Y.Gangi Reddy Associate Professor (CRI) STUDY TEAM Dr.Y. Gangi Reddy, Project Director Dr. S. Venkatadri, Professor & Head Dr. P. SivaRam, Associate Professor firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com NIRD, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad-500 030 040-24008416/20025011 +919848387111 +919848780266 Centre for Rural Infrastructure (CRI), National Institute of Rural Development, HYDERABAD. Rural Housing • Housing is a basic human need after Food & Clothing (Roti, Kapada & Makaan) – Constitution of India: Article 21 (1951) – Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)1948 – Istanbul Declaration 1996 • Owning a house provides significant economic security and Social status in village community Indira Awas Yojana (1996 – 75:25) • All BPL or income less than Rs. 32,000 (Annual) • GP and Gram sabha - Waiting list on GP wall • Selection is based on Priority, SC/ST-60% (Permanent Waitlist) • Unit Cost Plain Rs. 45,000 - (48,500) minimum plinth 200 sq.fts. • Support for Up gradation Rs. 15,000 • Payment by GP through bank account (female) • Monitoring & Evaluation (midterm- GP with a committee- gram sabha) Shortage of Housing in India • 2001Census – Total shortage 35 Million – People in Kutcha: 32 Million – Houseless : 3 Million • Working Group 11th FY Plan – 43 Million (2007-12) • Working Group 12thFY Plan – 48.81 Million (2012-17) – BPL (90%) 43.93 • Decadal GR of RHH 24.31% • • • • • • • • Indira Awas Yojana (1996 – 75:25) All BPL or income less than Rs. 32,000 (Annual) GP and Gram sabha- Writing list on GP wall Priority, SC/ST-(Permanent Waitlist) Proportionate Unit Cost Plain Rs. 70,000 - (75,000) minimum plinth 20 sm Support for Up gradation Rs. 20,000 Credit cum subsidy Rs. 62,500 (50,000 +12,500) Payment through bank account (female) Monitoring &Evaluation (Gram sabha,Local Area Officers, Awaassoft & NLM of MoRD) New Initiatives • Administrative Expenses – 4% of fund released • House site support for Landless- 20,000 (Homestead)-20,000 • Empowered Committee (ASRD) • 5 % of total budget for special projects) • Habitat for PTG/FRA & Individual for Scattered • Access to Land, Finance, Infrastructure, Technology, Delivery mechanism, Capacity building & Information Land Use Classification in India (2009-10) 10% Land under Cultivation 17% Land under Forests 73% Not available for Cultivation Literacy Rate in India - 2011 Census 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Rual Urba Total Male Fema Total n le Series1 68.91 84.98 74.04 82.14 65.46 74.04 Poverty Ratio in India 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Rural Urban Total 1973-74 56.4 49 54.9 19992000 41.8 25.7 37.2 2009-10 33.8 20.9 29.8 Households used Predominent Material for the Roof Thatch Housing Condition in India Dilapidated 6% Tiles Good 46% 18% 21% Burnt Bricks Stone 16% 9% Livable 48% Households by No. of Dwelling Rooms No Exclusive 3% 3% 4% Room One Room 7% 37% 14% Two Rooms Three Rooms Four Rooms Five Rooms 32% Six Rooms and above 29% 7% GI / Asbestos Sheet Concrete Households by Main Source of Drinking 4% Water Tap Water 8% 31% Well Hand Pump 44% 13% Tube / Borewell Other sources Households by Latrine Facility 70.00% Axis Title 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Series1 Latrine facility within the premises 30.73% No Latrine within the premises 69.27% NEED FOR THE STUDY • Given the background of Shelter for all the poor and the programme of IAY, several states initiated their own state specific programmes such as INDIRAMMA, Ashraya, SPAY, AAY & Samathvapuram during the recent past. • Several Good Practices are adopted by different states in fulfilling the Housing Needs of the Poor. • MoRD was interested to take up a study on IAY in different states to document the same so as to strengthen the programme of IAY. • With this background the study was undertaken on IAY Objectives of the study • To review the guidelines of IAY and their relevance to the socio-economic profile of beneficiaries and trace out the various problems of housing of rural poor • To understand the constraints, analyze provisions and the process of implementation of IAY programme • To identify different best practices adopted in the implementation of IAY • To suggest interventions for refinement of national rural housing policy for effective implementation of IAY Study Area & Sample Name of the Districts