TRAINING MATERIAL
Item
- Title
- TRAINING MATERIAL
- extracted text
-
’Tz
to
<
7
to
TRAINING iATERIAL
Vr
K
z?,
‘ft.
A
•
r
''Institutionarising Bast Practices of i
Social Audits in IWMP
I
A
I
vv
22-26/February 2016
I
*
♦A
CENTRE FOR WATER AND LAND RESOURCES
(CWLR)
1’
/?
•S
Content Chapter -1
What is a social audit?
Objectives of social audit
—
Advantages of social audit
Appropriate institutional level for social audit
Social audit committees
Steps in social audit in local bodies
Key factors for successful social audit
How to enhance local capacities for social audit
Social development monitoring (SDM): a social audit process
Chapter - 2
A.
B.
Key Conditions for effective Social Audit initiatives
Step-by-step Approach to Design and Conduct Social Audits
Chapter - 3
Implementation of Social audit in IWMP -Material by SSAAT
Additional Reading Material (Soft copy)
A. Social Audit manual prepared by CGG
B.
Guidelines for Evaluation of Preparatory Phase of IWMP projects
C.
Social Audit Guidelines for IWMP-Andhra Pradesh by SSAAT
D.
Social Audit in IWMP-Case study repot by SSAAT
Basis of social audit
Social audit as a term was used as far back as the 1950s. There has been a flurry of activity and interest
in the last seven to eight years in India and neighboring countries. Voluntary development
organizations are also actively concerned.
Social audit is based on the principle that democratic local governance should be carried out, as far as
possible, with the consent and understanding of all concerned. It is thus a process and not an event.
What is a social audit?
A social audit is a way of measuring, understanding, reporting and ultimately improving an
organization's social and ethical performance. A social audit helps to narrow gaps between vision/goal
and reality, between efficiency and effectiveness. It is a technique to understand, measure, verify,
report on and to improve the social performance of the organization.
Social auditing creates an impact upon governance. It values the voice of stakeholders, including
marginalized/poor groups whose voices are rarely heard. Social auditing is taken up for the purpose
of enhancing local governance, particularly for strengthening accountability and transparency in local
bodies.
The key difference between development and social audit is that a social audit focuses on the
neglected issue of social impacts, while a development audit has a broader focus including
environment and economic issues, such as the efficiency of a project or programme.
Objectives of social audit
2.
Assessing the physical and financial gaps between needs and resources available for local
development.
Creating awareness among beneficiaries and providers of local social and productive
3.
4.
services.
Increasing efficacy and effectiveness of local development programmes.
Scrutiny of various policy decisions, keeping in view stakeholder interests and priorities,
1.
5.
particularly of rural poor.
Estimation of the opportunity cost for stakeholders of not getting timely access to public
services.
Advantages of social audit
(a) Trains the community on participatory local planning.
(b) Encourages local democracy.
(c) Encourages community participation.
(d) Benefits disadvantaged groups.
(e) Promotes collective decision making and sharing responsibilities.
(f) Develops human resources and social capital
To be effective, the social auditor must have the right to:
1.
2.
seek clarifications from the implementing agency about any decision-making, activity,
scheme, income and expenditure incurred by the agency;
consider and scrutinize existing schemes and local activities of the agency; and
3.
access registers and documents relating to all development activities undertaken by the
implementing agency or by any other government department.
This requires transparency in the decision-making and activities of the implementing agencies. In a
way, social audit includes measures for enhancing transparency by enforcing the right to information
in the planning and implementation of local development activities.
<
Box 6.1 Public documents for social audit
I
(a) All budget allocations, beneficiary lists, muster rolls, bills, vouchers, accounts, etc. must be available for public
[scrutiny.
j;(b) All applications for licenses/permits and certificates issued by local self-government institutions must have a
!
Iserial number. Registers indicating date of application and date of clearance in each case should be available for
j
‘reference by any applicant. If possible, copies should be publicly displayed.
;
;(c) Public assessment of tax, exemptions, grants, etc., to ensure there are no complaints of undue preferential
treatment.
Several states have declared all Gram Panchayat plan documents related to beneficiary selection, budget cost
estimates, etc. to be public documents. A daily notice to be posted at the site of all development works, lists names
of workers, wages paid, cost and quantities of material, transport charges, etc.
However, social audit arrangements have mostly been ineffective because there is no legal provision for punitive
action. States should enact legislation to facilitate social audit by the Gram Sabha.
Appropriate institutional level for social audit
The most appropriate institutional level for social audit is the Gram Sabha, which has been
given 'watchdog' powers and responsibilities by the Panchayati Raj Acts in most States to supervise
and monitor the functioning of panchayat elected representatives and government functionaries, and
examine the annual statement of accounts and audit reports. These are implied powers indirectly
empowering Gram Sabhas to carry out social audits in addition to other functions. Members of
the Gram Sabhaand the village panchayat, intermediate panchayat and district panchayat through
their representatives, can raise issues of social concern and public interest and demand an
explanation.
Box 6.2 Right to information for members of Gram Sabha
Some States have already passed Right to Information Acts. Notwithstanding some weaknesses, the Acts have
opened the way for transparency in administration from the State to the panchayat level.
The Right to Information Acts specify the modalities for obtaining information and provide penalties or failing to
furnish or supplying false information. The Acts facilitate social legislation such as on minimum wages and gender
rights and, more importantly, pave the way for public debate on government development projects.
However, none of the Acts have defined the right to information to include inspection of works and documents, and
the taking of notes and extracts. This is needed to make the social audit by the Gram Sabha more effective.
The Gram Sabha should have the mandate to: inspect all public documents related to budget
allocations, list of beneficiaries, assistance under each scheme, muster rolls, bills, vouchers, accounts,
etc., for scrutiny; examine annual statements of accounts and audit reports; discuss the report on the
*
j
local administration of the preceding year; review local development for the year or any new activity
programme; establish accountability of functionaries found guilty of violating established
norms/rules; suggest measures for promoting transparency in identifying, planning, implementing,
monitoring and evaluating relevant local development programmes; and ensure opportunity for rural
poor to voice their concerns while participating in social audit meetings.
Social audit committees
Social audit can also be used for auditing the performance of all three PRI tiers with a social audit
committee at each level. These committees should not be permanent, but can be set up depending
on the nature of programmes/schemes to be audited.
Social audit committee members can be drawn from among programme stakeholders. It is advisable
to use the services of retired functionaries of different organizations, teachers or persons of
impeccable integrity living in the Zillo Ponchoyat/B\ock Ponchoyot/Gram Ponchoyot jurisdiction. Both
facilitators and social audit committee members can be trained by social audit experts.
Steps in social audit in local bodies
1.
Clarity of purpose and goal of the local elected body.
2.
Identify stakeholders with a focus on their specific roles and duties. Social auditing aims to
ensure a say for all stakeholders. It is particularly important that marginalized social groups,
which are normally excluded, have a say on local development issues and activities and have
their views on the actual performance of local elected bodies.
3.
Definition of performance indicators which must be understood and accepted by all. Indicator
data must be collected by stakeholders on a regular basis.
4.
Regular meetings to review and discuss data/information on performance indicators.
5.
