Are SDAs serving their purpose?

manual labourers in railway lines, plantations, farms and mines.
They were prepared to do work which the inhabitants of these continents found undesirable.

But today they control the retail sector throughout the whole world. In smaller economies such as Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi, Mozambique, Kenya and Uganda, they constitute the majority in their middle and upper class members of the society.
The same story of the humble origins of Indians can be told about the evolvement of Schools Development Associations (SDAs).

Before the 1990s there were very few SDAs. However, today nearly every school has an SDA committee.
Before it was made up of former students who had a burning desire to give back to the school as an appreciation for what they got from it.
Then it was known as former students association. Examples that come to mind are Kutama Old Boys’ Association (KOBA), Goromonzi Old Boys’ Association, St Augustine’s Old Students’ Association

(KwaTsambe), Peterhouse Old Boys, to mention only a few.
These were vibrant associations whose prominence seemed to wane with the passage of time.

Somehow the former students’ associations though still existing do not make a great impact due to the problems associated with keeping loose associations together.
This led to the birth of Schools Development Associations with the mandate of raising funds and managing funds for school development.
Initially, the SDAs had a small function, which complemented the Government/missionary or church efforts.

They were formed to assist schools in performing small tasks such as fencing schoolyards, maintaining grounds and painting or maintaining swimming pools.
Currently, their roles have expanded to include teachers’ salaries, benefits and incentives, construction of school buildings, purchase of fixed and movable assets (such as buses, lorries, trucks and computers) for schools.

In some schools their roles include almost everything. They are now more powerful than the school’s board of directors.
Most students who are expelled from school are a result of failure to pay levies, which are charged by SDAs instead of failure to raise tuition. In most cases levies are far greater than tuition.

Criteria for choosing SDA committee members and their terms of reference
In theory SDAs members are supposed to be elected from people who are dominant or prominent in society.

Ideally these are people who have a high status, good stature and a track record either in commerce or experienced in other important facets of life.
They are supposed to be responsible people who are sensitive to the plight of most parents as well as being focussed on the key issues concerning the school.

However the situation on the ground is that people who are noisy and vociferous now dominate the SDAs.
They also seem to represent the elite few and the rich. These are the domineering or show off type of personalities with flashy cars to go with it.
Most SDAs operate outside the provisions of Statutory Instrument 379 of 1998, which governs their operations.
It is apparent this document is not referred to most of the times or it is never given to the office bearers at the time when they are elected into office.

SDAs members are supposed to be elected on yearly basis in theory. In most cases elections are circumvented.
Some refuse to step down at the end of their terms by offering the common excuse that they fear that if they step down no one will be able to finish the projects they would have started.
They are not supposed to be recalled during their term. This renders the checks and balances that could have been offered by parents useless in the event that parents notice that the SDA is not effective.

However in some schools there is lack of democracy as office bearers are handpicked with no clear-cut term in office.
Parents are not told the criteria, which is used in nominating the members of SDAs.
The members nominated might be fellow Christians or friends of the Headmaster and the Pastor at the school.

These are basically old boys network with serious corporate governance ramifications.
Some Headmasters even hire people to attend and vote at SDA selection meetings in order to influence results.
They are supposed to be answerable to the board of trustees/directors of the school and the parents.

However it does not appear as if the parents nor the board can censure the activities of some SDAs.
Over the years Headmasters have been punished for misappropriating the school’s resources but I still have to hear of any SDA which has been brought to book.
It appears that there are no clear reporting structures between the Board, the SDAs and the parents.

Should SDA’s be remunerated?
Initially, SDA membership was voluntary. Now we hear of members being paid sitting allowances from the school fees.
Some are actually on school payrolls. Naturally they have an incentive to push for higher levies and fees.
Most parents are now faced with escalating school fees and the introduction of multiple levies.

In the process most schools have become elitist and for the rich. This becomes more pronounced in a country like ours where the middle class has all but disappeared.
Are their priorities correct?
Ideally, the SDAs are supposed to be focussed in long term projects that assist in enhancing good education (ie well equipped, classrooms, libraries, science laboratories and computer rooms), good sporting facilities (well maintained grounds), good catering facilities.

In addition they are supposed to be concerned about water and sanitation facilities.
Nevertheless it appears Most SDAs are concerned with glamorous and visible things such as purchasing school buses, school lorries and school trucks.
Most of these movable assets are expensive to purchase and run (ie a bus costs US$150 000)

If not carefully monitored these assets can be a major drain to the schools’ resources.
One of the key result areas of the SDAs is to ensure that they purchase their goods using the most competitive quotations.
The tendering process must give parents value for their money. It appears people who are jostling for business and easy money dominate most SDAs.

The mark ups which most of the SDAs members charge the school range from 100 percent to 500 percent.
Recently, I heard about a school, which bought old 486 Pentium computers at a price of US$4 000 each (normally these computers cost less than US$400 each).
I also heard about a school, which forked out US$10 000 to buy a truck for their school.

The truck broke down soon after crossing Beitbridge Border Post. The school had to fork out more money to tow the car to Harare (a 590-km distance) as well as money to repair it.
Most SDAs resist the idea of using reputable auditors. All the time parents are given cost as the excuse for not choosing good auditors.
At times friends (not auditors) of the SDAs members are asked to verify and rubberstamp the manipulated books of the SDAs.

Thus most SDAs members are working in cahoots to short change the schools they purport to represent.
Ultimately it is the parents who have suffered from the unscrupulous and wayward activities in the name of SDAs.

It is also important to point out the sterling work done by SDA’s, which kept most schools afloat during the period of hyperinflation.
Basic school facilities and infrastructure were maintained. Good and qualified teachers were retained because of the incentives that they were given then.
It became much easier for these schools to take off when the multi-currency system was introduced.

In conclusion it is still possible to get the SDAs working for the good of the schools provided parents play their role in choosing the right calibre of people to sit in the SDA committee.
There should be a central control of school fees and levies. There should be checks and balances to prevent abuse and corruption.
It is not the idea of SDAs, which is bad, but it is the people who make most the SDAs committees that are not correct and accountable.