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: 

Design and develop outcomes-based assessments 
SAQA US ID UNIT STANDARD TITLE
115755  Design and develop outcomes-based assessments 
ORIGINATOR
SGB Assessor Standards 
PRIMARY OR DELEGATED QUALITY ASSURANCE FUNCTIONARY
ETDP SETA - Education, Training and Development Practices Sector Education and Training Authority 
FIELD SUBFIELD
Field 05 - Education, Training and Development Higher Education and Training 
ABET BAND UNIT STANDARD TYPE PRE-2009 NQF LEVEL NQF LEVEL CREDITS
Undefined  Regular  Level 6  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L6  10 
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 replaces: 
US ID Unit Standard Title Pre-2009 NQF Level NQF Level Credits Replacement Status
7976  Design and Develop Assessments  Level 6  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L6  10   
9928  Design integrated assessment for learning programmes  Level 5  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L5  18   

PURPOSE OF THE UNIT STANDARD 
This unit standard is for people who design and develop assessments to facilitate consistent, credible, reliable, fair, and unbiased assessments of learning outcomes. The outcomes may be defined in a range of documents including but not limited to unit standards, exit level outcomes, assessment standards, curriculum statements and qualifications. This unit standard will contribute towards the achievement of a variety of qualifications particularly within the field of Education Training and Development Practices and Human Resource Development.

In particular, people credited with this unit standard are able to:
  • Demonstrate understanding of design principles of outcomes-based assessment,
  • Design outcomes-based assessments,
  • Develop assessment activities,
  • Develop assessment guides, and
  • Evaluate assessment designs and guides. 
    		•

    LEARNING ASSUMED TO BE IN PLACE AND RECOGNITION OF PRIOR LEARNING 
    The credit calculation is based on the assumption that those entering programmes to learn towards this unit standard:
  • Have already achieved unit standard NLRD 115753: Conduct outcomes-based assessment, or equivalent,
  • Are competent in the relevant field in which they are designing assessments, or have access to subject matter experts, and
  • Are able to analyse and interpret the relevant outcomes (or standards). 
    		•

    UNIT STANDARD RANGE 
    1. This is a generic assessment unit standard, and candidates can design and develop assessments within any field of learning in line with their subject matter expertise. For the purposes of assessment of this assessment design unit standard, candidates should have access to the relevant outcomes for which assessments will be designed. However, the assessment of candidate-designers will only be valid for award of this unit standard if the following requirements are met:

    > The credit value for the assessment/s designed is worth 8 credits (or the equivalent of 8 credits). This means the candidate can design an assessment for a single outcome worth 8 credits or more, or for a number of smaller outcomes collectively worth 8 credits.
  • The outcome/s selected for design of assessments require assessment in relation to significant, meaningful and coherent outcome statements that include assessment criteria and allow for judgements of competence in line with SAQA's definition of competence i.e. embraces foundational, practical and reflexive dimensions of competence. As a general guide, the outcomes selected should carry at least 4 credits each or the equivalent. Single-task assessments will not be valid for awarding this unit standard. Outcomes that are highly task-orientated and do not demand much, if any, in the way of reflexive competence, will not be sufficient for measuring competence as an assessment designer in terms of this unit standard. Thus candidate-designers should select outcomes that enable them to meet the requirement laid out here.
  • At least three assessment activities are designed in detail, illustrating the use of three different assessment methods.
  • Candidates produce evidence that they can design assessments in RPL situations and for candidates who may have fairly recently acquired the necessary knowledge and skills through courses or learning programmes.


    2. For the purposes of assessment against this unit standard, candidates should have access to organisational assessment policies, procedures and systems (including moderation). It is assumed the organisational policies and procedures are of a quality sufficient for accreditation purposes. Where such policies and procedures are not yet available, the provider may make general policies and procedures available for the purposes of this assessment.