S.No. Name of the State visited Mayurbhunj 1 Orissa Sambalpur Dhamtari 2 Chattisgarh Raipur Dhanbad 3 Jharkhand Ranchi Simogha 4 Karnataka Bidar West Godavari 5 Andhra Pradesh Anantapur Coimbatore 6 Tamil Nadu Erode Thane 7 Maharashtra Solapur Bikaner 8 Rajasthan Nagaur Thiruvanantapuram 9 Kerala Kollam Cachar 10 Assam Nagaon Vadodara 11 Gujarat Anand Solan 12 Himachal Pradesh Kangra No. of Name of the Blocks Visited GPs Joshipur, Bisai 04 Hirakud, Sason 04 Dhamtari, Nagri 04 Bhansoj, Arang 04 Dhanbad, Kusunda 04 Namkon, Rampur 04 Hosanahalli, Hiriyur 04 Bidar, Andur 04 Achanta, Pedavegi 04 Kuderu, Tadimarri 04 Anamalai, Polachi 04 Bhavani, Gobichettipalayam 04 Jawar, Mokhada 04 Mohol, Pandarpur 04 Shri Kolayat, Mundsar 04 Pharrod, Asawari 04 Athayanoor, Nemon 04 Kottarakara, Vattakavala 04 Narsingpur Dev, Sonai Dev 04 Kathiatal, Rupahilat 04 Sankheda, Naswadi 04 Kambat, Sojitra 04 04 Solan, Dharampur Annexure 04 Nagrota Bagwan No. of Samples 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Methodology & Data Collection – Selection of the district and blocks was done in consultation with the concerned officials and progress of the work done – In-depth study is based on data collection from the primary stakeholders (IAY households) Total Sample: 960 – Focus Group Discussions: 1. IAY Beneficiaries 2. GP Members 3. Concerned Officials - Consulted with: 1. RBCs / Nirmiti Kendras 2. Brick Making Units Aspects of Best Practices Identified • Selection Process of the beneficiaries • Cost of Construction: Unit Assistance Credit Sources No. of Installments • Own contribution (labour, materials, finance) • Appropriateness to Household Needs: Space etc. • Cost Effective Technology Locally available Raw materials Design used for the House Disaster Proof Technology • Convergence Practices: Household Needs – Electricity, IHHL, Drinking Water etc. Livelihoods etc. • Access and Service availability • Institutional Mechanism - Institutional Structure - Institutional Support Transparency and Accountability • MAJOR FINDINGS OF THE STUDY • • • • • • • • • INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK Rural Housing and Development Corporation State Housing Boards/ Corporations National Mission for Rural Housing Habitat Development National Housing Bank (NHB) National Rural Building Centers (RTP-NIRD) Research and Development (CBRI-CSIR-IITs) Griha Nirmith Kendras Policy perspectives – National Rural Housing and Habitat Policy (2008) – Joint Secretary (Rural Housing), MoRD, GOI 1. Participatory Selection Procedure: - Transect Walk : A.P., Kerala, Karnataka, Tamilnadu, Gujarath, Maharashtra etc. - Selection through Grama Sabha: In almost of all the states, but in some states Grama Sabha resolutions were not there. 2. Tamilnadu: Selection Process is based on BPL and IAY waitlist but considering who could able to construct the house 3. IAY boards were displayed with all the details at GP - Maharastra, Gujarat, Tamilnadu etc. 4. Due weightage is given to Houselessness for selection of Blocks and Villages - Maharashtra 5. Priority was given to SCs first and then to STs, OBCs and OCs respectively at beneficiary level – Maharashtra and Rajastan 6. Yearly Selection and Display of Beneficiary List in at GP and Ward (Vaartha Boards ) – Kerala • GPs were providing the temporary shelter for the beneficiaries while construction was going on - Tamilnadu. • State specific schemes are more attractive than IAY – Kerala ESN • Uniform Assistance to both state specific and IAY – Tamilnadu & A.P. • 100% coverage of SC, ST under IAY – A.P. (Maharastra & Rajastan – 2002 BPL) • Saturation Approach – A.P. (Maharastra – limited to SCs, STs) • The beneficiaries constructed their houses under IAY in the least plinth area (about 201 sq.ft.). This type of practice was seen especially in Tamilnadu state. • Priority to the coverage of beneficiaries rather than the enhanced unit of assistance – Rajastan Policy Suggestions: BPL Survey should be done both the methods of Participatory and Secondary data base: Income and Expenditure method, per capita consumption of food / Calaries intake method etc. It should be done once in five years. Grama Sabha can delete the names of the beneficiaries but it should not include new beneficiaries. In IAY boards on GP walls should provide the following information: • S.No. • Name & Father/ Husband name of the beneficiary • BPL Rank • IAY