Child support grant has saved millions of children, but there is still a way to go – GroundUp

Report on Child Support Grant Efficacy and Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

Progress and Setbacks in Achieving SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger)

• The introduction of the Child Support Grant in 1998 contributed to a significant reduction in children living below the food poverty line, decreasing from 53% in 2003 to 33% in 2019. This represents progress towards SDG 1.
• Recent economic shocks, notably the COVID-19 pandemic, have reversed these gains, pushing an additional 1.2 million children into food poverty.
• As of 2024, 7.8 million children remain below the food poverty line, indicating a persistent challenge in achieving SDG 1 and SDG 2 targets.

Financial Inadequacy of the Grant in Addressing SDG 2 Targets

1. The current monthly grant value is R560.
2. This amount is significantly below the established food poverty line of R796.
3. Independent calculations estimate the actual cost to meet a child’s nutritional needs is between R826 and R1,085.
4. The grant, in its current form, is insufficient to protect a child from food poverty and malnutrition, undermining the objective of SDG 2 (Zero Hunger).

Implementation Gaps and Impact on SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities)

• Significant implementation gaps hinder the grant’s effectiveness. In 2020, approximately 48% of eligible infants did not receive the grant, highlighting a failure in social protection systems and contributing to inequality (SDG 10).
• The consequences of inadequate nutrition and grant access directly impact child health outcomes, which is a key focus of SDG 3.
• More than a quarter of children in South Africa suffer from stunting due to malnutrition.
• In 2023, an estimated 1,450 children under the age of five died from acute malnutrition, a severe failure in ensuring child well-being as mandated by SDG 3.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 1: No Poverty
   • The article directly addresses poverty by discussing the “food poverty line” and the number of children living below it. It highlights the role of the child support grant, a social protection measure aimed at alleviating poverty. The text states, “Since the child support grant was introduced in 1998, the number of children living below the food poverty line has decreased,” directly linking the grant to poverty reduction efforts.
2. SDG 2: Zero Hunger
   • This goal is central to the article, which focuses on child hunger and malnutrition. It uses terms like “food poverty,” “malnutrition,” and “stunted.” The article explicitly mentions that “More than a quarter of children in South Africa are stunted due to malnutrition” and that thousands of children died from “acute malnutrition,” connecting directly to the goal of ending hunger and all forms of malnutrition.
3. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
   • The article connects malnutrition to severe health outcomes, including child mortality. The statement, “About 1,450 children under the age of five died of acute malnutrition in 2023,” directly links the issue of food insecurity to child health and survival, which is a core component of SDG 3.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 1.2: By 2030, reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definitions.
   • The article tracks the proportion of children living below the “food poverty line,” a national definition of poverty. It notes a decrease from 53% in 2003 to 33% in 2019, but also a recent increase, showing a direct engagement with this target.
2. Target 1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all, including floors, and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable.
   • The child support grant is a key example of a “nationally appropriate social protection system.” The article discusses its impact, its value (R560), and its coverage, noting that “About 48% of eligible infants did not receive the grant in 2020,” which relates directly to achieving substantial coverage.
3. Target 2.1: By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations, including infants, to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round.
   • The article highlights that 7.8 million children live below the food poverty line, indicating a lack of access to sufficient food. It also questions the sufficiency of the grant by comparing its value (R560) to the food poverty line (R796) and the estimated cost of a child’s nutritional needs (R826-R1,085).
4. Target 2.2: By 2030, end all forms of malnutrition, including achieving, by 2025, the internationally agreed targets on stunting and wasting in children under 5 years of age, and address the nutritional needs of adolescent girls, pregnant and lactating women and older persons.
   • The article explicitly states that “More than a quarter of children in South Africa are stunted due to malnutrition,” directly addressing the issue of stunting in children under 5, a key focus of this target.
5. Target 3.2: By 2030, end preventable deaths of newborns and children under 5 years of age, with all countries aiming to reduce neonatal mortality to at least as low as 12 per 1,000 live births and under-5 mortality to at least as low as 25 per 1,000 live births.
   • The article’s mention that “1,450 children under the age of five died of acute malnutrition in 2023” points to preventable deaths among children under 5. Malnutrition is a leading cause of preventable child mortality, making this statistic highly relevant to Target 3.2.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Proportion of children living below the national poverty line (Indicator 1.2.1).
   • The article provides specific data points for this indicator: “the number of children living below the food poverty line has decreased, from 53% of all children in 2003 to 33% in 2019.” It also notes that “7.8-million children live below the food poverty line” as of 2024.
2. Proportion of population covered by social protection floors/systems (Indicator 1.3.1).
   • The article implies this indicator by discussing the reach of the child support grant. The statement that “About 48% of eligible infants did not receive the grant in 2020” is a direct measure of the coverage gap in this specific social protection program.
3. Prevalence of stunting among children under 5 years of age (Indicator 2.2.1).
   • The article directly provides data for this indicator by stating, “More than a quarter of children in South Africa are stunted due to malnutrition.”
4. Under-5 mortality rate (Indicator 3.2.1).
   • While not providing a rate, the article gives a raw number that contributes to this indicator: “About 1,450 children under the age of five died of acute malnutrition in 2023.” This figure is a direct measure of mortality within this age group due to a preventable cause.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: groundup.org.za