Planning & integration

download Planning & integration

of 28

Embed Size (px)

description

Interactive workshop on Integration of Panchayat Development plan with District plan began in Atithi Bhavan at Koraput in presence of a host of researchers , officials and officials from the district administration .A study which was conducted as a part of PRIs - Good Governance and Social Justice in Kumargamdhana panchayat of Lamtaput block was also shared by CWS , Ekta Koraput and KFA- Koraput .

Transcript of Planning & integration

Slide 1

Integration of Planning and Budgeting in Odisha A Study by Centre for World Solidarity (CWS) and Centre for Youth and Social Development (CYSD), BhubaneswarObjectives of the studyTo study the existing processes of formulation of annual plans and their upward integration across the three tiers of Panchayat as also in the State Plan vis-a-vis the norms suggested by the Planning Commission and the 73rd Amendment and the GP Act ; To examine the actual magnitude of fund flow how much exactly reaches the Panchayats to enable them to deliver the 29 earmarked functions;To examine the adequacy of functionaries available for providing facilitative support in developing plans for each of the 29 subjects;To identify bottlenecks and implementation gaps and suggest advocacy issues and suggest way-outs to improve the status of devolution of power to three tiers and ensure actual decentralised planning.

DISTRICT

BLOCK

GPTWO SCHEDULE DISTRICTS OF ODISHASUNDARGARHKORAPUTHEMGIRLAMTAPUTKUCHEDEGAKENDUDIHIKUMARGANDHANATIKARPADASTUDY AREA Sampling techniquesParticipatory and consultativePrimary Evidence based Qualitative and quantitative Case studies Focussed Group Discussions

DATA SOURCES The documents that were collected from the Panchayats were Annual Financial Statements (AFS) of 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012 13 depending on their availability, Annual plans, resolution documents of panchayat annual plan meeting, other meetings, perspective plans and panchayat resolutions of latest years available and the latest budget documents are collected for detailed analysis

Sample coverage

CoverageNosCoverageNosHousehold survey356Ex Zila president 2Ward member46PD DRDA2Ex ward member46DPO2Sarpanch4DPC2Ex-Sarpanch4Collectors2Block Chairman2Technical Support Institutions 2Ex-Block Chairman2DPMU1GPO2Director (Planning, Panchayat raj, Finance) 3BDO2Special Secretary (Planning, panchayat raj, finance) 3ABDO2TOTAL492GENERAL FINDINGS

Awareness about the provisions of 73rd Amendment Act

96.5% of the total household representatives are not aware of the provisions of 73rd Amendment Act

93.9% of the total GP level representatives were not aware of the provisions of 73rd Amendment Act

Majorities 66.67% of the block and district level representatives are unaware regarding the provisions of the 73rd Amendment Act Out of 33.33% respondents of the total block and district level representatives who were able to express their awareness on the provisions of 73rd Amendment Act

a majority 72.22% respondents said that its prime objective was an improved 3 tier system, 55% viewed direct election for PRI posts was its objective, 50% viewed 33% reservation for women candidates in the PRIs as a provision in the Act 38.9% said additional powers to PS/GP as a provision in the Act and 27.7% said devolution of specified powers to the GPs as a provision in the Act.8Awareness on provisions of PESA99% of the Household respondents do not know about the provisions of PESA Act.70% of the total block and district level representatives respondents are not aware about the provisions in the PESA Act.

Whether Households attend Palli Sabha MeetingsA majority 71% of the HH respondents attended Palli Sabha 29 % of the respondents could not attended Palli Sabha meetings because they were either not aware or were not informed. 33% of the HH respondents came to know about Palli Sabha meeting from the public by word of mouth compared to 18% of the respondents who receive information from the panchayat offices where the notice is put on the office wall. 91% of the HH respondents know about Palli Sabha within 7 days before the PS meeting.42% of the HH respondents who have participated in Palli Sabha meetings said that the Gram Panchayat mostly accepted their views 22% said they were accepted or rejected on merit. On the other hand, nearly 31% of such respondents were of the view that the GP either rejected their proposal or was unresponsive and showed mere sympathy without taking any action.

However, a majority 50% of the non-attendees expressed little interest in PS proceedings and said either they had no time, or the meetings were not useful for them. Some even thought that attending PS was not their duty.

