First Independent Review Mission for Backward Regions Grant Fund State Report
Overall Views and Summary of Overall Findings
Download 0.5 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- 2. Development Grants
1.2 Overall Views and Summary of Overall FindingsThe overall impression from the field-visit to Madhya Pradesh is that the BRGF is largely on track to achieve several of the objectives. It is contributing to the improvement of the local planning processes though the integrated planning has yet to be made effective, (makes the planning at the lower PRI tiers meaningful as it is linked to resources), to the governance performance and functioning of the entire system of PRI, including empowerment of the PRIs and communities. Overall the system is supporting all four objectives, but the expected outcome - to mitigate regional imbalances and contribute (significantly) to reduce poverty, will require i) increased amounts of funds3, ii) better convergence and coordination with other funding sources and iii) improved targeting of the flow of funds towards the backward areas. Madhya Pradesh effort to open over 13,500 bank accounts in various banks and transfer of funds under the rapid telegraphic transfer of funds (RTTF) with the lead bank Central Bank of India directly to Zila Panchayats, Janpad Panchayats, Gram Panchayats and District Urban Development Authority at district level is commendable. There are several operational issues identified, which require attention and quick improvement. Amongst these, (i) the timing of the planning process, (ii) the complex system of approval, (iii) selection of schemes from amongst a set of pre-identified activities of the line departments: AWC (Women and Child Welfare), additional classrooms, library etc (Education), and support to central scheme like, Apna Ghar under Indira Awas Yojna, (iv) the use of the funds for improved staffing capacity, (v) the need to move towards more demand driven CB support - the existing CB support has been mainly supply driven with a set of short duration training programs designed to deliver a much larger course content beyond the absorption capacity of the not so well educated elected representatives and functionaries at the PRI. The state PRI general elections at all tier are due later this year (2009) which will mean that most of the elected representative will not be returning to their offices. There is thus a need to expand the existing CB support a fresh to the newly elected representatives, both in terms of coverage and content, and to strengthen the PRIs’ planning capacity and HR management with field-support and closer interactions between the PRIs and support initiatives. Below is a brief overview of some of the general views from the various tiers of PRI, prior to the more detailed review and assessment of the main components in the support. State Level The officials at the state and at the PRI level were appreciative of the BRGF program as untied funding is handy in filling the resource gaps at the village level though at the same time felt that the funds available are too less for any meaning full decentralized planning and visibility at the village level. District Level At the district level there was a similar strong appreciation to the BRGF modality. The views were clearly that that the scheme supports improvements in the level of small scale infrastructure, supported capacity building of political representative and officials at all tiers of PRI and bottom-up planning and good governance. Some of the operational modalities can be improved, but the BRGF was generally highly appreciated thogh it is perceived that the grammar of the programme had become slightly centralized, see below. Janpad (intermediate Panchayat) Gram Panchayat levels BRGF has taken gradually root and is appreciated as an important source to fast-track the achievement which are visible – AWC, village roads, Panchayat Ghar, community centre, benefiting the most. The support to one Apna Ghar to one eligible BPL family in all 13,449 Gram Panchayat each year, and a fixed yearly support in the name of telephone connectivity at each level of PRI has tied 12-15 percent of the annual funds available under BRGF. The untied grant has therefore restricted the local planning and participation. The training under the capacity building program, though acknowledged, has failed to make visible impact on the awareness level of the elected representatives met during the field visit – some even did not remember that it happened. There are signs of valuable investments in all Janpad and GPs visited with investments benefiting a large group of citizens within relevant areas of health education, welfare, housing, roads etc. However, the delays in the planning process, delays in allocation of funds and insufficient awareness about the operations, such as the allowed eligible investments have been amongst the major challenges. Urban Local Bodies Though, BRGF is welcomed by the municipal representatives, yet introduction of the BRGF at the municipal level needs review. Urban local bodies in the backward districts are under the state Urban Administration and Development Department (UADD) and governed by two separate acts – Municipality Act governing 87 Nagar Palika Parishad (Municipalities) and 237 Nagar Panchayats (Town Panchayat) and the Municipal Corporation Act governing 14 Nagar Palik Nigams (Corporations). At the district level, for the BRGF schemes, they are administered by the District Urban Development Agency (DUDA). There have been delays and confusion on the relationship between the districts, including the District Planning Committee (DPC) and the municipalities and authority and decision-making. The planning is not participatory; the schemes recommended by the local body’s council are changed at the DUDA and DPC level. 2. Development Grants2.1 Size of Development FundingThe table below shows the BRGF entitlements, releases and actual utilized funds. It should be noted that the average annual per capita grant funds is Rs. 162 only. The annual per capita grant fund in the two districts visited is Rs. 128 in Balaghat District and Rs. 159 in Seoni District. Table 2: State – Madhya Pradesh (Rs, Crores4)
Source: State presentation, 1 July 20095 As per MOPR the entitlements, releases and actual utilized funds by the State is shown in Table 2A which do not confirm with the figures provided by the State in Table 2. The State should reconcile the differences with the MOPR. Table 2A: State – Madhya Pradesh (Rs, Crores)
Source: MOPR e mail 3 September 2009. Table 3: Balaghat District (Rs Crores)
Source: Balaghat District. As per MOPR the entitlements, releases and actual utilized funds by Balaghat District is shown in 3A which do not confirm with the figures provided by the District in Table 3. The State/District should reconcile these with the MOPR. Table 3A: Balaghat District (Rs Crores)
Table 4: Seoni District (Rs Crores)
Source: Seoni District. Directory: rti rti -> Last updated on 26 2014 Manual-1 Particulars of organization, functions and duties [Section 4(1)(b)(i)] rti -> Calendar of activities; Academic; Co-scholastic and Games & Sports calender of activities for session 2015-16 rti -> Rti’s Integration Designer® apex programming Software is Now Available rti -> Template for the information handbook under right to information act rti -> Intercom Telephone Directory of iasri room office /epabx resi Download 0.5 Mb. Share with your friends:
|