Blog Archive - Page 106 of 130 - Accountability Initiative: Responsive Governance

Contextualizing PAISA: Towards a New Frontier for Governing Elementary Education Finances in India

Yamini Aiyar, Director, Accountability Initiative

India’s elementary education system is at a crossroads. In 2009, the Indian Parliament passed the Right to Education (RTE) Act guaranteeing the provision of free and compulsory education to all children between the ages of 6 to 14 years. At the heart of the law is a guarantee to ensure ‘age- appropriate mainstreaming’ for all children. In other words, the Act is a guarantee that every child in India acquires skills and knowledge appropriate to her age. Now, as efforts to deliver on this guarantee gain ground, the country faces an important choice: should elementary education be delivered through the current model that focuses on the expansion of schooling through a top- down, centralized delivery system? Or should we use the RTE as an opportunity to fundamentally alter the current system and create a bottom-up delivery model that builds on an understanding of children’s learning needs and privileges accountability for learning rather than schooling?

For decades, the primary goal of the Indian government’s elementary education policy has been to create a universal elementary education system by expanding schooling through inputs. Substantial finances have been provided to meet this goal. Between 2007-08 and 2009-10, India’s elementary education budget increased from Rs. 68709 to Rs. 97,255 crore in 2009-10.[2]

Most of this money has been used to build school-level inputs through a large education bureaucracy controlled and managed by the state and central government. To illustrate, PAISA analyzed the elementary education budgets (SSA and State budgets) of 7 states in the country for 2009-10 and 2010-11 to find that, on average, 78% of the education budget is invested in teachers and management costs. All critical teacher-related decision-making, for instance, hiring or salary payment, lies with the state administration.[3] Following teachers, the next largest investment is on the creation of school infrastructure: 14% of the budget. Funds for infrastructure development are often channeled to schools; however, key decisions related to sanctions and procurement are taken by the district. Importantly, while a school can demand infrastructure funds, it has no decision making power over the timing of receipt of these funds and de-facto funds have to be spent based on priorities set by the state and district administration. Interventions aimed directly at children, such as the provision of free textbooks and uniforms and addressing the problem of out of school children, account for just 6% of the total investment.

Interwoven in this top-down system is an intent to involve parents in decision-making. In 2001, the Government of India (GOI) launched the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan ((SSA), now the programmatic vehicle for the delivery of the RTE) with a mandate that expenditure decisions be taken based on plans made at the school level through Village Education Committees (VEC). These plans are then aggregated at the district and state levels. Drawing on this model, the RTE mandates the creation of School Management Committees (SMCs) tasked with similar responsibilities. Despite this bottom-up planning structure, the centralized delivery system has disempowered these committees and in fact created disincentives for parental participation in a number of ways:

First, teachers, as pointed out already, are not accountable to SMCs.

Second, committees have spending powers over very little money. In 2010-11, committees had spending powers over just about 5% of SSA funds. Even these funds are expected to be spent based on norms set by GOI. So, if a school wants to spend more than the norm on, say, purchasing teacher material or if a school wants to invest more in improving children’s reading capabilities by dipping in to its maintenance fund – it can’t. Table 1 below offers an illustrative example from Hyderabad of the different activities over which an SMC can actually take decisions.

Table 1. Activities for which SMCs in Hyderabad city can take decisions

Activity	Is SMC resolution sufficient?	Is any additional approval needed?	From whom?	How long will it take?	Who can do the procurement or appointment	What documents and other things will be needed?
Desks and Chairs	No	Yes	SSA planning	2 months	SSA office	Approval of design; Three quotations from local suppliers
Sintex Water Tank	Yes	No		2 weeks	SMC	Local purchase at PWD rates
Roof Repair	No	Yes	SSA Civil/JE	1 month	SMC+SSA	Approval of work and measurements;Materials bought locally as per PWD rates; vouchers of payments maintained
Ayah	Yes	No		1 week	SMC	Interview notice with date and time

Third, governance inefficiencies further curtail SMC powers. As PAISA has repeatedly pointed out, school grants rarely reach schools before October/November. These delays in fund flows mean that needs at the school often remain unmet owing to lack of money. More worryingly, PAISA found that in many districts, expenditures even for school grants are based on formal or informal orders received from district and block officials. Consequently, often monies are spent without adequate consideration to school needs.

