Transparency, Accountability & Timeliness in Right to Public Services

1. Transparency, Accountability & Timeliness in Right to Public Services An Overview of 5 States -Tina Mathur February 2012

2. Why Service Guarantees - Broad • Changes in Political Thought & Agenda – What [also] gets Votes • Good Governance • Development – Provision of Basic Essential Services • Open, Transparent Government • Anti-corruption Measures • Acceptance by State of Civil Society movements for rights

3. Why Service Guarantees- Specific • Failure of Citizen Charters • Precedence of Rights-based Laws : RTI, MNREGS, RTE • Increasing Bad Publicity on Grievances related to poor Public Service Delivery • Top-down Push for systems that holds front-line service providers accountable • Simultaneously empowering citizens

4. RTPS Acts: Highlights • Transparency • Accountability • Timeliness

5. RTPS Acts: Highlights • Transparency- making public service delivery processes & procedures open and visible • Transparency – Information to citizens on: • Reasons [in writing] why an application is rejected or a service delayed or denied • Status of Applications

6. RTPS Acts: Highlights • Accountability - by identifying the responsible authorities within the system • Accountability - Penalizing wilful non-performance • Accountability - Put Citizen First: mechanism for redress of grievance; compensation

7. RTPS Acts: Highlights • Timeliness - Imposes a legally enforceable timeframe for service delivery • Timeliness: Imposes legally enforceable timeframe for addressing grievances through the mechanisms of Appeals and Reviews

8. Comparative Overview • Sample: 5 States • Methodology • Review of Documents • Limited field visits • A Quick Review of Major Elements

9. Comparative Overview • Madhya Pradesh- PIONEER- first to pass and implement Act • Bihar- RTPS NO. 1 on its ‘SUSHASAN’ Good Governance Agenda • Rajasthan- maximum number of services guaranteed • Delhi- An entirely different approach – e-SLA • Uttar Pradesh- quick to follow MP, but least number of services under Act

10. TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY, TIMELINESS Key Highlights

11. TRANSPARENCY -Public Awareness • Awareness drives through • Special Gram Sabhas in MP; • TV, Radio, Print media in Bihar, • NukkadNataks, Village Pracharaks, Schools in Rajasthan • Notice Boards in all States • Clear instructions for citizens on application process and services coming under RTPS • Bihar BRTPS Rules (sec.18) and Rajasthan Rules (20) specifically mention Dissemination and Training

12. Transparency • Online application tracking and monitoring systems in MP, Bihar, Delhi, UP; final stages of software readiness in Rajasthan • Jigyasa and Samadhan helpline in Bihar for queries related to RTPS • e-SLA monitoring and tracking system in Delhi [compensatory cost for delay is calculated through e-SLA software] • SMS based reminder system in MP for officials regarding pending services; application status through SMS in Bihar

13. Accountability – Fixing Responsibility • Designated Authorities/Competent Officer, Appellate Authorities, Reviewing Authority identified in all 5 States • Penalties have been notified in case of failure to comply by time stipulations; compensation fixed in MP, UP, Rajasthan and Delhi • Delhi - Incentives for Good Performance- upto 5000 rupees for no default in 1 year; disciplinary action for 25 defaults in a year

14. Accountability – Monitoring Performance • Monitoring and tracking at the level of applications – • Offices to maintain Register of applications accepted or rejected AND services delivered, delayed or denied • Software-driven such as Adhikar, e-District and e-SLA • Monitoring also done through • nodal officials, • inspections, • monthly meetings at which disposal, pendency of applications & appeals is done • Video conferences

15. Timeliness – Regular Systems • In all five states, Notified Services have to unambiguously state the TIME LIMIT within which services will be delivered • In all states [except Uttar Pradesh] acknowledgement slips show the Date on or before which the service would be delivered • Delhi : an automatically generated Time Limit through the e-SLA system; Bihar: through Adhikar • Single window systems in Revenue Department – all 5 States • MP and Rajasthan - in addition - 1-day Governance

16. Timeliness – Some Field Observations • Most services – reported to have been delivered before time: especially, mutation, caste/income/residence certificates • MP, Bihar, UP, Rajasthan and Delhi have used IT for process efficiency. • Online application system introduced in MP, Bihar, Delhi & Rajasthan • In Rajasthan for certain services (caste, domicile and birth) certificates issued online with digital signature • In MP and UP: where connectivity or capacity a problem, applications accepted, verified on paper and entries made into computer later to save time

17. Timeliness- Issues • Too much time has been stipulated for services in the RTPS Acts • Citizens: Earlier the process was faster. • Governments: A safety mechanism since penalties are involved; does provide flexibility to set better standards locally • Delays: Very few appeals so far- MP, Bihar and Rajasthan have reported a few

18. Overarching Challenges • Overall implementation mechanisms robust • rules framed • process simplification on-going • citizen awareness campaigns on-going • capacity building on-going • Shortages of Staff in Front-line Institutions: seems to be nearly universal • In urban: due to high demand for services • In rural – vacancies not filled for years • Staffing situation needs re-assessment • Shortage of funds has been reported: extra costs incurred for computer stationery; electricity supply, etc.

19. Overarching Challenges • Service Delivery staff need further capacity building • Mindset change • Infrastructure: Frontline institutions require more space and better working conditions • Service guarantee to reach the illiterate, people living in remote areas: How to enable? • Important that citizens understand what is guaranteed: NOT acceptance of Application alone! • in some cases even where citizens were not eligible, perception was that the service was still guaranteed

20. Overarching Challenges • A competitive spirit amongst states for increasing number of services under RTPS Acts • Good when notification of more services is well-thought out • Danger in playing number games

21. Overall Picture So Far • States-led: Ownership Very High • State Specific Strategies the Norm • Notified Services – local demand-pull; supply-push • Multi-modal Delivery: Paper and Electronic • Choice: Punishment or Mutual Understanding [Delhi-developing culture for timely service delivery; encouraging departments to join E-SLA] • Modes of Monitoring • Procedures for Appeals/Complaints • Self-generated Competitive Spirit amongst states

22. Overall Picture So Far • An enabling law for citizens rights that has received largely positive feedback from all, including government staff • Pressure of service delivery on the designated officials as more people applying for services after learning about the guarantee • Change in citizen perceptions: no longer need the services of middlemen or bribe to get services

23. Thank You