progress on rural sanitation in indiathe ihhl coverage at the end of march 2016 varied from 99.9%...

PROGRESS ON RURAL SANITATION IN INDIA ANNUAL REPORT 2015-16

Riddhi Foundation

PROGRESS ON RURAL SANITATION IN INDIA

ANNUAL REPORT 2015-16

BY

RIDDHI FOUNDATION, KOLKATA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Sl. No. Contents Page No.

1. India 1-11

2. Andhra Pradesh 12-16

3. Arunachal Pradesh 17-21

4. Assam 22-27

5. Bihar 28-32

6. Chhattisgarh 33-37

7. Goa 38-39

8. Gujarat 40-45

9. Haryana 46-51

10. Himachal Pradesh 52-57

11. Jammu & Kashmir 58-63

12. Jharkhand 64-69

13. Karnataka 70-75

14. Kerala 76-80

15. Madhya Pradesh 81-86

16. Maharashtra 87-92

17. Manipur 93-98

18. Meghalaya 99-104

19. Mizoram 105-109

20. Nagaland 110-114

21. Odisha 115-120

22. Punjab 121-126

23. Rajasthan 127-132

24. Sikkim 133-135

25. Tamil Nadu 136-141

26. Telangana 142-147

27. Tripura 148-152

28. Uttarakhand 153-158

29. Uttar Pradesh 159-164

30. West Bengal 165-170

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AIP Annual Implementation Plan

ASER Annual Status of Education Report

GP Gram Panchayat

IEC Information Education and communications

IHHL Individual Household Latrines

MGNREGS Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme

NFHS National Family Health Survey

NSSO National Sample Survey Organisation

ODF Open Defecation Free

R-SoC Rapid Survey on Children

SBM(G) Swachh Bharat Mission (Grameen)

FOREWORD

Swachh Bharat Mission (Grameen) is one of the most important flagship programmes of

India, which is being implemented with missionary zeal and enthusiasm to make the country free

from open defecation by 2nd October, 2019. Though the programme has been designed and being

guided by the Union Government, the responsibility of its implementation rests upon every unit

of administration up to the Gram Panchayats as well as every rural household of the country. It

is necessary to know the progress across each unit of administration for achieving the goal on

time.

Progress under the programme is available in the website of the Ministry of Drinking

Water and Sanitation (www.mdws.gov.in). It has been felt that a consolidated report with

appropriate analysis to appreciate advancement in various dimensions of sanitation during the

year across states as well as for the country will be useful for the implementers, researchers as

well as others who have joined the mission for making the country ODF. The report covers

achievement made by the 29 states and reflects district wise status in some cases. There has not

been enough data to include the Union Territories and those have not been covered in the report.

The Annual Report for the year 2015-16 is the first ever attempt to come out with such a

comprehensive document on progress of rural sanitation in India. This has been prepared based

on progress reported in the website mentioned above as well as secondary data available on

various aspects of sanitation. There is some discrepancy among data reported in different formats

in the website and best effort has been made to reduce such discrepancies. However, that is not

likely to affect the broad findings highlighted in the report. It has not been possible to report on

the usage of the sanitation facilities due to huge requirement of resources, which was not

available. Yet, we believe that the report will be very useful and feedback from the users will

help to improve the report further in the coming years.

Compilation of the report has been supported by UNICEF, India Country Office. Without

their active support it would not have been possible to prepare the report, which is sincerely

acknowledged.

Dr. M. N. Roy

President, Riddhi Foundation

http://www.mdws.gov.in/

1 | P a g e

INDIA

Overview

Coverage of IHHL in rural areas of the country has increased from 44.7% at the end of March 2015 to

52.1% at the end of March 2016. Total 133.7 lakh IHHLs (including achievements under MGNREGS)

were constructed during the year 2015-16, which is 168.5% higher than that constructed during the year

2014-15. The IHHL coverage at the end of March 2016 varied from 99.9% (Sikkim) to 25.4% (Bihar)

across the states.

The IHHL coverage of rural India, is estimated to be 77.5% on 2nd October 2019 and the country is likely

to become ODF earliest by September 2022, at the pace achieved during 2015-16.

Sikkim is the only state, which is also the first state, which has been declared as ODF during the year.

23,045 out of 2,51,123 GPs (9.2%) of the country have attained ODF status up to the end of March 2016.

An amount of Rs 12,146.7 crore was spent by the states on SBM(G) during the year 2015-16, which is

186% higher than Rs 4,243.2 crore spent in 2014-15.

Expenditure on IEC and administrative purposes during 2015-16 were Rs 147.1 crore (1.2%) and Rs

78.9 crore (0.7%) respectively.

Access to household toilet

At the end of March 2016, 52.1% rural households of the country had access to IHHLs, as shown in Graph

1. Still, around 8.7 crore households were yet to have their toilets, at the end of the year, as per Baseline. The

coverage has improved by 7.4 % points during the year 2015-16. The corresponding increases during the

year 2014-15 and 2013-14 were 3.2 and 2.7 % points respectively as shown in Graph 2.

The IHHL coverage in rural India was 45.3% according to the Rapid Survey conducted by NSSO during

May-June 2015 and 40.6% during the NSSO 69th round (conducted during July-December 2012).

Coverage across states

Map 1 shows a wide variation of IHHL coverage across states ranging from 25.4% (Bihar) to 99.9%

(Sikkim), which achieved ODF status by providing universal access although there are HHs without

52.147.9

Graph 1: Rural Sanitation

Coverage (%)

HH with toilet

HH without toilet 31st March 2016

38.8

41.5

44.7

52.1

35

37

39

41

43

45

47

49

51

53

Mar'13 Mar'14 Mar'15 Mar'16

Graph 2: Progress of Rural Sanitation

Coverage (%) in India

INDIA

2 | P a g e

individual toilets. Kerala (96.3%) and Himachal Pradesh (95.2%) are the other two states very close to

reaching the target. On the other hand, there are five states with coverage less than 40% as shown in the map.

The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 varied across the states from 0.2 % points

in Kerala to 15.4 % points in Goa.

Performance during 2015-16

Launch of Swachh Bharat Mission has been a major boost in improving sanitation in the rural areas of the

country. While monthly construction of IHHL during 2014-15 was 4,89,254, it increased to 11,14,468 during

2015-16. Number of IHHLs constructed across states during the year 2015-16 is shown in Graph 3.

Map 1: State wise rural sanitation coverage in India

80%-100% 7 states

60%-79% 10 states

40%-59% 7 states

20%-39% 5 states

2,1

79

,473

1,4

45

,212

1,3

40

,447

1,1

42

,031

1,0

77

,970

93

1,7

77

90

6,1

38

74

2,4

66

65

5,6

20

53

0,7

15

46

5,5

74

36

7,9

11

36

7,3

59

32

3,6

93

24

0,1

68

13

3,7

24

3,7

07

6,4

87

12

,21

8

19

,46

2

22

,74

4

28

,63

8 44

,19

5

47

,74

9 62

,27

2

66

,84

0

68

,41

2

69

,04

2

71

,57

3

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

0

500000

1000000

1500000

2000000

2500000

Graph 3: IHHL construction under SBM(G) during 2015-16

INDIA

3 | P a g e

Out of the total construction, 6,32,250 were under MGNREGS which is 4.7% of all the IHHLs constructed

during the year. The variation of construction under MGNREGS across states has been shown in Graph 4.

The country is likely to become ODF by 2nd October 2019 if the states collectively maintain an enhanced

pace of construction of 20.7 lakh IHHL per month in next 42 months as shown in Graph 5. Graph 6 shows

the actual and the required

pace of construction of IHHL

during 2015-16 compared to

that of 2014-15 to become

ODF by 2nd October 2019. It

indicates that though the

construction has increased by

nearly 2.3 times in 2015-16

from that during 2014-15,

there has been a shortfall of

7.4 lakh IHHLs per month

during the year. Graphs 7 and

8 show the state-wise actual

and required increase in construction for becoming ODF by 2nd October 2019. It appears that 13 states

(excluding Sikkim) are on track by achieving the desired aggregated pace. It does not include Nagaland

1.0 1.1 1.2

1.2 1.5 1.7

1.7 2

.5 2.8 3.0 3.3

12

.1

0.4 0.7

0.6 1.1 1.2

1.1 1.3 2

.2

1.7 2

.4

2.2

8.6

0.0

4.0

8.0

12.0

16.0

Graph 7: (Actual vs. Required)

States which have attained the desired rate

No. of times construction actually increased

No. of times construction required to increase

4.9

11.1

18.5

20.7

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0

Actual Construction during

2014-15

Actual Construction during

2015-16

Required Construction during

2015-16

Required Construction during

2016-19

Graph 5: Construction of IHHL per month:

Actual and Required (in lakhs)

2.3

3.8

0.0

2.0

4.0

INDIA

Graph 6: Enhancement of pace of

construction during 2015-16 (no. of

times) from 2014-15 (Actual vs.

Required)



19

3,7

44

12

2,6

09

10

3,6

77

55

,40

4

47

,97

9

16

,96

8

14

,88

3

13

,14

7

12

,36

3

10

,80

4

10

,61

5

9,0

49

8,5

63

3,7

47

2,8

10

2,4

10

0 0 1 23 29

30 66 11

3

12

7

46

1

46

6

10

63

10

99

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

020,00040,00060,00080,000

100,000120,000140,000160,000180,000200,000

Graph 4: IHHL construction under MGNREGS during 2015-16

INDIA

4 | P a g e

(because of limitation of

scale) which had

reported marginal

construction during

2014-15 but substantial

construction during

2015-16. Graph 7 shows

that the other 15 states

need to enhance the pace

of construction further to

become ODF by 2nd

October 2019. Goa did

not report any construction during 2014-15 and hence the state has not been shown in the graphs.

Analysis of Coverage

Achieving ODF status is decided on the existing IHHL coverage and the pace at which the same is increasing.

To assess the time to be taken by a state to become ODF, both these indicators are to be considered. The

states are placed in four quadrants of Graph 9 on the basis of coverage as on 31st March 2016 (along the

horizontal axis) and the increase in coverage (along the vertical axis) relative to the national average This

helps to understand the inter-state variation and to pay appropriate attention on states which are lagging

behind.

Odisha

MP Chhattisgarh

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

25 35 45

Rajasthan

Assam Karnataka

Tamil

Nadu

Nagaland

Arunachal

Gujarat

Tripura

W. Bengal

Goa

Manipur

Meghalaya

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

50 60 70 80 90 100

Bihar

J & K

Jharkhand

Telangana

UP

Andhra

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

25 30 35 40 45 50

Maharashtra

Punjab

Uttarakhand

Mizoram

Haryana

Himachal

Kerala

Sikkim

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

50 60 70 80 90 100

Incr

ease

in

IH

HL

Cov

erag

e (%

poin

t) d

uri

ng 2

015

-16

IHHL Coverage at the end of March 2016

Graph 9: States in different categories based on coverage & progress relative to the National status

0.4 0.8 1.2 1.4 1.7

1.8

1.8 2.1 3.1

3.2

3.2

6.2 7.3 9

.2 10

.0

1.3

1.1 1.3

6.3

4.0

2.2

4.3

3.0 3.9

6.6

18

.3

19

.6

14

.5

11

.9

10

.8

0.0

4.0

8.0

12.0

16.0

20.0

Graph 8: (Actual vs. Required)

States which could not attain the desired rate



INDIA (52.1%; 7.4 % points)

INDIA

5 | P a g e

The above graph shows how far the states are behind universal coverage and the rate at which the coverage

has increased during the year 2015-16. In spite of having coverage more than the national level, IHHL

coverage in Rajasthan has increased by 19.0 % points during the year, which is the highest among all the

states. Odisha, which had coverage lower than the national average, had accelerated the pace of

construction and its IHHL coverage increased by more than double during the year (from 13.4% in March

2015 to 28.2% in March 2016). On the other hand, Bihar had shown only 2.5 % points increase in coverage

during 2015-16, which was the least among the most trailing behind states and it continues with lowest

coverage (25.4%) in the country. Kerala, had the highest IHHL coverage (96.1%) at the beginning of the

year and the same improved by 0.2 % points only.

Projected Coverage and Estimated Year of attaining ODF

Graph 10 shows the projected

IHHL coverage of the states

as on 2nd October 2019, based

on the pace of construction

during 2015-16. Since the

progress slows down as a

state approaches universal

coverage, the estimated

coverage has been shown

100% for all the states which

are likely to reach that level

by the target

date. It is

estimated

that rural

India will

achieve

77.5%

coverage on

2nd October

2019, if the

current pace

continues.

Also, 11 out

of 29 states

are likely to

become

ODF by the

target date,

based on

projection

of state wise

aggregated

Map 2: Estimated year of becoming ODF across states

LEGEND

By Sept. 2019 11 states

Oct. 2019-Sept. 2024 4 states

Oct. 2024-Sept. 2029 10 states

Beyond 2029 4 states

32

.9

46

.8

51

.4

55

.6

59

.2

60

.2

75

.9

76

.0

76

.7

77

.5 85

.1

85

.3

85

.6

86

.9 94

.4

94

.9

97

.0

99

.0

99

.4

30405060708090

100

Bih

ar

J &

K UP

Tel

angan

a

Jhar

kh

and

An

dh

ra

MP

Od

isha

Ch

hat

tisg

arh

IND

IA

Ass

am

Kar

nat

aka

Pun

jab

Mah

aras

htr

a

Nag

alan

d

Utt

arak

han

d

Ker

ala

Tri

pu

ra

Miz

ora

m

Har

yan

a

Aru

nac

hal

Tam

il N

adu

W. B

eng

al

Him

achal

Gu

jara

t

Man

ipur

Meg

hal

aya

Sik

kim

Raj

asth

an

Go

a

Graph 10: Projected IHHL coverage as on 2nd October

2019

INDIA

6 | P a g e

rate attained during 2015-16. The estimated earliest year of becoming ODF is as shown in Map 2.

Status of attaining ODF by district wise aggregated rate of construction

The estimated year of attaining ODF status is just a projection made on the basis of the current state wise

aggregated rate. However, a state becomes ODF only after the last district attains such status and therefore

knowing district-wise estimates of attaining ODF and how many of those will attain such status beyond the

target date is very critical. That will also give a better insight on the possibility of delay from the projected

date because of one or more districts not being able to have the desired pace of progress. Percentage of

districts of the states which are estimated to become ODF at the pace of construction of 2015-16 is shown

in Graph 11. However, in that case also there may be blocks within a district which may fail to become

ODF, but the same has been ignored for having a simplistic estimate of district wise progress.

The graph shows that although 11 states are likely to become ODF by 2nd October 2019 as per projection

based on average rate of the states. It may be further mentioned that two other states namely Mizoram and

Tripura are estimated to be ODF earliest by October 2019. However, only Goa (excluding Sikkim, which

has already become ODF) will have all the districts ODF by 2nd October 2019. One or more districts of the

other 27 states will fail to become ODF by 2nd October 2019, if the current rate continues. Apart from that,

Gujarat will have the highest percentage of districts (88.5%) which are likely to attain ODF by the target

date while another 6 states (Rajasthan, Manipur, Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, Uttarakhand and Meghalaya)

will have between 50 to 80% of their districts likely to become ODF by the target date. On the other hand,

not a single district of Bihar and Andhra Pradesh is likely to become ODF by that date. It is estimated that

Bihar AndhraUP

JharkhandJ & K

Telangana

Odisha

MP

Chhattisgarh

Assam

Nagaland

Karnataka

Tamil Nadu

Arunachal

Rajasthan

Maharashtra

KeralaPunjab

Tripura

Mizoram

W. Bengal

Uttarakhand

Meghalaya HaryanaHimachal

Manipur

Gujarat

Goa

Sikkim

India

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

% o

f d

istr

icts

exp

ecte

d t

o a

tta

in s

atu

rati

on

by

2n

d O

ct '

19

Coverage at the end of 2015-16

Graph 11: % of districts expected to attain 100% coverage by 2nd October 2019

across States

INDIA

7 | P a g e

only 30.1% of the districts across the country will attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019 at the pace

achieved during the year 2015-16.

Categories of states according to coverage and pace of construction

IHHLs constructed in a year as a share of all the households without toilet at the beginning of that year is a

key determinant of the time that will be required for a state to become ODF. The other obvious determinant

is how far the state is behind universal coverage. Based on these two critical indicators, the states are in

widely different positions though all of them have to attain the ODF status by the same day. In this context,

it is better to know the relative positions of the states so that the trailing ones can be identified for appropriate

interventions. The best scenario is for states with both higher coverage and faster pace of progress as it

exists for 14 states (including Sikkim, which is yet to have universal coverage of IHHL). The other two

cases have either higher coverage and slower progress or lower coverage and faster progress. There are two

states in the former category and four states in the latter category. The last category of states has both lower

coverage and slower progress and they pose the maximum challenge in making the country ODF. Graph 12

depicts the four category of states. The states constituting the last category are trailing behind and hence

most critical to address. These states are Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Andhra Pradesh, Jharkhand, Telangana and

Jammu & Kashmir. Graph 13 shows the status of these states in respect of coverage and pace and Graph 14

Lo

wer

Co

ver

ag

e F

ast

er P

rog

ress

Hig

her

Co

ver

ag

e S

low

er P

rog

ress

Lo

wer

Co

ver

ag

e S

low

er

Pro

gre

ss

Hig

her

Co

ver

ag

e F

ast

er P

rogre

ssArunachal Pradesh

Assam

Goa

Gujarat

Haryana

Himachal

Karnataka

Maharashtra

Manipur

Meghalaya

Mizoram

Nagaland

Sikkim

Tamil Nadu

Tripura

Uttarakhand

W. Bengal

Kerala

Punjab

Chhattisgarh

Madhya Pradesh

Odisha

Rajasthan

Uttar Pradesh

Bihar

Andhra Pradesh

Jharkhand

Telangana

J & K

Graph 12: Categories of states in terms of coverage and pace

Uttar

Pradesh

Bihar

Andhra

Pradesh

Jharkhand

TelanganaJammu &

Kashmir

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

20 30 40

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

hou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r

Coverage at the beginning of 2015-16

Graph 13: States with Lower Coverage

and Slower Pace

17.3

16.5

4.7

3.53.01.2

53.9

Graph 14: Burden of uncovered

households

Uttar Pradesh

Bihar

Andhra Pradesh

Jharkhand

Telangana

Jammu & Kashmir

Other States

INDIA

8 | P a g e

shows the burden of uncovered households of these states, which is 46.1% of total households without IHHL

in the country.

Overall Status of achieving ODF

SBM(G) aims at making India ODF by 2nd October

2019. This is possible when each village and gram

panchayat (GP) of the country will eliminate open

defecation. Therefore, the GPs are required to

declare that their areas have become ODF which

implies all their villages have attained that status or

some of their villages have become ODF, which are

to be verified appropriately. Graph 15 shows that

9.2% of 2.5 lakhs GPs and 9.0% of 6.1 lakh villages

of the country have been declared as ODF up to31st

March 2016. Of these, 43.4% GPs and 38.4% villages have been verified so far.

Access to toilet in schools and AWCs

According to DISE 2014-15, toilet facilities are available in 88.6% schools for boys and 93.1% for girls.

However, ASER 2014 found a gap between availability and use of toilet in schools as shown in Graph 16. R-

SoC 2013-14 found that 42.0% AWCs of the state had toilet facility (Graph 17).

Availability and utilization of funds

The states collectively spent Rs. 12,146.7

crores while the available fund during the year

was Rs. 11,692.1 crores. As a result, there was

93.7

65.2

81.2

55.7

0

20

40

60

80

100

Any type of

toilet

Toilet useable Girls Toilet Toilet

accessible and

useable

Graph 16: Status of School Sanitation: % of

schools with toilet facility (ASER 2014)

4243.2

12146.7

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

2014-15 2015-16

Graph 19: Comparison of fund

utilization (Rs. Crore)

11692.1 12146.7 11773.2

147.1 79.3 454.6

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

Total

available

fund

Total fund

utilised

IHHL

incentive

IEC Exp Admin

Exp

Deficit

Graph 18: Availability and Utilisation of Funds

during 2015-16 (Rs. crore)

9.2

43.4

9.0

38.4

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

% Declared ODF % Verified ODF

Graph 15: % ODF GPs & Villages

GPs Villages

42.0

58.0

Graph 17: Status of Anganwadi

Sanitation: % of AWCs with toilet

(R-SoC, 2013-14)

With toilet Without toilet

INDIA

9 | P a g e

a deficit of Rs. 454.6 crore at the end of the year as shown in Graph 18. The expenditure during 2015-16 has

been 186.3% higher than that during 2014-15 as shown in Graph 19. While the states together spent 103.9%

more than the available fund and the same varied from 37.4% (Kerala) to 393.1% (Goa). 13 states have faced

deficit of funds that ranges between Rs. 4.8 crores (Goa) to Rs. 595.6 crores (Madhya Pradesh).

Expenses on IEC

An amount of Rs 147.1 crore was spent on IEC

during the year 2015-16, which is 1.2% of the

total expenditure. This is 6.6% lower than that

spent during the previous year as shown in Graph

20. The state wise IEC expenditure during the

year varied from nil in Goa to Rs. 20.1 crore in

West Bengal, based on available data online. The

share of IEC expenditure out of total varied

widely from 0% (Goa) to 20.9% (Kerala) as

shown in Graph 21

and in actual terms that varied from Rs. 3.6 lakh (Mizoram) to Rs. 100.5 lakh (West Bengal) as shown in

Graph 22.

157.5

147.1

3.7

1.2

0

1

2

3

4

140

145

150

155

160

2014-15 2015-16

IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)

Graph 20: Comparative Analysis of IEC

Expenditure

Expenditure on IEC % of total expenditure

0.0 0.3 0.4

0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.1

1.1 1.2

1.2 1.3 1.5 1.6

1.6

1.6 1.7 1.8

1.8 2.0 2.2 2.9 3.1 3.4 3.8 4.3 5

.5 6.9 7

.9

20

.9

0

5

10

15

20

25Graph 21: Expenditure on IEC as % of total expenditure during 2015-16

20

09

.4

14

79

.0

13

48

.2

10

59

.5

98

8.9

76

2.5

64

3.5

60

7.2

58

1.0

55

6.5

54

6.0

51

8.6

51

7.0

50

3.5

47

8.0

42

4.6

34

8.1

29

0.0

23

6.2

20

4.6

17

9.2

17

2.2

16

9.1

16

6.9

12

4.1

87

.2

50

.6

28

.7

24

.6

0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500Graph 22: Expenditure on IEC during 2015-16 (Rs. lakh)

INDIA

10 | P a g e

However, reports were not received from all the districts and there may be unreported expenditure on this

account. Percentage of districts which have reported IEC expenditure online is shown in Graph 23.

Administrative Expenses

The states spent Rs. 79.3 crore for administrative

purposes during 2015-16 which is 0.6% of the total

expenditure as shown in Graph 24. The

expenditure, in absolute terms, has increased by Rs.

16.9 crore during the year than that of 2014-15,

although the share out of total has declined. As per

report available online, administrative expenses

varied widely across the states. Graph 25 below

shows Administrative expenses as percentage of

total which varies from 0.02% (Manipur) to 11.0%

(Kerala). Goa did not report any such expenditure

during the year and hence, the state has not been

shown in the graph.

In absolute terms, the same varied from nil (Goa) to Rs. 9.7 crore (Madhya Pradesh) as shown in Graph 26.

62.0

79.31.5

0.6

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

2014-15 2015-16

Ad

min

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

Ad

min

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)

Graph 24: Comparative Analysis of Admin

Expenditure

Expenditure on Admin % of total expenditure

0.0

2

0.1

0.1 0.2

0.2 0.3

0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

0.6 0.7

0.7

0.7 0.8

0.8 0.9

0.9

0.9

0.9

0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2

1.8

2.2

2.8

4.3

11

.0

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

Graph 25: Expenditure on administrative purposes as % of total expenditure

25

.0

25

.0

25

.0

25

.0

25

.0

25

.0

25

.0

24

.2

24

.1

23

.9

23

.8

23

.3

22

.9

22

.8

22

.4

22

.2

21

.2

19

.9

19

.8

19

.4

18

.8

18

.3

17

.4

17

.2

16

.7

15

.7

15

11

.1

0 0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

Graph 23: % of districts reporting IEC Expenditure across states during 2015-16

INDIA

11 | P a g e

Graph 27 shows the percentage of districts which reported administrative expenses during the year. It is likely

that many districts incurred such expenses but did not report online.

10

0.0

10

0.0

92

.6

91

.3

88

.1

87

.1

84

.6

83

.3

83

.1

81

.3

80

.8

78

.3

75

.7

72

.1

71

.2

69

.0

64

.5

61

.2

56

.3

46

.7

35

.4

35

.2

25

.0

18

.8

17

.2

16

.7

5.6

1.1

0.0

0.0

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

Graph 27: % of districts reporting Admin Expenditure across states during 2015-16

97

5.3

85

3.6

66

4.1

64

7.8

60

7.5

43

0.5

42

6.8

40

8

40

1

37

9.7

33

0.3

29

7

29

4.6

28

9.1

27

1.9

25

2.8

18

3.9

91

.6

82

.1

70

.9

53

.6

52

.6

24

.2

19

.1

15

.6

13

.6

10

9.9

1.5

0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Graph 26: Expenditure on Administrative purposes during 2015-16 (Rs. lakh)

INDIA

12 | P a g e

ANDHRA PRADESH

Overview

Coverage of IHHL in rural areas of the state has increased from 38.6% at the end of March 2015 to

43.4% at the end of March 2016. Total number of IHHLs constructed during the year 2015-16 has been

3.7 lakh, which is 68.2% higher than that constructed during the year 2014-15. The IHHL coverage at

the end of March 2016 varied across the districts from 74.3% (West Godavari) to 10.3% (Anantapur).

None of the 13 districts of the state is likely to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019, if the pace of

construction of the year 2015-16 continues. At that pace, the estimated IHHL coverage of the state (rural

areas) on 2nd October 2019 will be 60.2% and the state will become ODF earliest by November 2027.

431 out of 12,924 GPs (3.3%) of the state have attained ODF status up to the end of March 2016.

The state spent an amount of Rs 436.9 crore during the year 2015-16 which is 232.5% higher than Rs

131.4 crore spent during the year 2014-15. It had a balance of Rs 182.2 crore under SBM (G) at the end

of the year.

Expenditure on IEC and administrative purposes during the year were Rs 5.6 crore (1.3%) and Rs 3.0

crore (0.7%) respectively.

IHHL coverage

At the end of March 2016, 43.4% of the rural HHs had access to IHHLs, as shown in Graph 1. Still, around

42.7 lakh HHs were yet to have their toilets. The coverage has improved by 4.8 % points during the year.

The corresponding increases during 2014-15 and 2013-14 were 2.9 and 1.9 % points respectively as shown

in Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural Andhra Pradesh was 47.9% according to the Rapid

Survey conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015 and the NSSO 69th round (conducted during July-

December 2012) found that 44.5% of the rural households in undivided rural Andhra Pradesh had improved

access to latrines.

Coverage across districts

Map 1 shows a wide variation of IHHL coverage across districts ranging from 10.3% to 74.3%. There are

only three districts namely, West Godavari, Krishna and Kurnool with coverage above 60%. On the other

hand, there are seven districts with coverage less than 30% as shown in the map. The maximum increase in

IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 varied from 8.5 % points in Guntur to 1.3 % points in Anantapur.

56.6

43.4

% HH without IHHL

% HH with IHHL

Graph 1: Rural Sanitation Coverage

33.8

35.7

38.6

43.4

30

35

40

45


Graph 2: Rural Sanitation Coverage over time

(%)

31st March 2016

ANDHRA PRADESH

13 | P a g e


Launch of Swachh Bharat Mission has been a major boost in improving sanitation across the state. While

monthly construction of IHHL

during 2014-15 was 18,194, it

increased to 30,613 in 2015-16.

Total construction of IHHL

during the year was 3,67,359 and

the state achieved only 24.1% of

the AIP target. Out of the total

construction, 12,363, i.e., 3.4%

were under MGNREGS. The

state needs to maintain an

enhanced pace of construction of

1,01,637 IHHL per month in next

42 months in order to become

Map 1: IHHL coverage across districts as on 31st March 2016

LEGEND

More than 60% 3 districts

31%-60% 3 districts

Less than 30% 7 districts

18,194

30,613

85,854

101,637

10,000 30,000 50,000 70,000 90,000 110,000

Actual Construction per month

during 2014-15

Actual Construction per month

during 2015-16

Required construction per month

during 2015-16

Required construction per month

during April 2016-September 2019

Graph 3: Construction of IHHL per month: Actual and

Required

ANDHRA PRADESH

14 | P a g e

ODF by 2nd October 2019 as shown in Graph 3.

