has satisfied all the requirements for qualification
for which she/he was registered. (b)
No student satisfying the requirements for a qualification is recorded as a
“non-graduate” or “non-diplomate” or “occasional”. |
|
019 NSFAS status |
VALPAC data correspond with the institution’s documentation on
student’s eligibility |
|
073 % research time for a
Masters qualification |
The student has completed the Master’s qualification with n.nnn
research time. That is if a student
has done 50% research it will be reflected as 0.500 for element 073 |
8.2 Incorrect qualification codes can affect
the state subsidy generated by students.
For example if a student registers for a BCom
this should be reflected in Valpac unless there is
proof that the student has requested a change.
There have been cases where students have been registered for the
incorrect qualification, through an administrative error. This should then be rectified prior to the
census date.
8.3 A registration
form is important as it represents a formally signed contract between the
institution and the student. If a registration form cannot be found and if a
satisfactory explanation cannot be offered by the institution, then the student
concerned should be deleted from VALPAC.
8.4 The race and nationality of students can
affect their eligibility for state funding through the subsidy formulas and
through the national student financial aid scheme. The accuracy of these data
must therefore be checked.
8.5 Part of the
definition of a student is that she/he has satisfied the legally defined
entrance requirements for study at a higher education institution. No person
who fails to meet these requirements can be included in an institution’s VALPAC
data.
8.6 Masters qualifications may generate
subsidy for Teaching outputs and Research outputs. Element 073 therefore is critical in determining
the fraction that needs to be subsidized as research outputs. The percentage research time completed by the
student must be the accredited research time for a Master’s qualification, this
may vary from a part research dissertation to a full research dissertation,
therefore the indicator is set against the percentage research completed by the
student.
8.7 Students who have
fulfilled the academic requirements for their qualifications (Element 025) but
who have not been awarded their qualification for outstanding fees etc, should
be coded “W”. These students will be
included in the subsidy tables. However,
if the code for element 025 is changed from a “W” to an “F” then this should
not be reflected in a future years database.
The database of the relevant reporting year must be updated accordingly
and resubmitted to the Department.
9.1 The table below
sums up the main checks which must be made in the course registration file. The
notes below the table describe in more detail certain aspects of these checks.
|
Data
element |
Checks to be made |
|
064 attendance mode for course |
VALPAC data correspond with student’s signed application and or
registration forms |
|
018 funding status |
The student is a bona fide student of the institution and is not
registered for the same course by another public institution, as part of a
collaboration agreement. |
|
030 course code |
VALPAC data correspond with student’s signed registration and/or
change-of-course forms |
|
032 course completion status |
VALPAC data are consistent with institutional examination or
other records |
|
051 examination-only indicator |
VALPAC data are consistent with institutional examination and
registration records |
9.2
State subsidy for contact students is considerably higher than that for
distance students. It follows that incorrect use of the attendance mode
indicator could have a major impact on the state subsidies of institutions.
9.3 Students cannot generate state subsidy
for the same qualification and course at more than one public higher education
institution. Collaboration agreements must indicate which one of the
participating institutions will be registering students for particular courses.
9.4 Incorrect course codes can have a major
impact on the amount of state subsidy generated by students. These must
therefore be checked.
9.5
Some students who do not complete the requirements of a course in a
given academic year are permitted by the institution to write the course in a
subsequent year, without re-attending the course. Institutions must register
these students as “examination-only” students, which has the effect of
excluding them from the enrolled student count for that year. These students will not be included in the
enrolled funding credit (fte) tables but in the
completed funded credit (degree credit fte) tables.
10. VALPAC
STAFF PROFILE FILE
10.1 The table below sums
up the main checks which, must be made in the staff profile file.
|
Data
element |
Checks to be made |
|
039 Personnel category |
The institution has used the staff categories correctly,
particularly the category “instruction and research professionals” as this
determines the norm for the research outputs. |
|
012 Gender |
VALPAC data correspond with the institution’s human resource
records. |
|
013 Race |
VALPAC data correspond with the institution’s human resource
records. |
|
014 Nationality |
VALPAC data correspond with the institution’s human resource
records. |
|
041 Permanent/temporary status |
VALPAC data correspond with the institution’s human resource
records. |
|
048 On payroll code |
VALPAC data correspond with the institution’s payroll of staff
members. |
February
2008
The
VALPAC on-line help function contains summaries of some of the key policies
affecting the reporting of student, staff and academic programme
data by public higher education institutions . The list of relevant national
policy documents is set out below:
(1) Report
116: A Qualification Structure
for Universities in South Africa, March 1995
(2) Report
150: General Policies for Technikon Instructional Programmes,
January 1997
(3) Government
Gazette Vol 415: Norms and Standards for
Educators, February 2000
(4) Report 151 Formal Technikon Instructional Programmes, January 2004.
This document is no longer being updated. Universities of Technology must follow the programme approval route for the introduction of new programmes, new major fields, changes to major fields of
study and programme names.
(5) Report
003: Classification of
Educational Subject Matter, October 1982
(6) Report
004: Formal
Degree/Diploma/Certificate Programme Classification
Structure
Manual,
October 1995
(7) Report
005: Student Statistics Manual,
January 1998
(8) Report 007 Personpower Resources Budgeting
and Accounting Manual, May 1982
(8) Report
020(U): Notes on the Reporting of
Student Statistics (Universities), May
1983
(9) Report 021(U): Notes on the Reporting of Person-power
Resources (Universities), May 1983
(10) HEMIS
Circulars: Number 1 of August
2002
Number
2 of October 2002
Number
3 of May 2003
Number
4 of September 2004
Number
5 of August 2005
(11)
Funding for Foundation provision in formally approved programmes 2007/08 to 2009/10
NOTE: The implementation date of the Higher Education
Qualifications Framework (HEQF) is January 2009, therefore it is not applicable
to the auditing requirements for the 2007 and 2008 reporting years.
The
tables which must be signed by external auditors and submitted to the
Department of Education with the audit report are these:
(1)
Funded credit report, contact-mode only, excluding experiential
learning, including foundation
(2) Funded credit report, contact-mode only, excluding
experiential learning, including foundation (a) by race and (b) by nationality
(3) Completed funded credit report, contact-mode only, excluding
experiential learning, including foundation
(4) Funded credit report, other than contact-mode only, excluding
experiential learning, including foundation
(5) Completed funded credit report, other than contact-mode only,
excluding experiential learning, including foundation
(6) Funded credit report, contact-mode only, excluding
experiential learning, foundation only
(7) Funded credit report, other than contact-mode only, excluding
experiential learning, foundation only
(8) Fractional 1ST order CESMS for all students Total (Table 2.12)
(9) Fractional 1ST order CESMS for all students Contact only (Table 2.12)
(10) Fractional 1ST order CESMS for all students Distance only (Table 2.12)
(11) Fractional 1st order CESMS for
all students fulfilling requirements (Table 2.13)
(12) Headcount of permanent Staff by personnel
category race and gender (Table3.3)
Note:
The
funded credit reports are used in the calculation of the teaching input
units. The completed funded credit
reports are now used in determining the success rates, they are no longer used
in the subsidy calculation.
The
funded credit reports by race and nationality are used in the calculation of
the allocations to NSFAS.
Table
2.12 used in the calculation of the norms for the teaching outputs.
Table
2.13 is used in the calculation of the teaching outputs and research outputs.
Table
3.3 (row instruction/research) is used in the calculation of the research
output norm.
External
audit requirements 11 February 2008