    Further range statements are provided in the body of the unit standard where they apply to particular specific outcomes or assessment criteria. 
    		•

    Specific Outcomes and Assessment Criteria: 

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 1 
    Demonstrate understanding of design principles of outcomes-based assessment. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    Comparisons between outcomes-based design and another form of assessment design highlight key differences in terms of the underlying philosophies and approaches to assessment, including an outline of advantages and disadvantages. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
    Similarities and differences include assessment methodology, advantages to learners, employers and institutions, impact on learners and assessors, and means of reporting results.
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 
    Key differences are identified in the approach to designing assessments for RPL-candidates and for programme-based assessments. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    Different assessment methods are described and justified in relation to particular contexts, and their advantage over other possible options. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
    The description of methods should cover situations for gathering evidence of abilities in problem solving, comprehension, analysis and synthesis, evaluation, practical and technical skills, attitudinal skills and values.
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 
    Key principles of assessment are described and illustrated in terms of their impact on assessment design, and ultimately assessment practice and results. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
    See "Definition of Terms" for a definition of principles of good assessment principles.
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5 
    Scenarios are provided to illustrate the manner in which questioning approaches impact on the validity of assessments. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
    Open versus closed questions, leading questions, probing questions
     

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 2 
    Design outcomes-based assessments. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    The design addresses the need for cost-effectiveness and takes into account the overall assessment plan, results of previous assessments, special needs of candidates, assessment contexts, and where applicable, the accessibility and safety of the environment and contingencies. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 
    Assessment activities, instruments and resources selected are appropriate to the outcomes to be assessed and the assessment candidates, and have the potential to enable the collection of valid and sufficient evidence. The design accommodates the possibility of RPL. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    Potential unfair barriers to achievement by candidates are identified and the design addresses such barriers without compromising the validity of the assessment or possibilities for continued learning. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
    Unfair barriers could relate to issues such as language or disabilities.
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 
    The design ensures holistic, integrated and comprehensive assessment using a range of potential sources and types of evidence. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5 
    Opportunities for gathering naturally-occurring evidence are identified and planned whenever possible, so as to improve assessment efficiency and match assessment conditions to real performance conditions where applicable. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
    Naturally-occurring evidence refers to evidence gathered during the normal course of learning or work.
     

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 3 
    Develop assessment activities. 
    OUTCOME RANGE 
    Candidates are to provide evidence for the development of activities that assess:
  • Psychomotor skills: through methods such as observation of naturally occurring evidence, simulations, skills tests, assessment of products.
  • Cognitive skills: through methods such as fixed and open response, written and oral items.
  • Affective skills (value and attitudinal orientation): such as through observation of behaviour. 
    		•

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    The activities facilitate the production of valid, sufficient, authentic and current evidence, matching the requirements of the given outcome statement/s. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 
    Activities promote integrated assessment as far as possible and enable combinations of outcomes to be assessed simultaneously where possible. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    The activities are appropriate, fair and manageable, and are consistent with the defined purpose of the assessment, including the possibility of RPL. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
    See "Definition of Terms" for a definition of appropriate, fair and manageable.
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 
    Communication intended for candidates is appropriate to the candidates and assessment context, and provides clear direction without influencing candidates towards particular responses. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5 
    The activities are described in sufficient detail to facilitate effective and efficient assessments, but with sufficient opportunities for assessors to adapt and contextualise the activities as required within the assessment context. Where appropriate, guidance is provided for contextualising the activities. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 6 
    Activities meet cost and time requirements and any other constraints within the assessment context. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 7 
    Time allocated for the activities is realistic, can be justified in terms of the requirements of the outcomes and is sufficient for the nature of the performances being assessed. 

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 4 
    Develop assessment guides. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    Guides contain all the details needed by assessors to conduct assessments in line with defined assessment principles. 
    ASSESSMENT CRITERION RANGE 
    Details concerning at least: the approach to assessment, outcomes to be assessed; types and quality of evidence to be collected (including cognitive, affective and psychomotor); assessment methods to be used; resources required; conditions of assessment; timing of assessment; time-limits where applicable, sequence and schedules of activities; accountabilities; deadlines; relevant standard operating procedures where applicable; administrative procedures; moderation arrangements; instructions to assessors, candidates, and support personnel.
     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 
    The guide provides clear details of the assessment activities in line with the assessment design, so as to facilitate fair, reliable and consistent assessments by assessors. The activities are presented in a form that allows for efficient communication of requirements. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    The structure of the guide promotes efficient and effective assessment. It further facilitates the recording of data before, during and after the assessment for purposes of record keeping, assessment judgements and moderation of assessment. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 
    The guide includes all support material and/or references to support material, including observations sheets, checklists, possible or required sources of evidence and guidance on expected quality of evidence including exemplars, memoranda or rubrics as applicable. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 5 
    The guide makes provision for review of the assessment design, and is presented in a format consistent with organisational quality assurance requirements. 

