Report Works on Individual Land in MGNREGS

Prepared and Submitted to National Employment Guarantee Council Through Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India

Prepared by the Committee on Works on Individual Lands 30th JUNE, 2010

Contact Address: K S Gopal, Chairman, NEGC Committee on Works on Individual Lands in MGNREGS 3-4-142/6, Barkatpura, Hyderabad 500027. Phone: 040-27564959/3017 E-Mail: cechyd@eth.net cecgopal@yahoo.com

Contents
Page No. I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. Mandate Committee Membership Methodology Acknowledgements Field Observations Approach Moving Forward Guiding Principles Committee Recommendations Explanatory Notes on Certain Recommendations 5 6 10 10 12 13 22 28 39 44 3 4 4

Annexure I Annexure II Annexure III

I Mandate
The terms of reference (TOR) of this committee as given are: 1. Examine the draft guidelines prepared on this and give suggestions. 2. Examine existing practice in major states. 3. Define public work/community asset. 4. Identify measures that aim to optimize the potential of NREGA for enhancing agricultural productivity and reducing economic vulnerability of the eligible groups. 5. Instituting broad norms for selection processes and per capita financial assistance. Later and in addition, the committee was asked to examine a) Why capital formation in Indian agriculture is declining. b) Coverage, quality and support given to individual works be analyzed in detail at the Gram Panchayat and at individual and social group specific level, as many a work so far done are not complete nor fructuous. c) The impact of MGNREGS on agricultural productivity and sustainability need be ascertained and ensured. d) Address the impact of MGNREGS on the farmers under distress and on those of the tribes in the Left Wing Extremist affected areas. e) Feedback on the contribution of MGNREGS as in the farmer suicide districts and on the debt and credit impacts on the indebted farmers. Based on TOR and upon review of current works, its orientation and thrust, the committee unanimously opined to consider its task as based in a context of complementary and symbiotic nature of landscapes, of productive natural resource base, multiple income sources of the poor and also as no other committee is looking it, to therefore adopt a wider view on works in MGNREGS that can improve productivity. Although land size is the determinant to qualify for being a beneficiary in MGNREGS land development schemes, we must see them and define them as farmers. Here we have adopted the definition as given by the Farmers Commission as being most apt and includes landless agricultural laborers, share cropper, tenants small, marginal and sub marginal cultivators, fishers, livestock and poultry raisers, pastoralists, small plantation farmers as well as rural/tribal families engaged in farm related occupation such as collection of non timber forest products. Upon MORD advice the committee furthered its task with focus on increasing productivity in the works taken up on individual lands and in conjunction with works permissible in MGNREGS. Following field visits, consultations with villagers and discussions with experts, we also outline the possible new works that increase productivity and serve the intent of the Act on works. Our recommendations are based on the issues and opportunities from the aspects of land, natural resources and labor productivity of self employment or demand for labor services.

II Committee Membership
The committee has thirteen persons - one scientist each from agriculture and fishery, a representative of the Ministry of Agriculture, six nominees of voluntary organizations, one Member of Lok Sabha and a management expert. In addition it had two state government nominees whose names never arrived. The process was facilitated by NIRD. The members participated in field visits and state consultations and the committee received got cooperation and inputs from a large fraternity of experts, in farmers gathering and discussion with officials. While Mr. K. S. Gopal, Member of the national Employment Guarantee Council is the Chairperson the members of the committee are: 1. Dr Balasubramanyam 2. Dr G.R. Desai 3. Mr. Dibyendu Chaudhury 4. Dr Girish Sohani 5. Dr Hemnath Rao 6. Mr. Malla Reddy 7. Ms Neelima Khetan 8. Mr. Sashi Kumar 9. Mr. Siricilla Rajaiah 10. Dr J. Venkateswarlu Central Institute of Fisheries Technology, Cochin MANAGE (Min of Agriculture Representative), Hyderabad PRADAN, Kolkata Bharatiya Agro Industries Foundation, Pune Administrative Staff College of India, Hyderabad Accion Fraterna, Anantapur Seva Mandir, Udaipur Yugantar, Hyderabad Member of the Lok Sabha, Warangal Former Director, CZARI, Jodhpur

The process and logistics was anchored at the National Institute of Rural Development by Dr Suresh Babu under the leadership of Dr Hanumantha Rao, Head of CWEPA at NIRD.

III Methodology
The committee drew up its work plan and agreed to thematically and geographically address the task in the following manner. Thematically 1. Agriculture irrigated, rain fed, dry land, protective and critical irrigation based farming. 2. Livestock Ruminants (small and big), birds and others like rabbit, pigs etc with focus on measures to tackle feed and fodder as that is the biggest cost. 3. Horticulture Fruits, vegetables and creeper based gourds (long shelf life) and greens (short shelf life). 4. Fisheries Inland (both seasonal and perennial) including fresh and saltwater regimes. 5. Homestead Trees, creepers, vegetables, birds etc.

Geographical regions were clubbed as under:

1. North East to represent the seven sister states, Sikkim, Chhattisgarh, Orissa and Jharkhand (all hilly terrains and market underdevelopment). 2. North West to mean Rajasthan, Gujarat, Haryana and MP. 3. Indo-Gangetic plains to mean Bihar, UP, Punjab and West Bengal. 4. Deccan to mean AP, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Chhattisgarh. 5. North to mean J&K, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand. The committee held consultations and field visits in Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Orissa, Rajasthan and Maharashtra wherein some of the members participated. Through these consultations we met over two hundred NGOs working on land development, a dozen scientists and five hundred poor farmers. In the consultations in Bhubaneswar and Udaipur, the State Ministers for Rural Development participated actively. The consultations were organized and hosted by some of the committee members and the members and some experts provided written inputs.

IV Acknowledgements
The Committee thanks all those who helped us in successfully undertaking this task especially the Central Employment Guarantee Council and the MORD for entrusting us with this task. To the committee members this is also seen as a unique opportunity to further what has been dear to many of us and hence the acceptance of our report would mean immense satisfaction in making real what has been the pursuit for years by many of us. We acknowledge the assistance, inputs, logistic support for field visits that we received from state governments and from rural development officials of Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra, Orissa, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal. We like to specifically mention and thank non-government organizations such as Accion Fraterna in Anantapur, AP, BAIF of Pune, Maharashtra, PRADHAN of West Bengal and Seva Mandir of Udaipur, Rajasthan. They helped organize consultations with stakeholders and we would like to place on record our appreciation to the ministers of rural development in the states of Orissa and Rajasthan for actively participating in the consultations along with officials of the state government. We would also like to place our appreciation for the inputs received from experts and in deepening our understanding of the issues involved. Our gratitude is also to the staff of NIRD for giving cooperation always with a smile. As, the chair, I K S Gopal, Member of the Central Employment Guarantee Council would like to place my grateful thanks to the members of the Committee for their hard work and full commitment to successfully undertaking this task. I do hope that I have been able to include all the ideas of the committee members and in case there are any mistakes, I am solely responsible.

V Field Observations
The works in MGNREGS continues legacy of thinking on the lines of old employment schemes and food for work schemes. Works are ad hoc with limited types of physical infrastructure activities. Beneficiary involvement is missing as works on individual lands are decided elsewhere and dumped on gullible poor. Works are isolated as officials pursue their whims or act as directed. Works detailing is based on experience of rural development officials or their intuition, rather than technical knowledge. Single intervention or investment is deemed to qualify an asset and isolated infrastructure creation has not impacted increased productivity. Success stories are yet to demonstrate a framework to optimize productivity. Lack of interagency coordination and transparency on fund use on works is leading to anxiety of duplication of investments, as similar work type schemes are found in Integrated Watershed Department project (IWDP), Backward Region Grant Fund (BRGF) and National Horticulture Mission or where new implementing agencies are emerging in then states. Approach to land development in MGNREGS assumes that a large latent resource is waiting to be tapped with one or two steps for being productive. This narrow approach offers little to lands with poor endowments and thus has little to offer to SC/ST farmers, although statistics will show a large of coverage of them. And there is no involvement of agriculture department or research institution in any manner in the works planned or taken up. The Draft Guidelines note of the MORD given to the committee titled Implementation of Works on Individual Land states the primary objective of the Act is augmenting wage employment. Its auxiliary objective is strengthening natural resource management. Hence the orientation to implementation and monitoring machinery has little or no attention to works, save what serves the primary objective. There is no systematic understanding or review of why certain works are taken up in the basket of options or its value and relevance written down as outcomes dont figure in the proposals. The perception of assets are limited to physical, measurable and verifiable and centered on labor component. This precludes investments that are consumed in the process of building an asset. Water conservation is not linked to increasing soil moisture retention capability or its per capita use in production. Thus water productivity is not an issue. There is a need to redesign and improve the works and its management along with its reporting and monitoring system. One observes good results in few districts of innovative thinking and integration with other schemes. But they remain isolated initiatives of individual officials and not absorbed into the thinking process or deliverance system. The challenge is how to avoid large scale investment failures. One observes three types of investments infrastructure such as roads and buildings used by the community, development of common or government lands predominantly used by the poor and thirdly improvement of SC/ST/MF individual lands. But most investments are increasingly channeled to infrastructure. For the second and third type, although much sought by the

community, it has neither articulation nor acceptance as where villagers list their proposals and are included in the shelf of works, what is finally sanctioned and taken up are departmental decisions Nor are the works suggested by people taken up later they just ornate in the shelf. While in several states no works on individuals land is being taken up, even among those few doing so, we find the investment on individual land development in MGNREGS on the decline as a percentage of the increasing total financial resources. Unless this distortion is checked, MGNREGS would soon have little to offer to the task given to our committee. This trend must be reversed as it is well recognized that on an average, better resource utilization is observed in works taken up on individual lands and on common resources, even though it is limited and ad hoc. This falling use of MGNREGS on individual lands, in a country with massive rural poverty, is worrisome and must change. A key reason why individual land development is not preferred by officials is because such works are scattered and difficult to supervise whereas large works are easy to roll out. Interventions must be specific and based on land types, soil conditions and monsoon behavior. Lands belonging to the poor are poor in quality and enhancing it calls for substantial well planned measures and spiraling activities that are spread over time. Works taken on individual lands must address farmer needs and they must see value in it. If these are not addressed, plant mortality will be high or growth stunted, growth leading to low yield. Without addressing the underlying productivity bottlenecks extension of mainstream treatment and plant growth practices is leading to high mortality and low returns. MGNREGS must shift from physical land development to land husbandry. Conserved soil and moisture would be productive only with microbial life and capacity to retain moisture for some time period. The problem of soils is alarming and serious even in irrigated areas but for different reasons. Without addressing them, physical water structures will not be much useful for the plant growth and to increase crop productivity. MGNREGS, being a public investment and intended to improve land productivity of poor farmers, must focus on production bottlenecks with investments to increase agricultural productivity that cannot be afforded by them but crucial for increasing incomes. This is important as no government schemes or lending of commercial banks is available for soil work as it takes much time to bring in the returns. People do not know or are not told of the options available to them in the list of permissible activities in MGNREGS individual land development schemes. They receive what is given or thrust on them. The Act enshrines that works must be decided by Gram Sabha but its practice is observed in its breach. Even where the Gram Sabha meets and proposes some works, it is helpless as the works taken up is decided by departments. Unless the gram sabha has a say in works and its implementation, investments will have little scope of being an asset. Information, exposure and knowledge on works for individual land beneficiaries are lacking. Technicalities in land husbandry and agriculture are complex and embedded in natural resources and its ecological principles and cycles. This is not commonplace knowledge but embedded through an interactive understanding of the scientific and natural processes at work

in plant growth. But works in MGNREGS on individual lands are treated as similar to laying roads or constructing building or doing soil and moisture works or developing and renovating water bodies. Such cavalier attitude to land development must change and agriculture bodies such as district KVK and agriculture extension officers must play an active role in planning the activities to be taken up for land development and after examining each site. The key in works on individual lands is to understand and plan on the basis of its specificities along with incorporating farmers ideas. Irrigated horticulture is gaining attention in individual land development activities. But only few with assured water supply can take it up. Dry land horticulture is ignored even though they are best suited considering the soil type and location of lands owned by the poor people. Also one should not be overwhelmed with providing irrigated horticulture on the entire land as it is important to for the poor to have some fodder and food crops as often are higher in the realized income. This is because among the factors of production costs, it places a value on physical labor, the only strength and competitive capability of the poor people owning such small patches of land. MGNREGS officials training must extend to literature and knowledge on the technical aspects of land development as otherwise they would continue to serve in the old ways. The Prime Minister has repeatedly stressed on outcomes and MGNREGS must deliver on them providing employment on demand along with judicious use of this money and manpower to develop our productive natural resource base. For Indian agriculture to grow, it is vital that investments on land development be grounded in knowledge and the changing nature of the demands on our soil and water resources. Climate change adaptation and mitigation steps need to be incorporated. Although expert advice on what is best suited to their land is necessary, it is important that the actual land development plan is prepared by farmers with their assistance. This can be done by training farmers and exposure to diverse successful farming methods and then assisting them to develop, cost and roll out an action plan along with defining their responsibilities and entitlements. This will make them seek what is appropriate to them from the available shelf of works for land development as the financial cap will compel making best choices from the menu. An aspect that determines what must be grown on the land be it the type of plantations or crops is the backward and the forward linkages. For instance if a particular species is to be taken up, its backward linkages of quality supplies of seeds, seedlings and other inputs must be locally available while forward linkages calls for accessing markets especially when they are thin and with poor transport infrastructure, as found in backward areas. For instance ber was cultivated extensively in rain fed farm lands in Maharashtra with protective summer time water provisioning. In the beginning it failed as the seedlings were of poor quality. Later when this was improved through local nurseries, the yield was good but fetched little income to farmers as little could be supplied to the market. It was only when the plastic net was developed that farmers could pack them and sold to distant needy markets earning good incomes. Similarly where the infrastructure to reach wider markets are low then instead of growing vegetables with short shelf life and high perishable types, the effort must be on those with longer shelf life

such as gourds. By intimately linking MGNREGS productivity investment plans with platforms that provide and develop the necessary forward and backward linkages are crucial. Shrinking land availability is leading to intense competition in its use. The worst affected are livestock. Their feed areas, be it stall fed or grazing, is shrinking and degrading. In earlier days a part of the farm land lent itself for grazing or feed production but no longer so. Crops grown are not driven by considerations of fodder, although some crop residues serve as animal feed. Weeds that served as fodder are no longer available as deep plough has led to failure of seed germination of them. Forest land usufruct management is by select users as officials see grazing as an obstacle. Community lands, another grazing source, is now patta land or under tree plantation or given away to community purposes like graveyards etc. There are rising conflicts over CPRs and village pastures and the commons. These constraints call for community participation in its management and development. So livestock traverse longer distance and finding less quantity and quality feed, leading to poor productivity of milk and meat. Steps to increase the productivity of livestock must gain attention in MGNREGS. One also needs steps to reduce competitive pressure on scarce resource especially living soil must be addressed through alternatives. For instance, as live soil is vital for productivity, apart from soil erosion, the biggest threat is coming from its use in brick kilns. It may be worthwhile exploring the use of dead rather than live soil in its manufacture. This will make available the live soil for application on lands apart from its conservation through building bunds. Undertaking such tasks must also be seen as developing convergence in natural resource use. In certain areas works within the current permissible works framework is difficult especially states like Bihar. In such places we find water inundated areas, intensive land use and little common property resources. The ideas on permissible works are dominated by the needs of drought prone areas, as most hitherto employment schemes were in response to monsoon failure. The needs of such areas must merit reconsidering permissible works to serve them.

VI Approach:
1) Our overall approach is to examine the status/problem/issue being addressed, followed by reasons for it and upon examining them to state our recommendations as measures or as strategy. Current works as discussed earlier are narrow and limited with its implementation being straight jacketed. We studied opportunities to harness low lying fruits and actions that trigger farmer social capital along with generating interest of potential investors, be it a government schemes or an institutional credit.

2) We examined validated and successful current non-MGNREGS practices with potential for adoption. Also we looked at out of the box ideas and experiments that are grounded in science and experience and examined its value for land development activities in MGNREGS. As farmers showed little or no enthusiasm for the current works being taken up save irrigation, we see the need for individual famer to vet each land development proposal

and activity and proper use of scarce resources to increase farm productivity. Our recommendations emerged after examining the following for each activity: a) Is this step or measure of interest to the farmer? b) Is this priority investment to the farmer especially women in the household? c) Does it stabilize and enhance productivity? d) List sequencing of measures, timeframe and check its usefulness to farmer. e) List necessary conjunctional measures to optimize water harnessing, soil improvement as the steps to increasing productivity and income. f) Examine from beneficiary perspective the yardsticks on investment impact and outcome. g) How does it enhance the scope of farmer to access bank loans and related development measures and investments?

VII Moving Forward

An appraisal of ground realities suggests three genres of works. The first brings unused land or fallow or low level of farming to cultivation with steps of land leveling, stone and boulder removal, bund building, plantation or digging farm ponds and open wells. They are generally single intervention based and dominant work types taken up for individual land development in MGNREGS. The second genre has a project approach, and adopted in Andhra Pradesh but on a small scale and goes more than genre one and involves steps for soil and water augmentation, trenches for water storage, application of tank silt, irrigated horticulture and growing green leaf plants on the bunds etc. The third genre which can seriously tackle underlying productivity bottlenecks of soils, both physical and biological properties and are innovative validated holistic ideas and next practices of farmers, voluntary agencies and research institutions. However its benefits take time to flow but enable investments being led to creating optimum productive assets. MGNREGS must have both short and medium term measures but the focus must be clear soil health correction including for enhanced soil moisture retention capacity, water harnessing optimization measures and its efficient use and production systems suiting local ecological cycles. Such an approach alone can serve the land types owned by the potential beneficiaries in MGNREGS as they are soil wise poor with low or no water potential. It will significantly increase and sustain productivity and to reduce crop risk. This approach is being sought by all sections officials, scientists, farmers and volunteers in tackling land development of the targeted group of farmers. If these above is supplemented with steps for assured protective irrigation from external sources and as life saving measures for khariff crops to tackle long dry spells, then MGNREGS would address the key bottleneck facing rain fed poor farmers. An important issue in the three genres of works is who should be benefit. Currently it is SC/ST followed by small and marginal farmer. This is valid but exceptions are needed in specific areas. Areas with mixed populations must be demarcated in advance and here the authority to include other beneficiaries be vested with a senior officer with clear technical criteria. Certain

land development activities in areas with salinity or water logging can succeed only when the entire degraded portion is treated. In such cases one cannot restrict others but can impose criteria that at least fifty percent of those owning lands belong to the eligible categories to treat the entire area. In acidic soils this can be handled for a single farm and here the benefit need not be extended to beyond the current list of eligible beneficiaries of SC/ST and SF. Here we need to make one important clarification on works that are physical infrastructure oriented covering the entire watershed. In the draft on note on works on individual lands of the MORD and asked to be examined by the committee, it is wrongly interpreted that (only) para (iv) of schedule I permits work on individual lands. Originally, permissibility of only irrigation facilities on individual lands was mentioned in the said para which is quite appropriate as irrigation is a different category of activity not normally covered under para (i) or (ii) and a special permission for this was given for the disadvantaged sections of the community. Similar is the case with horticulture, where externalities are limited and benefit of the development is primarily confined to the household which owns the plantation. On the other hand activities like land development, have strong water conservation and soil enhancement affect with large externality and should not be seen as an individual beneficiary oriented activity if taken up as part of an area development project. In this context we must note that Schedule I of MGNREG Act lists permissible works in order of priority. Item (i) refers to water conservation and water harvesting and item (ii) refers to drought proofing. Outcomes here do not recognize ownership boundaries. Therefore, works under these two categories need to be taken up on public as well as private lands to be effective. The activities have to be area specific and watershed development illustrates the point where in the best results have been produced where lands have been treated from ridge to valley by planning for every survey number, irrespective of ownership and taking into account only land capability and the socio-economic condition of the owner of each survey number to decide on the treatment. In MGNREGS we favour choosing the disadvantaged sections in order of priority - SC/ST first followed by small and marginal farmers. But this should be taken up as a principle and as priority and not as a restrictive execution guideline, such as single rain fed crops or where the lands are contiguous and have some non-SC/ST farmers. In many regions large populace and livelihoods are dependent upon common lands and in ways more than one. For instance in Udaipur district, where the committee held a meeting with farmers, 72% of land is under commons. Though such lands are thoroughly degraded it is an important source of fuel wood, fodder and biomass for the tribal community who constitute 37% of the total population of the district. The extremely fragile natural resource base and little availability of alternatives locally to supplement household incomes merely reinforce the vicious cycle of degradation. It is vital that MGNREGS builds in the steps to arrest degradation and improve productivity of such lands although they do not qualify as individual lands.

VIII Guiding Principles

Much criticism of MGNREGS hinges on the assets being unproductive. It comes not only from external critiques but with questions that are posed to the committee - why it has not impacted on farmer suicides, left wing extremism or in capital formation. Accepting this reality and correcting this through considerable improvements in the planning and implementation package is vital for MGNREGS to stay and be sustainable. The old notion of works emerging from food for work and other employment schemes must give way to a radical change and overhaul in planning, implementation, monitoring and investing on personnel to get the desired results and outcomes. Works on individual lands must be a part of a larger district development agenda and here the District Agriculture Plan, envisioned by Planning Commission, could be useful. The work plans for individual lands focus on the poor must and in its integration one caveat is that its thrust must be redirected to include the needs of resource poor lands. Otherwise it will serve better doing farmers or those with irrigation, leaving out the bulk of the poor who depend on rain fed or stored water for their farming operations. This will involve agriculture institutions, enhance technical manpower capacities and provide the backward and forward linkages as they are primary for successful increase in yields and in enhancing incomes. While know-how and technologies for land development and enhancing productivity are available, the real bottleneck is implementation especially for cascaded tasking work types as proposed by the committee as timely undertaking of works activities are crucial for outcomes through farmer confidence. The National Council on Employment Guarantee sub group on Planning and Execution is addressing this matter but our report carries some recommendations, anxious as we are that the employment offer may dominate and its implementation framework may be extended to works. Ideas and plans can deliver the desired outcomes when implementation is capable, creative and builds on social capital. We have given suggestive roadmaps to translate the recommendations into ground realities. This is high priority as the tasks in works are relegated by officials as being incidental and secondary, does not extend beyond physical civil works oriented check measurement, people have to take what is given to them and directing investments for intended asset building is low in importance. It is crucial that justification of any works on its rationale and outcomes must form a component in planning and selection of works. Tradition in Indian agriculture philosophizes on the practice of one crop for farmer income and another for soil rejuvenation. Our soils are becoming sterile, is in poor health and soil organic matter has drastically decreased. Currently MGNREGS physical structures (e.g. contour bunds, terracing, loose boulder structures for soil and moisture conservation; check dams, percolation tanks, CCTs for water harvesting), must be accompanied with measures to improving soil productivity (fertility and soil tilth/structure) along with vegetation. One must seek for growing sustainable healthy crop by being integrated to livestock development and to tackle the vagaries of nature that will get worse with climate change. MGNREGS thrust must swiftly move from land development to land husbandry with investments that build such assets that enhance productivity and reduce risk.

Vegetation, neglected in physical works, plays a greater role in soil and water management plus its grasses offer several products used by the poor and consumed by their livestock. So while we start with physical infrastructure works in an area, it must follow with specific and tailored activities that address the needs in developing the land including soil quality and its health to sustain plant nutrient cycle needs. This will improve productivity of lands with healthy plant growth can tackle disease and moisture stress. It has another value as it helps farmers in the lower portions through increased harvests of ground water.

IX Committee Recommendations
Our recommendations are in four categories - Approach, Scope, Modality and Others. In bold letters are the recommendations followed with a brief explanatory note. Explanations of some recommendations are detailed in subsequent pages.

Approach
1. Works to receive equal and independent attention in personnel, planning, training, review and management time and financial provisions. The dominant impression of task at hand of officials in MGNREGS is that its primary objective is wage employment. This has unwittingly led to little or no attention to works, save in the context of serving the primary objective. This has a cascading negative effect in terms of deployment of human and technical resources, financial support and administrative interest and attention to works. Most administrative expenses of the permissible six percent go to tasks related to employment generation with very little or nothing for the myriad tasks involved in developing productive assets. In the current situation of degraded lands it is crucial that specific attention be bestowed on works that improve productivity and not on par with civil works such as roads, buildings or cement mortar works. So specific manpower, management attention and monitoring of investments for land development by allocating necessary finances and administrative support is the first crucial step. These funds must be driven by then needs of specific works and earmarked to plan, develop and implement works that aim to increase productivity. If needed Administrative support must be increased to ensure adequate financing for works. To re-orient senior officials of the equal importance to works as assets, training must enlarge include inputs on works planning, social capital building, land husbandry, sustainable agriculture, convergence of services and market dynamics. 2. Approach to shift from land development to land husbandry with implementation being a set of cascading activities spread and over a timeframe of two, three and four years. Tradition in Indian agriculture philosophizes on the practice of one crop for farmer income and the other for soil rejuvenation. Scientists have called for soil health cards to monitor soils as

they are becoming sterile, are in poor health and soil organic matter has drastically fallen. Unless soil fertility is improved, productivity increase cannot occur or gains if any will be minimal and not sustainable. A first step forward in this direction under MGNREGS will be a leap for healthy crop growth, enhanced animal productivity and tackle the vagaries of nature. Land husbandry approach compels a shift from the current one time activity to a spiraling set of tasks that are spread over time. The plans must be region and land specific, integrated within the larger landscape contour and developed with participatory approaches using experts to assist beneficiaries by providing knowledge inputs. To tie-together various interventions for land husbandry, each project should be developed with a Farming Systems Approach, as seen in the BAIF Wadi programme funded by the Ministry of Tribal Affairs. Annexure I details adoption strategies of this approach in different agro-climatic zones. 3. Land development cannot be treated like other civil works in MGNREGS and calls for specific and differently oriented personnel and practices. To begin and succeed with recommendation 2, the first step is of changing the orientation and responsibility of officials. Productivity increase cannot be the domain of civil engineers and RD officials as it calls for soil and agricultural scientists in planning and extension of the works. It involves managing diverse mutually reinforcing activities and has to be handled by competent agencies to function as Technology/Knowledge Partners. It calls for separate trained and skilled staff to plan, develop and oversee the works related to land and natural resources activities. Currently the MGNREGS technical assistant who is capable of giving markings and demarcation of work lay out, check measurement and wage calculation is entrusted with this task. Personnel needed to work on land development will always be limited but their responsibilities can extend and cover several villages and a set number of farmers. They could be consultants with clear instructions including defining the number of visits to each farmer with time schedules, participatory planning, quality assurance and community mobilization. They must be provided with transport allowance with their cost being treated as skilled labor coming from the material/skilled labor component. 4. Works must address the underlying causes for low productivity with choice of what must be done on the treated land wresting with the farmer. The current approach assumes that the land is ready for productive use or enhancement with marginal inputs whereas this is not the case with most lands belonging to SC and ST farmers and hence kept fallow or seed broadcasted for whatever may come in. Hence to correct the status of the inhibiting natural factors for deficient and unstable production calls for tackling the underlying bottlenecks. Works and investments towards them must be seen as the first step to improve productivity. Bulk of MGNREGS must focus on it rather than the current situation where the land quality is taken up as good and plantations are taken upon. We recommend that upon addressing underlying bottlenecks the choice of what the improved land must be used for must wrest with the farmer and not thrust upon them by officials or experts.

For this the farmer must be assisted to get government schemes and institutional credit, and the capital leveraged must be seen as a key measure to judge the value of the MGNREGS investments on the individual lands. 5. Farmer participation, community motivation in planning and choice making is the key to mobilizing social capital and its tapping must be invested upon. Providing a list of permissible activities on individual lands or elaborating its implementation through guidelines will not suffice as investments on it has not lead automatically productivity rise or income benefits to poor farmers. Currently no money is invested on planning and designing/prioritizing while works on individual lands or natural resources productivity increase needs both technical and social engineering expertise. Community land development involves working closely with the panchayats and the people. Equally crucial is to eliminate faulty implementation while ensuring timely, efficient and accountable roll out of the agreed plan. This will bring farmer energy, vital for investments being productive. Such soft skills for community facilitation must be invested upon and built into work plans for individual and community land development. These must be set in a framework of facilitation for outcome that holds the program and ties up all the nitty-grittys. Such tasks are labor and time intensive and hence the field personnel must be trained, oriented and tasked in undertaking them. The staff proposed in 3 must be entrusted with these tasks. 6. To design productivity enhancement plans we recommend the following as the basis. a) Information dissemination on options in land development activities followed by discussions on choices and options among the beneficiaries b) Exposure visit to successful farms by beneficiary leaders c) Help beneficiaries understand the linkages among various activities for soil health d) Vetting of development proposal and building in the ideas of the women in the household.

Scope
1. The list of permissible works on individual lands must be expanded to include soil fertility enhancement and soil deficiency correction, tank soil and organic manure application and vegetation growth. In addition and as essential link, activities to enhance productivity of livestock, fisheries, homesteads and of humans must be included in permissible works. The works in individual lands are low on impact and farmer interest, as they are a limited set of ad hoc isolated physical activities, whereas the lands of poor farmers and assigned lands are highly degraded needing several mutually reinforcing corrective measures. So along with soil improvement measures, livestock development in terms of genetic improvement, feed

availability, quality and storage, improving grazing lands, provision of water for livestock, upgrading cow shed, development of fingerlings, platforms for drying crops etc must be added to the list of permissible works. To increase household food and nutrition and incomes, homesteads infrastructure development offers good scope and opportunity and calls for inclusion. Such a widened listed of permissible works will help MGNREGS cater to the needs of the bulk of the poor especially women, while it can bring in quick productivity results and increases and done with relatively small investments. Reasons for each of what are being sought are specifically detailed in the next chapter. 2. A committee to be constituted to develop norms, measurement yardsticks, outturn and for financial integrity. In case recommendation one is accepted, which we do expect as those aspects are basic and crucial needs for increasing productivity of MGNREGS investments, this genre calls for specific measurement centered detailing of inputs as they are not currently available while forming the basis of payments. They include standard schedule of rates for labor and materials, outturn including measurements, payment calculation, audits and verification needs of consumables and steps to check, avoid and detect financial dishonesty and corruption. Towards this we recommend the forming of a committee to examine and come up with solutions. The committee must include currently available expertise such as banks that lend for long term land development, non-govt. organizations that have undertaken such works along with experts. They must be asked to submit their findings within three to four months. Members of our committee having expertise in this task are willing to volunteer to assist and associate if called upon. 3. MGNREGS land development investments must provide assured protective irrigation to khariff crop. Drought is a major and recurring issue facing poor farmers. Unless addressed crop productivity and unleashing the energies of the farmer will not happen. Several measures - water conservation, water harvesting structures and tank restoration are taken up in MGNREGS whose real benefits of enhanced water availability accrue only to a limited number of farmers and farming in the valley portion. The operational details are provided in following chapter. As the poor have lands in ridge portion and drought is the biggest challenge we recommend MGNREGS invests in providing assured protective water supply to at least one acre to all SC, ST and SF farmers during kharif, in case of monsoons are not on time and crops begin to wither. This can be done by laying pipes from the improved tanks or water bodies to the lands of beneficiaries by pumping arrangements. This single measure will make the biggest dent to increasing productivity, unleash the energies of poor landowners, reduce distress migration and

make a significant contribution to the national food basket. 4. Individual land development productivity success needs integration with natural resources development and management. Incomes, inputs and livelihoods of the poor come from own land, wages, CPRs and forests. Small peasant farming is dependent on livestock as timely operations is crucial and use of cattle as plough and manure for continued soil enrichment is the raison dtre for viable and successful faming by the small landowners. Hence while treating individual lands it is important that the productivity of CPRs and forests is increased, as they are degraded and need rejuvenation investments. Such tasks are avoided or neglected by officials as its impact is time consuming, slow on results at start and success here depends on community action and management and not the investments alone. With panchayat raj agencies as the implementing agency in MGNREGS, we have a unique opportunity break this obstacle in developing community and government lands. In certain areas such as Rajasthan it has the largest land mass and provides incomes for the poorest people. The Panchayats may overlook this need and priority for it as they offer value only to the poorest populations and hence calls for motivating the panchayat leadership with its planning and actions being incentivized. This can be done by assuring and providing the manpower needs for CPR development and management through provisioning MGNREGS employment person days. The government must enable a fast track approval from the departments that have a say on such land and its use. Details of what to be done for improving such lands are listed under livestock in the subsequent chapter. 5. A Committee of the NAEC Council to list out works in areas where works options are limited and to submit a report within four months. There are many scattered areas where employment need and poverty are high, but the options of works seem limited. We see this in areas where land holding among SC/ST is meager and where every bit of land is under use or wherein lands are under water inundation for many months. The committee observed it in many parts of poverty ridden Bihar and also in some villages in Andhra Pradesh. One bottleneck for lack of ideas in such areas in providing productive employment lies in the historical fact that the type of works in MGNREGS itself has emerged from employment schemes, most of which were Food for Work schemes and taken up in drought prone areas where such a situation of high water availability is unthinkable. In tackling such areas creative thinking is called for. For instance in Bihar one observed surfeit of grass in some areas, a precious product in dire demand in many other parts of the country. Employment here could mean making fodder enriched briquettes for easy transport to needy

regions of the country. To address what works must be taken up in such areas that lie out of the drought framework and to help the communities we recommend constitution of a committee to creatively examine and propose the works to be taken up in such areas. Its proposals must come in four months and unless such parts of India that have the potential and need to improve the livelihoods of the poor it will continue to go unaddressed. 6. Investment per acre or beneficiary must be activity based and with a cap while overall limit be brought down to realistic levels Currently 1.5 lakh rupees per land holder is the cap provided in MGNREGS, with most top end investments going on stone lining terraced dug wells. Ground water tapping opportunities through open wells have very limited prospects but can take away the bulk of the investments in just trying. The better option is conjunctive planning of water harvesting and drainage along with physical land development and soil husbandry. We recommend a cap of Rs 50000 for individual beneficiaries and no cap on investments for overall water resource development and management. The beneficiaries must be given options from the menu with costs for each so that they exercise choice and limit to priority needs. It is crucial that MGNREGS investment addresses the underlying bottlenecks in productivity with the other aspects being covered through the farmer tapping institutional credit. 7. Need based personnel and administrative costs approach rather than uniform systems We have delineated three genres of works for land husbandry. In all the three the crucial element is an effective well conceived participatory on the sight develop plan followed by scrupulous adherence to its implementation both in quality and on time. The first and the second genre can be done by having trained field assistants. They can be provided with templates on various land types and what needs to be look for and done. As illustration some additional items for inclusion in genre one is given in annexure II. The crucial aspect is overall planning for the area and specific planning for the particular land in terms of succeeding steps. In planning which must be participatory, one must involve local expertise of KVK, Agriculture Extension staff and NGOs while the implementation roll out steps can be managed by a field assistant. As already the District Agriculture Plan (DAP) must be the nodal framework on what is to be done for land and CPR development in MGNREGS with convergence departments also going through and working within this district development framework.

Modalities
1. MGNREGS individual land and natural resource development must be an integral part of the District Agriculture Plan.

The Planning Commission advises the preparation of District Agriculture Plans and ATMA is entrusted with the task. This is not done but could serve as a platform to embed and gain convergence for MGNREGS land and natural resource development initiatives. While doing so the unique issues facing lands with poor productivity must be adequately attended upon. Doing so will have better outcomes and success with works integrated and derived from such plan. This will help bring in backward and forward linkages in terms of inputs and market, provide the technical capacities to land husbandry and improve farm productivity and to bring convergence with available schemes etc leading to optimizing outcomes. By doing so the district KVK can be actively involved in various technical services needed in the processes for land husbandry. 2. Begin with contiguous land patches of the poor and make the beneficiaries central. For ease, including the management, skill sets needs and benefit optimization, we must start with work on contiguous lands belonging to the eligible beneficiaries. This will provide wider learning making its adoption in individual land patches easy with the farmers being capable of developing their detailed plan for enhancing land productivity. Plans for each beneficiary must developed through consultation wherein the farmer is provided with options to choose among and has the benefit of expert/specialist advice. Hence budgetary allocations must build in the commitments made over the years. In such contiguous plots the scheme infrastructure work must be based on overall needs even if non SC/ST farmers are involved. While individual land activities must have a cap the overall landscape work for water conservation, drainage and vegetation enhancement the investment must be need based and without a limit. The implementation timeframe for each of the works must be clearly spelt out, written down and mutually agreed to between the official and the farmer. 3. Strengthen community say in works envisaged in the Act through authenticated and verifiable registering of community choices. On who selects the works depends its benefit or use. The Act has rightly provides this responsibility to the gram sabha. In most places they are not held or the list of works that officials are read and taken as accepted or most people do not participate. Unless this issue is addressed the source of proposals will be contrary to the provisions of the act. Towards this it is important to have the community to list and cast their choice from among the shelf of works in an authenticated, transparent and well recorded process that uses low cost portable information technology tools. Doing this by itself would provide a reasonable basis for the works to be a community asset. 4. ADD BIO (Agreed Development Design to Build Incubate Operate) approach for certain integrated work types pilots of one per district. As discussed earlier of the three genres of works, the first two can be delivered within existing personnel through enhanced training and tapping of locally available skills. Genre three must receive special attention and capabilities as they are innovative and promising next practices.

We suggest having one such pilot must be taken in each district. This can serve as a learning centre for subsequent scaling up and wider adoption. The first batch of such districts must begin right away and be those districts where NREGS begun in its first year of implementation and then progressively increased to cover all districts within a two year framework. Here the approach centers on as enunciated in land husbandry or integrated farming systems. It has been successfully demonstrated by organizations like BIAF, PRADHAN, Seva Mandir and Accion Fraterna and in different agro-climatic zones. Here the knowledge based service provider develops the detailed project design through a rigorous consultative process of interaction with the community that is followed by a peer review. They assist the stakeholders in undertaking the entire gamut of tasks beginning with planning and followed by building the physical structures, then incubate a process of land husbandry for soil quality enhancement and finally provide operational assistance with cropping pattern and farm practices advice along with helping obtain financial institutional support for continuing productivity enhancement and sustainability. In addition to undertaking this task they will provide and benchmark the measurement needed to be made for various activities for land husbandry. An additional challenge worth tried is that such pilots must involve younger people as many of them are shying away from farming. Such pilots will need considerable budget and involves considerable skill sets and intensive work and at least fifteen percent of the budget of the project costs as incurred in MGNREGS must be provided for it. Some states have begun this process but much streamlining of the memorandum of agreement and stating of outcomes is needed. 5. Farmer confidence on works deliverance and on time through written agreement In works on individual lands there must be written agreement given by the official or the service provider to the farmer listing the measures, transparency safeguards, timeframe, oversight arrangements and grievance resolution. A binding obligation in writing from the concerned implementing department is akin to giving of receipts upon application for work as provided in MGNREGS. We need such an arrangement will deliver works, make rights real, provide community confidence and ensure that officials deliver on what is planned and agreed upon. Also the TOR of the Ombudsman must include their overseeing that such agreement is complied with. This will improve beneficiary confidence in MGNREGS works and ensure that officials deliver on time. Such agreement must also be provided in case of CPR and forest development plans and with the panchayat with mutual tasks being defined. 6. Fifty percent money for Land Development The money or increasing productivity and natural resources conservation and development are shrinking in MGNREGS. Bulk of the money is increasingly going for road, buildings and to certain departments. We recommend that at least fifty percent of investments of MGNREGS be earmarked for land development including individual beneficiaries and for overall area development based natural resource enhancements including CPRs and over time. Such

commitment will provide assurance, adequate resources and full coverage to works to land development. 7. Revision of schedule of works to avoid conflict of interests between farmer and worker The standard schedule of rates (SSR) drives wage realization and is a source of conflict between workers and farmers. For instance in stone removal from the land, the worker collects and heaps them close by. The farmer wants it to be placed along boundaries. But in the SSR for stone removal no lead is provided. Where the farmer uses his or her own labor, for which they receive a wage, they hire additional hands of their choice defeating the fundamental tenet of MGNREGS job card holder right to employment on demand. Some workers will not find suitors as caste forms the criteria in employment. 8. Improve work place facilities and provide lunch to people coming to work on land development activities. It is observed that lands of poor people that are far away from the habitation or for that matter to work on CPRs or works in hilly places is not finding labor. Unless such areas are worked upon and treated, many of the proposals placed here may not fructify. The ten percent increased wage for working in places beyond five kilometers is not seen on the ground. We suggest that when works are taken up in MGNREGS in such places the workers be provided with lunch, in addition to work place facilities as provided in the Act. A pilot on this idea found good response and hence placed for consideration by the Council. It also provided local rain fed cereals. The additional costs for this comes to twelve to fifteen rupees and can be paid in lieu of the compensation now offered works that are beyond five kilometers.

Others
In some areas support for fencing through live plants or material, land terracing in undulating areas, habitat sanitation and saturation approach to household toilets and drinking water are worth inclusion as they provide the infrastructure necessary for increasing productivity. All the ideas and suggestions given under exploratory notes are the committee recommendations.

X Explanatory Notes on Certain Recommendations

1. Protective Irrigation Water is crucial to successful farming and unless its use builds the notion of distributive justice, bulk of the poor land owners improvement in MGNREGS investments will not succeed. As a major breakthrough to motivate poor farmers and to reduce crop risk and assure incomes, we recommend that MGNREGS begin the building of a new approach to water equity. One must note that the lands of the poor people scheduled castes and scheduled tribes are mostly rain fed and located in the ridge portion. Dug wells or bore well will remain their dream that can never fructify. Water storage options are limited and crop production and its yield depends on

timely rains. Works of tank renovation and water harvesting structures taken up in MGNREGS is benefiting the valley portion land holding farmers. This inequity can be revered by assuring protective water supplies for at least a part of the land and during khariff, as that is what their lands are mostly used for and capable of. Here MGNREGS can create the infrastructure by digging and lay pipes followed by facilities for pumping water to these areas from nearby tanks and water bodies. This can also be extended, subject to water availability, to rabi crop provided the surface conditions are optimal for seeding. In case water is available in summer months, it can assure protective water supply to a small portion of the land for horticulture, trees or fodder cultivation, as chosen by the individual. Here the harvested water (surface r groundwater) has to be delivered to the field that is made into small plots. This may involve lifting the water from the source to the field and uniformly distributing it to the laid out small plots. A diesel pump to lift the water from surface water bodies or a bore well with a submersible pump along with high polythene density tubes from source to the field and lining of the channels in the small plots of the field are needed. This step will have a very significant impact on productivity, contribute to beneficiary confidence, enthusiasm and livelihood and address the growing needs of cereals and legumes in the national food basket. Providing such water was not considered as the infrastructure costs were high and the return low returns as only one crop was seen as possible on such lands. It is now desirable as MGNREGS are public works investment aiming to address the livelihoods of the poor. It also serves the poor at marginal additional that makes effective and equitable the investments on watersheds and on water bodies. 2. Livestock There are two distinct categories of livestock with each calling for different interventions. One is stall fed and the other is grazing based. Both are a good portion of household income, especially women. In the stall fed varieties, productivity increase calls for improving the genetic stock along with feed quality, adequate availability and in some periods of its augmentation. One sees a paradox in India with some places burning crop stubs that lead to global warming and harming our future while the same is desperately sought elsewhere as fodder for cattle. Steps to correct this must merit attention. In addition we need to provide fodder storage infrastructure of fodder and make it available to other places in periods of acute scarcity or seasonal shortages. This needs fodder chaffing, preparation of fodder blocks including some that are fortified with legume blocks. Cattle provide substantial productive employment generation. Genetic improvement can be made possible by establishment of cattle/buffalo crossbreeding service centers with the developmental infrastructure service coming from MGNREGS. This must be augmented with the availability of feed and fodder resources to ensure that the livestock can produce to the full extent of their genetic potential. In order to augment the availability of feed and fodder

resources, MGNREGS must consider the following in planning the works to be taken up for all land related activities. a. Fodder production by improved seed of fodder crops, grasses, planting multipurpose trees; b. Improving the productivity of barren lands through silvi-pasture development; c. Measures to improve practices such as fodder chaffing, preparation of fodder blocks, storage infrastructure for fodder, ensilation, etc. d. Support to improve cattle management through construction of better cowsheds, introduction of water troughs and managers. The above three pronged approach covering breeding, feeding and management under the Material Component along with the wage payment support for the rearing of cattle during the gestation period can provide current-period employment generation along with production of valuable productive assets in the form of high producing livestock. Meeting the green fodder need for milch bovine calls for supply of quality seed, irrigation and processing including the possible ensiling. One must redesign and improve cow sheds to serve various purposes water trough, urine and dung collection and to tackle harsh climatic variations. Placing these in the district agriculture plan with complementary investment from MGNREGS will bring good results of increased incomes, avenues of self employment and support sustainable agriculture. In the livelihood of the poor grazing based livestock is crucial and its income potential is well known. Small ruminants need pastures for grazing and which are in a very poor condition and calling for improvement. The large pastoral flocks of camels, sheep, buffaloes and cattle, the semi-migrant systems in sheep and stationary or local grazing based systems depend heavily on non-cultivated fodder in terms of pastures, common lands, private fallows, water bodies etc. MGNREGS must invest in integrated development of the commons and govt. lands along with provisioning water. Otherwise degradation of common pasture lands and fodder resources will continue and further erode the natural resource base of the poor who depend on livestock. Fodder availability can be increased by improving the productivity of common lands through multipurpose trees, shrubs and grasses based on local knowledge on the indigenous (mix of) species, climax vegetation and use them in regenerating fodder biomass. Water harvesting structures can provide drinking water to livestock but as the availability of water in many surface water bodies is unpredictable, there must be an assured ground based drinking water source for livestock through construction of water troughs that is appropriately designed and usable by small ruminants. The panchayat could supply assured water source from the village bore well with the infrastructure such as pipes being laid under MGNREGS. The success of MGNREGS investments here will depend on the community. Its works must be designed and based on the agro-ecosystem, specific measures of biomass regeneration, evolving appropriate grazing systems and regulatory norms and management with the government helping to overcome the complexity in the legal rights regimes over such land and its usufructs as they involve of multiple-line departments in its management. The following

measures are suggested for enhancing animal productivity and as part of individual land development because of the symbiosis between land, plant and livestock.
1. Water ponds with appropriate and slope channels from the watershed hills to provide 2. 3. 4. 5.

6.

7.

drinking water to animals to reduce grazing stress incurred in walking long distances. Silvi-pasture with improved genotypes of grasses and bio-fencing of pasture and range lands. Pruning of trees and bushes and collection and storing of leaves and pods for animals during lean period. Harvesting and storing livestock feed crop stem stock from farm lands as they are often left in the land in case the crop fails especially among poor farmers doing rain fed farming. Regulating differed/rotational grazing and browsing on pasture lands to allow re-seed and regeneration. Fabrication of scientifically designed low cost thatched animal shelters with appropriate inter-spacing and around water ponds to provide cool environment and rest to the animals during peak sun hours in summer and thereby saving animals energy for productivity. Scientifically designed low cost thatched animals pen to provide warmth to the animals during cold winters to curtail mortality of new born kids and lambs (kidding and lambing occurs generally in November) and saving animals energy for productivity which otherwise would have spent for increasing body temperature. Promoting ethno-veterinary plants to treat animal diseases of de-worming, cracked udders, gastric problems, wounds, arthritis, stomach disorders, fractured bones etc.

3. Homesteads In places such as in tribal areas and in Eastern India, one observes poor people of having sizable homestead lands. Bringing it to use and enhancing its productivity will provide food security and give incomes for the households and hence it infrastructure development must be included in the MGNREGS. Food plants and creepers one can lay wooden poles and structure, improve cattle sheds and undertake linked activities such as compost or vermin-compost. A dug and lined water trough will provide adequate water to cattle, plants and other purposes. In homesteads in high rainfall areas backyard ponds can be dug and being mostly lateritic soils lining is not be needed and this can serve for supplying fingerlings to improve fish productivity. In addition and especially for tribal habitations one must include activities such as flat paved floor for drying crops along with small storage structures. In undertaking such tasks, extension inputs must come from the agriculture and animal husbandry departments and by including this in the district agriculture plan, we can help build household food and nutrition security. Homestead farming is site specific could involve any of the following;
Sl. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Component Milch animals including cow, buffalo, goat Poultry / duckery Vegetable growing Vermi composting / compost Fish / watering livestock Infrastructure needed Sheds Baskets for poultry cover Poles for pandal for creepers Trenches and shed Pond / Trough

6. 7. 8.

Fodder storing Sericulture Honey production

Shade with tree cover Rearing and reeling appliances Bee hive

4. Horticulture In horticulture the focus has to be on dry land horticulture. Selection of suitable fruit trees and their varieties matching with the ecosystem is the first step. For establishing and stabilizing the seedlings to have normal growth a 2-3 year protective irrigation is important. This must be followed by pit diggings in a manner that it can hold as much rain water as possible. Mulching must be another step along with correcting soil deficiency. In case the farmer has a source of dependable irrigation, pressurized systems of irrigation may be extended provided the fruit crop chosen is of high value. Secondly depending on the quality of water, the choice of fruit tree may be made. Examples
Quality water Good Satisfactory Salty Fruit tree(s) Citrus Mango, Custard apple, Sapota, Guava Ber, Aonla, Pomegranate

If the farmer chooses to provide flow irrigation as mentioned earlier high density polythene tubing may be provided to carry water from source to the basin. And forming the basin (size depending on the choice of the fruit tree and its possible canopy) with lining of the sides may also be taken up. 5. Saturation Approach to Water and Sanitation Though not listed as permissible works in MGNREGS its money is used in many states to meet certain costs for providing village water and sanitation schemes. But this is not serving its key objective - significant impact on health and hygiene - as open defecation continues. Gram Vikas in Orissa has a unique offer wherein no sanitation is taken up unless all households are covered. This approach is recommended for inclusion in MGNREGS along with sanitation schemes taken up by states, subject to undertaking the saturation approach. This will have a major impact on community health while bringing to people the values of impact enhancement through a whole habitation or village saturation approach and will trigger changes in the self image of women. Two principles govern the Gram Vikas approach. One, it does not commence work unless the entire village chooses to have individual latrines. And next, the provision of toilet facilities ensures piped water supply to it. If water supply is not ensured or left as the problem of the individual household, no sanitation scheme can succeed. So we seek inclusion of the water supply infrastructure to toilets subject to acceptance and building of toilets by every household. Gram Vikas works in hilly areas and amidst tribal settlements. In their scheme they excavate a dug well in a suitable area on the hills so that water can flow through gravity to the village

overhead tank. Once the water yield is established, a trench is cut from the bottom of the well down to the village where a suitable spot is identified for construction of an overhead tank. A pipe line is laid along the trench and since water has to find its level, water flows from the bottom of the well down the pipe line and would rise by capillary action to the overhead tank from where two outlets are provided. One outlet from the overhead tank leads to individual dwelling units in the village for supply of water to meet household consumption including use of water in toilets while the other outlet would direct the water available in excess of meeting household consumption, to the nearby kitchen gardens. A related initiative is of excavation of water collection chambers normally of 20x20x15 dimension is found very useful in collecting water from the streams flowing across hilly areas. The water from the collection chamber can be pumped to village overhead tanks for sanitation. In times when the collection of water is sufficient enough to last beyond household consumption, the water is pumped to nearby farms. Such initiatives needs persons for masonry, plumbing, stone dressing and scaffolding and people can be trained by appropriate institutions. Such skills can potentially be deployed for creating quality assets under MGNREGA. As the absorptive capacity to undertake such works in MGNREGS would be large, this would create and trigger the initial demand for inculcating such skills as such services are needed in a growing market with the economy witnessing a good growth rate. 6. Convergence Convergence is much talked but its dynamics on the ground is overlooked. A key factor for convergence not taking off is because departments seek individual financial allotment. One must note that apart from MGNREGS there is virtually little or no money for development elsewhere and in their control. Nor is bringing them on board is being actively sought as the purse holder is happy with routine employment generation oriented work projects. Some change is now being witnessed as there is pressure on officials to spend more MGNREGS money. This has led to works being outsourced rather than emerging as convergence. Unless one aims a strength based convergence the situation on the ground in terms of work being outcomes will be low. With villagers or elected representatives having little say, business as usual dominates. Unless drastic steps of change and for accountability of asset creation are in place wherein productivity enhancement is driven, stressed and monitored, one will not see any drastic change in the situation. The MORD has signed MOUs with the Ministry of Agriculture, Agricultural Research and Education, Ministry of Water Resources, Ministry of Environment and Forests etc. The MOUs spell out guidelines in detail for facilitating convergence of MGNREGA with schemes of the above ministries so as to widen the shelf of projects for meeting the wage employment demand, improve the quality of assets created under MGNREGA as well as leverage scarce resources to increase beneficiary coverage under various development schemes. For instance, the Ministry of Agriculture is implementing a suite of development programmes like the National Agriculture Development Programme/ Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (NADP/ RKVY); the National Food Security Mission (NFSM); National Horticulture Mission (NHM); Development of

Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture (DIFA) and the Fodder and Feed Development Scheme (FFDS). But none of these are translated into ground reality. Convergence is implicit in the design of RKVY that envisages Each district will formulate a District Agriculture Plan (DAP) by including the resources available from other existing schemesdistrict, state or central schemes such as the BRGF (Backward Region Grant Fund), SGSY (Swarn Jayanti Gram Swarojgar Yojana), MGNREGS and the Bharat Nirman. The process of planning under RKVY also involves the active participation of the Panchayat Raj Institutions (PRIs) and seeks a bottom-up planning approach as envisaged in MGNREGA. The guidelines for convergence emphasize joint planning from the habitat/ village level up to the district. The District Rural Development Agency is expected to constitute small resource groups at the District and block levels with the active participation of representatives of the Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs). Combined with the MGNREGA work plans approved by the Gram Sabha, the district and block level groups will scrutinize the activity plans and give professional advice for effective and co-ordinate implementation. The KVKs are to indicate appropriate technologies for each work. All such guidelines can begin to take shape only by ensuring the making of the DAP and then serve as the platform for convergence and field action. Yet, convergence as observed on the field is not merely a function of implementing joint MOUs and guidelines but involves a change in mindset and commitment on the part of related Line Departments to work together in a spirit of partnership, which calls for intense capacity building, among other initiatives. One such initiative that this Working Group recommends is the appointment of an additional Field Assistant (Land and Farm Husbandry) to support the Gram Rozgar Sewak (GRS) in planning and implementing convergence projects on individual land holdings. While the GRS could continue to be the administrative face of the MGNREGA at the GP level, the Field Assistant (Land and Farm Husbandry) shall be the new technical face who should be trained to facilitate convergence and the ADD-BIO projects on individual lands. The planning of activities through the development of District Agriculture Plan can serve as the platform for key department stakeholders and ADD-BIO partners to plan and have an understanding for assisting its implementation and in measuring its deliverance.

Annexure I
Land Husbandry
In MGNREGS physical structures (e.g. contour bunds, terracing, loose boulder structures for soil and moisture conservation; check dams, percolation tanks, CCTs for water harvesting), being one time tasks, are the dominant practice. It is crucial that the approach is shifted from soil conservation to land husbandry. So improving soil productivity (fertility as well as soil tilth/ structure) is crucial. Vegetation in any form, including a good crop, is a key technique in soil and moisture conservation. But this can happen only over a period and with well planned and sequenced investments along with active farmer participation.

For improved productivity through land husbandry, it is essential to improve and maintain the soil organic matter (SOM) as it drives several other chemical processes, physical properties, soil stability and resilience, vital for sustained food production. Enhanced SOM leads to better aggregate stability through biologically more active soils, increased water retention capacity and mitigating the effects of drought. The opportunities for incorporating organics in some form or the other are many - FYM, compost, vermin-compost, incorporation of weeds, leaf litter from tree farming and crops, green leaf manure, integrated crop livestock farming etc. SOM involve activities spread over a period of 3 to 5 years by increasing the availability and
application of bulky organics along with on-farm turnover of crop residues. Adequate biomass calls for multipurpose trees planting by bulk planting or row planting in cultivated land and on field boundaries along with its planting on farm roads, canals, fallows and on community lands. This must be complimented with in-village seed production and adoption of non chemical pesticide ways.

Large land tracts in Indian need reclamation. Soil is saline. Here salinity can be reversed by adding tank silt and cultivation of green manure crops, as part of the cropping system. In the Indo-Gangetic plains cultivation of rice is followed by wheat crops. This has led to soils being acidic that is temporarily managed by using chemical fertilizers. MGNREGS could promote here the growing of a green manure crop after the two harvests. Here a mixture of seeds or seed balls can be broadcasted and the crop ploughed into the soil after forty to fifty days. This has two advantages one is availability of green leaf in the soil and its cultivation helps the roots to emerge and with the moisture to serve as triggers for microbial diversity and activity. Here MGNREGS could cover the cost of the seed or seed balls and two wettings using ground water and coming from the material component. Such land treatment must be assured to the farmers for three years and upon seeing its benefits, the additional income earned could be used by the farmer to adopt the practice on his/her own. The key is that the manure crop must be short duration so that the farmer has enough time to prepare for the next sowing and undertaken during and in places with crop cultivation time gaps and having groundwater to irrigate the green manure crop. A varied practice can be promoted in rain fed farming areas wherein bund plantation of green manure perennials is sown and harvested for application on the soil. Another rich source of green leaf is the forest areas. In MGNREGS, the forest department has support but its investments continue to be traditional wood and pulp plantations centered. These are of value to the department but the productive capacity of such lands to provide green manure is not seen as an asset of value to farmers. Here one can grow green leaf manure plants that are harvested and supplied to farmers in the nearby areas. This would be similar in richness to taking soil from tanks and applying on farm lands. India is a large country with diverse ground realities. For each agro-climatic zone prescriptions on the steps for land preparation and amelioration are available and given below are steps to be taken up in existing farming systems of farming improvements for arid, dry semiarid, wet semiarid and humid climatic ecosystems.

a)

Arid ecosystem
Existing systems Possible improvements Hot arid Northwest India Action needed

Pastures with bushes like Ziziphus nummularia (Jhar ber) in extreme arid and trees like Prosopis cineraria (Khejri) and Acacia Senegal (Kumata) in arid regions

Improvement of pastures with HYV of grass seed of sewan (Lasiurus scindicus) and Cenchrus ciliaris (Anjan) linked to livestock production. Inclusion of tree component (e.g. Acacia tortilis (Israeli babool), Colophospermum mopane (mopane), Dicrostachys nutans (nutans) and perennial legumes). Contour furrowing for rainwater conservation Provision of water bodies in the native pastures through rainwater harvesting. In case of medium and large farmers, individual pastures can be developed as LEY farming Pearl millet as fodder needs separate breeding programme

Seed of sewan and anjan grasses need be produced / procured for subsidized sale to the farmers The technologies available with CAZRI and the traditional systems in vogue in the region may be encouraged with 3:1 share of finances

With biotic pressure, pastures degrade. Pearl millet is grown even in extreme arid regions. It is also a substitute feed for bovines and camels in particular Cluster bean is taken up as a fodder for camel and draft/milch cattle. With the entry of gum industry, large scale growing of clusterbean is taken up as it is the raw material for gum industry. The churi (leftovers after gum extraction) is sold back by the industry to the farmers as cattle feed concentrate. Short pulses are also taken up eg. mothbean, mungbean.

The AICRPPM located in Jodhpur under the aegis of RAU, Bikaner has already a programme in this direction. It needs more attention The tie-up between industry and NARS (CAZRI; RAU) may be set in motion for supply of improved seed of Gaur

Supply of HYV cluster beans as a joint programme between gum industry and NARS system on a no-loss no-profit basis

Adoption of HYV of short duration pulses as evolved by the NARS system

Seed multiplication is needed through seed villages

Existing systems The interdunal plains in some locations are put to mustard (taramira) and sorghum (fodder)

Possible improvements Better varieties and improved in situ rainwater harvesting systems

Action needed Seed multiplication is needed through seed villages

Under irrigation commercial crops like Jira (Cuminum cyminum), mustard and Isubgol (Plantago ovata) and coriander taken MPTs like Commiphora mukul (Guggal) and Salvodora sp. (Jhak, Pilu) taken Traditional rainwater harvesting systems like Khadin, Nadis, Rela farming and Ad-bandh practiced

Improved varieties need to be introduced

Industry must be encourated to be partners in this endeavour

Guggal, Jhak and Pilu are fast vanishing and need improvement, agrotechniques, replantation Khadin and Nadi are slowly becoming extinct due to encroachment on catchment. Rela farming and Ad-bandh need fine-tuning and extended applications/use Diversification to horticultural plants Aonla (Emblica officinalis) pomogranate etc. Drip irrigation has promise for water saving in such crops Improved varieties can be used

Under protection of biodiversity (POB), this programme may be considered Traditional systems need be encouraged through proper funding

Well/bore well water used for commercial crops like chillies. Wheat and barley shifted to mustard Native ber (both Z. numularia and Z. rotundifolia) in small pockets besides Kair (Capparis decidua) and Phog (Calligonum polygonoides) Overexploitation water Small camels of ground

Participatory hydrological monitoring with cropping practiced by the farmers after assessing the availability of water (rainfall, well, flow) CAZRI may be involved along with the Centre for arid fruits of ICAR located at Bikaner

Need interventions to recharge ground water and use of drip irrigation Health care and breed improvement (artificial insemination/introduction of pure-bred males) Quality drugs need be made available to the pastorolists

Simpler systems of recharging groundwater at farm level are available and need be adopted NGOs like CASA are already involved in this endeavour. They need be widely involved Need support from Government to be provided

ruminants,

bovines,

Pastorolists not able to adequately attend to health care of their small ruminants

Cold desert region of Ladakh and Lahaul and Spiti

Existing systems Traditional water harvesting systems (e.g. Kuhl / Gool; artificial glaciers), use (e.g. gravity flow from spring channels and reservoirs) and management by people have been in existence Vegetables under green houses is found useful by the Defence Ministry and the State Agricultural University Several important local plant species are available, but not properly attended to

Possible improvements These systems can be improved. Limited water use through drips and micro-sprinklers and use of concepts like critical irrigation need be explored

Action needed PHM may be encouraged The State Agricultural University may be entrusted with the developent of water use efficiency techniques

Needs replication

A suitable mechanism can be considered

Examples include seabuck thorn, a non-leguminous Nfixing plant Arid Deccan plateau

These need be looked into by the State Agricultural University and developed

1. Red soil regions Groundnut is the most important crop. Yields are static. Cost of production is increasing. Droughts are common. Often seed becomes a constraint Overuse of phosphatic fertilizers (DAP) should be discouraged to avoid P-induced Zn deficiency Depreding on the feasible yield the external inputs should be used In-village seed production must be adopted Rice need be discouraged Drip irrigation may be provided for fruit orchards Critical irrigation concept may be considered Adequate market mechanisms for alternate crops must be puit in place Awareness on these issues has to be created Intercropping of groundnut with pigeonpea must be encouraged

With any source of irrigation (canal, well) rice is commonly grown. Some fruit orchards are also taken up 2. Black soils Pearl millet, setaria, coriander safflower and rabi sorghum are common crops

Subsoil salinity is common in these areas. Salt tolerant crops (coriander, safflower) and shallow rooted cereals (local varieties of pearl millet, setaria and rabi sorghum) be taken up Drip irrigation considered for plantations may be the fruit

Suitable marketing must follow

facilities

B)

Dry semiarid ecosystems

Existing systems Village Commons are relatively less in area. Whatever available are poor/degraded. The common tree Acacia nilotica is vanishing at a fast rate for commercial usage. Vegetation on hilly areas is also depleting

Possible improvements The existing commons can easily be upgraded with Sehima-Dicanthium (Sedwa Marvel grasses) climax grasses/Cenchrus ciliaris. Introduction of fodder legume like Stylosanthes hamata has great promise. Neem also deserves attention. Besides A. nilotica (Desi Babool), A. Senegal and Hardwickia binata (Anjan) can be considered

Action needed Social fencing concept may be introduced Pro-poor and pro-shephered bias is needed in the share of usufructs

Important crop systems South Deep and medium black soils: Rabi sorghum, safflower, chickpea, sunflower, groundnut, pigeonpea, cotton Shallow black soils: Pearlmillet, short pulses, sunflower, groundnut, pigeonpea (sole or intercropped) Subsoil saline Coriander, safflower areas: Crop choice be made depending on the LGP (length of growing period), farmers priority and economic considerations One emerging point is that better crop husbandry with integrated use of on-farm and external inputs provide stability (case in point is groundnut in Rajkot). However mono-cropping of groundnut need be avoided. So is rabi sorghum. In-village production of seed of groundnut and other crops must be taken up Proper training and capacity building facilities are needed

Medium to shallow red soils: Groundnut, castor, sorghum, pearlmillet

North Medium black soils : Groundnut, castor, pigeon pea, soybean, sorghum, maize, sesame, sunflower Medium to shallow red soils: Pearl millet, mung bean, cluster bean, sunflower. Alluviums: Mustard, chickpea, wheat Irrigation: Heavy duty crops like sugarcane are taken up Heavy duty crops need shift to commercial crops, mustard (above Vindhyan belt) and sunflower (below the Vindhyan belt) with limited water use along with fruit Proper training and capacity building facilities are needed

Existing systems

Possible improvements trees, etc

Action needed

Tanks, percolation tanks, check dams (medium to large) besides soil conservation through bunding is common Saline water used to flocculate sodic black soils for growing crops Fruit trees: Ber, pomogranate, mango, guava, aonla (Emblica officinalis) with protective irrigation Tamarind, neem, seethaphal (Annona squamosa), Acacia catechu, mulberry also grown

Many structures are dysfunctional and warrant rejuvenation through user groups involvement Drip irrigation should replace the existing systems for fruit trees and vegetables Clean cultivation and individual plant attention needed Besides grasses and fodder legumes, tree components (A. nilotica, Prosopis juliflora (Vilayati babool) can be grown on degraded lands for fuel and bushes like agave can be considered. Jamun (Syzygium cumini), Hardwickia binata can also be taken up Health care and (articifial insemination / breed improvement) introduction of pedigree bulls/rams

Needed governmental support may be provided The user groups may have to maintain the structures Improved genetic stock must be in place

Small ruminants, bovines

Necessary support may be provided through existing programmes

C)

Wet semiarid ecosystem

Existing systems Commons fast vanishing. Cases of even tank beds being usurped for arable farming. Vegetal cover on hilly areas also degraded Possible improvements Re-vegetation to reduce erosivity of rainfall. Leucaena leucocephala (Subabool), Dalbergia sisso (Shisham) along with Sehima Dicanthium grasses and Stylosanthes hamata fodder legume be taken up Proper seed supply mechanism needed for sustained productivity. Wheat may be discouraged below Vidhyan belt. Safflower and chickpea are better. HYB/HYV cotton in medium to deep black soils need specific attention. So is the case with rice. Frequently, Action needed Social fencing concept with pro-poor bias in share of usufructs be developed

Important crop systems Medium to deep black soils: Kharif sorghum, cotton are traditional along with rice and pigeonpea. Sunflower, soybean are the new additions supplanting kharif sorghum or taking up in kharif fallows. Double cropping is also practised with wheat, The needed HYV seed may be produced in situ By encouraging custom-hiring of tractors, second crop in these regions is feasible, more so in deep black soils (e.g. Vidarbha, Malwa plateau and eastern part of Madhya Pradesh)

Existing systems chickpea, safflower as second crops. Sometimes mungbean is taken as first crop

Possible improvements the area is small, so neglected. Grown mostly by tribals. Variety needs improvement. Mixing rice and finger millet is a unique practice to cope with vagaries of weather and consequent fluctuations in the moisture regime. Should be fine-tuned. Diversification in the upland rice cropping system is urgently required

Action needed Fine tuning in management of temporary stagnation of rainwater in black soil region allows double cropping particularly in the Malwa plateau

Shallow/medium black soils: Kharif sorghum, pearlmillet, ,sunflower, soybean, pigeonpea, mungbean. Some intercropping taken up with sorghum and also with pigeonpea Deep to medium red soils: Kharif sorghum, finger millet, groundnut, pigeonpea, maize, pearl millet, horse gram, cowpea. Intercropping also taken up Fruit trees: Mango, citrus MPTs: Bamboo, Acacia catechu (Khair), teak, sal (Shorea robusta), Tendu (Diospyros melanorylon), mulberry Introduction of perennials (trees, shrubs and grasses) desirable for control of erosion by runoff. FSR including livestock component should be the priority area of research to support the requirements of perennials For packing citrus fruits, mango trees are felled. Alternates are available (e.g. Dalbergia sisso, Albizia lebbek (Siris)). Pest management on MPTs needs attention Groundwater recharge is possible in black soils with the lentilar structure (Malwa region) as well as in red soil areas. For surface storage prismatic / blocky structure black soil areas (Deccan region) hold promise Gully control through gabions. On farm rainwater conservation with small crosssectional bunds Health care, artificial Governmental support through existing programmes need be put in place A crash programme on fast growing MPTs need be taken up

Water harvesting structures: Common ponds, tanks, sunken ponds in the streams and sunken stretches between fields are seen. High erosivity leads to considerable gully formation. Bandh cultivation practised in deep black soils for rabi crops

Bovines, small ruminants

Governmental support through

Existing systems

Possible improvements insemination and introduction of pure bred pedigree males

Action needed existing programmes need be put in place

D)

Humid (Dry humid, Humid and Per humid) ecosystem

Existing systems Possible improvements Rejuvenation of these areas is possible with participatory forest management systems. Alnus nepalensis (Alder); Grewia optiva (Bhimal); Sal, Tendu can be considered Shifting cultivation is gradually phasing out. Associated land degradation can be moderated through appropriate soil conservation measures Encouraging the stakeholders to go for horticulture is a possible moderator Rice is life in this region. Grown in all locationsuplands, medium lands and lowlands. Uplands need special attention with diversification to more remunerative crops like groundnut. The medium and low lands and bunded uplands require specific technological options. Sweet potato and cassava cultivation need improvement through introduction of better varieties By early transplanting or seeding, second crop is certainty. Stand establishment of the second crop with minimum disturbance to the soil is a distinct possibility. If needed a come- up irrigation may be advantageous. Groundnut has a good potential and a specific programme be built up. Technologies are available Should be encouraged for better nutrition. Better Action needed Elite trees be identified and propagated

Substantial area still remains under forest, shrub jungles and village commons. However considerable degradation still occurring Shifting cultivation is practised in slopy lands. Even fruit plants like pine apple are grown in high slopes

Encourage Alder or fruit trees in agricultural fields aiming at agroforestry so that shifting cultivation phases out at a faster rate The needed saplings be obtained from NEH complex, Barapani (ICAR) Production technologies need fine tuning depending on the slope of the land

Slopes beyond cultivated

30%

also

Rice is mostly grown as staple crop. Others include finger millet, niger, sweet potato, cassava, horse gram grown on the slopes. Sugarcane is also grown as rainfed, in the plains

Second crop is taken through paira cultivation. In plains second crop of wheat, mustard or chickpea are taken

Came-up irrigation for the second crop and initial irrigation for growing paddy nurseries is feasible with shallow tube / open wells. A specific programme on groundnut can be mounted in the region

Growing vegetables along with arable crops is a common

Improved vegetable seed is

Existing systems feature. Some farmers grow vegetables with protective irrigation through inverted pyramid wells dug in the fields Besides the oil seed crops like niger and groundnut, farmers also grow commercial crops like turmeric and ginger

Possible improvements varieties be introduced

Action needed needed

Turmeric and ginger are locally accepted/grown crops. Varietal changes could be the first attempt Sal leaves are used as mulch. Forest Department restricts use of them to protect sal trees. This clash needs a scientific solution through participatory management approach A good crop establishment is difficult as the top soil dries up. A come-up irrigation helps. Shallow wells/tube wells are possible. They help in decongestion of the area The plant material in use can be improved with better varieties of vegetables and fruit trees. The fish quality in the ponds also needs improvement Existing systems are good and can be fine-tuned to properly provide surplussing without loss of added nutrients from field to field Energising the system of shallow tube wells provides great opportunities for early nurseries of rice and come-up irrigation to the second crop

Since turmeric and ginger are already grown locally its improvement in production is feasible The OUAT may look into the problem of sal leaves, besides supplying the improved varieties of turmeric and ginger To provide come-up irrigation for rabi crop and to decongest the area during the later part of kharif season, shallow open / tube wells programmes must be taken up on an massive scale Necessary financial support may be provided

Diara lands are put to short duration crops (Satta maize) in kharif followed by a poor second crop. Tal lands are put to post-monsoon crops which some-times fail for want of proper plant stands Homesteads family needs for meeting

Traditional soil and water conservation system, among others, includes

Soil conservation Terracing slope lands Bunding flat lands Providing levees Water conservation Pynes, Ahars and Talabs Shallow tube wells or wells Zabo system Gool/Kuhl system Farm ponds in homesteads

Necessary financial support may be provided even to finance improvement / replication of traditional systems

Existing systems MPTs and horticulture, among others, include

Possible improvements Improvement through better genetic stock possible

Action needed Kisan nurseries in close association with RAU, BAU and other may be taken up for supplying state universities, the seedlings of fruit trees and MPTs

MPTs like Alnus, Sal, Bamboo Bhima, Mulberry, and Horticulture Of Mango, Guava, Litchi, Jack etc Livestock: (Bovines, small ruminants and piggery) Health-care and breed upgradation of livestock. Better breed of pigs need attention

Provide necessary facilities through existing programmes

Given under are key considerations to be kept in mind in taking forward the above proposals. Develop and improved agricultural technologies adapted to local context ecologically, culturally, locally developed biological and technical measures and build on and improved indigenous practices and species, whenever possible. Emphasize the maintenance of the lands productivity, rather than limiting soil loss. Act to prevent of land degradation rather than the treatment of symptoms. Use biological (agronomic) technologies, e.g. agro forestry, and plant species that provide cover, organic matter, wood, fodder, food, soil nitrogen, etc. Emphasize productive diversity so as to minimize short-term risks both for farmer and land. Employ physical measures only when necessary and as supplements to biological measures. Promote techniques whose benefits can be captured by women and others secondary tenure rights holders (planting of grasses or bushes along contours). Promote techniques that accomplish more with less i.e. economize on water/nutrients. In arid areas, for sustainability, ensure that plans to increase biological production are based on thorough understanding of the local water balance. Avoid comprehensive land-use planning approach in which land capability is determined by elaborate physical surveys carried out by outsiders and imposed upon local land users. Encourage simple land-use planning by the land users themselves, with only complementary support from outside expertise and as locally requested and finalize the works plan through dialogue. The planning process is as important as the plan itself. When promoting land husbandry on a catchment basis, respect administrative boundaries as being more important than hydrological ones, as this reinforces the management capacity of existing institutions.

Annexure II

Restructuring Current Physical Land Development Activities

This follows recommendation 2 given in page 11. The current physical land development activities need improvements with the objective of ensuring the following - check erosion, diversify land-use to reduce vulnerabilities, incorporate fodder or grass plantation, check siltation of the water bodies in the downstream, finally enhance percolation to enrich soil moisture regime and finally augment ground water. Given are some examples that are suggestive and not comprehensive as several other validated approaches are found on the ground to serve the stated objectives. 1. Staggered Trench A staggered trench helps in-situ water conservation wherein pits are excavated across the slope of the land that without bunds or terrace to collect runoff and allow gradual percolation into the soil mass. It is a low-cost soil and water conservation to substitute conventional measures such as contour bunds/trenching. Each trench is about one foot in depth and located directly below one another in alternate rows with the excavated soil serving as a bund for plantation or growing grasses that is planted in the space between the trench and the bund. The soil quality determines the type of vegetation that it can support. The trench and the bund together act as a barrier to the runoff and check soil erosion. Again the accumulated water in the trench and behind the bund percolates down the soil to enhance soil moisture that increases biomass production from the otherwise unproductive lands. As often such soils are hard it is preferable to begin trench work when the soil is wet and labor is not engaged in agricultural operations. This is particularly useful in hilly regions where the slopes are high and where at least one foot deep soil can be excavated manually. This technique must be adopted on common land or government land with trench big enough to store expected runoff volume and bunds behind the trenches again provide for additional storage in case the runoff exceeds the average. Land treatment with staggered trench should start from the ridgeline. A diversion channel has to be constructed, if for some reason the treatment cannot be started from the ridgeline, to prevent entry of runoff from above into the treated patch and dispose it off safely. There is another approach to contour bunds and suited to high rainfall areas and easier for villagers to construct. Here as pit is dug at the lowest point of each such plot and the excavated earth from the pit is used to make two of its bunds. The steps here are: Divide and mark the selected area into 30 X 40 ft, starting from the ridgeline, with the help of measuring tape, rope, and lime. The size of the plots may be altered up to + 10% to fit to the boundary and ownership. Identify the lowest point in each plot. Dig a 3 ft deep pit that is 7 X 7 ft at the top. The pit should have a sloping wall such that the bottom of the pit is 5 X 5ft. Bund the plot with the excavated soil from the pit. The bund across the slope should be 1 ft high with a top width of 1 ft and bottom width of 2 ft. Use the rest of the excavated earth to construct the field bund at the side, along the slope.

2. Field leveling and bunds Field leveling and bunds make a plot suitable for agriculture by uniform distribution of soil moisture retention of soil and manure better drainage and use of irrigation water where available Field bunds are generally done in uplands, having less than 3% slope, to be used for intensive agriculture. The upstream side and mounds of the plot are cut to fill its downstream side, depressions and bunds to almost make a level field. Sloping fields are leveled and bunds constructed by using either earth or rocks. A bund is an earthen or rock embankment made around an agriculture plot to conserve soil and moisture. Rocks are used when they are easily available and there is a thin layer of topsoil. They are employed on gentle slopes for the purpose of preparing level fields. Where the soils are clayey and rainfall is high, the fields are provided with a grade across the slope to drain away the excess runoff. Its purpose is to break long slopes into a series of level fields for cultivation, reduce run-off and soil erosion and increase infiltration. The people who have undulating land can adopt this technique, as it brings about efficient water application to the crops. Irregular, uneven lands do not hold soil moisture and so land leveling is necessary to level out sloping lands. This helps in increasing soil moisture as well as its uniform distribution across the plot. The horizontal spacing of the bunds should be such that they are not close to make agricultural operation difficult. At the same time they should not be far away to make the leveling difficult. The spacing of bunds must vary according to the slope. For instance, steeper slopes will result in narrower strips for cultivation. The steps in field leveling and constructing bunds are: After the selection of the patch for leveling and bunding, plan plot boundaries and drainage system considering the ownership and topsoil depth. The topsoil depth has to be kept in mind, for deciding the width of plots along the slope. After cutting the earth from upstream side of the plot for field bunds, at least 6 topsoil has to be ensured for crop cultivation. In case of thin topsoil, plots will be of smaller width. Mark the ground boundaries, along which bunds have to be laid, with a rope and lime powder. Make the bunds and fill up the depressions of each plot by removing a thin layer of topsoil from the adjacent upper slopes and mounds. While removing the topsoil care should be taken not to expose the hard strata that are not suitable for cultivation. In extreme cases the top soil may be kept separately and replaced once the final level of the plot is attained. Construct the bund as follows: The top width of the bund ranges from 0.5-1.5 ft depending on its height. The side slope is 1:1. The height of the bund will be such that the plot holds enough run off to maximize moisture conservation without causing inundation. It should at least be of 1 height. Usually the bund should be made 30% higher than the design height to provide for settlement.

To drain the excess run off from the field, construct a small surplus escape on the lower field bund with local stones. The top of the spillway should be at least 6 below the top of the bund. The small bunds should be protected by establishing grasses and the big ones by providing stone pitching with local material. The exact site of the spillway is to be fixed after discussion with the landowners of the surrounding plots. 3. Water Storage We need in-situ rainwater harvesting suitable for medium uplands, in which every plot has its own water body, the area of which equals 5% of the total area of the plot. It is able to hold rainwater that otherwise flows out of the plot as run off. The water held in the pits would irrigate the plots during water scarcity. The length is one-fifth of the length of the plot and the width is one-fourth of the width of the plot and constructed in the following way after measuring the length and width of each individual plot. 1. Demarcate 5% area of the plot in the following manner. Mark an area of one-fifth of the length and one-fourth of the width at the upper right corner of the plot to dig the pit. A simple illustration may be of help. Suppose a plot is 150 ft. long and 100 ft. wide, the pit area needs to be 30 ft X 25 ft or 750 square feet. 2. The pit dug to the following dimensions: depth: 8-10 ft depending upon the type of the soil and wall slope 1:1. 3. Use the excavated earth to fill the depressions and strengthen the field bunds. 4. Make a small 4 high bund around the pit to keep some standing water in the field. The above not only saves the crop in the plot but also increases percolation to augment water availability in the downstream. Additionally, this treatment increases the farmers access to water as there is a storage structure in each of his plots. So the farmer can exercise individual choice to best utilize it. The 5% model has been successfully experimented in this agro-climatic zone for the above two purposes. The core idea of the 5% model of in-situ rain water harvesting is that every plot should have its own water-body to hold runoff that otherwise was flowing out of the plot. This treatment is suitable for a patch of minimum 4 hectares with unidirectional slope where crop fails due to regular water stress. The patch should have good soil cover with moderate porosity. The norm for allocating 5% area is not sacrosanct. One needs to consider land qualities and farmers preferences and other crop plans. A bigger pit is required to store more water. While laying out the pits in successive plots along the slope, one needs to make sure that pits are, not in a straight line, rather staggered. 4. Loose boulder Checkdams: This is one of the temporary structural measures for gully control adopted where plenty of loose boulders are available locally. They are constructed in series across the gully bed to stop channel erosion. By reducing the original gradient of the gully channel, they diminish the velocity of water flow and the erosive power of run-off. They convey the peak run-off safely. They have a life-span of three to eight years and collect and hold soil and moisture in the

bottom of the gully. Tree seedlings, as well as shrub and grass cuttings can be planted in gullies without being washed away by flowing water. Thus, they facilitate establishment of a permanent vegetative cover afterwards. They are used in 100-1000m long gullies with a catchment area of 20 ha or less. To avoid falling and damage to the likely vegetation, their heights are kept low. They are not necessary on those gully portions that are not affected by channel and lateral erosion due to continuous rock outcrops along their gully beds. They may also be combined with retaining walls parallel to the gully axis in order to prevent the scouring and undermining of the gully banks. They continue functioning if the gully catchment is well vegetated. The check dams are advised to be placed along the gully in such a way that the top level of the lower one nearly matches with the bottom level of the upper check dam. However, they can be placed along the gully at a gradient up to 3%, called compensation gradient. The lowest check dam in a gully at the junction point of the gully to the main stream or river, lake or reservoir should preferably be constructed on a stable point such as a rock outcrop. If there is no such stable point, enough precaution has to be taken to make it stronger. The points where the other check dams are to be built are determined according to the compensation gradient and the effective height of the check dams. The height of these check dams above the gully bed is normally kept within 1m and its foundation depth at least 0.5 m. This means that the top of the check dam, in the middle of the stream, is 1m above the bed level. They are preferably placed on the narrowest parts of the gully in order to reduce construction costs. The thickness of the dam at spillway level is 0.5m. As the material used in the check dam has a high angle of repose, the upstream slope of the check dam should be fixed at 1:1 in general, to be varied only in exceptional cases where the structure has to handle very high volume of runoff of high velocity. The downstream slope of the boulder check can vary from 2:1 to 4:1 depending on the volume and velocity of runoff. The higher the volume and velocity of runoff, the flatter is the slope. The downstream slope is given for two reasons absorb the impact of water that enters the structure at a high velocity; and drain out water from the structure and make it trickle-through at a non-scouring velocity. Boulder check dams are made in a series along the drainage line, with each structure dividing the total catchment of the drainage line into smaller sections. 1. Boulder checks should not be made at a point where the bed slope of the drainage line is above 20%. This reduces its capacity to hold water and trap silt. The flatter the bed slope, the more would be the storage per unit height of the structure. 2. A boulder check dam should be made where the embankments are strong and stable, and high enough to accommodate the peak flow. 3. No checks should be constructed where boulders are not adequately available within a radius of 50m. 4. Maintenance of these must be continued for at least two years after the treatment year. Treated areas must be inspected at least once a year. 5. Diversion channel or Grassed water way

Waterways are constructed to carry runoff from the upper catchments at a safe velocity to a natural drainage line without forming a gully. Waterways are vulnerable to erosion caused by water flow. Many farmers make the waterways too narrow to avoid wasting land that leads to erosion within them. So they should be carefully designed, constructed and maintained to reduce its risk of failure by erosion. When waterways are constructed to intercept and divert runoff away from agricultural land or habitations into natural drainage or water storages, they are called diversion channels. The typical uses for diversion channels are: above the patches treated with 30-40 or contour/graded bunds to intercept runoff from areas above cropping land and direct it to a waterway in strategic locations within cultivated patches where it is required to divert runoff from entering the low lands and take it through uplands and medium lands before joining a waterway and collect runoff from cross road drainage points and direct it to a waterway 6. Earthen tank or Water Harvesting Tank Earthen structures constructed mostly across the drainage lines to store water for irrigation, fishery, domestic use or livestock. Its size is usually dictated by the availability of adequate land. In rare cases one gets to design and build a tank of a desired size to meet the water requirements of the community. The step is to determine the catchment area, above the tank site, from where the run off would be collected to fill the pond. Thereafter the location, alignment and height of the earthen bund are decided, as also the location and size of the spillway to evacuate the surplus monsoon discharge.

