JAN 2010

ANALYSIS OF MPLAD IN GAYA MP CONSTITUENCY

GoI-UN Program on Convergence | Jun-11

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION ________________________________ ________________________________ ______ 3 GOI-UN JOINT PROGRAM ON CONVERGENCE ________________________________ ___________ 3 Box 2 ________________________________ ________________________________ __________ 3 Box 1 ________________________________ ________________________________ __________ 3 TRACING THE HISTORY OF INSTITUTIONALIZING GENDER ________________________________ 4 ___ ALL ABOUT THE STUDY ________________________________ ________________________________5 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY________________________________ ______________________________5 METHODOLOGY________________________________ ________________________________ ______ 5 THE PROGRAM MPLAD ________________________________ ______________________________6 BACKGROUND OF SCHEME ________________________________ __________________________ 6 PROVISIONS UNDER THE SCHEME ________________________________ _____________________ 6 WORKS PROHIBITED UNDER MPLAD ________________________________ ___________________ 7 GENDER ISSUE IN GUIDELINE ________________________________ ___________________________ 8 OVERVIEW OF GAYA DISTRICT ________________________________ __________________________ 8 MAJOR FINDINGS ________________________________ ________________________________ ____ 9 FUND DISTRIBUTION UNDER THE SCHEME ________________________________ _____________ 10 KEY RECOMMENDATIONS ________________________________ ____________________________ 11 Works Cited ________________________________ ________________________________ ________ 12

INTRODUCTION
This report presents the findings of an analysis of MPLAD interventions from the point of view of gender equality. In spite of the limited time span, the Given the limitations, the findings presented here are by no means conclusive. Instead, they may be treated as pointers, as unheard voices that need to be heardand acted upon. The hopes that the study will usher in a process of enquiry in terms of integrating gender: in the Program Implementation.

GOI-UN JOINT PROGRAM ON CONVERGENCE

Joint Collaborative Program between Union Planning Commission, Govt. of Bihar and UN system in India to help 5 selected districts to accelerate actions to meet MDGs by fostering convergence, improved Utilization of resources from Government Programs and other sources and UN agencies delivering as one in support of Government at state and district level. This are achieved through formation of Technical Support Group to assist District Planning Committee (DPC). The core functional areas of the group are to strewnghten the system and build the capacity of all stakeholders and create evidence based knowledge. Evidence based System Strengthening and pro-poor and pro-deprived Innovative approaches / models to achieve desired programme outcomes. This program is meant to support State and District to achieve key monitoring indicators of 11th five year plan and improved service delivery in National Flagship Program through System Strengthening, Capacity Building, Knowledge Management, Decentralized Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation.

Box 2

Key Monitoring Indicators

I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. XII. XIII.

11th Plan

GDP growth rate Agric ltural growth rate New work opportunities Poverty ratio Dropout rate in ele entary schools Literacy rate Gender gap in literacy rate Infant mortality rate (IMR) Maternal mortality ratio (MMR) Total Fertility Rate (TFR) Child malnutrition Anaemia among women and girls Sex-ratio

Box 1

National Flagship Program (NFPs)

I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. National Rural Health Mission Integrated Child Development Services Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan Rastriya Krishi Vikas Yojna (RKVY) Accelerated Rural Water Supply Program Total Sanitation Campaign Backward region grant fund National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme Jawaharlal Nehru Urban renewal Mission

