(Report) Study of Special Package for Drought Mitigation and Integrated Development of Bundelkhand...

Final Report

Mid-term Quick Impact Evaluation Study of Special Package for Drought Mitigation and Integrated

Development of Bundelkhand Region

NABARD Consultancy Service Pvt. Ltd.

Prepared for National Rainfed Area Authority

Erstwhile, Planning Commission, now NITI Aayog

Govt. of India

by

ii

Quick Impact Evaluation Study of Special Package for Drought Mitigation and

Integrated Development of Bundelkhand Region

A Study Report prepared by NABARD Consultancy Services (NABCONS) Pvt Ltd.for the National Rainfed Area Authority, erstwhile Planning Commission, now NITI Aayog, Government of India, New Delhi Study team from NABARD Consultancy Services (P) Ltd. (NABCONS)

Overall guidance:

Shri K. Jindal, Chief General Manager & Chief Executive Officer, NABCONS

Shri. Arun. K. Tallur, Vice President, NABCONS

Dr. Sunil Kumar, Vice President, NABCONS

Principal Researcher and Team Leader

Dr. V. Mohandoss, NABCONS

Shri. Sadique Akhtar, NABCONS

Members:

Shri Tariq Shafiq, Consultant MI & Water Resources, NABCONS

Shri. Kuldeep Singh, Vice President, NABCONS

Shri. Jay Nigam, AGM, NABARD

Shri. Amit Kumar, Associate Consultant- Economist, NABCONS

iii

Disclaimer

This document has been prepared by NABARD Consultancy Services

(NABCONS) Pvt. Ltd for the National Rainfed Area Authority (NRAA),

Planning Commission, Government of India, New Delhi based on the

field study.

The views expressed in the report are advisory in nature. It does not

represent or reflect the policy or view of NABCONS/ National Bank for

Agriculture & Rural Development (NABARD). NABCONS/ NABARD

accepts no financial liability or any other liability whatsoever to anyone

in using this report.

iv

Acknowledgement

The Quick Impact Evaluation Study of Special Package for Drought Mitigation and Integrated Development of Bundelkhand Region was undertaken by NABARD Consultancy Services (P) Ltd. on behalf of National Rainfed Area Authority (NRAA), Planning Commission, Govt. of India covering the period of XI Five Year Plan, with a view to assessing the scheme’s impact and evaluating operational roles of various stakeholders, identifying constraints and bottlenecks and suggesting areas for improvement. NABCONS would like to thank to NRAA for their financial support to this study. We would also like to place on record our special gratitude to Ms Sindhushree Khullar, Secretary, Planning Commission for extending her support, cooperation and valuable suggestions during the study period. We also thank Dr. J S Samra, CEO, NRAA and Dr. K S Ramachandra, Member and Technical Expert, NRAA for their valuable inputs and contribution at every stage of the study. We appreciate their assistance in providing essential information and data on the package. The cooperation, support, valuable inputs and insights received from the Divisional Commissioners of Sagar, Jhansi, and Chitrakoot and other officials of district administration and implementing departments is gratefully acknowledged. The cooperation received from the Nodal Officers and Consultants of NABCONS and other Officers of UP & MP Regional Offices of NABARD in conducting the study, especially in data collection and compilation of preliminary study observations is also deeply acknowledged. The study could not have been completed successfully but for the best efforts put in by the staff attached to the Zonal Office of NABCONS, New Delhi who deserve our appreciation.

v

Table of Contents

LIST OF TABLES IX

LIST OF FIGURES XII

LIST OF ABBREVIATION XIII

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY XIV

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 29

BUNDELKHAND REGION 29

BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE 30

SECTORS OF FOCUS 31

SECTORAL ALLOCATION OF ACA FUNDS IN BUNDELKHAND REGION 31

RELEASES AND EXPENDITURE UNDER ACA ALLOCATION 32

RATIONALE, SCOPE AND TOR FOR THE STUDY 32

CHAPTER 2 APPROACH, METHODOLOGY, SAMPLING AND RESEARCH TOOLS 34

APPROACH 34

METHODOLOGY 35

SAMPLE 35

SAMPLE DISTRIBUTION 37

RESEARCH TOOLS 38

CHAPTER 3 WATER RESOURCES SECTOR – SURFACE WATER IRRIGATION 40

THE ALLOCATIONS AND FINANCIAL ACHIEVEMENTS 40

BRIEF OUTLINE OF SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS 41

OVER ALL PHYSICAL PROGRESS 42

ADDITIONAL IRRIGATION CAPACITY CREATED 42

MAJOR OBSERVATIONS DURING FIELD VISITS: MADHYA PRADESH 45

PHYSICAL PROGRESS OF SAMPLE PROJECTS 45

ANTICIPATED AND ACTUAL COST OF SAMPLE PROJECTS 49

IRRIGATION POTENTIAL OF SAMPLE PROJECTS (MADHYA PRADESH) 50

IMPACT OF THE IRRIGATION PROJECTS ON THE FARMERS 51

CHANGES IN CROPPING PATTERN 52

INCREASE IN PRODUCTIVITY AND FARM INCOME 52

MAJOR OBSERVATIONS FROM FIELD VISITS: UTTAR PRADESH 53

PHYSICAL PROGRESS OF SAMPLE PROJECTS 53

ANTICIPATED AND ACTUAL COST OF THE PROJECT 54

vi

IRRIGATION POTENTIAL OF SAMPLE PROJECTS (UTTAR PRADESH) 55

IMPACT OF THE IRRIGATION PROJECTS ON THE FARMERS 55

CHANGES IN CROPPING PATTERN 56

INCREASE IN PRODUCTIVITY AND FARM INCOME 56

CHAPTER 4 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 70

ACTIVITIES IN UTTAR PRADESH 70

NEW DUG WELLS, DUG WELL RENOVATION, RECHARGE AND HDPE PIPE 70

PHYSICAL AND FINANCIAL PROGRESS 70

PHYSICAL PROGRESS 70

FINANCIAL PROGRESS 72

COST OF THE PROJECT (NEW DUG WELLS/ BLAST WELLS, RENOVATION/DEEPENING OF DUG WELLS, DUG WELL

RECHARGE) 73

IMPACT OF THE DUG WELLS SCHEME IN UTTAR PRADESH 73

SOCIO ECONOMIC PROFILE OF SAMPLE RESPONDENTS 73

INCREASE IN IRRIGATED AREA- DISTRICT WISE 74

CROPPING PATTERN OVER THE YEAR IN KHARIF SEASON 74

CROPPING PATTERN OVER YEAR IN RABI SEASON 75

CHANGE IN PRODUCTIVITY OF CROPS 76

CHANGE IN CROPPING INTENSITY 79

DEEPENING OF DUG WELLS 80

IMPACT OF DEEPENING OF DUG WELLS ON GROUND WATER LEVEL 80

INCOME FROM AGRICULTURE 81

HDPE PIPE DISTRIBUTION 82

SUMMING UP 82

ACTIVITIES IN MADHYA PRADESH 83

ENERGIZATION OF KAPILDHARA WELLS THROUGH PUMP SET 83

THE PHYSICAL AND FINANCIAL ACHIEVEMENTS 83

MAJOR OBSERVATIONS FROM FIELD VISITS 83

CHARACTERISTIC OF WELLS & WATER AVAILABILITY DURING DIFFERENT SEASONS 84

IMPACT OF ENERGIZATION OF DUG WELLS 85

SUMMING UP 88

STOP DAMS IN MADHYA PRADESH 89

THE ALLOCATIONS AND FINANCIAL ACHIEVEMENTS 89

OVERALL PHYSICAL PROGRESS 89

MAJOR OBSERVATIONS FROM FIELD VISITS 90

IMPACT OF STOP DAMS 91

CHAPTER 5 AGRICULTURE MARKETS 93

FINANCIAL ALLOCATIONS AND PROGRESS 93


SAMPLE VISIT & MAJOR OBSERVATIONS DURING FIELD VISITS: MADHYA PRADESH 96

vii

SAMPLE VISIT & MAJOR OBSERVATIONS DURING FIELD VISITS: UTTAR PRADESH 96

IMPACT OF MARKET YARDS AND GODOWNS PROJECTS 98

RECOMMENDATION 99

CHAPTER 6 ANIMAL HUSBANDRY 100

THE ALLOCATION AND FINANCIAL ACHIEVEMENTS 100

BRIEF OUTLINE OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY PROJECTS 101


DISTRIBUTION OF GOAT UNITS 102

PERFORMANCE OF BREED IMPROVEMENT ACTIVITIES 104

MAJOR OBSERVATIONS DURING FIELD VISITS: UTTAR PRADESH 106

CHAPTER 7 DAIRY DEVELOPMENT 108

THE ALLOCATION AND FINANCIAL ACHIEVEMENTS 108

BRIEF OUTLINE OF DAIRY PROJECTS 108


MAJOR OBSERVATIONS FROM FIELD VISITS: UTTAR PRADESH 110

MAJOR OBSERVATIONS DURING FIELD VISITS: MADHYA PRADESH 113

RECOMMENDATION/ SUGGESTION 115

CHAPTER 8 FOREST & ENVIRONMENT 117

FINANCIAL ALLOCATIONS AND PROGRESS 117

CONVERGENCE OF FUNDS IN FOREST AND ENVIRONMENT ACTIVITIES 118


SAMPLE VISIT & MAJOR OBSERVATIONS FROM FIELD VISITS: MADHYA PRADESH 120

SAMPLE VISIT & MAJOR OBSERVATIONS FROM FIELD VISITS: UTTAR PRADESH 120

IMPACT OF THE PROJECT 121

RECOMMENDATION 122

CHAPTER 9 RURAL DRINKING WATER 123

FINANCIAL ALLOCATIONS AND FINANCIAL ACHIEVEMENTS 123

FINANCIAL PROGRESS 123


SAMPLE VISIT & MAJOR OBSERVATIONS FROM FIELD VISITS: MADHYA PRADESH 126

SAMPLE VISIT & MAJOR OBSERVATIONS FROM FIELD VISITS: UTTAR PRADESH 126

IMPACT OF THE PROJECT ON LIVES OF THE BENEFICIARIES 127

IMPACT IN MADHYA PRADESH- 127

IMPACT IN UTTAR PRADESH- 128

RECOMMENDATION 128

viii

CHAPTER 10 RELEVANCE/ ACCEPTANCE OF DIFFERENT INTERVENTION MADE UNDER THE

PACKAGE AS MEDIUM LONG TERM STRATEGIES FOR DROUGHT MITIGATION. 129

RAINFALL SITUATION AND IRRIGATION COVERAGE IN BUNDELKHAND 129

MEDIUM AND LONG TERM STRATEGIES FOR DROUGHT MITIGATION 131

FOCUS OF THE PACKAGE 132

LIKELY PHYSICAL IMPACT OF THE PACKAGE ON DROUGHT MITIGATION 132

CHAPTER 11 CONVERGENCE IN THE PACKAGE 134

LEVEL AND EXTENT OF CONVERGENCE OF VARIOUS CS/CSS SCHEMES, MGNREGA IN DIFFERENT COMPONENTS

AND THEIR IMPACT ON OVERALL PROGRESS OF THE PACKAGE. 134

CHAPTER 12 MONITORING OF THE PACKAGE 139

VISIT OF NRAA OFFICIALS 139

REVIEW MEETINGS WITH PRINCIPAL SECRETARIES AND SENIOR GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS OF THE IMPLEMENTING

DEPARTMENTS 140

ADVISORY MEETINGS AT DELHI 140

CHAPTER 13 RECOMMENDATION AND SUGGESTIONS 142

PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION DEFICIENCIES AND SUGGESTIONS 142

DELAYS IN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROJECTS 142

CONVERGENCE A HINDRANCE TO IMPLEMENTATION? 143

REVISITING PROJECTS INVOLVING SUPPORT FOR INDIVIDUALS 143

POST HARVEST GETTING EQUAL FOCUS AS DROUGHT MITIGATION 144

ABSENCE OF STRUCTURED MONITORING MECHANISM OF THE PACKAGE 144

ABSENCE OF STRUCTURED REVIEW BY ADVISORY BODY 144

INADEQUATE REPORTING SYSTEM TO NRAA 145

ABSENCE OF CONCURRENT / MIDTERM MONITORING AND EVALUATION MECHANISM BY THIRD PARTIES 145

ANNEXURE TOOLS USED DURING THE STUDY 146

ix

List of Tables

TABLE 1 DISTRICTS OF BUNDELKHAND REGION OF UP AND MP ................................................................................... 29

TABLE 2 FUNDING SOURCES FOR BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE ......................................................................................... 30

TABLE 3 ACA ALLOCATION, RELEASES AND EXPENDITURE IN MADHYA PRADESH .............................................................. 32

TABLE 4 ACA ALLOCATION, RELEASES AND EXPENDITURE IN UTTAR PRADESH ................................................................. 32

TABLE 5 SAMPLE DISTRIBUTION OF MADHYA PRADESH .............................................................................................. 37

TABLE 6 SAMPLE DISTRIBUTION OF UTTAR PRADESH .................................................................................................. 38

TABLE 7 ALLOCATION TO WATER RESOURCE PROJECT UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE ................................................... 40

TABLE 8 FINANCIAL ACHIEVEMENTS UNDER WATER RESOURCE PROJECT UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE ........................... 41

TABLE 9 SHARE OF DIFFERENT PROJECT UNDER SURFACE IRRIGATION IN TOTAL ACA ALLOCATIONS ...................................... 41

TABLE 10 PHYSICAL PROGRESS UNDER SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN MP & UP ........................................................ 42

TABLE 11 ACHIEVEMENT OF TARGETED IRRIGATED ACREAGE UNDER SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS.................................... 44

TABLE 12 DISTRICT WISE SAMPLE PROJECTS VISITED UNDER SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS ............................................... 45

TABLE 13 STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF SAMPLE MINOR IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN MP ................................................. 48

TABLE 14 SANCTIONED AND ACTUAL COST OF SAMPLE SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN MP ............................................ 49

TABLE 15 CCA, POTENTIAL CREATED AND AREA IRRIGATED DURING RABI FROM MAJOR/ MINOR IRRIGATION PROJECT IN MP .. 51

TABLE 16 AVERAGE LAND HOLDING AND CROPPING INTENSITY OF SAMPLE BENEFICIARIES OF SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN

MP ......................................................................................................................................................... 52

TABLE 17 KHARIF CROPPING PATTERN OF SAMPLE BENEFICIARIES OF SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN MP ......................... 52

TABLE 18 RABI CROPPING PATTERN OF SAMPLE BENEFICIARIES OF SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN MP ............................. 52

TABLE 19 PRODUCTIVITY OF MAJOR CROPS OF SAMPLE BENEFICIARIES OF SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN MP ................... 53

TABLE 20 SAMPLE SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS VISITED IN UP ................................................................................. 53

TABLE 21 SANCTIONED AND ACTUAL COST OF SAMPLE SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN UP ............................................ 54

TABLE 22 YEAR WISE IRRIGATION POTENTIAL OF SAMPLE SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN UP ......................................... 55

TABLE 23 AVERAGE LAND HOLDING AND CROPPING INTENSITY OF SAMPLE BENEFICIARIES OF SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN

UP .......................................................................................................................................................... 56

TABLE 24 KHARIF CROPPING PATTERN OF SAMPLE BENEFICIARIES OF SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN UP ......................... 56

TABLE 25 RABI CROPPING PATTERN OF SAMPLE BENEFICIARIES OF SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN UP ............................. 56

TABLE 26 PRODUCTIVITY OF MAJOR CROPS OF SAMPLE BENEFICIARIES OF SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN UP ................... 57

TABLE 27 AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD FARM INCOME OF SAMPLE BENEFICIARIES OF SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN UP ............ 57

TABLE 28: COMPONENT WISE PHYSICAL PROGRESS UNDER SAMPLE SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN MADHYA PRADESH ...... 59

TABLE 29: COMPONENT WISE PHYSICAL PROGRESS UNDER SAMPLE SURFACE IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN UTTAR PRADESH .......... 66

TABLE 30 DISTRICT WISE PHYSICAL TARGETS AND ACHIEVEMENTS OF DUG WELLS SCHEME UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE IN UP

.............................................................................................................................................................. 71

TABLE 31 DISTRICT WISE FINANCIAL TARGETS AND ACHIEVEMENTS OF DUG WELL SCHEME IN UP ........................................ 72

TABLE 32 COST INCURRED FOR CREATING AN ACRE OF IRRIGATED AREA BY NEW DUG WELLS IN UP ..................................... 73

TABLE 33 SOCIO ECONOMIC PROFILE OF SAMPLE DUG WELL BENEFICIARIES IN UP ........................................................... 73

TABLE 34 CHANGE IN STATUS OF RAINFED AND IRRIGATED ACREAGE DUE TO DUG WELL IN UP ........................................... 74

TABLE 35 CHANGE IN CROPPING PATTERN OF KHARIF CROPS AMONG DUG WELL BENEFICIARIES IN UP ............................... 75

TABLE 36 CHANGE IN CROPPING PATTERN OF RABI CROPS AMONG DUG WELL BENEFICIARIES IN UP.................................... 75

TABLE 37 CHANGE IN PRODUCTIVITY OF KHARIF CROPS (KG/ACRE) AMONG DUG WELL BENEFICIARIES IN UP ........................ 76

TABLE 38 CHANGE OF PRODUCTIVITY OF RABI CROP (KG/ACRE) AMONG DUG WELL BENEFICIARIES IN UP ........................... 78

TABLE 39 CHANGE IN CROPPING INTENSITY AMONG DUG WELL BENEFICIARIES IN UP ....................................................... 79

TABLE 40 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF DEEPENING OF DUG WELLS WITH RESPECT TO DEPTH IN UP ................................. 80

TABLE 41 PHYSICAL AND FINANCIAL PROGRESS UNDER PUMP SET DISTRIBUTION SCHEME OF BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE IN MP . 83

TABLE 42 SOCIO ECONOMIC PROFILE OF PUMP SET BENEFICIARIES IN MP ...................................................................... 84

TABLE 43 DIMENSION OF DUG WELLS AND DEPTH TO WATER LEVEL IN MP ..................................................................... 85

TABLE 44 IMPACT OF DUG WELLS AND PUMP SETS ON CROPPING PATTERN AND YIELDS: AGGREGATE OF SAMPLES IN MP ........ 86

x

TABLE 45 ACA ALLOCATION IN STOP DAMS UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE IN MP ...................................................... 89

TABLE 46 ALLOCATION, RELEASE AND EXPENDITURE IN STOP DAMS UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE IN MP ........................ 89

TABLE 47 PHYSICAL PROGRESS AND FINANCIAL EXPENDITURE OF STOP DAM IN MP UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE ............ 89

TABLE 48 SAMPLE STOP DAMS VISITED AND COST STRUCTURE ..................................................................................... 90

TABLE 49 NUMBER OF STOP DAMS AND HOUSEHOLD BENEFITTED FROM STOP DAMS UNDER BUNDELKHAND SPECIAL PACKAGE IN

MP ......................................................................................................................................................... 91

TABLE 50 IMPACT OF STOP DAMS ON WATER STORAGE, IRRIGATED AREA AND WATER LEVEL IN NEARBY DUG WELLS ............... 92

TABLE 51 ALLOCATION TO AGRICULTURE MARKET YARDS, GODOWN PROJECT UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE .................. 93

TABLE 52 FINANCIAL ACHIEVEMENTS UNDER STORAGE AND MARKET YARDS PROJECTS .................................................... 94

TABLE 53 PHYSICAL PROGRESS OF STORAGE AND MARKET YARD PROJECTS IN MP .......................................................... 94

TABLE 54 PHYSICAL PROGRESS UNDER MARKET YARDS AND STORAGE PROJECTS IN UP ................................................... 95

TABLE 55 SAMPLE MARKET YARDS/ STORAGE PROJECTS VISITED IN MP ....................................................................... 96

TABLE 56 SAMPLE PROJECTS OF MARKET YARDS/ RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE NUCLEI VISITED IN UP ..................................... 97

TABLE 57 STORAGE CAPACITY CREATED UNDER THE PACKAGE IN UP AND MP ................................................................ 98

TABLE 58 ALLOCATION IN ANIMAL HUSBANDRY PROJECT UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE ............................................ 100

TABLE 59 ALLOCATION, RELEASE AND EXPENDITURE IN ANIMAL HUSBANDRY SECTOR UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE ....... 100

TABLE 60 OVERALL PHYSICAL PROGRESS OF ACTIVITIES UNDER TAKEN IN ANIMAL HUSBANDRY SECTION IN UP & MP UNDER

BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE .......................................................................................................................... 101

TABLE 61 SOCIO ECONOMIC PROFILE OF GOATRY BENEFICIARIES ................................................................................ 103

TABLE 62 STATUS OF GOATRY UNITS AND IMPACT ON INCOME OF SAMPLE BENEFICIARIES ............................................... 103

TABLE 63 STATUS OF BREED IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE ............................................... 105

TABLE 64 ALLOCATION IN DAIRY SECTOR UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE .................................................................. 108

TABLE 65 ALLOCATION, RELEASE AND EXPENDITURE IN DAIRY SECTOR UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE............................ 108

TABLE 66 PHYSICAL PROGRESS UNDER DAIRY SECTOR IN UP & MP ........................................................................... 109

TABLE 67 STATUS AND IMPACT OF DAIRY DEVELOPMENT UNDER BUNDELKAHAND PACKAGE IN UP ................................... 111

TABLE 68 STATUS AND IMPACT OF DAIRY DEVELOPMENT IN MP ................................................................................ 114

TABLE 69 ALLOCATION AND EXPENDITURE IN ENVIRONMENT & FOREST SECTOR UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE .............. 117

TABLE 70 CONVERGENCE OF FUND IN FOREST AND ENVIRONMENT ACTIVITIES UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE ................. 118

TABLE 71 AREA TREATED AND STRUCTURE CREATED UNDER SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION ACTIVITIES BY FOREST DEPT. UNDER

THE BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE (MADHYA PRADESH) ........................................................................................ 119

TABLE 72 PHYSICAL PROGRESS IN UP UNDER SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION ACTIVITY IN UP ....................................... 119

TABLE 73 AREA TREATED BY FOREST DEPT UNDER THE BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE IN MP ................................................ 120

TABLE 74 AREA TREATED BY FOREST DEPT. UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE IN UP ...................................................... 121

TABLE 75 ALLOCATION, RELEASES AND EXPENDITURE IN DRINKING WATER PROJECTS UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE ....... 123

TABLE 76 DISTRICT WISE FINANCIAL ALLOCATION AND UTILIZATION OF FUND IN DRINKING WATER PROJECTS IN MP UNDER

BUNDELKHAND SPECIAL PACKAGE. .............................................................................................................. 124

TABLE 77 DISTRICT WISE FINANCIAL ALLOCATION AND UTILIZATION IN DRINKING WATER SCHEME UNDER BUNDLKHAND

PACKAGE IN UP ....................................................................................................................................... 124

TABLE 78 PHYSICAL PROGRESS UNDER RURAL DRINKING WATER SCHEME PROJECTS IN MP .............................................. 125

TABLE 79 PHYSICAL PROGRESS UNDER RURAL DRINKING WATER SCHEME UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE IN UP................ 125

TABLE 80 TOTAL NUMBER OF SCHEMES AND SAMPLE PROJECTS UNDER RURAL DRINKING WATER SCHEMES VISITED IN MP .... 126

TABLE 81 TOTAL NUMBER OF SCHEMES AND SAMPLE PROJECTS UNDER RURAL DRINKING WATER PROJECT VISITED IN UP ...... 127

TABLE 82 NET SOWN AREA AND IRRIGATED AREA (000 HA) IN BUNDELKHAND REGION .................................................. 130

TABLE 83 MEDIUM/LONG TERM STRATEGIES DRAWN UNDER THE BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE ............................................ 131

TABLE 84 ANTICIPATED IMPACT OF THE BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE .............................................................................. 133

TABLE 85 FUND CONVERGENCE UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE (RS. CRORE) ............................................................ 134

TABLE 86 RELEASE OF FUNDS FROM DIFFERENT SOURCES UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE ............................................. 135

TABLE 87 PHYSICAL PROGRESS OF ACTIVITIES INVOLVING CONVERGENCE OF MGNREGA FUNDS IN UP ............................ 135

TABLE 88 PHYSICAL PROGRESS OF ACTIVITIES INVOLVING CONVERGENCE OF MGNREGA FUNDS IN MP ........................... 136

xi

TABLE 89 VISIT OF TECHNICAL OFFICERS OF NRAA TO PROJECT SITES ......................................................................... 139

TABLE 90 VISIT OF CEO, NRAA TO THE REGION ..................................................................................................... 139

xii

List of Figures

FIGURE 1 FUND ALLOCATION UNDER BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE .................................................................................... 31

FIGURE 2 SECTORAL SHARE UNDER ACA COMPONENT OF BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE ........................................................ 31

FIGURE 3 OVERALL CHANGE IN PRODUCTIVITY OF KHARIF CROP AMONG DUG WELL BENEFICIARIES IN UP ............................ 77

FIGURE 4 OVERALL CHANGE IN PRODUCTIVITY OF WHEAT AND GRAM CROPS AMONG DUG WELL BENEFICIARIES IN UP ........... 78

FIGURE 5 OVERALL CHANGE IN PRODUCTIVITY OF MUSTARD, PEAS, ONION AND TOMATO AMONG DUG WELL BENEFICIARIES IN

UP .......................................................................................................................................................... 79

FIGURE 6 IMPACT OF DEEPENING OF DUG WELLS ON WATER COLUMN IN UP .................................................................. 80

FIGURE 7 IMPACT OF DEEPENING OF DUG WELL ON CHANGE IN IRRIGATED ACREAGE IN UP................................................ 81

FIGURE 8 CHANGE IN FARM INCOME DUE TO ENHANCED WATER AVAILABILTIY AMONG DUG WELL BENEFICIARIES ................... 81

FIGURE 9 OVERALL CHANGE IN PRODUCTIVITY OF KHARIF AND RABI CROPS DUE TO DUG WELLS AND PUMP SET IN MP ........... 87

FIGURE 10 CONVERGENCE OF FUNDS FROM DIFFERENT SOURCES UNDER FOREST AND ENVIRONMENT ACTIVITIES UNDER THE

BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE .......................................................................................................................... 118

FIGURE 11 NORMAL ANNUAL RAINFALL (MM) IN BUNDELKHAND DISTRICTS ................................................................. 129

FIGURE 12 SHORTFALL IN RAINFALL IN BUNDELKHAND REGION ................................................................................. 130

FIGURE 13: SHARE OF IRRIGATION AND WATERSHED PROGRAMMES IN BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE ...................................... 132

FIGURE 14 SHARE OF ACA AND NON ACA FUND IN BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE ............................................................. 135

FIGURE 15 MEETINGS HELD WITH SENIOR OFFICIALS OF STATE GOVERNMENTS AT STATE LEVEL. ....................................... 141

FIGURE 16 ADVISORY MEETINGS HELD AT NEW DELHI ............................................................................................. 141

xiii

List of Abbreviation

ACA Additional Central Assistance

AH Animal Husbandry

AI Artificial Insemination

APL Above Poverty Line

BAIF Bhartiya Agro Industries Foundation

BMC Bulk Milk Coolers

BPL Below Poverty Line

BRGF Backward Rural Grant Fund

CAD Command Area Development

CCA Culturable Command Area

CEO Chief Executive Officer

CS Central Sector Scheme

CSS Centrally Sponsored Schemes

CUMEC Cubic meter per second

CUSEC Cubic foot per second

DCS Dairy Cooperative Society

FCI Food Corporation of India

FGD Focused Group Discussion

GAP Good Agriculture Practice

HDPE High Density Poly Ethylene

IWMP Integrated Watershed Management Programme

LBC Left Bank Canal

LPCD Liter Per Capita Per Day

MARKFED Marketing Federation Limited

MGNREGA Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act

MI Minor Irrigation

MIS Management Information System

MP Madhya Pradesh

MT Metric Tonnes

MY Market Yards

NGO Non Governmental Organizations

NRAA National Rainfed Area Authority

PACS Primary Agriculture Cooperative Societies

PCDF Pradeshik Cooperative Dairy Federation

RBC Right Bank Canal

RIN Rural Infrastructure Nuclei

RKVY Rashtriya Krishi Vigyan Yojana

RRR Restoration Rehabilitation and Remodelling

SC Scheduled Castes

SD Stop Dam

ST Scheduled Tribes

SWC State Warehousing Corporation

UP Uttar Pradesh

WUA Water User Association

xiv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Backgrounder to the study

Bundelkhand Package aimed at mitigation of progressively increasing drought by inclusive

integrated development with investment portfolio of Rs. 7,466 crore, consisting of 49% (Rs.

3650 crore) Additional Central Assistance and 51% Central Sector and Centrally Sponsored

Scheme. The package commenced from 2009-10. Mid-term impact was evaluated by

NABCONS by well designed methodology and sampling technique with rationale of assessing

the acceptance of such a large program in targeted geographies and the relevance of

medium and long term drought mitigation strategies. The Quick Impact Evaluation Study

covered all the activities/ intervention in all the seven sectors: Water Resource, Watershed

Management, Environment and Forest, Agriculture, Dairy, Animal Husbandry and Rural

Drinking Water Supply. The sample projects for the study were drawn from all the sectors /

activities across all the 13 districts of Bundelkhand region. In all, a total of 256 site

inspections/ FGDs and 1965 household surveys were conducted. This report presents the

findings of the quick impact evaluation study.

The executive summary highlights the findings and views on essential aspects of the package

viz.

Conception of the package especially for drought mitigation strategies

Implementation of the package by the constituent states

Release of funds and convergence related issues

Monitoring the implementation of the package / projects

Impact assessment

Recommendations for future guidance in planning, implementation and monitoring

Conception of the package especially drought mitigation strategies

Bundelkhand region falls under rainfed farming areas with more than 750 mm of annual

normal rainfall and the soil moisture situation is better. The irrigated area averaged 45–

46% of the net sown area. However continuous shortfall in rainfall for 4 years prior to

formulation of the package made the region drought affected. The shortfall increased from

2004-05 to 2007-08. The recurring drought situation sparked the need for implementation

of a drought mitigation package in Bundelkhand region.

The total allocation under Bundelkhand package aggregated Rs 7266 crore (Rs 3860 crore in

Madhya Pradesh and Rs 3606 crore in UP). Within the package, the ACA allocation was to

the extent of Rs 3649 crore: Rs 1953 crore in MP and Rs 1696 crore in UP. The total fund

requirement was arrived at on the basis of projects suggested by the two state governments

thus signalling need based assessment.

Increasing the irrigated area through major, medium and minor irrigation projects and

increasing the soil moisture regime through watershed development constituted a major

portion of the package allocation and ACA allocation. About two thirds of the total

Bundelkhand package and 50 to 61% of the ACA allocation were earmarked for irrigation

and watershed development programmes. The IWMP funds were converged with ACA funds

xv

for integrated watershed management of arable lands. Thus the package has fully focussed

on the drought mitigation activities.

Overall the package when fully implemented would result in increasing the irrigated acreage

in the region by 4.23 lakh ha; 2.15 lakh ha in MP and 2.08 lakh ha in UP. This works out to

about 26% of the irrigated area in MP prior to the project and 25% in UP. Thus the additions

would be substantial. The irrigation coverage of the net sown area would increase from 45-

46% to 56% in either states and in the region.

The watershed management activities in arable lands would enhance the moisture regime

by about 4 lakh ha in MP and 7 lakh ha in UP constituting 22% and 38% of the net sown area

in the respective states. Besides, the treatment of forest lands would also enhance the soil

moisture regime in forest lands leading to increased vegetation. Thus overall, it can be

concluded that the package comprehensively addressed the issue of drought mitigation. On

completion of all the projects and the assets well maintained, the package would transform

the livelihood of the people in the region

While drought proofing was the focus of the package, other complementary activities like

postharvest management (market yards and storage godowns), livelihood improvement

through livestock related activities (establishment of milk societies and Livestock

Development Centres, income generation through goats and murrah buffaloes etc.,

mitigating the drinking water stress through drinking water supply project etc., were also

given due importance. Thus the package was well conceived for the desired objective in the

first phase.

Implementation of the package

The states right earnestly started implementing the projects sanctioned under the

Bundelkhand package from 2010-11 onwards once the first instalment of 50% ACA was

released by end March 2010. The projects were implemented by the respective line

departments in the states. No additional staffs were placed in the respective departments for

implementing the package but the existing staffs were geared up to complete the projects in

a time bound manner. Divisional Commissioners were made in charge of the package

implementation and a constant review of the implementation of the programme was made.

In the entire package envisaged implementation of a large number of projects under

different sectors and activities. The sectoral discussions on the implementation of the ACA

funded projects are presented below:

Surface Irrigation Projects

Development of water resources is the major activity. The surface water resources were to

be developed by the various implementing department, especially the irrigation department

and ground water resources are to be judiciously exploited by individual farmers. While

overall, 24 to 25% of the ACA allocation has been earmarked for development of water

resources in either state, the composition varied widely. In Madhya Pradesh, surface

irrigation development to be carried out by state government departments had a share of

about 90% in the ACA allocation for this sector and in UP individually implemented projects

and departmentally implemented projects have more or less an equal share.

xvi

The allocation to surface irrigation projects in MP was Rs 881 crore (45% 0f ACA allocation)

against which Rs 869 crore has been released and Rs 796 crore expended. The allocation to

surface irrigation projects in UP was Rs 410 crore against which Rs 400 crore has been

released and Rs 367 crore expended. In Madhya Pradesh, the surface irrigation projects

comprised of Rajghat command area development projects, Beriyarpur and Singhpur

irrigation projects, completion of incomplete minor irrigation projects, new minor irrigation

projects and RRR of water bodies. In UP, Rajghat command area development projects, RRR

of water bodies, Betwa Gursarai canal system and few miscellaneous projects are

implemented. As high as 90% of the total allocation in MP was towards creating additional

irrigated area while in UP, a larger share was allotted to restoring water bodies (71%)

indicating restoration of lost irrigation capacity. This highlights the need for proper

maintenance of the created irrigation potential through adequate budgetary support.

In general, the proportion of incomplete projects is more in UP as compared to MP. These

incomplete projects are in various stages of implementation and they are likely to be

completed soon. Based on field survey, the major reason for delays in completion of the

projects was due to land acquisition in MP. In UP as most of the projects are renovation /

modernisation / lining of existing canals / water bodies projects no land acquisition

problems were encountered. Despite no hurdles in land acquisition, delays were seen in

completion of the projects due to reasons delays or no release of funds from CS or CSS

shemes, and less period for renovation and lining works.

Most of the projects have been completed / likely to be completed within the sanctioned

cost some with considerably reduced costs, while only in respect of three projects there was

cost overrun. As long as the total expenditure under all the projects under the package is

within the sanctioned cost, the cost overrun may not hinder completion of all projects within

the sanctioned package amount.

