child progress index - iasmantra.com

1

Districts of Uttar Pradesh

CHILD PROGRESS

INDEX

A study by Institute for Competitiveness

Institute for Competitiveness, India is the Indian knot in the global network of the Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness at Harvard Business School. Institute for Competitiveness, India is an international initiative centered in India, dedicated to enlarging and purposeful disseminating of the body of research and knowledge on competition and strategy, as pioneered over the last 25 years by Professor Michael Porter of the Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness at Harvard Business School. Institute for Competitiveness, India conducts & supports indigenous research; offers academic & executive courses; provides advisory services to the Corporate & the Governments and organizes events. The institute studies competition and its implications for company strategy; the competitiveness of nations, regions & cities and thus generate guidelines for businesses and those in governance; and suggests & provides solutions for socio-economic problems

© 2019 The Institute for Competitiveness. All rights reserved. For more information about obtaining additional copies of this or other Institute for Competitiveness publications, please visit IFC's website, www.competitiveness.in

Visit www.competitiveness.in for more information

U 24/8DLF Phase 3Gurgaon 122002Haryana, IndiaPhone: +91-124 437 6676E.mail: [email protected]

ABOUT THE INSTITUTE FOR COMPETITIVENESS

The Institute for Competitiveness

The Institute for Competitiveness

CHILD PROGRESS INDEX

Amit KapoorChairInstitute for Competitiveness, India

Petra KrylovaSenior AnalystSocial Progress Imperative

Aniruddh DuttaaResearcherInstitute for Competitiveness, India

Litmus Ink

Institute for CompetitivenessU 24/8, DLF Phase 3, Gurgaon 122002, Haryana IndiaWebsite: www.competitiveness.in

Abhinandan MenonResearcherInstitute for Competitiveness, India

© 2019 The Institute for Competitiveness. All rights reserved.

Manisha KapoorSenior ResearcherInstitute for Competitiveness, India

Authors

With Inputs from

Research Support

Designed by

Publisher

Content07

09

11

15

19

23

27

31

45

53

55

56

129

130

Preface

Why a Child Progress Index?

Child Progress Index: Framework

How it complements the 2030 Global Agenda for

Sustainable Development?

Methodology

Results: District Level Analysis

How Uttar Pradesh Scores on Child Progress?

Discussion of Results

Child Progress & Economic Development

Learnings & Recommendations

From Indexto Action

Scorecards

References

Appendix 1: District Wise Scores on Child Progress, its

dimensions & components

Child Progress Index | 6


PrefaceA society’s future is indubitably tied with its children – how they survive, grow, and thrive. A region that provides

its children with the opportunities to grow and learn,

protect their rights, and presents to them a healthy living

environment will not only help them to create a better life

for themselves but also contribute to society’s growth and

development.

On this front, around 40 percent of the population in India is below 18 years of age. And with a fertility rate of 2.3, which is higher compared to its peers, it will have a substantially high child population during the coming years. Therefore, investment during the early years for the growth and development of children is imperative to reap the future demographic dividend.

However, there are still significant deficits in child progress. Thirty-seven percent of the world’s poor and nearly half of the world’s malnourished children come from the region. According to the 2018 Global Nutrition Report, the country will fail to achieve all the nine nutrition goals set by WHO. In addition to these burdens children also face other societal challenges such as caste and gender discrimination that leaves people, particularly poor, even more vulnerable.

These facts highlight there is an urgent need for the nation to invest in its children. One of the biggest challenges to take up such interventions is the regional level variations that exist in the country. There are some regions that are doing well on the education front and need to invest in healthcare, while there are some that should work towards addressing prejudices that exist in the society that prevent the formation of an inclusive society.

Therefore, Institute for Competitiveness has developed a data-driven measurement tool that can provide insights about different facets of child progress at the regional level. It will equip policymakers, businesses, and NGOs by highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of all the regions and by identifying areas of intervention.

The Child Progress Index draws conceptual antecedents from the Social Progress Index. A multi-stage iterative process was followed to reach the right set of indicators that can capture the wellbeing of children.

The first stage involved identifying a broad set of indicators that met the Social Progress principles. There are numerous publicly available indicators that can be used to reflect the true state of children. The second stage involved interaction with Social Progress Imperative, who provided valuable feedback on the framework as well as the methodology of the index.

The Institute is thankful to everyone who has contributed to this effort.

while under-five deaths have fallen below 1 million for the first time ever. The education landscape has been improved due to rising enrolment and completion rates and addressing gender parity.

2006

2016

In recent times, India has made considerable progress towards ensuring child progress. On the health front, child stunting has declined from

48%

38%


Why a Child Progress Index?

In the last few decades, the world has made significant

progress towards reducing child mortality, giving millions

of children a better chance of survival. The under-five

mortality rate has declined from 93 deaths per 1000 live

births in 1990 to 39 in 2017. The decline in child mortality

has been steady and encouraging, with the annual rate

of reduction of 3.8 percent in the past two decades. Now,

there is a need to look beyond child survival. It is important

to follow the progress achieved in reducing mortality by

providing opportunities for children to thrive. There are

still around 385 million children living under extreme

poverty; undernourishment is the leading cause for nearly

half the deaths of children under five; nearly 262 million

children and youth aged 6 to 17 were out of school in 2017.

These statistics show that it is imperative to invest in early

child development for breaking the intergenerational cycle

of deprivation and poverty.

While these changes require commitment from every country in the world, India can be a major driving force since it inhabits the world’s child population in the world. India was also one of the major contributors to the progress that the world has registered in child mortality. The rapid economic growth in the country over the past two decades has also resulted in improvements on development indicators such as reduction in poverty headcount ratio that fell fromHowever, there still remain significant challenges from access to

quality education to affordable healthcare. Consider the impact of malnutrition. Since half the women in the country are anaemic, it not only damages their health and cognitive development but also has a negative impact on the development of their children. As a result, India has the largest number of malnourished children in the world.1 Malnourishment results in a high prevalence of stunting (low-height-for-age) and wasting (low-weight-for-height) among Indian children. Evidently, the productive capacity of such children is severely impacted as their brains do not develop fully, and the effect is irreversible. Thus, malnourishment not only affects the current healthcare scenario of the country’s population but also its future economic potential.

Similarly, there are shortcomings in the education ecosystem of the country as well. While India has achieved universal enrolment at the elementary level, reflecting noteworthy improvements in providing basic education, there is a fall in levels of enrolment at the subsequent levels. As per the All India Survey of Higher Education (2017-18), the gross enrolment ratio for higher education is at 25.8 percent, implying that around 74 percent of the youth lack access to higher education severely hindering the future growth prospects of children and thus the country.

1990

2011-12

47.8%

21.9%

universalization of primary education, improvement in the sex ratio and increasing retention rates in school.

1 ASSOCHAM & EY (2017), “Bridging the gap: Tapping the agriculture potential for optimum nutrition”.


The widespread issues still prevalent across the country hamper the Prime Minister’s vision of ‘Sabka Saath Sabka Vikas’- inclusive growth-and lead to inequality not only in economic terms but also in opportunity for the most vulnerable sections of the society. Investing in children can help achieve this objective and promote equitable, inclusive societies, allowing more people to effectively participate in their economic development. All children should have access to essential health, educational, and nutritional requirements. Providing these will allow equitable access to better-paying jobs later in life, as well as improve productivity.