Status of achieving ODF

Till March 2016, 431 GPs and 478 villages out of 12,924

GPs (3.3%) and 18,945 villages (2.6%) respectively were

declared as ODF. Verification for ODF has been done in

199 (46.2%) GPs and 211 (44.1%) villages. Graph 4

shows the status of GPs and villages declared and verified

as ODF up to 31st March 2016.

NFHS-4 (conducted during May 2015 to August 2015)

found that 43.1% rural households were using improved

sanitation facility. However, the Rapid Survey conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015 found that 52.5%

of total population were defecating in the open.

Estimated year of achieving ODF

The state can achieve ODF status only if all the

districts attain such status. The coverage at the end

of 2015-16 and the rate of progress achieved

during the year being different across districts,

attainment of ODF status will vary widely. At the

rate of construction achieved during the year

2015-16, Guntur is likely to attain ODF status

earliest by 2021 and Anantapur will achieve so by

2071. Graph 5 shows that the state is likely to

become ODF by March 2027, which is a mere

projection based on the state level aggregated rate

3.3

46.2

2.6

44.1

0

10

20

30

40

50


Graph 4: % of GPs and Villages

Declared as ODF and Verified

GPs Villages

STATE:

2016,43.4%

1st Achiever

(Guntur)

2021 100%

STATE:

(2027,100%)Last Achiever

(Anantapur)

(2071)

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

2000 2020 2040 2060 2080

Co

ver

ag

e

Estimated year

Graph 5: Estimated Year of Saturation

Map 2: Estimated earliest year of attaining ODF across districts

LEGEND

2020-2024 4 districts


Beyond 2030 4 districts

ANDHRA PRADESH

15 | P a g e

of progress. Actual attainment of ODF status will depend on the last GP to become ODF in the state.

However, no single district at the pace of 2015-16 is likely to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019. Map 2

shows the earliest year by which the districts are likely to become ODF.

Relative position of the districts in coverage and rate of construction

Achieving universal coverage within a specific timeframe depends on the coverage at a particular time and

the pace of constructing toilets for the households without toilet facility during that period. The districts have

been categorized on these two parameters (at the beginning of 2015-16 and during the year 2015-16

respectively) relative to those of the state as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 6. Four districts

(Guntur, Prakasam, Krishna and West Godavari) have both higher coverage and faster growth rate and two

districts (East Godavari and Kurnool) have higher coverage but slower growth during the year. On the other

hand, three districts (Nellore, Cuddapah and Chittoor) have lower coverage and faster growth indicating

current improvement in performance. Four districts (Anantapur, Srikakulam, Vizianagaram and

Visakhapatnam) are trailing behind both in terms of coverage and pace of construction as shown separately

in Graph 7. Share of IHHLs yet to be constructed for four group of districts as well as the trailing districts

are shown in Graph 8 and Graph 9 respectively.

Burden of uncovered household

35.1

15.5

24.5

24.9

Graph 8: Share of districts constituting

different categories

% of districts

trailing behind

% of districts

started lagging

% of districts

surging ahead

% of districts as

the emerging

performers

State

(39.1%,

7.9%)

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng 2

01

5-1

6 a

gai

nst

tar

get

of

tota

l

HH

wit

ho

ut

toil

et a

t th

e b

egin

ing o

f th

e yea

r

Coverage at the begining of 2015-16

Graph 6: Number of districts in different

categories based on combined indicators of

progress relative to the State status

Districts surging ahead;

Higher coverage and

Faster growth

4 Districts

The emerging

performers; Lower

coverage and Faster

growth

3 Districts

The trailing behind;

Lower coverage and

Slower growth

4 Districts

District started lagging;

Higher coverage and

Slower growth

2 Districts

STATE

Anantapur

Srikakulam

Vizianagara

m

Visakhapat

nam

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

0 10 20 30 40 50Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng 2

01

5-1

6 a

gai

nst

tar

get

of

tota

l

HH

wit

ho

ut

toil

et a

t th

e b

egin

ing o

f th

e yea

r


Graph 7: Districts with lower coverage and

slower growth rate

33.7

20.6

22.1

23.5

Graph 9: Share of total IHHLs to be

constructed across districts that are

trailing behind

Anantapur

Srikakulam

Visakhapatnam

Vizianagaram

ANDHRA PRADESH

16 | P a g e

Institutional coverage



SoC 2013-14 found that 24.7% AWCs of the state had toilet facility as shown in Graph 11.

Utilisation of Funds during 2015-16

The state had spent Rs. 436.9

crore in the year 2015-16, which

is 73.0% of the available fund

(Rs. 598.5 crore) as shown in

Graph 12. The same was 232.4%

higher than Rs 131.4 crore spent

during 2014-15. Actual

expenditure per district during

2015-16 was Rs 33.6 crore, which varied from Rs 8.1 (Anantapur) to Rs 69.4 crore (Guntur).

Expenditure on IEC

Rs. 5.6 crore was spent on IEC in the state

during 2015-16, which is 1.3% of the total

fund utilised in that year as shown in Graph

13. IEC expenditure varied from Rs. 1.5 lakh

(Anantapur) to Rs. 104.5 lakh (Guntur), with

average expenditure of Rs 42.8 lakh per

district.

Administrative Expenditure

The state had spent Rs. 3.0 crore for

administrative purposes during 2015-16,

which is 0.7% of the total fund utilised.

Administrative expenditure increased by Rs.

1.7 crore in 2015-16 than that during 2014-

15 as shown in Graph 14. These expenses

varied from Rs. 4.6 lakh (Anantapur) to Rs.

59.3 lakh (Visakhapatnam) and the average

per districts works out to be Rs 22.8 lakh.

8764.3

81.6

54.2

020406080

100

With toilet

facility

Toilet useable With separate

provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable

Graph 10: Status of available and useable

toilet in Schools of Andhra Pradesh &

Telangana (%)

ASER 2014

75.3

24.7


Sanitation: % of AWCs with toilet (R-

SoC 2013-14)

Without Toilet

With Toilet

619.8

436.9 420.6

5.6 3.0

182.9

0.0100.0200.0300.0400.0500.0600.0700.0

Fund

Available

Fund

Utilised

IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Admin

Charges

Balance

Rs.

cro

re

Graph12: Availability and Utilisation of Funds during

2015-16 (Rs. crore)

19.0

5.6

14.5

1.3 0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

2014-15 2015-16

IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)


Expenditure


ANDHRA PRADESH

1.2

3.00.9

0.7

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

1

2

3

4

2014-15 2015-16 Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

as

% o

f to

tal

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

(Rs

Cro

re)

Graph 14: Comparative Analysis of


Expenditute on Admin % of total expenditure

17 | P a g e

ARUNACHAL PRADESH

Overview



19,462, which is 50.9% higher than that constructed during the year 2014-15. The IHHL coverage at the

end of March 2016 varied from 89.2% (Changlang) to 42.9% (Anjaw).

7 out of 16 districts of the state are likely to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019, if the pace of

construction during the year 2015-16 continues. At that pace, the state is likely to attain ODF status in

its rural areas earliest by May 2019.


The state spent an amount of Rs 34.4 crore during the year 2015-16 which is nearly double than Rs 17.9

crore spent during the year 2014-15. The state had a balance of Rs 15.2 crore under SBM (G) at the end

of the year.


lakh (0.6%) respectively.

IHHL coverage

At the end of March 2016, 68.4% of the rural HHs had access to IHHLs, as shown in Graph 1. Still, 0.6 lakh

HHs were yet to have their toilets. The coverage has improved by 11.0 % points during the year. The

corresponding increases during 2014-15 and 2013-14 were 7.7 % points respectively as shown in Graph 2.

The 69th round of sample survey conducted by NSSO during July-December 2012 found that 46.5% of the

rural households of Arunachal Pradesh had access to improved latrines. However, DLHS-4 conducted during

June 2013-January 2014 found that 55.5% rural households of the state were using improved latrines.


Map 1 shows a wide variation of IHHL coverage across districts ranging from 42.9% to 89.2%. There are 3

districts which have more than 75% coverage. On the other hand, 4 districts have less than 55% coverage as

shown in the map. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 varied from 29.4 %

points in Papum Parey to 3.5 % points in East Siang.

68.4

31.6


Coverage (%)

% HH with IHHL % HH without IHHL

31st March 2016

42.0

49.7

57.4

68.4

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

75.0



(%)

ARUNACHAL PRADESH

18 | P a g e



monthly construction of IHHL during 2014-15 was 1,075, it increased to 1,622 in 2015-16. The total

construction of IHHL during the year was 19,461 and the state achieved 124.0% of the AIP target. Out of the

total construction, 23 (0.1% of total) were under MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain a pace of constructing

1,337 IHHL per month in next 42 months to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019 as shown in Graph 3.


1,075

1,622

1,400

1,337

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

Actual Construction per month during 2014-15


Required Construction per month during 2015-16

Required Construction per month during April 2016-

September 2019

Graph 3: Construction of IHHL per month: Actual and Required

LEGEND


65%-75% 7 districts

55-65% 2 districts

Below 55% 4 districts

ARUNACHAL PRADESH

19 | P a g e




declared as ODF. No report of verification has been

received so far. Graph 4 shows the status of GPs and

villages declared as ODF up to March 2016.


The state can achieve ODF status only if all the districts attain such status. The coverage at the end of 2015-16

and the rate of progress achieved during the year being different across districts, attainment of ODF status will

vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, West Kameng is likely to attain

ODF status by February 2017 while East Siang is likely to achieve it by July 2026. Graph 5 shows that the

state is likely to

attain ODF by

December

2019, which is

a mere

projection

based on the

state level

aggregated rate

of progress.

Actual

attainment of

ODF status will

depend on the

last GP to

become ODF

in the state.

However,

considering the

districts as


1st Achiever

(West Kameng, 2017)

STATE

(2019, 100%)Last Achiever

(East Siang, 2026)

60

80

100

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

Co

ver

ag

e

Estimated year

Graph 5: Estimated year of attaining ODF

STATE

(2016, 68.4%)

LEGEND

By 2019 7 districts



10.48.6

0

5

10

15

GP Village

Graph 4: % of GPs and villages

declared as ODF

ARUNACHAL PRADESH

20 | P a g e

units, 7 out of 16 are likely to attain ODF by 2nd October 2019. Map 2 shows the earliest year by which the

districts are likely to become ODF.

Relative position of the districts in coverage and growth

Achieving universal coverage within a specific timeframe depends on the coverage and the pace of covering

the households without toilet facility during that period. The districts have been categorized on these two

parameters (at the beginning of 2015-16 and during the year 2015-16 respectively) relative to those of the state

as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 6. Two districts (West Kameng and Chamlang) have both

higher coverage and faster growth rate and 8 districts (Lohit, East Siang, Tirap, Lower Subansiri, Tawang, East

Kameng, Upper Subansiri and Upper Siang) have higher coverage but slower growth during the year. On the

other hand, four districts (Papum Pare, Anjaw, Kurung Kumey and West Siang) have lower coverage but faster

growth indicating current improvement in performance. The remaining two districts (Dibang Valley and Lower

Dibang Valley) are trailing behind both in terms of coverage and pace of construction. Share of IHHLs yet to

be constructed for four groups of districts as well as the trailing and lagging districts are shown in Graph 7 and

Graph 8 respectively.




However, ASER 2014 found a gap between availability and use of toilet in schools as shown in Graph 9.

However, R-SoC 2013-14 found that 31.8% AWCs of the state had toilet facility as shown in Graph 10.

State

(57.4, 25.7)

05

101520253035404550

50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

ho

ut

toil

et

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 6: Number of districts in different categories based on combined indicators of


Districts surging ahead; Higher

coverage and Faster growth

2 Districts

The emerging performers; Lower


4 Districts

The trailing behind; Lower

coverage and Slower growth

2 Districts

District started lagging; Higher


8 Districts

2.9

5.1

20.0

11.2

3.86.1

5.5

5.7

2.6 8.1

Graph 8: Share of the districts that are

lagging & trailing out of total IHHLs to

be constructed in the entire state

Dibang Valley

East Kameng

East Siang

Lohit

Lower Dibang Valley

Lower Subansiri

Tawang

Tirap

Upper Siang

Upper Subansiri

6.7

50.6

5.7

37.0



% of districts

started lagging

% of districts

trailing behind

% of districts

surging ahead

% of districts as

the emerging

performers

ARUNACHAL PRADESH

21 | P a g e


The state had spent Rs. 34.4 crore

in the year 2015-16, which is

69.4% of the available fund (Rs.

49.5 crore) as shown in Graph 11.

The same was nearly double than

Rs 17.9 crore spent during 2014-

15. Actual expenditure per district

during 2015-16 was Rs 2.2 crore,

which varied from Rs 0.5 crore in

Tawang to Rs 6.3 crore in Papum Pare.

Expenditure on IEC


during 2015-16, which is 6.9% of the total fund

utilised in that year as shown in Graph 12. IEC

expenditure varied from Rs. 0.5 lakh in Lower

Subansiri to Rs. 58.8 lakh in West Siang, with

average expenditure of Rs 14.7 lakh per district.


The state had spent Rs. 19.1 lakh for

administrative purposes during 2015-16, which

is 0.6% of the total fund utilised. Administrative

expenditure increased by Rs. 3.0 lakh in 2015-

16 than that during 2014-15. These expenses

varied from Rs. 0.5 lakh (West Siang) to Rs. 5.0

lakh (Papum Pare) and the average per districts

works out to be Rs 0.8 lakh.

49.5

34.4

22.6

2.4 0.2

15.1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Fund

Available

Fund Utilised IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Admin

Charges

Balance

Rs.

cro

re

Graph 11: Availability and Utilisation of Funds during

2015-16 (Rs. crore)

16.1 19.1

0.9

0.6

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0

5

10

15

20

2014-15 2015-16

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

as

% o

f to

tal

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

(Rs

cro

re)




0.7 2.4

3.8

6.9

0.0

5.0

10.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

2014-15 2015-16IE

C e

xp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)


Expenditure


69.2

35.1

48.4

24.5

0

20

40

60

80

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable

Graph 9: Status of availabile and useable toilet

in Schools (%)

68.2

31.8



(R-SoC, 2013-14)

Without Toilet

WithToilet

ARUNACHAL PRADESH

22 | P a g e

ASSAM

Overview




the end of March 2016 varied from 76.8% (Nalbari) to 35.5% (Karbi Anglong).

Out of 27 districts of the state, only 10 are likely to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019, if the pace of

construction during the year 2015-16 continues. At that pace, the estimated IHHL coverage of the state

(rural areas) by 2nd October 2019 will be 85.1% and the state will become ODF earliest by May 2021.

17 out of 2,707 GPs (0.6%) of the state have attained ODF status up to March 2016.


142.2 crore spent during the year 2014-15. The state had a balance of Rs 81.4 crore under SBM(G) at

the end of the year.



IHHL coverage




in Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural Assam was 66.4% according to the Rapid Survey

conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015 and the NSSO 69th round (conducted during July-December

2012) found that 75.4% of the households had access to improved latrines.


Map 1 shows a wide variation of IHHL coverage across the districts ranging from 35.5% to 76.8%. There are

seven districts with coverage above 60%. On the other extreme, there are three districts with coverage less

than 30% as shown in the map. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 varied

from 22.2 % points in Bongaigaon to 2.1 % points in Karbi Anglong.

40.843.6

46.3

54.5

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0



(%)

45.5

54.5


Coverage (%)

Without Toilet

With Toilet 31st March 2016

ASSAM

23 | P a g e




construction of IHHL during the year was 4,65,574 and the state achieved 73.9% of the AIP target. Out of the

total construction, only 29 were under MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain an enhanced pace of

construction of 61,556 IHHL per month in next 42 months in order to become ODF by 2nd October 2019 as

shown in Graph 3.


LEGEND

60% and above 7 districts

50%-59% 12 districts

40%-50% 6 districts


12,561

38,798

56,499

61,556

0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000






ASSAM

24 | P a g e


Till March 2016, 17 GPs and 212 villages out of

2,707 GPs (0.6%) and 27,468 villages (0.8%)

respectively were declared as ODF. Verification for

ODF has been done in 14 (82.4%) GPs and 166

(78.3%) villages. Graph 4 shows the status of GPs

and villages declared and verified as ODF up to

March 2016.

NFHS-4 (conducted during November 2015 to

March 2016) found that 45.1% rural households were

using improved sanitation facility. However, the Rapid Survey conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015

found that 18.9% rural households of the state were defecating in the open.


The state can achieve ODF status only if all the districts attain such status. The coverage at the end of 2015-

16 and the rate of progress achieved during the year being different across districts, attainment of ODF status

will vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, Nalbari is likely to attain

ODF status earliest by January 2018 and Karbi Anglong will achieve so by February 2044. Graph 5 shows

that the state is likely to attain ODF by May 2021, which is based on mere projection of the state level

aggregated rate of progress. Actual attainment of ODF status will depend on the last GP to become ODF in

the state. However, considering the districts as units, 10 out of 27 districts are likely to attain it by 2nd October

2019. Map 2 shows the earliest year by which the districts are likely to become ODF.

1st Achiever

(Nalbari, 2018)STATE

(2021, 100%)

Last Achiever

(Karbi Anglong, 2044)

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

105

110

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045

Co

ver

ag

e

Estimated year


STATE

(2016, 68.3%)

0.6

82.4

0.8

78.3

0

50

100

% Declared % Verified

Graph 4: % of GPs and villages declared

& verified as ODF

GP Village

ASSAM

25 | P a g e


The districts have been categorized on these two parameters (at the beginning of 2015-16 and during the year

2015-16 respectively) relative to those of the state as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 6.

Eleven districts (Chirag, Kamrup-Metro, Kokrajhar, Goalpara, Dhubri, Kachar, Sibsagar, Dibrugarh, Nalbari,

Marigaon and Hailakandi) have both higher coverage and faster growth rate and three districts (Dhemaji,

Jorhat and Golaghat) have higher coverage but slower growth during the year. On the other hand, six districts

(Bongaigaon, Darrang, North Kachar Hills, Kamrup, Karimganj and Bagsha) have lower coverage and faster

growth indicating current improvement in performance. Seven districts are trailing behind both in terms of

coverage and pace of construction as shown separately in Graph 7. Share of IHHLs yet to be constructed for

four groups of districts as well as the trailing districts are shown in Graph 8 and Graph 9 respectively.

State

(46.3, 15.2)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0 20 40 60 80Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

ho

ut

toil

et

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r (%

)

Coverage at the beginning of 2015-16 (%)





Higher coverage and Faster

growth

11 Districts

The emerging performers;

Lower coverage and Faster

growth

6 Districts


coverage and Slower

growth

7 Districts


Higher coverage and Slower

growth

3 Districts

STATE

Barpeta

Karbi

Anglong

Lakhimpur

Nagaon

Sonitpur

Tinsukia

Udalguri

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

30 35 40 45 50

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

hou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 7: Districts with both poorer

coverage and Poorer progress (%)

LEGEND

By 2019 11 districts


2024-2029 1 district


Map 2: Estimated year of attaining ODF across districts

ASSAM

26 | P a g e





R-SoC, 2013-14 found that 40.3% AWCs of the state had toilet facility as shown in Graph 11.






Graph 12. The same was

182.7% higher than Rs. 143.7

crore spent during 2014-15.

Actual expenditure per district

during 2015-16 was Rs 15.9

crore, which varied from Rs. 1.9

crore (Dhemaji) to Rs. 37.8

crore in Dhubri.

30.6

9.1

40.4

19.9

Graph 8: Share of Districts constituting


Districts surging

ahead

Districts started

lagging

The trailing behind

The emerging

performers

7.5

3.9

3.8

9.8

7.1

4.2

4.0


constructed across Districts that are

trailing behindBarpeta

Karbi Anglong

Lakhimpur

Nagaon

Sonitpur

Tinsukia

Udalguri

92

58.7

87.2

47

25

35

45

55

65

75

85

95

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet accessible

and useable

Graph 10: Status of availabile and useable toilet in

Schools (%)

59.7

40.3


Sanitation: % of AWCs with

toilet (R-SoC, 2013-14)

Without Toilet With Toilet

631.4

550.0 543.5

2.9 1.0

81.4

0.0

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

500.0

600.0

700.0

Fund

Available

Fund

Utilised

IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Admin

Charges

Balance

Rs.

cro

re


2015-16 (Rs. crore)

ASSAM

27 | P a g e

Expenditure on IEC

Rs. 13.5 crore was spent on IEC in

the state during 2015-16, which is

3.1% of the total fund utilised in

that year as shown in Graph 13. IEC

expenditure varied from Rs. 2.4

lakh (Barpetta) to Rs. 34.3 lakh

(Dhubri), with average expenditure

of Rs 7.5 lakh per district. Out of 27

districts, 17 have reported IEC

expenditure.



for administrative purposes during

2015-16, which is 0.2% of the total

fund utilised. Administrative

expenditure increased by Rs. 0.8

crore in 2015-16 than that during

2014-15. These expenses varied

from Rs. 0.03 lakh (Nalbari) to Rs.

11.7 lakh (Sibsagar) and the

average per districts works out to

be Rs 30.0 lakh. Only 16 districts

have reported admin expenses

during 2015-16.

3.8

2.92.6

0.50.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

2014-15 2015-16 IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)

Graph 13: Comparative Analysis of IEC Expenditure


0.2

1.0

0.1

0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

2014-15 2015-16

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s (R

s

lak

h)

Graph 14: Comparative Analysis of Administrative

Expenditure


ASSAM

28 | P a g e

BIHAR

Overview




the end of March 2016 varied from 60.5% (Gaya) to 13.0% (Madhubani).

No district of Bihar is likely to become ODF by 2nd October 2019, if the pace of construction during the

year 2015-16 continues. At that pace, the estimated IHHL coverage of the state (rural areas) at the end

of 2nd October 2019 will be 32.9% and the state will become ODF earliest by November 2048.


The state spent an amount of Rs. 436.2 crore during the year 2015-16 which is 205.9% higher than Rs





IHHL coverage


1.6 crore HHs were yet to construct their toilets. The coverage has improved by 2.5 % points during the year.


in Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural Bihar was 31.6% according to the Rapid Survey


2012) found that 25.8% of the rural households had access to improved latrines.



only two districts namely, Gaya and Patna with coverage above 50%. On the other extreme, there are 19

districts with coverage less than 25% as shown in the map. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during

the year 2015-16 varied from 1.1 % points (Aurangabad and Purba Champaran) to 9.0 % points (Sheohar).

21.4

22.2

22.9

25.4

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26


Graph 2: Rural Sanitation Coverage over time (%)

25.4

74.6


Coverage (%)


31st March 2016

BIHAR

29 | P a g e



monthly construction of IHHL during 2014-15 was 13,788, it increased to 44,226 in 2015-16. Although, it

was much lower than that of the required amount i.e. 3,05,371 per month. Total construction of IHHL during

the year was 5,30,715 and the state achieved only 18.7% of the AIP target. Out of the total construction,

1,03,677, i.e., 19.5% were under MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain pace of construction of 3,79,984

IHHL per month in next 42 months in order to become ODF by 2nd October 2019 as shown in Graph 3.

13,788

44,226

305,371

379,984

0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000





September 2019



LEGEND


30-50% 4 districts

25-29% 13 districts


BIHAR

30 | P a g e


Till March 2016, 58 GPs and 242 villages out of 8,404 GPs

(0.7%) and 38,791 villages (0.6%) respectively were

declared as ODF. Verification for ODF has been done in 6

(10.3%) GPs and 17 (7.0%) villages. Graph 4 shows the

status of GPs and Villages declared and verified as ODF up

to 31st March 2016.

NFHS-4 (conducted during 1st April 2015 to 25th September

2015) found that 20.7% rural households were using

improved sanitation facility. However, the Rapid Survey conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015 found

that 72.9% of total rural households were defecating in the open.



16 and the rate of

progress achieved during

the year being different

across districts,

attainment of ODF status

will vary widely. At the

rate of construction

achieved during the year

2015-16, Sheohar will

attain 100% coverage by

December 2021 and

Aurangabad will achieve

so by January 2078. Graph

5 shows that the state is

likely to attain ODF by

November 2048, which is

based on mere projection

of the state level

aggregated rate of

progress. Actual

attainment of ODF status

will depend on the last GP

to become ODF in the

state. However,

considering the districts as

units, not a single district is

likely to attain it by 2nd

October 2019. Map 2

shows the earliest year by

which the districts are

likely to become ODF.

0.7

10.3

0.6

7.0

0

10

20


Graph 4:% of GPs and Villages


GPs

STATE

March 2016, 25.4%

1st Achiever

(Sheohar)

December 2021

STATE

(November 2048,

100%) Last Achiever

(Aurangabad)

January 2078

20

40

60

80

100

120

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090

Co

ver

ag

e

Estimated year of saturation



2030-2060

2020-2024

2025-2029




BIHAR

31 | P a g e



the pace of covering the households without toilet facility during that period. The districts have been

categorized on these two parameters (at the beginning of 2015-16 and during the year 2015-16 respectively)

relative to those of the state as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 6. Nine districts (Gaya,

Patna, Sheohar, Jehanabad, Sheikhpura, Arwal, Munger, Lakhisarai and Saran) have both higher coverage

and faster growth rate and twelve districts (Vaishali, Begusarai, Saharsa, Bhojpur, Sasaram, Aurangabad,

Puraba and Paschim Champaran, Purnia, Siwan, Bhagalpur, Darbhanga) have higher coverage but slower

growth during the year. On the other hand, six districts (Nawada, Kisanganj, Muzaffarpur, Araria, Madhepura

and Gopalganj) have lower coverage and faster growth indicating current improvement in performance.

Eleven districts are trailing behind both in terms of coverage and pace of construction as shown separately in

Graph 7. Share of IHHLs yet to be constructed for four group of districts as well as the trailing districts are

shown in Graph 8 and Graph 9 respectively.


State

(22.9, 3.2)

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st t

arg

et

of

tota

l H

H w

ith

ou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r






Higher coverage and

Faster growth9 Districts



growth6 Districts


Lower coverage and

Slower growth11 Districts


Higher coverage and

Slower growth12 Districts

StateBanka

BuxarJamui

Kaimur

(Bhabua)

Katihar

Khagaria

Madhubani

NalandaSamastipur

SitamarhiSupaul

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

10 15 20 25Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st t

arg

et

of

tota

l H

H w

ith

ou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 7:Districts with lower coverage

and slower growth rate

33.2

12.1

17.0

37.7



The trailing behind

Districts surging

ahead

The emerging

performers

Districts started

lagging behind

5.05.5

5.6

6.7

7.0

8.2

8.610.3

11.9

15.0

16.2


constructed across districts that are trailing

behindJamui

Khagaria

Buxar

Banka

Kaimur(Bhabua)

Supaul

Katihar

Nalanda

Sitamarhi

Samastipur

Madhubani

BIHAR

32 | P a g e



Availability and use of toilets in schools as per ASER 2014 is much less as shown in Graph 10. R-SoC 2013-

14 found that 20.4% AWCs of the state had toilet facility.


The state had spent Rs. 436.2 crore in

the year 2015-16, which is 63.0% of the

available fund (Rs. 692.9 crore) as

shown in Graph 12. The same was

205.9% higher than Rs 142.6 crore

spent during 2014-15. Actual

expenditure per district during 2015-16

was Rs 11.5 crore, which varied from

Rs 29.0 crore (Muzaffarpur) to Rs 1.5

crore in Arwal.

Expenditure on IEC


during 2015-16, which is 3.1% of the total fund

utilised in that year as shown in Graph 13. The

IEC expenditure varied from Rs. 0.4 lakh

(Banka) to Rs. 50.0 lakh (Lakhisarai), with





is 0.7% of the total fund utilised. Administrative

expenditure decreased by Rs. 0.5 crore in 2015-

16 than that during 2014-15 as shown in Graph

14. These expenses varied from Rs. 0.8 lakh

(Supaul) to Rs. 40.1 lakh (Patna) and the

average per districts works out to be Rs. 8.5

lakh. 4 out of 38 districts have not reported any

administrative expenditure during 2015-16.

