Sunday 29 December 2013

EXPERIENCE OF CONVERSION OF ACCOUNTS FROM CASH BASIS TO ACCRUAL BASIS


INTRODUCTION:
In one of the land mark decisions[1] of Government of India, commercial entities under Currency and Coinage Division of Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance were corporatised with effect from 10th February 2006. There were nine such departmental organizations responsible for printing of currency notes, security paper, travel document and postal stationery, minting of coins, medals and medallions, production of security paper, etc.  The daunting task ahead was to ensure transformation of departmental units into a company registered under Indian Companies Act, 1956.  However, the immediate challenge before the management was to prepare accounts, consolidate and comply with statutory provisions. 
In order to achieve this, it was thought prudent to build on the available data and prepare accounts of the units with maximum possible accuracy.  These units were maintaining cash account and a subsidiary account namely proforma account. This is a kind of accounting record generated at the end of financial year by collecting and collating the data from cash accounts as well as other records. There is no set accounting principle and no prescribed format to collect and present information. Some broad outlines are stipulated such as requirement of preparation of Balance Sheet, Profit & Loss Accounts and method of calculation of depreciation.  Available data of proforma account was adopted and all expenses incurred by Government of India in running these units, net of earnings were taken into consideration to arrive at sources and deployment of funds.  As per the consolidation these funds amounted to Rs.3237.71 crores as on 10/02/2006[2].  In order to complete the preparation and compilation of accounts, account codes were devised, guidelines issued and continuous monitoring was done to achieve this objective in a time bound manner.  There were several challenges like non availability of accounting data, lack of trained manpower and resources, non availability of authentic and revalidated data on assets, preparation of books of accounts on commercial pattern and compliance with provisions of Companies Act, Income Tax Act and other statutory compliances.  With limited resources account was compiled deriving information from records maintained on cash basis.  Inputs were taken from cash accounts pertaining to cash items and from Proforma Accounts as well as other sources for non cash items and non-government transactions.  With concerted effort accounts upto 31/03/2006 were prepared, audited by Comptroller & Auditor General of India and presented to shareholders in first Annual General Meeting of the Company held in December 2006[3].  It is the first time when a Government of India company, created after conversion of Department has been able to get its accounts prepared and approved through all requisite authorities within one year of its creation.  
MANDATE OF MINISTRY OF FINANCE:
Government of India has several Ministries/Departments through which it discharges its administrative responsibilities. All departments enjoy financial powers delegated by the Parliament of India through Ministry of Finance. Ministry of Finance[4] has several other financial functions carried out through Boards, Authorities, Directorates and Divisions. Its Currency and Coinage Division is responsible for all policy matters relating to production and supply of currency notes and coins in India, actual production of currency notes and coins, production and issue of commemorative coins to mark important events and occasions, production of postage stamps and postal stationery like post-cards, envelopes, inland letter cards, etc, production of a large number of security items like Excise Duty Stamps, Judicial and Non-judicial stamps, MICR cheques, Railway Warrants, National Savings Certificates and other saving instruments such as Indira Vikas Patras and Kisan Vikas Patras, Postal Orders etc., production of Passports and visa stickers and administration of the Government Mints and Security Presses. To take care of the above, prior to 10/02/2006 nine industrial production units were working as departmental organization of Department of Economic Affairs. It included following four Mints, Two currency/bank note presses, two security presses and one paper mill.
A.        MINTS:
  • India Government Mint, Mumbai (Maharashtra)
This Mint was established in the year 1829 which is one of the oldest mints of the Country.  It has got the capacity of minting coins, medals & further, it is also takes care of refining of Gold and Silver and other metals.  
  • India Government Mint, Kolkata (West Bengal)
This mint was established in 1952 at Kolkata.  Originally, different minting facilities were created in and around Kolkata in the 18th Century.  One of the mints was modernized in the year 1952 and it was then known as Alipore Mint.  Later-on Government of India, renamed it as India Government Mint, Kolkata.  
  • India Government Mint, Hyderabad (Andhra Pradesh)
India Government Mint, Hyderabad was originally started in the year 1903 in the Hyderabad city.  However, after modernization, it was re-located to a place –Cheralapalli, near Hyderabad in the year 1997.  This is the most modern minting unit in the country having refining facility as well as facility to mint coins, medals and medallion.  
  • India Government Mint, Noida (Uttar Pradesh)
This Mint was established in the year 1988.  The Minting facility at Noida takes care of the requirement of Coins.  This is one of the modern mints in the country.  
B.        CURRENCY/BANK NOTE PRESSES:
  • Currency Note Press, Nasik (Maharashtra)
Currency Note Press, Nasik Road was established in the year 1928 with the objective of printing Currency Notes of denominations as per the requirements and indents placed by Reserve Bank of India from time to time.  
  • Bank Note Press, Dewas (Madhya Pradesh)
Bank Note Press, Dewas was established in 1973 and it was notified as commercial Undertaking under Ministry of Finance.  It prints Bank Notes of Rs.20/-, Rs.50/-, Rs.100/- and Rs.500/- denominations.  This Press also manufactures security ink for various security printing organizations.  
C.         SECURITY PRESSES:
  • India Security Press, Nasik Road (Maharashtra)
India Security Press, Nasik Road was established in the year 1925 and it was notified as commercial industrial unit under the administrative control of Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance.  It prints & supplies Judicial/non-Judicial stamp papers, all types of postal & non-postal stamps & stationery, passports, visa & other travel documents, MICR & Non-MICR cheques in continuous Stationery form, Identity Cards, Railway Warrants, Income Tax Return Order Forms, Saving Instruments (IPOs & KVP, IVP Certificates, etc.)  
  • Security Printing Press, Hyderabad (Andhra Pradesh)
This organization was established in the year 1982 and it was notified as commercial industrial unit under the administrative control of Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance.  It also prints and supplies low Denomination Judicial & Non-Judicial Stamp Papers, Postal Stamps & Postal Stationery to Dept. of Post, etc., covering mostly the Southern States.  
D.        SECURITY PAPER MILL:
  • Security Paper Mill, Hoshangabad
Security Paper Mill (SPM), Hoshangabad was established in 1968 and it was notified as non-commercial undertaking under the administrative control of Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance.  This unit manufactures different types of Security Papers.
CREATION OF SECURITY PRINTING AND MINTING CORPORATION OF INDIA
NEED:
