The National Social Assistance Programme (NSAP), sponsored by the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD), Government of India, came into effect from August 15, 1995, with the purpose of providing social assistance to the rural poor in India. It aims at improving the quality of life of the rural poor, ensuring equality and effective peoples’ participation in the process. The programme extends 100% central assistance to the States and Union Territories to provide the benefits under it in accordance with the norms, guidelines and conditions laid down by the Central Government. The NSAP introduces a national policy for social security assistance to the poor families in the case of old age, death of primary breadwinner and maternity. It provides an opportunity for linking the social assistance package to schemes for poverty alleviation and provision of basic needs. The programme is being implemented through a synergistic partnership with State Governments and under the direct supervision of District Rural Development Agencies (DRDAs) in close collaboration with the various Panchayat Raj institutions. It has three components, namely:

1. National Old Age Pension Scheme (NOAPS)
2. National Family Benefit Scheme (NFBS) and
3. National Maternity Benefit Scheme (NMBS)

This report pertains to the study carried out for evaluating the National Social Assistance Programme to assess the effectiveness in its implementation. Primary data required for the study has been collected from sample beneficiaries and officials engaged in the implementation of the scheme at various levels. Records maintained and reports available were used as sources of secondary data. Discussions involving different functionaries in the field were organised to gather qualitative data on the implementation and impact of the programme.

This report has been divided into five chapters, of which the first one covers the Objective and Scope of the study and the Methodology adopted for the conduct of the study. The second chapter covers the salient features of the NSAP and its performance in various States/UTs. The next two chapters, third and fourth, narrate the survey findings, giving details on the general profile of the participating beneficiaries and various aspects of programme implementation. The last chapter gives the conclusions of the study and recommendations for further improvement in implementation of the programme. The major findings of the study are summarised below:

The States/UTs has been ranked according to their performance in the implementation of the NSAP schemes. This ranking has been done based on criteria like coverage of the scheme, utilisation of the funds, economic backwardness of recipients, timeliness of release of benefits, expenditure incurred for the recipients in getting the benefits, impact of the NSAP schemes in social development, follow up action by concerned officials on complaints from beneficiaries etc. Accordingly Andhra Pradesh is ranked first followed by Karnataka and Nagaland. The ranking is provided in Chapter 2, pages 15 to 17. The first ten States/UTs under this ranking are listed below.

Details regarding the implementation of the programme in each State are also presented separately in Chapter 2.

The objective of NOAPS is to extend financial assistance to old destitutes having little or no regular means of subsistence. In the overall assessment, the scheme has achieved its objective in providing social assistance to the destitute persons above the age of 65 years. Nevertheless, there are certain areas, which need further attention for improvement. The details of the scheme are included in chapters three (pages 93 to 101) and four (pages 119 to 139). Certain positive indicators along with areas for improvement are given in the following pages.

National Old Age Pension Scheme is found to be extremely beneficial to the old destitute. In general, it has succeeded in giving them a sense of security in life and has definitely improved their quality of life. The following are the positive indicators in implementation of the scheme:

• As evident from the study, a majority (81.22%) of the NOAPS beneficiaries did not face any difficulty in availing the benefit. 82.12% of the respondents got the approval from the authority concerned within 6 months and for a good percentage of them (49.76%), the time lag between application and sanction has been only to the extent of 2 months. Even a majority of the non-beneficiaries interviewed expressed the view that as far as they knew, the implementation of the scheme was generally good.

• Of the persons selected for the scheme, 81.16% received the benefit within 2 months of sanction, of which 31.54% received it within 15 days and another 30.35% within 15-30 days’ time.

• Nearly 96% of the beneficiaries feel that the NOAP Scheme definitely made a perceptible change in the quality of their life at least to some extent. About 59% of the non-beneficiary respondents also think in similar directions. More than 94% of the non-beneficiary samples consider that it would also give a feeling of security to those who come under the scheme.

• The Panchayat Raj system of Governance is one of the main sources, which has helped the needy to avail the benefits - both as source of information and in prompting them to apply for the benefit. It is evident from the study that the applications for availing NOAPS benefits are submitted in specified application formats and majority of them are submitted in the Panchayat Raj institutions. Also, in cases of delayed payment of pension, the beneficiaries approach Panchayat Raj institutions for help.

• It is found that 72.79% of the beneficiaries belong to the age group, 65-74 years. It is also noticed that only one person from a family is being provided with the benefit even if there are more than one eligible person in the family.

