2.1 DPEP financing would be covered as per parameters set out below:
1. As DPEP is externally funded it is subject to the parameters of external
assistance approved by CABE at its 46th meeting held on March 8-9, 1991 and
reiterated by its 47th meeting held on August 5-6, 1992. One of these parameters
is that external funding should be additional to the resources for education.
This would, in operational terms, mean that DPEP cannot finance:
(i) Salaries of sanctioned but unfilled posts.
(ii) Salaries of posts that should have been created as per the State Government
norms such as teacher posts that ought to be created as per the teacher-pupil
ratio.
(iii) Salaries of posts transferred to DPEP, e.g., if some of the functions
relating to textbook development are transferred along with posts to a Textbook
Development Board to be financed by DPEP, the posts transferred would not be
financed.
DPEP would finance coverage under State Government schemes only over and above
the level that the state would itself cover each year. 2. Inextricably linked to and flowing from the principle of additionality, is the need to safeguard existing expenditure on elementary education. This would help enable DPEP resources to remain an additionality. It is therefore a basic requirement of DPEP that at least 1991-92 levels of expenditure on elementary education are maintained in real terms.
3. The DPEP seeks to operationalise Para 7.4.6 of the programme of Action 1992
which enjoins that an ethos of cost effectiveness and accountability should
permeate every part of the education system. This ethos is all the more
necessary for DPEP as it is largely financed by external debt. In operational
terms this would mean, inter-alia, that administrative overheads should be a
bare minimum (the 6% ceiling on administrative cost is a ceiling and not an
entitlement). DPEP would not finance expansion of supervisory cadres, or
activities having no proven direct educational salience.
4. The cardinal principle is that every proposal has to be appraised and found
to conform to the criteria of relevance, feasibility and sustainability.
5. DPEP would not finance non-educational incentives such as free uniforms,
incentives for attendance, nutrition, etc. Only provision of free textbooks to
girls, SC/STs would be financed in project districts in States which do not have
such a scheme.
6. A central concern of the POA of 1992 is the convergence of the services such
as primary education, health, ECCE etc. DPEP would prefer measures to promote
convergence wherever such services exist rather than replicating the services.
Thus DPEP would not finance setting up of ECCE Centres in villages covered under
ICDS. Instead, it would seek to bring together the ICDS and the primary school.
Likewise it would not seek to replicate medical services or supplies in schools
but would facilitate diagnosis of learning disabilities through medical check-up
of students and better linkages between PHCs and the schools. Activities and
process which would promote these convergence would be financed.
8. Basic to the DPEP is the premise that there are large “unknown” areas that
are crucial to the achievement of UEE. Innovation, which is critical to DPEP,
entails systematic trial, evaluation, scaling and phasing. It would be expedient
to move systematically and in a phased manner. Programme implementation can
begin with core known programme components and progressively add on more and
more components. All new programmes and strategies that have been either
untested or are still at a nascent stage need to be systematically planned and
their implementation staggered.
9. DPEP stresses participative process whereby the local community would play an
active role in promoting enrolment, retention, achievement and school
effectiveness. This process would be institutionalized through the Village
Education Committee and bodies like Mother-Teacher Association. In line with
this approach of participative decentralized planning DPEP would not fund supply
of standardized packages of teaching-learning equipment, furniture and other
materials to schools. Instead VEC and the school would be facilitated to improve
the school facilities according to locally felt needs and priorities, through
provision of an amount of Rs 2000 per school per annum to be jointly operated by
the VEC and school. In addition the school will be provided an amount of Rs 500
per teacher to procure consumables and to develop, prepare and acquire low cost
teaching aids.
10. The State Component is intended to provide the resource and management up
for the implementation of the district components. The state component should
therefore comprise activities having direct relevance to the district
components. As already spelt out the state component would comprise, inter-alia,
development of MIS, training modules and instructional material. The financing
of the end-products of these developments would be limited to DPEP districts.
11. The basic premise of DPEP is contextuality. Therefore the relative emphasis
on access, equity, quality and achievement would vary from district to district.
