Date post: | 02-Mar-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | vikas-kumar |
View: | 84 times |
Download: | 10 times |
REPORT AND PROCEEDING OF WORKSHOP STATE LEVEL CONSULTATION WORKSHOP ON NATIONAL RURAL LIVELIHOOD MISSION (NRLM)
26-27 AUGUST 2011
ORGANISED BY
JHARKHAND STATE LIVELIHOOD PROMOTION SOCIETY, RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF JHARKHAND
1
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
TABLE OF CONTENT
S.No. Content Page No.
1. Inaugural Session 2
2. Group Work 2-13
3. Presentation
3.1 Presentation on POTENTIAL CONVERGENCE OPPORTUNITY IN NRLM 4-7
3.2 Presentation on POTENTIAL ROLE OF NGOS, CIVIL SOCIETY IN NRLM 8-10
3.3 Presentation on POTENTIAL ROLE OF PRIVATE SECTOR IN NRLM 11-13
4. Deliberation by Mr. T. Vijay Kumar on inception of NRLM 14-17
5. Question Answer Session 17-19
6. Annexure:
6.1 List of Participant 20
6.2 Acronyms 21
2
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
The Programme started with welcome note of Mr. S.N. Pandya, SPM, Jharkhand State
Livelihood Promotion Society. Later a bouquet was presented to Mr. Debasish Gupta,
Development Commissioner, Mr. R.S. Poddar, Principal Secretary Rural Development
Department and Mr. Vishnu Kumar, Secretary Labour and Welfare Department.
INAUGURAL SESSION
Dignitaries like Mr. Debasis Gupta, Development commissioner, Principal Secretary, RDD,
Mr. Vishnu Kumar, Secretary, Labour and welfare Govt of Jharkhand have contributed in the
inaugural session. Their contribution in the workshop is given in brief as follows:
Mr. Poddar brought to attention of the house the importance of conducting workshop in order
to meet deadline of submitting SPIP (State project implementation plan) by Sept 30, 2011. He
introduced the concept of National Rural
Livelihood Mission (NRLM) and explained
the rich background Jharkhand state, though
Jharkhand is suffering from poverty the
present times. He reiterated that JSLPS, a
functional society under RDD will be the
nodal agency to implement NRLM. Mr.
Poddar explained how grass root level
institutions will be involved in NRLM and
what would be their role in preparation of
SPIP.
Describing about the journey of poverty alleviation programmes in India, Mr Poddar said that
IRDP was launched and completed its 15 years of project period. Later, IRDP was replaced by
SGSY under which a community institution (SHG) formed and it was linked with banks. Now,
NRLM is going to be launched. The basic feature of NRLM is to enable community institution
to carry on with livelihood activity on their own and govt role should be minimal.
Mr. Bishnu Kumar said about the offers of 22 ITIs in Jharkhand to promote skill to the rural
poor. He informed the house that National Council for Vocational Training has recognised 125
industrial centres.
Mr. Debashis Kumar Gupta shared with the house his dismal past experiences, when poverty
alleviation program confined to just asset distribution.
GROUP EXERCISE SESSION
This session started with brief introduction about the workshop by Mr. Pandya. He threw light
on the reasons of conducting the workshop. Describing the importance of workshop, he said
that JSLPS, being a nodal agency for implementation of NRLM in the state has the
responsibility to prepare quality SPIP and hence this workshop is a road in the making of SPIP.
And for this purpose, two competent consultants have been working rigorously for the last two
months for JSLPS.
3
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
Further about group exercise, he reiterated that this session is purely technical session. Groups
will be formed for the discussion
1. Role of NGO, how we want to integrate, role for better implementation,
2. What would be the convergence,
3. Role of private sector, what exact role for skill training and skill development.
Subsequently Mr. Pandeya Invited
Mr. Manish Dubey, consultant JSLPS for
SPIP to acknowledge the house about
group exercise
Mr. Manish Dubey greeted house to join
the workshop and explain as to why their
role is important in making SPIP. He
reiterated that shaping of programme is
rolling process and similarly rural
livelihood promotion is also taking its
shape right from IRDP then SGSY to NRLM in terms of the perspective and view replaces in
the issue on rural livelihood e.g how the role of implementers, how the programme has
changed, What would be whole range of stakeholders (Civil society, Pvt. Sector, various Govt
support institution like financial institution and line department) and their potential role, How
the partnership should be happen, anticipate the challenges, how to address the entire
programme.
