Detailed reports of the 62 villages
1 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
SOCIAL AUDIT REPORT
PART II: DETAILED REPORTS November 2016
2 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Contents 1. Ariyalur District ...... 6 1.1 Sendurai village, Sendurai block, Ariyalur District ...... 6 1.2 Viluppanankurichi village, Thirumanur block, Ariyalur District ...... 8 1. Coimbatore district ...... 10 2.1 Periyapodu Village, Anaimalai Block, Coimbatore District ...... 10 2.2 Nachipalayam Village, Madukkarai Block, Coimbatore District ...... 13 2.3 Puliyampatti village, Palladam block, Coimbatore district ...... 16 3. Cuddalore district ...... 20 3.1 Nedunkulam village, Mangalore block, Cuddalore ...... 20 3.2 T.V.Puthur village, Viruthachalam block, Cuddalore ...... 21 4. Dharmapuri district ...... 23 4.1 Madehalli village, Pennagaram Block, Dharmapuri district ...... 23 4.2 Vadugupatti village, Harur Block, Dharmapuri district ...... 27 4.3 Irulapatti village, Pappireddipatti Block, Dharmapuri district ...... 29 5. Dindigul district ...... 31 5.1 Puliyampatti Village Thoppampatti Block Dindugal District ...... 31 5.2 K.Pudukottai Village, Reddiyarchatram Block, Dindugal District ...... 35 5.3 Kottur Village, Nilakottai Block, Dindugal District ...... 39 6. Kancheepuram district ...... 43 6.1 Minal Chitambur, Acharapakam, Kancheepuram ...... 43 6.2 Kunavakam village, Uthramerur block, Kancheepuram district ...... 44 7. Karur district ...... 47 7.1 Mullipadi Village, Kadavour Block, Karur District ...... 47 7.2 Senthamangalam West village, Aravakurichi block, Karur ...... 49 7.3 Baganatham village, Thonthonimalai block, Karur District ...... 52 8. Krishnagiri district ...... 54 8.1 Palayamkottai Village, Thalli Block, Krishnagiri District ...... 54 8.2 Naickanur Village, Uttankarai Block, Krishnagiri District ...... 57 8.3 Santhanapalli Village, Kelamangalam Block, Krishnagiri District ...... 59 9. Madurai district ...... 61 9.1 Kuppalanatham Village, Sedapatti Block, Madurai District ...... 61 9.2 Thumbakulam Village, Kallipatti Block, Madurai District ...... 64 10. Nagapattinam district ...... 67 10.1 Irukkai village, Keezhvelur, Nagapattinam district ...... 67 10.2 Neikupai village, Tirumarugal block, Nagaipattinam ...... 70
3 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
11. Namakkal district ...... 72 11.1 Mavurettipatty, Elachipalaym block, Namakkal district ...... 72 11.2 Thottiyampatti village, Vennanthur block, Namakkal district ...... 73 11.3 Koothanatham village, Mallasamuthiram block, Namakkal district ...... 76 12. Perambalur district ...... 78 12.1 Melamathur village, Alathur block, Perambalur district ...... 78 12.2 Puduvettaikudi village, Veppur block, Perambalur ...... 80 13. Pudukottai district ...... 82 13.1 Panampatti Village, Annavasal Block, Pudukkottai District ...... 82 13.2 Pallathupatti Village, Kunrantarkovil Block, Pudukkottai District ...... 84 14. Ramanad district ...... 87 14.1 A Puthur village, Bogalur block, Ramanad district ...... 87 14.2 Keezhselvanur village, Kadaladi block, Ramanad ...... 88 15. Salem district...... 90 15.1 Valayakaranur village, Ayothiyapattinam block, Salem district ...... 90 15.2 Thalaivasal village, Thalaivasal block, Salem district ...... 91 15.3 Nallur tribal village, Yercaud block, Salem district ...... 93 16. Sivagangai district ...... 95 16.2 Udayanoor village, Ilayankudi block, Sivagangai ...... 95 16.2 Tirumalai Koneripatti village, Sivagangai block, Sivagangai ...... 96 17. Theni district ...... 98 17.1 Kamarajapuram village, Bodinayakanur block, Theni district ...... 98 17.2 Ramakrishnapuram Village, Andipatti Block, Theni District ...... 101 18. Tiruvannamalai district ...... 103 18.1 Oorgoundanur village, Jawvathu hills block, Thiruvannamalai ...... 103 18.2 Perumpakkam village, Chengam block, Thiruvannamalai ...... 105 18.3 Thorapadi village, Pudupalayam block, Thiruvannamalai ...... 106 19. Thoothukudi district ...... 110 19.1 Inam Arunasalapuram village, Pudhur block, Thoothukudi district ...... 110 19.2 P. Meenachipuram village, Vilathikulam block, Thoothukudi district ...... 113 19.3 Vedanatham village, Ottapidaram block, Thoothukudi district ...... 115 20. Tirunelveli district ...... 118 20.1 Thenpathu village, Manur Block, Tirunelveli district ...... 118 20.2 Tharugapuram village, Vasudevanallur block, Tirunelveli district ...... 121 20.3 Umayathalaivan patti village, Kuruvikulam Block, Tirunelveli district ...... 124 21. Tiruvallur district ...... 126
4 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
21.1 Sirigumi panchayat, Thiruthani block, Thiruvallur district ...... 126 21.2 Kannigaiper panchayat, Ellapuram Block, Thiruvallur District ...... 128 21.3 Peritivakam Village, Poondi Block, Tiruvallur District ...... 132 22. Tiruvarur district ...... 134 22.1 Palayakudi Village, Thiruthuraipoondi Block, Tiruvarur District ...... 134 22.2 Thandalai village, Thiruvarur block, Thiruvarur district ...... 138 23. Vellore district ...... 141 24. Villupuram district ...... 144 24.2 Vadhanur village, Kandamangalam block, Villupuram District ...... 144 24.2 Ariyaperumanur village, Kallakurichi block, Villupuram District ...... 147 24.3 Thagamtheerthapuram village, Chinnasalem block, Villupuram District ...... 148 25. Virudhunagar district ...... 150 25.1 Isali Village, Narikudi Block, Virudhunagar district ...... 150 25.2 Kundaeruppu village, Vembakottai Block, Virudhunagar District ...... 154
5 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
1. Ariyalur District
1.1 Sendurai village, Sendurai block, Ariyalur District
Social audit dates: 29.08.2016 - 04.09.2016
Area Findings 1. Village Situated 20 km from Ariyalur is this village with 1855 households spread across 5 habitations Overview namely - Ilangaiseri, Sendurai, Kattaiyankudikadu, Ambedkar Nagar, Neivanam. Community aspects: The village has about 211 ST families is about 11% of the population, there is a separate VPRC functioning for them. SC Population of the village is about 28%. About 50% is BC. Social audit was conducted in the main village. Political aspects: The Panchayat Talaivar is Selvaraj (BC community) Livelihood: Agriculture (maize or sollam, millets or kambu, nellu, agricultural labour, NREGA) Total Population of the village is 9643. Mrs. Ramya is working as VPRC Book-keeper from 20.05.2015 and Mrs. Kavitha working as PLF Book-keeper since 15.08.2016. 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 379 households as target, whereas BPL list identifies 315 families. Gram BPL: Sabha approval copies were not available for verification. In the absence of this, the PIP list was cross-checked against PIP register. No changes were made to the PIP list. 3. Individual 72/103 beneficiaries were met by the team. assistance In the case of 68 members who took a loan to buy cattle, first time insurance was purchased but was not renewed subsequently. During record and field verification, in 4 cases, there was a difference in amount of Rs.7700 in loan repayment, as follows:
Name Register Field Visit Difference Loan Repaid Loan Repaid amount amount amount amount amount Balamurugan 10000 2000 10000 5000 3000 /Selvaraju Jayakodi/Karumpa 12000 0 12000 3000 3000 yeeram Nelampal/Perumal 12000 0 12000 1200 1200 Theivasigamani/Ka 12000 0 12000 500 500 rumpayeeram Total 46000 2000 46000 9700 7700
4. SHGs 2 SHGs are defunct out of 43 SHGs (based on interactions with villagers, and verified against SHG registers and documents.) 2 CSTs are working. Mrs. R. Umarani is monitoring 10 SHGs and has submitted a report up to March-2016. Mrs. V. Sathya is monitoring 15 SHGs and has submitted a report upto June- 2016. CDF Mrs. M. Shanmugapriya is monitoring 18 and submitted a report upto May-2016. 5. SHG 26/43 SHGs have completed IVth module training and payments were verified. Training SHG IVth module training has been given for 3 days for 3 SHGs (Vannamalar, Puthiya Thalaimurai and Roja SHG). Other 23 SHGs have received training for only 2 days. The attendance and expenditures were verified and found to be correct.
6 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
32 SHGs have a bank linkage and another 11 SHGs have not taken any bank loan. But rating has been completed for 9 SHGs on 04.08.2016 and application submitted to bank on 05.08.2016. During discussions held with SHG members, many women said they wanted a bank loan. 6. PLF 63/99 beneficiaries were met by the team. 1. The following SHGs have not made their repayments for the month of August: Sevvanthi, Kurinjimalar, Kurinji, Annaparavai, Mariamman, Sakthi, Anbuthozhi, Amman, Kalki, Durga, Mariamman, Vanambadi SHGs. 2. ASF loan has been given to only 25 SHGs, and 18 SHGs have not received a PLF ASF loan yet. 3. Insurance has not been made for the assets created by the Amuthasurabhi loan. 7. Skill 29/66 youth beneficiaries were met by the team. 31 youths have received direct employment. The following issues were identified: 1. Skill training documents were not maintained properly (applications, ID proof, certificates, bills, employment letter) 2. 5 youths – Ashokraj, Sudhakar, Prabakaran, Sakthivel, Aravanindam - have dropped out or not completed 45 days of training for driving (2 of the youths went for 30 days, 22 days, 20 days, 10 days) but payment for the same has gone to Arasu Driving Institute. License too has been given. 3. Youths who have completed beautician training are doing their own Business. The institute did not arrange any employment opportunity. 4. Most of the youths said they did not get any soft-skill from the training institutes. 5. Ashokraj who completed driving training is now working as Fire & Extinguisher Fitter in AGP Passive Fire & Safety Company, Chennai. 6. Employment documents not available for 15 members. 8. PAR 0% (Registers) 80:20 81.81:18.19 70:30 Loan 94.94:5.06 repayment 94% Closing Rs. 101268/- Balance 9. Functionin All CBOs - VPRC, PLF, SAC committees attended social audit meetings in less numbers. All g of CBOs CBOs resolutions were maintained and meeting member quorum is minimum 90% according (VPRC, to records in all meetings PLF, SAC) 10 Tally VPRC, PLF Tally entries updated Upto August-2016. SHGs not updated. . 11 CLG CLG has not been formed in the village. While asking reason, they said that CLG had been . formed in the Tribal VPRC and not the main one. Total 12 Misappropriation Nil Amount 13 OorKootta 200 people attended the Oor Koottam on 3rd September 2016 held in Sendurai village lasted . m for 1 hour. DPM, 3 APMs, all PFT Staff attended the Oorkoottam. All the issues identified were discussed at the Oor Koottam. SHG Members who had not been repaying one month’s amount promised to repay the amount regularly.
7 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
1.2 Viluppanankurichi village, Thirumanur block, Ariyalur District Social audit date 29.08.2016 - 04.09.2016
Area Findings 1. Village Overview The village is situated in Tirumanur Block, and poor Transport facility available. With about 443 households in a Single habitation, the village has about 7 ST families. Total Population of the Village is 1683. The president is a woman, Malathi. She discharges duties herself. Mrs. Lakshmi is working as Both VPRC and PLF Book-keeper since september-2015. 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 139 households as target, whereas BPL list identifies 235 families. BPL: Gram Sabah approval copies were not available for verification. PIP LIST was verified in PIP Register. 3. Individual 39/48 beneficiaries were met. assistance 1. In the case of 44 members who took a loan to buy cattle, first time insurance has been bought but not renewed. 2. As per records, 22 persons have received individual assistance for being in the vulnerable category. When this list was checked against PIP list, it was found that 4 persons amongst them were not in the list of vulnerables. Name: Jeyanthi, Jenselamary, Inbavalli, Valarmathi. During field verification when these women were met, it was found that they were neither widows nor destitutes and therefore not eligible to receive assistance meant for vulnerable. However, they are repaying the loans. 3. 14 members have not get individual loan (4 differently able, 11 vulnerable). 4. SHGs 5 SHGs defunct out of 20 SHGs. (based on interactions with villagers, and verified against SHG registers and documents) Of these 3 SHGs had loan repayment issue, 1 SHG did not have a CST monitoring it, and last SHG’s representative has passed away. 8 SHGs have received bank linkage and another 12 SHGs have not received any bank loan. But rating has been done for 12 SHGs and applications have been submitted to bank. None of the SHGs have got a bank loan at current financial year. CST has been appointed from 28.11.2015 and CDF from 29.06.2016 but they have not submitted reports nor received honoraria. 5. SHG Training Only 5 SHGs have completed IVth module training. 3 SHGs for 3 days, training expenses made for Rs. 4326, while 2 SHGs for 2 days training expenses made for Rs.1614. Attendance, bills, photos, documents were verified to be true. 6. PLF 62/74 beneficiaries were met by the team. IHHL Loan given to 20 Members. 3 SHGs not affiliated to PLF. Out of 15 Active SHGs only 11 SHGs received ASF Loan. Singaravelan SHG - Veerammal has received PLF loan of Rs. 20,000 in Nov 2015. But she has given the amount to another person Kavitha. Insurance not made for assets created by use of Amuthasurabhi loans. 7. Skill 27/30 youth beneficiaries were met by the team. 1. 10 Youths have completed driving training. But of these only 6 are working as drivers. 2. Jewel making training has been given to 16 youths - 8 target, 8 non-target. But they are not employed. Training has been completed. No placement has been provided. Training payments have not been made to the institute. Youths said they wanted some employment opportunity to use the training they had received.
8 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
3. 2 youths - Rajavel, Sudhagar – have attended only one week of driving training instead of 45 days. For these dropouts, a payment of Rs. 4500 has been made. Gender ratio License has been given to the institute. 4. Skill training documents are not maintained properly - Application, Certificate copy, ID proof, bills 5. Rs.19,150 payment has been given to Lakshmi Driving School on 05.08.2014 but VPRC resolution not available for this payment. It could not be found out who the payment has gone for. Therefore, these youths could not be identified or met. 6. All youth beneficiaries said that they did not get any soft-skill training from the institutes Total misuse in skill: 4500 8. PAR 16.27% (Registers) 80:20 Members 67.5:32.5, Amount 77.3:22.7 70:30 Members 54:46, Amount 74.4:25.6 Closing Balance Rs. 103706.82/- 9. Functioning of All CBOs - VPRC, PLF, SAC committees meeting were conducted by the team, the CBOs member participant is less number. Book-keeper, CST, CDF fully attended. (VPRC, PLF, SAC) All CBOs resolutions were maintained and meeting member quorum is minimum 90% according to records in all meetings. 10. Tally VPRC, PLF Tally entries updated Upto August-2016.SHGs not updated. 11. CLG Amman Dairy CLG has received fund of Rs. 95000 in Aug 2015. Training and Exposure visit given to them. But there is no services made by the CLG. CLG is not functioning.
12. Total Total :4500 (Skill – 4500) Misappropriation Amount 13. OorKoottam 100 people attended the Oor Koottam on 3rd September 2016 held in Villupanankurichi village which held for 1 Hour. DPM, 2 APMs, Panchayat President, all PFT Staff attended the Oor koottam, All the issues identified were discussed at the Oor Koottam. The CLG President promised to function the CLG.
9 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
1. Coimbatore district
2.1 Periyapodu Village, Anaimalai Block, Coimbatore District Social Audit 30.08.16 to 03.09.16
Area Findings 1 Village Overview Periyapodu is 16 km from Pollachi town, and it has 6 habitations with 1100 households spread across them. The total population is 3333. Community aspects: BC communities are majority, while SC community is about 19% Livelihood: Agriculture (vegetable cultivation, cattle), driving, etc are the main occupations Languages – Tamil and Malayalam are spoken by the community here It was felt that the Panchayat talaivar had full control over functioning of the VPRC. This is because, after delay of 2 days, when the PIP list was finally shared for social audit purpose, the analysis showed that many non-target persons in the village had benefited from the scheme, and target had been neglected. Many members who are not in target lists have been given individual loans, reportedly on the recommendation of the Talaivar. Other aspects: The village is calm and serene, and was observed to be very clean,tidy. 2. PIP: A big issue here was that the PIP list itself was not shown to social audit team for two BPL: days. After asking for 2 days, the project staff visited the Talaivar’s home and hurriedly brought a PIP list which was handed to the team for audit. When checked with this list, it was found that in both individual assistance loans as well as skill, a majority of non-target people have benefited. In skill, 89% non-target youths had been sent for training. PIP list identifies 281 families as target, while BPL identifies 362 families as poor. Of the 281 families identified as target, by the project, of which 74 are ‘very poor’ and 207 ‘poor’. There are 36 differently abled persons and 36 vulnerable persons identified for individual assistance. Apart from PIP list, BPL list could not be seen by the social audit team. PIP Approval (Grama Sabha Xerox copy) was not maintained in the VPRC. 3 VPRC/PLF/SAC/CLG 1. VPRC & PLF meetings have not been conducted after April 2016 (No meetings Function in May,June,July, August 2016) 2. VPRC Books of Accounts not updated after April 2016 3. Some VPRC expenditure bills and vouchers were missing. Signature and Dates were not there in many bills. 4. All VPRC Activity handled by the VPRC Bookkeeper only 5. A separate bookkeeper has not been appointed for PLF 6. A few signed blank cheques were found, containing signatures of the officebearers(VPRC Secretary and Treasurer). These were for both VPRC Development Fund and PLF ASF accounts. The bookkeeper had these cheques 7. CDF has not been functioning for more than one year 8. None of the office-bearers of the CBOs came to the VPRC during the audit time 9. CLG is not functioning and for Rs.1500 misused and no resolution passed 4 Individual The team met 26/57 beneficiaries. assistance 1. 10 differently-abled persons not in PIP List but have received Rs. 48,500. One person involved in an accident got Rs.8,000. 28 members not vulnerable but they have given to Individual loan Rs.2,01,500. Total Rs.2,50,000 2. Most of the ineligible people who received money were recommended by the Panchayat President. The Talaivar’s mother-in-law is one of the
10 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
‘vulnerable’category loan beneficiaries, but when met in person, it was found that she is not eligible to receive loan as she did not quality to be ‘vulnerable’ 5. SHGs Total number of SHGs is 31. Number of existing Women SHGs were 28 in all, while differently abled were 3 SHGs. 10 defunct SHGs Register updation was poor for most SHGs 6. SHG Training 27 SHGs have received 4th module trainings as per attendance records, but no photos, reports, schedules could be found. Full attendance records have been shown for all the 27 SHGs. Some SHG members said that only 5-10 members in their group had attended trainings. For example, in Malligai SHG, 12 members are there, but during discussions with the SHG, 6 of them said that they did not attend trainings Some SHG members reported that training was provided only for 2 days Training Expenditure for 4th module training was Rs.54,880 as per cash register Social audit team made calculations to arrive at the actual misappropriation on the basis of signature differences made in every SHG, discussions, and the per person expenditure made. The misuse figure so calculated is Rs.16,640. 7. Skill The team met 42/84 Skill beneficiaries, across the following categories of trainings: 1. Driving Training – 35 2. Computer Training – 09 3. CNC Training – 04 4. Tailoring Training – 17 5. Beautician training – 11 6. Nursing Training – 25 7. Electrician – 01 8. Suguna Chicken – 01 9. Masonry - 01 10. Direct Employment- 26 Total = 110 Findings in skill are as follows: 1. Totally 84 youths have completed skill trainings, but of these 75 youths are non-target; only 9 youth from the ‘target’ list identified were trained. 2. Most youths who had gone for driving classes knew how to drive; they used the facility only to get an official driving license. All of them know driving and they were experienced with over 10 years driving experience. Some even have their own vehicles, they(beneficiaries) said. Given that the institute – Selvan Driving Institute - has benefited through payments of these 35 trainees, this needs to be probed further. 3. For some students, the employment certificate was missing 8. PLF ASF 1. The team met 32/286 beneficiaries. Loans have been disbursed to 28 ‘very poor’ members, for an amount of Rs.6,95,000 and to 216 ‘Poor’members for an amount of Rs.36,15,000, to 42 non-target members for an amount of Rs.9,48,000. So,total loans given is Rs.52,58,000. 2. ASF Loan card had not been given to SHG members, this means members have no way of tracking their own repayments a. And loan given livelihood purpose 244 members amount Rs.49,58,000 and others 42 members amount Rs.3,00,000. 3. ADFT loan disbursed to 104 members amount Rs.31,25,000 for dairy. It was found that in the case of 2 SHGs, PLF loans had been taken to repay this loans.
11 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
9. Funds received 10,00,000 Outstanding Rs 11,41,550 Amount Rs.68856.86 Closing Balance 78 % Recovery Recovery Rate 22% PAR PAR 86 % Target : 14% Non-target 80:20 83 % Livelihood : 17% Consumption 70:30 10. Tally Tally updated upto May -2016 and system Available in VPRC Office 11. CLG Kogul Kannan Diary CLG was inactive Rs 16,500 was given as an individual loan to Ms. Mailathal (for her personal medical expenses) which is against the project guidelines. Moreover, this amount sanctioning and processing was handled by Mailathal herself. CLG Amount Resolution was found to be passed for an amount of Rs.15,000, but amount released was found to be Rs.16,500 for the CLG Member’s Individual loan described above (medical purpose to Mailathal) 12. Total SHG Training: Rs.16,640 Misappropriation Individual assistance misuse amount Rs.2,50,000. Amount CLG misuse amount Rs.16,500. In skill, almost all the trainings have been given to non-target. Misuse could not be quantified. Total misuse identified: Rs.2,83,140 13. Impact during the PLF overdue amount of Rs 52,000 was recovered on the day of the Oor 5-day audit Koottam. VPRC and PLF records updated during social audit team visit 14. OorKoottam 60 people attended the meeting. Panchayat President, cluster staff and APM (VF) attended Oor koottam Social audit team explained the risk of having blank cheques that has been pre- signed. SHG training issue was raised in the Oorkoottam. CST and CDF did not attend the meeting. Amma Kaipesi cell phone meant for this village was in the cluster office and not being used. One of the villagers wanted to know about the outstanding amount in the SHGs, but suddenly at this point, APM responded pointing out that since the Oor Koottam was being filmed, he told them ‘if you want to ask any questions regarding finance after Oor Koottam you can ask the social audit team later on’.
12 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
2.2 Nachipalayam Village, Madukkarai Block, Coimbatore District Social Audit 30.08.16 to 03.09.16
Area Findings 1. Village Overview This village is at a distance of 40 km from Coimbatore town. There are 4 habitations in this village with 705 households of which 234 have been identified as target families by this project. Livelihood aspects: Agriculture based village (flower nursery, vegetable cultivation, cattle) Political aspects: Panchayat talaivar is a woman who has been elected for the first time. She is supportive to the community, and herself belongs to SC community. Villagers during discussions shared that all decision-making usually rests with the ex-President. Community aspects: SC community is majority in this village Languages spoken: Tamil, Telugu 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 234 families as target, but BPL identifies 720 families as poor. BPL: BPL List was not shared with the Social Audit Team & PIP Approval (Grama Saba Xerox copy) was not maintained in VPRC 3 VPRC/PLF/SAC 1. VPRC resolutions were not maintained properly. For example, book keeper salary Function records are not clear. Skill payment does not mention names of the youths, SHG training expenses. 2. PLF monthly meetings have not been conducted regularly. 3. VPRC, PLF & SAC member signatures were all by the same person. The signatures were identical. 4. VPRC Office-bearers have been changed from 15.08.2015 due to rotation norms, but these members are not active 5. PLF Members and office bearers have not been changed. The same people hold the posts right from the beginning ie. since 01.05.2010 6. VPRC & PLF Loan Repayment register not available, Individual Assistance Registers were not updated 7. VPRC, PLF & SAC members do not come to the VPRC Office 8. 8 times bookkeeper has been changed and salary has been given, but main records are not available nor updated 9. SAC Meeting was conducted last on 26.08.15 and is not functioning 10. For PLF a separate bookkeeper has not been appointed 4 Individual The team met 67/108 beneficiaries. assistance 1. Individual Loan cards have not been given to beneficiaries, so there is no way of tracking repayments 2. 4 persons - Kannammal w/o Chinnan, Palaniyammal Thabakavundan (both from Palayam habitation),Ranjan w/o.kanniyammal (from Kumarapalayam habitation), Tulasiammal (from Nachipalayam habitation) – have been given Individual Assistance loans each of Rs.8000, totally for Rs.32,000. However, when met in person, it was found that they were not ‘vulnerable’ category (ie, not widows/destitutes/etc) and therefore ineligible to receive the assistance. 3. There was only one case of repayment difference as follows: Name Loan Register Field Visit Difference Amount Repay Repay Yoga Lakshmi 5000 875 1125 250
People’s perception was that the ex-President Velu Mani has benefited a lot from the loan schemes but the social audit team could not go into this aspect or verify this.
13 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
5. SHGs Total no of SHGs: 25 Newly formed SHGs: Women – 10, differently abled 5, 1 Youth. It was said that 9 Existing SHGs have bank linkages, but we could not find supporting documents in the VPRC 18 defunct SHG – they are not functional, and registers are not updated 6. SHG Training 1. 12+23= 35 SHGs have received 4th module trainings as per expenses 2. But 12 SHGs have only attendance records(signatures all same). There is no photo, report, schedule of these 12 SHG trainings. As for the other 23 SHGs, there is no record at all of the SHG trainings for them. 3. Some SHG members shared that only 2-6 members had attended trainings 4. 23 SHGs have not attended the 4th module trainings. This was found from interactions held with the SHG members. 5. Training Expenditure is Rs.50,601 as per VPRC Resolutions and Cash Register 6. 12 SHGs names appeared for receiving 4th module training two times 7. In the case of Manigandan Women SHG, it was found that there is no person called Nithya in that SHG. But there is a signature found in the name of a person Nithya. 8. Om Sakthi WSHG training dates are not available. 9. As per registers, trainer honorarium of Rs.3950 has been released for the trainings to the CST, for the 23 SHG trainings which did not happen. 7. Skill The team met 72/138 Skill beneficiaries, with the following breakup : Driving Training – 85 Computer Training – 20 CNC Training – 23 Tailoring Training – 4 Beautician training – 4 Nursing Training -2 Total = 138 Issues identified are as follows: 1. Most of the youths have only undertaken the LMV Training without completing the corresponding Badge Training for the same. 2. Skill institute – payments have been released without youth names mentioned. This means that it is not clear for whose trainings the payments have been made, making it difficult to verify. For example: a payment of Rs. 70,920 has been made to Ambal Driving Institute. This has been at the rate of 18 youths*Rs.3940 per youth = Rs. 70,920. But, no youth names have been mentioned against this training. Total of all such payments (where youth names are not present) = Rs.1,21,771. 3. In VPRC, in the case of several youths, basic training data was not available (days of training, institute name, amount paid, youth contribution, application) 4. In some cases, youth employment certificate was missing 8. PLF ASF The team met 96/225 beneficiaries. ASF loan card has not been given to SHG Members 9. Funds received Rs.13,71,795 Outstanding Amount Rs.31,987 Closing Balance 32% Recovery Recovery Rate PAR: 96% PAR 86% Target 80:20 78 % Livelihood 70:30 10. Tally Tally system update Aug -2016 VPRC, PLF Available VPRC Office
14 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
11. CLG There is one CLG, Vanavil Poocharam, for painting activity. CLG was being handled by the ex-CDF, Rajan only. Issues found: It was observed that Rs.90,000 has been withdrawn without resolutions, and of this Rs.85,000 has been deposited back. Balance Rs.5,000 still remains and is being identified as fund misuse. Quotations have been brought on 27.1.15. But the very next day, 28.1.15, procurements have been purchased 12. Total Individual Assistant Repayment : 250 Misappropriation Individual Assistance : 32,000 Amount CLG : 5,000 SHG Training : 50601 Total Amount: Rs.87,851 13. Impact during VPRC & PLF Registers - some records got updated as the social audit progressed the 5-day audit 14. OorKoottam 82 people attended the meeting. Individual assistance repayment mismatches, skill training, SHG Training were the issues raised in the Oor Koottam. Ex.Panchayat President and the project staff APM (cluster team) attended Oor the Koottam. Panchayat president did not attend the Oor Koottam. The Bookkeeper did not attend the Oor Koottam. Ex Panchayat President requested for documents of those who have not repaid loans, for the follow up.
15 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
2.3 Puliyampatti village, Palladam block, Coimbatore district Social Audit 30.08.16 to 03.09.16
Area Findings 1 Village Overview In this village, there are 4 habitations in all, of which 2 habitations have mixed communities, 2 habitations have SC Community. Livelihood aspects: Most of the villagers work as agriculture labourers, or weavers and work on poultry farms Community aspects: People complained that they get drinking water only once in two days. Political aspects: The Panchayat President or Talaivi is a woman from the SC community. She is also an SHG member, she has been previously elected as ward councilor, and been on the VPRC committee. But it was said that the control of Panchayat rests with the Vice President (BC community) Social aspects: There were separate tumblers in the tea shop, as noticed by the social audit team, for the SC community and the BC Community (Kongu Vellalar) 2. PIP: In PIP list identifies 184 families as target. BPL: It was found that PIP process was conducted only in 2 habitations. 2 habitations have not been visited at all during PIP process. This was confirmed by looking at the PIP register where there are no members in the PIP list from these 2 habitations, which were excluded in the identification process initially conducted. 3. Individual The team met 57/57 beneficiaries. (75 Loans) assistance (observations) 1. As per records, an amount of Rs.82,500 has been disbursed as individual assistance loans to 10 persons. During field verification, it was found that these persons were not eligible to receive the loans. Ie, they were neither differently abled nor ‘vulnerable’ as per project guidelines. 2. As per records, Mrs. Amirtham w/o Aruswamy (differently abled person) has received Rs. 8000 as loan. But during field visit her son said she has not received the loan. 3. Individual assistance loans should be disbursed only to differently able and Vulnerable persons as per project norms, but it was found that one loan of Rs. 10000 has been given in the name of a youth Mrs.Narmada devi w/o Dhanapal , in June 2016, for purchase of bike. 4. For 19 members, there was a difference of Rs.17,750 in the loan repayment amounts between registers and field visit. 5. The current CDF belongs to Puliyampatti, she is also the CDF of the neighbouring Melagoundampalayam village, in violation of project rules. She is not functional or active in this village.
4. SHGs Total Affiliated SHG: 16 New SHG Formed: 1 Differently abled SHG: 1 Total: 18 Defunct: 13 SHGs Bank Linkage – 10 SHGs are having a bank loan – repayment is prompt
Some other observations about SHGs: 1. Many private microfinance institutions have disbursed loans to PVP SHG members.
16 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
2. There is no CST in this village. Records are not updated and it was felt that SHGs face challenges in updating the record themselves 3. SHG members are involved in micro finance, bank loan, savings, internal loan as well as amuthasurabi loan through our project. 5. SHG Training 1. Total SHGs are 18 in all, having 218 members in all. Among this only 153 members attended the training 2. In resolution, it is mentioned training was conducted for 3 days and that all the members from all SHGs participated. During field verification, members could not share learnings or training experience, but they recollected that on three days food was served. 3. Total expense amount Rs.40508 but of this, for Rs.5,600 there were no bills 6. Skill The team met 51/59 beneficiaries. Findings are as follows: 1. During field visit while verifying skill records, 21 candidates who were met in person said that they did not go for training. But against their names, payments have been made to Jeya Driving School. For 7 youths, payment of Rs.9,800 and for the remaining 14 youths Rs.19,800, so a total of Rs.29,400 cheque payments have been released against these trainings. 2. In this village, skill fund is available. During field visit, youths said they did not know about the scheme or project. Given that most of them do work in power loom and poultry farm, they said training in these subjects would be helpful in employment. 3. In Kovai, Ramakrishna Mission Training Institute, masonry training was given to Karthik, Nagaraj, Vijiana and Vijiyakumar. They have not completed the trainings. Amount has been released to the institute at the rate of Rs.3000 for each candidate and totally Rs.12000 released. 4. As per records, 30 youths have undergone training with Ellora Tailoring training institute. Cheques have been released at payment rates of Rs.2000 per member, so a total of Rs.60,000 has been released to the institute. But during field visit, it was found that 19 of these youths have not completed the training. Certificates have been given too. 5. As per project rule only one training must be given to a youth. But for Mrs. Shanthamani, both tailoring and beautician trainings were given.
7. PLF The team met 109/180 beneficiaries. Findings: Sindhunadhi SHG received Amuthasurabhi loan of Rs.1,59,500. When met in person, they said they have repaid the amount, but as per records Rs. 39,007 is shown as outstanding amount yet to be repaid. 8. PAR 14% 80:20 74% : 26% 70:30 98%: 02% Recovery Rate 65% Closing Balance 83205 9. Functioning of In many cases, registers did not reflect the true and correct picture of the CBOs functioning of committees. Field visits and interactions with the members revealed (VPRC, PLF, SAC) the actual position vis-à-vis the registers. This is described below: 1. For the VPRC EC signatures, it was found that registers are being updated by going door to door to merely get the signatures. Actual involvement of members is not there. Similarly, for PLF, EC members have not attended the meetings but signature have been collected from them. 2. SAC registers have been maintained but meetings are not conducted.
17 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
3. Social audit team requested for a CBO meeting, but nobody came and over the 5-day audit period the meeting could not be organized. 4. Without conducting the meetings, resolutions have been updated and shown as passed through consensus. 5. There is no CST in this village. 10. Tally VPRC records are updated till 7/2016 PLF records were updated till 7/2016, but Tally PLF PAR 98% does not reflect the correct PAR (which is 74%, found by our team through register calculation) SHG Transactions were updated only till 2/2015 11. CLG 1. PLF loan has been given to 25 members for purchase of cattle. Dairy Poocharam CLG has been formed with these members. The CLG has received the infra fund of Rs.97750. They have completed exposure visits and attended trainings. They have received fodder too. Total expense Rs.49,350. But during field visit it was found that some members have not purchased cattle, and they have used the loan amount for their own purposes. The CLG is currently inactive 2. It was observed by the social audit team that blank cheques have been signed and kept in VPRC. (Cheque no 000004,000005) 3. We found resolutions showing intent of purchase of cattle feed unit and weighing machine in the minutes note but this has not actually been executed. 4. Cattle feed mixer has been purchased for Rs.40,954 from Milk Society and it has been kept it for sales at a nearby shop. They have earned an amount of Rs.11,550 through sales. But now the shop has been shut down, resulting in a loss of Rs.29,404 (since not even the amount spent for purchase of the unit has been recovered through sales). 12. Total Total Amount Rs. 2,15,661 Misappropriation Break up as follows: Amount SHG – IV Module Training – 5,600 Skill Training – 41,400, Individual Assistance Rs.100250, PLF – Rs.39007 CLG-Rs.2904 13. Impact during 1. Sindhupoo SHG loan repayment was wrongly entered against another group the 5-day audit name and this was corrected 2. Initiatives were taken for CLG to collect the amount from owner of the shop 3. New CST was appointed 4. During this period, a person was identified for appointment as book keeper to PLF 5. Initiatives taken to recover the amount Rs.29400 from the Jeya driving training institute 6. Individual assistance loan receipts were given to those who had not received them earlier 7. PIP register and loan register was corrected 14. Oor Koottam Perceptions in this village were that they would not attend an Oor Koottam. By 12.30pm, 51 people had come. Panchayat Talaivar and Vice President expressed their surprise that people had attended the Oor Koottam.
APM (LH) Skill, Cluster staff and District MaKaMai participated in the Oor Koottam.
18 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Issues discussed included the loans meant for differently-abled and vulnerable being wrongly disbursed to other members. The book keeper’s daughter has received such a loan. When this was brought out, the book keeper Mariammal apologised in the Oor Koottam.
Sindhupoo SHG representatives wanted to know why there was an outstanding shown against their SHG, given that their repayments were complete. To this, the book keeper clarified, ‘I had entered this wrongly and now it stands corrected’.
Tailoring trainee youths who attended the Oor Koottam said that they did not usually attend the tailoring training. They said that they would sign at the institute but go away to do MGNREGS work, and did not actually attend the training. The loan has been disbursed continuously to the group having loan outstanding and mostly loan disbursed to the book keeper group and her relation groups.
Nodal APM instructed the Team Leader to select correct persons for the CBOs and focus on activating them at the earliest. The SHGs promised that they would repay the loan amounts.
19 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
3. Cuddalore district
3.1 Nedunkulam village, Mangalore block, Cuddalore Social Audit from 29/8/2016 to 4/9/2016
Area Findings 1. PIP: PIP list identifies 188 households as target, whereas BPL list identifies 299 families BPL: as poor. The people said partisan influences could be a reason for the difference. 2 changes were made to the PIP list. 2 persons have been added and 2 persons have been deleted in the PIP registers. But these did not have Gram Sabha approvals. When this was pointed out, the staff present promised that they would obtain Gram Sabha approvals for the same in the next Grama Sabha (2ndoct 16) 2. Individual 52/61 beneficiaries were met. Most of the beneficiaries did not have any loan assistance repayment receipt. Instead of the loan card, the beneficiaries had a small booklet which had up to date repayment information. 3. SHGs 5/25 SHGs were defunct. 5 SHGs did not have even one bank linkage, while none of the SHGs had a single bank loan in the current financial year. The members reportedly felt PLF loan is cheaper and hence did not prefer a bank loan at higher interest. 4. SHG Training 20 SHGs have completed IV module training. In case of 96 members, there were differences in training attendance, between the registers and field verification. This means people did not attend the full training and have dropped out, but the records and expenses show that they have completed trainings. The average training expense per person was Rs. 130.68. Based on this, for 96 members, the attendance difference comes to a cost of Rs. 12525. 5. PLF 157/301 beneficiaries were met by the team. In 9 cases, the stated loan purpose was not the same as actual loan use. 6. Skill 81/98 beneficiaries were met. None of the youths met had received any soft skill training. Overall the target ratio was found to be 71.5:28.5. Gender ratio in skill was 1.6 males: 1 female 7. PAR 36.18% (as per registers) 80:20 80: 20 (i.e. target 242 members and non-target 59 members) 70:30 100% Livelihood Recovery Rate 68% Closing Balance Rs. 220011 8. Functioning of PLF committee was formed in 2011, with no rotation in membership except for the CBOs PLF President. Their registers were up-to-date. (VPRC, PLF, SAC) Last 3 month CST reports were not in place, nor had she received a salary. Most people’s awareness about the scheme was low. They do correlate the scheme with the bookkeeper Sarla. 9. Tally VPRC and PLF updated till August 2016, and SHG update is pending 10. CLG The Goat CLG ‘Durgaiamman’ has received fund of Rs. 85,500 in Oct 2012, they have gone for training and exposure visit. The only CLG activity has been measurement of each goat’s weight at the rate of Rs. 5/goat. For 52 goats, this amounts to Rs. 260. No other activity in the CLG. 11. Total Rs. 12,525 (SHG IVth module training, based on signature differences) Misappropriation Amount
20 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
12. OorKoottam 320 people attended the Oor Koottam on 3rd September 2016, which lasted for 2.5 hours. The DPM, APM, cluster team, Panchayat President and all ward members were present at the Oor Koottam.
President promised to facilitate repayments for all members. The Team Leader promised to work on the defunct SHGs in the current month.
3.2 T.V.Puthur village, Viruthachalam block, Cuddalore
Social Audit from 29/8/2016 to 4/9/2016
Area Findings 1. PIP: PIP list identifies 245 households as target, whereas BPL list identifies 231 families. BPL: Gram Sabha approval copies were not available for verification. 2. Individual 32/77 beneficiaries were met. In the case of 16 beneficiaries, record and field visit assistance loan repayment amount was found to be different. This means that the loan money collected through repayments has not been deposited properly, and the correct amount has not been shown in the registers. Repayment amounts were different in registers and in field visit. The amount actually repaid by people was more (than the repayment amount as per the records) by Rs. 53,125. Most of the beneficiaries did not have loan cards and did not have any loan repayment receipt. The bookkeeper was silent when asked about the difference. We found 13 differently-abled and 15 vulnerable who had not received individual assistance and they were in need of loans. One member, Indrani, had taken a loan of Rs. 8000 in the year 2009, but she died subsequently. Her family said that the loan had been waived off in the Gram Sabha, but we could not find approval for the same. 3. SHGs There are 22 SHGs in the PLF. 12 SHGs was defunct. Of these, 10 SHGs were in the SC habitation. Microfinance Gramsakthi, Usvan are thriving well in this habitation. The bookkeeper in fact belongs to this habitation. The people did not know about Pudhu Vaazhvu. 10 SHGs do not have a bank loan in the current financial year. 4. SHG Training 23 SHGs have completed IV module training. While examining documents of SHG training, mismatches in the attendance records came to light. As per records, over 3 days of training, there are 1004 signatures. But during verification through interaction with members, in the case of 355 signatures, members said that the signature was not theirs, when shown the records. Rs. 32,090 was spent on the trainings as cash payments for which no bills were there. Cash has been withdrawn in the name of VPRC Secretary, who could not be met over the 5 days of audit. 5. PLF 67/172 beneficiaries met. In the case of 57 beneficiaries, the loan repayment amount was different in records versus field verification. This means repayments from people are not being collected and deposited properly. The amount actually repaid by people (field verification) was more than the amount entered in registers (record verification) by Rs. 2,25,345. Most of the beneficiaries didn’t have a loan card and did not have any loan repayment receipt.
21 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
2 SHGs - Ganga and Sakthi – had taken loans for Rs. 1.75 lakh and Rs. 2 lakh respectively and had split the amount equally amongst all its member. The amount is being repaid. Loan monitoring registers and DCB calendar was not shown to the social audit team despite 5 days of asking for the same. 6. Skill 35/68 beneficiaries met. Skill training documents – attendance records, youth application forms, proof of youth contribution, institute order copy - were not presented for social audit over the 5 days. When asked the bookkeeper and staff said all these documents were at district office.
