MTEF for School Education Department: 2010-11 Update · • This MTEF presents updated budget data...

pwc

MTEF for School Education Department: 2010-11 Update Long Term Consultancy under DFID Assisted Strengthening Performance Management in Government Programme June 2010

Government Reforms and Infrastructure Development (GRID)Public Finance

DFID Supported Strengthening Performance Management in Government Programme Long Term Consultant, Government of Madhya Pradesh

MTEF for School Education Department

2 | Page PricewaterhouseCoopers

Preface The Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) has been prepared for School Education Development (SED). This MTEF however does not cover the expenditure incurred by other departments and institutions on school education The first draft of MTEF report for SED was submitted in October 2008. Thereafter, two presentations were made - one to the officials of Finance Department and Planning Department on Nov 12, 2008 and, the other involving SED officials as well on 21 April 2009. The details of the comments and suggestions received during these presentations and how they were addressed in the final submission of MTEF are included in ‘Annexure B: Summary of past comments and suggestions’. Based on discussions with the department and agreed understanding, detailed level of analysis has been undertaken only for Secondary Education looked after by the Directorate of Public Instruction (DPI) as it was opined during the presentation that the state does not have much flexibility in elementary education owing to Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) being under operation. Towards the preparation of the third cycle update of MTEF, following activities were undertaken post the submission of the final MTEF Report: • A MTEF manual was prepared for the use of department. The document is expected to serve as a quick reference

when MTEF is institutionalized within the budgetary process of the department. • Further in the pre-Annual Plan deliberations for 2010-11, contribution was made through suggestions for scheme

rationalization in terms of their grouping/ convergence for secondary education.

• This MTEF presents updated budget data for 2008-09 (accounts), and 2009-10 (RE).

• Based on the feedback received, a new section on resource envelope estimation has also been added.

• The MTEF projections have been rolled over to cover the period of 2010-11 to 2014-15. Variance analysis for the year 2010-11 between MTEF trend projections and departmental budget estimates of 2010-11 reveals that the MTEF projection for total expenditure for 2010-11 is 14.2% higher than 2010-11 (BE). This is mainly accounted for by the budget estimates for plan expenditure of major demand numbers in 2010-11 being lower than their revised estimates for 2009-10. This document can serve as an input towards preparation of the annual plan for the DPI.




Table of Contents

Preface ...................................................................................................................................................................... 2

1 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 7

2 Sector Overview and Prioritization of Objectives ............................................................................................. 12

2.1 Sector Review .................................................................................................................................................. 12 2.1.1 Access ...................................................................................................................................................... 12 2.1.2 Drop Out Rates ........................................................................................................................................ 12 2.1.3 Adequacy of Infrastructure ....................................................................................................................... 13 2.1.4 Teachers .................................................................................................................................................. 13 2.1.5 Learning Outcome .................................................................................................................................... 14 2.1.6 Sectoral Issues ......................................................................................................................................... 15

2.2 Scheme Review ............................................................................................................................................... 15 2.2.1 Rationalization of State Plan Schemes..................................................................................................... 15

2.3 Institutional Review .......................................................................................................................................... 17 2.4 Prioritization of Objectives ............................................................................................................................... 17

3 Mapping and Measurement of Outputs and Objectives ................................................................................... 19

3.1 Performance Indicators (PI) ............................................................................................................................. 19

4 Gap Analysis .................................................................................................................................................... 24

4.1 Analysis of Past Expenditure ........................................................................................................................... 24 4.1.1 Review of Expenditure under Development Heads .................................................................................. 24 4.1.2 Review of Expenditure of the Department for School Education .............................................................. 25 4.1.3 Budget Demand Numbers under School Education Department ............................................................. 25 4.1.4 Analysis of Expenditure by School Education Department ....................................................................... 25 4.1.5 Expenditure under Major Demand Numbers ............................................................................................ 28 4.1.6 Sources of funds for the Department ........................................................................................................ 34

4.2 Trend Projections ............................................................................................................................................. 35 4.2.1 Projections for Plan Expenditure .............................................................................................................. 35 4.2.2 Projections for Non Plan Expenditure ....................................................................................................... 36 4.2.3 Projections for Total Expenditure of School Education Department under Trend Scenario ...................... 38 4.2.4 Projections for Off-Budget Allocation of School Education Department ................................................... 39

4.3 Identification and Costing of Interventions ....................................................................................................... 39 4.3.1 Strategy for Elementary Education ........................................................................................................... 39 4.3.2 Strategy for High School Education .......................................................................................................... 43 4.3.3 MTEF Expenditure Requirement for all the Scenarios ............................................................................. 47

5 Estimation of Resource Envelope for Secondary Education ............................................................................ 52

5.1 Rationale .......................................................................................................................................................... 52 5.2 Methodology for forecasting Medium Term Resource Envelope for Secondary Education ............................................................................................................................................. 52

5.2.1 Step I: Aggregate Plan Resource Envelope at State level ........................................................................ 52 5.2.2 Step II: Medium Term Sectoral (Development Head) Budget Envelope for State Plan Schemes ............ 52 5.2.3 Step III: Medium Term Resource Budget Envelope for SED .................................................................... 52




6 Reconciliation and Reprioritization ................................................................................................................... 55

6.1 Reconciling plan requirements with resources ................................................................................................. 55 6.2 Reprioritization ................................................................................................................................................. 55 A Annexure A ...................................................................................................................................................... 59 A.1 Methodology for projecting PTR related expenditure for Primary and Middle Schools ..................................................................................................................................................... 59

A.1.1 Projections for Enrolment ......................................................................................................................... 59 A.1.2 Projections for Additional Classrooms, Teachers and Schools ................................................................ 59 A.1.3 Projection of financial requirements ......................................................................................................... 59

A.2 Methodology for projecting PTR related expenditure for High Schools ....................................................................................................................................................................... 60

A.2.1 Projections for Enrolment ......................................................................................................................... 60 A.2.2 Projections for Additional Classrooms and Teachers ............................................................................... 60 A.2.3 Projection of financial requirements ......................................................................................................... 60

A.3 Methodology for projecting Incentive Scheme for Secondary Education level teachers ............................................................................................................................................. 60

A.3.1 Projections for High Schools .................................................................................................................... 60 A.3.2 Projections for High Schools .................................................................................................................... 61

B Annexure B: Summary of past comments and suggestions ............................................................................. 63

List of Tables Table 1: Projected resource and expenditure growth of SED ........................................................................................... 8 Table 2: Reprioritization of allocation ................................................................................................................................ 9 Table 3: Enrolment of students (in Lakh) ........................................................................................................................ 12 Table 4: Gross Enrolment Ratio ...................................................................................................................................... 12 Table 5: Drop out rate in 2005-06 (in %) ......................................................................................................................... 12 Table 6: Number of Schools and Teachers at Elementary Level .................................................................................... 13 Table 7: Number of schools in Madhya Pradesh ............................................................................................................ 13 Table 8: Status of Infrastructure in Elementary schools .................................................................................................. 13 Table 9: Quality of education related indicators for MP ................................................................................................... 13 Table 10: Gender Parity Index at Elementary Level ........................................................................................................ 14 Table 11: Gender Inequities in Education Sector across MP and Neighbouring States .................................................. 14 Table 12: Pass percentage in Schools ............................................................................................................................ 15 Table 13: Convergence of bottom 10% with top 90% of schemes (In Rs ‘000) .............................................................. 15 Table 14: Grouping among bottom 10% of schemes (In Rs ‘000) .................................................................................. 16 Table 15: Standalone schemes ...................................................................................................................................... 16 Table 16: Under SUCCESS ............................................................................................................................................ 17 Table 17: Matrix for data collection ................................................................................................................................. 19 Table 18: Logframe and Performance Indicators for Secondary Education .................................................................... 20 Table 19: Trend of Expenditure by GoMP ....................................................................................................................... 24 Table 20: Expenditure Trend Growth .............................................................................................................................. 25 Table 21: Demand Numbers ........................................................................................................................................... 25 Table 22: Expenditure of Education Department as percentage of GSDP and total expenditure of GoMP (in Rs. Crore) ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 25 Table 23: Expenditure incurred during Tenth Five Year Plan period (in Rs Crore) ......................................................... 26 Table 24 Plan and Non Plan Expenditure of School Education Department ................................................................... 26 Table 25: Revenue and Capital Expenditure of the Department (in Rs Crore) ............................................................... 26




Table 26: Object wise Expenditure of Education Department (in Rs. Crore) .................................................................. 27 Table 27 Expenditure under Major Demand Numbers (in Rs. Crore) ............................................................................. 28 Table 28: Expenditure under demand 27 from 2004-05 to 2009-10 (in Rs. Crore) ......................................................... 28 Table 30: Minor Head wise expenditure for Plan schemes under demand 27 from 2004-05 to 2009-10 RE (in Rs. Crore) ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 29 Table 31: Budget allocation for major schemes under demand number 27 (in Rs. Crore) .............................................. 30 Table 32: Minor Head wise expenditure under demand number 77 from 2004-05 to 2009-10 RE (in Rs. Crore) ........... 30 Table 33: Budget allocation for major schemes under demand number 77 (in Rs. Crore) .............................................. 31 Table 34: Object wise expenditure under demand number 27 from 2004-05 to 2009-10 RE (in Rs. Crore) ................... 32 Table 35: Object wise expenditure under demand number 77 from 2004-05 to 2009-10 RE (in Rs. Crore) ................... 33 Table 36: Sources of funds for on-budget plan expenditure of the Department (Rs. Crore) ........................................... 34 Table 37: Off- budget funds for School Education (Rs. Crore) ........................................................................................ 34 Table 38: Projected Plan Expenditure for Elementary Education- Demand number 27 .................................................. 35 Table 39: Projected Plan Expenditure for Secondary Education- Demand number 77 ................................................... 36 Table 40: Non Plan Expenditure Projections for the Demand Number 27 (Rs in Crore) ................................................. 37 Table 41: Non Plan Expenditure Projections for the Demand Number 77 (Rs in Crore) ................................................. 37 Table 42: Total Expenditure Projections of the Department (in Rs. crore) ...................................................................... 38 Table 43: Off-Budget Allocation (in Rs. Crore) ................................................................................................................ 39 Table 44: Scenarios for Elementary Education on the basis of PTR............................................................................... 39 Table 45: PTR related expenditure in Elementary Education (in Rs. Cr) ........................................................................ 40 Table 46: Assumptions made and the underlying rationale ............................................................................................ 40 Table 47: Cost projections for TA (in Rs.) ....................................................................................................................... 41 Table 48: Cost projections for PTA strengthening (in Rs. crore) ..................................................................................... 41 Table 49: Cost estimates for teacher incentive under alternative scenarios at primary and middle school level (in Rs. crore) .............................................................................................................................................................................. 42 Table 50: Cost Estimates (in Rs. crore) .......................................................................................................................... 42 Table 51: Cost of sanitary napkins and incinerators (in Rs. Crore) ................................................................................. 43 Table 52: Cost of separate toilets for girls (in Rs. Crore) ................................................................................................ 43 Table 53: Scenarios- High School Education .................................................................................................................. 43 Table 54: PTR related expenditure in Secondary Education (in Rs. Cr) ......................................................................... 44 Table 55: Cost estimates of interventions at high school level to improve quality of education (in Rs. crore) ................. 45 Table 57: Cost Estimates (in Rs. crore) .......................................................................................................................... 46 Table 58: Cost estimates for Improving Quality of Training (in Rs. Crore) ...................................................................... 46 Table 59: Cost of Girls Health and Hygiene Programme (in Rs. Crore) .......................................................................... 47 Table 60: Cost of separate toilets for girls (in Rs. Crore) ................................................................................................ 47 Table 61: Total cost estimates for establishing Schools of Excellence (in Rs. Crore) ..................................................... 47 Table 62: MTEF Expenditure Requirements Table (in Rs. Crore) .................................................................................. 47 Table 63: Minor Head wise projections in Scenario 1 ..................................................................................................... 50 Table 64: Minor Head wise projections in Scenario 2 ..................................................................................................... 50 Table 65: Projections for resources available for SED .................................................................................................... 53 Table 66: Projected resource and expenditure growth of SED ....................................................................................... 55 Table 67: Reprioritization of allocation ............................................................................................................................ 56 Table 68: Incentive Structure for High School ................................................................................................................. 61 Table 69: Incentive Structure for Higher Secondary School ........................................................................................... 61




List of Acronyms ANPRO Model

Analysis and Projection Model JSK Jan Shikshak Kendra

BEO Block Education Officer KGBV Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya BPL Below Poverty Line MDM Midday Meal Scheme BRC Block Resource Coordinator MTEF Medium-Term Expenditure Frameworks BTI Basic Training Institute MTFF Medium-Term Fiscal Framework CABE Central Advisory Board of Education NCERT National Council of Education Research and

Training CAG Comptroller Auditor General NER Net Enrolment Ratio CRC Cluster Resource Coordinator NPEGEL National Programme for Education of Girls at

Elementary Education Level CSS Centrally Sponsored Schemes NREGS National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme DA Dearness Allowance OHPs OverHead Projector DEO District Education Officer PETS Public Expenditure Tracking Survey DDO Drawing and Disbursal Officer PMPSU Poverty Monitoring and Policy Support Unit DFID Department for International Development PS Primary School DIETs District Institute of Education and Training PSE Public Sector Enterprise DISE District Information System for Education PTR Pupil Teacher Ratio DPI Directorate of Public Instruction QEP Quality Education Program DRC District Project Coordinator RMSA Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan EFA Education for All RSK Rajya Shiksha Kendra FRBMA Fiscal Responsibility and Budget

Management Act SCP Special Component Plan

GER Gross Enrolment Ratio SPMG Strengthening Performance Management in Government (SPMG) Project

GoI Government of India SPC State Planning Commission GoMP Government of Madhya Pradesh SSA Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan GSDP Gross State Domestic Product SUCCESS Scheme of Universal Access and Quality at

Secondary Stage GT Grand Total UEE Universalization of Elementary Education HDR Human Development Report UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural

Organization ICT Information and Communications Technology UNICEF United Nations Children's Fund IMF International Monetary Fund UPS Upper Primary Education ITELL Information Technology Enabled Learning

and Literacy USE Universalization of Secondary Education




1 Executive Summary For preparation of Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) for SED, sector and scheme level analysis has been undertaken for Primary, Upper Primary and Secondary education. The highlights of the analyses are as follows:

• Status of key indicators in education

o Low enrolment (compared to national average) in middle and high schools combined with high drop-out rates

o Urgent need to address quality of education: Quality encompasses various aspects - learning environment and tools, teacher quality, infrastructure, equity in access, curriculum etc. Of these, teacher quality is one that needs special focus given huge number of untrained teachers and vacant posts for new teachers in the state.

o Infrastructure facilities (classrooms, laboratories, libraries, and toilets) are inadequate especially in rural schools and in schools providing higher level of education.

• Past Expenditure Trends

o From 2004-05 to 2009-10 RE, total expenditure of the Department has increased by almost 132%. However, successive year’s annual increase in the departmental expenditure has shown a declining trend over the period 2004-08. The substantial increase in the department expenditure in the initial years of this decade may be attributed to the commencement of the Centrally Sponsored Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. However, departmental expenditure is showing significant growth again from 2008-09 onwards.

o Expenditure of the department as a percentage of the State GSDP registered a continuous rise from 2.01% in 2004-05 to 2.76% in 2009-10 RE. The department expenditure as a percentage of total government expenditure has also shown an increasing trend. From 8.2% of total government expenditure in 2004-05, it has increased to nearly 10% in 2009-10 RE.

o The object-wise classification of the departmental expenditure shows that the major contributor to expenditure has been Salaries and Allowances and Grants. Together they constituted over 97% of the total expenditure in 2004-05, which reduced to 92% in 2008-09, but increased again to 95% in 2009-10 RE. This is a result of the increase in pay as per recommendations of Sixth Central Pay Commission (6CPC).