Dug Wells (New / Deepening / Recharge) and Distribution of HDPE pipes in UP

A total of Rs 400 crore constituting 24% of the ACA allocations were earmarked for the

above activities. The amount released was Rs 236 crore (59%), against which Rs 168 crore

has been expended. The low level of financial achievement was due to several

implementation problems faced at the field level. The total targeted new dug well/blast

wells under the package for the phase-I was 8,834 against which 4,094 are reportedly

completed, which is 46% of the total target dug wells. The convergence with MGNREGA

Scheme has resulted in considerable delays in completion of work and many dug wells are

still incomplete. Cases of collapse were also reported because the wells were not completed

in time as the fund from MGNREGA was not released in time.

Under Renovation/Deepening of Dug Wells and Blast wells, the progress is not at all

satisfactory as only 13% of the targeted deepening have taken place. In Jalaun, Hamirpur

and Banda districts, activity of deepening was dropped due its impracticability. Similarly

under dug well recharge programme, the achievements were only 21% of the targets and

whatever has been completed, the utility of these recharge pits is in question as the

infiltration rate is almost negligible. The HDPE pipe distribution programme was more than

achieved, however quite a good numbers of farmers covered under the activity are well off.

xvii

Energisation of Dug Wells in Madhya Pradesh

An allocation of Rs 80 crore constituting 4% of the ACA allocations to MP was made under

the package for energisation of dug wells (constructed under MNREGA). Against this, Rs 76

crore has been has been released and Rs 60 crore has been expended. Against the total of

40000 targeted wells, 36826 wells have reportedly been constructed and energised. It is

remarkable that a programme in which MNREGA was converged, had taken off very well in

the state due to the excellent coordination between the district administration and the

implementing department.

Stop Dams in Madhya Pradesh

Stop dams are constructed under the Bundelkhand package in the state of Madhya Pradesh

to enhance the irrigation facilities and water table. The allocation to this activity in MP was

Rs 132.48 crore constituting 6.63% of the ACA allocation to the state. As against the above

allocations, the releases so far and the expenditure incurred were Rs 90 crore and 76.99

crore respectively. Out of a total of 352 projects to be implemented only 218 projects have

been completed. Eight projects are yet to be started. Inaccessibility of sites and technical

difficulties in locating appropriate site for the stop dams are reported to be the reasons for

slow progress.

Forests and Environment

Funding under environment and forest showcased a convergence of ACA, CS and MGNREGA.

The total allocation was Rs 314 crore, of which MP had a share of Rs 242 crore and UP Rs 72

crore. ACA funds and MNREGA funds are the two major sources for the environment and

forestry component of the package. While ACA funds have been released in full, the releases

under MNREGA was not commensurate especially in MP where only 6.63% of MNREGA

funds have been released. Forest department in Bundelkhand region have undertaken many

activities; Contour Bunding, Earthen Check Dam, Deepening of ponds etc. to restore the lost

moisture of the land and improve the ground water level. Madhya Pradesh has reported that

the Forest department was able to achieve their targets in the stipulated period of time.

However, in terms of treatment of forest area for soil and moisture preservation, despite

95% completion of the envisaged structures, only 92554.83 hectare of land as against the

targeted 2 lakh hectares could be treated.

In case of Uttar Pradesh, it has been reported that 100% of the work has been completed by

the forest department and the targeted 60000 ha have been treated. The ACA releases

exceeded the allocations and this helped in completing the targeted acreage in UP.

Animal Husbandry Sector

Animal Husbandry sector accounted for about 2% of the total ACA budget allocated to

Bundelkhand region. The package supported the distribution of goats and Murrah buffalo to

individual farmers, establishment of Artificial Insemination Centres in Collaboration with

NGO (BAIF), establishment of fodder banks etc.

In MP, 72% of the targeted Murrah buffaloes were distributed while the 99% have been

distributed in Uttar Pradesh. The sample survey revealed that the services provided by these

animals were found to be satisfactory in both the states.

xviii

Similarly, 96% of the targeted goats have been distributed in Uttar Pradesh, while 65% have

been distributed in Madhya Pradesh. There is a requirement of contribution by the

beneficiaries to the extent of 20-25% of the cost of the animals as margin money in MP. Thus

beneficiary selection has been rigorous in MP which may be one of the reasons for

underachievement of targets. At the same time, this contribution ensured that the animals

are properly maintained in MP. In its absence the beneficiaries in UP have not maintained

the animals properly. Besides high mortality of goats was reported in UP due to sudden

outbreak of diseases , poor quality of animal supplied, insufficient quarantine practices, non-

suitability of Barbari breed in the climatic conditions etc., may be another reason for high

mortality.

All the targeted three fodder banks in MP have been completed and operations have also

started. In UP the operations are yet to commence. The fodder stored in fodder banks in MP

are currently used in cattle breeding farms. The impact is yet to be felt among the dairy

community and farmers.

All the Livestock Development Centres (LDCs) which are to be operated by BAIF have been

set up covering all the districts falling under Bundelkhand region. A total of 230 centres have

been set up in 13 districts of Bundelkhand region from the package.

Dairy Sector

Dairy sector accounted for about 1% of the total ACA budget allocated to Bundelkhand

region. In Madhya Pradesh, the major activities undertaken in package are Organization/

revival of 500 Dairy Cooperative Societies, establishment of 09 Bulk Milk Coolers,

strengthening of milk processing plant at Sagar, procurement of milk and marketing. In

Uttar Pradesh, the activities under taken were organization/ revival of 560 Dairy

Cooperative Societies and their registration, technical investments in improved husbandry

practices, subsiding transportation cost of milk , milk processing plant at Jhansi,

strengthening and upgradation of infrastructure at Chitrakoot and Jalaun district was also

undertaken in the package. The progress reported by both the states is almost 100% against

the targets.

The dairy sector in Madhya Pradesh has shown an impressive progress since the inception

of the package. The funds have been fully utilized and infrastructures have been fully

created and functional. All the established societies are functional. The milk procurement

targets have been fully achieved and the functioning of the societies is impressive. The

prices realised by the farmers are competitive.

In Uttar Pradesh however underutilisation of milk processing capacities, non-functional

cooperative societies, idling of assets created, nonaccrual of any additional benefits to the

milk producers due to the interventions etc., are observed.

Agricultural Market Yard and Godowns projects

Agriculture sector mainly covering market yards and godowns projects accounted for about

35 % of the total ACA budget allocated to Bundelkhand region. Out of total allocation of

Rs.1268 crore, the allocation made to Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh was Rs. 574.50

crore and Rs. 694 crore respectively. Of the total allocations for this sector, an estimated

40% was towards creation of additional storage capacity and the balance was towards

xix

erection of auction platforms, construction of internal roads within the mandi area, farmers’

facilitation centres, traders facilitation centres and other supporting infrastructure.

As against the allocation, 100% releases were made and 72% expenses are reportedly made

by the Implementing Departments in MP. In UP, against the allocation of Rs 694 crore, only

Rs. 320 crore was released and the utilisation was 100% of the releases.

In Madhya Pradesh, the state implemented 27 schemes relate to 27 PACS each creating 3000

MT of storage capacity and 67 schemes relate to creation of 110 market yards and godowns.

The three major agencies involved in marketing and storage of agricultural inputs and

outputs in MP viz., the MP State Warehousing and Logistics Corporation Ltd., MP State

Mandi Board and MARKFED implemented these projects in MP. . In all, the projects are

expected to create an additional storage capacity of 6.40 lakh MT besides auction platforms,

construction if internal roads within the mandi area, farmers’ facilitation centre traders’

facilitation centres and other supporting infrastructure.

In Madhya Pradesh, 71% of the projects implemented under the head “Construction of

warehouse & marketing infrastructure facility” were found to be completed whereas 62% of

the projects implemented under the head “Development of mini markets run by PACs” were

found to be completed. Few of the projects have already started functioning. Storage

godown created under the package was used by MARKFED and FCI to store the wheat that

had been procured during the month of May 2014. The physical progress was quite

satisfactory

In Uttar Pradesh, the plan envisaged construction of 7 Specialised mandi yards at the seven

district headquarters of the 7 districts of Bundelkhand region in UP and 168 numbers of

Rural Infrastructure Nuclei at sub district level. Each RIN will have 500 MT capacities of

storage godowns along with auction platform, 5 shops, farmers facilitation centres etc. The

Specialised Market yards will have 20000 MT of godowns capacity each apart from auction

platforms, shops etc., on a larger scale.

Delays in administrative approvals and site location for the special mandi yards, in the first

place, resulted in delayed commencement of work and as on date of visit work in respect of

one yard was yet to commence while in respect of others only 20 to 38% of the work has

been completed. Similarly in case of RIN programme, only 14.4% of 138 sanctioned projects

were completed in case of RIN commencement of works for these yards; even the completed

projects are non-functional reportedly due to difficult site location, lack of understanding

among the stakeholders as to the utility of these RINs. A considerable delay in the

construction work was observed in all the districts of Uttar Pradesh. Deadlines were missed

by most of the contractors to whom the work was assigned through an open tender process.

Overall, the special mandi yards / RIN programme in UP has not been implemented

satisfactorily.

Rural Drinking Water projects

A total of Rs. 195.0724 crore (5.34% of ACA allocation) has been sanctioned under ACA for

the Bundelkhand region. In MP about 96.4% of the sanctioned funds (Rs 103 crore) have

been released of which 92.8% of the funds were utilized to create the stated infrastructure.

In UP however, only 69.7% of the total allocation has been received of which 89.3% of the

funds were utilized to create the stated infrastructure.

xx

Piped drinking water scheme and Installation of hand pumps were two activities

undertaken under the package to provide clean drinking water to people living in

Bundelkhand. Madhya Pradesh showcased a number of pipelined projects while in UP, hand

pumps were the major intervention followed by pipelined drinking water. It was observed

that 70% of the sanctioned projects in the first phase of the package were completed in

Madhya Pradesh. In UP while the piped drinking water schemes which were fewer in

number registered a slow progress, the state could achieve 100 % of the targets in

installation of hand pumps.

Funds Flow and Convergence

The ACA allocation under Bundelkhand package aggregated to Rs 1953 crore in Madhya

Pradesh and Rs 1696 crore in UP. Against this the releases till 31 March 2013, the end date

for Phase I amounted to Rs 1880 crore to the state of MP and Rs 1212 crore to UP. Thus

there was a large gap in release of ACA allocated funds to the state of UP as the end of Phase

I. The shortfall was in Agriculture Sector (Rs 473 crore) under which the state is to create

infrastructure for market yards and RIN. Generally the ACA component has been designed to

be released in two stages, the first stage being the advance which are normally 50% of the

allocation and the balance as and when the advance amount gets exhausted and UC

submitted. By and large the states expressed satisfaction in the release of ACA funds and if

the works are not progressing as per schedule it was on account of factors other than release

of funds. The released amounts have been utilized to an extent of 82% and 83% respectively

in MP and UP. The sector wise / date wise release of funds to MP is summarized and placed

in Exhibit 1 and that for UP in Exhibit 2 (Page- 137 &138) .

The Bundelkhand package envisaged convergence of funds from different sources for

enhancing resources availability and ensuring complementarities of activities. Of the total

package amount of Rs 7466 crore, about 3649 crore amounting to 48% was the ACA

exclusively provided for the Bundelkhand region and the balance was to be sourced from

other CS / CSS schemes, MGNREGA and BRGF / RKVY in that order. State government

contribution to the package as per CS/CSS norms was a minor component. Beneficiary’s

contribution was envisaged in individual beneficiary oriented projects like dug wells, pump

sets, etc. On the whole a more than 50% of the resources for implementation of the package

have to be sourced from outside the ACA. The biggest advantage of ACA funding was that it

accelerated the pace of implementation of identified long pending projects due to smooth

flow of funds and targeted programme period deadline.

Under ACA as also the CS, the flow of funds is smooth in the sense that 25 - 50% of the funds

are placed in advance with the states and further flow is ensured once the benchmarks set

for utilisation is achieved. The ACA funds and the funds under CS /CSS schemes and RKVY /

BRGF are routed through the consolidated funds of the respective states. As in the case of

ACA funds no problems were expressed by the states in availing the CS / CSS funds.

However the MGNREGA funds are with the district administration and the funds flow is

contingent upon completion of certain designated tasks by the rural people. By its very

nature the activities under MGNREGA are taken up by rural households in their respective

villages while the activities supported by ACA / CS / CSS schemes are undertaken by the line

departments under the package. The outcome and implementation of the package is very

much dependent on the flow of funds from MGNREGA sources.

xxi

In Uttar Pradesh, MNREGA funds were to be used in activities like earth works under lining

of canal projects, renovation of dug wells and tanks, watershed management activities in

forest areas. The slow release of funds from MNREGA to some extent has affected the

progress of the activities. In MP the involvement of MNREGA funds in Forests and

Environment sector has affected the progress. At the same time in MP the involvement of

MNREGA resources do not appear to have affected the progress of implementation of the

energisation of Kapildhara programme under which wells are constructed. A better

coordination between various departments would have helped achieve the satisfactory

position in respect of this activity.

Overall while convergence is good as it enhances the availability of funds from different

sources in a focussed manner to targeted sectors /activities, involving MGNREGA funds in

projects with specific time frame may hamper implementation in a smooth manner. Further

MNREGA works are typically non skilled, while majority of the activities contemplated

involve skilled labour. Therefore, it is suggested that MNREGA funds need not be dovetailed

with other programmes of GoI. Where such convergence becomes essential, the state should

ensure better coordination between the implementing departments.

Monitoring the implementation of the package

The monitoring of the implementation of the package at Government of India level is done as

under:

Regular visit of technical officers of NRAA

Visit by CEO of NRAA to the states for technical monitoring

Review meeting with Planning Secretary and Senior Officials of the State Government

by NRAA CEO

Meetings of Advisory Body for the Package at Planning Commission

At the state level, the state governments are required to monitor the projects as per their

internal guidelines and NRAA has not prescribed any structured monitoring of the projects

being implemented by the state departments.

In the guidelines relating to the implementation of the package, no structured monitoring

studies / visits had been suggested to the state governments; nor has structured review of

the progress of the package been envisaged both at the state level and NRAA level. While

discussions with the state authorities revealed that they have frequent meetings /

interactions with the implementing departments, it is felt that this has not been effective

especially in UP as could be seen from the delays in project execution; besides proper post

project follow up was lacking especially in diary projects in Uttar Pradesh.

The visits of technical officers are by and large linked to status of implementation. As the

progress overall was at a better pace in Madhya Pradesh, more number of visits have been

undertaken in that state between 2010-11 and 2012-13. There were regular visits by the

CEO of NRAA to the project districts.

Between January 2010 and February 2014, a total of 5 Review Meetings with Principal

Secretaries and Senior Government officials of the Implementing departments were held in

MP while in UP, a total 6 meetings have been held. Meetings with Planning Secretary and

xxii

senior officials of the State governments were being held on adhoc basis. No structured

quarterly meetings were envisaged.

The Advisory Committee at Delhi is the overall authority for deciding the package

parameters and effecting changes in any of the parameters during the course of

implementation of the package. During the period 2009-10, the Advisory Body had met

three times i.e., in September 2010, June 2011 and December 2011. There have been no

advisory meetings thereafter.

Overall assessment in terms of impact

The Bundelkhand package was right earnestly implemented by the two states from 2010-11

only and hence many of the projects taken up under the package excepting activities that

supported individuals like animal husbandry, dairy, dug wells, energisation of wells etc.,

were on-going as at the time of field visits. Therefore the full benefits of the projects are yet

to stabilize and reach the intended beneficiaries. The broad trends in benefits assessed

through field visits and sample surveys revealed the following:

The surface irrigation projects are envisaged to create additional irrigation capacity of

155297 ha in MP and 96500 ha of additional area and 38700 ha of restoration of lost

irrigated area totalling to 135200 ha in UP. During sample survey it was observed that most

of the completed projects have achieved the targeted potential barring one of the sample

projects in MP viz., Sakaria tank (a failed project). It is possible that once all the projects are

completed in full measure, the anticipated targets will be more or less fully achieved.

The surface irrigation projects enabled the farmers to bring additional area under irrigation

and shift and expand the cropping pattern to remunerative wheat crop. In MP, additional

irrigated area accrued during rabi season. This was devoted to wheat and the area under

wheat in the sample farms increased from 2.14 acres in 2009-10 to 3.38 acres (57%) in

2012-13. In UP also the additional area was brought under wheat due to availability of

irrigation facilities. The area under wheat in the sample farms increased from 1.95 acres in

2009-10 to 2.32 acres in 2012-13 (19% increase). Overall it can be concluded that the

additional irrigated potential created by the surface irrigation projects has been fully

devoted to cultivation of wheat crop in Bundelkhand region. As for productivity, the yield of

wheat in the sample farms in MP increased from 886 kg per acre in 2009-10 to 1129 kg per

acre in 2012-13, a 27% increase due to assured irrigation and adoption of HYV /improved

varieties of seeds with appropriate package of practices. Similarly the yield of wheat

increased from 581 kg per acre to 789 kg per acre between 2009-10 and 2012-13 i.e., by

36%. At a macro level the total production of wheat would have increased by 91300 MT in

MP and 69740 MT in UP aggregating all to 161000 MT in the region because of the package.

The dug wells supported under the package in UP to individual farmers significantly

improved the status of irrigated agriculture. The percentage increase in irrigated area for

the sample farmers is estimated at 63%. In Rabi season, there has been a significant shift to

wheat and Vegetables from gram, lentil, etc. Deepening of wells, though not picked up to the

desired extent, had helped in better water availability to the farmers. It was observed that

the average water column during kharif and rabi seasons increased by about 4.0 meters

resulting in increase in irrigated area by 1.85 acres per farm. Recharge of dug wells through

xxiii

recharge pits was a total failure and no benefits accrued to the intended beneficiaries. The

HDPE pipes distributed to farmers have proven useful in reduction of conveyance loss and

wastage of water. On average, there is reduction of 4 hours for irrigating an acre of land

from 10.85 hours to 6.98 hours, which is equivalent of saving at least 4 litres of diesel

amounting to Rs.200 per acre/ per irrigation.

Energisation of dug wells constructed under Kapildhara programme in MP enabled the

farmers to increase the area under wheat production by as much as 87% due to availability

of assured irrigation. The productivity of all the crops have increased largely due to the

presence of assured irrigation which during stress period in kharif can be utilized to give

protective irrigation when needed.

Construction of stop dams in MP led to an increase in the storage capacity to the extent of

216% of the pre project storage capacity. The incremental irrigated area accrued at a

marginal cost of Rs.78,572 per ha. Focused Group Discussions with farmers revealed that

they could cultivate vegetable crops in kharif in addition to soya bean, while in Rabi they

introduced HYV of wheat in place of local variety. A significant increase in water level has

been reported by the farmers of the sampled projects. Once all the 352 stop dams projects

are completed, an additional irrigated area of about 16000 ha would be created in rabi

season which would invariably devoted to wheat. The additional production of wheat in MP

due to stop dams would be 45000 MT.

Projects implemented under the Forest and Environment head had a mono objective of

checking the soil erosion by restoring the soil moisture. In both the states, the land near the

project area showcased an excellent progress. However, not much change could be observed

on those areas which were a bit far from the project site. Impact quantification was not

possible as the activities have been implemented in forest areas and there are no direct

beneficiary farmers for this activity.

Storage and market yards projects enabled food grain procurement and distribution

agencies to store the procured food grains in a scientific manner as compared to open yard

storage. In MP, all the projects are more or less complete and the projects have created / are

expected to create an additional storage capacity of 6.40 lakh MT besides auction platforms,

construction of internal roads within the mandi area, farmer’s facilitation centres, trader’s

facilitation centres and other supporting infrastructure. Newly constructed trading platform

at HAAT bazaar in MP has devolved considerable satisfaction to the locals. Infrastructure

created under PACS would help the farmer to receive assistance under a single window.

In UP only a few of the projects have been completed and none of them are functioning. A

considerable delay in the construction work was observed in all the districts of Uttar

Pradesh largely on account of the problems in acquiring land. A total of 104000 MT of

storage is likely to be created in Uttar Pradesh after completing of work under RIN & Special

Market Yards. RIN again is an excellent initiative for a single window availability of requisite

inputs for the farmers. It is definitely going to boost good agriculture practices (GAP) among

the local farmers.

Activities under Animal Husbandry sector included animal distribution, establishment of

Livestock Development Centres, fodder banks etc. By far the most successful activity in both

xxiv

the states across all sectors and both the states are setting up of LDCs by BAIF. All the 230

LDCs which are to be operated by BAIF have been set up within a period of three months

covering all the districts falling under Bundelkhand region. Since the inception of the activity

from January 2013, BAIF LDC centres have performed more than 23 thousand and 35

thousand AI in MP and UP respectively. The additions to the improved breed of calves

amounted to 1288 and 1537 in MP and UP respectively in slightly over one year period. The

annual additions to cross bred cattle and improved buffaloes would be about 3000 per

annum over the next 5 years. In few years to come this would result in a substantial increase

in cross bred cows population in the Bundelkhand region.

Distribution of goats to poor and landless under the package has resulted in additional

income generation to the extent of Rs 16323 per beneficiary in MP and Rs 9425 in UP. The

income realisation to the beneficiaries was higher in MP as they have been maintaining the

animals properly guided by the department officials. Benefit accrual to beneficiaries in UP

was lower due to mortality, non- suitability of the breed, sale of animals etc.

Positive benefits accrued to the beneficiaries of the bull distribution programme through

natural servicing though the amounts accrued were lower than the annual maintenance

charges. They may not be able to increase the service rates as the AI facility is available at

cheaper rates. A rethink on extending such support for natural servicing in the context of

easy availability of AI services at cheaper costs may be required.

The fodder stored in fodder banks in MP are currently used in cattle breeding farm. The

impact is yet to be felt among the dairy community and farmers. The units in UP are still

under establishment. Benefits may accrue to the community in due course.

The dairy sector as already stated has shown an impressive progress since the inception of

the package in Madhya Pradesh through establishment of dairy cooperative societies and

milk chilling centres. A total of 18460 families have benefited by becoming members of the

societies. It has been estimated that each member family of the cooperative has been able to

generate additional Rs. 8184.00 per annum from the dairy activity which is quite significant

addition to its overall income. Fair prices were ensured to the dairy farmers besides supply

of quality inputs, AI facilities etc. The investments in the sector in UP has not achieved the

desired results and most of the societies established are not functioning at present or at the

desired level. Therefore limited benefit has accrued to the dairy farmers in the state.

The rural drinking water supply projects have helped the beneficiaries to reduce the

travel time by an average of 55% and also improved the supply of drinking water from an

average of 31 LPCD to 55 LPCD. In Tikamgarh, easy availability of clean water has helped

the villagers in improving sanitation facilities have home. This in turn has improved the

hygiene & living standards of the villagers. Overall the allocation of Rs 195.07 crore under

the package would benefit about 5 lakh persons in the region at an average per capita cost of

Rs 3500.

Overall it can be concluded that the trends in benefit realisation are more or less in tune

with the expectations excepting the goatry units and dairy sector activities in UP.

xxv

Suggestions and recommendations

Planning of the package

At the time of formulation/ conception of the package, several factors were considered for

ensuring a holistic approach to drought mitigation and enhancing the financial resources

available for the package. The consultants, after a review of the implementation of the

package at the field level and with Bundelkhand II package on the anvil, feel that the

following few critical areas need to be addressed at the planning stage itself for enhancing

the overall impact of the package.

Revisiting projects involving support for individuals

Under the package two types of projects were envisaged and implemented with reference to

the project entity:

1. Departmentally implemented projects which benefit a large number of farmers in a

geographical area

2. Individual beneficiary projects like dug wells, lifting devices, supply of HDPE pipes,

income generating activities like bull induction, goatery etc.

The latter type of projects were found to suffer from the following

Tentativeness in fixing targets.

Complaint of bias in beneficiary selection.

Slow progress and inability to ensure proper quality control.

Problems in monitoring due to large number of beneficiaries spread over the

districts.

Tendency to develop liking for only fully subsidised projects from the government.

We are of the opinion that individual beneficiary oriented projects may be taken out of

purview of such packages and they may be implemented like any other CSS with funding

from bankers and individuals. A larger share of subsidy can be envisaged considering the

drought in the region. This would ensure proper implementation, endues and monitoring of

the funds. The complaint of bias in beneficiary selection can also be precluded.

Specific activities that may be precluded in the package

The buffalo bull induction programme ensures natural servicing but at the same time will

not be able to compete with AI programmes due to ease of implementation and cheaper

delivery costs of the latter. Since AI programmes are well established and there is a good

response for AI, emphasis may be exclusively placed on AI for breed upgradation and bull

induction at individual farmer level may be discouraged.

Post-harvest infrastructure to be planned with a lag

The Bundelkhand package was aimed to be a drought mitigation package with focus on

irrigation and watershed management activities. While this was ensured by converging

funds from CS / CSS schemes, it is observed that there was an equal emphasis on post-

harvest market infrastructure in terms of market yards and warehouses especially in UP

where post-harvest sector was the largest beneficiary of the ACA funding. While these

infrastructure are required to take care of the enhanced production arising out of drought

mitigation activities, they are not immediately needed as the irrigation / watershed projects

xxvi

will take time to yield full results and the post-harvest infrastructure created in anticipation

of the increased production may be fully utilised only after four to five years; till such time

the maintenance of the structures has to be funded from budgetary sources. Besides, the

attention of the funding agency also gets diluted from the drought mitigation activities.

Therefore it is suggested that post-harvest infrastructure may be funded with a lag perhaps

with a built in second phase in the package.

Convergence a hindrance to implementation?

At the time of formulation of the package, convergence of various activities / sectors was

envisaged so as to pool all the resources available for drought mitigation to achieve this

common objective. Accordingly the package was funded by ACA, CS / CSS funds, RKVY,

MNREGA besides state and owners contribution. As already seen from the chapter on

Convergence, while no difficulty has been faced by the implementing authorities in sourcing

funds from other sources, funds availability from MNREGA has been a source of concern and

projects involving partial funding from MNREGA had invariably experienced delays. This is

pronounced in dug well projects and RRR of water bodies, where part of the work is funded

by ACA and the balance from MNREGA. Besides MNREGA funds can be utilised for unskilled

works while most of the projects required skilled labour for execution. In this context, it is

suggested that

Convergence of funds from MNREGA for the same activity may be avoided

In case it is required for funds augmentation, the complete activity has to be funded

from single source

Besides it was also found that there are activities like watershed development in arable

lands, crop production programme for drought mitigation which form part of the package

but fully funded by CS / CSS schemes without any commitment from ACA. Such activities are

not properly monitored and reported to NRAA with the result that monitoring is mostly

restricted to ACA package. The state governments also focus mostly on ACA funded

activities. Therefore an umbrella body including NRAA and the Various Ministries whose

funds are sought to be involved has to review the progress of the package. Alternatively the

focus of NRAA can be only ACA funds without envisaging any convergence from other

sources.

Provision of budget for post package maintenance

The package as conceived has provisions only for creation of assets; the resources

required for subsequent maintenance of assets have not been provided for nor the

post package maintenance issue been adequately addressed in the package. It

assumes importance especially in the context of a large number of surface irrigation

projects in UP are intended for restoration of lost irrigation potentials. It is

suggested that the state governments should be advised to provide for annual

allocation in the state budgets during the project implementation period so as to

create a corpus for maintenance of the assets in future

Implementation of the package

The major plank of the Bundelkhand package is drought proofing of the region within a time

frame of three years i.e., by 2012-13. However a large number of projects were found to be

xxvii

on going even during period of field visits i.e., February – May 2014; besides a number of

projects were completed with delay. Some of the projects which experienced significant

delay are include the following

All the market yards projects and rural infrastructure nuclei projects in UP are

ongoing and yet to be completed; administrative delays in taking decision as to the

location of the projects , delays in land acquisition are sighted as the major reasons

All the ground water irrigation projects in UP which support the individual farmers

are found to suffer delays in completion due to convergence of MNREGA projects

with ACA funds for completing the activity

Several minor, medium and major surface irrigation projects in UP experienced

delay, contractors not fulfilling commitment, very limited work period available for

water bodies’ renovation due to release of water continually in the canals etc., as

well as issues on releases of MNREGA funds.

The stop dams projects Madhya Pradesh also suffered delays due to insufficient

man power, tendering and technical problems.

In general in both the states poor response to tendering process resulted in

retendering; besides open tendering in initial stages in UP resulted further delays in

processing

To overcome the above difficulties, the state governments may consider instituting

transparent mechanisms for tendering, land acquisition, tough penalties for way ward

contractors etc. Besides the administration should, with people’s involvement, work

towards increasing the working period during the year. As MNREGA funds are to be released

by the district administration, effective coordination between the implementing

departments and administration has to be ensured from the higher level decision making

authorities in the states. Staff augmentation is another area which the states have to address

for effective implementation. The recommendations for better implementation of activities

under different sectors are presented in the respective chapters.

Monitoring of the package

A strong monitoring mechanism can pre-empt many of the implementation deficiencies

especially those relating to administrative and financial issues. In the guidelines relating to

the implementation of the package, no structured monitoring studies / visits had been

suggested to the state governments; nor has structured review of the progress of the

package been envisaged both at the state level and NRAA level. The provisions can be

incorporated in the guidelines for strengthening the monitoring efforts during the

implementation phase of such programmes.

Structured Meetings of Advisory Body

The meetings of the Advisory Body give strong signals to the States for effective

implementation of the package. It is suggested that the Advisory Body meets at least once in

a half year as it would transmit the seriousness of the funding agency to the implementing

states for faster implementation of the projects.

xxviii

Structured Meetings with state level implementing departments

Structured quarterly meetings with Planning Secretary and senior officials of the State

governments may be held to sort out interdepartmental issues relating to administrative

and financial areas.

Reporting system to NRAA

The reports submitted to NRAA on the physical achievements are aggregates of a large

number of projects and it is difficult to ascertain whether the projects are complete or not.

Many a time, while the reports submitted by the states indicate full achievement of the

targeted physical programme under the sector/ group of similar projects, yet field visits

revealed that many individual projects forming part the sector/ group were ongoing as on

the dates of the consultants field visits and were slated for completion even one year hence.

Thus while at the aggregate level, the targets seem to have been achieved, yet in reality there

exists a gap in achievement which is not captured in the present reporting system of the

states to NRAA. A robust MIS is required that would provide project specific progress on a

quarterly basis needs to be introduced. The services of professional MIS experts may be

availed in developing a robust reporting system and a Project Monitoring Unit can be set up

in NRAA by outsourcing the same from professional consultancy organisations

Concurrent / Midterm monitoring mechanism by third parties

By design, the package has not envisaged a mechanism for third party monitoring of the

package / concurrent evaluation. Such processes are necessary components of any

programmes. It is suggested that provision may be made at the time of formulation of the

package for third party monitoring. Professional consultancy organisations can be roped in

for this purpose.

Chapter 1 Introduction

Bundelkhand Region

The Bundelkhand region comprises of 7 districts of Uttar Pradesh and 6 districts of Madhya

Pradesh

Table 1 Districts of Bundelkhand Region of UP and MP

Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh

Chhatarpur Jhansi

Tikamgarh Jalaun

Damoh Hamirpur

Sagar Banda

Datia Chitrakoot

Panna Mahoba

Lalitpur

Geographically, the region falls in India’s heartland (i.e. Central India) , which has a number

of north bound perennial rivers viz. Sindh, Pahuj, Betwa, Dhasan, Ken, Baghein, Paisuni and

Tons along with their numerous tributaries. However, topographically it is a hard rock area

with limited or inadequate ground water resources, lacks infrastructure, access to improved

technologies, markets and inputs with low productivity. It is predominantly an agrarian

economy with over 80% of population being dependent on agriculture; the livestock,

usufructs from forest and outsourcing income by seasonal migration after Rabi sowing are

other alternative sources of income. The

agriculture is vastly rain-dependent, diverse,

complex, under-invested, risky and vulnerable. In

addition, extreme weather conditions, like

droughts, short-term rain and flooding in fields add

to the uncertainties and seasonal migrations.

The 13 districts of Bundelkhand feature in the

Planning Commission of India’s 200 most backward

districts list. Eighty percent people depend on

agriculture and livestock rearing

The scarcity of water in the semi-arid region, with

poor soil and low productivity further aggravates

the problem of food security. With a population of

approximately 21 million in Bundelkhand, 82.32

per cent is rural and more than one third of the

households in these areas are considered to be

Below the Poverty Line (BPL). The poverty situation in the region has become extremely

critical in the recent years. This is because of lack of employment and lack of opportunities.

Picture 1 Map of Bundelkhand region

30

The insecurity of livelihoods and lack of supportive governance have led to forced large-

scale migration of the local population. Further, climatic uncertainties, leading to extended

and frequent spells of drought and drastically reduced agricultural yields, have also

aggravated the problem.

All these districts in the region lag behind the rest of UP and MP in many socio economic

indicators such as; literacy rate, health related indicators and the overall human

development index. Highly feudalistic society has resulted in the exploitation of the limited

natural resources available in the area by a few. Though the region has a natural basin, it is

divided between the two states of MP and UP. Management and conservation of water

resources therefore has become a challenging and sensitive task. The recurring drought

adversely impacted the socio economic conditions in the region affecting standard of living

of the people in the area.

Bundelkhand Package

Against the above backdrop, the Government of India approved a Special Package at a cost of

Rs.7,266 crore Rs 3606 crore for UP and Rs 3860 crore for MP) for implementation of a

drought mitigation strategy over a period of three years commencing from 2009-10 for

integrated development of Bundelkhand region. The prime mover of the package was

optimization of water resources through rainwater harvesting and through proper

utilization of the river systems. Intensive and diversified agriculture was to be promoted for

productivity gains in the crops along with promoting higher sown area in the Kharif season.

Animal husbandry and diary activities were to be expanded as ancillary activities to enhance

farmers’ incomes to cope with the drought conditions. Under the package, provision of Rs.

3450 crore was created as Additional Central Assistance (ACA) and balance cost of the

package was to be met through convergence of Central Sector Schemes (CS) and Centrally

Sponsored Schemes (CSS). Additional Rs 200 crore, Rs 100 crore each for UP and MP has

been approved as ACA for providing drinking water thus making the total package amount

aggregate Rs 7466 crore.

Table 2 Funding sources for Bundelkhand Package

S.No Fund Component Madhya Pradesh

Uttar Pradesh

Bundelkhand

1 Additional Central Assistance (ACA) 1953.20 1695.76 3648.96

2 CS/CSS Schemes 953.65 1318.59 2272.24

3 BRGF / RKVY 225.00 25.00 250.00

4 MGNREGA 595.00 471.00 1066.00

5 State Share 12.04 12.04 24.08

6 Beneficiary Contribution 121.11 83.61 204.72

Total 3860.00 3606.00 7466.00

31

Sectors of Focus

Under the Bundelkhand package, the following six broad thematic areas have been

identified for intervention

i. Water resource sector

ii. Watershed Management

iii. Environment and Forest

iv. Agriculture

v. Animal Husbandry

vi. Rural Drinking water Supply

Sectoral Allocation of ACA Funds in Bundelkhand Region

The allocation under Bundelkhand package aggregated Rs 1953 crore in Madhya Pradesh

and Rs 1696 crore in UP. The component wise share is presented in Figure 2

Figure 2 Sectoral share under ACA component of Bundelkhand Package

Water resources (45%) was the most dominant sector in Madhya Pradesh while agriculture

(41%) essentially market yards was the most dominant in Uttar Pradesh. Animal husbandry,

rural drinking water supply and environment and forest had a share of about 3-6% across

the states. The balance was accounted for watershed management (11% in MP and 24% in

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Madhya Pradesh

Uttar Pradesh

Bundelkhand

Figure 1 Fund allocation under Bundelkhand Package

32

UP). Aggregating irrigation and watershed management which directly alleviate the ill

effects of drought , the package on the whole allocated about 48% to 56 % of the amount to

these sectors in UP and MP respectively.