One member (name withheld) has gone for the JCB operator training in 2011, but till date training certificate has not been given to him. Similarly, youths who went for training for tailoring (2), nursing training (1 person) in 2015 have till date not got a certificate. 7. PAR 87.65% 80:20 90.11 : 9.89 (I,eTarget 155 members and non target 17 members) 70:30 97.6% Livelihood, 2.4% consumption Recovery Rate 18.05% Closing Balance Rs. 190198 8. Functioning of VPRC expenses were all in cash. The project rule is that payments over Rs. 500 CBOs should be made by cheque and not cash, but we found that even payments as high (VPRC, PLF, SAC) as Rs. 12,950 (year 2005) had been made in cash with no proper bills. Bill book from April 2016 upto date were not presented for the audit despite asking for the same over a period of 5 days. Cash books were not updated for the current month. All 3 - VPRC, PLF, SAC committees could not be met for a single day over the 5 days of social audit. But in the records, resolutions were maintained properly and meeting member quorum is shown to be 100%. When asked, the office-bearers did not know about expenditures made. 9. Tally VPRC and PLF updated till July 2016, and SHG update is pending 10. CLG The diary CLG has received fund of Rs. 95000 in 2012, they have gone for training and exposure visit. Over the last two months, the CLG had stopped functioning, because there was a shortfall in sales (being sold to Ko milks located in Ulunthurpettai), leading to a loss of Rs. 4600. Hence people have stopped giving milk to the CLG since 2 months. 11. Total Rs. 3,10,560 Misappropriation (SHG IVth module 32090, Amount individual assistance difference 53125, PLF loan different 225345) 12. Progress made A day after the social audit began, and PLF repayment differences came to fore, during social loan repayments of Rs. 1,91,990 were made by the bookkeeper into the PLF audit days account. Another positive impact of the social audit was that all registers got updated as the audit progressed over 5 days. 12. OorKoottam 82 people attended the Oor Koottam on 3rd September 2016, which lasted for 1 hour. The issue of repayment mismatch was discussed at length. The DPM, APM, team leader, facilitator, Panchayat President, were present at the OorKoottam. The follow up action:
22 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
The DPM, at the Oor Koottam, instructed the cluster team to report with action taken before 10th September 2016 over the repayment differences.
4. Dharmapuri district
4.1 Madehalli village, Pennagaram Block, Dharmapuri district Social Audit from 29/8/2016 to 4/9/2016
Area Findings Panchayat The village is situated in Pennagaram block, 17 km from Dharmapuri. With 746 households overview spread across two habitations, namely Madehalli and Pillapanayakanahalli. Total population is 3161. Livelihood aspects: Agriculture. Tamarind (puli) repackaging by the women is an important source of livelihood, men are mostly out of the village and travel to Hosur for daily labour. Dairy too. Community aspects: The village composition is 100% MBC community (Vanniyar) Political aspects: The panchayat talaivar, Perumal, is about to complete 5 years in his term 1. PIP: PIP list identifies 293 households as target. When the team asked to know the BPL count of the BPL: village, the Panchayat clerk responded saying they have no separate BPL list but in fact use the PIP list as BPL. This could not be verified further. 2. Individual The team met 68/70 beneficiaries. Findings are as follows: assistance 1. In the case of 4 members – Chinnakannu, Arunkumar, Govindasamy, Konammal – there is a loan repayment difference in record and field verification, to an amount of Rs.7200. When asked about this, the bookkeeper said the ledger had not been updated. But the amount still could not be traced. 2. As per records, Rani w/o Sivalingam (PIP no. 056) has received a loan of Rs.6000 by cheque in June 2014. When met, Rani said that she had not taken the money but had passed on the cheque to Vimala (the then BC or Bank Correspondent). The money is still with Vimala who has reportedly moved to Bengaluru. 3. The team met Jothivel S/o Kandhasamy, who has taken a loan of Rs.6000 in June 2014. Reason: the member is the old CDF and has not got his honorarium from VPRC, as per his statement to social audit. What is worse is that details of this loan have not even been entered in the Loan Repayment Register. 4. 6 members’ VPRC loans have been written off as subsidy. 5. 23 members have not been given individual assistance at all. 6. Of 5 members who have not been repaying loans given from VPRC 4 members have passed away and one has migrated. 3. SHGs The team met 13/28 SHGs. 7 SHGs did not have bank loan in the current finance year. 1 SHG has not taken a bank loan at all. None of the SHGs showed the SHG register during field visit, the reason given by the SHG members was that registers were in the house of the Panchayat Vice-President. 4. CST Salary 3 CSTs have been appointed in this village for monitoring 28 SHGs. But only 2 CSTs are active. irregulariti Only 17/28 SHGs are being monitoring the CST and this CST has been paid honorarium till July es 2016. 11 SHGs are not being monitored by any of the CSTs. 5. SHG 10/28 SHGs were complete the 4th Module training. (2 Differently abled SHG, 8 women SHGs) Training As per resolution, we found that a total of Rs.6300 had been spent on IVth module SHGS trainings of 2 SHGs - Kaliamman and vetkaliamman SHG in 2016(22.02.2016 to 23.02.2016).
23 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
According to the SHG Consolidation Register, each of these SHGs had a membership of 12 women. However, in SHG Training register, there were 20 signatures instead of 12. When we met these women during field verification and asked them about the training, the 12 women said they did not know about it. From this, it can be inferred that the trainings did not happen. For SHGs IVth module training, an amount of Rs. 34575 has been withdrawn in Feb 2016. But only Rs.30565 has been spent on training, while the balance Rs. 4010 has been spent on office infrastructure (which should not have been done from the training expenses) 6. PLF 1. 28 SHGs have been affiliated from PLF. In the case of 26 SHGs, 108 members have got the PLF loan of Rs.18,35,000. 2 SHGs have not received a PLF loan. (1 SHG differently abled has already been given the individual assistance loan and another SHG has a bank loan which they are repaying at present.) 2. The team met 57/108 members. 3. Annie Besant SHG has received a loan of Rs. 75000 in names of 3 members (Mari, Saritha, Theivanai) in June 2016. It was found that Mari has given the loan amount to Rajeswari (who is the Annie Besant SHG representative) and Saritha has given her loan amount to another person is Kalaimani. The above details were not known to any of the SHG members until the social audit. 4. None of the members had the loan card. So loan repayment was not clear from member interaction. 5. 2 SHGs (Deepam SHG, Thirupathi SHG) did not have the loan repayment receipts, hence loan repayment details were not clear. 6. In Thenaruvi SHG, a woman Konammal has been sanctioned a loan of Rs.25000, but during field visit it was found that Konammal has received a loan amount of Rs.23000 and given a bribe of Rs. 2000 to the animator. Konammal also revealed that the animator had asked her not to divulge this information to anyone. The next day Konammal said that she had been asked to retract her words given to social audit team, by the said animator. 7. 2 SHGs – Angalamman and Malligai – have received PLF loans in Oct 2015, each SHG getting an amount of Rs. 54000 with a split up as follows: 12000,12000,18000,12000 as per records. However, during field verification, it was found that this amount was in fact split equally to all members, each taking a loan of Rs.13500. They are repaying the loan. 8. Based on field visit, Deepam SHG members have made loan repayments of Rs.6500. (Selvi - Rs. 1250, Angalamman - Rs.2000, Punitha - Rs.2000, Murugamma - Rs.1250) But this amount has not been updated in the Loan Ledger. 7. Skill 1. We met 21/32 skill training beneficiaries. 2. Skill Training Register was not update properly – the training completion date, employee status, course fee, were not updated. 3. Raja s/o Samraj has undergone LMV Training. An amount of Rs.4750 for this training has been made, through a payment by cheque dated 5.9.2013. But for the same person – Raja s/o Samraj - a second payment has been made, i.e, Rs.4750 has again been paid for the same training on 5.8.2015. 4. Rajsekar has taken his own driving licence already in 1.06.2011 as on date (even before the project began). But as per records, for driving training in Rajsekar’s name, a payment of Rs. 4750 has been made through cheque dated 5.09.2013. The institute identified was John Driving Institute.
5. There were errors in entering the institution name while filling up the skill vouchers. Voucher number 55 dated 5.8.2015 mentions the payment being made to Om Sakthi Driving School, but in the resolution register, the institute named is different (John Heavy Driving School, Dharmapuri) Amount Rs.18400/- has gone to John Heavy Driving
24 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
School. The youths too have gone to John for training, so this appears to be a case of mistaken entry in voucher and not misuse.
6. C.Anand, a youth from the neighbouring Padi Village (Nakkanahalli habitation) has taken training through another VPRC, but payment for the same has been made from the Madehalli VPRC on 5.8.2015 through cheque no.078458(LMV+Badge) . The total amount paid has been Rs. 4750(3000 LMV +1750 Badge). The institute identified was Om Sakthi Driving Institute. The same issue was found in 2 more cases: Settu s/o Pachiyappan – Rs. 4750, Sivakumar s/o pachiyappan – Rs. 4750. However it is not known which village the above two youths belong to. None of the 3 youths could be met because they were not from the village. The fact that these youths are from a different village was found out through discussion with the youths of Madehalli, who shared this. 7. Two persons - Pushpa W/o Madesh, Thenmozhi W/o Ramesh – have received trainings twice. They have first attended tailoring training to ATDC Tailoring Institute and an amount of Rs. 9400 (each member Rs 4700) has been spent by the VPRC on this. But both these persons have attended another training in nursing to MGR Institute in Jan 2015 - Apr 2016 for which Rs. 29000(each member 14500) has been spent by VPRC. Project rules require that the first training amount should be collected back before a second training can be given.
Total Misappropriation amount Rs.23750(4750 x 5 for the issues described in points 3,4,6 above) 8. PAR 0% PAR 80:20 81.3: 18.7 (74: 17) 70:30 70: 30 ASF Closing Balance: Rs.2,28,888/- 9. Functionin VPRC g of CBOs VPRC office bearer have been changed, but Grama Sabha approval has not been taken for the (VPRC, PLF, same. VPRC registers have got updated but not properly maintained. VPRC minutes member SAC) signatures have differences. PLF loan ledger updated till July 2016, so it has not been updated for one month. SAC Meeting Register are updated, but members are not involved in VPRC and PLF activity monitoring. 10. Tally Tally upto date updated but only VPRC PLF transaction. 11. CLG CLG Sri Murugan Tamarind (puli) CLG has received an amount of Rs. 90000 on 17.07.2014. Total members : 20 (target 16 and non-target 4). But CLG is not active. CLG Bank Balance amount - Rs.97050. 12. Total Rs. 80050 Misapprop SHG 4th module training bills not proper – Rs. 6300/- riation Skill training -- Rs.23750/- Amount PLF (Two members’ names mentioned but loan given to various members) – Rs.50000 13. OorKootta 95 members attended this Oor Koottam. Panchayat President, APM VF and Cluster staff m attended. All issues were discussed in the Oor koottam. The panchayat in-charge staff promised to take corrective action based on findings.
25 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
26 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
4.2 Vadugupatti village, Harur Block, Dharmapuri district Social Audit from 29/8/2016 to 4/9/2016
Area Findings 1 Panchayat The village is situated in Harur block, 47 km from Dharmapuri. With about 834 Overview households spread across 9 habitations, the total population is 2905. The two main habitations where most benefits are concentrated are Vepanatham (majority beneficiaries) and Turanampatti. The other 7 have little or no beneficiaries. Livelihood aspects: Diary (goat, karavai maadu), agriculture based activity (sugarcane, kambu, rice, etc). Garments, NREGS works. Community aspects: 44% SC community, rest is MBC (Chettiyar, etc) Political aspects: The thalaivi is a woman, Kalpana (SC), but it is her husband who acts as the President. The people too recognize him as the Talaivar. Social aspects: it was learnt that an intercaste marriage was the source of intense conflict in this village. The Talaivi’s son (SC) had married a woman from a different habitation’s (MBC) community, which had led to a community issue in the village. The Panchayat office had initially been in the MBC section. After the tensions, the panchayat office as well as the VPRC buildings have been shifted to Vepanatham habitation, where the Talaivi’s family reside. All beneficiaries too are mostly from this habitation. 2. PIP: The project has identified 238 households as target. There are 30 differently abled BPL: and 20 vulnerable persons according to the PIP list. There were no changes made to the PIP list. BPL category identifies 226 families has poor. 2. Individual Social Audit Team met 37/55 beneficiaries. assistance As per records, Murugan s/o Govinthan has received a loan amount of Rs.15000 in Dec.2014, but till date there has been no repayment. It was found that Murugan has passed away, and the loan has not been waived yet through GS approval. Loan cards have not been properly maintained.(Missing voucher number, date) During the 5 days of social audit, repayments to the amount of Rs.51,820 was made by people who had not been repaying loans upto that time. 3. SHGs Social audit team met 13/23 SHGs. 3 SHGs were defunct. 18/20 SHGs did not have a bank loan during the current financial year. 2 SHGs have not been repaying the bank loan properly, while 3 SHGs have not been repaying PLF Loan properly. 4. CST Salary 3 CSTs are there in this VPRC. 20/23 SHGs are being monitored by the CST. irregularities CST reports have been manually prepared but not entered in Tally. CST salaries have not been given for 3-4 months. 5. SHG Training 18/23 SHGs have completed the 4th module training. 5 SHGs have not got the training yet. 1. SHGs training bills and attendance register have not been properly maintained. Based on the records, the following details could not be found out: which training, how many members have participated, which SHG, how many days training was conducted. Those details were not present from examination of VPRC minutes, cash book, vouchers, bills (white paper hand bill). During field visit, the women said recollected that some trainings did happen, but could not share training content or purpose. 2. It was noticed that SHG training has been given in Oct 2015 but the vouchers for this were present for dates upto January 2016. The amount of Rs.25765 has been taken against this through cheque no. 632414 dated 2.1.2016. 6. PLF There were 23 SHGs affiliated with PLF. The team met 48/48 beneficiaries. PLF loan has been given 17 SHGs. Issues identified were as follows:
27 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
1. Financial records were updated only upto May 2016. 2. PLF loan ledger was blank. This was possibly because the PLF bookkeeper needed training. 3. Loan cards were not available with anyone. 4. In the case of 5 members, loan purpose was found to difference in record and field verification (5 members’ PLF loans had been classified as being given for ’livelihood’ purpose but the loans should have been categorized correctly as for ‘consumption’ purposes. This is because the members had used it for educational expenses (3 members) and for housing(2 members)purposes 7. Skill The team were met 38/56 youth beneficiaries. 33 youths were target and 5 youths were non-target. 1 Skill training register was not updated on day 1 of social audit but the next day it got updated. 2 Indumathi w/o Mani has attended only 15 days (out of a 90 day course). But a payment of Rs.4800 has been made to the institute. 3 16s youths have undergone LMV training but not undergo the PSV Badge training. 4 Soft skill training has not been given for any of the members. Misuse amount in skill: Rs.4800 8. Loan recovery 52.36% PAR 0% Loan outstanding 80:20 784759 70:30 Target – 77% :Non-Target – 23% (37 member + 11Member) Closing balance 94% (Livelihood) : 6 % ASF Closing Balance: Rs.117721/-,General a/c Closing Balance : Rs.4716/- 9. Functioning of 1. VPRC is running in the veterinary hospital building. CBOs 2. About 80% of the CBO members are from Veppanatham habitation, the other (VPRC, PLF, habitations have less membership. SAC) 3. VPRC office bearer – the Treasurer has been appointed in Aug 2013 but till date not changed. 4. VPRC and PLF register updated but not properly maintained, so it was felt that the bookkeeper needs support and training. 5. SAC Meeting Register is updated regularly, members were active based on register and field visit. It was noteworthy that all information has been shared in the habitations, and notice boards have been updated during solving the internal problems. 10. Tally Tally updated only for VPRC PLF transaction. 11. CLG Iyarkai Velanmai (Organic Farming) CLG has received the amount of Rs.95000 in Aug 2015, but till date it is not functioning. The above CLG has 30 members, target 25 members and non-target 5 members. 12. Total Rs. 30650/- (SHG training bills not proper: 25850 + 4800 skill training not attended Misappropriation the training full period) Amount 13. Effect of social During the 5 days of social audit, repayments to the amount of Rs.51820 were made audit over 5 days by people who had not been repaying upto that time. 13. OorKoottam 129 members attended this Oor Koottam. Panchayat President, DPM, APM BF and Cluster team have attended the Oor Koottam. Police too was present since the village is considered to be sensitive. All issues identified were discussed in the Oor Koottam.
28 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
4.3 Irulapatti village, Pappireddipatti Block, Dharmapuri district Social Audit from 29/8/2016 to 4/9/2016
Area Findings Village Irulapatti village is situated at about 50 kms from Dharmapuri district. There are overview about 651 Households in 4 habitations. Livelihood aspects: The village relies on agricultural cultivation. Community aspects: the village has about 87% people MBC (Vanniyar) population. There are about 62 ST households in the village, and so the village has a separate tribal VPRC. For social audit, the main VPRC was selected. Political aspects: Panchayat President is a woman, Poonkodi, but it is her husband who discharges duties. 2. PIP: There were no changes made to the PIP list. BPL: In this village, while Pudhu Vaazhvu has identified 176 target families, BPL category identifies 693 family (the BPL number is higher compared to PIP possibly because this count includes tribal and non-tribal households, whereas the PIP figure is for the regular VPRC only) 3. Individual The team met 33/38 beneficiaries in all: 25 differently abled and 13 vulnerable. No assistance differences between record and fields found. 4. SHGs 11/21 SHGs affiliated with PLF. The balance 10 SHGs have had a previous poor experience with borrowing through NGOs(the SHGs have been with the well-known NGO Myrada, having taken a loan but not repaid properly) 4/21 SHGs were Defunct. (1 SHG said that they had poor monitoring, 3 SHGs said that their bank loan repayment was a problem) 5. SHGs 5/21 SHGs complete only 4th Module training. Training As per registers, 3-day training has been given to 5 SHGs. The total number of signatures in this is 128. But during field visit, it was found that only 98 members (not 128) had attended the training. (3 SHGs – 3 days, 2 SHGs – 2 days but records showed full attendance) SHG training bills and attendance register was not properly maintained,against the expense of Rs. 7650. 6. CST Salary There is no CST at present. irregularities CDF Sulochana was changed in 18.5.14, and the new CDF Mullai has joined in Aug ‘14, but she is not functioning. Monthly reports not there. 7. PLF This is a new district for the project implementation and hence loans have been issues since last one month only. 14/15 beneficiary were met by the team. PLF first instalment has been received for only Rs.3 lakh. 7. Skill The team met 12/22 youth beneficiaries. As per VPRC cheque number 690154 dated 20.05.16, an amount of Rs. 6800 has been paid to Tamilan Driving School, but vouchers are present for Rs. 6500. Rs.300 is the amount difference. 8. PAR 0%(All the loans have been issued for the first time in the last month only.) 80:20 100% (Target member 15) 70:30 100% (Livelihood only) ASF Closing Balance: Rs.25861/- General A/c Closing Balance : Rs.11298/- 9. Functioning VPRC: of CBOs 1. The VPRC did not receive the VPRC 3rd installment fund. VPRC office bearers (VPRC, PLF, have not been changed the last four and half years. SAC)
29 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
2. VPRC Register was updated but not properly maintained. For example, the date, voucher number, receipt number, ledger book number have not been mentioned in the cash book. 3. VPRC minutes note was found to be updated, but member signature did not match the signatures collected during field interaction in the VPRC meeting conducted with Social audit team. 4. VPRC bank reconcile statement (BRS) should be maintained every month by comparing cash book and bank passbook for differences. But this has not been maintained (refer: Cheque nos. 99810 and 95570) PLF: 1. Loan card not available. 2. PLF Register updated but not properly maintained by the PLF bookkeeper who is new and in need of support and training. 3. PLF loan ledger was not updated. SAC SAC Meeting register updated only SAC Not involve the CBOs (VPRC, PLF, SHG, CLG) activities monitoring. 10. Tally Tally updated upto Aug 2016 only for VPRC PLF transaction. 11. CLG Komatha Milk Production Dairy CLG started on November 2013, the CLG 30 members include that is target 25, non target 5. The above CLG receive the amount Rs.90000 in May 2015. CLG is active but does not involve all the CLG members. CLG is being operated by a single person who is the VPRC Secretary’s husband. The other members are producing milk, but ownership remains with a single person. Income and expenditure book was not there. 12. Total Rs. 7950 (SHG 4th module training bills - 7650 + 300 Skill training bill amount Misappropriation Amount difference) 13. OorKoottam 129 people attended the Oor Koottam on 3rd September 2016, which lasted for 1.30 hours. Panchayat president and cluster all staff were present at the Oor Koottam. Nobody from the DPMU attended the Oor Koottam. One individual assistance beneficiary, Mathammal, had received loan of Rs. 15,000 and has been repaying it. She used it to buy a cow and is now earning Rs.150/- a day with it. There were people who said they were in need of loans from the project and they shared the same at the Oor Koottam.
30 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
5. Dindigul district
5.1 Puliyampatti Village Thoppampatti Block Dindugal District Social Audit from 16.09.2016 to 19.09.2016
Area Findings 1. Village Overview In Puliyampatti village there are 414 households in 2 habitations – Puliyampatti and Vannampatti. Livelihood aspects: agriculture, milch animals and masonry work Community aspects: The backward community(56%) is majority Political aspects: Panchayat Thalaiver is a businessman, and owns the well known Mani Broilers poultry farm, and the people from this village regularly work in his farm. People said the Panchayat Thalaivar is supportive to the people. For the upcoming panchayat elections, reservation is for an SC woman candidate. Poverty level is medium overall. Less than half a km from Puliyampatti village, there is a small settlement of 657 Sri Lankan Tamil refugees. The men mostly cut firewood and many of the women are engaged in tailoring. They are reportedly availing benefits from the government. 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 136 families as target, but in BPL list 336 families as poor. BPL: No addition and deletions from the PIP list 3. Individual The team met 35/36 beneficiaries. assistance Individual assistance loan has been disbursed to 14 differently-abled people for an amount of Rs.180000. 22 vulnerable people have received amount of Rs.445000. So totally 36 persons have received an amount of Rs.625000. Some issues observed are as follows: Loan card has not been issued to the beneficiary and all the loan cards were with VPRC secretary. Out of 14 differently-abled, 6 of them are from the refugees camp (Sri Lankan) but they have not been included in the PIP list. In the individual assistance, Palaniswamy received a loan amount of Rs.10000 on 20/12/2013 and he has left the village after repaying only Rs. 1000. 4. SHGs The team met 4/7 SHGs. 2 SHGs were affiliated for PLF and 5 SHGs were newly formed. 2 women SHGs are defunct and 5 SHGs do not have bank linkage in current year. 10 SHGs are not affiliated with PLF. During the field visit, we organized meetings with SHGs and asked to know the reason for defunct SHGs. It was found that a bank loan is overdue. In the functioning SHGs, records were not updated since 2012. CST is not available. In Utchimakaliamman SHG, RF was not repaid to the bank. In one case, Eswaran, an LH facilitator nodal staff has arranged a loan from HDFC for 8 members. A loan amount of Rs.150000 at 24% interest and members have used this amount to repay the previous bank overdue amount. Two defunct SHGs Kanniyathal SHG and Nagathal SHG said they were not interested in getting a loan from HDFC because they had been asked to pay a bribe of Rs.2000 per member. These women said that if they got a loan from PVP, they would be able to repay the bank loan, and that the SHGs would begin working.
31 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
5. SHG Training The team met 3 of the active SHGs. SHGs Module I training was conducted in 2013 but not documented. Attendance was verified, but bills for Rs.5210 could not be produced.
6. Skill The team met 19/21 skill beneficiaries. Out of 21 beneficiaries, 100% are target.
As per records, a total amount of Rs.147360 has been paid through cheques to Jeyam Tailoring Institute for training 15 youths. But bills and vouchers for Rs.142860 of this amount could not be found.
During field verification it was found that out of 19 beneficiaries, 5 beneficiaries had dropped out of training but an amount released to Jeyam Tailoring Institute Institute Rs.42240. In one of these 5 cases, Karuppathal w/o Veeramuthu went to Jeyam tailoring Institute only for 10 days (in a 90 day course) but amount of Rs.8400 has been released to the institute. Karuppathal’s full attendance and certificate has been given to the VPRC. Karuppathal has submitted in writing that she is a dropout. The remaining four persons went to training only for 30 to 40 days out of 90 days but attendance is shown for all the days and no soft skills have been given in the case of these trainings. Reportedly, Jeyam Tailoring Institute is an NGO that operates in all blocks in Dindugal district, as told by one of the staff members present. 7. PLF ASF The team met 42/48 beneficiaries Only ASF I Installment received Rs.840000 ASF loan has gone only to 4 SHGs. During the field verification all the loan cards were found in the possession of the respective SHG secretaries only. Amounts are collected by her and repayments made in the bank, but members have no individual card to track the repayments. Differently abled SHG said they did not want a loan because they felt they would not be able to repay it. 8. PAR As per PLF PAR outstanding amount NIL and PLF total outstanding amount Rs.476895. 100% repayment 80:20 Totally amutha surabhi loan is disbursed to 48 members amount 70:30 Rs.1120000 in that 38 target members and amount is 870000 and benefited Recovery Rate 77 % Target and 10 non target and amount is 250000 and benefited 23% Closing Balance non target. 85% for livelihood amount Rs.1025000 and 15% for others amount Rs.95000 PLF Demand Rs.558750/collection Rs. 643105 and115 % Recovery Closing balance in Bank Rs.431906 9. Functioning of VPRC and PLF meetings are not being conducted properly. Register CBOs(VPRC,PLF,SA signatures are inconsistent and the PLF is a livelihood subcommittee (since C) there are less than 10 SHGs). As far as rotation is concerned, only the treasurer has been changed. In the month of September meeting had not been conducted. Minutes were found for 7/9/2016 but the meeting had not actually been held and there were no signatures.
32 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
SAC resolution passed but members are not active and SAC members have not signed in the resolution, it was found that signatures were being done by others.
VPRC and PLF accounts were updated during the social audit visit.
Bookkeeper has taken salaries meant for CST, CDF and bookkeeper (she holds all the 3 posts) to an amount of Rs.4200 on 11/10/2015. CST and CDF salary is not properly issued. The note was not updated and there were several other inconsistencies in salary records.
Parasakthi VPRC Secretary has also taken a salary on 6/8/2015 meant for CDF to an amount of Rs. 3000. The KaiPesi was found in the possession of the bookkeeper and not CST. 10. Tally In VPRC and PLF completely updated up to the month of August 2016 11. CLG Shenbagam Goat CLG started on 17.08.2015 and 30 members are in it. 26 target and 4 non target members. The CLG has received the infrastructure fund amount Rs.67466, it is not functional, and members who were met were not aware of CLG. Closing balance Rs.75516. 12. Total Skill training: Rs.42240 Misappropriation Total Misappropriation amount Rs.42240 Amount 13. Status of poverty In Puliyampatti habitation, MGR Nagar, Nagalakshmi is mentally challenged ever since her delivery. She has two daughters and one boy. After doing a uterus operation she developed mental issues, and her husband works as a coolie sporadically. The family lives in a small hut. Government benefits like fan, mixie, and TV have not reached this family. They rely on ration rice, and they eat only two times per day. He was asking for any help from the government for livelihood and for his wife to take treatment from the government hospital. They have not taken a loan from the project because they do not have income to return the money. 14. During the 5-day Social audit team stayed in the cluster office. Panchayat Talaivar, Panchayat audit clerk and the villagers were supportive of the team. Panchayat thalaiver kept on insisting that the bookkeeper should join as a computer operator on his farm.
15. Oor Koottam 90 people attended the meeting. Panchayat Talaivar, DPM, APMs, PFTs presided the Oor koottam. Individual assistance, skill training and PLF issues was discussed.
On many occasions people were prevented from speaking. On the finding about vouchers being there but supporting bills not being there for the 4-month period, the APM VF threw down a file containing bills which did not have signatures of VPRC secretary and Treasurer. Since the team had not seen this set of bills earlier over 5 days of asking for the same, it can be presumed that these bills were prepared specifically for Oor Koottam. The vouchers too in question had been prepared only during the social audit period.
33 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
In the case of SHG trainings where 5210 Rs. did not have bills (though the amount was reflected in resolutions), APM(VF) said that since financial audits have been completed, therefore social audit findings were false. People at the Oor Koottam said they did not know who the project staff were (except Eswaran LH who has been transferred to a different cluster) and said that VPRC meetings were not happening. People also said that office bearers come only to sign cheques.
Karuppathal said she had not attended the full training, and the issue was raised about the payment having gone for a dropout case. In front of the people, the DPM told Karuppathal to complete her training.
The members who had attended the tailoring training said that they needed a job after the tailoring training.
One woman, Kalaivani said that she was currently attending tailoring training, but that the institute had informed her that Pudhu Vaazhvu Project was about to close, to which the DPM responded that the training would be continued.
Panchayat thalaiver accepted the findings and he said that the staff needed more training and in future the gaps identified should be corrected and VPRC should be graded to A grade. In IHHL, it was discussed that applications were not being collected from the eligible member as per master register and target is not achieved. The Panchayat thalaiver and Panchayat clerk announced in the Oor Koottam that they would arrange to build toilets as soon as possible and Panchayat should become ODF Panchayat.
34 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
5.2 K.Pudukottai Village, Reddiyarchatram Block, Dindugal District Social Audit Period 16.09.2016 to 20.09.2016
Area Findings 1. Village Overview In K.Pudukottai village there are 666 households across 8 habitations and Livelihood: Primarily MGNREGS, agriculture, nearby spinning mill where people work at a daily wage rate of Rs. 150. There is a stone quarry and an old kottai near the village. Social aspects: This village has been announced as an open defecation free village, and the Panchayat Talaivar has got an award for the same. In this village there are no hut houses, there is a Government Primary Health Center which is open 24 hours, and a Higher Secondary School is in the village. Panchayat Talaivar is supportive to the people, as told by the villagers and VPRC/PLF members met. Community aspects: MBC communities are the primary community here. 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 227 families as target, but BPL identifies 220 families as poor. BPL: Two poor families were added to the PIP list. In one of the two families, a member has had an accident (and thereaftere his leg amputated because of no blood circulation), and in second person’s case due to nicotine consumption, both legs amputated. These two persons have been added to PIP list. Seven families were removed from the PIP list because they were at first wrongly identified as differently abled. GS approval was there dated 15/08/2016. But for the deletion, the name list is not mentioned in the Gram Sabha approval. 3. Individual The team met 56/75 beneficiaries. assistance There were several discrepancies between registers and field verification. Some of these are: In 5 cases, there was a difference in amount of Rs. 7000/- in loan repayment, as follows:
Name Register Field Visit Difference Loan Repaid Loan Repaid amount amount amount amount amount Dhanalakshmi 5000 2000 5000 2500 500 Lingammal 5000 1000 5000 1500 500 Backiyalakshmi 5000 2000 5000 3000 1000
Chinnakkal 5000 1000 5000 1500 500 Krishnamurthi 6000 1500 6000 6000 4500
1.Total misappropriation amount Rs.7000. 2. For the two differently abled persons who have been newly added, a loan has yet to be released. It was found during field verification that they were in need of loans. 3. For 7 differently abled loans amounting to Rs.35500/- which has been announced as subsidy due to death, in the case of one member Thathammal, we found that repayment was possible, because the family reportedly has 20 acres of land.
35 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
4. SHGs The team met 16/16 SHGs. 6 SHGs were affiliated for PLF and 10 SHGs were newly formed. 3 Women SHGs and 1 differently able groups are defunct and 10 SHGs do not have bank linkage in current year. In the case of 5 SHGs repayment is not prompt. During the field visit we organized SHG meetings and asked the reason for SHGs being defunct. It was found that bank linkage is in overdue and while ASF loan disbursed to the group members from the bank, the bank has debited the overdue amount from ASF loan. The members have used up the savings amount for the repayment. So the members said that we will not continue to keep savings anymore for the self help groups, and have a feeling that their money was lost. CST is ready to work in the Bethinaicknur habitation but due to community issues they are not accepting to monitor the group because CST is SC community. Existing CDF took another member’s loan of Rs. 19000 and has left the village with all the records, the other members are ready to run the group, they want the CDF (whom we located as being currently in Tiruppur and spoke over phone) to repay the loan amount. 5. SHG Training The team met 9/9 SHGs. SHGs Module III trainings was conducted, documented and no difference in the attendance was found. Bills were in place and verified.
6. Skill The team met 34/38 skill beneficiaries. Out of 38 beneficiaries male – 25, female - 13 Target 97% and non target 3% 1. As per record Kumaresan s/o Thaimuthu went to HMV for 45 days in year 2015 for which an amount of Rs.7650/- has been released to the institute but during the field verification it was found that he went only for 10 days for the training. He has signed this. 3. As per records, Vennila w/o Ayyanar went for tailoring in July 2015, the duration of the course is 3 months and amount released is Rs.9900/- to Jeyam Tailoring Institute. Attendance, certificate records for the same are available in the VPRC. However, during field verification, Vennila reported that she went only for 10 days, but fund has been released to the institute and she has not received the certificate (which exists in records) She has signed to this effect. 4. Chitra w/o Ganasen has attended Jeyam tailoring Institute, a 90 days training which she completed, but certificate has not been given to the candidate, but a Xerox copy of the certificate was found in VPRC. The original was not to be found with Chitra. Payment has been released in this. 5. As per records, Navaneethakrishnan s/o Mukkuiyan has undergone HMV training and went to Shri Jothi Institute in December 2015. From the institute, a payment bill request for the 80% amount, i.e, Rs.10950/- was found, but against this the VPRC amount released is Rs.11800/-. Excess amount Rs.850/- was found to be paid to the institute. 6. Jeyalakshmi w/o Sakthi Mariyam went to CSC computer training in the year 2015 and completed the course but no certificate has been issued. Payment has been released in this case. 7. Murugeswari D/o Dhandapani went for nursing training in June 2015 and course was completed and fund not released to institute. Certificate has not been received and she is unable to go for work.
36 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
For four candidates Jeylakshmi, Sathyamariyam, Murugeswari and Krishnaveni, who attended trainings (3 in tailoring and 1 in nursing) last year, it was found that fund has not been released to institute. 7. PLF ASF The team met 52/65 beneficiaries 5 beneficiaries difference of amount PLF Loan and repaid amount Rs. 5050.
SHG Name Name Register Field Visit Difference Loan Repaid Loan Repaid amount amount amount amount amount Athipookal 5 members 80000 50550 80000 56000 5050
From PLF, an Amuthasurabhi loan has been disbursed to Veeramathiamman SHG for 5 members. The amount is Rs.85000. During field verification it was found that the amount was in reality split equally between 11 members. A second loan for 4 members amounting to Rs.90000/- was also split equally between 12 members identified during the field verification. While asking the reason for this, the members insisted that bank loans were equally split but that their repayments are prompt. Members of the SHG insisted on a principle of equally splitting all loans.
Another issue identified was that loan card has been disbursed only at SHG level not for individuals. 8. PAR As per PLF PAR outstanding amount Rs.210712/- and PLF Total outstanding amount Rs.521340/- = PAR 22% 80:20 Totally amutha surabhi loan is disbursed to 65 members amount 70:30 Rs.1220000/- in that 53 target members, amount is 990000/- and benefit is to Recovery Rate 81 % Target and 12 non target and amount is 230000/- and benefit to 19% Closing Balance non target. 57 members for livelihood and 8 for Consumption. PLF Demand Rs.220676 collection Rs. 46909 and22 % Recovery Closing balance in Bank Rs.970203
9. Functioning of VPRC and PLF meeting is being regularly conducted, as per registers, but CBOs(VPRC,PLF,SAC) signature inconsistencies were easily found in the registers. Office-bearers rotation has not happened since the start. SAC resolutions have been passed but members are not active. Moreover, one of the SAC members is related to the bookkeeper, possibly affecting the independence of SAC work and role. VPRC Bookkeeper has been newly appointed and needs support, training. VPRC and PLF accounts were found to be regularly updated.
10. Tally In VPRC and PLF completely updated upto the month of August 2016 11. CLG It was noteworthy that this panchayat had a Music CLG. Sri Vinayaga music drums CLG started on 17.01.16 and all 21 members are from the target category. They have received an infrastructure fund amount of Rs. 95000. Cultural drum materials have been procured for the amount of Rs.71000/-. The CLG was found to be very active and income contribution to CLG account amount was at Rs.11305
12. Total Individual Assistant Repayment : Rs.7000/- Misappropriation Skill training : Rs.9900/- Amount PLF Loan:Rs.5050/-
37 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Total Misappropriation amount Rs,21.950/- 13. Status of poverty Two families were identified during the social audit, as follows: Pitchaimmal, aged 76 years has three sons. Unfortunately one son is dead and two sons have got married. Now Pitchaiammal has no income, she has not received OAP for the last 2 years. MGNREGS work/payments also not received for 2 months. Her sons do not give her money for the food. Ration card also not available with her. She is identified as ‘vulnerable’ in the PIP list, but she does not want any loan from the VPRC because she said she has no way to earn money or repay loans at her fragile age. Chippalammal’s husband deserted her 12 years ago. She is having three daughters, and one of them is married to Chippalamal’s brother itself. The second daughter has completed Higher Secondary, wants to study further but they do not have the resources. She has not received OAP and only goes for MGNREGS works for a living. She has received a loan of Rs. 7000 and has repaid Rs. 4000 so far. 14. During the 5-day Social audit team stayed in the cluster office where modest accommodation audit and food arrangements were made by the MaKaMai who were supportive. It is appreciated that the PFTs did not disturb the team or the audit in any way. From this village, one CP has been selected as facilitator, and is working in this very cluster, coordinating well. VPRC &PLF book keeper, CST & CDF were very helpful to the team. 15. Oor Koottam 85 people attended the meeting. Panchayat thalaivar, DPM, APM, PFTs presided the Oor koottam. Individual assistance, skill training and PLF issues was discussed. Social audit team reported the findings at the Oor Koottam.
The attitude of the staff was reportedly anti-people at the hearing. After the report was read out and it was the turn of the public to speak, the DPM did not allow the people to speak and took the mic himself, reviewing the findings, calling out to trainees and cross questioning them. In one instance, a young lady Vennila who was a tailoring dropout trainee was present in the Oor Koottam. Vennila courageously identified herself and asserted in public that she had indeed dropped out of the training and could not complete the course. At this, the DPM sought to know from her why she had dropped out. Expressing his deep mistrust, the DPM further asked if the trainee had been compelled by the social audit team to answer in a certain way. The DPM diverting the core issue of a wrong payment gone to Jeyam Tailoring institute in a dropout scenario. The DPM openly defended the institute in this case. He intensively questioned the young lady who had courageously spoken up a truth in public. This showed that in public his attitude was against the people and in defense of the staff and institute in question. Vennila, however, maintained her stand, and repeated that she had indeed dropped out of the tailoring course. In another case, while discussing Kumaresan (HMV dropout issue), the DPM at the Oor Koottam justified dropouts saying that livelihood was affected and hence trainees were dropping out, without addressing the issue of wrongful payments being made against the dropouts. The DPM refrained from clarifying that the payments made to institutes in dropout cases should be rightfully returned to the VPRC account. Instead he has asked the youths to go and complete their trainings.
38 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
5.3 Kottur Village, Nilakottai Block, Dindugal District Social Audit Period 16.09.2016 to 20.09.2016
Area Findings 1. Village Overview In Kottur village, totally there are 2788 households and there are 18 habitations and total population 9263 and their common livelihood is flower plucking and agriculture. Community aspects: In this village, Christians and SCs are a substantial portion. Sociopolitical aspects: The village has been announced as an open defection free village and the Panchayat Talaivar has got an award for best village for the tree plantation. Especially the Panchayat Talaivar is continuously four times selected as thalaivar and he is a member of the Congress Party. In this village the SC community was noticeably poorer than the other settlements which had visible assets. Out of the 18 habitations, Sengottai and Avayampatti are poorer (smaller, poorer lined houses, landless, SC populations), Christians live in Michaelpalayam and Inasi (almost all of PVP beneficiaries are from these habitations alone) But in 4 habitations(Rayappanpatti, Annanagar, Sandanamadapuram, Salithmadapuram) not a single benefit has gone to the people even though they are in the PIP list, because these habitations are far away (8km) 13/30 SHGs are in a single habitation, that of Michaelpalayam. The other 17 habitations have fewer SHGs. 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 596 families as target, but BPL identifies 142 families as BPL: poor. One poor family was added to PIP list because the widow had no income (vulnerable category) and one family were removed from the PIP list because of death. GS approval was there, dated 15/08/2015. During social audit we came across four families who were very poor but not included in the PIP list. 3. Individual The team met 52/62 beneficiaries. assistance There were several discrepancies between registers and field verification. Some of these are: In 9 cases, there was a difference in amount of Rs. 4500 in loan repayment, as follows:
Name Register Field Visit Difference Loan Repaid Loan Repaid amount amount amount amount amount Jermmanammal 10000 9500 10000 10000 500 Vimalamary 10000 9500 10000 10000 500 Velakanni 10000 9500 10000 10000 500 Victoria 10000 9500 10000 10000 500 Jeyasheeli 10000 9500 10000 10000 500 Panimatha 10000 9500 10000 10000 500 Jeyasheeli 10000 9000 10000 9500 500 Gnanamani 10000 9000 10000 9500 500 Shanthimary 10000 9000 10000 9500 500
39 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Total misappropriation amount Rs.4500. Importantly, beneficiaries did not have a loan card, they only had repayment receipt for the Rs. 9000. Moreover, for the above 9 members, the bookkeeper has not issued receipt for repayment installment of Rs.500. We found that these members had repaid the money to the bookkeeper but not got receipts. The bookkeeper denied receiving this money in all 9 cases, but the 9 people insist they have repaid it to her.
2. Muthupriya w/o Kuzhandhaivel has received loan of Rs.10000 and repaid amount Rs.6000 to Renukadevi CST(Existing CST) but as per record only Rs. 1500 has been entered and so there is a difference in amount of Rs.4500 3. Pathinattu and Vairamani, two members of differently abled community, have received an amount of Rs. 20000 as per record but during the field visit they said that they have not received any loan from Pudhu Vaazhvu project. This fund misuse by Renukadevi CST has already been recorded and mentioned in the resolution register, but amount had not been recovered. In some cases, there were no loan card and receipts for their repayment. Total misappropriation in Individual assistance amount Rs.29000 4. SHGs The team met 18/30 SHGs. 16 SHGs were affiliated for PLF and 14 SHGs were newly formed 15 Women SHGs and 3 Differently able groups are defunct and 9 SHGs do not have bank linkage in current year. Only 3 SHGs received direct linkage and their repayment is very prompt. During the field visit we organized the meeting and asked the reason for defunct SHGs. It was found that no CST and CDF are there since the past year, because the last CST was involved in fund misuse. Members also said that if they asked PLF loan, the loans were not getting approved. No regular meetings in SHGs, only office bearers are reportedly dominating the other members, group members said. In all the SHGs, it was found that registers are not updated from 2014 and the groups are having only minutes register. No awareness about Pudhu Vaazhvu project. Members said that we don’t know what is happening in this project.
5. SHG Training The team met all 12SHGs. SHGs Module III trainings was conducted and fully documented. In training attendance, signature issues were identified. A shocking thing that was noticed by the social audit team was that there was blue ink on both hand thumbs of Malliga facilitator SM and Sasirekha LH, to fill up thumb impressions on the signature column of the training attendance register. This was also verified during interaction with the concerned SHG members who confirmed that they did not attend the trainings. Only two groups - Rajakaliamman SHG and Amman SHG - accepted that they have attended the training. 6. Skill The team met 43/54 skill beneficiaries. Out of 54 beneficiaries male – 52 ,female -2 Target 76% and non target 24% In this village 11 candidates who were met in person during field verification said that they already knew driving, but joined the training only to attain license. They have attended only for one week but fees at a rate of Rs.7650 per candidate, totaling to an amount of Rs.84,150 in the year 2015 for 11 candidates have been paid to the Anbu driving Institute 7. PLF ASF The team met 42/88 beneficiaries
40 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
In the case of 6 beneficiaries, difference of amount in PLF loan and repaid amount comes to a total of Rs. 22219, as shown below.