wait List Number • Year of Allotment • Year of completion of IAY Status of Land for the Construction of IAY House 1. Kerala: Government is providing Rs. 35,000/for General with 50% subsidy, Rs.70,000/- for SCs with full subsidy for house site. 2. The highest percentages of (about 78.75%) of the beneficiaries were provided the land from the Govt. in Tamilnadu followed by 58.75% in Maharashtra, 50% in A.P. Own Land 69% Govt. Provided Land 31% 3. In Tamilnadu, most of the Panchayats were providing the temporary shelter while construction is going on. Status of Land in the study area 100.00% 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Govt. Provided Land Own Land Problems in facilitating the Landless PoP - Land cost is very high in many states like Kerala, Tamilnadu, A.P., Karnataka - In many states like Kerala etc CPR land is not available, if land is available, it is very far away from the main panchayat. - Forest officials were not giving permission to get the possession certificate on land and sometimes it takes one to two years time to allot the land for the poor especially in tribal areas. - It is very difficult to provide the land for the newly married couples, who are separated from their parents after getting married. - The provision of Rs.10,000/- (homestead) is not at all sufficient to purchase at least one cent of land. Design of the House • Only few states like Tamilnadu, Rajastan, Mahararastra, A.P., Assam had taken initiation towards designs made available for the benefit of beneficiaries. • But only one or two types of designs are made available for the benefit of beneficiaries. Category Total No. Installments A.P. Tamilnadu Maharashtra Kerala Karnataka Rajasthan Gujarat Assa m H.P. 3 3 - 0 Orissa Chattisgarh Jharkhand of 6 5 3 4 4 2 3 3 3 3 0 - 20000 - Beneficiary Contribution 1.Advance - - 1500 - 5000 1500 - - 30.00% 20000 21000 - 20% 2. Basement / Plinth 8300 12364 25000 - 0 20000 0 20000 3. Lintel Level - 13351 25000 - 14000 20000 0 - 4. Lintel Laid 6000 23894 - - - 5. Roof 10400 - - - 6. Roof Laid 13800 17891 - 20.00% 7. Completion Total Amount 5000 7500 18500 10.00% 12500 - 45000 75000 70000 100.00% 50000 50000 - 30000 25000 Table 5000 - Additional Amount from State Govt. 40.00% 12500 12500 12500 25000 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 30% - 0 - 0% 10000 8500 20000 20000 20000 - 5000 8500 8500 45000 48500 48500 45000 48500 48500 0 - 0 - 20% 20000 0 Unit Cost provided by the State Government of Kerala Additional Amount provided by the State IAY Govt. Social Assistanc S.No. GP Category DP Share BP Share e Share (25%) (50%) (25%) 48,500/1. General 6,625/13,250/6,625/(65%) 48,500/2. SCs (48.5%) STs (38.8%) 26,500/(35%) 75,000/- 12,875/- 25,750/- 12,875/- 51,500/1,00,000/(51.5%) 19,125/- 38,250/- 19,125/- 76,500/1,25,000/(61.2%) 48,500/3. Total Grand Total Amount • Good Practices: - Beneficiary contribution is compulsory - Maharastra, Rajastan - Adavance Payment is being done - A.P., Kerala, Rajastan, Gujarat, Assam, H.P., Orissa, Chattisgarh - Absence of final installment - Rajastan - Affects the completion of the house. Different Practices: • No additional amount - Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh. • No. of Installments varies from state to state. • Unit Cost and Installment Amount varies from state to state. • Only few states are adopting the system of Beneficiary contribution in terms of finance - Maharastra, Rajastan. Average Cost per one Sq.ft. of Plinth Area Average Construction Cost per one Sq.ft. of Plinth Area 800.0 600.0 400.0 200.0 379.3 0.0 318.9 271.3 212.4 294.9 227.7 239.3 227.8 338.8 518.4 277.6 428.2 311.9 Average Construction Cost per one Sq.ft. of Plinth Area • The average cost for the construction of IAY house was observed Rs.311.9 per one sq.ft. of plinth area in India as a whole. • It is very high in the states like Kerala Rs. 518.4 followed by H.P. (Rs.379.3) • It is very low in the states like Jharkhand (Rs.212.4) followed by Chattisgarh (Rs.227.9), Maharashtra (227.8) etc. Proportion of IAY Assistance to Total Construction Cost of the House Proportion of IAY assistance to the Total Construction Cost of the House 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% • The proportion of IAY assistance to the total construction cost of the house was observed 56.38% in India as a whole. • The same was observed very low in states like H.P (28.38%) followed by Kerala (33.8%), Orissa (37.7%) etc. where construction is very high Name of the State IAY assistance 6.00% 5.00% 4.00% 3.00% 2.00% 1.00% Name of the State Self help groups INDIA Tamilnadu Kerala Karnataka A.P. Maharastra Gujarath Chattisgarh Orissa Jharkhand Assam Rajastan 0.00% H.P. More credit was also availed from the Housing Credit societies - Kerala, Tamilnadu etc. Proportion of Credit from Self help groups to the Total Construction Cost of the House Percentage of Credit from SHGs to the total Construction Cost of the House Nominal credit is availed from SHGs --A.P., Karnataka, Tamilnadu. 