i

25% IS OUR RIGHT: EXAMINING SC/ST EXCLUSION

THROUGH BUDGETS IN SCHOOL

EDUCATION

Dr Jayshree P. Mangubhai

Centre for Social Equity and Inclusion & Swadhikar

New Delhi, 2013

25% IS OUR RIGHT: EXAMINING SC/ST EXCLUSION THROUGH

BUDGETS IN SCHOOL EDUCATION

Implementation of the Scheduled Castes Sub Plan and Tribal

Sub Plan by the Centre, Bihar and Jharkhand Governments

Dr Jayshree P. Mangubhai

Centre for Social Equity and Inclusion & Swadhikar

New Delhi, 2013

iii

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to all the Dalit and Adivasi students and civil society organisations that participated in the con-

sultations in Bihar and Jharkhand, and to all government offi cials who gave some of their time for interviews.

For fi eldwork coordination & support:

Annie Namala, Centre for Social Equity and Inclusion (CSEI), New Delhi

Satyendra Kumar, Centre for Social Equity and Inclusion (CSEI) State Offi ce, Patna, Bihar

Ghanshyam & Sunil Minj, SAMVAD, Ranchi, Jharkhand

Ganesh Ravi, Ambedkar Samajik Trust, Daltonganj, Palamu district, Jharkhand

Ghanshyam Deen Bandhu, Gaurav Gram Shakti, Bhagalpur, Bihar

Hans Kumar, Sant Kabir Sewa Samiti, Begusarai, Bihar

Pratima Kumari, Gurav Gramin Mahila Vikas Manch, Patna, Bihar

Ravinder Kumar- Jan Adhikaar Kendra, Rohtas, Bihar

Vishnudev Manjhi, Paramount Global Welfare Society, Jamui, BIhar

For data collection:

Annie Namala, CSEI, Delhi

Pankaj Kumar, CSEI, Patna

Sunil Minj, SAMVAD, Ranchi

Vijeta Sinha, CSEI, Patna

For budget data support:

Mohit Jain, Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan – NCDHR

For research support:

Abhay Xaxa, Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan – NCDHR

Babita Negi, Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan – NCDHR

Rajesh Singh, Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan – NCDHR

Sanjay Bharti, Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan – NCDHR

Tarapada Pradhan, Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan – NCDHR

Bhaswati Borghain, CSEI, Patna

Shabana Ali, CSEI, Patna

Chandrakantha Bharti, CSEI, New Delhi

Research Partners:

Dalit Adivasi Shiksha Vikas Adhikar (SVADHIK)

Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan (DAAA) - NCDHR

Special thanks to

Indian Institute of Dalit Studies (IIDS), Delhi for anchoring the study.

ChristianAid - IPAP programme for sponsoring this study.

v

Contents

Acknowledgements iii

Introduction 1

Chapter 1 Central Government and School Education 12

Chapter 2 School Education and SCSP/TSP in Bihar and Jharkhand 27

Chapter 3 School Education Planning for SC/ST Children in Bihar and Jharkhand 40

Chapter 4 Conclusions and Recommendations for Fulfi lling the Right to Education for All

Dalit and Adivasi Children 53

Bibliography 63

1

The Indian government has recognised that the hierarchies of caste, eco-

nomic status and gender characterising Indian society deeply infl uence chil-

dren’s access to education. It therefore emphasises the signifi cance of social

access in universalising elementary education, which can also be extended

to secondary education. Social access has two key components. One is

equity, which means that all children should have equal access to, in and

through elementary education to realise their potential and aspirations.1 En-

suring equity means not only creating equal opportunities, but also enabling

conditions in which socially excluded children like Dalit and Adivasi children

can avail of the opportunity to receive an education.2 The second is in-

clusion, which means two processes: reducing exclusion from and within

education; and addressing and responding to the diversity of learning needs

among students.3 In other words, inclusion means transforming school sys-

tems and the learning environment in order to respond to the diversity of

learners. Contextualised and fl exible strategies therefore have to be devel-

oped based on an understanding of the challenges socially excluded Dalit

and Adivasi children face with regard to access, retention and completion

of school education, including discrimination, and their subsequent needs.4

1 UN Girls’ Education Initiative & EFA Fast Track Initiative, 2010. Equity and Inclusion in Education. Washington DC: UN Girls’

Education Initiative & EFA Fast Track Initiative, p.3.

2 Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2010. Report of the Committee on Implementation of h e Right of Children to Free & Com-

pulsory Education Act, 2009 and the Resultant Revamp of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. New Delhi: MHRD, para.12.

3 UN Girls’ Education Initiative & EFA Fast Track Initiative, 2010. Equity and Inclusion in Education. Washington DC: UN Girls’

Education Initiative & EFA Fast Track Initiative, p.3.

4 Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2011. SSA Framework for Implementation based on RtE Act 2009. New Delhi: MHRD,

Ch.3.

Introduction

Social access has two key components. One is equity, which means

that all children should

have equal access

to, in and through

elementary education

to realise their potential

and aspirations. The second is inclusion, which means two

processes: reducing

exclusion from and

within education;

and addressing and

responding to the

diversity of learning

needs among students.

2

From the 11th Five Year Plan 2007-12 onwards, focus has fallen on ‘inclusive growth’ as key to ensuring that all In-

dian citizens are able to enjoy socio-economic development as part of the country’s economic progress. The 12th

Five Year Plan 2012-17 emphasises the expansion of education, signifi cantly improving the quality of education

imparted, and ensuring that educational opportunities are available for all. The four main priorities for education

policy continue to be access, equity, quality and governance, while greater emphasis is now placed on improv-

ing learning outcomes at all levels of education. While the Plan claims a signifi cant reduction in socio-economic

inequality in access to education and a narrowing of the gap between SCs/

STs and other social groups in education between 1983 and 2010, it reiterates

that SC/ST students continue to be more likely to drop out of education than

other social groups. Therefore, SC/ST children ‘need greater and focused

attention’.5 All this is in keeping with Article 46 of the Indian Constitution,

which directs the state to take special measures to ensure the educational

development of SCs and STs. It is also in keeping with the National Policy

on Education 1986/1992, which emphasises education as an agent of basic

change in the status of disadvantaged groups like SCs and STs, and focuses

on the equalisation of their education levels with other social groups.

At the same time, public expenditure on education (at all levels of education,

by central and state governments) as a percentage of GDP has seen very little

change over the past 30 years. In 1990-91, it stood at 3.8% of GDP; by 2000-

2001 it was 4.3%; and in 2010-11 it stood at 3.3%.6 This amount, moreover,

may be even less, due to the inclusion of sports, arts and culture in the capital

account expenditure and also due to double accounting on account of state

transfers.7 This low spending pattern exists despite the current government’s commitment under the Common

Minimum Programme to spend 6% of GDP on education. As a percentage of total government expenditure, edu-

cation accounted for 11.6% (as per revised estimates) in 2011-12, or 47.2% of total social services expenditure.8

In the 11th Plan period, the total expenditure on education by both central and state governments was estimated

at Rs 12,44,797 crores, of which 35% was accounted for by Plan expenditure and 65% by non-Plan expendi-

ture. Further, around 43% of public expenditure on education was for elementary education, 25% for secondary

education and 32% for higher education.9

Inclusive development encompasses progress both in terms of social and fi nancial inclusion. The government

has acknowledged the social and fi nancial exclusion that SCs and STs face, in response to which government

policies should be specifi cally directed towards the upliftment of these communities in order to enable them to

equally reap the benefi ts of economic growth.10 Budgets are crucial policy documents that expose the social

and economic priorities of governments. By examining budgets, therefore, one can understand the priorities of

the government and how government commitments towards SCs/STs become concretised. Further, as far as

education is concerned, one core element on which strategies are to be based is ‘innovations and diversity of

approaches in terms of curricula, pedagogies and community engagements in order to respond to the diversity

of learner groups’.11 This demands that the specifi c needs of SC/ST children be assessed and adequately ad-

dressed through education schemes and budgets. In sum, there is a need to examine how government planning,

legal and policy commitments to ensure the educational development of Dalit and Adivasi children are translated

into reality via education schemes and budgetary allocations and expenditures.

5 Planning Commission, 2012. 12th Five Year Plan, Vol. 3: Social Sector. New Delhi: Government of India, p.50.

6 Jha, Praveen & Parvati, P., 2009. Education for All: Mid-Decade Assessment: h e Challenges of Public Finance. New Delhi: NUEPA;

Ministry of Finance, 2011. Economic Survey 2011-12. New Delhi: Government of India.

7 Jha, Praveen & Parvati, P., 2009. Education for All: Mid-Decade Assessment: h e Challenges of Public Finance. New Delhi: NUEPA,

p.21.

8 Ministry of Finance, 2012. Economic Survey 2012-13. New Delhi: Government of India, p.271.

9 Planning Commission, 2012. 12th Five Year Plan, Vol. 3: Social Sector. New Delhi: Government of India, p.47.

10 Ministry of Finance, 2012. Economic Survey 2012-13. New Delhi: Government of India, p.270.

11 Planning Commission, 2012. 12th Five Year Plan, Vol. 3: Social Sector. New Delhi: Government of India, p.52.

While the Plan claims a

signifi cant reduction in socio-

economic inequality in access

to education and a narrowing

of the gap between SCs/STs

and other social groups in

education between 1983 and

2010, it reiterates that SC/ST

students continue to be more

likely to drop out of education

than other social groups.

Therefore, SC/ST children ‘need greater and focused attention’.

3

Status of Dalits and Adivasis in School Education in India

Dalits and Adivasis across the country today constitute two communities that continue to experience social ex-

clusion and discrimination in the education system, which leads to low access, retention and completion rates.

The 12th Five Year Plan mentions that while the gap in socio-economic inequality in access to education between

SCs/STs and other social groups has reduced over the recent years, SC/ST higher dropout rates and numbers

out of school, as well as lower learning outcomes, remain a concern. Exclusion, therefore, is cited as “the single

most important challenge in universalising elementary education”.12

As per the 2001 Census, the SC literacy rate was 54.7% and ST literacy rate 47.1%, as compared to the overall

literacy rate of 64.8 percent. Gender disparities in literacy were stark: literacy rates ranged from 34.8% for ST

women and 41.9% for SC women, to 59.2% for ST men and 66.6% for SC men. Likewise, rural-urban disparities

were large: literacy rates for SCs were 51.2% in rural areas as compared to 68.1% in urban areas; and literacy

rates for STs were 45.0% in rural areas as compared to 69.1% in urban areas.

While in 2010, the gross enrolment ratio (GER)13 for SC students was 132.0 for Classes 1-5, it dropped to 92.3

in classes 6-8, 70.9 in classes 9-10 and 38.3 in classes 11-12. Similarly, the GER for ST students was 137.0 in

classes 1-5, dropping to 88.9 in classes 6-8, 53.3 in classes 9-10 and 28.8 in classes 11-12. Confi rming this

trend of signifi cantly lower enrolments at the higher levels of school education, the dropout rates from classes

1-10 stood at 56.0% for SC students and 70.9% for ST students; i.e. well over half the children were dropping

out before completing their elementary education. This can be compared to the overall dropout rate of 49.3%

from the same classes.14

Accompanying this trend of high dropouts from school education among SC/ST children is their lesser educa-

tional achievements. A NCERT survey conducted in 2012 in 6,602 schools among class 5 students revealed

that SC/ST students consistently underperformed compared to other caste students when tested in reading

comprehension, mathematics and environmental sciences.15 Similarly, in the higher secondary examinations,

SC/ST students continue to perform much lower than students in general. Of

the students who passed the higher secondary education examinations in 2009,

around one-third of SC/ST students (29.8% of SCs and 35.7% of STs) obtained

below 50% marks. Around 30% of SC/ST students (31.9% of SCs and 27.1%

of STs) obtained fi rst division marks as compared to 40.3% for all categories of

students.16 The implications are that many SC and ST students do not achieve

the marks to access higher education. This is especially in central education

institutions like IITs, IIMs, etc., where admissions are now based on competitive

exams as well as aggregate marks in Class 12. All this points to the necessity

of tailoring specifi c programmes to academically support SC/ST students, espe-

cially the many who come from little or no education backgrounds, to success-

fully complete their schooling.

Behind the educational disparities between SC/ST children and other children are a number of factors. Two im-

portant factors are poverty and discrimination based on caste/ethnicity and gender. The economic status of SCs/

STs continues to lag behind other communities, with a much higher percentage of SCs/STs living below the pov-

erty line as compared to OBCs and Others: the BPL population for SCs was 36-39%, for STs 33-47%, for OBCs

12 Planning Commission, 2012. 12th Five Year Plan 2012-2017, Vol. 3: Social Sector. New Delhi: Government of India, p.50.

13 GER is the ratio of the number of children enrolled in the class group to the total number of children in the corresponding oi cial age

group.

14 MHRD, 2012. Selected Educational Statistics 2010-11. New Delhi: Government of India.

15 Mohanty, Basant Kumar, 2012. ‘School survey ties primary scores to caste’. h e Telegraph, 13.09.2012.

16 MHRD, 2010. Results of High School and Higher Secondary Examinations, 2009. New Delhi: Government of India.

Two important factors behind the

educational disparities

between SC/ST children

and other children

are poverty and discrimination based on caste/ethnicity and gender.

4

27-31% and for Others 16% in rural and urban areas.17 This is compounded by multiple forms of exclusionary

and discriminatory practices in schools.

The SSA Framework for Implementation18 has given the broad listing of examples of exclusion of SC children as

follows:

A) Exclusion by Teachers, in terms of segregated seating arrangements; undue harshness in reprimanding

SC children; not giving time and attention to SC children in the classroom, including to answer their ques-

tions; excluding SC children from public functions in the school; making derogatory remarks about SC

children and their academic abilities; denying SC children the use of school facilities; asking SC children to

do menial tasks in school.

B) Exclusion by peer group, in terms of calling SC children by caste names; not including SC children in

games and play activities; not sitting with SC children in the classrooms.

C) Exclusion by the system, in terms of incentives schemes meant for SC children not being implemented

in full; a lack of acknowledgement of SC role models in the curriculum or by teachers; reinforcing caste

characteristics in syllabi and textbooks; lack of sensitisation of teachers in teacher education and training;

insuffi cient recruitment of SC teachers (para 3.8.2.3).

ST children, besides facing some of the exclusionary practices mentioned above for SC children, also face prob-

lems peculiar to their situation (paras 3.8.2.6 & 3.8.2.8). Tribal populations tend to be concentrated in remote, hilly

or heavily forested areas with dispersed populations where even physical access to schools is diffi cult. If there are

schools and teachers, the teachers are unlikely to share the students’ social and cultural background or to speak

the students’ language, leading to a sense of alienation among the children. The biggest problem faced by ST

children is that of language: i.e. teaching materials and textbooks tend to be in a language the students do not

understand; content of books and syllabi ignore the students’ own knowledge and experience and focus only on

the dominant language and culture.

Accompanying social exclusion in the fi eld of education is also institutional exclusion in terms of the operation

of schemes, programmes and funds for the educational development of SCs/STs. For example, a 2007 perfor-

mance audit on the educational development of SCs and STs through the Ministry of Social Justice and Empow-

erment and the Ministry of Tribal Affairs education schemes found defi cient fi nancial management in terms of:

under-utilisation of funds

inter-state imbalances in allocation of funds

non-availing of central assistance

delay/non/short release of funds

unspent balances lying with states/UTs

diversion of funds.

There were also problems reported in terms of:

delays in the disbursal of educational entitlements such as scholarships

shortage or non-delivery of benefi ts

inadequate or substandard hostel facilities being provided to these children

poor awareness of these schemes among SC/ST populations

failure to monitor and independently review implementation of these educational schemes.19

17 Planning Commission, 2005. NSS 61st round (July 2004 - June 2005). New Delhi: Government of India.

18 MHRD, 2011. SSA Framework for Implementation based on the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. New Delhi: Govern-

ment of India.

19 Comptroller Auditor General, 2007. Performance Audit Report on ‘Educational Development of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.’

Report no. 14 of 2007. New Delhi: CAG.

5

Why and How of the SCSP and TSP

The Special Component Plan (SCP) for scheduled castes (later renamed as the Scheduled Castes Sub Plan

(SCSP) in 2006) and Tribal Sub Plan (TSP) for scheduled tribes were introduced in 1979-80 and 1974 respectively

with a view to achieving the overall development of Adivasis and Dalits. The government recognised that Adivasis

and Dalits have suffered for many years and continue to suffer social exclusion and economic exploitation. They

have been deprived of access to resources and opportunities, such as the opportunity to become educated. The

result is that they lag behind the rest of the Indian population with regard to all development indicators, includ-

ing (as seen above) education and literacy. The SCSP/TSP thus were designed to channelise the fl ow of budget

outlays and benefi ts from the general sector in the Plans of States/UTs and the Central Ministries to the SCs and

STs.20

In order to channelise the fl ow of funds and benefi ts, the SCSP and TSP are allocated different codes in the

budget books, namely 789 and 796 respectively. However, only from the 2011-12 budget onwards have the

budget codes for the SCSP and TSP been made mandatory. Before that, the codes were not followed by most

states and, therefore, it was impossible to track the fl ow of SCSP/TSP funds. These codes appear in the detailed

demands for grants (DDGs) generated by each ministry/department as part of the budget. They break down the

schemes under that ministry/department and the amount allocated for each scheme under SCSP/TSP.

Sector-wise, the largest percentage of SCSP/TSP allocations has been for social services, which includes educa-

tion.

In 2012-13, the allocation for social services was Rs 23,250.40 crores under SCSP and Rs 11,052.08 crores

under TSP. This amounted to 61.7% of the SCSP funds (total Rs 37,696.35 crores) and 51.3% of the TSP

funds (total Rs 21,544.30 crores).

In 2013-14, the allocation for social services was Rs 24,717.16 crores under SCSP and Rs 12,632.52 crores

under TSP, or 59.5% of SCSP funds (total Rs 41,561.13 crores) and 51.4% of TSP funds (total Rs 24,594.45

crores).21

While this amount of funding for social services is necessary, a critique is that the bulk of SCSP/TSP funds are

more for social services that are ‘survival in nature’ and not for economic sectors that are ‘developmental in

nature’ and would ensure that Dalits and Adivasis obtain access to productive resources for their long-term de-

velopment and empowerment.22

A core principle of plan budget allocations under SCSP/TSP is that Central Ministries should allocate funds at

least in proportion to the population of SCs and STs in the country – i.e. 16.2% and 8.2% respectively – both in

physical and fi nancial terms.23 As far as the states are concerned, the plan budget allocation under SCSP/TSP

should be at least in proportion to the population of SCs and STs in the state. In addition, the funds allocated

under the SCSP/TSP should be used only for focused strategies, mechanisms and schemes to promote the

overall development of SCs and STs. In this manner, the SCSP/TSP become important mechanisms for the

socio-economic empowerment of Dalits and Adivasis across the country.

Other basic principles are to be followed in allocating funds under the SCSP and TSP include:

20 Note that the Sub-Plans deal only with Plan funding, not non-Plan funding, even though non-Plan funding is generally a larger bud-

get.

21 Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan-NCDHR, 2013. Scheduled Caste Sub Plan & Tribal Sub Plan: Union Budget Watch 2012-13 (with note

for Union Budget 2013-14). New Delhi: DAAA-NCDHR. Data compiled from Statements 21 & 21A of Expenditure Budget Vol. 1,

Union Budget 2012-13 and 2013-14.

22 Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan-NCDHR, 2013. Scheduled Caste Sub Plan & Tribal Sub Plan: Union Budget Watch 2012-13. New

Delhi: DAAA-NCDHR; Narkar, Amit. 2011. Tribal Sub-Plan under the Eleventh Five Year Plan. Pune: National Centre for Advocacy

Studies.

23 Planning Commission, 2006. Guidelines for Implementation of the Scheduled Castes Sub Plan. New Delhi: Government of India.

6

Only those schemes that ensure direct benefi ts to SC/ST individuals or families, or SC/ST localities with more

than 40% SC/ST populations (under area-wise schemes) should be included under SCSP/TSP.

These funds should be non-divertible, in that they should not be spent for general schemes that only indi-

rectly benefi t SC/STs, nor for schemes that have nothing to do with SC/ST development.

These funds should be non-lapsable, in that if central/state governments do not spend the funds in that

fi nancial year, they should not be returned as unspent; instead, governments should ensure that those funds

are spent in the next fi nancial year.

To circumvent the problem of non-divisible nature of funds for certain sectors such as major irrigation, power,

roads, etc., SCSP/TSP funds may account for only around 5% or the actual area being covered or benefi tted

by SCs/STs under the project and not the population percentage.

A dedicated unit for effective functioning can be constituted in every Central Ministry/ Department for the

welfare and development of SCs/STs as a nodal unit for the formulation and implementation of the SCSP/

TSP.24

In this regard, the Prime Minister stated in the 51st meeting of the National Development Council on 27 June 2005

that “if the benefi ts of (economic) growth have to reach all sections of our diverse society, there is a need to equip

them with necessary skills and resources to become active participants in growth processes”…. “SCSP and TSP

should be an integral part of annual plans as well as fi ve-year plans, making provision therein non-divertible and

non-lapsable with the clear objective of bridging the gaps in socio-economic conditions of SCs and STs within a

period of 10 years”.

However, while the SCSP/TSP have been operational now for around 33 years, several major problems exist in

their operation:

1. Funds are often not allocated under SCSP/TSP in proportion to the population of SCs/STs in the state/na-

tion. For example, in the current central government budget 2013-14, while the allocations under SCSP and

TSP recorded a slight increase of 0.43% and 0.32% respectively, they are still short of being proportionate

to the population of SCs and STs in the country. The SCSP allocation under the central government budget

of Rs 9931.80 crores amounts to only 9.92% (as compared to SCs’ 16.2% share of the national population)

of the total Plan budget, and the TSP allocation of Rs 5313.52 crores is only 5.87% (as compared to STs’

8.2% share of the national population).

2. A large amount of funds under SCSP and TSP are being allocated for general programmes and schemes,

which are not specifi cally designed for SCs and STs with fi xed, realistic targets. Much of the allocations by

different departments are thus ‘notional’, in that they are made on paper but the money does not reach

SCs and STs. The Planning Commission’s Mid-term Appraisal of the Eleventh Five Year Plan, for example,

noted that only two states – Gujarat and Tamil Nadu – had fi xed realistic physical targets for TSP schemes

and programmes, while several states had not conducted surveys to identify the issues and priorities for ST

development in their states.25

3. Most of the schemes devised by different departments for SCs and STs, that are accounted for under the

SCSP and TSP that have direct benefi t to SC/ST benefi ciaries are merely for survival, not for their develop-

ment or empowerment. In other words, the funds fl ow mainly for schemes for education, health and poverty

alleviation, and less to schemes that would redistribute resources to SCs and STs and make them also own-

ers of productive and knowledge resources.

4. Critical administrative bottlenecks in the implementation of the development programmes/schemes and

funds allocations, and the absence of adequate monitoring mechanisms, means that much of the funds for

24 See Planning Commission, 2006. Guidelines for Implementation of the Scheduled Castes Sub Plan. New Delhi: Government of India;

Planning Commission, 2010. Taskforce to Review Guidelines on SCSP & TSP by Central Ministries/Departments. New Delhi: Govern-

ment of India.

25 Planning Commission, 2011. Mid Term Appraisal for Eleventh Five Year Plan 2007-2012. New Delhi: Government of India, para

8.67.

7

schemes for SCs and STs do not reach the communities. There is, therefore, poor utilisation of the funds for

the welfare of SCs and STs.

5. SCSP/TSP have been, time and time again, diverted to other sectors and for other purposes.

6. There is a lack of transparency in many state budgets in terms of accessing information on the SCSP/TSP,

to be able to track the funds and how much actually reaches the communities.

7. Scheme planning and budgeting for SCs and STs is devised without the participation of the communities, or

often any needs assessment on the ground. Consequently, as one report noted, “In spite of the number of

schemes and incentives for educational development among STs, the impact has been marginal.”26

8. Service delivery mechanisms are poor and are a major constraint to the attainment of good development

outcomes for SCs and STs.

9. There is a lack of effective monitoring and review mechanisms at the central, state and district levels to en-

sure that all the relevant departments/ministries at both the central and state levels earmark the appropriate

amount of funds under SCSP/TSP and also utilise effectively those funds as per the guidelines framed.27

The Mid Term Appraisal of the 11th Five Year Plan noted that major issues relating to implementation of

SCSP and TSP strategies include that “priority sectors and need-based schemes/programmes for the benefi t

needs based on equity considerations.” (para 8.70)

The 12th Five Year Plan notes: “Despite the fact that strategies for TSP and SCSP have been in operation

for more than three decades, they could not be implemented as effectively as desired. The expenditure in

many states/UTs was not even 50% of the allocated funds. No proper budget heads/ sub-heads were cre-

ated to prevent diversion of funds. There was no controlling and monitoring mechanism and the planning

and supervision was not as effective as it should be.” (para 24.134)

The Indian National Congress, in its Jaipur meeting in 2013, declared that it is concerned about the insuf-

fi cient allocations and utilization under the TSP and SCSP in Central and States budgets. The Party called

upon the Government to consider bringing a national legislation to assure allocation of suffi cient resources

to these plans, as has been recently done by the Congress government in Andhra Pradesh. (para 18, Jaipur

Declaration 2013)

The overall impact of these problems in the SCSP/TSP allocations and expenditures is that Adivasis and Dalits are

being denied their due entitlement to funds and schemes to ensure their socio-economic development, including

educational development, on par with the rest of the country’s population. This form of institutionalised exclusion

of Dalits and Adivasis needs to be interrogated in terms of how education policies are being implemented through

the education planning and budget allocation process. As education is a concurrent subject, how the SCSP and

TSP budget allocations are made and implemented at both the central and state levels needs to be specifi cally

examined. Further, this must be analysed in relation to the perceptions of Dalit and Adivasi school-going children

and their communities as to their education needs and current gaps. This will enable suitable and workable rec-

ommendations to be devised that meet these children’s aspirations in and through education.

Purpose of the Study

To unpack the education policy and key education programmes/schemes in order to identify patterns of

institutional exclusion in the fulfi lment of the right to primary and secondary school education for SC/ST

children.