He throws a big question to the house that how we can together mobilize and strengthen the
institution of the poor to make sure that the range the livelihood actually reach to the poor, who
ensure poor better access to the services, to entitlement, to right & so on and to strengthen
policy and governance in terms of livelihood concern, programme management of NRLM.
What are the enable arrangement, structure, instrument and people will live for this to happen.
How we will planning for partnership work. How it will actually be operationalize.
Moreover, he briefed about the formation
groups, for exercise and told that three
groups will be formed to discuss on three
different topics as follows:
1. Potential role of NGOs, Civil society in NRLM
2. Potential convergence opportunity in NRLM;
3. Potential role of private sector in NRLM;
Before starting group exercise, a brief
presentation to the house on NRLM
guidelines & implementation framework
given by Mr. Manish Dubey. After this
presentation, Mr. Dubey briefed the house about the topic on which groups will have to work
out.
4
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
PRESENTATION ON POTENTIAL CONVERGENCE OPPORTUNITY IN NRLM
5
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
6
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
7
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
8
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
PRESENTATION ON POTENTIAL ROLE OF NGOS, CIVIL SOCIETY IN NRLM
9
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
10
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
11
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
PRESENTATION ON POTENTIAL ROLE OF PRIVATE SECTOR IN NRLM
12
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
13
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
Exercise of group 3 is presented by Mr. Deepak Upadhyay
Addition/queries
1. If beneficiary gets skill training and is positioned in a far flung place, 50 km away from the
village. Will it be worthwhile, when hostel in the same city can be provided at least during
the probation period, so that they can save money which can be spent on the journey
between village and town.
2. Participant from DBtech assured that L & T provides accommodation also.
Mr. T Vijay Kumar answered that this is a valid point. The employers should provide the
accommodation facilities. State Livelihood Mission with a dedicated setup can start facilitation
centres, and the remuneration for this can be part of their own salary structure. He indicated at
the kind of facilitation centres D Btech & L & FS and have provided, and that this should be
responsibility of SLM and private sector.
Mr. Pandya was facilitating the programme and summed up the gist of all the three
presentations. Mr. Pandya called the house for their queries, confusions, suggestions and
comments regarding operational issues, implementation framework, and policy to be formed at
state level.
Mr. Pandya pointed at the
commendable contribution of Mr.
T.Vijay Kumar as a key planner of
NRLM & extended his gratitude for
his commitment towards the
programme, as he could make his
presence in the programme a very
short notice.
Mr. Pandeya invited P Secretary
RDD Mr. R.S Poddar, J.S MORD
Mr. T. Vijay Kumar and special
secretary RDD Mr. Paritosh
Upadhyay to be with members on the dais and called on the participants to clear their doubts
and queries in the open session and expressed his confidence that this session would definitely
give the whole house a very good insight of the programme.
14
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
DELIBERATION OF MR. T. VIJAY KUMAR ON INCEPTION OF NRLM
Mr T. Vijay Kumar described about how this programme came into inception and how it
differed from the earlier programmes. He said that IRDP’s focus was on asset and over the
years, different initiatives, many of them from NGOs have been taken. Several interventions
came from the report which was submitted to the SAARC summit in Dhaka in 1993. Where the
first independence of South Asia commission of poverty eradication consisting of eminent
experts from South Asian Countries took close to two years 91-92 to look at large scale poverty
eradication initiatives in countries like India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Maldives,
Nepal, Bhutan. They looked for those initiatives of poverty eradication which had worked and
those which had failed. The
challenge before the
commission was that most of
the world had eradicated
poverty. Many countries
which had become
independent when India had
come out of the colonial rule,
experienced tremendous
economic growth and also
were able to abolished
poverty.
The world largest numbers of poor are in South Asia, and naturally in South Asia, India. So the
attempt of this commission was to understand why poverty is endemic and why poverty has not
been eradicated in these areas, compared to the similar countries which attained independence
at same time, e.g. China, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Philippines. India was represented by Mr.