Follow-up of social audit meeting with the ponchoyot body reviewing stakeholders' actions,
activities and viewpoints, making commitments on changes and agreeing on future action as
recommended by the stakeholders.
6.
Establishment of a group of trusted local people including elderly people, teachers and others
who are committed and independent, to be involved in the verification and to judge if the
decisions based upon social audit have been implemented.
7.
The findings of the social audit should be shared with all local stakeholders. This encourages
transparency and accountability. A report of the social audit meeting should be distributed
for Grom Ponchoyot auditing. In addition, key decisions should be written on walls and boards
and communicated orally.
—
Key factors for successful social audit
•
•
•
Level of information shared with and involvement of stakeholders, particularly of the rural
poor, women, and other marginalized sections.
Commitment, seriousness and clear responsibilities for follow-up actions by elected
members of the Grom Ponchoyot.
Involvement of key facilitators in the process.
3
How to enhance local capacities for social audit
•
•
•
Organization of a mass campaign to increase public awareness about the meaning, scope,
purpose and objectives of social audit.
Establishment of a team of social audit experts in each district who are responsible for
training social audit committee members (stakeholders).
Implementation of training programmes on social auditing methods - conducting and
preparing social audit reports, and presentation at Gram Sabha meetings.
Social development monitoring (SDM): a social audit process
SDM is a periodic observation activity by socially disadvantaged groups as local citizens who are
project participants or target beneficiaries. It could also take the form of action intended to enhance
participation, ensure inclusiveness, articulation of accountability, responsiveness and transparency by
implementing agencies or local institutions, with a declared purpose of making an impact on their
socio-economic status.
Conclusion
To sum up, the following proposals can be made to make social audit a regular and effective institution
to promote the culture of transparency and accountability through the Gram Sabha.
1.
States should enhance Gram Sabha powers to make them effective instruments of
participatory decision-making and ensuring accountability of PRIs in local development
planning.
2.
An agency like the Ombudsman can be set up to look into complaints of local
maladministration.
3.
Development functionaries found guilty of violating established norms for local
development planning should be punished.
It is important to ensure that rural poor are given due protection when they wish to stand
up to speak against any misconduct.
4.
GRAM PANCHAYAT STAKEHOLDERS
Contributed by Srivastava, former Professor and Head, Centre for Panchayati Raj, National
Institute of Rural Development (NIRD), Hyderabad, India & Chandan Datta, PRIA, New Delhi.
A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SOCIAL AUDIT AS A PARTICIPATORY TOOL TO STRENGTHEN DEMOCRATIC
GOVERNANCE, TRANSPARENCY, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
. Key Conditions for Effective Social Audit Initiatives
There is wide consensus that social audit initiatives are not only a matter of a planning process, but also
*
of windows of opportunity and capacity that are directly related to the political, policy, institutional, and
organizational settings in a given country. As such, social audit cannot be considered an end, but rather
a means for citizen engagement and greater accountability and transparency. While there is not a
standard blueprint to conduct social audits, donors, governments and CSOs have come to share a basic
understanding on key conditions that are necessary for social audits to be effective. These conditions
include:
Political Will: Social auditing is most effective when government authorities are willing to collaborate
and allow civil society to provide feedback and information about their activities.
It enables public
sector entities and civil servants to build a clearer picture of how their stakeholders view them and build
more mutually beneficial relationships with them. Through social audit activities, public entities and
officials can also anticipate any concerns that stakeholders may have and manage risks. However,
governments are not always willing to cooperate, nor allow citizens to monitor their activities and/or
respond to citizens' evaluations of government actions. In that case, social audit requires developing
creative and effective ways to communicate their findings and grasping the attention of public officials
(Box 4).
A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SOCIAL AUDIT AS A PARTICIPATORY TOOL TO STRENGTHEN DEMOCRATIC
GOVERNANCE, TRANSPARENCY, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
Box 4: Social Audit Experience for the Local Road Construction Project in Sonsonate, El Salvador
During a local construction project for a six-kilometer local road in El Salvador, the stakeholders used a
social audit to evaluate this project, with the intention of ensuring the road would be built with
improved standards of quality, would meet the needs of the target population, and would be durable,
thus benefiting future generations, as a result of greater social oversight and transparency.
The main stakeholders involved included the Mayor, the chief of the Institutional Procurement and
Contracts Unit (UACI), the Local Development Committee, a Social Audit Committee, the direct and
indirect beneficiaries comprising some 1,500 low-income families. The broad participation of the all
stakeholders was a key element in achieving the stated goals.
During the social audit, the Mayor's Office provided logistical and administrative support, as well as the
underlying legal framework for all audit activities. This was critical during the project's early stages since
the other participants perceived a degree of political will to undertake this unprecedented social audit
activity. While the Local Development Committee (CDL) played a prominent role in identifying the most
affected population, prioritizing needs, and identifying local leaders in the area.
Meanwhile, community leaders who organized the Social Audit Committee were the eyes and ears of
the entire process. They monitored the physical construction process and paid attention to everything
from the receipt and quality of materials to their proper use. They approached this task with unswerving
dedication, given that they were the direct beneficiaries of the project. Technical assistance was crucial
particularly to raise awareness, support and encourage collaborative activities, and provide training to
the Social Audit Committee in the application of the Procurement Law.
Source: World Bank, Voice, Eyes ond Ears: Social Accountability in Latin America. Washington D.C., Civil Society
Team/World Bank, 2003.
Enabling Legislation: Democracies rest on the premise that citizens have a right to know what the
government does, how it does it, and how they go about it, and finally how this impact them. The
government, on the other hand, has an obligation to respond and become accountable to citizens. A
basic legal framework must exist for effective social audit to take place. This often involves the right to
demand, and the right for civil society participation in public affairs, and a right to access to public
information. Social audits also require access to reliable information about government's actions and
decisions. Without information, citizens can neither assess the situation they are trying to change nor
participate effectively in shaping it. Nevertheless, in countries with poor legal instruments, social audits
are still relevant and perhaps even more important. Informal mechanisms activating accountability can
also make an important impact.
Evidence shows that the legal framework for social audit can be international, regional, national and/or
even sub-national (municipal). Since many countries are signatories of international and regional anti-
A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SOCIAL AUDIT AS A PARTICIPATORY TOOL TO STRENGTHEN DEMOCRATIC
GOVERNANCE, TRANSPARENCY, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
corruption conventions, such as the United Nations Convention against Corruption or regional
Conventions against Corruption, recognize the importance of external oversight, offer one legal basis for
social audit activities.
In some countries, constitutions explicitly reference issues related to
accountability and transparency in the management of public resources and thus provide a possibility of
external oversight, including social audit. For example, in Colombia, the 1991 Constitution explicitly
recognizes the right of citizens to oversee government officials and to exercise social control wherever
public resources are used.
In South Korea, the Board of Audit and Inspection (BAI) introduced in 2000
the Citizens' Audit Request System, through which citizens can request audits related to service
providers in cases where the violation of laws or corruption could seriously undermine public interest.12
In Honduras the 1990 Decentralization Law and the 2000 Municipal Law established Municipal
Commissioners who monitored the Hurricane Mitch Reconstruction Assistance subsidies to villages and
rural funds in accordance with donor requirements, which led the Honduran Comptroller General’s
office to establish social auditors in municipalities receiving reconstruction support.