TRACING THE HISTORY OF INSTITUTIONALIZING GENDER

The planning Commission of India has always focused on womens issues as per the perceptions of their members on womens status within the economy. The First Five Year Plan (1951-1956) set up Central Social Welfare Board in 1953 to promote welfare work through voluntary organisations, charitable trusts and philanthropic agencies. The Second Five Year Plan (1956-1960) supported development of Mahila mandals for grass roots work among women. The Third, Fourth and Interim Plans (1961-74) made provision for womens education, pre-natal and child health services, supplementary feeding for children, nursing and expectant mothers. The Fifth Plan (1974-1978) marked a major shift in the approach towards women, from welfare to development. The Sixth Plan (1980-85) accepted womens development as a separate economic agenda. The Multidisciplinary approach with three- pronged thrust on health, education and employment. The Seventh Plan (1985-1990) declared as its OBJECTIVE TO BRING WOMEN INTO THE MAINSTREAM OF NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT. The Eighth Plan (1992-1997) projected paradigm shift, from development to empowerment and promised to ensure flow of benefits to women in the core sectors of education, health and employment. Outlay for women rose from 4 crores in the First plan to Rs. 2000 crores in the 8th Plan. The Ninth Plan (1997-2002) stated that Empowerment of women was its strategic objective. It accepted the concept of Womens Component Plan to assure at least 30% of funds/benefits from all development sectors flow to women. The Tenth Five Year Plan (2002-2007) has suggested specific Strategies, policies and programmes for Empowerment of women. (Gender Budgeting Handbook forGovt of India Ministries and Departments , 2007) The Approach Paper to the Eleventh Plan states that "gender equity requires adequate provisions to be made in policies and schemes across Ministries and Departments. It also entails strict adherence to Gender Budgeting across the board." For the Eleventh Five Year Plan, for the first time there was a Sub-Group on Gender Budgeting, as part of the Working Group on Empowerment of Women. In addition to providing recommendations on Gender Budgeting for various sectoral ministries, the Sub-group recommended the setting up of a Gender Budgeting bureau in the MWCD, establishment of Regional Resource and Training Centres for Gender Budgeting (RRTCGB) as well as preparation of Gender Budgeting training manuals. The report of the sub-group was incorporated as a part of the Working Group on Women and submitted to the Planning Commission. The importance of Gender Budgeting has been stressed time and again in different forums. To provide further impetus, the Finance Minister, in his budget for 2004-05, mandated the setting up of gender budget cells in all Ministries and Departments and highlighted the need for budget data to be presented in a manner that brought out the gender sensitivity of the budgetary allocations. This was followed by a more emphatic commitment in the budget speech of 2005-06, where budgetary allocations under 10 demands for grants, estimated at a total of Rs. 14,379 crore, were shown in a separate gender budget statement. The 2006-07 Budget Speech revealed an estimated allocation of Rs.28,737 cr. for benefit of women under 24 demands for grants in 18 Ministries and Departments. This statement was extended in the budget of 2007-08, to include 33 demands for grants of 27 ministries/departments.

These gender budget statements covered allocations that were 100% targeted at women and girls and those where at least 30% of the funds were targeted at women and girls. The suggest strategies under 11th Five year plan are as follows measurement of development has to go beyond achievement of GDP growth to indicators of distributive justice and their monitoring. Women headed households have to be specifically targeted, identifying added disadvantages in the rural and urban locations with reference to different parameters of deprivation. Formulation of Gender Development Indicators to measure human Development and their use as a tool for monitoring development needs to be hastened. Out of 13 key monitoring indicators 5 are directly related to women. These are Gender gap in literacy rate, maternal mortality ratio (MMR), Total Fertility Rate (TFR), Anaemia among women and girls and Sex-ratio.

ALL ABOUT THE STUDY

This study was conducted under the guidance of Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, IAS, District Magistrate of Gaya to see how MPLAD scheme is being translated into field and how sensitivity it carries both at guideline and at Implementation level. This was Joint effort of District administration and district UN team led by District Facilitator in District.

OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

The main objectives of the study are: To attempt as far as possible a gender analysis of MPLAD scheme from 2004-05 to 2008-09 in Gaya MP Constituency to track flow of resources to women. To offer some policy suggestions following largely from the mismatch between what was envisaged by Planning commission and Ministry of Women and Child development, given the mechanisms and processes put in place for assessing gender needs and priorities, and what has been the outcome. Integrate gender issues into planning, monitoring, and evaluations to promote and support activities, which contribute to gender equality goals

METHODOLOGY
The analysis of the MPLAD scheme was carried our using studied adopting methodology of Data analysis and validation, qualitative research, concerns, challenges. The study is based on the data given by competent authority of MPLAD and guideline of Member of Parliament Local area development scheme, Government of India. (MPLAD Guideline, 2009) Several documents of Government of India, Ministry of Women and Child and UN agencies were referred for this analysis to give a natural view. The scheme details were categorized broadly into eight categories to see how the schemes were selected and how much resource is allocated to each category. And whether the

schemes which were selected during last 5 financial years are sensitive to womens need or are gender natural.

