Setting up public school partnerships in the Northern Cape
OPPORTUNITY
SYNERGIES
Stop nutritional stunting of young children.
Place-based interventions unlock the true power of DGMT's 10 opportunities to escape the inequality gap.
OPPORTUNITY
SETTING UP PUBLIC SCHOOL
PARTNERSHIPS IN THE NORTHERN CAPE
Accelerate learning for learners failed by the system
The Lesedi Solar Park Trust in the Northern Cape has a mandate to invest in communities within a 50-kilometre radius of the Lesedi Power Project over an extended period of time. DGMT’s place-based synergies (PBS) team is responsible for managing community development funds for the trust and facilitates supportive developmental pathways for people in the communities of Postmasburg, Skeyfontein, Marimane, Jenn-Haven, Danielskuil, Groenwater and Lime Acres. Public School Partnerships (PSP), a programme co-funded by DGMT, is starting work with three schools in the Lesedi catchment area after 18 months of consultation, co-creation and cooperation. The programme aims to change the trajectory of school-going children.
This learning brief looks at the steps taken to meet the needs of school communities by setting up an effective public school partnership in the Lesedi catchment area.
SCHOOLS IN THE LESEDI CATCHMENT AREA
The proliferation of mining activity in the Lesedi area (there are 13 mines and three power companies) has led to substantial population growth and urbanisation. This has intensified pressure on municipal services and caused issues such as the overcrowding of schools.1 Despite significant economic activity in and around these communities, unemployment remains high, and people continue to face overlapping challenges.
DGMT’s place-based synergies (PBS) team adopts collaborative and innovative approaches to drive meaningful change in vulnerable communities. Sinazo Nkwelo, the PBS team’s director, explains the strategic approach to human development it has taken in the Lesedi communities: “We have 20-plus years here and we see that as a wonderful opportunity to really try and close gaps, from pregnancy to employment, and shift outcomes so that children born today will have better outcomes than their parents in 20 to 30 years’ time.”
There are 17 schools within the catchment area of the Trust. Many are “underperforming”2 in terms of pass rates, and also face leadership challenges and cultural issues while trying to support learners in difficult home environments. The community was growing increasingly concerned about the quality of education and persistently low learner outcomes. “We came to understand that a different model and approach needed to be taken,” says Nkwelo.
While exploring models that have enabled effective learning and teaching to take place in “underperforming” schools, the PBS team identified Public School Partnerships (PSP) as a framework for whole-school-improvement worth pursuing. PSP’s collaborative approach to supporting schools matched the place-based synergies ethos of working with communities. PSP is designed to support no-fee public schools, often struggling with low learner achievement, to access highquality education. The partnership is formed between a no-fee public school, a provincial education department and a non-profit civil society organisation which specialises in whole-school support. The non-profit partners with the school to increase its capacity, accountability and flexibility. The core focus is to create and sustain excellent management structures in schools, which includes supporting governance, instructional leadership, teaching, learning and operations.
KEY FEATURES OF THE PUBLIC SCHOOL PARTNERSHIP
MODEL
A core partnership between:
Levers of capacity, accountability and flexibility that: BUILD CAPACITY to deliver new skills, ideas and inputs, ENSURE ACCOUNTABILITY of implementation and excellence, and ENCOURAGE FLEXIBILITY in education and operational approaches in service of learners' needs. 1 2 3
"Escaping the inequality trap - DGMT’S
A PUBLIC SCHOOL, as an organisation that includes staff, parents and the local community, and THE PROVINCIAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT that gives contractual responsibility and accountability to
A NON-PROFIT CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANISATION that specialises in education management, known as a School Operating Partner (SOP).
Cohesive, accountable, and excellent management structures in public schools between: A PRINCIPAL who leads the school and reports to A SCHOOL OPERATING PARTNER (SOP) who shares responsibility for professional management and whole-school improvement, and A SCHOOL TEAM of teachers and support staff who are at the forefront of education delivery.