The benefits of investing in children far outweigh the costs. Various studies find that investments at relatively low financial costs during childhood in health and education can yield long term gains. For instance, increasing the time that children spend at school enhances their cognitive development and knowledge, enabling them to become a more qualified, productive part of the society as adults in contrast to children who receive less schooling. A study of 139 countries shows that, on average, each year of schooling increases a person’s wages as an adult by nearly 9 percent2.

Also, the benefits of investing in children are not limited to those receiving the investment but are far outreaching. The country can ensure a prosperous future for itself if it successfully taps into the talent of its young, burgeoning population by addressing the challenges that children are facing through adequate investment in early childhood development. A healthy and more educated society benefits everybody. Although there exists some lag between the time when the investments are made, and the time when the society starts experiencing the benefits, these gains can be remarkable and long-lasting.

Furthermore, as the poorest and the most vulnerable sections in the society are unable to make adequate investments on their own, there is a strong rationale for public investment in social sectors linked to children- especially when focussed at those in most need.

Policy choices and interventions made today will determine whether millions of children and youth are able to achieve their full potential or are left to face a future of worsening inequity and marginalization. And the successful implementation of the policies is only possible if they are based on empirical evidence rather than instincts, dogma, or personal experiences. The evidence-based on data improves the government’s ability to manage risks and produce results. To facilitate the data-driven policymaking in the area of child development, the Institute for Competitiveness has developed a framework to access the performance of Indian districts on the same.

The Child Progress Index is a multidimensional tool that would enable policymakers and other stakeholders to monitor how individual districts across India are performing with respect to the wellbeing of their children. The index focusses on what matters to children from basic needs to foundations of wellbeing to the level of opportunity. The results of the index are not just meant to project a snapshot about how regions across India are performing on different aspects relevant to the quality of life of children such as healthcare, education, etc., but also to provide insights about how lives can be improved. The index encourages the spirit of competitive federalism among the Indian districts where regions can draw learnings from the performance of their peers. The pilot study accesses the wellbeing of children across the districts of Uttar Pradesh.

2 Montenegro, C. E., & Patrinos, H. A. (2014). Comparable estimates of returns to schooling around the world. The World Bank.


3 Defining a child in India is under constant debate as different laws have different age limits. For this project, individuals between the age of 0 – 18 years are considered as children.

Child Progress Index: Framework

The Child Progress Index that draws conceptual

antecedents from the work on Social Progress focuses

on capturing all the facets of child well-being. It

provides policymakers a tool to better understand how

to improve opportunities for children and enhance

their conditions of livelihood.

Child Progress3 is defined as the “capacity of a society to meet the basic human needs of its children, establish the building blocks that allow children to enhance and sustain the quality of their lives, and create the conditions for all children to reach their full potential.”

Each dimension is then broken down into four components. These components capture different aspects that form the dimension.

BASIC HUMAN NEEDS FOUNDATIONS OFWELL-BEING OPPORTUNITY

The definition alludes three broad dimensions of child progress:

Basic Human Needs

Foundations of Wellbeing

Opportunity

Nutrition and Basic Medical Care

Access to Basic Knowledge Personal Rights

Water and Sanitation

Access to Information and Communications

Personal Freedom and Choice

Shelter Health and Wellness Inclusion

Personal Safety

Environmental Quality

Access to Quality Education


The table below illustrates the rationale for each component, as well as the indicators that are used to capture the components.

The selection of indicators was based on the following approach:

1. Wherever possible, indicators were disaggregated by age to capture indicators relevant for children

For instance, schools with access to internet and computer facilities

2. Some indicators, relevant for all age groups, that impact the growth and development of children were also considered

For instance, households with improved sanitation facilities


Indicators Rationale

Antenatal Care Nutrition has an undeniably strong correlation with the physical and mental development of a child. To be able to realize the full potential in future, a child needs to have access to nutritional facilities along with basic medical care. These services include provision of nutritious food for all, antenatal care of mother, immunization of infants and children against various diseases and affordability of vaccines, etc. The failure to provide any of these services impacts a child's holistic growth and can have huge bearings on their productivity as an adult.

Children Fully Immunized

Child mortality rate

Maternal mortality rate

Public Facility Births

Vaccination



Household with improved Sanitation Facilities

The provision of improved source of drinking water along with improved sanitation and good hygiene practices are elementary for the wellbeing of a child and has been recognised as the fundamental right by the United Nations (UN). The lack of provision of safe drinking water can be linked to transmission of diseases such as diarrhoea, dysentery, etc. As per the UN, a child's household ought to be equipped with improved water sources from either a protected borewell or municipal water supply. Along with this, basic sanitation facilities are also necessary for a healthy life. Open defecation has been a cause of grave health issues like cholera, jaundice etc posing threat to life.

Household with drinking water on premises

Household with tap water

ShelterIndicators RationaleElectricity

Availability of safe and affordable housing is necessary for survival. Shelter must be protected from forced evictions and destructions. Household of a child is considered adequate if it has proper electrical supply, has bathing facilities.

Pucca housesHousing CongestionLatrine FacilitiesBathing Facilities


Personal Safety


Rape Crimes

One of the most important elements to define the future development of a child is his/her personal safety. Safe and secure environment is the right of every child. Crime and violence committed against a child are impediments to their mental and emotional well-being

Murder crimes

Kidnapping

Buying Minors for Prostitution

Selling Minors for Prostitution

Access to Basic Knowledge


Primary Enrolment Knowledge has been one of the most important components of human development. It is the most precious 'wealth’ that humans possess and an important factor for the evolution of societies. Today's society is knowledge driven, and knowledge sharing is at the heart of it. It is imperative that children in every society have access to these avenues of knowledge sharing.

Secondary enrolment

Gender parity

Dropout rates

Transition rates

Access to Information and Communication


TV Availability Information and Communication can be viewed as both a means and an end for development of any region. As access to ICT facility not only eases dissemination of information but can also be used to develop critical thinking in a child by means of internet facilities.

Internet Facilities

Phone Availability

Health and Wellness


Underweight Children A person's health is rooted in everyday life. It has a direct bearing on learning, providing for the family, building a home and future or realising their true potential. A healthy population is good for the economy as a whole. This component specifically talks about the health conditions of a child. Taking into consideration anaemia, diarrhoea and stunted as main indicators, this component focusses on how health can be a major part of an individual’s productivity and his/her contribution to the economy.

Acute Respiratory infections

Diarrhoea

Anaemic Children

Stunted Children




Household with Drainage Facilities

The quality of environmental has a direct impact on the health and fitness of a child. Cleanliness of surroundings, safety from acute respiratory diseases by providing improved fuel can make a child's household a better place to live.

Acute Respiratory infections

Improved Fuel for Cooking Household’s using traditional fuels

Personal Rights


Child Births which were registered

Personal rights of a child are as important as that of an adult. Children have to be helped, protected, and supported. Giving them legal identity since birth and providing them juvenile justice can prevent the negative and disproportionate impact a society can have on a child's development.