Annexure III Select Field Examples of Next Practices

Shashwat, a NGO in Ambegaon Tehsil of Pune district has carried out terracing on private lands in the upper reaches of the Dimbhe dam. As a result, lands which produced minor millets have started producing paddy. Food availability which previously lasted for 4 to 6 months for the families involved went up to 8 to 10 months post terracing. A bonus benefit is the prevention of silt transport into the Dimbhe dam significantly adding to the design life of the dam. Here traditional system of community mutual aid (Padkai) helped convert the uplands into terraces. Village youth were trained for the measurement work which was then only cross checked and certified by the departmental staff. Community mobilization has led to making this happen. SERP in AP with the help of self help groups has pioneered an innovation in MGNREGS which is promising. Here on individual lands, continuous counter trenches on the top field and stand alone trenches are dug at various places within the field so that water is harvested to flow through them into the farm pond. Diversion drain is also dug to allow excess to flow out. Then each farmer has a compost pit and green manure crops will be planted and this along with the crop waste will be used for composting. In addition conservation furrows are dug in the field for each four meter gap with a depth of fifty centimeters. The furrow bunds are planted with perennials variety of red gram. In addition to these and at the start silt application is taken up

on the individual land along with pits for horticulture. This approach has enabled the land to absorb and store rain water in various places or sink into the soil and be available for plant growth. Cropping is also advised and done across the slope so that the runoff is smooth and as much as possible water is absorbed in the soil or available on the land. This explains the value of rigorous and integrated planning. Tree Based Farming Systems is the approach of BAIF wherein activities are planned in compact blocks of 100 hectares of farmers lands. The support on individual farmers land can range from one acre to one hectare. The project is 5 to 6 years of which material/input support activity is of 3 years, and last 2-3 years is wage support until the productivity stars. During first three years major material support is also needed and for this location specific 60- 40 norm details are worked out. Some material is sourced from the area itself, seedlings, while neem cake, seedlings, seeds, etc are be sourced from outside. In the first three years land productivity enhancement through water and soil conservation measures along with standard watershed treatment with intensive thrust on landscape greening. Here technology and size integration are seen as the basis for its effective outcome. The summary table given below is the approach of WASSAN, an organization well experienced on watershed being evolved under AP Drought Adaptation Initiative for asset improvement. A. Enhancement of soil fertility: Fertility and productivity of the soils improvement by rectification
of soil problems, establishing mechanisms for regular application of organic matter and bringing about appropriate changes in crop patterns/ rotations. The status of soil organic matter Tank silt application, Improve soil physical and during the crop season improved biological and chemical Promoting composting properties. Reduce soil through changes in the crop systems, (aerobic and vermi), green nutrient deficiencies appropriate agronomic measures, manure& mulching and including micronutrient application of compost and tank silt other practices. deficiencies application. Rectification of the problem soils Warping, gypsum The soil productivity is (salinity, alkalinity, acidity, water application, addition of improved. Problem soils logging, stone clearance etc.) green manures, stone / bush will be brought under clearance etc. cultivation.

1)

2)

B. Biomass development: in both private and common lands provides critical support for soil
fertility enhancement, increasing fodder base (tree and grass) for large and small ruminants, fuel, fruits and income diversification. Development of tree biomass within Multi-species nursery 50 fodder, 5 fruit and the farms on bunds and allocated raising, 100 other trees to areas particularly fodder trees and improve soils. plantation, protection and biomass for soil productivity. watering in private lands Biomass compost and (bulk / on bunds) green leaf manure along with fodder.

3)

4)

Rain fed horticulture integrated into Purchase /nursery raising, At least 10% area in dry the farming systems plantation, protection and land horticulture watering species as part or bulk plantations.

C. Diversification of crop systems and promoting sustainable agriculture: Establishing support

systems, especially in the supply of seed material of diverse crops, integrating millets/ pulses into mono-crop systems and promoting diversified crop systems and crop rotations will enhance the adaptive capacity. Crop systems are diversified to Infrastructure for seed Enable multiple crop include intercrops that provide cultivation. banks fodder and food fodder and improve soil fertility. Harvest green manure and crop residues.

5)

D. Regeneration of commons: Patches of common lands or water bodies will be conserved and 6)
biomass in such lands is enhanced. The common lands (including water bodies) and private fallows within the block will be developed into quality pastures/ fodder plots. Conservation and Location specific with development of resources, focus on vegetative and plantation (if required) and measures pasture development as per the local needs. irrigation to Location specific & based opportunities of rain fed lands from water on availability of water. bodies. trenching and laying of pipelines for extension of critical irrigation of irrigation canals, water bodies/feeder channels.

E. Extending Protective Irrigation 7) Protective irrigation expanded to Protective

most of the 100 ha depending on the opportunities/ negotiations water bodies by block local

Support

Restoring the irrigation potential of

Repair/maintenance

Report of the Working Group on Specific Needs of Special Categories under MGNREGA

July 2010

Members of Working Group on Specific needs of specific category of workers

Chairperson Smt. Renuka Chowdhury Former Union Minister Members Dr. Botcha Jhansi Laxmi, MP Dr. T. Haque, Centre for Social Development Ms. Neeta Hardikar, ANANDI Prof. R. Limbadri, Centre for Dalit Studies Sri S. K. Pattnayyak, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment Sri T.C .Shiva Kumar, National Institute of Mentally Handicapped

3 Faculty Members of NIRD who were associated with the Working Group I. From Centre for Wage Employment and Poverty Alleviation Dr.C.Dheeraja Dr.V.Suresh Babu Dr.Joseph Abraham Mr.S. David Brynerd

II.

From other Centres of NIRD Dr.R.R.Prasad Dr.P.S.Geethakutty Dr.B.Chakravarty Dr.K.P.Kumaran Dr.A.Rizwana Dr.V.Annamalai

III.

Overall co-ordination Dr.M.V.Rao Dr.K.Hanumantha Rao Dr.G.Rajanikanth

Acknowledgements
The Working Group would like to place on record its sincere thanks to Ministry of Rural Development, Govt. of India for entrusting this onerous task. The Working Group profusely thank Shri Mathew C. Kunnumkal, IAS, Director General, Shri K.N. Kumar, IAS, Deputy Director General and Dr M.V. Rao, IAS, Registrar & Director (Administration) of National Institute of Rural Development, Hyderabad for their unstinted support . Shri A Murali, Director MGNREGA-AP deserves special mention for his rich contribution to the discussions and suggestions. It likes to acknowledge the support extended by the district administration of Khammam for arranging the consultation meeting with elected

representatives, member of civil society organizations, and officials. The feedback and suggestions helped us in refining our recommendations. Special thanks are due to Shri R. Venkata Reddy, Hon. Minister of Cooperative, Employment and labour, Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, Shri Bhatti Vikramarka, Chief Whip and Shri N. Nageswara Rao, District Programme Coordinator for their valuable observations and suggestions. Shri Pavan of Swadhikar, Anantapur made significant contribution in the discussions on the needs of physically challenged and measures for enabling them to take part in MGNREGA with human dignity. Thanks are also due to all the faculty members of NIRD who have provided academic support. Ms. Prasanna and Ms. Lakshmi provided much valued secretarial assistance to the Working Group.

Chairperson and Members

Report of the working group on Specific Needs of Special Categories under MGNREGA Backdrop
The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Programme is the first programme to provide guaranteed livelihood security to Indias rural poor. The MGNREGS is an innovative programme to boost (1) the rural economy, (2) stabilize agricultural production and (3) to provide livelihood security to the poor and thereby transform the scenario of poverty. The MGNREGA, by providing legal guarantee to work, marks a paradigm shift from all earlier wage employment programs. It is an inclusive programme covering all the disadvantaged sections of the society Still, the participation levels of the special groups like minorities, disabled and aged are low. Though women participation levels are more than the stipulated norms of one third, still are not able to reach 100 days of minimum guaranteed employment. Among the socially disadvantaged, the land owning members could not reap much benefit despite adequate provision to take up work on the lands of these groups. Further, adhocism in planning and lack of awareness about the schemes features (rights and entitlements) also resulted under utilization of the opportunities under MGNREGA. In fact, one can infer that while MGNREGA could provide employment, it failed to convert expenditure into investment. The implementing agencies have failed to undertake the intensive and continuous Information Education Communication (IEC) to educate the people of their rights under the Act. Delivery system in general, is also not very proactive and pro- poor in several states In this context, to improve the situation, the Ministry of Rural Development constituted six working groups to discuss various issues and suggest recommendations which can make MGNREGS more effective. It is the endeavor of the MGNREGA to lay focus on distributive social justice even while revitalizing the agriculture and allied works. One such working group under the chairmanship of Smt. Renuka Chowdhury, has examined the issues of socio-economic inclusion and identification of specific needs of

6 special groups in MGNREGS and suggests measures for meeting their specific requirements.

ToR
The specific terms of reference of this committee given by MoRD are: A. Issues to be addressed (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Gender equity Needs of disabled persons Needs of old persons Special benefits to SC/ST/groups or families in LWE/drought affected areas

B. Measures identified should aim at enhancing the effectiveness of the law as a social safety net especially for vulnerable groups

Approach adopted
The working group met at NIRD on 23rd April, 2010 to discuss the issues pertaining to participation of vulnerable sections like SC/ST, minorities, women, disabled and aged. The current status of participation of these socially disadvantaged groups in MGNREGS in different regions of the country has been reviewed. Members shared their experiences and views in enhancing the effectiveness of MGNREGA as a social security intervention for the deprived groups (Minutes of the meeting are presented in Annexure- I). The chairperson in the light of the deliberations decided to form three sub-groups to discuss the issues relating to the special categories in greater depth and to arrive at certain action points to overcome the obstacles and there by improve the access of the disadvantaged to MGNREGA benefits. Sub-Group I: Social equity and gender equity concerns under MGNREGS Sub-Group II: Needs of the disabled and aged people Sub-Group III: Requirements of people in LWE and Drought Prone areas (Sub-Group wise list of Chairpersons and Members is presented in Annexure- II)

7 Sub Group on Gender Equity and Social Equity The sub-group under the chairmanship of Dr. Botsa Jhansi, MP deliberated on the ToR of the sub group which are reproduced below. Effective measures for striking gender equity Effective measures for striking social equity (encouraging measures for participation of all socially and economically deprived classes in rural society) Identifying more specific needs of women at worksites and suggesting measures for implementing the same. Measures to popularise and propagate facilities for women under MGNREGA Any other issue, the sub-group consider essential

Group prepared a check list and mailed to all development corporations like SC/ST and women to elicit their opinions on the functioning of MGNREGS and suggest ways and means to collaborate or converge with MGNREGS to reach the target group more effectively. The team members visited the corporations in Hyderabad and collected their suggestions too. (Template is presented in Annexure III) The sub group met in Vizianagaram, Andhra Pradesh during 6-7, June 2010 to interact, consult and understand the special interventions designed and implemented for the people (SC/ST and Women) with specific needs. The team held meetings and visited the worksites where the lands of the SC and ST communities are developed and also to capture the needs of women workers and minorities. Discussions were held with the Mandal and District level officials and representatives of the voluntary organisations to understand the processes carried out for inclusion of women and socio economically marginalised workers in MGNREGS. Suggestions made for enhancement of their participation were recorded. (Detailed Report is attached in Annexure-IV)

8 Sub-Group on Needs of the disabled and aged people The sub-group was mandated to look into the following aspects: (i) Specific measures to identify suitable works for physically challenged persons and aged people. (ii) (iii) (iv) Worksite facilities for Physically Challenged and Aged persons Specific measures to protect their rights. Any other issue that the sub-group deemed suitable. Sub group under the Chairmanship of Sri. S.K Pattanayak, Director, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Government of India held discussions on 11.6.2010 and 12.6.2010 at NIRD. In the deliberations, the problems of database on differentially abled persons in terms of the number and also the degree of disability were highlighted. It was also felt by the group that there has been a rise in the share of aged in the population. Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) are more vulnerable among the poorer sections. They also opined that the present coping mechanisms are inadequate to ensure livelihood security to PwDs and the aged population. They also appreciated the efforts made by the few States in this regard. (Detailed minutes of the meeting are attached in Annexure-V) Sub-Group on requirements of people in LWE and Drought Prone areas The sub-group headed by Dr. T. Haque met on 28th May at New Delhi and discussed the TOR given by the chair person Smt. Renuka Chowdhury. The mandate for the sub-group includes: 1. special measures for SC/ST / other workers in LWE areas 2. special measures for SC/ST / other workers in drought prone areas 3. worksite facilities in LWE & DP areas 4. work norms in LWE & DP areas 5. any other relevant issues The problems of the socially and economically disadvantaged in particular and village communities in general residing in the Left wing Extremism (LWE) areas and Drought Prone (DP) areas are discussed at length.

9 The nature and extent of vulnerabilities experienced by these disadvantaged sections and determinants of livelihood (in) security are reviewed. The group also discussed the untapped opportunities in these areas and performance of the MGNREGA in some of these areas. It is to be noted that despite limitations, the contribution of MGNREGA in these areas has been found to be beneficial and measures to strengthen MGNREGS would be more rewarding to the rural communities and more so to the disadvantaged sections.( Detailed report is attached in Annexure-VI). The Chairperson of this working group had a discussion on sub-group reports with NIRD faculty members on 28th June, 2010. Keeping in view the recommendations of the sub groups, Chairperson added few issues for consideration. (Minutes attached at Annexure-VII). The working group had a discussion with the elected representatives, officials and representatives from civil society organisations on the issues dealt with by the working group and the suggestions made by the group at Khammam on 4th July 2010. (The minutes of the meeting are enclosed. See Annexure- VIII).

Framework for addressing the needs

MGNREGA aims at ensuring livelihood security to rural poor through provision of gainful employment opportunities. It also attempts to create productive and durable assets (community and individual) for generation of employment and income on sustainable basis. The Working Group has noted the apprehensions that MGNREGA is not serving the interests of agriculture. However, the working group strongly feels that MGNREGA can address the problems of agriculture adequately and in the process generate 100 days of guaranteed employment to all the willing workers. It also opines that through participatory planning process MGNREGA can play a key role in elimination of absolute poverty in the medium run and move towards achievement of sustainable livelihoods even while achieving the goal of sustainable agriculture in the long term. Thus, MGNREGS can visualize achievement of sustainable livelihoods as well as sustainable agriculture. The priorities and the institutional arrangements need to be reoriented for realization of the above vision. The working group made specific suggestions for addressing their special needs articulated by the special categories through MGNREGS.

10 Based on the deliberations and field observations and interactions with the special groups, the main needs of these groups are presented below

SC/ST Lack of assets and resources; meager and unproductive assets Low Levels of skills Low social capital - lack of access to formal and informal organisations Not able to avail of all the 100 days of guaranteed employment; not able to get employment on demand Lack of social security measures like pension, insurance etc Socially marginalized and the victims of dominance of other castes discrimination in work allotment. Lack of information on provisions of MGNREGA to realize full benefits such as development of their lands. Delayed wage payments Low employment opportunities Undernourishment / food insecurity

Women Dependent and single women exclusion from MGNREGS Lack of awareness and skills Unfavourable work norms in MGNREGS (piece rate work) and so not able to get wages on par with men Hardships in unskilled manual labour Household responsibilities Lack of sensitivity of delivery system towards problems of women Lack of ownership of assets (access and control over resources) Low social capital- lack of formal and informal organisation Not able to utilize all the 100 days employment; not able to get employment on demand Lack of social security measures like maternity benefits, pension, insurance etc.

11 Non-provision of worksite facilities Gender bias in labour market Lack of women friendly tools

Disabled Aged Dependency on the children Non inclusion in the MGNREGS (one job card per household) Unfavourable work norms in MGNREGS; low wage earnings. Lack of sensitivity of officials towards aged for inclusion Lack of / inadequate security measures like pension and insurance Non inclusion in the MGNREGS (low coverage) Unfavourable work norms in MGNREGS Distance to worksites Lack of sensitivity of delivery system towards disabled Low social capital- Lack of access to formal and informal organisations

Minorities Lack of awareness Cultural taboos Low preference to unskilled work

LWE areas Risks posed to implementing agency by LWE Backwardness of the region and limited economic opportunities Illiteracy and low skills of people (low levels of social development) Weak Panchayats Improper and inadequate shelf of works Ineffective enforcement of PESA Non enforcement of Forest Rights Act.

Drought Prone Areas Resource deficiency of the area low and erratic rainfall, poor fertile soils, problems of water and soil conservation, low productivity

12 Lack of credit and market facilities Inadequate and degenerated natural resources Inadequate shelf of projects Lack of adequate employment opportunities

The working group has adopted an analytical framework for looking at various issues affecting the socially disadvantaged in terms of accessing 100 days of gainful employment and also in enriching their asset base so as to earn adequate incomes. Thus, besides provision of livelihood security, MGNREGS should create tangible and productive assets for revitalizing the agriculture and allied activities. The working group felt that the MGNREGS workers should be differentiated into asset owning and asset less (land and Skill) and measures should be suggested for poverty alleviation in short run and eradication of absolute poverty in medium run through a diversified and sustainable agriculture base. The Working group feels that there is ample scope for effectively utilizing the MGNREGS for modernizing the Indian agriculture and integrate with the world economy through effective backward and forward linkages. The group strongly opines that the possibilities of graduating unskilled to semi skilled and skilled workers category through convergence of MGNREGS with other skill based development programmes have to be explored. As far as disabled and aged are concerned special measures are suggested to meet their specific needs. It is the considered view of the group that for the land owning poor, the eight categories of permissible works (if necessary by including additional works) if undertaken in a more systematic way would strengthen the natural resource base of the area. The Group suggests that the farmers need to be organized into Self Help Groups of farmers and federated into Village Organisation at village level. The VO has to act as an interface between the farmers and the other stakeholders. This arrangement will facilitate the farmers to access technology, credit and market support in an organized manner. SHGs with the help of VO can identify works to be taken up on their individual lands to make them productive and sustainable in a period of three to four years. Every farmer household has to prepare a development plan keeping his preferences and adopting

13 integrated farming systems approach. Being a right based programme, the working group is of view that the suggested action points should not only help meet the specific needs of these special groups but also empower them in terms of well informed and capable citizenry. Figure- 1 presents the suggested framework for the sustainable agriculture and sustainable livelihoods for the SC/ST/small farmer through MGNREGA. Formation of landless workers into Labour Groups and federated into VOs would enable them to access the MGNREGA related information and articulate their demand for employment. The groups can also suggest works which can be taken up on community lands to access 100 days of employment. There is need as well as scope for identifying new works which would provide guaranteed 100 days employment besides strengthening agriculture and social infrastructure. The latter would facilitate in enriching the quality of life. Provision of access to other social safety nets would ensure livelihood security to these groups in the short term. It is also suggested that the landless Labour Groups should be given maintenance of the works taken up on community land. The group suggests that these unskilled workers should be graduated to higher level by providing skills and building the capacities of Labour Groups. Such arrangements would enhance their negotiation capacity and facilitate mobility which may lead to reduction in their poverty. Such type of qualitative changes in the rural labour market would reduce the burden on the agriculture (disguised unemployment) and make rural economy diversified. Figure 2 illustrates the suggested framework for sustainable livelihoods of landless.

MGNREGA for sustainable livelihoods to landless SC & ST: A Framework

Landless

MGNREGA

Livelihood Security
100 days of supplementary employment Minimum wages Accessing other safety nets Expenditure on food, health & education

Poverty alleviation
Capacity Building (Quality of workforce) --------------- Negotiation capacity (organization) --------------- Accessing other safety nets ---------------- Multiple sources of income Access to social amenities

di

SHG

Access to information on MGNREGA

Demand work (when needed)

Timely & minimum wage

SC / ST 125 days of employment Allocation of CPR maintenance

Aged / disabled Separate job card Reduced SoRs Transport to worksite Tools Flexible timings Convergence with health

LWE/DPAP 150 days of work per household or 100 days for each worker Identification of certain processing works as permissible

Women Tools Works Worksite facilities Flexible timings Maternity Benefits Job card (for single / dependent women) Convergence with ICDS/Health (vaccination)

A l t m i S g t w t d M M ( p

MGNREGA for Sustainable Agriculture and Sustainable livelihoods to SC & ST Farmers: A

Community resource personnel facilitation

Line departments / KVK convergence Productive assets 3 to 5 years MGNREGA Livelihood Security 100 days of supplementary employment Minimum wages Expenditure on food, health & education Accessing other safety nets Poverty alleviation Quality of workforce --------------- Negotiating capacity (organized) --------------- Accessing other safety nets ---------------- Mobility (occupation / physical-pull) ---------------- Capacity Building

S A

HH specific land development plans

Land owning

SHGs of farmers

Access to MGNREGA information Demand for work Timely & minimum wages

SC / ST Priority in SoP (% of expenditure) Educated to be trained as mates / FAs Access to CPR CPRs use for providing backward linkages with land development schemes

LWE 150 days per HH & 100 days for each worker STs using government land to be treated as tenants (LWE) MGNREGA, PESA & FRA framework for development of land & forest resources Identification of certain processing works to disabled

L p F s a p M ( p u A i q

16 As far as aged and disabled are concerned MGNREGA should aim at providing safe and friendly working environment by responding to their special needs in terms of timing, liberal work norms, inclusion of additional works, etc. It is imputative that the local institutions should ensure their access to social security opportunities. To operationalise the framework indicated above necessary institutional arrangements have to be made along with capacity building initiatives.

Institutional arrangements
Formation of workers into Labour Groups and SHGs of farmers should be done in a mission mode and the Mate, Field Assistant and GRS and the SC/ST women members of GP should be involved in this particular task. There should be some arrangement at GP level preferably to enable the farmers to prepare household specific plans. Arrangements are also needed to monitor the progress of the implementation of these plans and also in regard to specific outcomes expected. (Working Group on identification of works to be taken up on Individual lands dealt with this aspect in detail).

Capacity building
The group strongly feels that farmers need to be oriented towards environmental friendly practices and gradually move towards modernized agriculture through value addition measures such as processing and marketing of semi-processed products to minimize the risks. The institutions such as KVKs, Farmers Schools, and reputed NGOs with expertise in agriculture should build the capacities of the farming community in this regard. Keeping the articulated needs in view and based on the insights from the field and views of the delivery system the working group has made the following recommendations to address the specific needs of special groups and also for enhancing the effectiveness of the MGNREGA in ensuring livelihoods and minimize the vulnerabilities of the groups.

17

Recommendations

a. SC/ST
Since most of the MGNREGA workers of SC/ST community are either un-or underemployed, they have to be provided with at least 20-25 days of work additionally. This would minimize food insecurity. All the SC/ST farmers and landless workers should be organized into self help groups / labour groups of 15-20 members and all these SHGs / Labour Groups should be federated at the village level as Village Organisation (VO). All the SC/ST landless workers who participated for at least 30 days in MGNREGS should be covered under Provident Fund scheme (as in West Bengal) as a social security measure. All the SC/ST MGNREGS workers should be graduated to semiskilled and skilled level in a specified time period by converging with NRLM and other self employment and job oriented programme. At least one worker in the households who participated for more than 75 days under MGNREGA should be provided with such opportunity. Land development of SC/ST and other farmers should be done in a comprehensive and project mode to ensure formation of productive assets yielding regular income and employment to the household. Each household should be given a work identification number and all the tasks necessary for making the land productive should be taken up in (sequential) time-bound manner. Community resource persons, the line departments, KVKs and NGOs with relevant expertise should be associated with the preparation of household specific land development plan (tree based planning, horticulture, integrated farming system, land husbandry, agro forestry systems, pisciculture, livestock management etc). It is imperative this process should be farmer specific and his priorities and preferences should be the guiding factor. DPC/PO should commit resources over the project period for development of the lands of the SC/ST. Wherever irrigation is feasible at least one acre of SC/ST land should be provided with assured irrigation in the next 2-3 years.

18 All the GP plans should accompany with activity mapping in order to have a clear picture of agriculture production cycle and seasonality and demand for employment in order to safeguard the labour requirements of the farming community. The SC/ST land development work should be given priority in future MGNREGS planning in terms of budgetary allocation (at least 50 per cent at state-level), coverage of minimum area etc. The development of lands of others and CPRs should be taken up only after meeting the targets of SC/ST lands. The wage seekers whose lands are taken under comprehensive land development activities should be trained in the interventions to be undertaken on their land. SC/ST can be given priority in other skill training in construction work, vermi compost production, horticulture and drip irrigation systems etc, and these trainings may be done in convergence with SC/ST development corporations and to concerned line departments/ agencies. The literate but unskilled wage workers could be trained as Mates, Technical Assistants, Social Auditors and this would enable them to acquire new skills. Such measure helps in creation of a cadre of para professionals at GP level (capacity building of community). A district or state level resource group be formed for capacity building of SC/ST wage workers as well as the SC/ST members of Gram Panchayats Separate shelf of works may be prepared for development of SC/ST lands Ownership and user rights on community assets be reserved and assigned for the women and SC and ST groups (landless) Ward Sabhas should be conducted separately in SC and ST hamlets for effective participation in planning and identification of shelf of works A small and separate cell may be created at the State level and positioning of one official at district level to periodically monitor the provision of the facilities and enforcement of rights and entitlements for the women and SC/ST workers. They have to submit reports quarterly and these reports along with concrete actions taken by officials should be placed in the public domain.

19 MIS formats should be modified to track the benefits accruing to the women and SC/ST from MGNREGS

b. Women To minimise the vulnerability of widows, deserted and separated women, they
should be treated as separate units and job card be provided with. Separate identification and job card for single as well as dependent women residing with family members, should be issued for their livelihood security. Separate SoRs be prepared for different categories of wage workers (men, women, aged, physically challenged etc.) to ensure the minimum guaranteed MGNREGA wage for all. Flexible timings like four hours a day be treated as half day work and women workers may be allotted work for double the number of days of four hours each. Many places Crche facility is not provided on account of inadequate number of children (5). More over, mothers are also not willing to bring the children to the worksite because of the distance, heat and unsafe environment. It is safer to keep children at the Aanganwadi Centre. Thus, crche facility should be provided in convergence with ICDS to ensure safety of children; this would also provide the poor childrens access to nutritious food and non-school education; such measures would enable to achieve Millennium Development Goals. In many cases mothers cant take the children for vaccination, as they have to come for work. So, instructions may be given to the ANM to provide vaccination at the worksite itself to the children of women wage seekers or at Anganwadi and also to pregnant and lactating mothers who come for work. Like convergence with other development schemes, we need to converge MGNREGS with the NRHM and ICDS programmes for periodic health care camps, vaccination, supplementary nutrition etc. should be planned for reducing mortality rates.

20 Women friendly works like horticulture and nurseries may be taken up and preference should be given for pregnant, lactating and aged women. Women friendly tools have to be made available to women, to ensure the productivity on par with men besides minimizing health hazards caused by the heavy and man friendly tools. Provision of hats to protect from heat and gum boots (to protect from water borne diseases and insect bites) are recommended by the group. In many of the worksites, provision of facilities is done by women. In some places, where the water availability is not adequate, women have to walk far of places. In such cases, Trolleys be used for bringing water to worksites to reduce drudgery Collection of non timber forest produce and processing( eg. Leaf plate making, de seeding and de- fibrin of the tamarind manually) may be considered as permissible activity under the MGNREGS The provision of soil and water conservation works on SC/ ST land should be extended to lands owned by women of BPL category too. All common property resource should be a collective property of the users of which at least 50 per cent of them should be women. The training and capacity building component in the programme should also focus on building skills among women labour in order to undertake skilled jobs/ works in the MGNREGS. There should be reservation for at least 5o per cent women as Mates All IEC print as well as audio visual material must communicate the need and importance of separate account in bank or post office and equal wages for men and women. IEC in NREGA would reinforce education and action on this constitutional right to all workers, especially women. Transport facility should be provided to the pregnant women to reach the worksite or the existing norm of 5 km for eligibility of transport allowance may be relaxed to 1 km. Works like nurseries, vermi compost production and vegetable garden can be considered as permissible activity for enhancing women participation.

21 Maternity benefit is every womans right. The group has suggested advance payment of wages in the advanced stages of pregnancy for all those who worked during the last year. Paid maternity leave may be given to those who have worked on MGNREGS for at least 30 days in a year.(But it should be restricted to first two deliveries)

c. Disabled and Aged

i) ii) All those workers above 65 years be treated as aged. The claim of the disabled should be supported by doctors certificate or by fellow workers. In case of wrong certification the fellow worker should be made liable to lose the job card. iii) The District administration should strive to graduate all the disabled towards skilled status in a specific time frame. iv) In the selection of Mates, Grama Rozgar Sevaks (GRS) and Technical Assistants, the literate and/or semi skilled persons with disabilities (PwDs) belonging to labour households be given preference. v) A system of flexi hours should be adopted for PwDs and aged, so that they can execute the work at convenient times during the day. vi) The length of actual work time be relaxed for PwDs and aged and they may be allowed to work for 5.30 hrs a day (This is recommended on the basis of Work Time Motion Studies under taken by an NGO (SWADHIKAR, AP.) vii) The work norms (as per SoRs) for PwDs and aged should be reduced by 30 percent. viii) The PwDs and aged be given separate and independent Job Cards within a household. It has been observed that the households having a PwD and aged at home generally avail the benefit for a non disabled member in the family and PwDs are not allowed to work in the site and actually earn. Having a separate Job Card will make the PwDs and aged independent for pursuing employment under the scheme if s/he chooses to do so. ix) Exclusive staff may be posted at the block and district level for mobilization of PwDs and to look after the special needs of the workers with disabilities.

22 He will act as a channel between the officials / PIA and workers with disabilities and strive for creating conducive environment for PwDs to work. He will also look after the information, communication and education (IEC) needs of PwDs. The salary and allowances of such staff may be borne out of administrative expenses of the scheme. x) In the matters of deciding the work and also location of work the PwDs and aged be allowed to exercise their choice (in a situation where different types of work are being carried out and at different locations) and priority should be given to their preferences. xi) The PwDs and aged be given travel allowances at higher rate on preferential basis. For the travel from place of residence to worksite, the travel allowance may be paid @ 10 % of the minimum daily wages for the initial distance from 0 .50km to 5km and @ 20 % for above 5 kms. xii) At Gram Panchayat, Block, and District levels, a monitoring and reporting mechanism of the works meant for PwDs and aged be put in place and monitoring and reporting should be done on a regular and continuous basis. The present institutional arrangements in MGNREGA be strengthened/ modified to accommodate this. A dedicated Cell at the state and district levels and an additional PO would help in effective monitoring and coordinating with other departments. xiii) In Andhra Pradesh there is a system of providing Rs 3 per person per man day for mobilizing PwDs in MGNREGS. The CSOs/NGOs are engaged in mobilizing PwDs and the system seems to be working very well. This system may be replicated in other States. The NGOs and CSOs may also act as an implementing agency and can mobilize PwDs under this system. This suggestion is not duplicating the suggestion given at point No.(ix) above. The staff to be posted at block and district level will be performing a job of moderator and facilitator and provide necessary intervention to facilitate a smooth work environment for PwDs and Aged.

23 xiv) A suitable shelf of works and opportunities may be created for the semiskilled PwDs having soft and traditional skills and crafts like computer, carpentry, masonry etc. xv) The land owned by the PwDs be given preference in the execution of MGNREGA individual works. xvi) Works that facilitates accessibility and barrier free entry to all public places like schools, PHCs, water sources, parks etc., should be undertaken on priority and may be included in the shelf of projects as mentioned at Point no 11. xvii) The work site facilities must be such that it takes care of the specific needs of PwDs and Aged.

d. Minorities
The participation levels are very low among the minority women in MGNREGS. They prefer skilled work in the place of unskilled. Though there is no ban on their participation still cultural taboo exists which do not motivate minority women to participate in MGNREGS. So, special awareness drive should be planned for their inclusion in the programme.

Wherever possible skill oriented trainings should be provided for these groups. e. LWE and Drought Prone areas
Planning Process The LWE regions falling under Schedule V area, PESA and FRA provide necessary framework for strengthening of land and forest resources. MGNREGA could

provide the necessary support (with financial and professional) for empowerment of tribal community and poverty alleviation. The adhoc planning has led to lack of adequate works and also found to be incompatible in the prevailing conditions and local priorities. Participatory approach to prepare area development plan to workout systems for livelihood security for landless and land owing wage seekers is the immediate need of the programme.

24 GIS based resource mapping would facilitate in better identification and preparation of developmental plan. Watershed based planning needs to be adopted for effective rejuvenation of natural resources. Officials involved in planning should be given adequate time for developing the GP plan by using PRA techniques. Land development plan should be prepared based on the individual land owning household plan. A consolidation of activities under land development should be carried out at Gram Panchayat level. These consolidated land development plan should figure in the District Agriculture Plan. The ITDA needs to be strengthened with competent professionals to provide guidance, assistance to the tribal community in preparation of community as well as household specific development plans. The funds for tribal development are under utilized. The formal and informal institutions (Eg: Gram Sabha, Tribal Chiefs, VSS, VTDA, etc.,) should be strengthened. For this, the capacities needs to be built with the help of SIRD, ETC, ITDA and other institutions and also reputed CSOs. Each ITDA in consultation with local institutions should take up this task in mission mode with in one year. The educated tribal youth need to be trained as community facilitators. Research Institutions and reputed CSOs working with tribals may be entrusted with preparations of plans in participatory mode. Their services can be engaged to monitor the implementation of these plans periodically. Convergence should be an inbuilt component of planning. Capacity building It is necessary to organize the wage seekers as SHG member and federate them at village. The capacity building of these wage seekers on thematic areas such as Apiary (Bee-keeping), Mushroom cultivation, scientific collection (staggered and non-destructive harvest methods) and non-exploitive procurement of the forest produce like medicinal and aromatic plants. The capacity building of the

25 functionaries, local leaders and community is critical and effective measures have to be taken up immediately. Their execution at field level should be technically and financially supported by the concerned line departments. The landless tribal poor who are in occupation of Government land should not be treated as encroachers and should not be evicted. These landless people should be considered as tenants on lease. The lease should be renewed once in three or five years. In future however, efforts should be made to avoid encroachment of village commons. In drought prone areas, farmers should be exposed and trained in coping mechanisms with emphasis on water harvesting and water conserving structures (viz., farm ponds, contour farming, contour bunding, tree based farming system, staggered trenching, mulching techniques, pot irrigation system, etc). Under MGNREGS convergence, intensive capacity building is needed in modern advances in agriculture and allied sectors for selected young farmers, especially women in every village through Krishi Vigyan Kendras acting as nodal agencies for quality training and for dissemination of knowledge and skills. In a mission mode, the KVKs in these areas should take up this task. These SHGs should also be made aware of the PESA, Forest Rights and their entitlements apart from the rights and entitlements provided under MGNREGA to enable them in participation at different stages of the programme (viz., planning, implementation, evaluation and monitoring). Concerted efforts need to be made for empowerment of STs by improving their access to and control over use of resources (land, water and forest) in a time bound manner. The literate youth as wage seekers under MGNREGS in the DP&LWE area should be provided with training and skills development for self employment such as masonry, brick making, mobile repairs, book keeping, maintenance of muster roll to engage them in the MGNREGS activities Land development activities

26 MGNREGS has made a provision to undertake land development activities for the SC, ST, BPL and Small and Marginal farmers. There is an immediate need to consider the ST farmers in the LWE area to improve their livelihoods by formulating land development plans. A facilitator should be assigned to each group of 15 20 farmers in this regard. The SHG group leaders capacities need to upgraded in the activities such as land and animal husbandry including Integrated Farming Systems, Non-pesticide management practices, etc. Most of the lands given to SC and ST communities are unfit for agriculture (either located in waste land regions/ degraded forest lands or at the ridges). Therefore more works under MGNREGS should be given as a package viz., farm pond, land leveling and development. Forest Rights Committee has to identify such land holdings for their development through MGNREGS. MGNREGS works should convert surplus lands which are barren or of poor quality so as to make them fit for cultivation or any other productive purpose (grazing). The rain water harvesting structure should be created under MGNREGS at free of cost for the SC/ST farmers while, at nominal charges for the other weaker sections to avoid further degradation of their lands and to restore their soil health. In case of SC/ST farmers owning small holdings (< half an acre) allowing each of them to have a farm pond may not be viable in which case, a group approach can be adopted sharing the land loss and benefits by the group. Further, these small holdings have to be consolidated on a cluster approach and developed through cooperative farming or community farming mode. Depending upon the suitability, appropriate activities should be identified by professionals under MGNREGS so as to derive more benefit from such lands. Tribals in forest areas should be given degraded scrub forest lands within the forest area to develop them through afforestation programmes under JFM concept (through VSS /VFC/ FPC/EDC) in order to increase the forest cover and biodiversity and long term land use rights to them. Convergence

27 Under convergence, infrastructure facilities (such as cold storage godowns, market yards) can be created under MGNREGS with support of Forest Department (LAMPS [Large-scale Adivasi Multi-Purpose cooperative Societies] and SC/ST federations) which will ensure lucrative prices for the NTFP procured by the tribals. The necessary credit facilities should be provided for creation of such facilities by ITDA (if necessary Tribal Welfare Department should provide security for the loans). The rural connectivity should be integrated with PMGSY or other rural roads programmes to ensure creation of quality all weather roads. Because of the activities of the LWE, this work could not be taken up in many villages. A different strategy has to be worked out to provide connectivity facility to all villages in the LWE area. In LWE areas, severe casualty is caused due to outbreak of epidemic disease (like malaria and cholera which are contagious in nature) during the onset of monsoons and continue till mid winter (January month). As a precautionary measure,

mosquito controlling activities are taken up by the PHC. These works (spraying) could be included under permissible works of MGNREGS to strengthen the health care system. Person days under MGNREGS During the man made and natural calamities in LWE and DP areas, employment opportunities are very scanty. The landless labourers and small farmers are very often forced to migrate; such people may be provided with more than 100 days of wage employment. In respect of LWE areas, the group recommends 365 days of employment while 150 days per household in the Drought prone areas based on the intensity of the calamity. Worksite facilities Priority should be given for construction of temporary shelter with drinking water, child care and medical facility to ensure increased women participation, more so, pregnant women and lactating mothers.

28 Payment of wages Timely payment of wages is one of the major concerns of MGNREGS and in several of LWE / some DP areas, the postal and bank network is rather weak. As in case of Chenchu (PTG) tribes of Andhra Pradesh, an advance payment may be made which can be adjusted against the payment of their wages at the weekends, as they cannot afford to wait for their wages for longer periods. Further, disbursement of wages may be entrusted to the local institutions (PDS dealer or retail merchant) or VOs of MGNREGS workers or thrift groups formed under ITDA for timely disburse of wages on commission basis. Senior citizens or unemployed youth of the village may be engaged by Dept. of Post on temporary basis on consolidated pay of Rs. 3,000 to assist BPM for maintaining and updating records relating to MGNREGS wage payment. It will help in reducing delays in payment of wages. Escorted mobile vans should be provided to the Branch Post Master to disburse the wages at a common point in their respective villages in the LWE area. Poverty Alleviation One of the main causes of rural poverty is disappearance of Common Property Resources (CPRs) through which poverty stricken households were using to supplement their livelihoods and incomes. The MGNREGS should consider

restoration of CPRs through drought proofing and tree plantation for the purpose of sustenance of livelihoods of the poverty groups. Forest department should converge with MGNREGS to contribute for the material (nursery and planting material) and technical component (selection of suitable species and harvesting technology). Wherever, any occupation group like fisher folk, grazers, honey gatherers and the like had customary rights over Common Property Resources and other natural resources, such rights should be statutorily protected and properly recorded and user pattas should be issued jointly in the name of both wife and husband and women alone for female headed households. Strengthening of Delivery System:

29 Administration finds it difficult to meet the requirements of the Gram Panchayats in the LWE areas for the past few decades. There is a need for rejuvenation of the Traditional Panchayats, to strengthen the community participation and planning process under MGNREGS. There is a need for expanding the permissible works so as to meet their requirements such as provision of drinking water / potable water, sanitation facilities, rural connectivity, education and health systems. The social development infrastructure is very weak and MGNREGS in convergence mode should take up construction of anganwadis, overhead tank, individual and community toilets in SC/ST habitations and residential schools at taluk level. Part of the labour cost in the case of individual toilets may be met from MGNREGS wage bill.

30

Annexure-I
Proceedings of the Working Group on specific needs of special groups held at National Institute of Rural Development, Hyderabad on April 23, 2010.

Dr. M.V.Rao, Deputy Director General, NIRD welcomed the chairperson and members of the working group. He briefly presented about the expectations of MoRD while constituting the six working groups. This was followed by a round of introduction by all present in the gathering. In her initial remarks, Smt. Renuka Choudhury, Chairperson emphasized that MGNREGS is a revolutionary measure and have potential to establish a matrix of social justice. She also underlined the governments honest and sincere intentions for reaching out to the most marginalized. She has shown concerns over lack of participation of women. She empathised with the plight of mentally challenged and urged for redefinition of mental health. Dr. K. Hanumantha Rao, Professor & Head, CWEPA shared few of the research experiences carried out by the NIRD. He found that though MGNREGS is a right based programme, it is turning out to be another wage employment programme at the cutting edge level. MGNREGS aims at provision of livelihood security and as well offer economic opportunities to the asset (land) owners of marginalized groups. For ensuring active participation of primary stakeholders, first, the community should be adequately informed and then an enabling environment should be created. For achieving so, workers organizations are needed. Andhra Pradesh is making efforts to form one lakh labour group by the end of this year. He informed about the three important studies undertaken by the CWEPA, NIRD: 1) Change in Gender relation through NREGS 2) impact of NREGS on SC/ST and 3) A study on financial Inclusion. He observed through these studies that IEC system is not effective. The delivery system is reluctant to provide information on the account of mainly two reasons: 1) unemployment allowance and 2) worksite facilities. He stressed on exploring options for awareness building other than conventional means. Owing to limited presence of credible NGOs, he mentioned that

31 CBOs can be potential agents of taking up IEC activities for special groups. He opined that due to insufficient MGNREGS works there is unmet demand at the countryside. It also provides opportunity for resource pooling and thereby resource augmentation. But, generally due to lack of IEC, these opportunities are not latched upon by special groups. Problem of special sections in poverty stricken states is rather worse. Delivery system is also not effective. There is scope of addressing issues of SCs/STs/Women as wage earners and asset owner as well. But in practice they are not realizing even minimum wages. An important reason of woman not getting minimum wages is that the works which were traditionally performed by men are being performed by women and implements and tools are also not compatible with physiological characteristics of women. Therefore, modification in work norms or provision of women friendly tools should be looked into. He observed that assets belonging to SC/ST are of inferior quality therefore, a concerted effort, may be in the form of a package of inputs, must be thought out. It should be so planned that convergence should be a natural process. He also mentioned that silo attitude of line departments is an obstacle in convergence of resources. Line departments should facilitate not dictate the community since community has the wisdom to address their needs what all is required is little support from the line departments to help the small farmers to realize his plans. He criticized that MGNREGS in many states is Sarpanch centric and emphasized the need for wider participation of members of GP more so representative of special groups. He underlined that MGNREGS, indeed, has brought about an increase in womens income thus, an improvement in intra household relations. The expenditure done by women is generally on human resource development such as education, health etc. He pointed out that NREGS has been a socially and economically inclusive scheme. He also highlighted the problems of specific area such as LWE area, hilly areas etc., where due to various reasons participation of the marginalized sections is low and thereby problems of livelihood security and low productivity of resources owned by them. Dr. Botcha Jhansi Laxmi , Member of Parliament, shared her field observations with the group. In her visit to several worksites she saw that disabled people were not given employment. She suggested for more women mates to be engaged as they have proved to be better managers and this will improve the womens participation. She made a case for

32 scientific matching and batching, which will improve performance of MGNREGS and hence the chances of realization of minimum wages. She also referred to Indiraprabha Yojna for wasteland development of SC/ST land. She argued for community managed agriculture (sustainable land development) system and converting assigned SC/ST land into productive assets. She suggested that separate tent /shade may be provided for lactating women and either hike in the wages or advance may be given to women in advanced stages of pregnancy and early stage of lactation, which may be recovered later. She suggested that extent or percentage of disability of a person may also be indicated on the job card. The chairperson felt that payment of wages (partial or full) to the women workers of these categories should be viewed as Maternal rights. Dr. Sivakumar, Director, National Institute of Mentally Handicapped, observed that disability and poverty are correlated. He pleaded for creation and maintenance of reliable database at disaggregated levels in view of conflicting statistics of World Health Organization, National Sample Survey Organisation and Population census. He stressed upon awareness creation and attitudinal change among officials towards Persons with Disability (PWD) for better delivery. PWD generally face two problems: 1) problem of mobility and 2) problem of accessibility. Sometimes, handicapped situation is created by the environment. He expressed a need for involvement of professionals and rights based organizations with district authorities for identifying work and training of PWD and officials. Time Motion studies should also be carried out keeping the specific disadvantages of PWD. He pleaded that three percent reservation on jobs may be extended to MGNREGS also. A national chart of works suitable for PWD can be prepared with pilot study to begin with. Dr. R.R. Prasad, P&H, CESD, felt that PWD are basically differently abled, and accordingly work should also be identified. According to him PWD should be imparted and rehabilitated rather than encouraging them to take up hand work under MGNREGS. He drew attention of the group on the problems of Primitive Tribe Groups (PTGs). PTGs refuse to work under MGNREGS as theirs is a subsistence economy and wages under this

33 scheme are not paid daily. Therefore, advance wage payment to PTG should be made. He suggested that the cooperative society of SC/ST workers should be given opportunity to supply the material so that they can realize commission from material ratio also. He argued that distinction between SC and ST should be maintained. Since, SCs live in contiguous area therefore, such blocks may be identified and integrated development may be taken up. Dr. Prasad pointed out that as per the Census in about 44,000 villages, SC population is more than 50 per cent and these need to be accorded priority. He also argued for community mobilization to make MGNREGS community driven. Dr. B. Chakravarthy , P&H, CMRD, flagged issues pertaining to SCs. He observed that there is an acute poverty among SCs. An assessment should go to see how much of resources are owned by SCs and how much investment is required to help them come out of poverty. He identified two streams to come out of the poverty SGSY and MGNREGS. Out of which SGSY has failed and MGNREGS is not providing 100 days of employment in reality. He objected the inclusion of APL in provision of works under MGNREGS. Dr. P.S.Geethakutty, P&H, CWDGS, raised gender issues under MGNREGS. She cited the example of Tamilnadu and Kerala, where individual job card has been given which enabled individual access to bank by the women wage seekers. She urged this to be scaled up at national level. She pointed out that there is a need to examine whether MGNREGS structures at local level are ensuring access to women and removing their hardships. She observed that MGNREGS has increased work opportunities for women but these works and implements are not gender sensitive. ICAR, Agriculture Universities etc. have developed some women friendly implements. She felt that Time-motion study from gender point of view should be carried out. MGNREGS is also contributing in reduction in domestic violence and trafficking. Dr. Haque, underscored the need of institutional arrangements at the grassroot level for the ownership of the programme. Identification of work should be need based and should not be Panchayat centric rather led by peoples institutions. He pleaded for systematic study of MGNREGS on agriculture.

34 Dr. Joseph Abraham, Consultant, CWEPA, observed that the ownership on land in case of STs has not been established. Therefore, works on them are neglected. In LWE area, as there is no work opportunity other than MGNREGS, therefore the 100 days ceiling should be reconsidered. In Backward areas and for backward classes investment is not adequate for productive use. Hence, investment should be linked to productivity. He compared the cases of Jharkhand, where market wage rate are lower than minimum wages and Kerala, where market wage rates are higher than minimum wages. In Kerala, people from disguised unemployed household sector come out to participate in MGNREGS. They do not pay much attention to sustainability and productivity in MGNREGS works rather look it as government job. Dr.V.Annamalai, Faculty, NIRD opined that MGNREGS works should be so synchronized that community land may be made use by the special groups. Dr. V.Suresh Babu, Asst. Professor, CWEPA, observed that due to works taken up in the individual land, at many places people are going for fragmentation of land. Dr. K.P. Kumaran, Faculty, NIRD informed that in Amaravati district of Maharashtra, people expressed the view that the farm work is more comfortable than MGNREGS works. He also highlighted the need for awareness programme to sensitize the functionaries at all the levels. Dr.C.Dheeraja, Asst. Professor, CWEPA, presented few observations regarding women workers based on NIRD study- Changing Gender Relations through MGNREGS. She stressed upon the need for capacity building for women MGNREGS workers alongside functionaries. These training modules should focus not only unskilled but skill development module also. She advocated for a greater role of SHGs. In this regard, flexibility in the guidelines should be incorporated to accommodate women based organization such as SHGs to take care of awareness generation and worksite facility provision. As 80 per cent of the sample workers are illiterate, conventional methods of IEC activities such as wall writing, pamphlets etc. will not prove to be effective. Therefore, right agency and right media should be identified to disseminate the

35 information to the target groups. She informed that separate SoRs are there for male and female in West Bengal and Bihar, and the same may be emulated elsewhere also. Ms. Neeta, ANANDI, touched upon some of the burning issues relating to women in MGNREGS. She viewed that definition of household is not clear under the Act which is denying the rights of women. She argued for separate bank account for women so that she could have access to her own wages. She opined that the kind of works given to women is sometimes socially unacceptable. Thus, attitudinal and behavior change module need to be built into the training programmes for officials. Who owns the asset is a moot question and that should be addressed adequately. Because even after working hard, women create asset but they do not own it. Inadequate worksite facilities, especially lack of crche, are prohibiting women to take part in MGNREGS. There should be an attempt to define community accurately and attempt should be made to create a database showing ownership of MGNREGS assets by women. India has the largest women anemic population. Keeping this in mind, nutritional security may be built into the wage component. This may also be achieved through convergence such as convergence with Janani Suraksha Yojana. Maharashtra EGS Act provides for maternity leave, she desired that same may be extended to MGNREGS. She also made the case for value addition on SC & ST land and resources. She informed that, they have prepared the list of work identified by PWD and same will be shared with the group. Chairperson, wondered that why Muslims are not evincing much interest in MGNREGS? She observed that, Muslim women generally possess some skills and therefore, probably do not venture out for MGNREGS (unskilled) works. Dr.M.V.Rao, DDG, NIRD, based on his field experience as an MGNREGS Commissioner, West Bengal found that especially in Eastern India, Muslim women participation is next to nil. The main reason is stigma attached to some MGNREGS works. Whereas, for some other works such as horticulture, nursery development etc., their participation levels are impressive. Therefore, the scope of MGNREGS works should be enlarged so that these women may also participate.

36 Dr. K. Hanumantha Rao suggested that all women group supervised by women may encourage Muslim women to participate in MGNREGS activities. Ms.Neeta observed that rural Muslim household has very low asset base therefore the questioned of asset augmentation does not arise for them. Chairperson concluded the meeting by deciding the working group to be divided into two or three sub groups and work upon specific areas. Later on all the reports may be collated and in the form of consolidated working group report. She called upon all the members to put their best efforts as they are dealing with the most complex and delicate issues. Dr. K.Hanumantha Rao proposed the vote of thanks to the chair, all the distinguished guests, DDG and NIRD faculty members.

37

Annexure-II
Mahatma Gandhi NREGA Working Group on Specific Needs of Specific Category of Workers List of Sub-group Members and Tasks A. Sub-group on Gender and Social Equity (Issues to be addressed: Gender Equity and Social Equity) 1. Dr. Botcha Jhansi Lakshmi Honourable Member of Parliament B-7, A Block, MS Flats, BKS Marg, New Delhi 110001 Ms. Neeta Haridkar, ANANDI, Pareksheri Street Devgadh, Baria Dahod, Gujarat 389380 Prof. R. Lambadri, Centre for Dalit Studies Dept. of Public Administration Osmania University, Prof. RR Prasad, Prof. & Head Centre for Equity and Social Development NIRD, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad Prof. Geetha Kutty Professor & Head Centre for Gender Studies NIRD, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad Dr. A. Rizwana Associate Professor, Centre for Gender Studies NIRD, Rajendanagar, Hyderabad Chairperson

2.

Member

3.

Member

4.

Member

5.

Member

6.

Member

7.

Dr. C. Dheeraja, Member Assistant Professor Centre for Wage Employment and Poverty Alleviation NIRD, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad

38 Mandate: i. ii. iii. iv. v. Effective measures for striking gender equity Effective measures for striking social equity (encouraging measures for participation of all social and economic classes in rural society) Identifying more specific needs of women at work-sites and suggesting measures for implementing the same. Measures to popularise and propagate facilities for women under MGNREGA Any other issues the sub-group considers essential

B.

Sub-group on Special Benefits to SC/ST/Groups in Left Wing Extremism Areas LWE) and Drought Affected Areas 1. Prof. T. Haque Council for Social Development Sangha Rachanaa, 53, Lodhi Estate, New Delhi 110003 Shri AK Srivastava, Director (SG) Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Govt. of India Ms. Rashmi Arun Shami Chief Executive Officer MS State EG Council Government of MP Bhopal Dr. B. Chakravarthy Professor & Head Centre for Media and Rural Documentation NIRD, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad Dr. V. Annamalai Associate Professor, Centre for Equity and Social Development, NIRD, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad Chairman

2.

Member

3.

Member

4.

Member

5.

Member

6.

Dr. V. Suresh Babu Member Assistant Professor, Centre for Wage Employment and Poverty Alleviation NIRD, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad

39 7. Mr. David Brenyard Member Consultant, Centre for Wage Employment and Poverty Alleviation NIRD, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad

Mandate: i. ii. iii. iv. v. C.

Special measures for SC/ST etc. workers in LWE areas Special measures for workers in drought affected areas Work-site facilities in LWE and drought affected areas Work-norms in LWE and drought affected areas Any other issues the sub-group deemed suitable

Sub-group on Physically Challenged Persons and Old Age Persons 1. Shri S.K. Pattanayak, Chairman Director, Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment Govt. of India New Delhi Shri Javeed Abidi Member Honorary Director National Center for Promotion of Employment for Disabled People (NCPEDP) A 77,Ground Floor ,South Extension Past 2,New Delhi-110049 Phone:011-26265647 / 26265648 Shri TC Shiva Kumar Member Director, National Institute of Mentally Handicapped Manovikas Nagar Secunderabad 500 009 Representative from Govt of Orissa Member Dr. KP Kumaran Member Associate Professor Centre for Equity and Social Development NIRD, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad Dr. Joseph Abraham Member Consultant Centre for Wage Employment and Poverty Alleviation NIRD, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad

2.

3.

4. 5

6.

Mandate: i. ii. iii. iv. Specific measures to identify suitable works for Physically Challenged Persons and Old Age People Work-site facilities for Physically Challenged and Old Age Persons Specific measures to enshrine protective measures Any other issue that the sub-group deemed suitable.

40

Annexure-III Working group on Specific Needs of Special Groups (SC/ST/Women/Minorities)

Schedule for Opinion

1. Currently what role your Corporation has been playing in the Implementation of MGNREGA, If so give details; (like land development, housing, horticulture etc.); 2. Was there any initiation from the district officials to involve you in the implementation of the scheme? 3. What difficulties, if any, you are facing in performing this role? 4. Are you experiencing any benefits due to the convergencece efforts between your Corporation and MGNREGS? 5. If there is no role at present, in what way you can converge with the implementation of MGNREGA? 6. Have you made any efforts to create awareness among your cliental group (SC/ST/Minorities/women) about MGNREGS? 7. Kindly give your opinion on the possible role that you can play to facilitate better participation of SC/ST/Women/Minorities in MGNREGA? 8. Can you provide a list of GPs/blocks where more than 50% of the population belongs to these specific groups? (SC/ST/Minorities), so as to take up MGNREGA in a project mode to give more benefit to these groups? 9. Can you suggest some works to be taken up under MGNREGA which are more suitable and useful to these groups? 10. Please suggests possible areas of convergence between your Corporation and MGNREGA.

41

Annexure-IV
Report of the Working Group on Specific Needs of Special Groups Sub Group on Gender Equity and Social Equity
Context Social and economic indicators for developing countries consistently show that women bear the brunt of hardship in poor communities. The vast majority of the worlds poor and the world's non literates are women. Of the millions of school age children out of school, the majority are girls. Women bear almost all responsibilities for meeting basic needs of the family, yet are systematically denied the resources, information and freedom of action they need to fulfil this responsibility. The current world food price crisis impacts socio economically poor and women more specifically, as they are denying themselves the meal to ensure that their children are fed. These women are already suffering the effects of even more severe malnutrition, which inevitably is their children's fate as well. While the policy approach recognizes the link between gender equality and economic development in programmes and efforts to overcome poverty, the efforts are feeble to address gender discrimination, gendered distribution of productive assets and resulting vulnerability of women. The NREGA may not be womens empowerment programme, but all legislations have an intrinsic obligation of empowering the citizen and the community at large. NREGA has significant achievements with regard to mobilisation of women wage workers, gender parity of wages and increased control over womens earnings from NREGA. Many women prefer government work as it provides dignity and higher wages compared to the work available in the village or as migrant worker available in the market. It is important to note that there are limited or no opportunities created for specific needs of specific category of workers. This includes socio economically marginalised communities of SC, ST and minorities, pregnant women, nursing mothers, aged and physically challenged people.

42

While there is a need for building gender and social equity concerns centrally in the policy and programme of NREGS. Field Visit The sub group met in Vizianagaram, Andhra Pradesh on 6-7 June 2010 to interact, consult and understand the special interventions designed and implemented for the people with specific needs. This included meeting and field exposure to the worksites where the lands of the SC and ST communities are developed and needs of women workers are regarded. Interface with the mandal and district level officials and representatives of the voluntary organisations helped to understand the processes carried out for inclusion of women and socio economically marginalised workers in NREGS. It was tried to incorporate all the recommendations and observations of all the stakeholders in this report of the sub group.

Suggestions
Gender Equity To minimise the vulnerability of widow, deserted and separated women, the household definition for NREGA job card must recognize them as separate household. Separate identification and job card for single as well as dependent women residing with family members, should be issued for their livelihood security. It was observed from the interactions that, women usually can not put as much as output as men. So to have gender equity, separate SoR be prepared for different categories of wage workers (men, women, aged, physically challenged etc) Flexibility in time of work could be thought specifically for women, as they are engaged in multi activities including household chores. eg 4 hours a day be treated as half day work and women workers may be allotted to work for double the number of days of 4 hours each.

43 Many places Crche facility is not provided saying that there are no sufficient children( 5). More over mothers are also not willing to bring the children to the worksite because of the distance, heat and unsafe environment. It is safer to keep children at the Aanganwadi Centre. Hence the AWC should allow a wage worker as Ayah to be at the AWC with children, whose mother is working in MGNREGS. Thus the children will be looked after by the Ayah when their mothers are at the workplace. The AWW and the helper can take charge of children and their needs (food and water, safety and pre school education). If necessary, the timings of Anganwadi may be changed. In many cases mothers cant take the children for vaccination, as they come for work. So instructions may be given to the ANM to provide vaccination at the worksite itself to the children of women wage seekers and pre- natal and anti natal mothers who come for work. Like convergence with other development schemes at the state level for building and strengthening assets for livelihood, we need to converge with the NRHM and the ICDS programme for periodic health care camps, vaccination, supplementary nutrition and monitoring of the crche etc. Lighter and women friendly works like horticulture and nurseries may be provided not only for pregnant, lactating and aged women but also for all women groups Women friendly tools and technologies be made available to women, to ensure the productivity on par with men The Monitoring and Vigilance Committee should have at least 50 per cent women members, who would ensure that the right of workers to have worksite facilities is protected. In many of the worksites, provision of facilities is done by women. In some places, where the water availability is not adequate, women have to walk far of places. In such cases, Trolleys be used for bringing water to worksites to reduce drudgery

44 To encourage more women participation, collection of non timber forest produce and processing( eg. Leaf plate making, de seeding and de- fibrin of the tamarind manually) may be considered as permissible activity under the NREGS The provision of soil and water conservation works on SC/ ST land should be extended to lands owned by women of BPL category too. This would also encourage to build asset in the names of women. All common property resource should be a collective property of the users of which at least 50 per cent of them should be women. The training and capacity building component in the programme should also focus on building skills among women labour in order to undertake skilled jobs/ works in the NREGS. There should be reservation for at least 50 per cent women as mate since this would help the women workers interactions with the mate at the worksite All IEC print as well as audio visual material must communicate the need and importance of separate account in bank or post office and equal wages for men and women. IEC in NREGA would reinforce education and action on this constitutional right to all workers, especially women. For Pregnant Women / Nursing mother/ Aged women: Community Kitchens be started for elderly people and pregnant women who also go for work under the NREGA Transport facility should be provided to the above mentioned group of workers to reach the worksite. Relax the existing norm of 5 km for eligibility of transport allowance Identification and allocation of lighter works like plantation, watering, nurseries, vermi compost production and vegetable garden can be considered as permissible activity. Maternity benefit is every womens right. The group has suggested advance payment of wages in the advanced stages of pregnancy. Paid maternity leave may be given to those who have worked on NREGS for at least 30 days in a year.(But it should be restricted to first two deliveries)

45 Social Equity SC and ST wage seekers be provided with at least 20-25 days of work additionally. The existing SC/ST land development work should be strengthened with vegetable cultivation along with the horticulture programme. The wage workers whose lands are taken under comprehensive land development activities should be trained in the interventions undertaken on their land The literate but unskilled wage workers could be trained as mates, technical assistants, social auditors and this would enable them to acquire new skills. SC/ST can be given priority in other skill training such as in construction work, vermi compost production, horticulture and drip irrigation systems etc, and these trainings may be done in convergence with SC/ST development corporations and concerned line departments/ agencies A district or state level resource group be formed for capacity building of SC/ST wage workers as well as the SC/ST members of Gram Panchayats Separate shelf of works may be prepared for SCs/STs Ownership and user rights on community assets be reserved for the women and SC and ST groups Ward Sabhas should be conducted separately in SC and ST hamlets for effective participation in planning and identification of shelf of works SC/ST be given priority in training and recruitment for mates, technical assistants and field assistants A small and separate cell may be created at the State level and positioning of one official at district level to periodically monitor the provision of the facilities and enforcement of rights and entitlements for the women and SC/ST workers. They should submit reports quarterly and these reports along with concrete actions should be placed in the public domain. MIS formats should be modified to track the benefits accruing to the women and SC/ST from MGNREGS

46

Annexure-V
Sub Group On Physically Challenged and Old Age Wage Seekers
Discussions held on 11.6.2010 and 12.6.2010 at NIRD by the Sub Group under the Chairmanship of Sri. S.K Patanayyak, Director, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Government of India

2.

Dr. Hanumantha Rao, Prof. & Head (CWEPA) welcomed the Chairperson,

members and invitees to the meeting. He highlighted the problems of database on differentially abled persons in terms of the number and also the magnitude of deprivation. He also drew the attention of the group to the rising share of aged in the population and mentioned that the aged among Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) are more vulnerable among the poorer sections. He opined that the present coping mechanisms are found to be inadequate to ensure livelihood security to PWDs and the aged population. He appreciated the efforts made by the States like Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh in protecting and promoting the interest of PwDs. He raised a number of issues to be discussed by the group which included the need for changing the work time motion study design to accommodate the specific groups like aged and PwDs. He also suggested that there should be flexibility in the timings, differential SORs and treating every PwD and aged as a separate unit under MGNREGA. Planning of works should also include those which are PwD friendly. Since the participation of aged has been increasing under MGNREGA, the convergence of health and other departments with MGNREGA should be ensured.

3.

The Chairman, Shri S K Patanayyak, welcomed all the members and invitees to

the meeting and drew the attention of the group to various issues that needed to be addressed. He categorised the problems of the PwDs broadly into two categories, one that relates to psycho-social barriers and other, physical limitations. He desired that proactive nature of delivery system in providing equal opportunities with human dignity to the PwDs would be essential. Right to work and Right to equality of PwDs should be

47 honoured and efforts need to be made to create an environment that promotes equality and ensures equal opportunities. India is a signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) which casts a number of obligations on the Country. With a view to secure increased and effective participation of PwDs in the wage employment programme like MGNREGA, special arrangements have to be made for the PwDs and the aged in terms of Aids /Appliances/ Tools and also in creating enabling environments such as worksite facilitation, transport, etc. He also briefly pointed out issues relating to measuring population of PwDs and variation of figure in Census and NSSO survey. 4. Shri Murali, Director, MGNREGA, Govt. of AP made a brief presentation on the

efforts of the State Govt. to include PwDs in Rights- based framework and elucidated steps taken in this regard in the context of MGNREGA. He has made a number of suggestions for promoting the participation of PwDs and also empowering them in the process. 5. 6. The members of the sub-group and the invitees have deliberated on several issues. Major points that emerged out of the presentations and deliberations are summed

up as below: (i) In the selection of Mates, Grama Rozgar Sevaks (GRS) and Technical Assistants, the literate and/or semi skilled persons with disabilities (PwDs) belonging to labour households be given preference. (v) A system of flexi hours should be adopted for PwDs and aged, so that they can execute the work at convenient durations on a day. (vi) The length of actual work time be relaxed for PwDs and aged and they may be allowed to work for actual work time of 5.30 hrs per day (this is recommended on the basis of Work Time Motion Studies under taken by an NGO (SWADHIKAR, AP.) (vii) It may also be considered to make provision to fix the per unit work turn over as per SoRs at an enhanced or concessional rate in the ratio of 0.70: 1 in the

48 case of PwDs vis- a - vis the general workers. This enhancement be given to PwDs and aged without any other binding considerations. (viii) The PwDs be given separate and independent Job Cards within a household. It has been observed that the households having a PwD at home generally avail the benefit for a non disabled member in the family and PwDs are not allowed to work in the site and actually earn. Having a separate Job Card will make the PwDs independent for pursuing employment under the scheme if s/he chooses to do so. (ix) Exclusive staff may be posted at the block and district level for mobilization of PwDs and to look after the special needs of the workers with disabilities. He will act as a channel between and the workers with disabilities and will arrange for special intervention for creating conducive environment for PwDs to work. He will also look after the information, communication and education (IEC) needs of PwDs. The salary and allowances of such staff may be borne out of administrative expenses of the scheme. (x) In the matters of deciding the work and also location of work, PwDs and aged be allowed to exercise their choice (in a situation were different types of work are being carried out and at different locations) and priority should be given to their preferences. (xi) The PwDs be given travel allowances at higher rate on preferential basis. For the travel from place of residence to worksite, the travel allowance may be paid @ 10 % of the minimum daily wages for the initial distance from 0.50 km to 5 km and @ 20 % for above 5 kms. (xii) At Grama Panchayat, Block, and District levels, a monitoring and reporting mechanism of the works meant for PwDs be put in place and monitoring and reporting should be done on a regular and continuous basis. The present institutional arrangements in MGNREGA be strengthened/ modified to accommodate this arrangement so that specific and categorized monitoring in relation to PwDs is possible from village to district level. A dedicated Cell at the state and district levels and an additional PO would help in effective monitoring and coordinating with other departments.

49 (xiii) In Andhra Pradesh there is a system of providing Rs 3 per person per man day for mobilizing PwDs in MGNREGS. The CSOs/NGOs are engaged in mobilizing PwDs and the system seems to be working very well. This system may be replicated in other States. The NGOs and CSO may act as implementing agency and can mobilize PwDs under this system. (xiv) This suggestion is not duplicating the suggestion given at point no (vi) above. The staff to be posted at block and district level will be performing a job of moderator and facilitator and will look forward for providing necessary intervention to facilitate a smooth work environment for PwDs and aged. (xv) A suitable shelf of works and opportunities may be created for the semiskilled PwDs having soft and traditional skills and crafts like computer skills, carpentry, masonry etc. (xvi) The land owned by the PWDs be given preference in the execution of MGNREGA individual works. (xvii) Works that facilitates accessibility and barrier free entry to all public places like schools, PHCs, water sources, parks etc., should be undertaken on priority and may be included in the shelf of projects as mentioned at Point no 11. (xviii) The work site facilities must be such that it takes care of the specific needs of PwDs and Aged

The other issues emerged in the discussion are as follows: 1. In Andhra Pradesh there is a system of Fixed Labour Groups (FLGs) of PwDs. It has been noted that in this FLGs, the PwDs form a small groups like self help groups. The groups plan, execute, maintain and own the work. It has been viewed by many of the participants that the FLGs have several advantages emerging out of the homogeneous concerns and needs. As a fixed group these PWDs seem to perform better as the Andhra Pradesh experience suggests. This practice may be tried in other States with suitable modifications.

50 2. For the vulnerable groups and senior citizens the works be such that it does not involve much travel and that the works provided are not very strenuous for them. 3. A system of payment through cash may be considered for PwDs and aged in habitations which are far from the Banks/Post Offices, until the Business Correspondent model comes into operation. 4. It may be considered to make provision for adjustment of the cost towards artificial limbs and appliances based on individualized needs of PwDs from the 40 per cent of the material costs under MGNREGA works. 5. Thrust may be given on research and development activities. R& D be carried out on continuous basis to develop technology and equipments needed for the PwDs, to increase their productivity level at par with non disabled persons. National Institutes and agencies may be identified for R& D purposes to undertake specific areas of research. 6. Convergence with other departments like Social Welfare and Agriculture be worked out in detail with regard to schemes and funds that can help better coordination and execution. 7. The involvement of Non Government Organisations, Community Based Organisations and Civil Society Organisations be encouraged in converging and promoting the welfare of the PWDs. 8. Follow up Sri. Murali, Director, APREGS of Andhra Pradesh was requested by the Chairman to give a brief note to the Sub Committee on the following issues/ practices as adopted in AP : i) SoRs for PwDs ii) Fixed Labour Groups of PwDs iii) Suitable shelf of works applicable to the PwDs. 9. The Chairman wanted the draft recommendations to be circulated among the members for comments. 10. The meeting ended with thanks to the Chair.

51 FIELD VISIT A field visit was undertaken on 12.6.10 by the Chairman to Rajapur village in the Balanagar Mandal of Mehaboobnagar district. The team interacted with a group of PwDs who have been working under MGNREGA. The interaction revealed inter alia the following: 1. Formation of group helps them in organising their activities, better earning, supporting each other, etc. The group also addresses other issues beyond the ambit of MGNREGS. 2. The PwDs require better facilities at the work site and other facility like transport, etc. 3. Suitable intervention to address to specific needs is required in more organised manner.

The issues emerged during discussion with the PwDs on the field are getting addressed/ covered in the suggestions listed out in the meeting.

NIRD/12.6.10 (Draft report Prepared by Associate Prof. Kumaran and Dr.Joseph Abraham)

52

Annexure-VI
Report of Sub- Group on SPECIFIC NEEDS OF SPECIAL CATEGORY OF WORKERS in LWE and DP Areas Preamble: LEFT WING EXTREMISM (LWE) AND DROUGHT PRONE AREAS The term left wing extremism (LWE) is generally used to refer to the various Maoist terrorist groups in India. It affects areas in the country spread over 35 districts in 9 States of Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal. It is the tribal nature (85 per cent of schedule Tribes resides in forest tracts of central and peninsular India) of this movement that compounds the internal security threat potential of this insurgency. Naxalite movement has its support among the landless, share-croppers, agricultural labour, Harijans and tribals. There is huge economic disparity due to deprivation and exploitation. The root causes are as under:i) Exploitation and oppression of Dalits, Adivasis, and landless people in interior areas. ii) Absence of developmental activities and virtual absence of health care, drinking water, roads, electricity and educational facilities in areas where Naxalism has taken roots. iii) Disillusionment of people living in interior areas with the Parliamentary democratic system of governance in India. iv) For tribals, forest, land, and water mean their livelihood. They have been deprived of these under various acts and orders.

Due to multiple causes, there has been a failure of the administrative system at the grassroots level. The development programmes and the management of natural resource are in vicious circle. The extremist forces have led to low productivity, poor livelihood systems, unemployment and poverty and hence under development of the LWE area.

53 DROUGHT PRONE AREAS Drought is a serious problem in India which has affected many parts of the country intermittently. Most drought-prone areas lie in the arid (19.6%), semi-arid (37%) and sub-humid (21%) zones which occupy 77.6% of the total land area of the country. Increased climate variability has made rainfall patterns more inconsistent and unpredictable in the country increasing the recurrence of drought or drought like situation. Apart from reduction in agricultural production, drought has other multifarious long drawn impact, like shortage of drinking water, fodder, less water in reservoirs for power generation etc., which has severe impact on the economy of the country affecting its growth. Social impact arises from lack of income causing out migration of the population from the drought affected areas. Farming community cope with drought in several ways which affect their planning: they withdraw their children from schools, postpone daughters marriages, and sell their assets such as land or cattle. The sub-group headed by Dr. T. Haque, Centre for Social Development met on 28th May at New Delhi and discussed the TOR given by the chair person Smt. Renuka Choudhary. The mandate for the sub-group includes: 1. special measure for SC/ST / other workers in LWE areas 2. special measure for SC/ST / other workers in drought prone areas 3. worksite facilities in LWE & DP areas 4. work norms in LWE & DP areas 5. any other relevant issues The problems of the socially and economically disadvantaged in particular and village communities in general residing in the Left wing Extremism (LWE) areas and Drought Prone (DP) areas are discussed at length. The nature and extent of vulnerabilities experienced by these disadvantaged sections and determinants of livelihood (in)security are reviewed. The group also discussed the untapped opportunities in these areas and performance of the MGNREGA in some of these areas. It is to be noted that despite limitations, the contribution of MGNREGA in these areas has been found to be beneficial and measures to strengthen

54 MGNREGS would be more rewarding to the rural communities and more so to the disadvantaged groups.

The specific suggestions vis--vis the TOR are as follows: Planning Process The LWE region falling under Schedule V area, PESA and FRA provides necessary framework for strengthening of land and forest resources. MGNREGA could

provide the necessary support (financial and professional) for empowerment of tribal community and poverty alleviation. The adhoc planning has led to lack of adequate works under shelf of projects and also found to be incompatible in the prevailing conditions and local priorities. Participatory approach to prepare area development plan to workout systems for livelihood security for landless and land owning wage seekers is the immediate need of the programme. GIS based resource mapping would facilitate in better identification and preparation of developmental plan. Watershed based planning need to be adopted for effective rejuvenation of natural resources. Land development plan should be prepared based on the individual land owning household plan. A consolidation of activities under land development should be carried out at Gram Panchayat level. These consolidated land development plan should figure in the District Agriculture Plan. The ITDA, needs to be strengthened with competent professionals to provide guidance, assistance to the tribal community in preparation of community as well as household specific development plans. The funds for tribal development are under utilized and leakages are also reported to be significant. The formal and informal institutions (Eg: Gram Sabha, Tribal Chiefs, VSS, VTDA, etc.,) should be strengthened by building the capacities by ITDA with the help of SIRD,ETC, ITDA institutions and also deputed CSOs. Each ITDA in consultation with local The

institutions should take up this task in mission mode with in one year.

55 educated tribal youth need to be trained as community facilitators. Research

Institutions and reputed CSOs working with tribals may be entrusted with preparations of plans in participatory mode. Their services can be engaged to monitor the implementation of these plans periodically. Convergence should be an inbuilt component of planning. Capacity building It is necessary to organize these landless wage seekers as SHG member and federate them at village. The capacity building of these wage seekers on thematic areas such as Apiary (Bee-keeping), Mushroom cultivation, scientific collection (staggered and non-destructive harvest methods) and non-exploitive procurement of the forest produce like medicinal and aromatic plants is necessary. The capacity building of the functionaries, local leaders and community is critical and effective measures have to be taken up immediately. Their execution at field level should be technically and financially supported by the concerned line departments. The landless tribal poor who are in occupation of Government land should not be treated as encroachers and should not be evicted. These landless people should be considered as tenants on lease. The lease should be renewed once in three or five years. In future however, efforts should be made to avoid encroachment of village commons. In drought prone areas, farmers should be exposed and trained in coping mechanisms with emphasis on water harvesting and water conserving structures (viz., farm ponds, contour farming, contour bunding, tree based farming system, staggered trenching, mulching techniques, pot irrigation system, etc). Under MGNREGS convergence, intensive capacity building is needed in modern advances in agriculture and allied sectors for selected young farmers, especially women in every village through Krishi Vigyan Kendras acting as nodal agencies for quality training and for dissemination of knowledge and skills. In a mission mode, the KVKs in these areas should take up this task.

56 These SHGs should also be made aware of the PESA, Forest Rights and their entitlements apart from the MGNREGS rights to enable them in participation at stages of the programme (viz., planning, implementation, evaluation and monitoring). Concerted efforts need to be made for empowerment of STs by improving their access to and control over use of resources (land, water and forest) in a time bound manner. The literate youth as wage seeker under MGNREGS in the DP&LWE area should be provided with training and skills development for self employment such as masonry, brick making, mobile repairs, book keeping, maintenance of muster roll to engage them in the MGNREGS activities Land development activities MGNREGS has made a provision to undertake land development activities in the SC,ST, BPL, IAY beneficiaries and Small and Marginal farmers land. It is notice from the research study findings that some Village Panchayats have not executed any works on the individual lands that would facilitate their livelihood systems in LWE areas. There is an immediate need to consider the ST farmers in the LWE area to improve their livelihoods by formulating the land owning job card holders into Self Help Groups. Each group of 15 20 members need to be formulated. The SHG group leaders capacities need to upgraded in the activities such as land and animal husbandry including Integrated Farming Systems, Non-pesticide

management practices, etc. The SHG leaders should be educated by the agriculture department (involved in ITDA) in identifying cropping pattern based on the moisture availability and the crop growth period. Most of the lands given to SC and ST communities are unfit for agriculture (either located in waste land regions/ degraded forest lands or at the ridges). Therefore more works under MGNREGS should be given as a package viz., farm pond, land leveling and development. Forest Rights Committee has to identify such land holdings for their development through MGNREGS. MGNREGS works should convert surplus lands which are barren or of poor quality so as to make them fit for cultivation or any other productive purpose (grazing).

57 The rain water harvesting structure should be created under MGNREGS at free of cost for the SC/ST farmers while, at nominal charges for the other weaker sections to avoid further degradation of their lands and to restore their soil health. In case of SC/ST farmers owning small holdings (< half an acre) allowing each of them to have a farm pond may not be viable in which case, a group approach can be adopted sharing the land loss and benefits by the group. Further, these small holdings have to be consolidated on a cluster approach and developed through cooperative farming or community farming mode. Depending upon the suitability, appropriate activities should be identified by professionals under MGNREGS so as to derive more benefit from such lands. Tribals in forest area should be given degraded scrub forest lands within the forest area to develop them through afforestation programmes under JFM concept (through VSS /VFC/ FPC/EDC) in order to increase the forest cover and biodiversity and long term land use rights to them. Convergence Under convergence, infrastructure facilities (such as cold storage godowns, market yards) can be created under MGNREGS with support of Forest Department (LAMPS [Large-scale Adivasi Multi-Purpose cooperative Societies] and SC/ST federations) which will ensure lucrative prices for the NTFP procured by the tribals. The Necessary credit facilities should be provided for creation of such facilities by ITDA (if necessary Tribal Welfare Department should provide security) as to facilitate the financial inclusion concept. The rural connectivity should be integrated with PMGSY or other rural roads programmes to ensure creation of quality all weather roads. In LWE areas, severe casualty is caused due to outbreak of epidemic disease (like malaria and cholera which are contagious in nature) during the onset of monsoons and continue till mid winter (January month). As a precautionary measure,

mosquito controlling activities are taken up by the PHC. These works could be included under permissible works of MGNREGS to strengthen the PHCs.

58 Person days under MGNREGS During the man made and natural calamities in LWE and DP areas, employment opportunities are very scanty. The landless labourers and small farmers are very often forced to migrate; such people may be provided with more than 100 days of wage employment per individual or 150 days per household based on the intensity of the calamity. Presently, they are not able to fulfil the 100 days employment per household (on average the LWE areas households are provided with 50 days of employment) due to inadequate works under shelf of projects. Worksite facilities Priority should be given for construction of temporary shelter with drinking water, child care and medical facility should be provided at worksite in DP area before initiating works to ensure increased women participation. Payment of wages Timely payment of wages is one of the major concerns of MGNREGS and in several of LWE / some DP areas, the postal and bank network is rather weak. As in case of Chenchu (PTG) tribes of Andhra Pradesh, an advance payment may be made which can be adjusted against the payment of their wages at the week ends, as they cannot afford to wait for their wages for longer periods. Further, disbursement of wages may be entrusted to the local institutions or VOs of MGNREGS workers or thrift groups formed under ITDA for timely disburse of wages on commission basis. Poverty Alleviation One of the main causes of rural poverty is disappearance of Common Property Resources (CPRs) through which poverty stricken households used to supplement their livelihood and incomes. The MGNREGS should consider restoration of CPRs through drought proofing and tree plantation category for the purpose of sustenance of the poverty group. Forest department should converge with MGNREGS to contribute for the material (nursery and planting material) and technical component (selection of suitable species and harvesting technology). Wherever, any occupation group like fisher folk, grazers, honey gatherers and the like had customary rights

59 over Common Property Resources and other natural resources, such rights should be statutorily protected and properly recorded and user pattas should be issued jointly in the name of both wife and husband and women alone for female headed households. Strengthening of Delivery System: Administration finds it difficult to reach out to the requirements of the gram Panchayats in the LWE areas for the past few decades. There is a need for

rejuvenation of the Traditional Panchayats, to strengthen the community participation and planning process under MGNREGS. There is a need for expanding the permissible works so as to meet their requirements such as provision of drinking water / potable water, sanitation facilities, rural connectivity, education and health systems. The social development infrastructure is very weak and MGNREGS in convergence mode should take construction of anganwadis, overhead tank, individual and community toilets in SC/ST habitations and residential schools at taluk level. Part of the labour cost in the case of individual toilets may be met from MGNREGS wage bill.

60

Annexure-VII
GIST OF DISCUSSIONS HAD WITH SMT. RENUKACHOWDHARY ON 28.6.2010 The chairperson of the working group called for a discussion on progress of tasks allotted to different sub-groups and the course of action, especially towards submission of report, with NIRD faculty members. Accordingly, Dr K Hanumantha Rao, Prof. & Head (CWEPA) and Dr. G RajaniKanth, Assistant Professor (CWEPA) attended the meeting to appraise Chairperson on the issues concerned. Keeping in view, the direction of recommendations arrived at by the sub-groups, current issues pertaining to targeted wage seekers and also the issues emerging out of research conducted by NIRD, Smt. Renuka Chowdhury dwelled at length on various aspects and the gist of issues emerged for consideration are as follows: i. De-silting of huge tanks can not exclusively be attended to by manual labour. It results in hardship to the wage seekers. Hence, the issue of mechanization of works to some extent should be focused on to improve quality of works as well. ii. The very instances like students discontinuing (especially at Plus Two level) education and joining MGNREGS as wage seekers is a disturbing trend and this issue needs to be addressed. iii. How does EGS playing role in planning issues at national level has to be examined in general context to cull-out the very direction and interventions of the programme. iv. The issue of 1 of 70 has become a huge problem and issues surrounding it has to be examined. For instance, in areas to be covered under Polavaram Project or in areas of similar nature no EGS or any other programme is happening and this needs to be looked into. v. While making recommendations, the very social issue among Muslim women i.e. taboo of carrying head-load, is resulting lack of penetration among them. Such issues may also exist among different social communities and this aspect needs to be addressed.

61 vi. Regarding PWDs, the stipulation of including a minimum number of such persons in every labour group should be made. vii. While quoting incidents happening in Rajasthan and elsewhere in India, she highlighted the issue on how the delays in payment resulting in wage seekers borrowing money against their expected wages from money-lenders and ultimately they were deprived of their wages since most of it consumed as payment towards interest rate. viii. A kind of recommendation resulting in taking up Visible Assets under EGS should be made to avoid proliferation of invisible and repeated works of no use. Lack of works related invisible works results in huge leakages. ix. A consideration should also be made to include all types of works under EGS so that meaningful assets can be generated. x. The issue of duplication of works under the tag of convergence needs to be addressed. xi. The very genuine issue of feelings among younger people that Old Age persons are not able to do rigorous work under EGS and yet claiming equal wages has to be addressed without disturbing stake of each other. xii. The very concept of cut-off age of Old Age may be fixed at 60 years and there should be mutually agreeable upper age limit. xiii. Turning her attention on the likely recommendation of provision of advance payment of wages to pregnant and lactating women etc. care has to be taken to curtail exploitation by linking the payment with the portion of work completed etc. xiv. The working group should carefully look into the issue of percentage of disability while considering weightage under disabled category of workers. Such workers should get certificate from the authorities concerned or the fellow normal workers may certify the requisite but he/she should be made liable to loose EGS Job Card if wrong certification is made. xv. Emphasizing on the very issue of convergence of works taken up under EGS, Chairperson considered the involvement of different Ministries concerned and a recommendation should be made accordingly.

62 xvi. The recommendation of providing Hats to women workers has to be made in view of the scorching sun under which the female labor works. The hats can be produced by women SHGs. Provision of Gum Boots should also be considered since working in wet soil attracts several skin diseases. xvii. The suggestion of providing skills in processing NTFP may be earmarked for Handicapped ST women. xviii. EGS works should be taken up in a phased manner as a integral part of Five Year Plans for meaningful contribution to rural development. xix. Endorsing the suggestion on forming Farmer and their Workers Groups to identify the works to be taken up in their lands, she emphasized that the workers identified for such grouping should be dominated by farm workers. xx. She also endorsed the recommendation of building awareness among SHGs among land-owners and asset-less. xxi. On the lines of ATMA, she felt there is need to educate the farmers once the EGS works are completed. She felt that it can become an effective tool in utilizing the natural resources management resulted through EGS works. xxii. Recommendations benefiting small and marginal farmers to dissociate from copycat farm practices should be made. Towards this she emphasized a recommendation on the lines of integrated planning while taking up works under EGS. xxiii. Reaction to the recommendation on tree-crop she emphasized that such recommendations should take into consideration the complex issues prevailing in agriculture sector. xxiv. She considered the Irradiation storage complexes (based on the technology from BARC) have immense value for small and marginal farmers since it results in vast drop in wastage and spoilage of agriculture crops. xxv. Turning her attention on agents of awareness, she identified the local Grocery Shop Owner, Pan Shop Owner and the fellow who runs PDS centre as principal resource persons to generate awareness among EGS workers and a recommendation towards this should be made for effective awareness generation.

63 xxvi. Turning her attention on the need for graduating a wage seeker, recommendations should be made so as to enable the workers to acquire skills towards building nation for sustainable development. The EGS Card holder should become a Card Holder of Skilled work in future. xxvii. Further turning her attention on categorization of workers based on the skills possessed by them, different Job Cards on the lines of Platinum, Gold, Blue etc. should be introduced denoting the level of skills the workers possess. She felt that if categorization of workers is attempted then a kind of dynamism would creep in among wage seekers. xxviii. After completion of each work taken up under EGS, there must be counseling sessions for the workers on various issues of social and economic development. It results in graduation of workers from wage seeking to skills based development. xxix. Finally, she focused on the very issue that recommendations of the Working Group should also be on how EGS works can be converted positive to agriculture.