SHG Name Name Register Field Visit Difference Loan Repaid Loan Repaid amount amount amount amount amount Annai therasa Christin 20000 12210 20000 16000 3790 sumathi mary Annaitherasa Lakshmi 20000 12210 20000 16000 3790 Thamarai Paramaeswari 20000 12210 20000 16000 3790 Thamarai Amuthavalli 20000 12210 20000 16000 3790 Rajakaliamman Powunthai & 40000 24941 40000 32000 7059 Poovathi
In this PLF, some of the records (Loan Register, Receipt book, bills) were being updated only during the social audit verification. Further, the book keeper accepted that for loan repayment records, she has not being entering the SHG name in the Cash book. In Rajakaliamman SHG, loan documents are in the name of Boopathi but loan has actually been taken by Panchu, and the repayment is proper. Challans from the group have not been properly handed over to the book keeper. Loan card is only in the name of SHG, and not at individual level but at the same time all the loan cards got disbursed during social audit visit. PLF loan repayment receipt from 30/10/15 to 11/08/16 have been entered in the register, but SHG group name is not mentioned and because of this we were unable to identify the group which has repaid the amount. One member, Pownthai has taken seed money of Rs. 15000 and PLF Amutha Surabhi loan led this amount of Rs. 40,000 so a total of Rs.55000 and she is further lending this money earning an interest. 8. PAR As per PLF PAR outstanding amount Rs.2,26,189 and PLF Total outstanding amount Rs.12,15,378 = PAR 19% 80:20 Totally Amutha Surabhi loan is disbursed to 88 members amount Rs.1795000. 70:30 In that, Recovery Rate TARGET: 78 were target members and amount is 16,40,000 and 91 % Target Closing Balance NON-TARGET:10 non target members and amount is 1,55,000 and beneficiaries 9% non-target. 83 members for livelihood and 5 for others. PLF Demand Rs.9,75,750 collection Rs. 7,07,781 and 72 % Recovery Closing balance in Bank Rs.629811 9. Functioning of VPRC and PLF meetings are not being regularly conducted. Signatures are CBOs(VPRC,PLF,SAC) inconsistent in the register, and office bearers are coming to VPRC only for signatures on the cheque. There is no awareness regarding meetings. Registers were updated only during social audit visit. SAC members are not attending the meetings but records are updated signature are problematic and inconsistent. No CST and CDF in this village. 10. Tally In VPRC and PLF completely updated upto the month of August 2016 and Showing 100% repayment and no PAR% but actually we received the challan for the month of July 16 and August 16 only during social audit visit. 11. CLG Durgaiamman Goat CLG started on 13.08.15 and 25 members are in the CLG. In this, 20 are target and 5 are non-target. They have received the infra fund
41 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
amount of Rs.68400 and CLG is not functioning. No exposure and training but for procurement resolution has been passed. The amount is lying unused. 12. Total Individual Assistant Repayment: Rs.29000 Misappropriation Amount 13. Status of poverty 1)Rasathi w/o chellapandi, 2) Pappathi w/o Vellaiswamy and 3) Palaniammal w/o Veeran are the 3 poor families identified during the social audit who had no houses, no proper income and they are identified in Oor Koottam where it was decided to include them in the PIP list. 14. Impact during the 5- Records got updated by the staff. Also, all the bank chellans (in loan day audit repayments) were collected from people by the staff only during the 5 day social audit process. Social audit team stayed for 4 nights in the VPRC office. Panchayat Talaivar and public supported the team. 15. Oor Koottam 80 people attended the meeting. Individual assistance, skill and PLF are discussed in the oor Koottam Panchayat Thalaivar, APM M&E, APM LH, APM VF and the Nilakottai block staff attended the oorkuttam. DPM came after the Oor Koottam ended.
The attitude of the APM VF was particularly hostile, and anti-people at the Oor Koottam, described as follows: While the findings about the Rs. 9000 repayment misuse was raised, the APM(VF) argued against the findings, and he supported the book keeper and the staff. Of the 9 vulnerable people who had repayment issues, 5 of them spoke up on the microphone insisting that they had indeed repaid money to the bookkeeper but had not got receipts. The APM VF publicly argued against all of the beneficiaries, declaring the findings to be totally wrong, accusing all the villagers and social audit team of speaking lies. He publicly blamed the people of lying about the repayment to bookkeeper, and also threw across the PLF Loan register in anger at the Oor Koottam. He then said that the social audit team should change its findings. On seeing the APM VF’s attitude, and not being allowed to speak much in the Oor Koottam, the ‘vulnerable’ category beneficiaries (who had repayment issues) said they would leave Pudhu Vaazhvu Project and that in future they would not take a loan again from this project. The Panchayat Talaivar, however, accepted the findings and said that corrections should be made, and he said that in future these issues should not happen again.
42 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
6. Kancheepuram district
6.1 Minal Chitambur, Acharapakam, Kancheepuram Social audit from 29/8/16 to 4/9/16
Area Findings 1 Village Overview Minal Chitambur village has 3 habitations, very poor families. There were many blind people, who live in huts. Electricity is a problem here, so is water. Bus frequency is low. Social aspects observed: For the meetings we convened, it was observed that people always sat separately according to their caste. Caste was also practised in giving our team water. In one case, a woman sprinkled water and cleaned the place after our team got up. Moreover, a few villagers explicitly stated that they were not comfortable with the bookkeeper (SC). 2 PIP: PIP list identifies 151 families as target, but BPL identifies 70 families as BPL: poor. Most houses were huts, with few proper houses. High poverty. 3. Individual The team met 31/68 beneficiaries. assistance According to register, Krishnan had a loan of Rs. 20,000 in 2011 and had repaid Rs. 2000. But he was no more, and his daughter-in-law said they had not got the loan. It came to light that the VPRC secretary Mariamma had this amount. According to register, Chandra had taken a loan of Rs. 20,000 in 2011, and had repaid Rs. 4000. But when met in person, she shared that she had not taken this money. It was found that the VPRC Treasurer Santhakumari had taken this amount. Loan cards were not there for the beneficiaries. Loan documents did not have signatures. Resolution register did not have signatures, in some cases it had only 3-4 signatures instead of 11. 4. SHGs 20 SHGs in all. 4 are defunct (2 disability, 2 women’s) The SHGs did not have bank linkage. 5. SHG Training Akshaya Unavakam, a CLG has received Rs. 47,100 for which only Rs. 7100 had been actual expense, and Rs. 40,000 had been taken by the bookkeeper. When this was found out, she returned the same in cash to the VPRC account. 6. Skill The team met 19/62 beneficiaries. Many youths were not at home and could not be met. 7. PLF The team met 56/294 beneficiaries. 1. There were no loan cards, so repayments could not be verified against what people said. 2. Roja SHG has received Rs. 1,50,000 in the names of 6 members in application form, but when checked against the resolution register, 4 names did not match. We found that outstanding balance member names had been changed to those who had no outstanding balance. 3. SHGs in which PLF Secretary and Treasurer were members have much higher loans, almost 6-7 lakhs, while other SHGs had about 1.5 lakhs. 8. PAR 52% (Manual), 66% (Tally)
43 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
80:20 73.8: 16.2 (beneficiaries), 80.1:19.9 (amount) 70:30 92.8: 7.2 (beneficiaries), 89.5: 10.5 (amount) Recovery Rate 6% 9. Functioning of VPRC Secretary and Treasurer could not be met for the 5 days despite CBOs efforts. Nor was the committee met. VPRC bookkeeper was the single (VPRC, PLF, SAC) person handling everything. SAC register was not updated since 1.5 years and had no signatures nor resolutions. 10. Tally Tally was updated upto July 2016 11. CLG One diary CLG, ‘Paal Poocharam’ in 2011 had received Rs. 95,000 for which Rs. 75,820 was spent on Milk analyzer, milk cans, etc for which there were no bills nor proper resolutions or quotations. Moreover, of this an amount of Rs. 17,000 had also been spent on buying office furniture like table, cupboard, chairs, etc. 12. Total 74,000 in total. Misappropriation 40,000 (bookkeeper from SHG training – which she has returned during Amount audit) + 34,000 (VPRC Secretary 18000 + Treasurer had taken 16000) 13. Status of poverty Ration card – getting oil was difficult for the 3 poor families we interviewed. Dependence on ration and NREGS was high. NREGS work they had obtained only for 25 days. Medical center being far away, treatment was less accessible. The people we met were very poor and were struggling to make ends meet. 14. Impact during Rs. 40,000 was returned by the bookkeeper to the VPRC account. the 5-day audit PLF recoveries also were being done as the audit went on. Last 1 year records had not been updated, but got completed by the end of the 5 day audit. 15. Oor Koottam About 150 people attended. APM M&E, Panchayat talaiver, clerk and other project staff attended the hearing. With power outage there was no mic system. During the Oor Koottam people wanted to know the names of the youths who attended the training. PLF loan was discussed at length. Follow up action: The staff promised to monitor and check into the issues of bills, update the registers and complete recoveries.
6.2 Kunavakam village, Uthramerur block, Kancheepuram district Social audit from 29/8/16 to 4/9/16
Area Findings 1. Village Overview The village has 6 habitations, the communities that live there are BC, SC, ST. SC constitutes about half the population. Mainly agriculture. They take loans for agriculture and diary primarily. 2. PIP: There are 130 people in the PIP list, and there were 2 additions, but BPL: Gram Sabha approvals were not there for the same. 3. Individual The team met 19/51 beneficiaries and based on this findings are: assistance 1. Loan cards were not there with the people. It has not been issued at all. Repayments therefore could not be verified fully. 2. Development fund has recently been opened, but transaction details were not available.
44 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
3. In 2015, Rs. 1,02,000 has been withdrawn from the development account, but during the social audit on 31/8/2016, 9 months later, this amount was deposited into VKC account. For 9 months this amount has possibly remained with the bookkeeper. The purpose is not known. 4. In 2015, for project registers to be issued, a cheque payment of Rs.22,100 has been made. But resolution was not shown for this. On being asked, it was said that the amount was used to buy registers for 15 panchayats from the nearby villages! When we contacted the bookkeepers of the neighbouring villages - Paleswaram and Kadalmangalam VPRCs - about this expenditure, they denied receiving any payment from Kunavakam and said they had bought their own registers. 5. On 23/3/2015, an amount of Rs. 36000 has been withdrawn from the VPRC account as cash. When we asked what this was for, the amount was immediately deposited on 3/9/2016 and receipt was shown against the same. 6. On 11/5/2016 a cash withdrawal of Rs. 27,000 has been made and when asked about this, on 31/8/2016, i.e, during the social audit, this amount was put back into VKC account. 4. SHGs There were 24 SHGs in all. 4 defunct. CST was not active, there were no monthly reports. She admitted the same at the Oor Koottam. 5. SHG Training Rs.41800 has been spent on the 4th module training, but bills were there only for Rs. 15000. Balance Rs. 26800 amount bills were not shown over 5 days of the audit. 6. Skill Only 10/83 youths could be met. Masonry training payment of Rs. 46,022 has been spent on the training of 6 youths, of which Rs. 23,600 has been spent as cash. Cheque registers were not there. 7. PLF 1. Loan register, loan applications were not there for at least two days of the social audit. 2. Registers were not updated. Bills, vouchers were not proper. 3. 5 people had loans each of Rs. 10,000 to a total of Rs. 50,000 as per Loan Register. But during field verification they said they had not received these loans. 4. In 2013, Rs. 40,000 loan to Indira Gandhi SHG and Rs. 40,000 to Mariamman SHG were given as per records. When we met the members, they denied having received the loans. The two SHG Talaivis have signed to this effect. 5. Rs. 31,61,000 to 249 individuals has been given on rotation basis. 103 people for Rs. 10,30,000 documents were presented. Documents for the balance (Loan application, SHG resolution copy, promissory note, subcommittee resolutions) were not there. 8. PAR 47% (register) 80:20 67% - 33 % (registers), Tally target : 71- 29 70:30 87:13 Closing Balance Rs. 63,203 (as per Tally) entry upto March 2016, Development account had no transactions, it had been newly opened Feb 2016 PLF Closing Balance 53397 General, March 2016 – Rs. 3011
45 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
9. Functioning of CBOs VPRC, PLF committee meetings could not be conducted despite efforts (VPRC, PLF, SAC) for 5 days. SAC is not functional either (from registers, attempts to meet people) 10. Tally - 11. Total Rs. 1,50,800, with break-up of: Misappropriation 50,000 - PLF loan not received Amount 26,800 - SHG training 80,000 - amount loaned to 2 SHGs but not received (Rs. 1,65,000 misappropriated amount was recovered during the audit itself.) 12. Impact during 1) Rs. 36,000 of cash taken was repaid into VPRC account after the 5-day audit almost 1.5 years, when the social audit team pointed out. 2) Rs. 1,02,000 cash deposit was made into VKC account as the audit began. 3) 11/5/2016 a withdrawal of Rs. 27,000, and on 31/8/2016, this amount was put back into VKC account. This totals Rs. 1,65,000 13. Oor Koottam About 100 people attended the Oor Koottam. DPM, APMs, Talaivar, cluster staff attended. People spoke about loan amount differences and lack of getting a bill against repayment. One member suggested that the loan data be put on VPRC walls along with the DPM number. The DPM discussed the issues raised at the Oor Koottam and directed for corrective action.
46 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
7. Karur district
7.1 Mullipadi Village, Kadavour Block, Karur District Social Audit from 16.09.2016 to 20.09.2016
Area Findings 1. Village Overview This is a huge village situated at about 60 kms from Karur district. With about 1319 Households in 14 habitations, the village has about 82% people(Pillai) BC population. The habitations are all far flung. The village relies on agricultural cultivation. Transport facility is low. Political aspects: People said the Talaivar was not active. He did not come to the Oor Koottam. Awareness about the scheme was low. Poverty was high in the village. 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 503 households as target, whereas BPL list identifies 650 families. BPL: 3 members were added to PIP list and Grama Sabha approval dated 1.5.2013 was found against this. 3 VPRC/PLF/SAC Member rotation of office bearers has been followed as per norms. Function There is no CDF since September 2015. On record, there are 3 CSTs - S. Josevin Rani, K Mahalakshmi, M Lakshmi. But since 4 years, CST monthly reports are being given by the bookkeeper. All of them accepted that the bookkeeper works as the CST and takes the salaries too. CST honorarium has been released till August 2016. Since the last 4 years, the cheque payment is being made in the name of one, Josevin Rani, who draws and gives this money to the bookkeeper. SAC committee monthly meeting is being conducted as per registers, but members said that they did not know much about the project, and that the bookkeeper updates the SAC register. 4 Individual 59/92 beneficiaries were met. assistance None of the 59 beneficiaries met had loan card. In some cases, loan purpose was found to be different from the stated one. There were 5 member loan repayment discrepancies between registers and field verification, amounting to Rs. 4000 in loan repayment, as follows: Name Register Field Visit Difference Loan Repaid Loan Repaid amount amount amount amount amount Meenachi 5000 2200 5000 4000 1800 Arayee 5000 1600 5000 2000 400 Rasammal 7000 7000 7000 6500 500 Priya 4000 400 4000 1000 600 Sivapriya 4000 1300 4000 2000 700
These loans have been taken in 2013, and people said the repaid amount was with bookkeeper. None of the members had insurance for the animals bought from loans. 5. SHGs 48/61 SHGs were met by the team. Of these 26 SHGs were defunct. (based on meetings conducted with SHGs, interactions with SHG Members, and verified against SHG registers and documents)
2/48 SHGs have never taken a bank loan. 6. SHG Training 23/61 SHGs have completed IVth module training.
47 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
All 23 SHGs were met by the team to verify training data. SHG IVth module training expenditure based on registers (cash book) was Rs.42634, but resolution have been passed showing expenses of Rs. 26980 in October 2015. When asked about the difference in amount, the bookkeeper said she did not remember what the amount was spent on. Photo documents were present only for 2 SHGs training. Balance amount - 15654. Payments for this training have been made through 3 cheques given in the name of SHG Muthaalamman, in which the bookkeeper is the SHG President. 7. Skill 13/19 youth beneficiaries were met by the team. Differences between records and field verification are as below. • 1 youth has dropped out (3/45 days), but training fund was found to have been released Rs. 4000, as shown below: Name of the Training Type Institute Amount youths released (Name Driving Lakshmi 4000 (cheque withheld) Driving School no:264406)
This youth also came to the Oor Koottam and publicly confirmed his dropping out. Gender ratio Gender ratio was skewed at 3 males: 1 females (15:4) 8. PLF ASF 156/190 beneficiaries were met by the team. None of the 156 beneficiaries met had a loan card. Verifications were done through receipts. 9. PAR PAR: 0% 80:20 69:31 member, 61.8:38.2 Amount 70:30 95 % Livelihood Recovery Rate 100 % Recovery Closing Balance Rs. 73035. 10. Tally • Tally upto August 2016. 11. CLG 1. Deepam Goat CLG Receive the amount of Rs.92150. The common procurement is purchased (weight machine). Quotation and bills are available. 2. CLG is active 3. CLG Accounts was handled by the bookkeeper only 12. Total Rs. 23,654 (Individual Assistant Repayment : 4000, Skill Training :4000, SHG IVth Misappropriation module training :15654) Amount 13. Status of poverty During the social audit exercise some poor families were met. Manisankaran is bed-ridden and is very unwell. His mother cannot use one of her hands, yet she earns through NREGS works. They eat only one time a day, by buying food from a neighbour. They live in a broken mud house, and are landless. Although the family is in PIP list, they said they could not afford a loan since they could not repay it. They have a ration card and are surviving through this. Many other cases of OAP and NREGS not working well came up during discussions. 14. Oor Koottam 145 people attended the Oor Koottam on 20th September 2016, which lasted for 1.30 hours. The APM M&L, Facilitator and ward members were present at the Oor Koottam. All the issues identified were discussed at the Oor Koottam. One of the youths (name withheld) spoke at the Oor Koottam saying he had dropped out of the Driving Training Institute. The attitude of the staff, to this, was startling. APM M&L instead of addressing the issue of payment being made in a dropout case, began accusing the youth of speaking lies.
48 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
After the Oor Koottam ended, the APM M&L continued shouting at the youth who had said he dropped out of the Driving Institute. He asked the youth why he had spoken to the social audit team. He also shouted at the social audit team asking why the team had talked to youths at all. He said youths could only speak lies, and hence they should not be asked about their training at all. “Who asked you to talk to the youths?” he rudely asked the CPs who were in the audit team. He failed to talk about the payment gone to Lakshmi Institute.
7.2 Senthamangalam West village, Aravakurichi block, Karur Social Audit from 16.09.2016 to 20.09.2016
Area Findings 1. Village Overview The village is situated in wilderness, with about 995 households in 17 habitations, the village is about 55 kms from the main district. The habitations are spread out over 10 KM with challenging transport inside the village. Political aspects: The President, Nansundeeswarar, is a powerful person with his family having been in power for 8 terms continuously. The last 40 years the family has had a President. People said that the President usually attends all family functions of all the villagers. Community aspects: The village has about 70% people BC (Gounder) population. Most people rely on NREGS works and Tiruppur garments for work, where they work in shifts from 8.30 to 6.00 PM or 6.00 PM to 11.00Pm earning Rs. 350 per day. The village is fully dependant on rains for agriculture. Social aspects: In a few instances, clear signs of caste issues were noticed by the team. In one case, the CDF (SC) was separately served coffee in a different disposable cup, while others were served in tumblers. 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 209 households as target, whereas BPL list identifies 643 families BPL: as on Mar 2015. Gram Sabha approval copies were available for verification. 36 families were added and 34 families were removed from the PIP list. but GS approvals were present only for 27 member additions. Approval dates were Aug 2013 (14 members), May 2013(13 members) PIP deletion: 30 members’ names were deleted from PIP list. VPRC resolutions dated 2.9.2013 mention 26 of these names, but Gram Sabha approvals for the 30 deletions were not there. 4 members whose names had been removed did not have VPRC approvals either. 3. Individual 47/53 beneficiaries were met by the team. assistance In some cases, the member loan purpose is different from record and field visit. There was only one case of loan repayment difference between registers and field verification of Rs. 1000: Name Register Field Visit Difference Loan Repaid Loan Repaid amount amount amount amount amount Sivaselvi 8000 6000 8000 7000 1000 This amount is cash in hand of CDF (Rs.1000) and she admitted to this. None of the members had insurance for animals purchased. None of the members had a loan card. Verifications were carried out on the basis of receipts alone.
49 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
17/70 members did not get the individual loan, reason: the members felt they did not have the ability to repay the loan and hence did not want a loan. 4. SHGs 19/22 SHGs were met by the team. 3 SHGs were defunct. Reason: 2 SHGs had a bank loan repayment problem, and 1 SHG the habitation has had a fire accident a year ago. Roja SHG has not taken a bank loan at all. 7 SHG do not have a bank loan in the present financial year. 3/22 SHGs are special SHGs and are being monitored by the CDF, but there is no CST appointed since July 2014. The old CST Ramaprabha (who is also the President's sister-in-law) is monitoring the 8 SHGs. The CDF has not got honorarium and monitoring cost in the last 4 months. 5. SHG Training 8/22 SHGs have completed IVth module training at a cost of Rs. 7945. Bills and documents were in place and people were able to share their learnings about trainings. 6. PLF 17/22 SHGs were federated with PLF. 15/17 SHGs members had paid their equity. 13/15 SHGs have received a PLF loan. All 69 beneficiaries were met by the team. In a few cases, the member loan purpose is different in record and field visit. None of the beneficiaries had a loan card, they did not have loan repayment receipt either, as found during field visit and beneficiary interaction. But on the last day of social audit, loan cards were being prepared for 10/13 SHGs in the VPRC office. When we audited these loan cards, there was a difference of Rs. 1715 between the loan card and PLF loan repayment register (the amount was due to loan interest and this too needs to be reflected in the loan cards). None of the beneficiaries had animal insurance as found based on member interaction. 7. Skill 38/41 youth beneficiaries were met by the team. Differences between records and field verification are as below. • In the case of 5 youths, who were met during field visit verification, placement was not given after their training, but as per the registers, 20% fund has been released, with the break-up of: No. of youths Training Type Institute Amount released of 20% 3 youths JCB Visvam 3*1600=4800 Institute 2 youths Beautrician Belisiya 2*920=1840
This amounts to Rs. 6640 • 38 youths who were met during field verification said they did not get soft skill training. • One youth has gone for training to National Diary Development Board (NDDB). Payment has been made on 17.06.2013 for Rs.15169 through cheque no: 02008809, but bills not available. Certificate was also not present. • 11 youths completed the tailoring training to Amaidi Kalluri in July 2015, but certificate has not been issued till date to the youths. They have not been placed, and accordingly 20% fund also has not been released. 8. PAR 4.5% (Based on registers)
50 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Recovery rate 88.62% (Based on registers) 80:20 71:29 member, 72.7:27.3 amount 70:30 100% Livelihood Closing Balance Rs. 356825.50 9. Functioning of All 3 - VPRC, PLF, SAC committees member meetings were held by the social audit CBOs team, and the members were found to be active. But presently, there is no (VPRC, PLF, SAC) bookkeeper appointed since one month. At present CST not available since two years. SAC member (report-writer) has joined SAC in Aug 2013, but she is also the VPRC treasurer since Oct 2015 and continues to hold two posts. VPRC secretary has not been rotated for the past 4 years. PLF incentive fund received of Rs.1 lakh is in old PLF account in past 3 years, but till date the fund transfer has not been made to the current PLF account. ILF, GAAP meetings have not been conducted, registers were not present over 5 days. The staff present did not know much about the panchayat habitations and SHG members said they were not visiting it regularly. Staff registers did not have regular signatures. 10. Tally Tally VPRC and PLF updated upto August 2016 and 8 SHGs updated in August 2016. 11. CLG The Kathambam mushroom cultivation CLG has received fund of Rs. 84550 in November 2015. The training and exposure visit were complete, but CLG not functioning, based on member interaction. People said more fund was needed to arrange infrastructure for the same. The money remains unspent. 12. Total Rs.6640 (skill - 6640) Misappropriation Amount 13. OorKoottam 145 people attended the Oor Koottam on 20th September 2016, which lasted for 1.30 hours. The APM M&E, Panchayat President, ward members and cluster staff were present at the Oor Koottam. All the issues identified were discussed at the Oor Koottam. The President was participated actively, clarifying/asking questions on the issues about missing PIP household approval, member rotation, new bookkeeper and new CST appointment as well as approval in next Grama sabha. He also asked about the 3 defunct SHGs, the 3 SHGs affiliated this week. Komarapalayam habitation fire during which registers were burnt and about Rs. 10000 cash collected was burnt was also discussed. At the Oor Koottam people asked the Talaivar for a place for SHG meetings in the burnt habitation of Periyakattuthottam, at which Talaivar promised a government building for conducting SHG meetings. He also promised to arrange for share auto for transport within the village. Mrs. Ramaprabha, old PLF Secretary, promised at the Oor Koottam that the incentive fund would be transferred to new PLF account this week. Team leader promised, at the Oor Koottam that the 11 youths certificate would be disposed within 2 days. APM M&E was supportive of the process. 14 Impact of social 1) Loan cards were given during the social audit period audit 2) A new bookkeeper was selected during the Oor Koottam 3) VPRC Vouchers, PLF Receipt for 9 months, PLF Voucher Book, PLF Incentive Accountbook, VPRC Cash book were all updated during the audit. Skill documents
51 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
were present only for 14 members, for 26 members skill documents were put in place during the audit 4) Tally updation till date
7.3 Baganatham village, Thonthonimalai block, Karur District Social Audit from 16.09.2016 to 20.09.2016
Area Findings 1. Village overview Baganatham panchayat, with 10 habitations, has about 1090 households. Most of the people are in labour (garment companies) and work on daily wage basis. The other livelihood is mostly cattle rearing. The President or Talaivi is a woman Jayachitra, but it is her husband who is the acting President. The panchayat, with an 'A' grade rating, seems to have been visited by World Bank specialists and state specialists. Community aspects: about 83% population being BC. There is a community issue over use of water in this village. Kaveri river is the prime source of water that comes through pipeline and tank system, but the tank in this village is not available for use to the SC community, as told by women of the village. Other schemes: NREGS and OAP payments are also problematic in this village. 2 PIP: PIP list identifies 293 households as target, whereas BPL list same as PIP families. BPL: 3. Individual 88/97 beneficiaries were met by the team. In some cases, the stated member loan assistance purpose was found to be different in record and field visit. Loan card was not present with any of the beneficiaries. There were two member loan repayment discrepancies between registers and field verification. In one case, there was a difference in amount of Rs.1300 in loan repayment, as follows: (Field verification based on voucher) Name Register Field Visit Difference Loan Repaid Loan Repaid amount amount amount amount amount Kannammal 5000 2000 5000 3000 1000 S.Vellaiyammal 6500 1650 6500 1950 300
4. SHGs 34/34 SHGs were Met by the team. 2 SHGs were defunct. 8 SHGs do not have a bank loan at least one time. 1 SHG bank loan has been repaying before three Years Ago. 5. SHG Training 15/34 SHGs have completed IV module training. Bills and documents were in place and people were able to share their learnings about trainings. 6. PLF 95/100 beneficiaries were met by the team. Last month’s PLF repayment receipt has not been issued to the members. None of the beneficiaries had any insurance for the animals. 7. Skill 37/43 beneficiaries were met by the team. Training fund release 33 members project fund and 10 member Mathi (Mahalir Thittam) fund. Genter ratio 1 Male:1.4 Female 8. PAR 0% (registers) 80:20 82:18 member count, 81:19 amount. 70:30 91:9 member count, 94:6 amount Recovery Rate 92%
52 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Loan outstanding Rs. 1065405 Closing Balance Rs. 404780 9. Functioning of Overall committees are functional, and are meeting regularly, as seen from registers CBOs and interactions. (VPRC, PLF, SAC) When OAP issue was discussed, we tried to find out why the Banking Correspondent (BC) was not active. The current CST Radha (SC community) was the former BC. She informed us that people would not take money from her hands usually and that she faced discrimination issues. She has stopped being the BC due to this issue. CLG members also confirmed that the discrimination issue was true. Further, members of the CLG shared that the CST, with her infant child in her arms, would at times not even be offered a place to sit down. Reportedly, some of the staff members practised this too. 10 Tally VPRC, PLF and SHG updated till August 2016 11 CLG The Rojavanam Garments CLG has received fund of Rs. 1 lakh. The fund is lying unused. Exposure visit has taken place at Rs. 3600. It was found that each of the CLG members have taken a loan from PLF and are using that money to buy machines. They are working together in a common place. Garment sales are happening too. 12 Total Rs. 1300 (individual loan repayment - 1300) Misappropriation Amount
13 Staff attitude The attitude of the staff was as follows: On the second day of the social audit, the DPM during social spoke over phone to one of the team CPs who was conducting the social audit, heatedly audit arguing with her over the methods followed during the social audit. Over the call, he has verbally harassed her, at one point even asking her to make adjustments with her findings, driving her to tears. Given that the CP coordinator in question is not even a graduate, but is a simple woman from a very poor family living in a hut house, this show of power by the DPM for the mere act of conducting a social audit speaks of all the elements that came into play during this telephonic conversation between two unequal people: class, education, caste and abuse of authority taken out on a poor, illiterate, community woman courageously leading a social audit team in a village unknown to her in a project that is about women SHGs. 14 OorKoottam Over 152 people attended the Oor Koottam on 20th September 2016, which lasted for 1.15 hours. The APM LH, President, ward members and cluster team were present at the Oor Koottam. The Talaivar said that for VP incentive, a proposal had been taken in 2013 on building a school compound wall, however, no fund was released subsequently. He wanted to know from the project why this was the case. The case of a 15-year old orphaned boy not having a ration card was brought up and discussed at length. The staff promised to help him out. There is a community issue over the use of water in this village which surfaced over the Oor Koottam. The case of a water tank being built in the BC habitation, but meant for the use of SC population was brought up. The issue could not be addressed. OAP and NREGS issues were also discussed at the Oor Koottam. President said funds had not come and hence he could not pay this. Bank being far was also raised. Banking Correspondent (BC) present was newly joined and said she would become active soon.
53 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
8. Krishnagiri district
8.1 Palayamkottai Village, Thalli Block, Krishnagiri District Social Audit 30.08.16 to 03.09.16
Area Findings 1. Village profile This village situated at about 60 kms from Krishnagiri district. There are 3800 households. The village relies on agricultural cultivation – nursery (floriculture), vegetables are grown, cattle-rearing 3 language are spoken by the people here - Tamil, Telugu and Kannadam 2 PIP: PIP list identifies 348 families as target, while BPL identifies 470 families as poor. BPL: No changes were made to the PIP list. 3 VPRC/PLF/SAC 1. VPRC Meeting last two months were not conducted, based on resolution Function registers.(July, August 2016) 2. As per VPRC Office-bearers rotation norms, member changes have taken place in 25.11.2015 but new members are not active. 3. VPRC books of accounts were not updated for last two months – July, August 2016. This was the case for the Individual Assistance Register, Skill training register,Cashbook, bank passbook) 4. For the period between 01.04.15 to 31.03.16, VPRC expenditure bills and voucher were missing were not available over the 5-day audit period. Despite repeated requests this could not be presented. This amounts to Rs. 1,22,000 (this total is calculated from the cash book) 5. Tally System was not available at the VPRC office 6. All VPRC activities are being handled by the VPRC bookkeeper only, as shared by the committee members. 7. The SAC committee last meeting was conducted in November 2015. 8. PLF Resolution Register was not available in the office 9. Separate bookkeeper has not been appointed for PLF, it is the VPRC bookkeeper who manages this too. 4 Individual The team met 32/47 beneficiaries. Findings are as follows: assistance 1. There were 20 discrepancies between registers and field verification, amounting to a total difference of Rs.44000, as shown below: Name Loan Register Field Visit Difference Amount Repayment Repayment amount amount Shalini 10000 7000 10000 3000 Kumar 20000 13500 16500 3000 Dhanrajamma 10000 6000 10000 4000 Roja 10000 6000 10000 4000 Mottama 10000 7000 10000 3000 Krishnamma 19000 7000 8000 1000 Balakrishnan 10000 0 2000 2000 Mathurumma 15000 0 2000 2000 Lakshmi 15000 0 2000 2000 Marappa 15000 0 2000 2000 Mala 15000 2000 6000 4000 Pachamma 10000 0 1000 1000 Manju 10000 500 1000 500 Savitha 10000 9000 10000 1000 Munikka 15000 8000 9000 1000 Malasamma 20000 18000 20000 2000 Nagamma 10000 9000 10000 1000 Narayanamma 20000 18000 20000 2000
54 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Chinnamma 10000 7000 10000 3000 Jayamma 10000 6500 9000 2500
Total loan repayment difference in the case of the 20 individuals above is Rs. 44,000.
2. Individual loan cards have not been given to beneficiaries. This means that beneficiaries do not have a record and cannot track their repayments 3. In the last two months (July, August 2016), individual assistance repayment amount is 0. Fund misuse: Rs. 44,000 5 SHGs 1. Total number of SHGs in this village is 22, but of these only 2 are affiliated to PLF, whereas 20 are affiliated with the NGO IVDP. 2. There are 6 newly formed women SHGs and 1 differently abled SHG. In the case of 7 SHGs which reportedly have bank linkages, documents for the same are not available with VPRC. 3. all SHGs are functional, and SHG registers were found updated in Kannadam, Telungu as well as Tamil languages 6. SHG Training 1. 9 SHGs have received 4th module trainings as per attendance records, but no photos, reports, schedules could be found. 2. One SHG told us that only 9-10 members had attended the trainings. Attendance was shown for full membership in every SHG. 3. 8 SHGs did not receive 4th module trainings, as found based on SHGs meeting and member interaction during the 5-day period. But, in records, training expenditure has been booked for Rs.13,920 against these trainings. Found based on cash book. Fund misuse identified: Rs.13,920 7. Skill 1. The team met 23/24 skill beneficiaries 2. As per records, SRA Institute has conducted Electrical/Home Appliance training from 06.05.16 to 11.07.16 for 3 students (1.Balakrishnan, 2.Amaresh and 3.Dhanapal). Course fees at the rate of Rs.5700*3 persons =Rs. 17,100 has been paid to the institute from VPRC account. During field visit, the team met one of these 3 youths, Balakrishnan, who said that the only attended the training for one week and dropped out after that. But the institute has submitted 30 days’ attendance records and taken full payment from VPRC. The second youth, Amaresh, said he did not attend the training at all. Full attendance records were found for all 3 the youths and all the 3 payments have been done. 3. It was found out during the Oor Koottam meeting on the 5th day, that CSC Institute had directly approached and mobilized 15 women for tailoring training without approval from Pudhu Vaazhvu project, charging Rs.800 as contribution from each of them. But after 15 days this training was suspended. The 15 women have signed a letter to this effect, when they pointed it out after the Oor Koottam. They named a person called Sudhakar from CSC Institute, who had mobilized in the name of Pudhu Vaazhvu project. The amount of Rs.800 X 15 = Rs.12,000 needs to be returned to the women. 4. Another youth, Kaviya Nagaraj, went for Tally training to CSC Institute. She said that she had paid Rs.5000 to the training institutes as fees. The VPRC also has paid Rs.4900 as fees for this training, resulting in double payment. 5. For some youths who have completed their course, employment certificates were missing in the VPRC
55 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Fund misuse: Rs. 22,100 (17,100 + 4900) 8. PLF ASF The team met 37/50 beneficiaries. Findings are as follows: ASF loan card has not given to the SHG members Sri Mariyamman SHG has taken an ASF loan of Rs.1,00,000 in the names of 4 members, as per PLF documents. But during field verification it was found that 10 members have split and taken this amount. 9. PAR PAR: 0% 80:20 85:15 70:30 95:05 Recovery Rate 100% Closing Balance Rs. 1,95,020 10. Tally Tally system was not available in VPRC Office, so could not be audited 11. CLG Sri Vinayaga Poocharam for Roja Nursing activity has been formed. The CLG is primarily handled by the VPRC bookkeeper only 12. Total Individual Assistant Repayment : 44,000 Misappropriation Skill Training : 22,100 Amount SHG Training : 13,920 Total Amount: Rs. 80,020 Missing VPRC bills : 1,22,000 (some of this was hurriedly prepared on Oor Koottam day) 13. Impact during The bookkeeper returned individual assistance repayment amount Rs. 12,000 into the 5-day audit bank account and also showed this challan at the Oor Koottam. 14. Oor Koottam 60 people attended the Oor Koottam on 3rd September 2016, which lasted for 2 hours. APD –II, Social Audit Consultant, Panchayat President and the project staff APM, cluster team attended the Oor Koottam. All the issues identified were discussed at the Oor Koottam. Bookkeeper Arulmani accepted before the people that she would return the individual assistance difference amount (misuse) identified by the team. Bills for Rs. 1,22,000 were hurriedly prepared just before the Oor Koottam began by the staff, on learning that APD-II was expected at the hearing.
56 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
8.2 Naickanur Village, Uttankarai Block, Krishnagiri District Social Audit from 30.08.16 to 03.09.16
Area Findings 1. Village Overview Naickanur Village has 3 habitations with 530 households. Most of the people rely on agriculture, basket weavers(olai) and on NREGS work. Panchayat Talaivar is not much involved with work, it is the Panchayat Secretary who handles most of the work, said the villagers 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 170 families as target, but BPL identifies 223 families BPL: as poor. No changes were made to the PIP list. 3. Individual The team met 39/41 beneficiaries. One case of repayment difference assistance as follows: Name Register Field Visit Difference Loan Repaid Loan Repaid amount amount amount amount amount Chinnakannu 10000 4000 10000 7000 3000
Misuse identified: Rs.3000. 4. SHGs The team met 11/16 SHGs. 10 SHGs were affiliated with PLF, and 6 were newly formed. 3 SHGs do not have bank linkage in current year. All SHGs are properly repaying bank loan. 5. SHG Training The team met 11/11 SHGs. As per records, 11 SHGs have received training, conducted for 379 members against an expense of Rs.33040. But during field visit it was found that only 10 SHGs or 297 members had attended the trainings. Signature differences were found in attendance, and bills were not proper. Silampu oli SHG has undergone 3 days of training as per records but during field visit it was found that the training was not conducted at all. Amount spent in record for this training was Rs. 2160. For 8 SHGs, training reports and photo documents were not there in VPRC office. Misuse identified: Rs. 2160. 6. Skill The team met 13/18 skill beneficiaries. 1. 1 youth (Prakash) did not go for training, but training fund of Rs. 5250 has been paid from the VPRC to Sairam Driving Institute. 2. 2 youths (Murugan, Kandhan) went for 3-4 days but dropped out after that. Driving trainings. VPRC again has paid Rs. 10,500 to Sairam Institute and training documents (attendance, employment certificate, course certificate) were not there. They have signed to this effect. 3. Many trained youths, employment certificates and documents were missing in the VPRC office. Misuse identified: Rs.15750 7. PLF ASF The team met 83 /87 beneficiaries 83 members loan has been given correctly and 100 % repayments. 8. PAR 0% 80:20 69:31 70:30 100 % Livelihood Recovery Rate 100 % Closing Balance Rs.1,73,954
57 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
9. Functioning of 1. For the period from 1.04.16 to 19.8.16, VPRC expenses - bills and CBOs(VPRC,PLF,SAC) vouchers were not there in VPRC office, for a total of Rs.25,369. 2. Social audit committee constituted under the project is not functioning but Resolution registers were found updated to current month. The finding is based on interviews with 2 social audit committee members who were met by our team. 3. VPRC monthly meetings are not conducted, but resolutions are passed every month in the registers. Finding is based on interaction with the VPRC members, who also said that all the VPRC activities were known to the VPRC Bookkeeper alone. 10. Tally Tally last updated in March 2015 11. CLG CLG formed for weaving activity has received the fund of Rs. 95950 and made expenses Rs.36,400. But till date it is not active. Bills were not present for this amount, and the procured materials were not shown, hence this is being identified as misuse. 12. Total Total amount: Rs. 46,279. Misappropriation Individual Assistant Repayment : 3000 Amount Skill Training : 15,750 SHG Training : 2160 PLF Loan : 0 Missing /false bills amount (VPRC) : 25,369 13. Status of poverty Two families identified during social audit are as follows: 1. One very poor ST family was met who had not received any assistance from the project. 2. A family has 3 children, the mother had committed suicide, while the father was imprisoned. The old lady in the family takes care of all the 3 children. They were in need of a loan, and haven’t got one. 14. Oor Koottam 200 people attended the meeting. Panchayat Talaivar did not attend. Cluster staffs, APMs were present. All issues were discussed at the Oor Koottam.
58 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
8.3 Santhanapalli Village, Kelamangalam Block, Krishnagiri District Social Audit from 30.08.16 to 03.09.16
Area Findings 1. Village Overview There are 1525 households in this village and spread across 20 habitations which are all far flung in this hilly region. The village is at a distance of 60 km from Krishnagiri town. Majority livelihood: agriculture (flower nursery, vegetable cultivation, cows and goats). Languages spoken: Tamil, telungu, kannada, the village being closed to the borders of both states. Other aspects: Bus frequency is low, being a hilly area. Panchayat President is a woman, but it is her husband who discharges the Talaivar functions. 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 492 families as target, but BPL identifies 617 families as BPL: poor. The PIP list did not have any changes. 3. Individual The team met 92/98 beneficiaries. In case of 6 beneficiaries, there was a assistance difference in amounts of individual assistance repayments, between registers and field verification. The total difference amount is Rs.18,000
Name Loan Register Field Visit Difference Amount Repayment Repayment Gowri 10000 3000 6000 3000 Pushpa 10000 0 2000 2000 kovindaraj 10000 2000 3000 1000 Nagaraj 10000 5000 6000 1000 Manju 10000 0 9000 9000 Arjunan 10000 5000 7000 2000
Moreover, none of the members had a loan card. Loan assets had not been insured. Total misappropriation amount Rs.18000 4. SHGs 26 SHGs were affiliated with PLF and all SHGs were functioning. CST monitoring was found to be weak, and CST works for very few SHGs. 6 SHGs are being monitoring by the bookkeeper, the SHG members said during interactions. For 26 SHGs after affiliation, there was no bank linkage. 4 SHGs are still active with Seed NGO and refused to share records with us. 5. SHG Training 4th module trainings have not yet been conducted for SHGs. 1st and 3rd module trainings were conducted in VPRC, but photo documents and reports were not available in VPRC. The team met with SHG Members who said that they had attended the trainings 6. Skill The team meet 49/49 skill beneficiaries.
1. As per records, 7 youths have been trained in welding from Diamond institute. But course certificates and employment certificates were not present on the day of office audit. Course fee per person at the rate of 7*Rs.7500 =Rs.52,500 has been paid from the VPRC account. The course duration is 90 days but training has been conducted for 20 to 30 days only, based on what the youths said.