93.6

60.674.6

46.2

0

20

40

60

80

100

With toilet Toilet useable With separate

provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable

Graph 10: Status of available and useable toilet

in Schools (%)

ASER 2014

20.4

79.6



(R-SoC, 2013-14)

With Toilet

Without Toilet

692.9

436.2 419.0

13.5 2.9

256.7

0.0100.0200.0300.0400.0500.0600.0700.0800.0

Fund

Available

Fund

Utilised

IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Admin

Charges

Balance

Rs.

cro

re



19.4

13.5

13.6

3.1

-1.0

2.0

5.0

8.0

11.0

14.0

17.0

20.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

2014-15 2015-16

IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)


Expenditure


3.43.0

2.4

0.7

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.0

0

1

2

3

4

2014-15 2015-16

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

as

% o

f to

tal

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

(Rs

lak

h)




BIHAR

33 | P a g e

CHHATTISGARH

Overview



3.7 lakh, which is more than eight times higher than that constructed during the year 2014-15. The IHHL

coverage at the end of March 2016 varied across the districts from 76.1% (Dhamtari) to 20.7% (Bijapur).



(rural areas) at the end of 2nd October 2019 will be 76.7% and the state will become ODF earliest by

July 2022.

825 out of 9,798 GPs (8.4%) of the state have attained ODF status by the end of March 2016.

The state spent an amount of Rs. 350.6 crore during the year 2015-16 which is around fourteen times the

amount (Rs 24.5 crore) spent during the year 2014-15. The state had a deficit of Rs 6.8 crore under SBM

(G) at the end of the year.



IHHL coverage


22.0 lakh HHs were yet to construct their toilets. The coverage has improved by 8.3 % points during the year.


in Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural Chhattisgarh was 21.2% according to the Rapid Survey





only four districts namely, Dhamtari, Rajnandgaon, Dantewada and Korba with coverage above 60%. On the

other hand, there are five districts with coverage less than 35% of which two have less than 25% coverage as

shown in the map. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 varied from 23.5 %

points in Koriya to 2.8 % points in Mahasamund.

49.750.3

% HH without IHHL

% HH with IHHL 31st March 2016


(%)

39.641.1

42.0

50.3

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

55.0



CHHATTISGARH

34 | P a g e


Launch of Swachh

Bharat Mission has

been a major boost

in improving

sanitation across the

state. While monthly

construction of

IHHL during 2014-

15 was 3,321, it

increased to 30,659

in 2015-16. The total

construction of IHHL during the year was 3,67,911 and the state achieved 52.4% of the AIP target. Out of

the total construction, 10,804, i.e., 2.9% were under MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain a pace of


shown in Graph 3.

Map 1: IHHL coverage across

districts as on 31st March 2016



LEGEND


50-65% 8 districts

35-50% 10 districts


3,321

30,659

47,581

52,415

0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000

Actual Construction per month during 2014-

15

Actual Construction per month during 2015-

16

Required Construction per month during

2015-16

Required Construction per month during April

2016-September 2019


CHHATTISGARH

35 | P a g e


Till March 2016, 825 GPs and 2,032 villages out of 9,798



365 (44.2%) GPs and 929 (45.7%) villages. Graph 4 shows

the status of GPs and villages declared and verified as ODF

up to 31stMarch 2016.

The Rapid Survey conducted by NSSO during May-June

2015 found that 70.1% of rural households were defecating

in the open.


The state can achieve ODF status only

if all the districts attain such status.

The coverage at the end of 2015-16

and the rate of progress achieved

during the year being different across

districts, time of attainment of ODF

status will vary widely. At the rate of

construction achieved during the year

2015-16, Dhamtari is likely to attain

ODF status earliest by June 2017 and

Kondagaon will be the last district to

achieve so by January 2041 as shown

in Graph 5.

The graph also

shows that the

state is likely

to attain ODF

by July 2022,

which is based

on mere

projection of

the state level

aggregated

rate of

progress.

Actual

attainment of

ODF status

will depend on

the last GP to

become ODF

in the state.

However,

8.4

44.2

10.3

45.7

0

20

40

60

% Declared % Verifed



GP

Village

STATE

2016, 50.3%

1st Achiever

(Dhamtari)

2017

STATE


(Kondagaon)

2041

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045

Co

ver

ag

e

Estimated year

Graph 5: Estimated year of ODF

Map 2: Estimated earliest year of

becoming ODF across districts

LEGEND

By 2019 4 districts




CHHATTISGARH

36 | P a g e

considering the districts as units, 4 out of 27 districts are likely to attain it by 2nd October 2019. Map 2 shows

the earliest year by which the districts are likely to become ODF.



the pace of covering the households without toilet facility. The districts have been categorized on these two

parameters (at the beginning of 2015-16 and during the year 2015-16 respectively) relative to those of the

state as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 6. Seven districts (Surguja, Balod, Durg, Bilaspur,

Kanker, Rajnandgaon and Dhamtari) have both higher coverage and faster pace and six districts (Kawardha,

Balrampur, Bastar, Mahasamund, Dantewada and Korba) have higher coverage but slower growth during the

year. On the other hand, four districts (Bijapur, Narayanpur, Koriya and Baloda Bazar) have lower coverage

and faster pace indicating current improvement in performance. Ten districts are trailing behind both in terms

of coverage and pace of construction as shown separately in Graph 7. Share of IHHLs yet to be constructed

for four group of districts as well as the trailing districts are shown in Graph 8 and Graph 9 respectively.


State

(42.1,14.3)

-1.0

4.0

9.0

14.0

19.0

24.0

29.0

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng 2

01

5-1

6 a

gai

nst

tar

get

of

tota

l H

H w

ith

ou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inin

g o

f

the

yea

r




progress


Higher coverage and

Faster growth

7 Districts

The emerging

performers; Lower

coverage and Faster

growth

4 Districts


Lower coverage and

Slower growth

10 Districts


Higher coverage and

Slower growth

6 Districts

48.1

22.1

11.0

18.9

Graph 8: Share of districts

constituting different categories

The trailing

behind

Districts

surging ahead

The emerging

performers

Districts started

lagging behind

3.0

6.9

7.7

7.8

8.0

9.6

9.910.2

18.1

18.8



behindSukma

Gariyaband

Bemetara

Kondagaon

Mungeli

Jashpur

Raipur

Surajpur

Raigarh

Janjgir - Champa

State

BemetaraGariyaband

Janjgir -

Champa

Jashpur

Kondagaon

Mungeli

Raigarh

RaipurSukma

Surajpur

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

20 30 40 50

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

ho

ut

toil

et a

t

the

beg

inin

g o

f th

e y

ear


Graph 7: Districts with lower coverage


CHHATTISGARH

37 | P a g e




SoC 2013-14 found that 35.4% AWCs in Chhattisgarh had toilet as shown in Graph 13.


The state had spent Rs. 350.6 crore in the

year 2015-16, which is 2.7% more than the

available fund (Rs. 341.5 crore) as shown in

Graph 12. The same was Rs. 326.1 crore

higher than Rs. 24.5 crore spent during

2014-15. Actual expenditure per district

during 2015-16 was Rs 13.0 crore, which

varied from Rs 2.2 crore (Dantewada) to Rs

31.8 crore (Baloda Bazar).

Expenditure on IEC




13. IEC expenditure varied across districts

from Rs. 1.2 lakh (Narayanpur) to Rs. 158.7

lakh (Rajnandgaon), with average

expenditure of Rs 18.5 lakh per district.





Administrative expenditure increased by Rs.

2.4 crore in 2015-16 than that during 2014-

15 as shown in Graph 14. These expenses

varied from Rs. 5.2 lakh (Narayanpur) to Rs.

30.0 lakh (Dhamtari) and the average per districts works out to be Rs 14.3 lakh.

91.8

68.9 70.2

53.4

0

20

40

60

80

100

With any type

of toilet


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable


in Schools (%)

ASER 2014

35.4

64.6



(R-SoC, 2013-14)

With Toilet

Without Toilet

7.8

5.2

1.9

1.5

0

1

2

0.0

5.0

10.0

2014-15 2015-16

IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)


Expenditure


1.7

4.0

6.9

1.2

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

0

1

2

3

4

5

2014-15 2015-16

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

as

% o

f to

tal

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

(Rs

Cro

re)




341.5 350.2 334.6

5.0 3.9 8.70

200

400

Fund

Available

Fund

Utilised

IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Admin

Charges

Deficit



CHHATTISGARH

38 | P a g e

GOA

Overview



28,638. The IHHL coverage at the end of March 2016 of South Goa and North Goa were 56.7% and

61.6% respectively.

Both the districts are likely to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019, if the pace of construction during

the year 2015-16 continues. At that pace, the state is likely to attain ODF status in its rural areas earliest

by September 2017.

The state spent an amount of Rs 6.4 crore during the year against available fund of Rs. 1.6 crore. The

entire expenditure was incurred on providing incentive to eligible families for IHHL construction.

IHHL coverage

At the end of March 2016, 76.1% of the rural HHs had access to IHHLs, as shown in Graph 1. Only 45,000

more HHs need to be covered.

However, the 69th round of sample survey conducted by NSSO during July-December 2012 found that 85.8%

of households living in rural areas of Goa were using improved source of latrine. DLHS-4 conducted during

June 2013-January 2014 also found that 84.4% rural households of the state had access to improved toilet

facility.


Graph 3 shows the IHHL coverage in both the

districts of Goa as on 31st March 2016. While

South Goa has 70.8% coverage, it is 77.7% in

North Goa. While coverage in South Goa

increased by 14.1 % points during the year

2015-16, it was 16.1 % points in North Goa. If

t5he current trend continues, both the districts

are likely to attain ODF status by 2018.

76.1

23.9


Coverage (%)


31st March 2016

60.7 60.7 60.7

76.1

55

60

65

70

75

80



70.8

76.1

77.7

66

68

70

72

74

76

78

80

South Goa STATE North Goa

Graph 3: Rural Sanitation Coverage across

districts (%)

GOA

39 | P a g e


Launch of Swachh Bharat Mission has been a major boost in resuming the implementation of rural sanitation

across the state. The monthly construction of IHHL during 2015-16 was 2,387 and the state achieved 67.1%

of the AIP target. The state needs a very low asking rate of construction of 1,062 IHHL per month in next 42

months to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019 as shown in Graph 4.


No report of declaration and verification of ODF has so far been received. However, NFHS-4 (conducted from

January 2015 to April 2015) found that 80.8% households living in rural areas were using improved sanitation

facility.



According to DISE 2014-15, toilet facilities are available in 90.85%

schools for boys and 99.42% for girls. R-SoC 2013-14 found that

83.9% AWCs of the state had toilet facility as shown in Graph 6.


The state spent Rs. 643.8 lakh against available fund of Rs. 163.8

lakh with a deficit of Rs. 480.0 lakh.

Entire amount was spent in providing

incentives to eligible families for IHHL

construction. No expenditure on IEC or

Administrative purposes has been

reported during the year.

1st Achiever

(North Goa, 2017)

Last Achiever

(South Goa, 2018)

70.0

90.0

110.0

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Cover

age

Estimated year


STATE

(2016, 76.1%)

16.1

83.9




Without

Toilet

WithToilet

0

2,387

1,356

1,062

0 1,000 2,000 3,000





September 2019


1.64

6.4 6.4

0.0 0.0

4.8

0

2

4

6

8

Fund

Available

Fund

Utilised

IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Admin

Charges

Deficit

Rs.

cro

re



GOA

40 | P a g e

GUJARAT

Overview




the end of March 2016 varied from 45.3% (Dahod) to 112.0% (Narmada).

At the aggregated pace of construction for the state as a whole, attained during the year 2015-16

continues, the projected year of attaining ODF status by the state is July 2018 and the estimated IHHL

coverage is likely to be more than 100% by 2nd October 2019. However, if such projection is made district

wise, then only 21 out of 26 districts are likely to become ODF by that date.

3,381 out of 13,923 GPs (24.3%) of the state have attained ODF status up to the end of March 2016.

The state spent an amount of Rs. 763.1 crore during the year 2015-16 which is 252.8% higher than Rs

216.3 crore spent during the year 2014-15. The state had a deficit of Rs. 154.6 crore under SBM(G) at


Expenditure on IEC and administrative purposes during the year were Rs. 2.9 crore (0.4%) and Rs. 6.1


IHHL coverage


18.9 lakh HHs were yet to construct their toilets. The coverage has improved by 13.3 % points during the

year, indicating rapid rise of coverage during the period. The corresponding increases during 2014-15 and

2013-14 were 4.7 and 2.2 % points respectively as shown in Graph 2. It may be mentioned that the IHHL

coverage in rural Gujarat was 55.5% according to the Rapid Survey conducted by NSSO during May-June

2015 and the NSSO 69th round (conducted during July-December 2012) found that 40.7% of the rural

households had access to improved latrines.



only six districts with coverage above 80%. On the other extreme, there are two districts (Dahod and Banas

Kantha) with coverage less than 50% as shown in the map. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during

the year 2015-16 varied from 35.9 % points in Narmada to 6.5 % points in Dangs.

73.0

27.0


Coverage (%)

31st March 2016

52.855.0

59.7

73.0

50

55

60

65

70

75



(%)

GUJARAT

41 | P a g e





the total construction, 9,049, i.e., 1.0% were under MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain a pace of


shown in Graph 3.


27,980

77,648

52,408

45,196

20,000 35,000 50,000 65,000 80,000

Actual construction during 2014-15

Actual construction during 2015-16

Required construction during 2015-16

Required construction during April 2016 - September 2019


LEGEND


50-70% 3 districts

70-85% 15 districts

85-100% 5 districts

Above 100% 1 district


GUJARAT

42 | P a g e

Till March 2016, 3,381 GPs and 4,368 villages out of

13,923 GPs (24.3%) and 18,056 villages (24.2%)

respectively have been declared as ODF. However,

verification has been done for only 0.06% GPs and 0.05%

villages respectively.


2015 found that 48.1% of total households were defecating

in the open.




will vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, Navsari attained 100%

coverage by September 2016 but by March only 93.4% of the GPs of the districts were declared as ODF.

Rajkot will achieve so by April 2020. Graph 5 shows that the state is likely to attain ODF by July 2018, which

is based on mere projection of the state level aggregated rate of progress. Actual attainment of ODF status will

depend on the last GP to become ODF in the state. However, considering the districts as units, 21 out of 26

districts are likely to attain it by 2nd October 2019. Map 2 shows the earliest year by which the districts are

likely to become ODF.

* Navsari has attained more than 100% coverage but has not become ODF till March 2016.

Achieving universal coverage within a specific timeframe depends on the coverage and the pace of

constructing toilets for the households without toilet facility during that period. The districts have been


relative to those of the state as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 6.

1st Achiever*

(Navsari, 2016)

STATE


(Rajkot, 2020)

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

105

110

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Cover

age

Estimated year


STATE

(2016, 73.0%)

24.3

0.06

24.2

0.050

10

20

30

% declared % verified


declared & verified as ODF

GPs Villages

GUJARAT

43 | P a g e

Relative position of the districts in coverage and pace of construction


2015-16 respectively) relative to those of the state as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 6. Ten

districts (Narmada, Dangs, Navsari, Amreli, Anand, Ahmedabad, Surat, Porbandar, Mahesana, and Bharuch)

have both higher coverage and faster growth rate and six districts (Junagadh, Kachchh, Rajkot, Vadodara,

Sabar Kantha and Valsad) have higher coverage but slower growth during the year. On the other hand, three

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

ho

ut

toil

et a

t

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 6: Number of districts in different categories

based on combined indicators of progress relative

to that of the state


Higher coverage and

Faster growth

10 Districts

The emerging

performers; Lower

coverage & Faster

growth

3 Districts


Lower coverage and

Slower growth

7 Districts


Higher coverage and

Slower growth

6 Districts

State

(59.7, 32.9)


LEGEND By 2019 24 districts Beyond 2019 2 districts

Banas

Kantha

BhavnagarDahod

Gandhinagar

Jamnagar

Panch

Mahals

Surendranagar

State

(59.7,32.9)

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

20 40 60

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

ho

ut

toil

et a

t

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 7: Districts with lower

coverage and slower growth rate

GUJARAT

44 | P a g e

districts (Patan, Tapi and Kheda) have lower coverage and faster growth indicating current improvement in

performance. Seven districts are trailing behind both in terms of coverage and pace of construction as shown

separately in Graph 7. Share of IHHLs yet to be constructed for four group of districts as well as the trailing

districts are shown in Graph 8 and Graph 9 respectively.



However, ASER 2014 found a gap between availability and use of toilet in schools as shown in Graph 10. The

R-SoC 2013-14 found that 58.3% AWCs of the state had toilet facility as shown in Graph 11.


The state had spent Rs. 763.1 crore in the year 2015-

16, which is 125.4% of the available fund (Rs. 608.5

crore) as shown in Graph 12. The same was 252.8%

higher than Rs. 216.3 crore spent during 2014-15.

Actual expenditure per district during 2015-16 was

Rs 29.3 crore, which varied from Rs 3.2 crore in

Kachchh to Rs 76.7 crore in Dahod.

28.7

11.6

18.1

5.9

8.2

13.1

14.5



trailing behind

Banas Kantha

Bhavnagar

Dahod

Gandhinagar

Jamnagar

Panch Mahals

Surendranagar

41.7

58.3



(R-SoC)

Without Toilet

With Toilet

98.3

84.8

94.2

81.4

7580859095

100

With any type

of toilet


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable

Graph 10: Status of availabile and useable

toilet in Schools (%)

46.9

28.5

14.6

10.0



Districts trailing

behind

Districts started

lagging

Districts surging

ahead

The emerging

performers

608.5

763.1 747.5

2.9 6.1

264.0

0

200

400

600

800

Total

fund

available

Total

fund

utilised

IHHL

incentive

IEC exp Admin

exp

Deficit

Rs.

cro

re

Graph12: Availability and Utilisation of

Funds during 2015-16 (Rs. crore)

GUJARAT

45 | P a g e

Expenditure on IEC




13. IEC expenditure varied from Rs. 2.6 lakh

(Surendranagar) to Rs. 119.5 lakh (Navsari),

with average expenditure of Rs 11.2 lakh per

district. However, report on IEC expenditure

was received online from only 18 out of 26

districts. It is likely that actual expenditure on

IEC has been more including what has not

been reported.





Administrative expenditure increased by

Rs. 0.8 crore in 2015-16 than that during

2014-15 as shown in Graph 14. These

expenses varied from Rs. 4.2 lakh

(Bharuch) to Rs. 98.9 lakh (Navsari) and the

average administrative expenditure per

district works out to be Rs 23.4 lakh.

However, report on administrative expenditure was received from only 19 out of 26 districts and, therefore,

there are some unreported expenditure on this account.

6.9

2.9

3.2

0.40

2

4

0

5

10

2014-15 2015-16

IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

) Graph 13: Comparative Analysis of IEC

Expenditure

Expenditure on IEC (Rs. crore)

5.4

6.12.5

0.8

0

2

4

4

5

6

7

2014-15 2015-16 Ad

min

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

Ad

min

exp

ense

s (R

s

cro

re)


Expenditure

Expenditure on Admin (Rs. crore) % of total expenditure

GUJARAT

46 | P a g e

HARYANA

Overview




the end of March 2016 varied from 47.8% (Mewat) to 101.5% (Faridabad) and three other districts had

coverage of 100% or more.

At the aggregated pace of construction for the state as a whole attained during the year 2015-16

continues, the projected year of attaining ODF status by the state is April 2019 and the estimated IHHL

coverage is likely to be 101.8% by 2nd October 2019. However, if such projection is made district wise,

then only 14 districts are likely to become ODF by that date.

1,160 out of 6,081 GPs (19.1%) of the state have attained ODF status up to the end of March 2016. Even

Faridabad with IHHL coverage of 101.5%, only 19.8% GPs were declared ODF while for Gurgaon with

100% IHHL coverage in March 2016, 71.0% of the GPs were declared ODF.

The state spent an amount of Rs. 98.4 crore during the year 2015-16 which is 15.5% higher than Rs 85.2

crore spent during the year 2014-15. The state had a balance of Rs. 22.5 crore under SBM(G) at the end

of the year.



IHHL coverage

At the end of March 2016, 86.9% of the rural HHs had access to IHHLs, as shown in Graph 1 and the coverage

improved by 4.4 % points during the year. Yet around 4.0 lakh HHs were yet to have their toilets. The

corresponding increases during 2014-15 and 2013-14 were 3.6 and 3.8 % points respectively as shown in

Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural Haryana was 90.2% according to the Rapid Survey


2012) found that 74.2% of the rural household had access to improved latrines.

13.1

86.9

% HH without IHHL

% HH with IHHL31st March 2016


(%)

75.1

78.9

82.5

86.9

65.0

70.0

75.0

80.0

85.0

90.0


Graph 2: Rural sanitation Coverage over time (%)

HARYANA

47 | P a g e


Map 1 shows IHHL coverage across districts. There are only two districts namely, Mewat (47.8%) and Palwal

(52.6%) had coverage below 55%. On the other hand, there are 11 districts with coverage more than 90%

coverage and four out of those namely, Gurgaon, Panipat, Kurukshetra and Faridabad have coverage of 100%

or more in respect of total HHs at baseline.


Monthly construction of IHHL during 2014-15 was 9,120 which increased to 11,144 during 2015-16, which

is higher than that required (9,965 per month) to make the state ODF by 2nd October 2019. The total


the total construction, 1,063, i.e., 0.8% were under MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain pace of


LEGEND


75%-90% 7 districts

55%-75% 1 district


9,120

11,144

9,965

9,628

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000





September 2019


HARYANA

48 | P a g e


shown in Graph 3.



6,081 GPs (19.1%) and 6,955 villages (18.6%)


ODF has been done in 33 (2.8%) GPs and 36 (2.8%)

villages. Graph 4 shows the status of GPs and villages

declared and verified as ODF up to 31st March 2016.

NFHS-4 (conducted during 1st April 2015 to 25th

September 2015) found that 77.4% rural households

were using improved sanitation facility. However, the

Rapid Survey conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015 found that 15.6% of total households were

defecating in the open.


The state can attain ODF status only if all the districts attain such status. The coverage at the end of 2015-16

and the rate of progress achieved during the year being different across districts, time of attainment of ODF

status will vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, Faridabad has already

attained 100% coverage as per baseline and can become ODF provided all HHs have access and use their

toilets. Mewat will achieve so by December 2036. Graph 5 shows that the state is likely to attain universal

coverage by April 2019, which is a mere projection based on the state level aggregated rate of progress and

7 out of 21 districts will have coverage below 100%. Thus, 14 out of 21 districts are likely to become ODF

earliest by the target date as shown in Map 2. However, the same is based on district level aggregate rate and

actual attainment of ODF status will depend on the last GP to become ODF.

STATE

(March 2016, 86.9%)

1st Achiever

(Faridabad)

January 2016

STATE

( April 2019,100%)

Last Achiever

(Mewat)

December 2036

80

85

90

95

100

105

110

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Co

ver

ag

e


Graph 5: Estimated earliest year of attaining ODF

19.1 18.6

2.8 2.8

0

5

10

15

20

25

% of GPs % of villages

Grpah 4: % of GPs and Villages declared

and verified as ODF

Declared as ODF

Verified for ODF

HARYANA

49 | P a g e


Achieving ODF status will be decided on the existing IHHL coverage and the pace at which IHHLs are being

constructed for those HHs without toilets. To assess the status of any district in terms of time to be taken to

become ODF, both these indicators are to be considered. Graph 6 below shows the coverage at the end of the

year 2015-16 along the horizontal axis and the pace of construction of IHHL for those HHs without toilets at

the beginning of the year along the vertical axis and the districts are placed in four different quadrants based

on the values of the said two indicators relative to that of the state average. Nine districts (Kurukshetra,

Faridabad, Panipat, Sirsa, Fatehabad, Gurgaon, Karnal, Mahendragarh and Jhajjar) have both higher coverage

and faster pace of construction and three districts (Rothak, Hiasr and Jind) has higher coverage but slower

pace during the year. On the other hand, four districts (Yamunanagar, Ambala, Bhiwani and Kaithal) have

lower coverage and faster pace indicating current improvement in performance. Five districts are trailing

behind both in terms of coverage and pace of construction as shown separately in Graph 7. Share of IHHLs

yet to be constructed for four group of districts as well as the trailing districts are shown in Graph 8 and Graph

9 respectively.

Map 2: Estimated earliest year of attaining ODF

across districts

LEGEND

After 2029 1 district

By 2025-29 1 district

By 2020-24 4 districts


HARYANA

50 | P a g e




ASER 2014 reveals the availability and use of toilet in schools as shown in Graph 10. R-SoC 2013-14 found

that 55.7% AWCs of the state had toilet facility.

State (82.6%, 25.0%)

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

73.0 78.0 83.0 88.0 93.0

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st t

arg

et

of

tota

l H

H w

ith

ou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r



based on combined indicators of progress relative to the

State status


Higher coverage and

Faster growth

9 Districts


Lower coverage and

Faster growth

4 Districts


Lower coverage and

Slower growth

5 Districts


Higher coverage and

Slower growth

3 Districts

State

Mewat

Palwal

Panchkula

RewariSonipat

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

40 60 80 100

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st t

arg

et

of

tota

l H

H w

ith

ou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 7:Districts with lower

coverage and slower rate of

construction

52.7

9.4

26.3

11.6



The trailing behind

Districts surging

ahead

The emerging

performers

Districts started

lagging behind

2.9

10.4

20.4

28.9

37.4



trailing behind

Panchkula Rewari SonipatPalwal Mewat

97.681.8

95.479.6

020406080

100120

With any type

of toilet


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable

Graph 10: Status of available and Useable Toilets

in Schools (%)

ASER 2014

44.3

55.7



(R-SoC, 2013-14)

Without Toilet

WithToilet

HARYANA

51 | P a g e






Graph 12. The same was 15.5%

higher than Rs 85.2 crore spent


expenditure per district during

2015-16 was Rs 4.7 crore,

which varied from Rs 8.9 crore

(Palwal) to Rs 1.9 crore in

Ambala.

Expenditure on IEC

Rs. 4.3 crore was spent on IEC in the state during

2015-16, which is 4.3% of the total fund utilised in

that year as shown in Graph 13. The IEC expenditure

varied from Rs. 1.4 lakh (Kurukshetra) to Rs. 68.2

lakh (Jind), with average expenditure of Rs. 20.2

lakh per district.


The state had spent Rs. 4.3 crore for administrative

purposes during 2015-16, which is 4.3% of the total

fund utilised. Administrative expenditure increased

by Rs. 2.5 crore in 2015-16 than that during 2014-


(Jhajjar) to Rs. 45.3 lakh (Hisar) and the average per

districts works out to be Rs 20.3 lakh.

3.2 4.2

3.8

4.3

3

4

5

0

2

4

6

2014-15 2015-16 IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s L

ak

h)


Expenditure

Expenditure on IEC (Rs. Crore) % of total expenditre

1.8 4.3

2.2

4.3

0

5

0

2

4

6

2014-15 2015-16

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

ex

pen

ses

as

% o

f to

tal

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

(Rs

La

kh

)


Expenditure

Expenditure on Admin (Rs. Crore)

% of total expenditre

120.9

98.4

74.8

4.2 4.3

22.5

0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

125.0

150.0

Fund

Available

Fund

Utilised

IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Admin

Charges

BalanceR

s.cr

ore


2015-16 (Rs. crore)

HARYANA

52 | P a g e

HIMACHAL PRADESH

Overview




end of March 2016 varied from 100.9% (Hamirpur) to 83.1% (Sirmaur).


continues, the projected earliest year of attaining ODF status by the state is February 2017 and the

estimated IHHL coverage is likely to be more than 100% by 2nd October 2019. However, if such projection

is made district wise, then only 8 out of 12 districts are likely to become ODF by that date.

Mandi and Lahaul & Spiti are the two districts where all the GPs were declared to be ODF during the

year. Mandi had coverage of 100.2% and Lahaul & Spiti had coverage of 99.6% at the end of the year.


The state spent an amount of Rs. 84.2 crore during the year 2015-16 which is 125.1% higher than Rs.

37.4 crore spent during the year 2014-15. The state had a balance of Rs 77.0 crore under SBM(G) at the

end of the year.



