United Nations Public Service Awards Case Studies

The Central & State Governments spend millions of rupees on poverty alleviation programs through various development schemes. Despite this, only a fraction of the money meant for the poor beneficiaries of these employment and welfare programs reaches them. Most of the schemes are hijacked by contractors and middle-men and invariably fall prey to rampant corruption. As a result, the poor often lose out on their entitlements and face considerable hardships to access the benefits of the schemes.

While transparency and accountability have been oft used terms there has seldom been any system designed to ensure the same. The poor have rarely been aware of either the objectives, implementation of the schemes or their rights and entitlements. In none of the poverty alleviation schemes that have been implemented so far has the aspect of ongoing public monitoring ever been initiated. Rarely has any government pro-actively disseminated information of the expenditure incurred in a demystified and simplified manner which the common person or beneficiary can understand. Governments, have, by and large, concentrated on the scale issues without really focusing on the micro-management aspects as a result of which targeting, accountability & transparency have been weak in development programmes. A top down silo culture has ensured that poor beneficiaries never got a chance to participate and influence the decision-making process nor monitor their implementation. Inspite of a constitutionally mandated people’s forum (Gram Sabha), individual beneficiaries rarely ever had a formal platform where they could express their views or air their grievances. Administration has always been seen by the people with distrust rather than as an ally, an amorphous body which is too intimidating for the poor to even attempt approaching it.

It is in this context that Social Audits have been introduced in the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS) in Andhra Pradesh, wherein the primary stake holders (laborers working under the Employment Guarantee Scheme) actively participate in the audit of the program. The social audit process starts with the filing of applications for information of relevant official records pertaining to the program, by trained civil society activists who then identify literate youth from laborers’ families. The youth are trained in the social audit processes and go into the villages and cross check official records through a door to door verification of muster rolls and physical verification of works. Awareness building regarding the rights and entitlements of the labourers through focus group discussions is an integral part of the social audit process. And on a pre-notified date the reports along with the findings of the social audit are readout in public meetings attended by the labourers, official functionaries, political representatives and the media. The officials respond to the issues which are read out in public and take corrective action.

What is the initiative about? (the solution)
In a social audit the micro processes of a mammoth program (annual budget allocated to the State of Andhra Pradesh for the implementation of the Scheme in the financial year 07-08 is Rs. 10000 million (256.4 Million USD)) are studied at the last point of delivery through which the strengths and weaknesses as well as the gaps and the leakages in the program are brought out in great detail. When information about budgets, allocation of works, wages, pay orders etc., are placed in the public domain and read out in front of the primary stake holders and the officials concerned, it is public accountability in practice. When corrective action is taken immediately it leads to the strengthening of the program as well as empowerment of people to ask for their rights. The awareness building and public meetings increase the awareness of the laborers regarding their rights and entitlements. It is a powerful deterrent for corruption and an effective monitoring and evaluation tool. In a social audit public meeting all the stake holders such as the laborers, the official functionaries of the implementing agency, the political class and the media participate and a whole range of implementation related issues ranging from the type of works being taken up, wage rate for a particular work, entitlements of the laborers under the scheme, responsibilities of the PRI bodies etc, get discussed in great detail which leads to increased awareness and transparency on all sides of the various aspects of the scheme. The key achievements till date include:  Social Audits have been conducted in 25,000 habitations spread across 13 Phase I districts in Andhra Pradesh;  The value of EGS works which were socially audited is Rs. 5000 million;  The number of village activists trained is 24,000, and more than 400 officials have been trained in Social Audit;  More than 150 Civil Society Organisations are involved in this process;  Total number of wage seekers reached under the scheme is 1.2 Million  Applications filed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act are around 400 (RTI is used to obtain information from public authorities for the social audits)  Documents scrutinized publicly number more than 400,000  More than 15000 elected representatives have participated in the social audits;  More than Rs. 7 million (180,000 USD) has been returned voluntarily in the public gaze by people who have indulged in embezzlement or misappropriation; and  Administrative action in the form of dismissal, suspension or disciplinary enquiries has been taken against more than 100 employees indulging in embezzlement or misappropriation.