From time to time, measures were taken to reform the above departmental organizations by Government in general and Ministry of Finance in particular. Government of India takes reform majors on a regular basis and as a special project; Expenditure Reforms Commission (ERC) was constituted to suggest reforms in the functioning of Government organizations. ERC in its recommendation of Dec 2000 pertaining to Currency and Coinage Division had suggested corporatisation plan of these 9 units. Even earlier studies were conducted for improvement of these units and efforts were made at unit level or at the level of Department of Economic Affairs.  Subsequently, an independent consultant namely M/s IFCI was engaged to study the feasibility to implement the recommendations of ERC.  The consultant submitted its report which was by and large accepted by Government. IFCI Study indicated low productivity, delay in decision making, wastages etc. in these government departmental organisations as major reason for recommending corporatization.  It was envisaged that creation of Corporate entity will result in improved decision making, operational flexibility – man power deployment, etc, accountability and efficiency, disclosure of activities and financial health of the units in time and in a professional manner and reward and remuneration linked with performance and productivity.  The report suggested that Corporation will enable the management to take appropriate and timely decisions to improve financial performance, manpower deployment and HR policies. It will also facilitate setting up performance and productivity standards, performance and productivity remuneration structure to be linked with the.  Corporatisation was recommended as there was a trend worldwide to corporatise Minting and Security Printing related operations.
INCORPORATION OF SPMCIL:
Once such reports are accepted by the Government, depending upon the nature and quantum of change required, approval of competent authorities is obtained. The consultant suggested conversion of government department into a company which required approval of Cabinet Ministers of India. Accordingly, in September 2005 Cabinet Note was put up for corporatisation of these nine units so that approval of Cabinet is obtained. Union Cabinet approved corporatisation of units on 02/09/2005. Subsequently, a company namely Security Printing and Minting Corporation of India Limited was registered under Companies Act, 1956 on 13/01/2006.  Ministry vide Gazette Notification transferred all assets and liabilities, staff etc. to the company w.e.f. 10/02/2006. Since, the company was not having any liquid resources at the time of creation and taking over of nine units, it was granted a loan of Rs.7000 million (US$175 million) from Government as working capital to start its operations and then be at its own. Further Government envisaged modernization of security paper mill, capacity enhancement of security paper production, modernization of currency printing unit and automation of various activities being carried out in traditional manner. It has assured to provide fund for the same.
CONVERSION OF ACCOUNTS
CHALLENGES FACED:
SPMCIL came into being as per notification of Government and without creation of necessary infrastructure and support system. Consultant had advised in reports about creation of a corporate headquarters manned with a bare minimum strength. Even recruitment of those officers took time as recruitments need to do be done by following a transparent process. Therefore, in the initial phases only a handful of officers were there to take care of affairs at SPMCIL Head Office. At unit level no resources were available for this challenging task. Financial Advisors and Chief Accounts Officers (FA&CAOs) of the units were loaded with the responsibility of handling the implementation of this transition at unit level with their small team of untrained personnel.
Information on asset and liability at unit level was not available or if available it was inconsistent or inaccurate. In order to make the task easier and uniform across the units first detailed guidelines were issued in April’06. This was prepared keeping the broad accounting policy followed by business entities in mind. Further, methodology for accounting and timelines for the project with clearly marked milestones were prepared. Regular meetings, interactions and rigorous efforts for capacity building were initiated as part of this project. Units were at different level of computerization and using different formats to record information. There was no system of capturing information as per accrual principles. Collating and collecting this information at unit level was a major challenge. Since the units were independent in the past, inter unit transactions used to be handled like any other transaction which led to actual transfer of fund. This further used to inflate turn over of all units put together as raw material of one unit was the finished product of other unit and both were treating there output as sales. As a result of corporatisation, banking became costly and every transaction of transfer of funds used to cost a lot of money. Banking arrangement needed to be reviewed to take care of different dynamic requirements of business pertaining to both cash and non-cash transactions. At the end of all this there was a major challenge of consolidation of the accounts inputs received from the units. This included preparation of balance sheet as on 9-2-2006 with necessary sub-ledgering. Soon after consolidation it was to be taken over in the books of SPMCIL as on 10-2-2006. This required application of due diligence and accepted principles of price considerations. Further issues haunting at the time of this project was preparation of accounting details and disclosures pertaining to receivables and payables, maintenance of fixed assets registers. Soon after preparation of accounts it was to be approved by the Board, audited by the statutory auditors and presented to shareholders in the AGM. Thereafter returns as required under Companies Act of India, 1956 and other statutory returns were to be filed.
HOW IT WAS HANDLED:
In order to make the task easier and uniform across the units first detailed guidelines were issued in April’06. This was prepared keeping the broad accounting policy followed by business entities in mind. Further, methodology for accounting and timelines for the project with clearly marked milestones were prepared. Regular meetings, interactions and rigorous efforts for capacity building were initiated as part of this project. Accounting entries were computerized using very popular accounts software with back up support available at all units. Units were asked to enter the accounting data in computer on a daily basis and send the back up of accounts in an electronic form at the end of month. Once the system established, back up was obtained on a fortnightly basis. Accounts back up was reviewed and corrections were suggested. As the situation warranted, feed back obtained and corrections carried out from one unit were circulated in the form of guidelines for the benefit of all units.
Prior to corporatisation, transactions between units were settled on cash basis. Receipts were inflated as it was counted twice. Further, banking operations were also required to be carried out where book adjustment would have achieved the results. Therefore it was decided to discontinue this practice after the corporatisation. Now it is being handled through modern and effective techniques i.e. Inter Unit Accounting on accrual basis. In this system, Units’ balance sheet shows only funds from Corporate Office and its application at their end. Since a lot of fund transfer was taking place at the unit level, it was prudent to have banking arrangement whereby minimum time is taken in fund transfer with minimum efforts and minimum possible transaction cost. Accordingly bank was selected through competitive, transparent tender, covering funds and non-funds parameters. It has resulted in better management of cash and smooth transfer of funds at no cost, hence savings.