26 Institute of Social Sciences, 2003. Report on Impact of TSP implementation in Improving the Socio-Economic Condition of the Tribal

People with Special Focus on Reduction of Poverty Levels covering the States of Assam and Tamil Nadu. New Delhi: ISS. p.14.

27 Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan-NCDHR, 2013. Scheduled Caste Sub Plan & Tribal Sub Plan: Union Budget Watch 2012-13. New

Delhi: DAAA-NCDHR, pp.1-2.

8

To assess the budgetary allocations and utilisation under SCSP and TSP as to their fi t with SCSP/TSP man-

dates and the needs and aspirations of SC/ST children and youth in education.

To devise concrete recommendations to promote equal opportunities in education that is of equitable and

inclusive quality.

Study Objectives

Map and analyse education budget allocation fl ows under SCSP and TSP from the central and state govern-

ments, identifying the problems in fl ow and any budgetary misalignment;

Assess the types of education schemes for which substantial budgets are allocated in terms of their imple-

mentation and quality: i.e. their ability to address issues of discrimination and exclusion of SC/ST children in

education, as well as meet the educational needs and aspirations of SC/ST children;

Identify the barriers SC/ST students face in accessing key educational schemes, and the gaps in these

schemes;

Make concrete policy, budget and programme recommendations to the central and state governments to

enhance the quality and effective delivery of funds and schemes to promote SC/ST children’s access to

school education, and develop a package of entitlements for SC/ST children to ensure their access, reten-

tion and completion of school education.

Scope of Study

The study covered the school education budgets of the central government (Ministry of Human Resource Devel-

opment) and state governments (State Departments for School Education) in Bihar and Jharkhand. The primary

focus for budget analysis is the budget year 2011-12, given that this is the latest year for which complete data

on the budget estimates, revised estimates and actual expenditures is available. At the same time, the budget

estimates and revised estimates for the budget year 2012-13, and budget estimates for the year 2013-14, are

also analysed. The process of annual school education planning is also analysed in order to understand how

schemes and funds are devised and allocated (or not) to ensure direct educational benefi ts for SC/ST students.

Bihar and Jharkhand were chosen due to the fact that Bihar has the third largest SC population in the country

(13,048,608 SCs as per 2001 Census), and Jharkhand the sixth largest ST population (7,087,068 STs as per

2001 Census). This allowed a comparison between a largely SC populated state and largely ST populated state

in terms of school education budgeting and provisioning. At the same time, how budgets and schemes are be-

ing implemented for the minority SC and ST populations in those respective states (758,351 STs in Bihar and

3,189,320 SCs in Jharkhand, as per 2001 Census) was also examined. Bihar and Jharkhand, both educationally

backward states with some of the highest numbers of out-of-school children in the country, also report very low

education levels among SCs and STs (much lower than the average levels in the state), which implies the urgent

need for special measures to ensure these children enjoy their right to education.

The study also focuses specifi cally on three key government schemes – Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA), Rashtriya

Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA) and Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti (NVS) – due to their allocation of a sizeable

proportion of funds under the SCSP/TSP for promoting SC/ST children’s access to school education. SSA and

RMSA are also today the primary schemes through which the government aims to ensure elementary and sec-

ondary education to all children. Moreover, SSA and RMSA both include planning stipulations on how to bridge

gender and social category gaps in elementary and high school education respectively, while NVS operates a

quota system that ensures access to SC/ST students. These three government schemes are unpacked and

tracked fi nancially at the national and state levels.

9

Study Methodology

SECONDARY DATA

1. Secondary data and research on education budgeting for children in general, education planning and audit-

ing, state SC/ST schemes, and the status of school education for SC/ST children was examined, in order to

understand the general trends in the education system and its ability to cater to the needs of SC/ST children.

2. The education budget allocations (estimates), revised estimates and actual (expenditure) for the fi nancial year

2011-12 for primary/secondary school education in general and under the SCSP and TSP at the MHRD and

state government levels were collected and analysed, alongside the budget estimates and revised estimates

for 2012-13, and the budget estimates for 2013-14. An assessment was then made of the breakdown of

the education budget in terms of the proportion of funds going to direct schemes (scholarships, textbooks,

etc.) that generate concrete benefi ts in hand for SC/ST children, to grants in aid to institutions (for school

maintenance, upgrading of facilities, salaries of non-permanent staff, etc.) and to the creation of capital as-

sets (classrooms, toilets, new school buildings, etc.).

3. Secondary data and research on the three key education schemes – SSA, RMSA and NVS – were examined

to understand how these schemes are designed, for what priorities funds are allocated, the mechanisms for

their implementation and the fund fl ow to these schemes at the central and state government levels.

PRIMARY DATA

Primary data collection was carried out in Bihar by the state offi ce of Centre for Social Equity and Inclusion (CSEI),

and in Jharkhand by both SAMVAD Jharkhand and CSEI Bihar staff over the period of March-April 2013.

4. Taking the base as the national/state education budgets, interviews were held with key state education of-

fi cials – Education Department, SSA, RMSA and NVS offi cials – in Bihar and Jharkhand to understand the

education planning and budgeting process at the state level, how the SCP/TSP funds for education are al-

located and accounted for under different education-related schemes (SSA, RMSA and NVS in particular),

how schemes are devised for SC/ST children in the state, and how funds are disbursed to the district and

school levels. The interviews also assessed the level of understanding of the SCSP/TSP budgets, as well as

the constraints and barriers that hinder these funds being of direct benefi t to SC/ST school-going children.

5. Further, two districts were chosen in each state – one having a sizeable SC population and one having a size-

able ST population – and as much as possible the same offi cials met at the district level to also understand

the district-level education planning and budgeting process in general, and under SSA, RMSA and NVS

schemes.

a. Nalanda district in Bihar was chosen on the basis of it being Chief Minister Nitish Kumar’s home

district, it being a district noted for its strong governance, including e-governance, and it being a

district where the Chief Minister has piloted a number of government schemes. The district has

had a lot of fund pumped into it as a result, and it also has a large population of SC/STs: as per

the 2001 Census, SCs are 20% of the district population, while STs are 0.04%. In terms of literacy

rates, both SC and ST literacy rates are fall below those of the general population: 42.0% for SC

men, 15.4% for SC women, 39.3% for ST men, 18.2% for ST women, as compared to 66.4% for

men in general and 38.6% for women in general.

b. Jamui district in Bihar was chosen on the basis of it being one of the districts with the highest

concentration of ST population (4.8% of district population as per 2001 Census). Jamui also has

a fairly high concentration of SC population (17.4% of district population) and has strong pres-

ence and network of Dalit civil society organisations who have been working with the community

for a long period, including in the arena of education. In terms of literacy rates, both SC and ST

literacy rates are fall below those of the general population: 35.4% for SC men, 12.8% for SC

10

women, 39.5% for ST men, 13.0% for ST women, as compared to 57.1% for men in general and

26.3% for women in general.

c. Ranchi district in Jharkhand was chosen due to its high concentration of ST population: 41.8%

as per the 2001 Census. SCs are only 5.2% of the district’s population, by contrast. As it is the

district containing the state capital, education institutions and funding for the district are high.

d. Palamu district in Jharkhand was chosen due to its high concentration of SC population:

27.6%, as per the 2001 census. STs are only 9.0% of the district’s population, by contrast.

6. Dalit and Adivasi students in the two chosen districts per state were also met for a one-day consultation

each (total 4 consultations). The groups were chosen on the basis of existing networks and school contacts

the coordinating organisations in each state had formed with SC/ST students in the districts. Care was taken

to ensure adequate representation of both SC/ST communities, as well as sub-caste/tribal and gender rep-

resentation within the two communities. The consultations focused on understanding the key barriers SC/

ST children face in accessing and enjoying quality school education up to 12th class, the current gaps in

education schemes meant for their direct benefi t, and the types of educational needs and aspirations they

have, for which scheme matching is required.

7. A state-level consultation was held in both Patna and Ranchi with Dalit and Adivasi-led civil society organi-

sations working on the right to education (total 2 consultations). The main purpose was to understand the

barriers and constraints SC/ST children face in accessing and enjoying quality school education up to 12th

class at both the district levels and overall state level, the current gaps in education schemes meant for their

direct benefi t, and the possible interventions and schemes that could be devised to ensure SC/ST children’s

right to education.

Data Analysis and Organisation of the Report

The central and state education budget outlays to SCSP and TSP were compiled into tables from the budget

books for the years 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14. The interviews with government offi cials and the consul-

tations with SC/ST students and civil society organisations were manually coded, and then broader analytical

categories developed under which to group the data for analysis. Information from the interviews broadly fell

into three main categories: on the education planning process in general at both the state and district levels;

on SCSP/TSP allocations in particular; and on the process of devising education schemes for SC/ST children.

From the consultations, the information was categorised in terms of awareness of the SCSP/TSP; educational

constraints barriers for SC/ST children in the states; gaps in current education schemes; and a charter of de-

mands that expressed the aspirations and needs of SC/ST children in order to be able to successfully access

and complete their school education.

The report is then organised into fi ve sections:

The Introduction provides a broad overview of the educational status of SC/ST children in the country today, the

current education planning thrust, and the SCSP/TSP and its implementation so far. This makes the case for an

urgent need to focus on education budgeting and planning for SC/ST children. The purpose, objectives, scope

and methodology adopted for the study are then detailed.

Chapter 1 analyses the central government allocations and expenditure under the SCSP/TSP for school edu-

cation, with a particular focus on SSA, RMSA and NVS schemes.

Chapter 2 examines the status of school education for SC/ST students in Bihar and Jharkhand, as well as al-

locations and expenditures under the SCSP/TSP in those states.

Chapter 3 examines the education planning process in Bihar and Jharkhand at both the district and state

levels, especially with respect to SCSP/TSP. An assessment is made of the key education schemes

meant for SC/STs as well as SSA, RMSA and NVS, highlighting the gaps from the perspective of

11

Dalit and Adivasi students and civil society organisations. This assessment is linked to a needs

analysis for these students to successfully access and complete school education.

Chapter 4 then presents the overall conclusions in terms of the current gaps in budgets, planning and schemes,

and recommendations in terms of policy changes as well as a basket of schemes that would ensure

direct benefi ts reach SC/ST students in order to fulfi l their right to education.

12

Education is a concurrent subject and, therefore, both central and state/union territory governments have obliga-

tions to ensure the right to education for all children within their jurisdictions. Education is also a signifi cant sector

of expenditure by the Government of India under the SCSP/TSP: in fact, the Ministry of Human Resource Devel-

opment (MHRD) allocations for the SCSP/TSP are the largest of all Ministries, and amount to around 30% of all

Union Budget allocations under SCSP/TSP. The Department of School Education and Literacy (DSEL), MHRD is

the key department in charge of promoting and developing school education at the central government level. Its

vision, as per its Citizen’s Charter, is to ensure education of equitable quality for all in order to fully harness the na-

tion’s human potential. Specifi cally, DSEL aims to provide free and compulsory quality education to all children at

elementary level, as envisaged under the Right of All Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009, and

to universalise opportunities for quality secondary education. DSEL implements a number of central and centrally

sponsored schemes for school education, of which three major schemes with large budget allocations are dealt

with in detail below. The DSEL budget estimate for 2013-14 runs to Rs 49,659 crores, Rs 6930 crores more than

the revised estimate of Rs 42,729 crores for 2012-13.28

This chapter presents an analysis of the overall DSEL budget as well as the three schemes in terms of the alloca-

tions and expenditures made under the SCSP/TSP and their contribution to ensuring that SC/ST children enjoy

their right to school education.

28 Ministry of Finance, 2013. Statement 12, Expenditure Budget Vol. 1, Union Budget 2013-14. New Delhi: Government of India.

Central Government and School Education

CHAPTER 1

13

1.1 SCSP and TSP under the Department of School Education and Literacy

As mentioned in the previous chapter, the Planning Commission policy guidelines for the implementation of the

SCSP/TSP mandate the following: population-proportionate funding allocations under the SCSP (16.2%) and

TSP (8.2%); only those schemes that directly benefi t SC/ST individuals or households or SC/ST localities to

be categorised under SCSP/TSP and only expenditures commensurate with the benefi ts accrued to SCs/STs

booked there under; and these funds to be non-divertible and non-lapsable. The Narendra Jadhav Committee

Report additionally recommended that a nodal unit be set up in all ministries/departments that have an obligation

to earmark funds under the SCSP/TSP; and the Central Tripartite Committee created in 1999 (and reconstituted

in 2006) be fully activated to regularly review the implementation of the SCSP/TSP, identify specifi c schemes that

would benefi t SCs/STs, and to promptly resolve any inter-ministerial issues.29

The Narendra Jadhav Committee Report divided central government ministries into four categories according to

their function and accordingly stipulated the acceptable percentage allocations under SCSP/TSP. For Ministries/

Departments such as the Department of School Education and Literacy, which are implementing social sector

programmes/schemes of major relevance for the development of SCs/STs, they may be required to earmark

more than 16.2% of their plan outlay under SCSP and 8.2% under TSP. In terms of allocations under the SCSP/

TSP, the Department of School Education and Literacy, MHRD has consistently allocated more than the afore-

mentioned percentages for school education (see Table 2.1). Its allocations, moreover, have increased over the

past three budget periods, though the increase has been much less over the 2012-13 to 2013-14 period than

over the 2011-12 to 2012-13 period: SCSP allocations increased by Rs 1402.4 crores between 2011-12 and

2012-13, but only by Rs 738.0 crores between 2012-13 and 2013-14; TSP allocations likewise increased by Rs

750.3 crores between 2011-12 and 2012-13, but only by Rs 394.8 crores between 2012-13 and 2013-14. At the

same time, the percentage share of SCSP/TSP funds to the total Plan outlay by the Department has increased

between the 2011-12 and 2013-14 budgets to stand at 20.14% for SCSP and 11.64% for TSP.

Table 2.1 | Department of School Education and Literacy Allocations under SCSP/TSP

Sub Plan

Allocation 2011-12 (BE) + %

allocation to total DSEL Plan

Outlay

Allocation 2012-13 (BE) + %

allocation to total DSEL Plan

Outlay

Allocation 2013-14 (BE) + %

allocation to total DSEL Plan

Outlay

SCSP7791.40

(20.00%)

9193.80

(20.00%)

9931.80

(20.14%)

TSP4168.40

(10.70%)

4918.68

(9.61% )

5313.52

(11.64%)

Source: SCSP/TSP allocations as per statements 21 and 21A, Expenditure Budget Vol. 1, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14

Currently, however, there is no nodal offi cer appointed to the Department of School Education and Literacy to

oversee the allocations and expenditures under the SCSP/TSP. This means that there is no institutional mecha-

nism in place to plan, coordinate and monitor the implementation of programmes for SC/ST children within

school education schemes and to book only expenditures for such programmes under the SCSP/TSP. There is

also a lack of periodic review on the SCSP/TSP performance in terms of positive educational impacts on SC/ST

children.

Moreover, the large allocations under the SCSP/TSP for school education are offset when examining the break-

down of those allocations under specifi c education schemes. Tables 2.2 and 2.3 present the breakdown of the

Department of School Education and Literacy budgetary allocations under SCSP and TSP respectively for the

years 2011-12 to 2013-14. The data reveals that in 2011-12, 27 education schemes were allocated funds under

the SCSP and TSP. Of these, two schemes clearly targeted (Religious) Minority children and one was for an Indo-

29 Planning Commission, 2010. Taskforce to Review Guidelines on SCSP & TSP by Central Ministries/Departments. New Delhi: Govern-

ment of India.

14

Mongolian school, and therefore should not have been allocated funds under SCSP/TSP in the fi rst place. At least

no expenditure was incurred under SCSP/TSP for these three schemes that year, and thereafter no funds have

been allocated to them under SCSP/TSP.

Further, in 2011-12, the actual expenditure accounted for as a percentage of the Revised Budget estimates for

that year under SCSP was 91.6% and under TSP 98.4%: i.e. the budgeted funds were not fully utilised, though

over 90% of funds under SCSP/TSP were accounted for as spent during that fi nancial year. This should be seen

in light of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Human Resources Development, which highlighted that the

unspent balances means that the targeted benefi ciaries are not being covered fully and non-adherence to fi nan-

cial norms is taking place. Moreover, the committee noted that in view of the high dropout rates especially among

SC/ST students, the Department should come out with a specifi c action plan to curb the problem.30

The main concern when viewing SCSP/TSP allocations and expenditures for school education, however, is that

there is no mechanism currently in place to ensure that funds allocated under these schemes are spent for the

direct benefi t of SC/ST students. For example, critiques have been made of the education outlays under SSA

and the Midday Meals for Elementary Schools schemes, which represent the two highest budgetary allocations

under the SCSP/TSP, that the funds are for students in general and not specifi c for SC/ST students. SSA does

not contain any programmes specifi cally to ensure SC/ST student school admissions or the recruitment of SC/

ST teachers. Similarly, the Midday Meals for Elementary Schools scheme does not have any mechanism to indi-

cate how these funds will be spent directly for SC/ST students.31 The same can be said for the RMSA scheme,

which records the third highest allocation under SCSP/TSP, but without any specifi c programmes targeting SC/

ST children (see section 1.3).

Table 2.2 | Department of School Education & Literacy Allocations under SCSP (in Rs crore)

S. No. Scheme

BE *

2011-12

RE **

2011-12

AE #

2011-12

BE

2012-13

RE

2012-13

BE

2013-14

1 Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) 4200.00 4200.00 3920.48 5111.00 4728.78 5451.60

2

National Programme of Nutrition Sup-

port to Primary Education (Midday

Meal Scheme)

2076.00 2076.00 1781.10 2387.40 2301.57 2643.00

3Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan

(RMSA)484.78 484.78 512.26 624.80 625.80 796.60

4 Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti (NVS) 240.00 240.00 240.00 250.00 250.00 250.00

5

Scheme for setting up of 6000 Model

Schools at Block level as Benchmark

of Excellence

240.00 240.00 216.34 216.00 161.34 200.00

6Strengthening of Teacher Training

Institutions100.00 75.31 68.42 100.00 58.40 100.00

7Information and Communication Tech-

nology in Schools100.00 100.00 98.26 70.00 70.00 70.00

8Adult Education & Skill Development

Scheme97.70 97.70 94.16 118.40 84.30 114.40

9 Kendriya Vidyalayas Sangathan 70.00 70.00 70.00 70.00 70.00 70.00

10

Scheme for construction and running

of Girls Hostels for Secondary and

Higher Secondary School students

50.00 50.00 0.02 89.44 60.40 90.00

11Support to NGOs/Institutions/SRCs for

Adult Education & Skill Development20.00 20.00 19.16 21.00 16.09 20.00

30 Department-Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Human Resource Development, 2012. ‘244th Report on Demands for

Grants 2012-13 of Department of School Education and Literacy’. Presented to Rajya Sabha on 03.05.2012 and laid on table of Lok

Sabha on 03.05.2012, paras 2.10 & 3.25.

31 Menon, Sreelatha, 2013. ‘SC/ST funds increase, but Plan yet to reach Benei ciaries’. h e Business Standard, 02.03.2013.

15

S. No. Scheme

BE *

2011-12

RE **

2011-12

AE #

2011-12

BE

2012-13

RE

2012-13

BE

2013-14

12Inclusive Education for the Disabled at

Secondary Schools20.00 20.00 8.92 14.00 5.61 10.00

13National Means-cum-Merit Scholarship

Scheme12.00 14.00 12.06 14.00 14.00 14.00

14 Mahila Samakhya 10.00 10.00 10.00 12.00 12.00 12.00

15National Scheme for Incentive to Girl

Child for Secondary School10.00 68.69 68.69 67.00 67.00 66.20

16 Vocationalisation of Education 5.00 5.00 2.66 20.00 16.00 16.02

17National Council of Educational Re-

search & Training5.00 5.00 5.00 3.00 2.34 5.00

18 National Bal Bhawan 2.80 2.80 0.80 2.80 1.09 1.60

19 Directorate of Adult Education 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.80 0.68 1.80

20Centrally Sponsored Scheme of ap-

pointment of Language Teachers1.00 1.00 0.99 1.16 0.38 1.16

21 National Institute of Open Schooling 3.00 3.00 0.70 -- -- 0.02

22 National Literacy Mission Authority 0.40 0.40 0.00 -- -- 0.40

23Central Tibetan School Society Admin-

istration1.60 1.60 1.43 -- -- --

24Access and Equity - Grants to Volun-

tary Organisations0.02 0.02 0.02 -- -- --

25Scheme for Providing Quality Educa-

tion in Madarsa (SPQEM) 30.00 3.00 -- -- -- --

26Scheme for Infrastructure Develop-

ment in Minority Institutions (IDMI) 10.00 1.00 -- -- -- --

27Joint Indo-Mongolian School (Mon-

golia) 0.20 0.20 -- -- -- --

SUB-TOTAL 7791.40 7791.40 7133.37 9193.80 8545.80 9931.80

* BE = budget estimates ** RE = revised estimates # AE = actual expenditure

Source: Statement 21, Expenditure Budget Vol. 1, 2012-13 and 2013-14: Demand No. 58 (2012-13)/59 (2013-14).

Table 2.3 | Department of School Education & Literacy Allocations under TSP (in Rs crore)

S.

No. Scheme

BE *

2011-12

RE **

2011-12

AE #

2011-12

BE

2012-13

RE

2012-13

BE

2013-14

1 Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) 2247.20 2247.00 2246.72 2744.93 2539.64 2916.61

2

National Programme of Nutrition

Support to Primary Education (Mid-

day Meal Scheme)

1110.63 1110.66 1069.83 1277.26 1230.50 1417.23

3Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhi-

yan (RMSA)259.36 257.95 273.73 334.27 342.81 426.18

4 Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti (NVS) 128.40 128.40 128.40 133.75 133.75 133.75

5

Scheme for setting up of 6000 Model

Schools at Block level as Benchmark

of Excellence

128.40 128.40 109.11 115.56 80.25 107.00

6Strengthening of Teacher Training

Institutions53.50 37.39 35.79 53.50 31.25 75.00

7Information and Communication

Technology in Schools53.50 53.50 53.32 37.45 37.45 37.45

8Adult Education & Skill Development

Scheme52.27 52.27 50.35 63.34 44.79 61.20

9 Kendriya Vidyalayas Sangathan 37.45 37.45 37.45 37.45 37.45 37.45

16

10

Scheme for construction and running

of Girls Hostels for Secondary and

Higher Secondary School students

26.75 26.75 21.51 48.15 32.31 48.15

11

Support to NGOs/Institutions/SRCs

for Adult Education & Skill Develop-

ment

10.70 10.70 10.35 11.24 8.61 10.70

12Inclusive Education for the Disabled

at Secondary Schools10.70 10.70 5.19 7.49 3.00 5.35

13National Means-cum-Merit Scholar-

ship Scheme6.42 7.49 4.98 7.49 7.49 7.49

14National Scheme for Incentive to Girl

Child for Secondary School5.35 43.17 43.17 25.00 25.00 10.70

15 Mahila Samakhya 5.35 5.35 5.35 6.42 6.42 6.42

16 Vocationalisation of Education 2.68 2.68 0.02 10.70 8.56 8.57

17National Council of Educational Re-

search & Training2.68 2.68 2.68 1.61 1.25 1.61

18 National Institute of Open Schooling 1.61 1.61 0.38 -- -- 0.01

19 National Bal Bhawan 1.50 1.50 0.50 1.50 0.58 0.86

20 Directorate of Adult Education 1.02 1.02 1.03 0.96 0.68 0.96

21Centrally Sponsored Scheme of ap-

pointment of Language Teachers0.54 0.54 0.53 0.61 0.21 0.62

22 National Literacy Mission Authority 0.21 0.21 -- -- -- 0.21

23Access and Equity - Grants to Volun-

tary Organisations0.01 0.01 0.01 -- -- --

24Central Tibetan School Society Ad-

ministration0.86 0.86 0.76 -- -- --

25Scheme for Providing Quality Educa-

tion in Madarsa (SPQEM) 16.05 -- -- -- -- --

26Scheme for Infrastructure Develop-

ment in Minority Institutions (IDMI) 5.35 -- -- -- -- --

27Joint Indo-Mongolian School (Mon-

golia) 0.11 0.11 -- -- -- --

SUB-TOTAL 4168.40 4168.40 4101.16 4918.68 4572.00 5313.52

* BE = budget estimates ** RE = revised estimates # AE = actual expenditure

Source: Statement 21, Expenditure Budget Vol. 1, 2012-13 and 2013-14: Demand No. 58 (2012-13)/59 (2013-14).

Furthermore, the nature of allocations under the various schemes of the Department of School Education and

Literacy are mostly ‘notional’, in that a proportion of the total scheme meant for the general school student or

child population is presumed to be utilised for the benefi t of SC/ST children. Funds thus are accounted for under

SCSP/TSP as a technical calculation of a percentage of the total funds spent on the schemes. However, within

each scheme there is no specifi c component or programme that would ensure that direct benefi ts fl ow to SC/ST

children for their education and that they enjoy such benefi t in both physical and fi nancial terms. This has been

openly acknowledged by the MHRD, which notes that its schemes operate primarily along the following lines:

general schemes for all children/students; or area-based schemes which focus on areas with major concentration

of SC/ST populations. In other words, little or no schemes exist that are exclusively meant for SCs/STs.32

This can be illustrated by examining the object-wise breakdown of SCSP/TSP allocations, which are based on

the Detailed Demands for Grants (Tables 2.4 & 2.5). Note that the allocations as per Statements 21 and 21A

under SCSP and TSP respectively sometimes differ from the amounts calculated based on the Detailed Demands

for Grant (DDG) of the Department of School Education and Literacy.

32 MHRD, 2012. ‘Agenda Items for Meeting of Sub-Committee for Drafting of Guidelines for Implementation of SCSP and TSP in

Higher Education and School Education Sectors’. Meeting held on 12.09.2012 in ICSSR, New Delhi.