Releases and Expenditure under ACA Allocation

The entire ACA allocation has been released in case of Madhya Pradesh, while in case of UP,

only 75% of ACA funds have been released largely because of slow progress in watershed

management sector and agriculture market sectors. The released amounts have however

utilized to an extent of 82% and 83% in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh respectively.

Table 3 ACA allocation, releases and expenditure in Madhya Pradesh

Sector ACA allocation

ACA released

ACA expenditure

Water Resources 881.00 878.16 796.00 Watershed management 210.00 210.00 137.15 Environment and Forest 107.00 107.00 105.87 Agriculture 574.50 574.50 412.65 Animal Husbandry 80.70 72.70 49.86 Rural Drinking water supply 100.00 100.00 92.51 Energisation of Private Tube Wells

0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 1953.20 1942.36 1594.04

Table 4 ACA allocation, releases and expenditure in Uttar Pradesh

Sector ACA allocation

ACA released

ACA expenditure

Water Resources 410.00 400.25 367 Watershed management 400.00 235.66 70.24 Environment and Forest 31.56 61.56 31.56 Agriculture 693.50 320.00 320 Animal Husbandry 60.70 55.30 55.3 Rural Drinking water supply 100.00 70.00 91.63 Energisation of Private Tube Wells

0.00 69.77 69.77

Total 1695.76 1212.54 1005.5

Rationale, Scope and ToR for the Study

The first phase of Bundelkhand package was over by 2012-13 and the second phase is to be

implemented. At this juncture, NRAA has decided to undertake a quick evaluation study of

the implementation of the package with the rationale of assessing the acceptance of such a

large programme in the targeted geographies and the relevance and impact of medium term

and long term drought strategies in mitigating drought in this region. With this objective in

mind, NRAA commissioned NABCONS to undertake a quick impact evaluation study. As per

the Terms of Reference of the study, the broad components to be covered are:

i. Impact of the package in creating additional water storage capacity in situ rain

water conservation as long term drought mitigation strategy.

33

ii. Impact of package in enhancing the net sown area; production and productivity

of crops.

iii. Shift in ratio of kharif: rabi crop sowing in Bundelkhand region.

iv. Relevance/ acceptance of different intervention/ scheme made under the

package as medium long term strategies for drought mitigation.

v. Impact of package in providing livelihoods opportunities especially to the land

less/ asset less and weaker section of the community through intervention in

dairy and animal husbandry.

vi. Level and extent of convergence of various CS/CSS schemes, forest/ agriculture

under activities in different components and their impact on overall progress of

the package.

vii. Overall constraints and opportunities of the package.

The Impact Evaluation Study will cover all the activities/ intervention in all the seven

sectors; Water Resource, Watershed Management, Environment and Forest, Agriculture,

Dairy, Animal Husbandry and Rural Drinking Water Supply. The study will select sample

projects from all the sectors / activities across all the districts of Bundelkhand region.

34

Chapter 2 Approach, Methodology, Sampling and Research Tools

Approach

The activities under Bundelkhand Package were categorized broadly under sectors; Water

Resources, Watershed Management, Agriculture, Environment and Forest, Animal

Husbandry, Dairy and Drinking Water Schemes. Under Water Resource Sector the activities

implemented were Construction/ Repair, Renovation, Restoration, Remodelling of Irrigation

Infrastructures (Reservoirs & Canals), Water Bodies (Tanks and Ponds, Stop Dams), Dug

wells. Under Environment and Forest, the activities implemented were mostly watershed

activities in Common Wasteland and Forest Land. In Agriculture sector the activities

implemented were mostly the warehousing and storage infrastructure differing from size

and mode of implementation. Animal Husbandry sectors involved distribution of goats and

bulls to individual beneficiaries, creation of fodder banks, construction of meeting halls,

mobile vans etc and establishment of AI Centres. While, dairy sectors mostly focused on

organization of Milk Cooperative Societies at the village level and strengthening/

upgradation of chilling centres/ processing units. These activities varied within sectors and

districts in both the states. Considering, the complexity, the following approach was adopted

to cover all the sectors and sample.

1. The documents related to fund allocation, sanctions and releases, and activities

implemented were obtained from the National Rainfed Area Authority.

2. The documents obtained were studied with regards to percentage allocation and

release to each sectors and activities implemented.

3. Two division level meetings were organized in Jhansi and Sagar in presence of the

implementing agencies heads and officials of district administration. The meeting

was objectively organized to obtain clarity on the types of activities undertaken,

their status and spread across districts. Sites visits for sample projects were made to

ascertain the implementation process, activities undertaken, and understanding on

the output and outcome level indicators.

4. The district wise list of activities for each sectors were obtained from Sagar Division

of Madhya Pradesh and Jhansi Division of Uttar Pradesh. The district level

information were obtained for Chitrakoot Division.

5. Once, the information on the sector wise activities and financial details were

obtained, it was enlisted for each district to see their spread across each districts of

Bundelkhand region. The prepared list was later used for selection of sample

projects so as to cover every project and every district.

35

6. The projects were categorized under each sector were then selected based on their

size and financial allocations.

7. Once the sector wise list of activities was made, appropriate research tools were

developed to capture information on important variables.

8. Site Inspection were made for the sample projects categorized under Irrigation

(Major/ Medium/ Minor), Agriculture Projects (Market Yards, Haat Bazars, Rural

Infrastructure Nuclei), Environment and Forest, Dairy, Animal Husbandry and

Drinking Water Schemes followed by Focussed Group Discussions with the project

beneficiaries by the technical staffs.

9. Individual household survey were conducted to estimates the impact of intervention

on the livelihoods of the beneficiaries from the project catchment villages of

irrigation projects, dug wells/pump set/HDPE Pipe schemes, goatry and buffalo bulls

beneficiaries.

10. The data were tabulated for statistical analyses supplemented by the findings of site

inspection and focused group discussion.

Methodology

The study is based on the primary and secondary data. The primary data were obtained

through sample survey across all the 13 districts of Bundelkhand Regions covering

beneficiaries of Major, Medium and Minor Irrigation Projects, Animal Husbandry Projects. In

addition to sample survey Focused Group Discussion were held with the beneficiaries of

drinking water schemes, Secretary of Dairy Cooperative Societies, nodal officers of all line

departments implementing the projects and Chief Development Officers/Collectors/

Commissions of districts/ division and NRAA to consolidated their view on overall package

design, implementation constraints and potential to maximize the benefits from the package.

The secondary information was collected from the National Rainfed Area Authority (NRAA),

line departments of 13 districts and official websites of each district on requirements. The

secondary information mostly encapsulated Financial Allocations, Sanction, Release and

Expenditure, Activities targets and achievement status and monitoring mechanism.

Sample

The samples were selected based on the following criteria for each of the sector.

Irrigation projects were selected based on size and category of projects (major,

medium and minor). The projects were selected randomly on the criteria based on

Highest Financial Allocations.

Agriculture Market Yard Projects were selected based on the category (Market

Yards, RIN, Haat Bazar), their storage capacity and Mode of Implementation

(Convergence of Markfed, MPWCL and Mandi Samiti) and their status of physical

progress (completed and in progress)

20 Milk Cooperative societies (4 each from 5 districts of MP) and 09 from 05

districts of UP were selected randomly. 5 Bulk Milk Coolers/ processing plants from

04 districts of MP and 03 Milk Chilling/ processing plants from 03 districts of UP

which received the allocations under the package were selected.

The beneficiaries of goatry, bull induction, new dug wells, deepening of dug wells,

recharge pits, pump set, and HDPE pipes were selected randomly from the list of

36

beneficiaries provided by the implementing department. 07 districts from UP and 06

districts from MP were covered.

02 AI Centres each from each district of Bundelkhand Region were selected

randomly after obtaining the list from the BAIF.

Under environment and forest, the sites intervened were selected randomly. One or

two sites based from each districts were obtained. Since, a significant number of stop

dams were constructed by the forest department in Madhya Pradesh under the BSP,

this particular activity was chosen purposively, however the site for site inspection

was done randomly from the list.

Two different systems were installed; one the pipe line based system and another

Mark-II hand pumps. Both the systems were selected based on their availability in

the district randomly. A good number of pipe line system has been installed and

completed in MP so the priority has been given to study the pipe line based system,

while a significant number of Hand pumps were installed in UP, so the priority was

given to study the installation of Hand pumps in UP along with a few pipe line based

system. The pipe line based systems were selected based on highest financial

allocation.

The farm households falling under the project catchments villages of Major, Medium

and Minor Irrigation Projects were selected randomly for sample survey. A total of

630 household in 21 Sample Irrigation (Major/ Medium/ Minor) Projects of MP and

870 beneficiaries in 17 sample Irrigation Projects of UP were covered. In Major

/Canal projects, the beneficiaries were selected from Head, Middle and Tail Reach.

37

Sample Distribution

Table 5 below presents the sample distribution across activities undertaken in Bundelkhand

Special Package in MP and UP.

Table 5 Sample distribution of Madhya Pradesh

Sectors/ Activities No Name/ District Covered

Water Resource Sectors Major Medium Irrigation Project

05 Rajghat CAD, Beriyarpur & Singpur Barrage, Urmil and Rangwan (Datia, Chhatarpur)

Ongoing and New Minor Irrigation Projects

21 Sagar, Tikamgarh, Chhatarpur, Damoh & Panna

Stop Dams 30 Sagar, Chhatarpur, Damoh & Tikamgarh Dug Wells with Pumpset 85 Sagar, Chhatarpur, Tikamgarh, Damoh & Panna Agriculture Agriculture Market Yards 14 Sagar, Chhatarpur, Tikamgarh & Panna Dairy Development Milk Cooperative Societies 20 Tikamgarh, Panna, Damoh and Chhatarpur Milk Chilling Centre/ Processing Plant/BMC

05 Sagar, Tikamgarh, Chhatarpur, & Damoh

Animal Husbandry Goatry Units 30 Sagar, Tikamgarh, Chhatarpur , Panna, Damoh

Bull Induction 30 Sagar, Tikamgarh, Chhatarpur, Panna

AI Centres 10 Sagar & Tikamgarh

Fodder Bank 03 Sagar, Tikamgarh & Panna

Environment & Forest

Construction of Stop Dams 25 Sagar, Chhatarpur, Damoh & Panna

Drinking Water Schemes

Cistern based pipe line system 08 Sagar, Damoh, Chhatarpur, Tikamgarh & Panna

Household Survey of Irrigation Schemes

630 Covering all 26 Major, Medium, Minor Irrigation Schemes (Sagar, Chhatarpur, Tikamgarh, Panna, Damoh and Datia)

Thus, in MP across the 06 Bundelkhand Districts, a total of 141 site inspection/ FGDs and

775 household surveys conducted covering all the sectors.

Table 6 below presents the sample distribution of UP.

38

Table 6 Sample distribution of Uttar Pradesh

Sectors/ Activities No Name/ District Covered

Water Resource Sectors Major Medium Irrigation Project

06 Upper Rajghat, Lower Rajghat, JPC, Badwar, Pathrai, Maudaha (Lalitpur, Jhansi, Jalaun)

Ongoing and New Minor Irrigation Projects

11 Jhansi, Jalaun, Hamirpur, Banda & Chitrakoot

New Dug Wells 100 Jhansi, Lalitpur, Chitrakoot and Mahoba Deepening of Dug wells 60 Jhansi, Lalitpur, Chitrakoot and Mahoba Dug Well Recharge 50 Jhansi, Lalitpur, Chitrakoot, Mahoba and Banda Agriculture Agriculture Market Yards 25 Jhansi, Jalaun, Lalitpur, Chitrakoot, Mahoba, Banda

and Hamirpur Dairy Development Milk Cooperative Societies 09 Jhansi, Lalitpur, Banda, Hamirpur & Mahoba Milk Chilling Centre/ Processing Plant/BMC

03 Jhansi, Jalaun, & Chitrakoot

Animal Husbandry Goatry Units 70 Jhansi, Jalaun, Lalitpur, Chitrakoot, Mahoba, Banda

and Hamirpur Bull Induction 30 Jhansi, Jalaun, Lalitpur, Chitrakoot, Mahoba, Banda

and Hamirpur AI Centres 14 Jhansi, Jalaun, Lalitpur, Chitrakoot, Mahoba, Banda

and Hamirpur Fodder Bank 03 Jhansi, Jaluan,, & Lalitpur

Environment & Forest

Sites of Visit 10 Jhansi, Jalaun, Lalitpur, Hamirpur & Mahoba

Drinking Water Schemes

Cistern based pipe line system 02 Mahoba & Hamirpur

Handpumps 32 Chitrakoot, Banda, Mahoba, Hamirpur

Household Survey of Irrigation Schemes

870 Covering all the 17 Major/ Medium/ Minor Irrigation Schemes (Jhansi, Jalaun, Lalitpur, Chirakoot, Banda, Mahoba and Hamirpur)

In UP, across all its 07 Bundelkhand Districts, a total of 115 site inspection, FGDs and 1180

individual household surveys were conducted covering all the sectors.

In total, a total of 256 FGDs and 1955 household surveys were conducted between 24

February 2014 and 30 May 2014.

Research Tools

The structured questionnaires were developed for all the individual activities. For site

inspection and focused group discussion, separate questionnaires were developed for all the

activities which during the course of discussions with departments were documented. This

questionnaire was designed to obtain information on physical and financial progress,

important dates (admin approval, tendering, type of tendering, award of tender,

commencement of work, time of completion- actual/ expected etc), types of infrastructure

39

and status of progress, implementation constraints, institutional mechanism, overall

perception of beneficiaries on impact variables and overall comments of the technical staff.

This questionnaire after administering with department officials was verified in the actual

site and discussions were held with beneficiaries.

A total of 09 different questionnaires were developed which were administered by technical

staffs during site inspection/ FGDs covering major irrigation, medium irrigation, stop dams,

Water User Associations, AI Centres, Fodder Banks, Dairy Cooperative Societies, BMC/

Chilling Plants and Drinking Water Schemes. Eight (08) separate questionnaires were

developed to capture information from individual household who were benefitted under

large irrigation projects, installation of pump sets, new dug wells, deepening of dug wells,

dug well recharge, HDPE pipes, goatry, and bull induction.

One separate check list was also prepared with regards to capture the information on fund

flow from central to state, state to directorate to districts.

Averages, percentages, frequency distribution and other simple statistical tools are used

deriving the results. The questionnaires are attached in Annexure of this report.

40

Chapter 3 Water Resources Sector – Surface Water Irrigation

The Allocations and Financial Achievements

Development of water resources is the major activity under the Bundelkhand package. Both

the surface water resources and ground water resources were to be developed under the

package. The surface water resources are to be developed by various implementing

departments especially the irrigation department while ground water resources are to be

judiciously exploited by individual farmers. The ground water exploitation has been clubbed

under watershed development sector in the package allocation. However for sectoral

discussion, the ground water works have been considered under water resources sector.

The allocations to this activity in MP and UP are presented in Table 7.

Table 7 Allocation to Water Resource Project under Bundelkhand Package

State Allocation to irrigation

projects (Rs. Crore)

Total allocation in the package

(Rs. Crore)

% allocation to the sector

Surface water development

Madhya Pradesh 881 1958 45%

Uttar Pradesh 410 1696 24%

Bundelkhand region 1268 3654 35%

Ground water development




Total water resources




While overall, 24 to 25% of the ACA allocation has been earmarked for development of

water resources in either state, the composition varied widely. In Madhya Pradesh, surface

irrigation development to be carried out by state government departments had a share of

about 90% in the ACA allocation for this sector, in UP individually implemented projects and

41

departmentally implemented projects have more or less an equal share. As against the

above allocations, the releases so far and the expenditure incurred by the respective states

are given in Table 8.

Table 8 Financial achievements under Water Resource Project under Bundelkhand Package

State Allocation (Rs.

Crore)

Amount released

(Rs. Crore)

Amount released as % of

allocation

Amount expended

(Rs. Crore)

Expenditure as % of release

Surface water development

Madhya Pradesh 881 869 99% 796 92%

Uttar Pradesh 410 400 98% 367 92%

Bundelkhand region 1291 1269 98% 1163 92%

Ground water development

Madhya Pradesh 80 80 100% 60 76%

Uttar Pradesh 400 236 59% 168 71%


Total water resources development

Madhya Pradesh 961 949 99% 856 90%

Uttar Pradesh 810 636 79% 535 84%


The expenditure incurred under individual beneficiary oriented ground water development

projects was about three fourths of the releases which was lower than the 92% expenditure

achieved under departmentally implemented surface irrigation projects.

Brief Outline of Surface Irrigation Projects

Since the impact of surface water resources are different from that of the ground water

resources, this chapter deals with surface water irrigation schemes only. - The share of the

different types of projects in the total allocation is given in Table 9.

Table 9 Share of different project under surface irrigation in total ACA allocations

Activity Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh

ACA Allocation

% ACA Allocation

%

Rajghat Command Area Development

50.00 6% 80 22%

Ongoing and new MI projects (MP) / Schemes (UP)

522.00 59% 6 2%

Incomplete Beriyarpur project (MP) / Betwa Gursarai project (UP)

117.00 13% 20 5%

Singpur Barrage Project 100.00 11%

RRR of water bodies 92.00 10% 264 71%

Total 881.00 100% 370.00 100%

42

As high as 90% of the total allocation in MP was towards creating additional irrigated area

while in UP, a larger share was allotted to restoring water bodies (71%) indicating

restoration of lost irrigation capacity. This highlights the need for proper maintenance of the

created irrigation potential through adequate budgetary support.

Over all Physical progress

The status of completion of surface water irrigation projects in the two states is summarized

as under in Table 10.

Table 10 Physical progress under surface irrigation projects in MP & UP

Activity Number of projects

Total Complete Incomplete % of incomplete

Madhya Pradesh


1 1 0 0%

On going MI projects 49 49 0 0%

New MI projects 97 74 23 24%

Incomplete Beriyarpur project (MP) 1 1 0 0%

Singpur Barrage Project 1 0 1 100%

RRR of water bodies 3 3 0 0%

Uttar Pradesh


1 0 1 100%

Betwa Gursarai Canal System 1 0 1 100%

RRR scheme of canals 39 17 22 56%

Repair of Lift irrigation schemes 1 1 0 0%

Changing Pump sets 3 3 0 0%

RRR of water Bodies 28 28 0 0%

Reconstruction of water bodies 10 0 10 100%

In general, the number of incomplete projects is more in UP as compared to MP. These

incomplete projects are in various stages of implementation and they are likely to be

completed soon.

Additional Irrigation Capacity Created

The above projects are envisaged to create additional irrigation capacity of 155297 ha in MP

and 96500 ha of additional area and 38700 ha of restoration of lost irrigated area totalling

to 135200 ha in UP. AS PER THE DATA PROVIDED BY THE RESPECTIVE STATE

GOVERNMENTS, the actual irrigated area achieved as on date of visit was 88% in MP and

61% in UP. The project wise details are given in Table 11.

It can be seen there from that cent percent achievement of targeted area was reported under

Rajghat Command area project, Beriyarpur canal project, canal renovation projects etc.

43

However during sample survey it was observed that several projects were still ongoing;

further one of the sample projects in MP viz., Sakaria tank was found to be a complete

failure. Therefore the achievements of additional area irrigated would be lower than what

has been reported; it is possible that once all these projects are completed in full measure,

the anticipated targets will be more or less fully achieved.

LINING OF LOWER RAJGHAT CANAL UNDERTAKEN IN BSP

44

Table 11 Achievement of targeted irrigated acreage under surface irrigation projects


Project Category Target Achievement % Project Category Target Achievement %

Command Area Development of Rajghat Project

26,624 26,624 100% Command Area Development of Rajghat Project

69,500 39,140 56%

New and ongoing minor irrigation projects (146)

50,232 42,272 84% Betwa Gursarai Canal System

27,000 20,570 76%

Bariyarpur Medium Projects(1)

43,850 43,850 100% RRR scheme of canals 28400 12,379 44%

Singhpur Barrage Medium Projects(1)

10,200 0 0% RRR of water Bodies 10000 10,000 100%

Canal Renovation (3) 24,391 24,391 100% Others 300 300 100%

Total 1,55,297 1,37,137 88% Total 1,35,200 82,389 61%

45

Major Observations during field visits: Madhya Pradesh

As a part of the evaluation study, 24 major, medium and minor irrigation projects were

visited. Apart from the Rajghat CAD project which transcends several districts, the district

wise of the remaining 23 projects visited are presented below (Table 12):

Table 12 District wise sample projects visited under surface irrigation projects

Chattarpur Damoh Panna Sagar Tikamgarh

Mamon tank

Urmil right bank canal

Rangwan canal

Beriyarpur left bank canal

Gonchi tank

Singpur barrage

Naruguwan tank

Sakaria tank

Ken anaicut

Paharikeda tank

Lipari tank

Amha tank

Krahi tank

Rampura tank

Samnapur tank

Bila feeder canal

Chanaua Bujgrug tank

Satdhara tank

Tikari tank

Veersagar tank

Rongataghat stop dam cum cause way

Sarkanpur tank

Satighat tank

6 projects 1 project 7 projects 5 projects 4 projects

Of the above 5 projects viz., the Rajghat CAD, Urmil Right Bank Canal project, Beriyarpur

left bank canal project, Singpur barrage project

and Rangawan Canal Project are classified as

major / medium irrigation projects while all

others are minor irrigation projects. All the 5

major / medium irrigation projects are on going

as on date of visit and they are expected to be

completed by June 2015.

Of the remaining 19 minor irrigation projects, 10

projects have been completed and another 7 are

likely to be completed by June 2014. The

following projects are expected to be completed by June 2015:

Naraguwan tank scheme

Samnapur tank scheme.

Physical Progress of Sample Projects

Rajghat CAD Project

The Rajghat Project which is a completed project, have over period witnessed reduction in

the irrigation capacity due to system deficiencies and damage. To remove these deficiencies,

the works were simultaneously undertaken under eight different packages amounting to Rs

46

2871 lakh for ERM under AIBP, under five

different packages for CSD and work of water

courses/ field channels through WUAs under

Bundelkhand Special Package amounting to Rs

2238.36 lakh. Based on the site inspection of

head middle and tail reaches of Datia Irrigation

Canal (DIC) and discussion with WRDs and

WUAS, it is observed that works of strengthening

of Canal bank in select reaches and repair of

various structures on the canal in select reaches

are significantly under progress and needs to be

completed. Out of the allocated amount of Rs.

2238.36 lakh, 1000 lakh was released and expenditure of Rs 917.40 lakh was made under

different works. The major operational

difficulties as reported by the Department

official are the sporadic nature of repair and

maintenance resulting in high cost due to

adverse effect of over emphasis on the economy

o scope in project formulation and unavailability

of suitable and resourceful contractors for small

works, scattered maintenance/repair and new

works carried out by WUAs

Beriyarpur Left Bank Canal Project

It is one of the major irrigation projects with a 45 km long main canal, 30 km of branch

canal and 412 km length of subsidiaries and net works. All the canals have been completed,

while the lining of canals are at different stages of completion. The project is expected to be


Type of component Unit Target Achievement % Achievement

Length of main canal KM 45.00 49.00 100

Length of branch canal KM 30.00 30.00 100

Length of subsidiary and networks

KM 412.00 400.00 99

Length of main canals lined under the package

KM 49.00 43.00 88

Length of branch canals lined under the package

KM 30.00 15.00 50

Length of subsidiary and net works lined under the package )

KM 412.00 42.00 10

47

Singpur barrage project

It is one of the medium irrigation projects with a 23

km long main canal and 127 km length of subsidiaries

and net works. While the main canal has been more or

less constructed, about 20-30% of the remaining

works are complete. The project is expected to be


Urmil Right Bank Canal

It is one of the major irrigation projects with a

30 km long main canal and 105 km length of

subsidiaries and net works. While the main

canal has been constructed, about 45 – 55% of

the remaining works are complete. The

project is expected to be completed by June

2014 though it was scheduled to be

completed by February 2013. The delay in

completion was due to the contractor.

Type of component Unit Target Achievement % achievement



KM 105.39 47.12 45

Length of irrigation canals lined under the package (meter)

KM 135.48 75.08 55

Rangawan Canal Project

It is one of the major irrigation projects with a 40 km long main canal and 85 km length of

subsidiaries and net works. While the main canal has been completed upto 84%, about 68-

73% of the remaining works are complete. The project is expected to be completed by June

2014 though it was scheduled to be completed by February 2013. Early and continuous

rains were reported to be the reason for the delay.


Unit-i h/w cement : concrete and masonry

TH. CUM

88.50 61.50 70



KM 127.00 30.00 20

Length of irrigation canals lined under the package (km.)

KM 149.68 52.12 30

48




KM 85.54 58.54 68


METER 1255.40 92090.00 73

Minor Irrigation Schemes

Of the 19 minor irrigation projects, 10 projects have been completed of which 8 were

completed within the scheduled time while the remaining two had experienced a delay of 1-

2.5 years. The delay in execution of individual minor irrigation projects is presented in Table

13. The status of construction of physical structures of individual projects is presented in

Table 28 at the end of the chapter.

Table 13 Status of implementation of sample minor irrigation projects in MP

Sl. No Project name Delay

( days)

Status Reasons for delay

1 Sarkanpur tank

scheme

0 Complete NA

2 Ken anicut 0 Complete NA

3 Veer sagar tank

scheme

0 Complete NA

4 Rongataghat stop

dam cum

causeway scheme

0 Complete NA

5 Amha tank 0 Complete NA

6 Karahi tank 0 Complete NA

7 Rampura tank 0 Complete NA

8 Gonchi tank 0 Complete NA

9 Lipari tank 400 Complete NA

10 Satighat tank

scheme

884 Complete Delay in land acquisition and

hindrance by the cultivators

11 Tikari tank

scheme

0 Incomplete Likely to be completed on scheduled

date i.e., june 2014

12 Chanaua Bujugrg

tank scheme

740 Incomplete Due clearance from forest

department for forest land and

shifting of high tension power line

13 Mamon tank 60 Incomplete to be completed by June 2014

49

Sl. No Project name Delay

( days)

Status Reasons for delay

14 Bila feeder canal 273 Incomplete Due to increase in the quantity of

excavation, particularly hard soil

and rock.

15 Sakariya tank 536 Incomplete Project failed

16 Paharikheda tank 536 Incomplete Small patch is left to be completed.

17 Narguwan tank

scheme

943 Incomplete Tenders had to be floated 4 times

due to non-completion of stipulated

works by the contractors acquisition

amounting to 2.479 ha has been

sought from forest deptt. on

03/03/2014

18 Samnapur tank

scheme

1500 Incomplete Land acquisition, case & obtaining

agency for canal work 2nd call and

tender

19 Satdhara tank

scheme

1692 Incomplete Delay due to land acquisition cases

affecting the work of canal system

Anticipated and actual cost of sample projects

The sanctioned project cost and the expenditure incurred along with the status of project

implementation in respect of the above 24 projects is given in Table14

Table 14 Sanctioned and actual cost of sample surface irrigation projects in MP

Sl.No. Name of the

project

Project

Cost

Expenditur

e

%

expenditure

Status of project

1 Mamon tank 955 769.01 81% To be completed

by June 2014

2 Urmil r.b canal

project

4569 1850 40% To be completed

by June 2014

3 Singhpur barrage

project

20052 17988.43 90% To be completed

by June 2015

4 Rangawan canal

project

3244 2381 73% To be completed

by June 2014

5 Bariyarpur left

bank canal project

20566.08 19930.79 97% To be completed

by June 2015

6 Narguwan tank

scheme

1268.66 1042.66 82% To be completed

by June 2015

7 Veer Sagar tank

scheme

58.55 40.38 69% Completed

8 Rongataghat stop

dam cum

causeway scheme

164.98 164.98 100% Completed

50

Sl.No. Name of the

project

Project

Cost

Expenditur

e

%

expenditure

Status of project

9 Sarkanpur tank

scheme

42.52 30.31 71% Completed

10 Satighat tank

scheme

797.01 671.5 84% Completed

11 Sakariya tank 392.22 468.54 119% To be completed

by June 2014

12 Ken anicut 52.87 50.78 96% Completed

13 Paharikheda tank 895.64 653.51 73% To be completed

by June 2014

14 Lipari tank 1578.88 2217.75 140% Completed

15 Amha tank 41.08 17.13 42% Completed

16 Karahi tank 238.24 209.13 88% Completed

17 Rampura tank 88 40.6 46% Completed

18 Samnapur tank

scheme

3449.7 3449.7 100% To be completed

by June 2015

19 Bila feeder canal 3785.89 3338 88% To be completed

by June 2014

20 Chanaua Bujurg

tank scheme

826.52 620.64 75% To be completed

by June 2014

21 Satdhara tank

scheme

2091.21 2151.45 103% To be completed

by June 2014

22 Tikari tank

scheme

1289.59 1150 89% To be completed

by June 2014

23 Gonchi tank 406.58 275.28 68% Completed

24 Rajghat canal CAD 2238.36 917.4 41.5% To be completed

by June 2015

Total 69092.58 60428.97 87%

While overall , the expenditure incurred constituted 89% of the total cost of the selected

projects, it is observed that several projects have been completed at less than the sanctioned

project cost while in three projects there is seen a cost overrun. As long as the total

expenditure under all the projects under the package is within the sanctioned cost, the cost

overrun may not hinder completion of all projects within the sanctioned package amount.

Irrigation Potential of Sample Projects (Madhya Pradesh)

Among the four major/medium irrigation projects selected for the study viz., Beriyarpur,

Urmil, Rajghat and Rangawan Canal, the total CCA has increased from 137 thousand in 2008-

09 Ha to about 188 thousand Ha by 2013-14 recording an increase of 37%. The potential

created as reported by the department officials for the sample project has also increased to

113 thousand Ha in 2013-14 from 68 thousand Ha in 2008-09. With increased potential, the

area irrigated during the rabi has also shown a significant increased over the period of 5

years. This significant increase in area is largely due to additional potential created and area

brought under irrigation from Bariyarpur Left Bank, Rungwan Canal and Urmil Projects.

51

Table 15 CCA, Potential created and area irrigated during rabi from major/ minor irrigation project in

MP

Particulars

20

08

-09

20

09

-10

20

10

-11

20

11

-12

20

12

-13

20

13

-14

Major/Medium Project

Culturable Command Area (Th. Ha)

137.26 137.26 137.26 137.26 182.07

188.07

Irrigation Potential Created (Th. Ha)

68.21 65.71 63.81 68.81 105.17

113.17

Area Irrigated during Rabi (Th. Ha)

9.00 35.77 40.19 69.95 84.59 116.58

Ongoing/New Minor Irrigation Projects


3.32 3.32 3.32 3.32 9.12 19.03


2.42 2.42 2.42 3.06 5.89 11.18


0.75 0.59 0.50 1.81 4.32 7.01

Total


140.57 140.57 140.57 140.57 191.18

207.09


70.63 68.13 66.23 71.86 111.06

124.35


9.75 36.36 40.68 71.75 88.90 123.59

The results are highly encouraging for sample Minor Irrigation Schemes where the CCA,

Irrigation potential and Area irrigated under rabi has increased by more than 200%. In total,

due to creation of additional irrigation infrastructures, completion of ongoing and new

minor irrigation scheme has resulted in increased area under rabi crop by more than 200%.

Impact of the Irrigation Projects on the Farmers

Based on sample survey of 630 farmers benefitted by

the selected sample projects, the impact of these

projects on the increase in irrigated land, cropping

pattern, productivity levels etc., were studied and the

results are presented in the following paragraph.

The average farm holding size was 5.56 acres and there

was no accretion to the land owned after the projects

were implemented. The average irrigated land of the

sample farmers in the pre project period (2009-10) was

2.78 acres which increased to 4.67 acres in 2012-13 with a corresponding decrease in the

rainfed land. There is further scope of increase in irrigated area as few more projects are to

be completed.

52

Table 16 Average land holding and cropping intensity of sample beneficiaries of surface irrigation

projects in MP

Parameter 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Average rainfed land (acres) 2.78 2.78 2.5 0.89

Average irrigated land 2.78 2.78 3.06 4.67

Average farm holding 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56

Average gross cropped area 6.56 6.23 6.51 6.89

Cropping intensity (%) 118% 112% 117% 124%

Changes in cropping pattern

Black gram, paddy, and soya bean were the major kharif crops and it was observed that

there was no major shift in cropping pattern in the Kharif season due to the projects nor the

cropped area increased in that season.

Table 17 Kharif cropping pattern of sample beneficiaries of surface irrigation projects in MP

Crop 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Black gram 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.38

Paddy 0.51 0.52 0.52 0.53

Soybean 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75

Others 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.18

Kharif Total 1.95 1.96 1.96 1.84

In rabi season, the acreage under wheat increased from 2.14 acres per farm to 3.38 acres,

the entire additional cropped area due to the projects being brought under wheat, besides

shift from gram and lentil.

Table 18 Rabi cropping pattern of sample beneficiaries of surface irrigation projects in MP

Crop 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Gram 1.96 1.95 1.83 1.52

Lentil 0.21 0.21 0.19 0.17

Wheat 2.14 2.13 2.41 3.38

Others 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.09

Rabi total 4.37 4.36 4.50 5.16

Increase in Productivity and Farm Income

The details of productivity of major crops in the sample farms in the pre project and project

period are presented in Table 19

53

Table 19 Productivity of major crops of sample beneficiaries of surface irrigation projects in MP

Crop 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Kharif crops

Paddy 1154 1395 1172 1172

Blackgram 223 221 215 225

Soybean 646 678 704 695

Rabi crops

Wheat 886 944 1106 1129

Gram 285 285 280 297

Lentil 794 776 519 604

The yield of major kharif and rabi crops increased during the project period for the

following reasons:

Life saving irrigation available during kharif seasons

Assured irrigation during rabi season

Adoption of HYV /improved varieties of seeds with appropriate package of practices

However the productivity of lentil has gone down showing disinterest by the farmers in this

crop

Major Observations from Field Visits: Uttar Pradesh

As a part of the evaluation study, 17 major, medium and minor irrigation projects were

visited. The district wise projects visited are presented below in table 20.