*****

64

Annexure VIII
Minutes of the Consultative Meeting of Working Group on Specific needs of Special category of Workers in MGNREGA held on 04.07.2010 at TTDC, Khammam Chaired by Smt. Renuka Chowdhury

The Project Director, DWMA, Khammam welcomed the Honble Chairperson of working group, Honble MP of Vizianagaram, Member of the working group, and the District Collector & DPC, MGNREGS-AP, Khammam and all present in the gathering. This consultative meeting was aimed at suggestions and recommendations from the all corners of Public, Elected Representatives and Officials concerned with implementation of MGNREGA. These suggestions were mainly on promotion of participation of SCs, STs, Women and disabled group of wage seekers working under MGNREGS. The chairperson informed that, after implementation of the scheme, the Social Security of people in rural areas has increased and it is benevolent to the common man and working groups in rural areas. The Honble chairperson explained that impact would be felt on LWE area, Agriculture and drought prone area and hence valuable suggestions were invited from all the participants to help the landless labour and as well as agricultural farmers. The Honble Member of Parliament, Vizianagaram and Chairperson for the sub group of SC, ST and Women category shared her experiences on the working of sub group in Vizianagaram district. She felt that this is the rights based programme and not a charity programme and the SC, ST and women category of wage seekers are now getting their livelihood security under MGNREGS. She argued that the notion of agriculture has been impacted adversely by MGNREGS is not correct. She explained that 50% wage seekers are from women category through out the India and some entitlements to the women workers and particularly pregnant women workers have to be provided. She suggested that in the Fixed Labour Groups of Andhra Pradesh, there is a problem with old aged wage seekers and women. Anemic women should be given extra wage. The disabled persons with more than 40 % of disability may be given special works/ easy nature of works such as nurseries and plantation works. The pregnant women

65 wage seekers may be provided with friendly tools instead of hard tools. To avoid the soil erosion, protection walls shall be constructed in coastal belt of Andhra Pradesh, and Cashew and Coconut plantations may be taken up. She suggested that in ponds created under MGNREGA cultivation of Gambusia fish may be taken up to increase the livelihoods for coastal people. Children of wage seekers may be provided with bicycles for dropping the wage seeker parents to the work spot as well as for going to their schools. The small kids of wage seekers may be taken care of by the Anganwadi workers, as Aaya is not sufficient only at worksite. Water storage tanks are to be purified with material components under MGNREGS to reduce the health problems in rural areas. Training on Collection and Packaging of tribal products should be provided to the wage seekers. The payments of wages may be disbursed at village fair (Santha) once in week, so that a large number of wage seekers may get their wages at a time at one place, as the postal payments resulted in some delays. Agricultural based works of small and marginal farmers should be included in shelf of works, so that Comprehensive Land Development may take place. Instead of present ceiling of 05.00 Acres, even in one acre of land the ring wells may be taken up with sprinkle irrigation, so that a small farmer can get more benefit. She observed that by implementing the programme the child labour has decreased and migration for the works has also been reducing. And more over food security and education in rural areas has been increased. The District Collector, Khammam suggested that for every work video recording may be a must for evidence purpose in the interest of transparency; the works which have been executed but not visible/ not existing can be verified. This may be incorporated in the rules under MGNREGA. In Left wing extremist Mandals of the district, work may be provided for 365 days to whoever has no work, so that extremism may be decreased to some extent and work security may be provided to the people. The District Collector, has suggested that disabled and old aged particularly wage seekers above the 60 years of age should be given extra allowance or they must be given time based wage. Further suggested that wages under MGNREGS may be on par with the market wage rates so that migration to the other works may be decreased and all the job card holders could come for the EGS works. Providing Drinking water work at worksite may be given only to disabled wage

66 seekers. In agency areas, 2 to 3 months may be given for preparation of realistic plans for the benefit of youth by giving ITI/ Computer trainings. The District Collector informed that due to lack of man power to the Postal Dept., they have provided two hired vehicles for mobilization of payments to be disbursed promptly to the wage seekers. The Collector has also suggested that one or two persons with a consolidated pay of Rs.3000/- each may be temporarily engaged to assist the BPM in writing, updation of records but not with money related work. So that the dissatisfaction of the wage seeker in getting delay payments may be solved. The chairperson of the working group accepted the proposal and suggested to take the services of either senior citizen or un employed youth in the village for this purpose. The Chairperson, Zilla Parishad, Khammam observed that there is a problem with the temporary establishment like FA, and TA as they are not taking of the programme seriously. In view of that permanent staff may be recruited at all levels under the programme. She requested for taking up of side walls, side drains to internal roads and CC roads under this programme. The women wage seekers shall be given priority and one or two hours relief in work may be allowed. The representative for ANANDI, Gujarat has shared her experience on gender equality and social equality. Women wage seekers have to play important role under this programme. Maternity benefits to the extent possible shall be provided to the women wage seekers. The planning not only by the Gram Sabhas but at Hamlet level shall be taken up so that the ownership of the assets e.g., community lands of small farmers will be developed and their income levels will also increase. The Representative of NGO-SECURE, Bhadrachalam has suggested that orientation is needed for tribal wage seekers. Tools at free of cost may be given to the SC/ST wage seekers who completed 30 Person days under this programme. The Kondareddy tribes in Bhadrachalam division may be given works such as Voota Cheruvu in their villages. Sanitation particularly common toilets to the women have to be provided. Under MGNREGS, Extra Agency allowance in addition to the wages shall be given in tribal Mandals. Fixed Labour Groups may be reshuffled as per the willingness of the wage seekers formed in the groups.

67 Wide range publicity in agency area may be given on the land development works and productivity based agricultural works in these lands. The Honbe MP of Vizianagaram urged that drains works, school fencing with tree guards and road bumps works may be provided under the convergence programme with 60: 40 wage and material ratio at the district level. This integrated approach under MGNREGS will develop the livelihood security and increase the income of rural people. Tank works such as desilting of tanks shall be provided giving priority to SCs and STs. For this activity mapping for a period of 2 to 3 months may be prepared by giving wide publicity in the village. The Professor of CWEPA, NIRD, Hyderabad suggested that every farmer wise plan may be taken up for development of land in project mode and funds be earmarked. The support from all the line departments may be ensured for the comprehensive land development of the farmers. The Sarpanch from Chintoor suggested that the old aged and disabled wage seekers shall be given lighter works such as Percolation Tanks etc., and wage seekers may be provided insurance policy under the programme. The Sarpanch from Thallada Mandal has claimed that due to the implementation of this programme 80% poverty has been eliminated during the last four years in the rural areas and suggested that Katcha drain works may not be taken up which may damage the fair roads. Plantation programme in each and every village should be taken up for the Environmental sustainability as is being done in Karnataka State and for watering to the trees for 365 days provision should be made under the programme. The Honble chairperson has responded that the watering and maintenance works will be taken up by the disabled wage seekers under MGNREGS. All the works shall be provided with work site boards displaying the details of works under the MGNREGS. The MPDO, Dummugudem suggested that in agency area, the traditional works of tribals such as collection of tamarind, amla, and honey may be included under MGNREGS. The Chairperson explained that the original concept of the MGNREGS is to get supplementary income after completion of agricultural activities and coordination

68 between the farmers and wage seekers has to be arrived by the field functionaries at Mandal level. The MPP, Chintoor informed that payments are being delayed due to insufficient staff at Mandal level.

Chairperson observed that if wage payment is delayed, private money lenders will come into the picture and wage seeker get dissatisfaction over the scheme. She suggested that local institutions, PDS dealers, etc., may be entrusted with this task. The Honble Chief Whip, Govt., of AP appreciated MGNREGS and informed that in more than half of the agency Mandals poor people are getting wage employment while creating their own livelihood. In implementation, employment creation was concentrated in the 1st phase and now asset creation is to be concentrated in the 2nd phase. He congratulated MORD for this achievement and suggested that the target groups of wage seekers particularly Dalits should be financially benefitted. The Patta lands given to tribals should be developed under the scheme. The works of land leveling and plantations should be taken up in the water logging areas of Govt. establishment like Hostels, Hospitals and Schools. The Honble Minister for Co-Operative, Employment and Labour, Govt., of Andhra Pradesh stressed that the wage rate should be based on the work turnout only. The workers under construction sector are being given insurance and suggested that the wage seekers who completed 90 days of EGS works may also be covered under the scheme of insurance. The Honble Chairperson, working group under MGNREGS has requested all the public representatives and NIRD officials and district level and Mandal level officials to play enabling role in implementation of the MGNREGS Programme. The Project Director, DWMA, Khammam offered vote of thanks to the Chairperson, all the members and participants of the consultative Meeting.

***

69

Elected representatives and Officials Present:1. Sri R. Venkata Reddy , Honble Minister for Co-Operative, Employment and Labour Govt., Of Andhra Pradesh 2. Sri M Batti Vikramarka,Chief whip, Govt. of Andhra Pradesh 3. Dr Smt B.Jhansi Lakshmi, Honble MP, Vizianagaram and member of working group. 4. Smt G Vijaya Lakshmi, Honble Chairperson, ZPP, Khammam. 5. Dr. Sri N Nageswara Rao, District Collector & DPC, MGNREGS-AP, Khammam 6. Dr. K Hanumantha Rao, Prof. & Head, CWEPA, NIRD, Hyderabad. 7. Sri S. K. Pattanayak, Dy.Director-III, Ministry of SJ&E, Govt. of India 8. Sri A Rama Rao, PD & Addl.DPC, MGNREGS-AP,DWMA, Khammam. 9. Sri V Chakradhar Rao, PD & Addl.DPC, MGNREGS-AP, DRDA, Khammam. 10. Ms. Neeta Hardikar, Director, Anandi, Gujarat. 11. Sri T S Siva Kumar, Director, NIMH, Secunderabad. 12. Prof. R Limbadri, Director, Centre for Dalit Studies 13. Sri S David Brynerd, Consultant, NIRD, Hyderabad. 14. Dr. V Suresh Babu, Faculty, NIRD, Hyderabad. 15. Dr.C.Dheeraja, Faculty, NIRD, Hyderabad. 16. Dr. V Annamalai, Faculty, NIRD, Hyderabad. 17. Sri Saurabh Kumar, TRG-Manager, NIRD, Hyderabad. 18. Sri N A S V Prasada Rao, CHESTD, NGO, Bhadrachalam. 19. Sri P S S Hari Prasada Rao, AID, NGO, Khammam 20. Sri V Gandhi Babu, ASDS, NGO, Khammam 21. Sri S Subhani, ASHA-NGO, Chintoor. 22. Other District Line department Officers, Khammam. 23. Public Representatives ( Mandal Presidents, and Sarpanches) 24. (05) MPDOs in the district.

**

Report of the Central Employment Guarantee Councils Working Group on Wages

August 2010

1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................1 2 Background: The Crisis of Wage Policy...........................................................................1 3 Three Emergency Recommendations...............................................................................2 4 Fixation of Wages.............................................................................................................5 5 Indexation of Wages.........................................................................................................7 6 Schedule of Rates.............................................................................................................8 7 Timely Payment................................................................................................................9 8 Compensation for Delays...............................................................................................12 9 Financial Inclusion..........................................................................................................14 10 Unresolved Issues.........................................................................................................17 11 Summary of Recommendations....................................................................................19 12 Concluding Remarks....................................................................................................23 References..........................................................................................................................27 Annexure 1: Terms of Reference.......................................................................................28 Annexure 2: List of Members and Contributors................................................................29 Annexure 3: NREGA and the Minimum Wages Act (Legal Opinion)..............................30 Annexure 4: On Delays in Wage Payments.......................................................................36 Annexure 5: Provisions of the Payment of Wages Act......................................................41

Acknowledgements
The Working Group on Wages is most grateful to Dr. Joseph Abraham and Professor K. Hanumantha Rao (National Institute of Rural Development, Hyderabad) for facilitating the meetings of the Working Group and the preparation of this report; to the Institute for Human Development (New Delhi), the Tribal Research Institute (Ranchi), and the V.V. Giri National Labour Institute (New Delhi) for hosting the meetings; to the National Institute of Rural Development (Hyderabad) for logistic support; to Mr. K.K. Soan (Deputy Commissioner Ranchi) for local hospitality in Ranchi; to Christian Oldiges and Siddhartha Gupta for help with the analysis of NREGA wage data; to Akansha Batra for editorial assistance; and to Surabhi Chopra, Indira Jaising, Brinda Karat, Kamala Sankaran, Abhijit Sen, and Siddhartha, among others, for helpful advice and suggestions.

Report of the Central Employment Guarantee Councils Working Group on Wages

1 Introduction
The Working Group on Wages was constituted under the auspices of the Central Employment Guarantee Council to examine a set of questions related to wage policy for the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA). The Terms of Reference of the Working Group are given in Annexure 1. The list of members and contributors is given in Annexure 2. The Terms of Reference (treated by the Working Group as a broad roadmap) fall under five broad headings, but some received more attention than others. The Working Group was particularly concerned about a few issues that need to be urgently addressed. These include (1) the general disarray of NREGA wage policy (see below); (2) the steady decline in the real value of NREGA wages, as prices increase without any corresponding increase in money wages; and (3) the lack of timeliness in wage payments. The Working Group held three meetings: in New Delhi on 3 May 2010, in Ranchi on 22 May 2010, and in New Delhi on 29 June 2010. Further consultations also took place by email. This report presents the main conclusions and recommendations of the Working Group. Some issues, however, remain unresolved or at best partially resolved including crucial issues such as the reconciliation of NREGA with the Minimum Wages Act (see Section 4 below). It is strongly suggested that follow-up work be initiated, through this Working Group or otherwise, to address these issues in greater detail.

2 Background: The Crisis of Wage Policy

The Working Group felt that it was important to begin by acknowledging the current crisis of wage policy. In many ways, this crisis goes back to a notification dated 1 January 2009 of the Ministry of Rural Development, whereby Section 6(1) of the Act was activated. But the crisis also reflects deeper ambiguities related to the fixation of NREGA wages. This crisis is best appreciated from the point of view of NREGA workers. The key idea of NREGA is to give workers enforceable entitlements. Consider however the following:

2 1. The wages of NREGA workers are falling in real terms month after month, as prices increase while wages have effectively been capped at Rs 100 per day. 2. There is no clarity as to how wages are to be determined, no specific process to revise them from time to time, and no guarantee that NREGA workers will earn the statutory minimum wage, let alone a living wage. 3. In many states, NREGA workers are already earning less than the statutory minimum wage, due either to under-payment of wages, or simply to the fact that the Rs 100 per day norm is below the states minimum wage. 4. NREGA workers are entitled to payment within 15 days, but reports of rampant and prolonged delays are pouring in from all over the country. 5. NREGA workers are entitled to compensation (as per the provisions of the Payment of Wages Act 1936) in the event of a delay in payment. However, with one or two exceptions, this has never happened. Last but not least, very little has been done to address this crisis, or even acknowledge and discuss it. Resolving these issues is likely to require considerable work, consultations with state governments, and possibly, amendments of the law. The Working Group, for its part, made an attempt to clarify the main issues and make some preliminary recommendations.

3 Three Emergency Recommendations

At its first meeting, held in New Delhi on 3 May 2010, the Working Group unanimously decided to make three emergency recommendations on NREGA wage policy. These emergency recommendations were finalized at the second meeting, on 22 May 2010, and communicated to the Secretary, Ministry of Rural Development the next day. No response has been received so far. The emergency recommendations (as sent earlier to the Ministry of Rural Development, with explanatory footnotes added) are as follows: (A) Indexing of NREGA wages: Paying a real wage of (at least) Rs 100 per day is a longstanding promise of the UPA-2 government. It was made, inter alia, in the Finance Ministers Budget Speech on 6 July 2009: We are committed to providing a real wage of Rs 100 a day as an entitlement under the NREGA.1 But instead, NREGA wages have effectively been frozen at Rs 100 per day in nominal terms (i.e. without any periodic adjustments for inflation). With prices increasing by leaps and bounds, especially food prices, this freeze is eroding the real value of NREGA wages month after month. The erosion of real wages
1

Note: The term real wage is well-defined in economics. It refers to the purchasing power of wages at constant prices, i.e. adjusted for inflation.

3 threatens to undermine the entire programme, and in any case, it is a gross injustice to NREGA workers, all the more so when millions of them are struggling to survive under severe drought conditions. Meanwhile, we understand that the Ministry has appointed a task force (chaired by Dr. Pronab Sen) to examine the possibility of creating a separate price index for NREGA workers.2 This is a misguided initiative. As pointed out by several members of the Central Employment Guarantee Council at its last meeting (on 22 February 2010), a suitable price index already exists: the Consumer Price Index for Agricultural Labourers (CPIAL). The Working Group unanimously felt that this price index is adequate for the purpose of indexing NREGA wages, and that there is no need to devise a separate price index for NREGA workers. Aside from being unnecessary, this would lead to further delays in the process of indexing (an informal communication from Dr. Pronab Sen suggests that it may take up to a year to devise and compute a separate index). Our considered recommendation is as follows: R1. NREGA wages should be immediately indexed to the price level, using the Consumer Price Index for Agricultural Labourers (CPIAL), with 1 April 2009 as the base, so that the real value of the wage is at least Rs 100 per day at April 2009 prices. As long as NREGA wage rates are set by the Central Government, they should be promptly revised upwards every six months or at most every twelve months - in line with the CPIAL. (States that had wages notified at more than Rs 100/day at the time of the 1 January 2009 notification should have their wages indexed with their notified wage as a base.) (B) Compliance with Minimum Wages Act: The working group is also very concerned about the implicit overriding of the Minimum Wages Act 1948 involved in switching from Section 6(2) to Section 6(1) of NREGA, as a basis for setting wage rates. The relevant sections of NREGA are as follows:3 6.(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, the Central Government may, by notification, specify the wage rate for the purposes of this Act:

We learnt later from Dr. Pronab Sen that he had declined the invitation to chair this task force, as he felt that the issue should be dealt with by this Working Group. Further, Dr. Sen concurred with the view that the existing Consumer Price Index for Agricultural Labourers (CPIAL) would be adequate for the purpose of indexing NREGA wages. He suggested, however, that the base of this Index might be updated, so that it better reflects current consumption patterns. These sections of NREGA must be read in conjunction with Section 22, which states that the Central Government shall meet the cost of the amount required for payment of wages for unskilled manual work under the Scheme.

4 Provided that different rates of wages may be specified for different areas: Provided further that the wage rate specified from time to time under any such notification shall not be at a rate less than sixty rupees per day. (2) Until such time as a wage rate is fixed by the Central Government in respect of any area in a State, the minimum wage fixed by the State Government under section 3 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 for agricultural labourers, shall be considered as the wage rate applicable to that area. Until January 2009, Section 6(2) was the basis of NREGA policy - state governments were setting minimum wages for NREGA. On 1 January 2009, however, the Central Government issued a notification that effectively froze the NREGA wages state-wise. Later, state governments were allowed to raise the NREGA wage up to Rs 100 per day (if it was below that on 1 January 2009). This new policy effectively activates Section 6(1) of the Act, which involves a potential if not actual overriding the Minimum Wages Act. Indeed, it would be illegal for any state government to pay NREGA workers anything less than the minimum wage for the relevant occupation. And it is the prerogative of state governments (not the Central Government) to set minimum wages. The Central Governments commitment, for its part, does not go beyond Rs 100 per day. An unacceptable situation is thereby arising where NREGA workers in some states are being paid less than the statutory minimum wage. There is, thus, a potential conflict between the current wage policy and the Minimum Wages Act. This potential conflict needs to be resolved at the earliest, by amending NREGA if need be, but in the meantime, what is of paramount importance is to avoid any actual overriding of the Minimum Wages Act, so that the sanctity of this Act (affirmed by the Supreme Court) is respected. In short, our recommendation is as follows: R2. NREGA policy must be consistent with the Minimum Wages Act. In no circumstances should this Act be overridden. (C) Shorter work hours: A third urgent concern is the prolongation of NREGA working hours from seven hours (the initial formulation, under Para 8(1) of Schedule I) to nine hours (the new formulation, as per notification of 14 January 2008, amending Para 8(1) of Schedule I).4 Considering the exacting nature of NREGA work, and the fact that many NREGA workers are undernourished, this new provision is unfair and unnecessary, even if the said nine hours including one hour of rest, as was subsequently clarified by the Ministry of Rural Development. We recommend a return to the initial formulation: R3. Para 8(1) of Schedule I of NREGA (The Schedule of Rates of wages for various unskilled labourers should be so fixed that an adult person working for
4

It was later clarified by the Ministry of Rural Development that nine hours included an hour of rest.

5 nine hours would normally earn a wage equal to the wage rate) should be amended so that the words nine hours are replaced with seven hours.

4 Fixation of Wages
The Working Group was extremely concerned about the absence of a coherent wage policy for NREGA. Some background to this issue has already been given in the preceding section. As explained earlier, there was a switch from Section 6(2) to Section 6(1) of NREGA in January 2009, and subsequently, NREGA wages were effectively frozen at Rs 100/day. This leads to a highly unacceptable situation where (1) the Minimum Wages Act (MWA) is being overridden, and (2) NREGA workers have no legal protection against the arbitrary decline in real wages as prices increase. Effectively, NREGA workers enjoy no minimum wage protection at all. This situation is the result of an explicit attempt to delink NREGA from minimum wages (by activating Section 6(1)), as Honble Minister for Rural Development Dr. C.P. Joshi put it to the Central Employment Guarantee Council on several occasions. This policy, too, is unacceptable: there must be a minimum wage for NREGA workers, consistent with the Minimum Wages Act. In fact, the switch to Section 6(1) appears to be illegal, in so far as the protection workers enjoy under the Minimum Wages Act is inalienable. According to expert legal opinion from Ms. Indira Jaising, Additional Solicitor General, overriding the Minimum Wages Act under Section 6(1) would be unconstitutional (see legal opinion in Annexure 3). It is worth noting that this switch to Section 6(1) was made against the undivided advice of the Central Employment Guarantee Council. The issue was indeed deliberated at some length at a special meeting of the Council held in June 2008.5 Most of the members strongly advised against the proposed switch, and no member (except for the Chairperson) supported it. Incidentally, judging from the deliberations of that meeting (and the background note circulated by the Ministry of Rural Development in advance), it appears that the main justification for this switch to Section 6(1) was an alleged problem or potential problem - of wage inflation. The argument was that, since NREGA wages are fully paid by the Central
5

We are bemused to learn, from a note circulated to the Central Employment Guarantee Council in advance of that meeting (Note on Fixation of a Central Wage Rate under NREGA), that the formal opinion of the Legislative Department to the Ministry of Rural Development, at that time, was that it is obligatory on the Central Government to notify central wage rate under Section 6(i) of the Act.

6 Government (under Section 22 of NREGA), state governments may be tempted to raise minimum wages without any restraint. In this connection, it is worth noting that the growth of NREGA wages has actually been quite modest during the three years that preceded the January 2009 notification see Tables 1 and 2. At the all-India level, the growth rate of NREGA wages in real terms (after deflating with the CPIAL) was lower than the growth rate of per-capita GDP before the said notification, and turned negative after that. There was, thus, no serious basis for the fear of wage inflation, even if substantial increases in real wages did occur in a few specific states (notably Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh). With this background, the Working Group essentially discussed three possible ways out of the current impasse: Option 1 (State Minimum Wages): Revert to Section 6(2), i.e. pay minimum wages as set by State Governments (for agricultural labourers) under the Minimum Wages Act. Option 2 (Rational Central Norm): Under this option, NREGA wages would continue to be fixed by the Central Government under Section 6(1), but (i) the central norm(s) would be indexed to the price level, and (ii) the central norm(s) would be based on a well-defined tripartite process (involving the Central Government, State Governments and representatives of workers organizations) consistent with the spirit of the Minimum Wages Act. Option 3 (Compromise Option): The Central Government would pay up to a national norm (indexed to the price level), fixed through a clear tripartite process. NREGA workers would earn the state minimum wage. And State Governments would pay the difference, if any. This formula would require an amendment of Sections 6 and 22 of NREGA. Option 1 (reverting to Section 6(2)) is the simplest way out of the current impasse. Since the current situation is unacceptable, and possibly also illegal (see Annexure 3), the Working Group felt that the Central Government should immediately revert to Section 6(2), as an emergency measure, until such time as a sustainable and legally tenable alternative option is found. Whether Option 1 is the best course of action on a longer-term basis is not so clear. Possible objections include the risk of wage inflation (such as it may be), lack of equity across states (better-off states, with higher wages, would get more from the Central Government), and some possible arbitrariness in wage setting. The danger of wage inflation is perhaps not so serious, in the light of recent experience (see above), and also considering that there are restraints on arbitrary increases in minimum wages at the state level including the countervailing influence of some farmers organisations, and the fact that state governments

7 have to pay the minimum wage for work done under their own Departments. An issue remains about the possible lack of equity and rationality in the emerging pattern of minimum wages across states. Much depends on the process of minimum wage fixation at the state level. The question remains whether there is any alternative to Option 1. The main problem with Option 2 (Rational Central Norm) is to reconcile it with the Minimum Wages Act. If statespecific minimum wages are not to be undermined, then the central norm would have to be no lower than the highest minimum wage among all states, which sounds impractical. Alternatively, different norms could be set for different states or regions, all of them consistent with the state minimum wages. But this would not be very different from Option 1. Option 3 (Compromise Option) attempts to reconcile the idea of a minimum central norm (a national floor wage) and compliance with state minimum wages: state governments would simply pay the difference, if any. From a common-sense point of view, this formula is quite attractive. However, it is doubtful whether it can be imposed on the states, bearing in mind the principles of fiscal federalism.6 Thus, implementing Option 3 would require the cooperation of the state governments. Even if their consent can be secured, Sections 6 and 22 of NREGA would need to be amended for this Option to be permissible under the Act. This is as far as the Working Group was able to go on this matter. Further thought, debate and advice are urgently required to resolve this complex issue. Meanwhile, we reiterate our recommendation that the Central Government should immediately revert to Section 6(2), to avert a crisis (including, possibly, legal complications). Along with this, it should urgently initiate a process of thorough examination of possible alternative longer-term wage policies for NREGA, consistent with the Minimum Wages Act. The longer the government waits, the more difficult it will be to resolve these issues.

5 Indexation of Wages
This item of the Terms of Reference has already been dealt. As explained earlier, our main recommendation is that NREGA wages should be immediately indexed to the Consumer Price Index for Agricultural Labourers, with 1 April 2009 as the base.

There is a view that this can actually be done, under Articles 256 and 258 of the Constitution. Further legal advice on this matter would be helpful.

6 Schedule of Rates
The NREGA allows for time-rate payment of wages as well as piece-rate payment. When workers work on a piece-rate basis, they are supposed to be paid according to the Schedule of Rates. Further, Section 8 of Schedule I of the Act states: The schedule of rates of wages for unskilled labourers shall be so fixed that a person working for seven hours would normally earn a wage equal to the wage rate.7 The Working Group made an effort to collect Schedules of Rates from different states, so that they may be compared and assessed. We are sorry to report that this proved extremely difficult the search was unsuccessful in most cases. It is only in a few cases of states directly represented on the Working Group that we were able to secure a copy of the Schedule of Rates. This inaccessibility and lack of transparency in Schedules of Rates is an important issue in its own right. The Government of Uttar Pradesh (not generally known for exemplary implementation of NREGA) set a useful example by preparing a pocket edition of the Schedule of Rates a small flyer with a reader-friendly version of the Schedule of Rates in the local language. Other states would do well to prepare similar material, and also to display their Schedules of Rates on the web. Due to the non-availability of Schedules of Rates, the Working Group did not go into this issue in much detail. Nevertheless, a few broad recommendations were formulated, as follows.

Gender-specific Schedules of Rates

The Working Group noted that some states have gender-specific Schedules of Rates, with different rates for men and women. In West Bengal, for instance, the daily norm for digging in loose and soft soil to be excavated by spade is 99 cft for men and 85 cft for women. There was no unanimity as to whether this was a desirable practice. On the one hand, it seems useful from the point of view of gender equity, considering that rural women are particularly exposed to undernourishment and ill health. On the other hand, the distinction may lead to some complication in record-keeping, particularly when men and women work in mixed teams. Some members also pointed out that very little is actually known about productivity
7

In this formulation, wage rate refers to the wage fixed under Section 6 of the Act. Note also that the length of the work day (seven hour) was later modified see third emergency recommendation.

9 differences between men and women. It was felt that while there was (to the best of our knowledge) nothing illegal or objectionable about gender-specific Schedules of Rates, it should be left to the states to decide whether they wish to introduce this practice.

Separate Schedules of Rates for NREGA

There was a brief discussion of the issue as to whether separate Schedules of Rates for NREGA should be allowed. The Working Group is not aware of any legal or other barriers in this regard. Since NREGA work tends to be of a distinct type, and to be performed by a distinct category of workers, there is a case for allowing separate Schedules of Rates.8

7 Timely Payment
The Working Group is deeply concerned about a wave of reports of prolonged delays in NREGA wage payments from all over the country. To the best of our knowledge, only a few states (including Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu) are anywhere near routine payment of NREGA wages within fifteen days. In other states, delays of several months are common. In some cases, the delays persist for years, or worse, workers are not paid at all as the relevant records are not available.9 This is a serious violation of workers basic entitlements under the law. Further, there is no evidence of this problem having been taken seriously by the Ministry of Rural Development. The primary responsibility for timely payments lies with the state governments. However, the Central Government can also play an important role in facilitating the timely payment of wages, in so far as it sets many important parameters of the implementation of NREGA. The Central Government should also take great care not to exacerbate the delays, e.g. by setting excessively complicated rules for the release of funds or imposing unnecessary conditionalities that may stand in the way of a smooth flow of funds. As far as a diagnosis of the causes of these delays is concerned, we can do little better than to reproduce here a recent article by Dr. Reetika Khera on this issue (see Annexure 4). Briefly, the article points out that there are quite a few steps in the payment process: submission of Muster Roll, work measurement, preparation of Payment Order, issuing of cheque, crediting of workers accounts, to mention a few. At every step, there is a possibility of foot-dragging
8

One member also suggested that a provision should be made for adjustment in the NREGA Schedule of Rates when the temperature crosses pre-specified limits (of heat or cold). Extreme cases of this nature were encountered, for instance, in Khunti and Latehar Districts of Jharkhand. Some of them have already been referred to the Ministry of Rural Development.

10 on the part of responsible functionaries. Further, it appears that foot-dragging has intensified after the transition to wage payments through banks and post offices (instead of cash payments), because of the reduced possibility of inducements. This may well be the real reason why delays have apparently shot up after the introduction of bank payments rather than the frequently-cited but somewhat exaggerated problem of delays in banking procedures. Aside from the overarching problem of foot-dragging, another important cause of delays (in some states at least) is the lack of technical staff for work measurement. On this, the Working Group felt that the best way forward was accelerated transition to the system of trained mates, with mates performing some of the tasks otherwise expected of technical staff. In fact, ideally no piece-rate work should be done without adequate measurement arrangements being in place: imposing piece-rate without a guarantee of timely measurement would be a violation of workers basic entitlements under the Act. Turning to remedial action, the Working Group felt that the most important step was due recognition of the problem and a determination to put an end to foot-dragging. A few specific recommendations are presented below.

Tracking of Delays
One reason for the persistence of delays in wage payments, and lack of remedial action, is that the delays are largely invisible. Until recently, they did not show up at all in the Monitoring and Information System (MIS). There has been some improvement in this respect in recent months, with payment dates being included in the MIS. This can be of great help in tracking the extent of delays in different areas. However, the helpfulness of MIS tracking in reducing the delays depends a great deal on the authenticity and timeliness of this information. There are reasons for concern in this regard. For instance, evidence was found of systematic tampering with dates in some districts, to hide the delays. To illustrate, in Lakhanpur Block (Surguja District), it was found that the data entry operators had been trained to adjust the dates to ensure that the delays are hidden. In some districts, MIS data are entered with a lag of several months, so that they are of little use in ensuring payment within 15 days. Thus, further vigilance and improvements are required to ensure that work and payment dates are accurately entered in the MIS, in a timely manner.

Remedial Measures

11

1. Every state must have clear timelines for each step of the wage payment process (as in Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu), and fix responsibility for each step. The implementation of these timelines must be regularly reviewed. 2. Mates must be responsible for entering attendance details in the Job Card at the end of the week, so that workers have a proof of having worked (otherwise it can be very hard for them to claim their wages later). Job Cards should be designed accordingly. 3. Mates should make (and record) initial measurements, and if the measurements are not verified by technical personnel (Junior Engineer, Technical Assistant, etc.) within 15 days, payment should be made based on mates measurements, or even attendance (as per Muster Rolls) if need be. Along with this, action should be taken against the responsible technical personnel. 4. The possibility of immediate interim payments at the end of the week (e.g. 50% or even 80% of the wages), based on mates measurements or attendance, with the balance being paid later (after measurements are finalised), should also be considered. 5. The minimum mate:workers ratio should be raised from 1:5010 to 1:25, to help mates with the effective accomplishment of their duties, including maintenance of Muster Rolls, Job Card entries and work measurement. 6. Wage slips must be distributed in public within 15 days, and follow all the transparency norms applicable earlier to cash payments (distribution in a public space, reading of Muster Rolls, updating of job cards, signing of receipts, etc.). Responsibility must be fixed for this. The possibility of account payee cheques may also be considered, as a variant of the wage slip system, provided that there is a facility for immediate withdrawal of wages at the bank/post office. 7. Every state must ensure that Programme Officers have up to date information on wages due at all times, and that this information is displayed on a special board at their office (aside from being entered in the MIS). 8. All states should have well-designed, numbered Payment Order forms, so that payment orders are smoothly and transparently prepared from the Muster Rolls. As far as possible, payment orders should be computer-generated from the Muster Rolls.
10

Government of India (2008), page 31.

12

Further Interventions
Ineffective flow of funds is one of the major reasons for delays in wage payments. The funding arrangements dont seem to be in tune with the requirements of NREGA. Hence: 9. Arrangements for the flow of funds should be urgently reviewed by a separate expert group. All unnecessary barriers to the smooth flow of funds, including excessively complicated planning procedures and superfluous conditionalities, should be removed.11 Having said this, the most important remedial measure is the routine payment of compensation for delays in wage payments. This is the subject of the next Section.

8 Compensation for Delays

The Working Group unanimously felt that it was very important to activate Section 30 of Schedule II of the Act, whereby workers are entitled to compensation as per the provisions of the Payment of Wages Act 1936 in the event of any delay in payment. It is a matter of deep concern that, with one or two exceptions (notably in Khunti District, Jharkhand), compensation has never been paid so far, even when the delays show in the official records. Realising the right to compensation is essential to ensure that delays pinch the government, and not just the workers. The Working Group also felt that it was important for the government to acknowledge (and act on) its duty to compensate, pro-actively, without waiting for the courts to order compensation. The expression as per the provisions of the Payment of Wages Act 1936 should be interpreted to mean that the compensation entitlements under NREGA are based on the norms set in that Act (on this see Annexure 5), not that compensation has to be claimed under the Payment of Wages Act, through the courts. Further, aside from accepting the general responsibility of paying compensation (without waiting for court orders), the government should pro-actively pay compensation without even waiting for an application from the concerned workers. Ideally, there should be automatic,
11

It was felt in particular that there was much scope for simplification of the planning process, as spelt out in the Operational Guidelines. The cumbersome nature of the planning process contributes to delays in wage payments, in so far as any failure to comply with the requirements can be invoked to delay the flow of funds.

13 full payment of compensation as per the provisions of the Payment of Wages Act 1936) (i.e. Rs 1,500 to Rs 3,000 per worker) as soon as there is any delay in payment. With the rapid computerization of wage payments, this is within the realm of possibility. Indeed, several states (including Andhra Pradesh and Chhattisgarh) are already generating automatic, computerized Payment Orders from the Muster Roll data entered in the MIS. There is no great difficulty, in principle, in adding an automatic compensation component to the wage payments, as and when applicable. Given the endemic nature of the delays, full and automatic compensation at Payment of Wages Act (PWA) rates would be very costly compensation could easily cost more than the wage payments themselves. But at the very least, some compensation should be paid proactively and automatically, along with clear acceptance of the duty to pay compensation at PWA rates whenever workers apply for it. To sum up, the Working Group recommends the following system of graduated compensation (paid by state governments) with three different levels:12 1. Automatic compensation: Wherever wage payments are computerized, they should include an automatic compensation component. The rate of compensation should be moderate to begin with, but rise sharply as the delays increase, so that there is a strong incentive to avoid long delays. 2. Duty to compensate: Whenever workers apply for compensation, and the delays show in official records (e.g. Muster Rolls and Payment Orders), compensation should promptly be paid as per the provisions of the Payment of Wages Act, without requiring the workers to go to court. 3. Legal recourse: As a last resort, workers always have the option of enforcing their legal right to compensation, by application to the competent authority (e.g. Assistant Labour Commissioner), or through the courts if need be. In addition to this, it was also suggested that interest should automatically be paid on delayed wages, not as compensation (this would be highly inadequate) but as a matter of routine banking practice, aimed at preserving the real value of payments. Even this modest step would create an important incentive for governments to pay on time, at least in states
12

It was pointed that, in cases where the Central Government is responsible for delays in wage payments (e.g. because funds are not released on time), it may not be fair to expect the state government to pay compensation. After much deliberation, it was suggested that in such cases, the state government could claim reimbursement of the compensation amounts from the Central Government. This, however, may require the creation of a National Ombudsman for NREGA, in case there is any dispute. This institution would, in any case, be quite useful, for the general purpose of arbitration in the event of any dispute (not necessarily related to wage payments) between the Central Government and state governments in the context of NREGA.

14 where the volume of payments is relatively large. For any of this to happen, it is important for the Central and state governments to issue detailed orders on this matter, spelling out specific norms and procedures for the payment of compensation on a routine basis. The Working Group felt that it could be made the duty of the District Programme Coordinators to pay compensation under level 2 above, at PWA rates (independent powers to sanction compensation could also be given to the NREGA Ombudsman at the district level). Automatic compensation under level 1 could be initiated in states where the computerization of records has reached an adequately advanced stage. Another requirement of routine compensation is the creation of compensation funds. This could be done at the district level, if compensation is to be sanctioned by the District Programme Coordinator. In fact, the ambit of these funds could be broadened they could also be used to pay unemployment allowance (where applicable), compensation for accidents, etc. Indeed, all these provisions are dormant at the moment. The creation of compensation funds, along with the requisite instructions, would help to activate them.13 Last but not least, taking a longer view, the Working Group felt that the payment of compensation under NREGA should not depend on cross-reference to a separate Act (the Payment of Wages Act) that was framed in a very different context. It would be best for compensation norms and procedures to be explicitly specified in NREGA itself. This would require an amendment of Schedule II, Section 30 of NREGA.

9 Financial Inclusion
Due to limited expertise on this issue, the Working Group did not attempt to formulate detailed recommendations on financial inclusion. The deliberations on this were limited to a few general observations and recommendations. The Working Group felt that the transition to wage payments through banks and post offices (POs) had been a step forward in many ways, notably by enabling millions of people to open bank or post office accounts (something they would have found difficult to do earlier), and by making it much hard for corrupt middlemen to embezzle wage funds. However, the transition was too rushed, and caused much chaos in its initial stage.14 Even today, there are serious problems associated with the system of wage payments through banks and post offices. These
13

One member suggested that interest earned by the state governments on NREGA funds could be allocated to worker compensation funds. This suggestion seems worth pursuing. For further discussion, see Vanaik and Siddhartha (2008) and Adhikari and Bhatia (2010).

14

15 include: 1. Major inconvenience (including much spending of time and money in making frequent journeys to the bank/PO) for NREGA workers, in cases where there is no bank or post office within reasonable distance. 2. Work overload in banks and post offices, exacerbating the delays and inconvenience. 3. Poor maintenance of bank/PO passbooks, making it difficult for workers to keep track of their wages, and for social auditors to verify the payment details. 4. Poor record-keeping. For instance, many states still lack well-designed Payment Orders (sometimes Payment Orders are designed by hand on the spot). 5. The system of wage slips, recommended in the NREGA Operational Guidelines, is non-functional (if it has been introduced at all) in many states. It is also important to acknowledge that the payment of wages through banks and post offices is not a fool-proof protection against fraud. In areas with exploitative social relations, it is not uncommon for corrupt middlemen to control the bank/PO accounts of NREGA workers and use them to siphon off wage funds.15 Even when NREGA workers operate their own accounts, bribes are sometimes extracted from them by bank or (especially) post office employees. While there is some evidence that NREGA workers are rapidly learning to avoid this sort of exploitation, the problem is far from resolved. Further, the entire system remains vulnerable to collusive arrangements whereby middlemen siphon off NREGA wage funds from bank accounts in collusion with workers, or fictitious workers. It is very important not to over-rely on bank/PO wage payments to avoid corruption, and to consolidate (or revive) other transparency safeguards such as the transparency of Muster Rolls, maintenance of Job Cards, activation of Vigilance Committees, social audits, etc. Thus, much work remains to be done to consolidate and streamline the entire system of wage payments through banks and post offices. It is also important not to disrupt this consolidation phase through hasty introduction of new arrangements (see below). Among other steps required to streamline the system are: 1. Awareness drives to ensure that NREGA workers understand the system and are able to operate their own accounts without being exploited.

15

For an illustration, see Drze and Khera (2008).

16 2. Improved record-keeping, e.g. use of well-designed Payment Orders. 3. Accelerated transition to computerized generation of Payment Orders and Wage Slips from the Muster Rolls. 4. Capacity building (including computerization) in banks, and particularly in post offices, especially in remote areas. 5. Activation of the wage slips system in all states. Aside from these general points, a few specific recommendations were formulated by the Working Group: 1. The Reserve Bank of Indias Know Your Customer (KYC) guidelines should be strictly implemented and monitored when it comes to bank payments of NREGA wages including prompt issue of passbooks and updating of passbook when wages are disbursed. 2. The possibility of paying a provisional commission of (say) 0.5% to Post Offices on NREGA wage payments, to help them upgrade their infrastructure, should be considered. However, it was felt that further advice on this was required. 3. The NREGA Guidelines should clearly indicate that separate individual accounts for men and women (and not joint accounts) should be the norm. 4. Until such time as the system of wage payments through banks and post offices is thoroughly streamlined, NREGA workers should be paid an extra day of wages every two weeks, to compensate them for the time and money spent in collecting their wages from banks or post offices. Caveat on the Business Correspondent Model It was noted that the Ministry of Rural Development seemed to rely heavily on, and place high hopes in, the business correspondent model as a means of reducing delays in wage payments. On this, the Working Group felt it important to express a word of caution, for the following reasons: 1. The business correspondent model may be valuable in its own right (especially in areas with poor banking and post-office facilities), but it is unlikely to be a solution

17 to the problem of delays in wage payments. This solution is based on the assumption that the main problem is the remoteness of banks and post offices from peoples homes. There is no evidence, however, that this is the main issue. 2. The business correspondent model is still at an early experimental stage, even in states (such as Andhra Pradesh) that are best prepared for it. 3. While the business correspondent model may help to fight corruption, it is itself vulnerable to certain forms of corruption, such as extraction of commissions from gullible workers by unscrupulous correspondents. This is not to dismiss the possible value of the business correspondent model. However, it is important to avoid hasty introduction of untested models as well as over-reliance on them to reduce delays or corruption. Similar caution is required with related innovations such as the use of smart cards, biometric identification, etc., to facilitate wage payments. Some of these innovations are likely to be very valuable in due course, but they require careful experimentation, and one must always guard against undue reliance on them as well as against hasty transitions to new arrangements that may not be adequately tested. The hasty switch to bank (and post office) payments in mid-2008, which caused havoc for several months, was a sobering experience in this regard. Its lessons should not be forgotten.

10 Unresolved Issues
Before concluding, we place on record two sets of issues that were intermittently discussed by the Working Group but remained largely unresolved and call for further deliberation. 1. Fair and equitable wages: According to the Terms of Reference, the Working Group was expected to shed light on this issue. Annexure 3 includes a brief discussion of the distinctions between minimum wage, fair wage and living wage. However, the Working Groups deliberations were largely confined to the first step guaranteed minimum wages. One way of ensuring that the determination of minimum wages for NREGA includes considerations of fairness and equity is to require that it be based on a transparent tripartite process, as discussed in Section 3. (a) Measurement-related issues: Work measurement under the piece-rate system raises a range of issues that were not part of the Working Groups terms of reference, but were

18 nevertheless difficult to separate from our main concerns, e.g. for guaranteed minimum wages and timely wage payments. Some of these issues are as follows: (a) Interpretation and enforcement of minimum wages under the piece-rate system; (b) Implications of Section 6 of Schedule I of NREGA (Under no circumstances shall the labourers be paid less than the wage rate)16 under the piece-rate system; (c) Abuses of power on the part of Junior Engineers and other technical staff; (d) Reconciliation of mates measurements with engineers measurements; (e) Challenges of timely payment under the piece-rate system. Some Working Group members felt that the piece-rate system itself is objectionable as long as these issues are unresolved.

16

In this sentence, wage rate should be understood as it is defined in the Act, i.e. as the wage rate determined under Section 6 of NREGA.

19

11 Summary of Recommendations
The main recommendations are summarized below, starting with the three emergency recommendations discussed in Section 3, followed by thematic recommendations under each heading of the Terms of References. Emergency Recommendations R1. NREGA wages should be immediately indexed to the price level, using the Consumer Price Index for Agricultural Labourers (CPIAL), with 1 April 2009 as the base, so that the real value of the wage is at least Rs 100 per day at April 2009 prices. As long as NREGA wage rates are set by the Central Government, they should be promptly revised upwards every six months or at most every twelve months - in line with the CPIAL. (States that had wages notified at more than Rs 100/day at the time of the 1 January 2009 notification should have their wages indexed with their notified wage as a base.) R2. NREGA policy must be consistent with the Minimum Wages Act. In no circumstances should this Act be overridden. R3. Para 8(1) of Schedule I of NREGA (The Schedule of Rates of wages for various unskilled labourers should be so fixed that an adult person working for nine hours would normally earn a wage equal to the wage rate) should be amended so that the words nine hours are replaced with seven hours. Thematic Recommendations (i) Indexing methods for arriving at a real wage of Rs. 100 R4. NREGA wages should be immediately indexed to the CPIAL, with 1 April 2009 as the base (see first emergency recommendation). (ii) Schedule of Rates and Work Time Motion Studies R5. Reader-friendly summaries of the Schedule of Rates should be prepared in all states and widely disseminated. R6. The Schedules of Rates of different states (all states) should be conveniently available on their NREGA websites.

20

R7. A comparative study of all SoRs should be undertaken at the earliest. R8. Separate Schedules of Rates for NREGA (distinct from those used, say, by line departments) should be allowed. (iii) Timely wage disbursements and institutional/agency ( administrative and financial) responsibilities towards this end. R9. Every state must have clear timelines for each step of the wage payment process (as in Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu), and fix responsibility for each step. The implementation of these timelines must be regularly reviewed. R10. The authenticity and timeliness of MIS data on delays in wage payments must be rigorously monitored. No adjustments in the work dates or work payment dates should be tolerated. R11. Mates must be responsible for entering attendance details in the Job Card at the end of the week, so that workers have a proof of having worked (otherwise it can be very hard for them to claim their wages later). Job Cards should be designed accordingly. R12. Mates should make (and record) initial measurements, and if the measurements are not verified by technical personnel (Junior Engineer, Technical Assistant, etc.) within 15 days, payment should be made based on mates measurements, or even attendance (as per Muster Rolls) if need be. Along with this, action should be taken against the responsible technical personnel. R13. The possibility of immediate interim payments at the end of the week (e.g. 50% or even 80% of the wages), based on mates measurements or attendance, with the balance being paid later (after measurements are made), should also be considered. R14. The minimum mate:workers ratio should be raised from 1:50 to 1:25, to help mates with the effective accomplishment of their duties, including maintenance of Muster Rolls, Job Card entries and work measurement. R15. Wage slips must be distributed in public within 15 days, and follow all the transparency norms applicable earlier to cash payments (distribution in a public space,

21 reading of Muster Rolls, updating of job cards, signing of receipts, etc.). Responsibility must be fixed for this. The possibility of account payee cheques may also be considered, as a variant of the wage slip system, provided that there is a facility for immediate withdrawal of wages at the bank/post office. R16. Every state must ensure that Programme Officers have up to date information on wages due at all times, and that this information is displayed on a special board at their office (aside from being entered in the MIS). R17. All states should have well-designed, numbered Payment Order forms, so that payment orders are smoothly and transparently prepared from the Muster Rolls. As far as possible, payment orders should be computer-generated from the Muster Rolls. R18. Arrangements for the flow of funds should be urgently reviewed by a separate expert group. All unnecessary barriers to the smooth flow of funds, including excessively complicated planning procedures and superfluous conditionalities, should be removed. (iv) Compensation for delayed payments R19. State governments should immediately notify the competent authority for payment of compensation under the Payment of Wages Act, in cases where this has not been done already. R20. Every state should create NREGA workers compensation funds (preferably at the District level), for payment of compensation in the event of delays in wage payments, and also for payment of unemployment allowance, compensation for accident, etc. R21. Every state should put in place specific, mandatory procedures for pro-active payment of compensation in the event of delays in wage payments. Generally, powers to sanction compensation should be given to the District Programme Coordinator, and also to the District NREGA Ombudsman. R22. Compensation for delays should be payable in three different ways: 1. Automatic compensation: Wherever wage payments are computerized, they should include an automatic compensation component. The rate of compensation should be moderate to begin with, but rise sharply as the delays

22 increase, so that there is a strong incentive to avoid long delays. 2. Duty to compensate: Whenever workers apply for compensation, and the delays show in official records (e.g. Muster Rolls and Payment Orders), compensation should promptly be paid as per the provisions of the Payment of Wages Act, without requiring the workers to go to court. 3. Legal recourse: As a last resort, workers always have the option of enforcing their legal right to compensation, by application to the competent authority (e.g. Assistant Labour Commissioner), or through the courts if need be. R23. Interest should automatically be paid on delayed wages, not as compensation but as a matter of routine banking practice, aimed at preserving the real value of payments. R24. Section 30 of Schedule II of NREGA should be amended, so that the norms and procedures for compensation of NREGA workers in the event of delays in wage payments are sui generis, instead of depending on the Payment of Wages Act for this purpose. R25. Aside from paying compensation, there should be strict sanctions (including, at the very least, a penalty of Rs 1,000 under Section 25 of NREGA, and also penal proceedings if necessary) against persons responsible for delays in wage payments, whenever responsibility can be fixed. There should also be an automatic penalty on the Programme Officer, who has an overarching responsibility for the timely payment of wages under Section 15(5)(c) of the Act. (v) Financial inclusion R26. The Reserve Bank of Indias Know Your Customer (KYC) guidelines should be strictly implemented and monitored when it comes to bank payments of NREGA wages including prompt issue of passbooks and updating of passbook when wages are disbursed. R27. The possibility of paying a provisional commission of (say) 0.5% to Post Offices on NREGA wage payments, to help them upgrade their infrastructure, should be considered. However, it was felt that further advice on this was required. R28. The NREGA Guidelines should clearly indicate that separate individual accounts for men and women (and not joint accounts) should be the norm.

23 R29. Until such time as the system of wage payments through banks and post offices is thoroughly streamlined, NREGA workers should be paid an extra day of wages every two weeks, to compensate them for the time and money spent in collecting their wages from banks or post offices. R30. Caution should be exercised in switching to new payment systems and technologies such as the Business Correspondent model, use of biometrics, smart cards, etc. New arrangements should be introduced gradually, starting with areas that are in a better state of preparedness, and after thorough testing and evaluation of the proposed arrangements. (vi) Other recommendations (last but not least!) R31. The Central Government should urgently initiate a process of further examination of possible alternative wage policies for NREGA, consistent with the Minimum Wages Act. R32. Meanwhile, the Central Government should immediately revert to Section 6(2) (instead of Section 6(1)) of NREGA as a basis for the fixation of wages.

12 Concluding Remarks
We end by reiterating our deep concern about the crisis of wage policy, and related problems connected with the payment of NREGA wages, especially the persistence of endemic delays in wage payments. We hope that this report has helped to clarify the issues, and to identify possible action points. However, it should be considered as a beginning, and not the end, of a thorough review of these matters. A great deal of further work is required to resolve the current crisis, and to ensure that the entitlements of NREGA workers are adequately protected. Perhaps there is a temptation to stay the course and hope for the best. But as mentioned earlier, the longer the government waits, the more difficult it will be to resolve these issues.

TABLE 1 NREGA: Average Wage Cost per Day

Average Wage Cost per Day (Rs) State Andhra Pradesh Assam Bihar Chhattisgarh Gujarat Haryana Himachal Pradesh Karnataka Kerala Madhya Pradesh Maharashtra Orissa Punjab Rajasthan Tamil Nadu Uttar Pradesh Uttarakhand West Bengal INDIAb
a b

2006-7 86.0 66.4 70.1 62.4 55.5 96.5 68.8 66.5 120.8 59.1 103.7 52.7 94.0 50.7 80.0 56.1 72.4 70.0 63.4

2007-8 83.0 73.3 79.9 68.4 64.2 124.2 75.4 72.3 117.5 63.5 89.7 77.0 101.3 58.6 77.3 92.6 73.8 79.0 74.2

2008-9 82.5 77.1 85.1 85 67.7 119.7 74.1 81.0 120.0 73.2 74.7 69.3 110.6 88.3 79.7 103.1 84.6 78.2 84.3

2009-10 92.0 87.0 97.5 82.2 89.3 151.0 109.5 89.1 128.7 83.7 94.2 106.0 123.5 87.4 71.6 99.5 99.0 90.3 90.2

Annual growth rate (%)a 2006-7 to 2008-9 2006-7 to 2009-10 Money wages Real wages Money wages Real wages -2.1 -10.5 2.0 -7.8 7.4 -1.0 8.5 -1.1 9.6 1.2 10.5 0.8 15.5 7.0 10.4 0.7 9.9 1.5 15.0 5.0 10.7 2.3 13.0 3.3 3.7 -4.7 14.0 4.0 9.8 1.3 9.9 0.2 -0.3 -8.7 2.0 -7.6 10.6 2.1 12.0 2.1 -16.4 -24.8 -4.7 -14.4 13.6 5.1 19.8 10.1 8.1 -0.3 9.0 -0.6 27.6 19.2 20.4 10.6 -0.2 -8.6 -3.0 -12.7 30.3 21.9 18.2 8.5 7.7 -0.7 10.7 0.1 5.5 -2.9 7.5 -2.1 14.2 5.8 11.8 2.1

Based on semi-log regression of wage rate on time. Real wages are based on deflating money wages with the all-India CPIAL.

Weighted average of state figures (with total person-days of NREGA employment as weights). Source: Calculated from official (Monthly Progress Reports) data posted at www.nrega.nic.in; wage cost per day refers NREGA expenditure on unskilled labour.

25

TABLE 2 Summary: All-India Figures

2006-7 Average wage cost per day at current prices (Rs) Growth rate over previous year (%) CPIAL (base 1986-7)a CPIAL (base 2006-7) Average wage cost per day at 2006-7 prices (Rs) Growth rate over previous year (%) Growth rate of real per-capita GDP over previous yearc (%) 63.4 2007-8 74.2 2008-9 84.3 2009-10 90.2

380 100.0 63.4

17.0 409 107.6 68.9

13.6 450 118.4 71.2

7.0 505b 133.9 67.4

8.7

3.3

-5.5

7.9

8.1

3.7

5.3

a b c

Source: Economic Survey 2009-10. Unweighted average of months for each year. Unweighted average of months from April to December. Per capita GDP at 2004-05 prices (Economic Survey 2009-10, Table 1.3, page 5).

Source: Calculated from Table 1 and Economic Survey 2009-10 data.

26

References
Adhikari, A., and Bhatia, K. (2010), NREGA Wage Payments: Can We Bank on the Banks, Economic and Political Weekly, 2 January. Drze, Jean (2009), Employment Guarantee or Slave Labour?, The Hindu, 18 September 2009. Drze, J.P., and Khera, R. (2008), From Accounts to Accountability, The Hindu, 6 December. Drze, J.P., and Khera, R. (2009), The Battle for Employment Guarantee, Frontline, 3 January. Government of India (2008), The National Rural Employment Guarantee Act 2005 (NREGA): Operational Guidelines, third edition (New Delhi: Ministry of Rural Development). Government of India (2010), Economic Survey 2009-10 (New Delhi: Ministry of Finance). Khera, Reetika (2010), Wages of Delay, Frontline, 21 May 2010. Vanaik, A., and Siddhartha (2008), Bank Payments: End of Corruption in NREGA?, Economic and Political Weekly, 26 April.

27

Annexure 1: Terms of Reference

A: Issues to be addressed (vii) Indexing methods for arriving at a real wage of Rs. 100 (viii) Schedule of Rates and Work Time Motion Studies (ix) Timely wage disbursements and institutional/agency ( administrative and financial) responsibilities towards this end. (x) Compensation for delayed payments

(xi) Financial inclusion

B. Measures identified should aim at (i) Ensuring conformity to Mahatma Gandhi NREGA and Operational Guidelines (ii) Fair and equitable wages (iii) Wage payment within 15 days, else compensation (iv)Better use of ICT (v) Transparency in processes

Extract from Order No. J-11011/2/2010-MGNREGA of the Ministry of Rural Development, dated 4 March 2010 (available at www.nrega.nic.in).

28

Annexure 2: List of Members and Contributors

1. Members of the Working Group17
Jean Drze (Allahabad University) [Chairperson] Nikhil Dey (Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan) Annie Raja (National Federeation of Indian Women) M.M. Rehman (V.V. Giri National Labour Institute, NOIDA) S.M. Vijayanand (Principal Secretary, LSG Department, Government of Kerala; representative from Government of Kerala) Sanjiv Kumar (Commissioner, Rural Development, Government of Uttar Pradesh; representative from Government of Uttar Pradesh) Sekher Sengupta (Joint Secretary, Panchayath & RD, Government of West Bengal; representative from Government of West Bengal) Harcharan Singh (Deputy Director General, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi; representative from Ministry of Labour)

2. Special Invitees
First meeting: Dr. Ashok Pankaj (Institute for Human Development, New Delhi); Ms. Rukmini Tankha (Institute for Human Development); Dr. Joseph Abraham (National Institute of Rural Development). Second meeting: Dr. Reetika Khera (Indian Statistical Institute); Prof. B.T. Kaul (Faculty of Law, Delhi University); Dr. Kingshuk Sarkar (National Institute of Rural Development); Dr. Joseph Abraham (National Institute of Rural Development). Third meeting: Siddhartha (National Judicial Academy, Bhopal); Prof. B.T. Kaul (Faculty of Law, Delhi University); Dr. Joseph Abraham (National Institute of Rural Development).

3. Special Advisors
Dr. Kamala Sankaran (Faculty of Law, Delhi University). Ms. Indira Jaising (Additional Solicitor General). Ms. Surabhi Chopra (eminent Lawyer).

17

No nomination was received from the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation.

Annexure 3: NREGA and the Minimum Wages Act (Legal Opinion)

We sought a legal opinion from Ms. Indira Jaising, Additional Solicitor General, on the validity of Section 6(1), the permissibility of overriding the Minimum Wages Act, and related matters. Her legal opinion, received on 9 July 2010, is reproduced below without change:

1. My opinion has been asked on the question, what should be the wages paid to the workers who are given guaranteed work under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 (hereinafter called, The Act for short). In order to answer the question it is necessary to glance at the objects and reasons of the Act. In brief the object is to provide:

a) minimum days of employment b) secure waged employment c) enhancing livelihood security to the poor.

2. The question that has arisen for consideration is what should be the rate of wages paid by the Central Government to such guaranteed work. The matter is governed by section 6 of the Act. 6. Wage rate.(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, the Central Government may, by notification, specify the wage rate for the purposes of this Act : Provided that different rates of wages may be specified for different areas : Provided further that the wage rate specified from time to time under any such notification shall not be at a rate less than sixty rupees per day. (2) Until such time as a wage rate is fixed by the Central Government in respect of any area in a State, the minimum wage fixed by the State Government under Section 3 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 for agricultural labourers, shall be considered as the wage rate applicable to that area.

3.

The said section provides for two distinct methods for fixing the wages. Sub Section

30 (1) of section 6 empowers the Central Government to notify the wage rate. This power is given notwithstanding anything contained in the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. At the first glance, this may lead to the impression that the wage noted under subsection (1) above may or may not be a minimum wage fixed under the Minimum Wages Act. However, on closer examination, this view may not be correct as will be, hereinafter, discussed.

4.

The second method of determination of the wages is under sub-section (2) to the

effect that until such time as a wage rate is fixed by the Central Government in respect of any area in a State, the minimum wage fixed by the State Government under Section 3 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (11 of 1948) for agricultural labourers, shall be considered as the wage rate applicable to that area.

5. After the enactment of the law, the wages were paid at the rate of minimum wage as fixed by the State Government under Section 3 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (11 of 1948) for agricultural labourers. It may be noted that minimum wages vary from state to state. The highest rate appears to be in Kerala. Delhi Government has also fixed the minimum wage rate of Rs. 203 for unskilled agricultural workman, Rs. 225 for semi-skilled agricultural workman and Rs. 245 for skilled agricultural workman with effect from 1.2.2010.

6. Presently, wages have been notified under sub-section (1) of section 6 of the Act to be Rs. 100 per day. The effect of this fixation is that the minimum wages under sub-section (2) of Section 6 will cease to apply and all the workmen under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 will be paid only Rs. 100 per day.

7. My opinion has been sought on the question whether this fixation of wage is lawful and constitutional. Reliance is placed upon the expression Notwithstanding anything contained in the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 to fix a rate that is almost half of the minimum wage under sub section (2) of Section 6.

8. In order the answer the question, it is necessary to examine the very concept of minimum wage. From as far back in 1947, it has been recognized that minimum wage is a need based and should ensure the minimum needs of the workman. Minimum wages are distinguished from fair and living wages. Whereas minimum wages are meant to provide for bare subsistence, living wages represent a standard of living and not merely bare physical subsistence for living (recommendation of Committee on fair wages).

31

9. In Kamani Metals and Alloys observed:

v. Their workmen (1967) II LLJ 55 SC it was

Broadly speaking, the first principle is that there is a minimum wage which, in any event must be paid, irrespective of the extent of profits, the financial condition of the establishment or the availability of workmen on lower wages. This minimum wage is independent of the kind of industry and applies to all alike big or small. It sets the lowest limit below which wages cannot be allowed to sink in all humanity. The second principle is that wages must be fair, that is to say, sufficiently high to provide a standard family with food, shelter, clothing, medical care and education of children appropriate to the workmen but not at a rate exceeding his wage earning capacity in the class of establishment to which he belongs. A fair wage is thus related to the earning capacity and the workload. It must, however, be realised that "fair wage" is not "living wage" by which is meant a wage which is sufficient to provide not only the essentials above mentioned but a fair measure of frugal comfort with an ability to provide for old age and evil days. Fair wage lies between the minimum wage, which must be paid in any event, and the living wage, which is the goal.

10.

Article 23 of the Constitution of India reads as under: 23. Prohibition of traffic in human beings and forced labour.(1) Traffic in human beings and begar and other similar forms of forced labour are prohibited and any contravention of this provision shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law. (2) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from imposing compulsory service for public purposes, and in imposing such service the State shall not make any discrimination on grounds only of religion, race, caste or class or any of them.

11. In Peoples Union for Democratic Rights Vs. Union of India (1982) 3 SCC 235, the question was whether workmen employed by the Union of India on wages lower than the minimum wages could be said to be forced labour. While deciding the issue the court held: It is obvious that ordinarily no one would willingly supply labour or service to another for less than the minimum wage, when he knows that under the law he is entitled to get minimum wage for the labour or service provided by him. It may therefore be legitimately presumed that when a person provides labour or service to another against receipt of remuneration, which is less than the minimum wage, he is acting under the force of some compulsion which drives him to work though he is

32 paid less than what he is entitled under law to receive. What Article 23 prohibits is 'forced labour' that is labour or service which a person is forced to provide and 'force' which would make such labour or service 'forced labour' may arise in several ways. It may be physical force which may compel a person to provide labour or service to another or it may be force exerted through a legal provision such as a provision for imprisonment or fine in case the employee fails to provide labour or service or it may even be compulsion arising from hunger and poverty, want and destitution. Any factor which deprives a person of a choice of alternatives and compels him to adopt one particular course of action may properly be regarded as 'force' and if labour or service is compelled as a result of such 'force', it would we 'forced labour'. Where a person is suffering from hunger or starvation, when he has no resources at all to fight disease or feed his wife and children or even to hide their nakedness, where utter grinding poverty has broken his back and reduced him to a state of helplessness and despair and where no other employment is available to alleviate the rigour of his poverty, he would have no choice but to accept any work that comes his way, even if the remuneration offered to him is less than the minimum wage. He would be in no position to bargain with the employer; he would have to accept what is offered to him. And in doing so he would be acting not as a free agent with a choice between alternatives but under the compulsion of economic circumstances and the labour or service provided by him would be clearly 'forced labour.' There is no reason why the word 'forced' should be read in a narrow and restricted manner so as to be confined only to physical or legal 'force' particularly when the national charter, its fundamental document has promised to build a new socialist republic where there will be socioeconomic justice for all and every one shall have the right to work, to education and to adequate means of livelihood.

12. It is, therefore, clear that the minimum wages are the lowest possible wage at which a workman can be employed by any employer private or public. I may mention that the word employment must not mean employment of a formal nature under the contract of employment but has reference to the performance of services as labour for a given wage, whether on a daily basis or on a casual basis or on a contractual basis (as in the contract labour) or under any scheme relating to unemployment relief or any relief work like a famine related work.

13. In Sanjit Roy Vs. State of Rajasthan (1983) 1 SCC 525, Justice Bhagwati relying on Peoples Union for Democratic Rights Vs. Union of India (1982) 3 SCC 235 it was held: I must, therefore hold consistently with this decision that where a person provides

33 labour or service to another for remuneration which is less than the minimum wage, the labour or service provided by him clearly falls within the meaning of the words 'forced labour' and attracts the condemnation of Article 23. Every person who provides labour or service to another is entitled at the least to the minimum wage and if anything less than the minimum wage is paid to him, he can complain of violation of his fundamental right under Article 23 and ask the Court to direct payment of the minimum wage to him so that the breach of Article 23 may be abated. If this be the correct position in law, it is difficult to see how the constitutional validity of the Exemption Act in so far as it excludes the applicability of the Minimum wages Act 1948 to the workmen employed in famine relief works can be sustained. Article 23, as pointed out above, mandates that no person shall be required or permitted to provide labour or service to another on payment of anything less than the minimum wage and if the Exemption Act, by excluding the applicability of the Minimum Wages Act 1948, provides that minimum wage may not be paid to a workman employed in any famine relief work, it would be clearly violative of Article 23.

14. Sub-section (1) of Section 6 needs to be considered in the light of these decisions. So read, it should be clear that the expression Notwithstanding anything contained in the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 cannot permit the Central Government to fix a wage below the minimum wage in the state in question for to do so would be a clear violation of Article 23 of the Constitution of India. Even otherwise, both the subsections must be read harmoniously with each other. Both the subsections cover the same field, namely, payment of wages for employment under the Act.

15. While it is clear that sub-section (2) mandates the payment of the minimum wages fixed by the Central Government at the rate of the minimum wages fixed by the State Government. Although, on a bare reading, it appears that both the subsections operate in a mutually exclusive field and subsection (2) will cease to operate once subsection (1) comes into play. However, the fixation of rate of wage by the Central Government cannot be oblivious of the benchmark prescribed under subsection (2) of Section 6 of the Act. The rate at which wages are to be paid under subsection (1) can only be analogous to the rate at which wages are fixed under sub-section 2. The work given to be performed whether paid for under either subsection is identical. The Central Government cannot be left with the arbitrary choice of deciding whether to pay under sub-section (2) or to pay under subsection (1) of section 6. Regardless of the subsection under which wage is fixed, there must be a parity in the quantum of payment under both the abovesaid sub-sections.

34 16. Hence, in my opinion, the fact that the payment is made with the object of providing guaranteed work to the unemployed is irrelevant to the question what should be the rate at which wages are to be paid. In other words, a possible argument that since the person seeking employment was unemployed and the payment is a measure of social welfare cannot justify payment of wages below minimum wage.

17.

Capacity to pay is not relevant while fixing minimum wages. So long as the

employment is the waged employment as quoted in the statement of objects and reasons of the Act wage has to be paid at the rate of minimum wages. It is irrelevant, whether such employment is in a relief work, under National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, casual work, contract work. It is equally irrelevant whether the payment is made monthly, weekly or daily. It is equally irrelevant whether rate is a time rate or piece rate. The non obstante clause in subsection (1) of section 6 by itself will not enable the Central Government to fix a wage at a rate lower than what is provided under the Minimum Wages Act. The payment of wage below minimum wage would amount to forced labour.

Annexure 4: On Delays in Wage Payments

In connection with the issue of delays in NREGA wage payments (see particularly Section 7), we reproduce below the full text of an insightful article by Dr. Reetika Khera (Indian Statistical Institute, New Delhi), published in Frontline on 21 May 2010:

Wages of Delay
When the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act was enacted in 2005, it was celebrated as a peoples act. It was an act that focussed on labourers rights - to employment, minimum wages and timely payments. Besides the involvement of peoples groups in its drafting, the transparency provisions therein and so on earned the NREGA this tag. For over a year now, serious delays in the payment of NREGA wages have been recorded across the country. Apart from violating the law (the act stipulates that wages be paid within 15 days of work being done), delays cause great hardship to NREGA labourers. When wages are delayed, they are forced to resort to lower-paid or exploitative employment, and even distress migration. The delays have diminished the interest of labourers in the Act, so much so that this people's act faces the danger of those very people turning against the NREGA. For instance, in May 2009, labourers in Khunti (Jharkhand) who had not been paid for up to six months, insisted on earlier dues being cleared before taking on more NREGA work. More recently in February 2010, in Banswara (south Rajasthan), I noticed that the highway to Gujarat was dotted with migrant labourers. One of them was Amro Jitra Garasiya (Satra Khuta Panchayat), who had not been paid for afforestation work done exactly 12 months ago! Now, he said, he was not sure if he would be paid at all. He did not want to "risk" NREGA work any more. Such complaints - lack of work, delays in payments and labourers turning against NREGA have been pouring in from several states, including Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal. This note is based on field visits to these states. Fallout of payments through banks and post offices? What has caused these delays? In 2008, the Centre had directed that all NREGA wages be

36 paid through banks and post offices. This move was motivated by the need to separate the implementing agency from the payment agency. This separation, it was hoped, would end the embezzlement of NREGA wages. The administration is quick to blame banks and post offices for the delays. Government officials often claim that they do their work in a timely manner, but that banks and post offices are unable to cope with the volume of payments. It is true that the transition from cash to payments through accounts created a "jam", as banks and post offices were overburdened with the opening of thousands of accounts in each branch. In the case of banks, that initial hurdle seems to have been largely overcome, though the opening of accounts remains incomplete. Where the account opening process is complete and banks are computerized, they are able to cope with NREGA payments reasonably efficiently. Generally, banks do not take more than 2-3 days to credit wages into the accounts of labourers after they receive the cheque from the administration. The case of post offices is different. Take, for instance, Surguja District (Chattisgarh) where they rely on post offices because there are hardly any rural banks. In one Block, the post office had only one employee who was responsible for opening and operating thousands of NREGA accounts. All the work is done manually, as there are no computers. In addition, the post master complained that account opening formalities remained incomplete because he did not have enough passbooks (its supply had been delayed by the district for months)! Similar problems have been reported wherever post offices are being used for NREGA payments, including Rajasthan and Jharkhand. Sources of delays There are, however, several steps in the wage payment process. Once work is complete, Muster Rolls (MRs) have to be submitted to the implementing agency. The next step is the measurement of work, since most states pay wages on the basis of work done, not on attendance alone ("daily wage"). After this payment orders (POs), listing the labourers and the wages due to them, are prepared. These payments have to be sanctioned by concerned officials (e.g. Block Development Officer, sarpanch, junior engineer, etc.). Then, the cheques and payment orders are sent to the bank or post office so that wages can be credited into the accounts of individual labourers. Delays are creeping in at some, or all, of those steps. On tracking the payment process, one finds that there are several other sources of delays. Often the delay occurs before the cheques reach the bank/post office. After the POs have been generated, the signatures of the sanctioning authority take time. An important reason behind this foot-dragging is that the separation of the payment and implementing agency has made embezzling NREGA wages very difficult. Even if the implementing agency inflates

37 measurements and attendance on MRs, they can no longer embezzle that money as it goes directly into the accounts of the labourers. In order to cheat, they would either have to collude with labourers, or illegally operate the labourer's bank accounts, or forcibly extract wages from labourers after they withdraw the money. This "loss" seems to have affected the motivation of concerned officials. This is indirect way in which payments through accounts has led to delays. In the present system, where payments are made on the basis of measurements rather than attendance alone, the Junior Engineer (JE) exercises a lot of power. Attendance has to be reconciled with measurement before payments are processed. Though the law requires it, in many states, MRs are not maintained at the worksite. Notable exceptions are Andhra Pradesh, Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu. In other states, the practice that has evolved is to maintain "kachha" attendance and measurement records, which are faired out later on official MRs, after the JE approves informal measurements maintained by the worksite supervisors. However, delays have also emerged in Rajasthan where strict enforcement of transparency measures had had a noticeable impact on reducing corruption, at least in the labour expenditure. If the loss of opportunities for embezzling wages were the only cause of delays, then bank payments would not have affected Rajasthan. Here, it seems that apart from post offices causing delays, another issue is the scale of employment. During the peak season, up to 2000 workers are known to report for work. When all workers show up for payments at the bank or post office, even computerized banks find it hard to cope with the crowds. "Flow of funds" is another important source of delays. This is especially true in states like Bihar, Jharkhand and Karnataka. It is not clear is whether this is due to poor planning by the district administration (e.g., delaying demand for funds, low standards of record-keeping) and/or due to Centre-State politics whereby funds are withheld or delayed by the Centre (e.g., incomplete reports being submitted by the state, frequent changes in the norms for release of funds). Recently in Bihar, I was told that funds are transferred just before the close of the financial year. This shows up as a large opening balance and becomes an excuse for holding up further release. Record-keeping requirements of the NREGA also put a strain on the system. After the MRs, the POs have to be generated. Many states do not use a printed format for the POs. NREGA staff, often already overstretched and untrained, prepare these formats manually (including wasting their time drawing rows and columns) each week, slowing things down and also leading to errors. Ideally, this process should be computerized. At the very least printed formats should be provided.

38 Finally, it is worth mentioning that distance, though an inconvenience, has rarely been mentioned as the source of delay. Therefore, the ministry's technological solution of a "business correspondent model" (whereby an intermediary will withdraw wages from the bank or post office and deliver wages at the doorstep of labourers) cannot go very far in dealing with delays. The use of the biometrics machine (used in AP post offices) can help in cases where the volume is very high. However, wherever this model is introduced, adequate safeguards must be put in place to ensure that business correspondents do not demand an "informal fee" from labourers in exchange for the service they provide. What can be done about these delays? No significant delays have been reported in Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu though the scale of NREGA employment is substantial. In Andhra Pradesh, computerization of the payment process has helped to ensure timely payments. One reason for timely payments in Tamil Nadu is that it continues to pay wages in cash in spite of the Central government's order on payments through accounts. The state has done this as it was felt that the transition to payments through accounts would cause labourers a lot of inconvenience. What other lessons can we learn from these states? Both states have streamlined the process of wage payments, by putting in place a weekly schedule. There is a deadline for each step in the payment process (submission of MRs, measurement, sanctioning of payments, disbursal of wages). This weekly schedule is accompanied with intensive monitoring, e.g., MIS tracking of which step in the process has been delayed and setting up alerts to deal with them. Apart from this, both states have appointed additional staff, especially technical staff, to ensure timely measurement of NREGA works. Each person involved in the payment process seems to be aware of the schedule and faces pressure to meet deadlines. For instance, in Dindigul District (Tamil Nadu), the data entry operator in Shanarpatti Block told me that if the NREGA website (www.nrega.nic.in) reports any delays in wage payments for Tamil Nadu, it had to be on account of a data entry error. "In all of Tamil Nadu, wages are paid on Tuesdays", he confidently declared. This suggests the need for a transparent system to track the payment process and to fix responsibility for delays at each step. Going beyond Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, it is essential to go back to the basics, including the maintenance of MRs at the worksite and regular updating of job cards, so that labourers have official evidence of the dates on which work was done. The present "dual record-keeping" system (whereby "kachha" records are faired out only after measurements are passed by the JE), makes it vulnerable to delays and corruption.

39 Strict measures must be taken to ensure greater accountability of the implementing bodies towards labourers. There are provisions in the NREGA that can be activated. For instance, the penalty clause (Section 25, NREGA) which allows for a fine of up to Rs. 1000 when any officer fails to do his/her duty should apply automatically in cases of delays that exceed 15 days. This measure would go a long way in ensuring accountability of officials. In places where payments are being held up due to delays in measurement by the JE, states could consider paying labourers on daily wage basis (at least as a short term measure until adequate staff is appointed). Further, Schedule II of the NREGA mandates that labourers be compensated for delays in accordance with the provisions of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936. As far as we are aware, this has been used only once when 265 workers were paid Rs. 2000 as compensation in Khunti District, Jharkhand in May 2009. (There is some evidence that there has been some improvement in Khunti where wages are now paid within one month.) Other longer term measures would include upgrading post offices, increasing staff in rural post offices, providing stationery and computerized facilities so that they are better equipped to deal with the workload. For a government that believes that NREGA played an important role in its re-election in 2009, such delays cannot be ignored. Indeed, when the Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh and UPA Chairperson, Ms Sonia Gandhi spoke at this year's NREGA Sammelan on 2 February, they noted that delays in payments presented one of the most serious challenges in the implementation of NREGA. The Ministry of Rural Development should focus on the electoral promises made in the Congress manifesto where it "pledges at least 100 days of work at a real wage of Rs 100 a day for everyone as an entitlement under the NREGA.". These two promises assume greater importance for labourers in a year of drought and spiralling food inflation. To the extent that the Congress is interested in cashing in on votes through the NREGA, this is where its efforts should be directed. The Ministry, however, seems to believe that measures such as prefixing "Mahatma Gandhi" to the name of the Act and constructing "Bharat Nirman Rajiv Gandhi Sewa Kendras" under NREGA, would consolidate its vote-catching potential. The disconnect in the Ministry's understanding regarding the priorities under NREGA and that of labourers is likely to boomerang.

Annexure 5: Provisions of the Payment of Wages Act18

NREGA 2005, on delays in wage payments: Section 3, sub-section 3: Save as otherwise provided in this Act, the disbursement of daily wages shall be made on a weekly basis or in any case not later than a fortnight after the date on which such work was done.

Schedule II, Rule 30: In case the payment of wages is not made within the period specified under the Scheme, the labourers shall be entitled to receive payment of compensation as per the provisions of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (4 of 1936).

POWA, 2005: Under Section 15(3) of the Act, the authority (which includes the Labour Court, Assistant Labour Commissioner, etc) dealing with a complaint can take the following steps:

o Direct the payment of wages that are pending.

o Pay compensation not exceeding Rs. 3000 and not less than Rs.1500. Note that compensation can be ordered even if the pending wages are paid before the authority deals with the application, but if the pending wages are paid before the application is disposed, the maximum compensation is Rs. 2000. (Amount increased by the Payment of
Wages (Amendment) Act, 2005.)

Applications have to resolved within 3 months of the application being made, provided that the period of three months may be extended if both parties to the dispute agree for a genuine reasons to be recorded by the authority that the time period should be extended to dispose of the application in a just manner.

18

Contributed by Surabhi Chopra (eminent Lawyer).

41

The relevant sections under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA), 2005 are Section 3, sub-section 3 which states that Save as otherwise provided in this Act, the disbursement of daily wages shall be made on a weekly basis or in any case not later than a fortnight after the date on which such work was done and Schedule II, Rule 30: In case the payment of wages is not made within the period specified under the Scheme, the labourers shall be entitled to receive payment of compensation as per the provisions of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (4 of 1936).

The Payment of Wages Act, 1936 was amended in 2005. As per Section 15 of the Payment of Wages (Amendment) Act, 2005, the following are relevant: one, the competent authority can direct the payment of wages; two, the amount of the compensation is between Rs. 1,500 and Rs 3,000. Compensation can be claimed even if the wages have been paid at the time of hearing the matter, though in such cases, the maximum claim will be Rs. 2,000; three, all claims must be settled within three months of the matter being registered with the authority. Finally, the "authority" could be any one of the following: any Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, the presiding officer of a Labour Court, Regional or Assistant Labour Commissioner (ALC), any officer of the State Government not below the rank of the ALC and with two years experience, any officer with experience as a Judge of a Civil Court or a Judicial Magistrate.

Endnotes
i

Comment (here or elsewhere) on the exaggerated fear of wage hyperinflation.

ii iii
iv v

Provisionally pasted without change from the 23 May letter. Retrieve recos from second meetings minutes.

Explain why it matters. Add a para on wage slips (and the need to reinstate payment in public etc.)? vi What about the issue of transparency/privacy of bank accounts? vii Append the bank parcha and suggest it be included in the Job Cards? viii Append the model Payment Order? ix Check details. x Provisionally pasted without change from the draft recommendations prepared before the second meeting. xi NB We discussed whether its best for NREGA funds to go from GOI to state funds, or directly to the districts, but didnt come any conclusion on that; similarly with the issue of whether societies should be created at the state level to ease the flow of funds.
xii

To be updated.

DRAFT REPORT OF THE WORKING GROUP ON

CAPACITY BUILDING

( FOR INTERNAL CIRCULATION ONLY)

CENTRAL EMPLOYMENT GUARANTEE COUNCIL

MEMBERS OF THE WORKING GROUP;

Ashwani Kumar (Member, Central Council) ----Chairman Pramathesh Ambasta (SPS, MP) --------------------Member Ved Arya (SRIJAN, Delhi) -----------------------------Member Dr. Bhagirathi Panda (NEHU, Shillong) ----------Member Prof. S.Narayan (Institute of Social Studies, Delhi) ---- Member Official Members from the Government Mr. P.K. Kesavan, Director, MoPR (GoI) Mr. SK Singh, JS, Department of Rural Development, (GoB) Mr. Badrinarayan, Add. Commissioner, MGNREGA( Govt. of Rajasthan)

6JULY 2010

Acknowledgement At the outset, the Working Group thanks Dr. CP Joshi, Honble Minister RD (GoI) for initiating the process of governance reforms for MGNREGA. The Working Group is thankful to Dr Mihir Shah, Member Planning Commission, Shri BK Sinha, IAS, Secretary, Ministry of Rural Development, Govt. of India and Ms. Amita Sharma, IAS, Joint Secretary (MGNREGA), Ministry of Rural Development, Govt. of India for their guidance and unstinted support. The Working Groups places its special thanks to Shri Mathew C. Kunnumkal, IAS, Director General and Dr MV Rao, IAS, Registrar & Director (Administration) of National Institute of Rural Development, Hyderabad for their logistic and coordination support. We also place on record the support of Shri K. Raju, IAS, Principal Secretary to Chief Minister, Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, Shri T Vijai Kumar, IAS, Joint Secretary, NRLM, Ministry of Rural Development, Govt. of India, Shri Rajashekhar, Chief Executive Officer, APSERP, Hyderabad, Shri Phani Kumar, Commissioner, Andhra Pradesh Academy of Rural Development, Hyderabad, Shri SM Vijayanand, IAS, Principal Secretary, Local Self Government, Govt. of Kerala, Shri Santhosh Mathew, IAS, Principal Secretary, Rural Development, Govt. of Bihar, Mr. Vijay Prakash, IAS, Secretary , Planning, Govt. of Bihar, Shri R Parasuram, IAS, Principal Secretary, Rural Development, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Shri Shiv Shekhar Shukla, CEO, SREGS, Madhya Pradesh, Shri C S Rajan, IAS, Principal Secretary, Rural Development, Government of Rajasthan, Mr. Tanmay Kumar, IAS, Secretary, Rural Development and Commissioner, MGNREGA, Govt. of Rajasthan, Shri Arun Kumar, IAS, Principal Secretary, Rural Development, Govt. of Assam, Ms. Swahil, IAS, Additional Commissioner, MGNREGA(Chhattisgarh) and Mr. Brahma Dutt Tiwari, SDO, Sohara district. and Collectors and District Magistrates of Jehanabad, Gaya, Khagria districts in Bihar. The Working Group also thanks Prof. Vinay Singh, Director, NIRD-NERC(Guwahati) and Prof. Ramakanthan, Director, Kerala Institute of Local Administration,(KILA) Thrissur, Kerala, Prof.Hemanth Rao, Administrative Staff College, Hyderabad, Prof. G. Nagraj of Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai, Dr Jayashankar, IRS, Additional Director, DTA, Nagpur, Shri Prashuram Roy, CFES, New Delhi, Achut Das, Director Agramgamee, Kashipur, Orissa for their support and knowledge sharing The Working Group appreciates continuous support received from Dr. Rajani Kant, NIRD ( Logistic Coordinator for the working group) and also thank Prof. K. Hanumantha Rao, Professor & Head, Centre for Wage Employment and Poverty Alleviation, NIRD, Ms. P. Leelavathi, Visiting Fellow (CWEPA), NIRD, Dr Joseph Abraham, Mr. David Brenyard, Consultants (CWEPA), Mr K. Sudhir Kumar, Stenographer (CESD) and Ms. B. Prasanna, Electronic and Data Processing Assistant (CWEPA) of National Institute of Rural Development, Hyderabad. We, in the end, are grateful to labourers for their continuing hope in MGNREGA! Chairperson and Members

Index
S.No. 1 2 3 4 5 Acknowledgements List of Abbreviations Preface CHAPTER I : INTRODUCTION CHAPTER II : GOVERNANCE REORMS FOR CAPACITY BUILDING Part-I : Reforming Governance Systems at all levels Part-II : Assertion of Workers Rights wrt Social Mobilisation, Planning and Social Audit Lok Sevak/Lok Karmis
PART-III : STRENGTHENING CAPACITIES OF WORKERS TO ENFORCE THEIR RIGHTS : INFRASTRUCTURAL AND MOBILISATION SUPPORT

List of Contents

Page No.

CHAPTER III : Strengthening Capacities of Workers to enforce their rights : Infrastructural and Mobilisation support CHAPTER IV : Capacity Building Reforms for Implementation and Transparency : ICT/GIS based capacity building reforms CHAPTER-V : Strengthening Research and Evaluation Systems for MGNREGA Part I : Policy Evaluation and Research Service (PERS) Part II : Innovations in Research Methodologies for Evaluation

9 10

CHAPTER VI : Capacity Building Reforms for strengthening Panchyati Raj CHAPTER VI : Capacity Building Reforms for Training

11 12

CHAPTER - VII : Capacity Building Recommendations for North East ANNEXURES

List of Abbreviations

PREFACE
The National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) notified on 7th September, 2005, aims at enhancing livelihood security of households in rural areas of the country by providing at least one hundred days of guaranteed wage employment in a financial year to every household whose adult members volunteer to do unskilled manual labour. On 2 February 2006, Prime Minster Dr. Manmohan Singh and UPA Chairperson Mrs. Sonia Gandhi travelled to Bandlapalli village in Anantapur district of Andhra Pradesh to launch the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS) as the most radical and largest plan of public employment, poverty reduction and rural development in the human history. From 200 districts, the plan has now been extended to cover all of rural India. The guarantee of 100 days of unskilled works now extends to more than 5.8 crore households in 2009-10, covers now about 79 lakh work projects and it has also led to opening of about 11 crore bank accounts, a rare feat in the history of financial inclusion of poor in the socio- economic architecture in India. First of its kind, nationally and internationally, MGNREGA with its rights-based framework and focus on creation of durable assets, and propelled by proactive disclosures rules of right to information, has the potential to address the challenges of rural unemployment, food security and regenerate the village economy in India. MGNREGAs most significant impact has been on the Minimum Wages Act as awareness about minimum wages has increased considerably and the notified minimum wages rates have gone up especially after the Government of India decided to provide a real wage of Rs 100 a day as an entitlements under MGNREGA, (Ref to FMs budget speech 2009). It is also radical in the sense that it ensures rural labourers to have a legal entitlement not only to work on demand but also to minimum wages and in case of non-availability of work, the poor labourer is entitled to unemployment allowance. Similarly, the Act by emphasizing lateral public accountability systems like social audits, and proactive disclosure of information has internalized the spirit of transparency and accountability enshrined in the Right to information Act. Centrality of the Panchayati Raj Institutions in the implementation of MGNREGA has the potential to institutionalize peoples power at the grassroots and radically transform governance in rural areas. The government has also taken a giant leap by owning up the responsibility of providing complete fiscal resources and administrative mechanisms for implementing MGNREGA. All these call for innovating new governance structures, mainstreaming existing service delivery mechanisms, and re-designing more effective means of public monitoring for successful expansion and consolidation of MGNREGA. This indeed requires a

paradigm shift in the way capacity building has been conceptualized and mainstreamed in the implementation of MGNREGA.