17

The breakdown of SCSP/TSP allocations by the Department of School Education and Literacy shows a dis-

proportionate allocation for grants-in-aid for the creation of capital assets and general grants. Taking the year

2012-13 budget estimates, 29.2% of funds allocated under the SCSP and 21.3% of funds under the TSP were

for the creation of capital assets like school infrastructure, where it is not possible to divide the accounts for funds

spent that directly benefi t SC/ST students and funds spent that benefi t other students. A further 59.7% of SCSP

funds and 77.5% of TSP funds were for grants-in-aid general, which does not indicate how much of these funds

would have been utilised for programmes with direct benefi ts to SC/ST children. Less than 1% of funds – 0.2%

of SCSP funds and 0.2% of TSP funds – were for the direct benefi ts of scholarships and stipends for SC/ST stu-

dents. A similar situation prevails in 2013-14, where 22.0% of SCSP and TSP funds were grants for the creation

of capital assets, 76.9% of SCSP funds and 77.0% of TSP funds for general grants-in-aid, and only 0.01% of

SCSP and TSP funds for direct entitlements such as scholarships and stipends for SC/ST children. In sum, there

is no evidence of clear fi nancial and programme planning to address the obstacles and needs of SC/ST children

in school education.

Table 2.4 | Object-wise Details of SCSP Allocations under Dept of School Education and Literacy

(in Rs crore)

Object Head Details 2012-13 BE 2012-13 RE 2013-14 BE

Grants-in-aid-General 6406.60 5885.80 7640.17

Grants for Creation of Capital Assets 2684.39 2558.31 2188.42

Grants-in-aid-Salaries 87.01 87.01 87.01

Scholarship/Stipends 14.00 14.00 14.00

Advertising & Publicity 1.28 0.68 1.28

Other Administrative Expenses 0.52 0.00 0.92

Total 9193.80 8545.80 9931.80

Table 2.5 | Object-wise Details of TSP Allocations under Dept of School Education and Literacy (in

Rs crore)

Object Head Details (TSP) 2012-13 BE 2012-13 RE 2013-14 BE

Grants-in-aid-General 3425.63 3085.57 4089.63

Grants for creation of Capital Assets 1441.10 1434.75 1171.72

Grants-in-aid-Salaries 43.51 43.51 43.51

Scholarship/Stipends 7.49 7.49 7.49

Advertising & Publicity 0.68 0.68 0.68

Other Administrative Expenses 0.28 0.00 0.49

Total 4918.69 4572.00 5313.52

In addition, on examination of the types of schemes under the Department of School Education and Literacy

and their various allocations (Tables 2.6 & 2.7), the following broad categorisation can be made between general

schemes meant for all children, and schemes directly targeting SC/ST children. The general schemes amount to

a notional allocation of funds under SCSP/TSP, since there is no mechanism to ensure that specifi c funds and

benefi ts fl ow directly to SC/ST children. Only for those directly targeting SC/ST children can there be said to be

a real allocation of funds under SCSP/TSP. A Planning Commission Task Group on the Development of SCs/STs

has actually confi rmed this trend as far as education is concerned:

A Special Component Plan with the notional allocation of 15% is being implemented for the welfare of

scheduled castes and a Tribal Sub Plan with a notional allocation of 7.5% of the total allocation of all

schemes is being implemented for the welfare of scheduled tribes. There are no exclusive schemes for

scheduled castes and scheduled tribes even though preferences/ concessions are given to scheduled

castes and scheduled tribes under different schemes.33

33 Planning Commission, 2005. Report of Task Group on Development of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes on Selected Agenda Items of

the National Common Minimum Programme. New Delhi: Planning Commission, para 3.1.3.

18

Taking this categorisation and applying it to the 2012-13 budget outlays under SCSP/TSP, the result is that only

an estimated 1.5% of the Department’s SCSP budget and 0.4% of its TSP budget actually fl ows to SC/ST chil-

dren for their education under targeted schemes.

Table 2.6 | Department of School Education and Literacy Breakdown of SCSP Allocations 2012-13

Name and Details of SchemeAllocation for

Total Scheme

Total SCSP

as per DDGs%

Notional

Allocation

General

Allocation

Real

Allocation

Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan 25555.00 4934.64 19.31 0.00 4934.64 0.00

Elementary Education - Na-

tional Programme of Mid Day

Meals in Schools

11937.00 2221.00 18.61 0.00 2221.00 0.00

Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha

Abhiyan3124.00 624.80 19.68 0.00 624.80 0.00

Elementary Education - Other

Expenditure23114.47 342.76 0.03 0.00 342.76 0.00

Navodaya Vidyalayas Samiti 1250.00 250.00 18.61 0.00 250.00 0.00

Scheme for Setting up of 6000

Model Schools at Block Level

as Bench Mark of Excellence

1080.00 216.00 18.00 0.00 216.00 0.00

Adult Education & Skill Devel-

opment Scheme531.00 119.45 21.19 0.00 119.45 0.00

Elementary Education - Teach-

ers Training450.00 100.00 22.22 0.00 100.00 0.00

Scheme for Construction and

Running of Girls Hostels

for Students of Secondary &

Higher Secondary Schools

450.00 89.44 19.88 16.54 0.00 72.90

National Scheme for Incentive

to the Girl Child for Secondary

(SUCCESS)

100.00 67.00 67.00 0.00 0.00 67.00

Information & Communication

Technologies in Schools350.00 70.00 18.57 0.00 70.00 0.00

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan 350.00 70.00 18.44 70.00 0.00 0.00

Support to NGOs/ Institutions/

SRCs for Adult Education &

Skill Development

105.00 19.95 19.00 0.00 19.95 0.00

Vocationalisation of Education 100.00 19.40 19.40 0.00 19.40 0.00

Inclusive Education for the

Disabled at Secondary Schools

(IEDSS)

70.00 14.00 20.00 0.00 14.00 0.00

National Means cum Merit

Scholarship Scheme70.00 14.00 20.00 0.00 14.00 0.00

Mahila Samakhya 60.00 12.00 20.00 0.00 12.00 0.00

National Council of Education

Research and Training13.50 3.00 22.22 3.00 0.00 0.00

National Bal Bhawan National

Children’s Museum Bal Bhawan

Society

14.00 2.80 20.00 2.80 0.00 0.00

Directorate of Adult Education 9.00 1.80 18.00 1.80 0.00 0.00

Appointment of Language

Teachers5.80 1.16 20.00 1.16 0.00 0.00

Evaluation and Studies Appren-

tices Act Teacher Training0.00 0.60 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.00

Total 68756.47 9193.80 440.12 95.90 8958.00 139.90

Source: Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan (DAAA)-NCDHR budget analysis 2012-13

19

Table 2.7 | Department of School Education and Literacy Breakdown of TSP Allocations 2012-13

Name and Details of SchemeAllocation for

Total Scheme

Total TSP

as per DDGs%

Notional

Allocation

General

Allocation

Real

Allocation

Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan 25555.00 1489.12 5.83 0.00 1489.12 0.00

Elementary Education -

National Programme of Mid

Day Meals in Schools

11937.00 1149.53 9.63 0.00 1149.53 0.00

Rashtriya Madhyamik Shik-

sha Abhiyan3124.00 288.46 9.23 288.46 0.00 0.00

Navodaya Vidyalayas Samiti 1250.00 114.40 9.15 0.00 114.40 0.00

Scheme for Setting up of

6000 Model Schools at

Block Level as Bench Mark

of Excellence

1080.00 104.13 9.64 0.00 104.13 0.00

Elementary Education -

Teachers Training450.00 53.50 11.89 0.00 53.50 0.00

Elementary Education -

Other Expenditure0.00 883.54 0.00 0.00 883.54 0.00

Secondary Education - As-

sistance to Non-Govern-

ment Secondary Schools

(Amount of this scheme

is already added in other

scheme)

0.00 81.29 0.00 0.00 81.29 0.00

Secondary Education -

Other Grants0.00 58.12 0.00 0.00 58.12 0.00

Adult Education & Skill

Development Scheme531.00 51.54 9.71 0.00 51.54 0.00

Secondary Education - Re-

search and Training0.00 35.17 0.00 0.00 35.17 0.00

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sanga-

than350.00 32.75 9.36 32.75 0.00 0.00

National Scheme for Incen-

tive to the Girl Child for

Secondary (SUCCESS)

100.00 19.00 19.00 0.00 0.00 19.00

Adult Education - Other

Adult Education Pro-

gramme

0.00 13.90 0.00 0.00 13.90 0.00

Secondary Education -

Other Expenditure0.00 13.85 0.00 0.00 13.85 0.00

Support to NGOs/ Institu-

tions/SRCs for Adult Educa-

tion & Skill Development

105.00 9.14 8.70 0.00 9.14 0.00

Mahila Samakhya 60.00 6.42 10.70 0.00 6.42 0.00

National Means cum Merit

Scholarship Scheme70.00 4.00 5.71 0.00 4.00 0.00

Secondary Education -

Scholarships0.00 3.49 0.00 0.00 3.49 0.00

Information & Commu-

nication Technologies in

Schools

350.00 2.67 0.76 0.00 2.67 0.00

National Bal Bhawan Na-

tional Children’s Museum

Bal Bhawan Society

14.00 1.50 10.71 0.00 1.50 0.00

Directorate of Adult Educa-

tion9.00 0.87 9.67 0.87 0.00 0.00

20

Vocationalisation of Educa-

tion100.00 0.64 0.64 0.00 0.64 0.00

Equipment- Secondary

Education0.00 0.54 0.00 0.00 0.54 0.00

Scheme for Providing Quality

Education in Madrassas 13.50 0.36 2.67 0.00 0.36 0.00

Information & Communication

Technology in Schools - Grants

to Union Territories Without

Legislature

0.00 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.00

Evaluation and Studies Appren-

tices Act Teacher Training0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.00

Adult Education - Direction &

Administration0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00

Scheme for Construction and

Running of Girls Hostels for

Students of Secondary & Higher

Secondary Schools

450.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

Inclusive Education for the

Disabled at Secondary Schools

(IEDSS)

70.00 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.00

Appointment of Language

Teachers5.80 0.01 0.17 0.00 0.01 0.00

Total 45642.00 4418.69 143.21 322.08 4077.59 19.02

Source: Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan (DAAA)-NCDHR budget analysis 2012-13

This fi nding of notional allocations is further confi rmed by the right to information replies34 received from the

Department of School Education and Literacy, MHRD in 2011 and 2012 under the following schemes: RMSA,

National Programme of Midday Meals in Schools, Inclusive Education for the Disabled at Secondary Stage,

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Jan Shikshan Sansthans and Saakshar Bharat. Most of

these replies point out to allocations of funds under the SCSP/TSP but without any attempt to justify any specifi c

activities under these schemes to benefi t SC/ST students. For example, the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan reply

mentions the fi ndings allocation under SCSP and TSP, and notes that “the allocated amount is being utilised for

construction activities and computerisation and the SC/ST category students are benefi tted by these facilities

altogether”.

The absence of targeted schemes for SC/ST children is partly the result of education schemes for SC/ST children

being separately dealt with under the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment (for SCs) and Ministry of Tribal

Affairs (for STs). For example, in 2013-14 the MSJE allocated a total of Rs 961.85 crores for SC children’s educa-

tion through the following targeted schemes: post-matric scholarship for SCs; girls hostel for SCs; boys hostel for

SCs; pre-matric scholarship for children of those engaged in certain (unclean) occupations; upgradation of merit

of SC students; and pre-matric scholarship for SCs. Likewise, in 2013-14 the MTA allocated Rs 1202.19 crores

for ST children’s education through the following targeted schemes: PMS, book bank and upgradation of merit

for ST students; hostels for ST boys and girls; establishment of ashram schools in TSP areas; strengthening edu-

cation of ST girls in low literacy districts; and pre-matric scholarship for ST students.35 However, no convergence

across Central Ministries/Departments on school education for SCs/STs seems to be taking place. At the same

time, any earmarking by the DSEL under the SCSP/TSP should come from specifi c programmes created for SC/

ST children to equalise their educational levels with others, in the same way that schemes and programmes exist

for girls and disabled children.

34 Replies to RTI applications i led by DAAA-NCDHR in 2011-12.

35 Ministry of Finance, 2013. Union Budget 2013-14, Expenditure Budget Vol. 1, Statement 22: Budget Provisions for Schemes for the Welfare

of Children. New Delhi: Government of India.

21

1.2 Three Major School Education Schemes from an Equity-Inclusion Angle

Within school education, three major schemes are next examined: Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan; Rashtriya Madhya-

mik Shiksha Abhiyan; and Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti. As seen from Tables 2.2 & 2.3, these three schemes are

among the top four schemes (the fourth being the Midday Meals in Schools scheme) to allocate funds under the

SCSP/TSP. The three schemes are briefl y outlined, including their specifi c programmes for addressing equity and

inclusion issues in education for SC/ST children. The next section then analyses at the budgetary allocations and

expenditures for these schemes under SCSP/TSP at the central government level.

(I) SARVA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN (SSA)

SSA is a centrally sponsored scheme launched in 2001, under which central and state governments share fi -

nancial responsibility in the ratio 65:35. It is the primary vehicle for ensuring elementary education for all children

aged 6 to 14 years in the country, with its focus on adequate school infrastructure, personnel, academic support,

etc. There is also a specifi c focus on disadvantaged social groups, including SCs and STs, and bridging gender

and social gaps. The equity agenda of SSA is stated as follows: working towards and rights and entitlements

approach to elementary education; developing an understanding of the issues that contribute to social exclusion;

assessing the needs of different excluded social groups and thereafter address these needs through contextu-

alised strategies; an encouraging innovative thinking to identify holistic and viable strategies to address social

exclusion and promote equity across different SSA goals.36

Thus, allowance is given for context-specifi c interventions and strategies for education of these target groups

in line with the RtE Act. SSA has also targeted geographical areas in districts and blocks where SCs and STs

are concentrated in the matter of allocation of funds and school infrastructure to promote elementary education.

Special Focus Districts are currently identifi ed with 25% and above SC and ST populations as follows: 61 districts

with a high SC population and 109 districts with a high ST population. The education plans in these districts

should provide for interventions to focus on the specifi c problems of these communities in the districts. As per

the 2012-13 budget, SC and ST concentrated districts received 12% each of the total national SSA budget. The

equity strategy under SSA is translated into free textbooks to be given to all students, including SC/ST students,

in classes 1-8. Back to school camps, bridge course and other alternative schooling facilities are to be given to

those children who are out of school, as well as special coaching/remedial classes to improve learning outcomes.

Teacher sensitisation programmes should also promote equitable learning opportunities and address in-class

discrimination. SC/ST representation in the school management committees is another mandated strategy, as is

the deployment of tribal coordinators at the state level and in ST populated districts to monitor SSA activities.37

The planning process at the district level, moreover, should ensure the large-scale participation of women and

other disadvantaged groups so as to ensure community ownership of the district plan for elementary education.

Under the 12th Five Year Plan, one of the strategic areas under SSA is to address residual access and equity

gaps in elementary education. This is to be achieved through such measures as residential school complexes

in blocks with over 50% ST population; residential schools for SC children; seasonal hostel facilities for SC/ST

children of migrating families; special educational support for SC/ST children; curriculum revision to address

caste-based exclusion and to promote inclusion; and encouraging partnerships with Dalit civil society organisa-

tions.38 However, equity measures are rarely being discussed by government offi cials, especially with regard to

SC/ST children. For instance, the Conference of State Education Secretaries, held in January 2012, reviewed the

implementation of the Right to Education Act without any mention of SC/ST children, nor any equity measures

beyond special trainings for mainstreaming out-of-school children. At the same time, guidelines on preparing the

36 MHRD, 2011. SSA Framework for Implementation based on the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. New Delhi: Govern-

ment of India, para 3.3.2.

37 Ministry for Human Resource Development, 2011. Annual Report 2010-11. New Delhi: MHRD, p.196.

38 Planning Commission, 2012. 12th Five Year Plan, Vol. 3: Social Sector. New Delhi: Government of India, pp.60-61.

22

Annual Work Plans and Budgets for 2012-13 specifi cally mentioned the need for systemic change to ensure that

all classroom material and translations are discrimination and bias-free. States were to prepare their plans de-

scribing how this would be ensured through the curriculum, syllabus and teaching learning materials; classroom

practices; management and administration of all incentives and provisions from a child rights perspective; and

training programmes for teachers and school management committee members on how to address these issues

in schools.39

While SSA currently receives the highest amount of funds, the current challenge is to design specifi c schemes

for SC/ST children to address the educational needs and issues of discrimination and exclusionary practices

that these children face. While some state governments have been utilising the ‘district equity innovation funds’

(Rs 50 lakhs per district) under SSA for these purposes, most districts do not use these funds, or else use them

for programmes that do not close the educational gap between SC/ST students and other students. This was

confi rmed by the Performance Audit report on SSA in 2006, which found that funds to the tune of Rs 39.80 crore

remained unutilised as no innovative activities for girls, SC/ST education and computer training were undertaken.

Moreover, free textbooks in many instances did not reach the target groups like SC/ST children, or reached them

late.40 At present, the only direct benefi ts that SC/ST students receive under SSA are fi nancial support towards

their uniforms, textbooks, or scholarships, which comprise only a small percentage of the SSA funds.

Furthermore, as far as fi nancial commitments to operationalise the right to elementary education are concerned,

there is less clarity. The MHRD has estimated the need to increase funds by around Rs 10,000 to 12,000 crores in

order to fi nance the implementation of the Act. However, in 2010-11, the allocation for SSA, which is the primary

scheme for implementation of the RTE Act, was only Rs 15,000 crores, or roughly half the amount required to

implement the Act.41 The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Human Resource Development likewise noted

that the budgetary allocation of Rs 25,555.00 crore for SSA in 2012-13 (as against the Department’s demand for

Rs 40,000 crore) was insuffi cient, which would hinder the implementation of SSA-RTE programmes within the

stipulated timeframe under the RTE Act.42 At the same time, funds have been reported as diverted to activities

and schemes that are beyond the scope of SSA43, or else available SSA funds have been under-utilised.44 The

latter may in part be due to schools tending to receive their grants under SSA only during the second half of the

fi scal year.45

(II) RASHTRIYA MADHYAMIK SHIKSHA ABHIYAN (RMSA)

RMSA is a centrally sponsored scheme launched in 2009-10, under which central and state governments share

fi nancial responsibility in the ratio 75:25. The main objectives of the scheme are to enhance access to secondary

education and improve its quality. Under the 12th Plan, it is envisaged that RMSA will be made a single compre-

hensive scheme to address the issues of coverage (including availability, accessibility and affordability) and quality

in secondary education. The 12th Plan also stresses the need to build capacity in secondary schools to absorb

the students passing out of elementary education today. The RMSA guidelines specify that the educational de-

velopment of SC, ST, OBC and educationally backward minority children is a special focus in the scheme. Every

activity under the programme should identify the benefi ts that will accrue to children from these communities.

39 Department of School Education and Literacy, 2012. Minutes of Conference of State Education Secretaries, held on 4-6 January 2012.

New Delhi: MHRD.

40 Comptroller Auditor General of India, 2006. Performance Audit on Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. Report No. 15 of 2006. New Delhi: CAG,

paras 7.4.6 & 7.5.1.3.

41 Mehrotra, Santosh, 2010. “h e Right to Education and its Financing”. CBGA Budget Track, Vol. 7, Issues 2&3, p. 12.

42 Department-Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Human Resource Development, 2012. ‘244th Report on Demands for

Grants 2012-13 of Department of School Education and Literacy’. Presented to Rajya Sabha on 03.05.2012 and laid on table of Lok

Sabha on 03.05.2012.

43 Comptroller Auditor General of India, 2006. Performance Audit on Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. Report No. 15 of 2006. New Delhi: CAG,

paras 7.2.4.1-.2.

44 Centre for Budget and Governance Accountability & UNICEF India, 2011. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. Budgeting for Change Series, 2011.

New Delhi: CBGA & UNICEF, pp.8-11. Utilisation data examined from 2005-06 to 2009-10.

45 ASER 2011 i ndings, as reported in Ministry of Finance, 2012. Economic Survey 2011-12. New Delhi: Government of India, p.322.

23

Moreover, the participation of SCs/STs in the affairs of the school is to be ensured through representation in the

School Management Committees. RMSA is very progressive in that it addresses a number of equity elements,

namely: (i) special focus in micro-planning addressing the needs of every child, especially for interventions for SC/

ST students; (ii) preference to Ashram schools in ST-populated areas in upgradation; (iii) preference to areas with

concentration of SCs/STs for opening of schools; (iv) special enrolment drive for the weaker sections (including

SCs/STs); (v) more female teachers in schools; and (vi) separate toilet blocks for girls. The RMSA Guidelines go

as far as to suggest some equity strategies such as: free lodging/boarding facilities for SC/ST students; hostels/

residential schools; cash incentives, uniform and books; providing scholarships to meritorious/needy students at

the secondary level.

The 12th Five Year Plan, however, is mostly silent as to equity measures under RMSA. At most, the government

acknowledges its prime responsibility to provide access to secondary education for disadvantaged groups such

as SC/ST children through focusing on educationally backward blocks where many SC/ST children reside.46 To

date, while the bulk of RMSA funds have focused on ensuring the necessary infrastructure and personnel in sec-

ondary schools, equal priority to the afore-mentioned equity elements has not taken place. Gaps therefore still

remain in terms of ensuring more secondary schools in SC/ST populated areas; fee waivers in residential schools

for SC/ST children; the reorganisation of ashram schools into residential school complexes for ST children; and

the creation of innovative schemes to address the discrimination and exclusion of SC/ST children in second-

ary schools. At the Conference of State Education Secretaries, held in January 2012, equity measures were

discussed in terms of the need for proper identifi cation, planning and effective strategies for ensuring secondary

education for SC/ST children; special sub plans or projects for disadvantaged areas and social groups like SCs/

STs; special interventions for SC/ST girls, who form a major chunk of dropouts from elementary education; and a

focus on eliminating discriminatory practices in classrooms and schools against disadvantaged children like SC/

ST children.47 However, to date no equity action plans have been developed by states detailing any needs-based

equity interventions, nor annual targets related to equity with the methods by which they will be achieved.

Like SSA, RMSA has suffered from low release of funds: for the years 2009-10 to 2011-12 only a total of Rs

4550.00 crores was sanctioned and released under this scheme. This was due then to technical issues such as

the non-adoption of state-specifi c schedule of rates. Only from the fi nancial year 2012-13 onwards has a fairly

substantial budget been released under RMSA.

(III) NAVODAYA VIDYALAYA SAMITI (NVS)

NVS was started in 1985-86. Under the scheme residential schools called Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas (JNVs)

are set up in the districts to enable talented rural children to access high quality education, especially those who

might not otherwise be able to afford such education or able to access such education usually found only in ur-

ban areas. NVS is a central scheme wherein funds fl ow directly from the central government to the regional JNV

offi ces across the country, and from these offi ces directly to the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya residential schools

(JNVs) for classes 6 to 12 in the districts. As on January 2012, there are 586 functional JNV schools across 586

districts in the country, which fall directly under central government control. An additional 378 JNV schools are

to be created under the 12th Plan, with their scope expanded including to provide for enrolment for economically

weaker sections. The JNVs have as one main objective to ensure academic excellence coupled with equity and

social justice. The claim is that these schools have strengthened a feeling of national integration among students,

including SC/ST students.48

46 Planning Commission, 2012. 12th Five Year Plan, Vol. 3: Social Sector. New Delhi: Government of India, p. 73.

47 Department of School Education and Literacy, 2012. Minutes of Conference of State Education Secretaries, held on 4-6 January 2012.

New Delhi: MHRD, Annexure 10.

48 Committee on the Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, 2007. 24th Report on Ministry of Human Resource Development

(Department of School Education and Literacy): Reservation in Services including in Admission and Employment in Kendriya Vidyalayas and

Navodaya Vidyalayas. New Delhi: Lok Sabha Secretariat.

24

With regard to admissions to the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya (JNV) residential schools, this is through an admis-

sions test. A total of 75% of seats are reserved for rural children and a minimum of 33% of seats are reserved for

girls. SCs and STs also have due reservations in proportion to their population in the concerned district, provided

that in no district is the reservation to be less than the national average (16.2% for SCs and 8.2% for STs), but

subject to a maximum of 50% reservation for both categories together. SC/ST students receive a relaxation in

the minimum qualifying marks (28%) for admission into JNVs. In 2011-12, there were 24% SC children and 15%

ST children studying in the JNVs.49 A gender-wise disaggregation of these numbers is not available. However,

data from JNV schools in both Nalanda and Jamui districts in Bihar noted over two-thirds were boys. These res-

ervations exist over and above the candidates selected under open merit. Moreover, in order to ensure that SC/

ST children are not denied admission into JNVs, their admissions are supposedly thoroughly monitored at the

school level by the respective District Education Offi cers and District Collector, and at the regional and national

headquarters by Samiti offi cials.50

Education and board and lodge in JNVs are free of cost for all students. Only in classes 10 to 12 is a nominal

fee of Rs 200 per month charged to all students, except for SC/ST students, girls and BPL students. Currently,

there are no specifi c guidelines or programmes created to respond to the specifi c educational needs of SC/ST

children in the JNVs. Nor do the guidelines for the formation of Parent-Teacher Associations for the JNVs stipulate

the presence of a SC/ST member as one of the three parents’ representatives in each Association. While the

Committee on the Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes has indicated that it would like to be ap-

prised of the educational progress made by SC/ST children as compared to other students in JNVs51, it has not

recommended any specifi c programmes to support SC/ST children and ensure the closure of any educational

gap between them and other JNV students.

1.3 Three Major School Education Schemes: Analysis of SCSP and TSP

In the 2013-14 budget, the total funds allocated for SSA stand at Rs 27,258 crores, for RMSA at Rs 3883 crores,

and for NVS at Rs 1250 crores. As a percentage of the entire DSEL school education plan budget for that year,

SSA accounted for 54.9%, RMSA for 7.8%, and NVS for 2.5%. Notably, their allocations as per Statements 21

and 21A under SCSP and TSP respectively differ from the amounts calculated based on the Detailed Demands

for Grant of the Department of School Education and Literacy. Furthermore, fl agship programmes like SSA and

RMSA operate as general schemes and have few special programmes to address SC/ST issues in elementary

education. In both schemes, a focus exists on paper on equity and innovative programmes, with both mention-

ing SC/ST children for these programmes. However, in practice, allocations for these types of programmes have

been minimal. Similarly, NVS has no programmes specifi cally for SCs/STs beyond providing reservations at the

time of admissions. Again, examining the three schemes allocations under SCSP/TSP (as per Statements 21 and

21A) as a proportion of their total scheme funds for the year 2013-14, all three schemes have allocated 20% of

their funds under SCSP and 10.7% of their funds under TSP.