Hashim & Mr. Venugopal was secretary to PM at that time. They said what we should have a
model, unique to south Asia. South Asia also has its strengths, be it institution of the family,
being community, the village community so looking into this they saw mostly failure. The
interventions, in which poor had a very active role right from beginning, were successful.
There didn’t come at the end of all the planning method done for them. That’s why the
paradigm shift from seeing poor as passive object, to basically subject people who are thinking,
people who have capabilities. So, they said those programme which had taken this into account
and there was active role for the poor members in all stages of the programme, those
programme was successful. The second thing they said, poor suffers from multiple deprivations
so, economic poverty eradication will not do so there are multiple deprivations. Poor face many
obstacles even though they have tremendous capabilities. So, what is that secret, what is that
mechanism, which has enabled the poor to come out from poverty in spite of so many
obstacles. And that they said to when you, when institution of the poor. When people were
organised and when they build their own institutions and here we must be clear the meaning
institution of the poor as compared to institution for the poor, so institution for the poor will
include NGOs Govt, Bank etc. They still external to the poor. The institutions of the poor will
include SHGs, Farmer group, Labour association. These groups are formed by the poor
themselves, and hence there is sense of ownership in decision making. So, the institution of the
15
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
poor are typical building blocks for any poverty eradication programme that was the very
important lesson, very important finding and they found wherever poor were encouraged,
poverty eradication was possible. They also said that these are not, they also look at to correct
the institution of the poor so generic institutions which are based on affinity, based on bonding.
These are the worth which is capable of being with sovereignty of deprivation. They also said
that this has not happened automatically so there is need to induce this. And that is the role of
institution for the poor. A sensitive
support system for the poor that is
provided by local govt, NGO,
Govt. Now, based on the
recommendation of commission,
UNDP funded a pilot in each of
the SACs. So the pilot in India was
implemented in AP from 95 to
2000. Similarly there is pilot in
Pakistan and Sri Lanka.
Incidentally it may come as
surprise that in Independence
south Asia commission recommendations were based on very successful programme that was
run in Pakistan by a very eminent person who was from the Civil Service of Pakistan govt, who
resigned and joined AGA Khan rural support programme Mr. Shoyeb Sultan Khan. So the Pilot
in AP was most the successful one among pilots in South Asia. And then the idea of the
SAARC secretariat at the time was that similar programme should be run in various states and
some more that didn’t happen. But within AP the lesson learnt for UNDP pilot from 95-2000,
was scaled out. The state govt itself took a loan from World Bank and this was scaled up in two
phases which ran from 2000 and it will be over in 2011. So for about 11 years of this
programme based on success of the first UNDP pilot was scaled up in our state. I have
privilege to be associated with the Andhra Pradesh govt for about 10 years right from the
beginning when I came here at New Delhi. Meanwhile the planning commission & MORD
looked at what was the large scale initiative throughout the country and therefore how to
restructure SGSY programme and so as a result of this based on Kudubashree, SERP based on
Tamilnadu experience, Pradan, various NGOs, and Myrada etc. Idea was how to do we scale
up without losing of quality and that is how NRLM was formed based on assessing what
happened within the country and plugging the missing areas in various programme.
