BUDGET BRIEFS - Home | Accountability Initiativeaccountabilityindia.in/sites/default/.../BudgetBrief_SBM-G_2017-18.pdf · BUDGET BRIEFS, SBM-G, GOI 2017-18, VOL9/ISSUE1 3 Expenditure

BUDGET BRIEFS, SBM-G, GOI 2017-18, VOL9/ISSUE1 1

SUMMARY & ANALYSIS

HIGHLIGHTS

Accountability Initiative, Centre for Policy Research, Dharam Marg, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi - 110021

Government of India (GOI) allocations for Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation (MDWS) in Financial Year (FY) 2017-18

GOI allocations for SBM-G in FY 2017-18

Swachh Bharat Mission - Gramin (SBM-G)GOI, 2017-18

BUDGET BRIEFSVol 9/Issue 1

Prepared by: Avani Kapur, [email protected] & Abhishri Aggarwal, [email protected]

The Swachh Bharat Mission- Gramin or SBM-G is the Government of India’s (GOI) flagship rural sanitation programme.

Using government data, this brief reports on trends for SBM-G along the following parameters:• Allocations and expenditures• Physical progress of toilets built• Expenditures incurred under Information, Education and Communication (IEC) activities• Coverage and open defecation (OD)

Cost share and implementation: Funds for rural sanitation are provided primarily through GOI. For Individual Household Latrines (IHHLs), states and beneficiaries are expected to contribute a share as well. GOI share for IHHLs is 60 per cent and the state share is 40 per cent since FY 2015-16. For the North East states, Jammu and Kashmir and Special category states, the GOI to state ratio is 90 per cent to 10 per cent.

₹20,011 cr ₹13,948 cr

■ Release of funds to state governments has improved in the last three years. In FY 2014-15, GOI had sanctioned 96 per cent of its total allocations (releases calculated from date of sanction). This increased to 102 per cent in FY 2015-16. In FY 2016-17, 75 per cent of GOI allocations (revised estimates) have been sanctioned by the third quarter of the financial year, up from 61 per cent during the same period in FY 2015-16.

■ Construction of IHHLs accounts for the largest share of total expenditure and has been consistently rising over the years. In FY 2014-15, 91 per cent of total expenditure was on IHHLs. This increased to 97 per cent in FY 2015-16. In FY 2016-17, 98 per cent of total expenditure incurred between April and 10 January 2017 was for the construction of IHHLs.

■ As of 10 January 2017, there are 1,42,799 Open Defecation Free (ODF) villages in India – more than double the number reported in FY 2015-16 (49,599). However, only 40 per cent of these have been verified by government authorities. The number of ODF districts currently stands at 74, compared to 5 in FY 2015-16.

■ SBM-G guidelines require 8 per cent of allocations to be utilized for IEC activities. However, in FY 2016-17, till 10 January 2017, only 1 per cent of total expenditure had been incurred on IEC activities.

2 ACCOUNTABILITY INITIATIVE, INDIA

■ In October 2014, GOI announced the restructuring of the Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan into the Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin (SBM-G) – a community-led rural sanitation programme aimed at providing access to sanitation facilities and eradicating the practice of open defecation by 2019. SBM-G is administered by the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation (MDWS).

Allocations

■ In FY 2017-18, GOI allocated `13,948 crore to SBM-G. This was a 33 per cent increase over FY 2016-17, when Rs. 10,500 crores was allocated. Allocations for the MDWS, however, have not kept pace with increases in allocations for SBM-G. Between FY 2014-15 and FY 2017-18, whilst allocations for rural sanitation increased by nearly five times, allocations for the MDWS increased by less than two-fold. Consequently, SBM-G is now the largest scheme run by the MDWS. It accounts for 70 per cent of the total budget for the MDWS, up from 24 per cent in FY 2014-15.

TRENDS IN GOI ALLOCATIONS, RELEASES AND EXPENDITURE

13,00512,006 12,107

10,907

16,512

20,011

2,500 2,300 2,850

6,525

10,500

13,948

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 BE

GOI allocations of MDWS GOI allocations for rural sanitation (SBM-Gramin)

Source: India Expenditure Budget, Vol 2, MDWS. Available online at: http://indiabudget.nic.in. Note: Figures are in crore of rupees and are revised estimates (RE), except for FY 2017-18 which are budget estimates (BE). Last accessed on 1 February, 2017.