“It was clear to us in interacting with the model that it required a lot more from the school and the department in terms of partnership. There was a give and take. It was wanting something more of a school and its leadership, to take ownership of certain things, and to behave in different ways. We saw that the way we would need to approach this was going to be different.”
— Sinazo Nkwelo, Director of
To establish which schools would be best suited to the PSP model, DGMT invited several school principals, a circuit manager and department representatives from the relevant education district in the Northern Cape Department of Education to a meeting in Cape Town in November 2022. They were introduced to the PSP model through presentations and by visiting Collaboration Schools3 in the Western Cape to observe how different non-profit partners implemented contextually relevant versions of the PSP model at different schools.
Following this visit, there was significant interest in developing a similar model, suited to the needs of the contexts in Danielskuil and Postmasburg. An independent consultant specialising in education partnerships4 was asked to facilitate a series of workshops to explore the feasibility of a partnership between a group of non-profit partners, the Lesedi Solar Park Trust and several public schools. These workshops became the building blocks of the months-long process that followed, eventually resulting in a service-level agreement (SLA) being signed and the implementation of the PSP model. This Learning Brief looks at how the parties involved arrived at this agreement.
WORKSHOP APPROACHES
EXPLORATION
In July 2023, several months after the introductory meeting in Cape Town, stakeholders began exploring what a prospective partnership in the Northern Cape might look like. The process consisted of a series of workshops with focus groups to identify their interests and objectives, as well as
Place-based Synergies
the conditions necessary for a successful partnership. The focus groups comprised of nominated members from school management teams, school governing bodies, representatives from the Northern Cape Department of Education and nonprofit partners.
Insights and opinions were drawn from the groups through targeted questioning and facilitation, using the three key levers for effective public school partnership models (capacity, flexibility and accountability) as a focal point for discussions.
It became apparent that schools in the Northern Cape were facing similar challenges to those in other parts of the country. There were concerns about the quality of teaching and learning, resource constraints, learners dropping out of high school, and low learner outcomes in both primary and high school that led to low levels of employability and employment after school.
The workshops outlined why public school partnership models were a possible solution, namely that such partnerships offer the means to provide increased capacity and accountability, leading to improved teaching and learning, lower dropout rates, improved results – and hopefully – more work opportunities for young people. The workshops allowed for a process of “reiterative ideation” in which ideas and needs could be tested and adjusted.
ALIGNMENT
The Public School Partnerships team knew from their experience implementing the model in the Western Cape and Eastern Cape that all stakeholders must be aligned with the programme’s purpose and outcomes from the onset for it to be successful. Thus, it was crucial to establish what kind of support the schools needed and if the non-profit partners could deliver it. For example, if a school needed new
infrastructure, the non-profit partners would not be able to provide it because infrastructure was not their core focus. Instead, the non-profit partners would be poised to provide operational support, instructional leadership coaching for management and help with developing school culture and policies, and work with school leaders to develop core instructional practices for teaching staff to shift learner outcomes.
DEFINITION
The consultation process then moved on to defining the functions of the partnership, and precisely what the roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder would be with regards to each of the school improvement functions (learner achievement, teaching and learning, behaviour and safety, leadership and management, governance, and parents and community).5 Once these functions were agreed upon, a preferred partnership model was discussed. This was determined not only by the agreed objectives and outcomes, but also by current legislative frameworks.
Once the school’s requirements were finalised, they were shared with potential non-profit partners to see if there was the opportunity for a partnership. Some of the key questions put to potential partners included:
What are your objectives in a partnership with schools in the Northern Cape?
What are you able to offer in terms of technical capacity and expertise?
What levels of autonomy would you need to be able to operate optimally in a partnership framework?
SYNTHESIS
The outcomes of the workshops were then synthesised by the respective teams working on the project before another meeting was called with all parties in Postmasburg in the Northern Cape. This meeting clarified areas of full alignment, points of dissonance or disagreement, potential compromises and the feasibility of a partnership framework.