Almost all units were handling the accounting in manual forms. There was a set up of Drawing and Disbursing Office which used to prepare the bill and present to Pay and Accounts Office (PAO) for release of payment and accounting thereof after pre-check of bill, ascertaining the admissibility of the claim and look into the availability of budget. After payment and accounting, consolidation of accounts was done at PAO as done in all other Government Departments. PAO was computerized but it was handling accounts only on cash basis. There was a need to ensure that accounting books are maintained and uniformity is also ascertained across the units. In order to achieve this mammoth objective it was necessary to switch over to computerized accounting right from voucher level to consolidation. It was decided to attempt ledgering to the maximum possible extent with preparation of ledgers, sub-ledgers and journals.
At Unit Level PAO was recording transactions on cash basis covering following items/accounts:
Bank Accounts, Expenditure in Grant Heads, Adjustment Accounts and settlement through other PAOs e.g. Central Public Works Department, Department of Audio Visual Publicity etc
Therefore SPMCIL got Government Equity/Funds consisting of net balances of the above transaction and effect of some transaction handled on accrual basis e.g. interest calculations on loan taken from Reserve Bank of India and government capital.
Above information takes care of sources of funds. Information on application of funds was derived from the records maintained on cash basis/available proforma accounts (Closing Entries on 9-2-06). Information on fixed assets was tracked from the fixed assets registers or from the latest available proforma accounts maintained at the unit. Store records were adopted for quantitative details of inventories. Its valuation information was derived from the proforma accounts or it was valued as per the last comparable rate of transaction of the same inventory. Similar approach was followed for the Work in Progress (WIP) and finished goods. Depreciation for the period was worked after classifying the assets in accordance with accounting standards. Sundry creditors were recast based on store records considering goods taken on credit from the suppliers for which payment was still not released. Party wise ledgers were maintained for all transactions. Once the information was collected and entered in the computerized system, it was necessary to check its accuracy and consistency. To ensure accuracy of sources of funds, data from accounts of PAO was the most reliable source hence it was reconciled with him. At unit level this included reconciliation of collected information with the Bank accounts of PAO and authorizations made by PAO to other PAOs to incur expenditure on their behalf. To above cash figures, such authorizations made to other PAOs were added to arrive at total cash figure. Non Cash Items covered accrued interest liability, liability of pensionary charges as per General Financial Rules and non-Govt. transactions namely depreciation (P&L) and its provision (BS). With the above methodology and checks, accounts for 50 days of operations in the first year and complete year operation in 2006-07 were prepared and audited.
CAPITAL STRUCTURE OF SPMCIL:
As on 31.03.2006, in the audited Balance Sheet[5] of SPMCIL, there stands an amount of Rs.28420.93 million (US$710.52 million) being funds adjustable from Government of India. Due to earlier method of accounting, neither these funds could be linked and traced through voucher level transaction nor is it desirable to do that. On the scrutiny of records and assets maintained by different units, it was noticed that huge blockage of funds is there in non-earning or unproductive assets. These assets have remained idle in past and continue to remain so, due to outdated machines and limited production capacity. Moreover, huge funds have been blocked in social assets created due to social commitments of the Government of India e.g. huge town ships with all infrastructure, dedicated power stations, water and sewage line, fire brigade. Besides, large area of land acquired in various units is lying idle, due to various security reasons. Considering the above facts, it can be concluded that large amount of funds are not engaged in any kind of income generating asset hence non-productive.
Besides, many units were established more than 50 years ago and included Plants & Machineries in their Fixed Assets which are either obsolete or non-functioning. Neither they are generating any kind of income nor engaged in the production process. Due to this, SPMCIL had assets in balance sheet which represent sunk cost and in addition it had to bear huge maintenance and social cost regarding the prior social commitments of the Government.
Considering the above underlying facts and principle of prudence, capital structure of the company is being worked out. As all assets cannot be attributed as income generating assets, hence need arose to identify assets into earning and non-earning assets. In order to determine whether the assets to be treated as financed by the Equity Capital and assets to be financed through Grant Capital, classification of assets has been done. This is done to clearly calculate the return on capital invested. Return on Equity Capital can be provided only through income generating assets and Grant capital can be used in the creation of various social and other assets.
Equity Capital:
Equity Capital includes Funds attributable to Earning Assets i.e. Plant & Machinery, Tools & Parts and Inventories which are engaged in production process. As mentioned earlier, not the entire asset base is income generating asset. These assets are being identified and categorized which are likely to be of the value amounting to Rs. 9769.10 million (US$ 244.23 million) as on 31.03.2006.This includes Rs.500,000 (US$12,500) Share capital already raised and Reserves & Surplus of Rs. 323.76 million (US$ 8.09 million). Balance funds may be allocated to Equity Capital which is Rs. 9445.34 million (US$ 236.13 million).
Grant Capital:
Grant capital represent funds invested in social and maintenance assets and are non-earning in nature. They have been spent either in acquiring assets facilitating production in indirect manner but not directly attributing to commercial production activities of the units. Besides, it includes social asset created due to welfare and social policies of Government, for instance huge partly unused residential colony for workers. It is estimated that asset which may be termed as Grant Capital amounts to Rs.18354.50 million (US$ 458.86 million) out of total remaining amount of Rs. 29632.80 million (US$740.82 million). From this amount outside liabilities of Rs. 11278.30 million (US$281.96 million) have been deducted to arrive at the balance which may be attributed as Grant from Government.
Conclusion
With clear objective, methodology and specific targets, conversion of accounts from cash to accrual was handled at SPMCIL. This has benefited the management in monitoring of units on industry standards, specially financial ratios and operational parameters. Inventory built up was huge and now the issue has been flagged due to the above reforms. It has resulted in liquidation of unserviceable/unused inventories, increase in inventory turn over. As the process of reforms was handled almost in a war like situation, available resources were drenched beyond their capacity. In order to get the benefit of reforms and continue with it, capacity building and training is essential. A set up needs to be created to take care of auditing at unit level in a timely manner. As accrual accounting involves greater detailing, data capturing and analysis, hence significant cost and man-power (man-hours) are required. In the end, it must be highlighted that accrual accounting involves more man-efforts and cost than cash accounting.

