1. Improving Public Expenditure Outcomes of MDMS and NREGS through Social Accountability Approaches: Field Experiences from Rajasthan, India George Cheriyan CUTS International The World Bank, Washington DC June 4, 2008

2. About CUTS Established in 1983, pursuing social justice and economic equity within and across borders. CUTS has five programme centre and five resource centres: six in India, two in Africa (Lusaka & Nairobi), one in London and one in Hanoi. One resource centre in Geneva will be opening shortly Good Governance is one of the key programmatic area. Working in the area of promoting transparency and accountability at all levels of governance through increased people’s participation from its inception

3. Introduction Traditionally focus has been on supply side of institutions and systems with less attention to demand side Today the situation is fast changing This includes actions to enable citizens to exert accountability over public institutions and services

4. Framework for Accountability Relationships UsersProviders Policymakers Making Services Workable for the Poor (WDR 2004) Voice Service Compact Client Power Demand Side Approaches Supply Side Approaches

5. Enabling Environment Democracy works when citizens ask questions, seek accountability and participate in the process of governance Information enters the debate on governance at this point Access to Government held information is a pre-condition for good governance Enactment of the RTI Act (2005) in India had triggered the genuine demand for SAc mechanisms

6. SAc Pilots in Rajasthan, India ( in partnership with the World Bank and as part of SASANet) 1.Child Nutrition – “Improving Outcomes of Nutrition based Mid Day Meal Scheme (MDMS) in Rajasthan” (Oct. 2005 to Sept. 2006) 2.Wage Employment – “Assessing the Outputs of the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS) Rajasthan” (June 2007 to August 2008 - ongoing)

7. Mid-Day Meal Scheme (MDMS)

8. Context 1995 - National Programme of Nutritional Support to Primary Education, commonly known as the Mid-Day Meal Scheme (MDMS) started Largest school meal programme in the world (Budget Allocation, 2008-09 is INR 73 billion = ~ $1.8 billion) Covers all primary school (Class I to V) students in Government schools (10.2 million children in 75,000 primary schools in Rajasthan) 2001 - India’s apex court, the Supreme Court, directed all State Governments to provide cooked mid day meal

9. Why a Mid-Day Meal Scheme? School meal programs support health, nutrition and education goals A strong incentive to parents to send children to school, thereby encouraging enrolment, reducing absenteeism and dropout rates A special focus on girl child, mainly to enhance enrollment of girl child

10. Nutrition Based Entitlements Primary school children provided daily with one nutritionally adequate cooked meal –300 calories and 8-12 grams of protein per child per day –For a minimum of 200 days per year –GoI provides 100 grams of food grain (wheat or rice) per child per school day –Conversion cost is shared by the GoI & GoR

11. Government of India Government of Rajasthan State Nodal Agency (Panchayati Raj Department ) Zilla Parishad Panchayat Samiti Gram Panchayat Village level MME Primary School Government of India (FCI) State Food Corporation (FCI Warehouse) District FCI Warehouse Primary School Flow of Cash & Food Grains Line of Accountability

12. Pilot Methodology Combination of two social accountability tools – Public Expenditure Tracking Survey (PETS) and Citizen Report Cards (CRC) used –PETS for gathering information regarding budget allocations, budget transfers and expenditure –CRC for assessing citizen’s perceptions and satisfaction levels on MDMS management/delivery Survey restricted to one district, Chittorgarh, of Rajasthan (population: 1.8 million) Sample size - 211 primary government/aided schools from 14 blocks; a total of 2,110 students, 2,110 parents, 422 teachers and 211 cooks were interviewed; Scientific sampling techniques - school selection on the basis of parameters such as size, access by road, remoteness, etc.

13. Key Survey Findings High Overall Satisfaction Level: 90% parents and students satisfied Acceptable Quality of Food Grains: 97% of the teachers reported receiving acceptable to good quality of food grains Indeterminable Quantity of Food Grains: Only 23% of the schools received food grains after getting them weighed before delivery Lack of Basic Infrastructure: 95% of the schools do not have a kitchen shed, while only 36% have a separate store room. Trade-off between Education Quality and MDMS Management: 68% teachers spend more than 1 hour (17%) of allotted teaching time, in MDMS activities Delayed Receipt of Funds for Conversion: 79% schools receive funds with delays ranging from 2-6 months (against the mandatory 15 days) affecting meal quality adversely

14. Key Survey Findings: Impact of MDMS

15. Key Findings: Quality of Education

16. Improving Outcomes through Feedback Education Service Provider District Administration/ Government State Government Feedback Accountability Services Redesign Programs Reallocate Resources Improved Quality of Service Delivery Feedback

