Summary record of proceedings of ‘Workshop on Social Audit’

Held at C&AG Office, New Delhi on 10March 2015

The record of proceedings of the day long workshop for each session is as under:

  1. Inaugural Session

Shri A.K.Singh DAI (RC) welcomed all the participants for the workshop on behalf of CAG and MoRD; thanked civil society members for acknowledging importance of C&AG;stated that views of state government officers while implementing MGNREGS will be of immense help; heads of SAU- are star cast of today’s show, requested them to share challenges faced; requested PrAGs /AGs to identify possible areas of synergies with social audit; informed that we will be doing compliance audit of Social Audit as per Audit of Scheme Rules, 2011; thanked CAG for active encouragement for organising the workshop.

Shri S.M.Vijayanand, Secretary, MoPRmade some points regarding how conventional audit systems under CAG can help social audits- it can enhance and promote the legitimacy of social audit, utilising social audit reports in an appropriate manner, (social audit could be trigger for more structured audit by CAG). He appreciated beneficiary survey done by CAG in performance audit of MGNREGS, CAG could commission social audit, send auditors as observers; now FFC has recommended TGS for DLFA which will require greater coordination; demystification of audit to common man; possible interaction of iCISA with NIRD for common programmes; aggregation of social audits. FFC has devolved over Rs. 2 lakh crore to gram panchayats over five years and their accounting and auditing becomes important.He also requested CAG to spread message of social audit in INTOSAI as there is great deal of interest internationally.

Shri J.K.Mohapatra, Secretary MoRDexpressed his gratitude to CAG for organising the workshop; he also stated that since he has just joined the Ministry he may not be fully aware of issues. However he recalled his experiences in initial conceptualisation and drafting the MGNREG Act, when he was Joint Secretary in the Ministry. Stated that, people are sceptical of the programme that whether money is well spent or not, and an important pillar for ensuring the same is social audit. He stated that the Act was implemented in 2005, which contained provisions of social audit, and now even after 10 years we are still struggling to institutionalise social audit. He said that there are two major challenges to address- that labour gets their entitlement and in time, and second accountability framework is institutionalised. Works done in panchayats are actually subjected to intense public scrutiny, but there are empowerment deficits in panchayats-these are functional empowerment, political empowerment and social empowerment deficits which creates bottlenecks. To overcome these deficits we need mechanisms like social audits which empower people. He also emphasised that social audits need tobe done in non adversarial manner. He stated that there is tremendous amount of externalities for social audit and a large number of flagship programmes can ride piggyback on this mechanism. He ended with expressing full support of MoRD to CAG for planned compliance audit.

Ms. Aruna Roy Member PAG, MGNREGAmade a small presentation to convey the journey of Jansunwais. She narrated experience of her initial campaign for public audit at Kotkiranagram panchayat in 1994 which was done under extreme threats, nevertheless about 1200 persons participated. She explained how initial campaigns of jansunwais led to two movements- one about RTI and another as demand for work culminating in MGNREGS. She also stated that India is amongst the first few countries to have implemented social audits. ‘Hamara paisa, hamarahisab’ ,is the philosophy of social audit and which indicated that people had started owning the process of accounts and audit, which so far was kept alien. She also mentioned Lima Declaration which made independence of the auditing institution, as one of the non negotiable. She said that CAG as a large umbrella can really support social audit. At the end she stated that coming together of various institutions like CAG, ministries, civil society with different perspectives marked maturing of our democracy, and with the synergies so generated the common man will be the ultimate beneficiary. She thanked CAG for the initiative.

The manual on Social Audit which was prepared by MoRD and suitable feedback given by CAG was also released on the occasion.