In essence, SSA has promoted a bottom-up delivery system with no bottom-up control or decision-making power. The result is thus a de-facto centralized, top-down system.

To the extent that expansion of infrastructure has been the goal, this centralized investment model has been effective. Schools have been built, teachers have been hired and enrolment levels have reached near universal levels.[4] To be sure, the pace of this expansion has been variable across the country. Yet, even as lagging states work to fill this gap, the improved education infrastructure has thrown up the next great challenge: that of ensuring that children actually learn. Evidence thus far suggests that education infrastructure is yet to translate into children acquiring basic abilities in reading and arithmetic. The Annual Status of Education Report (ASER), has been tracking learning outcomes since 2005 to find that learning levels have remained almost stagnant over the years; just about half the country’s Standard 5 children can read a Standard 2 textbook and far fewer can do basic arithmetic. Arguably, therefore, this hierarchical centralized education system has been successful in creating education inputs and putting in place a system for schooling.

The challenge for India now lies in shifting its focus from schooling to learning. The first question in addressing this challenge is this: can this top-down delivery system enable the transition from schooling to learning?

This shift towards enhancing learning requires that the system focus on the needs of individual schools and children; or, to draw on GOI’s framework, it requires a system that recognizes ‘… the need for the creation of capacity within the education system and the school for addressing the diversified learning needs of different groups of children who are now in the school system.’[5]

Can this shift be achieved through a large centralized education bureaucracy? If not, what should this alternative model be? How do we align plans and financing systems to focus on learning? Can this be done through the traditional line-item budgeting system or does it require an alternative funding mechanism? Can the RTE-mandated School Management Committees (SMC) be the catalyst for this shift? If so, how best to channelize investments so that planning and financing capacities of SMCs can be strengthened? Crucially, how do we alter the decision making structure so that SMC’s exercise more powers than they currently do?

In many ways enabling the shift from schooling to learning offers us an opportunity to re-assess the current structures for governing elementary education finance and delivery. Understanding the status quo is the first step towards such a re-think. How are education resources allocated? How do their flow through the system to reach their destination? Who controls decisions on how resources are allocated and spent? What are the outputs and outcomes of this expenditure? PAISA is an effort at understanding and answering some of these very questions.

[1] Director, Accountability Initiative, Centre for Policy Research. This is a summary version of a longer introduction to the PAISA District Studies, 2011. For those interested, the study is available on the following link: www.accountabilityindia.in

[2] Kapur, A (2011). ‘Analysis of State Budgets: Elementary Education,’ Accountability Initiaitve, Budget Briefs series, www.accountabilityindia.in

[3] Some states like Bihar and Madhya Pradesh experimented with decentralizing the hiring process to local governments. Local governments were empowered to only hire contract teachers. However, even here all critical decision related to salaries and regularization remained with the administration.

[4] In 2009-10, the Government of India reported a net enrollment of 98.3%.

[5] Ministry of Human Resource Development (2011), ‘ Sarva ShIksha Abhiyan: Framework of Implementation’

SSA Grant Receipt and Expenditures: Stories behind the Trends in Bihar

Shailey Tucker, Accountability Initiative

Bihar’s elementary education budget has increased by over a quarter between 2009-10 and 2010-11. During this time, Bihar has achieved near-universal primary enrolment rates (DISE 2009-10) and, as a result of high increases in allocations for infsrastructure (PAISA Survey 2011) there are visible signs of construction of schools and additional classrooms across the state as well. According to the PAISA Survey 2011, the proportion of schools receiving the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) grants[1] greatly varies across districts. Funds largely begin arriving in schools from September onwards;[2] this occurs despite the fact that the school-year begins earlier in April. Furthermore, the PAISA Survey highlights how there are gaps of over a month at the school-level between the date of grant receipt and the date of first expenditures. Yet, little is known in detail about when schools receive their grants, how they plan and manage their expenditures, and what the real decision-making process is at the school-level. Are schools really able to make expenditures according to their needs? What kinds of difficulties do they face and how do they cope when grants arrive late?

