1. Mid Day Meal Scheme MDM-PAB Meeting – MAHARASHTRA On 01.05.2009
Ministry of HRD
Government of India
MDM-PAB Meeting – MAHARASHTRA On

2. Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India
Part-I
Review of Implementation of MDMS in Maharashtra (Primary + Upper Primary) ( to )
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

3. Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India
Questions?
What is the level of coverage – Institution-wise, No. of children-wise, in terms of No. of meal served?
What is the level of unspent balances (Inventory) as on as well as ?
How regular the lifting of food grains? Is there any disruption/shortage in availability of food grains?
What is the level of lifting?
How about cooking cost? Was disbursed to Districts? What is the level of utilisation at school level?
How synchronous utilisation of food grains and cooking cost?
How utilisation of foodgrains reconcile with number of meal served?
…… contd
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

4. Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India
Contd ….., Questions?
How much MME was utilized? Under what activities?
What is the progress in construction of Kitchen Sheds and procurement of kitchen devices?
Part –II
What is the trend in Enrollment and No. of children availing MDM from 2007 to 2008?
How well MDM data compares with SSA data and Census data?
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

5. Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India
Benchmarks
Target Coverage: 100% (Institution-wise, No. of children-wise, in terms of No. of meal served)
Desirable stock in hand : 15% (+ or - 5%)
Lifting of foodgrains [ to ]: 85% (+ or – 10%)
Utilisation of foodgrains and cooking cost [ to ]: 71% (+ or – 10%)
Every month 1/12th of foodgrains is lifted & distributed.
Utilisation of foodgrains & cooking cost is synchronous.
State’s AWP&B is in accordance with M/HRD’s guidelines.
Data in the AWP&B is authentic, reliable & based on the records.
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

6. Plan Vs Performance (No. of Meal in Q1+Q2+Q3)
(Primary + Upper Primary)
No. of Meal (in Crore)
(22% Less)
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

7. Non-Coverage : Number of Meals ( PY + U PY)
Sl. No.
Districts
Target as per MDM-PAB Approval for ( In Cr.)
Meals actually served as on ( In Cr.)
Short-served
No. of meals % 1
Dhule
4.79
2.39
-2.40
-50% 2
Solapur
9.56
5.47
-4.09
-43% 3
Sindhudurgh
1.70
1.01
-0.69
-41% 4
Jalgaon
8.21
4.95
-3.26
-40% 5
Mumbai
11.25
6.83
-4.42
-39% 6
Pune
13.34
8.59
-4.75
-36% 7
Aurangabad
7.57
4.97
-2.60
-34% 8
Latur
5.42
3.63
-1.79
-33% 9
Yeotmal
5.81
3.91
-1.90 10
Chandrapur
4.05
2.81
-1.25
-31%
Excess
Parbhani
7.17
3.12
+77%
Probable Reasons: -
Over / Under Budgeting, Non-coverage, Disruptions, Poor Quality of meals .

8. Plan Vs Performance: (No. of children in Q1+Q2+Q3)
( 10% Less)
No. of children (In lakh)
(1% More)
(32% Less)
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

9. Non-coverage : No. of Children availing MDM (Primary)
Sl. No.
Districts
Target as per MDM-PAB Approval for
Average No. of children availing MDM as on
Difference
No. of children %
LOW 1
Chandrapur
1,64,811
1,38,540
-26,271
-16% 2
Dhule
1,82,651
1,53,727
-28,924 3
Jalgaon
3,75,269
3,22,845
-52,424
-14% 4
Washim
1,13,150
99,694
-13,456
-12%
Excess
Parbhani
1,73,540
3,13,690
1,40,150
81%
Probable Reasons: -
Over / Under Budgeting, Non-coverage, Disruptions, Poor Quality of meals .

10. Non-coverage : No. of Children availing MDM (Up. Primary)
Sl. No.
Districts
Target as per MDM-PAB Approval for
Average No. of children availing MDM as on
Difference
No. of children %
LOW 1
Mumbai
1,96,560
-1,96,560
-100% 2
Dhule
1,24,300
50,419
-73,881
-59% 3
Gadchiroli
48,346
22,220
-26,126
-54% 4
Aurangabad
1,57,723
78,924
-78,799
-50% 5
Buldhana
1,18,144
61,099
-57,045
-48% 6
Jalana
80,360
43,454
-36,906
-46% 7
Raigad
92,624
50,215
-42,409 8
Ahmadnagar
2,00,806
1,11,456
-89,350
-44% 9
Latur
1,29,612
73,722
-55,890
-43% 10
Jalgaon
1,51,342
88,621
-62,721
-41%
EXCESS
Osmanabad
71,160
1,29,632
58,472
82%
Probable Reasons: -
Over / Under Budgeting, Non-coverage, Disruptions, Poor Quality of meals .