• MTEF Methodology

o For elementary education, PTR has been taken as the target variable for building the improved scenarios, along with additional proposed state level interventions. The PTR for primary schools has been maintained at current level of 37:1 while that for upper primary schools has been progressively rationalized towards a lower value of 30:1 as per Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) norms.

o For secondary education, different scenarios have been built taking PTR and transition rate as the target variables, besides other proposed state level interventions. The scenarios developed for secondary education are as follows:

Scenario 1 (Moderate): PTR is progressively rationalized to 33:1 maintaining the transition rate at 75%




Scenario 2 (Aggressive): PTR is progressively rationalized to 30:1 maintaining the transition rate at 80%

• MTEF Costed Interventions

o Additional funding required to improve PTR across all school levels

o PTA strengthening program in Primary Schools

o Enhancing Travelling Allowance of Jan Shikshaks

o Incentive Schemes and Model Training for teachers at all levels

o Strengthening infrastructure in high schools

o Girl specific interventions such as provision of sanitary napkins, installation of incinerators and construction of separate toilets for girls in middle and high schools

o Establishment of additional Schools of Excellence

• MTEF Expenditure Requirements for next five years

o Annual growth of 19.58% expected under trend scenario

o Annual growth of 20.96% and 21.13% expected in scenario 1 and scenario 2 respectively

• Anticipated Plan Resource Availability

o Annual growth rate of 21.99% anticipated from 2010-11 to 2014-15; hence meeting Trend Scenario requirements

• Reconciliation and Reprioritization

o Reconciling plan expenditure requirements with anticipated plan resource availability Table 1: Projected resource and expenditure growth of SED

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

I. PLAN EXPENDITURE I. A. Top Down Resource Envelope for SED 3,372.46 4,094.10 4,985.90 6,091.80 7,468.17 I. B. Bottom Up Trend Scenario 3,509.41 3,852.01 4,275.48 5,206.53 6,356.64 Trend deficit (+)/ surplus (-) with respect to resource envelope 136.95 -242.09 -710.42 -885.26 -1,111.53 Scenario 1 4,385.27 4,915.72 5,610.47 7,182.76 8,909.84 Scenario 2 4,635.63 5,100.60 5,866.23 7,642.96 9,463.28 II. NON PLAN EXPENDITURE 4,343.42 5,288.92 6,454.98 7,896.55 9,683.02

o Strategic interventions proposed under Scenario 1 are desirable for the state and therefore they should

be undertaken by the department. Scenario 1 projections are however not affordable by the top-down projected resource growth. The additional expenditure estimates for the suggested interventions under Scenario 1 would need to be therefore provided for by identifying savings opportunities in Heads of expenditure not related to identified interventions. Also, given the constraints in plan expenditure, there




is a need to explore opportunities for identifying savings in non-plan expenditure. This is presented in Table 2.

Table 2: Reprioritization of allocation

Code

Expenditure Head Detail

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

T G1 Projections

Costed Interventions

T G Projections


T G Projections


T G Projections


T G Projections


Minor Heads with identified interventions in Plan expenditure 2202 General Education [01] Elementary

Education

{101} Government Primary Schools 715.14 612.13 856.02 751.75 1024.68 907.75 1226.57 1275.99 1468.26 1599.35

[02] Secondary Education

{105} Teacher Training 13.80 1.88 16.52 2.01 19.78 2.15 23.68 2.30 28.34 2.51{109} State Madhyamik

School 37.51 119.46 44.64 158.40 53.12 210.58 63.23 380.71 75.26 524.13[80] General {001} Direction &

Administration 3.05 5.05 3.66 5.62 4.38 7.82 5.25 8.76 6.29 10.05{800} Other Expenditure 46.08 135.06 54.46 143.47 64.36 204.07 76.05 305.66 89.88 414.154202 Capital Expenditure on Education, Sports, Art & Culture

[01] General Education {202} Madhyamik

Education 23.36 2.29 27.99 2.45 33.53 2.62 40.17 2.81 48.12 3.00 Sub-Total of

Additional Plan Exp owing to interventions 838.95 875.86 1003.29 1063.71 1199.85 1334.99 1434.95 1976.23 1716.16 2553.20

Trend projection on Minor Heads from which adjustments will have to be made to accommodate proposed interventions: I. Plan Expenditure

2202 General Education (School Education)

[01] Elementary Education

{102} Assistance to Non Government Primary Schools

14.38 17.22 20.63 24.72 29.62

1 TG (Trend Growth) Projections refer to expenditure projections done based on past trend growth rate.




Code


2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

T G1 Projections


T G Projections


T G Projections


T G Projections


T G Projections


{108} Text Books 45.64 54.67 65.50 78.47 94.01 [02] Secondary

Education

{001} Direction & Administration

31.21 37.40 44.80 53.67 64.30

{103} Informal Education 9.58 11.48 13.76 16.48 19.74 [04] Adult Education {800} Other Expenditure 0.97 1.16 1.39 1.66 1.99 [05] Development of

languages

{103} Sanskrit shiksha 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 {200} Education in other

languages 0.06

0.07 0.08 0.10 0.11

[80] General {107} Scholarships 126.85 151.97 182.06 218.11 261.30 2204 Sports & Youth

Services

{101} Expenditure on exercise

0.20

0.24 0.29 0.35 0.42

{102} Youth welfare activities for students

0.11

0.13 0.15 0.18 0.22

4202 Capital Expenditure on Education, Sports, Art & Culture

[01] General Education {201} Primary Education 1.20 1.44 1.72 2.06 2.47 [04] Art & Culture {800} Other Expenditure 52.79 63.24 75.76 90.76 108.74 Sub Total of Trend

Projection of Exp on Heads from which corresponding Adjustments will have to be made for Plan

282.98 339.01 406.15 486.57 582.93

II. Non Plan Expenditure

Total ‘non-salary’ non-plan 1484.84 1916.94 2477.40 3204.59 4148.39




Code


2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

T G1 Projections


T G Projections


T G Projections


T G Projections


T G Projections


expenditure2 from which savings have to be identified

Note: We would like to highlight that towards implementation of the MTEF, the School Education Department has launched Complete Literacy Village Scheme at Elementary level. The scheme contours are very similar to the scheme proposed under the submission of first cycle of MTEF under which we had proposed an Incentive Scheme for teachers as a state intervention. A similar Incentive Scheme for teachers of government secondary and higher secondary schools has also been approved for implementation from the year 2010-11 for improving examination results of class X and XII. The consultants provided support to Directorate of Public Instruction (DPI) in the design of the above scheme. The proposed intervention for improving enrolment of girls in Middle Schools through provision of sanitary napkins to all girl students on monthly basis in middle schools has also been approved by the Hon’ble Minister for implementation on pilot basis in selected Middle Schools across the State.

2 The non-salary non-plan expenditure projections based on trend from 2010-11 onwards could undergo upward revision due to higher devolutions under XIII Finance Commission from 2010-11.




2 Sector Overview and Prioritization of Objectives

2.1 Sector Review The indicators that have been considered to evaluate the status of education in Madhya Pradesh are literacy, access, drop out rates, infrastructure, and the availability and quality of teachers. Data available from various sources like DISE, HDR and other selected education statistics has been used.

2.1.1 Access The state has universalized access to elementary education. The accessibility and capacity of the education system to enrol students is captured by the total enrolment numbers and Gross Enrolment Ratio. Table 3: Enrolment of students (in Lakh) 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 Primary School 75.38 91.04 101.90 112.71 113.56Middle School 27.30 30.77 33.45 39.11 40.54High School 12.28 13.21 14.24 16.06 NASource: District Information System for Education (DISE)and Handbook of Statistics, Govt. of MP • Enrolment of students at the primary and middle school level have increased by around 50% from 2003-04 to 2007-

08 • Increase in enrolment at High School level has been lower, having increased by 31% from 2003-04 to 2006-07 Table 4: Gross Enrolment Ratio GER in 2005-06 Classes I-V 129.76Classes VI-VIII 71.28Classes IX-XII 40.29Source: DISE • Gross Enrolment ratio, in the case of Classes I-V, exceeds 100 per cent due to inclusion of over-age, under-age, as

well as repeat students for the concerned class. • Lower ratio in the middle school and high school levels as compared to primary level is possibly due to lower

enrolments in the higher classes or higher drop out rates

2.1.2 Drop Out Rates Table 5: Drop out rate in 2005-06 (in %) General SC ST Boys 56.38 59.46 70.29Girls 65.48 71.14 79.96Total 58.69 55.49 74.77Source: Directorate of Public Instructions (DPI) • Drop out rate for classes I-X stood at 59% in 2005-06 • The drop out rate is higher for girls and particularly higher for SC and ST students. The highest drop out rate of

80% was observed for ST girls.




2.1.3 Adequacy of Infrastructure One measure to assess the adequacy of infrastructure facilities is the number of schools and teachers. Table 6: Number of Schools and Teachers at Elementary Level 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 Elementary Schools 86327 111727 121335 125858 Number of teachers in elementary schools 313881 377420 378501 398744 Ratio of Primary to Middle Schools 2.33 2.77 2.81 2.68 Source: DISE • From 2003-04 to 2006-07, the physical infrastructure at the elementary education level has improved with increase

in number of schools and teachers • However, as can be seen from Table 6, there are lesser schools at the Middle School level compared to Primary

Level. There were 2.33 primary schools for every middle school in 2003-04, which peaked to 2.81 in 2005-06, following which it fell to 2.68 in 2006-07

• Scarcity of schools is even more severe at higher levels of education, as can be seen from Table 7.

Table 7: Number of schools in Madhya Pradesh Type of School Number in 2005-06 Primary Schools 95517Middle Schools 24293High Schools 4325Higher Secondary Schools 4179Source: DISE and DPI Another measure to assess the adequacy of infrastructure facilities is the availability of classrooms which in turn can be assessed from the average student classroom ratio. Table 8: Status of Infrastructure in Elementary schools Indicators 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 Average Student-Classroom Ratio 45 46 52 44 33% Schools with Student Classroom Ratio > 60 15.55 17.87 10.19% Schools without Drinking Water Facility 17.96 18.88 15.29 11.80 8.05% Schools with Common Toilet 27.94 30.47 34.53 46.65 71.62% Schools with Girl’s Toilet 18.93 19.51 21.42 26.43 46.98Source: DISE • This student to classroom ratio was worse than the desired level of 40:1 for the period 2003 to 2007, with the ratio

coming down to 33:1 only in 2008. Hence, the state government has been able to provide adequate number of classrooms for students.

• Until 2007-08 less than 50% of elementary schools had separate toilets for girls

2.1.4 Teachers Some of the indicators that have a direct bearing on the quality of education in MP are given in Table 9. Table 9: Quality of education related indicators for MP Indicators 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 Percentage of Female Teachers in Elementary 31.87 32.00 32.73 35.18 37.27




schools Pupil-Teacher Ratio 33 32 36 38 36% Schools with Pupil-Teacher Ratio > 60 21.03 22.16 17.53% Schools with Pupil-Teacher Ratio > 100 3.48 3.32 5.30 6.56 4.38% Single-Teacher Schools (in schools with more than 15 students) 24.34 21.79 15.21

% of professionally trained teachers 48.96 53.32 46.89 60.09 75.08Source: DISE • Proportion of female teachers has improved substantially from 31.87% in 2003-04 to 37.27% in 2007-08, though it

is still lower than all India average at 42.72%. • Pupil teacher ratio for MP worsened during the period 2004-05 to 2006-07. This indicator has a bearing on quality

of education and, hence, on retention of enrolled children in schools. • Number of schools with PTR greater than 100 has also increased from 3.48 per cent in 2003-04 to 4.38 per cent in

2007-08.

2.1.5 Learning Outcome One of the very important attributes to achieve UEE is to ensure gender parity. Table 10: Gender Parity Index at Elementary Level 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 Primary School 0.90 0.90 0.95 0.95 0.96 Middle School 0.72 0.74 0.79 0.82 0.84 Source: DISE • Gender parity is lower at Middle School Level compared to Primary School (Table 10). • Girls’ enrolment, though, has been improving over the years Table 11: Gender Inequities in Education Sector across MP and Neighbouring States States Examination results, 2006-07

(Grade IV/V) Examination results, 2006-07 (Grade VII/VIII)

Boys Girls Boys Girls

Pass percentage

Passed with 60% and above

Pass percentage


Pass percentage


Pass percentage


Madhya Pradesh 75.39 21.31 73.24 20.48 62.67 19.10 62.4 20.10

Maharashtra 95.50 54.38 95.87 56.05 91.63 37.53 92.40 40.47

Rajasthan 97.54 53.47 97.52 49.18 83.02 60.35 82.58 59.87 Uttar Pradesh 96.71 37.77 96.63 35.74 96.44 36.94 96.30 38.46

All States 94.80 44.96 94.89 45.12 88.44 38.83 88.84 40.06Source: DISE Examination results for grades IV/V and VII/VIII (Table 11) reveals that the State’s performance had been much below than other states




The pass percentage in schools in different classes also shows a declining performance at higher classes. The pass percentage for the year 2004-05 is shown in Table 12. Table 12: Pass percentage in Schools Class V Class VIII Class X Pass Percentage 68.30 53.80 41.82Source: DISE and DPI

2.1.6 Sectoral Issues Above assessment on basic indicators reveals that while primary education has registered improvement in terms of access and infrastructure, there are issues that still remain at secondary level. These are recapitulated below: • Lower GER in middle and secondary schools as compared to primary schools • Higher drop out rates at levels above primary school with considerable gender and social disparity in the magnitude

(higher for girls and SC/ST students) • Scarcity of schools is more severe at higher levels of education. The success of SSA in increasing enrolments and

transition rates has enlarged the student population eligible for entering secondary education. • Critical gaps in availability of infrastructural facilities and qualitative aspects of education including PTR.

Infrastructure facilities (classrooms, toilets etc.) are inadequate. • Poor learning outcome in terms of performance of students in examinations.

2.2 Scheme Review

Secondary education has been taken as the focus area for MTEF analysis.

