kila training programme for child-friendly local governance

IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF

KILA TRAINING PROGRAMME FOR CHILD-FRIENDLY LOCAL GOVERNANCE

Report submitted byINTEGRATED RURAL TECHNOLOGY CENTRE, PALAKKAD

Submitted to

KERALA INSTITUTE OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION

We express our sincere gratitude to Dr. Joy Elamon, Director of Kerala Institute of Local Administration (KILA), Thrissur, for permitting us to undertake this study and to pro-vide necessary financial support for the same. We would like to express our special thanks to Dr. S Sreekumar, Director of Integrated Rural Technology Centre, Palakkad, for the guidance and suggestions rendered for the fruit-ful completion of this work. We express our thanks to Dr. Peter M. Raj, Associate Professor, KILA, and Child Re-source Centre, for providing all support to conduct this study. We would like to express our sincere thanks to Dr. Benoy Peter, Executive Director,Centre for Migration and Inclusive Development (CMID), Ernakulam, for the expert support to finish this study successfully. We also take this opportunity to extend our special thanks to all the elected represen-tatives of Grama Panchayats and Municipalities, officials of all LSGIs, ICDS supervisors and other officials, CDS Chairpersons, Representatives of Bala Sabha, head of the institutions of all the schools, and ICDS workers for their cooperation and support.

Study TeamSocial Science Division

IRTC

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

RESEARCH TEAM

Principal Investigator : Dr. Rajesh.K Head and Senior Fellow, Social Science Division, IRTC

Project Coordinator : Mr. Arjun Prasad Project Assistants : Ms. Shibina E Mr. Akhil Benny Mr. Anandu K S Ms. Geethu T V Ms. Krishna Radhakrishnan Ms. Shinshya P Ms. Saritha V Ms. Sajana A.S Mr. Muhammed Afsal K.TProject Intern : Anagha EExpert Consultant : Dr. Benoy Peter Executive Director, Centre for Migration and Inclusive Development (CMID), ErnakulamSupporting Team : Mr. Chinchu C Associate Fellow, IRTC, Palakkad Mr. Nikhil Sudheesh Research Assistant, IRTC, Palakkad

ADS - Area Development SocietyASHA - Accredited Social Health ActivistAWW - Anganwadi WorkersCCDP - Comprehensive Child Development ProgrammesCDPU - Child Development Protection UnitCDS - Community Development SocietyCFLG - Child-friendly Local GovernanceCPC - Child Protection CommitteeCPCR - Commissions for Protection of Child RightsCRC - Child Resource CentreFGD - Focus Group DiscussionICDS - Integrated Child Development SchemeIMNCI - Integrated Management of Neonatal and Childhood IllnessesINAP - India Newborn Action PlanJSSK - Janani Shishu Suraksha KaryakramKILA - Kerala Institute of Local AdministrationLSGD - Local Self Government DepartmentLSGI - Local Self Government InstitutionMDG - Millennium Development GoalsNCPCR - National Commission for the Protection of Child RightsNPA - National Plan of ActionNPC - National Policy for ChildrenSSA - Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan UNCRC - United Nations Convention on the Rights of the ChildUNICEF - United Nations Children’s Fund

ABBREVIATIONS

CONTENTS

Chapter No. Title Page Nos.Chapter 1 Introduction 01 – 03

Chapter 2 Context and Methodology of the Study 04 – 08

Chapter 3 Child Survival 09 – 21Chapter 4 Child Development 22 – 50Chapter 5 Child Protection 51 – 65Chapter 6 Child Participation 66 – 81

Chapter 7 Attitude and Knowledge of Trainees Regarding CFLG 82 – 85

Chapter 8 Success Stories: Promising practices of CFLG 86 - 96

Chapter 9 Findings and Recommendations 97 - 110

Appendix 111 - 119References 120 - 121

Sl. No Table Number Table Page No.1 2.1 Child-Friendly initiatives Prior to CFLG 052 3.1 Child sex ratio in India and Kerala 093 3.2 Programs for child survival initiated by the Government 094 3.3 & 3.4 Year wise allocation and utilisation of fund by LSGIs for Survival 10-115 3.5 & 3.6 Initiative for eradication of sex selective abortion by LSGIs 126 3.7 & 3.8 Initiative for sensitisation and training under RBSK by panchayat 14-157 3.9 & 3.10 Activities addressing malnutrition by LSGIs 16-17

8 3.11 Funder allocation by Chengottukavu panchayat for supplementary nutrition 18

9 3.12 Vaccination status of India and Kerala 1910 3.13 & 3.14 Initiative to facilitate vaccination in LSGIs 19-20

11 4.1 & 4.2 Year wise allocation and utilisation of fund for child development by LSGIs 22-23

12 4.3 & 4.4 Disaggregated data preparation by LSGIs 2513 4.5 & 4.6 Number of LSGIs have own building for Anganwadis 27-2814 4.7 & 4.8 Initiative for barrier-free environment in public space 28-2915 4.9 & 4.10 Educational initiative especially for ST students by LSGIs 31-3216 4.11 & 4.12 Educational initiative especially for SC students by LSGIs 33-3517 4.13 & 4.14 Initiative for infrastructure development during Pre school 36-3818 4.15 & 4.16 Interventions of LSGIs in the schools 41-4319 4.17 & 4.18 Initiatives for creating public spaces 45-4620 4.19 & 4.20 Recreational programme for children 47-4921 5.1 & 5.2 Year wise allocation and utilisation for child protection by LSGIs 5322 5.3 & 5.4 Activities for facilitating child protection committees 54-5523 5.5 & 5.6 Activities for sensitising child rights by LSGIs 57-5824 5.7 & 5.8 Number of reported and action taken child abuse cases in LSGIs 60

25 5.9 & 5.10 Number of reported cases and action taken on children in conflict with law by LSGIs 62

26 5.11 & 5.12 Initiatives for providing psycho social support for children through LSGIs 63-64

27 6.1 & 6.2 Allocation and utilisation of LSGIs in the domain of LSGIs 67-6828 6.3 & 6.4 Details of Balasabha meeting in LSGIs 70-7129 6.5 & 6.6 Documentation of child Gramasabha in LSGIs 72

30 6.7 & 6.8 Initiatives for collecting and discussing children’s demands inn general Gramasabha 74

31 6.9 & 6.10 Children’s participation in working groups 75-7632 6.11 & 6.12 Functioning of child parliament and Bala panchayats 77

33 6.13 Total allocation and utilisation of Panchayat for children except mandatory allocation 79

34 6.14 Total allocation and utilisation of Control Panchayat for children except mandatory allocation 79

35 6.15 Total allocation and utilisation of Municipality for children except mandatory allocation 79

36 7.1 Status of knowledge and attitude of trainees 82-8337 7.2 Initiatives taken after getting CFLG training 8438 7.3 Change in awareness levels of trainees 85

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Executive Summary Page 1

IMPACT ASSESSMENT OFKILA TRAINING PROGRAMME FORCFLG

IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF KILA TRAINING PROGRAMME FOR CHILD FRIENDLY LOCAL GOVERNANCE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION Child friendly local governance is a prin-ciple and practice by which all duty-bearers of children’s rights are able to progressively ensure that every child within their area of jurisdiction is fully able to enjoy their rights for survival, de-velopment, participation and protection. Child friendly local governance is a concept where the local governance system, in the country facili-tates an environment to protect all child rights and promotion of these child rights. All human beings have rights. Children are also entitled to enjoy many of the rights that adults under na-tional and international human right treaties. Discourses on child rights have emerged in the early decades of 20th century. The international declaration on the right of the children in 1924 was the first internation-al effort to promote child rights. United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child occurred in1989 and in 1992 entered into action and be-came legally binding. The international platform of UN has developed various child right relat-ed laws and treaties which has been ratified and practiced by countries across the world. Estab-lishment of UNICEF, an exclusive body which promotes the rights and wellbeing of every child has facilitated governments to address child right violations, regulations and laws for chil-

dren, programmes for children etc. As Asian countries are in a developing stage, children are facing enormous survival issues in these coun-tries. India is a developing country with higher rate of poverty for children and still faces child labour, exploitations of children and lack of in-frastructure etc. So UNICEF has been working with India as a facilitator and also engaged in joint efforts with different local organizations and state governments. As part of the new efforts for children a comprehensive plan for children was necessary. Decentralized planning is con-sidered as more efficiency and accountability in the service provision of Indian governing sys-tem. Kerala is already known for its initiatives for decentralization and achievements in human development those are comparable to developed nations. People’s plan in Kerala and progressive decentralized governance also contributed in Kerala’s achievements. Education, health, and Human developmental indices are high in Ker-ala while comparing with other Indian states. Even though local governments in the state had implemented many projects in their jurisdiction an integrated child friendly approach was miss-ing in their initiatives. In this context, UNICEF and KILA jointly started the child friendly local governance in Kerala.



INITIATION OF THE PROJECT KILA works as research and training in-stitution of government of Kerala in the field of decentralization and local governance. It has ex-posure to various international institutions such as UNDP and UNICEF. In 2011 UNICEF and KILA jointly established Child Resource centre (CRC) at KILA. CRC works as a supporting and training centre for effective child-centric local governance throughout out the state of Kerala. CRC-KILA and UNICEF Chennai have also or-ganized consultations and workshops to evolve and disseminate valuable information related to child-friendly governance. CRC-KILA facili-tates Local Self Government Institutions (LSGI)s to design and implement comprehensive child development plan (CCDP)and has trained 2,107 participants from local governments and repre-senting five districts of Kerala. This participants were included representatives from district, block and gram panchayats.(Ortiz, Bishai, & Rashid, n.d.).UNICEF and KILA encourage LSGs’ adop-tion to facilitate child friendly governance; and to prepare child development plans( CCDP ) they have jointly prepared and published guidelines, training manuals and handbooks on CCDP, and conducted trainings based on these materials for panchayaths (village councils).(UNICEF project to make panchayats child-friendly, n.d.). In 2007among Asian countries Nepal has been started the project child friendly local gover-nance. Nepal National Framework defines child friendly local governance as “Overall guidance to the government in realizing and mainstreaming the rights of children (Survival, Development, Protection and Participation) into the local gov-ernment system, structure, policies and process”.(Subedi, n.d.). In 2016 UNICEF and KILA initi-ated CFLG project as a collaborative programme in Kerala. The child friendly local governance in Kerala also focuses on the four domains of child rights such as child survival, child development, child protection and child participation. Local governments are authorized to introduce child friendly initiatives based in these domains. From the survival aspect to participation, the CFLG project encourages children to be the part of the democratic process. Allocation of funds for children, creation of child friendly infrastruc-

ture and development of educational facilities are covered in the projects. Apart from the sur-vival and development protection of children is also were considered as the pillars of projects. Local governments were already running earmarking funds and running programmes for child development as a result of planning guide-lines of local self government departments. Even though regular activities for children were un-dertaken by LSGs in the state an integrated lo-cal development plan for child development was missing. CFLG was an initiative in this direction.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY The study cover 30 panhayaths,3 con-trol panchayaths, 2 municipalities and a control municipality. 23 comparatively best performing local bodies also selected as case studies. The KILA training assessment study is significant to find out how far the training was useful to un-derstand child rights and make stakeholders en-able to formulate and implement child centered projects. This study can evaluate how far CFLG programme is able to make the local governance more children friendly. Recognition of children as an individual and as a citizen can make varied implications in children’s life. As a statewide proj-ect implemented in 146 local bodies the study can evaluate the effectiveness of training through the assessment local governments selected through systematic sampling local governance. The study intends to know status of CFLG programme in the state. Gaps in the CFLG at its framework and practice can be identified and through this study and approaches, strategies and activities of the programme can be revisited accordingly.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM After the approval from the deparment of LSG, KILA has been given training to 140 panchayaths and 6 municipalities for the child friendly local governance. Multi-stake hold-ers including elected representatives, officers, standing committee chair persons, KILA men-tors, ICDS officers etc were trained for 3 days at KILA campus. It took about a year to train representatives of 146 local bodies. They were provided with hand book and KILA also pre-



pared two operational manuals for CFLG in 2016. KILA has provided mentors for pancha-yaths, for advocacy and follow ups .There were various domains and directions that have to be each local body. This study is trying to address whether the expectations of the CFLG pro-gramme realized at the grass root level or not.

Following are the domains under CFLG pro-gramme;

Survival; reversing the declining Child sex ra-tio was the first goal to achieve. Under the do-main of Zero discrimination against Girl Child the strategies suggested were; Update and en-sure that girl friendly schemes are taken up by LSGs, quality service to pregnant and lactating women, Early registration of all pregnancies in Anganwadi and Sub Centre. Other domains are Immunization, vitamin A supplementation and de-worming, safe drinking water, Sanitation and hygiene, reducing neonatal, infant and under 5 mortality etc. The study would examine how far the LSGs could undertake initiatives under the domains of survival under CFLG programmes.

Development: early child care and Stimula-tion for development (ecd) (0-3 years, uni-versal EarlyChildhood care and Education (ecce) (3-5 years, healthy and child friendly School and pre-school, education for all up to 18 years, improving nutritional status and Fit-ness of children are coming under domain of child developments. This study analyses wheth-er activities to reduce the concept of child de-velopment have been reached in practice.

Protection: safeguarding the rights of children as per law, prevention of child Abuse in all settings, safe and protective school zones, safe adolescent Phase, prevention of child Marriages, supportive and caring family environment, disability reduc-tion and disabled friendliness were the activi-ties proposed under the domain of protection. This study has analyzed whether this concepts were taken by the local bodies through CFLGs.

Participation: To activate Balasabha in every ward, Functional and active Adolescent clubs at all AWCs and Government run hostels, partic-

OBJECTIVES• Understand the Child Friendly initiatives

of LSGIs; Pre and Post CFLG.• Understand the impact of the programme

in disseminating the concept of Child Rights among different stakeholders.

• Mapping of Initiations of LSGIs for pro-tecting child rights in the domains of Survival, Development, Protection, and Participation.

• Analyse the pattern of budget alloca-tion and expenditure of LSGIs for Child Friendly initiatives.

• Comparative analysis of CFLG and non CFLG LSGIs performance in protecting Child Rights.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS• Whether performance of local govern-

ments in reference to children has changed after the KILA training while compar-ing to the experience of pre-CFLG year?

• What are the initiatives local bodies have taken for children after the KILA training?

• Understand what is the most significant effect of KILA training for CFLG in local bodies?

• How much funds has been allocated by lo-cal bodies annually for child friendly initia-tives in differ ent domains?

• Performance of local bodies working in each of the four major rights unidentified by UNICEF?

ipation of all students in school based Forums/clubs, to include children’s views in Local Self Government’s plans and to promote prepara-tion of Child Development Plan and promote adequate child friendly public space for children were the activities proposed in CFLG. This study analyze whether there were realized on practice.

The current study is an impact assessment of the KILA training. It assesses the pre and post scenarios of each local body in the child friendly initiatives. It assesses the alloca-tion and expenditure of funds for each do-main. Whether training was effective and it reflected in the projects. It also studies status of child friendly local governance in Kerala.



• How far trained stakeholders are aware of child rights and current problems faced by children?

• What are the major achievements of local governments taken under the study?

• Whether any significant difference between in implementing and internalizing child friendly local governance by Pancha-yaths and municipalities take part in train-ing and not received training

• To what extend initiatives promoted as the part of CFLG were sustainable in nature.

METHODOLOGY One hundred and forty gram Panchayats and 6 municipalities participated under the first round of training for the CFLG Programme of KILA, a sample of 30 Panchayats that received training was chosen through systematic random sampling ensuring 10 each Panchayats from the districts in south, central and southern regions of Kerala. In order to enable comparisons, one Panchayat from each region, which did not re-ceive CFLG training, was selected as control cases. From among the six municipalities that received CFLG training, two were selected ran-domly ensuring representation of north and south regions1. One municipality from each re-gion was selected, along with one municipality as control case. Thus a total of 33 sample Pan-chayats and 3 municipalities were covered by the study. A mixed method approach was em-ployed in the study using a blend of qualitative and quantitative techniques. A checklist was de-veloped in accordance with the assessment ma-trix proposed in the operational manual of the CFLG Programme covering each of the four di-mensions of child friendly local governance. The same was used to collect and analyse data from each sample LSG. A structured questionnaire was used for analyse the attitude and knowledge of trainees regarding CFLG. There were 3 sec-tions in the questionnaire; the first portion of the questionnaire was to understand the attitude and knowledge level of trainees who were trained under the CFLG programme regarding various domains of CFLG. The second portion covered the initiatives taken by them after getting CFLG training and the third portion was to understand the contribution of KILA training in building

1 Municipalities in the central region did not receive CFLG training in the first phase and hence central region was not represented in the sample municipalities.

TOOLS OF STUDY Different tools were used in the study to collect from various stakeholders.

Checklist: Administering checklist was the pri-mary stage in data collection. The structure of the checklist was suitable to analyze the pre and post analysis of child friendly programmes done each local body. This checklist was administrat-ed in three control Panchayath and one control municipality.

Case studies: Case studies of 14 best perform-ing Panchayts were documented under the study through in-depth case studies.

A structured questionnaire: The trainees from selected 30 Grama Panchayat were targeted to collect data. The research team could collect data from 40 participants from 17 Grama Panchayat, 32 elected representatives, 7 government staff, and one resource person. Various tools have been adopted in the design of the project. At the first step of the research data collection of child friendly Pro-grammes were done by using the Check list. Secondary data also has been collected to cross check the check list and to collect plan fund of each local body. A structured questionnaire also

capacity of trainers in basic concepts of CFLG. In addition to this, a semi-structured interview schedule also was used. The tools were shared with KILA and concurrent was obtained. Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were conducted sep-arately with key stakeholders including children. Total 24 FGDs were conducted and 40 Key Informants were interviewed. In order to collect data from sample LSGs 10 Research Of-ficers were recruited and were provided 2 days’ training at IRTC during 9-2-2019 to10-2-2018. Field training was also provided at 10 pan-chayats. The data collection of the study took place 1st February to 27th April 2019. The re-search team interviewed elected representatives and implementing officers in the local govern-ments CSO representatives, extension officers appointed by KILA to support the LSGs and children from the LSG. A total of 306 adults and 429 children participated in the study.



prepared to assesses the knowledge and attitude of child friendly initiatives among CFLG train-ees. Two FGDs were conducted. One for stake-holders and other was children’s FGD. Semi structured interview schedule were prepared to analyze the training experience of the stakehold-ers representing the Panchayat’s. Respondents of Semi structured interview were Elected repre-sentatives, officials, implementation officers and civil society representatives.

GENERAL FINDINGS AND THE OBSERVA-TIONS ABOUT THE CFLG PROGRAMME

• It is an appreciable effort that, the UNICEF-KILA initiative of Child friend-ly local governance could disseminate the concept of CFLG to 146 LSGIs as a policy. The one year long training in KILA for 146 different local bodies has transferred the idea of four domains i.e., survival, devel-opment, protection, and participation, into the local government institutions.

CHAPTERIZATION

The study report is containing 6 chapters. Following are the brief content of the chapters.

CHAPTER 1- deals the introduction of child rights and child friendly local governance.

CHAPTER 2- is deals the context and methodology of the study.

CHAPTER 3- chapter includes analysis of activities done in the domain of survival.

CHAPTER 4- chapter deals analysis activities done in the domain of development.

CHAPTER 5- chapter analysis activities done in the domain of protection.

CHAPTER 6- chapter deals with analysis of activities done in the domain of participation.

CHAPTER 7- is deals with the analysis of attitude and knowledge of trainees regarding CFLG.

CHAPTER 8- chapter deals with the Success stories: Promising practices of CFLG

CHAPTER 9- chapter is the findings, recommendations and conclusion of study.

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY Many stakeholders could not recollect the process and information in the training and the current impact assessment study have three years gap. Official who were in charge of CFLG and who were trained go transferred in many panchayat. Many respondents who were trained under CFLG could not to recollect about the training and many respondent were busy with parliament elections. Hence the participation of all stakeholders was irregular in FGDs, and fell difficulty to catch them for collecting data an-other limitation of the study was lack of docu-mentation about child friendly initiatives taken up by the panchayat they were death of docu-mentary evidence.

• As a massive state level training programme with the participation of multi-stakehold-ers such as representatives, elected mem-bers, local body officials, school heads, ICDS officers, and other officials under the LSGIs the CFLG training could reach into authorities of local governments and it has helped sensitisation of the CFLG pro-gramme among them.

• Most of the trained LSGIs have absorbed the concept of Children’s Gramasabha or Children’s as a forum of children. Almost all trained local bodies at least once con-ducted Children’s Gramasabha.

• Apart from the normal training, the mentor-ing system with the follow-ups, enhancement programmes by the involvement of mentor is appreciable as an equipping strategy.

• As a part of the extensive training and var-ious strategies some exemplary initiatives areemerged in LSGIs.



Issues implied in the framework of the programme Since Kerala development experience and status of children are quite different from a universal Indian frame work, the framework of UNICEF has to be designed and operationalised in the Kerala context. Such an adaptation of the pan Indian framework to Kerala framework was missing in the programme. The programme had to be re-designed operationalised in Kerala context.

Issues in recognising Children as Citizens International convention on child right highlights the citizenships of children whereas such a right based approach was missing in the overall training programme related to CFLG. CFLG could not deliver the citizenship right of children as one among their basis right to the LS-GIs through training. Hence the representatives of LSGIs in CFLG programme implemented lo-cal body could not perceive children as citizens. This problem has reflected in the basics approach of the programme has made impediments in re-alising the real target of the programmes

Absence of evidence based planning Systematic identification of problems and evolving solution for them require proper data base. Children’s comprehensive develop-ment plan in most of the LSGIs was not pre-pared with support of data. The comprehensive data on children is unavailable in LSGIs. Limited data collected from the annual routine survey by ICDS officers is the only data bank of children. KILA format has not been followed or updated in most of LSGIs. Along with this data sets were not used for planning programme for children.

Absence of a permanent institutional mechanism for children in LSGIs KILA has promoted institution mech-anism for their participation in governance, Balasabha, Bala Panchayath, and children’s Gramasabha were these institutions. The study indicated that theses institutional mechanism could not work as a permanent democratic fo-rum of children in studied Panchayats and mu-nicipalities these were limited to one-time events

for gathering children. The real functions envis-aged to be realised to the forum such as identi-fication of children’s issues, gathering children’s suggestions for evolving child friendly plans and nurturing democratic culture among children were not turned into practice at ground level.

Dearth of initiative for comprehensive child development plan As a part of CFLG they were suggest-ed to prepare a comprehensive child develop-ment plan and implement it under the devel-opment plan of LSGIs. KILA in cooperation with UNICEF prepared guidelines for LSGIs for comprehensive child development plan based on four major domains of child rights, however the stakeholders related to CFLG in each local body could not internalized it. Data from LSGIs show that most of the LSGIs were either follow-ing routine programmes or organizing onetime events like Balasabha in the name of plans for children. Only few of them could formulate cre-ative plans for children, most of the LSGIs have followed an adhocism approach in the planning and implementation of programmes. Majority of them could not utilize the provision of mandato-ry 5% allocation for children affectively.

Absence of involvement of parents and teachers There was no serious programme under CFLG for orienting parents and teachers towards the concept of child rights. CFLG has focused only organized children programme rather than attempting to transform the perspectives of par-ents and teachers towards children. Parents are unavoidable factor in the life of a child. Parent’s life, behavior and attitude towards children affect behavior of the child. Children’s environment with changing the global, regional, socio-polit-ical situations has also been changing. Parents are often denying child rights in the comprehen-sive environment which push the children into psycho-emotional issues. Hence continues pro-grammes for educating parents and teachers are immense relevant. Data from LSGIs shows that they could not undertake serious initiatives to sensitize parents on child rights.



Absence of innovative projects LSGs have followed certain routine proj-ects which has elements of child rights, from the inception of peoples plan campaign and par-ticularly after the 11th plan. Even after various exposures of training of CFLG, LSGIs are still following the same pattern of projects. There is a decrease of initiatives for innovative child friendly project by the LSGs even though some initiatives were generated in some LSGIs. How-ever it is interesting to note that there are some cases of innovative projects across the state Nir-bhaya programme at Matthuthur, Sabhalamee Balyam at Kottayam, Kanmani and GOAL pro-gramme at Sreekrishnapuram, Thaliridam pro-gramme at Porur Gramapanchayath, Child Nir-bhaya programme and child protection centre at Mattathur (Thrissur) gram etc. Are examples for innovative programme s taken up by Gramapan-chayaths. Kottakkal municipality could also take up few initiatives. (Name it)

Role of Mentors Some LSGs are advised and supported by KILA through a mentoring system. Supporting local bodies for better governance for children is the purpose of this assistance. At least one men-tor for a cluster of penchant could be provided by KILA for enhancing the efficiency of child friendly initiatives of LSGIs eventually it can be extended toll LSGIs all over the states.

Need of special strategy for children from marginalised groups Status of SC and ST children highlight the need of a special strategy in addressing the survival issues in their life. However CFLG could not evolve a specific and locally contextualised strategies to address the issues of children form marginalised communities such as SC and ST.

KEY FINDINGS OF THE STUDY• CFLG programme could mainstream the

concept of children’s’ grama sabha and pan-chayat through their initiative.

• CFLG was able to evolve some remarkable experiments from different LSGIs. Such as Child Protection Centres, Children’s Li-brary, Bio diversity park, creche and Chil-dren’s’ park

• Limitation of UNICEF frame work in ad-dressing the specific issues of Kerala.

• Lacuna in recognizing the citizenship rights of children and converting children’s demands into activities

• Majority of the LSGIs failed in preparing comprehensive data on children which act-ed as a hurdle in preparing scientific child development plans

• Absence of a permanent institutional mechanism for children at LSGIs is highly reflected

• Dearth of initiative for comprehensive sta-tus report and child development plan

• Absence of involvement of parents, chil-dren and teachers in programme formula-tion and implementation of CFLG

• Majority of the LSGIs could not introduce innovative project ideas apart from the rou-tine activities of departments.

• Need of platforms and mechanisms for sharing best practices of LSGIs

• Absence of special strategy to address the needs of marginalized children were re-flected.

• The allocation pattern of LSGIs showed that there was a significant increase in the allocation for children by the LSGIs after CFLG. Whereas such a trend was missing in the case of expenditure.

• Majority of the LSGIs could spent only low-er than 15% of their total allocation towards children

• Absence of mechanism for coordinating different agencies working for children at LSGI level

• Limited power of LSGIs with in the existing legal frame work related to POCSO and JJ ACT

• Absence of initiative to address the issues of migrant children.

• Need of refreshment trainings • Limitation of a centralized and universal

approach rather than evolving approaches and strategies from local context.

• Dearth of local ownership by LSGIs as their own programme

• Lack of sustainability of initiatives under-taken by LSGIs



FINDINGS OF THE STUDY IN DIFFERENT DOMAINS The following section of the chapter at-tempts to provide major findings in the different domains of the study such as survival, develop-ment, protection and participation.

CHILD SURVIVAL• The activities conducted by LSGIs under

the domain of Child Survival are nutrition-al status, screening of pregnant women, lac-tating mother and children through PHC, Anganwadi classes, Gramasabha classes on nutrition, visiting of ASHA workers, trib-al medical camps, and classes on hygiene, follow-up of immunisation and distribu-tion of vitamin supplements. In most of the panchayats, the allocation and expenditure for child survival are lying between zero to ten per cent. Most of the initiatives taken by LSGIS under this domain are either costless or lying under the routine activities of de-partments such as health and social justice. This may be one reason for low allocation and expenditure by the LSGIs.

• Regarding the efforts to identify and eradi-cate sex-selective abortion, no LSGIs under the study had taken any specific initiative by themselves to address the issue. The initiatives mainly come from the health department and other concerned depart-ments. The introduction of the CFLG pro-gramme was not an influencing factor in deciding the number or frequency of the initiatives to address the issue of sex-selec-tive abortion. In general, the low number of reported sex-selective abortion cases in their localities might have worked as a fac-tor in reducing the concern and interest on the side of trained LSGIs to come forward with new initiatives or to strengthen the ex-isting mechanisms to address the issue.

• As part of the RBSK programme under the health department, nurses visit schools, PHCs, and Anganwadis in their assigned locations periodically and conduct screen-ing sessions to identify the health issues among children and refer them to high-er-level public health care institutions. The child-friendly movement has influenced

the CFLG trained panchayaths to improve activities such as initiatives by ICDS, An-ganwadi classes, Health department class-es, Gramasabha classes, own Initiatives by LSGIs and screenings through schools. There is a significant difference found in the periods before and after the CFLG. How-ever, the CFLG initiatives could not bring much of a change in urban locations when compared with their rural counterparts in terms of interventions as the part of RBSK, whereas the own initiatives by LSGIs seem to be not significant.

• A considerable amount of fund is allocat-ed for supplementary nutrition to address malnutrition among children every year by LSGIs in Kerala. However, this could not be included in the mandatory 5% allocation for children. This legal provision is provid-ing space for allocating separate money for the needs of children. However, the pan-chayats are not taking appropriate initia-tives for allocating funds for child survival except for the allocation for supplementary nutrition. This also indicates that address-ing the issue of malnutrition and mapping the status of nutrition among children was not seriously taken up by the LSGIs under CFLG except for the routine activities hap-pening through Anganwadis.

• Even though Kerala has shown better per-formance in comparison with the national average in vaccination, the state has to im-prove the achievement to reach 100% vac-cination. ASHA workers, Kudumbashree groups, and Anganwadi workers who are affiliated to panchayaths are taking a key role in making the vaccination campaigns successful.

• The CFLG training could bring out only a slight improvement in the case of initiatives already taken by the health department and ICDS system. Even though the over-all trend of performance of vaccination is positive in panchayaths and municipalities, there have been some setbacks visible in a few locations of the state. The campaigns against vaccination by religious groups, some naturopathic groups and anti-science movements have created a mood of suspi-



cion against vaccination. This has increased the responsibility of LSGIs in such regions. It is noted that some of the LSGIs have tak-en special initiatives for improving the rate of vaccination where the anti-vaccination campaigns were active. For instance, the Pulamanthole panchayat has done a special campaign in this regard. However, the find-ings of the study indicate that such initia-tives were not widely taken up by all LSGIs.

Child Development• Development is the single largest domain

under which LSGIs have allocated and uti-lised a large amount of funds under CFLG. There has been a significant improvement in the allocation of panchayaths for devel-opment in the post-CFLG training period. There is no such trend visible in the case of urban LSGIs. As against the trend of increas-ing allocation the expenditure of the rural local government shows a higher level of mismatch. This perceived lethargy of pan-chayaths in spending the allocated money particularly in child development may be a reflection of their insensitivity towards the issues of children. Absence of proper social audit mechanism from the participatory forums for children may be another per-tinent reason for this trend. Data on child participation in CFLG trained panchayats which are discussed in chapter 6 (see chap-ter 6) indicate that participatory forums are either inactive or restricted to one-time events. This has a larger implication in the utilization of funds for child development.

• The study also indicates that the majority of LSGIs could not prepare disaggregated and comprehensive database on children which would have acted as a baseline to preparing developing programme for children.

• An initiative for constructing permanent buildings for Anganwadi without land is in a stagnant stage across the state. The high value and unavailability of land are identi-fied as the major reason for this. About 60% of panchayats under study have already completed constructing own building for Anganwadi. However, the other panchayats could not take any initiative for construct-

ing permanent building during CFLG years. In municipalities, there is no signif-icant difference in constructing Anganwadi building in pre and post CFLG years. There has been no change during 2016-17 and 2017-18.

• The study indicates that LSGIs have taken commendable initiatives for creating a bar-rier-free environment in the institutions coming under their jurisdiction. This was visible particularly in constructing toilets and ramps in schools and fixing of chairs in Panchayats and establishing feeding cor-ners and arranging drinking water.

• Primary needs such as barrier-free toilets, ramps, drinking water, primary and uni-versal needs of differentially abled children were met, while they could not address the secondary needs such as lifts and cra-dle. Provision for wheelchairs, which is a very important need for differentially abled children with moving disabilities was ne-glected. This is an indication that the CFLG programme has to focus more on cultivat-ing sensitivity towards the issues of differ-ently-abled children. The findings indicate that CFLG training could sensitise the local body authorities to extend the relevance of special facilities for differentially-abled children. However, there is a need to be ex-tended this sensitivity to the next level of intervention.

• The educational assistance initiatives for ST children by the LSGIs are very low. The lack of study facilities in tribal households and poor orientation on career are the major is-sues faced by tribal students. The FGDs of children in the tribal areas indicated that Panchayats are mostly interested to take up easy and simple initiatives rather than ad-dressing the basic issues of tribal children such as malnutrition, absence of study facil-ities at home, and poor career orientation. The data shows that there has been a slight improvement in the routine activities tak-en up by the panchayats for tribal children between pre and post-CFLG periods. How-ever, they could not initiate any innovative programme after CFLG training to address the issues of tribal children. This indicates



that CFLG still requires adopting a special strategy to address the issues of children in tribal regions apart from the universal strat-egy of planning and implementation. Such a specific strategy for vulnerable groups is currently missing in the CFLG programme.

• The initiatives by local bodies targetted at SC children indicate that the CFLG train-ing could only increase the momentum of some traditional projects which had been taken up by the LSGIs. This includes ac-tivities such as the distribution of laptops and study tables. CFLG training could not usher in any innovative initiatives in the list of activities. This underscores the need for and relevance of special effort within CFLG to make it more inclusive and beneficial to the marginalized communities.

• LSGs are responsible to provide ba-by-friendly or child-friendly environment for children of the age group of 3-5 years. The infrastructure development, provi-sioning of learning aids, utensils, toys to the Anganwadis, and making the Angan-wadi environment conducive to joyful learning are the activities they could have taken up under the domain. Majority of the panchayats have been undertaking the task of maintenance and renovation of the Anganwadis even before the CFLG initia-tive. There was no significant change even after CFLG training in this regard. While examining the activities initiated in pan-chayats in the pre-primary sector, it was seen that the majority of the panchayats have followed only the traditional activities that were followed by them even before the CFLG training. It can be said that the CFLG training could not bring any significant change in this direction. At the same time, some of the new initiatives which were pro-posed as the part of CFLG, such as the con-struction of child-friendly toilets, making Anganwadi building premises learning aids through paintings and the establishment of children’s park were not taken up seriously by the majority of local bodies. CFLG had introduced some innovative ideas in the pre-primary sector, but the majority of the CFLG panchayats failed in realizing them

in practice. Interventions for making pre-schools attractive centres of joyful learning were missing even in CFLG framework.

• An initiative for constructing permanent buildings for anganwadis without land is in a stagnant stage across the state. The high value and unavailability of land are identi-fied as the major reason for this. About 60% of panchayats under study have already completed constructing own building for anganwadis. However, the other pancha-yats could not take any initiative for con-structing permanent building during CFLG years. In municipalities, there is no signifi-cant difference in constructing anganwadi building in pre and post CFLG years. There has been no change during 2016-17 and 2017-18.

• The study indicates that LSGIs have taken commendable initiatives for creating a bar-rier-free environment in the institutions coming under their jurisdiction. This was visible particularly in constructing toilets and ramps in schools and fixing of chairs in Panchayats and establishing feeding cor-ners and arranging drinking water.

• Primary needs such as barrier-free toilets, ramps, drinking water, primary and uni-versal needs of differentially abled children were met, while they could not address the secondary needs such as lifts and cra-dle. Provision for wheelchairs, which is a very important need for differentially abled children with moving disabilities was ne-glected. This is an indication that CFLG programme has to focus more on cultivat-ing sensitivity towards the issues of differ-ently-abled children. The findings indicate that CFLG training could sensitise the local body authorities to extend the relevance of special facilities for differentially-abled children. However, there is a need to be ex-tended this sensitivity to the next level of intervention.

• The educational assistance initiatives for ST children by the LSGIs are very low. The lack of study facilities in tribal households and poor orientation on career are the major is-sues faced by tribal students. The FGDs of children in the tribal areas indicated that



Panchayats are mostly interested to take up easy and simple initiatives rather than ad-dressing the basic issues of tribal children such as malnutrition, absence of study facil-ities at home, and poor career orientation. The data shows that there has been a slight improvement in the routine activities tak-en up by the panchayats for tribal children between pre and post-CFLG periods. How-ever, they could not initiate any innovative programme after CFLG training to address the issues of tribal children. This indicates that CFLG still requires adopting a special strategy to address the issues of children in tribal regions apart from the universal strat-egy of planning and implementation. Such a specific strategy for vulnerable groups is currently missing in the CFLG programme.

• The initiatives by local bodies targetted at SC children indicate that the CFLG train-ing could only increase the momentum of some traditional projects which had been taken up by the LSGIs. This includes ac-tivities such as the distribution of laptops and study tables. CFLG training could not usher in any innovative initiatives in the list of activities. This underscores the need for and relevance of special effort within CFLG to make it more inclusive and beneficial to the marginalized communities.

• LSGs are responsible to provide ba-by-friendly or child-friendly environment for children of the age group of 3-5 years. The infrastructure development, provi-sioning of learning aids, utensils, toys to the Anganwadis, and making the Angan-wadi environment conducive to joyful learning are the activities they could have taken up under the domain. Majority of the panchayats have been undertaking the task of maintenance and renovation of the Anganwadis even before the CFLG initia-tive. There was no significant change even after CFLG training in this regard. While examining the activities initiated in pan-chayats in the pre-primary sector, it was seen that the majority of the panchayats have followed only the traditional activities that were followed by them even before the CFLG training. It can be said that the CFLG

training could not bring any significant change in this direction. At the same time, some of the new initiatives which were pro-posed as the part of CFLG, such as the con-struction of child-friendly toilets, making Anganwadi building premises learning aids through paintings and the establishment of children’s park were not taken up seriously by the majority of local bodies. CFLG had introduced some innovative ideas in the pre-primary sector, but the majority of the CFLG panchayats failed in realizing them in practice. Interventions for making pre-schools attractive centres of joyful learning were missing even in CFLG framework.

• When compared to other working do-mains of CFLG, school-based programmes have attained better status in establishing child-friendliness by introducing innova-tive projects for the comprehensive develop-ment of children. There is a gradual positive change in the rate of initiatives by introduc-ing community development programmes for children during the CFLG years. There is an accelerating change in projects such as building smart classrooms, provision for newspaper and magazines etc. While the basic facilities such as drainage construc-tion, she toilets etc. we’re not included in the LSGIs. She toilets were not included in almost any LSGI. Also, most of the school officials believe that there is no need to sep-arate she toilets. The CFLG trained pancha-yats had made some new initiatives after CFLG. Creation of bio-diversity parks in schools, construction of disabled-friendly toilets and establishment of child-friendly furniture are pertinent among them. Con-struction of the she-toilets, renovation of playgrounds, career guidance programmes, construction of new buildings and Haritha Vidyalayam programmes are the elements neglected by the majority of the pancha-yats.

• Performance of LSGIs in the creation of public spaces indicates that only a minori-ty of LSGIs could do any such initiatives. Availability of play spaces in the nearby locations is basic to ensuring children’s right to engage in recreational activities.



Playgrounds are also spaces of socialisation for children. Hence the creation of public places and playgrounds for children should have been included in the preferential list of CFLG initiatives. However, the findings of the study point towards an absence of such initiatives by LSGIs. High land value along with the unavailability of land has also restricted the scope of interventions in this regard. However, LSGIs would have to develop community initiatives to identify common land available under their juris-diction and to identify the potential do-nors who are willing to provide land for the creation of public spaces. However, such initiatives were missing in the majority of the panchayats. Some studies have indi-cated that health issues are widely visible among children in Kerala because of the absence of sufficient physical exercise. This also corroborates the need for the creation of more public spaces under the leadership of LSGIs. As discussed above, this substan-tiates the dearth of initiatives by LSGIs in addressing the real needs of children.

• The initiatives such as the creation of spe-cial corners for children in libraries and the initiation of new libraries or strengthen-ing of existing children’s libraries were also missing in the initiatives of LSGIs. This has a large implication in planning the future training of CFLG. Creation of public spaces for children needs to be located in the man-datory intervention as the part of CFLG programme. This element would have to be emphasised more In future CFLG training.

• LSGIs have given low preference for pro-viding recreation facility to children. Chil-dren’s right to play and engage in recre-ational activities are still not attaining space in the minds of planners in LSGIs.

• LSGI’s could not bring any significant change in organising recreation activities such as swimming coaching, Anganwadi Balamela, distribution of sports kit, sports coaching and the Arts fest for children. Besides, a majority of them could not or-ganise any special programme for different-ly-abled children.

• It is on a positive note that some pancha-yaths could initiate tour and trips for Bal-asabha participants after CFLG training. These findings underscore the relevance of special training which emphasizes on the need of providing a recreational activity to the children.

PROTECTION• There was no significant increase in the

number of panchayats who have allocated more funds for child protection activities after the initiation of the CFLG programme. The pattern of funds utilisation under the domain of child protection indicates that most of the panchayats (96 %) could spend allocation between the percentage intervals of 0-30 only. Only one panchayat could do a comparatively good performance in utiliza-tion of funds. CFLG training did not make a significant impact on the allocation and expenditure of local bodies in the domain of child protection. There might be differ-ent reasons for this trend. One pertinent reason may be the nature of activities lying under this domain. It seems that many of the activities included under this domain incur only marginal costs. Along with this, local bodies were not able to identify inno-vative actions in this domain.

• Activities for facilitating the child protec-tion committees have had an increasing trend from 2015 to 2018. Among these, Jagratha Samithi, Vigilance committee, and installation of the complaint box at ward level are the elements which have shown a promising trend. There is a static trend in the case of child protection centres. The overall picture of child protection indicates that only one-half of the panchayats could take positive initiatives in the domain of child protection.

• Apart from the traditional methods of sen-sitisation on child rights, innovative com-munication and public education tools were not used for creating sensitisation among stakeholders. Continuous parent and teacher education programmes on child rights are necessary, and they have to adopt innovative strategies for sensiti-



zation. This kind of initiative is missing in the CFLG programme in general. There is a need for a coordination mechanism be-tween different agencies working on child right sensitization within LSGIs.

• The number of cases of child abuse and the number of actions taken by the LSGIs are also not satisfactory. The percentage of cas-es in which a panchayat has taken action was 40 in 2015-16, 36 in 2016-17, and 40 in 2017-18. This indicates that the panchayats could not take any action in 60 percentages of reported cases. The limitations of LSGIs in terms of mandatory powers may be one factor restricting their interventions. Ab-sence of institutional mechanism for prop-er monitoring of cases at LSG level may be another factor which leads to this limited intervention.

• The number of cases reported and action taken of Children in Conflict with Law is found low. The present juvenile justice sys-tem is not providing any space for inter-ventions by local bodies in cases related to children in conflict with the law. There is no local level institution functioning relating to the implementation of this law.

• Most of the panchayats have failed in pro-viding psychosocial support to the chil-dren in needy situations. In the case of ap-pointment of counsellors through ICDS, the number was six in the pre-CFLG year, which has increased to eight in the first year of CFLG and enhanced to nine only in the last year. The performance of both pancha-yats and municipalities, in the case of ini-tiating legal service centres for children at LSGI’s, is poor. Even two-third of the LSGIs could not take any initiatives for provid-ing psychosocial support to the children. Children from marginalised groups such as fishermen, tribal and scheduled caste com-munities are also facing specific issues re-lated to their socioeconomic backgrounds. These issues are remaining unaddressed. The FGDs and interactions with the chil-dren emphasise the need for an institution-al mechanism for providing psychological support to the needy. Such a facility is not available for them except counselling ser-

vices provided in some schools. CFLG pro-gramme can plan some proactive steps for making a coordination system of school counsellors and other child counsellors at LSGI level. This could also act as a mech-anism for parental counselling in LSGIs. It is also noteworthy that the present coun-selling system including school counsel-ling system requires to be remoulded in the context of child rights. Hence orient-ing all school counsellors in the context of child rights could be a centralised initiative which can be undertaken as a part of CFLG initiative by CRC of KILA.

PARTICIPATION• The majority (more than 95%) of the pan-

chayats could allocate funds between 0-10 percentage for the domain of participation in the pre-CFLG year and the first year of CFLG.

• CFLG could make a small change in the allocation and expenditure of panchayats in the domain of participation. Notwith-standing to this the utilisation percentage as remained as poor irrespective of a slight improvement after CFLG. There could be several factors which might have influ-enced this pattern. The CFLG LSGIs even may not have imbibed the relevance of building children’s participatory forum in their jurisdiction.

• Majority of the panchayats and municipali-ties were conducting Balasabhas and creat-ing a space for children to participate in the democratic process.

• The Initial enthusiasm of panchayat in or-ganizing child Gramasabha has shown a declining tendency in the second year. Anyway, CFLG could establish the rele-vance of Child gramasabhas as a participa-tory institution of Children in local govern-ments. Child Gramasabha was conducted as onetime events rather than an institution which needs to sustain for protecting the interest of children. CFLG could contribute to improving the documentation process of child Gramasabhas.

• LSGIs were not taking the comments raised by the children in Gramasabha as



issues which need to be addressed. Along with with this the authority of the Local Government could not perceive children’s as citizens who also have rights like other citizens. Initiatives for discussing children’s demands in working groups of LSGIs and general Gramasabhas were poor. However, the situation of CFLG LSGIs is slightly bet-ter than control LSGIs.

• In practice, the majority of CFLG LSGIs could not uphold the citizenship rights of children to raise their voice in a public forum and to ensure that their issues are getting addressed by the LSGIs. The study indicates that majority of the LSGIs have approached children’s forum as a space for ritualistic gathering of children, in place of considering them as a democratic forum of children. The feedback from the children’s FGDs point out the fact that the children who attended child Gramasabhas earlier had a feeling that their demands were ne-glected by the LSGIs. This also prompted them to withdraw from such participatory forums.

ATTITUDE AND KNOWLEDGE OF TRAIN-EES REGARDING CFLG

1. Status of knowledge and attitude of train-ees regarding CFLG

• The knowledge level of trainees regard-ing the basic pre-requisite of CFLG, such as the creation of child data profile at LS-GI’s, vision document for children, and comprehensive local development plan for children have been analyzed in the study. The data indicates that the majority of the trainees have a basic understanding of the comprehensive local development plan for children (92.5%)

• Their understanding of the vision docu-ment for children is also considerably bet-ter (60%) while their knowledge about the data profile of the children seems to be poor (45%). At the same time, it is noteworthy that the majority of the LSGI’s could not bring out initiatives to leverage the fact that the trainees had succeeded to an extent in imbibing a basic understanding about the

deliverables of the CFLG programme.• Poor knowledge level of trainees regarding

the child data profile could have acted as a barrier in creating a basic child profile in all LSGI’s.