GOI ALLOCATIONS FOR SBM-G HAVE INCREASED BY NEARLY FIVE TIMES SINCE 2014-15

■ Budgets for SBM-G are determined through a process of negotiation between the GOI and state governments. The negotiation is based on project proposals called Annual Implementation Plans (AIPs) developed at the Gram Panchayat (GP) level and consolidated at the state level. Final approvals rest with the MDWS. Funds are released based on approved budgets.

Releases

■ Release of funds to state governments has improved in the last three years. In FY 2014-15, GOI had sanctioned 96 per cent of its total allocation (release numbers calculated from date of sanction). This increased to 102 per cent in FY 2015-16.

■ There have also been improvements in the pace of fund release. In FY 2014-15, only 4 per cent of the total allocations had

been released in the first quarter and close to 50 per cent had been sanctioned in the last quarter of the financial year. FY 2015-16 saw some improvement, with 38 per cent of the funds going out in the first quarter, but little movement was seen in the second and third quarters.

■ In FY 2016-17, 75 per cent of GOI allocations had been sanctioned by the third quarter of the financial year, up from 61 per cent during the same period in FY 2015-16.

BUDGET BRIEFS, SBM-G, GOI 2017-18, VOL9/ISSUE1 3

Expenditure performance

■ Total funds available include opening balances, releases and interest earned by both the GOI and states. Expenditure as a proportion of funds available has been increasing. In FY 2014-15, only 58 per cent of total funds available were spent. In FY 2016-17, 89 per cent of the available funds had been spent till 10 January, 2017.

4

3834

22

4

1422 19

27

4840

NA0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

Quarter 1 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 4

Percentage of GOI releases out of GOI allocations

Source: Sanction order details, SBM Management Information System (MIS) reports, April 2014 to December 2016. Available online at: http://sbm.gov.in/sbmreport/Report/Release/SBM_SanctionOrder.aspx, http://sbm.gov.in/tsc/DataEntry/Sanc_OrderEntry/Rpt_Sanc_OrderDetails.aspx?id=Home. Union Budget 2016-17 and 2017-18. Available online at: www.indiabudget.nic.in. Allocation figures are revised estimates.. Last accessed on 1 February, 2017.

PACE OF FUND RELEASE HAS STEADILY IMPROVED SINCE 2014-15

58

9789

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 (till 10th January, 2017)

Percentage of funds available spent (approved)

Source: Format B2(a1), SBM MIS reports. Available online at: http://sbm.gov.in/sbmreport/Report/Financial/SBM_StateReleaseAllocationincludingUnapproved.aspx,http://sbm.gov.in/tsc/Report/Release/RptStatewiseReleaseAllocation_New.aspx?id=Home. Last accessed on 10 January, 2017.

PROPORTION OF APPROVED EXPENDITURE REACHED NEARLY 100% IN 2015-16

■ Some states have spent money from their own resources. This has not yet been approved by GOI. On including this, till 10 January, 2017, 110% of funds available had been spent. This excess in expenditure is understood better when studied at the state level. In FY 2016-17, till 10 January, 2017, Madhya Pradesh had already spent over 7 times the funds available with it (including unapproved expenditure). Similarly, Odisha had spent 4 times more than the funds available with it. Other states which have overshot their available funds by significant margins include Rajasthan (219 per cent), Tamil Nadu (155 per cent) and Gujarat (148 per cent). It is expected that states will be reimbursed for this additional expenditure by GOI, post verification.

4 ACCOUNTABILITY INITIATIVE, INDIA

728

405

219

155 148 130 11377 75 65 60 54 39 36 16

170 148109

196

125

37

109 102 8051

7299

52 63 81

0%

200%

400%

600%

800%

Percentage of funds ava ila ble s pent in 2016-17 inc luding una pproved ( till 10th Ja nua ry , 2017)

Percentage of funds a va ilable s pent in 2015-16

Madhya

Prades

h

Rajasth

an

Tamil N

adu

Gujarat

Kerala

West B

engal

Chhattis

garh

Jhar

khan

d

Uttar P

rades

h

Mahar

ashtra

Punjab

Himac

hal Pra

desh

Bihar

Harya

na

Odisha

Source: Format B2(a1), SBM MIS reports. Available online at: http://sbm.gov.in/sbmreport/Report/Financial/SBM_StateReleaseAllocationincludingUnapproved.aspx,http://sbm.gov.in/tsc/Report/Release/RptStatewiseReleaseAllocation_New.aspx?id=Home. Last accessed on 10 January, 2017.