Pendency of Cases

Protection of Child from Sexual Offences

Personal Freedom and ChoiceIndicators Rationale

Family planning Personal freedom and choice is a vital pillar for a child's development. Addressing harmful practices like forced child marriage, giving access to contraceptives under critical scenario, and taking care of the reproductive health of children are few ways in which the sustained growth of a child can be ensured.

Child marriages

Adolescent Pregnancies

Inclusion


Enrolment of disabled students

The concept of inclusion is of extreme importance for child progress. No child should be denied any facilities based on caste, religion, gender, etc. Children from backward classes and minorities should be provided with opportunities in the form of scholarships to study and safeguard their future. It is equally important to address the concerns of disabled children and how their enrolment in schools and colleges can provide opportunities of effective learning.

Scholarship given to Minorities

Scholarship given to SC/ST/OBC



Schools with access to internet and computer facilities

Availability of quality education plays a pivotal role in enhancing the learning outcomes and employability of children. Quality education include aspects such as the availability of trained and qualified teachers, learning outcomes of students, among others.

Professionally Trained TeachersTeachers receiving in-service training


How it complements the 2030 Global Agenda for Sustainable Development?The Child Progress Index, by providing a district-level tool for evidence-based

policy making on aspects such as quality access, personal rights, nutrition,

environmental quality, amongst others, complements the global efforts

towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

SDGs represent the commitment by the world leaders for creating a better world by improving the quality of life of all the people across the globe. Having 169 targets grouped in 17 goals, the idea of SDGs set out a universal and an unprecedented agenda which embraces economic, environmental, and social aspects of the society’s well-being. It is an extension of the Millennium Development Goals, which were focused only on least developed or developing countries.

Figure 1: Child Progress Index and Sustainable Development Goals |


Basic Human Needs Foundations of Well-Being Opportunity


Shelter

Personal Safety



Health and Wellness


Source: Social Progress Imperative

Personal Rights

Personal Freedom & Choice

Inclusion



Although the goals are universal in scope, children are at the top of the agenda. According to UNICEF4, the greatest responsibility is “to provide children and young people today with the services, skills, and opportunities they need tomorrow to build better futures for themselves, their families, and their societies.” The idea that our future depends on how well we are able to fulfil the needs of the children is at the core of SDGs. There are around 44 children related indicators across the 17 goals. These include the provision of quality antenatal, delivery and postnatal care for mothers and their new-borns, prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV, immunization to protect children from infectious diseases, access to adequate and nutritious food.

However, studies suggest that over half a billion of the world’s children live in 64 countries that lack enough data to assess the position of children, India being one of them. And India, with 8 percent of the world’s child population would be a deciding factor in the global achievement of these goals. The biggest data challenge that these countries face is that the vastness in scope of indicators makes it difficult to track them, especially the presence of indicators such as number of students who know how to read and write in their lower secondary standard, mental health among others. The inefficiency in tracking also poses a challenge in implementing policies to achieve these goals. Leaders across the globe are posed with the question of how translating the SDGs into action.

The Child Progress Index offers the provision of capturing the spirit of SDGs. There is a wide stratum of SDG’s that can be looked at and can be measured through the index due to the coherence between the two (Figure 3). However, unlike the SDGs, the Child Progress Index has a general framework that can be aggregated in a single number and can be tracked over time. This Index acts as a means in providing a solution to the problem of capturing, implementation, and as a result achieving these goals till 2030.

There are certain efforts by the government towards measuring these goals, such as National Indicator Framework by (Ministry of Statistics and Program Implementation) MoSPI, SDG India Index by NITI Aayog. The Child Progress Index can add onto these initiatives by providing details at the district level and help India achieve its 2030 SDGs.

4 Atnic, T. M., & Wright, E. G. (2014). Brookings. Retrieved from Brookings.Claeson, M., Bos, E. R., Mawji, T., & Pathmanathan, I. (n.d.). Reducing child mortality in India in the new millennium. Bulletin of the World Health Organization.Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is the co-efficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications . Journal of applied psychology, 78(1),98.Devercelli, A., & Saavedra, J. (2019, April 10). World Bank Blogs. Retrieved from World Bank Group US: https://blogs.worldbank.org/education/world-bank-s-unwavering-commitment-early-childhoodGertler, P., Heckman, J., Pinto, R., Zanolini, A., Vermeersch, C., Walker, S., . . . Grantham-McGregor, S. (2014). Labor Market returns to an early childhood stimulation intervention in Jamaica.

Studies suggest that over half a billion of the world’s children live in

that lack enough data to assess the position

of children, India being one of them.

countries64



Methodology

The first step after setting the framework is the selection of

appropriate indicators that represent the components under

each dimension. Apart from the criterion that the data should

be publicly available, principles of the index guide the choice of

relevant set of indicators. The following are the set of unique

design principles based on which Child Progress Index has been

developed:

l Social and environmental indicators only

l Outputs and not inputs

l Relevant to each society

l An actionable tool to drive change

Geographic Coverage

The index gives the citizens and policymakers a first of its kind framework for measuring child progress that is independent of the economic performance. Our objective is to isolate the non-economic dimensions of child progress for a better understanding of the relationship between economic gain and child progress.

The index offers a systematic, empirical foundation for governments, businesses, civil society, and communities to prioritize issues that are hindering the growth of children. This would also offer a picture of benchmark performance against other regions, cities and communities to inform and drive the public policies, investments, and businesses towards betterment of the children in our country.

The technique used for index creation is the technique of considering only output indicators as relevant points to analyze. The objective is to look at, not the policies created or implemented for the said problem, but what has been the impact of these policies. For getting an idea of the link between the two, a mapping between the Indian government schemes with the child progress indicators is created.

While children across the country face numerous issues, their situation in Uttar Pradesh is miserable. The state with India’s largest child population has the worst malnutrition rates in the country, low learning outcomes, low rates of transition from primary to upper primary, and the highest share of child labour with an increasing trend. The results of this Index would help in improving the situation in state by highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each region.

As a pilot, the Index is calculated for districts of Uttar Pradesh. For the purpose of this study,

71 districts

of Uttar Pradesh have been covered.

The case for investing in children during their formative years is compelling. As per World Bank, the first few years of an individual’s life are the most crucial years. Stable livelihood, nurturing relationships and rich learning experiences are factors that do provide lifelong benefits. According to UNICEF, cognitive, emotional and social capacities of a child is what determines their future. Optimizing the early years of children’s lives is the best investment we can make as a society in ensuring their and the country’s future success.

India, since 2018, has entered a 37-year period of demographic dividend. Demographic dividend is the accelerated growth achieved because of increased levels of income, productivity and savings due to change in the age structure of the economy. This can be only achieved when the population is more in the working age group (20-59 years) rather than the dependent age

group i.e. children and elderly. At present, India has a large proportion of population that is young. Approximately 30% of India’s population is in the age group of 0-14 years. Uttar Pradesh being the highest contributor to this, with an estimated child population of 120.9 Million in 2021 (Economic Survey 2018-19), can play a huge role in capitalizing on this and increase their dividend. According to Economic Survey 2018-19, Uttar Pradesh has an increasing proportion of working population till 2041. As shown in the below figure, States like Kerala and Karnataka have a very limited window left for gaining demographic dividend whereas Uttar Pradesh is estimated to have approximately 60% of its population in the working age group of 20-59 years in 2041 (Economic Survey 2018-19). This surely points at an opportunity for Uttar Pradesh to capitalize and transform its child population demographic of present into a boon for its economic growth in the future.