Therefore the programme has been conceived based on practical appreciation of situation on
ground it’s not theatrical. There are some generic principles common to and across the country
but exact shape which naturally which NRLM will take in any state naturally depend upon
local circumstances, local geography and local history. There are some generic principle those
are believe in the capabilities of poor, organising of the poor, building institution of the poor,
nurturing them and so institution is poor has independent investment on its own and then
having a sensitive support structure. So whenever you have all these three then it’s possible to
work with the NRLM and each state should learn what are the best practices within the state is
and Jharkhand itself has many best practices. So, my request to the SPIP team, state govt which
is at planning phase is all to take stocks of which are the best practices within the state of
16
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
Jharkhand. And I have very interest to the last presentation I saw the lots of corporate have
expressed interest to do a bull’s tick model and that is something which I have not heard in
other states. When I saw the agenda of the govt body come out of the corporate partnership but
we look surprise and I am very impressed the group recommended that we would we will to
take up certain block, certain geography in bull stick model. So I think we should take stock of
whatever work has Jharkhand but not quick results there have been in operation for reason time
for us to learn lessons. So I think the first thing to recommend to SPIP team is to take stock of
this so whether best practice of institution building, livelihood promotion, financial inclusion,
around social issues. Poverty is not based on income power; go around health, around issues of
trafficking. So this state’s of yours best practices and how the lesson to be learnt from that. We
also do that failure, what is not work why it is not work. So we should be very honest we
should do infrastructure. It’s not the question of blaming but at least we should not repeat
mistakes. So that gives us, then we should look at what are happened outside of state or can we
learn from there. So we should have home grown model which is built on your strength. Which
is based on your unique opportunities, so this is I thought is the framework for the SPIP
planning for you to do a planning and one very serious problem I do see in Jharkhand is about
Financial Inclusion. The performance is very poor, I really don’t know even though Mr.
Pandeya has been saying that I have all answers but this something which bits me. So, we
really have to figure out what is the solution for financial inclusion but at affordable cost. So, I
also need to worry when people say that we should have MFIs. So what is the affordability to
the poor? For this we need private sector. MFI unfortunately have been looking at whatever
affordable potentials. So, poor their own viability should be there. So this again we have to
look at various alternatives. In fact one of the states realises that PACS is working well. So, I
advice to the state why can’t you do financial intermediaries through your PACS. States like
Chhattisgarh where PACS are doing wonderful work around procurement for Paddy & etc.
My request to GM NABARD, please you should constitute today team which looks at financial
input it is matter which is you know being discussed at all level actually in Delhi we have so
many meetings where the moment we talk about Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Orissa and then
the issue of Financial Inclusion. If you see the history of Jharkhand, many tribal worlds suffer
exploitation by the middleman. Where the poor there, Mahajan are there. Government will not
be there, Mahajan is there. So, Financial Inclusion we need to have a unique solution. One of
the solutions which Jharkhand should look at the Karnataka Govt experience with NABFINS
that Mr. Al. Fernandez is also closely involved with work done in Jharkhand that something
you should have seen. Third piloting with commercial banks in Bihar to basically address the
problem faced by Branch Manager. Because at corporate level CMDs & all they says yes yes
we look for the poor but finally BM is the person who decides he the chairman for me. Unless
he signs cheque, credit will not be given to the beneficiary. There are some experiences in
Jharkhand, where NGOs have worked with branch managers. For financial inclusion, I would
request all of you apply your mind; this is very serious bottleneck so far as NRLM is concern.
We know the fact that poverty can be defeated. It is shame that poverty is still there.
One of the important learning from AP. Turning point in NRLM will be also in Jharkhand
when you develop social capital among the poor. So the women come out of poverty, became
17
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
the trainer, we have this is concept of Community Resource person. These pools of resource
persons really change the picture. We realise that when you build SHG & SHG federation,
federations you know this worked out institution of the poor but when you transform them into
Institution support the poor then your job is that. NRLM success depends upon how well you
nurture the social capital of the poor and it is highly doable. It is highly doable, 8 years ago we
started requesting women who had come out with poverty to go to neighbouring village,
neighbouring district and to do the training them and they responded very well and result was
outstanding. In Bihar, the programme started in 2005-06, 200 women came from AP these
were SHG members who had came out from poverty, who had been members of SHG for more
than 10 years that will be substantial diversified livelihoods and still they are willing to go to
other state that to train people. 200 women come to Bihar and 40-50 villages covered village by
them. They spent month in each village and they took 4 to 5 rounds in a year. They have to for
about 2.5 years and turning point in Bihar Jeevika is when the first set of hosts in Bihar were
able to produce their own CRP. So, CRP is not women who’s very articulate or who speaks
well but is a person whose life has changed whose life has been transformed. And so she
speaks from her experience. So its experience is training and that is the solution for Jharkhand.
