NREGA in Orissa: Back to Basics?

1
NREGA in OrissaBack to Basics?
2
NREGA Evaluation Criteria

• Compliance with Act/Guidelines
• Quality of process (e.g. participation)
• Realisation of workers entitlements
• Socio-economic impact

3
NREGA Basic Entitlements

• Work on demand
• Unemployment allowance
• Minimum wages
• Payment within 15 days
• Worksite facilities
• No gender discrimination
• Prompt redressal

4
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)

5
Part 1

• Selected Survey Findings

6
Awareness Levels are Still Very Low
Proportion () of sample worksites where few or
none of the labourers were aware of

• 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

7
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

8
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.

9
Work on Demand?

• Did most labourers employed at this worksite get
  employed in response to an application for work?
  
• YES 7
• NO 93

10
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

11
Payment of Minimum Wages Half Empty!

• 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

12
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).

13
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.

14
No Worksite Facilities

• Proportion () of worksites that had
• Drinking water 39
• First-aid kit 7
• Child care facility 3

15
Participatory Planning A Long Way to go

• Proportion () of sample GPs that
• had a shelf of projects 46
• Proportion () of worksites that
• were selected from a shelf of projects 30

16
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

17
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 wont migrate.
• Most labourers prepared to work 100 days, even
  more if possible.

18
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.

19
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!

20
Part 2

• Transparency and Corruption

21
The Traditional System of Corruption

• Contractor Raj
• Dual records (kachha/pacca)
• PC system
• Contractor-politicians nexus

22
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!

23
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

24
Survival of Contractors

• Proportion of worksites where
• evidence of contractor
• involvement was found 56

25
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.

26
PC System Persists

• Percentages paid by contractors in Balangir

• PEO 5
• GP Secy 3
• Misc 3
• TOTAL 22

• BDO 2
• JE 5
• AE 3
• Block staff 1

27
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.

28
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

29
Muster RollsAdjustment or Fraud?

• Workers without job cards are often clubbed
  with others in the MRs.
• Wages of several team members are often entered
  in one persons name.
• Fudging of MRs is common fake names, inflated
  days, etc.
• Badhigam Fake muster roll!

30
Elusive Worksite Boards

• Proportion () of worksites that
• had a worksite board 59
• Proportion () of boards
• that mentioned the wage rate 55

31
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.

32
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

33
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

34
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.

35
Part 3

• Recommendations
• (see Interim Report at www.righttofoodindia.org)

36
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

37
If it can be done in Kultajore, why not elsewhere?