• With regard to the knowledge of trainees in the four major domains of CFLG such as survival, development, protection, and par-ticipation, the data indicates that more than half of the participants of the training do not have a basic understanding of the four domains of CFLG except for the domain of participation.

• Regarding the attitude of trainees on the different dimensions of child rights, the responses have shown a satisfactory status. At the same time half of the trainees believe that adults can make better plans for chil-dren even without them being heard. This again ratifies the fact that still a good num-ber of functionaries of CFLG could not rec-ognize the basic citizenship rights of chil-dren.

2. Initiatives after getting CFLG Training• The overall trend of initiatives taken by

trainees after training in realizing the ac-tivities proposed in the training shows that the majority of them could not take initia-tives in realizing the proposed activities of the training. Organizing balasabha was the only exception in this aspect.

• This also highlights the fact that the ma-jority of the training participants could not convert the training ideas into deliverables in the field.

3. Contribution of KILA training in im-proving the participant’s basic conceptual knowledge about CFLG

• The data on the contribution of KILA training in improving the basic concepts of CFLG among participants indicates a pos-itive trend. The KILA training contributed to improving their basic conceptual under-standing in various aspects of CFLG except in the case of accepting citizenship of chil-dren. However, it is noteworthy that the KILA training could not improve the con-cept level (43%) of the trainees in accept-ing children as citizens. This indicates that



there is a high scope of improving KILA’s training context by including activities for changing the concepts of trainees regarding the citizenship of children.

SUCCESS STORIES: PROMISING PRACTIC-ES OF CFLG

• As part of the study, we could identify 14 promising cases of exemplary execution of CFLG practices all over the state. There were initiatives from LSGI’s on different dimensions of CFLG. These included pro-grammes for; making public institutions child friendly, developing database and registry of children, interventions for im-proving the health and nutrition status of children, activities for providing physical education and arts performance training to children, effective running of children’s forums, bringing environmental conser-vation consciousness among children, addressing the issues of differently-abled children, conducting public education pro-grammes for child rights, and initiatives for ensuring protection of children.

• About the Sustainability of a project is de-termined by an entire range of factors in-cluding its contextual relevance over time, availability of sufficient funds, good coordi-nation and support between concerned de-partments or bodies, will power of political leadership, transparent execution, public co-operation, holistic participation of ben-eficiaries in all stages of project, and timely need-based modifications. Sustainability in turn influences the possibilities of scaling up the projects or interventions over time to enhance the coverage of beneficiaries and benefits themselves. When we look at our chosen interventions for sustainable models in which we can find the converged positive performance of at least some of the above-mentioned factors, disappointingly we do not have much to pick out. Hence several of the interventions under analy-sis here are of short-run nature and some of them have collapsed in between before they could even meet their short run ob-jectives. Even the few long run projects, which are being continued by LSG bodies

and gets scaled up over the years, seem to be mostly running on a few specific factors like availability of funds, will power or par-ticular interests of the ruling front etc. and when these energy sources runs out of fuel, a broad based social space and support to continue and upgrade this projects will be absent mainly due to the lack of thrust on the holistic participation of children.

Suggestions and Recommendations• There requires a basic change in the frame-

work adopted by CFLG programme by considering the specific context of Kera-la. The elements such as nuclearization of families, isolation of children from public space, increasing stress over children, lack of physical activities and health issues relat-ed to that, and the emotional issues faced by children also need to be brought into the mainstream agenda of CFLG. The CFLG programme framework would have to be reformulated in a way that it can address the second-generation issues such as en-suring quality education and quality health services.

• Though in general, poverty in Kerala has reduced significantly but studies indicate that poverty does exist, concentrated in some areas. Marginalised communities, Tribes, Scheduled Caste, fishermen, and differently-abled groups are largely facing the issues of survival and poverty. Hence CFLG programme would have to develop specific strategies for addressing the spe-cial needs of children from marginalised categories rather than following a universal strategy across the state.

• CFLG programme would have to give more emphasis on developing special pro-grammes and plans for differently abled children. It can give focus in the second round of CFLG programme to support LS-GIs to develop workable models which can be replicated elsewhere for the comprehen-sive development of differently-abled chil-dren.

• The study indicates an absence of a coor-dination mechanism at panchayat level for convergence for all kinds of child friendly



initiatives taken up in the jurisdiction of LSGIs by different agencies. Hence a pan-chayat level/municipal level institutional mechanism with representation of chil-dren’s forum at lower level can be built as a participatory forum for decision making. Along with this, an institutional mecha-nism with the participation of all stake-holders related to children can be organ-ised at panchayat level and the entire child friendly initiatives can be coordinated through this system.

• A resource school can be identified in each LSGI which can act as a coordination cen-tre of all educational research, training, and other education service systems within the LSGI. This centre can also function as a legal service cum counselling centre for children.

• The study indicates the need of a statu-tory provision for conducting children’s Gramasabha and Panchayats. It is also worth mentioning that there is a need of provision to ensure that the demands raised by the children in Gramasabhas and Bala Panchayat would be considered by the working groups for planning and imple-mentation. A social audit mechanism of the children to ensure that their demands are addressed by LSGIs can be introduced as a part of CFLG programme.

• Special initiatives under CFLG programme would be required for orientation of par-ents and teachers towards the concept and implications of child rights.

• It is necessary to collect disaggregated data of all children in the panchayath. This data bank should have all the details on chil-dren such as education, health, nutrition etc. This could be the first step of any ex-tended programme of CFLG. It can also be a online data base. Part of this can be done through school based survey in LSGIs and the remaining can be done through An-ganwadis. Disaggregated child data could be prepared and revised periodically. A comprehensive child development plan could be evolved out of the data prepared by LSGIs.

• There is a need for special allotment to the

LSGIs in promoting their initiatives for creating new public spaces and in renovat-ing existing spaces.

• Along with infrastructure development, quality of pre-school system also needs to be improved. A special emphasis on the CFLG programme needs to be provided in this aspect.

• Counselling facility needs to be available in panchayat and all the school counsellors could be connected with the system.

• There is need of an LSGI level institution to gather information on children in con-flict with law and to deal with these cases with the perspective of child rights. The agencies that are associated with cases on children in conflict with law would have to handover the details of such cases to the respective LSGI’s. This would enable them to pursue such cases in the perspective of child right.

• A child rights charter could be drafted in every LSGI and could produce action tak-en report periodically based on this char-ter.

• There is a relevance of special training for CFLG panchayats to include programmes for providing recreational activities to the children.

• Systematic public education programme is needed to sensitize all stakeholders related to LSGIs on child rights. This could be in the mode of a continuous education pro-gramme.

• There require more initiatives to develop child friendly programmes to address the issues of children from deprived categories such as SC, ST, fishermen and different-ly-abled children. It also needs to be devel-oped the programmes which include the issues of migrant children as well.

• Rather than following a universal ap-proach, training modules can be developed by providing more space for encouraging models created by local bodies. There can be a frequent experience sharing mecha-nism between the local bodies for sharing innovative ideas and experiences.

• While considering the varying socio-eco-nomic and cultural contexts of different



panchayats, there are limitations in using the same measurement scales for all the LS-GIs. Hence context specific evaluation and assessment tools require further develop-ment in order to evaluate the programme in different locations.

• A decentralised process of training should be followed for LSGIs across the state. Civil

The training provided by KILA to local self government institutions in Kerala towards establishment of a Child-Friendly Local Gov-ernance (CFLG) system has provided mixed re-sults. While the training was largely successful in imparting most of the underlying concepts of child-friendly local governance to the train-ees, the last-mile impact in terms of successfully implemented programmes leave much to be de-sired, especially with regard to the acceptance of citizenship rights of children as partners in pol-icy formulation, and formulating independent projects under child survival. The results of the study indicate that the CFLG programme large-ly succeeded in mainstreaming the concept of child gramasabha and child panchayat. Howev-er, these initiatives were not translated into the strengthening of democratic decision making processes by the children. These forums were considered and utilized as only venues for or-ganising children rather than launching pads for raising the LSGIs into child friendly institutions by considering the real needs of children. This shortcoming is particularly glaring, given the legacy of Kerala as a globally acclaimed model in democratic decentralization. The way forward for CFLG lies in customizing its glob-al framework to suit the needs and context of children in Kerala, and focusing on the gaps that have been identified both in the ideation and action fronts of child-friendliness. Once these lacunae are addressed, there lies the potential to transcend the currently identified domains of child-friendliness and adopt and practice nov-el concepts like flourishing in the place of mere survival, and liberty instead of protection. Such

society groups functioning in the pancha-yaths can a play a significant role in the planning and implementation of the CFLG projects. They can share ideas, provide ex-pertise and human resource, and can direct the LSGIs about various funding possibili-ties.

an evidence-based action programme holds the potential to catapult Kerala to yet another round of global recognition as a model in child-friend-ly local governance. CFLG could generate some promising practices all over the states in different dimen-sions of Child Friendly Local Governance. As part of the study, we could identify fourteen promising cases all over the state. There were initiatives from LSGI’s in different dimensions of CFLG. They are initiatives for; making public institutions child friendly, developing date base and registry of children, interventions for im-proving the health and nutrition status of chil-dren, activities for providing physical education and arts performance training to the children, effective running of children’s forums, bring-ing environmental conservation consciousness among children, initiatives for addressing the issue of differently-abled children, conducting public education programmes for child right, and initiatives for ensuring self protection of children. The study indicates that continuous hand holding and support from an institution like KILA has contributed in shaping these ex-emplary practices. The mentoring system of KILA has provided support to many pancha-yats in elevating their performance in CFLG. These underscore the fact such a hand-holding can be expanded to all the other panchayats se-lected under CFLG. Local governance in Kerala is ultimately a political process, with different stakeholders embedded in the decision-making process of local governance. Hence, bringing attitudinal changes among all the stakeholders

CONCLUSION



such as political parties, elected representatives, parents, teachers, officials, and all other actors interacting with children is important to trans-form an LSG into a status of child friendly lo-cal governance. This highlights the relevance of continuous interaction with different groups to bring about a paradigm shift in their conceptu-alization and approaches towards child rights and child friendly local governance. The strategy of future course of action of CFLG programme needs to be designed by addressing these lacu-nae.

However to go forward, we cannot do without the following improvements: further ideological changes and awareness creation among the stakeholder groups, continuous evaluation and monitoring of programme im-plementation, frequent impact assessment and feedback collection exercises, inspiring incen-tives for better performing panchayats, legis-lative reformations, strong multi-stake holder collaboration and coordination ,exploration of the alternative and more democratic ways of re-source mobilisation and utilisation and holistic all round participation of children.

1KILA | IRTC Page |


INTRODUCTION The concept of Child-Friendly LocalGovernance(CFLG)isbuiltonthepremisethatlocalgovernmentinstitutions,functioningatthegrassroots,arethebestplacetointeractwiththechildrenandcontributemostmeaningfullytore-alizetheirrights.TheCFLGconceptthusbelievesthatstrengtheningthe localgovernance frame-work has the potential to benefit all childrenacrossthecountry,particularlythemostvulner-able and disadvantaged groups, through betterparticipation in planning and implementation. In 1995 at first, State Action Plan forChildren inKerala has accepted. It envisionedahealthychildhoodforallchildreninthestate.Stateactionplandecidedtoachievecertaingoalsby 2000. As a result, many of the goals wereachieved such as in 2001 infantmortality ratehasreducedas14/1000anditcouldimproveim-munityofchildrenagainstvariousdiseasessuchastuberculosis,measles,polio,tetanus.In2004action plan for children has organized a plan-

CHAPTER - I

ningcommitteetoformulateaplanforchildrenin theareassuchashealth,education,physicalenvironment, disability, adolescent etc. Thesepolicieswerethepathwayinidentifyingcompre-hensivedevelopmentofchildreninKerala(Kut-tikalkkayulla Karmapadhathi-Keralam2004,2006).Keralaisoneamongthebeststatewhichhaspracticedthedecentralizedplanninginitia-tives fromthemidof the1990s.People’sPlan-ningCampaign(PPC)startedinKeralain1997was abreakthrough indecentralized initiativesin the state. After the Panchayati Raj Amend-mentAct1994,PPCpavedthewaytothehigherlevelofpoweranddevolutiontothelocalgover-nanceStudiesshowthatLocalSelfGovernments(LSGs)inKeralahaveattemptedtoevolvediffer-entinterventionsamongchildrenevenfromtheoutset of People’s PlanningCampaign. (Rajesh2013)Eventhoughtheinitiativeswerestartedin1997,mandatory provisions of the earmarkingplanfundsfortheneedsofchildrenandelder-lypeoplehas started fromtheplanningguide-

Anganwadi in Kanjikuzhi Grama Panchayat

2KILA | IRTC Page |


linesintroducedin2013.Thishaselaboratedthehorizonsofactivitiesthatcanbeundertakenbylocalgovernanceforaddressingchildren’sneeds. Since1998,LocalSelfGovernmentInsti-tutions(LSGIs)inKeralahavestartedallocatingthe funds for providing supplementary nutri-tion to theAnganwadis all over the state.Thishasalargerimplicationinimprovingthequalityof supplementary nutrition programme whichwas earlier done by IntegratedChildDevelop-ment Scheme (ICDS). Along with this, LSGIshaveundertakendifferentinitiativestoimprovethe quality of Pre-primary education, and in-frastructureofgovernmentschools in thestate(Rajesh,2013). Interventions in thehealthsec-toranditsimplicationsonimprovingtheservicedeliveryforwomenandchildrenarealsonotice-able in this context. (Rajesh&Thomas, 2012).Differentchildren’sinstitutionssuchasBalasabhandChildren’sGramasabhaswere experiment-edbydifferentLSGIsinvariouslocationsofthestate.Notwithstanding these interventions, LS-GIscouldnotapproachandaddresstheissuesofchildren in thecontextofchild rightsdeclaredunderUNpolicyandNationalPolicyonChil-drenin2013.LSGIswerefollowinganeed-basedapproach rather than a right based approachuntil the intervention of Child-Friendly LocalGovernance programme launched by KILA in2016.KeralaissetonapathtomakeitsLSGIschild-friendly by moving away from a systeminwhich elders decide andplot out the devel-opmentprojectsandprogrammes forchildren.

Towards a programme for Child-friendly Local governance The post-war experience has energizedconcernforchildren.Policylevelinitiativesatin-ternationalplatformstartedonlyduringthefirsthalfofthe20thcentury.TheearliereffortwastheGenevaDeclarationin1924.Thoughitwasnotalegallybindingdeclarationofaleagueofana-tion,itemphasizedonthewell-beingofchildrenandrecognizedtheirrighttodevelopment,assis-tance,relief,andprotection.FollowingtheGene-vadeclaration,thereisadevelopmentoftheideaofChildRightattheInternationalLevel(Chil-dren’sRightsAlliance(Ireland),2010).TheUni-versalDeclarationofHumanRightsin1948hadtriggeredgovernmentstorecognisechildrights

assameastheadult’scivil,political,social,cul-turalandeconomicrights.Followingthegradualconcernforchildren,theyear1979wasdeclaredas“InternationalYearoftheChildren(IYC)”inrespect of the rights of children (Yadav, 2003). The rights-based approach finally be-camea legally-bindinginternationalagreementwiththeadoptionoftheUnitedNationsConven-tionontheRightsoftheChild(UNCRC),whichinstitutionalized and universalized the conceptofchildhood.TheUNCRCconsistsof54articlesthat set out children’s rights and how govern-mentsshouldworktogethertomakethemavail-able to all children.(Thomas, 2011).The CRCbasicallyexplorestheprincipleof‘childrenfirst’andhas changed the concept that children arenotmerelythesubjectofrightsbuttheobjectsoflegalprotection.Itrecognizesthechildasanindividualwiththerighttoparticipateinadeci-sionaffectingthechild’sownlife.’(Yadav2003). As an agency is functioning on partic-ularlyrightsofthechildren,UNICEFhasbeenexperimenting with different initiatives in thechild-friendly governance system. Since Kera-lahasmadeauniquepathwayinstrengtheninglocalgovernments,UNICEFhaveoptedKeralaasastateinIndiatoexperimentChild-FriendlyLocal Government concept in India. UNICEFhas started an association with KILA by es-tablishing a Child Resource Centre (CRC) in2011.Eventually,acollaborativeprogrammeofUNICEFandKILAwaslaunchedintheyearof2016as an initiative for creating child-friendlylocal governments through the interventionsinselectedruralandurbanlocalbodies(Rajan&Radhakrishnan,2016).Thisprogrammewasimplemented in 140 Gramapanchayats and 6municipalities all over the state. And the pro-gramme was started in the year of 2016, andthe training part of the programmewas com-pleted by 2017. Kerala Institute of Local Ad-ministration (KILA) has appointed mentorsin selected local bodies to support the LSGIsthroughoutthestate.Trainingprogrammesweredevelopedbasedon the conceptual frameworkof UNICEF which has highlighted child sur-vival, development, protection, and participa-tionas the fourmajordomainsofchild rights.

Survival rights: include thechild’s right to life

3KILA | IRTC Page |


and the needs that are most basic existence,such as nutrition, shelter, an adequate liv-ing standard, and access to medical services.

Development rights: include the rightto education, play, leisure, cultural activi-ties, and access to information, and free-dom of thought, conscience, and religion.

Protection rights: Ensurechildrenaresafeguard-edagainstallformsofabuse,neglect,andexploita-tion,includingspecialcareforrefugeechildren;safeguards for children in the criminal justicesystem;protectionforchildreninemployment;protection and rehabilitation for children whohavesufferedexploitationorabuseofanykind.

Participation rights: include children’s free-dom to express opinions in matters affectingtheir own lives, to join associations and to as-semble peacefully. As their capacities devel-op, children should have an increasing op-portunity to participate in the activities ofthe society, in preparation for adulthood.

Content of the training, training man-uals and the follow-ups has instructed thelocal bodies to evolve programmes and ac-tion steps to realize child rights in this do-

main. CRC in KILA has given the intellec-tual and practical lead to this programme.A programme which has completed its threeyearsoflaunching,animpactassessmentofthesameisquiterelevant.Thisstudyisattemptingto inquire about the impactof theprogrammeindeliveringtheconceptofChildRightsamongdifferentstakeholders,initiatingprogrammesforprotectingchildrightsinthedomainsofSurviv-al,Development,Protection,andParticipation,making the LSGIs budget more child-friendlyand in making child-friendly initiatives moresustainable.The study also attempts to under-standthedistinctivenessofChild-FriendlyIni-tiatives taken up by theCFLG LSGIswith theLSGIswhohavenotimplementedtheCFLGpro-gramme.Thisstudyhasselected30Gramapan-chayatsand2municipalitieshavesamplesofthestudy throughthesystematicstratifiedrandomsamplingprocess.ThreecontrolPanchayatsandone controlmunicipalitywho have not imple-mentedCFLGwerealsoselectedforcomparison.

4KILA | IRTC Page |


This chapter analyses the discussionon child rights in India and also examiningthe status of child rights in Kerala. It gives abrief narrative of initiatives taken by the lo-cal self-government for addressing the needsof childrenand the institutions createdaspartof such initiatives. This chapter explains themethodology of the study including the the-oretical framework adopted, the procedureof the sampling, tools used in the study andthe limitations that the study that confronted. Child rights in India realized throughtheconstitution,thenationalpolicyforchildrenandthroughinternationalconventions.InIndia,moreattentionwasgiventochildlabour,sexualexploitationsandtheexistingpolicygapsbytheGovernment and other non-Governmental or-ganizations.on26thApril2013,thegovernmenthasadoptedaNewNationalPolicy.Itrecognizesamultispectralandmultidimensionalapproachisnecessarytosecuretherightsofchildren.ThePolicyhasidentifiedfourkeypriorityareas:sur-vival, health, and nutrition; education and de-velopment;protectionandparticipation,forfo-cusedattentionforchildren.Aschildren’sneedsis multi- sectoral, interconnected and requirecollective action, the policy calls for purpose-ful convergence, coordination across differentsectorsandlevelsofgovernance”.(TheNationalPolicy forChildren, 2013 2013).Though thereareinstitutionsforprotectingtherightsofchil-dren, Indianpolicy towardschildren is laggingbehind.Indianchildrenconstituteabout39%ofthetotalpopulationofIndiabycensus2011.Butexpenditureon childrenhasdecreased consid-erably by the Government after liberalization.There are gaps in policy frameworks for chil-dren.TheUnion budget 2016-17 has allocatedonly 3.23% of children. Although it is slightlyincreased compared to the previous year, allo-

CHAPTER II

CONTEXT AND METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

cations forchildrenare low in Indiacomparedto other developed or developing countries. Itisalsoalarmingthat,accordingtothecensusof2011,10.13millionchildlabourersareinIndiabetween the ages of 5-14 years (Census,2011).

Kerala development and child rights Kerala stands first in development in-dicatorscomparedtootherIndianstates(Gov-ernment of India 2005). Kerala has success-ful experience of decentralization in terms offormulation and implementation of its LocalSelf Government Institutions. The State hadset a benchmark in the devolution of pow-ersand funds to localbodies (Centreemulateschild-friendly local governance 2019). In thefederalsystemofIndia,welfareprojectsareim-plementedundertheLocalgovernancesystem.Sotherightbasedframeworkistobemoreflex-ible inKerala.Thestatecouldberesponsive tosurvival, development, protection and partic-ipation aspects of UNICEF. But Children andchild rights is one of themost neglected partsinKerala’sexperienceofdevelopment.Thestateis laggingbehindthepoliciesandprogrammesfor children in the perspective of rights andequality. Kerala did not have a comprehen-sivedevelopmentplan exclusively for children.

Child-Friendly Initiatives Prior to CFLG As discussed above since the inceptionof PPC, LSGI’s have been implementing proj-ects for addressing children’sneeds.Theywereundertakingprojects forprovidingsupplemen-tary nutrition through theAnganwadis.Alongwiththis,infrastructuredevelopmentofschoolswastheirmajorareaofintervention.Severalin-terventions have been done for improving thebasic infrastructureofthehealthsystemwhichin turnhasmade the impact of quality of ser-

5KILA | IRTC Page |


vice delivery towomen and children.The im-provement in the immunization coverage is agoodinstancefortheresultofLSGinterventionsin the Health sector (Rajesh, SAGE). Some ofthe LSG interventions prior to theCFLG pro-grammeamongchildrenarebrieflystatedbelow.

LSGI PROGRAMMES

Noolpuzha

In order to decrease the number of dropouts, NoolpuzhaGramapanchayatinWayanaddistrict,where1/3rdof thepopulationbelongs to theScheduleTribes (ST)aprogrammehasbeen initiated.ThePanchayatapproached theproblembyprovidingbasicnecessitiessuchastravellingfacilities,breakfast,lunch,uniform,volleyballandkaratecoachingforgirlchildren,literacypro-gramforparents,etc.During2015-16thenumberofdropoutsdecreased.

PulamantholPulamantholofMalappuramdistrictcreatedaprotectiveenvironmentforad-olescentgirlsof thePanchayat.Themajorprogramwas to train thegirls inkarateandtaekwondofromAdolescentGirlsclubs.

Mala

MalaPanchayat inThrissurdistrict createdaplatform for children tovoicetheirneeds,suggestionsandprioritiesintheformofconductingGramasabhaforchildren.ThisisconductedtwiceinayearonSundaysoranyotherholidaysintheward.TheopinionsandsuggestionsputforwardbytheGramasabhaarepresentedinthemeetingandthereafterrecommendationsandsuggestionsaresubmittedtotheGramapanchayatfornecessaryfollowupactions.

EruthempathyGramapanchayat

ThePanchayatinitiatedprogrammesforenrollingchildrenofmigrantlabour-ersatKarumandaKoundannur(Palakkad)AnganwadiCentre:Otherprogrammesdoneformigrantchildrenare:• ImmunizationcampaignorganizedbythePHC.• Nutritionfoodsgiventothebeneficiarychildrenandgraduallythechil-

drenintheagegroupof3–6weresenttotheAnganwadiCentre.Table No. 2.1

Institutions Created for Children prior to CFLG Sincepeople’sPlanningCampaign,par-ticularlyaftertheintroductionofKudumbasreeprograms in LSGIs inKerala, has evolved andexperimented different institutions for Chil-dren.Balasabha,BalaParliament,andChildren’sGramasabhaarenoteworthyamongthem.Bal-asabha(children’sassembly)isagrassrootslevelorganizationofchildrendevelopedbyKudumbas-ree Mission at a neighbourhood group level. Children’sGramasabhaisanassemblyofallchildrenbetweentheagesof10and18fromthejurisdictionofaward(ConstituencyofanLSGorUrbanLocalBody).Children’sGramasabhaaimstoinitiateachild-friendlydevelopmentperspec-tiveonthelocalgovernmentthroughfixingthegaps in theplanning interventions forchildrenand alsomake plans to fill the gaps identified.

Roots of CFLG UNICEF initiated the CFLG project inKeralajoiningwithKeralaInstituteofLocalAd-ministration (KILA). Kerala Institute of LocalAdministration(KILA)isanautonomoustrain-ing,research,andconsultancyorganizationcon-

stituted under theMinistry of Local Self-Gov-ernment, Government of Kerala. In 2011,UNICEFhas started India’sfirst child resourcecentre (CRC) inKILA.CRCworksas a centreofexcellenceinchildrights.UNICEFandKILAjointlypreparedacomprehensivechilddevelop-mentplan(CCDP)in2012.ThecomprehensivechilddevelopmentplanhascoveredmainlyfourareassuchasSurvival,development,protection,and participation. (Study Tour of MLAs fromOdishaonLocalGovernance ofKerala, 2016). CRCactasatrainingandadvocacycen-tre for various stakeholders engaged in childgovernance.CRChasanOnlineRepositoryonChild Governance and issues related to chil-dren. CRC collects resources of publications,researchstudieswithpreferencetosecondgen-eration development issues affecting the chil-dren of Kerala. The establishment of a child

6KILA | IRTC Page |


resource centerbyUNICEFhas enabledKILAtoextendspecializedservices for localgovern-mentsinchilddevelopment.ThisenablesKILAtoequipitselfasacentreofexcellenceinchildgovernance (Study Tour of MLAs From Odi-sha On Local Governance of Kerala, 2016).

PROCESS AND IMPLEMENTATION OF CFLG An impact assessment study has beencarried out KILA-CRC after developing thecomprehensivechilddevelopmentplan(CCDP)manual. Extensive training sessions have beenconductedfor140Panchayats,6municipalitiesanumberofblockanddistricts,atthebeginningof the implementation of child-friendly localgovernance. The pilot study of Child-Friend-ly Local Governance conducted for five s andamunicipality.Adraftoperationalmanualof2volumeshas beenprovided.Guidancenote onfourareasofchildrightswasalsoprepared.EachOperationalManualhasfourtosevendomainstobeintervenedbythelocalgovernmenteffec-tivelysoas toachieve thechild-friendlystatus.Under each domain, 5-10 strategies are incor-porated against which monitoring indicatorsaregiven.Thelocalgovernmentswereaskedtodecide their own objectives and targets usingthe indicatorbasedmonitoring tools.After theinitial pilot training, 94 new Panchayats fromnortherndistrictsweregivenCFLGtrainingandsomeofthemareresolvingtohavechild-friend-ly interventions.KILA hasconducted thefirstroundoftrainingfrom2015-2016andthesamehas been widely done in 2016 among the 140Panchayats all over the state.The trainingwasgivenwithintheguidelinesofUNICEFandthe-matically focussed on the four core concepts.

Process and Implementation Theparticipantsweremadeawareoftheneed for having awareness of child rights andtheneed formore creative spaces for the chil-dren within the LSGIs. The participants werealsomadeawareof theneedformonitoringofcommitteesandensureanenvironmentsaferforchildrenandthusensurechildren’sparticipationin asserting their rights and thus transformingtheir respective LSGIs as child-friendly. Since

CFLGhasfinisheditsfouryearsoffunctioning,a comprehensive evaluation based on its theo-reticalframeworkandpracticalcontributionsisnecessary.However,suchacomprehensivestudyismissingaftertheimplementationoftheCFLGprogrammeinKerala. Inthiscontext,aninquiry-basedonthefollowingresearchquestionswouldberelevant.

• Whether the performance of local govern-ments inreference tochildrenhaschangedaftertheKILAtrainingwhilecomparingtotheexperienceofPre-CFLGyears?

• What are the initiatives local bodies havetakenforchildrenaftertheKILAtraining?

• Understand what are the most significanteffects of KILA training forCFLG in localbodies?

• Howmanyfundshavebeenallocatedbylo-calbodiesannuallyforchild-friendlyinitia-tivesindifferentdomains?

• Performance of local bodies working ineach of the fourmajor rights identified byUNICEF?

• How far trained stakeholders are aware ofchild rights and currentproblems facedbychildren?

• What are the major achievements of localgovernmentstakenunderthestudy?

• Whether any significant difference be-tween in implementing and internalizingchild-friendlylocalgovernancebysandmu-nicipalitiestakepartintrainingandnotre-ceivedtraining

• Towhat extend initiativespromoted as thepartofCFLGweresustainableinnature.

METHODOLOGY The study has taken the theoreticalframework of theCFLGprogramme as an as-sessmentframeworktoevaluatetheimpact.Theindicators used in the CFLG training manualhavebeenconvertedintoassessmentindicatorsduringthestudy.Amixedmethodapproachwasemployedinthestudyusingablendofqualita-tiveandquantitativetechniques.Alongwiththechecklist, FGDs among different stakeholdersan attempt was done to assess the knowledgeandawarenessleveloftraineesondifferentdo-

7KILA | IRTC Page |


Sampling 140 Panchayats and 6 municipalitiesparticipated under the first round of trainingfor the CFLG programme of KILA, a sampleof 30 Panchayats that received training werechosen through systematic random samplingensuring10eachPanchayats fromthedistrictsinNorth,CentralandSouthernregionsofKer-ala. In order to enable comparisons, one pan-chayatfromeachregion,whichdidnotreceiveCFLG training, was selected as a control case.Fromamongthe6municipalities thatreceivedCFLG training, two were selected randomlyensuringrepresentationofnorthandsouthre-gions.Onemunicipalityfromeachregionwasselected,alongwithonemunicipalityasacon-trol case.Thus, a total of 33 sample panchayatand3municipalitieswerecoveredbythestudy.

Tools Achecklistwasdevelopedinaccordancewiththeassessmentmatrixproposedintheop-erationalmanualoftheCFLGprogrammecover-ingeachofthefourdimensionsofchild-friendlylocalgovernance.Thesamewasusedtocollectand analyse data from each sample LSGIs. Inaddition to this, a semi-structured interviewschedulealsowasusedforconductinginterviewswith key stakeholders. The tools were sharedwithKILAandconcurrencewasobtained.Fo-cusGroupDiscussions(FGDs)wereconductedseparatelywithkeystakeholdersincludingchil-dren.Different toolswereused in the study tocollectdata fromvarious stakeholders such as;

mainsofCFLG.Astructuredquestionnairewasusedforthis.Therewere3sectionsintheques-tionnaire; thefirstportionofthequestionnairewas to understand the attitude and knowledgelevel of trainees who were trained under theCFLG programme regarding various domainsofCFLG.The second portion covered the ini-tiativestakenbythemaftergettingCFLGtrain-ing and the third portion was to understandthe contribution of KILA training in buildingcapacityof trainers inbasicconceptsofCFLG.

Checklist: Administering checklist was theprimary stage in data collection. The struc-ture of the checklist was suitable to analysethe pre and post analysis of child-friendlyprogrammes done in each local body. Thischecklist was administered in three controlPanchayats and one control municipality.

Questionnaires for trainees: The analyticaltechniques based on various sets of the ques-tionnaire have been applied. Stakeholder’s ex-perience of child-friendly local governancetraining, awarenessof child rights, projects forchildren were measured using questionnaire.

Case studies: In-depth case stud-ies of 14 best performing Pancha-yats were documented under the study.

Various toolshavebeen adopted in thedesign of the project. At the first step of theresearch data collection of child-friendly pro-grammes were done by using the Checklist.Secondary data was collected to cross-checkthechecklistandtocollecttheplanfunddetailsof each local body. Semi-structured interviewquestions were prepared to analyse the train-ingexperienceofthestakeholdersrepresentingthe panchayats. Individual evaluation ques-tions also prepared to assess the knowledge ofchild-friendly initiatives among stakeholders.TwoFGDswereconducted.Oneforstakehold-ersandotherswaschildren’sFGD.Respondentsof both Semi-structured interview and Indi-vidual evaluation questions were elected rep-resentatives, officials, implementation officers,civil society representatives, KILA extensionfaculty, and children from each LSG institu-tionwere selected as respondentsof the study.

Administration of the Study: Total 24 FGDswereconductedand40keyInformantswerein-terviewed.InordertocollectdatafromsampleLSGIs, 10 Research Assistants were recruitedandwere provided 2 days training at Integrat-edRuralTechnologyCentreduring09-02-2019to10-02-2019.Thedatacollectionof thestudytook place from 1st February to 27th April2019. The research team interviewed elect-

8KILA | IRTC Page |


ed representatives and implementing officersin the local governments, extension officersappointed by KILA to support the LSGs andchildren from the LSG. A total of 306 adultsand 429 children participated in the study.

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY The child-friendly local governancetraining KILA has initiated is well conceptu-alizedwhichwas carried from2015 and 2016.The impact assessments of this study is tak-ingplace after 3 years and inmostof theoffi-cials who received training were transferredandparticipantswereunabletorecollectabout

the training and many participants were busywith elections. Hence the participation of allstakeholders was irregular. The other limita-tionwastofixascheduleforFGDsduringelec-tion time.Wewere able to tackle this throughcontinuous perseverance and continuous fol-low-upswith the representatives. Lack of doc-umentationabout child-friendly initiativeswasalsoanother limitationof thestudyandweat-temptedtocover this limitationthroughtrian-gulationof information fromdifferent sources.

9KILA | IRTC Page |


Child Survival implies the right to lifeof children. Survival rights include aspects oflife, health, nutrition, water, sanitation, envi-ronment,andstandardofliving.Theinitiativeswere suggested by the UN-KILA frameworkunder the child survival are interventions toreduce sex-selective abortion, ensuring safedrinking water, better sanitation and hygiene,neonatal infant and under five mortality rate,immunization, distribution of vitamin A sup-plements andensuringquality service topreg-nantandlactatingwomen.AsthemortalityrateofchildreninIndiaishigh,reducingmortalityofneonatalandchildrenunderfivearesignifi-cantgoalsofCFLG.Thischapterexamines theinitiativestakenbytheLSGIsunderthedomainofChild Survival.This has been done by ana-lysingthenatureofprojectstakenupbyLSGIsand by examining the allotment and expendi-tureofLSGIs in thedomainofChildSurvival.

CHAPTER - III

CHILD SURVIVAL

Theabove table(Table-3.1)showsade-creaseof child sex ratio in India from1991 to2011. But in the case of Kerala, the child sexratio has increased considerably from 1991to 2011 (census of India 2011). The statisticsshowsthatKeralaperformsbetterthanthena-tionalaverage inthedomainofchildsexratio. The table (Table-3.2) belowshows various programmes for child sur-vival initiated by the Government.

Child sex ratio statusYear India Kerala1991 945 9582001 927 9602011 918 964

Table-3.1 (Source: Secondary data)

Increasing Child Sex ratio is an indi-cation of better child survival. The followingtable provides a picture of Child sex ratio inIndia and Kerala over the last three decades.

The table below shows various programmes for child survival initiated by the GovernmentPROGRAMME AND YEAR OBJECTIVE OF THE PROGRAMME

KeralaMaternityBenefitPro-gramme(2018-2019)v

TheGovernmentofKeralabeganthisprogrammetohelppregnantwomeninthestate.TheGovernmenthopestoprovideFinancialAssistance.Accordingly,abene-ficiarygetsapproximatelyRs.5,000asassistanceMainlylactatingmothersandthenew-bornswillbenefitfromthisYojana.

JananiSurakshaYojana(JSY-2005-06)

ThisschemeisinoperationinKeralafrom2005-06andisimplementedwiththeobjectiveofreducingmaternalandinfantmortalitybypromotinginstitutionaldelivery.

Immunisationstrengtheningprogramme(1991-2001)

Thestatehasachievedtremendouslyineliminatingneonataltetanus,polioandreductionofothervaccinepreventablediseases.Childreninmanydistrictsarepoliofree.

ICDS(IntegratedChildDevel-opmentScheme-1975)

ToprovidesupplementarynutritionToprovidehealtheducationandnon-formalpreschooleducation.

Table-3.2 (Source: Secondary data)

10KILA | IRTC Page |


YEAR WISE ALLOCATION AND UTILISA-TION OF FUNDS BY LSGIs Analysis of fund allocation and expen-diture is a good indicator to understand thenature of initiatives taken by the LSGIs un-der the domain of child survival. The follow-ing table shows the allotment and expenditureofthesameforthelastthreeyears.Thiswouldhelp understand the variation in allocationand expenditure for a particular time period.

Asmentioned above, the initiatives forchild survival is a core component under thechild-friendly programme. Hence the analy-sisof fundallocated andutilizedby theLSGIsandnatureofactivitiesundertakenby themtorealize the objective of child survival are im-portant. The following section in this chap-ter isanattempttoshedlight inthesematters.

YEAR WISE ALLOCATION AND UTILIZATION OF PANCHAYATSPANCHAYAT

2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

Percentage Intervals

Number of Panchayats

allocated


utilised


allocated


utilised


allocated


utilised0-9.99 26 28 25 27 26 2810-19.99 0 0 2 0 0 120-29.99 1 0 0 0 3 130-39.99 1 0 1 2 1 040-49.99 0 1 1 0 0 050-59.99 1 1 0 0 0 060-69.99 0 0 0 0 0 070-79.99 1 0 0 0 0 080-89.99 0 0 0 1 0 090-99.99 0 0 0 0 0 0

100-109.99 0 0 1 0 0 0CONTROL PANCHAYAT

2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

Percentage Intervals


allocated


utilised


allocated


utilised


allocated


utilised0-9.99 1 1 2 2 2 1

10-19.99 0 0 0 0 0 020-29.99 1 2 0 0 0 130-39.99 1 0 0 0 1 040-49.99 0 0 0 0 0 050-59.99 0 0 0 1 0 160-69.99 0 0 0 0 0 070-79.99 0 0 0 0 0 080-89.99 0 0 1 0 0 0

Table-3.3 (Source: Primary Data)



Theallocationandexpenditureforchildsurvival inmostof thePanchayats liebetweenzero and 10 percentage.The allocation for 26Panchayats(outof30Panchayats)in2015-16,25Panchayatsduring2016-17and26during2017-18liebelow10percentage.Thisshowsthatmorethan 90 percent of the Panchayats could ear-markonly10percentagesofthefundsallocatedconsistentlyfor3yearsunderthechild-friendlyinitiativesforchildsurvival.Thesituationisnotdifferentwhenitcomestoexpenditure.Major-ity of the Panchayats could spend only below10 percentage of the total allocation for sur-vival foraperiodof3yearsbetween2015and2018.28Panchayats in2015-16,27 in2016-17and 28 in 2017-18 could spend only below 10percentage of the allocation.While examiningthe caseof controlPanchayats, the same trendisfollowedwithfundallocationandaslightim-provementinthecaseofutilization.InthecaseofpreandpostCFLGanalysis,datashowsthereis slightdecline inallocationwhen it comes toGramapanchayats,particularlyinthe2018whiletherewasaslightimprovementintheexpendi-ture.Thenumberofpanchayatsthatwereallo-catedmorethan30percentfromthetotalfundsunderchild-friendlyinitiativesforchildsurvivalwas,3in2015-16,thatdeclinedto2in2016-17andfurtherdeclinedtoamere1in2017-18.Inthecaseoffundutilization,thenumberofPan-chayats that spend more than 30 percent forchild survival under child-friendly initiativeswas2in2015-16whichincreasedto3in2016-

YEAR WISE ALLOCATION AND UTILIZATION OF MUNICIPALITIESMUNICIPALITY

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18No. Municipali-

tyallocationPercentage

MunicipalityutilisationPercentage

MunicipalityallocationPercentage


Municipali-tyallocationPercentage


1 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 5.56% 4.83%2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

CONTROL MUNICIPALITY2015-16 2016-17 2017-18



MunicipalityallocationPercentage




1 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%Table-3.4 (Source: Primary Data)

17 and further declined to a mere 0 in 2017-18. This shows that there is no considerableimprovement in survival pre and post CFLG. Whilelookingatthecaseofmunicipali-ties,theirperformanceispoorincomparisontoPanchayats.Outof2municipalities,only1couldinitiateactivityintheareaofChildSurvivalthatwasalsoduringthelastyear(2017-18).Onemu-nicipalitycouldnotallocateandutilizeanyfundfor child survival during the last 3 years.Thesame case is shown in the caseof controlmu-nicipalityaswell.Therecanbevariousreasonsforthistrend.Thedomainssuggestedunderthetitleofchildsurvivalareinterventionstoreducesex-selective abortion, ensuring safe drinkingwater,bettersanitationandhygiene,neonatalar-restinginfantandunderfivemortalityrate,im-munization, distribution of vitaminA, supple-mentsandensuringqualityservicetopregnantand lactatingwomen.The activities conductedby LSGIs under the domain of Child Surviv-al are nutritional status screening of pregnantwomen,lactatingmotherandchildrenthroughPHC, Anganwadi classes, Gramasabha classeson nutrition, visiting of ASHA workers, tribalmedicalcamps,hygieneclasses,andfollow-upofimmunisationanddistributionofvitaminsup-plements. (See Table No.3.7)This informationshowsthatmostoftheinitiativestakenbyLSGISunder this domain are either costless or lyingundertheroutineactivitiesofdepartmentssuchashealthandsocialjustice.Thismaybeonerea-sonforlowallocationbytheLSGIs.Atthetime,



PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

Type of programmesNumber of Panchayats

Initiated


Not initiated


Initiated

Number of Panchayats Not initi-

ated

Number of Panchayat Initiated

Number of Panchayat

Not initiated

1)Initiativesfromhealthdept. 5 25 5 25 5 25

2)Classesfromotherdepartment 4 26 4 26 4 26

CONTROL PANCHAYAT

Type of programmesNumber of Panchayats

Initiated


Not initiated


Initiated

Number of Panchayats Not initi-

ated


Number of Panchayat

Not initiated

2)Classesfromotherdepartment 0 3 0 3 0 3

Table-3.5 (Source: Primary data)

thelethargyofLSGIscouldbehighlightedasareasonforpoorperformanceinfundutilization.The above table shows urban local bodies arepoorlysensitizedonchildsurvivalintermsofal-locationandexpenditurewhilecomparingwiththerural localgovernance.It isalsointerestingthatthePanchayatsandmunicipalitieswhohavenotincludedintheCFLGhavealsoshownpoorperformance in fund allocation andutilizationunderchildsurvival.Theanalysisoffundallot-ment and fundutilizationduringpre andpostCFLG does not show any considerable differ-

MUNICIPALITY

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18

TYPE OF PRO-GRAMMES

Number of municipality

Initiated

Number of municipality Not initiated


Initiated



Initiated


Initiativesfromhealthdept. 0 2 0 2 0 2

Classesfromoth-erdepartment 0 2 0 2 0 2


TYPE OF PRO-GRAMMES Municipality Initiated Municipality Initiated Municipality Initiated

Initiativesfromhealthdept. No No No

Classesfromoth-erdepartment No No No


ence.This indicated CFLG training could notmakemuchchangeinthescenariooffundallot-mentandutilizationofLSGIsforchildsurvival.

3.1) INITATIVES FOR ERADICATION OF SEX-SELECTIVE ABORTION BY LSGIs Inthecaseofchildsexratio,Keralahasasafersituation.However,interventionstopre-vent, sex-selective abortion are still pertinent.The following table analyses the interventionsoflocalbodiesinpreventingsex-selectiveabor-tion.



Note:This table indicates the number of pan-chayats that have taken initiatives to eradicatesex-selectiveabortion. Note:Theabovegiventableindicatethenumber of municipalities that have taken theinitiative to eradicate sex-selective abortion.And table ‘Control municipality’ indicates theinitiativestakentoeradicatesex-selectiveabor-tionprogrammes. Regarding the efforts to identify anderadicate sex-selective abortion, no LSGIs un-der the study has taken any specific initiativesthemselves to address the issue.The initiativesmainly come from the health department andotherconcerneddepartmentslikesocialjustice(ICDS), and theymainly conducted awarenessclassesandsomeeventsunderprogrammeslikeBetiBachaoBetiPadao.ComparingthepreandpostCFLGscenario,itisindeednoticeablethatthenumberofpanchayats,whereatleastoneac-tivityorinitiativetoaddresstheissuehasbeenreported to be conducted, remains stagnant.Onlyafewnumbersofpanchayatsunderstudyovertheyearshastakenanyofsuchinitiatives.However, among the3 controlpanchayats thatcomeunderthestudy,whohavenotreceivedanytrainingonCFLGprogramme,nonehasreport-edhavingconductedeventheactivitiesfromthesideof thehealthdepartment, ICDS, etc in allthe3financialyearsofevaluation.Analysingthedataavailable forone trainedmunicipalityandanotheruntrainedcontrolmunicipality,inboththe places no activities to address the issue ofsex-selectiveabortion,hasbeenreportedeitherinthepre-CFLGyearof2015-16orthefollow-ing post–CFLG years. Analysing these trends,itisevidentthattheintroductionofCFLGpro-grammewasnotaninfluencingfactorindecid-ingthenumberorfrequencyoftheinitiativestoaddress the sex-selective issue under survival,departmentofhealth,andICDSconductedsuchactivitiespurelyaspartoftheirroutineexercises. Ingeneral, the lownumberof reportedsex-selective abortion cases in their localitiesmighthaveworked as a factor in reducing theconcernandinterestonthesideoftrainedLS-GIs tocomeforwardwithnewinitiativesor tostrengthen the existingmechanisms to addresstheissue.Intheinterviewsandfocusgroupdis-cussion of stakeholders, it is reported that the

caseofsex-selectiveabortionisnotreportedoridentifyingintheirPanchayats.Thestronglegalframeworkandits implementationmaybeonereasonfor thisandthecontinuousobservationmechanismthroughthePHCandAnganwadiswould also be working for preventionmecha-nism to address sex-selective abortion. Otherreasonfornotreportingofcasesmaybethehid-denpracticesthatmaybehappeninginprivateclinics and hospitalswhere the LSGIs have nodirectcontrol.