• Nearly sixty percent of the sample beneficiaries are found to be women. Socially backward communities like SC/ST/OBC constitute 83.79% of the sample population. Of these, the SC/ST beneficiaries form 54.25%.

• Majority (84.41%) of the beneficiaries are illiterate and 53.82% of their family members also belong to the same category.

• Most of the beneficiaries (68.20%) are not engaged in any income generating activity. About (26.61%) are found to be unable to work while 41.59% are currently not working.

• The beneficiary households are found to be earning income mainly from wages (38.42%) and agriculture (26.11%). The aggregate annual average household income amounts to Rs.5032. Of the total beneficiaries, 42.36% families earn income below Rs.5000 per annum. Only 2.23% of the families are found to earn annual income of more than Rs.20,000, indicating that care is taken to verify the BPL status of the beneficiaries before sanctioning the benefit.

• Among the sample beneficiaries, 80.38% are found to live in their own houses. However, of these, 79.27% possess Kucha houses and 8.54% live in houses with a plinth area of only 300 sq. ft. or less. Only 5.98% live in houses of plinth area of 500 sq.ft. or more. About 36.42% of the beneficiaries are found to possess landed property of their own.

• The number of beneficiaries possessing various home appliances is found to be low. A mere 3.90% of the sample beneficiaries own television sets, while 6.30% use ceiling fans. This indicates that most of the beneficiaries are from the lower social strata and are genuine candidates.

• Only a very low 0.91% of the beneficiaries own farm implements like tractors, power tillers and combined thresher/harvester.

• Cash is the most prevalent mode of payment of the benefit. In more than half of the cases (52.09%), the beneficiaries receive the pension in cash.

• A vast majority of the beneficiaries (83.39%) have reported that they do not incur any regular expenses in getting the benefit.

The scheme would serve its purpose even better if some improvements were made in certain areas like building awareness, reducing delays, selection of beneficiaries, etc. Some of the major points for consideration are given below:

• Less than 25% of the beneficiaries indicated their awareness about the selection procedures of the scheme. About 25% of the non-beneficiary interviewees reported that they did not apply for the benefit, as they are not aware of the scheme. Awareness programmes may be organised with the support of Panchayat Raj institutions.

• A significant 40% of the beneficiaries are reported to be not getting the pension on a regular basis. In the case of 18.83% of the sample beneficiaries, payment of pension is delayed for more than two months, and in case of delayed payment, most of them (78.31%) have to borrow from neighbours and relatives. This indicates the need for better planning in disbursement of the benefit.

• Difficulties in availing the benefit have been experienced by 18.77% of the sample beneficiaries. The major difficulty indicated is the non-co-operation of authorities.

• Though low in number, 2.53% of sample beneficiaries are reported to have paid more than Rs.20 as bribe for their pension.

• More than 23% of the respondents had to make four or more follow-up visits to meet the concerned authorities to speed up the process of sanction and disbursement of the benefit.

• Many beneficiaries (54.41%) are not aware of any follow-up action from the authorities concerned and 37.63% clearly indicated that there is no follow up to understand the problems in the scheme affecting the beneficiaries and the utilization of the amount and its impact on them. Only 8.29% of the beneficiaries reported that there is a follow-up.

• More than one year’s delay is noticed in 5.19% of cases in sanctioning the pension after submitting the application. Around 46.43% of non-beneficiaries revealed that their application for NOAP are pending before authorities.

• Certificate to prove destitute status of the beneficiary has not always been insisted upon (only 37.24% of the beneficiaries have reported that they had to produce the certificate).

• Of the sample beneficiaries, 11.39% are aged less than 65 years, the prescribed minimum age for eligibility to avail NOAP. This indicates loopholes in the system of selection of the beneficiaries.

• Families in the higher income group, though minimal in number have also benefited from the scheme. Nearly 10% of the beneficiaries possessing costly consumer durables like television, refrigerator, ceiling fan, etc., have crept into the BPL list. There is thus a need for further improvement in the verification system.

• Also, 11.29% of the beneficiaries own property of more than 3 acres of land. They have also been considered to be BPL and the benefits of the scheme provided to them. This needs verification and correction.

• Beneficiaries living in pucca houses (6.09%) and houses with a plinth area of 500 sq.ft. and above (5.98%) also need further verification before the sanctioning of the benefit.