59 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
2. Praveen Kumar has been given Tally training from Appolo Institute. He dropped out of the training, but full course fees has been paid from VPRC, an amount of Rs.3820 3. As per records, skill training has been provided to 49 youths, for a training amount of Rs. 4,14,620 which has been paid from VPRC to various skill institutes. But bills of Rs. 2,11,410 were missing and during the audit period this was not produced. 4. Another youth, Amsa, has completed her Tally course but not received her course certificate and she is not employed anywhere. Total misappropriation amount of Rs. 56,320 Bills missing Rs.211410 7. PLF ASF The team met 58/61 beneficiaries, no repayment differences. PLF DCB Calendar and Loan Monitoring registers were not updated. 8. PAR PAR: 0% 80:20 94:06 70:30 95:05 Recovery Rate 100% Closing Balance Rs.34791 9. Functioning of Rotation norms have been followed. CBOs(VPRC,PLF,SAC) 1. CST- one habitation SHGs (9 SHGs) are being monitored. Other SHGs are not being monitored. 2. VPRC Meeting has not been conducted regularly, and the committee members were not aware of the activities or transactions, as found during member interactions and interviews. 3. As per the Social Audit Committee registers, resolutions have been passed. But VPRC, PLF, SHG activity not known to SAC members. 4. VPRC expense bills have not properly been maintained. 10. Tally VPRC office not available EB Connection and Tally system 11. CLG Mullai Roja Poocharm started Roja Nursery Activity and received the amount of Rs. 91650. But no expenses have taken place. 12. Total Individual Assistant Repayment : 18000 Misappropriation Skill Training : 56320 Amount bills missing skill training : 211410 SHG Training : 0 Total Amount : 2,85,730 13. Status of poverty Sanjeev has received Individual Assistance loan of Rs.20000 from the VPRC, for dairy activity. But no insurance was there for the cow, so his cow is now dead and he cannot repay the loan 14. During the 5 day Social audit team stayed in the audit village in the panchayat office. There social audit : was no electricity or lighting. The village being very hilly, in a forest area, with experience very low bus frequency. The dialect of the people here was different. 15. Oor Koottam 150 people attended the meeting. APD –II and SAC Consultant, Panchayat President and the project staff APM (cluster team) attended Oor Koottam. Individual Assistance repayment mismatches, Skill training, SHG Training issue were raised in the Oor Koottam. Individual assistant misappropriation amount accepted the CDF at oor koottam.
60 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
9. Madurai district
9.1 Kuppalanatham Village, Sedapatti Block, Madurai District Social Audit from 16-09-2016 to 20-09-2016
Area Findings 1. Village Overview There are 696 households in this village, and 3 habitations. Majority livelihood is agriculture and cattle rearing. Social aspects: No toilet facility, no water facility. Cauvery river is the source of water, distributed through a pipeline and tank system used for drinking water. For all other domestic uses, salty water is used. Community aspects: In two habitations BC and MBC reside, only in Kuppalanatham habitation a few SC communities are there. Political aspects: Women president named Hema Kanagamani. She is discharging the duties herself and attends all the meetings – VPRC and other schemes too. Status of poverty: Nearly all the houses have goat and cows. People rise early and are engaged in cattle rearing. There are no thatched houses, most houses have sheet roofs. 2. PIP: PIP list identified 236 families as target, of which 139 are poor, 97 are very BPL: poor, but BPL identifies almost double this number, at 462 families. One disabled member, Pandiammal, has been added to PIP list on 1.05.15, the Gram Sabha resolution for the same was present in the VPRC. 3. Individual The team met 38/42 beneficiaries. assistance 1. Loan cards were not given to members. In some cases, the income receipt (for repayments) in Development account was written without a carbon paper. 2. Overall, there were no differences in repayments. 3. Pandiammal and Saravanakumar had received loans without loan applications. This came to light from analysis of cash book and passbook which had entries reflecting the loans. 4. VPRC Development account registers were not updated for two months in the period of 18-07-2016 to 30-08-2016. 4. SHGs The team met 14/22 SHGs. 13 SHGs were affiliated for PLF and 9 were newly formed. 1 SHG was defunct. 15 SHGs do not have bank linkages in current year.
5. SHG Training The team met 22/ 14 SHGs. No signature differences were observed in training attendance. Training year and bill amounts were verified and found to be consistent.
6. Skill The team met 36/44 skill beneficiaries. Documentation in skill was not proper, as described below. 1) As per registers, 5 youths had attended tailoring training. An amount of Rs.25000 has been released against this training, but VPRC resolution books did not have the member names list. 2) 39 people had gone for training, but in youth skill training register, these 39 members list was not updated. There was a rough paper containing these names. 7. PLF ASF The team met 84/90 beneficiaries, and there were no repayment differences.
61 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
PLF Incentive Fund loan was found to be issued to 9 members for an amount of Rs.160000. The amount has been given as per records, but in PLF Resolution records, only the SHG name was found but not a member wise listing. There should have been a member-wise listing of the loan details and this was not found. PLF loan register not updated for the months of July, August 2016. PLF General fund accounts for the period April -2016 to August 2016 was not updated. On the last day of the social audit exercise, this was completed. 8. PAR PLF PAR outstanding amount 4750 and PLF Total outstanding amount Rs.679450 = PAR%00 80:20 88 % Target 70:30 100 % Livelihood Recovery Rate PLF Demand Rs.80750 collection Rs. 76000 and 94 % Recovery Closing Balance Cash Rs. 0, Bank Rs.242701. 9. Functioning of SAC register had signatures only until October 2010. CBOs(VPRC,PLF,SAC) VPRC committee members did not know about transactions, as was seen from interactions with members. VPRC Cash book was last updated on 18/7/2016 (but this got updated during social audit) 10. Tally Tally Transaction updated in VPRC account completed upto 30-07-2016. PLF Transaction updated upto month of June -2016. PLF General fund accounts updated upto 25-11-2014. PLF incentive fund account, VKC accounts not updated in tally. 11. CLG Project fund received amount in 95500/- dated on 27-07-2016. Karuppusamy Milk Production CLG has been formed. Meeting records not updated for July-2016, August 2016. It was found that CLG members fees collected in 8900/- has been deposited in bank, but 2900/- amount not updated in bill books.
12. Total NIL Misappropriation Amount 13. Status of poverty Below is a short profile of the poor families met during social audit: 1. We met a person named Marriammal, W/o Raju. She is only 28 years old. Raju had been affected with HIV. The wife came to know of this only 6 months before his death. She has 2 children – a girl, a boy. No proper house for her to stay. Her daughter had died of a snake bite. Her son and she herself are now affected with HIV. She is going for MGNREGS work and she is unable to do work. She received 3 free goats through Amma Thittal, now she has 6 goats. But she is left out from the PIP list. 2. We met another person named Subbulakshmi w/o Radhakrishan aged 48. Her husband had remarried and died one year ago. After his death, the second wife has taken over the house and left her alone without a place to live in. Now the first wife is living in a broken house at a rent of Rs. 50 per month. She doesn’t have an MGNREGS card, nor is she an OAP beneficiary. She has one daughter who has recently married out of the caste. Subbulakshmi has received individual loan of Rs. 8000 from VPRC and has repaid it. Now she has received Rs. 15000 and is repaying it properly. 14. Impact during the 5- We met the special SHG which had been defunct for over 2 years. The day audit members agreed to activate it again from this month.
62 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Registers updated during social audit: ASF loan ledger, General account register, incentive fund registers were updated. Development register were updated
15. Oor Koottam 289 people attended the meeting. Panchayat President Hema and Secretary attended this Oor Koottam. APM VF, Team leader, Facilitator attended. Mr Saravanakumar, disabled person spoke in this Oor Koottam that he benefited by this project. Moiakkal w/o Chinnan, spoke saying “I am an aged person, widowed, but I am not in the PIP list.” Lakshmi w/o Chellandi also is a very poor lady who was not in the PIP list. Patchiammal w/o Periyavotchan is paralyzed for more than one year, but not included in the disabled list. Many persons asked for OAP in this Oorkootam, and some non target members also raised that we need ASF loan.
63 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
9.2 Thumbakulam Village, Kallipatti Block, Madurai District Social Audit from 16-09-2016 to 20-09-2016
Area Findings 1. Village Overview There are 512 households in this village, and 2 habitations namely Thoombakulam and T.Pudhur. Majority livelihood: agriculture and cattle rearing. Social aspects: No toilet facility, no water facility in the village. Cauvery river is the source of water, distributed through a mini tank system used for drinking water. 4 mini tanks are there in one habitation. For all other domestic uses salty water is used. Community aspects: BC and SC reside in Thumbakulam. In T Pudhur, a few SC and MBC communities are there. Political aspects: Talaivar, V.Katturaja, is said to be active and attends all the meetings. Status of poverty: Some go for flower plucking. Most of the people have Goat and cows. They go for MGNREGS work. 2. PIP: PIP list identified 154 families as target, of which 76 are poor, 80 are very BPL: poor, but BPL identifies 219 families. Ten disabled members’ names have been deleted from the PIP list on 02.10.11, the resolution for the same was found in the VPRC(reason for deletion : 8 migration, 2 dead) 3. Individual The team met 29/39 beneficiaries. assistance Loan cards were not given to them. There were no differences in repayments. 4. SHGs The team met 20/20 SHGs. 1. 17 SHGs were affiliated for PLF and 3 were newly formed. 2. 1 SHG was defunct. 13 SHGs do not have bank linkages in current year. 3. Members of SHGs reported that they visit the bank only once in two or three months. 4. Muthumariyamman SHG, internal loan recovery amount Rs. 46700 collected by SHG Talaivi (animator) Kalayarasi but she has not deposited this in the SHG account. So the amount is with her. And during field verification when this was found, she accepted and promised to repay this. Because of this issue, the SHG has not been functioning for the past 18 months. 5. Similarly, in Kurinji disabled SHG, internal loan recovery amount of Rs.20000 had been collected by the animator Murugeswari but was not deposited in the bank account of SHG. The amount was used by her for her own use without the knowledge of the SHG members. This came to light during the field verification process. 5. SHG Training The team met 20/ 20 SHGs. No signature differences were observed in training attendance between registers and field. Documents were verified and found to be true with door-to-door visit. 6. Skill The team met 26/42 skill beneficiaries. No major issues were found. 5 youths who have taken driving license are not working as driver, but are doing masonry work.
64 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
7. PLF ASF The team met 74/79 beneficiaries, and there were no repayment differences. Loan cards were not given to all SHG members. The repayment is done through bank by the SHG members, who then give the bank receipt to the bookkeeper. In return for this, the bookkeeper has to give them an income receipt when she has not been giving. Till now 3 groups did not receive the ASF loan. (2 SHG 1 Disable group) 8. PAR PLF PAR outstanding amount 33936 and PLF Total outstanding amount Rs.476814 = PAR:7% 80:20 94 % Target 70:30 95 % Livelihood Recovery Rate PLF Demand Rs.64816/collection Rs. 64312 and 99 % Recovery Closing Balance Cash Rs. 0, Bank Rs.264816/- 9. Functioning of During the team visit VPRC, PLF meeting could not be conducted. During CBOs(VPRC,PLF,SAC) the field visit, we met some of the members. The VPRC Treasurer, Meenakshi, said “We don’t know the meeting date and I don’t go for the meeting. They call me only for taking amounts, which we withdraw and give to the book keeper.” VPRC resolution note book (older books) was not found in the VPRC. SAC meeting resolution books and records updated for last 4 months but no signatures where found. CST monthly report last four months (May-16 to august-16) had no reports. 10. Tally Tally Transaction updated in VPRC account completed upto 30-03-2016. PLF Transactions, General fund accounts were updated upto March 2016 only. PLF incentive fund account, VKC accounts not updated in tally. 11. CLG Project fund received amount in 57000, for Mariyamman Goat rearing Group. Meeting records were not updated for April-2016 to August 2016. 35 households have been included in CLG of which target households = 28. But member contribution amount has not been collected. 12. Total NIL Misappropriation Amount 13. Status of poverty We met some very poor families during the social audit. Their status is described below. 1. Murugeswari, aged 25 got married and has 2 children – a daughter and a son. Her husband left her because he had many debts. She is suffering to raise her children and lives with her parents. She goes and collects fire wood and sells for her living. She is not included in the PIP list. She doesn’t have an MGNRGES card also. If she falls ill, she cannot afford to go to the hospital, she simply takes tablets or prefers prayers for healing, out of poverty. 2. Eswari w/o Murugan aged 35 has 2 daughters and 1 son. Her husband passed away 3 years before. He committed suicide, unable to bear his stomach pain, by roping his neck at a graveyard. The family has no house to stay. Seeing this, tshe village has given her a little thatched house. She belongs to Dhobi community, so she washes the clothes of the village and earns subsistence from this. Now she is not able to wash clothes anymore. She survives on ration rice only. The villagers are now asking her to vacate the house given
65 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
to her, because they wish to build a community hall in its place. Despite her situation of poverty and difficulties, it was noteworthy that she has sent children for education. Elder son is in 12th class, and the daughters in class 10 and 8. When we asked her son if he helps her mother, he shied away saying the villagers make fun of him if he helped her 14. Impact during the 5- Defunct SHGs were met, issues discussed. SHG members agreed to day audit activate the group here after. Loan cards got updated. VPRC, PLF records got updated. Most of the SHGs were not linked with bank, and it was agreed to grade and get bank linkage for them. The DPM and staff have been very positive and supportive to the process, and went to great lengths to ensure independence and integrity of the process. 15. Oor Koottam 168 members participated in the Oorkottam. President, Clerk, DPM, 2 APMs, Team leader and Facilitators attended this Oorkootam. After the report was read out, people said they wanted to avail of loans from the bank. For this DPM replied to the people that he will arrange for the rating and arrange for the same very soon. OAP issues were raised. Kurinji disabled SHG repayment issue was discussed at length through the DPM’s intervention. His role in this was very positive, and he carefully went over the repayment problem over the microphone, keeping the people informed at all times. Murugeswari was asked to repay the amount at the earliest. The DPM and staff were very supportive to the process. The DPM acknowledged the role of the feedback through social audit.
66 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
10. Nagapattinam district
10.1 Irukkai village, Keezhvelur, Nagapattinam district Social audit from 9/8/16 to 13/8/16
Area Findings 1. PIP: 8 people have been added to PIP list in 2007. In 2010, 10 families were added BPL: to PIP. All 18 had Gram Sabha approvals. In this village, while Pudhu Vaazhvu has identified 250 target families, BPL category identifies only about 114 families. 2. Individual The team met 58/67 beneficiaries. assistance There were several discrepancies between registers and field verification. Some of these are: 1) 3 persons – Baskaran (Rs. 10,000 in 2010, has not repaid), Santhi (Rs. 2000 in 2009, but she is dead now), Balakrishnan (Rs. 6000 in 2009 and is repaying) had disability ID cards (<40%) but were not included in original PIP list. 2) Kaliaperumal’s records show that he has got a loan of Rs. 3000 but when we met his mother (mentally challenged) said she did not know about this loan at all. Though when we checked the VPRC record, it showed an outflow of Rs. 3000. 3) According to records, in 2015, one Rangarajan has taken Rs. 5000 loan. When we met him, he denied taking the loan. He was disabled but from a non-poor background. On being asked, the bookkeeper Anbumani admitted to our team member that she had taken this. 4) Vijaya Abirami had taken Rs. 5000 in 2015. But when we met her, she said she had taken only Rs. 3000. The bookkeeper told us that she (the bookkeeper) had transferred this amount back to the VPRC account, but we could not find passbook entries proving this. 5) While doing field verification we discovered Murugaiyan, in 2015 had taken a loan of Rs. 5000 but this transaction has not been recorded in the register. Repayments however are going on. 6) Krishnaveni was not there in the target list, but has received loan of Rs. 10,000 in 2010. 7) Jawahar Nachia has taken 10,000 in 2010. Name not in target list. Has repaid only Rs. 2000 so far. 8) Vasudevan was not in disabled list, but took loan of Rs. 8000 in 2015. Has not repaid. 3. SHGs The team met with all 25 SHGs. 9 functional, 16 were defunct (as found based on registers, passbooks, meetings with them). Equitas – a microfinance company – has 13 SHGs in this village. SHGs which were with Pudhu Vaazhvu (for example, Sembarthi, Veera Jansi Rani, Nila, etc) have migrated to Equitas. These SHGs have taken at least two installments of Rs. 17000 and Rs. 25,000 through Equitas and are running well, unaware of the higher interest rates there. None of the 9 functional SHGs have bank linkages, but have outstanding amounts in PLF. Two noteworthy aspects were: 1) One SHG, Tiruvalluvar, had purchased one acre of land in 2010 and was cultivating on it. But it is not functional (no record updates for 3 months at least) now.
67 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
2) One SHG, Sembarthi, has taken LIC policies for all its members and is paying premium 4. CST Salary CST Sundarambal has received salary only two times – Rs. 1800 (2011) and Rs. irregulariti 2500 (2015). Cumulatively in this period, though, Rs. 42,500 has been spent es on CST salary as per records, but the CST insists she has not received this amount. Cheques in the name of Sundarambal were found in the records, but she denied receiving them. 5. SHG 23 SHGs have received 4th module trainings as per attendance records, but no Training photos, reports, schedules could be found. Attendance records showed 100% attendance but when we held discussions with SHGs, many women told us that only 4-5 members had attended trainings. About half the signatures in SHG Training records did not match the in-person signatures, with the members pointing out the discrepancies in their signatures. Apart from 3 SHGs, none of the others had loan repayment cards. 6. PLF Loan Registers were not updated : 18/3/2016 was the last repayment date as per registers. Our team met 173/204 beneficiaries. Most of their loan cards were not present with the members and so could not be checked. Sembarthi SHG, Malarkodi and Aarthiveni have each taken Rs. 15,000 loan and have repaid Rs. 7250 together. But the record shows repayment of only Rs. 2250. The remaining Rs. 5000 could not be traced, and the bookkeeper said she did not remember. Andavar SHG as per records took a loan of Rs.60000 in year 2013 in the names of Rasool Biwi, Tulsiya Begum, Ramzaan Dani.As per record, they have an outstanding balance of Rs. 54,000. As per field verification, they said they have repaid Rs. 53,000 with a balance Rs. 7000. In years 2010, Bismi SHG, has taken a loan of Rs. 30,000 in 4 names – Tamilselvi, Jeyakodi, Malliga, Najima biwi. Balance Rs. 11244. But during field verification, Najima biwi has an outstanding amount of Rs. 3600, and the 4 members insisted that all the money had been repaid to bookkeeper. The bookkeeper has signed and given to the social audit team that she will repay Rs. 7000 to PLF account. 7. Skill 71 youths in this village have gone for training. Placement orders were not there in VPRC records in some cases. Gender ratio in skill was found to be 4:1 8. PAR 100% 80:20 75:25 70:30 98:2 Recovery Rate: 27% Closing Balance: Rs. 43,349 9. Functionin VPRC Secretary Rani could not be met at all as she lives in Velankanni. g of CBOs Committee did not know much about the functioning. Only the Treasurer (VPRC, PLF, Saroja knew about transactions. SAC) PLF meeting could not be organized despite efforts for 3 days. They did not come for Oor Koottam either. SAC meetings have not taken place the last 6 months, as told to us by one of the SAC members, Sarojini (who is also a former award winning Panchayat Talaivi) 10. Tally Was up to date 11. CLG 1 diary CLG ‘Valarpirai’ was not functional. Output being low, the members have not been able to give milk to Aavin, they sell it locally (to cyclepersons who sell milk locally).
68 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
12. Total Rs. 1,20,294 (CST honorarium 42500 + Individual assistance 18150 + PLF Misapprop repayment difference 59644) riation Amount 13. Oor 150 people attended the meeting. Repayment mismatches, issues about the Koottam placement order not being there, CLG fund not being utilized, were raised in the Oor Koottam. APM BF attended the hearing, Panchayat Talaivar and the project staff (cluster team) Follow up action promised: Bookkeeper Anbumani promised to return Rs. 7000 to PLF account. Sundarambal (CST) promised to repay the misdirected amount. APM promised to set up a team to look into the issues.
69 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
10.2 Neikupai village, Tirumarugal block, Nagaipattinam Social audit from 9/8/16 to 13/8/16
Area Findings 1. PIP: PIP list has identified 122 families as target, whereas BPL list identifies 250 families as BPL: poor. Totally 356 families. The list had 14 additions, all had Gram Sabha approvals. 2. Individua The team met all 38 beneficiaries (except the two dead persons) l 1) As per record, Vijayalakshmi in 2010 has taken Rs. 7000 of which Rs.1200 has assistanc been repaid, balance of Rs. 5800. She says she has repaid Rs. 5600 and only e has a balance of Rs. 1400 left to pay. Difference of Rs. 4400 could not be traced. 2) As per records Umashankar, a disabled person, has taken loan of Rs. 9000 in 2015 and has repaid only Rs. 500. In field – he denied taking the money. Even though the bookkeeper showed us a photograph with a cheque as proof, Umashankar’s mother insists that the cheque was taken back after the photo and the money not given. Bookkeeper Kalaiselvi also accepted this saying she used the cheque money to adjust this amount against the mother’s outstanding ASF loan. 3. SHGs 15 SHGs, all are defunct. Reasons: None of the registers were updated, no resolutions, passbook entries, no repayment. Equitas and other microfinance institutions have SHGs that are running well. In one case, when we requested for loan card to verify, a woman brought out her Equitas loan card accidentally to show us! Samanthipoo SHG has taken a loan in the name of 3 members for Rs. 60,000. Magilampoo’s bank loan was repaid using this amount. In Karambai, Abiramiamman SHG, loan of Rs. 1,20,000 was taken in 5 names but split between 12 women who each took Rs. 10,000. The record shows 46,646 and repaid about 49000. The difference amount of Rs. 2364 PLF Secretary Sumathi admitted that she had this amount.
In Karambai habitation’s Kalasam SHG, loans in the names of 5 persons have been taken, for Rs. 1,20,000 but this has been split between 20 persons who each took Rs. 6000. They were found to be repaying it. 4. SHG All 4th module trainings have been shown on records. Signatures matched, photo Training records were present. But during discussions, members could not share learnings from their trainings. CST is not active since none of the registers were updated. The CST could not be met despite repeated efforts by our team. 5. PLF The team met with all 15 SHGs. 13 SHGs have outstanding loans. Samanthipoo SHG has received Rs. 60,000 to Chinnaponnu (25,000), Shashikala (24,000) and Malar Jothi (11,000) in the year 2015. This is the record as per resolutions. But during field verification, all three of them denied. In repayments, it was found that Magizhampoo SHG was repaying this loan. Dhanalakshmi is the VPRC and PLF bookkeeper since 6 years. PLF Secretary, Sumathi has been in post since 8 years. Sumathi was, at times, found to be coaching the answers of people (as told to us by the villagers), even as the social audit team went about its door-to-door verifications over three days. 6. PAR 81%
70 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
80:20 Verified 70:30 verified Recovery 46.75% Rate Closing Rs. 26,798.80 Balance 7. Functioni VPRC meeting could not be held despite efforts for 3 days. ng of “PLF Secretary and Treasurer do not call for meetings. They make decisions CBOs themselves”, said a member of the PLF, Kalaivani. “I do not know any of the (VPRC, proceedings”, she said and signed. PLF, SAC) SAC registers were not shown, nor could the members be reached. 8. Tally SHGs was updated only till May 2015 VPRC and PLF March 2016 One positive aspect was that Tally got updated during the social audit. 9. CLG CLG: 1 goat CLG Imayam, 1 diary CLG Akshaya, both are defunct. Imayam has spent Rs. 17,450 for weight machine. Akshaya has spent Rs. Rs.53,507 for milk cans etc. 10. Total Rs. 66,764 (SHG member name changes plus the amounts taken by PLF Secretary Misappropri ation Sumathi – Rs. 62,364 , and Individual assistance in the name of Vijayalakshmi Rs. 4400) Amount 11. Oor Over a 100 persons attended the Oor Koottam hearing. Koottam APM LH, cluster staff, Panchayat Talaivar all presided the meeting. Loan repayment issues came to the fore. The PLF Secretary, who mismanaged the loan repayments, turned aggressive at the team reading out the report. She had been reportedly asked the villagers not to attend the Oor Koottam, because at first nobody was there at the hearing. After efforts by the social audit team, people were mobilized for the Oor Koottam. The Talaivar, (who was from a 5-timer Talaivar family) initially contacted the social team to report about the PLF Secretary Sumathi’s mismanaging the funds. However, during the Oor Koottam, he turned around and became defensive of Sumathi. The two are reportedly related, having adjacent houses. Follow-up action promised: 1) It was agreed that the PLF Secretary would be removed, on immense demands from the people 2) It was agreed that recoveries would be made against misappropriations 3) Loan repayments would be made by people once recoveries were done, people promised during the Oor Koottam 4) VPRC Office did not have electricity, but expenses on this has been shown as being made on it. It was promised by the Talaivar on Day 1 of social audit that the VPRC Office would be changed to a better place 5) There is a serious issue of water in the village (which has dead dogs etc in it) and needs urgent cleaning, as people complained about it at length 6) The team identified issues around drinking water, toilets and transport. NREGS wage payments and OAP issues too were reported. 12. Status of When the team met the 3 poorest families, we identified the following 5 names as Poverty missed out as target in the PIP list : 1) Sushila Govindaraj (separated, with 3 children, monthly income Rs.1000, landless), 2) Anita Aruldas (widow, age 38, 4 children, labourer, survives on Rs. 1000 pension) 3) Mariapushpam (widow, 3 children, survives on ration, OAP,etc) 4) Revathi Ramesh (widow, 5 children, survives on pension) 5) Jeyalakshmi Ponnusamy (widow, has some land but no income, 3 sons)
71 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
11. Namakkal district
11.1 Mavurettipatty, Elachipalaym block, Namakkal district Social Audit 29/8/16 to 4/9/16
1 Village Overview Mavurettipatti has 4 habitations and it has 690 households. The people rely on agricultural lands. Some work as daily labourers, masonry and tailoring purposes for a living. The Panchayat President (SC) is a Woman and she has been elected two times. During discussions when we asked people about the role and participation of the Talaivi, villagers said that she is fully dominated by her cousin-in-law, who is also the clerk of the Panchayat. When this person was met, he said that the Talaivi did not know anything, and that it was he who took her signatures on papers as and when necessary. In this village most of the communities are backward community (Gounders,Aasari)
From the visitor’s register it was evident that the village is an A grade panchayat for PVP, frequently visited by World Bank, other departments (TN SRLM) for field visits, and visited by State specialists. 2 PIP: PIP list has identified 217 families as target, whereas BPL list identifies 685 families BPL: as poor. No PIP additions and deletions. 3 Individual The team met 36/60 beneficiaries. There were no differences in repayments in Assistance records and field verification, except for Rs.100 in the following case: As per record Perumai in 2012 has taken Rs 5000 of which Rs 200 has been repaid, balance of Rs 4800. During field visit, she has repaid Rs. 300 and only has a balance of Rs 4700 left to pay. Difference of Rs 100 could not be traced. Loan cards were present with the members. 4 SHGs The team met with23/25 SHGs. All 23 SHGs were found to be active. (as found based on registers, passbooks, meetings with them) 5 SHG Training All 4th Module training 4 SHGs has been shown on records. But during discussions members could not share learning regarding trainings. Training resolution registers were present with details of SHGs who attended trainings. 6 PLF The team met with all functional SHGs. 19 SHGs have outstanding loans. Our team met 89/139 beneficiaries. Loan cards were not present with the any of the beneficiaries, so people do not have a record of their repayments. 7 Skill As per the records, there are 92 eligible youth, of whom 40 have completed trainings. The institutes have not provided placement to the youths following the training, but 100% of payment has been released to all institute. VPRC Office bearers also agreed with these findings. 8 PAR: No PAR 80:20 Total amount Rs.34,80,000 70:30 Target :156 Beneficiaries Non target: 29 Livelihood:149 Others:36 9 Functioning Of Committee members were found to be active and knew about the transactions. CBOs (VPRC, Secretary updates the resolution register regularly. PLF,SAC) CLG is not functioning. 10 Tally VPRC, PLF and SHG are updated upto the month
72 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
11 CLG Goat CLG received the amount Rs.95000 and they have constructed a shed and procured weighing machine in the infra fund. And CLG is not functioning since the start. 12 Total Nil Misappropriation Amount 13 Oorkoottam Over 150 persons attended the Oor Koottam hearing. And Cluster staff, Panchayat Talaivi all presided the meeting. SHSs training status came to the forum. The Bookkeeper responded to the training details shared. In this village, the Office bearers were found to be well-aware about the scheme and were also active.
11.2 Thottiyampatti village, Vennanthur block, Namakkal district Social Audit from 29/8/16 to 4/9/16
1 Village Overview Thottiyampatti has 4 habitations and it has 364 households. The people rely on working on agricultural lands of the landowners. Some work as daily labourers, breaking large stones for construction purposes for a living. The Panchayat President (SC) is a labourer working on the Vice-President’s (BC) having agricultural land. The President’s son works as the Vice-President’s driver. The Vice- President has previously been elected for 3 consecutive terms. The people too commonly refer to the Vice-President as the President. The Vice President was found to have a dominant influence on all schemes and works in the Panchayat. 2 PIP: In this village, PIP list has identified 117 target families, 4 differently abled persons had BPL: passed away but their names were not removed from the list. 7 people’s names have been added to PIP list and 11 people’s names have been removed from the PIP list. All 18 did not have Gram Sabha approvals. 3 Individual The team met 40/65 beneficiaries. Assistance There were no loan cards, so repayment could not be verified against what people said. People have no way of tracking their own repayments. There were several discrepancies between registers and field verification. Some of these are: As per record, Santhi in 2014 has taken Rs.5000 of which Rs.2400 has been repaid, with a balance of Rs.2600. She says she has repaid Rs. 3800 and only has a balance of Rs.1200 left to pay. Difference of Rs 1400 could not be traced. As per record, Kanthayi in 2015 has taken a loan of Rs.15000 of which Rs 3000 has been repaid, with a balance of Rs.12000. She says she has repaid Rs. 5500 and only has a balance of Rs.9500 left to pay. Difference of Rs.2500 could not be traced. As per record, Arukaani in 2010 has taken Rs.3000 of which Rs. 2200 has been repaid, with a balance of Rs.800. She says she has repaid Rs. 3000 and balance. Difference of Rs.800 could not be traced. As per record, Manikandan in 2014 has taken Rs 5000 of which Rs 400 has been repaid, balance of Rs 4600. He says He has repaid Rs. 3250 and only has a balance of Rs 1750 left to bay. Difference of Rs 2850 could not be traced. During the social audit, it was found that CDF began making some loan repayment collections, an amount of Rs.10,500. The team requested her to deposit this amount so that it could be reflected in the registers. However, this deposit was not done, so the amount is being highlighted as still being in the form of Cash In Hand with CDF.
73 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Total difference amount: Rs. 7550, cash-in-hand with CDF: Rs.10,500 When asked about the repayment differences, people said they repaid loans to bookkeeper Thangamani, without getting receipts or loan cards. When the bookkeeper was asked, she could not explain the differences. 4 SHGs The team met with 17 SHGs. 7 were functional, 10 were defunct (as found based on registers, passbooks, meetings with them) The microfinance company Equitas is currently lending to 6 SHGs in this village. 5 CST Salary 2 CSTs have received salaries for the last year as follows: Irregularities Divya, Rs.13200 and Gowthami, Rs.6000. But there is no record, or monthly report of their work. The SHG members said the CSTs were not updating the SHG registers nor monitoring. During the 5 days of social audit, the CSTs could not be met by the team. Total misuse amount: Rs.19200 (13200 + 6000) 6 SHG Training All 4th module training has been shown on records. But during discussions members could not share learning from their trainings. 7 PLF The team met with all 17 SHGs. 12 SHGs have outstanding loans. Findings are as follows: Loan registers were not updated beyond 8/08/2015. This was the last repayment date as per registers. The repayments beyond this date have not been recorded. Our team met 41/57 beneficiaries. Loan cards were not present with the members so repayments could not be checked. Om Sakthi SHG as per records has received a loan of Rs.25000 in year 2013 in the name of one member Lakshmi, as per the record, and has an outstanding balance of Rs.20000. But during field verification, it was found that she has not received the said loan amount at all.
Om Sakthi SHG as per records has received a loan of Rs.20000 in year 2013 in the name of Sundharambal, as per the record, and has an outstanding balance of Rs. 16000. But during field verification, she said she did not know about her own repayment, but that she had been repaying to the bookkeeper. There was no loan card to verify.
Annai tharasa SHG as per records took a loan of Rs.40000 in year 2012 in the names of Alamelu (20,000) and Senthamarai (20,000). As per the record, they have an outstanding balance of Rs. 1891. As per field verification, they said they have repaid all amount and have no balance. (Rs 1891 in hands of bookkeeper)
Venkatasalapathi SHG as per records took a loan of Rs.20000 in year 2012 in the names of Kalaivan as per the record, and they have an outstanding balance of Rs. 3000.But as per field verification, they said they have repaid all the amount and have no balance (Rs.3000 in hands of bookkeeper) As per the PLF pass book, VPRC bookkeeper and CDF have each taken a loan of Rs. 25,000 in February 2016, but this transaction has not been recorded in the register
Total repayment difference: Rs.74,891 (25000+ 20000+ 1891 +3000 + 25000 from points 3,4,5,6,7 described above) 8 Skill Our team met 55/109 youth 51 youths said they had gone for training, but said none of the institutes provided them a job. 20% payment has gone in all these cases. All 51 have signed to this effect. As per records, 3 youths (Pushpha, Sumathi, Vidya) have attended tailoring training for 90 days each. But when met in person, it was found that they did not attend the training at all. Payment of Rs. 1400 per person, so a total of Rs.4200 has been made to the institute.
74 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
5 of the 55 youths met said they had dropped out from tailoring training after attending only 1 or 2 days of training. Again, full payment has been made in these cases, at the rate of Rs. 1400 per person. So total payment: Rs. 6000. While doing field verification, we discovered that 5 youths (Shankar, Suganya, Susila, Rajeshwari and Kumaravel) have attended driving/tailoring trainings but their trainings were not documented and hence this could not be audited fully. There were cases of people taking multiple trainings. 3 youths had gone for 3 trainings each (Computers, Tailoring, beautician), but this list includes the bookkeeper and CDF. 1 youth had gone for 2 trainings (driving, poultry) Youth register not fully updated. Total misuse amount: Rs.10200 (4200 + 6000) 9 PAR: 100% 80:20 69:31 70:30 89:11 10 Functioning Of Last one year not functioning the VPRC, PLF, SAC but VPRC bookkeeper, CST, CDF salaries CBOs have been drawn on the basis of resolutions in the VPRC registers. The amount drawn (VPRC,PLF,SAC) was Rs.16,500 for CDF and Rs.19,200 for CST. VPRC, PLF resolution book signatures were not those of the members. VPRC Secretary has told the team that she did not sign any of the cheques over the last 1.5 years. In light of this, it needs to be investigated who has endorsed the cheques signed in this period given that the Secretary is a mandatory signatory for cheque powers. 11 Bookkeeper The last 1.5 years, the bookkeeper has not been working – there were no monthly Salary reports. Registers were not updated the last 1.5 years. Despite this, salaries were drawn for the bookkeeper totalling an amount of Rs.51,000 over this period. 12 Tally Not updated 13 CLG 3 CLG in this village but it was found that 2 CLG not functioning 14 Total As on date not register update and loan confirmation card not with the members, Misappropriation Total: 1,89,841 Amount Individual assistance 7550 (Bookkeeper) PLF 74891 CDF cash in hand 10500 Book keeper salary 51000 CDF Salary 16500 CST salary 19200 Skill 10,200 15 During the 5 day Due to social audit verification, the people became more aware about the Pudhu Vaazhvu social audit project and they came to know about the status of the accounts. The Panchayat Vice period President (who acts as the President) admitted that the village people had not repaid the amount and misappropriation was done by book keeper, CST and CDF. However, he also asked people not to attend the Oor Koottam. Moreover, now the book keeper has been changed. 16 Oor koottam The Oor Koottam was poorly attended - only 35 people came. The DPMs, APMs did not attend. Only Cluster Team leader, facilitator presided the meeting. Much effort was exercised in preventing the Oor Koottam from taking place. Initially it had been announced that the Oor Koottam would be conducted at 2.00 pm. But it actually began only at 5.30pm after a second round of efforts to mobilize people. It was learnt that people initially did not come because the CDF, bookkeeper had gone door-to-door visiting every house and informing people that ‘Talaivar has asked you not to attend the Oor Koottam’(message in tamil: “yarum Ooru kootathiku vara vendam endru thalaivar solla sonar”) So no one attended the Oor Koottam at 2 pm.
75 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
On learning about this, our team members began another effort to invite people to the Oor Koottam after which about 35 people attended it.
Individual loan members, PLF loan members did not attend. After the Talaivar’s play, it was the effort of the youths of the village who helped in mobilizing people for the Oor Koottam. They shared that they were not aware of trainings given through PVP.
11.3 Koothanatham village, Mallasamuthiram block, Namakkal district Social Audit from 29/8/16 to 4/9/16
1 Village Overview In this village, there are 4 habitations and totally 550 households. Panchayat talaivar has been elected consequently for two times, Vice President is a woman. Agriculture is main livelihood, people said that mostly in the mornings they go for MGNREGS work, while in the evening the go for agriculture work. Often, people could be met only after 8pm in their homes, during our 5-day period spent in the village. People said that the panchayat Talaivar is very supportive to the people and to the VPRC. Transport is scanty: the bus comes only two times to the village - the students of this village have participated in strikes two times demanding a town bus. 2 PIP: In this village, Pudhu Vaazhvu has identified 173 target families – 100 families as ‘poor’ and BPL: 73 as ‘very poor’. To give individual assistance loans, the project has identified 10 differently- abled persons and 15 vulnerable persons. There were no additions/deletions made to PIP list. 3 Individual The team met 40/49 beneficiaries Assistance The following are the discrepancies between registers and field verification: We met Selvaraj, Kaveriyamma, and Chinnammal, who in 2010 had each taken a loan of Rs.4000 but this transaction has not been recorded in the register For Last 2 years there has been no repayment in individual assistance 4 SHGs The team met with 13/18 SHGs. 7 groups were found to be defunct, based on analysis of SHG registers, passbooks and on holding meetings with them. 4 SHGs were found to be very active, functioning well and requested more support from the project staff 5 SHG Training For 18 groups 4th Module training has been conducted for 3 days as per records. But during field visit discussions members said they had attended only 2 days’ trainings. Misappropriation amount identified: Rs.5809 The CST post is inactive after the CST’s delivery. None of the registers were updated. Tally was updated up to the current month. 6 PLF The team met with all 17 SHGs. Of these 12 SHGs having outstanding loans. Loan Registers was not updated since last 3 months. Loan cards were not present with all members and it could not be checked. For Last 3 months, members’ repayment 100% but not repaid in the bank but they are paying to book keeper. Cash in hand with book keeper Rs.3,02,400 and during social audit verification only she repaid the amount. 7 Skill 101 youths in this village have gone for training (91 candidates from PVP fund, 10 from Mathi fund) The team met 25/101 beneficiaries.
76 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
The trained computer youths met are now still in college. They have undergone training during their holidays after the 12th class exams at the age of 17 years itself (not attained 18 years of age) In all cases of youths met, none of the institutes have provided a placement. Yet, 100% of payment (including the placement-linked 20% fund component) was released to all institutes for training. 8 PAR: 100% repayment 80:20 Target: 167 beneficaries, and amount Rs.27,53,000 and in non target 24 beneficiaries, 70:30 amount Rs. 5,85,000 so ratio comes to 87:13 (beneficiaries) and 82:18 (amount) Livelihood 156 members amount Rs.24,83,000 and Consumption to 35 members amount Rs.8,55,000 so the ratio comes to 82:18(beneficiaries) and 74:26(amount) 9 Functioning Of The last one year, VPRC has not been functioning. Members also shared that the Panchayat CBOs (VPRC, PLF, Talaivar domination was high over the committees. SAC has not been functioning for the last SAC) 2 years. For the past one year, PLF activity too was found to be low. Since one year, the book keeper is not working because of her delivery. CST too has not been working since her delivery. 10 Tally Tally is updated up to the month 11 CLG 2 CLG in this village but both are not functioning. Few or no current transactions. Malligai Dairy CLG fund received Rs.1,10,646 and has spent Rs.96,462 Amman Goat CLG Fund received Rs.83,913 and has spent Rs.40,850 Common Procurement for Cow feed mixing machine and chop cutter machine but both machines are not working 12 Total Bookkeeper cash in hand Rs. 3,02,400 (but this got deposited when brought to light) Misappropriation SHGs Training Amount Rs. 5809 Amount Total: Rs. 5809 13 During the 5 day Bookkeeper Cash in hand amount got deposited - Rs. 302400 social audit All Registers got updated period
14 Oor Koottam Over all 150 people attended the Oor Koottam hearing. DPM, Cluster Team leader, facilitator, Panchayat Talaivar all attended the Oor Koottam. Findings about youths not completing training were agreed upon by all at the Oor Koottam. PLF Repayment amount Rs.302400 VPRC bookkeeper misappropriation was identified during the audit and recovered. This entire amount has been deposited to the bank on 2.09.2016. The 2 CLGs together have received fund of Rs.194559, and spent Rs 137312. Both are non functional. Findings were agreed upon at the Oor Koottam.
77 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
12. Perambalur district
12.1 Melamathur village, Alathur block, Perambalur district Social audit from 8/8/16 to 13/8/16
Area Findings 1. PIP 8 vulnerable people have been added to the PIP list. The team met all 8. 2 of them – BPL Tavamani and Karpagam - were found to be non-target (i.e they were neither disabled nor vulnerable). Rs. 20,000 have been taken by them each in 2015. Both have been repaying the loan. The previous secretary had taken them into the list. The other 6 additions were alright. Gram Sabha approvals were not there for these 8 entries, although VPRC resolutions existed. 14 disabled were removed from the list. The team met 10 of these people. In the case of 7 of them, the disability ID card shows that their disability was below 40%, making them ineligible to receive loans. However, for 3 of the people met – Neelavati Gopal, Malathi Maruthamuthu, Rani Pazhanivel – the ID cards showed more than 40% disability. Yet they had not received loans. When asked they said they wanted loans. They lived in the outskirts of the village, and had no idea about the scheme. The CDF too admitted that they had been left out. 2. Individual 55 people have been given assistance since 2012 out of 57 target (43 disabled + assistance vulnerable 14) totally identified. The 2 people who did not get it were found to be not poor, and said they did not need loans. 55 had got loans correctly, with no mismatches found. About 12 people have not been repaying from over 1.5 years. Our project identifies only 219 target families, the BPL list identifies 774 families (Source: Panchayat Baseline 2005-06) 3. SHGs There are 25 SHGs. 2 are defunct. More than half the members of these two SHGs had reportedly migrated out of the village. All of them had quoted ‘Goat’/’Cows’ as loan purpose.
3 SHGs are defunct – of which 1 is disability SHG and 2 are women’s SHGs. The representatives have not been active. SHG bank linkage was found to be weak. Only 1 SHG has taken a bank loan now. 12 SHGs had bank linkages earlier and repaid loans. Union Bank of India has given a grading a year ago, but SHG members told our team that bank has not given them loan, although all 12 SHGs had applied for loans.