Who proposed the solution, who implemented it and who were the stakeholders?
Section 17 of the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 mandates the conduct of social audit. The Social Audit programme was initiated in February, 2006 with money (Rs 1 million) that was available under the reform action plan budget (DFID supported Governance Reforms Programme 2006-09). The Strategy and Performance Innovation Unit (SPIU) set up for implementing the reform action plan with the help of Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) and Action Aid International undertook the training of 30 senior resource persons from civil society organisations who had experience of working at the grass root level on peoples’ rights in the social audit processes. The results of the pilot social audits where more than 90% deviation was found at the last point of delivery (significantly the documents and records pertaining to these works were financially audited and nothing was found to be wrong on paper) were a revelation to the senior officials working in the Department of Rural Development who were at that point formulating the operational guidelines for the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme - Andhra Pradesh. It was in this context that a decision was taken to make Social Audits an integral part of the implementation of the Employment Guarantee Scheme. The SPIU has since July 2006 been conducting social audits of the NREGS in Andhra Pradesh. The Village Social Auditors (youth from families of labourers) supported by State and District resource persons drawn from civil society organisations and workers’ unions conduct these social audits. The primary stakeholders are labourers who work under the Employment Guarantee Scheme and potential labourers from the poorest families in the villages. Other stakeholders are the Panchayati Raj Institutions, political class and the official functionaries.

Describe how and when the initiative was implemented by answering these questions
a. What were the strategies used to implement the initiative? In no more than 500 words, provide a summary of the main objectives and strategies of the initiative, how they were established and by whom.
1. Constituting a Cadre of Resource Persons - The SPIU (RD) put together a team of people who were from different work backgrounds but who invariably had experience of working at the grass root level on rights-based approaches to development. People from administration worked closely with those from non–government groups. Expertise was drawn from other places where social Audits had been carried out previously. The team was kept small and manageable. Resource persons from Civil Society groups with not less than 10 years of grass roots experience were identified and trained in the Social Audit process. 2. Developing a cadre of Village Social Auditors – The concept of using Village Social Auditors who are literate youth from wage seekers families was arrived at after much brain storming and trials as to who would actually carry out the Social Audit process. 3. Undertaking a Pilot Project - As a part of the training process a pilot social audit was conducted of 12 civil works completed the previous year (2005) under the National Food for Work Programme (NFFWP). This was subsequently extended to 3 districts. 4. Quick Scaling Up of the Process – The project was then scaled up from the initial three districts on a pilot basis to cover all the 13 Phase I districts within 4 months, before anyone could realise the implications or oppose it. 5. Continuous monitoring of the processes at the grassroots and ensuring that no co-option of the process takes place has yielded positive results. 6. Ensuring that the Administration is brought on board and accepts the Social Audit process as a tool to improve the implementation of the scheme has been a critical factor. 7. Commitment to the process at the top levels of administration ensured that down the line every official took it seriously and supported it as has been communicated to them through Government orders and Memos. 8. Involvement of all key stakeholders including the beneficiaries, the community, officials at various levels, elected representatives etc. in the social audit process has ensured that there has been transparency and ownership as well as minimised the initial reluctance. 9. A 15 day appraisal to ensure that decisions taken at public meetings are complied with, for which a group of Village Social Auditors and two District Resource Persons go back every fifteen days with the reports of what action has been taken and what is yet to be taken. 10. Constant deepening and experimenting with new ideas to make the Social Audits more proactive and for it to strike root in the community has been a continuous and ongoing endeavour of the social audit team.