During a visit to Purnea district in eastern Bihar, we saw a flurry of infrastructure-building activity in schools in anticipation of a visit by the Chief Minister − despite the fact that not all schools had received their grants yet. By mid-December 2011, out of a total of 1,914 government elementary schools the SDG and SMG had been released to only 86 and 98 schools, respectively. Yet, the District Resource Centre (DRC) had directed all schools in the district to carry out white-washing and infrastructure repair work; in particular, there was a large push from the district to improve the status of usable girls’ toilets in all schools.

Officials attributed delays in the transfer of grants largely to organisational restructuring in the state a few months earlier and to administrative issues, such as incorrect account numbers and delays in the submission of previous year’s grant utilisation certificates. All four schools that we visited were replete with construction material – some, where additional classrooms were being built, others, where toilets were being repaired or constructed.

Oftentimes, where grants had not arrived, the headmasters had gone ahead to buy materials either on credit or with contribution from the community. Directives were often given on how to use the grants because the administration felt that headmasters lacked sufficient capacity and that this would aid more efficient spending. Yet, it should be noted that such directives were never given officially, only as verbal guidelines or suggestions. The utilisation certificates of those headmasters who made other expenses were not passed by the administration. This raises questions about the freedom with which schools can make expenditures to meet specific needs, increasing the likelihood of corruption at the same time.

To cite an example from Nalanda district, we visited a school where a headmistress had not been appointed since the late 1990s and a senior teacher had been deputed as the acting headmistress. Over the years, she had found the financial management of the school too complicated and, appointed another senior teacher to look after financial matters. This teacher, quite aged himself, kept the financial records and took care of financial procurement for works in the school. It’s interesting to note however, that he, in turn, outsourced the job of maintaining the financial records to a third party – a retired teacher in the village, who had clearly and neatly filled in the register with detailed expenditures.

There was almost a vicious cycle at play here, one which was repeated in several instances across Nalanda and Purnea: the grants arrived at any time between September and October, half-way into the school year. When they arrive, by electronic transfer, the grant head is not clearly mentioned, nor are the schools duly notified about the grant transfer. The 2011-12 grants had arrived in October and this was not considered late at all by the schools, since that is when they always arrive. Part of the reason for the late arrival of grants in this school could have been that the utilisation certificates had not been submitted for expenditures made the previous year; the senior teacher stated this was because the Cluster Resource Centre Coordinator (CRCC) or the block officials had not yet asked for them (in January 2012). However, even in January 2012 the grants had not been spent. Expenditures at the school-level were delayed due to a variety of reasons, including a lack of knowledge not only of grant utilisation and financial management, but also more simply of a lack of information that grants had arrived. In this particular case, the senior teacher shared that, even though the raw materials had been bought on credit, work on school infrastructure was delayed due to a dispute with the adjoining community temple. Thus, the grants for 2011-12 had been left untouched for over four months. No written complaints were ever lodged in relation to the late arrival of funds, even though the matter was discussed verbally at regular block- and cluster-level meetings.

Block and cluster officials recognise that these difficulties exist at the school-level, forcing headmasters to meet expenses out of their own pockets and to seek grant-related information from officials and other colleagues in the absence of formal notifications. Yet, they state that their hands are tied since all related action is to be taken at the district-level. This leaves much to be desired in the block’s role as a link between schools and the district.

