THE PLANNING PROCESS IN DPEP
Copy Right:
DPEP Calling, Volume VI, No.
11, December 2000, Government of India, MHRD, New Delhi
Background:
DPEP lays emphasis on preparation of need based plans
in a decentralised manner, through participatory approach with
district as a 'unit' of planning. Based on the needs of
districts, the state component plans are also prepared in a
similar manner. The main objective
of DPEP
is universalisation of primary education, which requires
preparation of a holistic plan that lays equal emphasis on
universal access, equity, capacity building of stakeholders and
improvement in achievement level of learners. A systematic
understanding about linkage and interdependence in all these
aspects is required to formulate strategies for effective
interventions. Improvement in the quality of education is
essential to solve the problems of dropout, irregular attendance
and low achievement of children. It has been realised that these
objectives can only be achieved through preparation of need
based and realistic plans, the planning process for which has to
be participatory, involving not only planners but also
teachers, parents, panchayat members and other concerned
persons. The nature of plan that emerges there upon largely
depends on the process of planning adopted by the states as
well as the districts.
Though guidelines for DPEP have been prepared at the
national level, the states have a great deal of flexibility and
autonomy to decide about the planning process. There exists
sufficient scope for delineating suitable strategies and
activities in the plans. The thrust areas of plans can vary from
one district to another within a state because of local and
context specific needs. That is why, within a state, one may
find that the districts with high concentration of tribal
population can prepare their Annual Work Plan with special
emphasis on tribal education, while the other districts can lay
emphasis on the education of migratory children, if migration
appears to be their problem.
In DPEP 'Perspective Plans' are prepared for the
entire project period of five to seven years, which involves delineating
project goals and major strategies to achieve these goals. The sustainability
as well as phasing out of the project activities are important considerations
while preparing these plans. The Annual Work Plans are prepared keeping the
perspective plans in view, but the districts AWP&Bs (Annual Work Plan and
Budget) may deviate from initial perspective plans, if the need arises. The
necessary data and information must support the strategies designed. This has
necessitated creation of authentic database in each state. Most of the states
have strengthened their EMIS and conducted house to house survey and micro
planning for creation of authentic database, though as per information given
in AWP&Bs of the current year, use of this data for planning is still
limited in some states. Due to the growing emphasis on micro planning, it has
been realised that, the 'unit' for planning may be changed gradually from
district to sub district level and further to 'habitation' and 'school levels'.
Visualising this need, several training programmes on micro planning have been
conducted at the national level, emphasising preparation of "Village
Education Plans" and "School Development Plans".
Since DPEP is a time bound project with limited
financial resources, prioritisation of needs becomes an important aspect in planning. Prioritisation of needs
helps districts to decide the thrust areas and to formulate strategies and
activities accordingly. This, in turn, helps in preparing a realistic budget.
The states have also been suggested to establish coordination and convergence
with other concerned departments and developmental programmes for proper
utilisation of funds in a cost-effective way.
It has been envisaged that capacity building of
project functionaries is essential to prepare a realistic plan, because they
have no previous experience of preparing such educational plans. Therefore,
financial provision for establishing SIEMAT with trained and qualified faculty
at the state level has been made in the DPEP The SIEMAT can help the states not
only in preparation of plans but also to improve planning process by conducting
trainings and workshops on different aspects of planning for capacity building
of project functionaries. Provisions have also been made to improve
infrastructure facilities of DIETs, which help the districts in preparation of
plans. It has been visualized that involvement of these institutions would make
planning process more participatory and sustainable. In addition, provisions
exist for evolving a decentralized and flexible project management structure
for smooth functioning of the programme.
Considering the importance of decentralised process
in preparation of a need based and context specific plan, this study has been
undertaken to review the planning process, prevalent in different states. An
attempt has been made to discuss various issues, relevant for educational
planning and management. It should help to understand the problems and
constraints the states are facing in developing a decentralised planning
process. An effort has been made to assess the extent to which the present
planning process has helped the states in improving the quality of AWP&B
and its effective implementation. Emphasis has been given to explain the
measures that the states have planned to undertake for strengthening planning
process in the coming years. It is expected that this study will help in
identifying further interventions needed for improving planning process at the
national as well as state level.
Objectives:
'The
main objectives of this study are :
-
To make an assessment of
the process of educational planning prevalent in the DPEP states
-
To elicit evidence of
local specific planning in the AWP&B documents of the district and
-
To assess whether the
states/districts have proposed any activity for capacity building of its
project functionaries for planning or not.
Approach:
Out of fifteen, seven DPEP states have been selected
for the purpose of this study. To study the planning process, the project
functionaries at the state, district and sub district levels have been
consulted. This has provided an important insight into the perception of
different functionaries about the planning process. The extent to which all
these functionaries get involved in the planning process has been assessed by
undertaking elaborate discussions with them. A better reflection about the
educational situation and its implications on planning has been explored
through school visits. To understand the impact of planning process on the
quality of plan, the AWP&Bs of one or two districts from each selected
state have been reviewed. A checklist has also been prepared for interaction
with the various field functionaries.
These
state visits included:
-
Interaction with the
functionaries at the SPO & DPO
-
Visits to BRC and CRC/
CLRC (in case of West Bengal)
-
Visits to schools
a) for
interaction with teachers and VEC members and
b) to
observe the classroom situation and physical environment of the schools.