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 5 
    Evaluate assessment designs and guides. 
    OUTCOME RANGE 
    Candidates to provide evidence of the ability to identify and make recommendations on strengths and weaknesses of assessment guides. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    Methods are appropriate and sufficient to evaluate the quality of the assessment design and guides in relation to good assessment principles and the intention of the assessment reflected in the standards. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 2 
    The evaluation results are described and justified in terms of the principles of good assessment and based on evidence from a variety of sources, including empirical data, moderation findings and stakeholder feedback. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 3 
    Recommendations contribute towards the improvement of assessment design and guides to facilitate assessments in line with the requirements of the given outcome statements and the purposes of the assessment. 

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 4 
    The evaluation is carried out in line with quality assurance requirements, including moderation requirements, and contributes towards enhancing the credibility and integrity of the recognition system. 


    UNIT STANDARD ACCREDITATION AND MODERATION OPTIONS 
  • A candidate-designer wishing to be assessed, against this unit standard may apply to an assessment agency, assessor or provider institution accredited by the relevant ETQA.
  • Anyone assessing a candidate-designer against this unit standard must meet the assessor requirements of the relevant ETQA. In particular, such assessors must demonstrate that they assess in terms of the scope and context defined in all the range statements.
  • Any institution offering learning towards this unit standard must be accredited as a provider with the relevant ETQA.
  • External moderation of assessment will be conducted by the relevant ETQA at its discretion. 
    		•

    UNIT STANDARD ESSENTIAL EMBEDDED KNOWLEDGE 
    The following knowledge is embedded within the unit standard, and will be assessed directly or indirectly through assessment of the specific outcomes in terms of the assessment criteria:
  • Outcomes-based education, training and development - underpins understanding of outcomes-based assessment
  • Principles of assessment - directly assessed through assessment criterion 'Key principles of assessment are described and illustrated in terms of their impact on assessment design, and ultimately assessment practice and results.', and indirectly assessed via a requirement to apply the principles throughout the standard.
  • Principles and practices of RPL - directly assessed through assessment criteria 'Key differences are identified in the approach to designing assessments for RPL-candidates and for programme-based assessments.', 'Assessment activities, instruments and resources selected are appropriate to the outcomes to be assessed and the assessment candidates, and have the potential to enable the collection of valid and sufficient evidence. The design accommodates the possibility of RPL.' and 'The activities are appropriate, fair and manageable, and are consistent with the defined purpose of the assessment, including the possibility of RPL.', as well as through application in the rest of the standard.
  • Methods of assessment - directly assessed through assessment criterion 'Different assessment methods are described and justified in relation to particular contexts, and their advantage over other possible options.', and indirectly assessed through application of the methods when designing activities, Specific outcome 'Develop assessment activities'.
  • Potential barriers to assessment - assessed when dealing with special needs.
  • The principles and mechanisms of the NQF - this knowledge underpins the standard
  • Assessment policies and ETQA requirements
  • Moderation requirements 
    		•

    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: planning for contingencies, candidates with special needs, problems that could arise during assessment, suggesting changes to assessment following evaluation of the design. 

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO ORGANISING 
    Organize and manage oneself and ones activities: planning the assessment, assessment activities and assessment guide. 

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO COLLECTING 
    Collect, analyse, organize and critically evaluate information: determine evidence requirements and sources, evaluate the quality of assessment guides. 

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO COMMUNICATING 
    Communicate effectively: communicate all assessment requirements and processes in writing. 

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO DEMONSTRATING 
    Demonstrate the world as a set of related systems: understanding the impact of assessment on individuals and organisations. 

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO CONTRIBUTING 
    Be culturally and aesthetically sensitive across a range of social contexts: plan and design assessments in a culturally sensitive manner. 

    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 
    This unit standard replaces unit standard 9928, "Design integrated assessment for learning programmes", Level 5, 18 credits.
    This unit standard replaces unit standard 7976, "Design and Develop Assessments", Level 6, 10 credits.