Table 20 Sample surface irrigation projects visited in UP

Physical progress of sample projects

All the 17 projects are renovation / modernisation / lining of existing canals / water bodies

projects. Therefore no land acquisition problems were encountered. All except one of the

projects were awarded to contractors after open tendering process in 2010-11; the lone

project viz., the Urmil dam project was also awarded after open tender but in February

Mahoba Lalitpur Jahnsi Jalaun Chitrakoot Hamirpur

Salarpur tank Urmila dam Dashrapur tank

Jaklaun pump canal

Pachwara lake Pachwara main canal –RRR Kakrawara main canal Ajrar main canal PT. Deendayal Upadhyay Pathrai dam In Barwar main canal Ajrar tank

Repairs and renovation of 6 bandhies ( 2 projects) Jayawanti tank Kuthond branch

Burdha dam and canal system

Maudaha main canal

3 Projects 1 Project 7 projects 3 projects 1 project 1 project

54

2013. Despite no hurdles in land acquisition, delays were seen in completion of the projects

as could be seen from the following table

Period of Delay No of Project

No delay 7 Upto 6 months delay 0 Upto 7-12 months 5 13-24 months 0 >24 months 5

Of the 5 projects with more than 2 years delay,

four projects are still ongoing and they are

expected to be completed in a years’ time. The

major reason reported for the delay was

providing irrigation and drinking water

facilities for most parts of the year considering

the drought situation in the region and

therefore very less period is available for

renovation and lining works. The status of

construction of physical structures of individual

projects are presented in Table 29 at the end of the chapter

Anticipated and actual cost of the project

The cost of the sample projects and the expenditure incurred against each of the project is

given in Table 21.

Table 21 Sanctioned and actual cost of sample surface irrigation projects in UP

Sl.

No.

Name of the project Total cost

(Rs lakh)

Actual

expenditure

(Rs lakh)

Physical

progress

1 Salarpur tank project 740.27 740.27 Completed

2 Urmil dam project (left bank canal) 405 175 Completed

3 Dashrapur tank project 118.53 118.53 Completed

4 Jakhlaun pump canal (renovation [c.c.

lining])

1902.95 1705.42 Completed

5 6 no bundhies (repair and restoration

of[kadaura])

23 23 Completed

6 Bundhies (repair and restoration of 6 no

[kadaura])

23 23 Completed

7 Pachwara lake (capacity restoration

moderization )

70.99 69.3 Completed

8 Pachwara main canal (restoration &

lining )

305.23 173.27 Completed

9 Kakarwara main canal (restoration and

lining)

Completed

10 Arjar main canal((restoration and lining) Completed

55

Sl.

No.

Name of the project Total cost

(Rs lakh)

Actual

expenditure

(Rs lakh)

Physical

progress

11 Pt. Deendayal Upadhyay Pathrai Dam

(modernization, restoration and lining of

the canal )

561.52 479 Incomplete

12 Arjar tank (capacity

Restoration/moderization )

84.29 84.26 Completed

13 Barwar main canal (restoration and

construction of c.c. lining-0.0000 to

30.880)

684 528.78 Completed

14 Burdha dam & canal system 321.26 321.26 Completed

15 Jaywanti tank (restoration) 587.62 571.62 Incomplete

16 Kuthond branch (restoration of lining) 2528 1379 Incomplete

17 Maudaha Main canal (c-c lining &

restoring section)

1853.95 859.63 Incomplete

10209.61 7251.34

It could be seen there from that many projects have been completed within the sanctioned

cost; few with considerable savings.

Irrigation Potential of Sample Projects (Uttar Pradesh)

The increase in the irrigation potential of these projects was expected to the extent of about

11000 ha at an estimated cost of Rs 10209 lakh, with average per ha cost working out to Rs

1 lakh . The year wise progress in creation of irrigation potential from these projects is given

in Table 22.

Table 22 Year wise irrigation potential of sample surface irrigation projects in UP

Year => 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Irrigation potential (ha)

46701 46812 46697 53658 56046 57332

Impact of the Irrigation Projects on the Farmers

Based on sample survey of 870 farmers benefitted by the 17 sample projects, the impact of

these projects on the increase in irrigated land, cropping pattern, productivity levels etc.,

were studied and the results are presented in the following paragraphs.

The average farm holding size was 3.89 acres and there was no accretion to the land owned

after the projects were implemented. The average irrigated land of the sample farmers in the

pre project period (2009-10) was 2.89 acres which increased to 3.37 acres in 2012-13 with

a corresponding decrease in the rainfed land. There is further scope of increase in irrigated

area as few more projects are to be completed.

56

Table 23 Average land holding and cropping intensity of sample beneficiaries of surface irrigation

projects in UP

Parameter 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Average rainfed land (acres) 1.00 0.86 0.85 0.52

Average irrigated land 2.89 3.02 3.04 3.37

Average farm holding 3.88 3.89 3.89 3.89

Average gross cropped area 5.54 5.68 5.68 5.90

Cropping intensity (%) 1.43 1.46 1.46 1.52

Changes in Cropping Pattern

Arhar, til , soya bean, urd, jowar, maize and moong were the major kharif crops and it was

observed that there was no major shift in cropping pattern in the Kharif season due to the

projects nor the cropped area increased in that season.

Table 24 Kharif cropping pattern of sample beneficiaries of surface irrigation projects in UP

Crop 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Arhar 0.26 0.25 0.23 0.20

Juwar 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19

Maize 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15

Moong 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.19

Soyabeen 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.48

Til 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27

Urd 0.80 0.81 0.81 0.74

Others 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.19

Kharif 2.46 2.46 2.44 2.42

In rabi season, the acreage under wheat increased from 1.95 acres per farm to 2.32 acres,

the entire additional cropped area due to the projects being brought under wheat.

Table 25 Rabi cropping pattern of sample beneficiaries of surface irrigation projects in UP

Crop 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Wheat 1.95 2.05 2.07 2.32

Gram 0.65 0.68 0.67 0.67

Peas 0.35 0.36 0.37 0.37

Others 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12

Total rabi 3.07 3.22 3.23 3.47

Increase in Productivity and Farm Income

The details of productivity of major crops in the sample farms in the pre project and project

period are presented in Table 26

57

Table 26 Productivity of major crops of sample beneficiaries of surface irrigation projects in UP

Crop 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 % increase over 2009-10

Kharif crops

Arhar 219 313 238 264 21%

Juwar 412 461 483 499 21%

Maize 412 503 544 575 40%

Moong 47 61 68 86 83%

Soyabeen 683 720 742 729 7%

Til 82 83 90 92 12%

Urd 164 207 201 247 51%

Rabi crops

Wheat 581 727 681 789 36%

Gram 316 373 384 438 39%

Peas 347 421 458 492 42%

The yield of major kharif and rabi crops increased during the project period for the

following reasons:

Life saving irrigation available during kharif seasons

Assured irrigation during rabi season

Adoption of HYV /improved varieties of seeds with appropriate package of practices

As a result, the average farm income per household increased from Rs 44717 in the pre

project period to Rs 60203 in 2012-13.

Table 27 Average household farm income of sample beneficiaries of surface irrigation projects in UP

Parameter 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Average household income from agriculture at 2012-13 prices (Rs)

44717 48038 53839 60203

Likely macro impact of surface irrigation projects

The surface irrigation projects enabled the farmers to bring additional area under irrigation

and shift and expand the cropping pattern to remunerative wheat crop. In MP, additional

irrigated area accrued during rabi season. This was devoted to wheat and the area under

wheat in the sample farms increased from 2.14 acres in 2009-10 to 3.38 acres (57%) in

2012-13. In UP also the additional area was brought under wheat due to availability of

irrigation facilities. The area under wheat in the sample farms increased from 1.95 acres in

2009-10 to 2.32 acres in 2012-13 (19% increase). Overall it can be concluded that the

additional irrigated potential created by the surface irrigation projects has been fully

devoted to cultivation of wheat crop in Bundelkhand region. As for productivity, the yield of

wheat in the sample farms in MP increased from 886 kg per acre in 2009-10 to 1129 kg per

acre in 2012-13, a 27% increase due to assured irrigation and adoption of HYV /improved

varieties of seeds with appropriate package of practices. Similarly the yield of wheat

58

increased from 581 kg per acre to 789 kg per acre between 2009-10 and 2012-13 i.e., by

36%. At a macro level the total production of wheat would have increased by 91300 MT in

MP and 69740 MT in UP aggregating all to 161000 MT in the region because of the package.

59

Table 28: Component wise physical progress under sample surface irrigation projects in Madhya Pradesh

Sl. No. Project Name Type of infrastructure Physical Quantity Stage of completion (%)

Stage of completion (%)

Target Unit Achievement

1 Mamon tank Length of main canal 4.86 KM 4.86 100 100


12.57 KM 12.57 100 100


2 Urmil r.b canal project

Length of main canal 30.09 KM 28.04 90 90


105.39 KM 47.12 45 45


135.48 KM 75.08 55 55

3 Singhpur barrage project

Unit-i h/w cement : concrete and masonry

88.50 TH. CUM 61.50 70 70

length of main canal 22.68 KM 22.12 95 95

length of subsidiary and networks

127.00 KM 30.00 20 20

length of irrigation canals lined under the package (km.)

149.68 KM 52.12 30 30

4 Rangawan canal project



85.54 KM 58.54 68 68


1255.40 METER 92090.00 73 73

60



5 Bariyarpur left bank canal project


Length of branch canal 30.00 KM 30.00 100 100


412.00 KM 400.00 99 99


49.00 KM 43.00 88 88


30.00 KM 15.00 50 50


412.00 KM 42.00 10 10

6 Narguwan tank scheme

Head works

Dam 1290.00 METER 967.50 75 75

w.w 30.00 METER 25.50 75 75




7 Veer Sagar tank scheme

Head work

Construction of protection wall, and various repair work

420.00 METER 420.00 100 100

Resectioning of main canal

1400.00 METER 1400.00 100 100

Re-sectioning of branch & 1100.00 METER 1100.00 100 100

61



minor canals

8 Rongataghat stop dam cum causeway scheme

Head work

Concrete weir 153.00 METER 153.00 100 100

Weirs and cause way 153.00 METER 153.00 100 100

Length of left bank canal

Length of right bank canal

9 Sarkanpur tank scheme

Head work

Repair of sluice 1.00 NO 1.00 100 100

RRR of canal 400.00 METER 400.00 100 100

New masonry canal 861.00 METER 861.00 100 100

10 Satighat tank scheme

Head work

Dam 630.00 METER 630.00 100 100

W.W 186.00 METER 186.00 100 100

Length of left bank canal 1400.00 METER 1400.00 100 100

Length of right bank canal 5500.00 METER 5500.00 100 100

11 Sakariya tank Length of main dam

Length of main canal



12 Ken anicut Length of main weir 60.00 METER 60.00 100 100



62




13 Paharikheda tank

Length of main dam 1080.00 METER 1080.00 100 100




14 Lipari tank Length of main dam 1650.00 METER 1650.00 100 100



46.80 KM 44.46 95 95


15 Amha tank Length of main dam 2305.00 METER



10.56 KM 10.56 100 100


16 Karahi tank Length of main dam 540.00 METER 540.00 100 100

Length of main canal 2850.00 METER 2850.00 100 100


11700.00 METER 11700.00 100 100

Length of irrigation 750.00 METER 750.00 100 100

63



canals lined under the package (meter)cc channel

17 Rampura tank Length of main dam 675.00 METER 675.00 100 100

Length of main canal LBC 3000.00 METER 3000.00 100 100

Length of main canal RBC 3090.00 METER 3090.00 100 100


Length of irrigation canals lined under the package (meter)cc channel

600.00 METER 600.00 100 100

18 Samnapur tank scheme



14770.00 METER 12000.00 81 81


11310.00 METER 0.00 0

19 Bila feeder canal

Excavation of feeder canal 2194913.00 CUM 1872587.00 85 85

Head work & canal structures

42.00 NO 8.00 20 20



NIL NA

Length of irrigation canals lined under the package

NIL NA

20 Chanaua bujugrg tank

Length of main canal (LBC)

1.95 KM 0.21 11 11

64



scheme Length of main canal (RBC)

4.50 KM 1.05 23 23

Length of subsidiary and networks (minor)

1.20 KM


NO PROVISION NO PROVISION

21 Satdhara tank scheme

Head work

Dam 1290.00 METER 1290.00 100 100

w.w. 140.00 METER 140.00 100 100



9800.00 METER 7000.00 72 72


785.00 METER 785.00 100 100

22 Tikari tank scheme

Excavation of all type soil 323005.00 CUM 288174.00

Rock excavation 51732.00 CUM 46028.00

Earth work 661764.00 CUM 699429.00 98 98

Pitching 41264.00 CUM 41530.00

Boulder toe 21404.00 CUM 17494.00

Excavation of all type soil 255695.00 CUM 132218.00

Rock excavation 25037.00 CUM 10950.00

Cement concrete work 8074.00 CUM 2536.00 48 48

Cement concrete lining 3999.00 CUM 1098.00

Structures 77.00 NO 27.00

Length of main Canal (RBC & LBC)

16.50 KM

65



Length of minor canal (RBC & LBC)

17.80 KM

Length of irrigation canals lined under

14.90 KM

23 Gonchi tank length of main canal 2.88 KM 2.88 100 100

66

Table 29: Component wise physical progress under sample surface irrigation projects in Uttar Pradesh

SL Project name Type of infrastructure Unit Physical quantity Stage of completion (%)

Target Achievement

1 Salarpur tank project Length of main dam KM 2.97 2.97 100

Quantity of de-silting from dam CUM 400000.00 400000.00 100


2 Urmil dam project (left bank canal)

Length of irrigation canal lined under the package in meters

5225 2350 45

3 Dashrapur tank project Tank (1) KM 1.50

Tank (2) KM 1.15

Tank (3) KM 1.50

Quantity of de-silting CUM 90000.00 100

Tank (1) KM 4.50

Tank (2) KM 3.60

Tank (3) KM 9.00

4 Jakhlaun Pump Canal (renovation [c.c. Lining])

C.c. Lining of JPC. (in patches) form km. 4.000 to 34.300

13.770 13.770 100

Length of main canal in patches 13.770 13.770 100



13.770 13.770 100

5 6 no bundhies (repair and restoration of[Kadaura])

Earth work 5320 4721 Completed

Pucca work NO 1.00 1.00 100




67


Target Achievement

6 Bundhies (repair and restoration of 6 no [kadaura])

Earth work 8605 7442 COMPLETED

Pucca work NO 1.00 1.00 100




7 Pachwara lake (capacity restoration modernization )

Restoration of pachwara lake in district Jhansi

Cum 49140.00 49140.00 100




8 Pachwara main canal (restoration & lining )

Cement concrete lining (1:2:4 mix & 60 mm thick)




9 Kakarwara main canal (restoration and lining)

Cement concrete lining (1:2:4 mix & 60 mm thick)

Length of main canal KM 6.20



10 Arjar tank (capacity restoration/modernization )

Restoration/modernization of Arjar tank in district Jhansi

68


Target Achievement




11 Pt. Deendayal upadhyay pathrai dam (modernisation, restoration and lining of the canal )

Canal service road KM 9.50 9.50 KM 100

Restoration canal section KM 2.00 2.00 KM 100

Pucca work on canal NO 29.00 29 NOS 100

Dam work JOB 1.00 1 JOB 100




KM 3.75 3.75 KM 100

12 Arjar main canal((restoration and lining)

Cement concrete lining (1:2:4 mix of 60 mm thick)




13 In Barwar main canal (restoration and construction of c.c. Lining-0.0000 to 30.880)

Restoration and const of c.c. Lining in Barwar main canal

KM 13.25 10.00 75


Length of subsidiary and networks KM 22.86


KM 13.25

14 Burdha dam & canal system Restoration of embankment of ram KM 2.78 2.78 100

Restoration of canals KM 8.15 8.15 100

69


Target Achievement

15 Jaywanti tank (restoration) Restoration of Jaywanti KM 3.40 3.40 100

16 Kuthond branch (restoration of lining)

C.c. Lining KM 20.40 8.00 40

Construction of bridge NO 2.00 2.00 100

Repair of bridge NO 13.00 13.00 100

Repair of heads of meter NO 9.00 9.00 100

Restoration of canal KM 107.22 107.22 100

Construction of retaining works M 1205.00 345.00

Restoration of canal KM 185.37 169.50


Length of subsidiary and networks KM 861.94


KM 20.40

17 Maudaha main canal (c-c lining & restoring section)

Earth work LAC CUM 2.06 1.40

C-c lining of canal LAC CUM 0.24 0.15




12000 5000

70

Chapter 4 Watershed Management

Activities in Uttar Pradesh

New Dug wells, Dug well renovation, Recharge and HDPE Pipe

All the above four activities are intended to benefit individual farmers to judiciously exploit

and distribute ground water resources in their fields. However the first three activities have

been classified under Watershed Development sector while distribution of HDPE pipes has

been classified under water resources sector. The construction of new dug wells were

implemented in four districts; Jhansi, Lalitpur, Chitrakoot and Mahoba.

Deepening/Renovation of existing dug well were undertaken in districts of Jhansi, Lalitpur

and Mahoba. Recharge tanks were constructed for the purpose of recharge of dug wells in all

the districts. New Dug wells and renovation of existing/ old dug well were proposed in

convergence with MGNREGA Scheme and Additional Central Assistance. No new dug wells

were considered in the districts of Jalaun, Banda and Hamirpur. HDPE pipes were

distributed in all the districts. A total of Rs 400 crore constituting 24% of the ACA

allocations were earmarked for the above activities. The amount released was Rs

236 crore (59%), against which Rs 168 crore has been expended. The low level of

financial achievement was due to several implementation problems faced at the field

level.

Physical and Financial Progress

Physical Progress

The total targeted new dug well/blast wells under the package for the phase-I was 8834

against which 4094 are reportedly completed, which 46% of the total target dug wells. The

number of completed dug wells in Chitrakoot is only

19%, the least compared to three other districts;

Jhansi, Lalitpur and Mahoba. The most important

reasons cited by the department for incomplete work

is due to convergence with MGNREGA Scheme, which

do accompany with labour shortage because of

additional works of Panchayat. The problems are also

faced by the department due to sanction and release of

amount by the MGNREGA. The convergence with

MGNREGA Scheme has resulted in considerable delays in completion of work and may dug

wells are still incomplete. There were cases of collapse reported earlier because the wells

were not completed in time as the fund from MGNREGA was not released in time.

71

Table 30 District wise physical targets and achievements of dug wells scheme under Bundelkhand Package in UP

Name of the Scheme District Physical

Target Achieved % Achievement

Construction of New Dug Well/Blast Wells

Jhansi 2617 1338 51%

Lalitpur 2617 1686 64%

Mahoba 1800 726 40%

Chitrakoot 1800 344 19%

Total 8834 4094 46%

Renovation/Deepening of Dug Well/Blast Wells

Jhansi 8900 700 8%

Lalitpur 8900 2046 23%

Jalaun 1600 0 -

Hamirpur* 622 0 -

Banda* 900 0 -

Mahoba* 7040 875 12%


Total 30120 3954 13%

Dug Well Recharge

Jhansi 8565 162 2%

Lalitpur 8750 3000 34%

Jalaun 2215 599 27%

Hamirpur 910 910 100%

Banda 1360 766 56%

Mahoba 6864 302 4%


Total 30864 6586 21%

Under Renovation/Deepending of Dug Wells and Blast wells, the progress is not at all

satisfactory as only 13% of the targeted deepening

have taken place. In Jalaun, Hamirpur and Banda

districts, activity of deepening was dropped due its

impracticability. In Jhansi, only 8% of the targets

were deepened. In Lalitpur, although a fair progress

of 23% have been made during the first phase but it

was also found, that only deepening as proposed has

been done on older

wells but the ideal

would have been the proposal should have included the

lining of dug wells as well.

One small pit of the size of 2 m. X 1.5 m. X 1.5 m. and one

bigger pit of the size of 3 m. X 3 m. X 1.5 m. are constructed

in series and they are also connected with a 150 mm.

diameter PVC pipe. The bigger pit is then connected with

the dug well through another PVC pipe of 150 mm.

diameter. It is ensured that both the pits and well are

constructed in series. An artificial catchment is created to facilitate flow of rain water to the

pits and then ultimately to the well.

72

The project is a total failure as the soils in the area are heavy and after the first rain fall the

infiltration rate of water from the pits becomes almost zero. Neither farmer nor the

department officials are convinced about the utility of the dug well recharge pit. It is also not

possible to keep the catchment area clean and therefore dirty and muddy water flows into

the well (if at all there is any flow from the recharge pit to dug well) which pollutes the

water of the well also. GoUP may consider stopping the construction of dug well recharge

pits.

Financial Progress

The financial sanction given for construction of New Dug Wells/Blast Wells (8,834),

Renovation/Deepening of Dug Well/Blast Wells (30,120) and Dug Well Recharge (30,864)

was Rs. 250 crore for the former two and Rs. 46.43 crore for the later respectively. The

target of renovation of old wells and recharge pit structures were quite large and did not off

take satisfactorily. Total expenditure by 2013-14 made out of the total sanctioned budget

was 46% for New Dug wells, 10% for renovation activities and 25% for Dug well recharge.

The district wise financial progress of dug well scheme can be seen in the Table 31

presented below.

Table 31 District wise financial targets and achievements of dug well scheme in UP

Name of the Scheme District Financial (Rs. Crore)

Sanctioned Expenditure ACA Exp. % of Exp to Sanction

Construction of New Dug Well/Blast Wells

Jhansi 74.06 38.50 21.15 52%

Lalitpur 74.06 45.85 16.70 62%

Mahoba 50.94 17.22 8.43 34%

Chitrakoot 50.94 2.52 1.27 5%

Chitrakoot 50.94 2.52 1.27 5%

Total 250.00 104.09 47.55 42%

Renovation/Deepening of Dug Well/Blast Wells

Jhansi 73.87 6.63 2.98 9%

Lalitpur 73.87 12.02 6.33 16%

Jalaun 13.28 - - -

Hamirpur 5.16 - - -

Banda 7.47 - - -

Mahoba 58.43 4.09 1.77 7%

Chitrakoot 17.91 2.52 1.27 14%

Total 250.00 25.26 12.37 10%

Dug Well Recharge

Jhansi 13.87 0.40 0.33 3%

Lalitpur 14.17 5.95 5.37 42%

Jalaun 3.58 1.52 1.29 42%

Hamirpur 1.47 1.35 1.22 92%

Banda 2.20 1.67 1.45 76%

Mahoba 11.12 0.78 0.65 7%

Chitrakoot - - - -

Total 46.43 11.70 10.32 25%

Most of the expenditure which was made in construction of recharge pits was made from

Additional Central Assistance which has not yielded the desired result.

73

Cost of the Project (New Dug Wells/ Blast Wells, Renovation/Deepening of Dug

Wells, Dug Well Recharge)

The estimated cost of new dug wells varied between Rs. 2.83 lakh to Rs. 3.15 lakh, Rs. 0.83

lakh for Renovation/ deepening of old dug wells and Rs. 0.23 lakh for recharge pit. However,

a few of the structures are even found be completed below the estimated cost due to

variation in soil strata. From the sample, the average cost of creating an acre of irrigated

area worked out to be Rs. 84,250 which is far less than the major/ medium irrigation

projects. The average for creating an acre of irrigated area in different districts is presents

below.

Table 32 Cost incurred for creating an acre of irrigated area by new dug wells in UP

District N Total Cost (Rs)

Total Irrigated Area

(Acre)

Cost Per acre of Irrigated

Area

Jhansi 20 6088000 48.6 125267.48 Lalitpur 20 4280222 59.95 71396.53 Mahoba 15 3557829 50.5 70452.05 Chitrakoot 25 5078285 65.8 77177.58 Overall 80 19004336 224.85 84520.06

Impact of the Dug Wells Scheme in Uttar Pradesh

Socio Economic Profile of Sample Respondents

One hundred and twenty five beneficiaries of New Dug well/blast wells and Renovation of

Dug wells were surveyed from four Bundelkhand districts of Uttar Pradesh. The sample

distribution is given below in Table 33 below.

Table 33 Socio economic profile of sample dug well beneficiaries in UP

Particulars Jhansi Lalitpur Mahoba Chitrakoot Total/Overall

Sample 40 40 20 25 125

Average Age 47.1 50.65 50.8 57.96 50

Mean Years of Education

3.72 3.4 0.75 3.8 3.17

SC/ST 4 (10%) 6 (15%) 5 (25%) 2 (14%) 17 (14%)

OBC 34 (85%) 29 (73%) 14 (70%) 14 (56%) 91 (73%)

Others 2 (5%) 5 (13%) 1 (5%) 9 (36%) 17 (14%)

BPL 9 (23%) 11 (28%) 5 (25%) 16 (64%) 41 (33%)

APL 31 (78%) 29 (73%) 15 (75%) 9 (36%) 84 (67%)

Mean Family Size 6.85 7.65 6.7 9.8 7.67

Marginal (Upto 2.5 acre)

28 (70%) 13 (33%) 8 (40%) 15 (60%) 64 (51%)

Small (2.5 to 5 acre) 12 (30%) 26 (65%) 12 (60%) 9 (36%) 59 (47%)

Other (> 2.5 acre) 0 (0%) 1 (3%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 2 (2%)

Mean Land Holding 2.26 3.32 3.1 2.63 2.81

The mean beneficiary age is estimated at 50 years with approximately 3 years of schooling

which means that most of the beneficiaries have very little exposure to formal education. Of

74

all the 125 beneficiaries of New Dug wells and Renovation of dug well, 73% belongs to OBC

Category, SC/ST and Other beneficiaries were found to be 14% each respectively. With

respect to economic status, 33% were Below Poverty Line while 67% were Above Poverty

Line. The mean family size works out to be on high side with 7.67, having highest estimates

for Chitrakoot (9.8).

Most of the beneficiaries of dug well and dug well recharge were small (51%) and marginal

(47%). Only 2% of the beneficiaries were found whose land exceeded 5 acres. The overall

average land holding worked out to be 2.81 acre.

Increase in Irrigated Area- District wise

The net land holding available for agriculture among the sample beneficiaries reportedly

sum to approximately 225 acre (N=80). The status of irrigated agriculture among the sample

beneficiaries has significantly improved due to the construction of new dug well as can be

seen from the table below. The area under rainfed agriculture has remained almost the same

but improved in places like Lalitpur and Chitrakoot as many farmers have started cultivating

vegetable crops once the availability of water is ensured.

Status of Rainfed and Irrigated Agriculture after construction of Dug New Wells/Blast Wells

Table 34 Change in status of rainfed and irrigated acreage due to dug well in UP

District Net Land Holding

2010-11 2013-14

Rain-fed (Acre)

Irrigated (Acre)

Rain-fed (Acre)

Irrigated (Acre)

Jhansi 48.6 48.6 21.5 48.6 51.1

Lalitpur 59.95 48.5 40 54.5 59.45

Mahoba 50.5 50.5 37.5 35.54 40.5

Chitrakoot 65.8 28.9 27.5 35.5 54.9

Total 224.85 176.5 126.5 174.14 205.95

Irrigated to rainfed Ratio 0.717 1.18

The ratio of irrigated to rainfed agriculture has shown an impressive results among the

sample farmers. This in simple terms means that a very good proportion of land has been

converted to double cropped area due to assured supply of water. The percentage increase

in irrigated area for the sample farmers is estimated at 63%.

Cropping Pattern over the year in Kharif Season

The cropping pattern of Kharif among the sample beneficiaries of Dug Wells is presented

below. As such the cropping pattern in Kharif season has not seen a major shift except the

crops like Soybean, Paddy, Sugarcane and Vegetables.

75

Table 35 Change in cropping pattern of Kharif crops among dug well beneficiaries in UP

District Crop N 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Jhansi Groundnut 20 48.6 46.1 47.6 46.1

Lalitpur Soybean 20 28.5 28.5 32 32

Black Gram 19 17.5 17.5 19 19

Green Gram 5 2.5 2.5 3.75 3.75

Mahoba Groundnut 10 15 15 14 14

Green Gram 3 4 4 4 4

Black Gram 4 6.5 6.5 5.5 5.04

Sesame 3 3 3 3 3

Sugarcane 3 3 3 5 5

Vegetable 5 - - 5 5

Chitrakoot Paddy 17 24.5 24.5 31.5 31.5

Pegion Pea 2 2.6 2.6 2.4 2.4

Vegetable 4 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.1

Cropping Pattern over year in Rabi Season

The cropping pattern in rabi season of the sample farmers is presented below.

Table 36 Change in cropping pattern of Rabi Crops among dug well beneficiaries in UP

District Crop N 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

2013-14

Jhansi Mustard 20 21.5 21 25 24

Wheat 20 27.1 26.1 26.6 27.6

Lalitpur Wheat 20 24 24 39.95 40

Peas 17 14.5 14.5 17 17

Gram 3 1.5 1.5 2.5 2.5

Mahoba Wheat 20 10 10 30 30

Gram 8 14 14.5 3.5 3.5

Lentil 1 2 2 0 0

Peas 8 11.5 11.5 5 5

Chitrakoot Wheat 25 10.7 10.7 38.8 38.8

Gram 11 14.6 14.6 10.9 10.9

Vegetable 17 0.4 0.4 2.8 2.8

Mustard 2 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.6

Barley 2 1 1 0.5 0.5

In contrast to Kharif crops, there has been a significant shift in almost every crop, most

impressive in crops like Wheat and Vegetables. The area under crops that can be grown in

lesser water such as gram, lentils etc have decreased over time.

76

Change in Productivity of Crops

Change in Productivity of Kharif Crop (Kg/Acre)

The productivity of Kharif crop has changed due to assured irrigation through dug wells,

which is result of any additional water required during the stress period. The district wise

change is reported in Table 37 above. Overall the productivity of Kharif Crops taken most

commonly in the region like Soybean, Groundnut, Blackgram, Greengram, Paddy has shown

an improvement. Most significantly for crops like soybean, groundnut and paddy with

percentage increase by 59%, 11% and 76% relative to 2010-11 yield reported by sample

farmers. The productivity of other crops such as blackgram, greengram has estimated to be

increased by 41% and 22% respectively.

Table 37 Change in productivity of Kharif crops (Kg/Acre) among dug well beneficiaries in UP

District Crops 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 % change

Jhansi Groundnut 421.0 448.0 459.5 497.5 18%

Lalitput Soybean 237.7 253.9 356.2 378.5 59%

Urad 100.3 164.4 164.4 183.5 83%

Moong 32.5 37.8 57.0 65.8 103%

Mahoba Groundnut 366.7 393.3 326.7 310.0 -15%

moong 225.0 250.0 225.0 237.5 6%

Sugarcane 1140.0 1260.0 1300.0 1380.0 21%

Sesame 93.3 93.3 96.7 96.7 4%

Urad 384.6 392.3 346.2 307.7 -20%

Vegetable 0.0 0.0 966.7 966.7

Chitrakoot Paddy 582.5 701.8 989.5 1028.1 77%

Pegion Pea 387.1 387.1 387.1 387.1 0%

Potato 7500.0 6200.0 8100.0 9000.0 20%

Tomato 3000.0 3000.0 4000.0 6000.0 100%

77

Change in Productivity of Rabi Crop

The irrigated crops taken during the Rabi season has

shown changes with respect to cropping pattern

bringing more area under certain crops such as

wheat, the most preferred crops. Even the acreage of

some crops such as red gram, peas etc might have

decreased, but as the productivity has increased it has

compensated for the lost area. The change in

productivity of crops grown as reported by sample

farmers is presented in table 38 below.

Figure 3 Overall change in productivity of Kharif Crop among dug well beneficiaries in UP

78

Table 38 Change of productivity of Rabi Crop (Kg/Acre) among dug well beneficiaries in UP

District Crop 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Jhansi Mustard 472.1 488.4 583.7 534.9

Wheat 699.3 712.2 885.6 706.6

Lalitpur Wheat 359.8 379.4 749.3 798.6

Peas 274.9 309.2 377.9 408.0

Gram 178.8 193.8 367.5 382.5

Mahoba Wheat 355.6 371.1 807.8 771.4

Peas 590.5 552.9 480.0 520.0

Lentil 250.0 300.0 - -

Gram 504.0 512.0 246.2 442.9

Chitrakoot Wheat 507.4 507.4 759.3 813.3

Gram 525.4 533.9 678.0 745.8

Onion 16666.7 18333.3 22000.0 25555.6

Tomato 15000.0 16000.0 10700.0 10600.0

Vegetables 50000.0 55000.0 73000.0 79500.0

The overall change in productivity of crops such as wheat, gram, peas, mustard, and some

vegetable crops such as onion can be seen in figure below.

The productivity of wheat on average has increased from 445.2 Kg/Acre in 2010-11 to 778

Kg/Acre in 2013-14, which is 74% increase. Similarly, the Gram has recorded productivity of

14% increase during the same period. The other crops such as peas, mustard the estimated

productivity has increased by 20% and 13% respectively.

Since, the farmers have also changed to vegetable crops, the productivity of onion has

increased by 53% from 166 quintal to 255 quintal per acre from 2010-11 to 2013-14,

however for tomato the productivity has shown a decreasing trend.

Figure 4 Overall change in productivity of Wheat and Gram crops among dug well beneficiaries in UP

79

Change in Cropping Intensity

The impact of the Dug Wells in district wise and overall change in cropping intensity is

presented below in Table 39

Table 39 Change in cropping intensity among dug well beneficiaries in UP

District 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 % Point change

Jhansi 200% 192% 204% 200% 0%

Lalitpur 148% 148% 190% 190% 42%

Mahoba 137% 137% 145% 145% 8%

Chitrakoot 86% 86% 137% 137% 52%

Overall 138% 137% 167% 167% 28%

From the table above, the overall cropping intensity has increased on average from 138% in

2010-11 to 167% in the year 2013-14. Comparing the figures for 2010-11 to the recent year

2013-14, the cropping intensity among the sample beneficiaries of dug wells scheme on

average has increased by 28 percentage point. As such there is no increase in cropping

intensity among the sample beneficiaries, while a marginal increase of 8% point is observed

Figure 5 Overall Change in productivity of Mustard, peas, onion and tomato among dug well beneficiaries in

UP

80

in Mahoba. Among the four districts where the new dug well schemes has been

implemented, the farmers of Chitrakoot district has performed relatively better from other

district farmers, despite the progress on overall achievement of physical targets of dug wells

are lowest among the four districts.

Deepening of Dug Wells

Forty five beneficiaries of dug well deepening were interviewed from three districts Jhanis,

Lalitpur and Mahoba. It must be noted that the deepening of dug wells were not

implemented in the Jalaun, Hamirpur and Banda due its impracticability. The progress in

deepening is not satisfactory, as only 10% of the total targets have been met during the first

phase. Out of total 45 dug wells inspected, 60% of them were 5.00 m to 7.00 m deep, 24%

were 7.00 m to 9.00 m deep and the rest 15% were more than 9.00 m deep. The average

depth before deepening was 7.42 m which is reportedly deepened by 4 meters. The average

depth after deepening was found to be 11.63 m. No change in diameter has been done in any

of the wells. The distribution of sample deepened dug wells are presented in table 40 below.

