WELFARE REGIMES IN DELHI
Case Study of Old Age Pensions
UC Berkeley-IIHS Conference, March 2012
Shrayana Bhattacharya
Today’s Agenda
Describing Patterns
•Background on Pensions
Schemes
Describing Mechanisms
Paperwork
• Proving Eligibility is costly
• Delhi’s Identity crises
• Lack of Portability
•Outcomes
• Payment systems function
well
• Lack of systematic data on
coverage
• Exclusion of “Slum”Dwellers and Migrants.
Politicians
• Costs of Connectedness
• Missing ‘Clientalism’
• Missing Collective action
BACKGROUND & DATA
• Motivation of Study
• Introducing Old Age Pension Schemes
• Data sources (JPAL+MC+World Bank+CPR)
CONTEXT SETTING
• Nascent welfare machinery at the district level
• Increasing focus on Geographical Targeting – Defining “Slums”
• Move away from “Poverty” to “Vulnerability”
Set in motion a series of administrative reforms since 2005
• Move towards universalization and relaxing BPL and prioritization
based on residence, socio-demographic attributes of
households.
• Samajik Suvidha Sangam (Mission Convergence) key
component in urban administrative reform for welfare assistance.
Attributes of Benefit Recipients
(MC 2010, JPAL 2012)
Head of HH is female
HH lives in unrecognized slum
HH lives in JJ Colony/Recognized Slum
HH has disabled members
Less likely to be enrolled
HH has bank account
HH has ration card
More likely to be enrolled
MLA specific + Neighborhood “A” MCD property tax classification
Case Study: Old Age Pensions
Monthly financial assistance of 1000 INR to poor & elderly
• Above 60 years
• Family income < 60,000 INR (per annum)
Managed by District Social Welfare Office
OUTCOMES
• Lack of systematic data on coverage and targeting
outcomes
• Payment Systems function well – no delays or
deficits reported
Are Delhi’s Elderly Poor Covered ?
Yes, according to the administrative arithmetic……
Total number of OAP Beneficiaries : 0.38 million
Are Delhi’s Elderly in Slums Covered?
Low coverage rates; these change along residence continuum
• Recognized : JPAL (2012) finds that 32% of eligible households receive OAP.
• Recognized and Unrecognized : Mission Convergence (2010) finds only 17% of
eligible households received benefits, while 82% said they would like to apply/had
applied.
• Using administrative data from 2012, 24% are from recognized/unrecognized slum
localities and JJ colonies.
Targeting in Recognized JJ colonies
(JPAL 2012)
MECHANISMS ?
• Low demand and awareness
• Despite relaxed eligibility criteria, cumbersome
application process
• Administration lacks capacity to verify claims of
applicants
• Politicians and Paperwork are gate-keepers
The Problem of Paperwork
Delhi’s Identity Crisis: BPL Targeting and
Under-Identification of the Poor (NSS0 07)
Ration Card Allocation by Income Level
Percentage with Ration Card
70%
Delhi’s Poverty Line
60%
50%
40%
BPL (Poor)
30%
APL (Non-Poor)
20%
10%
0%
0-395
395-580
580-675
675-930
930-1380
Monthly Per-capita Expenditure (INR)
Above 1380
BPL Targeting and Proof of Income
The income poor lack credible documentary proof of poverty
•Of those households with BPL and AAY cards, only 16% report
household annual income below the OAP eligibility threshold.
•In non slums : 21%, of those with households with annual household
income below the OAP eligibility threshold have BPL ration cards
(IHDS 2005)
•In recognized slums, number dwindles to 15% (JPAL 2012)
GNCTD does recognize that the BPL/AAY cards are not a good
indicator of poverty…
• Application process does not require BPL card as proof of poverty.
•Applicants can submit a self attested income statement, which
indicates that annual household income is below the eligibility threshold
(Rs 60,000).
Documentary Requirements to prove Eligibility
For all Financial Assistance Schemes

Income Proof : Self attested income statement

Copy of Bank Account Passbook


Recommendation from MLA/MP/Gazetted Officer mandatory on all forms. Separate letter not required.
Age proof (any one of the following)


Ration Card, Voter ID, birth certificate (hospital, school), hospital discharge slip at the time of the birth of the
child, age assessment medical certificate, immunization card, driving license, Passport, PAN Card, any document
issued by govt. recognized body stating date/place of birth
Domicile proof (any one of the following)

Ration Card, Voter ID, birth certificate (hospital, school), immunization card of any family member, driving
license, Passport, PAN Card, insurance policy, electricity bill, water bill, telephone bill, gas connection receipt,
student i-card, service identity card, medical records of treatment in Delhi, caste certificate issued in Delhi,
property document, any other document that shows proof of residence >5 years; OR

Two witnesses testifying that they know the applicant for a period of more than 5 years; attaching their
domicile proof (no domicile proof needed if witness is MP/MLA)
Applicants Must Possess Singly Operated Bank
Accounts