Shri Shashi Kant Sharma CAG delivered keynote address and welcomed all the participants to the workshop. He stated that in any democratic polity there are twoimportant pillars- accountability and transparency, and social audit takes these concepts to the last stakeholder for social sector programmes. During social audit executing agencies, beneficiaries and oversight mechanism come face to face and discuss whether moneys spent actually benefitted people or not. He appreciated presence of Ms Aruna Roy in the workshop and recalled that her jansunwais werebeginning of social audits as we understand now, and that she had been the driving force behind right to information. He also appreciated the fact that all stakeholders for social audit- be it ministries of government of India, officers implementing MGNREGS, heads of social audit units and officers from audit offices, were present for the workshop, which made him optimistic about outcome of the same. He stated that at CAG we welcome the concept of social audit and earlier also attempts to synergise social audit were made in 2009, when a task group headed by Deputy CAG was constituted. Unfortunately, because of lack of progress on this account in implementation of social audit, not much could be achieved. He expressed happiness that now about 20 states have taken initiatives and made significant progress in conducting social audits. He conveyed a clear message to concerned field offices and AsG/ PrAsG to adopt social audit as part of our formal audits. He mentioned about two performance audits on MGNREGSand important findings contained therein, including beneficiary survey. He said that expenditure of central and state governments which directly impacts socio-economic development was estimated to be Rs 17 lakh crore in a year and on an average of Rs 2,656 crore is incurred as development expenditure per district, which is a large sum. But the accountability and transparency mechanism in local bodies have not been commensurate with increasing responsibilities and flow of ever increasing funds. He therefore emphasized on need for mandatory social audit of social sector schemes.

He appreciated MoRD for releasing manual of social audit and its usefulness for practitioners in the field.

  1. Session II (A & B) – Status implementation and challenges.

The session covered presentations given by 18 states (split into two sessions covering 9 states each) namely Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Haryana, J&K, Punjab, Tripura, Assam, Sikkim and Meghalaya in seminar room and Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Karnataka and Rajasthan in auditorium. The panellist were Mr. A.K. Singh, Dy. C&AG (Chairman), Mr. Rakesh Jain, ADAI (NR), Ms. MinakshiGhose, ADAI(NER), Ms. Anita Pattanayak, ADAI(NER) and Mr Nikhil Dey, Social activist (panel- seminar room); and Ms Aruna Roy (Chair), Ms Rita Mitra, ADAI(CR), Mr Nand Kishore, ADAI(WR), Ms Vani Sriram, Pr AG(AP), Mr Ashish Ranjan, Social activist (Penal- Auditorium). Mr S M Vijayanand, Secretary MoPRalso joined the first panel.

The discussions started with the opening note, stating that the concept of social audit is in nascent stage. This is a great opportunity to sit together and try to understand the concept of social audit and how we can work together to further improve upon in this area. Accountability and transparency would play a vital role in the success of social audit.Hence, the relationship between the PAGs/AGs and the State Government officials should be synergised in a coherent manner.

Then the officers from states and heads of SAUs made presentations regarding status of social audit in their states, its impact, challenges faced and plan of action. Each presentation was followed by remarks from concerned Pr AG/AG regarding social audit and possible synergies. The copies of all presentations are in enclosed CD.

The summary of presentations and corresponding remarks of PrAG/AG are as under:

S.No / Name of State / Key points
(as presented by SAU) / Key points
(as presented by PAG)
1 / Madhya Pradesh /
  • An independent Social Audit Unit established and norms notified
  • Concurrent audit by CAs being done.
  • MGNREGS software, Panchayat Darpan and Samagra software helpful for social audit and concurrent audit
  • Pilot social audit done in Mandla in 2012, schemes other than MGNREGs also covered; social audits done in 2013-14 and 14-15 also
/
  • Reports of SA may be sent to AG
  • Synchronised audit will be helpful, may be done on a pilot basis

2. / Chhattisgarh /
  • Difficulty in obtaining records from Line Departments prior to the Audit
  • Lack of physical infrastructure to carry out the audit
  • Poor action taken on findings of social audit
/
  • Offered support to SAU in consolidation of social audit reports and capacity building programmes for social audit.
  • Offered to engage one person from the SAU as a nodal officer for engaging with the SAU
  • Open to the idea of taking help from the SAU during physical verification and beneficiary survey conducted by the AG