SHGs resolution registers are updated, but cash book, general ledger and savings book were not updated. 4. SHG SHG Training records of attendance, signatures, bills were verified with the SHGs and Training found to be true as per records. 5. PLF 61/81 beneficiaries were met. 15 lakhs loans have been given to these 81 beneficiaries, about 7 lakhs repaid. But none of the loan repayment cards could be seen or verified. Community members said loan cards had not been issued. On being asked the reason, the bookkeeper informed that she had not received printed loan cards from the cluster. This is an issue since PLF repayments could not be fully verified because of this. 6. Skill The team met 40/62 beneficiaries (many were not in the village), out of the 102 youths identified as eligible. 22 non-target persons had been sent for three trainings: JCB training (6) driving(9), Tailoring(7).
78 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
PIP list was taken for door-to-door verification. It was found that the Panchayat Talaivar’s son – Muthukumar Periyasamy – had attended driving training, by using somebody else’s PIP number (00202, belonging to a different person called Saraswati Selvamani). The Talaivar’s family is non-target and they had used a target PIP number on the training register. Overall, 35% youths were found to be non-target. So the target non target ratio was found to be 65:35. Moreover, with 44 males and 18 female beneficiaries, the gender ratio in skill training is skewed at 2.4:1. 21 people have not been given certificates since 6 months even though they have completed training and payments have been made to the institutes. Soft-skill training had not been given to any of the 40 people met. 7. 80:20 PAR: 3.3% 70:30 78:22 in PLF Recovery 84% Rate 84:16. The assets were verified and found to be true, but none of the 60 beneficiaries had taken insurance. 8. Tally Updation was there upto July 2016 for PLF and VPRC. A few entries were found to be erroneous, and these were rectified during audit. SHG data for last 4 months had not been updated. 9. CLG 1 CLG – goat. Rs. 95,000 fund had been received in 2016. 16,000Rs. has been used to buy equipment. The CLG has 22 members. Exposure visit has happened to Namakkal to see how goat- breeding there. A few members did not know how much fund the CLG had received. Account has been opened in the names of VPRC Secretary and bookkeeper, both of whom are members of the CLG. The team felt that the opportunity could have been used by other members. 10. Oor About 100 people attended the hearing where these findings were read out and shared. Koottam The talaivar, ward members, Vice President, Panchayat clerks, SHGs all attended. APM,cluster staff attended.
79 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
12.2 Puduvettaikudi village, Veppur block, Perambalur Social audit from 8/8/16 to 13/8/16
Area Findings 1. PIP: PIP list identifies 264 households as target, whereas BPL list identifies BPL: 227 families as poor. 16 changes were made to the PIP list. 9 differently abled and 7 vulnerable persons have been added in the PIP registers. But these did not have Gram Sabha approvals. 14 of these 16 people had received VPRC loans, and are repaying the amounts. 2. Individual 41/68 Beneficiaries met. In the case of 25 beneficiaries, record and field assistance visit loan repayment amount was found to be different. The amount actually repaid was more by Rs. 87700. Most of the beneficiaries didn’t get loan card and did not have any loan repayment receipt. The CDF admitted to the social audit team and also in the Oor Koottam that she had taken it, and promised to repay the amount. We found 14 differently-abled and 1 vulnerable had not received individual assistance and they did not want the loans. It may be guessed that the 16 new PIP additions could have been made to show complete loan disbursement against these 15 people who did not want loans. (due to the administration’s pressure of showing loan disbursements) 3. SHGs There are 23 SHGs. But only 20 SHGs are a part of PLF. The 3 left out are in the same habitation, called ‘Thuninchapadi’, and the SHGs are Kurinchimalar, Vamsam, Pasumai SHG. These 3 SHGs had had a previous bad experience with the NGO called Hand-in-Hand and hence were skeptical about PLFs. 1 SHG was defunct(Mullai Disabled SHG) The team met 11/23 SHGs. We found that 5 SHGs did not have even one bank linkage, while 5 other SHGs have a bank loan in the current financial year. 4. SHG Training Only 13/20 SHGs have completed IV module training. The training records (attendance, signatures, etc) were matched and verified. 5. PLF 49/79 beneficiaries met. In about half the cases, the stated loan purpose was not the same as actual loan use. For PLF membership, 227/247 members had paid their subscription amounts. 20 members had not paid. PLF EC member selection was found to be wrongful. The PLF President (Radha w/o Palanivel from Kurinchimalar SHG) and one EC member (Jeevitha w/o Ravichandran from Pasumai SHG) are both from SHGs which have not been federated. They are from Thuninchapadi habitation. 5 SHGs have not taken a PLF loan at all. (in the 9 months of its existence) 6. Skill 23/50 beneficiaries met. Two youths as per records have attended tailoring classes with Chella Foundation Skill Institution for 3 months in 2014. However, when we met them, it was found that they attended
80 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
only 22/90 days. Full course fees of Rs. 4500 was found to have been given to the institute along with full attendance records. 4 people should have got soft skills, but had not got any. Training and employment status was found to be different in many of the cases. Overall the target ratio was found to be 60-40 target : non-target … PIP list. Gender ratio in skill was highly skewed, at about 7 males : 1 female 7. PAR 6.65% 80:20 86% Target(66 member), 14% Non target(13 member) 70:30 95% Livelihood, 5% consumption Recovery Rate 91.35% Closing Balance Rs. 359499/- 8. Functioning of VPRC members were met on the first day. Since 4 years, there was no CBOs rotation of office bearers. Resolutions were maintained. Knowledge and (VPRC, PLF, SAC) awareness of the non-office bearer members was low. For example, the VPRC members did not know about expenditures made. PLF committee is two years new. All members new about all the loans made. Their registers were updated too. SAC registers had entries but had missed writing about the CDF repayment problem. 9. Tally VPRC and PLF updated till July 2016, and SHG updated till Mar 2016 10. CLG Being a new district, the diary CLG ‘Kasturi’ has received fund of Rs. 95000 in Dec 2015, they have gone for training and exposure visit. They are yet to start activities. 11. Total Rs. 87,700 (repayments due from CDF) Misappropriation Amount 12. Oor Koottam 142 people attended the Oor Koottam on 13th August 2016, which lasted for 2.5 hours. The issue of repayment mismatch was discussed at length. It was agreed that the VPRC Secretary and Treasurer would be changed as per rotation norms on the 15th August Gram Sabha. The DPM, Panchayat President, all ward members were present at the Oor Koottam. The follow up action promised was the recovery from CDF, and federating the 3 unlinked SHGs.
81 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
13. Pudukottai district
13.1 Panampatti Village, Annavasal Block, Pudukkottai District Social Audit from 16-09-2016 to 20-06-2016
Area Findings Village Overview The village is situated middle of Tirchy and Pudukottai road, near a place called Muthu-udayanpatti main road. The village is 20 km from Pudukottai district. There are 7 habitations in this village. Pot making, agriculture is the main livelihood. 489 households are in this village, with 2087 people. Majority people(87%) are from backward community. 1. PIP: Total target families are 127, of which very poor are 58 and poor are 69 BPL: families. There are 24 differently-abled persons and 18 vulnerable persons. BPL category identifies about 123 families. There are no PIP additions and deletions. 2 VPRC/PLF/SAC Over the 5 days of social audit, VPRC, PLF, SAC committee meetings Function could not be conducted. Members did not come to the office over 5 days. VKC computer not available in VPRC office, so VKC is not functioning. 3 Individual The team met 31/38 beneficiaries. assistance There were some discrepancies between registers and field verification. Some of these are: In 7 beneficiaries, difference of amount for individual assistance repayment was found for Rs.6,900. Individual loan card was not given to any of the beneficiaries Loan Assets were not insured
Field Loan Register S.No Name Visit Difference Amount Repay Repay 1 Ranganayagi 10000 2500 4000 1500 2 Murugan 10000 7500 8000 500 3 Arulmary 8000 7600 8000 400 4 Mathialagu 10000 8000 10000 2000 5 Alagammal 10000 9500 10000 500 6 Karupaiyee 10000 9500 10000 500 7 Anantharaj 10000 6500 8000 1500 Total 68000 51100 58000 6900
Total misappropriation amount Rs 6900. 4. SHGs The team met 11 SHG out of 16 SHG. 16 SHG affiated in PLF, All SHG active. 7SHGs have a bank linkage in current year. 5. SHG Training 4th Module training has not been conducted. 6. Skill 33 youths have benefited in skill training. The team met 23/33 beneficiary.
82 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
In batch amount payment made in May 2014 made to Sri Vengateshwara Driving Institute while comparing records, it was found that Rs.3500 was paid extra against the names of Pandiyarajan and Selladurai (extra of Rs. 1750 per person). Each trainee fee is Rs. 4750. All four youths have signed to this effect during field verification. Also, the gender ratio of youth trainees was skewed at 2.1:1 Total misappropriation amount: Rs. 3500 7. PLF ASF The team met 11/16 beneficiaries. PLF loan card not issued to the SHGs. Loan ledger register was not properly maintained - i.e. Loan application number, date, receipt no. DCB nil in PLF, PLF Loan tracking registers were not updated. 1 SHGs have not got ASF loan. ASF A/c bank balance: Rs.466978. 8. PAR PLF PAR outstanding amount Rs.0 and PLF total outstanding amount Rs.1157559/- PAR: 0% 80:20 76 % Target 70:30 100 % Livelihood Recovery Rate 77 % Recovery (DCB Calendar not maintained) Closing Balance Rs. 466978 9. Tally Tally all accounts updated Auguest-2016 10. CLG Ayyanar Tailoring CLG received amount Rs.85, 500 in the year 2014. An amount of Rs.89720 (including contribution) has been spent in year 2015 for purchase of tailoring machine. But CLG is not functional now. The rest of the amount is lying unspent. 11. Total Individual Assistant Repayment : Rs.6900 Misappropriation Skill Training : Rs.3500 Amount Total amount: Rs. 10400/- 12 Status of poverty Alagammal w/o Marimuthu is living in Manickampatti. Her husband had expired 19 years before. She has 7 daughters. 3 have got married and other four daughters are studying. Her income is only through OAP and MGNREGS. She is managing her family with this income. She got individual loan from VPRC and has also repaid it. 13. Impact during Skill training register was updated. the 5-day audit PLF loan ledger register was updated. Skill training bills were collected and updated. When the social audit began, loan cards were distributed to PLF and individual assistance beneficiaries overnight without bookkeeper signature. 14. Oor Koottam 61 people attended the meeting. Repayment mismatches, skill training extra payment, CDF, PIP list variation, were the issues raised in the oor koottam. DPM & APM VF attended the hearing, Panchayat Talaivar and the project staff (Cluster team) Follow up action promised: The salary was not paid to Thooimai Kaavalar (Solid Waste Management person) for the last three months. It was asked in the Oor Koottam. For this the president promised that the salary would be paid to Thooimai Kavalar.
83 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
13.2 Pallathupatti Village, Kunrantarkovil Block, Pudukkottai District Social Audit from 16-09-2016 to 20-06-2016
Area Findings 1 Village Overview The village is situated middle of Tiruchi and Pudukottai, near a place called Keeranur. The village is 28 km from Pudukottai district. There are 18 habitations in this village. Agriculture is the main livelihood. 802 households are in this village, with 3296 people. Majority people (84%) are from backward communites, and there are a few community issues over the Mukkanakaliyamman temple located in the middle of the habitations. Anna Nagar habitation has 96 families of the Narikuravar residing in 54 households. 2. PIP: Total target families are 237 in all, of which very poor are 121 families BPL: and poor are 116 families. Differently abled 33 persons, Vulnerable 59 persons. 7 people have been added to PIP list in 2013, only about 1 member removed for death. All addition and deletions had gram sabha approvals. But this has not been updated in the VPRC PIP Register. BPL Category identifies about 212 families as poor. 3 VPRC/PLF/SAC Over the 5 days of social audit, VPRC, PLF, SAC committees meetings Function could not be conducted. Members did not come to the office over 5 days. VKC Computer not available in VPRC office, so VKC is not functioning. Printer is not working last 3 months. 4 Individual The team met 58/72 beneficiaries. assistance There were some discrepancies between registers and field verification. Some of these are: In 17 beneficiaries, difference of amount for individual assistance repayment was found for Rs.23,250 Individual loan card was not given to any of the beneficiaries Loan Assets were not insured
Field Loan Register S.No Name Visit Difference Amount Repay Repay 1 C.Amutha 10000 1000 2000 1000 2 A.Poomalai 10000 2500 6000 3500 3 M.Karupaiya 10000 5000 7000 2000 4 Kasthuri 10000 5000 7000 2000 5 Palanivelu 10000 3000 5000 2000 6 Muthumail 10000 8500 10000 1500 7 Kalarani 10000 0 4000 4000 8 Vijayarani 4000 800 3200 2400 9 S.Kavitha 4000 1600 2000 400 10 Usha 4000 1600 2000 400 11 A Kavitha 4000 1600 2000 400 12 Rani 4000 2400 4000 1600 13 Manikumar 10000 5500 6000 500 14 D Sekar 10000 5500 6000 500 15 Panchavarnam 15000 11250 11500 250
84 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
16 Vellaiyammal 4000 3600 4000 400 17 Mathiyalagi 4000 3600 4000 400 Total 133000 62450 85700 23250
Total misappropriation amount Rs 23250. During social audit 1600 amount was repaid. 5. SHGs The team met 14 SHG out of 19 SHG. 19 SHG affiated in PLF, Vasantham DSHG not functioning last one year, due to community issues over the temple, as told by villagers as well as the previous bookkeeper to social audit team. There are only 5 differently abled members in this SHG who are from different communities. Sabarisri WSHG not functioning due to a bank loan of Rs. 1 lakh taken in year 2014 which is overdue. Kavikuil SHG defunct due to members who have migrated. 6. SHG Training The team met 14 SHG out of 19 SHG. There were inconsistencies within the records in training. 4th Module training conducted for 7 SHGS over 2 days only as per attendance. But bills have been claimed for 3 days training, as shown below. Voucher No: 1270 shows Rs.2160 amount but no bills. Voucher No: 1271 shows expense of Rs.3700 amount. The bills for this training were shown for 10-10-2015, but the training was conducted on 12,13,14 October-2015 VPRC SHG Consolidation Register not updated SHG Grading, Rating, and Training details. SHG total amount through improper bills: Rs. 5860 7. Skill 29 Youth benefited in skill training. In batch amount payment made to Bismilla Driving Institute while comparing records, it was found that Rs.1750 was paid extra against the name of one Pandiyan. Each trainee fee is Rs. 4750. One youth (name withheld) has attended only 30/45 days in a beautician course, but full payment Rs 8000 paid to Kavitha Institution. She has signed to this effect. Another youth (name withheld) dropped out after attending 11/45 days in a beautician course. The course was not completed but full payment of Rs.8000 paid to Kavitha Institution Two disabled youths (names withheld) underwent electrician training. He dropped out after attending for the first day, but payment of Rs.11000 has been made to Kavitha institution.
All four youths have signed to this effect during field verification. Also, the gender ratio of youth trainees was skewed at 2.2:1
Total misappropriation amount : Rs. 28,750 8. PLF ASF The team met 47/68 beneficiaries. PLF loan card not issued in PLF. Loan ledger register was not properly maintained - i.e. Loan application number, date, receipt no. DCB nil in PLF, PLF Loan tracking registers were not updated after December 2015.
85 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
In Durgaiyamman SHG, a loan of Rs. 20000 has been taken by Rani in the year 2015, but it has not repaid the last 9 months. 6 SHGs have not got ASF loan. ASF A/c bank balance: 7, 76,686. 9. PAR PLF PAR outstanding amount Rs.20,000 and PLF total outstanding amount Rs.7,28,000 PAR:2.7% 80:20 84 % Target 70:30 95 % Livelihood Recovery Rate 75 % Recovery ( DCB Calendar not maintained ) Closing Balance Rs. 7, 76,686. 10. Tally Tally accounts not updated after feb-2016 11. CLG M.G.R. Paasimani CLG received amount Rs.94, 855. It was found that this amount was being used for internal lending instead of on the CLG. An amount of Rs. 77500 has been spent in year2015 for purchase of table chair,rack,pench,store advance,materials But CLG is not functional now. 12. Total Individual Assistant Repayment : 23,250 Misappropriation Skill Training : 28,750 Amount SHG Training : 5,860 Total amount: Rs. 57,860 13 Status of poverty Chindamani w/o Arumugam aged 60 has 2 sons. Chindamani is deaf and dumb. Her husband met with an accident. Her elder son is deaf. Her husband’s sister is also living with them because she lost her husband and son. Her elder son aged 10 is with her brother’s house for work and for his survival. No one is capable of doing labour work. Chindamani usually begs door to door to get food for their survival. 14. Impact during Skill training register was updated. the 5-day audit Loan ledger register was updated. Skill training bills were collected and updated. Individual assistance repayment Rs.1600 collection (on learning that this would be read out during Oor Koottam.) When the social audit began, loan cards were distributed to PLF and Individual assistance overnight without bookkeeper signature. 15. Oor Koottam 70 people attended the meeting. Repayment mismatches, skill training dropout payment, SHG 4th module training issues were raised in the Oor Koottam. APM BF & SS attended the hearing, Panchayat Talaivar and the project staff (Cluster team) Follow up action promised: People demanded that they wanted bank loans. APM BF promised that he would ensure bank linkages with IOB bank within 1 week. Cluster Staff promised defunct SHG revival and affiliation with PLF and that they would arrange to give the ASF loans in Pankunivayal habitation. The president promised to build a bridge between OVK Nagar and Vivekanandha Nagar so that people could cross over the railway track.
86 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
14. Ramanad district
14.1 A Puthur village, Bogalur block, Ramanad district Social audit from 8/8/16 to 13/8/16
Area Findings 1. PIP Did not have any changes. They have included 6 disability members. BPL PIP list identified 245 target families 2. Individual 52/96 people were met. There were instances where loans have not assistance been taken for stated purposes. For example, Muniammal, took loan for ‘Goat’ but actually bought earrings. Nobody has purchased insurance. Repayment was poor. Rs.96,500 has been recovered. Recovery Rate = 28% 2.5 lakhs outstanding. 3. SHGs 11 out of 18 SHGs are defunct. Repayment issues. Linkage only for one bank.Only 6 SHGs are being monitored by a CST. 4. SHG training 286 people have attended, as per records. 146 members only have participated. When we met and discussed with 12 SHGs, it was found out. But bills were there for 144 people, so it appears that only attendance seems to have been marked carelessly. 5. PLF Two issues: groups having misappropriation. Roja SHG – 1,60,000Rs. misuse / overdue. 10 people have divided and taken the loan. Vyahammal has not taken any loan herself. But according to her records, in her name loan has been issued for Rs. 15,000. On field verification the loan was actually found to be taken by Noor Mary. Reason: Noor Mary was too sick to come out. She could not be met by the team. Roja SHG: defunct since last 2 years. Clara has migrated to elsewhere, and so the group fell. Tamarai SHG: 5 people have taken loans of Rs. 1 lakh. One person Arogya Mary alone has received loan of Rs. 20,000. But the other 4 members, 80,000Rs. has gone to Nirmala Motchamary. The other 3 people did not know that loans had been taken in her name. Matha SHG: In 6 people’s names, Rs. 1 lakh loan has been given according to records. But again this amount has been taken by one person Nirmala Motchamary. 6. Skill 74/116 youths have been met. About 20-25 of them were employed outside the country and in Singapore as daily wage labourers. Many of the youths have gone for nursing, tailoring trainings and have benefited. 7 80:20 and 70:30 71:29 and 82:18 Loan Only 64% and PAR = 36% recovery,PAR 8. Tally VPRC, E governance, development PLF has pending corrections. Updated upto August 2016. 9 CLG Two CLGs, only material has been purchased. Both are not active. No transactions. Both have purchased accounts for about Rs. 70,000 each. One is goat and the other for charcoal.
87 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
14.2 Keezhselvanur village, Kadaladi block, Ramanad Social audit from 8/8/16 to 13/8/16
Area Findings 1. PIP: PIP list identifies 142 families, while BPL list identifies 460 families. Further probing BPL: may be required to understand why the difference is so large. 2. Individual The team met 41/49 beneficiaries. During field verification, we found that 8 people (2 assistance disabled, 6 vulnerable) who are NOT in the PIP list have been given loans. We were shown GS approvals for 6 of the vulnerable to be added to PIP list, but this PIP register was not updated. 5 repayment amount differences were observed – Lakshmi, Murugan, Muniswari, Kumarayi, Puttuamman – have paid Rs. 400-500 each more as found during field visit than the registers/passbooks. This difference amounts to Rs. 2100 unexplained.
3. SHGs Totally 13 SHGs, 2 of them have not been federated. We had group discussions with these groups and they seemed interested to federate. 4/13 groups are defunct (savings not paid, loans not being repaid etc) It was felt that the SHGs are not being monitored. CST did not know how to maintain records. 4 SHG have never had a bank linkage, the active 9 SHG did not have bank linkage in the current financial year. 4. SHG Training 4th module attendance, bills checked. Only 4 groups have got 4th module training. 80% of the group has been attending the trainings. 5. PLF The team met all 26 beneficiaries. 6. Skill The team met 22/27 beneficiaries. (mismatch, 50% of the people are in different employment areas from the training areas. Soft skill Gender ratio, training has not been given. 80:20) Gender ratio 2.5:1 female Non target was 33.3% in skill (9/27) 7. PAR Nil 80:20 65:35 – a lot of PLF loans have gone to non target 70:30 100% Livelihood purpose Recovery Rate 100% Closing Balance Rs. 530473/- 8. Functioning of During discussions, many villagers and committee members reported to the social CBOs audit team that the influence of the President in the functioning of the committees (VPRC, PLF, SAC) was heavy and often detrimental to the process. 9. Tally Tally has been updated for SHG, PLF etc. 10. CLG 1 CLG has not got fund yet and hence not begun functioning. 11. Total Rs. 2100 (5 member loan repayment difference) Misappropriation Amount 12. Oor Koottam Over 120 people attended the hearing, and they signed the Oor Koottam report. Issues of repayment were discussed. The DPM and cluster staff also attended the meeting.
88 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
13. Village Yadavar, Devar (BC) and SC communities stay in the village. We found that the village socioeconomic history resulted in a climate that was politicized and negatively affecting the profile implementation of several scheme there. The current president has been serving since 3 terms. For example, more effort is needed to ensure that the Yadavars community in Kottayenthal with 292 families are included in the various schemes. There was an overhead tank which is in urgent need of chlorination. Roads, toilet facilities were also problematic. Focus on convergence work is needed.
89 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
15. Salem district 15.1 Valayakaranur village, Ayothiyapattinam block, Salem district Social audit from 29/8/16 to 4/9/16
1. Village Overview Valayakaranur is located at the foothills of Yercaud. There are 3 habitations in the village.
2. PIP: In Valayakkaranur, 208 families have been identified as target. 110 families are BPL: classified as very poor, 98 families as poor. 30 persons have been identified as disabled and 37 as vulnerable. 7 people have been added to PIP list and 12 people have been deleted from the PIP list. All 19 changes have Gram Sabha approvals.
3. Individual The team met 20/70 beneficiaries Assistance There were several discrepancies between registers and field verification. Some of these are: As per record, Govinthammal on 20.03.15 has taken Rs.10000 of which Rs.2500 has been repaid, and she has a balance of Rs.7500. It was found that before social audit team began field verification, the project staff have met the people and given them a card stating that they have received 20000, and instructing them not to show us the old card. However, Govinthammal, who shared this with us, gave us both the cards and said “I have received only 10000”. During our conversation, the VPRC book keeper said we had issued cheque to Govinthammal. But it was found that the cheque was cleared in another person’s name - Jeyakodi - who was found to have taken 10000, and given only Rs.10000 to Govindammal. As per record, Chellammal has been given Rs. 20000 but during field verification it came to light that she has received only Rs. 10000. Again it was found that she has been given another card stating that she has have received Rs.20000. As per record, Parvathi also received only Rs.10000 but during field verification she too said that she had received only 10000, but she had been instructed that if anyone comes home and asks please say 20000. She too had been given a card one day before our field verification. As per record, Annamalai has received Rs.20000 on 5.4.15. He has repaid Rs. 5000. On the loan card this has been reflected, but receipt has not been issued. As per record, only Rs.1000 has been repaid. So, Rs.4000 (difference of 5000 – 1000) is still with Jeyakodi to whom the repayment has been done. But Jeyakodi could not be contacted when we went for field visit. 4 SHGs The team met with 17 SHGs. 12 functional, 5 were defunct (as found based on registers, passbooks, meetings with them). CST is not active. 5 CST Salary No report for last 2 years and no salary given to CST.
6 SHG Training All 4th Module training have been shown on records, during discussions members said they attended the training. CST is not active. SHG registers were not shown during social audit and hence could not be verified. This data was not found in Tally either
90 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
7 PLF The team met with all 17 SHGs. All of the SHGs have outstanding loan. Our team met 59 beneficiaries. Loan cards were given recently and there were many differences between loan card and records. As per records, one of the Thendral SHG members said that she didn't receive any loan but as per record, a loan of Rs.20000 exists. In Thamarai SHG, Rajeeswari and Saraswathi have each received a loan of Rs. 20000 in the year 2013. As per record, full amount is pending but they have given in writing that they have repaid fully. In many SHGs, when the previous loan was pending, again the loan has been given. But the names in the record are different from the actual loan card recipient on field. In one case, in Thamarai SHG, a loan of Rs.25000 has been taken and given to another 5 members for IHHL loan who are not in the group.
8 Skill 173 youths had gone for training. Placement orders were not there. In 30 cases, applications were not there. Training institute bills were not found for the youths trained in the initial period. 9 PAR: 88.2 80:20 11.7 70:30 65.8 35.4 Recovery rate 45% PAR 55%
10 Functioning Of Last one year not functioning the VPRC, PLF SAC. But resolution written. CBOs (VPRC,PLF,SAC) 11 Tally Not updated
12 CLG 2 CLG in this village but 1 CLG not functioning.
13 Total Rs. 1,19,000 (Individual loan 34,000+PLF 85,000) Misappropriation Amount 14 Oor Koottam We found that despite our efforts to mobilize the villagers, nobody initially came to the Oor Koottam. The Talaivar then arranged for an auto so that people could come. About 100 SHG members attended. Issues about the individual assistance were brought up in the Oor Koottam. PLF issue was not discussed much. One of the SHG members came to raise her problem, but at that point the DPM and CST asked her not to discuss the problem at this particular social audit platform.At one point, when the staff was heatedly discussing an issue raised, the videographer was instructed to censor and drop the heated conversations before sending to state office.
15.2 Thalaivasal village, Thalaivasal block, Salem district Social audit from 29/8/16 to 4/9/16
1 Village Overview There are 2 habitations in this village – Thalaivasal, Nathakarai. It is over an hour’s journey from Salem by bus. 1919 families in all. In the main Thalaivasal habitation, visibly there were more disabled people in the village.
91 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Political aspects: The President is a lady(SC), but her husband(BC) is a bank employee and runs the panchayat on her behalf. 2 PIP: In Thalaivasal village, the project has identified 592 target families of which BPL: 223 are identified ‘very poor’ and 369 as ‘poor. There are 117 disabled persons and 120 vulnerable persons. There were no changes made to the PIP list. 3 Individual The team met 63/154 beneficiaries. Assistance Out of persons identified as disabled/vulnerable, only 97/117 disabled and 57/120 vulnerable persons have received individual assistance. Which means there are still 83 persons who have not received any loan from the project. At the same time, 50 persons have benefited twice. Another finding is that 3 persons - Mary, Jeyanthi and Rajammal have been given loans while the previous loan was pending. Overall loan outstanding is Rs.442265 4 SHGs The team met with 26/46. Manoranjitham SHG is not affiliated with the PLF but has received loan for 11 members, worth Rs.275000. During field verification, it was found that 5 SHG s were defunct. We could not meet with all the SHGs because the number of habitations was high. None of the SHGs have a bank linkage. 5 CST Salary Out of 3 CSTs, one is not working. Varathammal is looking after 9 SHGs and has Irregularities received her honorarium till Feb’ 16, while Anitha is looking after 6 SHGs and has received honorarium till April 2016.The rest of the SHGs have no CST.
VPRC bookkeeper had earlier been functioning as CST too. 6 SHG Training We met 20 SHGs. Trainings were found to have been conducted as per records. 7 PLF Totally there 47 SHGs, all have received ASF loan. During field visit it was found that in Thamarai SHG, Jothi has repaid Rs. 11000 and Neelavathi Rs.7250 to one person, Saja (animator).On the day of visit, Saja accepted and paid Rs.10000 and promised to repay the remaining amount in one or two days. So, total misuse identified = 11000 + 7250 = 18250 8 Skill 219 youths had gone for training. This team met only 17 youths. Out of 17, one named Mohandas finished mechanic training, for which an amount of Rs. 9618 is given to the institute, but certificate has not been issued yet. 9 PAR: 78.1% 80:20 21.8% 70:30 682.2% 17.7% Recovery Rate:76.8% PAR:25.2% 10 Functioning Of Participation of members was low in the committees met during social audit. CBOs (VPRC,PLF,SAC) 11 Tally Updated
12 CLG There are 3 CLGs in this village: Theiva Thirumagal milk CLG received 95000 as project fund. From 7.4.15, the CLG is not functioning. Kulamatha Milk CLG received 95000 as project fund but it is not functioning from the beginning only records have been updated. Another Atsaiya CLG received 66500.This CLG is not functioning for last 4 months. Member contributions have not been collected from this CLG. Only
92 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Karpuradeepam SHG members are in this CLG. The hotel is run by VPRC Secretary, reportedly. And the income expenditure had not done under this CLG account.
All 3 are currently non-functional. 13 Total 18250-10000= Rs. 8250 Misappropriation (Rs. 18250 is the repayment difference amount and Rs. 10,000 which was Amount recovered during social audit) 14 Oorkoottam About 70-80 people attended the Oor Koottam. The APM and cluster staff attended. The Talaivi also attended the meeting. The issue of many SHGs not receiving bank linkage was discussed. The Talaivi also spoke of the importance of timely repayments.
15.3 Nallur tribal village, Yercaud block, Salem district
Social audit from 29/8/16 to 4/9/16
1 Village There are totally 156 households in Nallur. The village has mostly tribal population. There is only Overview habitation. Livelihood: floriculture, agriculture. The talaivar could not be met at all. Only the ward member could be met. The main panchayat is Vellakadai and the Talaivar, Venkatachalam, lives there and not in Nallur. 2 PIP, BPL In Nallur village, Pudhu Vaazhvu has identified 148 target families. Of this 47 families have been identified as ‘very poor’, and 101 as ‘poor’. There are 8 disabled and 18 vulnerable persons identified for individual assistance. 2 persons have been added to PIP list and this had the necessary Gram Sabha approvals. 3 Individual The team met 46 beneficiaries. Assistance Differences identified between registers and field verification are as follows: Gandhimathi (Rs. 6500), Muthukumar(5500), Sunilkumar(5000), Mangammal (2000) and Vellayee (6000) have repayments amounting to a total of Rs.25000 which they said they have repaid to the bookkeeper, but this has not been credited into the bank. During field verification it was found that old book keeper Anjali has kept the amount with her, since over two years. She is not the bookkeeper anymore since two years. Loan cards were not present with the beneficiaries. So people do not have a way of tracking their repayments. In two more such cases, Lakshmi has repaid Rs.4000 and Raman repaid Rs.4000, so a total amount of Rs.8000 also has not been entered in the register. This amount was given to one Mr.Vijaykumar (the first bookkeeper). Total misuse amount identified based on this: Rs.33000 (25000 + 8000) 4 SHGs The team met with 10 SHGs. 8 are functional 2 are defunct.
93 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
As per the records in Mullai SHG there are 19 members as per records, but during field verification, only 12 members were there. Similarly, in Sikaram SHG as per records 20 but in the field verification only 12 members. Nallur A and Nallur B SHG: as per records these SHGs have 19+19=38 members but in the field verification it was found that the SHGS have 12+12=24 members only. Kurinji SHG: as per record 17 members, but in field there were only 12. In Senthamarai SHG 17 members are there as per records, but in field only 12. 8/10 SHGs have no bank linkage. 1 SHG has not been repaying the bank loan properly. 4 SHGs are not repaying ASF loan properly. 5 CST Salary No CST for the past 2 years. Prabavathi old CST received a salary 1050 in the month of November Irregularitie 2014. Now new CST Sathyia has been selected 15.8.16. This was written in the VPRC resolution. s 6 SHG Resolutions are not there. Training People could not remember what the training was about or what they learnt at the training. But they recollected having eaten food at the training. It was also found that Non Communicable Diseases (NCD) training and 4th module training were combined and given together. 7 PLF The team met with 72 members. They are repaying the loan properly. Even as the field verification was going on, Rs.16027 amount have been collected as repayment for ASF. There were no loan cards present with the beneficiaries. When asked, it was learnt that the cluster staff had not issued loan cards at all. 8 Skill 49 youths had gone for training. Issues identified are as follows: 33 youth have been given masonry training through Mavatta MaKaMai. Out of the 33, 11 are males and 22 are females. Most of the female trainees are now at home, while a few are going for estate work. The training amount spent for them is Rs. 1,01,140. The purpose of the training is not fulfilled, they reported. Out of the 33 who attended training, 4 youths who were met clearly stated that they did not attend the training at all but the amount of Rs.9500 per person has been fully paid to Mavatta Makamai. Rs.38000. In the field verification 19 out of 49 youth were not given placement but 20% placement portion of the skill fund was found to have been released. Misuse in skill: Rs.38,000 (from point 2 above) 9 PAR: 100% 80:20 88% 70:30 12% Recovery rate 96.78% PAR 3.22% 10 CLG No CLG 11 Total Rs.71,000 (Individual loan 33,000 + Skill 38,000) Misappropriati on Amount 12 Oorkoottam 70 members attended the Oor Kootam. From the staff, only Bhaskar team leader attended this Oorkottam. People reported that the above fund misuse had happened when the VPRC was run by DAN foundation, by two the villagers identified above (Anjali and Vijayakumar). There is no VKC because it is a subcommittee. People spoke about needing bus facility, speaking of troubles of the hilly area. People at the Oor Koottam also asked a place to conduct SHG meetings. VPRC is being run on a place on rent in one of the houses and so a separate place was asked for the same.
94 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
16. Sivagangai district
16.2 Udayanoor village, Ilayankudi block, Sivagangai Social audit from 8/8/16 to 13/8/16
Area Findings 1. PIP: The PIP list identifies 148 families as target, while the BPL list identifies 234 families as poor in the village. BPL: The PIP list has 15 additions, and these had Gram Sabha approvals. 2. Individual The team met 25/37 beneficiaries. 3 repayments were showing differences assistance between loan card and loan registers. The bookkeeper was not available to check. For example, one person, Thiru. Arulananthar, has repaid Rs. 8000 according to his loan card but he has repaid only Rs. 6000 according to the registers. Most of the beneficiaries seemed to have loan cards which were updated. 3. SHGs All the 13 SHGs are functional but have no bank linkage. Their registers were updated upto July 2016, but only internal lending is taking place. Reason for this: There have been repayment issues with the previous SHGs in this village, as told to us by community members. There was no CST at all since September 2015. 5. PLF 37/60 beneficiaries met. 1) As per records, Murugan SHG, in 2015 has taken a loan of Rs. 80,000 through 5 members. But during field verification, it was found that only 4 members took loans. 2) 9000Rs is outstanding but no challan is there at bank. Our records show that it is not repaid. 3) Only 9/13 SHG received the ASF loan. Special SHGs (differently abled) - none of them have got an ASF loan. 6. Skill 13/19 beneficiaries met (i.e, 6 youths, 7 families of youths). Most youths could not be met at their homes as they were not present. 7. PAR Nil 80:20 80% Target(48 member), 20% Nontarget(12 member) 70:30 100% Livelihood Purpose Recovery Rate PLF loan recovery 120.51% Closing Balance Plf Closing Balance 386865 8. Functioning of CDF is giving physiotherapy. She is working well. CBOs and functionaries (VPRC, PLF, SAC) (CDF,CST, BK) 9. Tally PLF, VPRC was updated. SHG not updated. 10. CLG 1.Goat CLG. Not active. No transactions happening. 2.Only 2 houses had goats. 25 houses in all, but 23 could not be verified. Days. 39 people in all in the goat CLG.
11. Total 9000 (VPRC repayment differences of 3 members) Misappropriation Amount 12. Oor Koottam 60-70 people came to the Oor Koottam.
95 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Vice President, APM M&E, BFTs were all there – VPRC, PLF members of all 3 habitations. SHG linkage, CST not being there, Tally updation, CLG needs to be functional. APM M&E and other functionaries promised follow up on all of these
16.2 Tirumalai Koneripatti village, Sivagangai block, Sivagangai Social audit from 8/8/16 to 13/8/16
Area Findings 1. PIP: The PIP list identifies 211 households, whereas the BPL list identified 246 families. BPL: 2. Individual The team met 44/50 beneficiaries met. 6 repayments are showing differences – assistance between loan card and record. For example: one person, Vinothini, has repaid Rs. 3500 according to the loan card but has repaid only Rs. 2500 according to the registers. Difference amount of all 6 cases put together amounts to Rs.5000/. The members said that the bookkeeper did not give them the receipt, and that they made the repayments at their house. No vouchers were present for Development Account. This means – there is no proof of expenses or loans made. The bookkeeper said she did not know that vouchers were needed for this.
3. SHGs There are 23 SHGs in all, of which 2 SHGs are defunct (Hare Krishna women SHG, Repco thenral women SHG) Bank linkage not there for any of the 21 SHGs for the current year. 4. SHG Training 4th module training has been completed only for 6 SHG out of the 23. The others are yet to happen. There were a few mismatches in attendance records.(as inferred through bills, meeting minutes, group discussions with the trainees) 5. PLF 50/56 beneficiaries met. According to the records, PLF loan of Rs. 20,000 was disbursed to a woman Manimegalai in Kurichi Women SHG in 2015.But during field verification we found that loan was taken by another person Valli. Reason: Manimegalai said she did not need it. There are 3 differently abled SHGs in this village. None of them have received any ASF Loan. When we met them, they said they wanted loans. Reason for this: individual assistance has gone to these members and is not repaid yet fully. Some also said that the office was closed for some days when they came for repayment, since there was no CDF for two years.
6. Skill 18/26 beneficiary (including families) met, some people work in other states and so only their families could be spoken to. Training and employment status was found to be different. For example, youths have completed driving but are employed as machine operators abroad. Most people are not to be found at home. From the records, the gender ratio in the beneficiaries was found to be 2.3:1.
96 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
7. PAR 0% 80:20 73% Target(41 member), 27% Non target(15 member) 70:30 100% Livelihood purpose Recovery Rate Loan recovery 100% Closing Balance Rs.169717/- 8. Functioning of VPRC Development Account - no vouchers were made. CBOs VPRC committee did not know much about the salary payments of bookkeeper (made (VPRC, PLF, SAC) 2 months ago) 5 members attended the PLF meeting with us. PLF Treasurer did not know much about the finances of PLF. SHG Bank passbook entry was being made late. 9. Tally VPRC and PLF update July 2016, and SHG update Mar 2016 10. CLG Diary CLG ‘Malligai’ formed in 2013, but CLG not functional. They said they had gone for exposure visit, but they did not show documents to this effect. Fund of Rs. 93850 had been received by the CLG in 2015 only, and it remains unused.
11. Total The 5000 Rs. (individual assistance loan mismatches) Misappropriation Amount 12. Oor Koottam Over 70 people attended the hearing. DPM, APM CB, Panchayat Talaivar presided the hearing. The loan repayment issue was discussed by the people. The VPRC and PLF passbooks, which had not been updated, were updated and shown on the Oor Koottam day. The Talaivar requested the project staff that loans taken by the two dead persons – Sudha d/o Krishnan (Rs. 10,000 loan, 7000 outstanding) and Aravindan s/o Arumugam (Rs. 10,000 loan, full outstanding) – be waived off.
97 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
17. Theni district
17.1 Kamarajapuram village, Bodinayakanur block, Theni district Social audit from 15/9/2016 to 20/9/2016
1. Village Overview The village has 546 households, with 2 habitations. Livelihood: primarily agriculture, migration to Kerala for labour. Communities: Mixed. About 60% population is SC. Political aspects: People in the village spoke in detail of partisan influences in their lives. Talaivar was of AIADMK party, but voting populations were perceived to be DMK, as told to the team by people. 2. PIP, BPL 175 families were found in target as per PIP list. 118 families were poor; 57 families were very poor. Differently abled 55 members. Vulnerable 27 members. BPL list identifies 240. There were no changes made to PIP list.
3. Individual We met 60/79 beneficiaries. households Loan card was not present with any of the beneficiaries. There were 10 cases in the habitation of Manickapuram of repayment differences between records and field, as follows: As per records, Ponnitayi has taken loan of Rs.10,000 in 2009. Rs.1250 has been repaid by her, with outstanding Rs.8750. But when met in person, she denied having received this loan. Sitammal had taken assistance of Rs.500 for medical, but she said she not received this amount. Ramayi has taken loan of Rs.5000 in the year 2009. We found that the family, in person, was not very poor, but the loan had been waived off in the Repayment Registers. There were no VPRC resolutions and GS approvals required for the waiving off. When met in person, Ramayi said she would repay it. Panjavarnam has taken a loan of Rs.5000 in the year 2009 as per records. She has repaid Rs.275, as per registers. But the loan has been marked as ‘Subsidy’ in the register. When met in person, she said she had stopped repaying but has signed saying she would now repay the loan. Papathi has taken a loan of Rs.5000 in the year 2009. She has repaid 1300 as per registers, the remaining 3700 has been marked as subsidy/grant. But when met in person, it was found that her son has a government job and was not poor enough for writing off the loan. She promised to repay this and has signed to the effect. Malaichami has taken a loan of Rs.10,000 in year 2010. He has repaid 2000 as per registers and field, and 8000 was marked off as Grant. But all members of the family are well employed and were capable of repaying. He promised (signed) that he would repay. Suppammal has taken a loan of Rs.5000 in 2009. She has repaid Rs. 2420 as per register and field, rest had been marked off as grant. She has two employed sons, and promised to repay when met by the social audit team. Ochammal, has taken a loan of Rs.5000 in 2009. She has repaid 2500 and the rest is marked as Grant. She has cattle and has children who are earning members. She refused to repay the loan, and in fact denied having received the loan. Muthuchamy in 2009 has taken Rs. 5000 as loan, and repaid Rs. 700. 4300 is marked as subsidy as per registers. During field verification, he said he had stopped repaying long
98 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
ago and would not repay it. He is a differently abled person, and has a son(works outside) and a daughter(tailoring). He did not know his loan had been waived off. Nagajothi in 2008 has taken a loan of Rs. 2000 and has repaid Rs. 800. But as per registers, 1200 has been marked off as subsidy. All of the 10 cases above are family members of the bookkeeper. The members did not know that their loans had been marked off as grant. Total mismatch amount: 35,363. 4 SHGs There are totally 24 SHGs, 5 special SHGs. The team met 18 SHGs. 2 are defunct. None of the SHGs had a bank linkage in the current year.