So to cover the whole state we don’t have to multiply their office, we do this own way initially
in blocks and human resource from this block they once move this programme to neighbouring
block, districts, and then human resource there takes into other places. Sometimes people
thinking that you know we are training when we talk about poverty eradication, but it is
possible that we have to change, change of our thinking and we have to differently and it’s also
not costly but it is very cost effective model. So the CRP that means NRLM should be driven
by the poor. Apply all element of strategies in every phase of implementation rather applying it
into first stage of introduction and then phase of conclusion whatever strategy whatever
implementation we want to do the lens that you should adopt the lens you will adopt judge
whether strategy make sense or not is what is the role of institution of the poor, what is the role
of CRPs what is the role of community professional. Each and every element of the strategy
would be the might view of salt test. One you do this the result will automatically come. So,
NRLM would require believing in the capability of poor and believing in each of operational
strategy.
Question answer session
It has become fashion to initiate a programme with the name of MISSION like NRHM, NHM
etc but parent department never gives full autonomy of its operation. Still project mission unit
is dependent to the parent organisation for decision making. Hence system of operation is not
improved. So, under NRLM, state management unit will have autonomy to work independently?
Mr. T. Vijay Kumar replied that we have said, state govt should develop annual action plan
based on their condition. Action plan by interface by the ministry, by the state govt, by the
mission. The Annual Action Plan is also in the context of 7 year poverty eradication plan, so
therefore the flexibility is there. But, I know unless that spelt very carefully into the byelaws
for the society and govt also keep say the flexibility of operation. So, I couldn’t agree with you
more. This is only programme where entire focus is building demand side. We are saying that
18
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
we do have any target for the development of like road, infrastructure etc. For the success of
mission how many self reliant, self dependent institution of a poor have been created. We
believe that once you have built strong institution of people, they will have known how to
remove the poverty. They understand better how to remove the poverty. The objective here to
build good institution of the poor, institution managed by people, financially self reliant. This is
investment for demand side. The basic work under NRLM is to involve people.
SHG movement is very poor. NABARD can participate to improve the scenario, only if
principal secretary Mr. Poddar initiate in this issue.
Mr. Poddar replied that the problem of FI is very much centre of agenda. UIDAI Adhar, 30
members have enrolled. Whosoever is registered job card in NAREGA will have bank a/c. We
have allocated one block one bank in different areas to ensure ADHAR number to open bank
a/c. PACS have presence in each and every village/panchayat. We have allowed regenerating
PACS in every panchayat/village. This LAMPS and PACS can do banking operation.
Cooperative deptt has a plan under ITDP to enable each of the LAMPS & PACS banking
operation. Those institutions which are very mature very much in place and they have lot of
potential what is missing link are there. We can probability can take care of these institution.
Suggestion by Mr. T Vijay that if PRADAN or NGO can map of good SHG. We can work
under NRLM treat this location as intensive area by capitalising federations from both end,
work can be started at demand and supply both.
Mr. Poddar added that under NRLM, SPIP should also envisage convergence with similar
programmes implemented by different programme like agriculture department, welfare deptt.
Our SPIP will take of this aspect. Everybody in isolation will not work.
T Vijay reiterated that in second phase JTDP is scaling in 500 villages. Earlier they were
working in 300 villages. Rather scale up to 500 villages, JTDP has to scale up the programme
to 200 villages and take care of 300 villages for further support mean supply side, if capacity
building aspect took place.
Narendranath from PRADAN shared experience regarding bank linkage in Hazaribag & told
NABARD will be an effective body in mobilising bankers and their support for financial
linkage.
Mr Deepak Upadhyay raised and issue on Financial Inclusion and said that just opening of
bank a/c is should not be considered as financial inclusion. This is the very sector, where NGO
has great opportunity. Unless and until income level of beneficiary increased and they go for
re-banking, it should not be treated as FI. He again asked a condition of those areas which is
not taken intensive block in first phase and SGSY will be terminated by 31 Dec 2011.
Mr. T Vijay Kumar replied that for non-intensive, flow of fund will not stop. But budget given
to the state government the fund for non intensive will cut down but it will not be zero.
Discussing in this issue he reiterated that wherever good work has been done with SHG might
have work like intensive block. But this will do in partnership with corporate. So, identify
block, cluster etc and also treat them as intensive.
