Evaluation Study on Economic Backwardness in Dharmapuri District with Special Reference to Literacy

(Final Report)

EVALUATION STUDY ON ECONOMIC BACKWARDNESS IN DHARMAPURI DISTRICT WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO LITERACY

Submitted to State Planning Commission Government of Tamil Nadu

October

2014

Prepared by PRIA Foundation for Research and Development Chennai

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abbreviations List of Tables

Executive Summary

Section 1 . Objective, Scope and Methodology of the study

Section 2 : State Policies on Backwardness –An overview

Section 3 .Aspects of Backwardness in Dharmapuri District

3.1 District profile

3.2 Aspects of Backwardness –A Block level analysis

Section 4 .Evaluation of Economic Backwardness and Literacy: Findings from the Field Survey

Section 5 : Summary, Conclusions and Policy recommendations

References Appendix

Abbreviations

AAY Antyodaya Anna Yojana APL Above Poverty Line BC Backward Community BPL Below Poverty Line CSR Child Sex Ratio FGD Focus Group Discussions HDI Human Development Index HHs Household(s) GoTN Government of Tamilnadu ICDS Integrated Child Development Scheme ICPS Integrated Child Protection Scheme IE Indian Express IMR Infant Mortality Rate NCLP National Child Labour Project MGNREGA Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act MIDS Madras Institute of Development Studies MBC Most Backward Community OC Other Community OSC Out of School Children PG Post Graduate PDS Public Distribution System SSA Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan SBGF State Balanced Growth Fund SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences SC Schedule Caste ST Schedule Tribes UG Under Graduate UNICEF United Nations Children’s Education Fund

List of Tables

Table 1.1 List of Indicators considered Table 1.2 Ranking of Backward Blocks in Dharmapuri district based on Composite Backwardness Index Table 3.1 Details about Backwardness Indicators and their relative position across different blocks in Dharmapuri district Table 4.1 Distribution of sample households by Caste/Community Table 4.2 Family size and Sex Ratio by Caste Table 4.3 Level of Education Across Blocks in the District Table 4.4 Distribution of households by Size of Land Holding Table 4.5 Distribution of households based on migration Table 4.6 Places of Migration of HHs Table 4.7 Occupational Distribution of Households members Table 4.8 Distribution of Households by average annual income Table4. 9 Distribution of Assets Values of the household by Community Table 4.10 Indebtedness of the households by community Table 4.11 Purpose of loan borrowed Table 4.12 Distribution of households having ration cards Table 4.13 Distribution of households by different sources of drinking water Table 4.14 Availability of Sanitation facilities by Community Table 4.15 Linkage between education and occupation -perception of respondents Table 4.16 Linkage between education and the overall socio-economic development Table 4.17 Households having school children at present Table 4.18 Interests of Respondents for sending children for higher studies Table 4.19 Inter-relation between level of education and socio economic conditions of the of households

Executive Summary

The study shows that two blocks (Pappireddipatti and Harur) are most backward in the district based on a set of fourteen indicators. Hence these two blocks which are identified as most backward based on a number of socio-economic aspects need specialised development attention in the district. This can be taken up under the State Balanced Growth Fund (SBGF) programme of the State Planning Commission. Apart from these two most backward blocks, other blocks also require special attention in many aspects which lack development.

Improvement of sex ratio is required on priority basis in three blocks namely Pennagaram, Nallampalli and Palacode. Baby Cradle scheme, ICDS, and Campaigns for prevention of child marriages through massive awareness programmes are to be strengthened in these blocks.

Literacy and school education are other important indicators which need more attention. Special schemes meant for out of school children (OSC) should be taken up in Pennagram, Nallampalli, Palacode and Morappur blocks which are identified as most backward in literacy and school education. These blocks are also identified as areas of child labour and migration. Hence special schemes to address both education and child labour along with employment opportunities for addressing migration issue can be considered under SBGF programme.

measures are also to be considered on pilot basis in areas like Harur and Pennagaram blocks, as most part of these blocks are un-irrigated and hence prone to drought - the intensity and frequency of which is likely to increase due to climate change.

Provision of gainful employment to agricultural labourers is another important aspect of intervention required. Most of them now migrate to other places as there is not adequate employment opportunity in the district. Employment schemes like MGNREGA require further strengthening which can be also used for improving soil and water conservation and agriculture in the district.

About 28 per cent of the households do not have ration cards mainly due to migration .Hence special effort can be taken up to issue ration cards to these households.

As non- institutional agencies (such as money lenders, finance companies) constitute the main source of borrowing for a majority of households (73 %) strengthening of institutional credit agencies is extremely important. Existing credit programmes like District LEAD Bank Scheme, Regional Rural Banks, Cooperatives, etc. should be further revitalised especially to help agriculture sector. In this context, the recommendations of Vaidyanathan Committee on Rural Credit are important for implementation. New innovative credit schemes through Self Help Groups can be thought of to help small business people to increase non-farm employment.

Though majority of households are reported to have safe drinking water, the problem is not fully addressed as there are seasonal variations in the available water supply and also quality issues like salinity in some pockets. These issues can be addressed by strengthening the existing schemes like Hogenakkal Water Supply Scheme, etc.

Sanitation is another important problem in the district as majority of the population do not have individual toilets. In the two blocks (Harur and Pappireddipatti) identified as most backward blocks in the district, sanitation is quite poor as vast majority of them still use open defecation. Existing schemes like Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC) etc should be appropriately used for this purpose.

Convergence of various development programmes under SBGF can be planned to address the backwardness problem of the district effectively. For this purpose, Block Level Plans can be prepared with active participation of all stakeholders by focussing on specific backwardness issues identified in the study .The SBGF programme provides good opportunities for preparation of such plans and their implementation at the local level.

Evaluation Study on Economic Backwardness in Dharmapuri District with Special reference to Literacy

Section 1-Objective, Scope and Methodology of the study

Introduction

Tamil Nadu is one of the relatively more developed states in India. However, there are significant regional differences within the state in respect of human development as well as that of the overall economy. The 11th plan (2007-12) has drawn attention to some of these differences among districts .1Out of 32 districts, Dharmapuri, Krishnagiri, Villupuram, Thiruvannamalai, Perambalur were rated as the most backward districts based on Human Development Index (HDI).The 12 th plan (2012-17) has paid more attention on this at the block level within the districts and has started a special programme viz State Balanced Growth Fund to address the regional imbalances and backwardness in human development and gender parameters. 2. There are many indicators which form part of Human Development and literacy is one of the important indicators. According to Census 2011, Dharmapuri is ranked as the lowest in terms of literacy rate in the state. While the state average literacy rate is 80.33 percent , Dharmapuri achieved only 64.71 percent .This is well below the all India average of 74.04 percent. It should be noted that the district also ranked lowest in 2001 census in literacy rate.

Objective and scope of the study There are many factors associated with development or backwardness of an area like income, employment, ownership of productive assets such as land holding , percentage of people depending upon agriculture, land less labour , access to institutional credit ,indebtedness etc. There are many social factors like caste, gender, health , access to basic facilities like water and sanitation etc. which also determine peoples welfare in a region. It is known from many studies that these social and economic factors influence each other and play important role in determining the outcome of any welfare programme. In this study we try to evaluate the economic backwardness in an area ,factors associated with it with special reference to literacy in Dharmapuri district. In other words, the objective study is to understand the factors associated with lowest literacy rate in the district especially the socio economic backwardness. The study also take into account other aspects like cultural (example female infanticide ) which retard progress of an area especially literacy in the district. The study is undertaken at the disaggregated levels ( blocks and villages ) to capture intra-district variations in the backwardness and factors associated with it which are important for local level planning.

Methodology: The study is undertaken in two stages as discussed below

1 GOTN(2007)-11 th Plan Document

2 GOTN(2011) Tamilnadu 12 th Plan Document 7

I) Desk Reviews and Analysis of Secondary data

To start with we have undertaken a review of literature related to the subject of backwardness , its importance in the context of social welfare programmes especially education and literacy programmes.We have undertaken analysis of secondary data at the block level to identify the most backward blocks in the district by using a number of indicators including literacy level. Table 1.1 provides details about indicators considered for the secondary data analysis.

Table 1.1 List of Indicators considered

S.No Index Variables

1 General Population sex ratio General Population –Male Female population proportion index

2 Child Sex ratio Index (0 -6 0-6 – children Male and Female proportion years)

3 IMR Index Infant Mortality Rate

4 SC &ST Population Index SC and ST Population

5 Illiteracy Index Total number of Illiterates

6 Literacy level of population - Male and Female Literacy gender gap difference

7 OSC Index Out of School Children

8 Agri. labour index Proportion of Agricultural Labourers to total workforce

9 Irrigation index Proportion of Un irrigated to total cultivated area

10 Poverty -BPL Household Percentage of Households to total households below index poverty line

11 Proportion of length of Access to Road (relative access to Good or mud road) Mud road to total length of road index

12 Cooperative membership Percentage of population having membership in Index cooperatives

13 Water supply Index (A ccess Percentage of households not having safe drinking to Safe drinking water water index)

14 Sanitation Index (Access to Percentage of Households not having toilet facilities in toilet facility index) their home

Index value of components : The index value for each component of backwardness has been worked as follows. Actual value – Minimum value Backwardness Index = ------Maximum value – Minimum value

Composite Backwardness Index: The Index values of different indicators have been aggregated to get composite value of backwardness of each block which are given in Table 1.2. Each indicator has been given equal weight in working out composite backwardness index.

Table 1.2 Ranking of Backward Blocks in Dharmapuri district based on Composite Backwardness Index

Name of Block Karima Pappir- Morap Nallam ngala Pennaga Dharm Name of Indicators eddipatti Harur pur palli m ram Palacode apuri General Population - Sex Ratio Index 0.975 0.959 0.956 0.943 0.924 0.898 0.939 0.924 Child Sex ratio index (0-6 year) 3 0.904 0.863 0.849 0.796 0.803 0.751 0.806 0.821 IMR Index 0.018 0.023 0.018 0.019 0.028 0.0 29 0.028 0.014 SC & ST Pop Index 0.459 0.417 0.293 0.145 0.131 0.140 0.115 0.121 Illiteracy Index 0.361 0.392 0.370 0.395 0.427 0.437 0.418 0.332 Literacy gender gap Index 0.152 0.141 0.162 0.163 0.162 0.153 0.148 0.124 OSC Index 0.173 0.036 0.055 0.12 9 0.110 0.190 0.173 0.133 Agriculture Labour Index 0.421 0.430 0.311 0.207 0.326 0.299 0.326 0.269 Unirrigated Land index 0.353 0.861 0.670 0.724 0.607 0.793 0.612 0.624 BPL Household Index 0.290 0.670 0.610 0.610 0.290 0.500 0.320 0.220 Access to Roa d (% of Mud road) Index 0.136 0.118 0.255 0.286 0.663 0.183 0.387 0.153 Membership in cooperatives (Non- Access) Index 0.675 0.602 0.753 0.963 0.979 0.791 0.656 0.701 Household not having access to Safe Drinking water Index 0.74 0.00 0.26 0.03 0.25 0.15 0.08 0.14 Households not having access to toilet facility Index 0.70 0.72 0.53 0.68 0.26 0.63 0.63 0.55 Backwardness 0.454 0.445 0.436 0.426 0.418 0.412 0.391 0.357 Composite Index Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Note: Children below 6 years data refers 2001 Census Data

3 Based on 2001 Census data 9

Selection of Blocks for the study There are eight blocks in the district for which composite backwardness index has been worked out as described above. These blocks are ranked in descending order based on composite values .The blocks with highest backwardness index values are ranked first and least values in the last and others in the order .Based on the above ranking, four blocks were selected for the detailed study: two blocks with most backwardness in social, economic conditions and literacy levels and two more blocks which are relatively less backward in terms of social, economic factors and literacy levels were selected for comparative study. Based on the ranking , Pappireddipatti and Harur are identified as most backward blocks whereas Dharmapuri and Palacode are ranked as relatively less backward blocks. Details of analysis and findings are discussed in Section 3.

II) Field Visits for the Primary Data collection

Selection of villages Two villages from each of the four blocks were selected randomly to undertake field study and primary data collection. Group discussions were conducted with knowledgeable people in the selected villages to understand development issues including education and literacy .

Primary Survey of Households (HH): For understanding the backwardness and factors associated with it like literacy , education, income, employment, land holdings, assets, source of livelihoods, indebtedness, water and sanitation etc a survey of Households was undertaken in the eight villages selected. There are a few hamlets under each of the villages selected; however we have chosen the main hamlet for the purpose of the survey considering the constraints of time and resources for the study.

For the purpose of the survey , eight HHs from each of the village/hamlet (totalling sixty four sample HHs) were selected based on random sampling .Under this method , the list of all the HHs in each of the selected hamlet was prepared based on information from knowledgeable persons like ward members, village panchayat presidents, Panchayat Secretary ,Unicef-NCLP field coordinators . A detailed questionnaire was used for this purpose.(Appendix-1)

Sources of Data: The sources of data for the study are as follows.

Secondary Data : Secondary Data about the district and blocks were collected from Census (2011), District Planning Cell (Dharmapuri), SSA –Dharmapuri, UNICEF-NCLP, Integrated Child Protection Scheme (ICPS) Dharmapuri, Department of Rural Development (Puduvazhvu project,) Water Resources Department-Dharmapuri, etc. Data from government portals /district websites about the district ,Directorate of Economics and Statistics ,Chennai and Madras Institute of Development Studies (MIDS) are other sources of data for the study.

Primary Data As already mentioned field visits were undertaken to conduct Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and primary survey in the eight selected villages/hamlets under four blocks in the 10

district . In addition we had detailed discussions with district level officials like District Planning Officer, SSA-CEO, Block Resource Centre Coordinators, Project Director and Block Coordinators under NCLP project , Education and Child Protection Officers -Unicef, Chennai who are in charge of Dharmapuri district for their respective programmes.

Data were collected by experienced investigators from the district who were involved in the earlier surveys in the area. Data were computerised and analysed using SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) programme.