5 CST/CDF CST has given reports which are incomplete or not up-to-date for the last one year. functioning CST Aazhagumanikam: She is overseeing only 6 SHGs, but submits reports for all SHGs including the 2 defunct SHGs and is withdrawing a salary. CDF Mahalakshmi: Now she is in a government job as a teacher in primary school in neighbouring Kodangipatti panchayat. Monthly CDF salaries are going in her name regularly, her monthly reports are in place but she is not working as told to us by people and the bookkeeper. She has been in the post of CDF for 10 years, and in the government job for 2 years. 6 SHG Training As per records, 20 SHGs have received training, including to the 2 defunct SHGs. There are 12 SHGs in Manickapuram and 12 SHGs in Kamarajapuram. The 2 defunct are in Manickapuram. There are bills totalling Rs. 48370. But the photo documentation, record dates and bills did not match. For example, Rs. 10940 amount has been paid to Shaktiambikai SHG as per resolution, but the money in fact has been credited to Azhagumanikam (CST) as per passbook, with hotel bills of Vasanthabhavan against this transaction. Bills for expense of one habitation training were attached against photos of training in another. 7 PLF The team met 132/466 beneficiaries. Members of Mullai SHG have taken loans in the names of 4 people an amount of Rs. 1 lakh. They have repaid Rs. 88000 as per registers. But during field visit, they said they had repaid the entire amount and that the balance 12,000 was with Gomathi, a PLF member. It was learnt that a police case had been filed in this matter in the year 2015 on Gomathi. Vasantham SHG: a member Anandi in 2014 has taken loan of Rs. 25000 as per register. But during field verification, Anandi could not be met as she lives out of the village. While trying to meet her, it was found that Palaniswari has taken the loan, as admitted by her. She has repaid Rs.3750 and the rest Rs. 21250 is outstanding. Nagamalikai SHG: 5 members have taken loans of Rs.25,000 each to a total of Rs. 1,25,000 in 2015 as per registers. During field verification, it was found that the entire amount was with Palanimuthu w/o Rasaiyya and she has repaid Rs. 11650 and now lives no more in the village. Outstanding Rs. 88,330. Meenakshiamman Women SHG: In 2011, two members have taken loans of Rs. 40,000 each. As per registers, 13,400 is outstanding. But during field verification, both members said they had finished repaying the money to Sentamizhselvi (of the same SHG) two years ago. Total amount : Rs. 1,34,980 (13,400 + 88330 + 21250 + 12000) New loan cards have been freshly issued in this village as told by the villagers.
99 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
8 Skill We met 120/133 beneficiaries and their families. In June 2016, 4 youths have gone for tailoring to Mithun Sai Institute including the CDF Azhagumanickam against an amount of Rs. 20,650. But certificates have not been received by them till date. The attendance records had x and o formats instead of signatures. As per registers, one youth, Suryakala, has gone for computer as well as tailoring training but could not be met during field verification. Gender ratio for males to females was found at 2.5:1. 9 PAR: 80:20 31% (but in MPR this had been reported as 23%) – as calculated from DCB 70:30 80:20 Recovery rate 90:10 Closing Balance 83% Rs. 61215
10 Functioning Of CBOs PLF meeting was held. The members did not know about transactions, the (VPRC,PLF,SAC) bookkeeper’s influence was high. PLF Talaivi said “I have not attended the PLF meetings since 6 months” and has signed this. It is a rule that PLF Secretary should have been in an SHG for at least two years. But the current PLF Secretary Jayanthi has been nominated without following this rule. She is related to VPRC bookkeeper. VPRC Secretary has said that she was contacted only for cheque signatures, and that bookkeeper usually runs the committee. She has signed to this effect. VPRC registers were updated and showed meetings happen regularly. But during field verification members did not know much. Kaliammal, a VPRC member, signed saying she did not know what VPRC was. 11 Tally Tally was updated till July 2016.
12 CLG 5 CLGs – Star Fertilizer SHG, Vettri goat CLG, Nila Manure CLG, Sweetie Aluminium CLG, Surya Diary CLG have received a total fund of Rs. 2,95,450. They have made an expense of Rs. 242500, and have a balance of Rs. 52950. Bills for the entire amount were not shown for any of the expense. Procurement materials were not shown despite asking for 5 days during the social audit. Moreover, after the Oor Koottam was concluded, the social audit team CP received a message through the MaKaMai CP from DPMU requesting that this finding about the CLG should not be reported. 13 Total Rs. 4,61,213 Misappropriation VPRC: Rs. 35,363 (repayment differences) Amount PLF: Rs. 1,34,980 (mismatches shown above) SHG Training: 48,370 (bills/documents date place mismatch) CLG: 2,42,500 (bills /materials not shown) 14 Oor Koottam About 200 people attended the Oor Koottam. DPM, APMs and staff attended the Oor Koottam. All issues were discussed. A previous pending issue about PIP list additions for 75 families was raised by people, who wanted to know the progress of this. DPM promised to look into the issues brought up.
100 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
17.2 Ramakrishnapuram Village, Andipatti Block, Theni District Social Audit Period 16.09.2016 to 20.09.2016
Sl.No Area Findings 1. Village Overview In this village there are two habitations - Ramakrishnapuram and Kozhingipatti, the total number of households in this village is 415, and population of this village is 1412.
2. PIP: In this village, PIP list identified 113 families and the BPL families are 120. In this village BPL: 3 members are included in PIP list and one member is removed from PIP list due to death (Mr.Thangaraj C/O Selvam). Two persons have been included in the PIP list (due to being affected with HIV) and have been added as vulnerable. This was approved on 17.06.2016 Special GS.
3. Individual As per records, total differently abled persons are 38 in all and vulnerable are 65 in assistance number. So out of 103 persons, 42 have been given individual assistance loans. Team members verified 36 persons in that activity Ms. Veluthai she left from the village, Ms. Bakiyam and Ms. Velammal ‘s loans have been written off due to their death. The records were verified and found to be consistent with field. 4. SHGs The team met 17/18 SHGs. All 17 SHGs are affiliated with VPRC and PLF, one SHG is defunct. There are 13 women SHGs, and 4 are differently abled SHGs, presently there are no bank linkages for any of the SHGs. Villagers said that in the past they have repaid bank loans. CDFs take care of all SHGs, presently there is one CST, Jothy. Regular meetings are conducted in all SHGs.
5. SHG Training The team met 17/17SHGs. SHGs module IV trainings has been conducted. But signatures had several issues. We found that thumb impressions were applied on the registers by the same person. In field while verifying signatures it was observed that members in fact sign their names and do not use thumb impressions at all. Defunct SHGs has been given the M4 training. Record shows that the training was given to 18 groups at cost of Rs. 56880 for 673 persons. But in field, it was found that only 464 persons have undergone training at expense of Rs.32480. The difference comes to Rs.24400. This amount has not been repaid into VPRC account, and was identified as being with the CST. 6. Skill The team met 41 /64 Skill beneficiaries. Out of 41 beneficiaries, male – 26, female -15, Target 100% and non-target 0% as per the field verification. For the 41 persons the skill records were verified against field and found to be consistent. 7. PLF ASF The team met 58/164 beneficiaries PLF loan repayment amount stands at Rs.70700. In this PLF all the records are kept updated. There are defaulters in loan repayment. The Book Keeper (Rs. 25000) of PLF and Secretary (Rs.25000) are also not repaying the loan amount properly. Totally 66 persons are not repaying the amount properly. 8. PAR As per PLF PAR outstanding amount Rs.94700 and PLF Total outstanding amount 80:20 Rs.813300 = PAR 11.65%
101 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
70:30 Totally Amuthasurabhi loan has been disbursed to 126 members an amount of Recovery Rate Rs.39,95,000. Of this, target members and amount is Rs. 33,80,000 and of those Closing Balance benefited, 76.82 % are target and 38 are non-target with an amount of Rs.6,15,000, which is 23.17% for non-target. 148 members for livelihood and 16 for others. PLF Demand Rs.795400, collection Rs. 700700 and 88 % Recovery. Closing balance in Bank Rs.125645 9. Functioning of VPRC, PLF Meetings are conducted regularly, and the SAC members were available in CBOs(VPRC,PLF,SAC) the VPRC Office during the Social audit. SAC records were updated. 10. Tally There was no computer system in this VPRC. It was brought in only at the time of the social audit. 11. CLG SAKTHI Cow Common Livelihood Group is working in the Panchayat and bulk milk collection is done, supplies are sold to Aavin society. The infra fund received is Rs.99750 and it was utilized for purchase of cans and equipment and the available fund is Rs.8802. 12. Total In Module VI Training - Rs.24,400 is identified as misappropriation amount. Misappropriation Amount 13. Status of poverty The team met 3 very poor families during the social audit. Mr. Guruswamy S/o Palpaandi lives alone and sustains himself through ration for his food and lives in a mud house. With nobody to support him, he works at NREGS for daily wages. He is in PIP list but cannot avail of loans under the project under any of the current categories. 14. Impact during the 5- Records got updated properly. day audit Computer system was brought into VPRC from cluster office during the social audit period. During the field visit Individual assistance repayment collection Rs.13000. Social audit team stayed in the VPRC office through the 5-day period. 15. Oor Koottam Nearly about 120 people attended the meeting. Individual assistance, skill and PLF were the issues discussed in the Oor Koottam. Panchayat President, APM(VF) and the DPM and Ramakrishnapuram cluster team leader and staff attended the Oor Koottam. They accepted the findings and promised to make improvements.
102 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
18. Tiruvannamalai district
18.1 Oorgoundanur village, Jawvathu hills block, Thiruvannamalai Social audit from 29/8/16 to 4/9/16
Area Findings 1. Village Overview The village is situated in the hills, and is very difficult terrain to travel. With about 301 households in 6 habitations, the village has about 96% ST population. The habitations are all far flung and spread across the hills, with challenging transport. The president is a woman, Sumathi (ST). The bookkeeper is also a ward member of the panchayat. Social audit was done for the main VPRC. 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 301 households as target, whereas BPL list identifies 351 families. BPL: Gram Sabha approval copies were not available for verification. 3. Individual 68/102 beneficiaries were met. assistance In the case of 28 members who took a loan to buy cattle, insurance at the rate of Rs. 500 has been collected from each member, for a total amount of 28X500 = Rs.14,000. This amount is still with the CDF Kali and TCF Thirupathi since 2011, but insurance has not actually been given to people the last 5 years. Misuse amount identified in Individual assistance: Rs.14,000 4. SHGs 9/10 SHGs were defunct - based on meetings conducted with SHGs, interactions with villagers, and verified against SHG registers and documents. The SHG members themselves said they do not conduct meetings or pool in savings. Only 1 SHG is active. 5. SHG Training All SHGs have completed IV module training. All 10 SHGs were met by the team to verify training data. Attendance was marked as full for all members of all 10 SHGs, as per registers. But only 4/10 SHGs have participated in the IV module training. An expense of Rs. 31,210 in the year 2015 was found to have been made on trainings of the defunct SHGs. The only active SHG – Saraswathi women SHG of Endirapattu habitation - was not trained in this. 6. PLF 55/115 beneficiaries were met by the team. As per SHG Resolution Register, Amman SHG has taken a PLF loan of Rs.50000 in the names of 2 members – Sathya and Kali. But during field verification, it was found that only Sathya had received the amount of Rs. 25000. Kali’s name could not be traced in the SHG Details, and the amount could not be traced to any individual. 7. Skill 47/78 youth beneficiaries were met by the team. Differences between records and field verification are as below. 1. 2 youths did not get any training at all, but training fund of Rs. 11,000 was found to have been released against their names. The institute is again Anand Driving Institute, and the youths met have signed that they did not know about the training. 2. 4 youths did not complete the training, but training fund was found to have been released, with the break-up of: No. of youths Training Type Institute Amount released 2 youths Driving Anand Driving 9700 Institute 1 youth Masonry Shanmuga ITC 6000 1 youth Computer CSC 3600 This is a total of Rs. 19,300.
103 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
3. 12 youths who were met during field verification said they did not get a placement after their training, but in the registers, 20% placement-linked fund was found to have been released. All 12 youths have gone to Anand Driving Institute. Similar problems in Perumpakkam and Thorapadi villages with the same institute were found.
The total amount thus spent is Rs. 30300. (19,300 + 11000 from points 1, 2 above) 8. PAR 51.9% (registers) 80:20 100% target members 70:30 100% Livelihood Closing Balance Rs. 474751/- 9. Functioning of All 3 - VPRC, PLF, SAC committees could not be met for a single day over the 5 days CBOs of social audit. But resolutions were maintained and meeting member quorum is (VPRC, PLF, SAC) 100% according to records. 10. Tally Tally updated upto April 2015. 11. CLG Sri Sakthi Goat CLG has received fund of Rs. 99700 in Dec 2011. Equity amount from members on this is Rs. 300. When we met the CLG members in person, it was found that the total amount of Rs. 1 lakh was split as grant between 12 members to the tune of Rs. 8000 per person. Balance of Rs. 4000 could not be traced. The CLG has no transactions and is defunct. The President of this CLG is also the wife of the TCF. 12. Total Rs.169000/- Misappropriation (Individual assistance insurance amount 14000, Amount PLF loan disbursement amount 25000, Skill 30300, CLG 99700) 13. OorKoottam 160 people attended the Oor Koottam on 3rd September 2016, which lasted for 3 hours. The APM, Jewathu block all staff, Panchayat President, Vice President, Panchayat President of neighbouring village, Ex-President, ward members and block staff were present at the Oor Koottam. All the issues identified were discussed at the Oor Koottam. The CLG President, at the Oor Koottam, refused to return the amount. The social audit team clarified that the CLG amount was not a grant/subsidy, and had to be repaid. One CLG member (Kavitha), at the Oor Koottam, promised to repay her share.
104 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
18.2 Perumpakkam village, Chengam block, Thiruvannamalai Social audit from 29/8/16 to 4/9/16
Area Findings Village overview Perumpakkam, with 5 habitations, has about 642 households, with about half the population being SC. Most of the people are in agriculture or masonry or work as daily wage labourers in MGNREGS. The president ‘talaivi’ is a woman Vijaya, and she actively participates in the VPRC meetings. The panchayat, with an A grade rating, seems to have been visited by World Bank specialists and state specialists. 1. PIP: PIP list identifies 194 households as target, whereas BPL list identifies 107 BPL: families. 16 member changes were made to the PIP list. 13 persons have been added and 3 persons have been deleted in the PIP registers and GS approvals were verified for the same. 2. Individual 44/65 beneficiaries were met. assistance Every loan application seemed to have the Talaivi’s signature and seal compulsorily. This shows that she has a clear measure of control over the loan decisions and processing. 3. SHGs 3/36 SHGs were defunct. 22 SHGs do not have a bank loan in the current financial year. 9 SHGs PLF loan has not been repaying through monthly installments. 4. SHG Training 32 SHGs have completed IV module training. Bills and documents were in place and people were able to share their learnings about trainings. 5. PLF 97/407 beneficiaries were met.
A CP in the village, Utharambal, has taken a loan of Rs. 20,000 in December 2013. She has repaid Rs. 3000 and has Rs. 17000 loan outstanding. When asked why she had not repaid, she said that she had invested her amount in the CLG (Selvanayagi Groundnut oil CLG) and therefore would not return the amount until the CLG became functional again.
2 SHGs have never taken a PLF loan. Reason: One SHG(Thamarai) joined the PLF 4 months ago, another SHG (Athilakshmi WSHG) has a bank loan which they are repaying at present. 6. Skill 36/147 beneficiaries were met. The issues observed were: 1. None of the youths met had received any soft skill training. 2. 4 youths were sent to a Government run education bridge course training in July 2015. This course is free of cost. But as per resolution register and passbook, a cheque payment towards Edu Bridge Free Course has been made of Rs.12000. 3. 15 youths did not get a placement after their training, but 20% placement-linked fund was found to have been released. All 15 youths have gone to Anand Driving Institute. Similar problems in Thorapadi and Oorgoundanur villages with the same institute were found. 7. PAR 15% (registers) 80:20 79 : 21 (I,e target 328 members and non target 79 members) 70:30 97.6% Livelihood, 2.4% consumption Recovery Rate 88% Closing Balance Rs. 158353/-
105 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
8. Functioning of Overall committees are functioning well, meeting regularly, as seen from CBOs registers and interactions. But the CDF and bookkeeper are one and the (VPRC, PLF, SAC) same person. 9. Tally VPRC,PLF and SHG updated till July 2016 10. CLG 2 CLGs have been formed, one CLG for diary (Sri lakshmi Narayani) has received fund of Rs. 95000 in 2013. It is till date running well. Another one CLG for oil (Selvanayagi) has received fund of Rs.99750 in 2013. They have gone for training and exposure visit. People told us that this CLG was not functioning because ground nut production was down. 11. Total Rs. 12000/- (4 youths - skill training cheque paid for a free bridge course) Misappropriation Amount 12. OorKoottam Over 200 people attended the Oor Koottam on 3rd September 2016, which lasted for 3 hours. The DPM, APM, cluster team were present at the Oor Koottam. The Talaivi and ward members did not attend. People did not participate much at the Oor Koottam.
18.3 Thorapadi village, Pudupalayam block, Thiruvannamalai Social audit from 29/8/16 to 4/9/16
Area Findings 1. Village Overview Thorapadi has 4 habitations, with a population of 764, of which about 70% is SC. The main habitation has mixed communities, with the surrounding 3 habitations fully SC. 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 132 households as target, whereas BPL list identifies 540 BPL: families as poor. Grama Sabha approval copies were not available for verification. There were no changes made to the PIP list. 3. Individual 42/57 beneficiaries were met. In the case of 17 beneficiaries, record and assistance field visit loan repayment amount was found to be different. The amount actually repaid was more by Rs. 20650. For 3 beneficiaries that the team met, record and field visit loan disbursement amount was found to be different. The amount actually repaid was more by Rs. 8800. When cashbook was compared with bank passbook, a difference amount of Rs. 1,25,000 came to light. When we asked the staff present about this, it was found that the amount had been in the form of cash in hand for over 2 years. They returned a portion of this amount the very next day, depositing Rs. 55000 (on 3rd September 2016 as the audit went on) into VPRC account. Rs. 70,000 still remains to be repaid by the staff. 4. SHGs 5/25 SHGs were defunct. None of SHGs have a bank loan in the current financial year. SHGs PLF loan repayment is not happening regularly. 5. SHG Training 9/25 SHGs have completed IV module training. An amount of Rs. 29000 has been spent on these trainings, with only bills shown for this amount. But attendance, reports, documents were not maintained. There were 9 SHG name differences between the SHG Consolidation Register and 4th module training participant SHG register.
106 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
6. PLF 73/119 beneficiaries were met by the team. In the case of 4 beneficiaries, record and field visit loan repayment amount was found to be different. The amount actually repaid by people was more by Rs. 15,500.
When cash book was being analyzed, it was noticed that cash in hand was again Rs. 45,587 (for more than 2 years) with the bookkeeper. When the team asked them about this amount, a cash deposit of Rs.40,000 dated 3.09.16 was made and receipt shown to our team. Rs. 5587 balance still remains to be repaid. 7. Skill 50/99 beneficiaries were met. None of the youths met had received any soft skill training. 12 youths did not get a placement after their training, but 20% placement- linked fund was found to have been released. All 12 youths have gone to Anand Driving Institute. Similar problems in Perumpakkam and Oorgoundanur villages with the same institute were found. Overall the target ratio was found to be 75 target :25 non-target beneficiaries. Gender ratio in skill was highly skewed, at 2.8 males : 1 female 8. PAR 49.8% (as per registers) 80:20 84: 16 (i.e. target 100 members and non target 19 members) 70:30 87.4% Livelihood, 12.6% consumption Recovery Rate 50% Closing Balance Rs. 147017/- 9. Functioning of All 3 - VPRC, PLF, SAC committees could not be met for a single day over the CBOs 5 days of social audit. But on record, resolutions were maintained and (VPRC, PLF, SAC) meeting member quorum is 100% according to records. When checked, the office-bearers did not know about expenditures made. A few observations about the office-bearers: CLG treasurer is the same as PLF secretary. SAC member is the same as CLG Secretary. This affects independence of these positions. CST dropped out of her job in April 2016, but it was found that CST honorarium was paid until June 2016. A new CST has been appointed 10 days ago. Moreover, the latest CDF and CST appointments did not have Gram Sabha approvals.
A new VPRC bookkeeper has been appointed a few months ago, but all of her responsibilities (including signatures) are still being handled by the previous bookkeeper. 10. Tally VPRC and PLF updated till August 2016, SHG update is pending 11. CLG Vinayagar Deevanam CLG (cattle fodder) has received a fund of Rs. 94550. Expenditure worth Rs. 52000 was made on buying rice but no bills. Against the expenditure, the team saw only 7 sackfulls of rice. CLG members when asked did not know about the CLG at all. 12. Total Rs. 244437 Misappropriation (SHG IVth module training-29000, Amount Individual assistance loan difference 8800, individual assistance repayment difference 20650, PLF repayment difference 15500, VPRC cash in hand 125000, PLF cash in hand 45487)
107 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
13. Impact during A day after the social audit began, the bookkeeper made a cash in hand social audit days deposit into the bank of Rs. 95000/- (Rs. 40,000 from PLF + Rs. 55,000 from VPRC). Rs. 70,000 still remains to be recovered from VPRC differences and Rs. 5487 from PLF difference. (Bank challan copies are attached below) All registers got updated as the audit progressed over 5 days. 14. OorKoottam 217 people attended the Oor Koottam on 3rd September 2016, which lasted for 3 hours. The APM, cluster team, Panchayat President were present at the Oor Koottam. All the issues identified were discussed at the Oor Koottam. APM assured recovery of the remaining misappropriated amount (hand cash Rs.75487)
108 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
109 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
19. Thoothukudi district
19.1 Inam Arunasalapuram village, Pudhur block, Thoothukudi district Social Audit Period: 16.09.2016 to 20.09.2016
Area Findings 1. Village Overview There are two habitations – Inam Arunachalapuram and Tholmalaipatti - in this village, and there are 239 households. Total Target household are 84, BPLF is 189. Livelihood is mostly agriculture based work. Community aspects: Both SC and BC communities live in the village. Political aspects: Panchayat president (SC) has been elected for 2 consecutive terms. All our beneficiaries are in Tholmalaipatti habitation only, and Inam Arunachalapuram, due to political issues between the habitations 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 84 families as target, but BPL identifies 135 families as poor. BPL: PIP additions/removals: NIL. 4 deceased members’ names have not been removed from PIP list. 3. Individual Individual assistance beneficiaries are 44 in all, of which the team met 37. 4 had assistance passed away and 3 had migrated. 1. One differently-abled person has taken a loan of Rs.10,000 for the first time and Rs.20,000 for the second time, as per registers in 2012 and 2014 respectively. But during field verification it was found that the amount of Rs.30,000 has gone in the name of her daughter-in-law, who is a non-target person who is not repaying the amount. 2. One member loan recovery difference is Rs. 2,000. This was for Muthulakshmy w/o Ganapathypillai who took a loan of Rs. 15000. She has repaid Rs. 5000 as per registers, but in field she has repaid 7000. 3. When asked about why repayments were not happening, people said that the VPRC office was not open often in the last 1.5 years. 4. The neighbouring VPRC bookkeeper works in this panchayat and she has collected loan repayments upto Rs. 6500 in January. This amount is still present as cash in hand since the last 6 months. Total misappropriation amount Rs.32,000 4. SHGs 1 new women SHG was formed, and 8 affiliated old SHGs. Total women SHGs were 9 in number and 1 differently abled persons group formed. There are 10 SHGs in all. 1. 5 SHGs are defunct. 2. 2 SHGs have bank linkage in current, year and are properly repaying the bank loan 3. ASF loan has been given to 5 SHGs and they are properly repaying it to the bank. 4. CST is not functioning, but one college student has been appointed in July 2015. She has not been paid salary, nor are monthly reports for the CST present. She has only received a payment of Rs. 1000. 5. CDF is not functioning, there were no monthly reports for the period between 2014 to 2016, but salary has been paid for these 2 years.
110 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
5. SHG Training As per records, SHG IV module training was conducted for 5 SHGs in 2014, and attendance signatures are present for 77 members. But during field verification, it came to light that the training did not happen at all. SHG Members signatures did not match, trainer sign was missing in the attendance Training expense bill is present for food, snacks, tea and stationery. But the bill dates did not match the training dates. (Eg: Training date is: 18,19,20 Oct 2014 but the date on bills was 18 oct-2014, for food for all 3 days)
SHG Total No of No of Training Improper Name Members members Training expenses bills amount Attended dates Training 5 77 0 3 13050 13050
Total misappropriation amount Rs.13050
6. Skill The team met 8/8 Skill beneficiaries. 8 youth details matched in register and field verified correctly. During skill audit, it came to light that state reports for appraisal on number of youths trained had been falsely inflated, as follows: In Youth Skill Register and MIS report, 70 youths were trained and the expenditure was Rs.2,02,319 but as per resolution register only 8 youths were trained, as per field verification. The amount spent has been Rs.45,500 to Alagarsamy Driving School in Kovilpatti and Vilathikulam branches. 7. PLF ASF The team met 70/72 beneficiaries 1. Loan rotation ratio is 4.72 2. In Thamarai SHG member Tmt. Chitradevi took the loan of Rs.25000 in 2016 but she has given it to another member of the same SHG, who is repaying it properly. 3. ASF Loan has been properly disbursed. Loan applications, SHG members, loan card properly, many of which got updated at the time of social audit, as told to us by the villagers. 8. PAR PLF PAR outstanding amount 0 and PLF Total outstanding amount Rs.863350 = PAR is 0% 80:20 80 % Target 70:30 75 % Livelihood Recovery Rate PLF Demand Rs. 863550/collection Rs. 708111, and 82 % Recovery Closing Balance Cash Rs.-Nil-- Bank Rs. 5,87,001 9. Functioning of 1. VPRC/PLF/SAC/CLG committees could not be met over the 5 days of social CBOs(VPRC,PLF,SAC) audit. We met the committee members and they said that over the last 1.5 years the VPRC office had not been opened and that meetings are not conducted. 2. However, Bookkeeper (she comes from the neighbouring VPRC) ‘s salary, CDF Salary and Office Maintenance expenditures and resolutions were present. The expenditure cheques are signed and received from the Office bearers at their home, as told to us (in writing) by the office bearers themselves. 3. Since 2012, the old bookkeeper Chitradevi has had a cash in hand of Rs.19,826. Resolutions too were found saying that the old bookkeeper had this money. But till date the money has not been returned. She has signed a letter to the social audit team saying she will return it within 2-3 days.
111 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
4. The VPRC second bookkeeper, M. Mariammal has been appointed as per resolutions. But when asked she said she had not worked or taken salaries. But the CDF, S. Maraimmal admitted that she had taken the salaries cumulatively Rs.9000 and given this to the neighbouring VPRC bookkeeper Devi 10. Tally VPRC and PLF transactions updated till 31.08.2016, but PLF PAR Analysis report - last SHG transaction is November 2015. The new bookkeeper does not know to operate Tally. 11. CLG “Vennila” Goat CLG has 37 members and fund received is Rs.91,000 Exposure visit and training expenditure spent is Rs.7764 and assets purchased worth Rs.49,382 1. Goat water shed and hook have been purchased and disbursed to CLG members 2. Goat weight machine has been purchased and is in the VPRC office, 3. No insurance for any of the goats, CLG not functioning at the time of social audit 12. Total Individual Assistant Repayment : Rs.32,000 Misappropriation Skill Training : Nil Amount SHG Training : Rs.13,050 PLF Loan : Nil Missing /false bills amount : Rs. 28,826 ------Total : Rs.73,876 ------13. Status of poverty The team met the 5 poorest members in the age group of 60-80. The son and daughters do not take care. All 5 are women living alone, depending on ration rice. They are working at MGNREGS and are getting OAP. NREGS payments are not regular, they said. 14. Impact during the 5- Beneficiaries know the importance of loan repayment receipts through discussions day audit over the 5 day period. Defunct SHGs (Vaigai and Kavery) were met with and spoken to during the social audit. A few repayments also happened during the social audit. One disabled member Dharmaraj brought Rs. 5000 in terms of repayment and gave this to the bookkeeper. 15. Oor Koottam 127 people attended the meeting. DPM, Cluster staff, President, Upa Talaivar attended the Oor Koottam. The issue of inflated reporting about skill numbers was also discussed at the Oor Koottam. SHG IV module training issue was also discussed. DPM promised to look into the same.
112 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
19.2 P. Meenachipuram village, Vilathikulam block, Thoothukudi district Social Audit Period: 16.09.2016 to 20.09.2016
1 Village overview P.Meenachipuram has one habitation and has 198 households. The people rely on working on the agricultural lands of the landowners, and charcoal production. Panchayat president is a woman, but all the work is done by her husband, who in fact is referred to as Talaivar by the villagers. Total differently-abled persons are 13, and vulnerable 23. Most houses appeared to be well off, some of the villagers had 5-10 acres of land. 2 PIP: PIP list has identified 78 families as target, whereas BPL list identifies 68 families BPL: as poor. There were only 2 changes to the PIP list – one addition and one deletion. Both had GS approvals. 3 Individual Assistance The team met 24/35 beneficiaries. There were no differences in record and field verification. Records were found to be true. Loan cards were present and verified. 4 SHGs The team met 8/8 SHGs. 8 SHGs were affiliated with PLF. NO SHG has bank linkage in the current year. None of the SHG registers were updated, but members of the community said that the CST visited them every month. CST monthly reports were regular, and salaries were being paid. 5 SHG Training The team met 8/8 SHGs. All 4th Module training 4 SHGs has been shown on records and in bills. But during discussions members Every SHG 6-7 members out of 12 attended the trainings. Exact numbers with regards to attendance was not clear from the discussion held with the SHGs, but, members of the community highlighted that they had given signatures for training days that they had not attended. 6 PLF The team met 59 /67 beneficiaries In the case of 5 beneficiaries, there was a difference in names in the record versus field. SHG Name Name Register Field Visit Loan Repaid Name Loan amount amount amount Dhurgaiamman Indhirarani 25000 21500 Jayachitra 25000 Kaliyammal Vellathai 15000 11192 Ramajothi 15000 Karpagavinayagar Karupaiyee 25000 12500 Ponnuthai 25000 Dhurgaiamman Meenachi 20000 14000 Selvi 20000 Uthayam kunthavai subbuthai 25000 20955 Subbulaksh 25000 m
7 PAR PLF PAR outstanding amount 0 and PLF total outstanding amount Rs.670800 80:20 92: 8 70:30 87:13 Closing Balance Bank Rs.890898 8 Skill The team met all 13 skill beneficiaries. As per the record, 18 youths had undergone training. 5 of them were shown as having taken direct employment.
113 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
But before we set out for field verification of these 18 persons, the bookkeeper confessed that 5 of them were fake names who had been added for appraisal purposes to show good records. She requested the team not to audit these 5 cases since they had been faked. 9 Functioning Of CBOs VPRC meeting was held, and the Secretary and Treasurer were active. But (VPRC,PLF,SAC) member attendance was low( at about 60%) as seen from Resolution Register. VPRC Loan Register, VPRC Cash book, VPRC general Ledger had been updated only in the previous night of the social audit team visit, as told to the team by the bookkeeper. SAC Meeting register was up to date with signatures, but SAC members have not been attending the meeting, as told to us by a SAC member whom we interviewed. Moreover, signature inconsistencies were observed within the SAC register across different pages, and the SAC members too confirmed the same. PLF is meeting regularly, and appears to be functioning well. PLF loan register, PLF Cash book, updated only in the previous day of our team visit, as told to us by the staff. 10 Tally Tally could not be checked due to electricity problems 11 CLG One tailoring CLG in there in this panchayat since 2015 but it is not functional. CLG Amount received is Rs.67900 in year 2015, and of this, Rs. 61500 has been spent in the same year on purchase of 5 tailoring machines and one cutting table, 5 stools. But the equipment in not in use the last one year. Quotations for the same were not in place. 12 Misappropriation Nil 13 SAC Impact All Registers and bills got updated both before and during the social audit 5 days. 14 Oorkoottam Over 132 persons attended the Oor koottam hearing. DPM, APM (BF), Cluster staff, Panchayat Talaivar all presided the meeting . Our team met 7 young women who had undergone computer training. Of these 7, 2 are the women working as VPRC staff, the other 5 women are not working. Moreover, in CSC Computer Institute, after training no placement was done, yet 100% of payment release in the institute. The VPRC Office bearers also accepted this finding. There was an issue raised by a youth about a Vilathikulam job mela and training which was discussed at length. When CLG being non functional issue was discussed, one of the women from the Oor Kootam said she had asked the VPRC staff if she could use the tailoring machines, and that she had not got a favourable response. DPM did not directly respond to this point, and deferred responding saying he would discuss in the evening.
114 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
19.3 Vedanatham village, Ottapidaram block, Thoothukudi district Social Audit Period: 16.09.2016 to 20.09.2016
1 Village overview Vedanatham has one habitation and has 438 households. The women rely on working on the flowers exports (cotton), scent/perfume-making. The men engage in mason work and Arasan spinning mill. Total there are 25 differently-abled persons and 49 vulnerable. The village is near and accessible from the district. Social aspects: There are as many as 18 temples in this village, one each for the 18 different community groups residing in the village. Political aspects: The Panchayat Talaivar has served nearly 3 terms – twice unopposed. People spoke well of him, he is known to be from a poor family and is known to travel on a cycle in the village. He has won awards for his work. The village is an A grade panchayat, frequently visited by World Bank specialists and TNRTP fund of about Rs. 2.5 lakhs has been given to this village for skill upgradation. 2 PIP: PIP list has identified 194 families as target, whereas BPL list identifies 175 families BPL: as poor. There were 8 changes to the PIP list – 4 additions and 4 deletions. All had GS approvals. 3 Individual Assistance The team met all 29 beneficiaries. There was no difference in record and field verification. Records were found to be true. Loan cards were present and verified. 4 SHGs The team met 13/16 SHGs. Apart from this, 3 SHGs are outside the PLF and want to be a part of the PLF. 16 SHGs were affiliated with PLF. 2 of the SHGs are defunct 14 SHGs have bank linkage in the current year. 9 SHGs has bulk loan received amount Rs.17.1 lakhs. CST monthly reports were not present in the VPRC since March 2015 but regular salaries were being paid. SHG members said the CST was functional, and that she helped in register updation. 5 SHG Training The team met 13/16 SHGs. All 4th Module training for 16 SHGs has been shown on records and bills, photos, documents are present. But during discussions with members, across SHGs, 401 members out of 657 attended the trainings. Attendance was shown for all 657. Exact numbers with regards to attendance was not clear from the discussion held with the SHGs, but, members of the community highlighted that they had signed against training days that they had not attended. 6 PLF The team met 160/168 beneficiaries. Mahatma Gandhi SHG as per records has received a loan of Rs.25000 in year 2015 in the name of one member Angalaparameshwari. As per the record the outstanding balance is Rs. 4172. But during field verification, it was found that she has received only Rs.15000 and she is repaying this. It was found that the Rs. 10,000 was adjusted by the bookkeeper against another SHG’s loan. On being asked, she promptly deposited this amount of Rs.10000 during the audit period. Loan cards were present and verified. In the PLF EC, it is necessary for at least 1 member to be from the differently-abled community. However, since 2011, this has not been the case and there is not differently abled person in the PLF EC.
115 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
7 PAR PLF PAR outstanding amount Rs.63396 and PLF total outstanding amount Rs.1080568. PAR is at 5.8% 80:20 82:18 70:30 90:10 Closing Balance Bank Rs.139425 8 Skill The team met 63/96 skill beneficiaries. Our team met 22/24 youths who had undergone driving training. 22 of them were shown as having already been working as lorry or van cleaners. All 22 of them already knew driving, and have signed saying so. One of the youths had attended training only for one week. The team met 15 tailoring trainees. 3 of them have dropped out, but certificates have been given for all. Without job placement, 100% fund has been released in all 15 cases. The team met 3 beautician trainees. Again, 100% payment has been released in all 3 cases without placement order. One CNC student has written a letter to the project describing his personal experience during his training. He has written that he was not treated properly and was in fact misrespected because he had come through PVP. According to him, the fees for a PVP student is Rs. 6800 and for non-PVP is about Rs. 3000. He has written that he faced many challenges during his 2 month training at Chennai logistically.
For the below cheques amounts, no bills were present:
S.NO Date Institute Check No Amount Name 1 21.03.12 J.N Driving 333620 14000 2 20.7.15 M.K.N 104589 3960 Driving 3 17.1.16 Shilpa 645510 18480 Beauty center Total 36440
On being asked why the bills were not there, a bill of Rs. 3960 was presented, but the rest is still missing.
9 Functioning Of CBOs VPRC meeting was held, and the Secretary and Treasurer did not know about the (VPRC,PLF,SAC) committee happenings. Their signatures were present in records but were unaware of transactions. SAC Meeting register was up to date with signatures, but SAC members have not been attending the meeting, as told by one SAC member whom we held a meeting with. Moreover, signature inconsistencies were observed within the SAC register across different pages, and the SAC members too confirmed the same. PLF meeting was held, and the Secretary and Treasurer were active. 10 CDF salary CDF Kuruvammal has received salaries of Rs 19500 for the last 2 years. But there is no record, or monthly report of their work. The bookkeeper said that the SGF had in fact instructed that she should not be paid, but she was continuing to take a payment. The differently-abled community of the village did not know the CDF. 11 Tally As on date updated. 12 CLG 2 CLGs are there in this panchayat since 2012 but it is not functional.
116 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Subiksha Tailoring Center has received fund of Rs. 87500 and has spent Rs. 69145 on procurement of 4 tailoring machines, motor and 1 overlock machine, stools, scissors, 3 iron boxes in 2014. All of these are present in the houses of the 15 CLG members and being engaged on private use, and the work/output is not being pooled in any way. Jeyam Goat CLG has received fund of Rs. 95000, and has made an expense of Rs. 76570 on materials, but out of 20 members, only 5 members are using the resources. The CLG is not active. 13 Total 55940 Misappropriation (Rs. 19500 CDF Salaries + 36440 bills issue in skill ) Amount 14 SAC Impact PLF difference amount got deposited, for Rs.10000, TNRTP fund expenditure Rs.1,10,000 bill preparation during social audit. (being a TNRTP village for skill upgradation, the village had received fund of Rs. 2.5 lakhs) 15 Oor Koottam Over 69 persons attended the Oor koottam hearing. APM (LH), Cluster staff, Panchayat thunai Talaivar all presided the meeting. When CLG being non-functional issue was discussed, one of the women from the Oor Kootam said she had asked the VPRC staff if she could use the machines, and that she had not got a favourable response. DPM did not directly respond to this point, and deferred responding saying he would discuss in the evening. Staff responded to CLG issues by saying that members needed to come together and decide on how to activate the CLG.
117 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
20. Tirunelveli district
20.1 Thenpathu village, Manur Block, Tirunelveli district Social Audit from 16.09.2016 to 20.09.2016
Area Findings 1. Village Overview This village is 16 kms away from Thiruneveli. There are in total 4 habitations, namely Chittan(a km away from VPRC), Chokkadanthoppu (VPRC building is here), Karikathoppu(mostly Muslim households here) and Perumalsamypuram(much poorer than other 3 habitations, only about 10 households here). There are 569 households with a population of 1123.Out of this 90% of the households are SC, rest from other communities. Political aspects: The Talaivar has served a previous term, and is going to contest as Councillor. People spoke well of him and said he had a clean image. Livelihood: agriculture, NREGS, beedi-production (Rs. 70-140 per day wage for working on beedi) The village is surrounded by vayal, (green pastures and agricultural land) and the village derives its name based on this. PIP: PIP list identifies 181 families as target, whereas BPL identifies 236 families as poor. 14 2. BPL: members were added as very poor (vulnerable), one as differently abled. Resolutions were there in the VPRC. 3. Individual The team met 69/77 beneficiaries. Two cases of differences are as below: assistance 1) Raman received loan amount Rs. 12000/- on Oct 2015 as per record, but during field verification he said that he didn’t receive any loan. During this field visit, the book keeper was with the team. When Raman denied receiving the loan, the book keeper said that Raman was thought to be a different person. The answer was not clear. 2) Rathinavel received the loan amount Rs.15000/-on Nov 2010 as per record. But during field verification, he said that I have not received any loan. For this, the book keeper said that the cheque was handed over to Rathinavel’s mother. When the mother was contacted, she too denied receiving the loan. It was later found that Kalarani VPRC secretary has taken the amount. 4. SHGs The team met 22/ 22 SHGs. 22 SHG were affiliated. 4 SHGs are defunct and 22 SHGs do not have bank linkage in current year. Totally 18 SHGs were active. Out of 4 defunct, 2 disabled SHGs were defunct. 5. SHG Training SHGs module 4 training were given to 7 groups. All members have attended the training. Documents and signatures were in place. Interactions with the SHGs over the 5-day period revealed some interesting aspects, that the SHGs are indeed self-run and self-managed. It was impressive to note that the SHG registers were being updated by SHG members themselves (and not by staff or anyone else), and also that they conduct weekly meetings at Sunday 8 pm which are attended mostly by everyone with no reminders required. The team witnessed all these SHG meetings actually taking place quite well where all the SHGs sat in groups, in circles for their meetings on their own. Moreover the quality of discussions and decision making methods was observed to be good. Repayments were discussed at length and in great detail by the SHG. It was found that by rotation, the SHG members take turns to go to the bank to make repayments. 6. Skill The team met 26/67 skill beneficiaries. 1) There was some confusion around what the exact number of youths was. This was because: in the youth register it has been noted that 127 youths were trained
118 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
and given payment (though this is not actually the case). Possibly the inflated figure is shown for appraisal or some other purpose. While taking this list of 127 youths for field verification, initially, we met 12 members all of whom said that we had not gone for any training. Payments too had not gone for these 12. On realizing that the 127 list was a false list, the team went back to the VPRC, taking the General ledger and resolution register to compare and find out how much amount had been released to whom. After this analysis, the list of 127 was cut short to 67 by looking at payment cases. Such a list of 67 youths was prepared for the audit and so it was identified that in reality only 67 youths have been trained for whom payment has been made. In this the issues observed were: 2) On 25.04.15, Rs 40800/- was given through cheque no.415070 to Fancy Driving School, but there is no resolution and we found 4 pages of the resolution note was kept blank. The team scanned the name list in General Ledger and found that one person, Mr.Marimuthu S/o Muthusamy has not attended HMV training. He has only given an Application form seeking training. Against his name too, training fees has been included in the above cheque. Given that all the officebearers and PFTs are changed now, it could not be determined who has done this. 3) On 15.02.2011, Rs.4000 was given through cheque No 042259 to ‘Pothilingam trust’ without any reason specified in the resolution register. It is not known for whose training this fund has been released nor for what purpose. 4) As per resolutions dated 08.12.10 and 12.02.11, a sum of Rs.68000 was released to Fancy Driving School in Tirunelveli. In this case, as per resolution the payment has been made for four-wheeler driving training for 17 persons and two wheeler endorsement for two persons. The actual amount for 17 persons is Rs.59500 and the balance Rs.8500 has been used for two-wheeler endorsements against no names of trainees. So we could not meet the youths (since names were missing). As per project guidelines, we are not able to give amount to two wheeler endorsement. Names of trainees missing and bills were not proper. 5) During field verification, 6 youths reported that they only attended one week training (instead of 45 days) and that they don’t know proper driving but they got the driving license. Payment has been made in their names too.