Table 40 Percentage distribution of Deepening of dug wells with respect to depth in UP

Depth of Well Before Deepening After Deepening

No Percentage No Percentage

5.00 m - 7.00 m 27 60% 0 0%

7.00 m to 9.00 m 11 24% 6 13%

9.00 m to 11.00 m 5 11% 18 40%

11.00 m to 13.00 m 2 4% 9 20%

13.00 m to 15.00 m 0 0% 7 16%

15.00 m to 17 m 0 0% 5 11%

45 100% 45 100%

Impact of Deepening of Dug Wells on Ground Water Level

Figure 6 Impact of deepening of dug wells on water column in UP

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

Before Deepening

After Deepening Before Deepening

After Deepening

Water Column (Mid June) Water Column (Mid June)

1.5

8

6.6

3

3.3

5

8.9

1

0.0

8

4.0

8

4.1

5

6.6

8

1.1

2

6.1

4

0.6

2

1.1

4

0.8

6

5.4

4

3.4

0

7.0

5

Me

ter

Jhansi lalitput Mahoba Overall

81

The average water column during mid June as reported by sample farmers before the well

were deepened was 0.86 meters. After increase in depth by approximately 4.00 meters, the

retention capacity of most of the wells has improved. The average water column during mid

June after the deepening of well is reportedly 5.44 meter. During, rabi period, the average

water column during mid November before was reportedly 3.4 meter which improved to

7.05 meter.

The land which was irrigated to an extent of 40 acre, out of net cultivable area 126 acre

before deepening, due to enhanced water availability all the land is now irrigated. Additional

62 acre of land has also been reportedly brought under irrigation through sharing to

neighbours.

Figure 7 Impact of deepening of dug well on change in irrigated acreage in UP

Income from Agriculture

The household income from agriculture on average has increased from Rs. 26,589.6 to Rs.

42,636.8 after the construction of new dug wells and deepening of existing dug wells.

0 20 40 60 80

100 120 140 160 180 200

Total Cultivable Land

Land Irrigated before Deepening

Land Irrigated after deepening

Additional area brought under

irrigation

Acr

e

Rs. -

Rs. 5,000.00

Rs. 10,000.00

Rs. 15,000.00

Rs. 20,000.00

Rs. 25,000.00

Rs. 30,000.00

Rs. 35,000.00

Rs. 40,000.00

Rs. 45,000.00

HH Income (Before) HH Income (After)

Rs. 26,589.66

Rs. 42,636.84

Figure 8 Change in farm income due to enhanced water availabiltiy among dug well beneficiaries

82

HDPE Pipe Distribution

Hundred percent achievements are reported in

HDPE pipe distribution scheme in all the

Bundelkhand district of Uttar Pradesh. Against the

targeted 17751 beneficiaries to be allocated HDPE

pipes, 18000 beneficiaries are reportedly allocated

the pipes. Each beneficiary was given 600 feet (30

pipes each of 20 ft length) the cost of which varied

between Rs. 23,000 to Rs. 30,000. The pipes were

distributed by the Minor Irrigation Department

entirely on the approved budgetary allocation under ACA. No convergence or beneficiary

contributions were made by the beneficiaries of the scheme.

Though, the HDPE pipes have proven useful in reduction of

conveyance loss and wastage of water, but the selection of

beneficiary in the scheme has not been sturdy enough. Many

beneficiaries who were distributed the pipes were well enough to

buy on their own. Rather it would have been beneficial if the pipes

were distributed among the beneficiaries who have been provided

new dug well or those who are economically weaker to invest on

assets. Selection of beneficiaries may be strengthened. Due to

reduction in losses of water, during conveyance, there has been

reduction in total time required to irrigate the land. On average, there is reduction of 4 hours

for irrigating an acre of land from 10.85 hours to 6.98 hours, which is equivalent of saving at

least 4 litre of diesel amounting to Rs.200 per acre/ per irrigation.

Summing Up

The impact from the completed new dug wells and dug well deepening is quite evident due

to assured irrigation. There has been as significant change in area under irrigated

agriculture. Due to availability of water; during stress period in Kharif, the additional one or

two irrigation has been made possible resulting crop saving and enhanced productivity. The

rabi crop productivity has increased from the pre intervention period and farmers having

access to irrigation now growing gram or lentils have turned to wheat crop; from local to

high yielding variety. The distributions of HDPE pipes have reduced the wastage of water by

reduction in conveyance losses and net saving in time of irrigation. The dug well recharge as

such has not been accepted well by the farmers. The structure is not technically viable due

to heavy soil, mostly black cotton in the region. The impact of new dug wells and dug well

deepening would have multiplied further; given the achievements against the targets were

more. As per the reports and estimates, only 46% and 13% of the new and old dug wells

have been completed. The department should critically review the situation for completion

of new dug wells and renovation of older dug wells at the earliest. The recharge structures

may be dropped from the second phase of the package. The HDPE Pipe distribution system

though may be continued but the beneficiaries’ selection criteria may be strengthened.

Additional, provisioning for pump sets for new dug well beneficiaries may be included in the

package.

83

Activities in Madhya Pradesh

Energization of Kapildhara Wells through Pump Set

The Physical and Financial Achievements

Watershed Management activities in Madhya Pradesh consisted of construction of dug well,

stop dams, watershed management activities in arable land and provisioning of water lifting

devices to new dug wells which are implemented under Kapil Dhara Scheme of MGNREGA.

Total approved budget for the Watershed Management sector in MP was 1300 crore of the

total 3860 crore which 34% of the total approved budget. The allocations provisioned as

Additional Central Assistance (ACA) was Rs 210 crore of which Rs 80 crore was allocated for

energization of new dug wells, which is 4% of the total allocations of ACA of MPs share.

District wise financial and physical targets for establishment of pump sets are given in table

41 below.

Table 41 Physical and financial progress under Pump set distribution scheme of Bundelkhand Package in

MP

Districts Physical (No) Financial (Crore)

Tar

get

(No

of

Wel

ls)

Co

mp

lete

d W

ells

% (

Co

mp

lete

d v

s.

targ

et

Ach

iev

emen

t (N

o o

f P

um

ps)

% (

pu

mp

s vs

. ta

rget

ed w

ells

)

Tar

get

Ach

iev

emen

t

%

Sagar 5668 5906 104 5217 92 12.34 09.69 79

Chhatarpur 11281 9752 86 6761 60 22.56 13.48 60

Damoh 7623 7787 102 7395 97 15.25 14.46 95

Tikamgarh 7754 6684 86 6594 85 15.5 13.18 85

Panna 6474 6241 96 4789 74 13.94 08.93 64

Datia 1200 456 38 302 25 02.40 00.52 22

Total 40000 36826 92 31058 78 81.99 60.26 73

Against the total 40000 targeted wells, 36826 wells have already been constructed. The

districts like Sagar and Damoh has constructed more than the targeted wells which were

sanctioned by the district administration, hence achieving more than 100%. The progress in

Datia is relatively on the lower side as compared to progress in other districts. As can be

seen from the table above, that overall 78% of the targeted wells under the package have

been completed with the installation of pump sets. The highest achievements are observed

in districts of Damoh and Sagar where 97% and 92% of the targeted wells have been

installed with the pump sets. Out of the Rs. 81.99 crore allocations, Rs. 75.93 crore were

received and Rs. 60.26 crore have been spent towards for installing 31058 pump sets. The

average cost for installation of pumpset work out to be Rs. 19402.

Major Observations from Field Visits

The prime objective of providing lifting devices is to provide efficient and effective

management of water resource to achieve enhanced agriculture production resulting in

84

improved livelihoods impacts. The quick impact evaluation with regards to pump sets in this

study was undertaken using data sets collected from 5 districts covering 85 sample

beneficiaries who are benefitted from the scheme.

The socio economic characteristic of respondents of pump set beneficiaries is given in the

table 42.

Table 42 Socio economic profile of pump set beneficiaries in MP

Parameter Sagar Chhatarpur Damoh Tikamgarh Panna Total

Sample 15 20 15 15 20 85 Average Age (Years) 49.4 51.35 36.6 52.86 48.1 47.9 Average Education (Years) 2.3 (3.50)a

SC/ST 29 (34%) OBC 39 (46%) Others 17 (20%) BPL 71 (84%) APL 14 (16%) Marginal (Upto 2.5 acres) 30 (35%) Small (2.5 acre to 5 acres) 50 (59%) Others (> 5 acre) 5 (6%) Average Land Holding (Acre)

3.41 (1.50)a

Average family size 6.43 (2.76)a a Figure in parentheses indicates standard deviation.

Quite a good number of beneficiaries were BPL (84%) and small/ marginal category (94%).

The average land holding estimated for the sample work out to be 3.41 acre. The average

family size is large to an extent of 6 members per household.

From the list obtained, the beneficiaries reportedly received the pump sets were selected

randomly. Out of total 85 beneficiaries, 61 (71%) beneficiaries’ wells were constructed in

the year 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11. Out of 85 beneficiaries 51 installed the pump sets

in the year 2010-11. Nearly 65% of the installation was of diesel pump set and rest 35%

electricity based pumps. 70% of the pumps were of 5HP and rest 30% were of 3 HP.

Characteristic of Wells & Water Availability during Different Seasons

The average dimensions of the wells constructed under Kapildhara and depth to water

levels across the six districts are presented in Table 43.

85

Table 43 Dimension of dug wells and depth to water level in MP

Parameters Sagar Chhatarpur Tikamgarh Damoh Panna Pooled Data

Average Depth of Dug well (m)

11.8 9.66 9.6 11.33 8.66 10.09

Minimum 7.0 4.5 6 7 6.5 4.5 Maximum 16 13 11 18 10.4 18 Average Diameter of Dug well (m)

6.15 4.87 6.74 5.49 6 5.81

Minimum 4.5 4 5.8 4.3 3.8 3.8 Maximum 9.09 7.25 7.1 8 8.6 9.09 Average Water Level- Mid June-BGL (m)

11.25 6.37 6.46 7.93 6.15 7.47

Minimum 6.5 4 3 6 4 3 Maximum 15 9 8 9 8 15 Average Water Level- Mid Nov-BGL (m)

6.76 3.87 4.96 6.13 4 5

Minimum 4 3 3 5 3 3 Maximum 8.5 5 9 9 6 9 Average Water Column during rabi (m)

5.06 5.78 4.83 5.22 4.66 5.12

Minimum 1.5 1 2.5 2 2.6 1 Maximum 9 8 8 12 7 12

Impact of Energization of Dug Wells

The impact of the dugwells and the pumpsets on the

cropping pattern, cropping intensity and yields is

presented in Table 44.

BENEFICIARY OF KAPILDHARA AND ENERGIZATION OF WELL IN SAGAR

86

Table 44 Impact of dug wells and pump sets on cropping pattern and yields: Aggregate of samples in MP

The area under the Kharif cropping season remains almost uniform with very

marginal change as can be seen from the table above.

The most significant change has taken place in rabi cropping. As observed from the

sample data, the area under Wheat production in particular has shown an increase

of 87% due to availability of assured irrigation. The total area under rabi cropping

has also shown an increase by 23% and 14% during 2011-12 and 2012-13.

The productivity of all the crops have increased largely due to the presence of

assured irrigation which during stress period in kharif can be utilized to give

protective irrigation when needed.

It must be noted that although the area under kharif crops has recorded marginal

decrease of 1% to 6% but the productivity has shown a significant improvement.

The highest improvements have been estimated for Paddy and Green Gram of (48-

53) % and (21-24) % respectively.

Due to assured irrigation supplemented by mechanization through pump sets, the

area under the rabi crop has also increased as evident from the rabi to kharif ratio

and increasing trend.

As per the estimates of the sample beneficiaries, the area under rabi crop has

improved from 252 acres to 313 acre and 290 acres during 2011-12 and 2012-13,

which is an increase of 15% to 24%.

The farmers have started taking HYV of wheat post intervention against the local

varieties recording increase by more than twice the previous yield. Before

Parameter 2008-09 2009-10 2011-12 2012-13 % Change

Cropping Pattern-Kharif (Acre) Soybean 74.6 74.6 73.6 73.6 -1% Green Gram 24 24 22.5 23 -(4%-6%)

Black Gram 48.95 48.95 49.45 49.45 1% Paddy 16 16 15 15 -6% Total 163.55 163.55 160.55 161.05 -2% Cropping Pattern- Rabi (Acre) Wheat 85.45 85.45 156.95 159.05 +(84%-86%) Gram 138.9 140 126.25 101.75 - (27%-9%) Lentil 28.5 28.5 27.5 27.5 -4% Mustard 0 0 2 2 Total 252.85 253.95 312.7 290.3 +(15%-24%) Productivity Kharif Crops(Kg/Acre)

Soybean 647.61 665.22 738.81 718.88 +(11%-14%) Green Gram 194.87 215.38 235.89 241.02 +(21%-24%) Black Gram 246.41 253.4 310.96 290.5 +(18%-26%) Paddy 417.38 421.73 639.13 617.39 +(48%-53%) Productivity Rabi Crops (Kg/Acre)

Wheat 572.56 599.97 1326.13 1310.23 +(129%-132%) Gram 353.71 374.5 394.06 387.20 +(9%-11%) Lentil 161.67 175.83 180.83 187.50 +(12%-16%) Cropping Intensity 143% 144% 163% 155% +(12%-20%) Rabi to Kharif Ratio 1.5:1 1.55:1 1.94:1 1.80:1

87

interventions, the yield reported by the farmers harvested 550 to 600 kg/acre on

average which has gone upto 1300kg/acre.

The yield of other rabi crops such as gram, lentil has also recorded increase as can be

seen from the table above.

Figure 9 Overall change in productivity of Kharif and Rabi Crops due to dug wells and pump set in MP

88

Summing up

The programme of installation of pump sets on Kapildhara wells has progressed

satisfactorily despite the fact that the wells have to be constructed from MNREGA funds.

This was possible due to the close coordination between the district administration and the

implementing department. The benefits accruing to the farmers are also significant. On the

aggregate, all the 40000 wells when completed would increase the rabi irrigated area by

about 20000 acres besides providing protective irrigation to crops in kharif season. The

productivity increases augurs well for food security of the farm families.

89

Stop Dams in Madhya Pradesh

The Allocations and Financial Achievements

Stop dams are constructed under the Bundelkhand package in the state of Madhya Pradesh.

The allocations to this activity in MP are presented in Table 45.

Table 45 ACA allocation in Stop Dams under Bundelkhand Package in MP

State Allocation to stop dams

(Rs crore)

Total allocation under the package

(Rs crore)

% allocation to stop dams

Madhya Pradesh 132.48 1958.14 6.63

The projects under this sector are intended to enhance the irrigation facilities and the water

tables in the ground water structures. As against the above allocations, the releases so far

and the expenditure incurred by the respective states are given in Table 46.

Table 46 Allocation, release and expenditure in stop dams under Bundelkhand Package in MP

State Allocation to stop dams

(Rs Crore)

Releases under the package

(Rs. Crore)

Actual expenditure

incurred (Rs. Crore)

% of

expenditure to releases

% of

expenditure to

allocations

Madhya Pradesh 132.48 90 76.99 85.54 58.11

Overall Physical Progress

The status of progress of these projects in the Bundelkhand region is presented as under:

Table 47 Physical progress and financial expenditure of Stop Dam in MP under Bundelkhand Package

District ACA Allocation (Rs. Crore)

Number of Projects Expenditure (Rs. Crore) Total Not

Started In

Progress Completed

Sagar 40.17 84 0 31 53 23.49 Damoh 18.55 53 0 3 50 15.72 Panna 15.78 35 0 19 16 9.87 Chhatarpur 25.43 86 05 19 62 13.93 Tikamgarh 20.88 66 03 31 32 9.31 Datia 16.67 28 0 23 05 4.67 Total 132.48 352 8 126 218 76.99

It could be seen that the stop dams programme is one of the few activities in Madhya

Pradesh, which is not progressing satisfactorily. Out of a total of 352 projects to be

implemented only 218 projects have been completed. Eight projects are yet to be started.

Inaccessibility of the sites is reported to be one of the reasons for slow progress.

90

Major Observations from Field Visits

As a part of the evaluation study, 30 out of 344

projects implemented under the package in MP

were visited in four districts where the numbers

of projects are more. Since, the numbers of

projects are low in Panna and Datia; these two

districts were not covered. The sample projects

for site visits and FGDs were selected based on

the highest fund allocations. The district wise

number of projects visited is given in Table 48.

Table 48 Sample stop dams visited and cost structure

Sl District No. of Sample Projects Visited

No of completed

projects

Cost of Project estimate

(Rs. Lakh)

Expenditure actually incurred

(Rs. Lakh)

1 Chhatarpur 8 8 208.67 142.63

2 Damoh 7 7 515.56 442.77

3 Sagar 7 6 367.05 324.12

4 Tikamgarh 8 7 276.25 244.5

TOTAL 30 28 1367.53 1154.02

The consolidated field level observations are given as under:

Out of 30 sample projects, eight were implemented by Panchayat Raj department

while 21 were implemented by Rural Engineering Services department. The lone

barrage cum stop dam project was implemented by Water Resources Department.

Out of 30 projects visited, 28 are found to be completed while Stop Dam at Sajli in

Sagar and stop dam cum causeway at Pathaghat in Tikamgarh is yet to be completed.

The earth work and CC work are completed in all respect but miscellaneous work

related to the safety of the dam structure is to be completed. The remaining work to

an extent of 50% and 25% is left to be completed.

All the projects were implemented in government land; hence there were no

problem faced in acquiring the land for the construction of the stop dams.

All projects were awarded to contractors through open tender system.

The cost of project varied from a minimum of Rs 19.90 lakh to a maximum of Rs 85

lakh depending upon the number of stop dams constructed under each project and

the corresponding physical dimensions. The barrage cum stop dams project costed

Rs 338 lakh.

Total cost allocated for 30 sample projects was Rs. 13.67 crore of which Rs. 11.54

crore was actually spent on work, which is 84% of the total allocations. The

allocations were made entirely from Addition Central Assistance. No convergence

was reported by the department, either from State/Central CSS/ MGNREGA Scheme.

Consulting agencies were roped in for preparation of DPR, supervision and quality

control due to shortage of manpower with Rural Engineering Services. However,

during the site inspection and field survey by technical staffs a few of the critical

91

observations were made with regards to design of the structure. For example as the

stop dam located at Harpura village in Tikamgar, the entire right embankment was

washed away in the very first rain. The RES has extended the length arbitrarily

without any protective measures. The finishing of the concrete work was not found

upto the mark in terms of line and level. The design provided by the consultant was

generally faulty.

Delay in completion (months) No. of projects

Within the time 10

Delay of 6 months 3

Delay of 6-12 months 4

Delay of 12-24 months 8

Delay of > 24 months 3

Incomplete 2

Total 30

Of the total 30 sample projects, only 10 (33%) projects were found to be completed

on time while there was considerable delay (more than one year) for 13 projects.

Two of the projects are still in progress and the portions related to the protection of

stop dam are yet to be completed.

Impact of Stop Dams

Table 49 Number of stop dams and household benefitted from Stop Dams under Bundelkhand Special

Package in MP

Sl District No. of Projects

No of Stop Dams on Nala

No of HH Benefitted

Before Package

After Package

Before Package

After Package

1 Chhatarpur 8 26 36 530 710

2 Damoh 7 0 11 0 472

3 Sagar 7 3 11 27 211

4 Tikamgar 8 15 23 273 515

TOTAL 30 44 81 830 1908

Out of 30 SD project sites visited, the

number of SD on the existing nalla has

almost doubled due to package

intervention. The household benefitted as

a result of construction of SD exceeded

from 830 to 1908. Hence, additional 1078

HH are benefitted from the construction

of SDs in the sample projects.

Estimating the data of the number of

household benefitted from the sample to

the total number of completed SD

projects (218) in Madhya Pradesh, at 95% confidence interval, it would be in 10852

to 14175.

92

Table 50 Impact of stop dams on water storage, irrigated area and water level in nearby dug wells

Sl District No Storage Capacity (Mcum)

Area Irrigated during Rabi (Ha)

Average Water Level (BGL)

Before Package

After Package

Before Package

After Package

Before Package

After Package

1 Chhatarpur 8 787480 942000 520 720 8.31 8

2 Damoh 7 0 1486440 120 685.96 4.5 2

3 Sagar 7 120000 200455 86 436.5 6.85 3.07

4 Tikamgar 8 0 245800 0 624 11 5

TOTAL 30 907480 2874695 726 2466.46 7.66 4.51

The increased storage capacity due to creation of SDs aggregated 19.67 lakh Mcum

recording an increase of 216% of the pre project storage capacity.

The incremental irrigated area due to these projects aggregated 1740.46 hectares; at

the total ACA allocation of Rs 1367.53 lakh. The marginal cost of creating additional

hectare of irrigated area worked out to Rs. 78,572.

Focussed Group Discussions with farmers

revealed that they could cultivate vegetable

crops in kharif in addition to soya bean, while

in Rabi they introduced HYV of wheat in place

of local variety buoyed by the assured

irrigation facility.

A significant increase in water level has been

reported by the farmers of the sampled

project from all the districts. The water level

increased considerably in Damoh, Sagar and

Tikamgarh by almost 50% due to creation of

water storage. The least recharge is reported in Chhatarpur. On average, the ground

water level increased by 3.15 meter from 7.66 meter to 4.51 meter.

Estimating the data for the total irrigated area from the sample to the total number

of completed SD projects (218) in Madhya Pradesh, at 95% confidence interval, the

irrigated area would have increased in between 12384 ha to 14929 ha.

Once all the 352 stop dams projects are completed, an additional irrigated

area of about 16000 ha would be created in rabi season which would

invariably devoted to wheat. The additional production of wheat in MP due to

stop dams would be 45000 MT.

93

Chapter 5 Agriculture Markets

Financial Allocations and Progress

Storage Godown and Agriculture Markets are an integral part of the Special Bundelkhand

Package as the projects under this sector are intended to enhance the marketing facilities

and post harvest structures especially storage structures towards meeting the requirements

of increased production of agricultural crops consequent upon creation of additional

irrigation potentials and improved soil moisture regime under the Bundelkhand package

As per the estimated need, In Madhya Pradesh, the implemented projects are expected to

create an additional storage capacity of 6.40

lakh MT. Besides, other vital facilities such as

auction platforms, internal roads within the

mandi area, farmer’s facilitation centres,

trader’s facilitation centres, etc are also

expected to rise. MP State Warehousing and

Logistics Corporation Ltd, MP State Mandi

Board and MARKFED have implemented these

projects in Madhya Pradesh.

In Uttar Pradesh, the package envisaged

construction of 7 Specialised mandi yards at the seven district head quarters of the 7

districts of Bundelkhand region in UP and 168 Rural Infrastructure Nuclei at sub district

level.

The allocations to this activity in MP and UP are presented in Table 51

Table 51 Allocation to Agriculture Market Yards, Godown Project under Bundelkhand Package

State Allocation to market yards and

godowns (Rs crore)

Total allocation under the package

(Rs crore)

% allocation to MY and Storage

Godown

Madhya Pradesh 574.50 1958.14 29.33 Uttar Pradesh 693.50 1696.00 40.83 Bundelkhand region 1268.00 3654.14 34.70

Of the total allocations for this sector, an estimated 40% was towards creation of additional

storage capacity and the balance was towards erection of auction platforms, construction of

94

internal roads within the mandi area, farmers’ facilitation centres, trader’s facilitation

centres and other supporting infrastructure.

As against the above allocations, the releases so far and the expenditure incurred by the

respective states are given in Table 52.

Table 52 Financial achievements under Storage and Market Yards projects

State Allocation to market yards and godowns

Releases under the package

Actual expenditure

incurred

% received of allocated

% spent of received

Madhya Pradesh 574.50 573.64 412.65 99.9% 71.9% Uttar Pradesh 693.50 320.00 320.00 46.1% 100.0% Bundelkhand region 1268.00 893.64 732.65 70.5% 82.0%

Madhya Pradesh received 99.9% of its allocated share and has utilised 71.9% of the amount

received. Uttar Pradesh only received 46.1% of its allocated share, and has spent the

complete sum. Less than 50% release to UP was on account of considerable delays in

initiating the implementation of the projects by the concerned departments.

Physical Progress

This section provides a detail of the infrastructure

created under the package. A district wise list of

complete executed projects is available in this

section.

The following is the physical progress of projects

implemented in Madhya Pradesh.

Table 53 Physical progress of Storage and Market Yard

Projects in MP

Madhya Pradesh

Districts Construction of warehouse & marketing infrastructure facility

Development of mini markets run by PACs

Total Completed Percentage Total Completed Percentage

Chatarpur 12 08 66% 06 02 33% Tikamgarh 13 11 84% 05 05 100% Panaa 7 00 - 03 02 66% Datia 7 04 57% 04 01 25% Damoh 12 12 100% 03 02 66% Sagar 15 13 86% 08 05 62.5% Total 67 48 71% 27 17 62%

All the projects implemented by the respective government

have not been completed, however a decent progress was

observed in case of Madhya Pradesh. 71% of the projects

implemented under the head “Construction of warehouse &

marketing infrastructure facility” were found to be

completed whereas 62% of the projects implemented under

95

the head “Development of mini markets run by PACs” were found to be completed.

Few of the projects have already started functioning. Storage godown created under the

package was used by MARKFED and FCI to store the wheat that had been procured during

the month of May 2014. The physical progress was quite satisfactory as compared to the

progress in UP where only a few of the projects have been completed and none of them are

functioning. The following is the progress in UP.

Table 54 Physical Progress under Market Yards and Storage Projects in UP

Uttar Pradesh

Districts Rural Infrastructure Nuclei Special Market Yard Total Completed Status Total Completed Status

Jhansi 25 0 No RIN has been completed. Work

completing ranged in between 10% to 90%

1 0 Work not yet started

Jalaun 21 0 No RIN has been completed. Work


1 0 25%

Lalitpur 22 12 Work has been completed in 12 RINs but no trade has taken

place. For the rest of the project work completed ranged in between 60%

to 90%

1 0 30%

Mahoba 10 0 No RIN has been completed. Work


1 0 35%

Hamirpur 24 8 Work has been completed in 8 RINs but no trade has taken place. Two projects have been

permanently stopped due to land dispute. For

the rest of the project work completed ranged in between 60% to 90%

1 0 38%

Chitarkoot 16 0 No RIN has been completed. Work


0 0 -

Banda 20 0 No RIN has been completed. Work


1 0 20%

Total 138 20 6 0

96

A considerable delay in the construction work was observed in all the districts of Uttar

Pradesh. Deadlines were missed by most of the contractors to whom the work was assigned

through an open tender process. Of the total, only 14.4% projects were completed in case of

RIN. Special Mandi Yard in UP have been sanctioned late and therefore, the projects still

have a decent time left for completion.

Sample Visit & Major Observations during field visits: Madhya Pradesh

As a part of the evaluation study, 20 out of 94 projects implemented under the package in

MP were visited. The following table showcase the breakup of the sample visited district

wise-

Table 55 Sample Market Yards/ Storage Projects visited in MP

District Total projects

Sample Visited

Names of the location/ Project

Chattarpur 18 4 (i) Chandala (ii) Nawgaon (iii) Bamitha (iv) Chatarpur Mandi

Damoh 15 3 (i) Killai (ii) Jabera (iii) Tendukheda Datia 11 3 (i) Dati Market (ii) Basai (iii) Sewada HAAT bazaar Sagar 23 3 (i)Sagar MY (ii) Banda MY (iii) Berhana godown Tikamgarh 17 4 (i)Tikamgarh Mandi ii)Kundeshwar HAAT bazaar

(iii)Shivpuri PAACS (iv)Badora Ghat warehouse

Panaa 10 3 (i) Brijpur HAAT Bazaar (ii) Badagaon Mini Agriculture Market (iii) Raipura warehouse

Total 94 20 -

A satisfactory progress was observed in the progress made at the field level. The following

are the major observation from the field visit-

i. The facilities constructed under the package would be widely used by state

warehousing corporation (SWC). Currently, SWC hires warehouses from private

players

ii. Work under Development of mini markets run by PACS is still under construction

phase in Chattarpur & Panaa. It is expected to be over by August 2014

iii. At Sagar Mandi, one area of concern is the absence of boundary wall in the market

yards leading to poor maintenance and trespassing by animals and anti social

elements

iv. In Panna, MARKFED has completed the construction of godowns, however no hand

over support to PACS have been made. The authorities are yet to take a final decision

on the hand over support

v. The storage godowns on completion need to be accredited and registered with

WDRA so as to provide the benefit of NWR facility to the farmers in the area

Sample Visit & Major Observations during field visits: Uttar Pradesh


UP were visited. The following table showcase the breakup of the sample visited district

wise-

97

Table 56 Sample projects of Market Yards/ Rural Infrastructure Nuclei visited in UP


Sample project visited

Names of the location/ Project

Jhansi 26 3 (i) Sakraar RIN (ii) Bhandara RIN (iii) Maanpur RIN

Jalaon 22 4 (i)Special Market Yard (ii) Redar RIN (iii) Kanjausa RIN (iv) Parasan RIN

Lalitpur 23 3 (i)Special Market Yard (ii)Lakhanpura RIN (iii)Targuana RIN

Chitarkoot 16 4 (i) Pahaadi RIN (ii) Hardauri RIN (iii) Biharva RIN (iv) Cheebo RIN

Hamirpur 25 4 (i) Special Market Yard (ii) Rivan RIN (iii) Echauri RIN (iv) Mundera RIN

Banda 21 4 (i)Special Market Yard (ii) Murval RIN (iii)Badokhar RIN (iv)Motiyaari RIN

Mahoba 11 3 (i)Special Market Yard (ii) Bamrara RIN (iii) Bharvara RIN

Total 144 25

The following are the major observation from the field visit-

i. Tenders for construction of RIN have been awarded through open tenders.

ii. In Jhansi, Hamirpur & Lalitpur, two godown of

500 MT were sanctioned in RIN (Rural

Infrastructure Nuclei) as per the project

documents. However, in most of the cases, a

RIN had only one 500 MT godown. The amount

allocated for the second godown has been used

to create boundary wall around the RIN.

iii. In Hamirpur, construction of two RIN has been

permanently discontinued due to a land

dispute.

iv. Details of works with respect to estimated cost, date of start, likely date of

completion, name, phone and address of the contractor were not displayed at all the

RIN.

v. On a FGD conducted on group of farmers & traders at present Mandi, it was observed

that there were concerns about remoteness and proper utilization of infrastructure

in some cases

vi. It was observed that no proper coordination and understanding is arrived amongst

the stakeholders with regard to utilization of the infrastructure being created in RIN.

Besides, RINs with improper connectivity in UP are going to be a challenge for the

Market Committees.

vii. The major concern is whether there will be adequate commodity arrivals in the 137

RINs created under the package in UP. The utility of these huge infrastructure being

created in rural areas will solely depend on the increase in agricultural production

in the area with the limited water resources available in the region

98

viii. A significant delay in the progress of construction work was observed in all the

districts of UP. The following are some of the reasons cited for the considerable

delay-

a. Soil in Bundelkhand region of UP are porous in nature i.e. they hold the

water for a longer period of time thus hampering the construction activity.

Rains in winter were cited as the main reason for delay in the work in

construction of physical structures.

b. The district of Hamirpur has shown the least progress as compared to other

6 districts of UP. Issue with administrative approval was cited as the main

cause for the delay. The parishad headquarter had banned the construction

of godowns in RIN, thereby hampering the work in progress. The order was

reverted on 17/08/13 and thus there has been a considerable delay.

c. In Chitarkoot & Mahoba, the rate approved as per the administrative

approval was less and no contractor was ready to take the work. A new

revised rate was designed and a fresh advertisement was made leading to

the delay.

d. In case of Special Market Yard, the work has been hampered due to land

dispute

Impact of Market Yards and Godowns projects

Most of the projects implemented were under the construction phase and therefore it was

difficult to calculate its impact on the beneficiaries. However, after the field visit and FGD’s

with local farmers & potential beneficiaries, a likely impact could be analysed which is

provided here in this section.

The following table illustrates the likely storage capacity that would is expected to

be created-

Table 57 Storage Capacity created under the package in UP and MP

Godown/Warehouse Capacity under the package ( In MT)

Uttar Pradesh Madhya Pradesh S.No District Storage capacity District Storage capacity 1 Jhansi 17500 Sagar 237100 2 Jalaon 15500 Damoh 51050 3 Lalitpur 16000 Chhatarpur 115850 4 Chitarkoot 10000 Panaa 53500 5 Hamirpur 17000 Tikamgarh 130950 6 Banda 13000 Datia 52000 7 Mahoba 15000 - - 8 Total 104000 640450

A total of 104000 MT of storage is likely to be created in Uttar Pradesh after completing of

work under RIN & Special Market Yard whereas 640450 MT of storage capacity is likely to

be created after the construction of envisaged infrastructure is completed in MP. The new

capacity should be bliss for the government of both the states as it would help them to store

their procured produce and also the farmers who would be able to store their produce

99

rather than go for a distress sale. The following now is the other likely impact of the

program-

i. Increase in the storage capacity in

Madhya Pradesh would lead to better

storage of procured grains. Godowns

created are used by FCI & MARKFED to

store wheat which are being procured

in May 2014.

ii. Newly constructed trading platform at

HAAT bazaar in MP has derived

considerable satisfaction from the

locals. Further, Godown created at the HAAT bazaar would help the local traders to

minimize distress sale which is a common phenomenon at present.

iii. Infrastructure created under PACCS would help the farmer receive assistance under

a single window. This would be a positive support for the co-operative members.

iv. In Uttar Pradesh, RIN is likely to minimize the transportation cost as well as time for

the farmers. Few RINs with good connectivity have shown a positive performance

with all the shops being sold before the start of the formal trading.

v. RIN again is an excellent initiative for a single window availability of requisite inputs

for the farmers. It is definitely going to boost good agriculture practices (GAP)

among the local farmers.

Recommendation

i. The storage godowns on completion need to be accredited and registered with

WDRA so as to provide the benefit of NWR facility to the farmers in the area.

ii. In the future for construction tenders, E tendering mode should only be used. It was

learnt that the work done on the field by contractors selected through E tendering

was more efficient than that selected through open tendering.

iii. Schemes which are large in nature and has a significant importance from the centre

point of view should always be made in consultation with district administration of

the area where projects are implemented. In parts of UP, it was observed that there

was a significant delay in the work done as the district administration did not

understand the need of creation infrastructure under the RIN.

iv. There is an immediate need to analyse a way through for the RIN who are not well

connected. If the issue is not tackled, these RINs are going to be a failure.

v. In Madhya Pradesh, there is a need to initiate the hand over procedures of the

infrastructure created under PAACs. It was observed that many of the godowns

structure sanctioned under PAACs project were completed; however there was no

hand over. The infrastructure was either lying idle or was made informally into use

from the orders of district collectors. A hand over support will result in proper

maintenance and sustainability of the infrastructure created.

vi. In case of almost all the RINs, the complex is barren with buildings. In view of

availability of adequate land, plantation of trees and plants may be considered in the

complex.