However, in addition to strengthening the capacities of officials, headmasters and School Management Committees (SMC), there are practices being followed in the districts which must be institutionalised. Most important is to facilitate the flow of information, ensuring that it reaches headmasters and teachers on time. For instance, in Nalanda itself there are cases where the grant heads are mentioned clearly in the passbooks – it is imperative that this information is reflected in the passbooks of all schools across the state. Timely information must be provided about grant transfers, such as through SMS alerts as has been planned in Madhya Pradesh. Furthermore, it was found in Purnea that headmasters who are closer to the Cluster Resource Centre or to the teachers’ union members are more knowledgeable than others and maintain better records. It would be useful to devote more time for training on financial management, focusing on how to plan expenditures and civil works for the year and on how to maintain detailed financial records. Most importantly, the SMCs must be empowered to play out their due role in the planning, managing and monitoring of school activities. In order to meet the objectives of the Right to Education Act, 2009, and implement the SSA in the decentralised manner that is mandated by the Act, it would do well for us to identify areas where SMCs are working well and replicate their good practices.

[1] Under the SSA Framework, each school is entitled to three annul grants: School Maintenance Grant (SMG) – for minor repairs, maintenance , white-wash, etc.; School Development Grant (SDG) – for ex expenditures on chalk, dusters, blackboard, etc.; and the Teaching-Learning Material (TLM) grant – for expenditures on teaching-learning aids.

[2] For instance, the PAISA Survey reveals that by September 2010, the proportion of schools receiving the SMG in Nalanda district was only 25%, down from 91% the previous year. In contrast, by September 2010, 58% of Purnea district’s schools had received the SMG; overall in that year, only 42% of Purnea’s schools had received all three SSA grants.

PAISA Report 2011

We are very happy to present the third PAISA national report, PAISA 2011. The report was launched on Tuesday, March 20^th 2012 at the Constitution Club of India.The report was officially launched by The Comptroller and Auditor General of India, Shri Vinod Rai and was followed by a panel discussion moderated by Dr. Yogendra Yadav. The panelists were

Mr. Jayant Chaudhary (Member of Parliament),

Mr. Uday Singh (Member of Parliament),

Prof. R. Govinda (Vice Chancellor, National University of Educational Planning and Administration (NUEPA),

Mr. T. R. Raghunandan (ex- Secretary, Ministry of Panchayati Raj, Government of India & Advisor (PAISA Project)) and

Mr.Prakash Javadekar, Member of Parliament Rajya Sabha

The PAISA national report tracks fund flows and expenditures under the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. In 2011 the survey covered 14,283 primary and upper primary schools across the country. PAISA is the first country-wide citizen-led effort to track development expenditures. The annual PAISA survey is conducted through the annual ASER survey that tracks learning outcomes.

Highlights from Budget 2012-13 – Social Sector

Health

NRHM allocations increased to Rs. 20,852 crores, an increase of 15 percent. There has been no new polio case reported in the last one year.
A multi-sectoral programme to address maternal and child malnutrition in selected 200 high burden districts is being rolled out during 2012-13.
National Urban Health Mission is being launched.

Education

For 2012-13, Rs. 25,555 crore provided for RTE-SSA representing an increase of 21.7 per cent over 2011-12.
Rs. 3,124 crore provided for Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA) representing an increase of 29 per cent over BE 2011-12.
An allocation of Rs. 750 crore proposed for Rajiv Gandhi Scheme for Empowerment of Adolescent Girls, SABLA.
Rs. 11,937 crores allocated for the National Programme of Mid-Day Meal scheme

Women and Child

ICDS allocations in FY 2012-13 is Rs. 15,850 crores, an increase of 58 percent over 2011-12 budgeted estimates.

Rural development

Rural housing increased from Rs. 3000 crores to Rs. 4000 crores.
Allocation under National Social Assistance Programme raised by 37 per cent to Rs. 8,447 crore in 2012-13. In the ongoing Indira Gandhi National Widow Pension Scheme and Indira Gandhi National Disability Pension Scheme for BPL beneficiaries, pension amount to be raised from Rs. 200 to Rs. 300 per month. Lump sum grant on the death of primary breadwinner of a BPL family, in the age group 18-64 years, doubled to Rs. 20,000.
Rs. 14,000 crores allocated for rural drinking water and sanitation – an increase of 27% .
Allocation for Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana increased by 20 per cent to Rs. 24,000 crore to improve connectivity.
Backward Regions Grant Fund scheme to continue in twelfth plan with enhanced allocation of Rs. 12,040 crore in 2012-13, representing an increase of 22 per cent over the BE 2011-12.
MGNREGA RE was Rs. 31,000 crores compared to Rs. 40,000 crores BE. In 2012-13, the allocation has come down to Rs. 33,000 crores.