3 / Jharkhand /
  • Challenges in conducting Public Hearings; conducting audit in every GP; capacity building and establishing the autonomous SAU
/
  • Offered support to SAU in capacity building of their resource persons
  • Offered AG Officers tp participate as observers in the social audit process

4 / Bihar /
  • Challenges in systematic response for audit
  • Presented on the pilot social audit undertaken in 202 Gram Panchayats of the State and lessons learnt from the same
/
  • Suggested sticking to a national uniform nomenclature for personnel recruited by the SAU
  • Advised the SAU to retain connections with village social auditors identified

5 / Maharashtra /
  • Actively looking for a Director in the State
  • Contemplating initiation of a social audit campaign to conduct social audits in complete compliance with Audit of Scheme Rules, in selected Gram Panchayats of the States
/
  • Concerned with the lack of progress by the SAU and non submission of social audit reports by them to the AG’s Office

6 / Karnataka /
  • Independent SAU functioning since June 2013
  • Rules and Regulations framed
  • Capacity building programme discussed
  • SA of all GPs twice a year planned and in 2013-14, 94% achieved, 80% in 2014-15
  • Findings of SAU discussed

7. / Rajasthan /
  • Presented on the launch of a pilot social audit campaign to be launched in 510 GPs of the State and its aims and objectives
/
  • Expresses concern over the quality of social audits being undertaken by the SAU and non submission of the social audit reports to the AG’s Office
  • Extended support on capacity building and training on social audit

8 / Gujarat /
  • Presentation by NGO Unnati on social audits conducted
/
  • Expressed concern over social audit reports not being brought into the public domain

9 / Uttar Pradesh /
  • Presented manner of conducting social audit
/
  • Expresses concern over the quality of social audits being undertaken by the SAU and claimed that the audits were not getting conducted at the grass root level.

10 / Meghalaya /
  • At present the SRES (state rural employment society) is in incharge of the SA and it is conducting SA through NGOs
  • Stated that there were cases of misappropriation of funds, but there was no proper documentation of the same in the social audit reports.
/
  • Expressed concern over the lack of timely recruitments by the SAU
  • Extended support towards capacity building

11 / Sikkim /
  • SAU headed by the Voluntary Health Association of Sikkim
  • MoU signed between SAU and Department of RD
  • Presented the methodology of social audits adopted that includes verifications, gram sabhas, exit conferences
  • Expressed concern over challenges such as timely follow up, poor quality of record keeping, and poor IEC
/
  • Extended support for greater synergy

12 / Assam /
  • SIRD being the autonomous institute has conducted social audit for the first time in 2201 GPs of the State
  • Social Audit Reports yet to be submitted to the State Government for action
/
  • Stated that the social audit in the state is at rudimentary stage
  • Suggested building in synergies with the AGs office from the next FY
  • Suggested putting in place quality checks on social audits conducted
  • Requested the SAU to keep the AG’s office in the loop on ana ongoing basis
  • Requested for greater training to be provided to the SAU

13 / Tripura /
  • An NGO called MadyaBharati Welfare society has been heading the social audit unit with one state coordinator, 2 SRPs, 8 district units with 18 block level coordinators and 1118 VRPs.
  • The state has completed 2 rounds of social audits
  • Sought support for trainings and launch of a social audit campaign
/
  • Requested the SAU to forward Social Audit Reports to the AGs Office on a monthly basis
  • Requested SA Calendar to be shared with AGs Office

14 / Punjab /
  • Stated lack of access to records; poor physical verification; social audit processes being biased by the Sarpanch and poor action on social audit findings as major challenges
/
  • Suggested presence of independent observers in the social audit
  • Requested the SAU to forward the SA Calendar in advance to the AGs office

15 / Jammu and Kashmir /
  • Described the process of social audit followed in the State
/
  • Suggested measures for greater independence of the SAU
  • Suggested greater partnership in beneficiary survey

16 / Haryana /
  • Described the process of social audit followed in the State
/
  • Suggested provision of timely information to the AGs office so as to provide support on independent observers, test audits, access to reports