When no legal framework exists for citizens' participation in social audits, binding mechanisms can be
established to ensure that social audit activities have a legal basis.
For example, the National
Commission on Audit (COA) - the Supreme Audit Institution of the Philippines - entered into a
partnership with a NGO, Concerned Citizens of Abra for Good Governance (CCAGG) to conduct
participatory audit exercises in the Abra region. The exercises focused on assessing the impact of the
audited government program/project to determine whether the program/project achieved its desired
results.
In another example, in Andhra Pradesh, the fourth largest state in India, the Government
permitted the appointment of Village Social Auditors (VSA) for each local government body (Grom
Ponchayat) under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS).
These village social
auditors are unemployed youth from the village who are trained for this purpose and facilitate the social
audit in the village.
Skills and Resources: The central elements enabling civil society organizations (CSO), to conduct social
audits, entails their capacity to organize, as well as their available technical and advocacy skills. The skills
required probably encompass legal, operational and communication skills, and are important not only in
terms of technical skills but also to use them to mobilize support and resources. With more knowledge
about the social audit process, and the possibility to reach the aims, the motivation to engage policy
makers could be raised. Similarly, CSOs' ability to mobilize and effectively use the media, and their
breath membership, as well as their capacity to form and sustain coalitions, their legitimacy and level of
representation, responsiveness and accountability to their own members are all central elements. Even
in countries where political will, enabling legislation and basic rights exist, civil society stjlLrequires the
capacity to organize and promote action. Organization is not a spontaneous outcome. It also requires
skills, discipline, strategy and resources. While spontaneous participation can create excitement at the
12 Pyun, Ho-Bum (2006).
"Audit and Civil Society: The Korean Experience," in the International Journal of Government Auditing.
Washington D.C.: International Budget Project, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, April.
g
A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SOCIAL AUDIT AS A PARTICIPATORY TOOL TO STRENGTHEN DEMOCRATIC
GOVERNANCE, TRANSPARENCY, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
beginning, it is neither effective nor sustainable. Organizing for collective action entails different
essential elements (see Section VI for a detailed step by step example).
Box 5: Training Citizens in Understanding Health Subsidies in Colombia
.
♦
Social Audit experience to monitor the allocation of public health subsidies: The social audit exercise
brought together the participation of several stakeholders, including municipal and departmental
governments, local CSOs, youth groups, and other citizens. The project brought these groups together to
work cooperatively to train youth participants, educate the public, and help in investigating
inconsistencies in health policy.
The initiative also used technical advisors and coordinators in municipal "base teams" in order to
provide technical support for monitoring of the health subsidy, and to coordinate the various
organizations working on the project. Citizens and youth also were trained on themes related to the
health subsidy and citizen participation. The initiative also utilized local media resources, such as radio,
television, and print, to distribute information on the health subsidy and to promote community
activities related to the project.
The youth participants, largely high school-aged students, were instrumental to the project because, in
addition to other activities, they helped educate the general public on the health subsidy program and
policies. The youth used their creativity and energy to communicate in ways that were easily understood
(artwork, theater performances, poems, and songs that explained the health subsidy programs and the
importance of finding and correcting inconsistencies. Youth groups were created to hold community
assemblies and to make house calls to resolve any discrepancies in the health subsidy program, and to
confirm health subsidy card expiration dates and validity. This process identified waste, fraud, and
mistakes in the health subsidies program, so that the funds were subsequently reallocated to needy
citizens with first priority given to infants, children, and pregnant mothers.
Source: Partners of the Americas, Involving Citizens in Public Budgets: Mechanisms for Transparent and
Participatory Budget. Washington D.C.: Partners of the Americas, 2005.
Objectivity and Independence: Successful social auditing requires that those who monitor or track
government activities maintain their objectivity and independence from the government. Objective and
impartial collection of data and/or information is vital for the ability of social audits to inform both
government and society about government activities and their consequences. Politically motivated
social auditing exercises lose credibility and impact. Similarly, programs and policies audited by third
parties should not have a vested interest in the public entity being monitored. Finally, independence
also often implies financial autonomy from government resources as well. When government resources
are added, there should be some safeguards to ensure that this funding does not adversely affect the
process.
7
i2
A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SOCIAL AUDIT AS A PARTICIPATORY TOOL TO STRENGTHEN DEMOCRATIC
GOVERNANCE, TRANSPARENCY, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
Broad civil society participation: Social auditing initiatives yield better results when citizens are actively
»
included in the entire process from design and planning to implementation. This increases participants'
understanding of the process and sense of ownership and enhances potential sustainability. It is
important that legally recognized organizations (NGOs and CSOs) establish links with the community
members they represent in order to generate credibility and acceptance by the community. Citizen
initiatives which originated
in organizations without community support lose credibility and
effectiveness. Syndicates and unions, and sometimes even private enterprises can also play an
important role in enhancing accountability. More importantly, broader social coalitions increase the
power and effectiveness of advocacy initiatives in support of government reforms (Box 6).
Box 6: Broadening Citizen Participation: Enhancing Effectiveness and Impact
A critical part of any social audit initiative involves bringing the findings to the attention of the
concerned public sector official and/or policy-maker, and to negotiate for change. In Bangalore, India, to
curb public works corruption, children were sent to monitor the streets with checklists. The youth, aged
12 to 14 years old, were first briefed on the need to drain water from the roads to maintain their
quality. The technical advisors explained the various critical road dimensions: the efficacy of the
drainage system, impediments to pedestrian and road safety, and the quality of the riding surface.
The youth were then sent to observe 300 meters of each road and to fill out their checklists. Some of
the indicators were: presence of drains, evenness of the surface, presence of covered footpaths,
number of potholes, and number of cracked areas.
The results were presented to the Bangalore
Municipal Commissioner at a public function. Based on the youth's findings, the Municipal
Commissioner directed his officials to take immediate steps to upgrade the roads covered in the
research. Consequently, these measures produced a visible change in road maintenance in Bangalore as
the filled-in potholes produced an observable improvement.
In Indonesia, the Koalisi Perempuan (Coalition for Women) submitted its blueprint for the National Plan
of Action to the Ministry of Women Empowerment. It drafted proposals and lobbied for amendments to
the 1945 Constitution. The coalition wrote position papers on maternity rights, on affirmative action for
women, and on anti-trafficking measures. In response, Indonesia's Koalisi Perempuan established a
Caucus of Parliamentarian Women at the national level and the coalition installed itself in the policymaking body of the Ministry for Women Empowerment. As a result of this ground-breaking work, the
ministry established focal points for gender and development concerns to be in charge of planning
gender policy.
In the Philippines, UNDP and UN-Habitat partnered with five municipal governments to implement the
Citizen Action for Local Leadership to Achieve MDGs by 2015 project or Call 2015. The objective was to
localize MDGs and promote citizen engagement in urban governance. It aimed to establish dialogue and
8
2
A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SOCIAL AUDIT AS A PARTICIPATORY TOOL TO STRENGTHEN DEMOCRATIC
GOVERNANCE, TRANSPARENCY, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
voice mechanisms between citizens and the government to combat corruption and strengthen the
delivery of basic services.