Investing in early childhood has been found to be a cost-effective strategy. According to Professor Heckman’s analysis of the Perry Preschool Program, there is a 7% to 10% per year return on investment based on increased quality schooling years. Along with this, reduced costs have been observed in remedial education, health and criminal justice system expenditures. Early intervention in the health conditions of a child does have a positive influence on the child’s future. According to Brookings, a healthy child transforms into being a vital part of our country’s skilled workforce. By enhancing the efficiency and productivity levels, a child’s future earning would boost by approximately 25% (Heckman’s analysis). This would not only reduce the income disparity but also the achievement gaps that

are present between disadvantaged and privileged peers.

Looking at these implications of early interventions in a child’s life, the policy makers should understand the need to invest in childhood. Improving the conditions of aforementioned factors such as education, health and basic amenities would not only have a positive influence on an individual’s childhood but also would enable the individual to be a productive, self-sustaining and contributing part of the labor force hence, the economy. The children of Uttar Pradesh, if provided with adequate environment for maximized development, would surely play a major role in driving India’s economy to great extents in future.

DEMOGRAPHIC DIVIDEND- The future of Uttar Pradesh

Kerala

56.2

57.3

43.2

44.6

56.2

59.7

48.9

52.7

54.7

59.2

55.9

57.9

52.8

56.9

58.3

60.3

2011 2011 2011 20112021 2021 2021 20212031 2031 2031 20312041 2041 2041 2041

% o

f wor

king

age

po

pula

tion

BiharTamil Nadu Uttar Pradesh



The calculation of the child progress index is a multi-stage process outlined below:

1. Indicators selection and data collection

The indicators for the child progress index were selected based on discussions with Social Progress Imperative. Along with this, the credibility of the sources, expert feedback, and data availability were also considered. All the data used in the Index were compiled from government sources. A descriptive analysis was performed on the selected indicators. Such an analysis informs decisions pertaining to the variables that should be included in the analysis as well as highlight data management issues, such as coding of variables and missing values.

2. Data Transformation

The indicator set includes some indicators that are positively correlated with the phenomenon that we are trying to capture through the index, while some other indicators that are negatively correlated with the overall index. For example, lower the ratio of child mortality, better the conditions of a child’s livelihood. These indicators, which have a negative effect on the index, must be inverted for the purpose of calculating the index.

3. Data normalization

The next step after data transformation is of data normalization. This involves normalizing the data so that they become comparable with each other. This is done before making any data aggregation because the indicators have different units. For instance, child mortality is a ratio, but the number of wasted children is in percentage, which makes these indicators incomparable by any standard. The normalization procedure is carried out to make every data point into dimensionless numbers.

Normalization is done using Z-scores that can be used in a normal distribution. A Z-score is the number of standard deviations a data point is from the mean. It ranges from -3 S.D to a +3 S.D. Standardization rescales the indicators with a mean of zero and standard deviation of one to make them comparable with each other.

4. Evaluating the fit

The selection process of indicators includes indicators that describe the concept best as well as are conceptually linked to each other. The rigor of the Child Progress Index methodology is strengthened by assessing multiple aspects of fit between the indicators. First the exploratory factor analysis is used to test the underlying factors among the set of selected indicators in each component. In this process, the indicators that are statistically incompatible are removed. Furthermore, the methodology involves

The following formula is used:

Z=(X-μ)/σ

Index Calculation

Indicator Selection and Data Collection

Dealing with Missing Values

Data Transformation

Evaluating the Fit

Aggregation

1

2

3

4

5

Where, Z represents the Z-scoreX is the indicator value µ is the mean σ is the standard deviation


evaluating the fit between the individual indicators by calculating Cronbach’s alpha for each component.

Alpha was developed by Lee Cronbach in 1951, which provided a measure of the internal consistency of a text or scale, it is expressed as a number between 0 to 1 (Tavakol and Dennick 2011). Internal consistency is the extent that all the items in a test measure the same concept or construct and hence it is connected to the inter-relatedness of the items within the test. Internal consistency can be employed for research or examination process to ensure validity. An applied practitioner’s rule of thumb is that the alpha value should be above 0.7 for any logical grouping of variables (Cortina, 1993)

5. Aggregation

Component Scores

The child progress index uses the technique of Principal Component Analysis along with expert opinions for calculating the weights of indicators within a pillar.

The component values are calculated by summing the weighted indicator scores using the following formula

COMPONENT= ∑(w(i)*Indicator Scores)

Dimension(d)= ∑(w(i)*component)

These scores are then be transformed into a 0 to 100 scale, using the following formula:

Where “X” is the district score

Dimension Scores

Each dimension score is taken to be a weighted average of its components.

Index Scores

The final index score is the weighted average of the three-dimension scores and is calculated as follows:

(X-Minimum Score)

Child Progress Score =W(i) * (Scores of Basic Human Needs) + W(i) * (Scores of Foundations of Well-Being) + W(i) * (Scores of Opportunity)

(Maximum Score-Minimum Score)


Child Progress Score

26.58 69.10

Pivot Field Values

Map based on Longitude (generated) and Latitude (generated). Color shows sum of Pivot Field Values.Details are shown for District. The data is filtered on Pivot Field Names, which keeps Child Progress Score.

Figure 3: Child Progress Index Scores

Results: District Level Analysis

The Child Progress Index ranks

the districts of Uttar Pradesh on

different facets of child progress

and aggregates the score on these

areas to come up with an overall

score. The districts are categorised

into four tiers from ‘High Child

Progress’ to ‘Low Child Progress’

based on the quartile values of the

child progress scores.

The results are presented in the map in Figure 3. There is a clear positive correlation between the level of economic development and child progress, but the relationship varies significantly, especially among the middle- and low-income districts. The relationship between income and child progress is discussed in detail in the section – Child Progress and Economic Development.

Rank District Score

HIGH CHILD PROGRESS

1 Gautam Buddha Nagar 69.102 Ghaziabad 63.983 Baghpat 62.054 Meerut 60.955 Varanasi 58.456 Kanpur Nagar 57.967 Saharanpur 57.908 Lucknow 57.239 Bijnor 55.38

Scores


10 Agra 55.1511 Jhansi 54.7012 Bulandshahr 54.6813 Muzaffarnagar 53.8814 Allahabad 53.5315 Gorakhpur 53.3716 Jyotiba Phule Nagar 53.3317 Hamirpur_UP 52.5318 Rampur 52.33

UPPER MIDDLE CHILD PROGRESS

19 Mathura 51.9720 Deoria 51.7421 Moradabad 51.6222 Azamgarh 51.4123 Bareilly 51.0624 Chandauli 50.6625 Mau 50.6526 Jalaun 50.5727 Ballia 50.0628 Ambedkar Nagar 49.4529 Etawah 49.4430 Mainpuri 49.1431 Jaunpur 48.3732 Aligarh 48.2633 Mahoba 48.2434 Firozabad 48.1835 Faizabad 48.1236 Ghazipur 47.98