19
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
Mr. Paritosh Upadhyay, special secretary RDD said regarding the nodal agency in state for the
preparation of SPIP that we have submitted proposal to nominate existing JSLPS as nodal
society for SPIP preparation as initial work of NRLM. It is clear from Law department but
from finance deptt, has reservation that how can society formed for one project can be
applicable for multiple projects, if it is formed for the purpose to run one project. They again
raised the issue of funding after NRLM.
Replying on the issue of state nodal agency Mr. T. Vijay Kumar said if we looked at other
state Tamilnadu women development corporation, In Bihar Jeevika (BRLP) was setup to
implementing Jeevika has been nominated by government as nodal agency. It’s not necessary
to start new society. If state can start new society, please mend the bye-laws in such way that
the programme can be implemented across state.
Mr. Pandya concluded the session with a belief that this not end but this is starting of sharing
innovative and workable views.
Finally Mr. Kailashpati Jha gave vote of thanks to Debasish Gupta, Mr. Vishnu Kr Secretary
labour deptt, Mr. Poddar, Principal secretary Mr Paritosh Upadhyay and delegates from various
institution, NGOs and corporate.
20
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
Appendix List of Participants NRLM Workshop
Sl
No
Name of the Participant Designation Organization Phone E-mail
Administration & Government
1 Mr. T. Vijay Kumar Joint Secretary MORD Government of India
2 Mr. Debasis Gupta Development Comissioner Government of Jharkhand 0651-2491070
3 Mr. R S Poddar Secretary Department of Rural Development,GoJ 9431707250
4
Shri Vishnu Kumar Principal Secretary
Department of Labour ,Employment
and Training 0651-2490514 [email protected]
5 Mr. Paritosh Upadhaya Program Director SRLM,GoJ 9431381831 [email protected]
6 Mr. B. Nijalingappa CEO SLNA,GoJ 9204857260
7 Mr. Jata Shankar Choudhury Director SAMETI 9431115706 [email protected]
NNMU (NRLM)
8 Mr. Kamalesh Prasad National Manager National Project Management Unit 9810899893 [email protected]
Banking
9 Mr. Vinay Kumar Vutukuru Consultant World Bank 9934368224 [email protected]
10 Mr. Jiji Mammen Genral Manager NABARD 9431708964 [email protected]
11 Mr. B K Das AGM NABARD 7250961670 [email protected]
12 Mr. S K Singh Coordinator,SLBC Allahabad Bank 9470140089 [email protected]
13 Mr. Sanjay Akhouri Zonal Manager State Bank of India 9431706703 [email protected]
14 Tarlochan Singh Zonal Manager Bank of India 9431115417 [email protected] n
15 Shalabh Kr. Shrivastava Chief Manager PNB 7209015729 [email protected]
Academics & Research
15 Dr. Harishwar Dayal Regional Coordinator Institute of Human Development 9835540564 [email protected]
16 Dr. Shivendra Kumar Head HARP 9955360454 [email protected]
17 Prof. A.K Jaiswal Principle Scientist IINRG( formely ILRI) 9431593545 [email protected]/[email protected]
18 Mr. Mintoo Job Professor Birsa Agricultural University 9431374196 [email protected]
CSR & Industry
19 Dr. O P Jha Eecutive Director Zindal Steel & Power 0651 2242362 [email protected]
20 Mr.Biren Bhuta Chief (Corporate
Sustainability Services)
Tata Steel 9234531276 [email protected]
21 Ms. Jaya Patel Head(CSR) Tata Power Ltd [email protected]
22 Mr. Ravindra Singh Executive Director Bokaro Steel Plant Non Government Organization
23 Mr. Mahesh Venketesh KGVK 9279448630 [email protected]
24 Siva Kumar Group Head - Agri & IT Businesses,ITC 91 40 2780 0875 [email protected]
25 Mr. Sanjay Basu Mullick Secretary ICFG 9431103041 [email protected]
26 Bipin Bihari Singh Zonal Programme Manager GVT 0651-2230904 [email protected]
27 Mr. S.A.Ahmed President KSRA 651-2351520 [email protected]
28 Mr. Satish Girija Secretary NBJK 6546-263332 [email protected]/ [email protected]
29 Mr. Arvind Secretary Badlao Foundation 9334346801 [email protected]
30 Mr. Manish Kumar Executive Director Dynamics Tarang 0651-2547480 [email protected]
Narendra Nath PRADAN 9868882025 Non-farm Skill Development
31
Dr. B.V. Somasekhar Fashion Institute, OCFIT 040-32995455/ 325520000, 9701299933 40-66772009 [email protected]
32 Mr. Sebastian Fernandis Regional Coordinator Cap Foundation 9337475699 [email protected]
33 R.Anwer State Coordinator BOSCO(DBTI) 9811122604 [email protected]
34 Mr. Vikash Kumar Regional Head IL& FS Cluster Development Initative
Ltd.
