Penalising poor performance

How can any entity perform very poorly and yet survive in present day of digital and competitive world where even those showing comparatively better performance are always waiting in wings to get not only incentives and funds support but how to make the best use of them to keep the graph of their performance high. Motivating slogans laced with warning bells should ideally be , “Perform or perish”. We feel aghast in observing that Jammu and Kashmir should be penalized for poor performance in the 2018-19 Health System Strengthening Conditionality Report on States . Not only on one or a few, but on too many parameters, the State has been found wanting in mobilising its human resources resulting in losing a major part of National Health Mission budget which is sanctioned by the centre.
On seven key indicators , the State’s performance has been registered as poor though still eighty per cent of the earmarked amount from the Budget would, in all probabilities, be received by Jammu and Kashmir and the remaining 20 per cent , it was going to lose when on the other hand, it should have cleared all parameters to fall eligible for funds as additional or in bonus form. Where it has flawed in its performance, it is showing negative performance in implementing District Mental Health Programme (DMHP), Human Resource Information System (HRIS) and functioning of Primary Health Centres. About the plight of Primary Health Centres, especially in remote rural areas where except this medical facility , the inhabitants had no other facility available, the problems usually are shortage of Doctors and Para- medical staff , absence of basic facilities like X-Ray and blood testing, absence of gynaecologist etc . In the same fashion, the report card was dismal about screening of Non- Communicable Diseases andoperationalizing Health and Wellness Centres.
Since the concept of provision for incentives and dis- incentives and allotting weight- age points for good performance , poor performance and negative performance is not introduced at all in Jammu and Kashmir , the concerned Union Ministry , however, applying that barometer was upsetting the applecart of old traditional approach to performance and working culture which has cost it to lose on major indicators. It is a thing to be believed that performance of Jammu and Kashmir in three indicators is worst as can be observed that the report in respect of Mental Health Services in districts and as well as functioning of Prime Health Centres is minus five (-5) while score in implementing Human Resource Information System (HRIS) is minus fifteen (-15). The score is, on the other hand absolutely zero in running of Health and Wellness Centres as also screening of Non Communicable Diseases . In other words, it denotes no progress at all while there was no deterioration too in both the indicators.
Making the long story short, it could be said that Jammu and Kashmir has been given net score of minus two (-2) and thus penalized. Who are to be blamed for that ? Where have shortcomings occurred and why , especially when funds support was assured? Those who have taken the Mission quite lightly are not made to feel the pinch of the consequences of non- performance and it must be fairly in the knowledge of the Governor’s administration . What type of action plan is being contemplated, now , by the Government to overcome the after effects of having been penalised, must be made known and that too fairly. There was a competition between the States in showing better performance and precisely for that, incentives , grades, scores , marks etc have been devised . If one was unresponsive to competitions and rewards for performance , what could be done in that case, must be made known in the context of Jammu and Kashmir.