SAQA All qualifications and part qualifications registered on the National Qualifications Framework are public property. Thus the only payment that can be made for them is for service and reproduction. It is illegal to sell this material for profit. If the material is reproduced or quoted, the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) should be acknowledged as the source.
SOUTH AFRICAN QUALIFICATIONS AUTHORITY 
REGISTERED UNIT STANDARD: 

Apply costing principles to municipal operational and service-based costing 
SAQA US ID UNIT STANDARD TITLE
116340  Apply costing principles to municipal operational and service-based costing 
ORIGINATOR
SGB Public Administration and Management 
PRIMARY OR DELEGATED QUALITY ASSURANCE FUNCTIONARY
-  
FIELD SUBFIELD
Field 03 - Business, Commerce and Management Studies Public Administration 
ABET BAND UNIT STANDARD TYPE PRE-2009 NQF LEVEL NQF LEVEL CREDITS
Undefined  Regular  Level 6  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L6  11 
REGISTRATION STATUS REGISTRATION START DATE REGISTRATION END DATE SAQA DECISION NUMBER
Reregistered  2018-07-01  2023-06-30  SAQA 06120/18 
LAST DATE FOR ENROLMENT LAST DATE FOR ACHIEVEMENT
2024-06-30   2027-06-30  

In all of the tables in this document, both the pre-2009 NQF Level and the NQF Level is shown. In the text (purpose statements, qualification rules, etc), any references to NQF Levels are to the pre-2009 levels unless specifically stated otherwise.  

This unit standard does not replace any other unit standard and is not replaced by any other unit standard. 

PURPOSE OF THE UNIT STANDARD 
This Unit Standard is intended for practitioners in local government who are involved in decision-making processes at operational, management and political levels.

The qualifying learner will be able to:
  • Use relevant cost information in all areas of decision-making within local government.
  • To determine the economic cost of the services in order to make informed decisions about service delivery.
  • To analyse the apportionment of overheads in trying to determine the full costs of providing services.
  • To decide on the efficiency of service provision by examining and comparing costs between services and service providers.
  • To advise on service agreements between departments in order to improve the costing system of the municipality. 

  • LEARNING ASSUMED TO BE IN PLACE AND RECOGNITION OF PRIOR LEARNING 
    It is assumed that Learners are competent in:
  • Communication at Level 4.
  • Mathematical Literacy at Level 4.
  • Economics at Level 4 

  • UNIT STANDARD RANGE 
    The application of this Unit Standard is limited to a public sector organisation at the municipal level of government, and would not include costing of services at a national or provincial level. 

    Specific Outcomes and Assessment Criteria: 

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 1 
    Compile and interpret a unit cost statement and apply the results in a decision-making process. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    The unit costing approach to service delivery is explained in a municipal service delivery context. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 
    The service measurement unit is identified in a municipal service delivery context. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    The relationship between total cost of and unit cost is discussed in terms of service provision. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 
    The method of unit costing is evaluated within the decision-making context. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5 
    The importance of using marginal costs is explained as part of the decision-making process. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 6 
    A unit cost statement is compiled in relation to a specific decision problem. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 7 
    Decisions relating to cost-efficiency and value for money are made on the basis of the unit cost statement. 

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 2 
    Identify the strengths and weaknesses of recognised approaches to efficiency comparisons. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    The concept of efficiency is interpreted within the framework of service delivery in municipalities. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 
    Efficiency indicators are identified and listed for appropriate use in a municipal context. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    The importance of benchmarking is identified and explained within a municipal context. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 
    A cost effectiveness approach is used to evaluate different options of service delivery. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5 
    Benchmarking methods are critically discussed in terms of their strengths and weaknesses for process in a municipal service provision context. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 6 
    The cost effectiveness analysis is evaluated in terms of its strengths and weaknesses for process in a municipal service provision context. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 7 
    The use of a cost benefit analysis in evaluating social efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery is appraised in terms of its viability in a municipal provision context. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 8 
    Efficiency indicators and performance management are compared in terms of the links between the two. 

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 3 
    Apportion overhead costs efficiently in a municipal specific context. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    The importance of apportioning overhead costs to a specific service is commented on in relation to the decision-making context. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 
    The allocation bases are commented on in terms of apportioning service overheads. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    Types of overhead costs are identified in relation to delivering a specific service. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 
    The most appropriate allocation base for the overhead cost is determined in line with sound costing principles and management information policy. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5 
    The basis is calculated for an overhead recovery rate. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 6 
    A calculated overhead recovery rate of a municipal service is interpreted to facilitate decision-making. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 7 
    The use of Service Level Agreements to solve the problem of costing in support and administrative service sections of a municipality is explained using examples where the situation was improved by the practice. 

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 4 
    Recognise the importance of classifying costs by behaviour. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    Cost behaviour is recognised within a local government context. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 
    Cost drivers are identified for each specific municipal service. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    Cost drivers are classified according to their effects on different costs categories. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 
    A distinction is made among various types of costs in the municipal organisation. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5 
    Costs are classified by their behaviour in line with sound costing principles and management information policy. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 6 
    The relationship between cost drivers and municipal service levels is indicated within a municipal context. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 7 
    The behaviour of costs and their related cost drivers is interpreted in making decisions on service levels. 