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Himachal Pradesh Rajastan Assam Jharkhand Different Credit Sources Proportion of Sources to the Total Construction Cost of the House under IAY in India Friends & Relatives 19% 56% Money lenders / land lords Money lenders / land lords Maharastra Andhra Pradesh Karnataka Kerala - Labour Cost is very high in Kerala, Himachal Pradesh due to scattered houses - Average construction cost is very low in Tribal Areas due to accessibility of locally available construction material with a free of cost. Bank Finance Self help groups Gujarath The Proportion between Labour Cost and Material Cost is Rs.1:4 in the states like Kerala, H.P. due to high labour cost whereas in all other states it is Rs.1:6.3 only. Own funding 10% Chattisgarh - IAY assistance 1% 5% 9% Self help groups Bank Finance Own funding Friends & Relatives Orissa IAY assistance Proportion of Credit Sources Proportion of different sources to the Total Construction Cost of the House in sampled States Credit Sources: Proportion of Bank Finance to the Total Construction Cost of the House Proportion of Bank Finance to the Total Construction Cost of the House 14.00% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% Name of the State • The average share of Bank finance is just 5.46 % in all India. • The contribution of DRI loans is negligible in all the states except Gujarat, where 50% of beneficiaries were getting DRI Loans. Bank Finance • Banks are not willing to pay loans as the credit amount seems to be very low in almost of all the states • In states like; Tamilnadu, Kerala, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Himachal Pradesh, Rajastan and A.P., Banks are not giving loans without getting proper security documents or getting proper secured Assets • In states like; Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat Banks are not giving loans when one’s close relative is a defaulter in the respective banks. • DRI Loans are getting very easily where GP Presidents and members are Proportion of Credit from Money Lenders to the Total Construction Cost of the House Proportion of Credit from Money lenders / land lords to the Total Construction Cost of the House 20.00% 18.00% 16.00% 14.00% • Role of Money Lender continues in Karnataka (18%), Kerala (15%), H.P. and A.P. (11%) and Jharkhand (10%) 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% Name of the State Money lenders / land lords • The share of SHGs contribution is about 2.21 per cent in all India • It is very high in the states like A.P. (5.72%) followed by Karnataka (5.21%) • The contribution of NREGA wages is significant in all the states during construction • Wages are used for the purpose of household consumption • Having a NREGA Bank account helped in getting loans from Banks Tamilnadu, Gujarat, Kerala, A.P Proportion to the Total Construction Cost of the House Proportion of Own Contribution to the Total Construction Cost of the House 40.00% 35.00% - Own Labour Contribution is seen in all the states. - House construction was being done in the presence / fully involvement of Beneficiary households. - Community Help was seen in almost of all the states except where the housing construction was handed over to the local Masonry as a contract. 