THE PROGRAM MPLAD

The Member of Parliament Local Area Development Division is entrusted with the responsibility of implementation of Member of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS). Under the scheme, each MP has the choice to suggest to the District Collector for, works to the tune of Rs.2 Crores per annum to be taken up in his/her constituency. The Rajya Sabha Member of Parliament can recommend works in one or more districts in the State from where he/she has been elected. The Nominated Members of the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha may select any one or more Districts from any one State in the Country for implementation of their choice of work under the scheme. The Department has issued the guidelines on Scheme Concept, implementation, and monitoring. The Department has initiated all necessary steps to ensure that the scheme is successfully implemented in the field. The progress of the works being implemented under the scheme is monitored on a regular basis.

BACKGROUND OF SCHEME
The general public approach Members of Parliament (MPs) for provision of certain basic facilities including community infrastructure in their areas. Government of India considered the need for a mechanism to respond to such requests and decided to have a scheme to meet the felt needs of the people. On 23rd December 1993 Prime Minister announced in the Parliament the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS). Initially the MPLADS was under the control of the Ministry of Rural Development. The Guidelines were issued in February 1994, covering the concept, implementation and monitoring of the Scheme. The subject relating to the MPLADS was transferred to the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation in October 1994. The Guidelines were periodically updated in December 1994, February 1997, September 1999, 2002 and lastly in November 2005. The objective of the scheme is to enable MPs to recommend works of developmental nature with emphasis on the creation of durable community assets based on the locally felt needs to be taken up in their Constituencies. Right from inception of the Scheme, durable assets of national priorities viz. drinking water, primary education, public health, sanitation and roads, etc. are being created. In 1993-94, when the Scheme was launched, an amount of Rs. 5 lakh per Member of Parliament was allotted which became Rupees one crore per annum from 1994-95 per MP constituency. This was stepped up to Rs. 2 crore from 1998-99.

PROVISIONS UNDER THE SCHEME

All works to meet the locally felt community infrastructure and development needs with emphasis on the creation of durable assets in the respective constituency are permissible under MPLADS except those prohibited in Annex- II. MPs may choose some works for creation of durable assets of national priorities namely drinking water, education, public health, sanitation, and roads under the Scheme.

There is a greater need to develop areas inhabited by Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs). It is necessary that special attention is given for infrastructural development of such areas. The MPs are to recommend every year such works costing at least 15% of MPLADS fund for areas inhabited by Scheduled Caste population and 7.5% for areas inhabited by Scheduled Tribe population. In other words, permissible works costing not less than Rs. 30 lakh out of the annual allocation of Rs. 2 crore per MP shall be recommended for areas inhabited by SC population and Rs. 15 lakh for areas inhabited by ST population. In case, a constituency does not have ST inhabited area, such fund may be utilized in SC inhabited areas and vice-versa. It shall be the responsibility of the District Authority to enforce this provision of the Guidelines. MPLAD Scheme can be converged with the Central and State Government schemes provided such works are eligible under MPLADS. Funds from local bodies can also be pooled for MPLADS works. Wherever such pooling is done, funds from other scheme sources should be used first and the MPLADS funds should be released later, so that MPLADS fund results in completion of the work. The MPs concerned can recommend the use of MPLADS funds towards the State Government share in a Centrally Sponsored Scheme being implemented in their constituencies, provided the works under the Centrally Sponsored Scheme are permissible under MPLADS. Public and community contribution to the works recommended by MPs is permissible. In such cases, MPLADS funds will be limited to the estimated amount minus the public and community contribution. As per the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005 and the Rules framed there under, all citizens have the right to information on any aspect of the MPLAD Scheme and the works recommended/ sanctioned/ executed under it. This may include any information on works recommended by the MPs, works sanctioned/ not sanctioned, cost of works sanctioned, Implementing Agencies, quality of work completed, Users Agency etc. The District Authorities are responsible to provide such information to the public in the manner as required under the Right to Information Act 2005.