3.2) INITIATIVE FOR SENSITIZATION AND TRAINING UNDER RBSK BY THE LSGIs RBSK is the new better version of theschool health programme that is being con-ductedoverthelastseveralyearswithanaimofidentifyingandtreatingearlychildhooddisabil-ities,deficiencies,diseases,etc.RBSKisaprojectunderthehealthdepartment,beingimplement-edincollaborationwiththeICDSprogramme.As part of the programme, RBSK nurses visitschools,PHC,andAnganwadisintheirassignedlocationsperiodicallyandconductscreeningses-sionstoidentifythehealthissuesamongchildrenandreferthemtohigherlevelpublichealthcareinstitutions if in the requiredcases.Thehealthdepartment also provides awareness classes inconnectionwith theprogrammeon childhoodhealth issues atPHCs andAnganwadismainlyforparents.Thefrequencyandqualityof thesescreeningsessionsandsensitizationeffortunderRBSKundertookbythehealthsystemincollab-orationwithICDSisrequiredanalysis.Thestudytrying to find whether the implementation ofCFLGprogrammeinthepanchayatshasresult-edinanysortofenhancementinthemomentumofsensitizationandtrainingeffortsunderRBSK.

KANMANI: SREEKRISHNAPURAM PANCHAYAT

KANMANI programme was initiatedby the Sreekrishnapuram panchayats part ofpromotionofgendersensitizationandpreven-tionofsexselectiveabortionbygivingatokenofappreciationtoeverynewborngirlchildinthe panchayat. Panchayat officials and wardmemberused to visit thenewborn girl childandmotherwithgifthampers.



Itcanbeobservedfromthetablethatanincrease in the number of activities of trainedPanchayats.ScreeningthroughPHCsandotherrelated initiativesunderNHMreportedhavingconducted, in the post-CFLG training year of2016-17incomparisonwiththeyearpreCFLGyear of 2015-16.The table on initiatives under-takenbythePanchayatsshowthatamong8typeactivitiestakenupbythePanchayatsasthepartof RBSK activities 6 of them showing a slightimprovement After the CFLG while comparewiththatofpre initiativebyICDS,Anganwadiclasses,Healthdepartmentclasses,Gramasabhaclasses, initiativesbyLSGIs,Screening throughschoolsarethecomponentswhichhaveshownimprovementsatthesametimetwoactivitiesv/sscreening throughPHC and initiative byNHShasshownincreaseinthefirstyearofCFLGandfurtherdeclinedinsecondyearofCFLG.Inthecase of control Panchayats, there is no signif-icant change in the activities initiatedby theminthepreandpostCFLG.Itisalsonoteworthythat initiatives such as classes in Gramasabha,own initiatives (add it in all other) by LSGIs,screeningthroughschoolsareabsentinthecon-trol Panchayats.This shows that child-friendlyinitiative has influenced the CFLG Panchayatsto initiate the above-mentioned activities. InthecaseofmunicipalitiesthereisnosignificantchangeinpreandpostCFLGinntheactivitiesundertakenbyItispertinenttonotethatclass-es inGramasabha, own initiatives of LSGs aremissing here, this indicates that CFLG initia-

tive couldnotmakemany changes in the caseof urban locationswhile comparingwith theirruralcounterparts.Theinferencesfromthedataindicate that the contributionofRBSK,NHM,PHC are significant factors in the achieve-mentsunderRBSK, the same timeown initia-tivesbytheLSGIsarenotsignificantinnature.

1.3) ACTIVITIES ADDRESSING MALNU-TRITION BY LSGIs Malnutrition is a term used to refer toany condition inwhich the body does not re-ceiveenoughnutrients forproper function.Toaddress the issueofmalnutritionvariousstrat-egiesareadopted.ThestudyassessesinitiativesofLSGIstoaddressmalnutritionbyexaminingthe status of Nutrition supplementation underthe ICDS, Screening inAnganwadis,Activitiesunder Health department, Nutrition for preg-nantladies,classesatPHC,andOwninitiativesofLSG.

PANCHAYAT2015-16 2016-17 2017-18

ACTIVITIES UNDER-TAKEN

Number of panchayats

Initiated


Not initiated


Initiated


Not initiated


Initiated


Not initiatedInitiativesbyICDS 26 4 26 4 26 4ScreeningthoughPHC 20 10 23 7 18 12InitiativesbyNHM 10 20 21 9 11 19Anganwadiclasses 23 7 24 6 24 16Healthdepartmentclasses 16 14 19 11 19 11

GramSabhaclasses. 01 29 04 26 06 24InitiativesbyLSG 04 26 04 26 05 25Screeningthroughschools-RBSK 4 26 4 26 04 26

PHC in Pulamanthole Grama Panchayat



CONTROL PANCHAYATNumber of panchayats

Initiated


Not initiated


Initiated


Not initiated


Initiated


Not initiatedInitiativesbyICDS 3 0 3 0 3 0ScreeningthoughPHC 3 0 3 0 3 0InitiativesbyNHM 2 1 2 1 2 1Anganwadiclasses 3 0 3 0 3 0Healthdepartmentclasses 3 0 3 0 3 0

GramSabhaclasses. 0 3 0 3 0 3InitiativesbyLSG 0 3 0 3 0 3Screeningthroughschools-RBSK 0 3 0 3 0 3


MUNICIPALITY2015-16 2016-17 2017-18


Number of Municipali-ties Initiated

Number of Municipal-

ities Not initiated


Number of Municipal-

ities Not initiated


Number of Municipalities Not initiated

InitiativesbyICDS 2 0 2 0 2 0ScreeningthoughPHC 2 0 2 0 2 0InitiativesbyNHM 2 0 2 0 2 0Anganwadiclasses 2 0 2 0 2 0Healthdepartmentclasses 2 0 2 0 2 0GramSabhaclasses. 0 2 0 2 0 2InitiativesbyLSG 0 2 0 2 0 2Screeningthroughschools-RBSK 2 0 2 0 2 0


ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN Municipalities Initiated Municipalities Initiated Municipalities Initiated

InitiativesbyICDS Yes Yes YesScreeningthoughPHC Yes Yes YesInitiativesbyNHM No No No

Anganwadiclasses Yes Yes YesHealthdepartmentclasses Yes Yes Yes

GramSabhaclasses. No No NoInitiativesbyLSG No No NoScreeningthroughschools-RBSK No No No




Note: (1) The table indicates that the number of Panchayat taken initiatives in different activi-ties for sensitization and training under RBSK.

(2) Anganwadi classes (Classes about Mother and child care, nutrition, sanitation, and ado-lescence class) Itcanbeobservedfromthetablethatanincrease in the number of activities of trainedPanchayats.ScreeningthroughPHCsandotherrelatedinitiativesunderNHMreportedhavingconducted, in the post-CFLG training year of2016-17incomparisonwiththeyearpreCFLGyear of 2015-16.The table on initiativesunder-takenbythePanchayatsshowthatamong8typeactivitiestakenupbythePanchayatsasthepartof RBSK activities 6 of them showing a slightimprovement After the CFLG while comparewiththatofpre initiativebyICDS,Anganwadiclasses,Healthdepartmentclasses,Gramasabhaclasses, initiativesbyLSGIs,Screeningthroughschoolsarethecomponentswhichhaveshownimprovementsatthesametimetwoactivitiesv/sscreening throughPHCand initiative byNHShasshownincreaseinthefirstyearofCFLGandfurtherdeclinedinsecondyearofCFLG.Inthecase of control Panchayats, there is no signif-icant change in theactivities initiatedby theminthepreandpostCFLG.Itisalsonoteworthythat initiatives such as classes in Gramasabha,own initiatives (add it in all other) by LSGIs,

screeningthroughschoolsareabsentinthecon-trol Panchayats.This shows that child-friendlyinitiative has influenced the CFLG Panchayatsto initiate the above-mentioned activities. InthecaseofmunicipalitiesthereisnosignificantchangeinpreandpostCFLGinntheactivitiesundertakenbyItispertinenttonotethatclass-es inGramasabha, own initiatives of LSGs aremissinghere,thisindicatesthatCFLGinitiativecouldnotmakemanychangesinthecaseofur-banlocationswhilecomparingwiththeirruralcounterparts.Theinferencesfromthedataindi-catethatthecontributionofRBSK,NHM,PHCaresignificantfactorsintheachievementsunderRBSK,thesametimeowninitiativesbytheLS-GIsarenotsignificantinnature.

3.3) ACTIVITIES ADDRESSING MALNU-TRITION BY LSGIs Malnutrition is a term used to refer toany condition inwhich the body does not re-ceiveenoughnutrients forproper function.Toaddress the issueofmalnutritionvariousstrat-egiesareadopted.ThestudyassessesinitiativesofLSGIstoaddressmalnutritionbyexaminingthe status of Nutrition supplementation underthe ICDS, Screening inAnganwadis,Activitiesunder Health department, Nutrition for preg-nantladies,classesatPHC,andOwninitiativesofLSG.

PANCHAYAT2015-16 2016-17 2017-18

Activities undertakenNumber of panchayats Initiated


not initiated

Number of panchayats Initiated


not initiated

Number of panchayats Initiated


not initiatedNutritionsupplementa-tionundertheICDS 30 0 30 0 30 0

Screeninginanganwadis 28 2 29 1 30 0ActivitiesunderHealthdept. 18 12 21 9 21 9

Nutritionforpregnantladies 30 0 30 0 30 0

classesatPHC 07 23 11 19 12 18OwninitiativesofLSG 0 30 0 30 0 30



CONTROL PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

Activities undertaken"Number of Panchayats Initiated"

Number of Panchayat

not initiated

"Number of panchayats Initiated"

Number of Panchayat

not initiated

"Number of pancha-

yats Initiated"

Number of Panchayat

not initiated

Nutritionsupplementa-tionundertheICDS 3 0 3 0 3 0

Screeninginanganwadis 3 0 3 0 3 0ActivitiesunderHealthdept. 3 0 3 0 3 0


classesatPHC 0 3 0 3 0 3OwninitiativesofLSG 0 3 0 3 0 3


Note:ThetableshowsthatthenumberofPanchayattakeninitiativestoaddressingmalnutrition.

MUNICIPALITY2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

Activities undertakenNumber of

Municipality initiated

Number of Municipality Not initiated

Number of Municipality

initiated



initiated


Nutritionsupplemen-tationundertheICDS 2 0 2 0 2 0

Screeninginangan-wadis 2 0 2 0 2 0

ActivitiesunderHealthdept. 2 0 2 0 2 0


ClassesatPHC 1 1 1 1 1 1OwninitiativesofLSG 0 2 0 2 1 1


Activities undertaken Municipality initiated Municipality initiated Municipality initiatedNutritionsupplemen-tationundertheICDS Yes Yes Yes

Screeninginangan-wadis Yes Yes Yes

ActivitiesunderHealthdept. Yes Yes Yes

Nutritionfoodforpregnantladies Yes Yes Yes

ClassesatPHC Yes Yes YesOwninitiativesofLSG No No No


Note:Thetableindicatethattheinitiativesontoaddressingmalnutrition.



Theinitiativestoaddresstheissueofmalnutri-tion amongunder 5 children,majority consti-tute activities have undertaken supplementaryprogram under ICDS program and they havebeentakingplaceinallthe30PanchayatsthereisnodifferencebetweenCFLGandcontrol, inthiscase,changesinpreandpostscenarioalsoobserved.WhilegoingthroughtheallocationofthePanchayatsforthechildrenagoodamountof that is allocatedor supplementarynutritionprogrammethroughAnganwadisasmentionedabove. As mentioned earlier after PPC LSGIsproposedtoearmarkamandatoryprovisionofsupplementnutritionthrough.Hencethisinter-ventioncan’tbeattributedastheresultofCFLG.

The table below shows the allocation of fundsforsupplementarynutritioninthepreandpostCFLG.

Fund allocation by a Panchayats (Chengottukavu Panchayat)

under study for supplementary nutritionYear 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

Fundfornutrition 2300000 2400000 4034260


Table3.11showsthePanchayathasallo-catedhugeamountofmoneyforsupplementarynutritionevenbeforetheCFLG. DatashowsthatahugeamountoffundhasbeenallocatedforsupplementarynutritionineveryyearbyLSGIs inKerala.Thismaybeincludedinthe5%mandatoryallocationofLS-GIsforchildrenandoldage.Thismightbeact-ingasinperdimensionrestrictingtheaddition-alallocationofLSGIstowardsCFLG.Henceanarrangement to exclude the supplementarynutritionprogramme from themandatory5%allocation for women and children may be awayouttoprovidemorefreedomtotheLSGIs.However, themandatoryprovisionforsupple-mentarynutritionshouldcontinueatthesamelevel.Andadditional allocation from the statefundcanbegivenforthis.Itisnoteworthythatthe increasing number of mandatory alloca-tions for the centrally instructed programmefromthestateandcentralgovernment.

Tableno.3.9Showthoseotherinitiativesto address the malnutrition such as screeningandmonitoryofhealthdepartment, andclass-es by PHC are showing an increasing trendwhileonecomparestheinitiativesofPanchayatsduringpreandpostCFLGatthesametimeitisnoteworthy thatowninitiativesbyLSGIsapartfromtheinitiativesofotheragenciesismissing.On examining the case of control PanchayatstheycouldinitiateallotheractivitiesmentionedintheCFLGPanchayatexceptclassesonnutri-tionbyPHChenceitcouldarriveintoaconclu-sionthatclassesonnutritiononPHCmaybetheexceptionalinitiativewhichcanbementionedinCFLGPanchayats.Inthecaseofmunicipalities,thereisnoconsiderabledifferenceisseeninallthese indicators in the pre and post period ofCFLG.ThedataofPanchayatsandmunicipali-tiesunanimouslyhighlight theabsenceofowninitiativesofLSGIsinaddressingnutrition. As mentioned above mandatory allo-cationforsupplementarynutritionmaybeonereasonforthedearthofotherinitiativesbytheLSGIs.Thisalsogivesanindicationthataddress-estheissueofnutritionandmappingthestatusofnutritionofchildrenwerenotseriouslytakenup by the LSGIs under CFLG except the rou-tine initiativeshappening throughAnganwadisdiscussiononthislacunaisalsoreflectedinthelethargyofpreparingdisaggregateddataofchil-dren at the panchayat level. Panchayats couldnotmake disaggregated data of children fromacomprehensiveperspective[seediscussiononchapter4,table4.3and4.4].

3.4) INITIATIVES TO FACILITATE VACCINATION Immunization is theprocesswhereby apersonismadeimmuneorresistanttoaninfec-tiousdisease,typicallybytheadministrationofavaccine.Vaccinesstimulatethebody’sownim-munesystemtoprotectthepersonagainstsub-sequentinfectionordisease.(WHO|Immuni-zationn.d.)Vaccinationagainstvariousdiseasesisanimportanttoolforensuringimmunisationandsurvival.



Vaccination status India and KeralaVaccination BCG Measles AllvaccinationAll India 84.4 67.2 51.2Kerala 100 88.4 79.7

Table-3.12 (Source: Secondary data)Planning Commission, Evaluation Report on Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) released

in March 2011

By analysing table number 3.10, it isclear that Kerala shows better performance incomparison with the Indian average, the statehastoimprovetoachieveabsolutevaccination.SoensuringvaccinationisagoalofCFLGpro-

gramme. Initiatives for improving vaccinationincludesASHAhousevisit,PHCoutreachwork,MonitoringbyAnganwaditeachers,Monitoringby Anganwadi teachers,Tribalmedical campetc.

PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

Activities under-taken

Number of panchayats Conducted


Not conducted



Not conducted


Number of panchayats Not

conductedCampaigns 25 5 27 3 30 0ASHAhousevisit 29 1 30 0 30 0PHCoutreachwork 20 10 22 8 24 6onitoringbyAngan-waditeachers 30 0 30 0 29 1

Tribalmedicalcamp 4 26 3 27 4 26CONTROL PANCHAYAT

Activities undertaken



Not conducted



Not conducted


Number of panchayats Not

conductedASHAhousevisit 3 0 3 0 3 0PHCoutreachwork 3 0 3 0 3 0MonitoringbyAn-ganwaditeachers 3 0 3 0 3 0

Tribalmedicalcamp 0 3 0 3 0 3Table-3.13 (Source: Primary data)

Note: Thetableindicatesthatthenumberofpanchayatsistakeninitiativestoeradicatevaccination.



MUNICIPALITY2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

Activitiesundertaken

NumberofMunic-ipalities

Conducted

NumberofMunicipal-itiesNot

conducted


Conducted


conducted


Conducted


conductedCampaigns 2 0 2 0 2 0ASHAhousevisit 2 0 2 0 2 0PHCoutreachwork 2 0 2 0 2 0MonitoringbyAnganwaditeachers 2 0 2 0 2 0

Tribalmedicalcamp 0 2 0 2 0 2CONTROL MUNICIPALITY

Activities undertaken Municipality Conduct-ed

Municipality Conduct-ed

Municipality Conduct-ed

Campaigns Yes Yes YesASHAhousevisit Yes Yes YesPHCoutreachwork No No NoMonitoringbyAnganwa-diteachers Yes Yes Yes

Tribalmedicalcamp No No No


Data from the table (3.13 and 3.14)shows the initiatives of improving vaccinationhasslightlyenhancedinpanchayats.Atthesametime,thereisnoconsiderablechangeinmunici-palitiesduringpreandpostCFLG.However,datafromcontrolpanchayatsandmunicipalitiesalsoshowthatalmostalltheinitiativestakenbytheCFLGpanchayatswerealsovisibleinthecontrolpanchayatsandmunicipalitieswhohavenotre-ceivedCFLGtraining.Alongwiththequantita-tivedataavailfromthechecklistqualitativedataexaminedoutofFGDsandinterviewsalsoratifytheobservationthatthehealthdepartmenthasacomparativelysystemforgoodimmunizationcoverage.Butthepanchayatsholdonlytheroleofamonitor. A health official from KadukuttiGramapanchayatsrespondedthat: “Eventhemigrantchildrenalsocoveredunder the immunizationnetworkof thehealthdepartment.” It is noticeable that ASHA workers,KudumbashreegroupsAnganwadiwhoareaffil-iatedtopanchayatsastakingakeyroleinmak-ingthevaccinationcampaignasuccessfulinitia-tive.Hence,itcouldbeobservedthattheCFLG

trainingcouldmakeonlyaslightimprovementinthecaseofinitiativestakenbythehealthde-partmentandICDSsystemunderthesocialjus-tice department.The CFLG initiatives in pan-chayatsmighthavecontributedintriggeringthedepartment initiatives for vaccination but thefeedbackfromthecontrolpanchayatsshowthatthereisnouniquenessintheactivitiesofCFLGpanchayatswhilecomparingthemwithofcon-trolpanchayats. Eventhoughtheoveralltrendofimmu-nization is positive in panchayats andmunici-palities, there are some counter factors recent-lyemerginginsomepanchayatsparticularly inMalappuramdistrict.Campaignsagainstvacci-nationfromreligiousgroupsandsomenaturop-athy groups and anti-science movements havecreateda trendagainstvaccinationamongcer-taincommunitiesandgroups.TheroleofLSGIsisgettingmorerelevantinsuchchallengingar-eas. Onehealthofficialaboutthevaccinationprogramme; “Vaccination programme is being con-ductedproperly.WiththehelpofASHAwork-ers,wehavebeenabletoreachouttotheunim-



munizedchildren,providevaccinationtothemandalsotoproperlyprovideiron-folicacidtab-letstopregnantwomen.“(JPHN:Kadukutti;11-03-2019-3-5p.m). Otherofficialtoldaboutimmunization.“We don’t have unimmunized children in thispanchayat.Migrantchildrenhadbeengivenpo-liolastSunday.Themechanismistheretotrackeachandeverychild.Thereshouldbemorecam-paignsregardingpreventivehealthandnutritionofchildren.ThereareclassesbeingconductedinAnganwadis,butonlyfewerchildrenareattend-ing them.Mainly awareness should reach par-ents.Thehealthdepartment shouldworkwithmore enthusiasm. “(H.I;Nenmanikara -19-03-19-11-12.30p.m).

SUMMARY The analysis of fund allocation patternduring pre- and post-CFLG training periodsshowsthatonlybelow10%offundshavebeenallocated and spent in the domain of survival.Majorityoftheprogramsunderthedomainareroutineprogramsandquantumoffundalloca-tiondoesnotshowanysignificantchange.Apartfromstrengtheningtheexistingpoliciesofhealthdepartment,socialjusticedepartment,andICDSprogrammes,anynovelprogrammesarenotini-tiatedbyLSGIsforaddressingissuessuchaspos-siblesexselectiveabortion.ThehealthstatusofchildrenisbeingassessedthroughtheRashtriyaBal Swasthya Karyakram (RBSK) programmebydifferentpublicinstitutions.Ithasalsobeenshown that RBSK activities are having an in-creasingtrendinrurallocalbodiesincompari-sonwiththeurbanlocalbodies.AlargeamountoffundisallocatedforsupplementarynutritioneveryyearbyLSGIsinKerala.ButamappingofthestatusofnutritionofchildrenisnotseriouslytakenupbytheLSGIs.Thoughtherearesomeexceptions inMalappuramandKozhikodedis-trictsonimmunizationstatus,mostoftheLSGIsarepositiveandhaveabout100%coverage.ButalltheLSGIsaretryingfortheimprovementofimmunization status through better governingsystems.

Kerala’sstatusasastatewithoneofthebest health infrastructures in the countrymayhave had a positive bearing on the acceptablestandard of child survival despite the lack ofnovelinitiatives.Lookingatfutureprospectsinthisdirection,andgivenitspastachievements,itcanbesaidthatKeralahasafirstmoveradvan-tage in terms of formulatingnewprogrammesforchildsurvival.Theambitofsurvivalcanbeexpandedtoincludeflourishinginformulatingnewprogrammesinthisdomain.Futureexten-sions of CFLG framework may take this ideaintoconsideration.



Child development is a concept lyingunderchildrightsasperUNCRC.AshavebeenhavediscussedearliertheLSGIsinKeralahavedonesomeinvestmentstoundertaketheissuesofchildrenthroughtheirdevelopmentplanning.Mandatoryallocationwasrestrictedonlytothesupplementarynutritionprogramme.This lim-itationwasalsowavedoffaftertheintroductionofguidelinesfor5%mandatoryallocation.Thishas provided a goldenopportunity for theLS-GIstoinvestmoremoneyforthedevelopmentofchildren. The indicators instructed by theUNICEFunder theheadof childdevelopment

YEAR WISE ALLOCATION AND UTILISATION OF FUND FOR CHILD DEVELOPMENT BY THE LSGIs

PANCHAYATS2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

Percentageinterval

Numberofpan-chayatallocated

Numberofpan-chayatutilised

Numberofpanchayatallocated

Numberofpanchayatutilised

Numberofpanchayatallocated

Numberofpanchayatutilised

0-9.99 0 4 1 1 0 210-19.99 0 2 0 1 1 020-29.99 0 3 0 2 0 230-39.99 1 2 0 4 1 340-49.99 1 0 1 4 1 550-59.99 0 4 3 3 1 560-69.99 1 4 0 5 2 470-79.99 2 4 3 6 4 380-89.99 11 4 9 2 6 390-99.99 13 3 10 2 10 3

CHAPTER - IV

CHILD DEVELOPMENT

are Early childcare, Universal early childhoodcare,Healthyandchild-friendlyschoolandpre-schools, Education for all up to 18 years, Nu-trition status and fitness of children.Activitiesmeasured under the domain are developmentofacomprehensivechilddata,creationofBar-rier-free environment, quality of Anganwadibuildings,developmentofSCandSTchildren’seducation,developmentofAnganwadis,schoolsandpublicspacesbyLSGIs. Inthiscontext,ananalysisabouttheal-locationandutilizationoffundsforchilddevel-opmentactivitiesishighlyrelevantthefollowingtableisanattemptinthisdirection.




Percentage interval

Number of panchayat allocated

Number of panchayat

utilised


Number of panchayat

utilised


Number of panchayat

utilised0-9.99 0 1 0 0 0 0

10-19.99 0 1 0 2 0 020-29.99 1 1 0 0 0 130-39.99 0 0 0 0 1 040-49.99 1 0 1 0 0 150-59.99 1 0 0 1 0 160-69.99 0 0 0 0 1 070-79.99 0 0 0 0 0 080-89.99 0 0 2 0 1 0


MUNICIPALITY2015-16 2016-17 2017-18

Municipalities allocation

Percentage

Municipalities utilisation

Percentage


Percentage


Percentage


Percentage


Percentage100.00% 33.74% 98.00% 35.58% 92.76% 33.51%99.27% 94.87% 100.00% 66.96% 99.52% 45.49%

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18Municipality

allocation Percentage

Municipality utilisation

Percentage

Municipality allocation

Percentage


Percentage


Percentage


Percentage100.00% 28.33% 100.00% 81.90% 100.00% 90.39%


DatafromtheplandocumentsoftheLS-GIs shows that development is the single larg-est itemtheyhaveallocatedandutilizedunderCFLG. However, the above table shows thatthereisasignificantimprovementinallocationandexpenditureofLSGIsforchilddevelopmentinitiativesafterCFLG.Atthesametimethein-creasingtrendofallocationdoesnotseemtobesupplementedbyincreasingutilizationoffunds.Thereisasignificantmismatchbetweentheal-location of funds and the utilization of funds.InthecaseofPanchayatsinthepreCFLGyear15-16numberofPanchayatswhohaveallocat-edfundsforthechilddevelopmentundertheirtotal child budget below 50% was only 2 andthenumberofpanchayatswhohaveearmarkedthefundamountinthe50-80%was3,thePan-chayatswhohaveallocatedfunds80-90was11,

thepanchayatswhohaveallocatedfundsinthepercentage intervals 90 and abovewas 14.Theallocationfortheyear2016-17was2,6,9and13respectively.Theallocationin17-18ofthesamepanchayatsinthesamepercentageintervalswas3,7,6and14.Thisdatashowsthatthenumberofpanchayatswhohaveearmarkedfundsforchilddevelopment has allocated above 50% underCFLG has increased from 15-18 has increasedgradually.Forinstance, thenumberofpancha-yatswhohaveallocatedmorethan90%was14in15-16;itwas13in16-17whichincreasedasagainas14in17-18. At the same time, the allocation of thenumberofpanchayatswhoare lying in the in-tervalof80-90isshowingagradualdecline.In2015-16 thisnumberwas11which reduced to9in2016-17andfurtherreducedto6in2017-



2018.Thisindicatesthoughthereisagradualin-creaseinallocationafterCFLGmajorityofthemlying in 50-80. That increase is shown in thepercentage intervals is shown50-80In the caseofcontrolpanchayatsthenumberofpanchayatswhohaveallocatedbelow50wasalsodecreas-ingitwas2in2015-16,reducedto1in2016-17and the samewas in 2017-18.This shows thatthe control panchayats have also shown someimprovementinallocation. Theallocationofcontrolmunicipalityisremainingsame(100)forCDduringthe last3years.Hence,wecouldreachintoaconclusionthatthereisasignificantimprovementintheal-locationofpanchayatsfrompre-postCFLGpe-riod.While there isno such trend is visible inthecaseofurbanlocalbody.KILAtrainingandthe knowledge disseminated that might havemadeapositiveenvironment for increasingal-lotmentforchilddevelopment.Atthesametimetillthereisagapwhichneedstobeaddressedintheurbanlocalbody. As against the trend of increasing allo-cationfundutilizationbythepanchayatsunderthedomainof childdevelopmenthas shownagradual trend on declining. For instance, thenumberofpanchayatswhocouldspendonlybe-low50%ofallocationwas9in2015-16whichhasincreased12in2016-17andagain12intheyear2017-2018.Inthecaseofanumberofpancha-yatswhowerelyinginthepercentageintervalof50-80utilizationitwas12in2015-16whichhasshownaslightimprovementin2016-17(14)andagainreducedinas12in17-18. The number of panchayats who havespentmoneybetweenthepercentagesof80-100alsoshowingagradualdecliningtrendin2015-16itwas7,whichwasreducedto4in2016-17whichhasshownaslightimprovementin2017-18(6)butingeneral,itwasshowndeclinedinthepostCFLGtraining.Inthecaseofcontrolpan-chayatsitisshownthatbelow50%ofutilizationhasdeclined in2015-16this isapositive trendof fund utilization. As a reflection of this, thenumberofpanchayatswhohaveshownspend-ingmore than 15 % is also increasing. In thecaseoftheexpenditurepatternofmunicipalitiesareshowingadecliningtrendwhilethetrendofcontrolmunicipality showing a significant im-provement.Inactualthedataonallocationand

expenditureoftherurallocalgovernmentshowsa higher level ofmismatch between allocationandexpenditurenotwithstandingtheimprovingtrendofallocationutilizationpatternhasshownagradualdecliningtrend.Thishasmadeanim-provementinallocationtobecomemeaningless.Thelethargyofpanchayatsinspendingtheallo-catedmoneyparticularly inchilddevelopmentmaybeareflectionoftheirinsensitivitytowardstheissueofchildren.Absenceofpoorsocialau-ditmechanismfromtheparticipatoryforumsofchildrenmaybe theotherpertinentreason forthistrend.Thisunderscorestherelevanceofac-tiveparticipatorycitizenshipof childrenunderthe localgovernmentparticipatory forumsuchaschildren’sGramasabhapanchayatscouldhavebeenactedasforumsofsocialauditorvigilancemechanism to monitor the implementation ofchild-friendly initiatives.Dataonchildpartici-pationinCFLGpanchayatwhichisdiscussedinchapter6(seechapter6)indicatethatparticipa-toryforumsareeitherinactiveorrestrictedtoaone-timeevent.Thishasalargerimplicationintheutilizationoffundsforchilddevelopment.

4.1) DISAGGREGATED DATA DIRECTORY PREPARATION OF CHILDREN BY LSGIs AccurateDatafromacoresetofindica-torsisrelevantfordevelopingchilddevelopmentplansin localself-governmentinstitutions.TheUNICEFKILAinitiativeforchild-friendlylocalgovernanceasmentionedasdisaggregatedcom-prehensivedatasetatthelocalgovernmentlevelasaprerequisite fordevelopingcomprehensivechilddevelopmentplanatLSGlevel.Disaggre-gateddataonchildrenonthedictatorssuchasage,sex,education,healthstatus,nutrition,so-cio-economiccondition,natureofdisabilityanddataondeprivedsocialgroupswereproposedtoprepare at the inception level of the project inall theLSGIs. It isnotworthy thatameaning-fulchilddevelopmentplancannotbedevelopedwithoutthesupportofaproperdatabase.HenceitispertinenttoexaminetheinitiativestakenbytheLSGIstopreparedisaggregateddatabaseatthelocallevel.Thefollowingtableisanattemptinthisdirection.



PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN

Number of Panchayat Prepared

Number of Panchayat

Not prepared


Number of Panchayat

Not prepared


Number of Panchayat

Not preparedICDSSURVEYREPORT 30 0 30 0 29 1

STATUSREPORT NA NA 7 23 14 16DATACOLLEC-TIONBYKILAFORMAT

4 26 13 17 6 24

DATADIRECTO-RYBYLSG 0 30 3 27 4 26

CONTROL PANCHAYAT



Number of Panchayat

Not prepared


Number of Panchayat

Not prepared


Number of Panchayat

Not preparedSTATUSREPORT NA NA 2 1 2 1DATACOLLEC-TIONBYKILAFORMAT

NA NA 0 3 0 3

DATADIRECTO-RYBYLSG NA NA 0 3 0 3


Note: ThetableindicatesthatthenumberofpanchayatstakeninitiativesforcollectingandprepareDisaggregateddataofchildren.

MUNICIPALITY2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

ACTIVITIES UNDER TAKEN

Number of Municipali-

ties prepared

Number of Munici-palities not

prepared

Number of Munic-ipalities

prepared


prepared

Number of Munic-ipalities

prepared


prepared1)ICDSSURVEYREPORT 2 0 2 0 2 02)STATUSREPORT 1 1 1 1 2 0DATACOLLECTIONBYKILAFORMAT 0 2 1 1 1 1

DATADIRECTORYBYLSG 1 1 1 1 1 1


ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN Municipality Prepared Municipality Prepared Municipality Prepared

ICDSSURVEYREPORT Yes Yes YesSTATUSREPORT No No NoDATACOLLECTIONBYKILAFORMAT No No No

DATADIRECTORYBYLSG No No No




Itcanbefoundthat100%ofthetrainedpanchayats have been collecting data on chil-drenthroughtheannualICDSsurveyconduct-edbyAnganwadis.ThesameTrendisseeninthecase ofmunicipalities. All the control pancha-yats andmunicipalities also did this. As ICDSsurvey is a routineprocess there arenodiffer-encesinthepreandpostperiodofCFLGtrain-ing.HencetheimplicationofCFLGtrainingonICDSdatacollectionisnotrelevant.ApartfromthedetailscollectedfromtheICDSsurveyKILAhas made a format for panchayats for collect-ingdataofchildrenduringCFLGtraining.Thiswasconsideredasasteppingstoneforpreparingcomprehensivedatadirectoryonchildren.Theinferencesfromthetableshowthatmajorityofthepanchayatshavenotprepareddisaggregateddata in KILA format. Only 19 panchayats outof 30haveprepared thisdata from2016-2018.Inthecaseofmunicipalities1outof2prepareddataonKILAformatitisnoticeablethatmajor-ityofLSGIscouldn’tdataonchildrenwhich isprerequisite forpreparingCCDP, status report,datadirectoryonchildren.Thedataonthesta-tusreportshowsthat21outof30haveprepareda status report in2years. It isnoteworthy thatonly19panchayatshaveprepareddataonKILAformat.Henceitcanbenotedthat2panchayatsoutof21havepreparedstatusreportonlybasedonthedatathroughICDS. Itisalsoimportanttonotethat9pancha-yatsof30couldnotprepareanydataonchildrenwhichwasabasicprerequisiteforCCDP.Inthecaseofthemunicipality,thesituationiscompar-ativelybetter.2municipalitiesstudiedcouldpre-paretheirstatusreport.Theyhavealsocollect-eddatainKILAformathencetheperformanceof urbanLSGIs in preparation of status reportseems to be systematic in nature.Disaggregat-

eddatadirectoryonchildrenwastheexpectedoutputofcomprehensivedatacollectionatLSGlevelbut thedataonpanchayats in this regardisshowingapessimisticpictureonly7outof30panchayats(73%)couldprepareComprehensivedata decoy while one municipality could pre-pare the same. It isalsopertinent tonote that,14panchayatswhohavepreparedstatusreportcould not reach into the target disaggregateddataonchildren.Absenceofdisaggregateddataonmajority panchayats has created hurdles inevidence-based planning majority of the pan-chayatshasshownICDSdataasacomprehen-sivedatabase.Which isnot actually a compre-hensivedatabaseasmentionedbyKILAtrainingin practice LSGIs particularly panchayats hastaken a casual approach towards the planningprocess.Thereluctanceofpanchayatsinprepar-ingevidence-basedplanninggeneralmighthavebeenreflectedhereaswell.Thiscasualreporthasanegative impacton thequalityof theprojectpreparedbylocalbodiesinthedomainsofchildsurvival, development, protection, and partici-pation.Thedearthoftheproperdatabasemighthave forced thepanchayats to relayongeneralimpressionistic opinionswhile preparing planswhichinturnmighthavecontributedtotheab-senceofinnovativeplansinthesedomains.

4.2 NUMBER OF PANCHAYATS HAVING OWN BUILDING FOR ANGANWADIS Anganwadi is an institution under theLSGIswhichenhance thephysical,mentalandsocialabilityofchildrenundertheageof3-5.ItisthetargetofCFLGprogrammetoenhanceallAnganwadisaschild friendly for that it isnec-essary to increase the quality of Anganwadisthroughitsmodernisinginfrastructure,makeitasamultiplerecoursecentrewhereclubsforad-

Anganwadi in Cheruvathur Grama Panchayat



NUMBER OF PANCHAYATS WITH OWN BUILDINGPercentage intervals 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

0-19.9 0 0 020-39.9 2 2 140-59.9 5 5 660-79.9 5 5 580-99.9 18 18 18

CONTROLPANCHAYATS0-19.9 0 0 020-39.9 0 0 040-59.9 1 1 160-79.9 0 0 080-99.9 2 2 2

Table-4.5 (Source: Primary data)NOTE: Thistableindicatesthatthenumberofpanchayats

AnganwadiinstitutionsinKeralaareal-readywellestablishedthroughthedevelopmen-tal experienceofKerala.Thedata showsabout60% of panchayats have already achieved ownbuilding for Panchayats. The table shows thatOutofthetotal30trainedpanchayats,18pan-chayats(60%)hasabout80-100%ownbuildingfor Anganwadis. Data on municipality showsthatbelow65%ofmunicipalityhaveownAn-ganwadibuildingwhencompared to the trendofpanchayats.Thesametrendcontinuedincon-trolpanchayats. Incontrolpanchayats2outofthree panchayats have 80-100% own buildingfor Anganwadis. But one control panchayathavecompletedonlybelow60%ofownbuildingforAnganwadis.Whencomparedtothedataofmunicipality, controlmunicipality demonstrat-edahighdifferenceinthestatusofAnganwadibuilding.Thecontrolmunicipalityhas close to90%ofownbuilding.TheCFLGmunicipalitieshave fared worse than control municipality inprovidingownbuildingstoAnganwadis. In2015-16,2panchayatsshowedbelow40%completionofownbuildingforAnganwa-

isnochangeinownbuildingforAnganwadisinthe intervalof40-60%.But in2017-18a slightimprovementhasseen.Itincreasedfrom5to6.Thereisnochangeoccurredinpreandpostpe-riodofCFLGtraining,in2015-16thedatashowsthat23panchayatshaveabove60%Anganwadishaveownbuilding.Thereisnochangeoccurredin2016-17and2017-18.Inmunicipalitiesthereis no significant difference in Anganwadi ownbuilding on the pre and post period of CFLGtraining.Butin2017-18thereisslightimprove-mentinonlyonemunicipality.Ithasimprovedfrom 60.5% to 63.15%. In control panchayatsthereisnodifferenceinthestatusofAnganwa-diownbuildingpreandpostperiod.Incontrolmunicipality2015-16have92.85%ownbuildingforAnganwadi,itdecreasedto89.85%in2016-17.And then a slight improvement showed in2017-18thatincreasedupto90.62%.

olescentchildren libraryandotherservicesareavailable.InKeralaAnganwadisareworkingasaserviceproviderinruralareassupplementaryfood for children and adolescent girls, moni-toringofpregnantladiesandlactatingmothersareworkingunderAnganwadis.Permanentandqualitybuildingareessential inprovidingsuch

services.The tablebelowshows thenumberofownbuildingforAnganwadisundereachpan-chayath.

dis.In2016-17thestatusiscontinued.But2017-18 the number of panchayats which has ownbuilding forAnganwadishasdecreasedasone.It showsan improvement inAnganwadibuild-ing.Thedatashowsintheperiodof2015-16thepanchayatshaveownbuildingsforAnganwadisintheintervalof40-60%is5.In20156-17there

4.3) INITIATIVES FOR BARRIER FREE ENVIRONMENT IN PUBLIC SPACES Barrier free environment is one whichenables people with disabilities tomove safelyand freely anduseall facilitieswithin thegov-ernment.Institutionslikeschools,hospitalsandotherinstitutionscomingundertheLSGIwere



PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

BARRIER FREE INDI-

CATORS


Number of Panchayat

Not initiate


Number of Panchayat

Not initiate


Number of Panchayat

Not initiateToilets 10 20 14 16 16 14Chairs 8 22 12 18 13 17

Rampinschools 12 18 16 14 19 11

Feedingcor-ner 4 26 5 25 12 18

Cradle 2 28 3 27 4 26Lift 0 30 2 28 2 28

Drinkingwater 21 9 23 7 22 8

Wheelchair 5 25 7 23 10 20

CONTROLPANCHAYATBARRIER

FREEINDI-CATORS

NumberofPanchayatInitiated

NumberofPanchayatNotinitiate





Toilets 1 2 1 2 1 2Chairs 1 2 2 1 2 1

Rampinschools 2 1 2 1 3 0

Feedingcorner 1 2 1 2 1 2

Cradle 0 3 0 3 0 3Lift 0 3 0 3 0 3

Drinkingwater 3 0 3 0 3 0

Wheelchair 1 2 1 2 1 2Table-4.7 (Source: Primary data)

expected to make barrier free environment.These facilities help them to involve in publicspaceswithmore freedom.Thefollowing tablegivesapictureaboutthebarrierfreeinitiativebytheLSGIs.

PERCENTAGE OF ANGANWADIS IN THEIR OWN BUILDINGS

MUNICIPALITY 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-201834 57% 57% 57%35 60.5 60.5 63.15%

CONTROLMUNICIPALITY

92.85% 89.85% 90.62%

Cradle at Pulamanthole Grama Panchayat office



MUNICIPALITY

BARRIER FREE INDI-

CATORS

Number of Municipality Take Initia-

tion

Number of Municipali-ty Not Take Initiation


tion



tion


Toilets 1 1 1 1 2 0Chairs 1 1 1 1 2 0Rampinschools 0 2 2 0 2 0

Feedingcor-ner 0 2 0 2 1 1

Cradle 0 2 0 2 0 2Lift 0 2 0 2 0 2Drinkingwater 2 0 2 0 2 0

Wheelchair 0 2 1 1 2 0

CONTROL MUNICIPALITYBARRIER FREE INDICATORS

Municipality Take Initiation



Chairs Yes Yes YesRampInschools Yes Yes YesFeedingcorner Yes Yes YesCradle No No NoLift No No NoDrinkingwater Yes Yes YesWheelchair Yes Yes Yes


Barrier freeenvironmentenablesacces-sibility of services to children.The data showsLSGIs are done initiatives for creating barrierfreeenvironment.ConstructionandenablingofToilets,Chairs,RampInschools,feedingcorner,Cradle,Lift,DrinkingWaterandwheelchairarethe indicators used to assess the availability ofbarrierfreeenvironment. Thenumberof initiativeshas increasedBytheLSGIshasgraduallyincreasedduringtheperiod2015-2018.Whilecomparingthetrainedpanchayatwiththeinitiativesofthecontrolpan-chayatwiththetrainedpanchayattheirperfor-manceisquitelow.Municipalitiesarealsointhesametrendovertheyearsinthecaseofimprove-mentinbarrierfreeinitiative. WhilecomparingthepreandpostCFLGperiodcreationofbarrierfreeenvironmenthasshownasignificantadvancementparticularlyin

constructingToilets,rampsinschoolsandfixingofchairsinschoolsandestablishingfeedingcor-nerandarrangingdrinkingwater.Thenumberof panchayatshave initiatedbarrier free toiletswas10in2015-2016whichhasincreased14in2016-2017 to 16 in 2017-2018.Th number ofPanchayatsarrangedchairsforthevisitorwas8in2015-16,whichincrease12in2016-17and13in2017-18.Thesametrendwasseeninrampsinprimaryschools,Thenumberofpanchayatshavewhichhasconstructedrampsinschoolswas12in2015-16whichhasfurtherincre16,andagainincreased19in2017-18. Thepanchayatshave takenmore initia-tives to provide drinkingwater to the visitors.In2015-16 the21panchayathasprovided thisfacilitywhichhasincreasedto23thisindicatesthat the panchayats has givenmore interest togiven drinking water even before CFLG. Ini-



tiatives such as cradle, lift in buildings,wheel-chairwererarelyinitiatedinLSGIsbutthereisa slight increase in introducing these elementswhilecomparingwiththepreCFLGperiod.Thenumberofpanchayatsinitiated;liftwaszeroin2015-16which continued unaltered in comingtwoyears.Inthecaseofwheelchair,thenumberofpanchayatsinitiatedwas5in2015-16whichincreasedto7and10inrespectively.Thenum-berofpanchayatsarrangedcradleforbabieshasshownonlyslightincreased2infirstto4andinfinal year.This information show that theper-formanceofCFLGpanchayats in creatingbar-rier free environment in some specific aspectswhiletheyfailedinotheraspects.Theyhavead-dressed theprimaryneeds suchasbarrier freetoilets,ramps,drinkingwater,primaryanduni-versalneedsofdifferentlyabledchildrenwhiletheycouldnotaddressthesecondaryneedssuchasliftsandcradleatthesametimetheyneglect-ed a very important need of differently abledchildrenwithmovingdisabilitiesthat iswheel-chair,thisshownCFLGhastofocuscreationofmoresensitivitytowardscreationofbarrierfreeenvironmentinlocalbodies.Controlpanchayathas shown comparatively low performance inthecreationofbarrier freeenvironment in thelocalbodies.Cradleandlifthavenotbuiltatanymunicipality in theperiod2015 to 2018.Otherfacilities are in an increasing trend comparingthepreandposttrainingperiod.InThecaseofconstruction of toilets, the number of munic-ipalities initiated inpreCFLGperiodwasonlyone2015-2016andchairwhichhasincreasedin2as2017-18.InthecaseofdrinkingwaterbothofthemunicipalitieshavetakeninitiativesevenbeforeCFLG.Onlyonecouldestablishfeedingcorner that is also in final year (2017-18). Incontrolmunicipalityalsocradleandliftarenotbuiltintheseyearsbutotherfacilitieswerebuiltinaslowpaceinthesemunicipalities.Buildingof Barrier free environment shows an increas-ingwhilecomparingthepreandpostperiodoftraininginthemunicipalities.Trainedlocalbod-iesshowsbetterperformancethantheuntrainedLSGIs. Creating barrier free environment is aprominent factor in establishing child friendlyatmosphere.According to the visionperceivedthrough training,manyof the trainedpancha-yattookinitiativesforestablishingabarrierfree

environmentinpublicspaceswhilethecontrolandpanchayatsandmunicipalitieswereinactiveinthisdirection.ThisindicatesthatCFLGtrain-inghasmadeagoodimpactofcreationofbar-rierfreeenvironment.ThequalitativedatafromFGDsandInterviewsalsoratifythisobservation.An elected representative fromMulanthuruthypanchayatofErnakulamdistrictofresponded. Whiletakingaboutthebarrierfreefacil-itieswehaveconstructedrampsanddifferentlyabledtoiletinpanchayatofficeandotherinstitu-tionsunderpanchayats. “To talk about the barrier free facili-ties,we have constructed ramps and different-lyabledfriendlytoilets inpanchayatofficeandotherpublicofficesunderit.Besidesinsomeofthegovernmentofficesfeedingroomsalsohavebeen built.Wemostly keep the programmeofchildren at the auditorium in the top floor ofpanchayatoffice.Ifthereareanydifferentlyabledchildrenamong thekids coming toparticipatein these programmes,we have constructed liftintheofficetohelpthemreachtheauditorium.”(President,Mulanthuruthy,19/3/2019,11-12.30PM). An official fromPulamanthole pancha-yatrespondedaboutthebarrierfreefacilitiesasfollows: “Pulamanthole isapublic friendlypan-chayat.Sincethepanchayatofficehasbeenshift-edintothenewbuilding,wehavehadcradleandfeedingroomfacilitiesforchildren.Similarly,wealso havewheel chair facility for the different-lyabled.”(Planclerk,Pulamanthole,17/4/2019,12-1PM).