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% Name of the State Own funding • The practice of Collective Purchase of materials - Maharashtra, Karnataka, A.P., Rajasthan thereby getting economies of scale. • In Maharashtra (especially in Thane district) bricks were made by the beneficiaries themselves (collective action with 4 to 5 members) with locally available mud. • District authorities are supplying the construction material like cement, steel / iron, windows, doors etc. with subsidized rates – A.P. and Tamil Nadu • IAY beneficiaries turning into a brick producer – Orissa (Mayurbunj). Share of Self Contribution to the total Construction Cost of the House 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Self Labour Community Help Hired Labour 1400.0 1200.0 1043.3 1000.0 800.0 570.7 429.7 245.5 439.7 455.9 600.0 428.2 551.2 187.6 400.0 427.2 123.8 380.1 251.4 322.6 317.2 200.0 241.4 230.3 243.0 0.0 Backyard Area 129.5 72.0 222.1 362.3 Average Plinth Area (in Sq.ft.) 363.2 317.7 272.5 211.8 • Minimum of three room construction - H.P., Kerala, Karnataka. • Washing Platforms are constructed in Backyard - Tamilnadu. • Seating Platforms are constructed in frontyard - Tamilnadu, Karnataka • Traditional Chulhas linked to the Bathroom tub – Tamilnadu • Additional room for occupational activity – Tamilnadu, Maharastra and tribal areas • Plantation of Trees in all houses - Maharastra, Kerala, H.P • Both Plinth area and Backyard area was highest in Rajastan,H.P.Kerala • Houses were being constructed in Agricultural fields especially in Rajastan, Himachal Pradesh • Houses were being constructed along with their old houses – Rajastan, Chattisgarh - In Rajastan, locally available Stone Patties were used for Roof - In Rajasthan, for flooring and filling the gap between the bricks for the construction of wall - Lime mud mortar with locally available material - In Tamilnadu, IAY beneficiaries were fixing the tiles on the roofing - Most of the IAY beneficiaries still using the Asbestos Sheets / steel sheets for the Roof - Maharashtra, Gujarath - Most of the IAY houses were being built with bullies (local name is wooden patties) for the support of Roof in the states like Maharashtra, Gujarath - The State Govt. (In A.P. and Tamilnadu) is supplying the material like steel, windows, doors and cement. - In Himachal Pradesh, people are using 3 types of sand viz., a) Coarse Sand for RCC roofing b) Fine Sand is used for Plastering of walls, flooring purpose and c) Sand mixed with mud is used for filling the gap between bricks etc. - Due to high cost of Sand, Stone Dust (M Sand) is used - Kerala - Cement Bricks are made with M Sand - Kerala - M sand is also used for Plastering - Kerala - Concrete based Window Frames - Tamilnadu, Kerala Usage of bricks in RCC of second layer Arc roof – saves cement, sand and mortar – Rajastan Honey Comb Technique is used for pit construction of IHHL – Gujarat V shaped RCC roofs - Kerala - easy draining of rain water • Pillar foundation is seen - Kerala, Himachal Pradesh considering soil condition • About 95 % of the beneficiaries don’t have knowledge about Disaster proof technology. • The cost of construction of Disaster Proof housing is high. • Housing Insurance for IAY – Kerala • Inter Locking Brick construction method is limited to few areas due to non availability of skilled masons - Kerala In Kerala, Nirmithi Kendras are not useful for IAY beneficiaries In the states like Gujarat, the beneficiary households are getting the construction material from Gulf of Combat which is 200 KMs far away from these places In the absence of facilitation centers adoption of new technology and technique of construction is limited • In Himachal Pradesh, Latrine Pits 10”x10”x6” costing Rs.30,000/• Technical ly 4”x4”x6” is enough costing Rs.8,000/- to Rs.12,000/- per Latrine • About 70% using Grade- II Bricks (I Grade: Fine; II Grade: Medium; III Grade: Lowest) • 20 % using the Grade-I bricks and 10% using the Lowest quality of bricks. • Cracks on the walls due to poor plastering & curing (TN, A.P & Maharashtra ) • In Gujarath state, the beneficiaries from Vadodara and Anand districts were getting the bricks from Gulf of Combat, which is 300 KMs far by paying extra Rs. 1/- to Rs.1.50 per each brick in the absence of alternative technology & locally available material. • Very few houses constructed with inner locking brick Technology in Kerala • It is very difficult to motivate the people to construct their houses with the alternative & cost effective technology. • Honey Comb Masonry Technique for the construction of IHHL in some parts of Gujarat Convergence with Household Needs Electricity with RGGVY: In India – 39.52% - Highest in Kerala (78.75%), Tamil Nadu (58.8%) IHHLs Convergence with TSC: Convergence of IAY with TSC is about 62..8% in India as a whole – Tamil Nadu, Jharkahand, Kerala are highest in the