-
The Annual Work Plans of
the districts have been reviewed with a particular focus on database,
linkages of strategies and activities with data, the linkage between
activities and budget and also to assess how far these budgets are
realistic.
Assessment of planning process has been done on the
basis of observations made at the time of state visits and reviewing the
section on 'planning process' of AWP&Bs. Analysis of planning process has
been made mainly in the following areas:
-
Whether planning teams
exist at different levels or not;
-
Whether forums have been
created and used to discuss the specific problems of districts, blocks
or habitations or not;
-
Whether forums have been
created and used to discuss the specific problems of districts, blocks or
habitations or no;
-
Extent to which the data
have been utilised in planning the strategies;
-
The thrust areas of
plans and how these thrust areas have been identified;
-
The plan of the state to
strengthen and sustain the decentralised planning process in the coming
years.
The study presents a detailed analysis of planning
process of the seven states namely: Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra (Phase
I), West Bengal, Gujarat Himachal Pradesh (Phase II) and Uttar Pradesh (Phase
III). For the purpose of this study, Bangalore (Rural) and Mysore districts of
Karnataka, Cuddalore and Thiruvannamalai of Tamil Nadu, Jalna and Parbhani of
Maharashtra, Banaskantha of Gujarat, South 24 Parganas of West Bengal, Sirmour
and Nahan of Himachal Pradesh and Ghaziabad of Uttar Pradesh have been visited.
These states have been selected after appraisal of AWP&Bs of these
districts for the year of 2000-01. It has been noticed at the time of appraisal
of AWP&Bs, that majority of the Phase-1 states have been able to develop
more decentralised planning process in comparison to the Phase II states and
Phase III states like Uttar Pradesh. However, the states have been selected on
random basis from all the four regions of India.
Based on the findings of state specific studies, a
comparative analysis of various aspects related to planning process has been
given in the study.
Impact of planning process:
An attempt has been made to compare the planning
process of these states. AWP&Bs of some selected districts have been
referred to ascertain impact of planning process on the quality of plan.
It is evident from the studies that the planning
process varies from state to state. In some states, formation of an effective
planning team has been considered a pre-requisite for initiation of a
decentralised planning process. For instance, in Karnataka, Maharashtra and
Tamil Nadu, separate teams have been formed for AWP&B preparation. On the
other hand, different committees have been formed in West Bengal involving
functionaries of panchayat who are responsible for planning. Cooperation of
district administration in carrying out DPEP activities has also been observed
in all these states. To address block specificity, several consultations and
meetings are reported to have taken place at the sub district levels, before
plan preparation in all the Phase-1 states. Some of these states have developed
separate formats to get feedback from grassroot level functionaries i.e. VEC
members, teachers and CRC coordinators.
This shows that almost all the states have made concerted
efforts to evolve a decentralized and participatory planning process. This has
been possible due to the flexibility and autonomy the states have in deciding
their planning process. A comparative analysis of various aspects related to
planning process has been attempted in the subsequent paragraphs.
Planning Teams:
Formation
of planning teams at various levels is considered important to ensure a
decentralised planning process. The study reveals that planning teams exist at
different levels in Phase -I states of Maharashtra, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu.
In Maharashtra, separate teams at the state, district
and sub-district levels have been formed. The team at the SPO consists of nine
to twelve members, while DPO teams have included seven to ten persons. Apart
from project functionaries, some officials from Education Department are also
included in state and district level teams. The block level teams consist of BEO,
EDO, Resource Teachers, BRC Coordinators and some selected CRC coordinators.
The team at the cluster level includes CRC coordinator, Headmasters of centre
schools and VEC chairpersons. This suggests that in Maharashtra grassroots
level functionaries have also been included in the planning teams at different
levels.
Similarly, the planning teams have been formed at all
levels in Tamil Nadu. At the SPO, a planning wing consisting of Finance Officer
and three consultants is responsible for plan preparation, under the guidance
of Joint Director and Financial Advisor. Planning Teams consisting fourteen
members have been formed at the district level. The District Project
Coordinator (DPC) who also shares the responsibilities of Department of
Elementary Education, is the coordinator of this team. The responsibility of
plan preparation mainly lies with Additional District Project Coordinator
(ADPCs). Since they are also responsible for monitoring overall functioning of
DPEP in their districts, they are fully aware of the progress made in each
functional area. The coordinator of each functional area also participate in
the planning exercise. Thee grassroots level functionaries like, two BRC
supervisors, two Headmasters, one teacher, one teacher educator are also a
part of this team. Other concerned persons like, Financial Advisor, AEO, DIET
faculty members etc. are also included. VEC members and NGO representatives
are not part of the district planning team though some VEC members are involved
in preparatory exercises of school plans and block plans. The block level teams
consist of two AEOs, two BRC supervisors and three teacher educators. They are
responsible for identifying relevant issues in their respective blocks.
In Karnataka, planning teams exist at the district
and block levels. Apart from DPEP functionaries, elected representatives of
the districts, taluks and village level administration, prominent
educationists, VEC members, NGO representatives, member of teacher association
are also involved in planning exercise. The block level teams have been formed
recently and members of these teams have been oriented to DPEP activities and
the planning process. The cluster level planning team is yet to be formed.
