370 likes | 612 Views
NREGA in Orissa: Back to Basics?. NREGA: Evaluation Criteria. Compliance with Act/Guidelines Quality of process (e.g. participation) Realisation of workers’ entitlements Socio-economic impact. NREGA: Basic Entitlements. Work on demand Unemployment allowance Minimum wages
E N D
NREGA: Evaluation Criteria • Compliance with Act/Guidelines • Quality of process (e.g. participation) • Realisation of workers’ entitlements • Socio-economic impact
NREGA: Basic Entitlements • Work on demand • Unemployment allowance • Minimum wages • Payment within 15 days • Worksite facilities • No gender discrimination • Prompt redressal
The Field Survey • Date: 3-12 October 2007 • Districts: Balangir, Boudh, Kalahandi • Sample Frame: • Two Blocks per Districts • Five Gram Panchayats in each Block • One worksite in each GP (i.e. 30 worksites)
Part 1 Selected Survey Findings
NREGA being in force 31 Right to apply for work 100 Right to unemployment allowance 90 Right to minimum wage 55 Mandatory worksite facilities 93 MRs to be kept at worksite 100 Awareness Levels are Still Very Low Proportion (%) of sample worksites where “few” or “none” of the labourers were aware of:
Incomplete Job Card Distribution • Initial distribution restricted to BPL households in some areas • Confusion on BPL issue persists • Households with no ration card are often excluded • Poor arrangements for issuing job cards on a continuous basis
Job Card Distribution: Some Good News • Most people did not have to pay any bribes or charges for the job card. • However, about half of the applicants were charged for the photu.
Work on Demand? Did most labourers employed at this worksite get employed in response to an application for work? YES 7% NO 93%
Timeliness of Wage Payments: A Glass Half-Full Proportion of sample worksites where wages had been paid: • within 15 days 41 • within one month 82
Proportion (%) of worksites where: “All” or “most” labourers earned the minimum wage 48 “Very few” or “none” of the labourers earned the minimum wage 41 Payment of Minimum Wages: Half Empty!
Awareness of the schedule of rates Positive feature: Growing awareness of the schedule of rates (e.g. basic rate for soft soil). Shortcoming: Awareness of the details remains very low (e.g. lift and lead, dressing).
Work measurement: Plenty of issues • Low awareness of schedule of rates. • Shortage of technical staff. • Fiction of individual measurement by Junior Engineers. • Ground reality: rough measurements by PEO/VLL, no official record. • Lack of transparency all the way, opening the door to cheating.
No Worksite Facilities Proportion (%) of worksites that had: • Drinking water 39 • First-aid kit 7 • Child care facility 3
Proportion (%) of sample GPs that had a shelf of projects: 46 Proportion (%) of worksites that were selected from a shelf of projects: 30 Participatory Planning: A Long Way to go
Productivity of works Economic usefulness of the work, in the assessment of survey team: “Very useful” or “quite useful” 59 “Not particularly useful” 37 “Useless” 4
Impact on hunger, poverty and migration • Clear evidence of enhanced food security among NREGA workers. • NREGA often helps to repay debts. • Limited impact on migration: too little work and not predictable. • However, many people said that if there is work in the village they won’t migrate. • Most labourers prepared to work 100 days, even more if possible.
Summary: Incipient achievements • Payment of minimum wages. • Timely wage payments. • Creation of productive assets. • Where work is available, NREGA is a lifeline for the rural poor. Also: There have been major changes over time, with much scope for more.
Summary: Major Concerns • Low levels of awareness. • Incomplete distribution of job cards. • Low level of employment generation. • Application process not in place. • Cryptic work measurement. • Gross violations of guidelines. • Absence of participatory planning. • Breakdown of transparency safeguards!
Part 2 Transparency and Corruption
The Traditional “System” of Corruption • Contractor Raj • Dual records (kachha/pacca) • “PC system” • Contractor-politicians nexus
NREGA: Major Transparency Safeguards • Contractors are banned • Transparency of muster rolls • Job cards • Worksite boards • Vigilance committees • Social audits • Monitoring and Information System There are more…!
Breakdown of Transparency Safeguards • Contractors are alive (and well?) • Muster rolls nowhere to be seen • Poor job card maintenance • Brazen “adjustments” in the records • Inactive Gram Sabhas • Vulnerability to local collusion
Survival of Contractors Proportion of worksites where evidence of contractor involvement was found: 56
Dual Records Continue • Muster rolls are never at the worksite. • Kachha-pacca records are maintained (both MRs and MBs). • Sometimes labourers are asked to sign blank MRs “in advance”.
BDO 2% JE 5% AE 3% Block staff 1% PEO 5% GP Secy 3% Misc 3% TOTAL22% PC System Persists “Percentages” paid by contractors in Balangir:
Job Cards or Joke Cards? • Faulty design, e.g. there is no column for wage payments! • Job card virtually impossible to read. • Cards often kept by GP functionaries. • Poor job card maintenance if any. Outcome: Job cards are virtually useless.
Poor Job Card Maintenance • Proportion (%) of worksites where job card maintenance was incomplete or irregular: 71 • Proportion (%) of worksites where job card entries were made at the time of wage payments: 7
Muster Rolls:“Adjustment” or Fraud? • Workers without job cards are often “clubbed” with others in the MRs. • Wages of several team members are often entered in one person’s name. • Fudging of MRs is common: fake names, inflated days, etc. • Badhigam: Fake muster roll!
Elusive Worksite Boards • Proportion (%) of worksites that had a “worksite board” 59 • Proportion (%) of boards that mentioned the wage rate 55
Gram Sabhas: Still in Infancy Good news: Gram Sabhas have started discussing NREGA. However: • Poor attendance (no “quorum”). • Dominated by a few bigwigs. • Manipulation of proceedings. • No social audits.
Vigilance Committees are asleep Proportion (%) of sample worksites: • With Vigilance Committee 56 • With an “active” VC 20 • Where VC has prepared a report or statement 8
Bottom line: Non-verifiable System and Massive Leakages • The records are virtually impossible to verify due to faulty design, incomplete maintenance, rampant adjustments, etc • Proportion (%) of employment days recorded in the MRs that were “confirmed” by labourers: 60%
How Much Embezzlement? “Guestimate” of leakages, based on indirect evidence from the PC system: • Total PC outlay 22 % • Profit of contractors 10 % • TOTAL 32 % If anything, this may be on the low side.
Part 3 Recommendations (see Interim Report at www.righttofoodindia.org)
A “success story”: Kultajore • Work was selected by the Gram Sabha • Job cards well maintained • Workers earn the minimum wage • Wages are paid within 15 days • Worksite facilities are in place • Active Vigilance Committee • No sign of corruption at sample worksite • NREGA is highly valued by the villagers