2.2.1 Rationalization of State Plan Schemes Schemes for Secondary Education have been assessed to identify scope for their rationalization for bringing in administrative efficiency. It is observed that while the schemes under top 90% of the plan expenditure in 2009-10 RE are merely seven in number, the rest bottom 10% of the schemes are 21 in number. This clearly builds the case for rationalization of schemes for better targeting and efficient management of schemes. Given that state does not have much leverage over CSS and CS schemes, rationalization among the State Plan (SP) schemes is explored. Two possible pathways are suggested for streamlining the bottom 10% plan expenditure schemes for better targeting of beneficiaries:

• Convergence – with schemes in top 90% of plan expenditure • Grouping - within schemes in bottom 10% of plan expenditure

2.2.1.1 Convergence

There are certain schemes in the bottom 10% lot which directly serve the same objective as the ones in the top 90% lot. Merging of such schemes is warranted not only for better management of schemes but also for greater chances of realization of objectives. Two such schemes in the bottom 10% exhibiting potential for convergence are listed in Table 13. Table 13: Convergence of bottom 10% with top 90% of schemes (In Rs ‘000) Code Scheme Name Lot Nature 2009-10 (RE) 6717 Free cycles to girl students Top 90% SP 1476515676 Virangna LakshmiBai cycle scheme for poor Bottom 10% SP 1




Code Scheme Name Lot Nature 2009-10 (RE) students of Class VI

2267 Free Text Books Top 90% SP 114332

5675 Provision of free text books to poor students of classes IX-XII Bottom 10% SP 1

Source: Demand for Grants, Department of Finance, GoMP

2.2.1.2 Grouping There are other schemes in the bottom 10% which though do not share common objectives with the ones in 90%, but lend enough scope to be merged among themselves under an umbrella scheme as they are related to similar broad category. Three such possibilities wherein schemes can be clubbed are listed in Table 14: Table 14: Grouping among bottom 10% of schemes (In Rs ‘000) Code Head Nature 2009-10 (RE) Sanskrit Development Scheme 7036 Sanskrit Promotion Scheme CS 800005677 Promotion of Sandipani Sanskrit for poorer section SP 15545 Maharishi Patanjali Sanskrit Sanstha SP 1000Cultural Activities 5275 Baalrang mahotsav SP 30005543 Mowgli Utsav SP 10005544 Bird watching SP 500Scholarships to poorer section 5627 Scholarships to poorer students SP 200005663 Scholarships to poor people for Classes VI, VII & VIII SP 1Source: Demand for Grants, Department of Finance, GoMP

2.2.1.3 Schemes with objectives unrelated to any other scheme Rest of the schemes can however be continued as it is as they address independent objectives. These are listed in Table 15. Table 15: Standalone schemes Code Head Nature 2009-10 (RE)

5704 SUCCESS SP 386978

5541 Shikshak Abyuthan SP 200005542 Physical Education and sports improvement SP 200005542 Physical education & improvement in sports SP 30003782 Residential sports school SP 17005196 Yoga Niti SP 5000




Code Head Nature 2009-10 (RE) 3746 National Cadet Corps CS 8925539 Improvement of Libraries SP 90004031 Departmental Education Council SP 4656005 Implementation of National Secondary Education Campaign CSS 667006006 Establishment and operation of girls hostel CSS 63800Source: Demand for Grants, Department of Finance, GoMP

2.2.1.4 Scheme of Universal Access and Quality at Secondary Stage (SUCCESS) With the launch of Centrally Sponsored Scheme SUCCESS, certain existing schemes in the bottom 10% lot can be subsumed in this scheme aimed to achieve universalisation of secondary education by 2020. With its specified targets for components to improve Access and Quality and achieve Equity, separate allocations for the following schemes may no longer seem desirable. Table 16: Under SUCCESS UNDER SUCCESS Code Head Nature 2009-10 (RE) 6849 Establishment of schools of excellence in development blocks SP 05541 Shikshak Abyuthan SP 200005706 Strengthening of laboratories of Higher Sec schools SP 05539 Improvement of Libraries SP 9000Source: Demand for Grants, Department of Finance, GoMP Some schemes identified under grouping too show potential to be taken care of by SUCCESS.

2.3 Institutional Review Following are the issues brought to the fore when delved into department processes: • Dual control in elementary schools in MP: The administrative control of these schools is with DPI while the

academic control (Curriculum, Teaching Learning Process, Evaluation and Teacher Training) is with RSK. Owing to this, a significant duality in control of resources, schools and teachers is observed in the system.

• Cross-cutting nature of interventions of School Education Department spread over multiple departments: The school education schemes in MP are run by several departments - School Education, Tribal Development, SC & ST Welfare, Panchayat & Rural Development Department. These departments put in separate demand for grants for financing their schemes and administer them independently of each other. The School Education department is responsible for the final outcome without having control over all the schemes that are related to school education.

2.4 Prioritization of Objectives After completion of the reviews on sector performance and scheme review gauged above, the objectives of the department are ranked in accordance with the order of priority to be accorded to them on an annual basis. The laggards are accorded higher priority, warranting more concerted efforts of the department to improve its overall performance.




Elementary Education: Suggestions of SSA have been analysed to arrive at the following prioritized objectives for elementary education: 1. Universalising Enrolment and Retention (Incentivizing elementary education, bridging all gender and social

category gaps at elementary education level, monitoring through PTAs, teacher motivation) 2. Improving Quality of Education (Teacher training and development programs, development of innovative

Teaching Learning Material) 3. Improving Access (Ensuring 100% access to primary schooling and upper primary schooling as per state norms

of 1 & 3 kms respectively)

Secondary Education: Suggestions of CABE on Universalisation of Secondary Education have been analysed to arrive at the prioritized objectives for secondary education (which are aligned to those listed out in Perspective Plan for RMSA) as follows:

1. Achieving Equity (Improving enrolment/ transition of socially disadvantaged groups like SC/ST and OBC; girls;

and differently-abled children) 2. Improving Quality of Education (Providing essential infrastructure of libraries, laboratories etc., maintaining pupil-

teacher ratio, classroom-pupil ratio, capacity building of teachers through subject-specific training programs, holistic/ vocalization of education)

3. Improving Access (Horizontal/ vertical expansion, increasing reach by serving the un/underserved) 4. Learning Outcome (Improving examination performance by encouraging brilliant students, incentivizing education

for the rest) 5. Institutional Reforms and strengthening of resource institutions (including administrative/ school governance

reforms, modernization, PTAs, monitoring and evaluation)




3 Mapping and Measurement of Outputs and Objectives To build ‘intervention logic’ across the entire ‘results chain’ of interventions, department’s education-related schemes have been mapped to their respective outputs/ major scheme output (MSO) to meet concerned objectives of the department, which in turn are aligned to attainment of long-term government goal of ‘social and economic upliftment of people’3. Steps involved in building logframe are:

1. Detailing of existing schemes in terms of their respective objectives and outputs from scheme guidelines 2. Mapping of schemes in relation to department objectives

3.1 Performance Indicators (PI) Steps involved are:

1. Identify/ develop PIs at scheme output/ MSO level 2. Identify/ develop PIs at objective level 3. Data collection on PIs.

Table 17 presents a sample data collection matrix pertaining to the indicators to ensure their availability in a timely manner and at reasonable cost. Table 17: Matrix for data collection Indicator Level of

Indicator (Objective or Scheme)

Scheme* Data Sources (Files/ Documents)

Data Collection Method (Database/ Surveys/ Interviews)

Frequency of Collection (Monthly/ Quarterly/ Annually)

Responsibility for Collection

Number of students having received free books as % of students enrolled

Scheme Free Text Book Scheme

Schools, which are the final distribution points

Database Annually Teachers and District Education Officer

*Scheme(s) need to be specified in case the indicator under consideration pertains to MSO level The matrix on PIs has been developed for all schemes under Secondary Education (Table 18). Data on PIs will need to be entered for every scheme and regularly updated to monitor performance.

3 Definitional clarity on goal, objective, output and MSO is given in the SED MTEF Manual.




Table 18: Logframe and Performance Indicators for Secondary Education

Scheme Code Scheme Name Output/ MSO PI for Output/ MSO Department

ObjectivePI for Department Objective

6717 Free cycles to girl students Distribution of cycles

Ratio of number of cycles distributed to that of number of girls enrolled in IX

Achieving equity (Improving enrolment/ transition of girls)

Girls enrolment in HS; Transition rate among girls from MS to HS

3504

Integrated Education for Disabled Children (IED)

Education to disabled children in the mainstream

% of disabled children provided assistance out of total disabled children; No. of resource teachers appointed; % of schools covered

Achieving equity (Improving enrolment of differently abled children)

Enrolment rate of disabled children in HS/ HSS

6819

Information and Communication Technology (ICT) @ school

Promotion of ICT literacy

% of schools being provided ICT enabled infrastructure; No. of computer trained teachers appointed

Improving quality of education (through capacity building of teachers); Achieving equity (Bridging educational as well as digital divide)

% of computer literate students in educationally backward blocks/ areas

6704 Book Bank for BPL students

Distribution of free books to BPL students from class VI to XII

No. of BPL student beneficiaries

Achieving equity (Improving enrolment/ transition of socially disadvantaged groups)

Transition rate of BPL students at each level of education, from IX to XII

5627 Scholarships to poor students

Scholarship assistance to poor

% of poor students awarded scholarship

Achieving equity; Learning outcome

Examination performance; Dropout rate of poor students

5674 Vikramaditya Free Education scheme for poor

Scholarship assistance to poor

% of BPL students awarded scholarship Learning outcome

% of poor students in scoring >= 60% marks in XII examination

5677 Promotion of Sandipani Sanskrit for poor

Scholarship assistance to poor;

No. of scholarships awarded

Learning Outcome (Language promotion)

% of students from economically backward groups awarded scholarships % of students






enrolled for learning Sanskrit

6849

Establishment of schools of excellence in development blocks

Construction of schools

% of educationally backward blocks (EBB) equipped with such schools % of blocks in the state with such schools No. of schools of excellence constructed

Achieving equity; Improving quality of education; Learning outcome

Pass % in X and XII examinations

6967 Upgradation of MS to HS

Upgradation of MS to HS

% of MS upgraded with additional classrooms, teachers and laboratories, MS:HS ratio

Improving access (Vertical Expansion)

Enrolment in HS; Transition rate from MS to HS

6968 Upgradation of HS to HSS

Upgradation of HS to HSS

% of HS upgraded with additional classrooms and teachers, HS:HSS ratio

Improving access (Vertical Expansion)

Enrolment in HSS; Transition rate from HS to HSS

5704

SUCCESS: Strengthening of HS & upgradation of Middle Schools (MS) to HS

Expansion of schools

% of MS upgraded with additional classrooms % of HS capacitated with additional classrooms/ teachers/ laboratories, MS:HS

Improving access (Horizontal/ Vertical Expansion)

Enrolment in HS; Transition rate from MS to HS

5703 SUCCESS: Construction of new High Schools (HS)

Construction of HS

No. of HS constructed, MS:HS ratio

Improving access (Vertical Expansion) MS:HS ratio

6970 Construction of Higher Secondary Schools (HSS)

Construction of HSS

No. of HSS constructed MS:HSS ratio

Improving access (Vertical Expansion) HS: HSS ratio






6969 Construction of HS Construction of HS

No. of HS constructed; MS:HS ratio

Improving access (Vertical Expansion) MS:HS ratio

5675

Provision of free text books to poor students of classes IX-XII

Distribution of free text books

No. of BPL student beneficiaries

Achieving equity (through improving transition among economically-disadvantaged groups)

Transition rate of BPL students from MS to HS

5103

Information Technology Enabled Learning Laboratory (ITELL)

Provision of required software in HSS/ HSS

No. of students being provided education through this medium

Improving access (serving the underserved)

% of HS/HSS provided the requisite software

5541 Shikshak Abyuthan Imparting training to teachers

No. of teachers’ training programs conducted in a year

Improving quality of education (through teachers' teaching programs)

% of trained teachers

5539 Improvement of Libraries Assistance to libraries

% of students using libraries (signed entry or borrowing books)

Improving quality of education (through provision of learner support material); Learning outcome

% of schools' libraries assisted

7036 Sanskrit Promotion Scheme

Training programs on language dev

% of sanskrit trained teachers

Improving quality of education (through promotion of language)

% of schools with trained sanskrit teachers

5196 Yoga Niti Conduct of Yoga training programs

No. of training programs conducted for students, No. of teachers training activities

Improving quality of education (through holistic education)

% of participants in the program/ certified

3746 National Cadet Corps

Organization of related programs/ training classes

No. of camps/ training classes held in a year

Improving quality of education (through vocalization of education/ parallel education)

% of students admitted/ completed NCC

5542 Physical Education Organization of No. of related events Improving quality of Talent nurtured






and sports improvement (2 Major Heads)

sports events organized in a year; No. of students' participants

education (through vocalization of education)

captured by no. of students participated in state/ national/ international events

5543 Mowgli Utsav Organization of camps/ events

No. of students participated in the organized field visits/ educational tours


No. of students participated

5275 Baalrang Mahotsav Organization of camps/ events

No. of student participants in this children's festival

Improving quality of education (through vocalization/ holistic education)

No. of student participants in this children's festival

5544 Bird Watching Organization of camps/ events

No. of students participated in related camps/ events


No. of students participated in related camps/ events

3782 Residential sports school

Once established, running expenses

Institutional Reforms and strengthening of resource institutions

5663 Establishment of poor welfare commission(1time)



5545 Maharishi Patanjali Sanskrit Sansthan






4 Gap Analysis Subsequent to developing logframe and identification of key performance indicators to measure department MSOs and objectives, gap analysis is undertaken to take the education sector to the envisaged level of performance, the steps for which are given below: • Past Expenditure Analysis to get the current status of the ‘objective-level key indicators’ of the education sector. • Trend scenario expenditure projections for next five years showing expenditure required to maintain current level of

performance indicators • Envisaged status of the sector in terms of the ‘objective-level key indicators’ in order to meet the overall department

objectives • Comparison between trend scenario projections and the expenditure that should be incurred in order to meet the

envisaged status of the sector. This will enable the Department to identify the interventions (in the form of strengthening existing schemes or introducing new schemes) and estimating their respective costs

• Scenario Development: Through improvements in indicators and accompanying expenditure projections, two alternative expenditure scenarios are suggested:

o Scenario 1 (Moderate): Partial achievement of objectives o Scenario 2 (Aggressive): Higher achievement of objectives

4.1 Analysis of Past Expenditure

4.1.1 Review of Expenditure under Development Heads Expenditure on social services by GoMP has increased considerably during the past five years. From 26.57% of the total expenditure in 2004-05, it has increased gradually over the years to 31.58% in 2008-09 (Table 19). Table 19: Trend of Expenditure by GoMP 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Agriculture and Allied Services 1302.71 1322.86 1685.81 2008.90 2614.52

Rural Development 1008.27 1504.11 1949.97 2607.25 2436.60

Irrigation and Flood Control 1998.73 1580.99 1730.89 2415.48 2570.29

Energy 3212.99 5219.64 1768.07 1987.51 2350.50Industry & Minerals 87.67 226.00 367.99 541.98 321.62

Transport 687.20 1107.26 1656.11 2478.48 2257.72Science, Technology and Environment

4.83 40.32 7.50 44.53 58.64

General Economic Services 39.71 60.29 90.67 71.70 114.46

Social Services 6104.05 7293.53 8298.92 9286.42 11441.02General Services 7614.56 7714.44 8672.79 9427.74 10287.21Source: Finance Accounts, Published by CAG of India and Finance Department, GoMP




4.1.2 Review of Expenditure of the Department for School Education Expenditure on School Education forms a major part of the expenditure on social services. In 2008-09, expenditure in School Education as a percent of social services was nearly 38% (Table 20). As a percent of Total expenditure it accounted for nearly 12%. Table 20: Expenditure Trend Growth Expenditure on School Education

2004 – 05 2005 - 06 2006 - 07 2007 - 08 2008 - 09

As percent of Social Services 34.73 33.77 38.64 34.93 37.58As percent of Total Expenditure 9.23 9.06 11.65 10 11.87Source: Demand for Grants, Department of Finance, GoMP

4.1.3 Budget Demand Numbers under School Education Department The total expenditure of the Department for School Education is captured under 7 demand numbers as listed in Table 21. Table 21: Demand Numbers

Demand Number Demand Title

27 Elementary Education

77 School Education (excluding Elementary Education)

75 Financial Assistance to Municipal Corporations

80 Financial Assistance to Panchayati Raj Institutions

15 Financial Assistance to Panchayati Raj Institutions under the Special Component Plan (SCP)

64 Special Component Plan

41 Tribal Sub Plan

4.1.4 Analysis of Expenditure by School Education Department

Table 22 presents School Education Department expenditure since 2004-05 as a percentage of GSDP. Table 22: Expenditure of Education Department as percentage of GSDP and total expenditure of GoMP (in Rs. Crore) Item 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 REDepartment expenditure 2,149.64 2,503.27 2,745.68 2,746.22 3,653.56 4,985.87GSDP 1,06,808 1,16,932 1,30,571 1,42,500 1,62,525 1,80,402Department expenditure as a % of GSDP 2.01 2.14 2.10 1.93 2.25 2.76Source: Demands for Grants, Department of Finance, GoMP • From 2004-05 to 2009-10 RE, the Departmental expenditure has increased by almost 132% (Table 22). The

substantial increase in the department expenditure in the initial years of this decade may be attributed to the commencement of the Centrally Sponsored Scheme Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan.