11. Plan Vs Performance (No. of Working Days in Q1+Q2+Q3)
1% Less
51% Less
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

12. Analysis: Foodgrains lifting (Month-wise cumulative)
Foodgrains (in MTs)
*: Including unspent balance of MTs as on
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

13. Analysis: Foodgrains lifting (Month-wise)
Foodgrains (in MTs)
*: Including unspent balance of MTs as on
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

14. Analysis: Foodgrains Availability (1.4.08 to 31.12.08)
Foodgrains (in MTs)
100%
49%
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

15. Foodgrains lifting (Availability) – Dist. wise
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

16. Foodgrains Utilisation (1.4.08 to 31.12.08)
Benchmark : 71%
3.10 Lakh MTs
1.50 Lakh MTs
1.27 Lakh MTs
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

17. Foodgrains Utilization– Dist. wise
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

18. Cooking Cost Disbursed and Utilisation (1.4.2008 to 31.12.2008)
Cooking Cost (in % Disbursed and utilisation.)
Benchmark :71%
Rs Cr.
Rs Cr.
Rs Cr.
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

19. Cooking Cost Utilisation – Dist. wise
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

20. Mismatch in Utilisation of foodgrains and cooking cost (District-wise)
State average: 41%(FG) & 53%(CC)
% Utilisation
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

21. Reconciliation : No. of meals Vs Qty of foodgrains
Sl. No
District
No. of Meals served
Expected consumption of food grains (MTs)
Actual Consumption of food grains (MTs)
Deficit in %
Deficit Consumption 1
Parbhani
7.17 Cr.
-57% 2
Nanded
5.79 Cr.
-45% 3
Thane
11.14 Cr.
-40% 4
Kolhapur
6.14 Cr.
-34% 5
Jalana
3.34 Cr. 6
Gadchiroli
1.68 Cr.
-33% 7
Osmanabad
2.87 Cr.
-27% 8
Satara
4.39 Cr.
Excess Consumption
Washim
1.79 Cr.
+34%

22. Reconciliation : No. of meals Vs Cooking Cost
(Rs. In Lakhs)
Sl. No
District
No. of Meals served
Expected consumption of Cooking cost
Actual Consumption of Cooking cost
Deficit in %
Deficit Consumption 1
Osmanabad
2.87 Cr.
640.69
487.70
-24% 2
Nandurbar
3.35 Cr.
731.55
569.29
-22% 3
Amaravati
4.29 Cr.
917.51
755.34
-18% 4
Parbhani
7.17 Cr.
-17% 5
Nashik
8.91 Cr. 6
Buldhana
3.71 Cr.
779.76
650.77
Excess Consumption
Jalgaon
4.95 Cr.
+24%
Solapur
5.47 Cr.
Nanded
5.79 Cr.
+17%
Pune
8.59 Cr.
+15%
Dhule
2.39 Cr.
508.53
585.06

23. Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India
MME Utilisation ( to )
Utilisation(Rs. In lakhs)
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

24. Transport Assistance Utilisation (1.4.08 to 31.12.08)
Utilisation(Rs. In lakhs)
(100%)
Rs Cr.*
(85%)
(46%)
*: MTs foodgrains lifted x Rs. 750 per MT
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

25. Achievement during 2008-09 (Kitchen Sheds)
Progress (in %)
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

26. Achievement during 2008-09 (Kitchen Devices)
Progress (in %)
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

27. Performance Score card – A Summary
Sl. No.
Component
Achievement
Benchmark 1.
Foodgrains Availability
49%
85% 2.
Foodgrains Utilisation
41%
71% 3.
Cooking Cost Utilisation
53% 4.
MME Utilisation 0%
100% 5.
Kitchen Shed construction
29% 6.
Kitchen Devices procurement 7
QPRs received
3 nos.
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

28. Analysis of State’s Proposal for 2009-10
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

29. Time Series – No. of Children (PRIMARY)
(up by 1%)
(up by 1%)
No. of children (in lakhs)
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

30. Primary School Enrolment – SSA [Govt. + Govt.-aided + LB) Vs MDM
No. of children (in lakhs)
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

31. Population Vs Enrolment Vs Availing MDM (PRIMARY)
No. of children (in lakhs)
Q-1
Q-2
Q-3
(Proposed)
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

32. Population Vs Enrolment Vs Availing MDM during 2008-09 (UPPER PRIMARY)
No. of children (in lakhs)
Q-1
Q-2
Q-3
(Proposed)
*:SSA= Govt+LB+GA
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

33. No. of School Working Days (Pry & U Pry) DISE Vs MDM
Sl. No
Year
As per DISE Data
As per MDM Sanctions 1
204
237 3
226
235 4
220 5
Not available
231
(State’s claim for )
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

34. Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India
Thank You
Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India