Note: This article was published in the Jornal " Journal of Centre for Management Studies, New Delhi"


[1] Gazettes notification of Government of India, January 2006.
[2] Source: Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance, Government of India.
[5] Audited Accounts of SPMCIL

Saturday 28 December 2013

AN INTRODUCTION TO MEASUREMENT OF RESULTS OF DEVELOPMENT AND POSSIBILITY OF INTRODUCING DEVELOPMENT EVALUATION IN INDIA

 by Ajay S Singh [1]
Introduction:
Core objective of this article is to present the basic concepts of development evaluation and explore the possibility of introducing IT enabled development evaluation system in India. Development schemes are implemented by government, multi-lateral agencies and corporate; and there is always a need to assess whether the inputs (primarily money) allocated for the development activities have yielded desired results or not. Traditionally the focus of agencies has been to see whether money has been utilized properly or not (efficiency audit), whether processes have been followed (process audit) or not and whether outputs have been derived or not (financial audit). However now the approach towards development has shifted from output to outcome and thus it is seen whether inputs have been converted to outcomes in an effective and efficient manner or not. In order to carry out evaluation, it is necessary to develop adequate capacity for development evaluation where there are executives who understand development and evaluation philosophy and executives who are acquainted with the tools and techniques of development evaluation. Further there is a need to identify IT systems and processes which may be integrated and developed into an effective tool for development evaluation. As the basic objective of evaluation is to learn from the failures and successes of the projects and then take suitable policy and execution decisions to ensure that similar failures are avoided and successes are replicated or bettered, these tools facilitate the same.  In order to carry out measurement of development, there must be some guiding principles and standards so that it is done almost in similar manner by all concerned in the field of evaluation. It is therefore, very important to be clear about the definitions of the basic concepts of developmental evaluation. There are several definitions of development hence measurement of results of developments also is defined differently by authorities of the field. Main issue however is not about defining evaluation, its process or mechanism but to ensure that development activities are done well and to have a mechanism in place to ascertain that it has actually been done well. In order to say so, there must be sound criteria of evaluation which should be scientific thus giving same or similar results. Since the field of evaluation has grown big during last decade, principles and standards of evaluation have taken shape and now there is general acceptance to these principles and standards across the globe. As per these principles a sound result based monitoring and evaluation system needs to be created after thorough understanding of the context of the program and its theory of change. By following suitable evaluation method, evaluation need to be carried out after asking probing questions formulated in a design matrix. In order to find out answer to questions, data is collected for which different methods of data collection are adopted with different tools of data collection. Collected data is to be analyzed and presented in a manner so that it gives input to the answer to the key questions or at least paves way forward to seek answers to the key questions haunting the development efforts of developmental agencies. Apart from understanding the basics of development evaluation, this article also tries to explore the possibility of utilizing the existing systems in development evaluation. Existing hardware and software may be taken forward through backward and forward integration to capture data on schemes and evaluating the impact of the schemes in an acceptable scientific manner.

Development Evaluation:

Development evaluation has been defined using different nomenclature but by and large all definitions may be grouped or classified under three broad categories; namely, prospective, formative and summative. Prospective evaluation is a method of evaluating the likely outcomes of proposed interventions. There may be a program already running where it is not clear as to what are the objectively measurable outcomes. Therefore, a question must be asked whether an existing program is evaluable or not? Formative evaluation is process which focuses on improving performance before and during implementation. Unlike prospective and formative evaluation methods, summative evaluation focuses on outcomes and impacts. Which method of evaluation shall be chosen for a particular intervention may be decided purely on the basis of context and nature of the project as well as availability of resources for carrying out evaluation. In all cases of evaluation it is intended to help make resource allocation decisions, rethink the causes of the problems and identify emerging problems. Evaluation is also useful in facilitating decision making on competing or best alternatives and providing trigger for public sector reforms and innovation. Evaluation, if carried out diligently provides information on strategy, operations and analysis of learning from success or failure. Resources are scarce and competition for them is phenomenal in the governments, especially developing countries thus it heightens interest in knowing which programs are achieving and which is not achieving as per plan. Such information gives an opportunity to the willing officials make better decisions about continuance of the existing program or otherwise or to increase the scope and penetration of program by giving funding increases or otherwise. Evaluation becomes important in times of rough weather where national governments find it difficult to handle social and economic challenges posed to them.
Monitoring:
Earlier monitoring of projects or programs was considered to be adequate to take care of project and assurance of its outcome. It was presumed that, if inputs are utilized efficiently then outputs would be delivered and outcomes are logical fallout of the same. Hence it shall be ensured that process of acquisition and utilization of inputs is made robust and it is monitored to ensure that it is done well. Delivery of outputs shall also be monitored to keep track of it vis-a-vis planned outputs.



However, now it is regarded as a process which takes care of routine, ongoing, generally internal activity of tracking key indicators. It is also used to collect information on program’s activities, outputs and outcomes to measure performance against specific targets.  