MODEL SELECTION
Partners agreed that the desired outcomes could be achieved while operating within the existing legislative framework. Schools selected a partnership model in which non-profit partners were co-opted as School Governing Body (SGB) members, meaning they were not elected members by voting but appointed by the SGB for their knowledge or expertise in a specific area. This is the same model used in the Eastern Cape.
The Common Good Foundation was the preferred nonprofit partner for these Northern Cape schools. A service level agreement (SLA) was drawn up to reflect clearly defined objectives, levels of autonomy, roles, responsibilities and key performance indicators. The SLA established a partnership between the non-profit partner, the provincial education department and the schools.
In 2024, Common Good began implementing the cocreated vision with tailor-made packages for each of the schools: Ratang Thuto, HTT Bidi Memorial and Danielskuil Intermediate. Matthew Draper, head of instructional learning at Common Good explains: “There is differentiation between the various schools, but we work from a foundational offering built on what we see as the instructional practices that need to be developed. We express this in terms of curriculum, assessment and lesson delivery. The differentiation follows from how each school best takes on these principles and puts them into practice.”
LESSONS ON BUILDING EFFECTIVE PUBLIC SCHOOL PARTNERSHIPS
RECOGNISE THAT A PARTNERSHIP IS DIFFERENT FROM SERVICE PROVISION
The PSP model differs from a traditional service provision model. In service provision, the responsibility for success lies primarily with the service provider, with minimal involvement from the school itself. In contrast, the PSP model requires
mutual responsibility for core school functions, with shared accountability for improvement in outcomes. The model's success hinges on the willingness of SGBs, principals and teachers to be accountable and adopt new approaches. It's crucial for all stakeholders to acknowledge this, and the process should be designed to support this understanding.
Representatives from Lesedi schools and the provincial education department were invited to attend presentations on the PSP model and witness the Collaboration Schools model in action. To ensure a thorough understanding, the PSP team actively sought feedback from both the schools and the department. This feedback revealed a mix of apprehension, particularly regarding potential impacts on jobs, and excitement about the model’s potential. The prospect of seeing functional, no-fee schools making optimal use of existing departmental mechanisms, such as School Improvement Plans, was especially promising.
GET BUY-IN FROM KEY CHAMPIONS
2 3 4
It’s important to secure buy-in from those who will champion the PSP model within a district. The initial immersive visit was conducted with key stakeholders, such as the circuit manager, district officials, and importantly, principals. Having principals involved from the start was invaluable; they could advocate for the model among their peers, a more effective strategy than top-down directives.
Nkwelo highlighted the impact of principals hearing directly from their Collaboration Schools peers about their experiences. Potential partners realised that a PSP project is not a one-time initiative but an ongoing journey that schools undertake with their non-profit partners.
After the trips, the PBS team consulted the circuit manager and the department to identify schools that could benefit from the model. Once candidates were selected, the department briefed them on the model and invited school principals and SGB representatives to a detailed planning session in Kimberley, Northern Cape, ahead of the workshop series. This approach, backed by departmental endorsement, reassured principals and gave them the confidence to adopt the model.
Instead of imposing solutions on the schools, the Lesedi Solar Park Trust put the decision-making power in the hands of school representatives. This approach emphasised collaboration, allowing the schools to ask questions, seek clarification, and make informed decisions about which partner was best suited to meet their specific requirements.
AN INDEPENDENT, KNOWLEDGEABLE FACILITATOR IS VALUABLE
When establishing the parameters and objectives of a partnership, involving an external, independent party ensures that all agendas, objectives, and non-negotiables are clearly defined. This also helps facilitate and mediate the process effectively. Engaging an organisation like Proteus Advisory proved invaluable due to the consultants' expertise and extensive experience across all levels of the South African education sector.