IHHL coverage


0.7 lakh HHs were yet to have their toilets. The coverage has improved by 4.6 % points during the year. The


Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural Himachal Pradesh was 90.4% according to the Rapid


December 2012) found that 73.7% of the rural households had access to improved latrines.


Map 1 shows the variation of IHHL coverage across districts which ranges from 83.1% to 100.9%. There is

only one district namely Sirmaur with coverage below 85%. On the other hand, there are 7 districts with

86.0 86.7

90.6

95.2

80.0

85.0

90.0

95.0

100.0


Graph 2: Rural sanitation Coverage (%) over time

95.2

4.8


Coverage (%)


31st March 2016

HIMACHAL PRADESH

53 | P a g e

coverage more than 95% as shown in the map. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year

2015-16 varied from 0.0% points (Lahaul and Spiti) to 12.0 % points (Kullu).



monthly construction of IHHL during 2014-15 was 4,847, it increased to 5,754 in 2015-16 which is higher

than that required i.e. 2,590 per month. The total construction of IHHL during the year was 69,042 and the

state achieved 44.2% of the AIP target. Out of the total construction, 2,410, i.e., 3.5% were under MGNREGS.

The state needs to maintain pace of construction of 1,686 IHHL per month in next 42 months in order to

become ODF by 2nd October 2019 as shown in Graph 3.

Map 1: IHHL coverage across districts

as on 31st March 2016

LEGEND


90-95% 3 districts

85-90% 1 district

Below 85% 1 district

4,847

5,754

2,590

1,686

0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000

Actual Construction during 2014-15


Required Construction during 2015-16



HIMACHAL PRADESH

54 | P a g e



3,243 GPs (48.8%) and 18,465 villages (52.4%)


ODF has been done in 936 (59.1%) GPs and 6,734

(69.5%) villages. Graph 4 shows the status of GPs and

Villages declared and verified as ODF up to 31st March

2016.

The Rapid Survey conducted by NSSO during May-

June 2015 found that 8.9% of total rural households

were defecating in the open.




will vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, Hamirpur and Mandi have

already attained 100% coverage as per baseline and Solan will achieve so by February 2021. Graph 5 shows

that the state is likely to attain ODF by February 2017, which is based on mere projection of the state level




1st Achievers

(Lahaul & Spiti and

Mandi, 2016)

STATE

(2017, 100%)

Last Achiever

(Solan, 2021)

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Cover

age

Estimated year


STATE

(2016, 95.2%)

48.8

62.152.4

74.0

0

20

40

60

80



declared as ODF & verified

GP Villages

HIMACHAL PRADESH

55 | P a g e





state as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 6. Four districts (Hamirpur, Mandi, Shimla and

Bilaspur) have both higher coverage and faster growth rate and Lahaul and Spiti (which has become ODF

and its coverage is very close to 100%) has higher coverage but slower growth during the year. On the other

hand, three districts (Chamba, Kullu and Una) have lower coverage and faster growth indicating current

improvement in performance. Four districts are trailing behind both in terms of coverage and pace of

construction as shown separately in Graph 7. Share of IHHLs yet to be constructed for four group of districts

as well as the trailing districts are shown in Graph 8 and Graph 9 respectively.

Map 2: Estimated earliest year of attaining

ODF across districts

LEGEND By 2019 9 districts 2020-2021 3 districts

HIMACHAL PRADESH

56 | P a g e




Availability and use of toilet in schools found in ASER 2014 has been much less as shown in Graph 10. R-

SoC 2013-14 found that 70.5% AWCs of the state had toilet facility which is shown in Graph 11.

State

(90.6, 49.4)

40

42

44

46

48

50

52

54

56

58

60

80 85 90 95 100Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st t

arg

et

of

tota

l H

H w

ith

ou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inin

g o

f th

e y

ear






Higher coverage and

Faster growth

4 Districts



growth

3 Districts


Lower coverage and

Slower growth

4 Districts


Higher coverage and

Slower growth

1 District

STATE

Kangra

Kinnaur

SirmaurSolan

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

75 80 85 90 95

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

hou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r



coverage and Poorer progress

76.8

2.9

20.3

0.04



The trailing

behind

Districts surging

ahead

The emerging

performers

Districts started

lagging behind

2.9

21.9

29.4

45.8



trailing behind

Kinnaur Solan Sirmaur Kangra

99.687.6

98.486.2

20

40

60

80

100

120

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable

Graph 10: Status (%) of availabile and useable

toilet in Schools (ASER, 2014)

29.5

70.5



(R-SoC, 2013-14)

Without Toilet

WithToilet

HIMACHAL PRADESH

57 | P a g e







125.1% higher than Rs 37.4




crore, which varied from nil

(Lahaul and Spiti) to Rs 12.0

crore in Chamba.

Expenditure on IEC


the state during 2015-16, which

is 2.1% of the total fund utilised

in that year as shown in Graph

13. The IEC expenditure varied

from Rs. 0.1 lakh (Mandi) to

Rs.99.5 lakh (Chamba), with

average expenditure of Rs. 20.1

lakh per district. Four districts,

namely, Kangra, Sirmaur, Una

and Lahul & Spiti did not report

such expenses during 2015-16.



for administrative purposes

during 2015-16, which is 0.8%

of the total fund utilised.

Administrative expenditure

decreased by around Rs. 0.1

crore in 2015-16 than that during


from Rs. 31.4 lakh (Solan) to Rs.

0.1 lakh (Hamirpur and Chamba)

and the average per districts

works out to be Rs 7.5 lakh. Four

districts, namely, Kangra, Sirmaur, Una and Lahaul & Spiti did not report such expenses during 2015-16.

161.2

84.268.4

1.8 0.7

77.0

0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

125.0

150.0

175.0

200.0

Fund

Available

Fund

Utilised

IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Admin

Charges

Balance

Rs.

cro

re


2015-16 (Rs. crore)

2.0

1.85.4

2.1

-1.0

2.0

5.0

8.0

11.0

14.0

17.0

20.0

1.7

1.8

1.8

1.9

1.9

2.0

2.0

2.1

2014-15 2015-16

IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)



0.8

0.7

2.1

0.8

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

2014-15 2015-16 Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s (R

s

lak

h)


Expenditure


HIMACHAL PRADESH

58 | P a g e

JAMMU & KASHMIR

Overview



68,412, which is 6.1 times higher than that constructed during the year 2014-15. The IHHL coverage at

the end of March 2016 varied from 116.9% (Srinagar) to 14.8% (Kishtwar).

Except Srinagar, none of the other 21 districts is likely to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019, if the

pace of construction during the year 2015-16 continues. At that pace, the estimated IHHL coverage of

the state (rural areas) at the end of 2nd October 2019 will be 46.8% and the state is likely to attain ODF

status earliest by December 2032.


The state spent an amount of Rs 78.4 crore during the year 2015-16, which is 12.6 times higher than Rs

6.2 crore spent during the year 2014-15. The state had a balance of Rs 53.4 crore under SBM (G) at the

end of the year.

Expenditure on IEC and administrative purposes during the year were Rs 124.1 lakh (1.6%) and Rs 9.9


IHHL coverage




in Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in the rural areas of Jammu & Kashmir was 47.4% according

to the Rapid Survey conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015 and 55.7% during the NSSO 69th round

(conducted during July-December 2012).


Map 1 shows a wide variation of IHHL coverage across districts ranging from 14.8% to 116.9%. While

Srinagar has possibly attained ODF status with 116.9% coverage, other 2 districts have attained more than

80% coverage. On the other extreme, there are 9 districts with less than 30% coverage as shown in the map.

The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 varied from 7.4 % points in Pulwama to

0.9 % points in Reasi.

33.5

66.5


Coverage (%)


31st March 2016

24.6

28.8 29.4

33.5

0

10

20

30

40


Graph 2: Rural Sanitation Coverage (%) over

time

JAMMU & KASHMIR

59 | P a g e



monthly construction of IHHL during 2014-15 was 926, it increased to 5,701 in 2015-16. Total construction

of IHHL during the year was 68,412 and the state achieved only 22.7% of AIP target. Out of the total

construction,

3,747 (5.5% of

total) were under

MGNREGS.

The state needs

to maintain an

enhanced pace

of construction

of 26,631 IHHL

per month in

next 42 months

to attain ODF

status by 2nd October 2019 as shown in Graph 3.

LEGEND

Above 80% 2 districts

50%-80% 2 districts

30%-50% 9 districts


926

5,701

21,980

26,631

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000







JAMMU & KASHMIR

60 | P a g e


Till March 2016, 17 GPs and 32 villages out of 4,164 GPs (0.4%)

and 7,512 villages (0.4%) respectively were declared as ODF.

No report of verification has been received so far. Graph 4 shows

the status of GPs and villages declared and verified as ODF up

to 31st March 2016.

R-SoC, 2013-14 (conducted during November 2013 to May

2014) found that 33.9% rural households of Jammu & Kashmir

were using improved sanitation facility. However, the Rapid

Survey conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015 found that 42.3% rural households of the state were

practicing open defecation.




vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, Srinagar has already attained 100%

coverage as per baseline. However, Kathua is likely to achieve it earliest by January 2066. Graph 5 shows

that the state is likely to attain ODF by December 2032, which is a mere projection based on the state level

aggregated rate of progress. Actual attainment of ODF status will depend on the last GP to become ODF in the

state. However, considering the districts as units, no single district other than Srinagar is likely to attain ODF

by 2nd October 2019. Map 2 shows the earliest year by which the districts are likely to become ODF.

0.4 0.4

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

GP Village


declared as ODF

1st likely Achiever

(Srinagar, 2016)*

STATE


(Kathua, 2066)

30.0

50.0

70.0

90.0

110.0

2014 2024 2034 2044 2054 2064 2074

Cover

age

Estimated year


STATE

(2016, 33.5%)

JAMMU & KASHMIR

61 | P a g e



the rate of construction to cover the households without toilet. The districts have been categorized on these

two parameters (at the

beginning of 2015-16 and

during the year 2015-16

respectively) relative to those of

the state as a whole and placed

in the four quadrants of Graph 8.

Seven districts (Kargil,

Pulwama, Anantnag, Budgam,

Ganderbal, Shopian and Leh)

have both higher coverage and

faster growth rate and six

districts (Kulgam, Poonch,

Samba, Doda, Jammu and

Srinagar) have higher coverage but slower growth during the year. On the other hand, five districts (Kupwara,

Bandipora, Baramulla, Ramban and Rajauri) have lower coverage and faster growth indicating current

improvement in performance. The rest 4 districts are trailing behind both in terms of coverage and pace of

By 2019 1 district



2030 above 12 districts


across districts

0

2

4

6

8

10

0 10 20 30 40 50

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

as

% o

f ota

l

HH

s w

ith

ou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 6: Number of districts in different categories based

on combined indicators of progress relative to the State

Higher coverage and

Faster growth

7 districts


growth

5 districts

Lower coverage and

Slower growth

4 districts

Higher coverage and

Slower growth

6 districts

State

(29.4, 5.8)

JAMMU & KASHMIR

62 | P a g e

construction as shown

separately in Graph 7.

Share of IHHLs yet to be

constructed for four

groups of districts as

well as the trailing

districts are shown in

Graph 8 and Graph 9

respectively.



According to DISE 2014-15, toilet facilities in schools are available in 71.5% cases for boys and 77.9% cases

for girls. However, ASER 2014 found a gap between availability and use of toilet in schools as shown in

Graph 12. However, R-SoC 2013-14 found that 37.4% AWCs of the state had toilet facility.

33.2

17.520.0

29.3

Graph 9: Share of IHHL to be

constructed in the trailing behind

districts

Kathua

Kishtwar

Reasi

Udhampur

83.0

58.165.6

46.7

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable


toilet in schools (ASER 2014)

62.6

37.4



(R-SoC, 2013-14)

Without Toilet

With Toilet

Kathua

Kishtwar

Reasi

Udhampur

STATE

(29.4, 5.8)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

10 15 20 25 30Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

as

%

of

HH

s w

ith

ou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

rCoverage at the beginning of 2015-16

Graph 7: Districts with lower coverage and slower growth rate

21.5

28.7

19.5

11.9



% of districts

trailing behind

% of districts

started lagging

% of districts

surging ahead

% of districts as

emerging

performers

JAMMU & KASHMIR

63 | P a g e



the year 2015-16, which is 59.5% of

the available fund (Rs. 131.9 crore) as


more than 12.6 times higher than Rs

6.1 crore spent during 2014-15.

Actual expenditure per district during

2015-16 was Rs. 3.6 crore, which

varied from Rs. 0.2 crore in Srinagar

to Rs. 7.9 crore in Baramulla.

Expenditure on IEC

Rs. 124.1 lakh was spent on IEC in the state



13. The same has increased by more than 15

times compared to that during 2014-15. IEC

expenditure varied from varied from Rs

48.7 lakh (Budgam) to Rs. 4.6 lakh

(Ganderbal), with average expenditure of

Rs. 31.2 lakh per district. Only 4 districts

have reported IEC expenses during 2015-16


The state had spent Rs. 9.9 Lakh for




Rs. 7.0 lakh in 2015-16 than that during

2014-15. These expenses varied from Rs.

0.8 lakh in Ganderbal to Rs. 7.3 lakh to

Baramulla and the average per districts

works out to be Rs 3.3 lakh. Only 3 districts

namely, Rajauri, Ganderbal and Baramulla

had reported expenditure in administrative

purpose during the year 2015-16

131.9

78.4 73.5

1.2 0.1

53.4

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

Fund

Available

Fund

Utilised

IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Admin

Charges

Balance

Rs.

cro

re


2015-16 (Rs. crore)

8.0

124.1

1.3

1.6

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

2014-15 2015-16 IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s L

ak

h)


Expenditure


2.9

9.9

0.5

0.1

0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.0

0.01.02.03.04.05.06.07.08.09.0

10.0

2014-15 2015-16

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s (R

s

La

kh

)



Expenditure on Administrative Expenses

% of total expenditure

JAMMU & KASHMIR

64 | P a g e

JHARKHAND

Overview



3.2 lakh, which is more than three times the number of IHHLs constructed during the year 2014-15. The

IHHL coverage at the end of March 2016 varied across the districts from 14.9% in Dhanbad to 65.6%

in Dumka.

Out of 24 districts of the state, only Sahibganj is likely to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019, if the

pace of construction during the year 2015-16 continues. At that pace, the estimated IHHL coverage of

the state (rural areas) at the end of 2nd October 2019 will be 59.6% and the state is ikely to become ODF

earliest by February 2026.

The state spent an amount of Rs 351.0 crore during the year 2015-16, which is 194.0% higher than the

amount spent (Rs 102.4 crore) in 2014-15. The state had an unspent balance of Rs 88.9 crore under SBM




IHHL coverage




in Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in the rural areas of Jharkhand was 18.8% according to the

Rapid Survey conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015 and the NSSO 69th round (conducted during July-

December 2012) found that 8.9% of the rural households had access to improved sanitation facilities.


Map 1 shows a wide variation of IHHL coverage across districts ranging from 14.9% to 65.6%. Out of 24

districts, only 3 have more than 60% coverage. On the other hand, one third districts (8) have less than 30%

coverage. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 varied from 2.8 % points in

Palamu to 14.7 % points in Sahibganj.

62.2

37.8


Coverage (%)

% HH without IHHL % HH with IHHL

31st March 2016

28.029.5

31.4

37.8

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0


Graph 2: Rural Sanitation Coverage (%)

over time

JHARKHAND

65 | P a g e



monthly construction of IHHL during 2014-15 was 8,309 it increased to 26,974 in 2015-16. Total construction

of IHHL during the year was 3,23,693 and the state achieved 70.3% of AIP target. Out of the total construction,

8,563, i.e. 2.6% of the total was under MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain an enhanced pace of


shown in Graph 3.


LEGEND 60% and above 3 districts

45%-59% 6 districts

30%-44% 7 districts

10%-29% 8 districts

8,309

26,974

64,708

75,488

0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000





September 2019


JHARKHAND

66 | P a g e



(0.4%) and 26,962 villages (0.5%) respectively were declared

as ODF. However, no report of verification has been received

so far. Graph 4 shows the status of GPs and villages declared as

ODF up to March 2016.

However, R-SoC (conducted during November 2013 to May

2014) found that only 5% of rural households in Jharkhand were

using improved sanitation facility. The Rapid Survey conducted

by NSSO during May-June 2015 found that 83.1% households

of rural areas of the state were defecating in the open.




will vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, Sahibganj is likely to attain

ODF status earliest by October 2018 and Palamu is likely to achieve so by December 2042. Graph 5 shows

that the state is likely to attain ODF by April 2019, which is based on mere projection of the state level


the state. However, considering the districts as units, 20 out of 32 districts (60%) are likely to attain it by 2nd

October 2019. Map 2 shows the earliest year by which the districts are likely to become ODF.

1st Achiever

(Sahibganj, 2018)

STATE

(2025, 100%) Last Achiever

(Palamu, 2042)

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

2015 2030 2045 2060

Cover

age

Estimated year


STATE

(2016, 38.6%)

0.4

0.5

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

GP Village


declared as ODF

JHARKHAND

67 | P a g e





state as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 6. Eight districts (Sahibganj, Dumka, Lohardaga,

Hazaribag, Ranchi, Paschim Singhbhum, Purbi Singhbhum and Latehar) have both higher coverage and faster

growth rate and three districts (Gumla, Pakur and Deoghar) have higher coverage but slower growth during

the year. On the other hand, four districts (Ramgarh, Chatra, Seraikela and Simdega) have lower coverage

and faster growth indicating current improvement in performance. Seventeen districts are trailing behind both

in terms of coverage and pace of construction as shown separately in Graph 7. Share of IHHLs yet to be

LEGEND

By 2019 1 district





State

(32.3, 9.3)

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

ho

ut

toil

et

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r



progress relative to the State's status



8 Districts



4 Districts



9 Districts



3 Districts

JHARKHAND

68 | P a g e

constructed for four groups of districts as well as the trailing districts are shown in Graph 8 and Graph 9

respectively.





R-SoC 2013-14 found that 27.2% AWCs of the state had toilet facility.

State

Bokaro

Dhanbad Garhwa

GiridihGodda

JamtaraKhunti Koderma

Palamu

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

10 15 20 25 30 35Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st t

arg

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

hou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r



51.9

11.1

25.1

11.9



Districts trailing

behind

Districts started

lagging

Districts surging

ahead

The emerging

performers

3.8

4.6

6.1

9.7

12.4

12.715.3

16.8

18.6



trailing behind Koderma

Khunti

Jamtara

Bokaro

Garhwa

Godda

Dhanbad

Palamu

Giridih

89.1

52.9

82.6

48

25

40

55

70

85

100

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable


in Schools (%)

72.8

27.2



(R-SoC, 2013-14)

Without

Toilet

With Toilet

JHARKHAND

69 | P a g e


The state utilized Rs. 351.0 crore in the year 2015-16, which is 79.8% of the available fund (Rs. 440.0 crore)

as shown in Graph 12. The same was more than three times higher than Rs 102.4 crore utilized during 2014-

15. Actual expenditure per district during 2015-16 was Rs 14.6 crore, which varied from Rs 6.7 crore in

Koderma to Rs 33.6 crore in Sahibganj.

Expenditure on IEC




that year as shown in Graph 13.

Such expenditure was higher at Rs

9.5 crore during the year 2014-15.

IEC expenditure varied across the

districts from Rs. 1.7 lakh in

Garhwa to Rs. 69.3 lakh in

Simdega, with average expenditure

of Rs 26.3 lakh per district. 22 out

of 24 districts reported IEC

expenditure during the year.



administrative purposes during

2015-16, which is 1.1% of the total

fund utilised. Administrative

expenditure increased by Rs. 10

lakhs in 2015-16 than that during


across districts from Rs. 2.3 lakh in

Bokaro to Rs. 55.7 lakh in Paschim

Singhbhum and the average

expenses per district was Rs 15.2

lakh. 22 districts reported the

administrative expenditure during

the year.

440.0

351.0 339.8

6.4 3.8

88.9

0

100

200

300

400

500

Fund Available Fund Utilized IHHL Incentive IEC Expenditure Administrative

Expenses

Balance

Graph12: Availability and Utilisation of Funds during 2015-16 (Rs. crore)

9.5 6.4

9.2

1.8

012345678910

0.0

3.0

6.0

9.0

12.0

2014-15 2015-16

IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)



3.7 3.8

3.6

1.1

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

2014-15 2015-16

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)

Graph 14: Comparative Analysis of Administrtive

Expenditure

Expenditure on Administrative Expenses % of total expenditure

JHARKHAND

70 | P a g e

KARNATAKA

Overview



6.6 lakh, which is 17.2% lesser than that constructed during the year 2014-15. The IHHL coverage at the

end of March 2016 varied from 100.2% (Kodagu) to 19.2% (Yadgir).




July 2021.

Udupi district has become ODF during the year, though as per MIS its IHHL coverage was little below

100%.


The state spent an amount of Rs 602.3 crore during the year 2015-16 which is 1.1% lesser than Rs 608.9

crore spent during the year 2014-15. The state had a deficit of Rs 111.1 crore under SBM(G) at the end

of the year.



IHHL coverage




in Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural Karnataka was 47.0% according to the Rapid Survey




Map 1 shows a wide variation of IHHL coverage across districts ranging from 19.2% (Yadgir) to 100.2%

(Kodagu). There are only six districts namely, Kodagu, Mangalore, Udupi, Bangalore (both rural & urban)

and Shimoga with coverage above 90%. On the other extreme, there are five districts with coverage less than

33% as shown in the map. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 varied from

16.4 % points in Gadag to 0.3 % points in Mangalore.

41.6

58.4

% HH without IHHL



(%)

35.441.4

50.758.4

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0


Graph 2: Rural sanitation Coverage over time

(%)

KARNATAKA

71 | P a g e


While monthly construction of IHHL during 2014-15 was 65,974, it decreased to 54,635 in 2015-16. The total

construction of IHHL during the

year was 6,55,620 and the state

achieved 63.6% of the AIP

target. Out of the total

construction, 1,22,609, i.e.,

18.7% were under MGNREGS.

The state needs to maintain an

enhanced pace of construction

of 84,435 IHHL per month in

next 42 months in order to

become ODF by 2nd October

2019 as shown in Graph 3.


LEGEND


60-80% 6 districts

40-60% 13 districts


65,974

54,635

77,813

84,435

20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000

Actual Construction per month during

2014-15


2015-16

Required Construction per month

during 2015-16

Required Construction per month

during April 2016-September 2019

Graph 3: Construction of IHHL per month: Actual and

Required

KARNATAKA

72 | P a g e

Status of achieving ODF status of GPs

Till March 2016, 326 GPs and 1,972 villages out of 5,630 GPs


as ODF. Verification for ODF has been done in 64.4% GPs

and 31.8% villages. Graph 4 shows the status of GPs and

villages declared and verified as ODF up to March 2016.

NFHS-4 (conducted during April 2015 to September 2015)


sanitation facility. However, the Rapid Survey conducted by

NSSO during May-June 2015 found that 55.7% of total rural

households were defecating in the open.




will vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, Udupi has already attained

ODF status during 2016 and Bijapur will achieve so by January 2035. Graph 5 shows that the state is likely

to become ODF by July 2021, which is a mere projection based on the state level aggregated rate of progress.

Actual attainment of ODF status will depend on the last GP to become ODF in the state. However,

considering the districts as units, 14 out of 30 districts are likely to attain it by 2nd October 2019. Map 2

shows the earliest year by which the districts are likely to become ODF.

LEGEND





5.8

64.4

7.1

31.8

0

50

100




GP Villages

1st Achiever

(Udupi, 2016)

STATE


(Bijapur, 2035)

50

75

100

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Cover

age

Estimated year


STATE

(2016, 58.4%)

KARNATAKA

73 | P a g e



the households without

toilet facility. The districts

have been categorized on

these two parameters (at

the beginning of 2015-16

and during the year 2015-

16 respectively) relative to

those of the state as a

whole and placed in the

four quadrants of Graph 6.

Thirteen districts

(Kodagu, Mangalore,

Bangalore (both rural and


across districts

State

(48.4, 14.8)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0 20 40 60 80 100Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

as

% o

f to

tal

HH

wit

hou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 6: Number of districts in different categories based on

combined indicators of progress relative to the State status


Higher coverage and Faster

growth

13 Districts



growth

6 Districts


coverage and Slower

growth

10 Districts


Higher coverage and

Slower growth

1 District

LEGEND


60-80% 6 districts

40-60% 13 districts


KARNATAKA

74 | P a g e

urban), Udupi, Shimoga, Chickmagalur, Uttar Kannada, Koppal, Ramanagara, Dharwad, Mysore and

Mandya) have both higher coverage

and faster growth rate and one

district (Davangere) has higher

coverage but slower growth during

the year. On the other hand, six

districts (Chikballapur, Kolar,

Gadag, Hassan, Tumkur and

Bagalkot) have lower coverage and

faster growth indicating current

improvement in performance. Ten

districts are trailing behind both in

terms of coverage and pace of

construction as shown separately in Graph 7. Share of IHHLs yet to be constructed for four group of districts






R-SoC (2013-14) found that 56.2% AWCs of the state had toilet facility.

56.223.3

17.4

3.1



% of districts

trailing behind

% of emerging

performers.

% of districts

surging ahed

% of districts

started lagging

20.3

8

9.9

10.86.1

9.1

9.4

6.5

13.4

6.5



trailing behindBelgaum

Bellary

Bidar

Bijapur

Chamarajanagar

Chitradurga

Gulbarga

Haveri

Raichur

Yadgir

98.4

60.2

93.8

55.1

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

With any type of

toilet


provision for girls

Toilet accessible

and useable

Graph 10: % of schools with useable toilet facility

ASER 2014

56.2

43.8




With Toilet

Without

Toilet

Belgaum

Bellary

Bidar

Bijapur

Chamarajanagar

Chitradurga

Gulbarga

Haveri

RaichurYadgir

STATE

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

10 20 30 40 50

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

hou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 7: Districts with lower coverage and slower

growth rate

KARNATAKA

75 | P a g e



in the year 2015-16, which is



The same was 1.1% less than Rs

608.9 crore spent during 2014-15.



which varied from Rs. 3.2 crore in

Kodagu to Rs 54.9 crore in

Mandya.

Expenditure on IEC

Rs. 9.9 crore was spent on IEC in the

state during 2015-16, which is 1.6% of

the total fund utilised in that year as

shown in Graph 13. IEC expenditure

varied from Rs. 0.9 lakh (Raichur) to

Rs. 80.0 lakh (Hassan), with average

expenditure of Rs 21.3 lakh per

district.



administrative purposes during 2015-

16, which is 0.5% of the total fund

utilised. Administrative expenditure

increased by Rs. 15.4 lakh in 2015-16

than that during 2014-15. These


(Mysore) to Rs. 23.1 lakh

(Chamarajanagar) and the average per

districts works out to be Rs. 8.7 lakh.

613.0 607.8 590.0

9.9 3.3 5.20.0

100.0200.0300.0400.0500.0600.0700.0

Fund

Available

Fund

Utilised

IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Admin

Charges

Balance

Rs.

cro

re


2015-16 (Rs. crore)

6.4

9.9

1.1

1.6

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

2014-15 2015-16 IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)



3.13.3

0.5

0.5

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

0

1

2

3

4

5

2014-15 2015-16

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s a

s

% o

f to

tal

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s (R

s

cro

re)


Expenditure


KARNATAKA

76 | P a g e

KERALA

Overview



12,218, which is nearly one third of that constructed during the year 2014-15. The IHHL coverage at the

end of March 2016 varied across the districts from 100% in Thrissur to 89.4% in Idukki.

Though IHHL coverage in all the 14 districts are close to 100% of the baseline but due to slow progress

during the year only 3 are likely to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019, if the pace of construction

during the year 2015-16 continues. At that pace, the estimated IHHL coverage of the state (rural areas)

at the end of 2nd October 2019 will be 96.5% and the state will become ODF earliest by February 2035.

However, a little push can help the state to become ODF much earlier and even by 2016-17.

No single GP and village have been declared as ODF as required by the MDWS.

The state spent an amount of Rs 22.9 crore during the year 2015-16 which is 30% less than Rs 30.4 crore

spent during the year 2014-15. The state has a balance of 45.4 crore under SBM(G) at the end of the

year.



