Government of Jammu & Kashmir - Directorate...

Government of Jammu & Kashmir

Evaluation Report

On

Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme(MGNREGA)

(Jammu, Pulwama & Leh Districts)

(2009-10 to 2011-12)

Directorate of Economics and Statistics, J&K

Planning and Development Department

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Improved Village Connectivity

Improved Irrigation

Land Development Took place

Afforest ration Took Place

Soil Erosion Stopped

Water Conservation ensured

70%

72%

41%

30%

28%

19%

Impact of MGNREGA scheme in sample villages as per Knowledgeable Persons perspective

Percentage of Sample Knowlegeable Persons reporting

http://www.nrega.net/

Highlights of the study

1) The information on the availability of funds under MGNREGA in the sample

districts amply suggests that the scheme was progressing well year after

year. The aggregate availability of funds registered phenomenal increase of

414% during the reference period from 2009-10 to 211-12. The overall

expenditure in the sample districts was of the magnitude of Rs.11329.02 lacs

against the total availability of Rs.12046.00 lacs during the reference period

from 2009-10 to 2011-12 at the utilization rate of 94% of the available funds.

2) The registration of Job Card Holders was on the rise during the reference

period completely in consonance with the expenditure profile of the

programme. The Job cards issued from 2009-10 to 2011-12 registered an

increase of 24% and 23% over previous years respectively. The number of

applications seeking employment under the programme were also on the rise

showing 53% increase in 2010-11 and 300% in 2011-12 over the previous

years.

3) The Job days claimed provided to the unemployed job seekers from 2009-10

to 2011-12 were also progressing considerably registering an increase of 33%

and 213% over previous years respectively.

4) In the sample districts, the quantum of works executed under MGNREGA

revealed almost identical prioritization of works over the three reference

years of the study. The rural connectivity was priority first in the execution of

MGNREGA works claiming 36% of the total works executed during 2009-10

and 2010-11 and 33% during 2011-12.

5) During the reference period the participation of women workers under the

scheme in the sample blocks had remained nominal at the rate of 11%. Only

54533 person days out of total of 4.90 lac were availed by women workers in

the sample bocks.

6) The field enquiry results indicated that all the sample beneficiaries but 9 had

been provided Job Cards by the Rural Development Department within 15

days of their submission of application. The Job Cards were issued to the

beneficiaries strictly as per the norms of the scheme.

7) At an average, every Job Card Holder household had availed only 34 days

against 100 days available for them. This simply means that only 34%

benefit of the scheme was derived in the enquired villages both in terms of

wages and assets creation.

8) While interacting with the beneficiaries, their Job Cards were also scrutinized

with reference to Job days offered and wages received. It was given to know

that adjustments were made regarding person days offered and payments

made in the Job Cards taking the Job Card holders into confidence. These

adjustments were inevitable otherwise offering of labour under MGNREGA at

current wage rate was not possible.

9) 1913 beneficiaries constituting 98% of the enquired beneficiaries stated to

have been provided wage employment within 15 days of application for

work.

10) No unemployment allowance was paid in favour of the beneficiaries who

were not provided employment within the time limit of 15 days which had

become due to them as per scheme norms.

11) In the surveyed villages, 1076 beneficiaries constituting 55% of the enquired

number stated to have received wages within a week/fortnight. The

remaining 45% reported otherwise and majority of them had reportedly

received wages after 30-60 days the work was done. This evidently is clear

violation of norms and needs immediate attention of the Implementing

Department.

12) Regarding worksite facilities the ground level realities reflected that these

provisions of the Act/Scheme were mostly confined to papers only. Not a

single Creche was provided during 2011-12 in any of the worksites in the

sample villages inspite of the fact that maximum women participation was

reported in Chuchot block of Leh district.

13) The medical aid facility which is the need of every worksite was reported

provided by only 1% beneficiaries. The facility of shed was reported provided

by just 4% of the enquired beneficiaries.

14) The enquired beneficiaries expressed satisfaction over their engagement in

MGNREGA, registration process, transparency and ensured payments.

However, the satisfaction on worksite facilities and timely payments was

observed low. The payments were also not provided within week/fortnight in

sizeable number of cases which had amply been reflected in the low

satisfaction level of beneficiaries on this very parameter. The Implementing

Department must evolve all possible measures to ensure that the weak

implementing aspects of the scheme are corrected by appropriate action on

ground. It would, among other things, require intensive supervision and

monitoring of the programme plus effective coordination with other involved

agencies, particularly the financial institutions.

15) The enquiry of beneficiaries on the problems and bottlenecks suggested that

only one problem was universal in nature i.e.the low rate of wages as

compared to prevalent market rate. In spite of 100 Job days available for

every registered household, only 14% had applied for the maximum number

of 100 days. The reason behind this situation was evidently the low rate of

wages as compared to market rate.

16) While offering suggestions for effecting further improvements in the

programme, the enhancement in the wage rate was universally put forth. The

suggestion of enhancing the wage rate at least to the neighbourhood of

prevalent market rate could boost the programme implementation at a very

large scale.

17) In the surveyed 51 villages across the sample blocks there were 1233 non-

beneficiary households who did not offered labour during 2011-12 inspite of

Jobs in offering under MGNREGA. From the job seekers point of view the

main reason for not offering labour under the programme was the low rate of

wages as compared to prevalent market rate in the open market.

18) A minute analysis of data collected from the 51 surveyed villages revealed

that the registered Job Card holders would have claimed 3.191 lakh person

days as a matter of right from MGNREGA but they actually availed only

0.660 lakh person days during 2011-12 which was deficient by 79% of the

total entitlements. The scheme being demand driven, it could be concluded

that maximum utilization of entitlement of 100 person days by the registered

households would have claimed 79% more investment of MGNREGA funds in

the sample area.

19) In the normal lean periods the wage rate during 2011-12 was approximately

in the range of Rs.200/- to Rs.250/- in rural areas and Rs.250/- to Rs.300/-

in the urban areas. In the busy agricultural season the rates were higher by

almost 20%. In such a situation, the Implementing Department could do a

very little in enhancing the utilization of full entitlements of registered

households who find best comparative advantage for working in the open

labour market. However, the scheme could prove comparatively successful in

remote and inaccessible areas of the state where employment opportunities

are scarce.

20) The satisfaction level of Knowledgeable Persons on different aspects of the

execution programme were mostly positive. The quality of works executed

under MGNREGA was regarded satisfactory by 94% of the enquired

Knowledgeable Persons. The satisfaction over scope of executed works,

material used, durability, functionality was also 90% or close to it. This

implies that moderately good quality works were being executed under the

programme.

21) Regarding benefits accruing to the rural areas, 70% Knowledgeable Persons

reported that village connectivity improved and 72% stated improvement in

the irrigation facilities of the villages. The Land Development having taken

place was reported by 41% Knowledgeable Persons and afforestration by

30%.

22) Among the verified works 86% were complete and 14% were incomplete. So

far as specifications were concerned, 85% were coinciding with the official

documents and 15% were deficient as reported by the evaluation teams.

23) The quality of construction was put on a scale and only 37% were rated good

and 57% of average quality. 6% of the total verified works were declared

below standard. This situation again warrants that the labour material ratio

under MGNREGA must undergo a realistic revision in view of huge price

escalation in material costs. Further the supervisory system of the scheme

must be strengthened to pave way for creation of durable and quality assets

for ultimate well being of the rural poor.

Contents

Chapter No Description of Chapter Page No’s

I Introduction 1 – 5

II Financial/Physical Progress 6 – 14

III Sample Block level Profile 15 – 20

IV Field Findings 21 - 40

& suggestions

V Summary of Main Findings 41 – 45

Annexure A List of beneficiaries provided 46 onwards

delayed jobs

____________ ____________________________________ _________

\

Chapter - I

Introduction:

The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) envisages to guarantee at least 100 days of employment in a

financial year to any rural household whose adult members are willing to do unskilled manual work. The scheme was introduced in the country from

2005 and in the J&K State its implementation started from 2005-06 in districts of Poonch, Doda and Kupwara. The scheme was subsequently extended to all districts of the state from 1st of April 2008. The objective of

the scheme is to enhance livelihood security in rural areas by providing at least 100 days of guaranteed wage employment in a financial year to every household whose adult members volunteer to do unskilled manual labour.

TYPES OF WORKS PERMISSIBLE UNDER THE SCHEME:

As per the guidelines of National Rural Employment Scheme (NREGA),

the focus shall be on following works:-

a) Water conservation and water harvesting works;

b) Drought proofing including afforestration and tree plantation; c) Irrigation canals including micro and minor irrigation works;

d) Provision of irrigation facility to land owned by households belonging to the SC/ST or to land of the beneficiaries of land reforms or to the beneficiaries under Indira Awas Yojana;

e) Renovation of traditional water bodies including desilting of tanks; f) Land development; g) Flood control and protection works including drainage in waterlogged

areas; h) Rural connectivity to provide all weather access. The construction of

roads may include culverts where necessary, and within the village area may be taken up along with drains;

i) Any other work that may be notified by the central Government in

consultation with the state government.

IMPLEMENTING AGENCY:

The scheme is implemented by the Assistant Commissioner Development (Project Officer, Wage Employment) as District Programme

Coordinator at the district level and by the Block Development Officers as the programme officers at the block level.

Salient Features:

1) Adult members of a rural household, willing to do unskilled manual labour, may apply for registration in writing or orally to the local Gram

Panchayat.

2) The Gram Panchayat after due verification will issue a Job Card. The Job Card will bear the photograph of all the adult members of the

household willing to work under the scheme and is free of cost. 3) The Job Card is to be issued within 15 days of application.

4) The Job Card holder may submit a written application for employment to the Gram Panchayat, stating the time and duration for which work is sought. The minimum days of employment have to be at least

fourteen. 5) Employment will be given within 15 days of application for work,

otherwise daily employment allowance has to be paid as per the Act

governing the scheme. 6) Work should ordinarily be provided within 5 Kms otherwise extra

wages of 10% are payable to meet additional transportation and living expenses.

7) Wages are due to be paid according to the Minimum Wages Act 1948

for agricultural labourers in the state, unless the centre notifies a

wage rate which will not be less than Rs.60/- per day. Equal wages

would be provided to both men and women.

8) The Centre has initially notified the wage rate of Rs70/- per day and

was revised a couple of times and at present it stood at Rs 131/- per

day.

9) Unlike the earlier Wage Employment Programmes that were allocation based, MGNREGS is demand driven. Resources transfer under the scheme is based on the demand for employment.

10) Disbursement of wages has to be done on weekly basis and not beyond a fortnight in any case.

11) At least one-third of beneficiaries have to be women who have registered and requested for work under the scheme.

12) Permissible works predominantly include water and soil conservation,

afforestration and land development works. 13) At least 50% of works will be allotted to Gram Panchayat for

execution.

14) A 60:40 wage and material ratio has to be maintained. No Contractor and Machinery is allowed.

15) The Central Govt bears the 100% wage cost of unskilled manual labour and 75% of the material cost including the wages of skilled and semi-skilled workers.

16) Grievances redressal mechanisms have to be put in place for ensuring a responsive implementation process.

17) All accounts and records relating to the scheme should be available for public scrutiny.

Need for Evaluation:

The objective of MGNREGS is the creation of durable assets and strengthening the livelihood resource base of the rural poor. Investments made under MGNREGS are expected to generate employment and

purchasing power, raise economic productivity, promote women’s

participation in the work force, strengthen the rural infrastructure through the creation of durable assets, reduce distress migration and contribute to

the generation of natural resources. Thus, outlays under MGNREGS have to be transformed into outcomes. Regular evaluations of the programme are

required to be conducted to assess the outcomes. The State Level Evaluation Committee (SLEC) in its 5th meeting held at Jammu on 25th of November 2011 inter alia, identified MGNREGS for evaluation during 2012-13 in three

districts, one each in Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh regions. The job was entrusted to the Directorate of Economics and Statistics. The study was, accordingly, accomplished as per the following phases/strategies:-

Objectives of the Study:-

The objectives of the study were:-

1) To assess the utilization of resources made available under the scheme with bottlenecks , if any;

2) To assess the physical progress made under the scheme in creating durable assets and the final outcomes of the work done in terms of benefits accruing to the community;

3) To ascertain the quantum of person days generated with the feminine participation;

4) To assess transparency in registration, Job Card issuance, Work allotment, Payment of Wages, Un-employment Allowance etc;

5) To assess the impacts of the scheme on the socio-economic welfare of

the MGNREGS workers/beneficiaries on the basis of their statements; 6) To ascertain the deviations, if any, witnessed/reported by the workers

from the set guidelines of MGNREGS and satisfaction level of

beneficiaries on various facets of the scheme; 7) To ascertain problems/bottlenecks being faced in the implementation,

reasons therefor and measures to address them successfully.