The project's strategy was to build partnerships between research and academic institutions, civil
society organizations (including grass-roots women's organizations) and local governments to develop
systems of knowledge exchange and management as well as user-friendly applications to measure
results and track progress towards the MDGs. "Integrity Circles" (ICs) composed of respected men and
women from local communities selected through a community consultation process were established in
all 5 cities. Researchers and academics from participating universities were also members. Each of the 5
cities piloted Call 2015 through various projects. A Community Based Monitoring System (CBMS) was
developed to profile all the households in the municipalities and establish baseline indicators for eight
poverty "dimensions". The baseline data was translated into household-level maps indicating problem
areas. Local government officials and IC members were trained to use the CBMS to monitor service
delivery against the baseline.
The involvement of city officials through systemic consultation increased their responsiveness to the
suggestions of the ICs to update local legislation and policies. In Tuguegarao, the city government
established the Call 2015 Information Corner and invited the city-level IC to monitor and evaluate the
performance of the city. An official resolution facilitated participation of IC members in city council
proceedings. This strengthened the direct accountability of city officials to citizens. The success of these
pilot projects resulted in mainstreaming this approach in all cities in the Philippines.
Source, India and Indonesia; Dennis Arroyo, "Summary Paper on the Stocktaking of Social Accountability
Initiatives in Asia and the Pacific," The World Bank Institute Community Empowerment and Social
Inclusion Learning Program, 2004.
Source, the Philippines: UNDP (2010) Fostering Social Accountability: From Principle to Practice. Guidance Note.
Oslo: United Nations Development Programme. Oslo Governance Centre.
A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SOCIAL AUDIT AS A PARTICIPATORY TOOL TO STRENGTHEN DEMOCRATIC
GOVERNANCE, TRANSPARENCY, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
VI. Step-by-step Approach to Design and Conduct Social Audits
Ideally, every step of the social audit process should contribute to informing/engaging citizens and
mobilizing support. The ability of citizens to engage governments is crucial to the success of social audit
initiatives.
Initiating
1.
1.1
Define a clear objective: Social audit objectives vary greatly, for example, they can be the
quality of health services, the use of targeted public resources, teachers' attendance rates at school,
the use of fees collected by a school, the quality and/or rate of completion of a government project,
or the compliance with legal regulations. What is important is that citizens have a clear idea of what
they are monitoring, its relevance, and who within the government is responsible for the service,
action, program or decision they are monitoring. Having a clear objective is essential for defining
good indicators of government performance and generating adequate information that serves both
to inform the community and to provide feedback for public authorities about specific government
actions or programs.
1.2
Define What to Audit: One of the first steps to designing and implementing social audit activities
is to determine what will be the subject of the social audit exercise, and/or determine the entry
point. The subject and/or entry point may be of a specific or general nature and may be identified
at a local, provincial or national level. For example:
Policies/Laws/Programs/Plans, such as investment and/or development plans, annual
■
operative plans, anti-poverty programs, access to information, procurement processes and
compliance with international conventions.
Infrastructure and Public Works, such as street electrification projects, pavement of streets,
■
and highway and bridge construction.
Public Services is another potential area with a number of possibilities, such as property
■
registration and taxes, public transportation, trash and recycling services, public markets, water
and sanitation services, courts and judicial services.
Specific policy/program topics that are the basis for human development, such as health,
■
education, housing and human rights.
1.3
Establish person/organization responsible for the Social Audit: Once the entry point has been
determined, then the stakeholders should be identified. That is, who are going to be the main
players involved in the process, including the beneficiaries, government offices and officials,
io
A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SOCIAL AUDIT AS A PARTICIPATORY TOOL TO STRENGTHEN DEMOCRATIC
GOVERNANCE, TRANSPARENCY, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
technical advisor and leading social audit group/commission/committee?
It is here where the
formation and promotion of collaborative relationships between civil society and government, and
among CSOs is crucial.
1.4
Secure Funding: the funds to carry out the planning and audit process should be obtained
through a donor agency, international organizations or the State, as long as there is no conflict of
interest.
2.
Planning
Once the subject of social audit /entry point has been selected, the stakeholders should move to
designing the strategy and/or action plan to implement the exercise.
In this part of the process,
answering how would the exercise be conducted and implemented is a key element. This plan/strategy
should guide the entire process and at minimum should delineate objectives, activities, time framework,
responsible entities and/or people, and funding requirements. It would be important at this stage not
only to have a realistic budget, but also an analysis of funding and potential gaps and sources to fill
those gaps. This is also the stage where CSOs would want to engage donors and other international and
national sources of funding. The sequence of steps to implement the social audit process needs to be
well articulated and linked to availability of resources.
2.1
Selecting Strategy/Methodology/Approach/Tools: At this stage consensus should be formed
around a methodology and approach, including means to collect data, and pre-feasibility
assessments. Thought should also be given at this stage to the beneficiary community to clearly
identify their needs and manage their expectations. Also, deciding who specifically (an od hoc team,
a NGO, a Social Audit Committee and/or Commission) will actually be conducting the exercise is
another important element of this stage in the process.
2.2
Identifying stakeholders, recognizing viable entry points, and drafting of an action plan: Once
a common objective has been identified and understood, an action plan needs to be drafted
explaining how the monitoring of government performance will take place. This includes, how will
the different activities be coordinated, who will be responsible for what; what kind of information
needs to be collected; what government agency needs to be approached; and the timeframe for
completing the activity.
2.3
Understanding government decision making process: As well as the substantive issues involved
in the public policies that are being audited. The more complex the subject matter being analyzed
and evaluated, the more technical sophistication is required on the part of social auditing groups.
Without this understanding and technical capacity, citizens can make unrealistic evaluations about
government performance, can overload the government with unsupported and non-viable requests,
and can lose credibility, thus risking generating greater frustration and cynicism about the
government.
A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SOCIAL AUDIT AS A PARTICIPATORY TOOL TO STRENGTHEN DEMOCRATIC
GOVERNANCE, TRANSPARENCY, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
2.4
Collaborative Approaches: Once stakeholders have been identified, and before designing a
strategy, it is imperative to adopt collaborative approaches and practices. This could help generate
political will and commitments, although it is not automatic. Collaborative efforts between CSOs
and government often result in increased mutual trust. Citizens also come to expect that
government will treat civil society as a partner. These expectations and relationships may help to
expand and sustain social audit initiatives in periods and places where political will is weak. The idea
is to create a collaborative environment that enables the stakeholders to design a strategy and
achieve the goals of the exercise, as well as to strengthen their individual capacities through the
mutual exchange of tools, lessons learned, and technical skills. While conventional wisdom would
point to stakeholders working in similar areas to naturally collaborate, this is not always the case.
Evidence suggests that stakeholders, particularly CSOs, often perceive themselves more as
competitors for funding and donor attention than as partners.
2.5
Engaging government counterparts: Is another key activity to seek their participation and inputs
regarding the plan/strategy. Some of the social audit processes may be complicated and require
access to information and sources of information within the government.
In some cases,
particularly where there is no Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) and/or a weak FOIL, procuring
public information may involve formal agreements with government institutions.
3.
Implementing
3.1 Perform audit: The plan for the audit process will be implemented and the audit will be
performed by the selected person or organization that best guarantees technical expertise and
objectivity throughout the process.