100

Chapter 6 Animal Husbandry

The Allocation and Financial Achievements

Animal Husbandry activity taken up during the Phase-I of the package was visited

comprehensively in districts of both the states. Animal Husbandry sector accounted for

about 2% of the total ACA budget allocated to Bundelkhand region. The allocations to this

activity is presented in Table 58

Table 58 Allocation in Animal Husbandry Project under Bundelkhand Package

State Allocated to Dairy Sector

Total Allocation under the Package

% Allocation to Dairy

Madhya Pradesh 39.40 1958.14 2.0%

Uttar Pradesh 33.96 1695.76 2.0%

Bundelkhand region 73.36 3653.9 2.0%

Out of total allocation of Rs. 73.36 crore, the allocation made to Madhya Pradesh and Uttar

Pradesh was Rs. 39.40 crore and Rs. 33.96 crore respectively. The projects under this sector

are intended improve the livelihoods through distribution of goatry units, improve

breed/progeny through natural breeding process using improved breed of buffalo and

artificial insemination process, strengthening infrastructure support by creating fodder

bank to meet fodder demand during scarce period, and create awareness against the

prevailing Anna Pratha in the Bundelkhand Region. Additionally Mobile Health/AI Centres

were also proposed and created in UP. Renovation/ Strengthening of Veterinary Hospitals in

UP was also proposed. As against the allocation, 100% releases were made and 100%

expenses are reportedly made by the Department in MP. In UP, against the allocation of Rs

33.96 crore, Rs. 28.56 crore was released of which Rs. 22.10 crore was reportedly utilized.

The allocation, release and expenditure are presented in the Table 59.

Table 59 Allocation, release and expenditure in Animal Husbandry Sector under Bundelkhand Package

State Allocated to Animal

Husbandry Sector

Release under the Package

Actual Expenditure

% of expenditure

to release

% of expenditure to allocation

Madhya Pradesh 39.40 39.40 39.40 100% 100%

Uttar Pradesh 33.96 28.56 22.10 77% 65%

Bundelkhand region

73.36 67.96 61.50 90% 84%

101

Brief Outline of Animal Husbandry Projects

In Madhya Pradesh, under the AH Sector, the package

extended support for distribution of goats and

Murrah buffalo to individual farmers, establishment

of Artificial Insemination Centres in Collaboration

with NGO (BAIF), establishment of fodder banks, goat

sheds.

In Uttar Pradesh, additional activities of

strengthening infrastructure of existing Veterinary

Hospitals, organize camps for awareness against the

Anna Pratha, and establishment of Mobile Health/AI

Services were supported by the package.


The status of progress of the dairy projects in the Bundelkhand region is presented as under:

Table 60 Overall physical progress of activities under taken in Animal Husbandry section in UP & MP

under Bundelkhand Package

Activity Unit Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh

Target Achievement % Target Achievement % Distribution of Murrah Buffalo Bull

No. 2403 1723 72% 508 501 99%

Distribution of Goatry Units

No. 5296 3421 65% 2560 2450 96%

Establishment of Fodder Banks

No. 3 3 100% 410 417 102%

Establishment of goat sheds

No. 1 1 100% NA NA NA

Establishment of AI Centers

No. 110 110 100% 120 120 100%

Establishment of Mobile Health Units/ AI Centers

No. NA NA NA 24 24 100%

Modernization of existing Veterinary Hospitals

No. NA NA NA 58 57 98%

Awareness camps against Anna Pratha

No. NA NA NA 4608 4414 96%

i. In MP, 72% of the targeted murrah buffaloes were distributed while the 99% have

been distributed in Uttar Pradesh. Similarly, 96% of the targeted goats have have

been distributed in Uttar Pradesh, while 65% have been distributed in Madhya

Pradesh.

ii. Three fodder banks each in MP and UP have been undertaken. In Madhya Pradesh,

the fodder banks have been constructed in Sagar, Tikamgarh and Panna. In UP the

fodder banks and fodder block makers are constructed/ installed in Jhansi, Jalaun

and Lalitpur. The capacity of each fodder bank is 3000 quintals. All the civil work in

102

MP has reportedly been completed as on the date of visit and operations have also

started. In contrast the civil work of all the fodder stations in UP has been completed

however not yet operational. The fodder block machine has been installed in all the

three centres.

iii. All the AI Centres which is to be operated by BAIF have been set up covering all the

districts falling under Bundelkhand region. A total of 230 centres have been set up in

13 districts of Bundelkhand region from the package.

iv. One room and a meeting hall were proposed to be constructed from the package in

all the veterinary hospitals of all the districts of UP. As per the report, 57 out of 58

structures are constructed from the package. More than 50% of these structures

were found to be incomplete. As in nearly all the districts 1-2 sites were visited and

most of them were incomplete with respect fixtures and fittings, installations of

water supply etc.

Distribution of Goat Units

Goat unit consisting of 10 female goats and one ram of age ranging between 6 months to 18

months were distributed to beneficiaries. The beneficiaries were selected based on the

criteria such as BPL, Landless, Widow etc. The consultations with the Gram Pradhan were

done before distribution of goat units. The cost of each unit (10+1) in Uttar Pradesh

includes the cost of animals (Rs. 35000), insurance cost, ration for 03 months, medicine cost

which accounts to Rs. 43,939 per unit. For MP, the

unit cost account to Rs. 41628 per unit. In MP,

margin money of 20% and 25% of the total cost

of unit were taken from the beneficiaries while in

UP no such provision was made. The concept of

margin money in MP has helped in filtering the

non eligible and non interested beneficiaries but

since no such provision was made in UP, a

significant number of beneficiaries have sold out

the goat units after receiving it from the

department. A sample of 70 units of goatry from

UP and 30 units from MP were selected randomly to study the impact of the activity on the

livelihoods of beneficiaries. The beneficiary’s socio economic profile is presented below in

Table 61 and findings on relative performance of goat distribution among the beneficiaries

of two states are presented in table 62

103

Table 61 Socio economic profile of goatry beneficiaries

Particulars Unit Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh

Sample to be covered No. 30 70

Responses received No. 30 58

Category wise participation

SC/ST No / (%) 7 (23%) 33 (57%)

OBC No / (%) 21 (70%) 23 (40%)

Other No/ (%) 2 (7%) 2 (3%)

APL No/ (%) 5 (17%) 9 (16%)

BPL No/ (%) 25 (83%) 49 (84%)

Status of Beneficiaries

Farmers No/ (%) 18 (60%) 41 (71%)

Landless/Ag. Labour No/ (%) 12 (40%) 17 (29%)

i. Out of 30 goatry sample beneficiaries in MP, 23% belonged to SC/ST category while

70% belonged to OBC category. Nearly 83% of the beneficiaries belonged to BPL

category and 40% were found to be agriculture labour having no land for

agriculture. The rest 60% were marginal and small farmers. No large farmers were

found in the sample.

ii. Out of 58 goatry sample beneficiaries in UP, 57% belonged to SC/ST category while

40% belonged to OBC category. Nearly 84% of the beneficiaries belonged to BPL

category and 29% were found to be agriculture labour having no land for

agriculture. The rest 71% were marginal and small farmers. No large farmers were

found in the sample.

Table 62 Status of goatry units and impact on income of sample beneficiaries

Particulars Unit

Adult Goats Kid Total

Madhya Pradesh

M F T M F T M F T

Total Distribution No. 30 300 330 0 0 0 30 300 330

Kidding No. 0 0 0 97 144 241 97 144 241

Morality No. 2 17 19 6 14 20 8 31 39

Sold No. 178 0 0 0 0 0 0

Animals as on the date of visit No. 23 297 320 91 130 221 114 427 541

Average Income generated through sales

Rs. Rs. 16323

Uttar Pradesh

Total Distribution No. 58 580 638 0 0 0 58 580 638

Kidding No. 0 0 0 84 114 198 84 114 198

Morality No. 32 245 277 0 0 0 32 245 277

Sold No. 130 0 0 0 0 0 130

Animals as on the date of visit No. 44 317 361 84 114 198 128 431 559

Average Income generated through sales

Rs. Rs. 9245

M= Male, F= Female, T=Total

104

i. From the sample surveyed in MP, it is found that all the beneficiaries were having

goat units as given by the department and responded positively with regards to the

impact on the livelihoods. The age of goats at the time of distribution as reported by

the beneficiaries range in between 01 to 1.5 years.

ii. In contrast, out of 70 targeted sample beneficiaries, only 58 beneficiaries could be

contacted during the field visits. Out of the 12 beneficiaries in Chitrakoot, 01 of the

beneficiary was found to have goats while the rest reported mortality or later on

sold whichever survived.

iii. In Madhya Pradesh, from the sample surveyed, it is found that as on the date of visit,

the total number of animal have increased over the period. 144 kids were reportedly

born from 300 female goats. 30 beneficiaries reported selling of 178 goats either

born or from the older stocks received.

iv. In UP the total number of goats have were found to be 559 against the total

distribution of 638 goats among the

sample beneficiaries. 198 kids were

reportedly born from the units

given to the sample beneficiaries

and 130 goats were sold by the

sample beneficiaries.

v. The mortality of goats remained

well controlled to less than 10% in

Madhya Pradesh while in UP, it is

estimated from the sample that

mortality has accounted to extent of 43 %.

vi. The reasons for high mortality of goats in UP as reported by the beneficiaries is

sudden outbreak of diseases (dysentery) as reported by the beneficiaries. Also, the

beneficiaries reported poor quality of animal when supplied. Further, discussions

with several other stakeholders also brought out reasons such as insufficient

quarantine practices were followed at the department level which has resulted in

high mortality. The non suitability of Barbari breed in the climatic condition may be

another reason for high mortality.

vii. The sample beneficiaries from MP have earned income of Rs. 16323 on an average

while in UP, the average net income is Rs. 9425.

Performance of Breed Improvement Activities

Two activities were incepted under the first phase of

Bundelkhand Package for improving the locally available

breed. BAIF (NGO) was drawn into the services for

providing artificial insemination services and second by

inducted improved Murrah Buffalo in every Gram

Panchayat for providing natural breeding services to the

farmers in the village. A total 230 AI centres were opened

covering all the district of Bundelkhand region (110 in MP

and 120 in UP) within three months of the award of work.

105

More than 2000 murrah buffaloes were distributed to the farmers which can provide

breeding services through natural AI services. Table 63 presents the performance of breed

improvement activities in MP and UP

Table 63 Status of breed improvement program under Bundelkhand Package

Particulars Unit Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh

Cow Buffalo Total Cow Buffalo Total

AI Centres No. - - 110 - - 120

AI done since inception No. - - 23227 - - 35000

Confirmed Pregnancy No. 2695 2665 5360 3683 3538 7221

Success percentage No. 23% 21%

Number of Calves Born through AI

No. - - 1288 - - 1527

Average Natural Services provided/ per buffalo#

No. 20-30 64

Sample famers visited No. 30 30

Number of animals found providing services

No. 30 20

Average coverage per buffalo/year

No. 25-30

# Based on the Estimation of Sample beneficiaries

i. Since the inception of the package, BAIF LDC centres have performed more than 23

thousand and 35 thousand AI in UP and MP. Out of the total number of AI performed,

the confirmed pregnancy reportedly found to be 23% in MP and 21% in UP.

ii. Out of total 5360 confirmed pregnancies in MP, 1288 calves have been born while in

UP, out of total 7221 confirmed pregnancies,

1527 calves have been born which is 24% and

21% of the total confirmed pregnancies

respectively.

iii. From the sample visits of 14 AI centres in UP,

02 in each district, it is estimated from the data

that a total of 1023 calves are born both for

cows and buffaloes.

iv. The semen stalks of Jersy, HF, Gir and Sahiwal

for cow and Murrah for buffalo have been used.

v. With respect to the murrah buffalo distribution, a sample of 30 units each in MP and

UP were inspected and responses on coverage, cost of maintenance of bull, coverage

and income were gathered. Out of 30 bulls

inspected in UP, 20 provided natural services

in nearby villages, 07 were not mature

enough to provide services, and rest 01 were

not found with the care taker and reported

to be taken by some relative. On average one

buffalo provided services to 25-30 buffaloes

during the last one year. It was difficult to

obtain information on total number of

106

services provided by the buffalo as no such data was kept by the care taker. The

charge levied per service is in between Rs 100 to Rs. 200 which is not sufficient to

cover the cost of maintenance.

vi. In MP, it was found that beneficiaries maintained record properly which was largely

facilitated by the Animal Husbandry Department. The records in UP are by the

maintained by Department in few districts consolidated in one place, but not by the

beneficiaries.

Major Observations during field visits: Uttar Pradesh

As a part of Quick Impact evaluation study, every activity which was created under the

Bundelkhand package was visited on sample basis. The key insights generated from field

observations and discussion with beneficiaries and department officials are presented

below.

i. The size of goatry (10+1) is too large to be managed for beneficiaries of low

economic profile. Therefore it is desirable to reduce the size of goatry to 5+1

resulting in more coverage and good husbandry practices by the beneficiaries.

ii. As reported, instead of inducting the Berbery breed of goats, the graded Jamnapari is

more suited to the local geographical context and hence the selection of breed could

also be looked on.

iii. The cost per unit given earlier was not sufficient based on the existing market rates

of goats and buffalo which have resulted in purchasing of animals of varying age

groups and health. Hence the increase in cost per unit of goats and buffalo can be put

forth.

iv. The artificial insemination centres run by BAIF has performed quite satisfactorily

towards improving the progeny from local animals. The improved variety attains

maturity in 20 to 24 months against 4-5 years taken by the local breed. The staffs of

BAIF undertake the constant follow up for pregnancy detection and confirmation but

the speed is constrained due to low awareness among the beneficiaries on AI.

v. Fee for one AI is Rs 25 to Rs. 40 as compared to Rs. 200 to Rs. 300 in natural

servicing. On average 2-3 AIs are done for confirming pregnancies; thus the cost per

conception is Rs 75- Rs. 120 which is still a viable option to get a good progeny.

vi. The fodder banks constructed in MP have become operational now while the same

has still to be operational in UP. The fodder stored in fodder banks in MP are

currently used in cattle breeding farms as so far not utilized by the farmers. The

impact is yet to be felt among the dairy community and farmers.

vii. In UP, the civil work of fodder banks in the district of Jhansi, Lalitpur and Jalaun are

completed and is ready for operation. No fodder procurement has started yet.

Machinery related to block making have been

procured from the supplier duly licensed by

IARI, Pusa but there is no proper arrangement

for providing required power supply and

manpower for operation of fodder bank and

fodder block machine. In Jalaun, the

Pashuchikitsa Adhikari has been given

additional charge as manager of fodder bank,

which resulted in lagging in completion of

107

work in fodder bank and also his absence from the hospital. Thus the work is

reportedly delayed due to non availability of operation and maintenance funds and

man power required to run the unit.

viii. Diesel generator is provided as an

operation to operate the fodder block

machine. In absence of any permanent

source of power, it is doubtful how the unit

will produce fodder block at the

commercially reasonable rates to the

farmers. A significant time has passes since

the installation of machineries and no

progress has been made on sourcing the

fodder. Any further delay in starting the

production will result in a machines getting

depreciated at faster rate.

ix. There is urgent need for placement of separate skilled workers to handle machinery

installed in fodder bank unit along with arrangement of permanent power source

and raw material. Unless the arrangements are made, the entire infrastructure

created will remain in fructuous.

108

Chapter 7 Dairy Development

The Allocation and Financial Achievements

Dairy activity taken up during the Phase-I of the package was visited comprehensively in

districts of both the states. Dairy sector accounted for about 1% of the total ACA budget

allocated to Bundelkhand region. The allocation to this activity is presented in Table 64.

Table 64 Allocation in Dairy Sector under Bundelkhand Package

State Allocated to Dairy Sector (Rs Crore)

Total Allocation under the Package

(Rs Crore)

% Allocation to

Dairy

Madhya Pradesh 21.3 1958.14 1.1%

Uttar Pradesh 26.74 1695.76 1.6%

Bundelkhand region 48.04 3653.9 1.3%

Out of total allocation of Rs. 48.04 crore, the allocation made to Madhya Pradesh and Uttar

Pradesh was Rs. 21.3 crore and Rs. 26.74 crore respectively. The projects under this sector

are intended to revive the cooperative societies, thereby increasing the milk procurement

from the members resulting in additional income generations. As against the allocation,

100% releases were made and 100% expenses are reportedly made, which can be seen in

the Table 65 below.

Table 65 Allocation, release and expenditure in Dairy Sector under Bundelkhand Package

State Allocated to Dairy Sector

(Rs. Crore)

Release under the Package

(Rs Crore)

Actual Expenditure (Rs Crore)

% of expenditure

to release

% of expenditure to allocation

Madhya Pradesh 21.3 21.3 21.3 100% 100%

Uttar Pradesh 26.74 26.74 26.74 100% 100%

Bundelkhand region

48.04 48.04 48.04 100% 100%

Brief Outline of Dairy Projects

In Madhya Pradesh, the major activities undertaken in package are Organization/ revival of

500 Dairy Cooperative Societies, establishment of09 Bulk Milk Coolers, strengthening of

109

milk processing plant at Sagar, procurement of milk and marketing. In Uttar Pradesh, the

activities under taken were organization/ revival of 560 Dairy Cooperative Societies and

their registration, technical investments in improved husbandry practices which include

distribution of de-wormers, mineral mixture, and fodder seed distribution, feed and fodder

distribution, working capital for supporting the milk procurement through DCSs, meeting

transportation cost towards marketing of milk and training. Additionally, one milk

processing plant as Jhansi, strengthening and up-gradation of infrastructure at Chitrakoot

and Jalaun district was also undertaken in the package.


The status of progress of the dairy projects in the Bundelkhand region is presented as under

in Table 66:

Table 66 Physical progress under Dairy Sector in UP & MP

State Activities Unit Targets Achievement % Achievement

Ma

dh

ya

Pra

de

sh

Organization of DCS No. 500 561 112%

Bulk Milk Coolers No. 9 14 156%

Milk Processing Units (Renovation & Upgradation)

No. 1 1 100%

Average Daily Milk Collection

K.G/ day 25000 36418 145%

Milk Tanker No. 3 3

Utt

ar

Pra

de

sh

Organize DCS No. 560 560 100%

Technical Investment

De-wormer No. of Ben 65198 65198 100%

Mineral Mixture No. of Ben 18480 18480 100%

Berseem Mini Kit No. of Ben 16800 16800 100%

Bajra Minikit No. of Ben 8400 8400 100%

Urea Molasses (link block)

No. of Ben 68400 68400 100%

Animal Feed No. of Ben 93861 70037 75%

Average Daily Milk Collection

K.G/ day 59680 25600 43%

Milk Transportation Cost No. 7 7 100%

Training and Exposure

Exposure Visit No. of Ben 427 427 100%

Promotional Activities No. 679 679 100%

Training of Field Staffs No. of Ben 70 70 100%

Training of Managerial Level Staffs

No. of Ben 28 28 100%

Plant renovation and upgradation

No. 5 5 100%

As can be seen, the progress reported by both the states is almost 100% against the targets.

110

Major Observations from Field Visits: Uttar Pradesh

As a part of Quick Impact evaluation study, every activity which was created under the

Bundelkhand package was visited on sample basis. The sample include, 09 Cooperative

Societies in 05 out of 07 districts of Uttar Pradesh were visited. Also, the milk processing

unit at Jhansi, milk chilling centre at Jalaun and Chitrakoot were also visited and information

was obtained as per the designed check list. Discussions with the beneficiaries/ milk

pourers, secretary of DCS, milk inspectors and officers of processing and chilling centres

were held to obtain their feedback on the benefits generated from the intervention.

Table 67 below gives brief findings of the indicators evaluated during the field visits.

MILK PROCESSING CENTRE ESTABLISHED UNDER BSP IN JHANSI

111

Table 67 Status and impact of dairy development under Bundelkahand Package in UP

Indicators Unit Jhansi Lalitpur Jalaun Chitrakoot Banda Hamirpur Mahoba Total

Bulk Milk Coolers No 6 0 0 5 0 10 0 21 Milk Chilling Centre No 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 Milk Processing Plant No 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 Capacity LPD 10000 5000 30000 10000 0 0 0 55000 Milk Route Established No 8 1 NA 6 2 4 4 25 No of active routes No 1 0 NA 1 1 4 4 11 Daily Milk Received at BMC/ Chilling Centres (Average)

Litre/day 5000 803 6500 2000 896 960 81.5 16240.5

Total Dairy Cooperative Societies

No 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 560

Non Functional Dairy Cooperatives

No 66 64 9 65 31 67 75 377

Functional Dairy Cooperative Societies

No 14 16 71 15 49 13 5 183

Sample of Dairy Cooperative Societies Visited

No 1 1 0 0 4 2 1 9

Total Members No 32 No Records

found

NA NA 90 122 80 324 Women Members No 2 6 23 4 35 Ratio (Men to Women) 15:1 14:1 4.3:1 19:1 8.25:1 SC/ST Participation No 3 14 21 9 47 SC/ST Participation % 9% 16% 17% 11% 15% Total pourer members No 4 55 44 23 126 Milk Collection Litre/day 09-11 40-50 30-50 59-86 Average/ day (Lean season) Litre/day 9 35 30.75 72.5 Average/ day (Flush Season) Litre/day 20 55 45.84 160 Total Payment disbursed Rupees NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Price Realization Rs./Litre NA Rs.21 - 23 Rs. 22.10 - 29.5 Rs. 10.8-15

112

The progress of the dairy sector in Uttar Pradesh has not achieved the desired results and

most of the societies established are not functioning at present.

i. The milk processing centre at Jhansi of 10000 litres per day capacity is running at

less than half the potential capacity. The average milk collected per day varies

significantly during the flush season and peak season. During the months of October,

November, the average collection goes upto 5000 litters per day which goes down to

400- 800 litres during the lean season. Overall the units are running at significantly

low level.

ii. Out of the targeted procurement of 55000 litres per day, the current procurement

from the seven districts is found to be 16000 litres per day which 70% less than the

desired level for self sustenance.

iii. Out of 25 routes to be activated, only 11 routes are functional as per the reports

obtained during the visits and interaction with the department officials.

iv. Out of 560 Dairy Cooperative Societies which were revived/ organized, 377 (67%)

are sick/ non functional. Although, 183 (23%) are reportedly functional but the

actual number may be less considering the grim situation of dairy.

v. A total of 09 Dairy Cooperative Societies were chosen, 03 randomly from Jhansi,

Lalitpur and Hamirpur, while rest six were chosen in consultation with the

department officials in order to study their relative performance and assess the

actual status. The societies in Jhansi, Lalitpur and the one chosen in Hamirpur are

collecting milk ranging in between 9 litres to 30 litres a day. The best performing

dairies which were shown by the officials collecting milk not more than 40 litres

during the lean season and not more than 90 litres during the flush season. The most

encouraging societies were found in Banda where 4 societies shown were collecting

milk between 40 to 50 litres a day.

vi. Out of total 324 members form 09 DCS, only 126 (38%) members are pouring milk

to the cooperative societies while the rest either sells it to the private collectors or

consume. Only 10% of the members were found to be women, which in terms of

ratio is for every 9 men there is 1 women members.

vii. The price realization from selling of the milk to cooperatives not at the desired level.

The prices paid to the pourers range in between Rs.11.00 to Rs. 15.00 per litre in

Mahoba to maximum of Rs. 22.00 to Rs. 29.00 per litre in Hamirpur. The secretary of

DCS sells after collection to private players, at the rate of Rs 32.00 to Rs. 35 litres

keeping the margin. As there is no incentive for the pourer to sell the milk to

cooperative societies, this defeats the very purpose of creating the Dairy Cooperative

Society.

viii. Even after the renovation of milk processing plant of Jalaun, Jhansi and Chitrakoot,

less than the required supply of the milk has

resulted in sub-optimal utilization of asset

created. In Chitrakoot, the treatment plant is

found to be incomplete. The packaging

machines are installed in Chitrakoot and

Jhansi. A part of milk collected in Chitrakoot is

packed and sold but that is not enough to

reduce to increasing losses of the unit.

ix. In Lalitpur, Rs. 1.00 core working capital is

113

required to run the chilling plant, which is 100% complete. The assets installed is

lying in-fructuous and depreciating at a high rate. Six (06). There is no availability of

water in the chilling centre despite of 06 boring already done in the campus.

x. The transportation cost in all the routes is reportedly high to an extent of Rs 4.00 to

15.00 per litre. The officials of the dairy department informed that the societies are

not getting any transport subsidy and as such cost on transport per litre of milk has

increased substantially and the societies are incurring losses due to high

transportation cost.

xi. At Hamirpur, the concerned dairy development officer reported that Rs. 1.00 crore

payments are pending with Kanpur Milk Union which has become sick and

liquidated. The pending payment has severely affected the payment to pourers. The

average lag in payment reported is 3 weeks but in actual it is more than a month.

Further, with closure of the Kanpur Dairy, the disposal of milk collected at the

chilling centre/ milk coolers has become one of the major bottlenecks.

Major Observations during field visits: Madhya Pradesh

The dairy sector in Madhya Pradesh has shown an impressive progress since the inception

of the package. The funds have been fully utilized and infrastructures have been fully

created and functional. The results presented in Table 68 below the results achieved by the

dairy development department in Madhya Pradesh.

114

Table 68 Status and impact of dairy development in MP

Indicators Unit Sagar Chhatarpur Damoh Panna Tikamgarh Datia Total

Bulk Milk Coolers No 1 3 2 3 3 2 14 Milk Chilling Centre No 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Milk Processing Plant No 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 Capacity LPD 5000 4500 4500 3000 5000 3000 25000 Milk Route Established No 7 7 6 4 8 7 39 No of active routes No 7 7 4 4 8 7 37 Daily Milk Received at BMC/ Chilling Centres (Average)

Litre/day 12294 6480 3301 2734 8703 7701 41213

Total Dairy Cooperative Societies No 105 96 95 77 140 48 561 Non Functional Dairy Cooperatives

No 7 4 30 1 0 0 42

Functional Dairy Cooperative Societies

No 98 92 65 76 140 48 519

Sample of Dairy Cooperative Societies Visited

No - 5 5 5 5 -

Total Members No 3386 3455 2796 2537 4739 1547 18460 Women Members No 1304 1121 814 654 3101 1035 8029 Ratio (Men to Women)# - 2.15:1 0.01:1 0.42:1 0.59:1 - 1.29:1 SC/ST Participation# No - 18 46 37 13 - SC/ST Participation % 6% 37% 21% 5% - 13.45% Total pourer members No Milk Collection Average/ day Litre/day - 118.18 34.35 81.83 141.65 - 95.12 Total Payment disbursed Rs.(Lakh) 1686.71 1049.21 409.14 478.46 1593.84 806.08 6023.44 Price Realization Rs./Litre 21.9-31.9 14.9-29.6 21.9-29.6 17.4-24.5 # Based on sample cooperative societies visited

115

i. A total of 14 bulk milk coolers were installed

against the targeted 09 and 01 milk processing

plant located in Sagar was renovated and

upgraded to the capacity of 20000 litres per

day. Against the capacity of 20000 LPD, the

plant is operating at a capacity of more than

28,000 LPD.

ii. Total DCS established is 561 against the

targeted 500 DCS of which 519 are functional

on 37 out of 39 established milk routes.

iii. Against the targeted milk collection of 25000 LPD, the current collection is 41213

LPD which is 64% more than the targeted milk collection.

iv. Total membership created through revival/ reorganizing the DCS is 18460 of which

8029 were women member which accounts for 43% of the total members of the

societies. The man to women ratio is much significant in case of Madhya Pradesh

(1:1.29), thus creating favourably the environment to participate in economic

activities and empowerment.

v. Since, the inception of package after revival of dairy sector in Madhya Pradesh, the

amount that has gone to the members of Dairy

Cooperative Societies is Rs. 6023.44 lakh. Thus,

each member family of the cooperative has

been able to generate additional Rs. 8184.00

per annum from the dairy activity which is

quite significant addition to its overall income.

vi. The payments made to pourers are strictly

made on the rates based on SNF and Fat

percentage

vii. The creation of infrastructure and institutionalization of whole process has

benefited the farmers who use to carry milk earlier to large distance of more than 18

Kms as reflected by the farmer of Sagar district. Since, there were no cooperative

societies, the milk was usually sold to private dealer and market was more or less

oligopsonic where there was large number of sellers but few buyers who used to

dictate the terms of trade. The establishment of cooperative societies in have been

able to create a competitive market in the region.

viii. The price realization of milk per litre estimated range in between Rs. 15.00 to Rs.

32.00 depending on the seasons which affect the fat/SNF percentage and milk

productivity.

Recommendation/ Suggestion

i. The viability of dairy sector in all the district of Uttar Pradesh needs to be critically

and comprehensively reviewed before any attempt to expand the activity in the

region. Although, the department demand budgets for expanding the activity and

creating additional infrastructure of Chilling centre/ BMCs but unless the supply

constraints are removed, any further expansion and installation will remain in-

fructuous.

116

ii. The payment lag has to be reduced to a week instead which is currently more than

03 weeks at present, because most of the pourers are small and marginal in the

regions which needs cash more frequently to meet their daily requirement. They

turn to private players because they make payment spot and cash payment.

iii. Breed improvement may be given additional thrust to get new progeny which are

more productive than the exiting cattle/ buffalo population. Although, this appears

to be a long term solution to address the issues of Annapratha and Milk Supply

constraints.

iv. Modernization of existing dairy cooperative societies with Automated Milk

Collection and Testing System will improve transparency and accountability in

overall system which is absent in present system.

v. A more transparent system of reporting using Management Information System may

be established by the PCDF which is completely found lacking and reports obtained

reflect different figures at different places.

117

Chapter 8 Forest & Environment Forests are repository of the bio-diversity. They play a vital role in sustaining the life of

people and are crucial for the food and water security. However, planning and sustainable

management are key art to safeguard forest resources. In absence, degradation appears

which seriously affects the sustainability of crops and natural vegetation. As forests

disappears, the possibilities of rainwater being conserved below the ground decreases thus

resulting in acute water shortage.

Draught has a strong correlation with poor

management of forest resources. Bundelkhand,

which is a draught affected area, soil erosion and

dryness are key characteristics of forest land in

Bundelkhand region. Henceforth, to revive the land

under the forest, it was decided to allocate Rs 314

crore under the package to Forest & Environment.

It was targeted to bring in 60,000 hectares of forest

areas in UP and 2 lakh hectares of forest areas in

MP for integrated conservation and management.

This intervention on the forest land will help in

planting of local grasses and fruit bearing trees which will restore not only the degraded

forests but will also enhance the drinking and ground water availability.

Financial Allocations and Progress

Funding under environment and forest showcased a convergence of ACA, CS and MGNREGA.

The following is the fund allocation-

Table 69 Allocation and Expenditure in Environment & Forest Sector under Bundelkhand Package

State Allocation to Environment & Forest (Rs Crore)

Released under the package (Rs Crore)

Actual Received (Rs Crore)

Actual expenditure incurred (Rs Crore)

% received of allocated

% spent of received

Madhya Pradesh 242 130.03 106.58 105.87 44.04% 99.33% Uttar Pradesh 72 86.9 86.9 31.56 120.69% 36.32% Bundelkhand region

314 216.93 193.48 137.43 61.62% 71.03%

118

Convergence of Funds in Forest and Environment Activities

One important issue with respect to allocation of funds to environment & forest department

pertains to convergence of funds. The following table showcases the funds allocated and

released by different funding sources.

Table 70 Convergence of fund in Forest and Environment activities under Bundelkhand Package

Madhya Pradesh

Total Fund ACA Share CS Share MGNREGA Share Allocated Release Allocated Release Allocated Release Allocated Release 242 130.03 107 107 20 19.36 115 3.67 Uttar Pradesh Total Fund ACA Share CS Share MGNREGA Share Allocated Release Allocated Release Allocated Release Allocated Release 72 86.9 31.56 61.56 5.44 4.34 35.00 21.00

It can be seen there from that ACA funds and MNREGA funds are the two major and equal

sources for the environment and forestry component of the package.

One key observation with respect to release of fund was the huge discrepancies between the

allocated & released. In UP, actual release in ACA contribution was 195% of the allocated

amount whereas MGNREGA release in MP was meagre 3.2% of the allocated amount.

From the figure above, it is clearly evident that except the ACA contribution, others have

failed to contribute as per the allocated share. This was cited as a key reason for delay in

creating said infrastructures under the environment & forest head in UP & MP.

100% 96.8%

3.2%

195.1%

79.8%

60%

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

ACA CS MGNREGA

Madhya Pradesh

Uttar Pradesh

Figure 10 Convergence of funds from different sources under forest and environment

activities under the Bundelkhand Package

119

Physical Progress

Forest department in Bundelkhand region have undertaken many activities to restore the

lost moisture of the land and improve the ground

water level. Some of the activities undertaken using

the package funds were contour bunding, Earthen

Check dam, Concrete Check dam, deepening of ponds,

etc. The section provides a brief note on the physical

structure envisaged under the special package in

Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh.

District forest officer implemented the projects under

the Bundelkhand special package in the state of

Madhya Pradesh. Forest Range Officers were assigned

the task of detailed continuous monitoring of the projects implemented. The following is the

progress made in Madhya Pradesh-

Table 71 Area treated and structure created under soil and water conservation activities by Forest Dept.

under the Bundelkhand Package (Madhya Pradesh)

District Total Treated Land

(Hectare)

Number of Structure to be created

Completed In Progress

% completed

Sagar 27784.83 73 73 0 100% Damoh 14464.00 41 41 0 100% Chhatarpur 13266.00 67 67 0 100% Tikamgarh 8844.00 54 48 6 88% Panaa 24320.00 249 249 0 100% Datia 3876.00 21 6 12 28% Total 92554.83 505 484 21 95% Except Tikamgarh & Datia, all the other districts of Madhya Pradesh have been able to

achieve their targets in the stipulated period of time. However, in terms of treatment of

forest area for soil and moisture preservation, despite 95% completion of the envisaged

structures, only 92554.83 hectare of land as against the targeted 2 lakh hectares could be

treated.

In case of Uttar Pradesh, the department officials notified that 100% of the work has been

completed by the forest department. The following table illustrates the number of

infrastructure created and their coverage

Table 72 Physical progress in UP under soil and water conservation activity in UP

Districts Projects Completed (No)

Area Covered (Ha.)

Jhansi 117 12000 Jalaun 45 6000 Lalitpur 103 16000 Mahoba 58 5000 Hamirpur 73 7000 Chitarkoot 100 12000 Banda 19 2000 Total 515 60000

120

It was observed that UP was able to complete the target in terms of area of coverage.

Sample Visit & Major Observations from Field Visits: Madhya Pradesh


MP were visited. The following table showcases the breakup of the sample visited district

wise:

Table 73 Area treated by Forest Dept under the Bundelkhand Package in MP



Total Treated Area (Ha.)

Total Treated area covered

(Ha.)

Sagar 73 0 27784.83 00.00 Damoh 41 0 14464.00 00.00 Chhatarpur 67 8 13266.00 1426.20 Tikamgarh 54 0 8844.00 00.00 Panaa 249 10 24320.00 2674.43 Datia 21 0 3876.00 00.00 Total 505 18 92554.83 4100.63

As the projects were of similar nature and lacked beneficiaries, it was decided to cover 18

sample projects covering a total area of 4100.63 hectare. The following are the major

observations from the field visit-

i. In Panna, forest department have constructed 8 small tanks of 250 meters in length

and 2 meter deep. Besides, 700 percolation pits and 24 percolation tanks were also

constructed. However, on date of visit the percolation pits and tanks both were dried

out.

ii. The area around the created structure was found to have decent density of trees

with a wide coverage of green grass.

iii. All the interventions covered under the sample had no beneficiaries. Thus, it was not

possible to validate the data provided by the department officials.

iv. Sample Earthen Dams infrastructure created in Panaa was damaged and could not

store the water as per the capacity. Forest department cited heavy rains as the

reason for the damage.

v. No Project Details Display Board was erected at the project site / entry point from

the civil area for social audit. Hence it was difficult to distinguish between a package

funded and non package funded structures.