Reference Period:

The reference period of the study was 2009-10 to 2011-12. However,

under field operations works executed during 2011-12 and workers who offered services during 2011-12 were covered. Workers/Job Card holders registered but not applying for work during 2011-12 were also interviewed to

ascertain reasons of their non-participation. The works executed during the period were assessed on various parameters i.e. scope, specifications,

quality, durability, functionality, maintenance, community basis etc. in order to focus on the tangible outcomes of the programme.

Sample Size and Selection Procedure:

As per the aspirations of the SLEC, only three districts were covered under the study, one representing each region of the state. Within the selected district, one block with moderate achievements under the scheme

was selected on purposive basis to avoid over estimation/under-estimation of results. For this study, Pulwama, Leh and Jammu districts were selected

by simple random sampling procedure. In the selected block, 20% of total villages were selected. In the selected villages, all the works executed during

2011-12 were put to evaluation audit with reference to different efficiency parameters. The Job Card Holders who offered services during 2011-12 were

interviewed and their Job Cards audited with regard to person days offered, wages received etc. The Job Card Holders of the village who did not avail

work/engagement under the scheme during the said year also came under evaluation exercise to ascertain the specific reasons for not providing/availing wage employment. 5 Knowledgeable Persons in each

selected village were also interviewed to ascertain their viewpoint on the functioning of the scheme with special reference to creation of utility assets and generation of employment opportunities for rural poor.

Field Operations:

The collection of information from the selected districts as per devised formats was done by the concerned District Statistics and Evaluation

Officers (DSEOs). On the basis of collected information, sample was drawn as per the stipulated sampling procedure. The field operations were

conducted by the DSEO Offices and for that purpose the Statistical Staff placed in the Block Development Offices of the districts was also utilized on need basis for ensuring timely completion of the assignment.

Supervision:

The Regional Joint Directors in their respective districts carried-out

intensive supervision of the field operations. They prepared observatory/ supervisory notes on the functioning of the scheme in the sample area

which subsequently were furnished to the Directorate of Economics and Statistics. These notes were used as an authentic source of information for drafting the final report on the study. The Director, Economics and

Statistics, J&K along with Regional Joint Director Kashmir supervised over the field operations in Leh district.

Scrutiny and Tabulation:

Scrutiny of schedules was done by a committee of experts constituted by DSEOs of the concerned districts under the supervision of Assistant

Directors (E&S). In case discrepancies were noticed, rectifications were made and in some cases of Pulwama district reference back to the field was also done for authentication of data. The data was then displayed on muster

sheets and then condensed as per the requirements of tabulation plan which was devised by the Directorate of Economics and Statistics and

provided in advance to the concerned DSEO offices.

Report Writing:

The report on the Study was authored at the Directorate level keeping

intact the sample district level information. The report confined itself to the

satisfaction of postulated objectives alone.

Analytical Tools:

All appropriate Statistical and Mathematical tools and techniques had

been applied in analyzing data in order to make phenomenon easy to understand and to enhance the presentation of the report. These included percentages, averages, ratios, bar charts, pie-diagrams, trend curves etc.

Instruments of Investigation:

For obtaining official data from the Implementing Department, seven formats were devised. For conducting field operations, four different

schedules; Beneficiary Schedule, Non-beneficiary Schedule, Knowledgeable Person Schedule and Physical Verification Schedule were devised. All

formats and schedules devised and used for accomplishing the study are annexed with the report for facilitating future studies on the subject.

Chapter - II

District Profile:

The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme

(MGNREGS) is undoubtedly the largest employment programme in human

history and is unlike any other wage employment programme in its scale,

thrust, people centered, demand driven, rights based, self selecting etc. It is

implemented as a centrally sponsored scheme on a cost sharing basis

between the centre and states as determined by the Act governing the

scheme. The basic input of the scheme is the financial allocations

earmarked for it and, of course, the efforts of the Implementing Department

and the cooperation of all other stakeholders. The Evaluation Process is the

input and output analysis of the scheme and naturally before analyzing the

outputs in terms of realization of set objectives, the assessment of inputs

has to be made. The instant evaluation study of MGNREGA had been

confined to three districts viz; Pulwama, Jammu and Leh representing each

region of the state. The reference period stands restricted to the years 2009-

10 to 2011-12. The following table provides information on the financial

inputs earmarked for the programme and utilization profile of the

Implementing Department:-

Table No – 1

District Level availability and expenditure

S.

no

District

Year 2009-10 Year 2010-11 Year 2011-12 Total

Availability Exp Availability

Exp Availability Exp Availability Exp %age

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)

1. Jammu 972.32 916.24 1765.75 1688.11 5279.84 5249.84 8017.91 7854.19 98%

2. Pulwama 395.36 383.90 993.28 805.83 1755.74 1442.90 3144.38 2632.63 84%

3. Leh. 117.38 106.54 168.83 150.35 597.50 585.31 883.71 842.20 95%

Total 1485.06 1406.68 2927.86 2644.29 7633.08 7278.05 12046.00 11329.02 94%

%age - 95% - 90% - 95% - 94%

The MGNREGA is a demand driven wage employment

programme. Release of central share of funds are based on the projection of labour demand in the agreed-to Labour Budget (LB)

between Central Govt and State Govt. The central releases are, thus, based on district/state specific anticipated labour demand proposals rather than on pre-determined budget allocations. Central share of funds under MGNREGA are normally released in two tranches. While

the release of 1st tranche of central share is based on proportionate fund requirement as per the agreed-to Labour Budget to take care of requirement for the first six months of the financial year subject to a maximum of 50% of the total fund required for a whole year, the

release of 2nd tranche is based on (i) Un-spent balances and (ii) actual performance against the agreed-to Labour Budget during the year.

The information on the availability of funds under MGNREGA depicted in table No-1 above amply suggests that the scheme in the

sample districts was progressing well. In the year 2009-10, the

aggregate availability of funds was Rs.1485.06 lacs which rose to

Rs.2927.86 lacs for the year 2010-11 registering an increase of 97%

over the previous year. Again during the year 2011-12 the aggregate

availability was of the magnitude of Rs.7633.08 lacs showing an

increase of 161% over the fund availability of 2010-11. The utilization

profile of the funds was also satisfactory which was 95% of the available funds during 2009-10 and dropped down to 90% in the subsequent year and attained 95% level during the year 2011-12. The overall expenditure in the three sample districts was of the magnitude

of Rs.11329.02 lacs against the total availability of Rs.12046.00 lacs

during the reference period from 2009-10 to 2011-12 at the utilization

rate of 94% of the availability. At district level, the highest utilization of 98% of the available funds was reported in district Jammu followed by 95% in Leh and 84% in respect of district Pulwama. Given the fact that the utilization of funds was satisfactory, conceeding very little unspent balances for the subsequent years, the increase in the availability of funds was evidently the result of an increase in the

demand for work under MGNREGA. The district level information in respect of all the three districts reflects an identical situation of huge increase in the availability as a result of proportionate increase in the demand for work under the programme.

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

Jammu Pulwama Leh. Total

80

17

.91

31

44

.38

88

3.7

1

12

04

6

78

54

.19

26

32

.63

84

2.2

11

32

9.0

2

97

.96

%

83

.72

%

95

.30

%

94

.05

%

Availability Exp %age Exp

Utilisation profile of funds under MGNREGA in sample district during the period from

Am

ount

of

Registration of Key Stakeholders:

The single most important and distinguishing feature of MGNREGA

from other employment programmes of the past is the provision of work on

demand by wage-seekers and work provided as their legal right. Most of the

previous employment programmes ensured jobs when Governments decided

to provide work, not when people demand work. On the contrary,

MGNREGA is a demand driven public wage employment programme where

works are under-taken and jobs offered whenever there is a demand for

work by the registered job seekers. Thus the implementation of MGNREGA

involves the pivotal role of wage seekers as the primary stakeholders of the

programme. Their exercise of rights, process of registration, issuance of job

cards, demand for work are the main triggers of key processes. In the three

sample districts, the achievements made during the reference period in

respect of these basic parameters are reflected hereunder:-

Table No – 2

Achievements of Registration of Job Seekers under MGNREGA

S.no

District Description of Item

Year of reference Period %age increase over

previous year

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2010-11 2011-12

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)

1. Jammu

No of Job Cards issued 35108 44018 58290 25% 32%

No of applications for Jobs received 17643 33963 194407 92% 472%

No of Person days provided 427383 687692 2550363 61% 271%

Women days provided 10292 6038 39078 - 41% 547%

2. Pulwama




Women days provided 1171 8005 3076 583% -62%

3. Leh


No of applications for Jobs received 5900 3323 11212 - 44% 237%


Women days provided 17756 26100 125900 47% 382%

Total




Women days provided 29219 30143 168054 3% 458%

Before analyzing the official information as obtained from the

concerned Implementing agencies of the Rural Development Department, it

needs special mention here that the maintenance of database in respect of

MGNREGA was observed very weak. The data was contradictory and not

consistent within itself with the result the Evaluation Agency faced a lot of

inconvenience in obtaining precise information. However, all possible efforts

were made to get rectified & un-contradictory data from the concerned

Agencies, even then un-preciseness of certain data can’t be ruled-out. The

Govt Departments implementing various developmental and Social Security

Schemes have over the years become very reluctant in sharing information

with the Evaluation Agency, perhaps fearing out-cry on under

implementation and mis-implementation of schemes as a result of

evaluation auditing. The system needs to be set right and the evaluation

exercise under taken by the Directorate of Economics and Statistics or any

other agency must be taken in the right perspective for enhancing the

implementation efficiency of the programme, the stressed objectives of the

evaluation.

The data demonstrated in Table No-2 reflected that the achievements

on registration of job card holders was on the rise during the reference

period completely in consonance with the expenditure profile of the

programme. Upto the year 2009-10, there were 68884 Job Cards issued in

the sample districts which reached to 85485 in 2010-11 and further to

105515 in 2011-12 registering an increase of 24% and 23% over previous

years respectively. The number of applications seeking employment under

the programme were also on an increasing trend showing 53% increase in

2010-11 and 300% in 2011-12 over the previous years. In response, the

Rural Development Department reported to had provided Job days to the

unemployed job seekers of the magnitude of 8.56 lacs person days during

the year 2009-10 which touched 11.38 lac days in 2010-11 and 35.59 lacs

days in 2011-12 registering an increase of 33% and 213% over previous

years respectively. These facts and figures suggested that the programme

was popularizing in the state year after year. However, the participation of

women workers was very limited having almost no scoring relation with the

overall job days generated under the programme. The low participation of

women workers in MGNREGA programme had mainly social and religious

reasons in the state. The sample district level data reflected in the table

shows identical movement suggesting that the issuance of Job Cards,

receipt of applications for jobs and number of person days provided were on

the upward move in all the sample districts. The fluctuations could be seen

only in respect of work days availed by women workers, though there exists

level playing field both for men and women in obtaining employment under

MGNREGA.