IHHL coverage



corresponding increase during both 2014-15 and 2013-14 was 0.7 % points as shown in Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural Kerala was 99.3% according to the Rapid Survey

conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015 and 96.9% during the NSSO 69th round (conducted during July-

December 2012). DLHS-4 also shows that 97.7% households living in rural areas of Kerala had access to

improved toilet facility (survey conducted during April 2013 to February 2014).


Map 1 shows a wide variation of IHHL coverage across districts ranging from 89.4% to 100%. All 14 districts

are close to achieve ODF. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 varied from 0.7

% points in Kasargod to 0.1 % points in Thrissur, Ernakulam and Malappuram.

94.7

95.4

96.196.3

93.5

94

94.5

95

95.5

96

96.5



(%)

96.3

3.7


Coverage (%)


31st March 2016

KERALA

77 | P a g e


Total construction of IHHL during 2015-16 was 12,218 only, i.e., only 1,018 per month. The corresponding

figures for the year 2014-15 was 2,845 respectively. Out of the total construction, only 466, i.e., 3.8% of the

toilets were constructed under MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain an enhanced pace of construction of

4,543 IHHL per month in next 42 months in order to become ODF by 2nd October 2019 as shown in Graph 3.

2,845

1,018

3,760

4,543

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000





September 2019



LEGEND





KERALA

78 | P a g e


Though the state has not reported anything on declaration of ODF and its verification for the GPs and villages

during 2015-16, the Rapid Survey conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015 found that 5.3% of rural

households of Kerala are practicing open defecation. R-SoC conducted during November 2013 to March

2014 indicates that the state is too close to achieve ODF.


The state can achieve ODF status only if

all the districts attain such status. The

coverage at the end of 2015-16 and the

rate of progress achieved during the year

being different across districts,

attainment of ODF status will vary

widely. At the rate of construction

achieved during the year 2015-16,

Thrissur is likely to attain ODF status

earliest by September 2016 and

Ernakulam is likely to achieve so by

April 2044. *Although Thrissur has attained 100% coverage but the district is yet to be ODF

Graph 5 shows that the state is likely to attain ODF status by March 2035, which is a mere projection based

on the state level aggregated rate of progress. Actual attainment of ODF status will depend on the last GP to

become ODF in the state. However, considering the districts as units, 11 out of 51 districts are likely to attain

it by 2nd October 2019. Map 2 shows the earliest year by which the districts are likely to become ODF.

1st likely Achiever

(Thrissur*, 2016)

STATE

(2035, 100%)

Last Achiever

(Ernakulam, 2044)

95

97

99

101

103

105

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

Co

ver

ag

e

Estimated year


STATE

(2016, 96.3%)


LEGEND


2024-29 3 districts

2019-24 2 districts

By 2019 3 districts

KERALA

79 | P a g e


Achieving universal coverage within a specific time-frame depends on the coverage at a particular time and

the rate of construction of IHHL for the households without toilet at the beginning of the year. The districts

have been categorized on these two parameters (at the beginning of 2015-16 and during the year 2015-16

respectively) relative to those of the state as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 6. Four districts

(Thrissur, Kozhikode, Kottayam and Kannur) have both higher coverage and faster growth rate and two

districts (Ernakulam and Malappuram) have higher coverage but slower growth during the year. On the other

hand, three districts (Kasargod, Pathanamthitta and Wayanad) have lower coverage and faster growth

indicating current improvement in performance. Five districts (Idukki, Thiruvananthapuram, Palakkad,

Alappuzha and Kollam) are trailing behind both in terms of coverage and pace of construction as shown

separately in Graph 7. Share of IHHLs yet to be constructed for four groups of districts as well as the trailing

districts are shown in Graph 8 and Graph 9 respectively.




However, ASER 2014 found a small gap between availability and use of toilet in schools as shown in Graph

10. R-SoC 2013-14 found that 87% of AWCs in the state had toilet facility as shown in Graph 11.

14.3

14.3

17.825.9

27.7



trailing behind

Kollam

Thiruvananthapuram

Idukki

Alappuzha

Palakkad

STATE

4.0

6.0

8.0

92 94 96 98 100

IHH

L c

on

stru

cted

du

rin

g 2

01

5-1

6

as

% o

f H

Hs

wit

hou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r




progress relative to the state status

Higher coverage and

Faster growth

4 Districts

Lower coverage

and Faster growth

3 Districts

Lower coverage

and Slower growth

5 Districts

Higher coverage

and Slower growth

2 Districts

65.1

7.2

10.3

17.4



Districts trailing

behind

Districts started

lagging

Districts surging

ahead

The emerging

performers

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

88 90 92 94 96 98

IHH

L c

on

stru

cted

du

rin

g 2

01

5-1

6

as

% o

f H

Hs

wit

hou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 7: Districts with both poorer coverage

and Poorer progress

Alapuzha

Idukki

PalakkadKollam

Thiruvantapuram

State

(96.1, 6.0)

KERALA

80 | P a g e



crore in the year 2015-16,

which is only 37.4% of the

available fund (Rs. 61.2

crore) as shown in Graph 12.

The same was 25% less than

Rs 30.4 crore spent during

2014-15. Actual expenditure

per district during 2015-16

was Rs 1.63 crore, which

varied from Rs 0.6 crore in

Thrissur to Rs 9.1 crore in Thiruvananthapuram.

Expenditure on IEC


2015-16, which is 20.9% of the total fund utilised

in that year as shown in Graph 12. The

expenditure is 1.8 times higher than Rs 2.7 crore

spent on IEC during 2014-15. IEC expenditure

varied across districts from Rs. 8.4 lakh in

Kasargod to Rs. 112.4 lakh in Pathanamthitta

with average expenditure of Rs 65.0 lakh per

district.




is 11.0% of the total fund utilised.

Administrative expenditure increased by nearly

double in 2015-16 than that during 2014-15.

These expenses varied across districts from Rs.

9.8 lakh in Palakkad to Rs. 68.8 lakh in

Thiruvananthapuram and the average expenses

per district was Rs 17.8 lakh.

13.0

87.0



(R-SoC, 2013-14)

Without Toilet

With Toilet

100

84.898.1

80.2

25

40

55

70

85

100

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable



68.3

22.913.4

4.8 2.5

45.4

0

20

40

60

80

100

Fund

Available

Fund Utilized IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Administrative

Expenses

Balance

Rs.

cro

re

Graph12: Availability and Utilisation of Funds during 2015-

16 (Rs. crore)

2.7

4.8

9.0

20.9

4.0

8.0

12.0

16.0

20.0

24.0

1.0

3.0

5.0

2014-15 2015-16

IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)


Expenditure


1.4

2.5

4.6

11.0

2.0

6.0

10.0

14.0

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.0

2014-15 2015-16

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

as

% o

f to

tal

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

(Rs

cro

re)




% of total expenditure

KERALA

81 | P a g e

MADHYA PRADESH

Overview



10.8 lakh, which is double than that constructed during the year 2014-15. The IHHL coverage at the end

of March 2016 varied across the districts from 89.0% (Indore) to 18.9% (Singrauli).




March 2022.


The state spent an amount of Rs 1069.8 crore during the year 2015-16 which is more than three times of

Rs 308.6 crore spent during the year 2014-15. The state had a deficit of Rs 441.6 crore under SBM (G)

at the end of the year.



IHHL coverage


69 lakh HHs were yet to construct their toilets. The coverage has improved by 8.9 % points during the year.


in Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural Madhya Pradesh was 27.5% according to the Rapid





districts with coverage above 80%. On the other extreme, there are 10 districts with coverage less than 30%

as shown in the map. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 varied from 17.2 %

points in Agar Malwa to 2.4 % points in Bhind.

43.2

56.8


Coverage (%)

% HH with IHHL

% HH without IHHL 31st March 2016

25.8

30.0

34.3

43.2

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50



MADHYA PRADESH

82 | P a g e





the total construction, 55,404, i.e. 5.1% of the total was under MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain an

42,935

89,831

146,984

163,313

25,000 50,000 75,000 100,000 125,000 150,000 175,000 200,000





September 2019


LEGEND


65-80% 5 districts

50-65% 16 districts

35-50% 17 districts



MADHYA PRADESH

83 | P a g e

enhanced pace of construction of 1,63,313 IHHL per month in next 42 months in order to become ODF by 2nd

October 2019 as shown in Graph 3.


Till March 2016, 1,238 GPs and 2,626

villages out of 22,942 GPs (5.4%) and

51,714 villages (5.1%) respectively were

declared as ODF. Verification for ODF

has been done in 286 (23.1%) GPs and

577 (22.0%) villages. Graph 4 shows the

status of GPs and villages declared and

verified as ODF up to March 2016.

NFHS-4 (conducted during November

2015 to March 2016) found that 19.4%

rural households were using improved

sanitation facility. However, the Rapid

Survey conducted by NSSO during May-

June 2015 found that 78.0% households of rural areas were defecating in the open.




will vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, Indore is likely to attain ODF

status earliest by September 2016 and Bhind is likely to achieve so by April 2044. Graph 5 shows that the

state is likely to attain ODF by March 2022, which is based on mere projection of the state level aggregated

rate of progress. Actual attainment of ODF status will depend on the last GP to become ODF in the state.

However, considering the districts as units, 11out of 51 districts are likely to attain it by 2nd October 2019.

Map 2 shows the earliest year by which the districts are likely to become ODF.

1st Achiever

(Indore, 2016)STATE


(Bhind, 2044)

30

50

70

90

110

2016 2022 2028 2034 2040 2046

Co

ver

ag

e

Estimated year


STATE

(2016, 58.4%)

5.4

23.1

5.1

22.0

0

5

10

15

20

25


Graph 4: % of GPs and villages declared as ODF

& verified

GP Villages

MADHYA PRADESH

84 | P a g e



the pace of covering the households without toilet facility during that period. The districts have been


relative to those of the state as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 6. Fourteen districts have

both higher coverage and faster growth rate and nine districts have higher coverage but slower growth during

the year. On the other hand, eleven districts have lower coverage and faster growth indicating current

improvement in performance. Seventeen districts are trailing behind both in terms of coverage and pace of

construction as shown separately in Graph 7. Share of IHHLs yet to be constructed for four groups of districts


LEGEND

After 2029 6 districts





STATE

(35.4%, 13.6%)

11.6

12.1

12.6

13.1

13.6

14.1

14.6

15.1

15.6

33.4 33.9 34.4 34.9 35.4 35.9 36.4 36.9 37.4

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

hou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r





Higher coverage & Faster growth

(14 Districts)

Districts started lagging;

Higher coverage & Slower growth

(9 Districts)


Lower coverage & Faster growth

(11 Districts)


Lower coverage & Slower growth

(17 Districts)

MADHYA PRADESH

85 | P a g e





R-SoC (2013-14) found that 38.4% AWCs of the state had toilet facility.

38.9

19.4

18

23.7



Districts trailing

behind

Districts started

lagging

Districts surging

ahead

The emerging

performers

Sagar

Khargone

Sidhi

Morena

Tikamgarh

Bhind

Panna

Singrauli

Shahdol

Barwani

Guna

Ashoknagar

AnuppurSheopur

Umaria

Datia

Alirajpur

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

ho

ut

toil

et a

t th

e

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 7: Districts with both Lesser Coverage and Slower Progress than the state

average

16.4

8.8

7.4

7.3

7.35.8

5.65.6

5.3

5

4.8

4.6

3.9

3.4 3.3

2.82.6



trailing behindSagarKhargoneSidhiMorenaTikamgarhBhindPannaSingrauliShahdolBarwaniGunaAshoknagarAnuppurSheopurUmariaDatiaAlirajpur

91.4

55.4

66.7

40.5

25

40

55

70

85

100

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable


toilet in Schools (ASER 2014)

38.4

61.6



(R-SoC, 2013-14)

With Toilet

Without Toilet

MADHYA PRADESH

86 | P a g e


The state had spent Rs. 1069.8 crore in the year 2015-16, which is 69.9% higher than the available fund (Rs.

629.8 crore) as shown in Graph 12. The same was more than three times higher than Rs 307.1 crore spent

during 2014-15. Actual expenditure per district during 2015-16 was Rs 21.0 crore, which varied from Rs 4.7

crore in Datia to Rs 60.6 crore in Chhindwara.

Expenditure on IEC





IEC expenditure varied from Rs.

0.4 lakh (Tikamgarh) to Rs. 112.0

lakh (Indore), with average

expenditure of Rs 15.0 lakh per

district. Out of 51 districts, 40

reported the IEC expenditure

during the year.








1.3 lakh (Sidhi) to Rs. 96.7 lakh

(Hoshangabad) and the average expenses

per districts works out to be Rs 23.3 lakh.

Forty-two districts reported the

Administrative expenditure.

629.8

1069.8 1053.9

6.1 9.8

440.0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Fund Available Fund Utilised IHHL Incentive IEC Expenditure Admin Charges Deficit

Graph 12: Availability and Utilisation of Funds during 2015-16 (Rs. crore)

10.7

6.1

3.5

0.60.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

2014-15 2015-16

IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)



7.8 9.8

2.5

0.9

0

1

2

3

0

2

4

6

8

10

2014-15 2015-16

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s a

s

% o

f to

tal

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s (R

s

cro

re)




MADHYA PRADESH

87 | P a g e

MAHARASHTRA

Overview




the end of March 2016 varied from 99.5% (Sindhudurg) to 37.1% (Dhule).




July 2021.







IHHL coverage




in Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural Maharashtra was 52.6% according to the Rapid Survey


December 2012).



only 2 districts namely, Sindhudurg and Ratnagiri with coverage above 90%. On the other extreme, there are

six districts with coverage less than 50% as shown in the map. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage

during the year 2015-16 varied from 13.3 % points in Thane to 2.7 % points in Sindhudurg.

36.4

63.6


Coverage (%)

% HH without IHHL% HH with IHHL 31st March 2016

47.8

52.3

56.3

63.6

40.0

45.0

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0



MAHARASHTRA

88 | P a g e




construction of IHHL during the year was 9,06,138 and the state achieved 52.9% of AIP target. Out of the

total construction, 16,968, i.e., 1.9% were under MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain an enhanced pace

of construction of 1, 07,333 IHHL per month in next 42 months in order to become ODF by 2nd October 2019

as shown in Graph 3.


LEGEND




30%-49% 6 districts

41,497

75,512

100,261

107,333

10,000 30,000 50,000 70,000 90,000 110,000





2016-September 2019


MAHARASHTRA

89 | P a g e

Progress across divisions

Coverage of IHHLs across the divisions at the end of March 2016 is shown in Graph 4. The same varied

from 49.9% (Aurangabad) to 82.8% (Konkan). The increase in coverage during the year varied from 6 %

points in Pune division to 9 % points in Aurangabad division, as shown in Graph 5.



27,831 GPs (17.6%) and 41,130 villages (15.8%)

respectively were declared as ODF. Verification for ODF

has been done in 3,580 (73.0%) GPs and 4,677 (72.2%)

villages. Graph 6 shows the status of GPs and Villages

declared and verified as ODF up to March 2016.



sanitation facility. However, the Rapid Survey conducted

by NSSO during May-June 2015 found that 48.4% of total

rural households were defecating in the open.




will vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, Sindhudurg is likely to attain

ODF status earliest by April 2016 and Jalgaon will achieve so by March 2026. Graph 7 shows that the state

is likely to attain ODF by March 2021, which is based on mere projection of the state level aggregated rate

of progress. Actual attainment of ODF status will depend on the last GP to become ODF in the state.

However, considering the districts as units, 12 out of 34 districts are likely to attain it by 2nd October 2019.


9.0

8.2

7.3 7.37.1

6.9

6.0

5

6

7

8

9

10

Graph 5: Increase in coverage across

Divisions

17.6

73.0

15.8

72.2

0

50

100




GP Villages

82.8 81.1

71.563.6

56.152.8 49.9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Graph 4: Coverage across Divisions as on

31st March 2016

MAHARASHTRA

90 | P a g e

STATE

(March 2016, 63.6%)

1st Achiever

(Sindhudurg)

April 2016

STATE

(March 2021, 100%)

Last Achiever

(Jalgaon)

March, 2026

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028

Co

ver

ag

e

Estimated year



LEGEND




MAHARASHTRA

91 | P a g e

IHHL coverage and pace of construction across districts




state as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 8. Fourteen districts (Sindhudurg, Ratnagiri, Thane,

Kolhapur, Satara, Pune, Sangli, Wardha, Nagpur, Chandrapur, Ahmednagar, Gondia, Bhandara, and Palghar)

have both higher coverage and faster growth rate and one district (Raigad) has higher coverage but slower

growth during the year. On the other hand, two districts (Nanded and Jalna) have lower coverage and faster

growth indicating current improvement in performance. Seventeen districts are trailing behind both in terms





68.0

21.6

7.8

2.6



The trailing

behind

Districts

surging ahead

The emerging

performers

Districts

started lagging

behind

3.03.6 3.6

3.9

4.4

4.5

4.7

4.9

5.1

6.16.77.2

7.3

7.9

8.4

9.2

9.3


constructed across Districts that are trailing

behind

Hingoli

Akola

Gadchiroli

Washim

Osmanabad

Latur

Nandurbar

Amravati

Parbhani

Dhule

Aurangabad

Solapur

Buldhana

Yavatmal

Beed

Nashik

Jalgaon

State

Akola

Amravati

Aurangabad

Beed

Buldhana

Dhule

Gadchiroli

Hingoli

Jalgaon

Latur

Nandurbar

Nashik

Osmanabad

Parbhani

Solapur

Washim

Yavatmal

10.0

11.0

12.0

13.0

14.0

15.0

16.0

17.0

18.0

25 35 45 55 65

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

as

% o

f to

tal

HH

s

wit

ho

ut

toil

et a

t th

e b

egin

nin

g o

f th

e y

ear

Coverage (%) at the beginning of 2015-16

Graph 9: Districts with lower coverage


State

(57.3,17.3)

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0 45.0 55.0 65.0 75.0

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

as

% o

f to

tal

HH

s

wit

ho

ut

toil

et a

t th

e b

egin

nin

g o

f th

e y

ear

Coverage (%) at the beginning of 2015-16





Higher coverage &

Faster growth

14 Districts

The emerging

performers;

Lower coverage &

Faster growth

2 Districts


Lower coverage &

Slower growth

17 Districts


Higher coverage &

Slower growth

1 District

MAHARASHTRA

92 | P a g e






the year 2015-16, which is 72.0% of

the available fund (Rs. 1196.1 crore) as


147.4% higher than Rs 347.9 crore



was Rs 25.31 crore, which varied from

Rs 7.4 crore (Sindhudurg) to Rs 45.6

crore in Ratnagiri.

Expenditure on IEC


state during 2015-16, which is 1.2% of the

total fund utilised in that year as shown in

Graph 15. IEC expenditure varied from

Rs. 3.6 lakh (Gondia) to Rs. 139.9 lakh

(Jalna), with average expenditure of Rs.

30.7 lakh per district.








1.4 lakh (Sindhudurg) to Rs. 42.7 lakh

(Amravati) and the average per districts


97.1

66.3

90.2

59.1

020406080

100

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable



52.048.0



SoC, 2013-14)

With Toilet

Without Toilet

1199.6

861.0 833.3

10.6 8.5

338.6

0.0

200.0

400.0

600.0

800.0

1000.0

1200.0

Fund

Available

Fund

Utilised

IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Admin

Charges

Balance

Rs.

cro

re


2015-16 (Rs. crore)

11.3 6.8

3.2

1.9

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

2014-15 2015-16

IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)



6.8

8.51.9

1.0

0.0

0.4

0.8

1.2

1.6

2.0

0

2

4

6

8

10

2014-15 2015-16 Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

as

% o

f to

tal

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

(Rs

cro

re)


Expenditure


MAHARASHTRA

93 | P a g e

MANIPUR

Overview




the end of March 2016 varied from 92.7% (Tamenlong) to 44.2% (Ukhrul).

Out of 9 districts of the state, 7 are likely to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019, if the pace of


(rural areas) at the end of 2nd October 2019 will be more than 100% as per baseline and the state will

become ODF earliest by March 2018.


The state spent an amount of Rs. 59.6 crore during the year 2015-16, which is 151.4% higher than Rs

23.7 crore spent during the year 2014-15. The state had a deficit of Rs 10.4 crore under SBM(G) at the

end of the year.



IHHL coverage


98.7 thousand HHs were yet to have their toilets. The coverage has improved by 11.0 % points during the

year. The corresponding increases during 2014-15 and 2013-14 were 6.6 and 8.2 % points respectively as

shown in Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural Manipur was 75.9% according to the Rapid Survey




Map 1 shows a wide variation of IHHL coverage across districts ranging from 44.2% to 92.7%. There is only

one district namely, Ukhrul with coverage below 50%. On the other hand, there are seven districts with

coverage more than 75% as shown in the map. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year

2015-16 varied from 0.7 % points (Chandel) to 15.1 % points (Ukhrul).

22.9

77.1

% HH without IHHL

% HH with IHHL31st March 2016

Graph 1: Rural Sanitation Coverage (%)

51.3

59.5

66.1

77.1

45.0

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

75.0

80.0



MANIPUR

94 | P a g e


Launch of Swachh Bharat Mission helped in improving sanitation across the state. While monthly

construction of IHHL during 2014-15 was 2,355, it increased to 3,979 in 2015-16 which is higher than that

required i.e. 2,712 per month during 2015-16. The total construction of IHHL during the year was 47,749

and the state achieved 116.9% of the AIP target. Out of the total construction, 113, i.e., 0.2% were under

MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain pace of 2,350 IHHL construction per month in next 42 months to

become ODF by 2nd October 2019 as shown in Graph 3.

2,355

3,979

2,712

2,350

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000







LEGEND


50-75% 1 district


MANIPUR

95 | P a g e



(2.1%) and 2,857 villages (2.2%) respectively were



the status of GPs and villages declared and verified as

ODF up to March 2016.

NFHS-4 (conducted during April 2015 to September


improved sanitation facility. However, the Rapid Survey

conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015 found that

19.9% of total rural households were defecating in the open.




will vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, Thoubal and Tamenlong will

attain 100% coverage as per baseline by December 2016 and Chandel will achieve so by December 2038.

Graph 5 shows that the state is likely to attain ODF by March 2018, which is a mere projection based on the

state level aggregated rate of progress. Actual attainment of ODF status will depend on the last GP to become

ODF in the state. However, considering the districts as units, 8 out of 9 districts are likely to attain it by 2nd


1st Achiever

(Thoubal &

Tamenlong)

December 2016

STATE

(March 2018,100%)

Last Achiever

(Chandel)

December 2038

75

80

85

90

95

100

105

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Co

ver

ag

e

Estimated year of attaining ODF


STATE

(March 2016, 77.1%)

2.1

96.8

2.2

95.3

0

20

40

60

80

100




GP Villages

MANIPUR

96 | P a g e




parameters (at the beginning of 2015-16 and during 2015-16 respectively) relative to those of the state as a

whole and placed in four quadrants of Graph 6. Three districts (Tamenlong, Thoubal and Imphal East) have

both higher coverage and faster growth rate and two district (Imphal West and Chandel) has higher coverage

but slower growth during the year. On the other hand, one district (Senapati) has lower coverage and faster

growth indicating current improvement in performance. Three districts are trailing behind both in terms of


four group of districts as well as the trailing districts are shown in Graph 8 and Graph 9 respectively.

State

(66.7, 32.6)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 50 100

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

ho

ut

toil

et

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r




status


Higher coverage and

Faster growth

3 Districts



growth

1 District


Lower coverage and

Slower growth

3 Districts


Higher coverage and

Slower growth

2 Districts

STATEBishnupur

Churachandpur

Ukhrul

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

20 40 60 80

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

hou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 7: Districts with both

lower coverage and Slower

progress


across districts

By 2016 2 districts



MANIPUR

97 | P a g e












151.5% higher than Rs. 23.7



during 2015-16 was Rs. 6.6

crore, which varied from Rs.

14.1 crore (East Imphal) to Rs.

0.3 crore in Chandel.

46.6

18.3

17.6

17.5



The trailing

behind

Districts surging

ahead

The emerging

performers

Districts started

lagging behind

17.1

31.351.6



trailing behind

Bishnupur Churachandpur Ukhrul

24.2

75.8



(R-SoC, 2013-14)

Without Toilet

WithToilet

84.4

53.1

35.7

19.8

10

30

50

70

90

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable



49.3

59.6 59.1

0.5 0.02

10.3

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

Fund

Available

Fund Utilised IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Admin

Charges

Deficit

Rs.

cro

re


2015-16 (Rs. crore)

MANIPUR

98 | P a g e

Expenditure on IEC




shown in Graph 13. During the year

2015-16, only 4 out of 9 districts namely,

Churachandpur, E. Imphal, W. Imphal

and Bishnupur have reported IEC

expense which varied from Rs 17.9 lakh

(E. Imphal) to Rs. 5.0 lakh

(Churachandpur).





Out of 9 districts in Manipur, East

Imphal only had reported expenditure of

Rs.1.5 lakh for administrative purpose

during the year 2015-16. There had been

admin expenditure of Rs.8.5 lakh in the

year 2014-15.

93.8

50.6

4.0

0.80.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

2014-15 2015-16

IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s la

kh

)


Expenditure


8.5

1.5

0.4

0.020.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

1

3

5

7

9

2014-15 2015-16

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

ex

pen

ses

as

%

of

tota

l

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s (R

s

lak

h)


Expenditure


MANIPUR

99 | P a g e

MEGHALAYA

Overview



44.2 thousand, which is 5.2% higher than that constructed during the year 2014-15. The IHHL coverage

at the end of March 2016 varied from 97.4% (Ri Bhoi) to 49.7% (West Khasi Hills).


continues, the projected year of attaining ODF status by the state is February 2018 and the estimated

IHHL coverage is likely to be more than 100% by 2nd October 2019. However, if such projection is made

district wise, then only 5 out of 7 districts are likely to become ODF by that date.


The state spent an amount of Rs 65.3 crore during the year 2015-16 which is 35.8% higher than Rs 48.1

crore spent during the year 2014-15. The state had a balance of Rs 15.3 crore under SBM(G) at the end

of the year.



IHHL coverage


81.5 thousand HHs were yet to have their toilets. The coverage has improved by 10.7 % points during the

year. The corresponding increases during 2014-15 and 2013-14 were 10.2 and 7.1 % points respectively as

shown in Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural Meghalaya was 66.7% according to the Rapid Survey





only two districts namely, West Khasi and South Garo Hills with coverage below 60%. On the other hand,

there are two districts (Ri Bhoi and East Garo Hills) with coverage more than 90% as shown in the map. The

maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 varied from 0.6 % points (West Garo Hills)

to 16.1 % points (Jaintia Hills).

52.259.3

69.580.2

0

20

40

60

80

100



(%)

80.2

19.8


Coverage (%)


31st March 2016

MEGHALAYA

100 | P a g e


Monthly construction of IHHL during 2014-15 was 3,500 and the same increased to 3,683 in 2015-16 which

is higher than that of the required amount i.e. 2,327 per month for the state to become ODF by 2nd October

2019. The total construction of IHHL during the year was 44,195 and the state achieved 85.0% of the AIP

target. Out of the total construction, 66, i.e., 0.1% were under MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain a pace

of construction of at least 1,940 IHHL per month in next 42 months in order to become ODF by 2nd October


LEGEND


75-90% 2 districts

60-75% 1 district



3,500

3,683

2,327

1,940

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000






MEGHALAYA

101 | P a g e


Till March 2016, 1,997 GPs and 2,094 villages out of 6,785



all declared GPs and villages. Graph 4 shows the status of

GPs and villages declared and verified as ODF up to March

2016.




by NSSO during May-June 2015 found that 16.9% of total rural households were defecating in the open.

Estimated year of achieving ODF across districts


16 and the rate of progress achieved during the year being different across districts, the date of attainment of

ODF status will vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, East Garo Hills

will attain 100% coverage as per baseline by November 2016 and South Garo Hills will achieve so by

November 2022. Graph 5 shows that the state is likely to attain ODF by February 2018, which is based on

mere projection of the state level aggregated rate of progress. Actual attainment of ODF status will depend

on the last GP to become ODF in the state. However, considering the districts as units, 5 out of 7 districts are

likely to attain it by 2nd October 2019. Map 2 shows the earliest year by which the districts are likely to

become ODF.