• Between 2006-07 and 2007-08, the increase in Departmental expenditure was very nominal as expenditure for elementary education showed a decline. However, departmental expenditure is showing significant growth again from 2008-09 onwards.

• Expenditure of the department as a percentage of GSDP has been showing an upward trend even though in 2009-10 RE it stood at 2.76%, which is below the national average of 3.6%.

Table 23 shows the utilization of the outlay during the Tenth five year plan period. Table 23: Expenditure incurred during Tenth Five Year Plan period (in Rs Crore) School Education 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 Total

2002-07 Percentage Utilization

Elementary Education 167.30 229.75 231.46 546.09 539.64 1,714.24 150.48Secondary Education 77.29 77.41 71.78 49.66 48.55 324.69 91.55Total 244.59 307.16 303.24 595.75 588.19 2,038.93Source: Draft Eleven Five Year Plan 2007-12, Annual Plan 2006-07 and 2007-08 • Expenditure under Elementary Education exceeded the outlay envisaged for this period, whereas Secondary

Education did not even utilize 100% of its outlay. • This indicates that while elementary education has shown marked improvement over the past few years, secondary

education needs to catch up.

4.1.4.1 Plan and Non Plan Expenditure of the Department Table 24 shows Plan and Non Plan Expenditure of the department since 2004-05. Table 24 Plan and Non Plan Expenditure of School Education Department Item 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 RE Plan 284.45 615.27 702.50 600.61 914.88 1410.45Non Plan 1865.18 1888 2043.17 2145.61 2738.67 3575.42Source: Demand for Grants, Department of Finance, GoMP • Non Plan expenditure accounts for almost 76% of the total expenditure of the School Education Department. • However, over the years plan expenditure has shown a higher trend growth rate than non plan expenditure. There

has been an increase in plan expenditure of over 100% from 2004-05 to 2005-06. The inflow of funds from the Centre for the operation of the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan could have possibly caused the continuous growth in plan expenditure during this period.

• After a slight decrease in plan expenditure in 2007-08, due a fall in plan expenditure under elementary education, it has again shown an increase over 50% per annum in subsequent years.

4.1.4.2 Revenue and Capital Expenditure of the Department Table 25: Revenue and Capital Expenditure of the Department (in Rs Crore) Item 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 RE Expenditure on Revenue Account 2,143.27 2,482.45 2,721.96 2,676.36 3520.73 4896.87

Expenditure on Capital Account 6.37 20.82 23.72 69.86 132.86 89.00Total Expenditure 2,149.64 2,503.27 2,745.68 2,746.22 3,653.59 4,985.87Source: Demand for Grants, Department of Finance, GoMP




• Almost all expenditure of the Department falls in the revenue account with expenditure on the capital account accounting for less than one percent of the total expenditure of the department till 2006-07. This is because most of the capital expenditure for Elementary education had been coming through off- budget funds.

• In recent years however, capital expenditure as a percent of Total expenditure has increased to 2.54% in 2007-08 and nearly 3.64% in 2008-09. This is due to higher allocation for construction works such as hostels and Higher Secondary Schools, which also come directly through budget.

4.1.4.3 Object-wise Expenditure of the Department

Object wise expenditure of the department is presented in Table 26. Table 26: Object wise Expenditure of Education Department (in Rs. Crore) Code No.

Object 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 RE

1 Personal Services and Benefits 1640.51 1547.54 1578.11 1689.92 2084.91 2511.6811 Salaries and Allowances 1637.07 1544.41 1574.51 1686.56 2081.12 2506.1212 Wages 3.43 3.13 3.60 3.33 3.77 5.3014 Awards 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.262 Administrative Expenses 8.19 21.42 11.87 12.01 16.44 33.1821 Travel Allowances 3.66 5.02 3.15 3.90 5.24 8.4922 Office Expenses 4.51 12.40 7.48 7.07 9.71 18.3423 Vehicle Costs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.0024 Examination and Training 0.03 3.97 1.10 0.83 1.37 6.2026 Seminars 0.00 0.04 0.14 0.09 0.11 0.163 Contractual Services & Supplies 8.95 96.05 29.22 48.72 74.64 92.2831 Payment for Professional Services 0.15 0.27 0.71 0.86 1.66 1.9532 Minor Construction Works 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.0433 Maintenance Works 0.40 51.22 7.69 6.87 0.11 0.3634 Material and Supplies 8.26 44.45 20.69 40.96 72.72 89.9337 Festivals, Occasions 0.14 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.11 0.004 Grant, etc 487.43 852.84 1056.62 907.71 1304.37 2242.2641 Stipend and Scholarships 28.18 29.81 138.74 5.10 23.86 38.0442 Grant-in aid 459.25 823.02 917.87 902.61 1280.51 2204.225 Other Expenditures 3.00 8.51 5.75 31.44 45.45 17.1551 Others Charges 0.89 6.51 2.58 28.10 41.14 11.5053 Payment of decretal amount (charged) 2.11 2.00 3.17 3.34 4.31 5.65

6 Acquisition of Capital Assets & other Capital Expenditure 0.05 5.99 19.47 61.20 132.83 87.10

63 Machinery 0.00 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.1064 Major Works 0.05 5.00 19.47 61.20 132.83 87.00Source: Demand for Grants, Department of Finance, GoMP




• The major contributor to expenditure has been Salaries and Allowances and Grants. Together they constituted over 97% of the total expenditure in 2004-05, which reduced to 92% in 2008-09, but increased again to 95% in 2009-10 RE. This is a result of the increase in pay as per recommendations of Sixth Central Pay Commission (6CPC).

• Expenditure on Object 34 Materials and Supplies has increased by over 100% from 2007-08 to 2009-10 RE. This is due to enhanced budget allocation for some schemes such as Shaikshik Abyuthan and IED.

• Expenditure on Object 64 Major Works under Capital Account has been showing a trend of over 200% since 2006-07. This Object reflects the expenditure made on construction of HS, HSS buildings and Strengthening of laboratories in HSS in Secondary education.

4.1.5 Expenditure under Major Demand Numbers The two major demand numbers of the Department are 27 (Elementary Education) and 77 (School Education excluding Elementary Education). Expenditure under these two demand number since 2004-05 is shown in the Table 27 below. Table 27 Expenditure under Major Demand Numbers (in Rs. Crore) Demand Number 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 RE 27 1401.80 1563.47 1734.41 1548.72 2050.74 2575.9677 361.26 396.52 399.69 493.09 637.52 848.44Total Expenditure 2,149.64 2,503.27 2,745.68 2,746.22 3,653.59 4,985.87Source: Demand for Grants, Department of Finance, GoMP • The two major demand numbers of the Department 27 and 77 together constitute over 75% of the total

departmental expenditure over the period 2004-10. • Allocation under these demand numbers increased by over Rs. 150 crore per annum during 2005-06 and 2006-07.

After a fall in 2007-08, due to decrease in expenditure under demand number 27, allocation for both these demand numbers have been increasing by over Rs. 600 crore per annum.

• However, the share of 27 and 77 as a percentage of the total expenditure by the Department has fallen from 82% in 2004-05 to 69% in 2009-10 RE.

Expenditure under Demand Number 27 – Elementary Education Table 28 shows the details of expenditure under demand number 27 during 2004-10. Table 28: Expenditure under demand 27 from 2004-05 to 2009-10 (in Rs. Crore) Item 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 RE Non-Plan Expenditure 1,314.79 1,264.18 1,363.10 1,335.82 1,609.78 1,870.44Plan Expenditure 87.00 299.29 371.31 212.90 440.96 705.52Total Expenditure 1,401.80 1,563.47 1,734.41 1,548.72 2,050.74 2,575.96Annual Rate of Growth 10.74 11.53 10.93 -10.71 32.42 25.61Source: Demand for Grants, Department of Finance, GoMP • Total expenditure under this demand number has shown a steady growth over the period 2004-05 to 2009-10. • While share of non plan expenditure in the total expenditure has shown a steady fall, the share of plan expenditure

has increased from 6.2% in 2004-05 to 27.39% in 2009-10 RE. • Plan expenditure registered a three and half fold increase in 2005-06, which could possibly be attributed to large

inflow of funds from the Centre for the successful implementation of SSA. However, plan expenditure fell by 43% from 2006-07 to 2007-08 because the scheme RGPEM has been discontinued.




Expenditure under Demand Number 77 – School Education (Excluding Elementary Education) Table 29 shows the details of expenditure under demand number 77 during 2004-10. Table 29: Expenditure under demand number 77 from 2004-05 to 2009-10 (in Rs. Crore) Item 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 RE Non-Plan Expenditure 324.21 349.46 357.79 392.29 487.39 615.85Plan Expenditure 37.04 47.07 41.90 100.79 150.13 232.59Total Expenditure 361.26 396.52 399.69 493.09 637.52 848.44Annual Rate of Growth 402.27 9.76 0.80 23.37 29.29 33.08Source: Demand for Grants, Department of Finance, GoMP • After registering a four fold increase in total expenditure in 2004-05, the growth in expenditure under this demand

number has slowed down considerably. • In 2009-10 RE, total expenditure under demand number 77 has increased by over Rs. 82 crore from the previous

year. This is due to introduction of the new scheme SUCCESS and enhanced spending on schemes such as free cycles for girl students, free text books and upgradation of higher secondary schools.

4.1.5.1 Analysis of Plan expenditure Expenditure under Demand Number 27 – Elementary Education Table 30 shows the expenditure under demand 27 for Plan schemes under different Minor Heads. Table 30: Minor Head wise expenditure for Plan schemes under demand 27 from 2004-05 to 2009-10 RE (in Rs. Crore) Item 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 RE 2202 General Education [01] Elementary Education {101} Government Primary Schools 79.48 288.99 347.87 212.20 322.64 609.45{102} Assistance to Non Government Primary Schools 0.43 5.44 7.08 0.02 11.48 12.00

{108} Text Books 0.00 1.94 19.00 28.22 65.86 38.09[02] Secondary Education {105} Teacher Training 0.23 0.22 0.29 8.13 6.01 11.53[80] General {107} Scholarships 0 0.0028 0 0 0 0[04] Adult Education {800} Others 0 0.17 0.43 0.54 0.30 0.814202 Capital outlay on education, sports, art & culture

[01] General education {201} Primary Education 6.37 6.68 3.83 9.61 0.00 1.00{800} Others 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 46.45 44.06Source: Demand for Grants, Department of Finance, GoMP




• Most of the expenditure is under the minor head {101} Government Primary Schools, which recorded an increase of nearly Rs. 530 crore from 2004-05 to 2009-10 RE. This is due to increased budget allocation under CSS schemes such as SSA, DIET, NPEGEL and free uniforms to girl students.

• Capital expenditure has also been showing an increase since 2008-09 due to construction works in State Universities, DIETs and hostels. This is reflected under capital outlay, minor head {800} Other Expenditure.

Further, major schemes under demand number 27 have been analysed. Such schemes have been identified by their share in total budget allocation in 2009-10 RE. Schemes comprising 90% of the budget allocation in 2009-10 RE have been selected for analysis, excluding Central sector schemes. The final list of schemes that have been analysed are shown in Table 31. Table 31: Budget allocation for major schemes under demand number 27 (in Rs. Crore) S.No. Code Scheme Name Nature 2009-10 RE

1. 8810 SSA Central Sponsored 515.352. 8799 Construction of Hostels State Plan 44.463. 1502 DIET Central Sponsored 40.444. 6716 Free uniforms to girls Central Sponsored 31.665. 2267 Free Text Books State Plan 15.706. 7419 NPEGEL Central Sponsored 10

Source: Demand for Grants, Department of Finance, GoMP • SSA is the largest scheme under demand number 27. NPEGEL and KGBV are schemes integrated under SSA. • A large allocation in the budget is also made for teacher training under DIET and free text book scheme for

students.

Expenditure under Demand Number 77 – School Education (Excluding Elementary Education) Table 32 shows the plan expenditure under demand 77 for Plan schemes under different Minor Heads. Table 32: Minor Head wise expenditure under demand number 77 from 2004-05 to 2009-10 RE (in Rs. Crore) Item 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 RE 2202 General Education [02] Madhyamik Education {001} Direction & Administration 0 0 0 0 3.02 2.55{109} State Madhyamik School 0 0 1 21.53 32.72 31.52{105} Training to Adhyapaks 3.79 18.78 5.35 0 0 0{103} State colleges & Institutes 3.25 5.64 3.80 2.51 0.05 8.00

[05] Development of Language

{103} Sanskrit Shiksha 0 0 0 0 0 0.0001{200} Education in other languages 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.05

[80] General




Item 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 RE {001} Direction & Administration 0 0.00 10.79 11.00 34.67 26.06{800} Other expenditure 0 9.09 0.60 0.20 1.69 39.00{107} Scholarships 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.75 105.882204 Sports & Youth Services

{101} Expenditure on exercise 0.15 0.19 0.15 0.16 0.19 0.17{102} Youth Welfare Activities 0 0.69 0.32 0.13 0.05 0.094202 Capital outlay on education, sports, art & culture

[01] General education 0 0 0 0 0 0{202} Madhyamik education 331.88 29.24 19.89 55.68 74.18 19.50Source: Demand for Grants, Department of Finance, GoMP • In 2009-10 RE, 45% of the expenditure under demand number 77 has been in minor head {107} Scholarships. This

includes some new Central Sponsored schemes such as Implementation of National Secondary Education Campaign, Establishment and operation of girls hostel and Establishment and operation of Model Schools.

• Under Revenue Account, most of the expenditure is under Minor Head {109} State Madhyamik School and {001} Direction & Administration under sub-major head [80] General. The schemes recording higher budget allocation under {109} State Madhyamik School are mainly Free text book scheme and Upgradation of HS to HSS. The increase in minor head {001} Direction & Administration is due to increased allocation for Free cycles to girl students scheme.

• Minor head {800} Other Expenditure has also shown an increase of more than Rs. 38 crore in 2009-10 RE due to introduction of new scheme SUCCESS.

• Most schemes under Capital Expenditure have been discontinued resulting in a fall of share of capital outlay in total plan expenditure from 98% in 2004-05 to only 8% in 2009-10 RE.

Major schemes under demand number 77 have been analysed on the basis of their share in budget allocation in 2009-10 RE. These schemes are listed in Table 33. Table 33: Budget allocation for major schemes under demand number 77 (in Rs. Crore)

S.No. Code Scheme Name Nature 2009-10 RE

1. 6007 Establishment and operation of Model Schools Central Sponsored 49.832. 6918 ICT @ School Central Sponsored 433. 5704 SUCCESS State Plan 38.704. 6717 Free cycle to girl students State Plan 26.065. 6970 Construction of Higher Secondary Schools State Plan 17.506. 6968 Upgradation of High Schools to Higher Secondary Schools State Plan 16.697. 2267 Free Text Books State Plan 11.43

Source: Demand for Grants, Department of Finance, GoMP • Scheme 6007 Establishment and operation of Model Schools and 5704 SUCCESS are new schemes. • ICT at School and free cycles to girl students received a major part of the budget allocation in 2009-10 RE. • Construction of Higher Secondary Schools, upgradation of High Schools to Higher Secondary Schools and

provision of free text books also account for a major part of the budget in Secondary education.