From the above discussion, it is evident that all
the three Phase-1 states have developed planning teams at the district and
sub-district levels. Responsibilities of identification of needs of districts
have been shared with grassroots functionaries. Now, these states are making
efforts to train its project functionaries in various techniques of planning.
It has been realised that due to lack of proper orientation and training, they
are unable to participate effectively. However, interaction with grassroots
level functionaries reveals that their role in planning process remains
confined to the identification of specific educational needs. It is difficult
for them to formulate appropriate strategies and activities to address the
problems. Budget preparation appears to be a difficult task for them. More
workshops and meetings need to be organized, for these functionaries to ensure
their effective participation in planning exercise.
Formation of teams at various levels is also evident
to some extent in the case of DPEP II states. The report on planning process in
West Bengal suggests that the state has evolved a participatory process of
planning by creating or restructuring various committees at the district and
sub-districts levels. These committees are expected to play a crucial role in
planning, but presently they are functioning largely as advisory committees.
Some of these committees consist of the members from some other departments.
It is difficult for them to get actively involved in planning exercise, as they
are preoccupied with the work in their respective departments. Moreover, lack
of proper orientation prevents these members from actively participating in
the process of AWP&B preparation. However, formation of these committees
has made it possible for DPEP to establish coordination with other concerned
departments. This has helped the state in working out a convergence plan for
some of the DPEP activities. The state is planning to form a core planning team
at the district level and to orient the members of the team in various aspects
of planning techniques. It is mention worthy, that a separate committee (DPTC)
has been formed to look after various pedagogic inputs provided by DPEP
Establishment of Circle Level Resource Centres has
facilitated the process to create a proper school support as well as
monitoring system Creation of a team at the circle level including Resource
Teachers (RTs), Circle Project Coordinator (CPC) and one/two support staffs
has helped in carrying out programme activities at the grassroot level.
However, involvement of this team in planning is yet to be materialised. A new
initiative of the state in this direction, is organisation of noon and
afternoon meeting sessions which has resulted in frequent interaction of CPCs
with VEC members and teachers. This year, a group of Key Resource Persons will
be formed. Five persons from each district will be included in this group. This
group will be responsible for planning and their training will be conducted
before preparation of next year's AWP&B.
While significant progress in terms of formation of
various committees is evident in the case of West Bengal, the SPO in Himachal
Pradesh is striving for creation of teams as well as for integration of DPEP
with mainstream Education Department, particularly at the district level. A
commendable achievement of the district level functionaries mainly of the DPC,
Sirmour has been the establishment of coordination with senior officials of
District Administration as well as with DIET faculty members. Their cooperation
and involvement have facilitated the personnel at DPO to take several important
policy decisions, particularly in the area of training and civil work
construction. This year the state has decided to develop cluster level groups
to conduct different training programmes at the cluster level. This group will
consist of experienced teachers with special skills and expertise in their
respective subjects. Subsequently, this resource group will be involved in
planning exercises also.
In Gujarat, separate planning teams do not exist at
any level including SPO. All the unit heads (incharge of functional areas) and
senior officials sit together and finalize the plan with very little
consultation with district functionaries. No special effort has been made to
involve the functionaries from other concerned departments and institutions
like DIET in planning exercises.
From the above discussion, it is clear that West
Bengal and Himachal Pradesh have initiated a decentralised planning process,
while Gujarat is lagging behind. Gujarat needs to form planning teams at the
state as well as at the district level. Efforts are also needed to make
planning process decentralised and participatory by ensuring involvement of
teachers, headmasters and other stakeholders from grassroot level like, VECs,
MTAs and Panchayat members.
Though DPEP was launched in Uttar Pradesh much later,
the state has some experience from Basic Education Project. The DPEP programme
was expanded in Ghaziabad district only in 1999. The study reveals that due to
previous experience of BEP and DPEP Phase-11, co-ordination with other departments
of the government has been achieved in preparation of district perspective
plan from the very beginning. Existence of a committee for the purpose of
planning is evident in Ghaziabad district. This committee has been formed at
the time of preparation of the 'perspective plan'. Officials from various
departments are included in this committee.
Preceding discussion reveals that the states are
making concerted efforts to establish teams at various levels. Making these
teams functional is a major task before all of them. Earlier experience of
states like West Bengal had been that the core planning teams Were formed at
the time of preparation of prospective plans, but it could not function for
long. One of the reasons for this ineffectiveness was lack of capacity building
of the members of the teams. Hence, it has been realised that the capacity
building of the planning team members which include project functionaries as
well as officials from other concerned departments is essential.
Capacity
Building
It is imperative at this stage to review the extent
to which various states have taken initiatives for capacity building of the
project functionaries. In Maharashtra, commendable effort has been made for
imparting trainings to all the project functionaries working at various
levels. Five members of the state planning team along with a few members of the
district planning teams received trainings at the national level institutes
like NIEPA and NSDART. Several workshops and meetings have been conducted for
capacity building of the district level functionaries. Interaction with the district
and sub-district level functionaries of Parbhani and Jalna districts reveals
that all the BRC and CRC coordinators have received trainings in AWP&B
preparation and in micro planning exercise. In both the districts, all the
headmasters of centre primary schools and one member from each VEC have been
oriented in DPEP planning. They have attended block level and cluster level
workshops also. It suggests that there are conscious efforts to make all the
project functionaries trained on various planning techniques to ensure their
active participation for sustenance of decentralized and participatory
planning process.