Next, looking at the Detailed Demands for Grants for 2012-13 and 2013-14 (Tables 2.8 & 2.9), a disproportionate

amount of funds fl ow for grants-in-aid for the creation of capital assets and grants-in-aid general, without any

indication of how such funds will be of direct benefi t to SC/ST students. In addition, NVS also allocated funds for

49 Department-Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Human Resource Development, 2012. 244th Report on Demands for Grants

2012-13 of Department of School Education and Literacy. Presented to Rajya Sabha on 03.05.2012 and laid on table of Lok Sabha on

03.05.2012.

50 Committee on the Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, 2007. 24th Report on Ministry of Human Resource Development

(Department of School Education and Literacy): Reservation in Services including in Admission and Employment in Kendriya Vidyalayas and

Navodaya Vidyalayas. New Delhi: Lok Sabha Secretariat, para. 2.11.

51 Committee on the Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, 2007. 24th Report on Ministry of Human Resource Development

(Department of School Education and Literacy): Reservation in Services including in Admission and Employment in Kendriya Vidyalayas and

Navodaya Vidyalayas. New Delhi: Lok Sabha Secretariat, para. 2.16.

25

teachers’ salaries under SCSP/TSP, without any indication of how these funds are allocated and if they are spent

solely for the salaries of SC/ST teachers.

Table 2.8 | Dept of School Education and Literacy: Object-wise breakdown of SCSP & TSP 2012-13

Sub

PlanSub Head Schemes 2012-13 BE

Grants-in-

aid General

Grants for

Creation of

Capital Assets

Grants-

in-aid for

Salaries

Other

Admin.

Expenses

Scholarship/

Stipends

SCSP

Sarva Shiksha

Abhiyan4934.64 3306.21 1628.44 0.00 0.00 0.00

Rashtriya

Madhyamik Shiksha

Abhiyan

614.80 236.00 378.80 0.00 0.00 0.00

Navodaya Vidyalaya

Samiti232.60 88.68 81.81 62.11 0.00 0.00

TSP

Sarva Shiksha

Abhiyan1489.12 1332.71 156.41 0.00 0.00 0.00

Rashtriya

Madhyamik Shiksha

Abhiyan

288.46 111.00 177.46 0.00 0.00 0.00

Navodaya Vidyalaya

Samiti114.40 47.44 35.90 31.06 0.00 0.00

Table 2.9 | Dept of School Education and Literacy: Object-wise breakdown of SCSP & TSP 2013-14

Sub

PlanSub Head Schemes 2013-14 BE

Grants-

in-aid

General

Grants for

Creation of

Capital Assets

Grants-

in-aid for

Salaries

Other

Admin.

Expenses

Scholarship/

Stipends

SCSP

Sarva Shiksha

Abhiyan5451.60 4361.27 1090.33 0.00 0.00 0.00

Rashtriya

Madhyamik Shiksha

Abhiyan

796.60 239.60 557.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Navodaya Vidyalaya

Samiti250.00 96.18 84.81 69.01 0.00 0.00

TSP

Sarva Shiksha

Abhiyan2916.61 2330.24 586.37 0.00 0.00 0.00

Rashtriya

Madhyamik Shiksha

Abhiyan

426.18 128.80 297.38 0.00 0.00 0.00

Navodaya Vidyalaya

Samiti133.75 57.44 41.80 34.51 0.00 0.00

The allocations for SCSP/TSP under these three schemes, therefore, amount to mathematical accounting with-

out direct fi nancial fl ows for the special needs or issues of SC/ST children. In other words, most of these funds

are notional or general allocations. This is further confi rmed by the breakdown of funds under SCSP/TSP for the

various education schemes (Tables 2.6 & 2.7). The majority of funds allocations, including for RMSA, SSA and

NVS, are general in that it is presumed that 20.0% and 10.7% of their schemes will be utilised for SC/ST children.

However, these schemes do not have programmes for SC/ST students specifi cally, and so funds do not fl ow

in reality to these children. Even for SSA’s Special Focus Districts with high SC and ST populations, it has been

noted that the interventions so far have not yielded positive results that could justify allocations under SCSP/

TSP. Moreover, as the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Human Resource Development has recently noted,

“mere sanction of infrastructure facilities may not make any impact unless it is followed by focused strategies.”52

52 Department-Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Human Resource Development, 2012. ‘244th Report on Demands for

Grants 2012-13 of Department of School Education and Literacy’. Presented to Rajya Sabha on 03.05.2012 and laid on table of Lok

Sabha on 03.05.2012, paras 3.27-.28.

26

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Department of School Education and Literacy seems to be mechanically allocating funds under

the SCSP/TSP without any proper needs assessment of SC/ST children in schooling, planning of schemes and

programmes for SC/ST children, and accordingly budgeting under SCSP/TSP. Recently, an Andhra Pradesh

Cabinet Sub-Committee report has spelled out the major loopholes in central government planning under SCSP/

TSP:

‘While Central Ministries are expected to prepare plans under SCSP/TSP taking into account the needs

of SCs/STs, there is no evidence of this taking place in any Central Ministry... Central Government Minis-

tries do not have the expertise to plan exclusively for the development of SCs/STs.... Even the Ministries

that have allocated funds under SCSP/TSP have mechanically shown such allocation under the ongoing

general schemes... The concept of non-divertibility and non-lapsbility of SCSP/TSP funds has not been

operationalised by the Government of India.’53

All this seems to hold true for the Department of School Education and Literacy, MHRD as well. Without a nodal

offi cer in the Ministry to coordinate planning of the SCSP/TSP, mostly general schemes without specifi c SC/ST

programmatic components are being notionally earmarked under the SCSP/TSP. Meanwhile, the outcomes are

the continuing lower educational levels of SC/ST children in the country. The Ministry itself has acknowledged

the need to ensure better planning for SC/ST children under the SCSP/TSP in 2012, when it set up a taskforce

to generate guidelines for the implementation of MHRD education programmes and schemes under SCSP/TSP.

The challenge, therefore, is to reorient the school system and centre stage equity in DSEL schemes. All this would

contribute towards ensuring accountability for SC/ST children’s learning, as vital future citizens of the country.

53 Draft Report of the Cabinet Sub-Committee on Scheduled Caste Sub-Plan (SCSP) and Tribal Sub-Plan (TSP), submitted to the State

Government of Andhra Pradesh, August 2012, p.11.

27

Bihar and Jharkhand provide interesting contrasts with their high SC and ST populations respectively, alongside

continuing low educational indicators for these two social groups. In both states, budgeted expenditure on edu-

cation by the education departments – the Education Department in Bihar and Department of Human Resource

Development in Jharkhand – amounts to around one-fi fth of each state’s total revenue budget: in 2010-11, it

was 20.2% in Bihar and 17.4% in Jharkhand. However, an examination of the Education Department budgets

as a percentage of the GSDP reveals that the actual expenditure on education is low: it amounts to only 3.78%

(Bihar) and 2.69% (Jharkhand) of the GSDP (as on 2010-11).54 Further, in Bihar, the Common School System

Commission, constituted in 2006 to review the existing school education structure in the state and to prepare a

roadmap for universal elementary education by 2012-13, secondary education by 2015-16 and higher secondary

education by 2016-17, noted a resource gap of around Rs 5,700 to 10,100 crores in terms of required annual

expenditure to meet the fi rst target.55 PAISA studies in 2011 have also shown that for major education schemes

like SSA, the majority of funds fl ow to teachers and schools, and less than 15% to children themselves in terms of

direct entitlements like textbooks, remedial teaching and special measures for out-of-school children. Moreover,

expenditure trends indicate that even these small allocations that directly benefi t children are not even close to

being fully spent: e.g. in 2010-11 only 43% of allocations for Bihar’s school children reached them as compared

54 Ministry of Human Resources Development, 2012. Analysis of Budgeted Expenditure on Education 2008-09 to 2010-11. New Delhi:

MHRD, table 7.

55 Ghosh, Prabhat P., 2012. ‘Financing Elementary Education in Bihar’. Presentation at the Consultation on Education Financing organ-

ised by the Council of Social Development, New Delhi on27.02.2012.

School Education and SCSP/TSP in Bihar and Jharkhand

CHAPTER 2

28

to 64% in Jharkhand.56 In this situation of low expenditure on school education in general in both states, the

SCSP/TSP become even more relevant to ensuring that Dalit and Adivasi children are not denied access to and

enjoyment of school education.

2.1 Socio-Economic and Educational Status of Dalits and Adivasis in the Two States

As per the 2001 census, in Bihar scheduled castes number 1,30,48,608 and scheduled tribes 7,58,351. They

represent 15.7% and 0.9% respectively of the state’s population, and a total of 16.6 percent. By contrast, in

Jharkhand scheduled tribes number 31,89,000 and scheduled castes 7,87,000. They represent 26.3% and

11.8% respectively of the state’s population, and a total of 38.1%.

A large percentage of the SC/ST population in both states is children. According to the MHRD Selected Educa-

tion Statistics 2010-11, the estimated SC/ST child population in Bihar is: for SCs, 31.1 lakhs in the age group

6-13 years and 13.4 lakhs in the age group 14-17 years; for STs, 1.8 lakhs in the age group 6-13 years and 0.8

lakhs in the age group 14-17 years. As a percentage of the total child population in the state, SC children repre-

sented 15.3% and ST children 0.9%. In Jharkhand, the estimated SC/ST child population is: for STs, 15.02 lakhs

in the age group 6-13 years and 7.49 lakhs in the age group 14-17 years; for SCs 7.15 lakhs in the age group

6-13 years and 3.33 lakhs in the age group 14-17 years. As a percentage of the total child population in the state,

ST children represented 26.14% and SC children 12.17%.

The economic status of both communities in Bihar and Jharkhand is very poor. In 2004-05, Planning Commis-

sion data showed that in Bihar, 64.0% of rural SCs and 67.2% of urban SCs lived below the state’s poverty line.

STs were only slightly less poor, with 53.3% in rural areas and 57.2% in urban areas living below the poverty line.

Similarly in Jharkhand, 54.2% of rural STs and 45.1% of urban STs lived below the state’s poverty line. SCs were

even poorer, with 57.9% in rural areas and 47.2% in urban areas living below the poverty line.

In terms of education, the overall literacy rates (age 7+) in Bihar, as per the 2001 census, stood at 47.5% (60.3%

for males and 33.6% for females). The literacy rates for STs and SCs, however, were much lower. For SCs, the

overall literacy rate was 28.5%, which is much lower than that of all SCs at the national level (54.7%). Likewise,

the SC male and female literacy rates (40.2% and 15.6%) were also considerably lower than those at the national

level (66.6% and 41.0%). Similarly, the ST literacy rate was 28.2%, much lower when compared with that of all

STs at the national level (47.1%). ST male and female literacy rates (39.8% and 15.5% respectively) continued to

be lower than those at the national level (59.2% and 34.8%).

In Jharkhand, the overall literacy rate (age 7+) was 53.6% (67.3% for males and 38.0% for females), but for STs

and SCs the literacy rates were much lower. For STs, the overall literacy rate has increased from 27.5% as per the

1991 census to 40.7% as per the 2001 census. Despite this improvement, the literacy rate among STs was much

below in comparison to that of all STs at the national level (47.1%). Like the overall literacy rate among the STs,

ST male and female literacy rates (54% and 27.2%) were also considerably lower than those at the national level

(59.2% and 34.8%). Similarly, though there was an improvement in the overall literacy rate of SCs from 23.7% as

per the 1991 census to 37.6% as per the 2001 census, it was still lower when compared with that of all SCs at

the national level (54.7%). SC male and female literacy rates (51.6% and 22.5% respectively) also continued to

be lower than those at the national level (66.6% and 41.9%).

A number of reports have highlighted the increasing enrolment ratio among SC/ST children in recent years. In

2009-10, the gross enrolment ratio57 in Bihar for SC children was 137.9 in classes 1-5, but dropped down to 59.1

56 Accountability Initiative & ASER, 2011. PAISA 2011: Do Schools Get their Money? New Delhi: AI & ASER.

57 GER is the ratio of the number of children enrolled in the class group to the total number of children in the corresponding oi cial age

group.

29

in classes 6-8, 31.1 in classes 9-10, and just 15.8 in classes 11-12. Similarly, the gross enrolment ratio (GER) for

ST children was 163.7 in classes 1-5, but dropped down to 67.2 in classes 6-8, 33.9 in classes 9-10, and just

26.6 in classes 11-12. For both communities, the enrolment ratios for girls were slightly less than for boys. This

can be compared to the overall GER for Bihar’s children, which was 127.7 in classes 1-5, dropped down to 64.6

in classes 6-8, 41.8 in classes 9-10, and 21.2 in classes 11-12.

In the same year in Jharkhand, the gross enrolment ratio for ST children was 164.5 in classes 1-5, but dropped

down to 82.4 in classes 6-8, 40.9 in classes 9-10, and just 10.1 in classes 11-12. Similarly, the gross enrolment

ratio (GER) for SC children was 166.3 in classes 1-5, but dropped down to 90.7 in classes 6-8, 46.3 in classes

9-10, and just 12.3 in classes 11-12. For both communities, the enrolment ratios for girls were slightly less than

for boys. This can be compared to the overall GER for Jharkhand’s children, which was 147.1 in classes 1-5, but

dropped down to 81.3 in classes 6-8, 45.3 in classes 9-10, and just 12.6 in classes 11-12.

When looking at the dropout rates, however, many SC/ST children in both states continue to drop out before

completing their school education, much higher than the state’s overall dropout rates. Behind these high dropout

rates are a number of issues, not least the continuing exclusion these children face in the education system.

This is not only due to their different learning needs as often fi rst generation learners from disadvantaged socio-

economic backgrounds, which are not addressed by the schools they attend, but also due to other factors such

as discrimination in schools. In Bihar, the overall dropout rates in 2010-11 were 35.7% for classes 1-5, 58.3%

for classes 1-8, and 62.2% for classes 1-10. For SC children, however, 38.8% dropped from classes 1-5, 61.9%

from classes 1-8, and 79.8% from classes 1-10; for ST children, 27.1% dropout from classes 1-5, 54.8% from

classes 1-8, and 71.1% from classes 1-10. In the same way in Jharkhand, the overall dropout rates in the same

year were 28.4% for classes 1-5, 45.1% for classes 1-8, and 69.5% for classes 1-10. For ST children, 37.5%

dropped from classes 1-5, 55.8% from classes 1-8, and 79.8% from classes 1-10; for SC children, it was 40.6%

dropout from classes 1-5, 40.8% from classes 1-8, and 72.3% from classes 1-10.58

Moreover, of those children who are out of school, a disproportionately large proportion are SC/ST children. Tak-

ing Nalanda district in Bihar, the government reported 2,549 SC children aged 6-14 years and no ST children out

of school in 2011. Signifi cantly, SC children formed 42.9% of all children in that age group out of school in the

district.59 Moreover, the Bihar government has openly acknowledged that a bulk of its over 7 lakh out-of-school

child population is SC children.60

As a result of the high dropout rates, as per the Census of India 2001, only 15.1% of SCs and 16.3% of STs in

Bihar had attained their metric/HS/intermediate education, and only 3.6% of SCs and 3.8% of STs a graduate

degree. The pass percentages in Class 10 board examinations, released by the Bihar School Examination Board

in 2012, show that for the year 2009-10, of those enrolled in class 10, the pass percentages were 61.53% of

SC boys, 55.97% of SC girls, 63.65% of ST boys and 9.77% of ST girls. This can be compared with 73.28% of

non-SC/ST/OBC boys and 68.30% of non-SC/ST/OBC girls.61

The facts and data suffi ciently prove that caste-based discrimination still persists in the society of Bihar. The

SCs and STs are economically far behind than other social groups and all important indicators of educational

achievements are unfavourable in case of SCs and STs vis-a-vis other social groups.

SC/ST Welfare Department, 2012. Report on the Status of Backwardness among SCs/STs in Bihar

58 Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2012. Selected Educational Statistics 2010-11. New Delhi: MHRD.

59 Data on children aged 6-14 years in Nalanda district, taken from SEEP 2011 & HHS 2009.

60 Government of Bihar, 2011. Growth with Justice: Approach Paper to the 12th Five Year Plan, Executive Summary. Patna: Government of

Bihar, p. 17.

61 Department of SC/ST Welfare, 2012. Report on the Status of Backwardness among SCs and STs in Bihar; Inadequate Representation of SCs

and STs in Sta� ng of Government Services; and Overall Administrative E� ciency of Government Machinery in the light of Reservations in

Government Services in Bihar. Patna: Government of Bihar.

30

2.2 Analysis of Overall Education Department SCSP/TSP Allocations

Both the budget books for Bihar and Jharkhand currently provide information on the allocations under SCSP/

TSP, though there are no separate statements on the SCSP/TSP. The Jharkhand budget books also clearly

specify the object-wise types of allocations made (grant-in-aid (salary or non-salary), grants for the creation of

capital assets, etc.). From these budget documents, a clear pattern emerges as regards the priority accorded by

these two state governments to school education for SC/ST children.

(I) IN BIHAR

Based on the 2001 Census SC/ST population data, in Bihar the allocations under the SCSP should be

15.7% and under the TSP 0.9% of the total state Plan funds. In 2008-09, however, only seven departments

in the state had specifi ed allocations under the SCSP/TSP, which did not include the Education Department.

Similarly, in 2009-10 and 2010-11, only six departments in the state, again not including the Education Depart-

ment, had made these allocations.62 Only from 2011-12 have a number of state departments like the Education

Department started to allocate funds under the SCSP/TSP. Overall, in 2012-13, the total Plan budget of the

government of Bihar was Rs 28,000 crores. Out of this, the budget estimates under the SCSP and TSP were Rs

3485.34 crores and Rs 270.81 crores respectively. In other words, the allocation under SCSP was only 12.45%,

while under the TSP it was 0.97%. Hence, the SCSP had a shortfall of nearly Rs 916.26 crores.

Turning to the school education sector, in 2011-12, the approved outlays for elementary and adult education

were supposedly Rs 319.64 crores under the SCSP and Rs 59.93 crores under the TSP. This represented 16.0%

and 3.0% respectively of the total Plan outlay for elementary and adult education. Similarly, for secondary educa-

tion, the approved outlays were supposedly Rs 154.05 crores under the SCSP and Rs 18.12 crores under the

TSP. This represented 17.0% and 2.0% respectively of the total Plan outlay for secondary education.63 In both

cases, the TSP and SCSP allocations were slightly higher than the SC/ST population proportions in the state.

However, when examining Demand No. 21 for education for the years 2011-12 to 2013-14 (Tables 2.1 & 2.2),

which gives the budget estimates, revised estimates and actual expenditure details under specifi c schemes for

which allocations are made under SCSP/TSP, a number of issues emerge:

The most signifi cant fi nding is that there are in fact no funds allocated under the TSP for school education

schemes in Bihar for these three years. Taking the total State Plan allocations for school education, this

means that the minimum of Rs 26.43 crores due to STs for their school education was completely denied in

2011-12, Rs 29.88 crores denied in 2012-13, and Rs 40.22 crores denied in 2013-14.

In 2011-12, only 55.8% of SCSP allocations for school education were actually spent. This meant that Rs

459.50 crores under the SCSP was denied to SCs. The reasons for the low actual expenditure are often

constraints in fund fl ows, or identifi cation of benefi ciaries, or coordination between different departments, or

even diversion of such funds for other programmes, etc.

Of the total Plan funds of Rs 4419.70 crores budgeted for primary and secondary education in the state in

2012-13, the SCSP (as per revised estimates) accounted for 18.5%. Similarly, in 2013-14, of the total Plan

funds of Rs 3283.26 crores budgeted for primary and secondary education, the SCSP accounted for 19.0%.

In other words, the state government was allocating more than the amount as per the state SC population

percentage for their education.

This positive allocation of funds, however, does not in any way ensure that these funds are applied directly to

benefi t SC children or SC populated areas. The allocations under SCSP are almost all notional allocations.

This is clear on an examination of the schemes for which allocations under the SCSP are made, which re-

62 Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan (DAAA)-NCDHR Bihar budget analysis 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11.

63 Planning and Development Department, 2011. Approved Plan Outlay 2011-12. Patna: Government of Bihar.

31

veals that almost all are general schemes applicable to all children. The only SC specifi c scheme allocated

SCSP funds is the Utthan Kendras, but this has had a drastic reduction in funding in the 2013-14 budget.

Table 2.1 | Allocations for School Education under SCSP (in Rs crores)

Name of Scheme 2011-12

BE

2011-12

RE

2011-12

AE

2012-13

BE

2012-13

RE

2013-14

BE

SSA 508.45 330.49 330.49 363.24 363.24 636.64

National Programme of Midday Meals in

Elementary Schools

48.00 48.00 48.00 0 0 100.00

Mukhya Mantri Poshak Yojana (funds

for children in classes 3-5 for purchas-

ing uniforms and stationary)

20.00 20.00 17.84 0 0 46.00

Mukya Mantri Balak Cycle Yojana (for

boys studying in class 9 to purchase

bicycle)

28.00 29.96 24.73 28.00 30.15 30.00

Mukya Mantri Balika Cycle Yojana (for

girls studying in class 9 to purchase

bicycle)

24.00 25.68 20.83 24.00 27.77 28.00

Equipment (Auzar) 2.00 2.00 0 1.08 1.08 0.15

Education Development Centres for

Mahadalit Children (Utthan Kendras)

578.45 400.49 0 171.42 183.92 0.0001

RMSA 182.67 182.67 137.90 0 0 0

TOTAL 1391.57 1039.29 579.79 587.74 606.16 840.79

Source: Demands No. 21, Education Department, Bihar Budget 2012-13 & 2013-14: Plan Expenditure Details

Table 2.2 | Allocations for School Education under TSP (in Rs crores)

Name of Scheme 2011-12

BE

2011-12

RE

2011-12

AE

2012-13

BE

2012-13

RE

2013-14

BE

TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0

Source: Demands No. 21, Education Department, Bihar Budget 2012-13 & 2013-14: Plan Expenditure Details

In sum, aside from the failure to allocate funds under TSP for ST children’s education and the failure to spend all

allocated funds under SCSP, the allocation of funds by itself in no way ensures that direct benefi ts fl ow to SCs

and STs. For example, the State Auditor General’s performance audit report on SSA in Bihar64 noted that imple-

mentation of the scheme in the state suffered due to under-utilisation of funds received from the Government of

India. Infrastructure facilities in the schools – i.e. additional class rooms, toilet for girls, drinking water facilities,

etc. – were inadequate as most of the civil works remained incomplete. Only half of the targeted primary schools

were upgraded and vacant posts of teachers were not fi lled. As a result, pupil teacher ratio far exceeded the

prescribed norms of 40:1 and dropout rate was as high as 63%. Many of these dropout children would be SC

and ST. Against the targets of universal enrolment to be achieved by 2003, there were 33.15 lakh out-of-school

children in the state in 2004. Thus, achievement of the objectives of the scheme was far from satisfactory. (para

3.2) Hence, one of the Auditor-General’s recommendations was that the state government pay attention to the

primary objective of enrolling all out of school children, with special focus on girls and SC/ST children. A similar

pattern applies for secondary education in the state as well. The 2009-10 performance audit of secondary edu-

cation in Bihar65 noted the lack of a long-term strategic plan for secondary education, which led to savings in

the Plan budget ranging between 28% and 82%. While the audit noted the National Policy on Education focus

on enrolments of SC/ST children, no assessment was made on schemes for the inclusion of SC/ST children in

secondary education.

64 Comptroller Auditor General, 2006. Audit Report (Civil) Bihar 2005-06: Performance Audit of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. Patna: Govern-

ment of Bihar.

65 Comptroller Auditor General, 2010. Audit Report (Civil) Bihar 2009-10: Performance Audit of Human Resources Development Depart-

ment Secondary Education Programme (2005 to 2010). Patna: Government of Bihar.

32

Moreover, even where educational schemes are devised for SC/ST children, the issue of poor implementation

of such schemes remains. The Auditor General’s performance audit report on the Bihar State Welfare Depart-

ment educational schemes for SCs/STs66 noted that the state government had not implemented the schemes

effectively as follows:

Department had not carried out any survey to ascertain the number of SC/ST students under each scheme.

State government releasing funds late for educational entitlements to reach the children.

Denial of scholarships due to shortage of funds.

Non-supply of uniforms to SC/ST girls

Out of available 131 SC/ST hostels, only 71 hostels (54%) were functional in the state.

Inadequate deployment of teaching staff in residential schools.

Unfruitful expenditure on pre-examination coaching

Lack of adequate monitoring mechanisms. (para 3.7)

(II) IN JHARKHAND

Jharkhand has 14 districts and 112 blocks where the ST population is concentrated, and where the integrated

tribal development project (ITDP) is implemented in what is locally known as MESO areas. This is signifi cant be-

cause the TSP is renamed as the Tribal Areas Sub Plan by the state government in its budget books. As far as

the TSP in the state is concerned, a major problem is that it is being implemented on the basis of tribal populated

areas in only 14 of the total 24 districts in the state. This means that Adivasis in other blocks and districts with

lesser populations of STs are not covered by the TSP. In addition, the budget or other state government docu-

ments do not provide a MESO-wise breakdown of resources, in order to see how much money actually fl ows to

ST concentrated areas.67

The state government has earmarked Rs 53,770.36 crores for the TSP and Rs 10,998.13 crores for the SCSP

in the 12th Five Year Plan period, while Rs 9360.33 crores is earmarked for education in general (both school and

higher education).68 Based on the 2001 census population data, in Jharkhand the allocations under the TSP

should be 26.3% and under the SCSP 11.8% of the total Plan funds. Overall, in 2012-13, the total Plan budget

of the government of Jharkhand was Rs 18,709.67 crores. Out of this, the budget estimates under the SCSP

and TSP were Rs 1,695.78 crores and Rs 7510.17 crores respectively. In other words, the allocation under SCSP

was only 9.1%, while under the TSP it was 40.1%. This translated into a shortfall of nearly Rs 511.96 crores for

the SCSP. Moreover, the larger percentage allocation under the TSP is suspicious, given that this was the case

in the previous Five-Year Plan period as well and yet Adivasis in the state continue to experience extremely poor

socio-economic development levels.