LOWER MIDDLE CHILD PROGRESS

37 Sultanpur 47.8438 Mahrajganj 47.3539 Basti 47.2740 Kanpur Dehat 47.1841 Fatehpur 46.8342 Pratapgarh_UP 46.8043 Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi) 46.2944 Mahamaya Nagar 45.8245 Mirzapur 45.5446 Farrukhabad 45.34


47 Kushinagar 45.0948 Banda 44.5849 Sant Kabir Nagar 44.4850 Unnao 44.4551 Rae Bareli 43.9652 Kanshiram Nagar 43.9353 Pilibhit 43.93

LOW CHILD PROGRESS

54 Kannauj 43.8255 Lalitpur 43.6956 Etah 43.6957 Auraiya 42.5758 Bara Banki 42.5759 Sonbhadra 41.8860 Hardoi 41.3061 Chitrakoot 41.3062 Kaushambi 40.0363 Kheri 39.5964 Gonda 38.7065 Shahjahanpur 38.5666 Siddharthnagar 38.1067 Budaun 36.7568 Sitapur 35.8069 Shrawasti 30.2470 Bahraich 29.0271 Balrampur 26.58

The child progress index reveals significant differences among the districts of Uttar Pradesh.

• Eighteen districts in the state represent the “top tier” in terms of child progress and register relatively strong performance across all three dimensions. The average dimension scores for the tier are: Basic Human Needs is 67.70, Foundations of Wellbeing is 53.74, and Opportunity is 49.64. These districts show generally strong performance on Water and Sanitation, Shelter, and Access to Information and Communication. Nearly all the districts in this tier are among the relative high-income bracket, but not all high- or upper-middle-income districts rank in the top half of child progress districts.

• The next eighteen districts in the upper-middle child progress trier have tightly clustered overall scores from 51.97 to 41.98. The districts in this tier perform best on Basic Human Needs, averaging 55.38, followed by Foundations of Wellbeing (47.89) and Opportunity (49.64). They also score highly on Access to Basic Knowledge and Health and Wellness. On some components, a high variance in performance is also observed:


Ambedkar Nagar is the leading performer on Personal Safety in the state with a score of 98.40; however, Aligarh ranks last (38.34) due to high child rate in the district. Five of the eighteen districts are among the lowest income districts in the state.

High Child Progress 67.70

55.38

49.21

41.96

53.74

47.89

45.58

39.01

49.64

46.22

42.28

34.72

Upper Middle Child Progress

Lower Middle Child Progress

Low Child Progress

Tier Basic Human Needs

Foundations of Wellbeing Opportunity

Average performance across different tiers of districts

• The third group of seventeen districts forms the lower middle child progress tier. The overall scores across the districts record extremely low variance with only 4 points separating the 37th ranked Sultanpur from Pilbhit at 53. The average scores for this tier are: Basic Human Needs is 49.21, Foundations of Wellbeing is 45.58, and Opportunity is 42.28. Compared to higher tiers, the districts in this tier perform better on Access to Basic Knowledge and Health and Wellness with an average score of 59.75 and 60.87, respectively.

• A final group of seventeen districts registers the lowest levels of child progress in the state from Kannauj (43.82) to Balrampur (26.58). The districts in this tier account for around one-fourth of Uttar Pradesh’s child population underlining the need to invest in child progress as even basic necessities elude a high proportion of children in the state. The group consists of districts at different levels of economic development. The inclusion of Sonbhadra and Chitrakoot, the two high-income districts in this group, highlights that higher per capita GDP does not guarantee that the region would provide its children with better facilities to learn and grow.


5 The average score for Uttar Pradesh is calculated by weighting the score of each district by population and then summing across district.

Figure 4: Scores of Uttar Pradesh on Child Progress, its dimensions, and components

How Uttar Pradesh Scores on Child Progress?

The district-level analysis, once averaged5, provides valuable

insights about how the state of Uttar Pradesh performs on

parameters of child progress (Figure 4). The overall score of Uttar

Pradesh is 48.18, placing between districts of Faizabad (48.12)

and Firozabad (48.18). Among the dimensions, it achieves the best

results in Basic Human Needs (54.60), followed by Foundation of

Wellbeing (46.84). Opportunity, that captures whether children

have freedom to make their own choices, is the most challenging

aspect of child progress with a score of 43.09. This shows the

performance of state is best when it comes to providing basic

necessities such as Shelter, Water, and Sanitation, etc but become

increasingly challenging as the complexity of the provision of

services increase.

Child

Pro

gres

s Sc

ore

Scor

e

0

40

20

60

10

50

30

70

80

Acc

ess

to In

form

atio

n an

d Co

mm

unic

atio

n

Bas

ic H

uman

Nee

ds

Hea

lth

and

Wel

lnes

s

Nut

riti

on a

nd B

asic

M

edic

al C

are

Envi

ronm

enta

l Q

ualit

y

Wat

er a

nd

Sani

tati

on

Opp

ortu

nity

Shel

ter

Pers

onal

Ri

ghts

Pers

onal

Saf

ety

Pers

onal

fre

edom

an

d Ch

oice

Foun

dati

ons

of

Wel

lbei

ng

Incl

usio

n

Acc

ess

to B

asic

Kn

owle

dge

Acc

ess

to Q

ualit

y Ed

ucat

ion

The score of Uttar Pradesh on child

progress

reveals that there are systematic issues

that are preventing the growth and

development of children within the state.

on a scale of 0-100,48.18



A closer analysis of the 12 components that form these dimensions demonstrates that the performance of the state is best on Personal Safety, Personal Freedom and Choice, and Nutrition and Basic Medical Care. The areas that require immediate attention comprises Inclusion, Access to Information and Communication, Access to Quality Education, and Water and Sanitation. The progress in these areas is essential to India’s success in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and since Uttar Pradesh inhabits 42 percent of India’s child population it is important for the state to address these concerns.

A final peek into the state-level analysis is presented in Figure 5, which shows the variation in the performance of districts across dimensions and components. The figure illustrates that the degree of variation varies across different aspects of child progress. There are some areas in which the districts perform uniformly, and their scores have a low range compared to others.

In absolute terms, the highest variation is experienced in Water and Sanitation, where district scores range from almost 0 to 90. Since there are some districts that have achieved high progress they can serve as examples for other districts that are lagging. The lowest variation is observed in Personal Rights where scores are clustered within 21 and 79.

These results are aligned with the Global Youth Progress Index where the biggest difference is within Water and Sanitation and the smallest on Personal Rights. This highlights that across the world providing necessities such as Water and Sanitation, which is a region-specific thing has high variation. There are some regional level policymakers that are making more concerted efforts to provide their children with better living conditions and can serve as role models for others.