3.2 Collection and Analysis of Information: Producing relevant information and building credible
evidence that will serve to hold public officials accountable, is a critical aspect of social audit. There
are a number of tools that can be selected to collect and analyze data for social audit. Nonetheless,
generally all aim at obtaining "supply-side" data/information (from government and service
providers) and "demand-side" data/information (from users of government services, communities
and citizens).
On the one hand, social auditors must have accessibility to information from
government officials and institutions, and on the other hand, the capacity to obtain and effectively
analyze and present the information. When information about particular government policies or
activities does not exist, social audits need to develop creative ways to generate useful information,
such as surveys, report cards, or even less sophisticated information sources such as using cameras
to photograph the humiliating conditions of public hospital rooms in Mexico or rulers to measure
the width of cement applied to local roads in the Dominican Republic.
Often information provided by the government is not always up to date, and/or it comes in an
aggregated and/or unfriendly format. For social audit to be successful, this may involve working with
A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SOCIAL AUDIT AS A PARTICIPATORY TOOL TO STRENGTHEN DEMOCRATIC
GOVERNANCE, TRANSPARENCY, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
trained specialists in such areas as budget, surveys, and access to information, who can help to
unbundle financial information and collect and analyze data using techniques that will guarantee
credibility and objectivity. Often at this stage, and with proper training, stakeholders can get
involved in the collection of data and in testing systems and services. In any case, the goal is to
produce meaningful findings that can be understood by all stakeholders and used to shine a light on
a policy/program/service/issue and provide appropriate recommendations. Similarly, evidence
shows that any methodological approach that is developed to conduct a social audit must be easily
replicable by other stakeholders.
3.3
Disseminating Findings and Information: Bringing information and findings into the public
sphere and generating public debate around them are a key element of most social audit initiatives.
Irrespective of the topic, the information, analysis and findings produced in a social audit exercise
can be key evidence to raise awareness, improve public sector initiatives and/or build support for
reform.
Reporting and dissemination of results and findings, has to be done in the most
constructive way.
Definition of a viable communication plan to disseminate the results of the
activity, generate broader social support, increase awareness about a particular issue that triggered
the social audit and advocate for reform.
The communication plan needs to consider who the
appropriate audience is, what is the most appropriate medium of communication, how will the
messages be delivered, and who will take responsibility for responding to government and/or
citizens concerns.
Effective communication strategies and mechanisms are, therefore, essential
aspects at this stage. These may include the organization of press conferences, public meetings and
events as well the strategic use of both modern and traditional forms of media. Transmitting
relevant information to government officials who are in a position to act on it (and, ideally,
interacting directly with those decision-makers on an on-going basis) is also an essential aspect of
social audit.
Moreover, the reporting and dissemination process must be thought as a dialogue, to establish
cooperative partnerships (either informal or formal) between government authorities and citizen
groups performing social auditing. Out of this dialogue process, political will for change, action and
follow-up if not already present, can begin to develop and/or strengthen. As was mentioned earlier,
social audit initiatives are not ends but means to improve democratic governance policy
performance and impact. Therefore, the reporting and dissemination of the analysis and findings, is
only the beginning of a process and should not only inform citizens about the status of their rights
and the impact of policies on them, but also engage their interests and mobilize them to build
— coalitions and partnerships with different stakeholders (like bureaucrats, media, legislatures, the
business sector).
3.4
Considering institutionalization and sustainability: The mechanisms that bring social audit into
fruition include basic processes such as how to channel participation and engage policy-makers, to
more specialized steps such as a technical mapping of the subject of the social audit exercise. There
are often additional technical needs such as understanding pertinent laws (FOIL, Citizen
13
A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SOCIAL AUDIT AS A PARTICIPATORY TOOL TO STRENGTHEN DEMOCRATIC
GOVERNANCE, TRANSPARENCY, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
Participation, Procurement, and Municipal Ordinances) to facilitate social audit, and/or providing
training on these laws to a variety of audiences, such as national public officials and bureaucrats,
mayors, governors, mayors, NGOs and CSOs, and the media to name just a few. Clearly having a
grasp of the enforcement boundaries and elasticity of these laws, can create spaces for social audit
processes to obtain and get better access to public information, recognition of citizen committees,
guidelines for greater citizen participation.
At this stage it is also important to address the concern of sustainability in order to create long-term
results. Thus plans should be made to ensure sustainability of the social audit process, beyond the
duration of the specific exercise being planned. In addition, it is important at this stage also to think
on ways to leverage additional resources in order to institutionalize the process. Social auditing, like
any other social initiative, requires financial resources to train and guide participants, conduct
particular actions, communicate and disseminate its results, and advocate for change. Therefore if
ultimately, the social audit exercise can demonstrate that it has improved key aspects of public
sector management of resources, government efficiency, and democratic citizenship, it may provide
sufficient evidence to justify additional funding, even from the public sector.
4.
Closing
4.1 Follow-up: The interaction between government and citizens ultimately promotes more
accountable and transparent democratic governance. While citizens reporting the results of the
social audit exercise in itself does not guarantee transparency and accountability, at minimum it
creates an opportunity to highlight demands and needs, as well as to promote dialogue,
agreements, shared visions to improve public policies and promote reforms. Ultimately, ensuring
that the results of the social audit exercise have been translated into sustainable change is the key
to any social audit exercise.
A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SOCIAL AUDIT AS A PARTICIPATORY TOOL TO STRENGTHEN DEMOCRATIC
GOVERNANCE, TRANSPARENCY, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
66
Figure 2: Illustrative Step by Step Process of Social Audits
*
objective
•1.2 Define what to
audit
•1.3 Establish
person responsible
for Audit Process
•1.4 Secure funding
Strategy/
Methodology/
Approach
•3.2 Collection and
Analysis of
Information
•2.2 Identify
stakeholders
•2.3 Understand
government
decision process
•2.4 Collaborative
approaches and
practices
•2.5 Engage
government
counter parts
•3.3 Diseminate
findings and
information
•3.4 Consider
institutionalization
and sustainability
Source: Compiled and summarized from an array of Manuals and Guides those have been produced all over the
world to help replicate social audit experiences.
SS^gA.T
vzivy
Guidelines for Social Audit of the
Integrated Watershed Management Programme (1WMP)
Society for Social Audit, Accountability and Transparency (SSAAT)
Department of Rural Development, Government of Andhra Pradesh
it
ABBREVIATIONS:
AP
Andhra Pradesh
ATRs
Action Taken Reports
CSOs
Civil Society Organizations
DA
Daily Allowance
DRPs
District Resource Persons
DTR
Decision Taken Report
DVCs
District Vigilance Cells
DWMA
District Water Management Agency
GO
Government Order
GP
Gram Panchayat
IWMP
Integrated Watershed Management Programme
MGNREGS.
Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme
NGOs
Non-Governmental Organizations
OBC
Other Backward Classes
PIA
Project Implementation Agency
PRI
Panchayati Raj Institutions
RTI
Right to Information
SC
Scheduled Caste
ST
Scheduled Tribe
SLNA
State Level Nodal Agency
SRPs
State Resource Persons
SSAAT
Society for Social Audit. Accountability and Transparency
TA
Travel Allowance
VOs
Village Organizations
VSAs
Village Social Auditors
WCC
Watershed Computer Centre
WSC
Watershed Committee_
SHGs
Self Help Groups
MPDO
Mandal Parishad Development Officer
17
Table of Contents
Introduction:
^1
1
Definitions:
4
Periodicity of Social Audit:
5
Scope of Social Audit:
5
I The Social Audit Process:
5
; Role of Presiding officer and Decision Taken:
9 !
i
I Participation of Quality Control Team:
!
10 j
1
101
Public Discloser of Social Audit Reports:
| Action Taken Reports Public Disclosure:
1l--.- —. .... . --—--- . . - --- --—------- — . — . —
11
————------- — •
1
—-- —— — --- — - —
"i
— rq
11 I
Code of Conduct for the Social Audit Personnel:
Monitoring of the Social Audit:
Role and Responsibility of State Resource Persons (SRPs):
12 :
Role and Responsibility of District Resource Persons (DRPs):
_______ .
12
Selection Process of Village Social Auditors (VSAs):
Annexure:!:
!__________ ____
i
..
. ........... ---------
I8
----------------------------------------
14
I.
Introduction:
The common guidelines for Watershed Development Programme 2008 emphasizes on ‘Social
Audits’ of IWMP Projects for ensuring transparency and accountability. As per the guidelines,
the state government is committed to ensure the social audit process for transparency and
accountability in the programme. It is in the interest of programme implementation to arrange
social audits for the works undertaken.
The Department of Rural Development, Government of Andhra Pradesh is the first in the
country to carry out the social audit process for IWMP projects. The Social Audit process was
first piloted in two project areas in Ananthapur District in the year 2011. This was followed by
three social audits covering all three regions of the State. Based on the practical experiences
gained from these social audits, the following guidelines are prepared for carrying out social
audits in IWMP projects.
The Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India describes social audits as “...auditing
of a scheme by the primary stakeholders or with the active involvement of the primary
stakeholders of the Scheme. This includes facilitation and verification of facts on the ground
while taking into account official records, verification of works and verification by meeting
beneficiaries, recording written/oral evidence of beneficiaries, writing the social audit report
followed by a discussion on the report in a public assembly in the presence of independent
observers.” The Ministry also adds that social audit is “a continuous process of public vigilance
through which the potential beneficiaries and other stakeholders of an activity or project are
involved at every stage: from planning to implementation as well as monitoring and evaluation”;
The social audit process in Andhra Pradesh is undertaken by the Society for Social Audit,
Accountability and Transparency (SSAAT), an independent society set up by the Department of
Rural Development. Government of AP to facilitate social audits of the MGNREGS. The social
audits are being conducted as a means to empower the people and to facilitate public scrutiny of
the implementation of the government development schemes and programme in the utilization of
funds in the prescribed manner and to access their rights and entitlements;
Definitions:
IL
a.
‘Social auditors* mean the beneficiaries or members from the beneficiaries' families
identified by SSAAT, trained in social audit processes who will carry out the social
audits and present the findings in the ‘social audit gram sabha’;
b.
‘Social audit gram sabha' means the gram sabha specially convened on the conclusion of
the social audit process in which the social audit report is read out;
c.
State Resource Persons (SRPs) are Resource Persons deputed by SSAAT to lead the
social audit exercise:
d.
District Resource Persons (DRPs) are Resource Persons deputed by SSAAT to facilitate
the social audit exercise;
e.
Village Social Auditors (VSAs) are literate youth from the primary stake holders’
households of the IWMP identified and selected by resource persons of SSAAT and
trained in social audit process. The village social auditors are the primary stake holders in
the social audit process;
f.
“Social audit project level public hearing” means the public meeting conducted at IWMP
project level presided by the Project Director or any other officer authorized on his/her
behalf. Social Audit public hearing shall be conducted in one of the Micro watersheds of
the project preferably at the head quarters of the project.
III. Periodicity of Social Audit:
a.
The social audits of Integrated Watershed Management Programme (IWMP) will be
carried out once in a year for every project;
b.
Social audit in a project will be taken up in all the micro watersheds of the project
area simultaneously in consultation with the SLNA.
IV. Scope of the Social Audit:
a.
Social Audit shall be taken up for the works executed under Entry Point
Activities (EPA), Natural Resource Management (NRM), Production Systems
Improvement (PSI) & Livelihoods for the asset less & landless
components
of IWMP on which expenditure are incurred at village level;
b.
Funds released under Production Systems Improvement (PSI) both from
Watershed Computer Center (WCC) and DWMA to Village Organizations
(VOs), Animal Husbandry dept and other convergence departments and also
expenditure incurred by WCC itself shall be audited;
c.
Expenditure under Institution &, Capacity Building incurred at WCC shall also
be audited.
V. The Social Audit Process:
1.
Pre-Social Audit -
a.
Social Audit Schedule -.The schedule for conduct of social audit will be prepared by
SSAAT in consultation with the Slate Level Nodal Agency (SLNA) once in 3 months
and communicated to the Districts through written proceedings in advance, so as to give
them sufficient time to prepare for the audit process:
■5.0
b.
Intimation Letter - The concerned Project Directors of DWMA and Project Officers will
receive an intimation letter with the details of social audit schedule listing out the records
that are to be provided to the social audit teams.
c.
Handing over of Records - The records pertaining to the project area to be audited will
be kept ready and handed over to the social audit team on the first day of commencement
of the audit process. The records required for social audit will be as per the list attached
in Annexure -1
d. Responsibility for producing the records- The project officer will provide the required
information to the team without fail. The PO will be responsible for keeping records
ready as per the schedule of the social audit and ensure that it is handed over to the team.
e. Facilitation for providing accommodation, food and logistics - PO has to ensure
providing accommodation, food and logistics arrangements to the SA team during the
audit.
f.
Selection and deployment of the Social Audit Team - SSAAT will be responsible for
identifying, training and deploying the IWMP social audit teams. The Programme
Manager and Additional Programme Manager (Technical), SSAAT (IWMP) will ensure
that the schedules drawn up are followed scrupulously. Two teams shall be deployed in
Rayalaseema and one team each in the Telangana and Andhra region.
g. Randomization of the SA team - Each social audit team will be headed by an SRP who
shall not belong to the same district. SRP shall have a team of 7 DRPs. DRPs shall not
belong to the same mandal/ project area.
2. Social Audit Process at the Project level a.
Meeting with WCC Staff: Before the Social Audit process commences at the Project
level, the SRP and the project officer have to organize a meeting between the social audit
team and the staff at the Watershed Computer Centre (WCC). They will jointly decide
the social audit schedule at the project level and also schedule of the MWS gram sabhas.
b.
VSA Selection and Training: The social audit team shall identify the interested literate
youth (3-4 per village/ micro watershed area) from the beneficiaries families, henceforth,
known as VSAs. The team will train VSAs along with TOs of the WCC. Training will
include main features of IWMP, technical
aspects under IWMP, RTI (Right to
Information) and social audit process.
DRPs will adequately orient the VSAs about the entire social audit process right from
record verification to verification of works in the field through classroom training. In the
selection of VSAs, youth from primary stake holders of IWMP preferably from
Scheduled Caste/ Tribe/ Other Backward Classes (SC/ST/OBC) and other poor families.