Section 2: State Policies on Backwardness –An overview

Even though India has opted for planned growth, regional imbalances in growth and other development parameters have been a reality. With differing histories, resource endowments and infrastructural developments, regions present varying levels of development as well as abilities to make use of development opportunities. There have been noticeable differences both among different states and between different regions of particular states. These imbalances have been sought to be addressed by a number of policy initiatives. The central government has appointed committees from time to time to look into the issues that impact on regional differences.

While states lagging in development have been sought to be helped though a favourable devolution of funds, even sub-state units like districts have been taken up for redressing backwardness. There are also instances of agro-climatic or ecological regions becoming the focus of policy making. Taking into account the fact that Indian states are large entities and considerable differences prevail in regions within most of the individual states, it has been increasingly felt that state-level approach to development may not yield optimal results.

As each state exhibits a number of distinct socio-economic and physical regions, undertaking development planning at the district level has been favoured. It is not uncommon to find districts with low development indicators in relatively prosperous states, while districts with high development indicators could be found in poorer states. The availability of administrative structure at the district level is also an advantage in decentralizing the planning process to the district level. However, there has been preference among policy makers for blocks as the planning unit. The crucial consideration in choosing between the district and the block is the physical and socio-economic homogeneity of the latter. The districts are large units with a great deal of variation in their size. They also have a variety of physical conditions within themselves. The potential for development as well as efforts needed to tap the potential may tend to vary in district. With more homogeneous physical and socio-economic conditions, the block is considered as a better primary unit for development strategies.

It is felt that the concern for balanced regional growth had been articulated only in qualitative terms until the mid-sixties. There were no systematic exercises to capture the problem in quantitative terms. A number of policy initiatives were debated and suggested. However, action was limited to locating major industrial projects in backward areas. Even on this score, the gains were somewhat limited. Like in the case of the steel plants, the establishment of industrial units in the interior areas was mostly due to the availability of raw materials.

Report on Regional Variations in Social Development and Levels of Living—A Study of the Impact of Plan Programmes (1967)

This report published by Union Planning Commission in 1967 is an extensive statistical analysis of the inter-state and inter-regional variations in key parameters such as consumption, unemployment, land holding, rural investment and debt, agricultural development and the status of educational and health facilities. The report also evaluates the major rural development programmes. The adoption of new agricultural practices, functioning of minor irrigation facilities and soil conservation and drinking water supply progammes are examined. The study made available data about variations among states in quantitative terms. The fact that a large exercise was untaken to deal with the problem of regional imbalances in quantitative terms is seen as an indication of the increasing concern for the problem. 4

Fourth Five Year Plan The Fourth Five Year Plan (1969-74) was more forthcoming on the issue of regional imbalances. The Plan pointed out that the measures taken so far have failed to restrain the tendency of new enterprises to gravitate towards the metropolitan centres. On the other hand, the strategy of intensive development of irrigated agriculture led to a concentration of efforts only in certain areas. The plan document calls for the maximisation of production along with measures to remedy the imbalances. Towards this end, the Plan proposes special programmes for dry farming, desert areas, small farmers and agricultural labourers. The Fourth Five Year Plan document focuses on both the backward areas as well as marginalised classes. During the Fourth Plan period, there was also concern over the incidence of poverty as well as how it varied between states. In the Plan period, pilot projects on integrated development of tribal areas were also initiated. 5

Fifth Five year Plan The Fifth Plan encompassed the broad policy that desert and drought prone, hill and tribal areas need special attention. The approach should be integrated planning rather than limited sectoral programmes. The plan also emphasised a proactive role for the Central Government in uplifting the backward areas and includes the Tribal Sub-Plan. But most important of all, the Plan pointed out the stark inter-district differentials in the level and rate of growth of agricultural output and underlines the need to spread the agricultural revolution to new areas 6.

4 Report on General Issues Relating to Backward Areas Development National Committee on the Development of Backward Areas Planning Commission, Government of India (1981)

5 ibid 6 Report on General Issues Relating to Backward Areas Development National Committee on the Development of Backward Areas Planning Commission, Government of India (1981) 12

One of the earliest attempts to redress backwardness was through the dispersal of industries. Even though the need for industrial dispersal was widely acknowledged, a set of incentivising policy instruments designed to achieve this objective only came into being in the seventies. Following deliberations in the National Development Council on industrial development in backward areas, it was decided that two separate working groups would be formed- Pande Working Group dealing with the question of backward areas and the Wanchoo Working Group dealing with the incentives. These were mandated to identify backwardness and design the incentives for development of the backward regions.. Both the working groups had submitted their reports in 1969. For identifying the industrially backward states, the Pande Working Group took into account the per capita income, per capita income from industry and mining, number of workers in registered factories, per capita annual consumption of electricity, length of surfaced roads in relation to population and the area of the State and railway mileage in relation to the population and area of the State. The Working group also came with a set of indicators to identify backward districts within the backward states and union territories. However, the planning commission opted for a ‘more inclusive’ approach in deciding the industrially backward districts that qualified for incentives. A host of measures were introduced for the promotion of industries in backward areas. The major initiatives included investment subsidy, concessional finance, fiscal incentives and various promotional schemes of the state government. Besides these measures, efforts were also continued to be made to locate public sector industries as well as industrial estates in backward regions. 7

National Committee on the Development of Backward Areas ( 1981) : On the overall approach, the committee had stated that while regional imbalance as a problem have drawn the attention of planners, the emphasis has been often on economic performance- though the impact of historical and social factors has also been taken into account. However, the concept of backwardness is vague and designates areas that fail to benefit from general development. The concrete measures that have been taken so far are limited to the subsidies for industry or the special area development programmes. These schemes have failed to tackle backwardness..

While most backward areas have a potential for growth, such potential be realised if special initiatives are undertaken. The planning process should identify the right set of special initiatives suited for each type of backward area. One of the major recommendations of the committee was that block should be unit for identification of backwardness and such blocks should be situated in desert, drought prone, hill, tribal, chronically flood affected and salinity affected coastal areas. 8

7 Report on Industrial Dispersal ,National Committee on the Development of Backward Areas Planning Commission, Government of India (1980)

8 Report on General Issues Relating to Backward Areas Development National Committee on the Development of Backward Areas Planning Commission, Government of India (1981)

Following the report of the the Technical Committee on Drought Prone Areas Programme and Desert Development Programme (1994), detailed guideline were issued to the states to implement watershed programmes for not only drought prone and desert areas but also for rain-fed areas and wastelands. In 1993- 94, an intensified Jawahar Rozhar Jojana was introduced in 120 districts-identified by planning commission for their poverty and unemployment. For providing universal education in districts faring poorly in the spread of education, the District Primary Education Programme (DPEP) was started in 42 districts in 1994 and the coverage was expanded later. 9

The E A S Sarma Committee on Backward Districts (1997) :

The committee prepared a list of 100 most backward and poorest districts in the country. The committee identified these districts based on both direct indicators reflecting human deprivation and indirect indicators relating to the quality of life. Though the idea was to formulate an action plan for infrastructure development in these districts, the report was not implemented. In 2003, a Task Force ranked 487 districts on the basis of the value of the output per agricultural worker, agricultural wage rate and the percentage of SC/ST population. 10

Rastriya Sam Vikas Yojana (RSVY)

The Central Government launched the Rastriya Sam Vikas Yojana (RSVY) during 10 th plan to accelerate the development process in the backward regions. The scheme consisted of three components- the backward districts initiative, Bihar special plan and the special plans for the undivided districts of Koraput, Balangir and Kalahandi. The hundred districts to be covered under the backward districts initiative were selected from the ranking made available by the Task Force. The eligible districts were allocated Rs 15 crore annually for three years. The fund should be utilised as supplementary flows for bridging the gaps in social and physical infrastructure. 11

Backward Regions Grant Fund (BRGF)

With the aim of helping the backward regions to catch up with their advanced counter-part, the Backward Regions Grant Fund (BRGF) was launched in 2006. The programme was designed in such a way that the Panchayati Raj institutions would play major role in its implementation. District plans would be prepared at the grassroots with the active

9 Nayyar, R. ‘Planning for the Development of Backward Districts.’ CPRC-IIPA Working Paper 23. Chronic Poverty Research Centre, University of Manchester and Indian Institute of Public Administration. (2004)

10 Ibid 11 Evaluation Study on Rashtriya Sam Vikas Yojna (RSVY),Programme Evaluation Organisation, Planning Commission,Government of India 2010

participation at the Gram Panchayat level, the Block Panchayat level and the Zila Panchayat level. Planning Committees at the district-level would integrate plans of rural and urban local bodies. The funds provided under the scheme would be earmarked for developing infrastructure, promoting sustainable livelihoods and converging development inflows. While the programme subsumes the RSVY, it covers a total of 250 districts spread over 27 states 12 .

Vision 2023 by Tamilnadu

At the state level Tamilnadu’s Vision 2023 envisages a high rate of economic growth with simultaneous efforts to reduce income inequality in the state. By proving widespread access to physical and social infrastructure, the strategic plan would promote equitable growth. The plan also envisages channelising substantial resources to the lowest income groups and making the state poverty-free. This will mean that no resident in the state would be deprived of basic needs such as food, clothing and shelter. Every employment-seeker will also find gainful employmemt. Also, the state would provide social security net to the old, helpless and destitute.

The Vision document points out that the state scores reasonably well on social indicators with respect to most other states. This is particularly true in terms of Human Development Indicators. The state has attained considerable gains in relation n to these indicators in the past decade. Vision 2023 has set an ambitious target for key parameters like crude birth and death rates, MMR, IMR and Under 5MR. As a result, the state’s performance on these parameters will be the best in the country. By providing universal access to healthcare facilities, Vision 2023 envisages that the state should go beyond achieving the numero uno status in India and reach the human development levels attained by the developed countries.

The strategic plan document aims to provide piped, pressurized and round-the clock water supply to all the residents. It also envisages universal access to safe sanitation including open- defecation free as well as garbage-free environment. With respect to housing, the document underlines the need to construct 25 lakh affordable houses. This will make the villages hut-free and the cities slum-free. Besides providing quality healthcare for every resident, it is envisaged that both universal secondary education and over 50 per cent college enrolment will be achieved. 13

State Balanced Growth Fund (SBGF)

With a view to attain the high social sector benchmarks set by the Tamil Nadu Vision 2023, the State Government launched the State Balanced Growth Fund (SBGF) in 2012 .As noted already ,even though the State has registered considerable progress in terms of Human Development Index, regional imbalances continue to persist. Disparities are significant in

12 Backward Regions Grant Fund, Programme Guidelines,Ministry of Panchayathi Raj, Government of India (2007) 13 Vision Tamil Nadu 2023,Strategic Plan for Infrastructure Development in Tamil Nadu,Government of Tamil Nadu (2012)

some regions in poverty levels, per capita income, literacy, health and gender related indicators.

The Fund aims to improve the outcomes with respect to the key socioeconomic indicators of backward regions. As a major component of the state's inclusive growth strategy, SBGF strives for the equitable and sustainable development of the districts. This is sought to be achieved by converging the resources of the current schemes and making available additional allocations to low performing blocks as well as wards of urban local bodies. This will bridge the infrastructure and schematic gaps in the existing schemes.

Through capacity building, the SBGF scheme allows the stakeholders-particularly the PRls- to play a key role in planning at the district level. As part of the process, resource gaps that are responsible for the backwardness are identified. Benchmarks are also set for monitoring and evaluation. After converging the existing projects, the developmental gaps and the resources required to address them are mapped. Following this, sub-projects are formulated to meet the identified needs. While new projects are tied with the existing projects, the sub-projects are implemented in a multi-sector format-cutting across departments- in possible cases. There is also continuous monitoring of select human development indices at sub-district, district and state levels. Both quantitative and qualitative evaluations are undertaken to find out whether any strategy change or course correction is necessary.

The SBGF covers the lowest fourth among rural and urban local bodies. As many as 100 panchayat unions, town panchayats, and wards of backward Municipalities and wards of municipal corporations are targeted. The identification is based on a number of parameters- the multiple dimensions of poverty, per capita income, unemployment, health, education and gender. As the parameters are highly inter-related, the new projects are expected to have cross-parameter impacts. The selection of blocks or wards is also likely to be impacted because of the inter-related nature of the parameters.

The scheme is operated by taking up one-third of the blocks or wards every year. In the chosen entities, the schemes will be implemented over the next five years on the basis of a perspective plan. The SBGF was provided with a corpus of Rs 100 crores in the year 2012- 13. Of the annual allocation, 98 per cent will be used for financing approved projects or schemes. Without curtailing the physical or financial contributions of the local body, the funds are only meant for meeting the gaps in the on-going schemes. Usually with an outlay of Rs 25 lakh, the projects should be designed in such a way that measurable progress is achieved in backward areas. 14

14 G.O.Ms.No.83 Dated: 07.02.2013,Planning, Development and Special initiatives Department, Government of Tamil Nadu

Section 3-Aspects of Backwardness in Dharmapuri District

The section is divided into two parts: a)Dharmapuri district –General profile b)Aspects of Backwardness in Dharmapuri District- A block level analysis. The first part provides a macro-level picture about the district especially its social, economic and literacy aspects .In the second part the backwardness of the district is analysed at block level to understand development issues at this level for focussed intervention attention.

3.1 Dharmapuri District –General profile

Dharmapuri district, came into existence in 1965 (from its erstwhile Salem ) is situated in the North western corner of Tamil Nadu and is mostly a hilly terrain. The district has 3.46 percent (4498 sq. km) of the state’s geographical area . and is bounded by Tiruvannamalai and Villupuram Districts on the east, Salem District on the south, Krishnagiri District on the north and Kaveri river on the west.The district has two revenue divisions (Dharmapuri and Harur), five taluks viz., Dharmapuri , Harur , Pennagaram , Palacode ,and Pappireddipatti and 470 revenue villages.There are eight blocks, 251 village panchayats, ten town pachayats and one (Dharmapuri) municipality .

The District economy is mainly agrarian in nature. As per Census 2011,about 60 percent of the workforce is dependent on agriculture- of them 29 percent are cultivators and 32 percent agriculture labourers. The district is one among most backward and drought prone in the state. According to Census 2011,the district has a total population of 15.02 lakhs of which 51 percent are Male and 49 percent Female. Most of the population (83 percent) live in rural areas and only 17 per cent in urban areas.