Sample Visit & Major Observations from field visits: Uttar Pradesh

As a part of the evaluation study, 19 of the implemented projects under the package in UP

were visited. The following table showcases the breakup of the sample visited district wise:

121

Table 74 Area treated by Forest Dept. under Bundelkhand Package in UP



Total Treated Area (Ha.)

Total Treated area covered (Ha.)

Jhansi 117 5 12000 1100

Jalaun 45 3 6000 1125 Lalitpur 103 3 16000 1356

Mahoba 58 4 5000 1076

Hamirpur 73 4 7000 330

Chitarkoot 100 0 12000 0

Banda 19 0 2000 0

Total 515 19 60000 4987

In case of UP, a sample of 19 projects were selected and visited covering an area of 4987

hectares. The following are the major observations from the field visit-

i. The check dams constructed are in ideal locations having anticipated level of water

storage and overflowing during the rainy season. The quality of construction was

found to be satisfactory.

ii. Pond deepening work done in UP have resulted in higher level of water storage and

seasonal fishery activity is undertaken by a beneficiary.

iii. Earthen dams created in Mahoba have no stored water on the date of visit. Even, the

villagers nearby the earthen dam did not experience any change in the level of water

availability with them. However, the department officials propagated that there has

been a significant change with an increase in greenery around the project area.

iv. Structured created by forest department provided a great relief from thirst to milch

animals who are left out in open in accordance with “Anna Pratha” practiced in the

Bundelkhand region. Besides, it also provided drinking water for animals living in

the forest.

v. There was convergence with MANREGA for carrying out the projects. It was also

learnt that work was delayed due to the convergence as the adequate labour supply

was not available.

vi. No Project Details Display Board was erected at the project site / entry point from

the civil area for social audit. Hence it was difficult to distinguish between a package

funded and non package funded structures.

Impact of the Project

Projects implemented under the Forest and

Environment head had a mono objective of checking

the soil erosion by restoring the soil moisture. In both

the states, the land near the project area showcased

an excellent progress. However, not much change

could be observed on those areas which were a bit far

from the project site however fallen under the

catchment area of the project. Based upon the field

visit and interaction with available beneficiaries &

122

department officials, the following impact was observed-

i. In Jhansi district of Uttar Pradesh, where the projects implemented are close to the

catchment area of farmers, it was learnt that pre intervention the land was not found

suitable for cropping however; post intervention farmers are able to grow

groundnut and soybean because of enhanced moisture level downstream.

ii. In Hamirpur, Concrete stop dams created by the forest department have helped in

increasing the level of water in the nearby dug wells. Farmers were satisfied with the

structure and used the water for irrigation of crops cultivated around the stop dam.

iii. On inspection of the timeline of the pictures provided by the department officials of

the project construction, it was observed that in Mahoba the earthen dam created

under the package have improved the greenery around the project to a very large

extent. A decent amount of grass coverage was also observed which made a check on

the soil erosion.

Recommendation

i. First and foremost, GIS mapping of the structure created under the package is a

must. It is impossible to distinguish a structure created under the package and non

package. Audit of such infrastructure is impossible. GIS mapping besides providing

the location details of the structure would also help in maintaining the authenticity

of work.

ii. Under watershed treatment activity, the activities implemented were not planned

but implemented on adhoc basis. It is recommended that watershed approach may

be followed while planning the activity in the forest area.

iii. Concrete stop dam/check dam highlighted a much significant success as compare to

earthen dam in the region of Bundelkhand. It is thus recommended that in near

future, projects should be sanctioned under concrete stop dam/check dam rather

than earthen dams.

iv. Beneficiary’s participation should be encouraged while creating an infrastructure. If

possible, a demand analysis should be made and accordingly the envisaged

infrastructure should be created.

v. Many of the structures visited mostly earthen dam was found to be technically weak

as no pitching and spillways are provided to safeguard the structure in case of heavy

rain. In order to safeguard the earthen check dams, it is suggested that stone pitching

on the upstream side of bunds, provision of masonry spillways for escape of surplus

water and plantation of grasses and shrubs on the bunds should be undertaken.

123

Chapter 9 Rural Drinking Water The region of Bundelkhand is vast and complex in terms of its geographical as well as its

economic, social and political aspects. It is divided between UP & MP comprising of total 13

districts. The region is characterized as a dry area with an annual rainfall of approximate

500 mm. In light of the previous statement, the issues of clean drinking water supply are

important. Keeping in view the demand from the Minister of State in the Ministry of Rural

Development and other Members of Parliament from Bundelkhand the Government on 19th

May 2011 approved an Additional Central Assistance for the State Governments of Uttar

Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh to provide drinking water in the Bundelkhand region.

Financial Allocations and Financial Achievements

A total of Rs. 195.0724 crore (5.34% of ACA allocation) has been sanctioned under ACA for

the Bundelkhand region. The Table 75 highlights the state wise breakup of the total amount

allocated, released and expenditure.

Table 75 Allocation, releases and expenditure in Drinking Water Projects under Bundelkhand Package

State Allocation Releases Expenditure % of expenditure to Allocation

% of expenditure to Release

Madhya Pradesh 103.44 99.74 92.51 96.4% 92.8% Uttar Pradesh 91.63 63.88 57.05 69.7% 89.3% Bundelkhand 195.07 163.62 149.56 83.9% 91.4%

Madhya Pradesh as compared to Uttar Pradesh has been able to better utilize the financial

allocation under the ACA to the respective states. A total of 83.9% of the allocated budget

was released to respective department of both the states whereas 91.4% of the received

budget had been used by both the states.

Financial Progress

This section talks about the fund utilization by the respective departments of both the states.

The following is extent of fund utilization in Madhya Pradesh-

124

Table 76 District wise financial allocation and utilization of fund in drinking water projects in MP under

Bundelkhand Special Package.

District Total Cost of projects

sanctioned

Total fund received

Total fund

Spent

% received of the total

cost

% spent of the total received

Sagar 29.95 29.61 29.61 98.9% 100% Damoh 26.18 25.23 22.70 96.4% 90% Chhatarpur 9.24 9.33 8.66 101% 92.8% Tikamgarh 14.66 15.12 14.68 103% 97.1% Panaa 19.95 16.84 13.51 84.4% 80.2% Datia 3.46 3.61 3.35 104.3% 92.8% Total 103.44 99.74 92.51 96.4% 92.8%

Sagar district received the maximum of the funds for creation of the stated infrastructure

whereas Datia received the least. About 96.4% of the sanctioned funds have been released of

which 92.8% of the funds were utilized to create the stated infrastructure.

UP as compared had not been able to receive the fund to the extent of MP. The following

table provides detail information on the financials utilization in UP-

Table 77 District wise financial allocation and utilization in Drinking Water Scheme under Bundlkhand

Package in UP

District Total allocated

Total received

Total Spent

% received of the

allocated

% spent of the received

funds

Jhansi 45.56 27.20 27.17 59.7% 99.9% Jalaun 2.21 2.21 2.21 100.0% 100.0% Lalitpur 7.92 4.46 4.46 56.4% 100.0% Hamirpur 1.33 1.18 1.33 89.0% 112.4% Banda 6.87 4.16 3.11 60.6% 74.7% Mahoba 25.22 16.57 16.25 65.7% 98.0% Chitarkoot 2.50 2.50 2.50 100.0% 100.0% Total 91.63 63.88 57.05 69.7% 89.3%

Jhansi district received the maximum of the funds for creation of the stated infrastructure

whereas Hamirpur received the least. On the aggregate, 69.7% of the total allocations have

been received of which 89.3% of the funds were utilized to create the stated infrastructure.

Physical Progress

Pipeline drinking water scheme and Installation of hand pumps were two activities

undertaken under the package to provide clean drinking water to people living in

Bundelkhand. Madhya Pradesh showcased a number of pipelined projects however in case

of UP, hand pumps were the major intervention followed by pipeline drinking water. The

following is the status of progress of the rural drinking water scheme in the MP leg of

Bundelkhand region:

125

Table 78 Physical progress under rural drinking water scheme projects in MP

District Number of projects

Completed On going

% Completed

% On going

Sagar 350 282 48 81% 14% Damoh 249 178 71 71% 29% Chhatarpur 150 138 12 92% 8% Tikamgarh 200 145 55 73% 28% Panaa 280 129 72 46% 26% Datia 58 32 26 55% 45% Total 1287 904 284 70% 22%

It was observed that 70% of the sanctioned projects in the first phase of the package were

completed in Madhya Pradesh. Chhatarpur

showcased the highest success with 92% of the

work completed on day of the inspection whereas

Panaa highlighted the lowest success with meagre

46% completion of the work Delay in

administrative approval was cited as the key

reason for the low performance in Panaa district

of MP.

The physical progress was superior in case of UP,

however the intervention mainly comprised of

hand pumps installation. The pipeline drinking

water scheme in UP were fewer in number and showcased a slow progress. The status of

physical progress is presented in table 79 below.

Table 79 Physical progress under rural drinking water scheme under Bundelkhand Package in UP

District Installation of Hand pumps Pipeline Drinking Water

Target Completed % Comp.

Target Completed In Progress

% Complete

Jhansi 400 400 100% 3 1 2 33% Jalaun 375 375 100% 0 0 0 - Lalitpur 350 350 100% 1 0 1 0% Hamirpur 300 300 100% 0 0 0 - Banda 400 400 100% 2 0 2 0% Mahoba 500 500 100% 6 1 5 17% Chitarkoot 400 400 100% 0 0 0 - Total 2725 2725 100% 12 2 10 17%

Installation of hand pumps in UP showcased a 100% completion whereas out of the 12

pipeline drinking water scheme sanctioned in the state, only two projects have been

completed and the rest 10 were under the construction phase.

126

Sample Visit & Major Observations from Field Visits: Madhya Pradesh

As a part of the evaluation study, 10 out of 904 completed projects implemented under the

package in MP were visited. The Table 80 showcase the breakup of the sample visited

district wise.

Table 80 Total number of schemes and sample projects under rural drinking water schemes visited in

MP

District Total Completed Sample visited

Sagar 350 282 3 Damoh 249 178 2 Chhatarpur 150 138 1 Tikamgarh 200 145 2 Panaa 280 129 2 Datia 58 32 0 Total 1287 904 10

The following are the major observations of the field visits:-

i. Tenders for cistern based pipeline system/tube well have been awarded through

open tenders. PHED, Government of MP has implemented the projects.

ii. Annual maintenance of a system is estimated at Rs. 94000 per annum by PHED,

however monthly charges levied on beneficiaries is Rs. 30 per month which is too

low to meet the operation & maintenance cost. Besides a 50% default in payment of

the monthly charges was observed at the beneficiaries’ level. Understanding the

situation, the long term sustainability of the system is in doubt.

iii. Beneficiaries lacked awareness about the cost & benefit of the implemented scheme

iv. PHED officials informed that it was envisaged that a committee of users would be

formed that will take care of the operations & maintenance of the scheme. However,

despite 6 months of operations, no such committee have been formed. Currently

Gram Panchayat & PHED is jointly looking after the maintenance & operations.

v. Schemes implemented under the project were supply driven rather than based on

demand of the local villagers.

vi. In village Sagauri (Damoh), the project is being non operational as the source of

water is not available. Two wells have been dug but both of them have turned out to

be dry. Rs 11.79 lakh have been invested in the project till the date of evaluation

Sample Visit & Major Observations from Field Visits: Uttar Pradesh


UP were visited. The following table showcase the breakup of the sample visited district

wise-

127

Table 81 Total number of schemes and sample projects under rural drinking water project visited in UP

District Installation of hand pumps Pipeline Drinking water scheme

Total Completed Sample Total Completed Sample Jhansi 400 400 6 3 1 1 Jalaun 375 375 5 0 0 0 Lalitpur 350 350 5 1 0 0 Hamirpur 300 300 5 0 0 0

Banda 400 400 5 2 0 0 Mahoba 500 500 5 6 1 1 Chitarkoot 400 400 6 0 0 0 Total 2725 2725 37 12 2 2

The following are the major observation of the field visit-

i. Tenders for installation of new hand pumps were awarded through open tendering

system

ii. Soakage pit installed under the package failed to achieve its objective. It was

criticized by both the department officials & the local villagers.

iii. It was observed that in many cases hand pumps were used as a private property

rather than a public utility system. The installations are made in private campus,

than on public place.

iv. In case of Hamirpur, hand pumps installed as

per the department notifications were

actually missing on the field level in few of the

cases verified.

v. Pipeline Drinking water scheme in UP is only

implemented in Jhansi, Lalitpur & Mahoba. Of

which, one in Jhansi & another in Mahoba are

complete. During the evaluation, it was

observed that due to high density of hand

pumps in the area, villagers refrained from

using pipeline system as they have to pay for the connection & monthly charges.

Impact of the project on lives of the beneficiaries

Drinking water is a basic need of every human being. Hence it has a wide impact on the lives

of people. Projects implemented under the projects have successfully met the objective of

providing drinking water to number of beneficiaries living by the implemented project. The

following are key other observation that has come out from a detailed Focus Group

Discussion (FGD) with beneficiaries of the project-

Impact in Madhya Pradesh-

i. On a sample basis, a decent impact on the lives of beneficiaries was observed at each

implemented project. All the implemented projects have helped the beneficiaries to

reduce the travel time by a average of 55%

ii. Implemented scheme under the package has improved the supply of drinking water

from an average of 31 LPCD to 55 LPCD in Damoh & Sagar.

128

iii. In Tikamgarh, easy availability of clean water has helped the villagers in improving

sanitation facilities have home. This in turn has improved the hygiene & living

standards of the villagers.

Impact in Uttar Pradesh-

i. New Hand pumps installed under the package has helped people get clean drinking

water throughout the year. Common utility places enjoyed the highest success rate

in terms of number of beneficiaries and popularity

ii. Installed hand pumps under the package have increased the density of hand pump in

villages thereby reducing the manual work of the locals.

iii. Chitarkoot being a tourist place, few hand pumps installed at strategic location have

helped the tourist get clean water during their visit. However, a biased in selection of

beneficiaries for hand pump installation was seen in the area. The SC ST dominated

area lacked the facility whereas the upper caste people had a decent density of hand

pump installed.

iv. Installed drinking water system at Jhansi has highlighted a good success. The

implemented project has helped the beneficiaries receive water without much of

drudgery.

Recommendation

Corresponding departments have decently done their job of providing clean drinking water

to people of Bundelkhand, which was the key objective of funding under the Rural Drinking

water scheme. The following are the major recommendations which would enable the

department officials to further improve the implementation project & work for betterment

of the Bundelkhand area and respective people living here-

i. Projects under the head installation of new hand pumps should not be encouraged

anymore in the area. The area already has a decent density of hand pumps.

Bundelkhand being a dry region, installation of many more hand pumps will result in

a drastic fall in the ground water level which is not a good sign on sustainability.

ii. Projects under the head pipeline drinking water scheme should be encouraged.

People should be made aware of the scheme from a long run sustainability point of

view. A formal discussion on issues with payments & installation charges should

take place between the officials & people and a mutual agreement should be made.

iii. It was difficult to distinguish hand pumps installed under the package from those

who were not installed under the package. A GIS mapping could be a solution to the

stated issue.

iv. Soakage Pit which is an integral part of the current scheme under the head

installation of new hand pumps should be stopped.

v. New pipeline drinking water schemes should be initiated on consultation with

common public/beneficiaries in the area. A potential demand analysis is a must

before sanction of such projects. Also, a user committee should be made from the

potential users of the service to monitor and sustain the project.

129

Chapter 10 Relevance/ Acceptance of Different Intervention Made under the Package as Medium

Long Term Strategies for Drought Mitigation.

Rainfall Situation and irrigation coverage in Bundelkhand

The average annual rainfall of Bundelkhand in Uttar Pradesh is 876.1 mm with a range of

786.6 to 945.5 mm. In Madhya Pradesh portion the average rainfall is 990.9 mm with a

range of 767.8 to 1086.7 mm and is 13% more than the Uttar Pradesh part. About 90% of

the rainfall is received in the monsoon season of July to September in about 30-35 events or

spells.

Figure 11 Normal Annual rainfall (mm) in Bundelkhand districts

Technically speaking the Bundelkhand region falls under rainfed farming areas with more

than 750 mm of annual normal rainfall and the soil moisture situation is better.

The irrigated area averaged 45 – 46% of the net sown area which is also a

satisfactory position.

768

972 985 1065 1070 1087

787 851 851 879 880

940 945

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

1000 1100 1200

130

Table 82 Net sown area and irrigated area (000 ha) in Bundelkhand region

State / district Net sown area

Major and

medium irrigation sources

Minor irrigation sources

Total irrigated

area

% of irrigated area to net sown area

Uttar Pradesh

Lalitpur 299.7 27.45 120.54 147.99 49%

Jhansi 199.9 13.62 35.55 49.17 25%

Jalaun 303.9 37.92 88.6 126.52 42%

Hamirpur 337.1 118.09 96.41 214.5 64%

Mahoba 306 57.24 87.25 144.49 47%

Banda 213.3 46.74 60.97 107.71 50%

Chitrakoot 194.1 8.83 45.97 54.8 28%

Total 1854 309.89 535.27 845.16 46%

% share of sources 37% 63% 100%

Madhya Pradesh

Sagar 498 8.74 131.37 140.11 28%

Damoh 303.4 1.8 118.06 119.86 40%

Panna 235.5 2.67 53.86 56.53 24%

Chhaterpu 363 21.73 216.32 238.05 66%

Tikamgarh 240.1 16.85 170.79 187.64 78%

Datia 212 20.72 64.34 85.06 40%

Total 1852 72.51 754.74 827.25 45%


Bundelkhand

Total 3706 382.4 1290 1672.41 45%


However continuous shortfall in rainfall for 4 years prior to formulation of the package

made the region drought affected. The shortfall increased from 2004-05 to 2007-08.

Figure 12 Shortfall in rainfall in Bundelkhand region

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08

Madhya Pradesh

Uttar Pradesh

131

It is this drought situation that sparked the need for implementation of a drought mitigation

package in Bundelkhand region.

Medium and Long Term Strategies for Drought Mitigation

Drought mitigation should essentially address the issue of enhancing the water availability

for agriculture and consumption besides creating enabling environment for creation of

institutional mechanism to effectively market the increased production. About 90% of the

geological area of Bundelkhand is a hard rock with very poor yield of aquifer, fast depletion

of water table and inadequate rate of replenishment or recharging. Development of ground

water resources is not very dependable or attractive. Watershed management, development

of surface water resources, improving water use efficiency, enhancing biomass productivity

of forest and livestock sector are the most important options of the new strategies.

Watershed management in the upper most forest catchment is the highly prioritized starting

point for integrated development of resources from ridge to valley. Besides, reviving of

traditional dug-wells and tanks, de-silting ponds, command area development and efficient

micro irrigation systems should get high priority. Intensification of diversification,

marketing, value addition, processing and ensuring the risks are also essential to consolidate

gains of enhancing productivity and other mitigative effects. Accordingly the following

medium and long term strategies of drought mitigation were drawn up under the

Bundelkhand package.

Table 83 Medium/long term strategies drawn under the Bundelkhand Package

Medium term strategies Long term strategies

Desilting, renovation, repairs of tanks, check dams, deepening and recharging of about 2.8 lakh dug-wells

Rainwater conservation in trenches, planting of indigenous fruits, fodder trees

Digging of farm ponds and new open wells

Completion of ongoing Rajghat canal project and Bariyarpur barrage

Creation of fodder and feed block banks

Improving efficiency of AI services

Creation of seed banks of extra short duration varieties

Professionally designed integrated participatory treatment of watersheds from ridge to valley system.

Mostly open dug-wells and Recharging of open dug-wells to be encouraged to tap the low yielding ground water potentials

Left Bank Canal at Bariyarpur of Madhya Pradesh should be expedited and Right Bank Canal taken up on priority basis.

Command areas of surface water resources to be developed

In situ conservation of rainwater, contour cultivation, sowing on ridges or raised beds especially in black soils

Modern market converging sale of farm produce, purchase of inputs, warehousing, sample testing services, banks, extension and electronic display system etc.

Seed multiplication and creation of seed banks Breed improvement with Tharparkar, Haryana and

Murraha bulls is necessary. Goat rearing especially of Jamnapari and Barberi to be

encouraged. Liquidation of animal assets for coping with drought Marketing of milk through Consumer institutions and

setting up modern milk processing plants (also for meat and animal related by products)

Development of drought tolerant varieities of filed crops

132

and planting of early bearing fruit crops Weather based insurance (Barsha Bima) Special institutional arrangements like that of Sujala

Watershed of Karnataka Strengthening of Agriculture College

Focus of the Package

The total allocation under Bundelkhand package aggregated Rs 3860 crore in Madhya

Pradesh and Rs 3606 crore in UP. Within the package, the ACA allocation was to the extent

of Rs 1953 crore in MP and Rs 1696 crore in UP. Increasing the irrigated area through major,

medium and minor irrigation projects and increasing the soil moisture regime through

watershed development constituted a major portion of the package allocation and ACA

allocation.

`

Figure 13: Share of irrigation and watershed programmes in Bundelkhand package

Thus about two thirds of the total Bundelkhand package and 50 to 61% of the ACA

allocation were earmarked for irrigation and watershed development programmes.

Essentially, the IWMP funds were converged with ACA funds for integrated watershed

management of arable lands. The IWMP fund convergence was to the extent of Rs 840 crore

in MP and Rs 480 crore in UP. Thus the package has fully focussed on the drought mitigation

activities.

Likely Physical Impact of the Package on Drought Mitigation

Completion of irrigation projects, new minor irrigation schemes, command area

development, and restoration / repairs/ renovation of different water bodies are the

irrigation projects supported by the package. Besides construction / renovation / recharge

of dug wells, distributing pump sets and HDPE pipes for individual farmers are also

supported under the package. Treatment of forest and arable lands for moisture

conservation through stop dams, check dams and regular watershed management practices

69%

61% 65%

50%

67%

56%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Under the package ACA allocation

Madhya Pradesh

Uttar Pradesh

Bundelkhand

133

are also the key activities. The likely physical impact of these activities is summarized as

under:

Table 84 Anticipated impact of the Bundelkhand Package


Hectares Hectares Increase in irrigated area Command Area Development of Rajghat Project

26,624 Command Area Development of Rajghat Project

69,500

New and ongoing minor irrigation projects (146)

50,232 Betwa Gursarai Canal System 27,000

Bariyarpur Medium Projects(1) 43,850 RRR scheme of canals 28400* Singhpur Barrage Medium Projects(1)

10,200 RRR of water Bodies 10000*

Canal Renovation (3) 24,391 HDPE Pipe distribution 17751* Distribution of Water lifting devices (pump sets)

60,000* Construction of New dug wells / blast wells

13251*

Recharge of dug wells / tanks/ ponds

30,864*

Renovation of dug wells 11,194* Others 300* Total 215,297 Total 208,260 Improvement in soil moisture regime Construction of Stop dams 3530 Treatment of forest area for soil & moisture conservation

200000 Treatment of forest area for soil & moisture conservation

60,000

Treatment of arable lands 400000 Treatment of arable lands 700000 Total 603530 760,000 *: Estimated

Overall the package when fully implemented would result in increasing the irrigated acreage

in the region by 4.23 lakh ha; 2.15 lakh ha in MP and 2.08 lakh ha in UP. This works out to

about 26% of the irrigated area in MP prior to the project and 25% in UP. Thus the additions

would be substantial. The irrigation coverage of the net sown area would increase from 45-

46% to 56% in either states and in the region.

The watershed management activities in arable lands would enhance the moisture regime

by about 4 lakh ha in MP and 7 lakh ha in UP constituting 22% and 38% of the net sown area

in the respective states. Besides, the treatment of forest lands would also enhance the soil

moisture regime in forest lands leading to increased vegetation. Thus overall, it can be

concluded that the package comprehensively addressed the issue of drought mitigation. If

properly implemented and the assets well maintained, the package would transform the

livelihood of the people in the region.

134

Chapter 11 Convergence in the Package

Level and extent of convergence of various CS/CSS schemes, MGNREGA in

different components and their impact on overall progress of the

package.

The Bundelkhand package envisaged convergence of funds from different sources for

enhancing resources availability and ensuring complementarities of activities. Of the total

package amount of Rs 7466 crore, about 3649 crore amounting to 48% was the ACA

exclusively provided for the Bundelkhand region and the balance was to be sourced from

other CS / CSS schemes, MGNREGA and BRGF / RKVY in that order. State government

contribution to the package as per CS/CSS norms was a minor component. Beneficiaries’

contribution was envisaged in individual beneficiary oriented projects like dug wells, pump

sets etc. On the whole a more than 50% of the resources for implementation of the package

have to be sourced from outside the ACA.

Table 85 Fund convergence under Bundelkhand Package (Rs. Crore)

S.N Fund Component Madhya Pradesh

Uttar Pradesh

Bundelkhand

1 Additional Central Assistance (ACA)

1953.20 1695.76 3648.96

2 CS/CSS Schemes 953.65 1318.59 2272.24 3 BRGF / RKVY 225.00 25.00 250.00 4 MGNREGA 595.00 471.00 1066.00 5 State Share 12.04 12.04 24.08 6 Beneficiary Contribution 121.11 83.61 204.72 Total 3860.00 3606.00 7466.00

MADHYA PRADESH UTTAR PRADESH BUNDELKHAND

NON ACA FUND

135

Figure 14 Share of ACA and Non ACA fund in Bundelkhand Package

Under ACA as also the CS, the flow of funds is smooth in the sense that 25 - 50% of the funds

are placed in advance with the states and further flow is ensured once the benchmarks set

for utilisation is achieved. The Sector wise / date wise release of ACA funds to MP and UP is

presented I Exhibits 1 and 2 respectively at the end of this chapter. The ACA funds and the

funds under CS /CSS schemes and RKVY / BRGF are routed through the consolidated funds

of the respective states. Only the MGNREGA funds are with the district administration and

the funds flow is contingent upon completion of certain designated tasks by the rural people.

By its very nature the activities under MGNREGA are taken up by rural households in their

respective villages while the activities supported by ACA / SC / SCC schemes are undertaken

by the line departments under the package. The outcome and implementation of the package

is very much dependent on the flow of funds from non ACA sources.

The releases against the allocated amounts from different sources are presented in Table 86.

Table 86 Release of funds from different sources under Bundelkhand Package

Source Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh

Allocation Release as on 31 March 2013

Release as on 31 March 2014

Allocation Release as on 31

Dec 2012

Release as on 31 March 2014

ACA 1953.20 1880.32 1942.36 1695.76 1212.54 1212.55 CS /CSS 848.00 293.21 455.20 258.92 419.00 RKVY/MNREGA 210.00 33.01 NA 358.60 44.68 6.68

The release of funds under MNREGA has substantially lagged behind the releases under ACA

and CS / CSS schemes. Bulk of CS / CSS funds relate to IMWP under which the funds are

released over a period of 7 years and therefore the gap in releases under CS/CSS as shown

above should not be seen as constraint to implementation of the package.

In Uttar Pradesh, MNREGA funds were to be used in activities like earth works under lining

of canal projects, renovation of dug wells and tanks, watershed management activities in

forest areas. The slow release of funds from MNREGA to some extent would have affected

the progress of the activities as could be seen from the table 87.

Table 87 Physical progress of activities involving convergence of MGNREGA funds in UP

Activity Physical target Achievement Remarks

RRR of canals 39 Only 17 completed; 22 under progress

Full ACA amount released

Construction of New dug wells / blast wells

8834 3219 (36%) 75% ACA released

Recharge of dug wells / tanks/ ponds

30864 5442 (17%) 75% ACA released

Renovation of dug wells 11194 2665 (24%) 75% ACA released

Planning Secretary, Government of UP also opined that involvement of MNREGA funds in the

package has affected the progress of some of the activities.

136

At the same time in MP the involvement of MNREGA resources do not appear to have

affected the progress of implementation of the related activities as could be seen from Table

88.

Table 88 Physical progress of activities involving convergence of MGNREGA funds in MP

Activity Physical target Achievement Remarks

Construction of Stop dams

353 213 Full ACA amount released

Distribution of Water lifting devices (pump sets)

40000 31332 Full ACA amount released

A better coordination between various departments would have helped achieve the

satisfactory position in Madhya Pradesh.

Overall while convergence is good as it enhances the availability of funds from different

sources in a focussed manner to targeted sectors /activities, involving MGNREGA funds in

projects with specific time frame may hamper implementation in a smooth manner. Further

MNREGA works are typically non skilled, while majority of the activities contemplated

involve skilled labour. Therefore it is suggested that MNREGA funds need not be dovetailed

with other programmes of GoI. Where such convergence becomes essential, the state should

ensure better coordination between the implementing departments.

137

Exhibit 1 : Sector wise / Date wise Release of ACA Funds to Madhya Pradesh

Sector / Date of release Amount released in Rs crore

Agriculture 513

28/03/2011 270

15/03/2013 243

Animal Husbandry 72.7

30/08/2010 20.88

05/09/2011 29.46

28/02/2013 10.36

29/03/2013 12

Environment and Forest 107

31/03/2010 23.52

14/02/2012 46.03

27/02/2012 37.45

Rural Drinking water supply 100

27/06/2011 60

05/03/2012 40

Water Resources 878.16

31/03/2010 266.6

30/08/2010 39.871

12/11/2010 114.93

20/01/2011 175.5

09/03/2011 17.75

01/02/2012 119.67

28/02/2013 35.4

08/03/2013 6.274

20/03/2013 66.699

29/03/2013 35.466

Watershed management 210

30/03/2010 71.4

31/03/2012 138.6

Grand Total 1880.86

138

Exhibit 2 : Sector wise / Date wise Release of ACA Funds to Uttar Pradesh

Sector / Date of release Amount released in Rs crore

Agriculture 320

28 March 2011 320

Animal Husbandry 43.06

30 March 2010 26.74

30 August 2010 16.32

Animal husbandry activities 12.24

31 March 2012 12.24

Energisation of Private Tube Wells 69.77

29 March 2013 69.77

Environment and Forest 61.56

30 March 2010 3.16

09 March 2011 18.44

08 March 2013 9.96

30 March 2013 30

Rural Drinking Water Supply 70

27 June 2011 50

27 December 2012 20

Water Resources 400.25

30 March 2010 200.72

13 January 2011 51.7

09 March 2011 3.23

14 June 2011 10

13 March 2012 57.3

27 December 2012 77.3

Watershed management 235.66

30 March 2010 101.66

28 September 2010 59

09 December 2011 75

Grand Total 1212.54

139

Chapter 12 Monitoring of the Package

The monitoring of the implementation of the package at Government of India level is done as

under:

Regular visit of technical officers of NRAA

Visit by CEO of NRAA to the states for technical monitoring

Review meeting with Planning Secretary and Senior Officials of the State

Government by NRAA CEO

Meetings of Advisory Body for the Package at Planning Commission

At the state level, the state governments are required to monitor the projects as per their

internal guidelines and NRAA has not prescribed any structured monitoring of the projects

being implemented by the state departments.

Visit of NRAA officials

The visits of technical officers are by and large linked to status of implementation. As the

progress overall was at a better pace in Madhya Pradesh, more number of visits have been

undertaken in that state between 2010-11 and 2012-13.

Table 89 Visit of Technical Officers of NRAA to project sites

State Year No. of visits Coverage of districts

Madhya Pradesh 2009-10 2010-11 6 All the six districts 2011-12 5 All the six districts 2012-13 3 Five districts 2013-14

Uttar Pradesh 2009-10 2010-11 4 Six out of 7 districts 2011-12 3 All the seven districts 2012-13 3 Four districts 2013-14 1 Four districts

The CEO of NRAA has also visited the region as under:

Table 90 Visit of CEO, NRAA to the region

State Year No. of visits

Madhya Pradesh 2009-10 2010-11 2 2011-12 1 2012-13 2 2013-14

Uttar Pradesh 2009-10 2010-11 1 2011-12 2 2012-13 2 2013-14 2

140

The visits both by Technical team and CEO of NRAA to UP during 2013-14 were perhaps

necessitated to ensure speedy completion of projects which by and large were lagging

behind in the state.

Review Meetings with Principal Secretaries and Senior Government

officials of the Implementing departments

Between January 2010 and February 2014, a total of 5 meetings with Principal Secretary

and senior official of Govt of MP was held by NRAA. Similarly in UP, a total 6 meetings have

been held. There is no regularity in organising the meetings as could be seen from the chart

given in Fig --.

Advisory Meetings at Delhi

The Advisory Committee at Delhi is the overall authority for deciding the package

parameters and effecting changes in any of the parameters during the course of

implementation of the package. During the period 2009-10, the Advisory Body had met

three times i.e., in September 2010, June 2011 and December 2011 (Figure 16). There have

been no advisory meetings thereafter.

141

Months from Jan 2010 to February

2014

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1

0

1

1

1

2

1

3

1

4

1

5

1

6

1

7

1

8

1

9

2

0

2

1

2

2

2

3

2

4

2

5

2

6

2

7

2

8

2

9

3

0

3

1

3

2

3

3

3

4

3

5

3

6

3

7

3

8

3

9

4

0

4

1

4

2

4

3

4

4

4

5

4

6

4

7

4

8

4

9

5

0

M

P

U

P

Figure 15 Meetings held with senior officials of state governments at state level.

Months from Jan 2010 to February 2014

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1

0

1

1

1

2

1

3

1

4

1

5

1

6

1

7

1

8

1

9

2

0

2

1

2

2

2

3

2

4

2

5

2

6

2

7

2

8

2

9

3

0

3

1

3

2

3

3

3

4

3

5

3

6

3

7

3

8

3

9

4

0

4

1

4

2

4

3

4

4

4

5

4

6

4

7

4

8

4

9

5

0

Figure 16 Advisory meetings held at New Delhi

142

Chapter 13 Recommendation and Suggestions

Planning and implementation deficiencies and suggestions

The Bundelkhand package has been implemented by the Governments of Madhya Pradesh

and Uttar Pradesh in accordance with the terms of sanction by NRAA especially with respect

to the cost of the projects sanctioned. A few planning and implementation deficiencies have

been observed which in a way pre-empted realisation of the full impact of the package in

drought mitigation within the stipulated time period. With Bundelkhand II package on the

anvil, the following few critical areas need to be addressed for enhancing the overall impact

of the package.