Some observations: • Expenditure trend during Tenth Plan (Table 23) revealed that expenditure in Secondary Education was significantly

less as compared to Elementary education during this period. This was a result of introduction of SSA in Elementary education in 2002-03. However, since 2008-09, expenditure in Secondary education has also started increasing. Also, SUCCESS (similar to SSA at elementary level) has been introduced at secondary level from 2009-10 onwards.

• SSA has addressed the issue of access and also improved PTR. In order to improve enrolments, incentives such as free textbooks, uniforms, mid-day meals (through Rural Development Department) are now being provided which has significantly improved enrolments and reduced the number of out of school children at the Elementary level. However, the achievement levels of students are quite low. The issue of quality of education at the Elementary level still needs to be addressed.

• In Secondary education, the current focus of SUCCESS is on improving school infrastructure. This combined with State Plan schemes where maximum budget allocation is being provided, such as construction of HSS, upgradation of HS to HSS, free text books for students and cycles for girl students, is likely to improve access and enrolment in schools at Secondary level. However, in later years there is likely to be increased focus on learning levels, as is the case with Elementary education at present.

4.1.5.2 Analysis of Non Plan expenditure Expenditure under Demand Number 27 – Elementary Education Table 34 shows the non plan expenditure under demand number 27 at the object level. Table 34: Object wise expenditure under demand number 27 from 2004-05 to 2009-10 RE (in Rs. Crore)

Source: Demand for Grants, Department of Finance, GoMP

Code No. Object 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 RE

1 Personal Services & Benefits 11 Salaries and Allowances 1281.87 1193.03 1219.47 1291.49 1582.78 1828.2612 Wages 0.92 0.75 0.70 0.80 0.81 0.772 Administrative Expenses 21 Travel Allowances 1.65 1.70 0.27 0.90 1.85 2.3822 Office Expenses 1.88 4.51 2.04 1.03 1.45 2.0424 Examination and Training 0.01 0.07 0.11 0.01 0.15 0.183 Contractual Services & Supplies 31 Payment for Professional Services 0 0.04 0.14 0.09 0.11 0.1633 Maintenance Works 0.02 0.05 0.08 0.02 0.10 0.1434 Material and Supplies 0.33 33.23 0.08 0.04 0.05 0.0937 Festivals and Occasions 0 0 0.06 0 0.06 0.074 Grant, etc 41 Stipend and Scholarships 0.14 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.11 0.0042 Grant-in aid 28.16 29.69 138.71 5.07 21.98 35.895 Other Expenditures 51 Others Charges 0 0.02 0.04 0 0.02 0.04




• Salaries and Allowances constitute the major part of the non plan expenditure. Since 2007-08, salaries and allowances have been accounting for more than 98% of the total non plan expenditure. This object has shown a growth of nearly 43% from 2004-05 to 2009-10 RE.

• Grants-in-aid showed an increase till 2006-07 when it reached Rs. 139 crore, but it has fallen drastically in recent years. This was a result of court order which reduced grants for private schools to 50%. However, private schools challenged the reduction of grants in the Court and won the case in 2008-09, and hence grants are being provided to them at earlier levels along with past arrears.

Expenditure under Demand Number 77 – School Education (Excluding Elementary Education) Table 35 shows the non plan expenditure under demand number 77 at the object level. Table 35: Object wise expenditure under demand number 77 from 2004-05 to 2009-10 RE (in Rs. Crore)

• Salaries and Allowances have been accounting for more than 95% of the budget for High School Education since

2005-06. Salaries and Allowances have increased by 57% from 2007-08 to 2009-10 RE. This is due to higher salaries being paid as per 6CPC recommendations. Also, arrears for 2008-09 have been paid in 2009-10.

Code Object 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 RE

1 Personal Services & Benefits 11 Salaries and Allowances 13.98 331.30 339.68 377.86 470.58 595.0812 Wages 0.14 2.23 2.74 2.35 2.48 2.87

16 Salaries and allowances- All India Services 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21

2 Administrative Expenses 21 Travel Allowances 0.10 2.36 2.41 2.40 2.49 3.0022 Office Expenses 1.04 2.36 2.21 2.53 3.22 3.02

23 Vehicle costs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.00

24 Examination & training 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.06

3 Contractual Services & Supplies

31 Payment for Professional Services 0.13 0.22 0.63 0.82 0.96 1.2232 Minor construction works 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.0433 Maintenance Works 0.00 2.54 0.06 0.12 0.06 0.2634 Material and Supplies 3.33 3.55 3.14 1.54 1.88 2.47

4 Grant, etc

41 Stipend and Scholarships 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.1642 Grant-in aid 0.69 0.78 1.85 0.91 0.99 1.4943 Contribution 0.01 0.00 0.06 0.05 0.08 0.13

5 Other Expenditures

51 Others Charges 2.11 2.00 3.17 3.34 4.31 5.6553 Payment of decretal amount(charge) 0.05 0.09 0.17 0.12 0.00 0.00




• Other major objects are 51- Other expenses which records expenditure on sports activities and National Military Parties, 22-Office expenses, 21- Travel Allowances and 34- Material and supplies.

• Object 41- Stipends and Scholarships showed a five fold increase from 2008-09 to 2009-10 RE. This is as a result of new scholarships being announced by the state government.

4.1.6 Sources of funds for the Department The Table 36 shows the contribution of the different sources in the department’s budget for expenditure on Plan schemes. Table 36: Sources of funds for on-budget plan expenditure of the Department (Rs. Crore)

Source 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 RE

GoI

Central Sector Schemes 14.29 42.79 46.67 15.08 17.39 39.20

GoI's Share in Centrally Sponsored Schemes 15.10 20.79 24.63 174.92 301.16 91.04

A –Total GoI's Contribution 29.39 63.58 71.30 190.00 318.55 130.24GoMP State's share in CSS 83.13 205.80 261.13 238.07 269.48 896.94State Schemes 171.93 345.90 411.92 172.54 326.85 383.27B - Total GoMP's Contribution 255.06 551.70 673.05 410.62 596.34 1280.21Total Expenditure on Plan Schemes (A+B) 284.45 615.27 744.35 600.61 914.88 1410.45

Centre's share (in %) 10.33 10.33 9.58 31.63 34.82 9.23State's Share (in %) 89.67 89.67 90.42 68.37 65.18 90.77Source: Demand for Grants, Department of Finance, GoMP For the period 2004-05 to 2009-10 RE, state share of the Government of MP in total expenditure of the department on Plan schemes has been nearly 90%, except in 2007-08 and 2008-09, when GoI’s contribution through Centrally Sponsored Schemes of SSA, NPEGEL, DIET, KGBV and free uniforms for girl students comprised 38% and 53% respectively of the total expenditure of the department on Plan schemes. However the resources that flow through Centrally Sponsored Schemes and Central Sector Schemes are not necessarily completely included in the demand for grants of the department. The Table 37 shows the various Central Assistance Schemes whose provisions are made off budget. Table 37: Off- budget funds for School Education (Rs. Crore) Scheme 2008-09 2009-10 RE Kasturba Gandhi Gram Balika Vidhyalaya (KGBV) 24.48 48.98National Programmes of Education for girls at Elementary level (NPEGEL) 19.47 41.58Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) 811.75 1243.14Establishment of Model Schools 0.00 37.37Total 855.70 1371.06Source: Budget Books, Department of Finance, GoMP




4.2 Trend Projections

4.2.1 Projections for Plan Expenditure

• Plan Expenditure projections for the department has been made using separate growth rates for the Salary and Non Salary Components of Plan Expenditure.

• For Salaries, a growth rate of 17.96% has been used to project the expenditure on salaries for the next five years based on recommendations made in the FRBM of 2010-11.

• For Non salary component of Plan expenditure, average annual growth rate has been used for the period 2003-04 to 2009-10. The average of these annual growth rates have been computed after removing the outliers. The average works out to be 19.8%.

Further these projections have been distributed across the minor heads in demand numbers 27 and 77 using their proportions as per the revised estimates of 2009-10.

4.2.1.1 Minor head wise projections for Plan Expenditure of the department Table 38 show projections for salary as well as non salary component of plan expenditure disaggregated at minor head level under demand number 27 for next five years. Table 38: Projected Plan Expenditure for Elementary Education- Demand number 27 2009-10 RE 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2202 General Education [01] Elementary Education {101} Government Primary Schools 597.45 715.14 856.02 1024.68 1226.57 1468.26{102} Assistance to Non Government Primary Schools 12 14.38 17.22 20.63 24.72 29.62

{108} Text Books 38.09 45.64 54.67 65.50 78.47 94.01[02] Secondary Education {105} Teacher Training 11.53 13.80 16.52 19.78 23.68 28.34[04] Adult Education {800} Other expenditure 0.81 0.97 1.16 1.39 1.66 1.99[80] General {107} Scholarships 0 0 0 0 0 04202 Capital Expenditure on Education, Sports, Art & Culture

[01] General Education {201} Primary Education 1 1.20 1.44 1.72 2.06 2.47[04] Art & Culture {800} Other Expenditure 44.06 52.79 63.24 75.76 90.76 108.74Total non salary component 670.59 803.38 962.48 1153.07 1381.41 1654.97Total salary component 34.35 40.52 47.80 56.39 66.51 78.46Total Plan Expenditure- Elementary Education 704.94 843.91 1010.28 1209.46 1447.92 1733.43

• The trend scenario for total expenditure on elementary education shows an increase of nearly Rs. 1,028 crore from

2009-10 to 2014-15.




• Minor head {101} - Government Primary Schools is the largest component accounting for nearly 85% of total plan expenditure on Elementary education.

Table 39 shows the projections for salary as well as non salary component of plan expenditure disaggregated at minor head level under demand number 77 for next five years. Table 39: Projected Plan Expenditure for Secondary Education- Demand number 77 Minor Head 2009-10

RE 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

2202 General Education [02] Secondary Education {001} Direction & Administration 2.55 3.05 3.66 4.38 5.25 6.29{103} State colleges & Institutes 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00{109} State Madhyamik school 31.52 37.51 44.64 53.12 63.23 75.26[05] Development of Languages {103} Sanskrit Shiksha {200} Education in other languages 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.10 0.11[80] General {001} Direction & Administration 26.06 31.21 37.40 44.80 53.67 64.30{107} Scholarships 105.88 126.85 151.97 182.06 218.11 261.30{800} Other expenditure 39.00 46.08 54.46 64.36 76.05 89.882204 Sports & Youth Services {101} Expenditure on exercise {102} Youth Welfare Activities 0.09 0.11 0.13 0.15 0.18 0.224202 Capital Expenditure on Education, Sports, Art & Culture

[01] General Education {202} Madhyamik education 19.5 23.36 27.99 33.53 40.17 48.12Total non salary component 184.47 221.00 264.77 317.20 380.01 455.26Total salary component 48.34 57.02 67.26 79.34 93.59 110.40Total Plan Expenditure- Secondary Education 232.81 278.02 332.03 396.54 473.60 565.66

• Plan expenditure under demand number 77 is projected to increase by Rs. 333 crore from 2009-10 to 2014-15. • Minor head {107} Scholarships has the largest share of 45%.

4.2.2 Projections for Non Plan Expenditure Non Plan projections for demand numbers 27 and 77 have been made object wise for next five years using varying growth rates for each object. These growth rates were arrived at using a trend growth rate or other assumed growth rates as given below: 1. Projection for Salaries has been made assuming 17.96% growth as per FRBM 2010-11. 2. Objects under Administrative Expenses have been projected using inflation at 7%. 3. Objects showing very irregular trend have been projected using rule of thumb growth rate of 10%. 4. For some of the other Object Heads, very low or high values registered during 2004-2010 have been treated as

outliers.

For other demand numbers with non plan expenditure, namely 74 and 75, growth rate has been assumed at 30%.




Table 40 shows non plan expenditure projections for demand number 27. Table 40: Non Plan Expenditure Projections for the Demand Number 27 (Rs in Crore) Code No.

Classification of Expenditure 2009-10 RE 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

1 Labour Services and Bonuses 11 Salaries and Allowances 1828.26 2156.61 2543.94 3000.84 3539.79 4175.5312 Wages 0.77 0.79 0.81 0.83 0.84 0.862 Administrative Expenses 21 Travel Allowances 2.38 2.55 2.73 2.92 3.12 3.3422 Office Expenses 2.04 2.18 2.34 2.50 2.67 2.8624 Examination and Training 0.18 0.19 0.21 0.22 0.24 0.253 Contract Services and Supplies 31 Payment for Professional Services 0.16 0.17 0.19 0.20 0.21 0.2333 Maintenance Work 0.14 0.15 0.17 0.18 0.20 0.2234 Material and Supplies 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.1237 Festivals, occasions 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.074 Grant, Others 41 Stipend and Scholarships 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.1042 Grant-in aid 35.89 39.47 43.42 47.76 52.54 57.795 Other Expenditures 51 Others Charges 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 Total Non Plan Expenditure 1,870.02 2202.43 2594.10 3055.76 3599.94 4241.42 • Total non plan expenditure under demand number 27 is projected to increase by 127% from Rs. 1,870 crore in

2009-10 to Rs. 4,241 crore in 2014-15. • In the next 5 years, nearly 98% of non plan expenditure will be under Salaries and Allowances.

Table 41 shows non plan expenditure projections for demand number 77. Table 41: Non Plan Expenditure Projections for the Demand Number 77 (Rs in Crore) Code No.

Classification of Expenditure 2009-10 RE

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

1 Labour Services and Bonuses 11 Salaries and Allowances 595.08 701.96 828.03 976.75 1152.17 1359.1012 Wages 2.87 2.98 3.11 3.23 3.36 3.5016 Salaries and allowances- All India

Services 0.21 0.25 0.29 0.35 0.41 0.482 Administrative Expenses 21 Travel Allowances 3.00 3.21 3.44 3.68 3.94 4.2122 Office Expenses 3.02 3.23 3.46 3.70 3.96 4.2423 Vehicle costs 0 0.000007 0 0 0 024 Examination & training 0.06 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08




Code No.

Classification of Expenditure 2009-10 RE

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

3 Contract Services and Supplies 31 Payment for Professional

Services 1.22 1.40 1.61 1.86 2.14 2.4632 Minor construction works 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.0633 Maintenance Work 0.26 0.29 0.31 0.35 0.38 0.4234 Material and Supplies 2.47 2.72 2.99 3.29 3.62 3.984 Grant, Others 41 Stipend and Scholarships 0.16 0.19 0.23 0.27 0.33 0.3942 Grant-in aid 1.49 1.66 1.86 2.07 2.32 2.5943 Contribution 0.13 0.14 0.16 0.17 0.19 0.215 Other Expenditures 51 Others Charges 5.65 6.96 8.57 10.55 12.99 15.99 Total Non Plan Expenditure 615.67 725.11 854.18 1006.39 1185.93 1397.72

• Total non plan expenditure under demand number 77 is projected to increase by 127% in 2013-14 from the current

RE of 2009-10. • In the next 5 years, nearly 97% of non plan expenditure will be under Salaries and Allowances.