Scheduled Castes and Tribal Sub Plans

Allocation for Scheduled Castes Sub Plan at Rs. 37,113 crore in BE 2012-13 represents an increase of 18 per cent over BE 2011-12.
Allocation for Tribal Sub Plan at Rs. 21,710 crore in BE 2012-13 represents an increase of 17.6 per cent.

And since we are all taxpaying citizens, here is some good news on direct taxes for individuals.

The exemption has been increased from Rs. 1.8 lakhs to Rs. 2 lakhs. Moreover, the upper limit has been increased from Rs. 8 lakh to Rs. 10 lakhs. The tax brackets are thus:

From

0-2 lakhs – 0%
2-5 lakhs – 10%
5-10 lakhs – 20% and
For those above 10 lakhs – its 30%.

In addition, a 10% deduction on interest from savings account of up to Rs. 10,000.

However, service tax is being increased from 10% to 12%.

Link to the Union Budget and Economic Survey

The Annual Budget of India is referred to as the annual Financial Statement in Article 112 of the Constitution. It lays down the proposals for estimated income and expenditure of the Union government for the coming financial year, and has to be passed by the Parliament before it can come into effect on April 1. Normally, the Budget is presented on the last day of February but this year it was postponed because of state assembly elections. It is being presented today by the Union Finance Minister, Mr Pranab Mukherjee. Here is the link to the Economic Survey 2011–12. It reviews the developments in the Indian economy over the previous 12 months, summarizes the performance on major development programmes, and highlights the policy initiatives of the government and the prospects of the economy in the short to medium term.

Accountability Initiative has reviewed the budget of key social sector schemes. You can find it on our Expenditure Track page.

Vidya Ka Mandir

Dinesh Kumar, Accountability Initiative

यह कहानी उस विद्यालय की है जिसे उसके प्रधान उसे विद्या का मंदिर कहते है | जब आप इनके विद्यालय की कहानी सुनेगें तो आप भी सोचेंगे कि प्रधान ने आखिर क्या किया कि इस विद्यालय मे इतनी सुविधाए है। विद्यालय मे प्रयाप्त कमरे, उचित पेय जल की व्यवस्था, बिजली, कुलर, अलमारी, टेलिविजन और प्रधान के कक्ष मे गद्धेदार कुर्सिया लगी हुई है। कैम्पस में माँ सरस्वती और दुर्गा की मंदिर है |

This story is of that school, whose headmaster calls it the “Temple of Learning”. When you hear the story of this school, even you would wonder as to who the headmaster provided so many facilities in this school. The school has enough classrooms, appropriate drinking water facility, electricity for the entire building, cooler, almirah, televsion and a fancy sofa in the headmasters room. The campus, in fact, has a temple dedicated to Lord Saraswati and Durga.

इस ‘विद्या के मंदिर’ में और क्या- क्या हो रहा है आप जानिए| यह कहानी पुर्णिया जिला मुख्यालय से 42 कि.मी. दूर प्रखंड दमदाहा के हरिजन मध्य विद्यालय की है | मै जब पैसा सर्वे को लेकर घूम रहा था तभी मुझे इस विद्यालय में जाने का मौक़ा मिला | शाम का समय था, जब मै वहां गया। मैंने सोचा कि विद्यालय में जिस प्रकार की सुविधा है उसके लिये तो इतना पैसा सरकार नहीं देती है, फिर भी इस तरह सुविधा के होने का कारण क्या है ?

This story is of a “Harijan High School” 42 km away from the district headquarters of Purnea, in a village called Damdaha. I had an opportunity to visit this school as a part of the PAISA survey. I reached there in the evening. I kept wondering, that the government does not provide so much funds that you can so have so many facilities in a school. So how did this school manage?