■ Expenditure as a proportion of funds available was slow in the states of Haryana, Bihar and Himachal Pradesh. In FY 2015-16, Haryana and Bihar had spent 81 per cent and 63 per cent of funds available, respectively; but in FY 2016-17, till 10 January, 2017, they had spent only 16 per cent and 36 per cent, respectively. Similarly, Himachal Pradesh too had spent less than 50 per cent of its available funds till 10 January, 2017.

MADHYA PRADESH, ODISHA AND RAJASTHAN SPENT SIGNIFICANTLY MORE THAN BUDGETED ALLOCATION

COMPONENT-WISE TRENDSImplementation of SBM involves a number of activities. These include: ■ Start-up activities, such as a needs assessment and subsequent preparation of plans ■ Information Education and Communication (IEC) activities to push for behaviour change■ Construction of Individual Household Latrines (IHHLs)■ Construction of community sanitary complexes■ Construction of school toilets and hygiene education ■ Construction of anganwadi toilets■ Setting up of Rural Sanitary Marts (RSMs) or production centres and retail outlets responsible for manufacturing and

marketing low-cost hardware.

Individual Household Latrines

■ IHHLs are basic low-cost toilets provided to Below Poverty Line (BPL) households and certain categories of Above Poverty Line (APL) households, such as Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes, small and marginal farmers, landless labourers, physically handicapped, and women-headed households.

■ Post-construction, an incentive of `12,000 is to be given to an eligible household for the construction of an IHHL. Till FY 2014-15, `9,000 (75 per cent) was to be contributed by the GOI with states providing `3,000 (25 per cent). Since FY 2015-16, funds are shared between the GOI and states in a 60:40 ratio.

BUDGET BRIEFS, SBM-G, GOI 2017-18, VOL9/ISSUE1 5

■ Construction of IHHLs accounts for the largest share of total expenditure and has been consistently rising over the years. In FY 2014-15, 91 per cent of total expenditures were for IHHLs. This increased to 97 per cent in FY 2015-16. In FY 2016-17, 98 per cent of total expenditure incurred between April and 10 January, 2017 was for construction of IHHLs.

■ Expenditure on IHHLs as a percentage of total expenditure was high across states. Most states spent nearly all their money on IHHL construction, in both FY 2015-16 and FY 2016-17 (up to 10 January, 2017). There were, however, some exceptions. Haryana spent only 76 per cent of its total expenditure on IHHLs in FY 2015-16. Similarly, Arunachal Pradesh spent only 66 per cent.

96 96 99 98 97 98 98

58

97 95 95

81

66

8676

100 100 100 99 99 99 99 99 97 9793 90

80

5649

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Percentage spent on IHHL out of total expenditure in 2016-17 (till 10 January, 2017)

Percentage spent on IHHL out of total expenditure in 2015-16

Madhya

Prades

h

Rajasth

an

Andhra Pra

desh

Gujarat

Kerala

West B

engal

Chhattis

garh

Arunac

hal Pra

desh

Uttar P

rades

h

Mahar

ashtra

Punjab

Himac

hal Pra

desh

Bihar

Harya

na

Nagala

nd

Source: Format B2(b), SBM MIS reports. Available online at: http://sbm.gov.in/sbmreport/Report/Financial/SBM_StateDistrictExpYearwise.aspx, http://sbm.gov.in/tsc/Report/Financial/RptStateDistrictExpYearwise.aspx?id=Home. Last accessed on 10 January, 2017.

98% OF SBM-G EXPENDITURE IN 2016-17 HAS BEEN ON IHHL CONSTRUCTION

■ The pace of construction has been slow relative to targets. In FY 2014-15, of the annual target of 1.25 crore IHHLs, only 58 lakh (47 per cent) toilets had been constructed. Similarly, in FY 2015-16, 55 per cent of the annual target of 2.31 crore was achieved.

■ It has, however, been improving over the past three years – from 58 lakh toilets constructed in FY 2014-15, to 1.27 crore (more than double the previous year) in FY 2015-16. In FY 2016-17, as of 10 January, 2017, 1.2 crore IHHLs had already been constructed, with three months still to go in the financial year.