District Level Workdone Profile:

The second most important goal of the MGNREGA is to provide livelihood security for the poor through creation of durable assets, improved

water security, social conservation and higher land productivity. The

emphasis of the programme is on integrated National Resource Management rather than on relief works approach. The programme requires an

appropriate system to accurately record demand for work by wage-seekers. But before recording demand, it needs to make a prior assessment of the

quantum of work likely to be demanded and also to ascertain the timing of such demand. Concomitantly, a shelf of projects is to be prepared and prioritized to meet this demand. This matching of demand and supply of

work is the process of planning under MGNREGA and this is to be achieved through the preparation of Labour Budget (LB). The LB thus covers two

aspects viz; assessment of quantum & timing of demand for work and

preparation of a shelf of projects to meet demand for works.

A shelf of projects consists of those projects that have been given

administrative and technical sanctions and could be opened-up

immediately upon receipt of demand for employment. The process of

planning and identification of projects must start in a participatory

manner at the habitation level, reflecting the needs and aspirations of

the people. The MGNREGA stresses the need for convergence with

other schemes, such as Integrated Watershed Management

Programme(IWMP), Rashtiya Krishi Vikas Yojana(RKVY), Command

Area Development (CAD), Horticulture Mission(NHM) etc. in order to

attain sustained livelihood. In May 2012, the Central Govt has notified

additional list of works permissible under MGNREGA and has

provided greater clarity on the precise works that could be taken-up

under the permissible category of works. In the sample districts, the

works programme undertaken during the reference period is provided

below:-

Table No- 3

Works Programme undertaken in Sample districts

S.no

Nature of works

Jammu District Pulwama District Leh District Total

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14)

1. Water

Conservation/Harvesting 152 269 525 12 25 30 6 17 36 170 311 591

2. Afforest ration and Tree

Planting

2 38 307 - - - 1 1 13 3 39 320

3. Works under Irrigation 248 210 532 212 490 597 50 70 287 510 770 1416

4. Rural Connectivity 487 679 1341 111 376 661 36 73 165 634 1128 2167

5. Soil Conservation/Soil

erosion 66 121 210 - - - - - 43 66 121 253

6. Land

Leveling/development 69 180 353 3 22 42 3 8 40 75 210 435

7. Flood Control 218 347 1032 29 122 204 16 25 43 263 494 1279

8. Others 21 4 84 4 23 28 - 4 - 25 31 112

Total

1263 1848 4384 371 1058 1562 112 198 627 1746 3104 6573

In the sample districts, the quantum of works executed under

MGNREGA was 1746 in 2009-10 which rose to 3104 in 2010-11 and further

to 6573 in 2011-12. Thus there was increase of 78% during 2010-11 and

112% in 2011-12 over the previous years against 88% and 175%

increase in the utilization of funds during the same period. All the

three sample districts were seen on the path of progress in the

execution of works. In Jammu district, 1263 works were completed in

2009-10 which increased to 1848 in the subsequent year and further

to 4384 in the year 2011-12 indicating an increase of 46% and 137%

over previous years respectively. In district Pulwama, the quantum of

works executed during 2009-10 was 371 which increased to 1058 in

the year 2010-11 and further to 1562 in the year 2011-12. District

Leh also managed execution of 112works in 2009-10 which increased

to 198 in the subsequent year and further to 627 in the year 2011-12.

All these facts and figures revealed that the ambit of the schemes was

increasing year after year.

Prioritization of Works:

The MGNREGA provides for permissible works in different

sectors which naturally coincide with the set objectives of the programme i.e. generation of employment and livelihood security for the poor through creation of durable assets, improved water security, soil conservation and higher land productivity. The programme also provides a negative list of works which are not permissible under it

due to their peculiar nature of not being helpful in the generation of employment and sustaining the natural economy. Works which are

not tangible, measurable and verifiable in nature are also included in the negative list of MGNREGA works as stand-alone activities except when they are part of tasks in projects for strengthening the livelihood source base of rural poor. While undertaking works under the programme, the order of priority is to be determined locally and there are completely no restrictions whatsoever. In the sample districts the

sector-wise execution of works is detailed below for analysis:-

Table No – 4

Sectorwise works executed in sample districts

S.no

Sectorwise works

executed/completed Total Works executed %age to Total

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)

1. Water

conservation/Harvesting

170 311 591 10% 10% 9%

2. Afforest ration/Tree Planting 3 39 320 - 1% 5%

3. Works under Irrigation 510 770 1416 29% 25% 22%

4. Rural Connectivity 634 1128 2167 36% 36% 33%

5. Soil Conservation/Soil Erosion 66 121 253 4% 4% 4%

6. Land Leveling/Development 75 210 435 5% 7% 7%

7. Flood Control 263 494 1279 15% 16% 19%

8. Others 25 31 112 1% 1% 1%

Total 1746 3104 6573 100% 100% 100%

The sample districts which represent proportionately all the three

regions of the state would naturally demonstrate the state level accurate

situation. The aggregate sample data revealed almost an identical

prioritization of works over the three reference years of the study. An over-

view of column 6, 7 and 8 reflected that the order of prioritization was

similar in all the three years under review. The Rural Connectivity was

priority first in the execution of MGNREGA works claiming 36% of the total

works executed during 2009-10 and 2010-11 and 33% during 2011-12. The

connectivity of rural areas within and to the nearby villages would definitely

have two way effect and impact on the progress by easing-out access to the

markets over and above other social, economic and educational benefits.

The 2nd most prioritized sector under the programme was the irrigation

sector under which 510 works were executed in 2009-10 which increased to

770 in 2010-11 and to 1416 in 2011-12. Among the permissible sectors it

occupied rank 2nd in all the three years claiming 29% of total works in 2009-

10, 25% in 2010-11 and 22% in 2011-12. This activity is basically related to

the agricultural sector aiming at bringing more lands under irrigation and

facilitating intensified irrigation facilities for raising the production and

productivity levels in the agricultural sector. This activity also had its

favourable impact on the cropping pattern inducing farming community to

shift towards highly productive and profitable crops. Flood control works

had also been taken-up on a large scale in J&K. Floods not only damage

agricultural crops but poses threat to the agricultural lands, property and

even to human and livestock life as well. The works executed under this

activity were 263 in 2009-10 which increased to 494 in the subsequent year

and stood at 1279 in 2011-12. In the over-all works programme it claimed

15% works in the first year of the reference period, 16% in the 2nd year and

19% in the year 2011-12. The other sectors under which works were taken-

up under the programme included Land Leveling/development, Water

Conservation/Harvesting, Soil Conservation/Soil erosion. The afforestration

and tree planting had received the least concern in the first two years of the

reference period but during 2011-12 a tangible quantum of 320 works were

executed across the sample districts registering 5% coverage in the over-all

works programme for 2011-12.

Chapter - III

Sample Block Level Profile:

As per the directions of the State Level Evaluation Committee (SLEC)

the study was to be confined to limited geographical areas. Accordingly, in

the selected districts one block with moderate coverage under the

programme was selected to avoid over-estimation or under estimation of

results.

As the programme is demand driven, the allocations at the block level

are naturally determined by the demand for work. This demand is

determined by various factors which include un-employed labour force,

poverty, lean agricultural season, remoteness etc. During the reference

period, the funds made available to the sample blocks and the utilization

made there against are reflected in the following table:-

Table No- 5

Availability of funds & Utilization at sample block level

( Unit - Rs in lacs)

S.no

District

Sample Block

Year 2009-10 Year 2010-11 Year 201-12 Total

Availability

Utilized Availability

Utilized

Availability

Utilized

Availability

Utilized

%age utilization

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

1. Jammu Bishnah 68.37 65.27 170.00 160.00 707.80 706.74 946.17 932.01 99%

2. Pulwama Pulwama 92.79 92.79 126.83 126.83 247.61 247.61 467.23 467.23 100%

3. Leh Chuchot 26.05 25.97 22.64 22.64 104.85 103.44 153.54 152.05 99%

Total

187.21 184.03 319.47 309.47 1060.26 1057.79 1566.94 1551.29 99%

%age - 98% - 97% 100% - 99%

As already stated the allocation of funds under MGNREGA is wholly

and solely guided by the demand for work. The availability of funds

increases with the increase in demand for work. The sample block level

data reflected above amply brings this fact to the fore that the availability of

funds was on the rise year after year in all the sample blocks except in case

of block Chuchot Leh where availability had decreased during 2010-11 as

against previous year. But in the subsequent year the availability again

showed huge increase by 363%. The aggregate utilization of funds at the

sample block level was in the neighbourhood of cent percent suggesting that

there were no hurdles in the implementation process of the scheme.

During the reference period an amount of Rs.1551.29 lacs were

utilized in the three sample blocks against the availability of

Rs.1566.94 lacs registering utilization of 99% funds. Bishnah block of

Jammu and Chuchat block of Leh registered 99% utilization and

Pulwama block managed 100% utilization of available funds during

the reference period. The efficient fund utilization capacity of a

programme is regarded as a positive indicator expected to help in the

realization of the objectives set for the programme. But such

programmes are equally vulnerable to mis-appropriations,

duplications, over-lappings also, if not implemented under proper

checks and balances. The programmes are required to be implemented

under strict vigil by the supervisory and monitoring authorities to

avoid indiscriminate implementation without any regard to the rules,

regulations and norms governing it.

Registration at Sample Block Level:

The provision of work on demand by wage-seekers and work provided as their legal right is the distinguishing feature of MGNREGA. Thus generating awareness among potential Job-Seekers, setting-up of appropriate system that facilitates registration, issuance of Job Cards, application of demand for work etc are the primary

responsibilities of the Implementing Department. The implementation of the scheme itself starts with the registration and issuance of Job Cards to the wage-seekers. The process is continuous. There might be some households who did not seek registration earlier due to any reasons. There would be another category of households who would like additional names to be entered on account of having become

adults. To ensure that all the Job-Seekers are provided Job Cards, a door to door survey is envisaged under the programme to be undertaken by each Gram Panchayat. This survey needs to be conducted at that time of the year when people have not migrated to other areas in search of employment or other reasons. By every

possible means the programme aims at bringing all the desirous Job-

Seekers within its fold with special focus on vulnerable sections of the society including the women. In the sample blocks selected under the instant evaluation study, the following table provides facts and figures on the registration process and issuance of Job Cards:-

Table No- 6

Job Card Holders as on 31-03-2012 & Job Seekers

S.no

Name of

Sample Block

Number of Job Card Holders

Year of Registration No of Job-Seekers

Prior to 2009-10

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Men Women Total

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

1. Bishnah 7668 2406 1850 1462 1950 7312 905 8217

2. Pulwama 5417 2182 2242 622 371 6727 268 6995

3. Chuchot 2811 2571 109 36 95 2568 3356 5924

Total 15896 7159 4201 2120 2416 16607 4529 21136

%age - 45% 27% 13% 15% 79% 21% 100%

The sample block level data presented above shows that the

registration process under MGNREGA was a running process. Given the fact

that there are no hurdles, whatsoever, in registering and obtaining Job

Cards, the maximum registration had taken place prior to the reference

period i.e. before 2009-10. However, during the reference period also bulk of

Job Cards were issued across the sample blocks which reflects popularity of

the scheme among Job-Seekers. In aggregate there were 15896 Job Card

holders as on 31-3-2012 in the three sample blocks. Prior to 2009-10, the

Job Cards issued were of the magnitude of 7159 which constituted 45% of

the total Job Cards. 27% were issued during the year 2009-10, 13% in

2010-11 and the remaining 15% were issued in the subsequent year 2011-

12. The number of Job Seekers was 21136 across the sample blocks which

included 4529 women workers constituting 21% of the total strength of Job

Seekers. The maximum number of women Job Seekers was from block

Chuchot Leh which was of the magnitude of 3356 against 2568 male

workers. Thus in the sample block of Leh district the number of Job Seekers

under MGNREGA was at the ratio of 57:43 in favour of women workers. In

the sample blocks of Jammu and Pulwama, the ratio was in favour of males

as only 11% in Jammu and 4% in Pulwama were women workers among the

registered Job Seekers.