Panchayats such as Kumarakom

and Ramapuram took initia-

tives in child safety and care by

providing clean and safe drinking

water as a part of CFLG activi-

ties. Kumarakom is a panchayat

which suffers from the scarcity

of clean water. To overcome this

and to prevent water borne dis-

eases among children the Pan-

chayat installed RO plants



4.4) EDUCATIONAL INITIATIVES ESPECIALLY FOR ST STUDENTS BY LSGIs Scheduledtribesaremarginalizedcom-munity in Kerala.They face various socioeco-nomicdeprivationandbarriersindevelopment.Thougheducation is free forchildrenup to14years, study materials and infrastructure forchildrenisstillexpensive.LSGIsinKeralahavetribal sub plan for the development of tribalcommunityhenceunderwhichtheycaninitiatetheactivitiesforthechildren.

PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

INITIATIVESNo of Pancha-yats Conduct-

ed

No of Pan-chayats Not Conducted

No of Pancha-yats Conduct-

ed



ed


ScholarshipforHigherStudies.

0 5 1 4 1 4

LaptopDistri-bution. 0 5 0 3 1 4

StudytableforStudents. 2 3 3 2 3 2

StudyroomforStudents. 1 4 3 2 2 3

StudymaterialforStudents. 3 2 2 3 3 2

Careerguid-ance 0 5 0 5 1 4


INITIATIVESNo of Pancha-yats Conduct-

ed



ed



ed


ScholarshipforHigherStudies.

0 3 0 3 0 3







Thefollowingtableshowstheinitiativesofthepanchayatstakenforthetribalchildren.

TotalSTpopulatedpanchayatsunderstudyis5otal ST population control panchayats understudyis1.



MUNICIPALITY2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

INITIATIVESNumber of

Municipality Conducted


not conducted

Number of Municipality Conducted

Number of Municipality not Conduct-

ed


Number of Municipality not Conduct-

edScholarshipforHigherStudies.

0 2 0 2 0 2







INITIATIVES Number of Municipality Conducted



ScholarshipforHigherStudies 0 0 0

LaptopDistribution 0 0 0StudytableforStudents 0 0 0StudyroomforStudents 0 0 0StudymaterialforStudents 0 0 0Careerguidance 0 0 0


The data shows in general, the educa-tional assistance initiatives for ST children bythe LSGIs are very low. In the case of trainedpanchayats, assistance to studymaterial for STstudents,studyroom,anddistributionofStudytableweregivenmorepreferencewhileotherfa-cilitiesshowingavaryingtrend. Distribution of Study table and distri-butionofstudymaterialarethetwomajorini-tiativesdonebypanchayats forSTchildren. In2015-16 the numbers of panchayats who havedistributedStudytabletotheSTstudentswere2 which increased 3 in 2016-17 and the samenumbercontinuedin2017-18.Thesecondhigh-estinterventionwasdistributionofstudymate-rialtothestudents.InthefirstyearthatispreCFLGyearitwas3whichreducedto2in2016-17butagainincreasedto3.

At the same time data show that from2015-16thepanchayathasstartedanewinitia-tive for assisting ST families to construct newstudy rooms for students. But this is showinga varying trendover the years.ThenumberofPanchayats-initiated study rooms for ST chil-dren was 1 in 2015-16 which has increased 3in second year and again reduced 2 last year.However,thishasshownanincreasingtrendinpostCFLG. In thecaseofcareerguidance, thepanchayats showed poor performances. Eventhoughtherewasaslight increase inthenum-berofPanchayats-initiatedcareerguidancehasimproved over the year. In the case of controlpanchayat, study material, study table, careerguidance are the major activities done for STchildren.Thetableisnotapplicabletomunici-palitiesandcontrolmunicipalitiesasthereisno



STpopulationintheselectedmunicipalitiesandcontrolmunicipalities. The lack of facility in study in tribalhouseholds and poor orientation of career arethe major issues faced by the tribal students.panchayatsaremostlyinterestedtotakeupeasyandsimpleinitiativesratherthanaddressingthebasicissuesoftribalchildrensuchasmalnutri-tion,absenceofstudyfacilitiesathomeandpoorcareerorientationthedatashowthat, therearesomeslightimprovementintheroutineactivitytakenupforthepanchayatduringpreandpostCFLGperiod. Atthesametime,theycouldnotinitiateany innovative programme after CFLG to ad-dress the issuesof tribalchildrenthis indicatesthatCFLGrequires adopting a special strategyto address the issues of children in tribal re-gions rather than a universal approach. Somebureaucraticstringsarealsomakinglimitationsonpanchayatsinaddressingtheneedsoftribalchildren.For instance, theLSGIguidelinesput

restrictionsonpanchayatsinundertakingcareerorientation programme for students the pan-chayatwithhigherpresentof tribalpopulationshouldbegivenmoreflexibilityandautonomyindecidingthe initiatives thatcanbe takenupfortribesbyconsideringthelocalcontextofthepanchayat.

4.5) EDUCATIONAL INITIATIVES ESPE-CIALLY FOR SC STUDENTS Scheduled caste is also a marginalizedcommunityinKerala.Educationalassistancetochildren from the scheduled caste communityaimsforinclusionofallchildrenfromdifferentsocial-economicgroups. All theLSGIs inKeralahasaprovisionforspecialcomponentplanhencethereisahigh-errelevanceinevaluatingtheactivitiestakenupbytheLSGIsforchildrenfromSCcommunitiesduringpreandpostCFLGperiod.Thefollowingtableisanattemptinthisdirection.

PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

INITIATIVES UN-DER TAKEN

Number of Panchayat Conducted

Number of Panchayat Not

Conducted


Number of Panchayat

Not Conduct-ed


Number of Panchayat Not

Conducted

LaptopDistribution 14 16 17 13 18 12Studytable/chairforstudents 18 12 14 16 18 12

Studyroomforstudents 10 20 13 17 15 15

Scholarships 11 19 10 20 12 18Dayprotectioncentres 0 30 0 30 2 28

Financingforhighereducation 6 24 5 25 5 25

Scholarshipstomen-tallyandphysicallychallengedSC

1 29 4 26 2 28

Studymaterials 0 30 1 29 0 30Others 3 27 5 25 3 27




INITIATIVES UNDER TAKEN


Number of Panchayat

Not Conduct-ed


Number of Panchayat

Not Conduct-ed


Number of Panchayat

Not Conduct-ed

CycleDistri-bution 0 3 0 3 0 3

LaptopDistri-bution 2 1 1 2 1 2

Studytable/chairforstu-dents

0 3 0 3 2 1

Studyroomforstudents 1 2 2 1 2 1

Scholarships 2 1 1 2 0 3Dayprotectioncentres 0 3 0 3 0 3

Financingforhighereduca-tion

0 3 0 3 0 3

ScholarshipstomentallyandphysicallychallengedSC

0 3 0 3 0 3

Studymate-rials 1 2 0 3 0 3

Others 0 3 0 3 0 3Table-4.11 (Source: Primary data)

MUNICIPALITY2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018



Number of Munici-pality Not

Conducted

Number of Municipali-ty Conduct-

ed


Conducted



Not Con-ducted

CycleDistribution 0 2 0 2 1 1LaptopDistribution 1 1 1 1 0 2Studytable/chairforstudents 0 2 0 2 1 1

Studyroomforstu-dents 0 2 0 2 0 2

Scholarships 0 2 0 2 0 2Dayprotectioncentres 0 2 0 2 0 2Financingforhighereducation 0 2 0 2 1 1


0 2 0 2 0 2

Studymaterials 0 2 0 2 0 2Others 0 2 0 2 0 2





Municipality Con-ducted



CycleDistribution No No NoLaptopDistribution No No NoStudytable/chairforstudents No No No

Studyroomforstu-dents No No No

Scholarships Yes Yes YesDayprotectioncentres No No NoFinancingforhighereducation No No No


No No No

Studymaterials No No NoOthers No No No


ItisclearthattheeducationalassistancegiventoSCstudentsbythetrainedPanchayatsisnotinasustainablemode.Onlythedistribu-tion,laptop,studytable,cyclesandscholarshipswereshowinganincreasein2017-18comparedtotheyearof2016-2017.Buttherateofinitia-tivesandeffortinthisparticulardomaindoesn’tshowsastaticincreasewhereasthereisagradualincreaseinprojectallocationforthesedomainsthroughspecialconsiderationasapartofchildfriendlinesscreation.Butactualizationof theseprojects is not effective in all LSGIs. In shortmostoftheLSGIsconsideringthevulnerableormarginalizedgroupduringplanningperiodbutthis consideration was absent in implementa-tionstage.Datashowedthatthereisanincreas-ingtrendinlaptopdistribution,studyroombutinitiate such as scholarships for mentally andphysically challenged students and provision-ingfinancialassistanceetchighereducationhasshownadecreasing.OncomparingthepreandpostCFLGscenario therewasIncreaseonly inthedistributiveprogramme laptopdistributionanddistributionofstudytable.Constructionofstudyroomswastheonlyexceptioninthiscase. The control panchayat has also shownsimilarperformance topanchayat exception in

the case of distribution of laptop. Hence, onecannot observe any uniqueness in the perfor-mance of CFLG panchayats while comparingthemwiththecontrolpanchayats. Performanceofmunicipalitiesintheed-ucationalassistance toSCchildren isvery low.Studytableandeconomicassistanceforhighereducation are the only initiatives taken during2017-18period.NoothereffortsweremadeforSCchildrenbyconsideringthevulnerabilityormarginalityofSCstudents.Controlmunicipal-ity has given only scholarships to SC studentsfortheeducationalpurposeinthe2015to2018periodwhichisapartofmandatoryallocationforSCstudents.Thoughbothtrainedandnon-trainedsamplesarelessperforminginthecaseofSCchildren,hencethestudycouldnotobserveanyconsiderabledistinctionbetweenCFLGandnon CFLG panchayats. During FGDs a hoperaised from few panchayats for instance,Mat-tathur panchayat ofThrissur district has takenagood initiative toestablishachildprotectioncentre.OnewardmemberfromMattathurpan-chayatinThrissurtoldabouteducationalinitia-tives; “InMonadiSCcolony,adayprotectioncentre forchildren isundergoingconstruction.



PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018



Number of Panchayat Not Con-

ducted

Number of Pancha-yat Con-ducted


ducted



ductedAnganwadimaintenance 28 2 29 1 27 3Distributionoftoysandstudymaterial 9 21 6 24 11 19

Makingbuildingaslearningaids 9 21 4 26 6 24

Utensilsandanothermaterialspurchase 12 18 13 17 11 19

ConstructionofChildfriendlytoilets 5 25 6 24 11 19

Furniture-chair,bedandshelfpurchaseandmaintenance 13 17 14 16 14 16

Children’sparkinAnganwa-dis. 5 25 5 25 4 26

InaugurationofthecentrewillbethereafterthemonthofApril.Thiscentrecanbeusedtomeettheacademicneedsofchildreninthecolonyandalsotoconducttrainingforthem.Panchayathasalsoplannedtouseoneroominthiscentreasli-braryandconductprogrammesheretoenhancetheartisticandsportsskillsofchildren”(WardMember-Mattathur-16/03/2019-11-1.30pm) The data regarding the of initiatives oflocalbodyorSCchildren indicates thatCFLGcouldonlyincreasethemomentumofsometra-ditionalprojectstakenwhichhadbeentakenupbytheLSGIssuchasdistributionoflaptopandstudytable.CFLGcouldnotintroduceanyinno-vativeinitiativesinthelistofactivities.ThisalsounderscorestherelevanceofspecialeffortwithinCFLGtomakeitmoreinclusiveandfriendlytothemarginalizedcommunity.

4.6) INITIATIVES FOR INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN PRE-SCHOOLS Pre-Schoolhasanimportantroleinso-cialisation,characterformationandcomprehen-sivedevelopmentofchildren.LSGsArerespon-sible toprovidebaby friendlyor child friendlyenvironmentforthechildrenagegroupof3-5yearstheinfrastructuredevelopment,provision-ingoflearningaids,utensils,toystotheAngan-wadis,andmakingtheAnganwadienvironmentconducetojoyfullearningandprovidingoppor-tunityforthechildrenforbetterpsycho-motordevelopment are the responsibilities of localbodies.CFLGprojectsasprovidedinstructionstomaketheAnganwadismoreattractiveinna-ture. The following table examines the natureandextentofactivities thatLSGIshas takentomakethepreschoolmoreattractive.




ACTIVITIESNumber of Panchayat Conducted


ducted



ducted



ductedAnganwadimaintenance 2 1 3 0 3 0Toysandstudymaterialpurchase 0 3 0 3 0 3

AnganwadiCFLGwalldraw-ing 0 3 0 3 0 3


Childfriendlytoilets 0 3 0 3 0 3Furniture-chair,bedandshelfpurchaseandmaintenance 0 3 0 3 0 3

Children’sparkinAnganwa-dis. 0 3 0 3 0 3


MUNICIPALITY2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

ACTIVITIESNumber of


Number of Municipality Not Conduct-

ed


ed


Conducted


ed


Not Con-ducted

Anganwadimainte-nance 2 0 2 0 2 0

Toysandstudymate-rialpurchase 2 0 2 0 2 0

AnganwadiCFLGwalldrawing 1 1 1 1 1 1


Childfriendlytoilets 2 0 2 0 2 0Furniture-chair,bedandshelfpurchaseandmaintenance

2 0 2 0 2 0

Children’sparkinAnganwadis. 0 2 0 2 1 1




ACTIVITIES Municipality Conducted



Anganwadimainte-nance Yes Yes Yes

Toysandstudymateri-alpurchase Yes Yes Yes

AnganwadiCFLGwalldrawing Yes Yes Yes

Utensilsandanothermaterialspurchase No No No

Childfriendlytoilets Yes Yes YesFurniture-chair,bedandshelfpurchaseandmaintenance

Yes Yes Yes

Children’sparkinAn-ganwadis. No No No


The above table shows thatmajority ofthepanchayathavebeenundertakingthetaskofmaintenanceandrenovationoftheAnganwadisevenbeforeCFLGinitiative.Therewasnosignif-icantchangeevenCFLGperiodinthisinitiative.Thesametrendwasshowninthecaseofdistri-butionof utensils and furniture to theAngan-wadis.Whileexaminingtheactivitiesthosewereinitiatedinpanchayatinthepre-primarysector,majorityofthepanchayathasfollowedonlythetraditional activities which they were alreadyfollowing. CFLG did notmake any significantchangeinthisdirection,atthesametimesomeof the new initiatives which were proposed asthepartofCFLGsuchasconstructionofChildfriendlyToilets,MakingAnganwadibuildingsaslearning aids through paintings and the estab-lishmentofchildren’sparkwerenottakenupse-riouslybymajorityofthelocalbodies.TherewasaslightImprovementinthenumberofpancha-yatswhoareinitiatedchildfriendlytoiletswhichwas5in2015-16increasedto6in2016-17andfurther increased to 11 in 2017-18. However,the concept of child friendly toilets could notpracticeinatleast50percentofCFLGpancha-yat even after years of its implementation.ThedatashowsthatperformanceofCFLGpancha-

yatwerepoorintermsofestablishmentofchil-dren’sparkandinmakingAnganwadibuildingaslearningaids. On analysing the data on the controlpanchayats,itcouldbeobservedthatitcouldnotinitiated the ideas of child friendly toilets andmakingbuildingas learningaids(‘Bala’-specialprogramme).HencetheroleofCFLGinintro-ducingsomenewconcepts to the trained localbodiesisappreciable. In the case of urban LSGI there is noconsiderable difference in intervention ofmu-nicipalitiesinpre-primarysectorbeforeandaf-terCFLGtraining. It isalso interestingtonotethattheycouldinitiatetheideasofchildfriendlytoiletandBalaevenbeforeCFLGtraining. Anganwadis are the cradles of childfriendly initiatives, indications from the dataunderscores that fact that even though CFLGhas introduced some innovative ideas in thepre-primary sectormajorityof theCFKGpan-chayats failed inrealizing theminpractise. In-terventionsformakingpre-schoolsasanattrac-tivecentreofjoyfullearningwasmissingeveninCFLGwithframework. Literature shows that some of the pan-chayathaddone exemplary initiatives tomake



thepreschoolprocessmoreattractiveevenattheinitialstageofpeople’splanningcampaign.Thepanchayatshavedoneinterventionseventofor-mulateanewcurriculumforpre-primaryschoolinthepeople’splanningcampaign(PPC).SuchkindofinnovativeinterventionsweremissinginCFLGpanchayats. An elected representative from Mat-tathurGramapanchayatshasrespondedthat: “Asachild friendlyprojectplayequip-ment have been provided to Anganwadis” –“(Ward Member-Mattathur-16/03/2019 - 11-1.30pm)

4.7) INTERVENTIONS OF LSGIS IN THE SCHOOLS Aschoolisaneducationalinstitutionde-signed toprovide learning spacesand learningenvironmentfortheteachingsofchildren.Child

friendlylocalgovernanceinaregioncanbees-tablished onlywith the sustainable andmean-ingful coordination of schools and other edu-cationalinstitutions.Panchayatrajmunicipalityact provide powers and responsibilities to theLSGIstomakeeducationalinterventionthroughschools.Hence LSGISs have been undertakingseveral initiatives for the improvement of theinfra sectors an academic activity in schools.LSGIS were proposed to make mandatory al-locations for implementation of Sarva ShikshaAbhiyanintheirjurisdiction.AlongwithasthepartofchildfriendlygovernanceinitiativesLS-GIsunderCFLGprojectshasundertakenthereoninitiatives.Almost22programmeswereini-tiatedindifferentLSGIsbasedonschoolsforthecomprehensive development of children. Thefollowing table provides information’s regardLSGISinterventionsinSchools.

Haritha Vidhyalayam Project in Unnikulam Grama Panchayat

Smart classroom in Thirunnavaya Grama Panchayat



PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

ACTIVITIESNumber of Panchayat initiated

Number of Panchayat

Not initiated

Number of Panchayat ini-

tiated

Number of Panchayat

Not initiated

Number of Panchayat initiated

Number of Panchayat

Not initiatedGroundrenovation 9 21 11 19 5 25DistributingSap-lingstoschools 0 30 0 30 1 29

Maintenanceandrenovation 24 6 22 8 24 6

Seedsandgrowbagstoschools 3 27 2 28 3 27

Constructionoftoilets(normal) 5 25 4 26 6 24

Distributionofwaterprovisionandwaterpurifier.

6 24 7 27 6 24

Shetoilet. 0 30 0 30 0 30Smartclasses. 6 24 8 22 14 16Childfriendlyfurniture. 4 26 5 25 10 20

Children’splayarea(children’spark). 7 23 10 20 8 22

Constructionofnewbuildings. 2 28 1 29 2 28

Disabilityfriendlytoilets. 1 29 1 29 6 24

Fundforbiodiversityparkandmedicinalpark.

0 30 0 30 4 26

Careerguidance. 5 25 2 28 3 27Budsschools. 4 26 3 27 6 24Newspaperandmagazinestoschool.

9 21 11 29 13 17

Drainageconstruc-tion. 2 28 3 27 3 27

Shelvesandrackstoschools. 3 27 4 26 7 23

Distributionofsanitarynapkin. 2 28 3 27 5 25

Harithavidhya-layamprojectbypanchayat.

0 30 2 28 1 29

Distributionoffur-niture.(normal) 1 29 0 30 1 29

Distributionofcomputerandrelat-edequipment’s.

0 30 0 30 1 29



CONTROL PANCHAYAT

2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

ACTIVITIESNumber of Panchayat initiated

Number of Panchayat

Not initiated


Number of Panchayat

Not initiated


Number of Panchayat

Not initiatedGroundrenovation 0 3 0 3 0 3Saplingstoschools 0 3 0 3 0 3Maintenanceandrenovation 3 0 3 0 2 1


Constructionoftoiletsnormal. 0 3 0 3 0 3

Waterpurifier. 0 3 0 3 0 3Shetoilet. 0 3 0 3 0 3Smartclasses 0 3 2 1 3 0Childfriendlyfurniture 0 3 0 3 0 3

Children’splayarea(children’spark) 0 3 0 3 0 3

Constructionofnewbuildings. 1 2 1 2 1 2

Disabilityfriendlytoilets. 0 3 0 3 0 3

Fundforbiodiversityparkandmedicinalpark.

0 3 0 3 0 3

Careerguidance. 1 2 0 3 1 2Budsschools. 0 3 1 2 1 2Newspaperandmagazinestoschool.

1 2 0 3 0 3

Drainageconstruc-tion. 0 3 0 3 0 3

Shelvesandrackstoschools. 1 2 0 3 0 3

Distributionofsanitarynapkin. 0 3 1 2 1 2

HarithaVidhya-layamprojectbypanchayat

0 3 0 3 0 3

Distributionofnormalfurniture. 0 3 0 3 0 3

Distributionofcomputerandrelat-edequipment.

0 3 0 3 0 3




MUNICIPALITY2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

ACTIVITIESNumber of



Number of Municipali-ty initiated




Groundrenovation 0 2 1 1 2 0saplingstoschools 0 2 0 2 0 2Maintainandreno-vation 1 1 2 0 2 0


Constructionoftoiletsnormal 0 2 1 1 2 0

Waterpurifier 0 2 1 1 1 1Shetoilets 1 1 1 1 1 1Smartclasses 0 2 2 0 2 0Childfriendlyfurni-ture 1 1 1 1 2 0

Children’splayarea(children’spark) 1 1 2 0 2 0

Constructionofnewbuildings 0 2 1 1 2 0

Disabilityfriendlytoilets 0 2 1 1 0 2

Fundforbiodiversityparkandmedicinalpark

0 2 0 2 0 2

Careerguidance 1 1 0 2 1 1Budsschools 0 2 0 2 0 2Newspaperandmaga-zinestoschool 1 1 1 1 2 0

Drainageconstruction 0 2 1 1 1 1Shelvesandrackstoschools 2 0 2 0 2 0

Distributionofsani-tarynapkin 0 2 1 1 1 1

HarithaVidhyalayamprojectbypanchayat 0 2 0 2 1 1

Distributionofnormalfurniture 0 2 0 2 0 2

Distributionofcomputerandrelatedequipment

0 2 0 2 0 2




ACTIVITIES Municipality initiated Municipality initiated Municipality initiatedGroundrenovation No No NoSaplingstoschools No No NoMaintenanceandrenova-tion Yes Yes Yes

Seedsandgrowbagstoschools No No No

Constructionoftoiletsnormal Yes Yes Yes

Waterpurifier Yes Yes YesShetoilets Yes Yes YesSmartclasses Yes Yes YesChildfriendlyfurniture Yes Yes YesChildren’splayarea(chil-dren’spark) No No No

Constructionofnewbuildings No No No

Disabilityfriendlytoilets No No NoFundforbiodiversityparkandmedicinalpark No No No

Careerguidance Yes Yes YesBudsschools Yes Yes YesNewspaperandmagazinestoschool No No No

Drainageconstruction No No NoShelvesandrackstoschools Yes Yes Yes

Distributionofsanitarynapkin Yes Yes Yes

Harithavidyalayamprojectbypanchayat Yes Yes Yes

Distributionofnormalfurniture No No No

Distributionofcomputerandrelatedequipment No No No




ThetableshowstherateinitiativestakenbydifferentLSGIsonprogrammesandprojectsbasedonschoolsforthecomprehensivedevelop-mentofchildren.Ascomparedtootherworkingdomains of CFLG, school-based programmeshaveattainedbetterstatus inestablishingchildfriendliness by introducing naive projects forthe comprehensive development of childreninmasspopulation.There isagradualpositivechange in the rateof initiativesby introducingchildrencommunitydevelopmentprogrammesalongtheseyears.Andthenotabletrendinthedataisthatthereisacceleratingchangeinmake-ableprojectssuchassmartclassroombuilding,newspaper and arts magazine preparation etcwhile the basic facilities such as drainage con-struction,shetoiletsetcwerenotintheconsid-erationofLSGIs.Shetoiletswereabsolutelyab-sentinalmostallLSGIsandmostoftheLSGIsandschoolofficialsbelievesthatthereisnoneedforseparateShetoilets. LSGIs are shown improvement in theperformance of some interventions in theschool.Maintenanceofschool,creationofsmartclassroom,distributingofmagazinesandnews-paperstoschool,arrangingplayareasinschool,initiatingbuds’school,establishingbio-diversityparkandareimportantamongthem.Thetableshowsthatmajorityofthepanchayathavespentmoney for themaintenanceof the school evenbeforeCFLGandtheyhavecontinuedthesameduringCFLGperiodaswell.ThetableindicatewhilecomparingpreandpostCFLGperiodtheCFLG trained panchayat has made some newinitiativesafterCFLG.Creationofbio-diversityParkinschools,constructionofdisabilityfriend-lytoiletsandestablishmentofchildfriendlyfur-niturearepertinentamong them.These initia-tivesaremissinginthecontrolPanchayat;henceitcanbetakenascontributionofCFLG. Constructionof the she-toilets, renova-tionofplaygrounds,careerguidance,construc-tionofnewbuildings andHarithaVidyalayamproject by panchayat the initiatives for are theelementsneglectedby themajorityof thePan-chayats. Along with the maintenance of schoolmunicipalitiesaremadesomechangesinaspectof construction of toilets, child Friendly Park,

installation of water purifier and provisioningof child friendly furniture to schools.Thedatashowthatalltheseelementsexceptthemainte-nanceof schoolhavemade significant changesinmunicipalitiesafterCFLG.Thetableindicatesthatmunicipalityhasshownmoreapathyinar-eassuchasconstructionofchildfriendlytoilets,shetoilets,anddisabilityfriendlytoilets,andes-tablishmentofbio-diversityparkintheschools. The trend of CFLG municipalities andpanchayats provides as a picture that there issomenew initiative fromCFLGmunicipalitiesand panchayats at the same time the numberpanchayat who have initiated innovative pro-grammearerestrictedto1/3ofthetotalLSGIswhohaveimplementedCFLGprogramme.Thishighlights the fact that impacted training onCFLGLSGIshasmadeadifferentialimpact.Thispointsouttheneedofindicator-basedactiononeachsectortoachievesomeminimumtargetlev-elsoftheprogramme.Therecanbeexceptionalcasesandhigher-levelachievementastheresultofoninitiativesofLSGIs.Atthesametimesomebasiclevelsofachievementareinevitableforthesuccessof theprogramme.ThisalsohighlightstheneedofalistofmicrolevelinitiativesitcanbetakenupineachsectorneedstobedeliveredaspartofCFLGprogramme.

THALIRIDAM is a child friendly initiative developed by Porur Panchayat in a district to reduce the gap between children and envi-ronment. Through this project, the pancha-yat instructed all aided and unaided schools to provide a sapling for every child. It was an initiative that started on the special interest of the Panchayat Welfare standing commit-tee. The sustainability of the programme is ensured by the collective effort of LSG and Principals of the schools.

4.8) INITIATIVE FOR CREATING PUBLIC SPACES Public space mentioned here as spacesthosecanfulfilobjectivessuchas,socializationof children, facilitating recreational activitiesand to nourish the enjoyable life of children,



PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

ACTIVITIESNo of

Panchayat initiated

No Pan-chayat not

functioning

No of Panchayat

functioning

No Pan-chayat not

functioning

No of Panchayat

functioning

No Pan-chayat not

functioningChildren’slibrarycornerinitiatedbyexternalagency

2 28 2 28 5 25

Children’slibrarycornerbypanchayat 5 25 7 23 7 23

Childrenpark 3 27 3 27 2 28Renovationofstadium 1 29 2 28 4 26Renovationofground 5 25 5 25 8 22Installationofthehighmasslightinstadium/ground

1 29 0 30 2 28

Panchayatlibraryreno-vation 1 29 0 30 2 28


ACTIVITIESNo of

panchayat functioning

No pan-chayat not

functioning

No of panchayat

functioning

No pan-chayat not

functioning

No of panchayat

functioning

No pan-chayat not

functioningChildren’slibrarycornerbyexternalagency 0 3 0 3 0 3


Childrenpark 0 3 0 3 0 3Renovationofstadium 0 3 1 2 1 2Renovationofground 0 3 0 3 1 2Installationofthehighmasslightinstadium/ground

0 3 0 3 0 3

Panchayatlibraryreno-vation 1 2 0 3 1 2


The following tables show the performance ofLSGIsincreationofpublicspaces.

playground, andpublic libraries are the exam-plesofpublicspaces.Nuclearizationoffamiliesincreasestherelevanceofpublicspacesasaspaceforsocialisationofchildrenfamilyandsocialre-lationsetc.Park,playground,publiclibrariesarethe examples of public spaces.There are somestudies observe that lack of physical activitiesleading to thehealthproblemofchildrensuchasobesity thishighlights theneedof sufficientspace forchildren toplayandgrow.Byunder-standingtherelevanceofhavingpublicspacesineachLSGprovince,eachLSGIsinitiatedprojectstodevelopandrecreatepublicspacestoensurebetterrecreationalfacilities.

Children’s Park Kattakada Grama Panchayat



MUNICIPALITY2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

ACTIVITIESNo mu-

nicipality functioning

No munic-ipality not

functioning

No mu-nicipality

functioning


functioning

No mu-nicipality

functioning


functioningChildren’slibrarycornerbyexternalagency 0 2 0 2 0 2


Childrenpark 0 2 0 2 0 2Renovationofstadium 0 2 0 2 0 2Renovationofground 0 2 1 1 1 1Installationofthehighmasslightinstadium/ground 0 2 1 1 0 2

Panchayatlibraryrenovation 0 2 1 1 0 2

CONTROL MUNICIPALITYACTIVITIES Municipality functioning Municipality functioning Municipality functioning

ACTIVITIES Yes Yes YesChildren’slibrarycornerbyexternalagency No No No

Children’slibrarycornerbypanchayat No No No

Childrenpark No No NoRenovationofstadium Yes Yes YesRenovationofground Yes Yes YesInstallationofthehighmasslightinstadium/ground

No No No

Panchayatlibraryrenova-tion No No No


Theabovetabledescribesthatthenum-berofpanchayatswhohavetakeninitiativesforcreatingpublicspacesquite lowingeneral,notmore than1/6of the total panchayats.Amongtheseestablishingchildren’scornerlibrary,ren-ovation of playground, and renovation of thestadiumaretheinterventionwhichhaveshownaslightincreasingtrendaftertheCFLG.Atthesametimepanchayat libraryrenovation,estab-lishmentofchildren’sparkaretheelementstheyhaveshownpoorperformance. Data of the control panchayats are alsoshowing similar trend. Establishment of reno-vationofmunicipal library and the renovationofmunicipality groundare the twoglaring in-terventions of municipalities after CFLG. Thesameactivitieshavebeentakenupbythecontrol

municipalityaswell.Theabovetableonperfor-manceofLSGIsincreationofpublicspacesindi-catesthatonlyaminorityofLSGIscoulddoanyofsuchinitiatives.Ashavementionedaboutthecreationofmorespacesforplayandrecreationaregettingforemostrelevanceintheageofchil-drenisolationwithinfamiliesbuttheLSGIswhohavebeenincludedinCFLGprojectsalsocouldnotmakecouldnotexhibitbetterperformanceinthisregard.Higherlandvalueandthehigheroftheinvestmentmaybeonereasonwhichre-stricttheLSGIsfromtakingmoreinitiativesforcreatingpublicspaces.ThisundergoestheneedofaspecialallotmenttotheLSGIsinpromotingtheir initiatives for creating new public spacesandinrenovatingexistingspaces.



PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018


Number of Panchayat

Not conducted


Number of Panchayat

Not conducted


Number of Panchayat

Not conducted

Swimmingcoaching 3 27 2 28 1 29Summercamp 4 26 0 30 6 24AnganwadiBalaMela 7 23 5 25 4 26Sportskit 3 27 4 26 3 27Self-defencetrainingforgirls 3 27 5 25 6 24Literatureworkshop 2 28 0 30 0 30Kurunnilaprogramme 3 27 5 25 3 27Sportscoaching 4 26 2 28 3 27Artsfest 2 28 3 27 3 27Artsfestfordifferentlyabled 2 28 2 28 3 27TourandtripsforBalasabha 0 30 3 27 3 27

Ramapuram Panchayat initiated a practise of providing free membership for all children in the panchayat library and a chance to partici-pate in all activities of the library. The Pancha-yat provided a nurturing space for children by organizing quiz sessions, discussion and inter-action sessions etc. Free access to magazines and newspaper for children was also provided after declaring the library as child friendly. Spe-cial day observations were organized to ensure participation of children and to scale up social awareness among children.

4.9) RECREATIONAL PROGRAMMES FOR CHILDREN Recreational programme is productiveprogrammewith anobjective ofmental, phys-ical, intellectualandemotionaldevelopmentofchildren.They can be cultural, arts and sportseventsandcoachingprogrammeforthecompre-hensivedevelopmentofthechildren.FollowingtableanalysestheactivitiesinitiatedbyLSGIs.

Arts fest for differently abled children in Thirunnavaya Grama Panchayat



MUNICIPALITY2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

ACTIVITIESNumber of


Number of Municipality Not conduct-

ed



ed



edSwimmingcoaching 0 2 0 2 0 2

Summercamp 1 1 0 2 1 1AnganwadiBalaMela 1 1 1 1 1 1

Sportskit 0 2 0 2 0 2Self-defencetrainingforgirls

0 2 0 2 1 1

Literatureworkshop 0 2 0 2 0 2

Kurunnilaprogramme 0 2 0 2 0 2

Sportscoach-ing 1 1 0 2 1 1

Artsfest 0 2 0 2 1 1Artsfestfordifferentlyabled

0 2 0 2 0 2

TourandtripsforBalasabha 0 2 0 2 0 2



Number of Panchayat

Not conducted


Number of Panchayat

Not conducted


Number of Panchayat

Not conducted

Swimmingcoaching 0 3 0 3 0 3Summercamp 0 3 0 3 0 3AnganwadiBalaMela 0 3 0 3 0 3Sportskit 0 3 0 3 0 3Self-defencetrainingforgirls 0 3 0 3 0 3Literatureworkshop 0 3 0 3 0 3Kurunnilaprogramme 0 3 0 3 0 3Sportscoaching 0 3 0 3 0 3Artsfest 0 3 0 3 0 3Artsfestfordifferentlyabled 0 3 0 3 0 3TourandtripsforBalasabha 0 3 0 3 0 3




Informationfromthetableindicatesthatpanchayathasshownpoorperformanceingen-eral in organising recreational activity for thechildren.They could make good performanceonlyintwoelements,organizingsummercampand self-defence training for girls are the twoelements theycouldperformwell.At thesametime,theycouldnotmakesignificantchangeinorganisingswimmingcoaching,organisingAn-ganwadiBalamela,distributionofsportskit,or-ganisingsportscoachingandtheorganisingArtsfestfordifferently-abledchildren.However,Pan-chayatcouldinitiatetourandtripsforBalasabha

Nirbhaya self-defence classes Nirbhayaself-defence classeswhich includes traininginKalari,Karateetc.wasintroducedtoem-powerandtoincreasetheconfidenceamongchildren. About 60 children made use ofthese trainingandparticipationof childrenwas ensured by the voluntarymobilizationworkdonebyKudumbashreemembers,An-ganwadiworkersetc.

participant after CFLG.Here also the numberofthepanchayatwhohaveinitiatedanyofthesesuchactivitiesarequitelowwhichislowerthan1/5ofthetotalpanchayat.Thedatafromcontrolpanchayat indicates that their performance ontheseaspectsarealsopoor.Notwithstandingto


ACTIVITIES Municipality Conducted Municipality Conducted Municipality ConductedSwimmingcoaching Yes Yes YesSummercamp Yes Yes YesAnganwadiBalaMela No No NoSportskit No No NoSelf-defencetrainingforgirls

Yes Yes Yes

Literatureworkshop Yes Yes YesKurunnilaprogramme No No NoSportscoaching Yes Yes YesArtsfest No No NoArtsfestfordifferentlyabled

Yes Yes Yes

TourandtripsforBal-asabha

No No No


theexperienceofthepanchayatsmunicipalitieshasshowncomparativelybetterperformanceinthecaseoforganisingrecreatingactivitiesforthechildren. ItcaninferfromthetablethatLSGIshasgiven lowpreferenceforprovidingrecreationalfacilitytothechildren.Thechildren’stryforplayandengageinrecreationalactivitiesarestillnotreachintothemindsofplannersinvolveintheplanningexercisesofLSGIs This indicates the relevance of specialtraining for CFLG panchayat to include pro-grammes for providing recreational activity tothechildren.

Summary DevelopmentisthesinglelargestdomainunderwhichLSGIshaveallocatedandutilizedfunds under CFLG. There has been improve-ment in allocation and utilization of funds forchilddevelopment.However,thefundallocationisnotproportionatelyreflectedinthefundutili-zation.AccuratedataonchildrenisessentialforformulatingdevelopmentplansbuttheessentialdisaggregateddataisnotpreparedbymajorityofLSGIs.Developmentofpremisesforanganwadisis in stagnationafter60%completion inmajorLSGIs.DevelopmentofbarrierfreeenvironmentisinanincreasingtrendinLSGIs.Butitneedsto be more inclusive of disabled. Educational



initiativesaretobemademoreinclusiveforSC,STandsocio-economicbackwardsections.LS-GIsaredevelopinginfrastructuresinpreschools,schoolsandpublicplacesinaslowbutcontinu-ingprocess.Recreationalopportunitiesandac-tivitiesforchildrenasdevelopmentactivitiesareyettoimproveandgetintotheschemeofplan-ningprocess.

Childdevelopmentcanbeanimportantindicator of social development and progress.Given the importanceof childdevelopment totheaccepteddevelopmentgoals,itiscrucialthatproperfundutilisationinchilddevelopmentbeensuredthroughproperchecksandbalances,le-veragingthelocaladministrationnetworkofthestate.



INTRODUCTION UNICEFusesthetermchildprotectionto refer to preventing and responding to vio-lence, exploitation and abuse against children– including commercial sexual exploitation,trafficking,child labourandharmful tradition-alpractices.TheothertargetsofUNICEFpro-grammes related to protection are protectingchildren who are uniquely vulnerable to theseabuses,suchaschildrenlivingwithoutparentalcare,childrengettinginconflictwithlawandin-volved in armed conflict.Childprotection is aprominenceissueinmostofthecountriesandamajorareaofinterventionofUNICEF. In Kerala the goal of the programmeis topreventall typeofviolationsagainst chil-dren’sandtostrengthentheprotectionservicesfor children in vulnerable situations. Its sup-portthenewlylaunchedGovernmentofKeralaprogrammenamely integratedchildprotectionto create aprotective environment to children.Protectionschemeshelptoimprovetheeduca-tionalqualityofchildren’sandcreateawarenessfor empowering them, families and communi-ties.Thiscanenablechildren,family,andcom-munities to take collective action against childlabourandotherabuseslyingunderthedomainofchildprotection.ICDS,ICPUandstakehold-ers helped to reduce child marriage ratio andcontroltheviolenceagainstchildren.Protectioninvolves extending safety from deliberate andsituationalharmthroughappropriateandtimelysafeguardfromanykindofabuses. The purpose of CFLG training is tostrengthen the protection services for childreninvulnerable situationandalso strengthen thedifferent committees related to children. Chil-dreninKeralaareexposedtovariousthreatsin

MEASURES FOR CHILD PROTECTION Jagrathasamathi:-It’saplatformforen-suring theprotectionof the rightswomenandchildren under the local self – government.Jagrathasamithieshasadministrativestructuresandbothpanchayatandwardlevel. Theofobjectivesofjagrathasamathiare• Protecttherightsandtoensurefriendlyen-

vironmenttothem• Toaccepttoreceivethecomplainingregard-

ingviolationofchildrightsandtakenactionofthem.

• To ensure friendly atmosphere to childreneverywhereandprovideprotectiontothereright.

• Provide guidelines and ideas to localself-governmenttoavoidchildrelatedissues

CHAPTER – V

CHILD PROTECTION

life.ItisthedutyoftheLSGtoprotectchildrenandadolescencefromexploitation,abuse,mor-alandmaterialabandonment.FormulationandadministeringthePanchayatwithdifferentcom-mitteesandsamithiestoensurechildprotectioninvarioussituationsisgivenprimeimportance.Theseare the functioningprogrammesofpan-chayat and panchayat related departments.Jagratha samathi, child protection committeeandschoolvigilancecommitteearethecommit-tees functioning in LSGIs for child protection.CFLGdocumentsofKILAclassifiedchildpro-tection into seven domains. Safeguarding therights they are children as per law, preventionofchildabuseinallsettings,Safeandprotectiveschool zone, Safe adolescent phase, preventionofchildmarriage,supportiveandcaringfamilyenvironment, disability reduction and disabledfriendliness.(RajanandRadhakrishnan2016)



YEAR WISE ALLOCATION AND UTILSA-TION OF CHILD PROTECTION by LSGIsDetails of child protection allocation and utilisa-tion Child protection is one among the keyareasoftheinterventionofLSGIsunderCFLG.As has beenmentioned earlier LSGIswere in-structedtoallocateaminimumof5percentageof their plan fund for addressing the needs ofchildrenandoldagepeople.RunningofJagrathasamithi,maintainingcomplaintsystemforchil-dren, awareness class through, Anganawadis,Balasaba, and classes in CDS and crimemap-ping are the major activities that are comingundertheCFLGundertakenbytheLSGIs.ThefollowingtableprovidesadescriptionabouttheallotmentandutilisationoffundsbytheLSGIsintheareaofchildprotection.

Child protection committee: - Childprotectioncommittee isagovernmentof Indiainitiatedprogrammeforchildprotection.It’sbe-ingimplementedacrossthecountrysince2009-2010. Themainobjectiveofthiscommitteeistobeimprovingthewellbeingofchildrenindif-ficultsituations,aswellasreductionofvulnera-bilitytosituationitalsointendedtotakeactionagainst any kind of abuse, neglected to child,exploitation, abandonment and separation ofchildrenfromparents.Everyvillagehaveachildprotection committee under the chairmanshipofthepresidentofpanchayattorecommendandmonitortheimplementationofchildprotectionservicesatthevillagelevel.Themainfunctionsare; to identify the vulnerable children’s in thevillage, to provide support to orphan and vul-nerable children and forming adolescent clubfromeveryvillageunderthepanchayat Protection of Child Sexual Offenses: -The(POCSO)Act,2012isacomprehensivelawtoprovide toensure theprotectionofchildrenfromtheOffenceofsexualassault,sexualharass-mentandpornographyit intendstosafeguardtheinterestofchildateverystageofjudicialpro-cessbyincorporatingchildfriendlymechanismforreporting.Recordingofevidence,investiga-tionandspeedy trialofoffence throughdesig-natedspecialcourtaretobecarriedout. Theactdefinesachildasanypersonbe-loweighteenyearsofage,anddefinesdifferentformofsexualabuse,includingpenetratingandnon–penetratingassault,aswellassexualha-rassment and pornography. People who trafficchildrenforsexualpurposesarealsopunishableunder the provision relating to amendment inthesaidact. Juvenilejusticeact:-Ajuvenilemeansapersonwhohasnotcompletedeighteenyearsofage and a “child in conflictwith law”means achildwhoisallegedorfoundtohavecommittedanoffenceandwhohasnotcompletedeighteenyearsofageonthedateofcommissionofsuchoffence.Juvenilejusticeact2015providesprovi-sionsforbothchildreninneedofcareandpro-tectionandchildreninconflictwithlaw.Itpro-vides protection, treatment and rehabilitation

ofchildrenanddelinquentjuvenilesandfortheadjudicationofcertainmattersrelatedtodispo-sitionofdelinquentjuvenilesandalsoitreplacedallotherchildacts. Ithasalsoreplacedandallotherchildactsrelatedto juvenile justice.(Thejuvenilejustice(careandprotectionofchildren)Act,20152016) Childlabour:-Childlabourreferstotheemploymentofthechildreninanyworkthatde-priveschildrenoftheirchildhood,theirpoten-tial,dignityandthatisharmfultophysical,men-talandsocialdevelopment.Itisamajorproblemof thedevelopingcountries.Child labour spoilanddestroysthefutureofthechildren,thechildlaboursustainsduetopoverty,employment,im-propereducation,limitedrulesandlawsonchildlabour etc. these reasons forces a child to earnmoney to supporting his/her family. The datashowsthatthepractiseofchildlabourbyusingMalayalichildrenforworkisnotreportedwhileinKerala.Atthesametimeofchildandadoles-cent labourofmigrantsare stillunderpractiseinKeralahenceLSGhasakeyroleinidentifyingandtakenactionagainstthechildlabour.



