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 THAT HAS PASSED THE END DATE: 

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
Passed the End Date -
Status was "Reregistered" 		 2018-07-01  2023-06-30  SAQA 06120/18 
LAST DATE FOR ENROLMENT LAST DATE FOR ACHIEVEMENT
2026-06-30   2029-06-30  

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  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "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"     		 2023-06-30  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. Africa Rising Advisory Services Pty Ltd 
    3. Amabamba Recruitment 
    4. AVAX SA 481 CC. T/A Mandisa Development Services 
    5. Buena Vista Learning Academy 
    6. Commerce Edge South Africa 
    7. Concepts of Sustainable Management (CSM) 
    8. Edequette Training Institute 
    9. Elvis Koena Consulting (Pty) Ltd 
    10. Excellent Minds Institute (Pty) Ltd 
    11. Giamanje TVET College 
    12. Growth Management Consulting 
    13. Hamonate Consulting 
    14. HDPSA 
    15. IQ Skills Academy (PTY) LTD. 
    16. Jabukile Consultancy 
    17. Jobafrik Consulting 
    18. Josmap Training Institute 
    19. Khehli Institute 
    20. KOKANO PROJECTS PTY LTD 
    21. KYM MANAGEMENT CONSULTING 
    22. Lewerb Holdings (PTY) Ltd 
    23. Mafamawethu Consultants 
    24. Makhuba Development Projects CC 
    25. Mamuhle Academy 
    26. MANCOSA Pty (Ltd) 
    27. Maritime Business Institute 
    28. MARS Business Consulting 
    29. MATEPE INVESTMENTS (PTY) LTD 
    30. Mcebo Technologies 
    31. Melatrend Management Consulting 
    32. Morar Incorporated - KZN 
    33. Mortarboard Training Solutions 
    34. MTK Corporate Solutions 
    35. Ndwamato Training Solutions (Pty) Ltd 
    36. Nelson Mandela University 
    37. Nemalale Eagles Consultancy CC 
    38. Opelong Business Institute 
    39. Pachedu Skills Solutions 
    40. Pachi Global Foundation 
    41. Pebetse Training and Consulting 
    42. Petra Institute of Development 
    43. PFIM Trading (Pty) Ltd 
    44. PMA Holdings (PTY ) LTD. 
    45. Progressive School of Business and Engineering (Pty) 
    46. PTDEV (Pty) Ltd 
    47. Reflections Development Institute 
    48. Regenesys Management (Pty) Ltd 
    49. Regent Business School (Pty) Ltd t/a Regent Business School 
    50. Resonance Institue of Learning 
    51. Sebenzisanane Human Capital 
    52. Silalele Consulting CC. 
    53. Siza Nesu Training and Consultants 
    54. South African Corporate Training Association 
    55. Stellenbosch University 
    56. Tachfin Holdings 
    57. Tasc Business Consulting and Training 
    58. Thinking Mind Trading 
    59. Tloumogale Business Development & Consulting 
    60. Transafric Consulting Pty Ltd 
    61. Tshepang Consulting & Project 
    62. Tshwane Training Institute (PTY) LTD. 
    63. Tsogo-Tlhago Trading Enterprise 
    64. Umqondo Consultancy 
    65. UNIVERSITY OF BUSINESS EXCELLENCE(PTY)LTD 
    66. University of Pretoria 
    67. University of Venda 
    68. Ursivox Interactive Systems 


    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.