Applications for Employment in Sample Blocks:

Once the Job Card is issued to a household, every member of the

registered household whose name appears in the Job Card is entitled to apply for unskilled manual work. The application for work must be atleast

for 14 days of continuous work. There is, however, no upper limit on the number of days of employment for which a registered person may apply, or on the number of days of employment actually provided to him/her subject

to a maximum of 100 days per household in a given financial year. When a Job Card holder applies for work, employment has to be given to him within

15 days of application. The worksite must be within a radius of 5 Kms, otherwise a travel and subsistence allowance of 10% of the minimum wages have to be paid in addition to entitled wages. The programme provides many

more rights to the workers which include entitlement to notified wage rate, equal rate for men and women, payment within week/fortnight, payment of wages through Post- Office/bank etc. If workers are not provided

employment within 15 days of applying, unemployment allowance is provided. The applications for work may be on plain paper or it may be on a

printed proforma which must state the registration number of the Job Card,

the date from which employment required and the number of days of employment required. In the sample blocks, the applications for work

received during 2011-12 and the quantum of mandays provided is detailed in the following table:-

Table No- 7

Job Card Holders applying for work during 2011-12

S.no

Name of Sample Block

Job Card Holders 2011-12 Number of Person days provided

during 2011-12

Total Wages provided

during 2011-

12( Rs.in lacs) Total Applying for

Work Men Women Total

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)

1. Bishnah 7668 5357 294275 25135 319410 386.49

2. Pulwama 5417 3510 119699 1677 121376 146.86

3. Chuchot 2811 2216 22099 27721 49820 60.28

Total 15896 11083 436073 54533 490606 593.63

%age - 70% 89% 11% 100% -

In the sample blocks, 70% Job Card Holders as stood on 31-03-2012

had applied for employment under MGNREGA during 2011-12. In response

the Implementing Department had provided 4.90 lakh person days of which

54533 person days were availed by women workers at the ratio of 11%. The

lowest women participation was in block Pulwama of the magnitude of just

1% and in Bishnah block it was 8%. In Chuchot block of Leh district, the

women participation had outnumbered males by claiming 56% participation

in the MGREGA works during 2011-12. The minute analysis of the data

reflects that at an average 44 person days were availed by households

applying for work during 2011-12. The average household earning were of

the magnitude of Rs.5356 in the sample blocks during the year under

study i.e. 2011-12.

Works Taken-Up in Sample Blocks:

With the implementation of MGNREGA huge money in the form of

wages gets pumped in the rural economy which boosts economic activities all around. The increase in the effective demand due to wage earning paves

way for enhancement in economic activities which favourably affects each and every sector of the economy. Due to implementation of MGNREGA in

the sample blocks a huge sum of Rs.593.63 lacs was set in circulation

during 2011-12 in the form of liquid wages alone which naturally would

pave way for solid socio-economic development of the concerned areas. The creation of durable assets aimed at providing livelihood security for the rural poor is the 2nd most significant feature of the programme. The schemes

which are admissible under it need to be labour intensive and securing the

rural livelihood. Those works which does not commensurate with the basic outcomes of MGNREGA have been specifically disallowed. Even those works

which are not tangible, measurable and verifiable are not permissible as stand-alone activities except when they are part of tasks in projects for

strengthening the livelihood resource base of rural poor. In the selected sample blocks, the works undertaken and the resultant outcomes in terms of mandays generated, assets created etc. are provided in the following table

for analysis:-

Table No- 8

Works taken-up in sample blocks during 2011-12

S.no

Name of

Sample Block

Number of Panchayats taken-up

Number of villages taken-up

Number of works

executed 2011-12

Total Cost of Works 2011-12

( Rs. in lacs )

Number of Person days generated

2011-12

Wages Material Total

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)

1. Bishnah 39 118 438 386.49 320.25 706.74 319410

2. Pulwama 49 97 654 146.86 100.75 247.61 121376

3. Chuchot 15 10 111 60.28 43.16 103.44 49820

Total 103 225 1203 593.63 464.16 1057.79 490606

%age - - - 56% 44% 100% -

In the three sample blocks, the number of Panchayats was 103 and

those of villages was 225. During the reference year 2011-12, the works

executed were of the magnitude of 1203 at an average of 5.34 works per

village. An amount of Rs.1057.79 lacs was utilized on the execution of these

works which constituted 56% of wage component and 44% of material

component. As per the programme stipulations, the ratio of wage costs to

material costs should not be less than the minimum norm of 60:40. The

expenditure incurred on tools and implements is to be booked under the

material component. The Act governing the MGNREGA scheme directs the

state Govts to take administrative/disciplinary action against officers

responsible for a) approving works not in the permissible list, b) approving

works in violation of the norms and principle, c) not adhering to the

prescribed wage: material ratio and d) not following the procedure for

procurement of tools and implements. Further expenditure in violation of

these norms and principles is disallowed from MGNREGA funds and the

state Govts are required to meet these expenses separately as this

expenditure would be treated as a liability of the State Govt. The stagnant

wage: material ratio is very difficult to be maintained in all sorts of works

and in all kinds of locations and situations. Though the minimum wage ratio

of 60% is focused on generating maximum wage employment, yet a balance

is required to be evolved. The norm must be made slightly elastic at least in

respect of some category of works requiring more material costs and in

locations where transportation costs of material happen to be on the higher

side. These locations could be explicitly notified for the purpose. In the given

situation some works of added scope disqualify to be taken up under

MGNREGA in view of involving slightly more than prescribed material

component. The revision in the norm is also justified in view of huge price

escalation in the material costs since the launch of MGNREGA scheme.

Though the revision in the wage rate was effected several times but the

increase in the material costs is phenomenal as compared to increase in the

rate of wages allowed under the programme.

Chapter – IV

Field Findings

The essence of Evaluation Studies are the field findings based on

observations, inspections and interactions with all the stakeholders. As an

independent and unbiased source of assessment, knowledgeable persons,

non-beneficiaries are also roped in to get necessary feedback on the

implementation of the scheme together with the areas of successes and

failures and reasons therefor. In the foregoing chapters, the official claims in

respect of sample districts and sample blocks have been elaborated and

many conclusions and inferences were drawn both of positive and negative

nature. But the actual status of the programme is measured mainly in the

field which enables direct contact with the stakeholders and on-spot

inspection and verification of works executed under it. The field findings act

as yardstick for measuring the preciseness or otherwise of claims made by

the Implementing Department. In fact the Evaluation Process is an exercise

of striking a comparison between the official claims of Implementing

Department regarding achievements made and what existed on ground

together with the assessment of effects and impacts with reference to set

objectives.

In the instant Evaluation Study, the enquiry was confined to three

blocks of Bishnah(Jammu), Pulwama(Pulwama) and Chuchot(Leh) as per the

instructions of the State Level Evaluation Committee(SLEC) giving

proportionate representation to all the three regions of the state. In the

selected blocks, 20% villages were selected at random for conducting field

operations. However, in respect of Chuchot(Leh) all the villages were taken-

up for field enquiry in view of being limited in number. In the selected

villages all the works executed during 2011-12 were physically verified with

relation to various efficiency parameters. All the Job Card Holders who

offered work during 2011-12 were interviewed and their Job Cards audited

with relation to work offered and wages provided. The Job Card holders of

the villages who did not offered work during 2011-12 were also approached

to ascertain reasons for not offering work and availing the benefits under

MGNREGA. A sizeable number of knowledgeable persons was also contacted

to obtain necessary feedback on the implementation of the scheme and their

views on the problems and bottlenecks of the scheme plus suggestions for

effecting improvements in it. The sample which finally emerged is detailed

hereunder:-

Table No- 9

Final Sample contacted/verified under MGNREGA

S.no Description Jammu Pulwama Leh Total

1. Beneficiaries contacted 555 728 675 1958

2 Non-beneficiaries contacted 155 365 713 1233

3. KP’s Contacted 105 100 75 280

4. Works Verified 90 95 111 296

5. Villages taken-up 21 20 10 51

6. Panchayats Taken-up 20 20 15 55

7. Blocks taken-up 01 01 01 03

Across the three sample districts, 51 villages were taken-up for field

investigations which were spread over 55 Panchayats in three sample

blocks. In these villages, 1958 beneficiaries having offered work and earned

wages under MGNREGA were finally contacted. Besides this, 1233 Job Card

Holders not availing wage earning opportunities during 2011-12 under the

programme were also interviewed using a separate schedule. The number of

knowledgeable persons finally interviewed were 296 and the works verified

were to the extent of 296 constituting 100% works executed in the selected

villages under MGNREGA during 2011-12. Some beneficiaries/non-

beneficiaries were reported dead on the date of survey and consequently

could not be contacted. Some others could not be interviewed due to various

reasons. However, the number of such Job Card Holders was very small.

Local Level Adjustments:

The MGNREGA programme has been designed for the whole country

and the local level specific conditions have received no consideration at all

while devising rules, regulations and norms governing it. The scheme in its

copy book fashion is not compatible to the ground level situations in Jammu

& Kashmir. The wage rate of labour offered under MGNREGA is too low, as

compared to market rates, to induce labourers to work under MGNREGA.

The material costs are very high and to take-up required durable works on

the prescribed wage material ratio is not possible. The schemes/Projects

which could be taken-up on the prescribed ratio are very unlikely to meet

the quality requirements. If MGNREGA rules and norms are strictly adhered

to in J&K State, the implementation of the programme is not possible. In

order to ensure that the programme takes-off in J&K State, some

adjustments were inevitable and practically made on the ground level. The

adjustments pertained to the material costs, labour costs, payments made

to Labourers and Labour days adjusted in the Job Cards. The Evaluation

teams across the sample districts have interacted with the stakeholders and

the adjustments, though contrary to the existing norms, have been made in

the right perspective of ensuring implementation in the state which

otherwise was not possible.

Beneficiary Feedback:

Wage seekers are the primary stakeholders of the programme. Their exercise of rights and demands for work are the main triggers of key

processes. The rights of wage seekers are:- a) Application for Registration;

b) Obtaining a Job Card;

c) Application for work and to obtain a dated receipt for the

application made;

d) Choice of time and duration of work applied for;

e) Getting work within 15 days of application or from the date when

work is sought in the case of an advance application, whichever is

later;

f) Facilities of Creche, drinking water, first aid etc. on the work site;

g) Right to get 10% extra wage in case of employment provided

beyond 5 Kms of radius;

h) Right to check their Muster Rolls and to get all the information

regarding their employment entered in their Job Cards;

i) Disbursement of wages on weekly basis or in any case not later

than a fortnight after the date on which such work was done;

j) Right to get unemployment allowance in case employment is not

provided within 15 days of submitting the application or from the

date when work is sought in the case of an advanced application,

whichever is later.

During the field survey the beneficiaries were interviewed with regard

to all the above noted parameters in order to see whether the rights and

benefits envisaged in the Act/Scheme were actually provided and to what

extent. In respect of issuance of Job Cards which happens to be the starting

point of the whole process, the findings of the study are reproduced

hereunder:-

Table No- 10

Applications for Job Cards & Work by beneficiaries

S.no


Number of

sample beneficiaries

contacted

Number applied for Job Cards Number applied for work during 2011-12

Before 2010-

11 2010-11

2011-12

Provided within 15

days

14-30 days

30-60 days 60-75 days

75-100 days

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)

1. Bishnah 555 265 104 186 552 224 131 42 158

2. Pulwama 728 517 109 102 728 530 149 17 32

3. Chuchot 675 626 32 17 669 308 207 74 86

Total 1958 1408 245 305 1949 1062 487 133 276

72% 13% 15% 99.54% 54% 25% 7% 14%

The field enquiry results indicated that all the sample beneficiaries

but nine had been provided with Job Cards by the Rural Development

Department within 15 days of their submission of application. The Job

Cards were issued to the beneficiaries as and when applied for. Maximum

number aggregating to 1408(72%) were issued Job Cards before 2010-11

and during the remaining two years 245 Job Seekers were issued Job Cards

in 2010-11 and 305 in 2011-12. This indicates that the process of issuance

of Job Cards was continuing throughout the implementation period of the

scheme. The Job Card holders had applied for different durations of work

depending upon their convenience and availability. The aggregate results

showed that only a small number of 276 Job Card Holders had applied for

maximum(75-100) days job. The maximum number constituting 54% had

applied for (14-30) days during 2011-12. 487 had requested for (30-60) days

and the remaining 133 for 60-75 days job. Thus the beneficiaries were not

maximizing the employment opportunities offered to them under MGNREGA.

