PUBLIC RESOURCES FOR CHILDREN - UNICEF...The priority for children in the State Budget shows an improvement from 2004-05 onwards, with the Child Budget accounting for 16.4 per cent

Vol. 2 of Resources for Children Series

PUBLIC RESOURCES FOR CHILDREN IN INDIA: A STUDY OF THE BUDGETS OF RAJASTHAN

(Supported by: UNICEF India)

2007

Centre for Budget and Governance Accountability (www.cbgaindia.org)

PUBLIC RESOURCES FOR CHILDREN IN INDIA: A STUDY OF THE BUDGETS OF RAJASTHAN

(Supported by: UNICEF India)

Study Team: Subrat Das

Debdulal Thakur Ramgati Singh Satadru Sikdar

Editorial Inputs:

Ramya Subrahmanian Yamini Mishra

2007

Centre for Budget and Governance Accountability (www.cbgaindia.org)

CONTENTS

Sl. No. Section Page No.

Key Findings (i)

1. Introduction 1

2. Condition of Children in Rajasthan 5

3. Investment in the Social Sector from the Budgets of Rajasthan 12

4. Resources for Children in the Budgets of Rajasthan 18

5. Public Resources for Children in Rajasthan bypassing the State Budgets

33

6. Concluding Remarks 36

ANNEXURE 41-65

KEY FINDINGS • The study finds that total expenditure on Social Services from the Rajasthan State Budget registered

an increase during 1998-99 to 2000-01, reaching the level of 9.6 per cent of the State’s NSDP in 2000-01.

During 2001-02 to 2004-05, the total expenditure on Social Services from the Rajasthan Budgets was

maintained at levels close to 9 per cent of the NSDP.

• As regards the priority accorded to Social Services within the total expenditure from the Rajasthan

Budgets, the study finds that total expenditure on Social Services registers a decline from 32.1 per cent of

the State Budget in 1998-99 to 23.4 per cent of the State Budget in 2003-04; though it recovers from 2004-

05. The last two years, i.e., 2005-06 (RE) and 2006-07 (BE), show a much better effort from the State, with

the priority for Social Services rising up to 35 per cent of the State Budget.

• Within the total funds provided to the social sector from the Rajasthan Budgets, Education has had a

substantial share which has varied between 3.8 per cent of NSDP to 4.7 per cent of the NSDP during the

period 1993-94 to 2004-05. The expenditures on Water Supply & Sanitation and Medical & Public Health

have also been relatively high (i.e., in comparison to other States like U.P. and M.P.). However, the

expenditures from the State Budget on several other important services, like Family Welfare, Social Security

& Welfare, and the Welfare of SCs, STs & OBCs have been very low. As a result, targeted interventions in

the areas of child health (which gets financed mainly through expenditure on Family Welfare) and child

protection (which gets financed mainly through expenditure on Social Security & Welfare, and Welfare of

SCs, STs and OBCs) have got very limited resources from the State Budgets of Rajasthan during the period

1993-94 to 2004-05. Moreover, the sharp increase in the expenditure on the social sector from the

Rajasthan Budgets during 1998-99 to 2002-03 was accounted for mainly by the additional spending on

Education.

• The study finds that the magnitude of the total Child Budget within the Rajasthan State Budget had

fallen from 4 per cent of the NSDP in 1993-94 to 3.6 per cent of the NSDP by 1997-98, but it rose to 4.1 per

cent of the NSDP in 1998-99, following a pattern similar to the one observed for total expenditure on Social

Services from the State Budget. During the period 1999-2000 to 2002-03, the magnitude of the Child Budget

had been around 4.5 per cent of the NSDP before falling to 3.9 per cent of the NSDP in 2003-04.

• As regards the priority accorded to child-specific expenditure within the State Budget of Rajasthan,

the study finds that the magnitude of the Child Budget as a proportion of the total State Budget had declined

consistently during the period 1999-2000 to 2003-04, after recording a relatively high figure of 15.4 per cent

of the total State Budget in 1998-99. The priority for children in the State Budget shows an improvement

from 2004-05 onwards, with the Child Budget accounting for 16.4 per cent of the State Budget in 2005-06

(RE) and 15.2 per cent of the State Budget in 2006-07 (BE).

• The sectoral composition of total Child Budget (in the Rajasthan State Budget) raises serious

concern. In each of the years during 1993-94 to 2006-07, child education has accounted for a very high

share in the total Child Budget, although this share has come down gradually from 94.9 per cent in 1996-97

to 91.5 per cent in 2006-07 (BE). The share of child development has been increasing gradually from 2.28

per cent in 1996-97 to 7.26 per cent in 2006-07 (BE). The share of child health has fallen from its already

low level of 2.63 per cent in 2001-02 to 0.85 per cent in 2006-07 BE. The share of child protection in the

total Child Budget has always been very low, though it has increased marginally from 0.22 per cent in 1993-

94 to 0.34 per cent in 2006-07 (BE).

• Taking into account the projected child population (i.e., all persons up to 18 years of age) for

Rajasthan, the study finds that the resources earmarked for children in the State Budget have been of very

low magnitude. The per annum expenditure per child on child education shows an increase from Rs. 747 in

1996-97 to Rs. 1,644 in 2006-07 (BE). The per child per annum expenditure on child development has gone

up from Rs. 18 in 1996-97 to Rs. 130 in 2006-07 (BE). The per child per annum expenditure on child

protection from the State Budget has gone up from Rs. 1.70 in 1996-97 to Rs. 6.20 in 2006-07 (BE).

However, per child per annum expenditure from the State Budget on child health has fallen from Rs. 32 in

2001-02 to Rs. 15.30 in 2006-07 (BE). Given the huge deficits persisting in the condition of children in

Rajasthan, the expenditures per child on child health and child protection are grossly inadequate, and this

problem of inadequate resources, although less acute, would also be true of child development and child

education.

• The study also finds that with regard to the expenditure earmarked for children under ‘Centrally

Sponsored Schemes’ in the Rajasthan Budget, the Actuals have been considerably lower than the Budget

Estimates for each of the years during 1999-2000 to 2004-05. Thus, during 1999-2000 to 2004-05, the

ability shown by Rajasthan to utilise the resources sanctioned for children under Centrally Sponsored

Schemes, has been low.

• The study finds that the total amount of Central Government funds for children bypassing the State

Budgets of Rajasthan have increased sharply over the last decade, from Rs. 53 crore in 1999-2000 to Rs.

795.6 crore in 2005-06. Adding up the funds for children provided in the State Budget for 2005-06 (RE) and

the ‘funds released’ for Rajasthan by the Centre in 2005-06 which lie outside the State Budget, the study

finds that a total amount of Rs. 5,549 crore was available in Rajasthan for investments on children in 2005-

06. However, the sectoral composition of these total funds for children was heavily imbalanced, with child

education accounting for a very high share of 92.6 per cent in total, child health accounting for a meagre

share of 1.8 per cent in total and child protection accounting for only 0.44 per cent of the total public

resources earmarked for children in Rajasthan in 2005-06.

A Study of the Budgets of Rajasthan

1

1. Introduction The present Report is the second volume in the Resources for Children series generated through the

Child Budgeting Study undertaken by the Centre for Budget and Governance Accountability (CBGA) in

collaboration with UNICEF India. This Report presents an analysis of Rajasthan Budgets through the

child lens, while the first volume of the series presented the analysis of Union Budgets through a similar

lens.

As mentioned in the Report on Union Budgets, children constitute nearly 40 per cent of India’s population,

and many of the development indicators for children show that they are one of the largest disadvantaged

sections of the population. The same holds true for most of the States in India, including Rajasthan. In

Rajasthan, children (i.e., all persons up to the age of 18 years) constituted 49.3 per cent of the State’s

population in 1996, and in 2006, their proportion in the total population of the State was projected to be

45.6 per cent. In absolute numbers, the projected child population of Rajasthan was 2.84 crore in 2006. It

is well known that Government’s prioritise while spending money from their limited resources, which are

almost always insufficient in comparison to the needs for public spending. In this context, it is pertinent to

enquire into the priorities accorded to children in the State Budgets of Rajasthan.

Like other Indian States with low levels of human development, Rajasthan also presents a disappointing

picture with regard to the condition of children. However, the case of Rajasthan is distinct among all

States with low levels of human development, because it seems to have performed better than other

backward States in accelerating human development over the decade of the 1990s.

Table 1: Human Development Index (HDI) for the Backward States in India (for 1981, 1991 & 2001)

States 1981 States 1991 States 2001 HDI Value Rank* HDI Value Rank* HDI Value Rank* All India 0.302 All India 0.381 All India 0.472 Andhra Pradesh 0.298 9 Andhra Pradesh 0.377 9 Rajasthan 0.424 9 Assam 0.272 10 Assam 0.348 10 Andhra Pradesh 0.416 10 Orissa 0.267 11 Rajasthan 0.347 11 Orissa 0.404 11 Rajasthan 0.256 12 Orissa 0.345 12 Madhya Pradesh 0.394 12 Uttar Pradesh 0.255 13 Madhya Pradesh 0.328 13 Uttar Pradesh 0.388 13

Madhya Pradesh 0.245 14 Uttar Pradesh 0.314 14 Assam 0.386 14 Bihar 0.237 15 Bihar 0.308 15 Bihar 0.367 15 Notes: 1. * Ranking among the 15 larger States in India, viz., Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Gujarat, Haryana, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, and West Bengal. 2. The Planning Commission had estimated the HDI for 2001 only for a few selected States for which some data, including the Census 2001, was available at the time of preparation of the NHDR 2001. Source: Planning Commission, National Human Development Report 2001, Government of India.


2

Table 1, given above, shows the HDI values and relative rankings (among the fifteen larger States) for

seven backward States in 1981, 1991 and 2001, estimated by the Planning Commission and presented in

the National Human Development Report 2001. At each of the three points of time (i.e., 1981, 1991 and

2001) all seven of these backward States had a lower value of the HDI than the national average. The

HDI, which takes a value between 0 and 1, has improved at the national level from 0.302 in 1981 to 0.381

in 1991 and to 0.472 in 2001. Among the seven backward States, Rajasthan stands out on the basis of a

visible improvement in its HDI and an improvement in its relative position among the backward States

between 1991 and 2001. That Rajasthan has outperformed other backward States in the field of human

development gets corroborated by the HDIs (for Indian States) for 2001 prepared by the UNDP office in

Delhi1. Based on the HDIs for 2001, the UNDP categorises Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa and Uttar

Pradesh as Low Human Development States, while Rajasthan is considered a part of the Lower Middle

Human Development, States.

Hence, it seems worthwhile to examine the trends and priorities in public expenditure by the Government

of Rajasthan since the early 1990s and compare the same with the trends and priorities in public

expenditure exhibited by other backward States, in order to generate some insights into the relevance of

public resources for human development in these States. The Child Budgeting Study undertaken by

CBGA attempts this kind of an exercise for Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, with specific

focus on the development of children in these States. The present study focuses on the resources

provided from the State Budgets of Rajasthan for programmes/schemes meant specifically for the welfare

of children over the last one and a half decades.

Scope of the Study The present study focuses on budgetary transactions of the Government of Rajasthan over the time

period from 1993-94 to 2006-07. The study lays emphasis on budgetary provisions for those

programmes/schemes being implemented in Rajasthan that are meant substantially for the benefit of

children. However, Social Services delivered by the Government (in India) have the most direct benefits

for children. Hence, investments in Social Services provide the larger resource envelope within which

targeted investments for children are made. Taking this into account, the study first analyses the

investment on Social Services from the State Budgets of Rajasthan over the time period 1993-94 to 2006-

07. It then analyses in detail the targeted investments made on children from the State Budgets over the

same time period. Finally, the study also discusses the public resources meant for children in Rajasthan,

which have bypassed the State Budget, because of specific fund flow arrangements adopted by the

Central Government over the last decade. The study tracks such resources for a shorter time period of

1999-2000 to 2005-06. The issues relating to fund utilisation in Rajasthan are not discussed in this

1 The UNDP office in Delhi had prepared these HDIs for the benefit of the Twelfth Finance Commission. Please refer to the Government of India, Report of the Twelfth Finance Commission (2005-10), November 2004, pp. 60-61, available at www.fincomindia.nic.in.


3

Report, though they are as important as the issues relating to the quantum of funds for children. These

fund utilisation issues are discussed separately in the Fifth Report of the present Series.

Key Objectives Some of the key objectives of the present study are:

• To analyse budgetary provisions by Rajasthan for Social Services, in particular for education,

health & family welfare, and water supply & sanitation over the time period 1993-94 to 2006-07.

• To identify the magnitude of provisions made in the State Budgets of Rajasthan for programmes/

schemes, which are largely meant for addressing the specific needs of children, and to study the

trends in the same over the period 1993-94 to 2006-07.

• To analyse the sectoral composition of total budgetary provisions for children, i.e., to assess the

distribution of budgetary provisions among different needs of children such as early childhood

care and development, health, education and protection of children in difficult circumstances.

• To compare the actual expenditures with the budgetary allocations for children.

• To compare the funds provided by the State Government and those by the Centre for expenditure

on selected sectors over the chosen time period.

Methodology and Data It may be noted at the outset that the selection of certain programmes/schemes (from among all

programmes/schemes funded through the State Budget) as directly addressing the needs of children, in

other words, as a part of the Child Budget within the State Budget, is to some extent, subjective. The

compilation of child-specific schemes in this analysis excludes a couple of relevant schemes, such as the

Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme (ARWSP) and the Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC) due to

the unavailability of data on resources that are ex ante earmarked for children under these schemes. On

the other hand, there could also be a little overestimation of child specific spending due to the inclusion of

certain schemes which benefit children along with other sections of the population, like women. However,

the programmes/schemes included in the present analysis (which has been carried out taking into

account the national Five Year Plan documents, State Plan documents, Union Budgets and State

Budgets) may be considered as a fair approximation of the total Child Budget component in the Budget of

Rajasthan.

The data for the analysis presented in this Report have been taken mainly from Detailed Demands for

Grants and Budget at a Glance in the Rajasthan Budgets for various years. In particular, the figures for

State expenditures on child specific programmes/schemes (shown in Annexures 4.1 to 4.4) have been

taken from the Department-wise Detailed Demands for Grants for various years. Data on social sector

expenditure from the State Budget have been taken from two publications by the Reserve Bank of India

(RBI), viz., Handbook of Statistics on State Finances and State Finances: A Study of Budgets.


4

The analysis presented in this Report divides the entire Child Budget into four categories, viz., Early

Childhood Care and Development, Child Health, Child Education, and Child Protection. However, this

division is subjective to some extent as some of the schemes included in a particular category could also

be considered for certain other categories. For instance, a scheme like the Mid-Day Meal scheme, which

has been considered as a part of Child Education here, could have also been considered a part of Child

Development.

The figures for expenditure on child specific schemes from the Rajasthan Budgets are actual

expenditures for the years 1993-94 to 2004-05. However, for 2005-06, Revised Estimates (RE) and for

2006-07, Budget Estimates (BE) of expenditure have been used, since the study included Budget

documents only up to 2006-07. As regards the Centrally Sponsored Schemes for children in the case of

which the Central Government funds (either entire funds for the scheme or a part of the same) bypass

State Budgets (i.e., funds are transferred directly to autonomous programme implementing societies in

the State), the figures mentioned in this Report refer to “funds released” by the Centre to Rajasthan. A

detailed discussion on the methodology of child budget analysis is presented in the Sixth Report of the

present series of study outputs.


5

2. Condition of Children in Rajasthan The present Section highlights some of the relevant areas/sectors where needs of children demand

urgent attention. Although Rajasthan seems to have outperformed other backward States, like Bihar,

Uttar Pradesh, Orissa and Madhya Pradesh, in the overall progress in human development over the

decade of the 1990s, many of the development indicators for children in Rajasthan point to the fact that it

still needs to address huge deficits persisting in this area. The indicators referred to in the following

discussion include some of the key outcome indicators for children as well as indicators of the reach of

some of the critical services for children provided by the Government of Rajasthan.

Table 2: Some Vital Statistics/Indicators for Rajasthan Outcome Indicator Year Rajasthan India Best Performing State Poor Performing State

Sex Ratio 2001 921 933 1058 (Kerala) 861 (Haryana)

Child Sex Ratio (0-6 Years) 2001 909 927 964 (Andhra Pradesh) 793 (Punjab)

Life Expectancy at Birth

(in Years) 1996-2002 61.1 -Female

60.1 -Male 62.7 -Female

61.0 -Male 76.1 –Female, 70.7 –Male

(Kerala) 56.3 –Female, 56.6 –Male

(Madhya Pradesh)

IMR (Per 1000

Live Births) 2005-06 65 57 15 (Kerala) 73 (Uttar Pradesh)

MMR (Per 1 lakh Live Births)

2002-03 445 301 110 (Kerala) 517 (Uttar Pradesh)

Notes: IMR: Infant Mortality Rate; MMR: Maternal Mortality Ratio The MMR for 2002-03, reported here, has been calculated by the Registrar General, GOI, on the basis of a special survey using RHIME (routine, representative, re-sampled household interview of mortality with medical evaluation). Source: 1. Census of India- 2001, Primary Census Abstract. 2. Registrar General of India (2006), Maternal Mortality in India: 1997-2003 Trends, Causes and Risks Factors, New Delhi, GOI. 3. Registrar General of India (2006), Sample Registration System, SRS Bulletin, April 2006, New Delhi, GOI.

Table 2 above presents some of the vital statistics/indicators for Rajasthan along with the figures for the

best performing State and one of the poorest performing States in the country. As is evident from these

figures, the low Child Sex Ratio, high Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) [per 1000 live births] and high Maternal

Mortality Ratio (MMR) [per 1 lakh live births] in the State, each of which is visibly worse than the national

average, indicate the significant deficits in human development still persisting in Rajasthan.

Over the last half decade, Rajasthan has succeeded in bringing the IMR (per 1000 live births) down from

a level of 80 in 1998-99 to 65 in 2005-06. However, it is still much higher than the national average (57 in

2005-06). Chart 2.1, given below, shows the trends in IMR in the major States of India as revealed by the

three different rounds of the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) in 1992-93, 1998-99 and 2005-06.


Chart 2.1: Trends in Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) as revealed by the NFHS (I, II & III)

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

UTTAR PRADESH MADHYA PRADESH

Assam Orissa

RAJASTHAN Bihar

Andhra Pradesh Gujarat

Delhi West Bengal

Karnataka Haryana

Punjab Maharashtra

Tamil Nadu Kerala

India

Infant Mortality Rate (per 1000 live births)NFHS-1((1992-93) NFHS-2 (1998-99) NFHS-3 (2005-06)

Notes: a. NFHS-1 (1992-93), NFHS-2 (1998-99), NFHS-3 (2005-06) b. The data collected in each National Family Health Survey pertain to the previous three years from the year of the respective Survey. Source: NFHS-3 (2005-06), Fact Sheets (Provisional Data), Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, GOI. For further details see Table 2.1 in the Annexure.

