Back to Index

Literature and Guidelines

Tools and Methodologies

Workshop Reports

Benchmarking Processes

Many Promises to Keep... Bench Marking of  Processes at Field Level in APRLP - A Report (2006)

» Rapport building

» Situation analysis

» Identification of Institutions

» Identification of members

» Formation of new institutions

» Experimental learning

» Action Plan for NRM

» Productivity Enhancement

» Gender Scrutiny

» Approval of Action Plans

» Implementation - Initial tasks

» Capacity building

» Implementation - Role of UGs

» Execution of works

» Completion of works/records

» Sustainability of assets

Making the Processes...

» Gender

» Transparency

» Equity

Result of WS Projects

» General

» Drinking water

» Wages

» Sustainability

A Promising Opportunity.... Bench Marking of Capacity Building Initiatives - A Report (2006)

» Memo. of Understanding

» Physical infrastructure

» Human Resources

» Collection of information

» Learning needs & CB action

» Approval of CB Action Plan

» Financial systems

» CB Plan & Resource persons

» No. of training programme

Study details

» Person who contributed

» Profile of sample villages

» DLRC / CLRC

» List of Acronyms

Approval of Action Plans...


Q1

Who approved the action plan at the village level? 

Q2

Whether any conflicts / problems were faced during this time?

Q3

Who submitted the consolidated action plans to district officers?

Q4

How long it took for the approval of 4/5 year perspective plan?

Q5

Whether action plans are formally approved by DWMA and approval sent to WC/GP/VO?

Why is this important?

APRLP envisages action planning as an empowerment process. User groups and SHGs will prepare action plans with the support of WDT and paraworkers. Genuine needs of community will reflect in the action plans. Grama Panchayati and Village Organization will consolidate these action plans and submit them to DWMA. The approved action plans will be formally communicated to the Grama Panchayati, by DWMA. This action plan will be basis for further fund releases. This entire process is expected to strengthen institutionalization of action planning and its approval in an efficient and transparent manner.

What is happening and how is this happening?

  • The approval of action plans at village level is a mere formality. Respective responsible institution at village level approved the action plans (57% - Watershed Committee; 14% Grama Panchayati and 28% Village Organization). There are hardly any conflicts on this issue. Even submission of approved plans (to DWMA) does not have any variations. WDT submitted the action plans on behalf of either Village Organization or Watershed Committee. It is important to see how such a uniform process is achieved.

  • The time taken for approval of action plans ranged between 3 to 6 months in majority of cases. In case of GO PIAs in APRLP, there are not very impressive experiences on this event. These experiences are - Grama Panchayati is not aware of the approval of action plans; approval of action plans took more than a year and plan is prepared after the budget is released.

  • DWMA did not formally communicate the approval of action plans to Grama Panchayati/ Village Organization (in 57% cases). In 30% of watersheds, DWMA formally shared the copies of approved action plans with all Village Organization, Grama Panchayati and PFA. Performance of NGO PIA in Non APRLP is better in this regard.


Watershed Support Service and Activities Network (WASSAN)
H. No. 12-13-452, Tarnaka, Secunderabad - 500 017
Tel. No. +91 - (40) 27015295 / 96, Fax. No. +91 (40) 27018581, Email: wassan@eth.net
Website: www.wassan.org