Welcome

PRADAN presentation

PRADAN working Districts in Rajasthan

With DPIP

Future expansion

Coverage (DPIP)(As on November 30, 06)

Particulars Dausa Dholpur Total

Entered in agreement July 2003 April 2002

Blocks 1 3 4

Villages 78 126 204

CIGs sanctioned (No) 143 231 374

SP submitted of CIGs (No) 105 188 293

SP sanctioned of CIGs (No) 90 188 278

CIGs received funds (No) 76 180 256

Fund released (Rs Lakh) from DPIP

181 579 760

CIGs linked with banks (No) 14 103 117

Bank loan to CIGs (Rs Lakhs) 7.43 102 109.42

Current interventions• Promoting SHGs /CIGs

• SHGs – saving and lending among the members, Organising, grooming in SHGs (380 SHGs), clusters (40 cluster) and federations (2)

• Leverage bank credit and government funds• Dairy and goat rearing

– Induction of quality animal/livestock– Improved rearing practices – Veterinary support and milk marketing, – Creating various system, system setting for sustainability – Promotion of Producers Intuitions and Producers Company

• Land & water activities and improved agriculture – Revival & constructions of Paals (RWHS) Land leveling &

Bunding , Irrigation – rain water harvesting, Improved cropping practices

Saheli Sangthan(Social Capital to rural poor women)

Current Status (Major activities)

Particulars Dairy Goat rearing

Dausa Dholpur Dausa Dholpur

CIGs formed (No) 63 145 56 75

CIGs sanctioned (No) 61 123 44 69

SP sanctioned of CIGs (No) 49 107 32 63

CIGs received funds (No) 41 107 26 63

Amount of fund released (Rs Lakh) 96 392 70 167

CIGs inducted animals (No) 34 107 17 56

Animals inducted (No) 503 2607 1991 6686

Outreach DetailCIGs Sanctioned Dholpur (231) Dausa(143)

Majority Gps of Kushwa: 34% Gurjar: 16% Meena:14%

Jatav:16% Mixed: 20%

Major caste –65%, Mixed-35%

SC-Bairva,Jaatav,Koli ST-Meena, OBC-Kushwah,Gurjars, Mali,Mallah, Others

42%SC, 9%ST, 41% OBC, 8%Others

37%SC,23%ST, 27% OBC, 12%Others

CIGs benefited 180 76

Land based 6 3% 0

Dairy 107 59 % 41 54 %

Goat rearing 63 35 % 26 34%

Micro Enterprise 4 2% 9 12%

CIG Submission CIG Approval

Subprojects submission

Implementation

Up TO Three YEARS

Subprojects Approval

Panel of Experts Recommendation

MOU submission

Administrative Sanction

Release of Funds(only for first instalment)

Implementation including Purchase

and Training

UC

CC

Contribution deposition

Financial Sanction

Business Processes in DPIP

Subproject process timeline (Months)

Dholpur Dausa

Ave Range Ave Range

Preparing Gps for livelihoods 18 12-24 15 12-24

Time taken for preparation SP 6 2-10 3 1-5

Time for sanction of project 0.5 1-2 2 2-7

Time taken for group contribution

2.5 1-5 2 1-3

Time taken for transfer of funds to CIG accounts

2 1-5 3 2-7

Time taken for acquisition of assets

7 3-18 6 3-18

CIG performance

Dholpur Dausa

>Rs. 15000/ month 20% 25 %

Rs. 10000-15000/ month 30% 40 %

Rs. 5000-10000/ month 32% 15 %

Up to Rs. 5000/ month 16% 3 %

No income 2% 17 %

Gps acquired additional assets 10% 15%

Gps linked to market 55% 50 %

Assets and Insurance% of gp members who lost assets Dholpur Dausa

Through sale 3% 3%

Death 1% 2%

Other Reasons 1% 1%

No of gps insured their assets 163 51

No of claims filed 219 249

No of claims disbursed 175 189

Pending 12 60

Credit Linkage & Capacity building of CIGs

Dholpur Dausa

No of CIGs linked with banks (No & %age)

103

(57%)

14(13%)

Amount of Loan (Rs Lac) 102 7.43

Amount of loan/group (Rs Lac) 0.99 0.53

Orientation training of CIG(2 days )

75 %, 346 days

87%, (222days)

Post Induction Training (2 days) 15 % 40%

Skill based training of CIG ( 3 days)

94 %, 477 days

61%,

10 Success GroupsDholpur DausaKrishi Vikas Samooh Sannupura (IA) Saraswati SRS Malarna (Goat)

Sri Ram Domai(Tent) Bhawani SRS Barkhera(Nagina)

Bhairon Baba PVS Gironiya(Goat) Banjara SRS Dantli (Trading)

Chamad devi MVS Ranpura(Goat) Shankar SRS Khurikhurd(Goat)

Baba MahaKaleshwar MPVS Kota (Goat)

Saraswati SRS Rohra Kalan(Dairy)

Laxmi MVS Bhilgavan (Dairy) Laxmi SRS Kableshwar (Goat)

Kaila Mata MVS Hansai (Dairy) Puja SRS Bishanpura(Dairy)

Karauli Mata MVS Pura Ulavati (Dairy)

Samata SRS Kundal (Dairy)

Vaishno devi MVS Hanspura(Dairy) Sakhi SRS Khorakhurd(Goat)

Santoshi Mata MVS Chandanpura(Dairy)

Punjlot SRS Badoli (Dairy)

What has worked

• Women SHGs, then livelihood activity• Poor friendly approach (Managed by PRADAN)• Social Capital developed for Poor

– poor community(Especially women) organised in groups, clusters and federation

• Enhanced confidence, bargaining power, self respect, respect in family of poor women

• Skills and Income enhanced • Large number of poor people gets huge funds without

cuts, directly to them • Community groups managed funds well

What has worked cont..

