Each indicator is assigned a score as a percentage of the maximum possible score. It is a composite based on responses from all questionnaires, all respondents and all questions measuring the indicator. Score 0 means that none of the responses indicates that there is potential Each indicator is assigned a score as a percentage of the maximum possible score. It is a governance problem in a relationship, while score 100 means that all of the responses indicate that composite based on responses from all questionnaires, all respondents and all questions the problem exists. measuring the indicator. Score 0 means that none of the responses indicates that there is potential governance problem in a relationship, while score 100 means that all of the responses indicate that Each indicator gets low, medium or high risk and performance grades. If the score of an Indicator is the problem exists. below 20 per cent, it indicates low risk (green). If the score is from 20 per cent to 40 per cent, risk is medium (yellow). If the score is above 40 per cent, risk is high (red). Each indicator gets low, medium or high risk and performance grades. If the score of an Indicator is below 20 per cent, it indicates low risk (green). If the score is from 20 per cent to 40 per cent, risk is Table 5: National score of indicators medium (yellow). If the score is above 40 per cent, risk is high (red). Governance Table 5: National score of indicators Lack of accountability Lack of integrity National<>Province Province<>District Province<>School National<>Province District<>School Lack of Lack of Transparency Participation Capacity Average Governance Performance 4 Governance Lack of accountability 9 Lack of integrity 25 58 Province<>Districtactors School<>External Corruption risk Lack of Lack of Transparency Participation 6 Capacity 33 27 Average Governance 7 3 Performance Corruption risk 14 38 4 11 27 73 Province<>School School<>SGB 9 52 7 6 7 29 14 District<>School School<>Teachers 25 50 58 5 33 40 38 32 11 School<>External actors School<>Users 58 27 21 50 59 27 38 7 15 School<>SGB* SCG<>Users 52 8 67 55 29 23 School<>Teachers System 50 5 School<>Users School 58 21 * SCG<>Users SGB 8 6 System School 0‐20 40 50 LOW 32 40 59 58 38 59 41 55 78 23 76 20‐40 MEDIUM 40‐100 78 76 MEDIUM 40‐100 SGB* A summary of the risk map indicates0‐20 that: LOW 20‐40 58 59 15 40 HIGH 41 HIGH * School High risk areas Governing Body are predominantly at the school level, especially in the relationship between the school and its users. Here the map raises red flags in the areas of lack of accountability, lack of A summary of the risk map indicates that: participation, capacity and performance. Problems are mainly related to issues of accountability,  High risk areas are predominantly at the school level, especially in the relationship between the the application of rules and procedures, and low levels of participation. Only 63 per cent of school and its users. Here the map raises red flags in the areas of lack of accountability, lack of educators participate directly in financial planning and less than 70 per cent have access to the participation, capacity and performance. Problems are mainly related to issues of accountability, financial information of the school. Low levels of participation, coupled with irregular attendance the application of rules and procedures, and low levels of participation. Only 63 per cent of at School Governing Body meetings by members, contribute to poor levels of accountability. educators participate directly in financial planning and less than 70 per cent have access to the financial information of the school. Low levels of participation, coupled with irregular attendance At the district/provincial level, the governance risk is medium, with a high risk in integrity at School Governing Body meetings by members, contribute to poor levels of accountability. mechanisms, indicating that rules and standards are not well known.  Capacity perceived as low: There is a major problem with capacity of school governance At the district/provincial level, the governance risk is medium, with a high risk in integrity mechanisms, particularly in the Schools Governing Bodies. mechanisms, indicating that rules and standards are not well known.  Capacity perceived as low: There is a major problem with capacity of school governance mechanisms, particularly in the Schools Governing Bodies. 25 25 25 Transparency International

Mapping Transparency, Accountability and Integrity in Primary Education in South Africa