In Tamil Nadu, several steps have been undertaken to
enhance the skills of planning teams for AWP&B preparation. It has been
observed that in the initial years, involvement of District Planning Teams was
confined to sharing of necessary information with the state planning team
before AWP&B preparation. Based on first AWP&B manual, the district
teams started preparing AWP&B independently from 1998 onwards. In 1999 and
also in 2000, the District Planning Teams of Phase-1 districts have prepared
entire plan and budget with little support from the State Planning Team. It has
been possible, because firstly, they consulted Manual of AWP&B preparation,
which provided them proper guidance for preparation of need based plan and
secondly, several workshops were conducted to discuss various issues before
AWP&B preparation and draft plans were prepared by the district teams
based on the recommendation made in workshops. It has been reported that
before preparation of AWP&B of 2000-01, three workshops had been conducted
for AEOs, BRC supervisors and CRC coordinators. The state level officials
attended these workshops. In the fourth meeting, drafts of AWP&Bs, were
finalized. In addition to these workshops, several trainings have been
conducted for Headmasters, CRC coordinators and BRC supervisors in which
preparation of cluster plan and methodology of data analysis have also been
included as the topics of discussion. From these instances it is clear that
Tamil Nadu also has worked on capacity building of project functionaries in a
systematic way like Maharashtra.
In Karnataka, the state level functionaries have
been trained at the NSDART for AWP&B preparation. A significant thrust has
been given for capacity building of grassroot level functionaries. The VEC
members are trained by BRC and CRC coordinators while Headmasters are trained
by DIETs and BRC coordinators. Training on micro-planning is being conducted
through trained resource persons at the district as well as block level.
Frequent visits of state and district level functionaries have resulted in
better networking with the grassroot level functionaries. This has a significant
implication for planning and management.
It has been observed that, similar attempts for
capacity building of project functionaries have been made in Phase II states
also. This year in West Bengal, main emphasis has been given to capacity
building of district and sub district level functionaries. Workshops to be
conducted by the district level micro planning team, VECs, CPCs and Resource
Teachers (RTs) are planned to clarify their roles in planning. A group of Key
Resource Persons (KRPs) is going to be formed in which five persons from each
district will be included. A state level workshop will be conducted for these
resource persons and a guidebook for planning will be given to them. In 'noon'
and 'afternoon' meeting sessions, VEC members and teachers are expected to be
informed about the techniques of need identification, formulation of need
based strategies and even budgeting of these activities. This will help them to
prepare a comprehensive Village Education Plan. It is a matter of concern, how
the state is going to conduct so many trainings in sequenced manner during
short period of time between November and February before the finalisation of
AWP&B in March-April. A systematic time schedule for all these training
needs to be prepared. Mechanism of incorporation of micro level plans like
Village Education Plans and school based plans (prepared by VEC and teachers),
circle plans (prepared by CPCs and RTs), and the district plans, which will be
prepared by key resource persons in AWP&Bs needs to be decided before
initiation of process of preparing AWP&d3s for the forthcoming year.
In Himachal Pradesh, it has been reported that
regular meetings have been conducted to get the feedback at district level from
BRC and CRC and at the block level from VECs and teachers. However, it seems
that less thrust is being given on planning in such meetings because no
workshop has been conducted so far to train the project functionaries at the
district and sub district level. In initial years, some of the project
functionaries of the SPO received training at SIEMAT, Allahabad and NSDART,
Mussoorie. After receiving these trainings, the SPO functionaries have prepared
the state component plan. To make district level functionaries better aware
about planning process, a state level workshop has been conducted recently on
preparation of AWP&B and institutional planning. It is likely to enhance
capacity of project functionaries to prepare plan for each functional area.
Workshops on the same issues have been proposed to be conducted at the district
level also. Simultaneously, training on micro planning has been proposed for
grassroot functionaries. Resource persons have already received training and
now, they are likely to train the grassroot functionaries. The state has also
planned to conduct training for CHT and BEO as their participation is being
perceived as essential in making planning exercise participatory and
decentralised. The state has also initiated capacity building of CRC
coordinators to plan for development of each school. The process has already
started in Banikher block of Chamba disrtrict. Moreover, the proposal is to
expand this programme to other districts also. Another development that has taken
place in the state is the establishment of SIEMAT which is helping the state in
conducting various training programmes.
From the above discussion it is evident that both
West Bengal and Himachal Pradesh have planned and initiated activities for
capacity building of the project functionaries, working at various levels. An
emphasis on training of grassroot level functionaries for their better
participation in planning process has also been reported from both the states.
It is expected that after completion of the trainings and workshops, these
states may be able to ensure the participation of all project functionaries in
plan preparation.
Contrary to the situation in West Bengal and Himachal
Pradesh, Gujarat has not made any serious attempt for the capacity building of
project functionaries, particularly of those working at the district and sub
district level. Though some of the project functionaries received training in
NSDART and NIEPA, but these were not followed up by any other state level training
to promote planning skills of other functionaries, including those working at
the district and sub-district levels. For more than last one year, no training
programme on planning has been conducted. The state has no plan to conduct any
such training and workshop this year also.