9801555990 [email protected]
35 Col.N.B. Saxena(RETD.) Regional Training Manager Lersen & Tuubro Limited 9810646996 [email protected] /
36 G. Singh
Peoples' Enterprise & Producer Networks
36 Mr. Nilesh K. Singh Program Coordinator RRA ( Watershed network) 6512401974 [email protected]
37 Ms. Bala Devi CEO VB.Net( State wide Value Chain
network)
9431385251 [email protected]
38 Mr. Vartika Jaini Executive Director Collectives for Integrated Livelihood
Initiative
9910866637 [email protected]
Other
39 Mr.Abhijit Chanda Programme Officer The Centre for Development and
population activities
0651 2243296 [email protected]
40 Mr.Kallol Saha Consultant NRLM 9471710631 [email protected]
41 Mr.Manish Dubey NRLM Consultant NRLM 9810511019 [email protected]
JSLPS team
42 S.N. Pandya State Project Manager UNDP/JSLPS 9431102803
43 Mr. K.P. Jha M & E expert UNDP/JSLPS 9471171401
44 Mr. Debasis Mohapatra Livelihood Specialist UNDP/JSLPS 9431102656
45 Mr. Navin Gupta State Finance Associate UNDP/JSLPS 9470161360
46 Mr. Arif M. Akhtar District Coordinator, Palamu JSLPS 9471761237
47 Mr. Kamal Jaiswal Block Coordinator, Satbarwa JSLPS 8986715542
48 Mr. Debashis Chaki Block Coordinator,
Bishrampur
JSLPS 9304969406
49 Ms. Shanti Mardi District Coordinator, Ranchi JSLPS 9934161626
50 Mr. Khalid Hussain Block Coordinator, Anagara JSLPS 9431356408
51 Mr. DD Singh Block Coordinator, Namkom JSLPS 9431750399
52 Mr. Praveen Singh District Coordinator, HB JSLPS 9431552327
53 Mr. H. N. Mishra Block Coordinator, Padma JSLPS
54 Mr. Ajit Singh District Coordinator, Pakur JSLPS 9471142332
55 Mr. Birbal Thakur Block Coordinator, Pakuria JSLPS
56 Mr. Prakash Kumar Block Coordinator JSLPS
57 Mr. Sanjay Kumar Block Coordinator JSLPS
58 Mr. Xavier Ekka Block Coordinator JSLPS
59 Ms. Ekta Kumari EACO JSLPS 8986641070
21
JSLPS/Arif Document/Report/Workshop NRLM
Acronyms
RDD – Rural Development Department
NRLM – National Rural Livelihood Mission
CRP – Community Resource Person
SPIP – State Project Implementation Programme,
SHG – Self Help Group
AP- Andhra Pradesh
BRLP – Bihar Rural Livelihood Programme
GM – General Manager
NABARD – National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development
PACS – Primary Agriculture Credit Society
SLM – State Livelihood Mission
NGO – Nan Government Organisation,
SERP – Society for elimination of Rural Poverty,
SGSY – Swarn Jayanti Swarozgar Yojna,
MORD – Ministry of Rural Development,
SAARC – South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation,
IRDP – Integrated Rural Development Programme,
JTDP – Jharkhand Tribal Development Programme,
LAMPS – Large Area Multipurpose Society,
UAIDAI – Unique Identification Authority of India,
JSLPS – Jharkhand State Livelihood Promotion Society,
PM – Prime Minister
SPM – State project Manager