As far as school education in the state is concerned, in 2011-12, the approved Plan outlays for primary educa-

tion were Rs 369.90 crores under the TSP and Rs 162.41 crores under the SCSP. This represented 40% and

17.6% respectively of the total Plan outlay for primary education. Similarly, for secondary education, the approved

outlays were Rs 77.59 crores under the TSP and Rs 44.11 crores under the SCSP. This represented 38.4% and

21.8% respectively of the total Plan outlay for secondary education.69 By 2013-14, the Plan outlays for primary

education were Rs 475.41 crores under the TSP and Rs 187.99 crores under the SCSP, and for secondary

66 Comptroller Auditor General, 2006. Audit Report (Civil) Bihar 2005-06: Performance Audit of State Welfare Department educational

schemes for SCs/STs. Patna: Government of Bihar.

67 Prasad, Neha, 2011. A Study of Allocations and Implications under Tribal Sub Plan during Eleventh Five Year Plan in Jharkhand. Ranchi:

Life Education and Development Support.

68 Planning and Development Department, undated. Jharkhand: An Overview. Available at <<http://jharkhand.gov.in/new_depts/pland/

pland_fr.html>>, accessed 05.05.2013.

69 Planning and Development Department, 2011. Approved Plan Outlay 2011-12. Ranchi: Government of Jharkhand.

33

education Rs 74.80 crores under the TSP and Rs 36.27 crores under the SCSP. This represented 43.0% and

17.0% respectively of the total Plan outlay for primary education, and 33.0% and 16.0% respectively of the total

Plan outlay for secondary education.70 In both years, the TSP and SCSP allocations were higher than the SC/

ST population shares in the state, and together represented over 50% of the Plan budget for school education.

However, looking at the Department Demands for Primary and Public Education and for Secondary Education

between 2011-12 and 2013-14, signifi cant divergences in amounts appear between them and the above Plan

documents. This aside, an examination of the allocations under the SCSP/TSP, as per Grant Nos. 58 and 59

(Tables 2.3 & 2.4), reveal a number of problems:

In 2011-12, only 84.5% of TSP allocations for school education and only 39.7% of SCSP allocations were spent.

This meant that Rs 67.58 crore under the TSP and Rs 124.56 under the SCSP were denied to STs and SCs

respectively.

Of the total Plan funds of Rs 1132.32 crores budgeted for primary and secondary education in the state in 2013-

14, the TSP accounted for 47.1% and the SCSP for 19.8%. Similarly, in 2012-13, of the total Plan funds of Rs

1270 crores budgeted for primary and secondary education, the TSP (as per budget estimates) accounted for

38.1% and SCSP for 15.9%. In other words, the state government has allocated more than the required percent-

age of funds under SCSP/TSP for ensuring school education for SC/ST children. However, a report analysing

the allocations under TSP for the 11th Five Year Plan noted that ‘mere high allocations to TSP without a proper

implementing mechanism only increases the vagueness about the actual expenditure of TSP funds for the benefi t

of STs’.71

This positive allocation of funds does not in any way ensure that these funds are applied directly to benefi t SC/

ST individual children or SC/ST populated areas. The allocations under SCSP/TSP are merely notional alloca-

tions. This is clear on an examination of the schemes for which allocations under the SCSP/TSP are made, which

reveals that all are general schemes applicable to all children or groups of children like girls. These are either

schemes are allocated funds under SCSP/TSP for the creation of infrastructure that would benefi t all children, or

the payment of salaries for teachers, or else entitlements such as textbooks for all children. Even the scheme for

distribution of textbooks to general and OBC children is being booked under SCSP/TSP, though it is not at all ap-

plicable to SC/ST children! At the same time, the state government reported over 17 lakh out-of-school children

as on 31.03.2012, many of whom are SC/ST children for whom specifi c education schemes would have great

benefi t. The government also acknowledged that the education of SC/ST children is one of the current challenges

for the state.72 Nonetheless, there are no specifi c schemes under the Department of Human Resource Devel-

opment to address the specifi c educational needs of SC/ST children, which could then be legitimately booked

under the SCSP/TSP.

70 Planning and Development Department, 2013. Annual Plan Outlay 2013-14. Ranchi: Government of Jharkhand.

71 Prasad, Neha, 2011. A Study of Allocations and Implications under Tribal Sub Plan during Eleventh Five Year Plan in Jharkhand. Ranchi:

Life Education and Development Support, p.20.

72 Government of Jharkhand, 2012. National E-Governance Plan: School Education – Mission Mode Project. Available at <<www.mhrd.

nic.in>>, accessed 21.03.2013.

34

Table 2.3 | Allocations for School Education under TSP (in Rs crores)

Name of Scheme

2011-12

BE

2011-12

RE

2011-12

AE

2012-13

BE

2012-13

RE

2013-14

BE

Grant No. 59 Primary and Public Education

Grants-in-aid/ Special grants-in-aid for Sarva

Shiksha Abhiyan 270.00 270.00 270.00 308.80 308.80 375.82

Govt Primary and Middle Schools Saraswati

Wahini (Monitoring and Evaluation of Midday

Meals) 52.42 52.42 50.04 54.24 54.24 62.71

Mukhyamantri Bal Scholarship Yojana 0 0 0 4.00 4.00 8.60

Free Distribution of Uniform to Girl Students 0 0 0 0 0 7.74

Grants-in-aid to State Literacy Mission Au-

thority (S.L.M.A.) 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 1.72

Strengthening of Primary Teachers Training

College 3.20 3.20 0.92 4.00 4.00 3.44

Construction of Store-cum-Kitchen Sheds 26.00 26.00 0 32.00 32.00 4.80

Free Course books to General and OBC

students 3.20 3.20 3.20 4.00 4.00 4.30

Grants-in-aid to Kasturba Gandhi Residential

School 8.00 8.00 0 8.00 8.00 2.15

Compensation to private schools for admit-

ting 25% students from underprivileged class 1.60 1.60 0 0.80 0.80 1.29

D.I.E.T. 0 0 0 0.40 0.40 1.29

Merit Scholarship and Stipend for Govt. Pri-

mary and Middle Schools 0.52 0.52 0.49 0.87 0.87 0.66

Teacher Awards for Govt Primary and Middle

Schools 0.32 0.32 0.19 0.33 0.33 0.35

Grants-in-aid to Unaided Educational Insti-

tutes 0.20 0.20 0 0.22 0.22 0.23

Seminar and Symposium 0.16 0.16 0.06 0.18 0.18 0.19

Training of State Education and Subordinate

Education Service Offi cers 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.12

Non-Formal Education 0.20 0.20 0.07 0 0 0

Grant No. 58 Secondary Education

KGBV Support & Civil Works 8.25 8.25 8.25 9.90 9.90 11.80

Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan 11.60 11.60 0 18.15 8.15 11.22

Assistance to Unaided Schools under Special

Integrated Scheme for Jharkhand Area (in-

cluding inter school) 5.50 5.50 5.50 7.30 7.30 10.55

Establishment of Model Schools under CSPS 10.56 10.56 0 7.30 7.30 7.92

Creation of Post for +2 Govt. School under

Special Integrated Scheme for Jharkhand

Area 1.65 1.65 1.43 2.75 12.75 3.25

Free Education to Girls up to Intermediate

Level under Special Integrated Scheme for

Jharkhand Area 3.00 3.00 2.51 2.50 2.50 2.60

Merit-cum-poverty Scholarship under Special

Integrated Scheme 0.48 0.48 0.41 1.83 1.83 1.80

Free Cycle distribution among girl students

of class 8 under Special Integrated Scheme

for Jharkhand Area 3.30 3.30 1.15 4.00 4.00 1.65

Free Distribution of dress, text book and so-

lar lamps to girl students of classes 9 to 12 0 0 0 1.65 1.65 1.65

35

Name of Scheme

2011-12

BE

2011-12

RE

2011-12

AE

2012-13

BE

2012-13

RE

2013-14

BE

Netarhat Residential School, Netarhat 17.00 17.00 17.00 1.84 1.84 1.58

Construction of B.Ed. Colleges in the State 3.00 3.00 2.68 1.00 1.00 1.32

Creation of Post of Upgradation Middle

Schools into High School under Special Inte-

grated Scheme for Jharkhand Area 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.74 0.74 0.74

Strengthening of Public Libraries under Spe-

cial Integrated Scheme for Jharkhand Area 0.33 0.33 0.21 0.65 0.65 0.65

Publication and Educational Seminar 0.17 0.17 0.13 0.26 0.26 0.33

Establishment of J.C.E.R.T. 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.25 0.25 0.25

Teacher Awards under Special Integrated

Scheme for Jharkhand Area 0.17 0.17 0.09 0.17 0.17 0.17

Online Education under Special Integrated

Scheme for Jharkhand Area 0.05 0.05 0 0.10 0.10 0.10

Establishment of Girls’ Hostel under CSPS 0.03 0.03 0 0.10 0.10 0.10

Strengthening Field Offi ces 0 0 0 1.65 1.65 0.10

Skill Development Mission and Vocational

Education in +2 Schools 0.33 0.33 0 0.05 0.05 0.05

Scholarship to Students Enrolled in RIMC 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02

Computer Literacy under Special Integrated

Scheme for Jharkhand Area 0.66 0.66 0 0.01 0.01 0.01

TOTAL 436.53 436.52 368.94 484.17 484.17 533.27

Source: Demands Nos. 58 & 59, Department of Human Resource Development, Jharkhand Budget 2013-14, Vol.1

Table 2.4 | Allocations for School Education under SCSP (in Rs crores)

Name of Scheme

2011-12

BE 2011-12 RE

2011-12

AE

2012-13

BE

2012-13

RE

2013-14

BE

Grant No. 59 Primary and Public Education

Grants-in-aid/ Special grants-in-aid for

Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan 115.00 115.00 43.00 123.56 123.56 148.58

Govt Primary and Middle Schools-

Saraswati Wahini (Monitoring and

Evaluation of Midday Meals) 22.90 22.90 10.32 34.50 34.50 26.69

Mukhyamantri Bal Scholarship Yojana 0 0 0 1.60 1.60 3.40

Free Distribution of Uniform to Girl

Students 0 0 0 0 0 3.06

Strengthening of Primary Teachers

Training College 2.60 2.60 0 1.60 1.60 1.36

Free Distribution of Textbooks/ Free

Course Books to General and OBC

students 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.60 1.60 1.70

Grants-in-aid to Kasturba Gandhi

Residential School 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.20 3.20 0.85

Grants-in-aid to State Literacy Mission

Authority (S.L.M.A.) 4.00 4.00 0 1.60 1.60 0.68

Compensation to Private Schools for

admitting 25% students from under-

privileged class 0.68 0.68 0 0.32 0.32 0.51

D.I.E.T. 0 0 0 0.16 0.16 0.51

Merit Scholarship and Stipend for

Govt. Primary and Middle Schools 0.30 0.30 0.27 0.35 0.35 0.27

36

Name of Scheme

2011-12

BE 2011-12 RE

2011-12

AE

2012-13

BE

2012-13

RE

2013-14

BE

Teacher Awards for Govt. Primary and

Middle Schools 0.14 0.14 0.08 0.13 0.13 0.15

Grants-in-aid to Non-Financed Educa-

tional Institutes 0.09 0.09 0 0.09 0.09 0.10

Seminar/ Symposium 0.07 0.07 0 0.07 0.07 0.08

Training of State Education and Sub-

ordinate Education Service Offi cers 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.05

Construction of Store-cum-Kitchen

Sheds 11.10 11.10 7.55 0 0 0

Non-Formal Education 0.09 0.09 0.09 0 0 0

Grant No. 58 Secondary Education

KGBV Support & Civil Works 11.00 11.00 0.40 10.75 10.75 15.75

Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhi-

yan 9.00 9.00 0 8.80 8.80 5.44

Grants-in-aid for Non- Financed

Schools under Special Integrated

Scheme for Jharkhand Area 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.50 3.50 5.10

Establishment of Model Schools

under CSPS 6.00 6.00 0 3.50 3.50 3.84

Free Education to girl up to interme-

diate level under Special Integrated

Scheme for Jharkhand Area 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.25 1.25 1.20

Construction of building in Indira

Gandhi Residential Girls School,

Hazaribagh 0.16 0.16 0.06 0.20 0.20 0.50

Merit-cum-poverty Scholarship under

Special Integrated Scheme 0.23 0.23 0.17 0.92 0.92 0.85

Free Distribution of dress, text book

and solar lamps to girl students of

classes 9 to 12 0 0 0 0.80 0.80 0.80

Free Cycle among girl students of

General category (class 8) 2.50 2.50 0.61 0 0 0.80

Minor Construction of B.Ed. College

of the state 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.50 0.50 0.64

Netarhat Residential School, Netarhat 0.08 0 0 0 0 0

Grants to Netarhat School Committee 0 8.00 8.00 0.36 0.36 0.42

Strengthening of Public Libraries

under Special Integrated Scheme for

Jharkhand area 0.16 0.16 0.10 0.35 0.35 0.30

Creation of Post of Upgraded Middle

Schools into High School under Spe-

cial Integrated Scheme for Jharkhand

Area 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.16 0.16 0.16

Publication and Educational Seminar 0.08 0.08 0.05 0.14 0.14 0.16

Establishment of J.C.E.R.T. 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.35 0.35 0.15

Sainik School, Tilaiya 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08

Teacher Awards under Special Inte-

grated Scheme for Jharkhand area 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.08 0.08 0.08

Creation of Post for +2 Govt Schools 0.80 0.80 0.27 0 0 0

Computer Literacy under Special Inte-

grated Scheme of Jharkhand Area 0.40 0.40 0 0 0 0

37

Name of Scheme

2011-12

BE 2011-12 RE

2011-12

AE

2012-13

BE

2012-13

RE

2013-14

BE

Establishment of girls’ hostels under

CSPS 0.02 0.02 0 0 0 0

Skill development Mission and Voca-

tional Education in +2 Schools 0.16 0.16 0 0 0 0

Strengthening of Field Offi cers 0 0 0 0.85 0.85 0

TOTAL 198.60 206.52 81.96 201.42 201.42 224.26

Source: Demands Nos. 58 & 59, Department of Human Resource Development, Jharkhand Budget 2013-14, Vol.1

The above fi ndings, based on the SCSP/TSP analysis from the budget books, are supported by the Auditor

General’s performance audit report on the Government of Jharkhand in 2007. The report noted that the imple-

mentation of the TSP and centrally sponsored schemes was far from satisfactory in terms of the slow pace of

implementation of schemes (expenditure to total budget allocation); the extension of benefi ts to non-ST benefi -

ciaries; the non-fi nalisation of ST benefi ciaries lists in order to deliver entitlements to them; the abandonment of

schemes without their completion; and the absence of any monitoring or evaluation of these schemes. A key

recommendation that fl owed from these audit fi ndings was for the government to regularly monitor and assess

the impact of its schemes for STs.73

A similar performance audit conducted in 2006 on the State Welfare Department regarding the educational de-

velopment of SCs/STs74 noted the following problems:

A sharp decline in the number of benefi ciaries under the Pre-Matric Scholarship Scheme for children of those

engaged in unclean occupations due to lack of effi cacious planning and non-identifi cation of benefi ciaries.

Only 55% of the available funds were utilised. (paras. 3.3.7.1-2)

The 76% expenditure of the budgeted amount for Post-Matric Scholarships for SC/ST students during 2001-

06 was not commensurate with the number of benefi ciaries. Moreover, these scholarships were not paid

during the same academic session, thereby depriving 4,738 SC/ST students in the fi ve districts checked of

scholarship benefi ts amounting to Rs 94.60 lakh during 2002-06. (paras 3.3.8.1-2)

SC/ST students were denied the benefi ts of the Book Bank Scheme as neither the need for books was as-

sessed nor were these distributed to SC/ST students. (paras 3.3.9-3.3.9.1)

The Department spent only 40% and 28% of total allotment of funds for SC and ST hostels. Thus, the con-

struction of hostels remained incomplete and the benefi ciaries were denied the intended benefi ts. (paras

3.3.11 & 3.3.11.5)

Likewise, a more recent study also found that the allocations by the Welfare Department to the TSP, which in-

cludes some educational schemes, are not being spent solely for the benefi t of STs. The study also found that the

widescale diversion of TSP funds was occurring and that most schemes were general in nature and not specifi -

cally targeting STs.75 Overall, therefore, the large allocations especially under the TSP in Jharkhand are belied by

the diversion of funds, non-utilisation of allocated funds, or the allocation of funds for general schemes, and this

too, in only around half of the state currently covered by the TSP.

73 Comptroller Auditor General, 2007. Jharkhand Audit Report (Civil & Commercial) for the year ending 31 March 2007. New Delhi:

CAG, Chapter 3.

74 Comptroller Auditor General, 2006. Audit Report (Civil and Commercial) for the year ended 31 March 2006. New Delhi: CAG, Chap-

ter 3.

75 Prasad, Neha, 2011. A Study of Allocations and Implications under Tribal Sub Plan during Eleventh Five Year Plan in Jharkhand. Ranchi:

Life Education and Development Support, p.20.

38

2.3 Analysis of SCSP/TSP Allocations under SSA and RMSA in both States

This pattern of non-implementation of SCSP/TSP to directly benefi t SCs/STs is especially clear in the school

education sector, where targeted programmes under major centrally sponsored schemes like SSA and RMSA

have not been devised in consultation with SC/ST communities, and any funds for equity innovation lie un-utilised

or under-utilised.

In Bihar (Tables 2.1 & 2.2), as mentioned above, no TSP allocations have been made for school education, includ-

ing under SSA and RMSA. Otherwise, SSA has seen a large increase in allocation under the SCSP in 2013-14

as compared to the two previous years. However, the only funds clearly demarcated for SC/ST children, as per

the Bihar 2012-13 Annual Work Plan & Budget (AWPB) for SSA, was for uniforms for SC/ST boys studying in

classes 1-8 in government schools. Meanwhile, for 2012-13 and 2013-14 no RMSA funds have been allocated

under the SCSP. Given that RMSA is now the key scheme for ensuring universal access to secondary education,

this means that no schemes specifi cally targeting SC/ST children are being envisaged by the state government

despite their lower education levels, including at the level of secondary education.

In Jharkhand (Table 2.3 & 2.4), SSA and RMSA continue to allocate the largest education-related funds under

SCSP/TSP in the state. SSA has seen a steady increase in funding allocation under SCSP/TSP, though like Bihar,

the only funds clearly demarcated for SC/ST children, as per the Jharkhand 2012-13 Annual Work Plan & Budget

for SSA, was for uniforms for SC/ST boys studying in classes 1-8 in government schools. Meanwhile, RMSA has

allocated less funds under SCSP/TSP in 2013-14 as compared to 2012-13. Moreover, RMSA funds were not

spent under SCSP/TSP in 2011-12. This indicates that this major secondary education scheme has not chalked

out any equity programmes to ensure access to secondary education for SC/ST children in Jharkhand.

Under innovative activities, interventions with SC/ST children have been minimal. Data on the fi nancial and physi-

cal coverage of SSA in Bihar under the innovative activities head during 2008-09 to 2010-11 show that the

number of SC/ST children who benefi tted from targeted interventions under this innovative fund head was merely

357, 100 and 0 in those three consecutive years. This was despite an increase in funds under this head, from

Rs 23.77 crores in 2008-09 to Rs 38.0 crores in 2010-11.76 In 2011-12, moreover, while the AWPB proposed

1,40,000 SC/ST benefi ciaries under innovative programmes for these communities with fi nancial outlay of Rs 4.1

crore, by the time of preparation of the 2012-13 AWPB, only 50,000 benefi ciaries were noted and Rs 2.62 crores

(63.8% of the budget allocation) spent. In Jamui and Nalanda districts, however, no innovative programmes for

SC/ST children had been undertaken, despite outlays of Rs 15 and 5 lakhs respectively being approved by the

Project Approval Board for that year.77 Moreover, the 2012-13 AWPB did not contain any fi nancial outlay for in-

novative programmes for SC/ST children. This is because the government’s proposed activities had not been

accepted during the appraisal process. A similar situation applies for the current fi nancial year 2013-14, where

it was reported that no equity innovation interventions for SC/ST have been accepted by the Project Approval

Board. In sum, little or no SC/ST programmes are being implemented in the state for SC/ST children, despite the

state government’s recognition of the continuing educational disadvantage these children face.

In Jharkhand, as per the 2012-13 AWPB for SSA, in 2011-12, a total of Rs 20.09 lakhs was spent on innovation

activities for SC/ST children covering all 24 districts of the state. The proposed outlay for innovative schemes

for 2012-13 was then increased to Rs 331.52 lakhs for all the districts. No attempt, however, had been made to

calculate the actual number of SC/ST benefi ciaries under these programmes. Moreover, as on 28.02.2013 (i.e.

one month before the end of the fi nancial year 2012-13), only 52% of the Rs 331.52 lakhs allocated in 2012-13

for interventions with SC/ST children had been spent. The situation was even worse in Ranchi district, where only

45% of the Rs 23.04 lakhs allocated for interventions for SC/ST children in 2012-13 had been spent; meanwhile,

76 Finance Department, 2012. Bihar Economic Survey 2011-12. Patna: Government of Bihar, tables 5.11 & A.5.9.

77 See Project Approval Board, 2012. Minutes of PAB meeting held on 21.05.2012: Costing Sheets for AWPB of 2012-13 – SSA Bihar,

Jamui and Nalanda sheets.

39

in Palamu district, Rs 25.60 lakhs was allotted, but no details were available on expenditure.78 Moreover, the

AWPB for SSA in 2013-14 that was fi nalised by the Project Approval Board has cut out all proposals related to

the equity innovation funds for SCs/STs.

The situation of equity programmes under RMSA is even worse. To date, there has been absolutely no emphasis

placed on ensuring the equity innovation component in RMSA, despite the existence of detailed guidelines on

this component of innovation.79 Both the Bihar and Jharkhand RMSA programmes for 2012-13 contain no equity

programmes of any sort. At most, the Jharkhand government mentioned a focus during the 11th Five Year Plan on

‘special training for students’ in class 9 and allocated Rs 240.30 lakhs for this programme in 2012-13. However,

no details are provided as to who are the benefi ciaries from these trainings and in any case, the programme was

of a general nature for all academically weaker students. In terms of equity, the Jharkhand Secondary Educa-

tion Project Council’s suggested list of activities and norms under RMSA on their website notes that activities to

improve the participation of SC/ST students in secondary schools are to be taken up. The examples given are:

transportation facilities; schooling retention drives; adolescent education in convergence with AEP; and exposure

to different career options. How these programmes relate to the actual educational needs of SC/ST children in

the state, however, is questionable.

Conclusion

In both the school education departments in Bihar and Jharkhand, as seen with the Department of School Edu-

cation and Literacy at the central government level, budget allocations for SCSP/TSP are high, except for the nil

allocation by the Bihar Education Department under the TSP. However, poor utilisation of SCSP/TSP funds has

been recorded in both states for the year 2011-12. Moreover, almost all education schemes earmarking funds

under the SCSP/TSP are general schemes that have no specifi c programmes targeting SC/ST children. Even the

equity innovation interventions for SC/ST children have been by and large absent or nominally utilised under major

schemes like SSA and RMSA. In other words, looking at the overall educational schemes budgeted under SCSP/

TSP by the two state education departments, little priority seems to be placed on ensuring targeted educational

benefi ts reach SC/ST children in the states. This can be further evidenced in the next chapter, which examines the

educational planning process in Bihar and Jharkhand, and the mismatch between existing educational schemes

and the needs and priorities of SC/ST children in those states.

78 Jharkhand Education Project Council, 2013. SSA Target vs. Achievement 2012-13 (up to 28.02.2013). Ranchi: JEPC.

79 See MHRD, 2012. Promoting Innovation under Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan: Guidelines. New Delhi: MHRD.

40

Having examined the overall budgeting for SC/ST children under the SCSP/TSP by the Education Departments

in Bihar and Jharkhand in the previous chapter, this chapter now turns to the education planning process itself

with a specifi c focus on planning and implementation of SCSP/TSP budgets and schemes for SC/ST children

in school education in the two states. Complementing this analysis is a detailing of the educational barriers of

SC/ST children in the two states, as well as their perceptions of the gaps in current education schemes and

programmes.

3.1 Education Planning Process in Bihar and Jharkhand

Signifi cantly, in the presentations by the State Planning Departments of both states to the National Planning

Commission on the 12th Five Year Plan and 2012-13 Annual Plan in the states in June 2012, no mention is made

of equity gaps with respect to the implementation of the right to education. At the same time, the Bihar Govern-

ment’s Approach Paper to the 12th Plan noted that key areas are the rolling out of the SCSP in letter and spirit, and

providing cluster-based support for the development of STs in MADA and TSP districts. In addition, there will be a

focus in the coming years on upgrading existing residential high schools; strengthening the Bihar Mahadalit Vikas

School Education Planning for SC/ST Children in Bihar and Jharkhand

CHAPTER 3

41

Mission and effective implementation of its schemes for some of the most marginalised SC communities; and

reorienting programmes for SCs/STs in line with the concept of broad-streaming – i.e. giving equal importance to

the lifestyles, languages and needs of different excluded communities – to address their issues of exclusion and

promote inclusion.80 The paper also talks about the need for the convergence of services and planning based on

issues, such as education. Such planning, moreover, should be entitlements based: i.e. based on constitutional

and statutory provisions and entitlements under various schemes that ensure rights such as the right to educa-

tion, and ensuring better people’s participation in planning. The state government’s policy for inclusion of socially

excluded groups likewise focuses on education and prioritises the improving of access to schools for SC/ST

children.81

The Jharkhand government does not have as yet an equivalent Approach Paper to the 12th Plan detailing how it

plans to deal with the low educational levels of the large population of SC/ST children in the state. This is despite

a fi ve-day consultative process with civil society organisations, district panchayat offi cials, MLAs/MPs, develop-

ment and other stakeholders as a part of the preparations for the 12th Five Year Plan.