17 / West Bengal /
  • Upon describing the process of social audit traditionally adopted by the State, a presentation was made on the initiatives being taken up for ensuring its independence
/
  • Expressed concerns about the severe lack of independence of the social audit unit

18. / Tamil Nadu /
  • Described the process of social audit undertaken by ‘SASTA’- the registered body of designated to conduct social audits in the entire state since 2013
/
  • Extended support on an ongoing basis

  1. Session III - Social Audit- Lessons Learnt, Synergies with the C&AG Audit and way forward

Thissession covered the issue regarding implementation status of social audit in India, experience of social audit by SSAAT in AP and Telangana, synergies between CAG audit and social audit in Andhra Pradesh, Compliance audit of implementation of MGNREGA Audit of Scheme Rule 2011, Social accountability framework, and international best practices in respect of social audit. The panellist were Shri A.K. Singh, Dy. C&AG, Shri S.M.Vijayanand, Secretary, MoPR, Ms. Aruna Roy, PAG MGNREGA and Shri A. Mukhopadhyay, Retired IA&AS officer and Civil Society member.

Shri Subramanyam JS MoRD- Status of social audit in India

  • Thinking in MoRD on way forward regarding social audit-
    Not a new concept, all should be on the same platform regarding social audit, fundamentals cannot be compromised (SA not by govt employees but by enlightened stakeholders, proactive disclosure, people intensive and should follow discipline of audit), narrated experiences at AP while implementing SA, SA is politically also correct as seen in AP, SA is statutory.
  • There may be no release of NREGA funds, if there is no social audit. Its absence may affect programme implementation.
  • Five fundamentals- by stakeholders (not from the same village), trained in reading records, all records provided or not, it is 100 % check, proper report.
  • Five preparatory steps- Independent and non bureaucratic, rules in place including penalty for violation of these rules, putting expert teams, re orient to avoid panic (it’s not against you it’s for us), systematic calendar
  • Five challenges- getting right type of VRPs, effective training, sharing of records, disruption of gram Sabha and strategy to deal with that, taking action on report
  • Special Social Audit Project of 147 cr for help in setting up SAUs, five experts in NIRD, 100% funding of all state and district experts, test social audit in some states
  • Out of 28 States, 18 States have not set up SAUs.Out of 149 sanctioned resource persons at State level only 63 post filled up. Further at district level out of 1182 sanctioned post for resource persons only 582 posts filled up.
  • In AP andTelangana, the SAhas been institutionalized and made statutory.
  • Sikkim, Chhattisgarh-Many good efforts made, Jharkhand, Bihar and Rajasthan- good practices.
  • SA is worth a journey.

Ms. SowmyaKidambi, Director, SSAAT Andhra Pradesh & Telangana- Implementation of social audit in Andhra Pradesh& Telangana-lesson learnt

  • Learnt fundamentals of social audit sitting in a village in Rajasthan, 25 years back
  • SA is a powerful tool for social transformation and training of communities.
  • In Feb 2006, pilot social audit was conducted in 3 villages with the help of society (MKSS) under reform action plan after that SSAAT is an independent Society established by the Department of RD in 2009.
  • Full access was available to all the information to SAU before taking up social audit, with enough time for assimilation and verification.
  • Trained cadre of two lakhs Village Resource Persons and 1200 fulltime cadrewas built up to facilitate the process of SA.
  • State government has given full operational and financial independence to her.
  • AP Promotion of Social Audit & Prevention of Corrupt Practices Act 2012was passed. It is a landmark act in social audit.SA recognized as compulsory statutory process and Offences proved in SA brought under criminal law and special mobile courts established.Summary trial in villages and imprisonments up to 2 years.So far there have been 9 convictions.
  • Mobilising political will is necessary but there is no reversal once it is done.
  • Independent observers to see nobody is stopped from speaking- USP of SA.
  • Public hearings at block levels- long but decisions on all issues are taken.
  • There is complete synergybetween SAU and Pr AG Office, she appreciated that whenever they had any problem they would approach PrAG.
  • Way forward-

-Need for establishment of National Resource Centre with adequate resources.