The Breakup for skill training completed details given as follows. S.No Name of the Trade No of Members
1. Driving 40 2 Computer 6 3 Nursing 9 4 Mechanic 1 5 L&T 3 6 Libration 1 7 Artificial intimation 1 8 JCB 1 Total 67
Total misuse amount in skill training: Rs.25,500
7. PLF ASF The team met 510/530 beneficiaries, and there were no repayment differences.
119 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
8. PAR PLF PAR outstanding amount Rs.38750/- PLF VPRC total outstanding amount Rs.2696250/- PAR%- 1.5% 80:20 73:27 % Target (Rs.8030000: Rs.3105000) 70:30 85:15 % livelihood (Rs.10055000: Rs.1080000) Recovery Rate PLF Demand Rs.179403 collection Rs.176864 and 98.5% recovery Closing Balance Cash Rs.0 Bank Rs.10,27,675. 9. Functioning of During the social audit team visit, we met all the VPRC, PLF and SAC committees. It was CBOs found that the CBOs are functioning well. Aug’16 VPRC meeting was not conducted due (VPRC,PLF,SAC) to change of office building. There are no monthly reports (since 3 months) nor salaries withdrawn (since 2 months). Aruna is the bookkeeper for both VPRC as well as PLF. She has been taking regular salaries for both positions. She has been CST previously. At present there is no CST in the village. 10. Tally As per the field inspection the entries are completed up to 27.08.2016 and the team could take print outs from the tally system for audit 11. CLG Akshaya Milk Production and Sankamam Earthworm Compost Production CLGs were functioning well upto the last year but not now due to the role played by one member (he has taken all the milk privately), it is not functional. 12. Total Total amount: Rs.52,500/- Misappropriation Skill Training :25500/- Amount Individual assistance :27000/- 13. Status of poverty The couple Mr. &Mrs.Pachiammal w/o Subaiya live in a thatched hut and are not in the PIP list. They survive through the 100 days wage and OAP. They have two goats. They stay in the temple on rainy nights. It was identified that they could be included in PIP list. 14. Impact during The problem of skill resolution blank pages identified was rectified by the staff members the 5-day audit and the 4 blank pages are written. But in doing this, the signatures of the VPRC Members added are false. (particularly Sevalaperiammal’s signature) 15. Oor Koottam Oor Koottam was attended by all PFT staff and the APM SS. About 160 people participated in it.
Issues were identified with the ex-book keeper and Secretary, who is now no longer in the VPRC but works with an NGO. This person, Kalarani, argued with the team members denying the amount she had of Rs. 49,000. This could not be addressed at the Oor Koottam.
120 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
20.2 Tharugapuram village, Vasudevanallur block, Tirunelveli district Social Audit from 16/09/2016 to 20/09/2016
Area Findings 1. Village Overview Tharugapuram is situated at about 14 kms from Sankarankovil (where the Thirunelveli DPMU is located), at the foothills 20 kms from Kutralam waterfalls. The village has about 576 households spread across two habitations – Taragapuram and Marudanachiapuram. Economic aspects: The village relies on agricultural cultivation (paddy, sugarcane, cotton) and NREGS work. Many coconut trees here. Community aspects: the village has about 50% people BC(Devar) population. Sociopolitical aspects: Panchayat Talaivi is a woman, Suppammal, since 2 terms (she belongs to SC community). But the Oor Naatamai (BC) is said to be more powerful than her, as reported by the villagers. The Talaivi attended but was silent at the Oor Koottam. In one instance when the VPRC, PLF officebearers (BC community) spoke loudly to her,she was submissive to them, it was observed. 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 170 families as target, but BPL identifies 105 families as poor. There BPL: were no changes made to the PIP list 3. Individual The team met 27/37 beneficiaries assistance There were few member discrepancies between registers and field verification. In 7 cases, there was a difference in amount of Rs.7110 in loan repayment, as follows:
Name Register Field Visit Difference Loan Repaid Loan Repaid amount amount amount amount amount M.Malliga 9000 6600 9000 9000 2400 M.Chinna isakki 5000 4400 4000 4710 310 K.Velthai 5000 3900 5000 5000 1100 Chinnapothi 9000 2250 9000 3000 750 M.Sakthivel 9000 3100 9000 4000 900 S.Muniyanti 5000 2350 5000 4000 1650 Total 42000 22600 41000 29710 7110
It was found that the difference amount is in the form of cash in hand with the old bookkeeper Sudha, based on field visit. 4. SHGs The team met 9/13 SHGs. 10 SHGs were affiliated with PLF. 3 SHGs were defunct (2 SHGs due to member migration, 1 SHG Thalaivi does not conduct regular meetings) All 13 SHGs do not have bank linkage in the current year. During SHG interactions, members said the reason for this was that internal lending was sufficient for their needs and that they did not require a bank loan. So they have never taken a bank loan. 7 SHGs have not have been repaying ASF loan.
121 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
5. SHG Training As per records, 5/13 SHGs have completed the 4th module training conducted over 3 days, with an expenditure of Rs.20400 spent, as per Resolution register, but during field verification through member interaction, 4/5 SHGs informed that the training took place only for one day, and the 5th SHG did not attend the training at all.
SHG Name Total No of members Date of Training Members Attended Training Sivasakthi 15 13 17.10.14 Shenbaruthi 13 0 Did not happen
Roja 12 12 17.10.14 Thamarai 12 12 17.10.14 Venbhu 8 8 17.10.14 Total 60 45 The total expenses made over these trainings is 20,400 of which for an amount of Rs. 15,700 there no proper bills. Total misappropriation amount Rs.15,700. 6. Skill The team met 19/31 youths beneficiaries. (based on skill applications, the breakup is as follows: Driving-8, Computer-8,JCB-7,Beautician-1, Nursing-1,Catering-4, TVS-2 Total trained youths-31) Trained youths details and training completion certificate photocopies were not found in the VPRC. Also, from the registers it was found that the VPRC has given the amounts to the institutes for youth skill training. But there is no statement indicating which cheque has been given in whose name. (not in place : cheque book, passbook, cash book, skill training register) Another issue that was found was with 6 members who underwent CSC Computer Center training in September 2011. A 1st installment payment release of Rs.2340 has been done but 2nd installment was not released because VPRC had no fund. So the institute has sent back the students. 7. PLF ASF The team met 69/84 beneficiaries In the case of 5 beneficiaries loan repayment amount difference between record and field visit. The different amount was of Rs.30,000
SHG Name Register Field Visit Difference Name Loan Repaid Loan Repaid amount amount amount amount amount Senbaruti Chellathathai 25000 0 25000 21250 21250 Kaveri 25000 20000 25000 21250 1250 Shoba 20000 15000 20000 16250 1250 Kasiththai 20000 15000 20000 17500 2500 Rameshwari 25000 20000 25000 23750 3750 Total 115000 70000 115000 100000 30000
Total misappropriation amount Rs. 30,000. 8. PAR PLF PAR outstanding amount Rs.6,97,903 and PLF Total outstanding amount Rs.7,86,303 = PAR 89% 80:20 (92 : 8) 70:30 (100:0) Recovery Rate August month 0% recovery Closing Balance Rs.3,30,701/-
122 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
9. Functioning of VPRC, PLF, SAC Resolutions records was not written upto last one year. CBOs(VPRC,PLF,SAC) CST, CDF both have not been drawing salaries since 2 years. Monthly reports have not been there since 2 years. The same person, Murugalakshmi, is working as PLF and VPRC bookkeeper and she draws salaries of both positions. She has not worked for one year upto February 2016, but salaries of this period too have been drawn. 10. Tally Last one year was not up to date. 11. CLG 1 hotel CLG Sivasakthi is working. In CLG fund procurement of Rs.99750 was done. But they have no procurement and expenses bills for the entire amount. Our team could not find out procurement amount. Because resolution minutes, cash book and Bank pass book was not up dated for past one year. When met in person the CLG has been functional, a meeting could be held with the CLG members. They also did not have any of the bills. They said the procurement items were suddenly given to them one day, arranged through Murugalakshmi bookkeeper. From the Village Incentive fund, it was found that an amount of Rs.1,60,000 was withdrawn for use of CLG about two years back. Details of this expense were not found and hence could not be audited. But on being found out, the amount was transferred back to the CLG account (instead of the VPRC account) in April 2016. As on 7.8.16, CLG Bank Balance Rs.1,75,823. 12. Total Total Rs.50,710 Misappropriation Individual Assistant Repayment: Rs.7110, Amount SHG Training :Rs.13600, PLF Loan: Rs.30000) Missing /false bills amount: They don’t have proper bills and vouchers in the case of CLG. Last one year there were no bills or records for PLF, CLG, Module 4 training shown. 13. Status of poverty C.Vellaithai W/o.Chakkarasamy age 33. Her husband is a TB patient for past 4 years. She has 2 daughters, and her aged parents too live with her and depend on her. They live in a small thatched roof house. In front of the house, is a small clearing. Children study in the Government school. She is the only earning person. She rolls beedis, and earns Rs.50 or 60 per day through this. They don’t have NREGS card. Her husband is in the vulnerable list, but they didn’t get any benefit from the VPRC. Her husband needs the medical care. The Vasudheva Nallur Health Centre has suggested that they go to the Thenkasi Government Hospital for further treatment. But they told they don’t have the transporting expense. They use only items procured through ration shops for food. 14. Impact during the 5- Records were being updated as the social audit progressed. Help from neighbouring day audit panchayat was taken by the staff to update records of Tarugapuram during social audit. PLF repayment (Rs. 1.8 lakhs) happened during the 5 day period, including on the Oor Koottam day. 15. Oor Koottam 100 people attended the Oor Koottam on 19th September 2016, which lasted for 1.30 hours. DPM, APM, Panchayat president and cluster all staff were present at the Oor Koottam. Loan repayment issues came up in Chenbaruthi SHG. The loan difference Rs.18,000 have in the representative. The Chenbaruthi SHG. Representative accepted the findings. In Marutha Nachiyar habitation (being 6 km away) most of the people did not know about the Pudhu Vaazhvu Project. Findings were presented in Oor Koottam. At that time, DPM promised we should appoint one CST and within 2 days, we should conduct the Oor Koottam in the particular habitation which had been missed.Maruthu Nachiyarpuram youths wanted training. So DPM said we have funds, we should give the training. For the poor lady identified (Mrs. Vellaithai), DPM announced we have PLF fund, so SHG should conduct the meeting and give her a loan.
123 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
20.3 Umayathalaivan patti village, Kuruvikulam Block, Tirunelveli district Social Audit from 16/09/2016 to 19/09/2016
Area Findings 1. Village Overview Umayathalaivan patti village has only 1 habitation, with 625 households. The primary livelihood is agriculture (lentils), diary, cattle-rearing and NREGS works. Community aspects: MBC, BC, SC The Talaivar had a good reputation with the people. The Talaivar is very involved with the project, and the people were active in their participation during discussions. The panchayat is an A grade panchayat and has been visited often by the project. The village was very clean. 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 144 families as target, but BPL identifies 173 families as poor. There are BPL: 44 people who are differently abled, 46 vulnerable. There were no additions or deletions to the PIP list. 3. Individual The team met 37/83 beneficiaries assistance All beneficiaries had loan cards which were up to date.
In the case of 2 members, there was a difference in repayment amount of Rs.3000 in loan repayment in records versus field verification, as follows:
Name Register Field Visit Difference Loan Repaid Loan Repaid amount amount amount amount amount S.Santhi 10000 7500 10000 10000 2500 K.Mariyammal 10000 7500 10000 8000 500 Total 20000 15000 20000 18000 3000
4. SHGs The team met 5/19 SHGs. 15 SHGs were affiliated with PLF. 4 SHGs are defunct and 9 SHGs do not have bank linkage in the current year. 11 SHGs are not properly repaying ASF loans. 5. SHG Training The team met 5/19 SHGs. 4th module training was given to 6 SHGs for 2 days and 3 SHGs for 1 day. Field verification and the records were matched and found to be true. 6. Skill The team met 39/77 skill beneficiaries (Driving-29, Beautician course-1, ITI-2, computer-4, not working -3 members) There are many issues with documentation in skill in this VPRC, making it challenging to audit. From a detailed analysis of the documents, it was not possible for the team to determine which payment has gone against which individual, making the payments impossible to track or verify. This presents a great risk for possible misuse, and yet the actual misuse could not be identified, due to the overall poor situation of documents. On the other hand, Tally showed that 92 people were trained. But documents presented a challenging picture. This is described below:
1) In skill register, a total of 77 youth names have been listed. Skill register was incomplete with only first names and no last names. Moreover, applications, ID
124 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
proof, address, certificate were not present for some of the youths. In order to continue with the audit, we analyzed old VPRC resolution registers, chequebooks, institution bills in order to prepare the actual name list for audit purposes. This analysis could be done only for 61 youths. For the remaining 16 youths, there was not enough data and hence this could not be verified.
2) As per record Tharmaraj s/o Muppidathi was sent to Gomathi Driving Training Institute, and registers show that payment has been made of Rs. 5250. But during field verification, it was found that he did not go at all. While asking why his name had been enlisted, it was found that since Tharmaraj had been underage, his name got enlisted but he did not actually attend the training. He also signed to this effect. This could be a case of wrong entry in skill register, OR, payment gone may have included Tharmaraj. Currently he is going for HMV training. So this amount is being flagged as misuse. The total amount spent on skill in this panchayat is Rs. 4,63,875. Bills amount for which audit could not be done: 4,42,600 (because it could not be traced which youth payment these bills were for.) While analyzing bills, for an amount of Rs. 21,275, bills could not be traced. Misuse: Rs. 5250 (but this needs to be probed and confirmed) 7. PLF ASF The team met 50/299 beneficiaries. Records and field were verified for these 50. But most of them could not be met in person. 8. PAR PLF PAR outstanding amount Rs.1,75,229 and PLF Total outstanding amount Rs.10,35,129 PAR 17% 80:20 82 70:30 78 Closing Balance Bank balance Rs.3,12,064 9. Functioning of The VPRC and PLF committee meetings were conducted, and people were very active. CBOs(VPRC,PLF,SAC) SAC Resolutions records were not written up to last one year. CST/CDF have been appointed only two months ago. So salaries had not been drawn. 10. Tally Tally data could not be audited 11. CLG Annapurna Rice CLG is formed 27 members. A fund of Rs. 42750 has been received, but the whole amount is unspent. CLG is not functional. CLG Resolutions records were not written up to last one year. 12. Total Individual assistance: Rs.3,000 Misappropriation Skill: 5250 Amount Total: Rs. 8250 13. Impact during the 5- Some of the registers (cashbook, DCB) got updated during the process day audit 14. Oor Koottam 106 persons attended the meeting. DPM, APM VF, cluster staff, Panchayat Talaivar all presided meeting. Pending ASF loan and other issues were discussed in the Oor Koottam. The DPM promised to look into the findings presented.
125 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
21. Tiruvallur district
21.1 Sirigumi panchayat, Thiruthani block, Thiruvallur district Social Audit from 29/8/16 to 4/9/16
1 Village In this village, there are 7 habitations. Overview Livelihood aspects: agriculture, milch animals, fodder production. Political aspects: Thalaivar was said to be active but often dominated by his younger brother, who is the Vice President, as found during interactions with the villagers. Community aspects: SC community is majority 2 PIP: In this village, 212 families were identified as target. BPL list was not shared. There were no BPL: changes made to PIP list.
3 Individual The team met 39/44 beneficiaries. Findings are as follows: Assistance There were no loan cards, so repayment could not be verified against what people said. It had already been noted by the project that in the case of 24 people’s loans, there were differences in loan repayments to the tune of Rs.1,23,000. This misuse had already been identified by the project before the social audit. People said they had been repaying loans by paying money to the then bookkeeper, Jothi(She is also the former CST, currently she is a MaKaMai CP) and to another former bookkeeper, Thangam. When we contacted these bookkeepers, both of them agreed that they have taken the money. As per records, in the name of Rohit Kumar, amount of Rs.25,000 has been released. During field verification, it was identified that this amount had been repaid to the book keeper Sudha’s brother, but not deposited into VPRC. Fund misuse identified in Individual Assistance loans: Rs. 1,48,000
4 SHGs The team met with 22 SHGs. 11 SHGs are functional, while 11 are defunct (based on registers, passbooks, meetings with them) Two CSTs have been appointed in this village, but for the last 3 years they have not been working. Presently there is no CST.
5 SHG 8 SHGs have received 4th Module training and as per attendance records 114 women have Training attended these trainings. But photos, reports, or training schedules could not be found. Attendance records showed all women have attended 100% of the trainings. But during field verification and discussions with SHGs, many women said that only 5-6 members had attended the training. When shown the registers, members pointed out that the signatures against the names had not been made by them.
126 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
6 PLF The team met with all the 22 SHGs. Of these, 19 SHGs have outstanding loans at present. Findings are as follows: 1. Loan Registers ware not updated - 30/08/2015 was the last repayment date as per registers. 2. Our team met 89/273 beneficiaries. Loan cards were not present with the all members so could not be checked. 3. When we analysed loan data given to SHGs, it was observed that 19 SHGS had received PLF loans. The recorded loan repayment amount was Rs.26,92,880. When this was verified during door-to-door visits with the SHG members who had received these loans, a difference in amount of Rs.4,17,080 came to light. When asked about this, people said that they had been repaying their loan money to the current bookkeeper, Sudha and in some cases to Thangam (the former Bookkeeper). Both Sudha and Thangam accepted that they have taken the money, when contacted by social audit team. Fund misuse amount Rs. 4,17,080 7 Skill Our team met 31/123 youths. Many youths were not at home and could not be met. Findings are as follows:
In one case, Dinesh Kumar said he had discontinued his driving training, but it was observed that full payment of Rs.8600 has been made to the concerned institute: Shiba Driving Institute. HMV license has not been issued in this case to Dinesh, but payment has been made against this dropout training. All 31 youths met who had undergone training said that none of the institutes provided them a job. 20% payment has gone in all these cases. All 31 have signed to this effect. Fund misuse: Rs. 8600
8 PAR: 90% 80:20 78:22 70:30 83:17
9 Functioning Of VPRC, PLF, SAC Committee meeting could not be conducted despite efforts for 6 days. CBOs VPRC, PLF, SAC register not updated. (VPRC,PLF,SAC ) VPRC Bookkeeper(Sudha) was the single person handling all aspects of the VPRC on behalf of officebearers. 10 Tally Not updated for one year.
11 CLG One diary CLG, ‘Komatha’, has received fund of Rs. 95000 two years ago. But the amount was lying unused and unspent since two years. CLG not active.
127 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
12 Total As on date not register update and loan conformation card was not with the members Misappropriat Total misuse identified at the time of social audit: Rs.5,58,380 with the following breakup: ion Amount In PLF: Sudha (Bookkeeper) 30,000 Thangam (Ex Bookkeeper) 3,71,780 In Individual Assistance: Sudha (Bookkeeper) 50,000 Thangam (Ex-Bookkeeper) 24,850 Jothi (Ex-CST) 73,150 Skill 8,600 TOTAL Rs.5,58,380
13 Impact during On the evening of the Oor Koottam, the bookkeeper Sudha returned Rs. 10,000 (which had social audit been given to her brother) from the misappropriation identified by the social audit team. Attempts were also made to coach the people on how to answer the social audit team’s questions by the bookkeeper, the villagers shared. The Oor Koottam had the participation of the state specialist (CAO) who also looked into the repayment differences with great detail, going over every person’s loan in detail. DPM and state specialist were supportive to the overall social audit process. When the repayment differences came to light, the social audit team made efforts to contact the previous bookkeeper and requested her to be present for the Oor Koottam so that the issues could be sorted. 13 Oor One of the longest public hearing meetings in this social audit round happened in Sirigumi Koottam village, and the hearing ended only by nightfall. About 125 persons attended the Oor Koottam which lasted for over 5 hours. SPMU specialist(CAO), DPM, APM, Cluster Team and Panchayat President presided over the Oor Koottam. During the hearing, when the records were read out, one of the village women rose to say that she did not know about the loan taken in her name. It was then found out that SHG representative Jeeva took Rs.20000 and the book keeper Sudha took Rs.30000 in the name of other members. When the team read out the findings about individual assistance repayments, the villagers present arose to say that they had repaid the amount to Thangam, the former book keeper. During the Oor Koottam evening, the bookkeeper Sudha repaid Rs. 10,000 from the misappropriation identified in individual assistance.
21.2 Kannigaiper panchayat, Ellapuram Block, Thiruvallur District Social Audit from 29/8/16 to 4/9/16
1 Village Overview Kannigaiper village has four habitations and 1091 households. Total population is 6790. Livelihood aspects: Farming, diary, cattle-rearing Political aspects: The Panchayat President is a woman, Selvi Balu, but it is her
128 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
younger brother who discharges her functions, as learnt from villagers during interactions and group discussions held. Community aspects: Majority is MBC community. 2 PIP: In this village, PIP list has identified 305 target families for project benefits, while BPL BPL: list identifies 469 families as poor. 4 differently abled deceased persons were still on the PIP list. Overall there were no changes in the PIP list as per records. However, the PIP list was shown to the social audit team only on the 5th day of the audit, and therefore, it could not be audited. 3 Individual The team met 40/168 beneficiaries. Assistance There were several discrepancies between registers and field verification in loan disbursement as shown below. S No Name Loan Loan Difference received received in amount in record field visit 1 Shanthi 4000 5000 +1000 2 Devi 5000 3000 -2000 3 Kalendheri 4000 5000 +1000 4 Kattamma 4000 5000 +1000 5 Chithra 4000 5000 +1000 6 Selvi Rani 3000 5000 +2000 7 Anbu 4000 5000 +1000 8 Shanthi 5000 3000 -2000 TOTAL : 7000 more for people and 4000 less in some cases loan disbursement varies as per record and field visit
This is possibly because records are out of sync with the real situation regarding disbursement of how these loans were taken by the members. In the following 28 persons’ cases, loan repayment differences were identified, as shown below: S No Name Loan repaid Loan repaid Difference as per record as per field amount visit 1 Shanthi 1800 250 1550
2 Gunavathi 1750 1000 750 3 Devi 250 2000 1750
4 Kalendheri 800 5000 4200 5 Suriyakala 1100 5500 4400
6 Veluloka 750 5000 4250
7 Savithiri ----- 5000 5000 8 Kattamma 800 2000 1200
9 Shanthana 1000 4000 3000 Krishnan 10 Vallammal 1400 4000 2600 411 Pappathi 3000 1000 2000
12 Selvam ---- 5000 5000
13 Valliammal 1000 5000 4000 14 Vashantha 2400 3000 600
15 Palayan 1600 2400 800 16 Boopalan ---- 4000 4000
129 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
17 Lakshmi ---- 3000 3000
18 Chithra ---- 4000 4000 19 Kala ---- 3000 3000
20 Vasantha ---- 3000 3000
21 Rani ---- 2000 2000 22 Nagammal 600 2000 2000 23 Mahalakshmi 4000 1000 3000 24 Muthu 3000 900 2100 25 Anbu 2050 3000 950 26 Kanchana 2500 4000 1500
27 Lakshmi 4450 1550 2900
28 Shanthi ----- 3000 3000
TOTAL: Rs.75,550
Total misuse in individual assistance loans identified is Rs.86,550 (Loan disbursement Rs.11,000+ Loan repayment Rs.75,550) People said that they had repaid the amount to bookkeeper. The bookkeeper accepted that she had taken this amount identified. 5 The team met with 58/58 SHGs. 41 functional, 17 were defunct (based on registers, SHGs passbooks, interactions with SHG members) The microfinance company Equitas is currently lending to 6 SHGs in this village. People did not know about the interest rates being higher with Equitas than with PVP. They said that prompt repayments with Equitas ensured that their money circulation was happening correctly. CSTs Deepa, Uma Maheswari have not submitted any report to the VPRC, and they have not been paid salaries. Another CST Ramadevi has not been working, and not taken a salary 6 SHG Training All 4th Module trainings have been conducted as per records. 37/58 SHGs members have attended the training, and expenses have been made on trainings. But expenditure bills for Rs. 44081 were not enclosed. Our team met the trainer.
Fund misuse identified: Rs. 44081 7 PLF The team met with all 54 SHGs. Of these, 17 SHGs have outstanding loans. Findings and observations are as follows: 1. Loan Registers were updated, and the last repayment date as per registers was 19/08/2016. 2. Our team met 118 beneficiaries during social audit. Loan cards had not been distributed to the members. Neither were there loan cards at SHG-level. 3. As per records, ‘SHG-16’ has taken a loan of Rs.2,45,000 in the year 2012. 2 times (on 13.2.2012, 8.8.2012, 3.4.2013, 18.9.14) the names of 14 members (Andal, Gulorymathi, Selvi, Flara, Annakizhi, Juliyet, Jothiprema, Gnanaselvi, Sheela, Muthulakshmi, Kalpana, Nalini, Rukku and Sathiya). As per records, they have an outstanding balance of Rs.1,59,044. But when met in person, these members said that the full loan amount of Rs.2,45,000 had been given to Glorymathi for the purpose of her daughter’s education. They said they had given this amount to her with their full consent for the education. Glorymathi has been repaying this amount.
130 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
4. In Dravida Women’s SHG, as per records, two persons Nirmaladevi and Premalatha have taken a loan each of Rs.20000 in year 2016. As per field verification, both of them gave Rs.10000 each to Ramadevi, the CST. All 3 of them are repaying the loans properly. 5. In Pudhumai women SHG, as per records, Saridha has taken a loan of Rs.15000 in year 2016. As per field verification she said she had given Rs. 5000 to another member Amudha. Amudha has not been repaying the loans. 6. Thendral SHG as per records took a loan of Rs.5000 in year 2016 in the name of Saritha, and Saritha has repaid Rs.2700. As per field verification, she has paid Rs. 2500. The amount difference is possibly because of interest payment. 7. In Amman SHG, as per records, 4 members have received loans of Rs.25000 in Aug 2009, and they have repaid an amount of Rs.15,875. But when met in person during field verification, these 4 members said they had completed fully repaying the amount. The difference amount had been paid to Amulmeri, (who is a member of the same SHG) which is an amount of Rs. 9125. Total misuse :Rs. 34125 (20000+5000+9125) 8 Skill Our team met 52/192 youths. 52 youths said they had gone for training, but said none of the institutes provided them a job. 20% payment has gone in all these cases. All 52 have said the institute did not provide soft skill training. 9 PAR: 54% PAR 80:20 PIP list was shared only on the last day, so target-non target ratio could not be 70:30 calculated.
10 Functioning Of All CBOs - VPRC, PLF office bearer involvement was observed, but a committee CBOs meeting could not be held over the 5 days of social audit. (VPRC,PLF,SAC) All CBO resolutions were maintained and meeting member quorum is 90% according to records in all meetings. SAC not functioning based on records. VPRC, PLF resolution members signatures had differences and inconsistencies based on analysis of registers 11 CLG 3 CLGs in this village – all 3 CLGs are not functioning. 1. In Diary CLG, fund of Rs.50650 has been received, of which an amount of Rs.32,392 has been spent. 2. In ‘Indian Departmental Store CLG’ (common sales CLG), fund of Rs. 25,000 has been received of which Rs.39,342 has been spent. 3. In Earthworm CLG, fund of Rs. 56,333 has been received, and Rs.12,639 has been spent. The expenditure amount was identified by examining the passbooks to look at what transactions had been made. There were no resolutions found explaining these expense nor bills. Above all, the procured materials were not to be found. Misuse identified: Rs.83,496 (32,392 + 39,342 + 12,639) 12 Total Individual loan Rs. 86550 Misappropriation SHG training : Rs.44081 Amount PLF Rs. 34125 CLG Rs. 83496 Total amount Rs. 2,48,252 13 During the 5-day Rs.5000 was repaid a day before the Oor Kootam, as ASF loan repayments, after the social audit team went door-to-door. People realised that individual loans were to be repaid and period that it is not a subsidy. Registers were getting updated as the social audit progressed.
131 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
14 Oor Koottam Over 60 people attended the Oor Koottam hearing which lasted for an hour on 4th September, 2016. DPM, APM, Cluster Team Leader, facilitator attended the meeting. It was discussed that the loan has to be repaid and the people accepted that they would repay the amount in due course of time. One person raised that people did not know the office bearers of VPRC and PLF committees.
21.3 Peritivakam Village, Poondi Block, Tiruvallur District Social Audit 30.08.16 to 03.09.16
Area Findings 1. Village Overview In this village, there are 5 habitations. Panchayat Talaivar has been continuously elected for 5 times and was said to be supportive to the project. The people are very poor and most of them belong to SC community. They depend on agriculture (paddy), milch animals, appalam sales, while many others travel to Chennai, Ambattur or Avadi for daily work. 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 294 households in all, of which target families are 109 in all. The BPL: project identifies 61 families as ‘Very Poor’ and 48 families as ‘Poor’. There are 36 differently-abled persons and 28 vulnerable persons for the purpose of individual assistance. 80 youths have been identified as eligible for skill training. There were no changes to the PIP list. Even names of 5 deceased persons continue to remain on the list. BPL list could not be obtained. 3 Individual The team met 70/86 beneficiaries. assistance A total of 13 individuals had loan repayment differences as shown below,
S.No. Name Register Field Difference repayment verification 1. Saroja 900 3500 2600 2. Poniammal 1600 4000 2400 3 Nagammal 600 3000 2400 4 Santhi 600 6000 5400 5 Vanasundari 300 1800 1500 6 Nagarathnam 300 1800 1500 7 Sampoornam 500 1500 1000 8 Muniammal 1500 6000 4500 9 Nalini 2000 5000 3000 10 Murugammal 2500 5000 2500 11 Sankarammal 300 3000 2700 12 Senjammal 300 3000 2700 13 Kothandam 0 4000 4000 Total 36200
The difference is a total of Rs. 36,200. People said they had repaid this amount to one person, Uma(VPRC Secretary). Register signatures on resolution were inconsistent. Loan repayment bills were there with people but no loan card was there. 4. SHGs There are 23 SHGs in all, of which 11 are target SHGs. 12 are affiliated SHGs.6 SHGs are defunct (based on registers, transactions, interactions with the SHGs) 5. SHG Training Totally 210 members are there in 17 SHGs they were trained.
132 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Of this, full 2 day attendance was found for 227 members, but during field verification only 178 members had attended the training. Attendance differences were found for 51 signatures. Training misuse amount identified: Rs.7140 6. Skill 29/51 beneficiaries met by the team. Only 51 youths in PVP beneficiaries but according to the register it is 80 because direct employment 29 youth. As per the record 26 youth only target, others 25 youths on Non- Target 50% youth in non-target. 7. PLF ASF 1. ASF loan given to 22 SHGs 154 members. Our team met 71 members. 2. In Natchiyamman SHG, loan amount of Rs.100000 has been received in names of 4 members, dated 16/04/12 for Uma, Shanthi, Latha, Lakshmi and Kamalammal. Outstanding amount is Rs.24,000. On 10/04/12, a second loan has been disbursed to the same members for Rs.1,00,000. On 26/04/12, another loan disbursed to same members for Rs.80,000. During field verification they told only they have received Rs.100000 and balance Rs.24000 it is correct but the two subsequent loan amounts of Rs.180000 have not received. It was also found that this SHG has two passbooks in different bank (PACS and Bank of India). One of the passbooks is operated among Uma and Maheswari(the old secretary) and the former staff (Facilitator) Meganathan and the PLF amount of Rs.1,80,000 is identified as misuse.( It was learnt that Meganathan had already been terminated after being identified for misuse, but the money is yet to be recovered) Total misuse amount: Rs.1,80,000 8. PAR Total amount disbursed: Rs.40,35,000 80:20 Total Outstanding:13,54,482 70:30 PAR amount: 4,31,191 Recovery Rate PAR:31% Closing Balance 110 target members and 44 non-target members 71%:29% amount (28,15,000:12,20,000) 137member for livelihood and 17 others 89%:11% amount (37,10,000: 3,25,000) 9. Tally Tally not updated for 6 months 10. CLG Jeyam dairy CLG has received infrastructure fund of Rs.83,600 and procured milk analyser, cans, etc, for an expenditure of Rs.67700, but there were no bills for the amount. CLG is inactive. 11. Total Individual assistance amount: Rs.36,200 Misappropriation SHG training: Rs.7,140 Amount PLF amount: Rs.1,80,000 Total misuse amount: Rs.2,23,340 12. Impact during It was observed that there were two loan registers being maintained and the purpose the 5-day audit for this was not clear. Rs.43,250 was the PLF repayment collected during social audit team, and receipts were being issued against this. Individual assistance amount Rs.7800 was collected. DPM took efforts to use the feedback positively, and was supportive to the CP teams. 13. Oor Koottam DPM,APM(LH),Cluster staff participated, and nearly 125 people attended the Oor Koottam. Panchayat Talaiver presided the Oor Koottam. Social audit team read out the findings. From Natichiyamman SHG, four members Uma, Shanthi, Lakshmi and Latha came forward to say that they had not received the loan amounts in their name, for Rs.180000. They wanted to know who had misused the
133 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
amount in their names. At this, the Team Leader clarified that this had been done during the period of Meganathan. The APM promptly called Meganathan to the village, and questioned him about the misuse. Finally the DPM said that a separate team would be arranged to identify the amount and address the misuse.
22. Tiruvarur district
22.1 Palayakudi Village, Thiruthuraipoondi Block, Tiruvarur District Social Audit 16.09.16 to 20.09.16
Area Findings 1. Village overview Palayankudi has three habitations and 744 households. This village is 20 km away from Tiruvarur. This panchayat has been declared as an Open Defecation Free (ODF) panchayat and has received award for this. The people depend on NREGA works, agricultural lands of the landowners and brick production. Panchayat Talaivar belongs to the Communist Party and is supportive of the public. Poverty is medium and SC community is majority. In this village there are 10 ponds for fishing and with the help of MGNREGS, a 50 m road has been laid in the way of agriculture land and 45 solar lamps are posted in the around the village which is reportedly very helpful to the community. 2. PIP: PIP list has identified 321 families as target, but BPL identifies 641 families as BPL: poor, and the total village population is 3366. BPL List & PIP Approval (Gram Saba xerox copy) list were not available in the VPRC. There were no changes to the PIP list. 38 differently-abled persons have been identified, and 22 vulnerable persons have been identified by the project. 3. Individual The team met 37/89 beneficiaries. Assistance There were several discrepancies between registers and field verification. Individual Loan cards have not been given to beneficiary There was one case of difference in amounts in individual assistance repayment between record and field as shown below:
Name Loan Register Field Visit Difference Amount Repay Repay Rajamanikam 6500 6500 6000 500
4. SHGs Total no of existing SHGs 42 which are affiliated to PLF Newly formed women SHGs 4; differently abled SHGs 4, existing SHG 34. Bank linkage documents were not present in VPRC 22 SHGs are defunct and only 20 SHGs are functioning but registers have not been updated since 2015 and 16 SHGs have not shown the records to the team – they gave various reasons including officer bearers are out of station and some of them have gone to attend functions etc.
134 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
In the current year no credit linkages from the bank. In this area micro finance institutions are functioning well, and member repayments are prompt in them. 5. SHG Training 18 SHGs have received 4th module training. VPRC had attendance, bills. 2-3 training photos were there. During field visit it was found that 8 of these 18 SHGs did not attend the 4th module training. Saarathi SHG members attended only 2 days of the 4th module training. Annai Therasa SHG, Nethaji, Vandarkulali IV module have gone for SHG training two times (1. Vandarkulazhi 23.03.2015 to 25.03.2015 & 03.06.2015 to 05.06.2015 (2. Annaitherasa & Nethaji 26.03.2015 to 28.03.2015 & 15.06.2015 to 17.06.2015) Trainings are conducted only in the evening time two to three hours and only tea & snacks are given but lunch bills are in the VPRC. Training Expenditure was Rs.50748/- as per register. 6. Skill The team met 83/142 skill beneficiaries. 13 youths have not attended skill training but training fees has been paid to training institute 1. CSC – 10 youths – Rs.49,000 2. Masonry – 1 Rs. 7,800 3. Driving – 2 Rs. 7,750 ------Total - 13 Rs.64,550 ------ Skill documentation was not complete: placement order, course completion certificate, license copy, youth register was updated (applications, voter ID, etc, education qualification, not in place). 100 % of the training fund has been paid to the institution but VPRC has not maintained proper placement order copy details, as shown below:
No. of youth gone Sl No Type of training Amount Rs. skill training 1 Driving 75 344510 2 Computer 40 162050 3 CNC 1 8850 4 Tailoring 1 1000 5 Masonry 7 53630 6 Nursing 9 60000 7 ITI 2 3900 8 Direct employment 7 Total 142 633940 Identified Youth – 305 Trained Youth – 142 Target youth – 75 (51%) Non Target Youth – 69 (49%) Trained Male – 72, Female – 60
In the below cases, amount has been paid to training institution but youths names have not entered in VPRC minutes note book. Details given below:
135 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Sl. No Type of training Amount Rs.
1 NTC Driving School 12000 2 Balamurugan Driving school 4750 3 CSC computer training 28700 Total 45450
Total misuse identified in skill: Rs.1,10,000(64,550 + 45450) The 20% fund release which should not have been released without placement amounts to 6,33,940 – 1,10,000 = 5,23,940, 20% of which is Rs. 1,04,788 7. PLF ASF The team met 195/416 beneficiaries. Total loan amount Rs.83,45,000 Very poor – 6 persons – Rs.1,20,000 Poor – 209 persons – Rs.62,05,000 Non Target – 101 – Rs.20,20,000 Insurance amount (Rs.1000 each) was collected from 50 members who received PLF Loans. Total amount was Rs.50,000/- but insurance was not purchased. In the case of both VPRC and PLF loan assets, where animals have been insured but on death of the animals, insurance claim could not be availed. Documents were not present.
Loan Repayment difference was found in one case as follows:
Name Loan Register Field Visit Difference Amount Repay Repay Yoga Lakshmi 5000 875 1125 250
Repayment misappropriations have been found in 3 SHGs to an amount of Rs. 4.5 lakh, as described in the below table: Register Field Visit SHG Name Loan Repaid Name Repaid Difference amount amount amount Ayyanar SHG 660000 372000 660000 660000 288000 Nallamuthu 80000 30000 80000 80000 50000 mariayamman Nethaji 220000 100000 220000 220000 120000 Total 960000 502000 960000 458000 (Maheswari -VPRC Bookkeeper 338000, Sridevi – PLF Bookkeeper 120000) Total misappropriation in PLF: 4.58 lakhs. Total misuse in insurance: Rs. 50000 (amount collected but no insurance given) 8. Fund Rs. 16,49,700/- Out standing Rs. 21,74,860/- PAR PAR: 43% 80:20 60 % Target and 40% non-target 70:30 85 % Livelihood and 15% others Recovery Rate 54 % Recovery Closing Balance Rs.230066.50
136 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
9 VPRC/PLF/SAC 1. As per the schedule VPRC meetings have not been conducted during this Function month first fortnight(In record verification we observed minutes note book following dates meeting minutes date only mentioned no minutes and signature on 21.10.15 & 21.11.2015) 2. Four blank cheques (of PLF general account) bearing signatures of the office bearers was found by the social audit team 3. VPRC & PLF expenses made every month (Rs.300) but all signatures were identified to be made by others. 4. As per VPRC Office bearers rotation norms , changes had been effected on 15.08.2016 but office bearers are not active 5. Individual assistance register, PLF loan register, skill training register, cash book has not been properly maintained 6. Some VPRC & PLF expenditure bills and vouchers are missing. 7. All activities have been handled by the PLF Bookkeeper, indicating that the committees are weak in nature 8. SAC Meeting was last conducted on 26.08.14 as per registers 9. PLF Resolution register was not available in the office 10. A separate book keeper has been appointed for VPRC but she is not active. 10. Tally Tally VPRC accounts updated up to march 2016 11. CLG 3 CLGs (dairy, goat & canteen) have received infrastructure fund but all of them are defunct. CLG account is maintained by PLF bookkeeper Imayam CLG has withdrawn Rs 2500 for office maintenance from the Infrastructure fund. 12. Total Individual Assistance Repayment: 500 Misappropriation PLF Repayment : 458000 Amount Insurance amount : 50,000 Skill Training : 110000 SHG Training : 38169 CLG : 2500 Total Amount : Rs.6,59,169 13. Impact during Bookkeeper repaid Rs. 1,50,000/- to the PLF bank account the 5-day audit VPRC & PLF records got updated during social audit period 14. Oor Koottam 120 people attended the meeting. DPM, Panchayat President and the project staff APM (cluster team) attended Oor Koottam Individual assistance repayment mismatches, skill training, SHG Training were raised in the Oor Koottam. Village youths came to the Oor Koottam and said that they did not go for trainings. This was accepted by DPM and the staff. VPRC book keeper Maheswari had repaid some of the money and the DPMU had registered a CSR complaint in the police station but no action has been taken by the police. The amount was repaid during this period. Panchayat president said that they will take steps to activate the defunct SHGs and improve the administration.
137 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
22.2 Thandalai village, Thiruvarur block, Thiruvarur district Social Audit 16.09.16 to 20.09.16
1 Village overview Thandalai has 2670 households and it has seven habitation. The people rely on working on the NREGA works, agricultural lands of the landowners, brick production and town based work since the village is only 5km from. Social aspects: There is a transgender SHG in this village with 7 members, one of whom has undergone driving training. The thalaivar is a two time Thalaivar. He supported the VPRC and is said to attend all the meetings in the PVP. 2 PIP: PIP list has identified 362 families as target, whereas BPL list identifies 187 BPL: families as poor. When asked about the difference in numbers, the Panchayat secretary informed that during the BPL process, they had left out a particular habitation, Vilamal I from the survey. There were no changes in the PIP list. Total differently-abled persons are 66, and vulnerable 80 persons 3 Individual Assistance The team met 75/149 beneficiaries. Loan differences between registers and field were observed as follows. Three types of cases: There were 12 members during field verification who said that they have not received individual assistance loan at all. Cumulative amount Rs.37000. There was difference in record and field verification of loan amount for 11 members amounting to Rs.28200, difference between loan repayment for 14 members Rs.19130 Of the 75 members who were met, it was found that 36 members were neither disabled nor vulnerable and not in PIP list. Cumulative amount given to these 36 members is Rs.177500, many of whom are not repaying the loans. Moreover, it was found that 19 members who have taken loans had passed away, with an outstanding cumulative amount of Rs.65500.
Based on points 1-4, total misuse amount in individual assistance is Rs.2,61,830 (37000+28200+19130+177500) 4 SHGs The team met 72/101 SHGs. 87 SHGs were affiliated with PLF and 14 were newly formed. 15/52 SHGs have bank linkage in the current year 49 SHGs were defunct 5 SHGs is irregular with its bank loan repayment. There are 7 CSTs monitoring 101 SHGs. The team could not meet 3 out of the 7 CSTs at all. 28/52 SHG registers were updated as on date, and members of the community said that the CST visited them every month. CST monthly reports were regular, and salaries were being paid. 24 SHGs registers were not updated, but their CSTs too are taking salaries after submitting monthly reports. 5 SHG Training The team met 50/69 SHGs. Of the 69 SHGs, bills and records were there for 60 SHGs and for 9 SHGs there were no training attendance and bills. Across 60 SHGs, 1958 members have taken training, against an expenditure of Rs.1,17,480. But actual Cheque payment amount is for Rs.1,64,850.