As far as the TSP is concerned, as mentioned in the previous chapter, a major problem is that it is being imple-

mented on the basis of tribal populated areas; i.e. it is applicable only to certain tribal populated blocks in the

states that fall under the Integrated Tribal Development Project (ITDPs), Modifi ed Area Development Approach

(MADA), ST Clusters or Primitive Tribal Groups.82 This means that ST individuals and families living in other areas

with low population concentrations are not covered by the TSP. In Bihar, for example, there are only 10 districts

where tribal development programmes are run under MADA and TSP. In Jharkhand, likewise, currently the TSP

is limited to only 14 districts with over 50% ST populations. On a positive note, the Bihar government has recog-

nised the need to extend the benefi ts of these programmes to districts with scattered ST populations.83

(I) BIHAR EDUCATION PLANNING

Looking at the overall annual planning process for education, offi cials in the education departments in both states

noted that there is no specifi c focus on SC/ST children, nor on the SCSP/TSP, as they prepare their annual work

plans and budgets (AWPB). In Bihar, offi cials mentioned that based on the population proportion of SC/ST chil-

dren, their general costs for education are calculated in keeping with the overall costs of providing school educa-

tion. Special costing is only done where there are specifi c schemes, like residential schools or scholarships for

SC/ST children under the SC/ST Welfare Department, and these are automatically earmarked under the SCSP/

TSP. One offi cial suggested the need to make SC/ST children specifi c plans at the central government level,

which could then be pushed at the state government level. As far as centrally sponsored schemes like SSA and

RMSA are concerned, they indicate the funds fl ow under SCSP/TSP separately for each planned programme, as

separate from the OSP or general budget. In other words, the department follows a notional allocation approach,

in that it assumes that a proportion of funds for general schemes or for SC/ST populated areas can be taken as

directly benefi tting only SCs/STs.

In Bihar, the SC/ST Welfare Department is not a nodal department for SC/ST development and SCSP/TSP;

instead, its offi cials merely note that they are a department directly concerned with implementing schemes for

these two communities. There is currently no convergence or linkages between this department and the Edu-

cation Department as regard SC/ST education schemes. SC/ST Welfare Department offi cials also could not

comment on whether they thought the SCSP/TSP planning would be better if the Department became a nodal

80 Government of Bihar, 2011. Growth with Justice: Approach Paper to the 12th Five Year Plan, Executive Summary. Patna: Government of

Bihar, p. 23.

81 Government of Bihar, 2011. Growth with Justice: Approach Paper to the 12th Five Year Plan, Executive Summary. Patna: Government of

Bihar.

82 See Ministry of Tribal Af airs, undated. Overview of STs. Accessed from MTA website <<tribal.nic.in/writeeaddata/mainlinki le/

i le722.pdf>>, accessed 01.07.2013.

83 Government of Bihar, 2011. Growth with Justice: Approach Paper to the 12th Five Year Plan, Executive Summary. Patna: Government of

Bihar, p. 139.

42

agency. This may be because of the different status social welfare departments hold in comparison to more ‘high

profi le’ economic departments, which might impact on their ability to push other departments to implemented

SC/ST schemes, as well as issues of assessing the nature of schemes from different departments. Without of-

fi cials sensitive to the issues of SCs/STs being placed in such nodal agencies, the chances of generating, imple-

menting and monitoring schemes that are actually required for these communities to develop on par with others

becomes very much less.

Specifi c to Bihar, the creation of the Mahadalit Vikas Mission under the SC/ST Welfare Department to specifi cally

target the most socio-economically marginalised SC communities through special schemes is completely ac-

counted under the SCSP. These include schemes for special schools for Mahadalit children, community halls in

Mahadalit tolas and Vikas Mitras (education volunteers) at the panchayat level in rural areas and ward level in ur-

ban areas, to link Mahadalit children to the various educational schemes for them.84 Any new scheme under this

Mission is either declared by the Chief Minister, or the Mission team takes the initiative to devise a new scheme

and then presents their proposal to the Chief Minister in the bi-annual department reviews or as per need. Partici-

pation by the Mahadalit community in the creation of the schemes is completely absent, nor even the involvement

of the village panchayats. Moreover, the centralised decision-making process means that schemes are devised

without assessing the needs of the Mahadalit community.

In addition to the Mahadalit Vikas Mission schemes, the Education Department operates the Education Develop-

ment Centres for Mahadalit Children (Utthan Kendras), which are also fully funded under the SCSP. Under this

scheme, Tola Sevaks are employed in each Mahadalit tola to cater to around 25 children in the area. They are

to take 2 hour classes in the mornings and ensure that the children attend the local schools. As on September

2011, the Utthan Kendras numbered 19,962 centres covering 6.2 lakh SC children.85 Initially this scheme was

funded under SSA, but after three years this was stopped. The reason was that the Education Department made

no efforts to assess the impact of this programme and suggest some improvements if required, in order to justify

its continuation under SSA. Hence, after a gap of one year, it was only after the Chief Minister allowed the scheme

continue with state fi nances that the scheme was resumed. However, as seen in the previous chapter, funds for

the scheme have not been earmarked under the SCSP since 2012-13.

Otherwise, signifi cant schemes for SC/ST children in Bihar include the 51 residential schools run for SC children

and 15 residential schools for ST children. Moreover, there are 150 hostels for SC students and 13 hostels for

ST students, with hostels envisaged in all the districts of the state. The government’s proposed strategies for the

12th Plan includes the creation of quality residential schools for SCs with an accountability mechanism to ensure

such quality; and the provision of residential schools for ST girls at the block level and hostels for ST girls and

boys at the district level.86

The district level education structure in Bihar is currently in the process of linkages being formed between the

Education Department and major schemes like SSA and RMSA, which have their own mission offi ces. The aim

is to ensure that the District Education Offi cer will operate as the head of the district for education planning and

implementation, with different district project offi cers for SSA, RMSA, etc. under her/him. No suggestion is

being made, however, to also ensure linkages to the SC/ST Welfare Department vis-à-vis their SC/ST education

schemes implemented in the districts.

84 A total of 9662 Vikas Mitras have been recruited, all allegedly from the SC community: Government of Bihar, 2011. Growth with

Justice: Approach Paper to the 12th Five Year Plan, Executive Summary. Patna: Government of Bihar.

85 Finance Department, 2012. Bihar Economic Survey 2011-12. Patna: Government of Bihar, p.198.

86 Government of Bihar, 2011. Growth with Justice: Approach Paper to the 12th Five Year Plan, Executive Summary. Patna: Government of

Bihar.

43

(II) JHARKHAND EDUCATION PLANNING

In Jharkhand, according to the Planning and Development Department, each department makes its plan for

earmarking of funds for its schemes under the SCSP/TSP and sends these plans to the Planning Department,

which reviews and sanctions the budget before placing it before the State Assembly for approval. According to

Planning Department offi cials, they review matters such as whether the desired objectives put forward by the

departments are sound; whether the proposed activities are in keeping with the objective; whether the correct

indicators are given; and whether the proposed budgetary outlay is in keeping with the objectives. However, offi -

cials understood the goals behind earmarking funds under the SCSP/TSP as ensuring that the weighted average

educational levels (under the Results Framework) as a whole would go up, not improving the educational levels of

SC/ST communities and reducing inequalities. Education Department offi cials added that spending on SCs/STs

was not a problem in the state, given the higher than required allocations being currently earmarked under the

SCSP/TSP. Even to a query of whether allocation of over 50% of education funds for special schemes for SC/ST

children would adversely affect the overall planning and implementation of general education schemes, Welfare

Department offi cials were of the opinion it would not do so given that SC/ST children in the state form a sizeable

population whose educational status is poor.

There is currently no scope for the participation of SC/ST communities in education or other planning, or even

in the implementation of education schemes. A Planning Department offi cial explained that they instead rely on

‘feedback mechanisms’ in terms of people’s representatives or various media reports to gauge the needs of

people such as SCs/STs. Welfare Department offi cials were of the opinion that a nodal agency for SCSP/TSP

schemes planning and implementation might work in their state, and have had a consultation at which repre-

sentatives from other states like Kerala and Maharashtra shared on how SCSP/TSP are being implemented by

nodal departments in their states. At the same time, different constraints operate in Jharkhand to make holistic

planning for SC/ST development more diffi cult. These include the lack of adequate human resources and the

high turnover of principal secretaries in departments like the Welfare Departments, as well as the lack of micro-

planning in which new needs-based specifi c schemes could be developed. The latter is linked to the fact that the

panchayats have only recently started to function in Jharkhand.

Holistic planning for the development of SCs/STs is further hampered by the area-wise implementation of the TSP

and SCSP. Though Planning Department offi cials indicated that the state adopted both an area-wise and indi-

vidual benefi ciary approach to the SCSP/TSP87, Welfare Department offi cials and research especially on the TSP

show the emphasis on the former approach. Block development offi cers, therefore, are the functional agencies

implementing schemes earmarked under SCSP/TSP, including education schemes. This is not the most optimum

approach as there is no mapping done to identify the number of benefi ciaries that will be targeted under the dif-

ferent schemes. The Welfare Department is the administrative department for all ITDP or MESO areas where the

TSP is implemented. A Tribal Welfare Commissioner is in charge of these areas and is responsible for collecting

allocations under the TSP from every department and implementing them in MESO and MADA areas. The Com-

missioner works through a Project Implementation Committee, which is responsible for identifying benefi ciaries

and implementing schemes for STs. According to one report, though, the Commissioner’s offi ce currently only

implements the schemes of the Welfare Department; even then, it does not provide information about the MESO-

wise allocation and utilisation of funds for ST development that would enable an assessment of the impact of

such schemes.88 Welfare Department offi cials also admitted that they are now thinking of shifting to more indi-

vidual and family oriented schemes for SCs/STs, as they felt that individual benefi ciary oriented schemes impact

on the community better than area-wise schemes. At the same time, the challenge is to ensure that offi cials

87 Note that Planning Department oi cials were not able to state what percentage of SCSP/TSP funds went into area-wise schemes and

what percentage � owed to individual benei ciaries. h is indicates the absence of adequate planning and evaluation of dif erent schemes

towards ensuring measurable indicators of impact on SC/ST educational development.

88 Prasad, Neha, 2011. A Study of Allocations and Implications under Tribal Sub Plan during Eleventh Five Year Plan in Jharkhand. Ranchi:

Life Education and Development Support, p.14.

44

understand better the specifi c contexts and needs of SC/ST children in the different regions of the state in order

to evolve more effective schemes and programmes.

Regarding the education schemes currently run by the Welfare Department for SCs/STs, these include hostels for

SC/ST boys and girls; ashram (residential) schools for STs; SC/ST scholarships at all schooling levels, including

scholarships for SC children of persons engaged in unclean occupations; reimbursement of examination fees;

midday meal scheme for ST Paharia students studying in Paharia Day Schools; the provision of school bags for

children studying in ST residential schools; and vocational training. At present, there is no convergence with the

Department of Human Resources Development regarding SC/ST education, though the schools run by the Wel-

fare Department report to the District and Block Education Offi cers in relation to compliance with norms under the

Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009. The Welfare Department also occasionally puts

up funds for Department of Human Resources Development programmes such as the construction of hostels

in ST areas, where the Education Department has a funds shortage. In fact, a Department of Human Resources

Development offi cial made a functional distinction between their department, meant for all children, and the SC/

ST Welfare Department, which supposedly has more funds and is meant for targeted schemes for specifi c so-

cial groups. Universal schemes are supported by stating that they ensure equality, in that no child should be left

behind.

In the absence of micro-planning for SC/ST children’s education, moreover, new schemes have not been devel-

oped in recent years. Education offi cials seemed more concerned that existing schemes have not reached all the

intended benefi ciaries yet. At most, new schemes like solar lamps for girl students or computer aided learning

have been created by the Department of Human Resources Development after companies have piloted these

technologies in some schools or areas. In other words, products are marketed to the department and thereafter

emerging as schemes, rather than through any social mapping and needs analysis. Moreover, one Education

offi cial indicated that more than special schemes, universal schemes were preferred by the Department. By this

he seemed to distinguish between schemes for all girls or for all children with special needs, and those means for

specifi c social groups like SCs/STs. The only specifi c intervention this offi cial suggested as necessary was for all

subject textbooks until class 3 to be made in the tribal languages in Jharkhand.

At the district level in Jharkhand, education planning is done at the cluster and block levels, and then consoli-

dated at the district level. There are two offi cers – the District Superintendent for Education for elementary schools

and the District Education Offi cer for secondary schools. The district education department makes the AWPBs

for all schemes, including centrally sponsored schemes like SSA, RMSA, etc. and submits them to the state de-

partment. According to one Ranchi district offi cer, the SCSP/TSP funds are not a problem in Jharkhand because

of the high populations of these two communities in the districts. However, this translates into a feeling that spe-

cial schemes are not needed for these two communities and that universal education schemes adequately cater

to the educational needs of these two communities.

(III) FUNDS DISBURSEMENT, UTILISATION AND ASSESSMENT

Funds disbursement and utilisation also throws up a series of issues. In Bihar, Education Department offi cials

mentioned that the disbursement of funds from the central government to the state government, and from the

state to the district levels for the fi nancial year is often delayed up to as far as October-November of that year.

Aside from offi cial laxity in ensuring timely funds transfers, delays occur when civil works take a longer time and,

therefore, utilisation certifi cations do not arrive in time. While non-Plan funds are routinely disbursed, for Plan

funds the special sanctions required for their disbursal leads to greater delays. This is signifi cant due to the fact

that the SCSP/TSP are earmarked only from Plan funds. As far as Jharkhand is concerned, the major issue is

having the Annual Plan sanctioned, after which funds will be allocated. This process itself sometimes is delayed.

According to the Planning Department offi cial, any delays in entitlements such as scholarships is then an issue of

poor implementation rather than any delay in funds disbursal.

45

Furthermore, funds disbursal in no way ensures the quality of scheme implementation. An example is the 66

residential schools (51 for SCs and 15 for STs) run by the SC/ST Welfare Department in Bihar, which have a per

child cost – Rs 14,700 per child per year in classes 1-5; Rs 18,675 per child per year for classes 6-12 – that is

similar to the special category JNV (Navodaya) schools. An offi cial admitted that the conditions in these residential

schools, however, were considerably worse than those in the Navodaya schools. This is despite the fact that

the Department offi cials see these schools are playing an important role in improving the literacy rates of SC/ST

children in the southern states.

In fact, during the course of the Five Year Plans in both Bihar and Jharkhand no assessment has been made on

the performance of the state governments in implementing the SCSP/TSP both fi nancially (i.e. via audits) and

physically (i.e. scheme impact assessment). By not assessing the impact of schemes for SC/ST children in edu-

cation, therefore, the state governments indicate the low priority they give to ensuring government schemes and

funds match with the needs of SC/ST children in order for them to enjoy their right to education.

Given that the fund outlays for school education under the SCSP/TSP are primarily for general education schemes,

the question arises as to how the SCSP/TSP allocations under major schemes are planned in the states and the

scope for SC/ST community participation in this planning process. This is examined in the context of SSA, RMSA

and NVS, given the scope for equity programmes in the fi rst two schemes and specifi c admission reservations

for SC/ST students in the third scheme.

(IV) PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF SSA

SSA in Bihar is implemented by the Bihar Education Project Council (BEPC) and in Jharkhand by the Jharkhand

Education Project Council (JEPC). The SSA guidelines mandate the preparation of AWPBs by individual state

governments through a decentralised planning process starting from the community level. AWPBs should be

prepared for each habitation by the school management committee in consultation with the local community,

then collated at the block level, then at the district level and fi nally at the state level.89 These AWPBs are then

submitted to an Appraisal Committee, after which the revised AWPBs are submitted to the Project Approval

Board for fi nalisation.

In reality, though, the exercise is top-down driven and the participation of school management committees and

communities is absent in both Bihar and Jharkhand. In Bihar, for example, at most the school management com-

mittee signs off on the DISE data format prepared by the schools. Instead, each year the Department of School

Education and Literacy, MHRD issues a letter to all SSA State Project Directors, indicating some major issues to

be incorporated into the AWPBs of the states. From the 2011-12 SSA budget onwards, the AWPBs were to be

prepared from the perspective of the provisions of the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009, which

included signifi cant focus on addressing the challenge of social exclusion of groups like SCs/STs in education

under a section on ‘bridging gender and social category gaps’. This meant focusing on programmes to address

exclusion in the curriculum, syllabus and teaching learning material; in classroom practices; via reconceptualis-

ing textbooks, scholarships, etc. as entitlements and not incentives; and ensuring social inclusion issues are

addressed in trainings of SMCs so that this fi lters into their school development plans. In addition, the guidelines

given for preparation of the 2012-13 AWPB also required states to stipulate their proposals for Special Focus

Districts with high SC/ST populations, as well as to ensure a comprehensive write up on proposals under the

innovative activities component of SSA meant for groups like SC/ST children. This was scaled back to only focus-

ing on proposals for Special Focus Districts while preparing the 2013-14 AWPBs. According to one SSA offi cial

in Bihar, as the MHRD does not ask for separate planning for SC/ST children and costing under the SCSP/TSP,

state governments do not prepare such plans. A SSA offi cial in Jharkhand also noted that as this year no mention

was made about the equity innovation fund and no funds have been sanctioned in the recent Project Approval

Board meeting.

89 Centre for Budget and Governance Accountability, 2011. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Budgeting for Change Series. New Delhi: CBGA.

46

Alongside these guidelines, formats have been developed for state governments to fi ll out, some of which include

detailed costing of different programmes. Most of these formats, however, do not ensure that states provide dis-

aggregated data on the situation of SC/ST children, not even in terms of those out of school. At most, in 2012-13,

states were asked to provide disaggregated data on the enrolment of SC/ST children in government schools for

the provision of free textbooks and uniforms, as well as in private unaided schools under the 25% free-ship quota

provided for under the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009. In 2013-14, this was extended to also

include the numbers of SC/ST children living in un-served habitations but enrolled in faraway schools; those re-

quiring transportation arrangements; as well as a detailed write up on social mapping to break gender, caste and

religious barriers for discrimination-free access and participation in elementary education. However, while many

aspects of SSA have detailed instructions, the same is not available for needs mapping and the devising of equity

innovation programmes for SC/ST children.

Based on these MHRD guidelines, the state SSA mission offi ces hold orientations for the district SSA staff on

how to prepare a detailed AWPB. This primarily consists of explaining the different sections for planning, which

does not allow for going into great detail on components such as planning equity innovation interventions. These

district plans are then consolidated and merged at the state level after some cross-verifi cation by the state gov-

ernment. Reliance is placed on the DISE school education data, primarily enrolment data, as well as school and

block level elementary education plan formats (SEEP and BEEP) for the AWPBs, and not on any socio-economic

and educational mapping of different groups of children both in and out of schools in the districts. In fact, a Bihar

SSA offi cial admitted that it was diffi cult for schools and especially the school management committees to plan

much except civil works under this SSA planning process. Moreover, despite the often divergences between

SEEP/DEEP and DISE data, both are used to make the AWPBs for any planning that might include SC/ST chil-

dren. Scholarship amounts, for example, fl ow from the enrolment data collected under DISE and SEEP/BEEP in

Bihar.

As the previous chapter noted, the Bihar 2012-13 AWPB does not make any allocation of funds for innovative

programmes for SC/ST children and, therefore, its section on bridging gender and social category gaps is silent

on SC/ST children. This is despite its own data presented at the PAB meeting on 21.05.2012, indicating that SC

children are disproportionately represented as 30.4% in terms of the offi cial out-of-school child population in the

state and also lag behind other social groups in terms of enrolment. The reason is the creation of programmes

for SC/ST children under the ‘innovation fund’ budget head without any clear mapping and needs assessment,

leading to these programmes not being approved during the Appraisal Board meeting. Meanwhile, innovative

programmes for SC/ST children under the 2011-12 AWPB are supposed to have benefi tted 50,000 children in

Bihar. These programmes are computer learning, spoken English and special coaching. Without any bottom-

up planning, however, these programmes are mostly replicas of previous programmes. In 2013-14, the district

offi cials were again directed to design programmes for SC/ST children under the equity innovation head. The

Nalanda district AWPB proposed some programmes such as mushroom growing, cycle repairs, and teddy bear

making for SC girls under the innovation budget head. These schemes were decided upon by the SSA district

team and then taken to some active Tola Sevaks in the district to get their opinions. Again, the result is a set of

programmes without any form of needs analysis with the targeted community, and all equity innovation interven-

tions for SC/ST children were not approved in the recent Project Approval Board meeting.

SSA offi cials in Bihar noted that some SSA strategies for inclusion of SC children, like opening up schools in

SC habitations, have resulted in further segregation and stigmatisation of these children. Hence, the decision

was taken to only operate integrated schools where children of all communities can study together. The lack of

focus on anti-discrimination programmes in schools can also be explained by the general attitude that universal

programmes like SSA will reach every child without any need for separate focus on SC/ST children. At the same

time, SSA offi cials opined that the goal of reducing gender inequalities in education has now been achieved in

the state, with more girls than boys now enrolled in schools. However, when it comes to bridging the educational

gaps for SC/ST children, they are yet to address this adequately. Having said this, while programmes are being

47

formulated for education for girls, there seems to be no equivalent emphasis placed on ensuring well-planned

programmes for SC/ST children.

In Jharkhand, by contrast, a state SSA offi cial mentioned the use of the equity innovation fund for SC/ST interven-

tions in the state such as regular awareness campaigns on education in SC/ST habitations. The state has also

suggested various equity innovation fund options such as the preparation of primary school textbooks in the fi ve

main tribal languages (Mundari, Santhali, Ho, Kharia, Korku), bi-lingual dictionaries, and training of SC/ST teach-

ers. One offi cial suggested that rather than short-term residential bridge courses for out-of-school children, many

of whom are SC/ST, a more effective strategy would be to place children in long-term residential schools with the

necessary support classes to transition into education. Notably, these programmes are been viewed as special

needs for equity, without any consideration that some like textbook preparation should fall under general SSA

programmes given the large ST population in the state. However, in 2013-14, the equity innovation funds have

been cut from the AWPB that was fi nally approved. MHRD offi cials apparently told the state offi cials that they had

inadequate funds to implement all the proposals under the Jharkhand SSA AWPB.

At the district level, no SSA offi cials interviewed had any information on the SCSP/TSP. Neither had they under-

taken any equity fund interventions for SC/ST children in the past two years. According to a Jamui district, Bihar

SSA offi cial, in previous years only computer aided learning, part of the innovation funds, was planned directly at

the state level for all the districts. Even this, however, was not implemented in the end in Nalanda district in the

state. Only for 2013-14 were district SSA offi cials being asked to plan under the equity innovation head, and in

Jamui district one proposed plan was to open a residential school for SC Musahar girls who have one of the low-

est enrolment and retention rates in schooling. Otherwise, only in Jamui district did one SSA offi cial highlight the

operation of a special residential school for ST girls in Khaira block. The aim is to ensure that ST girls from remote,

hilly areas and naxalite affected areas who pass out of KGBVs go on to complete at least their matriculation (10th

class). A positive step in Jharkhand is that the KGBVs have been extended up to class 10, whereas they usually

only operate up to class 8, with the additional two years taken care of under the state government’s budget.

The lack of planning under SCSP/TSP at the district level also meant the lack of participation of SC/ST parents

and communities in the planning process. The only orientation given to SC/ST parents were for those who are

part of the school management committee. Even then, the trainings they received were on how to devise the

school management plans and how to monitor child enrolments, etc. The trainings do not cover the topics of

equity and inclusion, or bridging social category gaps in school education. Otherwise, no space currently exists

for SC/ST communities or SC/ST civil society organisations to become involved and have a say in the types of

educational programmes required for their children.

When asked about programmes and interventions to deal with discrimination against SC/ST children in schools,

however, some district offi cials in Bihar showed their unawareness of prevailing exclusion and discrimination

against these children. One offi cial went so far as to state that discrimination no longer exists in schools. Hence,

there is no thought then given to designing anti-discrimination interventions under SSA. In Nalanda district, how-

ever, the District Project Offi cer had in 2012-13 identifi ed one middle school in each of the 20 blocks of the district

with a mixed student population. Three teachers had been appointed as block resource persons, who regularly

visited these schools to give classes on non-discrimination to the students and to ensure that SC children were

being seated in the front row alongside non-SC students. The content of these classes is decided upon in con-

sultation with the District Project Offi cer. This offi cial also monitored the midday meals scheme in order to ensure

the absence of caste discrimination during the meals. However, this initiative has not been monitored or assessed

to date to see what impact especially the non-discrimination classes are having on student and teacher attitudes.

(V) PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF RMSA

RMSA in the two states falls under the Bihar Education Parishad and the Jharkhand Secondary Education Coun-

cil. No district offi cial interviewed had any knowledge of the SCSP/TSP and none had received any orientation

48

on these Sub Plans as part of the RMSA AWPB planning orientation. Planning under RMSA for schemes with

a direct, targeted impact on SC/ST children to ensure their enrolment, retention and completion of secondary

education is non-existent so far in both the states. The Planning Approval Board Minutes of RMSA for the year

2011-12, where both the annual Plan proposals of Bihar and Jharkhand were discussed and approved, do not go

much beyond a focus on school mapping, proposals for new or upgraded secondary schools, teacher require-

ments and teacher training. The Secretary, School Education and SPD, RMSA from Bihar also noted that school

development plans have not been developed in the state. The situation in Jharkhand, in particular, is quite seri-

ous, with only one senior secondary school (classes 11-12) available in each block headquarters. Hence, most

of the focus is on setting up functional secondary schools with teachers.

Until 2013-14, moreover, RMSA planning was undertaken only at the state level, not the district level. Only this

year were state governments directed to develop district-wise AWPBs, following which all district RMSA project

offi cers were oriented on the AWPB process. This required the district offi cials to basically fi ll out a detailed for-

mat provided and did not involve designing any schemes or programmes, such as for SC/ST children. At the

district level, RMSA offi cials in Bihar admitted to only having data on SC/ST enrolments in secondary education.

One major constraint admitted by RMSA offi cials in Nalanda district, Bihar at present is the lack of skilled staff in

developing the AWPB as well as fi ling out the elaborate Secondary Education Management Information System

(SEMIS) format supplied by MHRD. Nalanda district RMSA offi cials this year, therefore, have been relying on help

from the district SSA offi cials, who are also busy in their own AWPB process. The lack of adequate staff – only

3 staff per district including the District Project Offi cer – and technical issues also delay the planning process.