position Rajasthan & Kerala: If all the facilities did not complete amount will be deducted from the unit cost. Usage is about 42.7 % in India as a whole. Convergence with NRDWP 57% IAY HHs were converged with NRDWAP in India as a whole. - Tribal Areas – 100% Only 14.3% HHs were connected with Tap Connection to their house Premises – Gujarat is high (78%) Encouragement for Water Harvesting Structures: - Kerala – Rs.10,000/- for digging wells - Rajasthan – Rs.20,000/- for Tanks - Tamil Nadu – Rs.6,000/- for laying tiles on the Roof Convergence with Livelihoods Convergence with NREGS – 75.7% in India as a whole - But highest in A.P (88.3%) followed by Rajastan (78%), Maharastra (75%, Tamil Nadu (73%), Jharkhand (67.5%) Amount is being utilized for household consumption during construction This is the major contribution than financial assistance. Convergence with NREGA during Construction • Land Development – Himachal Pradesh, Kerala • Upto Plinth level Construction – Engagement of two labours under NREGA – Kerala • Latrine Pit Digging and Construction – Maharastra • Convergence with NREGA for getting Bank Loans under DRI – Tamil Nadu, Gujarat Drinking Water Source for the IAY Households 120.00% 100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% Public Hand Pump Piped Water Public Tap Status of IHHL in the IAY House 100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% Yes No Open Well Utility of IHHLs in the study area 100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% Regularly Occasionally During Rainy Season Not Using at all IAY beneficiaries with NREGA 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Yes No IAY beneficiaries with NSAP support 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Yes No Accessibility of Bus Stop facility from the respective IAY House 100.00% 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% <50 51 - 100 100 - 150 151 - 200 200 -250 > 250 Accessibility of Primary School from the IAY House 100.00% 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% <50 51 - 100 100 - 150 151 - 200 200 -250 > 250 Involvement of Local NGO: Jharkhand Payment: Except in Tamilnadu and Kerala, rest of the states following the payment system with joint account of both Grama Sevik / Junior Engineer and Beneficiaries. Material Support: In Andhra Pradesh: 18.3 % of the HHs were getting the material from RBCs. Tamil Nadu Govt. is providing material support – Cement, Cement based Windows, Iron, Doors etc. on subsidized price. Transparency - Beneficiary details on GP walls – Rajastan, Maharastra, Chattisgarh - Amount Deposited into Beneficiary Account directly - Using GPS system - Rajastan - Using AwaasSoft – Uploading Beneficiary Photos – Chattisgarh using Android system - Complaint redressal system - Tamilnadu – Social Audit INITIATION BY GP – BOMMANACIKANPALAYAM (Tamilnadu) In this village, about 420 HHs are living and in this 211 HHs were belong to the BPL Category Private ½ (half) acre of Land was purchased by spending Rs. 53.85 Lakh – Same was distributed to 139 poor landless HHs with 3 Cents each Beneficiary contribution (from Rs. 4,000/- to Rs.10,000/- according to their level of poverty) Total Amount Rs. 5.5 Lakh from the beneficiaries. Support received under Homestead Policy – 16.70 Lakhs Support received from Department of Backward Classes - 30.65 lakhs. Donations from Textile Mill Owners - Rs. 1.0 Lakh Initially, the GP selected 15 beneficiaries sanctioned under IAY. bank linkage of Rs.10,000/- per each household under DRI by linking with NREGS scheme for better Repayment Areas of concern • • • • • • • • Land – Access & Management ( Homestead) Access to Finance (DRI) Infrastructure & Habitat Development Sustainability Concerns Technology Support and Transfer Capacity Building of Manpower (Mason) Delivery Mechanisms & Capacity Building Monitoring & access to Information Convergence Model for Housing programme State Action Plan TSC MNRE (Solar) NRDWP IAY House Housing Habitat NREGS Labour Jan Shree & AAB (Insurance) BRGF Gap filling SSA/DPEP School NAP Plantation SGSY Livelihoods & C Hall RGGVY Electricity PMGSY Roads Finance Commission Internal Road Policy Suggestions- A:Selection Process • BPL Survey based composite index • BPL Survey strictly be once in Five years • Gram Sabha can delete but no additions • Selection strictly be based on seniority • Gram Sabha’s resolution in