1. 1 1 Mid Day Meal Scheme Ministry of HRD Government of India MDM-PAB Meeting – MIZORAM On 09.04.2009

2. 2 Review of Implementation of MDMS in MIZORAM (Primary + Upper Primary) (1.4.2008 to 31.12.2008) Part-I Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

3. 3 Questions?  What is the level of unspent balances as on 31.03.08?  How regular is 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 it disbursed to Districts? What is the level of its utilisation at school level?  How utilisation of food grains and cooking cost is synchronized?  How is the utilisation of foodgrains reconciled with the number of meals served? …… contd Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

4. 4 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. 5 Benchmarks  Desirable stock in hand : 10% (+ or - 5%)  Lifting of food grains as on 31-12-08 : 85%  Utilisation of foodgrains and cooking cost [1.4.08 to 31.12.08]: 76% (+ or – 10%)  Every month 1/12th of foodgrains is required to be lifted & distributed.  Utilisation of foodgrains & cooking cost should be synchronous.  State’s AWP&B should be in accordance with MHRD’s guidelines.  Data in the AWP&B should be authentic, reliable & based on the records. Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

6. 6 No. of Schools Covered (PY + UP.PY) 100% covered

7. 7 PAB Approval Vs State Performance (No. of children in Q1+Q2+Q3) No. of children (In lakh) Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India 113% Covered 82% Covered 100% Covered

8. 8 Variation in the no. of Children approved by PAB, MDM enrollment & Availing MDM during SEP & DEC 08 No. of children (In lakh) Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India No. of children availing MDM is more than enrolment as on 30 th Sept 2008 in both cases.

9. 9 PAB Approval Vs State Performance ( No. of Working Days i n Q1+Q2+Q3) No. of Working days Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India (77%) (66%) (100%) Benchmark 76 %

10. 10 PAB Approval Vs State Performance (No. of Meals in Q1+Q2+Q3) No. of Meal (in Crore) 66 % meals served 76% meals to be served 100% Benchmark 76 % PAB Approval 08-091.52 lakhs. Children X 205 Working days = 3.12 Cr. Meals. PAB(Q1+Q2+Q3)1.52 lakhs. Children X 155 Working days = 2.36 Cr. meals (100%) State(Q1+Q2+Q3)1.53 lakhs. Children X 136 Working days = 2.08 Cr. meals (88%)

11. 11 Foodgrains Lifting as per G.O.I. (1.4.08 to 31.12.08) Foodgrains (in MTs) 100% Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India 63% Benchmark (76+10)%

12. 12 Foodgrains Lifting as per AWP&B 09-10 Foodgrains (in MTs) 100% Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India 63% Benchmark (76+10)%

13. 13 Food grains lifting Month-wise cumulative (Including USB*) Foodgrains (in MTs) Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India  Including unspent balance of 27 MTs as on 31.3.2008

14. 14 Foodgrains Utilisation (Q1+Q2+Q3) 61% Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India Foodgrains (in MTs) 100% Benchmark 76%

15. 15 Cooking Cost Utilisation (1.4.2008 to 31.12.2008) 63% Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India 42% 100% Benchmark 76%

16. 16 Mismatch in Utilisation of foodgrains and cooking cost (District-wise) % Utilisation Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

17. 17 Mismatch of Utilisation-AWP&B 09-10 No of meals served, Cooking Cost, Foodgrains (Q1+Q2+Q3) Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India Benchmark : 77%

18. 18 MME Utilisation (1.4.08 to 31.12.08) 55% Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India 45% 100% Benchmark 75%

19. 19 Transport Assistance Utilisation (1.4.08 to 31.12.08) 00% Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India 100%

20. 20 Achievement during 2008-09 (Kitchen Sheds) Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India 40%

21. 21 Achievement during 2008-09 (Kitchen Devices) Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India 56%

22. 22 Performance Score card – A Summary Sl. No. ComponentAchievementBenchmark 1. Foodgrains Utilisation61%76% 2. Cooking Cost Utilisation63%76% 3. MME Utilisation55%75% 4. Kitchen Shed construction 40%100% 5. Kitchen Devices procurement 56%100% 6. QPRs2 nos.3 nos. Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

23. 23 Observations of Monitoring Institute University, Aizwal  All the schools in the sample districts MDM was in operation. However, it was found to be irregular in a considerable percentage of schools in both the districts. It is pertinent to mention that certain sample schools from both the district s have not served MDM from many months.  It was reported that 73% of the schools from Lawngtali district and 66% from Saiha district reported that food grains supplied to them from MDM is of average quality. However, 11% of sample schools from Saiha district reported that food grains supplied to them were of very poor quality.  Majority of the children are not happy with the quantity and quality of food in both the districts.  Community participation in inspection and supervision of MDM service in their respective schools was almost absent. Participation of the concerned CRCCs, BRCCs and district and State level authorities in the inspection, monitoring and supervision MDM programme in their respective jurisdictions is quite discouraging.  In 56% of sample schools in Saiha district and 33% from Lawngtlai district do not have proper water supply connection. Districts : Lawngtlai and Saiha

24. 24 ISSUES  Central Assistance of 140.61 lakhs was released during 2008-09 for Mautam Disaster affected areas in two installments as under. 1 st installment 35.00 lakhs 29-08-2008 2 nd installment 105.61 lakhs 21-01-2009 Details/Response from state Govt. is still awaited.  Details of transport exp. Not given in the AWP&B 2009-10  Confirmation of foodgrains lifting by the State Govt. of Mizoram for the period from April 2008 to November 2008( Primary & Upper Primary) is still awaited.  QPR for the 3 rd Quarter from the State is still awaited.  ATR of one C&AG and para for the period is still awaited from the State (Para 2.4.1(g)

25. 25 Analysis of State’s Proposal for 2009-10 Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

26. 26 Time Series – No. of Children (PRIMARY) No. of children (in lakhs) Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India 4% Increased

27. 27 Primary School Enrolment – SSA [Govt. + Govt.-aided + LB) Vs MDM No. of children (in lakhs) Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India

28. 28 Population Vs Enrolment Vs Availing MDM (PRIMARY) No. of children (in lakhs) Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India 4% Decreased 4% Increased

29. 29 Population Vs Enrolment Vs Availing MDM during 2008-09(UPPER PRIMARY) No. of children (in lakhs) Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India 7% Increased

30. 30 No. of School days NoYearAs per DISE dataAs per MDM Sanctions 1 2006-07204221 2 2007-08208220 3 2008-09NA205 4 2009-10NA207(State Claim)

31. 31 PAB’s Recommendations (2009-10) * 80% of the state demand Population is decreasing by 4.% SSA Enrollment/DISE data 1.26 Lakhs (07-08)

32. 32 Thank You Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India