Even the fact that the SEMIS format is in English makes it diffi cult for the school heads to fi ll in their portion of the

format, which leads them to skip many sections of the form. Regardless of this, the SEMIS data then becomes

the basis for planning. One RMSA offi cial in Jamui district, Bihar therefore commented that it would be more ef-

fective to have bottom-up planning with school plans collated at the district level and then forwarded onto the

state RMSA offi ce. This offi cial also admitted that their drawback is that they do not have any discussions with the

local communities or Dalit civil society organisations to be able to understand the educational needs of different

chdilren in the district.

From 2012-13 in Bihar, the RMSA funds have not been budgeted under SCSP/TSP. A RMSA offi cial explained

that the funds allocated so far have been relatively small and the budget heads already decided upon by MHRD.

For example, the 2013-14 guidelines issued by MHRD ask for the state AWPBs to contain four major compo-

nents – teacher training, school management and development committees, exposure visits and school grants.

This is aside from the annual school grants and maintenance grants. Other areas are planning for children with

special needs, ICT, girls’ hostels and vocationalisation of higher secondary schools. Unlike SSA, RMSA does not

yet have any priority districts where upgrading of secondary schools can be concentrated. Hence, there is also

no requirement built into the scheme as yet to focus on districts with high SC/ST populations in order to ensure

quality secondary schools. The expenditures are likewise fi xed, leaving the state governments with little room to

shift funds to the equity component of the scheme and to then earmark funds under SCSP/TSP. At the same

time, like SSA, offi cial perceptions seem to be that RMSA is a general scheme and not one that should have ‘af-

fi rmative action’ provisions for SC/ST children like scholarships, etc.

The only linkage between RMSA and the SC/ST Welfare Department was regarding a Department scheme for

SC girls (Rs 3000 on enrolment in class 9, to promote their retention in schooling). RMSA offi cials supported the

programme by providing the list of SC girl children enrolled in secondary schools. At the same time, the RMSA

offi cials admitted there was no follow up or monitoring to check how many girls benefi tted from this scheme.

Finally, delays in the release of the RMSA budget from the centre to the state governments is a key concern,

which translates into late releases to districts and schools. In Bihar, for example, delays due to reasons such as

the late submission of utilisation certifi cates has meant that the 2009-10 RMSA funds were only released in 2010-

11. The Nalanda district RMSA offi cial noted that the quality of their programmes suffer due to the late funds

49

releases, which sometimes have them rushing to complete trainings and other programmes right at the end of

the fi nancial year.

(VI) PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF NVS

JNV schools are established, managed and monitored by the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, which is an autono-

mous organisation under DSEL. The Samiti’s Memorandum of Association and Rules do not contain any specifi c

provision for the inclusion of SC/ST members in the Samiti governing body, though the MHRD had indicated its

willingness to nominate a SC/ST person to the Samiti.90 Aside from the headquarters in New Delhi, eight regional

offi ces operate, including one in Patna, Bihar that oversees JNVs in both Bihar and Jharkhand. For each JNV

school, then, there is a Vidyalaya Advisory Committee and a Vidyalaya Management Committee. The District

Magistrates are the Chairs of the Vidyalaya level Committees in their concerned districts. Currently there are 38

JNV schools in Bihar and 22 in Jharkhand. Notably, the regional offi ce for Bihar and Jharkhand mentions that

separate JNV schools for SCs/STs will soon be functional in certain districts; this includes one JNV school for SC

children in Palamu district, Jharkhand.

At the district level, the JNV offi cials interviewed had no knowledge of the SCSP/TSP. They explained that they

implement a central government scheme and so have no part in the state planning and budgeting process. In

saying so, they exposed their lack of knowledge that NVS earmarks the fourth largest funds under SCSP/TSP

at the central government level (see Chapter 1). Moreover, the funds are directly credited to the JNV schools in

the districts under fi xed budget heads each year. Only if there is any specifi c need passed by the school board

meeting can these fi xed budgets be altered.

Information about the JNV selection test process that occurs twice a year is spread in the districts via newspa-

per advertisements and the entrance forms are circulated to the schools by the District Education Offi ce or else

are available at the JNV schools themselves. No special effects are made to reach out to SC/ST children. A few

years ago in Nalanda district, offi cials did collect SC population data, but this was never used to plan any specifi c

interventions for these children to facilitate their access to the JNV school. The same lack of specifi c interven-

tions for SC/ST children applies once they are in JNV schools. The understanding of JNV offi cials seemed to be

that since education in JNV schools is free for all and SC/ST students have separate enrolment quotas, there is

no need to design any specifi c programmes for these children. At most, a Nalanda JNV offi cial mentioned that

there is a complaints box in the school, but so far they have not received any complaints regarding discrimination

practised in their school. There is also no felt need to ensure SC/ST representation on the Vidyalaya Advisory or

Management Committees.

3.2 Gaps in Educational Provisioning from SC/ST Perspective

Having examined the education planning process and the types of intervention programmes operating for SC/

ST children, this section now presents an assessment of the existing SC/ST school education programmes from

the perspectives of these children as well as Dalit and Adivasi civil society organisations in both states. Given the

similarity in the types of programmes being implemented in Bihar and Jharkhand, the gaps in educational provi-

sioning in both states are considered together.

Asked what main education programmes most benefi t them, Dalit and Adivasi students in both states men-

tioned scholarships, hostels, residential schools, free uniforms and textbooks, midday meals, bicycle distribution,

KGBV residential schools and Ladli Lakshmi Yojana for SC/ST girls, Navodaya Vidyalaya and Netarhat Vidyalaya

(Jharkhand) residential schools. Dalit and Adivasi organisations likewise mentioned scholarships, hostels, resi-

90 Committee on the Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, 2007. 24th Report on Ministry of Human Resource Development

(Department of School Education and Literacy): Reservation in Services including in Admission and Employment in Kendriya Vidyalayas and

Navodaya Vidyalayas. New Delhi: Lok Sabha Secretariat, para. 1.11.

50

dential schools, free uniforms and textbooks, midday meals, and bicycle distribution and KGBV schools for SC/

ST girls. In other words, a combination of residential schools and hostels alongside different entitlements that

make schooling affordable and accessible currently support these children in pursuing school education.

However, both students and civil society organisations also pointed out a number of gaps either in the current

education schemes themselves or else in their implementation that affected their enjoyment of their right to

school education. These were in addition to the host of issues related to the availability of school infrastructure

and personnel: i.e. the lack of schools in their neighbourhoods; the lack of adequate infrastructure in the schools

they attended; the lack of adequate teachers who were fully engaged only in teaching work and taught regularly;

and the poor conditions of basic school facilities like toilets and drinking water. The other main gaps are sum-

marised in the table below:

Gaps related to SC/ST targeted

schemes

Gaps related to general schemes Gaps currently not covered by

existing schemes

• Lack of information about available

schemes for SCs/STs; schools do

not often inform students about the

schemes for them

• Long process to apply for and get

benefi ts of schemes

• Delays in the receipt of scholar-

ships and denial of full amount due

to students

• Inadequate amount of scholarships

that did not cover all education

costs today

• Lack of adequate hostels for SC/ST

students, especially in Jharkhand

where senior secondary schools are

almost only available at the block

level

• Misappropriation of funds meant

for SC/ST schemes

• Lack of community/CSO consulta-

tion in the devising of SC/ST educa-

tion schemes

• Budgetary constraints within

various schemes, which lead to

full entitlements not reaching the

intended benefi ciaries

• Lack of empathy among offi cials for

SC/ST children affecting the educa-

tion planning process

• Lack of monitoring of SC/ST educa-

tion schemes in order to ensure

effective implementation

• Language barriers faced by ST stu-

dents due to the lack of textbooks

in the various tribal languages

• Lack of trained teachers

• Lack of special classes arranged

for educationally weaker stu-

dents

• Lack of computer education

• Lack of emphasis on English

language learning for SC/ST

students

• Lack of libraries in many

schools

• Delays in the receipt of free

textbooks and uniforms

• Lack of quality education be-

ing imparted in government

schools

• Lack of educational tours for

students

• Poor quality midday meals

• More schemes for girls than for

boys

• Lack of free textbooks or uni-

forms beyond class 8

• Inadequate security for SC/

ST girls travelling to and

from schools, and within

schools

• Discrimination faced in

schools from teachers and

other caste students

• Lack of educational pro-

grammes to address child

marriages among girls

• Lack of health checkups in

schools

Given that elementary education in classes 1-8 is to be free under the Right of All Children to Free and Compulso-

ry Education Act 2009, a major gap continues to be economic accessibility to secondary education. At the same

time, even in elementary education, hidden costs still occur, such as the purchase of notebooks or transportation

costs or payment for private tuition classes in classes 6-8 to make up for poor quality teaching in government

51

schools (as much as Rs 3000 per year). A group discussion with Adivasi students studying in 8th to 12th class

in Ranchi, Jharkhand detailed the actual costs of secondary school education (classes 9-10) today as follows:

Items Unit Costs Annual Cost (Rs)

Admission fee for class 9-10 120

2 notebooks each for 9 subjects 18 books/subject at Rs.15/note book 240

Pens for a year Rs.5/pen x 4 pens a month x 10 months 200

Geometry box, etc 200

Text books for 9 subjects Rs.100 x 9 text books 900-1000

2 sets of uniforms Rs.900/set 1800

School bag 250

Shoes 500

For additional teacher in school Rs.30/month x 10 months 300

Pooja, celebrations, etc 30 x 6 functions 180

Tuitions for 2-3 subjects in class 9-10 Rs.600 x 10 months 6000

Exam fees 30

Cycle repairs 500

TOTAL 11,320

These costs then further increased in senior secondary schools (classes 11-12) in the state, due to the very

limited number of such schools primarily at the block headquarters. The admission fees are around Rs 700-800

per year. In the absence of adequate hostels, SC/ST students had to share rented accommodation, which cost

them around Rs 400 per month, or Rs 4000 annually. Added to this would be Rs 500 per month, or Rs 5000 an-

nually, spent on basic food and other living costs, as well as private tuition classes costing Rs 900 per month, or

Rs 9000 annually. In sum, while the costs of elementary education are now affordable to most SC/ST students,

without adequate educational support schemes at the secondary level the costs prevent many from being able

to pursue and complete their school education.

Additionally, both the Dalit and Adivasi students and civil society organisations were asked about their knowledge

of the SCSP/TSP. Almost all students did not know about the SCSP/TSP and that separate funds and planning

was supposed to occur for their educational benefi t. At most, some Dalit hostel students in Palamu district,

Jharkhand knew that the SCSP and that they received very little of the funds in terms of direct benefi ts. Civil

society organisations, by contrast, mostly knew about the SCSP/TSP in broad terms as started by the central

government in the 1970s and as broadly being misutilised for schemes and programmes that did not directly

benefi t their communities and support their development. However, less organisations knew the details about

the guidelines for earmarking funds under the SCSP/TSP and how educational budgets and plans are being

developed, including SC/ST targeted programmes, and the current status of implementation of the SCSP/TSP in

their states. In other words, despite over 30 years of the operation of these two Sub Plans specifi cally designed

to ensure SC/ST development, the target communities themselves have little or no knowledge about these Plans.

Consequently, there has been little community mobilisation to demand state accountability for the effective im-

plementation of such plans, with adequate budgetary allocations that directly fl ow to the community to ensure

their development.

Conclusion

Educational planning at present in Bihar and Jharkhand, as across the country, continues to top-down driven,

with little space for Dalit and Adivasi students and their communities to have a say in terms of defi ning their needs

in education and helping to develop effective schemes to ensure their right to education. A common perception

of education offi cials in Bihar and Jharkhand continues to be that general or universal schemes are adequate

to cover all students, including SC/ST students. Rather than talking about special schemes for SCs/STs, they

52

prefer to ensure implementation of the current schemes for these children. Despite offi cial recognition that certain

groups like girls and children with special needs require special schemes to ensure their right to education, the

same is not extended to SC/ST children. Additionally in Jharkhand, because over 50% of the education budget

is earmarked under the SCSP/TSP, there is a general feeling that SC/ST children are in fact receiving adequate

funds and entitlements to ensure their school education. These perceptions, however, are challenged by the

reality of continuing low educational levels among SCs/STs today in both states. They are further challenged by

Dalit and Adivasi students themselves as well as civil society organisations, who point to a number of gaps in the

current education schemes themselves, as well as their implementation. Ultimately, without any contextualised

understanding of the specifi c needs of SC/ST students today, government schemes will continue to fail to reach

these children in ways that ensure equity and inclusion in education. Furthermore, the SCSP/TSP in this context

will continue to be more notional than real in terms of ensuring concrete benefi ts reach these students and ensure

their development on par with their peers.

53

Where do Dalit and Adivasi children stand today with regard to their right to school education, and specifi cally

their entitlement to the SCSP/TSP funds and schemes that will fulfi l this right for them? And what is the framework

of educational development that SC/ST communities envision to ensure them social justice as well as sustainable

development?

As a preliminary point, the SCSP/TSP today remain as policy guidelines and not as legal, enforceable rights. A

fundamental shift in government approach, from that of welfare or social assistance for SC/STs to ensuring the

rights of SCs/STs, is urgently required. This would allow for the creation of a holistic development plan for these

two communities, one that includes the participation of SC/ST communities. The 12th Five Year Pan talks of a

paradigm shift: from post-facto accounting to “proactive planning for SCSP/TSP”. This is to be achieved through

a set of key implementation measures to strengthen the SCSP/TSP planning process, including: the earmark-

ing of SCSP/TSP funds from the total plan outlay well in advance of the commencement of the fi nancial year;

preparation of pro-planning documents as Sub Plans; an appraisal and approval mechanism for the Sub Plans;

and a robust monitoring and evaluation mechanism. While at the central government level, the Planning Com-

mission will ensure these changes, at the state level, an apex body headed by the Chief Minister and designated

Nodal Department will appraise the SCSP/TSP for each state.91 All this is necessary and can be assured under

comprehensive national legislation on the SCSP/TSP.

91 Planning Commission, 2012. 12th Five Year Plan, Vol. 3: Social Sector. New Delhi: Government of India, para. 24.141.

Conclusions and Recommendationsfor Fulfi lling the Right to Education for Dalit and Adivasi Children

CHAPTER 4

54

The urgency of addressing the educational needs of SC/ST children is clear from the data that shows their con-

tinuing high dropouts from school education and low literacy levels, both lower than the national/state averages.

The situation in Bihar and Jharkhand, states with high SC and ST populations respectively, is particularly poor,

especially for SC/ST girls. Over 70% of SC/ST children are dropping out of education between classes 1-10. The

government of Bihar openly acknowledges that a bulk of its out-of-school children is SC children. Meanwhile,

the Bihar SC/ST Welfare Department has noted the continuing persistence of caste-based discrimination and

that the indicators of educational achievements are unfavourable for SC/ST children vis-a-vis other social groups.

While the government data shows that enrolments have increased in both states, this is not matched by signifi -

cant improvements in retention and completion of school education for children from these two communities.

4.1 Current Gaps

(I) BUDGETARY GAPS

A major gap in Bihar is the lack of funds allocated under the TSP by the Education Department. This signals

the lack of focus on ensuring education for the minority ST population in the state.

The 2011-12 actual budget expenditure details show the lack of 100% expenditure of SCSP/TSP budgets

in education at both the central and state government levels, especially the latter. In order words, despite the

dire need for improving the educational status of SC/ST children, the implementation of targeted schemes

utilising the full fi nancial resources available remains lacking.

While both at the central and state government levels the allocations under the SCSP/TSP are generally

higher than the mandated percentage as per their populations, there is no mechanism in place to ensure that

funds are earmarked and spent under the SCSP/TSP only for schemes and programmes that directly ben-

efi t SC/ST individuals, families or habitations. Instead, the majority of education schemes earmarking funds

under the SCSP/TSP are general or universal schemes, for which merely a notional percentage of funds is

earmarked. Moreover, in Jharkhand, even schemes that have no SC/ST benefi ciaries, like course books for

general/OBC students, are earmarking funds under the SCSP/TSP.

There is no breakdown for SCSP/TSP funds available to show specifi cally how these funds have been spent

in physical terms and what impact these schemes have generated. For example, in Jharkhand, there is no

impact assessment made to show how TSP funds are spent in tribal populated MESO areas and what de-

velopment has resulted.

In Bihar and Jharkhand, equity innovation funds under SSA and RMSA have been under-utilised in the case

of the former, and not at all utilised in the case of the latter. Moreover, in both states the fi nal AWPB for 2013-

14 contains no equity innovation programmes for SCs/STs that could be earmarked under SCSP/TSP.

Students reported frequent delays in the receipt of scholarship funds, or being denied the full amount due to

them, as well as delays in the receipt of all other entitlements from schools. Misappropriation of funds meant

for SC/ST students was a common conclusion in many student discussions.

(II) EDUCATION PLANNING GAPS

The education departments at the central and state levels lack a comprehensive framework and strategies

to ensure the closure of the educational gap between SCs/STs and other children.

There is a complete lack of knowledge even at the state level, but particularly the district level, regarding the

SCSP/TSP. State and district offi cials have received no orientation on the objectives of the SCSP/TSP and

how to develop these Sub Plans.

The TSP is currently being implemented primarily through an area-wise approach, meaning that only blocks

and districts with a high concentration of ST population are being covered by the TSP. This effectively places

55

around half of Bihar and half of Jharkhand out of the purview of TSP programmes.

Education offi cials in Jharkhand view the SCSP/TSP less in terms of its objectives of reducing inequali-

ties and ensuring the educational development of SC/ST children, and more in terms of ensuring that the

weighted average educational levels (as per the Results Framework) as a whole increase.

There is no institutional mechanism in the form of a nodal offi cer in the Department of School Education and

Literacy, MHRD or in the state education department/ state government to oversee the planning, coordina-

tion and monitoring of the process of allocation and expenditure of funds under the SCSP/TSP.

There is a tendency to distinguish between universal education schemes and special education schemes

for SC/ST children, the former primarily under the Department of School Education and Literacy/ State

Education Departments, and the latter under the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment/ Ministry of

Tribal Affairs/ State SC/ST Welfare Departments. This leads to the absence of an inclusive framework for

planning and implementation of the SCSP/TSP in education under the Central/State Departments that deal

with school education. Such an inclusive framework would require greater convergence and linkages across

departments.

There is a complete absence of any spaces for participation by SC/ST communities in planning for the

educational development of SC/ST children. Nor is any needs assessment carried out by the Educations

Departments or even SC/ST Welfare Departments regarding the educational needs of SC/ST children today.

Instead, all planning is made based primarily on DISE data, which only gives a broad picture on enrolments

and dropouts in education.

There is a complete absence of micro-planning for SC/ST children’s education in both Bihar and Jharkhand.

At most, in Bihar the Mahadalit Vikas Mission has supported the development of programmes specifi cally

targeting Mahadalit children. New schemes have not been otherwise developed. In Jharkhand, the only new

schemes to emerge seem to be more of a corporate initiative in piloting their products in schools, rather

than any micro-planning exercise with communities or panchayat representatives. In part this lack of micro-

planning can be attributed to the lack human resources within the Education Departments, as well as the

only recent creation of village panchayats in Jharkhand.

SSA, RMSA and NVS are all top-down driven schemes, in that planning is detailed at the central government

levels, leaving little room for state governments to develop new, more targeted schemes. At the same time,

while equity innovation programmes are a signifi cant component of major school education schemes like

SSA and RMSA, without any systematic effort to develop schemes in line with the specifi c needs of SC/ST

children, these funds are often failing to clear approval at the Project Appraisal meetings.

While SSA offi cials see the need for separate programmes targeting girls and children with special needs,

there is no equivalent emphasis placed on separate programmes for SC/ST children. This includes the lack

of recognition of continuing discrimination faced by SC/ST children in schools, for which specifi c interven-

tions need to be designed. Only in Nalanda district, Bihar was a special programme of anti-discrimination

classes being conducted in one middle school in each of the 20 blocks in the district. No assessment has

been made so far, though, to gauge the impact of such classes on the students in these mixed schools.

RMSA planning was even more constrained in that no scope is currently being given for designing innovative

schemes for SC/ST students, despite evidence of their higher dropout levels from secondary education than

other students and the expansive RMSA manual on developing innovative schemes and equity plans.

NVS planning does not include any element of separate schemes or interventions for SC/ST children outside

of the reserved quota in admission for them, despite being the scheme earmarking the fourth largest funds

under SCSP/TSP. District Navodaya offi cials knew nothing of the SCSP/TSP and did not consider it relevant

to their schools.

Overall, educational planning for socially excluded SC/ST communities has to recognise three types of costs

that they incur to access school education. One is the actual costs of placing a child in schools. Second are

the opportunity costs of SC/ST children accessing education instead of working to fi nancially support the

56

family or taking care of the household and younger siblings. Third is the additional costs borne by SC/ST

families due to the lack of state services or provisions in their localities. For example, the lack of adequate

state early childhood care pushes families to push this burden onto older girls in the family; similarly, the

lack of seasonal migrant hostels in rural areas forces families to stop their children’s schooling and bring the

children along with them in search of work. These costs can be termed as ‘deprivation costs’, in that they

often force SC/ST children into situations where they cannot access school education. Education planning,

therefore, has to shift to understanding and taking into account all three types of costs in order to devise

effective schemes that cater to SC/ST children’s educational and allied needs.

(III) MONITORING AND EVALUATION GAPS

There is no monitoring mechanism established at either the central or state government levels to check how

SCSP/TSP funds are being spent, nor how SC/ST education schemes are being implemented. The result

can be gauged from the various CAG performance audits of educational schemes, departments as well as

SC/ST education, which point to a number of lacunae in expenditures and implementation of education

schemes.

No systematic evaluation has been made of the implementation of the SCSP/TSP at the central and state

government levels, in terms of what quantum of funds has allocated (via a CAG audit), what quantum of

funds has reached SC/ST individuals, families and habitations, and what impact has been generated in

terms of their socio-economic development.

4.2 Current Needs of Dalit and Adivasi Children

Having examined the overall budgetary, planning, monitoring and evaluation gaps in the education system, this

section seeks to answer the question: what do Dalit and Adivasi children need today to secure and enjoy their

right to education? Both children and civil society organisations from the two communities suggested a number

of educational needs, many of which are based on the gaps they identifi ed in the current education schemes in

the previous chapter. The following needs then should form the basis of detailed planning for their educational

development:

Type of Need Need

Information

• Access to information on educational schemes for them

• Access to information on norms and provisions of the Right of all Children to Free

and Compulsory Education Act (RTE Act)

• Awareness programmes for SC/ST parents on the various education schemes for

their children as well as community mobilisation

Academic support

• A quiet room within schools in which to study, given the often noisy atmosphere in

their crowded homes

• Computer facilities and computer education in schools

• Special classes for academically weaker students, so that they do not need to go

outside for private tuition classes

• Free coaching for SC/ST students in classes 10 and 12 to prepare for the competitive

exams

• Curriculum in tribal languages at the primary school level

• A review of the curriculum at all stages of school education from the perspective of

Dalits and Adivasis, to ensure their rich cultural identity and important leaders are

acknowledged in positive ways

• Special coaching in English, access to English medium schools

57

Type of Need Need

Basic entitlements

• Systems to ensure that the full scholarships, textbooks, etc. reach the students on

time

• Increase the scholarship amounts by at least 10%: e.g. for classes 1-5 it should be Rs

600 to 1200; for classes 6-8 Rs 1200 to 2400; for classes 9-10 Rs 1800 to 3600.

• Free computers for SC/ST students in secondary schools

• Free textbooks, notebooks and stationary at least up to class 10, if not class 12

• Decent quantity and quality of midday meals in schools

• Move towards free education for SC/ST children up to class 12

• Transport or escort facilities for SC/ST students, especially girls

Hostels/residential

schools

• Hostels for SC/ST girls and boys at the block and district levels

• A residential school of JNV standard in every block for SC/ST students

• Separate schools for ST Paharia and Birhor students in Jharkhand, who are extreme-

ly socio-economically marginalised

Resource centres

• Greater access to vocational and technical education schemes/centres

• Education resource centre-cum-library in the villages in which students can study

and learn, even be provided with tuition.

• Block level resource centres should have SC/ST representatives

Extra-curricular

support

• Guidance and counselling on social issues such as child marriages and how to nego-

tiate social confl icts, as well as career guidance

• A special guidance counsellor for girls

• Karate and boxing training for students, especially girls

• Extra-curricular activities such as sports, music and art provided in all schools with

adequate equipment

• Monthly health checkups for all students

• Educational tours for secondary school students

• Ensure electricity in all SC/ST habitations and in schools (via generators if neces-

sary)

Participation

• Regular meetings should be organised between SC/ST parents and children with

Education Department offi cials in order to share on issues and plan on education

• Building better relationships between SC/ST parents and teachers

Monitoring

• Proper monitoring systems in schools to ensure regular, quality teaching takes place,

that teachers are not over-burdened with other non-teaching works, and that basic

facilities like toilets and drinking water are adequate and clean

• All education volunteers working with SC/ST communities should be properly

trained and regularly monitored in terms of their sensitivity towards these communi-

ties and their work

• Regular impact analysis of SC/ST educational schemes to ensure match to SC/ST

children’s needs

Grievance redress

• Specifi c intervention programmes to address discrimination in schools and ensure

SC/ST children are not made to do extra work in the schools like cleaning

• Special training for teachers and school management on issues of discrimination and

exclusion, equity and inclusion

• Grievance redress system in schools to deal with discrimination and other violations

of the right to education.