PROTECTIONPANCHAYAT

2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

Percentage intervals

Number of Panchayat allocated

Number of Panchayat

utilised


Number of Panchayat

utilised


Number of Panchayat

utilised0-9.99 23 24 25 25 23 2310-19.99 7 6 2 2 5 520-29.99 0 0 2 2 1 130-39.99 0 0 0 0 0 040-49.99 0 0 1 1 0 050-59.99 0 0 0 0 1 160-69.99 0 0 0 0 0 0




Number of Panchayat

utilised


Number of Panchayat

utilised


Number of Panchayat

utilised0-9.99 3 3 2 2 1 110-19.99 0 0 1 1 1 120-29.99 0 0 0 0 0 030-39.99 0 0 0 0 0 040-49.99 0 0 0 0 0 150-59.99 0 0 0 0 1 0


PROTECTIONMUNICIPALITY

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18

Allocation Percentage of Municipality

Utilisation Percentage of Municipality




Utilisation Percentage of Munici-

pality1 0.00% 0.00% 1.39% 0.46% 1.68% 0.56%2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.23% 0.23%








1 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%Table-5.2 (Source: Primary data)



The above table show that majority ofthepanchayathasallocatedthefundinpercent-ageintervalof0-20forchildprotectionoutoftheirtotalallocationforchildreninthreeyears.The trend shows that there was no significantincreaseinthenumberofpanchayatswhohaveallocatedmoremoney for the child protectionactivity then after the initiation of CFLG pro-gramme.Thedataofthecontrolpanchayatalsoshowthesametrendofallocationhenceonecanreach into a conclusion that CFLG panchayatcouldnotmakeasignificantdifferenceintheal-locationforchildprotection.ComingtothecaseofmunicipalitiesthereisaslightincreaseintheallocationofmunicipalitiesforchildprotectionafterCFLGprogramme.Therewasnoallocationfromthemunicipalityfromintheyear2015-16were as it has increase in to 1.39% in 2016-17and shifted to 1.68% in2017-18.However, thecontrolmunicipalitiesallocationremainszeroincontinues threeyears, this indicates thatCFLGmunicipalitycouldperformslightlybetterthancontrolmunicipalityinthecaseofallocationforchildprotection. Thetrendofutilizationofchildprotec-tion indicates that most of the panchayats 96percentagecould spendallocationbetween thepercentageintervalsof0-30.Onlyonepancha-yatcoulddocomparativelygoodperformanceinutilizationoffunds.Thesametrendisfoundin

thecasecontrolpanchayataswell.ThisspendingpatternofmunicipalitiesexhibitscomparativelybetterpatternthanthepanchayatsduringCFLGperiod.Inthe2015-16noneofthemunicipali-tiescouldspendanyamountintheheadofchildprotectionwhereasithasimprovedto0.46%in2016-17andagainincreasedto0.56%in2017-18. Abovetrendreflects thatCFLGdidnotmakeasignificantimpactonallocationandex-penditureoflocalbodiesinthedomainofchildprotection.Theremightbedifferentreasonsforthisonepertinentreasonmaybe thenatureofactivity lyingunder this domain. It seems thatmany of the activities included under this arecostlessinnature.Alongwiththeselocalbod-iescouldnotidentifyinnovativeactionsinthisdomain.However,theCFLGcouldmakeanim-pactonmunicipalitiesintermsofallocationandspending.

5.1) ACTIVITIES FOR FACILITATING CHILD PROTECTION COMMITTEES (CPC)CHILD PROTECTION As discussed earlier, LSGIs have a keyrole in smooth functioningof child protectioncommittees,thefollowingtableanalysestheini-tiativesofLSGIsinfacilitatinginthefunctioningofchildprotectioncommittees.

3.1) ACTIVITIES FOR FACILITATING CHILD PROTECTION COMMITTEES (CPC)

PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

Programmes initiated

Number of panchayat initiated

Number of panchayat not

initiated



initiated



initiatedJagratha samathi 11 19 13 17 16 14

Vigilance committee 2 28 4 26 7 23

Child protec-tion centre 4 26 4 26 4 26

Complaint boxes at ward level

1 29 3 27 4 26



Table-5.3 (Source: Primary data)Table-5.3 (Source: Primary data)




tiated

Number of Panchayat not

initiated


tiated


initiated


tiated


initiatedJagratha samathi 2 1 0 3 0 3

Vigilance committee 0 3 0 3 0 3

Child protec-tion centre 0 3 0 3 0 3

Complaint boxes at ward level

1 2 1 2 1 2


MUNICIPALITY2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018



initiated

Number of Municipality not initiated


initiated



initiated


Jagrathasamathi 1 1 1 1 2 0Vigilancecom-mittee 1 1 1 1 1 1

Childprotectioncentre 0 2 0 2 0 2

Complaintboxesatwardlevel 0 2 0 2 0 2


PROGRAMMES Municipality initiated Municipality initiated Municipality initiatedJagrathasamathi No No NoVigilancecommittee Yes Yes YesChildprotectioncentre No No NoComplaintboxesatwardlevel No No No


Thedatashowsthatactivitiestofacilitat-ingthechildprotectioncommitteehaveanin-creasingtrendfrom2015to2018.Amongthese,Jagratha samithy,Vigilancecommittee, and in-stallationofthecomplaintboxatwardlevelarethe elementwhich has shown a higher rate oftrend.Thereisastatictrendinthecaseofchild

protectioncentre.During2015-16,thereisonly11 panchayat has Jagratha samithies in actualfunctioning,in2016-17ithasincreasedinto13and further Increased to 16 in 2017-18. In thecaseof childprotectioncentredata shows thatnoevidentchangeduringpretopostCFLGpe-riod(fourinallyears).inspiteoftheincreased



vene.” Another responded head mistress ofCheruvathoor UPS, Kasaragod (CheruvathoorGramapanchayat)commentedon7/4/2019; “We have Jagratha Committee in thepanchayat. Similarly, in school a teacher hasgiven thecharge, so thatchildrencanopenupabout theircomplaintsbeforeher. “(HM,UPS,Cheruvathoor,7/4/2019,10.30-12PM) DuringthefieldworkwegotafeedbackfromaHeadMasterofKadukkuttiunionLowePrimarySchoolofKadukkuttiGramapanchayatabout the potential of child protection groupsinaschoolshehasresponded(inanFGDdated11/3/2019) There is government direction to formschoolprotectiongroups.Butitisnotactiveinschools. Still in some schools this committeeis very active. In high schools and higher sec-ondaryschools, ithastobemadeactive.Thereshouldbeaproperbodyfortheschoolprotec-tiongroupandpositionssuchaschairmanetc.shouldbecreated.Busdrivers,shopkeepersandallotherrelevantpersonalsshouldbeincludedintheprotectiongroup.Alongsideabondingandattitude shouldbe inculcatedbetweenchildrenand teachers,whichwill encouragechildren toopenupabouttheirproblemsbeforetheirteach-ers.Ifwearereadytoacknowledgetheirissuesandpains,theywillcomeandtellusabouttheirproblems. Especially in high schools, for theveryspecificpurpose,someonewhocaninteractandbehaveinafriendlyandlovingmannerwithchildren should be employed. These respondsindicatethepotentialofonemoreinstitutioninschools(CPC)forprotectingtheinterestofthechildren.CFLGprogrammecanincludethisasabeststrategyorinitiatingchildprotectioninaschool.

5.2) SENSITIZATION CREATION INITIA-TIVES ON CHILD RIGHTS Childrightisaconceptwhichhasbeenwidely discussed among the community sinceitisanewconceptcontinuessensitizationpro-gramsaremadetomakeitasapopularconceptinparentsandcommunities,thererequirecon-tinuessensitizationprogrammeamongthechil-dren and the stakeholders such as parents andteacherswhohaveaprominentroleinensuring

trendofinitiativesofpanchayatitisnoteworthythatsuchaprogressivetrendisrestrictedonlyto50%oftotalpanchayat.ThishighlightsthattheratepercolationofCFLGinitiativesarerestrict-edonlytoonehalfofthePanchayatslyingundertheCFLGprojects. Observationthatcanbedrawnfromthedataofcontrolpanchayatisthattheyshowade-cliningtrend inthecaseofactivities that facil-itating the child protection committees.Therewere2panchayatshasJagrathasamithyduring2015-16andthisratetowastozerointheyearof 2016-17 and this status continued withoutany change till 2018. Only one panchayat wasinstalled complaint boxes during 2015-16 andstillthenumberremainssamewithoutanysignofprogressinotherpanchayats.Thispointsoutthat there is a slight improvement in the caseofCFLGPanchayatswhilecomparingwith thecontrolPanchayatintheinitiativesfacilitating. While analysing the case ofmunicipal-ities, there are no evident changes in the ac-tivitiesduringpreandpostCFLGtrainingpe-riods.The only slight change that happened isthe increase in the number of municipalitieswhohaveorganised Jagratha samithis, thishasbeenincreasedfrom1to2whenduringthepe-riodof2015-17to2017-18.Whencomparingthestatus of CFLG initiatives amongmunicipalitywithcontrolmunicipality,thetrendshowsthatnothinghasbeendoneincontrolmunicipality.There is an exceptional case of vigilance com-mittee which has been working from 2015 to2018incontrolmunicipality.Thisindicatesthattherearesomeevidentinitiativesinthetrainedmunicipalitieswhilecomparingwiththecontrolmunicipality. The comments from the quali-tative tools also ratifies above observation thatJagrathasamithiesarethecommitteesfunction-inginthepanchayatwhocanalsodealswiththeissuesofchildrenalongwiththeissuesofwom-en,PresidentofMulamthuruthyGramapancha-yat during a personal interview on 19/3/2019commented; “Jagratha Committee has been sum-monedproperlyonceintwomonths.Casesre-lated to children is alsobeingdiscussed in thecommittee meetings. However as of now anycasesofgravenaturehavenotbeenreportedandhencepanchayathasnothadrequiredtointer-



childrights.Thereweredifferentkindsofinitia-tivesinLSGIsforsensitizingvariousstakehold-ersonchildrightstherewereAnganwadiclasses

Sensitization efforts by LSGIs on child rights

PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018


Number of Panchayat conducted


conducted



conducted



conductedAnganawadiclassesbyICDS 28 2 28 2 28 2

Balasabhaclassesatpanchayatlevel 5 25 8 22 10 20

ClassesbypanchayatasspecificinitiativeunderCFLG

1 29 4 26 6 24

CDSvigilancecommit-teeclasses 0 30 0 30 1 29

Crimemappingbyexternalagency 3 27 13 17 4 26

Classesofhealth 11 19 13 17 11 19Schoollevelclasses 14 16 16 14 16 14


ACTIVITIES UN-DERTAKEN

Number of panchayat conducted


conducted



conducted



conductedAnganawadiclassesbyICDS 3 0 3 0 3 0


Classesbypancha-yatasspecificinitia-tiveunderCFLG

0 3 0 3 0 3

CDSvigilancecom-mitteeclasses 0 3 0 3 0 3

Crimemappingbyexternalagency 0 3 0 3 0 3



byICDSclassesofBalasabha,classesbypancha-yat as the part of CFLG classesCDS vigilancecommittee,childrightclassesinschools.



MUNICIPALITY2015-16 2016-17 2017-18



conducted


not conducted


conducted


not conducted


conducted


not conductedAnganawadiclassesbyICDS 2 0 2 0 2 0


Classesbypan-chayatasspecificinitiativeunderCFLG

0 2 0 2 1 1

CDSvigilancecommitteeclasses 0 2 0 2 0 2

Crimemap-pingbyexternalagency

0 2 0 2 0 2


CONTROLMUNICIPALITY2015-16 2016-17 2017-18

ACTIVITIESUNDER-TAKEN

MunicipalityCONDUCTED



AnganawadiclassesbyICDSs Yes Yes Yes

Balasabhaclassesatpan-chayatlevel Yes Yes Yes

ClassesbypanchayatasspecificinitiativeunderCFLG

No No No

CDSvigilancecommitteeclasses Yes Yes Yes

Crimemappingbyexternalagency No No No

Classesofhealth No No NoSchoollevelclasses Yes Yes Yes




Analysis of initiatives of panchayat forsensitizing stakeholders on child rights showthat prominent activity under this domain isclasses inAnganwadiby ICDS it canbe foundthatthisactivityhasbeendonemorethan95%ofpanchayat.ThereisnogrowthinthisactivityevenafterCFLGinitiativessincethisisaroutinedepartmentprogrammebyICDSteamresultofthese cannot be attribute to CFLG. Classes bypanchayat in Balasabhas and special sensitiza-tionprogrammesorganisedasthepartofCFLGarethetwoprogrammesthathaveshownsomeimprovement during post CFLG period. Forinstants sensitization programme number ofpanchayats who have initiated sensitisationprogrammethroughBalasabhawasonlyfivein2015-16whichhasincreasedto8and10in2016-17,l2017-18respectively.ThenumberofspecialsensationprogrammeunderCFLGwasonlyonein 2015-16 which has increased to 4 and 6 in2016-27,2017-18respectively.Atthesametimesome important activities such as crimemap-pingwererestrictedtoonly1/10ofthepancha-yatevenafterCFLG.Thesametrendwasshownin the case of sensitization within vigilancecommittee.Coming to the control panchayats,their activities were restricted to sensitizationinschools.This same trendwas shown inmu-nicipalitiesaswell.OnecaninferfromdatathatexcepttheAnganwadisensitisationprogramme,othertraditionalsensitizationprogrammessuchas sensitizationwith in a school and sensitiza-tion through health departmentwere also im-plementedonlylessthan50%ofthepanchayat.Itisalsointeresttonotethatapartfromthetra-ditionalmethodsofsensitizationonchildrightinnovativecommunicationandpubliciseeduca-tivetoolswerenotusedforcreatingsensitizationinamong stakeholders. Is alsonotworthy thatspecialprogramme targetedonallparents andteacher were not also implementing in CFLGpanchayats.Manyofthestudyshowthatparen-talaspirationandparentalpressureonchildrenarechildrenandchildrightviolationsinschoolsare the elements which are challenging childrights in the eve of cut throat competition. Insuchcontextcontinuesparentsandteacheredu-cationprogrammeonchildrightsarenecessary,andtheyhavetoadoptinnovativestrategiesforsensitization.ThiskindofinitiativeismissinginCFLGprogrammeingeneral.Itisalsonotewor-

thythattherearelotofplayersinvolvedinchildrightsensitizationamongdifferentstakeholders.ICDS, health department, educational depart-ment,andprivateagenciesareworkingintothesamegroundwhichoftenleadingtooverlappingandrepetition.Henceitcouldbesuggestedthatthereneedsaco-ordinationmechanismbetweendifferentagenciesworkingonchildrightsensi-tizationwith in a LSGIs.This underscores therelevanceof an institutionalmechanismwhichcouldcoordinatealltheagenciesandtheactiv-itiesworkingon child rightsunder a commonumbrella.CFLGprogrammecan thinkof suchasLSGIlevelinstitutioninfuture. Alongwiththequantitativedataqualita-tivedatafromFGDsandinterviewsalsothrow-inglightintotheneedofsensitizationonchildright.Manycommentsratifiedthatmostofthechildrendon’tknowhowtorespondtosituationwhen they are facing situations of abuse. Onegirl child fromMulamthuruthyGramapancha-yatduringtheFGDsofthechildrencommented; “Once while I was travelling in bus anaged man misbehaved with me. But when Ilookedbackathim,hesmiledatme.ThenIdidn’tknowwhattodo”(Mulanthuruthy,19/3/2019) Andregardingtheuseofcomplaintboxinpanchayatalsoshowthatchildrenarenotus-ing these possibilities for recording their com-plaints.Vice-presidentofKadukuttyGramapan-chayat in his interview on dated 18/3/2019commented According to vice president Kadukuttychildren do not use complaint boxes instead;theyinformtheirissuestoAnganwaditeachers. “Currently the problem of children iscommunicated mainly through Anganwadi.There iscomplaintboxatpanchayatoffice.Werefrain from keeping complaint boxes at wardlevel, because we do not see the possibility ofpeople using them.With Anganwadi teacher’speople have comparatively more opening upabouttheirmatters”.(Vice-President,Kadukutty,18/3/2019) It is also interest in that there is somemisconception among CFLG resource personsregarding the free interactions of child. OneCFLG resource person from a Gramapancha-yatfromErnakulamdistrictinhisinterviewon3/4/2019commentedaboutchildren’sfriendship



“Relationshipiswrong.Childrenshouldonlytrusttheirparents.Friendshipisnotagoodthing” Feedback from the qualitative enquiryundergoestherelevanceofstrongandcontinuessensitization through the children about theirrightsandhowthoserightscanberealised.Itisalsoimportantthatthererequiresdeepersensi-tizationprogrammetotherecoursepersonsaf-filiatedtoCFLGandotherchildrightinitiatives.KILAcan thinkof specialisedorientationpro-grammesonchildright to therecoursepersonfromdifferentdepartmentsengagingwithchil-dren.

Reported Child Abuse cases in LSGIs• NumberofPanchayat:30• NumberofControlPanchayat:3• NumberofMunicipality:2• NumberofcontrolMunicipality:1

Swastha(ChildProtection):Thepancha-yatdevelopedaquestionnaireforcrimemappingnamed“swastha”tocheckthecrimes against children and to addressthisissueinasystematicmanneratpan-chayatlevel

5.3) Number of Panchayat Reported child abuse cases in different years

PANCHAYAT AND CONTROL PANCHAYATNUMBER OF CASES & ACTION TAKEN

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18Number of cases

reported

Number of cases action

taken

Number of cases

reported


taken

Number of cases

reported


takenPanchayat 32 13 38 1 20 8Control

panchayat 2 1 1 1 6 1


MUNICIPALITY AND CONTROL MUNICIPALITYNUMBER OF CASES & ACTION TAKEN

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18Number of cases

reported


taken

Number of cases report-

ed


taken

Number of cases reported


takenMunicipality 0 0 2 0 0 0ControlMunicipality 1 0 4 0 4 0

Table-5.8(Source:Primarydata)

Note:ThetablereferstothenumberofchildabusecasesperyearinselectedLSG.

AftertheintroductionofPOCSOinma-jorityoftheabusesagainstchildrenisregisteredunderthisactchildandadolescencechildprohi-bitionisalsopreventchildlabour.Prohibitionofchildmarriageactisalsoastrongruletoprotectchildright.Sincethelegalsideofchildrightsarestronginenoughtoensuretoprotectthechilditssubstancesdependuponhoeitimplemented

ingrassrootshence thenumber theanalysisofnumberofcasesreportedinpanchayatrelatedtovariousprovisiontochildprotectionareimport-ant.Thefollowingtablealsoprovidinginforma-tioninthisregard. Itisnoteworthythatthenumberofcas-esreportedinpanchayatbeforeandafterCFLGhasshownonlyavaryingtrend,itwas32in30



aconclusionthatnumberofcasesandnumberofactionstakencasesbytheLSGIsarealsonotsatisfactory innature.The limitationsofLSGIsintermsofmandatorypowersmaybeonefactorwhichrestrictingintheirinterventions.Absenceofinstitutionalmechanismforpropermonitor-ingofcasesatLSGlevelmaybetheotherfactorwhich leads to their limited intervention.Thisalso emphasise theneedof institutionalmech-anismatLSGlevel forcoordinatingandmoni-toringthemanagementofcasesrelatedtochildrightswithinthelocalbodies. Along with the quantitative data fromtheabovetable,qualitativeinformationprovidestheversatilenatureofabusesthatchildrenhaveto face indifferentsituationsanddifficulties indealing with them. Some comments indicatethatsexualabusecaseswerealsoreportedinthecaseofboysaswell.PresidentofChapparappa-davuGramapanchayatofKannurdistrictinhisinterviewcommentedthus: “Abuse cases against boys had been re-ported. Itwas a boy,who asked for lift on hiswaybackfromschool,facedsuchanexperienceonce.Thoughthecasegotregistered,nofollowupactionsweretaken”(President,Chapparapa-davu,22/3/2019). Somecommentsindicatethatnumberofabusesby trapping thegirls inaffair isalso in-creasingtremendously.Onepoliceofficer fromAdimali,inhisinterview2/4/2019commented; “Cases in which abuse takes place bytrappingthechildinloveaffairhasalsoincreas-inginnumber(Policepersonal,Adimali,Feb15) Thelocalbodyauthoritieshaveindicatedtheirhelplessnessandpowerlessness indealingwiththecaseslikePOCSO.PresidentofPulam-antholePanchayatofMalappuramdistrictinhisinterviewon10/4/2019commented; “Last year there were 3 POCSO cases.Buttheywerebeyondtheinterventioncapacityofpanchayatandhencepolicedealtwiththem.”(President,Pulamanthole) The above comments point out the in-creasing number of atrocities against childrenand its diverse nature. It’s also indicates thatpresentlawssuchasPOCSOACTnotprovidessufficientpowertotheLSGI’sininterveninginsuchcases.Thisalsounderscores therelevance

panchayatsduring2015-16,whichhasincreasedto38innextyear.Butthisagainreducedto28in2017-18.AtthesometimecontrolpanchayatwhohavenotimplementedCFLGhasshownfarbetterperformanceinthisregard.NumbercasesregisteredinmunicipalityhavealsonotshownasignificantincreaseduringCFLGyearswiththeperformanceofthecontrolmunicipalitywasbitaheadthantheCFLGtrainedmunicipalities. TheabovedataareprovidedbytheICDSsupervisors who are also affiliated to districtchildprotectionunits,at thesametimeduringthefieldworkwecouldobserve that there is amismatchbetweendataprovidedbybothpolicestationandICDSonchildabuses.Forinstance,the number of cases reported in Adimali andKanjukuzhy police stations are 16 at the sametime the data provided by the ICDS supervi-sorsare10respectively.Itisnotedthatpresentlythereisnosystemforcrossreportingthereport-edchildabusecasesinpolicestationtothere-spectivepanchayat.Thedis-functioningofchildprotection committees and Jagratha samithitheremaybethereasonforthis.Fromthefieldexperiencewecanreachintoaconclusionthatchildabusescasesarenotproperlyreported inpanchayatsandhandlebytheresponsiblebod-iesrelatedtothepanchayat.Thisalsohighlightstheneedofastatutory institutionatpanchayatlevelwhichismandatorilyresponsibletocollectandkeepallupdatedinformationrelatedtothechildren.SuchaninstitutionisimportantforthesmoothimplementationofCFLGprogrammeaswell. While going through the initiatives ofpanchayatfortakingactiononreportedcasesthesituationisnotoptimistic.In2015-16therewere32 cases reported from 30 panchayat but pan-chayatcouldtakeanyactiononlyon13cases.In2016-17thisnumberswere38and14respective-lyand2017-18itwas20and8respectively.Thepercentageofcasesinwhichpanchayathastak-enactionwas40in2015-16,36in2016-17,and40in2017-18.Thisindicatesthatthepanchayatcouldnottakeanyactionstepsin60percentag-esofreportedcases.Inthecaseofmunicipalityand control Panchayats the number of report-ed cases andnumber of cases took action ratealsolow.Fromthisinformerwhichreachesinto



of an institutionalmechanism at LSG level forbetterprotectionofchildrightswithintheirju-risdiction.

5.4) Number of LSGIs Reported cases and tak-en action on Children Conflict with Law Childrenwhoinvolveincriminaloffenc-es, drug abuse, and juvenile offences are com-

ing under the domain of children under con-flictwithlaw.SinceCFLGisinitiativeforchildfriendly panchayat, the number cases reportedin panchayat and action taken by them is im-portantforanalysis.Thefollowingtableprovidesadescriptioninthisregard.

Number of Panchayat reported cases on children conflict with law

PANCHAYAT AND CONTOL PANCHAYATNUMBER OF CASES & ACTION TAKEN

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18



taken



taken



takenPanchayat 3 0 3 1 3 2ControlPan-chayat 2 0 0 0 0 0

Table-5.9 (Source: Primary data)MUNICIPALITY AND CONTROL MUNICIPALITY

NUMBER OF CASES & ACTION TAKEN2015-16 2016-17 2017-18



taken



taken



taken

Municipal-ity 0 0 1 0 1 0

ControlMunicipal-ity

2 0 2 0 3 0


Whilegoingthroughthenumberofcas-esreportedinthepanchayat,itisfoundthattheyaretoolow.Numberofcasesreportedin2015-16wasonlythreewhichwasthesamein2016-17and2017-18.Therewasnoconsiderableincreaseinthecaseofmunicipalitiesaswell.Onlyaslightincreasehasseeninthecaseofcontrolledmu-nicipalities.Lookingat through thenumberof

Thepresentjuvenilejusticesystemisnotprovidinganyspacefortheinterventionsoflo-calbody,inthecasesrelatedtochildrenincon-flictwithlaw.Thereisnolocal level institutionis functioning related to the implementationofthislaw.Thisalso,underscorestheneedofaLSGI level institutiontogather informationonchildren in conflictwith law and to involve inthese caseswith the perspective of child right.Theagenciesthatareassociatedtocasesonchil-dreninconflictwithlawwouldhavetohandoverthedetailsofsuchcasestotherespectiveLSGI’s.Thiswouldenablethemtoperusesuchcasesintheperspectiveofchildright.

panchayats who have taken action, there wasno action on reported cases in the year 2015-16.Whileonlyoneoutofthreecaseswereper-suadedbythepanchayatsin2016-17.Twooutofthreecasesperusedbythepanchayatin2017-18.Inthecaseofmunicipalitiestherewasnoactionintheyears2016-17and2017-18.



ineducationsystem.Eventhesuicidesafterde-claringexamresultsarecommonphenomenainthestate.SinceCFLGisattemptingtoevolveachild friendly local governance system, valua-tionofinitiativestakenbytheLSGIstoprovidepsycho social support to thechildren inneedysituationsisquitepertinent.Thefollowingtableisanattemptforanalysingsuchinitiatives.

5.5) Initiative for providing psycho social sup-port for children through LSGIs

PSYCHO SOCIAL SUPPORT FOR CHILDREN THROUGH LSGIs StudiesshowthatchildreninKeralaarefacingseveralpsychologicalissuesbecauseoftheparentalpressureandcompetitiveenvironment

PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

InitiativeNumber of Panchayat Providing

Number of Panchayat

Not providing

Number of Panchayat Providing

Number of Panchayat

Not providing


Number of Panchayat

Not providingCounsellorappointedbypanchayat

6 24 7 23 7 23

ICDSCoun-sellors 6 24 8 22 9 21

Legalservicecentreatpan-chayat

1 29 2 28 2 28

CounsellingatPHC 0 30 2 28 3 27

CONTROL PANCHAYATInitiative 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018


Number of Panchayat

Not providing


Number of Panchayat

Not providing


Number of Panchayat


0 3 0 3 0 3



0 0 0 0 0 0





MUNICIPALITY2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

FacilityNumber of

Municipality Providing


Not providing


Providing


Not providing


Providing



0 3 0 3 1 2



0 3 0 3 0 3



Facility Municipality Providing Municipality Providing Municipality ProvidingCounsellorappointedbypanchayat No Yes Yes

ICDSCounsellors Yes Yes YesLegalservicecentreatpanchayat Yes Yes Yes

CounsellingatPHC No No NoTable-5.12 (Source: Primary data)

The reflections from table indicate thatmostofthepanchayatsfailedinofferingpsychosocialsupporttothechildreninneedysituations.Appointment of counsellor through ICDS andby panchayats is the only two activities whichhadshownsomemomentuminthepanchayats.HerealsotherateofincreaseafterCFLGtisnotsignificant in terms of numbers. For instance,therewere six panchayatswhohave appointedcounsellorsthroughtheirowninitiativesbeforeCFLG.Andthishas increasedonlytosevenintwoCFLGyears.Inthecaseofappointmentofcounsellors throughICDS, thenumberwassixinpreCFLGyear,whichhasincreasedtoeightinthefirstyearofCFLGandenhancedonlytonineinthelastyear.Whilegoingthroughthedataofcontrol panchayat, they could performonly intheelementsofICDScounsellor.Theinitiativesbymunicipalitiesindicatesthattheycouldmakelittle advantage in the case of appointment ofICDS counsellor, counsellor by municipality,and provisioning of counselling throughPHC.

The performance of both panchayats andmu-nicipalities,inthecaseofinitiatinglegalservicecentresforchildrenatLSGIsisliterallypoor. Data from the table indicates that eventwo thirdof theLSGIs couldnot take any ini-tiatives for providing psycho social support tothe children. Asmentioned above, children inKerala is going through the situations of sur-roundedpressurebecauseof career aspirationsoftheparents.Alongwiththese,childrenfrommarginalisedgroupssuchasfishermen, tribal,andscheduledcastecommunitiesarealsofacingspecific issues related to their socio-economicbackgrounds.Thenumberofcasesreachingintofamilycourtandthenumberofdivorcesisalsoshowinganincreasingtendencyinstate.Mostofthestudiesindicatethatchildrenarethevictimsofsuchfamilybreakdownstheseallfactorsun-derscoretherelevanceofastrongpsychosocialsupportmechanismatLSGleveltoaddressthepsycho emotional issues of children. But suchinitiativesaremissingwithinthe frameworkof



CFLG.Hence it couldbe suggested thatCFLGhas to think about a LSGI level institutionalmechanism toprovide continuespsycho socialsupport to the children.Kerala Panchayati RajAct provides sufficient powers to the LSGIs tointerveneinprimaryeducation.TheconceptofpanchayatresourcecentreforeducationwasalsoproposedbyaKeralaeducationRulesRevisioncommitteeappointedbyGovernmentofKerala(GovernmentofKerala2010).AresourceschoolcanbeidentifiedineachLSGIwhichcanactasacoordinationcentreofalleducationalresearch,training, and other educational service systemwithintheLSGIs.Thiscentrecanalsofunctionasalegalservicecumcounsellingcentreforchil-dren.

Summary Childprotectionisakeyareaofinterven-tionofLSGIsunderCFLG.LSGIswereinstruct-ed to allocate minimum 5 percentage of theirplan fund for addressing theneedsof childrenandagedpersons.Howeverthetrendofallottedfund and utilization the domain of Protectionreflects that theCFLGtrainingdidnotmakeasignificantimpactonallocationandexpenditureoflocalbodies.Itcanbearguedthatmanyoftheactivities included under this domain are notcost-intensive in nature.Alongwith this, localbodiescouldnot identifyandexperimentwithinnovativeactionsunderthisdomain.However,CFLGtrainingcouldbringanimpactintermsofallocationandspendinginmunicipalities.

Amongtheactivitiesunder thedomainof protection, for facilitating child protectioncommittees (CPC) there is a government di-rection to formschool levelprotectiongroups.Butthesegroupsarenotactiveinschools,witha few exceptions.Analysis of the initiatives bypanchayats for sensitization creation initiativeson child rights shows a positive trend on rou-tineprogrammesof ICDSthroughanganwadis(95%),classesbypanchayathinBalasabhas,andspecial sensitization programmes organised asthepart ofCFLG.At the same time some im-portant activities like crimemapping were re-strictedtoonlyoneintenpanchayatsevenafterCFLG training.With regard to reported casesandactiontakenonchildreninconflictwithlawinLSGI’s, thepresent juvenile justice system isnotprovidinganyspacefortheinterventionoflocalbodyincasesofchildabuse.Underactiv-itiesforsupportforthepsycho-socialproblemsof children through LSGI’s, data indicates thateventwo-thirdoftheLSGIscouldnottakeanyinitiativeforprovidingpsychosocialsupporttochildren. UndertheframeworkofCFLG,thereismuchscopeforscalingupthedomainofprotec-tionbeyondthemandatesofexistinglegalstruc-tures. Child protection initiatives underCFLGprogrammecanbedesignedtobeindependentand not merely supporting the administrative-legalsystem.Kerala’slocaldevelopmentsystemholdsthepotentialtoleadthewayinconceptu-alizingsuchnovelinitiatives.



Children’sparticipationincludestheop-portunityforchildrentoexpresstheirpointsofview and opinions and thus to influence deci-sionswhichmayaffecttheirlives.Participationincludesdifferentkindsofinvolvement,contri-bution, assistance and co-determination. Theydifferinqualityandhavetobedistinguishedinparticipationinitiatedandcontrolledbyadults,equaldecision-making,andchildren’sself-deter-mined and initiatedparticipation.The right tobeheardmanifestsitselfinseveralarticlesoftheUNConventionontheRightsoftheChild(seeArticles12,13,14,15,17,and31).ParticipationisoneoftheConvention’sguidingprinciplesandmostadvanced innovationsonUNconvention(UNICEF2004). Article 12 of the United Nations Con-vention on the Rights of the Child recognizesthatchildrenhavearighttobeheard.Theappli-cationofthisrighthasbeenbroadlyconceptu-alizedas‘participation’,althoughthetermitselfdoesnotappear in theConvention.Ofcourse,childrenhavealwaysparticipatedinmanywayswithinsocieties–forexample,atthecommuni-tylevel,throughplayandthearts,andintheireconomiccontribution to their families. In thecontext of Article 12, however, the term ‘par-ticipation’has evolved, and isnowverywidelyused,asashorthandtodescribechildren’srightto involvement in decisions and actions thataffect themandtohave thoseviews taken intoaccount.Children’sright tobeheardandtobetaken seriously is a crucial and also visionaryprovision of the Convention on the Rights oftheChild.Childrencannolongerbeperceivedas passive recipients of care andprotection, oraccidentalbeneficiariesofpolicydecisions;they

CHAPTER VI

CHILD PARTICIPATION

cannotbeenvisagedasnotyetpersonsoradultsin themaking.Attentionmustbepaid to theirinnerfeelings,thoughtsandviews. There were different experiments inKeralatobringChildren’sparticipationindem-ocratic process after the initiation of PeoplesPlanning Campaign.The concept of children’sGramasabha and Children’s Panchayats wereevolved and experimented in the mid of firstdecadeof21stcenturyas thepartof these ini-tiatives. Considering children as equal citizenswiththerighttoparticipatingdecisionmakingwas the vision behind all these experiments.TheCFLGprogrammehasdevelopeditsfootingfromtheexperimenthappenedinLSGIsalloverthestate. TheCFLGtrainingbyKILAoffersguid-ance to practitionersworkingwith children. Itisdesignedtohelpstaffdeveloptheirownbestpractice and pilot newways of involving chil-dren.Participationisaboutchildrenhavingtheopportunitytoexpresstheirviews,influencede-cision-makingandachievechange.Participationisawayofworkinganditisanessentialprinci-ple that shouldbeapplied toall arenas– fromhomestogovernment,fromlocaltointernation-al levels.Thepublicationoffersadviceonwaysforpractitionerstosupportchildren’smeaning-ful involvement in the governance, planning,implementation,monitoring and evaluation oftheirwork. Thereareseveral rights tochildrenandtheyaremainlycategorizedunderfourdomains.Child participation is one among them. TheCFLGprogrammehasproposedsomemeasurestoensuretheparticipationofeverychildinlocalgovernance. Children’sGramasabha, Bala Pan-



chayat (Children’s Panchayat) and representa-tionofchildreninallworkinggroupswerethesemechanisms.Balasabhas,runbyKudumbashreewereconsideredasbasicunitsforbringingchil-dreninlocalgovernance.BalaPanchayatswereenvisagedasa forumofChildrenatPanchayatlevel comprising of representatives from Bal-asabhas. It is proposed that consultationswithBala Panchayat, would be helpful to bring theissuesofchildrenintheagendaoflocalgovern-mentandthatwouldnaturally leadtotheevo-lutionof child friendly local plans. (Rajan andRadhakrishnan2016).Itwas also expected thatdiscussions and demands raised in children’sGramasabha,wouldalsobeconsideredinmak-inglocaldevelopmentplans.ThevisionofCFLGprogramme envisaged that it would providemore opportunities for the children topartici-pateinlocaldecisionsmakingprocessandlocaldevelopmentplanswiththerightsofcitizenship.Inotherwayround,theseparticipatoryforums

Year wise allocation and utilisation of child participation in LSGIs

PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

Percentage Interval


Number of Panchayat

utilised

Number ofPanchayat allocated

Number of Panchayat

utilised

Number ofPanchayat allocated

Number of Panchayat

utilised0-9.99 30 30 30 30 26 2810-19.99 0 0 0 0 2 220-29.99 0 0 0 0 1 030-39.99 0 0 0 0 0 040-49.99 0 0 0 0 0 050-59.99 0 0 0 0 0 060-69.99 0 0 0 0 0 070-79.99 0 0 0 0 0 080-89.99 0 0 0 0 1 0

wereenvisagedas schoolsofdemocracy to thechildren. In this context, this chapter analyseshow far the expectation of CFLG in evolvingparticipatory citizenship among children hasbeenrealizedinpractice.

Allocation and utilization of LSGIs in the do-main of Participation Since participation is an important do-mainofchildrightstheLSGIrequiremoneytoimplementtheprogrammeslyingunderthecon-ceptofparticipation.Conductanddocumenta-tion of Gramasabhas, Children’s gramasabhas,BalaPanchayatsandinitiativesforcollectinganddocumentingdemandsofchildrenfrompartic-ipatoryforumandconductingchildparliamentarethemajoractivitiesproposedinCFLGunderthedomainofparticipation.Thefollowingtableexamineshowmuchmoneyhavebeenallocatedandutilizedfortheactivitiestoensurechildren’sparticipationinlocalgovernance.



CONTROL PANCHAYAT

2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018


Number of Panchayat

utilised


Number of Panchayat

utilised


Number of Panchayat

utilised0-0.19 0 1 0 1 1 10.2-0.39 1 1 2 1 1 10.4-0.59 1 0 0 0 0 10.6-0.79 0 0 0 0 0 00.8-0.99 1 1 0 0 0 01-1.99 0 0 0 0 0 02-2.99 0 0 0 0 1 03-3.99 0 0 1 1 0 0


PARTICIPATIONMUNICIPALITY

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18Municipality

allocation Per-centage

Municipality utilisation Percentage


Percentage



Percentage


1 0.00% 0.00% 0.61% 0.03% 0.00% 0.00%2 0.73% 0.73% 0.00% 0.00% 0.25% 0.25%


Municipality allocation Percentage






1 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%Table-6.2 (Source: Primary data)

Thetrendfromtheabovetablesexhibitthatmajority(morethan95%)ofthepanchayatscouldallocateonlybetween0-10percentagein-tervalsinthefirsttwoyears.Thatisin2015-16and 2016-17 therewas a small increase in theallocationofthepanchayat,forparticipationinthesecondyearofCFLG.Example, in2017-18here thenumberofpanchayatswhohaveallo-catedmoneyforparticipationbetweentheper-centage intervals of 0-10 reduced to 26,whichwas30inthepreviousyear(86%).Whilegoingthroughthetrendofcontrolpanchayats, itcanbeobservedthattheycouldallocateonlyamea-greamountinthedomainofparticipation,andthere was considerable difference between preand post CFLG years.The trend of allocation

ofmunicipalitiesshowsthattheydidn’tallocateanymoneyduringpreCFLGyear,fortheactiv-itiesunder thedomainofparticipation.At thesame time their allocation has shown a feebleprogressinthenextyear.Notwithstandingtotheimprovementin2016-17,theirallocationagaindeclined to zero in 2017-18.While comparingCFLG municipalities with control municipal-ities, their status in allocation forparticipationremainszerothroughouttheyearsirrespectiveofpreandpostCFLGperiods.Whileoneexaminstheexperienceofutilizationofpanchayatinthedomainofparticipation, itcouldbenoted thatall thePanchayatswere lying inthepercentageintervals between0-10 in the years of 2015-16and2016-17.Thisshowstherewasnodifference



intheutilizationofpanchayatinthefirstyearofCFLG.However,therewaslittledifferenceinthesecondyearofCFLGintermsoffundutilizationofCFLG.Twooutofthirtypanchayats(6%)ofthePanchayatscouldimprovetheirfundutiliza-tionperformanceinthelastyear.OnexaminingthecaseofcontrolPanchayats,theirfundutiliza-tionperformanceislowerthan1%.Theinforma-tionaboutthemunicipalityalsoshowthattheirfundutilization is againbelow1%.Theycouldnotspendanyamountduringtheyears2015-16and2016-17. We can infer from the above table thatLSGIshasallocatedonlyasmallamount(lowerthan10%)inaveragefortheactivitiesinthedo-mainofparticipation.Whereastheirutilizationisalso seeming tobepoor. (Below10%)How-ever, the CFLG initiatives couldmake a smallchangeinallocationandexpenditureofpancha-yats in the domain of participation. However,suchatrendisnotvisibleinthecaseofmunici-palitiesaswell.ItisinterestedtonotethattheirperformanceofcontrolPanchayatsandmunic-ipalities is toopoor in fundallocationanduti-lization for participationwhile comparing thatofCFLGLSGIs.WecouldconcludethatCFLGinitiatives did not make a significant changein the performance of LSGIs in the allocationandspendingforchildren’sparticipation.Therecouldbeseveralfactorswhichmighthaveinflu-enced thispattern.TheCFLGLSGIsevenmaynothaveimbibedtherelevanceofbuildingchil-dren’sparticipation forumin their jurisdiction.Intheotherpertinentfactormaybetheamountofmoneyrequiredfororganizingchildren’s fo-

rummaybecomparativelylowandwhichwouldnothavebeenaccountedasofficialspendingofLSGIs.Anyway, the following tableswhich ex-plaintheperformanceofpanchayatsinorganiz-ingchildren’s forumwould throughmore lightintothesedirections.

6.1) CHILD PARTICIPATION AND BALASABHA Balasabhas are an inclusive platform ofthechildrenwhichcanenhancetheiragencyandcommunityinteractions.BalasabhasareworkingunderthebroadumbrellaofKudumbashreeandtheyarefunctioningasasubsetofKudumbashreeneighbourhood groups. Each Balasabhas con-sistof15-30childrenbetweentheagegroupof5-18and it isgivingtheopportunity tounder-stand democratic system. Kudumbashree dataclaims that there are 32,878 Balasabhas and 4,3908 members (Kudumbashree, 2018). KILAhas takenBalasabhasasprominent institutionsfor participating children in local governance.HenceCFLGprogrammehasgivenprominencetoorientthefunctionsofBalasabhas. Since Balasabhas are important forumswhichprovidesuniversalaccesstochildreninallLSGIs,andanalysisabouthowmuchlocalbod-ies succeeded inorganizing them isquite rele-vant.Thefollowingtableisanattempttoprovideinformationinthisaspect. Conducting of Balasabha meeting andits proper documentation are equally relevantwhen such initiatives are undertaken under aprogrammelikeCFLG.



ThefollowingtableprovidesinformationaboutdocumentationaboutthefunctioningofBalasabhasinCFLGLSGIsandcontrolLSGIs

PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018



Number of Panchayat

not initiated


Number of Panchayat

not initiated


Number of Panchayat

not initiatedHasConductedbutlostdocumentsinfloodsfromCDSoffice

0 30 2 28 2 28

HasconductedbutwardleveldocumentsarenotavailableatCDSoffice

8 22 8 22 11 19

HasConductedwardleveldocumentsareavailableatCDSoffice

6 24 12 18 15 15




Number of Panchayat

not initiated


Number of Panchayat

not initiated


Number of Panchayat

not initiatedHasConductedbutlostdocumentsinfloodsfromCDSoffice

0 3 0 3 0 3


3 0 3 0 3 0

HasconductedwardleveldocumentsareavailableatCDSoffice

0 3 0 3 0 3


MUNICIPALITY2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

Activities under takenNumber of







HasConductedbutlostdocumentsinfloodsfromCDSoffice

1 1 1 1 1 1


1 1 1 1 1 1

HasconductedwardleveldocumentsareavailableatCDSoffice

1 1 1 1 1 1



The above table reflects that two pan-chayats have lost their documents related toBalasabhasinflood.Thedataindicatesthatthenumber of panchayatswhohavenot keptBal-asabharelateddocumentsinAreaDevelopmentSociety level (ADS) has shown an increasingtrend even after the CFLG implementation.Thenumberofpanchayatswhocouldnotkeepsuchdocumentswaseightin2015-16increasedto eleven in 2017-18. It is noteworthy that thenumberofpanchayatswhohavekeptBalasabharelateddocumentsatCommunityDevelopmentSociety (CDS) has shown an increasing trendwhilecomparingthesameinpreandpostCFLGregimes.The number of panchayats who havekeptBalasabharelateddocumentsinCDSofficewasonlysixin2015-16,i.e.; inpreCFLGyear.This has increased to 12 in first year ofCFLG(2016-17)andfurtherexpandedto15inthelastyearofCFLG.Itisnoteworthythateventhoughthecontrolpanchayatshaveorganizedchildren’sBalasabhas,allofthemfailedinkeepingrespec-tivedocumentsinasystematicmanner.Oneoutoftwomunicipalitiescouldmaintainrecordsre-lated toBalasabhas in theirCDSoffice.At thesame time the control municipality could noteven conduct Gramasabhas. The above tablegivesus a feeling thatCFLG initiative contrib-uted instreamlining theprocessofconductingBalasabhasandmaintainingitsdocumentsinasystematicmanner. Thetableshowsthatdocumentationev-idenceofBalasabhaswaskeptinsafeinCDSof-ficeaftergettingCFLGtraining.Whenitscom-paresto2017-2018,therewasonly6panchayats


Activities under taken Municipality initiated Municipality initiated Municipality initiatedHasconductedbutlostdocumentsinfloodsfromCDSoffice

No No No


No No No

HasConductedwardleveldocumentsareavailableatCDSoffice

No No No


initiatedtokeepthedocumentsinCDSofficeintheyearof2015-2016. Theabove table shows that, the controlmunicipality has not performed well and oneamongthetrainedmunicipalityhastheconcernaboutchildandtheyaregivingthespacetochildtoperformandparticipate.Oneoftwomunici-palitieswhichgottraininghasbeenconductingBalasabha. By comparing the control panchayatwithCFLGtrainedpanchayat,itisevidentthatthe lack of training affected the effective func-tioningofBalasabhaincontrolpanchayats.2015onwardstheyareconductingBalasabharegular-ly but thedocuments arenot available atCDSoffice.Tableshows thatamong30samplePan-chayatsonly15panchayatsweretakeninitiativetokeepwardleveldocumentsatCDSoffice.Butinthecaseofcontrolpanchayatsit’sreflectsthatthe0outof3panchayatsarekeptdocumentsofBalasabhasinCDSoffice. ThemunicipalitieswereshowingachildfriendlyapproachinthecaseofBalasabhacon-duction but there was no documentation ev-idence at the CDS offices. But they are muchbetterthantheactivitiesofcontrolmunicipality.Thecontrolmunicipalitydatanarratesthattherewas nothing happening for the betterment ofchildrenbeyondmandatoryallocation. KILA introduced CFLG training withthe collaboration of UNICEF to the strength-eningtheactivitiesofthepanchayatlevelChildfriendlyprogrammes.Balasabhasareplayinganimportantroleallamongthem.Butthecollecteddatareflectsthatthemajorityofthepanchayats



andmunicipalities are at least conductingBal-asabhaandcreatingaspacetochildtopartici-pate,inthecaseofcontrolpanchayatalsotakenupthesamestandascomparedtocontrolmu-nicipality.Atthesametime,trainedmunicipal-itieshadtakeninitiativesfortheconductionofBalasabha.