b. What were the key development and implementation steps and the chronology? No more than 500 words
Piloting In February, 2006 the Department of Rural Development, Government of Andhra Pradesh, organised a pilot Social Audit in three Gram Panchayats in Andhra Pradesh. This process also enabled the training of 30 participants, identified from Civil Society Organisations and Workers Unions, as State Resource persons. Planning, Training & Developing Toolkits Based on the experiences from the pilot exercise, between February to June 2006, the development of necessary support material and planning was undertaken along with the training of resource persons.  Three training modules and one training film were developed  Step by step procedure to carry out a social audit has been devised specifically for the NREGS-AP.  Training of State Resource Persons/District Resource Persons/Village Social Auditors has been undertaken so as to create a mass base of trained auditors at the village level.  A Social Audit questionnaire has been designed to ensure that all aspects of the Social Audit are covered.  Government orders and memos regarding the Social Audit process were issued for institutionalising the Social Audit process. Phase I: Coverage of three districts From July to October 2006, the social audit process was undertaken in three districts – Nalgonda, Medak and Ananthapur. In Ananthapur, mass scale social audits were done in the first week of September wherein more than 10000 habitations were covered. More than 100 civil society organisations were involved in these mass social audits. Phase II: Roll-out to all districts under NREGA Between October 2006–March 2007 was the roll out phase. The social audit process was rolled out to all the 13 districts covered under the project. During this phase, extensive training of village social auditors was done and the social audit process was concurrently undertaken in these districts. Institutionalising & Sustaining the Initiative Since March 2007, the social audit process has become institutionalised in the programme delivery process. They are going well simultaneously in all the districts. Documentation exercises have been taken up by the Department. An independent monitoring & evaluation (M&E) was also conducted by the World Bank. Two more training films are also being developed. Simultaneously, training of officials as well as the political executive such as the Sarpanches in the Social Audit process has been taken up. A website has been designed and is in the process of being launched. Now that the Government of India has announced that all the districts in the country would be covered under the programme from April 1, 2008, the agency is in the process of planning and augmenting resources for extending the social audit to the new districts to be covered.

c. What were the main obstacles encountered? How were they overcome? No more than 500 words
• Resentment of the administrative machinery at the public nature of social audit and also at being held accountable publicly was a major issue. This was overcome with a combination of executive instructions form the top and a sensitisation and orientation of the administrative machinery in the social audit processes. Till date approximately 400 program officers have been trained in social audit processes (including classroom and actual social audit of one civil work and reading reports in the public meeting). • Interference from the political class posed problems because of the inherent nexus between them and the middlemen. This was overcome by a strategy design where the social audit processes were spread very quickly horizontally across the state before anyone could realise it. In a few months time social audits had taken roots everywhere in the 13 districts and thus critical mass of opposition was not allowed to build. Any opposition was addressed immediately as the situation arose. • Simultaneously another phenomenon that helped the social audits to be continued was the overwhelming response of the labourers who participated very enthusiastically in the verification process and attended in large numbers in the social audit public meeting. The administration, the political class and the media also found that the social audit findings (leakages, corruption, differences in measurement etc) to be true and could not be disputed and this enhanced the credibility of the social audit process. • Constant bridge building exercises were initiated between the civil society/community activists who conduct the social audits and the administration. • Disclosure of Information by the public authorities – The NREGA Operational Guidelines, mandates that information must be provided by the implementing agency to the applicant 7 days from the date that the application is received. The resource persons apply under the NREGA for the relevant information. Applications for NREGA related information can also be made under the RTI Act,2005, and the implementing agency would then have to furnish the information to the applicant within 30 days of the application being received, failing which it would be deemed a refusal and the concerned official could be fined upto Rs.25,000. Both the NREGA as well as the RTI Act, ensure that the administration furnish the information within the stipulated time period.