■ Improvement in fund flows in FY 2016-17 has smoothened the pace of construction. As incentives are given post-construction, increased releases in the first and second quarters of FY 2016-17 (as compared to the release pattern in FY 2015-16) mean that most of the construction has occurred in third quarter as opposed to the last quarter. In Kerala, for instance, 1,65,898 toilets were constructed in the month of October, as compared to 9,629 during the rest of the year. This could also be due to a rush to construct ,as Kerala declared itself open defecation free (ODF) in November 2016.

Information, Education and Communication Activities

■ According to the guidelines, 8 per cent of total allocation under SBM-G is to be utilized for IEC activities.

■ Despite this, expenditure on IEC has been declining. In FY 2014-15, `157 crore was spent on IEC, accounting for 4 per cent of the total scheme expenditure. This decreased to `147 crore or 1 per cent in FY 2015-16. In FY 2016-17, till 10 January, 2017, only `56 crore had been spent, amounting to approximately 1 per cent of total expenditure up to that month.

■ At the start of every year, states set targets for the amount of expenditure they will incur under IEC.

6 ACCOUNTABILITY INITIATIVE, INDIA

■ Most states, however, were behind their targets for IEC expenditure in FY 2016-17. Till 10 January, 2017, Chhattisgarh was the highest spender at 36 per cent, followed by Punjab at 35 per cent. Jammu and Kashmir had not spent any money out of its target allocations for IEC, while Telangana and Rajasthan had spent a nominal 1 and 3 per cent, respectively.

100 100 100 10089 88

72 71 70

51 50 47 4638

26

94 9690

77

60

83

36

5642

3439

3140

1323

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Percentage of IHHL Coverage in 2016-17 (till 10 January, 2017) Percentage of IHHL coverage in 2014-15

Madhya

Prades

h

Rajasth

an

Uttara

khan

d

Gujarat

Kerala

Sikkim

Chhattis

garh

Jhar

khan

d

Uttar P

rades

h

Mahar

ashtra

Andhra Pra

desh

Himac

hal Pra

desh

Bihar

Harya

na

Odisha

Source: SBM dashboard. Available online at: http://sbm.gov.in/sbmdashboard/. Last accessed on 10 January, 2017.

36 3522 21 19 15 10 7 7 6 6 6 4 4 4 3 1 0

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Percentage of IEC target allocation spent in 2016-17 (till 10 January, 2017)

Madhya

Prades

h

Andhra Pra

desh

Rajasth

an

Jammu an

d Kashmir

Telan

gana

Karnat

aka

Gujarat

Kerala

West B

engal

Chhattis

garh

Jhar

khan

d

Uttar P

rades

h

Mahar

ashtra

Punjab

Himac

hal Pra

desh

Bihar

Harya

na

Odisha

Source: Format B04, SBM MIS reports. Available online at: http://sbm.gov.in/sbmreport/home.aspx. Last accessed on 10 January, 2017.

NO STATE HAD MET EVEN HALF OF ITS IEC EXPENDITURE TARGET TILL 10 JANUARY, 2017

NEARLY 60% OF RURAL INDIA HAD IHHLs

COVERAGE■ According to the SBM-G dashboard, as on 10 January, 2017, over 3 crore IHHLs have been built, achieving an overall

coverage of 58.4 per cent.

■ There are, however, significant state variations. The highest increase in coverage was seen in Rajasthan, which jumped 36 percentage points between FY 2014-15 and 10 January, 2017. States such as Sikkim, Himachal Pradesh and Kerala already had very high IHHL coverage in FY 2014-15 and did not need to increase coverage by much to achieve 100 per cent coverage. A number of states, however, still have a long way to go. Toilet coverage in Bihar barely improved from 23 per cent in FY 2014-15 to 26 per cent till 10 January, 2017. Uttar Pradesh too was a slow performer: coverage in the state grew by only 6 percentage points to 46 per cent.

BUDGET BRIEFS, SBM-G, GOI 2017-18, VOL9/ISSUE1 7

■ Whilst the NSSO reports the percentage of households contributing to open defecation (OD), the SBM MIS reports the percentage of households that have an IHHL. In order to verify the MIS data using third party data, we have compared the NSSO figures with the percentage of households not having an IHHL. Whilst the two are not strictly comparable, it provides some insights on the differences in the two data sets.

■ According to the NSSO’s Swachhta status report of 2016, 97,73,437 (97 lakh) households had access to an IHHL up to February 2016 (as against 3 crore IHHLs set up till 10 January, 2017 according to the SBM MIS data), a stark difference of over 2 crore for a short time difference of eight months.