Evaluation Standards:

Evaluation however goes beyond this routine. It must address in depth issues which may be internal, external or participatory. It may also provide feedback to the key stake holders on these issues. Evaluations may be conducted by internal or external evaluators. There are debates going on the issue of efficacy of internal and external evaluators and even definition of these terms. External evaluator is generally considered as independent. Independence of evaluator is decided on the basis of his behavioral and organization independence from the executing agency and factors like protection from external influence and avoidance of conflict of interest. Whether evaluator is internal or external it must carry out the core activities it is expected to carry out. It must consult with main client, construct or reconstruct (if required) the theory of change, design the evaluation matrix and process and conduct the evaluation in an objective and fair manner. The evaluators must identify standards for effectiveness and collect, analyze, interpret and report on data and findings. In order to carry out these activities in a methodical manner, it is thought prudent to follow some standards and principles. These principles and standards aim at bringing in uniformity in discipline of evaluation, promote accountability and enhance reliability and quality of services provided. Development Assistance Committee (DAC) has come up with widely accepted evaluation quality standards (http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/55/0/44798177.pdf ).

By following these broad principles and standards, evaluation may be carried out provided institutions are in place. Thus, there is a need to have an institution put in place in developing countries. It is essential to establish a foundation for evaluation and develop a culture of routinely collecting baseline data and gear up to train their officials in data collection, monitoring and evaluation methods and analysis. Even though some countries have association or society for development evaluation, continuous effort of improvement is needed to make evaluations effective and acceptable. The need for continuous revisiting is there because of changes happening in the society due to increased expectations of the public from the government which is primarily due to globalization, growing incidences of conflicts, terrorism, money laundering etc. With the opening up of economies across the globe, unfortunately the gap between rich and poor is widening year after year. This gap increases resentment about the developmental efforts of the developmental agencies and it is generally counterproductive to development and peace of the area. Hence there are not only developmental projects required but there are more requirements of programs for equitable growth. Thus more players are likely to be active in the arena of development to ensure that equitable growth is achieved. Due to these global emerging issues, evaluation is gaining more importance. There is growing pressure on the governments of the developing countries to improve and demonstrate performance which necessarily asks for reforms in public sector management.

Result-based Monitoring and Evaluation System:

There is no denial that measurement of results has tremendous power to understand whether stated objectives are being achieved or not. It also gives continuous triggers to correct the path of execution of development projects, if results are not coming out as per plan and also gain public support in the process. Governments and organizations all over the world are grappling with internal and external demands and pressures for improvements and reforms in public management. These demands come from a variety of sources including multilateral development institutions, donor governments, parliaments, private sector, NGOs, Citizens’ groups, fourth estate etc. It calls for greater transparency and accountability. All this is possible when monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system is there and management is willing to take the reports of M&E as a tool in decision making as well as improvement of processes. Results based M&E provides crucial information about a view over time on the status of a project, program or policy and it promotes credibility and public confidence by reporting on the results of the programs in a timely manner. Since result based M&E focuses attention on achieving outcomes important to the stake holders and it provides timely and frequent as well as relevant information to all concerned, it has the potential to be used as an effective tool.
In order to carry out evaluation, evaluators must know about the objectives of the project and its indicators. Indicators are ideally for the performance or outcome. They must be studied in detail to understand their relevance and importance for the outcome of the project. In order to conduct this study, system must have capacity; human resources and institutions as well as finance. Generally presence of incentives at political, institutional and personal level goes in favor of adoption and growth of M&E systems in government. Without political will, M&E systems are all but likely to fail. As it was seen in the case of Bangladesh where there was no champion for M&E anywhere in the central or state government (World Bank, 2002c). It is a good idea to work on capacity building measures before taking a leap to implementation of M&E system. Once capacity building process is on the way, efforts shall be made to identify outcomes to be monitored and evaluated. It is always better to have clear outcomes which are important for the country and have clarity about the indicators to measure it. Complete process of setting and agreeing upon outcomes needs to be followed wherein representatives of stakeholders need to be identified and major concerns of stake holders need to be identified in order to formulate the problem and associated outcome to eradicate the problem. Care shall be taken to not have too many outcomes to monitor at national level; else it becomes very difficult to manage even the most important ones due to data clutter.

Major activities involved in development evaluation
S.no.
Activities
1
Creation of M&E system with skeleton manpower and documented systems and procedures.
2.
Study and listing of the objectives of developmental schemes which are planned to be evaluated
3.
Assessment of baseline data and information available on the same
4.
Plan for collection of baseline data, if not available or inadequately available.
5.
Assessment of indicators and difficulty in collecting data for the same.
6.
On the basis of above, reassessment of manpower requirement and decision on use of resources for evaluation. This shall include decision on going in for external evaluation, quantum of outsourcing etc.
7.
Identification and listing of outcomes
8
Identification and listing of indicators for measurement of outcomes
9
Detailing of process of data collection, analysis and review of data for measurement of outcome indicators.
10
Identification of key performance indicators
11
Detailing of process of data collection, analysis and review of data for measurement of key performance indicators.
12
Documentation of theory of change /logic frame document
13
Commissioning of data collection team for indicators
14
Execution of the process of result-based M&E system
15
Preparation of Evaluation report
16
Review of evaluation report and submission of key findings to decision makers for intervention in policy and execution of development schemes.

