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).
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:
- 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.
- Release
data for all other Centrally Sponsored Schemes and Central Plan Schemes on
the same lines as explained above in respect of flagship programs.
- 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.
- Capture
all expenditure details from the lower level on standardized formats.
- 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.
- Payment
to the ultimate beneficiary through banking channels.
- 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.
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 results‐based monitoring and evaluation system. Washington, DC: World Bank.
2.
Linda Morra, Road to Results, Washington, DC: World Bank
5.
World Bank Reports