Moreover, all the functional area incharge at the DPO
(Banaskantha) appear to be newly appointed and untrained. They have been found
to be completely unaware of the strategies and activities undertaken so far, as
well as, about the rationale for under taking these activities. Most of the
experienced and trained functionaries have been transferred to the new DPEP
districts. Capacity building of these newly appointed functionaries is urgently
required. They need to be trained not only in their respective functional
areas, but also in intricacies of planning. The functionaries at the block and
cluster level perceive planning as a seasonal exercise to identify tentative
needs, regarding physical infrastructures of the schools in particular. Their
skill in micro-planning has not been developed. Although, micro-planning in 90
villages (30 from each DPEP district), has been conducted the state did not
expand this activity to other villages. All of this indicates that the capacity
building of project functionaries has never been the thrust area of planning in
Gujarat.
In Ghaziabad district of Uttar Pradesh, most of the
planning exercises have taken place at the state and district levels. The
project has just begun here. Previous experiences of BEP and DPEP phase II have
helped in making the planning process decentralised to the extent possible
considering that it is still in its beginning stage. Though the district level
functionaries have been trained at SIEMAT Allahabad and DIET, the sub district
level functionaries are yet to be trained. However, visioning workshops for
teachers have already been conducted. There is a need to organise training for
district and sub district level functionaries to sustain the participatory
planning process, initiated at the time of preparation of perspective plan. Forums
also need to be created for discussing various issues related to planning and
implementation of the DPEP activities.
It is evident that all DPEP I states have stressed on
capacity building of various project functionaries and other concerned persons
to ensure their effective participation in planning. Similar activities have
been started for enhancing the capacity of project functionaries in districts
where DPEP has been expanded. Plan for capacity building in Maharashtra seems
to be rigorous and systematic. Major emphasis has been given on capacity
building of grassroot functionaries. Similar interventions for capacity
building have also been attempted by Phase II states like West Bengal and
Himachal Pradesh. Ghaziabad in Uttar Pradesh (Phase III), has shown a good
beginning in participatory planning. In contrary to the efforts made by all
these above mentioned states, such serious attempt lacking in Gujarat for
capacity building of the project functionaries for planning. The state needs to
pay immediate attention on this issue.
Various steps for capacity building might have had an
impact on the planning process of these states. A critical review of the
planning process may help developing a proper understanding about the trend
the states have followed to develop an effective process of AWP&B
preparation in recent years.
Process
of Plan
Preparation
In case of Maharashtra, it has been observed that a
series of workshops and meetings were conducted before preparation of AWP&B
to identify the needs and strategies. Meetings at the cluster level and Gatt
Sammelans (meeting of VEC, MTA, PTA and school teachers) have been organised to
identify the needs at the grassroot level. Based on house to house survey data
and the out come of different meetings and workshops, prioritization of needs
and activities is done at the district level. A significant improvement in the
planning process has been observed in
the initiative of the states to
prepare block and cluster level plans .
These plans are utilised for preparation of district plans. However, it has
been observed that in the absence of proper coordination between block and the
district level officials, prioritisation of needs becomes difficult. As a
result of this, some instances of mismatch between needs of block and district
may be found in the AWP&B document. In this context, it can be suggested
that the state needs to focus on block specificity while setting the priorities
during plan preparation.
Tamil Nadu also has followed a systematic process of
planning. Based on the information collected from schools and experience gained
through training and workshops, plans are prepared on the lines of
instructions given in AWP&B preparation manual. Last year, several
workshops have been conducted before preparation of AWP&B. In the first
meeting, the state planning team interacted with district and sub-district
level functionaries, including AEOs, one BRC supervisor and one CRC coordinator.
In the second meeting, appraisal team members and Joint Director from SPO
interacted with the District Planning Team. The third meeting was oriented to
discuss budgeting and costing. Two members from planning teams of each
district attended this meeting. In the fourth meeting, the drafts of
AWP&Bs were finalised. It is obvious that all the district and sub district
functionaries are still not involved in the planning exercises. Instead, a few
selected functionaries are participating in planning exercise. The state needs
to look into this issue as involvement of all the project functionaries for
participatory planning.
Most importantly, micro level planning has been
undertaken seriously in Tamil Nadu. Though house to house survey has not been conducted
in recent years, plans for some of the selected clusters have been prepared. It
has been reported that these plans are being utilised while preparing AWP&B. This year further
stress has been given on capacity building of cluster coordinators to prepare
cluster plans. Plans will be prepared for all the clusters of two selected
blocks from each district. Based on these cluster plans, block plans will be
prepared which will be utilised for AWP&B preparation. The state has
conducted cohort study and test for assessing achievement levels of 5th
standard students of government school. Schools will be ranked on the basis of
the results of these two activities. It has been proposed that thirty schools
with low level of performance will be identified in each block. More intense
plans will be prepared for these thirty low performing schools, Block Education
Officers will be responsible for preparation and execution of these plans.