138 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Difference is being identified as misuse: Rs.47,370 While meeting these SHGs, a sheet was passed for signatures. These signatures did not match the signatures on the SHG Training Register. During field inspection, a total of 50 SHGs were met, 1132 members have attended IV module Training. During these discussions, it was found that in every SHG, only about 8-10 members out of 12 have actually attended the training. Exact numbers with regards to attendance was not clear from the discussion held with the SHGs, but, members of the community highlighted that they had given signatures for training days that they had not attended. Non-communicable diseases (NCD) training for Rs. 3800 in the year 2014 was given, but bills, photos, attendance was not shown for this expense.
Total misuse in SHG Training: Rs.47370 6 PLF The team met 40 / 64 SHGs 143 beneficiaries Team met 63/143 beneficiaries Field verification 5 members told have not received ASF loan Rs.95000. Moreover, repayment difference for 4 members came to Rs.9000 as shown below.
SHG Name Name Register Field Visit Loan Repaid Repayment Difference amount amount amount
Bharathi Malliga 10000 8000 10000 2000 Pudhumalar Neelavathi, 20000 11300 15000 3500 Manimegalai 20000 11300 15000 3500 TOTAL 50000 30600 40000 9000
Total amount: Rs. 1,04,000 (95000 + 9000) 7 PAR PLF PAR outstanding amount Rs.920840 and PLF total outstanding amount Rs.1539156 = 60% 80:20 80%: 20% 70:30 96 %: 4% Closing Balance ASF -- SBI Rs.164280 BOI C/B – Rs.33625 PLF incentive – Rs.32768 PLF general fund BOI – Rs.1,976 ; SBI – Rs.164280 8 Skill The team met 80/110 skill beneficiaries. 18 youths had direct employment. When met, none of the 80 youths had received soft skill training. The youths have signed to this effect. 20% payment has been released without employment being given in most cases. Gender ratio: 55 males : 54 females, and transgender 1 Target non target ratio: 74%:26%
Skill register was shown, and was being updated as the social audit was in progress on request by the team. Attendance records were not shown during the 5-day social audit. No proper documents were presented and hence the team was unable to find out the detailed fund misuse. For 2 youths who underwent training in catering and 4 youths in driving, no certificates were given. All the 6 went for trainings in 2014. Payments have been made to Annai Sathya Driving and Bharat ITI Catering in this regard.
139 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
9 Functioning Of CBOs VPRC meeting was held, and the Secretary and Treasurer were found to be (VPRC,PLF,SAC) irregular and inactive. But member attendance was low (at about 60%) as seen from Resolution Register. After 2014 In VPRC and PLF resolution registers EC members signatures were identical and therefore being made by the same person. SAC registers updated up to 22/02/14, after this register is not maintained. CST Thilagam is the PLF EC member and her own SHGs is defunct. During the social audit team interaction with VPRC secretary, she said for past 5 months she has not attended the meeting due to fracture in the leg and she is hospitalised. But even during this period of absence we found her signatures in the registers. VPRC secretary and PLF secretary both are selected from the same Kaviyam SHG. Both of them have pending repayments in ASF and Bulk loan. Bulk loan misuse: Aastar SHG(PLF Treasurer is in this): in this group all the members repaid the amount but Vasanthi has not repaid to the PLF. This person alone has a huge amount of Rs.116711 and also ASF amount. She accepted that she had this amount and would repay it and has signed to this effect. In Veeralakshmi SHG there is a pending repayment due on Selvamani to the tune of Rs.20690 although she is in a different group (Deepam SHG) In Dhaanyalakshmi SHG, in the name of Malarvizhi, Selvamani took the amount and the outstanding amount now is Rs.27750. She is not repaying it. In Astalakshmi SHG, members repaid but Selvamani has taken the amount and has an outstanding Rs.21671 In Srikalki SHG, members have repaid the amount to Geetha who is the SHG head to the tune of Rs.1,44,552. This amount is yet to be deposited by Geetha. In Athisakthi SHG member, repayment amount of members in her group have been taken by Jansirani, to the tune of Rs.89500
Total misuse: Rs.4,20,924 (adding from points 1-6 above) 10 Tally Tally could not be checked due to electricity problems 11 CLG In this village two CLG formed. Amutham canteen CLG and Thulasi Mushroom cultivation CLG and also infra fund received for both CLG. In Amutham CLG infra fund received Rs.99350 it was so active before one year but materials are not procured in the infrastructure fund but now it is not active as told by APM LH but members said if amount settled by MaKaMai we will return the materials to the VPRC. In Thulasi Mushroom cultivation CLG all the materials procured and are being used by a single CLG member, Meenakshi, and she is also currently in the post of MGNREGS Panni thala poruppalar or Mate, but for the past one year both CLGs are not active 12 Total Total misuse: Rs. 8,33,124 Misappropriation Individual Assistance:2,61,830 Amount Skill training: unable to audit SHG training: 47,370 PLF ASF :1,04000 Bulk Loan :4,20,924 13 During the 5 day Social audit team stayed for 5 nights in the MaKaMai. Records all got updated social audit: impact up to the current month. Panchayat is very vast area and we were unable to meet all the SHGs. In Manalmedu habitation, members were present in more
140 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
than 1 SHGs, in order to obtain bank loan and PLF ASF loan. So 9 SHGs are defunct.
In skill, one youth Karthik had undergone training but has not get the driving license for the past one year. Because of the ongoing social audit, he got his original license and he was thankful to the team for the same. 14 Oorkoottam Over 92 persons attended the Oor koottam hearing. DPM, APM (BF), APM(LH), Cluster staff and Panchayat Thalaivar all presided the meeting . Social audit team shared the findings with everyone, on individual assistance, skill, SHG training and PLF. VPRC Office bearers came at the end of the meeting and PLF office bearers did not attend the meeting. Community interacted well in the Oor Koottam and they did not know what to do regarding fund misappropriation and they asked how to rectify it. They themselves said only if office bearers were changed it can be improved.
In Kazhanchiyam SHG one member Rajalakshmi (CST) said that her SHG records would be updated and the SHG would start working again.
Transgender Jeymatha SHG, 2 members Ramya and Julie attended the Oor Koottam. They praised the Pudhu Vaazhvu Project because Ramya got driving training and now is having a two wheeler and in the gazette record name is changed according to gender with the help of PVP. Ramya also spoke about importance of repayment to the people gathered. Ramya also said that she had donated Rs. 1000 (puravalar nithi) to the school in their own village and also motivated the members in their village regarding regular loan repayment. Everyone appreciated and praised the members of the transgender community who spoke.
TL said those outside the PIP list who had got loans would be verified and the money would be recovered.
23. Vellore district Pilot Social Audit report
July 25, 2016
A 5-day pilot social audit was conducted in two panchayats in two blocks of Vellore district from 18th- 22nd July 2016. The objective of the pilot has been to design elements of the actual social audit to take place in 60 blocks during the following months. This report describes some of the key findings of this pilot exercise.
141 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Key findings in the two villages:
The two randomly selected villages were Pattu and Aythampattu. Key findings are as below:
Pattu village 1. VPRC: Individual assistance given to 4 persons - Malliga, Vijaya, Jayalakshmi, Valliammal – were not ‘target’, i.e, they were neither disabled nor vulnerable, but had got loans under Individual assistance. When asked during the field verification, they admitted they had received loans. This list also includes Malar Vizhi, the CST, who had taken a loan. 2. PLF: The team through field visit contacted 19 out of the 23 SHGs, and met 84 beneficiaries in PLF alone. Many of those asked about their loans during the field verification said “I did not get the money”. When asked about one such case, the PLF secretary, Dravida Mani, admitted to our team that she had indeed taken loans in other people’s names. She did not come to the Oor Koottam at all. Overall, loan repayments were a problem, PAR calculation was 100% 3. Skill: Bills worth Rs. 72000 were issued in the name of a leather company, Aaruthal Foundation. According to the records, 10 youths, at a training cost of Rs. 7200/person had undergone leather-related training at a company. But on verification, we met two youths who said that they had already been working in that same company (in which they were shown to have been trained) since 5 or 6 years. Another problem was that resolutions for only Rs. 14,400 could be found. This means that the remaining amount spent did not have a resolution authorizing the expense. Driving: We met 10 youths for driving training who said that they had attended training only for a few days. Most of the youths are working in other businesses, and not doing driving-based work. 4. SHG Training: 4th module training - When we verified with people whether the 3-day SHG training of 4th module had taken place; it came to be known that the people had attended training only for 1 day. But, bills worth Rs. 52,000 were shown against this training. PLF Governance Training: When we verified with people whether the 3-days PLF training had taken place, the expenses around Rs.15000/- the proper bills and attendance are not attached. 5. Committees non-functional: VPRC, PLF registers were not updated the last 1.5 years. Both committees seem to be non-functional, because the members could not be met or interviewed by our team despite repeated attempts over three days. Some VPRC members whom we managed to meet during field verification confirmed that the committees did not meet. 6. Missing registers: The old PIP register was given on first day, but subsequent changes made to PIP list could not be analyzed. PLF Cheque Register, PLF Cash Book, PLF Ledger were missing in the office on the first two days of our visit. Skill Expenditure Receipts were not shown. CST reports were missing. 7. Loan papers: Loan application papers did not have correct signatures of VPRC members or the stamp paper. This was brought to the notice of the Panchayat Talaivi, who promised to take more interest in the activities of the scheme. 8. Bulk Loan: From Central Cooperative Bank, bulk loan of 10 lakhs taken on April 2013. About half the money has been repaid but half remains unpaid the last 3 years. 9. Community members concurred that the office would remain closed when they came for repayments, citing this as a reason when asked about their repayments. 10. 2 Youth SHGs – both are defunct. Registers were not updated, and during field verification youths confirmed that the SHGs were non-functional. 11. CLG: A shed was constructed worth Rs.49000/- but none of the CLG members use it. Aythampattu village
142 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
1. The 80-20 ratio was in fact found to be about 60-40 only. 2. ADFT Loans: ADFT loan of 12 lakhs was given to 30 people, but 10 of these people were not even SHG members. About 9 lakhs have not been repaid. 3. Loans in Panchayat leaders’ families not repaid: The family of the Panchayat Talaivar have taken loans in the names of his wife Sunita, mother Nirmala, and one more person, amounting to over 1 lakh rupees. But this amount has not been returned. Likewise, the Uptalaivar’s family has loans of Rs 80,000 but have repaid only Rs. 7000. 4. High Non-repayments: PAR value was 100%. Community members told us that the Talaivar had announced the amount would be waived off if he got re-elected. The Talaivar could not be contacted to verify this, as he was in Hyderabad. During the Oor Koottam, this team clarified to the people that the loans were indeed meant to be repaid, and would not be waived. 5. PIP Verification: It was found that names of 8 people had been removed from the PIP list and 8 names had been added instead. Gram Sabha approvals, when asked, were not shown for this. 6. ASF loan repayments in 2-3 SHGs did not have proper bills. One record showed Rs. 7000 as outstanding balance and Rs. 5000 as paid. When asked for the payment proof of Rs.5000, the VPRC bookkeeper said she did not have the bills. She further disclosed to us that she said she could not reveal who had taken the loans. 7. Skill: We met 4 beneficiaries from skill training list for verification. Two of them we met – Vigneshwari and Lokesh told us that they attended computer training for only 10-15 days and dropped out. However, Vigneshwari’s name on the list, certificates and bills existed. 8. CLG bookkeeper manages all: the present CLG bookkeeper, Balakrishnan, singly runs the entire Pudhu Vaazhvu scheme in this village. Everybody identified him as the person who controls the scheme. The same bookkeeper (Balakrishnan)’s name was also found twice on the list of trainees who had undergone skill training (driving class), with subsequent employment shown as him ‘driving a milkvan’. His case was shown to us as a success story. The same person, Balakrishnan, had also undergone a computer training. He had been the PLF bookkeeper for 8 years previously. 9. CLG irregularities: CLG expenditures beyond Rs. 77313 did not have proper bills and could not be accounted for. 10. Flight of VPRC bookkeeper: The current VPRC Bookkeeper, Nirmala, hadn’t repaid her loan of Rs. 20,000 since 2 years. She took flight from the Oor Koottam on seeing the people’s gathering and was not to be located until we left the village. 11. Loan taken in another’s name: During field verification, one beneficiary (as per records) Kaasi admitted to us that he had taken loan of Rs. 20,000 on behalf of another person, Tyaagu, because he asked him to do so. Tyaagu is the husband of a former SAC CP, Meenakumari. 12. The same account was found to be used for both PLF and ADFT Loan
Findings of both teams were presented at the Oor Koottams in the respective villages.
143 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
24. Villupuram district
24.2 Vadhanur village, Kandamangalam block, Villupuram District Social audit period 29/08/2016 – 04/09/2016
Area Findings 1. Village The village is situated in Kandamangalam block, on the border between Tamilnadu and Overview Pondicherry, 23 km from Villupuram. With about 524 households across 2 habitations (Vadhanur, P.S.Palayam), the total population of the village is 2427. The president is a woman, Valarmathi, but it is her husband who is discharging the duties and is called the Talaivar by everyone. Livelihood aspects: Agricultural labour, artificial jewellery making, milch animals Community aspects: SC community 31% Political aspects: the panchayat president is reportedly a member of ADMK party. Social aspects: Women of the village shared that alcohol was a rampant, widespread issue with the men. During many discussions held over the 5 days of social audit, the women described how incomes of the families were getting lost to liquor. Many of the women cited this as the reason they are driven to poverty and depend on jewellery making and other ways of raising an income. 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 184 households as target, whereas BPL list identifies 271 families. But PIP BPL: approval copy was not present in the VPRC. 8 members have been added to ‘vulnerable’ category in Aug 2015. Gram Sabha approval copy was present for this. 3. Individual 39/51 beneficiaries were met. assistance 1. None of the beneficiaries had a loan card with them. 2. In the case of 11 members, loan repayment differences were found in record and field verification to a total of Rs. 10300. The table below is prepared by totaling what people said (since loan cards were not present for verification) to identify the differences:
Name Register Field Visit Difference Loan Repaid Loan Repaid amount amount amount amount amount Poorani 5000 3500 5000 4000 500 Kasthuri 4500 2600 4500 4500 1900 Govinthammal 5000 3000 5000 5000 2000 Manikandan 7500 6000 7500 6500 500 Chandra 7000 4500 7000 6000 1500 Amirtham 7000 5500 7000 6500 1000 Jamuna 4500 2500 4500 3300 800 Angammal 5000 2300 5000 2500 200 Lakshmi 5000 1500 5000 2000 500 Saminathan 5000 3600 5000 4500 900 Gayathiri 7500 4000 7500 4500 500 Total Rs.10,300
3. The names of the 8 members for whom approvals were sought in Gram Sabha (described in previous section) have not been added to PIP list. However, loans have been disbursed to these 8 individuals. They are repaying the loans too. 4. It was found that 48 members have not got individual loans (25 differently able, 23 vulnerable) 4. SHGs 1. 9/37 SHGs were defunct based on interactions with villagers, and verified against SHG registers and documents.(Reasons identified for the defunct status: 3 SHGs
144 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
loan repayment issues, 1 SHG member participant problem, 1 SHG fund misuse, 4 SHGs – other issues) 2. 27/28 SHGs do not have a bank loan in the current financial year. 3. 3 CSTs are there in the village, but all 3 CST reports are not in place. The last CST honorarium has been paid in October 2011, so in effect none of the CSTs are working. 4. Tally entries have been maintained by the bookkeeper in july 2016. 5. SHG record was not properly maintained, based on field visit verification of the registers. 6. It was found that some women had membership in SHGs in both Tamilnadu as well as Pondicherry, being a border village. 5. SHG Training All SHGs have completed SHG IVth module training in the year 2014.
It was observed that 5 of the defunct SHGs (which had been defunct since 2012-13) have also been a part of the trainings given in 2014. It is noteworthy that these defunct SHGs did not become functional after the training. This suggests that there is a need to investigate and understand the actual reasons for an SHG becoming defunct, so that those specific causes may be addressed through directed actions. Instead, prescribing trainings as a one-stop-solution for all SHG problems might not succeed in activating a defunct SHG where reasons for the defunction are some factor other than lack of training. (Case in point: Roja SHG where there is a fund misuse issue) 6. PLF 58/172 beneficiaries were met by the team. In the case of 7 members loan repayment difference to an amount of Rs.15100 SHG Name Name Register Field Visit Difference Loan Repaid Loan Repaid amount amou amount amoun amount nt t Muthumariyamman Sivagami 9700 4300 9700 7400 3100 Venmathi Sathya 15000 11000 15000 12000 1000 Om sakthi Jaya 10000 0 10000 7000 7000 Om sakthi Lakshmi 10000 6000 10000 7000 1000 Sengaineeramman Pachiya 10000 1000 10000 2000 1000 mmal Kamatchiamman Sumathi 10000 700 10000 2100 1400 Selva ganapathi Saroja 10000 6400 10000 7000 600 Total 15100
But due to loan cards not being present with the beneficiaries, the records could not be verified. The above table is prepared based on what people said orally during the field visit. 7. Skill 55/72 youth beneficiaries were met by the team. 8/55 youth beneficiaries, are presently students in colleges. They have undergone training during their holidays but are presently still pursuing their education. Given that the project objective is to provide placement-linked skill training to youths aged above 18. These students are possibly under the age of 18. 21/55 youth beneficiaries met reported that they did not get a placement after the training was completed. 8. PAR 35.8% (Registers) 80:20 Members 81.3:18.7, Amount 83.4:16.6 70:30 Members 90.6:9.4, Amount 92.8:7.2 Closing Rs. 107031 Balance 9. Functioning 1. All CBOs - VPRC, PLF office bearer involvement was there, but over the 5-day social of CBOs audit period, a meeting with them could not be conducted.
145 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
(VPRC, PLF, 2. VPRC secretary has joined the project in January 2009 but till date has not been SAC) changed. 3. All CBO resolutions were maintained and meeting member quorum is minimum 90% according to records in all meetings. 4. SAC meeting minutes have not discussed the issue of CDF, CST activity. 10 Tally VPRC, PLF, SHG Tally entries updated Upto August-2016. 11 CLG Parijatham Tailoring CLG starting on March 2013 has received fund of Rs. 93700. Training and exposure visits have not been done. The fund is lying untouched in the CLG account. 12 Total Total amount: Rs. 25,400 (Individual assistance repayment difference – 10300, PLF loan Misappropri repayment difference – 15100) ation Amount 13 OorKoottam 100 people attended the Oor Koottam on 3rd September 2016 which lasted for an hour. DPM, APM, Panchayat President, all PFT Staff attended the Oor koottam. All the issues identified were discussed at the Oor Koottam. One of the youths (Manikandan) spoke at the Oor Koottam. He is trained in Driving training and earning monthly 12000. 5 more youths who had attended jewellery training, spoke at the Oor Koottam describing that the training was useful to them and that they earn Rs.4000-6000 based on this.
146 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
24.2 Ariyaperumanur village, Kallakurichi block, Villupuram District Social audit from 29/8/16 to 4/9/16
Area Findings 1. Village The village is situated in Kallakurichi block, 83 km from Villupuram. There is only one habitation, Overview with 369 households and a total population of 1863. The panchayat president is a woman, Ganthimathi, but it is her son who acts as the President. Livelihood: farming(sugarcane), NREGS works, milch animal, tailoring Community: 75% BC community (Vellalar pillai) Political: The talaivar was said to belong to ADMK, and reportedly the all the functions and events in this village usually have the ADMK posters. This is reportedly an A grade panchayat, frequently visited by state specialists and World Bank often. 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 97 households as target, whereas BPL list identifies 271 families. PIP approval BPL: copies were available and verified in VPRC. 6 persons were added and one person was deleted from the differently-abled category (she left the village after marriage) in Aug 2015. Gram Sabha approval copy was available and verified. 3. Individual Out of 53 beneficiaries, there were only 16 persons who had an outstanding loan and hence all 16 assistance were met by the team. The rest had finished repaying the loans. No repayment differences were found. 4. SHGs 15/24 SHGs were met by the team. 2/24 SHGs were defunct based on interactions with villagers, and verified against SHG registers and documents. When asked about reasons for the SHGs being defunct, it was reported that in one of the SHGs animator has shifted to another place, and the other SHG has split up and taken back their savings. 2 SHGs have never got a bank loan, while 2 other SHGs have not got a bank loan in the current financial year. 2 CSTs are there in this VPRC and honorarium has been paid in June 2016. Monthly reports were present. 5. SHG All SHGs have completed IVth module training. No issues were found. Documents and records Training were verified and field discussions were held. 6. PLF 72/374 beneficiaries were met by the team (74 members loan have an outstanding loan this month, of whom 72 members were met by the team. The others have finished repaying the loans and do not have a loan currently.) PLF loan application papers had many shortcomings – signatures, dates, were missing and the application paper was not complete. ADFT loan has been given to the PLF for Rs. 70 lakhs. This has been disbursed to 20 SHGs, to 200 members. Of this, 27 members were met by the team. 7. Skill 38/76 youth beneficiaries were met by the team. 16/40 youth beneficiaries met have not been employed. 8. PAR NIL (Registers) 80:20 Members 81.1:18.9, Amount 75.4:24.6 70:30 Closing Members 73.9:26.1, Amount 71.9:28.1 Balance Rs. 3,51,823 9. Functioning All CBOs - VPRC, PLF office bearer awareness was reportedly good, but we could not hold a of CBOs meeting of the committees over the social audit period despite efforts for 5 days. (VPRC, PLF, All CBO resolutions were maintained and meeting member quorum is minimum 95% according to SAC) records in all meetings. 10. Tally VPRC, PLF, SHG Tally entries updated upto August-2016. 11. CLG Nambikai Tailoring CLG starting on March 2012 has received fund of Rs. 84,340. Training and exposure visit have not been done. The fund is lying untouch in the bank account. Inactive. 12. OorKoottam 192 people attended the Oor Koottam on 3rd September 2016 which lasted for one hour.
147 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
The DPM, APM, Panchayat President, all PFT Staff attended the Oor koottam, findings were shared and discussed at the Oor Koottam.
24.3 Thagamtheerthapuram village, Chinnasalem block, Villupuram District Social audit from 29/8/16 to 4/9/16
1. Panchayat The village is situated in Chinnasalem block, 90 km from Villupuram. There is only one habitation, overview with 369 households and atotal population of 1863. Livelihood:agriculture, NREGS works, Masonry, etc. Community: MBC community (Vanniyar, Boyar) 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 119 households as target, whereas BPL list identifies 171 families. There were BPL: no changes to the PIP list. 3. Individual The team met 25/35 beneficiaries. Findings are as follows: assistance 1. 25 persons were identified as eligible to receive individual assistance but have not yet received any loan. (differently abled - 21 persons and Vulnerable - 4 members). Out of the 25 persons identified and met, 6 persons said to the team that they had requested for loans under individual assistance, but that the bookkeeper had informed them that funds were not available. 2. Malar w/o Veeramani received loan of Rs. 6000. As per records, this amount is still outstanding. But during field visit Malar informed that she had repaid the whole amount to bookkeeper Sudha, who has not deposited the amount back into VPRC. Moreover, during field verification, it was observed that her loan card correctly reflects the Nil outstanding balance. But the bookkeeper Sudha has passed a message to Saroja (Malar’s neighbour) instructing Malar to state that if anyone comes asking questions from an audit, ‘please say that the amount still has to be repaid’. Misuse identified: Rs. 6000 4 SHGs There are totally 19 SHGs in this village. (3 Differently-abled SHGs, 16 Women SHGs) 13/19 SHGs were met by the team. Samanthi SHG has not been given training because it has been formed recently. 8 SHGs were defunct. The following SHGs were not active, but have been given loans from ASF in the last month: Jeyam, Mahatma(DSHG), Sindhu, Sriram and Roja. 5. CST CST Backiavathi has been the trainer for SHGs until 2013. Currently none of the SHGs have a CST Functioning to monitor. In 15.08.16 new CST Kolanchi has been identified and got the approval from Gram Sabha. 6. SHG 13/19 SHGs had completed the IVth module training. (11 Women SHGs, 2 differently-abled SHGs) Training Only 3 SHGS have been given three days training and other 10 SHGs were called on third day and given only one day training but signatures were taken for three days against different dates. This was also told to the social audit team by CST Backiavathi. Bills and expenses did not indicate any misuse. 7. PLF ASF Loans have been given to 19 SHGs, to 221 members. A total amount of Rs.49,61,000 has been disbursed.(Very Poor 35+ Poor 65 + Disable 50 and Others 62 total 221) 85/221 beneficiaries were met by team. Findings are as below: 1. An SHG woman, Papathi, informed the social audit team, “I have been constantly asking for an SHG loan. They haven’t given me one yet. I was told that I have been removed from the group. But in my name they have taken a loan.” Before our field visit, one Ms.Chitra has asked Papathi to lie that she has received the loan ! 2. In Roja SHG, Gomathi has taken the loan amount of Rs. 75000 in the name of 3 persons - Kannaki , P. Periyammal and Chandra.
148 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
3. In another case, Chitra has taken the loan amount of Rs. 50000 in the name of Papathi and Chinnaponnu. 8. Skill 34/63 skill training beneficiaries were met. Findings: 1. 11 were target, and 23 members were non-target, violating the 80-20 rule for target inclusion in beneficiaries. 2. Vijay S/o Chellamuthu has gone for driving training. VPRC has given amount Rs.5000 through Cheque no 835053 on 1.12.2014 against this training. At the same time the Institute (Friends Driving School) has also charged Rs.1500 separately from Vijay. This was found during field verification when Vijay was met. 9. PAR 7% 80:20 72%:28% 70:30 84:16 ASF Closing Balance: Rs.7881 10. Functionin 1. The resolutions have been written but VPRC is not active, as found based on interactions g of CBOs with village people. (VPRC, PLF, 2. VPRC minutes had member signature differences (in the VPRC resolution register) SAC) 3. SAC Meeting Register is maintained, but VPRC, PLF activities were not discussed in the minutes notes. 11. Tally Tally was updated only with VPRC, PLF transactions. 12. CLG Milk CLG started in Jan 2013 has received the amount of Rs.95250. Total members in this are 107, of whom 85 are from target households and 22 from non-target. Milk Analyser and milk cans have been purchased and bills are present for expenditures uptoRs.94190. No bills found for exposure visit, for which the expense amount was Rs.3000. Overall the CLG is not active. 13. Total Total Rs. 1,36,000 Misapprop With breakup as follows: riation Individual loan Rs. 6000 Amount Skill Training Rs. 5000 PLF loan disbursement (5 member names mentioned, but loan given to different members) - Rs.125000 14. OorKootta 115 people attended the Oor Koottam on 3rd September 2016 which lasted for an hour. m APM VF, Team Leader, facilitators and Panchayat President attended this Oor Koottam. Individual and PLF loan issues were not discussed much, but skill issues were raised here. The APM said that he would verify with the institute and recover the amount. 5 SC families live in this Panchayat. They said that they had not been included in any way in the panchayat’s activities or scheme implementations. They requested to be included in the panchayat, but the President informed that they had not paid any tax, so they were left out from all counting and benefits of the village.
149 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
25. Virudhunagar district
25.1 Isali Village, Narikudi Block, Virudhunagar district Social Audit from – 16.09.2016 to 20.09.2016
Area Findings 1. Village Overview It is situated 75 kms from Virudhunagar. This village has 3 habitations, namely Isali, Enakkanery and Melakumilakulam. The village has in total 345 families. 104 families have been identified as target by the project, of which 58 families are ‘very poor’ and 46 families are ‘poor’. 241 families are non-target. Differently abled – 24 people, vulnerable – 22 people. Livelihood: Agriculture (groundnut, pettycrop), cattle rearing Social aspects: The village is backward in many aspects. There is no street light, nor road facility. Community aspects: BC (Devar) are the majority community, and SC only 15 families. Talaivar and most people in power are from the BC community. Political aspects: The talaivi is a woman, Banumathi, but her husband carries out the duties. Her sister-in-law is the VPRC Secretary. Further, the Talaivi’s son-in-law Ramesh is the Youth Representative. In this village many people own lands and are sowing groundnuts. Most of them go out (Tuticorin) for their livelihood during non-agricultural season.
During SHG interactions, women complained rampantly of alcoholism, and of liquor expenses affecting loan repayment habits of people. It was learnt that Ramesh, the Youth Representative, would buy alcohol from the nearest TASMAC and sell it locally to villagers in the habitations. During the social audit, the team (including the Consultant) often came across men completely drunk as early as at 9 am in the morning. 2. PIP: PIP list identifies 345 families as target, but BPL identifies 224 families as poor. No changes BPL: were made to the PIP list. 3. Individual The team met 44/44 beneficiaries. assistance There were several discrepancies between registers and field verification. Some of these are: In 15 cases, there was a difference in amount of Rs. 17500 in loan repayment, as follows:
Name Register Field Visit Difference Loan Repaid Loan Repaid amount amount amount amount amount Revathi 10000 6000 10000 7000 1000 Barameswari 10000 4000 10000 5000 1000 Sathya 10000 6000 10000 7000 1000 Pirabhu 10000 1500 10000 2000 500 Vijiyalakshmi 10000 5000 10000 7000 2000 Mari 10000 2500 10000 3500 1000 A.Barameswari 10000 4000 10000 5500 1500 Genamani 10000 6000 10000 7500 1500 Erulayee 10000 3500 10000 5500 2000 Amaravathi 10000 1500 10000 2500 1000 Vanaja 10000 3500 10000 4500 1000 R.Muniswaran 10000 2500 10000 3500 1000
150 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Selvi 10000 3000 10000 4500 1500 Karthik 10000 1500 10000 2500 1000 Seeni 10000 3000 10000 3500 500 Total 150000 53500 150000 71000 17500
Total misappropriation amount Rs.17,500 Loan cards were not present with the beneficiaries. Loan cards were distributed as soon as the social audit began. 4. SHGs The team met 11/11 SHGs. 11 were affiliated to PLF and 2 were newly formed. 2 SHGs are defunct and 3 do not have bank linkage in current year. 3 SHG are not properly repaying bank loan Only 3 SHGs are functional. 8 SHGs are not functioning. Apart from this, 15 SHGs are with an NGO in Kariyappati.
During SHG interaction, women spoke of how liquor was dominating their lives. They spoke of how financial savings would get depleted with the alcohol problem. The Panchayat Talaivi’s family was involved in this liquor sale. 5. SHG Training The training giving to only 2 groups on 26.07.16. The team met 2/ 2 SHGs. As per records, 30 members attended the training for 2 days. But during the field verification, the members said, “we attended training for 1 day only.”
SHG Name Total No of No of Training Improper bills Members members Training expenses amount Attended dates Training Muniyappasami 12 5 2 4580 4580 Karuppasammy 14 14 2 4580 4580
Total misappropriation amount Rs.9160. Totally 11 SHG but 8 SHGs have not been given training. 6. Skill The team met 24/24 skill beneficiaries. Male – 17, Female – 7, Very Poor -13, Poor-8, Non target- 3 Driving- 10, Tailoring – 3 , Jewel Making free course-11
1. M.Prabhu s/o Mattchakalai 2. M.shanmugamoorthy s /o Mattchakalai 3. Karthi s/o Angappan 4. Satheeskundu s/o Ramu 5. Duraiarasan s/o Muthusingam 6. Selvam s/o Gurusamy
The above 6 youth have attended driving as per records. An amount of Rs. 36750 has been released to the Raja Institute. Per person rate for the training is stated in the resolution as being Rs 5250. So, for 6 youths, the cost should have been only Rs.5250 X 6 = 31500 and not 36750. There is a difference in amount of Rs.5,250. When this came to light during social audit, the staff promised that Raja Driving Institute would be asked to return the amount. 7. PLF ASF The team met 25/25 beneficiaries, 3 beneficiaries had difference of repayment amount Rs. 15,750
151 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
SHG Name Name Register Field Visit Difference Loan Repaid Loan Repaid amount amount amount amount amount Vazhavanthal Saroja 25000 1250 25000 7500 5250 Vazhavanthal Santhanakaruppau 25000 1250 25000 7500 5250 Vazhavanthal Amutha 25000 1250 25000 7500 5250
Total misappropriation amount Rs.15,750
8. PAR PLF PAR outstanding amount Rs.118000 PLF Total outstanding amount Rs.446000 = PAR%- 26% 80:20 76:24 % Target (400000:125000) 70:30 100 % Livelihood (625000) Recovery Rate PLF Demand Rs.227500 collection Rs. 179000 and 78.6% Recovery Closing Balance Cash Rs.0 Bank Rs.543239
9. Functioning of The VPRC secretary as per project rules should be from target, but it was found that the CBOs current VPRC Secretary is non target (she is the Talaivi’s sister in law). VPRC meeting could (VPRC,PLF,SAC) not be conducted despite efforts for 5 days. But records were up to date. While meeting Sundaravalli Secretary and Valli Treasurer, they said nobody comes for VPRC meetings. If they attend the meeting, members expect to be paid Rs.50 or 100, they told us. Book keeper is very active. There is no CST. So SHGs are not being monitored. 8 SHGs are defunct but the CST salary has gone in the names of Chitra and Parameeswari for the period between 2.07.13 to 3.1.16 (amounting to Rs. 34,750). But there is no report for CST. CDF is working but there is no monthly report of her work. When we met CDF Chitra she said, “I have received honorarium for SHGs monitoring. I have received Rs.6000 over the 3 year period.” She also said she had returned Rs. 4000 of this honorarium amount back into VPRC account in February 2016. Office bearers have not been changed. PLF Treasurer Valli is not a SHG member for the past 6 years. Currently, she is a member in a new SHG which started 3 months ago.
SAC is not functioning. We could not meet SAC members during the 5 days of social audit. 10. Tally Tally updated as on 31.08.2016 11. CLG Meenatchi Goat CLG Received Rs. 99750. Member contribution has not been made. No CLG Bank passbook was shown during the social audit period. On being asked, we were told it was lost. Exposure visit has been done, weight machine purchased but not in use. 12. Total Total Misappropriation amount: Rs.77830 Misappropriation Individual Assistant Repayment: 17500 Amount Skill Training : 5250 SHG Training : 4580 PLF Loan : 15750 Missing /false bills amount : 34750 13. Status of poverty We met Valli w/o Irullandi aged 50. 15 years ago her husband had expired. After her husband, 2 sons also died one by one. No one supports and her she is alone. She is living in sheeted house. Receiving pension and having MGNRGS card but she cannot work for the 100 days. She goes only for 50 days. She is not included in the PIP list. Her ration card was not with her.
152 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
14. Impact during Fresh new loan cards for individual assistance and PLF were issued during this week. the 5-day audit Registers were updated. The extra payment made for skill was to be returned, promised the staff. 15. Oor Koottam 60 people attended the meeting. Panchayat Secretary, 3 APMs ,Team Leader, facilitator attended this Oorkootam. Police protection was given to this Oorkootam due to fear on account of rampant liquor problem. The following issue was raised by members of the community at the Oor Koottam: all the individual loan beneficiaries said that Rs. 500 amount had been deducted in the name of insurance, but in reality, the said insurance had not actually been given. 11 people have been insured, documentation was shown for only 9. Individual loan difference was discussed and people brought their receipts and said that we have repaid loans. But their repayment was not reflected in the record. The APMs assured them and said Chitra old CDF has to respond because she has collected the money. People also said that Ramesh, the Youth Representative and son-in-law of Talaivi, has collected some of the amount, against no bill, and that he has not paid in the development account. In one case, in Melakumilangulam habitation, an individual loan was received in the name of Pandiyarajan for Rs 10000 in year. But the amount was in fact taken by his grandson Murugan and Ramesh(the Youth Representative) reportedly for the illegal business of selling liquor(alcohol) in the habitation.
153 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
25.2 Kundaeruppu village, Vembakottai Block, Virudhunagar District Social Audit from – 16.09.2016 to 20.09.2016
Area Findings 1. Village Overview The village is situated 48 kms from Virudhunagar, and has 5 habitation namely Subramaniyapuram, Parraipatti, Sundarrajapuram, Jameen Kalamanaickanpatti and Kundaerupu. In this Panchayat, the overall population is 2068. Total households: 750 families, of which there are 158 target households (Very Poor 57 families and poor 101 families). 592 families are non-target. There are 24 differently abled persons and 20 vulnerable persons identified. Community aspects: In Parrapatti habitation, only Kattunaicker community lives. It was learnt that when they go out, they don’t even drink water from outside. In this habitation, there is the Oor Nattamai whose words are very powerful, reportedly he influences many decisions with his word. Members of the community shared that it is only now that the female child is allowed to go out for higher education, but that too not above 12th standard. Livelihood: Fireworks, cattle rearing, masonry. Political aspects: President is very cooperative, and is a member of AIADMK party. 2. PIP: PIP list identified –158 families as target, but BPL identifies -172 families as poor. No BPL: changes were made to the PIP list. 3. Individual The team met 43/43 beneficiaries. 1 differently abled person named assistance Kulanthaiammal didn’t receive any assistance, she was a mentally challenged person who didn’t even have an identity card. She lives alone. Total amount in individual loans given to 43 members amounts to Rs.5,56,000 and the repayment amount is Rs.2,84,000. The repayment amount in registers matched that in the field. 4. SHGs The team met 15/15 SHGs. 15 SHGs were affiliated. 1 SHG is defunct and 14 SHG do not have bank linkage in current year. 1 SHG properly not repaying bank loan. Totally 15 SHGs are there, and 14 are active. 5. SHG Training SHGs training were given to 9 groups. The team met 8/9 SHGs. On 3.4.15, an amount of Rs. 35000 has been withdrawn from the bank for the training (cheque no 456911). As per registers, it was noted that on 7.9.15 the remaining fund after the training Rs.12000 had been deposited. During the field visit, the SHG members said that they (the staff) called us for the training but we did not attend. Moroever, attendance records and bills were not proper. During the social audit visit, overnight the SGF had prepared the attendance and records. The SHG members’ sign was also put in the records by the SGF, and this was accepted by her.
SHG Name Total No of No of Training Improper Members members Training expenses bills Attended dates amount Training Speech-2 20 No 7.6.15 3160 3160 Attendance to 9.6.15 Speech -7 20 No 7.6.15 3160 3160 Attendance to 9.6.15 Uthaumkarangalal 5 No 7.6.15 3160 3160 Attendance to 9.6.15
154 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
Speech -3 20 No 7.9.15 7870 7870 Attendance to 9.9.15 Speech -4 20 No 7.9.15 7870 7870 Attendance to 9.9.15 Speech -5 20 No 7.9.15 7860 7860 Attendance to 9.9.15
Total misappropriation amount Rs.32,480.
6. Skill The team met 69/72 skill beneficiaries. VPRC gave the skill training to 28 males, 21 females, with a trade wise breakup as below: S.No Name of the Trade No of Members
1. Driving 23 2. Tailoring 10 3. Beautician 4 4. CNC 1 5. Jewel Appraisal 1 6. Direct Employment 6 7. Computer 4 8. Fire & Safety 3 9. Masonry 19
As per records, Fire & Safety training had been completed by 3 members. But during field verification the following statements were told by the candidates: The youth representative Gowtham told that they completed the training but they didn’t get any placement. Till the Oor kootam date, the completion certificate was not shown to the social audit team (but while returning the APM produced the certificate in the office)
Trained Youth Training Training Statement given by the youth Name Institution Name K.Mariswaran Angel Fire & I attended the training for 2 Marine Safety months. academy V.Tamilselvam Angel Fire & 1 day training attended. Marine Safety Academy Tamilselvam Angel Fire & 3 days attended. Marine Safety Academy
19 youths went for masonry training in March 2016. But till date they have not received the certificates. Moreover, the names of the 19 members were not updated in the Youth Skill Register. 7. PLF ASF The team met 63/69 beneficiaries. 3 groups did not receive ASF loan. 2 disabled SHGs, 1 women SHG. No PLF treasurer since 26.2.16, so the PLF is not functioning properly. Only repayments are taking place regularly. Idle fund is Rs.10, 27,675
155 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
In one case, the purpose of loan taken has been listed as ‘cow’ on records, but the amount was used for marriage expenses by Siluvaimary Speech 2 SHG. In this case, the amount taken was Rs. 15000 by Antonyammal and given to Tamilselvi. 8. PAR PLF PAR outstanding amount Rs.67498 PLF Total outstanding amount Rs.598068 PAR%- 11.2% 80:20 81:11 % Target (Rs.1235000: Rs.260000) 70:30 85:15 % livelihood (Rs.1265000: Rs.230000) Recovery Rate PLF Demand Rs.227500-/collection Rs.887065 and 95.6% Recovery Closing Balance Cash Rs.0 Bank Rs.10,27,675. 9. Functioning of During the Social audit team visit we met all the VPRC office members. There was CBOs(VPRC,PLF,SAC) no Cheque Issuing Register present. There were no bills from April 2016 for both VPRC and PLF. New book keeper has been appointed and she requires training. In the case of PLF members, only 3 persons attend the meeting, and they are all from Subramaniyapuram habitation. It was reported that others don’t attend the meeting. Idle fund is amount Rs.10,27,675 The PLF treasurer is not there from 16.02.16. There are no proper office bearers for PLF. No CST active here, only CDF is looking after the SHGs. SAC was not active. PLF book keeper has been paid salary only upto 12.01.2015. 10. Tally Tally entry not updated, but it got updated during the social audit period. 11. CLG A Goat CLG was started on 13.11.14. Total members 20, target 17 and non-target 3. This CLG has received amount of Rs.93100. They have gone for exposure visit and have completed training. Weight machine has been purchased but is not in use. CLG expenditure Rs.17700 only. 12. Total Total Misappropriation amount : Rs.52730 Misappropriation Skill Training : 20250 Amount SHG Training : 32480 13. Status of poverty 1. We met Lakshmi W/o Ganaprakasam, a very poor woman aged 70. No proper house. Her husband died within one year of her marriage. With no children, she had nobody to care for her. She receives old age pension. No clothes to wear. She has not been included in the PIP list. During the rainy season, she goes to the nearby church and takes shelter. 2. The second case is that of the old book keeper itself(who is now the SGF since May 2016). Her name is Sugirtha, and she is an SC community member married to a BC community person. They lived together only for 3 months. When he came to know that she was pregnant, he abandoned her. She went on to live with her old aged parents, and she now works daily to survive. Her husband has applied for a divorce but she is not willing to agree. The cause is going on, and she has been offered money but has refused, saying she needs a father for her son. 14. Impact during the 5- All VPRC PLF records got updated. PLF Treasurer has to be appointed. Skill training day audit completed youth received certificate. Tally entry updated during the social audit period. 15. Oor Koottam 85 members attended this Oorkootam. President S.Paulraj attended. DPM, 2 APMs Team leader and Facilitators attended. While the team read the report, for skill issue, the Youth Representative said that the 3 youths had actually completed the training, but only refused to go for placements because they had been given security work. DPM appreciated the social audit team and gave an explanation on the skill issue saying that it is not security work.
156 | Social Audit Report: Part II
Detailed reports of the 62 villages
President motivated the SHG members to repay the amount. The people those who had completed the tailoring asked for work to start in Garments. DPM accepted their request and said he would try to give the orders for the same.
157 | Social Audit Report: Part II