d. What resources were used for the initiative and what were its key benefits? In no more than 500 words, specify what were the financial, technical and human resources’ costs associated with this initiative. Describe how resources were mobilized
The pilot social audit was conducted from budget available under the reform action plan funded by the Government of Andhra Pradesh. Training tools were also developed with the same budget. For regular social audits, budgets are drawn from the Employment Guarantee Scheme budget provided by the GOI. For initiatives other than the regular social audits like development of Social audit website etc., are taken from the reform action plan budget. The monthly budget for the resource fee of the SRPs, DRPs and state level members and travel of SRPs and DRPs is Rs. 17,00,000. Break-up of monthly budget - Resource fee for State Resource persons: Rs. 2,60,000 - Resource Fee for District Resource fee: Rs. 13,00,000 - Resource fee for State Level team members: Rs. 63,000 - Salary of PS, Accountant, Attender at the State Cell: Rs. 26,500 - Travel (Reimbursable as per actuals): 50,000 The expenditure that is incurred at the Mandal level per Social Audit is approximately Rs. 50,000 per social audit. A core group of 25 state resource persons were trained who then trained nearly 300 district reource persons. More than 24,000 village activists have been trained social audits. These include many youth from the families of the beneficiaries as primary stakeholders, civil society activists, SHG members etc. More than 150 CSOs/NGOs have voluntarily associated themselves with the social audit process and provide technical/manpower support. From the supply side, about 350 block development officers have been trained.

Is the initiative sustainable and transferable?
When the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan carried out the first set of People’s Audits of development works in rural Rajasthan as a platform to push for a Right to Information Act to be passed by parliament, most other states claimed that the same could not be carried out anywhere else. However, the Social Audits in AP have proved beyond doubt that if an administration has the will to put in transparency safe guards and the intent to be accountable to its people, they can adopt the process and work at a much larger scale. The initiative that has been undertaken in AP will require hand holding initially to trigger the process of questioning on the part of the beneficiaries and the process of responding to the queries by the administration. However, the fact that the term “social audit” no longer sends shock waves resulting in resistance from the administration showcases the fact that the same is possible in not just other departments but in other states too. Taking the queue from the Rural Development Department, Department of School Education and the Department of Backward Class Welfare, Government of Andhra Pradesh are piloting social audit. The School Education Department is planning to audit the “Mid-Day Meal Programme” and the Department of Backward Class Welfare is auditing the “Post-matric Scholarships and Reimbursement of Tuition Fee programmes”.

What are the impact of your initiative and the lessons learned?
• No official MIS or M&E report captures the gaps, leakages strengths and weaknesses of a program like a social audit which involves primary stakeholders. • No matter how perfect the design of the program unless a formal platform is provided to the primary stake holders to articulate the issues and problems the program will fail to achieve its objectives. • Placing information in the public domain and an open discussion by all stakeholders on various aspects cleanses the program, allows for correction. • Verification of official records at the last point of delivery increases steeply the awareness levels of the labourers. • Social audits must be planned at the very inception of a programme for best results with a view to integrate it with various processes and systems. • Social Accountability mechanisms like the social audit can also significantly enhance hierarchical and internal monitoring systems. • Formal mechanisms, institutions and rules are required to sustain social accountability initiatives. • Management of the social audit process should be independent and free from governmental interference. • The effectiveness of social audits is enhanced by supporting legislations like Right to Information Act.


Institution Name:		Strategy Performance & Innovation Unit (Rural Development)
Institution Type:		Government Agency
Contact Person:		Karuna Vakati Akella
Title:		Director SPIU (RD)
Telephone/ Fax:		+91 40 27673157 / + 91 9849900788
Institution's / Project's Website:		+91 40 23450608
E-mail:		karunaakella@rediffmail.com
Address:		DWCRA Arts & Crafts Gallery, # 1-3-1028, Lower Tank Bund, Gandhi Nagar
Postal Code:		500 080
City:		Hyderabad
State/Province:		Andhra Pradesh
Country:		India

The Problem

Solution and Key Benefits

Actors and Stakeholders

(a) Strategies

(b) Implementation

(c) Overcoming Obstacles

(d) Use of Resources

Sustainability and Transferability

Lessons Learned

Contact Information