In Karnataka, data generated through house to house
surveys and EMIS are used for the identification of needs. These needs are
verified in CRC, VLC and PTA meetings. It has been reported that activities
such as Kalajatha, Chinnar Mela and Nali Kali are planned on the basis of
information. In addition, minutes of monthly review meetings at district and
state levels are also used at the time of formulation of AWP&B. Recently,
attention has been paid on forming block planning teams and there capacity
building. In the coming years, separate plans will be prepared for each block,
which will be incorporated into the AWP&Bs of the districts. It has been
reported that before preparation of plans, the project functionaries of the
DPO visit the villages and schools to identify specific needs. District
specific issues are discussed in a separate meeting which is attended by
Divisional Commissioner and members of Zilla Panchayat and Taluka Panchayat.
Similar emphasis on participatory planning process
has been reported from West Bengal also. Before formulation of AWP&B,
state and district level workshops have been conducted to identify and
prioritise needs and strategies. Finalisation of plan and budget has been done
at the state level. Two functionaries (incharge of functional areas) from the
DPO finalised the plans in consultation with Deputy SPD at the SPO. Involvement
of sub district level functionaries in planning process till last year was
insignificant. This year, state has planned to follow more systematic and
participatory process for preparation of AWP&B. It is worth mentioning
here, that this year the state has proposed conducting a workshop for Circle
Project Coordinators (CPCs) and Resource Teachers, who have important role in
planning. A group of Key Resource Persons will be formed for planning and a
state level workshop will be organised for them. Meetings will be conducted
for VEC members and teachers to make them familiar with planning techniques.
Feedback given by VEC members, teachers, resource teachers and CPCs will be
taken into consideration while preparing AWP&Bs. This year, CPCs will be
preparing plans for their circles while the KRPs will prepare plans for their
respective districts. On the basis of these plans, AWP&Bs of the districts
will be finalized. Apart from these, separate formats have been prepared to collect
data for school as well as for preparation of village education plans. It is
obvious that while West Bengal has systematically planned to ensure
participatory planning process, the state now will also have to develop a
mechanism to incorporate all these micro level plans in the AWP&Bs of the
districts. The process may be started with preparation of village and school
plans. Based on these, circle plans need to be prepared by CPC and RTs, which
can be used by KRPs to prepare the district plans.
In Himachal Pradesh, initiatives for improving
process of plan preparation have been undertaken this year. A state level
workshop for AWP&B preparation and micro planning has been conducted
recently. Till last year, the state had faced a lot of difficulties in
identifying specific needs due to non availability of authentic data. This
year, the DISE format has been modified and a separate format has been included
to collect information on out of school children. In addition, two more formats
have been prepared to assess the needs of schools and villages as well.
Training for Resource Persons on micro planning has been conducted at the
district level. This year, there is a plan to organise capacity building of
sub district level project functionaries in planning. A workshop at the
district level. The SPO has a plan to involve SIEMAT and DIET functionaries at
every stage of planning. It appears that the state has evolved a plan of
action (POA) for improving process of planning in the coming year.
It has been mentioned earlier that in Gujarat the
process of planning has not been decentralised to the desired extent. No
attempt has been made towards formation of planning teams as well as capacity
building of project functionaries. So far, the AWP&Bs have been prepared at
the SPO with little consultation with DPO personnel. Although monthly review
meetings are regularly conducted at DPO, BRC and CRC minutes of those meetings
are not utilised for planning. The plans are mainly prepared on the basis of
DISE reports. Since, DISE provides the information on schools, it may not be
possible to identify habitation specific needs if only DISE data are utilised
for planning. No other intervention, except opening of alternative schools,
has been made on the basis of house to house survey data, conducted in three
DPEP districts. Interaction with the project functionaries at the district and
state level reveals, that so far, plan for improvement in the process of
AWP&B preparation has not been prepared and not a single activity related
to AWP&Bs preparation has been budgeted in AWP&B of 2000-01.
Though
the DPEP programme has been implemented in Ghaziabad district recently, the
district functionaries have shown keen interest for improvement in planning
process. Workshops have been proposed for district and sub-district level
functionaries before formulation of AWP&B. Major thrust has been given on
convergence with other departments. Most importantly, this district has used
house to house survey data for formulation of major strategies in the
perspective plan. As the program has just begun, the EMIS is yet to be
functional. It is expected that in coming years, a significant improvement in
planning process will be possible when all the grassroot level functionaries
i.e. CRC, BRC and VEC will be appointed. Capacity building of these functionaries
will be taken up seriously for smooth functioning of programme as well as
Strengthening of decentralized planning process in inc following years. The
state level functionaries need to help the district in carrying out capacity
building activities.
Utilisation of Data:
It is clear that need based plans cannot be prepared
without sufficient and authentic database. Hence, collection and utilisation of
data have been considered the most important task in almost all the seven
states. Efforts made by the states in this respect are described in the
subsequent paragraphs.
In
Maharashtra, house to house survey has been conducted in 1999 in all the DPEP
districts. This has been computerised and consolidated at the district level.
EMIS data provide valuable information on physical infrastructure of schools,
Pupil Teacher Ratio and Net Enrolment Ratio etc. It has been reported that this
data has been utilised for preparation of AWP&B of 2000-01. On the basis of
micro planning data, important strategies have been formulated to cover
children of sex workers, leprosy patients, scavengers and children working in
slaughter houses. Some of the districts have proposed for conducting survey in
urban pockets to identify the educational needs of the deprived children.
