Sector Intelligence ·
The State of ECD Evidence
in South Africa, 2026
A structured intelligence document on the early childhood development evidence landscape in South Africa. Written for funders, programme officers, and policy practitioners. Grounded in the real funding and policy context.
Executive Summary
Three things every funder needs to know.
First:South Africa's ECD sector has strong monitoring capability and weak economic translation. The estimated average evidence maturity score across the sector is 52 out of 100. Organisations can demonstrate outputs and some outcomes, but very few can produce the fiscal evidence that Treasury and development finance institutions require before committing co-investment at scale.
Second: Three policy windows open in 2026 and 2027 that will determine which ECD organisations access the next tier of government and institutional funding. Organisations without fiscal evidence cases will not be competitive in these windows. The preparation time is now.
Third: The evidence gap is not a data problem. The data exists in most organisations. It is a translation problem. The SROI, the fiscal multiplier, the cost-per-outcome benchmark: these are calculable from existing programme data in most cases. The gap is the methodology to assemble them.
The Funding Context
A sector at a structural inflection point.
Early childhood development funding in South Africa is undergoing its most significant structural shift in a decade. The Bana Pele programme (the government's R10 billion commitment to ECD) represents the largest public investment in the sector since the National Integrated ECD Policy of 2015. It also represents the most demanding evidence environment the sector has faced.
The 2022 function shift of ECD from the Department of Social Development to the Department of Basic Education changed the accountability framework for the sector. DBE operates with a curriculum and outcomes orientation. It requires evidence in a different register than DSD: fiscal efficiency, cost-per-learner benchmarks, and measurable school readiness outcomes that connect to the broader Basic Education performance framework.
National Treasury's increasing requirement for fiscal evidence in social sector budget submissions is not a new trend, but its application to ECD is accelerating. The Medium Term Expenditure Framework process now expects organisations seeking government co-investment to demonstrate economic return, not just programme reach. Organisations that cannot produce a fiscal case are not being rejected on merit. They are being passed over because the evidence is not in the right language.
Philanthropic funders are responding to the same pressure. The Mastercard Foundation, ELMA Philanthropies, and DGMT have all signalled, through their grant reporting requirements and strategic frameworks, that the next phase of ECD investment will prioritise organisations that can demonstrate economic contribution alongside programme quality. Early childhood development funding in South Africa is moving toward a dual accountability standard: programme evidence and fiscal evidence.
The Evidence Gap
What exists. What does not.
South Africa's ECD sector has invested significantly in monitoring and evaluation over the past decade. Most established organisations have outcome measurement systems, annual reports with reach data, and some form of external evaluation. This is the evidence base that exists.
What does not exist, at scale, is economic evidence. An estimated 80% of ECD organisations in South Africa (estimate based on sector diagnostic data) have never calculated an SROI. Fewer than 10% have produced a fiscal multiplier analysis. Policy influence tracking, the systematic documentation of how programme evidence has shaped budget decisions or policy positions, is almost entirely absent from the sector's evidence architecture.
The consequence is a structural mismatch. Organisations arrive at Treasury conversations with programme evidence. Treasury asks for fiscal evidence. The conversation stalls. The funding does not move. The impact continues, unmeasured in the language that matters.
Sector Benchmarks
52 out of 100. Solid monitoring. Weak translation.
Auxeira's Evidence Health Check diagnostic assesses evidence maturity across eight dimensions: organisation type, primary audience, years of data, reporting frequency, economic analysis capability, evidence challenges, translation demand, and budget scale. Across the ECD sector, the estimated average score is 52 out of 100.
A score of 52 indicates solid monitoring capability: organisations know what they are doing and can demonstrate it to programme funders. It indicates weak economic translation. Organisations cannot yet produce the fiscal evidence that moves Treasury, development finance institutions, or co-investment conversations at scale.
The gap between 52 and 75 (the threshold for what Auxeira classifies as evidence-ready for institutional funding conversations) is not a data gap. It is a methodology gap. The data to close it exists in most organisations. The framework to assemble it does not.
Policy Windows
Three windows that matter in and .
October 2026 MTEF Submission Cycle
The Medium Term Expenditure Framework submission cycle is the primary mechanism through which social sector organisations influence government budget allocations. Submissions that include fiscal evidence, including cost-per-outcome analysis, SROI, and economic multiplier modelling, are materially more competitive than those that present programme reach alone.
Without fiscal evidence: Organisations without a fiscal evidence case will not be able to make a credible economic argument for budget allocation. The window closes in October 2026. Preparation requires a minimum of 8 to 12 weeks of evidence work.
DBE Annual Performance Plan Process
The Department of Basic Education's Annual Performance Plan process sets the evidence requirements for ECD organisations seeking recognition and co-funding within the Basic Education framework. Since the 2022 function shift, DBE has applied a curriculum and outcomes lens that requires evidence in a different register than DSD previously required.
Without fiscal evidence: Organisations that cannot demonstrate school readiness outcomes, cost-per-learner benchmarks, and fiscal efficiency within the DBE framework will find the co-funding conversation increasingly difficult to advance.
Bana Pele Implementation Review
The Bana Pele programme's implementation review will assess which ECD organisations and models are performing at the level required for continued and expanded government investment. The review will apply fiscal evidence standards. Organisations that have built economic evidence cases will be positioned to make the case for scale.
Without fiscal evidence: Organisations without economic evidence will be assessed on programme data alone. In a competitive allocation environment, fiscal evidence is the differentiating factor.
Evidence Leadership
What a Treasury-ready evidence architecture includes.
Evidence leadership in the ECD sector is not about having more data. It is about having the right evidence in the right format for the right audience. A Treasury-ready evidence architecture has four components.
Auxeira in the Sector
Closing the gap between evaluation evidence and economic evidence.
Auxeira is a Johannesburg-based evidence intelligence consultancy that specialises in translating programme evidence into economic evidence for the African social sector. The SmartStart 10-year impact report (49 interviews, 207-quote Evidence Index, 3.3x SROI established in six weeks) is the clearest demonstration of what this looks like in practice. SmartStart's SROI had existed in the data for a decade. Auxeira found it. The report became the evidence foundation for the 2026 Skoll Award for Social Innovation. Auxeira works with ECD organisations, education foundations, and social franchise models that have built something real and need the economic evidence to match.
Where does your organisation sit?
The Evidence Health Check takes three minutes and gives you a score, a gap analysis, and a clear picture of where your evidence stands relative to the sector.