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 5 
    Identify difficulties of classifying costs by behaviour in a municipal financial management system. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    The relationship between the budgeting format and the costing system is explained within a municipal context. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 
    The differences between budget control and cost control are discussed for a municipal service delivery process. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    The cost control approaches are applied in municipal expenditure management. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 
    Classifying costs by behaviour in a municipal financial management system are explained in terms of the difficulties of using this approach. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5 
    Changes to the financial management and budgeting system are recommended in line with supporting effective cost classification for a municipality organisation 

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 6 
    Understand the benefits and limitations of classifying costs by relevance to the decision consideration. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    Cost information for the decision-making in a municipality is analysed in terms of the value it provides. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 
    The benefits of cost classification for a specific decision are identified using a costing matrix. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    The relationship between the purpose of decision-making and cost behaviour is discussed with specific reference to municipality operational circumstances. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 
    Cost classification for decision-making are commented on in terms of the limitations they have for municipal financial management. 


    UNIT STANDARD ACCREDITATION AND MODERATION OPTIONS 
  • An individual wishing to be assessed (including through RPL) against this Unit Standard may apply to an assessment agency, assessor or provider institution accredited by the relevant ETQA, or an ETQA that has a Memorandum of Understanding with the relevant ETQA.
  • Anyone assessing a learner against this Unit Standard must be registered as an assessor with the relevant ETQA, or an ETQA that has a Memorandum of Understanding with the relevant ETQA.
  • Any institution offering learning that will enable achievement of this Unit Standard or assessing this Unit Standard must be accredited as a provider with the relevant ETQA, or an ETQA that has a Memorandum of Understanding with the relevant ETQA.
  • Moderation of assessment will be conducted by the relevant ETQA at its discretion. 

  • UNIT STANDARD ESSENTIAL EMBEDDED KNOWLEDGE 
  • Legislation pertaining to municipal budgeting.
  • The process of budgeting at a municipal level.
  • The role costing plays in the budgeting process. 

  • UNIT STANDARD DEVELOPMENTAL OUTCOME 
    N/A 

    UNIT STANDARD LINKAGES 
    N/A 


    Critical Cross-field Outcomes (CCFO): 

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO IDENTIFYING 
    Identify and solve problems using critical and creative thinking processes, e.g. by trying to choose between costing methods. 

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO WORKING 
    Work effectively with others as a member of a team, group, organization or community, e.g. through communicating with others regarding costing methodology. 

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO ORGANISING 
    Organise and manage oneself and one's activities responsibly and effectively, e.g. through the demonstration of accuracy in all costing processes. 

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO COLLECTING 
    Collect, analyse, organise and critically evaluate information, e.g. through collecting all the factors to be included in calculating the cost of an item. 

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO COMMUNICATING 
    Communicate effectively using visual, mathematical and / or language skills in the modes of oral and/or written persuasion, e.g. through advising and motivating others with regard costing options. 

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO SCIENCE 
    Use Science and technology effectively and critically, showing responsibility to the environment and health of others, e.g. use appropriate computer software for cost calculation, data capturing and document storage purposes. 

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO DEMONSTRATING 
    Demonstrate an understanding of the world as a set of interrelated systems by recognising that problem-solving contexts do not exist in isolation, e.g. in keeping in mind that accurate costing of services effects the financial well being of not only the municipality but the country as a whole. 

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO CONTRIBUTING 
    Participating as responsible citizens in the life of local, national and global communities, e.g. acting as custodian of ethical behaviour and maintaining a high Level of commitment to providing accurate costing input into the budgeting process. 

    UNIT STANDARD ASSESSOR CRITERIA 
    N/A 

    REREGISTRATION HISTORY 
    As per the SAQA Board decision/s at that time, this unit standard was Reregistered in 2012; 2015. 

    UNIT STANDARD NOTES 
    N/A 

    QUALIFICATIONS UTILISING THIS UNIT STANDARD: 
      ID QUALIFICATION TITLE PRE-2009 NQF LEVEL NQF LEVEL STATUS END DATE PRIMARY OR DELEGATED QA FUNCTIONARY
    Core  48965   Certificate: Municipal Financial Management  Level 6  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L6  Reregistered  2023-06-30  LG SETA 
    Elective  49554   National Diploma: Public Finance Management and Administration  Level 5  NQF Level 05  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered" 
    2020-07-30  LG SETA 


    PROVIDERS CURRENTLY ACCREDITED TO OFFER THIS UNIT STANDARD: 
    This information shows the current accreditations (i.e. those not past their accreditation end dates), and is the most complete record available to SAQA as of today. Some Primary or Delegated Quality Assurance Functionaries have a lag in their recording systems for provider accreditation, in turn leading to a lag in notifying SAQA of all the providers that they have accredited to offer qualifications and unit standards, as well as any extensions to accreditation end dates. The relevant Primary or Delegated Quality Assurance Functionary should be notified if a record appears to be missing from here.
     
