Part D:
Technical Indicator Descriptions
PROGRAMME 1: CORPORATE SERVICES
| Indicator Title | Procuring from B-BBEE suppliers as % of total procurement spend |
|---|---|
| Definition | Procurement from B-BBEE Suppliers |
| Source of data | D365 Procurement Spending per Supplier Category |
| Method of calculation | Rand value procured from B-BBEE suppliers as a % of total procurement value |
| Means of verification | Automated report was tested for accuracy on implementation |
| Assumptions | All suppliers are correctly categorised on D365 |
| Disaggregation of beneficiaries | N/A |
| Spatial transformation | N/A |
| Calculation type | Cumulative |
| Reporting cycle | Quarterly |
| Desired performance | Achieve the targeted % of procuring goods from B-BBEE suppliers |
| Indicator responsibility | CFO/Procurement Manager |
| Indicator Title | Actual General Reserve as % of Required Reserve |
|---|---|
| Definition | Actual General Reserve as % of Required Reserve to sustain operating activities |
| Source of data | Financial Statements |
| Method of calculation | Reflect the Actual General Reserve Balance against Budgeted Trial Balances |
| Means of verification | As per D365 Financial Statements, which are audited at the end of a financial year |
| Assumptions | None |
| Disaggregation of beneficiaries | N/A |
| Spatial transformation | N/A |
| Calculation type | Cumulative |
| Reporting cycle | Quarterly |
| Desired performance | Achieve the budgeted reserve level, which is supported by an actuarial valuation and approved by the Board |
| Indicator responsibility | CFO/Financial Accountant |
| INDICATOR TITLE | Asset Turnover Ratio |
|---|---|
| Definition | The efficiency with which assets are used to generate income |
| Source of data | Financial Statements |
| Method of calculation | Reflect the Actual General Reserve Balance against Budgeted Trial Balances |
| Means of verification | As per D365 Financial Statements, which are audited at the end of a financial year |
| Assumptions | Fixed Assets are acquired as per procurement plan |
| Disaggregation of beneficiaries | N/A |
| Spatial transformation | N/A |
| Calculation type | Cumulative |
| Reporting cycle | Quarterly |
| Desired performance | The assets of the PPECB are efficiently used to generate income |
| Indicator responsibility | CFO/Financial Accountant |
| INDICATOR TITLE | Rand value on ESD spend |
|---|---|
| Definition | Rand value invested in the development of B-BBEE suppliers |
| Source of data | Transactions processed in D365 |
| Method of calculation | Total rand value of expenses that meet the criteria of ESD |
| Means of verification | Verify with Trial Balance |
| Assumptions | All ESD transactions are approved and correctly allocated |
| Disaggregation of beneficiaries | N/A |
| Spatial transformation | N/A |
| Calculation type | Cumulative |
| Reporting cycle | Quarterly |
| Desired performance | Achieve the ESD spending on B-BBEE suppliers |
| Indicator responsibility | CFO/Procurement Manager |
| Indicator Title | Organisational customer satisfaction index measured annually as a % |
|---|---|
| Definition | Reporting on the percentage of customers who are satisfied with the service provided by the PPECB |
| Source of data | The data is gathered from the annual Customer Satisfaction Survey conducted by the Marketing and Communications Manager |
| Method of calculation | Respondents to the Customer Satisfaction Survey are asked to rate the PPECB’s customer service levels on a scale of 1% to 100%. The percentages are then averaged to obtain the final score |
| Means of verification | Customer Feedback Survey |
| Assumptions | N/A |
| Disaggregation of beneficiaries | N/A |
| Spatial transformation | N/A |
| Calculation type | Non-cumulative |
| Reporting cycle | Annually |
| Desired performance | Performance which is higher than the target is desirable as this means that the customers are satisfied with the PPECB’s performance |
| Indicator responsibility | Marketing and Communications Manager |
PROGRAMME 2: OPERATIONAL SERVICES
| Indicator Title | Number of export certificates processed via the electronic platform |
|---|---|
| Definition | Number of export certificates that are processed via the PPECB electronic TITAN 2.0® platform |
| Source of data | Monthly report from the PPECB mobile technology system |