Executive Summary
Working Group on Capacity Building for MGNREGA MGNREGA with its rights-based framework and focus on creation of durable assets, has the potential to address the challenges of rural unemployment, food security and regenerate the village economy in India. In order to realize the goals that MGNREGA has set out for itself, there need to be first and foremost human capacities. The capabilities of these human capacities need to be developed so that they are able to undertake the responsibility mandated to them. Human capacities and capabilities further need to be backed by proper supporting institutions, which act as decision support systems, assisting in concurrent monitoring of outcomes and better management of the schemes initiated under MGNREGA. The Working Group proposes to define capacity building not as ordinary shortage of staff and lack of training facilities but as the dynamic process of developing, strengthening and institutionalizing the rules of game, norms, standard operating procedures, skills, abilities, and resources that organizations, communities and individuals need to survive, adapt, and thrive in the fast-changing world of policy implementation.

Capacity building, broadly speaking, has two major aspects; for organizations, it relates to whole gamut of governance, administration (including human resources, financial management, and legal matters), business processes, program development, evaluation, and policy changes for innovation. For individuals, capacity building refers to excellence in individual performance, leadership development, socializing managerial values, technical skills, training opportunities, organizing abilities, and other areas of personal and professional development that includes sensitivity to values of equity, participation and inclusion. Thus, individual empowerment eventually needs to result in the communitization of capacities especially marginalized and socially excluded groups in the society.

Issues. The Working group found the following issues bedeviling the implementation of MGNREGA with special reference to the capacity building aspects.

1. Lack of Coordination among horizontal and vertical tiers of the government. Various institutional structures are not working in tandem and District Collectors (DPC) and Program Officers are still struggling with conflicting demands of vertical and horizontal coordination across departments and different tiers of government especially Panchayati Raj in the implementation of MGNREGA. For instance, Maharashtra has not suffered not only from lack of social mobilization of agricultural laborers and work site management issues but also from the usual bureaucratic turf wars and coordination conflicts between Chief Executive Officers of Zila Parishad and Collectors. 2. Poorly Crafted Administrative Systems. Some governments, for example, Bihar and Chhattisgarh, continue to suffer from deficits of poorly crafted and inadequate administrative and management systems at all levels. The innovation of a separate MGNREGA cell has not yet produced desired outcomes. (Refer to Appendix on Chhattisgarh). 3. Shortage of Professionals and Training Facilities. Our field visits and interactions with implementing support staff in the districts and blocks not only note shortage of dedicated personnel, poor training facilities and lack of community participation. 4. Ad Hoc Appointments of Professional Staff, Inadequate Compensation and Turnover. Unwittingly or otherwise, the government incentivized ad hoc appointments of low quality staff in large numbers, with every RD secretary and district collector somehow scrambling to recruit whoever s/he could get in the local job market. Many states suffer from high staff turnover. The process failed to take into account the fact that the Indian job market for professionals has become open and nationalized and salary expectations are to be calibrated to the demand-supply phenomenon. 5. Dissatisfaction among Contract Staff. We find evidence of growing dissatisfaction of the staff especially those contract staff with regard to poor working conditions and arbitrary contract appointment policies of various state governments. Except AP, no state government has yet formulated a clearly articulated Human Resource Development policy. 6. Failed experiments of social mobilization such as Gaon Sathi in Orissa and the idea of providing uniform for mates and Rozgar Sevaks in Jharkhand, a state battling against uniformed and un-uniformed Maoist rebels. At the same time there is acceptance in some states that SHGs be mobilised. 7. Lack of Strong Governance System at the National and State Level. The current system is mired into departmental rules and functioning style and doesnt have the strong management teams that can function autonomously to support the mission mode that is needed to realize the true objectives of MGNREGA. 8. Lack of Dedicated Pro-active Teams at the Cutting Edge. Barring a couple of states such as AP and Rajasthan, the implementation structure stops at the block level, relying as it does on Panchayats whose implementation capacities vary widely across states and districts. Thus often the system is in reactive

and fire fighting mode rather than in a pro-active mode with adequate capacities to plan ahead and to implement these plans well. 9. There is a huge gap in training system, characterized by the following: (a) Training institutions has very little practical experience of doing what they are training in and have very little touch with the intricacies of ground-level realities, implementation and social engineering; (b) Training institutions are located at a geographical distance, far removed from where the actual development intervention is scheduled to take place; (c) These institutes are run by personnel who speak a language which is largely incomprehensible to the people and whose attitude is didactic rather than dialogic, and who seem to lack the passion for the work which their training will enable; and (d) There is little follow-up in the field to ensure that the benefits of training are materialised at the field-level for which it was meant; and (e) there is near absence of any kind of role assigned to Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) in this crucial area. 10. There is no in-house capacity to undertake evaluation and assessment of MGNREGA on a continuous and comprehensive basis; PIN (professional Institutional network) of MoRD is highly decentred and fragmented and run mostly by bureaucratic fiats. As a result, genuine policy analysis and feedback for course correction in the policy is often lacking. As states have not yet developed any robust mechanism of evaluation or assessment, the MIS of MoRD remains the only source of public scrutiny of the implementation of MGRNEGA; we are aware that MIS suffers from reporting discrepancy between states and the Center. So establishing an evaluation system becomes urgent. 11. Capacity Deficiency in MGNREGA in North East. Deficiency in capacity is found in all the three levels i.e. (i) Individual stakeholders(workers, govt. officers and officials, PRI functionaries, functionaries of officials created under act in the absence of PRI system, neighborhood functionaries etc.), (ii) community and (iii) institutions involved in implementation and monitoring of this programme. Often the deficiency in one of these stakeholders affects the other and vice-versa. For example, capacity deficiency in institutions leads to capacity deficiency in individual stakeholders and community and vice-versa. Hence, in the North-East, there exists a low level circle of capacity deficiency in rural development programmes in general and MGNREGA in particular. These low capacity bases in these three levels act and react upon each other keeping the overall level of capacity in MGNREGA delivery in the region in a perpetual state of underdevelopment. To be specific these deficiencies manifest in the front of manpower availability, training institutions, capability of the institutions to undertake and impart training, training modules, institutional capacity to mobilize workers, PRIs and their functionaries, civil society, governance and leadership.

Recommendations

Working Groups recommendations are as follows in brief:

1. The term Administrative Expenses needs to be replaced by Capacity Building Expenses. 2. Anchoring Management Structure in a Council Secretariat in Order to Support the Central Employment Guarantee Council. Two organizational forms could be considered (a) One with complete autonomy with the Chairperson of the Central Council and the key functionaries of the Central Council Secretariat in-sourced from outside the normal channels; or (b) a hybrid structure may be adopted with the CEGC and Chairperson remaining as they are, and key positions in-sourced through external channels. a. In either case, all key positions of accountability should be filled in after a due high-level search and screen process. Serving government officers may also be identified and placed through such a screen process. The process should shortlist potential candidates from within the government or outside. b. The Council Secretariat should be headed by a Director General (DG). She is the executive officer through whom the will of the CEGC is expressed in action. There will be Deputy Director Generals to manage functions such as grievance redressal, human resources, Information technology, monitoring, evaluation and social audit. 3. Independent Society at the State level. It is recommended to set up an "Independent Society" with Chief Minister as Chair and Rural Development Minister as Deputy Chair, and Principal Secretary RD as member -secretary within the nodal agency of department of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj. Bihar is actively pursuing this approach (refer to appendix on Bihar). The Society would be operated by a Governing Committee/Council (GC) and present Commissioner (NREGA) would be the CEO or State Programme Coordinator assuming full responsibility for implementing MGNREGA, assisted by a Directorate comprising subject specialists/experts and support staff. The other members of the GC could be secretaries from Planning, water resources, finance, labour, road, environment & forest. Two to three prominent members from the civil society especially involved in the implementation of Employment Guarantee programmes/Social Audit/ Rural Entrepreneurship could also be nominated to the GC for a policy feedback and interface with civil society. 4. Project facilitation team (PFT) at the Cutting Edge of Implementation. A very strong fulltime spearhead team is needed at the sub-block level, which almost

on a daily basis, can easily reach out to, mobilize and empower the poor, wage seekers to make demands on the system. a. Such a dedicated PFT is will prepare an annual micro-plan for each gram panchayat each year resulting in shelf of works and annual budget estimates (material and labour budget both). The PFT will train Gram Panchayat representatives and functionaries and work with them on all aspects such as implementation, asset verification, measurement and payment, and monitoring and evaluation, MIS maintenance, and social audit. b. PFT will compose of the four members including the team leader to perform the following functions: (i) Social mobilization and awareness raising about their rights (reaching out potential job seekers, through SHGs or otherwise), (ii) Surveying, planning and budgeting of individual works apart from infrastructure and rehabilitation of common property resources such as pastures tanks, rivers and streams, canals; (iii) monitoring and measurement; and (iv) payment, accounts and MIS keeping. At least one person needs to be from IT background. 5. Village Development Cluster. PFT will reach to a population about a third of a block, or about 30 villages, and in terms of geographical area a maximum of 15,000 hectare. This aligns with the recommendations of the WG on Planning and Execution which also defines the village development cluster. Thus, there would be, in most cases, three PFTs in a block each led by a PFT team leader and reporting to the Program Officer at the block level. 6. Full Involvement of Institutions of the Poor such as SHGs and Federations. WG makes a strong recommendation of ensuring full involvement of women self help groups in micro-planning, monitoring, as well as in social audit exercises. MP government has shown willingness to look at this idea. 7. Harnessing NGO Capacities in Mobilisation, Micro Planning, Building PRI capacity, and Support in Implementation. Looking to the proposals of MP and Rajasthan governments, roles for NGOs could be worked out as per their core competence and track record of implementation. MP Government has identified micro-planning as well as implementation roles while they train and support the PRIs in works related to community ponds, roads and wells. This also aligns with the Ministrys proposal of Lok Sewak and the original directive to involve reputed NGOs. Section 4.6 elaborates the role of NGOs as Lok Sewaks further and suggests allocation of 6 per cent of the expenditure for their effort. 8. States should adopt a scientific and unbiased process in recruitment and selection of professionals to get the best out of the national pool.

Methodology must eliminate biases in selection, especially over-reliance on interviews. It should include tests not just for cognitive ability (Intelligence Quotient tests) but tests for attitudes such as ability to work in teams, empathy with the poor in the villages and achievement motivation. Such recruitments could be outsourced to credible agencies, backed by administrative and political support as has been done in number of states (livelihoods projects) such as Bihar and Tamil Nadu. A four-step process has been laid out in the main text. 9. We strongly recommend that a similar system of recruitment and selection is designed and implemented for Gram Rozgar Sahayak or Field Assistant. 10. Ensuring Accountability through Performance Management System. Once recruited often the question of accountability of contract staff is raised. WG recommends a performance management system with 360 degree evaluation system to be done in the field situations and linking salary and non monetary awards to performance grade. It has been done successfully by a livelihoods project in Tamil Nadu that works in 15 districts (VKP). 11. Human Resource Policy for Contract Staff. Working group strongly recommends formulation of a comprehensive HR policy for contract staff in each state that inter alia have the features such as specification of their salary in scales and grades, annual increments, leaves, transfer norms, travel allowances, cell phone allowance, lap top allowance, and grievance redressal.

12. Organizational Structure for Training needs to be set up to meet the needs arising out of MGNREGA implementation. Secondly CSOs could play a critical role here, since many have done a very good work across the country in enabling wage seekers and village communities to access their entitlements under MGNREGA and since CSOs have also had a long history of mobilization, capacity building and support to village communities. Accordingly, WG makes the following recommendations: a. At the national level, a National MGNREGA Training and Support Organization (NMTSO) needs to be created to anchor the entire training effort for MGNREGA. It would draw upon the best resources across the country and pool them to create hubs in each state and district of the country. In terms of roles, it will (a) act as a coordinating and anchoring agency between different state level resource centres;

(b) help to define and refine training policy at both state and national levels and make traiing needs assessments; (c) act as a clearing house for training material and resources and as a nodal centre actively involved in development and dissemination of training material, methods and resources; and (d) identify and mobilize institutions which can play the role of training institutions for MGNREGA across the country. More details are available in the main text. b. At the state level, a State MGNREGA Training and Support Organization (SMTSO) needs to be set up to oversee the training functions throughout the state. This should actually be a Consortium of carefully selected CSOs, available professional and technical institutions with practical experience of planning, who will act as Anchor Organizations (AOs), anchoring the training effort at the state level and creating master trainers and master trainer organizations at the district level. The purpose of this state level consortium will be to create District MGNREGA Training and Support Organizations (DMTSO) which are master trainer and support organizations at the district level for the purposes of MGNREGA planning, implementation and mobilization for entitlements. c. At the district level, there is need to set up a District MGNREGA Training and Support Organization (DMTSO). This is a master trainer organization which imparts training to block and sub-block implementation teams. The DMTSO may be formed by the state government by inducting full-time dedicated resource persons who will act as master trainers for MGNREGA. The DMTSO will also provide support to Project Implementation Agencies under MGNREGA. These would be trained by Anchor Organisations, where necessary. 13. In terms of curriculum for field staff training, a 20-day Foundation Course may be visualized, followed by another 20-day follow-up module. Otherwise a more rigorous 30-day Foundation Course may be followed up by a 20-day refresher module. An evaluation of the performance of the trainees is a must. This could take the form of a course-end examination as well as concurrent review of trainees on their attitude, skills and behaviour. Both could lead to course-end grades. Certificates clearly stating that the team members have been trained to act as Master Trainers at the district level will be awarded by

the SMTSO, mentioning the course-end grades attained, in order to maintain quality of trainers and in the interest of transparency. 14. Costs and collaboration with RUDSETI. It is estimated that provisioning for such a training structure down the line will come to less than 1% of the MGNREGA budget. This cost is expected to decline after the initial years since the more critical handholding requirements will be in the first and second years. It is recommended therefore that the Operational Guidelines be suitably modified to cater for such expenditure. Where CSOs are inducted for the task of training DMTSOs or play the role of DMTSOs, their training and staff expenses should also be taken care of. Possibilities of convergence with RUDSETI type institutions should be explored in terms of infrastructure and human resources for training. 15. There are quality issues in selection of CSOs and the main text gives detailed process and criteria so that genuine, reputed ones are only selected. 16. Harnessing IT systems to monitor and to redress grievances. IT system could (a) speedily process data, (b) enable availability of data nearly concurrently with its online updation/entry through networks, and (c) break down artificial barriers of geography, boundaries etc. to flow of information (present in paper systems). These are key to engendering transparency and together make for contributions in governance. Assuming better connectivity backbones and hardware, WG recommends an Online Real Time Work Demand System where demand could be generated on Mobile Phone by a potential job seeker. Further, if MGNREGA correspondents with a handlheld or a computer are available even within the perimeter of the cluster or the block, the application can be made online. WG recommends Online Real Time Grievance Redressal on similar lines. 17. Real Time Online Muster Rolls, Work Attendance and Measurements. A system can be visualized whereby handhelds are issued to field workers under MGNREGA, and muster rolls are directly updated online to the statelevel servers by biometric identification of the workers who are present on site. Such an immediate updation will go a long way in aiding concurrent monitoring. In fact, the paper muster roll can be a print out of the online muster. Fitted with GPS and webcam facilities, the system should further aid in verification of the work being done on the site at which is reportedly being done. It seems that this has also already been piloted in different states by the

MoRD. The results of this pilot should be made public and appropriate policies framed on the feedback 18. Biometrics and UID-Enabled IT Application Layer for MGNREGA thus integrating with UID. Since UID is going to be the identity proving mechanism in the not-too-distant future, its relationship with any application layer in the social sector becomes critical and synergistic. Critical because (1) any nonUID based authentication architecture potentially faces the problem of nonconformance and redundancy in the not-too-distant future; and (2) if the MGNREGA IT architecture is not sufficiently prepared for the backend authentication proposed by the UID, there will be problems. Synergistic because the sort of connectivity backbone that is required to make UID authentication foolproof will also benefit MGNREGA. 19. It is this Working Group's recommendation that a coordination mechanism between MGNREGA and UID is pro-actively worked out by MoRD. It is on the basis of this understanding that a clear IT plan to be rolled out should be made so that MGNREGA has strategically positioned itself to maximize the wage-seeker's benefits. 20. We propose using Banking Correspondent model for wage payments. Despite its various problems, everyone (including the villagers themselves) is agreed that payment through bank transfers is a good thing and must stay. Its basic premises of separating those in-charge of work execution from those incharge of payments and doing away with the handling of cash is fundamentally sound. In each village, Banks place a Customer Service Provider (CSP) identified by the banker equipped with a smart card reader networked to the bank server. Each beneficiary is given a bank account after biometric authentication by the bank. All disbursements are credited electronically to the accounts of the beneficiaries. Banks arrange cash to the CSP using a Business Correspondent (BC). The MIS showing disbursement is available online. A printer may give out details of the transaction as a paper record. 21. ICT/GIS Enabled Asset Management System. Based on Working Groups field visits in different states, interaction with different key stakeholders and also a workshop help at NIRD on 14 May 2010, the Working Group recommends setting up ICT/GIS enabled Assets Management System for MGNREGA. A Public Private Partnership (PPP) framework needs to be created for accessing and using the best skills, tools and technologies for

developing and maintaining Assets Management System. The district administration with the help of ICT enabled Rajiv Gandhi Seva Kendras (RGSKs) at the panchayat and block levels would uplink the AMS to NREGA division of MoRD. 22. Strengthening Policy Research and Evaluation Systems (PERS) For MGNREGA. As the implementation of MGNREGA has entered its fifth year in a row, the Working Group recommends setting up PERS as a continuous policy evaluation and research think tank for enhancing the capacity of MoRD in its effective and efficient implementation of NREGA by a. developing innovative participatory approaches and syncretic methodologies for impact analysis, b. anticipating policy research needs of key stakeholders and responding to specific policy analysis requests in the areas of innovation, convergence and capacity building on all current and emerging issues in MGNREGA, c. functioning as a forum and clearinghouse for the sharing of information as well as the dissemination of best practices through workshops, seminars, publication of journals, reports, bulletins, briefs and other literature, and d. helping create an environment for imparting expertise to people interested in rigorous program evaluation and training to policy makers/implementers on how to conduct randomized and qualitative evaluations in social policies. 23. With a rigorous adherence to objectives of MGNREGA especially articulating voices of poor in the realm of livelihood security , PERS would help create a robust, dynamic and self-evolving knowledge-space that is authoritative, objective, nonpartisan and transparent in generic terms of monitoring and evaluation as mentioned in the Section 11 of the Act. Further, PERS is intended to breakdown the silos in social science research and deepen the sphere of participatory and informed dialogue between policy makers and civil society. 24. Why PERS? A couple of reasons behind suggesting PERS are: (i) there is nothing in terms of independent policy research and evaluation support at the central or state level. PIN (Professional Institutional Network) in the MGNREGA cell of MoRD is generally bureaucratically driven and often

operates on the principles of ex-post-facto analysis of the implementation of MGRNEGA. the impact of PIN studies on course correction, innovation and policy change is rather limited as most policies changes in MGNREGA have been carried out without any research and analysis support of PIN; (ii) Based on the field visit, interaction and meeting with key officials at NIAR (LABSNA) the Working Group on 28 April 2010 does not think that NIAR is equipped with enough in-house resources, skills, aptitudes and backed by quality researchers including dedicated professionals to justify the role of National Resource Center for MGNREGA. In short, members of Working Group recommend that the NIAR needs to focus more seriously on research for teaching and training of career civil servants rather than undertaking Livelihood based development research. 25. Location of PERS: It should ideally be located in the proposed branch of NIRD in Jaipur (Rajasthan). 26. Structure of PERS: PERS will be composed of three units (or sections); namely Independent Evaluation or Impact Assessment Unit that will focus on various implementing aspects including impact analysis and appraisal of MGNREGA. Second, Research and Analysis Unit will be a new avatar of current PIN (Professional Institutional Network) for commissioning, guiding, and coordinating studies from a network of universities, social science institutes, and civil society organizations for fostering public-private partnership in the monitoring and evaluation of MGNREGA. Third unit will be Publication &Communication Unit. This will be primarily responsible for publishing Policy Briefs, Occasional Papers, Special Reports, Working Papers, documentaries, short films etc. for effective and transparent dissemination of information and setting the stage for informed dialogue between people and the government about the implementation of MGNREGA. 27. Capacity Building Reforms for Strengthening Panchayati Raj. Some specific recommendations are I) Converting PRIs into Mission Mode: Panchayat Empowerment & Accountability Incentive Scheme of MoPR ( Ministry of Panchyati Raj) may be made an integral part of the Mission; (ii) Following Maharashtra Experience, state governments need to make six meetings of Gram Sabha as mandatory for enhancing the implementation of MGNREGA. Necessary amendments in the Constitution may be made in this regard; (iii) Borrowing from Kerala experience, a campaign mode of decentralization must accompany the implementation of MGRNEGA in various states. Either

transfer cadre (Kerala model) or create a new cadre for PRI( Bihar model): Learning from Kerala experience, the Working Group suggests that even while the State Government is the staff-creating and cadre-controlling authority, PRIs need to have full freedom in assigning work, supervising its execution, reviewing performance and even imposing minor punishments, if required. 28. For urgent need of communitization of capacity building, MoRD needs to declare people based rural development centres in Ralegaon Siddhi, MKKS in Vijaypura, SPS(MP), Vilasrao Salunkhe (Pani-baba)s experiments in Purandhar block in Pune, Subhas Palekars Zero budget agriculture in Amaravati and various similar innovative experiments across the country as National Centres for excellence for Community Learning for imparting training in rural development. 29. Urgent reforms are necessary for NIRD and SIRDs; the working group welcomes the initiative of MoRD to setup an Expert Group to consider the feasibility of reforms for NIRD. 30. Capacity Building Recommendations for North East. To overcome capacity deficiency in the north eastern states, we suggest strengthening, streamlining and mainstreaming the faculty strength, infrastructure and training modules respectively of NIRD-NERC, Guwahati and all the SIRDs in the region. Large states like Arunachal Pradesh should open more extension centers of SIRDs in three different regions of the state. We also suggest better networking of these SIRDs with their extension centers and with NIRD Guwahati through video conferencing etc. Power cut is a problem in interior regions of North East. These remotely located power deficient SIRDs and their extension centers must be equipped with alternative sources of power like solar power and DG Sets. The expenditure undertaken on this head can be met from the administrative cost of the rural developmental programmes including MGNREGA. 31. Iimportant stakeholders of the programme particularly the programme officers (BDOs) be imparted a short course on The Theory and Practice of Development and NREGA. The course should have some (i) elements of development theory that includes current thinking on development( like sustainable development, participation and role of institutions (ii) an understanding of development practice that relate and flow from these theories including role of democratic decentralization, (iii) an explanation of

how NREGA is an intervention in development practice and finally (iv) an understanding of the dynamics of rural development through NREGA that provide insight to read and rewrite the theory and practice of rural development in the context of the North East. The essential investigation of the course should be to link up NREGA with capability enhancement, sustainable development and participation in the region. 32. The SHG movement is slowly but steadily gaining ground. Hence we suggest better coordination between SGSY and NREGA and explore the SHG route of mobilising workers in NREGA. 33. Social Audit. Once the acceptability of social audit been established, initially this exercise can be undertaken by reputed organisations like MKSS and afterwards can be passed on to regional organisations of credibility, import and expertise. 34. Financial Inclusion. Financial inclusion is limited because of thin spread of banks/post offices. The topography and cultural practices of people also contribute to it. To overcome the topographical compulsions, we suggest the introduction of bike-cum-barefoot satellite banking system by the postal department/banks. The postal department is undertaking innovative expansion in its activities. We find that in states like Meghalaya home delivery of letters/documents are not undertaken in remote rural areas. This is the right time that a model like bike-cum- barefoot satellite banking (with biometric cards) with postal article delivery can be combined by the postal department and the job can be undertaken by the modern postman. 35. Role of SIRDs in Awareness Generation. SIRDs of respective states, can be given a project to identify the major languages of their states, collaborate with the local linguistic departments of respective universities and can get efficient translation done for dissemination of MGNREGA material. 36. To overcome the problem of shortage of technical assistants, in addition to having a HR policy in place in MGNREGA and increasing remuneration associated with this post, the authorities can recruit local youths with class XII pass certificates and train them for two/three months by the government engineers of the district/block/divisions and then employ them for measurement and technical supervision of NREGA works. 37. Ombudsmen. Many of the NER States except Assam and Tripura, do not find enough candidates for the position of Ombudsman. Where ever, they are

available, the list is heavy with retired bureaucrats only. To overcome this problem, to make the selection inclusive and to strengthen this institution, the required 20 years experience may be reduced to 15 years so that we get candidates from the civil society, as in many states civil society is of recent origin including separation of judiciary from executive. 38. Helpline. No state in the region has a dedicated MGNREGA 24*7 help line. This should be immediately taken up and activated.

PS: The Working Group notes with some concern that a parallel working group has also been formed by MoRD on 11 March 2010 to recommend appropriate measures for the technical and administrative strengthening of the States and their implementing agencies. (Ref; No.J-11011/15/2007-NREGA). Therefore, members of Working Group wonder as to how MoRD would like to reconcile the recommendations of Working Group on Capacity Building with those of Working Group on technical and administrative strengthening as the task of capacity building indeed involves suggesting measures for the technical and administrative strengthening of the States and their implementing agencies. We would have appreciated if MoRD could have shared its own perspective on what it considers capacity building before venturing into setting up another group.1

The report has been written by unofficial members of the working group; official members provided logistic, coordination and research support as and when required. Since the official members were busy with multiple governmental tasks and not often available for consultation, discussion and field visits, the division of labour worked optimally and effectively.

23

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
What is Capacity Building?
Based on discussions with various stakeholders, field visits in various states and learning from theories of neo-institutionalists,( Olson& March,1997; Steinmo, 2001), the Working Group proposes to define capacity building not as ordinary shortage of staff and lack of training facilities but as the dynamic process of developing, strengthening and institutionalizing the rules of game, norms, standard operating procedures, skills, abilities, and resources that organizations, communities and individuals need to survive, adapt, and thrive in the fastchanging world of policy implementation. (Ann Philbin, 1996). Capacity building, broadly speaking, has two major aspects; for organizations, it relates to whole gamut of governance, administration (including human resources, financial management, and legal matters), business processes, program development, evaluation, and policy changes for innovation. For individuals, capacity building refers to excellence in individual performance, leadership development, socializing managerial values, technical skills, training opportunities, organizing abilities, and other areas of personal and professional development that includes sensitivity to values of equity, participation and inclusion. Thus, individual empowerment eventually results in the communitization of capacities especially marginalized and socially excluded groups in the society. In other words, capacity building is not a stand-alone, top-down strengthening of managerial systems and imparting technical know-how to implementers but in reality a polycentric governance (ala Vincent Ostrom) that covers the whole range of implementation, accountability, monitoring, and evaluation of policy at multiple levels including systems and community at the grassroots. Capacity Building for MGNREGA: MGNREGA is certainly the largest and most innovative flagship program of the Central Government of India in terms of its outlay, coverage, expected outcomes and the potential to change the face of rural India. With a cumulative employment generation figure of 578.65 crore person-days, and a budgetary allocation of Rs.40,100 crores for 2010-11, MGNREGA promises the largest employment guarantee in the world. Its current budgetary allocation stands at Rs.40,100 crores. As the truly comprehensive Operational Guidelines (2008) backing MGNREGA clearly enunciate, the intention behind the legislation goes well beyond the narrow goal of providing relief employment or unemployment doles. It is perhaps worthwhile to remind ourselves of the goals of MGNREGA as set out in these guidelines in order to define the framework within which the idea of capacity building

24

for it needs to be looked at: a. Strong social safety net for the vulnerable groups by providing a fall-back employment source, when other employment alternatives are scarce or inadequate b. Growth engine for sustainable development of an agricultural economy. Through the process of providing employment of works that address causes of chronic poverty such as drought, deforestation and soil erosion, the Act seeks to strengthen the natural resource base of rural livelihood and create durable assets in rural areas. c. Empowerment of rural poor through the processes of a rights-based law d. New ways of doing business, as a model of governance reform anchored on the principles of transparency and grass-root democracy [MoRD, 2008, Chapter 1, Section 1.2; emphasis added] Backed by a constitutional right, it is MGNREGA's mandate of addressing chronic causes of poverty, redressing imbalances and deficiencies in the natural resource base, empowerment of the poor and governance reform that makes it stand apart from all social sector initiatives hitherto attempted. Taken together, a fulfillment of these mandates may well translate into reality the potential of MGNREGA. The above mandate points to the inherent challenges and the tremendous opportunities present in MGNREGA. If the opportunities are seized, the goal can be realized. However, in order to seize these opportunities, several challenges have to be overcome. This becomes all the more critical given the yet unfinished agenda of grassroots devolution and decentralization first embarked upon nearly two decades ago with the constitutional 73rd Amendment, followed by its extension to scheduled areas in 1996, widely heralded as the dawn of a new era in the history of India and also as the largest decentralization project in the world. The report of this Working Group seeks to deal with some of the major challenges which, despite the impressive progress registered by MGNREGA in the initial years, need to be addressed, if the true potential of MGNREGA is to be realized. It is true that MGNREGA is anchored in the decentralized administration of PRIs,( section 15,16,17 of the Act), but the role of career civil servants especially District Collectors better known as District Program Coordinators (DPC), Program Officers, officials from Line departments and various support staff at the grassroots continues to be critical to the success of MGNREGA. Given the unique rights perspective of

25

MGNREGA, conventional models of public administration and management have become largely irrelevant. Implementing MGRFNEAG provides us rare opportunity for social re-engineering of citizen-centric administration and innovating the participative and decentralized public service delivery (Ref; Unlocking Human Capital, Second Administrative Reforms Commission). Although a multi-tier structure of administrative and institutional arrangements for implementation and monitoring with specified roles and responsibilities have been set up, ground level reports suggest that various institutional structures are not working in tandem and District Collectors (DPC) and Program Officers are still struggling with conflicting demands of vertical and horizontal coordination across departments and different tiers of government especially Panchayati Raj in the implementation of MGNREGA. For instance, Maharashtra has not suffered not only from lack of social mobilization of agricultural laborers and work site management issues but also from the usual bureaucratic turf wars and coordination conflicts between Chief Executive Officers of Zila Parishad and Collectors. In contrast, Bihar, Chhattisgarh etc continue to suffer from deficits of poorly crafted and inadequately managed administrative and management systems at all levels. The innovation of a separate MGNREGA cell has not yet produced desired outcomes. ( Refer to Appendix on Chhattisgarh). Our field visits and interactions with implementing support staff in the districts and blocks not only note shortage of dedicated personnel, poor training facilities and lack of community participation, but also find evidence of growing dissatisfaction of the staff especially those contract staff with regard to poor working conditions and arbitrary contract appointment policies of various state governments. Except AP, no state government has yet formulated a clearly articulated Human Resource Development policy. Therefore, the open protest marches and rallies of MGNREGA support staff in states like Bihar and Maharashtra, remind us about the looming crisis in MGRNEGA. Apart from moral hazards and distorted incentives, MGNREGA also suffers from path dependencies of top-down bureaucratic mode of governance. This not only results in known administrative failures such as underutilizations of funds (Jharkhand failed to spend Rs. 1000 crore in 2008-9), poor-project completion( total number of works taken up under the scheme from February 2006 to September 2009 is over 79 lakh but the number of works completed is less than 31 lakh, about 39%, according to a study of Planning Commission ) but also failed experiments of social mobilization such as Goan Sathi in Orissa and the toying of idea of providing uniform for mates and Rojzar Sevaks in Jharkhand, a state battling against uniformed and un-uniformed Maoist rebels! Therefore, capacity building from a uniquely rights perspective and communitization of governance has indeed emerged a major critical pillar to the success of MGNREGA; much hyped convergence has suffered largely because of lack of innovative administrative and management systems at district and block levels. In short, the implementation of MGNREGA suffers as much from the so-called capture by particular interests or dominant factions as from the lack of institutional and managerial capabilities to perform at multiple levels. Therefore, the so-called crisis of capacity building has, in part, been caused by demand over load and in part caused by supply- side -distortions due to the complexity of multilevel implementation from the Center to Gram Sabha. This has further been aggravated by astronomical numbers of stakeholders that demand not only a robust structure of Human resources but also a well defined strategy to develop the capabilities of these stakeholders to perform the assigned tasks

26

efficiently and efficiently. According to a note submitted to the Working Group by NIRD, the tentative estimate of the number of stakeholders in the implementation (other than the millions of the worker households) is more than seven millions. And a tentative training estimate informs that the current coverage is about 1.5 to 2.0 millions ( Ref to Appendix on NIRD by Professor Hanumantha Raos to the working group dated 24 June 2010). Considering the bureaucratic inertia and lack of cuttingedge research environment that NIRD suffers from and the comatose in which SIRDs have entered into, it is almost impossible to think that training needs of key Officials/Staff of MGNRGEA and PRIs functionaries could be undertaken without an innovative government-civil society partnership.

Though mandated under section 18 of the Act and harshly reminded by CAG report (2008) and various civil society reports about the shortage of key staff and distortions in the delivery systems, state governments have been rather tardy or wilfully negligent in laying down requisite human resources structures in place, however every state government loves the quick bite of so-called untied NREGS funds from the Center! Other than Rajasthan, AP and Kerala, most state governments have been implementing MGNREGA with skeleton support staff from line departments without any professional and moblizational support from civil society, which is a critical stakeholder in ensuring the integrity of the implementation of MGNREGA. For example, Sidhi district of Madhya Pradesh is one of the top ten districts in terms of high expenditure but the state of Madhya Pradesh began appointing dedicated Program Officers (POs) only in 2009. North East is also an instructive case where much of the work is being implemented without any community participation and adequate management systems. Except Tripura and Sikkim, states in the North East have taken up implementation in a food for work mode or BRGF format. Although they need specific strategies for planning and implementation, regions like Ladakh and Andaman Nicobars do not exist on the radar of MGNREGA. In this scenario country wide, much has been expected from over-burdened, fatigued and politically challenged District Collectors and Program Officers who multitask much beyond their human and managerial capacities. Notorious Line departments have increasingly become life-line of MGNREGA. And also much faith has been placed in the efficacy of PRIs which often work without any infrastructure and human resource support systems. In other words, MGNREGA requires broad based institutional reforms in the administrative systems, and management reforms especially in areas of human resources right from the national level to the Panchayat. It is this challenge of addressing capacity building at multilevel, the Working Group takes up in the following chapters of the report; each chapter is designed in a separate diagnostic and problem solving format.

Capacities, Capabilities and Support Systems

In order to realize the goals that MGNREGA has set out for itself, there need to be first and foremost human capacities. The capabilities of these human capacities need to be developed so that they are able to undertake the responsibility mandated to them. Human capacities and capabilities further

27

need to be backed by proper supporting institutions, which act as decision support systems, assisting in concurrent monitoring of outcomes and better management of the schemes initiated under MGNREGA. It is this Working Group's considered view that the key to maximizing the gains from MGNREGA implementation and the key to effective democratic devolution and decentralization is the creation and enhancement of capacities available with the PRIs at all levels, The institutional framework which defines the interactions of these human capacities has to be designed in order that the challenges of accountability and autonomous spaces are both met. Such a framework must also recognize that better governance is not merely about increased efficiency (which is no doubt important) in the sense of cost or time efficiency but has to be seen as the ability to respond with concrete outcomes, while at the same time following due process, transparency and regularity. Further, the organization (both in the sense of a body carrying out a task and the underlying structure, allocation of responsibilities and the interconnections between the various components) delivering MGNREGA to the people of this country needs to be characterized by a common sense of purpose and cohesiveness, inter-connectedness, sharing and flow of needed expertise and insights, with an ability to work across walls rather than in silos. The subject of this report therefore, deals with: 1. Capacities, i.e., personnel required at different levels to carry out the tasks which go towards fulfilling the goals above 2. Capabilities of these personnel to carry out the tasks mandated
3. the support systems at national, state and district level for the

capacities and capabilities to be fully realized Since the last of these is the most challenging and in this Working Group's view, has the maximum bearing on the first two, this report will first look at this aspect and then the other.

Deleted:

28

CHAPTER II GOVERNANCE REFORMS FOR CAPACITY BUILDING

4. Management Support Systems for MGNREGA

2.1 Anchoring at the National Level

MGNREGA has assigned several responsibilities of steering and guiding the programme to the central government. The MGNREGA also assigns the following powers to the Central Employment Guarantee Council (CEGC) "(a) establish a central evaluation and monitoring system; (b) advise the Central Government on all matters concerning the implementation of this Act; (c) review the monitoring and redressal mechanism from time to time and recommend improvements required; (d) promote the widest possible dissemination of information about the Schemes made under this Act; (e) monitoring the implementation of this Act; (f) preparation of annual reports to be laid before Parliament by the Central Government on the implementation of this Act; (g) any other duty or function as may be assigned to it by the Central Government. (2) The Central Employment Guarantee Council shall have the power to undertake evaluation of the various Schemes made under this Act and for that purpose collect or cause to be collected statistics pertaining to the rural economy and the implementation of the Schemes." [Section 11 of MGNREGA] The Act also provides for establishment of similar State Employment Guarantee Councils in each state to oversee and monitor the MGNREGA implementation. The Working Group's observations on human resources, capacity building and evaluation in the earlier portions of this report indicate that there is need for a greater degree of cohesive effort across the board to make MGNREGA realize its true

29

potential. While the provisions of the Operational Guidelines are more than adequate with regard to different aspects of MGNREGA implementation, they cannot realize their true potential until a proper organizational structure and business plan is in place and a clear sense of purpose2 and cohesion across the board is achieved in pushing this business plan. Such an organizational structure needs to be accountable, flexible, highly professional and open. As the history of several rural development interventions in India have shown, the best pieces of legislation and the most well thought out scheme for betterment of the lives of the rural poor have tended to falter because of a failure to set systems in place which are critical. And this failure itself can be traced to some or the other stakeholder in the chain moving without the necessary commitment3. MGNREGA represents a set of constitutional obligations, which leave little room for slack in the delivery mechanism, since such a slack would mean legal entitlements being denied to the poorest. Thus a strong and proactive oversight mechanism is critical. We use the term proactive to suggest that rather than wait for grievances or violations to arise, the mechanism responds to ensure that the necessary pieces are in place to minimize the possibility of violations. While Section 11 of the Act, cited above point to the powerful oversight functions of the Central Council, which is the apex body for MGNREGA, it has also been pointed out that: " . . . it is interesting to compare the facilities and structures that are available for NREGA at the centre with those of say, the Election Commission, the Census of India, or Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan other national programmes with a much smaller budget and mandate. The NREGA cell at the Ministry of Rural Development is a dwarf in comparison . . . "4
2

Purpose here is used in the sense of Charles Heckscher's usage [see Charles Heckscher, The Limits of Partcipatory Management, Across the board, Nov-Dec 1995 and is distinct from goals, which often degenerate into quantitative targets or vision or mission, which are prone to becoming sweeping and large: A purpose is something in the middle: a complex statement of the organization's challenges and objectives over a three to five year time frame. It usually can't hang on a wall, because it is far too complicated. The limited time frame keeps the purpose concrete, away from airy abstractions. But it is a long enough period to provide a challenge worth caring about For instance, with regard to ombudsmen, it has been observed by the Working Group that different state governments have shown varying commitments to the idea, with some perceiving this to be an additional burden on an overloaded system

Jean Dreze, Kartika Bhatia and Reetika Khera, Making NREGA Work, Unpublished Report for the National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganized Sector (NCEUS), 2009

30

and that: NREGA is a complex legislation with many different actors. The Central Government has wide powers to define the implementation framework of NREGA through Guidelines, Rules and other means (including amendments in the Schedules of the Act). The state governments are responsible for implementing state-specific employment guarantee schemes within that framework. And the Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs), especially the Gram Panchayats, are the main implementing agencies of NREGA works on the ground, though the Act also allows other implementing agencies such as Line Departments. In this operational maze, clear principles and guidelines are essential. This requires, in particular, close coordination between the Central and state governments.5 In a detailed two-volume report submitted to the Prime Minister of India, based on intensive field surveys, the NCEUS recommends for MGNREGA that : . . . a full fledged Employment Guarantee Mission (on the lines of health and education missions) should be created in order to provide adequate support structures for the Central and state governments. 6

Indeed, for a national level programme such as the National Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM), whose budgetary outlay is about a quarter of that of the MGNREGA, a well structured implementational scheme has been envisioned with a national level mission governed by a proposed apex NRLM Council at the national level. Under the circumstances, it is unclear why a similar strengthening of the MGNREGA has progressed much more slowly, if at all.

Jean Dreze, Kartika Bhatia and Reetika Khera (op.cit.) The Challenge of Employment in India : An Informal Economy Perspective Volume I - Main Report (pg. 227) , NCEUS, 2009, New Delhi

31

The Working Group believes that the largest employment programme in human history requires a dedicated anchoring structure at the national level to fulfill the mandate of the Act and to strengthen the functioning of the apex council, the CEGC. The Working Group had intensive discussions on the form of such an anchoring structure, whether Mission, Authority, Directorate, or other. It was felt that the exact form of such a structure could emerge through wider debate but it would be worthwhile to spell out the mandate that such a structure should ideally fulfill. Since the CEGC is the apex Council responsible for MGNREGA and since the idea behind the anchoring structure is to strengthen the Act, the Working Group has preferred to use the term Central Council Secretariat to mean the above anchoring structure meant to act as the executive arm of the CEGC. The idea of this anchoring structure can be seen to be an elaboration and enlargement of the scope of the Technical Secretariat proposed under Section 11 of the Central Council rules. Such a Council Secretariat will take the responsibility of overseeing the following most important functions to make NREGA effective: b) Human resources and Capacity Building c) Monitoring d) Information Technology e) Social Audit and Evaluation f) Grievance Redressal Such a Council Secretariat should be a dedicated structure. Setting up of such a structure will also help to separate the functions of executing the programme from those of evaluation and grievance redressal, since as a matter of principle, the agency executing the programme should not be the one also assessing its own work. The Council Secretariat is also required also so that appropriate focus can be given in key areas such as deployment of IT and human resource development, without which NREGA will not realise its potential. Two organizational forms may be considered for this structure: one favouring complete autonomy with the Chairperson of the Central Council and the key functionaries of the Central Council Secretariat in-sourced from outside the normal channels

32

while full autonomy may be preferred, its constitutional and legal implications may take time to work out. Thus a hybrid structure may be adopted with the CEGC and Chairperson remaining as they are, and key positions in-sourced through external channels. In both cases, all key positions of accountability should be filled in after a due

high-level search and screen process. Serving government officers may also be identified and placed through such a screen process. The process should shortlist potential candidates from within the government or outside. The Council Secretariat should be headed by a Director General (DG). She is the executive through whom the will of the CEGC is expressed in action. The executive Secretariat should have the following departments: Monitoring: Headed by a Deputy Director General, responsible for concurrent monitoring of work under NREGA and establishing and refining systems of monitoring the work under MGNREGA Evaluations and Social Audit: Mounting evaluations through a carefully selected panel of experts and consultants from across the country, ensuring that social audits are undertaken and monitoring the action taken on the findings of such social audits; Grievance Redressal: Headed by another DDG, the department will be a window for complaints made by wage-seekers, lay citizens, representatives of wage-seekers, organizations working with wage-seekers or any other agency or institution wishing to bring to the notice of the CEGC any violation of the Act or its operational guidelines in any part of the country. The Ombudsmen throughout the country will work as the eyes, arms and legs CEGC. Information Technology Department: Also headed by a DDG, who will report to the DG, this department's role will be to: 1. assess ICT needs, in terms of both hardware and software, for providing a proper ICT backbone for NREGA implementation and come up with a blueprint for effective ICT deployment for NREGA which caters to information needs vis a vis transparency, monitoring and grievance redressals 2. deploy the best possible expertise available in the country to advise it on ICT deployments 3. ensure that the ICT blueprint is deployed once it has been ratified by the CEGC

33

4.

ensure ICT deployment across the country, conforming to the best standards anywhere in the world

5.

ensure that states are complying with the ICT requirements of data returns and updation ensure that latest developments in ICT which are potentially beneficial for use in NREGA implementation and monitoring are screened, piloted, developed further and disseminated

6.

7.

pro-actively set up a coordination mechanism with other major ICT-centred initiatives of the government such as the UIDAI NREGA implementation personnel are trained in use of ICT

8.

Human Resources Department: Also headed by a DDG, who will report to the DG, this department's primary responsibility will be to work out standards for human resources recruited for NREGA implementation, to work out recruitment processes, human resource policies, performance evaluation criteria and so on to assess gaps, (including region-specific gaps) in human resource deployment and availability and to work out short-term responses and medium-term and long-term mechanisms for ensuring a steady source of human resources for MGNREGA to widely promote a gender-sensitive, pro-poor and pro-active work culture down the line to work out a system of certification for human resources, which all implementation structures have to comply with, to identify and set standards for identifying training institutions across the country who can discharge the responsibilities of capacity building for NREGA to work out syllabi for training courses that NREGA personnel should go through, to arrange for trainings for these personnel to network with professional and technical institutions, Civil Society Organizations, subject matter specialists and experts to create the necessary human resource infrastructure for effective capacity building

34

to assess training material available, to ensure its wide dissemination across the country and to promote the production and dissemination of high quality resource material (print and electronic) for MGNREGA Each of these departments may induct and in-source professionals from across the country for their functions. Such a fully empowered Secretariat will report to the CEGC from time to time. Each of these departments may also be steered by Standing or Empowered Committees set up by the CEGC, headed by a CEGC member and optionally inducting experts of impeccable integrity and standing. Several of the separate recommendations of this Working Group made in earlier sections may be dovetailed into this structure.

2.2 Other Specific Recommendations at the National Level

While the above structure may emerge after due deliberation, the Working Group also sees the need for some specific and immediate recommendations with a view to strengthening the oversight mechanism inherent in the constitution of the CEGC as the apex council, which have emerged from discussions with Central Council members. 1. There is need to set in place a mechanism whereby the CEGC is informed about the action taken on the recommendations made by it. The CEGC may also be empowered to ask for such action taken information, not only from the Central Government but also from State Governments if and as the need arises. 2. Given a minimum number of CEGC members which may be deemed to constitute a quorum, desiring to convene a meeting of the CEGC and submitting this request in writing, the same should be convened. 3. With regard to Ombudsmen, it is important that the Ombudsmen also report to the CEGC or a Steering Committee thereof on the complaints received by her, the action taken by her and the action taken on her recommendations by the state government. This is important since, in the event of the SEGC or the state nodal department failing to Act, or failing to Act within a reasonable time-frame or in the best possible manner, the CEGC's power may be used to insist that action is taken. Without such

35

backup it may not be practicable for the ombudsmen to discharge her duties in the best possible manner. 4. A system of national level ombudsmen may also be considered with sufficient oversight powers to create the necessary backup. These National Level Ombudsmen should be people of impeccable integrity with a record of the highest standards of public service and should be appointed transparently through a very high level search process. They should also be empowered to conduct suo-moto inquiries and reviews if they perceive the need to arise.

36

2.3 Mission Mode at the State Level

Currently, most state governments barring Rajasthan and AP as observed in our field visits, rely on adhoc administrative systems for implementation and monitoring of MGNREGA. State Employment Gurantee Council functions minimally and are mostly limited to giving approvals to administrative actions carried out by the Department of Rural Development or Department of Panchyati Raj as the case may be. Therefore, given the polycentric nature of the design and implementation of MGNREGA, governance reforms in the existing administrative arrangements for implementing at the state level are urgently needed. As the success of MGNREGA depends on the institutionalized co-operations from state governments, it is recommended to set up an "Independent Society" under the Department of Rural Development or Panchyati Raj dedicated to the implementation and monitoring of MGRNEGA in the state. Bihar is actively pursuing this approach (refer to appendix on Bihar). The Society would be operated by a Governing Committee/Council (GC) which would be headed by Principal Secretary RD and Commissioner, RD as member -secretary. Commissioner Rural Development assumes the responsibility of State Programme Coordinator for MGNREGA and would be assisted by a Directorate comprising subject specialists/experts and support staff. The other members of the GC could be secretaries from Planning, water resources, finance, labour, road, environment & forest. Two to three prominent members from the civil society especially involved in the implementation of Employment Gurantee programmes/Social Audit/ Rural Entrepreneurship could also be nominated to the GC for a policy feedback and interface with civil society. The proposed Society would function more of Executive arm of the State Employment Gurantee Council and would oversee all administrative and technical issues arising out of the implementation of MGNREGA in the state. The Society needs to adopt Mission approach with observable outcomes for achieving the goals of MGNREGA.

Attached is an indicative diagram outlining the structures and their interconnections at different levels

37

38

CHAPTER III

3.1 Reforms in Human Resources

1. There is a need to lay down uniform guidelines under the MGNREGA for recruitment of staff particularly at the levels of Field Assistants, Technical Assistants and Additional Programme Officers who lead the project at the Block level. States like UP have been very reluctant to recruit staff on contract placing enormous burden on the existing staff of PRIs, while the neighbouring state of Uttarakhand has appointed large number of management graduates on contract basis. The terms of contract are not uniform among states or even staff categories. Job descriptions are not clear for positions filled up both by contractual employment and deputation from other state departments. In essence, while studies have preceded organisational changes in DRDAs, MGNREGA has not had the benefit of a comprehensive HR policy for project staff. 2. Given that the MGNREGA made a paradigm shift from conventional relief or wage employment generation programs by making a constitutional guarantee to wage seekers, the organizational governance and management (delivery) structure must be in a state of high preparedness and must have the internal capacity and systems, so as to timely and adequately respond to the demand as and when it arises. While the Act makes it incumbent on the central and state governments to deliver on this guarantee, simultaneously PRIs are expected to deliver. SHGs, line departments and NGOs could also be, at least in theory, equivalent to project implementation agencies (PIAs), but the emphasis is on the panchayats.

3.2 Existing Capacities An Analysis

3. Preparedness of the institutional structure or lack of it remains a huge concern, however. This is primarily a function of weakness in planning function and in turn that depends on the quality of staff, team composition, and their capacity and willingness to work for the poor and at the grassroots, round the year. Working Groups observation is that the human resources placed at the disposal of the Gram Panchayat (GP) are by and large inadequate and widely varying. The systems of recruitment, appointment, remuneration, termination and terms of service, where on contract are also either absent, or have not been able to sustain themselves after the initial round (example Bihar). 4. By making GPs the major implementation partner and assigning critical roles to PRIs at the intermediate and district levels, backed by a direct transfer of finances to districts, MGNREGA has moved ahead in terms of taking care of two of the bottlenecks in the way of effective democratic decentralization and devolution. However, in the absence of adequate functionaries at the GP level and above, the core mandate of MGNREGA is suffering. Adequate human resources with systems for their placement are therefore urgently needed. An assessment of existing capacities made by the Working Group through direct field observations and study of reviews of MGNREGA implementation has led to the conclusion that the human resources placed at the disposal of the Gram Panchayat (GP) are by and large inadequate and widely varying. The systems of recruitment, appointment, remuneration, termination and terms of service, where on contract are also either absent, or have not been able to sustain themselves after the initial round (example Bihar).

39 5. When one does a SWOT analysis of the MGNREGA institutional structure, one finds that the delivery of the employment guarantee has faltered, due to weaknesses in either in the state apparatus, or in PRIs, or there is a slack in peoples mobilization to demand (due to lack of peoples movement or peoples organization at the grassroots). Supply driven systems seem to be strong in a few states (AP, TN, Rajasthan and MP) and they havent depended on or waited for the demand to emerge. In cases where PRIs are strong (WB, Kerala) and a supporting state government apparatus exists, again the performance is better. In the rest of the states, neither of the three is strong, and the performance has suffered. The same formulation seems to apply in tribal areas in central Indian belt across from the west to east. 6. Lack of Demand. Demand strengthening processes and systems must be put in place in this phase of MGNREGA. The Working group recommends pro-action regarding the processes enabling community mobilization and awareness raising regarding their rights that irrespective of the actors. As a first measure, the government must recognize the role of formations such as SHGs and producer groups comprising of BPL families, and their aggregations at the village level and above, in helping the poor assert their rights and in helping them bargain a better deal from the PRIs in the gram sabhas as well as the government, and often with banks and market forces too. Given that the SHG movement is still weak in many parts of the north and tribal India, the government must give it further momentum. It will synergise the efforts that now NRLM is putting in at a vast scale. MGNREGA could then hope to have more assertive poor in Gram Sabha, and dictate their priorities in work selection. 7. Ad Hoc Appointments and Lack of Understanding of Job Market. By allocating a very low administrative expenditure, unwittingly the government incentivised ad hoc appointments of low quality staff in large numbers, with every RD secretary and district collector somehow managing with whoever s/he could get in the local job market. Indian job market has become open and nationalized and movement of all categories of human resources, from professionals to unskilled workers, across states to job intensive areas is a common phenomenon. It is also clear that with private sector opening up, the salary expectations are higher. It is amply demonstrated in many of the government projects having to raise their salaries constantly in order to retain older staff and to attract higher quality staff, and is also evident in actions of certain states within NREGA too and what is likely to be prescribed by NRLM. Problems commonly found in state NREGA systems are the following: (a) compensation structure indicating ad hoc nature of employment such as lump sum monthly payment; (b) much of the responsibility to hire staff is left to the DPC without specifying how or to the Mukhia/Sarpanch; and (c) high turnover. 8. Where does the capacity exist within the government system or outside? All states seem to be recruiting staff from the market to build institutional capacity for NREGA implementation, although leadership and certain senior level engineering and accounts positions are being filled by staff on deputation. A close examination of organograms of AP, MP and Rajasthan reveals that management teams at all levels, namely, the state, district and block level, are being set up with contractual staff. Contractual recruitment from market under NRHM further proves that this is now a widespread phenomenon across sectors. If this is so, why should there not be a proper policy and proper process for recruitment and selection for this category of staff?

3.3 Decentralization at the Cutting Edge of Implementation: Gram Vikas Sankul (Village Development Cluster)
9. Based on experiences across several livelihoods projects like SERP AP and Jeevika, Bihar, it is evident that a dedicated governance and management structure is unavoidable to produce

40 the results at scale and across districts. A very strong fulltime spearhead team is needed at the sub-block level, which almost on a daily basis, can easily reach out to, mobilize and empower the poor, wage seekers to make demands on the system. Such a dedicated PFT is will prepare an annual micro-plan for each gram panchayat each year resulting in shelf of works and annual budget estimates (material and labour budget both). The PFT will train Gram Panchayat representatives and functionaries and also village-level workers, and work with them on all aspects such as implementation, asset verification, measurement and payment, and monitoring and evaluation, MIS maintenance, and social audit. WG makes a strong recommendation of ensuring full involvement of women self help groups in microplanning, monitoring, as well as in social audit exercises. 10. PFT will reach to a population about a third of a block, or 30 to 35 villages, and in terms of geographical area a maximum of 15,000 hectare. This is a large enough area to employ and distribute the cost of hiring quality staff. Thus there would be three PFTs in a block each led by a PFT team leader and reporting to the Program Officer at the block level. Such an implementation unit would also become the cutting edge of implementation, instead of the block. This can be seen as an innovation in governance delivery in rural India, as decentralization is deepened further beyond the current District Block GP model. 11. On an average there are about 90 villages per block in India. We may divide the block into 3 parts, each to be called the Village Development Cluster (Gram Vikas Sankul, GVS) comprising 30 villages each or about 15 GPs (or one-third of the block). This middle tier GVS will be the cutting edge level of MGNREGA implementation between the GP and the Intermediate Panchayat. Such a layer will be co-terminus with optimum deployment of personnel, and will ensure: (i) proper planning; (ii) greater cohesion and coordination between GPs and within project teams; (iii) time-bound sanctions and releases, smoother functioning, through a reduction in the critical distance between GP and MGNREGA implementation hub; (iv) timely measurements and valuations of work; and (v) powerful social mobilization and social audit. Apart from increasing human resource allocation at the cutting edge of implementation, the Gram Vikas Sankul also ensures a level of efficiency of use of such resources since they are collectively used by several GPs. 12. While preparing its report, this Working Group also is in receipt of the recommendations of the Working Group on Planning and Execution (P&E) and is happy to note that there is convergence in recommendations on this aspect. It is also in agreement with the recommendation of the Working Group (P&E) tat the delineation of this cluster or GVS needs to be done on the principle of area and distance rather than administrative boundaries and accepts the recommendation of setting the delineation limit at about a population size of 40,000. In terms of national averages, this coincides with roughly onethird of the block. This Working Group also notes that this is roughly the area on which the cutting edge of NRLM implementation is also proposed to rest. This gives grounds for convergence and pooling of human resources at the disposal of PRIs.

3.4 Dedicated Implementation Structure at Cluster Level

13. We further propose that along with this decentralization of implementation, a fully dedicated professional support team for MGNREGA is placed at the Gram Vikas Sankul. This team is recruited on contract from the open market through a selection and screening process. In terms of the composition of the team, this Working Group is of the view that the GVS team should comprise at the very minimum 3 Technical Assistants, one person in-charge of social mobilization and one village- level community mobilizer for each GP. The team should be led by a Programme Officer or Additional Programme Officer. Since the Working Group (P&E) has examined the issue in detail from the point of view of effective planning and execution, this Working Group accepts the

41 team structure outlined by the Working Group (P&E), with the following points for consideration: i) the proposed JE at the Block level may be increased to 2; and (ii) the proposed Agriculture and Livelihoods TS be pooled at the block level and may be optionally be routed through the NRLM implementation team. The cost implications of the above changes are negligible and can be easily accomodated. Exact composition, educational qualifications and experience, and compensation structure is to be worked out separately. Suffice it to say that cluster team needs to be headed by some one who has at least three years experience in rural development, or by someone with a MSW or Post graduate degree in rural development or rural management with at least two years experience. Other members could be fresh or although preferably they too should have a years experience (often large number of experienced professionals are not available). 14. system. 14. Specific Observations related to Mate system. The active job seekers are being organised into groups under a mate who is an educated worker. He/she helps in taking the muster and in organising work at the work site. Mates are being trained in various aspects of programme implementation for which a separate organization has been created. Kudamshree model of Kerala offers an innovative perspective on mobilizing women as mates. 15. Specific observations related to Field Assistant (FA) or Gram Rozgar Sevak( AP Model). Model). Being the linchpin of MGNREGA at the GP level, active and accountable GRSs can make a major difference. Their quality, motivation and skills need to be developed and sustained through careful selection, training, technical support, incentives and clear accountability. Many irregularities spring from this level since he/she is the muster registering agency. There is much political interference in identifying this person. In order to insulate this institution from such pressures, it is recommended that the FA/GRS is automatically appointed by a computer programme that selects the literate person who has worked the highest number of days in the village. Such a person is trained in programme implementation.

3.5 Recruitment and Selection Process for Professionals

16. AP and MP experience in NREGA and that of Jeevika in Bihar and VKP in Tamil Nadu shows that: the system of recruitment and selection of professionals must be an objective, transparent and systematic exercise, not just for management cadre at the state and district level (in AP, even mate selection is done scientifically); Methodology must eliminate biases in selection, especially over-reliance on interviews; Such recruitments could be outsourced to credible agencies, backed by administrative and political support. The involvement of SRIJAN and SIDS7 in the recruitment process for the Jeevika project of the Government of Bihar is an illustration of such outsourcing. The project is being executed by an autonomous agency, the Bihar Rural Livelihoods Promotion Society (BRLP) which also outsourced the recruitment process. 17. Recruitment and Selection Process for MGNREGA must follow the following steps: Step One. The first key task is to create a profile of the desired candidate with respect to her knowledge, skills, attitude and values (KSAV) with respect
7

Self-Reliant Initiatives through Joint Action (Srijan) is an NGO working on water and agriculture related issues in several states of India. Srijan Infratech and Development Services (SIDS) is Srijan's consultancy arm

42 to the job profile. Once clearly defined, these attributes help in deciding on the right person, a methodology (tests) would be finalized. Step Two. Methodology must include Multiple and formal Tests of Selection: This allows for a more wholesome understanding of the person to be selected. It should include tests not just for cognitive ability (Intelligence Quotient tests) but tests for attitudes such as ability to work in teams, empathy with the poor in the villages and achievement motivation. Step Three. In order to be able to understand and rate candidates, three kinds of tests can be used: (i) Psychometric Tests: These are tests designed to indicate how psychologically comfortable an individual is with the kind of work expected to be taken up in the project. There are various types of psychometric tests which are used depending on what we want to assess in an individual. (ii) Sociometric Tests: These tests are used to indicate an individuals ability and attitude towards working in peer groups or in a team; (iii) Evaluation Interview: If handled well, this gives an overall view of what makes an individual tick. It also helps determine whether the candidate would fit with the role as well as with the organization or not. The interview, like other tools in this methodology, is used not so much as a tool of selection, but as a tool of rejection; (iv) In order to further test the suitability to rural development, the process must also include village immersion at least for fresh graduates who apply for field positions. Each of the tests would have a weight assigned and the final selection arrived at after a total of all scores. Hence weights for interview should never be more than 20% in the overall selection process. Step Four. Administration of the tests must be outsourced and should be formalized rather than be left to chance and vague. A Selection panel should be formally constituted to oversee the process. The interview panel should consist of experts who had experience of working in similar Projects (rather than only department officials or academicians). Clear, unambiguous and transparent criteria for selection or rejection of candidates should be placed. Having panelists who have been formally trained in the use of Selection techniques: Persons sitting as members of the selection panel should be oriented towards the selection process and techniques of observation/ evaluation for the various tests. It should not be assumed that anybody with general work experience can be a good observer/interviewer. 18. It bears repetition that the success of the initial process led the Government of Bihar to approve a similar process of selection across all levels of Jeevika. Thus, almost 300 staff across all the three levels were recruited for the first phase of implementation. Similarly more than 1200 district and field level staff were recruited in Tamil Nadu. Now Panchayati Raj department has also adopted this process. National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) too has outsourced recruitment and selection in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Chhattisgarh for state and district positions. 19. We strongly recommend that a similar system of recruitment and selection is designed and implemented for Gram Rozgar Sahayak or Field Assistant, the lynchpin of MGNREGA at the GP level, since many irregularities spring from this level since he/she is the muster registering agency and there is much political interference in identifying this person. Further, their quality, motivation and skills need to be developed and sustained through careful selection, training, technical support, incentives and clear accountability.

3.6 Accountability through Performance Management

20. Once recruited often the question of accountability of contract staff is raised. Experience of VKP, Tamil Nadu and that of anti poverty project Gemi Dirya of Sri

43 Lanka indicates that a system of performance management that grades the performance of staff on annual basis and rewards or punishes them by linking it to salary and non monetary awards, and to promotion or termination, can be hugely effective. 21. MGNREGA must introduce a system of performance management with following salient features: Performance assessment is done in the field through village visits and areas to be assessed would include potential wage seekers participation, reviewing books maintained, reviewing social audit process; Individual as well as teams performance must be assessed as per stated Key Performance Indicators; Assessment teams come from the state and other districts and also include village leaders from other villages; Appraisal follows a 360 degree feedback system, with comments from senior, peer and juniors. The System is to be followed for district and block and sub-block teams but also for state teams. The 360 degree appraisal method must build in a system of detailed feedback from the village community and the PRIs at different levels. In particular, the involvement of the panchayats and gram sabhas in planning, decision-making and the emergence of strong grassroots institutional structures should be a key element of the evaluation. The HR system must also work as a coordination mechanism for smoothening out implementation-related issues that may arise between the PFT and the PRIs. For this the HR structure at district and state level must play a pro-active role.

3.7 Human Resource Policy for Contract Staff

22. Government must take a long term perspective regarding its HR policy for NREGA. AP NREGA, Bihars Jeevika and Tamil Nadus VKP experience shows that contract staff would work under well defined rules that include specification of their salary in scales and grades, annual increments, leaves, transfer norms, travel allowances, cell phone allowance, lap top allowance, grievance redressal, and even exit interviews in case of resignation. Except giving provident fund and security of lifetime permanent employment, the rest of the stuff seems to be what a normal employment would provide for. These agencies also have a well defined compensation structure in a matrix form that allows for increments within each category. They define a promotion policy ensuring career growth. This leads to a sense of job security and eliminates arbitrary decisions on part of the authorities. 23. Working group strongly recommends formulation of a comprehensive HR policy with abovementioned features, especially for contract staff in each state.

3.8 Governance
24. Imperative for improving governance of a major program like this is to set up a separate organization registered as a society with a full time CEO who is given the best team recruited through a transparent and competent method, from open market just has been done in many programs even in the education sector (e.g. National Literacy Mission). This must be repeated at the state and district level too.

3.9 Culture
25. The functioning and implementation of such a structure would be helped by adopting a culture with clear purpose, results orientation, business plan for at least three

44 years, and systems of planning, implementation and monitoring and evaluation, in place.

45

CHAPTER IV
Capacity Building for MGNREGA

4.1 The Challenges and Problems

The operational guidelines of MGNREGA clearly state that there is need for setting up a chain of resource centres from the national to the state to the district level [Chapter 13]. While these resource centres will act as technology discovery, development and dissemination centres, the cutting edge in terms of training and capacity building has correctly been envisaged at the district level [Section 13.4.1.e]. It is the working group's view that the capacity building and technical support hub envisaged at the district centre is the need of not only MGNREGA but also all rural development initiatives and social sector delivery schemes. The working group is of the view however, that a strategy needs to be thought of for operationalization of this vision so that high quality capacity building and support hubs are indeed made possible at the district level. The following section hopes to detail such an operationalization vision. This will involve an understanding of what has troubled capacity building efforts in rural development interventions in general and MGNREGA in particular in the country thus far. The capacity building experience of MGNREGA in particular and rural development programmes in general has shown that this is on aspect which has suffered neglect. There appear to be serious gaps in terms of training infrastructure, training material, resource-persons to undertake training, syllabi and course content. These were observed in most states during the Working Group's visits. Either there is no training infrastructure at the district and sub-district level in several states, or where such infrastructure exists, trainers of good quality are missing or the capacity building of these trainers itself is a huge gap. There exists variation in the contents, methodology, duration, expected outcome and available physical infrastructure in training programmes of MGNREGA across states in India (if we look at Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, NE States, Bihar, Rajastan, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Maharastra). Although, some of these variations can be explained in terms of different nature of institutions and stakeholders involved, level of social mobisation and presence of regional specificities; yet a good amount of variation is due to unnecessarily differently designed course contents and delivery mechanisms. In this respect, it is also clear that institutions such as NIRD and SIRDs have not been able to deliver in the last 5 years or so. It is also not clear to this Working

46

Group whether they have the capacities to deliver the kind of training and support required to fulfill the objectives cited in the Operational Guidelines Section 1.2(b) cited above. The Working Group has also gone through the concept note and material available on the website with regard to a joint initiative of the MoRD and UNDP which seeks to build capacities of MGNREGA stakeholders across the board. While the initiative is important, as we have observed in our field visits and interactions with NIAR (Mussoorie), NIRD and SIRD that government training institutions woefully lack the capacity and also orientation to impart training for NREGA. The Working Group suggests that an excessively government centric approach would not only be inadequate but also counterproductive given the peoplecentric nature of MGRNEGA and also PRI centred planning and implementation. Therefore, not only voluntary organizations would provide hand-holding support but also efforts need to be made to establish People Learning Centres at the block or sub-block levels. It is also observed that the above initiative would benefit by a series of CSO consultations held across the country to seed the concept and invite partnerships. It would also be appropriate to consider CSO partnership in the steering of the project itself by giving space to CSOs in the Empowered Committee overseeing the initiative. There also seems to be a lack of a training plan or strategy at the state and national levels. It is clear that there is a lack of cohesion and shared sense of purpose across the board. This is seriously impacting the quality of outcomes on the ground. In general, the problems that have beset capacity building efforts with respect to rural developments can be seen as arising from the following: g) Training institutions has very little practical experience of doing what they are training in and have very little touch with the intricacies of ground-level realities, implementation and social engineering8 h) Training institutions are located at a geographical distance, farm removed from where the actual development intervention is scheduled to take place.

This was further confirmed by the visit of the Working Group to a few government training and support institutions considered at some point or other by the MoRD to get involved in the capacity building effort around MGNREGA. The personnel had very little clue as to what could be done with village communities, had never interacted much with them and certainly could not be seen as adding value to human resources at the PRI levels.

47

i) These institutes are run by personnel who speak a language which is largely incomprehensible to the people and whose attitude is didactic rather than dialogic, and who seem to lack the passion for the work which their training will enable. j) A very serious lacuna has been the absence of any kind of follow-up in the field to ensure that the benefits of training are materialised at the field-level for which it was meant. k) There has been an absence of a recognized system of certification for the training efforts l) Training also tends to become too specific9. Overall, the planning and implementation requirements can become so tightly structured that it discourage imaginative and innovative training methods, sticking to what is allowed. m) There seems to be a mismatch between what an institution is capable of delivering and what it is actually expected to deliver. Thus, some of the above mentioned issues could be taken care of by using existing training institutions and infrastructure as a facilitation and networking centres, which could also perhaps cater to the training needs of certain types (such as entitlements of wage seekers, procedures and guidelines) but cannot train implementing teams in the intricacies of plan preparation, execution, conflict resolution, social mobilization and social audit. n) There is also a lack of a certification system whereby teams can be judged to have capability to address the task they are entrusted with.
o) Another lacuna relates to the near absence of any kind of role assigned to

Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) in this crucial area. It is quite clear that this is one sphere in which civil society organizations have done well and have the potential to contribute.

4.2 Chain of Capacity Building Institutions

Given the multi-faceted challenges facing MGNREGA implementation, there is an urgent need to create a proper structure for capacity building at the national, state and district levels. Since several CSOs have done very good work across the
9

In one field visit, the working group members found that after appointment, the MGNREGA Project Officers and the technical personnel had only been given a two-day orientation on estimation and planning of roads, which they were mechanically applying to the task. In another state, which seemed to have a more structured and better approach to training, the standard interventions of watershed development were being taught to village-level personnel.

48

country in enabling wage seekers and village communities to access their entitlements under MGNREGA and since CSOs have also had a long history of mobilization, capacity building and support to village communities, capacity building for MGNREGA is one area where CSOs must be invited and mandated to play a role. The proposed structure outlined below will benefit by maximization of CSO participation.

4.2.1 National Level

At the national level, a National MGNREGA Training and Support Organization (NMTSO) needs to be created to anchor the entire training effort for MGNREGA. The Working Group is of the view that this is of critical importance. This is especially because the capacity for capacity building cannot be presumed to exist at the level of states10 and districts but may need to be either created or enhanced significantly. Thus, this effort of capacity building needs to draw upon the best resources across the country and to pool them to create hubs in each state and district of the country which service the aims and objectives of MGNREGA and eventually other social sector interventions (Forest Rights Act and National Food Security Act to name just two). This organization will: act as a coordinating and anchoring agency between different state level resource centres help to define and refine training policy at both state and national levels and make traiing needs assessments act as a clearing house for training material and resources and as a nodal centre actively involved in development and dissemination of training material, methods and resources. identify and mobilize institutions which can play the role of training institutions for MGNREGA across the country define training content and syllabi for different stakeholders

10

Some states may have such capacities but a majority do not seem to, despite presence of infrastructure and monetary allocations. Indeed, if the aim of capacity building is to create human resources capable of applying their minds and skills to any situation or problem arising in a village (not just this or that specific issue about which they are taught in training sessions), it is unclear that such a capacity building has even been attempted since independence.

49

draw up a national level training plan for different stages of MGNREGA implementation and for different stakeholders, factoring in state level training plans identify and induct capable CSOs with proven track records , professional agencies, technical institutes and other institutions who can play the role of Lead Resource Centres or Anchor Organizations (AOs) for MGNREGA in different states, with the active participation of the state level training and support organizations ensure that training requirements for MGNREGA are actually being fulfilled across the country as per the training plan monitor the quality of training imparted and make specific, germane recommendations for improvement of the same give clear recommendations and set clear deadlines to state governments who are not acting complying with the training road map to bring them on track Seek advice from the Central Employment Guarantee Council as the apex body steering the MGNREGA and report to the CEGC on the action taken by it and state governments in furtherance of its recommendations. A Steering Committee of the CEGC may be formed to oversee the functioning of the NMTSO. This committee may also
induct representatives from reputed and prominent CSOs to guide and monitor its work.

4.2.2 State Level

At the state level a State MGNREGA Training and Support Organization (SMTSO) needs to be set up to oversee the training functions throughout the state. This should actually be a Consortium of carefully selected CSOs, available professional and technical institutions with practical experience of planning, who will act as Anchor Organizations (AOs), anchoring the training effort at the state level and creating master trainers and master trainer organizations at the district level. Officials of the state government should also be represented in this SMTSO to ensure maximum coordination, mutual accountability and mutual respect. The purpose of this state level consortium will be to create District MGNREGA Training and Support Organizations (DMTSO) which are master trainer and support organizations at the district level for the purposes of MGNREGA planning, implementation and mobilization for entitlements. The SMTSO will also help to

50

formulate training courses, syllabi, training material and also set up district-level training resource centres and identify and appoint persons who can run these centres. In case CSOs capable of performing this role at the state level cannot be found, the SMTSO may consider tying up with the SMTSO of another state for the training requirements of their district level resource centres or inviting interested and prominent CSOs from other states identified by the NMTSO to set up a centre or office in their state to help them in the task of capacity building by playing the role of AOs. It is expected that the NMTSO will monitor and help address such lacunae where they arise.

4.2.3 District Level

At the district level there is need to set up a District MGNREGA Training and Support Organization (DMTSO). This is a master trainer organization which imparts training to block and sub-block implementation teams. The DMTSO may be formed by the state government by inducting full-time dedicated resource persons who will act as master trainers for MGNREGA. The DMTSO will also provide support to Project Implementation Agencies under MGNREGA. The recruitment of such resource persons may be undertaken through the same channels as that of the project implementation teams at block and cluster levels. The DMTSO can be a CSO provided one of high quality, impeccable credentials and some experience of planning and execution or working on nature-based livelihoods is available. These CSOs will have to be selected through a rigorous screening process. If credible and capable CSOs are available but are capable of operating at the scale of one or two blocks, then the DMTSO responsibilities for these blocks may be entrusted to them, while the responsibilities for the other blocks may be shouldered by the dedicated master trainers and support personnel. If technical and professional agencies such as Krishi Vigyan Kendras, agricultural colleges or other are available and can support the core staff of the DMTSO in the performance of their tasks, such support should be actively enlisted. The DMTSO team will be trained by the Consortium of AOs selected to be part of the State MTSO in a series of foundation courses. These courses will be designed after due deliberation at the state-level as to their duration and subject matter. If the selected DMTSO already has some experience in training and support for micro-

51

planning, a 20-day Foundation Course may be visualized, followed by another 20day follow-up module. Otherwise a more rigorous 30-day Foundation Course may be followed up by a 20-day refresher module. An evaluation of the performance of the trainees is a must. This could take the form of a course-end examination as well as concurrent review of trainees on their attitude, skills and behaviour. Both could lead to course-end grades. Certificates clearly stating that the team members have been trained to act as Master Trainers at the district level will be awarded by the SMTSO, mentioning the course-end grades attained, in order to maintain quality of trainers and in the interest of transparency. The SMTSO Consortium will also provide handholding support to the DMTSO, once established, will review the training being imparted by the DMTSO members and decide on the best road map for improving the quality of trainers. In a year it should be expected that one AO can reasonably cater to the training requirements of 4-5 DMTSOs. It is estimated that about the DMTSO on an average will work well with 6 dedicated professional resource persons, 3 of whom will attend to the requirements of technical training and support and the other 3 to issues relating to social mobilization, social audit and entitlements. Attempted below is an operationalization scenario for training of all VDC and block team members: Given that there are about 6000 blocks and about 600 districts in the country, the average number of blocks in a district can be taken to be 10. Each block will have on an average 3 Village Development Cluster (VDC) teams. The combined strength of the implementing teams at the block level and VDC level comes to about 18 personnel (see Chapter 2 of this report) in each block at the cutting edge of implementation whose training needs will have to be taken care of. With 10 blocks on an average, this means 180 persons. In the first year, the VDC/block teams must undergo a Basic Training Course (BTC) of at least 30 days' duration at the DMTSC. If these 180 persons were to attend the BTC at the DMTSC in batches of 36 (which is an ideal number in terms of trainers being able to attend to trainees), at least 5 batches will have to be trained. This means 5 months of the year.

52

Another two months should be reserved for refresher courses or specialized courses, orientations, workshops, meetings etc. This leaves about 5 months for field support work At least two field support visits for each VDC of about 7 days each visit must be envisioned. These field support visits will double up as on-site training for the VDC and Block teams, so that the training imparted at the DMTSO will be followed up with on-site training, support and handholding for plan preparation and execution. . A system may be envisioned whereby during the BTC, trainers set the team members practical tasks which the team members have to fulfill by the time of the support visit. In this support visit, In each support visit, a team comprising at least two members from the DMTSO should visit the VDC. In 5 months about 10 VDC field sites can be effectively visited by one team. Since there are about 10 blocks per district on an average, we have 30 VDC teams and 30 VDC field sites. Thus 3 support teams of 2 support persons each at the DMTSC will be able to carry out this workload.

The capacity building of village level community mobilizers can further be undertaken by the implementation team itself, once it is prepared and certified to be prepared. Over time the capacity building and support requirements for MGNREGA will go down or change in character to encompass more areas such as convergence with other programmes and entitlements under other social sector. A system of certification will be established at this level too, whereby the DMTSO will conduct concurrent and course-end evaluation of the implementation team members during the BTC and the on-site field training, on the basis of which a certificate may be issued to the team member, mentioning the grade attained. The Working Group also recommends that there should also be a space within the operational guidelines wherein CSOs with capacity and caliber can actually function as project implementation teams as well.

4.3 Costs
Some estimated costs of the DMTSO and the costs of training to be conducted by them have been attempted by the Working Group. It is estimated that provisioning for such a training structure down the line will come to less than 1% of the

53

MGNREGA budget. This cost is expected to decline after the initial years since the more critical handholding requirements will be in the first and second years. However, this 1% of MGNREGA funds needs to be seen as an investment in the future of not only MGNREGA but virtually all rural development interventions since this small amount can effectively mean a very big difference to the total expenditure made and the quality of outcomes thereof. It is recommended therefore that the Operational Guidelines be suitably modified to cater for such expenditure. Where CSOs are inducted for the task of training DMTSOs or play the role of DMTSOs, their training and staff expenses should also be taken care of. The Working Group also takes cognizance of the fact that there is a proposal to create RUDSETI type of institutions at the district level for the NRLM. Possibilities of convergence in terms of infrastructure and human resources for training should be explored so that facilities and human capabilities are used for wage employment programmes to be effectively converged. With MGNREGA effectively providing financial resources for work on the ground which can make an irreversible change to the poverty situation in the country, the case for multilateral donor or aid agencies providing support to the GoI for the software portion of MGNREGA is considerably strengthened. This is because the small percentage of funds invested by such agencies in ensuring human resource allocation, capacity building has the potential of leveraging benefits which are several-fold. Such investments are also a step towards ensuring better quality of programme execution, better outcomes from public investment and improvement in the human resource and skill base of the country which is in the form of a permanent investment. Possibilities of inviting such grants-in-aid should be explored. Possibilities of Public-Private-Partnership may also be explored with Indian companies who may see such investment in human resources as part of their CSR and may like to participate either at the state or at the district level by contributing resources. However, such participation should be to ensure that the quality of MGNREGA is improved as per the road map prepared by the NTMSO and approved by the CEGC.

4.4 Quality Issues in Civil Society Participation

Within the Working Group there is a shared concern w.r.t both participation of Civil Society Organizations and the quality of CSOs with whom partnerships are forged

54

for executing the above recommendations. The Working Group is of the view that there is every need to mainstream high quality CSOs with proven track record into this nation-wide training and capacity building effort. The Working Group considers it fit to particularly mention the efforts made by states such as Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh in this regard. While the former has entered into agreements with civil society organizations to partner the state governments, the latter has initiated programmes of natural resource management and convergence with a clear policy on CSO participation. The Working Group also is clear that while bringing CSOs on board, there is need to ensure the highest standards of CSO accountability a concern which has also been voiced by several state governments. However, it has also noted with concern that in discussions with some state governments on this issue, the attitude has sometimes tended to border on throwing the baby out with the bath water and characterizing all CSO participation as a non-starter. It is the understanding of this Working Group that this situation has arisen only partly because of quality of CSOs themselves. It stems in a major part due to an apprehension that their own systems are not geared up enough to keep undesirable elements out of the process. Discussions of the Working Group with CSOs of different hues and calling have underlined the need for CSO participation and the Working Group recognizes the truly excellent work done by several such organizations in mobilization, participatory planning, execution, social audit and so on. Such CSOs have also cited numerous instances of violations by local administrations or implementation interfaces which have been brought to light by them and which have also led to problems for them. They also cite the fact that their role is not mandated by any formal institutional space within the framework of the Act. As a result, there is also a constant hurdle faced by them of convincing local administrations about their participation and their locus standi. The Working Group is of the view that concerns on both sides may be addressed by adopting an approach which puts premium on quality and provides an autonomous and institutionalized space for the selection and functioning of CSOs. This will ensure to high quality CSOs a space where they can work smoothly and will also ensure a fallback mechanism for them if and when local conditions turn difficult for no fault of theirs. The process will also facilitate and strengthen the selection process of CSOs by state governments. This can be done by the NMTSO leading a joint,

55

two-stage selection and evaluation process, wherein the first round of screening and shortlisting is done by the concerned state level agency and the final round of screening is done by the NMTSO with oversight by its Steering Committee. In order to arrive at such a decision, the NMTSO will have to make use of a panel of carefully selected evaluators who evaluate the work of these CSOs. A high-level search committee may be formed which looks into the issue of empanelment of evaluators. In this entire scheme of things, CAPART could also potentially play a role. However, for this fundamental structural changes will have to take place in the institution in order for it to do justice to this role. The Working Group recommends that this institutional reform process in CAPART should be completed as a pre-condition to its partnership in the process

Criteria for Selection of CSOs as AOs

This Working Group suggests that at the very minimum, the following factors need to be assessed: Length of time for which organization has been working in the field Vision of the organization, especially in terms of having a decisive propoor and pro-women thrust Stability of organization in terms of personnel and core leadership Annual budget and quantum of funds handled Adequate support staff for finance and administration and ability to handle accounts, documentation and reporting and manage projects Systems and management practices A minimum of at least 7 years of experience of working on microplanning, water conservation and nature based livelihoods Quality of work done in its technical and other aspects (particularly relevant for livelihoods, convergence and watershed programmes) Institutional arrangements put in place for management and sharing of benefits and local people's institutions created Organisations presence in the field and its credibility and reputation among the communities it is working with

56

Organisations links and relationships with PRIs at different levels Organisations relationship with local government at the block and district level Presence of qualified and experienced team with social workers, mobilisers, technical personnel and grassroots barefoot activists Presence of team members with requisite communication skills, capable of becoming trainers and support personnel Non-adherence or opposition to any form of discrimination based on grounds of region, community, caste, religion, gender or colour.

In order to bring such AOs on board a thorough evaluation needs to be carried out before empanelling them as members of the SMTSO, since high quality is a matter of very serious concern. However, once selected, the CSOs concerned must be under a formal agreement with the SMTSO and NMTSO so that their operation is smooth and well coordinated and there is mutual accountability.

4.5 Designating Institutions as Training and Certification Institutions for MGNREGA

Given the urgent need for human resources of quality for the implementation of MGNREGA, the above recommendations point to a medium-term approach to solving the problem, by first matching the supply with demand and then training this supply. However, it needs to be recognized that the creation of human resources is going to challenge MGNREGA implementation constantly. There is thus a need to create a longer term plan for provisioning human resources steadily. This calls for a creation of a human resource pool which may be drawn upon when needed. This Working Group recommends that CSOs identified through the rigorous process described above may be formally recognized as Training Institutions for MGNREGA, with the provision that they can organize and carry out diploma courses for MGNREGA, which are recognized. Such a recognition must only be made for those CSOs who have the capability and practical field implementation experience to play this role. Tie-ups of such CSOs with technical colleges and institutes at state and national level may be further promoted so that students can carry out this diploma course as part of their formal degree course by requesting a field placement or an

57

internship. The duration for such a course should be 6 months to a year and a rigorous system of trainee evaluation should be part of this system.