10Issues discussed in Palli Sabha

While a majority 68% of the HH respondents opined that most of the discussion in PS revolved around activities of different line departments.Only 30% said that discussion on crucial issues of health and education were held in PS. There is hardly any discussion on revenue generation and infrastructure development. A majority 58% of the respondents believed that discriminatory practices were being followed in beneficiary selection process whereas 42 % remained inconclusive.77% of such respondents felt that most of the times benefits went to rich people and relatives of Sarpanch and Ward member or to those who bribed the Sarpanch and Panchayat Secretary.

Is the beneficiary list of the Palli Sabha changed in gram Sabha?

One-third of the house-hold respondents felt that beneficiaries recommended by Palli Sabha got changed in gram Sabha.Another one-third house-hold respondents said that it was not changedAnd the rest one-third house-hold respondents expressed their ignorance.30% of the house-hold respondents felt that PS list were not at all presented in the gram Sabha.22% of the house-hold respondents believed that lists were changed due to pressure from govt. officials.47.78% of the GP level representative respondents felt that the decisions of the gram Sabha, Palli Sabha changed at higher tiers76%of the GP level representative respondents felt that it was changed by the block level officialsCollector supersedes the decisions made by the GP / PS was felt by 20.37% of the GP level representative respondents18.52% of the GP level representative respondents think it is because PS and ZP impose their own mandate in planning

Issues on Power delegation to PRIs, Coordination etc71.7% of the block/district level respondents feel that the powers delegated are sufficient for the successful functioning of GPs.60%of the block/district level respondents think that co-ordination between the ZP/PS and GPs is not all right. Reasons are-Party feelings, Overlapping of functions, ZP does not function as apex body, PRI members lack of knowledge on their role and responsibilities.According to 78.3% respondents there is no co-ordination between executives and elected representatives. Due to non-cooperation of executives, Devolution of power is not followed by Admn., Executives ignore the PRIs recommendations, party feelingsProblems faced in the meeting session by block/district level representativesZP President/PS Chairman Acts as a nominal head -48.84% respondents.Line dept. authorities monopolize the meeting session according to 23.26%respondentsGovt. officials handle the meeting session in their own way according to 20.83% respondents Line department staffs do not attend meeting instead send extension officers this creates problems according to 18.75% respondents

Functioning of DPC

63.33% respondents have knowledge of the formation of DPC at districtDPC is only partially functional-73.81% respondents DPC functions more like an information base for the government -44.83% respondent .89.66% respondents said meetings are called irregularly.51.72% PRI respondents said even a ZP member does not receive notice for meetings.

SPECIFIC FINDINGS

Ward panchayat - PlanningThere is no resolution/record made at the ward panchayat levelPlanning is largely done in a informal list of beneficiaries to be provided to the panchayatInformation about panchayat meeting mainly given on word of mouth, very few cases of VLW getting resolution book signed for notice etc.Provision of sitting fee in ward panchayat meeting, capacity of ward panchayat and line departments presence makes it almost impossible for any kind of planning at ward level.Ward panchayat Budgeting In the absence of any formal planning process at the ward panchayat there is no budgeting which can then be analysed for any kind of integration etc.There is no financial flow to ward panchayat for any kind of schemes etc, it is just the monitoring role that is played by the ward panchayat members for implementation of schemes like IAY, Mo Kudia etc.Further capacity for financial management and flow of resources is not mandated to ward panchayat in existing provisions of PESA Act. Gram Sabha PlanningDecentralised planning is facilitated by TSIs at panchayat level and specified format is used for recording the wish list. TSIs organize meeting at panchayat level with sarpanch,ward members, and people but resolutions/formats were not found. For Kumargandhana panchayat at Lamataput there is one resolution facilitated and written by TSIs for five year perspective plan during 2009-10 and the same has been signed by the people after duly reading it out in meeting.Annual planning meeting resolution is formally not recorded in the panchayat resolution book.Aggregation of wish list from panchayat is again the responsibility of TSIs.Line departments plan which is mainly based on schemes and existing criterions are also aggregated and presented at the block level for further approval and escalationIt is not mandatory for line departments to be a part of annual planning meeting at panchayat levelPanchayat plan is not necessarily required for the fund to be made available to panchayat

Gram Sabha Budgeting Capacity of panchayat for managing finance is a major area of concern.Resource envelope for panchayat is not known to any of the Local Self Governance Institution s members.There is a fixed criteria for budgeting, for activities which are undertaken previously and some increase in amount .Documents to such budgeting is also not available at p