6.2) DOCUMENTATION OF CHILD GRAMASABHA OF LSGIs Children’sGramasabhaisanassemblyofallchildrenbetweentheageoftenandeighteenofaward(ConstituencyofaLSGorUrbanLocalBody).Children’sGramasabhaaimstoinitiateachild friendly development perspective in theLocalGovernment through rectifying the gapsintheplanninginterventionsforchildren.Italsomakesplanstofillthegapsidentified.(RajanandRadhakrishnan2016). Thefollowingtableexplainsthestatusofchildren’sGramasabhaconductedinLSGIsandthenumberofLSGIsdonedocumentationonChildren’sGramasabha.

STATUS OF CHILDREN’S GRAMASABHA AND ITS DOCUMENTATION BY LSGISPANCHAYAT

2016-2017 2017-2018


Number of Pan-chayat initiated


initiated

Number of Pan-chayat initiated


initiatedHasconducted;documentsareavailable

10 20 16 14

Hasconducted 24 6 21 9Table-6.5 (Source: Primary data)

MUNICIPALITY2016-2017 2017-2018

Activitiesunder-taken

Municipalityinitiated

Municipalitynotinitiated

Municipalityinitiated

Municipalitynotinitiated

Hasconducted;documentsareavailable

0 2 1 1

Hasconducted 0 2 1 1Table-6.6 (Source: Primary data)

The data shows that the number ofPanchayat who have conducted children’sGramasabhaasthepartofCFLGasshownade-clining trend in2years.For instants thenum-ber of Panchayat who have conducted childGramasabha was 24 in 2016-17 which has re-ducedto21inthesecondyearofCFLG.Atthesametimetherewasanimprovementofnumberofpanchayatwhohavedoneproperdocumen-tationCDSduring2yearsCFLG.Inthe1yearof CFLG it was only 10 which have improvedto16.ThisindicatesthatthefirstyearofCFLGonly41%ofthepanchayatwhohaveconductedchildren’s Gramasabha has taken initiative forproperdocumentation.Thishas increased76%in second year of CFLG. Coming to the caseof municipality both of them conducted childGramasabha infirstCFLGyear,whereas ithasreduced into one in the second year of CFLGyears. However, initiatives ofmunicipalities indocumentingthechildGramasabhaseemtobepoorinthefirstyearwhichhasimprovedinsec-ondyear. It canbe inferred fromdata that theinitial enthusiasm of panchayat in organizingchildrenGramasabhahasshownadecliningten-



dencyinthesecondyear.Inthefirstyear80%ofthepanchayatcouldconductchildGramasabhawhereasithasreducedto70%insecondyear.ItisalsointerestedtonotethatchildGramasabhawereidentifiedasone-timeeventatGramapan-chayatratherthananinstitutionwhichneedtobe sustainingeach localbody.Notbe standingthisthedataindicatesCFLGcouldcontributeinimprovingthedocumentationprocessofCGSs.Anyway,CFLGcouldestablishtherelevanceofchildGramasabhasasaparticipatoryinstitutionofChildreninLSGIs. Alongwiththequantitativedatathein-formationfromFGDofchildrenandStakehold-ers on childGramasabhas also provided somegaugesregardingtheissuesrelatedtoconductofCGSs.Anyof thechildrenattended inFGDinpanchayatcommentedthatthedemandsraisedby them in Gramasabhas were note seriouslytakenupbythepanchayat.OnechildofMullan-kollyPanchayatofWayanadduring theCFGDconductedondatecommented; “Cheta, when we were studying in 6thstandardIhadraiseddemandforaplayground.Nowwearestudying in9thstandardandhavenotyethappenedafterthat”. AnotherchildfromKolazhyGramapan-chayat ofThrissur district in FGD of childrencommented. “Thereisnopointinmerelyconductingmeetingsatpanchayat.Efforts shouldbe takentomaterializethings.InChildPanchayatalsowemerelytalkaboutourneeds,buteffortstofulfilthem are lacking”. (Child participant, Kolazhi,12/3/2019) Thesameresponsewasgivenbychildreninmajorityofthepanchayats; FGDSinpanchayatraisetheissueofap-athyofpanchayatintakingontheissuesonCGS(19/03/2019). Children’sresponsesfromFGDinmajor-ityofthepanchayatindicatedthatthedemandsraisedbythemwherenotdemandsraisedfromCGS,werenottakenupbytheLSGIs.Accord-ing to the opinion of stake holders that showstherewasagreatchangethathappensbecauseoftheCFLGtrainingandbecauseofthattheyarelearnedaboutthechildren’sneedinseveralso-cialsituations.Theresponsesrelatedtoconductofchildren’sGSatLSGIsindicatesthatchildren

whohaveparticipated inoneGramasabhahada sceptical approach about the efficiency of it.Mostofthemindicatedthatthesewereconduct-edasonetimeeventsratherthananinstitutionwhich needs to sustain for protecting interestof children it alsowidely commented that LS-GIsarenot taking thecommentsraisedby thechildren inGramasabhas as issueswhichneedto be addressed.Hence children’sGramasabhaaschildrencouldnotseethisGramasabhaspac-eshasbodieswhichfollowsaccountabilitytothechildren.AlongwiththistheauthorityoftheLo-calGovernmentcouldnotperceivechildren’sascitizenswhoalsohaverightslikeothercitizens.Theyfollowaguardian’sapproachwhodoesnotbelievechildrenarenotcapabletotakedecisionandmakeindependentopinionthatcanleadtodecisions.Theystillbelieve theycantakedeci-sioninfavourofchildrenratherthantheactualdemandscomingoutfromthechildren.

6.3) INITIATIVES FOR COLLECTING AND DISCUSSING CHILDREN’S DEMANDS IN GENERAL GRAMASABHA Children’s demands raise and gatheredthroughdifferentchildren’sforumsuchaschil-dren Gramasabhas, Balasabhas, and Bala Pan-chayats would be converted in to reality onlywhenthoseissuesareraisedanddiscussedinthedecision-makingforumsofadultcitizens.Gen-eral Gramasabhas and working group are thetwomajorcitizen’sforumsthathaveakeyroleinmakingtheplansoflocalbodies.Anevaluationintheaspectofhowfarthechildren’sdemandsareraisedandchildren’sdemandswerebroughtin to the adult forums such as aGramasabhasandworkinggroupsarerelevant.Thefollowingtableisattemptinthisdirection.



PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

NATURE OF INITIATIVES


Initiated


Not initiated


Initiated


Not initiated


Initiated


Not initiatedHascollectedthedemandsofchildrenandbutnotdis-cussedinworkinggroup

1 29 1 29 3 27

HascollectedanddiscussedingeneralGramasabha

5 25 6 24 8 22


NATURE OF INITIA-TIVES


Initiated


Not initiated


Initiated


Not initiated


Initiated


Not initiatedHascollectedthedemandsofchildrenandbutnotdis-cussedinworkinggroup

0 3 0 3 0 3


0 3 0 3 0 3


MUNICIPALIY2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

NATURE OF INITIATIVES


Initiated



Initiated



Initiated


Hascollectedthedemandsofchildrenandbutnotdiscussedinworkinggroup

1 1 1 1 2 0


0 2 0 2 0 2

CONTROL MUNICIPALITY

2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018NATURE OF INITIA-

TIVES Municipality Initiated Municipality Initiated Municipality Initiated

Hascollectedthedemandsofchildrenandbutnotdis-cussedinworkinggroup

NO NO NO

HascollectedanddiscussedingeneralGramasabha NO NO NO




The above table show that initiativesfor discussing children’s demands in work-ing groups of LSGIs and generalGramasabhaswerepooronly.Thenumberofpanchayatswhohavediscussthedemandsraisedbythechildrenthroughchildren’sGramasabhas,BalasabhaandBala panchayat were discuss only in one pan-chayatduringthepreCFLGyearthat is,2015-16but this didnot show a significant increaseinthisFLGyears.Thisnumberhas increase inaslowpace;ithasincreasedonlytothreeintheyear 2017-18. In the case of discussing in de-mands in the forums of general Gramasabhathe trend isalsoshowingaslight increase.Thenumberofpanchayatswhohavediscussedchil-dren’sdemandsingeneralGramasabhawas5inpreCFLGyearwhichhas increased into6and8respectivelyintheyearsof2016-17,2017-18.While one examines the case of municipalitytherewasan improvement in thenumbermu-nicipalitywhohavebroughtchildren’sdemandin to theworking groups.Thenumber ofmu-nicipalitieswhohavediscussedchildren’sissuesinworkinggroupwasonein2015-16whichhasincreasedin2 inthesecondyearofCFLGim-plementation.However, they couldnotdo anyinitiativefordiscussingchildren’sissueinGen-

PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

DESCRIPTIONNumber of panchayat

involvement

Number of panchayat

non-involve-ment

Number of panchayat

involvement

Number of panchayat

non-involve-ment

Number of panchayat

involvement

Number of panchayat

non-involve-ment

Childrenrepresen-tationinworkinggroups.

3 27 4 26 7 23

Awarenessaboutpar-ticipationofchildreninworkinggroup

7 23 8 22 8 22


DESCRIPTION

Number of panchayat

involve-ment

Number of panchayat

non-in-volvement

Number of panchayat

involvement

Number of panchayat

non-in-volvement

Number of panchayat

involve-ment

Number of panchayat

non-involve-ment

Childrenrepresentationinworkinggroups. 0 3 0 3 0 3

Awarenessaboutparticipa-tionofchildreninworkinggroup

1 2 1 2 1 2


eralGramasabhas.Whileonegoestothedataofcontrolpanchayatandmunicipality,theycouldnot do any initiative both in terms of discuss-ingchildren’s issueeither inGramasabhaor inworkinggroups.

CHILDREN’S PARTICIPATION IN WORK-ING GROUPS Inordertoensurethevoiceofchildren,andtoraise theirdemands indecisionmakingforums and participation in working groupsof the localbodies is important.As thepartofCFLGprogramme itwas instructed to theLS-GIstoincorporateatleasttwochildrenineachworkinggroupofLSGIs.

6.4) REPRESENTATION OF CHILDREN IN WORKING GROUP According to the table, it shows therepresentation of children and their awarenessaboutworkinggroup; it isevident that there isagradualpositivechange in therepresentationrate of children inworking group during postCFLGperiod.Anofficial atdifferentLSGsde-scribesitasamodificationinstrategywhichwasadoptedbythestakeholdersduetotheattitudechangethatoccurredafterKILAtraining.



MUNICIPALITY2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

DESCRIP-TION

Number of Municipality involvement

Number of Municipality non involve-

ment



ment



mentChildrenrepresentationinworkinggroups

0 2 2 0 2 0

Awarenessaboutpar-ticipationofchildreninworkinggroup

0 2 0 2 1 1


Awareness of panchayat regarding theCFLGinstructionstoincludechildreninwork-inggrouphasnotshownasignificantimprove-mentwhileonecomparespreandpostCFLGre-gimes.Atthesametimetherewasasmalltrendof increase in thecaseof including inworkinggroups.Thepanchayatswhohaveincludedchil-dren in working group was only 3 during preCFLGyear(2015-16)whichhasincreasedionto7insecondyearofCFLG.WhilecomingtothecaseofmunicipalitiestheywereawareabouttheneedofincludingchildreninworkinggroupandtakeninitiativestoincludetheminthefirstandsecondyearofCFLGimplementation. The above trend explains that onlyaround1/4of thepanchayatwere aware aboutthe need of including children in workinggroups,andtakenactiontoincludetheminthesame. Representation of children in decisionmakingbodiesofLSGIsisakeyfactorinmak-ingtheChildFriendlyLocalGovernance,sinceworkinggroupsarethekeyforumsofplanningin LSGIs children’s representation in them isquiterelevant.MajorityofthePanchayatscouldnot consider children are citizen who arema-turedintoparticipatetheforumsofadultsandtomakeopinions.Theymighthave the feelingthatadultscanalsoplanforthechildrenevenintheabsenceofchildren.

6.5) FUNCTIONING OF CHILDREN PAR-LIAMENT/BALAPANCHAYAT Children’sparliamentandBalaPancha-yat is representative bodies off selected fromgrassrootlevelinstitutionsuchasBalasabhaandchildGramasabhasinaddictiontotheseschoollevel parliaments of school also organise somepanchayat. Bala panchayat and parliament asenvisagedasapanchayat forumbygiving rep-resentationtochildrenfromallwardsofLSGIsandsomepanchayathasformedpanchayatlevelchildrencommitteesaswell.Thefollowingtableproviding information about the initiative tak-enbytheLSGISfororganisingchildren’sparlia-mentandBalaPanchayat.



PANCHAYAT2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

THE NATURE OF ACTIVITIES

Number of Panchayats Conducted


Not Conducted



Not Conducted



Not Conducted

Hasconducted 11 19 11 19 13 17Schoolparliament 8 22 8 22 1 29ConductedatpanchayatlevelselectingchildrenfromBal-asabhas

2 28 2 28 6 24

ConductedIpanchayatlevelchoosingchildrenfromchil-dren’sGramasabha

1 29 1 29 6 24

Table-6.11 (Source: Primary data)MUNICIPALITY

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18

THE NATURE OF ACTIVITIES



Conducted



Not Conducted



Not Con-ducted

Hasconducted 1 1 1 1 2 0Schoolparliament 0 2 0 2 0 2Conducted at pan-chayat level selectingchildren from Bal-asabhas

0 2 0 2 0 2

Conducted I pan-chayat level choosingchildren from chil-dren’sGramasabha

1 1 1 1 2 0


Theabovetableindicatesthatgatheringof children in the forum of school parliamenthasshownagradualdeclineaftertheinitiationof CFLG programme.The number of Pancha-yatwhohaveconducted school levelgatheringin the form of children’s parliament was 8 inpre CFLG year that is 2015-16 which was thesameinthefirstyearofCFLG2016-17andthishasreduced1in2017-18.AtthesametimethenumberofPanchayatwhohaveconductedpan-chayatlevelgatheringofchildrenintheformofeitherchildrenparliamentatpanchayatlevelorBalaPanchayathasshownan increasing trend.For indents the number of panchayats has or-ganizedchildren’sparliamentorBalaPanchayatwasthreeinthepreCFLGyear(2015-16)whichwassameinthefirstyearofCFLGandithasin-creasedto12inthesecondyearofCFLG.

Inthecaseofmunicipality,thechildren’sgathering in municipality was happening onemunicipality in the pre-CFLG year which hasincreasedtotwointhelastyearofCFLG(2017-18). Thereweretwoinwhichthepanchayat/municipality level gatherings of children wereoccurring in LSGIs some of the panchayats.Some of the panchayat has selected children’sfrom Balasabha for the panchayat level gath-ering.While some other has selected childrenfrom children’s Gramasabha to the panchayatlevelgathering.DatashowsthatthenumberofPanchayatswhohasconductedpanchayat levelgatheringbyselectingchildren’sfromBalasabhawasintwointhepreCFLGyearwhichwasthesameinthefirstyearofCFLGandincreasedto6inthesecondyearofCFLG(2017-18).Thenum-



berofPanchayatwhohasconductedpanchayatlevelgatheringofchildrenwasonein2015-16itwasthesameinthefirstyearofCFLGandthatisincreasedinto6yearinthesecondyearofCFLGthatis2017-18.Inthecaseofcontrolpanchayat,thegatheringofchildrenwasrestrictedonlyinschoolandnotintothelevelofpanchayat. Whileonecomestothecaseofmunici-palities, theyhaveorganizedmunicipal levelofgatherings of childrenwhile selecting childrenfromchildren’swardSabhas.Inthecaseofcon-trolmunicipalitytherewasnoinitiativeforanykindofmunicipallevelofgatheringofchildren. The overall trend of panchayat levelgathering of children is showing and increas-ingtrendduringpreandpostCFLGregimes.Itwas 10% in preCFLG year it has increased in40%inlastyearsofCFLG.However,itisworthmentioningthatstill60%ofpanchayatcouldnotorganizepanchayat levelgatheringsofchildrenfor collecting theirdemands.TheperformanceofCFLGmunicipalitiesisshowingslightlybet-tertrendinthisregard.InthesametimenosuchinitiativehashappenedincontrolpanchayatormunicipalityishighlightsthefactthattheCFLGprogrammecouldinculcatetheconceptofchil-dren’s parliament/ Bala Panchayat among theLSGIs covered under CFLG programme eventhoughreachoftheseneedstobeexpanded. Itisalsonoteworthythatwhenthenum-ber of panchayats who were conducting chil-dren’s parliament at panchayat level/Bala Pan-chayathasincreasedinthenumberofPanchayatwhohavingconductedinonlyschoolparliamentfor children has gradually reduced. This indi-cates someof thepanchayatcouldreorient theschools towards a panchayat level gathering ofchildren.Itisalsonoticeablethatpanchayathasfollowdiverseapproachesinorganizingchildreninapanchayatlevelbody.50%ofthepanchayatwhohaveorganizedchildren’sgatheringatpan-chayat levelby selectingchildrendirectly fromchildGramasabhaswereastheotherhalfhasor-ganizedpanchayatlevelassemblyofthechildrenbyselectingthemfromchildrenGramasabhaorwardSabhathisshowstheadaptivecapacityofpanchayatsinmakingthereonstrategyforim-plementingacentralizedprogramme. TheFGD alsomarks a trend of, Stake-holderswereawareofchildparliamentbuttheywerelackclarityonitsvariouspurpose

• The lack of clarity about the purpose andproperguidanceisthereasonfornotbeingtriggereduptheactivitiestoassemblechildparliament in control panchayats and mu-nicipalities.

ThecommentbelowthepanchayatwardmemberofMattathurpointsouttherootcauseofinefficientworkingofchildparliamentamongtrainedandcontrolLSGs: “Through the conduction of a childparliament, it is being intended that childrenshould be introduced to themain streamgov-ernance system and since the childhood theyshould have a base knowledge regarding thepanchayat and public affairs. However, manytimes children of Kudumbashree workers andotherpublicworkersaremainlyparticipatinginthechildparliament.Duetothesamereason,ademocraticapproachisnothappening inchildparliament.Childparliamentdoesnotgetcon-ductedinmanyplaces,but this is thesituationwhenever it happens. So panchayat authoritiesshouldunderstandtheproperobjectivebehindtheconductionofchildparliamentandperiodi-caltrainingshouldbeprovidedtotheconcernedpeople to conduct it in linewith thisobjective.Whentheresponsibilitybearerchangefromtheconcernedpositions, thenewperson inchargeshould show the concern to learn about theproperobjectivesandconductionof childpar-liament.“(Wardmember,Mattathur).

6.6) TOTAL ALLOCATION AND UTILISA-TION OF LSGIs FOR CHILDREN OTHER THAN MANDATORY ALLOCATION As have mentioned above, LSGIs in-structedtoallocateminimumoffivepercentageoftheirtotalallocationforchildrenandelderlypopulation. Some mandatory allocations wereinstructedwithinthissuchasallocationforsup-plementarynutritionprogramme,allocationforSarvaShikshaAbhiyan.Sincethistobemanda-toryallocationoftheautonomousinitiativesoflocalbodiesforchildrencouldberecognizebyaccepting these two allocations from the totalallocation of the children.The following tableindicateshowmuchamounthavebeenallocat-edandutilizesbyLSGIsforchildrenexceptthemandatory allocation instructed by state gov-ernmentthroughplanningguidelines.



TOTAL ALLOCATION AND UTILISATION OF PANCHAYATS FOR CHILDREN2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018



Number of Panchayat

utilised


Number of Panchayat

utilised


Number of Panchayat

utilised0-4.99 6 17 4 10 3 85-9.99 12 10 7 13 12 16

10-14.99 9 3 11 6 7 515-19.99 1 0 5 0 5 020-24.99 0 0 0 0 2 125-29.99 1 0 0 0 0 030-34.99 1 0 0 1 1 035-39.99 0 0 1 0 0 040-44.99 0 0 0 0 0 045-49.99 0 0 1 0 0 050-54.99 0 0 1 0 0 0


TOTAL ALLOCATION AND UTILISATION OF CONTROL PANCHAYATH FOR CHILDREN

2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

Sl. No.Percentage of allocation by

panchayat

Percentage of utilisation by

panchayat

allocation Percentage of

panchayat

utilisation Percentage of

panchayat

allocation Percentage of

panchayat

utilisation Percentage of

panchayat1 10.42 4.28 7.28 4.62 8.26 4.912 28.31 15.27 6.54 1.09 12.57 9.163 14.52 3.86 36.82 2.19 36.82 25.84


TOTAL ALLOCATION AND UTILISATION OF MUNICIPALITY AND CONTROL MUNICIPALITY FOR CHILDREN

2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

Sl. No.

Allocation Percentage of municipality

Utilization Percentage of municipality





1 8.04 0.9 12.29 4.87 8.27 1.872 0.44 0.41 4.49 2.74 9.28 3.86


MajorityofthePanchayatallottedfundsforthechildrenbetweentheintervalof0-15,in2015-16,27Panchayatshaveallocatedmoneyinthesepercentageintervalswhichhasreducedto22in2016-17andremainedthesameinthesec-ondyearof theCFLG.At the same time therewasapercentageincreaseinthenumberofpan-chayatswhohaveallocatedmoneybetweenthepercentage intervals of 15-20 afterCFLGproj-ect.Thiswas one in thepreCFLGyearwhich

has increased to5 in the1styearof theCFLGandmaintains the same status in the 2nd yearofCFLG.Italsointerestingthattwopanchayatshaveallocatedmorethan45%theirtotalalloca-tionforaddressingtheneedsofchildrenintheyearof2016-17,whereasthesamewasmissinginthesecondyearofCFLG.Thedataofcontrolpanchayat shows that they were also allocatedmore than10%evenbefore their total alloca-tionforchildrenevenbeforeCFLG.Itisnotable



thatevenonepanchayathasallocating36.82%oftheirallocationforaddressingtheneedsofchil-drenduringtwocontinuesyear.Hence,wecouldfindoutthetrendthateventheCFLGpanchayatwere allocatingmoney for addressing childrenmaybebecauseofinitiationtakenthem. The municipality has shown a varyingtrend towards theallocationofchildrenbeforeandafterCFLG.Onemunicipalityhasallocated8.04%oftheirallocationtowardschildrenintheyearof2015-16whichhasincreasedto12.29%in thefirstCFLGyear,whichagainreduced to8.27%insecondyearCFLG.Inthecaseofan-othermunicipalityitcouldallocatedonly0.44%duringpreCFLGyearwhichhas increas3edto4.99 in thefirstyearofCFLGandagainraisedto9.8%percentageinthesecondyearofCFLG.However, the municipality shown an increas-ingtrendinallocationafterCFLGeventhoughthere was a varying trend in allocation. Eventhough themajorityof thepanchayathasallo-catedmorethan5%oftheirallocationtowardschildren in thepictureofutilizationof fund isnotoptimisticinnature.Itcanbeobservedthatmajorityofthepanchayatcouldspendonlytheamountlessthan15%oftotalallocationbeforeandafterCFLG.Thenumberofpanchayatswhocould spendbelow15%of total allocationwas30 during 2015-16 which has reduced only to29duringtheCFLGyears.Onlyonepanchayatcould spendmore than 20%during theCFLGprojectperiod. Incaseofutilizationincontrolpancha-yat it shows a varying trend. Two panchayatshaveshownaconsiderablechange in theiruti-lization’swhile comparingwithpreCFLGyearwhile theutilizationof onepanchayat shows astatic picture.The utilization of municipalitieshasshownamixedtrendonemunicipalityhasshownconsistentincreaseinutilizationfundforchildrenwhiletheotherhasshownatrendofin-creaseinonyearanddecreaseinanotheryear.Inthecaseofcontrolmunicipalityshowsanin-creasingtrendinfundutilizationsince2015-16. From the table showing the allocationandutilizationpatternofLSGISforchildrenwecandrawthe followingconclusion.Majorityofthepanchayatscouldallocatemorethan5%oftheirallocationtowardaddressingtheissuesofchildren.Andthishasshownanincreasingtrend

duringtheCFLGperiod.AtthesametimethemunicipalityhasshownaninconsistenttrendofincreaseanddecreaseinallocationduringCFLGperiod.Itisinterestinthatevenafterexemptingthemandatoryallocations forchildren’sbyLS-GIs theycouldearmarkmore than5%of theirtotalallocationtowardsaddressingtheneedsofchildren.ThisisindicativeofconcernofLSGIsin addressing theneedsof children.Notewithstanding a positive trend of allocation in theutilization pattern of LSGIs has shown a poortrendofutilization.Majorityof thepanchayatscouldspendonly lowerthan15%ofthantheirtotal allocation. In other were round most ofthepanchayatcouldnotutilise85%of their to-talallocationforchildren.Thispointoutthele-thargicapproachoflocalbodiesinspendingthemoneyallocatedforthechildren.Utilizationofthemoneyallocatedforthechildrenmaynotbeincluded in theirpreferential areaof spending.This highlights the need of special orientationfromCFLG for ensuringcreative interventionsfromtheLSGIsforaddressingtheneedsofchil-dren.



SUMMARY TheCFLG initiatives couldbringaboutadiminutivechangeinallocationandexpendi-tureofpanchayatsunderthedomainofpartici-pation.Atpresent,theallocationandutilizationcomesunder10%oftheplanfund.However,itistobenotedthattheperformanceofcontrolPan-chayats andmunicipalities is toopoor in fundallocationandutilizationforparticipationwhilecomparedtothatofCFLGtrainedLSGIs.Theac-tivitiescomingunderthisdomainhaveshownaslightlyimprovingtrend,anddataindicatesthataftertheCFLGtrainingmajorityofthetrainedpanchayats are conducting Balasabhas to pro-videaspaceforchildparticipation.Inthecon-trolLSGI’salmostnothingishappeningtowardsbetterment of balasabhas. In the case of childgramasabhas,theCFLGtrainingcouldestablishtherelevanceofchildgramasabhasasapartic-ipatory institutionof children inLSGI’s.Thesearehappeningasone-timeeventsandthereisaneed to improve thedocumentationprocessof

child gramsabhas. Children’s participation inworkinggroupsofLSGI’sandrepresentationofchildrenindecisionmakingbodiesofLSGIshasshown a slight improvement while comparingthepre-andpost-CFLGperiods.Majorityofthepanchayatshavenotbeenconsideringchildrenaseithercitizensordecisionmakers.Function-ingofchildren’sparticipationinBalapanchayatshasshownanincreasingtrendinCFLGtrainedLSGIs when comparing pre- and post- CFLGperiod. Still 60% of the panchayats could nottakeanyinitiativetoorganiseapanchayathlev-elgatheringofchildrenforunderstandingtheirdemands,andtheCFLGmunicipalitiesshowaslightly better trend in this regard. Coming tothe total allocation and utilization under thefourdomainsofCFLG, it is interestingtonotethatevenafterthemandatoryallocationforchil-drenbyLSGIstheycouldearmarkmorethan5%oftheirtotalallocation,butinutilizationithasshownapoortrend.



Aspartofthestudy,aquestionnairead-ministrated among the trainees who have at-tendedCFLGtrainingfromtheselected30pan-chayats. Elected representatives, Governmentstaff,andResourcepersonswhowerepartofthetrainingwereidentifiedandaquestionnairewasadministrated among them.The research teamcould identify40participants from17pancha-yatswhichincludes32electedrepresentatives,7governmentstaff,andoneresourceperson.Thefirstportionof thequestionnairewas intendedtounderstandtheattitudeandknowledgeleveloftraineesregardingvariousdomainsofCFLG.Thesecondportioncovered the initiatives tak-enbythemaftergettingCFLGtrainingtowards

STATUS OF KNOWLEDGE AND ATTITUDE OF TRAINEESElected

RepresentativesGovernment

OfficialsResource per-

sons Total

QuestionsChosen Right

Answer

Chosen Wrong Answer

Chosen Right

Answer

Chosen Wrong Answer

Chosen Right

Answer

Chosen Wrong Answer

Chosen Right

Answer

Chosen Wrong Answer

Percent-age of

22right answer

Q.1:ClarityaboutVisionDocumentforChildren.

19 13 4 3 1 0 24 16 60%

Q.2:ClarityaboutChildren’sDataProfile.

14 18 3 4 1 0 18 22 45%

Q.3:ClarityaboutComprehensiveLocalDevelop-mentPlan.

31 1 5 2 1 0 37 3 92.5%

Q.4:In-depthideaaboutchildsurvival.

14 18 2 5 1 0 17 23 57.5%

Q.5:In-depthideaaboutchildDevel-opment.

16 16 3 4 1 0 20 20 50%

CHAPTER VII

ATTITUDE AND KNOWLEDGE OF TRAINEES REGARDING CFLG

realizingtheconceptsdeliveredintrainingandthethirdportionwastounderstandthecontri-butionofKILAtraininginbuildingcapacityoftrainersinthebasicconceptsofCFLG.

7.1) STATUS OF KNOWLEDGE AND ATTI-TUDE OF TRAINEES REGARDING CFLG. The table deals with the questions thatassess the knowledge and attitude of traineesregarding CFLG. This particular session con-stituted 12 objective type questions concernedwitheitherthelevelofknowledgeortheattitudeof each trainee regarding thebasic conceptsofCFLG.



Q.6:In-depthideaaboutChildProtection.

16 16 3 4 1 0 20 20 50%

Q.7:In-depthideaaboutChildParticipation.

26 6 4 3 1 0 31 9 77.5%

Q.8:Consider-ingChildrenascitizens

21 11 7 0 1 0 29 11 72.5%

Q.9:Understand-ingaboutchildreninconflictwithlaw

8 28 5 7 0 1 13 27 67.5%

Q.10:Understand-ingaboutreasonsofchildabuse

22 10 7 0 0 1 29 11 72.5%

Q.11:Under-standingabouttheimportanceofopportunitiestoplay.

20 12 5 2 1 0 26 14 65%

Q.12:Understand-ingtheroleofchildrenasstake-holdersinpolicymaking.

15 17 5 2 0 1 20 20 50%


Thetablecanbebroadlyclassifiedinto3section,firstthreequestionsarecomingunderfirst section intended to assess the knowledgelevel of trainees regarding the basic activitiesproposed as a pre requisite ofCFLG. Prepara-tionofvisiondocumentforchildren,children’sdata profile and comprehensive local develop-ment plan are important among them. Whileone analyses the responses of the participantswhich is noted that they have a high level ofknowledge regarding comprehensive local de-velopmentplan(92.5%),atthesametimemorethanhalfofthetraineesdidn’thaveaclearideaabout children’s data profile and 60% of themhaveideaaboutvisiondocumentforchildren.Itisalsorelevanttonotthatmajorityofthetrainedpanchayatcouldnotpreparedthesethreedocu-mentsexceptfewcases. Thesecondportionofthequestionnairefrom question 4 to 7 deals with different do-mainsofCFLG,Suchas;survival,development,protectionandparticipation.Thequestionswereintendedtoassesstheknowledgeleveloftrain-eesinthesedomains.Theresponsesindicatethat

except the domain of participation (77.5%) inother threedomainsaroundhalfof thepartic-ipantsdidnothaveaclearideaaboutthebasicconcepts. Thethirdsectionofthequestionnaireat-temptedtounderstandtheknowledgeandatti-tudeoftraineesregardingchildrights,theques-tionsfrom8to12includedinthissection.Theoverallresponsesinthissectionshowedmajorityoftherespondentcouldgiverighttermsexceptthe case of question number 12.This indicatethat majority of the trainees could internalisethebasicconceptdeliveredthroughtraining,atthesametimeitisinterestingtonotethatevenaftertrainingandtwoyearsofinterventionhalfof thetraineestillbelievethatadultscanmakeplansforchildrenevenwithouttheparticipationofchildren.Thisattitudeoftraineesmighthaveactedasanimpediment inactivatingchildren’sdemocraticforumsasaforumofcitizens.Oth-ernotable factor is thateven thoughthe tribeshasshowncomparativelybetterperformancere-gardingtheirknowledgelevelofchildrightstheactivities to uphold child rights have not been



INITIATIVES TAKEN GETTING CFLG TRAININGActivities Elected Persons Government Staffs Other Staffs Total

Initiated Not Ini-tiated Initiated Not Ini-

tiated Initiated Not Ini-tiated Initiated Not Ini-

tiated

Percent-age of

initiativesBalasabhaprogramme 24 8 0 7 0 1 29 11 72.5

ChildrensGramasabha 15 17 4 3 1 0 20 20 50

Artsandsportsprogramme 14 18 2 5 0 1 16 24 40

EducationProgramme 9 23 3 5 0 1 12 28 30

CreatingChildFriendlyEnvi-ronment

15 17 3 4 1 0 19 21 47.5

Collectingdis-aggregateDataofChildren

15 17 3 4 1 0 19 21 47.5

ToysDistribu-tion 9 23 1 6 1¬ 0 11 29 27.5

Participationofchildrenindesionmakingforums.

13 19 4 3 1 0 18 22 45


evolvedinthepanchayat inparwiththeirbet-terlevelofknowledge.Absenceofcontinuityinthefunctioningofchildren’sdemocraticforumssuch as children’s gramaasabha, panchayat isgoodinstantsforthis.

7.2) INITIATIVES AFTER GETTING CFLG TRAINING TheeffectivenessofCFLGtrainingcouldbeanalyzedbasedontheinitiativestakenbythetraineesafter training inrealizing theactivities

propose through organizing balasabhas, chil-dren’s gramsabhas arts and sports programme,education programme, initiatives for creatingchild friendly environment, toys distribution,andParticipationofchildrenindecisionmakingforums.Thesearetheindictorsusedtoassesstheinitiativesaftertraining.

Thedataindicatesthatmajorityofthemcould involve (72.5) in organising balasabhaprogrammes after training while only half ofthemcould take initiatives fororganising chil-dren’sgramasabhas.Thisdatacanbelinkedwiththepoorperformanceofchildreningramapan-chayats.Itisalsoworthmentioningthattheini-tiativesoftraineesfororganisingartsandsportsprogramme (40%) and education programmes(30%)forchildrenseemstobelow.Thisalsoin-dicatesthatthedatafromthechapterofdevel-

opmentunderscoresthefactthatmajorityoftheLSGIscouldnotinitiateinnovativeprogrammesinthesectors. Datafromthetablehighlightsthatonlyless than half of the trainees could take anyinitiative to create child friendly environment(47.5)andcollectingdisaggregateddataofchil-dren (47.5). It is also interesting to note thatmore than half of the trainees could not takeany initiatives to bring children’s participationindecisionmakingforums.Theoveralltrendin-



CHANGE IN AWARENESS LEVELS OF TRAINEESElectedPersons GovernmentStaffs OtherStaffs Total

Particulars Improved NotIm-proved Improved NotIm-

proved Improved NotIm-proved Improved NotIm-

proved

Percent-ageof

improvedpersons

Awarenessofchildrights 21 11 5 2 1 0 27 13 67.5

Understandtheroleofchildreninthesociety

20 12 5 2 1 0 26 14 65

Expandingthepar-ticipatoryforumsofchildren

20 12 4 3 1 0 25 15 62.5

Acceptcit-izenshipofchildren.

15 17 7 0 1 0 23 17 57.5


dicates that initiativesof trainees after traininginrealisingtheactivitiesproposethroughCFLGtrainingwasbelowtheaverageexceptinthecaseoforganisingBalasbhas.

7.3) CONTRIBUTION OF KILA TRAINING IN IMPROVING THE PARTICIPANTS’ BA-SIC CONCEPTUAL KNOWLEDGE ABOUT CFLG. TherewasaportioninthequestionnairetounderstandthecontributionofCFLGtraininginraisingtheawarenessleveloftraineesregard-ingthebasicconceptsofCFLGintheirpercep-tion.Awareness of child rights,Understandingthe role of children in the society, need of ex-pandingtheparticipatoryforumofchildrenandacceptance of citizenship of children were theindicatorsusedassessthis.

OveralltrendoftheresponsesshowthatKILA training has contributed in raising theawarenessleveloftraineesonvariousaspectsofchild rights.All the responses showed that thetrainee have made more impacts on creatingawareness child rights and the understandingtherolechildreninsociety.

SUMMARY The assessment of attitude and knowl-edgeof trainees regarding child rights and thedomains of CFLG has shown that majority ofthetraineescouldinternalisethebasicconceptsdelivered through the training.Theknowledgeleveloftraineesregardingthemandatorydatatobekept in theLSGIs is satisfying.At the sametime regarding children’s profile data, 60% oftraineesdidnothave any idea.TheknowledgeleveloftraineesaboutthefourdomainsofCFLGwasbetween50%and60%,except for thepar-ticipation domain (77.5%). The responses forquestions on knowledge level regarding childrights gave satisfying results. Notably, half ofthe trainees believe that adult canmake plansfor children without participation of children.ContributionofKILAtraininginimprovingthe

participants’basicconceptualknowledgeaboutCFLGhas shownabelowoptimum trend.Butanactivityfororganizingbalasabhashasshown72.5% trainees taking initiatives. The partic-ipants’ awareness level about basic concepts ofchildrightshas increasedbecauseof the train-ing.



INTRODUCTION TheCFLGtrainingprogrammewas in-deed an appreciable effort towards inducing anewsenseofdirectionamongtheLSGinstitu-tions in Kerala to develop amore socially ac-countable,democratic and rights-based systemofgovernance.ItmusthavebeenforthefirsttimethatthroughthetrainingprovidedbyKILA,thepanchayatandmunicipalauthoritieswereaskedtoseriouslythinkonhowthevoicesofchildrencouldbeincorporatedintothedecisionmakingandpolicyplanningmechanismoflocalgover-nanceandthattheirneedsandconcernsshouldbeaccountedforandaddressedeffectively.Thiswasasincerecalltocountchildrenasresponsiblecitizenswithallrightstopeacefully live,devel-opandparticipate inademocraticsociety.Theparadigm of programme implementation putforward, which holistically encompasses per-formanceindicatorsunderfourmajordomainsofCFLGsuchaschilddevelopment,protection,participationandsurvival,andalsoenlistsideasanddesignsfornumerousactivitiesandprojectsunder each domain, was certainly a push forthe participating LSG bodies to transcend theboundariesofusualwelfareprogrammesfocus-ingchildrenanddosomethingmoreproactive,creativeandneedbasedfortheirminorcitizens.Someofthepanchayatsput inreallycountableefforts towork on this freshly channelized in-sightsandenergyandwalkedtheextramilesinimplementing unique child friendly initiativesandprogrammes,whichresultedinasetofin-spiringmodelinterventionswithgreatscopefor

CHAPTER – VIII

SUCCESS STORIES: PROMISING PRACTICES OF CFLG

replication,contextualmodifications, inventingsustainableprojectexecutionpracticesandscaleenhancement. While some of these interventions willexciteonewiththecreativityoftheideabehind,someofthemcanexhibitthepowerofcooper-ationandcollaborationamongmulti-stakehold-ersinmakingsomethinggoodreallyhappen.Inthischapterwesharesomeoftheawe-inspiringstoriesofthesemodelCFLGinitiativesandpro-grammesundertookbyvariouspanchayats.In-steadofgivingjustglitteringnarrativesoftheseinterventionsdone,weprefertopresentamorecritically analysed and genuine picture of howtheyactuallygotplanned,executedandfollowedup in the field. Using primary data collectedthrough the study,weevaluate thechosencas-esmainlyontheaspectsoftheiroriginofidea,implementation procedures, impacts, replica-bility, scalability and sustainability.When suchanexerciseisbeingdone,astheresulttheseac-countswilltalkaboutthelimitations,challengesbeing faced, draw backs and other issues withtheinterventionunderlens.Eachcasepresent-ed in this chapter, beyond all their recognisedachievementsandlimitations,makeanimport-antcontributioningivingusabeginningpointoraninitialplatformtodiscuss,argueon,crit-iciseandappreciate,thepotentialofchangebe-ing envisionedby amassive socialprogrammelikeCFLGandredefineandrejuvenatethecre-ative imaginations, social awareness, skill sets,responsibilities andcommitmentsofbothgov-ernmentmachineriesandpublic.



TRANSFORMATION OF PUBLIC SPACES AS CHILD FRIENDLY The process of transforming LSGs tochild friendly approachwas initiated by trans-formingpublicspaces likeprimaryhealthcen-tres andAnganwadis child friendly. LSGIs likeKattakkada, Vengannur, Kumarakom, Mutho-ly, Ramapuram, Vadakarapathy, Unnikkulam,Thirunavaya transformed their primary healthcentresandAnganwadis.Thepromotingfactorbehind this specific initiativewas theguidancenotes providedbyKILA after training and theimmenseefforttakenbyKILAmentor.Theam-bienceofPHCandAnganwadiweremadechildfriendlybysettingupaspecialroomforbreastfeedingandaspecialroomforimmunizationofkids.ThePHCpremiseswere paintedwith at-tractivecartooncharacters tomakePHCmorechildrenfriendly.Anganwadisweremadechildfriendlybyinstallingchildfriendlytoilets,childfriendly furnitureetc.Beyond thatmostof thepanchayatsallocatedfundfortoysandtorecon-structionofchildrenplayspaceatAnganwady.LSGs were transforming all their governmentofficestoamodethatisaccessibletochildren.

CASES OF COMMENDABLE IMPLEMEN-TATION OF CFLG

EDAVAKA GRAMA PANCHAYAT - PIO-NEERS OF CFLG INITIATIVES Edavaka Panchayat is situated in theManathavady Block of Wayanad District. TheGramPanchayatcametoexistencein1964andtheCFLGinitiativesofthePanchayatwerefor-mulatedonthebasisofSituationalAnalysisandtheconveyanceoftheBalasabha.Thepanchayatwasdeclaredchildfriendlyundertheleadershipof thestudentgoverningcouncilconstitutedattheGramasabhalevelonNovember14,2014.

Nirbhaya Self-Defence Classes Theclasses,which includeKalari train-ing, Karate training etc. were initiated to em-power and to increase the confidence amongchildren.About60 childrenmadeuseof thesetrainingandparticipationofchildrenwereen-sured by the voluntary mobilizing work donebyKudumbashreeworkers,Anganwadiworkersetc.

Single Registry Pilot Project TheEdavakaPanchayatwas selected asone among the twoGramaPanchayats for thepilot project initiated by UNICEF and SocialWelfare Department, Government of Kerala.This project aimed to create a single windowfor integrating the data about children. It wasaimed that the data consolidation done by thecollectiveparticipationofdifferentdepartmentstomakeavailablethedataonchildrenandgov-ernment servicesutilizedby them fromvillagetostatelevel.Thiswasexpectedtoenhancetheplanningandmonitoringofthewelfareschemesmeant for children. Based on the findings andrectificationthesingleregistryschemewouldbeupscaledtoallPanchayatsinthestate.

Organic Farming Familiarisation Aseparateprojectproposalwasformu-lated forOrganic Farming Familiarisation andthe panchayat allocated funds and an imple-menting officer for the smooth functioning oftheprogramme.Thestudentsof thepanchayatweregivenclassesundertheguidanceof2farmhousesofthePanchayat.Thesessionwasleadbyrenowned organic farmer Cheruvayal RamanwhoistheAmbassadoroftheKeralaStateBiodi-versityBoard.Differentvarietiesofpotatoseedsweredistributedandresultedinthefamiliariza-tionoforganicfarmingandindigenouscrops.

KOLAZHY GRAMA PANCHAYAT Kolazhy panchayat in Thrissur Districtwas active in organizing skill training. It wasafter theKILA training that thepanchayatde-signed specific child friendly initiatives. Vicepresident Jessy Lonappan reported that it wasfromamodelpresentationsessionconductedbyKILAthatsheunderstoodthetechnicalviabilityofthemanyprogrammesthatcouldbeinitiated.Green literacy programme was an agricultureinitiativebydifferentpanchayatswhich startedasapartofCFLGexclusivelyforchildrenwithan objective of culturing agriculture habit andeco-friendly approach among them. All pan-chayatsinitiatedtheprogrammeafterthevisionthatwasconceivedthroughtheCFLGtraining.



Green School: Inthe2017-18financialyear,underthespecial interest of the then welfare standingCommitteechairpersonandcurrentvicepresi-dent JessyLonappan, a saplingnursery startedworkinginherwardinKolazhipanchayat.Thelandusedforthisinitiativewasthatofaprivateperson(providedfreeofrent)andfundsfromMNREGA programme were utilized to buyseedsinbulkfromanagrofarminWayanadandto employ MNREGA workers in the nursery.Growingupabout5000saplingsofGooseberry,Lakshmitharu,etcinthisnurseryin2017-18,thepanchayatdecidedtoprovidethemfreeofcostto all government, aided and unaided schoolsinthepanchayatwithavisionofcreatinggreenschoolcampuses.Schoolswereallowed to takeasmanyassaplingstheyneededfromthenurs-eryandaccordingtothevicepresident,almostalltheschoolsinthepanchayathadmadegooduseofthisopportunity.MsSumangala,teacherand eco-club coordinator atKuttoorGHSS forlongtime,thoughshecouldnotrecollecttheex-act year,was sure that around 60 saplings hadbeen brought to the school at that time fromnurseryandallof themweregiventochildrentotakehome.AccordingtoMs.JessyLonappan,in2018-19saplingsoffruitplantsalsohadbeendistributed among schools.Thenursery in thewardof thevicepresident,where the initiativebegan,wasreportedtobestillfunctional.

Crime Mapping: As part of the crime mapping pro-gramme,wardlevelawarenesscreatingsessionsonchildrightissuesforchildrenandadultswereconducted.Themain problems being faced bychildrenandmainproblematicareasinthepan-chayatwereenlisted.Reportsregardingsomeoftheseriousissuesthatcameacrossinthesessionswerealsohandedovertothepolicedepartment.Crime mapping was the result of long termcollaboration between BSW department of St.Mary’sCollege,Thrissurandthepanchayat

Free Breakfast: Free breakfast programme for childrenstudyingfrompre-primaryto7thstandardwasinitiated as per the special interest of the vicepresidentanditwasfromamodelpresentation

sessionconductedbyKILAthatsheunderstoodthetechnicalviabilityoftheprogramme.InJan-uary and February months of 2019, breakfasthas been provided to more than 300 childrenfromKutturGLPS&KutturGHSS.