Therefore in appraisal the DPEP National Management Structure expects
inter-district variations in programme components and investment patterns.
12. The first year of implementation would focus on putting systems in place and
setting processes in motion. This would include:formation of bodies like VECs,
Mother Teacher Association;
awareness building campaigns for providing the necessary institutional
infrastructure for stepping up enrolment, retention and for facilitating
performance of schools and NFE centres;
building up the training infrastructure by strengthening capacity of DIETs,
setting up Block Resource Centres and school clusters;
setting in motion processes such as development of training modules and
materials, reduction of academic burden and improving the efficiency in
production and distribution of learning materials.
13. Greater clarity has emerged on the national component and on the overall
programme design. The national components are now perceived to comprise:
(i) setting up of management structure at the National level
(ii) Development of MIS
(iii) Technical assistance to DPEP States in Project Planning and Management
(iv) Technical assistance in Pedagogy. This will include among other
thingsrationalization of academic burden (as per Yashpal Committee)development
of prototype training modules,programme for teaching numeracy and reading
skills, etc. (v) Programme Evaluation and Research (vi) Appraisal, Supervision and Monitoring arrangements for DPEP.
14. The programme design broadly encompasses the following inter-related and
mutually reinforcing areas:
(i) Building institutional infrastructure for action research, training and
academic supervision through augmenting/network/setting up of institutions at
the national, state, district and sub-district levels;
(ii) Building community support for primary education through institutions like
VEC, MTA and setting in processes such as awareness campaigns, micro-planning
and training of the functionaries of VEC, MTA;
(iii) Enhancing school effectiveness in terms of its reach (enrolment), grasp
(retention), classroom transaction and learning achievement;
(iv) NFE systems to reach out to those who would be still left in spite of
efforts to enhance school effectiveness;
(v) Convergence of ECCE, primary schooling and health;
(vi) Programmes and process with a focus on girls, SCs and STs.
15. DPEP would finance expansion of ECCE through establishment of ECCE centres
in villages not eligible to be covered by ICDS. In states with limited
experience of ECCE, new ECCE centres would be financed initially on a limited
scale only, in one district, or in one block per district, where inter-district
variations are substantial. The activity could be scaled up gradually over the
project period. The DPEP would not finance nutrition.
16. In order to improve the quality of ECCE, DPEP would finance development of
pre-school materials and training of functionaries in the ECCE centres set up
under DPEP. It would also finance the training of ICDS Anganwadi/Balwadi workers
in forging linkage with schools.
17. DPEP would strive for the development of an effective NFE system which can
meet the diverse educational needs of children whom the school, in spite of all
the measures designed to improve its effectiveness, would not reach. To this
end, DPEP would finance:
(i) to begin with, NFE centres as per the GOI scheme in states which are not
covered by that scheme.
(ii) development of a variety of NFE models;
(iii) extension coverage of viable and scalable NFE models and instructional
materials;
(iv) production and distribution of material for NFE programmes financed by DPEP
in project districts. (v) training related to NFE
financed by DPEP.
“To provide for the Integrated Education of the Disabled Children DPEP will fund interventions for the Integrated Education of primary school going children with integrable and mild to moderate disabilities. Towards this end DPEP will support: 1. Community Mobilization and Early Detection
i) interventions for community mobilization and parent contact so as to identify
type, degree and extent of disabilities amongst the primary level age group. As
far as possible these efforts will be integrated with on-going environment
building and micro-planning activities. Relevant data from the available sources
and surveys will also be tapped.
ii) early detention of disabilities amongst pre-scholars and provision for
necessary skill building for the parents and the children in ECCE and school
readiness programmes started under DPEP. In areas covered by other similar
programmes, DPEP will coordinate with that programme to provide support for the
above purpose, where necessary.
2. In-Service Teacher Training
iii) development of skills and competencies for early detection of disabilities,
functional assessment, use of aids and appliances, implementation of
individualized education plans and monitoring of progress in all primary school
teachers through in-service teacher training programmes. This training should be
recursive at block and cluster level and integrated with on going in-service
teacher training schedules and all training modules at SCERT, DIET & BRC level
should include a suitable component on integrated education.
