1 / 19

Prof M M Ansari , Information Commissioner and Pankaj K P Shreyaskar , Joint Registrar, CIC

Prof M M Ansari , Information Commissioner and Pankaj K P Shreyaskar , Joint Registrar, CIC. Assessing and grading of public authorities in terms of greater transparency and accountability and least corruption. Introduction.

umay
Download Presentation

Prof M M Ansari , Information Commissioner and Pankaj K P Shreyaskar , Joint Registrar, CIC

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Prof M MAnsari, Information Commissioner and Pankaj K P Shreyaskar, Joint Registrar, CIC Assessing and grading of public authorities in terms of greater transparency and accountability and least corruption

  2. Introduction • CICs sub committee has evolved a methodology for grading the PAs • In this study, an attempt has been made to employ this methodology for grading the PAs on the basis of RTI compliance Research Question: To examine whether there is any relationship between higher or lower degree of transparency/accountability and the larger or smaller number of RTI applications ??

  3. Concept • Transparency, Accountability and Least Corruption Index (TALC Index) is an indicator of good governance • The TALC Index provides an idea about preparedness of the public authorities to promote transparency and accountability and contain corruption

  4. The Approach & Methodology The TALC Index is based on a group of 8 major indicators which are further categorized into different parameters comprising of 100 indicators in all: • Citizen’s Charter (15 Indicators) • Citizen’s Grievance Redressal (12 Indicators) • Citizen Interface (12 Indicators) • Internal transparency/Accountability/Efficiency (16 Indicators) • Records Management/Maintenance (8 Indicators) • Accessibility and Participation (5 Indicators) • e-Governance Readiness (8 Indicators) • Compliance with the Right to Information Act, 2005 (8 Indicators) • Handbook under section 4 (1) (b) of RTI Act, 2005 (16 Indicators)

  5. The Approach & Methodology (Contd….) • Each question carries a maximum of 1 mark and a minimum of ‘0’ with no negative marks • Responses to the questions are classified into 2 categories i.e. • Yes/No, whereby, each ‘Yes’ carries ‘1’ mark while each ‘No’ carries ‘0’ marks.

  6. The Approach & Methodology (Contd….) • The overall scores of the PAs are classified under 5 grades • The classification is based on the ‘percentage’ of total marks obtained • The higher the percentage a PA scores, the better; it is deemed, to perform on the parameters of transparency, accountability and least corruption

  7. Methodology

  8. PAs Selection Criteria • Based on Annual Report 2007-08 those Central PA which has received at least 365 RTI application were selected i.e. one RTI a day • 48 Public authorities with more than 365 RTI application were identified • Questionnaire were filled up in consultations with the selected PA, mainly CPIOs and AAs • Consultations could be made only with 24 PAs

  9. The analysis of Results: Findings/Grading

  10. The analysis of Results: Findings/Grading

  11. The analysis of Results: Findings/Grading

  12. The analysis of Results: Findings/Grading

  13. Relationship b/w grading and receipt

  14. Assessment of Relationship, if Any • The Number of RTI requests in various PA s were plotted against the grading in the sub parameters to see if there exists any relationship between these parameters • The Number of RTI requests in various PA s were plotted against the grading for the overall performance to see if there exists any relationship between these parameters

  15. Observation: RTI regime has desirably increased citizen participation in Public Authorities

  16. Observation: Higher level e governance reduces filing of RTI application

  17. Observation: There exist a relationship b/w grading of PA s and filing of RTI application

  18. Conclusion • The result demonstrates that evidence for 58% of PA s (14/24) supports the view that higher the TALC Index lower is the number of RTI applications and vice versa • The lower Index for 6 PA s shows smaller number of application. These PA shave relatively much more friction points in terms of their public activities • For the remaining 4 PA s despite higher Index, the request of information was also higher. These PA s are BSNL, EPFO, SBI and DDA which has considerable public interface

  19. Thank You

More Related