KATTAKKADA GRAMA PANCHAYAT Kattakada grama panchayat in Thiru-vananthapuramhadtheexperienceofmootingsome creatively different and interesting childfriendly initiatives to share. Soon after KILA’straining, in 2016-17Kattakadapanchayat con-ducted a drawing competition for childrenstudying till 12th standard to select a logo forthepanchayat.Itwasaproudmomentwhenthepanchayatofficiallychosethedesignbyachildwhowonthecompetitionas the logothatrep-resentsKattakadaGramapanchayat.Theactiv-itywassettomarktheadaptationoftheideaofchild friendliness into the functioning of pan-chayatgovernancesystem.Itshouldbeacknowl-edgedasagoodchildfriendlyinitiativebothintherespectsofgivingaplatformforthechildreninterestedindrawingtoperformtheirtalentandmoresignificantlyasagestureofrespecttowardsthestakeofchildreninthegovernancesystemofpanchayat. Later in 2018-2019, Kattakada Pancha-yatreceivedattentionbyproposingthecreationof alumni networks in aganwadis to supporttheirdevelopmentalneeds.As theresultofco-ordinatedefforts,alumnimeethappenedacrosstheanganwadisinthepanchayatandoutofthetotal38anganwadis,22created theirowndatabase of alumni.This initiative is an interestingmodeloftappingthepotentialofalternativeandnon-conventionalwaysofresourcemobilisationandallowingdeterminationandeffectiveco-op-erationtooverruletheusualofexcuseoflackoffundsorresourcesingeneral,anddosomethinggood.

MATTATHUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT - SMART CLASS ROOM FOR A SMART GEN-ERATION Beingacomparativelybetterperformingpanchayatinmakingtheirlocalself-governancesystemchildfriendly,Mattathurhasdonesever-alinitiativesineducationfield.



Infrastructure Development: Mainlycomprisingoftheprojectsimple-mentedto improvethe infrastructural facilitiesat2governmentLPschoolsand2GovernmentUPschoolsinthepanchayat.Agoodnumberofprojectsandportionofplanfundforpanchayatupkeeparespenteveryyearforthese4schools.Thepanchayathasalsodoneprojectsfortheem-powermentofpublicprimaryandupperprimaryeducationalsysteminMattathur.Twoprojects-alongtermonethatprovidessmartfurnituretoall4schoolsyearafteryearandanotheronethatbuiltasmallchildren’spark in3of theschoolswerefoundtobequiteinterestinginterventions,whichcansetmodelsforotherpanchayats

Child Protection Centre- Ideal Project at Monadi SC Colony This project at Mattathur panchayat isanunder-constructioninitiative,butofauniquenaturethatcouldnotfindparallelsinanyoftheotherpanchayatsevaluated,whichaimstobuildadaytimeprotectioncentreforchildrenintheSCcolonyofMonadilocalityinthepanchayat.Ifthepanchayatcanensuretheeffortstosustainitsproperfunctioningasitisbeingenvisioned,thesocial significance itwillhave and the impactsitcancreatewillbeofasignificantdimension,whichcanprovideauniquemodelfortheentirestate.

‘Water Literacy’ Programme Initiated on The Background of Frequent Drowning Death of Children. When thematter of frequentdrowningof children came for discussion in Mattathurpanchayat governance committee, the mem-berswere reported tohaveunanimously votedin supportof this solutionand itwas includedin2017-18year’sannualplanasaspecificchildfriendlyproject and allocated an amount fromtheplan fund topay for the instructor,buyingswimmingtubesandtodothemaintenanceofpanchayat pool laying in Chembuchira locali-ty.TheCFLGtrainingreceivedfromKILAwassaidtobeamotivationalfactorinplanningsuchprojects andgoing aheadwith its effective im-plementation.Theultimateaimofpanchayatissaid tobeprovidingswimmingcoaching toallchildreninthepanchayat.

RAMAPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT Ramapuram Panchayat formulated theCFLG activities through a situational analysisandvisionperceivedthroughCFLGtrainingbyKILA.Commendableeffortsandinteresttakenby Panchayat member Jeena Nath and SAFA-LAM 55+, an organization of retired officersandCFLGsectionstartedatPanchayatandap-pointedanimplementationofficertocoordinateCFLGactivities.Theteamwereabletolaunchanumberofchildfriendlyinitiatives.

Free Membership:Anewpractiseofprovidingfreemembershipforallchildreninthepancha-yatandtoutilizeandparticipateallactivitiesofpanchayat librarywas initiated.The Panchayatprovides a nurturing space for children by or-ganizingquizsessions,discussionsandinterac-tionsessionsetc.Freeaccess tomagazinesandnewspaperforchildrenwerealsoinitiatedafterdeclaring the library as child friendly. Specialdayobservationswereorganizedtoensurechildparticipation and to scale up social awarenessamongchildren.

Safe Drinking Water: Ramapuram panchayattookinitiatives inchildsafetyandcarebypro-viding clean and safe drinkingwater as a partofCFLGactivities.Thepanchayat suffers fromscarcityofcleanwaterandtackledthedrinkingwaterproblembyinstallingwaterpurifiersinallschools.

Safalamee Baalyam: AProgramme tonurtureleadershipabilityamongchildren.It is import-antthatthechildrenofthepanchayatarebeingprovidedwithopportunitiestoleadandengagein the different programmes of the panchayatthroughwhichtheycangrowasleadersandre-sponsiblecitizens. Thishasledtoadecreaseofwaterbornediseases and increased confidence among thestudentstotakeupinitiatives.

UNNIKULAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT CFLGactivitiesinitiatedonthebasisofCFLGtrainingbyKILA.Separatesubcommit-teeswereformedexclusivelyforCFLGactivities.



Haritha Vidyalayam: A project initiated withanobjectivetoinfluenceorganicfarmingandef-fectivewastemanagementamongchildren’slifethroughschools.Asapartof this,certainpro-grammes such as ring composting installation,sapling planting, kitchen garden etc. were car-riedoutatdifferentschools.

Krishipadam: This is an agro training pro-gramme exclusively for children which intro-ducesdifferentpracticaltaskssuchasinsecticideproduction, pH value, soil testing etc. throughlive classes andactivities. Interactionswithex-perts,harvestingfestivals,andseedkitdistribu-tionfor6500studentswerealsoconductedasapartofKRISHIPADAM.

Amma Ariyan:Thisprogrammewas launchedamongmothersfocusingonanganwadis,wherethemothersarebeingsensitizedaboutthenec-essaryprecautionsandtheimportanceofnutri-tiousfoodintake.

KUMARAKOM GRAMA PANCHAYAT Kumarakomgramapanchayat seems tohave adopted the idea of child friendly gover-nance into the core of their functioning.Overthelast3yearstheyhaveinitiatedasetofveryuniqueandcontextuallyrelevantchild friendlyinterventions in the panchayat.The panchayathasbeenshowinggoodinterest infrequentor-ganisationandeffectiveconductofparticipatoryplatformsforchildren likeBalasabha ,Balapan-chayat,Childgramasabhaetc. The landofKumarakompanchayat be-ingsurroundedbyanetworkofbackwaters;theplace has always struggledwith the scarcity ofcleandrinkingwater.So itwasoneamong themaindemandsofchildrenraisedinabalasabhagatheringthatpanchayatshouldinstallwaterpu-rifiersacrosstheschoolsinpanchayat.Authori-ties took thisconcernseriously, andbrought itfor discussion in the grama sabhas of childrenandgeneralpublic.Thedemandreceivedstrongsupport in theseplatforms.As thefirst step, in2018 theLSGbody installedROwater purify-ing plants in all 5 government schools in thepanchayat.Inthenextphase, in2018miniROplantsweredistributedamongtheaidedschoolsfunctioninginthepanchayatandin2018theau-

thoritieswalkedanextramiletosolvethedrink-ingwatercrisisinanganwadisbyprovidingallofthemwithwaterconnectionsfromKeralaWaterAuthority. Thereadinessofthepanchayattounder-standandapproachtheparticipatoryplatformsforchildrenasopportunitiesitisobligedtoen-surethemtoexercisetheirrightstoparticipateinthedaytodaylifeofademocraticsociety,alsoresultedinthecreationofachildren’scornerinpanchayatlibraryintheyearof2019,followingtheideaputforwardbychildrenintheirgramasabha.Kumarakompanchayathassetupfeedingroomsinmanyoftheirofficesandinstitutions,which is an important indicator to read notonly thechild friendlinessbutalso thewomenfriendlinessbeingrepresentedbyagovernancesystem.Kumarakomwasoneoftheseverelyaf-fectedplacesinthe2018floodsandthepancha-yat tooktimelyactiontocollaboratewith localclubs,providedcounsellingsupportforchildreninfloodaffected familiesanddistributedstudymaterials to theaffectedschoolgoingchildren.ThisPanchayathasasectionclerk,whohasbeenparticularly assigned the duty of looking afterthemattersrelatedtoallchildfriendlyinitiativesbeingundertakenbythepanchayat. InKumarakomaswell,thecriticismwasheardthatthoughtheLSGbodywantedtocom-mitseveralprojectsbenefitingchildren, lackofavailabilityoffundsandrejectionofprojectpro-posals from various government departmentsandadministrativelevelsworkasthemainhur-dlesinrealisingtheirvisionaboutachildfriend-lypanchayatonabetterlevel.

MALA GRAMA PANCHAYAT CFLG activities were initiated ac-cording to the needs that were raised duringGramasabhasandprojectswereplannedonthebasisofCFLGtrainingprovidedbyKILA.

Free Swimming Training: InMalapanchayat,itwasoneofthemaindemandsofchildrenraisedin their gramasabhas conducted after KILA’strainingthatthepanchayatshouldprovidefreeswimmingcoachingtochildren.In2016-17pe-riod,duringthediscussionthathappenedoverthedemandsandsuggestionsgivenbychildreningramasabhasatthepanchayatplanningcom-



mitteemeeting, this demand also came up fordiscussion.Findingitscomparativelybetterpo-sitionintermsoffinancialandlogisticalviabil-ity,thecommitteedecidedtoadditasaprojectinthenextfinancialyearplanandtoallocateanamount fromtheplan fund for the implemen-tation. ThisprojectcomesundertheauthorityofhealthandeducationstandingcommitteeofthepanchayatandimplementationofficeristheHeadMasteroftheonlygovernmentUPschoolinthepanchayat.Theplanfundallocationfortheprojectwasaround1lakhrupeesintheyearof2017-18.Duetothelackofsuitablewaterbodiesto conduct the training, panchayat authoritiesapproachedtheHolyGraceCBSESchoolinthepanchayatwitharequesttoallowtheclassestobe conducted in the swimming pool availablein the school campus after the school’s hours.School authorities were quite co-operative to-wardsthisrequestandtheyprovidedpanchayatwiththepoolandswimmingequipmentforchil-drenatanominalrentandalsoallowedtousethe serviceof their swimming trainer after thenormalclasshours,providedthatheisreceivingremunerationfrompanchayatforthisextendedhoursofwork.Oncealltheseresourcesarranged,ward members called for applications in thegramasabhasofadultsanddirectedtheparentstogivethenameofinterestedchildrenstudyingin5th-10thstandardsandconsentformsfilledtoeitherthemorimplementationofficerdirectly.Thisyearthetrainingconductedcontinuouslyover amonth in the after-school hours. In thesecondbatchof2018-19year, total75childrenunderwent the training, which took place inthisJanuary.Whiletheclasseswerebeingcon-ducted, monitoring of parents, wardmembersand frequently implemented. More than 100childrenlearnedanimportantlifeskillthroughswimmingtrainingprogramme. Through themonthlyclassesandactiv-itysessionscouldprovideawarenessonvariouschild rights issues and skill training in severalfieldstochildren.TherewasanImplementationofficeraswell.

PALLIPPAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT Oneofthemainconcernsraisedbychil-drenintheirwardlevelgramasabhasandbalapanchayats conducted by Pallippad panchayat

afterthetrainingwasaboutthedropoutissueintheschoolsinpanchayat.Panchayatauthoritiesresolvedtointerveneintheissueandin2017asthefirst step theycollecteddetailsof the regu-lar absentee childrenwith the help of teachersand also using the data availablewith the sta-tusreportofchildrentheyhadalreadycreated.Next,groupsconsistingofpanchayatmembers,anganwadi teachers,ASHAworkersandhealthdepartmentofficials,visitedthehousesofthesestudents,talkedtoparentsandchildreninper-sonandunderstoodthereasonsforchildrennotattending schools. Based on the findings fromhouse visits, panchayat conducted awarenessclasses and counselling sessions for childrenandparentsatpanchayatlevelandconsequentlythereissaidtohavebeenadownfallintheschooldropoutrateinthepanchayat.Thisachievementof Pallippad panchayat reaffirms the scope ofparticipatory forums of children like exclusivegramasabhas,Balapanchayatsetcinhelpingthedemocracytoreachouttotheyoungergenera-tionsandinturnthemtoreachahealthycon-sciousnessabouttheirrightsanddutiesbothasacitizenandahumanbeing.Howeverinmanyplaceswhensuchplatformsarebeingconduct-edasamereproceduretojustgetawaywiththeobligationortoproduceaminutesreportatthemaximum, the spirit and commitment shownbypanchayats likePallippadtorespondtoandresolveat least someof the issuesgot raisedattheseplatformsare inevitableelements intheirmeaningfulconductandindeedpresentuswithan experience to learn from. In this case theutilisation of status report of panchayat’s childpopulation infindingout the children inneedofhelpalsogivesanotherexampleforhowthisexclusivedatasetcanpropelandsupporttimely,positiveinterventions. Whilecollectingdetailsofthisinterven-tion, thewelfare standingcommitteechairmanof panchayat mentioned about the technicaldifficulties and legislative restrictions pancha-yatsarefacinginallocatingfundforactivitiesorprogrammes like this, which block them fromgoing aheadwith several initiatives theywant-edtodoaspartoftheCFLGprogramme.InhiswordsDistrictPanchayatCommitteealsodoesnotgiveapprovalwhentheycomeupwithsomeproject.Here there is no valid supportive data



tostatethatthisintervention,particularlygiventhecomplexnatureofschooldropoutissueandparticipatory platforms for children in generalhavegotfollowedupandconductedinthelongruneffectively.Whileseveralinternalandexter-nal factorscan influence the lifespan,effectiveexecutionandimpactqualityofsuchinterven-tions like lackof funds, lackof interest on thesideofLSGbody,missingcoordinationamongconcerneddepartments ,resistance frompublicorpoliticalproblems,asthecommentdenotestheabsenceofanencouraging andsometimescompelling environmentof shared responsibil-ities among various administrative levels andbureaucratic machineries and missing sup-portivelegislationsarenofactorslesscapableoftamperingtheprogressofCFLGprogrammeoranyotherinitiativeaimingatsocialgoodforthatmatter.RAJAKUMARI GRAMA PANCHAYAT Rajakumari panchayat does not havemany child friendly initiatives to show case intheir credit. It has been observed during thestudythat,theawarenesscreatedthroughtrain-ingisyettomakeaconsiderableimpact,inthewayLSGbodyhereapproachthewholeideaofchildfriendlygovernanceandhencealsointhelifeofchildcommunityofthepanchayat.How-ever, Rajakumari panchayat did undertake aninterestinginitiativeinthewakeofafreshspiritchannelizedthroughthetraining.In2018,itin-stalledboardsbriefingtherightsofchildren inpanchayat office and several other institutionsunderit,whichstillcanbefoundasremindersfor everyone visiting these offices to acknowl-edgethatchildrenarealsorightfulcitizens.Lat-erthepanchayatalsopublishedabookonchildrights by themselves.Thismodel of awarenesscreationcanbesuggestedforallotherpanchyatstofollowasabeginningpointtokickstarttheirtransformationintoachildfriendlygovernancesystem.ButthefactshouldalsobeunderstoodthatiftheLSGbodydoesnottakefurtherstepsthatcanactuallytouchandpositivelychangethelivesinfield,suchawarenesscreatingeffortswillremainonpaper.

VADAKARAPPATHY GRAMA PANCHAYAT Following the training on CFLG pro-gramme, as part of the directions issued fromKILA, in2017-18 thepanchayatcreatedadatabaseoftheirchildpopulation.Thisexercisere-sultedinafindingofsignificancethattherearearound 14 other state children inhabiting thepanchayat without any proper identificationdocumentsandfacingtheabsenceofaconduc-tiveenvironmentfortheirgrowthanddevelop-ment.ThePanchayatauthoritiestimelysteppedinto the issue, anda casewas registeredunderthe provisions on human trafficking based ontheunderstandingthatthesechildrenwerechildlabourers brought to the panchayat for somework, at theexpenseof theirhealth, educationand the very right to live in the love, protec-tion and care of own families. Finally throughthe coordinated actions of panchayat and oth-er concernedauthorities, children’sparents gotcontactedandtheyweresafelysentbacktotheirhomes. It is truethattheinterventionsdonebyLSGbody in this case are something that theyare totally liable to do when such a circum-stanceofserioushumanrightviolationsarises.Butthisissue,whichwentunnoticeduntilthenirrespective of the on-going efforts of variousgovernment departments to create awarenessontheproblemofchildlabourandtherightsofchildren ingeneral, came into lightonlywhenthepanchayatsetouttoformadatebaseoftheirchildcommunityasoneoftheprimarystepstobuildachildfriendlylocalgovernancesystemattheirplace.Alongwiththis,thenewinsightsandinspirationsacquiredfromCFLGtrainingmighthavepropelledthebodytostandstrongerforthecauseofchildrightsprotection.Sowhenmanyofusargueorblatantlybelievethat there isnoissueofchildlabourinthestateoratleastinourlocalities,thisexperiencebeingsharedbyVada-karappathypanchayat shows the relevanceandunavoidableneedtocreateanexclusivedatabaseorregistryofchildpopulationattheLSGlevel,comprisingofcomprehensivedataonthesocial,economic,cultural,politicalandemotionallivesofchildrenandeffectivelyupdateandmodifyitoverthetime.AsCFLGprogrammeincludestheformationofchilddatabaseintheirlistofmustdoinitiatives,itislearntthatitsscopeworkswell



beyondprovidingjustnumbersofbeneficiariesfor various child friendly projects and actuallyhelpstosavethelivesofchildrenlivingintrou-ble,whichwillfurtherstrengthenthereadinessofLSGbody foreffectiveemergencyresponsesandinterventions.

VENGANOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT Similar to almost all the panchayatsunderstudy, inVenganooralsoweheardcom-mentsbyelectedrepresentativesandothercon-cerned authorities and figures denoting that itwas the training provided by KILA on CFLGprogrammethathelpedthemtorealisetheroleof panchayat in ensuring holistic developmentof children. It is indeed true that it was afterthe training many panchayats started to con-ductchildren’sgramasabhas,which isa crucialup-gradationofacrucial instrumentofdecen-traliseddemocracyandrealisethatchildrenalsohaveveryspecificdemands,needsandconcernstoputforwardtothegovernmentmachinery.Itis largely determined by the ideological standandcommitmentofLSGbodythatuptowhatextentitproperlyrespondsandeffectivelyinter-venes into the issuesbeingbroughtup in suchparticipatory platforms.However, the very ex-perience of encountering children publicly ex-pressingtheirownopinions,interestsandneedsregardinganythingthatmattersintheirperson-al and social lives, is in itself a factor that canencourageorothertimescompelthebodytoad-dressatleastsomeoftheissuesbeingraisedbythem. Thenotablechildfriendlyinitiativesun-dertook by Venganoor panchayat are of goodscope for replication in other panchayats andtheyagainprovidetestimonytotheabove-men-tioned potential of participatory platforms toproperchildfriendlyinitiatives.In2017,amag-azinenamed “Kinav”was published inVenga-noor,whenpanchayatstoodalongwithchildrentorealisetheirdesiretocreateawaytoshowcasetheir literary and artistic talents.Therewas anexecutive committee of children to coordinatethe activities ofmagazine creation and the re-sponseofchildcommunityinthepanchayatinterms of their creative contributions into thisinitiative said to have been great and very en-couraging. Venganoor LSG body in 2017 also

arrangedcoachingfacilityforchildreningameslikefootball,basketballetc.andthiswassome-thingchildrenhadbeenasking forpersistentlyin theirgramasabhas. Alongwith these initia-tives, training for making the panchayat con-sciousabouttheabsenceofacomprehensiveun-derstandingaboutthelivingconditionsoftheirchild population, in 2016 it also conducted ananalytical study to gather details regarding theactual living circumstances of children. Basedonthefindingsreachedby thisstudy, thepan-chayatpublishedavisiondocumentinthenameof ‘Nilaav’ to guide and facilitate its transitionintoachildfriendlypanchayat.Theformulationofavisiondocumentishighlyrecommendedtoensure efficient and effective planning, imple-mentation,monitoringandtimelyupgradationsoftheprojectsandactivitiesundersuchamas-sivetransformatoryprogrammelikeCFLGandVenganoorpanchayatsetsagoodmodelonthisfront.

SREEKRISHNAPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH SreekrishnapuramisapanchayatinPal-akkadblockofPalakkaddistrictinKerala.Childfriendly local governance at Sreekrishnapuramwas initiated as amulti convergence approachonchildfriendlyinitiativestoensureparticipa-tionandcitizenshipamongchildren. TheCFLGactivitiesinitiatedfollowedbytheKILAtrainingconductedinNovember2016.Ten selected students from the panchayat hadundergone2-daytrainingatShikishakSadanatPalakkad.Andtheywereaskedtosubmitare-portontheProjectsthatarretobeimplementedthroughanalyzingsituationandassessingneedsexclusivelyfortheChildren.Thereportwassub-mittedtothePanchayat.TwoChildrenwereadd-edineveryWorkinggroupandvisiondocumentweresubmittedbasedontheFourRightBaseddimensions formulated by the CFLG training(ChildSurvival,Child,Development,ChildPar-ticipationandChildProtection)AndbasedonthismanyChildFriendlyInitiativeswereformu-latedoutofwhich3notableinterventionsare:

Karunyasparsham (CHILD DEVELOP-MENT): Karunyasparsham project is a dig-italized data collection of differently abled



childreninPanchayatwiththeexpertiseofEngi-neeringStudentsOfGovt.EngineeringCollegeSreekrishnapuram.TheDatacollectedconsistofthedetailsofDifferentlyabledstudents,theser-vices that theyareavailing fromthepanchayatand further support required for them is beenrecordedandthenthereisseparatewebsiteex-clusivelyfordifferentlyabledstudentstoupdatetheirdetailsinfrequentintervals.

Swastha (CHILD PROTECTION):Thepancha-yatdevelopeda tool (questionnaire) forCrimemapping named “swastha” to check the crimeagainstchildrenandtoaddress theseproblemsinpanchayatlevel.

Snehabucket (CHILD DEVELOPMENT):Sne-habucket projectwas done in associationwithpalliativecareinitiativeofthepanchayatbypar-ticipating child community in palliative careservicesofthepanchayat.Throughthisproject,materialcollectiondrivefortheoldandelderlypersonsisbeendoneonNovember14aspartofchildren’sdaycelebrations. The digital data collection ensured theactual data of differently abled children in thepanchayatand timelyavailabilityof services tothem,accordingtoWelfarestandingcommitteechairperson’sopinion. “Wewereabletotapthelocalresourcesfortheschemes.Forexample,KARUNYASPAR-SHAMweusedtheexpertiseofengineeringstu-dentsofSreekrishnapuram. Wenotonlycollectedthedataofdiffer-ently abled childrenbut digitalised it and thuswereabletocreateaseparatewebsiteforthem”. Thepromotingfactorbehindthesmoothfunctioning of CFLG activities is that the col-lective effort of all stakeholders that triggeredthroughtheCFLGtrainingbyKILA.EducationstandingcommitteechairpersonofSreekrishna-puramGramapanchayatmarksthisas; “Sreekrishnapuram-wewereabletoini-tiatesuchprogrammesbecauseoftheconsensusamongtherulingandtheoppositionparties” Thechallengethatfacedbytheinitiativewere the limitationof LSG to intervene in ed-ucational affairs andcooperate the activitiesofschools,becausemostof theschoolsareunderprivatemanagement.

The sustainable development andman-agement ofCFLGprogrammes are ensured byutilizing local resources like counsellors, foot-ball coach, artists etc and CFLG stakeholders,CFLGinstitutionsetc.Mostoftheprogrammesareconductinginassociationwiththevoluntary,continues and comprehensive effort of otherstakeholders.

PORUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT Theyhadalreadyequippedwithcflgpro-grammeslikeBalasabhabutthefocusedandco-ordinatedactivitiesofcflgenabledafterkilacflgtraining.

‘Thaliridam’:isachildfriendlyinitiativedevel-opedbyPorurpanchayattoreducethegapbe-tweenchildrenandenvironment.Throughthisproject, panchayat instructed to all aided andunaided schools to provide a sapling for everychild.ItwasaninitiativethatstartedasperthespecialinterestofPanchayatandWelfarestand-ingcommittee.Thesustainability isensuredbythe collective effort of LSG and Principals ofschools.

Cycle rally;certainprogrammeswereconduct-edunderKaumaraclublikeCyclerally,antidrugabuse campaign, publishing magazine, leader-shiptraining,campaignagainstplasticuseetc.

Leadership Camp;Providedleadershiptrainingto200childrenatKILA.Thiscampwaswellre-ceivedbythechildren.

Leadership training increased the pro-activenatureamongchildrenwhichisreflectedontheeffectiveworkingofBalasabha Created a specific strategy for Childgramasabhaincreasedchildparticipation.ChildgramasabhaconductedonthebasisofkoumaraclubmembersbasedoneachAnganwadi.



Summary As part of the study, we could identify14promisingcasesalloverthestate.Therewereinitiatives from LSGI’s in different dimensionsofCFLG.Theyareinitiativesfor;makingpublicinstitutionschildfriendly,developingdatebaseand registry of children, interventions for im-proving thehealthandnutritionstatusofchil-dren,activitiesforprovidingphysicaleducationand arts performance training to the children,effective running of children’s forums, bring-ing environmental conservation consciousnessamong children, initiatives for addressing theissue of differently-abled children, conductingpublic education programmes for child right,and initiatives for ensuring self protection ofchildren. Edavaka, unnikulam, mattathur , ku-marakom, and sreekrishnapuram panchayatshavedoneremarkableinitiativesformakingthepublic institution’s child-friendly. These inter-ventionsweredonemostlyinPHCandAngan-wadi. Edavaka and vadakarapathy panchayatshavedoneinterventionsforevolvingbetterchilddatabase.Theinterventionof theedavakapan-chayat fordevelopingasingleregistry isworthmentioninginthiscontext.Kattakad,porur,andvenganur panchayats have done interventionsforimprovingthephysicalcapabilityofchildren. Kumarakom, venganur, and ramapur-ampanchayathave takena remarkable lead inensuringbetterfunctioningofchildren’sforumsuchaschildren’sgramasabha,childbalasabha,and child panchayats. Edavaka, kolazhy, unni-kulam and porur panchayat have undertakensignificant initiatives todevelopenvironmentalconservationconsciousnessamongchildrenandtocreating interestamongchildrenonagricul-tural activities. Krishipadam, thaliridam, andharithavidhyalayamare theprogrammes initi-atedbytheLSGIsinthisdirection. The sreekrishnapuram panchayat hastaken initiatives for providing special care todifferentiallyabledchildrenandtoevolvetheirdigitalized database in the panchayat. Thekarunyasprasham is a remarkable programmeinitiatedbysreekrishnapuarampanchayat.Mat-tathur, kumarakom, pallipad, rajakumari, ven-

ganur, ramapuram,andporurpanchayatshaveundertakenprogrammesforcreatingawarenesson child rights among different stake holds.counsellingsupportforchildreninfloodaffect-edfamilies,mappingandrestoringthedropoutstudents, ‘Nilav’ guideline, and water literacyprogrammesarethemainprogrammesdonebyLSGI’sinthisdirection.Themalapanchayathasdonedefenseclassesand free-swimming train-ingprogrammesforensuringtheself-protectionofchildren. Sustainabilityofaprojectisdeterminedbyanentire rangeof factors including its con-textual relevance over time, availability of suf-ficient funds, good coordination and supportbetweenconcerneddepartmentsorbodies,willpowerofpoliticalleadership,transparentexecu-tion,public co-operation,holisticparticipationofbeneficiariesinallstagesofproject,andtime-ly need-based modifications. Sustainability inturninfluencesthepossibilitiesofscalinguptheprojects or interventions over time to enhancethecoverageofbeneficiariesandbenefitsthem-selves.Whenwelookatourchoseninterventionsforsustainablemodelsinwhichwecanfindtheconvergedpositiveperformanceofatleastsomeoftheabove-mentionedfactors,disappointinglywedonothavemuchtopickout.Henceseveralof the interventions under analysis here are ofshort-run nature and some of them have col-lapsedinbetweenbeforetheycouldevenmeettheir short run objectives. Even the few longrunprojects,whicharebeingcontinuedbyLSGbodiesandgets scaledupover theyears, seemto bemostly running on a few specific factorslikeavailabilityoffunds,willpowerorparticularinterestsoftherulingfrontetc.andwhentheseenergy sources runsoutof fuel, abroadbasedsocial space and support to continue and up-gradetheseprojectswillbeabsent,mainlyduetothelackofthrustontheholisticparticipationofchildren. Thereareothersides to these ‘observedfacts’aswell.WhileonecriticisestheLSGbod-iesforlackoffocusedefforts,bureaucraticinef-ficiencies and their conventional and political-ly inclined ideological stands in not botheringabout the sustainability, scalability, and some-



times even the actual impacts of the projects,it has to be acknowledged that factors like in-ter,and intradepartmentalco-operation issuesand legislative restrictions do affect the timelyprojectapprovalandavailabilityoftherequiredfunds,evenwhenthepanchayatistotallyreadytostartanewprojectorcontinueandupgradeanexistingone.Alongwiththis,evenininstanc-eswhereagovernmentmachineryputsenougheffortstobringtheparticipationofchildrenandpublic into project execution and evaluationetc.,lackofinterestandsocialsenseofthepub-licandparentcommunitymaybe lethargicontheirsidetocontributetosuchactivitiesandletthechildrenparticipate.Thiscanpullbackanddiscouragetheauthoritiesfromfurtherdemoc-ratisingtheprocessandseekingdifferentpossi-bilitiestoensurethesustainabilityoftheproject.Thestudyteamhaswitnessedthedifficultybe-ingfacedbyauthoritiesinraisingtheattendancecountofchildrenfromthebottomlevelatvari-ouspanchayatandwardlevelgatheringsduringthestudy. So, while discussing remedies to over-comethementionedhurdles,strugglesandchal-lengesanddesignsustainable, impactfulmodelinterventionsarealityineachandeverypancha-yat,theeffortcomefromallsides.CFLGisaso-cialtransformatoryprogrammewithenormousopportunities to plant the seeds of many cru-cialstructuralandsystemicchangesandhencewithgreatscopetocontributeintothebuildingof a democratic society that is more humane,sustainable, equitable andethicallybonded.Asthisprogrammebringsallinterconnectedmajor

arenasofachild’slifeintotheambitofitsinter-est,thereareunlimitedcreativepossibilitiesforthe panchayats to initiate unique projects par-allel addressing theneeds ofmultiple domains,come up with better performance indicators,set new standards of performance and designmorecontextuallyrelevantownframeworksforprogramme implementation in the long run,oncetheyaredonewiththebasicrequirementstonurtureachild friendlypanchayat.This isalongrebelliousroadaheadtoempowerthecur-rent and future generations of children to livetheirchildhoodandadolescentinasocialenvi-ronment thateffectivelymeets theiremotional,psychologicalandphysicaldevelopmentalrightsand needs and grow up into better responsi-ble human beings with concerns beyond ownachievementsandself-interests. We, as the study team, are once againtaking this chance to appreciate and thank alltheeffortstakenbyKILAandthetrainedpan-chayats to kick start this journey. However togo forward,wecannotdowithout the follow-ing improvements: further ideological changesand awareness creation among the stakeholdergroups, continuous evaluation andmonitoringofprogrammeimplementation,frequentimpactassessmentandfeedbackcollectionexercises,in-spiringincentivesforbetterperformingpancha-yats,legislativereformations,strongmulti-stakeholder collaboration and coordination ,explo-ration of the alternative andmore democraticways of resource mobilisation and utilisationandholisticallroundparticipationofchildren.



The objective of the present study wastounderstandtheimpactoftheChildFriendlyLocalGovernance(CFLG)trainingprogrammeinitiated by Child Resource Centre (CRC) ofKILAwiththesupportofUNICEFfrom2015-16 to 2017-18.The study has followed an ap-proach of assessing the overall effectiveness oftheprogrammebyevaluating itsdemonstratedexperiencesinasampleoflocalbodiesselectedfromacrossthestate.Theassessmentwasdonein30Gramapanchayatsand2municipalitiesinthe state,which received the training. Inordertogetanobjectivecomparativepictureofchildfriendlyinitiatives,3panchayathsandonemu-nicipalitywereselectedascontrolcases for theassessment.Outcomes of the trainingwere se-lectedastheobjectivecriteriatoprovideanevi-dencebasetothedeliverablesoftheprogramme. This chapter is an attempt to provide apictureoftheoverallimpactoftheprogrammeby discussing the major findings of the study.Thefindingsaredividedintotwosections.Thefirst section discusses the general findings re-garding the overall design and strategy of theprogramme.Theother section provides reflec-tionsregardingtheexperienceofCFLGimple-mentation programmes under its different do-mainssuchassurvival,development,protectionandparticipation.Thestudyhasdevelopedtheassessment framework and tools based on theofficial programme framework proposed byUNICEFandKILA.

CHAPTER - IX

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

General Findings and observations about the CFLG programme• It is appreciable that the UNICEF-KILA

initiativeofChildfriendlylocalgovernancecoulddisseminatetheconceptofCFLGto146LSGIsasaprogressivepolicyinitiative.Theone-yearlongtrainingprovideatKILAfor these 146 local bodies has successful-ly transferred the idea of the four CFLGdomains i.e., survival, development, pro-tection, andparticipation, into these localgovernment institutions. The transfer ofknowledge achieved is commendable intermsofcontentdelivery.

• Asamassivestateleveltrainingprogrammewiththeparticipationofmulti-stakeholderssuch as representatives, electedmembers,localbodyofficials,schoolheads,ICDSof-ficials,andotherofficialsundertheLSGIs,theCFLG training could reachout to theauthoritiesoflocalgovernmentsandithashelpedinsensitisationregardingtheCFLGprogrammeamongthem.

• Most of the LSGIs trained have absorbedthe concept of Children’s Gramasabha asanimportantforumofchildren.Almostalltrained localbodieshaveconductedChil-dren’s Gramasabha at least once. Such aforumprovidesaplatform forchildren toexercisetheirfranchiseasapartnerintheplanningprocess.

• Apartfromtheroutinetraining,themen-toring system established with follow-upsand enhancement programmes, throughtheinvolvementofmentors,isappreciableasanequippingstrategy.



Asaresultoftheextensivetrainingandvarioushandholdingstrategies,someexemplaryinitia-tives related to child friendly local governancehaveemergedintheLSGIs.

Issues implied in the framework of the programme UNICEF is an international platform.Thismeanstheyfollowaninternationalframe-workandindicatorsfordevelopingprogrammes.While it is appreciable to have internationalstandards in issues related to rights of personsincluding children, there arepitfalls in groundlevel implementation too. It is understandablethatwhileapproachingIndia,auniversalframe-work fordevelopingcountrieswouldbeactingastheguidingmechanismforprogrammedevel-opmentandimplementation.Sincethedevelop-mentexperienceofKeralaandstatusofchildrenare quite different from the common Indianscenario,theframeworkoftheprogrammehasto be designed and operationalised within thespecificKerala context. Such a customized ad-aptation of the common Indian framework totheKerala situationwas found largelymissingintheprogramme.Ideally,theprogrammehadto be re-designed and operationalised in theKerala context. Even though the broad frame-workcomprisingofsurvival,development,pro-tection, and participation is suitable to Keralacontext,microindicatorswithintheframeworkneedtobemorecontextualized innature. Forinstance,thesexratioinKeralahasbeenshow-ingatrendofrelativeequalityeventhoughthereisaslightdeclineinthetendencyshowninthecaseof0-6agegroup.Sex selectiveabortion isbeingaddressedbythestatethroughstrongle-galmeasures.Whiletheexistenceofthepracticecannotberuledoutcompletely,itisnotasevereissue in the state. However, the CFLG frame-workconsidersitasakeyelement,eveninKer-ala.Likewise,thefirst-generationissuessuchasavailingnutritiousfoodforsurviving,ensuringbasic education facilities, providing minimumhealthfacilitiesetc.werelargelyachievedbythestate.Howeverthesecondgenerationissuessuchasqualityofeducation,qualityofhealthservicesand the quality of nutritional supply throughtheAnganwadisare the issuescapturingatten-tioninthepublicdiscoursesofthestate.Insuch

a context, a programme likeCFLGcouldhavebeenutilizedtodevelopandapplyanadvancedframeworksuited to the specificcontextof thestate. Keralaisalsofacingissuessuchassuicideamongchildren,highprevalenceofdepression,increasing substance abuse, trend alcoholism,lackofphysicalexerciseandstressfromnuclearfamilies.(Ortizetal.,n.d.)Notwithstandingtheintensityof these issuesan internationallysup-portedprogrammelikeCFLGcouldnotdevelopanadaptiveframeworksuitedtoaddressthespe-cificissuesinKerala’scontext.

Issues in Recognising Children as Citizens The International convention on childright highlights the citizenships of childrenwhereassucharights-basedapproachwasmiss-ingintheoveralltrainingprogrammerelatedtoCFLG.TheCFLGtrainingandfollow-upactionscould not deliver the citizenship right of chil-drenasoneamongtheirbasisrighttotheLSGIsthrough training. Hence the representatives ofLSGIs inCFLGprogrammeimplemented localbodycouldnotperceivechildrenascitizens.Thisproblemhasreflectedinthebasicsapproachofthe programme has made impediments in re-alisingtherealtargetoftheprogrammes.Evenif they have implemented CFLG the respondsof elected representative in interviews. Under-scoresthattheystillbelievetheycanmakepro-gramme even without children’s participation.Creation of clear understanding about childrightsamongthedifferentstakeholdersreactedto theprogrammewasmissing in the all exer-cise.Itisalsopertinenttonotethatchildrendidnotgetparticipationinanystageofprojectplan-ningandimplementationprogramme.

Absence of evidence-based planning Systematic identification of problemsandevolvingsolutionsforthemrequireascien-tificallymanaged database. Children’s compre-hensivedevelopmentplansinmostoftheLSGIswerenotpreparedwithsupportofdata.Hencethecomprehensivedataonchildrenisnotavail-able in theLSGIs. Limiteddata collected fromtheannualroutinesurveysconductedbyICDSofficersistheonlyavailabledatasetonchildren.Thestandardizedformatfordatacollectionhas



notbeenfollowedorupdatedinmostofLSGIs.Moreimportantly,suchdatasetswerenotusedforplanningprogrammesforchildren.

Absence of a permanent institutional mecha-nism for children in LSGIs KILAhaspromotedinstitutionalmech-anism for theparticipationof children in gov-ernance. Balasabhas, Bala Panchayath, andchildren’s Gramasabha are instances of suchmechanism. The study indicated that thesesinstitutional mechanism could not work as apermanent democratic forum of children inthe Panchayats andmunicipalities.Thesewerelimited to one-time events for gathering chil-dren.The real functions envisaged to be real-isedthroughtheforumsuchasidentificationofchildren’sissues,gatheringchildren’ssuggestionsforevolvingchildfriendlyplans,andnurturingdemocratic culture among children were notturnedintogroundlevelpractices. KILAhas envisagedCFLGas aperma-nentinstitutionalsystemwherechildrenarethekey stakeholders. But after one or two meet-ings theseprogrammes couldnot be sustainedand the programmeswere limited to one-timeevents.TheLSGIscouldnotdesignsuchinstitu-tionsinawaythattheycouldsustainforalongerperiodandcouldcontributetofurtherplanningandaction.

Dearth of initiatives for comprehensive child development plan LSGIs had already been instructed toearmark a mandatory 5% allocation in everyyearforchildrenandtheaged.Theyhavebeenallocating funding for supplementarynutritionprogrammeasastatutoryrequirementandthe5%ofmandatoryallocation isproposedoutoftheallocationforsupplementarynutritionasthepartofrecentguidelines.Thishasprovidedsuffi-cientresourcesforlocalgovernmentstodevelopand implementplans forchildren.AsapartofCFLGtheyweresuggestedtoprepareacompre-hensivechilddevelopmentplanandimplementitunder thedevelopmentplanofLSGIs.KILAin cooperation withUNICEF, prepared guide-lines for LSGIs for developing comprehensivechild development plans based on four majordomainsofchildrights.Howeverthestakehold-

ersrelatedtoCFLGinalllocalbodiescouldnotinternalizethespirit.DatafromLSGIsshowthatmostoftheLSGIswereeitherfollowingroutineprogrammesororganizingone-timeeventslikeBalasabha in the place of comprehensive pro-grammesforchildren.Onlyafewofthemcouldformulate creative plans for children. The ap-proachofmanyLSGIstowardsCFLGcouldbetermedasadhocismintheplanningandimple-mentationofprograms.Majorityofthemcouldnotutilizetheprovisionofmandatory5%fundallocationforchildreneffectively.

Absence of involvement of parents and teachers Therewerenospecificprogrammesun-der CFLG for orienting parents and teacherstowardstheconceptofchildrights.CFLGpro-grammehadfocusedonlyonorganizingactiv-ities for children. An attemp to transform theperspectives of parents and teachers towardschildrenwas absent in the framework.Parentsplay a pivotal role in the wholesome develop-mentof a child.Parents’ life choices, behavior,andattitudetowardschildrenaffectthebehaviorofthechild.Thelivingenvironmentexperiencedbyeachgenerationwiththechangingglobal,re-gional,socio-politicalsituationsarealsocrucialin this process. Family, with its undemocrat-ic and hierarchical structure is also responsi-ble indenyingchildrights inthisenvironmentwhich may cause psycho-emotional issues forthechildren.Hencecontinuousprogrammesforeducating parents and teachers are immenselyrelevantforthesuccessofachildfriendlylocalgovernancesystem.DatafromLSGIsshowsthattheycouldnotundertakesuchseriousinitiativesto sensitize parents and other adults on childrights.

Inadequacy of innovative projects TheLSGsinKeralahavefollowedcertainroutine projects with elements of recognisingandensuringchildrights,rightfromtheincep-tion of people’s plan campaign and particular-ly after the 11th plan. Even after the exposuregainedthroughtheCFLGtraining,mostLSGIsare still following the samepatternofprojects.Thereisageneraldecreaseininitiativesforin-novativechildfriendlyprojectsbytheLSGseven



thoughsomeinitiativesweregeneratedinsomeLSGIs. However, it is noteworthy that therehave been some cases of innovative projectsacrossthestateliketheNirbhayaprogrammeatMatthuthur, Saphalamee Balyam at Kottayam,Kanmani andGOALprogramme at Sreekrish-napuram, Thaliridam programme at PorurGramapanchayath, and child protection centreatMattathur(Thrissur)etc.TheseareexamplesforinnovativeprogrammestakenupbyGramapanchayaths,imbibingthespiritofCFLGtrain-ing.Thefactthatthenumberofsuchinitiativesare far less compared to the number of LSGswhichreceivedtraininginCFLGdeservesatten-tion.KottakkalmunicipalitycouldalsotakeupafewinnnovativeinitiativessuchasthePratheek-shaeducationprogramme.

Role of Mentors SomeLSGsareadvisedandsupportedbyKILAthroughamentoringsystem.Supportinglocalbodiesforbettergovernanceforchildrenisthepurposeofthisassistance.Atleastonemen-torforaclusterofpanchayatscouldbeprovid-edbyKILAforenhancingtheefficiencyofchildfriendlyinitiativesofLSGIs.ThissystemcanbeextendedtoallLSGIsofthestateinduecourseoftime.

Need of special strategy for children from marginalised groups SomePanchayaths,withasizeablepres-ence of tribal population such as Pudur,Mul-lankolly,ThirunellyandAdimalywereincludedin the CFLG programme. Many studies haveindicated that tribal children are still laggingbehind inbasiceducationalachievementwhencomparedwiththenon-tribalpopulation.Dropoutandinconsistencyinschoolingaretwoma-jor issueshighlightedbymany studies. Studiesof educational performance SC students alsoindicate they too exhibit the tendency ofmar-ginalisation fromthemainstream.StatusofSCandSTchildrenhighlighttheneedofaspecialstrategyinaddressingthesurvivalissuesintheirlife.However,CFLGcouldnotevolveaspecificand locally contextualised strategies to addressthe issues of children formmarginalised com-munitiessuchasSCandST.