4.6 Proposed Lok Sewak/Lok Karmi Scheme

Considering the general crisis of capacity building especially at the level of Gram Panchayat (Act clearly assigns pivotal role to Gram Sabha and Gram Panchayat in the implementation), Working Group recommends rolling out the Scheme of Lok Sevak/ Lok Karmis (under active consideration by MoRD) for enhancing the capacity of Panchayats/ representatives of Panchyati Raj in the implementation of MGNREGA and also realisation of entitlements of labourers. Section 2(g) of the MGNREGA clearly mentions that Implementing agencies includes ... Voluntary organizations authorised by the Central Government or the State government to undertake the implementation of any work taken up under a scheme. Based on our field visits and interaction with key stakeholders (internal and external), we think that a careful and calibrated approach towards involving voluntary organizations in the capacity building aspects of implementing MGNREGA is the need of the hour. Field visits in Rajasthan, Bihar, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, Assam, Chhattisgarh have made it clear that at present, without adequate capacity enhancement, Gram Panchayats will not be very successful in implementing the following activities: Receiving applications for registration Verifying registration applications Registering households Issuing Job Cards Receiving applications for employment Issuing dated receipts Allotting employment within 15 days of application Planning of works/preparation of shelf of works Executing works Maintaining records Convening the Gram Sabha for Social Audit Monitoring the implementation of the scheme at the village level

The disastrous experiences of Gaon Sathis in Orissa, whereby local labour contractors became community mobilizers or facilitators without any robust

58

institutional framework suggests that there is a strong and urgent need for creating an enabling environment for involvement of reputed and credible voluntary organizations in the mobilization tasks for MGNREGA especially tasked with the work of energizing Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat. Though, there is provision for Gram Rozgar Sahayak/ Employment Guarantee Assistant (EGA) in each GP for facilitating Gram Sabha, the field reality about the shortage of trained staff and lack of social mobilization of wage seekers compels us to recognize the need for deployment of Lok Karmi as Community Resource Person in each Panchayat (GP) who would be anchored in the Voluntary Organizations (Lok Sevaks) for insulating him or her from the usual collusion between local representatives of PRI and officials from Line Departments in the implementation of MGNREGA. The involvement of voluntary organizations following a consortium approach will also galvanize grassroots community organizations for resource support at the level of Gram Sabha/Gram Panchyat. Therefore, the need for involving a concurrent system of capacity enhancement to strengthen the gram sabhas. Following Suggestions are offered for implementing Lok Sevak/Lok Karmi: 1. The Lok Sevak/Lok Karmi scheme needs to be first piloted in the 200 districts where MGNREGA had been first implemented for field testing and policy feedback. This is important since universalization in haste may lead to severe loss in credibility and quality 2. At present the role assigned to agencies reflects a somewhat typical notion that CSOs are good to create awareness and facilitating environments for government interventions. However, the track record of CSOs clearly shows that there is wide ranging expertise and a wide variety of responsibilities that they are capable of discharging. 3. Thus, while the statutory responsibilities of implementing MGNREGA need not be outsourced from DPC/PO/ and PRIs; the role of Vos under the scheme should be enhanced to providing technical support, mobilizing, facilitating, and assisting Gram Sabha/PRIs for discharging their functions under the Act. This will involve broadening the scope of the scheme from the present one. Two scheme outlines of this nature have been prepared for CAPART by SubGroup 1, set up as part of its restructuring initiative. This may be considered for a broader space to CSO partners.

59

4. The name of Lok Karmi needs to be reconsidered; the terms Sevaks and Karmis convey an implicit hierarchical order; this needs to be avoided. Lok Karmis are basically Local Resource Persons or Community Resource Persons. 5. In the selection of Lok Sevaks (Voluntary Organizations), consortium approach may be considered, as a method of ensuring collective responsibility and accountability 6. In the selection of Lok Sevaks, state governments needs to be consulted as part of an institutionalized system of selection process; MoRD could seek the help of CAPART and state governments for identification of voluntary organizations as Lok Sevaks. 7. Consider using Rajiv Gandhi Seva Kendra(RGSK) hub for facilitating the work of Lok Sevaks/ Lok Karmis. 8. The call for Expression of Interest (EOI) for the identification of voluntary organizations by the State Government should be displayed at the portal of State-NREGA site or portal of PR department of the state government. And the role of the state government in the identification of voluntary organizations needs to be clearly spelled out for the success of the scheme. 9. A list of selected Lok Sevaks must be sent by the state government to MoRD (Govt. of India) for perusal and making sure that procedural and transparency provisions have been followed in the identification/ selection. 10. The annual turnover of Rs. 20 lakh proposed in the note of MoRD wrt Lok Sevak (Ref; note of MoRD) will work against smaller, locally efficient Voluntary organizations; it needs to be made more flexible keeping in mind the nature, capacity (skills, resources etc) and reputation of the Voluntary organizations are more important than turn over criteria! 11. Ordinarily, the Lok Karmi needs to drawn from NREGA households. Based on Rajasthan experience, mates need to be preferred for the work of Lok Karmi. 12. Efforts should be made to involve members of local Neighbourhood Groups or Self-Help-Groups for the identification of committed Lok Karmis. This will energize the convergence space between MGNREGA and proposed NRLM. 13. The insistence on 12 class criterion for selection of Lok Karmi as proposed in the note of MoRD on Lok Sevaks/Lok Karmis needs to be dropped as most NREGA households are illiterate. as capacity building

60

14. Terms of Reference (ToR) for Lok Sevak/Lok Karmi needs to be clearly spelled out leaving no scope for ambiguity in terms of job profile and functional responsibility. 15. Voluntary Organizations need to be supported under administrative expenses of 6% for providing training of Lok Karmis. 16. There is a concern that Lok Karmi may not be able to handle ICT related issues. There should be a separate cadre for ICT related functions at the GP. Lok Karmis should not be over loaded with work that they cant deliver. 17. As Lok Sevaks/ Lok Karmis are anchored in Voluntary Organizations, they are insulated from nexus between local PR officials and government functionaries. The success of several consortium partners of leading

Voluntary Organizations in different parts of the country have showed that they act primarily as Local Area Resource Persons or Community Resource Persons trained regularly by the Vos.(Partners of the National Consortium of Civil Society Organizations on NREGA such as the Jaisamand Consortium in Rajasthan, Wassan in AP, Karnataka Consortium, Western Orissa consortium in Orissa and so on) 18. In cases of violations of provisions of the Act /Guidelines with regard to implementation of Lok Sevaks/ Lok Karmis, appeals can be made to DPC and District Ombudsman for MGNREGA. However, care needs to be taken that credible and reputed voluntary organizations are accorded protection of natural justice so they do not become victim of district level administrative politics. 19. All expenses on operationlizing the scheme of Lok Sevak/ Lok Karmi should be borne under 6% of the administrative expenses.

3.7
Deleted: i

4.7 Infrastructural and Mobilisation Support

Deleted: m Deleted: s

61

Bharat Nirman Rajiv Gandhi Seva Kendras: Infrastructural and Moblizational Capacity Building Support The Construction of Bhart Nirman Rajiv Gandhi Seva Kendra under schedule I para 1(g) at the Gram Panchyat and Block level vide notification no. S.O. 2877(E) dated 11/11/2009( MoRD) is a much needed step to bridge the gaps/shortages in infrastructural resources for Panchayati Raj Institutions and also provide additional support facilities for establishing dedicated office of MGNREGA for implementation at the GP and Block level. As we know that there are about 40% of Panchayats in the country without any building for office space; several states barring Kerala have long been demanding infrastructural and human resource support for robust functioning of PRIs. The Working Group agrees with the policy guidelines of constructing Bhart Nirman RGSK and supports the construction of BNRGSK on a priority basis over the next three years as a major capacity building initiatives under MGRNEGA for realisation of the rights of labourers and reenergizing PRIs in the implementation of MGNREGA. The major capacity building activities at the Gram Panchyat/ Block level could easily be placed. BNRGSV should be equipped with telephones, photocopiers, fax machines etc. This will function as an ICT enabled Knowledge Resource Center or Public Facilitation Centres where MGNREGA labourers can submit applications for job cards, works, Muster roll scrutiny, Complaints and interact with MGNREGA staff/personnel along with representatives from PRIs. This will also enable mobilization of labourers through the proposed scheme of Lok Sevak/Lok Karmis for social audit. The grievances may be transferred to the concerned NREGA authorities and Ombudsman for disposal. Software on Peoples Information System with touch screen facilities may be developed and hosted in these centres to ensure quick delivery of information and recording of public views and complaints. Toll free helpline services can also be provided at the RGSK and also be equipped with the facility to facilitate coordination with the Media, organize visits of media persons to worksites, track media stories on MGNREGA implementation and refer them to the MGNREGA Authorities for verification. BNRGSK will also function as Single window information centre for all MGNREGA related information, and most importantly, all training and capacity building efforts could be organized at BNRGSK at the GP and block level. Additionally, BNRGSK will also help set the tone for facilitating the implementation of Panchyati Raj activities into a Mission Mode.

Deleted:

Deleted: Deleted: Deleted:

62

CHAPTER V

Cyberstructure A New Cyberstructure for MGNREGA; ICT/GIS BASED CAPACITY BUILDING REFORMS

5. Information Technology for Management Support

Apart from implementation, a critical role in ensuring entitlements under MGNREGA is that of monitoring. To ensure timely delivery of deliverables in any egovernance initiative, concurrent monitoring is a must. In this endeavour, apart from professional assistance that IT for MGNREGA becomes crucial in ensuring best results. Already, the IT system for MGNREGA is a pioneer in terms of the huge amount of information that it has warehoused and made available. We look at how this good start could be made better. The potential advantage of using IT systems for governance lies in: 1. the speed with which data can be processed and made available in meaningful forms 2. the availability of data nearly concurrently with its online updation/entry through networks, so that information is available pro-actively and to a

63

larger audience (in a paper system, this information would have to be dug out to become available) 3. the breaking of artificial barriers of geography, boundaries etc. to flow of information (in paper systems such boundaries do not automatically break there therefore a systemic support for information suppression) Of these, the last two are key to engendering transparency and together all three make for contributions in governance which only IT make. Thus, IT systems can become tremendous potential allies in concurrent monitoring, enabling preventives to be placed in line before situations deteriorate. They can also directly enable attaining entitlements and finally, they can become potent tools for grievance redressal

5.1 Usefulness of IT in the MGNREGA Context

We look at the present status of IT systems in the MGNREGA context and discuss how it can be improved. The following table illustrates the broad stages of MGNREGA workflow and the requirements of different stakeholders.
MGNREGA Workflow and Stakeholder Expectations from IT Stakeholders and Objectives of IT Use Wage Seekers Implementors Monitors/ Grievance Redressers Primary Objective: Monitor Programme for Quality, Smooth Out Bottlenecks and Ensure that Entitlements Reach Wage Seekers on Time

Primary Objective: Getting Entitlement in the Act

Primary Objective: Implementing and Planning Work to Fulfill Legal Mandate

Stages of MGNREGA Workflow11 Worker registration and issue of job cards Work demand applications Planning and estimation12

What IT must Enable to Fulfill these Objectives

demand for work must be visible to implementor work must be provided within the stipulated time wages for work

that information of work demand reaches them estimates and plans are drawn up in the shortest possible time

availability of updated information which is as close to reality as possible tracking of the implementation of the

11

This does not attempt to capture all complexities involved in the work flow but is offered more by way of illustration. A more detailed discussion on the workflow (as analyzed for the APREGS) can be found in Tata Consultancy Services (2006)

64

Sanction of work Estimating material requirements Start of work Daily attendance and preparation of muster rolls Measurement and valuation at fixed intervals Preparation of pay order Payment to wage-seekers through bank accounts Accounts/book keeping

done should be paid transparently, without any leakages and preferably at the doorstep work done must be visible to monitors to ensure that entitlements are fairly met non-fulfilment of demand or noncompliance with legal requirements of wage payments should become known to monitors for concurrent redressal

to meet this demand estimates of cost are not bloated the process of sanctions and releases is expedited work is started with minimum delay worker payments are made within a stipulated time wage payments reach workers and fraud and fudging is rooted out

MGNREGA schemes as they go from stage to stage

However, for IT to be able to deliver along the above lines a necessary condition is that it becomes central to the workflow and is tightly integrated end to end. In mixed mode systems, IT often ends up being an appendage to the main workflow which is carried out through the normal channels of paper. Under the circumstances there is no a-priori reason to presume that the information in the IT system is up to date. Hence the cutting edge advantage is lost. In addition, for maximization of benefits, it requires a system that is real time and online. The first is a case for better use of IT. The second requires better connectivity backbones and hardware and innovations to ensure that more and more such aspects of work are brought under the purview of IT which are traditionally thought of as belonging to the domain of notesheets and files. Both of the above lead to a situation that enables information to be as fresh as possible across a network and thus enable tighter monitoring. We discuss below some possible directions in which IT systems need to move (and are already moving in some states), with the recommendation that the MGNREGA implementation and
12

Although shown in a sequence, planning and estimation are not activities that need to wait for work demand . Nor should work demand be contingent upon work estimates prepared which seems to be the de facto situation today, because proper shelves of work rarely exist. So work demand on the MIS is always made equal to the work supplied by the simple method of normally entering work demand when a particular work has been estimated and sanctioned

65

monitoring system is strengthened by mainstreaming these. Where needed, the MoRD needs to build partnerships and common steering groups in order to enable this, such as with the UIDAI. Online Real Time Work Demand A common issue with work demand is that work demand is not immediately visible on the MIS. It is equal to the work supplied because entries are made postfacto. It is also quite common for functionaries to refuse to entertain work demand applications because of lack of adequate preparedness to open works. Under the circumstances, information on real work demand may be suppressed. In terms of IT for monitoring, the issue is to make this work demand visible as soon as it arises. If MGNREGA correspondents with a handlheld or a computer are available even within the perimeter of the GVS or the Block, the application can be made online. For those monitoring the system, this is enough information to trigger needed oversight functions. A cellphone based online work demand application system can be worked out wherein a short message from a wage seeker's cellphone in a predefined format lodges itself on a server at the state level. The PO's office, which is also part of the network takes cognizance of the application and ensures that employment is provided. It needs to be emphasized here that from the viewpoint of IT for monitoring MGNREGA, the sanctity of the work demand application is unquestionable. Since this is the demand which the entire system is geared to provide and is thereby a monitoring yardstick against which the sluggishness of the delivery system needs to be measured. Similarly, the opening of works is again an event which is recorded post-facto along with wage payments. If the initial work demand is visible, the system will be able to flag any delays in subsequent stages and raise the necessary alerts down the line. Online Real Time Grievance Redressal A similar system can be visualized for complaints and their redressal. Either they are entered through handhelds or directly by the wage seeker through her cellphone and the complaint is lodged to a central server. A recent move in Uttar Pradesh to enable a cellphone based complaints and grievance redressal system is on simlar lines (see Seth, 2009) The major contribution of such IT reforms will be to ensure greater and tighter monitoring of MGNREGA work so that essential parameters of timely delivery are ensured. It will also support, by making available current information for public scrutiny such as social audits. Together with decentralisation of implementation, this is the second step in ensuring that the core objectives of MGNREGA are met. Real Time Online Muster Rolls, Work Attendance and Measurements

66

A system can be visualized whereby handhelds are issued to field workers under MGNREGA, and muster rolls are directly updated online to the state-level servers by biometric identification of the workers who are present on site. Such an immediate updation will go a long way in aiding concurrent monitoring. In fact, the paper muster roll can be a print out of the online muster. Fitted with GPS and webcam facilities, the system should further aid in verification of the work being done on the site at which is reportedly being done. It seems that this has also already been piloted in different states by the MoRD. The results of this pilot should be made public and appropriate policies framed on the feedback. Alternatively, all job card holders in a village are loaded in the registered mobile available with the field assistant. Each day, for each work, the muster attendance is easily registered name-wise and sent to the central computer by a compressed SMS system. Details of the number of workers at each work-site can be queried both on the website and through SMS by any interested public for verification. The verification teams use this extensively to weed out any bogus muster rolls. Each technical assistant responsible for taking measurements is given a mobile phone where measurements are recorded and sent by compressed SMS to the central server along with GPS coordinates. This will ensure that the TAs visit the work site and avoids delay in processing the payments at the mandal computer centers

5.2 Biometrics and UID-Enabled IT Application Layer for MGNREGA

Each of the online systems referred to above can use the authentication mechanism proposed under the UIDAI. Non-repudiable, de-duplicable and possibly bi-directional13 authentication mechanisms, with a facility for beneficiaries locking their identification information14 have been mooted as part of the UIDAI design. This
13A

bi-directional authentication mechanism can potentially prevent identity fraud made possible through system crackers cracking the handheld device used for authentication and using it to spoof identity. Consider the following: the UID holder (say a MGNREGA worker) authenticates against the UID servers through her biometrics. The equipment used to facilitate this authentication may be a handheld device. The underlying technology used in the device may be cracked by malicious crackers to spoof the identity. Under the circumstances, a bi-directional authentication mechanism also authenticates the handheld device for its genuineness and integrity. Once the transaction is over, the beneficiary, using her identification mechanism, locks her identity data. Essentially, this means that only she can herself unlock it, thus preventing unauthorized access, misuse and possible encroachments on privacy.

Deleted:

14

67

has the potential of engendering far greater transparency than a paper based system which is far more susceptible to identity fraud. Simultaneously, this mechanism can also ensure that crucial data are concurrently available for monitoring. The identity can function as a single window for the entitlements of the poor not only under MGNREGA but all government schemes such as the proposed Food Security Act, health care, education and so on. The business of manual updation of job cards and the consequent bad practices of some people keeping workers cards can potentially become redundant. The technology architecture of UID is geared towards using biometrics15 based authentication systems on the basis of a unique identity number. The system is proposed to guarantee maximum accuracy when it is used online. It is quite clear from the UIDAI design architecture that smartcard technologies are not part of the architecture. The authentication mechanism is biometric based and does not need smart cards. Further, differing backend technologies for smartcard-based authentication, or any other design point which violates the fundamental principles of open standards and interoperability are unacceptable to the UID design. Since UID is going to be the identity proving mechanism in the not-too-distant future, its relationship with any application layer in the social sector becomes critical and synergistic. Critical because (1) any non-UID based authentication architecture potentially faces the problem of non-conformance and redundancy in the not-toodistant future; and (2) if the MGNREGA IT architecture is not sufficiently prepared for the backend authentication proposed by the UID, there will be problems. Synergistic because the sort of connectivity backbone that is required to make UID authentication foolproof will also benefit MGNREGA. It is this Working Group's recommendation that a coordination mechanism between MGNREGA and UID is pro-actively worked out by MoRD. It is on the basis of this understanding that a clear IT plan to be rolled out should be made so that MGNREGA has strategically positioned itself to maximize the wage-seeker's benefits. Another advantage of a single unified identification mechanism is in its potential to make possible digital sanctions and orders by providing a mechanism for non-repudiable authentication of any transaction. This can greatly speed up processing of work flows at critical points and its uses for MGNREGA also need to be explored.

15

There is also considerable debate around the use of biometrics and its efficacy in a high-volume transaction environment. The GoI has set up a Committee for framing the Biometric Standards for UID has also been set up (http://uidai.gov.in/documents/Biometric%20Standards%20Committee%20Notification.pdf)

68

5.3 Banking Correspondent Model

Labour payments in MGNREGA through banks or post office accounts16 have been made compulsory since 2008. With 80 million MGNREGA wage seeker bank accounts opened and 80% of MGNREGA wage payments already being made through this route, MGNREGA has ushered in unprecedented financial inclusion. Under the circumstances, it is desirable to think of ways in which the problems in the system are taken care of such as: There are not enough bank branches to deal with the number of wageseeker accounts that need to be created. The accounts, if created, have a lot of paper work associated with them and banks are understaffed to take on this load, or otherwise do not see it as a profitable enough proposition. At payment time, there are a large number of wage-seekers who come for cash withdrawal to cater to by a very small staff. Panchayats too do not have the human resources to help wageseekers with all the paper formalities that banks require to be completed wage-seekers are often not aware of bank procedures and do not know how to use their accounts bank branches are located at a large distance from where the workers live, so it is difficult for the to make frequent trips. For wage-seekers under NREGA, frequent cash withdrawals are necessitated because this cash is used to facilitate day to day consumption

most shockingly, there may arise different types of collusion mechanisms to beat the system. A "good samaritan" in the village can volunteer to make withdrawals on behalf of several villagers. He can collect their passbooks, get withdrawal slips signed, fill in one amount and give the wage-seeker another, or ask for a cut for his services. Even more serious cases are cited where for instance, contractors get bank accounts opened in the name of the wage-seekers without their knowledge. He then, along with the panchayat sewak fabricates muster rolls. Whatever money is transferred to the bank accounts of the labourers is eaten up by the two and unscrupulous elements in the bank Despite its various problems, everyone (including the villagers themselves) are agreed that payment through bank transfers is a good thing and must stay. Its

16

In this section, the term "bank" is used to mean banks and post offices

69

basic premises of separating those in-charge of work execution from those in-charge of payments and doing away with the handling of cash is fundamentally sound. Here the role of Information Technology is being leveraged. All payments with effect from March 2011 needs to be done in the village using bio-metric identification process through smart cards. Under this, each beneficiary is issued a biometric smart card (finger print technology) at the village level. In each village, Banks place a Customer Service Provider (CSP) identified by the banker equipped with a smart card reader networked to the bank server. Each beneficiary is given a bank account after biometric authentication by the bank. All disbursements are credited electronically to the accounts of the beneficiaries. Banks arrange cash to the CSP using a Business Correspondent (BC). The MIS showing disbursement is available online. A printer may give out details of the transaction as a paper record. While extending the BC model to MGNREGA beneficiaries, a critical issue is one of accountability, transparency and oversight. If individuals are chosen as BCs there is a risk of unwanted practices setting in because of a lack of strong regulatory mechanisms. There is also a risk that influential village persons may be found fit to become BCs, which may actually be opening a backdoor entry channel for moneylenders or may otherwise be discriminatory against the poor. A possible solution to this issue which takes care of the accountability concerns while using the BC model to the MGNREGA worker's advantage, may be to harness the BC function within the MGNREGA's Project Officer and VDC Team. Thus the PO's office and its associated VDCs are institutional BCs and it is the institution which is responsible for the individuals carrying out the interface at the village level.

5.4 Asset Management System for MGNREGA

Based on Working Groups field visits in different states, interaction with different key stakeholders and also a workshop help at NIRD on 14 May 2010, the Working Group recommends setting up ICT/GIS enabled Assets Management System for MGNREGA. (AMS).( Ref to Appendix on the Workshop). This may be anchored /located in the Independent Research and Evaluation Division at the proposed Jaipur branch of NIRD (MoRD). Annual census of Assets of MGNREGA and regular updates on the progress of works could easily be monitored by the proposed AMS. This policy recommendation is in line with discussion being initiated by MoRD (Ref to 5Feb2010 MoRD Workshop on Decentralized Planning and Monitoring) A Public Private Partnership (PPP) framework needs to be created for accessing and using the best skills, tools and technologies for developing and maintaining Assets Management System. The district administration with the help of ICT enabled Rajiv Gandhi Seva Kendras (RGSKs) at the panchayat and block levels would uplink the AMS to NREGA division of MoRD.

70

In view of enormous size, complexity of implementing MGNREGA in diverse social, political and geo-climatic conditions and challenges of transparency and accountability, the Working Group recommends state governments to make best use of latest Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) and frontier technologies like GIS to help ensuring effective planning, implementation and proper management of the programme and to bring transparency and accountability at all levels of implementation. Since MGNREGA is not only about wage payment but also about creating durable assets, (Section 2 Schedule1), census of asset on a continuous basis has emerged a major challenge. Let us not forget that MGNREGA has increasingly come under serious criticism for undertaking unviable and untraceable works. Planning Commission of India in its studies have pointed that the actual ground level status of works is unknown in most cases unless physical verification is carried out. Therefore, the Working Group suggests setting up a robust and dynamic ICT/GIS enabled Assest Management System as one of the most crucial second generation reforms for making MGNREGA a great success! Based on Working Groups field visits in different states, interaction with different key stakeholders and also a workshop help at NIRD on 14 May 2010, the Working Group favours Assets Management System being anchored /located in the Monitoring and Evaluation Division at the proposed Jaipur branch of NIRD (MoRD) or alternatively Technical Secretariat of MGNREGA at MoRD. Annual census of Assets of MGNREGA and regular updates on the progress of works could easily be monitored by the proposed AMS. This policy recommendation is in line with discussion being initiated by MoRD (Ref; MoRD Workshop 14 Feb/2010). A Public Private Partnership (PPP) framework needs to be created for accessing and using the best skills, tools and technologies for developing and maintaining Assets Management System. As mentioned in the ToRs section a, subsection (iii) for Strengthening Administrative systems at all levels, creating Assets Management System is intended to enhance the capacity of existing administrative systems for efficient, effective and transparent delivery and tracking systems in MGNREGA. The Asset Management System will also support and promote application of various other ICT/GIS technologies for better implementation of MGNREGA in the country. Policy Implications of applying ICT/GIS tools for MGNREGA Many states such as Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Orissa, UP, West Bengal, Kerala, etc. have started using ICT tools like smart cards and hand held devices for the wage disbursement. ICT initiatives like Smart Cards have the potential to capture details of the Workers, Work and Wages (WWW) including the muster rolls and the job cards. One innovative aspect of smart cards and hand held devices are to use them, from wage disbursement to make them operate like a Job card, so that all transactions of MGNREGA programme be captured, like: registration, Job card, demand for work, issue of dated receipt, allotment of work, entry into muster roll like attendance from the field through hand held devices, which will be able to record latitude and longitude of the area, ensuring presence of worker at the worksite and using biometric based technology or through low cost ATMs. Among ICT initiatives, the Smart card and hand held devices have additional

71

advantage of capturing delays and can be updated instantly in the MIS and accessible to the beneficiaries as well as the public, enhancing the management and monitoring of the programmes. Geospatial technologies play a key role in generating timely and reliable information for planning and decision making at all the levels, i.e., from macro to micro. Even though it is widely recognized that Geographic Information System (GIS) has the capacity to analyse both spatial and non-spatial data including temporal aspects in a cost-effective and efficacious manner, its application at micro-level for utilities planning and resource management is fast emerging with the advancement of GPS and High Resolution Satellite Data. Planning at micro-level, a village is considered to be a viable micro-administrative unit and development of spatial database infrastructure at village level will help in inventorying these resources into micro-level database, which can be a emerging potential technology tool for MGNREGS for effective planning, implementation and proper management of the Programme The GIS based integrated geo-database at village level consisting of various thematic maps (e.g., village boundary map, block/tehsil boundaries maps, etc.), demographic data, socio-economic data and data related to infrastructural facilities (e.g., roads, educational facilities, health facilities, drinking water, power supply, etc.), proves a critical base for judicious decision making and realtime applications at village level. A GIS based spatial model identifies the spatial gaps for provision of basic facilities and to propose new village locations for providing additional infrastructure by effective implementation of development programmes and policies. It is expected that user friendly GIS based spatial data infrastructure generated at microadministrative unit will increase the efficacy of administration and resource mobilization as well as help in informed decision-making, thus generation of a Geographical Information System (GIS) based for Micro-level Planning evolving an application areas of Participatory GIS, for identifying strategies for community empowerment. Thus GIS offers solutions for social, rural development planning and provides an opportunity for Panchayats for integrated local development. Geographical Information Systems (GIS) is an example of frontier technology, promoting the concept of convergence. Systems developed with integration of spatial and non-spatial data, has brought a paradigm shift in implementation of GIS technology by extensive use of Satellite Remote Sensing, Global Positioning and other mobile mapping technologies. With power of integration, GIS today is being considered the nerve system for planning and has been providing effective services around the world. Visualization of terrain through high resolution satellites data, aerial pictures or maps, LIDAR captures spatial data. Embedded in GIS with nonspatial information has brought revolutionary changes in the implementation of traditional Management Information System (MIS). The power of visualization not only projects the ground reality, but also is capable of validating data. Possible Areas of ICT & GIS intervention An ICT and GIS interventions in the implementation of NREGA is important from the following perspective:

72

p) ICT & GIS ensures transparency and help in information dissemination (b) An ICT & GIS tools are required because the size of the programme is very large, not only from the geographical and financial perspective but from the perspective of the size of the target group of beneficiaries as well. q) ICT & GIS facilitates online monitoring and evaluation of the programme. The timely feedback helps in timely corrective actions. r) An ICT & GIS tools help in social audits whereby the local bodies and citizens may actually audit the programme at their end. s) ICT& GIS plays important role every phase of the implementation of the MGNREGA. Communication & Mobilization 4. Some of the ICT interventions that can be possibly used for communication & mobilization include community radio, television, public address systems, panchayat websites and the Internet to publicize the NREGA. 5. Information kiosks that have been set up in some villages and the 100,000 Common Service Centres being implemented by the Dept. of IT can be used as focal points to disseminate information on the scheme. 6. Village Resource Centre which has both communication and GIS and Satellite Remote Sensing based resource information on various works undertaken under MGNREGS for planning, implementation and monitoring. Planning Phase 9. Creation of a database of durable, productive, labour-intensive works at Panchayat level. Mapping out socially productive and durable assets/infrastructure which can be created in the respective zones/clusters. 10. Issuing of job cards, digitization of muster rolls, persons employed, their output, wage rates, working hours etc can also be available for verification by the Panchayats, peers and the community through the use of ICT & GIS 11. The use of Smart Cards/Biometric cards to identify and track every beneficiary in the region and can be integrated with GIS.

Execution of Works Works Management System with authentic records of the attendance at the worksites with simultaneous updating of the employment records is necessary. Works identified in a particular block to be taken up under the scheme must be available for viewing and measurement by all Panchayats within that block.

73

Work Flow Automation System may be introduced since the approval of works, allocation of works to an implementing agency etc. must be sanctioned by the Programme Officer or such local authority (including the Panchayats at the district, intermediate or village level). Disbursement of wages and unemployment allowance.

Monitoring 1. ICT provides for ensuring that the members of the designated rural household are only availing the guarantee of 100 days of employment and their wage employment rights are not being misused by others. Biometric systems like fingerprint recognition may be used as potential solutions to address this issue. A fingerprint recognition based time and attendance system at the front-end backed by a comprehensive computerized MIS at the back-end may be able to address the issue. 2. Geographical Information System The use of GIS can greatly enhance the monitoring of the NREGS. Digital maps can be made available for viewing to show the assets that have been created under the scheme and provide for the assessment of the quality of assets created. Grievance Redressal System Citizens registration of grievances at all Panchayat Levels and in offices of the Programme Officer and the District Programme Coordinator, made available online. 5. Citizens to track their grievances online. 6. Number of households demanding jobs and number of households who have been issued job cards. 7. Avoiding payment of unemployment allowance, whoever is provided a job is registered. 8. Variations in wage rates paid State wise. SMS based fund transfer To enable speeding up the process of fund transfers an innovative solution using mobile phones has been suggested. It works as follows; Site Assistant Engineer sends the day's muster roll of NREGS beneficiaries by SMS. Village Payment Agent receives the SMS Village Payment Agent makes payment to NREGS beneficiaries based on muster roll received, a second SMS about payments made is sent to Panchayati Raj Department's Banker .On receiving the SMS, the Panchayati Raj Department's Banker transfers funds to Village Payment Agent's bank account. SMS database will be integrated with NREGS web portal to generate weekly payment details. Using Rural ATMs

74

The low-cost rural ATM (Gramin-teller) can be implemented if the bank account transfer mechanism is put in place. The ATM works with both used and new notes and has a fingerprint based authentication system. It works on very low power with a built-in battery back-up and does not require air conditioning. Synergetic Approach There are other projects like Common Service Centres, e-Panchayats, etc., percolating down to the panchayat level and State-Wide Area Networks are also available at the panchayat level in some States, where the use of ICT & GIS in NREGA implementation should be seen in synergy and complementary to all these initiatives that are contemplated or in progress. Then only can the full potential of ICT be harnessed for empowering the common citizen.

75

CHAPTER IV STRENGTHENING RESEARCH AND EVALUATION SYSTEMS FOR MGNREGA

PART-I Policy Evaluation and Research Service (PERS)

Policy evaluation is a systematic process for assessing the design, implementation and outcomes, intended or unintended, of public policies. Evaluation uses social science research methods, including qualitative and quantitative techniques, to examine the effects of policies. Some policy scholars describe policy making as a sequential process marked by distinct steps, such as agenda-setting, policy formulation, adoption and implementation. For others, evaluation/assessment is the final step in this process. However, they all caution that the public policy process is ongoing, with evaluation often resulting in policy changes/correction which are then implemented and evaluated again. Policy evaluation enables all participants in the policy process, including legislators, executives, agency officials and citizens at large, to measure the degree to which a program/scheme has achieved its goals, assess the effects and identify any needed changes to a policy. The two main types of policy evaluation are formative and summative evaluation. Formative evaluation examines the operations of the program, usually for the purpose of improving the program and assessing its implementation. For example, most PIN studies are primarily formative evaluation. Summative evaluation asks whether the program achieved its intended goals. Often, the best policy evaluations employ a creative hybrid or syncretic approach that uses both formative and summative techniques. Policy evaluation is rarely as simple or straightforward as some analysts may suggest. Factors that complicate evaluations include identifying goals, measuring performance and isolating the effects of policy from those of other endogenous or exogenous factors. Let us not forget that though policy makers often want immediate information on policy effects, but many programs/schemes have long-term effects (cascading or ripple) that will not be known in the short term. Objectives: As the implementation of MGNREGA has entered its fifth year in a row, the Working Group recommends setting up PERS as a continuous policy evaluation and research think tank for enhancing the capacity of MoRD in its effective and efficient implementation of NREGA by developing innovative participatory approaches and syncretic methodologies for impact analysis, anticipating policy research needs of key stakeholders and responding to specific policy analysis requests in the areas of innovation, convergence and capacity building on all current and emerging issues in MGNREGA. Additionally, PERS would also function as a forum and clearinghouse for the sharing of information as well as the dissemination of best practices through workshops, seminars, publication of journals, reports, bulletins, briefs and other literature . PERS would also help create an environment

76

for imparting expertise to people interested in rigorous program evaluation and training to policy makers/implementers on how to conduct randomized and qualitative evaluations in social policies. With a rigorous adherence to objectives of MGNREGA especially articulating voices of poor in the realm of livelihood security , PERS would help create a robust, dynamic and self-evolving knowledge-space that is authoritative, objective, nonpartisan and transparent in generic terms of monitoring and evaluation as mentioned in the Section 11 of the Act. Further, PERS is intended to breakdown the silos in social science research and deepen the sphere of participatory and informed dialogue between policy makers and civil society. Why PERS? In the existing architecture of governance and capacity building support for MGNREGA, there is nothing in terms of independent policy research and evaluation support at the central or state level. PIN (Professional Institutional Network) in the MGNREGA cell of MoRD is generally bureaucratically driven and often operates on the principles of ex-post-facto analysis of the implementation of MGRNEGA. Though Professional Institutional Network (PIN) has been instituted as an integrated structure (or network) for concurrent appraisal, diagnosis, remedial action and capacity building for steady, sustainable interventions, to enhance the quality of the programme, the impact of PIN studies on course correction, innovation and policy change is rather limited as most policies changes in MGNREGA have been carried out without any research and analysis support of PIN or any independent think tank located in the government or civil society. (expert groups of MoRD have indeed provided crucial support for policy changes) So far 61 studies have been commissioned by MoRD for the network of PIN but only 25 studies have been completed for policy appraisal in the last four years. Bulk of PIN studies (about 37 studies) have been commissioned in the last two years. Many of them have not yet submitted draft report. PIN suffers from not only from usual flaws of bureaucratic decision making but also usual selection bias, standardized format for impact analysis, and arbitrary criteria for choosing partners of PIN. There is also not clarity about the strategic vision of PIN. For instance, it is not clear what NIIT would do in its analysis of implementation of MGNREGA in the state of Delhi. Consider the case of Central Institute for Fisheries Education, Mumbai. Rather than doing study on convergence between MGNREGA and fisheries or pissiciculture, the institute was awarded study on a generic impact analysis in Thane and Akola. Now, Central Institute of Fisheries Education has been give to undertake a generic impact analysis. In contrast, leading experts on poverty and rural development in places like Indira Gandhi Institute for Development Research or IIT in Mumbai were either not consulted or not considered good enough to undertake impact analysis. . Based on the field visit, interaction and meeting with key officials at NIAR (LABSNA) the Working Group on 28 April 2010 does not think that NIAR is equipped with enough in-house resources, skills, aptitudes and backed by quality researchers including dedicated professionals to justify the role of National Resource Center for MGNREGA. In short, members of Working Group recommend that the NIAR needs to focus more seriously on research for teaching and training of career civil servants rather than undertaking Livelihood based development research. At the most, NIAR could be given resources for organizing peer learning workshops especially for DPC/ Collectors. Though MGNREGA is anchored in the decentralized administration of PRIs, the role of career civil servants especially District Collectors better known as District Program Coordinators (DPC) continues to be critical to the success of MGNREGA. (For a detailed report on NIAR, kindly refer to Annexure)

77

Though MoRD has now set up an Expert Group to recommend innovative methodologies for carrying our impact analysis, and commissioning impact analysis studies, there is urgent need for reforms of existing systems of evaluation and institutionalization of National Assessment or Evaluation System at the disposal of MoRD. The MGNREGA Technical Secretariat mainly provides administrativeprofessional support for the execution of MGNREGA as per the provisions of the Act. The Executive Committee of the Central Council is primarily an executive body engaged in giving directions to carry out the mandate of the Central Council. Barring some occasional and arbitrary impact analyses through PIN, there is no robust mechanism of continuous and comprehensive policy evaluation or appraisal of the implementation of MGNREGA at the state level. As they are mostly involved in the training programmes and providing logistic support to various programmes of Rural Development, NIRD and SIRD have also not done more than lip-service to the needs of policy analysis of MGNREGA. Given the scale, reach and significance of MGNREGA in transforming the lives of poor and altering the meaning of social sector, an independent policy evaluation and research service is urgently required for MoRD. Approach of PERS: Supported by existing mechanism of field-research based studies of PIN (Professional Institutional Network,) PERS would encourage interdisciplinary research methodologies in its framework of policy evaluation and analysis. The Book Series, Occasional Papers, Special Reports, Policy Briefs and Working Papers (published periodically) would present substantial research findings on data, methodological, and conceptual issues related to the implementation of MGNREGA. PERS would continue to use PINs network for commissioning research from independent researchers, collaborators, and partner institutions (Universities, Social Science Institute, IITs/IIMs etc) across the country. This will link governmental and non-governmental efforts in areas of policy research for MGNREGA and also give credence to research studies undertaken by PIN. Location of PERS: It should ideally be located in the proposed branch of NIRD in Jaipur (Rajasthan). Headed by eminent persons from academia, development sector, civil society, and bureaucrats having experience in social sector, PERS would be functionally independent and may be registered as an autonomous society within the purview of MoRD. Or alternatively, PERS could be conceptualized as a dedicated division of Research and Evaluation in the Technical Secretariat of MGNREGA in MoRD. Ideally, this should be headed by eminent scholars/researchers from academia, development sector and civil society. Structure of PERS: PERS will be composed of three units (or sections); namely Independent Evaluation or Impact Assessment Unit that will focus on various implementing aspects including impact analysis and appraisal of MGNREGA. Second, Research and Analysis Unit will be a new avatar of current PIN (Professional Institutional Network) for commissioning, guiding, and coordinating studies from a network of universities, social science institutes, and civil society organizations for fostering public-private partnership in the monitoring and evaluation of MGNREGA. Third unit will be Publication &Communication Unit. This will be primarily responsible for publishing Policy Briefs, Occasional Papers, Special Reports, Working Papers, documentaries, short films etc. for effective and transparent dissemination of information and setting the stage for informed dialogue between people and the government about the implementation of MGNREGA.

78

Functions of PERS ---- It will provide critical policy research support to crucial areas of improving delivery systems, innovation, convergence and social audit in the implementation of MGNREGA. It will act like a think tank or policy hub for incubation of research and analysis support to key stakeholders of MGNREG. In short, it will provide privatepublic interface in the assessment/evaluation of MGNREGA. ---- It will assist the Central Council and MGNREGA Technical Secretariat of MoRD by conducting independent research, review, appraisal, monitoring and evaluation of the implementing of MGNREGA for better policy feedback, impact analysis and innovation in course correction strategies. -- It will operationally facilitate institutionalizing consortium approach of MoRD as reflected/articulated in PIN (Professional Institutional Network). In other words, PERS will formulate appropriate research methodologies and also commission studies from the network of PIN. Additionally, PERS will also provide knowledge support to NIRD and SIRDs in areas of training and capacity building. In short, PERS is proposed as National Resource Support System for implementation and monitoring of MGNREGA. ------ For greater public participation or what we call institutionalization of epistemic community in the development discourses, PERS will also encourage and assist MoRD to support setting up Centres for excellence in Rural Development/Livelihood and endowment of professorial chair/fellowship in the universities and research institutions. A beginning could be made from Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh, known for best practices in the implementation of MGNREGA, in 2010-11.

PART-II INNOVATIONS IN RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES FOR EVALUATION

Consider following propositions for innovation in methodologies for research& evaluation:

1. Livelihood Security ; Voice, participation and equity in MGRNEGA

Participation of labourers under MGNREGA, ( the opening of work) often takes place under command and sovereign authority of bureaucratic power that places responsibility of participation (or burden of participation) on the "participants" as in most cases Panchayats collaborate/cooperate/collude with authoritative power rather than people, especially poor. In other words, transactions costs are structurally biased against poor, more so if they remain unorganized and ill (under)-informed. Therefore, the idea of Livelihood Security as mentioned in the preface of the Act needs to given analytical anchorage in the evaluation studies because it has inspired not only a facile dichotomous analysis in terms of wage

79

security vs creation of assets but also a growing schizophrenia in the current practices of evaluation analysis/or appraisal science that refuses to assign any value, normative or empirical, to the idea of autonomous self or agency in realization of the goals of MGNREGA. The voice (heard or unheard) and Will (general or insurgent) of the labourers, both as individual agent of change and also collective action, cannot be captured unless there exists a clearly defined robust and dynamic syncretic index of Livelihood Security which looks not only at income generation, migration, financial inclusion, social capital, infrastructural development etc. but also interrogates starvation deaths, extent of destitution, layers of exclusion, transparency, accountability, equity, voice, participation and justice etc as markers/ indicators of success or failure of MGNREGA.
2. As we all know that the differences between quantitative and qualitative research

methodologies are neither natural nor man-made; they are basically rooted in the difference between styles and specific techniques as both apply a unified logic of inference. (King, Keohane & Verba; 1994). Quantitative research uses numbers and statistical methods where as qualitative research refers to case study based interpretive methods (ethnographic-historical or discursive). As we propose a propoor hermeneutic turn, we wish to reject the so-called bifurcation of research methodologies into quantitative-systematic-generalizing branch and qualitative-humanistic- discursive branch for the purpose of analysis and interpretation (ala Clifford Gertz) of the impact of MGNREGA.
3. It is important to note that selection of Research Methodologies (RM) depends

largely on the nature of the policy intervention being evaluated. Therefore, it is important to build research methodologies in the program/scheme from the beginning rather than treat them as stand-alone evaluation or assessment decided by arbitrary bureaucratic fiats. The organic grounding of Research Methodologies (RM) will allow policy makers, government, operational staff and management to focus on variables that are of long term use to implementers and also allow for mid-course correction in the policy. Therefore, though randomized evaluations are popular (because of their high internal validity ), we should not ignore the importance of interpretive methodologies that map human motivations, contingencies and reversals in hierarchies of power.
4. We all know that quantitative methodologies have more secular and rigorous

requirements in terms of data collation and analysis . Therefore, attempts need to be made for normalization of existing data. For example, MGRNEGA website has generated so much crude data (the collection and posting of data on the site has not been perfect as Prof. Dreze has observed in his various analyses/reports on MGRNEGA) but without much rigorous analysis. We often hear success stories in terms of person days at the aggregate level but rarely hear about the fate of disaggregated data. In other words, we need to develop methodologies to capture variation in time and space and also different sectors. Though many sophisticated mathematical models and statistical techniques are available in social science research, but their application needs to be kept to minimum for the sake of equity and access as digital divide or cyberspace inequality has a serious implication for the participation of poor in the employment guarantee program.

80 5. Participatory Actions Research Methodologies such as Participatory Rural

Appraisal (PRA ala Robert Chambers), Process Documentation, Barrier Analysis, etc. need to be used with more calibrated and critical case studies as several approaches of traditional participatory research have increasingly been challenged. Similarly, monitoring and evaluation methodologies for MGNREGA need to look into some of the popular accountability tools such as participatory budgeting/planning, public expenditure tracking, citizen monitoring of public service delivery, citizen advisory boards, community score card, development compact etc. for developing a people-centric methodology for evaluation. The voice of the participant needs to be articulated not as subject but as proactive agent of change. Much could be learnt from practices of Neighbourhood Groups or Self-Help Groups. Therefore, local cultural resources such as traditions of dance-drama could be re-invented as an analytical tool in the assessment of MGNREGA and giving voice to the poor.
6. One of the serious shortcomings in the current system of appraisal or evaluation

is lack of Comparative Case Studies as it is quite known that some states have performed better than others. Using latest advances in comparative methodologies such as Event Structure analysis, path dependency analysis etc., cumulative insights could be gathered about the differential impact and also nature of social policy regimes in implementing MGNREGA. (Kohli, 1991; O Connor, 1993). The performance of MGNREGA has varied not only in terms of inter-sectoral dimensions but also has been impacted by changes in the policy regimes both at the centre and also states.
7. Considering the growing significance of MGNREGA in the country, it would be

useful to consider the feasibility of deploying future research methodologies such as forecasting and scenario analysis. Since both methods look at the future course of direction of a policy, forecasting proposes to predict the facets/contours of the future by presenting a set of estimates and their likelihood of becoming reality. In contrast, a scenario is more of a story, a plausible description that presents a series of causal links illustrating decisions and consequences of a policy. (Glenn and Gordon 2003) Though it seems premature to privilege any particular methods for forecasting future of MGNREGA, it may be useful to try out modified Delphi methods (with structured group of labourers, not experts), SWOT and PEST (political, economic, social and technological) analysis, for generating a consensus model for assessing group communication processes involved in the implementation of MGNREGA.
8. Additionally, methodologies for assessment or impact analysis need to consider

factors such as attrition, (many labourers in places like Bihar, Orissa continue to migrate to high paying labour markets) spill overs ( the effect of MGNREGA on improved agricultural activities), noncompliance, contamination etc., for a more accurate assessment of the impact of the policy.
9. It would also be good to devise a different set of indicators or variables for

assessing the impact of MGNREGA in Left Wing Extremism affected areas. In such areas a diagnostic tool kit may be prepared for energizing the implementation of MGNREGA. Secondly, regions having unique climatic, topographical and social conditions such as North East, Leh etc., require a differentiated approach for developing suitable research methodologies.

81 10. The members of Working Group noticed during their group and individual field

visits in states like Bihar, Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Kerala, Assam, and Meghalaya, that unless mobilized by civil society/ community based organizations in the villages, MGNREGA labourers generally lack the capacity for social mobilization due to multiple deprivations of class, caste and gender. They often suffer from systematic exclusion of their voices from the Gram Sabha, a key element in the architecture of MGNREGA implementation. (This may be corroborated by various monitoring reports of MoRD and also independent civil society reports) This invariably results in the syndrome of capture of MGNREGA by dominant interests in the village society. Since the dominant perceptive on Capacity Building revolves around issues of personnel development, staffing patterns, and training, poor labourers get left high and dry, often without any capacity whatsoever for resolution of dilemmas of collective action. Therefore, rather than wasting time and resources on so-called studies on Social Capital, PIN studies need to focus on various kinds of transactions costs and asymmetries that inhibit the social mobilization of labourers. 11. Given the shortage of trained-quality cadre and lack of skill development in Rural Development and Voluntary sector, the Working Group strongly suggests that MoRD should seriously consider recognising a one-year diploma course on MGNREGA, conducted by government and non-government training institutions spread across the country to build capacity. The proposed PERS at NIRD (Jaipur) needs to be involved in identifying eminent institutes of Social Sciences, IITs, and Agricultural Universities for running courses on Rural Development/ Rural Management/ Development Studies/ Social Entrepreneurship /Social Audit etc. to bridge the gap between demand and supply of Staff and personnel for implementing programs like MGNREGA. Necessary resource support for this could be made available from the Administrative costs of MGRNEGA.

82

CHAPTER V CAPACITY BUILDING REFORMS FOR STRENGTHENING PANCHAYATI RAJ

Panchyati Raj and MGNREGA: Capacity Building reforms for PRIs

The Panchayats at district, intermediate and village levels are the principal authorities for the planning and implementation of NREGA under Section 13 of the Act. The main responsibilities of PRIs are outlined in the Sections 13 to 17 (salient features at Annex. I). It is worth recalling here that (i) at least 50 percent of NREGA funds are to be spent directly by the Gram Panchayats (GPs), (ii) the Gram Sabhas (GSs) are to recommend specific projects to the GPs and conduct social audit of NREGA works, (iii) the District Programme Coordinators and Programme Officers are to assist the District and Intermediate Panchayats respectively in the discharge of their functions. These features of NREGA offer a unique opportunity to strengthen and enable PRIs, particularly the GPs and GSs. The rejuvenated and enabled Panchayats, in turn, can become powerful instruments in making NREGA a great success. It is generally seen that States with vibrant and optimally sized Panchayats with requisite manpower have implemented MGNREGA better. For instance, the success of MGRNEGA in Rajasthan is positively correlated with the success of Panchayats in ushering in a new era of decentralization of power which is also turbocharged by new forms of associational energy and public activism. But it is worth recalling here that while panchayats are the primary planning and implementation agency for the NREGS, but they are often overburdened without requisite capacity to implement various development programs. There are more than 200 central schemes for rural areas and panchayats have to implement over three-fourths of them. Additionally, the Bharat Nirman programme has a component to be implemented through panchayats. The Backward Regions Grant Fund (BRGF) is also to be implemented by panchayats alone. In a sample study done in Madhya Pradesh and Karnataka, the World Bank found that, on average, a village sarpanch or official has to keep track of 470 accounts and deal with 17 line departments involving 50 officials. Not only Panchayats are overburdened and understaffed but their critical deliberative and delivery institutions are also not functioning optimally and effectively. The working group has observed in its field visits in states that Gram Sabha rarely meets and occasionally performs its assigned statutory functions in the Act. Therefore, a better symbiosis between the NREGs and PRIs offers a unique opportunity to strengthen & enable PRIs with necessary manpower and infrastructure and in turn the enabled PRIs can become more powerful instrument in making the Mahatma Gandhi NREGA a much better success. The Working Group, based on the field visits and also interactions with key stakeholders that include Ministry of Panchyati Raj, would like to suggest some

83

policy steps for more effective integration of PRIs in the implementing architecture of MGRNEGA; 1. Converting PRIs into Mission Mode: Panchayat Empowerment & Accountability Incentive Scheme of MoPR ( Ministry of Panchyati Raj) may be made an integral part of the Mission. 2. Following Maharashtra Experience, state governments need to make six meetings of Gram Sabha as mandatory for enhancing the implementation of MGNREGA. Necessary amendments in the Constitution may be made in this regard. 3. For activation of Gram Sabha, Self-help groups of women may be given a salutatory role by state governments; the meeting of Mahila Groups must precede the meeting of Gram Sabha. Since MoPR (GoI) has already declared 2010 as the Year of Gram Sabha, we recommend adopting a campaign mode of activation of Gram Sabha with the help of leading civil society groups in a select panchayats in the country. An Expert groups needs to be formed to formulate the moblizational strategy in this regard. 4. Borrowing from Kerala experience, a campaign mode of decentralization must accompany the implementation of MGRNEGA in various states. Either transfer cadre (Kerala model) or create a new cadre for PRI( Bihar model): Learning from Kerala experience, the Working Group suggests that even while the State Government is the staff-creating and cadre-controlling authority, PRIs need to have full freedom in assigning work, supervising its execution, reviewing performance and even imposing minor punishments, if required. In future there should not be any permanent recruitment by the State Govt. for panchayati raj cadre. Instead Gram Panchayat needs to hire local cadre on contractual basis. On successful completion of contract for 3-5 years, local cadre will become eligible for permanent Govt. employee in future. A proper HR policy must back these measures. 5. Social Audit and participatory planning from MGNREGA could be used for enhancing financial and social accountability through due process in budgeting, transparency in decision making, particularly in selection of beneficiaries and in expenditures and mandatory reporting of performance to constituents. 6. Urgent steps need be taken to deploy essential staff such as Accountants, Gram Rozgar Sewaks, Barefoot Engineers, Data Entry Operators, Coordinators for social audit and grievance redressal etc. according to the need/size/terrain etc. of the Panchayats; MGNREGA Staff need not to be used as proxy staff for Panchayats but as supplemental support systems. 7. Role clarity: Key GP functionaries should be familiarized with their roles and responsibilities along with precise accountability. This may be facilitated through clear Job Charts. A system of modest honorarium and travel expenses need to be considered for representatives of PRIs. This can be financed from levy of local taxes by PRI. 8. Technical Manuals: Technical manuals for MGNREGA works need to be developed in a user-friendly format to facilitate GPs and GSs in the planning and implementation of Act. Some useful technical booklets, films, posters,

84

etc., have already been developed by reputed NGOs such as PRADAN and Samaj Pragati Sahayog. The manuals prepared by MKKS and Right to Food Activists may also be used for MGNREGA.

9. Media(Electronic and print) and Community Radio: Rural newspapers such as Khabar Lahariya, run by women in places like Chitrakoot and Banda districts of Uttar Pradesh needs to be given special support for promoting awareness about the employment guarantee Program by MoPR and MoRD.. Similarly, community radio and community video volunteers need to be used for monitoring and social audit of MGNREGA. Technical and financial support to promote rural media needs to be supported under the administrative expenses and states need to be given flexibility to rely on local, indigenous resources.

85

CHAPTER VI

CAPACITY BUILDING REFORMS FOR TRAINING

A. The Present Status of Training 1. The list of stake holders currently being imparted training is not inclusive. 2. There exists variation in the contents, methodology, duration, expected outcome and available physical infrastructure in training programmes of MGNREGA across states in India. (Example: Kerala, AP, NE States, Bihar, Rajasthan, Maharashtra). 3. Although, some of these variations can be explained in terms of different nature of institutions and stakeholders involved, level of social moblization and presence of regional specificities yet a good amount of variation is due to unnecessarily differently designed course contents and delivery mechanisms. 4. In all the states, most of the stakeholders of NREGA including DPCs, ADPCs, POs, Line Officers, Zilla Parishad Heads, Panchayat Samiti Chairmen, Gram Panchayat Heads, Civil Society Members do not realize that NREGA is meant to be an effective process of rural development but not an end in itself in the form of wage employment. They fail to understand that NREGA is an effective intervention in contemporary rural development practice. This failure in understanding, leads to consider NREGA as simply a wage employment programme. 5. There is no bench marking of course contents and institutional capability, identification and preparation of a list of trainers and experts at national, regional and sub-regional levels. 6. Training Needs Assessment for different stakeholders has not been undertaken.

B. Following are some of the general recommendations;

A dedicated division in MoRD for looking after the training needs of various development programmes of MoRD. Further, MoRD could identify eminent social workers, academics and policy makers as National Fellow and place them either in NIRD/SIRDs or Universities/ Social Science Institutes for strengthening the training and skill development of communities from the civil society and government.

86

MGNREGA division of MoRD urgently needs to set up an Expert Group to identify the training gaps and shortcomings for strengthening the implementation of Act. The ToR of the Expert group needs to cover NIRD and SIRDs as well as SIRDs are in most places are imparting mechanically and almost dysfunctionally without any input from latest research and analysis. The Expert group also needs to identify eminent institutes of national repute for placing key officials and staff for training and skill development. For urgent need of communitization of capacity building, MoRD needs to declare people based rural development centres in Ralegaon Siddhi, MKKS in Vijaypura, SPS(MP), Vilasrao Salunkhe (Pani-baba)s experiments in Purandhar block in Pune, Subhas Palekars Zero budget agriculture in Amaravati and various similar innovative experiments across the country as National Centres for excellence for Community Learning for imparting training in rural development. MoRD also needs to benefit from an innovative public and civil society partnership model in which voluntary organizations, foundations and social science research institutes, IITs, IIMs etc. provide continuous and comprehensive learning. CAPART needs to be made more proactive in communitization of training pedagogy, tools and course contents; CAPART could easily undertake the exercise of identifying leading, credible and innovative civil society organizations or voluntary organizations involved in the development of rural India. This can be done by the National Standing Committee of EC members of CAPART. The whole net work of Nehru Yuvak Kendras which can be used for awareness generation, planning and training in MGNREGA remain stuck in some cosmetic works of youth development. This trend needs to be reversed by convergence between Nehru Yuvak Kendras and MoRD. Based on visits and interactions with key officials and researchers at NIRD, SIRD (Rajasthan/ Bihar/ Guwahati) and KILA (Kerala), the Working Group recommends NIRD (Hyderabad) to undertake urgent reforms for restructuring the existing institutional and management processes . NIRD indeed could provide excellent logistic and coordination support and create congenial support systems for debate and discussion but it seriously lacks quality research environment. This will not happen unless NIRD is gradually freed from excessive bureaucratic control and given more academic freedom for introducing innovative course contents and teaching tools through new perspectives on participatory and inclusive rural development. For management reforms, NIRD could learn a lot from KILA model in Kerala. Given the vast resources and faculty available at its disposal, NIRD could easily transition into a full-fledged institution for imparting training to officials involved in the implementation of various flagships programs of rural development (MGNREGA, NRLM etc.) Since MoRD has already formed an Expert Group they consider reforms for NIRD (Hyderabad), the Working Group would prefer to wait for the report of the Expert Group.

87

The proposed chapter of NIRD at Jaipur needs to be declared a dedicated National Institute of Rural Development for fulfilling the goals of MGNREGA and NRLM (National Rural Livelihood Mission) by undertaking the tasks of research, impact analysis, training and advocacy services. Jaipur chapter of NIRD should ideally be designed as Policy Hub for Innovations(PHI) in rural development in India. As the exclusive focus on courses and programmes in various aspects of Rural Development and Management has been missing in the current architecture of university education in India, the Working Group recommends MoRD to urgently set up an Expert group to examine of the feasibility of incubating new courses and studies in the university system. . Overhauling of training ethos and contents: Most of the stakeholders of MGNREGA including workers, GP functionaries, officers and officials at the block level consider NREGA as a wage employment programme. However, MGNREGA is now focused to be an effective intervention in contemporary development practice. To recast NREGA in the developmental canvas, we suggest that the important stakeholders of the programme be imparted a short course on The Theory and Practice of Development and NREGA. The course should have some (i) elements of development theory that includes current thinking on development( like sustainable development, participation, social capital creation through mobilization, capability expansion of individuals and communities and role of institutions (ii) an understanding of development practice that relate and flow from these theories including role of democratic decentralization, (iii) an explanation of how NREGA is an intervention in contemporary development practice and finally (iv) an understanding of the dynamics of rural development through MGNREGA that provide insight to read and rewrite the theory and practice of rural development. The essential investigation of the course should be to link up MGNREGA with capability enhancement, sustainable development , social mobilization and participation. Four national level training Institutes in four regions: The Working Group feels the necessity of identifying four national level institutes in four regions of the country for organizing training and workshops on NREGS for DPCs, ADPCs, Zilla Parishad Presidents/chairmen, senior civil society members, Ombudsmen, senior journalists and other elected representatives like MPs and MLAs. Since NIRDs have their branches in Hyderabad, Guwahati, Patna and Jaipur (Upcoming), we feel that the Hyderabad branch can accommodate participants from Southern and Eastern states, Guwahati branch can accommodate participants from all the North eastern states, Jaipur branch can cater to participants from western regions and Patna branch can accommodate participants from northern and central states. However, NIRDs need to overhaul their infrastructure, course contents, and faculty

88

competence. As Patna NIRD is hardly functional so efforts need to be taken up for revamping the existing architecture of NIRD. Strengthening of SIRDs; SIRDs can conduct training programmes, workshops, brainstorming sessions on NREGS for other stake holders . However, they need to be strengthened in terms of physical infrastructure, faculty number and core competence. Their existing ETCs also need to be strengthened and more ETCs need to be established. Use of ICT like videoconferencing should be encouraged. Preparation of Register of national level experts in NREGS training: A list of national level eminent subject experts on NREGS can be prepared by NIRDs/NREGS Cell of MORD and the same can be displayed in the website of these institutes/MORD along with the detailed contact addresses of them. Similar exercise can be done at the state and regional level by the SIRDs/NREGS cell of State Governments.

C: Following are some of the specific recommendations: 1. Need to expand the list of stakeholders for training: (a) Government Functionaries: DPCs, Additional DPCs, Programme Officers, Additional Programme officers, Police Officers, Officers of line departments like agriculture, horticulture, tourism, irrigation, soil conservation, forests , Assistant Engineers, junior engineers, block Panchayat secretary, secretaries of Gram Panchayat. (b) Elected Representatives and Members of PRIs : MPs, MLAs, Zilla Parishad chairman, Panchayat Samiti chairperson, Gram Panchayat heads like sarpanch, members of Panchayat Samiti/block Panchayat, Members of Gram Panchayat, Members of Gram Sabha. (c) Technical Staff working and would be working under NREGS : TA, Gramrojgar Sahayak, Accredited Engineers, Data Entry Operators and Accounts Assistants/Accountants, Mate etc. (d) Representatives of Civil Society: NGOs, Vigilance and Monitoring committee members, Self Help Groups, Neighbourhood Groups, social audit professionals. (e) Ombudsmen 2 Model Training Module for District Programme Coordinators (This is a model training module for DPCs. Same modules can be prepared for other stake holders in MGNREGA)

89

Objective To sensitize the participants the relevance and potential of MGNREGA in development perspective in general and rural development perspective in particular. To understand the requirements, components, processes of planning, implementation and monitoring of MGNREGS. Expected Outcome

The training programme would enable the participants to

Contextualize MGNREGA in the current development theory and practice Understand the role of DPC in management of the programme both in its processes and outcomes. Ensure convergence of development schemes, minds and skills Handle MIS for effective data management and monitoring of NREGS Understand the role, use and importance of ICT in asset management in NREGA Appreciate the importance of NREGS in ensuring good governance Understand the details of management of finance, people, pragramme processes and outcomes. Content Details

1. NREGS as an effective intervention in contemporary development practice (a) Evolution of the concept of development as theory and practice from economic growth to sustainable development. Concepts and practices in capability expansion, sustainable development, participation, mobilisation and empowerment. (b) Evolution of economic system, agents of development and mechanism of resource allocation in the context of development theory and practice. (c) Linking these concepts and practices with rural development theory and practice. (d) Genesis and evolution of Rural Development models and practices in developing countries including India

90

(e) NREGS as a contemporary rural development practice in Livelihood security. (f) Evolution and appraisal of wage employment programmes in India (g) NREGS from programme to Act

2. NREGS and its relevance for the state of -------

3. NREGS Process (a) Understanding the provisions of NREG Act, with respect to demand for work, job card availability, workers entitlements, institutions involvement in its planning, implementation and evaluation. (b) Preparation of scientific district perspective plan for NREGS, labour budgeting, demand forecasting in the light of the seasonality of jobs, cultural and social practices of the people etc. 4. Convergence of works and schemes in NREGS Identifying the works, schemes, departments , officers and officials for convergence and exploring the possibility for convergence in meetings of the district planning committees. 5. Role of DPC in management of the programme both in its processes and outcomes. (a) Duties and responsibilities of DPC under the act. (b) DPC and sound management practices with respect to planning, implementing and monitoring of NREGS processes and outcomes.

6. MIS and NREGS monitoring (a) Why data management in NREGS? (b) MIS and NREGS-An Overview (c) Areas of process monitoring and MIS (d) District level appraisal and monitoring mechanism.

7. Use of ICT in Asset Management in NREGS.

91

(a) Importance of ICT in asset management (b) Potential of ICT use in asset management

8. Good Governance and NREGS (a) NREGS and Transparency (b) NREGS and Accountability (c ) NREGS and public vigilance (d) NREGS and Social Audit (e) NREGS and Ombudsman

9. Management of Finance and people (a) Funds Flow in NREGS (b) Sectoral utilization (c ) On line reporting (d) Deployment of people in NREGS (d) Reporting in NREGS-monthly and Annual

92

CHAPTER VII CAPACITY BUILDING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NORTH EAST The Northeast The North Eastern Region of India includes the eight sister states of Arunachal, Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Tripura, and a recent entrant, Sikkim. It has a landmass of 2.62 lakh sq. km that covers 7.9 per cent of the total area of the country. The total population of 39 lakh (2001 census) accounts for 3.8 per cent of the countrys total population. About 70 per cent of the region is hilly, and the topography varies within each state. Mountains and hills cover most of Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Sikkim and about half of Tripura, one-fifth of Assam and nine-tenth of Manipur. The economy of the region reflects its backwardness with 56 per cent of workers engaged in agriculture as per census 2001. The region is industrially very backward with the contribution of this sector being less than 3 per cent in all the states, except for Assam and Manipur where it is 12 per cent and 8 per cent respectively. The poverty level in the region is among the highest in the country with the percentage of population below poverty line in the states ranging from 36 to 29 per cent4, compared to the all India average of 26 per cent. The region is also characterized by low per- capita income, low capital formation, inadequate infrastructure facilities, geographical isolation and communication bottlenecks, and higher unemployment rate . The level of agriculture productivity is very low with a large section of the farmers, especially in the upland areas engaged in shifting cultivation. In both the periods i.e. 1980s and 1990s, the average growth in NSDP for the north eastern region as a whole, has been lower than the all India average. In 1990s the situation has even worsened. Whereas for the country as a whole, the average growth rate has marginally increased from 5.5 in 1980s to 5.8 in 1990s, for the north eastern region, it has decreased from 4.4 to 3.6 during the same period. The situation has grossly deteriorated in Assam. Except for Arunachal and Tripura, in all other states, growth rates in NSDP have not exhibited any difference during the last 20 years.Inequality in the north eastern region as measured by the Gini coefficient, has increased for the period from 1993-94 to 1999-

93

2000(Panda:2010). What worries one is the fact that this inequality has increased during this period in all the north-eastern states except Meghalaya. The fact that the primary sector contributes close to one third of the GSDP and in terms of employment to more than half of the workers, strengthens the belief that there is disguised unemployment and underemployment in the rural sector of the economy.

Thus, considering this high degree of underdevelopment manifested in poverty, inequality, disguised unemployment and underemployment, environmental exploitation, the necessity to initiate a programme like NREGS was all the more necessary in this region.

It has been more than four years that phase-I of NREGA have come in to effect in the region. Since this programme is comprehensive both in terms of its coverage and explicit and implicit objectives, and initial appraisal of its process of implementation and the extent, nature , productivity and sustainability of its outcome(Panda:2009), inter alia, brings up the issue of capacity deficiency at different levels as one of the limiting factors for the overall success of the programme; a comprehensive understanding of the capacity issues in MGNREGA in the North East is all the more important and pertinent.

Capacity Deficiency in MGNREGA in North East

Deficiency in capacity is found in all the three levels i.e. (i) Individual stakeholders(workers, govt. officers and officials, PRI functionaries, functionaries of officials created under act in the absence of PRI system, neighbourhood functionaries etc.), (ii) community and (iii) institutions involved in implementation and monitoring of this programme. Often the deficiency in one of these stakeholders affects the other and vice-versa. For example, capacity deficiency in institutions leads to capacity deficiency in individual stakeholders and community and viceversa. Hence, in the North-East, there exists a low level circle of capacity deficiency in rural development programmes in general and MGNREGA in particular. These low capacity bases in these three levels act and react upon each other keeping the

94

overall level of capacity in MGNREGA delivery in the region in a perpetual state of underdevelopment. To be specific these deficiencies manifest in the front of manpower availability, training institutions, capability of the institutions to undertake and impart training, training modules, institutional capacity to mobilize workers, PRIs and their functionaries, civil society, governance and leadership.

Manifestation of Capacity Deficiency: Some Facts Individual awareness about the programme details is not comprehensive. A Quick appraisal of NREGA in the state of Meghalaya undertaken by Panda in 2009 shows that 45% of the workers (stakeholder-I), 35% of the AEC and VEC Members (stakeholder-II), 40% of the Third party (stake holder-III) are not aware of the basic provisions of MGNREGA. This study also further highlights that (i) half of the workers surveyed in a study area did not specify their required demand of employment, (ii) Forty percent (40%) of the workers agreed to the fact that the job card was not issued to them within 15 days of their application, (iii) On an average 76.25 % of the workers opined that they did not get work with in 5 km range of their village. According to stakeholder II, (i) in 40% of the cases Gram Panchayat does not issue receipt of the application, (ii) 50% of the Vigilance and Monitoring Committee members are not be trained regarding NREGA and (iii) about 89% of the mates and 13% of Gram Rozgar Sewaks recruited have not undergone any formal training on NREGA (iv) in 15 percent of cases, works in progress are not being technically supervised regularly, (v)19 % of the work completed are not recorded in the Asset Register, (vi) Gram Rozgar Sewak is not available for each Village/Dorbar, (vii) payment to workers is not made trough banks and post offices, (viii) There is the absence of PRI institutions in some of the NE states like Meghalaya and Arunachal Pradesh.

Capacity Deficiency in Training:

95

The visit of the working group to the North East and its interaction with various stakeholders(minutes of it are given in Appendix-) brought out the deficiency in training institutes, spread of these institutes, training modules in NREGA very clearly. NIRD-NERC which is located in Guwahati runs with only four regular faculties including its Director. It does not have enough in-campus residential facility to accommodate participants. In the absence of accomplished faculties in adequate numbers with appropriate physical infrastructure, senior functionaries in NREGA like state secretaries, DPCs, ADPCs are not interested to have their training undertaken there. Further, the course modules for senior functionaries in NREGA deal more with NREGA Process monitoring and management devoid of the required understanding of the philosophy and theory of rural development and the role of NREGA therein. SIRDs too suffer from same deficiency in faculty, supporting staff; concept ,management and understanding of the theory and practice of NREGA.

To overcome these deficiencies, we suggest strengthening, streamlining and mainstreaming the faculty strength, infrastructure and training modules respectively of NIRD-NERC, Guwahati and all the SIRDs in the region. Large states like Arunachal Pradesh should open more extension centres of SIRDs in three different regions of the state. We also suggest better networking of these SIRDs with their extension centres and with NIRD Guwahati through video conferencing etc. Power cut is a problem in interior regions of North East. These remotely located power deficient SIRDs and their extension centres must be equipped with alternative sources of power like solar power and DG Sets. The expenditure undertaken on this head can be met from the administrative cost of the rural developmental programmes including MGNREGA. Most of the stakeholders of NREGA including workers, GP functionaries, officers and officials at the block level do not realize that NREGA is meant to be an effective process of development but not an end in itself in the form of wage employment. To make it happen, we suggest that these important stakeholders of the programme particularly the programme officers (BDOs) be imparted a short course on The Theory and Practice of Development and NREGA. The course should have some (i) elements of development theory that includes current thinking on

96

development( like sustainable development, participation and role of institutions (ii) an understanding of development practice that relate and flow from these theories including role of democratic decentralization, (iii) an explanation of how NREGA is an intervention in development practice and finally (iv) an understanding of the dynamics of rural development through NREGA that provide insight to read and rewrite the theory and practice of rural development in the context of the North East. The essential investigation of the course should be to link up NREGA with capability enhancement, sustainable development and participation in the region.

Capacity Deficiency in Mobilisation of Workers In the NE Region, there is absence of institutions like strong civil society or grass root NGOs to effectively mobilize and empower workers. However, the SHG movement is slowly but steadily gaining ground. Hence we suggest better coordination between SGSY and NREGA and explore the SHG route of mobilising workers in NREGA.

Capacity Building and Social Audit Concept of social audit is new to some parts of the people of the North East and often runs in to problems because of age old cultural practices and community ethos in the north eastern region. However, as social audit is mandatory in MGNREGA, we suggest social audit workshops to be preceded social audit exercise and be undertaken at village, block and district levels to reassure the people that it is not a fault finding system rather a system of transparency, certification and inclusion. Once the acceptability of social audit been established, initially this exercise can be undertaken by reputed organisations like MKSS and afterwards can be passed on to regional organisations of credibility, import and expertise. Integration of substitute Institutions of PRI with indigenous/traditional institutions and their capability Expansion. The North Eastern region does not have PRIs in place in many NER sates like Meghalaya and Arunachal Pradesh. They have their indigenous/traditional

97

institutions like the Durbar and Gaon Budha System. Bringing in PRI-proxies by legislation and integrating them with the traditional institutions and power structure in the context of NREGA is a bigger challenge. The substitute of PRI framework that has been introduced in states like of Meghalaya through MREGS is in its infancy. The members of the AEC(Area Employment Council) and VECs(Village Employment Council) need to be continuously provided trainings on the necessity, practices, procedures, objectives and achievements of PRI institutions and their relevance for a movement and programme like NREGS. A short course Rural Development and NREGA needs to be tailor-made for this category of stakeholders that should incorporate elements and practices on democratic decentralization, rural development and NREGA.

Capacity Building for Financial Inclusion Financial inclusion is limited because of thin spread of banks/post offices. The topography and cultural practices of people also contribute to it. To overcome the topographical compulsions, we suggest the introduction of bike-cum-barefoot satellite banking system by the postal department/banks. The postal department is undertaking innovative expansion in its activities. We find that in states like Meghalaya home delivery of letters/documents are not undertaken in remote rural areas. This is the right time that a model like bike-cum- barefoot satellite banking (with biometric cards) with postal article delivery can be combined by the postal department and the job can be undertaken by the modern postman. This delivery, collection of postal articles along with banking can be undertaken in remote areas twice in a week. Further, the postal department being a government organisation has the trust of the people, unlike other small private players. Capacity Building in Awareness and Dissemination:

One of the reasons for poor awareness about NREGA in North East particularly with workers is because of non-availability or limited availability of literature on MGNREGA in local languages because of limited and or poor translation in to local languages. We suggest here that SIRDs of respective states, can be given a project

98

to identify the major languages of their states, collaborate with the local linguistic departments of respective universities and can get efficient translation done for dissemination of MGNREGA material. Absence of technical people to be employed as technical assistants: To overcome the problem of shortage of technical Assistant, in addition to having a HR policy in place in MGNREGA and increasing remuneration associated with this post, the authorities can recruit local youths with class XII pass certificates and train them for two/three months by the government engineers of the district/block/divisions and then employ them for measurement and technical supervision of NREGA works. Capacity Building and Ombudsman Many of the NER States except Assam and Tripura, do not find enough candidates for the position of Ombudsman. Where ever, they are available, the list is heavy with retired bureaucrats only. To overcome this problem, to make the selection inclusive and to strengthen this institution, the required 20 years experience may be reduced to 15 years so that we get candidates from the civil society, as in many states civil society is of recent origin including separation of judiciary from executive. Capacity building and Convergence Existence of a pervasive culture of contractor raj in the North East is basically

exploitative on man and environment. This institution prevents convergence in NREGA as it fears its extinction if MGNREGA processes are bench marked for other departments and schemes. To realize the full potential of NREGA as a process of rural development, convergence of schemes, skills, and minds is a necessity. Ideally, we suggest the critical level at which the convergence should happen is the block. The head of the PRI at the block and the BDO are the institutions who command the respect of the other line officers. Although we feel that the BDOs are overburdened with other works, but considering NREGA to be central to rural development and the centrality of the institution of BDO in the block hierarchy, it is the best suited institution to promote convergence through commanding the services of other line officers. Any other separate institution created for NREGA implementation at the block level may

99

not command the respect as that of the BDO. Once the PRI institutions are strengthened, and become the central agency of rural development, the role of the BDO can be taken over by the PRI head at the block level. Till it happens, we suggest the strengthening of the institution of BDO in line with the model of the deputy commissioner at the district level with the creation of an institution of APO (Additional Programme Officer) who would be assisting the BDO in day to day activities in MGNREGA.

Capacity Building and Planning and Execution of MGNREGA work: The State Employment Guarantee Councils should be strengthened in line with the Central Employment Guarantee Council at the centre. To do so, the states in the region should induct men of integrity, capability, expertise in to the council who are apolitical in nature. Once this is done, the council should have its secretariat that can undertake the planning and monitoring work of MGNREGA by commissioning to undertake effective demand forecasting mechanism that takes in to account seasonality in jobs as seasonality in employment is an important issue in MGNREGA in this part of the country. MGNREGA Help Line No state in the region has a dedicated MGNREGA 24*7 help line. This should be immediately taken up and activated. In Passing The greatest asset of the NER region is its community centric living system in the rural areas particularly in the upland Hill Areas. This arrangement reduces information asymmetry and moral hazard in the implementation of developmental schemes making the cost, conflict and time-line of implementation of the programme significantly reduced. On the other hand the biggest challenge to implementation of MGNREGA is the typical cost, time and struggle associated with the geography and topography related factors. This brings us to the necessity of the use of innovative and appropriate modern technology in the form ICT, GPS etc. in reaching out to the tribal people. Let us maximize the impact of the capacity multiplier in MGNREGA in this region by adopting the required modern technology with a mindset that is not exploitative on men and material and free of rent seeking.

100

Chapter VIII

Conclusion: A New Era of Governance for MGNREGA!

Therefore, while we emphasise on governance, innovations, accountability and equity as key principles for new regime of capacity building, we also like to underline that MGNREGA needs to increasingly rely more on public-private partnership, better interorganizational processes, information technology, performance oriented incentive structures for human resources, more transparency in the social audit procedures, building quality human capital and supply bottom-up accountability to the public works. Emphasizing collaboration and empowerment rather than hierarchy and control, we focus on more proactive, transparent, equitous mechanisms of governance between various agencies located at the centre, state and panchayats. By suggesting a Mission Mode implementation system for states, we also recommend taking measures for making states as stakeholders in the key capacity building areas for deepening institutionalized trust and reciprocity between the Center and States for effective implementation and monitoring. Unless state governments, district administrations and Panchyati raj institutions develop long term stakes, the implementation of MGNREGA would continue to be suffering from distortions and deficits. There are those who marvel at the extent, depth and significance of MGNREGA, and there are also those who see it as fragile and inadequate in meeting the demands of durable human security and sustainable development. On balance, both optimists and cynics would agree that MGNREGA reveals more than it conceals about securing durable basis for livelihood security, transforming the lives of millions of poor and the rising participatory forms of democratic governance at multiple, overlapping social environments in the Indian Society. We are sure that with new governance reforms in place and innovative capacity building support systems available at all levels of implementation from the National to Gram Sabha level, MGNREGA has the potential to usher in what Jawaharlal Nehru evocatively called tryst with destiny, a destiny in which poor become game changers!

101

102

ANNEXURES

103

ANNEXURE I

STRATEGIES FOR CAPACITY BUILDING UNDER MGNREGA( A Note by NIRD(Prof. Hanumantha Rao)

The multiple stakeholders and astronomical numbers of stakeholders and multidimensionality of MGNREGA demand a well defined strategy to develop the capabilities of these stakeholders to perform the assigned tasks ably .The tentative estimate of the number of stakeholders (other than the millions of the worker households) is around seven millions (At present the coverage is about 1.5 to 2.0 millions). Further more, the socio-economic profiles of different stakeholders do vary considerably and there by the strategy should be innovative and multi-pronged. It also suggests that some of them need to be trained periodically so as to learn, practice, relearn and acquire the skills. The MGNREGA insists on participation, transparency and accountability which are (necessary conditions) indicators of good governance. The current strategy of capacity building through a network of training institutions has to be supplemented by a variety of non-formal training approaches. In fact, some of these training institutions are not well equipped (for quality delivery) more number of trainees and organsie some specialised programmes. Some of the faculty members of these institutions may need to be trained in participatory and other innovative training methods. Providing funds and (additional) staff in project mode may be worth considering in these cases. The present network should be extended to include reputed civil society organisations and implementers of successful projects. This four year old programme has been fraught with certain structural constraints leading to certain deficiencies. It is imperative that the CB strategy should be sensitive to the current and emerging challenges in planning and execution of MGNREGS. Given the magnitude of task, the training priorities have to be laid down both with respect to themes and (key) functionaries need to be identified and trained to make the MGNREGS more effective. The District Programme Coordinator (DPC) / CEO of ZP should play a key role in the CB endeavours by periodically informing the performance problems to the nodal department to identify relevant training solutions in consultation with the training institutions. This approach would be more effective in linking training to programme performance / outcomes. Revamping Delivery system: Institutional restructuring is a key element of the capacity building which enables the institutions to function as autonomous institutions with accountability besides imparting of knowledge and skills. The centre and states should pay attention to these design considerations for strengthening them as units of planning and execution. This is critical to realization of MGNREGA objectives. Checks and balances system should be in place to prevent possible check misuse rather than sidetracking /

104 sidelining them. Assigning specific roles and responsibilities in MGNREGA to reputed NGOs to act as one of the support systems is a case in point. Based on the evaluation and process studies, it is observed that the attitudes of the delivery system have to be changed to make the institutions work with pro-poor bias and also with sensitivity to issues of gender and disadvantaged. Thus, inclusion of ABC and gender modules etc., in training programmes, more so for functionaries at grassroots level, will have significant impact on the quality of service delivery.

Training priorities: Among the training themes, community mobilization, participatory planning and social audit should receive priority and with emphasis on hands holding. Engaging CSOs for community mobilization and awareness building : lack of awareness about rights and entitlements and inadequate knowledge about grievance redressal procedures are the major constraints for not making MGNREGS a demand led scheme. The delivery system may not be well equipped (appropriate agency) for this task; more so when the scheme is a rights based one. The CB strategy should also deal with the choice of agency for all the key activities. The success of CB can be ascertained in terms of successful mobilization, education (including counseling) and enabling workers to use Gram Sabha for communicating their needs and expectations as well as providing feedback on the reliability, adequacy and quality of services delivered. So, feasibility of creation of a network of VOs to work with community in allocated GPs may be explored in this regard. Independent agencies can monitor the changes in awareness levels, quality of participation, employment generation, quality and durability of assets created etc., to judge the effectiveness of this suggested intervention. It is obvious that a series of workshops for development of training material in partnership mode have to be planned to support the CB initiative. Building communitys capacity warrants that the educated among the workers / leaders should be targeted and imparted on skills required to facilitate/guide the community in participatory planning and social audit. This cadre of para professionals in the GP would be the driving force for operationalisation of bottom up planning and community driven social audit. Non-formal modes of capacity building :Organizing weekly interactions through TV during specified timings at Mandal / sub-block level with state nodal department to appraise the functionaries with latest developments / circulars and to provide clarifications and instructions for correcting the field level problems (as in AP) has been found to be very effective. The replication of such practices may be explored. The Video Conferencing and SATCOM (as in Karnataka) type of arrangements would be attempted to build the capacities of functionaries on a continuous basis. Interactive DVDs may be produced and provided on the specified thematic issues with illustrations / documentation of successful practices elsewhere as reference material in the execution of tasks. CB for vibrancy of GPs: To make PRIs more accountable and to function as units of local government, the framework provided by 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments should be made effective in practice. CB of PRIs more so of GPs should enable them to work with the community, officials and CSOs on partnership basis .The exposure visits to successful projects / GPs would enhance confidence levels of members of GP. Rewards and awards for GPs and GP members excelling in MGNREGA in terms of generation of more number of employment days, inclusion of SCs / STs / OBCs (poor) and women, creation of durable assets, conduct of Gram Sabhas in participatory mode etc., might provide the required incentive framework.

105

106 ANNEXURE - II
TENTATIVE LIST OF FUNCTIONARIES TO BE TRAINED UNDER MGNREGA

S.No.

Level

Designation of functionary

No. of Units

No. of functionaries (in lakhs) 0.05

State

Commissioner / Director (MGNREGS) (1) , GRO (1), Accounts Officers (2), MIS Manager (1), Technical Persons (1+1), Social Audit coordinator (1) and supporting staff (1) DPC(1), PD (1), SA (1), MIS (1), Accounts Officer (1+), GRO (1), Ombudsmen (1+2), Line dept. functionary @ 10 per district PO (1), APO (1), J.E (1), MIS manager (1+1), Accounts officer (1), T.A @ 1 per 10 GPs GP Secretary (1), GRS (1), Mates (2) Social Audit Committee members @ 5 per GP BPMs / SPMs / Banker

35

District

619

0.06

3 4

District Block

619 6100

0.06 0.6

5 6 7 8

GP GP

2.4 lakh 2.4 lakh 3.5 lakh 619

9.6 12 3.5 0.5

State

Line department officials IAY, Watershed, Forest, Tribal Welfare, Agriculture, NHM, RWS (6 per district) Total number of official functionaries to be trained

26.37 619 0.65

Vigilance Monitoring Committee Zilla Panchayat Pamchayat Samiti Gram Panchayat ZP PS GP GP

District Vigilance & Monitoring Committee members (10 per district)

10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Core ZP members @ 2 per district Core PS members @ 2 per district GP Sarpanch / Pradhan Members of ZP @ 6 per ZP Memebrs of PS @ 6 per PS Members of GP @ 8 per GP Vigilance and Monitoring Committee @ 9 per GP Total number of public representatives to be trained

619 6100 2.4 lakh 619 6100 2.4 lakh 2.4 lakh

0.01 0.12 2.4 0.037 0.37 19.2 21.6 44.387

* The number may alter in the light of recommendations of working groups on MGNREGA (The Source is not specified by NIRD )

107

ANNEXURE-III Notes on the visit of MGNREGA WG on Capacity Building in Kerala 15 May 2010
This meeting was arranged at short notice. ( The Chairman, Working Group had confirmed Kerala visit on 10 May 2010 and Dr. Rajani Kant agreed to fax all the necessary information to Ernakulum DPC and, KILA director and also Principal Secretary RD, Kerala.) Moreover field visits, under MGNREGA may be unannounced to observe a neutral and objective view of the ground zero where work is going on. And Dr. Joseph, consultant from NIRD was deputed for facilitating the visits of Working Group in Kerala.