As shown in the Chart above, the level of IMR still varies widely across the States, with six backward

States, viz. Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Assam, Orissa, Rajasthan and Bihar recording very high

levels of IMR (above 60 per 1000 live births in 2005-06 for each of these). The worst performing States in

this regard are undoubtedly Uttar Pradesh (IMR of 73 per 1000 live births in 2005-06) and Madhya

Pradesh (IMR of 70 per 1000 live births in 2005-06). Thus, for 2005-06, Rajasthan records a lower IMR

than U.P., M.P. and Assam. However, three other backward States, viz., Andhra Pradesh, Orissa and

Bihar record a better performance than Rajasthan in reducing the IMR. While Orissa has brought down its

IMR (per 1000 live births) from a very high level of 112 in 1992-93 to 65 in 2005-06, Andhra Pradesh over

the same time period has reduced its IMR (per 1000 live births) from 70 to 53; and Bihar has been able to

reduce its IMR (per 1000 live births) from 78 in 1998-99 to 62 in 2005-06. However, Rajasthan had shown

a sharp deterioration with regard to IMR, as its IMR (per 1000 live births) had in fact gone up from 73 in

1992-93 to 80 in 1998-99, before falling to the present level of 65 in 2005-06. Thus, Rajasthan’s

performance in reducing its IMR over the last seven years seems to have been far better than its

disappointing performance in the decade of 1990s. Nonetheless, as already mentioned, several of the

backward States, like Andhra Pradesh, Orissa and Bihar, have recorded better performance than

Rajasthan in reducing the levels of IMR over the last one and a half decades.

6


Chart 2.2: Trends in Vaccination Coverage Status as revealed by the NFHS (I, II & III) (in %)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Tamil Nadu Kerala

Haryana Karnataka

West Bengal Delhi

Punjab Maharashtra

Orissa Andhra Pradesh

Gujarat MADHYA PRADESH

Bihar Assam

RAJASTHAN UTTAR PRADESH

India

States

Percentage of Children 12- 3 months who have received all Recommended vaccines 2NFHS-1((1992-93) NFHS-2 (1998-99) NFHS-3 (2005-06)

Notes: Here we have considered the percentage of children, aged 12-23 months, who have received all recommended vaccines as an indicator of vaccination coverage NFHS-1 (1992-93), NFHS-2 (1998-99), NFHS-3 (2005-06) The data collected in each National Family Health Survey pertain to the previous three years from the year of the respective Survey. Source: NFHS-3 (2005-06), Fact Sheets (Provisional Data), Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, GOI. For further details see Table 2.2 in the Annexure. Chart 2.2, given above, shows the trends in vaccination coverage over the period from 1992-93 to 2005-

06, as captured by the three rounds of the NFHS. At the national level, the vaccination coverage (among

children aged 12-23 months) in India shows a very small improvement from 42 per cent in 1998-99 to 44

per cent in 2005-06. In 2005-06, the vaccination coverage (among children aged 12-23 months) in Uttar

Pradesh, Rajasthan, Assam, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh was lower than the national average, with Uttar

Pradesh and Rajasthan recording the lowest levels of coverage. The performance of Rajasthan in

improving the levels of vaccination coverage over the roughly one and a half decades from 1992-93 to

2005-06 resembles its performance with regard to the reduction of IMR over the same time period. That

is, between 1992-93 and 1998-99, the vaccination coverage in Rajasthan had fallen from 21 per cent to

17 per cent, but rose again to 27 per cent in 2005-06. In terms of its comparative performance, we find

that the only State that has performed worse than Rajasthan is Uttar Pradesh. And, several of the other

backward States, like, Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Orissa have performed significantly better

than Rajasthan in increasing the levels of vaccination coverage over the same time period.

7


Chart 2.3: Trends in Any Antenatal Care as revealed by the NFHS (I, II & III) (in %)

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Kerala

Tamil Nadu

Andhra Pradesh

Maharashtra

West Bengal

Delhi

Karnataka

Punjab

Haryana

Gujarat

MADHYA PRADESH

RAJASTHAN

Assam

UTTAR PRADESH

Orissa

Bihar

India

Percentage of Any Antenatal Care

Stat

es

NFHS-1((1992-93) NFHS-2 (1998-99) NFHS-3 (2005-06)

Notes: Here we have considered the percentage of women who utilised any ante-natal care provided by skilled personnel for reasons related to pregnancy at least once, during pregnancy. NFHS-1 (1992-93), NFHS-2 (1998-99), NFHS-3 (2005-06) The data for each survey pertain to births in the previous three years from the year of the respective survey. Source: NFHS-3 (2005-06), Fact Sheets (Provisional Data), Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, GOI. For further details see Table 2.3 in the Annexure.

Chart 2.4: Trends in Institutional Delivery Coverage as revealed by the NFHS (I, II & III) (in %)

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Kerala

Tamil Nadu

Orissa

Andhra Pradesh

Karnataka

Maharashtra

Delhi

Gujarat

Punjab

West Bengal

Haryana

RAJASTHAN

MADHYA PRADESH

Stat

es

Percentage of Institutional Deliveries

Assam

Bihar

UTTAR PRADESH

India

NFHS-1((1992-93) NFHS-2 (1998-99) NFHS-3 (2005-06) Note Here we have considered the percentage of births in the last 3 years through an institutional set up, as an indicator of institutional coverage of deliveries. NFHS-1 (1992-93), NFHS-2 (1998-99), NFHS-3 (2005-06) The data for each survey pertain to births in the previous three years from the year of the respective survey. Source: NFHS-3 (2005-06), Fact Sheet, Provisional Data, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, GOI. For further details see Table 2.4 in the Annexure.

8


9

Chart 2.3 above shows the trends in ante-natal care utilised by women in the country as captured by the

NFHS I, II and III rounds. With regard to increasing the coverage of ante-natal care utilised by women

(i.e., the percentage of women who utilised any ante-natal care provided by skilled personnel for reasons

related to pregnancy at least once during pregnancy), Rajasthan records an impressive performance both

during the period 1992-93 to 1998-99 as well as during the period 1998-99 to 2005-06. In 1992-93, as

compared to the national average of 65 per cent, the coverage of any ante-natal care utilised by women

in Rajasthan was very low, at only 33 per cent. However, in 2005-06, the coverage of any ante-natal care

utilised by women in Rajasthan at 76 per cent was almost equal to the national average of 77 per cent. A

few of the other backward States like Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh have also recorded significant

progress in this area between 1998-99 to 2005-06, although Bihar and Orissa are still lagging behind in

this respect.

Chart 2.4, given above, shows the trends in the coverage of institutional deliveries across the larger

States in India, as revealed by the three rounds of the NFHS. The performance in terms of increasing the

coverage of institutional deliveries in the country has been quite disappointing with only 40.7 per cent

coverage at the national level in 2005-06. Several of the backward States like U.P., Bihar, Assam, M.P.

and Rajasthan were lagging far behind other States in terms of coverage of institutional deliveries in

2005-06. The coverage of institutional deliveries in Rajasthan shows an improvement from 12 per cent in

1992-93 (national average, 26.1 %) to 22 per cent in 1998-99 (national average, 33.6 %) and then to 32

per cent by 2005-06 (national average, 40.7 %). It appears that with regard to increasing the coverage of

institutional deliveries, Rajasthan has performed better than other backward States like U.P., Bihar,

Assam and M.P. However, some other States like Orissa and Andhra Pradesh have done far better than

Rajasthan in this area. Also, Haryana, which had 22 per cent coverage of institutional deliveries in 1998-

99 (the same as that of Rajasthan in 1998-99), shows an improved coverage of 39 per cent institutional

deliveries by 2005-06. Thus, Rajasthan’s performance in comparison to its neighbouring State has been

disappointing during the period 1998-99 to 2005-06.

Thus, with regard to increasing the coverage of three of the important public services which could have a

strong bearing on maternal and child survival and health, viz., vaccination of children aged 12 to 23

months, institutional deliveries and any ante-natal care utilised by women, the trends revealed by the

NFHS for the larger States in India present a disturbing picture for the first two. That is, both with regard

to vaccination of children aged 12 to 23 months and coverage of institutional deliveries, the progress

achieved by several of the backward States, like, U.P., Bihar, Assam, M.P. and Rajasthan, during 1998-

99 to 2005-06 has been very slow. Although Rajasthan has recorded a comparatively better performance

than U.P., Bihar, Assam and M.P. in improving the coverage of institutional deliveries, its performance in

improving the vaccination coverage among children aged 12 to 23 months has been worse than that of

M.P., Bihar and Assam. As regards reduction of IMR, though Rajasthan’s performance in reducing its IMR

over the last seven years seems to have been far better than its disappointing performance in the decade


of 1990s, several of the backward States like, Andhra Pradesh, Orissa and Bihar, have recorded better

performance in reducing the levels of IMR over the last one and a half decades.

Chart 2.5: Trends in the Nutritional Status of Children as revealed by the NFHS (I, II & III)

10

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

MADHYA PRADESH

Bihar

Gujarat

UTTAR PRADESH

West Bengal

Orissa

RAJASTHAN

Haryana

Karnataka

Assam

Maharashtra

Andhra Pradesh

Delhi

Tamil Nadu

Kerala

Punjab

India

Stat

es

Percentage of children under age 3 who are underweightNFHS-1((1992-93) NFHS-2 (1998-99) NFHS-3 (2005-06)

Comment [U1]: NOTE for DTP: Some Charts have Titles outside the picture, while others have them inside. Please standardise.

Notes: Here we have considered percentage of children under age 3 who are underweight as an indicator of the nutritional status. NFHS-1 (1992-93), NFHS-2 (1998-99), NFHS-3 (2005-06) The data for each survey pertain to births in the previous three years from the year of the respective survey. Source: NFHS-3 (2005-06), Fact Sheets (Provisional Data), Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, GOI. For further details see Table 2.5 in the Annexure.

Child nutrition is regarded as very important because the nutritional status of children in their early

childhood is known to have a strong bearing on their development later in life. Chart 2.5, given above,

shows the trends in the proportion of underweight children among all children under 3 years (in the larger

States in India), as revealed by the three rounds of the NFHS. These figures show that, with regard to the

proportion of children under 3 years who are underweight, the worst performers are Madhya Pradesh

(60% in 2005-06) and Bihar (58% in 2005-06). In the case of Rajasthan, while the proportion of

underweight children among all children under 3 years was 44 per cent in 1992-93, it had deteriorated

further to 51 per cent in 1998-99, and then showed an improvement by again reaching a level of 44 per

cent in 2005-06. Thus, with regard to child nutrition too, Rajasthan’s performance shows a sharp decline

during the period 1992-93 to 1998-99, followed by an improvement during the years 1998-99 to 2005-06.

Another very important sector, which needs to be mentioned here, is child education. What we find from

recent data, as shown in Table 3 below, is that in the case of Rajasthan, although the Gross Enrolment

Ratios (GERs) for both boys and girls at the level of primary schooling have improved significantly, the


dropout rates at this level still continue to be unacceptably high. At the level of secondary schooling, even

the enrolment rates for both boys and girls are very low and require significant improvement.

Table 3: Gross Enrolment Ratios in Rajasthan in 2003-04

Outcome Indicator Rajasthan India Best Performing State Worse Performing State GER for Girls (Class I - V) 109.41 95.58 135.64 (Manipur) 64.20 (Bihar)

GER for Boys (Class I - V) 120.18 100.63 139.30 (Manipur) 71.04 (Punjab)

Dropout Rate for Girls (Class I - V) 55.83 28.57 0 (Kerala) 58.99 (Bihar)

Dropout Rate for Boys (Class I - V) 59.29 33.74 0 (Kerala) 59.05 (Bihar)

GER for Girls (Class VI - VIII) 46.16 57.82 98.44 (Tamil Nadu) 19.21 (Bihar)

GER for Boys (Class VI - VIII) 59.80 66.76 104.77(Goa) 30.64 (Bihar)

GER for Girls (Class IX – XII) 20.25 34.26 67.25 (Himachal Pradesh) 10.53 (Bihar)

GER for Boys (Class IX – XII) 43.16 42.94 72.16 (Himachal Pradesh) 18.27 (Jharkhand)

Note: GER: Gross Enrolment Ratio. Source: Annual Report 2005-06, Annexure I, Ministry of Human Resource Development, GOI.

Chart 2.6: Dropout Rates in School Education (Classes I-X) in 2003-04

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

India

Bihar

West Bengal

Rajasthan

Assam

Andhra Pradesh

Orissa

Madhya Pradesh

Gujarat

Karnataka

Tamil Nadu

Maharashtra

Uttar Pradesh

Punjab

Indi

a &

Maj

or S

tate

s

Dropout Rates

Haryana

Kerala

Total

Source: Annual Report, 2005-06, Ministry of HRD, GOI.

Chart 2.6, shown above, presents the situation as regards dropout rates in school education (classes I to

X) in 2003-04 across the major States in India, based on the latest data available from the government.

As shown in this Chart, for Rajasthan the dropout rate for classes I-X was very high, at above 70 per cent

in 2003-04. Also, in Rajasthan, as in most of the 15 major States, the dropout rate for girls was higher

than that for boys. While the indicators of school enrolment and dropout present a bleak picture, it must

11


12

also be noted here that the learning achievements of children in many of the States have been found to

be poor. Thus, child education continues to be one of the most significant areas where better state

intervention is called for.

3. Investment in the Social Sector from the Budgets of Rajasthan As mentioned earlier, investment in the social sector (or the Social Services) from the Budgets of the

Central Government and the States provide the larger resource envelope within which targeted

investments on children are made in the country. This Section presents an analysis of the expenditure on

Social Services from the Budgets of Rajasthan during the study period, i.e., 1993-94 to 2006-07. It may be worthwhile in this regard to consider a comparison of social sector expenditure by the different

States in India during 1998-99 to 2000-01, which was presented by the Twelfth Finance Commission in its

Report in 2004. As shown in Table 4 below, the average per capita per annum expenditure on Social

Services during the three year period from 1998-99 to 2000-01 (i.e., the average for the three years)

varied widely across the States. In particular, the per capita per annum expenditures on Social Services

by Bihar and U.P. were the lowest among the 15 larger States considered. While the per capita per

annum expenditure on Social Services by Kerala stood at Rs. 1,255, the same stood at Rs. 558.5 for U.P.

and Rs. 474 for Bihar. This highlights the paradoxical situation in which the States with better human

development indicators spent larger amounts on Social Services from their Budgets, while the backward

States with poor human development indicators spent much lower amounts (per capita) on Social

Services. However, even among the backward States, the disparity was significant. The per capita per

annum expenditure on Social Services from the Budgets of Rajasthan was much higher than those from

the Budgets of M.P., U.P. and Bihar. The average per capita per annum expenditure on Social Services

from the Budgets of Rajasthan during 1998-99 to 2000-01 was Rs. 1,020.7, which was higher than similar

expenditure figures for Bihar, U.P., M.P., Assam, Orissa, West Bengal, and Andhra Pradesh over the

same three year time period. This had translated into higher per capita per annum expenditures on

Education and Health from the Rajasthan Budgets than most of the other backward States, while the per

capita per annum expenditure from the Rajasthan Budgets on Water Supply & Sanitation was the highest

among all 15 major States covered in this analysis.

Table 4: Per Capita Expenditure on Social Services by the States (1998-99 to 2000-01)

States Average for the years 1998–99 to 2000–01 (in Rs.) Social Services Education Health Water Supply & Sanitation

Bihar 474.0 311.1 50.9 19.1

U P 558.5 340.4 63.4 20.0

M P 781.3 344.5 86.2 63.4

Assam 929.9 615.2 92.2 59.2

Orissa 931.2 463.1 94.7 56.2

W B 958.2 512.3 136.8 42.5

Rajasthan 1020.7 545.3 128.3 111.5 A P 1004.1 411.7 118.2 57.7

Karnataka 1083.9 558.3 135.7 60.3


Haryana 1145.4 587.6 122.1 102.1 T N 1240.9 651.5 154.4 38.3

Kerala 1254.8 713.3 172.3 52.3 Maharashtra 1276.1 730.9 131.7 79.7

Punjab 1220.5 716.3 221.1 55.0 Gujarat 1331.3 664.4 154.3 39.0

Note: Bihar, U.P. and M.P. considered above were taken as undivided States only. Source: Government of India, Report of the Twelfth Finance Commission, December 2004.

The following discussion focuses on the expenditure on Social Services from the Budgets of Rajasthan

from 1993-94 to 2006-07. In order to assess the efforts made by Rajasthan towards improving the

condition of children in the State, it is necessary to analyse the patterns of those public expenditures by

the State, which are important from the perspective of child development. Rajasthan’s budgetary

provisions for Social Services in general, and for education, health & family welfare, and water supply &

sanitation in particular, are important from this perspective.

Chart 3.1 below shows the total expenditure from the Rajasthan Budget as a proportion of its NSDP for

the years 1993-94 to 2004-05. We find that after falling from a level of 8.5 per cent of its NSDP in 1995-

96, the total expenditure on Social Services from the State Budget registered an increase during the

period 1998-99 to 2000-01, reaching a level of 9.6 per cent of the NSDP in 2000-01. As noted earlier in

this Section, in terms of per capita per annum expenditure from the State Budgets, the expenditure by

Rajasthan on Social Services during this period was significantly higher than that of all other backward

States.

Chart 3.1

Aggregate Expenditure on Social Services from the Rajasthan Budget as % of NSDP

14.00

8.407.84

8.507.62 7.57

8.49 8.549.61

9.059.93

9.04 8.82

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

1993-94

1994-95

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

1998-99

1999-2000

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

For details, please refer to Tables 3.1 and 3.6 in the Annexure.

13


It must be noted here that following the adoption of the Fifth Pay Commission Recommendations by the

Central Government in 1997-98, the States also implemented significant hikes in their pay scales in the

years following 1997-98. Therefore, a substantial part of the increase in social sector expenditure from

the State Budget, in the case of most States, during the late 1990s, can be regarded as the incremental

spending required for financing the higher salaries of government staff in the social sector. However, this

step also precipitated the fiscal crisis confronting most States in the decade of the 1990s, which led to a

reduction in social sector spending by several States during 2001-02 to 2004-05. Rajasthan, however,

presents a slightly better picture in this regard. As is evident from Chart 3.1 above, even during 2001-02

to 2004-05, the total expenditure on social services from the Budgets of Rajasthan was maintained at

levels close to 9 per cent of the NSDP.

Chart 3.2

Expenditure on Important Social Services from the Rajasthan Budget as % of NSDP

0.

0.

1.

1.

2.

2.

3.

3.

4.

4.

5.00

00

50

00

50

00

50

00

50

00

50

1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000

2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Education, sports,art and culture

Medical and PublicHealth

Family Welfare

Water Supply andSanitation

Welfare of SCs, STsand OBCs

Social Security andWelfare

For details, please refer to Tables 3.1 and 3.6 in the Annexure.

Chart 3.2 shows the expenditure from the Rajasthan Budget on selected social services as a proportion

of the NSDP during 1993-94 to 2004-05. This Chart reveals that education has had the major share in the

total funds provided to the social sector from the Budgets of Rajasthan, which has varied between 3.8 per

cent of the NSDP (in 1997-98) to 4.7 per cent of the NSDP (in 2000-01). The expenditures on water

supply & sanitation and medical & public health have also been relatively high, with the former varying

between 1.38 per cent of the NSDP (in 1996-97) to 1.85 per cent of the NSDP (in 2002-03) and the latter

varying between 0.9 per cent of the NSDP to 1.6 per cent of the NSDP. We must note here that the

expenditures from the State Budget on family welfare, social security & welfare, and the welfare of SCs,

STs & OBCs have been very low in comparison to Rajasthan’s NSDP. What this means in terms of

14


targeted investments on children is that targeted interventions in the areas of child health (which gets

financed mainly through expenditure on family welfare) and child protection (which gets financed mainly

through expenditure on social security & welfare, and the welfare of SCs, STs and OBCs) have received

meagre resources from the State Budgets of Rajasthan during the period 1993-94 to 2004-05. Moreover,

the sharp increase in expenditure on the social sector from the Rajasthan Budgets during 1998-99 to

2002-03 was accounted for mainly by expenditure on education.