The under-utilization of employment opportunities by the unemployed Job

Seekers need to be ascertained for better realization of MGNREGA

objectives.

Person-days Availed and Wages Paid:

The modality of the scheme provide for a maximum of 100 days of employment to a Job Card Household. Thus availing maximum number of

Job days by the Job Seekers in a particular location would proportionately enhance the developmental activities/works for development of the area. The quantum of works undertaken in an area is completely guided by the

demand for work by the respective registered Job Seekers. As per the information collected from the enquired beneficiaries with reference to

entries made in their Job Cards, the number of days availed and wages paid to them during 2011-12 are given below along with other related parameters:-

Table No- 11

Person-days availed and Wages Paid (2011-12)

S.no


Number of sample

beneficiaries contacted

Total Person-days availed

during 2011-12

Wages Paid during 2011-12

(Rs.in lakhs)

Number provided work as per choice

of time & duration

Male Female Total Male Female Total

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

1. Bishnah 555 20240 850 21090 24.49 1.02 25.51 337

2. Pulwama 728 17710 284 17994 21.55 0.32 21.87 728

3. Chuchot 675 11079 15887 26966 13.41 19.22 32.63 658

Total 1958 49029 17021 66050 59.45 20.56 80.01 1723

- 74% 26% 100% 74% 26% 100% 88%

The contacted beneficiaries had availed 66050 person days during

2011-12 against the maximum job potential of 195800 days available as

guaranteed right under the scheme. At an average every Job Card Holder

household had availed only 34 days against 100 days available for them

which simply means that only 34% benefit of the scheme was derived in the

enquired villages both in terms of wages and assets creation. The wages paid

to the workers during the year amounted to Rs.80.01 lakhs at an average

earning of Rs.4080 per registered household of the enquired beneficiaries.

The person-days availed by women workers were 26%, maximum of

them were located in Chuchot block of Leh district. In block Bishnah and

Pulwama, the participation of women workers was nominal at 4% and 2%

respectively. In Chuchot block, the participation of women workers was

59%, thus outnumbering male workers. Among various rights guaranteed

under the Act/Scheme, workers are free to exercise choice of time and

duration of work applied for. From the enquired beneficiaries it was

ascertained that only 88% had been provided work as per their choice and

12% denied to have been provided work as per their choice of time.

Auditing of Job Cards:

The Job Card issued to an eligible household makes him entitled to

the benefits and other benefit related rights under MGNREGA. Thus Job

Card is the basic and significant document and no one has the right to take

it away from the household. All entries have to be made in front of the Card

Holders to avoid false entries, particularly with relation to person days

offered and wages received.

Entries pertaining to employment and wages are required to be

updated from time to time and in any case no later than 7 days of the

corresponding event date. Missing entries or delay in entries in the Job Card

is considered a violation and punishable under the Act. While interacting

with the beneficiaries their Job Cards were scrutinized and they were asked

whether or not the details entered in the Job Card were true. It needs

special mention here that inevitable adjustments regarding the person

days offered and payments made were reported by the beneficiaries

without which offering of labour under MGNREGA was not possible. In

fact the labour was paid at the market rate and adjustments made in

the Job Cards accordingly taking into confidence the Job Card

Holders. The results of the auditing process are detailed below:-

Table No- 12

Validity of entries in Job Cards of beneficiaries

S.no


Number of sample


Person days shown in

the Job Cards

Amount Shown in the Job

Card

Number provided work

within 15 days

Availed fully

Not availed fully

Received fully

Not received fully

Provided Not Provided

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)

1. Bishnah 555 522 33 550 5 522 33

2. Pulwama 728 728 - 728 - 728 -

3. Chuchot 675 675 - 675 - 663 12

Total 1958 1925 33 1953 5 1913 45

- 98% 2% 99.74% - 98% 2%

The auditing of Job Cards and corresponding enquiry of beneficiaries

brought this fact to the fore that entries were being made in the Job Card in

front of the beneficiaries correctly and precisely with inevitable adjustments.

98% of the total beneficiaries reported that the entries made in their Job

Cards with reference to person-days availed during 2011-12 were correct. In

the same manner almost cent percent beneficiaries admitted to have fully

received the amount of wages shown in the Job Card for the year 2011-12.

Under the scheme, the wage seekers have been provided the right to get

employment within 15 days of submission of demand. From the enquired

beneficiaries, 1913 constituting 98% stated to have been provided wage

employment within 15 days of application for work. Only a small number of

45 beneficiaries constituting 2% stated that the time limit of 15 days was

not adhered to in their favour while providing wage employment to them

during 2011-12 (Annexure “A”). When asked about the payment of

unemployment allowance in their favour which had become due to them as

per scheme norms, they denied to have ever received such allowance under

MGNREGA. It seems that this right guaranteed to the wage seekers is

confined to the literature of the scheme only.

Payment of Wages and Work Site:

Every person working under the scheme is entitled to wages at the

wage rate notified by the Central Govt under Section 6(1) of the MGNREGA

Act. Notified wage rates are required to be displayed prominently at the

worksites. The Act governing the scheme provides that equal wages shall be

paid to both men and women workers. Timely payment of wages has been

guaranteed under MGNREGA. Payment within a week’s time or at the most

within 15 days has been recognized as a right of the wage earner under the

scheme. Further it also stands guaranteed that work shall be provided to

the Job Seeker within a radius of 5 Kms. In case employment is provided

beyond 5 Kms of radius, right to get 10% extra wage comes into force. The

field enquiry conducted established the following facts in this regard which

are presented in the tabular form:-

Table No- 13

Payment of wages and worksite under MGNREGA

S.no


Number of sample


Reporting Wage

Payment within

Week/Fortnight

Number reporting wages provided

after

Work provided

within 5 Kms of

radius

Number Provided

Number not

provided

15-30 days

30-60 days

60-90 days

After 90

days

Number provided

Number not

provided (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)

1. Bishnah 555 471 84 78 4 - 2 555 -

2. Pulwama 728 49 679 175 499 5 - 728 -

3. Chuchot 675 556 119 11 106 2 - 675 -

Total 1958 1076 882 264 609 7 2 1958 -

%age 55% 45% 30% 69% 1% - 100% -

In the surveyed villages, 1076 beneficiaries constituting 55% of

the enquired number stated to have received wages within a

week/fortnight. The remaining 45% reported otherwise and majority of

them had reportedly received wages after 30-60 days the work was

done. This evidently is clear violation of norms and needs immediate

attention of the Implementing Department. To ensure timely payments

with fairness and transparency in wage payments, the coordination of

various stakeholders must be ensured. The role of banks/Post Offices

is crucial in this regard which have their own concerns. In fact timely

payment of wages has emerged as one of the main challenges of

MGNREGA not keeping promise with the guaranteed right of wage

earners. The problems in the system of wage payments are required to

be eradicated so that the promises made under the scheme are

fulfilled to the best satisfaction of wage earners. All the beneficiaries

enquired stated to have been provided with job opportunities under

the scheme within a radius of 5 Kms which, among other things

indicates that only local labour was engaged in the execution of works.

In view of this situation, no extra wages were due to any of the

beneficiaries.

Worksite Facilities:\

Under MGNREGA workers are entitled to Worksite facilities.

These include drinking water, medical aid and shade. In case the

women workers are accompanied by five or more children below the

age of six years, a Creche is required to be provided. One of such

women worker shall be made to depute to look after such children.

She will also be paid wages at the prevalent wage rate paid to the

unskilled worker. The expenditure on worksite facilities is debitble to

administrative expenditure. From the enquired beneficiaries it was

ascertained whether or not these facilities were provided at the

worksites, the reported outcomes on the subject are provided in the

following table for analysis and inferences.

Table No- 14

Worksite facilities reported by beneficiaries

S.no


Number of sample


Number reporting worksite facilities provided Number reporting allowed to

Check Muster Rolls

Creche Drinking

Water First Aid Shade Other

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)

1. Bishnah 555 - 455 - 73 - 448

2. Pulwama 728 - 367 21 - - 719

3. Chuchot 675 - 41 - - - 671

Total 1958 - 863 21 73 - 1838

%age - 44% 01% 4% - 94%

Regarding worksite facilities the ground level realities reflected that

these provisions of the Act/Scheme were mostly confined to papers only. Not

a single Creche was provided during 2011-12 in any of the Worksites inspite

of the fact that maximum women participation was reported in Chuchot

block of Leh district. The medical aid facility which is the need of every

worksite was reported provided by only 1% beneficiaries. The facility of

shade was reported provided by just 4% of the enquired beneficiaries. The

Implementing Department must ensure that these facilities are provided at

every worksite to enable workers to participate in developmental activities in

safe and sound working environment. The supervisory staff of the

Department must also oversee that the MGNREGA works are executed on

ground in letter and spirit. The facilities as provided in the model guidelines

in the form of workers rights must be implemented/provided to promote

enthusiasm among wage earners for enhanced participation in the

programme. These facilities are also aiming at increasing the participation of

physically weaker sections of the society including women and handicapped.

Beneficiary Satisfaction:

The beneficiary satisfaction is the most significant indicator of

successes or failure of the scheme. Being the primary stakeholder of the

programme, if workers feel unsatisfied over various facets of it, then the plan

strategists must revisit the scheme modalities and scheme implementation

to find causes therefor. However, if the primary beneficiaries feel satisfied, it

carries enough weight to believe that the scheme is realizing the basic

objectives of benefiting the target group of population. In the backdrop of

this assertion, every evaluation study plans to measure the satisfaction level

in respect of different aspects of the scheme. It provides a reliable feedback

to the Implementing Department as well to identify the

weaknesses/leakages and duplications etc. in the implementation process

for plugging them in future. In the instant evaluation exercise, the

satisfaction level of beneficiaries was ascertained on various basic aspects of

the programme. This way the strong and weak aspects of the programme

have come to the fore as per beneficiary perspective for appropriate

deserving action by the concerned. The data on the subject is reflected

below:-

Table No- 15

Satisfaction of beneficiaries

S.no


Number of sample


Number of beneficiaries satisfied over

Engagement Worksite facilities

Ensured Payments

Registration Process

Timely Payments

Transparency

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)

1. Bishnah 555 482 419 517 502 545 509

2. Pulwama 728 728 220 698 726 128 714

3. Chuchot 675 667 13 647 674 632 675

Total 1958 1877 652 1862 1902 1305 1898

%age 96% 33% 95% 97% 67% 97%

The beneficiaries expressed satisfaction over their engagement in



observed low. As already discussed in the report, the worksite facilities were

very sparsely provided on the worksites inspite of having adequate provision

for the same in the scheme guidelines. The payments were also not provided

within week/fortnight in sizeable number of cases which had amply been

reflected in the low satisfaction level of beneficiaries on this parameter. The

Implementing Department must evolve all possible measures to ensure that

the weak implementing aspects of the scheme are corrected by appropriate

action on ground. It would, among other things, require intensive

supervision and monitoring of the programme plus effective coordination

with other involved agencies, particularly the financial institutions.