The meeting in the Project Directors office at Ernakulum began at 3.pm; there was sufficient notice already given to DPC about the purpose of the Working Group; I am under the impression that a copy of the MoRD notification wrt Working Group had been sent to DPC. The attendance was thin. Not only thin but was not organized properly keeping in mind the purpose of the visit of Working Group from MoRD. The District Mission Coordinator (DMC) of Kudumbasree was absent; this plays a major role in the implementation of MGNREGA in the state. The DP Secretary was also absent. The PD PAU was absent. The DPC was not able to attend the meeting as she has other very important commitments at the Vallarpadam Container Terminal. However the DPC made no effort from her side to either brief or contact Working Group. Given the pivotal role of DPC in the implementation of MGNREGA, the indifferent approach of DOC may be noted for future reference in the assessment of MGRNEGA in the district. A general perspective on the capacity of district administration to implement could have been easily gathered if DPC had made any effort! The Chairman Dr. Ashwani Kumar asked the APO- PAU (DRDA) to explain the Organization Chart and the Job Chart of PAU Officials. As the APO could not do it a note on it was requested. It clearly demonstrated the lack of capacity in a state known for practicing innovative methods of training by KILA. The Assistant DMC of Kudumbhasree who was present could not explain the Job Chart as well she was also requested to provide a description of her Job Chart. But she could not do it. Same story of lack of training or perhaps awareness about MGNREGA; recommend urgent training for all key staff involved in the implementation of MGRNEGA at the district level. The BDO/BPOs present informed that they are holding addl charge of BPO NREGA, this looked a serious handicap as none was prepared to implement MGRNEGA; it seemed like MGNREGA being low priority in the schemes of things in Kerala The Chairman wanted a copy of the order issued by the Govt. prescribing the qualification and experience of Accredited AEs. Data Entry Operators. No such copy ever received any one from Kerala When asked as to Why the GPs are implementing all the MGNREGA works and not the Block and District Panchayaths, there was no immediate response from the assembled staff at the district headquartersGiven the history of decentralization in Kerala, it appeared logical that GP would be drive force in the implementation of MGRNEGA The Chairman

108

wanted an organizational chart of the MGNREGA Officials working at the GP Level.; No such information has be handed out to the Working Group. However, it was noted that MGNREGA has been placed in a separate administrative unit for Poverty Alleviation, an umbrella administrative unit. After a disappointing experience at the district headquarters, the Working Group decided to go to Thiruvaniyoor GP of Vadaucode Block Panchayath of At 5pm The Working Group along with some POs reached the work site. Vandipetta Road Canal Cleaning. The work was being done by Kudumbhasree SHG members. There were 26 workers at site, 23 women and three men. Job cards were there. Muster Rolls was also present at the work site yes. But some of the details in the job cards and muster rolls were not complete. The woman mate has got training for two days, two times. Accredited AE (Accredited Engineer) was present. She has Diploma in Civil Engineer with 7 yrs work exp. So Rs 9000 per month is paid to her. Her appointment policy is part of a broad HR policy for human resources in MGNREGA in Kerala. The MGNREGA board was incomplete. There was no MGNREGA Logo or board detailing the work. In fact, the details of the work were written on cardboard attached to the eclectic pole; The Chairman raised issues of transparency and accountability as mentioned in the Operational Guidelines. The fear that work done under MGRNEGA could be replicated under some other works may be genuine in the absence of a sign board for MGNREGA No estimate copy was with the AE and No AS copy. As amount Rs 38000. A person day to be generated was 277. The workers at site have worked for 11 plus 5 days during the year 2010. This work was suggested by Kudumbasree SHG members.; it was all women that carried the work and the wage was paid on the basis of daily rate. MGNREGA staff was not aware of the difference between daily wage and piece rate; they needed more training and also exposure. AT GP Office at 5.30 pm, The Working Group met the Panchayat President and his staff, it was a good interaction and the Working Group noticed the good conditions of Panchayat Bhavan (building) and other resources. Surprisingly, the GP building or secretariat does not display any information about Development programs on its walls. In other words, the so-called Janta Information System developed by MKSS was absent in the GP. No work order or Muster Rolls of MGNREGA were pasted on the walls. Interestingly, the administrative cost of MGRNEGA in the GP was 8% in 2009-10. There are six GPs in this BP. About 5 to 6 works are on at the same time. The copy of the monthly progress report and AAP cloud not be got as the computer and printer was not working? Rs 57 lakhs expended this year. The GP was getting help from Agri and Irrigation departments for work projects preparation and execution. No AS Register was located in the GP. The Chairman, Working Group had a discussion with GP president about maintaining MGNREGA records and registers, GP President seemed oblivious of various provisions about MGNREGA, seemed he was not properly trained though he had attended a training program at KILA. No material cost incurred in the GP; this is one of the outstanding elements of MGRNEGA in Kerala. No works on individual plots of SC/STs so far; it clearly showed lack of diversity in the works of MGNREGA in Kerala though GP president reflected on expansion of permissible works for Kerala. A watershed Plan is being prepared in the GP. No unique ID to each work executed is given.

109

There is no clear cut HR policy for these contract personnel, a discussion with RD secretary required on this. Wages are delayed by one month in the GP. The delay due to delays in taking work measurements by AEs; this is surprising given the capacity of Accredited Engineers in the GP The work bills are made only after completion of the works. The field visit ended at6.30 pm on a note of the raising the wage in MGNREGA. In his discussion with GP president, the chairman explained the position of MoRD on the issue of Rs 100 as the minimum wage though Kerala has been paying Rs.140 to MGNREGA laborers under the state government wage policy for agricultural workers into eh state. 16.5.10; Visit in Cochin/Ernakulum District Interestingly, the members of the Working Group were very politely apprised the significance of Sunday Holiday in Kerala; So the Working Group decided to venture out in the fields on its own though one of the PO courteously joined the visit. The Working Group members decided to visit rural parts of Cochin/Ernakulum district to get a hang of various aspects of development in Kerala. On the way to Chirai beach where Working Group decided to stay overnight on the way to KILA, the members of Working Groups observed the fabled Kerala tale on the status of schools, hospitals and also extension of urban amenities. It appeared clearly that MGRNEGA does not suffer from infrastructural issues; the members of Working Group in interaction with officials and local people noticed the prevalence of high market wage for labour that often impede the participation of labourers in MGRNEGA. After checking in Country Cottage on the Chirai beach, the members of Working Group decided to visit the nearby GP Kuzhippally but got held up in massive traffic jam and returned to the hotel. Decides to leave the CBR at 6.30 am of 17.5.10 to KILA at Trichur. On 17.5.10 at 6.30are leaves to Trichur. Reaches KILA at 8.30am. At 10 am the meeting started at KILA Trichur in the presence of director,KILA and his team The Chairman Prof. Ashwani Kumar wanted a brief note from the Director KILA, on the ToT Modules in use by KILA for MGNREGThe CB Gaps identified by KILA was called for. The Director of SIRD explained the elements of the special CB Model being executed (. I would have needed some more information on thisAshwani) The Chairman wanted to know the nature of trainingscourse content/modules etc-- given to DPCs in Kerala. The Chairman wanted that the trainings must also take care of the Voice and Choice aspects of the MGNREGS workers as well.some methodological issues were also discussed in the presentation by KILA. Impact assessment of trainings was called for by the Chair from the Directors of KILA and SIRD. The tracking of trainees and their contribution to CB was to be assessed by KILA and SIRD. The Chairman urged KILA director to track the quality of training imparted to PRI representatives, he shared his experience of discussion with GP president of Thiruvaniyoor GP of Vadaucode Block Panchayath. It was suggested in the meeting that that the use of Community Radio could help CB MGNREGS, the director, KILS agreed to look into the issue. The convergence affected by Kudumbhasree and MGNREGS was noted very effective. The Chairman and members of Working Group impressed with the capacity building exercise of Kudamshree more in the form of social mobilization of

110

MGRNEGA laborers. The Director, KILA also gave a flavor of real class room of training to Working Group; members were taken to a class on Awareness and Social Audit and participated in lively and fruitful discussion with participants. The Working Group wishes to place on record the warmth and democratic nature of discussion in the class room; it was interesting to note that most participants in the class were not trained in computer. The Director, KILA noted it and promised to remedy the situation. After the meeting with Director KILA, the Working Group met Sri. S. M Vijayanad IAS, LSGD Prl. Secretary in the office of Director KILA and had a long discussion on implementation of MGNREGA in the state; The Secretary Shri Vijayanad gave following observations on the issues raised by members of Working Group:

Kerala has got some kind of HR policy for MGNREGA though it was not spelled out but there does exist some systems for recruitment etc... The mates to be trained to become a technical worker to speed up taking work measurements. These mates to become Bare- foot Engineers. The Ombudsman is being attempted in the Districts not started for want of suitable persons, it seemed. Third party independent evaluators is being attempted in the State; the Secretary shared the assessment of social audit done by MKSS in the State, the Chairman , Working Group discussed with him his experience of field visits and also the indifference approach of Ernakulum district authority. The Secretary was quite forthright about the shortcomings in the implementation. 400 GPs have prepared Watershed based Action Plans in 2010-2011 for MGNREGS to help go green.

The chairman wanted the SIRD and KILA to identify the training need Gaps and new subject areas that need more training by the Officials and elected representatives at different levels for strengthening of MGNREGS. The meeting came to an end at 1.30.pm. The Chairman thanked all participants and especially appreciates the environment of KILA as one of the best training places in the country and returned to Cochin on the way back to Mumbai in the late evening. Present. Ashwani Kumar,( Chairman, Working Group) Sri. S. M Vijayanad IAS, LSGD Prl. Secretary SIRD Director, Sri A.P. Pillai KILA Director, Prof. N.Ramakanthan. Dr.B.Panda ( Member, Working Group)

111

Dr.D. Nraryana ( Member, Working Group) (Draft Minutes were prepared by Dr.Joseph Abraham, NIRD and modified/corrected by Chairman, Working Group)

112

ANNEXURE - IV Meeting of Working Group at NIAR (Mussoorie) on 28 April2010 to assess the performance of NIAR as National Resource Center for MGNREGA Following are observations of the Working Group Key officials and staff at NIAR generally treated members of Working Group with due respect and courtesy, however, Director of NIAR was neither present in the meeting on 28 April nor made any effort to contact Working Group for any sort of knowledge sharing or dialogue. Chairman of the Working Group was informed by Mr. M.Gupta, officer-in charge of NIAR, that director was busy in a meeting on 28 April though he was already informed about the meeting by the NIRD. ( The detailed note for organizing NIAR meeting was emailed by Chairman to NIRD on 11 April 2010) Though Mr. Gupta had already been briefed about the purpose and rationale of the meeting in his interaction with Chairman on 27 April, the meeting was organized hastily without any resource support such as facility to make presentation etc. (Interestingly, minutes of the meeting at NIAR were never made available to the Working Groups despite several requests by the Chairman. On 28 June 2010, the Chairman made last attempt without any success to reach NIAR through the good offices of NIRD) NIAR indeed relies on home-grown lessons in capacity-building! After an assessment of material discussed in the meeting and also submitted to the working Group, the Working Groups recommends that rather than conducting evaluation and appraisal studies for MGNREGS, it would be better if NIAR helps LABSNA in developing teaching and training material on social sector policies and their impact on administrative and management practices in the government for enhancing the knowledge- base of career civil servants. The members of Working Groups in their interaction with key officials/researchers at NIAR conclude that the key officials/researchers of NIAR have very little exposure to the tools of survey research, case study, process evaluation, cost benefit/ barrier/ outcome analysis etc. It would have been much better if they had worked closely with NIRD (Hyderabad),

113

KILA (Kerala), IITs, IIMs, Social Science research institutes and various civil society organizations to develop requisite knowledge base and learning before rushing into the area of evaluation studies. Moreover, members of Working Group also feel strongly that conclude NIAR in its existing form does not have necessary academic and research environment and resources for incubation of studies on MGNREGA.( In fact, the report on social accountability by NIAR was outsourced to consultants). Therefore, it wont be a bad idea to involve some eminent consultants or experts from open market to enhance the capacity of NIAR to undertake impact analysis in near future. The Working Group appreciates the efforts of NIAR to set up professorial chair headed by eminent people from academia and civil society. Members of Working Group were disappointed by the casual, cavalier, and subjective manner in which various so-called evaluation studies have been undertaken by NIAR in different parts of the country. MoRD needs to develop a more calibrated and cautionary approach for awarding research studies to members of academic staff colleges who have little exposure or no exposure to rigors of evaluation and monitoring studies or policy research. Al though we see something on selection of tools, selection methodology etc, and hear about reference about quantitative and qualitative, but we could not figure out whether these studies are a process documentation or impact analysis or quick appraisal, Interestingly, no tool from participatory rural research has been used in the studies. Word on methodology. The issue of hypothetical indicators is quite interesting as researcher seems to be confused by the gap between hypothesis and validity. Consider issue based workshops and studies conducted by NIAR. Rather than being turbocharged by the theoretical understanding of Human Security, the fascination with the notion of social capital seems to be guiding the choice of methodologies and also pedagogies at NIAR without realising that social capital, a concept that has lost much of its initial charm and the vigour in the recent policy literature on development as policy scholars have suggested that concept of social capital "risks trying to explain too much with too little [and] is being adopted indiscriminately, adapted uncritically, and applied imprecisely" (Lynch et al. 2000:404). The research study on Social Capital by NIAR in Jharkhand is quite an eye-opener; how the construction of road, harnessing water, development of waste land, assets under draught proofing, flood control could have created social capital (Hope, Putnam listening all this!) A couple of reports/ studies of NIAR are so shoddy that they dont deserve mention; we recall one study where the researcher has used all his creativity in taking pictures of the project And Words such latency are used rather loosely!

114

Now, consider the findings of a study on convergence in Gujarat. They are so clichd that the study does not merit attention! For example, it is not clear how funds of the public could be equated with public participation as both need clarity. Plus the reports tendency to give a character certificate to officials from Line departments by saying that willingness of the line departments....in a willing manner. This is not only symphonic of poor research but also raises the issue of objectivity! Now, consider a couple of more studies by NIAR on MGNREGA. For instance, a study on Mate system in Chhattisgarh does not offer anything other known facts Neither ethnographic details or analytical insights accrue from the study. The study on social audit in Rajasthan seems eyewash as both ground reality and intuitive understanding of social audit movement by MKKS contradict the findings of the report. Consider this finding in the report Social Audit in Rajasthan failed to emerge as a good practice, (How would civil society activists especially MKSS respond to this). Let us not forget that MKKSs Janata Information system has become a powerful tool of social audit. The researchers from NIAR need to visit Vijaypura, the birth place of the movement of social audit before making tall claims about the ineffectiveness of social audit. And also needs to keep in mind the famous Bhilwara Social Audit campaign that galvanised the whole country. It is not clear how the study on impact on left wing extremism concludes that casual members dropped out of the moist groups. What is the basis for this conclusion? The findings reek of clichd generalizations without any evidence of strong research. This kind of research breeds complacency and also leads to suboptimal policy feedback. Consider another study on gender empowerment in Jharkhand; it is not clear how the researchers from NIAR would have come up with this interesting observation; The women participation rate is low as a large segment of women population is physically not strong enough to undertake strenuous earthen work. Is it based on some eyewitness account or reports on nutrition deficiency in the region? Moreover. Khunti is a place quite known for right to food movement that has resulted in the mass mobilization of MGNREGA labourers leading them to get compensation for delay payment under the Act. Similar clichd conclusions are repeated for Rajasthan, Punjab etc. It is disturbing to note that without much capacity or resources, NIAR has been allowed by MoRD to undertake in several states; it could have been better if it had conducted studies in Uttarakhand and UP and developed some much needed skills/knowledge for undertaking research studies. The Working Group recommends that the culture of state government officials being posted on deputation for conducting research or impact analysis needs to be arrested and a strong academic environment needs to be cultivated by investing in hiring quality professional researchers both

115

from academia and civil society. Since most those at NIAR come from the background of implementing policies, they need to be involved in the preparing of training modules and manuals and leaflets/pamphlets etc for better communication across board. They also need to involve in social mobilization and awareness generation if they themselves enjoy certain amount of social capital among MGRNEGA labourers! The members of Working Group also conclude that NIARs efforts to produce print material such as 1 pad on convergence, 8 brochures (on convergence, grievance redressal, transparency & accountability) would contribute to duplication of material already produced by MoRD in collaboration with NIRD/SIRDs and civil society organizations. More importantly, a complex issue like convergence need not be trivialized by printing 1 pad! The Working group also recommends that NIAR needs to be updating its website; the findings on ICT needs to be utilized!

The meeting at NIAR was attended by Ashwani Kumar, Chairman, Working Group, Dr. B. Panda, Member Working Group) and Mr. Pramathesh Ambastha (Member, Working Group)

ANNEXURE V

NATIONAL WORKSHOP ON ICT & GIS APPLICATIONS IN MGNREGS (14th May, 2010) WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS The National Workshop on ICT & GIS Applications in MGNREGS was held at NIRD on 14th May, 2010. The primary objective of the workshop was the following: 1. To discuss the capture of both spatial and attribute data pertaining to MGNREGS at micro level for planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. 2. To discuss on various scenarios by convergence by various programmes like watershed, forestry irrigation, rural connectivity etc for assessing potential employment aspects under MGNREGS. 3. To devise appropriate processes and methodologies for the effective, implementation and monitoring of MGNREGS programmes at micro level. About 35 delegates, 25 from various organizations from IITs, Corporate Sector, Institutions, Government sector, etc., and 10 faculty from NIRD participated in the National Workshop. The Chairman, Working Group on Capacity Building and 2

116

Members of the Working Group and a National Level Monitor from MORD participated in the National Workshop. The deliberation has two parts namely the first part deals with ICT & GIS Applications for Planning for MGNREGS and the second part deals with Implementation and Monitoring of MGNREGS. There were 19 Presentations by NIRD, MORD, Corporate Sectors, Institutions and Government Agencies. The National Workshop started with a welcome address by Dr M.V. Rao, Deputy Director General, NIRD, who stressed the need for capacity building for solving the problems in Planning, Implementation & Monitoring of MGNREGS. He emphasized that technological solutions could prove effective for reducing leakages and ensuring participation of the field functionaries, PRIs and local people through demystification and simplification of technology solutions. He identified problems and leakages at various levels in the process of MGNREGS implementation. He was of the opinion that satellite imagery can be used for pre and post position inquiry. He advocated for demystified and reachable technology. He applauded Andhra Pradesh MGNREGS software, especially estimate generation part, reducing dependence on engineers. He understood measurement to be a vital issue as it is linked to wage payment. Drawing from his own experience as Commissioner, MGNREGS, West Bengal, he reflected that tribal benificiaries are not realizing minimum wages indicating something wrong in schedule of rates. He laid more emphasis on technology transfer. Prof. Aswini Kumar, Chairman, Working Group on Capacity Building, stressed the need for beating the system by technology. He stressed pre and post identification of change and capturing indications ahead of the systems. The need for reducing engineering control and making the system peoples centric was emphasized. The work measurement linked to payment and technology solutions at local level was urged. Sri. S.N. Tripathi, Commissioner cum Secretary (Panchayati Raj), Govt. of Orissa attended the National Workshop as a Special Guest and emphasized the need for an integrated ICT & GIS System for MGNREGS. He pointed out that the measurement is the key issue and the technology should reduce the distance in payment. He stressed on users perspective and process driven in simplification of technology. In spite of rolling out Electronic Job Card in Orissa state and making it web enabled, it was found that the methods are not foolproof and that smarter technologies are needed to make a robust ICT & GIS based MGNREGS. Further, he stressed for common databases like Census, BPL, Landholdings, Watershed and MGNREGS in the web for transparency for effective empowerment of the Communities. Shri S. N. Tripathi, observed that the process of releasing funds till the process of paying wages has to pass through many hands. This indicates that technology is not used since the process is not simple and its complicated. Technology should be developed and adopted through usage perspective. Workers could be assigned the job of taking preliminary measurements at the worksite using some simple technology, which could be further verified by the junior engineers (JE). He informed that on 2 February, 2010, Orissa Governments issued electronic job cards. He suggested that a software/ database should be there which would have not only the list of MGNREGS beneficiaries but the beneficiary list of all the other government schemes. It should be an integrated beneficiary list. He is of the opinion that installing of any software/hardware may be easy but capacity building of the

117

villagers to use them is very critical success parameter for the effective implementation of the Scheme. Prof. Aswini Kumar, gave Outline of the progress of work on capacity building and policy architecture since 31st March, 2010 and stressed the need for robust architecture for MGNREGS policy initiatives. He felt that beyond training, capacity building, innovation and governance, reforms are needed towards efficient delivery systems. Prof. Aswini Kumar feels that the MGNREGS suffers from crisis of capacity building and is currently facing a challenge for efficient implementation of guidelines and delivery for ensuring optimum socio-economic benefit. He further elaborated on demand supply, asset management and long term sustainability. It was also said about size and scale to ensure proper planning, implementation and management of programmes for which ICT GIS can assist towards achieving this goal. There is a need to reduce uncertainty and establishment an open and transparent asset management system. The MGNREGS being the worlds largest social welfare programme which Rs.79.00 lakhs works being taken up across the country, there needs effective monitoring of completed works at national, state and district level. The census of asset management is a critical policy survival measure of MGNREGS. There need to be partnership on PPP mode and between people and technology. Prof. Ashwani Kumar thanked DDG for extending support to Working Group. He pleaded for a ploy centric, multi stakeholder, multi directional, multi functional policy architecture of MGNREGS, which is beyond the conventional mechanical and linear understanding of Capacity building. This will be aligned with governance and delivery system. He observed that MGNREGS does not suffer from bureaucratic commitment or political will, but from capacity prices. These capacity prices are capacity to prioritize, deliver services and unleash social and economic multiplier effects. He identified asset management system to be a critical element of Capacity Building. He underlined that programmes of this scale suffer from uncertainties. These are- information asymmetry, transaction cost and lack of bargaining power. Technology offers open, transparent and repetitive tools to deal with these uncertainties. He observed that 79 Lakh works has been executed under MGNREGS, till date and they have been monitored manually. But, monitoring to be effective, we have to use technology such as GIS. He underscored the necessity of MGNREGS work census. He stressed the need of strengthening of PRIs. He delineated two levels of asset management i) already existing at micro level and ii) at MoRD level. These two realities are needed to be converged to set up a system, including isolated actors such as corporate. He argued for engaging in partnership between people and technology. Shri. Tripathi stressed the need to integrate Census 2010 data, Household data, village and revenue data and with unique ID for making MGNREGS a transparent and robust process. The technical presentations on ICT & GIS Applications planning of MGNREGS under Chairperson of Prof Aswin Kumar was conducted in Technical session -1 during 10.30 am to 1.30 pm, in which 7 presentations were made. Dr V Madhava Rao, Head(CGARD), NIRD demonstrated the design and development of a Village GIS in a Template Mode for planning and decision making

118

at micro level and an effective integration of household, cadastry, village level, census, BPL, LULC & other point level reference data for ensuring participation and decision making for MGNREGS at village level. The Team also presented specific GIS Application process for asset capturing, monitoring and implementation of MGNREGS programmes. The workshop recommended that the Census 2010 and revenue information should be integrated with the Village GIS for making it widely usable decision making tool at village level. Col. U B Singh of MORD stated that the MGNREGS should concentrate on user end and should have demand based systems with appropriate fund management, and not led by rigid procedure base. Presently he felt that the capacity development are not adequate and the asset management and IEC efforts are minimal. The efforts on inspection, infrastructure base monitoring of schemes require proper architecture, systematic approach and a MIS for improving the data capturing process and helping the planning and decision making process at local level. Further he said that the voucher based accounting system should lead to Case Records and Geotagging and the technology should be doable, watchful and simple to ensure participation. Col. U.B. Singh observed that there is huge gap between implementation and policy making. Instead of demand based scheme MGNREGS has become target based fund management exercise. Human errors in the field can be eliminated by the use of technology. Asset management is very essential. IEC should help all the villagers get genuinely trained.

Prof. Nagarjuna of TIFR demonstrated Open Source Software initiatives developed by software foundation of India through knowledge lab. He suggested open standards exchange solutions and knowledge based systems for effective planning, implementation and monitoring of MGNREGS. He stressed need for localization and ontology in process, assets, people for developing processes and systems for MGNREGS. There were questions as to how free is free software and it was mentioned that the free software is permissible to change and customized which is a great advantage over commercial software. Shri G. Nagarjuna, TIFR made a presentation on Digital Inclusion. He explained the concept of Free Software. He cautioned that exclusion is done via discretization of knowledge. Shri S.N. Tripathi enquired about Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) of open software, to which Prof G. Nagarjuna responded that this is not free but freedom of use is the feature of open software. Dr N Jaya Shankar, NIDR, Nagpur, explained the role of statistics and Operational Research in monitoring and evaluating along with problem solving in MGNREGS, to make the system secure for livelihood assessment and heuristic base for efficient management. Prof. Aswin Kumar stressed the need for evaluation of assets, and developing a systematic process for addressing the needs of MGNREGS. Prof. H K Misra of IRMA illustrated the indexing and sustainable livelihood approaches of MGNREGS. Prof. H.K. Mishra, IRMA commented that policy architecture and data architecture should marry. UID project is one such attempt.

119

Dr B Panda of NEHU, Shillong & Member of the Working Group, stated that segregating impact of MGNREGS is important to justify promotion of MGNREGS in reducing the rural poverty and participation. Dr. B. Panda observed that any scheme is only a means and the end is to develop the capacity of people. He threw up the idea of measuring the quality of participation. Col. S S Rao of TCS stressed the need for qualitative assessment for MGNREGS and stated that policy architecture and qualitative measures are needed for making MGNREGS a people centric programmes. Prof. Panda stressed the need for game theory and convergence while Col. Singh stressed the need for infrastructure development at Gram Panchayat level. Dr M V Rao, Deputy Director General stressed the need for SMS based system to update and monitoring of inventory and web based solutions for trickledown effect. DDG, NIRD pointed that technology is a tool to expedite planning and implementation process. In MGNREGS, decision making power has been given to Gram Panchayat, therefore tools should be developed thinking this line. Referring to SMS based monitoring; he said that in real time information transfer, chances of anomalies are less. Prof. K H Rao, Prof & Head, CWEPA, NIRD stressed the need for convergence, game theory, and local initiatives for promoting MGNREGS. Dr. K. Hanumantha Rao, advocated a planning framework where convergence becomes the natural derivative. Two types of convergence have been experienced in the field top down and local initiatives. He envisaged that ICT should play a role of facilitator to enable planning where convergence is natural. Ms. Rajeshwari of Pragna, reflected that over the time the responsibility has moved from community to government. The scheme should focus on bringing responsibility back to people. Prof. Misra recalled Convergence Bill of 2000, where transaction based system is more appropriate than a mere MIS. The inflated schemes and fraudulent registration could be curtailed through transaction based systems. He suggested seasonal allowances based on soil conditions, materials used etc for making MGNREGS implementation effective. Col. S. S. Rao, TCS made a presentation about the MGNREGS software used for MGNREGS. Prof. Aswin Kumar Stressed the need for immediate implementation of census of MGNREGS assets and stressed to develop asset recording system along with provisions for social audit. Dr Y V S Murthy and Dr V V Sarath Kumar of NRSC, Hyderabad, demonstrated e-FMS handheld device for asset capturing, implementation and planning and monitoring systems through retagging, biometric attendance and SMS alerts. Prof. HK Mishra stressed on systems approach, convergence, usability, ease of use and usefulness for making ICT & GIS base systems effective use in MGNREGS. He stressed the need for convergence of content and convergence of carriage for a demand driven livelihood centric services for MGNREGS. Prof. Panda stressed the need for cultural sustainability and environmental sustainability for making MGNREGS robust. He further, stressed the need for the NIRD role for a synergy and a road map by networking all stakeholders in consortium and participation mode. The scientist from NRSC presented Pocket Digital Device based information system catering to demand synchronization which can help in bench marking

120

processes and works at local level and has an opportunity to look beyond in effective planning, implementation, monitoring of MGNREGS by integrating the location based services by satellite navigation system and asset management by high resolution satellite data, in a simple and powerful visualization tool in the handheld device. The Shri Pankaj Kumar Kamilya of Gujarat Government illustrated various challenges faced for successful implementation of ICT & GIS Applications in MGNREGS. The proposed cell phone and PDA based information sharing, capturing and updation in server in a web based system, is being contemplated in Gujrat, which was presented. Dr D Sudharshan of IIT Mumbai presented the forth coming technology of Geo ICT Sensor, which is developed by IIT Mumbai and Japanese Scientists, the price of which is expected to be very affordable within a period one or two years. The Geo ICT sensor can monitor all the MGNREGS assets on a continuous basis and can be portable to cover upcoming assets in other places for successful implementation and monitoring of MGNREGS works at field level. Dr NK Das of Pragna, Orissa explained the need for people and technology to work in tandem and capacity building development for making technological solutions acceptable to people and better implementation of MGNREGS works. Shri Santosh Sam Koshy of CDAC , Hyderabad, illustrated the application of ubiquitous computing for large scale application of anywhere and anytime information capturing for MGNREGS assets and information for planning, implementation, monitoring purposes. Shri. NS Jadhav of Real IT, Pune demonstrated the application of automatic engineering estimation and spatial decision support system which can be of effective use in implementation of MGNREGS at field level. Shri. G Santhosh Kumar, AIMIL India representing Trimble International demonstrated handheld GPS/DGPS for capturing coordinates, photography assets transmitting the same through GPS to Cell Phones or Servers, which has exhibited tremendous potential in asset management, monitoring of MGNREGS structures. Shri B Srikhar Reddy of Navayug Technology, Bangalore presented various applications at village level customized IT and GIS solutions in a simple and easy to understand mode with strong analytical and decision making capability which has great potential in application for MGNREGS at local level. Prof. Mishra brought the attention of the house to system complains conforming to guidelines of MGNREGS and stressed the need for designing and developing affective operational guidelines for implementation of MGNREGS at village level. Prof. H.K. Mishra, IRMA made a case for adopting systems approach for administering MGNREGS. Dr Panda stressed the need for the role of CBOs for maintenance and sustenance of the MGNREGS assets. Shri Ramjan Ali of NIIT presented ESRI, ArcPAD & Mobile GIS which can be effectively used at local level for asset management and planning, implementation, monitoring of assets created under MGNREGS. Shri P. Sirish Chandra of Luminous, Hyderabad presented the Mobile GIS applications namely super pad3 where the source code is provided to the user for making necessary customization and modification to suite to the requirements of local applications of MGNREGS. This technology has been expressed as a very useful and effective tool of asset management and decision making for MGNREGS.

121

The Chairman sought suggestions and recommendations of the delegates participation in workshop for asset capturing management, planning, implementation and monitoring of MGNREGS, convergence and appropriate technology processes and methodologies for MGNREGS implementation at local level. The National workshop concluded with a Summary by the Chairman, Prof. Aswini Kumar. The following are the Concluding Remarks by the Chairman. NIRD, IRMA, TIFR and Working Group to consolidate and network among all technology providers for suggesting appropriate ICT & GIS based solutions for MGNREGS at local level; A Proceedings highlighting the ICT & GIS technology applications in MGNREGS to be submitted to the Working Group within 2 weeks; ICT & GIS models such as village GIS, Integrating with aspect such as sustainability analysis and common data bases such as Census, BPL Census, land information and any other information at village level etc to be integrated in the system; Open source tools to be extensively used in the pattern of TIFR for customizing to the requirements of time and programmes as per the needs of the people at local level; Much of the processes to be automatic like report generation, local level language interface, compatibility etc to be ensured; The ICT & GIS based application need be Mobile or Hand Held device based and should be web based to ensure transparency and public information for making MGNREGS, a truly people centric Scheme; The ICT & GIS Applications need to be simple and easy to use mode for ensuring participation from stakeholders and local people; The ICT & GIS application models need to be flexible for changing parameters from time to time as per the need of the policies and programmes of MORD; Capacity building and hand holding to be an integral part of the ICT & GIS Application package to make people aware, participate, use and implement the technology facilitation process at Gram Panchayat Level; Multi function device with navigation facility(GPS) and with camera and internet with a good memory capacity with GIS & IT software and a mobile window software could be the ideal instrument for wide use of ICT & GIS at local level. The cost of present equipment could be around Rs. 11,000/- and within a year the cost may be reduced by half or below making the technology more affordable for popular use of systems; The present MIS formats developed by NIC and TCS ( in case of AP) should be integrated with the ICT & GIS formats developed for planning, implementation, monitoring of MGNREGS.

122

The day long discussions resulted in following Action Points:A short term consortium among Dr. V. Madhava Rao, Shri Nagarjuna, Shri Jayashankar and Prof. H.K. Mishra to develop a technical note delineating the pathway Framework and Road Map. A note on Challenges of Mobile based system and some Success Stories. (Shri Pankaj Kumar Kamliya) One page Write Up on Application of Sensor Technology in MGNREGS. (Shri D. Sudharshan) A Concept Note based on days Presentation. (Dr. V. Madhava. Rao)

Annexure VI Working Groups North East Visit from 24 May to 27 May 2010 The following members of the working group accompanied the team; 1. Ashwani Kumar, chairman 2. Prof. S, Narayan, member 3. Dr. B. Panda( NEHU), Member
North East visit; 24 May 2010 Assam Visit; Kamrup district. The working group have had an informal meeting with Director, NIRD regarding rationale and schedule of the visit. The Chairman gave some instructions about organizing the review meeting on 27 June with various stakeholders including district administration. It was brought to our attention that state governments were still struggling with confirmation of their participation and most state governments have sent their junior officials. After initial meeting at NIRD, the Working Group comprising chairman and Prof. Narayan (Dr. Panda could not join us because of some urgent meeting at NEHU) headed to the visit of work sites and interaction with

123

workers and Panchyat officials in Kamrup district. Accompanied by Director Prof. Vinay Singh and JE Mehtab Hussain. We inspected a site in Demoria Block and name of village of Hahara (Panchyat name) Name of site; Vishnupur We met workers at the site; Kalpna Das, she told us that she had worked for 100 days.she told that she was getting Rs.80 but the other women around her told us that they were not getting more than Rs.60. Another worker Pawitra Raham 40 years old worker claimed to work as a Mate but getting the wage of a worker. She also told that she had attended one-day training in Sonapur Block. We also talked to Lakhi Sahwna and Titeliyat Pathar. Both of them claimed to have worked for about 50 days. We also talked to Basanti Inzal, Panchyat member and also Vice president of Gram panchayat. Kamal Kumar das is the President of Gram Panchyat. She claimed that since there was no Panchyat Bhawan so the meetings of GP are held at the house of the President. There was no computer as reported by the ward member. Ward member generally mobilizes workers. She attended training at SIRD on Women empowerment. We further interacted with Digendra Das(SC) and Silkandra Das( SC) age 75.... Job Card number; Family ID is 74, ID for Job Card--AS-26-003-001-0014-74-30-10-2008. He claims to have completed 100 days and from April again working and getting an Rs 100 per day for work, land filling job he performs.....he does not get old age pension though he belongs to BPL family. There needs to be support to him as he works in others fields when NREGA work gets completed. Sajal Das Job card number AS-26-003-001-0014-141-date of registration 19/12/2009. He is the lone member of his family to work, gets 100 rs, he is 10 pass and belongs to BPL family but has no access to PDS system. We also checked the job cards of some workers; entries were by and large in order. Observations; 1. The MGNREGA board is not properly maintained; the board does not have NREGA logo neither unique work ID, neither number of workers having performed work; this raises a serious issue of duplication of the work as the village road is kaccha and may easily get washed out during heavy monsoon rains. 2. The job cards of most workers were dully filled out.... 3. The worksite facility was non-existent; the child care facility was not in place, the reason was the close proximity of work with village. 4. Work site facility not available....small children were carrying each other. Siblings. 5. The oldest worker at the site was 74 years who should have been given relatively light work After this, we moved to another site... .Harhara Panchyat.... Block name; Demoria Development Block

124

.Maniram Medhisecretary of Panchyat and Pradeep Datta is President of Panchyat from 2007. There was no Janta Information system...He did not get any training at SIRD( SIRD needs a capacity building support) Name of Rozgar Sahayak Manoranjan Thakuria---he gets Rs 3000 on contract. And complained about poor work conditions. Need for HR policy was noted by the working group! Jonu Das, he was card holder but he could not show his job card, He claimed that he was getting only Rs 80. Following observations were noted; Capacity building training need was expressed by PRI representatives; President gets honorarium of Rs.1000 per month Panchayats generates a revenue of Rs 45000 per year Gram Sabha takes places however the register shows that Gram Sabha does not take place( A major issue in Assam) 5. Muster roll register was not maintained, when asked for it, the Gram President said that the MR was in the office of Block. 6. The group of about 15 women were there who mentioned to us about not opening new works by the Panchyat president.... 7. Panchayat secretary...complained about lack of fund at Panchyat despite telling DPC several times about work demand from workers. 8. No Mate system in existence; they 9. Vigilance committee members on paper as process of social audit was hardly known to PRI representatives 10. Unemployment allowances not provided 11. The Panchyat Office was in good condition and had computer facility as well. The Panchyat President and Secretary appreciated the idea of RG Seva Kendra and showed willingness to implement this. 12. We also interacted with a group of 20 women workers who demanded work; Panchayat President claimed that DPC was not releasing fund as per labour budget so last work was opened 16/12/9... Sangeet, one of the workers pleaded with the Working Group that they need to be informed about their entitlements and they need work but their demand was not registered by the Panchayat President and secretary. After the intervention of Chairman, Working Group, the Rojzar Sayhak started taking their applications for work with dated receipt. However, the Chairman was later informed that the registration drive for work was stopped as soon the Working Group left the Panchayat. 1. 2. 3. 4.

25/5/2010 ; Working Groups Meghalaya Visit Ri Bhoi District

125

Preface : The district budget is 41 plus crore in 2010-11. The work completion is poor as only 184 works have been completed out of 1294. Village employment Council (VEC) is the most fundamental unit at the grassroots for implementation of MGNREGA in Meghalaya; VEC is akin to Gram Panchyat. Following the traditional system of Dorbar in the hills of North East, the VEC is the most critical institution but it works both ways; given the communitarian ways of life m it often becomes difficult for ordinary citizens to bring VEC to task for violation of provisions of MGNREGA. Community Coordinator is considered a fulcrum in the implementation architecture; he or she keeps record and also mobilizes workers. (Para Staff) The working group met at the circuit house for interaction with key officials in Ri Bhoi district. The DC/DPC was busy in his regular work and joined the meeting later. The working group, however, with great dissatisfaction places on record that apparently aggressive and negative attitude of DC towards Working group as if the visit of Working group was some kind of encroachment on his bureaucratic privileges. The DC needs to be counselled to handle meetings with courtesy and grace. The chairman very politely explained him the rationale of the visit though he was already sent a letter from NIRD (Guwahati) in this regard. Mawlong, Project director of DRDA and also looks after MGNREGA. ---She needed training in the planning and implementation as she was hardly aware of some of the basic entitlements, not aware of convergence or any new policy initiatives... (The DC was opposed to the idea of frequent training though he did not appreciate the fact that his key personnel were not aware of basic things about NREGA. We were not convinced with the argument that training hampers the implementation of MGNREGA) Project economistMatthew Makdos alone looks around 700 work sites, 200 sites functional... Capacity Building Observations; 1, SIRD needs to train VEC and AEC members about implementing; peer learning workshop needed. 2. Perspective planning was also missing. 3. There were 4 technical assistance present in the meeting; most technical assistant were either undertrained or no trained. 4. Wage payment was in cash though banks are available in the area (needs to be ascertained as to under what conditions Cash payment is still allowed. DC could not cite any exception granted by MoRD in this regard) 5. Mate system seems to be unknown to the region including DC/ DPC who was not aware of the job profile of Mate.

126

6. No evaluation or impact study DPC admitted that no effort has been made in this regard. 7. DC/DPC was not aware of Operational Guidelines, other than shortage of staff he could not give satisfactory answers on various other aspects of implementation; showed no interest in perspective planning, monitoring( we were told that a NGO has approached for social audit) and . 8. Until today, there is not a single complaint on record as we were told; the working group discussed with the myth of zero complaint; he agreed that there was no substance in this as this depends on reporting system. In short, transparency issues are a major casualty. The Program officer was out in the field with NLM Mr. PK Sinha, perhaps this may be the reason that DC/DPC was not very enthusiastic about meeting with Working Group though he was already informed by NIRD( Guwahati Branch) about the purpose and scope of the Working Group. At the end of the meeting/interaction, DC/DPC agreed to provide all the information sought by the Working Group within a reasonable time frame of one week. The letter and questionnaire are attached with the report. We regret that it never reached the working group! The Working visited Umdhiar Village----Block Umling in.district Ri Bhoi General Observation: Despite the good conditions of Panchayat building and having computer facility,( BRGF fund helped) , there is no reporting on key parameters such as delay payment, wage-material ration, work register, social audit etc; it is clear that the most basis provisions are either not being reported or being violated with impunity. Worksite observationsConstruction of Approach Road 4 Km long... 1. No Board for MGRNEGA work. 2. No worksite facility 3. One person was taking attendance at 2; 45 PM, when asked; he said he was taking attendance on the directions of secretary VEC. He was not worker though j ob card holder, some minors were also there.working; How can we penalize who takes kuccha muster roll in broad day light that too in front of visiting central team!( detailed comments have been entered in the block offices inspection register) 4. Lyngdoh Jenny, BA pass typist in VEC, she was at the site and defended the person who was taking attendance. 5. Secretary is the key functionary in the implementation. 6. Mary Wankuen Lyngdoh, diploma and a technical assistant for 5 moths...but did not know anything about the work. needs training

127

7. Barkyntilin Ryntothiang, another TA, diploma holder, 5 months RS 6000 per month. wants raise in salary. No training has been received, they were not even aware of MGNREGA...shock and disbelief greeted. the working group! 8. Given the status of poor training and lack of awareness, the role of SIRD in imparting training comes under the scanner; most staff involved in the implementation attributed their lack of awareness about Operational Guidelines to the poor or almost non-existent training by SIRD. The North Eastern branch of NIRD also seems to have failed to impart proper and adequate training on various aspects of implementing MGNREGA as many pointed out. 9. The Convergence of BRGF with MGNREGA in areas of capacity building could be a major concern among officials implementing the Act in North East. 10. BDO continues to discharge the responsibility of PO, however Meghalaya has started the proactive of hiring Additional Program officer who is paid Rs.10,000 11. Technical Assistants are very weak link; most of them we met were newly appointed and seemed strange to rural world especially MGNREGA. when asked about their training and preparation in the area of planning and scrutiny of works, they gave 12. We were told that banks and post offices are not having enough reach in the district Ri Bohi, the cash payment is the only solution. Although we saw bank branches on the road side, we were not convinced with this explanation. We discussed the possibility of mobile banking or Banking Correspondent to rid the cash payment of various distortions. We did not find any semblance of 13. Mates must be universalized across North East...this is serious issue of capacity building if MGRNEGA has to succeed. Given the history of stranglehold of contractor raj over the development schemes (as informed by various sources); the Mate selected from workers will be a critical pillar. 14. Muster rolls until 24 May were completed and payment, but the work beginning 25 May was being done without MR. When asked, the person who was representing told in the presence of Project Director that Muster rolls have not yet been issued by program officer. To verify this, when we asked Project director about PS, we were told that he was accompanying NLM and his phone was out of reach. 15. the practice of kaccha muster roll seems rampant as muster rolls were not found at the worksite. The muster rolls maintained in the VRC officer were so neatly recorded that it gives the impression that attendance of workers are carried first kaccha and then made pucca. Muster rolls are without dates. 16. Muster rolls in the block office no; 053277 to 053296work id no 245/01 requires to be investigated.

128

17. The office of DPC/DC was not far enough; a physical visit to the VRE would have solved a lot of issues and also sent a strong message down the line.

18. The workers were not aware of any entitlements . It looks like as if they were still continuing with old practice of food for work.... Any discussion on rights with implementing staff invited either ignorance or feigned pretence of doing proper things. 19. Social audit in a single word has become a causality of lack of transparency; the guilty parties are not only Village employment Council but the top district officials who have not adhered

20. Observations have been recorded in the Inspection register at the block office for further verification and also necessary action to take remedial and disciplinary actions. The chairman working group...recorded his observations in the Inspection Register in the presence of Prof. Narayan, Dr Panda (members of working group) Project director and also economist Matthew.

26 May 2010:The Working Group visit

Sohra in East Khasi Hill district: total fund available is 60.71 crore for MGRNEGA Inspected a worksite in Mawsmai village of Shella-Bholaganj in Sohra; the site was being built under village road connectivity. Accompanied by Prof. Vinay Singh, director, NIRD (Guwahati), the Working Group comprising Ashwani Kumar, Dr. Panda and Prof. Narayan reached circuit house of Sohra and held consultation with key officials including Mr. Brahmadutt Tiwari, IAS and SDO. Mr. F. Kharamujai, BDO holds the additional charge of PO. The BDO seems to have not aware of various provisions in the Act and also operational guidelines; training of officials and sensitization is major issue in the state. Mr. Tiwari was quite enthused about the implementation of MGNREGA in the region and shared with the group some of the challenges of implementation. Following observations were made during the visit of the nearby site. 1. Though traditional village council headed by village headman implements MGNREGA, the village Dorbar does not involve women; this needs to be looked into. MGNREGA is also about gender equity. Most women on the worksite seemed quite enthusiastic about MGNREGA as it has given them a new sense of livelihood and participation in public works.

129

2. Secretary of the Village council is custodian of MR. 3. The JR Albert Swer was taken from PWD 4. Technical Assistants were recently appointed and not aware of various aspects of the implementation. 5. Workers awareness was very poor, to say the least. 6. Job card number 02007006001186, family ID 186, name Ka letleinele Chyne age 39, she said she was getting Rs 100 as wage payment. And she worked for 60 days last year. 7. Job card entries are not properly filled .

Annexure VII
WORKING GROUP MEETING ON CAPACITY BUILDING UNDER MGNREGS: REVIEW OF PERFORMANCE IN NORTH EASTERN STATES (MAY 27, 2010) MINUTES OF THE MEETING At the very outset the Director, NIRD NERC welcomed the Chairman & Members of the Working Group and also the delegates from the states of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Mizoram and Sikkim. The Director felicitated the Chairman and Members of the Working Group with Phulam Gamochas. This is followed by the self introduction of the delegates.

Prof. Ashwani Kumar, Chairman of the Working Group explained the objectives of the meeting in the context of the Capacity Building under MGNREGS: Review of Performance in North Eastern States. After explaining the Terms of Reference (ToR), he emphasized capacity building from supply and demand perspectives a to minimize the gap in systemic distortions in the implementation of MGNREGA. He was of the view that a specific capacity building model exclusively for the North Eastern States is necessary. He also shared his experiences of field visits in Assam( demoria block) and Meghalaya (rivohi and sohra) and especially focused on poor record keeping, lack of training for key implementing officials/staff including PRIs and also representatives from village employment council/area employment council, poor awareness level of primary stakeholders. The lack of capacity in the area of social audit was also noted. He also mentioned the vulnerabilities associated with cash payment in the region and suggested implementing mobile banking/ Banking Correspondents. He sought frank opinion and observations from the participants based on the experience gained in the implementation of MGNREGS for improving and strengthening the implementation of MGNREGS. Having highlighted the

130

importance of maintaining the integrity of fundamentals of the Act, he opened the house for generating a lively discussion on the implementation of MGNREGA in a region characterized by mind-boggling ethnic diversity, unqiue ecological conditions and long-history of violent conflicts. Prof. B.K. Panda, Member of the WG in his inaugural comments emphasised to look at MG-NREGS not as an income approach for rural development but to look it as a wider canvas of rural development dealing with the issue of empowerment and more particularly the capacity building aspects of development. The presentation of the state scenario began thereafter. The first session was Chaired by Prof. S. Narayan, Member of WG. The state-wise presentation and salient points reflected in the deliberation are as below:

Arunachal Pradesh

Mr. K. Loyei, Deputy Director, SIRD, Arunachal Pradesh presented the activities of SIRD, AP with special focus on MG-NREGS.

There are capacity building programme planned every year with budgetary requirement to support the delivery of the same. The experience in getting the budgetary support to carry out capacity building programme has been highly disproportionate to the requirement. Secondly, the demand factor for capacity building at District, Block and Gram Panchayat level is of very high order as compared to the strength of SIRD as its provider. Further, the reach of the capacity building at District and below level has been another challenging task for SIRD in the absence of any Extension Training Centres (ETC) in the state. Capacity building on the maintenance of online MIS has been rather a difficult proposition in view of non-availability / erratic supply of power.

Assam Shri Arun Kumar, IAS, Principal Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development Department in his frank assessment of capacity building related measures in the region especially Assam pointed out the following constraints in smooth implementation of the MGNREGS. Flow of fund from Center to State has been the real hurdle in putting various provisions of the Act in order.

131

There is no provision of float in the fund allocation system whereas ensuring guaranteed employment for 100 days at the wish of the worker is the mandatory provision of the Act. He urged members of the WG to convey to MoRD about setting up a transparent, fair and predictable system of fund flow system. In his view, the uniform policy adopted at the national level is not suitable for states like Assam where labour absorption pattern is heavily guided by the seasonal variation of the climate. During Monsoons, the work in large parts of Assam gets stopped. This needs to kept in mind while assessing the needs for capacity building. The state has initiated necessary action through engagement of CA firm for maintenance of accurate and updated accounting system. Another initiatives of the state is in the strengthening of the technical manpower. The initiatives include recruitment of 1100 Diploma Engineer (Civil) during the current year. Augmentation of the job of Extension Officer posted at the Block has been made through modification of job description, so that the post of Programme Officer in the capacity of BDO is enhanced to look after the implementation process in the MGNREGS. There is engagement of Gramin Rozgar Sevak at grass root level. In respect of engagement of Mate, the action is not initiated. He welcomed the idea of Mate and would take necessary action in this regard. Keeping the population density in the villages, he opined that the five Mates per village is a very high ratio. Payment of wages through Bank account / Post Office account has been made compulsory through out the state. In view of inadequate coverage of Bank and Post Offices, exception is provided to Karbi Anglong and Dima Hasao (NC Hills) Districts. The administrative cost of 6% is short to meet the HR requirement as enlisted in the Act and the operational guidelines. This has caused difficulty in arranging the required support structure at District, Block and Gram Panchayat level. The convergence envisaged has not been implemented yet. Asset registration through MIS is yet to be introduced. The recent circular of Central Government directing Banks to operate the accounts of MGNREGS workers without service charge has been a shocking event to the implementation of the programme as Banks have refused to render such services without service charge. The immediate intervention on this issue is a must for management of transparent payment system. Shri K. Kalita, Director SIRD, Assam presented the capacity building activities completed upto 31st March 2010 and the proposal made for FY 2010-11 in Assam. In a period of three years (2006-07 to 2009-10), SIRD has conducted 361 programmes covering 13630 participants in the state representing elected representative of PRIs and functionaries connected with MGNREGS. The capacity building activities proposed fot FY 2010-11 include 225 programmes targeting 7865 participants to cover. Awareness building of

132

Gram Sabha is another proposed activity of the year. The target under it is to cover 20,000 participants under 200 awareness building campaigns. In his opinion, the SIRD along with its ETCs can meet all varieties of capacity building requirement in the state provided the following support is extended(a) Funding of Rs.300.00 lakhs annually to meet all expenditure. (b) Faculty Support to ETCs at the rate of two faculties per ETC and 3 at the SIRD Headquarters

Manipur The officers from Manipur was absent. The officer however, had turned up for the round table discussion on 25th May 2010 as per earlier invitation. The Chairman of the working group requested NIRD( Guwahati) to seek a detailed note from Manipur in areas of capacity building for the state.

Meghalaya Mr. BS Rumnong, Sr. Faculty Member, SIRD, Meghalaya presented the case of the state as under: Because the WG has had direct feedback from the field and also at the office level, the detailed position in respect of MGNREGS implementation was not presented. 80% of SIRDs training is concerned with the capacity building of MGNREGS staff. Prof. Panda from WG sought a detailed note on the training modules and calendar in this regard. All technical assistant engaged under MGNREGS have been trained at SIRD. The Chairman intervened in the discussion to point out the poor training of technical assistants. Based on field visits in Meghalaya, he observed that a technical assistants need to properly trained and also made familiar with the prospective planning process. Edusect network is under use with 15 terminals. Radio is also used for awareness building about the provisions of MGNREGS. ICT infrastructure is weak. Internet connectivity is also weak. Even it is not available in the three BRGF Districts also. Similarly, the helpline for MGNREGS is also absent. About HR deployment at different levels, the contract terms of service for the post of Additional Programme Officer at Block level has stood as a problem. The remuneration as well as the TA/DA provision arranged are not at all attractive resulting in lack of motivation and also frequent turn over the contract staff. This according to him as adversely affected the implementation performance. The office bearers of Village Employment Council (VEC) who discharge critical functions in the implementation have no provision for any kind of remuneration. Adequate provision is necessary.

133

The next session of the roundtable discussion was Chaired by Dr. B. Panda, Member of WG. The state-wise presentation and salient points reflected in the deliberation are as below:

Mizoram Mr. Laldinliana, Asst. Director, SIRD, Mizoram presented the case of Mizoram. Provided the structure of HR related to implementation of MGNREGS at State, District, Block and Village Council level. The concept of social audit is alien to the psyche of Mizo social life. By tradition Mizos shy away from pointing out the weakness of others. Social audit need not be fault finding, he argued. A culturally sensitive module of social audit needs to design for regions like Mizoram. The Faculty strength is available with SIRD and two ETCs are inadequate to cope with the capability building demand of MGNREGS. The frequent changes in the operation of MIS came up for discussion it was observed that this has resulted repeated need for equipping the staff with the new system. The payment of wages to workers through Bank / PO account is limited, because of non-availability of the same in many Blocks. Banking correspondent is a must.

Nagaland

Mr. Kelei Zeliang, Joint Secretary, RD, Nagaland presented various aspects related to the implementation of MGNREGS besides highlighting the problems. The role of SIRD was added further by Dr. Kedise Pucho, Sr. Lecturer, SIRD, Nagaland & OSD ETC Phek The organogram for implementation for the programme at State, District, Block and Village Council level has been presented. The post of DPC in respect of Nagaland is held by the Project Director. As regards DPC, it was felt in the discussion that more state service officials needs to be involved. This will ensure better and effective administrative control and management. At village level the implementation is looked after by VDB. Fund at grass root level is released to VDB and the joint account is maintained by Programme Officer and VDB Secretary. Workers are paid in cash and payment is made by VDB Secretary. Bank account / Post Office account is not introduced for the workers for payment of wages. The Social Audit is the responsibility of Village Council which it conducts in the presents of the villagers. Convergence is not attempted in the state. Need for issue of guidelines is necessary for the purpose.

134

The SIRD has seven Faculty Members besides two ETCs which no additional Faculty posts. At three levels trainings are being imparted. At the District level SIRD has covered 609 officers, at Block level 545 and at Village level 12700 participants. SIRD has translated the salient features of MGNREGS in to five local dialects and distributed in the villages for awareness generation and transparency building.

Sikkim

Ms. Bhumika Pradhan, Asst. Director, SIRD, Sikkim presented the status of implementation of MGNREGS along with the constraint encountered.

The HR structure followed in the state starting from State, District and Block level has been provided along with the strength of manpower in terms of regular and contractual services. The post of DPC held by District Development Officer and the post of PO is held by the BDO. Panchayats which is two tier system in the state is fully used for implementation of MGNREGS. There is Assistant DPC and PO engaged on contract service. The package for the former is Rs. 15,000/- per month and for the later Rs. 12,000/- per month. The plan estimates are prepared using a software package (estimate automation). The Chairman of WG observed that NIRD( Guwahati) needed to consider conducting a feasibility study for up scaling autorotation system across the region as generic capacity building support for planning in MGNREGA. Agriculture appears to have taken a back seat, because of the growth of new tendency of farmers to manage their livelihood through earning of wages under MGNREGS. Dated receipts application seeking job by the job card holder is not maintained. This was noted as a serious shortcoming in the implementation of MGNREGA. Working season is very limited. There should be a specific time slots for implementation of MGNREGS and the arrangement of fund flow should be there accordingly. NIRD (Guwahati) in consultation with Sikkim SIRD

135

needed to work out a project planning system for completing 100 days of work within limited working season, the Chairman of WG observed. Attempt has been made for carrying out Social Audit. The experience however is not encouraging creating disturbance in the relation between and amongst officers.

At the end of the meeting, It was noted that states that were absent in the meeting would present a detailed note in their capacity building requirements within a week. The Chairman of the Working Group congratulated the delegates from different states for their active participation and frank opinions. The Chairman thanked Prof. Narayan and Prof. Panda (members of Working Group) and Shri Arun Kumar, Principal Secretary, Assam for their fruitful interventions in the discussion. At the requests of representatives from different states, he also agreed to undertake detailed visit of the region. He praised Dr. Vinay Singh, director NIRD (Guwahati) for giving a new facelift to the programs of NIRD in the region and urged him to undertake more MGNREGA related training workshops during monsoon season. He also noted the courteous behavior of the faculty and staff of the institute. He requested all the states to submit an update on the status of their capacity building exercise. He suggested to participants to provide Working Group their detailed assessment of needs for capacity building in soft copies within a week. In addition the Chairman also requested each state to work out item wise budget for strengthening of SIRDs and ETCs and also the budgetary requirement for developing video conferencing facilities at State, District and Block level. Headed by Director, SIRD Assam and comprising members from Sikkim, Meghalaya and Arunachal Pradesh, a subgroup was formed to deliberate on this issue. The report of the subgroup would be submitted to the Director, NIRD (Guwahati) in a week for consideration of WG. The meeting concluded with vote of thanks from Dr. K. Haloi, Asst. Prof. (Sr), NIRD NERC, Guwahati.

136

137

ANNEXURE - VIII

Notes from Prof. Narayan (Member, Working Group on Capacity Building)

Visit report of Chhattisgarh; 9April 2010

The member met MGNREGA commissioner and also met joint secretary of MGNREGA; they were very proactive about the implementation. Later, he also visited Uparwara village of Uparwara Panchyat of Zila Janpad Panchayat of Raipur district with Mr. Om Prakash Sharma, Assistant Programmer M. NAREGA. He reached the site without prior information. He found that Panchayat Bhawan was in good condition with stationary and furniture. There was room and furniture for each functionary. Money recently resale for purchase of Computer and are likely to be installed in a week time; Panchayat was not earning enough revenue; MGNREGA was not very successful because the area was declared urban area. Sarpanch and Ward member were present. Panchayat Secretary, Rozgar Sahayak (Employment Assistant) was also present. Register of Gran Sabha was update and reflect regular meeting. Rozgar Sahayak also showed registers of M.GNREGA. The Member also checked a couple of worksites. Vashudeva worked in MGNREGA last year before rainy season for 14 days and was paid @ Rs. 75/- per day. No employment was provided last year. He also interviewed four persons about the functioning of MGNREGA; most workers generally appreciated the timely payment and were supportive of the program but workers were not happy about the quality of the work. Observations; 1. The first and foremost recommendation is that we must ensure the democratic functioning of the gram Sabha as per the Constitution and the findings of the committee is that Gram Sabha is not functioning anywhere which is the most important institution of MNAREGA People be made aware of their rights to get work under MGNARGEA otherwise the 100 days work will never achieved. Appointment and Training of Mate be made uniform across the country. Ward Sabha be made unit for demanding work/projecting work instead of Gram Sabha. Some more regulatory mechanism on Mukhiya and interface of Mukhiya and Pramukh with Rojgar Sewak/Programme Officer from MGNAREGA point of view is required. Training for maintaining records specially Muster Roll be organized for the functionaries and beneficiaries from panchayat to district level.

2. 3. 4.

5.

6.

138

7.

Accredited Engineers be trained properly in measurement. The observation of the committee is that in most of the state we find either no Engineer or cosmetic Engineer.

8. Each panchayat must have PANCHAYAT GHAR with required infrastructure.

139

Annexure IX

Organnogram of Chhattisgarh MGNREGA (Submitted by Add. Commissioner, MGNREGA) Organnogram of MGNREGA administration

Commissioner

Additional Commissioner

Joint Director, Finance

Joint Commissioner (2)

Account Officer

Deputy

Expert

Expert

Expert

Expert

Comm. (2)

(Irrigation) (RES) (Forest) (Agri.)

Asst. A.O.

140

Accountant (2)

Asst. Statistical Publicity Advisor Officer (1) Social (1) Audit

Comm. Officer (1)

(1)

District level (18)

District Programme Coordinator

141

CEO, ZP (Additional District Programme Coordinator)

Coordinator Asst. Finance Publicity

APO Coordinator

Coordinator Coordinator Programmer Coordinator

Expert

Grievance

Social audit

Technical

Training

Monitoring

Redressal Officer

&Evaluation

Account Officer

Assistant Grivance Redressal

Assistant

Assistant

Assistant

Social audit Technical Programmer

Block level (146)

Programme Officer

Coordinator Technical

Coordinator Social Audit

Assistant Programmer

142

Assistant Technical

Assistant Social Audit

Gram Panchayat level (9734)

Gram Rozgar Sahayak

The State Mahatma Gandhi NREGA cell is headed by the Commissioner (at present senior IFS officer Shri K.Subramanium). Besides an additional commissioner, one deputy commissioner, two technical experts, one publicity officer, one assistant commissioner and one officer in charge of social audit is posted at the State level.

Commissioner is responsible for the overall implementation of the programme within the State.

Contractual Staff at all levels are recruited under the Chhattisgarh Contract Service Rules, 2004.

143

Recruitment of contractual staff is for the period of 1 year and after 1 year service is extended or terminated on the basis of performance report. The performance report evaluate the performance of the concerned officer/staff on the basis of achievement of physical and financial progress, outstanding achievement in any of the areas, quality of work, knowledge of the work, approach to work, communication ability, performance in the team, ability to make plans, ability to inspect and review the works and integrity.

The process to appoint Ombudsman in the district is complete for 16 districts. Two meetings of the selection committee made for this purpose has been held so far. The details of the candidates for twelve districts were posted on the website for inviting objections and after that the second meeting of the selection committee took place. The appointment orders for these will be issued shortly. No suitable names were suggested in the panel of names for four districts. Therefore, names were invited after fresh advertisement. These names will be posted on the website for inviting objections soon.

The draft of Chhattisgarh MGNREGS Grievance Redressal Rules has been framed and posted on the website and notified in the extraordinary gazette dated 11th June 2010, for inviting objections and suggestions.

The department of Panchayat & Rural development conducts the training programmes for officials and staffs at the state, district and block levels. Besides State Institute of Rural Development is the main institution which has been preparing training modules for officials, staff as well as PRI functionaries. Since the beginning of NREGA SIRD has conducted 1247 sessions and more than 55,000 participants, which includes 10,473 PRI functionaries have been trained. SIRD has prepared 200 facilitators who go to the block and clusters of villages to train the village level functionaries. Trainings for officials have been conducted on NREGA in general, social audit under MGNREGA, village development planning, for maintenance and updation of MGNREGA records. Engineers from Rural Engineering Services

144

have been trained at the State level to facilitate and trained the gram rozgar sahayaks and mates at the block level.

Trainings for wage disbursement through post offices have also been conducted by SIRD through Edu-sat. The participants of this training were Programme Officers and Post office staff.

SIRD has prepare modules on the main provisions of the MGNREGA, on the working of village monitoring committee (VMC), social audit and has prepared short films on the process of implementation, social audit and wage disbursement.

Members of Panchayati Raj have been trained on MGNREGA and social audit in MGNREGA in particular.

State Level Bankers Committee meetings are taking place every month regularly under the chairmanship of the Chief Secretary. Various issues related to the problems faced by the field functionaries in wage disbursement through institutions are discussed there and brought to the notice of bankers. Besides regular reviews by the Secretary, Panchayat & Rural Development takes place through meetings and video conferencing. In such review meetings the CEO, ZPs along with Programme Officers, bankers and post office staff are also present. The SLBC Convener and Director, Post have also been attending such review meeting regularly.

Wage disbursement to MGNREGA workers is taking place through BCM in five districts. However, the remote districts having very low density of bank branches and post offices are still facing the difficulty in timely wage disbursement. State bank of India was assigned some parts of Bastar division for BCM, however no progress has been made in this regard due to non availability of staff at the customer service points.

145

146

Annexure X
Bihar visit of the Working Groups( May 3 to 5 May 2010) Schedule ; 3 May Chairmen and the team comprising Mr. Ved Arya, Mr. Pramathesh Ambasta, Mr. Badrinarayan reaching Patna. As soon as the chairman arrived at 3PM, he left for field visits and interactions with officials in JehanabadBodhgaya Gaya region. Mr. Pramathesh and Ved Arya left for Khagaria on 4 May. 4 May The chairman covers Gaya/Bodhgayafield visitsnight returns to Patna 5 May The meeting of Working Group with govt officials and roundtable at AN Sinha after 3PM. 6 May---The Chairman extended his visit and interacted with officials and had a meeting at ADRI(Patna). 7 MayThe Chairman returns to Mumbai Rationale of the Visit; As we all know that Bihar is one of the low performers in MGNREGA. Consider following facts; the average days of employment under National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) in Bihar has been 35 in 2006-07, 22 in 2007-08 and 26 in 2008-9 and 26 in 2009-10. Consider some districts with very low coverage of MGNREGA in 2009-10; Bhojpur(19 days), Darbhanga (19 days), Gaya(19days),Kaimur (19 days), Madhubani (12 days), Nawada(14 days), Purnia (15 days), Rohtas (19 days), Samastipur(19 days), Sheohar(19 days), Khagaria(19 days), Madhepura (13 days), Paschim Champaran( 15 days) until December 2009.( The Working Group decided to visit two low-performing districts namely, Gaya and Khagaria ) Compare the latest incident in Vaishali in which four dozen unemployed people of Chandi Village in Vaishali district of Bihar have allegedly burnt their job cards on Sunday7 February 2010( according to a news report) with the eruption of violence during the social audit on 23 December 2009 in Jamua Panchayat of Araria District. The district administration filed F.I.R against the infamous Mukhiya Pati. The social audit not only indicated the extent of neo-rural mafias hold over NREGA, but also shockingly revealed that 76% of the 1710 job card holders of the panchayat did not even get one day of work in 08-09. These seemingly isolated incidents are in fact part of an unfolding systemic crisis that MGNREGA has been facing in Bihar for long. In a state where it is estimated that there are approximately 1.5 crore BPL families (as argued by the state administration), the number of household provided employment has not exceeded more than 34 lakh in 2009-10. Ironically, although majority of people in Bihar are BPL, SC, ST, IYA beneficiaries and SF/MF but only 1% work has been done on individual Category IV works. With a meagre spending of

147

only Rs. 136 crore on MGNREGA Bihar fails to shed the clichd image of anti-poor state! Lets also not forget that the Bihar Rural Development Minister Bhagwan Singh Kushwaha has admitted in the state assembly that rich people including government officials were given job cards under NREGA in Sataur panchayat under Navhatta block in Saharsa district. Though Bihar government has done some innovation wrt sms based monitoring/ biometric muster rolls, formalization of contract system of hiring, efforts to formulate an independent society to implement MGRNEGA etc. it is still struggling to implement MGNREGA. Apart from capacity issues, in some GPs Mukhiyas escaped with the funds. Some officials are also very creative. Consider the case of Gopalganj: In a review meeting with MoRD, the officials from the district informed MoRD that total Fund available with Gopalganj was 70 crore Rs. but the district could not spend more than 20 crores until December 2009. However, the creative officials proposed to MoRD that they would spend the remaining 50 Crore Rs in the next three months! It seems MGNREGA continues to be bogged down by the infamous practices of March loot in Bihar!

Notes form the visit; 3 May 2010

After arrival at the Patna airport at 3PM, the Chairman left immediately for field visits and interaction with key officials and workers in Jehanabad-Gaya- Bodhgaya region. Accompanied by Mr. Badrinarayan, Add. Commissioner, MGRNEGA, Rajasthan and Mr. SK Singh, JS (department of RD, GoB), the team reached Jehanabad circuit house. The district Collector/ DPC Ms. Sahani gave a brief summary of the progress of the implementation in the district. Total 2952 schemes have been taken and 1036 schemes have been completed and Total Expenditure incurred on themes is Rs. 2221.93 Lakhs until Feb.2010. Jobs are provided to the job cards holders on their demand for work and payment of wages are made through account of Banks/Post Offices. More than 16 lakh person days of work has been created in 2009-10 in the district. The DPC reported that the implementation of MGRNEGA has also diluted the effect of Naxal movement in the district; it was here in Jehanabad where Naxals in 2005 attacked the district jail and released their cadre. Since the time was very limited, the chairman appreciate the works of the DPC and proposed to undertake an independent monitoring for assessing the impact of MGNREGA on Naxal movement in the district. Regarding staff, the DPC shed some light on the issues of contract staff and their training. The process of contract staff seems to be still evolving in Bihar and training is major handicap. The DPC also has not had much exposure wrt training and expressed her desire to attend to training at some nationally reputed training institute. The DPC enquired with Mr. Badrinarayan about the experience of mate. And social audit as conducted in Rajasthan. The lack of civil society participation was noted in the implementation.( Locals opine that district administrations looks at NGOs with suspicions as some of them are considered sympathisers of Naxal causes.) The DPC agreed that much of MGRNEGA was being carried out by Line departments and PRIs have not yet showed much success in realising their potential in the implementation. The Chairman drew the attention of DPC about the role of mate in worksite management. Presently in Bihar the mate only takes attendance for the workers; this has adversely affected the implementation. The Chairman discussed the possibility of Capacity Building and

148

training for Mates on issues such as task napi, lead and lift principles, calculations, SoR et al. It was clear that Bihar not only lacks managerial capacity but also serious requires a massive Upgradation of its existing training and skill development capacities for key functionaries of MGNREGA. The awareness about works for individual land development and works meant for SC/ST/ etc was found wanting among the key functionaries in the district. However, it was noted that DPC had a very positive attitude towards MGNREGA. After thanking DPC for promptly organizing the meeting, the Chairman left for Bodhgaya-Gaya at 6:30PM. The chairman reached late in Bodhgaya due to a massive road held-up during the journey and was received by Mr. Durgesh Nandan, DDC of Gaya.

Gaya/Bodhgaya Visit: 4 May 2010

Early morning in Bodhgaya, the Chairman visited the Samanvaya Ashram run by veteran Sarvodlya social worker Mr. Dwarko Sundrani for a discussion with him on local conditions wrt implementation of MGNREGA. Mr. Sundrani told him about violations of various provisions of MGNREGA especially non-opening of work despite demands of local labourers. He presented him a complaint about nonimplementation of MGNREGA in Bodhgaya in which several card holders have not been jobs. The complaint was duly received by Gaya administration and DDC was directed by the DPC on 30 March 2010(letter no; 1459) to take immediate action in this regard. It was quite frustrating to see that an old man in his 80s was struggling to secure jobs for poor under MGNREGA without any proactive support from the district administration. Accompanied with DDC, director SGSY, Sundraniji, and Mr Badrinarayan,( member, working group), the chairman decided to visit Gram Sarvodyapuri (post koshila) block Bodhgaya where it was alleged that some 88 cardholders had never got any work under MGNREGA. . Most job cards do not have photographs .In some job cards basic details such as work and payment are completely missing. And people narrated many instanced in which no dated receipts were given. The village was largely a SC habitation and the dismal conditions of various development programs of GoI were writ large. The villagers assembled in large numbers for an impromptu public hearing with the visiting team; the DDC and his staff agreed to record the proceeding so that a proper remedial action could be taken. The local Sarpanch was not available. The Program Officer finally reached the site after a long wait; she had apparently no idea about the conditions of the implementation of MGRNEGA in the village as most labourers (many of them were women) complained about no work under MGRNEGA. Some reported that after 4/1/ 2009, no work was ever started in the village; this was quite shocking given the acute poverty and also a Maoist area! The team concluded that no demand for work was at best an administrative myth that needed to be investigated. In contrast, women working under Jeevika project expressed a lot of satisfaction with works of Self Help group. It was strange to see that many SC families (also BPL families) such as Suraj Paswan did not job card. Manu Majhi job card number 641 bitterly complained about having worked only 6 days in MGNREGA. The Program Officer and Employment Gurantee Assistant along with Sarpanch needed to be made accountable for lapses in the implementation. DDC promised to discuss the matter with DPC/Collector in this regard. At the intervention of local people, the DDC instructed PO to start a work registration campaign and ensure opening of the work. The Visiting team after assuring the people that follow up action would be taken; this also showed that capacity building needs to broaden its ambit to look at the issues

149

of social mobilization and community participation as integral to the implementation of MGRNEGA. After this, the visiting team proceed for Gram Banfar in block Barachatti (Bodhgaya). The same story was repeated here also. DDC and Program Officer failed to explain as to why poor sc families were not getting MGRNEGA work. Most families told the same story of neglect by the local administration and no means to lodge any complain. A detailed visit report had been prepared by DDC. However, ironically, the school building had information about IYS and other programs painted on its walls but without any effect. The school was also a temporary shelter for para-military forces involved in anti-Naxal operations. Given the influence of Maoists in the area, the neglect of MGNREGA defied commonsense as well. In contrast, Mr. Dwarko Sundrani was quite welcomed by the local SC families and they appreciated his social work in the region. The working group recommends taking prompt administrative measures to ensure the implementation of MGNREGA in the villages the team visited. Despite the poverty and Naxal problem, the youth of the village were quite enthused about MGRNEGA and also SGSY; one disabled youth showed his talent in weaving carpet; the DDC promised to involve the village in the net of SGSY. It was quite clear that local block level officials and key support staff were not propoor. After the visit of the village, the team went to Barachatti block office; it was quite an eye-opener in terms of poor management of MGRNEGA and pathetic work conditions for MGNREGA staff. The computers for MGNREGA were used for other block works and the operator was missing on the pretext of MIS uploading. When the team wanted to inspect the registers and muster rolls, they were told that these are locked in the almirah and key were with the PO who after several calls did not pick up his phone. Mr. Badrinarayan pointed several errors in the reporting on the MIS; DDC agreed to take action in this regard. Though there was so much hype about Panchyati Raj, it was apparent that PRIs were in dismal conditions. After site visits, the Working Group met Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh. DPC/District Collectors. He gave a patient hearing and also agreed with several points raised by the Working Groups. He promised to take urgent action on Mr. Sundranis complaint about no work for jab card holders. The Chairman reminded him about his critical role in ensuring the integrity of the Act. He shared with the working group the remedial actions and also disciplinary actions taken against Employment Gurantee Assistant and also program officers; the district did indeed suffer from capacity related issues such as lack of POs, Rozgar Sevaks, and JEs etc. However, the district administration seemed to put transparency and accountability issues on the back burner. The working group then attended a public meeting organized by DPC in which key stakeholders from administration, PRIs, banks and post-officers participated. The silver lining in the meeting was DPCs imitative to launch an awareness campaign for MGRNEGA in a campaign mode; this has already been launched from 13 April 2010. The chairman, however, urged him to involve reputed and credible civil society organizations in the planning and monitoring of MGRNEGA. The Mukhiya and other PRIs representatives generally complained about lack of funds and bureaucratic controls. In the discussion, it became clear that district administration continues to implement MGNREGA through old administrative systems without any dedicated management support systems. In fact, the circulars/directives of MGRNEGA are being issued from confidential section

150

(Gopinay Shakha) of the collectorate; this is quite ironical as framers of MGNREGA had relied on proactive disclosures rules and RTI for making implementation more transparent and people friendly. In contrast, Bihar is still stuck in colonial practices of administration. If MGNREGA continues to implement from Confidential sections of district administration, there is no future for the poor! 5 May 2010. Meeting with Secretary, Rural Development, and Secretary, Planning, Government of Bihar. Meeting with Mr Santosh Mathew, Secretary, RD, GoB. Key observation made by the WG was that with a low rate of wage days (9 per year?), although major effort was made by the then RD Secretary, Mr Mukherjee to streamline recruitment of staff at the district level, especially engineers, through a transparent system, the ground level implementation left much to be desired. Mr Mathew made the point that the political will and leadership is strong and favourable for reforms. WG members made the observation that even then today there was little preparedness in the system to plan for works in the year ahead. The selection of mate was completely in control of the Mukhia and capacity of the field assistant was abysmal even to measure the work done on simple works like raising a wall of the well above the ground. The Secretary said he wasnt clear how many staff could be recruited and how much money could be paid. Is it proportionate to the population served or it was to be for a geographical area? We welcomed his idea of putting together a resource material on what is working and whats not working in various states from which he said he could learn (he quoted the example of NHSRC that has done a wonderful job in the health sector, w.r.t. NRHM).

5 May 2010: Interactions with key officials and roundtable at AN Sinha Institute of Social Studies, Patna
At the outset of discussion Professor D M Diwakar, Director, A N Sinha Institute of Social Studies welcomed Ashwani Kumar, chairman Working Group for visiting A N Sinha Institute of Social Studies, Patna for consultation regarding capacity building of MNREGS. He also extended his warm welcome to participant of the consultation meeting. While welcoming he expressed his opinion for strengthening the implementation, monitoring and evaluation network of MNREGS. He underlined the need of extensive awareness campaign for procedures, and entitlements. He emphasized to activate Gram Sabha and develop wage labour groups of catalysts and provide them proper training about entitlements, procedures and redressal mechanism in case of non-implementations. Professor Ashwani Kumar introduced the background of the formation of the group and objectives of the visit. He informed the participants that the Ministry of Rural Development has formed Working Groups for looking into the issues of wages, planning, transparency, and capacity building towards strengthening MNREGS. Emphasis was on ways and means to strengthen administration,

151

evaluation, monitoring, uniformity in operational activities and guidelines. Capacity building in terms of governance reforms Bihar is at the threshold of new model. He also expressed concerns of Bihar not being a front-ranking states in the implementation of MGNREGA and also not following operational guidelines of MNREGS. Average days of employment created in Bihar were quite low. Need assessment of society leading to a micro planning, and efficient support system including law and order, institutional finance, banking linkages and procedures, and developing indigenous model for MNREGS in Bihar is necessary. The question of inequality and share in power remained major challenge. His colleagues from the Working Group echoed the same observations; Ved Arya and Pramathesh also wondered if Jeevika could be a successful program then why not MGNREGA. They underlined the need for new management systems for Bihar. Dr P P Gosh (ADRI) underlined the severe shortage of infrastructure at PRI level. Stakeholders from BASIX emphasized on SHG models for implementation. Pramathesh acknowledged the need of effective decentralization; however, he underlined the difficulties in acquiring efficiencies in PRIs. Mr Ved Arya expressed his concerns as to what were happening in Bihar. Lapses in institutional delivery and insensitive power groups working against the interests of effective implementations of the NREGS. Dr. Shaibal Gupta very eloquently explained the notion of lack of good governance in the institutional memory of the state power as the prime culprit for the poor implementation of MGRNEGA. He expressed his concerns on quality of governance of NREGS. He argued that the people in villages are empowered but in absence of infrastructure and secretariat PRIs do not translate into effective implementations. Dr Meera Datta raised the issues of gender friendly environment for effective implementation. Members from civil society raised the issue of community participation in the planning and monitoring of MGNREGA. Mr Mathew talked about emulating the successful example of Jeevika in terms of recruitment and selection by an independent agency. Jeevika CEO Mr Arvind Chaudhury, iAS, clearly articulated the successful experience of outsourcing the task of recruitment and selection to a professional agency SRIJAN IDS that helped Jeevika find quality human resources to work as a dedicated staff at the cutting edge working with people directly as well as all management levels from block, district to the state. They have a HR policy for the contract staff (as most of the staff is).
Following Members were Present in the roundtable: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Ashwani Kumar Chairman, Dr. Pramathesh Ambasta Member Prof. Sachindra Narayan Member Mr. Ved Arya Member Prof. D M Diwakar Director, A N Sinha Institute of Social Studies, Patna Jagdish Prasad A N Sinha Institute of Social Studies, Patna

152 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. Sudhir Kumar, S M A Yousuf Shri Badri Narayan Shri Sunil Kumar Singh Anil Kumar Uma Shankar Prasad Vinay Ohdar Byomesh Kr. Lal Rakesh Tiwary Shaibal Gupta P P Ghosh Meera Datta V Sharan, Arvind Kumar Chowdhary Dharmendra Mihir Ved Arya Sanjay Kr Prasad Ms Pradeep Priyadarshini ANSISS, Patna, ANSISS, Patna, Addnl Commissioner, NREGS, Rajasthan Joint Secretary, RDD, Government of Bihar DDC Patna, Govt of Bihar DDC Vaishali, Govt of Bihar R M, Action Aid, Bihar Pro Manager, Action Aid M&E, Cell, Planning Department Member Secretary, ADRI, Patna Director, ADRI, Patna Development Research Institute, CIMP, Patna Proj Dir BRLP, Patna Sr Manager, Basix Basix Programme Leader, SRIJAN, Patna Ekta Parishad, Patna Ekta Parishad, Patna

Patna Visit: 6 May 2010 The Chairman interacted with Mr. Rajwardhan Sharma, Additional DG (Police) at the state secretariat at 10 AM on the specific issue of Maoist affected areas and the need for development programmes. It was felt that programmes like MGNREGA had great potential the blunt the appeal of Maoists. However, it needs to be done in an organized and systematic manner with the help of civil society groups/voluntary organizations. And this initiative needs to keep separate from police action or Green Hunt. In the identification or selection of Voluntary Organizations, care should be taken to deploy good, efficient and reputed voluntary organizations; local voluntary organizations should be partnered with good voluntary organizations having reputation and good track record. The Chairman also visited ADRI (Asian Development Research Institute) at11 AM for a discussion on implementation of MGNREGA and the role of PRIs. The issue of RG Seva Kendra came up for discussion. It was appreciated that Central Government has been trying to provide infrastructural and service support to PRIs especially for implementation of MGNREGA. However, the participants also pointed out that it needs to be integrated with Bihars scheme for a three-storied infrastructure for locating all offices of PRIs. Bihar has planned to spend Rs 80 lakh for building infrastructure for PRIs at the panchayat level. The field experience in Gaya was also shared with ADRI. One of the major issues that impede the implementation of MGNREGA was absence of civil society organizations/Voluntary

153

Organizations in the field. The capacity of PRIs to deliver MGNREGA would improve if VOs begin to organize or mobilize primary stakeholders (labourers) was noted by ADRI. It was also noted that leading research institutions need to be involved in the Evaluation Work of MGNREGA. The state government and Central government need to focus on ways and means to broadbase the existing framework of PIN (Professional Institutional Network) of MoRD. It was also noted that state governments hardly pay any attention to evaluation aspects of implementation of MGNREGA. As regards recharging MGNREGA in Maoist affected areas, ADRI agreed with the perspective of taking RD programs to the people with the help of Voluntary Organizations. However, the participants also suggested that it must be done with PRIs active involvement. As regards creating a new rural cadre for rural development programs, Bihar seems to have made some progress as the state has already laid down a separate cadre at the block level that comprises officials and staff from existing supervisory cadre at the Panchayat level. The BDOs and others have been relocated to district. The governance reforms in Bihar also came up for discussion. It was felt that with further administrative reforms, Bihar would also catch up with best performing MGNREGA states. The fragile base of governance systems was highlighted as the major capacity hindrance. The Chairman also visited BIPARD (Bihar Institute for Administrative and Rural Development) at 2:30 PM for a discussion with Mr. Amithabh Verma, DG of BIPARD. The issue of training of officials and staff was frequently mentioned in the Bihar visit. The shortage of training facilities that include systematic and organized training modules has been noted by the Working Group. The DG BIPARD was quite welcoming and shared his perspective on the role of the institute. The Institute was set up after bifurcation of the state and still undergoing the process of transitition. The DG explained the rationale of the institute and also the onerous challenges of serving the multiple needs of capacity building. Currently, the institute does not have a full time DG as the current DG is also Secretary Cooperatives and Animal Husbandries. Therefore, the need for a full time dedicated DG is urgently needed for taking the institute through the transition process. On the generic issue of training for MGNREGA the DG frankly accepted that not much was being done except organising workshops/seminars/. The working group gathered from the discussion with DG and also a submission dated 29June 2010(almost a gap of two months) that BIPARD itself needs capacity building support! Other than mechanically and linearly organized (without any exercise for TNA), block level training programmes/ one day orientation programs are being organized in the state for MGRNEGA. Most block level programs are for 3days. According to BIPARD, total number of training programs in 2008-9 was 269(all block level programs) and total number of participants was 17357. From April 2009- march 2010, BIPARD conducted only 8 training programs and the total number of participants was only 303; surely, there is dilution of focus on training in Bihar. BIAPRD is not currently not equipped though the numbers are impressive on their

154

own but if they are evaluated on some outcome parameters, there seems to be a crisis in the training systems for MGRNEGA in Bihar!
(The Chairman appreciates the support provided by Mr. SK Singh, JS( department of RD, GoB and also member of the Working Group), however NIRD could not provide any quick assessment of the performance of MGNREGA in the state of Bihar as suggested by the Chairman in his e-letter dated 27 April2010. The support from NIRD, Patna was wanting in many respects and efforts need to be taken to make Patna NIRD functional enough to support the works of MoRD, if not the working group. If the OSD of Patna, NIRD does not even know the location of BIPARD in the city, rest we can leave to the imagination of decision makers at NIRD(Hyderabad)!

Annexure XI

Working Groups visit in Rajasthan(Jaipur); 7 April 2010 Chairmans note on the visit

My meetings with Officials at NREGA cell of Rural Development Department (Rajasthan Govt) on 7 April 2010 went very well; Since NREGA Commissioner Mr. Tanmay Kumar was away to Delhi, the meeting was organized by additional MGNREGA Commissioner Mr. Gupta. The intervention of Mr. Tanmay Kumar whom some of us met at the Planning Commission (New Delhi) on 6 April resolved the issue of nominating a member from Rajasthan Government to the Working Group. He promised to nominated Mr. Badrinarayan, additional commissioner. However, I must place it on record that it delayed the functioning of our Working Group. In the

155

meeting, the MGNREGA officials in Rajasthan agreed to supply information sought within a week. I would appreciate if Dr. Rajni Kant follows it up and circulate the information as early as possible. In the meeting with Rajasthan Officials, it became clear that MGNREGA was being implemented without any HR policy especially for officials/staff working on contract. Ved and Pramathesh kindly pay attention to HR issues as discussed in Hyderabad. Dr. Panda can you give some thoughts on how to make more effective Capacity Building Training Report on MIS of MoRD; presently it gives consolidated figures on the status of training without any information of various relevant parameters of training , levels and frequency of training. In meeting with SIRD (Rajasthan) officials-faculty including DG SIRD on 8 April 2010, it has been resolved to place on record all the information relating to capacity building especially training for the perusal of members of Working Groups. Since Rajasthan has pioneered the concept of Mate training so it would be necessary that Working Group gets all the relevant information about the training of Mate. SIRD has agreed to supply information on training needs of Mate and other stakeholders Again, Dr. Rajanikant would coordinate with SIRD and get the required material within a week. I also visited the site of proposed branch of NIRD in Jaipur. We need to ask NIRD (Hyderabad) to supply information about this for ascertaining as to how the branch of NIRD in Jaipur could be conceptualized as a world-class institution on all capacity related issues relating to MGNREGA and Panchyati Raj. The idea of setting up a dedicated Research and Evaluation System for MGNREGA could be located at this proposed site. Since we have slowly and surely entered the era of innovation in the policies for rural development, the proposed branch of NIRD could easily become a Hub for Innovation Studies (HFIS) where innovations in MGNREGA, NRLM, Bhart Nirman, and BRGF etc could be institutionalized. Currently, MoRD is bogged down in attending to too many things apart from regular administrative issues

156

Annexure XII

Note on Information Constraints/ Research Support Challenges faced by the Working Group Following observations need to be kept for remedial action; 1. The Working Group places on record that no state government ever responded to the detailed questionnaire prepared by Working Group. 2. A brief questionnaire prepared by the Working Group was replied by Rajasthan and Bihar during study visits. Though Chhattisgarh did not respond to the detailed questionnaire during Prof. Narayans visit, but it provided a short summary within a span of 24 hours after the Chairman reminded on 27 June the MGNREGA cell of the state on Chhattisgarh. 3. And other than three SIRDs, (Jabalpur, Pune and Guwahati) and APARD, no SIRDs ever responded to Working Groups questionnaire, e-letter of chairman 9 April2010. The letter from NIRD dated 23 April 2010 notes receipt of material from three SIRDs but procured material never reached the Working Group. The Chairmans final reminder dated 17 June 2010 met with no success. Despite Chairmans personal visit and interaction with DG and his staff at Rajasthan, SIRD on 7 April 2010, no material on training was ever submitted to the Working Group. After several reminders through NIRD (Hyderabad), Bihar BIPARD finally on 29 June submitted a list of trainings workshops. 4. The functioning of NIRD (Patna) and its OSD are noted with great dissatisfaction by the Working Group. We would have appreciated if NIRD(Hyderabad) and SIRDs could have done an analysis of challenges of training in terms of pedagogy, course content and learning tools for the quick appraisal by Working Group. 5. The note on NIAR, Mussoorie is self-explanatory for taking a view on the capacity or lack of capacity of NIAR to live up to the expectation of being National Resource Center. 6. Not only this, the support from MoRD was found wanting as no material wrt capacity building was ever sent to the Working Group for its information. The

157

NIRD was reminded about it several times without any success. Following information/material was sought from MoRD through NIRD; Assessment of training needs by NIRD for MGNREGA officials and personnel right from the block to the national level; a written submission on the quantitative and qualitative aspects of training may be submitted to the working group by 15 April 2010. ( letter Ist April 2010) The working group needs information from MGNREGA division of MoRD on the whole spectrum of capacity building for examining the possibility of greater professionalization of NREGA division right from the national level to Block level. It is in this context, the Working Group requires from MGNREGA division of MoRD consolidated as well disaggregated information on the status of staff/personnel (filled and unfilled). The working group would also like to be briefed on the partnership of MoRD with any multilateral agency for capacity building tools and management support capacities for MGNREGA. This information and assessment will help the working group to recommend necessary steps for strengthening the capacity and effectiveness of NREGA division at the national Level as per the ToR of the Working Group.( letter dated April 4/2010) The Working Group needs consolidated information from MGNREGA division of MoRD on the status of training of officials and staff involved in the implementation of MGNREGA. It would be appreciated if working group is provided the whole basket of information on the agencies/institutions and civil society organizations involved in the training aspects of capacity building.( letter April 4/2010)

The Working Group requires from MGNREGA division of MoRD information on the communication strategies or policies aimed at strengthening/enhancing capacity building efforts/initiatives in the implementation of MGNREGA.( ( letter April 4/2010)

The Working Group needs from MGNREGA division MoRD consolidated and disaggregated information and analysis of current norms wrt to administrative expenses. In 2009-10, the administrative expenses have not crossed more than 3%. The administrative expenses were enhanced from 4% to 6% from March 2009. (Circular No J-11011/182007 dated March 2009). As states governments are authorized under Operational Guidelines to decide the percentage of administrative expenses to be incurred at different levels and by different implementing agencies, we need information for a comparative analysis of utilization of administrative expenses and also for suggesting some administrative benchmarks for spending administrative expenses across board. ( letter April 4/2010)

158

The Working Group needs information from MGNREGA division of MoRD about the proposed administrative expenses on setting up Office of Ombudsman in states. ( letter April 4/2010)

. The Working Group needs information from MGNREGA division of MoRD on the status of PIN(Professional Institutional Network) to assess the existing research and evaluation capacities right from the MoRD to State level. ( e-letter April 4/2010)

7. In contrast, Mr. Kesavan, director, MoPR very promptly provided all necessary information wrt PRIs. 8. We place on record the research support the Working Group received from NIRD(Hyderabad) in the preparation of questionnaire and the concept note for workshop on Asset Management System(C-GARD).