Chart 3.3

Aggregate Expenditure on Social Services as % of Total Expenditure from the State Budgets of Rajasthan

60

32.229.5

27.425.4 26.6

32.1

26.5 27.8 26.9

23 23.4

28.3

35.0 34.0

29.2

32.9 32.6

38.5

30

41.5

46

51.5 52.5

43.4

33.7

39.2 40.3

49.4

33.5

28.125.1

21.925.5

29.7

23.1 23.822.2

19.7 21.1

25.2

32.6

28.6

0

10

20

30

40

50

1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000

2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06RE

2006-07BE

Expenditure on Social Services as % of Total Expenditure from State BudgetPlan Exp. on Social Services as % of Total Plan Exp. from State BudgetNon-Ploan Exp. on Social Services as % of Total Non-Plan Exp. from State Budget

For details, please refer to Tables 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 in the Annexure.

Several observers have highlighted that many States had reduced their priority for social sector

expenditure, when they confronted a severe fiscal crisis towards the end of the 1990s and the following

half decade. In this context, it would be worthwhile to assess the priorities accorded to the social sector

within the total expenditure from the State Budgets of Rajasthan during the study period. Chart 3.3 shows

the priority accorded to social services within the total expenditure from the Rajasthan Budgets, as also

separately within the Plan expenditure and the Non-Plan expenditure from the State Budgets during

1993-94 to 2006-07. We find that the expenditure on social services as a proportion of the total

expenditure from the State Budget shows a decline from 32.2 per cent in 1993-94 to 25.4 per cent in

1996-97, increases sharply to 32.1 per cent in 1998-99, shows a decline in the following years and

reaches the level of 23.4 per cent in 2003-04, and then starts recovering again from 2004-05. The last

two years, i.e., 2005-06 RE and 2006-07 BE, however, show a much better effort from the State, with the

priority for social services rising to the level of 35 per cent within the total expenditure from the State

Budget.

15


However, as is evident from this Chart, the pattern observed in the priority for total expenditure on social

services resembles very closely the pattern observed in the priority for social services within the total

Non-Plan expenditure from the State Budget. This is because Non-Plan expenditure on social services

accounts for a very high share of the total expenditure on social services from the State Budget. The

sharp increases both in 1998-99 and 2005-06 are because of similar increases in the Non-Plan

expenditure on social services from the State Budget. While the first sharp rise, i.e., in 1998-99, can be

associated with the pay hike implemented by the State Government, the second sharp increase in 2005-

06 could be associated with the significant increase in the quantum of Non Plan Grants to States from the

Union Budget effected by the Twelfth Finance Commission.

However, Plan expenditure on social services is important as it finances the new and targeted

interventions by the Government in the social sector. We find that within the total Plan expenditure from

the Rajasthan Budgets, the priority for social services shows a consistent increase during the Ninth Five

Year Plan period (1997-98 to 2001-02). However, this stepping up of priority for social services in the

Plan expenditures could be partly due to higher salaries in the social sector following 1998-99. Charts

3.4, 3.5 and 3.6 present the priorities for some of the important social services within the total

expenditure, Plan expenditure and Non-Plan expenditure from the State Budget during the study period.

Chart 3.4

Expenditure on Important Social Services as % of Total Expenditure from the Rajasthan Budget

1820

02468

10121416

1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000

2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06RE

2006-07BE

Education, sports, art and culture Medical and public health Family welfare

Water Supply and Sanitation Welfare of SCs, STs and OBCs Social Security and Welfare

For details, please refer to Table 3.2 in the Annexure.

As observed earlier, in total expenditure from the State Budget of Rajasthan, expenditure on education

gets the highest share followed by water supply & sanitation, and medical & public health. The State

Budgets have accorded very low priorities to other important sectors, such as, family welfare, social

security & welfare, and the welfare of SCs, STs and OBCs.

16


As shown in Chart 3.5, given below, within the Plan expenditure from the Budgets of Rajasthan, priority

for water supply & sanitation has been higher than the priority for education in the years 1997-98 and

1998-99 and then for all five years from 2002-03 onwards. However, as shown in Chart 3.6 below, within

the Non-Plan expenditure from the Budgets of Rajasthan, the priority for education has been very high in

comparison to other social services. Hence, in aggregate, the expenditure on education still accounts for

a very large share of the total expenditure on social services from the State Budget.

Chart 3.5

Plan Expenditure on Important Social Services as % of Total Plan Expenditure from the Rajasthan Budget

02468

1012141618

1993-94

1994-95

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

1998-99

1999-2000

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06 RE

2006-07 BE

Education, sports, art and culture Medical and public health Family welfare Water Supply and SanitationWelfare of SCs, STs and OBCs Social Security and Welfare


Chart 3.6

17


Non Plan Expenditure on Important Social Services as % of Total Non Plan Expenditure from the Rajasthan Budget

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

1993-94

1994-95

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

1998-99

1999-2000

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06 RE

2006-07 BE

Education, sports, art and culture Medical and public health Family welfare

Water Supply and Sanitation Welfare of SCs, STs and OBCs Social Security and Welfare


4. Resources for Children in the Budgets of Rajasthan

This Section presents an in depth analysis of the State Budgets of Rajasthan for the period 1993-94 to

2006-07, focusing on the resources earmarked for children. As mentioned earlier in the discussion under

Methodology, the present study takes an ex ante approach in the selection of programmes/schemes in

the State Budget that can be considered as a part of the Budget for Children. An ex post approach in the

selection of schemes, i.e., taking into account the proportion of children in the actual beneficiaries after a

scheme has been implemented, would not only require considerable time and other resources, it would

also face serious problems in accessing data. Hence, the ex ante approach is far more workable.

Moreover, it has another clear advantage in the fact that it emphasises the policy goals/objectives

underlying each item of expenditure in the State Budget. Thus, if the policy goal underlying any

scheme/item of expenditure suggests that it is meant specifically/largely for addressing some need of

children, it is selected as a child specific scheme, i.e., as a part of the Child Budget within the State

Budget. On the other hand, if the policy goal underlying a scheme/item of expenditure is concerned with

the needs of the whole community, then it is kept outside the Child Budget. The reason for keeping such

schemes/items of expenditure outside the Child Budget, although children may also benefit from them, is

that children can, at best, derive only incidental benefits from them. For instance, children may derive

some incidental benefits from the services of a general Hospital in the State, but the benefits of that

18


19

Hospital are not earmarked for children. If the Hospital earmarks a certain proportion of its services for

children, then that proportion of the State’s expenditure on this Hospital would be included in the Child

Budget.

Hence, the focus of the present study is on the magnitude of resources in the State Budget, which

earmark some benefits for children. It does not include any of the resources in the State Budget, which

can provide only incidental benefits to children. We must also note here that the analysis presented below

shows only the aggregate heads of expenditure, dividing the entire Child Budget into four sectors, viz.

Early Childhood Care & Development, Child Education, Child Health and Child Protection. The Tables,

which list the major schemes/items of expenditure under each of these categories, are given in the

Annexure (Tables 4.1 to 4.4). However, even these Annexure Tables involve a significant amount of

aggregation/clubbing of numerous items of expenditure under each Department in the State Government.

This was required, as the State Budgets of Rajasthan have more than one hundred and sixty specific

schemes/items of expenditure, which earmark funds for the benefit of children.

4.1 Resources Earmarked for Children in the State Budgets of Rajasthan Taking into account all schemes/items of expenditure in the State Budget, which are meant substantially

for addressing the needs of children, in each of the years under study, we find that the total expenditure

on child specific schemes from the Rajasthan Budget has increased from Rs. 1,153 crore in 1993-94 to

Rs. 3,949 crore in 2004-05 and subsequently, to Rs. 5,098 crore in 2006-07 BE. As shown in Chart 4.1

below, at constant (1993-94) prices, however, the total expenditure on children from the Rajasthan

Budget shows an increase from Rs. 1,153 crore in 1993-94 to Rs. 2,400 crore in 2004-05.

Chart 4.1


20

Total Expenditure on Child Specific Schemes from the Rajasthan Budget8000.0

7000.0

6000.Rs. Crore 0

5000.0

4000.0

3000.0

2000.0

1000.0

0.0 1993-

94 1994-

95 1995-

96 1996-

97 1997-

981998-

99 1999-

00 2000-

012001-

02 2002-

03 2003-

04 2004-

05 2005-

06(RE)

2006-07

(BE)

Total Expenditure on Child Specific Schemes- at Constant (1993-94) Prices

Total Expenditure on Child Specific Schemes- at Current Prices

Please refer to Tables 4.5 and 4.12 in the Annexure for details.

Chart 4.2, given below, presents these total expenditures on children from the Rajasthan Budget (at

current prices) as proportions of Rajasthan’s NSDP (at current prices) for the years 1993-94 to 2004-05.

We find that total magnitude of the child budget within the Rajasthan State Budget has varied between

3.6 per cent of the NSDP to 4.5 per cent of the NSDP during the period 1993-94 to 2004-05. The

magnitude of the child budget had fallen from 4 per cent of the NSDP in 1993-94 to 3.6 per cent of the

NSDP by 1997-98, but it rose to 4.1 per cent of the NSDP in 1998-99, which shows a pattern similar to

the one observed for total expenditure on social services from the State Budget. During the period 1999-

2000 to 2002-03, the magnitude of the child budget had been around 4.5 per cent of the NSDP before

falling to 3.9 per cent of the NSDP in 2003-04. However, as shown in Chart 4.3 below, the expenditure on

child education has had a very high share of this total child budget. Expenditure from the Rajasthan

Budget on child education has varied between 3.4 per cent of the NSDP to 4.3 per cent of the NSDP

during this time period.


Chart 4.2

Total Expenditure on Child Specific Schemes from the Rajasthan Budget

as % of NSDP of Rajasthan

4.0 3.7 3.9 3.8 3.64.1 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.5

3.9 4.0

0.01.02.03.04.05.06.07.08.09.0

10.0

1993-94

1994-95

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

1998-99

1999-00

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

Please refer to Table 4.13 in the Annexure for details.

Chart 4.3

Expenditure on Child Education as % of NSDP

7.0

8.0

3.8 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.43.9 4.1 4.3

3.9 4.13.6 3.7

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Refer to Table 4.13 in the Annexure for details.

21


Chart 4.4

Expenditure on Child Development, Health and Protection as % of NSDP

0.11 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.10 0.09 0.08

0.12

0.21

0.290.25 0.25

0.100.07

0.11 0.10 0.10 0.110.09 0.07

0.11

0.060.09

0.020.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.010.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

1993-94

1994-95

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

1998-99

1999-00

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

Early Childhood Care & Development Child Health Child Protection


Chart 4.4 above presents the expenditure from the Rajasthan Budget on child development, child health

and child protection as proportions of the NSDP during the period 1993-94 to 2004-05. Expenditure on

child protection has been very small, at around 0.01 per cent of the NSDP for all the years under study.

Expenditure on child health hovered around 0.1 per cent of the NSDP during the period 1993-94 to 2001-

02, but then fell substantially in the following years reaching 0.02 per cent of the NSDP in 2004-05.

Expenditure on child development hovered around 0.1 per cent of the NSDP during the period 1993-94 to

2000-01, but rose sharply to around 0.2 per cent of the NSDP during the period 2001-02 to 2004-05. As

shall be discussed in the next Section, the entire amount of funds provided by the Central Government for

the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) gets reported in the State Budgets of Rajasthan,

which is not the case with the funds provided by the Centre in schemes in other sectors such as child

health [Reproductive & Child Health (RCH) programme] and child protection [National Child Labour

Project (NCLP)]. Hence, the sharp increase in the expenditure on child development from the Rajasthan

Budget during the period 2001-02 to 2004-05, as shown in Chart 4.4 above, was mainly due to the

stepping up of Central Government expenditure on the ICDS programme during this period.

It would be worthwhile here to assess the priority accorded to children within the total expenditure from

the Rajasthan Budgets during the study period. Chart 4.5, given below, presents such an assessment.

We find that the total magnitude of the child budget accounted for 15.3 per cent of the total State Budget

of Rajasthan in 1993-94, but it fell in the subsequent years (1994-95 to 1997-98).

22


Chart 4.5

Total Expenditure on Child Specific Schemes as % of Total Expenditure from the Rajasthan Budget

15.313.9

12.4 12.7 12.815.4

13.3 12.9 12.710.4 10.2

12.9

16.415.2

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

1993-94

1994-95

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

1998-99

1999-00

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06

(RE)

2006-07

(BE)


The magnitude of the total child budget rose to 15.4 per cent of the total State Budget of Rajasthan in

1998-99, which was probably because of the higher expenditure on salaries in the social sector that year.

In the subsequent years, however, the priority for child specific schemes/items in the State Budget of

Rajasthan were compressed, which led to a consistent decline in the magnitude of the child budget as a

proportion of the total State Budget during the period 1999-2000 to 2003-04. As a proportion of the total

expenditure from the State Budget, total expenditure on child specific schemes accounted for only 10.2

per cent in 2003-04, which was the lowest priority for children in the State Budget during the entire study

period. The priority for children in the State Budget shows an improvement from 2004-05 onwards, with

the total child budget accounting for 16.4 per cent of the State Budget in 2005-06 RE and 15.2 per cent of

the total State Budget in 2006-07 BE.

Charts 4.6 and 4.7, given below, show the priority accorded to children within the total Plan expenditure

and the total Non-Plan expenditure from the Rajasthan Budgets during the study period. As is evident

from Chart 4.7, the priorities accorded to Non-Plan expenditure on children within the total Non-Plan

expenditure from the State Budget have shaped up the priorities for the total expenditure on children,

since Non-Plan expenditure on children accounted for a substantial part of the total expenditure on

children in each of the years under study. With regard to Plan expenditure on children from the State

Budget, we must note here that the priority for child specific schemes within the total Plan expenditure

from the Rajasthan Budget registered a consistent increase during the years 1998-99 to 2001-02, i.e.,

during the Ninth Plan period. The Tenth Plan period (2002-03 to 2006-07) has witnessed a sharp decline

in the priority for children within the total Plan expenditure from the State Budget. However, the trends in

23


Plan expenditure on children have not influenced the trends in total expenditure on children, since the

share of Plan expenditure in the total has typically been very low.

Chart 4.6

Plan Expenditure on Child Specific Schemes as % of Total Plan Expenditure from the Rajasthan Budget

9.111.1 10.0

16.0

8.411.2

14.216.7

18.1

10.0 9.110.4

11.9 11.4

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

1993-94

1994-95

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

1998-99

1999-00

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06

(RE)

2006-07

(BE)


Chart 4.7

Non-Plan Exp. on Child Specific Schemes as % of Total Non-Plan Exp. from the Rajasthan Budget

17.9 18.4

25.0

15.013.5

11.814.2

16.5

13.1 12.3 11.7 10.5 10.413.5

16.5

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

1993-94

1994-95

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

1998-99

1999-00

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06

(RE)

2006-07

(BE)


24


4.2 Sectoral Composition of Resources Earmarked for Children in the State Budget

Charts 4.8, 4.9 and 4.10, presented below, show the sectoral composition of the total child budget within

the State Budget of Rajasthan for the years 1996-97, 2001-02 and 2006-07, respectively.

Chart 4.8

25

Sectoral Composition of the Total Child Budget in 1996-97

Child Health, 2.60Early Childhood Care & Development, 2.28

Child Protection, 0.22

Child Education, 94.90

Chart 4.9

Child Health, 2.63



Sectoral Composition of the Total Child Budget in 2001-02

Early Childhood Care &Development, 4.89

Chart 4.10


26

Sectoral Composition of the Total Child Budget in 2006-07 (BE)

Early Childhood Care & Development, 7.26

Child Health, 0.85



As is evident from these Charts, the sectoral composition of the total budget earmarked for children within

the State Budgets of Rajasthan has been quite disproportionately high for child education. In each of the

three years considered above, child education has accounted for a very high share of the total budget

earmarked for children, although this share has come down gradually from 94.9 per cent in 1996-97 to

92.2 per cent in 2001-02 to 91.55 per cent in 2006-07 BE. The share of child development, which covers

government interventions for child nutrition (such as the ICDS) and the care of infants, has been

increasing gradually from 2.28 per cent in 1996-97 to 4.9 per cent in 2001-02, to 7.26 per cent in 2006-07

BE. This increase in the share of child development has been primarily due to significantly higher outlays

on the ICDS from the Union Budget over the last few years. The share of child health has fallen from its

already low level of 2.63 per cent in 2001-02 to 0.85 per cent in 2006-07 BE. The share of child protection

in the total budget earmarked for children has always been very low, though it has increased marginally

from 0.22 per cent in 1993-94 to 0.34 per cent in 2006-07 BE.

As is evident from these Charts, the sectoral composition of the total budget earmarked for children within

the State Budgets of Rajasthan has been quite disproportionately high for child education. In each of the

three years considered above, child education has accounted for a very high share of the total budget

earmarked for children, although this share has come down gradually from 94.9 per cent in 1996-97 to

92.2 per cent in 2001-02 to 91.55 per cent in 2006-07 BE. The share of child development, which covers

government interventions for child nutrition (such as the ICDS) and the care of infants, has been

increasing gradually from 2.28 per cent in 1996-97 to 4.9 per cent in 2001-02, to 7.26 per cent in 2006-07

BE. This increase in the share of child development has been primarily due to significantly higher outlays

on the ICDS from the Union Budget over the last few years. The share of child health has fallen from its

already low level of 2.63 per cent in 2001-02 to 0.85 per cent in 2006-07 BE. The share of child protection

in the total budget earmarked for children has always been very low, though it has increased marginally

from 0.22 per cent in 1993-94 to 0.34 per cent in 2006-07 BE.

This distorted sectoral composition of the total child budget within the State Budget, however, does not

imply that child education has been provided excess amounts of public resources. Because, as several

experts have pointed out, public expenditure on education both at the national level and in most of the

States of India continues to be far below the desired levels, which could be one of the primary factors

responsible for the low educational attainments in the country, particularly in the backward States.

However, this sectoral composition does imply that the problem of inadequate-financing of government

interventions for children in other sectors, especially in child health and child protection, seems to be far

more acute than it is for child education. Given the disappointing performance of Rajasthan in reducing

its IMR and the proportion of underweight children during the last one and a half decades, as has been

revealed by the successive rounds of the NFHS, these glaring deficiencies in financing of interventions for

children in child health and child development call for major changes in policy priorities of the

Government.

This distorted sectoral composition of the total child budget within the State Budget, however, does not

imply that child education has been provided excess amounts of public resources. Because, as several

experts have pointed out, public expenditure on education both at the national level and in most of the

States of India continues to be far below the desired levels, which could be one of the primary factors

responsible for the low educational attainments in the country, particularly in the backward States.

However, this sectoral composition does imply that the problem of inadequate-financing of government

interventions for children in other sectors, especially in child health and child protection, seems to be far

more acute than it is for child education. Given the disappointing performance of Rajasthan in reducing

its IMR and the proportion of underweight children during the last one and a half decades, as has been

revealed by the successive rounds of the NFHS, these glaring deficiencies in financing of interventions for

children in child health and child development call for major changes in policy priorities of the

Government.