In Tamil Nadu data from various sources are available
for planning. Necessary information is collected through school plans and
cluster plans, while EMIS data are used to calculate Gross Access Rate, Gross
Enrolment Ratio, Dropout Rate, Repetition Rate etc. These key indicators help
in identifying, the thrust areas of planning.
In Karnataka, besides EMIS and microplanning data,
'Block Activity Registers', kept in DPCs office are also used for planning.
These registers provide update information about the activities carried out in
the blocks. EMIS data, updated every six months, is the important data source
for planning. The minutes of monthly review meetings, conducted at the
district and state levels are also utilised for planning purpose.
Increasing emphasis on preparation of need based
plans has been reported in DPEP phase II states also. In West Bengal,
consistent efforts have been made to collect important data through DISE
formats. The state has also conducted house to house survey at large scale.
The data is now being computerised. However, many discrepancies have been
found while compilation of this data. Now the cross checking and correction of
this data is continuing at the district level. It is expected that this data
will be utilised for formulation of strategies and activities of AWP&Bs
next year.
Although house to house survey has not been conducted
at an extensive scale in Himachal Pradesh, improvement in EMIS has made available
some essential data needed for planning. It has been reported that the EMIS
formats have been modified at the state level and another format to collect
information on out of school children and unserved habitations has been added.
In addition, separate formats for preparing village education plan and school
plan have been prepared. It is expected that the collection of all these data
will be completed before preparation of AWP&B of the next year.
It may be pointed out that West Bengal and Himachal
Pradesh both need to pay attention for developing suitable mechanisms for cross
checking, compilation and consolidation of micro-planning data for its
effective use in planning. Moreover, these states also need to see the extent
to which it is possible to formulate habitation specific strategies on the
basis of findings of the house-to-house survey. For instance, a list of
habitations having maximum number of out of school and drop out children may be
prepared for this purpose. It has been reported by Bangalore Rural district of
Karnataka that this year all the BRC coordinators and BEOs have been instructed
to formulate habitation specific strategies for at least 15 such habitations
where 100% enrolment has been achieved. Similar kind of attempts may be useful
for other states also.
In Gujarat, it has been reported that no other source
of data except DISE are used for planning purpose. House to house survey has
been conducted a few years back, but the data collected has not been used so
far. Visit to a village of Banaskantha district, where micro-planning has been
conducted earlier, revealed that 93 out of total 214 children in 6-14 years age
are still not going to school. VECs in many villages are yet to be formed and
some of the posts of CRCs are also found to be vacant. In absence of these functionaries
no one is found responsible to look into such matter.
Ghaziabad district of Uttar Pradesh has made
commendable efforts for preparation of need based plan. House to house survey
was conducted, before preparation of perspective plan of the district.
Information derived from the survey has been used for prioritising strategies
for Perspective plan as well as AWP&B. The number of EGS, AS centres,
Anganwaris have been to be opened decided on the basis of these data.
Intervention in Maktabs and Madarsas is also decided on the basis of this
survey. The EMIS is yet to become functional. The district may now attempt at
identifying the specific needs, separate plan may be prepared for some blocks
on pilot basis. These can be included in the next year's AWP&B. The
district may also start identifying habitation specific needs on priority basis
using the recent house-to-house survey data and these may also be incorporated
in the AWP&B of the coming year.
Convergence:
After the detailed discussions about the process of
plan preparation, a few observations related to convergence need to be
mentioned here as convergence is one of the most important aspects of planning
and budgeting in DPEP It has been observed that all the state have taken
initiatives for achieving convergence with other departments in carrying out
various DPEP activities. In Maharashtra funds are available from JRY, LDF,
DRDA, SWD, Zilla Parishad, PRI and Municipal corporation for Civil Works.
Institutions like DIET and STB are involved for pedagogic improvement while
ICDS and Health Departments are involved for ECCE and IED. In Karnataka,
involvement of NGOs, officials from
other departments have already been enlisted. The state may need to
explore the possibility of convergence the Department of Rural Development.
Tamil Nadu has also worked out convergence plan with various departments like
Welfare Department, Health Department, Social Welfare Department, DRDA, TINIF
etc. Funds available from DRDA are being utilised for providing drinking water
facilities, construction of toilets and boundary walls.
In West Bengal, involvement of Pabchayati Raj
Department is quiet significant. NGO activists and officials from health
department are involved in IED programme. Funds from JRY, BMS, DAP BDP etc. are
being utilised for civil work activities. Zilla Parishad decides about the allocation
of funds from all these sources. It has been widely observed that cooperation
of District Administration has helped District Project Coordinators to carry
out their work efficiently. In Himachal Pradesh, cooperation of DIET
functionaries has proved particularly useful in completion of various tasks
related to pedagogic improvement. Convergence with the new scheme 'Saraswati Bal
Vidya Yojna' can help DPEP in diverting its fund provided for construction of
additional class rooms, as the new scheme has a provision for construction of
additional classroom in the entire state. Some efforts for convergence have
also been observed in Gujarat, where community has come forward to pool the
resources for making various provisions in schools, such as, drinking water,
repair and renovation, leveling of ground etc. The AWP&Bs of districts
have also mentioned about convergence with JRY, DRDA for construction works
and for providing drinking water facilities respectively. Convergence plan has
been evident in Ghaziabad district right from the beginning. In addition to
the officials from District Administration, functionaries from various other
departments like, Social Welfare, Labour, Health and Rural Development are
involved in DPEP
In the foregoing section, the process of formulation
of plans in all the seven states have been described at length. It is
imperative at this stage to examine the extent to which the process of plan
preparation has influenced the quality of AWP&Bs of these states. It is
expected that with the more stress on decentralization and participatory
process of planning, plans should be more realistic and need based.