    Supplementary information:

    Definition of Terms

    The following terms are defined as used within this and related unit standards:
  • Assessment: - a process in which evidence is gathered and evaluated against agreed criteria in order to make a judgement of competence for developmental and/or recognition purposes.
  • Assessment activities: - what a candidate does or is involved in as a means of producing evidence e.g. designing things, making things, repairing things, reporting on something, answering questions, solving problems, demonstrating techniques.
  • Assessment criteria: - descriptions of the required type and quality of evidence against which candidates are to be assessed.
  • Assessment design: - the analysis of defined outcomes and criteria to produce a detailed description of how an assessment should take place, including all instructions and information regarding the assessment activities and assessment methods. The product of assessment design could be termed an Assessment Guide (see definition below).
  • Assessment facilitator (or evidence facilitator): - a person who works within particular contexts, under the supervision of registered assessors, to help candidates/learners gather, produce and organise evidence for assessment.
  • Assessment Guide: - this is a complete package based on a thorough analysis of specified outcomes and criteria, assessment requirements and a particular assessment context. Assessment Guides are designed primarily for use by assessors to conduct an assessment (or possibly a series of related assessments) in terms of a significant and coherent outcome of learning e.g. a unit standard. Assessment Guides address the following key aspects in detail:
    - How will the assessment take place?
    - What is needed to make the assessment happen?
    - How will evidence be gathered, recorded and judged?
    In general, Assessment Guides include descriptions of the approach to the assessment, assessment conditions, assessment activities, instructions to assessors and candidates/learners, assessment methods, assessment instruments (e.g. scenarios, role-plays, questions, tasks), resource requirements, guidance for contextualising assessments, relevant standard operating procedures, administrative procedures, moderation requirements, assessment outcomes and criteria, observations sheets, checklists, possible or required sources of evidence and guidance on expected quality of evidence including exemplars, memoranda or rubrics.
  • Assessment instruments: - those items that an assessor uses or a candidate uses as part of the assessment e.g. scenarios with questions, case studies, description of tasks to be performed, descriptions of role play situations.
  • Assessment method: - for the most part, assessment methods relate to what an assessor does to gather and evaluate evidence. Assessment methods include observing candidates, questioning candidates, interviewing supervisors/colleagues/managers of candidates, listening to candidates, reviewing written material, testing products.
  • Assessment plan: - an assessment plan is produced at provider level, and gives an overview of the timeframes and responsibilities for assessment and moderation for the agreed delivery period. The plan addresses practical implementation details, including, for example, decisions about the clustering of certain outcomes or unit standards/outcomes for integrated assessment, any planned RPL, and the relation of assessment and moderation to delivery of modules/ programmes in terms of timeframes.
  • Assessment principles: - see more detailed definitions in next section.
  • Candidate/learner: - person whose performance is being assessed by an assessor. Such people include those who may already be competent, but who seek assessment for formal recognition (candidates), as well as those who may have completed or are in the process of completing learning programmes (learners).
  • Candidate-designer: - the person who is being assessed against this particular unit standard.
  • evaluative expertise: - the ability to judge the quality of a performance in relation to specified criteria consistently, reliably and with insight. Evaluative expertise implies deep subject matter understanding and knowledge about the outcomes being assessed at a theoretical and practical level, but does not necessarily include practical ability in the outcome.
  • Evidence: - tangible proof produced by or about individuals, that can be perceived with the senses, bearing a direct relationship to defined outcomes and criteria, based on which judgements are made concerning the competence of individuals. Evidence includes plans, products, reports, answers to questions, testimonials, certificates, descriptions of observed performances, peer review reports.
  • Evidence facilitator: - see assessment facilitator
  • Moderation: - a process that supports and evaluates the assessment environment, process and instruments with a view to confirming the reliability and authenticity of assessment results and improving the quality of assessments and assessors.
  • Performance: - includes demonstration of skills, knowledge, understanding and attitudes, and the ability to transfer these to new situations.
  • Portfolio of evidence: - a carefully organised and complete collection of evidence compiled by candidates/learners to prove competence in relation to defined outcomes.
  • RPL - Recognition of Prior Learning means the comparison of the previous learning and experience of a learner against specified learning outcomes required for:
    - The award of credits for a specified unit standard or qualification,
    - Access to further learning,
    - Recognition in terms of meeting minimum requirements for a specific job,
    - Placement at a particular level in an organisation or institution, or
    - Advanced standing or status.

    This means that regardless of where, when or how a person obtained the required skills and knowledge, it could be recognised for credits. In this sense, RPL is an important principle of the NQF. RPL involves an assessment process of preparing for RPL, engaging with RPL candidates, gathering evidence, evaluating and judging evidence in relation to defined criteria, giving feedback and reporting results. Given that the all candidates are assessed against the same criteria, credits awarded through RPL are therefore just as valid as credits awarded through any other assessment process.
  • Outcomes-based assessment: - a planned process for gathering and judging evidence of competence, in relation to pre-determined criteria within an outcomes-based paradigm, for various purposes including further development and recognition of learning achievements.
  • Verifier: - those who operate at systems level to monitor assessment and moderation practices, trends and results.