However, since we know that most of the new and targeted interventions by the Government in the social

sector are financed by Plan expenditure, while the maintenance of existing Government institutions in the

However, since we know that most of the new and targeted interventions by the Government in the social

sector are financed by Plan expenditure, while the maintenance of existing Government institutions in the


social sector are financed by Non-Plan expenditure, it would be pertinent to study the sectoral

composition separately for the Non-Plan budget earmarked for children and the Plan budget earmarked

for children from the State Budget of Rajasthan. Chart 4.11, given below, presents such an exercise for

the State Budget of 2006-07. As we find from this Chart, in 2006-07 BE, within the Non-Plan budget

earmarked for children in the State Budget, child education accounts for a very high share of 99.46 per

cent. Non-Plan expenditure on child health, child protection and child development accounts for 0.37 per

cent, 0.15 per cent and 0.01 per cent, respectively, within the total Non-Plan expenditure earmarked for

children in 2006-07 BE (refer to Table 4.11 in the Annexure). The sectoral composition of the Plan budget

for children, however, is a little different. Within the total Plan expenditure earmarked for children in the

Rajasthan Budget for 2006-07, child education accounts for 59.68 per cent, child development accounts

for 36.42 per cent, child health for 2.78 per cent and child protection for only 1.12 per cent.

Chart 4.11

27

Composition of Non-Plan and Plan Budgets for Children in the Rajasthan Budget

For 2006-07 (BE)

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

100%

Child Education

Early ChildhoodCare &Development

Child Health

Child Protection

Sectoral Composition of N on Plan Budget for Children

Sectoral Composition ofP lan Budget for Children

For details, refer to Tables 4.10 and 4.11 in the Annexure.

The sectoral composition of the Plan budget earmarked for children is certainly quite disturbing, as it

implies that new and targeted interventions by the government for child health and child protection are

being grossly neglected in comparison to the interventions for child education and child development.


28

able 5: Per Child Expenditure on Child Specific Schemes from the Rajasthan Budget

EducatiChild Healt

Child Prot

Total Expenditure

T (Figures in Rs.)

Child Early Childhood

on Care &

Development h ection on Child Specific

Schemes 1996-97 746.7 17.9 20.5 1.7 786.8 2001-02 1125.0 59.7 32.1 3.2 1219.9 2006-07 (BE) 1643.6 130.3 15.3 6.2 1795.3

N able 4.14 nnexur e projected child population res for Rajast in the

we take into account the projected child population (i.e., all persons up to 18 years of age) for

.3 Budget Allocations versus Actual Expenditure on Children

hile the very low magnitude of resources earmarked for children in the State Budgets of Rajasthan,

he differences between Actuals and Budget Estimates for Non-Plan expenditure items for children

ote: Refer to Tomputation present

in the Ave.

e for th figu han usedc ed abo

If

Rajasthan in 1996, 2001 and 2006, we find that the resources earmarked for children in the State Budget

of Rajasthan have been of very low magnitude. The per child, per annum expenditure on child education

shows an increase from Rs. 747 in 1996-97 to Rs. 1,644 in 2006-07 BE. The per child per annum

expenditure on child development has gone up from Rs. 18 in 1996-97 to Rs. 130 in 2006-07 BE. The per

child per annum expenditure on child protection from the State Budget has gone up from Rs. 1.70 in

1996-97 to Rs. 6.20 in 2006-07 BE. However, most disturbing is the fact that, the per child, per annum

expenditure from the State Budget on child health has fallen from Rs. 32 in 2001-02 to Rs. 15.30 in 2006-

07 BE. There can be little doubt about the fact that given the huge deficits persisting in the condition of

children in Rajasthan, the expenditures per child on child health and child protection are grossly

inadequate, and this problem of inadequate resources, although less acute, would also be true of child

development and child education.

4 W

especially in crucial sectors like child health and child protection, raises serious concerns, we must also

assess the ability shown by Rajasthan to utilise fully the resources earmarked for children in the State

Budgets. Table 6, given below, shows the differences between the Budget Estimates (BE) of expenditure

and the Actual expenditures on the whole set of child specific schemes/items selected from the State

Budget for the years 1995-96 to 2004-05. Moreover, this exercise shows the differences between Budget

Estimates and Actuals separately for the items of Non-Plan expenditure, State Plan schemes (i.e.,

schemes of Plan expenditure, which are entirely funded by the State Government), and the Centrally

Sponsored & Other Schemes (i.e., schemes of Plan expenditure, which are either wholly funded by the

Centre or partly funded by the Centre [in which case the State Government is required to provide a

matching grant for the scheme]) for children.

T

(which are almost entirely in the child education sector) do not show any consistent pattern over the

chosen time period. In three of the ten years selected, i.e., in 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1999-2000, the


29

s regards the expenditure earmarked for children under the head of State Plan schemes in the

from the Rajasthan

Actual expenditure on the whole set of Non-Plan items of expenditure for children from the Rajasthan

Budget was higher than the Budget Estimates for the same period. During 2000-01 to 2004-05, the Actual

expenditure on the Non-Plan head was lower than the Budget Estimates for the same; however, the

extent of underspending in these years was usually very low. We must note here that since Non-Plan

expenditure is meant usually for financing the maintenance and running of the existing Government

institutions, the States rarely show any difficulty in utilising the resources under this head.

A

Rajasthan Budget, the differences between Actuals and Budget Estimates do not show any consistent

pattern during 1995-96 to 2001-02. However, during 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05, the Actuals under

this head are significantly lower than the Budget Estimates, which implies underspending of sanctioned

resources for children within the State Plan schemes in each of these three years.

Table 6: Gaps in Budget Allocations for Children and Actual Expenditures Budget (1995-96 to 2004-05)

Year Budget Estimate (BE) Actuals (Actuals - BE) (Actuals - BE) [in Rs. Crore] [in Rs. Crore] [in Rs. Crore] as % of BE

Non-Plan 1153.9 1221.5 67.5 5.9

State Plan 253.3 270.5 17.2 6.8 1995-96 onsored and Other Centrally Sp

Schemes 116.6 117.1 0.6 0.5

Non-Plan 1313.0 0 1415.1 102. 7.8

State Plan 360.6 346.1 -14.5 -4.0 1996-97 onsored and Other Centrally Sp

Schemes 145.6 182.2 36.6 25.1

Non-Plan 1766.8 1746.75 -20.0 -1.1

State Plan 243.8 209.3 -34.5 -14.1 1997-98

onsored and Other Centrally SpSchemes 168.3 116.1 -52.2 -31.0

Non-Plan 2412.1 2273.8 -138.4 -5.7

State Plan 246.7 271.9 25.2 10.2 1998-99

onsored and Other Centrally SpSchemes 113.2 124.9 11.7 10.3

Non-Plan 2423.8 2493.4 69.5 2.9

State Plan 361.6 350.2 -11.5 -3.2 1999-00 onsored and Other Centrally Sp

Schemes 214.8 125.4 -89.4 -41.6

Non-Plan 2602.4 2537.0 -65.4 -2.5


Schemes 226.1 157.1 -69.0 -30.5

Non-Plan 2811.6 2602.3 -209.3 -7.4


Schemes 257.9 220.1 -37.7 -14.6

2002-03 Non-Plan 3165.2 2878.5 -286.7 -9.1


30

State Plan 381.2 271.5 -109.7 -28.8

Centrally Sponsored and Other Schemes 254.9 170.6 -84.3 -33.1

Non-Plan 3156.6 3072.2 -84.4 -2.7

State Plan 540.8 410.1 -130.7 -24.2 2003-04

Centrally Sponsored and Other Schemes 459.6 197.3 -262.2 -57.1

Non-Plan 3246.3 3242.7 -3.6 -0.1

State Plan 597.3 538.2 -59.1 -9.9 2004-05 Centrally Sponsored and Other Schemes 196.6 167.8 -28.8 -14.6

As regards the expenditure earmarked for children under the head of Centrally Sponsored & Other

Schemes in the Rajasthan Budget, we find that the Actuals have been significantly below the Budget

Estimates for each of the years during 1999-2000 to 2004-05. Thus, during 1999-2000 to 2004-05, the

ability shown by Rajasthan to utilise the resources sanctioned for children, under Centrally Sponsored

Schemes, has been low. In fact, this problem of underspending of Central funds has been acute in

several of these years, such as, in 1999-2000 (Actuals 41.6% less than BE), 2000-01 (Actuals 30.5% less

than BE), 2002-03 (Actuals 33% less than BE) and 2003-04 (Actuals 57% less than BE).

Since the latest Rajasthan Budget covered by the present study was the Budget for 2006-07, the Actuals

for 2005-06 could not be captured. However, based on the evidence for the years 1999-2000 to 2004-05,

it can be inferred that Rajasthan needs to improve its ability to fully utilise the funds provided by the

Central Government for Plan expenditure under Centrally Sponsored Schemes for children. Otherwise,

any stepping up of outlays for children in the Union Budget (and consequently, under the head of

Centrally Sponsored Schemes, in the State Budget) would not translate into an equivalent amount of

higher expenditure on the ground.

4.4 A Comparison of the Funds provided by the Central Government and the State Government for Plan Expenditure on Children in Rajasthan As has already been mentioned, Plan expenditure from the Budgets of Rajasthan can be divided into two

categories, viz. expenditure on State Plan schemes (i.e., schemes of Plan expenditure, which are entirely

funded by the State Government), and expenditure on Centrally Sponsored & Other Schemes (i.e.,

schemes of Plan expenditure, which are either wholly funded by the Centre or partly funded by the

Centre; in the latter case, the State Government is required to provide a matching grant for the scheme).

Thus, resources provided by the Central Government and those provided by the State Government both


contribute towards Plan expenditure for children from the State Budget. It may be worthwhile to look at

these two different sources of funds for Plan expenditure earmarked for children during the study period.

Chart 4.12, given below, presents such an exercise.

We find that the funds provided under State plan schemes, i.e., by the State Government, have been

visibly higher than the funds provided under Centrally Sponsored & Other Schemes. However, the

magnitude of funds provided under State Plan schemes for children shows a decline in three years, first

in 1997-98 (a sharp decline), then in 2002-03 (again a sharp decline) and finally in 2006-07 BE. On the

other hand, the magnitude of funds provided under Centrally Sponsored & Other Schemes has shown a

much slower expansion over the years, but the declines in magnitude in the years 1997-98, 2002-03 and

2004-05 were much smaller than the sharp decline observed under the State Plan schemes.

Chart 4.12

31

(NCLP), the Central Government Ministries have been directly transferring either the whole or a

Plan Expenditure on Children from the Rajasthan Budget (in Rs. Crore)

800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100

0 1993-

941994-

95 1995-

961996-

971997-

981998-

991999-2000

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06 RE

2006-07 BE

Expenditure on the Head- Centrally Sponsored and Other Schemes

Expenditure on the Head- State Plan schemes

We must note here two factors, which could explain the slower expansion of funds provided under

Centrally Sponsored & Other Schemes (in comparison to the funds provided under State Plan schemes)

in the State Budgets of Rajasthan. One of the factors could be the inability shown by the Government of

Rajasthan in fully utilising the resources provided by the Centre for Plan expenditure on children during

the years 1995-96 to 2004-05 (which has already been discussed). The other factor to be noted here is

that in case of some of the major Centrally Sponsored Schemes for children, such as the District Primary

Education Programme (DPEP), the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA), the Reproductive & Child Health

(RCH) programme, the Pulse Polio Immunisation programme, and the National Child Labour Project


32

hus, child development seems to be the only sector (among the four sectors identified for children) in

hild Nutrition in Rajasthan from Central Government Funds and the

Year Source of Nutrition

PrICDS

World

Assi

Women’ PMGY-Nut(

Kishori Shakti

Juvenile Honorarium NationalNut

Capital TOTAL

substantial part of the Central funds for the States to autonomous societies constituted in the States for

implementing the respective programmes. The ICDS seems to be the only major Centrally Sponsored

Scheme for children, in which the concerned Central Government Ministry/Department has not followed

this kind of a fund flow arrangement that bypasses the State Budget. Thus, a substantial part of the

Central Government funds meant for Centrally Sponsored Schemes for children in Rajasthan have

actually bypassed the State Budgets, and this feature has become more marked from the late 1990s

onwards.

T

which the State Budgets have captured the total Central Government funds provided for Plan expenditure

on children in Rajasthan. Hence, it would be worthwhile to compare the magnitude of resources provided

by the State Government and those provided by the Centre, over the study period, for Plan expenditure

on child nutrition in Rajasthan. Table 7: Plan Expenditure on CState’s Own Resources

Funds Crèche ogramme

Bank stance

(Through DWCD)

s Welfare (World Bank)

ritionThrough

DWCD) YojanaGirls’

Schemefor Female Assistance

rition Mission N

Outlay on

utrition

State Plan 5.6 0 5.0 10.6 1995-96

23CSS 0 .7 0 23.7 State 11 0. Plan .2 0 7 11.9

1996-97 30CSS 0 .8 0 30.8

State 9 Plan .4 0 0 9.4 1997-98

37CSS 0 .7 0 37.7 State 12 Plan .0 0 0 12.0

1998-99 45CSS 0 .2 0 45.2

State 7 Plan .1 0 0 0 7.1 1999-00

45 0.1 CSS 0 .4 0 45.5 State 8 0 10.1 Plan .9 0 0 0 19.1

2000-01 49 6.9 0.1 8CSS 0 .9 0 .5 65.4

State 14 51 Plan .0 0 0 0 .0 2.9 67.9 2001-02

55 12.9 1.2 2CSS 0 .7 0 2.2 92.0 State 49 38 Plan .8 0 0 0 .4 0 88.2

2002-03 80 31.9 1.1 0.1 9. 1CSS 0 .8 0 2 23.1

State 51 67 0.7 Plan .6 0 0 0 .1 0 0 119.5 2003-04

80 28.1 0.9 0CSS 0 .6 0 .1 0 0 109.7 State 83 46 0 1.7 Plan .6 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 131.5

2004-05 81 27.2 0.4 0 0.CSS 0 .8 0 .2 0 0.0 0 8 110.3

State 65 2 2 1 Plan .0 0 0 0 .5 0 .0 4.0 0 0 83.5 2005-06 (RE) CSS 65.0 93 32.3 0 0 1.4 0 0 .3 0 0 0 .6 91.6

State 7 20 Plan 89.7 0 0 0 0 0 .2 .0 0 0.3 117.1 20153 2.2 0

06-07 (BE) CSS 90.0 .4 0 0 .3 0.0 0 0 2.0 247.7


33

Table 7 presents a comparison of the Plan expenditure on child nutrition in Rajasthan funded by the State

Government (as shown under the head State Plan) and those funded by the Central Government (as

shown under the head Centrally Sponsored & Other Schemes) for the years 1995-96 to 2006-07 BE. The

broad results of this exercise have been presented in Chart 4.13 given below.

As shown in Chart 4.13, the expenditure on child nutrition under State Plan schemes in Rajasthan has

been lower than the expenditure on child nutrition under Centrally Sponsored & Other Schemes for all the

years considered, except for 2003-04 and 2004-05. More important to note is the fact that during the

period 1995-96 to 1999-2000, the expenditure under State Plan schemes has been stagnant or falling,

while the expenditure under Centrally Sponsored Schemes has been rising consistently. This indicates

that when the Centre stepped up its expenditure on child nutrition, the State Government in Rajasthan did

not step up its expenditure proportionately during 1995-96 to 2000-01; it rather reduced its expenditure in

some of these years. As a result, the total expenditure on child nutrition in Rajasthan did not show any

significant increase during 1995-96 to 1999-2000, despite higher outlays provided by the Centre.

However, starting from 2001-02, this disturbing trend shows a change as the expenditure on child

nutrition under the State Plan head also registers a noticeable increase during the years 2001-02 to 2004-

05. It may be worthwhile to point out, in this context, that the higher expenditure under the State Plan

head in these four years was mainly due to the nutrition component under the Prime Minister’s

Gramodaya Yojana (PMGY), which was again a part of the Central Assistance for State Plan schemes in

Rajasthan. Hence, the State Government in Rajasthan has not shown enough commitment towards

improving the nutritional status of children in the State over the time period studied.

Chart 4.13


34

Plan Expenditure on Child Nutrition in Rajasthan fromCentral Government Funds & the State's Own Resources

400

350

300

250(Rs. Crore)

200

150

100

50

01995-

961996-

971997-

981998-

991999-2000

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06 RE

2006-07 BE

Total Plan Expenditure on Child NutritionExpenditure from Funds under the head Centrally Sponsored & Other SchemesExpenditure from Funds under the head State Plan

5. Public Resources for Children in Rajasthan bypassing the State Budgets 5. Public Resources for Children in Rajasthan bypassing the State Budgets As mentioned earlier, since the late 1990s, in the case of some of the major centrally sponsored schemes

for children, Central Government funds have been provided directly to the programme implementing

agencies formed in the States. The respective Ministries in the Central Government have been directly

transferring (either the whole or a substantial part of) the funds meant for the States to the Autonomous

State/District Level Societies constituted specifically for implementing these schemes. The largest (in

terms of funds) among such schemes are: the District Primary Education Programme (funds transferred

directly by the Ministry of Human Resource Development, GoI to the State Implementation Society for

As mentioned earlier, since the late 1990s, in the case of some of the major centrally sponsored schemes

for children, Central Government funds have been provided directly to the programme implementing

agencies formed in the States. The respective Ministries in the Central Government have been directly

transferring (either the whole or a substantial part of) the funds meant for the States to the Autonomous

State/District Level Societies constituted specifically for implementing these schemes. The largest (in

terms of funds) among such schemes are: the District Primary Education Programme (funds transferred

directly by the Ministry of Human Resource Development, GoI to the State Implementation Society for


35

DPEP), the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (State Implementation Society for SSA), Reproductive & Child Health

programme (State Committee for Voluntary Action/SCOVA), the Pulse Polio Immunisation programme

[funds provided for operational expenses of the State under this programme], the National Child Labour

Project (the Project Committee), and the Indo-US Matching Grants (Indus) Project (the Project

Committee). Of these, only the Indus Project has not covered Rajasthan, while the rest of the five

programmes/schemes have been implemented in this State.

Table 8: Central Government Funds for Rajasthan under Centrally Sponsored Schemes for Children, which were directly transferred to Autonomous Programme Implementing Societies in the State Funds Released by the Central Government (in Rs. Crore) Sector Scheme 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06

District Primary Education Programme (DPEP)*

30.5 15 90 78 185 105 125.5 Child Education

Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA)** - 0 3.2 99.96 156.27 235.50 603.13

Child Protection

National Child Labour Project (NCLP)@

1.12 1.79 3.24 3.37 3.52 4.43 6.86

Reproductive & Child Health (RCH) Programme $

12.47 23.09 29.73 16.11 41.19 27.97 51.40

Child Health

Pulse Polio Immunisation Programme (funds provided for operational expenses of the State under this programme)#

8.9 9.4 7.21 7.57 24.4 16.53 8.70

TOTAL 52.99 49.28 133.38 205.01 410.38 389.43 795.59

Source: Answers to various Parliamentary Questions and Central Govt. Ministries as mentioned below: * Lok Sabha Unstarred Question, dated 16.05.2006 Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 3031, dated 14.03.2000 Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 4352, dated 18.12.2001 Data collected from Dept. of Elementary Education & Literacy, MHRD, GoI by researchers in 2006 ** Data collected from Dept. of Elementary Education & Literacy, MHRD, GoI by researchers in 2006 @ C&AG Audit Report (Civil) for the year ended 31 March 2004- Rajasthan Data from Min. of Labour & Employment, GoI, New Delhi (29.12.2006) $ Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 338, dated 12.12.2001 Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 1570, dated 03.08.2005 Rajya Sabha Unstarred Question No. 1138, dated 01.12.2006 # Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 1979, dated 16.03.2005 Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 1506, dated 03.08.2005 Rajya Sabha Unstarred Question No. 1165, dated 02.12.2005 Thus, the State Budgets of Rajasthan do not capture the total expenditure incurred on these schemes

within the State. However, since such schemes include some of the most important interventions for

children at the current juncture (viz. the SSA, RCH, Polio Immunisation and NCLP), it is necessary to take

into account the magnitude of Central outlays on each of these schemes for Rajasthan in the recent past.