    1. A4 Consultancy CC 
    2. ABA Sebenzi 
    3. AfroXpert Performance Developement cc 
    4. All Access Holdings 
    5. Amabamba Recruitment 
    6. Amadube Investments CC 
    7. ARMS - Audit & Risk Management Solutions 
    8. Asiphokuhle Training and Research Institute 
    9. AVAX SA 481 CC. T/A Mandisa Development Services 
    10. Bantubanye Skills 
    11. Bavuse Trading Enterprises cc 
    12. Break The Chains Development Services 
    13. Buena Vista Learning Academy 
    14. Camissa Institute 
    15. Change Strategies Consulting Services CC 
    16. Chuma Development Consultants 
    17. Crimsonblu (PTY) LTD 
    18. CTAM Training and Consulting 
    19. CTC College(PTY) LTD. 
    20. Dean Institute Of Learning (Pty) Ltd 
    21. Development Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA) 
    22. DITEBOGO CONSULTANCY CC 
    23. Edequette Training Institute 
    24. Elective Training Institute Enterprise CC 
    25. Elvis Koena Consulting (Pty) Ltd 
    26. Execuprime Business College (Pty) Ltd 
    27. Express Model 405 
    28. Frugatrax Consultants 
    29. Glere Skills and Consultants 
    30. Glo Leb Training & Development 
    31. Growth Management Consulting 
    32. Hamonate Consulting 
    33. Hlaniki Investment Holdings 
    34. HS GLOBAL SKILLS BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 
    35. Ikhaya Training and Consulting 
    36. Ilinge Labantu Debt Solution 
    37. Inafrica General Trading Pty LTD 
    38. IQ Skills Academy (PTY) LTD. 
    39. Isipho Equiping (Pty) Ltd 
    40. JNUTO Trading and Projects 
    41. Jobafrik Consulting 
    42. K Shabangu FET College 
    43. KAGISHO BUSINESS CONCEPTS (Pty) LTD 
    44. KALIDEEN MANAGEMENT SERVICES 
    45. Kamanga Skills Projects 
    46. Kelsey Events and Business Consulting 
    47. Kgolo Institute 
    48. Khabolwazi Pty LTD 
    49. KHOSITHI TRAINING 
    50. Kia Chuma 
    51. KOKANO PROJECTS PTY LTD 
    52. Kueneng Investment Holding 
    53. Kuyakhula Development Initiatives 
    54. KYM MANAGEMENT CONSULTING 
    55. Lekoko Consulting (PTY) LTD 
    56. Letlotlo La Gae (Pty) Ltd 
    57. Lewerb Holdings (PTY) Ltd 
    58. Mabuya Amahle Trading 
    59. Maile Consulting 
    60. Makavila Suppliers CC. 
    61. Management College of Southern Africa (MANCOSA) 
    62. Mangalani Business Enterprises 
    63. Marcado Human Resources Strategies 
    64. Masemase Consultancy CC. 
    65. Mass Computer Training And Printers 
    66. MATEPE INVESTMENTS (PTY) LTD 
    67. Mcebo Technologies 
    68. Miczo's Enterprise 
    69. Mission Point Consulting 
    70. Mona SS 
    71. Mortarboard Training Solutions 
    72. Motheo Skills Entity 
    73. Nemalale Eagles Consultancy CC 
    74. Nhlahle Development Agency 
    75. NJ & L Trading Enterprise CC. 
    76. NOMAKU TRADERS CC 
    77. NORKEM LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE (PTY) LTD 
    78. NS Global Academy 
    79. Outeniqua Leadership Institute 
    80. Pachedu Skills Solutions 
    81. Paseka Business Enterprise 
    82. Pioneer Business Consulting 
    83. Power Rush Trading 170 CC. 
    84. PTDEV (Pty) Ltd 
    85. Regenesys Management (Pty) Ltd 
    86. RMK Industries (Pty) Ltd 
    87. Solstice Networks CC. 
    88. Stellenbosch University 
    89. The Crimson CO CC. 
    90. Thubelihle Graduate Institute 
    91. Tloumogale Business Development & Consulting 
    92. Tradesman Consulting and Training Solutions 
    93. Tshwane Training Institute (PTY) LTD. 
    94. Tuns Trading and Projects (Pty) Ltd 
    95. Ubuholi Bendabuko Capacity Building (PTY) Ltd 
    96. Umqondo Consultancy 
    97. University of Fort Hare 
    98. University of North West 
    99. University of Pretoria 
    100. University of Venda 
    101. Venado Trading 
    102. Vicmat Consultants 
    103. Vision Africa Training Institute 
    104. Vuselela FET College - Central Office 
    105. Vuselela FET College - Klerksdorp Campus 
    106. Wits University 
    107. Ya Hina Management Consulting and projects 



    All qualifications and part qualifications registered on the National Qualifications Framework are public property. Thus the only payment that can be made for them is for service and reproduction. It is illegal to sell this material for profit. If the material is reproduced or quoted, the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) should be acknowledged as the source.