■ As of March 2016, Rajasthan reported 45 per cent households not having an IHHL. However, according to NSSO, 67 per cent of the households surveyed as of February 2016 defecated in the open. Similarly, in Gujarat, whilst only 27 per cent of households did not have an IHHL as of March 2016, the NSSO survey found that 48 per cent of households defecated in the open.

■ Interestingly, in Telangana while 62 per cent of households did not have an IHHL, only 29 per cent of households defecated in the open according to NSSO.

75 72

62 6258 57 57

5045 43

37

2722

135 4 0 0

7377

83

29

7178

53

70 67

5648 48

916

95

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Percentage of households not having IHHLs (as on March 2016)

Percentage of households contributing to open defecation (as on February 2016)

Madhy

a Pra

desh

Rajasth

an

Andhra Pra

desh

Telan

gana

Gujarat

Kerala

Karnat

aka

Sikkim

Chhattis

garh

Jhar

khan

d

Uttar P

rades

h

Mahar

ashtra

Punjab

Himac

hal Pra

desh

Bihar

Harya

na

Odisha

Source: SBM dashboard. Available online at: http://sbm.gov.in/sbmdashboard/ and NSSO Swacchta status report, 2016. Last accessed on 10 January, 2017.

6 STATES REFLECTED A DIFFERENCE OF OVER 20 PERCENTAGE POINTS BETWEEN HOUSEHOLDS WITHOUT AN IHHL AND HOUSEHOLDS CONTRIBUTING TO OPEN DEFECATION

■ Conversion of dysfunctional toilets to functional has been slow. Out of 88 lakh beneficiaries found to have dysfunctional toilets as per the baseline survey (2012), only 1 per cent had been fixed till 10 January, 2017. Uttar Pradesh and Tamil Nadu had the maximum number of dysfunctional toilets at 17 lakh and 13 lakh, respectively. The conversion rates for both states, however, were 0 per cent. In contrast, Himachal Pradesh, which had close to 18,000 dysfunctional toilets at the time of the baseline, stood out for having fixed all as on January, 2017.

8 ACCOUNTABILITY INITIATIVE, INDIA

OPEN DEFECATION■ A major focus area for the government has been to make the country ODF. The first state to declare itself ODF was

Sikkim (January 2016), followed by Himachal Pradesh (October 2016) and Kerala (November 2016).

■ These declarations are made through a bottom-up process starting at the village or GP level. Once a village declares itself ODF, states are meant to verify these declarations by their own internal mechanisms and have continued engagement to sustain the ODF status.

■ As of 10 January, 2017, there are 1,42,799 ODF villages in India – more than double the number reported in FY 2015-16 (49,599). However, only 40 per cent of these have been verified. The number of ODF districts currently stands at 74, compared to 5 in FY 2015-16.

■ A high degree of variation is seen in the progression of states towards becoming ODF. Kerala jumped from 0 per cent ODF villages at the start of FY 2016-17 to being an ODF state within one financial year.

■ Similarly, Himachal Pradesh doubled its proportion of ODF villages within the same time span. Other states likely to declare themselves ODF in the near future include Uttarakhand and Haryana.

■ In contrast, states such as Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Odisha and Jharkhand show slow progress, with 5 per cent or less of their villages being reported as ODF.

100100 100

8477

51 50

40 39 39

22 21 20 2014 12

5 5 4 2

48

0

169

19

10

1915 15

94 7 7 8

2 0 3 0 10

20

40

60

80

Percentage of villages declared ODF in 2016-17 (till January 10, 2017) Percentage of villages declared ODF in 2015-16

Mad

hya P

rade

sh

Rajasth

an

Tamil N

adu

Gujara

t

Kerala

Wes

t Ben

gal

Chhat

tisga

rh

Andhr

a Pra

desh

Telan

gana

Karna

taka

Uttara

khan

d

Jhar

khan

d

Uttar P

rade

sh

Mah

aras

htra

Punjab

Himac

hal P

rade

shBiha

r

Harya

na

Odisha

Source: SBM dashboard. Available online at: http://sbm.gov.in/sbmdashboard/ODF.aspx. Last accessed on 10 January, 2017.

UTTARAKHAND AND HARYANA ARE LIKELY TO DECLARE THEMSELVES ODF IN THE NEAR FUTURE