3. Resource Support
iv) garnering resource support for integrated education at block/district level
through arrangements with NGOs and other organizations having expertise in this
field. Wherever necessary, DPEP will resource technical support with requisite
personnel and equipment at block level in order to provide guidance and
technical assistance to primary school teachers, the community, the parents and
children of that area. Such a facility will need to be supported by the State
Govt. after the project period is over.
v) Strengthening of DIETs in the field of Integrated Education to facilitate
development of suitable in-service training modules, providing training to
master trainers and continuous resource support to BRCs and CRCs for integrated
education.
vi) A Programme Officer for Integrated Education at the DPEP district project
office.
vii) the setting up of an advisory State Resource Group for integrated education
in DPEP with at least three experts in this field.
viii) an apex level resource group at the national level to provide guidance,
technical and academic support to Integrated Education under DPEP.
4. Educational Aids and Appliances
ix) provision of essential rehabilitation and educational aids and appliances to
primary school children, as per an approved list. Such items may be purchased
through DPEP funds subject to first assessing available aids and appliances
under existing schemes of the Department of Education, The Ministry of Welfare,
Govt. of India, etc.
5. Architectural Designs
x) development of innovative designs for primary schools and removal of
architectural barriers in existing schools to provide an enabling environment
for children with disabilities”.
18. DPEP would finance, subject to a ceiling of Rs 3 crores, strengthening of
state capacities in the area of educational planning and management which could
include inter-alia, setting up of a separate SIEMT, augmenting state level
structures such as SCERTs by creation of additional units for this purpose or
contracting services of existing resource institutes in the state such as IIMS
for training, research and related activities.
19. Financing of salaries would be on a declining basis, that is to say
beginning with 90% in the first two years, declining to 80% for the third,
fourth and fifth year, and 65% in the sixth and seventh year of the project. The
average works out to 75% of the salaries. In terms of these guidelines DPEP
would finance teachers’ posts in new schools being financed by DPEP. Depending
on the practice in a State, construction of school building can either precede
or follow the opening of a school. It is expected that as a result of the
interventions in DPEP, there would be substantial improvement in enrolment.
Therefore, with effect from third year of the project, teachers’ posts would be
financed on a school to school basis where the extra enrolment and the
teacher-pupil ratio (with reference to the first year of the project) warrant
such appointment.
20. DPEP would finance new posts created in institutions set up under DPEP such
as ECCE centres, Block Resource Centres, school clusters and State Institutes of
Education and Management, and in the State level societies and their units in
the districts.
21. DPEP would also finance extra posts created in existing institutions such as
DIET, SCERT for assisting DPEP.
22. However the salaries of existing state government officials holding
positions in DPEP on an ex-officio basis and salaries of supervisory and
administrative staff at secretariat, district and sub-district level, will not
be financed by the DPEP. Wherever amalgamation or up-gradation of existing
structures is proposed, state government’s commitment towards meeting salaries
of existing posts would be carried over so that DPEP finances salaries of only
additional staff.
23. DPEP will finance civil works (limited to 24% of project cost) such as
construction of new primary schools, new class rooms, major repairs and
rehabilitation's of schools, construction of toilets, residential schools, rooms
at ECCE centres, water supply and electrification, SIEMT, and other state
educational facilities as approved by DPEP. Maintenance would be financed as per
state norms and be within the 24% ceiling.
24. DPEP would not finance construction activities in aided or private schools,
NGOs, other associations or groups.
25. Constructions of offices would not be funded under DPEP barring office space
for the State Society on a small scale within the SIEMT or SCERT only.
26. DPEP would finance construction of residential schools for Scheduled Tribes
from the second year of the project onwards following proven evidence of demand
from the community and independent evaluation of similar schools.
27. Grants of Rs.500 per teacher per annum would be provided to the schools for
teaching learning aids and consumables. Further, a grant of Rs 2000 per annum
would be provided jointly to each school and VEC for improving school facilities
such as books and journals (other than textbooks), furniture health check up,
and bettering school environment, etc. No other financing would be provided to
schools for equipment.