FINDINGS OF THE STUDY IN DIFFERENT CFLG DOMAINS The following section attempts to pro-videthemajorfindingsunderthefourdomainsofchild-friendly localgovernance,suchassur-vival,development,protectionandparticipation

Child Survival The sub domains suggested under thetitleofchildsurvivalby theCFLGprogrammeare; interventions to reduce sex-selective abor-tion, ensuring safe drinkingwater, better sani-tation and hygiene, arresting neonatal and in-fantmortality rate, immunization, distributionofvitaminAsupplementsandensuringqualityservice to pregnant and lactating women.Theactivities conducted by LSGIs under the do-main of Child Survival are nutritional status,screeningofpregnantwomen,lactatingmothersand children throughPHCs,Anganwadi class-es,Gramasabhaclassesonnutrition,visitingofASHAworkers,tribalmedicalcamps,andclass-es on hygiene, follow-up of immunisation anddistributionofvitaminsupplements.Inmostofthepanchayats, the allocation and expenditureforactivitiesunderthedomainofchildsurvivalarelyingbetweenzerototenpercent.Thestudyindicates thatmajorityof thePanchayatscouldearmarkbelow10%ofthetotalfundsallocatedfor children for the domain of child survival.Alongwiththepoorallocation,thestudyindi-catesthatLSGIscouldutiliseonlylessthan10%of theallocatedmoney for implementingproj-ectsunderthedomainofchildsurvival.Itisalsonoted that there is no considerable differencebetween rural andurbanLSGIs in this regard.MostoftheinitiativestakenbyLSGIsunderthisdomainareeitherlow-budgetorlyingundertheroutineactivitiesofdepartmentssuchashealthand social justice.Thismay be one reason forlowallocationandexpenditurebytheLSGIsun-derchildsurvival.• The activities conducted by LSGIs under

thedomainofChildSurvivalarenutrition-alstatus,screeningofpregnantwomen,lac-tatingmotherandchildrenthroughPHC,Anganwadiclasses,Gramasabhaclassesonnutrition, visiting ofASHAworkers, trib-almedical camps, andclassesonhygiene,follow-up of immunisation and distribu-



tionofvitaminsupplements.Inmostofthepanchayats,theallocationandexpenditureforchildsurvivalarelyingbetweenzerototenpercent.MostoftheinitiativestakenbyLSGISunderthisdomainareeithercostlessorlyingundertheroutineactivitiesofde-partmentssuchashealthandsocialjustice.Thismaybeonereasonfor lowallocationandexpenditurebytheLSGIs.

• Regardingtheeffortstoidentifyanderadi-catesex-selectiveabortion,noLSGIsunderthe studyhad taken any specific initiativeby themselves to address the issue. Theinitiatives mainly come from the healthdepartment and other concerned depart-ments.TheintroductionoftheCFLGpro-gramme was not an influencing factor indeciding the number or frequency of theinitiativestoaddresstheissueofsex-selec-tive abortion. In general, the lownumberof reportedsex-selectiveabortioncases intheirlocalitiesmighthaveworkedasafac-torinreducingtheconcernandinterestonthesideoftrainedLSGIstocomeforwardwithnewinitiativesortostrengthentheex-istingmechanismstoaddresstheissue.

• AspartoftheRBSKprogrammeunderthehealth department, nurses visit schools,PHCs, and Anganwadis in their assignedlocationsperiodicallyandconductscreen-ing sessions to identify the health issuesamong children and refer them to high-er-levelpublichealthcareinstitutions.Thechild-friendly movement has influencedtheCFLGtrainedpanchayathstoimproveactivities such as initiatives by ICDS,An-ganwadi classes,Healthdepartment class-es, Gramasabha classes, own InitiativesbyLSGIsandscreenings throughschools.Thereisasignificantdifferencefoundintheperiods before and after theCFLG.How-ever, theCFLG initiativescouldnotbringmuchofachangeinurbanlocationswhencomparedwiththeirruralcounterparts intermsofinterventionsasthepartofRBSK,whereastheowninitiativesbyLSGIsseemtobenotsignificant.

• Aconsiderableamountof fund is allocat-ed for supplementarynutrition toaddressmalnutritionamongchildreneveryyearby

LSGIsinKerala.However,thiscouldnotbeincluded in the mandatory 5% allocationforchildren.Thislegalprovisionisprovid-ingspaceforallocatingseparatemoneyforthe needs of children. However, the pan-chayats are not taking appropriate initia-tivesforallocatingfundsforchildsurvivalexceptfortheallocationforsupplementarynutrition.Thisalsoindicatesthataddress-ingtheissueofmalnutritionandmappingthestatusofnutritionamongchildrenwasnotseriouslytakenupbytheLSGIsunderCFLGexceptfortheroutineactivitieshap-peningthroughAnganwadis.

• EventhoughKeralahasshownbetterper-formanceincomparisonwiththenationalaverageinvaccination,thestatehastoim-provetheachievementtoreach100%vac-cination. ASHA workers, Kudumbashreegroups, and Anganwadi workers who areaffiliated to panchayaths are taking a keyrole inmaking thevaccinationcampaignssuccessful.

• TheCFLGtrainingcouldbringoutonlyaslightimprovementinthecaseofinitiativesalready taken by the health departmentand ICDS system. Even though the over-all trendofperformanceof vaccination ispositiveinpanchayathsandmunicipalities,therehavebeensomesetbacksvisibleinafew locations of the state.The campaignsagainst vaccination by religious groups,somenaturopathicgroupsandanti-sciencemovementshavecreatedamoodofsuspi-cionagainstvaccination.ThishasincreasedtheresponsibilityofLSGIsinsuchregions.ItisnotedthatsomeoftheLSGIshavetak-enspecialinitiativesforimprovingtherateof vaccination where the anti-vaccinationcampaigns were active. For instance, thePulamantholepanchayathasdoneaspecialcampaigninthisregard.However,thefind-ingsof thestudy indicate thatsuch initia-tiveswerenotwidelytakenupbyallLSGIs.

Child Development• Development is the single largest domain

underwhichLSGIshaveallocatedanduti-lisedalargeamountoffundsunderCFLG.Therehasbeena significant improvement



intheallocationofpanchayathsfordevel-opmentinthepost-CFLGtrainingperiod.ThereisnosuchtrendvisibleinthecaseofurbanLSGIs.Asagainstthetrendofincreas-ingallocationtheexpenditureoftherurallocal government shows a higher level ofmismatch.Thisperceivedlethargyofpan-chayaths inspending theallocatedmoneyparticularlyinchilddevelopmentmaybeareflectionoftheirinsensitivitytowardstheissuesofchildren.Absenceofpropersocialaudit mechanism from the participatoryforums for childrenmay be another per-tinentreasonforthistrend.Dataonchildparticipation inCFLG trained panchayatswhicharediscussedinchapter6(seechap-ter 6) indicate that participatory forumsareeitherinactiveorrestrictedtoone-timeevents.Thishasalargerimplicationintheutilizationoffundsforchilddevelopment.

• ThestudyalsoindicatesthatthemajorityofLSGIscouldnotpreparedisaggregatedandcomprehensivedatabaseonchildrenwhichwouldhaveactedasabaselinetopreparingdevelopingprogrammeforchildren.

• An initiative for constructing permanentbuildingsforAnganwadiwithoutlandisinastagnantstageacross thestate.Thehighvalueandunavailabilityoflandareidenti-fiedasthemajorreasonforthis.About60%of panchayats under study have alreadycompleted constructing own building forAnganwadi.However,theotherpanchayatscouldnottakeanyinitiativeforconstruct-ing permanent building during CFLGyears.Inmunicipalities,thereisnosignif-icantdifferenceinconstructingAnganwadibuildinginpreandpostCFLGyears.Therehas been no change during 2016-17 and2017-18.

• Thestudy indicates thatLSGIshave takencommendableinitiativesforcreatingabar-rier-free environment in the institutionscomingunder their jurisdiction.Thiswasvisible particularly in constructing toiletsand ramps in schools andfixingof chairsinPanchayatsandestablishingfeedingcor-nersandarrangingdrinkingwater.

• Primaryneeds suchasbarrier-free toilets,ramps, drinking water, primary and uni-

versalneedsofdifferentiallyabledchildrenwere met, while they could not addressthe secondaryneeds suchas liftsandcra-dle. Provision for wheelchairs, which is averyimportantneedfordifferentiallyabledchildren withmoving disabilities was ne-glected.ThisisanindicationthattheCFLGprogrammehastofocusmoreoncultivat-ingsensitivitytowardstheissuesofdiffer-ently-abledchildren.ThefindingsindicatethatCFLGtrainingcouldsensitisethelocalbody authorities to extend the relevanceof special facilities for differentially-abledchildren.However,thereisaneedtobeex-tended this sensitivity to thenext level ofintervention.

• TheeducationalassistanceinitiativesforSTchildrenbytheLSGIsareverylow.Thelackofstudyfacilities intribalhouseholdsandpoororientationoncareerarethemajoris-suesfacedbytribalstudents.TheFGDsofchildren in the tribal areas indicated thatPanchayatsaremostlyinterestedtotakeupeasyandsimpleinitiativesratherthanad-dressing thebasic issuesof tribalchildrensuchasmalnutrition,absenceofstudyfacil-itiesathome,andpoorcareerorientation.Thedatashowsthattherehasbeenaslightimprovement in theroutineactivities tak-enupbythepanchayatsfortribalchildrenbetweenpreandpost-CFLGperiods.How-ever,theycouldnotinitiateanyinnovativeprogrammeafterCFLGtrainingtoaddresstheissuesoftribalchildren.ThisindicatesthatCFLGstillrequiresadoptingaspecialstrategytoaddresstheissuesofchildrenintribalregionsapartfromtheuniversalstrat-egyofplanningandimplementation.SuchaspecificstrategyforvulnerablegroupsiscurrentlymissingintheCFLGprogramme.

• The initiativesby localbodies targettedatSCchildren indicate that theCFLGtrain-ingcouldonlyincreasethemomentumofsome traditional projectswhich had beentaken up by the LSGIs.This includes ac-tivities such as the distribution of laptopsandstudytables.CFLGtrainingcouldnotusherinanyinnovativeinitiativesinthelistofactivities.ThisunderscorestheneedforandrelevanceofspecialeffortwithinCFLG



tomakeitmoreinclusiveandbeneficialtothemarginalizedcommunities.

• LSGs are responsible to provide ba-by-friendly or child-friendly environmentforchildrenof theagegroupof3-5years.The infrastructure development, provi-sioning of learning aids, utensils, toys tothe Anganwadis, andmaking the Angan-wadi environment conducive to joyfullearningare theactivities they couldhavetaken up under the domain. Majority ofthepanchayatshavebeenundertakingthetaskofmaintenanceandrenovationoftheAnganwadis evenbefore theCFLG initia-tive.TherewasnosignificantchangeevenafterCFLG training in this regard.Whileexamining the activities initiated in pan-chayats in the pre-primary sector, it wasseen that the majority of the panchayatshavefollowedonlythetraditionalactivitiesthatwerefollowedbythemevenbeforetheCFLGtraining.ItcanbesaidthattheCFLGtraining could not bring any significantchangeinthisdirection.Atthesametime,someofthenewinitiativeswhichwerepro-posedasthepartofCFLG,suchasthecon-struction of child-friendly toilets,makingAnganwadibuildingpremiseslearningaidsthroughpaintingsandtheestablishmentofchildren’sparkwerenottakenupseriouslybythemajorityoflocalbodies.CFLGhadintroduced some innovative ideas in thepre-primarysector,butthemajorityoftheCFLGpanchayats failed in realizing theminpractice. Interventions formakingpre-schoolsattractivecentresofjoyfullearningweremissingeveninCFLGframework.

• An initiative for constructing permanentbuildingsforanganwadiswithoutlandisinastagnantstageacross thestate.Thehighvalueandunavailabilityoflandareidenti-fiedasthemajorreasonforthis.About60%of panchayats under study have alreadycompleted constructing own building foranganwadis. However, the other pancha-yats couldnot take any initiative for con-structingpermanentbuildingduringCFLGyears.Inmunicipalities,thereisnosignifi-cantdifference inconstructinganganwadibuildinginpreandpostCFLGyears.There

has been no change during 2016-17 and2017-18.

• Thestudy indicates thatLSGIshave takencommendableinitiativesforcreatingabar-rier-free environment in the institutionscomingunder their jurisdiction.Thiswasvisible particularly in constructing toiletsand ramps in schools andfixingof chairsinPanchayatsandestablishingfeedingcor-nersandarrangingdrinkingwater.

• Primaryneeds suchasbarrier-free toilets,ramps, drinking water, primary and uni-versalneedsofdifferentiallyabledchildrenwere met, while they could not addressthe secondaryneeds suchas liftsandcra-dle. Provision for wheelchairs, which is averyimportantneedfordifferentiallyabledchildren withmoving disabilities was ne-glected. This is an indication that CFLGprogrammehastofocusmoreoncultivat-ingsensitivitytowardstheissuesofdiffer-ently-abledchildren.ThefindingsindicatethatCFLGtrainingcouldsensitisethelocalbody authorities to extend the relevanceof special facilities for differentially-abledchildren.However,thereisaneedtobeex-tended this sensitivity to thenext level ofintervention.

• TheeducationalassistanceinitiativesforSTchildrenbytheLSGIsareverylow.Thelackofstudyfacilities intribalhouseholdsandpoororientationoncareerarethemajoris-suesfacedbytribalstudents.TheFGDsofchildren in the tribal areas indicated thatPanchayatsaremostlyinterestedtotakeupeasyandsimpleinitiativesratherthanad-dressing thebasic issuesof tribalchildrensuchasmalnutrition,absenceofstudyfacil-itiesathome,andpoorcareerorientation.Thedatashowsthattherehasbeenaslightimprovement in theroutineactivities tak-enupbythepanchayatsfortribalchildrenbetweenpreandpost-CFLGperiods.How-ever,theycouldnotinitiateanyinnovativeprogrammeafterCFLGtrainingtoaddresstheissuesoftribalchildren.ThisindicatesthatCFLGstillrequiresadoptingaspecialstrategytoaddresstheissuesofchildrenintribalregionsapartfromtheuniversalstrat-egyofplanningandimplementation.Such



aspecificstrategyforvulnerablegroupsiscurrentlymissingintheCFLGprogramme.

• The initiativesby localbodies targettedatSCchildren indicate that theCFLGtrain-ingcouldonlyincreasethemomentumofsome traditional projectswhich had beentaken up by the LSGIs.This includes ac-tivities such as the distribution of laptopsandstudytables.CFLGtrainingcouldnotusherinanyinnovativeinitiativesinthelistofactivities.ThisunderscorestheneedforandrelevanceofspecialeffortwithinCFLGtomakeitmoreinclusiveandbeneficialtothemarginalizedcommunities.

• LSGs are responsible to provide ba-by-friendly or child-friendly environmentforchildrenof theagegroupof3-5years.The infrastructure development, provi-sioning of learning aids, utensils, toys tothe Anganwadis, andmaking the Angan-wadi environment conducive to joyfullearningare theactivities they couldhavetaken up under the domain. Majority ofthepanchayatshavebeenundertakingthetaskofmaintenanceandrenovationoftheAnganwadis evenbefore theCFLG initia-tive.TherewasnosignificantchangeevenafterCFLG training in this regard.Whileexamining the activities initiated in pan-chayats in the pre-primary sector, it wasseen that the majority of the panchayatshavefollowedonlythetraditionalactivitiesthatwerefollowedbythemevenbeforetheCFLGtraining.ItcanbesaidthattheCFLGtraining could not bring any significantchangeinthisdirection.Atthesametime,someofthenewinitiativeswhichwerepro-posedasthepartofCFLG,suchasthecon-struction of child-friendly toilets,makingAnganwadibuildingpremiseslearningaidsthroughpaintingsandtheestablishmentofchildren’sparkwerenottakenupseriouslybythemajorityoflocalbodies.CFLGhadintroduced some innovative ideas in thepre-primarysector,butthemajorityoftheCFLGpanchayats failed in realizing theminpractice. Interventions formakingpre-schoolsattractivecentresofjoyfullearningweremissingeveninCFLGframework.

• When compared to other working do-

mainsofCFLG,school-basedprogrammeshave attained better status in establishingchild-friendliness by introducing innova-tiveprojectsforthecomprehensivedevelop-mentofchildren.Thereisagradualpositivechangeintherateofinitiativesbyintroduc-ingcommunitydevelopmentprogrammesforchildrenduringtheCFLGyears.Thereis an accelerating change in projects suchasbuildingsmartclassrooms,provisionfornewspaper and magazines etc. While thebasic facilities such as drainage construc-tion, she toilets etc.we’re not included intheLSGIs.ShetoiletswerenotincludedinalmostanyLSGI.Also,mostoftheschoolofficialsbelievethatthereisnoneedtosep-arateshetoilets.TheCFLGtrainedpancha-yats had made some new initiatives afterCFLG. Creation of bio-diversity parks inschools, construction of disabled-friendlytoilets and establishment of child-friendlyfurniturearepertinentamongthem.Con-struction of the she-toilets, renovation ofplaygrounds,careerguidanceprogrammes,constructionofnewbuildingsandHarithaVidyalayamprogrammesare theelementsneglected by the majority of the pancha-yats.

• Performance of LSGIs in the creation ofpublicspacesindicatesthatonlyaminori-ty of LSGIs could do any such initiatives.Availability of play spaces in the nearbylocations is basic to ensuring children’sright to engage in recreational activities.Playgroundsarealsospacesofsocialisationfor children.Hence the creationof publicplacesandplaygroundsforchildrenshouldhavebeen included in thepreferential listofCFLGinitiatives.However,thefindingsof the study point towards an absence ofsuch initiativesbyLSGIs.High landvaluealong with the unavailability of land hasalsorestrictedthescopeofinterventionsinthisregard.However,LSGIswouldhavetodevelop community initiatives to identifycommon land available under their juris-diction and to identify the potential do-norswhoarewillingtoprovidelandforthecreation of public spaces. However, suchinitiativesweremissing in themajorityof



the panchayats. Some studies have indi-cated that health issues are widely visibleamong children in Kerala because of theabsenceofsufficientphysicalexercise.ThisalsocorroboratestheneedforthecreationofmorepublicspacesundertheleadershipofLSGIs.Asdiscussedabove,thissubstan-tiates thedearthof initiativesbyLSGIs inaddressingtherealneedsofchildren.

• Theinitiativessuchasthecreationofspe-cialcornersforchildreninlibrariesandtheinitiation of new libraries or strengthen-ingofexistingchildren’slibrarieswerealsomissingintheinitiativesofLSGIs.Thishasa large implication in planning the futuretrainingofCFLG.Creationofpublicspacesforchildrenneedstobelocatedintheman-datory intervention as the part of CFLGprogramme.ThiselementwouldhavetobeemphasisedmoreInfutureCFLGtraining.

• LSGIs have given low preference for pro-vidingrecreationfacilitytochildren.Chil-dren’s right to play and engage in recre-ationalactivitiesarestillnotattainingspaceinthemindsofplannersinLSGIs.

• LSGI’s could not bring any significantchange in organising recreation activitiessuch as swimming coaching, AnganwadiBalamela,distributionofsportskit,sportscoaching and the Arts fest for children.Besides, amajority of themcouldnot or-ganiseanyspecialprogrammefordifferent-ly-abledchildren.

• It isonapositivenote that somepancha-yathscouldinitiatetourandtripsforBal-asabha participants after CFLG training.Thesefindingsunderscoretherelevanceofspecial training which emphasizes on theneedofprovidingarecreationalactivitytothechildren.

PROTECTION• There was no significant increase in the

numberofpanchayatswhohaveallocatedmore funds for child protection activitiesaftertheinitiationoftheCFLGprogramme.Thepatternof fundsutilisationunder thedomain of child protection indicates thatmostofthepanchayats(96%)couldspend

allocationbetweenthepercentageintervalsof0-30only.Onlyonepanchayatcoulddoacomparativelygoodperformanceinutiliza-tionoffunds.CFLGtrainingdidnotmakea significant impacton the allocationandexpenditureof localbodies inthedomainofchildprotection.Theremightbediffer-ent reasons for this trend. One pertinentreasonmaybethenatureofactivitieslyingunder thisdomain. It seems thatmanyofthe activities included under this domainincuronlymarginalcosts.Alongwiththis,localbodieswerenotabletoidentifyinno-vativeactionsinthisdomain.

• Activities for facilitating the child protec-tion committees have had an increasingtrend from 2015 to 2018. Among these,JagrathaSamithi,Vigilancecommittee,andinstallation of the complaint box at wardlevelaretheelementswhichhaveshownapromising trend.There isastatic trend inthe case of child protection centres. Theoverallpictureofchildprotectionindicatesthatonlyone-halfofthepanchayatscouldtake positive initiatives in the domain ofchildprotection.

• Apartfromthetraditionalmethodsofsen-sitisationonchild rights, innovative com-munication and public education toolswere not used for creating sensitisationamong stakeholders. Continuous parentand teacher education programmes onchild rights are necessary, and they haveto adopt innovative strategies for sensiti-zation.ThiskindofinitiativeismissingintheCFLGprogrammeingeneral.Thereisaneed for a coordinationmechanismbe-tweendifferentagenciesworkingonchildrightsensitizationwithinLSGIs.

• Thenumberofcasesofchildabuseandthenumberofactions takenby theLSGIsarealsonotsatisfactory.Thepercentageofcas-es inwhich a panchayat has taken actionwas40in2015-16,36in2016-17,and40in2017-18.Thisindicatesthatthepanchayatscouldnottakeanyactionin60percentagesofreportedcases.ThelimitationsofLSGIsintermsofmandatorypowersmaybeonefactor restricting their interventions. Ab-senceofinstitutionalmechanismforprop-



ermonitoringofcasesatLSGlevelmaybeanother factorwhich leads to this limitedintervention.

• The number of cases reported and actiontakenofChildren inConflictwithLaw isfoundlow.Thepresentjuvenilejusticesys-tem is not providing any space for inter-ventionsbylocalbodiesincasesrelatedtochildreninconflictwiththelaw.Thereisnolocal level institution functioning relatingtotheimplementationofthislaw.

• Mostofthepanchayatshavefailedinpro-viding psychosocial support to the chil-dreninneedysituations.Inthecaseofap-pointment of counsellors through ICDS,thenumberwassixinthepre-CFLGyear,whichhasincreasedtoeightinthefirstyearofCFLGandenhancedtonineonlyinthelastyear.Theperformanceofbothpancha-yatsandmunicipalities, inthecaseof ini-tiating legalservicecentres forchildrenatLSGI’s,ispoor.Eventwo-thirdoftheLSGIscould not take any initiatives for provid-ing psychosocial support to the children.Childrenfrommarginalisedgroupssuchasfishermen,tribalandscheduledcastecom-munitiesarealso facing specific issues re-latedtotheirsocioeconomicbackgrounds.These issues are remaining unaddressed.The FGDs and interactionswith the chil-drenemphasisetheneedforaninstitution-almechanism forprovidingpsychologicalsupporttotheneedy.Suchafacilityisnotavailable for them except counselling ser-vicesprovidedinsomeschools.CFLGpro-grammecanplansomeproactivestepsformaking a coordination system of schoolcounsellors andother child counsellors atLSGI level.Thiscouldalsoactasamech-anismforparentalcounsellinginLSGIs.Itis also noteworthy that the present coun-selling system including school counsel-ling system requires to be remoulded inthe context of child rights. Hence orient-ingallschoolcounsellorsinthecontextofchildrightscouldbeacentralisedinitiativewhichcanbeundertakenasapartofCFLGinitiativebyCRCofKILA.

PARTICIPATION• Themajority(morethan95%)ofthepan-

chayatscouldallocatefundsbetween0-10percentageforthedomainofparticipationinthepre-CFLGyearandthefirstyearofCFLG.

• CFLG could make a small change in theallocation and expenditure of panchayatsin the domain of participation. Notwith-standing to this the utilisation percentageasremainedaspoorirrespectiveofaslightimprovement afterCFLG.There could beseveral factors which might have influ-enced thispattern.TheCFLGLSGIsevenmay not have imbibed the relevance ofbuilding children’s participatory forum intheirjurisdiction.

• Majorityofthepanchayatsandmunicipali-tieswereconductingBalasabhasandcreat-ingaspaceforchildrentoparticipateinthedemocraticprocess.

• TheInitialenthusiasmofpanchayatinor-ganizing child Gramasabha has showna declining tendency in the second year.Anyway, CFLG could establish the rele-vanceofChildgramasabhasasaparticipa-toryinstitutionofChildreninlocalgovern-ments. ChildGramasabhawas conductedasonetimeeventsratherthananinstitutionwhich needs to sustain for protecting theinterestofchildren.CFLGcouldcontributetoimprovingthedocumentationprocessofchildGramasabhas.

• LSGIs were not taking the commentsraised by the children in Gramasabha asissueswhichneed tobe addressed.Alongwith with this the authority of the LocalGovernment could not perceive children’sascitizenswhoalsohave rights likeothercitizens.Initiativesfordiscussingchildren’sdemands inworkinggroupsofLSGIsandgeneralGramasabhaswerepoor.However,thesituationofCFLGLSGIsisslightlybet-terthancontrolLSGIs.

• In practice, the majority of CFLG LSGIscould not uphold the citizenship rightsofchildren to raise theirvoice inapublicforum and to ensure that their issues aregettingaddressedbytheLSGIs.Thestudy



indicates thatmajority of the LSGIs haveapproachedchildren’sforumasaspaceforritualisticgatheringofchildren,inplaceofconsideringthemasademocraticforumofchildren.Thefeedbackfromthechildren’sFGDspoint out the fact that the childrenwho attended child Gramasabhas earlierhada feelingthat theirdemandswerene-glected by the LSGIs.This also promptedthemtowithdrawfromsuchparticipatoryforums.

ATTITUDE AND KNOWLEDGE OF TRAIN-EES REGARDING CFLG

1. Status of knowledge and attitude of train-ees regarding CFLG

• The knowledge level of trainees regard-ing the basic pre-requisite of CFLG, suchas thecreationofchilddataprofileatLS-GI’s, vision document for children, andcomprehensivelocaldevelopmentplanforchildren have been analyzed in the study.Thedataindicatesthatthemajorityofthetraineeshaveabasicunderstandingofthecomprehensivelocaldevelopmentplanforchildren(92.5%)

• Their understanding of the vision docu-mentforchildrenisalsoconsiderablybet-ter(60%)whiletheirknowledgeaboutthedataprofileofthechildrenseemstobepoor(45%).At the same time, it isnoteworthythat themajority of the LSGI’s could notbringoutinitiativestoleveragethefactthatthetraineeshadsucceededtoanextentinimbibing abasicunderstanding about thedeliverablesoftheCFLGprogramme.

• PoorknowledgeleveloftraineesregardingthechilddataprofilecouldhaveactedasabarrierincreatingabasicchildprofileinallLSGI’s.

• Withregardtotheknowledgeoftraineesinthe fourmajor domains ofCFLG such assurvival,development,protection,andpar-ticipation,thedataindicatesthatmorethanhalf of the participants of the training donothaveabasicunderstandingofthefourdomainsofCFLGexceptforthedomainofparticipation.

• Regarding the attitude of trainees on the

different dimensions of child rights, theresponseshaveshownasatisfactorystatus.Atthesametimehalfofthetraineesbelievethatadultscanmakebetterplansforchil-drenevenwithoutthembeingheard.Thisagainratifiesthefactthatstillagoodnum-beroffunctionariesofCFLGcouldnotrec-ognize thebasiccitizenship rightsof chil-dren.

2. Initiatives after getting CFLG Training• The overall trend of initiatives taken by

trainees after training in realizing the ac-tivitiesproposedinthetrainingshowsthatthemajorityofthemcouldnottakeinitia-tivesinrealizingtheproposedactivitiesofthetraining.Organizingbalasabhawastheonlyexceptioninthisaspect.

• This also highlights the fact that thema-jorityofthetrainingparticipantscouldnotconvertthetrainingideasintodeliverablesinthefield.

3. Contribution of KILA training in im-proving the participant’s basic conceptual knowledge about CFLG

• The data on the contribution of KILAtraininginimprovingthebasicconceptsofCFLGamongparticipantsindicatesapos-itivetrend.TheKILAtrainingcontributedtoimprovingtheirbasicconceptualunder-standinginvariousaspectsofCFLGexceptinthecaseofacceptingcitizenshipofchil-dren. However, it is noteworthy that theKILAtrainingcouldnotimprovethecon-cept level (43%)of the trainees inaccept-ingchildrenascitizens.Thisindicatesthatthere is ahigh scopeof improvingKILA’strainingcontextbyincludingactivities forchangingtheconceptsoftraineesregardingthecitizenshipofchildren.

SUCCESS STORIES: PROMISING PRACTICES OF CFLG• Aspartof thestudy,wecould identify14

promising cases of exemplary executionofCFLGpracticesalloverthestate.Therewere initiatives from LSGI’s on differentdimensionsofCFLG.Theseincludedpro-grammes for; making public institutionschild friendly, developing database and



registry of children, interventions for im-proving thehealthandnutrition statusofchildren, activities for providing physicaleducation and arts performance trainingtochildren,effectiverunningofchildren’sforums, bringing environmental conser-vation consciousness among children,addressing the issues of differently-abledchildren,conductingpubliceducationpro-grammesforchildrights,andinitiativesforensuringprotectionofchildren.

• AbouttheSustainabilityofaprojectisde-terminedbyanentirerangeof factors in-cludingitscontextualrelevanceovertime,availabilityofsufficientfunds,goodcoordi-nationandsupportbetweenconcernedde-partmentsorbodies,willpowerofpoliticalleadership, transparent execution, publicco-operation,holisticparticipationofben-eficiariesinallstagesofproject,andtimelyneed-basedmodifications.Sustainabilityinturn influences the possibilities of scalinguptheprojectsorinterventionsovertimeto enhance the coverage of beneficiariesandbenefitsthemselves.Whenwelookatour chosen interventions for sustainablemodelsinwhichwecanfindtheconvergedpositiveperformanceofatleastsomeoftheabove-mentioned factors, disappointinglywe donot havemuch to pick out.Henceseveral of the interventions under analy-sishereareofshort-runnatureandsomeof themhavecollapsed inbetweenbeforethey could evenmeet their short runob-jectives. Even the few long run projects,whicharebeingcontinuedbyLSGbodiesandgetsscaledupovertheyears,seemtobemostlyrunningonafewspecificfactorslikeavailabilityoffunds,willpowerorpar-ticularinterestsoftherulingfrontetc.andwhentheseenergysourcesrunsoutoffuel,abroadbasedsocialspaceandsupporttocontinueandupgradethisprojectswillbeabsentmainlyduetothelackofthrustontheholisticparticipationofchildren.

Suggestions and Recommendations• Thererequiresabasicchangeintheframe-

work adopted by CFLG programme byconsidering the specific context of Kera-

la.Theelements suchasnuclearizationoffamilies, isolationof children frompublicspace,increasingstressoverchildren,lackofphysicalactivitiesandhealthissuesrelat-ed to that,andtheemotional issues facedbychildrenalsoneedtobebroughtintothemainstream agenda of CFLG. The CFLGprogramme frameworkwould have to bereformulated in away that it can addressthe second-generation issues such as en-suringqualityeducationandqualityhealthservices.

• Though in general, poverty inKerala hasreduced significantly but studies indicatethat poverty does exist, concentrated insome areas. Marginalised communities,Tribes, Scheduled Caste, fishermen, anddifferently-abled groups are largely facingthe issues of survival and poverty.HenceCFLGprogrammewouldhave todevelopspecific strategies for addressing the spe-cial needs of children from marginalisedcategoriesratherthanfollowingauniversalstrategyacrossthestate.

• CFLG programme would have to givemoreemphasisondevelopingspecialpro-grammes and plans for differently abledchildren. It can give focus in the secondroundofCFLGprogrammetosupportLS-GIstodevelopworkablemodelswhichcanbereplicatedelsewhereforthecomprehen-sivedevelopmentofdifferently-abledchil-dren.

• The study indicates anabsenceof a coor-dinationmechanismatpanchayatlevelforconvergenceforallkindsofchildfriendlyinitiatives taken up in the jurisdiction ofLSGIsbydifferentagencies.Henceapan-chayat level/municipal level institutionalmechanism with representation of chil-dren’s forumat lower levelcanbebuiltasaparticipatoryforumfordecisionmaking.Along with this, an institutional mecha-nism with the participation of all stake-holders related to children can be organ-isedatpanchayatlevelandtheentirechildfriendly initiatives can be coordinatedthroughthissystem.

• AresourceschoolcanbeidentifiedineachLSGIwhichcanactasacoordinationcen-



tre of all educational research, training,andothereducationservicesystemswithintheLSGI.Thiscentrecanalsofunctionasa legal service cumcounselling centre forchildren.

• The study indicates the need of a statu-tory provision for conducting children’sGramasabha and Panchayats. It is alsoworth mentioning that there is a needof provision to ensure that the demandsraisedbythechildreninGramasabhasandBalaPanchayatwouldbeconsideredbytheworking groups for planning and imple-mentation. A social auditmechanism ofthechildrentoensure that theirdemandsareaddressedbyLSGIscanbeintroducedasapartofCFLGprogramme.

• SpecialinitiativesunderCFLGprogrammewould be required for orientation of par-entsandteacherstowardstheconceptandimplicationsofchildrights.

• Itisnecessarytocollectdisaggregateddataofallchildreninthepanchayath.Thisdatabankshouldhaveallthedetailsonchildrensuch as education, health, nutrition etc.ThiscouldbethefirststepofanyextendedprogrammeofCFLG.Itcanalsobeaonlinedatabase.Partofthiscanbedonethroughschoolbased survey inLSGIs and the re-mainingcanbedonethroughAnganwadis.Disaggregatedchilddatacouldbepreparedandrevisedperiodically.Acomprehensivechild development plan could be evolvedoutofthedatapreparedbyLSGIs.

• ThereisaneedforspecialallotmenttotheLSGIs in promoting their initiatives forcreatingnewpublicspacesandinrenovat-ingexistingspaces.

• Along with infrastructure development,qualityofpre-schoolsystemalsoneedstobe improved. A special emphasis on theCFLGprogrammeneedstobeprovidedinthisaspect.

• Counselling facility needs to be availableinpanchayatandalltheschoolcounsellorscouldbeconnectedwiththesystem.

• ThereisneedofanLSGIlevelinstitutiontogatherinformationonchildreninconflictwithlawandtodealwiththesecaseswith

theperspectiveofchildrights.Theagenciesthatareassociatedwithcasesonchildreninconflictwith lawwouldhave tohandoverthe details of such cases to the respectiveLSGI’s.Thiswouldenablethemtopursuesuchcasesintheperspectiveofchildright.

• Achild rights charter couldbedrafted ineveryLSGIandcouldproduceactiontakenreportperiodicallybasedonthischarter.

• ThereisarelevanceofspecialtrainingforCFLGpanchayats to includeprogrammesforproviding recreational activities to thechildren.

• SystematicpubliceducationprogrammeisneededtosensitizeallstakeholdersrelatedtoLSGIsonchildrights.Thiscouldbe inthemode of a continuous educationpro-gramme.

• There require more initiatives to developchild friendly programmes to address theissuesofchildrenfromdeprivedcategoriessuch as SC, ST, fishermen and different-ly-abledchildren.Italsoneedstobedevel-oped the programmes which include theissuesofmigrantchildrenaswell.

• Rather than following a universal ap-proach,trainingmodulescanbedevelopedby providingmore space for encouragingmodelscreatedby localbodies.Therecanbe a frequent experience sharing mecha-nismbetweenthelocalbodiesforsharinginnovativeideasandexperiences.

• While considering the varying socio-eco-nomic and cultural contexts of differentpanchayats, there are limitations in usingthesamemeasurementscalesforalltheLS-GIs.Hencecontextspecificevaluationandassessment tools require further develop-ment inorder toevaluate theprogrammeindifferentlocations.

• AdecentralisedprocessoftrainingshouldbefollowedforLSGIsacrossthestate.Civilsocietygroupsfunctioninginthepancha-yaths can a play a significant role in theplanningandimplementationoftheCFLGprojects.Theycanshareideas,provideex-pertiseandhumanresource,andcandirecttheLSGIsaboutvariousfundingpossibili-ties.



The trainingprovidedbyKILAto localself government institutions in Kerala towardsestablishment of a Child-Friendly Local Gov-ernance(CFLG)systemhasprovidedmixedre-sults.While the trainingwas largely successfulin imparting most of the underlying conceptsof child-friendly localgovernance to the train-ees,thelast-mileimpactintermsofsuccessful-ly implementedprogrammes leavemuch tobedesired,especiallywithregardtotheacceptanceof citizenship rights of children as partners inpolicy formulation, and formulating indepen-dent projects under child survival.The resultsofthestudyindicatethattheCFLGprogrammelargely succeeded in mainstreaming the con-cept of child gramasabha and childpanchayat.However, these initiatives were not translatedinto the strengthening of democratic decisionmakingprocessesbythechildren.TheseforumswereconsideredandutilizedasonlyvenuesfororganisingchildrenratherthanlaunchingpadsforraisingtheLSGIsintochildfriendlyinstitu-tionsbyconsideringtherealneedsofchildren. Thisshortcomingisparticularlyglaring,giventhelegacyofKeralaasagloballyacclaimedmodel indemocraticdecentralization.Thewayforward forCFLG lies incustomizing itsglob-al framework to suit the needs and context ofchildreninKerala,andfocusingonthegapsthathavebeenidentifiedbothintheideationandac-tionfrontsofchild-friendliness.Oncethese la-cunaeare addressed, there lies thepotential totranscend the currently identified domains ofchild-friendliness and adopt and practice nov-elconceptslikeflourishingintheplaceofmeresurvival,andlibertyinsteadofprotection.Suchanevidence-basedactionprogrammeholdsthepotentialtocatapultKeralatoyetanotherroundofglobalrecognitionasamodelinchild-friend-lylocalgovernance. CFLG could generate some promisingpracticesallover the states indifferentdimen-sions of Child Friendly Local Governance. Aspart of the study, we could identify fourteenpromising cases all over the state.There wereinitiatives from LSGI’s in different dimensionsofCFLG.Theyareinitiativesfor;makingpublicinstitutionschildfriendly,developingdatebaseand registry of children, interventions for im-

proving thehealthandnutritionstatusofchil-dren,activitiesforprovidingphysicaleducationand arts performance training to the children,effective running of children’s forums, bring-ing environmental conservation consciousnessamong children, initiatives for addressing theissue of differently-abled children, conductingpublic educationprograms for child right, andinitiatives for ensuring self protection of chil-dren. The study indicates that continuoushand holding and support from an institutionlikeKILAhascontributed inshapingtheseex-emplary practices. The mentoring system ofKILA has provided support to many pancha-yats in elevating their performance in CFLG.Theseunderscorethefactsuchahand-holdingcanbeexpandedtoalltheotherpanchayatsse-lectedunderCFLG.LocalgovernanceinKeralais ultimately a political process, with differentstakeholdersembeddedinthedecision-makingprocess of local governance. Hence, bringingattitudinal changes among all the stakeholderssuchaspoliticalparties,electedrepresentatives,parents, teachers, officials, and all other actorsinteractingwithchildrenisimportanttotrans-formanLSG intoa statusof child friendly lo-calgovernance.Thishighlightstherelevanceofcontinuousinteractionwithdifferentgroupstobringaboutaparadigmshiftintheirconceptu-alization and approaches towards child rightsandchildfriendlylocalgovernance.ThestrategyoffuturecourseofactionofCFLGprogrammeneeds tobedesignedbyaddressingthese lacu-nae. However to go forward, we cannot dowithout the following improvements: furtherideological changes and awareness creationamong the stakeholder groups, continuousevaluation andmonitoring of programme im-plementation, frequent impact assessment andfeedback collection exercises, inspiring incen-tives for better performing panchayats, legis-lative reformations, strong multi-stake holdercollaborationandcoordination ,explorationofthealternativeandmoredemocraticwaysofre-sourcemobilisationandutilisationandholisticallroundparticipationofchildren.

CONCLUSION



PANCHAYATS SELECTED FOR THE STUDYDISTRICT PANCHAYATH

ThiruvananthapuramVenganoorKaattakada

KollamNeendakaraMainagappally

PathanamthittaMallapallyKozhanjeri

Alapuzha Aroor

KottayamNeendoorKurichi

IdukkiKanjikuzhiAdimally

ErnakulamAlangadMulathuruthi

Thrissur

KolazhyKadukuttiMattathurNenmanikkaraThykkattusheri

PalakkadThiruvegapuraPudur

MalappuramVallikkunnuPulamanthol

KozhikodeKottoorChengottukavu

WayanadThirunelliMullankolly

KannurChapparapadavuAlakkode

KasaragodCheruvathurKinanurKarithalam

CONTROL PANCHAYAT DISTRICTKottungal PathanamthittaValiyaparamba KasaragodKonnathadi Idukki

MUNICIPALITY WHICH GOT CFLG TRAINING

CONTROL MUNICIPALITIES WITHOUT CFLG TRAINING

KottackalNeyyatinkara

Perinthalmanna

APPENDIX-I

2

KILA പര഻ശ഼ലകർ

Mentor ( )

പരിശീലനങ്ങളളോടു പഞ്ചോയത്തിന്ററ ഉള്ള മളനോഭോവം/പിന്തുണ

3

തഺഴഴ പറയഽന്ന പ്പസ്തഺവനകള഻ൽ ബഺധകമഺയതഽ ( ) ഴെയ്യുക

o o o o

o o o o

o o o o

CHILD SURVIVAL)

o o o o

4

CHILD DEVELOPMENT)

o o o o

CHILD PROTECTION)

o o o o

CHILD PARTICIPATION)

o o o o

CHILD

PARTICIPATION)

o o o

5

o o

o

o o

o

CHILD

PARTICIPATION)

o o

o

o o

o

o o o

6

o o

o

o o

o കഽട്ട഻കളുഴെ അവകഺശം മനസ഻ലഺക്കഺൻ

o

സമാഹത്ത഻ഴല കഽട്ട഻കളുഴെ പങ്കഽ മനസ഻ലഺക്കഺൻ

o

o കഽട്ട഻കളുഴെ പങ്കഺള഻ത്ത വവദ഻കൾ വ഻കസ഻ക്കഺൻ

o

o

7

o കഽട്ട഻കളുഴെ പൗരതവം അംഗ഼കര഻ക്കഺൻ

o

o ഇത഻ൽ ഉൾഴെെഺത്തതഽ o



Archard, D. W. (2018). Children’s Rights. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Phi-losophy (Winter 2018). Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/rights-children/Centre emulates child-friend-ly local governance. (2019, March 4). The Hin-du. Retrieved from https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Thiruvananthapuram/centre-em-ulates-child-friendly-local-governance/arti-cle26427955.ece

Children’s Rights Alliance (Ireland). (2010). The United Nations Convention on the Rights of

the Child = Coinbhinsiún na Náisiún Aontaithe um CHearta an Linbh. Dublin:

Children’s Rights Alliance.

James, A., & Prout, A. (Eds.). (1997). Construct-ing and reconstructing childhood:

Contemporary issues in the sociological study of childhood. London ; Washington, D.C: Falmer Press.

kuttikalkkayulla karmapadhathi-Keralam2004. (2006). social welfare department keralagovernment.

Morrow, V. G. (2017). Understanding children and childhood. Presented at the Centre for

Children and Young People Papers. Centre for Children and Young People Papers: University of London.

National Commission for Protection of Child Rights, Government of India [Government].

(n.d.). Retrieved May 16, 2019, from http://ncp-cr.gov.in/ website: http://ncpcr.gov.in/

Rajan, P., & Radhakrishnan, A. (2016, August).

Child friendly local governance Operational Manual 1. Retrieved from http://dspace.kila.ac.in/bitstream/123456789/270/1/Operational%20Manual%20-Eng-%20web%20version.pdf

Rajesh, K. (2011). Vikendreekritha Asoothra-nam Keralathile Anubhavangal (Malayalam),(Decentralised Planning: Kerala’s experiences).

Rajesh, K., & Thomas, M. B. (2012). Decentral-ization and Interventions in the Health Sector.

Journal of Health Management, 14(4), 417–433. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972063412468973

Rajesh,K. (2013). Institutions and practices: A study of the People’s Planning Campaign andthe Kerala Development Programme. PhD the-sis submitted to the Institute ofDevelopment Studies, University of Mysore. Bangalore: Institute for Social and Economic Change (PHD Thesis). University of Mysore, In-stitute for Social and Economic Change, Banga-lore,Study Tour of MLAs From Odisha On Local Governance of Kerala. (2016, February 25).

Retrieved from http://dspace.kila.ac.in/bit-stream/123456789/292/1/Handbook-%20Oris-sa%20final%20%281%29.pdf

Subedi, S. (n.d.). CHILD FRIENDLY LOCAL GOVERNANCE: A Study of Kaskikot VDC,Kaski District, Nepal (Tribhuwan University). Retrieved from

http://107.170.122.150:8080/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/735/12668.pdf?sequnce=1&isAllowed=y

The National Policy for Children, 2013. (n.d.). Retrieved June 17, 2019, from

REFERENCES



https://www.childlineindia.org.in/The-Nation-al-Policy-for-Children-2013.htm

Thomas, N. (2011). Children’s rights: policy into practice. Retrieved from

https://epubs.scu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1030&context=ccyp_pubs

Centre Emulates Child-Friendly Local Gover-nance’. 2019. The Hindu. https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Thiruvananthapuram/cen-tre-emulates-child-friendly-local-governance/article26427955.ece (May 21, 2019).

Governmenet of India, UNDP India. 2005. ‘Hu-man Development Report 2005 : Kerala’.

Governmenet of Kerala. 2010. ‘The Kerala Edu-cation Act – 1958’.

‘National Plan of Action for Children, 2016 Put-ting the Last Child First’. 2016.

Prout, Alan. 2005. The Future of Childhood to-wards the Interdisciplinary Study of Children. London; New York: RoutledgeFalmer : NetLi-brary [distributor. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nleb-k&db=nlabk&AN=115702 (May 31, 2019).Rajan, Peter, and Akila Radhakrishnan. 2016. ‘Child Friendly Local Governance Op-erational Manual 1’. http://dspace.kila.ac.in/

bitstream/123456789/270/1/Operational%20Manual%20-Eng-%20web%20version.pdf (May 7, 2019).

Sevón, Eija Mirjami. 2015. ‘Who’s Got the Pow-er? Young Children’s Power and Agency in the Child-Parent Relationship’. International Jour-nal of Child, Youth and Family Studies 6(4–1): 622–45.

‘The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)Act, 2015’. 2016. http://cara.nic.in/PDF/JJ%20act%202015.pdf (July 25, 2019).

‘The National Policy for Children, 2013’. 2013. https://www.childlineindia.org.in/The-Nation-al-Policy-for-Children-2013.htm (July 24, 2019).

UNICEF. 2004. ‘UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC)’. https://www.unicef.org.uk/what-we-do/un-convention-child-rights/ (May 10, 2019).

‘WHO | Immunization’. WHO. http://www.who.int/topics/immunization/en/ (July 25, 2019).

Yadav, A. 2003. ‘THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD: ROLE OF INTERNATIONAL AGENCIES’. shodganga. https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/14982/9/09_chatper%203.pdf (July 2, 2019).

kila training programme for child-friendly local governance

Documents