2.6
Consolidation of Records and Verification: The team will verify the records available
c.
at project level. They will cross check the given records & the web reports against the
total expenditure to ascertain that all the records were handed over to them.
Formation of teams for audit: The VSAs will be organized into teams headed by a
d.
DRP. The DRP's role is to help, facilitate the social audit verification process at the
village level through the VSAs. One or more teams will be allotted to each micro
watershed for audit based on the volume of expenditure to be audited.
The social audit process at micro watershed level: Prior to the start of social audit
e.
verification at the field level, there will be an orientation programme to the Watershed
Committee (WC) members, VOs, user groups and other people’s representatives to
explain the objectives of the social audit and to seek their participation in the programme.
Social audit team will create awareness about the programme amongst the community.
During the social audit, in the micro watershed areas, the following activities will be
undertaken:
i.
The social audit team will begin the process by explaining the objectives of the
IWMP and the manner in which it is being implemented in the state;
ii.
A thorough door to door verification of muster rolls and payments made to the wage
seekers whose names are entered in the muster rolls, benefits received under PSI I
LH components;
iii.
Verification of all the works executed under EPA, NRM, PSI (Agrl/AH/Others) &
Livelihoods components by going to the worksites & interviewing beneficiaries. They
will verify the worksites in the presence of the Watershed Assistant/ Technical
Officer/Junior Engineer/ Project Officer The project officer will ensure that he/she
and the concerned Watershed Assistant, Technical Officer are present at the worksite.
iv.
Quality Control team’s reports shall be taken in to account while preparing the DTF.
v.
Village Organization and beneficiaries of PSI
& LH
components should be
interviewed and records verified for utilization of funds & grounding of activities.
vi.
In case of doubts raised by the Technical Officer on measurement deviation issues,
they can recheck one or two worksites along with the DRP before the gram sab/ia\
vii.
Recording (he written statements of the Primary Stake holders of IWMP with proper
witnesses on any issue as well as filling_up of (he social audit formats and writing
reports;
viii.
In case of any misappropriation of funds noticed, in such cases the persons
responsible and the ultimate recipient of such fund shall be identified and indicated in
27
the report. In case, recoveries are made during the social audit the money will be
credited as per orders issued by the CRD;
ix.
The social audit team will conduct ward/habitation meetings with the primary
stakeholders including special meeting in the SC/ST localities on various aspects of
the implementation of the IWMP;
3. Social Audit Gram Sabha:
The social audit verification process at the village level will end with a social audit gram
sabha, which will be scheduled by the project officer through a written request to the
watershed committee chairmen/ members and the Sarpanch. The project officer will
organize the gram sabha bearing in mind the time when the villagers would be available.
The MWS grama sabha shall be chaired by the Sarpanch and proceedings of the Grama
sabha shall be recorded by the Panchayat Secretary. The SA team shall read out the issues
identified, deviations found and persons responsible in each issue in presence of IWMP
staff and IWMP stake holders. The persons will respond on each issue. The explanation
of the persons held responsible for lapses will be taken in to account before the report is
finalized and presented in the Public Hearing.
The project officer has to ensure that the information pertaining to IWMP activities,
provisions and contact details of the implementing persons should be made available to
the participants on paper/posters during the gram sabha.
Independent Observer:
The Gram Sabha shall be conducted in the presence of an independent observer who shall
not be part of Integrated Watershed Management Programme implementing agency, and
preferably of a cadre not less than of a Tahasildar, deputed by the District Collector. .
a)
On every issue identified by the social audit team, the independent
observer shall record, in writing, the evidence of the job card
holders, beneficiaries and the version of the persons indicted in the
social audit. Thereafter, statement so recorded shall be read over to
the deponent and his/her signature obtained.
b)
If any person aggrieved by the social audit finding desires, the
observer shall give an opportunity for re-examination of the issue in
his/her presence.
c)
The evidence so recorded shall not be re-opened al Project Level
social audit public hearing.
28
(For attending the Gram Sabha, honorarium will be paid to the
independent observer as decided by government.)
4. Public Hearing: The social audit process will culminate with a public hearing at the
project level (in any one micro-watershed village of the project as per availability of
transport, preferably at head quarters of the project). The social audit reports along with
evidences and grievances gathered by the social audit team and opinion of the grama
sabha as per the proceedings of the grama sabha will be read out in the presence of the
IWMP stake holders, people’s representatives, the concerned IWMP functionaries and
senior officers of the government.
5. The project officer has to ensure that the information pertaining to IWMP activities,
provisions and contact details of the implementing persons is made available to the
participants on paper/posters during the public hearing.
6. Process and Participation in the Public Hearing:
a)
The project staff will ensure the participation of all the User Groups (UGs) members
and leaders, watershed committee members, VO representatives, gram panchayat
sarpanches, wage seekers from all the micro watershed villages at the project level in
the public hearing.
b)
The project officer is responsible for making arrangements for the smooth conduct of
public hearing such as dais, tent, chairs and public address system etc.
c)
All the public representatives and functionaries involved in the implementation of the
project will be invited by the Project Officer for the meeting, along with all primary
stakeholders;
d)
The social audit findings will be read out Micro Watershed wise. The Presiding
Officer shall lake into account, the observations made by the independent observer in
the Gram Sabha report. Based on the Gram Sabha report and the persons held
responsible in the DTF, the presiding officer will pass orders then and there and
record the same in the DTF.
7. Role of Presiding Officer and Decision Taken:
a)
The Project Director- DWMA or his representative (a senior officer in the
department) will be the “Presiding Officer” at the public hearing. For every issue that
will be read out by the social audit team, the presiding officer will record his or her
decisions/ recommendations of the action to the government in the Decision Taken
format (DTF) by examining the evidence recorded by the observer at the micro
watershed and pass orders in each case;
2-9
b)
Presiding officer will record the decision on each finding of the social audit in the
public hearing based on the evidence presented by the social audit team and the
version of the persons made responsible by the SA team.
c)
In cases of lapses or deviations, Presiding Officer will fix responsibility and take
immediate corrective or disciplinary action as prescribed by the government from
time to time;
d)
Immediately on conclusion of the social audit public hearing, the photo copy of social
audit report, containing with the orders passed by the presiding officer will be sent to
the DWMA for follow-up action and original reports will be kept with SSAAT. Copy
of the social audit report shall be sent to SLNA.
e)
The social audit report finalized in the social audit public hearing of the project will
be considered as enquiry report;
f)
Where disciplinary action has been ordered in the public hearing, such process will be
completed within 30 days from the date of completion of the social audit public
hearing after following the due process outlined by SRDS for FTEs and SLNA for
others;
g)
Where the persons found to have misappropriated funds repay the same in the public
hearing, the same will be deposited in the account designated by the commissioner
and a receipt issued to the person then and there. If the amounts so recovered
rightfully belong to wage seekers, the same will be returned to them within 7 days
from the date of recovery of such money;
I
h)
In case the persons found guilty of misappropriation and fail to repay the amounts,
disciplinary action shall be taken as per the disciplinary rules devised by Society for
Rural Development Services (SRDS) for the fixed tenure employees (FTEs).
i)
In case VOs have distributed / misused funds, action may be initiated as per the
existing procedures and guidelines of SERP (Society for Elimination of Rural
Poverty).