58

4.3 Developing a Comprehensive Framework for SC/ST Education

The study has shown that the Department for School Education and Literacy, MHRD as well as the education

departments in Bihar and Jharkhand currently do not have any comprehensive framework or planning perspec-

tive for SC/ST education, under which certain strategies could be prioritised through schemes and programmes

to directly benefi t these communities and their habitations. The education policy 1986/1992 merely talks of the

following measures as part of its focus on equalising the educational status of SCs/STs with others: incentives for

SC families to send children to school; entitlements; remedial coaching; recruitment of SC/ST teachers; hostels

and residential schools; school infrastructure in ST areas; teaching learning material in tribal languages; early

childhood, non-formal and adult education facilities in SC/ST areas; and curriculum review to ensure positive

representation of STs. The policy thus lists a series of measures without building them into a comprehensive

framework designed to address the different educational needs of SC/ST children; nor does the policy fi x any

priorities in terms of strategic interventions. Moreover, there is no focus on combating the discrimination Dalit and

Adivasi students face in schools, despite discrimination being a major issue shared in the consultations with these

students. In the states, by contrast, there are no offi cial government documents that map out a comprehensive

framework and strategies for SC/ST education. The education departments at all levels, thus, have failed to

conceptualise and concretise plans and strategies for closing the gap between SCs/STs and others in terms of

educational development, nor even to carry forward many of these measures mentioned in the National Educa-

tion Policy.

A comprehensive framework for ensuring Dalit and Adivasi children’s right to education ultimately should be

based on the expressed needs of Dalit and Adivasi children. The framework has to have the clear goal of equal-

ising the educational status of SC/ST children with others through quality education in a conducive learning

environment. It has to envision education for Dalit and Adivasi children as building the knowledge resources for

these children to be able to determine their own development and realise their human potential. It has to specifi -

cally equip these children with the capacity to aspire and make choices regarding access to higher education,

vocational education and/or employment.

Based on the consultations in Bihar and Jharkhand, this framework would encompass the following:

1. access to information – measures to ensure that Dalit and Adivasi children and families are made aware of

their educational rights and entitlements, in order for them to be able to access these rights and entitlements

as well as demand state accountability for the same.

2. academic support – measures to overcome the lesser educational resources among Dalit and Adivasi com-

munities, to provide a more supportive learning environment and appropriate teaching learning materials that

refl ect their cultures and contribution to the nation, and to ultimately equalise learning outcomes.

3. basic entitlements – measures to remove fi nancial barriers to accessing school education that often pre-

vent SC/ST children from being able to complete their school education.

4. hostels and residential schools – measures to ensure physical and fi nancial accessibility to education, and

to combat issues such as migration and physical security concerns.

5. resource centres – measures to ensure that wider resources are available outside the schools to support

SC/ST children in their learning and in access to vocational/technical education.

6. extra-curricular support – measures to encourage the creativity and potential of SC/ST children, and to

address social issues that impinge on their enjoyment of the right to education.

7. participation – measures to ensure that educational planning takes into account the specifi c needs of SC/

ST children in their different contexts.

8. monitoring – measures to ensure effective implementation of schemes and their regular review as regards

the continuing fi t to SC/ST children’s educational needs.

59

9. grievance redress – measures to ensure that discrimination and other educational rights violations against

SC/ST children in schools are effectively addressed and that students, teachers, schools, education volun-

teers and education offi cials are sanctioned for any discriminatory practices in education.

This framework must tie into the SCSP/TSP planning process, given that the plans are not fi nancial plans as such,

but rather plans for the achievement of educational targets in physical terms with respect to SC/ST children. The

framework must guide the prioritisation of schemes and programmes for SC/ST children, and also how both gen-

eral and SC/ST targeted education schemes are devised, funds earmarked under SCSP/TSP, and implemented

for the clearly traceable benefi t of SC/ST children.

4.4 Matching Policy, Budgets and Schemes to Needs

Taking into account the current gaps as well as educational needs of SC/ST children, and the above frame-

work for SC/ST education, the following recommendations are given in terms of (i) planning and implementation

changes that are required and (ii) a minimum basket of schemes that are required to ensure SC/ST children enjoy

their right to school education.

(I) PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF SCSP/TSP

Legislate the SCSP/TSP in order to make these Sub Plans an enforceable right with clear norms to guide

central and state level planning for SC/ST development. This should include a right to participation by SC/

ST communities in educational planning for SC/ST children, either through community representatives or

community-led civil society organisations.

The Department of School Education and Literacy should immediately appoint a nodal offi cer to oversee the

planning, coordination and monitoring of SCSP/TSP. This nodal offi cer should be supported by two consult-

ants, one on SCSP and one on TSP. Similarly, a nodal offi cer/s should be appointed each state government

department to perform the same functions with regard to the state Plan funds earmarked for SCSP/TSP, with

the equivalent support staff. These nodal offi cers should evaluate the implementation of the SCSP/TSP for

school education on an annual basis both in fi nancial and physical terms, and make public their reports.

A National SC Development Authority and National ST Development Authority should be established to

formulate and approve the national SCSP and TSP, including the approval of schemes and programmes ear-

marking funds under the SCSP/TSP from the different ministries/departments. Similar institutions should be

established at the state level with the same functions in terms of the state government planning and outlays

under the SCSP/TSP. At the district level, District SC and ST Development Authorities should be created to

ensure SC/ST participation in the planning and implementation processes for the SCSP/TSP.

Given that the focus on SCSP/TSP planning is still relatively new in the education departments at the central

and state levels, a standing committee should be created to monitor the process of institutionalisation of

concrete education planning and budgeting for SCs/STs.

There should be a Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Areas Sub Plan that plans out both targeted educational

programmes in scheduled areas as well as programmes to ensure benefi ts reach STs dispersed in all other

areas across the country.

Planning for the SCSP/TSP in terms of funds allocations across various schemes must be guided by a few

basic indicators, which should be detailed as follows: i) What specifi c benefi ts under the scheme will directly

fl ow to SCs/STs? ii) In what specifi c way does the scheme address a need of SC/ST individuals, families or

habitations? iii) In what specifi c ways will the scheme reduce the inequalities between SCs/STs and other

communities?

60

The following principles should be mandated in the earmarking of funds under SCSP/TSP:

1. Earmarking of funds in proportion to the SC/ST population

2. Physical targets – i.e. number of SC/ST benefi ciaries or SC/ST habitations or SC/ST institutions (where

not less than 75% are SCs/STs) – must be specifi ed for any funds allocations under SCSP/TSP

3. SCSP/TSP funds are non-divertible and non-lapsable

4. Scheme-wise allocations should follow the following guidelines:

SC/ST targeted benefi ciary-oriented schemes (e.g. scholarships for SC/ST students), where both

the number of benefi ciaries and fi nancial outlays can be clearly calculated, can be earmarked under

SCSP/TSP.

Area-based educational schemes, which meet the requirement of at least 40% SC or ST population

and minimum of 75% SC/ST benefi ciaries (e.g. building of residential school in 40% ST populated

area, with at least 75% admission reserved for SC/ST students), may be earmarked under SCSP/

TSP.

Where general educational schemes exist in which individual SC/ST benefi ciaries cannot be identi-

fi ed and allocations made accordingly – i.e. non-divisible schemes – add-on programmes (e.g.

equity innovation under RMSA) need to be devised under these schemes targeting SC/ST children

and that extra programme cost can be earmarked under SCSP/TSP.

Funds for general, non-divisible schemes (e.g. construction of schools in non-SC/ST populated ar-

eas) or schemes meant for specifi c purposes (e.g. for a school in Mongolia) that have no bearing on

the educational development of SCs/STs are not entitled to any earmarking under the SCSP/TSP.

New schemes should be developed specifi cally for SC/ST children if the outlay under SCSP/TSP

(on direct, divisible schemes and area-wise schemes) remains under-utilised.

Micro-planning from the community/panchayat level up must be made mandatory for SCSP/TSP and strictly

monitored. Spaces for participation by SC/ST community representatives must be developed at the district

levels, which could be facilitated by SC/ST civil society organisations.

The annual work plans and budgets of state governments for centrally sponsored schemes like SSA and

RMSA must contain data formats that allow for the collection of disaggregated SC/ST data.

There must be increasing convergence between departments dealing with education and the welfare of

SCs/STs at the national and state levels respectively as regards school education planning and schemes

targeting SCs/STs.

Pre-school education should be brought within the purview of education departments, so that strong link-

ages in the education system are formed from pre-schooling through to schooling and higher education. In

particular, anganwadis/balwadis created in every SC and ST habitation would support the enrolment and

access to pre-school education of SC/ST children, as the fi rst step towards promoting their enrolment in pri-

mary schools. In addition, separating early childhood care and education from one year of pre-schooling and

placing pre-school with primary education covered under the Right of All Children to Free and Compulsory

Education Act would enhance access to education for SC/ST girls in particular.

The SCSP/TSP must reach SCs/STs across the country, irrespective of their population concentration in

an area or their residence in their home states or as migrants. To this end, the Government of India should

institute two sets of schedules in every state; one for SCs and STs from the state, and another for migrant

SCs and STs.

The central and state governments should immediately institute a comprehensive review of all SC/ST edu-

cational schemes and programmes to assess their fi t to the current educational context and needs of SCs/

STs.

61

Equity innovation programmes for SC/ST children should be a mandatory part of every annual AWPB under

SSA and RMSA, following clear guidelines to establish innovation programmes that meet the specifi c needs

of SC/ST children in the particular district.

Both SSA and RMSA should have a separate programme for SC and ST teacher recruitment drive and

training of 2 teachers (one SC and one ST teacher) per block, totalling around 13,000 teachers across the

country. This programme would be entirely earmarked under SCSP/TSP. These teachers could also be ap-

pointed to the Block Resource Centres as resource support to specifi cally look into issues of discrimination

occurring against SC/ST students as well as teachers in their blocks, as well as to focus on inclusion activi-

ties to promote harmony and interactions among different social groups in the schools.

Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti must ensure the representation of SCs/STs in their committee, and explore pos-

sible programmes that could directly target SC/ST children in terms of facilitating access to or participation

in JNV schools.

A national-level awareness campaign should be instituted by the central and state governments on the

SCSP/TSP, in order to create awareness among the SC/ST communities of these Sub Plans, as well as

among the general public and government offi cials.

All education offi cials at the central, state and district levels should undergo mandatory orientation on the

SCSP/TSP objectives and guidelines for the planning process.

(II) PROPOSED BASKET OF SCHEMES

1 Scholarships: This is one of the direct benefi t schemes under the SCSP/TSP that is valued by both SC/ST

communities and children. It is assumed under the RtE Act that all schooling costs are borne by the state

and the family does not incur any expenses, much less opportunity costs. Analysing the actual costs, how-

ever, this is not found to be the case. SC/ST families do incur expenses, even aside from opportunity costs.

In this context, annual costs at the elementary level run up to Rs.3000 per child (without private tuition, which

is widely prevalent) and at the secondary and higher secondary level between Rs.5000 to 7000 per child

(without private tuition costs). Note that the BPL levels are calculated on the presumption that education and

healthcare are taken care of by the state. Recommendations on school scholarships thus are:

Enhance the per child annual scholarship amount to Rs.3000 at the elementary level (Classes 1-8) and

Rs.6000 at the secondary level (Classes 9-10).

While scholarships become mandatory for all SC/ST children, special conditions such as families with

single parents, or where the available schools are far away (e.g. as in Jharkhand where higher second-

ary schools are only available in the block headquarters) should allow for additional costs to be borne

by the state.

Scholarships should be made available to all children at the beginning of the year through smart cards

or other IT solutions, and not at the end of the academic year.

Scholarship amounts should be regularly reviewed and revised in keeping with salary revisions of teach-

ers, or cost indexing.

2 Residential Schools: Residential schools are an effective means of promoting and supporting SC/ST chil-

dren to access school education and have proved their relevance in many states, particularly the southern

states. This is not withstanding the improvements needed in the current Residential Schools programmes.

It is thus recommended that the state ensures there is one residential school each for SC girls, SC boys, ST

girls and ST boys at every block headquarters from classes 6-12. The object should be to assess the current

dropout rates in the block and provide Residential Schools in proportion so that these children do not drop

out due to constraints within their families or within the school system. The functioning of these Residential

Schools has to be also improved in a more transparent and accountable manner.

62

3. Block-level coaching centres: SC/ST students need information and support to access the next layer of

education, be it from elementary to secondary, or to higher education and professional education. At this

point in time, there is no such information, nor support, available. It is therefore recommended that career

guidance and coaching centres be set up in every block where SC/ST students can access information and

guidance to move to the next level of education. One of the main tasks of such a coaching centre would be

to run year-long coaching classes for SC/ST children who would like to enter into professional courses. The

proposed coaching centres should be of comparable quality to the best available in the market.

4. Community engagement: The SCSP/TSP should be used to enhance community participation in the plan-

ning and monitoring of SC/ST education schemes as part of the design of SCSP/TSP. In this regard, it is rec-

ommended that educated SCs/STs, particularly those in civil society organisations from these communities,

be engaged with on issues of education access and equity through a GO-NGO collaboration memorandum

between the state and civil society organisations. A budget allocation should be made for this process under

SCSP/TSP. This should be viewed not only as a process of participation, but also a process of promoting

engagement and empowerment of SC/ST communities and their organisations.

5. Anti-discrimination and inclusion: The need to create sensitivity and commitment to non-discrimination

among teachers and school administration is reiterated time and again. However, except for a MHRD advi-

sory in 2012, nothing exists so far in terms of concrete programmatic interventions in this regard. Hence, the

following programmes should be implemented in a phased manner in every school:

every teacher/school administrator at all levels should undergo a compulsory 3-day training, as part of

teacher training, on non-discrimination, equity and inclusion.

a public awareness campaign, similar to the Shiksha ka Haq Abhiyan, should be undertaken with ma-

terials and messages against discrimination in education.

a manual to address discrimination should be developed as well as a mandatory code of behaviour

for schools that specifi cally mandates non-discrimination, the elimination of corporal punishment and

prohibition of other physical or mental abuse of children.

A manual of innovative inclusion activities should be developed and inclusion actively promoted through

these innovative activities for all children in schools. The above-mentioned training for teachers should

include a component to train teachers on a basket of inclusion activities to be undertaken in schools as

part of assembly and sport time periods.

a grievance redress helpline should be established at the block level to address discrimination, harass-

ment, abuse and corporal punishment occurring in any schools, government, aided, private or special

category schools. This helpline would fall under the jurisdiction of the Block Resource Centres, linked

to concrete redress mechanisms. The Block Resource Centres could link with local NGOs to receive

support in monitoring discriminatory practices in schools and/or managing the helpline.

6. Summer coaching camps: Summer camps where additional coaching is given in English, Science, Maths,

computers, sports, arts and music is essential to enable SC/ST students. These summer camps should

cater to students entering into 6th class in the following academic year, up to students who have completed

9th class and will be entering into 10th class in the following academic year. Existing teachers within schools

should be encouraged through the payment of an additional amount to teach these classes.

7. Computer education and computers (general scheme for all): Computer education is an essential skill

today that equips students with skills that open up a number of employment opportunities. Hence, every 8th

class child should be provided with a basic computer and computer classes provided to all students from

8th class onwards. As this would be a general scheme applicable to all students, this scheme would not be

earmark funds under the SCSP/TSP.

63

Bibliography

Accountability Initiative & ASER, 2011. PAISA 2011: Do Schools Get their Money? New Delhi: AI & ASER.

Cabinet Sub-Committee on Scheduled Caste Sub-Plan (SCSP) and Tribal Sub-Plan (TSP), 2012. Draft Re-

port of the Cabinet Sub-Committee on Scheduled Caste Sub-Plan (SCSP) and Tribal Sub-Plan (TSP), sub-

mitted to the State Government of Andhra Pradesh, August 2012.

Centre for Budget and Governance Accountability, 2011. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Budgeting for Change

Series. New Delhi: CBGA.

Centre for Budget and Governance Accountability & UNICEF India, 2011. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. Budgeting

for Change Series, 2011. New Delhi: CBGA & UNICEF, pp.8-11. Utilisation data examined from 2005-06 to

2009-10.

Committee on the Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, 2007. 24th Report on Ministry of

Human Resource Development (Department of School Education and Literacy): Reservation in Services

including in Admission and Employment in Kendriya Vidyalayas and Navodaya Vidyalayas. New Delhi: Lok

Sabha Secretariat.

Comptroller Auditor General, 2010. Audit Report (Civil) Bihar 2009-10: Performance Audit of Human Re-

sources Development Department Secondary Education Programme (2005 to 2010). Patna: Government of

Bihar.

Comptroller Auditor General, 2007. Jharkhand Audit Report (Civil & Commercial) for the year ending 31

March 2007. New Delhi: CAG, Chapter 3.

Comptroller Auditor General, 2007. Performance Audit Report on ‘Educational Development of Scheduled

Castes and Scheduled Tribes.’ Report no. 14 of 2007. New Delhi: CAG.

Comptroller Auditor General, 2006. Audit Report (Civil and Commercial) for the year ended 31 March 2006.

New Delhi: CAG, Chapter 3.

Comptroller Auditor General, 2006. Audit Report (Civil) Bihar 2005-06: Performance Audit of Sarva Shiksha

Abhiyan. Patna: Government of Bihar.

Comptroller Auditor General, 2006. Audit Report (Civil) Bihar 2005-06: Performance Audit of State Welfare

Department educational schemes for SCs/STs. Patna: Government of Bihar.

Comptroller Auditor General of India, 2006. Performance Audit on Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. Report No. 15 of

2006. New Delhi: CAG.

Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan-NCDHR, 2013. Scheduled Caste Sub Plan & Tribal Sub Plan: Union Budget

Watch 2012-13 (with note for Union Budget 2013-14). New Delhi: DAAA-NCDHR.

Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan (DAAA)-NCDHR. Bihar budget analysis 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11. New

Delhi: DAAA-NCDHR.

Department of School Education and Literacy, 2012. Minutes of Conference of State Education Secretaries,

held on 4-6 January 2012. New Delhi: MHRD.

Department of SC/ST Welfare, 2012. Report on the Status of Backwardness among SCs and STs in Bihar;

Inadequate Representation of SCs and STs in Staffi ng of Government Services; and Overall Administrative

Effi ciency of Government Machinery in the light of Reservations in Government Services in Bihar. Patna:

Government of Bihar.

Department-Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Human Resource Development, 2012. ‘244th

Report on Demands for Grants 2012-13 of Department of School Education and Literacy’. Presented to

Rajya Sabha on 03.05.2012 and laid on table of Lok Sabha on 03.05.2012.

64

Finance Department, 2013. Bihar Budget 2013-14, Demand No. 21, Education Department: Plan Expendi-

ture Details. Patna: Government of Bihar.

Finance Department, 2013. Jharkhand Budget 2013-14, Demand Nos. 58 & 59, Department of Human

Resource Development: Plan Expenditure Details. Ranchi: Government of Jharkhand.

Finance Department, 2012. Bihar Budget 2012-13, Demand No. 21, Education Department: Plan Expendi-

ture Details. Patna: Government of Bihar.

Finance Department, 2012. Bihar Economic Survey 2011-12. Patna: Government of Bihar.

Finance Department, 2012. Jharkhand Budget 2012-13, Demand Nos. 58 & 59, Department of Human

Resource Development: Plan Expenditure Details. Ranchi: Government of Jharkhand.

Ghosh, Prabhat P., 2012. ‘Financing Elementary Education in Bihar’. Presentation at the Consultation on

Education Financing organised by the Council of Social Development, New Delhi on 27.02.2012.

Government of Bihar, 2011. Growth with Justice: Approach Paper to the 12th Five Year Plan, Executive

Summary. Patna: Government of Bihar.

Government of Jharkhand, 2012. National E-Governance Plan: School Education – Mission Mode Project.

Available at <<www.mhrd.nic.in>>, accessed 21.03.2013.

Institute of Social Sciences, 2003. Report on Impact of TSP implementation in Improving the Socio-Econom-

ic Condition of the Tribal People with Special Focus on Reduction of Poverty Levels covering the States of

Assam and Tamil Nadu. New Delhi: ISS.

Jha, Praveen & Parvati, P., 2009. Education for All: Mid-Decade Assessment: The Challenges of Public Fi-

nance. New Delhi: NUEPA.

Jharkhand Education Project Council, 2013. SSA Target vs. Achievement 2012-13 (up to 28.02.2013).

Ranchi: JEPC.

Mehrotra, Santosh, 2010. “The Right to Education and its Financing”. CBGA Budget Track, Vol. 7, Issues

2&3.

Menon, Sreelatha, 2013. ‘SC/ST funds increase, but Plan yet to reach Benefi ciaries’. The Business Stand-

ard, 02.03.2013.

Ministry of Finance, 2013. Union Budget 2013-14, Expenditure Budget Vol. 1, Statements 21 & 21A. New

Delhi: Government of India.

Ministry of Finance, 2013. Union Budget 2013-14, Expenditure Budget Vol. 1, Statement 22: Budget Provi-

sions for Schemes for the Welfare of Children. New Delhi: Government of India.

Ministry of Finance, 2012. Union Budget 2012-13, Expenditure Budget Vol. 1, Statements 21 & 21A. New

Delhi: Government of India.

Ministry of Finance, 2012. Economic Survey 2012-13. New Delhi: Government of India.

Ministry of Finance, 2011. Economic Survey 2011-12. New Delhi: Government of India.

Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2012. ‘Agenda Items for Meeting of Sub-Committee for Draft-

ing of Guidelines for Implementation of SCSP and TSP in Higher Education and School Education Sectors’.

Meeting held on 12.09.2012 in ICSSR, New Delhi.

Ministry of Human Resources Development, 2012. Promoting Innovation under Rashtriya Madhyamik Shik-

sha Abhiyan: Guidelines. New Delhi: MHRD.

Ministry of Human Resources Development, 2012. Analysis of Budgeted Expenditure on Education 2008-09

to 2010-11. New Delhi: MHRD.

65

Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2012. Selected Educational Statistics 2010-11. New Delhi: Gov-

ernment of India.

Ministry for Human Resource Development, 2011. Annual Report 2010-11. New Delhi: MHRD.

Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2011. SSA Framework for Implementation based on the Right to

Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. New Delhi: Government of India.

Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2010. Report of the Committee on Implementation of The Right

of Children to Free & Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and the Resultant Revamp of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan.

New Delhi: MHRD.

Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2010. Results of High School and Higher Secondary Examina-

tions, 2009. New Delhi: Government of India.

Ministry of Human Resource Development, 1998. National Policy on Education 1986 (as modifi ed in 1992).

New Delhi: Government of India.

Ministry of Tribal Affairs, undated. Overview of STs. Accessed from MTA website <<tribal.nic.in/writeeaddata/

mainlinkfi le/fi le722.pdf>>, accessed 01.07.2013.

Mohanty, Basant Kumar, 2012. ‘School survey ties primary scores to caste’. The Telegraph, 13.09.2012.

Narkar, Amit. 2011. Tribal Sub-Plan under the Eleventh Five Year Plan. Pune: National Centre for Advocacy

Studies.

Planning and Development Department, undated. Jharkhand: An Overview. Available at <<http://jharkhand.

gov.in/new_depts/pland/pland_fr.html>>, accessed 05.05.2013.

Planning and Development Department, 2013. Annual Plan Outlay 2013-14. Ranchi: Government of

Jharkhand.

Planning and Development Department, 2011. Approved Plan Outlay 2011-12. Ranchi: Government of

Jharkhand.

Planning Commission, 2012. 12th Five Year Plan, Vol. 3: Social Sector. New Delhi: Government of India.

Planning Commission, 2011. Mid Term Appraisal for Eleventh Five Year Plan 2007-2012. New Delhi: Govern-

ment of India.

Planning Commission, 2010. Taskforce to Review Guidelines on SCSP & TSP by Central Ministries/Depart-

ments. New Delhi: Government of India.

Planning Commission, 2006. Guidelines for Implementation of the Scheduled Castes Sub Plan. New Delhi:

Government of India.

Planning Commission, 2005. NSS 61st round (July 2004 - June 2005). New Delhi: Government of India.

Planning Commission, 2005. Report of Task Group on Development of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled

Tribes on Selected Agenda Items of the National Common Minimum Programme. New Delhi: Planning Com-

mission.

Prasad, Neha, 2011. A Study of Allocations and Implications under Tribal Sub Plan during Eleventh Five Year

Plan in Jharkhand. Ranchi: Life Education and Development Support.

Project Approval Board, 2012. Minutes of PAB meeting held on 21.05.2012: Costing Sheets for AWPB of

2012-13 – SSA Bihar, Jamui and Nalanda sheets.

About the author

Dr Jayshree Mangubhai is a human rights and development researcher and activist. She

focuses on policy research for use in advocacy and lobbying on Dalit and Adivasi rights,

especially the rights of women from these communities. She currently is the Research

Programme Director at the Centre for Social Equity and Inclusion.

Centre for Social Equity & Inclusion

Centre for Social Equity and Inclusion (CSEI) is a policy monitoring and re-

search organisation based in New Delhi, with a fi eld offi ce in Patna, Bihar.

Using the frame of equity and inclusion, CSEI focuses on promoting equal-

ity of opportunities, equitable resource allocations, and adequate capability

building among socially excluded communities in two focus areas of educa-

tion and employment/ entrepreneurship. CSEI thus undertakes collaborative research, piloting/

model-building on equity-inclusion programmes in education, training programmes on a rights-

based equity-inclusion framework, policy monitoring and advocacy. Committed to deepening

democracy, CSEI collaborates with a wide network of civil society organizations, networks, aca-

demics, professionals and human rights activists, in particular with civil society organizations led

by members of marginalized communities.

Swadhikar

Swadhikar is committed to the elimination of discrimination based on caste

and collaborates with various groups led by Dalit women and men activ-

ists, with support and solidarity from organizations, academics, individu-

als, people’s organizations and institutions throughout the country who are

committed to work to protect and promote human rights focusing on wom-

en and children from vulnerable communities.

It’s main aim is to strengthen the institutions delivering justice to Dalits and build peoples capac-

ity to access them as rights and entitlements. It focuses on women among the vulnerable sec-

tions and recognises that economic entitlements are as equally important as social justice where

SCs and other vulnerable communities are concerned. A group of Dalit and Adivasi Activists,

Students, Academics and Civil Society groups started Dalit Adivasi Shiksha Vikas Adhikar

Abhiyan SVADHIK in 2012 which aims to ensure Dalit and Adivasi student’s access to educa-

tional entitlements through relevant schemes free from discrimination or exclusion in all forms of

school and higher education- elementary, higher secondary, university, vocational, technical and

professional. The Campaign demands for a comprehensive entitlement policy for educational

development rights of Dalit and Adivasi students, which is based on equity and inclusion in the

society.

Contact Details: shikshavikasadhikar@gmail.com

SC & STSHIKSHAVIKASADHIKAR