1st Achiever

(East Garo Hills)

November 2016

STATE

( February 2018, 100%)Last Achiever

(South Garo Hills)

November 2022

78

83

88

93

98

103

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Co

ver

ag

e



STATE

( March 2016, 80.2%)

29.4 30.6

100.0 100.0

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

GPs Villages



% Declared ODF

% Verified ODF

MEGHALAYA

102 | P a g e



the pace of construction of toilets for the households without such facility. The districts have been categorized

on these two parameters (at the beginning of 2015-16 and during the year 2015-16 respectively) relative to

those of the state as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 6. Four districts (Ri Bhoi, East and

West Garo Hills and East Khasi Hills) have both higher coverage and faster growth rate. There is no district

in the categories of higher coverage but slower growth rate and lower coverage but faster growth rate during

the year. On the other hand, three districts are trailing behind both in terms of coverage and pace of

construction as shown separately in Graph 7. Share of IHHLs yet to be constructed for these two groups of

districts as well as the trailing districts are shown in Graph 8 and Graph 9 respectively.


State

(69.5, 35.2)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0.0 50.0 100.0

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st t

arg

et

of

tota

l H

H w

ith

ou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r





Districts surging

ahead; Higher

coverage and

Faster growth

4 Districts


Lower coverage and

Faster growth

No District


Lower coverage and

Slower growth

3 Districts


Higher coverage and

Slower growth

No District

STATEJaintia

Hills

South

Garo

Hills

West

Khasi

Hills

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

30 50 70 90Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st t

arg

et o

f

tota

l H

H w

ith

ou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r



coverage and Poorer progress

LEGEND

By 2019 5 districts

By 2024 2 districts

MEGHALAYA

103 | P a g e



According to DISE 2014-15, toilet facilities are available in schools in 64.5% cases for boys and 63.9% cases

for girls. However, as per ASER 2014, usability and availability of toilet in schools are much lower as shown

in Graph 10. R-SoC 2013-14 found that 30.3% AWCs of the state had toilet facility which is shown in Graph

11.


The state had spent Rs. 65.3 crore in the year 2015-16, which is 81.0% of the available fund (Rs. 80.7 crore)

as shown in Graph 12. The

same was 35.7% higher

than Rs 48.1 crore spent


expenditure per district


crore, which varied from

nil (Ri Bhoi) to Rs 15.4

crore in West Garo Hills.

72.0

28.0



The trailing

behind

Districts surging

ahead

34.6

15.5

49.9



trailing behind

Jaintia Hills South Garo Hills West Khasi Hills

69.7

30.3


sanitation: % of AWCs with toilet

(R-SoC 2013-14)

Without Toilet

With Toilet

79.8

38.847.5

16.8

0

20

40

60

80

100

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable


in % of schools (ASER, 2014)

80.7

65.3

47.3

5.2 1.815.4

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

Fund Available Fund Utilized IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Administrative

Expenses

Balance

Rs.

cro

re

Graph 12: Availability and Utilisation of Funds during 2015-16

(Rs. crore)

MEGHALAYA

104 | P a g e

Expenditure on IEC




13. The IEC expenditure varied from Rs.

62.8 lakh (West Khasi Hills) to Rs. 24.3

lakh (Ri Bhoi), with average expenditure of

Rs. 0.7 crore per district.





The corresponding figure for the previous

year was 3.2%. In actual terms, the

administrative expenditure increased by

Rs. 29.2 lakhs in 2015-16 than that during


41.0 lakh (South Garo Hills) to Rs. 6.6 lakh

(Ri Bhoi) and the average per districts


2.9 5.2

6.1

7.9

5

7

9

0

5

10

2014-15 2015-16 IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)


Expenditure

Expenditure on IEC (Rs. Crore) % of total expenditre

1.5

1.8

3.2

2.8

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2014-15 2015-16

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s (R

s

cro

re)




MEGHALAYA

105 | P a g e

MIZORAM

Overview


83.8% at the end of March 2016. A total number of 6,487 IHHLs were constructed during the year 2015-

16, which is twelve times higher than that constructed in 2014-15. The IHHL coverage at the end of

March 2016 varied across the districts from 54.6% in Lawngtlai to 106.6% in Aizawl. Four out of the

eight districts of the state have more than 100% coverage by March 2016.

Out of eight districts of the state, six are likely to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019, if the pace of

construction during the year 2015-16 continues. At this pace, the state is expected to attain ODF status

by October 2019.

The state utilized an amount of Rs 7.6 crore during the year 2015-16, which is more than double the

amount utilized (Rs 3.5 crore) in 2014-15. The state had an unspent amount of Rs 4.3 crore under SBM




IHHL coverage


HHs of the state are yet to have their toilets. The coverage has improved by 5.7 % points during the year. The


Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in the rural areas of Mizoram was 96.2% according to the Rapid

Survey conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015 and 93.4% of the HHs had access to improved source of

latrine as the NSSO 69th round (conducted during July-December 2012).


Map 1 shows that IHHL coverage at the end of March 2016 varies from 54.6% to 106.6% in the state. IHHL

coverage in the districts of Aizawl, Serchhip, Kolasib and Champhai have crossed 100% and Saiha and Mamit

have more than 80% coverage. The remaining two districts, Lunglei and Lawngtlai have coverages of 71.3%

and 54.6% respectively and the last district may delay the process of attaining ODF by the state. The maximum

83.8

16.2


Coverage (%)


31st March 2016

73.7

77.7 78.1

83.8

65

70

75

80

85



MIZORAM

106 | P a g e

increase in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 varied across the districts from 0.9 % points in Kolasib

to 10.2 % points in Saiha.



monthly construction

of IHHL during

2014-15 was 45 it

increased to 541 in

2015-16. The total

construction of IHHL

during the year was

6,487 out of which

only 461 (7.1%) were

constructed with

support from

Map 1: IHHL coverage across districts as

on 31st March 2016

LEGEND


70-80% 1 district

80-90% 2 district


45

541

463

441

0 200 400 600


2014-15


2015-16


2015-16


April 2016-September 2019


MIZORAM

107 | P a g e

MGNREGS. The state achieved 50.6% of the AIP target for 2015-16. The state needs to maintain an asking rate

of construction of 441 IHHLs per month in next 42 months against 541 per month achieved during 2015-16 to

attain ODF by 2nd October 2019 as shown in Graph 3.


Till March 2016, 105 GPs and 109 villages out of 704 GPs

(14.9%) and 712 villages (15.3%) respectively were declared as

ODF. However, verification has been done for ODF in one GP

(1.0%) and one village (0.9%) only. Graph 4 shows the status of

GPs and villages declared as ODF up to March 2016.

However, R-SoC (conducted during November 2013 to May

2014) found that 88.3% of rural households in Mizoram were

using improved sanitation facility. However, the Rapid Survey

conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015 found that only 1.7% of rural households were practicing open

defecation in the state.

Estimated year of achieving

ODF

The state can achieve ODF

status only if all the districts

attain such status. The coverage

at the end of 2015-16 and the

rate of progress achieved during

the year being different across

districts, attainment of ODF status will

vary widely. While four districts have

crossed 100% IHHL coverage but

Champhai has the highest % of its GPs

declared as ODF and it is likely that the

district will be the first ODF district of the

state by 2016. Lawngtlai is likely to take

more than two decades to attain that status

as shown in Graph 5. It also shows that

the state is likely to attain ODF by April

2019, which is a mere projection based on

the state level aggregated rate of progress.

Actual attainment of ODF will depend on

the last GP to become ODF in the state.

However, considering the district as unit,

6 out of 8 districts are likely to become

ODF by 2nd October 2019. The estimated

year of attaining ODF across districts has

been shown in Map 2.

14.9

1.0

15.3

0.9

0

5

10

15

20




GP Villages

Map 2: Estimated year of attaining


LEGEND



By 2019 6 districts

1st Achiever

(Serchhip,

2016)STATE


(Lawngtlai,

2043)

80

85

90

95

100

105

2014 2019 2024 2029 2034 2039 2044 2049

Cover

age

Estimated year


STATE

(2016, 83.8%)

MIZORAM

108 | P a g e


Achieving universal coverage within a

specific timeframe depends on the

coverage and the pace of covering the

households without toilet facility

during that period. The districts have

been categorized in four groups on

these two parameters (coverage at the

beginning of 2015-16 and rate during

the year 2015-16 respectively) relative

to those of the state as a whole and

placed in the four quadrants as shown

in Graph 6. Two districts (Champhai

and Kolasib) have both higher

coverage and faster growth rate and two districts (Aizawl and Serchhip) have higher coverage but slower

growth during the year. On the other hand, two districts (Saiha and Mamit) have lower coverage but faster

growth that indicates the current improvement in performance. The rest two districts (Lunglei and Lawngtlai)

are trailing behind both in terms of coverage and pace of construction. Share of IHHLs yet to be constructed

in the districts as well as in the trailing behind districts have been shown in Graph 7 and Graph 8 respectively.





SoC 2013-14 found that 85.8% of the AWCs of the state had toilet facility as shown in Graph 10.

79.5

20.5



% of districts

trailing behind

% of districts as

emerging

performers

57.4

42.6



trailing behind

Lawngtlai Lunglei

92.4

33.7

88.9

28.1

20

40

60

80

100

With toilet

facility

Toilet

useable

With separate

provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible

and useable


in Schools (%)

14.2

85.8



SoC, 2013-14)

Without Toilet

With Toilet

State

(78.1, 25.9)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

50 60 70 80 90 100

Rate

of

con

stru

ctio

n o

f IH

HL

du

rin

g

20

15

-16

for

the

HH

s w

ith

ou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inin

g o

f th

e y

ear



based on combined indicators of progress



2 Districts



2 Districts



2 Districts



2 Districts

MIZORAM

109 | P a g e



year 2015-16, which is 64% of the

available fund (Rs. 11.9 crore) as


more than double than Rs 3.5 crore



was Rs 95 lakh which varied across the

districts from Rs 0.03 crore in Serchhip

to 2.04 crore in Lunglei.

Expenditure on IEC

The state spent Rs. 28.7 lakh on IEC during

the year 2015-16, which is 3.8% of the total

fund utilised as shown in Graph 12. The

same was much higher at 1.6 crore during

2014-15. IEC expenditure varied across the

districts from Rs. 1.3 lakh in Saiha to Rs. 5.3

lakh in Aizawl, with average expenditure of

Rs. 3.75 lakh per district.


The state spent Rs. 13.6 lakh for



Administrative expenditure reduced by Rs.

73.8 lakh in 2015-16 than that during 2014-

15. These expenses varied across the districts

from Rs. 1.14 lakh in Saiha to Rs. 2.98 lakh

in Aizawl and the average expenses per

district was Rs 1.7 lakh.

11.9

7.6 6.6

0.3 0.1

4.3

02468

101214

Fund

Available

Fund

Utilised

IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Admin

Charges

Balance

Rs.

cro

re

Graph11: Availability and Utilisation of Funds


0.9

0.1

24.7

1.8 0

10

20

30

0

0.3

0.6

0.9

1.2

1.5

2014-15 2015-16 Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

ex

pen

ses

as

% o

f to

tal

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

(Rs

crore

)




1.6

0.3

44.7

3.8 0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

0.0

0.4

0.8

1.2

1.6

2.0

2014-15 2015-16

IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)


Expenditure


MIZORAM

110 | P a g e

NAGALAND

Overview


66.1% at the end of March 2016. A total number of 22,744 IHHLs were constructed during the year 2015-

16. The IHHL coverage at the end of March 2016 varied across the districts from 49.5% in Mon to 94.2%

in Dimapur.

Out of eleven districts of the state, four are likely to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019, if the pace

of construction during the year 2015-16 continues. At this pace, the state is expected to attain ODF status

earliest by August 2020.

The state spent an amount of Rs 31.7 crore during the year 2015-16 which is nearly 24 times higher than

the amount spent (Rs 1.3 crore) in 2014-15. The state had an unspent amount of Rs 2.2 crore under SBM




IHHL coverage


HHs were yet to have their toilets. The coverage has improved by 8.6 % points during the year. The


Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in the rural areas of Nagaland was 90.2% according to the Rapid

Survey conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015 and 98.1% during the NSSO 69th round (conducted

during July-December 2012).


Map 1 shows the IHHL coverage across districts, which ranges from 49.5% to 94.2%. While ten districts have

50% or more IHHL coverage Mon has coverage of just below that level (49.5%). Two districts (Dimapur and

Khipire) have more than 90% coverage. Increase in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 varied across the

districts from 5.4 % points in Kohima to 18.5 % points in Longleng.

66.1

33.9


Coverage (%)


31st March 2016

49.8

57.4 57.5

66.1

45.0

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0


Graph 2: Rural Sanitation Coverage (%) over time

NAGALAND

111 | P a g e



monthly construction of IHHL during 2014-15 was only 9, it increased to 1,895 in 2015-16. Total construction

of IHHL during the year was 22,744 and the state has achieved 63.2% of AIP target. Out of the total

construction, 127, i.e. 0.6% was under MGNREGS. The state needs to construct 2,121 IHHL per month in next

42 months to attain ODF by 2nd October 2019 as shown in Graph 3.


Till March 2016, 128 GPs and 161 villages out of 1,122 GPs (11.4%) and 1,451 villages (11.1%) respectively

were declared as ODF and all were verified. Graph 4 shows the status of GPs and villages declared as ODF up

to March 2016.

LEGEND

Above (90%) 2 districts

60%-89% 3districts

49%-59% 6 districts

9

1,895

2,071

2,121

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500





September 2019




LEGEND


60-75% 3 districts


NAGALAND

112 | P a g e

While R-SoC (conducted during November 2013 to May 2014)

found that 76.5% households living in rural areas of Nagaland

were using improved sanitation facility, the Rapid Survey

conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015 found that only 7.4%

rural households were practicing open defecation in the state.


The state can achieve ODF status only if all the districts attain

such status. The coverage at

the end of 2015-16 and the rate

of progress achieved during

the year being different across

districts, attainment of ODF

status will vary widely. While

the district like Dimapur is

close to attaining ODF status,

Kohima may take nearly a

decade to attain that status

unless the pace of construction

of toilet is enhanced further.

Graph 5 shows that the state is

likely to attain ODF by May

2020, which is a mere

projection based on the state

level aggregated rate of

progress. Actual attainment of

ODF will depend on the last

GP to become ODF in the

state. However, considering

the district as unit, 4 out of 11

districts are likely to become

ODF by 2nd October 2019.

The district-wise estimated

year of attaining ODF has

been shown in Map 2.

1st Achiever

(Dimapur, 2016)

STATE


(Kohima, 2027)

50

60

70

80

90

100

2014 2018 2022 2026 2030

Co

ver

ag

e

Estimated year


STATE

(2016, 66.1%)

Map 2: Estimated year of reaching

saturation across districts

LEGEND


By 2019 5 districts

11.4

100.0

11.1

100.0

020406080

100




GP Villages

NAGALAND

113 | P a g e


Achieving universal coverage within a specific timeframe depends on the coverage at a particular time and the

rate of construction of toilets for

the households without toilet.

The districts have been

categorised in 4 groups on these

two parameters (at the

beginning of 2015-16 and

during the year 2015-16

respectively) relative to those of

the state as a whole and placed

in the four quadrants as shown

in Graph 6. Two districts

(Kiphire and Dimapur) have both higher coverage and faster growth rate and one district i.e., Phek, has higher

coverage but slower growth during

the year. On the other hand, three

districts (Longleng, Peren and

Wokha) have lower coverage but

faster growth that indicates the

current improvement in

performance. The rest five districts

(Mon, Zunheboto, Kohima,

Mokokchung and Tuensang) are

trailing behind both in terms of

coverage and pace of construction as shown in Graph 7. Share of IHHLs yet to be constructed in the districts as

well as in the trailing behind districts have been shown in Graph 8 and Graph 9 respectively.


Institutional Coverage




State

(57.5, 20.3)

0.0

8.0

16.0

24.0

32.0

40.0

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

as

% o

f to

tal

HH

s w

ith

ou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r




Higher coverage and

Faster growth

2 districts

Lower coverage and

Faster growth

3 districts

Lower coverage and

Slower growth

5 districts

Higher coverage and

Slower growth

1 district

Kohima

Mokokchung

Mon

Tuensang

Zunheboto

STATE

10

12

14

16

18

20

40 45 50 55 60

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st t

arg

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

ho

ut

toil

et a

t th

e

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 7: Districts with both lesser coverage and slower

progress

69.7

9.9

4.016.4

Graph 8: Share of districts

constituting different categories

% of districts

trailing behind

% of districts

started lagging

% of districts

surging ahead

16.4

16.5

19.8

20.8

26.5


constructed in trailing behind districts

Mokokchung Kohima Zunheboto Tuensang Mon

NAGALAND

114 | P a g e



year 2015-16, which is 93.5% of the

available fund (Rs. 33.9 crore) as shown

in Graph 12. The same was nearly 24

times higher than Rs. 1.3 crore spent

during 2014-15. Actual expenditure per

district during 2015-16 was Rs. 2.9 crore

which varied across the districts from Rs.

1.9 crore in Wokha to 4.0 crore in

Dimpur.

Expenditure on IEC

The state spent an amount of Rs. 169.1 lakh

on IEC during the year 2015-16, which is

5.3% of the total fund utilised as shown in

Graph 13. The same is 36.9% higher than

Rs 123.5 lakh spent during 2014-15. IEC

expenditure varied across the districts from

Rs. 11.9 lakh in Longleng to Rs. 17.6 lakh

in Dimapur, with average expenditure of

Rs. 15.4 lakh per district.


The state spent an amount of Rs. 24.2 lakh

for administrative purposes during 2015-

16, which is 0.8% of the total fund,

utilised. The same was 2.6 times higher

than the corresponding amount of the year

2014-15. All districts had uniform

expenditure of Rs. 2.2 lakh for

administrative purposes.

33.9 31.727.1

1.7 0.2 2.2

0.0

8.0

16.0

24.0

32.0

40.0

Fund

Available

Fund

Utilised

IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Admin

Charges

Balance

Rs.

cro

re



123.5

169.1

93.0

5.3

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

125.0

150.0

175.0

200.0

2014-15 2015-16

IEC

ex

pen

ses

as

% o

f to

tal

IEC

ex

pen

ses

(Rs

Lak

h)


Expenditure


9.2

24.27.0

0.80.0

5.0

10.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

2014-15 2015-16 Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

as

% o

f to

tal

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

(Rs

La

kh

)




95.6

68.0 68.9

45.0

20

40

60

80

100

120

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable


toilet in % of schools (ASER, 2014)

76.7

23.3



SoC, 2013-14)

Without Toilet

WithToilet

NAGALAND

115 | P a g e

ODISHA

Overview



13.4 lakh, which is ten times higher than that constructed during the year 2014-15. The IHHL coverage

at the end of March 2016 varied across the districts from 58.8% (Debagarh) to 12.1% (Kalahandi).




May 2021.


The state spent an amount of Rs 1596.2crore during the year 2015-16, which is 11.1 times higher than

Rs 143.8 crore spent during the year 2014-15. The state had a deficit of Rs 514.3 crore under SBM (G)


Expenditure on IEC and administrative purposes during the year were Rs 5.6 crore (0.4%) and Rs. 3.0


IHHL coverage


64.7 lakh HHs are yet to have their toilets. The coverage has improved by 14.8 % points during the year. The


Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural Odisha was 26.3% according to the Rapid Survey


December 2012).



only three districts namely, Debagarh, Baleswar, Gajapati, Jharsuguda and Jagatsingpur with coverage below

60% but above 40%. On the other extreme, there are 21 districts with coverage less than or equal to 30%, of

which 7 have less than 20% coverage as shown in the map. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during

the year 2015-16 varied from 52.4 % points in Debagarh to 6.2 % points in Kalahandi.

11.5 11.913.4

28.2

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0



28.2

71.8


Coverage (%)

% HH with IHHL

% HH without IHHL31st March 2016

ODISHA

116 | P a g e



monthly construction of IHHL during 2014-15 was 11,128, it increased to 1,11,704 in 2015-16. The total

construction of IHHL during the year was 13,40,447 and the state achieved 96.6% of AIP target. Out of the

total construction, 10,615, i.e., 0.8% was under MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain a pace of



LEGEND

41% -60% 5 districts

31%-40% 4 districts


0%-20% 7 districts

11,128

111,704

144,716

154,149

0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 180,000





IHHL Construction


ODISHA

117 | P a g e

construction of 1,44,716 IHHL per month in next 42 months in order to become ODF by 2nd October 2019



Till March 2016, 106 GPs and 1,797 villages out of 6,235 GPs


as ODF. No report of verification has been received so far.

Graph 4 shows the status of GPs and villages declared as ODF

up to 31st March 2016.

R-SoC (conducted during November 2013 to May 2014)


sanitation facility. However, the Rapid Survey conducted by

NSSO during May-June 2015 found that 76.7% rural





will vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, Debagarh is to attain ODF

status earliest by December 2016 and Kalahandi will achieve so by November 2029. Graph 5 shows that the

state is likely to attain ODF earliest by May 2021, which is a mere projection based on the state level



2019 and other 4 districts are expected to attain it by 2019. Map 2 shows the earliest year by which the

districts are likely to become ODF.

1st Achiever

(Debagarh

December 2016)

STATE

(May 2021, 100%) Last Achiever

(Kalahandi,

November 2029)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2015 2020 2025 2030

Cover

age

Estimated year


STATE

(March 2016, 28.2%)

1.7

3.8

0

1

2

3

4

GP Village


declared as ODF

ODISHA

118 | P a g e



the pace of construction of IHHLs for the households without toilets. The districts have been categorized on

these two parameters (at the beginning of 2015-16 and during the year 2015-16 respectively) relative to those

of the state as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 6. Eight districts (Jharsuguda, Gajapati,

Baleswar, Brgarh, Angul, Jagatsinghapur, Khorda and Mayurbhanj) have both higher coverage and faster

growth rate and five districts (Cuttack, Ganjam, Kendrapara, Nayagarh, and Bhadrak) have higher coverage

but slower growth during the year. On the other hand, nine districts (Debagarh, Sonepur, Malkangiri,

Sambalpur, Sundargarh, Nuapada, Dhenkanal, Kandhamal and Nabarangapur) have lower coverage and

faster growth indicating current improvement in performance. Eight districts are trailing behind both in terms

State

Balangir

Boudh

Jajapur

Kalahandi

Kendujhar

Koraput Puri

Rayagada

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

2 5 8 11 14Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

as

% o

f to

tal

HH

s w

ith

ou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r





attaining ODF across districts

LEGEND

By 2019 9 districts



STATE

(13.4, 17.2)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0 10 20 30

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

as

% o

f to

tal

HH

wit

ho

ut

toil

et a

t th

e b

egin

nin

g o

f

the

yea

r






Higher coverage and

Faster growth

8 Districts

The emerging

performers; Lower

coverage and Faster

growth

9 Districts


Lower coverage

and Slower growth

8 Districts


Higher coverage and

Slower growth

5 Districts

ODISHA

119 | P a g e


for four groups of districts as well as the trailing districts are shown in Graph 8 and Graph 9 respectively.




for girls. However, ASER 2014 found a gap between availability and use of toilet in schools as shown in

Graph 10. R-SoC 2013-14 found that 21.1% AWCs of the state had toilet facility.


The state had spent Rs.

1596.2 crore in the year

2015-16, which is 47.5%

more than the available

fund (Rs. 1081.9 crore) as

shown in Graph 12. The

same was 11.1 times

higher than Rs 143.8

crore spent during the

year 2014-15. Actual

91.8

68.9 70.2

53.4

25

40

55

70

85

100

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable


toilet in schools (ASER, 2014)

78.9

21.1


sanitation: % of AWCs with toilet

(R-SoC, 2013-14)

Without Toilet

With Toilet

32.0

23.7

24.6

19.7



Districts trailing

behind

Districts started

lagging

Districts surging

ahead

The emerging

performers

14.94.2

17.8

16.014.9

11.2

13.4

7.6



trailing behind Balangir

Boudh

Jajapur

Kalahandi

Kendujhar

Koraput

Puri

Rayagada

1081.9

1596.2 1587.1

5.6 3.0

514.3

0

400

800

1200

1600

Fund

Available

Fund Utilized IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Administrative

Expenses

Deficit

Rs.

cro

re

Graph10: Availability and Utilisation of Funds during 2015-16

(Rs. crore)

ODISHA

120 | P a g e

expenditure per district during 2015-16 was Rs 48.67 crore, which varied across districts from Rs. 12.2 crore

(Boudh) to 100.3 crore (Ganjam).

Expenditure on IEC


state during 2015-16, which is 0.4%

of the total fund utilised in that year

as shown in Graph 13. The same is

lower by Rs 2.4 lakh compared to the

amount spent during 2014-15. IEC

expenditure varied widely across

districts from Rs. 0.5 lakh (Bargarh)

to Rs. 118.6 lakh (Baleswar), with

average expenditure of Rs 20.1 lakh

per district. 2 Districts (Gajapati and

Nayagarh) did not report any IEC

expense during 2015-16.



administrative purposes during

2015-16 as shown in Graph 14,

which is 0.2% of the total fund


increased by Rs. 24.9 lakh in 2015-

16 than that during 2014-15. These


(Debagarh) to Rs. 24.9 lakh

(Raygada) and the average per


No administrative expenses had been

reported by 3 districts (Angul,

Gajapati and Nayagarh) during 2015-16.

5.7 5.6

3.9

0.400.511.522.533.544.555.56

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

2014-15 2015-16

IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)



2.83.0

1.9

0.2

0.00.30.60.91.21.51.82.12.42.73.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

2014-15 2015-16

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)

Graph 14: Comparative Analysis of Admin Expenditure


ODISHA

121 | P a g e

PUNJAB

Overview



71.6 thousand, which is 6.3 times higher than that constructed during the year 2014-15. The IHHL

coverage at the end of March 2016 varied from 94.1% (Ludhiana) to 40.7% (Pathankot).



(rural areas) at the end of 2nd October 2019 will be 82.4% as per baseline and the state will become ODF

earliest by December 2025.


The state spent an amount of Rs 95.7 crore during the year 2015-16 which is 8.5 times higher than Rs

11.3 crore spent during the year 2014-15. The state had a balance of Rs 60.6 lakh under SBM(G) at the

end of the year.



IHHL coverage




Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural Punjab was 86.7% according to the Rapid Survey





only 2 districts namely, Amritsar and Pathankot with coverage below 55%. On the other hand, there are 10

districts with coverage more than 75% as shown in the map. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during

the year 2015-16 varied from 0.7 % points (Moga) to 5.4 % points (S.A.S Nagar).

75.2 75.375.6

77.9

73

74

75

76

77

78

79



time

77.9

22.1


Coverage (%)


31st March 2016

PUNJAB

122 | P a g e



monthly construction of IHHL during 2014-15 was 820, it increased to 5,964 in 2015-16. However, that is

lower than the required rate of construction of 14,300 IHHL per month to become ODF by 2nd October 2019.

Total construction of IHHL during the year was 71,573 and the state achieved 43.2% of the AIP target. Only

one IHHL was reportedly constructed under MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain pace of construction

of 16,682 IHHL per month in next 42 months in order to become ODF by 2nd October 2019 as shown in

Graph 3.

LEGEND


55-65% 5 districts

65-75% 5 districts


820

5,964

14,300

16,682

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000







PUNJAB

123 | P a g e


Till March 2016, 804 GPs and 851 villages out of

12,807 GPs (6.3%) and 12,571 villages (6.8%)


ODF has not been done in any of the GPs or

villages. Graph 4 shows the status of GPs and

villages declared and verified as ODF up to March

2016.

The Rapid Survey conducted by NSSO during

May-June 2015 found that 8.6% of the rural




16 and the rate of progress achieved during the year being different across districts, date of attainment of

ODF status will vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, Ludhiana is likely

to attain ODF earliest by October 2017 as per baseline and Gurdaspur will achieve so by March 2052. Graph

5 shows that the state is likely to become ODF by December 2025, which is a mere projection based on the

state level aggregated rate of progress. Actual attainment of ODF status will depend on the last GP to become

ODF in the state. However, considering the districts as units, only 2 out of 22 districts are likely to become

ODF by 2nd October 2019. Map 2 shows the earliest year by which the districts are likely to become ODF.