“We’re not just facilitating the process – we know the right questions to ask schools, how they operate, and what’s needed to make a partnership like this work,” explains Jonathan Molver, director of Proteus Advisory.
CO-CREATION AND ADAPTABILITY ARE NECESSARY FOR GREATER ACCOUNTABILITY
Greater flexibility, accountability and capacity are key to the partnership model, but they cannot be achieved without cocreation and negotiation with those directly affected by the partnership implementation. At the Postmasburg session, the school representatives and the PSP team co-created a vision for change; they identified the areas where schools needed help, defining key goals, and identifying the levers of change necessary to attain them. They adapted the model to the needs of each school and negotiated in terms of where the schools were prepared to be flexible.
Authentic co-creation requires a willingness to adapt the model based on emerging needs and feedback. At the same time, it’s essential to clearly define which aspects of the model are non-negotiable. School requirements were shared with non-profit school partners experienced in working with Public School Partnerships. These partners identified the elements they could support, while schools – through their teachers, SGB members, and principals – ultimately chose their preferred partner and model.
This process ensured that potential partners understood the school’s vision and identified areas of alignment. The PSP team acted as matchmakers and facilitators, helping schools connect with the most suitable non-profit partner.
LAY THE FOUNDATION FOR CHANGE
Introducing change requires a participatory process that invites those affected to have a voice in shaping the outcome. As Nkwelo highlights: “This is not just about preparation; it’s a vital step in making development processes fair and just.” Engaging SGBs and teachers was a key part of managing this change effectively.
For example, the involvement of the non-profit partner in decisions traditionally made by the SGB, like appointing SGB teachers, was initially debated. A consensus was ultimately reached to include the non-profit partner as a non-voting, coopted member of the SGB. This collaborative approach helped secure buy-in from staff who would later work closely with the non-profit partner for coaching and support.
GIVE THE SET-UP PHASE SUFFICIENT TIME
It took 16 months to finalise and sign an SLA with the department, a period that included identifying suitable schools for implementation. This timeline was essential to properly align the programme, gain stakeholder buy-in, and co-create a context-specific implementation strategy. Rushing this process could have resulted in a top-down approach that might not have been well received.
WORK WITHIN THE DEPARTMENTAL SYSTEM, NOT AGAINST IT
Common Good’s approach to development recognises the fundamental identity of their schools as public institutions, subject to the same policy expectations as all government schools. The purpose of development is not to create parallel systems for improvement, but to help schools meet and exceed
what is required of them. Common Good supports schools to carry out mandated processes including school self-evaluation (SSE6) and performance management (QMS7) so that they contribute to meaningful and appropriate changes in practice.
WHAT’S NEXT?
In the first phase of the project, Common Good (which is based in the Western Cape) visited all the schools at least once in the first term, and then twice in the subsequent three terms. The Common Good team also held regular virtual meetings with the school and district representatives to inform School Improvement Plans. In term three, Common Good brought all the school leaders to Cape Town to attend a Collaboration Schools Conference and visit their schools in the Western Cape.
Given the relative size and remote location of the Lesedi schools, recruitment of high-quality support may prove challenging. Non-profit partners will need to provide compelling and attractive opportunities that will either attract local talent or draw talent from outlying areas.
In an era where partnerships between public institutions and private entities are increasingly vital for sustainable progress, Public School Partnerships in the Lesedi catchment area serve as a good example of how organisations can work together to create a brighter future for learners in no-fee schools. Through open dialogue, collaboration and a shared vision, the Lesedi Solar Park Trust is helping to ensure that students in these schools have access to the resources and support they need to thrive. 5 6 7
6 School Self-Evaluation (SSE) is a process that allows schools to assess themselves and improve their performance and quality of provision.
7 The Quality Management System (QMS), provides for the evaluation of school-based educators.
This Learning Brief was drafted by Daniella Horwitz and edited by Rahima Essop, with contributions from Public School Partnerships and DGMT’s Place-based Synergies team.