The data presented in Table 8 above shows the ‘funds released’ by the Centre to Rajasthan under each

of these schemes during each year from 1999-2000 to 2005-06. Given the inability of Rajasthan to fully

utilise Central funds for Plan expenditure on children (which was discussed in the previous Section), it is

quite likely that actual expenditures in Rajasthan on these schemes would have been lower than the


36

funds released by the Centre. However, even the data on funds released by the Centre to Rajasthan

provide crucial insights into the questions being addressed in this study.

We find that the total amount of Central Government funds for children (in Rajasthan) bypassing the State

Budget has increased sharply over the last decade from Rs. 53 crore in 1999-2000 to Rs. 795.6 crore in

2005-06. Thus, as the Centre has stepped up the Union Budget outlays on important centrally sponsored

schemes for children, the concerned Central Ministries have preferred to bypass the State Budgets in

routing these funds. The main reason for adopting such a fund-flow mechanism could be the intention of

the Central Ministries to reduce the delay in flow of funds up to the level of actual programme

implementing agencies (in the States) and also to insulate such schemes from the liquidity crisis in the

State Governments. However, it is obvious that such a mechanism is not really compatible with the spirit

of federalism.

Moreover, several other problems arise from this kind of a fund-flow mechanism, as has been pointed out

by Dikshit et al. (2007) [Ashutosh Dikshit, Renuka Viswanathan and T R Raghunandan, “Efficient

Transfer of Funds for Centrally-Sponsored Schemes”, Economic and Political Weekly, June 9, 2007].

According to Dikshit et al. (2007), “budgetary information and reporting systems of State Governments

remain incomplete when CSS funds are directly released by Central Departments without passing

through the State Budget or treasury systems” and “from the accounting point of view, reconciliation of

expenditure and release figures is a huge issue; the present mechanism gives tremendous scope for

States and implementing agencies to misreport releases on CSS schemes as expenditure.” Hence, it

would be worthwhile to assess the utilisation of funds under the concerned centrally sponsored schemes

in order to draw insights about the effectiveness of this fund-flow mechanism.

However, it is clear from the figures given in Table 8 that a major chunk of Central Government funds for

children, which have bypassed the State Budgets of Rajasthan, have been provided under the SSA, while

the magnitude of funds under schemes like DPEP, RCH and Polio Immunisation, have been much

smaller. The magnitude of funds for Rajasthan under the NCLP has been meagre in comparison to the

other schemes. Thus, in terms of the sectoral composition of the Central Government funds for children

under the major centrally sponsored schemes, we find an almost similar pattern (to what we had

observed in the case of the State Budget) – with Child Education accounting for a very large share of

funds and Child Protection having a negligible share, but the availability of funds for Child Health is better

than that within the State Budget of Rajasthan. If we sum up the funds for children provided in the State

Budget for 2005-06 RE and the ‘funds released’ for Rajasthan by the Centre in 2005-06 which bypassed

the State Budget, we find that around Rs. 5,549 crore was available in Rajasthan for investments on

children in 2005-06. However, the sectoral composition of the total funds for children still appears heavily

imbalanced, with child education accounting for a very high share of 92.6 per cent of the total, child health

accounting for a meagre share of 1.8 per cent of the total and child protection accounting for only 0.44 per

cent of the total public resources earmarked for children in Rajasthan in 2005-06.


Table 9: Total Public Resources Earmarked for Children in Rajasthan in 2005-06

Allocations from the State Budget

(in Rs. Crore)

Central Government Funds for Children bypassing the State Budget

(in Rs. Crore) (in Rs. Crore) (in %) Sector 2005-06 (RE) 2005-06 TOTAL % Share Child Education 4411.4 728.63 5140.03 92.63

Early Childhood Care & Development 282.6 0 282.6 5.09 Child Health 41.83 60.1 101.93 1.84 Child Protection 17.61 6.86 24.47 0.44

Total on Child Specific Schemes 4753.5 795.59 5549.09 100.00

Chart 5.1

37

Total Outlay for Children in Rajasthan in 2005-06 (from the Union Budget and the State Budget)

Central GovernmentFunds for Children bypassing the State

Budget, 14.3

State Plan (in the State Budget), 12.8

Centrally Sponsored and Other Schemes (in the State Budget), 5.8

Non-Plan (in the State Budget), 67.0

As shown in Chart 5.1 above, out of the total public resources earmarked for children in Rajasthan in

2005-06, around 67 per cent was meant for Non Plan expenditure (which would be meant almost entirely

for Non-Plan expenditure on child education), and only about 33 per cent was meant for Plan expenditure

on children in the State. However, within this 33 per cent, Centrally Sponsored Schemes accounted for

around 20 per cent, while the State Plan schemes accounted for the remaining 13 per cent. This

highlights the fact that Rajasthan has become heavily dependent on the Plan funds provided in the Union


38

Budget (for Centrally Sponsored Schemes for children) for financing its new and targeted interventions to

address the problems confronting children in the State.

6. Concluding Remarks Rajasthan shows huge deficits in child development as revealed by crucial indicators, e.g., the Infant

Mortality Rate, coverage of vaccination among children aged 12 to 23 months, proportion of underweight

children among children under 3 years, as also the indicators of educational attainment at upper primary

and secondary levels of schooling. With regard to several of these important indicators, Rajasthan’s

performance over the period from 1998-99 to 2005-06 appears significantly better than its performance

during 1992-93 to 1998-99. It has also outperformed several other backward States, like, U.P., M.P.,

Assam and Bihar, with regard to accelerating the development of children over the last decade. However,

States like Orissa and Andhra Pradesh seem to have done better than Rajasthan on this front. Moreover,

in terms of the absolute levels of disadvantages confronting children, the State still needs to address

numerous challenges. In this backdrop, the present study assessed the State Budgets of Rajasthan

through the child lens.

The study draws the following inferences with regard to the State Budgets of Rajasthan based on the

analysis presented above:

• The study finds that total expenditure on Social Services from the State Budget registered an

increase during 1998-99 to 2000-01, reaching a level of 9.6 per cent of Rajasthan’s NSDP in 2000-01.

However, a substantial part of this increase in social sector expenditure from the State Budget, during

the late 1990s, can be regarded as the incremental spending required for financing the higher salaries of

government staff in the social sector following the pay scale revision implemented by the Government.

As the fiscal crisis confronting most States in the decade of the 1990s was precipitated following pay

scale revisions, many States had compressed social sector expenditures from their Budgets during

2001-02 to 2004-05. Rajasthan, however, presents a slightly better picture in this regard, as during 2001-

02 to 2004-05 the total expenditure on Social Services from the Rajasthan Budgets was maintained at

levels close to 9 per cent of the NSDP.

• Within the total funds provided to the social sector from the Rajasthan Budgets, Education has

had a substantial share, varying between 3.8 per cent to 4.7 per cent of the NSDP during the period

1993-94 to 2004-05. Expenditures on Water Supply & Sanitation and Medical & Public Health have also

been relatively high (i.e., in comparison to other States, like U.P. and M.P.), with the former varying

between 1.4 per cent of the NSDP to 1.9 per cent of the NSDP and the latter varying between 0.9 per


39

cent of the NSDP to 1.6 per cent of the NSDP during the study period. However, the expenditures from

the State Budget on several other important services, like Family Welfare, Social Security & Welfare, and

the Welfare of SCs, STs & OBCs have been very low. As a result, targeted interventions in the areas of

child health (which gets financed mainly through expenditure on Family Welfare) and child protection

(which gets financed mainly through expenditure on Social Security & Welfare, and Welfare of SCs, STs

and OBCs) have received meagre resources from the State Budgets of Rajasthan during the period

1993-94 to 2004-05. Moreover, the sharp increase in expenditure on the social sector from the

Rajasthan Budgets during 1998-99 to 2002-03 was accounted for mainly by the additional spending on

Education.

• As regards the priority accorded to Social Services within the total expenditure from the

Rajasthan Budgets, the study finds that the total expenditure on Social Services registered a decline

from 32.1 per cent of the State Budget in 1998-99 to 23.4 per cent of the State Budget in 2003-04,

though it recovered from 2004-05 onwards. The last two years, i.e., 2005-06 (RE) and 2006-07 (BE),

show a much better effort from the State, with the priority for Social Services rising up to 35 per cent of

the State Budget.

• Plan expenditure on Social Services is important as it finances the new and targeted interventions

in the social sector. The study finds that within the total Plan expenditure from the Rajasthan Budgets,

the priority for Social Services showed a consistent increase during the Ninth Five Year Plan period (i.e.,

1997-98 to 2001-02). However, this stepping up of priority for Social Services in the Plan expenditure

could be partly due to higher salaries in the social sector following the pay scale revision in 1998-99.

Non-plan expenditure accounts for a very high share in the total expenditure on Social Services from the

State Budget. Non-plan expenditure on Social Services from the Rajasthan Budget shows a sharp

increase in 2005-06, which could be due to the significant increase in the quantum of Non-plan Grants to

the States made from the Union Budget that resulted from the recommendations of the Twelfth Finance

Commission.

• The study finds that the magnitude of the total Child Budget within the Rajasthan State Budget

had fallen from 4 per cent of the NSDP in 1993-94 to 3.6 per cent of the NSDP by 1997-98, but it rose to

4.1 per cent of the NSDP in 1998-99, following a pattern similar to the one observed for total expenditure

on Social Services from the State Budget. During the period 1999-2000 to 2002-03, the magnitude of the

Child Budget was around 4.5 per cent of the NSDP before falling to 3.9 per cent of the NSDP in 2003-04.

Given that children constitute more than 45 per cent of the State’s population and several indicators point

to the huge disadvantages confronting them, the low magnitudes of child-specific public expenditure from

the Rajasthan State Budgets raises a serious concern. Moreover, expenditure on child education has

had a very high share in the total Child Budget, with the expenditures on child development, child health

and child protection being very low.

• As regards the priority accorded to child-specific expenditure within the State Budget of

Rajasthan, the study finds that the magnitude of the Child Budget as a proportion of the total State


40

Budget had declined consistently during 1999-2000 to 2003-04, after recording a relatively high figure of

15.4 per cent of the total State Budget in 1998-99. The priority for children in the State Budget shows an

improvement from 2004-05 onwards, with the Child Budget accounting for 16.4 per cent of the State

Budget in 2005-06 (RE) and 15.2 per cent of the State Budget in 2006-07 (BE).

• The priority accorded to children within the total Plan expenditure from the Rajasthan Budget

registered a consistent rise during the years 1998-99 to 2001-02 (i.e., in the Ninth Plan period), but

witnessed a sharp decline during 2002-03 to 2006-07 (i.e., in the Tenth Plan period). However, the

trends in Plan expenditure on children have not influenced the trends in total expenditure on children

(i.e., the total Child Budget) since the share of Plan expenditure in the total has typically been very low.

Non-Plan expenditure has accounted for a substantial part of the total Child Budget in each of the years

during the period 1993-94 to 2006-07, and child education accounts for a very high share (of around

99%) within this Non-Plan budget for children.

• The sectoral composition of the total Child Budget has been disproportionately high in favour of

child education. In each of the years during 1993-94 to 2006-07, child education has accounted for a

very high share in the total Child Budget, although this share has come down gradually from 94.9 per

cent in 1996-97 to 92.2 per cent in 2001-02 and to 91.5 per cent in 2006-07 (BE). The share of child

development has been increasing gradually from 2.28 per cent in 1996-97 to 4.9 per cent in 2001-02 to

7.26 per cent in 2006-07 (BE). This increase in the share of child development has been primarily due to

significantly higher outlays on the ICDS from the Union Budget over the last few years. The share of

child health has fallen from its already low level of 2.63 per cent in 2001-02 to 0.85 per cent in 2006-07

BE. The share of child protection in the total Child Budget has always been very low, though it has

increased marginally from 0.22 per cent in 1993-94 to 0.34 per cent in 2006-07 (BE). The very high

share of child education in the total Child Budget does not imply that this sector has been provided

excess magnitude of public resources; but it does imply that the problem of inadequate-financing of

government interventions for children in the other sectors, especially in child health and child protection,

seems to be far more acute than it is for child education.

• The study finds that with regard to the expenditure earmarked for children under ‘Centrally

Sponsored Schemes’ in the Rajasthan Budget, the Actuals have been considerably lower than the

Budget Estimates for each of the years during the period 1999-2000 to 2004-05. In fact, this problem of

underspending of Central funds has been acute in several of these years, such as in 1999-2000 (Actuals

were 41.6% less than BE), 2000-01 (Actuals 30.5% less than BE), 2002-03 (Actuals 33% less than BE)

and 2003-04 (Actuals 57% less than BE). Thus, during 1999-2000 to 2004-05, the ability shown by

Rajasthan to utilise the resources sanctioned for children, under Centrally Sponsored Schemes, has

been low.

• The expenditure on child nutrition under ‘State Plan schemes’ in Rajasthan has been lower than

the expenditure on child nutrition under ‘Centrally Sponsored Schemes’ for all of the years considered,

except for 2003-04 and 2004-05. More importantly, the study finds that when the Centre stepped up its


41

expenditure on child nutrition, the State Government did not step up its expenditure proportionately

(especially during the period 1995-96 to 2000-01); rather, it reduced its expenditure in some of these

years. As a result, the total expenditure on child nutrition in Rajasthan did not show any significant

increase during the period 1995-96 to 1999-2000, despite higher outlays provided by the Centre.

• The study finds that the total amount of Central Government funds for children bypassing the

State Budgets of Rajasthan has increased sharply over the last decade, from Rs. 53 crore in 1999-2000

to Rs. 795.6 crore in 2005-06. Thus, as the Centre has stepped up the Union Budget outlays on

important Centrally Sponsored Schemes for children, the nodal Ministries at the Centre have preferred to

bypass the State Budget in routing these funds. Adding up the funds for children provided in the State

Budget for 2005-06 (RE) and the ‘funds released’ for Rajasthan by the Centre in 2005-06 which lie

outside the State Budget, the study finds that around Rs. 5,549 crore was available in Rajasthan for

investments on children in 2005-06. However, the sectoral composition of these total funds for children

was heavily imbalanced, with child education accounting for a very high share of 92.6 per cent of the

total, child health accounting for a meagre share of 1.8 per cent and child protection accounting for only

0.44 per cent of the total public resources earmarked for children in Rajasthan in 2005-06.

• Out of the total public resources earmarked for children in Rajasthan in 2005-06, around 67 per

cent was meant for Non Plan expenditure (which would be meant almost entirely for Non-Plan

expenditure on child education), and only about 33 per cent was meant for Plan expenditure on children

in the State. However, within this 33 per cent too, Centrally Sponsored Schemes accounted for around

20 per cent, while the State Plan schemes accounted for the remaining 13 per cent. Hence, the study

infers that Rajasthan has become heavily dependent on the Plan funds provided in the Union Budget (for

Centrally Sponsored Schemes for children) for financing its new and targeted interventions for children in

the State.

The Government of Rajasthan needs to step up its State Budget outlays on child specific

schemes/interventions significantly, especially for child health and child protection. Moreover, it should

augment its Plan outlays for child specific schemes in concurrence with the increasing Central

Government outlays for centrally sponsored schemes. However, the State Government also needs to

ensure better utilisation of outlays under the centrally sponsored schemes for children.


ANNEXURES

Outcome Indicators for Children in Rajasthan Table 2.1: Trends in Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) as revealed by the NFHS (I, II & III)

Infant Mortality Rate (per 1000 live births) Major States

NFHS-I (1992-93) NFHS-II (1998-99) NFHS-III (2005-06)

Uttar Pradesh - 89 73

Madhya Pradesh - 88 70

Assam 89 70 66

Orissa 112 81 65

Rajasthan 73 80 65

Bihar - 78 62

Andhra Pradesh 70 66 53

Gujarat 69 63 50

Delhi 65 47 50

West Bengal 75 49 48

Karnataka 65 52 43

Haryana 73 57 42

Punjab 54 57 42

Maharashtra 51 44 38

Tamil Nadu 68 48 31

Kerala 24 16 15

India 78.5 67.6 57 Notes: 1.Blank cells (-) indicate the non-availability of data. 2. IMR- Infant Mortality Rate Source: Fact Sheets, National Family Health Survey (NFHS) - 3, 2005-2006, www.nfhsindia.org

41


Table 2.2: Trends in Vaccination Coverage Status as revealed by the NFHS (I, II & III) (in %)

Percentage of children, aged 12-23 months,

who have received all recommended vaccines

Major States


Tamil Nadu 65 89 81

Kerala 54 80 75

Haryana 53 63 65

Karnataka 52 60 65


Delhi 58 60 63

Punjab 62 72 60


Orissa 36 44 52


Gujarat 50 53 45


Bihar - 12 33

Assam 19 17 32

Rajasthan 21 17 27


India 36 42 44 Notes: Blank cells (-) indicate the non- availability of data. Here we have considered the percentage of children 12-23 months who have received all recommended vaccines as an indicator of Vaccination coverage Source: Fact Sheets, National Family Health Survey (NFHS) - 3, 2005-2006, www.nfhsindia.org

42


Table 2.3: Trends in Any Antenatal Care as revealed by the NFHS (I, II & III) (in %)

Percentage of women who utilised any ante-natal care provided by skilled

personnel for reasons related to pregnancy, at least once, during pregnancy

Major States


Kerala 98 99 100

Tamil Nadu 96 98 99




Delhi 85 84 92

Karnataka 87 87 91

Punjab 88 75 91

Haryana 76 58 89

Gujarat 78 87 87


Rajasthan 33 49 76

Assam 53 60 71


Orissa 36 47 51

Bihar - 34 34

India 65 66 77 Notes: Blank cells (-) indicate the non- availability of data. Here we have considered the percentage of women who utilised any ante-natal care provided by skilled personnel for reasons related to pregnancy, at

least once, during pregnancy as a percentage of live births in a given time period. Source: Fact Sheets, National Family Health Survey (NFHS) - 3, 2005-2006, www.nfhsindia.org

43


Table 2.4: Trends in Coverage of Institutional Deliveries as revealed by NFHS (I, II & III) (in %)

Institutional Coverage of Births Major States


Kerala 89 93 100

Tamil Nadu 64 79 90

Orissa 64 81 87


Karnataka 31 59 67


Delhi 45 59 61

Gujarat 37 46 55

Punjab 25 38 53


Haryana 17 22 39

Rajasthan 12 22 32


Assam 12 18 23

Bihar - 15 22


India 26.1 33.6 40.7 Notes: Blank cells (-) indicate the non- availability of data. Here we have considered the percentage of births in the last 3 years through an institutional set up, as an indicator of institutional coverage. Source: Fact Sheets, National Family Health Survey (NFHS) - 3, 2005-2006, www.nfhsindia.org

44


Table 2.5: Trends in Nutritional Status of Children as revealed by the NFHS (I, II & III) (in %)

Percentage of children under age 3 who are underweight Major States



Bihar - 54 58

Gujarat 48 45 47



Orissa 52 54 44

Rajasthan 44 51 44

Haryana 35 35 42

Karnataka 51 44 41

Assam 49 36 40



Delhi 41 35 33

Tamil Nadu 46 37 33

Kerala 27 27 29

Punjab 46 29 27

India 53.4 47 46 Notes: Blank cells (-) indicate the non- availability of data. Here we have considered the percentage of children under age 3 who are underweight as an indicator of the nutritional status. Source: Fact Sheets, National Family Health Survey (NFHS) - 3, 2005-2006, www.nfhsindia.org

45


Expenditure on Social Services from the State Budgets of Rajasthan Table 3.1: Expenditure* on Social Services from the State Budgets of Rajasthan (in Rs. Crore)