Pivot Field Names

ChildProgress

Index

Basic HumanNeeds

Nutrition &Basic Medical

Care

Water &Sanitation

Shelter PersonalSafety

Foundationsof Wellbeing

Access toBasic

Knowledge

Access toInformationTechnology

Health &Wellness


Opportunity PersonalRights

PersonalFreedom and

Choice

Inclusion Access toQuality

Education

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Scor

es

Gautam Buddha Nagar

Gautam Buddha Nagar

Gautam Buddha Nagar

Gautam Buddha Nagar

Gautam Buddha Nagar

Gautam Buddha Nagar

Mahamaya NagarKanshiram Nagar

Sant Kabir Nagar

Muzaffarnagar

Shahjahanpur

Bulandshahr

Kushinagar

Kaushambi

Sonbhadra

Ghaziabad

GhaziabadGhaziabad

Chitrakoot

BalrampurBalrampur

Balrampur

Balrampur

Balrampur

BalrampurShrawasti

ShrawastiMirzapur

Bahraich

Bahraich

Bahraich

Bahraich

Mahoba

Jaunpur

Budaun

MeerutBareilly

Sitapur

SitapurPilibhit

Jalaun

Mau

Box and WhiskersPivot Field Names

Child Progress IndexBasic Human NeedsNutrition & Basic Medical CareWater & SanitationShelterPersonal SafetyFoundations of WellbeingAccess to Basic KnowledgeAccess to Information TechnologyHealth & WellnessEnvironmental QualityOpportunityPersonal RightsPersonal Freedom and ChoiceInclusionAccess to Quality Education

Sum of Pivot Field Values for each Pivot Field Names. Color shows details about Pivot Field Names. The marks are labeled by District. Details are shown for District.

Figure 5: Variation within the state


Discussion of Results

A more illuminating analysis that can provide the policymakers

with actionable insights is the evaluation of the components that

form the Child Progress Index. The examination of components can

help in identifying the areas that are creating challenging across

every district in the state and would also bring out the areas in

which almost all the districts are performing well. Moreover, this

would help districts in ascertaining any specific challenges that

they face and identifying the peer districts from whom they can

draw learning to move forward.

Based on careful examination, the components are divided into three categories:

• Leading Components This includes areas in which the performance of all the districts is above

average.

• Progressing Components This includes areas in which some districts are performing well, while

some others are lagging behind.

• Challenging Components This includes the areas in which the performance of almost all the

districts is below average.

Leading Components Progressing Components

Challenging Components





Environmental Quality Inclusion


Health and Wellness

Personal Safety Personal RightsShelterWater and Sanitation


The following components are the best-performing aspects within the Child Progress Index for the state of Uttar Pradesh. This section discusses their individual performance in greater depth to identify the regional variations that are hidden underneath the averages and the means to improve them.


The developments in Uttar Pradesh in the area of medical care are clearly reflected by the index, leading to an average score of 59.1. A potential contributing factor for these advancements lies in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which included targets focusing on various aspects of the Nutrition and Basic Medical Care component, such as child and maternal mortality. The indicators captured are also a part of the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) agenda.

Though, a score of 59 also reflects that there is immense scope of improvement for the state and its districts. They can devise strategies based on specific areas in which they are facing challenges by drawing learnings from their peers.

The district scores range from 20 to 85; however, there are just 15 districts that have a score of lower than 50. These districts lie mainly in the central region of Uttar Pradesh. They can draw insights from high performing districts – Baghpat (85), Deoria (82), Kanpur Nagar (81), and Chandauli (79) that have managed to achieve goals related to child healthcare.

The category of over performers includes only four districts – Meerut, Gorakhpur, Ghaziabad, Pratapgarh, and they belong to all the income categories. Despite the high and clustered absolute performance of almost all the districts, there are a large number of districts that underperform compared to their peers.

Leading Components

District

Meerut

Gorakh

purGha

ziabad

Pratapg

arh_UP Bas

tiAlig

arhPilib

hitSult

anpur

Mahoba

Lalitpu

rJyot

iba Phu

le Naga

rChit

rakoot

Etawah

Saharan

purFiro

zabad Mau

Mirzap

urBula

ndshah

rSan

t Ravida

s Naga

r (B..

Kushina

garRam

purJau

npur

Auraiya

Allahab

adSan

t Kabir

Nagar

Banda

Ghazipu

rUnn

aoMat

hura

Fatehpu

rSon

bhadra

Shahjah

anpur

Faizaba

dKan

nauj

Morad

abad

Mainpu

riBare

illyGon

daBud

aunKau

shamb

iKhe

ri Etah Hardoi

Bara Ban

kiFarr

ukhaba

dSita

purSidd

harth na

garKan

shiram

Nagar

Shrawa

stiBalr

ampur

Bahraic

h

-45

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

Overperformance and Underperformance

-44.75 6.09

From Boundary wi..

Sum of From Boundary with Sign for each District. Color shows sum of From Boundary with Sign. The data is filtered on Indicator, which keeps Nutrition and Basic Medical Care. The viewis filtered on sum of From Boundary with Sign, which keeps non-Null values only.

Nutrition & Basic Medical Care

20.01 85.44

Pivot Field Values

Map based on Longitude (generated) and Latitude (generated). Color shows sum of Pivot Field Values. Details are shown for District. The data is filtered on Pivot FieldNames, which keeps Nutrition & Basic Medical Care.


Amou

nt o

f Und

erpe

rfor

man

ce/O

verp

erfo

rman

ce

Scores



Without acquiring the right skill set and knowledge from an early stage in life, children face countless barriers to earning potential and employment. They are more likely to fall into the poverty trap, more likely to suffer adverse health consequences, and less likely to make political contributions in the decisions that affect them – threatening their ability to build a create a better society for themselves. This makes it imperative for every region to invest in and ensure that no child is excluded from learning.

The average score of Uttar Pradesh on this component – 56 reflects that the state is performing relatively well in this area compared to other aspects of child progress. It can be attributed mainly to the progress made during the last decade in enrolment rates for all as well as improving the gender parity in school education. This reflects success in an area that has been the focus of the Indian government as well as the global SDG commitment.

The district scores are mostly clustered between 50 and 80, with just 15 districts scoring below 19. The best performing districts include – Allahabad (80), Kannauj (75), Ghazipur (74), Basti (73), Fatehpur (71), and Baghpat (71). The highest score of 80 depicts that even the best performing districts have to work on certain areas, which includes transition and dropout rates.

On a relative basis, there are 46 districts that underperform compared to their peers. The range of underperformance varies significantly from -0.33 to -41.66. Despite the improved performance of most of the districts on this aspect, there is still a long way to go for Uttar Pradesh. Districts have to focus more on the data-driven policymaking that can guide investments in the areas where they are needed the most.

District

Baghpa

tLali

tpur

Varana

siSah

aranpur

Chanda

uliAur

aiya Gonda

Jhansi

Gautam

Buddha

Nagar

Mainpu

riKan

shiram

Nagar

Deoria

Azamg

arhGor

akhpur

Sant Ra

vidas N

agar (B

..Chi

trakoot

Faizaba

dKus

hinagar

Mahama

ya Naga

rBall

iaBijn

orMat

hura

Pilibhit

Jalaun

Bara Ba

nkiSita

purBula

ndshah

rKhe

riRam

purFiro

zabad

Mirzap

urBan

daHar

doiSha

hjahanp

urSidd

harthna

garBar

eillySult

anpur

Kausha

mbi

Agra

MauShr

awasti

Aligarh

Bahraic

hMee

rutMo

radaba

dGha

ziabad

Budaun

Muzaff

arnagar

Rae Bar

eliBalr

ampur

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10


-41.66 7.89

From Boundary wi..