1st Achiever

(Ludhiana)

October 2017

STATE

(December

2025,100%)

Last Achiever

(Gurdaspur)

March 2052

75

80

85

90

95

100

105

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055

Co

ver

ag

e

Estimated year of attaining ODF


STATE

( March 2016,

77.9%)

6.36.8

0

2

4

6

8

10

GP Village

Graph 4: % of GPs and villages declared as

ODF & verified

PUNJAB

124 | P a g e


Achieving universal access to toilets within a specific timeframe depends on the coverage at a particular time

and the pace of covering the households without toilet facility. The districts have been categorized on these

two parameters (at the beginning of 2015-16 and during the year 2015-16 respectively) relative to those of

the state as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 6. Seven districts (Ludhiana, Patiala, Faridkot,

Fatehgarh Sahib, Mansa, Bathinda and S.A.S. Nagar) have both higher coverage and faster growth rate and

three districts (Moga, Jalandhar and Sangrur) have higher coverage but slower growth during the year. On

the other hand, three districts (Muktsar, Rupnagar and Barnala) have lower coverage and faster growth

indicating current improvement in performance. Nine districts (Kapurthala, Nawanshahr, Ferozepur, Tarn

Taran, Hoshiarpur, Gurdaspur, Fazika, Amritsar and Pathankot) are trailing behind both in terms of coverage

and pace of construction as shown separately in Graph 7. Share of IHHLs yet to be constructed for four group

of districts as well as the trailing districts are shown in Graph 8 and Graph 9 respectively.


LEGEND




By 2019 2 districts

PUNJAB

125 | P a g e



According to DISE 2014-15, toilet facilities are available in schools in 99.1% cases for boys and 97.3% cases

for girls. However, as per ASER 2014 usability and availability of toilet in schools are much lower as shown

in Graph 10. R-SoC 2013-14 found that 47.6% AWCs of the state had toilet facility.

64.3

9.0

16.1

10.6


different categories% of districts

trailing behind

% of districts

started lagging

% of districts

surging ahead

% of districts as

emerging

performers

State

(72.4, 8.2)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

0 50 100 150

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

ho

ut

toil

et a

t

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r






Higher coverage and

Faster growth

7 Districts

The emerging

performers; Lower

coverage and Faster

growth

3 Districts


Lower coverage and

Slower growth

9 Districts


Higher coverage and

Slower growth

3 Districts

Amritsar

Fazika

FerozepurGurdaspur

Hoshiarpur

Kapurthala

Nawanshahr

Pathankot

Tarn Taran

State

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

ho

ut

toil

et a

t

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r




15.6

9.9

8.3

17.517.3

5.9

6

9.1

10.5



trailing behindAmritsar

Fazika

Ferozepur

Gurdaspur

Hoshiarpur

Kapurthala

Nawanshahr

Pathankot

Tarn Taran

52.4

47.6


sanitation: % of AWCs with


Without

Toilet

With Toilet

98.6

79.2

93.5

71.6

50

60

70

80

90

100

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet accessible

and useable

Graph 10: Status of availabile and useable toilet in

% of schools (ASER, 2014)

PUNJAB

126 | P a g e




2015-16, which is 99.4%

of the available fund (Rs.

96.5 crore) as shown in


8.5 times higher than Rs

11.3 crore spent during

2014-15. Actual


during 2015-16 was Rs 4.3 crore, which varied from Rs 8.1 crore in Patiala to Rs 1.4 crore in Moga.

Expenditure on IEC




shown in Graph 13. The IEC

expenditure varied from Rs. 0.04 lakh

(Hosiarpur) to Rs. 29.2 lakh (Patiala),

with average expenditure of Rs 6.4

lakh per district.





utilised. Proper implementation of

SBM(G) requires appropriate

manpower to be in place, however

only Mansa reported administrative

expenditure during the year 2015-16.

96.5 95.9 91.2

1.7 0.1 0.60

20

40

60

80

100

Fund Available Fund Utilized IHHL Incentive IEC

Expenditure

Administrative

Expenses

BalanceR

s.cr

ore


(Rs. crore)

71.9

166.96.4

1.7

0

2

4

6

8

50.0

75.0

100.0

125.0

150.0

175.0

200.0

2014-15 2015-16 IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s L

ak

h)



6.3

0.6

10.0

0.1 0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

2014-15 2015-16 Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s a

s

% o

f to

tal

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s (R

s

cro

re)


Expenditure


PUNJAB

127 | P a g e

RAJASTHAN

Overview



21.8 lakh, which is 3.3 times of that constructed during the year 2014-15. The IHHL coverage at the end

of March 2016 varied within the districts from 19.1% (Pratapgarh) to 100.6% (Ajmer).

The IHHL coverage has improved by 19.0 % points during the year, which has been the highest in the

country.

At the aggregated pace of construction attained during the year 2015-16, for the state as a whole, the

projected year of attaining ODF status works out to be May 2018. However, if such projection is made

district wise, then only 20 out of 33 districts are likely to become ODF by that date. 4 districts, namely

Ajmer, Churu, Bikaner and Jhunjhunu have attained 100% coverage as per Baseline but are yet to

become ODF.



421.7 crore spent during the year 2014-15. The state had a deficit of Rs 139.5 crore under SBM(G) at




IHHL coverage


52.5 lakh HHs were yet to have their toilets. The increase in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 was

19.0 % points and the corresponding increase during 2014-15 and 2013-14 were 5.7 and 2.4 % points

respectively as shown in Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural Rajasthan was 38.0% according to the Rapid Survey





four districts namely, Bikaner, Ajmer, Jhunjhunu and Churu with coverage 100% or more. On the other hand,

27.229.6

35.3

54.3

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0



(%)

45.7

54.3


Coverage (%)


31st March 2016

RAJASTHAN

128 | P a g e

there are fourteen districts with coverage less than 40% of which three (Baran, Karauli and Pratapgarh) have

less than 30% as shown in the map. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 varied

from 69.7 % points in Ajmer to 3.8 % points in Bikaner and Hanumangarh.



monthly construction of IHHL during 2014-15 was 54,599, it increased to 1,81,623 in 2015-16 which is

higher than that required i.e. 1,37,638 per month for the state to become ODF by 2nd October 2019. The total



LEGEND


80-100% 4 districts

60%-80% 5 districts

40%-60% 7 districts


54,599

181,623

137,638

125,071

20,000 60,000 100,000 140,000 180,000 220,000





2016-September 2019


RAJASTHAN

129 | P a g e

the total construction, 14,883, i.e., 0.7% was under MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain a pace of

construction of 1,25,071 IHHL per month in next 42 months in order to become ODF by 2nd October 2019




9,892 GPs (19.8%) and 42,128 villages (17.1%)


ODF has been done in 311 (15.9%) GPs and 951

(13.2%) villages. Graph 4 shows the status of GPs and

villages declared and verified as ODF up to March

2016.

R-SoC (conducted during November 2013 to May


improved sanitation facility. However, the Rapid

Survey conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015

found that 66.6% of rural households were defecating in the open.




will vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, Ajmer, Bikaner, Churu and

Jhunjhunu have attained 100% coverage during 2015-16 and around 90% of their GPs have been declared

ODF. On the other hand, Pratapgarh will achieve so by December 2022. Graph 5 shows that the state is likely

to attain ODF by May 2018, which is a mere projection based on the state level aggregated rate of progress.

Actual attainment of ODF status will depend on the last GP to become ODF in the state. However, considering

the districts as units, 20 out of 33 districts are likely to become ODF by 2nd October 2019 (excluding the four

districts which have attained 100% coverage). Map 2 shows the earliest year by which the districts are likely

to become ODF.

*Bikaner reached 100% coverage though it did not become ODF and at the end of March 2016.

19.8

15.917.1

13.2

0

5

10

15

20



declared fas ODF and & verified

GP Village

1st Achiever

(Bikaner, 2016)

STATE


(Pratapgarh, 2022)

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

110.0

2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024

Co

ver

ag

e

Estimated year


STATE

(2016, 54.3%)

RAJASTHAN

130 | P a g e


Achieving universal coverage within a specific timeframe depends on the coverage the pace of covering the

households without toilet facility. The districts have been categorized on these two parameters (at the

beginning of 2015-16 and during the year

2015-16 respectively) relative to those of

the state as a whole and placed in the four

quadrants of Graph 6. Seven districts

(Pali, Jhunjhunu, Churu, Sirohi,

Ganganagar, Bikaner and Hanumangarh)

have both higher coverage and faster

growth rate and five districts (Sikar,

Jodhpur, Jaisalmir, Udaypur and

Nagaur) have higher coverage but slower

growth during the year. On the other hand,

Ajmer district has lower coverage and

faster growth indicating improvement in

performance during 2015-16. Twenty

districts are trailing behind both in terms

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st t

arg

et

of

tota

l H

H w

ith

ou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inin

g

of

the

yea

r



based on combined indicators of progress relative to

the State status

Higher coverage and

Faster growth

7 Districts

Lower coverage and

Faster growth

1 District

Lower coverage and

Slower growth

20 Districts

Higher coverage and

Slower growth

5 Districts

Map 2: Estimated year of becoming


LEGEND




RAJASTHAN

131 | P a g e






However, ASER 2014 found that usability and accessibility of the toilets in schools are much lower as shown

Alwar

BanswaraBaran

Barmer

Bharatpur Bhilwara

Bundi

ChittorgarhDausa

Dholpur

Dungarpur

Jaipur

Jalor

Jhalawar

Karauli

Kota

Pratapgarh

Rajsamand

SMadhopurTonk

STATE

10

15

20

25

30

35

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st t

arg

et

of

tota

l H

H w

ith

ou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r



9.55.5

3.3

6.8

5.4

8.9

3.23.53.9

2.84.7

11.1

4.1

4

7.4

2.83.2

2.93.3 3.7



trailing behind AlwarBanswaraBaranBarmerBharatpurBhilwaraBundiChittorgarhDausaDholpurDungarpurJaipurJalorJhalawarKarauliKotaPratapgarhRajsamandSawai MadhopurTonk

9881.5

91.173.7

020406080

100120

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable

Graph 10: Status of available and useable toilet in

Schools (%)

ASER 2014

68.5

31.5



(R-SoC, 2013-14)

Without Toilet

With Toilet

80.3

17.6

2.1



% of districts

trailing behind

% of districts

started lagging

% of districts

surging ahead

RAJASTHAN

132 | P a g e

in Graph 10. R-SoC 2013-14 found that 31.5% AWCs of the state had toilet facility as shown in Graph 11.




2015-16, which is

8.9%more than the

available fund (Rs.

1573.5 crore) as shown

in Graph 12. The same

was 306.2% higher than

Rs 421.7 crore spent


expenditure per district during 2015-16 was Rs 51.9 crore, which varied from Rs. 4.3 crore (Bikaner) to Rs.

261.0 crore (Ajmer).

Expenditure on IEC

Rs. 581.0 lakh was spent on IEC in the

state during 2015-16, which is 0.3% of the

total fund utilised in that year as shown in

Graph 13. The corresponding figure for

the year 2014-15 was Rs 530.9 lakh. IEC

expenditure varied within districts from

Rs. 0.1 lakh (Jhunjhunu) to Rs. 76.4 lakh

(Bundi), with average expenditure of Rs

0.2 crore per district. 10 districts (Alowar,

Banswara, Bharatpur, Bhilwara,

Chittorgarh, Dungarpur, Ganganagar, Jaisalmer, Jhalawar and Pratapgarh) did not report any IEC expense

during 2015-16.


The state had spent Rs. 430.5 lakh

for administrative purposes during

2015-16 as shown in Graph 14,

which is 0.3% of the total fund


increased by Rs. 22.7 lakh in 2015-

16 than that during 2014-15. These

expenses varied from Rs 43.3 lakh

(Baran) to Rs 2.1 lakh (Alwar) and

the average per districts works out to

be Rs 17.2 lakh. 8 districts namely,

Banswara, Bhilwara, Chittorgarh,

Dungarpur, Ganganagar, Jaisalmer,

Jhalawar and Pratapgarh did not

report any expenditure for administrative purpose during the year.

4.1

4.31.0

0.3

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

3.8

3.9

4.0

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

2014-15 2015-16

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)


Expenditure


5.35.8

1.3

0.3

0

0.5

1

1.5

0.0

3.0

6.0

9.0

2014-15 2015-16 IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)


Expenditure


1573.51713.0 1683.0

5.8 4.3139.5

0

300

600

900

1200

1500

1800

Fund Available Fund Utilized IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Administrative

Expenses

Deficit

Rs.

cro

re

Graph10: Availability and Utilisation of Funds during 2015-16

(Rs. crore)

RAJASTHAN

133 | P a g e

SIKKIM

A Trend Setter

99.9% rural households of Sikkim have access to IHHL as on 31st March 2016. The state has constructed

3,707 IHHL during the year 2015-16, all under SBM (G).

Only 56 households as per base line date, had no IHHL but they had access to toilets. Sikkim became

ODF in 2015-16 and is the first and the only state in this category. No person is following the age-old

habit of open defecation in Sikkim, as informed by NSSO. Only 0.2 percent of rural population, all

children, are putting their shit in open. The rapid survey conducted by NSSO in May-June 2015 also

found that 98.2% households of Sikkim had a toilet of their own. All 176 Gram Panchayats and 446

villages have been declared as ODF and verified.

Another most unique feature is that the coverage has increased in a sustainable pace of around 6.0 %

points annually in last three years.

The state spent an amount of Rs 7.2 crore during the year 2015-16, which is just half of the available

fund. The expenditure made in 2015-16 is just 9.0% more than Rs. 6.6 crore spent during the year 2014-

15.



IHHL coverage

At the end of March 2016, 99.9% of the rural HHs had IHHLs in Sikkim, as shown in Graph 1. Only 56 HHs

were yet to construct their toilets. The coverage has improved by 6.3 % points during the year. The

corresponding increases during 2014-15 and 2013-14 were also 6.1 and 6.0 % points respectively as shown

in Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the National Surveys have also indicated the state’s sustained initiative in ensuring

universal access to IHHL in rural areas as shown in Graph-2. While the 69th Round of NSSO in 2012 found

that 99.1% rural households had access to improved latrine, DLHS-4 in 2013 found it as 93.6% and the Rapid

Survey of NSSO in 2015 found the coverage to be 98.2%.

NSSO: 69th

Round (July-

December

2012)

DLHS:

(July-

December

2013)

NSSO:

Rapid

Survey

(May-June,

2015)

Series1 99.1 93.6 98.2

99.1

93.6

98.2

90

95

100

Graph 2: Rural sanitation coverage

over time-Findings of National Surveys

81.5

87.5

93.6

99.9

50

60

70

80

90

100


Graph 1: Rural Sanitation Coverage over

time

SIKKIM

134 | P a g e


Graph 3 shows the IHHL coverage across districts and the

same ranges from 96.1% in South Sikkim to 105.1% in East

Sikkim. This shows an equal pace of program

implementation across districts unlike many other states.

The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year

2015-16 varied from 8.7 % points in West Sikkim to 4.1 %

points in South Sikkim.


The state has shown a sustained pace before and after launching of the SBM. While monthly construction of

IHHL during 2014-15 was 297 it increased to 309 in 2015-16. The total construction of IHHL during the year

was 3,707 and the state achieved 70.8% of AIP target. The state needs to cover only 56 households in next 42

months to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019.


Till March 2016, all 176 GPs and 446 villages (100%) were declared as ODF and verified as on 31st March

2016. The usage (shown in red in Graph

5) found during R-SoC 2013-14 and

NFHS-4 (2015-16) were 75.0% and

94.2% respectively, which also indicates

substantial increase within a short period.

While the coverage of IHHL (as per SBM

data) in rural Sikkim was 87.5% as on

March 2014 and 93.6% as on March 2015.

The coverage, however, improved to

99.8% by March 2016. R-SoC conducted

during November 2013 to May 2014

found that 75.0% of rural households were using improved sanitation facility. Similarly, NFHS-4 conducted

during January-July 2015 in the state found that 94.2% rural households were using improved sanitation

facility when the coverage was 93.6% as on 31st March 2015.

99.996.1

99.9

105.1

98.6

90

100

110

North

Sikkim

South

sikkim

STATE East

Sikkim

West

Sikkim

Graph 3: Coverage aross districts as on

31st March 2016

297

309

70

1

0 100 200 300 400 500





September 2019


75.0

87.594.2 93.6

0

20

40

60

80

100

R-SoC: Nov

2013-May

2014

Coverage on

31st March

2014

NFHS-4 (Jan-

July, 2015)

Coverage on

31st March

2015

Graph 5: Comparison between coverage & usage

SIKKIM

135 | P a g e






The state had spent Rs. 7.2 crore in the year

2015-16, which is half of the available fund

(Rs. 14.4 crore) as shown in Graph 8. The

same was 9% higher than Rs 6.6 crore spent

during 2014-15. Actual expenditure per

district during 2015-16 was Rs 1.8 crore

which varied across the districts from Rs 0.5

crore in North Sikkim to 3.1 crore in East

Sikkim.

Expenditure on IEC

Rs. 24.6 lakh was spent on IEC in the state during


that year as shown in Graph 9. IEC expenditure was

much higher during 2014-15, which helped the state

to attain ODF status. During 2015-16, IEC

expenditure varied across the districts from Rs. 3.0

lakh in North Sikkim to Rs. 8.3 lakh in East Sikkim,

with average expenditure of Rs. 6.2 lakh per district.


The state had spent Rs. 15.6 lakh for administrative



by Rs. 2.1 lakh in 2015-16 than that during 2014-15.

These expenses varied across the districts from Rs.

2.1 lakh in North Sikkim to Rs. 5.3 lakh in East

Sikkim and the average expenses per district was Rs

3.9 lakh.

97.3

73.0

89.4

65.2

102030405060708090

100

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable


in Schools (%)

13.6

86.4



(R-SoC, 2014)

Without Toilet

WithToilet

14.41

7.174.45

0.25 0.16

7.24

0

5

10

15

20

Fund

Available

Fund

Utilised

IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Admin

Charges

Balance



100.8

24.6

15.2

3.4 0.0

10.0

20.0

0.0

50.0

100.0

2014-15 2015-16 IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s la

kh

)


Expenditure


SIKKIM

13.515.6

2.0

2.2

1.8

2.0

2.2

2.4

0

4

8

12

16

20

2014-15 2015-16 Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

as

% o

f to

tal

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

(Rs

lak

h)




136 | P a g e

TAMIL NADU

Overview



11.4 lakh, which is triple of that constructed during the year 2014-15. The IHHL coverage at the end of

March 2016 varied across the districts from 44.3% in Dharmapuri to 101.4% in Kanyakumari.

Out of 31 districts of the state, 14 are likely to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019, if the pace of

construction during the year 2015-16 continues. At that pace, the state is likely to achieve ODF status by

April 2019.


The state spent an amount of Rs 754.2 crore during the year 2015-16 which is more than triple of the

amount spent (Rs 224.7 crore) during 2014-15. The state had a deficit of Rs 370.8 crore under SBM (G)


Expenditure on IEC and administrative purposes during the year were Rs 14.8 crore (2%) and Rs 6.6


IHHL coverage



The corresponding increase during 2014-15 and 2013-14 were 4.0 and 3.3 % points respectively as shown in

Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural Tamil Nadu was 41.0% according to the Rapid Survey





districts with coverage above 80%. Except two districts (Ariyalur and Dharmpuri) all other districts have more

than 50% IHHL coverage. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 varied from

2.0 % points in Kanyakumari to 26.1 % points in Perambur.

36.0

64.0


Coverage (%)


31st March 2016

44.8

48.1

52.1

64.0

40

50

60

70



(%)

TAMIL NADU

137 | P a g e



monthly construction of IHHL during 2014-15 was 31,671 it increased to 95,169 in 2015-16. The total


the total construction, 1,93,744, i.e. 17.0% of the total was under MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain a

minimum pace of construction of 81,714 IHHL per month in next 42 months in order to become ODF by 2nd


31,671

95,169

84,704

81,714

10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000100,000





September 2019


LEGEND

More than 80% 2 districts 70%-80% 9 districts 60%-70% 10 districts Below 60% 11 districts


TAMIL NADU

138 | P a g e



12,524 GPs (9.0%) and 12,542 villages (9.0%)

respectively were declared as ODF. Verification for ODF

has been done in 841 (74.6%) GPs and 841 (74.4%)

villages. Graph 4 shows the status of GPs and villages

declared and verified as ODF up to March 2016.

However, NFHS-4 (conducted during November 2015 to

March 2016) found that 34.0% rural households were

using improved sanitation facility. The Rapid Survey

conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015 found that 57.3% households of rural areas were defecating in

the open.




will vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, Coimbatore is likely to attain

ODF status earliest by October 2016 and Virudhunagar is likely to achieve so by December 2024. Graph 5

shows that the state is likely to attain ODF by April 2019, which is based on mere projection of the state level


the state. However, considering the districts as units, 20 out of 32 districts (60%) are likely to attain it by 2nd


1st Achiever

(Coimbatore, 2016)

STATE


(Virudhunagar, 2024)

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Cover

age

Estimated year


STATE

(2016,64.0%)

9

74.6

9

74.4

0

20

40

60

80




GP Village

TAMIL NADU

139 | P a g e





state as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 6. Nine districts have both higher coverage and

faster growth rate and six districts have higher coverage but slower growth during the year. On the other

hand, five districts have lower coverage and faster growth indicating current improvement in performance.

Eleven districts are trailing behind both in terms of coverage and pace of construction as shown separately in

Graph 7. Share of IHHLs yet to be constructed for four groups of districts as well as the trailing districts are

shown in Graph 8 and Graph 9 respectively.

LEGEND




State

(52.1, 25.0)

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

0 20 40 60 80 100

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

hou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inin

g o

f th

e y

ear




Districts surging ahead; Higher coverage and

Faster growth

9 Districts

The emerging performers; Lower coverage

and Faster growth

5 Districts

District started lagging; Higher coverage and

Slower growth

6 Districts

The trailing behind; Lower coverage and

Slower growth

11 Districts

TAMIL NADU

140 | P a g e





5.3

12.0

8.7

9.2

7

9.17.8

7.3

6.4

12.1

15.1



trailing behind

Ariyalur

Cuddalore

Dharmapuri

Dindigul

Erode

Krishnagiri

Madurai

Tiruppur

Tiruvarur

Vellore

Villupuram

Ariyalur

CuddaloreDharmapuri

DindigulErodeKrishnagiri

MaduraiTiruppur

Tiruvarur

VelloreVillupuram

State (51.8, 24.6)

10

15

20

25

30

20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st t

arg

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

hou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inin

g

of

the

yea

r


Graph 7:Districts with lower coverage and slower growth rate

49.6

21.7

16.0

12.7



Districts trailing

behind

Districts started

lagging

Districts surging

ahead

The emerging

performers

97.5

79.887

68.7

50

75

100

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable


toilet in Schools (ASER, 2014))

41.8

58.2




Without Toilet

With Toilet

TAMIL NADU

141 | P a g e


The state had spent Rs. 754.2 crore in the year 2015-16, which is double of the available fund (Rs. 383.4

crore) as shown in Graph 12. The same was three times higher than Rs 224.7 crore spent during 2014-15.

Actual expenditure per district during 2015-16 was Rs 23.5 crore, which varied from Rs 0.8 crore in

Kanyakumari to Rs 48.7 crore in Thanjavur.

Expenditure on IEC




shown in Graph 13. IEC expenditure

varied across the districts from Rs. 5.4

lakh in Ariyalur to Rs. 154.0 lakh in

Cuddalore, with average expenditure of

Rs 60.0 lakh per district. 24 out of 32

districts reported the IEC expenditure.






increased by Rs. 3.7 crore in 2015-16

than that during 2014-15. These

expenses varied across the districts from

Rs. 0.8 lakh in Virudhunagar to Rs. 64.6

lakh in Pudukkottai and the average

expenses per districts works out to be Rs

25.0 lakh. 26 districts reported the

Administrative expenditure.

2.9

6.61.3

0.9

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

2014-15 2015-16

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s (R

s

cro

re)


Expenditure


4.0

14.8

1.8 2.0

1.5

2

2.5

0.0

3.0

6.0

9.0

12.0

15.0

2014-15 2015-16

IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)


Expenditure


383.4

754.2 729.1

14.8 6.6

370.8

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Fund Available Fund Utilized IHHL Incentive IEC Expenditure Administrative

Expenses

Deficit

Graph 12: Availability and Utilisation of Funds during 2015-16 (Rs. crore)

TAMIL NADU

142 | P a g e

TELANGANA

Overview




the end of March 2016 varied from 76.2% (Karimnagar) to 13.1% (Mahbubnagar).

Out of nine districts of the state, only one is likely to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019, if the pace

of construction of the year 2015-16 continues. At that pace, the estimated IHHL coverage of the state

(rural areas) at the end of 2nd October 2019 will be 55.8% as per baseline and the state will become ODF

earliest by April 2028.



65.8 crore spent during the year 2014-15. The state had a balance of Rs 84.5 crore under SBM(G) at the

end of the year.



IHHL coverage




in Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural Telangana was 61.1% according to the Rapid Survey

conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015.



three districts namely, Mahbubnagar, Warangal and Adilabad with coverage below 30%. On the other

extreme, there is only one district with coverage more than 60% as shown in the map. The maximum increase

in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 varied from 0.6 % points (Rangareddi) to 10.9 % points (Medak).

25.829.9

32.8

38.2

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0



38.2

61.8


Coverage (%)


31st March 2016

TELANGANA

143 | P a g e



monthly construction of IHHL during 2014-15 was 11,029, it increased to 20,014 in 2015-16. However, this

is lower than that required i.e. 55,796 per month to attain ODF status by 2nd October, 2019. Total construction

of IHHL during the year was 2,40,168 and the state achieved 35.0% of the AIP target. The state needs to

maintain a pace of constructing 66,020 IHHL per month in next 42 months in order to become ODF by 2nd



LEGEND


30-45% 4 districts

45-60% 1 district

Above 60% 1 district

11,029

20,014

55,796

66,020

0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000






TELANGANA

144 | P a g e






the status of GPs and villages declared and verified as ODF

up to March 2016.




by NSSO during May-June 2015 found that 29.2% of total

population were defecating in the open.




will vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, Karimnagar will attain 100%

coverage as per baseline by September 2018 and Rangareddi will achieve so by June 2103. Graph 5 shows

that the state is likely to attain ODF by May 2028, which is based on mere projection of the state level


the state. However, considering the district as unit, one out of nine are likely to attain it by 2nd October 2019.


8.8 7.7

81.5 79.9

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

GPs Villages



% Declared ODF

% Verified ODF

STATE

March 2016, 38.2%

1st Achiever

(Karimnagar)

September 2018STATE

(May 2028, 100%)Last Achiever

(Rangareddi)

June 2103

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 2110

Co

ver

ag

e

Estimated year


TELANGANA

145 | P a g e



the households without toilet facility. The districts have been categorized on these two parameters (at the

beginning of 2015-16 and during the year 2015-16 respectively) relative to those of the state as a whole and

placed in the four quadrants of Graph 6. Two districts (Karimnagar and Medak) have both higher coverage

and faster

growth rate

and three

districts

(Nalgonda,

Khammam

and

Rangareddi)

has higher

coverage but

slower growth

during the

year. On the

other hand,

Map 2: Estimated year of attaining ODF across

Districts

LEGEND


2024-29 2 districts

2019-24 1 districts

By 2019 1 district

STATE

(32.8; 8.0)

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

ho

ut

toil

et a

t

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 6: Number of districts in different categories based on combined

indicators of coverage and pace of construction of IHHL relative to the

State averages



2 Districts



1 District



3 Districts



3 Districts

TELANGANA

146 | P a g e

one district (Nizamabad) have lower coverage and

faster growth indicating current improvement in

performance. Three districts are trailing behind both in

terms of coverage and pace of construction as shown

separately in Graph 7. Share of IHHLs yet to be

constructed for four group of districts as well as the

trailing districts are shown in Graph 8 and Graph 9

respectively.




for girls. However, ASER 2014 found that usability and accessibility is much lower as shown in Graph 10.

R-SoC 2013-14 found that 24.7% AWCs of erstwhile Andhra Pradesh had toilet facility as shown in Graph

11.

Adilabad

MahbubnagarWarangal

STATE

2

4

6

8

10

0 10 20 30 40

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st t

arg

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

hou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 7: Districts in different categories

based on combined indicators of progress

relative to the State status

14.0

25.8

50.5

9.7



Districts surging

ahead

Districts started

lagging

The trailing behind

The emerging

performers

13.1

19.4

18.0



trailing behind

Adilabad

Mahbubnagar

Warangal

87.0

64.371.6

54.2

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable


in % of schools of erstwhile Andhra Pradesh

(ASER, 2014)

75.3

24.7

Graph 11: % of AWCs having



147 | P a g e


The state utilized Rs.