While working on development projects, governments invariably have some visible outputs. But there is a need to bring in a practice of having outcomes with clear plan of action to achieve these outcomes which are achieved only after outputs are obtained. In this process, indicators get automatically defined. If it is not there, then it is more than evident that, outcomes have not been identified correctly or defined improperly. If it is not measurable then chances are that execution of project may lead the project to nowhere or even end up rewarding failures. It is very necessary to understand as how we will know success or achievement when we see the program or project getting implemented. It is also important to find out whether we moving toward achieving our desired outcomes or not?
Once the clear and measurable indicators are identified, the next step is to conduct base line survey and have base line data if it is not already there. Baselines are invariably derived from outcomes and indicators. While building baselines it is required to find out the sources of data and suitable method of collecting it. It is important to plan for the entire activity cycle which includes, who will collect the data, what will be the frequency of data, what is the likely cost of collecting data and anticipated problems in collecting data for baselines? Data collection on many occasions is a very complicated process but it becomes more complicated if it is not clear as to who is going to analyze data and whom it will be reported to and finally who will be using it. In order to have effective data collection and analysis, it may be a good idea to do a pilot so that any gaps identified are filled while going for full survey or data collection. Pilot provides an opportunity to learn about outcomes and indicators and difficulty in measuring them. It also provides input on utility of the existing indicators and thus facilitates decision on continuing the same indictors, dropping some of them or going in for some modified indicators.
Once the indicators are identified and it is clear that these are going to get affected while project implementation is on, measuring them may be easier. It is always desirable to have an eye on measurements of results so that monitoring is embedded in the process of effecting change in the implementation process. All inputs, whether financial, human and material, cost money and are scarce. Hence it shall be used in a manner so that they produce maximum benefits. All planned activities shall be carried out using the inputs which are planned to be used in getting the predetermined output. Outputs are either products or services and it is these outputs which are expected to bring out change in the behavior of beneficiaries. These outcomes, in simple words are derivatives of inputs which cannot be procured directly from the market or through monetary direct intervention. These are necessarily coming out of outputs but the relationship is such that an output may provide outcome and it shall provide it but same is not necessarily true by default. Linking of output and outcome is the core of the issue of development evaluation. If the output and outcome may not be linked objectively and through a scientific method of evaluation then the possibility of achieving the outcome may be there but it is only probabilistic. Development may not and shall not be left to probability. It has to be dealt in a serious manner with clear objectives and indicators of outcomes and same shall be monitored continuously with a focus on effecting changes in the process for betterment of the efforts made towards development.
Measurement of development efforts is thus to be carried out against the indicators and a comparison shall be done with the baseline data. It will clearly demonstrate the level or quality of development. There are several (mostly all) qualitative parameters of development evaluation and/or assessment. However, it must be quantified so that development is evaluated in a scientific manner. If not quantified, it cannot be measured and what cannot be measured cannot and shall not be used for evaluation. It is essential to ensure this so that only success is rewarded and not the failures which may get rewarded due to perception of evaluator based on his subjective assessment not supported by data. Data collection for baseline to implementation and evaluation is critical and it is data which shall be relied upon for informed decision making. Development projects, even if carried out with utmost sincerity and efficiency may not necessarily provide the desired measurable outcomes. Thus it is essential to have a development evaluation process and mechanism in place.
Efforts of Government of India towards development have been commendable but it is always debatable as to what has been achieved and how successfully it has been achieved. Unfortunately performance indicators are always not available upfront and schemes have by and large dealt with only output indicators. There are over a 1000 Centrally Sponsored and Central Sector Schemes being implemented through the different ministries of the Government of India. Given the diversity in the implementation hierarchy, the number of implementing units and the geographical reach of these schemes it has been a challenge to have meaningful information on these schemes. Further information on indicators of outcome is invariably wanting. Thus the need for a central monitoring, evaluation and accounting system for the Plan Schemes has been widely acknowledged and Government of India has come up with a system to have monitoring information on development schemes. However it is still lacking in a culture and resource to have database on indicators and objectives of schemes and subsequent outcomes. This system will definitely effects the monitoring of the Plan Schemes but also has implications for financial management in the public sector but it has to go beyond it. The system for Plan Scheme Monitoring is known as Central Plan Scheme Monitoring System (CPSMS).

About CPSMS

The Central Plan Scheme Monitoring System (CPSMS) is a Central Sector Plan Scheme of the Planning Commission. Planning Commission is a central body of Government of India which is responsible for formulation of Five years’ Plan for the federal government. This System (CPSMS) is being implemented by the Office of Controller General of Accounts of India. It is an on-line Management Information System and Decision Support System covering 785 plan schemes of the Government of India (Central Sector, Centrally Sponsored and Central Assistance to state schemes). The system is enabled to track the fund disbursement from Government of India up to the last beneficiary under various Plan Schemes and ultimately report utilization at different levels of program implementation on a real time basis. Under this system a computerized network has been developed with requisite hardware and an internet portal where data is available to target groups and public in general. National Informatics Centre of Government of India is providing the overall IT and related technical support. For System and process design M/s KPMG was hired and for initial IT and hardware support M/s TCS was engaged. This network and portal connects government agencies disbursing funds, government agencies responsible for execution of projects and intermediate agencies and ultimate beneficiaries of the scheme. Under this system following activities are carried out:
  1. Mapping of Plan Schemes with the code of accounts and compiling information on State-wise. Overall releases under flagship schemes are now available; the following refinements would have to be taken up: (a) State-wise and Agency-wise data releases (b) Reports on releases on sub-scheme / component level.
  2. Release data for all other Centrally Sponsored Schemes and Central Plan Schemes on the same lines as explained above in respect of flagship programs.
  3. Capture of data on sub-sanctions, going progressively down the line right up to the implementing agencies. This would involve making complete lists of implementing agencies at each level, the details of the associated bank accounts. As well as the specification of the component of the scheme being handled by each agency.
  4. Capture all expenditure details from the lower level on standardized formats.
  5. Components 3&4 above are to be taken up for implementation on a pilot basis in respect of a few programs in a few states in order to detect implementation problems and to sort them out.
  6. Payment to the ultimate beneficiary through banking channels.
  7. Report generation capabilities should be integrated into the transaction databases that are created at each stage of the roll out. This should be available at a minimum to show the State-wise and lower level allocation of funds. All these information in these databases should be available in the public domain for viewing and download usage. This entire database would constitute the core accounting system.
Following activities may be carried out to convert this system into a development evaluation tool:
1.   Capture baseline data of all development schemes covered or monitored through CPSMS.
2.   Capture objectives of all schemes/ programs.
3.   Consolidate data of various objectively defined indicators of the schemes of government of India.
4.   Continuous tracking and monitoring of indicators after analyzing the ongoing activities.
5.   MIS report on progress of the scheme and suggested changes in the implementation strategy of the scheme/plan.
6.   Analysis of outcomes after conclusion of the schemes/programs and publication of lessons learnt report for future usage.