• Women acquired assets from govt grant by their complete involvement – Funds withdrawal, counting, payments,

exploration, identification, transportation etc first time in life

• Involving voluntary sector/NGOs in grass root implementation on large scale

• Increased Transparency• Sectoral livelihood promotion (Though

came later)

What has worked cont..Value addition for Livelihoods sustainability

(From other sources)

• Vet services –ensuring vaccination, deworming, regular health checkups, treatment, emergency cases, castrations, dehorning etc

• Poor friendly pamphlets for awareness and medication

• Artificial Insemination• Developing local cadre as pashudhan sahyogis• Milk marketing thro federation, bulk cooling,

self managed procurement

What has not worked• Time frame of project, Planning (Financial & physical)

• Set models/units -not suited for ultra poor

• CIG has not, SHG – Saving and credit group worked and has been sustainable. CIG is not sustainable

• Up front cash contribution

• Single window support through CIG only

• One time support-needs more time support (Financial and handholding)

• Training extended by Non practitioners

What has not worked cont..

Limitation of promoting more than one CIG in one village on sectoral cluster approach

Various self imposed constraints like purchasing of goats in two phases, purchasing places,

involving line deptt, Technical sanctions for exactly same projects, whose rates largely decided by SPMU and number of supporting documents etc.

True partnership in actionHuge paper work ……… must be avoided Non clarity at various level, Procedural delaysLow support to NGOs for linkage with banks, institutional buyers…Technical bureaucratic bottlenecks, Support by Line deptt

What has not worked cont..Human resource –stability, attitude and

accountability to poor not as expectedShort period for execution, capacity and vision bldg

Activities are seasonal like land based, dairy etcLow focus on process part (community dev.)Low focus on livelihood (largely asset creation)No provision for post asset creation support like vet

services, post induction, entrepreneurship & business development trainings

What has not worked cont..

Less scope for accommodating ongoing innovations and experimentation

Generating group kosh for Livestock CIGsSanctioning of each step

CIGs sanctioning, membership inclusion –exclusion, changes in office bearers, subprojects –technical, administrative and financial, purchase plan sanction

Adding new tasks like Sharab bandi, Sarb bhomik Bima, Prashashan aapke dwar, Krishi Aapke dwar etc-has financial implications in task based agreement

What has not worked cont..

• DPMU: limited influence largely in sanctioning and disbursement.

• No development support was available to the agencies from DPMU

• Similarly SPMU’s influence also limited to administrative (fund flow, administrative and issuing circulars)

• Weak support and understanding to the activity cluster (common infrastructure) development

• No policy on common infrastructure, inadequate support

What has not worked cont..Same guidelines based on CF model for PFTs also,

Frequent changes in guidelineComplicated agreements and various changes in

project later on• Task basis payment to NGO did not worked.

Many NGOs had to withdraw, other raised own fund to carry out DPIP’s work

• Rs 70.31 Lac in Dausa and Rs 105 Lac in Dholpur invested in overhead support for project execution

• Where as Rs 7.89 Lac in Dausa and Rs 10.51Lac in Dholpur only can be claimed, financial burden,

What should be next

• PFT based execution – Both GO-NGOs in separate operational areas

• Larger time frame (5-7 yrs) in a village – for organizing, grooming, capacity building,

livelihood support and handholding• Focus on INRM and livelihood• Balance between sectoral, hybrid and honeybee

livelihoods- family focus instead of CIG• Supporting livelihoods of poor needs multi

approach, multi doses of support and hand holding for long term sustainability

What should be Next cont..• SHG focus, members can take up any livelihood

activity• Clear cut institutional building model-SHGs-

Cluster-Federation• Linking SHGs for credit with Bank/MFIs • Involve Community in mobilization • Ceiling on subsidy, part subsidy-part loan model,

back end subsidy..• More decision making powers to district level and

NGOs ( even for technical assessment)

What should be Next cont..

• Infra development at secondary and tertiary platform of livelihood chain

• Cluster based sanctioning, fund release, execution like in Watershed

• Lump sum amount for capacity building (Training, exposure) of community and team on disposal of NGO/agency like in watershed

• Innovative and flexible funds to address and accommodate value addition and new initiatives at disposal of agency (Lump sum amount can be allotted)

What should be Next cont..

• Livelihood training and capacity building of the implementing and intervening institutions and agencies

• Developing cluster with Sectoral intervention, developing common infrastructures for the producers

• Developing Producers institutions and Producers Company

What should be Next cont..

• Convergence with other govt program i.e NREGA, Watershed etc to complement and strengthen DPIP support

• Involve agencies like Resources and Research Institutions, Financial Institutions including Micro Finance Institutions (MFI), Government Departments and the Markets across.

• Applying the principals of Velugu in Rajasthan context

What should be Next cont..

• Bring real term partnership in action

– Clear cuts roles & responsibility– Minimize procedures and papers work – So that Thankless collaboration with govt can

be replaced with worthful collaboration

• Salary based payment /Increased task payment up to Rs 35000/SHGs– Both inputs and outputs cannot become criteria

for NGO contract;

•Thanks• for providing this opportunity to share our

expereince