2015-16, which is

71.6% of the available

fund (Rs. 297.9 crore)


The same was 224.2%

higher than Rs 65.8

crore spent during

2014-15. Actual


during 2015-16 was Rs

23.1 crore, which varied from Rs 66.0 crore (Karimnagar) to Rs 1.4 crore in Rangareddi.

Expenditure on IEC





The IEC expenditure varied from

Rs. 3.4 lakh (Medak) to Rs. 145.6

lakh (Adilabad), with average

expenditure of Rs 0.5 crore per

district. No IEC expenses had

been reported during 2015-16 by

two districts namely, Khammam

and Nizamabad.


The state had spent Rs. 0.9 crore for administrative purposes during 2015-16, which is 0.4% of the total fund

utilised. Administrative

expenditure increased by Rs. 31.2

lakh in 2015-16 than that during

2014-15 as shown in Graph

14These expenses varied from Rs.

0.1 lakh (Rangareddi) to Rs. 44.6

lakh (Nalgonda) and the average

expenditure per district works out

to be Rs 0.1 crore. No

administrative expenses had been

reported by two districts namely

Khammam and Nizamabad during

the year.

297.9

213.3 207.4

3.5 0.9

84.6

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Fund

Available

Fund Utilized IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Administrative

Expenses

Balance

Rs.

cro

re


(Rs. crore)

1.8

3.52.8

1.6

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

2014-15 2015-16

IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)



0.6

0.9

1.0

0.4

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

2014-15 2015-16

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s (R

s

cro

re)


Expenditure


TELANGANA

148 | P a g e

TRIPURA

Overview



62,123, which is 1.5 times higher than that constructed during the year 2014-15. The IHHL coverage at

the end of March 2016 varied across the districts from 63.6% in Gomati to 82.5% in Sepahijala.

Out of eight districts of the state, three are likely to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019, if the pace of


(rural areas) at the end of 2nd October 2019 will be 95.4% and the state is likely to become ODF earliest

by April 2020.

The state spent an amount of Rs 59.5 crore during the year 2015-16 which is triple of the amount spent

(Rs 20.1 crore) in 2014-15. The state had an unspent amount of Rs 39.7 crore under SBM (G) at the end

of the year.



IHHL coverage



The corresponding increases during 2014-15 and 2013-14 were 3.2 and 0.7 % points respectively, indicating

steady improvement as shown in Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that according to the NSSO 69th round (conducted during July-December 2012), 88.6%

of the rural households had access to improved latrines.


IHHL coverage across districts ranges from 60.6% to 82.5%. There is one district (Sipahijala) with coverage

above 80% and three other districts have coverage between 70 to 79%. The remaining four districts have

coverage between 60 to 69% as shown in Map 1. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year

2015-16 varied from 3.6 % points in South Tripura to 11.6 % points in Sepahijala. Map 1 shows an equal pace

of program implementation in the state.

74.1

25.9


Coverage (%)


31st March 2016

62.4 63.166.3

74.1

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

75.0

80.0



time

TRIPURA

149 | P a g e



monthly construction of IHHL during 2014-15 was 2,067 it increased to 5,189 in 2015-16. The total

construction of IHHL during the year was 62,272 and the state achieved 82.8% of AIP target. 1,099 IHHLs,

i.e. 1.8% of the total IHHLs constructed during the year was under MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain

the pace of construction of 4,928 IHHL per month in next 42 months in order to become ODF by 2nd October



80% and

above

1 district

70%-79% 3 districts

60%-69% 4 districts

2,067

5,177

4,986

4,928

1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000





September 2019


TRIPURA

150 | P a g e


Till March 2016, 5 out of 1,023 GPs (0.5%) and 5 out of

1,033 villages (0.5%) were declared as ODF till the end

of March 2016. No report of verification was received

from the state till the end of 2015-16. Graph 4 shows the

status of GPs and Villages declared as ODF up to March

2016. NFHS-4 (conducted during February 2015 to

August 2015) found that 65.1% rural households were

using improved sanitation facility in the state.


The state can achieve ODF status

only if all the districts attain such

status. The coverage at the end of

2015-16 and the rate of progress

achieved during the year being

different across districts,

attainment of ODF status will

vary widely. At the rate of

construction achieved during the

year 2015-16, Sepahijala is

likely to attain ODF status

earliest by March 2018 followed

by Khowai by August 2018. On

the other extreme, Unakoti is

likely to attain ODF earliest by

May 2025. Graph 5 shows that

the state is likely to attain ODF

status by April 2020, which is a

mere projection based on the

state level aggregated rate of

progress. Actual attainment of

ODF status will depend on the

last GP to become ODF in the

state. However, considering the

districts as units, 3 out of 8

districts (32%) are likely to

attain it by 2nd October 2019.

0.5 0.5

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

GP Village


declared as ODF



LEGEND

By 2025-29 1 district


By 2019 3 districts

1st Achiever

(Sepahijala,

2018)

STATE

(2020, 100%)

Last Achiever

(Unakoti,

2025)

72.0

77.0

82.0

87.0

92.0

97.0

102.0

107.0

2015 2018 2021 2024 2027

Co

ver

ag

e

Estimated year


STATE

(2016,

74.1%)

151 | P a g e


Achieving universal coverage within a specific timeframe depends on the coverage at a particular time and the

pace of

construction

of toilets for

the families

without

IHHLs. The

districts have

been

categorized

on these two

parameters

(at the

beginning of

2015-16 and during the year 2015-16

respectively) relative to those of the state as

a whole and placed in the four quadrants of

Graph 6. Two districts (Khowai and

Sepahijala) have both higher coverage and

faster growth rate and two districts (Dhalai

and South Tripura) have higher coverage but

slower growth during the year. On the other

hand, Gomati has lower coverage and faster

growth indicating current improvement in

performance. Three districts namely, North Tripura, West Tripura and Unakoti are trailing behind both in terms

of coverage and rate of construction as shown separately in Graph 7. Share of IHHLs yet to be constructed for

four groups of districts as well as that for the districts which are trailing behind are shown in Graph 8 and

Graph 9 respectively.


44.9

17.4

15.8

21.9



Districts trailing

behind

Districts started

lagging

Districts surging

ahead

The emerging

performers

North

TripuraUnakoti

West Tripura STATE

0

5

10

15

20

25

56 58 60 62 64

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st t

arg

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

hou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 7:Districts with lower coverage and slower

growth rate

31.1

41.8

27.1


constructed in trailing behind districts

North Tripura

West Tripura

Unakoti

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0 20 40 60 80 100 120Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

ho

ut

toil

et

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 6: Number of districts in different categories based on combined

indicators of progress relative to the State status



2 Districts



2 Districts



3 Districts



1 District

State

(66.3, 23.1)

TRIPURA

152 | P a g e




SoC 2013-14 found that 73.3% AWCs of the state had toilet facility, as shown in Graph 11.


The state utilized Rs. 59.3 crore in the

year 2015-16, which is 60% of the

available fund (Rs. 99.2 crore) as shown

in Graph 12. The same was 2.8 times the

fund (Rs 21.0 crore) utilized during 2014-

15. Actual expenditure per district during

2015-16 was Rs 7.4 crore, which varied

from Rs 2.0 crore in South Tripura to Rs

14.2 crore in Gomati.

Expenditure on IEC



that year as shown in Graph 13. IEC expenditure

during 2015-16 was Rs 29.8 lakh more during the

year compared to that of 2014-15. Expenditure on

IEC during 2015-16 varied from Rs. 6.1 lakh in

South Tripura to Rs. 40.3 lakh in West Tripura, with



The state spent Rs. 53.6 lakh for administrative



2.8 times in 2015-16 than that during 2014-15 (Rs.

19.3 lakh). These expenses varied widely across

districts from Rs. 1.6 lakh in West Tripura to Rs.

17.4 lakh in Khowai and the average expenses per


99.2

59.3 56.3

1.7 0.5

39.7

0

20

40

60

80

100

Fund

Available

Fund

Utilised

IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Admin

Charges

Balance

Rs.

cro

re



1.41.7

6.7

2.90.0

5.0

10.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

2014-15 2015-16 IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s

cro

re)


Expenditure


19.3

53.6

0.9 0.9

00.20.40.60.811.21.4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2014-15 2015-16

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

as

% o

f to

tal

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

(Rs

La

kh

)




96.1

58.7

80.0

57.1

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable


toilet in schools (ASER, 2014)

26.7

73.3





TRIPURA

153 | P a g e

UTTARAKHAND

Overview




end of March 2016 varied from 79.3% in Dehradun to 55.6% in Almora.

Nine out of thirteen districts of the state (70%) are likely to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019, if the

pace of construction during the year 2015-16 continues. At that pace, the rural areas of the state is likely

to attain ODF status earliest by November 2020.


The state spent an amount of Rs 80.4 crore during the year 2015-16 which is 53.1% higher than Rs 52.6

crore spent during the year 2014-15. The state had a balance of Rs 3.3 crore under SBM (G) at the end

of the year.



IHHL coverage


2.9 lakh HHs were yet to construct their toilets. The coverage has improved by 4.3% points during the year.


in Graph 2.

According to the Rapid Survey conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015, 80.5% rural households of

Uttarakhand had sanitary toilets while it was found during the NSSO 69th round (conducted in July-December

2012) that 80.2% of the HHs had access to improved sources of latrines.

.



three districts which have more than 80% coverage. On the other hand, only one district has coverage less

than 70% as shown in Map 1. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 varied from

7.3 % points in Uttarkashi to 1.6 % points in Haridwar.

81.0

19.0


Coverage (%)


31st March 2016

67.173.0

76.781.0

25

40

55

70

85

100



UTTARAKHAND

154 | P a g e




construction of IHHL during the year was 66,840 and the state achieved 61% of AIP target. Out of the total

construction, 2,810 (4.2% of total) were under MGNREGS. The state needs an enhanced pace of construction

of 7,000 IHHL per month in next 42 months to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019 as shown in Graph 3.


UTTARAKHAND

4,824

5,570

6,682

7,000

1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000





September 2019


LEGEND


80%-89% 6 districts

70%-79% 3 districts


UTTARAKHAND

155 | P a g e


Till March 2016, 700 out of 7,972 GPs (8.8%) and 1,471

15,532 villages (9.5%) were declared as ODF. No report of

verification has been received so far. Graph 4 shows the status

of GPs and villages declared as ODF up to March 2016.

However, NFHS-4 (conducted from 30th January 2015 to 19th

July 2015 in the state) found that 59.6% of rural households of

Uttarakhand were using improved sanitation facility. The

Rapid Survey conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015

found that 16.9% households of rural areas were practicing

open defecation in the state.




vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, Uttarkashi is likely to attain ODF

status by November 2017. On the other hand, Haridwar is likely to achieve it by January 2041. Graph 5 shows

that the state is likely to attain ODF by December 2019, which is based on mere projection of the state level

aggregated rate of progress. Actual attainment of ODF status will depend on the last GP to become ODF in the

state. However, considering the districts as units, 9 out of 13 districts are likely to attain ODF by 2nd October


8.89.5

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

GP Village


declared as ODF

1st Achiever

(Uttarkashi, 2016)

STATE

(2022, 100%)

Last Achiever

(Haridwar, 2041)

75

80

85

90

95

100

2014 2018 2022 2026 2030 2034 2038 2042

Cover

age

Estimated year


STATE

(2016, 81.0%)

UTTARAKHAND

156 | P a g e



the rate of construction of IHHLs for the households without toilet facility. The districts have been


relative to those of the state as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 8. Nine districts (Uttarkashi,

Chamoli, Pithoragarh, Tehri Garhwal, Pauri, Bageswar, Nainital, Dehradun and Champawat) have both

higher coverage and faster growth rate. On the other hand, only Rudraprayag district has lower coverage but

faster growth indicating current improvement in performance. The rest three districts (Almora, U. S. Nagar

STATE

(76.7, 18.5)

0

10

20

30

40

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st

targ

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

hou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r




Districts surging ahead; Higher coverage

and Faster growth

9 Districts



1 District

The trailing behind; Lower coverage and

Slower growth

3 Districts



No district in this category

LEGEND

By 2019 9 districts




across districts

UTTARAKHAND

157 | P a g e

and Haridwar) are trailing behind both in terms of coverage and pace of construction. No district falls under

the group of having higher coverage and slower pace. Share of IHHLs yet to be constructed for these three

groups of districts as well as the trailing districts are shown in Graph 7 and Graph 8 respectively.





However, R-SoC 2013-14 found that 51.8% AWCs of the state had toilet facility as shown in Graph 10.


The state had utilized Rs. 80.4

crore in the year 2015-16, which is



The same was 52.3% more than Rs

52.6 crore utilized during 2014-

15. Actual expenditure per district


which varied from Rs 2.7 crore in

Bageswar to Rs 9.8 crore in Pauri

Garhwal.

20.2

51.9

27.9



trailing behind

Almora Haridwar U. S. Nagar

57.3

38.9

3.8



% of districts

trailing behind

% of districts

surging ahead

% of districts as

emerging

performers

95.0

69.2 73.8

53.7

10.0

25.0

40.0

55.0

70.0

85.0

100.0

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable


in Schools (%)

48.2

51.8



(R-SoC, 2013-14)

Without Toilet WithToilet

83.7 80.4 76.3

0.9 0.5 3.3

0

20

40

60

80

100

Fund

Available

Fund

Utilised

IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Admin

Charges

Balance

Rs.

cro

re


2015-16 (Rs. crore)

UTTARAKHAND

158 | P a g e

Expenditure on IEC

Rs. 87.2 lakh was spent on IEC in the state



12. IEC expenditure was, however, much

higher at Rs 223.6 lakh during the year 2014-

15. IEC expenditure during 2015-16 varied

from Rs. 2.0 lakh in Almora to Rs. 14.2 lakh

in Pauri (Garhwal), with average expenditure

of Rs 6.7 lakh per district.


The state had spent Rs. 52.6 Lakh for



Administrative expenditure reduced by Rs.

22.5 lakh in 2015-16 than that during 2014-


in Champawat to Rs. 8.9 lakh in US Nagar

and the average per districts works out to be

Rs 4.0 lakh.

0.8

0.5

1.4

0.7

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

0

0.5

1

1.5

2014-15 2015-16 Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

as

% o

f to

tal

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

(Rs

cro

re)




2.2

0.9

4.3

1.10.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

2014-15 2015-16

IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

) Graph 12: Comparative Analysis of IEC

Expenditure


UTTARAKHAND

159 | P a g e

UTTAR PRADESH

Overview




the end of March 2016 varied from 90.8% (Ghaziabad) to 13.1% (Etah).

Out of 75 districts of the state, only one (Ghaziabad) is likely to attain ODF status by 2nd October 2019,

if the pace of construction during the year 2015-16 continues. At that pace, the estimated IHHL coverage

of the state (rural areas) at the end of 2nd October 2019 will be 50.8% and the state will become ODF

earliest by June 2038.


The state spent an amount of Rs. 765.6 crore during the year 2015-16 which is 114.7% higher than Rs.

356.6 crore spent during the year 2014-15. The state had a balance of Rs. 729.36 crore under SBM(G)




IHHL coverage


1.7 crore HHs were yet to construct their toilets. The coverage has improved by 2.6 % points during the year.


in Graph 2. It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural Uttar Pradesh was 29.5% according to the

Rapid Survey conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015 and the NSSO 69th round (conducted during July-




only 2 districts with coverage above 80%. On the other hand, there are 35 districts with coverage less than

40% as shown in the map. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-16 varied from

6.8 % points in Firozabad to 0.6 % points in Gautam Buddha Nagar.

35.2

38.039.8

42.4

25

30

35

40

45



(%)

57.6

42.4


Coverage (%)

% HH without IHHL


UTTAR PRADESH

160 | P a g e




construction of IHHL during the year was 7,42,466 and the state achieved only 16.1% of the AIP target. Out

of the total construction, 47,979 i.e., 6.5% were under MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain a pace of

construction of 3,94,080 IHHL per month in next 42 months in order to become ODF by 2nd October 2019 as

shown in Graph 3.


LEGEND

Below 40%

40-60%

60-80%

Above 80%

LEGEND


40-60% 27 districts

60-80% 11 districts



UTTAR PRADESH

161 | P a g e



GPs (0.4%) and 96,249 villages (0.4%) respectively have

been declared as ODF. However, verification has been

done for only 1.5% GPs and 2.8% villages.


2015 found that 70.7% of rural households in Uttar

Pradesh were defecating in the open.




will vary widely. At the rate of construction achieved during the year 2015-16, Ghaziabad is likely to attain

ODF status earliest by January 2019 and Hardoi will achieve so by February 2073. Graph 5 shows that the

state is likely to attain ODF by June 2038, which is based on mere projection of the state level aggregated rate

of progress. Actual attainment of ODF status will depend on the last GP to become ODF in the state. However,

considering the districts as units, only one out of seventy five districts is likely to attain it by 2nd October 2019.


42,953

61,872

320,256

394,080

0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000






0.4

1.5

0.4

2.8

0

1

2

3




GP Village

1st Achiever

(Ghaziabad, 2019)

STATE

(2038, 100%)

Last Achiever

(Hardoi, 2073)

35

50

65

80

95

110

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060 2065 2070 2075 2080

Co

ver

ag

e

Estimated year


STATE

(2016, 42.4%)

UTTAR PRADESH

162 | P a g e



2015-16 respectively) relative to those of the state as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 6.

Twenty-six districts have both higher coverage and faster growth rate and ten districts have higher coverage but

slower growth during the year. On the other hand, eleven districts have lower coverage and faster growth

indicating current improvement in performance. Twenty-eight districts are trailing behind both in terms of


four group of districts as well as the trailing districts are shown in Graph 8 and Graph 9 respectively.


LEGEND



2019-24 7 districts

By 2019 1 district

UTTAR PRADESH

163 | P a g e


49.3

21.1

13.9

15.7



Districts trailing behind Districts surging ahead

Districts started lagging The emerging performers

7.7

5.9

5.7

5.3

5.1

4.8

4.7

4.543.63.5

3.5

3.4

3.3

3.3

3.2

3.1

2.7

2.7

2.6

2.6

2.52.2

2.2

2 2 2

1.6



behind

AllahabadSitapurAzamgarhBalliaHardoiL. KheriBarabankiPratapgarhAgraSultanpurMaharajganjRae BareliBudaunBastiFaizabadSaharanpurAligarhEtahMathuraBalrampurSonbhadraAmethiLucknowMainpuriM. NagarMauS. R. NagarChitrakoot

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

20 30 40 50 60

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st t

arg

et

of

tota

l H

H w

ith

ou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inin

g o

f th

e y

ear






26 Districts


coverage & Faster growth

11 Districts

The trailing behind; Lower coverage

and Slower growth

28 Districts



10 Districts

State

(39.8, 4.3)

Allahabad

Sitapur

AzamgarhBallia

Hardoi

L. Kheri

Barabanki

Pratapgarh

Agra

Sultanpur

Maharajganj

Rae BareliBudaun

Basti

Faizabad

Saharanpur

Aligarh

Etah

Mathura

Balrampur

Sonbhadra

Amethi

Lucknow

Mainpuri

M. Nagar Mau

S. R. Nagar Chitrakoot

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st t

arg

et

of

tota

l H

H w

ith

ou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 7: Districts with both Poor Coverage and Poor Progress than the state average

UTTAR PRADESH

164 | P a g e




SoC 2013-14 found that 46.0% AWCs of the state had toilet facility.


The state had spent Rs. 765.6 crore in the year 2015-16, which is 51.2% of the available fund (Rs. 149.5 crore)

as shown in Graph 12. The

same was 114.7% higher

than Rs. 356.6 crore spent




crore, which varied from Rs

1.1 crore in G. B. Nagar to

Rs 27.2 crore in Gonda.

Expenditure on IEC



that year as shown in Graph 13. IEC expenditure

varied from Rs. 0.1 lakh (Banda) to Rs. 120.8 lakh

(Ghazipur), with average expenditure of Rs. 8.5 lakh

per district. However, only 45 out of 75 districts

(60.0%) reported IEC expenses during the year.


The state had spent Rs. 6.6 crore for administrative


fund utilised. Administrative expenditure reduced by

Rs. 32.1 lakh in 2015-16 than that during 2014-15 as

shown in Graph 14. These expenses varied from Rs.

0.01 lakh (Mainpuri) to Rs. 27.0 lakh (Bijnor) and the

average administrative expenditure per district works

out to be Rs 8.5 lakh. However, 60 out of 75 districts

(80.0%) reported administrative expenditure duirng

2015-16.

95.8

54.9

87.7

49.1

25

40

55

70

85

100

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable



54.0

46.0



(R-SoC, 2013-14)

Without Toilet

With Toilet

1494.8

765.6 749.6

7.6 6.6

729.2

0

400

800

1200

1600

Fund

Available

Fund Utilized IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Administrative

Expenses

Balance

Rs.

cro

re


(Rs. crore)

16.9

7.6

4.7

1.00.0

4.0

8.0

4.0

8.0

12.0

16.0

20.0

2014-15 2015-16 IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)


Expenditure


UTTAR PRADESH

6.9 6.6

1.9

0.9

0.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

2014-15 2015-16 Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

as

% o

f to

tal

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

exp

ense

s

(Rs

cro

re)




165 | P a g e

WEST BENGAL

Overview




the end of March 2016 varied across the districts from 100.9% (Nadia) to 39.8% (Purulia).

Out of 20 districts of the state, Nadia and North 24 Parganas have achieved ODF status while another 7

districts are likely to attain it by 2nd October 2019, if the pace of construction during the year 2015-16

continues. At that pace, the state is likely to become ODF earliest by October 2018.

778 out of 3,349 GPs (23.2%) have attained ODF status up to the end of March 2016.

The state spent an amount of Rs 1161.9 crore during the year 2015-16 which is 74.5% higher than Rs.

665.8 crore spent during the year 2014-15. The state had a deficit of Rs 106.0 crore under SBM(G) at




IHHL coverage




in Graph 2.

It may be mentioned that the IHHL coverage in rural West Bengal was 65.1% according to the Rapid Survey





two districts namely, Nadia and North 24 Parganas with coverage more than 100% and another two districts

(Hooghly and East Midnapore) are very close to 100%. On the other hand, there are two districts with

coverage less than 50% as shown in the map. The maximum increase in IHHL coverage during the year 2015-

16 varied from 15.2 % points in East Midnapore to 0.8 % points in Nadia.

55.3

59.3

64.9

74.4

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

75.0



25.6

74.4

% HH without IHHL



Coverage (%)

WEST BENGAL

166 | P a g e



monthly construction of IHHL during 2014-15 was 70,588, it increased to 1,20,434 in 2015-16. The total


the total construction, 13,147, i.e., 0.9% was under MGNREGS. The state needs to maintain a pace of


shown in Graph 3.



LEGEND


71%-89% 5 districts

51%-59% 9 districts


70,588

120,434

98,566

92,318

50,000 70,000 90,000 110,000 130,000






WEST BENGAL

167 | P a g e


Till March 2016, 778 GPs and 8,142

villages out of 3,349 GPs (23.2%) and

42,959 villages (24.0%) respectively

were declared as ODF. Verification for

ODF has been done in 187 (19.0%) GPs

and 1341 (16.5%) villages. Graph 4

shows the status of GPs and villages

declared and verified as ODF up to March

2016.

NFHS-4 (conducted during February

2015 to July 2015) found that 45.5% rural

households were using improved

sanitation facility. However, the Rapid

Survey conducted by NSSO during May-June 2015 found that 37.7% of rural households were defecating in

the open.




will vary widely. At the rate of construction during the year 2015-16, Hooghly is likely to attain ODF status

earliest by April 2016 and Malda will achieve so by February 2025. Graph 5 shows that the state is likely to

attain ODF by October 2018, which is a mere projection based on of the state level aggregated rate of

progress. Actual attainment of ODF status will depend on the last GP to become ODF in the state. However,

considering the districts as units, 7 out of 20 districts are likely to attain it by 2nd October 2019. Map 2 shows

the earliest year by which the districts are likely to become ODF.

23.2 24.0

19.016.5

0

10

20

30


Graph 4: % of GPs and villages declared as ODF

& verified

GP Villages

1st Achiever

(Nadia, 2015)

STATE

(2018, 100%) Last Achiever

(Malda, 2025)

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

105

110

2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026

Co

ver

age

Estimated year


STATE

(2016, 74.4%)

WEST BENGAL

168 | P a g e





state as a whole and placed in the four quadrants of Graph 6. Four districts have both higher coverage and

faster growth rate and one district have higher coverage but slower growth during the year. On the other hand,

two districts have lower coverage and faster growth indicating current improvement in performance. Eleven

districts are trailing behind both in terms of coverage and pace of construction as shown separately in Graph

7. Share of IHHLs yet to be constructed for four groups of districts as well as the trailing districts are shown

in Graph 8 and Graph 9 respectively.

STATE

Alipuduar

Bankura

Birbhum

Dakshin

Dinajpur

Darjeeling

Jalpaiguri

Malda Midnapur (W)

Murshidabad

Purulia

Uttar

Dinajpur

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

30 40 50 60

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st t

arg

et o

f

tota

l H

H w

ith

ou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r


Graph 7: Districts with both Lower

coverage and Slower progress



LEGEND

By 2019 9 districts


By 2025 1 district

LEGEND

By 2019 9 districts


Beyond 2024 1 district

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

50 60 70 80

Pro

gre

ss d

uri

ng

20

15

-16

ag

ain

st t

arg

et o

f to

tal

HH

wit

hou

t to

ilet

at

the

beg

inn

ing

of

the

yea

r





Districts surging

ahead; Higher

coverage and Faster

growth

4 Districts

The emerging

performers; Lower

coverage and Faster

growth

2 Districts


Lower coverage and

Slower growth

11 Districts


Higher coverage and

Slower growth

1 District

WEST BENGAL

169 | P a g e







The state had spent Rs. 1,267.9

crores in the year 2015-16,

which is 109.1% of the

available fund (Rs. 1,161.9

crore) as shown in Graph 12.

The same was 92.8% higher

than Rs 657.7 crore spent during

2014-15. Actual expenditure

per district during 2015-16 was

Rs 62.2 crore, which varied

from Rs. 7.6 crore (Nadia) to

162.4 crore (South 24

Parganas).

11.5

3.779.1

5.7



Districts surging

ahead

Districts started

lagging

The trailing

behind

The emerging

performers

3.5

9.6

7.2

2.7

1.7

4.1

9.112.1

14.1

8.0

7.0



behindAlipuduar

Bankura

Birbhum

Dakshin Dinajpur

Darjeeling

Jalpaiguri

Malda

Midnapur (W)

Murshidabad

Purulia

Uttar Dinajpur

97.8

70.8 69.2

46.9

25

40

55

70

85

100

With toilet

facility


provision for

girls

Toilet

accessible and

useable



47.1

52.9



(R-SoC, 2013-14)

With toilet

Without toilet

1161.91267.9 1225.9

20.0 4.0106.0

0.0

200.0

400.0

600.0

800.0

1000.0

1200.0

1400.0

Fund

Available

Fund Utilised IHHL

Incentive

IEC

Expenditure

Admin

Charges

Deficit

Rs.

cro

re


2015-16 (Rs. crore)

WEST BENGAL

170 | P a g e

Expenditure on IEC




13. IEC expenditure varied within districts

from Rs. 0.1crore (Alipurduar) to Rs. 3.5

crore (South 24 Parganas), with average

expenditure of Rs 1.0 crore per district.



administrative purposes during 2015-16 as

shown in Graph 14, which is 0.3% of the

total fund utilised. Administrative

expenditure increased by Rs. 63.4 lakh in

2015-16 than that during 2014-15. These


(Alipurduar) to Rs. 103.0 lakh (Darjeeling)

and the average per district works out to be

Rs 20.0 lakh.

14.1

20.12.2

1.6

0

1

2

3

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

2014-15 2015-16 IEC

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

IEC

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)


Expenditure


3.4 4.0

0.5

1.6

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

3

3.2

3.4

3.6

3.8

4

4.2

2014-15 2015-16 Ad

min

exp

ense

s a

s %

of

tota

l

Ad

min

exp

ense

s (R

s cr

ore

)




WEST BENGAL

progress on rural sanitation in indiathe ihhl coverage at the end of march 2016 varied from 99.9%...

Documents