WHAT CPSMS DOES AND WHAT IT CAN DO?
Stated objectives of CPSMS primarily talk about MIS for treasury management and being a handy tool for the policy makers regarding disbursement of funds to the executing and/or disbursing agencies. It is focusing on monitoring of flow of funds from Centre to the lowest level of implementation- both under SPV & Treasury routes and providing a Decision Support System (DSS) to all levels of program administration (Local Governments, Block, District, State and Centre). In order to do that it must capture component-wise expenditure and facilitate payments due to beneficiaries in a timely manner through direct credit. This would lead to enhanced transparency & accountability in public expenditure through public disclosure. It is apparent that stated objectives of CPSMS are clearly output oriented. It does not talk of any measurable outcome. Further the objectives have not been linked to any indicator to measure the success or failure of the system within a time frame.
CPSMS is fully operational at the Central Government level (Civil Ministries) since 2009-10 and all plan fund releases (Central Sector, Centrally Sponsored plans and Central Assistance to state plans) are routed through a unique ID. In the system this unique Sanction ID is handled through a separate software module on the portal (Table on modules of CPSMS is given as Annexure-I). For every release a unique Sanction ID is generated and scheme is monitored as per the same. Various MIS reports regarding Scheme-wise, State-wise, Agency-wise, Sector-wise, Geographic location-wise devolution of plan funds with time series data are available on the CPSMS Portal.
The total amount released to the states under Centrally Sponsored Scheme and Central Assistance to state plans during FY 2011-12 is Rs. 2,612 (i.e. Rs. 1,616 + Rs. 996) billions. (about 500 billion US$). The corresponding figure for North Eastern states (relatively under developed states of India) under Centrally Sponsored Scheme is Rs. 163 billion. Due to geographical and demographic difficulties there is emphasis of government on specific schemes for north eastern states. After review of data available from the system (Annexure-II Snapshot of release pattern of two major Centrally Sponsored Schemes (SSA & Total Sanitation Campaign) during FY 2011-12 it is revealed that maximum releases against the annual allocation is made in the beginning of the year, which leads to front loading of the accounts and idling of funds. Similarly, the MIS also provides information on multiplicity of agencies, release of grants for same or similar projects and different types of grants going to same agencies (Annexure-III IIT-Delhi grants), which enables the decision makers to plan more effectively after avoiding duplicity and bringing in synergy in the efforts made by the agencies.
To begin with, the implementation hierarchies under Centrally Sponsored Schemes are fully mapped and agencies at all levels reaching up to the last mile (viz. state/ district/ block/ panchayat, etc.) with their bank accounts are registered on the system. The accounts are validated through the CBS interface developed with all major banks of India. As on 23.5.2012, about 0.6 million Implementing Agencies have been registered on CPSMS, including direct recipients of GOI funds and tier-2 and 3 agencies in the pilot States. Under 10 leading schemes, many agencies have been registered in other states too. Consequently, the level-wise funds received, utilized and remaining idle in respective bank accounts of agencies in these states, registered under various schemes are now available on-line. It is evident that this system is currently working as a tool of treasury management. There is a lot of data capturing and capacity building required to upgrade this to a system wherein indicators are captured and development evaluation is monitored and conducted in a scientific manner.
One very important and commendable thing about CPSMS is that it has developed a real-time interface with the Core Banking Solution (CBS) of all Public Sector Banks (26 Nos.), major Private Sector Banks (e.g. ICICI, Axis, HDFC & Federal Bank) handling Government funds and 46 Regional Rural Banks (out of 82) of India.  System is thus not dependent on any one bank or aligned to any small cluster of banks. Since database is independent and draws strength from available infrastructure of all banks its reports generated on the basis of bank transactions are reliable, accurate and timely. Since the bank accounts of implementing agencies are registered on the portal, CPSMS extracts the actual balances in these bank accounts at the end of the day through CBS and provides complete treasury information for the benefit of decision makers. The system allows further drill down to lower levels, with visibility of the bank accounts of each agency, complete with Credit/ Debit transactions and balance for the day. This may be used as a decision support tool by the program managers by facilitating timely transfer of funds to the implementing agencies. This would also facilitate direct payment of wages to MGNREGS beneficiaries. Major benefits of Bank Interface (Annexure-IV) are the power of fund transfer monitoring it has offered to the managers. This power is enormous as transparency would lead to reduction in corruption and has the potential of public probe in utilization of funds. However, there is tremendous scope to increase the utility of this system by linking this data of fund release to the data of scheme targets, indicators and achievements. This is one process which would enhance the visibility of schemes’ objectives and would make it user focused. Users, policy makers and pressure groups would have access to the details of the scheme/program, what it is intended to achieve and what it is offering at the end of the day. It is also interesting to get the feedback on schemes from the people who are supposed to be getting benefitted from the scheme. Thus any disconnect between planners, executors and beneficiaries would get highlighted and all stakeholders would get an opportunity to work for improvement of the scheme/program to make it more effective. If the system has a dashboard where it has data of baseline, indicators and status after or during implementation then its utility and acceptability will further increase manifold. At a click of mouse, if a panchayat will come to know as to primary health and sanitation scheme has led to increase in life expectancy, decrease in infant mortality and morbidity or improvement in gender ratio over a defined period and with a comparison of targets and achievements then it would empower them and also make development efforts more focused.   

