Transparency, Accountability & Timeliness in Right to Public Services

An Overview of 5 States
-Tina Mathur February 2012

Why Service Guarantees - Broad

Changes in Political Thought & Agenda What [also] gets Votes
Good Governance Development Provision of Basic Essential Services Open, Transparent Government Anti-corruption Measures

Acceptance by State of Civil Society movements for rights

Why Service Guarantees- Specific

Failure of Citizen Charters
Precedence of Rights-based Laws : RTI, MNREGS, RTE Increasing Bad Publicity on Grievances related to poor Public Service Delivery

Top-down Push for systems that holds frontline service providers accountable
Simultaneously empowering citizens

RTPS Acts: Highlights Transparency Accountability

Timeliness

RTPS Acts: Highlights

Transparency- making public service delivery processes & procedures open and visible
Transparency Information to citizens on: Reasons [in writing] why an application is rejected or a service delayed or denied Status of Applications

RTPS Acts: Highlights

Accountability - by identifying the responsible authorities within the system

Accountability - Penalizing wilful nonperformance Accountability - Put Citizen First: mechanism for redress of grievance; compensation

RTPS Acts: Highlights

Timeliness - Imposes a legally enforceable timeframe for service delivery Timeliness: Imposes legally enforceable timeframe for addressing grievances through the mechanisms of Appeals and Reviews

Comparative Overview
Sample: 5 States
Methodology
Review of Documents Limited field visits A Quick Review of Major Elements

Comparative Overview
Madhya Pradesh- PIONEER- first to pass and implement Act Bihar- RTPS NO. 1 on its SUSHASAN Good Governance Agenda Rajasthan- maximum number of services guaranteed

Delhi- An entirely different approach e-SLA

Uttar Pradesh- quick to follow MP, but least number of services under Act

Key Highlights

TRANSPARENCY -Public Awareness

Awareness drives through
Special Gram Sabhas in MP; TV, Radio, Print media in Bihar, Nukkad Nataks, Village Pracharaks, Schools in Rajasthan

Notice Boards in all States Clear instructions for citizens on application process and services coming under RTPS Bihar BRTPS Rules (sec.18) and Rajasthan Rules (20) specifically mention Dissemination and Training

Transparency
Online application tracking and monitoring systems in MP, Bihar, Delhi, UP; final stages of software readiness in Rajasthan

Jigyasa and Samadhan helpline in Bihar for queries related to RTPS

e-SLA monitoring and tracking system in Delhi [compensatory cost for delay is calculated through eSLA software] SMS based reminder system in MP for officials regarding pending services; application status through SMS in Bihar

Accountability Fixing Responsibility

Designated Authorities/Competent Officer, Appellate Authorities, Reviewing Authority identified in all 5 States Penalties have been notified in case of failure to comply by time stipulations; compensation fixed in MP, UP, Rajasthan and Delhi Delhi - Incentives for Good Performance- upto 5000 rupees for no default in 1 year; disciplinary action for 25 defaults in a year

Accountability Monitoring Performance

Monitoring and tracking at the level of applications Offices to maintain Register of applications accepted or rejected AND services delivered, delayed or denied Software-driven such as Adhikar, e-District and e-SLA Monitoring also done through nodal officials, inspections, monthly meetings at which disposal, pendency of applications & appeals is done Video conferences

Timeliness Regular Systems

In all five states, Notified Services have to unambiguously state the TIME LIMIT within which services will be delivered In all states [except Uttar Pradesh] acknowledgement slips show the Date on or before which the service would be delivered Delhi : an automatically generated Time Limit through the e-SLA system; Bihar: through Adhikar Single window systems in Revenue Department all 5 States MP and Rajasthan - in addition - 1-day Governance

Timeliness Some Field Observations

Most services reported to have been delivered before time: especially, mutation, caste/income/residence certificates MP, Bihar, UP, Rajasthan and Delhi have used IT for process efficiency.
Online application system introduced in MP, Bihar, Delhi & Rajasthan In Rajasthan for certain services (caste, domicile and birth) certificates issued online with digital signature

In MP and UP: where connectivity or capacity a problem, applications accepted, verified on paper and entries made into computer later to save time

Timeliness- Issues
Too much time has been stipulated for services in the RTPS Acts
Citizens: Earlier the process was faster. Governments: A safety mechanism since penalties are involved; does provide flexibility to set better standards locally

Delays: Very few appeals so far- MP, Bihar and Rajasthan have reported a few

Overarching Challenges
Overall implementation mechanisms robust
rules framed process simplification on-going citizen awareness campaigns on-going capacity building on-going

Shortages of Staff in Front-line Institutions: seems to be nearly universal

In urban: due to high demand for services In rural vacancies not filled for years Staffing situation needs re-assessment

Shortage of funds has been reported: extra costs incurred for computer stationery; electricity supply, etc.

Overarching Challenges
Service Delivery staff need further capacity building
Mindset change

Infrastructure: Frontline institutions require more space and better working conditions Service guarantee to reach the illiterate, people living in remote areas: How to enable? Important that citizens understand what is guaranteed: NOT acceptance of Application alone!
in some cases even where citizens were not eligible, perception was that the service was still guaranteed

Overarching Challenges
A competitive spirit amongst states for increasing number of services under RTPS Acts
Good when notification of more services is wellthought out Danger in playing number games

Overall Picture So Far

States-led: Ownership Very High State Specific Strategies the Norm
Notified Services local demand-pull; supply-push Multi-modal Delivery: Paper and Electronic Choice: Punishment or Mutual Understanding [Delhi-developing culture for timely service delivery; encouraging departments to join E-SLA] Modes of Monitoring Procedures for Appeals/Complaints

Self-generated Competitive Spirit amongst states

Overall Picture So Far

An enabling law for citizens rights that has received largely positive feedback from all, including government staff Pressure of service delivery on the designated officials as more people applying for services after learning about the guarantee
Change in citizen perceptions: no longer need the services of middlemen or bribe to get services

Thank You