159

Annexure XIII
Brief questionnaire for States( prepared on 7 April2010 by the Working Group)

Organnogram of MGNREGA administration at multiple levels including state level Role , responsibility and functional specialization of Officials and Staff at the state level. Since the processes, procedures and institutional arrangements for MGRNEGA and Drought Relief are same, it would be better to understand the nature of how this convergence works at the administrative level. Human Resource management systems, if any, for handling Contractual Staff right from the state to the block level. Functional clarity of contractual staff Performance Evaluation System of contractual staff. Information regarding action taken under section 25 of the Act; status of administrative action taken for grievance redressal. Any institutional arrangement for this. Administrative /institutional Steps taken to implement the Ombudsman; appraise the progress on this with a clear time line. Incentives for Officials and Staff working for MGNREGA implementation. The status of e-governance in the implementation of MGNREGA in the state right from the state to GP Level. Training of Officials and Staff for MGNREGA implementation; details on institutional and organizational arrangements, course content, modules, pedagogy etc. Training efforts for primary stakeholders that include key panchayat functionaries, mates etc... Capacity building steps for making Gram Sabha more effective in the implementation of MGNREGA Information on the functioning and performance of SIRD in the institutional architecture of MGNREGA implementation. Efforts for independent Evaluation of MGNREGA works in the state; any institutional arrangement as per the directives of State Employment Gurantee Council. Steps taken to establish coordination mechanisms between state/district administration and banks/post-offices as per the relevant advisories of MoRD. Administrative issues arising out of the scheme of banking correspondent for wage payment of MGNREA workers. Details of Administrative expenses at all levels; suggestions are welcome. Administrative steps taken for census of MGNREGA works in the state. Any other matter arising out of ToR of the working group.

160

Annexure XIV
Detailed Questionnaire Sent to States for Response MGNREGA Administrative System/ HR Polices of Select States

States :

West Bengal; Kerala, Orissa, Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Rajasthan, Bihar, Himachal Pradesh, Chhattisgargh, Andhra Pradesh.

PART A: Regular Permanent Personnel.

PART B : Contract Personnel, CBOs, NGOs etc

PART.C. Elected Peoples Representatives

Personnel at State District, Block and Grama Panchayath levels.

1. State Level Personnel

Designations Cadre Nos Nature of Posting (Regular, Deputation, Contractual) Qualifications and Experience Prescribed and possessed, Tenure of Postings, Scale of Pay, Gross Emoluments, Nature of Tasks and Responsibilities, Reviewing and Reporting structures, Training undergone, Skills possessed, skills needed. Sanctioned Posts and Vacant Posts, since when the post is filled up and is lying vacant for how long. Remarks.

2. Disrtict Level Posts (Same as above)

161

3. Block/Mandal Level Posts (Same as above) 4. Grama Panchayath Level Posts (Same as above)

162

Issues.

1. Is there any mandatory staffing pattern meant for MGNREGS at different tiers by the state, at district, Block, and GP level?

2. Is there a shortage of personnel in the RD department to man these MGNREGS posts?

3. Are there a shortage of qualified personnel in the open market to meet with the skills sets needed for MGNREGS tasks?

4. What percentage, number of these MGNREGS posts are at present contracted out at different tiers?

5. Will the states governments decide to place a majority of these MGNREGS posts on contractual mode? If yes will these personnel be made regular after some time or a new team put in place?

6. Are their qualifications and pay packages fixed to be suitable and remunerative enough to draw up the required talents?

7. Are the exiting regular personnel able to carry out the mandatory MGNREGS job tasks? Are they over worked?

8. What infrastructural facilities already exist and are additionally needed by these MGNREGS personnel at different tiers? e.g. of computers at GP levels.

9. What could be the sort of package and composition of personnel needed at Grama Panchayath and Block Panchayath levels to meet with HR challenges of MGNREGS?

10. Is there an HR cell exclusively for MGNREGS in the state level to meet with policy matters?

163 11. The effectiveness of the contribution of informal structures like, Mates, SHGs, Contract Engineers, CBOs, and NGOs are assessed /studied or not by State and PRIs ?

12. The role of PRIs in managing the HR engaged in MGNREGS need be looked into in detail as to the control and review, monitoring needs?

13. What is the training strategy for MGNREGS at different tiers and levels?

14. What training needs gaps are identified of the incumbent MGNREGS personnels?

15. Are there relevant training modules available for better HR creation at all levels?

16. What is the training coverage of existing personnel? All personnel are covered or not?

17. Are there replicable success stories at HR development for MGNREGS personnel at grass roots levels?

I. State Level Human Resource on MGNREGS

I. A.I: Regular Personnel at state level. Sl :No Designation and Name Cadre/ Grade Current Gross Monthly Pay (Rs) If in position since when : (date ) ( date) 1 If now the post is vacant since when ? Date of Entry in service Date of Retirement At present do you hold other duties besides MGNREGS? Yes/No At present are you officiating on more than one post? Yes/No

to

164 n

I. A.2. Skills and Capacity Building Assessment at state level Sl.No Highest Education Specify any Technical Got training on If yes duration and topic of training received? Training attended Do you need If yes what sort/ subject of additional training is Needed by you? ( Describe) 1 to N Remarks

/ Professional MGNREGs possessed Yes/No skills possessed

at which more institutions? training on Give name MGNREGs Yes/No

I.B.I. Contract/ Deputation Personnel at state levels Sl. No Designation and Name Cadre/ Grade Posted by Deputatio n ( yes/ no) Posted By Contract (Yes/No) Departmen t Name of Parent Pay (Rs) Gross Monthly If in positio n since when : (date ) If the post is vacant since when (Date) Date of Entry in service Date of Retirem ent/ end of contract

1 To n

165 I. B.2. Skills and Capacity Building of Contract/ deputation personnel assessment at state levels Sl.No Highest Education possessed Specify Technical / Professional skills possessed Got training on MGNREGs Yes/No If yes duration and topic of training received? Training attended at which institutions Do you n more training on MGNREGs Yes/No

1 to N

II. District Level Human Resource on MGNREGS

II. A.I: Regular Personnel at district level.

Sl :No

Designation and Name

Cadre/ Grade

Current Gross Monthly Pay (Rs)

If in position since when : (date )

If now vacant since when ( date)

Date of Entry in service

Date of Retirement

Who is the controlling officer?

Remarks

to

II. A.2. Skills and Capacity Building Assessment of regular personnel at district level.

Sl.No Highest Education

Specify Technical

Got training on

Training attended

Do you need

/ Professional MGNREGs possessed

more training at which on MGNREGs institutions Yes/No

What sort/ subject of training

Remarks

166 skills possessed Yes/No is needed by you ( Describe) 1 to N

I.B.I. Contract/ Deputation Personnel at district levels

Sl.N o

Designation and Name

Cadre/ Grade

Posted By Deputation ( yes/ no)

Posted By Contract (Yes/No)

Name of Parent Departmen t

Gross Monthly Pay (Rs)

If in positio n since when : (date )

If vacant since when (Date)

Date of Entry in service

1 To n

I. B.2. Skills and Capacity Building of Contract/ deputation personnel assessment at district levels Sl.No Highest Education Specify Technical Got training on Training attended at which Do you need more training on MGNREGs What sort/ subject of Remarks

/ Professional MGNREGs

167 possessed skills possessed needed by you ( Describe) 1 to N Yes/No institutions Yes/No training is

I.B.I. Regular Personnel at Block/ JP/Mandal levels Sl.N o Designation and Name Cadre/ Grade Posted By Deputation (Yes/No) ( yes/ no) Departmen t Posted By Contract Name of Parent Pay (Rs) since when : (date ) 1 To n Gross Monthly If in positio n If vacant since when (Date) Date of Entry in service

I. B.2. Skills and Capacity Building of Regular personnel assessment at Block/JP/Mandal levels

168

Sl.No Highest Education

Specify Technical

/ Professional MGNREGs possessed skills Yes/No possessed

Got training on

Training attended

Do you need

more training at which on MGNREGs institutions Yes/No

What sort/ subject of training is needed by you ( Describe)

Remarks

1 to N

I.B.I. Contract/ Deputation Personnel at Block/JP/Mandal levels Sl.N o Designation and Name Cadre/ Grade Posted By Deputation (Yes/No) ( yes/ no) Departmen t Posted By Contract Name of Parent Pay (Rs) since when : (date ) 1 To n Gross Monthly If in positio n If vacant since when (Date) Date of Entry in service

I. B.2. Skills and Capacity Building of Contract/ deputation personnel assessment at Block/JP/Mandal levels Sl.No Highest Education Specify Technical Got training Training attended Do you need more training What sort/ Remarks

169 / on possessed Professional MGNREGs skills Yes/No possessed at which on MGNREGs institutions Yes/No subject of training is needed by you ( Describe) 1 to N

170

REPORT OF THE WORKING GROUP ON PLANNING AND EXECUTION

CENTRAL EMPLOYMENT GUARANTEE COUNCIL

MAY 2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS..................................................................................................3 2. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................4 3. IMPORTANCE OF PLANNING IN MGNREGA..................................................................................4 4. UNIT OF PLANNING: VILLAGE CLUSTER FOR DEVELOPMENT (VCD).................................................5 5. PERSPECTIVE PLAN ....................................................................................................................6 6. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AGENCY (PIA)....................................................................................7 7. SHELF OF PROJECTS (SOP)..........................................................................................................9 8. ANNUAL PLAN...........................................................................................................................9 9. LABOUR BUDGETING.................................................................................................................10 10. ROLE OF GRAM PANCHAYAT (GP)...........................................................................................11 11. HUMAN RESOURCE SUPPORT FOR MGNREGA AT THE LEVEL OF GP, VCD AND BLOCK.............12 12. CHOICE OF WORKS: THE MATERIAL / LABOUR RATIO.................................................................15 13. EXPANDING SCOPE OF WORKS: REGIONAL VARIATIONS ..............................................................15 14. CONVERGENCE WITH AGRICULTURE & LIVESTOCK DEVELOPMENT.................................................17 15. OTHER OPPORTUNITIES FOR CONVERGENCE ...............................................................................19 16. REFORMING SCHEDULE OF RATES (SORS).................................................................................20 17. WORK FOR DIFFERENTLY ABLED..............................................................................................22 18. FACILITIES FOR MGNREGA WORKERS..................................................................................22 19. FOREST ISSUES.......................................................................................................................23 20. MUSTER ROLLS, PAYMENT APPROVALS AND PREPARATION OF WAGE LIST.....................................25 21. JOB CARDS............................................................................................................................25 22. SELECTION OF IMPLEMENTING AGENCY APPROPRIATE TO THE PROJECT............................................26 23. ENSURING COMPLETION OF WORKS ..........................................................................................26 24. DEVELOPING DETAILED ESTIMATES...........................................................................................26 25. REVISION OF ESTIMATES..........................................................................................................27 26. MATES..................................................................................................................................27 27. MATERIAL PROCUREMENT BY GPS & OTHER PIAS....................................................................27 28. MIS.....................................................................................................................................28 29. ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS..........................................................................................................28 ANNEXURE 1: STATE VISIT & CONSULTATIONS UNDERTAKEN BY WORKING GROUP MEMBERS..............31 ANNEXURE 2: WORK CLASSIFICATION ACCORDING TO THE CAPACITY OF DIFFERENTLY ABLED PERSONS. 37 ANNEXURE 3: PERSONNEL DEPLOYMENT AND PROPOSED SALARIES UNDER MGNREGA......................43

REPORT OF THE WORKING GROUP ON PLANNING AND EXECUTION

1. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
The working group on Planning & Execution has examined its agenda and after consultation with officials and civil society organizations and field visits, arrived at the following set of recommendations aimed at improving the implementation of MGNREGA. While some of these recommendations are aimed at greater compliance with provisions of the MGNREGA guidelines, other recommendations may require revision of the guidelines. 1.1 The Annual Plan, drawn up on the basis of the Shelf of Projects (SoP) for each village, will get administrative and technical approvals so that works can be started as soon as there is a demand for work (Sec 8) 1.2 The Gram Panchayats (GP) and other PIAs are the appropriate authorities empowered to start works (by issuing work orders) once they have received administrative sanction for their Annual Plan (Sec 8) 1.3 The GP must prepare a base year labour budget on the basis of a survey of job card holders within the GP, eliciting information on the seasonal demand for labour from each job card holder. This must then be verified by the Gram Sabha (GS). The GP in this task may be assisted by the Village Cluster for Development (VCD) team (Sec 9) 1.4 Additional staff dedicated for MGNREGA: a) at the GP level (one community mobiliser; assistants to the Employment Guarantee Assistant (EGA) in case of large GPs) (sec 11A) b) at the level of a cluster of GPs (7-8 members) (Sec 11B) and at the block office (Sec 11C). The support team at the cluster level will be jointly supervised by the Programme Officer (PO) and GPs 1.5 The Labour-Material ratio is to be maintained at 60:40 across all works at the block level (Sec 12) 1.6 There is need for state-level detailed listing of works permissible under MGNREGA within the overall framework of the operational guidelines (Sec 13). Even in water-logged flood plains in the Gangetic basin, desert regions in Rajasthan and the coastal areas in Kerala, there is room for generation of more employment with appropriate works 1.7 Convergence projects may be encouraged provided they address priorities expressed in the Perspective Plan and are ratified by the GS (Sec 15) 1.8 There is need for provision of a creche within the village for children of MGNREGA workers. MGNREGA may pay wages for one attendant for every group of ten children (Sec 18) 1.9 To facilitate work on forest land, State Governments must set up a High Level Task Force which includes senior officials from the department of Rural Development, Forest Department and members of the SEGC. This Task Force must recommend a set of rules and orders to enable execution of MGNREGA on forest land. The Working Group suggests some institutional options for works on forest land (Sec 19). 1.10 Payment of wages should be made by the PIA every week or fortnight on the basis of the muster roll and the measurement book, without waiting for verification by the PO. Verification of the measurement book and completion report by the PO should be required only for making the final payment to workers/suppliers (Sec 20). 1.11 In case of a revision of wage or material rates, it should be the responsibility of the DPC to issue fresh approval of revised estimates for proposed works and annual plans. This should be done on a suo moto basis by the DPC and the revised estimates conveyed to PIAs (Sec 25). 1.12 There is need for appointment of one mate for every 30 workers, instead of the current ratio of 1:50 (Sec 26)

1.13 Every state must adopt a dashboard of key indicators which must be monitored at the highest levels to track MGNREGA implementation (Sec 28) 1.14 The provision for administrative costs be increased from the current 6% to 8%. Of this 8%, 6% should be reserved to support the costs of Planning & Execution at the Block level and below (Sec 29). The above recommendations will enable MGNREGA to substantially increase coverage as well as the provision of work to the poor households in rural India. With the above changes, MGNREGA will provide 60 days of employment per year to each of eight crore households in rural India. In the 2000 most backward blocks, four crore households will be provided 80 days of employment each. Additionally, MGNREGA works will contribute strongly to poverty reduction through improved productive assets and better convergence with local livelihoods and priorities.

2. INTRODUCTION
As mentioned in the official guidelines MGNREGA aims at three goals: Social protection through employment guarantee; Inclusive growth through strengthening livelihoods; and

Empowerment of the poor and improvement in governance. The Working Group of the CEGC on Planning and Execution has reviewed the recent experience with MGNREGA schemes and identified several issues which need to be addressed to better achieve MGNREGA goals. On some issues, problems arise despite adequate provision in the Operational Guidelines (MoRD, 2008). In such cases the Working Group suggests ways of improved compliance with the Operational Guidelines. On other issues there is need to modify or develop further some of the current provisions in the Guidelines. The Working Group suggests modifications in such cases. On a third set of issues the Working Group recommends a more detailed examination before arriving at specific recommendations. The Working Group arrived at its conclusions after a process of consultation with officials, NGO functionaries and communities in several states (Annexure I). Some members of the Working Group also undertook field visits to work sites and panchayat offices in selected states.

3. IMPORTANCE OF PLANNING IN MGNREGA

The Operational Guidelines of MGNREGA (MoRD, 2008) state: Planning is critical to the successful implementation of the Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGA). A key indicator of success is the timely generation of employment within 15 days while ensuring that the design and selection of works are such that good quality assets are developed. The need to act within a time limit necessitates advance planning. The basic aim of the planning process is to ensure that the district is prepared well in advance to offer productive employment on demand (4.1.1). The unique feature of MGNREGA is its bottom-up architecture - planning and selection of works and their implementation are to be done in a participatory manner under the

leadership of the Gram Sabha (GS) and the Gram Panchayat (GP). However, few reports record that this actually happens on the ground. Work priorities tend to follow orders from the state or district headquarters and do not reflect the needs and aspirations of the people as they should. The hope was that greater water security and drought- and flood-proofing would be realised. While there have been a few successes in this regard, these remain oases of excellence.

4. UNIT OF PLANNING: VILLAGE CLUSTER FOR DEVELOPMENT (VCD)

Section 13 of NREGA makes Panchayats the principal authorities for planning. The process of planning under Section 16 of the Act, the GS is to make recommendations on the works to be taken up under MGNREGA. The Gram Panchayat is to prepare a shelf of projects and annual plans on the basis of GS recommendations (MoRD, 2008). It is the considered view of the Working Group that a GP is too small a unit for planning. There may be productive natural resources which are used by several GPs on a shared basis, such as a minor rivulet, large water body, forest land shared across many villages, extensive groundwater aquifers, range of hills which drain into a river, agricultural land with identical agro-climatic conditions and a uniform cropping pattern. These resources are best addressed at the level of a cluster of villages. Hence, the Working Group recommends the establishment of a Village Cluster for Development (VCD) at the level of population unit of 40,000 50,000 or covering an area upto 150 sq.kms. (15000 ha). The area will broadly correspond to the boundaries of a milli-watershed and local aquifer. A multi-disciplinary team will be formed for each VCD. The team will be led by an Assistant Programme Officer (APO) and will comprise specialists in community mobilisation, gender and inclusion, agriculture and allied activities, water harvesting and soil erosion control. The role of the VCD team is as follows: Preparation of a perspective plan on the basis of consultation with constituent GSs, recommendations of the GPs falling within the VCD, technical advice from line departments and non governmental organisations (NGOs) under the supervision of the Programme Officer (PO). Providing advice to the GPs for preparation of shelf of projects on the basis of the perspective plans and priorities of the GSs. Providing technical support to GP for executing works, maintaining Measurement Books, site inspection reports etc. Coordination amongst different implementing agencies undertaking works in the cluster area, including exchanging information on availability of work and demand for employment, playing a co-ordinating role in execution of interlinked projects

(projects involving upstream/downstream issues, stream diversions, aquifer-level groundwater management, catchment area treatment etc) Assisting GPs in material procurement Assisting GP in maintaining records and preparation of reports

5. PERSPECTIVE PLAN
The VCD team must prepare a Perspective Plan which should be for a period of five years. The cluster team will provide technical assistance to GPs on all matters which fall within the GP purview on the basis of the Principle of Subsidiarity. The Principle of Subsidiarity is the idea that a central authority should have a subsidiary function, performing only those tasks, which cannot be performed effectively at a more immediate or local level. This implies that all issues, which can be handled within the boundaries of the GP must be addressed by the GP itself, such as, for instance, deepening of a village pond, works on a grazing plot and plantations on village community land. On the other hand, there may be productive resources, which are used commonly by several GPs. As mentioned before, these resources are best addressed at the level of a VCD. The cluster team will in consultation with the GPs prepare plans for such components where there are significant externalities beyond the boundaries of a single GP. GS approval will be essential for this Perspective Plan. The Plan should include a mapping of natural resources and livelihoods of the area. In particular, the plan must assess the challenges faced by the poor, marginalised and most vulnerable sections of the communities. This planning process is consistent with Guidelines issued by the Planning Commission for Decentralised District Planning. The GPs must be encouraged to refer to the Perspective Plan prepared under the district planning exercise in the overall planning for MGNREGA. The Perspective Plan will include details on An assessment of quantitative and qualitative status of natural resources (topography, soil depth and quality, rainfall, water bodies, groundwater, vegetation); Ownership and use patterns; what do the small and medium farmers do; The significance of agriculture and other livelihoods (livestock, fishing, NTFP, etc) based on natural resources; On-farm and off farm absorption of labour in different seasons, migration patterns; Specific challenges and opportunities posed by the natural resource base (e.g. depleting groundwater, substantial monsoon runoff, soil erosion and silting up of water bodies, flooding and waterlogging, land with declining vegetative cover);

Availability of surplus labour in each specific season, anticipation of demand for manual employment from the villages in the GP. The Perspective Plan will Facilitate the creation of a shelf of projects which is derived from assessment of local resources and needs; 4

Enable individual projects to be complementary to each other and build upon the results of earlier interventions to improve the productive base of the GP; Address opportunities to improve the productive natural resource base for a cluster of villages where there is strong interdependence and externalities in resource use; and

Reduce the arbitrary basis for selection and sequencing of projects for execution. The Perspective Plan will clearly list the priorities for the GP/VCD from among the work permissible under MGNREGA for a period of five years. It will also clearly indicate the most favorable sequence for implementation of works e.g.: upstream catchment area treatment before works on drainage line; setting up nurseries before plantation work etc. It will also broadly estimate the demand for work under MGNREGA and plan volume of work sufficient to meet that demand. To scrutinize the Perspective Plans and to support the DPC for implementation of MGNREGA, the Working Group recommends the setting up of a District level Technical Committee. The Technical Committee may seek support from District Level Support Groups as mentioned in the current MoRD Guidelines on MGNREGA. This Technical Committee may recommend changes to the Perspective Plan on the basis of technical considerations of district level priorities. The Technical Committee may also draw upon the district plan prepared under the Planning Commission guidelines. In particular these district plans may offer useful lessons for inter-departmental coordination. These recommendations are to be sent to the VCD and are to be discussed by the GPs in the cluster. The cluster level perspective plan will be finalised by the GPs thereafter. The functions of the Technical Committee include: Assist the DPC in preparation of the District level Perspective Plan on the basis of Cluster level and Block level Perspective Plan. Assist the DPC in granting technical sanctions to the shelf of projects Prepare District wide Schedule of Rates for common tasks

6. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AGENCY (PIA)

The MGNREG Act specifies that at least 50% of the works in terms of cost should be executed by the GPs. Section 6.3 of the Operational Guidelines indicates that the Gram Panchayat is the single most important agency for executing works. It says, the other implementing agencies can be Intermediate and District Panchayats, line departments of the Government, Public Sector Undertakings of the Central and State Governments, Cooperative Societies with a majority shareholding by the Central and State Governments, and reputed NGOs having a proven track record of performance. Self-Help Groups (SHGs) may also be considered as possible Implementing Agencies (MoRD, 2008, 6.3.2). The Working Group feels it is useful to define the implementing agency more clearly. This will also help enlist supportive functions, which can be provided by other government agencies and by other specialised bodies set up for this purpose. 5

A Project Implementing Agency (PIA) performs the following functions: Preparation of Shelf of Projects; Obtaining technical sanctions for the shelf of projects; Obtaining agreement with individual beneficiaries in case of works on private lands Obtaining agreement with GPs in case of work on common lands Obtaining administrative sanction for the annual plan which will contain all works to be taken up in that year; Starting works by issuing work order ; Employing persons who have applied for work, by approaching GPs, SHGs or worker organizations of manual workers; Obtaining muster rolls from the PO; Maintaining muster rolls and making relevant entries in the job cards of the workers; Weekly reporting on work site-wise job card wise number of work days provided; Weekly reporting on other details; Reporting to the PO on a regular basis of the job card wise provision of employment; Facilitating site inspections by PO or DPC On-site supervision by appointing mates including the job chart as specified under section 6.4.4; Maintenance of Measurement Book of ongoing works; Providing work site facilities such as shade, drinking water, first aid, crches etc. Ensuring completion of works and preparation of Completion Report

Fund Release to GPs & other PIAs

The Working Group recommends a uniform system be followed for making payments to workers and material suppliers for all categories of PIAs. The Working Group is of the view that all payments to workers and material suppliers must be made by the PIAs. This is at variance with the view that the roles of execution of work and payments should be separated in the interest of better governance. The Working Group recommends payments to be made by PIAs since this will ensure unity in accountability - workers will clearly know who is responsible for any irregularity in payments be it in the calculation or timing. The Working Group recommendation will ensure that this responsibility lies entirely with the PIA. Funds should be released by the DPC directly to the designated MGNREGA bank accounts of the PIAs. The initial release should be upto 50% of the annual budget of the PIA or the proposed expenditure in the first six months of the fiscal year whichever is less. This amount may be adjusted for any balance carried forward from the previous year.

7. SHELF OF PROJECTS (SOP)

The Operational Guidelines states: The sequence of approvals laid down under the Act necessitates time bound coordination between different levels. It is therefore legally imperative that there are no delays in the approval of the plan of works at any level and equally necessary to ensure that the priorities of the Gram Sabhas are maintained. The absence of an approved shelf of projects affects the pace at which employment demand has to be met (MoRD, 2008, 4.4.2). The PIA (GPs, line departments or any other agencies mentioned above) will prepare a Shelf of Projects (SoP). This SoP will include activities which are permissible under MGNREGA and which are consistent with the broad development priorities of the region as set in the Perspective plan. For the GP, the SoP will be drawn up with technical assistance from the VCD team. Other agencies may prepare SoP with their own in-house expertise. The PIAs need to seek approval for their SoPs from the GS, which will ensure that the projects meet local priorities and strengthen the productive resource base for the village economy. The Operational Guidelines states that the number of works in the shelf of projects in a village should be adequately more than the estimated demand (MoRD, 2008, 4.3). The Working Group felt that the SoP should contain projects, which can meet the demand for work from the GP for at least two years. The individual projects will include technical design (location, design of structure, materials used, construction process, estimate of potential employment to be generated at worksite). This SoP will be granted Technical Approval by the district level Technical Committee. Every year, the PIA will revisit the shelf of projects and replace completed (executed) projects with a new set of projects for which fresh technical approval will be sought. For the GP specifically, an approved SoP will enable it to respond quickly to demand for work from the villages. With technically approved shelf of projects, GPs can quickly plan execution of works and creation of employment. It will also reduce the time required for approval of Annual Plan/Budget and issue of work orders for specific projects. The PO must match the SoP with the perspective plan. In case any major priority of the GP or the VCD remains unaddressable, the PO may approach any agency with proven technical expertise to prepare a shelf of projects and function as a PIA.

8. ANNUAL PLAN
Every year, the PIA will prepare an Annual Plan. The Annual Plan will clearly indicate the time when works can be executed. It will be the responsibility of the PIA to inform the PO in case works are not being executed in time and the Annual Plan needs to be revised. The Annual Plan will also include a budget based on cost estimation of the proposed works and a half yearly forecast of expenditure. The administrative sanction will, therefore, be an approval of the annual budget of the PIA for the MGNREGA related scheme. The Annual Plan, drawn up on the basis of the SoP for each village, will get administrative and technical approvals so that works can be started as soon as there is a demand for work. This is in accordance with the 7

directions of the Operational Guidelines, 2008: 6.4.1. All works will be required to obtain Administrative Sanction and Technical Sanction in advance, by December of the year preceding the proposed implementation. 6.4.2 Once a demand for employment is received, works will be started from the shelf of approved works ready with technical and administrative sanctions. 6.4.4 The Gram Panchayats are generally the appropriate authorities empowered to start works (by issuing work orders) and to allocate employment among persons who have applied for work. 6.4.5 The Programme Officer (PO) shall also act as the authority empowered to start works (by issuing work orders) if the demand for employment is either received by the PO or referred to it by the Gram Panchayat (MoRD, 2008). The above planning process, with technical and administrative sanctions to the annual plan given beforehand and the actual execution of work on the basis of work orders, is essential to enable the GP to respond to demand for work. This will help avoid the common situation where demand for work is limited to the projects for which sanction is sought and obtained. It is common that poor manual workers enter into commitments as migrant workers well in advance of the actual period of migration. If such workers can reasonably predict when work will be available for them in the local area, they will stay back in villages and work under MGNREGA. Further, the process of granting technical sanction to the shelf of projects and administrative sanction to the Annual Plans will make the provision of work more predictable for manual workers. This will substantially reduce distress migration. The Working Group strongly recommends a quick transition to a system of sanctioning of works and work execution based on work orders as described above.

9. LABOUR BUDGETING
The Operational Guidelines states that the labour budget1 will be based on a projection of employment2 demanded by rural households. This is important and must form the basis for the preparation of the annual plan. In practice in almost all states, the employment provided in the previous financial year is the basis for projection of the labour budget of the current year. The Working Group feels that this practice underestimates the demand for work since it has found that a large number of potential MGNREGA workers are either unemployed or have migrated under distress conditions in search of work. The number of person days of
1Chapter IV, Para 14, sub section (6) of the NREG Act says that the District Programme Coordinator (DPC) shall prepare in the month of December every year a labour budget for the next financial year containing the details of anticipated demand for unskilled manual work in the district and the plan for engagement of labourers in the works covered under the Scheme. The Ministry of Rural Development will estimate the requirement of funds on the basis of projections made in the Labour Budget. Central funds will be sanctioned after examining these Labour Budgets and taking into account utilization of funds previously released (MoRD, 2008, 8.4). 2 The Guidelines (8.4.1 (a) i) suggests that the increase in projected household demand against last Financial Years household demand should be reasonable and based on past and current trends of the district

employment provided per job card is currently very low. The projected labour demand can be accurate only if the initial estimates of demand in the previous years are accurate. The working group recommends the preparation of a base year labour budget on the basis of a survey of job card holders within the GP. The GP must elicit information on the seasonal demand for labour from each job card holder. This must then be verified by the GS. The GP in this task may be assisted by the VCD team. This base labour budget will be a reliable basis for subsequent annual labour budgets as suggested in 8.4.1(a)i. Subsequently in case there is an adverse weather event (floods, droughts etc.) or a natural calamity, there may be a need to conduct a special survey in that particular year. The increment can accommodate demographic changes (population growth, new households and permanent migrations) and seasonal changes and monsoon variations. In the labour budget the GP should match this demand for work with the employment to be generated by its own Annual Plan. If there is a deficit of work or a deficit of workers the GP must highlight this condition. The PO/VCD may forward this information to potential PIAs (line departments and other agencies), inviting them to propose works as needed.

10. ROLE OF GRAM PANCHAYAT (GP)

The MGNREGA Act as well as the Operational Guidelines provides a pivotal role to the GP in implementation of MGNREGA schemes as well as in the objectives of the Act. We have already noted the role of the GP as a PIA. In addition the GP has a significant role under the Act as a local government to ensure that the Act is successful in providing livelihood security to every poor household in a transparent manner. This requires the GP to perform the following functions in addition to its role as PIA: Raising community awareness on the provisions of the Act. Providing Job cards and supporting poor households to get registered under the Act. Contribute to the formulation of a Perspective Plan for the VCD; assess local resources and requirements and identify components which may be addressed within the GP on the basis of the Principle of Subsidiarity. Ensuring that the MGNREGA SoP and the Annual Plan contribute to the development of the GP consistent with the overall development prepared under the Integrated District Planning process. Mobilising the community to ensure greater participation in GS so that the perspective plan, SoP and Annual Plans are discussed in detail Preparation of a base labour budget after consultation with all poor households. Receiving application for works and issuing dated receipts Receiving claims for unemployment allowance from workers, forwarding these to the PO and tracking compliance with the provision of the Act. 9

 Maintenance of works register and job card register Ensuring that works executed by all PIAs address the development priorities of the GP as expressed in the Perspective Plan. Monitoring design and execution of works by all PIAs in the GP to ensure quality and utility.

11. HUMAN RESOURCE SUPPORT FOR MGNREGA AT THE LEVEL OF GP, VCD AND BLOCK
A. Staff at the Level of GP
There should be one Employment Guarantee Assistant (EGA) at each GP. The Roles of the EGA are: All Administrative functions of the GP as PIA : Maintaining GP level registers as per the Guidelines Preparing Work Order and activities related to the Work Order Ensuring norms of Transparency and Proactive disclosure are observed in the GP vis a vis GS Reporting to the PO as required Issue and maintenance of Job Cards Preparing Annual Budget for MGNREGA including proposed works and obtaining formal agreements for works on private lands from the owners. Preparation of wage list on the basis of the Muster Roll Estimation of material requirements, identification of vendor, placement of order at prescribed rates, receipt of material, Preparation of pay order on the basis of wage list and submission to bank after ratification by the GP head ( Pradhan/Sarpanch) and the GP Executive Officer for transfer of wages to workers accounts and payment to material suppliers.

Issue of materials from stock for specific works, supervising of use of material, maintenance of stock register. In states where the GP covers more than 6000 people, it may be considered to provide an administrative assistant to the EGA for every additional slab of 6000 people or less. In the most backward 2000 blocks, there should also be one Community Mobiliser in every GP (the GPs will pay the salaries of the Community Mobiliser). The Community Mobiliser will: Provide information on REGS to potential/actual workers and other GP residents Ensure that the GS meetings and social audits are held and well attended Assess demand for work on an annual and seasonal basis from job card holders in the GP 10

Ensure the formation and support the functions of the GP-level vigilance committee including representation of MGNREGA workers and vulnerable groups as per guidelines. Form user groups to manage assets created by MGNREGA on panchayat or public land. Formalise agreements between user groups and panchayats for maintenance of MGNREGA assets.

B. Technical Support to Gram Panchayat (Team at VCD level)

The Working Group felt that lack of adequate personnel at crucial levels and with required capacities has been one of the key constraints of planning and execution under MGNREGA. There was a clear consensus in the group that a demanding programme like MGNREGA requires full-time, dedicated and adequately trained staff. Hence, adequate personnel deployment should be ensured at all levels and their capacities built for bottom-up planning. The Working Group felt that the issue of the human resource required for planning and execution is closely related to the issue of building their capacities which is being deliberated upon by the Working Group on Capacity Building. The Working Group on Planning and Execution recommends the following: Introducing an intermediate layer between the block and the GP in the form of a Village Cluster for Development (VCDs). This cluster could comprise groups of GPs covering a population of 40000 50000, or an area of 150 sq kms whichever is less. An Assistant Programme Officer (APO) who will be VCD team leader, supervise the provision of support to the GPs, report on activities to the PO at the Block level and assist in compliance with the provisions of MGNREGA. At every VCD, an MGNREGA team should be constituted with resource persons for community mobilisation, gender and inclusion, soil and moisture conservation, agriculture and allied activities. The DPC may appoint a civil society organisation (CSO) for this function where technically capable CSOs with demonstrated commitment and credibility are available. A minimum team at the VCD level will include Three technical specialists (TS) one each in charge of a) Community Mobilisation, Gender and Inclusion, b) Soil & Water Conservation and c)Agriculture and allied livelihoods. The specialists will provide support to GPs in their respective domain areas. E.g: The TS community mobilisation will suggest measures to include poorest households in the work force. She will suggest strategies to include works which will improve productive assets of poor 11

households. The TS soil and water conservation will survey surface and groundwater resources of the region and suggest appropriate structures for water harvesting and groundwater recharge. The TS agriculture and livelihoods will suggest steps to converge MGNREGA works with livelihoods of poor households. Two technical assistants (TA): The TAs will support the GP in design and execution of works. The TA will provide support to selection of sites, design of structures, cost estimation, site inspections, measurement book and work completion. In the 2000 most backward blocks, there will be provision for three TAs for each VCD. The VCD team will work under the overall supervision of the PO. The PO will pay the VCD team's salaries and all operational expenses. The VCD teams will be partially accountable to the GPs that they are expected to support. A system may be developed whereby VCD team members' visits to GPs are planned as per a predetermined roster. The GP will be expected to certify that the visits were made and useful services obtained. The PO must release salaries on the basis of such certification by GPs.

C. Block level team (including the Programme Officer)

In view of the responsibilities entrusted to the Programme Officer the Working Group recommends that there is one full-time Programme Officer in every block, dedicated to the implementation of MGNREGA. In addition to the responsibilities outlined in the Operational Guidelines under section 2.2.2., the working group suggests the following functions: supervising the performance of the VCD teams, releasing their salaries and meeting their operational expenses. facilitating release of funds to all PIAs as per guidelines section 8.5.6 upon request once the PIA has utilised more than 60% of its previous instalment. conducting periodic site inspections; verifying measurement books and work completion certificates; ensuring that the shelf of projects and annual budgets proposed by GPs and other PIAs is consistent with the Perspective Plan of the GP; working as the Grievance Redressal officer at the Block level (Section 11.7). Appeals against PIAs will be made to the PO;

reporting to the DPC on all complaints and action taken against complaints To enable matching of demand for employment with provision of work within the block, Section 2.2.2iv may be modified in the following way In case employment opportunities proposed by GPs and all other PIAs in the block fall short of the demand for work from the block, the PO may proactively seek further proposals for works under MGNREGA. 12

To perform the above functions, the PO will require a team of one junior engineer and one accountant-cum-administrative assistant fully dedicated to MGNREGA. The PO is responsible for entry of relevant data into the MIS for MGNREGA. The PO will be assisted in her task by a team of two Data Entry Operators. They will be responsible for first entry of data into the computerised MIS. In the most backward 2000 blocks, an additional data entry operator will be provided to each PO.

12. CHOICE OF WORKS: THE MATERIAL / LABOUR RATIO

The Material/Labour Ratio (M/L Ratio) under MGNREGA is stipulated as 60:40. There is a demand that this condition is too restrictive and rules out certain essential works in specific areas. Works to be taken up in the hill states such as Himachal Pradesh are usually cited as examples. Since work in the hills region necessarily involves works with high material cost, the demand for a suitable modification of the ratio is made. The Working Group is of the view that this ratio has been stipulated to check the tendency to adopt works with a high material component. Such works invariably brings in the contractor system. Hence, the Working Group feels that the stipulated ratio should be adhered to except in some specific circumstances (for instance, for works in the hill states like Himachal Pradesh). The Operational Guidelines states that this ratio should be applied preferably at the Gram Panchayat, Block and District levels (MoRD, 2008, 6.2). The Working Group feels that it is best if this ratio is maintained at the block level. This allows some flexibility in choice of works at the GP, VCD and block levels. The Working Group feels that strengthening the planning and execution process through the steps mentioned in this report will ensure that the choice of works adheres to this ratio at the block level. The district level Technical Committee should play the key role in ensuring that this ratio is maintained.

13. EXPANDING SCOPE OF WORKS: REGIONAL VARIATIONS

The framework of planning and execution of works under MGNREGA has to be mindful of the vast regional variations within India. Regional variations could be identified in two ways: a) variations in agro-ecological conditions and resource endowments across regions; and b) variations in capacities of institutions participating in planning and execution under MGNREGA. In both, the question is how the provisions of the Act have been utilized to develop appropriate schemes addressing specific regional problems. For instance, special attention on how MGNREGA can be adapted to address the problems in coastal areas, hills, deserts, saline areas, water-logged and flood-prone areas and so on need to be considered. For coastal areas, such as Kerala, a special set of Guidelines could be drawn up. This special focus is important because coastal areas and traditional fishing communities are the most backward and vulnerable in a state like Kerala, where the spatial inequalities have only widened over time. Coastal areas are densely populated with hardly any land available for public 13

works. Fishing communities normally do not take up the kind of manual work, which is provided under MGNREGA. Fishing communities suffer extreme hardship during the rainy season, a period when it is most difficult to provide work under MGNREGA. One option is the inclusion under MGNREGA of works which will improve the productive assets of the fishing community. Such works will include the construction of country boats for artisanal fishing, weaving of fishing nets, construction of landing jetties, drying yards and market platforms. Only such assets may be selected which can be created within the 60:40 labour : material ratio. In the water-logged and flood-prone areas in Indo-Gangetic plains, there is ample opportunity for taking up works in the MGNREGA framework. In several districts in chaur lands, extensive networks of drainage channels are in disrepair. These need to be cleared in a systematic manner. Where required such channels need to be extended to reach the wider natural drainage system which is the local river. This will help to drain fertile lands in this floodprone region and increase productivity. This region also has numerous ponds which are useful for irrigation and pisciculture. These ponds help to reduce the intensity of floods. There is considerable scope to desilt and deepen these ponds. Embankments need to be repaired and strengthened at regular intervals. To enable such works there is need for inter-departmental cooperation including department of fisheries, department of flood control and department of irrigation. There are opportunities to involve user groups such as fish workers cooperatives and groups of farmers. The GP can play an important role in identifying such work and coordinating between departments and user groups. In the desert region in western Rajasthan MGNREGA offers resources for works such as sand dune stabilisation and wind breaks. Shifting sand dunes and hot winds bearing sand threaten agriculture. Even in the command area of the Indira Gandhi Canal, shifting sand dunes reduce irrigation potential and threaten to overrun plots of small and marginal farmers. MGNREGA can support widespread establishment of nurseries of suitable grass and shrub species. In addition MGNREGA can support plantation work on sand dunes and as wind breaks. It can also create temporary wind breaks of brushwood to enable vegetation to survive in a protected micro environment. MGNREGA can also contribute significantly by supporting and reviving traditional water harvesting systems to meet the acute drinking water shortage (Tankas, Beri, Kuia) and facilitate limited protection to kharif crops (Nadi and Khadin) in the desert regions. In the case of the hills region, it was pointed out that the key difficulty is in terms of adhering to the labour to material ratio of 60:40. Most of the works to be taken up in the hills involve masonry construction with a high material component. Hence, planning here would involve a suitable modification of this ratio. These examples point to the need of a state level detailed listing of works permissible under MGNREGA within the overall framework of the operational guidelines. Regional variations are also in terms of the strength and weakness of the institutional

14

capacities of GPs, who are the principal implementing agency under MGNREGA. There seemed to be several types of situations here: in Jharkhand, GPs are almost non-existent. Here the VCD team can play a prominent role in generating awareness in creating and registering demand for work and in ensuring that MGNREGA plans conform to local priorities. In states like Bihar and UP, the GPs do exist but are extremely weak in terms of their institutional capacity. In these states, strong VCD teams need to be set up and their capacities developed to support the GPs. In the interim period, the line departments shoulder a major responsibility as MGNREGA PIAs. In states like Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh, the GPs are actively engaged in MGNREGA implementation but their institutional capacities are severely limited. In such states it becomes viable to deploy a strong technical team at the level of the VCD being proposed by this Working Group. Finally, in states like Kerala and West Bengal, the GPs are large and functional as institutions. Here, MGNREGA can support a technical staff for each GP in addition to the EGA. A closer study of all these variations needs to be done and the results incorporated into the state level architecture of MGNREGA. The capacities of local institutions in different regions are reflected in the roles that different agencies play in programme implementation.

14. CONVERGENCE WITH AGRICULTURE & LIVESTOCK DEVELOPMENT

MGNREGA offers a great possibility of stepping up public investment in rural areas of India. One of the most vital sectors where public investment needs to be stepped up is the rainfed agriculture. If it is used effectively, MGNREGA can have a great deal of convergence with agriculture and other livelihood activities, which could unleash a tremendous synergy to transform our rural landscape and revitalise rainfed agriculture. This investment should be directed towards those activities, which are locally relevant (such as soil fertility enhancement and greater organic matter in the soil) but are not taking off on a sufficiently large scale. The bottleneck could be the requirement for high initial investment, which could be overcome through MGNREGA funds. The attempt could also be to fundamentally influence farmer practices in a desirable direction (such as promotion of sustainable agricultural practices) by subsidizing the incremental cost of such activities. Some of these activities may initially appear to have a high associated risk or unclear benefits. MGNREGA support for the incremental cost may help the rainfed farmers to adopt sustainable practices by overcoming these barriers. There should also be the clarity that this support is available only for a limited time frame, beyond which these practices need to be financed through private investment. The MGNREGA investment must be real, additive (not displacing what the farmer would have invested in a business-as-usual scenario), measurable and verifiable. The following five principles may be laid down for including any agriculture-related works in MGNREGA: 1. It should be within the 8 program areas listed in the MGNREGA. 2. It must contribute to a 'durable asset' like soil fertility

15

3. The proposed work should not be in the nature of 'working capital' 4. It should not replace what the farmers/ people will be doing under business -as-usual i.e. should not replace farmers' own investments on asset creation. It must be supplemental / complementary. 5. Labour orientation must be the primary concern. The Working Group feels that specific activities like soil fertility enhancement, preparation of organic inputs like bio-pesticides, tree plantations, green manuring, green fencing, wind breaks etc. could be introduced into the micro-plans developed under MGNREGA. Specific activities under animal husbandry, NTFP processing, crop produce aggregation and value addition also could be made part of the MGNREGA micro-plans. The labour component of these activities as well as some part of the material component (on 60:40 basis) could be met from MGNREGA funds. The Working Group felt that the experience of Andhra Pradesh was worth a closer study in terms of convergence. The convergence of NREGA with sustainable agricultural practices will need to be facilitated through additional human resource and computing support. The example of HR and computing support provided by Government of Andhra Pradesh to the non-pesticide management (NPM) Agricultural Programme may be cited here. As per GoAP orders (G.O.Ms.No.55, dated 16th February, 2008), each GP has been provided with one village Level NPM-EGS activist. This Village NPM-EGS Activist is positioned by the VO and is paid remuneration as a skilled worker from January to June. At the Mandal level, one exclusive Mandal Coordinator/Technical Assistant (NPM-EGS) is positioned. The Mandal Coordinator (NPM-EGS), in addition to assisting Mandal Samakhya, also performs functions like coordinating all NPM-EGS activities, taking measurements of the works executed, compiling data and record keeping. An exclusive Computer Operator is also employed at the Mandal level to take care of the data processing and other works. The Mandal Samakhya is provided with a dedicated computer system with internet connectivity for data processing and generation of the work orders. The Guidelines on Convergence (MoRD, 2009) have identified several natural resource management activities where the expertise of the Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs) can be used in conjunction with the choice of works under MGNREGA: Afforestation including tree plantation on common and individual land (including homesteads) with multi-purpose vegetation (fuelwood, fodder, timber, herbal plans, medicinal and aromatic plants, biofuel plantations etc.); Land development with contour bench terracing, contour bunds and graded bunds, pasture development, tank silt application on agricultural land; Acid amelioration in problem soils and micro-nutrient management; Enriched compost production through various labour-intensive methods of biowaste recycling; Vermi-composts and vermi-wash; 16

Production of liquid manures like sanjeevak or amrit paani; Preparation of bio-pesticides like neem kernel extract, other neem-based preparations, NPV sprays etc.; Bamboo plantations; Mushroom cultivation, Sericulture and Pisciculture; Azolla production in tanks; Plastering the floor of cattle sheds and places of rest for animals in the homesteads; Plastering the floor of threshing ground in the fields to prevent post-harvest losses.

Support to farmers seed storage systems by constructing storage bins with locally available or improved materials and technology. MGNREGA can also support a comprehensive a commons - dependent livestock system by including works such as : treatment of common lands for raising additional fodder in the form of multi purpose trees, shrubs and grasses create infrastructure facilities for fodder storage increase drinking water facilities through surface water bodies and drinking water troughs

15. OTHER OPPORTUNITIES FOR CONVERGENCE

The Convergence Guidelines (MoRD, 2009) of the MoRD mentions five ways in which convergence of MGNREGA with other schemes could be achieved: Gap filling through MGNREGA for similar work under the schemes of the department with which convergence is being considered; Dovetailing inputs into a common Project; Area Approach; Value addition to MGNREGA works; and

Technical support for ensuring quality in planning, selection and execution of MGNREGA works The Working Group notes that the government of Madhya Pradesh has set an example by exploring the possibility of convergence of watershed programme with MGNREGA. This could be seen as an example of the Area Approach to convergence. In 2010, GoMP has gone further and have come out with a special set of orders for developing micro-plans for convergence under MGNREGA. The idea is to identify a Cluster of Villages (roughly 5000 ha, covering 15-20 villages) in each development block and formulate convergence plans for these clusters on a watershed basis. Many of the livelihood interventions mentioned above could be made part of the micro-planning exercises of the GPs in these clusters. The Working Group felt that any notion of convergence necessarily implied expansion 17

of the scope of MGNREGA to include works on the private land, especially of small and marginal farmers. As the Convergence Guidelines (MoRD, 2009) notes, this also means value additions to NREGA works and organizing better technical support to planning, selection and execution of NREGA works. The processes and content of planning for convergence will depend on the nature of works to be taken up under such land. Another Working Group of the CEGC is examining the issue of works on private land. The Convergence Guidelines (MoRD, 2009) has suggested piloting of the convergence of MGNREGA with National Afforestation Programme (NAP) of the MoEF in 18 districts. Several proposed activities under NAP (such as in situ soil and moisture conservation measures, soil and moisture conservation by constructing small scale engineering structures, planting and sowing of multi-purpose trees, shrubs, grasses and legumes, as well as non-timber species, fuelwood and fodder plantation including pasture development for meeting biomass needs of the rural communities, conservation in situ of medicinal plant species and augmenting their plant population, raising of bamboo, cane plantation and medicinal plants, raising of coastal shelterbelts in the problem areas, promotion of agro-forestry and sericulture, as appropriate etc.), are also allowed under MGNREGA. Hence, planning could be undertaken for the forest area and adjoining land areas including village common lands, community lands, revenue wastelands, jhum lands and private lands with watershed approach. The Joint Forest Management Committee (JFMC) at the village level and Forest Development Agency (FDA) at the division level could prepare micro-plans and work out modalities for convergence with MGNREGA. The Working Group has received suggestions for convergence with social programmes such as TSC and ICDS. In these cases, the respective line departments need to play a role as PIAs. The working group is of the view that convergence programmes be supported by MGNREGA. A few principles need to observed while designing convergence projects: 1. The convergence projects must address priorities as expressed in the perspective plans prepared by GPs or cluster of GPs. 2. The respective PIAs need to inform the respective GSs of the convergence proposals and obtain their agreement 3. Convergence proposals deliver definite gains in terms of development outcomes which would not be available if the interventions are implemented separately. 4. Convergence projects are governed by the transparency provisions of the MGNREGA guidelines including monitoring by the GS.

16. REFORMING SCHEDULE OF RATES (SORS)

The Working Group observed that the Schedule of Rates (SoRs) currently in use for estimation, monitoring and valuation of MGNREGA works has an intrinsic bias towards the contractor system and use of machines. They need to be drastically reformed. The need for 18

such a reform arises particularly in a sensitive and humane programme like MGNREGA, which is about providing gainful employment to all those who need it. In particular, women and elderly workers will seek work under MGNREGA. It was observed that several states have attempted revision of the SoRs, but these have been done by revising upwards the rates per unit of tasks without rigorous time and motions studies. Some states like Andhra Pradesh have added allowances for hot months by giving an extra percentage over the existing task rate for work taken up during March June season. A systematic revision of SoRs requires a re-estimation of the amount of work (a Task) a human being can perform in a given area during a given period of time (normally 8 hours). Carefully designed Work Time and Motion Studies (WT&MS) need to be undertaken for this3. This exercise has to be done in a transparent manner. IEC material must be developed and disseminated to demystify SoRs amongst potential workers. The Government of Rajasthan has some excellent examples in this regard. States like Rajasthan have moved forward in the direction of coming up with district specific SoRs, which enables them to take into account inter-regional and inter-district variations in conditions under which work is performed. The WT&MS should also allow for regional variations in tasks, depending on the variable local conditions and the health and nutrition status of the population. For instance, the tasks expected to be performed by the malnourished, primitive tribal groups, the aged and women should treated differently from those expected from able-bodied men. The Working Group felt that there is the need to develop a simple and accessible template of SoRs, which could be used by the GPs, EGAs and the mates during execution of works. This template could be developed at two levels: one, with rates for the simple and often repeated tasks and the other with rates for more complicated tasks. The SoR for common tasks may be developed at the level of the district whereas the SoRs for the complex tasks may be developed for a group of districts within the same agro-climatic region. Comprehensive training on SoRs should be made part of the capacity building exercises of the personnel involved in the execution of MGNREGA works. The template should also allow for regional variations and include special works to be taken up in the hills region, coastal regions, deserts, water-logged and flood-prone plains and saline areas. Let us closely examine one commonly encountered problem: in some arduous tasks women are less productive than men. If they work under a uniform SoR, women will earn lower wages than men for the same hours of work. State Governments have tried different solutions to enable parity on this issue.

3 As the Operational Guidelines states: the State Governments may undertake comprehensive work time and motion studies. These studies will observe out-turn and fix rates after detailed location specific observations. This implies that productivity norms must follow possible out-turn under different geo-morphological and climatic conditions, across and within Districts. This is of particular significance in areas with a high degree of location specificity and variability in the soil, slope and geological conditions and seasonal variation. Therefore, a matrix of rates for the same task needs to be drawn up that follows ecological rather than administrative boundaries. The Schedules of Rates (SOR) may be prepared on the basis of these studies ((MoRD, 2008, 6.7.2).

19

1. State Government like Rajasthan have modified their SoRs by reducing the task out turn for one unit of payment. This way, women are able to earn the minimum wage through 7 hours of work. The average earnings of male workers for 7 hours of work are higher than the minimum wages. In Rajasthan over 80% of the workers on MGNREGA sites are women. 2. State Governments like West Bengal and Bihar have seperate SoRs for women prescribing a higher rate for women compared to men for the same out turn. While this may be easy to administer when tasks on work sites are executed by gender segregated teams, this system poses a major challenge in case tasks are executed by gender mixed teams. The challenge lies in measuring the specific out turn of women members of such mixed teams. 3. A third option is to have a common SoR pegged at an average male worker's productivity. A woman worker may get a prescribed premium for the same out turn when compared with men workers. In case of gender mixed teams, this does not pose the above major challenge i.e. measuring the productivity of specific women members working in a mixed team. It just requires a head count of men and women to verify the muster roll. However, the overall estimate for a specific work may vary depending on the gender composition of the worker team.

17. WORK FOR DIFFERENTLY ABLED

The Working Group noted that Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan have come out with special orders for the differently abled those who are not able to perform regular tasks. The GoMP orders have classified different types of disabilities and have suggested works to be provided against each category of disability (Annexure II). Activities such as drinking water arrangements, looking after children, plantation, irrigation canal digging, earth backfilling, sprinkling water on newly built walls, filling sand and pebbles in pans etc., have been suggested to the differently abled persons. The Working Group feels that this is a highly commendable initiative. These orders not only classify the types of physical disabilities but also mention the types of work that people with these disabilities could perform. Obviously, these tasks and the rates corresponding to them do not form part of any SoR. But such a special consideration for the physically challenged is essential in MGNREGA, to strengthen the social safety net aspect of the programme.

18. FACILITIES FOR MGNREGA WORKERS

The Operational Guidelines provide for the employment of a person to look after children below the age of six years in case their parents work on a MGNREG scheme (MoRD, 2008, 6.8.2). The Guidelines suggest that the location of the crche should be planned for optimum utilization (MoRD, 2008, 6.8.3). The insistence of the crche to be located at the work

20

place seems to be primarily to benefit the exclusively breast feeding mothers, who could then conveniently go over to her very young infant and feed her. Since this situation is only necessary in the first six months after childbirth (in the first three months of which it is not advisable for the women to do physical labour), there seems to be sufficient rationale to provide for a creche in the village for children of MGNREGA workers who are over six months of age. The Working Group suggests that the option of supporting a crche in the village be made available to the MGNREGA workers. If the workers agree, the scheme can support one person for every ten children or less. This person will look after the children in one location in the village and will be paid the daily minimum wages. This person may also be supported to converge with the ICDS system at the local level. On account of this, the uptake and quality of ICDS services need drastic improvement.

19. FOREST ISSUES

In several states, in poor regions, forests occupy a significant portion of the geographical area. The Forest Department (FD) is administering most of these forests. Such land offers vast opportunities for productive investment through labour oriented works. Such works will enable a large increase in the days of employment provided to each job cardholder. Further such investment will increase productive assets such as ground and surface water and biomass yield. In all states, legislation and policy permit those works to be taken up on forestland, which contribute to the conservation of forest resources. Such works must be within the ambit of the Forest Working Plan, which is usually aimed at forest conservation. In most states however, very little work has been undertaken on forestland under MGNREGA. The Forest Department has been reluctant to execute such works or permit other PIAs to do so. The existing forest laws, particularly the Forest Conservation Act (FCA), and the attitude of the FD pose serious problems. While taking up MGNREGA interventions on the watershed development approach, the ridge area in a typical watershed is located on land in the control of the forest department. If no erosion control works are taken up in this part of the watershed, the entire principle of ridge-to-valley planning is violated. Moreover, since adivasis are normally concentrated in villages close to the forest, it becomes difficult to carry out development activities under MGNREGA in adivasi villages. A conflict is also often created with the very basic provisions of employment guarantee, since long delays in obtaining necessary permissions for working in forest areas translate themselves into inordinate gaps between work demand and work initiation, thus nullifying the very purpose of the employment guarantee. The Working Group felt that this situation should be rectified. Several options are available: 1. The FD plans a SoP for each forest unit which is consistent with the forest working plan. This SoP is granted technical and administrative sanction by the DPC. The FD then functions as a PIA, employing workers from the vicinity of the forest area, by

21

approaching the respective GPs. 2. The FD prepares a perspective plan and an SoP on forest lands and proposes these to the respective GSs. In case the works proposed are not located within any village boundary (revenue or forest) the FD may propose these to the GS located closest to the forest area. Once the GS approves the works, such treatment becomes the part of the perspective plan of the GP. The FD operates like a PIA and executes work after due AS and TS. It informs the respective GS of annual budgets and utilisation. 3. The FD can form JFM committees in the respective GS. This JFM committee can work as the PIA on behalf of the FD. The FD can assist the JFM committee to prepare and execute works in forest land which are consistent with MGNREGA Guidelines as well as the forest working plan. This JFM committee may be treated as a sub committee of the GP. 4. The FD permits other PIAs (including GPs) to plan and execute works on forest lands. It does so after ensuring that such works are consistent with the forest working plan. It provides an additional technical sanction for such works and undertakes periodic site inspection which may become a prerequisite for making payments. These PIAs will need to work within the perspective plan of the respective GPs and with the approval of the GS. In this option, a time-bound approval of proposals related to the forest areas by the FD need to be ensured. While these indicate the options available for facilitating work in the forest areas, the Working Group recommends that for any selected option, the State Government must set up a High Level Task Force which includes senior officials from the RD, FD, and members of the SEGC. This Task Force must recommend a set of rules and orders to enable execution of MGNREGA on the basis of the preferred option. In this context, it is important to highlight the provisions of the Forest Rights Act of 2006 (FRA). The FRA brings into its ambit all manner of forest areas and defines community forest resource to mean "customary forest land within the traditional or customary boundaries of the village or seasonal use of landscape in the case of pastoral communities, including reserved forests, protected forests and protected areas such as Sanctuaries and National Parks to which the community had traditional access." The FRA recognizes the rights of forest dwellers to live in forests, to nistaar, to entitlements such as grazing and fish and other products of water bodies and even provides rights for conversions of all forest villages into revenue villages. The most enabling provisions of the FRA are related to work in the forest areas. The FRA categorically states that notwithstanding anything contained in the FCA, the Central Government shall provide for diversions of forest land which involve felling of trees not exceeding seventy-five trees per hectare, for facilities managed by the Government such as schools, dispensary or hospital, anganwadis, tanks and other minor water bodies, drinking water supply and water pipelines, water or rain water harvesting structures, minor irrigation canals,

22

non-conventional source of energy etc. It stipulates that such diversion of forest land shall be allowed only if the forest land to be diverted for the purposes mentioned in this sub-section is less than one hectare in each case and the clearance of such development projects shall be subject to the condition that the same is recommended by the Gram Sabha (FRA, 2006). Hence, the Working Group feels that the FRA provides a facilitating framework, which helps overcome the difficulties apparently arising out of the FCA. The FRA has given a clear and overwhelming mandate to the Gram Sabha to take decisions relating to work in the forest areas. Work on NREGA in forest areas could hold the key to bringing the adivasi communities and other forest-dwellers out of their absolutely level of poverty.

20. MUSTER ROLLS, PAYMENT APPROVALS AND PREPARATION OF WAGE LIST

This is for works being executed by the GPs as PIA. Technically qualified personnel for maintaining the measurement book should be placed with each GP (Kerala and West Bengal) or at the VCD level. Payment of wages should be made every week or fortnight on the basis of the muster roll and the measurement book. The wage list should be made and the payment order issued by the PIA. At periodic intervals the PO or his/her nominee must verify the muster roll and measurement book and match it with the site inspection. The final payment by PIAs to workers and material suppliers may be subject to certification by the PO of the measurement book and the work completion report. PO should take corrective action immediately in case of any errors. Such provisions will on the one hand ensure that workers are paid wages within fifteen days of having performed their work. Such wages are on the basis of measurement of productivity. On the other hand, the above process also has provision periodic verification of productivity by the PO. Timely payment of wages is extremely important to attract very poor workers to MGNREGA sites. If wages are delayed such poor workers have no option but to migrate under distress conditions. The widely adopted current system of wage payment after validation of the measurement book by the PO, makes workers bear the burden of delays on the part of the PIA or PO. This system violates the provisions of the MGNREGA Act and Guidelines of wage payment within fifteen days of work done. The Working Group acknowledges the need to monitor the link between productivity and wages and recommends linking the final payment to workers and material suppliers with verification of the measurement book.

21. JOB CARDS

As per the current guidelines the job card proforma requires the names of all members of the households willing to work. This may be revised to enable entry of names of all members of the households regardless of age. The computerised MIS by itself must identify those members who are above the age limit and therefore eligible to work. This prevents the need for 23

periodic manual revision of Job Cards to enable entry of those households members who cross the age of 18 years. While GoMP enters the names of all members of the household on the job card, households have to file an application for inclusion of an additional member on the list of prospective job seekers once the member turns 18 years. This system can be improved if the MIS is programmed to modify the list of job seekers on the basis of the original entry in the job card. In Rajasthan there is provision for issue of a separate job card for a married couple as soon as the marriage takes place. This arises from a clear definition of a household and is useful for poor communities. Other states too may include such a provision for revision of job cards.

22. SELECTION OF IMPLEMENTING AGENCY APPROPRIATE TO THE PROJECT

The provisions of the Operational Guidelines (MoRD, 2008, 6.3.3) appear to be adequate. However, the Working Group has identified one problem in several states. Several PIAs have not commenced work on projects months after approval. In case any selected PIA is unable to commence the work allotted to it within 15 days or complete it within the scheduled time frame, it must inform the DPC. The DPC must proactively monitor delays in commencement or completion of approved works. In case of delays on projects which meet local priorities, the DPC may entrust this work to another approved agency.

23. ENSURING COMPLETION OF WORKS

The Working Group has noticed that in many states, several works remain incomplete several months after commencement of execution. In some cases, work had to stop because of faulty design, estimation of costs and estimation of M/L ratios. The PIA has abandoned these works and begun other works. This reduces the impact of MGNREGA on productivity. In some cases, the slow progress in works has been reported due to faulty labour budgets, which over-estimated demand for work. The PO needs to enquire into the reasons and take appropriate action. In some cases this may require revision of estimates. In others it may require that the DPC appoints a different agency as PIA to complete the work (MoRD, 2008, 6.3.3.i). The DPC after due enquiry must initiate action against the PIA which has left the work incomplete.

24. DEVELOPING DETAILED ESTIMATES

Every state government can develop a template for making estimates on the basis of choice of interventions and design parameters fed in by the user. This can assist the technical staff deployed by the PIA in designing works. In several states there is a shortage of such staff leading to inadequate provision of work. The state governments may refer to the template developed by the Government of Andhra Pradesh. Each State Government must prepare a menu of works which is sufficiently large to cover for the requirements of diverse set of

24

conditions. This menu should be open ended with provision for addition of new designs as appropriate. There should be ample scope for user defined parameters and user entry of measurements. This will enable innovative responses to ground level challenges. For each structure, the dimensions should be entered by the user rather than generated on a standardized basis by the system. The software should link these parameters and measurements to generate a set of tasks which are required to execute the work. The software should calculate the volume for each task and select the applicable rate on the basis of user defined parameters (soil type, lift and lead, geological strata, vegetation type). Such software will add to the efficiency of the technical staff while leaving them room for tailoring design of works to local conditions. In addition, such software will facilitate revision of estimates when there is a change in the base rates. (See below)

25. REVISION OF ESTIMATES

There have been several revisions of the prescribed minimum wages and rates for materials used in works approved under MGNREGA. These require immediate revision of cost estimates for proposed works. It has been observed that several works remain incomplete because the estimates have not been revised in keeping with increased base (wages or material) rates. There is need for a smooth and quick process of revision of estimates. The Working Group recommends that the DPC prepares a status report on the progress of works within 15 days of any such substantial revision of base rates. The DPC may within 15 more days revise the cost estimates of all ongoing works for which AS has been granted. These revised estimates must be formally conveyed to the respective PIAs within one month of revision of rates. This will ensure that ongoing works need not be stopped if base rates are revised. There is need for provision for concomitant revision of the annual budget for the district. In case budget revisions are not possible the DPC in consultation with the district level TSC may revoke administrative sanction granted to specific works on which execution hasn't commenced. The DPC will do so to accommodate the revised cost estimates of works already commenced within the prevailing approved MGNREGA budget for the district.

26. MATES
The Working Group recommends that one mate be appointed for every group of 30 workers instead of the 1:50 ratio in the current guidelines. This will serve to improve the quality of works and better record keeping. Further the mates may mobilise groups of workers and support the articulation of demand for work.

27. MATERIAL PROCUREMENT BY GPS & OTHER PIAS

The DPC should prepare a rate list for commonly consumed material components 25

of MGNREGA interventions in September of every year for the next fiscal year. The DPC may fix these rates after a market survey and will clearly indicate quality parameters for the material supplies. This may include differential rates for supply depending on the location and distance of the works. In addition the DPC may prepare a list of suppliers who have agreed to supply at the prescribed rates. This list may include suppliers at the level of every block within the district. Every PIA will be required to procure material components at the prescribed rates and the prescribed quality. The PIA must procure material from the list of suppliers approved by the DPC. In case the PIA is unable to obtain materials at the prescribed rates from the prescribed suppliers they may approach the PO for assistance.

28. MIS
As per Section 10.1.7 the State Government will monitor the scheme in all aspects of implementation and may set up a computerised MIS for this purpose. The PO will be responsible for the initial entry into the data system. At the level of the state government it is important that a select few indicators be monitored at a very high level at frequent intervals. This Dashboard of indicators must include: 1. Number of households provided work as a proportion of the total number of job cards; 2. Number of person days of employment provided to each household demanding work; 3. Employment (persondays) provided as a proportion of demand for work as per labour budget; 4. Number of persons and unemployment allowance amount provided; 5. Number of cases where workers have received wages more than 15 days after performing work; 6. Proportion of all money released under MGNREGA accounted under each of the following heads: Money held in bank accounts at various levels; Advances to implementing or payment agencies; Vouchers of actual expenses; and Number of works completed as a proportion of works for which work orders have been issued

29. ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS

It is the considered view of the Working Group that the provision for administrative costs be increased from the current 6% to 8%. Of this 8%, 6% should be reserved to support the costs of Planning & Execution at the Block level and below. This will support a team at the Block level under the PO and a technical team at the level of every VCD. This will 26

also ensure one EGA for every GP. While these personnel have to be deployed at all blocks, for the most backward 2000 blocks, the Working Group recommends the provision of additional staff as follows: One Community Mobiliser for every GP; One Additional Technical Assistant (TA) at the level of the VCD; and

Additional Data Entry Operator at the Block. The Working Group expects that its recommendations on Planning & Execution will enable an increase in coverage of MGNREGA (more households provided with work as a proportion of the total number of job cards) as well as more person days of work per employed household. The Working Group expects an increase in coverage of MGNREGA from the 5.25 crore households (2009-10) to 8 crore households. Additionally, the Working Group expects that 60 person days of employment will be provided to each participating household, which is higher than the 53 person days achieved in 2009-10. The Working Group has recommended intensive technical and administrative support in the 2000 most backward blocks and a relatively less intensive but effective support in the other 4000 blocks of the country. It is expected that with such support in the 2000 most backward blocks (covering roughly 1 lakh GPs), about 400 households in every GP will be able to demand and get 80 person days of employment every year (total 32,000 person days of employment per GP). The total person days of employment generated in 2000 most backward blocks of the country will, thus, be 320 crores. In the other 4000 blocks (covering roughly 2 lakh GPs), the Working Group expects that 200 households per GP will demand and get employment for 40 person days per year (total 8000 person days per GP). The total person days of employment generated in these 4000 blocks will be 160 crore. Thus, a total of (320+160 =) 480 crore person days of employment will be generated by the programme every year. The wage cost (@Rs. 100/day) of the programme comes to Rs. 48000 crores. Under the assumption of a labour : material ratio of 70:30 (which approximates the actuals for 2009-10), this requires an annual outlay of Rs 68000 crores for MGNREGA annually. This will provide 60 days of employment per year to each of eight crore households in rural India. The Planning & Execution arrangements recommended by the Working Group will require an annual outlay of 4000 crores for the system at the block level and below. This comes to 6% of the annual outlay on MGNREGA. If we add 1% for administration expenses above the block level and 1% for Capacity building, there is a requirement for provision of upto 8% of the overall annual outlay of MGNREGA for administrative and other components. The Working Group, therefore, recommends that 8% of the outlay on MGNREGA works be allocated as administrative costs which will include costs towards capacity building, community mobilisation, planning and execution and monitoring. Within the above provision, a sub provision of 6% should be made for expenditure at the block level and below towards community mobilisation and planning and execution of MGNREGA works. The projected expansion of the employment guarantee programme to cover more 27

households and to provide more days of employment per employed household is substantial. However, it must be remembered that at present the bulk of the financial expenditure and employment generation is confined to a few states. For instance, in 2008-09, five states (Rajasthan, Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and Chhattisgarh) accounted for about 66% of the expenditure and persondays of employment generated under MGNREGA in the country. When the processes of planning and execution suggested in this report are adopted on a large scale, the Working Group expects that the pace of implementation of the programme will pick up in many hitherto laggard states (like Orissa, West Bengal, Bihar, Jharkhand and Maharashtra). Moreover, this report also outlines possibilities of convergence of MGNREGA with agriculture, forests, animal husbandry and other livelihood generation activities. The Working Group is of the view that if work starts on all these components, the projected expansion of MGNREGA to cover more households and provide more employment per employed households is quite within the realm of possibility in the coming years.

28

ANNEXURE 1: STATE VISIT & CONSULTATIONS UNDERTAKEN BY WORKING GROUP MEMBERS

During the process of preparation of their report, the members of the Working Group on Planning and Execution visited various state governments and held meetings with officials and other consultations. Depending upon the availability of different members at different times, the tasks were split up in order to save time and resources. The details of these visits are provided below.

Andhra Pradesh
The team visited two districts of Andhra Pradesh (Mahboobnagar and Nalgonda) between 28th and 30th of March, 2010. In Mahboobnagar, the team visited Bomraspet Mandal and Daulatabad Mandal. The team reviewed the ongoing work under MGNREGA. At the Mandal office, the team held discussions with Madhusudan Prasad, Assistant Programme Officer and Venkat Reddy, member of the WDT. The officials explained how the planning and execution processes under MGNREGA actually unfold at the district, block and mandal levels. They explained that a total of 84 types of works have been identified which have been clubbed into 16 projects (project mode of planning). The team discussed the way work flow is organised in Andhra Pradesh on the basis of the TCS software. We were told that the shelf of projects is prepared every year and sanctioning process is done annually. The perspective plans were either not in existence or not used actively to guide the execution of works under MGNREGA. We also got to know that the SoRs have been revised in Andhra Pradesh to allow for a higher rate for the months from February to May. The team learnt about the additional personnel deployment done under MGNREGA, in the form of employment of full time Technical Assistants and Field Assistants and dedicated categories of personnel like the Muster Verification Officer and Check Measurement Officers (to verify Measurement Books). The team undertook field visits to understand how planning and execution of works is being done under MGNREGA in the district. In Nalgonda district, the team visited Turkappally and held discussions with Srinivas Babu, Programme Director, DWMA and Shekhar Reddy, Assistant Programme Director, DWMA. The officials informed us that there were 7.51 lakh job cards in the district, covering 18 lakh adult workers. In the previous year (2009-10), the district provided employment to 4.10 lakh households at a total financial expenditure of Rs. 221.57 crores. 92% of this expenditure was on wages. The team learnt that in Andhra Pradesh, the guarantee of 100 days of work is not taken as the maximum to be provided. The policy is to provide as many days of employment as there is demand. Hence, the system is under great pressure to generate adequate employment and pay wages in time. The officials informed us that the major activity for which MGNREGA funds were being used was for land development, which included bush removal, silt application, deep ploughing, stone removal and construction of water harvesting structures. Clearly most of these activities were taken up in private land. During field visit, the team visited

Tumalapalli in Ramanapet Mandal where the activity of bush removal was being conducted. We found that the employment as per job cards almost never reached 100 and the average would have been around 80. We also saw that the physically challenged persons were not given any special treatment. Instead, a blanket increase in their wages was being used as a way of ensuring fair treatment. We found this is far from being fair.

Rajasthan
Rajasthan has the record of being the highest spending state under MGNREGA. In 2009-2010, the state seems to have spent about Rs. 6200 crores under the programme. The team visited Rajasthan between 3rd and 5th of May 2010. On 3rd May, the team visited Jaipur and held meetings with Shri CS Rajan, Principal Secretary, Rural Development, GoR and Shri Tanmay Kumar, state NREGS Commissioner. We also met Shri Mukesh Vijay, Shri Ramnivas Mirdha and Mr. G. Gupta at the state NREGS office. Shri Rajan informed the team that the stipulation of 60:40 wage:nonwage ratio was a serious handicap for the progress of MGNREGA in the state. He mentioned the example of Sriganganagar in the command area of the Indira Gandhi Canal, where the irrigation schedule of the farmers could be regularised with more investment in water harvesting structures with cement lining. The Rajasthan officials seemed to be extremely concerned about the durability of assets and clearly favoured more durable masonry works (pucca works) in place of the seemingly non-durable kucha works. Shri Ramnivas Mirdha took the example of the need for lined canals in Dungarpur district, where irrigated area could be considerably enhanced if this activity is taken up on scale. He agreed, however, that the beneficiaries of such works could be largely rich farmers with access to canal irrigation. The WG team tried to engage the officials in a discussion that the quality of works is more appropriately seen in relation to the appropriateness of the chosen work to the area or in terms of the robustness of the planning and execution processes rather than on the basis of the material used in construction. Shri Tanmay Kumar, NREGA Commissioner, explained to the WG team that Rajasthan as a state is very prone to frequent droughts. The state, therefore, has developed the required capacities to deliver drought relief at a scale. Therefore, execution of MGNREGA works is very much within the capacity of the state structures in Rajasthan. However, the officials were not open to the idea of convergence of NREGA with watershed and similar programmes. The major work being implemented under MGNREGA in the state was road construction. Plantation was another major activity. The WG team visited Dungarpur and Udaipur districts and held meetings with district officials. In Dungarpur the team met Shri Purnachandra Kishan, District Collector and KL Sisodiya, Executive Engineer. The DM explained that he is deeply mindful of three ratios under MGNREGA, namely, the percentage of households completing 100 days of employment, the proportion of households being covered under the programme and the persondays of employment provided to each employed household. In terms of choice of works, the DM said that the major works being undertaken include road construction, deepening of water

harvesting structures and plantation including fodder development. He agreed that workwise sanctions are the order of the day and no annual or perspective plans are prepared by the GPs. He felt that the GPs lacked required capacity. However, the DM claimed that he was able to check corruption in material procurement by instituting a process of open tender at the district level. Still, there is high corruption in earthwork and the effort is to check leakages here. Shri Sisodiya informed the team that job card separation is done as soon as the adult member gets married and sets up a separate establishment. He said that the SoRs have been revised in Rajasthan sufficiently to take into account the problems of the physically challenged, the aged, malnourished and women. In Udaipur, the team held discussions with Shri Anand Kumar, District Collector, Shri RS Shekhawat, CEO, Zilla Panchayat and Shri SC Suklecha, Executive Engineer. The officials repeated the argument earlier proposed by the Principal Secretary about durable assets and quality of works in terms of kutcha and pucca activities. Shri Suklecha gave a number of useful suggestions about how to strengthen the planning process under MGNREGA. He also had several useful insights on how to organise work, arrange for labour payments and muster verification and overall monitoring of works under the programme. He explained that they had worked out a system of issuing muster rolls in a staggered manner to enable timely verification by the concerned technical staff and to enable payment of wages within 15 days as stipulated in the Act. The DM agreed that there is the need to consider convergence of the works taken up under MGNREGA with watershed programme. However, his view is that this convergence is more relevant for the tribal areas of Rajasthan only. During field visits, the team visited worksites at village Balicha (road construction and repair of water harvesting structures), Bhaisada Khurd (fodder development and stone bunds) in Udaipur district and village Dhavadi in Dungarpur district. In Dhavadi, many check dams have been constructed and irrigation channels (dhora) have been lined. This activity is supposed to have enabled irrigation in large areas in the village. However, the beneficiaries were largely big farmers and per hectare cost of this activity came to nearly Rs. 50-80000. In Balicha, conversion of kutcha road to pucca road was being done but it is doubtful who could use these roads unless they are black-topped. The uniqueness of worksites in these Rajasthan districts was the high proportion of women employed (over 80%). In some sites like Balicha, even the mates employed were women. The works taken up did not seem to follow any plan. They were more in the form of randomly chosen activities response to the huge pressure on the system to create employment.

Bihar
The working group met Suman Singh, Secretary, SAKHI, Jitendra Kumar of Navjagriti and Mohua Roy Choudhri of BASIX at the Aga Khan Foundation (AKF) office in Patna on April 13th. Mihir Sahana of BASIX met the group at the AKF office on April 14 th. Meeting with Sh.Santosh Mathew, Principal Secretary, Rural Development, Govt of Bihar was held on April 14th.

Following is the summary of the conclusions arrived through various meetings. Choice of Works There appears to be adequate opportunity for planning and execution of works permissible under NREGA in the flood plains of North Bihar. These works can generate much more employment than what is being currently created. Among the feasible options which are primarily labour intensive are: Desilting or deepening of public ponds, which are being currently leased to Fishermens cooperatives Clearing/desilting drainage channels in lowlying areas (locally called char) where water collects and prevents cultivation.): Drainage lines as govt land. By clearing these, the char land will be drained out and reclaimed . Excavating canal networks (we are informed that several small canal networks are in an incomplete state, whereby the land under the canal cannot be cultivated, even while the canal runs dry). Embankment repair: Several embankments are in need of repair due to minor breaches or erosion. Such preventive measures are important for all cultivable land outside the embankments. Social forestry along embankments (shrubs, bamboo) which will strengthen the embankments Earthen dams across seasonal streams, which serve to impound water in dry season and which get washed away during rains Individual lands are being lost due to siltation caused by large floods. In such areas desilting can be done and silt can be used for making approach roads. Staffing requirements: An average GP covers 7000 people (1200-1500 households) and roughly 12-17 GPs exist in one block. Currently one Rozgar Sevak has been appointed per GP. There is need for more technical support for GPs. For each cluster of GPs (4-5 GPs), we need one technical staff for structure design, cost estimation, periodic site inspection, MBs, valuation. In addition, there is need for a small intersectoral technical team at the block level to help preparation of the Perspective plan and to ensure that the assets are appropriate for supporting livelihoods The Rozgar sewaks role may include working with the GP on issue of jobcards, estimating demand for work, the muster roll, other required records, site supervision, ensuring that on-site facilities are provided, payments, etc Role of facilitator One major suggestion is an institutional arrangement for facilitating MGNREGA implementation: This may be through a state-wide society (which is being very actively considered by GoB) employing facilitation teams on contract or by designating one NGO per block/district or a combination of both. This facilitator can be assigned the task of working with GPs on community mobilisation and spreading awareness, technical support in planning and execution of works, monitoring progress and compliance. We may consider designing a performance based payment system for the facilitation functions Schedule of Rates Bihar has specific rates for women workers. But this provision is impractical. Payment of special rates for women is arbitrary. Even if there were no corruption/capacity issues, this feature is difficult to implement. Women rarely work in all-women groups. Specific sub-tasks may be entirely executed by women, but that will require splitting up rates for each sub-task.

Worksite facilities: In the meeting it was felt that worksite insurance is important, including on-site minor dependents. There was a suggestion to make NGOs responsible for provision of worksite facilities. Labour Budget The Labour Budget is an important feature of the Scheme that is not being utilised at all. In Bihar currently, there is ex-post matching of employment provided with work demanded. At present most states require this to be done in October, which is suitable. The Labour Budget must have two distinct parts. The first and the more important one should be an estimation of the demand for work on the basis of a job-cardwise listing. Each job card holder should be invited to convey when and for how many days does the household require work from MGNREGA. This demand should be estimated for each season/quarter, while collated into an annual demand. This should be approved by the Gram Sabha and individual details entered in job-cards. The Gram Panchayat should then calculate the employment that can be generated by its proposed works, once again broken into seasons/quarters. This requires that the GP plans its works well in advance and prepares an Annual plan for approval, along with the labour budget. Matching demand for work with the employment potential of wok proposed by the GP, helps estimate the volume of employment required to be generated by other agencies in the GP or beyond.This is a very important process for households which typically migrate in search of work. If they are not informed well in advance, they will make arrangements to migrate typically once the kharif crop is harvested (and occasionally even while the kharif crop stands). These households are the most needy and they need to be able to anticipate when and how much work will be provided locally under NREGS. Predictability of works is very important. Madhya Pradesh The members of the working group also met Sh. Parasuram, Principal Secretary, Deptt of Panchayats & Rural Development, GoMP. Some of the issues on which there was agreement was on unit of planning. A pilot is being initiated in the state of MP where the unit of planning is a cluster of villages and is on watershed basis. Active participation of the CSOs is being sought. The need for a survey to ascertain a accurate figure of households demanding work and in what seasons was also felt but the issue was of cost of such a survey. It was also felt that the system of granting Technical Sanction and Administrative Sanction to Annual Plans as mentioned in the guidelines instead of individual works and issuing of work order to individual works merits greater attention and such an approach might help in pushing up the momentum which currently tends to get slow because of GPs not getting sanction on time.

A consultation was organized on 25th May BAIF, Pune with the Rainfed Livestock Network. Members of the Working Group on Planning & Execution and the Working Group on Individual lands participated in the consultation. The summary of the recommendations are : Core focus on fodder, drinking water and infrastructure. Fodder: Focus on promotion, protection and plantation of 'browsable' species of grasses and shrubs etc on commons. Initiatives to enhance availability and quality of fodder during scarce periods such as silage, fodder blocks preparation, storage of hay etc. Water Creation of water bodies along grazing tracts/migratory paths exclusively earmarked for animals. If surface water bodies cannot be constructed then creation of open wells with necessary infrastructure. Construction of water troughs for community and private purposes Infrastructure Facilities for fodder chaffing, preparation of fodder blocks etc that add value and storage life for fodder Simple slaughter facilities at GP level or at the site of local haats/ market for towards improving quality of meat and hygiene. Infrastructure for livestock health service centers such as trevis etc. A strong civil society partnership and/or deployment of facilitators is required for planning and execution. An independent agency responsible for participatory planning and facilitation is recommended. Gram Panchayats are to be the Program Implementation Agency. Support should also be enlisted from all the line departments also.