Sum of From Boundary with Sign for each District. Color shows sum of From Boundary with Sign. The data is filtered on Indicator, which keeps Access to Basic Knowledge. The view isfiltered on sum of From Boundary with Sign, which keeps non-Null values only.


19.53 80.36

Pivot Field Values

Map based on Longitude (generated) and Latitude (generated). Color shows sum of Pivot Field Values. Details are shown for District. The data is filtered on Pivot FieldNames, which keeps Access to Basic Knowledge.


Scores

Amou

nt o

f Und

erpe

rfor

man

ce/O

verp

erfo

rman

ce



Considering the prevalence of child marriages and adolescent pregnancies, the personal freedom and choice of children forms an important component of child progress. Regions at early stages of development where even the most basic human needs are left wanting at times, usually perform poorly on such aspects of well-being. It is, thus, a positive achievement for Uttar Pradesh to have personal freedom and choice among the leading components of the index.

The state has an average score of 66.07. Saharanpur has emerged as the best-performing district on this component, with a score of 92.72. However, despite the promising outlook of the state on the aspect of personal freedom and choice, issues like child marriages are quite pertinent to the state of Uttar Pradesh. The district of Shrawasti, for instance, has a particularly high incidence of child marriage and the highest fertility rate in the country.6 The lack of access to contraceptives can be a leading cause for the latter. Unsurprisingly, the district is also the worst performer on the component with a score of 15.11.

The scope for improvement even shows up when the districts are compared with their peer groups. As shown in the second illustration, more than 50 districts under-perform compared to their peers and can make rapid advancements towards the median value of their peers simply by drawing learnings from their policy experience. Considering the state is one of the laggards on these aspects of child progress when compared on a national scale, addressing these issues should gain prominence in state policy. Since these are behavioural issues, their returns will only become evident over the long run.

District

Meerut

Morad

abad

Pratapg

arh_UP

Pilibhit

Rae Bar

eliAur

aiyaJau

npur

Allahab

adKau

shamb

iUnn

aoBula

ndshah

rGor

akhpur

Kanpur

Dehat

Deoria

Sultanp

urFaiz

abad

Hamirpu

r_UP

Kannau

jVar

anasi

Aligarh Ball

iaFiro

zabad

Mainpu

riBar

a Banki

Jalaun Agr

aHar

doiSan

t Ravida

s Naga

r (B..

Gautam

Buddha

Nagar

Ghazipu

rBas

tiEtaw

ahJha

nsiSan

t Kabir

Nagar

Shahjah

anpur

Kanshir

am Nag

arMir

zapur

Kushina

garMah

rajganj

Farrukh

abad

Mahoba

Mahama

ya Naga

rEtah

Chitrak

ootCha

ndauli

Sonbha

draSita

pur Kheri

Siddhart

hnagar

Mathur

aBud

aun Gonda

Balramp

urLali

tpur

Bahraic

hShr

awasti

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10


-60.36 11.72

From Boundary wi..

Sum of From Boundary with Sign for each District. Color shows sum of From Boundary with Sign. The data is filtered on Indicator, which keeps Personal freedom and Choice. The view isfiltered on sum of From Boundary with Sign, which keeps non-Null values only.


15.11 92.72

Pivot Field Values

Map based on Longitude (generated) and Latitude (generated). Color shows sum of Pivot Field Values. Details are shown for District. The data is filtered on Pivot FieldNames, which keeps Personal Freedom and Choice.

6 Khandelwal, S. (2018). Early to Wed, The Caravan.


Scores

Amou

nt o

f Und

erpe

rfor

man

ce/O

verp

erfo

rman

ce


Personal Safety

A final component where Uttar Pradesh performs relatively well is ‘Personal Safety.’ The state has secured an average of 73.29, which is the highest among all components within the index. It also has the lowest variation among states with the best-performing district, Ambedkar Nagar, having a score of 98.4 while the district with the poorest performance, Mahamaya Nagar, has a score of 34.3. Thus, the range of 64.1 between districts is the lowest among all components.

However, such a performance does not imply there can be complacency on the part of the state and local governments on this front. The aspect of personal safety always carries the scope for further improvement. Children must grow in an environment that is safe and conducive to their holistic development. The prevalence of crime against children can impede their progress in society in significant ways.

Moreover, the fact that more districts are underperformers relative to their peers than there are over-performers points towards the scope for improvement that remains on the component of personal safety. Therefore, despite the improved performance of the state on this front, the state government should seek ways to ensure that the children across the state are provided with a safe and nurturing environment. To begin with, the under-performing districts provide viable regional focus areas.

District

Shrawa

stiLali

tpur

Baghpa

tGha

zipur

Mahrajg

anjKus

hinagar Mau

Varana

siGon

daMo

radaba

dSon

bhadra

Muzaff

arnagar

Mathur

aAgr

aKau

shamb

iKan

pur Na

garGha

ziabad

Bahraic

hRam

purBar

eilly Deoria

Budaun

Farrukh

abad

Faizaba

dGor

akhpur Khe

riJha

nsiLuc

know

Sitapur

Jyotiba

Phule N

agar

Kanshir

am Nag

arBijn

orPilib

hitFate

hpur

Banda

Balramp

urEtaw

ahChi

trakoot

Auraiya Unn

aoKan

nauj

Meerut

Mahoba

Firozab

adSha

hjahanp

urGau

tam Bud

dha Na

gar Etah Aligarh

Mahama

ya Naga

r-45

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10


-43.77 9.29

From Boundary wi..

Sum of From Boundary with Sign for each District. Color shows sum of From Boundary with Sign. The data is filtered on Indicator, which keeps Personal Security. The view is filtered onsum of From Boundary with Sign, which keeps non-Null values only.

Personal Safety

34.30 98.40

Pivot Field Values

Map based on Longitude (generated) and Latitude (generated). Color shows sum of Pivot Field Values. Details are shown for District. The data is filtered on Pivot FieldNames, which keeps Personal Safety.


Scores

Amou

nt o

f Und

erpe

rfor

man

ce/O

verp

erfo

rman

ce


The following components are the ones where the districts of Uttar Pradesh are showing significant progress but still have scope for improvement. These can be said to be the low-hanging fruits for the state and can give the highest return with slightly improved focus.


With an average score of 30.15, access to information and communication is one of the most concerning components on the Child Progress Index. Only the component of inclusion has a poorer performance on an average. It does not come as a surprise that districts with prominent cities of Uttar Pradesh perform the best on the provision of information and communication – Gautam Buddha Nagar (97.09), Ghaziabad (69.38), Lucknow (58.97), Agra (58.9) and Meerut (55.63) being the leading districts. The disparity between the best and worst-performing districts is also significantly high for this component, with Sharawasti scoring a humble 10.

However, better provision of information and communication across the districts of the state is crucial because such advancements can help children access better services, like education, for instance, that are otherwise difficult to access in economically weaker areas. Better access to information and communication can also provide the government with necessary cost-effective infrastructure to deliver such quality services to children. Therefore, the betterment of this component can result in child development in other related areas as well.