| Method of calculation | Number of export certificates submitted for approval on a monthly basis via the PPECB electronic platform |
| Means of Verification | TITAN 2.0® (mobile application) compared to system-generated report |
| Assumptions | N/A |
| Disaggregation of Beneficiaries | N/A |
| Spatial Transformation | N/A |
| Calculation Type | Cumulative |
| Reporting Cycle | Quarterly |
| Desired Performance | Desired performance is to achieve the targeted number of export certificates processed electronically for the fiscal year |
| Indicator Responsibility | General Managers: Operations/Application Development Manager |
| Indicator Title | Number of container inspection conducted via the TITAN 2.0® platform |
|---|---|
| Definition | Percentage of container inspections conducted using TITAN 2.0® |
| Source of data | Monthly report from the PPECB mobile technology system |
| Method of calculation | Number of container inspections conducted using TITAN 2.0® divided by the total number of container inspections for a financial year |
| Means of verification | TITAN 2.0® (mobile application) compared to system generated report |
| Assumptions | N/A |
| Disaggregation of Beneficiaries | N/A |
| Spatial Transformation | N/A |
| Calculation Type | Cumulative |
| Reporting Cycle | Quarterly |
| Desired Performance | Desired performance is to achieve the targeted percentage of containers inspected on TITAN 2.0® for the fiscal year |
| Indicator Responsibility | General Managers: Operations |
PROGRAMME 3: FOOD SAFETY SERVICES
| Indicator Title | Number of tests carried out during sample analysis using accredited methods |
|---|---|
| Definition | Samples analysed for testing as per the DoA mandate for pesticides, mycotoxins and compositional dairy testing for export and the local market |
| Source of data | Through the Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS), sample information from tracking numbers to tests conducted are captured and recorded on a daily basis |
| Method of calculation | Volumes of samples analysed for different tests are counted by the LIMS automatically as received at sample reception |
| Means of verification | LIMS |
| Assumptions | N/A |
| Disaggregation of Beneficiaries | N/A |
| Spatial Transformation | N/A |
| Calculation Type | Cumulative |
| Reporting Cycle | Quarterly |
| Desired Performance | A higher-than-target performance is preferred, as increased samples analysed for testing are indicative of compliance with food and feed safety regulations and may also be indicative of increased exports |
| Indicator Responsibility | Laboratory Manager |
| Indicator Title | Number of food safety audits conducted |
|---|---|
| Definition | Reporting on the number of Export Food Business Operators who were SAGAP (R707) certified in a quarter |
| Source of data | The data is gathered from the Food Safety Programme which issues the certificates |
| Method of calculation | A count of the number of Food Safety Certificates issued in a quarter to Exporting Food Business Operators |
| Means of verification | Food Safety Audit Reports |
| Assumptions | N/A |
| Disaggregation of Beneficiaries | N/A |
| Spatial Transformation | N/A |
| Calculation Type | Cumulative |
| Reporting Cycle | Quarterly |
| Desired Performance | Performance which is higher than the target is desirable as this means that oversight is increasing |
| Indicator Responsibility | Programme Manager: Food Safety |
PROGRAMME 4: TRANSFORMATION AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
| Indicator Title | Number of students graduated through the Agri Export Technologist Programme (AETP) annually | |
|---|---|---|
| Definition | This is the number of people who fulfill all the requirements of the learnership and are then awarded an NQF Level 5 qualification after their Portfolios of Evidence have been assessed and moderated | |
| Source of Data | Certificates issued by SETA | |
| Method of Calculation | The indicator is calculated through stipulating the number of students graduated (who successfully meet the final requirements of the learnership) | |
| Means of Verification | AgriSETA certificates | |
| Assumptions | N/A | |
| Disaggregation of Beneficiaries | N/A | |
| Spatial Transformation | N/A | |
| Calculation Type | Non-cumulative | |
| Reporting Cycle | Annually | |
| Desired Performance | All registered students graduate after course completion and get employment in the sector | |