WORKS PROHIBITED UNDER MPLAD



   

  

Office and residential buildings belonging to Central, and State Governments, their Departments, Government Agencies/ Organizations and Public Sector Undertakings. Office and residential buildings, and other works belonging to private, cooperative and commercial organizations. All works involving commercial establishments/units. All maintenance works of any type. All renovation, and repair works except heritage and archeological monuments and buildings with specific permission available from the Archeological Survey of India. Grants and loans, contribution to any Central and State/UT Relief Funds. Assets to be named after any person. Purchase of all movable items except vehicles, earth movers, and equipments meant for hospital, educational, sports, drinking water and sanitation purposes

    

belonging to Central, State, UT and Local Self Governments. (This will be subject to 10% of the Capital Cost of the work for which such items are proposed) Acquisition of land or any compensation for land acquired. Reimbursement of any type of completed or partly completed works or items. Assets for individual/family benefits. All revenue and recurring expenditure. Works within the places of religious worship and on land belonging to or owned by religious faith/group.

GENDER ISSUE IN GUIDELINE

The MPLAD guideline never talks about disaggregated data collection for planning or monitoring. There are provisions for special category (SC/ST) but gender aspect is missing from guideline. Nowhere in the guideline is term gender or sex found. Even the work priorities which are mentioned in the guideline are generic in nature and it is left to the individual. Some guideline on activities should be given so that MPs can think beyond the Roads and bridges. The guideline talks about the fund installments to implementing agencies but it hardly say anything for women component plan which is mandated by Ministry of Women and child, Government of India. The selection of schemes is solely done by the MPs so they should be informed about gender issues before making choices for a particular scheme. It is open and only bar a few activities so wide range and issues related to gender should be given in the guideline.

OVERVIEW OF GAYA DISTRICT

According to 2001 Census Gaya has a population of 3,473,428 which comprises of 1,792,163 males and 1,681,265 females. Of the total population of the district, 86.30 per cent reside in rural areas and remaining in urban areas. The literacy rate of the Gaya is 50.4 percent against national average of 64.8. The sex ratio has

slightly increased from 922 (1991 census) to 938 (2001 census) but it is having declining trend in last century. 29 percent comprise of SC population and only less than percent is ST population. Gender gap in literacy is 26.6 points.
The district level health survey (DLHS-3, 2008) data also shows that early marriage is 50.4 percent in Gaya district. 22 percent of respondents have Access to toilet facility. Only 20.7 percent women have gone for Institutional delivery which is 15.2 percent in rural area.

P Y pP d Y @ @ @ X P 9 Y Q G F @ a Pb IG A Q ` F EE X U W S VSSR

0    2    '$  '  ''   $      '        (    6 # 5  ''    5    %  $   '  $     (       0        $'          4  '   '$       ''   $ 3       ( 0  '       '  '$  '   '        2  &  '   1 0    '$      '        ( (       ' $'     '  $' 0 '  $  (     (    0 '   $     $          )               $  '  '$      ( (     '      %    $   &          #" !                       

MAJ

X ED EE P d Y Q B@ G@ @ F @ q F @ Y 9 E C Y Y di E P C Yd dE Y E Y C P 9 IG A GB@ ` G ` QF @F @ Qh Q F B I @ Q G P d E d P aP Y gY P aY Y aEE e Y d CC a P EE Q F@ `@ c G B ` G@ ` G@G @f @ IG YY a YY X P Y 9 P 9 IG A GB AF Q G A G B@ ` G@B GB G G F@ H U C P C 9 P H E DC 9 9 Q BQ Q @ I @G@F B A@ G F S TSSR 87 G

We e o ie e e i i ie we e e i e o Co i i i e O e w few

of e Di i Le e e e DL e i i e i i e of o e e effo e Ce e o e e e e e o e of wo e i i e e i i e i fo e i e io io i e e A ee i ee o e e e o wi e e e ii i e e owe e of i wo e i i fo e e e o e of i i we e i i wo e i o e i e of e e o e i o o e fo e o e e e efo e e o e fo e eo e o e wo e ' o o e o e e f ow of e ef o i e io e o i io e e o o e o i ii o e Di i i Co i ee D C o e e e e io o e of e o o i e eo e o i fo i e