8. Participation of Quality Control Team:
In cases, where the material component of a work is very high and it is perceived that support
of members from the quality control wing is required, the same can be requested from the
CQCO team, if such work was not verified by the QC teams during their monthly
verification. They may further furnish relevant reports.
9. Public Disclosure of Social Audit Reports:
All Social Audit reports will be uploaded on the SSAAT website with link given to IWMP
website.
30
10. Action Taken Reports Public Disclosure:
All social audit Action Taken Reports (ATRs) will be uploaded on the SSAAT website. This
shall be linked to IWMP website.
11. Code of Conduct for the Social Audit Personnel:
The social audit teams including the SRPs, DRPs and VSAs will necessarily follow the
code of conduct laid down below:
a)
The social audit team will exhibit high standards of impartiality and integrity in their
work;
b)
c)
They will stay only in the houses of wage seekers or any government building;
They will accept the food arranged by the members of the SHG, who are independent
of the IWMP implementation. The Social Audit team will pay for the food that is
prepared from the DA that is paid to them ;
d)
Services of any social auditor violating the above code of conduct will be summarily
suspended;
12. Monitoring the Social Audit:
To ensure the objectivity and transparency in the social audit processes, SSAAT will
constitute a special team at the State level to cross check the functioning of SRPs, DRPs
and the findings of social audit reports. This will help in process evaluation and
transparent conduct of social audit.
13. Role and Responsibility of SRPs>
Will be responsible for the social audit process in the District where he/she is placed;
>
Will be responsible for drawing up the monthly schedule for social audits along with the
>
Will be responsible for ensuring that the DRPs do a proper identification and training as
DRPs and in consultation with the District administration;
well as monitoring of VSA;
>
Liaison with the project officials on the various aspects of social audit for which support
is required;
>
Will certify the expenditure incurred for making photo copies of the required documents
by the project officer for handing over to the social audit team for audit;
>
Will co-ordinate and facilitate implementation with local NGOs and CSOs \vho express
>
Will ensure that the DRPs and VSAs write the social audit reports and gather evidence
interest in being part of the social audit process and follow-up with them;
from the stake-holders during the social audit process;
31
>
Will ensure that the social audit reports, evidences and the decision taken report (duly
signed by the presiding officer) are submitted to the district administration and the state
office;
>
Will ensure that the DRPs and the VSAs plan and attend appraisals and submit reports to
>
The SRPs will also attend review meetings on a regular basis;
>
The SRP will ensure that the monthly reports of the work done as well as the attendance
the district administration, social audit follow-up cell and the state office;
of the DRPs are submitted to the state office on time;
>
The SRP will also submit the list of VSAs who have participated in the Social Audit
process to the State Office;
14. Role and Responsibility of the DRPs:
>
>
Will participate in drawing up the monthly schedule of social audits to be held in a
district;
Will be responsible for identification and training of VSAs to carry out social audits in
the respective project;
>
Will mobilize the primary stake holders of IWMP to public hearing.
>
Will provide awareness and information regarding IWMP to all Stake holders of DVMP.
>
Will be responsible for applying for all the IWMP related records at the watershed
computer office;
>
Will be responsible for coordinating the team assigned to him/her and conduct a free and
>
Will be responsible for ensuring that the social audit report is written and evidences are
fair social audit process at the micro watershed level;
gathered from the stakeholders by due process during the social audit;
>
Will be responsible for presenting the social audit reports in the public hearing and put up
the facts as gathered from the stake holders;
>
Will be responsible for submitting the final social audit reports as well as the Decision
Taken Reports (DTR) to the administration as well as SSAAT after the completion of the
process and the public hearing;
15. Selection Process of Village Social Auditors (VSA):
>
Each DRP will visit a Micro Watershed area and inform the PRI representatives of the
social audit process and explain (he audit process that will take place over the next week;
>
The PRI representatives will also be informed of the independent nature of the Audit
process and the VSA selection criteria, informing that the VSA cannot be related in any
way to the implementation agency and has to be from the labourers family;
>
The DRPs will approach the labourers’ families who have worked at the IWMP worksites
and explain the social audit processes to them and ask if there are any literate youth from
their families who would be interested to participate in the social audit process;
32
>
The families will also be informed that since the process will take 10 days, therefore
those who agree to be VSAs will have to be in the process throughout and cannot leave in
between to visit their villages;
>
3-4 literate youth (above 18 years age) among the Primary Stake Holders’ families per
each micro watershed will be identified and trained as village social auditors (VSA) at the
Project Level. These include both young men and women from the stake-holders
families;
>
Classroom trainings for two days will be held at the project level during which the VSAs
will be trained on the rights and entitlements aspect of the FWMP, RTI and the nonnegotiable in the Scheme. The VSAs will also be trained to read and understand the
IWMP related documents, so that they get familiar with muster-rolls, consolidated pay
orders and the bills and vouchers etc, which are required during the door to door
verification process;
>
They will be trained in the process of
implementation in Andhra Pradesh and made
familiar with the implementation process;
>
The VSAs will be trained on the verification of records and the manner in which these
records can be accessed from the government office, under the RTI Act.
>
Following the classroom training, the VSAs will be divided into teams’ equivalent to
>
The VSAs will do the door to door verification; gather written testimonies and evidence
number of MWSs headed by one DRP for the door to door and the worksite verification.
at the village level from the stakeholders, in case any inconsistency or deviation is found
on any issue under the guidance of DRP.
>
The VSAs will verify worksite and record deviations found if any with the DRP in
>
The VSAs will mobilize the labourers and build awareness through focused group
>
The remuneration to the VSAs will be according to the orders issued by SSAAT from
presence of technical IWMP staff concerned;
discussions;
time to time.
S3
Annexure: 1
List of Documents required for social audit of IWMP
1.
Detailed Project Report of Project and MWS (English & Telugu)
2.
List of works done.
3.
Technical and Administrative Sanctions of the works.
4.
Work commencement order
5.
Work I.D wise estimate copies and work done report
6.
WSC resolutions of all Micro Watersheds
7.
Treatment Maps of all Micro Watersheds
8.
Muster Watch Register
9.
M.B issue Register
10.
M.Bs of all works executed under all components (Original)
11.
Muster rolls
12.
QC reports of all Micro Watersheds
13.
Photos of pre and post execution of all works
14.
Estimate copies along with Site clearance/feasible certificates for PT, Check Dams and
check wall.
15.
Work wise FTOs and pay orders (wage & material)
16.
Material bills & vouchers
17.
Consolidated Muster Rolls and pay orders
18.
Suspense account details
19.
EPA estimate , expenditure details and Vouchers
20.
List of beneficiaries under NRM , PSI and LH
21.
Action plans of LH and PSI (Ag, & AH)
22.
Project wise amount released to VOs and grounding status report (SERP web report)
23.
WRP CB action plan, estimates and expenditure including FTOs.
24.
Records/ registers pertaining to animal health camp, feed distribution, mineral mixture
distribution, medicine and material allotment copies.
25.
Report on survival percentage of plants under plantation programme
34
- Media
TRAINING MATERIAL.pdf
Not viewed