Social Services (Total)

Education, sports, art and culture

Medical and Public Health

Family Welfare

Water Supply and Sanitation

Welfare of SCs, STs and OBCs

Social Security and Welfare

Total Expenditure from the State Budget**

Plan 651.86 192.39 134.21 - 225.89 42.09 4.06 2232.15 Non-plan 1781.63 1043.9 261.14 - 242.97 19.23 36.81 5323.3 1993-94

Total 2433.49 1236.29 395.35 - 468.86 61.32 40.87 7555.45 Plan 916.58 291.73 188.99 - 319.38 45.79 4.85 2789.94 Non-plan 1961.66 1171.19 289.43 - 259.39 19.61 38.25 6974.38 1994-95

Total 2878.24 1462.92 478.42 - 578.77 65.4 43.1 9764.32 Plan 1264.89 371.71 141.64 111.43 390.77 75.66 7.03 3879.06 Non-plan 2279.36 1341.68 317.3 4.86 306.84 20.28 39.12 9069.05 1995-96

Total 3544.25 1713.39 458.94 116.29 697.61 95.94 46.15 12948.11 Plan 1267.71 431.15 158.09 131.1 318.12 75.94 12.16 3296.72 Non-plan 2619.93 1558.86 360.5 4.86 384.99 11.8 35.84 11981.37 1996-97

Total 3887.64 1990.01 518.59 135.96 703.11 87.74 48 15278.09 Plan 1159.86 240.01 137.04 145.2 417.02 68.17 14.67 3869.08 Non-plan 3146.48 1921.48 429.26 5.06 454.92 13.67 39.47 12329.93 1997-98


Total 5566.97 2795.61 698.65 161.42 1093.49 96.63 67.58 17323.97 Plan 1537.89 387.73 123.9 152.19 334.69 74.34 11.65 3346.27 Non-plan 4399.14 2725.11 597.3 7.05 610.32 22.27 97.67 19057.46

1999-2000



Total 7,069.52 3455.52 780.32 216.76 1162.81 179.87 148.86 26303.61 Plan 1915.33 174.61 83.88 129.72 591.12 116.41 12.56 4417.41 Non-plan 5421.07 3155.25 679 20.44 775.89 30.47 148.43 27509.62 2002-03

Total 7336.4 3329.86 762.88 150.16 1367.01 146.88 160.99 31927.03 Plan 2242.7 278.72 96.83 181.2 561.86 160.54 14 6657.65 Non-plan 6236.69 3376.37 731.99 23.06 799.96 33.17 147.67 29528.9 2003-04

Total 8479.39 3655.09 828.82 204.26 1361.82 193.71 161.67 36186.55 Plan 2648.4 416.4 136.0 132.2 619.2 190.9 29.1 6763.03 Non-plan 6047.7 3558.3 786.6 23.8 857.1 34.0 146.4 23952.72 2004-05 Total 8696.1 3974.7 922.5 156.0 1476.3 224.9 175.5 30715.75 Plan 3514.6 702.3 238.2 159.8 902.6 279.1 41.9 8718.32 Non-plan 6599.7 4054.6 847.5 25.8 861.1 36.4 176.2 20214.22

2005-06 RE

Total 10114.3 4756.9 1085.8 185.5 1763.6 315.5 218.1 28932.54 Plan 4377.9 612.3 277.4 167.8 1267.8 285.0 58.4 8868.11 Non-plan 7069.5 4430.4 897.6 27.2 876.2 37.6 188.1 24752.31

2006-07 BE

Total 11447.4 5042.7 1175.0 194.9 2144.0 322.6 246.5 33620.42

Notes: * Expenditure figures given above include (i) Revenue Expenditure and (ii) Capital Outlay, but do not include the Loans & Advances for social services (if any). We may also note here that, while expenditure from the Budgets of Rajasthan shows very small amounts of

46


Loans & Advances for Total Social Services, it does not show any Loans & Advances for the individual services covered (e.g. Education, Medical & Public Health, Family Welfare, etc.) in most of the years covered. **Total Expenditure figures: RE for 1993-94, Actual for 1994-95, RE for 1995-96, Actual for 1996-97 to 2002-03, RE for 2003-04, Actual for 2004-05, RE for 2005-06, and BE for 2006-07. This kind of approximation of Total Expenditure figures for three of the fourteen years covered was made as the Budget at a Glance, Rajasthan Budget, Govt. of Rajasthan, could not be accessed for all of the study years. Source: 1. Data on Expenditure on Social Services from the State Budgets of Rajasthan have been compiled from: • Reserve Bank of India (2004), Handbook of State Government Finances, and • Reserve Bank of India, State Finances: A Study of Budgets, various years. 2. Data on Total Expenditure from the Rajasthan Budget (on all sectors) have been compiled from: • Govt. of Rajasthan, Budget at a Glance, Rajasthan Budget, various years. Table 3.2: Expenditure on Social Services as a proportion of Total Expenditure from the Rajasthan Budget (Figures in %)




Family Welfare




1993-94 32.2 16.4 5.2 - 6.2 0.81 0.54 1994-95 29.5 15.0 4.9 - 5.9 0.67 0.44 1995-96 27.4 13.2 3.5 0.90 5.4 0.74 0.36 1996-97 25.4 13.0 3.4 0.89 4.6 0.57 0.31 1997-98 26.6 13.3 3.5 0.93 5.4 0.51 0.33 1998-99 32.1 16.1 4.0 0.93 6.3 0.56 0.39 1999-2000 26.5 13.9 3.2 0.71 4.2 0.43 0.49 2000-01 27.8 13.6 4.6 0.64 4.6 0.46 0.60 2001-02 26.9 13.1 3.0 0.82 4.4 0.68 0.57 2002-03 23.0 10.4 2.4 0.47 4.3 0.46 0.50 2003-04 23.4 10.1 2.3 0.56 3.8 0.54 0.45 2004-05 28.3 12.9 3.0 0.51 4.8 0.73 0.57 2005-06 RE 35.0 16.4 3.8 0.64 6.1 1.09 0.75 2006-07 BE 34.0 15.0 3.5 0.58 6.4 0.96 0.73

Note: Expenditure figures given above are Total Expenditure, i.e., Plan + Non Plan. Source: Computed from data in Table 3.1 above. Table 3.3: Plan Expenditure on Social Services as a proportion of Total Plan Expenditure from Rajasthan Budget (Figures in %)




Family Welfare




1993-94 29.2 8.6 6.0 - 10.1 1.89 0.18 1994-95 32.9 10.5 6.8 - 11.4 1.64 0.17 1995-96 32.6 9.6 3.7 2.87 10.1 1.95 0.18 1996-97 38.5 13.1 4.8 3.98 9.6 2.30 0.37 1997-98 30.0 6.2 3.5 3.75 10.8 1.76 0.38 1998-99 41.5 8.0 2.3 4.40 14.8 2.18 0.36 1999-2000 46.0 11.6 3.7 4.55 10.0 2.22 0.35 2000-01 51.5 14.4 13.6 4.20 12.2 2.52 0.26 2001-02 52.5 12.6 3.2 5.19 11.0 3.79 0.36 2002-03 43.4 4.0 1.9 2.94 13.4 2.64 0.28 2003-04 33.7 4.2 1.5 2.72 8.4 2.41 0.21 2004-05 39.2 6.2 2.0 1.95 9.2 2.82 0.43 2005-06 RE 40.3 8.1 2.7 1.83 10.4 3.20 0.48 2006-07 BE 49.4 6.9 3.1 1.89 14.3 3.21 0.66 Source: Computed from data in Table 3.1 above.

47


Table 3.4: Non-Plan Expenditure on Social Services as a proportion of Total Non-Plan Expenditure from the Rajasthan Budget

(Figures in %)




Family Welfare




1993-94 33.5 19.6 4.9 - 4.6 0.36 0.69 1994-95 28.1 16.8 4.1 - 3.7 0.28 0.55 1995-96 25.1 14.8 3.5 0.05 3.4 0.22 0.43 1996-97 21.9 13.0 3.0 0.04 3.2 0.10 0.30 1997-98 25.5 15.6 3.5 0.04 3.7 0.11 0.32 1998-99 29.7 18.2 4.5 0.04 4.1 0.14 0.40 1999-2000 23.1 14.3 3.1 0.04 3.2 0.12 0.51 2000-01 23.8 13.5 3.0 0.03 3.3 0.11 0.66 2001-02 22.2 13.2 2.9 0.03 3.2 0.12 0.60 2002-03 19.7 11.5 2.5 0.07 2.8 0.11 0.54 2003-04 21.1 11.4 2.5 0.08 2.7 0.11 0.50 2004-05 25.2 14.9 3.3 0.10 3.6 0.14 0.61 2005-06 RE 32.6 20.1 4.2 0.13 4.3 0.18 0.87 2006-07 BE 28.6 17.9 3.6 0.11 3.5 0.15 0.76

Source: Computed from data in Table 3.1 above. Table 3.5: Net State Domestic Product (NSDP) of Rajasthan (1993-94 to 2004-05) (in Rs. crore)

1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 NSDP

at Current Prices 28977 36733 41690 50986 56912 65596 69491 69898 78089 73864 93846 98573

NSDP at Constant

(1993-94) Prices 28977 34269 35530 39682 44509 46457 46574 45664 50238 46177 59690 59911

Source: Website of the Central Statistical Organisation, Min. of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Govt. of India (www.mospi.nic.in) Table 3.6: Expenditure on Social Services as a proportion of the NSDP of Rajasthan (Figures in %)




Family Welfare




1993-94 8.40 4.27 1.36 - 1.62 0.21 0.14

1994-95 7.84 3.98 1.30 - 1.58 0.18 0.12

1995-96 8.50 4.11 1.10 0.28 1.67 0.23 0.11

1996-97 7.62 3.90 1.02 0.27 1.38 0.17 0.09

1997-98 7.57 3.80 1.00 0.26 1.53 0.14 0.10

1998-99 8.49 4.26 1.07 0.25 1.67 0.15 0.10

1999-2000 8.54 4.48 1.04 0.23 1.36 0.14 0.16

2000-01 9.61 4.70 1.58 0.22 1.59 0.16 0.21

2001-02 9.05 4.43 1.00 0.28 1.49 0.23 0.19

2002-03 9.93 4.51 1.03 0.20 1.85 0.20 0.22

2003-04 9.04 3.89 0.88 0.22 1.45 0.21 0.17

2004-05 8.82 4.03 0.94 0.16 1.50 0.23 0.18 Notes: 1. Expenditure figures used in the Table above are Total Expenditure, i.e., Plan + Non Plan. 2. Net State Domestic Product (NSDP) figures used in the Table above are NSDP of Rajasthan at Current Prices. Source: Computed from data in Tables 3.1 and 3.5 above.

48


Expenditure on Child Specific Schemes from the State Budgets of Rajasthan Table 4.1: Expenditure on Child Education from the Rajasthan Budget

(in Rs. Crore) Major Head of account- Child Education related Schemes/Items of Exp.

2202 - General Education- Elementary Education (Total Revenue Exp.)

2202 - General Edu.- Secondary Education (Total Revenue Exp.)

2202 - General Edu.- SCERT

2204 Sports and Youth Services- Child Education related Schemes/ Items of Exp.

2225 Welfare of SCs, STs and OBCs- Child Education related Schemes/ Items of Exp.

2235 Social security and welfare- Management of residential schools for the children of the families engaged in animal husbandry

4202 Capital outlay on Education, Sports, Art & Culture- Elementary Education

4202 Capital outlay on Education, Sports, Art & Culture- Secondary Education

4225- Capital Outlay on Welfare of SCs/STs/ OBCs- Child Education related Items of Expenditure

Total Exp. on Child Edu.

Non-Plan 563.85 358.21 1.28 3.52 7.00 0 0 0 0 933.86

Plan 82.34 60.76 0.07 1.53 6.45 0 2.64 0.36 1.29 155.45 1993-94 (Actuals)

Total 646.20 418.97 1.35 5.05 13.45 0 2.64 0.36 1.29 1089.32 Non-Plan 625.94 389.04 1.42 4.01 7.49 0 0 0 0 1027.90

Plan 152.86 85.01 0.20 1.83 8.87 0 6.24 1.35 2.28 258.65 1994-95 (RE)

Total 778.80 474.05 1.62 5.84 16.37 0 6.24 1.35 2.28 1286.54 Non-Plan 744.29 443.15 1.54 6.32 7.79 0 0 0 0 1203.10

Plan 195.35 103.54 0.05 2.01 10.35 0 1.32 0.79 2.73 316.14 1995-96 (Actuals)

Total 939.64 546.68 1.59 8.33 18.15 0 1.32 0.79 2.73 1519.23 Non-Plan 845.01 542.34 1.75 7.27 7.79 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1404.15

Plan 289.59 126.87 0.13 1.88 14.75 0 1.48 2.25 3.20 440.15 1996-97 (Actuals)

Total 1134.60 669.21 1.88 9.16 22.54 0 1.48 2.25 3.20 1844.31 Non-Plan 1035.92 677.81 1.93 7.90 8.65 0 0 0 0 1732.2

Plan 132.52 50.17 0.24 1.82 14.30 0 6.48 0.59 13.62 219.7 1997-98 (Actuals)

Total 1168.44 727.99 2.17 9.72 22.95 0 6.48 0.59 13.62 1951.9 Non-Plan 1328.21 902.76 2.53 10.25 12.42 0 0 0 0 2256.2

Plan 158.96 72.54 0.18 2.30 16.60 0 14.10 0.98 9.72 275.4 1998-99 (Actuals)

Total 1487.17 975.30 2.71 12.56 29.02 0 14.10 0.98 9.72 2531.5 Non-Plan 1515.78 938.19 2.62 9.32 15.73 0 0 0 0 2481.6

Plan 243.79 71.61 0.11 2.15 17.11 0 18.96 0.83 13.87 368.4 1999-00 (Actuals)

Total 1759.57 1009.81 2.73 11.47 32.84 0 18.96 0.83 13.87 2850.1 Non-Plan 1564.03 932.42 2.46 9.17 16.55 0 0 0 0 2524.6

Plan 304.74 92.73 0.07 2.27 13.77 0 43.05 0 4.72 461.3 2000-01 (Actuals)

Total 1868.77 1025.15 2.53 11.44 30.32 0 43.05 0 4.72 2986.0 Non-Plan 1572.07 986.43 2.56 9.57 19.85 0 0 0 0 2590.5

Plan 315.41 108.31 0.07 0.94 27.87 0 23.88 0.00 10.64 487.1 2001-02 (Actuals)

Total 1887.48 1094.74 2.63 10.51 47.72 0 23.88 0.00 10.64 3077.6 Non-Plan 1744.25 1083.45 2.37 9.97 22.72 0 0 0 0 2862.8

Plan 130.87 4.84 0.02 0.24 23.38 0 18.74 0.06 15.05 193.2 2002-03 (Actuals)

Total 1875.12 1088.28 2.39 10.20 46.11 0 18.74 0.06 15.05 3056.0 Non-Plan 1824.74 1180.84 2.54 10.62 35.26 0 0 0 0 3054.0

Plan 208.86 20.26 0.02 0.67 35.08 0 11.40 4.73 22.22 303.2 2003-04 (Actuals)

Total 2033.59 1201.10 2.56 11.29 70.35 0 11.40 4.73 22.22 3357.2

49


Non-Plan 1932.37 1253.11 2.66 11.12 24.72 0 0 0 0 3224.0

Plan 291.10 54.84 0.05 1.17 66.78 0 1.91 9.60 14.70 440.2 2004-05 (Actuals)

Total 2223.47 1307.95 2.71 12.29 91.50 0 1.91 9.60 14.70 3664.1 Non-Plan 2306.48 1350.76 3.06 11.84 26.20 0 0 0 0 3698.3

Plan 481.98 83.79 0.33 0.94 109.06 0.10 18.66 2.50 15.73 713.1 2005-06 (RE)

Total 2788.46 1434.54 3.39 12.79 135.26 0.10 18.66 2.50 15.73 4411.4 Non-Plan 2500.31 1519.11 2.94 12.53 26.91 0 0 0 0 4061.8

Plan 413.66 41.64 0.47 1.99 111.60 0.21 3.10 0.30 32.44 605.4 2006-07 (BE)

Total 2913.97 1560.75 3.41 14.52 138.50 0.21 3.10 0.30 32.44 4667.2

NOTES: Child Education related Schemes/ Items of Expenditure under 2204- (Revenue Expenditure on) Sports and Youth Services

101- (002) Dept of sports- various sports programme 101- (003) Physical education school 102- Youth welfare programme for students (001) National cadet core (NCC) 102- Youth welfare programme for students (002) National service scheme (NSS): Higher secondary school 102- Youth welfare programme for students (003) Grants in aid to Rajasthan, India scouts and guides 796- Tribal sub- plan (001) Grants in aid to Rajasthan, India scouts and guides, 02- Grants to Rajasthan sports council

Child Education related Schemes/ Items of Expenditure under 2225- (Revenue Expenditure on) Welfare of SCs, STs and OBCs

01 Welfare of SCs 196- Assistance to distt council/ distt level Panchayats (02) Management of hostels

01 Welfare of SCs 196- Assistance to distt council/ distt level Panchayats

(03) Pre-Matric scholarships cum hostels for the children of families whose parents are engaged in unclean occupation

01 Welfare of SCs 196- Assistance to distt council/ distt level Panchayats (04) Assistance to aided hostels for SCs

01 Welfare of SCs 277 Education (001) Scholarships and stipends: 01 through the Dept of Social Welfare 01 Welfare of SCs 277 Education (002) Management of hostels 01 Welfare of SCs 277 Education (004) Book bank

01 Welfare of SCs 277 Education (007) Pre-matric scholarships cum hostels for the children of families whose parents are engaged in unclean occupations

01 Welfare of SCs 789 Special component plan for SCs (001) Scholarships and stipends

01 Welfare of SCs 789 Special component plan for SCs (002) Assistance to aided hostels

01 Welfare of SCs 789 Special component plan for SCs (003) Book bank

01 Welfare of SCs 789 Special component plan for SCs (004) Scholarships for children engaged in unclean occupation

01 Welfare of SCs 789 Special component plan for SCs (010) Residential schools under German assistance

01 Welfare of SCs 789 Special component plan for SCs (012) Management of residential schools

01 Welfare of SCs 789 Special component plan for SCs (013) Special scholarships for SC students

01 Welfare of SCs 796 Tribal sub-plan (001) Scholarships and stipends

02 Welfare of STs 196- Assistance to distt council/ distt level Panchayats (01) Management of hostels

02 Welfare of STs 196- Assistance to distt council/ distt level Panchayats (02) Management of hostels under tribal sub plan

02 Welfare of STs 196- Assistance to distt council/ distt level Panchayats (03) Assistance to aided hostels under sub plan area

02 Welfare of STs 277 Education (001) Scholarships and stipends: 01 through the Dept. of Social Welfare 02 Welfare of STs 277 Education (002) Management of hostels 02 Welfare of STs 277 Education (006) Assistance to voluntary organisations

50


02 Welfare of STs 277 Education (007) Book bank

02 Welfare of STs 796 Tribal sub-plan (002) Assistance for tribal sub-plan schemes:19- sports scheme for ST students (SCA)

02 Welfare of STs 796 Tribal sub-plan (006) 01 Scholarships through the Dept of Social Welfare 02 Welfare of STs 796 Tribal sub-plan (006) 02 Management of hostels through the Dept of Social Welfare 02 Welfare of STs 796 Tribal sub-plan (006) 06 Assistance to aided hostels

03 Welfare of OBCs 196- Assistance to distt council/ distt level Panchayats (01) Management of hostels

03 Welfare of OBCs 277 Education (002) Management of hostels 03 Welfare of OBCs 796 Tribal sub-plan (001) Scholarships and stipends through the Dept of Social Welfare

Child Education related Schemes/ Items of Expenditure under 4225- Capital Outlay on Welfare of SCs/STs/ OBCs

01- Welfare of SCs 789 SCP for SCs 001- Management of Residential Schools 01- Welfare of SCs 789 SCP for SCs 002- Residential Schools Under German Assistance 01- Welfare of SCs 789 SCP for SCs 004- Construction of Girls’ Hostels 01- Welfare of SCs 789 SCP for SCs 005- Construction of Boys’ Hostels 01- Welfare of SCs 789 SCP for SCs 007- Residential school- II phase under German assistance 02- Welfare of STs 277 Education 001 Construction of Boys’ Hostels 02- Welfare of STs 277 Education 002 Construction of Girls’ Hostels

02- Welfare of STs 277 Education (003)- 01- Construction of Hostels for Boys through the Dept. of Social Welfare

02- Welfare of STs 277 Education (003)- 02- Construction of Hostels for girls through the Dept. of Social Welfare

02- Welfare of STs 796 Tribal Sub-plan (002) Construction of Hostels for ST Students [Special Central Assistance (SCA)]

02- Welfare of STs 796 Tribal Sub-plan (003) Construction of Hostels for ST Students [CSS] 02- Welfare of STs 796 Tribal Sub-plan (012) Construction of Hostels [SCA] 02- Welfare of STs 796 Tribal Sub-plan (018) Construction of Ashram Hostels In Sub-Plan Areas (Plan)

02- Welfare of STs 796 Tribal Sub-plan (020) Programmes under special schemes for tribal area development (Maharashtra pattern)- 02- Construction of hostels for ST students (CSS)

03- Welfare of OBCs 277 Education (001) Construction of Hostels 03- Welfare of OBCs 277 Education (002) Residential Schools

SOURCE: Compiled from Rajasthan State Budget (Detailed Demands for Grants), various years

51


Table 4.2: Expenditure on Early Childhood Care and Development from the Rajasthan Budget (in Rs. Crore)

Major Head of account- Schemes/Items of Exp. Related to Early Childhood Care & Development

2236 Nutrition- Nutrition Creche Prog.

2236 Nutrition- ICDS

2236 Nutrition- Kishori Shakti Yojana

2236 Nutrition- Juvenile girls scheme

2236 Nutrition- Other Schemes

2235 Social security and welfare

2211 Family Welfare- World Food Prog. Project

4215- Capital outlay on water supply & sanitation- Prime Minister's declaration: Drinking water facilities in primary schools

4235 Capital Outlay on Social Security And Welfare

4236 Capital Outlay on Nutrition

Total Exp. on Early Child- hood Care & Dev.