No assistance provided by GNCTD to open bank accounts.
Even if beneficiary has a joint account, has to open new singly operated
account; no help in opening bank account, but can open with any bank, any
branch
Opening singly operated bank accounts is the biggest hurdle for
beneficiaries. Banks impose rigid interpretation of KYC norms and seek
police verification and documents such as PAN cards. On average, it takes
months to open an account (5-6 trips)
The Problem of Paperwork
For non-slum dwelling poor : IHDS (2005) data suggests
mixed results on the notion that the income poor are
identity poor in Delhi…
•60% of those households with annual household income
below OAP eligibility have ration cards.
•75% of households with annual household income below
OAP eligibility have voter cards.
Compounding constraints, the application process requires
two unique documents proving residence and age…
The Problem of Paperwork appears specific to “slums”
Percent of Households in Posession of Identity Documents in
Delhi's "Slums"
100
90
Percent of Households
80
70
60
Recognized Slums (JPAL 2012)
50
40
Recognized and Non Recognized Slums (MC
2010)
30
20
10
0
Ration Card
Voter Card
Type of Identity Proof
Preliminary Data : 34% of individuals have Aadhar (WB 2013)
Majority of Applicants have paperwork
and politician signature
Rare for non-documentary and witness
route to be used.
Majority reason for rejection is related
to lack of ‘adequate paperwork’
(DoSW Admin Data 2011)
87% applications “forwarded” by MLA
(Admin data 2011)
70% of OAP recipients received
application form from MLA (JPAL
2012)
Two P’s for Pensions
Paperwork
Politicians
Must have requisite paperwork
Route 1
Must have requisite signature
Majority applications “forwarded” by MLA’s, but slum
dwellers find it costly to access politicians
Collective action ?
Only 14% of Politician’s party offices are located in recognized slums
(Delhi Vidhan
Clientalism
? Sabha website 2013)
30% of slum households reported interacting with a politician, while only
had ever
interacted
with an administrative
officer (Jha et
al 2007)
Are 10%
political
party
cadre’s/MLA
staff incentivized
and
able to
exert
effort to forward welfare assistance applications ?
Asset poor = Socio-politically poor (Jha et al 2007)
Problems in accessing MLA’s compounded by ethnicity based networks
(Jha et al 2007)
What is the implication of Aadhar and DBT ?






Delhi’s Pension Payment Systems satisfy important DBT operational prerequisites – digitized database, bank account payments.
Beneficiaries do not report major delays in receiving payments. There was no
issue regarding amounts being remitted: all pensioners interviewed said that
pension was regular and the amounts were paid in full every quarter.
Government assistance in financial inclusion and accessing bank accounts is
important.
Biometrics can address leakage, fraud and double dipping with MCD
pensions schemes– current magnitude of the problem is unknown.
Akin to RSBY, Aadhar based platform is important to activate portability of
benefits for migrants in the long term.
Facilitates future convergence of schemes and payment platforms
Intervention
Bolster identification and
enrollment in slums
•Create enrollment camps in slums
and JJ colonies to subsidize costs
of application and getting required
attestation and documents.
•Activate witness route via camps.
•Can’t help with mobile populations.
Formalize relationship between Politicians and DoSW
Migrants and Mobile Populations
• Migrants and mobile populations are excluded by
program eligibility rules
• 5 years residence proof a stringent requirement for
applicants
• Portability of benefits is a serious issue – not as much for
the elderly, but a larger concern in the design of urban
welfare systems.
Application Process
Step 1: Applicant Obtains Forms
 Applicant can approach MLA/MP/district office, DoSW to
obtain (free, Hindi) forms or downloads from SSS/DoSW
website
Step 2: Applicant compiles relevant documentation, signatures
and completes an Application Form




No provision for application assistance
Documentary proofs are essential;
Signature from Area MLA or Gazetted Officers
GRCs no longer in use; operate informally
Submission Process
Step 3: Applicant can either submit forms directly at the district office or submit it via the MLA offices, who
further submit them in batches at the district office


Initial screening takes place at the district office dealing counter

District (East) and District (West) for instance have 4 dealing counters each, solely for pensions, open
from 10 am to 1 pm, Monday to Friday

The dealing assistant sitting at the dealing counter checks whether the form is in order and relevant
documentary proofs are attached; checks with originals; applications without adequate proofs or
incomplete forms are rejected at the counter itself (dept. could not provide an estimate of how many)

The applicant is issued an acknowledgment slip (directly or gets it later through the MLA office)

Department Officials expect MLA staff to screen applications prior to being forwarded to the district
dealing counter.
Applicant can file an application following two routes
With Documentary Evidence – Even this requires MLA attestation/recommendation; the applicant possesses all
required documentary proofs, OR
No Documentary Evidence – those without adequate documentary proof of domicile can submit applications
with letters of support and attestation by any of the following witnesses -- MP/MLA/Local RWA
President/General Secy/Registered SHG President/ICDS or ASHA worker/Gazetted Officer of state or
central government/Two neighbors
Sanctioning Process
Step 6: Applications are Rejected/Sanctioned by District Office

Only one officer, per district (District Officer, SW/WCD) is the
Sanctioning/Competent Authority for sanctioning pensions

No formal prioritization criteria within the pool of applications; MC criteria on
the form, but not used.

On paper, the only prioritization criterion used is the time at which application
was received (tracked through the unique diary entry which includes date of
receipt of application at the dealing counter), so sanction/rejection does not
exceed 45 days from the date of receipt (now being reduced to 30 days, only
after department capacity os strengthened); for this pending cases are
tracked monthly (format in next slide).

Data analysis on sanctioning highlights that forged documents/lack of
adequate proof of residence or domicile account for majority reasons for
rejection.