Review of AWP&B:
The review of AWP&B of the two districts,
Parbhani and Jalna, of Maharashtra indicates that there is a significant
improvement in quality of plan as the process of planning in these districts
has been decentralised to a large extent. The participation of various
functionaries has been ensured by building their capacities. Several workshops,
training and meetings have been conducted before preparation of plan for
discussing the planning issues. EMIS and house to house survey data have been
used and included in the write up section of AWP&B. A clear linkage in
data, strategies and activities are found in these plans. In both the
districts, plans have been formulated according to the guidelines provided in
the AWP&B manual.
The linkage in information, strategies and activities
is properly established in the AWP&Bs of Thiruvannamalai, Cuddalore and
Villupuram districts. Various meetings and workshops have been conducted for
need identification and formulation of strategies, before preparation of
AWP&B of these districts. The plans have also incorporated specific needs
of blocks and of the deprived communities. These plans have also been prepared
as per instructions given in AWP&B manual, providing clear understanding
about progress, spill over and rationale behind formulation or dropping out of
various strategies and activities.
Similar attempt to follow a consultative process has
been reported from the two districts - Bangalore Rural and Mysore in Karnataka.
Formation of planning teams and their effective involvement in planning process
facili tated the districts to prepare need based AWP&B of 2000-01. the
issue that emerged from trainings, VEC mela, GP meetings, VEC meetings etc.
were discussed in greater details this year. As a consequence of this, certain
block specific activities have been included and budgeted in the plans. Use of
data and findings of research studies have made these plans more context
specific.
A significant improvement has been observed in
quality of AWP&Bs of South 24 Parganas and Jalpaiguri districts. It has
been possible because of initiatives taken by the state to identify specific
needs of the districts. AWP&Bs of both the district have explained planning
process in detail and budgeted certain activities for capacity building of
project functionaries in planning. Though the write up section of plan
document has explained all the strategies planned this year and the progress
of activities carried out last year, the financial tables have included budget
only for proposed activities. From next year onwards, plans need to be prepared
as per instructions given in the AWP&B manual.
In Himachal Pradesh, the AWP&B of Sirmour Nahan
and Lahaul & Spiti districts have elaborated each activity in the write up
section but it has not been supplemented with necessary data information.
Proper linkage in data, strategies and activities is not found in these plans.
Moreover, the financial tables were not given according to functional areas.
Similar problems are found in the AWP&Bs of Gujarat. These plans have not
mentioned the process of planning as well as the thrust areas of plan. It is
difficult to understand the amount of budget proposed for the activities of
each functional area. Since, the state has started the capacity building
activities for its project functionaries, it is expected that from next year
onwards, a more realistic and need based AWP&B will be prepared.
EMERGING
ISSUES
From the foregoing case studies, it is established
that planning process has an important role in improving quality of plan. It
is also clear that planning process is languishing in states like Gujarat
because serious thought has not been given for its improvement. Some crucial
issues which have emerged from the study are :
-
Barring Gujarat, all
other states have constituted planning teams at various levels. Their
effective functioning is now a prime concern before the states. Some
states like Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra have made systematic efforts to
build capacity of planning team members as well as project functionaries
for their effective participation in planning. In West Bengal, Himachal
Pradesh and Karantaka, though there have been some efforts for capacity
building, more systematic effort is needed. Gujarat needs to give immediate
attention to constitution of planning teams as well as their capacity building. Training on micro-planning
also needs to be undertaken on priority basis.
-
States which have
started preparing sub district plan such as block and cluster plans, need
to develop mechanism for better utilisation of these plans to address the
specific problems of a block and a cluster. Simultaneously, house to
house survey data need to be updated and utilised for identifying
specific needs of habitations. For example, in Gujarat the problem of
access is still continuing in some villages and pockets, though the state
has formulated a variety of commendable strategies for providing
schooling facilities to the deprived children. Absence of house to house
survey data may be one of the reasons for not addressing access issue
adequately.
-
Planning for improvement
in quality of schools needs to be emphasised in the coming years. Emphasis
needs to be given on preparation and implementation of plan for each
school involving teachers, VEC members, CRC and BRC coordinators. Many
states have already prepared school plans. The states need to encourage
CRCs and teachers to implement these plans.
-
It is necessary to
evolve a proper monitoring and support system for better networking with
grassroot level functionaries. Frequent visits to the schools by district
and state level functionaries provide an 'on site' support for effective
planning and implementation at school level.
-
Forums need to be
created to discuss various issues, including the state norms and policies,
relevant for primary education. Holding of regular review meetings may
serve this purpose. The minutes of review meetings can provide essential
inputs for formulation of strategies. Involvement of project functionaries
working at various levels in planning is expected to ensure better
implementation of the programme.
-
Finally, it can be said
that preparation of need based plans can be possible if decentralised and
participatory planning process is ensured.
Web
educationforallinindia.com
schoolreportcards.in
education.nic.in