Non-Plan 6.47 0.00 0 0 0 0.16 0 0 0 0 6.63

Plan 2.06 19.66 0 0 0 1.01 0 0 0 1.18 23.91 1993-94 (Actuals)

Total 8.54 19.66 0 0 0 1.17 0 0 0 1.18 30.55 Non-Plan 7.62 0.00 0 0 0 0.10 0 0 0 0 7.73

Plan 3.41 21.99 0 0 0 1.64 0 0 0 2.00 29.03 1994-95 (RE)

Total 11.03 21.99 0 0 0 1.74 0 0 0 2.00 36.76 Non-Plan 6.75 0.00 0 0 0 0.12 0 0 0 0 6.86

Plan 5.62 23.68 0 0 0 0.01 0 0 0 5.02 34.32 1995-96 (Actuals)

Total 12.37 23.68 0 0 0 0.12 0 0 0 5.02 41.19 Non-Plan 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0.15 0 0 0 0 0.15

Plan 11.15 30.78 0 0 0 1.49 0 0 0 0.70 44.13 1996-97 (Actuals)

Total 30.78 0 0 0 1.64 0 0 0 0.70 44.27 Non-Plan 0 0 0 0 0 1.63 0 0 0 0 1.63

Plan 9.37 37.71 0 0 0 5.09 0 0 4.14 0 56.31 1997-98 (Actuals)

Total 9.37 37.71 0 0 0 6.72 0 0 4.14 0 57.94 Non-Plan 0 0 0 0 0 0.23 0 0 0 0 0.23

Plan 12.03 45.19 0 0 0 2.33 0 0 1.20 0 60.74 1998-99 (Actuals)

Total 12.03 45.19 0 0 0 2.56 0 0 1.20 0 60.97 Non-Plan 0 0 0 0 0 0.24 0 0 0 0 0.24

Plan 7.06 45.49 0 0 0 0.19 0 0 0.09 0 52.83 1999-00 (Actuals)

Total 7.06 45.49 0 0 0 0.44 0 0 0.09 0 53.07 Non-Plan 0 0 0 0 0 0.29 0 0 0 0.29

Plan 8.92 56.87 0 0 10.21 0.27 0 0 0 8.45 84.72 2000-01 (Actuals)

Total 8.92 56.87 0 0 10.21 0.56 0 0 0 8.45 85.01 Non-Plan 0 0 0 0 0 0.32 0 0 0 0 0.32

Plan 14.01 68.64 0 0 52.18 2.98 0 0 0 25.11 162.92 2001-02 (Actuals)

Total 14.01 68.64 0 0 52.18 3.30 0 0 0 25.11 163.24 Non-Plan 0 0 0 0 0 0.70 0 0 0 0.70

Plan 49.82 112.65 0.67 0 39.57 0 0 0 9.23 211.94 2002-03 (Actuals)

Total 49.82 112.65 0.67 0 39.57 0.70 0 0 0 9.23 212.64 Non-Plan 0 0 0 0 0 0.67 0 0 0 0.67

Plan 51.58 108.69 0.57 0 68.75 0 3.47 0 0 233.06 2003-04 (Actuals)

Total 51.58 108.69 0.57 0 68.75 0.67 0 3.47 0 0 233.72 Non-Plan

0 0 0 0 0 0.70 0 0 0 0.70

Plan 83.62 108.98 0.87 0 48.21 0 6.71 0 0.75 249.16 2004-05 (Actuals)

Total 83.62 108.98 0.87 0 48.21 0.70 0 6.71 0 0.75 249.86

52


Non-Plan 0 0 0 0 0 0.84 0 0 0 0.84

Plan 129.96 125.72 1.82 2 16.55 0.00 5.11 0 0.62 281.77 2005-06 (RE)

Total 129.96 125.72 1.82 2 16.55 0.84 0 5.11 0 0.62 282.62 Non-Plan 0 0 0 0 0 0.46 0 0 0 0.46

Plan 179.65 155.53 2.83 7.15 20.00 0.00 2 0 2.25 369.41 2006-07 (BE)

Total 179.65 155.53 2.83 7.15 20.00 0.46 0 2 0 2.25 369.87

NOTES: Early Childhood Care & Development related Schemes/Items of Expenditure under 2235- (Revenue Expenditure on) Social Security & Welfare

02 Social welfare 102 Child welfare (003) Infant/child houses 02 Social welfare 103 Women’s welfare (005) Women development programme: 06 Balika Samridhi Yojana

02 Social welfare 103 Women’s welfare (007) Scheme for the development of women and children in rural areas (DWACRA) (integrated women environment programme)

02 Social welfare 104 Welfare of old-age, weak and destitute persons (004) Grants to voluntary organisations for Day Care Centres

02 Social welfare 796 Tribal sub-plan (011) Grants to voluntary organisations for Day Care Centres 02 Social welfare 796 Tribal sub-plan (013) Package programme for women through DWCD

Items of Expenditure under the Nutrition Creche Programme

2236 Nutrition 02 Distribution of nutritious food and liquids

101 Special nutrition programme (001) Through DWCD: 01 Nutrition Creche programme


789 Special component plan for SCs (001) Through DWCD: 01 Nutrition Creche programme

2236 Nutrition 02 Distribution of nutritious food and liquids 796 Tribal sub-plan (001) Through DWCD: 01 Nutrition Creche programme

Items of Expenditure under the ICDS

2236 Nutrition

02 Distribution of nutritious food and liquids

101 Special nutrition programme (001) Through DWCD: 02 ICDS

2236 Nutrition

02 Distribution of nutritious food and liquids

101 Special nutrition programme (001) Through DWCD: 03 ICDS (World Bank)

2236 Nutrition

02 Distribution of nutritious food and liquids 796 Tribal sub-plan (001) Through DWCD: 02 ICDS

Items of Expenditure under the Kishori Shakti Yojana


101 Special nutrition programme (001) Through DWCD: 06 Kishori Shakti Yojana

2236 Nutrition 02 Distribution of nutritious food and liquids 796 Tribal sub-plan (001) Through DWCD: 03 Kishori Shakti Yojana

Items of Expenditure under the Juvenile Girls’ Scheme


101 Special nutrition programme (007) Juvenile girls’ scheme

2236 Nutrition 02 Distribution of nutritious food and liquids 796 Tribal sub-plan (007) Juvenile girls’ scheme

Early Childhood Care & Development related Other Schemes/Items of Expenditure under 2236- (Revenue Expenditure on) Nutrition

02 Distribution of nutritious food and liquids 101 Special nutrition programme (001) Through DWCD: 04 Women’s welfare (World Bank) 02 Distribution of nutritious food and liquids 101 Special nutrition programme (001) Through DWCD: 05 PMGY (nutrition) 02 Distribution of nutritious food and liquids 101 Special nutrition programme (008) Honorarium for female assistance 02 Distribution of nutritious food and liquids

789 Special component plan for SCs (001) Through DWCD: 02 PMGY (Nutrition)

02 Distribution of nutritious food and liquids 796 Tribal sub-plan (001) Through DWCD: 04 PMGY

53


02 Distribution of nutritious food and liquids 796 Tribal sub-plan (005) National nutrition mission 02 Distribution of nutritious food and liquids 796 Tribal sub-plan (006) Honorarium for female assistance

Early Childhood Care & Development related Other Schemes/Items of Expenditure under 4235 Capital Outlay on Social Security And Welfare

02- Social Welfare 102 Child Welfare (002) Integrated Package Programme 02- Social Welfare 103- Women’s Welfare (005) Construction of female and Children Development Centres

Early Childhood Care & Development related Other Schemes/Items of Expenditure under 4236 Capital Outlay on Nutrition

02- Distribution of Nutritious Food and Liquids

800- other expenditure (001) Construction of Anganwadi Centres (World Bank)


800- other expenditure (002) Construction of Godowns


800- other expenditure (003) Construction of Buildings (World Bank)


800- other expenditure (004) Installation of Hand pumps (World Bank)


800- other expenditure (005) Construction of TCRC buildings


800- other expenditure (006) Construction of toilets at Anganwadi centres


800- other expenditure

(007) Construction of Anganwadi centres (through the Department of Disaster Management and assistance)

SOURCE: Compiled from the Rajasthan State Budget (Detailed Demands for Grants), various years

54


Table 4.3: Expenditure on Child Health from the Rajasthan Budget (in Rs. Crore)

Major Head of account- Child Health related Schemes/Items of Exp.

2210 Medical and Public Health- Sir Padampat Maternity and Child Health Institute, Jaipur

2210 Medical and Public Health- Child Health related Other Schemes/ Items of Expenditure

2211 Family Welfare- Training of Auxiliary Nurse- midwives and female health observers

2211 Family Welfare- Maternity and Child Health Centres

2211 Family Welfare- Externally Aided CSSM Programme

2211 Family Welfare- Child Health related Other Schemes/ Items of Expenditure

4211- Capital outlay on Family Welfare- Child Health related Schemes/ Items of Expenditure

Total Expenditure on Child Health

Non-Plan 1.39 2.46 0 2.95 0 0.02 0 6.81 Plan 0.07 0.63 2.05 0.00 0 18.89 0.64 22.28 1993-94

(Actuals) Total 1.45 3.08 2.05 2.95 0 18.92 0.64 29.09 Non-Plan 1.40 2.63 0 3.49 0 0 0 7.52 Plan 0.22 0.68 2.67 0.00 6.79 8.06 1.20 19.62 1994-95

(RE) Total 1.62 3.31 2.67 3.49 6.79 8.06 1.20 27.14 Non-Plan 1.66 3.06 0 3.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.33 Plan 0.13 0.72 3.71 0.00 17.38 13.94 0.46 36.34 1995-96

(Actuals) Total 1.79 3.78 3.71 3.60 17.38 13.94 0.46 44.66 Non-Plan 1.90 3.36 0 4.31 0.00 0.00 0 9.56 Plan 0.15 1.11 1.08 0 22.57 13.07 3.09 41.06 1996-97

(Actuals) Total 2.04 4.46 1.08 4.31 22.57 13.07 3.09 50.62 Non-Plan 2.24 4.55 0 4.61 0 0 0 11.40 Plan 0.12 0.37 2.95 0 16.47 10.35 16.46 46.72 1997-98



(Actuals) Total 2.89 1.07 3.72 6.15 25.38 18.62 2.69 60.51 Non-Plan 2.76 7.26 0 6.01 0.0004 0 0 16.03 Plan 0.36 0.63 4.06 0 8.44 14.49 7.69 35.68 2000-01

(Actuals) Total 3.12 7.89 4.06 6.01 8.44 14.49 7.69 51.71 Non-Plan 2.92 0.87 0 5.70 0 0 0 9.48 Plan 0.52 0.45 4.49 0.03 48.02 13.68 11.13 78.32 2001-02

(Actuals) Total 3.44 1.32 4.49 5.73 48.02 13.68 11.13 87.80 Non-Plan 3.43 1.33 0 5.94 0 0 0 10.71 Plan 0 0 4.62 0 14.40 14.37 0 33.39 2002-03

(Actuals) Total 3.43 1.33 4.62 5.94 14.40 14.37 0 44.09 Non-Plan 3.74 1.52 0 6.59 0 0 0 11.85 Plan 0 0 5.28 0 58.44 4.32 0 68.04 2003-04

(Actuals) Total 3.74 1.52 5.28 6.59 58.44 4.32 0 79.89 Non-Plan 4.29 1.26 0 6.79 0 0 0 12.34 Plan 0 0 6.86 0 3.13 2.06 0.005 12.05 2004-05

(Actuals) Total 4.29 1.26 6.86 6.79 3.13 2.06 0.005 24.38 Non-Plan 4.77 1.40 0 8.21 0 0.0001 0 14.38 Plan 0.0003 0 6.92 0 18 2.53 0 27.45

2005-06 (Revised Estimates) Total 4.77 1.40 6.92 8.21 18 2.53 0 41.83

Non-Plan 5.05 1.49 0 8.66 0 0.0005 0 15.20 Plan 0.2 0 7.56 0 18 2.47 0 28.23

2006-07 (Budget Estimate) Total 5.25 1.49 7.56 8.66 18 2.47 0 43.43

55


NOTES: Child Health related Other Schemes/Items of Expenditure under 2210- (Revenue Expenditure on) Medical & Public Health

01 Urban Health Services - Allopathy 110 Hospitals and Dispensaries 18 Ummed hospital, Jodhpur 01 Urban Health Services - Allopathy 110 Hospitals and Dispensaries 23 Regional Maternity and Child Health Institution, Jodhpur 01 Urban Health Services - Allopathy 110 Hospitals and Dispensaries 30 Child Hospital, Udaipur 01 Urban Health Services - Allopathy 110 Hospitals and Dispensaries 35 Jhamwar Child Institute, Jaipur (Gastroenterology)

Child Health related Other Schemes/Items of Expenditure under 2211- (Revenue Expenditure on) Family Welfare

003-Training (003) Training (conducted through state Govt) 003-Training (006) CRECHE training 103- Maternity and Child Health (002) Antibodies Generation Programme 103- Maternity and Child Health (004) World Bank Assisted RCH Project 103- Maternity and Child Health (005) Govt. of India Assisted RCH Project

104- Transportation (001):- Funds for Petrol, oil, lubricants and repairing of vehicles 05 Training centres for Pregnant Women's Health Observers-06- Post partum Centres

104- Transportation 06- Post Partum Centres 200- Other services and supplies (03)- Post partum centres 796- Tribal sub plan Maternity and Child Welfare Centre

800- Other Expenditure

(002) Schemes for Strengthening Family Welfare and Maternity and Child Health Services In Select Districts through the help of UNFPA 01 : Schemes for Strengthening Family Welfare and Maternity and Child Health Services In Select Districts through the help of UNFPA

800- Other Expenditure (004) Expansion of Family Welfare and Maternity and Child Health Services In Kachchi Slum areas of Jaipur City under India Population Project-8

Child Health related Schemes/Items of Expenditure under 4211- Capital Outlay on Family Welfare

103- Maternity and Child Health (002) RCH project through the help of World Bank/ Govt. of India 103- Maternity and Child Health (003) Construction of Building for Maternity and Child Health

800- Other Expenditure (001) Construction of Building for Maternity and Child Health through the Assistance of UNFPA

800- Other Expenditure (003) India Population Project --9 (01) Construction of Building for Maternity And Child Health

SOURCE: Compiled from the Rajasthan State Budget (Detailed Demands for Grants), various years

56


Table 4.4: Expenditure on Child Protection from the Rajasthan Budget (in Rs. Crore)

Major Head of account- Child Protection related Schemes/Items of Exp.

