As South Africa commemorates Child Protection Week 2026 under the constitutional principles of Family and Care, Basic Needs, Protection and Development, the Gauteng Department of Social Development’s (GDSD) own Fourth Quarter Performance Report for the 2025/26 financial year reveals a deeply concerning reality. While the department spent 99% of its R5.6 billion budget, many services intended to protect vulnerable children remained unstable, delayed, underfunded, or failed to meet their intended outcomes.
Child Protection Week is not merely about awareness campaigns. It is about asking whether the government is genuinely fulfilling its constitutional obligations to children. The department’s own performance and financial information suggest that too many children continue to face barriers to the rights this week seeks to promote.
While the department reports progress in family preservation and parenting programmes, its performance in key child protection services reveals persistent systemic weaknesses. Family reunification services continue to be delayed by lengthy assessments and administrative bottlenecks. Homelessness interventions remained unstable throughout the year because of governance failures, operational disruptions, and a lack of support for non-profit organisations (NPOs).
Even more concerning is the department’s failure to meet targets for children with valid foster care orders. While it continues to blame court backlogs and placement complexities, these are long-standing issues that should be anticipated, rather than used as explanations for underperformance.
For a child waiting for placement in a foster family, a delayed court order means another night without the stability, care, and sense of belonging that every child deserves. For a family waiting to be reunited, bureaucratic delays mean more time apart and uncertainty about the future. These are hardships that vulnerable children and families should not have to endure.
Child Protection Week also reminds us of every child’s right to nutrition, shelter, healthcare, and social services. Yet, the GDSD’s own figures show that critical child-focused support programmes failed to reach planned targets. Despite increased spending and expenditure recovery, the department fell short of its target to support 1,778,504 children through pro-poor interventions, reaching only 1,732,051 and leaving 46,453 vulnerable children without support.
Moreover, the department failed to meet its target for food support. Of the 147 732 households that were meant to receive assistance, only 141 061 were reached, leaving 6 671 households without the support that had been planned. Behind these numbers are families facing hunger and hardship without the relief they were promised.
The department has defended its performance by citing its transition to a centralised Food Distribution Centre model. Yet despite exceeding food relief targets by 102 702 beneficiaries and distributing 50 088 more food parcels than planned, it still failed to reach 6 671 households targeted for food support and missed its pro-poor basket target for 46 453 children.
This prompts an important question: Did the new model enhance access to food for vulnerable children and families, or did it simply boost distribution statistics? The department has not provided evidence that households previously receiving support continued to access food consistently during the transition, making it difficult to determine whether the reported gains translated into improved food security for those most in need.
Perhaps the most alarming finding relates to child protection services. Community-Based Care Services for Children, which provide prevention, early intervention and psychosocial support before children enter the statutory protection system, suffered one of the largest funding cuts in the department. But it proceeded regardless, and the consequences are now clear.
The allocation was slashed from R211.8 million to just R51.7 million, representing a reduction of approximately R160 million. The cut occurred despite the department itself acknowledging that community-based services are critical in preventing children from entering more costly institutional care. The department must explain why funding was cut from community-based services, where it was redirected, and what impact this has had on vulnerable children.
Meanwhile, reports of child abuse continued exceeding reporting targets throughout the year. While improved reporting mechanisms are important, rising abuse reports also indicate growing pressure on child protection systems and continued vulnerability within communities. A government serious about child protection would strengthen prevention services, not reduce them by R160 million.
The fundamental question this Child Protection Week is simple: is the Department of Social Development ensuring that children receive the care, basic needs, protection and developmental support they require to thrive? Based on the Department’s own performance analysis, the answer is no.
Despite spending 99% of its budget, the department failed to resolve foster care backlogs, cut approximately R160 million from community-based prevention services, missed food security targets, fell short of its pro-poor intervention targets, and continued to grapple with NPO instability and implementation failures. These are not merely administrative shortcomings. They have real consequences for vulnerable children who depend on government support for their safety, well-being, and future opportunities.
This Child Protection Week, Gauteng’s children deserve more than slogans and awareness campaigns. They deserve a child protection system that works and can deliver stable foster care services, strong community-based prevention programmes, reliable food, and nutrition support and ensure that NPOs are adequately funded.
The DA is committed to building a capable Gauteng government that delivers effective planning, accountable leadership, and social welfare systems that put vulnerable children first. Our goal is to ensure that every child receives the care, protection, and opportunities they deserve as guaranteed by our Constitution.
DA Gauteng Shadow MEC for Social Development, Refiloe Ntšekhe MPL
Refiloe Nt’sekhe
iol.co.za