Problems and Suggestions:

In fact all the programmes/schemes are designed in the most

appropriate manner keeping in view the set objectives and ground level

implementation environment in terms of target group, implementing

mechanism etc. There are also unforeseen factors which come into play and

effect the implementation of the scheme to a great extent. To overcome these

unforeseen factors, mid-term corrections are taken to enable the scheme to

perform successfully and maximize the objectives. Under MGNREGA around

Rs.40,000 crore are spent annually in the country and if implemented

effectively, it has the potential to transform rural areas by creating durable

assets that would not only enhance the livelihood security of rural poor but

also result in the upliftment of rural poor both economically and socially. It

is, therefore, of utmost importance to ensure good quality and durability of

assets being created under MGNREGA. An effective Management

mechanism to oversee all the aspects of this very large multidimensional

programme is inevitable. The external monitoring of the programme would

be done periodically but the effective implementation of the programme has

largely to rely on the internal staff for actual delivery of quality. The

management has to ensure that created assets achieve the objectives which

implies that the functionality of the assets in terms of location, design,

operation and maintenance is adequate. Further it has to ensure that the

assets created are durable compatible to sound engineering standards in

terms of design, materials and workmanship. An effective monitoring

mechanism which happens a concurrent process comes across problems

and bottlenecks which must be addressed instantly and effectively. The

evaluation process, particularly, the external evaluation also provides an

opportunity to the Implementing Department to locate the problems and

bottlenecks in the implementation system for their redressal and warranted

corrections in the modalities or at implementation level whatever the case

may be. The problems and suggestions put forth by the beneficiaries in

respect of MGNREGA for effecting further improvements in it are detailed

below for analysis:-

Table No- 16

Problems/Suggestions by beneficiaries

S.no


Number of sample

beneficiaries

contacted

Number citing Problems Number Offering Suggestions

Low Rate

Delayed Payments

Hard Work

Limited Job Days

other Enhanced

Rate On Time payment

Limited Workin

g Hours

Enhancement in Job Days

Other

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13)

1. Bishnah 555 555 9 59 352 1 549 - 49 390 -

2. Pulwama 728 713 581 19 67 1 712 596 12 89 -

3. Chuchot 675 673 193 28 461 - 669 212 4 488 -

Total 1958 1941 783 106 880 2 1930 808 65 967 -

%age 99% 40% 5% 45% - 99% 41% 3% 49% -

The enquiry of beneficiaries on the problems and bottlenecks

suggested that only one problem was universal in nature i.e. the low rate of

wages as compared to prevalent market rate. The other problems in terms of

delayed payments, hard work, limited Job Days etc. were putforth by a

small number of beneficiaries who had personally faced such problems and

were not general in nature. In spite of 100 Job days available for every

registered household under the programme, only 14% had applied for the

maximum number. The reason behind this situation was evidently the low

rate as compared to market rate. Naturally the wage seekers prefer to seek

employment from other sources. They avail the MGNREGA employment

opportunities only at that time when they fail to engage themselves in the

open labour market. While offering suggestions for effecting further

improvements in the programme, the enhancement in the wage rate was

universally put forth. The other suggestions in terms of timely payments,

enhancement in Job days were put forth by limited number of beneficiaries

hinting that these problems were local in nature and need to be addressed

locally or set aside in view of being absurd in the overall scenario of the

programme. The suggestion of enhancing the wage rate at least to the

neighbourhood of prevalent market rate could boost the programme

implementation at a very large scale. But being a flagship programme,

fixation of single wage rate fulfilling the needs and aspirations of all states

and localities would not be easy to happen, instead would be impossible to

materialize. In fact the programme provides for more avenues for under-

developed and labour surplus states. The Jammu & Kashmir being a labour

deficit state, engaging lakhs of labour of other states, would naturally

benefit sparsely from this type of scheme. In the given situation, the rules,

the regulations and norms governing the scheme must be made elastic to

match the local level situations.

Registered Non-beneficiaries:

When a Job Card is issued to a household, employment opportunities

under MGNREGA are guaranteed to him as a matter of right. The household

is at liberty to exercise his choice on the time and duration of employment

upto 100 days in a year. Once a household gets registered his decision to

work under the scheme is determined by various factors. Broadly speaking

he has to see the best comparative advantage or the least comparative

disadvantage. The main factor which guides his decision is the maximum

profitability. In the sample blocks there stood 15896 households registered

by the end of 2011-12 having adult labour force of 21136 members. The

number of households who applied for work during 2011-12 were of the

magnitude of 11083 i.e. 70% of the total registrations. In the ultimate

sample of villages where all the Job Card holder households were to come

under study, a quantum of 1958 beneficiaries were actually contacted

barring certain causalities which could not be contacted. Against this

quantum there were 1233 non-beneficiaries who inspite of being registered

households did not avail work under MGNREGA during 2011-12. Thus from

the registered households the ratio of those offering labour and not offering

labour under the programme for the year 2011-12 was 61:39. The situation

is reflected in the following table:-

Table No- 17

Registered beneficiaries VS Non-beneficiaries 2011-12

S.no

Description

Beneficiaries VS Non-beneficiaries in sample villages

Bishnah Pulwama Chuchat Total %age to total

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

1. Beneficiaries Contacted 555 728 675 1958 61%

2. Non-beneficiaries contacted 155 365 713 1233 39%

Total 710 1093 1388 3191 100%

1. Beneficiary Casualties not

contacted

8 7 5 20 -

2. Non-beneficiaries Causalities

not contacted

3 8 3 14 -

Grand Total 721 1108 1396 3225 -

In the surveyed 51 villages across the sample blocks, there were 1233

non-beneficiary households who did not offered services during 2011-12

inspite of Jobs in offering under MGNREGA. Before ascertaining reasons for

not availing employment opportunities during 2011-12 under the

programme, the analysis of their registration process and gender

combination is detailed hereunder:-

Table No- 18

Registration of Non-beneficiary households & Job Seekers

S.no


Number of contacted

Non-beneficiaries

Number issued Job Cards during Number provided

Job Cards within 15

days of application

Number of Job Seekers

Before 2010-11

During 2010-11

During 2011-12

Male Female Total

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

1. Bishnah 155 19 61 75 153 159 23 182

2. Pulwama 365 330 29 06 365 407 07 414

3. Chuchot 713 680 18 15 713 600 864 1464

Total 1233 1029 108 96 1231 1166 894 2060

%age 83% 9% 8% 100% 57% 43% 100%

The data reflected above corroborated the fact drawn from the enquiry

of beneficiary households on registration process as well as on gender

combination of Job Seekers. From the non-beneficiary category 1029

households were registered prior to 2010-11 which constituted 83% of the

total non-beneficiary category. The remaining were got registered during

2010-11 and 2011-12 at 9% and 8% rate respectively. Almost all of them

barring a couple from Bishnah Block stated to have been registered and job

cards issued in their favour within 15 days of application. The number of job

seekers who didn’t avail work during 2011-12 inspite of eligibility under

MGNREGA was 2060 in the selected villages of which 894 were women

workers constituting 43% of the total. As in the beneficiary category the

maximum female Job Seekers were from Chuchot block of Leh district. In

the remaining two blocks of Bishnah and Pulwama the number of women

workers was nominal.

Reasons for not availing work:

Barring a small number of non-contacted household

beneficiaries/non-beneficiaries in the ultimately selected 51 villages across

sample blocks, 3191 Job Card Holders were contacted of which 1958 offered

labour under MGNREGA during 2011-12 which constituted 61%. The

remaining 39% did not even applied for work during 2011-12. Those who

offered labour during 2011-12 availed a small portion of the entitlements

thereby not taking full advantage of the programme. In terms of labour

component, the following table provides crucial information on the

entitlements and actually employment opportunities availed by the

registered households during 2011-12.

Table No- 19

Entitlements VS Actual Utilization of Job Card Holders S.no

Description

Number in sample villages during 2011-12

%age Bishnah Pulwama Chuchat Total

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

1. Number of Registered Job

Card Holders 710 1093 1388 3191 -

2. Maximum entitlements @

100 days per household 71000 109300 138800 319100 100%

3. Actually availed person days 21090 17994 26966 66050 21%

4. Difference between

maximum entitlements &

Actual Person days availed

49910 91306 111834 253050 79%

The analysis made above brought this fact to the fore that in the

surveyed 51 villages the registered Job Card Holder households would have

claimed 3.191 lakh person days as a matter of right from MGNREGA scheme

but they actually availed only 0.660 lakh person days during 2011-12 which

was deficient by 79% of the total entitlements. The scheme being demand

driven, it could be concluded that maximum utilization of entitlements of

100 person days by the registered households would have claimed 79%

more investment of MGNREGA funds in the sample area. The causes which

led to availing of only 66050 person days against the entitlements of 319100

person days by the registered households during 2011-12 have to be

ascertained by those at the helm of affairs for taking corrective measures, if

within their jurisdiction. However, from the Job Seekers point of view the

main reason was the low rate of wages as compared to prevalent wage rate

in the open market. In the normal lean periods the wage rate during 2011-

12 was approximately in the range of Rs.200/- to Rs.250/- in rural areas

and Rs.250/- to Rs.300/- in urban areas. In the busy agricultural reason,

the rates were almost higher by 20%. The high wage rate in the state is the

consequence of labour deficit nature of the economy which presently

provides employment to lakhs of labourers from outside the state

throughout the year. The unemployment in J&K is in respect of educated

youth who normally hesitate to do manual labour even if remunerated

adequately. In such a situation, the Implementing Department could do a

very little in enhancing the utilization of full entitlements of registered

households who find best comparative advantage for working in the open

labour market. However, the scheme could prove comparatively successful

in remote and inaccessible areas of the state where normally employment

opportunities are scarce and remain cutoff with the rest of the state during

winter, like Karnah, Machil, Keran, Teetwal, Gurez, Mahore, Zanskar,

Nyoma etc. As such the Department is required to give added attention to

the far flung areas of the state where the prevalent wage rate is in the

neighbourhood of MGNREGA wage rate, particularly in winter season. The

scheme being a flagship programme of Govt of India, it is difficult to bind

within its fold all such provisions which could match different socio-

economic situations of different regions and states. In fact in some states

where floods, droughts and crop failures have forced farmers to commit

suicide in the recent years, this scheme could prove a great success and

would definitely provide livelihood security and safety net for the vulnerable

groups of the society.

Feedback of Knowledgeable Persons:

With reference to the objectives of the study, the field findings

comprising of observations, inspections, interviews and interactions with the

stakeholders are the basis for drawing inferences and conclusions with

regard to the successes and failures of the programme. But the stakeholders

do possess an element of bias which sometimes could affect the drawing of

inferences and conclusions positively or negatively. To overcome this

deficiency in evaluation, the findings are substantiated through an unbiased

source known as Knowledgeable Persons feedback. In the instant study, 5

Knowledgeable Persons in each selected village were managed to be

interviewed with respect to different aspects of MGNREGA. The selection

was done on hit and run method and any chosen person if found unaware of

the scheme was allowed to drop behind and only aware persons were chosen

for providing the required feedback. The following table provides the

satisfaction level of Knowledgeable Persons on various aspects of MGNREGA

relating to workers:-

Table No- 20

Knowledgeable Persons Satisfaction relating to Workers

S.no


Number of contacted

Non-beneficiaries

Number of Knowledgeable Persons Satisfied with

Wage Rate Job Cards

provided within 15 days

Work provided

within 5 Kms

Work provided on

Demand

Worksite facilities

Supervision

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)

1. Bishnah 105 17 94 95 79 41 29

2. Pulwama 100 25 95 100 93 45 38

3. Chuchot 73 8 72 73 71 13 25

Total 278 50 261 268 243 99 92

%age 18% 94% 96% 87% 36% 33%

In the surveyed 51 villages across three sample blocks, 278

Knowledgeable Persons were selected for providing required feedback on the

implementation of MGNREGA. The satisfaction over genuiness of wage rate

was expressed by only 18%. The worksite facilities and supervision over

works was also not up to the desired level as only 36% and 33%

Knowledgeable Persons were satisfied over it respectively. However, the

implementation of the programme with regard to issuance of Job Cards,

works within 5 Kms of radius and works provided on demand was rated

satisfactory by huge majority. Thus from Knowledgeable Persons

perspective, the low wage rate, the worksite facilities and supervision over

execution were the weak areas of the programme requiring additional

attention by all those at the helm of affairs within their legitimate

jurisdiction.