ANNEXURE 2: WORK CLASSIFICATION ACCORDING TO THE CAPACITY OF DIFFERENTLY ABLED PERSONS

Priority Works Under NREGA Water Conservation and Harvesting For drought-proofing, afforestation/ tree plantation. Canals for irrigation (small and medium irrigation work). To provide irrigation facilities on private land of SC/ST beneficiary families under Land Improvement and Indira Awas. Repair of traditional water structures. Desiltation of ponds. Land development Flood control/ security, drainage in water accumulation areas. All-weather roads for village connectivity Any other work as notified by central government on advice of state government. Keeping the above in mind, possible classification of work according to the capacity of differently abled people under NREGA: 1. Drinking water arrangements 3. Plantation 5. Earth backfilling 2. Helping in looking after children 4. Irrigation - canal digging 6. Dumping mud outside or in trolleys

7. Building construction - making concrete 8. Shifting concrete and other building material material from one place to the other 9. Carrying cement and bricks 11. Sprinkling water on newly built wall 10. Filling sand or pebbles in pans 12. Well deepening filling baskets with excavated mud inside the well

13. Helping in pulling out the sludge from the 14. Transferring the sludge to trolley well 15. Digging out the sludge from the ponds 16. Putting the waste in iron containers

17. Transferring contents of filled up pans into 18. Carrying stones trolley 19. Setting stones in the right place 21. Farm bunding 20. Land levelling 22. Digging pits in water conservation land

23. Setting the mud from the pits in a different 24. Road construction sweeping the kuchcha place roads with brooms 25. Sprinkling water, putting pebbles

Work which could be done by orthopaedically handicapped people Possible work for a person with one weak hand 5. 6. 7. 8. Drinking water arrangements Plantation Filling pans with sand/pebbles Sweeping kuchcha roads with brooms 9. Farm bunding 10. Assisting in looking after children 11. Carrying cement and bricks 12. Sprinkling water on newly built wall 13. Pouring water, putting pebbles

Work done by a person with both hands weak 14. Assisting in looking after children (family members or children can also help or they can also get employment. This way the handicapped person will feel more self confident) Work done by a person with one weak leg Work done with help 15. 16. 17. 18. Drinking water arrangements Assisting in looking after children Plantation Sprinkling water on newly built walls 19. Filling pans with sand or pebble 20. Sweeping kuchcha roads with brooms Work done independently 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. Drinking water arrangements Assisting in looking after children Plantation Irrigation - digging canals Filling earth Digging out mud / putting in the trolley Construction repairing concrete material Transferring concrete material from one place to other Carrying cement and bricks Filling metal containers with sand or pebble Sprinkling water on newly built walls Deepening wells putting the sludge inside the well into baskets Helping in pulling out the sludge from wells Transferring the sludge to trolleys Digging out the sludge from ponds Filling up pans with waste

37. Transferring filled up pans to trolleys 38. Carrying stones 39. Setting stones in the right place 40. Land levelling 41. Farm bunding 42. Digging pits in land meant for water conservation work 43. Transferring the mud from pits to another site 44. Building roads 45. Sweeping kuchcha roads with brooms 46. Sprinkling water, putting pebbles Work done by a person with both legs weak 5. 6. 7. 8. Assisting in looking after children Plantation Filling pans with sand or pebble Pulling out the sludge from wells (the sludge from the wells is filled in huge containers and to pull it out at least 10 15 people are required. But if this sludge is filled in smaller containers, 3 4 handicapped people can do the same, even while they are sitting. The benefit is that the work will be faster, the labour required will be less as well as the handicapped people will be employed) 9. Sweeping kuchcha roads with brooms Work done by a person with one weak hand and one weak leg Work done with help 47. 48. 49. 50. Organizing drinking water Assisting in looking after children Planting trees Sprinkling water on newly built wall 51. Filling pans with sand or pebble 52. Sweeping kuchcha roads with brooms Work done independently 53. 54. 55. 56. Organizing drinking water Assisting in looking after children Planting trees Sprinkling water on newly built wall 57. Sweeping kuchcha roads with brooms 58. Sprinkling water, putting pebbles

6. Work which could be done by hunchbacked persons 59. Drinking water arrangements 60. Assisting in looking after children 61. Plantation 62. Sprinkling water on newly built wall on construction sites 63. Sweeping kuchcha roads with brooms 64. Sprinkling water, putting pebbles

Possible work for visually handicapped people Possible work for a person blind in one eye whose other eye is weak also 1. Drinking water arrangements 3. Plantation 5. Filling earth 2. Helping in looking after children 4. Irrigation-digging canals 6. Dumping mud outside or in trolleys

7. Building construction- making concrete 8. Shifting concrete and other materials from material one place to the other 9. Carrying cement and bricks 11. Sprinkling water on newly built wall 13. Transferring the sludge to trolley 15. Putting the waste in pans 17. Carrying stones 19. Land Levelling 21. Digging conservation pits in land for 10. Filling sand or pebbles in pans 12. Helping in pulling out the sludge from the well 14. Digging out the sludge from the ponds 16. Transferring trolley the filled up pans into

18. Setting stones in the right place 20. Farm bunding water 22. Setting the excavated mud in a different place

23. Building roads sweeping the kuchcha 24. Sprinkling water, putting pebbles roads with brooms Work done by completely blind people Assisting in looking after children Plantation Filling pans with sand or pebble Drinking water arrangements 6. other family members should also be employed on the site so that they realize that the handicapped person is not a burden but is instead a source of income for the family 7. the handicapped person should be patiently trained. Proper training should be given on the way to do work as well as to measure the distance covered in terms of their footsteps Work done by a person with a weak vision 1. Organizing drinking water 2. Helping in looking after children

3. Planting trees 5. Filling soil

4. Irrigation-digging canals 6. Dumping mud outside or in trolleys

7. Building construction- making concrete 8. Shifting concrete and other materials from one material place to the other 9. Carry cement and bricks 11. Sprinkling water on newly built wall 13. Transferring the sludge to trolley 15. Putting the waste in iron containers 17. Carrying stones 19. Land Levelling 21. Digging pits in water conservation land 10. Filling sand or pebbles in metal pans 12. Helping in pulling out the sludge from the well 14. Digging out the sludge from the ponds 16. Transferring the filled up metal container into the trolley 18. Setting the stones in the right place 20. Farm bunding 22. Setting the excavated mud in a different place

23. Building roads sweeping the kuchcha 24. Sprinkling water, placing pebbles roads with brooms

Work which could be done by mentally handicapped people 1. Work that can be done by a people who are severely mentally challenged 1. Drinking water arrangements 3. Plantation 5. Filling earth 2. Helping in looking after children 4. Irrigation-digging canals 6. Dumping mud outside or in trolleys

7. Shifting concrete and other material from 8. Carry cement and bricks one place to the other 9. Filling sand or pebbles in metal pans 11. Digging out the sludge from the ponds 10. Transferring the sludge to trolley 12. Putting the waste in pans

13. Transferring the filled up pans into the 14. Carrying stones trolley 15. Setting the stones in the right place 17. Farm bunding 16. Land Levelling 18. Digging conservation pits in land for water

19. Setting the excavated mud in a different 20. Building roads sweeping the kuchcha place roads with brooms 21. Sprinkling water, putting pebbles Note: Such people should be instructed sequentially and slowly. They can produce good work once they have understood it well. 2. Work that can be done by a person who is mildly mentally challenged 1. Drinking water arrangements 3. Plantation 5. Dumping mud outside or in trolleys 7. Transferring the sludge to trolley 9. Sprinkling water, putting pebbles Such people are good at assisting and supporting others. They can carry pans of sludge and dump it if they are assisted in lifting them. Work which could be done by people under treatment for mental illness such people can do all kinds of work. Only the amount of work done could be quantitatively less. Work which could be done by hearing and speech impaired people such people can do all kinds of work but it is required that they are instructed properly in sign language. 2. Helping in looking after children 4. Filling earth 6. Filling sand or pebbles in metal pans 8. Building roads sweeping the kuchcha roads with brooms

ANNEXURE 3: PERSONNEL DEPLOYMENT AND PROPOSED SALARIES UNDER MGNREGA

Educational Contractual/ QualificaVC Blo Particulars Govt employee tions GP D ck A. For 2000 MOST BACKWARD BLOCKS of the Country Average Size of GP 300 1 (Persons) 0 2 Average Workers 3 EGA Community Mobilis4 er Assistant Pro5 gramme Officer Technical Special6 ists Community Mobilisation & Gender & a Inclusion Soil & Moisture Conb servation Contractual Contractual Contractual As per guidelines 10 +2 Post-Graduate in any discipline Post Graduate in Social Sciences/Social Work Graduate in Natural/Physical Sciences Graduate in Agriculture/liv estock/forestr y/biological Sciences Graduate in any discipline Diploma in civil engg/agrl engg Graduate in Commerce Graduate in any discipline 400 1 1 1 2500 2000 1800 0 50 50 3 125000 100000 54000 Com pensation Personnel (Total / Block) Total Salaries

Contractual Contractual

1 1

1400 0 1400 0

3 3

42000 42000

c Agriculture & Allied 8 Technical Assistants 9 Programme Officer 1 0 1 1 1 2 Junior Engineers Accountant cum Admn Astt Data Entry Operators Months Blocks (assume 50 GPs per Block) Total Salaries for 2000 Most Backward Blocks (Rs. Crore) Average Size of GP 1 (Persons) Average Number of 2 Workers

Contractual Contractual Govt employee Contractual Contractual Contractual

1 3 1 1 1 3

1400 0 1200 0 3000 0 2000 0 1300 0 1000 0

3 9 1 1 1 3

42000 108000 30000 20000 13000 30000 606000 12 2000

Total Salaries Per Month

1454.4 B. For OTHER 4000 BLOCKS of the Country 300 0 200

3 EGA Assistant Pro4 gramme Officer Technical Special5 ists Community Mobilisation & Gender & a Inclusion Soil & Moisture Conb servation c Agriculture & Allied 6 Technical Assistants 7 Programme Officer 8 Junior Engineers Accountant cum 9 Admn Astt 1 Data Entry Opera0 tors Total Salaries Per Month Months Blocks (assume 50 GPs per Block) Total Salaries for Other 4000 Blocks (Rs. Crore) Total Salaries for All Blocks Total Proposed Outlay under MGNREGA % of Salaries to Prop Exp

Contractual Contractual

1 1

2500 1800 0

50 3

125000 54000

Contractual Contractual Contractual Contractual Govt employee Contractual Contractual Contractual

1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2

1400 0 1400 0 1400 0 1400 0 3000 0 2000 0 1300 0 1000 0

3 3 3 6 1 1 1 2

42000 42000 42000 84000 30000 20000 13000 20000 472000 12 4000 2265.6 3720 68000 5.5%

Report of the Working Group on Transparency and Accountability (Central Employment Guarantee Council)

Report submitted on 7th July 2010 to MoRD

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

Table of Contents

Foreword A Note on the Sequence, Process, and Report Framework of Recommendations Specific Recommendations for ensuring Transparency and Public Accountability in MGNREGA I. Transparency Rules (Draft) (pg. ) II. Grievance Redressal Rules (Draft) III. Instructions on Ombudsman (Draft) IV. Framework for Social Audit V. Management Information System Rules (Draft) Annexures

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

Foreword

Commitment to transparency and accountability is an integral part of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA). This commitment also flows from the Right to Information Act 2005, which will be followed as a minimum standard in all matters relating to MGNREGA. The spirit of the peoples Right to Information is also established through the provisions made in the Act to promote the maximum degree of transparency of all MGNREGA related matters specially through proactive and mandatory disclosure. This Working Group was set up by the Central Employment Guarantee Council (CEGC) to recommend measures to strengthen processes of Transparency and Accountability within the MGNREGA with the objective of facilitating workers and citizens access to the rights guaranteed under the Act. In order to effectively establish the entitlements of the people, it is understood that these measures need to be strengthened and facilitated through more detailed rules and guidelines. There is also a need to allow and encourage initiatives which enhance the transparency and accountability of the MGNREGS as it is being implemented. It is critical that the poor for whom the Scheme is being implemented are aware of their rights and entitlements; that they participate in the program design and decision making processes; and are empowered to monitor and evaluate the scheme on an ongoing basis. The streamlining of service delivery systems are an intrinsic part of this effort through detailed accountability, and grievance redressal mechanisms. The MGNREGA is the first law in India that guarantees development rights. As part of the rights based approach, there is an expectation that poor delivery will be overcome by the people themselves demanding their rights, and pressurising the delivery system to increase efficiency and accountability. This must be a two way process. The participation of people is, dependent on strong legal mechanisms of transparency and accountability, and the administrative and political will to act. Along with the legal guarantee, this would enable people- based mechanisms of enforcement. It is keeping in mind this facet of enhanced transparency and a more accountable service delivery mechanism that the CEGC sub-group on Transparency and Accountability was mandated to recommend mechanisms for the
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

better implementation of this flagship programme. Framing such mechanisms was the task before this working group. In doing so, the following General Principles were accepted as a basis for the detailed suggestions made in the report. General Principles 1. Concepts like transparency and accountability must be framed in a manner in which they are governed by universal and inclusive processes. This is essential to empower every individual or group with the right to monitor the programme, and help and facilitate beneficiaries claim their rights under the Act . 2. This is in keeping with the spirit of the RTI Act 2005 which allows equal and open access to all citizens of India; and specifically precludes any provision that may restrict, or exclude any citizen from using it, or from having to prove their locus standii. 3. Within this universality, in a programme like the MGNREGS, there may be a need to specially empower and facilitate certain marginalized or beneficiary groups with mandatory provisions to support their access. However, this should not be taken as a means of restricting or limiting access of anyone else who might aid the principle of transparency and accountability voluntarily, or through the effort of particular agencies. In fact, in all cases of proactive disclosure or collective monitoring, there is an inherent need for facilitation by external agencies/individuals/groups. 4. Transparency and accountability of the institutions and individuals involved with the implementation of the NREGA is incumbent on the full and informed involvement of, and support to the potential and actual beneficiaries . This is because they, more than any of the other stakeholders, have the incentive, the resilience and the local knowledge required for adequately monitoring and evaluating the implementation of the scheme. 5. Whereas regulatory institutions and mechanisms can be corrupted, co-opted, intimidated, marginalized, or misled by vested interests, the workers and those who are entitled to benefit from the programme, should individually and collectively have access to platforms for exercising their entitlements both inside and out side
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

the Gram Sabha. Workers are perhaps the least susceptible to such disruptive tactics. 6. In order to enable and empower the workers and the gram sabha to effectively perform this function, various conditions need to be fulfilled. These include a widespread understanding of the entitlements, of the prescribed time frames, of whos responsible for what, of the prescribed standards and rates, of the decision making processes, of the possibility for appeal, complaint or grievance redressal, and of the reasonably expected outputs and outcomes. 7. All relevant information regarding the MGNREGA must be proactively displayed (Mandatory) and made accessible through different modes and medium, ensuring local language compatibility and keeping in mind the needs of the semi-literate, the illiterate and the differently abled . 8. Information must be authenticated, updated with reasonable periodicity, and put across in a manner and format that is easy to understand. Towards that end, special proformas and formats need to be developed. 9. Relevant information must be appropriately displayed from the worksite, the village and the gram panchayat office, the block and district level, right up to the state and national level. 10. It must also be kept in mind that, as far as possible, all decision making should be done in public in the full view of all interested stake holders. This is the best way of ensuring that decisions are not only fair but also appear to be fair. 11. Recognising that, despite best efforts, both the modes of providing information and of getting feedback can be corrupted or blocked, multiple modes and routes must be used in order to make it progressively difficult to inhibit the free flow of information to and from the people. 12. Whereas focus must be on using as far as possible culturally appropriate modes of communication, especially traditional modes with which the local people are familiar, the advantages promised by new and emerging technologies must also not be ignored. Of especial relevance are mobile phones which have effectively permeated rural households and promise an innovative, reliable and quick method of simultaneously communicating with a large number of people.
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

13. Advances in remote sensing and in biometrics must also be appropriately harnessed to give the common man and woman an advantage over traditional vested interests.

The members of the Working Group (including co-opted members and special invitees) have contributed immensely and equally to the deliberations, formulation and the presentation of the final report. The members have participated in the extensive and intensive discussions, including attending the meetings called at short notice, and patiently attended to details in the process. This has been time consuming, but necessary and important. Most of the members have been involved with implementation and policy formulation aspects of the MGNREGA over the last five years. The process and the final recommendations have been enriched by their extensive experience and valuable contributions. The Working group is deeply concerned about the rapidly increasing levels of corruption in the MGNREGA. MGNREGA expenditure is likely to exceed Rs 39,000 crores per year. If the Transparency and Accountability provisions are not taken seriously, the entire edifice will be undermined by a range corrupt practices - from denial of basic rights, to huge scams. In the process the poor workers of India for whom this Act was brought into place, will suffer and lose faith in the Act, and its capacity to deliver. There is therefore an urgent need to take the recommendations on board. We want to particularly draw the attention of the Ministry to the interim recommendation sent at the end March 2010, to the MoRD at their request to make appropriate recommendations for amends to Section 13(b) of Schedule I of the Act, and enable effective statutory Social Audits. This final report reiterates that recommendation, and we hope that the recommendation will be incorporated immediately. In fact it is not just the challenge of fighting corruption. The larger benefits of increased transparency and accountability, is their unmatched potential to encourage the poor to claim their due, and increase the efficiency of implementation in areas where it has been weak. We are convinced that the access to all the rights and guarantees of the worker hinges critically on the effective implementation of the transparency and accountability provisions.
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

The Working Group would like to place on record its appreciation to the secretariat of four volunteers who contributed time and effort, and who have managed to bring all the penetrating and often intense and varied discussions together. We would also like to thank all the members and co-opted members for taking time to write and edit the recommendations and to ensure that all the issues were reported accurately and precisely. This effort would not have been possible without the help of the NIRD who gave able and timely support for the logistics throughout the formal deliberations held, and the institutional support received from the IGPRS in Jaipur, the ICSSR in Delhi and the NIRD itself in Hyderabad. The suggestions in this report should be examined, and incorporated to ensure that continuous monitoring and evaluation of the Scheme is put into place. Unless otherwise specified, these should be incorporated into the Schedule and rules under the Act to make them non-negotiable and legally enforceable. We do hope that the Government of India, and the MoRD will take advantage of this collective effort, and bring in the necessary changes on a priority basis.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

on A Note on the Sequence, Process, and Report

The Central Employment Guarantee Working Group (CEGC) on Transparency and Accountability was set up by an order issued on 4th March 2010. (Copy attached). The Working group held its first meeting at the India Gandhi Panchyati Raj and Gramin Vikas Sansthan (IGPRS), in Jaipur on 23rd -24th March 2010. The meeting was chaired by Ms. Aruna Roy, Chairperson of the CEGC Working Group of Transparency and Accountability and was attended by Members of the working group, Co-opted Members, State representatives, and Special invitees.[See List of participants attached]. The meeting also conducted a field visit to a Panchayat to provide a practical orientation and context to the discussions. Based on the discussions and deliberations the Members decided to a) Send an interim recommendation on amendment to section 13(b) of schedule 1 of the NREGA, which was unanimously passed and sent was submitted to the Minister Shri C. P. Joshi. b) Constitute five sub-groups so that work could effectively take place on each of the issues to be addressed . Accordingly, five sub groups were formed as follows- Sub group on (i) Transparency and Proactive Disclosure to be co-ordinated by Aruna Roy . (ii) Grievance Redressal and Ombudsman Co-ordinated by Shekhar Singh (iii) Social Audit Co-ordinated by KS Sriram (iv) MIS Co-ordinated by Santosh Mathew and (v) Peoples Entitlements and Transparency Co-ordinated by Parasuram Rai It was decided that each of the sub groups would be assisted by one person from the informal secretariat who would provide assistance on a voluntary basis. The sub groups would outline issues by the next meeting (including those that had been stated in the first meeting) and the entire working group would attempt to look at the issues identified, and decide through consensus on the measure to be recommended. This process should be finalised by the third meeting , after which the specific recommendations could be made, circulated amongst all members, comments sought and incorporated, and then finally submitted by the Chairperson to the MoRD.
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

The second meeting of CEGC Working Group of Transparency and Accountability was held at the Indian Council for Social Science Research (ICSSR) in New Delhi on 27th 28th April 2010. The meeting was chaired by Ms. Aruna Roy, and was attended by members (nominated and co-opted) [See List of participants and minutes attached]. A revised interim recommendation on amendment to section 13(b) of schedule 1 of the NREGA was submitted to the Ministry dated 28th April 2010. [Attached - interim recommendation ] The final meeting of the Working group was held at NIRD, Hyderabad on 7th May 2010. The meeting was chaired by Ms. Aruna Roy, and was attended members (nominated and coopted) and others. [See List of participants and minutes attached] The recommendations, notes, draft suggestions, tables, formats, matrixes etc prepared during this process were put together and edited for consistency. The main recommendations of each of the sub groups was put into the form of draft rules, or amendments to existing provisions. These were circulated to all the members on and comments sought by . The comments have since been incorporated into the Final report which is being submitted in two parts- Part 1 consisting of Main recommendations and annexures, and Part 2 consisting of the list of participants, the guiding principles for each issue, the minutes of meetings, the matrixes prepared during the meetings, and annexures.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

Framework of Recommendations
The Report contains a set of draft (a) Transparency Rules (b) Grievance Redressal Rules (c) MIS Rules and (d) Amendments to the Schedule on Social Audit provisions, and Model Social Audit Rules, and (e) a set of Instructions on the Ombudsman. 1. Draft Transparency Rules The objective of the draft Transparency Rules is to put in place institutional systems and procedures for both pro-active disclosure as well as disclosure on demand to ensure that beneficiaries, other individuals and organizations can quickly get correct and reliable information on the status of implementation of their 10 major rights under MGNREGA, as well as to make the entire MGNREGA programme transparent and responsive. The rules seek to build up a Janta Information System where, through legal requirements, the People are able to examine the information, and act on it. Therefore it seeks to expand on the scope and design of the job cards so that the job card becomes the workers book of rights, recording all the possible transactions with dates, and proofs. Similarly, to enable an even greater understanding of every transaction that has taken place, related to the worker, and work, the MIS should have a virtual job card with all the electronic transactions that have taken place related to that job card holder, transparently reflected on that workers virtual job card. It should be possible to ensure that once the MIS becomes truly transaction based, all the corrective grievance redressal like payment of unemployment allowance, payment of interest and payment of compensation for delayed wage payments, should be made automatically by the computer as per the established norms. The third part of the Janta Information system is the different means of pro-active disclosure i.e. reading aloud of information at certain points; displaying information through notice boards and wall paintings, and proactive sharing of information during the Rozgaar Divas and social audits. Similarly, the regime of open office, open inspection seeks to build on provisions established under section 4 of the right to information act, and the provision for obtaining copies of
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

10

records seeks to make it easier, and faster than the RTI given the nature and importance of the MGNREGA records. 2. Draft Grievance Redressal Rules The objective of the draft Grievance Redressal Rules is to systematize the process for filing of complaints and grievances, and obtaining redressal thereof. This is a systemic gap in the existing provisions, so the rules seek to establish simple and parallel procedures for recording grievance redressal petitions/ applications and complaints, and connect them with the provisions for disposal of such complaints within seven days under section 23 of the Act. The procedure for filing such complaints/ petitions will be in writing, as well as through the phone (through a help line), through the MIS system, through social audit complaints, as well as through the District Ombudsman. All these are connected finally to another existing provision the District Ombudsman (also being looked at separately in these rules) to ensure action and proper disposal of all grievance redressal petitions and complaints.

3. Draft MIS Rules The objective of the draft MIS Rules is to ensure that (a) all payments are made through pay orders generated from the MGNREGA MIS (Central/ State version) this is to ensure that the MIS forms the primary system of recording and there is no need for post-transaction date entry; (b) the MIS automatically generates alerts on account of deviations/ failures/ non-compliance and also to individual beneficiaries on work done, payments etc. ; that it makes it possible for automatic corrective action on some of the alerts like the payment of unemployment allowance, and compensation for the delayed payment of wages (c) the MIS as well as the Janta Information System (JIS) provide a robust, simple and reliable platform for information gathering and dissemination for a wide variety of stakeholders. The MIS needs to be so designed that every individual can get all the information that might be required for accessing rights, in one place- preferably in the virtual job card, and that information requirements of social audit to proactively provide reliable information to

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

11

people in a consolidated form for each worker, work site, village, and panchayat, is made possible in real time. The MIS rules also seek to establish that the MIS platform would be open source /open access, so that it inexpensive, and universally accessible, and allows customisation at all levels.

4. Social Audit The objective of the proposed Amendment to the Schedule I Section 13 (b ) is to ensure that the social audit process is consistent with democratic principles and is kept inclusive and open, is consistent with audit principles, and is kept independent from the

implementing agencies, and th at the gram sabha is adequately assisted and facilitated in carrying out its task of carrying out statutory social audits, , with appropriate institutional support from the State Government, to ensure that social audits are not subject to capture by influential parties/ persons at these levels, and become active and live forums to hold officials accountable for their implementation of MGNREGA, rather than mechanical fulfillment of formalities stipulated in, or under the Act. The objective of the Model Social Audit Rules is to suggest a detailed framework for social audit that State Governments can use while drafting their own rules suitable appropriate to local conditions.

5. Instructions on Ombudsman The purpose of the Instructions on Ombudsman is to further strengthen the order already issued by the GoI for establishment of District level Ombudsman, to ensure that the terms of appointment are such that the right kind of people are persuaded to apply; that the appointment process ensures transparency and independence; that the stipulation of time limes for disposal at each stage, ensures timely disposal of grievances and complaints at a district level, and also to empower the ombudsman to ensure the workers access their rights as laid down under the law in a timely manner, as well as ensure that an autonomous authority can order action against errant functionaries for violating the Act. This includes
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

12

the levying of penalties under MGNREGA. It is notable that under the current dispensation, even after the appointment of the Ombudsman, it is not possible to activate section 25 of the MGNREGA and have penalties levied. In fact there is currently no mechanism available to impose the penalty provided for under Section 25 of the MGNREGA. By virtue of being an autonomous authority for grievance redressal and the disposal of complaints for MGNREGA at a District level, the Ombudsman is also required under these amended instructions to dispose of complaints generated through social audit, and the ones that come through help lines and electronic grievance redressal platforms

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

13

Specific Recommendations for ensuring Transparency and Public Accountability in MGNREGA

I. Transparency Rules (Draft) (pg. ) II. Grievance Redressal Rules (Draft) III. Instructions on Ombudsman (Draft) IV. Framework for Social Audit V. Management Information System Rules (Draft)

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

14

I. Transparency Rules (Draft)

Preamble 1. In keeping with the spirit of the RTI Act 2005 and the specific transparency provisions of the MGNREGA, the Rules prescribed below will seek to create an effective, appropriate and citizen-friendly transparency regime for the MGNREGA 2005.

Critical Entitlements 2. The whole process of planning and implementation of the MGNREGA shall be transparent. In particular, attention will be focused on facilitating implementation of the following basic entitlements under the Act. (a) The Right to 100 days employment a year for every rural household; (b) The Right to register and get a job card; (c) The Right to demand work, and get dated receipt and get work within fifteen days- or else unemployment allowance if work is not given in time; (d) The Right to get work within a five KM radius from home or get 10% extra; (e) The Right to select the work in the Gram Sabha; (f) The Right to Minimum wages; (g) The Right to Payment within fifteen days- or else compensation; (h) The Right to worksite facilities- water, shade, medical kits, and crches; (i) The Right to Transparency and proactive disclosure of all records; (j) The Right to audit works and expenditure in social audits- public audits;

3. In order to facilitate public monitoring and redressal, all the information related to realizing the basic entitlements under the Act, must be made transparent and

universally accessible. The details of the type of information to be recorded, the authority by, and the level at which this is to be recorded, the mode trough which it
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

15

must be made public, and other relevant details are given separately for each entitlement in annexure

Definitions 4. For all terms in these Rules, unless otherwise specified, the access to information shall extend to all persons and will be as open as possible. The definitions outlined RTI Act 2005 shall be used as a minimum standard. The terms right to information, information, and records will be based upon the definition as in RTI Act 2005:

(a) Right to Information includes the right to (i) (ii) Inspection of work, documents, records; Taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (iii) (iv) Taking certified samples of material; Obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device; (v) be informed by mandatory disclosure by means specified from time to time;

(b) Information includes information means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data, material held in any electronic form.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

16

(c) Record includes (i) any document, manuscript or file; (ii) any facsimile/fax, copy of a document; (iii) any reproduction of image or images such as photographs, maps, sketches etc.; (iv) any other material produced by a computer or any other device.

Transparency of MGNREGA-related Information 5. All MGNREGA-related information is in the public domain. The MGNREGA Transparency Rules shall ensure as specified in law that- all accounts and records relating to the Scheme shall be made available for public scrutiny and any person desirous of obtaining a copy or relevant extracts there from may be provided such copies or extracts on demand and after paying such fee as may be specified in the Scheme. The MGNREGA Transparency Rules shall include, but will not be restricted to :(a) Proactive mandatory disclosure (b) Inspection of all documents, work sites, and offices; (c) Making accessible copies of document, records and samples of material; (d) Ensuring the Transparency of the decision making processes;

Mandatory Disclosure 6. Mandatory disclosure places an obligation on the government and the implementing agency to make information available to people without their seeking it , needing to apply for it. Key documents related to MGNREGA must therefore be pro-actively disclosed to the public. A minimum list of such key documents is given in Annexure 2. 7. Pro-active disclosure will include the dissemination of records in such a manner that a layperson can understand the information. This would include the dissemination of information in a consolidated and summarized form, wherever appropriate.

8. Section 4 of the RTI Act, which concerns mandatory pro-active disclosure of information, shall be strictly complied with at all levels of implementation of MGNREGA. Proactive Disclosure would include but not be restricted to
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

17

(a) The reading out aloud of essential information as per the prescribed formats of these Rules. (see Annexure 2). (b) Through hanging/putting up information on notice boards at the Gram Panchayat, Block, and District levels as specified in the annexure . ( Annexure 2) (c) The establishment of painted wall boards at prescribed locations and in the prescribed formats (see Annexure 2). (d) The establishment of painted display boards at prescribed locations in the prescribed formats ( Annexure 2) (e) The publishing of information through newspaper advertisements, press releases, or the printing of leaflets and reports. ( Annexure 2) (f) By making announcements through the audio-visual media, such as , community radio, radio and television. ( Annexure 2) (g) Key records should also be made available on the Internet. There shall be free and open access to the website of the MGNREGA where, as much of the information as prescribed in these Rules, including summaries and consolidated information, will be uploaded regularly. Every State

Government and the Central Government shall work towards maintaining an online status of information, related to expenditures and disbursements. CDs containing extracts of all the information for a Block shall be prepared every quarter, and made available for open purchase at a nominal rate, not exceeding the cost of the CD.

Janta Information System 9. The MGNREGA will facilitate the right of every job cardholder to have regular transaction based updating of job cards and bank pass books that provide information about worker entitlements, details including photographs of workers in the household, work demanded, work received, money received, measurements recorded, along with dates and proofs of transactions. A model job card is attached as annexure 3(Tamilnadu?)
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

18

Inspection 10. The MGNREGA will follow an open office, open record, and open work site regime, where all records will be open for inspection by any group/individual, free of cost, at the location where the records are in use or stored (for instance, the Gram Panchayat Bhawan, worksite, etc.). Inspection should under normal circumstances be facilitated immediately and in any case within one hour. Inspection will include the right to inspect works or records and copy by hand any part of the records asked for. 11. Any person desirous of inspecting records, or documents shall seek permission only if it exceeds three hours. Permission to continue will be granted only if there is no one waiting to inspect the same records/documents. 12. For inspection of records, no fee shall be charged for the first 3 hours; and a fee of rupees five for each subsequent hour (or fraction thereof). 13. Inspection of documents and sites would include but not be limited to the(a) inspection of work, documents/records (b) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (c) inspection of offices and other facilities; and (d) samples of materials, RTI Rules.

Making accessible copies of documents and records 14. All documents and records would be provided on demand to any member of the public within seven days of the request. Ordinarily the request should be submitted in writing in English, Hindi or the local language, and a written, dated acknowledgement issued by the receiving person/official. 15. Where an applicant is not able to submit an application in writing (either because of illiteracy, disablement, or some other genuine reason), then the concerned individual/official will invariably reduce the oral request into writing and issue a dated, written acknowledgment to the applicant. No document or record would be refused unless otherwise specified in the MGNREGA.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

19

16. Applications for information can be made in person, or sent by registered/ speed A/d post. No application fees shall be charged. Fees charged for copies of MGNREGA-related documents shall not in any case exceed photocopying costs. 17. Copies of MGNREGA-related documents should generally be sought at source, e.g. from the Gram Panchayat in the case of GP-level documents such as muster rolls, bills and vouchers etc. However, any individual should have the right to apply for copies of information at a Block, and District level, while adding an additional seven days time to enable the PO or the DPC to procure the information and provide it to the applicant. 18. In each office the name and designation of the person (s) who is responsible for receiving and processing request for information must be made known to the public and painted on display boards outside every office. 19. Documents and records can be supplied in one or more of the following formsdiskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device or photocopies of such documents.

Transparent decision-making 20. The process of decision-making should be as transparent as possible. The actual process of decision-making shall allow as far as possible observation by other parties. For instance, Gram Panchayat meetings taking place specifically on MGNREGA shall be open for observation. 21. The GS meeting both for planning and selection of projects and social audits shall be video recorded and maintained meticulously and records of the proceedings kept, and these shall be proactively made available at all relevant levels. 22. The government shall ensure the transparency of each process from application of job card till payment, so that every MGNREGA worker can use transparency provisions to ensure access to essential entitlements under the Act. This will allow workers to conduct an entitlement audit, in addition to an audit of financial matters as part of public vigilance and the Social Audit of the programme.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

20

23. Any violation of these rules shall attract the penalty specified under section 25 of the MGNREGA, 2005. 24. In case the applicant is unable to deposit the application at the gram panchayat, or this request is not complied with within seven days, it shall be deemed a refusal. If the applicant fails to receive the information within seven days, he/she can file a complaint under Section 23(6) of the MGNREGA, with the Programme Officer. In addition to taking necessary steps under Section 23(6), the Programme Officer shall procure the copies applied for from the Gram Panchayat and provide it to the applicant within seven days of receiving the complaint. 25. Where either the PO on disposal of a complaint under section 23(6) feels that there has been a violation of the MGNREGA attracting the penalty prescribed under section 25 of the Act, or where a similar view is held by the applicant, either or both can forward the matter to the District Ombudsman, who shall take cognizance and send adated , written, acknowledgement to the complainant (s) and inquire into the matter as per the directions laid down for the Ombudsman. Where the Ombudsman is satisfied that there has been a violation of the Act a penalty shall be imposed on the erring official as specified under section 25 of the MGNREGA. 26. The RTI Act 2005 and these Rules constitute a minimum standard. Nothing in these rules shall constrain any official or functionary from finding ways and means of making more information available in a more citizen friendly manner.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

21

II. Grievance Redressal Rules (Draft)

A violation of any of the basic entitlements under the Act, including those listed in Transparency Rule 2, will constitute a grievance. In such an instance the affected party can seek redressal of the grievance or any violation of any other law in relation to the entitlements under the MGNREGA, through the following process.

Process of filing complaints and grievances 1. Each affected party will have the right to approach the Programme Officer (PO) with a complaint regarding violation of one or more of the entitlements, or any other issue relating to the implementation of the Act or its violation thereof. 2. Multiple modes would be provided by which the complainant can register the complaint with the PO. This would specifically include written complaints and telephone based help lines. All such complaints shall be acknowledged, in writing, along with the date of receipt and date of acknowledgement. Where appropriate, an SMS based

acknowledgment will also be sent. The list of complaints recorded would be available in the public domain, through the web, in real time or near real time. 3. As specified in section 23(6) the PO shall dispose off all such complaints within a period of seven days including the redressal of the grievance and the delivery of the entitlement. 4. Where, in disposing off the complaint, the PO finds that there has been a violation of the law attracting penalties, or where the complainant so desires, a complaint shall be lodged with the district Ombudsman, who will dispose it off for levying penalties as per section 25 of the Act and the relevant rules and instructions relating to the office of the Ombudsman. 5. In investigating a complaint, if a PO/ Ombudsman find that there is a prima facie case of corruption/ defalcation, s/he shall file an FIR within fifteen days of the matter being brought to their notice.
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

22

6. In addition to the complaint originated by the members of the public and aggrieved parties, there shall be institutional monitoring mechanisms at various levels including those described below. 7. To implement Section 14 of Schedule II of the Act there shall be a Vigilance and Monitoring Committee at all levels, starting from the the Gram Panchayat, Block, Zilla Parishad, State and National. The composition of these Committees and their functions is in annexure 4 8. Members of the Panchayat VMC should be paid one-day wages under MGNREGA, once a week to perform the tasks assigned to them. An indicative list of tasks is outlined in Annexure 5. 9. In addition to these monitoring committees, it would be the responsibility of officials both at the State and District levels to monitor the implementation of these schemes. The under listed officers will carry out inspections at the levels, periodicity and numbers specified. [Rajasthan Formats Annexure 5] Each inspecting officer, who finds a violation of the law/ or any other wrongdoing would initiate appropriate action as per the relevant law and these rules.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

23

III. Instructions on Ombudsman (Draft)

The Instructions for NREGS Ombudsman have been formulated under Section 27 of MGNREGA with the objective of establishing a system for redressal of grievances and disposal of complaints relating to implementation of the MGNREGA and the Schemes made under the Act by the States.

Chapter I

Preliminary Issues

1. Definitions In these Instructions unless the context otherwise requires: 1.1 Authorised representative means a person duly authorised by a complainant to act on his/her behalf and represent him in the proceedings before the Ombudsman. 1.2 Order means an Order passed by the Ombudsman. 1.2.1 Interim order means an order passed by the Ombudsman to provide immediate relief to the complainant, while pending a hearing or final order. 1.2.1 Final order means the final order passed by the Ombudsman in a matter indicating the complete disposal of the complaint. 1.3 Chief Secretary means the Chief Secretary of the State/Union Territory. 1.4 Complaint ordinarily means a representation in writing or electronically or telephonically recorded containing a grievance alleging deficiency in the implementation of

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

24

MGNREGA or Scheme, or some other wrongdoing or shortcoming in relation to the implementation of the MGNREGA. 1.5 Department of Personnel means the Department in the State Government dealing with the cadre management of the members of the Indian Administrative Service and the State Civil Service. 1.6 Nodal Department means the Department of the State Government which deals with the implementation of the MGNREGA and Schemes. 1.7 MGNREGA functionary or authority means any person or persons who have been vested with powers and functions under the MGNREGA. 1.8 Ombudsman means any person appointed under Clause 3 of the Instructions and includes the Deputy Ombudsman. 1.9 State means any State, and includes the Union Territory, of India.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

25

Chapter II Composition of the office of NREGS Ombudsman 2.1 The State Government may appoint one or more persons, but not more than three persons, as the Ombudsman in a District, of which the senior most will be the Ombudsman and the others will be known as Deputy Ombudsman. Establishment of the office of NREGS Ombudsman 2. 2 The Selection Committee for selecting Ombudsman shall consist of the following persons :(a) Chief Secretary of the State Government ---- Chairperson (b) Representative of Union Ministry of Rural Development -- Member (c) Eminent Civil Society Person nominated by Union Ministry of Rural Development - Member. (d) Secretary, State Nodal Department --- Member Secretary

Appointment, Tenure and Removal 2.3.1 The Selection Committee shall prepare a panel of suitable persons who shall be considered for appointment as Ombudsman. Prior to appointment, the panel prepared by the Selection Committee may be published on the official website of the State to invite comments from the public. On expiry of 30 days of publication, the comments may be examined by the Selection Committee. All comments and objections may be settled within 30 days of the date of expiry of the period for inviting comments. Anonymous comments and objections may not be considered.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

26

2.3.2 The selection of Ombudsman shall be made from amongst persons of eminent standing and impeccable integrity with at least twenty years of experience in public administration or law or academics or social work or media or management or any other profession. 2.3.3 No person who is a member of a political party shall be considered for appointment as Ombudsman. 2.3.4 The persons selected as Ombudsman must be physically active and capable of conducting field tours, inspections and visits to remote rural locations in the districts. 2.3.5 The Ombudsman shall be appointed for a tenure of 2 years. Based on objective performance appraisal, the tenure may be extended by an additional three years or till the incumbent attains the age of 65 years, whichever is earlier. Performance appraisal shall be made by the Selection Committee. A copy of the performance appraisal report shall be furnished to the State Employment Guarantee Council. 2.3.6 The Ombudsman may only be removed by the State Government after an enquiry has been conducted by the Selection Committee giving an opportunity of hearing to the concerned Ombudsman. 3. Autonomy of Ombudsman The Ombudsman shall function as an independent office outside the jurisdiction of the Central or State Governments. 4. Remuneration An Ombudsman shall receive a salary of Rs. 10,000 per month. In addition to the salary, he/she shall receive a sum of Rs. 1000 per day as sitting fee, provided that the sitting fee in any month would not as an aggregate exceed Rs. 20,000.

5. Territorial Jurisdiction
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

27

The State Government shall specify the territorial jurisdiction of each Ombudsman in terms of a District. 6. Location of offices The headquarters of the Ombudsman for MGNREGS shall be at the district headquarters of each district or at such other place as the state government may notify. 7. Technical and Administrative Support In case of heavy load of cases, not more than two Deputy Ombudsman may be provided to assist the Ombudsman in each district. The office of the Ombudsman shall be provided one steno and one peon to assist with administrative work. In addition, the Ombudsmen would also have the right to ask for the assistance of technical experts from the District administration, where such help may be required to properly investigate a complaint. Where such expertise is denied by the District administration, the Ombudsman can appeal to the Principal Secretary, RD of the State Government, whose decision on the matter would be final.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

28

Chapter III

8. Powers and Duties 8.1 The Ombudsman shall have the powers to : 8.1.1 Receive complaints from MGNREGA workers and others on any matters concerning any violation and /or denial of the Act as specified in clause 9 of these instructions. 8.1.2 Consider such complaints and facilitate their disposal in accordance with law. 8.1.3 Require the MGNREGA Authority complained against to provide any information or furnish certified copies of any document relating to the subject matter of the complaint which is or is alleged to be in his/her possession. In the event of failure of such authority to comply with the requisition within 7 days without any sufficient cause, the Ombudsman may draw an adverse inference against the MGNREGA authority under question. 8.1.4 Issue directions for conducting spot investigation. 8.1.5 Lodge FIRs against the erring parties. 8.1.6 Initiate proceedings suo moto in the event of any circumstance in the nature of a grievance arising within the territorial jurisdiction of the Ombudsman. 8.1.7 Engage experts for inquiring into the technical aspects relating to complaint. 8.1.8 Direct redressal including disciplinary and punitive action against the defaulting authorities. 8.1.9 Report the findings of the Ombudsman to the Chief Secretary of the State or the Secretary, State Nodal Department, or other officials/authorities for appropriate legal action against erring persons. The appropriate authority shall comply with the orders of the Ombudsman, or provide a written explanation for reasons for non compliance within 30

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

29

days of receipt of the order. This report of compliance/partial compliance /non-compliance will be sent to the Secretary Rural Development, GOI , to the SEGC and CEGC. 8.2 The Ombudsman shall have the following duties : 8.2.1 To be responsible for the conduct of business in the office. 8.2.2 The Ombudsman is obliged to make all NREGA related documents public and ensure that they are easily accessible. However, to maintain confidentiality of any personal information or document placed before the Ombudsman, in the course of discharging duties, the Ombudsman shall apply the norms relating to third parties as specified in the RTI Act 2005. Before placing the information in the public domain, the concerned party should be given an opportunity to be heard. Provided that nothing in this clause shall prevent the Ombudsman from disclosing information or documents furnished by a party in a complaint to the other party or parties, to the extent considered reasonable and keeping with the principles of natural justice and fair play in the proceedings. Provided, further, that no document, record or information would be kept confidential unless it qualifies for exemption under Section 8 or Section 9 of the RTI Act 2005. 8.2.3 To send a monthly report to the Chief Secretary and Secretary, State Nodal Department recommending appropriate action. The report shall specially highlight cases where action needs to be taken against erring MGNREGA functionaries for their failure to redress the grievance. The report will be accompanied with primary evidence needed to initiate action against the accused persons. 8.2.4 To furnish a report every year containing a general review of activities of the office of the Ombudsman during the preceding financial year to the Chief Secretary and the Secretary, State Nodal Department along with other relevant information. In the annual report, the Ombudsman, on the basis of grievances handled by the Office will review the quality of the working of the MGNREGA authorities and make recommendations to improve its implementation. The report shall be put on the MGNREGA website and submitted to the State MGNREGA Council.
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

30

8.2.5 To compile a list of Interim Orders, and final Orders passed by it between April and March of each financial year in respect of every MGNREGA Authority complained against and report it to the Chief Secretary of the State and the State Nodal Department. Text of Orders shall also be put on the MGNREGA website.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

31

Chapter IV

Procedure for redressal of grievances. 9. Grounds on which complaint shall be filed : 9.1 A complaint pertaining to any one or more of the following issues alleging deficiency in the implementation of the NREG Scheme may be filed with the Ombudsman :

9.1.1 Holding of Gram Sabhas 9.1.2 Registration of households and issue of job cards 9.1.3 Custody of job cards. 9.1.4 Demand for work 9.1.5 Issue of dated acknowledgement receipt against submission of application for work. 9.1.6 Payment of wages. 9.1.7 Payment of unemployment allowance. 9.1.8 Discrimination on the basis of gender/caste/religion. 9.1.9 Worksite facilities. 9.1.10 Measurement of work. 9.1.11 Quality of work 9.1.12 Use of machines 9.1.13 Engagement of contractors
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

32

9.1.14 Operation of accounts in the bank or post offices 9.1.15 Registration and disposal of complaints. 9.1.16 Verification of muster rolls 9.1.17 Inspection of documents 9.1.18 Use of funds 9.1.19 Release of funds 9.1.20 Social audit 9.1.21 Maintenance of record 9.1.22 Corruption/defalcation/falsification/destruction/losing/ tampering/ of records/ withholding of information/diversion of material 9.1.23 Violation of any other law or rule in relation to NREGS 9.2 State Nodal Department/ SEGC may include any other ground on which a complaint may be filed with the Ombudsman.

10. Procedure for filing the complaint

10.1 Any person, who has a grievance against the MGNREGA Authority, may, himself or through an authorized representative, make a complaint against the MGNREGA authority in writing or electronically, or telephonically to the Ombudsman or to any MGNREGA authority superior to the authority complained against. 10.2 However, where a complainant is unable to file a complaint in writing (due to illiteracy, disability, etc.), the Ombudsman would have the oral complaint reduced to writing by the
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

33

Ombudsman. 10.3 The reports of social audits, WVMCs and other reports generated through other monitoring where any deficiency or shortcoming has been pointed out as prescribed under rule .. would be placed before the Ombudsman. Any deviance, defalcation, lapse, or violation of the law and rules, and subversion of a process will be registered as a complaint by the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman could also, proactively, register a complaint if a violation of law or other wrongdoing comes to his or her notice by any other means. 10.4 All complaints made by individuals or groups directly to the Ombudsman shall be duly signed by the complainant and an authorized representative, if any, and shall state clearly the name and address of the complainant, the name of the office and official of the Nodal Department against whom the complaint is made, the facts giving rise to the complaint supported by documents, if any, relied on by the complainant and the relief sought from the Ombudsman. 10.5 A complaint made by an individual or a group of individuals through electronic means or by telephone through the help line shall also be accepted by the Ombudsman and a print out of such complaint shall be taken on the record of the Ombudsman. 10.6 A printout of such a complaint shall be signed by the Complainant at the earliest possible opportunity and no later than the first hearing of the matter. 10.7 The signed printout shall be deemed to be the complaint and it shall relate back to the date on which the complaint was made through electronic/ telephonic means. 10.8 No complaint to the Ombudsman shall lie if the complaint is in respect of the same subject matter which was disposed by the Office of the Ombudsman in any previous proceedings; whether or not received from the same complainant or along with any one or more complainants; or any one or more of the parties concerned with the subject matter. However, this would in no way restrict the rights of an aggrieved party to seek redressal or compensation even in a matter that has already been settled but under which their claim has not been considered.
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

34

10.9 No complaint shall be made to the MGNREGS Ombudsman on an issue which has-been or is the subject matter of any proceeding in an appeal, revision, reference or writ before any Tribunal or Court. N S T R U C T I O N S O N O M B U D S M A N Page 5 11. Proceedings to be summary in nature The Ombudsman shall not be bound by any legal rules of evidence and may follow such procedure that appears to him to be fair and proper. The proceedings before the Ombudsman shall be summary in nature. 12. Disposal of complaints 12.1 On receipt of the complaint made directly, the Ombudsman may refer the complaint to the appropriate MGNREGA Authorities for disposal within 7 days. In the event of failure of the MGNREGA Authority to dispose the complaint, the matter may be taken up by the Ombudsman for disposal. 12.2 The Ombudsman shall cause a notice of the receipt of any complaint along with a copy of the complaint to be sent to the MGNREGA Authority complained against. 12.3 When facts of the case are admitted by the parties, the Ombudsman shall dispose the case in accordance with the law. 12.4 The Ombudsman may issue an interim order in order to ensure the complainant gets immediate relief in accessing entitlements under the MGNREGA. These interim orders shall be binding on the concerned implementing authority, who shall be required to report compliance to the Ombudsman within seven days. Compliance/non compliance with the interim orders by the MGNREGA official shall be mentioned as a part of the final order of the Ombudsman. 12.5 If the Ombudsman is satisfied that any action which is a ground for the complaint has to be suspended temporarily, which is essential to protect the interests of justice, the Ombudsman may order such suspension and the same shall be complied with by the
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

35

concerned parties. 13. Order by the Ombudsman and Appeal 13.1 If the facts are not admitted by the parties in a case, Ombudsman may pass an Order after affording the parties reasonable opportunity to present their case. He shall be guided by the evidence placed before him by the parties, the reports of social audits, if any, the provisions of MGNREG A and Scheme and practice, directions, and instructions issued by the State Government or the Central Government from time to time and such other factors which in his/her opinion are necessary in the interest of justice. If necessary the Ombudsman may requisition any of the records or order an investigation by technical staff to help reach a reasoned conclusion, based on which an order can be passed. 13.2 The Order passed under sub-clause (13.1) above shall be a speaking order consisting of the following components: 13.2.1 Details of the parties of the case. 13.2.2 Brief facts of the case. 13.2.3 Issues for consideration 13.2.4 Findings against issues along with reasons. 13.2.5 Direction to the concerned MGNREGA Authority such as performance of its obligations like expediting delayed matters, giving reasons for decisions and issuing apology to complainants, taking of disciplinary and punitive action against erring persons, including the imposition of penalties under section 25 of the MGNREGA. 13.2.6 Costs, if any. 13.3 In every case of alleged corruption the Ombudsman may ask the complaint to submit an affidavit. In case the complaint of corruption and the affidavit is found to be false, malicious or vexatious, the Ombudsman shall,

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

36

For reasons to be recorded in writing, dismiss the complaint. The Ombudsman may also forward the order along with the affidavit to the District Administration with directions to file a case against the complainant for the submission of false affidavit. 13.4 A copy of the Order shall be sent to the complainant and the MGNREGA Authority Complained against. 13.5 There shall be no appeal against the Order passed by the Ombudsman and the same shall be final and binding on the parties. 13.6 A representative of Programme Officer/District Programme Coordinator may appear in cases where the Programme Officer/District Programme Coordinator is a party. Programme Officer/District Programme Coordinator shall appear only when a proceeding is taken up before the Ombudsman, in where the complaint is such that an order could be passed against the officer in which case the officer shall be provided the opportunity of a hearing.

13.7 All cases not involving complicated questions of fact or law shall be disposed within 15 days. Where external experts or investigators need to be involved or there are other good reasons why proper investigation cannot be completed within fifteen days, the period could be extended every fifteen days for another 15 days, on recording the reasons in writing. However, in no case should the total time between the receipt of the complaint and issuance of the final order exceed 45 days. Each time the period is so extended, the state government and the MoRD, GOI will be notified in writing, along with the reasons thereof, within seven days of such an extension being allowed. 13.8 Representation of parties by an advocate in any proceeding may be made with the prior permission of the Ombudsman. 13.9 Where the Ombudsman is satisfied, after due investigation and giving opportunity for all the relevant parties to be heard, that there has been a violation of the MGNREGA , the
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

37

Ombudsman shall impose penalty on the guilty party as specified in Section 25 of the MGNREGA.R U C T I O N S O N O M B U D S M A N Page 6 13.10.1 If the Ombudsman is satisfied that there is a prima facie case involving a criminal offence against the alleged person, the Ombudsman shall send the complaint to the District Superintendent of Police along with the findings and recommendations thereon. 13.10.2 The District Superintendent of Police shall, on receipt of complaint and recommendation under sub-rule (1), register an FIR and intimate the Ombudsman.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

38

Chapter V.

Miscellaneous

14. Rectification of error in the order.The Ombudsman may, whenever suo-motu or on application by any person, rectify or add as the case may be, any error or omission in its order: Provided that the concerned parties shall be given an opportunity for submitting their grievances before such rectification or addition. 15. Language to be used in the proceedings and orders.The Ombudsman shall use the local language in the trials and proceedings and its orders would either be in the local language or in English/Hindi. 16. Action, if the order of the Ombudsman is not enforced. All the persons concerned are liable to enforce the orders of Ombudsman and in case of failure the non enforcement shall be considered a violation of the MGNREGA where the Ombudsman can initiate action against the official concerned under these instructions. 17. Giving copy of the order: (1) A copy of final disposal of the complaints before the Ombudsman shall be given to each party to the complaint within one week from the date of disposal: Provided that if any party to the complaint applies in writing that a copy of the Order is immediately required that shall be given within three working days in such circumstances. (2) The interim and final orders issued by the Ombudsman shall bear the signature and office seal of the Ombudsman and be put up on the website of the MGNREGA.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

39

(3) On the final disposal of the complaints before the Ombudsman, and the pronouncement of final orders, the date of disposal and; nature of disposal and the details thereof, shall be entered into a register, as per the format specified. (4) All types of records and documents such as files and registers in respect of each complaint in the office of the Ombudsman shall be preserved for a period of twenty years.

18. Certain powers of the Ombudsman. In the cases where procedure in these rules are not specified for the disposal of the complaints before the Ombudsman, it may adopt appropriate procedures for the disposal of the complaint. 19. Review.The Ombudsman may, suo moto or on application submitted within sixty days from the date of the order, review any of its decisions. 20. Submission of Report to State Employment Guarantee Council and Legislative Assembly The summary report of cases disposed by the Ombudsman will be reported to the State Employment Guarantee Council by the Secretary, State Nodal Department In writing once every quarter and placed before the State MGNREGA Council in its next meeting. and will also form part of the Annual Report and placed in the Legislative Assembly. 21. Amount received to be deposited in the State Employment Guarantee Fund All sums payable by the parties to the Ombudsman and received by him shall be deposited in the account of the State Employment Guarantee Fund.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

40

IV. Framework for Social Audit

1. Social Audit Background Section 17 of the MGNREG Act stipulates that the Gram Sabha shall monitor the execution of works within the Gram Panchayat, and further that the Gram Sabha shall conduct regular social audits of all the projects under the Scheme taken up within the Gram Panchayat. The Act gives a central role to social audits as a means of continuous public vigilance. The NREGA Operational Guidelines indicate two types of social audit: a. Social audit as a continuous and ongoing process, involving public vigilance and verification at different stages of implementation; and b. Social Audit Forums every six months, involving a mandatory review of all aspects of the social audit at Gram Sabha meetings. The conduct of the Social Audit Forums has been indicated in Paragraph 13(b) to Schedule I of the Act, introduced vide MoRDs Notification No. S.O. 3000(E) dated 31st December 2008. Our views on the revised Paragraph 13(b) have already been communicated separately to MoRD . We reproduce those and reiterate that is crucial that Section 13 (b) be amended as follows in order to ensure that social audit processes are effectively carried out.

2. Revised Formulation of Schedule I -13 (b)

Schedule I - 13 (b) Social Audit Social Audit is an effective means for ensuring transparency and accountability under MGNREGA. The process of Social Audit combines peoples participation and monitoring with the requirements of the audit discipline, where the Gram Sabha requires inputs and facilitation for skill development and making informed decisions, for carrying out social audits successfully and effectively. Social Audit is a continuous process of public vigilance; the mandatory assembly of the Gram Sabha held every six months for this purpose may be called the Social Audit Forum.
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

41

In order to carry out the Social Audits: (a) The Social Audit Forum shall be held at least once in every six months. (b) To assist and facilitate the members of the Gram Sabha in conducting social audits and in ensuring that Social Audits are held regularly in all Gram Panchayats, each State Government shall set up a Directorate of Social Audit, which shall be independent of the implementing departments/agencies. It shall be the responsibility of the State Government to ensure that the Social Audit Directorate is adequately staffed and resourced, such that it can independently and effectively function. The State Government shall allocate adequate resources for this Directorate from out of MGNREGA funds (say 0.5 per cent of total MGNREGA funds for the State). This allocation will be booked under the funds of six per cent allocated for administrative expenses. The Social Audit Directorate shall also have a Technical Wing to inquire specifically into the upkeep of MGNREGA accounts and other financial records at all levels as also to examine quality related aspects of the MGNREGA works. (c) An announcement of the dates of Social Audit will be made by the District Programme Coordinator or the Programme Officer in consultation with the Directorate of Social Audit at least 30 days in advance. The Directorate of Social Audit shall frame an annual calendar for the Social Audit. (d) To ensure independent, impartial and transparent Social Audit and avoid allegations of bias and partisanship, the following group, along with other representatives of the Directorate of Social Audit will act as Social Audit Facilitators for Gram Panchayats other than their own Gram Panchayat. For each Social Audit culminating in the 'Social Audit Forum', the Directorate of Social Audit will identify and train the group of not less than 5 workers of integrity from the categories mentioned below: At least two of whom will be women; At least one member will be from Scheduled Caste / Scheduled Tribe; and

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

42

At least one worker from BPL family who has completed 100 days in the MGNREGA in the last year. Male members will be at least 10th standard pass and female members will at least be 5th standard pass; Preference will be given to workers and members of the Vigilance and Monitoring Committees (who will not be directly or indirectly related with any persons with implementation roles in the MGNREGS Gram Sarpanch, Gram Sevak (or Secretary), Gram Rozgar Sevak, Field Assistant, Employment Guarantee Scheme Mate, Senior Technical Assistant, Junior Technical Assistant, Junior Engineer, Assistant Engineer).

(e) To facilitate the conduct of Social Audit, the Social Audit Facilitators shall be responsible for the requisition of all necessary information and records from the Gram Panchayat in advance. It shall be the responsibility of the Programme Officer to ensure that all the required information and records are properly collated in the requisite formats and provided, along with photocopies of all related records, to the Social Audit Facilitators at least 15 days in advance of the scheduled date of meeting of the Social Audit Forum. (f) The Social Audit Facilitators shall disseminate information and help/assist the members of the Gram Sabha in verifying records and financial expenditure; examine the delivery of entitlements, critically evaluating the quality of works and services of the programme staff and discuss the priorities reflected in choices made. For this purpose, the Social Audit Facilitators will also obtain oral and written testimonies, as considered appropriate. They will also conduct necessary onsite inspections. The Social Audit Facilitators shall prepare a report of their observations with particular regard to any contravention of the Act and other rules. (g) This process will culminate in the Social Audit Forum, where the Social Audit Facilitators will read out their reports of findings in public. This Forum shall not be chaired by any one who is involved in the implementation of MGNREGA, including the Gram Panchayat Sarpanch (President etc.) as the Gram Panchayat is
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

43

the main implementing agency. All public representatives and staff involved in implementing MGNREGA shall be present at this Forum to respond to queries. This Forum will provide a platform to all villagers to seek and obtain further information and responses from the Social Audit Facilitators, public representatives and officials. (h) The Social Audit Forum shall be an open and inclusive forum to encourage broad based public participation. Any individual or association of individuals shall be allowed to participate, testify and place their observations on record. However, they will have no voting rights. (i) DPC shall nominate a district level official to attend the SA Forum meeting. This officer will be responsible for immediate redressal of grievances during the course of meeting and ensuring that the Forum takes place in true democratic spirit in an atmosphere where everyone can speak and testify without fear. This officer will be responsible for filing a report with the DPC as per the prescribed format. (j) The Social Audit Report consisting of the minutes of the Social Audit Forum, the resolution(s) passed, written and oral remarks, observations of the Social Audit Facilitators, and any other submissions made, shall be forwarded to the District Programme Coordinator, Programme Officer, concerned implementing

Department(s) and Directorate of Social Audit by the Social Audit Facilitators within one week of the Forum for necessary action. (k) Every contravention of the Act mentioned in the Social Audit Report shall be treated as complaint under section 23 of the Act. (l) The concerned Department/Authority shall take appropriate follow-up action including disposal of complaints within 7 days of receiving the Social Audit Report. In case of any Fund defalcation/misappropriation, the concerned controlling authority shall initiate requisite criminal proceedings and recovery proceedings against the concerned person/authority. Where the concerned

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

44

authority is a Panchayati Raj Institution, the DPC/ PO shall be responsible for initiating these actions. (m) The Directorate of Social Audit shall ensure that the concerned

Department/Authority takes appropriate action to meet the stipulation mentioned under section 23 of the Act. (n) While certifying accounts/records of the MGNREGS, the Government auditor shall take cognizance of any complaint regarding financial irregularities or misappropriations, raised through a Social Audit before certifying the accounts. (o) The Social Audit Directorate shall be responsible for immediately making available all findings and action taken to the public, by hosting it on the website and through other means of communication. (p) The action taken report relating to the previous Social Audit shall be read out at the beginning of the meeting of each Social Audit Forum. (q) All Action Taken Reports shall be filed by the concerned authority within a month of convening of the Social Audit to the Social Audit Directorate. (r) The state governments shall frame detailed rules for carrying out social audit effectively and in a transparent manner.

3. Model Social Audit Rules Enclosed are Model Social Audit Rules which may be used as a standard by the States while framing their own Rules. Instead of drafting a set of generic National Rules which may not be relevant to different circumstances across the length and breadth of the country, State Governments may be asked to form their own Rules. The Social Audit Rules formulated by the State Governments may be vetted by the MoRD and placed before the CEGC to ensure they subscribe to the standards contained in the Model Rules. Model Social Audit Rules

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

45

Whereas, the Government of India is committed to the transparent implementation of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 (Central Act No.42 of 2005); (henceforth MGNREGA, 2005). And whereas, Section 17 of MGNREGA, 2005 provides for regular 'social audits' so as to ensure transparency and accountability in the scheme, which are further detailed in paragraph 13(b) of Schedule-I to MGNREGA, 2005. In this regard, subsection (2e) of section 31 of MGNREGA, 2005 mandates that the Central Government can make rules of "any other matter which is to be, or may be, prescribed, (wherein "prescribed" means prescribed by rules made under this Act) or in respect of which provision is to be made by the Central Government by rules". And whereas, it is intended that social audits are to be conducted in an impartial and objective manner and that the findings of the same may be presented without any dilution and action would be taken to address the gap there of with an aim to strengthen the scheme. 1. Short Title These rules may be called the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act Government of India Social Audit Rules, 2010. 2. Definitions In these rules, unless the context otherwise requires:(a) "Act" means the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005. (Central Act No.42 of 2005) (b) Block means a community development area within a district comprising a group of Gram Panchayats, and shall also include Mandal or other designation adopted in different States; (c) "Civil Society" means any village community, non-official public spirited group or individuals who expressed in writing an interest or choose to participate in the public vigilance process in general, and social audit process in particular.
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

46

(d) Directorate of Social Audit means the apex body constituted by the State Government as a Directorate, Department, Society or other form, which shall be independent of the implementing agencies, and shall oversee the process of social audits throughout the State; (e) "District Programme Coordinator" means an officer of the State Government designated as such under sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the Act for implementation of the scheme in a district; (f) "Government" means the Government of India or the State Government, as the case may be; (g) "Gram Sabhas" shall ordinarily mean the same as defined in the Constitution of India or Panchayati Raj Act and notifications thereunder; however, for social audit purposes, Gram Sabha could also mean a meeting of one ward, village or habitation constituting residents of part of a Panchayat. (h) "Implementing Agency" includes any department of the Central Government or State Government, Zilla Parishad, Panchayat at intermediate/ block level, Gram Panchayat or any local authority or Government or authorized by the Central Government or the State Government to undertake the "implementation" of any work taken up under the scheme. (i) "Minimum wage" in relation to any area, means the minimum wage fixed by the State Government under section 3 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 for agricultural labourers as applicable in that area. (j) "Notification" means notification published in the Gazette of India, and the word "notified" shall be construed accordingly. (k) "Official Functionary" shall mean all public servants either appointed by Government or elected by the public holding public office. (l) "Primary Stakeholder" means the wage seekers, who have worked under or have applied for work under the Employment Guarantee Scheme (EGS), and their families, and residents of the Gram Panchayats where the EGS works are being carried out.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

47

(m) "Programme Officer (PO)" means an officer appointed under sub-section (1) of Section 15 of the Act for implementing the scheme; (n) "Resource Persons" mean the persons who will carry out the training and capacity building process for the social audit process. (o) Scheme" means a Scheme notified by the State Government under sub-section (1) of section 4 of the Act. (p) Social Audit Forum or "Social Audit Gram Sabha" is the special Gram Sabha to be held at least once every six months for this purpose. (Gram Sabha procedures regarding quorum, chair, announcement etc. would also apply to the Social Audit Gram Sabha). No Social Audit Forum shall restrict participation of anyone who has an opinion or testimony to offer or make a contribution in any way as long as they adhere to the principles of social audit. (q) Social Audit Facilitators mean the persons nominated by the Directorate of Social Audit, who will facilitate the social audit and ensure that it is independent, impartial and transparent. (r) "Social Audit of a Scheme" means auditing of a scheme by the primary stakeholders of the Scheme or with the active involvement of the primary stakeholders of the scheme, and includes, but is not limited to, verification of works, or facts on ground vis--vis official records by taking into account the recorded or oral evidence, which is aided and facilitated by the Government, Directorate of Social Audit and/or civil society organisations. (s) Social Audit Manual means the handbook to describe the steps to be followed during a social audit. (t) "Ward Sabha" means the meeting held at the ward level defined by the Panchayati Raj Act/ Rules. All words and expressions used but not defined in these rules have meaning assigned to them under the Act. 3. Social Audit Resource Base

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

48

In order to assist and facilitate the members of the Gram Sabha in conducting social audits and in ensuring that Social Audits are held regularly in all Gram Panchayats, the State Government shall facilitate a resource base in the following manner: (a) The State Government shall constitute a Directorate of Social Audit as an apex body for overseeing the process of social audits throughout the State. This body, which may be constituted as a Directorate, Department, Society or other form, shall be independent of the implementing agencies for the scheme. The State Government shall be responsible for ensuring that the Directorate of Social Audit Directorate is adequately staffed and resourced, such that it can independently and effectively function. The State Government shall allocate adequate resources for this Directorate from out of MGNREGA funds (say 0.5 per cent of total MGNREGA funds for the State). This allocation will be booked under the funds of six per cent allocated for administrative expenses. (b) The Directorate of Social Audit shall also have a Technical Wing to inquire specifically into the upkeep of MGNREGA accounts and other financial records at all levels as also to examine quality related aspects of the MGNREGA works. (c) Resource Persons shall be drawn from Civil Society Organisations with experience of having worked on strengthening and establishing peoples rights at the grass root level and who are specifically trained in social audit processes. The Directorate of Social Audit shall create a network of Resource Persons at the State and District levels, as well as lower levels (if deemed appropriate), who will form the resource base for carrying out training and capacity building in social audits on an ongoing basis. (d) To ensure independent, impartial and transparent Social Audit and avoid allegations of bias and partisanship, the following group, along with other representatives of the Directorate of Social Audit, will act as Social Audit Facilitators for Gram Panchayats other than their own Gram Panchayat. For each Social Audit culminating in the 'Social Audit Forum', the Directorate of Social Audit will identify and train the group of not less than 5 workers of integrity from the categories mentioned below:
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

49

At least two of whom will be women; At least one member will be from Scheduled Caste / Scheduled Tribe; and At least one worker from BPL family who has completed 100 days in the MGNREGA in the last year. Male members will be at least 10th standard pass and female members will at least be 5th standard pass; Preference will be given to workers and members of the Vigilance and Monitoring Committees (who will not be directly or indirectly related with any persons with implementation roles in the Scheme Gram Sarpanch, Gram Sevak (or Secretary), Gram Rozgar Sevak, Field Assistant, Employment Guarantee Scheme Mate, Senior Technical Assistant, Junior Technical Assistant, Junior Engineer, or Assistant Engineer). 4. Periodicity of Social Audits Social Audit Forums shall be carried out in every Gram Panchayat at least once in every six months. The Directorate of Social Audit shall frame an Annual Calendar for social audit, and an announcement of the dates of the Social Audit For shall be made at least 30 days in advance by the District Programme Co-ordinator or Programme Officer, in consultation with the Directorate. In turn, the Programme Officer shall notify, in writing, all Public Representatives and staff of implementing agencies for the scheme in the area of the Gram Panchayat well in advance, so that they co-operate in the conduct of the social audit process and are also present at the Social Audit Gram Sabha. He shall also inform the Sarpanch/ President of the Gram Panchayat to convene the Social Audit Gram Sabha on the stipulated date. As far as possible, social audits of all Gram Panchayats within a block should be scheduled together. In addition to the formal notifications by the Programme Officer to the public representatives and implementing agency staff as well as notice issued by the Sarpanch/ President/ Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat, the social audit facilitators and the district administration should also publicise the holding of the Social Audit Forum widely amongst the labourers and village community.
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

50

In addition to the mandatory Social Audit Forums every six months, social audit is a continuous and ongoing process, involving public vigilance and verification at different stages of implementation of the scheme viz.: Registration of families/ households; Issue and distribution of job cards; Receipt of applications for work and issue of dated receipts; Preparation of shelf of works and selection of works/ sites; Preparation and approval of technical estimates, and issue of work orders; Allotment of work to applicants; Execution of works and maintenance of muster rolls; Payment of wages; Evaluation of work; Payment of unemployment allowance; and Conduct of Social Audit Forums Consequently, the statutory requirement for Social Audit Forums cannot preclude any independent initiative by primary stakeholders, other individuals, and groups/ organisations in carrying out additional social audits. Government agencies shall endeavour to support such social audits by providing copies of the scheme records, attending the social audit meetings, and responding to these findings and taking necessary action thereon in the same manner as required for the Social Audit Forums. Further, these social audit reports as well as action taken reports shall be placed before the next Gram Sabha. 5. Filing of Applications for Official Records The team of Social Audit Facilitators shall file an application with the Programme Officer for relevant information on the Scheme at least 15 days before the scheduled date of the Social Audit Forum. The information sought shall include, but not limited to, Shelf of works; Gram Panchayat resolutions;
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

51

Technical Estimation and Sanction and Administrative Sanction (work-wise); Work commencement order; Muster Rolls and Payment orders to banks and post offices; Measurement Books/ Measurement Sheets Material payment bills/ invoices and vouchers Final Report The Programme Officer shall provide the required information and records in the requisite formats, along with photocopies of all related records, within seven days of the application, without fail. Failure to provide records within the stipulated timeframe shall result in disciplinary action against the Programme Officer, in addition to penalties under the Act. 6. Social Audit Process in the Village Social Audit shall be conducted on all works done and payments made during the specified period. The social audit process will include, but not be limited to, the following activities: Thorough verification of Muster Roll entries and payments made through door-to-door contacts with the wage seekers whose names are entered in the muster rolls; Work site verification, including verification of quantity of work done and assessment of the quality of work; Focused group discussions and holding of Ward Sabhas / habitation meetings with the primary stakeholders, including special meetings in the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe localities on various aspects of the implementation of the scheme; Scrutiny of cash book, bank statements and other financial records to verify the correctness and reliability of financial reporting; Scrutiny of invoices/ bills, vouchers and other related records for procurement of materials to verify that the procurement was economical, and the items procured were received and fully utilised on the work. The Social Audit Facilitators shall help/assist the members of the Gram Sabha in these processes through disseminating relevant information (appropriately summarized and
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

52

presented); verifying records and financial expenditure; examining the delivery of entitlements; critically evaluating the quality of works and services of the programme staff and discuss the priorities reflected in choices made. For this purpose, the Social Audit Facilitators will also obtain oral and written testimonies, as considered appropriate, and will also conduct necessary onsite inspections. The Social Audit Facilitators shall prepare a written report of observations and findings with regard to the implementation of the scheme. 7. Conduct of Social Audit Gram Sabha/ Forum The Social Audit Forum will provide a platform to all villagers to seek and obtain further information and responses from the Social Audit Facilitators, public representatives and officials, and will also provide an opportunity for informing people about their rights and entitlements under the Act. The Forum shall be conducted as follows: (a) The Forum shall not be chaired by any one who is involved in the implementation of MGNREGA, including the Gram Panchayat Sarpanch (President etc.) as the Gram Panchayat is the main implementing agency. All public representatives and staff involved in implementing MGNREGA shall be present at this Forum to respond to queries. (b) The Social Audit Forum shall be an open and inclusive forum to encourage broad based public participation. Any individual or association of individuals shall be allowed to participate, testify and place their observations on record. To keep the social audit process open and inclusive, all support and resources that foster its integrity should be given space and opportunity to contribute, and participation is facilitated from any organisation or individual (e.g. social activists, members of workers associations and civil society organisations) who can build the capacities of the primary stakeholders to understand the documents, details of work undertaken or have their voice heard. However, voting rights to take decisions will vest only with the labourers and their families and other residents of the Gram Panchayat. (c) The DPC shall nominate one or more district level officials to attend the Social Audit Forum meeting. These officials will be responsible for immediate redressal of
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

53

grievances during the course of meeting and ensuring that the Forum takes place in true democratic spirit in an atmosphere where everyone can speak and testify without fear. These officers will be responsible for filing a report with the DPC as per the prescribed format. (d) At the forum, the Action Taken Report on the last social audit will be read out. Then, the Social Audit Facilitators will read out their report of findings in public, and will also respond to questions from those present. The concerned official functionary shall respond to each of the issues identified in the report of the social audit facilitators by giving a clarification or an explanation to the affected party and the public as to why a certain action was taken or not taken. In case of inability to carry out rectification action in the meeting itself, the official functionary will specify the time period and nature of action to be taken by him/her to rectify a gap or a lapse in implementation as the case may be. In addition, members of the public have the right to put forward other questions related to the implementation of the scheme to the official functionaries, and receive responses thereto.

(e) The Social Audit Report consisting of the minutes of the Social Audit Forum, the resolution(s) passed, written and oral remarks, observations of the Social Audit Facilitators, and any other submissions made, shall be forwarded to the District Programme Coordinator, Programme Officer, concerned implementing

Department(s) and Directorate of Social Audit by the Social Audit Facilitators within one week of the Forum for necessary action. 8. Block/ Mandal Social Audit Public Hearing In addition to the Social Audit Gram Sabhas, the State Government may also prescribe social audit public meeting at the block/ mandal level as a culmination of the social audit process in all the Gram Panchayats within the block; a decision on this would depend on the practicability of such hearings, depending on the distances involved, road connectivity, feasibility of people participation at the block level, size of the blocks etc. Such Block/ Mandal level social audit public hearings would be in addition to, and not in substitution, of social audit forums at the level of the Gram Sabha.
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

54

9. Follow up Action on Social Audit Forum (a) Any social audit finding or any item in the social audit report that indicates a contravention of the Act or a shortcoming in the implementation of NREGA should automatically be treated as acomplaint under section 23 of the Act. In case of a social audit finding of a violation of workers entitlements, such finding shall be disposed off as per the Grievance Redressal Rules. (b) Senior officials such as the DPC as well as the Programme Officer shall, within a timeframe of 7 days of receiving the social audit report, ensure that corrective action is taken on the findings of the social audit forum. In the case of defalcation/ misappropriation of funds, the concerned controlling authority shall initiate criminal proceedings and recovery proceedings against the concerned person/ authority. Where the concerned authority is a Panchayati Raj Institution, the DPC/ PO shall be responsible for initiating such action. (c) In case of doubt or dispute on any findings of the social audit, senior officials such as the DPC or the Programme Officer shall cause enquiry and shall decide on the issue at the earliest, and not later than one month. (d) Where the persons found to have misappropriated funds repay the same in the social audit forum/ block level social audit hearing, the same shall be deposited in the account designated by the State Government and a receipt issued to the person then and there. If the amounts so recovered rightfully belong to wage seekers, the same shall be returned to them within 7 days from the date of recovery of such money. (e) All Action Taken Reports shall be filed by the concerned authority within a month of convening of the Social Audit Forum to the Directorate of Social Audit. (f) The Directorate of Social Audit shall be responsible for immediately making available all findings and action taken to the public, by hosting it on the website and through other means of communication.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

55

(g) The procedures for initiation of disciplinary action and registering of criminal cases, depending on the gravity of the irregularity or offence, shall be stipulated by the State Government. (h) The Directorate of Social Audit shall be responsible for ensuring that the concerned Department/Authority takes appropriate action on the social audit findings and to meet the stipulations mentioned under section 23 of the Act. Alternatively, the State Government may designate another person or authority, who would be held responsible for monitoring and ensuring that timely and appropriate action is taken on the social audit findings. (i) While certifying accounts/records of the MGNREGS, the Government auditor shall take cognizance of any complaint regarding financial irregularities or

misappropriations, raised through a Social Audit Forum before certifying the accounts.

4. Social Audit Manual Again, instead of drafting a generic social audit manual, we feel that the Social Audit Manuals of Andhra Pradesh may be appended as a model manual, and different States may appropriately alter it to suit their specific requirements.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

56

V. Management Information System Rules (Draft)

1. All financial and technical transactions relating to the MGNREGA must be proactively (suo moto) entered into a Management Information System (MIS) so that it is accessible to any interested person. 2. The general principles to be followed in developing an MIS would include; (a) As far as possible the information fed into a computer based MIS would be transaction based (as detailed in rule 10 & 11 below); (b) The formats used for entering information, analysis and display would be uniform across the country so that information can be uploaded and downloaded seamlessly at all levels from the Gram Panchayat/ Block level up to the National level; (c) In the medium to long term, the platform and software used for the computerised MIS would be open-source/open access so that it is inexpensive and universally accessible and allows customisation at all levels. This will empower and motivate states to shape their Management and Janata Information Systems MIS and JIS, to suit local needs, while recognising the need for a nationally standardised database; (d) Apart from a computer based web linked MIS, there will also be a Janta Information System (JIS), as detailed in Rule 16-18 and in Transparency Rule 9, which would ensure that the relevant information is available to those who do not have access to computers; (e) The MIS system should facilitate access by individuals to their own accounts so that authentic data in real time is available to them, as detailed in rule (f) To ensure a citizen friendly MIS system, the MIS should display easy to understand features. This includes interactive graphs that offer quick analysis along key indicators such as allocations and expenditures, person days of work allocated and so on. The MIS could also feature maps with search facilities so that the user can search for data down to the panchayat/ worksite level to assess
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

57

allocations and expenditures. To make the system interactive, the MIS should also include features that allow citizens to comment on data available, share experiences and so on. Examples of how to develop such interfaces can be found in websites such as www.recovery.org and data.gov. (g)

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

58

3. Process based orientation (a) All payments (wages, salaries, material and administrative expenses, etc) shall be made only through pay orders generated from either MGNREGA soft or its state companions or the new platform/software developed.
Explanation- under the proposed system wage lists sent to the bank and post office shall be generated only from MGNREGA soft or its state companions after the estimate, muster roll and MB have been entered into the system and authenticated (same for payments of material, salaries and all other expenses). (b) The location at which such pay order generation will take place (viz. Block/ Mandal or Gram Panchayat) will be decided by the State Government, based on geographical, logistical and other considerations.

(c) To take care of interruptions in power supply, the State Government shall make appropriate arrangements for UPS (Uninterruptible Power Supply) with sufficient runtime to ensure that transaction processing and data entry during working hours is not adversely affected. (d) Considering the widespread growth of mobile connectivity even amongst MGNREGA beneficiaries and potential beneficiaries, the MIS shall be so designed to capture the mobile number of the job card holder (if available), and SMS alerts shall be automatically generated in the local language to the mobile number in case of critical events, e.g. (a) receipt of application for work (b) allotment of work (c) generation of pay order (with details of work days and amount due) etc. 3. Issuing of cheques, cash books, asset cum cumulative register and preparation of various ledgers shall also be similarly done; and the application should seamlessly interface with the Banks/Post Offices, making it possible to possible to reconcile the accounts of Banks and Post Offices through this application.

4. There shall be transparency and connectability audit of various formats to ensure that they conform to the requirements of Social Auditing and are available in the
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

59

public domain so that the ends of concurrent audit and social audit are achieved at all times. 5. MoRD shall release funds on the provision of a certificate by States that all payments (wages, staff salaries, other administrative expenses, material suppliers bills etc.) are made only through MGNREGA soft or its state companions. 6. There shall be a standard set of rules developed for data entry. These rules shall be reviewed and certified for conformity with industry standards for data entry. 7. Training manuals shall be developed and made available to states by MoRD for training data entry operators and their supervisors. 8. There shall be a provision by which Panchayat Rozgar Sewak/Gram Sewak, Technical Assistant / Junior Engineer, Accountants and Program Officer should be given a log in with a password and be required to authenticate data that has been entered. 9. The MIS shall be so designed and operated as to be able to generate the following kinds of data, aggregates and comparisons: (a) Estimated costs (b) Value of work done (c) Difference between the above two, if any (d) Value of all vouchers and muster rolls (e) Evaluation of actual expenditure against expenditure incurred against expenditure booked emerging from social audits (f) The differences between the above iv-v, if any The MIS shall be designed and operated to generate all this information at the National, State, District, Block, Panchayat, MP constituency, MLA constituency, District Panchayat member constituency levels. It shall also generate this data for all the levels defined above- vendor wise materials supplied and payment made, worker wise days worked and payment received, and, material wise rates at which payment was made and quantities purchased. 10. The MIS system shall be designed and operated to highlight and send out alerts (at specified intervals to specified persons), the following information(a) List of Panchayats that do no have an adequate shelf of projects; (b) List of Panchayats not generating adequate work days in each week;
CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

60

(c) Names of job cardholders who have not got 100 days of employment in each year; (d) List of works with name in each Panchayat that has failed to record engineering measurements within the stipulated period. List of all incomplete works, along with number and total value of such works for which there is administrative approval; (e) List of Panchayats in which wages have not been paid within fifteen days of closure of the muster roll; (f) List of Panchayats in which muster rolls are not fully entered into the MIS each week . (g) List of Panchayats, which either have over rupees four lakh unspent or less than rupees one lakh to spend

11. All estimates and MBs shall have GPS coordinates of each work i.e. latitude and longitude. 12. MoRD shall, subject to technological capacity, work with the National Remote Sensing Agency to try to assess through remote sensing data the number of workers in random work sites once a month during the peak working season, as well as monitor the nature and quality of asset being created. 13. A national asset register shall be built on an appropriate platform (like Google Earth/Maps) using latitude-longitude coordinates and made available in the public domain. 14. CDs shall be prepared and made availablefor the complete data for each quarter and for each year, for an entire Block, District and State. at the Block level by the P.O, at the District level by the DPC and at the State level by the Commissioner at the rate of Rs 15 each, This shall also be made downloadable from the MGNREGA web site free of charge.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

61

Janta Information System 15. The MIS should be so designed that any worker who enters the job card no should be able to access all information relating to every transaction connected with that Job Card /worker. The worker should also be able to demonstrate the time lapse between application and provision of work, and the time lapse between completion of work and date of payment, Thereby generating, automatic claims for unemployment allowance and/or compensation for delayed payments. In addition the workers account on the JIS should provide all details of work, wages and payments made through the bank or post office. 16. All, details of Panchayat level information of MGNREGA painted on the outer walls of public buildings as per the Transparency Rules. (proactive disclosure section of Transparency Rule 6,7&8). 17. Prescribed categories of information shall also be printed/entered in the job card/labour card/ work measurement card , as detailed in rule(proactive disclosure section of Transparency Rule 8,9 & 10) (a) All MBs and muster rolls shall have a unique number countrywide; (b) All Estimates and MBs shall include an analysis of materials to be used/actually used as per the prescribed format; (c) The above shall be in local and engineering units.

CEGC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability

62

Annexure 1

Notes on Instructions of Ombudsman

The Working Group examined the structure and substance of the existing Ombudsman orders of the MoRD September 2009, and also discussed the difficulties States have been experiencing in implementing this order. Based on the issues that arose in the course of the discussions, a number of suggestions were made to make the institution more credible and effective. The substantial changes suggested are listed below. Brief reasons for the change are also indicated. 1. Change in terminology from Award to Order This was done, because the award implies some kind of arbitration or award of damages. In fact, the Ombudsman is issuing a direction to an NREGA authority to redress a grievance, or recommending the imposition of a penalty. If the government chooses to give the Ombudsman the power to order payment of unemployment allowance, or the compensation for late payment of wages, it would still qualify better as an order rather than an award. 2. Para 2.1 (d) designating the other ombudsmen as deputy ombudsmen This has been done to make sure that there is a single person who will ensure that the responsibilities of the Ombudsman are carried out without confusion. 3. Para 2.2.5 providing for extension of three years This is to ensure that those who perform their task well get an extension, without having to go through the selection process again. 4. Para 4, increasing the remuneration for the ombudsman (both salary and sitting fee) The fees that the Ombudsman receives today would work out to be Rs 10,000/- for a month (if there are 20 sittings) . That is less than the salary that a gram sewak

receives, and not enough for anyone but a committed social worker to be attracted by. The danger is that some people might take the position to make money through bribes, since they are likely to deal with many corruption related complaints. 5. Timelines of 7 and 30 days stipulated in para 8.1.3 and para 8.1.9 The time line of seven days for the PO to provide the information/ records, is so that the Ombudsman can proceed with the enquiry process within a week, and the PO has a week to try and sort out the grievance as per the provisions of section 23 of the Act. Compliance of the final orders within thirty days seemed a reasonable period of time, after which a report could be sent to the government for further action. 6. A clarification in Para 8.2.2. As to the public nature of MGNREGA documents. The amendment in this section from the earlier draft is to ensure that the MGNREGA, which has been seen as even more progressive and transparent than the requirements of the RTI Act, should not override the RTI Acts provisions by making MGNREGA documents non- disclosable. 7. Additional paras 9.1.22 and 9.1.23 The grounds for complaints should be as broad as possible, so that the grievance redressal authority has an opportunity to take up all matters related to non compliance of the provisions of the Act. 8. Para 10.2 allowing for oral complaints This is very important for two reasons. 1) Because many workers are illiterate or barely literate, and 2) So that the fast growing network and outreach of mobile phones can be used to have people file their grievances over the phone, or through a help line. 9. The additional sentence under para 10.8 10. Para 12.4 regarding suspension of proceedings 11. Expanding para 13.2.5 to cover imposition of penalties under section 25

This is one of the most important amendments. There is only one provision (section 25) under the MGNREGA where a penalty can be imposed. However, the

mechanisms for imposing the penalty have not been put into place even five years after the Act has come into effect. This is a lacunae that must be corrected. When there is an autonomous authority like the Ombudsman set up to look at complaints, then the Ombudsman becomes a very good way to activate the penalty clause after providing for due process. 12. Procedures for the functioning of Ombudsman Paras 16 to 18 seek to empower the Ombudsman, as well as lay down procedures to be followed by the ombudsman in carrying out functions.