| Indicator Responsibility | Learning and Development Manager |
| Indicator Title | Number of Graduate Placements |
|---|---|
| Definition | Reporting on the number of graduate placements provided by the PPECB Support Services to provide workplace exposure to unemployed youth (previously known as internships) |
| Source of data | The data is collected from the ATS and Payroll systems |
| Method of calculation | A count of the number of graduate placements |
| Means of verification | The applicant data is collected from the ATS and employment data from the payroll systems and reconciled into a report |
| Assumptions | N/A |
| Disaggregation of beneficiaries | N/A |
| Spatial transformation | N/A |
| Calculation type | Cumulative |
| Reporting cycle | Quarterly |
| Desired performance | Increasing the number of graduate placements (previously known as internships) provided by the PPECB Support Services provides a qualified talent pool for Support Services in addition to providing workplace exposure to unemployed youth and contributing to job creation. The PPECB has made a number of successful placements from this programme over the past five years |
| Indicator responsibility | Human Capital Executive |
| Indicator Title | Number of smallholder farmers trained |
|---|---|
| Definition | The number of smallholder farmers trained by the PPECB |
| Source of Data | Attendance registers completed by farmers during training sessions |
| Method of Calculation | Adding together all the farmers who attended training sessions during a quarter across all registers |
| Means of Verification | Attendance registers |
| Assumptions | N/A |
| Disaggregation of Beneficiaries | N/A |
| Spatial Transformation | N/A |
| Calculation Type | Cumulative |
| Reporting Cycle | Quarterly |
| Desired Performance | Performance which is higher than the target is desirable as this means that more smallholder farmers have an awareness of post-harvest activities |
| Indicator Responsibility | Organisational Development and Transformation Manager |
| Indicator Title | Number of smallholder farmers certified for export |
|---|---|
| Definition | Reporting on the number of smallholder farmers who attained SAGAP (R707) certification in a quarter |
| Source of data | The data is gathered from the Food Safety Programme which issues the certificates |
| Method of calculation | count of the number of certificates issued in a quarter to smallholder farmers |
| Means of verification | SAGAP Certificates |
| Assumptions | N/A |
| Disaggregation of beneficiaries | N/A |
| Spatial transformation | N/A |
| Calculation type | Cumulative |
| Reporting cycle | Quarterly |
| Desired performance | Performance which is higher than the target is desirable as this means that more smallholder farmers have gained market access |
| Indicator responsibility | Organisational Development and Transformation Manager |
| Indicator Title | Percentage of permanent Technical Professionals (Inspectors and Assessors) evaluated as technically competent |
|---|---|
| Definition | Reporting on the percentage of permanent Inspectors and Assessors evaluated as competent by an independent Learning and Development Product and Cold Chain Specialist within a four-year cycle. The organisation sets a targeted percentage based on the desired competency levels and the default risk tolerance manageable internally. A count of the number of individuals evaluated is now reported |
| Source of data | The data is gathered from specialists within the Learning and Development department, which has a national footprint in all the PPECB regions. A seasonal plan is followed, and the competence status of the inspectorate reported quarterly |
| Method of calculation | The number of technical professionals evaluated as competent expressed as a percentage of the total number of technical professionals |
| Means of verification | Evaluation report |
| Assumptions | N/A |
| Disaggregation of beneficiaries | N/A |
| Spatial transformation | N/A |
| Calculation type | Cumulative |
| Reporting cycle | Quarterly |
| Desired performance | Performance which is higher than the target is desirable as this means that the inspectorate is better equipped to fulfil its mandated and market access responsibilities |
| Indicator responsibility | Learning and Development Manager |