The district has 64.71 literacy rate of which 69 percent are Male and 60 percent Female. As noted already the district ranks last in literacy among 32 districts in the state. In terms of overall economy measured by per capita Gross District Domestic Product (GDDP) the district ranks 20 th in the state and 28th in Human Development Index(HDI) and last in Sex Ratio. 15 However it should be noted that though the district ranks as one of the backward districts in the state ,there has been improvement in its performance over a period in terms of HDI .The district’s HDI value which was 0.584 in 2003 16 has increased to 0.656 in 2007 17 .This has further improved to 0.707 in 2011 18 .

3.2 Aspects of Backwardness in Dharmapuri District- A Block level Analysis

15 See Appendix-II for District level data on these aspects 16 Tamilnadu Human Development Report (2003) 17 GOTN(2007)-11 th plan document 18 GOT,2011-Tamilnadu 12 th plan Document 17

As mentioned earlier we have considered a number of indicators for measuring the backwardness across blocks in the district . In the following we discuss separately each of these indicators of backwardness to understand their relative position across the blocks based on analysis presented in Table 3.1.

General Population Sex Ratio Index :

Sex ratio is the number of Females per 1000 of Males. Sex ratio is a valuable source for finding the population of women to that of men .There has been decline in sex ratio for many decades and it has shown improvement only in recent times. According to Census,2011 ,the sex ratio in Dharmapuri district (940) is the lowest in the state among all the districts. The ratio (940) is significantly is lower than the state average of 996. Across blocks in the district there are variations in the ratio. The ratios are in the range of about 900- 975.The lowest (896 ) is in Pennagaram and the highest ( 975) in Pappireddipatti .

Table 3.1 Details about Backwardness Indicators and their relative position across different blocks in Dharmapuri district 19

Karim Pappired Morap Nalla Pennag Palaco Dharmap Block Harur angala dipatti pur mpalli aram de uri m General Population - Sex Ratio 975 959 956 943 924 898 939 924 Child Sex ratio (0-6 year) 904 863 849 796 803 751 806 821 IMR 18.1 23.0 18.0 19.0 27.5 29.3 28.2 14.3 SC & ST Pop 45.9 41.7 29.3 14.5 13.1 14.0 11.5 12.1 Illiteracy 36.1 39.2 37.0 39.5 42.7 43.7 41.8 33.2 Literacy gender gap 15.2 14.1 16.2 16.3 16.2 15.3 14.8 12.4 OSC 0.37 0.94 0.34 0.83 0.87 1.01 1.08 0.60 Agriculture Labour 42.13 42.98 31.09 20.70 32.60 29.87 32.64 26.89 Un-Irrigated Land 35.32 86.12 67.03 72.36 60.71 79.31 61.19 62.40 BPL Household 29.00 67.00 61.00 61.00 29.00 50.00 32.00 22.00 Access to Road (% of Mud road) 13.60 11.767 25.508 28.558 66.280 18.295 38.669 15.282 Memb ership in cooperatives (Non-Access) 67.49 60.20 75.30 96.29 97.88 79.08 65.63 70.15 Household not having acce ss to Safe Drinking water 74.00 23.00 26.00 3.00 25.00 15.00 8.00 14.00 Households not having access to toilet facility 70.000 72.000 53.000 68.000 26.000 63.000 63.000 55.000 Backwardness Composite Index 0.442 0.429 0.427 0.426 0.418 0.412 0.391 0.357 Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Source : District Planning Cell-Dharmapuri (2014)

19 The block level data on different indicators used for working out composite index are given in Appendix-III 18

Child Sex Ratio (0-6 years)

Child sex ratio is the number of girl children per 1,000 boys children in the age group 0-6 years. Changes in Child Sex Ratio (CSR) index reflects underlying socio-economic and cultural practices of the society, especially its attitude towards the girl child. In Dharmapuri district there is an improvement in the child sex ratio between 2001-2011.The ratio which was 869 in 2001 has increased to 946 which is appreciable. However this is the lowest among all districts and quite lower than the state average of 995 which is matter of serious concern. Across blocks, Palacode, Pennagaram, Karimangalam, Nallampalli had lowest CSR about (800) compared to district figure of 946. “Discrimination based on gender exists within families and is found to perpetuate into every aspect of child rights like survival, growth and development, protection and participation,” the report said. The preference for boys in terms of higher education still continues which leads to drop out of girls who ultimately end up doing house chores and child labour.”(IE,6 Feb,2013).

Infant mortality Rate (IMR ) : IMR is the number of deaths of children less than one year of age per 1000 live births. IMR in Tamilnadu is reported to be 31 and 22 in Dhramapuri district .IMR varies widely from 14 to 29 across blocks ,highest in Pennagaram (29) and lowest in Dharmapuri block (14).It is understood that a number of neo-natal care programmes in the district have helped to reduce the IMR over a period (GOT,2011)

SC & ST Population : The district has about 23 percent of SC and ST population as per 2011 Census . It is highest in Pappireddipatti (46 percent ) and Harur ( 42 percent ).The lowest is Palacode 11.5 and in other blocks it is about 14 percent. The district is quite comparable with the state in SC&ST population which is about 25 percent .

Literacy : Literacy is key for socio-economic progress. The literacy rate of the district as per 2011 census is about 65 percent which is significantly less than state literacy average of about 73 percent .The district is ranked as the lowest in literacy in the state in both 2001 and 2011 censuses. Across the blocks the rate is lowest in Pennagaram block (56.3)and highest in Dharmapuri block (66.8)

Gender Gap in Literacy : There is a wide gender disparity in the literacy rate in India. In Tamilnadu the Literacy rates in 2011 were 80.3 for men and 73.9 for women. In Dharmapuri district, the relative rates are 69 for Male 60 percent for Female with gender gap of about 9 percent. Across blocks in the district, the literacy gender gap is highest in both Nallampalli (16.3) and Morappur (16.2) blocks and lowest in Dharmapuri block (12.4).

The low female literacy rate always had a negative impact in the participation of women in government programmes especially relevant to their empowerment .For example, studies have indicated that female literacy is an important factor for promoting the use of contraception among married Indian couples, even when women do not otherwise have economic independence.

Out of School Children (OSC): According to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009 every child in the age group of 6 to 14 years has the right to get free and compulsory elementary education. To achieve the goal of enrolling all children in school, the state has undertaken a special programme through SSA to identify and enrol out of school children with the help of teachers and anganwadis. However the problem persists and Dharmapuri is one of the districts with high level of OSC .The percentage of children out of school to that of enrolment is generally less than one percent in the state .It is 0.75 percent in Dharmapuri district .During 2013-14 there are 1649 OSC of them 1051(64%) are girls. Across blocks both Pennagaram and Palacode had OSC of about 1.0 percent of enrolment.(Details about number of schools ,enrolment , OSC are given in Appendix III)

Agriculture/Land Less Labour: Landlessness is one of the strong indicators of backwardness as it is one of the basic factors of production and livelihoods of rural people. About one third of rural households are landless in the district and mainly dependent upon wage labour .The percentage of landless varies widely across blocks. It is highest in Pappireddypatti and Harur blocks (about 43 percent) and about 30 percent in Moarppur,Kariamanagalam and Pennagaram. As a large percent of population is landless and the district is affected often by drought impacting agriculture and wage employment most of them migrate seeking employment and livelihoods in nearby cities and non farm sectors.

Irrigation: Dharmapuri is one of the districts in Tamilnadu declared as Drought Prone district and a number of drought relief programmes are implemented by both centre and state. The situation is worse when the district does have adequate irrigation which acts as insurance against drought .Only about 35 percent of cultivated land is irrigated and the remaining 65 percent depends upon monsoon rainfall which is erratic. Among blocks the percent of un irrigated area is highest in Harur (86) and Penngaram(79).Thus agriculture becomes uncertain and those depend on especially labourers migrate to other places as reported earlier.

BPL Households : There are 2.81 lakh households in the district in 2011-12 of which about 45 percent belongs to BPL category. Among blocks ,Harur has the highest ( 67) percent families under BPL. Other blocks which have higher level of BPL families are Moarappur (61%), Nallampalli (61%),and Pennagaram (50%). In the remaining blocks of Kariamanagalam,Palacode and Pappireddipatti, the BPL families constituted to about 30 percent and in Dharmapuri block it is about 22 percent.

Backwardness across blocks- analysis based on Composite Index : The results of the analysis of composite index taking into account 14 indicators show that both Pappireddypatti and Harur are the most backward blocks in the district (with highest backwardness index values of about 45 percent points.) Whereas Dharmapuri can be rated as the least backward block as the block has the lowest backwardness value (37 percent points).Other blocks are in the range of values 40 to 44 percent. For the comparative study purpose, we have chosen these two blocks ( Pappireddipatti and Harur ) with highest backwardness values and two blocks with lowest values (Dharmapuri and Palacode ).

Section 4

Evaluation of Economic Backwardness and Literacy : Findings from the Field Survey

As mentioned in the methodology , a field survey was undertaken to analyse the role of different factors like literacy , education, income, employment, land holdings, assets, source of livelihoods, indebtedness, water and sanitation etc associated with socio-economic development /backwardness at the local level in the villages .It also tries to analyse the linkage between socio-economic factors and government programmes like literacy, education ,water and sanitation etc.For the purpose of the survey , eight HHs from each of eight villages/hamlets were selected totalling sixty four sample HHs. The households were chosen based on random sampling method in each village. In the following we discuss the results of analysis of field survey data and findings of the survey.

Distribution of Sample Households : Table 4.1 provides details about the distribution of sample households by different castes/community. It can be noted from the table that majority (45% %) of the households are from Most Backward Class (MBC) , about 30 % belongs to the SC and 14 % ST. MBCs are dominant in Dharmapuri and Palacode blocks and in Pappireddipatti ,SC& ST is the major community –with (53%) are from ST and 47 percent from SC . In Harur block the picture is quite diverse: About 35 Percent of the sample households belong to both SC and BC each and MBCs constitute about one fourth of the sample households in this block.

Table – 4.1 Distribution of sample households by Caste

BC MBC OC SC ST Grand Block Total No % No % No % No % No % No % 100.0 Dharmapuri 0 0 10 71.40 0.00 4 28.60 0 0.00 14 100.0 Palakode 0 0 15 83.30 1 5.60 2 11.10 0 0.00 18 100.0 Pappireddipatti 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 7 46.70 8 53.30 15 100.0 Harur 6 35.3 4 23.50 0.00 6 35.30 1 5.90 17 100.0 District Total 6 9.4 29 45.30 1 1.60 19 29.70 9 14.10 64

Family size and Sex Ratio

Table 4.2 provides details about sex ratio and family size across blocks and community. It is seen that over all the sex ratio is lower (908) than that of district (940). Across blocks, the sex ratio is highest in Pappireddipatti (1185) and lowest in Harur (739). It is to be noted that Pappiredipatti the SC and ST population is predominant , whereas in Harur both MBCs and BCs are dominant. As regards family size, of the district is 4.6 which is higher than many other districts. Among blocks , the family size is highest in Palacode (5.0) and lowest in Pappireddipatti (3.7). The average family size is generally higher among BC (4.5) and MBC (5) households than SC and STs ( 4.2).

Table 4. 2 Family size and Sex Ratio by Caste

Total No of Male Female population Block/Caste households Sex Family No % No % No Ratio size Dharmapuri 14 35 57.38 27 44.26 61 771 4.4 SC 4 9 56.25 9 56.25 16 1000 4.0 MBC 10 26 57.78 18 40.00 45 692 4.5 Palakode 18 45 50.00 46 51.11 90 1022 5.0 SC 2 6 60.00 5 50.00 10 833 5.0 MBC 15 37 48.68 39 51.32 76 1054 5.1 OC 1 2 50.00 2 50.00 4 1000 4.0 Pap pired dipatti 15 27 45.76 32 54.24 59 1185 3.9 SC 7 12 44.44 15 55.56 27 1250 3.9 ST 8 15 46.88 17 53.13 32 1133 4.0 Harur 17 46 57.50 34 42.50 80 739 4.7 SC 6 16 59.26 11 40.74 27 688 4.5 ST 1 3 50.00 3 50.00 6 1000 6.0 MBC 4 11 55.00 9 45.00 20 818 5.0 BC 6 16 59.26 11 40.74 27 688 4.5 District Total 64 153 52.40 139 47.60 292 908 4.6 SC 19 43 28.10 40 28.78 80 930 4.2 ST 9 18 11.76 20 14.39 38 1111 4.2 MBC 29 74 48.37 66 47.48 141 892 4.9 BC 6 16 10.46 11 7.91 27 688 4.5 OC 1 2 1.31 2 1.44 4 1000 4.0

Level of Education In Table 4.3 we have given survey details about the literacy and education across different blocks. It is noted that average level of literacy of all the blocks surveyed is 75percent which is higher than the district average (65%). It is further noted that illiteracy level is highest (32%) in Harur block and Pappiredipatti (28%).Dharmapuri had the highest literacy rate of about 85 %. Being nearer to District head quarters, Dharmapuri might have had the 22

advantages position of access to many literacy programmes. There do not seem to be strong relationship between caste and literacy rate . Table 4.3 Level of Education Across Blocks in the District Male Female Tota l Block/Level of education No % No % No % Dharmapuri 30 27 57 Illiterate 2 6.67 7 25.93 9 15.79 Primary 11 36.67 11 40.74 22 38.60 Middle Level 3 10.00 3 11.11 6 10.53 High School 4 13.33 4 14.81 8 14.04 Higher Secondary 3 10.00 0 0.00 3 5.26 ITI, Diploma 2 6.67 1 3.70 3 5.26 UG 1 3.33 1 3.70 2 3.51 PG 4 13.33 0 0.00 4 7.02 Palacode 31 42 73 Illiterate 5 16.13 13 30.95 18 24.66 Primary 2 6.45 6 14.29 8 10.96 Middle Level 2 6.45 5 11.90 7 9.59 High School 11 35.48 8 19.05 19 26.03 Higher Secondary 4 12.90 3 7.14 7 9.59 ITI, Diploma 3 9.68 2 4.76 5 6.85 UG 2 6.45 4 9.52 6 8.22 PG 2 6.45 1 2.38 3 4.11 Pappireddipatti 24 29 53 Illiterate 7 29.17 8 27.59 15 28.30 Primary 6 25.00 8 27.59 14 26.42 Middle Level 5 20.83 7 24.14 12 22.64 High School 2 8.33 3 10.34 5 9.43 Higher Secondary 1 4.17 0 0.00 1 1.89 ITI, Diploma 0 0.00 1 3.45 1 1.89 UG 3 12.50 1 3.45 4 7.55 PG 0 0.00 1 3.45 1 1.89 Harur 38 25 63