17. Pilot Impacts: Policy Changes Redesign of program: –Advance transfer of funds for cooking meals: Release of sufficient amount for three months in advance (from –3 months to + 3 months) Reallocation of resources: –Improvements in basic infracture: School Grant Facility extended to construct kitchens, food grain storage rooms –Revision of Unit Conversion Costs: Conversion cost rates increased from INR 0.5 to INR 1.00

18. Pilot Impacts: Institutional Changes Improvement in quality of food grains: –Food grains supplied after thorough checking and proper weighing; –Increase in number of inspections; –Faster redressal of complaints Increased involvement of parent-teacher associations and PRIs: –PTAs and PRI members have started to take active part in monitoring MDMS implementation Increased awareness about entitlements: –Increased parent oversight over MDM preparation; –Reduced burden on teachers leading to availability of more time for teaching

19. Assessing the Outputs of NREGS

20. Context India's ruling Government enacted the NREGA on August 25, 2005. The scheme started since February 02, 2006 in 200 districts (out of a total of 593 districts in the country) and has been scaled up to all districts of the country from April 2008. Budget allocation for 2008-09: INR 160 billion = USD 400 million ; INR 14.4 billion for Rajasthan) The commitment to transparency and accountability runs through the Act There is a provision of compulsory social audit built-in the scheme, first time in the history of independent India

21. Employment Based Entitlements Legal guarantee for 100 days of employment in every financial year to adult members of any rural household willing to do unskilled manual work at the statutory minimum wage within a 5-km radius. Minimum NREGS Wage: Rs 73 (USD 1.70) per day; this has been increased to Rs. 100/- from April 1, 2008) per day to one member of every rural unemployed family A failure to provide work within 15 days or within 5 km radius gives the applicant the right to draw an unemployment/ transport allowance

22. Methodology: Social Accountability Tools Used Combination of CRC, PETS & CSC was used to assess the scheme –CRC & CSC for qualitative feedback and to assess beneficiary perceptions and satisfaction levels –PETS for the quantitative assessment of fund flow, fund utilization, etc.

23. Survey Findings: Satisfaction Levels Majority of the surveyed people endorsed the NREGS stating that it: Provides employment during lean season in own villages itself (97%) Has improved facilities in the villages (94%) Has ultimately helped in reducing migration (93%). Has helped in increasing the monthly income (87%) Has helped in creating assets, which will result in sustainable livelihoods (85%) and Has increased bargaining power of laborers

24. Survey Findings: Gender Empowerment 71% of the women surveyed felt that the increase in incomes had increased their importance in the family leading to increased say in decision making 51% of the women felt that NREGS had improved their living standards

25. Survey Findings: Accountability Issues Lack of awareness about entitlements (63%) Lack of participation in the decision making process (42%) as people were not informed about Gram Sabha meetings Opaqueness in wage payment – Measurement of work done in a mystified manner and not done to the satisfaction of beneficiaries (50%) – space for misappropriation in wage payment No effective grievance redress mechanism available (39%) Absence of social audit as per the provisions of NREGA Low wages paid to the NREGS Supervisors (INR 1,800 = 45 USD/per month) which force them to look for other means income

26. Pilot Impacts (Till Now): Operational Changes: Facilities at work sites: District level authorities have issued orders to ensure amenities at work sites are made available Appointment of women supervisors: Initiatives taken for the appointment of more female supervisors Availability of forms for demanding work: Forms are now available in all important places in the village Daily measurement of work: Work done is measured on a daily basis in the presence of the beneficiaries; all beneficiaries have been provided with a measuring tape Use of more broad-based communication strategies: Dissemination of information about entitlements and Gram Sabha meetings is more widespread

27. Pilot Impacts (Till Now): Changes in Development Outcomes: Citizen Awareness & Empowerment: –Increase in awareness about NREGA entitlements; –Beneficiaries are realizing that they have the power and opportunity to evaluate/assess the actions of the service providers Women Empowerment: –Women supervisors are being appointed under NREGS; –Increased participation of women in household decision making processes as they earn Policy Changes: To Be Determined

28. Remaining Challenges Institutionalization Building constituencies in the supply side Resource re-allocation Creating civil society coalitions

29. In Conclusion…

30. Improving Outcomes through Feedback Education Service Provider District Administration/ Government State Government Feedback Accountability Services Redesign Programs Reallocate Resources Improved Quality of Service Delivery Feedback

31. SAc Approaches Outcomes Citizen Report Cards Community Score Cards Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys Right to Information (RTI) Compliance Development Outcomes Improved Quality of Service Delivery Program Redesign and Resource Reallocation to Improve Program Effectiveness and Public Expenditure Efficiency Improved Governance through Demand Side Approaches in Governance Institutional Outcomes Institutionalization of continuous user feedback mechanisms Formation of community-public-private partnerships for implementation of development programs Stronger linkages between local governments and civil society

32. THANKS