4.2.3 Projections for Total Expenditure of School Education Department under Trend Scenario By summing the projections for plan and non plan expenditure of the department across all demand numbers, total expenditure projections have been arrived at for 2010-15 (Table 42). Table 42: Total Expenditure Projections of the Department (in Rs. crore) Code Item 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 27 Elementary Education 3046.34 3604.38 4265.22 5047.86 5974.85 77 School Education (excluding Elementary

Education) 1003.13 1186.20 1402.93 1659.53 1963.38

75 Financial Assistance to Municipal Corporations 261.34 339.74 441.66 574.15 746.40

80 Financial Assistance to Panchayati Raj Institutions 1220.17 1579.53 2045.37 2649.38 3432.69

15, 64 Financial Assistance to Panchayati Raj Institutions under the Special Component Plan (SCP)

180.58 216.34 259.18 310.50 371.99

41 Special Component Plan 319.66 382.96 458.79 549.64 658.49 Total Expenditure (TE) of the Department 6031.22 7309.15 8873.15 10791.08 13147.79 GSDP4 200247.05 222274.23 246724.39 273864.08 303989.13 TE as % of GSDP 3.01 3.29 3.60 3.94 4.33

4 GSDP Figures for the period 2009-15 have been obtained using growth rates mentioned in the GoMP FRBM 2010-11




• Total expenditure of the department as a percentage of GSDP is projected to go up from 2.76% in 2009-10 RE to 4.33% by 2014-15 in the trend scenario.

4.2.4 Projections for Off-Budget Allocation of School Education Department In RE of 2009-10, around 20% of the total expenditure of the Department was made under Centrally Sponsored Schemes. 35% expenditure under CSS is made by the State Government and the remaining 65% expenditure comes as off-budget from the Central Government. Off-budget allocation for the next five years has been projected by assuming that 20% of the Total Expenditure of the Department estimated under trend projections each year, as in Table 42, will be made on CSS. This 20% of Total Expenditure represents the state 35% share. Central share in CSS is assumed to reduce gradually from 65% in 2009-10 to 60%, 55% in 2010-11, 2011-12 respectively and 50% from 2012-13 onwards. These shares have been used for projecting the off-budget allocation (Table 43). Table 43: Off-Budget Allocation (in Rs. Crore) 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Off-budget 1821.61 1831.78 1857.31 2312.00 2891.87

4.3 Identification and Costing of Interventions Based on sectoral issues, scheme review and analysis of past expenditure of education Department reflecting laggards in Departmental objectives, interventions have been designed and costed to improve overall performance of the education sector in the state.

4.3.1 Strategy for Elementary Education

1. Improving PTR in Primary Schools and Middle Schools Retention and achievement levels to a large extent depend on availability of teachers and consequently focus has been given on improving Pupil Teacher Ratio (PTR). The assumptions are as follows:

• Scenario 1: PTR is kept constant at the current level of 37:1 for primary and 32:1 for middle school which is higher than the SSA norm.

• Scenario 2: PTR is rationalized as per norms suggested by SSA progressively as shown in Table 44 below:

Table 44: Scenarios for Elementary Education on the basis of PTR Year 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

Scenario 1 Primary 37 37 37 37 37Middle school 32 32 32 32 32Scenario 2 Primary 37 37 37 37 37Middle school 31 30 30 30 30 To arrive at PTR related expenditure, the following steps have been undertaken:

1. Projection of enrolments at Primary and Middle School Level 2. Estimation of additional teachers required based on enrolment projections and desired PTR




3. Estimation of additional classrooms required 4. Estimation of inspection and recurring expenses which is linked to total teacher salary being distributed

The costing for PTR related expenditure following above steps is detailed in Annexure A Methodology for projecting PTR related expenditure for Primary and Middle Schools. The projection for PTR related expenditure is shown in Table 45. Table 45: PTR related expenditure in Elementary Education (in Rs. Cr) Year 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

Scenario 1 Primary 0 0 0 0 0Middle school 414.05 536.12 672.60 1019.09 1319.96Scenario 2 Primary 0 0 0 0 0Middle school 597.92 619.63 765.21 1204.24 1529.67 • In Primary level, as PTR has to be maintained at 2008-09 level in both scenarios and enrolment growth has been

assumed to be zero, there is no PTR related expenditure in either scenario. • In Middle School level, in Scenario 1 even though PTR is kept constant at 2008-09 level, enrolment growth is

positive.

2. Strengthening Monitoring and Evaluation

Monitoring and Evaluation of performance of schools is an important function and is currently carried out by Jan Shikshak’s. Under the current norm, travelling allowance (TA) to Jan Shikshaks is at a rate of 50 paise per kilometre for schools which fall beyond 8 km from the cluster level office. There is no incentive for Jan Shikshak’s to visit schools with such low TA norms. Enhancing the TA to use it as a tool for incentivising the Jan Shikshak’s to undertake more school visits has been proposed. The calculation of a realistic TA has been shown in Table 46. Table 46: Assumptions made and the underlying rationale Per Month Assumptions made Depreciation Rs.400 per

month Assumed for a person with a motorcycle, 10% Straight line method on a Rs. 48,000 motorcycle per year

Maintenance Rs.200 per month

50% of Depreciation amount

Field Visit 50% 50% of time on paper work Kms travelled 12 Km per

day Per day - Assuming visiting 2 schools in an 8 km radius

No of travelling days per month

20 days As per norms

No of schools visited 2 per day As per norms Fuel cost Re.1 per km Rs/ km (assumed mileage of 50kmpl) For the proposed TA enhancement, based on the assumptions above, we have arrived at the cost implications for Primary Education as given in Table 47.




Table 47: Cost projections for TA (in Rs.) 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Depreciation 4000 4000 4000 4000 4000Maintenance 2289.80 2450.09 2621.59 2805.10 3001.46Fuel cost 2747.76 2940.10 3145.91 3366.12 3601.75Total Cost per year per CRC 9037.56 9390.19 9767.50 10171.23 10603.21

Total estimated cost per year in Rs. Cr 5.72 5.95 6.18 6.44 6.71

3. Strengthening of Parent Teachers Associations (PTAs)

PTAs have been formed in many schools in the state. However, for PTA to be effective capacity building of PTA is required to ensure better school management and accountability of teachers. Current in-house mechanism of strengthening PTAs will need to be supplemented with a PTA strengthening exercise by external agencies. The proposed intervention should include local visits by selected external agency to assess the need for strengthening and devising a plan for raising awareness. The details of the proposed intervention are as follows:

1. For strengthening the Parents Teachers Association, training programs will be provided to all schools, which will be rolled out over a period of five years.

2. An agency of good reputation in conducting trainings should be appointed to provide training programs for strengthening the PTAs

3. The training program will be a two day training program for all schools, the training cost being estimated at Rs. 5000 per day. Inflation on the training cost has been taken at 7%.

4. The agency will be required to review and assess the current functioning and constitution of the PTA’s, apart from giving trainings.

The cost projection for the proposed PTA strengthening program is given in Table 48. Table 48: Cost projections for PTA strengthening (in Rs. crore) 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Primary 93.34 99.88 106.87 114.35 122.35Middle School 29.63 31.71 33.93 36.30 38.84

4. Improving Quality of Education

As teachers are the key to improving the quality of education, incentives need to be provided to motivate teachers in performing well and improving the quality of education in the state. The details of the proposed intervention are as follows:

1. We have assumed an average reward of Rs. 3,750. 2. 2 schools per block will be monitored by an independent agency. In case of any mis-reporting in class grades

on the basis of which teachers are eligible for rewards, entire school will be made ineligible for incentives. 3. Cost of monitoring of elementary level schools by an independent agency has been assumed at Rs. 7,000 per

school based on discussions with some local NGOs.




On the basis of the above assumptions, the cost estimates for providing incentives to teachers at primary and middle school level is shown in Table 49. Table 49: Cost estimates for teacher incentive under alternative scenarios at primary and middle school level (in Rs. crore) 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Primary Scenario 1 11.94 11.98 12.02 12.06 12.10Scenario 2 11.94 11.98 12.02 12.06 12.10Middle School Scenario 1 5.97 6.49 7.06 7.67 8.34Scenario 2 6.14 6.88 7.49 8.14 8.86 5. Professional Development of Teachers

SCERT and DIET are apex bodies at state and district level, which have primary responsibility in developing and delivering robust curriculum based training to existing as well as potential teachers of the department. However, current capacity of these agencies, both physical and qualitative, demands that more and more training programs should be done on PPP mode. Some programs such as the training program for untrained teachers may be outsourced to NGOs. The details of the proposed intervention for Primary Education are as follows:

1. Three subject specific training programs will be provided to 90 teachers in each of the 48 districts 2. The 3 domains should be Language, Maths and Environmental Science 3. The training program will be for 3 days, each consisting of 3 sessions 4. 3 agencies will be appointed for providing these training. Each agency will cover 16 districts 5. The training will also be followed up with a refresher cum feedback session for the same set of teachers 6. The refresher cum feedback session will be for 3 days 7. Total cost of providing subject specific training includes the training cost of Rs. 2,000 per participant and a TA

of Rs.300 per day per participant. Inflation on training cost and TA has been taken at 7% p.a.

Based on these assumptions, the cost of such training programs is estimated in Table 50. Table 50: Cost Estimates (in Rs. crore) 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Cost Estimate 1.88 2.01 2.15 2.30 2.51

6. Improving enrolment of girls in Middle Schools

As observed, the gender gap becomes increasingly pronounced as we move from primary levels to middle school and high school levels. One of the reasons for this is the absence of separate toilets for girls in middle schools. It is proposed that all middle schools have separate toilets for girls.

Another reason for drop-out amongst girls is that they face added embarrassment of going to school during their monthly menstrual cycle. Under parental pressure and in absence of awareness about hygienic practices, they prefer to stay home during these days and eventually completely drop out of school.

Interventions similar to the ones adopted in Tamil Nadu could be replicated in MP to address this issue. Sanitary napkins could be provided to all girl students in middle schools on a monthly basis. Incinerators could be installed in




toilet to dispose of sanitary waste hygienically. Necessary steps have to be taken to educate girls about menstruation so that they are well versed with the changes in their body and are prepared to tackle them easily. Self Help Groups (SHGs) and local NGOs could be financially encouraged and trained to produce low cost sanitary napkins to facilitate its usage among girl students.

The details of the proposed intervention are as follows:

1. Four sanitary napkins to be distributed each month of academic year to all girl students in middle schools 2. Incinerators for the hygienic disposal of these napkins should be installed in all middle schools by 2014-15 3. Unit cost of sanitary napkins, for the current year, has been assumed to be Rs. 2 while that of an incinerator

machine is assumed to be Rs 2,300. 4. A recurring cost of 10% of the cost of an incinerator has also been taken for maintenance of the incinerators.

The projections for cost of providing these facilities for girl students in middle schools have been given in Table 51. Table 51: Cost of sanitary napkins and incinerators (in Rs. Crore) 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Cost Estimate 48 55.92 65.13 75.83 86.49 Note: The above scheme has been approved by Hon’ble Minister for implementation on pilot basis in Middle Schools across the State. For estimating the cost of constructing separate toilet for girls in middle schools which do not have this facility, the following assumptions have been made:

1. In Scenario 1 we assume that 20% of the schools without separate toilet for girls will be taken up every year. In Scenario 2, we assume that 33.33% of these schools will be taken up every year.

2. Cost of constructing an additional toilet in a school has been taken at Rs. 10,000 in 2007-08, using SSA norms.

Cost estimates for constructing a separate toilet for girls in middle schools is shown in Table 52. Table 52: Cost of separate toilets for girls (in Rs. Crore) 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Scenario 1 3.47 3.71 3.97 4.25 4.54Scenario 2 5.78 6.18 0 0 0

4.3.2 Strategy for High School Education

1. Improving the PTR As a first step in improving the outcomes at high school level the PTR is targeted to be improved to 30:1 from the level of 44:1 in 2006-07 under two different scenarios. • Scenario 1: PTR is progressively rationalized to 34:1 maintaining the transition rate at 75%. • Scenario 2: PTR is progressively rationalized to 30:1 maintaining the transition rate at 80%.

Table 53: Scenarios- High School Education Year Transition rate PTR across the years




2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Scenario 1 75% 37 36 35 34 33Scenario 2 80% 36 34 32 30 30 To arrive at PTR related expenditure, the following steps have been undertaken:

1. Projection of enrolments at Secondary Level 2. Estimation of additional teachers required based on enrolment projections and desired PTR 3. Estimation of additional classrooms required 4. Estimation of inspection and recurring expenses which is linked to total teacher salary being distributed

The costing for PTR related expenditure following above steps is provided in A.2 Methodology for projecting PTR related expenditure for High Schools. The projection for PTR related expenditure is shown in Table 54. Table 54: PTR related expenditure in Secondary Education (in Rs. Cr) Year 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

Scenario 1 209.05 252.66 362.33 631.22 880.62Scenario 2 246.91 323.11 492.22 878 1193.98

2. Improving Quality of Education

a) Infrastructure For quality improvement, the provisioning of following infrastructure facilities have been considered to estimate the expenditure requirements in a phased manner in select government high schools over a period of five years:

i. Library ii. Computer facilities, and iii. Laboratories for Biology, Chemistry and Physics

Three interventions have been proposed: Provision of Library, computer facilities and laboratories. • Scenario 1: 25 per cent of the schools are covered over 5 years • Scenario 2: 50 per cent of the schools are covered over 5 years

The cost estimates have been arrived at utilising the following assumptions:

1. Cost of library: Rs. 2 lakh for cost of the library room is estimated as per the SSA assumptions. Rs. 8000/- has been assumed for each school library for purchase of books. (This is two times the unit cost provided under SSA at the primary level).

2. Cost of computer facilities for a school: For facilitating ICT in schools, a provision of 20 computers is proposed to be provided for each school. The cost of each computer is estimated at Rs. 25,000 and 10% of the cost has been assumed for maintenance and training expenses.

3. Cost of laboratories: Three laboratories, one each for Biology, Chemistry and Physics are proposed. The cost for each laboratory has been taken to be Rs. 2 lakh. This is in accordance with the CABE report on Universalization of Secondary Education.

The cost estimates thus arrived at for the different scenarios are presented in Table 55.




Table 55: Cost estimates of interventions at high school level to improve quality of education (in Rs. crore) 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Scenario 1 Library 3.43 3.67 3.93 4.21 4.50Labs 9.90 10.60 11.34 12.13 12.98ICT 12.38 13.24 14.17 15.16 16.22Scenario 2 Library 6.87 7.35 7.86 8.41 9.00Labs 19.80 21.19 22.67 24.26 25.96ICT 24.76 26.49 28.34 30.33 32.45

b) Teacher Incentive Incentivisation of teachers for better performance is also critical to deliver high quality results. The cost estimates for teacher incentive is shown in Table 56. For detailed methodology and assumptions refer A.3 Methodology for projecting Incentive Scheme for Secondary Education level teachers. Table 56: Cost estimates for teacher incentive in HS and HSS (in Rs. Cr) 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 HS Teacher Incentive 10.83 12.03 13.04 13.76 14.04HSS Teacher Incentive 8.71 9.43 9.58 9.61 9.62 Note: It may be noted that after submission of first cycle of MTEF under which there was a proposal for an Incentive Scheme for teachers as a state intervention, School Education Department has launched Complete Literacy Village Scheme at Elementary level. The scheme contours are very similar to the scheme proposed under the first cycle MTEF. A similar Incentive Scheme for teachers of government secondary and higher secondary schools has also been approved for implementation from the year 2010-11 for improving examination results of class X and XII. MTEF team provided assistance to planning officials of DPI in designing the above scheme. 3. Subject specific training programs The details of the proposed intervention are as follows:

1. 5 subject specific training programs will be provided to 150 teachers in each of the 48 districts 2. The training program will be for 3 days 3. 3 agencies will be appointed for providing these training. Each agency will cover 16 districts 4. The training will also be followed up with a refresher cum feedback session for the same set of teachers 5. The refresher cum feedback session will be for 3 days 6. Total cost of providing subject specific training includes the training cost of Rs. 2,000 per participant and a TA

of Rs.300 per day per participant. Inflation on training cost and TA has been taken at 7% p.a.