Illiterate 14 36.84 6 24.00 20 31.75 Primary 5 13.16 7 28.00 12 19.05 Middle Level 5 13.16 4 16.00 9 14.29 High School 5 13.16 2 8.00 7 11.11 Higher Secondary 5 13.16 1 4.00 6 9.52 ITI, Diploma 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 UG 1 2.63 1 4.00 2 3.17 PG 3 7.89 4 16.00 7 11.11 District Total 123 123 246 Illiterate 28 22.76 34 27.64 62 25.20 Primary 24 19.51 32 26.02 56 22.76 Middle Level 15 12.20 19 15.45 34 13.82 High School 22 17.89 17 13.82 39 15.85 Higher Secondary 13 10.57 4 3.25 17 6.91 ITI, Diploma 5 4.07 4 3.25 9 3.66 UG 7 5.69 7 5.69 14 5.69 PG 9 7.32 6 4.88 15 6.10 23

As regards education level about 23 % of the population had higher education ie., above high school level in the district and 37 per cent had upto middle school and 16 % high school level education. Across blocks, in Harur 24 percent had higher education of above high school level and 33 percent had up to upper primary level. It should also be noted that the Harur block which had highest illiteracy rate also has the significant percentage of people with higher education which is paradoxical. Similarly, Palacode both the percentage of illiterate and higher education population are higher in the block. In Dharmapuri both literacy and higher education are equally higher than other blocks this can be rated as educationally advanced block. In Pappireddipatti both literacy and higher education are lowest , hence it can be rated as educationally backward block among the selected blocks.

Another important finding is that about 12 % of the population are graduates and post graduate in the district which is quite significant. In Harur which is backward in many other indicators the percentage of higher educated graduates population is about 15 % . The same is about 10 % in Pappiredipatti and 12 % in Palacode and 11 % in Dharmapuri. Thus we can observe presence of both illiterates and higher education graduates significantly in same blocks.

Farm size Table 4.4 provides details of the households by the size of land holding. It could be noted that vast majority of the households (55 %) are landless. The percentage of landless household is quite significant in Dharmapuri and Palacode blocks. Among farm households about 30 % belong to small and marginal farmers, only 3 % constituted large farm households. Marginal farm households are dominant in Pappireddypatti (47%) and in Harur about one four of the households belong to Medium farm size.

Table 4.4 Distribution of households by Size of Land Holding

In Number Block Landless Marginal small Medium Large Grand Total Dharmapuri 10 3 1 14 Harur 9 2 1 4 1 17 Palakoddu 11 3 1 3 18 Papireddipatti 5 7 2 1 15 Grand Total 35 12 7 8 2 64 In Percentage Dharmapuri 71.43 0.00 21.43 7.14 0.00 100 Harur 52.94 11.76 5.88 23.53 5.88 100 Palakoddu 61.11 16.67 5.56 16.67 0.00 100 Papireddipatti 33.33 46.67 13.33 0.00 6.67 100 Block 54.69 18.75 10.94 12.50 3.13 100 24

Note: Marginal Farmer : upto 2.5 Ha of dry land or 1.25 Ha of wet land Small Farmer : 2.5- 5.00 Ha of dry land or 1.25 -2.5 Ha of wet land Medium Farmer : 5.00- 10.00 Ha of dry land or 2.5-5.00 Ha of wet land Large Farmer : Above 10.00 Ha of dry land or above 5.00 Ha of wet land

Migration

Migration of members of HHs in search employment is an important issue in the district. About 40 % of the households are reported as migrant households. Migration is quite significant in Palacode, Dharmapuri and Pappireddypatty blocks. About 35 to 55 % are migrant household in these blocks. (Table 4.5) .Of the total migrant households, most of them (48 percent) migrated to outside district and state.(Table 4.6)

Table 4.5 Distribution of households based on migration

Total number of Migrant households Name of the Block sample households No % Dharmapuri 14 6 42.9 Harur 17 4 23.5 Palakoddu 18 10 55.6 Papireddipatti 15 5 33.3 Grand Total 64 25 39.1

Table 4.6 Places of Migration of HHs

Migrant hhs(no) Grand Name of Block Near by Near by Other Other State Total Total village Town district Dharmapuri 5 1 6 14 Harur 1 2 1 4 17 Palakodu 3 1 2 4 10 18 Papiredipatti 3 1 1 5 15 Grand Total 11 2 6 6 25 64 % Dharmapuri 83.3 0 16.7 0 100 100 Harur 0 25 50 25 100 100 Palakoddu 30 10 20 40 100 100 Papiredipatti 60 0 20 20 100 100 Grand Total 44 8 24 24 100 100

Note: Other districts (Tiruppur, Coimbatore, Salem etc.),; Other State (Karnataka, Kerala)

Occupation and Sources of Income of household members:

Table 4.7 provides details about occupations and sources of income. It can be noted that only 32 % per cent of household population is directly involved in agriculture of which about 10 % as agriculture labourers. About two third in the population is involved in various non farm activities including business and self employment. Most of them are working as construction labourers in nearby towns, with railway contractor, stone cutting, and causal labourer in Bangalore. Agriculture is the important occupation in Dharmapuri block where 40 % of the population involved . In other blocks ,the percentages of population engaged in agriculture are 16 % in Harur, 15 % in Palacode, 8% in Pappireddipatti. As for agriculture labour ,the percentage is quite significant in Pappireddipatti (31 %).In other blocks,the relative figure is 4 % in Dharmapuri, 9 % in Palacode.

It is to be noted that a significant per cent of population is employed in Government and private sectors as school teachers, supervisors in mills etc. garment factories , shops in the towns etc- about 15 % in Dharmapuri, 11 % in Harur, 39 % in Palacode and 22 % in Pappireddipatti. Similarly a quite significant percentage of population is employed in nonfarm sector as casual labourers – 29 % in Dharmapuri, 38% in Harur, 37% in Palacode and 22 % in Pappireddypatty. Thus it can be seen that a vast majority of population is involved in non -farm sector employment , especially as migrant labourer in construction and railway contract in nearby areas.

Table 4 .7 Occupational Distribution of Households members

Total number of Total number of person Block/Occupation % households involved in different occupation Dharmapuri 14 73 100 Agriculture 5 29 39.73 Agril labour 1 3 4.11 Non farm employment 4 21 28.77 Govt or Pvt regular job 2 11 15.07 Business/Self employment 2 9 12.33 Harur 17 37 100 Agriculture 2 6 16.22 Non farm employment 4 14 37.84 Govt or Pvt regular job 2 4 10.81 Others 4 13 35.14 Palakode 18 67 100 Agriculture 2 10 14.93 Agril labour 1 6 8.96 Non farm employment 5 25 37.31 Govt or Pvt regular job 5 26 38.81 Papireddipatti 15 36 100 Agriculture 1 3 8.33 Agril labour 4 11 30.56 Non farm employment 3 8 22.22 Govt or Pvt regular job 2 8 22.22 Business/Self employment 1 3 8.33 Others 1 3 8.33 District Total 64 213 100 Agriculture 10 48 22.54 Agril labour 6 20 9.39 Non farm employment 16 68 31.92 Govt or Pvt regular job 11 49 23.00 Business/Self employment 3 12 5.63 Others 5 16 7.51

Source of income from different occupations : Considering the district as a whole about 37 % of income of respondents is accounted for by agriculture and as large as 44 per cent from non agricultural occupation. Income from Livestock like sheep rearing , dairying is yet another important source of income for the household. As the district is affected often by drought livestock is considered as an insurance against drought for compensating loss of income from agriculture. (Table 4.8)

Table 4.8 Distribution of Households by average annual income

Income from Agriculture Livestock other than Total income Block/Caste Sl.No agriculture No % No % No % No % Dharmapuri 14 6786 51.63 107 0.82 6236 47.44 13143 100 MBC 10 9501 61.33 150 0.97 5830 37.63 15491 100 SC 4 0 0.00 0 0.00 7250 99.94 7254 100 Harur 17 12941 53.45 4603 19.01 6649 27.46 24210 100 BC 6 9167 32.50 13042 46.23 5994 21.25 28208 100 MBC 4 41250 87.27 0 0.00 6013 12.72 47267 100 SC 6 0 0.00 0 0.00 7333 99.92 7339 100 ST 1 0 0.00 0 0.00 9013 99.99 9014 100 Palacode 18 6767 20.26 3056 9.15 23564 70.54 33404 100 MBC 15 8120 21.94 3667 9.91 25210 68.11 37012 100 OC 1 0 0.00 0 0.00 10000 99.99 10001 100 SC 2 0 0.00 0 0.00 18001 99.99 18003 100 Papireddipatti 15 10867 36.71 12420 41.96 6300 21.28 29602 100 SC 7 15000 36.97 19143 47.17 6429 15.84 40578 100 ST 8 7250 36.28 6538 32.72 6188 30.96 19983 100 Grand Total 64 9372 36.49 5016 19.53 11234 43.74 25687 100

Agriculture constitutes an importance source of income in Harur (54%), and Dharmapuri (52%).blocks. In other blocks agriculture contributes to about 37 % of income in Pappireddipatti and 20 % in Palacode. Thus both in Palacode and Pappireddipatti, the non - farm income forms an important source of livelihood. In Pappireddipatti income from livestock constitutes to about 42 % which is the highest among all the blocks.The proportion of livestock income to total income is about 20 % in . Thus both in Palacode and Pappireddipatti, the non -farm income forms an important source of livelihood. Harur block, 9% in Palacode.. Nonfarm income is an important source of livelihood for SC population as most of them are landless. In Dharmapuri, Harur and Palacode blocks almost all the income is derived from non- farm employment by SC households . Only in Papireddypatty the significant source of income ie., 37 % is from agriculture by them. As for other castes, the non -farm income constitutes 27 % for MBCs and 21 % for BCs. However, its relative position varies across blocks. Thus over all, most of the BC and MBC households depend mainly on agriculture and livestock for their livelihoods.Whereas, SC and STs depend mainly on non-farm employment for their livelihood.

Assets value

In our study, the value of asset of a household is taken as a strong indicator of economic status of the household. For the analysis, the total assets value are classified into four types: agricultural land , livestock , agricultural implements and others such as housing and consumer durables such as two wheelers, cell phone, fridge washing machine, grinder, television etc. The aggregated assets values are distributed by caste and community across blocks for the analysis. Table 4. 9 provides details about these aspects.

It can be noted from the Table that overall asset value per household is highest ( Rs. 7.54 lakhs) by MBCs and lowest by STs (Rs. 2.70 lakhs)- about half of the asset value of MBCs. The average assets value by SC is Rs.3.02 lakhs per household which is about 40 % of MBC households asset value. Overall housing and other assets have contributed to about 80 % of the total asset value. Agriculture land, livestock and agriculture implements constitute about 20 % of total asset value only . Almost same pattern is seen across the community, though the individual values varies across the community as already noted. Almost the same pattern is seen across the blocks also.

Table 4. 9 Distribution of Assets Values of the household by Community

Total value in Rs Per household value Rs.

Total Agricultur Agricultura Blocks/Caste house Housing Agricultur Housing Agricultural Livestock al Livestock l holds and Other Total al land and Other Total land value value impleme value implement assets value assets nts s

6685100 115668 1125 31068 445314 593175 Dharmapuri 14 1619350 15750 434950 6234400

1034250 33375 188 0 258375 291938 SC 4 133500 750 0 1033500

5650850 148585 1500 43495 520090 713670 MBC 10 1485850 15000 434950 5200900

9801301 60256 10928 13542 520047 604772 Palakode 18 1084600 196700 243750 9360851

160350 5175 0 675 79500 85350 SC 2 10350 0 1350 159000

9541451 68317 13113 15113 607870 704413 MBC 15 1024750 196700 226700 9118051

99500 49500 0 15700 83800 149000 OC 1 49500 0 15700 83800

3935900 45963 19430 29130 213833 308357 Papireddipatti 15 689450 291450 436950 3207500

2265800 67114 29429 43614 250643 390800 SC 7 469800 206000 305300 1754500

1670100 27456 10681 16456 181625 236219 ST 8 219650 85450 131650 1453000

8078250 80482 15297 6765 453129 555674 Harur 17 1368200 260050 115000 7703200

1544500 22417 1667 0 255750 279833 SC 6 134500 10000 0 1534500

520000 20000 0 0 520000 540000 ST 1 20000 0 0 520000

2784250 47367 41675 9167 413200 511408 BC 6 284200 250050 55000 2479200

3229500 232375 0 15000 792375 1039750 MBC 4 929500 0 60000 3169500

28500551 74400 11937 19229 414155 519721 Grand Total 64 4761600 763950 1230650 26505951

74400 11937 19229 414155 519721 No Grand Total 14.3 2.3 3.7 79.7 100 %

39376 11408 16139 235868 302792 19 748150 216750 306650 4481500 5004900

13.0 3.8 5.3 77.9 100 SC %

26628 9494 14628 219222 269972 9 239650 85450 131650 1973000 2190100

9.9 3.5 5.4 81.2 100 ST %

118624 7300 24884 603050 753859 29 3440100 211700 721650 17488451 18421801

15.7 1.0 3.3 80.0 100 MBC %

47367 41675 9167 413200 511408 6 284200 250050 55000 2479200 2784250

9.3 8.1 1.8 80.8 100 BC %

49500 0 15700 83800 149000 1 49500 0 15700 83800 99500

33.2 0.0 10.5 56.2 100 OC %

Indebtedness

In Table 4.10 we have given details about the outstanding loans and indebtedness by the households across blocks and community. About 44 (70 %) household have borrowed an average amount of about Rs.1.21lakhs per household. The indebtedness per household is highest for BCs (Rs.2.63 lakhs) and for Rs.1.72 lakhs in MBCs. Whereas the loan outstanding for SC and ST households are Rs.65,000 and Rs. 99,450 respectively. Across blocks Harur block has reported highest borrowing of Rs. 1.63 lakhs per household and Palacode Rs. 1.35 lakhs , Pappireddipatti Rs 0.98 lakhs and Dharmapuri Rs.0.95 lakhs, thus there are wide variations across blocks.