2225 Welfare of SCs, STs and OBCs

2230 Labour and Employment

2235 Social Security and Welfare

4235 Capital Outlay on Social Security And Welfare

Total Expenditure on Child Protection

Non-Plan 0 0 3.27 0 3.27 Plan 0 0.07 0.65 0.02 0.74 1993-94

(Actuals) Total 0 0.07 3.91 0.02 4.00 Non-Plan 0 0 3.57 0 3.57 Plan 0 0.10 0.82 0.12 1.04 1994-95

(RE) Total 0 0.10 4.39 0.12 4.61 Non-Plan 0 0 3.18 0 3.18 Plan 0 0.04 0.76 0.02 0.81 1995-96

(Actuals) Total 0 0.04 3.95 0.02 4.00 Non-Plan 0 0 1.20 0 1.20 Plan 0 0.15 2.82 0.02 2.99 1996-97

(Actuals) Total 0 0.15 4.02 0.02 4.19 Non-Plan 0 0.09 1.43 0 1.51 Plan 0 0 2.65 0 2.65 1997-98

(Actuals) Total 0 0.09 4.08 0 4.16 Non-Plan 0 1.40 2.52 0 3.93 Plan 0 0.04 3.37 0 3.41 1998-99

(Actuals) Total 0 1.44 5.90 0 7.34 Non-Plan 0 0 2.06 0 2.06 Plan 0 0 3.21 0 3.19 1999-00

(Actuals) Total 0 0 5.27 0 5.25 Non-Plan 0 0 2.01 0 2.01 Plan 0 0.29 3.79 0 4.08 2000-01

(Actuals) Total 0 0.29 5.80 0 6.09 Non-Plan 0 0 2.02 0 2.02 Plan 0 0.11 6.50 0 6.61 2001-02

(Actuals) Total 0 0.11 8.52 0 8.63 Non-Plan 0.38 0 3.94 0 4.33 Plan 0 0 3.55 0 3.55 2002-03

(Actuals) Total 0.38 0 7.49 0 7.88 Non-Plan 0.98 0 4.71 0 5.69 Plan 0 0.11 2.97 0 3.08 2003-04

(Actuals) Total 0.98 0.11 7.68 0 8.77 Non-Plan 0.97 0 4.69 0 5.66 Plan 0 0.01 3.58 1.08 4.66 2004-05

(Actuals) Total 0.97 0.01 8.26 1.08 10.32 Non-Plan 1.09 0.0002 4.90 0 5.99 Plan 0.79 0.01 6.58 4.24 11.62

2005-06 (Revised Estimates) Total 1.88 0.01 11.48 4.24 17.61

Non-Plan 1.10 0.0002 5.13 0 6.23 Plan 0.8 0.12 5.21 5.19 11.32

2006-07 (Budget Estimate) Total 1.9 0.1202 10.34 5.19 17.55

NOTES: Child Protection related Schemes/Items of Expenditure under 2225- (Revenue Exp. on) Welfare of SCs, STs and OBCs

01 Welfare of SCs 789 Special component plan for SCs (018) Assistance to destitute children of SC communities under 'Palanhar' scheme

01 Welfare of SCs 789 Special component plan for SCs Assistance to voluntary organisations 02 Welfare of STs 796 Tribal sub-plan (010) Ashram hostels for Mada and Bikhri 02 Welfare of STs 796 Tribal sub-plan (012) Ashram hostels for Saharia

57


Child Protection related Schemes/Items of Expenditure under 2230- (Revenue Expenditure on) Labour and Employment 01 Labour 103 General labour welfare (004) Welfare of child labourers 01 Labour 112 Rehabilitation of bonded labourers (002) Relief to bonded labourers 01 Labour 112 Rehabilitation of bonded labourers (003) Grants-in-aid for bonded labourers to voluntary organisations

Child Protection related Schemes/Items of Expenditure under 2235- (Revenue Exp. on) Social Security and Welfare

02 Social welfare 101 Welfare of handicapped persons (001) Schools and hostels for blind boys and girls

02 Social welfare 101 Welfare of handicapped persons (002) Schools for deaf, dumb and blind students (conducted through the Dept of Primary and Secondary Education)

02 Social welfare 101 Welfare of handicapped persons (008) Scholarships for physically challenged students 02 Social welfare 101 Welfare of handicapped persons (015) Training to the teachers for blind students 02 Social welfare 101 Welfare of handicapped persons (016) Identification of handicapped 02 Social welfare 101 Welfare of handicapped persons (017) Training to the teachers for deaf students 02 Social welfare 101 Welfare of handicapped persons (019) Games and sports programme for the handicapped 02 Social welfare 101 Welfare of handicapped persons (020) Institutes for severely challenged persons 02 Social welfare 101 Welfare of handicapped persons (022) Transportation assistance to the handicapped 02 Social welfare 101 Welfare of handicapped persons (024) Polio correction camps for the handicapped 02 Social welfare 101 Welfare of handicapped persons (025) Assistance to voluntary organisations (Shiksha equipment) 02 Social welfare 101 Welfare of handicapped persons (028) Scholarships and stipend for handicapped students

02 Social welfare 101 Welfare of handicapped persons (029) Management of schools for deaf, dumb and blind students (through the Dept. of Primary Education)

02 Social welfare 101 Welfare of handicapped persons (032) Grants for distribution of "KIOSKS" to the handicapped 02 Social welfare 101 Welfare of handicapped persons (034) Residential schools for deaf, dump and blind students 02 Social welfare 102 Child welfare (002) Welfare expansion scheme through the Dept of Social Welfare 02 Social welfare 102 Child welfare (004) Child Act schemes 02 Social welfare 102 Child welfare (005) Assistance to executive voluntary authorities engaged in child welfare 02 Social welfare 102 Child welfare (006) Houses for mentally retarded children 02 Social welfare 102 Child welfare (008) Scholarships for the children of leprosy affected persons 02 Social welfare 102 Child welfare (010) Therapy centres 02 Social welfare 102 Child welfare (011) Strengthening of orphanages 02 Social welfare 102 Child welfare (012) Education of orphan/ignored children 02 Social welfare 102 Child welfare (013) Schools for mentally retarded children 02 Social welfare 103 Women’s welfare (011) Assistance for management of Mahila Sadan and Balika Sadan 02 Social welfare 106 Reformatory services (001) Social security services: 01 Probation services

02 Social welfare 196- Assistance to distt council/ distt level Panchayats (06) Scholarships for physically handicapped students: 02- Programmes and activities

02 Social welfare 196- Assistance to distt council/ distt level Panchayats (07) Identification of the handicapped: 02- Programmes and activities

02 Social welfare 196- Assistance to distt council/ distt level Panchayats

(09) Special scholarships for the children of leprosy affected persons: 02- Programmes and activities

02 Social welfare 196- Assistance to distt council/ distt level Panchayats (011) Scholarships for handicapped

02 Social welfare 196- Assistance to distt council/ distt level Panchayats (012) Identification of handicapped

02 Social welfare 200- (010) Management of residential schools for the children of the families engaged in beggary

02 Social welfare 796 Tribal sub-plan (002) Assistance to voluntary organisations engaged in the welfare of physically and mentally challenged persons

02 Social welfare 796 Tribal sub-plan (004) Assistance to voluntary organisations engaged in the welfare of destitute children 02 Social welfare 796 Tribal sub-plan (006) Scholarships for handicapped 02 Social welfare 796 Tribal sub-plan (007) Identification of handicapped 02 Social welfare 796 Tribal sub-plan (009) Polio correction camp for the handicapped 02 Social welfare 796 Tribal sub-plan (010) Grants for the distribution of "KIOSKS"

Child Protection related Schemes/Items of Expenditure under 4235 Capital Outlay on Social Security And Welfare 02- Social Welfare 101- Welfare of Handicapped (001) Construction of Hostels and School Buildings for Deaf, Dumb and Blind students 02- Social Welfare 101- Welfare of Handicapped (002) Construction of residential schools for destitute children 02- Social Welfare 102 Child Welfare (001) Buildings 02- Social Welfare 103- Women Welfare (008) Modernisation of buildings for mentally retarded women’s houses

02- Social Welfare 800- Other expenditure (001) Construction of residential schools for the children whose parents are engaged in beggary and other undesirable occupations

02- Social Welfare 800- Other expenditure (002) Construction of residential schools for the children of Rebari and other migratory communities SOURCE: Compiled from the Rajasthan State Budget (Detailed Demands for Grants), various years

58


Table 4.5: Expenditure on Child Specific Schemes from the Rajasthan Budget (in Rs. Crore)

Expenditure on Child specific schemes

Child

Education

Early Childhood Care & Development

Child Health

Child Protection

Total Expenditure on Child Specific Schemes

Non-Plan 933.86 6.63 6.81 3.27 950.57 Plan 155.45 23.91 22.28 0.74 202.38

1993-94 (Actuals)

Total 1089.32 30.55 29.09 4.00 1152.96 Non-Plan 1027.90 7.73 7.52 3.57 1046.72 Plan 258.65 29.03 19.62 1.04 308.34

1994-95 (RE)


1995-96 (Actuals)


1996-97 (Actuals)

Total 1844.31 44.27 50.62 4.19 1943.39 Non-Plan 1732.2 1.63 11.40 1.51 1746.75 Plan 219.7 56.31 46.72 2.65 325.43 1997-98

(Actuals) Total 1951.9 57.94 58.13 4.16 2072.18 Non-Plan 2256.2 0.23 13.44 3.93 2273.76 Plan 275.4 60.74 57.27 3.41 396.78 1998-99








(Revised Estimates) Total 4411.4 282.62 41.83 17.61 4753.50 Non-Plan 4061.8 0.46 15.20 6.23 4083.69 Plan 605.4 369.41 28.23 11.32 1014.36 2006-07

(Budget Estimate) Total 4667.2 369.87 43.43 17.55 5098.05

Source: Compiled from Tables 4.1 to 4.4 given above.

59


Table 4.6: Plan Expenditure on Child Specific Sectors as a proportion of Total Plan Expenditure from the Rajasthan Budget (in %)

Child Education


Child Health

Child Protection

Total Child Budget

1993-94 7.0 1.1 1.0 0.03 9.1

1994-95@ 9.3 1.0 0.7 0.04 11.1

1995-96 8.1 0.9 0.9 0.02 10.0

1996-97 13.4 1.3 1.2 0.09 16.0

1997-98 5.7 1.5 1.2 0.1 8.4 1998-99 7.8 1.7 1.6 0.1 11.2 1999-2000 11.0 1.6 1.5 0.1 14.2 2000-01 13.2 2.4 1.0 0.1 16.7 2001-02 12.0 4.0 1.9 0.2 18.1 2002-03 4.4 4.8 0.8 0.1 10.0 2003-04 4.6 3.5 1.0 0.05 9.1 2004-05 6.5 3.7 0.2 0.1 10.4 2005-06 RE 8.2 3.2 0.3 0.1 11.9 2006-07 BE 6.8 4.2 0.3 0.1 11.4

Table 4.7: Non-Plan Expenditure on Child Specific Sectors as a proportion of Total Non-Plan Expenditure from the Rajasthan Budget (in %)

Child Education


Child Health

Child Protection

Total Child Budget

1993-94 17.5 0.125 0.13 0.06 17.9

1994-95@ 14.7 0.111 0.11 0.05 15.0

1995-96 13.3 0.076 0.09 0.04 13.5

1996-97 11.7 0.001 0.08 0.01 11.8

1997-98 14.0 0.01 0.1 0.01 14.2 1998-99 16.4 0.002 0.1 0.03 16.5 1999-2000 13.0 0.001 0.049 0.011 13.1 2000-01 12.2 0.001 0.1 0.01 12.3 2001-02 11.6 0.001 0.04 0.01 11.7 2002-03 10.4 0.003 0.04 0.02 10.5 2003-04 10.3 0.002 0.04 0.02 10.4 2004-05 13.5 0.003 0.1 0.02 13.5 2005-06 RE 18.3 0.004 0.1 0.03 18.4 2006-07 BE 16.4 0.002 0.1 0.03 16.5

60


Table 4.8: Expenditure* on Child Specific Sectors as a proportion of Total Expenditure** from the Rajasthan Budget (in %)

Child Education


Child Health

Child Protection

Total Child Budget

1993-94 14.4 0.40 0.39 0.05 15.3

1994-95@ 13.2 0.38 0.28 0.05 13.9

1995-96 11.7 0.32 0.34 0.03 12.4

1996-97 12.1 0.29 0.33 0.03 12.7

1997-98 12.0 0.4 0.4 0.03 12.8 1998-99 14.6 0.4 0.4 0.04 15.4 1999-2000 12.7 0.2 0.3 0.02 13.3 2000-01 12.3 0.4 0.2 0.03 12.9 2001-02 11.7 0.6 0.3 0.03 12.7 2002-03 9.6 0.7 0.1 0.02 10.4 2003-04 9.3 0.6 0.2 0.02 10.2 2004-05 11.9 0.8 0.1 0.03 12.9 2005-06 RE 15.2 1.0 0.1 0.1 16.4 2006-07 BE 13.9 1.1 0.1 0.1 15.2

Notes: 1. * Expenditure figures used in the Table above are Total Expenditure, i.e., Plan Expenditure + Non Plan Expenditure. 2. ** Figures for Total Expenditure from the State Budget: RE for 1993-94, Actuals for 1994-95, RE for 1995-96, Actuals for 1996-97 to 2002-03, RE for 2003-04, Actuals for 2004-05, RE for 2005-06, and BE for 2006-07. This kind of approximation of Total Expenditure figures for three of the fourteen years covered was made as the Budget at a Glance, Rajasthan Budget, Govt. of Rajasthan, could not be accessed for all of the study years. Table 4.9: Sectoral Composition of the Total Budget for Children (in the Rajasthan State Budget)

(Figures in %)

Child Education


Child Health

Child Protection


1993-94 94.48 2.65 2.52 0.35 100 1994-95 94.94 2.71 2.00 0.34 100 1995-96 94.42 2.56 2.78 0.25 100 1996-97 94.90 2.28 2.60 0.22 100 1997-98 94.20 2.80 2.81 0.20 100 1998-99 94.79 2.28 2.65 0.27 100 1999-00 96.00 1.79 2.04 0.18 100 2000-01 95.44 2.72 1.65 0.19 100 2001-02 92.22 4.89 2.63 0.26 100 2002-03 92.03 6.40 1.33 0.24 100 2003-04 91.24 6.35 2.17 0.24 100 2004-05 92.79 6.33 0.62 0.26 100 2005-06 (RE) 92.80 5.95 0.88 0.37 100

2006-07 (BE) 91.55 7.26 0.85 0.34 100

61


Table 4.10: Sectoral Composition of the Plan Budget for Children (Figures in %)

Child Education Early Childhood Care & Development

Child Health

Child Protection

Total Plan Expenditure on Child Specific Schemes

1993-94 76.81 11.81 11.01 0.37 100 1994-95 83.88 9.41 6.36 0.34 100 1995-96 81.56 8.85 9.38 0.21 100 1996-97 83.31 8.35 7.77 0.57 100 1997-98 67.51 17.30 14.36 0.81 100 1998-99 69.41 15.31 14.43 0.86 100 1999-00 77.47 11.11 10.75 0.67 100 2000-01 78.75 14.46 6.09 0.70 100 2001-02 66.28 22.17 10.66 0.90 100 2002-03 43.70 47.94 7.55 0.80 100 2003-04 49.92 38.37 11.20 0.51 100 2004-05 62.35 35.29 1.71 0.66 100 2005-06 (RE) 68.97 27.25 2.65 1.12 100

2006-07 (BE) 59.68 36.42 2.78 1.12 100

Table 4.11: Sectoral Composition of the Non-Plan Budget for Children

(Figures in %)

Child Education Early Childhood Care & Development

Child Health

Child Protection

Total Non-Plan Expenditure on Child Specific Schemes

1993-94 98.24 0.70 0.72 0.34 100 1994-95 98.20 0.74 0.72 0.34 100 1995-96 98.50 0.56 0.68 0.26 100 1996-97 99.23 0.01 0.68 0.08 100 1997-98 99.17 0.09 0.65 0.09 100 1998-99 99.23 0.01 0.59 0.17 100 1999-00 99.53 0.01 0.38 0.08 100 2000-01 99.28 0.01 0.63 0.08 100 2001-02 99.55 0.01 0.36 0.08 100 2002-03 99.45 0.02 0.37 0.15 100 2003-04 99.41 0.02 0.39 0.19 100 2004-05 99.42 0.02 0.38 0.17 100 2005-06 (RE) 99.43 0.02 0.39 0.16 100

2006-07 (BE) 99.46 0.01 0.37 0.15 100

62


Table 4.12: Expenditure on Child Specific Schemes from the Rajasthan State Budget at Constant (1993-94) Prices (in Rs. Crore)


(in Rs. Crore)

Implicit Deflator used by the CSO in the data for the

Rajasthan NSDP at constant (1993-94) prices


(in Rs. Crore)

At Current Prices At Constant (1993-94) Prices

1993-94 1152.96 1 1153.0

1994-95 1355.05 0.93 1264.2

1995-96 1609.08 0.85 1371.3 1996-97 1943.39 0.78 1512.5 1997-98 2072.18 0.78 1620.6 1998-99 2670.55 0.71 1891.4 1999-00 2968.91 0.67 1989.8 2000-01 3128.78 0.65 2044.0 2001-02 3337.26 0.64 2147.0 2002-03 3320.58 0.63 2075.9 2003-04 3679.61 0.64 2340.4 2004-05 3948.7 0.61 2400.0

Table 4.13: Expenditure on Child Specific Schemes from the State Budget as a proportion of the NSDP (Figures in %)


Child Education


Child Health

Child Protection

1993-94 4.0 3.8 0.11 0.10 0.01 1994-95 3.7 3.5 0.10 0.07 0.01 1995-96 3.9 3.6 0.10 0.11 0.01 1996-97 3.8 3.6 0.09 0.10 0.01 1997-98 3.6 3.4 0.10 0.10 0.01 1998-99 4.1 3.9 0.09 0.11 0.01 1999-00 4.3 4.1 0.08 0.09 0.01 2000-01 4.5 4.3 0.12 0.07 0.01 2001-02 4.3 3.9 0.21 0.11 0.01 2002-03 4.5 4.1 0.29 0.06 0.01 2003-04 3.9 3.6 0.25 0.09 0.01 2004-05 4.0 3.7 0.25 0.02 0.01

Table 4.14: Projected Child Population in Rajasthan

(As on 1st of July)

1996 (As on 1st of March)

2001 (As on 1st of March)

2006 Projected Population in Rajasthan 0 to 4 years (in Crore) 0.73 0.79 0.73 5 to 18 years (in Crore) 1.74 1.94 2.11 0 to 18 years (in Crore) 2.47 2.74 2.84 All Ages (in Crore) 5.01 5.65 6.23 0 to 18 years Population as a proportion of Total Population (in %) 49.3 48.4 45.6

Source: (1) For 1996- Registrar General of India. (2) For 2001 and 2006- CENSUS OF INDIA 2001, “POPULATION PROJECTIONS FOR INDIA AND STATES 2001-2026 (Revised December 2006)”, Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner, India

63


Table 4.15: Composition of Total Plan Expenditure on Children from the Rajasthan Budget

Year Nature of Plan Expenditure Expenditure (in Rs. Crore)

% Share in Total Plan Expenditure on Children

State Plan 129.2 63.8 1993-94

Centrally Sponsored and Other Schemes 73.2 36.2

State Plan 210.3 68.2 1994-95 RE


State Plan 270.5 69.8 1995-96


State Plan 346.1 65.5 1996-97


State Plan 209.3 64.3 1997-98


State Plan 271.9 68.5 1998-99


State Plan 350.2 73.6 1999-2000


State Plan 428.7 73.2 2000-01


State Plan 514.8 70.0 2001-02


State Plan 271.5 61.4 2002-03


State Plan 410.1 67.5 2003-04


State Plan 538.2 76.2 2004-05


State Plan 711.9 68.9 2005-06 RE


State Plan 629.8 62.1 2006-07 BE


Table 4.16: Shares of Non-Plan and Plan Expenditures in The Total Expenditure on Children from the Rajasthan Budget

Year Nature of Expenditure Expenditure (in Rs. Crore) % Share in TOTAL

Non-Plan 950.6 82.4

State Plan 129.2 11.2


1993-94 (Actuals)

TOTAL 1153.0 Non-Plan 1046.7 77.2



1994-95 (Revised

Estimates) TOTAL 1355.1

64


65

Non-Plan 1221.5 75.9


Centrally Sponsored and Other Schemes 117.1 7.3 1995-96 (Actuals)

TOTAL 1609.1 Non-Plan 1415.1 72.8



TOTAL 1943.4 Non-Plan 721.2 68.9



TOTAL 1046.6 Non-Plan 2273.8 85.1



TOTAL 2670.5 Non-Plan 2493.4 84.0

State Plan 350.2 11.8 Centrally Sponsored and Other Schemes 125.4 4.2

1999-00 (Actuals)

TOTAL 2968.9 Non-Plan 2537.0 81.2


2000-01 (Actuals)

TOTAL 3122.8 Non-Plan 2602.3 78.0


2001-02 (Actuals)

TOTAL 3337.3 Non-Plan 2878.5 86.7



TOTAL 3320.6 Non-Plan 3072.2 83.5



TOTAL 3679.6 Non-Plan 3242.7 82.1


2004-05 (Actuals)

TOTAL 3948.7 Non-Plan 3719.6 78.2 State Plan 711.9 15.0


2005-06 (Revised

Estimates) TOTAL 4753.5 Non-Plan 4083.7 80.1



2006-07 (Budget

Estimate)

TOTAL 5098.0

Documents

PUBLIC RESOURCES FOR CHILDREN - UNICEF...The priority for children in the State Budget shows an improvement from 2004-05 onwards, with the Child Budget accounting for 16.4 per cent