The objective of the scheme is to extend financial assistance to pregnant women of households below the poverty line up to the first two live births. The implementation of the scheme is found to be benefiting the target group as envisaged. However, there is scope for improvement in certain aspects of operations of the scheme and extending its reach. The details of this scheme are presented in third chapter (pages 102 to 111) and fourth chapter (pages 140 to 153).

The scheme is benefiting the socially and educationally backward poor women. This is evident from the category-wise distribution of the beneficiaries, type of house they live in, the educational background and the income profile. The following indicate that the benefit of the scheme is reaching the targeted women.

• Majority of the beneficiaries expressed satisfaction in the procedures for availing the benefit. As high as 82.13% of the beneficiaries reported that they did not experience any difficulty in availing of the benefit. Also, 70.80% of the beneficiaries had to make only one or two visits to the concerned office to obtain the benefits.

• The most prevalent mode of payment of the benefit is cash. Also, 77.72% of the payments in cash are received in a public meeting or in the presence of others, indicating transparency in the process.

• The major sources of household income are wages earned and agriculture. While 68.54% of the beneficiary families earn income from wages, 41.14% have reported income from agriculture. The annual household income is less than Rs.20,000 in the case of 95.27% of the beneficiaries, indicating that the benefits of the scheme are reaching the needy.

• Most of the beneficiaries (97.80) are aged above 19 years, which is the minimum age to qualify for availing the benefit under the scheme. Of these, as much as 83.78% of the beneficiaries are young (aged between 19 to 29 years).

• Majority of the beneficiaries (85.64%) belong to the socially and educationally backward communities. Of these, the SC, ST and OBC categories account for 34.50%, 20.02% and 30.94% of the beneficiaries, respectively.

• More than half of the beneficiaries (54.42%) are illiterate. Similar is the pattern with their family members.

• As high as 90.15% of the beneficiaries are found to live in kucha or semi-pucca houses. The sizes of the houses they live in are also small (less than 200 sq.ft. for 76.33% of the beneficiaries).

The implementation of the scheme will be more effective if more care is taken in areas like selection of beneficiaries and timely disbursal of the benefits so that it can be better utilised for the benefits of the mother and the baby.

Some of the findings in this respect include:

• Majority of the beneficiaries were unaware of the verification and selection procedures. Similarly, analysis of the data elicited from the non-beneficiaries indicates that over 31% of them are unaware of the scheme.

• Instances of the mother being unaware of the sanction and receipt of the benefit were also reported from several places, indicating the possibility that the benefit does not get utilized properly.

• In certain cases there is extensive delay in sanction as well as disbursement of the benefits. The benefits, in such cases, are available only several months after the birth of the child. Delay in case of sanction of the benefit varies from six months to more than two years. Similar is the case with disbursement of the amount after sanction.

• Women aged under 19, though only a small percentage (2.20%), have also benefited from the scheme. The verification procedures employed to understand the genuineness of the applicants may need toning up.

• Women from above poverty level families have also benefited from the scheme. Above 45% of the beneficiary families are found to own landed property of more than one acre. While 13.41% of the beneficiary households use ceiling fans, 10.38% possess televisions.

• There is lack of clarity in the essentiality of various certificates for applying for the benefit. While in some places no certificates are required to be submitted, in other places the beneficiaries are required to submit various certificates to validate their application.

• Majority of the non-beneficiaries feel that their application was rejected due to the non-cooperation of the concerned officials and they would have benefited to a certain extent, if they had been provided with the assistance under the scheme.

• It is also noted that over 37% of the non-beneficiaries expressed doubt over the genuineness of the beneficiaries as well as the utilisation of the benefit.

In general the NFBS scheme is found to be achieving the objectives for which it is setup. There is no doubt regarding the amount of social assistance the scheme is providing but there are areas, which need improvement. The details pertaining to this scheme are given in chapters three (pages 112 to 118) and four (pages 154 to 168).

The scheme is definitely beneficial to the economically and socially backward as well as the weaker sections of the society. The following are some of the positive indicators of the scheme.

• Majority of the beneficiaries have expressed satisfaction over the benefit they have received. As many as 73.63% are happy to some extent and 24.06% are happy to a large extent. Only 2.31% beneficiaries have indicated that they are not at all happy with the benefits they have received. Even among non-beneficiaries, 95.04% feel that had they received the NFBS benefits, it would have definitely made a perceptible difference in quality of life at least to some extent.