It is seen that most of the loans borrowed are from private agencies, like finance companies, friends, relatives and money lenders etc. About 73 per cent of the borrower households have taken loans from private agencies which account for 56 % of the total loan outstanding. Thus still non institutional agencies continue to hold the credit market and only 27 % of the

borrowers have had access to institutional agencies like banks and co-operatives which account for 44 per cent.

Table4. 10 Indebtedness of the households by Community

Total number Average Per Blocks/ Caste of households Total Amount household indebted Borrowed loan Borrowed Dharmapuri 8 760000 95000 SC 2 60000 30000 MBC 6 700000 116667 Palakode 14 1890000 135000 SC 2 100000 50000 MBC 11 1770000 160909 OC 1 20000 20000 Pappireddipatti 14 1375000 98214 SC 6 580000 96667 ST 8 795000 99375 Harur 8 1300000 162500 SC 2 40000 20000 ST 1 100000 100000 BC 2 525000 262500 MBC 3 635000 211667 Grand Total 44 5325000 121023 SC 12 780000 65000 ST 9 895000 99444 MBC 14 2405000 171786 BC 2 525000 262500 OC 1 20000 20000

About 40 per cent of the households borrowed loan for house renovation, 21% is for education, around 10% ‘agriculture and 24 % for housing. It can be noted that a significant percent (11%) of borrowers are for education purposes (4.11).

Table 4.11 Purpose of loan borrowed

Grand Purpose of loan Dharmapuri Harur Palakoddu Papireddipatti Percentage Total borrowed Small Business 1 1 2 4.65 Crop 1 2 1 4 9.30 Education 4 3 2 9 20.93 House Renovation 3 7 7 17 39.53 Marriage 1 1 1 3 6.98 Medical purpose 1 1 2 4 9.30 Dig bore well 1 1 2.33 Others 1 2 3 6.98 Grand Total 6 6 15 16 43 100.00

Ration cards and Food Security:

Ration card provides entitlement to a household for food security as universal PDS system is followed in Tamilnadu. Hence it is an important development indicator to be considered. However it is noted that overall about 28 % of the households do not have ration cards which denies them the access to PDS and food security. (Table 4.12) .The issue is quite important in the case of both SC and MBC households as about 32 % of them do not have ration cards. The percentage of households who do not have access to ration cards is considerably large (45%) in Palacode block and 33 % in Pappireddipatti. In other two blocks ( Dharmapuri and Harur ) the percentage of households without ration cards is in the range of 15 to 34 %.

Thus absence of ration card is an important issue to be addressed in the district. It is reported that about 78 % of the ration cards are BPL card holders, 9 % AAY card holders and remaining (13 percent) are from APL card holders (Table 4.12).

Table 4. 12 Distribution of households having ration cards Yes No Grand Total Block/Community NO % NO % NO Dharmapuri 12 85.7 2 14.3 14 SC 4 100.0 0.0 4 MBC 8 80.0 2 20.0 10 Harur 14 82.4 3 17.6 17 SC 4 66.7 2 33.3 6 ST 1 100.0 0.0 1 MBC 4 100.0 0.0 4 BC 5 83.3 1 16.7 6 Palakode 10 55.6 8 44.4 18 SC 2 100.0 0.0 2 MBC 8 53.3 7 46.7 15 OC 0.0 1 100.0 1 Pappireddipatti 10 66.7 5 33.3 15 SC 3 42.9 4 57.1 7 ST 7 87.5 1 12.5 8 District Total 46 71.9 18 28.1 64 SC 13 68.4 6 31.6 19 ST 8 88.9 1 11.1 9 MBC 20 69.0 9 31.0 29 BC 5 83.3 1 16.7 6 OC 0 0.0 1 100.0 1

Water Supply and Sanitation

Drinking Water supply : It can be noted from the Table 4.13 that public tap is the main source of water supply for about 75 % of households and only 19 % have individual household connection. Others (6%) depend on hand pumps and open well. Thus over an whelming majority of the households (97%) are having safe water supply and there are not much differences across the communities and blocks in terms of access to drinking water supply.

Table 4.13 Distribution of households by different sources of drinking water

Hand House Public Drinking Blocks/Caste Total Pump Connection tap Open/Bore Dharmapuri 1 13 14 SC 4 4 MBC 1 8 9 Palakoddu 2 16 18 SC 2 2 MBC 2 13 15 OC 1 1 Papired dipatti 1 1 11 2 15 SC 1 6 7 ST 1 5 2 8 Harur 9 8 17 SC 2 5 7 ST 1 1 MBC 4 4 BC 2 3 5 Grand Total 2 12 48 2 64 % 3.1 18.8 75.0 3.1 100 SC 0 2 17 0 19 % 0.0 10.5 89.5 0.0 100 MBC 1 6 21 1 29 % 3.4 20.7 72.4 3.4 100 BC 0 3 3 0 6 % 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 100 OC 0 0 1 0 1 % 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100

Sanitation

As large as 60 percent of the households still depends on open defecation as only about 40 % of the households have toilet. Most of the MBC households (64 %) have individual toilets.and most of them are from Dharmapuri and Palacode, In Harur and Pappireddipatti the sanitation is very poor as majority of them used open defecation (Table 4.14)

Table 4.14 Availability of sanitation facilities by Community

Grand Block/Caste Yes No Total Number % Number % Number Dharmapuri 6 42.86 8 57.14 14 SC 2 50.00 2 50.00 4 MBC 4 40.00 6 60.00 10 Harur 6 35.29 11 64.71 17 SC 0.00 6 100.00 6 ST 1 100.00 0.00 1 MBC 4 100.00 0.00 4 BC 1 16.67 5 83.33 6 Palakode 10 55.56 8 44.44 18 SC 1 50.00 1 50.00 2 MBC 8 53.33 7 46.67 15 OC 1 100.00 0.00 1 Pappireddipatti 3 20.00 12 80.00 15 SC 1 14.29 6 85.71 7 ST 2 25.00 6 75.00 8 District Total 25 39.06 39 60.94 64 SC 4 16.0 15 38.5 19 ST 3 12.0 6 15.4 9 MBC 16 64.0 13 33.3 29 BC 1 4.0 5 12.8 6 OC 1 4.0 0 0.0 1

People’s attitude about the linkage between education and development

It is important to note that only about 42 percent of the respondents felt that there is link between education and occupation and most of them are from MBC community. Others (about 35 % ) expressed that there is no link between education and occupation. Almost similar pattern is observed across blocks except Pappireddipatti where about 60 percent could not express any opinion about the linkage (Table 4.15)

Table 4. 15 Linkage between education and occupation -perception of respondents

Not Block/Caste Yes No DK Applicable Grand No % No % No % No % Total Dharmapuri 7 50.00 4 28.57 1 7.14 2 14.29 14 SC 1 25.00 1 25.00 1 25.00 1 25.00 4 MBC 6 60.00 3 30.00 0.00 1 10.00 10 Harur 5 29.41 11 64.71 1 5.88 0.00 17 SC 3 50.00 3 50.00 0.00 0.00 6 ST 0.00 1 100.00 0.00 0.00 1 MBC 0.00 4 100.00 0.00 0.00 4 BC 2 33.33 3 50.00 1 16.67 0.00 6 Palakode 14 77.78 3 16.67 0.00 1 5.56 18 SC 1 50.00 1 50.00 0.00 0.00 2 MBC 12 80.00 2 13.33 0.00 1 6.67 15 OC 1 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Pappireddipatti 1 6.67 4 26.67 9 60.00 1 6.67 15 SC 1 14.29 2 28.57 4 57.14 0.00 7 ST 0.00 2 25.00 5 62.50 1 12.50 8 District Total 27 42.19 22 34.38 11 17.19 4 4.69 64 SC 6 22.2 7 31.8 5 45.5 1 25.0 19 ST 0 0.0 3 13.6 5 45.5 1 25.0 9 MBC 18 66.7 9 40.9 0 0.0 2 50.0 29 BC 2 7.4 3 13.6 1 9.1 0 0.0 6 OC 1 3.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1

Though a significant percentage of respondents felt there is no link between education and occupation most of them (78 percent) opined that the education will help improve the overall socio-economic development. The same opinion was expressed across all the blocks by majority of respondents (Table 4.16).

Table 4.16 Linkage between education and the overall socio-economic development

Yes No DK NA Block/Caste Grand Number % Number % Number % Number % Total Dharmapuri 12 85.71 0.00 1 7.14 1 7.14 14 SC 3 75.00 0.00 1 25.00 0.00 4 MBC 9 90.00 0.00 0.00 1 10.00 10 Harur 9 52.94 7 41.18 1 5.88 0.00 17 SC 5 83.33 1 16.67 0.00 0.00 6 ST 0.00 1 100.00 0.00 0.00 1 MBC 0.00 4 100.00 0.00 0.00 4 BC 4 66.67 1 16.67 1 16.67 0.00 6 Palakode 18 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18 SC 2 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 MBC 15 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 OC 1 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Pappireddipatti 11 73.33 4 26.67 0.00 0.00 15 SC 5 71.43 2 28.57 0.00 0.00 7 ST 6 75.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8 District Total 50 78.13 11 17.19 2 3.13 1 1.56 64 SC 15 30 3 27.3 1 50 0 0 19 78.9 157.9 15.8 143.7 5.3 263.2 0.0 0.0 100.0 ST 6 12 1 9.1 0 0 0 0 9 66.7 133.3 11.1 101.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 MBC 24 48 4 36.4 0 0 1 100 29 82.8 165.5 13.8 125.5 0.0 0.0 3.4 344.8 100.0 BC 4 8 1 9.1 1 50 0 0 6 66.7 133.3 16.7 151.7 16.7 833.3 0.0 0.0 100.0 OC 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 15 30 3 27.3 1 50 0 0 19

Extent of Interest of Parents for sending their School Children for Higher Studies

About 77 percent of the households are having children studying in schools at present (Table 4.17) and all of them expressed interest to send their children for higher studies (Table 4.18). The similar pattern is observed in all the blocks

Table 4.17 Households having School children at present

Yes No DK Grand Block/Caste Number % Number % Number % Total Dharmapuri 11 78.57 3 21.43 0 14 SC 2 50.0 2 50.0 0.0 4 MBC 9 90.0 1 10.0 0.0 10 Harur 9 52.9 8 47.1 0.0 17 SC 5 83.3 1 16.7 0.0 6 ST 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 1 MBC 1 25.0 3 75.0 0.0 4 BC 2 33.3 4 66.7 0.0 6 Palakode 17 94.4 1 5.6 0.0 18 SC 1 50.0 1 50.0 0.0 2 MBC 15 100.0 0.0 0.0 15 OC 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 1 Pappireedipatti 12 80.0 2 13.3 1 6.7 15 SC 4 57.1 2 28.6 1 14.3 7 ST 8 100.0 0.0 0.0 8 District Total 49 76.6 14 21.9 1 1.6 64 SC 12 24.5 6 42.9 1 100.0 19 ST 9 18.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 9 MBC 25 51.0 4 28.6 0 0.0 29 BC 2 4.1 4 28.6 0 0.0 6 OC 1 2.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1

Table 4. 18 Interest of Respondents for sending School Children for Higher Studies

No Yes Blocks Grand Number % Number % Total Darmapuri 3 21.4 11 78.6 14 SC 2 50.0 2 50.0 4 MBC 1 10.0 9 90.0 10 Harur 7 41.2 10 58.8 17 SC 1 16.7 5 83.3 6 ST 0.0 1 100.0 1 MBC 3 75.0 1 25.0 4 BC 3 50.0 3 50.0 6 Palakoddu 0.0 18 100.0 18 SC 0.0 2 100.0 2 MBC 0.0 15 100.0 15 OC 0.0 1 100.0 1 Papireedipatti 5 33.3 10 66.7 15 SC 4 57.1 3 42.9 7 ST 1 12.5 7 87.5 8 District Total 15 23.4 49 76.6 64 SC 7 46.7 12 24.5 19 ST 1 6.7 8 16.3 9 MBC 4 26.7 25 51.0 29 BC 3 20.0 3 6.1 6 OC 0 0.0 1 2.0 1

Interrelationship between level of Education and Socio Economic conditions of the of Households

One of the objectives of the survey is to find out the relationship between education and socio economic conditions of the household. For this purpose , we have regressed the level of education (dependent variable) on socio economic factors such as caste, family size, asset ownership, household income, official classification of family into APL, BPL and AAY, and indebtedness. The excise shows that family size and official classification of HHs into BPL and AAY are significantly related to education level of the household. It is to be further noted that there is a significant positive relationship between education and sanitation.(Table 4.19).