Knowledgeable Persons view on Execution:

The execution of Works Programme under MGNREGA is the 2nd most

significant objective, also aiming at the well being of the rural poor by

ensuring livelihood security. The Knowledgeable Persons were asked to

express their satisfaction level on different aspects of the executions, the

results are demonstrated hereunder on aggregate basis for analysis:-

Table No-21

Knowledgeable Persons satisfaction over Execution Programme

S.no


Number of KP’s contacted

Number of Knowledgeable Persons satisfied over

Women Participation

Quality of Work

Scope of Works

Material used

Durability Functionality

Maintenance System

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 Bishnah 105 56 97 97 97 92 97 75

2 Pulwama 100 46 92 89 85 85 88 58

3 Chuchot 73 73 73 73 69 53 62 27

Total 278 175 262 259 251 230 247 160

%age - 63% 94% 93% 90% 83% 89% 58%

As could be seen from the reported information the satisfaction level of

knowledgeable Persons on different aspects of the execution programme

were mostly positive. The quality of works executed under MGNREGA was

regarded satisfactory by 94% of the enquired knowledgeable Persons. The

satisfaction over scope of executed works, material used, durability and

functionality was also 90% or close to it which implies that moderately good

quality works were being executed under the programme. One among the

main factors ensuring good quality works might be the fact that the

executors/workers ultimately are the beneficiaries of the assets created.

However, on the maintenance of assets, only 58% knowledgeable Persons

were satisfied. On the participation of women, the satisfaction level of

knowledgeable Persons was also low except in case of block chuchot of Leh.

In Bishnah and Pulwama blocks, the women participation in MGNREGA

works was little due to their unwillingness, otherwise the scheme puts no

barriers in this regard. Instead it encourages women participation by

providing equal wage rate and other necessary safeguards for their young

children also on the worksites.

Due to the works programme executed under MGNREGA, the

knowledgeable Persons were asked to provide details of benefits accruing to

the rural areas, the outcomes are tabulated hereunder for analysis:-

Table No-22

Knowledgeable Persons reporting benefits under MGNREGA

S.no


Number of KP’s contacted

Number of Knowledgeable Persons reporting benefits under MGNREGA works

Programme

Improved Village

Connectivity

Improved Irrigation

Land Development Took place

Afforest ration Took

Place

Soil Erosion Stopped

Water Conservation

ensured 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1 Bishnah 105 36 42 35 50 40 27

2 Pulwama 100 89 85 28 7 14 20

3 Chuchot 73 69 73 50 26 23 6

Total 278 194 200 113 83 77 53

%age - 70% 72% 41% 30% 28% 19%

Regarding benefits accruing to the rural areas, 70% knowledgeable

Persons reported that village connectivity improved and 72% stated

improvement in the irrigation facilities of the villages. The Land Development

having taken place was reported by 41% knowledgeable Persons and

Afforest ration by 30%. It needs a mention here that the knowledgeable

Persons findings related to the whole programme implementation period of

MGNREGA and were not restricted to the reference period alone. 28%

knowledgeable Persons reported that soil erosion stopped as a result of the

executions under the programme. The executions in respect of ensuring

water conservation were reported by 19% knowledgeable Persons. In the

light of these expressions, it could be concluded that the construction of

village roads and execution of irrigation type works was the main thrust of

MGNREGA programme in the sample areas.

Physical Verification of Works:

The creation of durable assets and strengthening of livelihood

resources base of the rural poor is an important objective of MGNREGA. The

scheme has enough provisions to maintain a balance between creation of

employment opportunities and creation of durable and utility assets. It is,

therefore, of utmost importance to ensure good quality and durable assets

being created under MGNREGA. An effective quality management

mechanism can help achieve this objective. The programme implementation

mechanism has largely to deliver on this front together with the local

representatives. The quality management of works includes project

selection, site selection, survey, project design estimates, work execution,

scope, functionality etc.

Under the instant evaluation study, as per stipulations, the evaluation

teams inspected and verified all the works executed in the sample villages

during 2011-12 on various parameters. The exercise was done to observe

whether or not the assets created were as per the requirements of the area

and to see the extent of quality parameters taken into consideration while

executing such works. The number of works executed in the sample villages

and those put to physical verification are detailed below:-

Table No-23

Physical Verification of Works executed in 2011-12 in sample villages

S.no

Sector

Blockwise works executed in sample

villages

Blockwise works put to verification and found

existing

Bishnah Pulwama Chuchot Total Bishnah Pulwama Chuchot Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 Land Leveling 6 1 24 31 6 1 24 31

2 Soil Conservation 5 4 - 9 5 4 - 9

3 Water Conservation 5 1 - 6 5 1 - 6

4 Plantation 1 - - 1 1 - - 1

5 Connectivity 49 50 32 131 49 50 32 131

6 Irrigation 21 34 50 105 19 34 50 103

6 Others 3 5 5 13 3 5 5 13

Total 90 95 111 296 88 95 111 294

All the executed works in the 51 sample villages aggregating to 296 were put

to physical verification. These works were mostly related to connectivity and

irrigation to the extent of 236 thereby constituting 80% of the total works.

31 other works were regarding land leveling, 9 of Soil erosion, one plantation

and 13 of miscellaneous nature. Out of 296 works put to physical

verification 294 were located and two in block Bishnah were not located

anywhere which consisted of one work each under water conservation and

irrigation. The status of these works as on the date of survey is depicted

below:-

Table No-24

Status of Verified Works

S.

n

o

Name of

Sample

Block

Number

of

Works

verified

Status Specifications coincide

with official claim

Quality of Work

Complete In-

Complete

Coincide Not

Coincided

Good Average Below

Standard

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 Bishnah 88 71 17 43 45 17 61 10

2 Pulwama 95 80 15 95 - 41 50 4

3 Chuchot 111 103 8 111 - 52 57 2

Total 294 254 40 249 45 170 168 16

%age - 86% 14% 85% 15% 37% 57% 6%

Among the verified works 86% were complete and 14% were

incomplete. So far as specifications were concerned 85% were coinciding

with the official documents and 15% were deficient in specifications as

reported by the evaluation teams. The quality of construction was put on a

scale and only 37% were rated good and 57% of average quality. 6% of the

total verified works were declared below standard. This situation again

warrants that the labour material ratio under MGNREGA must undergo a

revision in view of huge price escalation in material costs. Further the

supervisory system of the scheme must be strengthened to pave way for

creation of durable and quality assets for ultimate well being of the rural

poor.

Scope and Site of Works:]

The scope and site of works constructed under the programme has

direct bearing on the objectives of the programme. The programme

guidelines are completely elastic on the execution of works provided they are

labour intensive and having the scope to strengthen the livelihood security

of rural poor. Within these parameters the execution has to be as per local

requirements and aspirations of the people. As such the process of Planning

and identification of works must be done in a participatory manner at the

habitation level reflecting the needs and aspirations of the people. The

following table reflects some other parameters of the verified works to

ascertain their scope, genuiness and feasibility with reference to local needs

and aspirations.

Table No-25

Other Parameters of Verified Works

S.

n

o

Name of

Sample

Block

Number of Works

verified

Number of works found of Community

Nature

Damaged

In Use

Site Appropriate

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 Bishnah 88 88 12 70 87

2 Pulwama 95 94 2 80 95

3 Chuchot 111 96 2 93 111

Total 294 278 16 243 293

%age - 98% 5% 83% 99%

\

The physical verification confirmed that maximum works were

executed which had a collective community utility and very small portion of

works were of individual nature. Out of 254 completed works 243 were in

public use. Among the 11 works which were not in use, the main reason

was the after execution damage. The appropriation of site was regarded as

fair in respect of 293 works thereby confirming the fact that the local level

aspirations and requirements were being taken care of under MGNREGA to

a great extent.

Delivery Mechanism:

The procedure of delivery under a particular Scheme warrants to

be simple but under proper checks and balances for ensuring

transparency. The MGNREGA delivery mechanism is the most

appropriate as it caters to all those willing to work under it and had

enough resources to provide the guaranteed work once demanded by

the wage seekers. The mode of payment had enough safeguards to

avoid misappropriations provided the Programme gets implemented as

per devised norms and guidelines. However, the instant Evaluation

Study had brought this fact to the fore that payments were not made

on time as guaranteed but were delayed in most of the cases. The

lower level officers had been allowed to implement the scheme

regardless of rules, regulations and norms. Further, the norms of the

scheme in relation to labour material proportion and labour rate needs

a flexible approach particularly in respect of J&K keeping in view its

topography. The low achievements in J&K are mostly due to these

factors. If these factors are appropriately addressed the achievements

would improve to a great extent in J&K.

Chapter - V

Summary of Main Findings

24) The information on the availability of funds under MGNREGA amply

suggests that the scheme in the sample districts was progressing well. In

the year 2009-10, the aggregate availability of funds was Rs.1485.06 lakhs

which rose to Rs.2927.86 lakhs for the year 2010-11 registering an increase

of 97% over the previous year. Again during the year 2011-12 the aggregate

availability was of the magnitude of Rs.7633.08 lakhs showing an increase

of 161% over the fund availability of 2010-11.

25) The utilization profile of the funds was also satisfactory which was

95% of the available funds during 2009-10 and dropped down to 90% in

the subsequent year and attained 95% level during the year 2011-12. The

overall expenditure in three sample districts was of the magnitude of

Rs.11329.02 lakhs against the total availability of Rs.12046.00 lakhs during

the reference period from 2009-10 to 2011-12 at the utilization rate of 94%

of the availability.

26) The registration of Job Card Holders was on the rise during the

reference period completely in consonance with the expenditure profile of

the programme. Upto the year 2009-10, there were 68884 Job Cards issued

in the sample districts which reached to 85485 in 2010-11 and further to

105515 in 2011-12 registering an increase of 24% and 23% over previous

years respectively. The number of applications seeking employment under

the programme were also on the rise showing 53% increase in 2010-11 and

300% in 2011-12 over the previous years.

27) The Rural Development Department reported to had provided job days

to the unemployed job seekers of the magnitude of 8.56 lakh person days

during the year 2009-10 which touched 11.38 lakh days in 2010-11 and

35.89 lakh days in 2011-12 registering an increase of 33% and 213% over

previous years respectively. However, the participation of women workers

was very limited having almost no scoring relation with the overall job days

generated.

28) In the sample districts, the quantum of works executed under

MGNREGA was 1746 in 2009-10 which rose to 3104 in 2010-11 and

further to 6573 in 2011-12. Thus there was an increase of 78% during

2010-11 and 112% in 2011-12 over the previous years. The aggregate

sample data revealed almost identical prioritization of works over the three

reference years of the study. The rural connectivity was priority first in the

execution of MGNREGA works claiming 36% of the total works executed

during 2009-10 and 2010-11 and 33% during 2011-12.

29) In the sample blocks, 70% Job Cards holders as stood on 31-3-2012

had applied for employment under MGNREGA during 2011-12. In response

the Implementing Department had provided 4.90 lakh person days of which

54533 person days were availed by women workers at the rate of 11%.

30) The field enquiry results indicated that all the sample beneficiaries

but 9 had been provided Job Cards by the Rural Development Department

within 15 days of their submission of application. The Job Cards were

issued to the beneficiaries as and when applied for. Maximum number

aggregating to 1408(72%) were issued Job Cards before 2009-10 and

during the remaining two years 245 Job Cards were issued in 2010-11 and

305 in 2011-12 in the selected sample villages.

31) The contacted beneficiaries had availed 66050 person days during

2011-12 against the maximum Job potential of 195800 days available as

guaranteed right under the scheme. At an average, every Job Card Holder

household had availed only 34 days against 100 days available for them.

This simply means that only 34% benefit of the scheme was derived in the

enquired villages both in terms of wages and assets creation.

32) While interacting with the beneficiaries, their Job Cards were also

scrutinized with reference to Job days offered and wages received. It was

given to know that adjustments were made regarding person days offered

and payments made in the Job Cards taking the Job Card holders into

confidence. These adjustments were inevitable otherwise offering of labour

under MGNREGA at current wage rate was not possible.

33) From the enquired beneficiaries, 1913 constituting 98% stated to have been

provided wage employment within 15 days of application for work. Only a

small number of 45 beneficiaries constituting 2% stated that the time limit

of 15 days was not adhered to in their favour during 2011-12. No

unemployment allowance was paid in their favour which had become due to

them as per scheme norms.

34) In the surveyed villages, 1076 beneficiaries constituting 55% of the

enquired number stated to have received wages within a week/ fortnight.