    Principles of assessment

    Methods of Assessment
  • Appropriate: The method of assessment is suited to the outcome being assessed i.e. is capable of gathering evidence in relation to the intended outcome, and not something else.
  • Fair: The method of assessment does not present any barriers to achievements, which are not related to the achievement of the outcome at hand.
  • Manageable: The methods used make for easily arranged, cost-effective assessments that do not unduly interfere with learning.
  • Integrated into work or learning: Evidence collection is integrated into the work or learning process where this is appropriate and feasible. (Often referred to as naturally occurring evidence).

    Evidence
  • Valid: The evidence focuses on the requirements laid down in the relevant standard and matches the evidence requirements of the outcome/s at hand under conditions that mirror the conditions of actual performance as closely as possible
  • Current: The evidence is sufficient proof that the candidate is able to perform the assessment outcomes at the time the assessor declares the candidate competent.
  • Authentic: The assessor is satisfied that the evidence is attributable to the person being assessed.
  • Sufficient: The evidence collected establishes that all criteria have been met and that performance to the required standard can be repeated consistently in the future i.e. the performance to standard is not a "once-off".

    Overall Assessment Process
  • Systematic: The overall process ensures assessment is fair, effective, repeatable and manageable.
  • Open: The process is transparent i.e. assessment candidates understand the assessment process and the criteria that apply and can contribute to the planning and accumulation of evidence.
  • Reliable/Consistent: The same assessor would make the same judgement again in similar circumstances and judgements match judgements made on similar evidence. 
    		•

    QUALIFICATIONS UTILISING THIS UNIT STANDARD: 
      ID QUALIFICATION TITLE PRE-2009 NQF LEVEL NQF LEVEL STATUS END DATE PRIMARY OR DELEGATED QA FUNCTIONARY
    Core  49277   National Diploma: Braille Practice  Level 5  NQF Level 05  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  ETDP SETA 
    Elective  50334   National Certificate: Occupationally Directed Education Training and Development Practices  Level 5  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L5  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  ETDP SETA 
    Elective  50333   National Diploma: Occupationally Directed Education, Training and Development Practices  Level 5  NQF Level 05  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  ETDP SETA 
    Elective  50330   Bachelor: Occupationally Directed Education Training and Development Practices  Level 6  NQF Level 07  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  As per Learning Programmes recorded against this Qual 
    Elective  50331   National Certificate: Occupationally Directed Education, Training and Development Practices  Level 6  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L6  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  ETDP SETA 
    Elective  61729   National Diploma: Policing  Level 6  NQF Level 06  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  SAS SETA 
    Elective  20485   National First Degree: ABET Practice  Level 6  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L6  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2018-12-31  ETDP 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. Academy of Personal Mastery 
    2. Akhule Development Institute cc 
    3. ASORIP NPC 
    4. Azanian Community Development Pty Ltd 
    5. Boston City Campus (Pty) Ltd formerly Boston City Campus and Business College (Pty) Ltd 
    6. Corporate Safety Training Academy PTY Ltd 
    7. Curoplex PTY LTD 
    8. Dynamic Safety Solutions 
    9. Empirical Training Agency (PTY) Ltd 
    10. Enskills Training and Consulting 
    11. Giver of Givers Foundation Organisation 
    12. HLOSI SECURITY SOLUTIONS 
    13. KDS Centre for Skills Development and Training Pty Ltd 
    14. Lehlabile Emergency Institute 
    15. LICENCE WISE TRAINING SPECIALISTS 
    16. Lionsden Africa Business Solutions Pty Ltd 
    17. Mabidi Funzani Trading And Projects Pty Ltd 
    18. MASHUSHE ETDP TRADING AND PROJECTS 
    19. Mentor Me Corporate Foundation 
    20. Metro Minds 
    21. PHALANE SAFETY CONSULTANT AND TRAINING PROVIDERS PTY LTD 
    22. Seshego Risk Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd 
    23. TDM Management Consulting Pty Ltd 
    24. The Finishing College (Pty) Lt 
    25. Totally Tailored Solutions Pty Ltd 
    26. Training Consultant and SD College 
    27. Tshepo Hope Consulting 
    28. UMO LEARNING SUPPORT SYSTEM 
    29. Vicresco (Pty) Ltd 
    30. VUWA PROJECTS 
    31. Workers Knowledge Centre Pty Ltd 
    32. XO EDUCATION (Pty) Ltd 


    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.