Delays in implementation of the projects

The major plank of the Bundelkhand package is drought proofing of the region within a time

frame of three years i.e., by 2012-13. However a large number of projects were found to be

on going even during period of field visits i.e., February – May 2014; besides a number of

projects were completed with delay. Some of the projects which experienced significant

delay are include the following

All the market yards projects and rural infrastructure nuclei projects in UP are

ongoing and yet to be completed; administrative delays in taking decision as to the

location of the projects , delays in land acquisition are sighted as the major reasons

All the ground water irrigation projects in UP which support the individual farmers

are found to suffer delays in completion due to convergence of MNREGA projects

with ACA funds for completing the activity

Several minor, medium and major surface irrigation projects in UP experienced

delay due to land acquisition problems, contractors not fulfilling commitment, very

limited work period available for water bodies renovation due to release of water

continually in the canals etc.,

The stop dams projects Madhya Pradesh also suffered delays due to insufficient

man power, tendering and land acquisition problems.

In general in both the states poor response to tendering process resulted in

retendering; besides open tendering in initial stages in UP resulted further delays in

processing

To overcome the above difficulties, the state governments may consider instituting

transparent mechanisms for tendering, land acquisition, tough penalties for way ward

contractors etc. Besides the administration should, with people’s involvement, work

towards increasing the working period during the year. As MNREGA funds are to be released

by the district administration, effective coordination between the implementing

departments and administration has to be ensured from the higher level decision making

authorities in the states.

143

Convergence a hindrance to implementation?

At the time of formulation of the package, convergence of various activities / sectors was

envisaged so as to pool all the resources available for drought mitigation to achieve this

common objective. Accordingly the package was funded by ACA, CS / CSS funds, RKVY,

MNREGA besides state and owners contribution. As already seen from the chapter on

Convergence, while no difficulty has been faced by the implementing authorities in sourcing

funds from other sources, funds availability from MNREGA has been a source of concern and

projects involving partial funding from MNREGA had invariably experienced delays. This is

pronounced in dug well projects and RRR of water bodies, where part of the work is funded

by ACA and the balance from MNREGA. Besides MNREGA funds can be utilised for unskilled

works while most of the projects required skilled labour for execution. In this context, it is

suggested that

Convergence of funds from MNREGA for the same activity may be avoided

In case it is required for funds augmentation, the complete activity has to be funded

from single source

Besides it was also found that there are activities like watershed development in arable

lands, crop production programme for drought mitigation which form part of the package

but fully funded by CS / CSS schemes without any commitment from ACA. Such activities are

not properly monitored and reported to NRAA with the result that monitoring is mostly

restricted to ACA package. The state governments also focus mostly on ACA funded

activities. Therefore an umbrella body including NRAA and the Various Ministries whose

funds are sought to be involved has to review the progress of the package. Alternatively the

focus of NRAA can be only ACA funds without envisaging any convergence from other

sources.

Revisiting projects involving support for individuals

Under the package two types of projects were implemented with reference to the project

entity:

3. Departmentally implemented projects which benefit a large number of farmers in a

geographical area

4. Individual beneficiary projects like dug wells, lifting devices, supply of HDPE pipes,

income generating activities like bull induction, goatery etc.

The latter type of projects were found to suffer from the following

Tentativeness in fixing targets

Complaint of bias in beneficiary selection

Slow progress and inability to ensure proper quality control

Problems in monitoring due to large number of beneficiaries spread over the

districts

Tendency to develop liking for only fully subsidised projects from the government

We are of the opinion that individual beneficiary oriented projects may be taken out of

purview of such packages and they may be implemented like any other CSS with funding

from bankers and individuals. A larger share of subsidy can be envisaged considering the

drought in the region. This would ensure proper implementation, endues and monitoring of

the funds. The complaint of bias in beneficiary selection can also be precluded

144

Post harvest getting equal focus as drought mitigation

The Bundelkhand package was aimed to be a drought mitigation package with focus on

irrigation and watershed management activities. While this was ensured by converging

funds from CS / CSS schemes, it is observed that there was an equal emphasis on post

harvest market infrastructure in terms of market yards and warehouses especially in UP

where post harvest sector was the largest beneficiary of the ACA funding. While these

infrastructure are required to take care of the enhanced production arising out of drought

mitigation activities, they are not immediately needed as the irrigation / watershed projects

will take time to yield full results and the post harvest infrastructure created in anticipation

of the increased production may be fully utilised only after four to five years; till such time

the maintenance of the structures has to be funded from budgetary sources. Besides, the

attention of the funding agency also gets diluted from the drought mitigation activities.

Therefore it is suggested that post harvest infrastructure may be funded with a lag perhaps

with a built in second phase in the package.

Absence of structured monitoring mechanism of the package

In the guidelines relating to the implementation of the package, no structured monitoring

studies / visits had been suggested to the state governments; nor has structured review of

the progress of the package been envisaged both at the state level and NRAA level. While

discussions with the state authorities revealed that they have frequent meetings /

interactions with the implementing departments, it is felt that this has not been effective

especially in UP as could be seen from the delays in project execution; besides proper post

project follow up was lacking especially in diary projects in Uttar Pradesh.

At NRAA level again there are no structured visits; need based visits are undertaken by the

Technical Officer and CEO of the NRAA at different intervals. During the four years of

implementation of the package, the Technical Team has visited the project sites several

times. The CEO has visited the project sites 5 times in MP and 7 times in UP. Meetings with

Planning Secretary and senior officials of the State governments were held only 5 times for

MP and six times for UP. Structured quarterly meetings with Planning Secretaries of the

state governments with structured agenda may be conducted for ensuring speedy and

proper implementation of the package

Absence of structured review by Advisory Body

The advisory body is the apex body in the Planning Commission to sanction the package,

monitor the progress of implementation and advise and approve midcourse correction

during the implementation phase of the package. The meetings of the Advisory Body give

strong signals to the States for effective implementation of the package. It was observed that

between 2009-10 and 2013-14, only three Advisory Body meetings were held one in

September 2010, the second one in June 2011 and the last one in December 2011. Thus

there is no periodicity of the meetings and after no meeting has been held after December

2011. It is suggested that the Advisory Body meets at least once in a half year as it would

transmit the seriousness of the funding agency to the implementing states for faster

implementation of the projects.

145

Inadequate reporting system to NRAA

The reports submitted to NRAA on the physical achievements are aggregates of a large

number of projects and it is difficult to ascertain whether the projects are complete or not.

Many a time, while the reports submitted by the states indicate full achievement of the

targeted physical programme under the sector/ group of similar projects, yet field visits

revealed that many individual projects forming part the sector/ group were ongoing as on

the dates of the consultants field visits and were slated for completion even one year hence.

Thus while at the aggregate level, the targets seem to have been achieved, yet in reality there

exists a gap in achievement which is not captured in the present reporting system of the

states to NRAA. A robust MIS is required that would provide project specific progress on a

quarterly basis needs to be introduced. The services of professional MIS experts may be

availed in developing a robust reporting system and a Project Monitoring Unit can be set up

in NRAA by outsourcing the same from professional consultancy organisations

Absence of concurrent / midterm monitoring and evaluation mechanism

by third parties

By design the package has not envisaged a mechanism for third party monitoring of the

package/ concurrent evaluation. Such processes are necessary component of any

programmes. It is suggested that provision may be made at the time of formulation of the

package for third party monitoring. Professional consultancy organization can be roped in

for this purpose.

Annexure Tools Used during the Study

SOCIO_ECONOMIC SURVEY OF PROJECT BENEFICIARIES UNDER IRRIGATION /

COMMAND AREA DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS

NOTE: This schedule to be administered to the beneficiaries of irrigation projects

/Command Area Development

1. Name of the head of the household:

2. Village/Block/District of the household:

3. Age (in Completed Years):

4. Education (Years of Schooling):

5. Caste: SC/ST/OBC/GENERAL

6. Family size : Adult males:_______; adult females:_______; children (<18

yrs):________

7. Economic Category: APL/BPL

8. Name of the Bundelkhand Project under which benefitted

9. Category of farmer : Marginal / small / others (2.5 ac / 5.0 ac / > 5.0 ac in pre

project)

10. Location of the farmers field in the command area : Head / middle / tail

11. Whether member of Water User Association: Yes No

12. Have you paid any subscription charge: Yes No

13. What are the charges: Rs.

14. Year from which project benefits accruing to the farmer (please tick)

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

CARE : The year in which the project benefits accrue to the farmer becomes the “project year” for

the beneficiary and the project benefits to be captured from that year to 2012-13 and pre

project details to be collected for three years prior to the “project year”

15. Land holding including owned land / leased in / acquired through mortgage minus leased out / given under mortgage (in acres)

Particular 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Ra

infe

d

Irri

ga

ted

Ra

infe

d

Irri

ga

ted

Ra

infe

d

Irri

ga

ted

Ra

infe

d

Irri

ga

ted

Ra

infe

d

Irri

ga

ted

Ra

infe

d

Irri

ga

ted

Own Land (1)

Leased in Land (2)

Land Acquired

through mortgage (3)

Land leased out (4)

Land given on

mortgage (5)

Total (1+2+3-4-5)

16. Cropping pattern (acres)

Crop / Season Rainfed /

Irrigated

2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Kharif

Rabi

Gross cropped area

17. Seed replacement rate (Area to be given in acre)

Crop / Season 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Area

under

Farm

Saved

Seed

Area

under

Certified

seed

Area

under

Farm

Saved

Seed

Area

under

Certified

seed

Area

under

Farm

Saved

Seed

Area

under

Certified

seed

Area

under

Farm

Saved

Seed

Area

under

Certified

seed

Area

under

Farm

Saved

Seed

Area

under

Certified

seed

Area

under

Farm

Saved

Seed

Area

under

Certified

seed

Khariff

Rabi

18. Number of irrigations provided for each irrigated crop

Name of the

irrigated crop

Acreage Number of irrigations provided

2007-08 2008-

09

2009-

10

2010-

11

2011-

12

2012-13

Kharif

Rabi

19. Production (in kg)

Crop /

Season

Rainfed /

Irrigated

No. of

acres

2007-08 2008-09 2009-

10

2010-

11

2011-

12

2012-

13

Rate

per

quintal

during

2012-

13

Kharif

Rabi

20. Annual household income (Rs )

Sl.

No.

Sources of Income 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

01 Agriculture/farm sources

02 Livestock (sale & products)

03 Wages (agriculture/farm)

04 Wages (non-farm)

05 Wages (MGNREGA)

06 Salaried employment

07 Income from NFS activities

08 Others specify

____________________

Total

21. Days of employment (number of days)

Particulars No. of

members

2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Family

labour

On farm

employment

Off farm

employment

MNREGA

employment

Hired wage

labourers

22. Migration status

Sl

No

PARTICULARS 2007-

08

2008-

09

2009-

10

2010-

11

2011-

12

2012-

13

1 Number of family

members migrating for

purposes of

employment

2 Of which

a. Persons migrating

outside home town but

within the district

Number

of

persons

Average

number

of days

b. Persons migrating


within the state

Number

of

persons

Average

number

of days

c. Persons migrating


within the country

Number

of

persons

Average

number

of days

d. Persons migrating

outside the country

Number

of

persons

Average

number

of days

23. Please indicate the reasons for increase / decrease in migration status

24. Overall observation/feedback and free comments of surveyor

DEEPENING OF WELL

1. Name of the household head:




5. Caste: SC/ST/OBC/GENERAL :

6. Family size : Adult males: ________; Adult Females:________; Children (<18 yrs):_______


8. Total Land holding (acre)

9. Category of farmer : Marginal / small / others (2.5 ac / 5.0 ac / > 5.0 ac in pre project)

10. Year in which deepening was undertaken: _______________

11. How was the deepening done? Through blasting/ other methods (Specify):

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________

CARE : The year in which the activity was undertaken becomes the “project year” for the beneficiary

and the project benefits to be captured from that year to 2012-13 and pre project details to

be collected for three years prior to the “project year”

12. Physical dimensions

Total Depth of Well (in meters) : Before Project: ………………… After Project: ……………

Diameter of Well (in meters) : Before Project: ………………… After Project: ……………

13. Cost of the works and sources of funds

I. Cost of Work Amount (Rs)

(a) Cost of deepening

(b) Any other cost incurred

(specify)

Total cost(a+b+c)

II. Source of funds

(a) MNREGA

(b) ACA

(c) Beneficiary contribution

(d) Others

Total(a+b+c+d)

14. Impact of implementation of Deepening on water levels:

(a) Water level (in m., BGL1) in mid June in the well : Before Project………… After

Project…………...

(b) Water level (in m., BGL) in mid November in the well: Before Project……….. After

Project………….

(c) Average Water Column (in m.) in Well during Rabi : Before Project…..…… After

Project………….

1 BGL= Below Ground Level

(d) Total CCA in (Acre) : Before Project..…………… After

Project…………

15. How successful is the deepening of well

Overall observation/ feedback and free comments of Surveyor:

NEW DUG WELLS

1. Name of the household head:




5. Caste: SC/ST/OBC/GENERAL :

6. Family size : Adult males: ________; Adult Females:________; Children (<18 yrs):_______


8. Total land holding (Acre):

9. Category of farmer : Marginal / small / others (2.5 ac / 5.0 ac / > 5.0 ac in pre project)

10. Year in which the well was constructed: ____________

CARE : The year in which the activity was undertaken becomes the “project year” for the beneficiary

and the project benefits to be captured from that year to 2012-13 and pre project details to

be collected for three years prior to the “project year”


Diameter of the well (in meters) :

Depth of well (in meters) :

Type of pumpset : Diesel / Electric :

Purchased pumpset : From package

From own funds

HP of pumpset :

12. Cost of the works and sources of funds

I. Cost of Work Amount Rs

(a) Cost of well

(b) Cost of lifting device installed if

any

(c) Any other cost incurred

(specify)

Total cost (a+b+c)

II. Source of funds

(a) MNREGA

(b) ACA

(c) Beneficiary contribution

(d) Others

Total (a+b+c+d)

13. Impact of implementation on water levels:

(a) Water level (in m., BGL2) in mid June in the well :

(b) Water level (in m., BGL) in mid November in the well:

(c) Average Water Column (m) in Well during Rabi :

(d) Total CCA in Hectares :

2 BGL= Below Ground Level


Crop /

Season

Rainfed /

Irrigated

Pre Proejct Year of well

Construction

Post Project

Kharif

Rabi

Gross cropped area


Name of the

irrigated crop


Pre Project Year of

Construction

of Well

Post Project

Kharif

Rabi


Crop /

Season

Rainfed

/

Irrigated

No. of

acres

Pre Project Year of

Construction

of Well

Post Project Rate

per

quintal

during

2012-

13

Kharif

Rabi


Income before construction of Dug Well: ______________________________

Income after Construction of Dug Well: _______________________________

Change in income due to construction of Dug well;________________________

18. Overall observation/ feedback and free comments of Surveyor

MAJOR / MEDIUM/ MINOR IRRIGATION PROJECTS /COMMAND AREA DEVELOPMENT

1. Name of the project:

2. Size of project: Major/ Medium/ Minor

3. Status of project: Ongoing project/ New Project

4. Location and address :

5. Implementing department:

6. Land required for the project:

7. Ownership of land : Government / acquired from farmers/ others

8. Important dates

(a) Date of administrative

approval

(dd/mm/yyyy)

(b) Date of completion of

land acquisition

(dd/mm/yyyy)

(c) Date of floating tenders

(dd/mm/yyyy)

(d) Type of Tendering e-

tendering or open

tendering

(e) Date of award of tender

(dd/mm/yyyy)

(f) Date of commencement

of works

(dd/mm/yyyy)

(g) Expected date of

completion of works as

per contract

(dd/mm/yyyy)

(h) Date of completion /

likely date

(i) Reasons for delay if

any

9. Physical Works taken up/carried out (To be identified by the Surveyor):

Construction of dams / bunds and canals

Excavation of Canal, Sectioning of Canal, Lining of Canal, Construction of Regulator gates,

Laying of Distribution System in the canal command area, Type of Distribution System viz

Open Channel or UGPL.

Renovation, Completion & Repair of Canals, Weir & Check/Stop Dam

De-silting, Re-sectioning of Canal, Repair of Weir/Check Dam, Lining of Canal, Repair of

Regulator gates, Renovation of Distribution System, Replacement of Open Channel

Distribution System with UGPL etc.

Renovation, Completion & Repair of Tanks, Ponds and Bundhies

De-silting, Repair of Fore Shore, Repair of Dam, Catchment Treatment, Repair of Regulator

gates, Renovation of Distribution System, Replacement of Open Channel Distribution System

with UGPL

10. Status of completion of the project (please attach photos)

Type of infrastructure Physical quantity Stage of

completion

(%)

Remarks

Target Achieved


Length of subsidiary and

networks

Length of irrigation

canals lined under the

package (meter)

11. Cost of project (cost of land if acquired may also be

included) Rs lakh

Type of infrastructure Cost as per project

estimates

Expenditure

actually

incurred

Remarks

12. Sources of funding (Rs lakh)

Sources Allocated

amount

Released

amount

Amount

actually

expended

ACA releases

State contribution

Subsidy under CSS scheme of Govt of

India

Other sources (pl specify)

Total

13. Impact

Particulars 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Water storage capacity

Carrying capacity of canal

(cusec/cumec)

Designed

Capacity

Actual Capacity

CCA (ha)

Irrigation potential (ha)

Irrigated area during rabi

season (ha)

Adequacy and reach of irrigation water to farmers in command area

Discharge of

water at head

reach

Quantum of

water reaching

the tail end

Frequency of release of water in the canal system and frequency of disruptions during release

Frequency of

release of water

Frequency of

disruptions

during release

Seepage in cusec in the

lined sections of Canal

Cropping pattern details

under the command

Cropping intensity (%)

Number of villages

benefitted from the

project

Total Number of HH

benefitted from the

Project

14. Process of implementation of the project:

15. Any convergence between various departments in implementing the project? If

so, provide details

16. Details of formation of WUAs and their functioning

17. Operational difficulties observed in the implementation of the project

18. Views of the farmers about created facilities under Bundelkhand package may be

sought through FGD

CONSTRUCTION OF NEW WEIR, STOP/CHECK DAM




4. Land require for the project


6. Important dates

Date of administrative approval

(dd/mm/yyyy)

Date of completion of land acquisition

(dd/mm/yyyy)

Date of floating tenders

(dd/mm/yyyy)

Whether E-tendering or Open

Tendering

Date of award of tender

(dd/mm/yyyy)

Date of commencement of works

(dd/mm/yyyy)

Expected date of completion of works

as per contract (dd/mm/yyyy)

Date of completion / likely date

Reasons for delay if any

7. Name of the consulting agency/ Consultant deputed

a. Role of the Consulting agency/ Consultant deputed

b. Whether the role confined till designing or supervision till end of

implementation of project?

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

c. Why was consultation taken (To ascertain whether there exist lack of man

power or lack of proficiency among the officials).

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

________

d. Main work of the Rural Engineering Services:

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

________

e. Has the work of package added additional work load among the officials of

the department.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

________

8. Physical Works taken up/carried out (To be identified by the Surveyor):

Length of the Weir ( in meters)

Height of the Weir ( in meters)

Type of Weir (Diversion Weir/Storage Weir)

Length of the Stop/Check Dam

Height of the Stop/Check Dam



completion

(%)

Remarks

Target Achieved

10. Cost of project (cost of land if acquired may also be

included) Rs lakh


estimates

Expenditure

actually

incurred

Remarks

Total


Sources Allocated

amount

Released

amount

Amount

actually

expended

ACA releases

State contribution


India


Total

12. Impact

Year of construction of Stop Dam

Pre

(year to be

written here)

__________ Post

No of stop dams on the

Nalla

No of beneficiaries

Water storage capacity

CCA (ha) direct irrigation

CCA (ha) indirect

irrigation

Irrigated area during rabi

season

Water levels in the nearby

wells

Cropping Pattern

13. Was is right to construct the stop dam (To ascertain opinion of the official on the

need of the project):

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

_________

14. Any convergence between various departments in implementing the project?? If

so, provide details

15. Number of farmers benefitted from construction of stop dams.

16. How have beneficiaries gained from the construction of stop dam (To ascertain pre

and post status on the cultivation practices of farmers)


18. Views of the farmers about created facilities under Bundelkhand package may be

sought through FGD. ( To ascertain from the farmers, area added under

irrigation, number of farmers benefitted from the construction of stop dam,

changes in cropping patter, change in production/ productivity etc and

satisfaction of farmers)

INSTALLATION OF PUMPSETS IN KAPILDHARA WELLS (MP)






6. Family size : Adult males:______; Adult females:_______; Children (<18 yrs):_______


8. Total land holding (acre):


project)

10. Year in which the wells were constructed: ____________

11. Year in which the pumpset was installed: _____________

12. Type of pumpset installed: Diesel/ Electric

13. HP of pumpset: _________________

14. Well constructed through: MGNREGA/ Other schemes

(spcify)________________

15. Labour employed: Family labour/ Hired labour

16. Cost of construction (in Rupees): Rs. ______________________

CARE : The year in which the activity was undertaken becomes the “project year” for the

beneficiary and the project benefits to be captured from that year to 2012-13 and pre

project details to be collected for three years prior to the “project year”


Diameter of the well (in meters) :

Depth of well (in meters) :

18. Impact of implementation of the works on water levels:

(a) Water level (in m., BGL) in mid June in the well :

(b) Water level (in m., BGL) in mid November in the well:

(c) Average Water Column (m) in Well during Rabi :

(d) Total CCA in Hectares :


Crop /

Season

Rainfed

/

Irrigated

Pre

Intervention

Year of

installation

of pumpset

Post

Intervention

Kharif

Rabi

Gross

cropped

area


Name of the

irrigated crop


Pre Intervention Year of

Installation

of Pumpset

Post

Intervention

Kharif

Rabi


Crop /

Season

Rainfed

/

Irrigated

No. of

acres

Pre Intervention Year of

Installation

of Pumpset

Post

Intervention

Rate

per

quintal

during

2012-

13

Kharif

Rabi


Sl.

No.

Sources of Income 2007-08 2008-09 2009-

10

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

01 Agriculture/farm sources

02 Livestock (sale & products)

03 Wages (agriculture/farm)

04 Wages (non-farm)

05 Wages (MGNREGA)

06 Salaried employment

07 Income from NFS activities

08 Others specify

____________________

Total

23. Days of employment (number of days)

Particulars No. of

members

2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Family

labour

On farm

employment

Off farm

employment

MNREGA

employment

Hired wage

laborers

24. Migration status

Sl

No

PARTICULARS 2007-

08

2008-

09

2009-

10

2010-

11

2011-

12

2012-

13

1 Number of family

members migrating for

purposes of

employment

2 Of which

a. Persons migrating


within the district

Number

of

persons

Average

number

of days

b. Persons migrating


within the state

Number

of

persons

Average

number

of days

c. Persons migrating


within the country

Number

of

persons

Average

number

of days

d. Persons migrating

outside the country

Number

of

persons

Average

number

of days

25. Did the scheme convergence with MGNREGA brought any benefits to the

farmer?

26. Please indicate the reasons for increase / decrease in migration status

Overall observation/ feedback and free comments of Surveyor

INTEGRATED MARKET YARD COMPLEX/ HAAT BAZARS/ RURAL INFRASTRUCTRE

NUCLEUS




4. Land details : Extent of land


6. Important dates

(a) Date of administrative approval

(b) Date of completion of land

acquisition

(c) Date of floating tenders

(dd/mm/yyyy)

(d) Date of award of tender

(dd/mm/yyyy)

(e) Name of Construction Agency

(f) Date of commencement of works

(dd/mm/yyyy)

(g) Status of Work Completed In Progress Not yet

started

(h) Expected date of completion of

works as per contract

(i) Date of completion (if

completed)

(j) Likely date of completion

(k) Reasons for delay if any



completion

(%)

Remarks1

1 Overall observation and remark can be given in additional sheet

8. Cost of project (cost of land if acquired may also be included) Rs.

lakh


estimates

Expenditure

actually

incurred

Remarks2



Sources Allocated

amount

Released

amount

Amount

actually

expended

(a) ACA releases

(b) State contribution

(c) Subsidy under CSS scheme of

Govt of India

(d) Other sources (pl specify)

Total

10. Coverage of Market Yard (Number and name of villages);

a. Number of villages:

b. Name of villages: _____________________________________________

____________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________

11. Commodities notified in Market Yard and Market fee being charged;

12. Any convergence between Mandi Board, Warehousing Corporation and

Marketing Federation envisaged? If so, provide details

13. Please collect arrival details of commodities if the project is undertaken in

existing market yards (unit in Metric Tonne)

Commodity 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13


15. What is role of Traders in Mandi

a. View of Traders

b. Their role

c. Issues faced

d. Prospects

16. Views of the farmers about created facilities under Bundelkhand package

may be sought through FGD (Give detailed write up)

GOATERY UNITS IN BUNDELKHAND REGION

Sl. No. ________




4. Family size : Adult males --------; adult females ---------; children (<18 yrs) ----

---



project)

7. Details of other animals owned : Cows-----; buffaloes-------; others-------

8. Year in which goats were received:

9. Details of goats purchsed :

Particulars Nos of animal given

Age of animal

Cost/animal Date of purchase

Name of breed

Source of Purchase

Male

Female

Total

Major Phenotypic Characters of given animal -------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Purpose of goatery unit- Milk production/ Meat production

Tagging details -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

10. Cost of animal and sources of funds

Cost of animals

Insurance cost

Transport cost

Total cost

ACA funds

Beneficiary contribution

Other sources

Total funds

11. Income generation : 2012-13

Income through sale of goats and milk

Maintenance cost of animal incl. labour

charges

Net income

12. Number of animals as on the date of visit:

Adult males Adult females Male kids Female kids

13. Opinion survey

1. Criteria followed by the department for selection of the farmer for the

scheme

2. How the quality of the animals was ensured at the time of purchase

3. Who maintains the goat unit

4. What are the feeding practices followed

5. Feeding practices followed

6. Comments on housing to the animal

7. Marketing arrangements

8. Availability of veterinary facilities

9. Any other problems faced by the farmer

SCHEDULE FOR INDUCTION OF BREEDING BULLS IN BUNDELKHAND AREA

Sl. No. ________




4. Family size : Adult males --------; adult females ---------; children (<18 yrs) -------



project)

7. Details of other animals owned : Cows-----; buffaloes-------; others-------

8. Year of Induction of buffalo bull:

9. Details of male buffalo purchased

Date of purchase

Place of purchase

Agency from whom purchased

Name of the breed

Age at the time of purchase (yrs & months)

Tagging details

Major phenotypic characters

10. Cost of animal and sources of funds

Cost of animal

Insurance cost

Transport cost

Total cost

ACA funds

Benreciary contribution

Other sources

Total funds

11. Date on which subsidy amount was deposited in Beneficiaries Bank Account:

___________

Amount deposited: Rs.__________________

12. Details of beneficiaries serviced during last one year: 2012-13

Name of Farmers Location No of

animals

benefitted

Charges taken Remarks

Note - Some beneficiaries may be contacted and their opinion about success rate of

male buffaloes and other related details may be sought.

13. Income generation : 2012-13

Service charges earned

Maintenance cost of animal incl. labour

charges

Net income

14. Opinion survey

1. Criteria followed by the department for selection of the farmer for the scheme

2. What was the earlier practice of breeding in the village and whether the same

has been discontinued

3. How the reliability of bulls is ascertained

4. Charges taken for servicing

5. Health of the animal on the date of visit

6. Feeding practices followed

7. Comments on housing to the animal

INFORMATION TO BE COLLECTED FROM MILK COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES

Sl. No. ___________

Date of Visit ---------------

A. General Information

1. Name of Society ----------------------------------Location of Society ----------------------------------

2. Block --------------------------------------------- District-------------------------------------------------

3. Name of Villages covered by the society ; (1)---------------------------------(2)-----------------------

a. (3)--------------------- (4)------------------------ (5)---------------------- (6)----------------------------------

4. Date of Commencement------------------------- Promoted by-------------------------------------

5. Is there any other milk society exist in the village - Yes/ No

6. If yes, then details about functioning/non functioning may be collected.

7. Total Membership ;(A ) Male -------------- (b) Female -------------- (c) SC/ST ------------

(d) Total member as on date----------------

(e) Total number of pourers as on date: _____

8. Infrastructure / activities created / undertaken with assistance from Bundelkhand package

Activity Physical units Assistance from the package Rs lakh

Other sources of funds Rs lakh

Whether completed or not

9. Details of Milk Collection/procurement, etc made by the society since inception to 2012-13

Months/ year Total Milk Collection/

month (litres)

Total Payment made to farmers (Rs.)

No of farmers who sold their milk to Society

Remarks

10. Mode of payment and other details of the Society(provided to members) : 2012-13

Particulars Milk rate Per fat % (Rs.)

Payment Made on (pl tick)

Mode of Payment (pl Tick)

Remarks

Cow Milk Weekly basis

Monthly basis

By Cash

Buffaloes Milk By Cheque

11. Details of input provided to members (Feed, etc.) : 2012-13

Type of input Number of members to whom supplied

Total quantity Value (wherever applicable)

Remarks

Cattle feed

AI services

Health coverage

Others (specify)

12. Details of income and expenditure of the society

Particulars 2012-13

Income

Expenditure

Net income

13. Procedure and timing of milk collection by the society

14. Details of marketing channels available in the villages prior to establishment of the

society

15. Comments on the functioning of the society

16. Constraints faced by the society

FGD of society members/ pourers to be done to solicit their experience with the society and

actual status.

SCHEDULE FOR BULK MILK COOLERS AND CHILLING PLANTS




4. Land require for the project :


6. Important dates

Date of administrative approval

Date of completion of land acquisition

Date of floating tenders

Date of award of tender

Date of commencement of works

Expected date of completion of works

as per contract

Date of completion / likely date

Reasons for delay if any

Date of commencement of operations



completion

(%)

Remarks

Target Achieved

Plant and machinery

Civil structures

Others

8. Cost of project (cost of land if acquired may also be included) Rs

lakh


estimates

Expenditure

actually

incurred

Remarks

Plant and machinery

Civil structures

Others

Total


Sources Allocated

amount

Released

amount

Amount

actually

expended

ACA releases

State contribution


India


Total

10. Mechanism of Milk Collection (from producer to BMC/CC to Milk

Plant or Consumer

Milk Marketing system in the coverage

area of the unit (Pre-development

Situation)

Existing Mechanism of Milk Collection by IA

(Post Development Situation)

11. Details of milk routes

Proposed Actual

12. Timing of milk collection and disposal

13. Progress of unit since inception

Months/ Year Av quantity of milk

collected /month

(litres)

Name of Villages/ Milk

Societies covered

during the period

Other Information (if

any)

14. Income and expenditure of the unit

Particulars 2011-12 2012-13

Income

Expenditure

Net income

15. Any convergence between various departments in implementing the project?? If

so, provide details

16. Operational difficulties observed in the implementation /running of the project ;

suggestions for improving the performance

INFORMATION TO BE COLLECTED FROM AI CENTRES

Sl. No: ________

Date of Visit ----------------------

1. Name of AI Centre -------------------------- Location--------------------Block --------------------------

District----------------- Year of Setting up AI centre------------------- IA-----------------------------

Date of Sanction of proposal------------------

Infrastructure facilities available with AI centre;

a) Buildings (owned/ leased) If Leased- Rent/ Month (Rs.) ---------------------

b).- Owned then year of construction---------------- Investment Cost (Rs.) ---------------

2. Nature of assistance provided under Bundelkhand package for AI centre;

Name of Components as per Sanction letter

Proposed / Sanctioned Cost

Actual Cost incurred

Actual infrastructure created

Mode of Execution (Tendering/ Non tendering)

Date of completion

Remarks

2.1. Details of equipments available with AI centre

Name of equipments

Size Year of Purchase Total Cost Remarks

3.Details of Facilities provided by AI centre in the area;

Name of Facilities Charges per Animal Remarks

4. Coverage of the AI centre (No of villages & Animal population)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5.Details of Staff posted in AI centre

Name of Person QuQualification Experience Salary/month

Permanent / adhoc staff

Other Information

6. Details of Inputs like semen straw, Liquid Nitrogen, etc. Supplied by

Items Name of Agencies Charges/unit Av Quantity consumed /month

Liquid Nitrogen

Cow

Buffaloes

7. Performance of AI Centre since inception.

Month/

Year

No of AI Performed Details of Charges Collected

Success Rate (%)

Cows Buffaloes Cow Buffaloes Cow Buffaloes

8. Impact of AI

No of calves born since starting of AI Centre

Cow Buffalo

Male Female Male Female

9. What is the Process adopted for identification of calves born by the AI centres?

Comments on use of AI facilities and identified bottlenecks --

FGD with AI service availed dairy farmers to be done to get their perceptions

SCHEDUEL FOR CISTERN/OVERHEAD/ TUBEWELL SYSTEMS-UTTAR PRADESH


2. Type of Project: Overhead Cistern based pipeline system/ Tubewells



5. Land details : Extent of land


7. Important dates

(l) Date of administrative approval

(m) Date of completion of

land acquisition

(n) Date of floating tenders

(dd/mm/yyyy)

(o) Date of award of tender

(dd/mm/yyyy)

(p) Name of Construction Agency

(q) Date of commencement of works

(dd/mm/yyyy)

(r) Status of Work Completed In Progress Not yet

started

(s) Expected date of completion of

works as per contract

(t) Date of completion (if

completed)

(u) Likely date of completion

(v) Reasons for delay if any



completion

(%)

Remarks1


9. Cost of project (cost of land if acquired may also be included) Rs.

lakh


estimates

Expenditure

actually

incurred

Remarks2



Sources Allocated

amount

Released

amount

Amount

actually

expended

(e) ACA releases

(f) State contribution

(g) Subsidy under CSS scheme of

Govt of India

(h) Other sources (pl specify)

Total

11. Coverage of Drinking Water Scheme (Number and name of villages);

a. Number of villages:

b. Name of villages: _____________________________________________

____________________________________________________________

_

c. Numbers of Households: _________________

12. Water user charges being charged from the households (if any?).

13. Responsibility of Operation and Maintenance by (Name of Agency)?


15. Role of Stakeholders

a. Villagers

b. Gram Panchyat

c. Implementing Agency

d. Prospects

16. Views of the farmers about created facilities under Bundelkhand package

may be sought through FGD (Give detailed write up)

a. Has the system been installed correctly?

b. Is the location appropriate?

c. How did you get the drinking water before installation of system (From Beneficiaries)?

d. What has been the change after installation of system?

e. Availability of drinking water during

Month Before Installation of system After Installation of System

1. Available sufficiently

2. Available but not sufficient

3. Available but travel distances

Distance travelled to fetch water

1. Available sufficiently

2. Available but not sufficient

3. Available but travel distances

Distance travelled to fetch water

April

May

June

July

f. For how many months the water was available sufficiently before installation of system

in the village (Number of months)?

g. For how many months the water is available sufficiently after installation of system in

the village (number of months)

h. How the operation and maintenance of the system are done?

i. Any existing problems in context of drinking waters.

NABARD Consultancy Service Pvt. Ltd.

Corporate Office

1st Floor, NABARD Tower

24, Rajendra Place

New Delhi-110125

Email: [email protected]

Website: www.nabcons.com

mailto:[email protected]

(Report) Study of Special Package for Drought Mitigation and Integrated Development of Bundelkhand...

Education

Transcript of (Report) Study of Special Package for Drought Mitigation and Integrated Development of Bundelkhand...