28. All new schools constructed under DPEP in the first instance would be
provided with furniture as per state norms. Once established and functioning,
they would also qualify for the grant for teaching learning aids and facilities
as above.
29. DPEP will finance equipment needed for state society offices, the district
units of the societies, MIS cells in state and project district, in SIEMT,
SCERT, BRC, school clusters and other educational facilities as justified in the
proposals and approved by the DPEP.
30. Procurement procedures for all equipment to be acquired under DPEP have to
conform to approved procedures, which would be spelt out shortly.
31. DPEP will finance a design for learning processes and materials based on
rationalization and reduction of academic burden (as recommended by Yashpal
Committee Report); principles of minimum Levels of Learning; and multi-grade
teaching concepts. DPEP financing for this purpose would be limited to
development of a design up to camera ready stage, only. Financing of printing of
learning materials would be for the purpose of field trials only. Costs of
distribution of learning materials would not be borne by DPEP. DPEP would also
finance :
¾ improving efficiency in the processes of production and distribution of
teaching/learning materials.
¾ provision of free learning materials to SCs/STs and girls in project district
(if not already financed by State Government).
¾ printing and distribution (in project districts) of teachers’ handbooks and
student workbooks (if not already financed by State Government).
32. DPEP would not finance non-educational incentives for improving school
attendance and retention such as midday means, nutrition, free uniforms. It
would also not finance cash scholarships/awards except an awards programme for
schools that could be organized at block level with a view to promote
competition amongst schools in area such as enrolment and retention of girls,
SCs/STs. The award winning school can use the award for acquiring educational
material or facilities in the schools.
33. Vehicles can be provided under the project as follows:
State level : One vehicle for State Project Director, two vehicles for common
pool, one for Director of SIEMT and one for common pool of SIEMT.
District level : One vehicle for District Programme Coordinator and vehicles for
common pool calculated at the rate of one vehicle for every four blocks; One
vehicle for DIET for academic supervision through BRCs and school clusters.
Procurement of vehicles should be staggered as per need.
34. DPEP would finance in project districts training of :teachers of primary schools including private and aided schools; pre-primary teachers/workers other than those under ICDS; administrative staff; VEC/MTA members and NGOs.
35. It would also finance, for use in DPEP districts, development and printing
of training materials, development of training modules for teacher training,
ECCE and educational management.
36. All pedagogic training modules should integrate as far as possible the MLL,
multi-grade teaching, gender sensitivity, environmental and other relevant
concerns.
“DPEP will fund a National level Distance Education Programme as support to the
on-going effort for training teachers and other personnel in primary education.
DPEP will support :
Core project staff at the national level for designing, developing, producing
and delivering distance learning inputs and materials.
Strengthening institutions at national, state, district and sub-district levels
in designing, development, producing and delivering learning inputs and material
through recruitment of personnel, their training and acquisition of equipment
and materials.
Development of materials an training inputs for the client group.
Strengthening of DIETs as contact/study centres for the Distance Education
Programme.
Audio-visual equipment at BRC/CRC levels”.
In each DPEP district level, a fund of Rs 1 lakh per annum. The cost of a single
project should not exceed Rs 1 lakh; its duration should not exceed one year.
This fund would be administered by the district unit of the State society. At
the state level, a fund of Rs 20 lakh would be provided per annum. The cost of a
single innovative project should not exceed Rs 5 lakhs and its duration should
not exceed two years.
at the national level, a fund of Rs 100 lakh would be provided per annum. Each
individual project should not cost more than Rs 20 lakhs.
38. No diversion from these funds to other activities would be permissible.
Innovative projects could be taken up from the second year onwards. NGOs,
institutions like SCERTs, SIEMT, DIETs, BRCs, school clusters can be financed.
39. DPEP would also finance other programme costs, such as Consultant services,
professional fees; Grants to NGOs and institutions like IIMs for support to
programme activities
Research, evaluation studies, impact studies;
Fellowships. 40. The above list is not exhaustive. As programme evolves and new activities come up, the eligibility for DPEP financing will be decided by the Project Approval Board at the national level. |