public to ensure transparency & genuine selection • Income limit of Rs. 32,000 need to be enhanced Policy Suggestions- B:Access to Land • Govt. & Panchayat land reserved for IAY • Agriculture land of beneficiary be allowed • Land allotments addressed by PRIs with Revenue Department support • Tribal housing colonies in Revenue lands adjacent to Forest- Security, Satisfaction, Occupancy & access to Livelihoods • Temporary shelter during construction • Display with all details at GP wall Policy Suggestions- C:Convergence • TSC amount should be increased and kept with IAY agency • IAY and TSC (NBA) by single agency • MG-NREGS with IAY- cost reduction, household income & enhance value to habitat development • All works of habitat development be included in MG-NREGS list of works • All IAY houses should have RSBY • BPL card should be proof for insurance • Linked with SGSY-NRLM- Kitchen Garden Policy Suggestions- C:Convergence • Converging with Bharat Nirman components' • Encouraged to Solar/Bio-gas/roof water harvesting • Bankers should be encouraged to extend DRI by Deposits and recovery of loans • RBI ensure active involvement of RRBs & Coop Banks in extending DRI loans to IAY • Training in Artisan/ Horticulture (NHM) • State specific Convergence model for adoption at village level • All IAY households extended with other RDPs Policy Suggestions- D:Instalment System • • • • • Four Instalments- 20 – 25 – 35 – 20 % Minimum support Rs. 75,000 and vary Bank credit is must < 50,00 – MG-NREGS SHGs and Federation involvement (AP) Cost reduction techniques, use of local materials, collective action in construction should be encouraged by awards/ rewards • Innovations of individual beneficiaries need to be recognised and encouraged Policy Suggestions- E:Type Design • Minimum plinth area – 300 sq ft (3 rooms) • Design option should be left to beneficiary • Shelf of designs- local condition, space, availability of materials, practices • Type design should have scope for livelihoods • Concept of Green Building (RWH- Solar) • Land scarce locations G+1 be encouraged Policy Suggestions- F:CET • Revival of RBCs with focus on CET • Competent NGOs be encouraged as RBC • State level workshops on Eco-friendly construction technologies for sustainable habitat management under IAY • Model buildings of CETs in different geoclimatic zones • Awarding of ISO code to CET • Structural and stability certificates • Mix of proper & proven practices be encouraged Policy Suggestions- G:Disaster Resistant Housing • State specific technologies so as to adopt by field functionaries in selected locations • Training of Engineers & masons on required techniques and technologies of different disasters • RBCs should also be oriented on region specific disasters and technologies • Model houses for demonstration in disaster prone areas so as to convince • Additional support to disaster prone areas Policy Suggestions- H:Institutional Networking • Dedicated institution to achieve Shelter for all by 2017 • • • • • Manpower support to implement & monitor Monitoring system with support of MIS State political will could make difference Administrative cost to be compensated Incentive mechanism for good performing villages on the lines of NGP • National Housing Board- State Housing Corporations • Policy Suggestions- I: MIS Applications • • • • • • • • • • • Integration of state level software with AWAASSoft Uploading of BPL & IAY-PWL to be mandatory Video Films on Best Practices- website IAY bank account to be linked with all others GPS based monitoring system through Mobile Uploading of Social audit proceedings on website Software to generate DRI application form Provision of contingent expenditure- AWAASSoft Dedicated staff with technical knowhow AWAASSoft Exclusive administrative charges upto 5% for MIS Flexibility to district authorities deciding bank code Conclusions • IAY could not help to realise the Dream of having one’s own house to lead safe, secure, comfortable and healthy life as desired • The limited success of IAY was determined by a few committed officials, PRIs, Women, NGOs and Beneficiaries • Separate administrative structure, online system, cluster type of housing, convergence with SHGs, NREGS has made IAY more effective • Immediate adoption of NRH&HP in totality could ensure safe, secure , comfortable and sustainable habitat (CET) for well being of rural people.