Based on the assumptions above, the cost estimates for this intervention is presented in Table 57:




Table 57: Cost Estimates (in Rs. crore) 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Cost Estimate 3.13 3.35 3.59 3.84 4.11 4. Professional Development of Teachers

Under the scheme of Shaikshik Abyuthan, all high school teachers in the State are being provided a 5 day annual training at the district level. For each district, there are 2 master trainers per subject. As in the case of elementary education, innovative training programs have to be designed on PPP mode and delivered for longer durations to all teachers in high schools as well as higher secondary schools. There should also be follow up sessions to these training programmes at the Block level wherein teachers can highlight any problems or bottlenecks faced by them. The master trainers will address these issues and provide necessary guidance. The details of the proposed intervention are as follows:

1. Follow up sessions to teacher training to be carried out in each of 313 blocks 2. The session will be for 1 day 3. Such sessions to be held thrice a year for each block 4. 1 master trainer will be responsible for follow up sessions at block level for a batch size of no more than 30

teachers 5. The trainers to be given TA of Rs.300 per day. Participating teachers to be also given Rs. 100 as participation

incentive. Inflation on TA has been taken at 7% p.a. for projections.

Based on assumptions above, cost estimates for this intervention under two scenarios are presented in Table 58: Table 58: Cost estimates for Improving Quality of Training (in Rs. Crore) 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Scenario 1 1.04 1.36 1.82 2.45 3.31Scenario 2 1.31 1.74 2.38 3.28 4.30 5. Improving Enrolment of Girls in High Schools

In order to bridge the gender disparity in high schools, girl-specific interventions as proposed under elementary education can be replicated. • This intervention providing sanitary napkins to girl students in HS and HSS and installing incinerators in these

schools for hygienic disposal of napkins will be started on a pilot basis in the first 2 years, i.e., 2010-11 and 2011-12, in 2 girls’ schools at the District level, giving a total of 100 schools for the first 2 years.

• Each of these schools will be visited once every month by an ANM who will be given an honorarium of Rs. 250 per visit for the same. The ANM will hold awareness camps for girls in the school. Sanitary napkins can be collected by girls in such camps.

• At the end of two years an impact study should be undertaken. If there is an improvement in the Enrolment rates and Drop Out rates of girls in these schools, then the programme can be extended to all the remaining girls’ schools in the state in the medium term.

• Other assumptions are the same as assumed for Middle Schools.

Financial projections are shown in Table 59.




Table 59: Cost of Girls Health and Hygiene Programme (in Rs. Crore) Cost Estimate 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Honorarium to ANMs 0.03 0.03 0.12 0.12 0.12Cost of Sanitary Napkins 0.82 0.88 2.19 2.34 2.50Incinerator cost + Maintenance 0.02 0.00 0.11 0.01 0.01Total cost 0.87 0.91 2.42 2.47 2.64 • For improving enrolments of girls at the Secondary level, construction of separate toilets for girls in those High

Schools which do not have the facility is also proposed. • Assumptions for estimating the cost are the same as assumed for Middle Schools and estimated cost is presented

in Table 60. Table 60: Cost of separate toilets for girls (in Rs. Crore) 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Scenario 1 0.23 0.25 0.26 0.28 0.30Scenario 2 0.38 0.41 0.44 0.00 0.00

6. Establishment of Schools of Excellence

Currently 313 schools of excellence are operational at district & block level. The academic achievements in these schools with almost ideal conditions have been very high. In 2007-08, pass percentage in these schools was nearly 95% at the High School and Higher Secondary level. Expansion of such schools with more and more penetration at block level is needed to serve as an incentive for children to perform better at elementary level.

• 20 additional Schools of Excellence are proposed to be established each year for the next 5 years. • Out of these 20 Schools to be added every year, 10 will be at the block level and 10 at the district level. • The costing for each School of Excellence is currently Rs.10 lakh which is given for construction, electricity and

cost of water supply to these schools.

The cost estimate for establishment of Schools of excellence is given in Table 61. Table 61: Total cost estimates for establishing Schools of Excellence (in Rs. Crore) 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total cost 2.29 2.45 2.62 2.81 3

4.3.3 MTEF Expenditure Requirement for all the Scenarios The Table 62 below juxtaposes expenditure requirements for all the scenarios- Trend Scenario, Scenario 1 and Scenario 2. Table 62: MTEF Expenditure Requirements (in Rs. Crore) Details 2009-10

(RE) 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

A. Trend Scenario Projections of Department

4985.87 6031.22 7309.15 8873.15 10791.08 13147.79




Details 2009-10 (RE)

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

Expenditure

B. Off-budget projection5 1371.06 1821.61 1831.78 1857.31 2312.00 2891.87

Scenario 1 C. Desired PTR for Primary Education

37 37 37 37 37

D. Desired PTR for Middle school Education

32 32 32 32 32

E. Desired PTR for High school Education

37 36 35 34 33

F. Annual Additional Funding required for Primary Education (including state level interventions)

112.89 119.81 127.22 135.15 143.68

G. Annual Additional Funding required for Middle school Education (including state level interventions)

501.12 633.95 782.68 1143.15 1458.19

H. Annual Additional Funding required for High School Education (including state level interventions)

261.86 309.95 425.09 711.50 972.24

5 The figures represent the off-budget amount in the Trend Scenario.





2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

Total Projected Expenditure A+B+F+G+H (in Crore)

8728.69 10204.64 12065.45 15079.31 18592.86

Total Projected Expenditure as a % of GSDP

4.36 4.59 4.89 5.51 6.12

Scenario 2 I. Desired PTR for Primary Education

37 37 37 37 37

J. Desired PTR for Middle school Education

31 30 30 30 30

K. Desired PTR for High school Education

36 34 32 30 30

L. Annual Additional Funding required for Primary Education (including state level interventions)

112.89 119.81 127.22 135.15 143.68

M. Annual Additional Funding required for Middle school Education (including state level interventions)

687.48 720.33 878.37 1324.52 1663.86

N. Annual Additional Funding required for High school Education (including state level interventions)

325.85 408.45 585.16 976.76 1299.09

Total Projected Expenditure A+B+L+M+N(i

8979.043 10389.52 12321.22 15539.51 19146.3





2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

n Rs. crore)

Total Projected Expenditure as a % of GSDP

4.48 4.67 4.99 5.67 6.30

• In 2010-11, total projected expenditure under scenario 1 is Rs. 8,729 crore, whereas the total projections under

scenario 2 are higher by Rs. 250 crore at Rs. 8,979 crore. • By 2014-15, projections under scenario 2 are higher than that under scenario 1 by Rs. 553 crore to register a total

of Rs. 19,146 crore.

4.3.3.1 Minor Head wise Projections for Interventions in SED in Scenario 1

The proposed interventions over and above the trend scenario have also been shown at the Minor Head Level for both Elementary and Secondary Education in Table 63 and Table 64 for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 respectively. Table 63: Minor Head wise projections in Scenario 1 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2202 General Education [01] Elementary Education {101} Government Primary Schools 612.13 751.75 907.75 1275.99 1599.352202 General Education [02] Madhyamik Education {105} Teacher Training 1.88 2.01 2.15 2.30 2.51{109} State Madhyamik School 119.46 158.40 210.58 380.71 524.13[80] General {001} Direction & Administration 5.05 5.62 7.82 8.76 10.05{800} Other Expenditure 135.06 143.47 204.07 305.66 414.154202 Capital outlay on education, sports, art & culture

[01] General Education {202} Madhyamik Education 2.29 2.45 2.62 2.81 3.00Total Interventions 875.86 1063.71 1334.99 1976.23 2553.20

4.3.3.2 Minor Head wise Projections for Interventions in SED in Scenario 2

Table 64: Minor Head wise projections in Scenario 2 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2202 General Education [01] Elementary Education {101} Government Primary Schools 798.49 838.13 1003.44 1457.36 1805.032202 General Education [02] Madhyamik Education {105} Teacher Training 1.88 2.01 2.15 2.30 2.51{109} State Madhyamik School 146.85 199.81 275.92 503.21 701.83




[80] General {001} Direction & Administration 5.31 6.00 8.39 9.59 11.04{800} Other Expenditure 171.40 200.19 298.24 461.16 583.224202 Capital outlay on education, sports, art & culture

[01] General Education {202} Madhyamik Education 2.29 2.45 2.62 2.81 3.00Total Interventions 1126.22 1248.59 1590.75 2436.43 3106.64




5 Estimation of Resource Envelope for Secondary Education

5.1 Rationale Sections 2 to 4 captures the ‘Bottom-Up’ essence of MTEF preparation, i.e. the expenditure estimates arrived in consolidated Table (Table 62) in earlier section are numbers generated in line with the financial requirements assessed to achieve targets under an ‘unconstrained budgeting’. The other side of MTEF budgeting is estimating ‘Resource Envelope’ for the department which involves projecting the likely availability of resources in the future within which the department is expected to fit in its expenditures.

5.2 Methodology for forecasting Medium Term Resource Envelope for Secondary Education A three-step methodology is adopted to arrive at estimation of resource envelope:

5.2.1 Step I: Aggregate Plan Resource Envelope at State level

• Total plan resources envelope for the state for meeting its medium term developmental strategies have been estimated by adding the projections for Plan Revenue expenditure, Plan Capital expenditure and Plan Loans & Advances.

• Above projections have been arrived at using growth rates as per MTFP (Medium Term Fiscal Plan) of Madhya Pradesh.

5.2.2 Step II: Medium Term Sectoral (Development Head) Budget Envelope for State Plan Schemes Estimate of resources available for State Plan schemes for the Social Services sector are arrived at using the following steps: • Calculation of historical shares of State Annual Plan Budget in Aggregate Plan Resource Envelope, Social Services

share in State Annual Plan Budget and State’s share in CSS/ EAPs schemes/ projects of Social Services • Projections for next five years, assuming that the historical shares will be maintained at all three levels • Projections for resources available for State Plan Schemes in Social Sector has been done ‘residually’ after

deducting the shares of CSS/ EAPs from the total of social sector.

5.2.3 Step III: Medium Term Resource Budget Envelope for SED Resource envelope projections have been arrived at for the School Education Department following the step-wise procedure detailed below. Budgetary Resources: • State Plan Schemes: Average share of such schemes in the total projected resource availability for State Plan

schemes in Social Sector assumed to be maintained in future • CSS (Inclusive of state’s contribution as well): Given that past allocations have been erratic, 30% annual growth

rate is assumed • CS: Given that past trend has been erratic, 10% annual growth rate is assumed • EAPs: None for secondary education

Extra-Budgetary Resources: • Off-Budget: As central share in CSS schemes presently coming as off-budget allocation will reduce gradually over

the years, annual growth rate is assumed at 20%.




The budgetary and extra-budgetary resources are added to obtain the total budgetary resource availability for the department for next five years is presented in Table 65. Table 65: Projections for resources available for SED

Fiscal Indicators 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10

RE

RoG/ Avg Share

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

STEP I Plan Revenue Expenditure 5,452.09 6,806.29 7,621.59 11,414.38 12.5 12,841.18 14,446.32 16,252.12 18,283.63 20,569.08

Plan Capital Expenditure 4,855.97 6,510.47 6,503.45 8,016.51 13.5 9,098.74 10,327.07 11,721.22 13,303.59 15,099.57

Plan Loans & Advances 263.68 446.39 677.18 828.65 47.79 1,224.64 1,809.86 2,674.74 3,952.92 5,841.91

Aggregate Plan Resource Envelope

10,571.74 13,763.15 14,802.22 20,259.54 23,164.55 26,583.25 30,648.08 35,540.14 41,510.56

STEP II State Plan Budget

12047.44 13081.02 15463.19 84.0 19476.10 22350.44 25768.03 29881.14 34900.91

Social Services (SS)

3491.20 4318.72 5443.94 32.40 6310.24 7241.52 8348.82 9681.46 11307.86

State’s share in CSS of SS

1346.90 133.65 294.21 15.69 990.26 1136.41 1310.18 1519.31 1774.54

State’s share in EAPs of SS

10.30 0.44 0.34 0.10 6.55 7.52 8.67 10.05 11.74

Resource Envelope for State Plan Schemes Envelope in SS

2133.99 4184.63 5149.39 5313.42 6097.59 7029.97 8152.10 9521.58

STEP III State Plan Schemes 360.27 582.39 675.20 14.64 777.75 892.53 1029.00 1193.25 1393.71

CSS 228.18 314.91 703.33 30 914.33 1188.63 1545.22 2008.78 2611.42CS 12.16 17.59 31.92 10 35.11 38.62 42.48 46.73 51.40On- budget resources 600.61 914.88 1410.45 1727.19 2119.78 2616.70 3248.77 4056.53

Off-budget resources 383.13 855.70 1371.06 20 1645.27 1974.33 2369.19 2843.03 3411.64

Total budgetary resources for SED

983.74 1770.58 2781.51 3372.46 4094.10 4985.90 6091.80 7468.17




• The allocation for school education department in the State budget is anticipated to grow at an average annual

growth rate of 21.99% from the 2010-11 to 2014-15 • Resource availability is projected to increase from current levels of 2,782 crore to about Rs. 7,468 crore by 2014-

15.




6 Reconciliation and Reprioritization

6.1 Reconciling plan requirements with resources This would entail reconciliation of ‘bottom up’ plan expenditure estimates with prior preliminary estimate of ‘top down’ plan resource constraint (among schemes) of the department, as presented in the Table 66 below: Table 66: Projected resource and expenditure growth of SED

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

I. PLAN EXPENDITURE I. A. Top Down Resource Envelope for SED 3,372.46 4,094.10 4,985.90 6,091.80 7,468.17 I. B. Bottom Up Trend Scenario 3,509.41 3,852.01 4,275.48 5,206.53 6,356.64 Trend deficit (+)/ surplus (-) with respect to resource envelope 136.95 -242.09 -710.42 -885.26 -1,111.53 Scenario 1 4,385.27 4,915.72 5,610.47 7,182.76 8,909.84 Scenario 2 4,635.63 5,100.60 5,866.23 7,642.96 9,463.28 II. NON PLAN EXPENDITURE 4,343.42 5,288.92 6,454.98 7,896.55 9,683.02

The projected resource envelope shows that it is adequate to meet trend projection expenditure in all years beyond 2010-11, i.e., there is a trend surplus from 2011-12 onwards. • However, the strategic interventions proposed under Scenario 1 are desirable for the state and therefore they

should be undertaken by the department. But Scenario 1 projections are not affordable by the top-down projected resource growth.

• The additional expenditure estimates for the suggested interventions under Scenario 1 would need to be provided for by identifying savings opportunities in Heads of expenditure not related to identified interventions. Also, given the constraint in plan expenditure, there is a need to explore opportunities for identifying savings in non-plan expenditure.

This reprioritization exercise is presented in the following sub-section.

6.2 Reprioritization Table 67 presents the trend scenario MTEF projections with identified additional costing for proposed interventions (as discussed under Scenario 1). The table also shows the Heads from which savings would have to be identified and reallocated to Heads linked to proposed interventions.