Table 4. 19 Inter-relation between level of Education and Socio economic conditions of the of household

Independent Variables T Value Sig. Per capita asset value 0.879 0.384 Family size 3.02 0.004 Per-capita Household Income -0.103 0.919 Indebtedness -0.428 0.671 Caste / Community -0.014 0.989 Official Classification of the Family (BPL, APL, AAY) 1.264 0.212

Access to safe Drinking water -0.61 0.545

Access to Sanitation 2.136 0.038 Dependent Variable Level of Education R value 0.530 R Square 0.281

Section 5 : Summary, Conclusions and Policy Recommendations

Dharmapuri is ranked as one of the most backward districts in the state in many development aspects including literacy .The study is meant to evaluate the factors associated with the socio economic backwardness in the district with focus on literacy. The study is undertaken at the block / village level to capture variations in the backwardness and factors associated with it which are important for local level planning and development interventions Initially we have undertaken an analysis of backwardness at the block level based on secondary data by using a number of socio-economic indicators including literacy level. These indicators are Sex Ratio, Workforce in agriculture, Poverty Index (BPL), Irrigation, Literacy ,School Drop outs /OSC, IMR, Water supply and Sanitation, etc. The analysis has helped to identify most backward blocks based on Composite Backwardness Index by taking all the indicators together. Based on the ranking of composite index values , Pappireddipatti and Harur are identified as most backward blocks whereas Dharmapuri and Palacode are ranked as relatively less backward blocks. Overall these two blocks Pappireddipatti and Harur requires more attention in development planning, funding, and monitoring of programmes .Apart from these blocks , there are other blocks which are backward in many aspects and hence requires attention related to those development aspects .In the following we summarise the findings of the analysis and recommendations for interventions .

Sex Ratio: The district is ranked as the last in Sex Ratio in the state .Among the blocks in the district Pennagaram is rated as the lowest in both general sex ratio and child sex ratio. Other blocks which are significantly less than district average are Nallampalli and Palacode .Hence these three blocks can be taken up on priority basis under special schemes in promoting Child Sex Ratios like prevention of female infanticide/foeticide ,child marriage etc. .To improve the sex ratio ,the existing schemes like baby cradle scheme, ICDS etc needs strengthening .Similarly intensive campaigns are required to educate people against child marriage in some blocks .Child marriages are reported significantly in Pennagaram (38) Nallampalli (15) Pappireddipatti (5)blocks. 20

Infant mortality Rate (IMR ) : IMR is highest in Pennagaram block and also significant in other blocks like Palacode and Kariamanagalam .These blocks needs strengthening of neo- natal care programmes for reducing IMR

Literacy and School Education : Penngaram,Nallampali ,Palacode and Morappur are ranked as most backward blocks in literacy and school education on the basis of many

20 UNICEF-NCLP Survey in Dharmapuri,2011 41

indicators.Special schools/programmes meant for Drop outs /OSC under SSA , Government of India (NCLP) etc should be focussed in these blocks. The success stories under these programmes can be used as reference for this purpose 21 .The SSA has identified already 2024 Drop Outs children as targets during 2013-14 of which 1675 have been enrolled. Most of the dropouts are from Pennagaram (380),Nallampalli (293) Palacode(293) and Kariamanagalam (227) .Child labour, Migration of families are important problems in addressing the OSC in the district.There are a number of child laboueres identified under NCLP project survey in 2011 .These are Morappur(96),Pappireddipatti(60),Pennagaram(93) ,Nallampalii (69) .The same survey has identified number of migrant families Morappur (1440) ,Pappireddipatti (877),Nallampalli (1400),Penngaram (1798) which increase Drop outs/OSC ratio.

Lack of infrastructure in the schools : Infrastructure of the school is another important aspect for improving enrolment and quality of education .It is reported that many children especially girls drop out due to lack of proper class rooms ,drinking water and sanitation in the school. Also many schools lack play grounds and compounds. Lack of compounds attract anti-social elements to misuse the school facilities. According to SSA-Dharmapuri, Out of total of 1296 schools in the district (both primary and middle schools) ,187 schools do not have toilets in 2012-13. 443 schools requires repair of toilets and 106 schools require repair of buildings and class rooms . Similarly 138 schools require 231 additional class rooms .11 schools have reported absence of drinking water and 21 lack of adequate water supply .40 schools reported lack of kitchen building for MDMS in the district

Agriculture and livelihoods : The district is predominantly based on agrarian economy . About 60 percent of the work force depends upon agriculture .However a quite significant percent (32percent ) of them are landless agriculture labourers. They form about 42 percent of the work force in Pappireddipatti and Harur blocks .In other four blocks (Morappur , Kariamangalam,Pennagaram,Palacode ) also they are present significantly with about 30-33 percent of the work force. Thus it is important to focus on agriculture development in these areas especially for generating wage employment through programmes like MGNREGA. As majority area is dry and rainfed , soil and water conservation through watershed development assumes added importance .

Water Supply and Sanitation : It is seen that in most of the blocks are having safe drinking water except Pappireddipatti block where it is reported that about 74 percent of the population does not have access to it . The situation is worse when we consider sanitation –as in almost all the blocks a vast majority of households do not have toilets and hence resort to open defecation.

Field Survey Observations Socio-economic conditions : Majority of the sample households are from Most Backward Community (MBC) , about 30 percent belongs to the SC and 14 percent to ST community. Sex ratio is highest in sample villages under Pappireddipatti block and lowest in Harur block.

21 The details of Success stories are presented in Appendix-IV 42

Sex Ratio is generally higher among SC and STs than others .Similarly family size is smaller in SC&STs than other communities. Among blocks ,Dharmapuri has the highest literacy rate (85 %) probably due to its proximity to district head quarters .There are no significant differences in level of education among different communities. The excise shows that family size and the official classification of economic backwardness of HHs ( as BPL,APL,AAY) are positively related to education level of the household. It is to be further noted that there is a significant relationship between education and sanitation. Most of the respondents expressed opinion that education is important for overall socio-economic development and they wanted to send their children for higher studies.

Employment and Livelihoods : Agriculture as a source of livelihood is not significant as only 32 percent is directly involved in agriculture. Sheep rearing , dairying are important sources of income for the household. As the district is affected by drought livestock is considered as an insurance against drought for compensating loss of income from agriculture. About two third of the population depends upon various non farm activities including business and self employment. Agriculture labour as a source of livelihood is quite insignificant . Most of them are working as migrant labourers in construction in nearby towns, with railway contractors, stone quarries and causal labourers in Bangalore city . Assets and Indebtedness Overall housing and other assets have contributed to about 80 % of the total asset value of HHs. Agriculture land, livestock and agriculture implements constitute about 20 % of total asset value. It is generally noted that the overall asset value per household is lowest among SC & ST compared to other communities . About 70 percent of the households are indebted .The percentage of indebted households is highest in SC and STs than others. However the amount of indebtedness is higher among MBCs and BCs than other communities like SC and STs. Food Security: Ration card is an important development indicator as it provides entitlement to a household for food security .However overall about 28 % of the households do not have ration cards which deny them the access to PDS and food security. The issue is equally important in both SCs and MBC households as about 32 % in both the categories of the households do not have ration cards. Thus absence of ration card is an important issue to be addressed in the district.

Water supply and Sanitation: An over whelming majority of the household (97%) are having safe water supply and there are no differences across the communities and blocks terms of access to drinking water supply. Public tap is an important source of water supply for about 75 % of households .About one fifth of sample respondents have individual household connection. Others depend on hand pumps and open wells. About 11 percent of households reported scarcity of water supply during summer .The Hogenagal water supply system introduced in the district recently has been reported to have improved the drinking water supply to a great extent.

Only 40 percent of the households have individual toilet and as large as 60 percent of the households still depends on open defecation . Most of MBC households ( 64) percent have toilets and most of the toilets are in Dharmapuri and Palacode blocks. In Harur and Pappireddipatti the sanitation is seen to be poor as majority of them use open defecation . Though some sanitary complex schemes have been implemented in some blocks by government these were not successful mainly due to lack of regular water supply . 43

Conclusions and Recommendations

The study shows that two blocks (Pappireddipatti and Harur) are most backward in the district based on a Composite Index worked out taking into account fourteen indicators. Hence these two blocks which are identified as most backward based on a number of socio- economic aspects need specialised development attention in the district. This can be taken up under the State Balanced Growth Fund (SBGF ) programme of the State Planning Commission. Apart from these two blocks , other blocks also require special attention in those aspects which are identified as backward or less developed

Literacy and school education are other important indicators which need more attention. Special schemes meant for out of school children (OSC) should be taken up in Pennagram , Nallampalli, Palacode and Morappur blocks which are identified as most backward in literacy and school education. These blocks are also identified as areas of child labour and migration . Hence special schemes to address both education and child labour along with employment opportunities for addressing migration issue can be considered under SBGF programme.

Declining agrarian economy is a major issue in the district which should be taken up with utmost priority. Increasing the percentage of irrigated area through new irrigation schemes, undertaking innovative watershed projects for improvement of rainfed areas, soil and water conservation, diversification of agriculture etc are recommend to rejuvenate the agriculture in the district. Climate change related measures are also to be considered on pilot basis in areas like Harur and Pennagaram blocks, as most part of these blocks are un-irrigated and hence prone to drought - the intensity and frequency of which is likely to increase due to climate change.

About 28 per cent of the households do not have ration cards which denies them the access to PDS and food security under the new Act. This issue should be taken up on priority basis to issue ration cards to all the eligible households.

As non- institutional agencies (such as money lenders , finance companies) constitute the main source of borrowing for a majority of households (73 %) strengthening of institutional credit agencies is extremely important. Existing credit programmes like District LEAD Bank Scheme , Regional Rural Banks, Cooperatives, etc. should be further revitalised especially to help agriculture sector. In this context ,the recommendations of Vaidyanathan Committee on Rural Credit are important for implementation. New innovative credit schemes through Self Help Groups can be thought of to help small business people to increase non-farm employment.

Though majority of households are reported to have safe drinking water , the problem is not fully addressed as there are seasonal variations in the available water supply and also quality issues like salinity in some pockets. These issues can be addressed by strengthening the existing schemes like Hogenakkal Water Supply Scheme, etc.

Sanitation is another important problem in the district (like other districts) as majority of the population do not have individual toilets. In the two blocks (Harur and Pappireddipatti ) identified as most backward blocks in the district, sanitation is quite poor as vast majority of them still use open defecation. Existing schemes like Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC) etc should be appropriately used for this purpose.

Convergence of various development programmes under SBGF can be planned to address the backwardness problem of the district effectively. For this purpose, Block Level Plans can be prepared with active participation of all stakeholders by prioritising development issues in each block as identified in the study .The SBGF programme provides good opportunities for preparation of perspective plans and its implementation at the local level.

References

Backward Regions Grant Fund, Programme Guidelines, Ministry of Panchayati Raj, Government of India (2007)

Dharmapuri District Human Development Report, Department of Economics, University of Madras, 2011, Report submitted to State Planning commission, Government of Tamil Nadu.

Evaluation Study on Rashtriya Sam Vikas Yojna (RSVY), Programme Evaluation Organisation, Planning Commission, Government of India 2010

Government of Tamil Nadu (2003), Tamil Nadu Human Development Report, State Planning Commission, Chennai.

Government of Tamil Nadu (2007), Eleventh Five Year Plan: 2007-2012, State Planning Commission, Chennai.

Government of Tamil Nadu (2012), Twelfth Five Year Plan: 2007-2012, State Planning Commission, Chennai.

Government of India (2011), Dharmapuri District Population Census, Directorate of Census Operations, Tamil Nadu

Government of Tamil Nadu (2003), Tamil Nadu Human Development Report, State Planning Commission, Chennai.

Indian Express,(IE), Child Sex Ratio Alarming in Tamilnadu, 6th February 2013.

National Committee on the Development of Backward Areas (1981), Report on General Issues Relating to Backward Areas Development Planning Commission, Government of India, 1981.

Nayyar. R. ‘Planning for the Development of Backward Districts.’ CPRC-IIPA Working Paper 23, Chronic Poverty Research Centre, University of Manchester and Indian Institute of Public Administration, 2004.

Planning, Development And Special Initiatives (SPC) Department, G.O.Ms.No.83 Dated: 07.02.2013, Government of Tamil Nadu.

Report on Industrial Dispersal National Committee on the Development of Backward Areas, Planning Commission, Government of India, 1980.

Report on General Issues Relating to Backward Areas Development, National Committee on the Development of Backward Areas, Planning Commission, Government of India, 1981. 46

Vision Tamil Nadu 2023, Strategic Plan for Infrastructure Development in Tamil Nadu, Government of Tamil Nadu (2012)

jUkòÇ kht£l¤â‹ bghUshjhu ã‹j§»a Ãiy - K¡»akhf fšÉ g‰¿a kâ¥ghŒî

jÄœehL khÃy â£l¡FG, br‹id.

I )General Information / bghJ Étu« FL«g tÇir v©: kht£l« Cuh£á x‹¿a« gŠrha¤J F¡»uhk« th®L e«g® ng£o¡ bfhL¥gt® bga® #hâ k‰W« tF¥ò (BC, MBC, SC, ST, OC) ng£o vL¥gt® bga®

1.Demographic Details / FL«g mik¥ò

bjhÊš gŸË¥go¥ ghÈd« (M - ig FL«g FL«g taJ (1=M©, fšÉ Ãiy F¿p£il bjhluhkš t.v cW¥ãdÇ‹ jiytÇ‹ (M©L 2= (m- F¿p£il ga‹gL¤ É£lt® bga® cwîKiw fËš) bg©) ga‹gL¤Jf) Jf) Étu« ©. 1

m.F¿pL : 1. go¡fhjt®, 2 vGj go¡f bjÇí« (Kiwahd fšÉ bgwhjt®), 3.Mu«g¡fšÉ (1tJ - 5tJ), 4. eLÃiy fšÉ (6tJ - 7tJ) . ca®Ãiy fšÉ (8tJ - 10tJ), 6. nkšÃiy fšÉ (11tJ - 12tJ) 7. o¥snkh (I.o.I), 8. g£lgo¥ò, 9. g£l nk‰go¥ò, 10. bghUªjhJ (NA)

M.F¿pL : 1. Étrha«, 2.Étrha¤ bjhÊyhË, 3. Étrha« mšyhj ïju bjhÊyhË, (f£Lkhd«, ãw), 4. muR k‰W« jÅah® Jiw ntiy, 5. tÂf« / RabjhÊš, 6. khzt®, 7. ãw (F¿¥ãLf ) 8. ïšiy

1 PRIA MuhŒ¢á k‰W« ts®¢á ÃWtd«, br‹id -88. III )Assets of the House Hold / å£L brh¤J¡fŸ Égu« a.Étrha Ãy« Égu§fŸ

(V¡f®)

ghrd Ãy« òŠbrŒ Úuhjhu« Étu« (khdhthÇ) njh¥ò F¿¥òfŸ gu¥ò (»zW, VÇ,

MW, ãw)

brhªj Ãy« F¤jif¡F -

th§f¥g£lJ F¤jif¡F

Él¥g£lJ ãw (F¿¥ãLf)

b. Housing Condition / åL g‰¿a Égu§fŸ t.v©. åL f£Lkhd« M« brhªj« 1 kâ¥ò (%.) thlif 2. 1 Foir 2 fh‹»Ç£ 3 X£L åL 4 ãw (F¿¥ãlî«)

c. Live Stock Details / fhšeilfŸ g‰¿a Égu§fŸ

bkh¤j tUl tUkhd« (ghš, fhšeil fhšeil tif v©Â¡if kâ¥ò É‰gid, ãw) %. %. fhis khL vUik gR MLfŸ nfhÊfŸ ïju (F¿¥ãLf) 1. 2.