FINDINGS

1901

1037

1911

1035

1003

1921

1931

1001

of e e e wi e o ize iz Co e i i io D i i i e ief o
1941 1001 1951 995 1961

Sex Ratio, Gaya

996

e fo o i Ro Co e i i w e A i e e i i i i i
1971 961 1981 966 1991

922

2001

938

A e o e e i

Sector wise scheme share

u t s rr h r r vv v
Vi ag R a

Drinking Wat r

C nn tivity R a

the year Thi hart early how the ele tio of he e e tor wi e D ri erio total he e were re o e e y o t of whi h erce t i for CC roads. If we club this with illage road .5%) and bridges .5%) the share increases to 58 ercent. econd big ie %) is for sanitation in this category ost of the che es were for drainage with CC road or other type of Roads. Only a few sche es were selected where e clusi e drainage work was done. e t to this, percent in the abo e pie, ostly for the ring boring and drinking water, this is other type of andpumps. Out of andpumps ot e en a single hand pump was gi en in the name of Anganwari centers/ ealth ub centers. where in aya district AWCs are there. Well, this percent schemes are directly contributing to the ender component depending on the location of these handpumps. In community hall %) it is usually made in the anchayats land, out of the illage where women hardly go for anything. This needs to be looked into for ideal location so that women can use these places for their meeting or other gatherings. O erall the number of schemes for sustainable li elihoods such as irrigation schemes for agriculture is only .5% which shows the lack of informed choices.
v r u d d s r t v v d

F ND DISTRIBUTI N UNDER THE SCHEME

As we went through the financial figures of Last fi e years we have found that during last 5 years total ,65,02,083/- rupees is allocated to aya district. Out of this sum of .65 crore rupees 58% is spent on CC Road. If we include the illage road and ridges this will reach to 65 percent. The sanitation which accounts for 8 percent of the allocation also includes road of different type along with drainage and a few scheme of drainage e clusively. Community hall and rooms with aramdah have the fund share of 8%. o in priority sector we only see Drinking water 2 percent and Irrigation 3 percent.
m k i j o n h l l g f

s u x w r y

r q

v x u vv s v u sr s

s r

C mmunity ha
p

C nn tivity Bri g
w y xw p r

Oth r

Sanitati n
Agri u tur

u t qs t

s r

Fund distribution of Schemes

45 10 33 147 25 7 13 9 289

Conn tivity Vi ag Bri g Roa 5% 2%

Community ha 8%

Oth r 4%

Drinking Wat r 2%

Conn tivity Roa 58%

This chart clearly shows that the schemes selected during last five years are not in line of ender responsive budgeting. And hence care should be taken before scheme selection and honorable ember of arliament should be informed and aware on gender related issues.

MPLAD scheme compilation of fund and Sector (Period : 2004-05 to 2008-09)

Nature of Scheme Sanitation Agriculture Drinking Water Connectivity Road Community hall Village Road Connectivity Bridge Other Total No of Schemes Cost of Schemes 14,130,330 2,009,300 1,271,813 43,976,940 5,846,600 1,737,100 4,153,600 3,376,400 76,502,083 Fund Released 13,793,180 1,857,615 1,202,525 42,132,350 4,682,100 173,100 4,028,200 2,974,200 70,843,270 Total fund Utilised 9,933,838 945,756 1,064,526 34,596,660 708,500 1,227,842 3,040,776 1,243,650 52,761,548 Total Completed Scheme 32 4 28 112 4 4 8 4 196

KE RECOMMENDATIONS
To help the s to prioritize the felt needs of various groups of population, the RIs may be asked to provide a list of works to be recommended to the annually . as RIs represents 50% women this will ensure the gender inclusive planning s so they should be informed about gender issues before making choices for a particular scheme. It is open and only bar a few activities so wide range and issues related to gender should be given in the guideline.
  ~   ~  ~

Sanitation 18%

Agri u tur 3%

Works Cited
(2009 December). Retrieved from MPLAD Guideline: www.mplads.nic.in DLHS-3. (2008). District Level Health Survey. Ministry of Health and family welfare, Govt. of India. Gender Budgeting Handbook forGovt of India Ministries and Departments . (2007). Ministry of Women and Child, Government of India.