Table 67: Reprioritization of allocation

Code


2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

T G 6Projections


T G Projections


T G Projections


T G Projections


T G Projections


Minor Heads with identified interventions in Plan expenditure 2202 General Education [01] Elementary

Education

{101} Government Primary Schools 715.14 612.13 856.02 751.75 1024.68 907.75 1226.57 1275.99 1468.26 1599.35

[02] Secondary Education

{105} Teacher Training 13.80 1.88 16.52 2.01 19.78 2.15 23.68 2.30 28.34 2.51{109} State Madhyamik

School 37.51 119.46 44.64 158.40 53.12 210.58 63.23 380.71 75.26 524.13[80] General {001} Direction &

Administration 3.05 5.05 3.66 5.62 4.38 7.82 5.25 8.76 6.29 10.05{800} Other Expenditure 46.08 135.06 54.46 143.47 64.36 204.07 76.05 305.66 89.88 414.154202 Capital Expenditure on Education, Sports, Art & Culture [01] General Education {202} Madhyamik

Education 23.36 2.29 27.99 2.45 33.53 2.62 40.17 2.81 48.12 3.00 Sub-Total of

Additional Plan Exp owing to interventions 838.95 875.86 1003.29 1063.71 1199.85 1334.99 1434.95 1976.23 1716.16 2553.20

Trend projection on Minor Heads from which adjustments will have to be made to accommodate proposed interventions III. Plan Expenditure

2202 General Education (School Education)

[01] Elementary Education

{102} Assistance to Non Government Primary Schools

14.38 17.22 20.63 24.72 29.62

{108} Text Books 45.64 54.67 65.50 78.47 94.01 [02] Secondary

Education

{001} Direction & Administration

31.21 37.40 44.80 53.67 64.30

6 TG (Trend Growth) Projections refer to expenditure projections done based on past trend growth rate.




Code


2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

T G 6Projections


T G Projections


T G Projections


T G Projections


T G Projections


{103} Informal Education 9.58 11.48 13.76 16.48 19.74 [04] Adult Education {800} Other Expenditure 0.97 1.16 1.39 1.66 1.99 [05] Development of

languages

{103} Sanskrit shiksha 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 {200} Education in other

languages 0.06

0.07 0.08 0.10 0.11

[80] General {107} Scholarships 126.85 151.97 182.06 218.11 261.30 2204 Sports & Youth

Services

{101} Expenditure on exercise

0.20

0.24 0.29 0.35 0.42

{102} Youth welfare activities for students

0.11

0.13 0.15 0.18 0.22

4202 Capital Expenditure on Education, Sports, Art & Culture [01] General Education {201} Primary Education 1.20 1.44 1.72 2.06 2.47 [04] Art & Culture {800} Other Expenditure 52.79 63.24 75.76 90.76 108.74 Sub Total of Trend

Projection of Exp on Heads from which corresponding Adjustments will have to be made for Plan

282.98 339.01 406.15 486.57 582.93

IV. Non Plan Expenditure

Total scope from non-plan expenditure (‘non-salary’ non-plan expenditure)7

1484.84 1916.94 2477.40 3204.59 4148.39

7 The non-salary non-plan expenditure projections based on trend from 2010-11 onwards could undergo upward revision due to higher devolutions under XIII Finance Commission from 2010-11.




Annexure




A Annexure A

A.1 Methodology for projecting PTR related expenditure for Primary and Middle Schools

A.1.1 Projections for Enrolment For projecting enrolment at primary and middle school levels, different assumptions have been used. The basis of analysis of underlying factors in projection is explained level wise in following sub-sections.

A.1.1.1 Primary School

The estimate for projected enrolments at primary stage is dependent on: • The projected child population of the relevant age group, and • The projected level of grossness in enrolment, i.e. proportion of under/over aged children at primary levels.

According to report of the Expert Committee constituted by Registrar General of India, projections for single-age wise population suggests a reverse demographic trend for child population. The level of grossness in enrolment is also expected to decrease because of increased emphasis on need and quality of education. Due to reduction in these two variables, a slightly decreasing trend in primary school enrolments is expected to follow from 2007-08.8 Thus enrolments at primary stage for the next five years have been assumed to remain constant at level of base year 2007-08 i.e. effectively zero growth in primary enrolment has been assumed until 2014-15.

A.1.1.2 Middle School According to latest DISE data, trend growth rate for enrolment in middle school has been estimated to be 11.62% per annum during the past five years. This trend growth rate has been used for projections.

A.1.2 Projections for Additional Classrooms, Teachers and Schools For estimating requirement of additional teachers, classrooms and schools, norms suggested by the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) have been used, which are as following:

• An additional classroom and a teacher should be provided for every 40 additional enrolments at primary stage. • An additional classroom and a teacher should be provided for every 30 additional students in middle school in

view of the need for smaller class sizes and subject-specific teachers. • SSA also envisages provision for at least one middle school for every two primary schools in a district. The

need of new middle school has been based on this SSA norm of 2:1 (PS: UPS).

A.1.3 Projection of financial requirements Salary Estimation It has been assumed that additional teachers who are required for improved PTR would be appointed as ‘Contract Teachers’. It has also been assumed in the projections that all contract teachers would be appointed as regular teachers immediately upon their completion of 3 years, hence taking a base salary of Rs. 3,750 (existing Rs. 3,000 + 25% increase owing to 6th Pay Commission recommendation) and Rs. 5,000 (existing Rs. 4,000 + 25% increase owing to 6th Pay Commission recommendation) for regular teachers who were earlier teaching under Grade 3 and Grade 2

8 This assumption has been made by the working group for XIth plan in order to make projections of enrolment for primary schools in India. The working group defines ‘grossness’ in enrollment as proportion of under/over aged children in middle school levels and says that it is likely to decrease. The same has been assumed for the state of Madhya Pradesh for this analysis.




respectively. As regular teachers, they would also be entitled to Dearness Allowance (DA). We have taken a 7 percentage point addition to DA every year on the existing DA of 47% of basic pay to account for inflation. Inspection expenses The additional enrolments, classrooms and teachers will also require additional expenditure on inspection and supervision. The additional requirement for inspection and supervision has been estimated by taking 2 per cent of the total estimated recurring expenditure on education each year as per CABE norms.

Cost of additional classrooms The capital cost of construction per class room in Primary and Middle Schools is Rs. 1,89,000 as per SSA norms for the year 2008-09. Inflation of 7% p.a. on the capital cost of construction per class has been assumed for the projections. Recurring Expenditure The estimated additional recurring expenditure in each year has been assumed to include salary expenditure, other recurring expenditure and the expenditure on inspection and supervision.

A.2 Methodology for projecting PTR related expenditure for High Schools

A.2.1 Projections for Enrolment The enrolment projection for High Schools is based on the enrolment in grade VIII for previous year and transition rate from grade VIII to grade IX. Based on projected enrolment in Class VIII available from Secondary Education department, projections in high school enrolment from 2010-11 to 2014-15 have been made assuming different transition rates.

A.2.2 Projections for Additional Classrooms and Teachers The additional teachers required have been computed depending on the target PTR that needs to be maintained for different scenarios. To arrive at number of classrooms required, CABE norm for 1.5 teachers for every additional classroom has been taken into consideration.

A.2.3 Projection of financial requirements The assumptions on salary, inspection expenses, cost of additional classrooms and recurring expenditure are same as in case of Primary and Middle Schools. However, for salary expenditure, the base salary of grade 1 contract teachers has been taken as Rs. 4,500 per month for high school teachers. It has been assumed that all contract teachers would be appointed as regular teachers immediately upon their completion of 3 years at a base salary of Rs. 5,625 (existing Rs. 4,500 + 25% increase owing to 6th Pay Commission recommendation). As regular teachers, they would also be entitled to Dearness Allowance (DA). We have taken a 7 percentage point addition to DA every year on the existing DA of 47% of basic pay to account for inflation.

A.3 Methodology for projecting Incentive Scheme for Secondary Education level teachers

A.3.1 Projections for High Schools Total number of HS has been categorized according to their pass percent as in 2007-08. A target pass percent of 65% has been set for state government High Schools. Schools in which teachers shall be eligible for receiving incentives must meet the condition set for their respective category, as stated below:




Schools above target pass percent of 65% 1. Category A Schools with pass percent of 80-100%: on attaining a result not less than previous year’s result 2. Category B Schools with pass percent of 65% and above but less than 80%: on attaining minimum 5%

improvement over previous year’s result

Schools below target pass percent of 65%

3. Category C Schools: on attaining minimum 20% improvement over previous year’s result 4. Category D Schools: on attaining minimum 15% improvement over previous year’s result 5. Category E Schools: on attaining minimum 10% improvement over previous year’s result

Incentive structure linked to the school categories is shown in Table 57 for the faculty in one High School. Table 68: Incentive Structure for High School Faculty No. Average Basic

Monthly Salary Category A Category B Category C Category D Category E

Principal 1 20000 10000 8000 7000 6000 5000Teacher 1 17000 9000 7000 6000 5000 4000Adhyapak 3 5000 5000 3500 3500 2500 1500Sahayak Adhyapak

1 4000 5000 3500 3500 2500 1500

SSGrade 2 2 3500 5000 3500 3500 2500 1500SSGrade 3 1 2500 5000 3500 3500 2500 1500

A.3.2 Projections for High Schools A target pass percent of 80% has been set for state government HSS. Total number of HSS has been categorized according to their pass percent as in 2007-08. Schools in which teachers shall be eligible for receiving incentives must meet the condition set for their respective category, as stated below: Schools above target pass percent of 80%

1. Category A Schools with pass percent of 90-100%: on attaining a result not less than previous year’s result 2. Category B Schools with pass percent of 80% and above but less than 90%: on attaining a result not less than

previous year’s result

Schools below target pass percent of 80% 3. Category C Schools: on attaining minimum 20% improvement over previous year’s result 4. Category D Schools: on attaining minimum 15% improvement over previous year’s result 5. Category E Schools: on attaining minimum 10% improvement over previous year’s result

Incentive structure linked to the school categories is shown in Table 68 for the faculty in one Higher Secondary School. Table 69: Incentive Structure for Higher Secondary School Faculty No. Average Basic

Monthly Salary Category A and B

Category C Category D Category E

Principal 1 25000 12000 9000 7000 5000Lecturer 1 20000 10000 7000 5000 3000Asst. teacher 1 15000 8000 6000 4000 2000




Faculty No. Average Basic Monthly Salary

Category A and B

Category C Category D Category E

Varisht Adhyapak 3 6750 5000 3500 2500 1500Sahayak Adhyapak 2 4000 5000 3500 2500 1500SSGrade 1 4 4500 5000 3500 2500 1500SSGrade 3 1 2500 5000 3500 2500 1500 In order to arrive at financial implications of this intervention, it has been assumed that all HS and HSS in Category A and B will meet the requirement for them to be eligible for incentive. The remaining schools in HS and HSS which have a current pass percent below the target are assumed to improve their result by 20% and fall under Category C. The financial requirements arrived at after taking the above assumptions gives the maximum expenditure requirement in case all schools get incentives and, schools with pass percent below target set (65% for HS and 80% for HSS) achieve 20% improvement in result. However, this is not likely to be the case. Hence, in the final projection only 60% of the financial requirement projection made each year has been included.




B Annexure B: Summary of past comments and suggestions • Key comments and suggestions received from GoMP (departments of Finance/ Planning/ TDD) are tabulated

below along with remarks on how they have been addressed. Comments noted from GoMP in Nov 2008 Remarks

1. Reasons for failure of training experiments in 1990s should be explored e.g. what were the results from Shikshak Samakhya program?

Has been incorporated in Appendix D of June 2009 report

2. Organizational structure related Issues to be highlighted in report

This has been addressed in Section 4 of June 2009 report

3. Rajasthan and U.P. to be included in Inter State comparison of expenditure on education

Rajasthan has been included in June 2009 report; but data for U.P. not readily available for the corresponding year and hence could not be included

4. Scheme strengthening and process re- engineering possibilities to be highlighted

This has been addressed in section 6.2.1 of June 2009 report

5. Suggestions on making Jan Shikshaks more effective through ensuring their visits to schools to be incorporated

School Improvement Plan (SIP) implemented in MP under SSA ensures follow-up on supervision as well as cross-checking on quality of school visit at each level. This Plan has been described in Section 6.2.3 of June 2009 report. We have proposed enhancement of TA for Jan Shikshaks to incentivise them to make school visits as one of interventions under MTEF (June 2009 report)

6. Terminology of Primary, Upper Primary and High Schools to be aligned to state level terminologies

Addressed in June 2009 report

7. Non Plan Revenue Expenditure (NPRE) norms of Finance Commission should be looked at and commented upon

NPRE when deducted from current revenue of the state determines the state’s balance from current revenues (BCR). One of the norms which need to be observed in deciding the number of new schemes affordable by states is that BCR should be non-negative. This issue is more with regard to overall finances of the state & hence has been addressed in our MTFF June 2009 report

8. Service Level Agreements to be included Included in Section 8 of June 2009 report

Comments noted from GoMP in April 2008 Remarks

1. For Elementary level, it was opined that the state does not have great flexibility in undertaking planning of expenditure as most of the money is routed through SSA as per national level norms.

The additional interventions proposed are under the state plan. However, if there can be funding possible from central schemes, it should be tapped first. The expenditure framework for primary level should be aligned to SSA numbers with a state level expenditure




Comments noted from GoMP in April 2008 Remarks framework being prepared for the secondary level. The June 2009 report has accordingly taken the trend expenditure levels for primary level.

2. General acceptance on proposed girl specific intervention was expressed

3. Follow up deliberations with DPI on interventions proposed for High School

Two suggested interventions have been included in the revised submission upon discussion with DPI that has been approved by the Hon’ble Minister for implementation

4. In light of RMSA, MTEF could be used as a base for estimating financial requirement of state for secondary education

Inputs have been provided to team involved in preparing a Perspective Framework Plan for Expanded Secondary Education (2009-2017). Expenditure section in the above report has been taken from MTEF report.




FOR LIMITED USE ONLY The primary purpose of this MTEF Booklet and its contents is to present the Medium Term Expenditure Framework Scenarios for School Education Department in Madhya Pradesh prepared under the Strengthening Performance Management in Government Programme to Government of Madhya Pradesh and Department for International Development, United Kingdom. The contents of this booklet are based on the facts, assumptions and representations stated herein. Our assessment and opinions are based on the facts and circumstances provided/collected during our meetings with the officials of Government of MP, DFID and research from sources in public domain held to be reliable. If any of these facts, assumptions or representations is not entirely complete or accurate, the conclusions drawn therein could undergo material change and the incompleteness or inaccuracy could cause us to change our opinions. The assertions and conclusions are based on the information available at the time of writing this report and PwC will not be responsible to rework any such assertion or conclusion if new or updated information is made available. PwC disclaims all liability to any third party who may place reliance on this report and therefore does not assume responsibility for any loss or damage suffered by any such third party in reliance thereon. This booklet is provided on the basis that it is for the use of DFID and Government of MP only and that it will not be copied or disclosed to any third party or otherwise quoted or referred to, in whole or in part, without PwC’s prior written consent. Furthermore, PwC will not be bound to discuss, explain or reply to queries raised by any agency other than the intended recipients of this report. ©2010 PricewaterhouseCoopers Private Limited. All rights reserved. 'PricewaterhouseCoopers' refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers Private Limited, India, or, as the context requires, other member firms of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited, each of which is a separate and independent legal entity.

pwc.com

Date post:	09-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times