2 PRIA MuhŒ¢á k‰W« ts®¢á ÃWtd«, br‹id -88. d. Machinery and Implements / Étrha fUÉfŸ

Égu§fŸ v©Â¡if kâ¥ò (%.) ouh¡l® fâuo¥gh‹ g«òbr£ MÆš vŠá‹ kUªJ bjË¥gh‹ fy¥ig kh£L t©o ïju fUÉfŸ 1. 2. 3. 4.

e. Household Consumer Durables / å£L cgnahf bghU£fŸ

Égu§fŸ v©Â¡if kâ¥ò (%) o.É ~ãÇ£{ Ä¡á »iu©l® nkh£lh® ir¡»Ÿ ir¡»Ÿ fh® bršngh‹ ïju bghU£fŸ 1. 2. 3. 4.

3 PRIA MuhŒ¢á k‰W« ts®¢á ÃWtd«, br‹id -88. IV. Agriculture / Étrha« r«gªjkhd Égu§fŸ

flªj M©L rhFgo Égu§fŸ (2012 - 13)

Ú®¥ghrd Étrha« khdhtÇ Étrha« É‰ É‰f¥ bkh¤j bkh¤j kâ¥ò f¥g g£l kfNš kâ¥ò gÆ® kfNš £l V¡f® Kg/qui kfNš V¡f® Kg/quint (%gh kf ntal/to (%ghÆš) al/tonne) Æš) nne) Nš

beš

nfœ tuF

nrhs«

f«ò

fU«ò

gU¤â

fhŒf¿fŸ

ó¡fŸ

bj‹id

fliy

ïju gÆ®fŸ

V. Employment / Migration Details of the Household / ntiy k‰W« ïl« bga®jš g‰¿a Étu§fŸ t.v©. FL«g cW¥ãdÇ‹ ntiy F¿p£L ntiy ïl« ntiy ruhrÇ khj bga® v©.* F¿p£L brŒj tUkhd« v©.+ khj§fŸ %. flªj M©L 1

4 PRIA MuhŒ¢á k‰W« ts®¢á ÃWtd«, br‹id -88. t.v©. FL«g cW¥ãdÇ‹ ntiy F¿p£L ntiy ïl« ntiy ruhrÇ khj bga® v©.* F¿p£L brŒj tUkhd« v©.+ khj§fŸ %. flªj M©L 3

1. Étrha TÈ 1. cŸq® 2. f£ol ntiy 2. g¡f¤ö® 3. ïuÆšnt ntiy 3. g¡f¤J efu« 4. NREGA 4.mL¤j kht£l« 5. mYtyf ntiy 5. mL¤j khÃy« 6. ãw (F¿¥ãLf) 6.ãw (F¿¥ãLf)

VI. Business / Self Employment / Ra bjhÊš k‰W« Éahghu« t.v©. FL«g cW¥ãd® bjhÊš v¤jid ruhrÇ khj bga® khj§fŸ tUkhd« (%) 1 2 3 4

VII. Expenditure Details of the House Hold / (per month) / FL«g¤â‰fhd khj bryÉd§fŸ t.v©. Étu§fŸ rurhÇ khj bryî (%.) 1 czî (mÇá, gU¥ò, fhŒf¿, v©bzŒ, nuõ‹ bghU£fŸ c£gl) 2 thlif 3 JÂkÂ 4 Rfhjhu« 5 fšÉ 6 bghGJngh¡F 7 guhkÇ¥ò bryî (åL, vªâu§fŸ) 8 ãw bryîfŸ 1. 2. 3. 5 PRIA MuhŒ¢á k‰W« ts®¢á ÃWtd«, br‹id -88. VIII. Indebtedness / fl‹ g‰¿a Étu§fŸ

fl‹ th§»a ïl« neh¡f« bjhif (%) âU¥ã F¿¥òfŸ brY¤âa bjhif (%.)

IX. c§fËl« ‘nuõ‹ fh®L’ cŸsjh? M« / ïšiy ( brŒaî«)

ïU¥ã‹ v‹d tif? BPL / APL, AAY, ãw ( brŒaî« )

X. Water Supply / å£L cgnafh¤â‰fhd Ú® F¿¤j Égu§fŸ

Égu§fŸ Mjhu«

mo å£L bghJ »zW Éiy¡F ïju g«ò g«ò FHhŒ th§»aJ (F¿¥ ãLf)

FoÚ®, rikaš ïju å£L cgnahf§fŸ fhšeilfS¡F ãw (F¿¥ãLf)

c§fŸ »uhk¤âš FoÚ® nghâa msî »il¡»wjh? nghJkhdJ / g‰whFiw / áy rka§fËš g‰whFiw ( brŒaî« )

XI. Access to Toilet Facilities / fÊ¥ãl trâ

M© bg©.

FHªijfŸ

* 1.å£L fÊ¥ãl« 2. bghJ¡fÊ¥ãl« 3. âwªj btË

6 PRIA MuhŒ¢á k‰W« ts®¢á ÃWtd«, br‹id -88. XII. fšÉ¡F« thœî K‹nd‰w¤â‰F« cŸs bjhl®ò g‰¿a c§fŸ fU¤J¡fŸ

1. c§fŸ FL«g K‹nd‰w¤âš f‰w fšÉ cjÉaJ v‹W fUJ»Ö®fsh ?

M« / ïšiy / bghUªjhJ (NA)

M« vÅš v›thW v‹W ÉtÇ¡fî«

2. c§fŸmã¥ãuha¤âš fšÉ¡F« brŒ»‹w ntiy¡F« bjhl®ò cŸsJ v‹W

fUJ»Ö®fsh?

M« / ïšiy / bjÇahJ / bghUªjhJ (NA)

M« vÅš ÉtÇ¡fî«

3. c§fŸ mã¥ãuha¤âš fšÉ, r_f bghUshjhu K‹nd‰w¤â‰F cjî« v‹W

fUJ»Ö®fsh? M« / ïšiy / bjÇahJ

M« vÅš v›thW v‹W ÉtÇ¡fî«?

4. c§fŸ å£oš j‰nghJ gŸË fšÉ bgW« FHªijfŸ cŸsdth? M« / ïšiy

5. j‰nghJ gŸË fšÉ bgW« FHªijfis ca®fšÉ bgw mD¥g ÉU¥g« cŸsjh?

M« / ïšiy

M« vÅš Égu§fŸ bjÇÉ¡fî« (v‹d go¥ò, ïl«, ãw)

njâ :

ïl« :

7 PRIA MuhŒ¢á k‰W« ts®¢á ÃWtd«, br‹id -88. Appendix II

District Level Data

Table A District wise Per Capita Gross District Domestic Product (GDDP )

No. District Per capita GDDP ` (2008-09) Rank

1 Kanniyakumari 68459 1 2 Coimbatore 65478 2 3 Virudhunagar 63978 3 4 Thiruvallur 61621 4 5 Thoothukodi 59880 5 6 Chennai 57387 6 7 Kancheepuram 56493 7 8 Namakkal 55592 8 9 Erode 54929 9 10 Thiruchirapalli 54636 10 11 Karur 52381 11 12 Thirunelveli 50546 12 13 Madurai 50463 13 14 Vellore 46096 14 15 Salem 46089 15 16 Krishnagiri 45628 16 17 Dindigul 42669 17 18 Cuddalore 41840 18 19 The Nilgiris 41491 19 20 Dharmapuri 40445 20 21 Sivagangai 37410 21 22 Thanjavur 37249 22 23 Ramanatha 37047 23 24 Theni 33918 24 25 Pudukkotai 33473 25 26 Nagapattinam 32292 26 27 Thiruvannamalai 30885 27 28 Villupuram 27405 28 29 Thiruvarur 26678 29 30 Perambalur 17761 30

Tamil Nadu 48216

Source: Dept. of Economics and Statistics, GoTN, Census of India (2011) and State Planning Commission (TN);

Table B District wise Human Development Index Tamilnadu - 2011

No. District HDI - 2011 Rank 1 Chennai 0.817 1 2 Kanniyakumar9 0.812 2 3 Coimbatore 0.802 3 4 Virudhunagar 0.795 4 5 Thoothukodi 0.789 5 6 The Nilgiris 0.787 6 7 Kancheepuram 0.787 7 8 Thirunelveli 0.777 8 9 Thiruvallur 0.776 9 10 Namakkal 0.768 10 11 Thiruchirap 0.766 11 13 Vellore 0.753 12 14 Krishnagiri 0.748 13 15 Salem 0.747 14 16 Erode 0.746 15 17 Ramanathapuram 0.744 16 18 Cuddalore 0.742 17 19 Dindigul 0.741 18 20 Karur 0.740 19 21 Thanjavur 0.737 20 22 Madurai 0.736 21 23 Sivagangai 0.733 22 24 Nagapattinam 0.728 23 25 Pudukkotai 0.723 24 26 Theni 0.722 25 27 Thiruvarur 0.720 26 28 Thiruvannalai 0.713 27 29 Dharmapuri 0.707 28 30 Villupuram 0.704 29 31 Perambalur 0.692 30 12 Tamil Nadu 0.765 31

Source: Dept. of Economics and Statistics,GoTN, Census of India (2011) and State Planning Commission (TN);

Table C District wise Sex Ratio-2011

No. District Sex Ratio Rank 1 The Nilgiris 1041 1 2 Thanjavur 1031 2 3 Nagapattinam 1025 3 4 Thoothukodi 1024 4 5 Thirunelveli 1024 5 6 Thiruvarur 1020 6 7 Ariyalur 1016 7 8 Karur 1015 8 9 Pudukkotai 1015 9 10 Thiruchirapalli 1013 10 11 Kanniyakumari 1010 11 12 Virudhunagar 1009 12 13 Perambalur 1006 13 14 Vellore 1004 14 15 Coimbatore 1001 15 16 Sivagangai 1000 16 17 Dindigul 998 17 18 Thiruvannalai 993 18 19 Erode 992 19 20 Madurai 990 20 21 Theni 990 21 22 Tiruppur 988 22 23 Chennai 986 23 24 Namakkal 986 24 25 Kancheepuram 985 25 26 Villupuram 985 26 27 Cuddalore 984 27 28 Thiruvallur 983 28 29 Ramanathapuram 977 29 30 Krishnagiri 956 30 31 Salem 954 31 32 Dharmapuri 946 32

Tamil Nadu 995

Source: Dept. of Economics and Statistics, GoTN, Census of India (2011) and State Planning Commission (TN); iii

Appendix III

Block level Basic Data related to different Indicators used for working out

Composite Backwardness Index

1. General Population - Sex Ratio and Index

Sl. No Block wise/District /State 2011 Pop index 1 Block

Dharmapuri 924 0.924 0.943 Nallampalli 943 Pennagaram 898 0.898 Palacode 939 0.939 Karimangalam 924 0.924 Morappur 956 0.956 Harur 959 0.959 Pappireddipatti 975 0.975 2 District 939 0.939 Source: District Planning Cell, Dharmapuri District

2. Child Sex Ratio and Index Sl. No Block Population in the age group Sex-ratio wise/District of 0-6 /State Index Male Sex Ratio Female 2001 2001 2001 1 Block Dharmapuri 10977 9013 821 0.821 Nallampalli 11886 9463 796 0.796 Pennagaram 13766 10338 751 0.751 Palacode 10191 8217 806 0.806 Karimangalam 10160 8160 803 0.803 Morappur 9185 7795 849 0.849 Harur 10000 8625 863 0.863 Pappireddipatti 5129 4636 904 0.904 Source: District Planning Cell, Dharmapuri District

3. Infant Mortality Rate and Index

Sl.No Block wise/District /State 2011 Index 1 Block Dharmapuri 14.3 0.0143 Morappur 19 0.019 Harur 29.3 0.0293 Pappireddipatti 28.2 0.0282 Nallampalli 27.5 0.0275 Pennagaram 18 0.018 Palacode 23 0.023 Karimangalam 18.1 0.0181 2 District 22.2 0.0222 Source: District Planning Cell, Dharmapuri District

4. Population size and growth rate and Index

Block wise/District SC pop % ST pop Total SC Sl. No Index /State 2011 % 2011 and ST