जब मैंने प्रधान शिक्षक से बात की, तो पाया कि इसकी कुछ अलग कहानी है। उन्होने बताया कि इस क्षेत्र के जितने भी पंचायती राज्य के सदस्य है, वे उन सभी की बैठक बुलाते है, और सभी सदस्य को अपने क्षेत्र के बच्चो की जबादेही लेने के लिये कह्ते है| साथ में विद्यालय सहयोग हेतु इन सभी को कुछ चन्दा स्वरुप राशि देने के लिये कह्ते है | उन्होंने आगे कहाँ की यहाँ जो भी सुविधा उपलब्ध देख रहे है, उसके लिए हमे समुदाय का काफी सह्योग मिलता है । पंचायत के मुखिया, सरपंच, वार्ड-सदस्य, और उस क्षेत्र के विधायक भी विधालय के विकास हेतु धन राशि देते है ।

When I talked to the headmaster, I found a story with a twist. He said that he calls a meeting of all members of the Panchayat and tells everybody to hold the school accountable for their children’s education. In addition, he requests everybody to pitch in funds for the school. He said that there is a great contribution from the community for all the facilities in the school. The Panchayat ‘Mukhiya’, ‘Sarpanch’, ‘Ward-members’ and the Legislator also provide funds for the school.

सरकार भी विद्यालय के लिए अनुदान देती है, जैसे की विद्यालय विकास,रख-रखाव ,शिक्षण सामाग्री, छात्रवृती,परिभर्मन विज्ञान कीट। उसके साथ ही प्रधान शिक्षक उन पैसे का भी सदउपयोग करते है । जो MDM के पैसा बचता है उसका प्रयोग भी बच्चो के लिये किया जाता है। प्रत्येक शिक्षक से भी सहयोग के रुप मे चन्दा के लिया जाता है।

In addition, the government also provides funds to the school in terms of School Development Grant, School Maintenance Grant, Teaching Learning Material, Scholarships, Transport allowance etc. The headmaster uses these funds for his school. He inflates the number of students who come for MDM, and uses the left-over money also for the school facilities. Each teacher also has to mandatorily put in a contribution for the school.

प्रधान ने विद्यालय के विकस हेतु समुदाय, अभिभावक, विधायक, मुखिया , सरपंच ,आदी से सहयोग लिया बहुत ही अच्छा किया है | लेकिन जब मध्याहन भोजन का पैसा इन सभी कार्यों के लिए खर्च करता है यह अच्छा नहीं हो रहा है|

The headmaster is doing a lot for the school, and has solicited contributions from the community at large, and that’s really amazing. However, misappropriating MDM funds, even if it’s for the good of the school, is not good.

Bewildering case of cycling of funds within the system

Venugopal Kalakota (PAISA associate), Accountability Initiative

While on the field, our PAISA associates come across various bewildering situations. This one about the cycling of funds through the system, without leading to any output, is one of the funnier ones.

Following the passage of the Right to Education 2010, the State Implementation Society(SIS) for Sarva Shiska Abhiyan, took a decision to provide two sets of uniforms to every student enrolled in a government elementary school[SA1] . Funds for the uniforms were to be transferred to schools, who in turn where given the responsibility for purchasing uniforms at a local level. Consequently funds were transferred into school accounts in FY 2011 ( at a unit cost of Rs. 200 per uniform) .

During the course of the PAISA survey, while scrutinizing the school passbooks, we found that although schools had received the uniform grant, none had spent it and in fact the funds had been re-appropriated back in to the district account. This seemed decidedly odd and so we probed the issue further. On probing we learnt that later that year contrary instructions had been issued by the SIS to retrieve the grant amount transferred to schools! This was because the state office, upon transferring money to schools, changed its mind and decided instead to procure uniforms centrally. To do this, the SIS office entered in to a contract with the Andhra Pradesh State Handloom Weavers Cooperative Society (APSHWCS). As a consequence of this administrative confusion, HMs found themselves in a bewildering situation of re-transferring funds received. The ultimate price however was borne by the students who as a result did not receive their uniforms on time.