Way Forward

The CPSMS pilot rollout has successfully demonstrated the capability and potential of the system to facilitate effective monitoring of scheme implementation, aid decision support at different levels e.g. Centre/ State/ Local government and enhance transparency and accountability in public expenditure. At a macro level, the visibility of idle funds can improve efficiency in cash management and lead to “just in time” deployment of funds with the implementing agencies, even below district levels. Leveraging connectivity and technological innovations, the system can deliver benefits directly to the beneficiaries under various social sector schemes to weed out corruption/delays and enhance financial inclusion. It will also improve participation of citizens in decentralized planning and social audit of schemes.
As per the official documents the Detailed Project Report for the pan India roll out of CPSMS has been prepared. The total cost of implementation of this system is projected at Rs. 16.66 billion spread over 5 years. The payback period is less than one year in terms of the cost of capital saved on account of idle fund management alone, primarily due to saving on cost of borrowings. However, this project has to go beyond this simple and rudimentary stage of being a MIS of fund released and utilized to become a comprehensive system of developmental evaluation. In this direction, there is a need to initiate efforts for capacity building in the country so that concept of development is understood correctly and focus of implementation is shifted from output to outcomes. Training and handholding support will be required to be given by the project at state and district levels. For this purpose a core team of evaluators need to be deployed for carrying out development evaluation and ensuring capacity building across the country.
A concerted effort is required to undertake baseline studies for the projects going to be initiated or even already initiated. Baseline would provide a very good tool to evaluate the schemes. It may be debated that reconstructed or midway prepared baseline is not accurate but accuracy may be compromised for the sake of future development. Even if base line is inaccurate, outcome may also be slightly deviant from the actual. It may be inflated or deflated in comparison to the baseline, but for the subsequent period, a more refined and reliable baseline has been created which would offer better indicators for monitoring and evaluation.
Existing hardware and software need to be upgraded and integrated with the schemes to capture information on development indicators and performance indicators as well as dashboard on their progress in comparison to baseline data. Further, tools of database analysis and development evaluation also need to be integrated in the system. It is essential to have clearly documented system and process flow diagram and documents for all stages of development evaluation which includes data collection to analysis of reports and action taken on recommendations arising out of development evaluation.
Annexure-I: Modules of CPSMS

Module
Advantages
1
Agency registration module
§  Implementing agencies get mapped to the scheme-hierarchy, complete with their address and bank account details.
§  Level wise bank account balances & daily transactions of these agencies become available on CPSMS portal.
§  The scheme becomes ready for migration to the next level of implementation, i.e., Expenditure filing.
2
Expenditure filing module
§  Component-wise fund utilization status (Expenditure, Advances and Transfers) of the scheme becomes available on-line.
§  Cheque validation process will ensure compulsory filing of expenditure by the agencies failing which their banking transactions will not go through.
3
e-Payment module
§  Facilitates direct credit under social sector schemes to the account (Bank/ Post office) of beneficiary/vendors/ institutions and employees.
§  Bank and scheme independent platform readily replicable across schemes and States.
§  Populates utilization report which is accurate and bank reconciled.
4
Module on Interfaces
§  CPSMS is a network of networks. Potential to interface with other MISs e.g. NREGASoft, PRIYASoft.
§  Ensures one time data entry in any system for data integrity and ease of operation at field level.
5
Public Information Portal
§  Array of reports e.g. Scheme wise, Agency wise, District wise, Sector wise releases can be put in public domain.
§  Citizens can get dynamic report (from.. to) for their locality delivered to them on their e-mails.
§  Public disclosure to enhance efficiency in public expenditure, transparency in the government functioning and accountability of the implementing agencies.

Annexure-II: A snapshot of release pattern of two major Centrally Sponsored Schemes (SSA & Total Sanitation Campaign) during FY 2011-12:
Maximum releases against the annual allocation under these schemes have been made in the beginning of the year.                                (Source: www.cpsms.nic.in)
Annexure-III: Total Release of Plan funds to IIT, Delhi during 2011-12:
Period:
From: 1/4/2011 to: 31/3/2012
Figures in: millions
Sr.no.
Scheme
Releases
1
Bioinformatics [0149]
2.40
3
Components and material development program [0528]
3.70
4
Convergence comm and strategic electronics DIT [0527]
5.50
5
IITS DHE (including OSC) [0920]
1420
6
National mission in education through ICT [0887]
79.50
7
National mission on nano science and nano technology [1022]
18
8
Program for promotion of excellence and innovation [0147]
8.20
9
R and D in new and renewable energy technologies [0689]
13.70
Source: www.cpsms.nic.in
The report on funding to one agency, e.g. IIT, Delhi from all plan schemes during any time period is derived from this system which may be used by the decision makers to have a view on merging or demerging grants and their intended outcomes.
Annexure-IV: Major benefits of Bank Interface:
      i.        “Just in time” provision of funds to lower level agencies, e.g. block and below for efficiency in program implementation.
     ii.        Financial inclusion at the lowest level of scheme hierarchy, e.g. village school/ Health and sanitation committee, etc. as the system is bank neutral and allows complete flexibility to these agencies to choose their bank, even an RRB.
    iii.        Efficient devolution of funds as scheme administrators can now redirect funds to needy areas, based on visibility of actual balances.
   iv.        Effective cash management at a macro level by linking future releases to the total float available with a state under a scheme. Huge potential saving on account of cost of idle funds to Government of India.
    v.        Major reduction in delays in transfer of funds to lower levels through NEFT/ RTGS possible under CBS.
   vi.        Better monitoring of programs possible by tracking flow of funds through bank transactions.
  vii.        Direct credit of accounts of beneficiaries at village level leveraging technology.


References:

1.       Kusek, Jody Zall, and Ray C. Rist. 2004. Ten steps to a resultsbased monitoring and evaluation system. Washington, DC: World Bank.
2.       Linda Morra, Road to Results, Washington, DC: World Bank
3. Evaluation Standards of OECD as published and accepted world-wide: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/55/0/44798177.pdf
4.       www.cpsms.nic.in
5.       World Bank Reports




[1] Article by Mr.Ajay S Singh, ICAS, Controller of Accounts, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Ministry of Finance, Government of India. Views are personal.