Block

Dharmapuri 10.60% 1.50% 12.10% 0.121

Nallampalli 11.30% 2.20% 13.50% 0.135

Pennagaram 12% 2% 14.00% 0.14

Palacode 9.30% 2.20% 11.50% 0.115

Karimangalam 11.40% 1.70% 13.10% 0.131

Morappur 27.50% 1.80% 29.30% 0.293

Harur 31.90% 9.80% 41.70% 0.417

Pappireddipatti 20.90% 25% 45.90% 0.459

Source: District Planning Cell, Dharmapuri District

5. Percentage of literacy and Index

Sl. Block Percentage of Illiteracy No wise/District /State/Nation Total literacy Illiterate index 1 Blocks Male Female Total Dharmapuri 93418(72.8%) 74008(60.4%) 167426(66.8%) 66.80 33.20 0.332 Nallampalli 67080(68.4%) 48279(52.1%) 115359(60.5%) 60.50 39.50 0.395 Pennagaram 78441(63.6%) 53963(48.3%) 132404(56.3%) 56.30 43.70 0.437 Palacode 62314(65.4%) 45731(50.6%) 108045(58.2%) 58.20 41.80 0.418 Karimangalam 54289(65.1%) 37939(48.9%) 92228(57.3%) 57.30 42.70 0.427 Morappur 63537(70.9%) 46829(54.7%) 110366(63%) 63.00 37.00 0.370 Harur 65717(67.8%) 50406(53.7%) 116123(60.8%) 60.80 39.20 0.392 Pappireddipatti 42803(71.4%) 32955(56.2%) 75758(63.9%) 63.90 36.10 0.361 2 District 68.10% 53.20% 60.90% Source: District Planning Cell, Dharmapuri District

iii

5.A Literacy Gap and Index Sl. Block wise/District No /State/Nation 2011 1 Blocks Male Female Gap Gender Gap Dharmapuri 72.80% 60.40% 12.40% 0.124 Nallampalli 68.40% 52.10% 16.30% 0.163 Pennagaram 63.60% 48.30% 15.30% 0.153 Palacode 65.40% 50.60% 14.80% 0.148 Karimangalam 65.10% 48.90% 16.20% 0.162 Morappur 70.90% 54.70% 16.20% 0.162 Harur 67.80% 53.70% 14.10% 0.141 Pappireddipatti 71.40% 56.20% 15.20% 0.152 2 District 68.10% 53.20% 14.90% 0.149 Source : SSA, Dharmapuri District

6. Out of school children - Index

Block Out of school Children wise/District/ 6-14 % of out Total Enrolment State of school Index 6-14 children Girls Boys Total Boys Girls Total Dharmapuri 162 58 220 19350 17482 36832 0.60 0.006 Nallampalli 134 79 213 13150 12367 25517 0.83 0.008 Pennagaram 199 114 313 16381 14948 31329 1.00 0.010 Palacode 172 107 286 13278 12488 25766 1.11 0.011 Karimangalam 122 59 181 11021 9898 20919 0.87 0.009 Morappur 46 45 91 13790 12784 26574 0.34 0.003 Pappireddipatti 39 20 59 8412 7712 16124 0.37 0.004 Harur 177 109 286 16116 14441 30557 0.94 0.009 DISTRICT 1051 591 1649 111498 102120 213618 0.77 0.008 Source: SSA, Dharmapuri District

7. Proportion of Agriculture Labour and Index

Block wise/District Total Agri. Proportion Sl. No workers Labourers /State of agril 2011 2011 labours Index 1 Block Dharmapuri 69093 18580 26.89 0.269 Nallampalli 92570 19164 20.70 0.207 Pennagaram 104832 31313 29.87 0.299 Palacode 80516 26282 32.64 0.326 Karimangalam 77219 25171 32.60 0.326 Morappur 90644 28180 31.09 0.311 Harur 80287 34510 42.98 0.430 Pappireddipatti 50916 21452 42.13 0.421 2 District 646077 204652 31.68 0.317

8. Proportion of Un-irrigated area and Index

CD Block Name Un-irrigated area Unirri index Pennagaram 79.31 0.793 Nallampalli 72.36 0.724 Palakkodu 61.19 0.612 Dharmapuri 62.40 0.624 Morappur 67.03 0.670 Uthangarai 70.76 0.708 Harur 86.12 0.861 Pappireddipatti 35.32 0.353

9. Percentage of BPL households and Index

Block wise/District Total No. of Total No.of % of BPL BPL sl. No /State HHs BPL HHs families Index

1 Block Dharmapuri 47691 10710 22% 0.22 Nallampalli 46956 28623 61% 0.61 Pennagaram 44929 22465 50% 0.5 Palacode 34764 11026 32% 0.32 Karimangalam 30210 9416 29% 0.29 Morappur 14438 8807 61% 0.61 Harur 40744 27570 67% 0.67 Pappireddipatti 21926 6467 29% 0.29 2 District 281658 125084 44.5% 0.445

10. Road length and Index Sl. Block Propor NO wise/District/St Total road length in KM Total . tion of Index ate KM Mud road

1 Block Mud WBM BT CC Dharmapuri 54.91 132.07 142.92 29.42 359.32 15.28 0.153 Nallampalli 71.4 70.5 245.98 2.4 390.28 18.29 0.183 Pennagaram 717.33 71.407 293.54 0 1082.3 66.28 0.663 Palacode 168.05 38.38 221.92 6.24 434.59 38.67 0.387 Karimangalam 217.9 296.7 210.8 37.6 763 28.56 0.286 Morappur 75.52 184.33 19.529 16.689 296.07 25.51 0.255 Harur 96.34 263.37 379.45 79.54 818.7 11.77 0.118 Pappireddipatti 12.615 1166.5 14 154 92.75 13.60 0.136 2 District 1414 2223 1528 325.9 5491

11. Financial Institutions - 2011

Block wise/District Total Number of Sl. No /State population Members % to total Index 1 Block Dharmapuri 137395 41017 29.85 0.299 Nallampalli 190535 39856 20.92 0.209 Pennagaram 204998 4352 2.12 0.021 Palacode 152214 52312 34.37 0.344 Karimangalam 143988 5343 3.71 0.037 Morappur 151994 37550 24.70 0.247 Harur 165033 65766 82.15 0.821 Pappireddipatti 98963 32169 32.51 0.325 2 District 1502900 307150 20.44 0.204

13 Percentage of HH provided with Safe Drinking water

% of % of HHs Number of hhs Block Total provided HHs provided without Sl. No wise/District Number of with safe Index with drinking safe /State HHs Drinking water drinking water water

1 Blocks Dharmapuri 47691 41014 86.00% 14.0 0.140 Nallampalli 46956 40113 85.00% 15.0 0.150 Pennagaram 44929 33697 75.00% 25.0 0.250 Palacode 34764 31983 92.00% 8.0 0.080 Karimangalam 30210 29250 97.00% 3.0 0.030 Morappur 14438 10684 74.00% 26.0 0.260 Harur 40744 548 1.34% 98.6 0.986 Pappireddipatti 21926 5720 26.00% 74.0 0.740 2 District 281658 193009 68.50%

vii

14 Percentage of population access to toilet facilities

% of Number of Block Total % of HHs HHs Sl. HHs are Index wise/District Number of provided provided with Toilet sanitation No /State HHs with toilets without facilities toilets

1 Blocks Dharmapuri 47691 21598 45% 55.00 0.55 Nallampalli 46956 17596 37% 63.00 0.63 Pennagaram 44929 33248 74% 26.00 0.26 Palacode 34764 9345 27% 73.00 0.73 Karimangalam 30210 9585 32% 68.00 0.68 Morappur 14438 6739 47% 53.00 0.53 Harur 40744 11576 28% 72.00 0.72 Pappireddipatti 21926 6745 30% 70.00 0.70 2 District 281658 116432 41.50%

viii

Appendix-IV

SUCCESS STORIES

SUCCESS STORY : 1 A boy named S.Raghu lives in a village named Natrampalayam which is in Krishnagiri district. In 2008-09 he joined as an 8th standard student in the Indur RSTC centre at the age of 13. Due to his father’s death he could not continue his studies after 3 rd Standard. He was abandoned by his mother also and was living with his aged grandmother. So After completing 3 rd standard he worked in a Binding shop to earn his living. As Raghu is interested in his studies, he was joined in school in the year 2008-09 by his uncle. He was encouraged to continue his studies by telling stories of famous personalities and Dr.A.P.J . Abdulkalam. He was admitted in the class of 8 th standard and he found difficulty in learning at first, later there was improvement gradually. After completing 8 th standard, he joined in Pennagaram Boys Higher Secondary School and he scored 415 marks out of 500. He continued his Higher Secondary in the same school and he scored 780 marks in twelth Standard. Now he is doing his B.Sc., (Maths) in Hosur Government Arts College. Thanks to SSA.

SUCCESS STORY : 2

My name is V.Sivakumar. I am studying IX Std in SHHSS Irudhayapuram. My father name is Velu and my mother is maadhu. We are living in aandikottai in paadi panchyat. My parents are working as coolies. I have an helder sister and a younger brother . I was not interested in studies so I didn’t go to school and stayed in home. As my neighbours are

i working in Bangalore, I went to banglore and worked with them. By that time BRTE and Teacher came to my house. They talked with my parents and asked them to send me to school. After few days I came back to my house. By that time BRTE and teacher met me and asked me to come to school by telling about the importance of education. Then I went to school and they gave uniforms, books, slippers and note books etc. And then I started going to school regularly. Teachers and students treated me with love and care. Now I understood the importance of education very well. In term I examination I secured 408 marks out of 500. Marks secured in subject wise,

Tamil 87 English 62 Maths 90 Science 79 Social Science 90 Total 408

I studied well and I want to become an IPS in future. Heartly thanks to those whom created interest to study. Especially to my parents teachers and BRTEs . Thanks to SSA , I will be greatful to all them.

SUCCESS STORY:3

I am P.Sonia 8 th STD residential school, Muthugoundan kottai, Dharmapuri.

My parents are not with me .Now I am with my grandmother. I am in a poor family. Due to the poor situation and without my parents I can’t continue my education, also lost my interest in studies and hence discontinued my school studies. Even though in school, I can’t interact with my peer groups and teachers. So I reject and avoid school study is certain period.

By that time, BRC Supervisor, BRTEs NGO, Saradha teacher come and appropriated me and my family. They explained me about the necessity of education and the importance of studies in life .she asked me to join their Residential school and to continue my father school education. In this school, they support me in all circumstance, Holt in education and other extra-curricular activates. Now, in was much interested in studies, and my aim is to become a teachers will secure my family throughout my life.

SUCCESS STORY: 4

My Name is M.Thirumoorthi. S/o Madhaiyan Dharmapuri. Now I am studying in the Residential school, Muthugoudan Kottai, Dharmapuri. Previously, I was studied in a nursery primary school. I was a frustiated to go to school, and to study lesson. My parents discouraged me and didn’t show interest to learn in the school due to their illiteracy. Hence I was suffered a lot, and discontinued my school education. Once BRC SUPERVISIOR, BRTEs and NGO Saradha teacher went me in my native placed and found I was dropped out of school. She met my parents and insisted them to continue the school education in their residential school. After that, my parents also showed some interest on me to study, then I got admissions in the residential school and now I was much happy to study and have a healthy relationship with my peer group and teachers. My aim is to become an I.P.S officer and to serve the society in a good way. Thanking you.

SUCCESS STORY: 5

I am Chellammal. I am living in Avvainagar, Dharmapuri. I have 3 younger sisters and one younger brother. I am the elder child of my family. My father is working as a bricks labour. My mother is working as a coolie.

Even though we are living under the poverty line because of the poverty. I drop out from the school at 3 rd standard. After that I am grazing the sheeps. On that time I met BRTE and Education volunteer.

I said that “Due to poverty and take care of my siblings”. They asked me “Are you interest to study”. I said “yes”.

iii

Next they convinced my parents and brought me to the RSTC-Nallampalli centre. After in the academic year 3005-06 I studied 5 th Standard at RSTC – Nallampalli. My father came and brought me from the RSTC – centre to take care of my younger brother.

So again I dropout from the RSTC and grazing the sheep. After that Education Volunteer met me and advised to my parents. My father said to me, Take care of your younger brother, later you can go to school. But I said that “I must go to school”.

In 2006-07 I rejoin to RSTC and studied 6 th . After I studied 10th Government High School Nagarkoodal. Now I am studying +2 at GHSS Adhiyaman Kottai. So I thank to SSA Scheme.

SUCCESS STORY: 6

I am Balaji. I live in Gettuhalli at Bandahalli Panchayat. My parents are daily wages. I have 3 brothers. I Studied 6 th at GHSS Bandahalli and drop out at 6 th . I did not have interest to study. My mother brought me to send the school. Sometime I left the school after the lunch break. My mother didn’t take any other care for me. I never go to school again.

After six month Nallampalli BRTE informed my mother about RSTC, Nallampalli. My mother asked me to join this RSTC-centre. But I do not interest to join that centre. My parents very urged to send me that centre.

Again I drop out from this centre. My school teachers and my parents again advised me to go to that centre. “You just attend one year class after you got 8 th standard passed certificate. If will use to get driving license”.

Now I am studying First year Civil Engineering at Varuvan Vadivelan Engineering College. So my mother is very happy now. I thank the RSTC Nallampalli centre, my teachers and parents also.

7 Student Success Story

My Name is V.Ramya. I am living in the village Vellolai in Pennagaram Taluk, Dharmapuri Dist. Family problem between my parents brought me without adult protection. Now I am living under the care of my aunty. Till 3 rd STD I studied in my village. My aunty family was in the poor situation. So I stopped my schooling. I stayed in my aunty house and I did domestic work of my aunty house. After then some teachers and BRTEs came from KGBV and SSA to my village and explained about KGBV School run under by SSA. After that my aunty enrolled me in the KGBV School. After joined the school I knew the importance of education and how the education bring our life brightly. I like this school very much because the government provided quality food, uniform, textbooks and basic needs. Day by day I learned many things like computer, karate, handcraft, music, yoga etc. now I am studying 8 th STD in KGBV School. After completion of my elementary education I surely continue my higher education. I would like to become a teacher in my future, and I will give my best teaching whoever belongs to my category.

8 College Student Success Story

I am S. Jayalakshmi. I am living in the village of Kotturmalai, Pennagaram Taluk, Dharmapuri Dist. Till 4 th STD I studied in my village school. After that some causes from my family situation I a, not able to continue my studies and from dropped out from school. After that I was grazing cow and goat. In that situation one day teachers from KGBV School came to my home and gave guidance about free education given by SSA scheme. From the counseling of the teachers my parents decided to join me in the KGBV School. I continued my studies. I got lot of facilities other than quality education like extra curricular activities. After completing 8 th STD I joined in G.H.S.S Thirumalvadi, and I scored 350 marks in 10 th STD 525 in 12 th STD. I got more interest in studies after that I joined B.Sc maths in Govt Arts & Science College in Dharmapuri. Now I am studying 3 rd year B.Sc maths. With the guidance of KGBV teachers, BRTEs and NGO I achieved this goal. My aim is to become a teacher. I will reach my aim I shall render my service to the children who are in poverty line.