The remaining 45% reported otherwise and majority of them had reportedly

received wages after 30-60 days the work was done. This evidently is clear

violation of norms and needs immediate attention of the Implementing

Department.

35) Regarding worksite facilities the ground level realities reflected that these

provisions of the Act/Scheme were mostly confined to papers only. Not a

single Creche was provided during 2011-12 in any of the worksites in the

sample villages inspite of the fact that maximum women participation was

reported in Chuchot block of Leh district. The medical aid facility which is

the need of every worksite was reported provided by only 1% beneficiaries.

The facility of shed was reported provided by just 4% of the enquired

beneficiaries.

36) The enquired beneficiaries expressed satisfaction over their engagement in



observed low. The payments were also not provided within week/fortnight

in sizeable number of cases which had amply been reflected in the low

satisfaction level of beneficiaries on this very parameter. The Implementing

Department must evolve all possible measures to ensure that the weak

implementing aspects of the scheme are corrected by appropriate action on

ground. It would, among other things, require intensive supervision and

monitoring of the programme plus effective coordination with other involved

agencies, particularly the financial institutions.

37) The enquiry of beneficiaries on the problems and bottlenecks suggested

that only one problem was universal in nature i.e. the low rate of wages as

compared to prevalent market rate. The other problems in terms of delayed

payments, hard work, limited Job days etc were put forth by a small

number of beneficiaries who had personally faced such problems and were

not general in nature. In spite of 100 Job days available for every registered

household, only 14% had applied for the maximum number. The reason

behind this situation was evidently the low rate of wages as compared to

market rate.

38) While offering suggestions for effecting further improvements in the

programme, the enhancement in the wage rate was universally put forth.

The other suggestions in terms of timely payments, enhancement in Job

days were put forth by limited number of beneficiaries suggesting that

these problems were local in nature and need to be redressed locally or set

aside in view of being absurd in the overall scenario of the programme. The

suggestion of enhancing the wage rate at least to the neighbourhood of

prevalent market rate could boost the programme implementation at a very

large scale.

39) In the surveyed 51 villages across the sample blocks there were 1233 non-

beneficiary households who did not offered labour during 2011-12 inspite

of Jobs in offering under MGNREGA. From the job seekers point of view the

main reason for not offering labour under the programme was the low rate

of wages as compared to prevalent market rate in the open market.

40) A minute analysis of data collected from the 51 surveyed villages revealed

that the registered Job Card holders would have claimed 3.191 lakh person

days as a matter of right from MGNREGA but they actually availed only

0.660 lakh person days during 2011-12 which was deficient by 79% of the

total entitlements. The scheme being demand driven, it could be concluded

that maximum utilization of entitlement of 100 person days by the

registered households would have claimed 79% more investment of

MGNREGA funds in the sample area.

41) In the normal lean periods the wage rate during 2011-12 was

approximately in the range of Rs200/- to Rs250/- in rural areas and

Rs250/- to Rs300/- in the urban areas. In the busy agricultural season

the rates were higher by almost 20%. In such a situation, the Implementing

Department could do a very little in enhancing the utilization of full

entitlements of registered households who find best comparative advantage

for working in the open labour market. However, the scheme could prove

comparatively successful in remote and inaccessible areas of the state

where employment opportunities are scarce.

42) The satisfaction level of Knowledgeable Persons on different aspects of the

execution programme were mostly positive. The quality of works executed

under MGNREGA was regarded satisfactory by 94% of the enquired

Knowledgeable Persons. The satisfaction over scope of executed works,

material used, durability, functionality was also 90% or close to it. This

implies that moderately good quality works were being executed under the

programme.

43) Regarding benefits accruing to the rural areas, 70% Knowledgeable Persons

reported that village connectivity improved and 72% stated improvement in

the irrigation facilities of the villages. The Land Development having taken

place was reported by 41% Knowledgeable Persons and afforestration by

30%.

44) Among the verified works 86% were complete and 14% were incomplete. So

far as specifications were concerned, 85% were coinciding with the official

documents and 15% were deficient as reported by the evaluation teams.

The quality of construction was put on a scale and only 37% were rated

good and 57% of average quality. 6% of the total verified works were

declared below standard. This situation again warrants that the labour

material ratio under MGNREGA must undergo a realistic revision in view of

huge price escalation in material costs. Further the supervisory system of

the scheme must be strengthened to pave way for creation of durable and

quality assets for ultimate well being of the rural poor.

Chapter- VI

Response of the Rural Development Department:

As per the established procedure of the Evaluation process, the draft

evaluation report on the findings of the study on MGNREGA was sent to the

Director Rural Development Department Kashmir/Jammu for their

comments vide Director Economics & Statistics letter

No:DES/Evl/SLEC/MGNREGA/2012-13/1061-63 dated:28-3-2013. The

concerned Department could not respond within the stipulated time-frame

and accordingly, the report was placed before the State Level Evaluation

Committee(SLEC) on 21-10-2013 for approval/release. In the SLEC meeting,

it was decided to approach the Administrative Secretary of the Rural

Development Department and request him to offer comments within the

stipulated time frame. The decision was implemented forthwith and the

concerned Secretary was approached vide DES letter

NO:DES/Evl/5th/SLEC/MGNREGA/2012-13 dated:25-10-2013 with a copy

to the concerned Head of the Department Kashmir/Jammu.

The Rural Development Department Kashmir was pleased to offer his

Departmental view-point on the findings of the report vide letter

No:DRDK/Plg/26737 dated:23-12-2013. The Department had not refuted

any of the findings of the report which tantamounts to virtual acceptance of

the report in totality. The official data presented in the report had also not

been contested except in respect of number of Panchayats in Pulwama

district which stands rectified in the final version of the report. Thus the

official data also stands authenticated. The Department had putforth

reasons responsible for low performance in respect of certain components

and the situations which led to deviation from the stipulated norms of the

programmme. The Department had also expressed its resolve to strive hard

in respect of weak areas for realization of postulated objectives of the

MGNREGA. The salient features of the response are provided hereunder:-

1) Lack of Worksite Facilities:

Medical Aid Facilities, wherever, required are being provided to the labourers working under the scheme. However, new directions have been passed to all the District Programme Coordinators for ensuring

first aid facility at each work site. Regarding facility of Shelter Sheds, it is to mention that these sheds are required mostly in such areas where temperatures are very high and are not required in Kashmir

division. However, during winter, provision of heating i.e. traditional Kangri(Hotpot) is being provided/allowed.

2) Delay in Payment of wages:

Every effort is being made to make payment within 15 days to all the

labourers under MGNREGA. However, some times delay has occurred in past due to insufficient manpower and sometimes late release of funds by the GOI. However, during the last two financial years the

delay has been very much minimized due to appointment of the supporting staff and efforts were also made to get the timely release of funds from the Central Govt.

3) Lack of Supervision/Monitoring:-

The inspection of the works is being done at block, district, division and State level. At block level, the programme Officer(BDO) AEE/AE

inspects 100% works and no payment is being done without their inspection/report. However, due to heavy number of works the

inspection from State, division and district level is not possible in full. But a regular inspection from district and divisional level Officers and teams is being done. Further, inspection teams from Administrative

Department and Govt of India are frequently visiting the works and submitting their feedback. However, some instances of lack of supervision may have been noticed by the Evaluation Teams which

may have been due to paucity of staff. As on date, most of the supporting staff has been engaged and as such more supervision of

works has become possible.

4) Low Participation of Women Workers:

Although efforts are being to involve more and more women in the

scheme, yet due to the various social factors, rural women are not willing to come forward to seek jobs. However, in the recent years because of the representation of the women in the Panchayat Bodies,

the percentage has improved and during the last financial year about 11% women participated in the works executed under the scheme in

Kashmir division.

5) Availing Limited Job Days:

This is mainly because of low wage rate of labourers under MGNREGA. The wage rate under the scheme is too low as compared

to the prevailing labour rates in the market. To induce labourers to work under the scheme, suggestions have already been discussed in

the report to enhance the wage rate for effective implementation of the scheme.

6) Quality of Works:

The material costs in the market are very high and to make durable

assets on the prescribed wage-material ratio is not possible. It definitely affects the quality of works being executed under the MGNREGA Programme.

Annexure – A

List of beneficiaries provided delayed Jobs

Villagewise list of beneficiaries provided delayed jobs ( Jobs provided

not within 15 days)

A) District Jammu

Pyt village Name of the Beneficiary with parentage Unique job card no.

1. Kanhal 1. chak chua 1. Krishna Devi W/o Late Thoru Ram jk-13-003-031003/171

2. Bimla Devi W/O Ruldu Ram jk-13-003-031003/180

3.Ajit Singh S/O Heena singh jk-13-003-031003/168

2. Chak jaralan 1. Raj Kumar S/o Karam Chand jk-13-003-031002/110

2.Om Prakash S/O Shanker Dass jk-13-003-031002/181

2. Kharyal Khurd Khawaspur 1. Milkhi Ram S/o Ram Dass jk-13-003-027-004/219

2. Surjeet Singh S/o Swarn Singh jk-13-003-027-003/135

3. Swaran Singh S/o Amar Singh jk-13-003-027-003/304

4.Sail Singh S/o Sat Paul Singh jk-13-003-027-003/134

5.Navdeep Chand S/o Ashok Kumar jk-13-003-027-001/271

6.Bachno Devi Wd/o Girdhari Lal jk-13-003-027-001/287

7.Ashok Kumar S/o Om Parkash jk-13-003-027-001/271

8 Navjot S/o Ashok Kumar jk-13-003-027-001/271

9. Gurdeep Raj S/o Gian Chand jk-13-003-027-004/196

10. Kuldeep Raj S/o Ishar Dass jk-13-003-027-004/19

3. sarore Sarore 1. Mohinder Lal S/o Chattar Singh jk-13-003-037-001/63

2. Rajinder Kumar S/o Ram Dass jk-13-003-037-001/114

4. Majua uttami Nandrol 1. Krishan Chand S/o Bua Ditta jk-13-003-014-004/125

2. Pawan Kumar S/o Om Prakash jk-13-003-014-004/082

5. Saidgarh Chak Shibu 1. Surjeet Singh S/o Ram Dhan jk-13-003-023-005/283

2. Faghu Ram S/o Bua Ditta jk-13-003-023-005/274

3. Krishn Lal S/o Bhagu Ram jk-13-003-023-005/272

6. Rehal Kalandrian

Rehal Kalandrian 1. Prem Chand S/o Kuda Ram jk-13-003-022-003/165

2. Uttam Chand S/o Naga Ram jk-13-003-022-003/089

7. Chak Majra Chak Majra 1. Subash Saini S/o Puran Chand jk-13-003-005-001/260

2. Sanjay Saini S/o Ram Ditta jk-13-003-005-001/280

3. Balvinder Saini S/o Babu Ram jk-13-003-005-001/215

4. Himat Sopaliya S/o Harbans Lal jk-13-003-005-001/216

5.Banarsi Lal S/o Chajju Ram jk-13-003-005-001/128

6. Ram Murti S/o Pishuri Lal jk-13-003-005-001/217

7. Anil Kumar S/o Ashok Kumar jk-13-003-005-001/218

8. Roshan Lal S/o Amar Nath jk-13-003-005-001/211

9. Sohan Lal S/o Kirpal Chand jk-13-003-005-001/614

B) District Leh.

1) Village Chuchot Yokma:

S.no Name of the beneficiary Gender Unique Job Card No (1) (2) (3) (4)

1. Haji Mirza Mehdi Male 064

2. Amina Khatoon Female 043

3. Fatima Bano Female 109

4. Ishey Dolma Female 118

5. Sonam Charol Female 116

6. Fatima Bano Female 161

2) Village Mathoo:


1. Ishey Angmo Female 0107002920170

2. Tsering Mutup Male 169

3. Tundup Pambar Male 151

4. Tsering Angchol Male 188

5. Tsewang Dolma Male 197

3) Village Stok:


1. Tsering Chosgail Male 013

Government of Jammu & Kashmir - Directorate...

Documents

Transcript of Government of Jammu & Kashmir - Directorate...