• A majority (70.81%) of beneficiaries report that they did not face difficulties in availing the benefits. Around 28.51% beneficiaries received benefits within 2 weeks of sanction and 76.44% got it within 2 months of sanction.

• Most of the beneficiaries (87.76%) have reported that they have received benefits through cheque/money order/ demand draft. This reduces the incidence of the beneficiaries being cheated by paying lesser amounts as against the actual eligible amount.

• SC/ST/OBC categories constitute 85.12% of the beneficiaries and 87.03% of the sample beneficiaries are women. More than 20.27% of the beneficiaries are aged above 50 years. 16.65% of the beneficiaries are either unable to work or not currently working.

• 71.87% of the sample beneficiaries are totally illiterate while 42.84% of their family members also belong to the same category.

• The major sources of income are from wages and agriculture. The aggregate sample average annual household income works out to only Rs.7901. Only 2.1% of the families have indicated that the total earnings are above Rs.20,000/- per annum indicating that the BPL status is verified to a large extent while awarding benefits.

• Only 45.72% possess landed property. 76.82% of the beneficiaries live in kucha houses and only 6.44% own pucca houses and a majority of these houses are below 300 sq.ft. Only 6.25% live in houses above 500 sq.ft. plinth area.

• Only 5.40% beneficiaries own TV sets and 7.36% own ceiling fan. Vehicles / refrigerators, etc. are owned by less than 1% of the samples.

• Of the non-beneficiary samples, 53.10% say that the NSAP benefits are in general used for the purposes they are meant for and only 19.60% feel that the implementation of the programme is poor. The fact that the above two points are from the non-beneficiaries points that the scheme is in general performing well.

Care has to be taken for better and efficient implementation of the scheme especially in selection of beneficiaries, sanctioning of applications, and timely disbursement of benefits to the beneficiaries. Some of them are listed below.

• Only 3.43% of the total beneficiary samples feel that the scheme has in a way brought a sense of security to life. This figure is minimal.

• Only less than 4% sample beneficiaries have responded to the question related to sources of information about the scheme. 75.73% are not aware of the verification procedures and 68.62% are not aware of the selection procedures. 42.26% of the beneficiaries are not aware of the exact amount they are eligible for under NFBS. All these indicate that the general awareness of the scheme is on the lower side.

• Difficulties in obtaining death certificates (49.41%) and non-co-operation of concerned officials (48.52%) are the major stumbling blocks in availing NFBS benefits. Around 48.57% of the beneficiaries availed NFBS benefits without attaching a death certificate along with the application form.

• 2.77% of the beneficiaries had to make more than 5 visits to the concerned offices to get benefits released and 54.65% of the beneficiaries feel that the payment of benefit is delayed.

• Delay in sanction is found to be high and extreme cases of over 2 yeas after submission of applications are also noticed. The procedures need to be toned up since the bereaved families need immediate support.

• Instances of bribe for availing of the benefit have also been reported. 89.66% of the total sample beneficiaries had to pay bribes of varying amounts to avail the benefits.

• NFBS benefits have also been given to deaths (4.48%) that have taken place after attaining 65 + years of age.

• Land ownership among beneficiaries show that 12.64% of them own more than 3 acres of land. Still they claim to be BPL and their claim is questionable. Families with annual income over Rs.20, 000/- have also benefited from the scheme. House holds having costly consumer durables and farm machinery have also crept into the BPL list, which is again questionable.

• No uniformity is observed even within a state on application procedures like where the applications are available, where it is to be submitted, what are the certificates to be attached, etc.

• Even though payment of benefits by cash is minimal, a majority of such payments in certain states are not made in public meetings or in front of others.

• It is noted that 37.31% of the non-beneficiary samples feel that the recipients of NSAP benefits are not genuine.

The salient points, which have not been covered along with the earlier sections, are mentioned here.

• It is noticed that there has been steady growth in disbursement of NSAP benefits. This indicates that the programme is progressing well.

• In most of the districts, DLCs have been constituted for monitoring and evaluation of the operation of the scheme.
• The schemes have helped to accelerate the social development. This evident from the response from the beneficiaries also.

• By and large the norms for selection, processing, disbursing, etc., are adhered to by the various states.

• The survey has revealed that separate accounts for each scheme are not maintained in all the districts. This is necessary for better monitoring and evaluation of the operation of the scheme.

• Implementing agencies differ from state to state and even among different districts within the states for the same scheme. This can lead to non-uniform practices in the implementation of the scheme.