Dr. D. R. Kapoor
Huge investment is being made by the state, central and international agencies in social development programmes in the rural areas. It becomes necessary to assess the impacts of the various development programmes on the socio-economic level of the people. Numbers of questions have come into discussion in public parley as who are accountable for lapses? Are programmes executed within time-frame? Are people quarries or grievances get redressed? Are people involved in decision making? Are people engaged in the implementation of programmes? Whether Gram Panchayats are being run by coterie of vested interest? or under the control of departmental officials?. Whether programme are being planned and executed whimsically or need based as per the requirement of the public? Whether beneficiaries are being empowered (i.e. capacity building) to demand their rightful benefits? Whether internal social audits allow people to enforce accountability and transparency? Whether it provides the ultimate users an opportunity to scrutinize development initiatives? Is there a need for creating a culture of social audits? What is the level of i) transparency; ii) accountability; iii) participation; and iv) good governance in the execution of development programmes?
What is Social Audit?
A social audit is a mechanism through which transparency, participation, responsiveness and accountability of the system can be ensured. In this process public (beneficiaries/stakeholders) are mobilised to evaluate or audit government’s performance and policy decisions. It is an instrument by which public resources are optimally and judiciously utilised, government officials are watched and monitored as not to abuse their power. Therefore, from the perspective of social audit the critical questions and premise are whether citizens have the skills, capacity and tools to effectively monitor and evaluate their governments and decision-makers. It relies on engagement from citizens and/or Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) to directly and/or indirectly demand accountability and transparency in the public policy and budget cycles. Social audit is participatory and efficiency enhancing mechanism. Observations reveal that:
* Social audit has become a key component of any democratic governance and anti-corruption strategy. It can provide answers to the key questions of, the public resources being managed by governments.
* It is incumbent upon the government to get substantial evidences to review, monitor and report on public resource management and expenditures.
* Social audits can greatly enhance the legitimacy and credibility of democratic institutions and generate greater confidence among citizens and public officials.
‘Social Audit’ is, therefore, “a public assembly where all the details of the project are scrutinized”. It is “a way of measuring, understanding, reporting and ultimately improving an organization’s social and ethical performance” It provides critical inputs to correctly assess the impact of government activities on the social well being of citizens It determines the social cost and gauges the benefit to the society (MoRD,2013)
Main Objectives
* To assess the status of Social Audit
* To recommend measures for ensuring quality, effective delivery system for sustainable socio-economic development
Specific Objectives
* To assess the status of Social Audit at the gross-root level
* To assess the people participation in the development programmes
* To study the level of transparency, accountability and responsiveness in the execution of development programmes
* To enable citizens to exercise their rights to information
* To provide feedback to government and public about strengths and weaknesses of the functioning of democratic system.
* To measure the impacts of policies and programs on the lives of people especially marginalised section of the society
* DESIGN OF SOCIAL AUDIT
Focus:- Democratic Institutions Participation in Planning, and Implementation & Evaluation Processes of Development Programmes
Purpose:- To Identify Transparency, Accountability and Responsiveness of Various Agencies Involved in Planning, Implementation and Monitoring of Development Programmes
Outcomes:- Enhance governance: Accountability and transparency of public officials is the cornerstone of democratic governance. A social audit, therefore, is expected to enhance accountability by allowing ordinary citizens to access information, voice their needs, evaluate performance, and demand greater accountability and transparency.
Increase Public Policy effectiveness: By enhancing the availability of information, strengthening citizen voice, promoting dialogue and consultation between stakeholders and creating incentives for improved public policy performance, social audits can go a long way toward improving the effectiveness of service delivery and making public decision-making more transparent and participatory. It leads to efficient resource utilization.
Increase citizen participation: Social audit is a source of policy dialogue and conflict resolution. By providing critical information on policies and rights and soliciting systematic feedback from constituencies, social audit can provide a means to increase and aggregate the voice of excluded and vulnerable groups. In turn, this can enhance voice and increase the chance of greater policy responsiveness on the part of government. Thus, social audits also become a confidence building measure.
METHODS: Primary & Secondary Data; Scrutiny of Records ; Field Work: Purposively Selected Sample are to be put to Qualitative Research Analysis. Focus Group Discussions, In-depth Interviews techniques are to be used for the collection of data. Benchmarks are to be laid-down on the parameters of a) Responsiveness, b) Transparency, c) Participation, and d) Accountability.
Processes of Focus Group Discussions
* The first step in FGD generally involves introducing members and fostering interest and commitment to participate..
* Actual discussion starts with ‘discussion stimulus’ i.e., providing space for the exchange of past and present experiences by the members of the group so as to get expected answers to questions.
* Must provide opportunity to participant group and individual members to raise their voice regarding; Identification of domains; b) Selection of Social Setting and
* Proactive Participation of each member
* Comparison and Control are fundamental in the process of Focus Group Discussions. The choices of individuals need to be picked up for implicit and explicit comparisons. At the same time, control is very important that the participants do not drift into just chatting or presenting endless anecdotes with little reference to the issue of the focus group and the study.
Analysis: All information collected from secondary and primary sources was collated and put into order to provide a logical form for analysis. Quantitative and Qualitative analyses of data are undertaken, As the data and information is primarily of qualitative nature, extra care has been taken to ensure that the authenticity and meaning of the same is presented in undiluted form. Individuals’ assessment and groups’ assessment data are compiled and analysed. Shifting through data, similar and related ideas and patterns emerged are identified.
(The author is former KAS Officer)
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com
Follow our WhatsApp channel