The accompanying figure of over-performing and under-performing districts paints a similar picture. Apart from three districts (Aligarh, Kanpur Nagar and Bulandshahr), most regions are under-performing in their respective peer groups. This implies that most districts perform lower than expected based on deviation from median score of the peer group. The scope for improvement in access to education and communication, thus, is immense and the government should begin by targeting the worst-performing districts.

Progressing Components

Access to Information Technology

10.01 97.09

Pivot Field Values

Map based on Longitude (generated) and Latitude (generated). Color shows sum of Pivot Field Values. Details are shown for District. The data is filtered on Pivot FieldNames, which keeps Access to Information Technology.

District

Kanpur

Nagar

Aligarh

Bulands

hahr

Sultanp

urJha

nsiGor

akhpur

Mirzap

urBag

hpat

Sonbha

draSan

t Ravida

s Naga

r (Bhad

..Bijn

orCha

ndauli

Deoria

Mahama

ya Naga

rAza

mgarh Bas

ti EtahFaiz

abad

Saharan

purEtaw

ahJala

unAur

aiya Ballia

Ghazipu

rJau

npur

Rae Bar

eli MauSan

t Kabir

Nagar

Firozab

adFarr

ukhaba

dJyot

iba Phu

le Naga

rMai

npuri

Rampur

Pratapg

arh_UP

Hamirpu

r_UP

Shahjah

anpur

Fatehpu

rAm

bedkar

Nagar

Morad

abad

Unnao

Gonda

Bahraic

hBud

aunBar

a Banki

Chitrak

ootKan

shiram

Nagar

Kannau

jKau

shamb

iMah

oba Banda

Kanpur

Dehat Khe

riMah

rajganj

Balramp

urSita

purHar

doiPilib

hitKus

hinagar

Siddhart

hnagar

Lalitpu

rShr

awasti

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10


-25.68 11.99

From Boundary with ..

Sum of From Boundary with Sign for each District. Color shows sum of From Boundary with Sign. The data is filtered on Indicator, which keeps Access to Information and Communication. The view is filtered on sumof From Boundary with Sign, which keeps non-Null values only.


Scores

Amou

nt o

f Und

erpe

rfor

man

ce/O

verp

erfo

rman

ce



The Child Progress Index looks at environmental quality from the perspective of households where children spend the majority of their time. Therefore, the incidence of acute respiratory infections and households with improved cooking fuel are taken as indicators for environmental quality. Since access to cleaner fuel is costly, the districts that perform better economically have also performed better on the component of environmental quality – Gautam Buddha Nagar being the leading district with a score of 81.06. The state has scored 44.8 on an average.

Since economic strength seems to be a strong determinant of performance on this component, as is evident from the cluster of better performing districts around Delhi and Lucknow, the state government should support households in economically backward districts in accessing cleaner fuel. Such efforts would help children and mothers grow up in households with a cleaner environment, which would have a positive impact on their health.

Surprisingly, there are no over-performers or under-performers on this component, which implies that each district has performed close to the median score of its peer groups.


16.10 81.07

Pivot Field Values

Map based on Longitude (generated) and Latitude (generated). Color shows sum of Pivot Field Values. Details are shown for District. The data is filtered on Pivot FieldNames, which keeps Environmental Quality.

Scores


Health & Wellness

20.35 88.17

Pivot Field Values

Map based on Longitude (generated) and Latitude (generated). Color shows sum of Pivot Field Values. Details are shown for District. The data is filtered on Pivot FieldNames, which keeps Health & Wellness.

Health and Wellness

The component of health and wellness is a relatively better performer than other components with an average score of 56.37. However, the districts show considerable variation with the best-performing district (Farrukhabad) having a score of 88.16 and the worst-performing one (Jalaun) having a score of 20.34. This implies there remains immense scope for improvement among the districts. Such districts can draw learnings from the districts that are performing well.

Meanwhile, it must be noted that a majority of the districts are clustered around the score of 60, which implies that there is scope for improvement among the better-performing districts as well. The scope and need for improvement in health and wellness become more pertinent in light of the fact that Uttar Pradesh not only has the worst child health outcomes in the country but in the world. As per a Lancet study, while 41 out of 1000 new-born babies die in the state, the commensurate figure for sub-Saharan countries like Congo, Ghana, and Kenya stands at 20.7

Therefore, addressing health and wellness should gain paramount concern for the state of Uttar Pradesh. The accompanying figure for over-performance and under-performance shows that there are more under-performers when compared to their peer group districts. These districts can make immense gains by following the learnings and experiences of their peers identified by the index.

7 Ahmed, I., Ali, S. M., Amenga-Etego, S., Ariff, S., Bahl, R., Baqui, A. H., & Biemba, G. (2018). Population-based rates, timing, and causes of maternal deaths, stillbirths, and neonatal deaths in south Asia and sub-Saharan Africa: a multi-country prospective cohort study. The Lancet Global Health, 6(12), e1297-e1308.

Overperformance and UnderperformanceDistrict

Mahama

ya Naga

rUnn

aoGau

tam Bud

dha Na

garDeo

riaKus

hinagar

Ghazipu

rGor

akhpur

Fatehpu

rKhe

riSan

t Kabir

Nagar

Aligarh

Chanda

uli Mau Meerut

Gonda

Mahrajg

anjSah

aranpur

Shrawa

stiBan

daAlla

habad

Sultanp

urAm

bedkar

Nagar

Hamirpu

r_UP

Balramp

urBijn

orMu

zaffarna

garPrat

apgarh_

UPSita

purFaiz

abad

Siddhart

hnagar

Mahoba

Morad

abad

Bareilly

Varana

siRae

Bareli

Jhansi

Sonbha

draJyot

iba Phu

le Naga

rMir

zapur

Bahraic

hRam

purKan

pur Na

garPilib

hitSan

t R avida

s Naga

r (B..

Budaun

Jaunpu

rLuc

know

Auraiya

Kausha

mbi

Shahjah

anpur

Chitrak

ootLali

tpur

Jalaun

-45

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15


-42.72 14.88

From Boundary wi..

Sum of From Boundary with Sign for each District. Color shows sum of From Boundary with Sign. The data is filtered on Indicator, which keeps Health and Wellness. The view is filtered onsum of From Boundary with Sign, which keeps non-Null values only.

Scores

Amou

nt o

f Und

erpe

rfor

man

ce/O

verp

erfo

rman

ce


Personal Rights

21.15 78.92

Pivot Field Values

Map based on Longitude (generated) and Latitude (generated). Color shows sum of Pivot Field Values. Details are shown for District. The data is filtered on Pivot FieldNames, which keeps Personal Rights.

Personal Rights

The only component of the ‘Opportunity’ pillar in the progressing category is ‘Personal Rights.’ This becomes an important element in ensuring child progress because personal rights are crucial in enabling a child to exercise any opportunity throughout life. The state secures an average score of 47.24 on this component.

However, the average conceals the high degree of variation among the districts, with Jhansi being the best-performing district with a score of 78.92 and Balrampur scoring the lowest score of 21.15. The proportion of children registered at birth, for instance, is significantly high for the former. Every district needs to ensure that the rights of the children within it are sufficiently secured.

In relative terms, a significantly higher proportion of districts under-perform compared to their peers. This is shown in the second illustration. Such districts can make vast improvements merely by identifying how their peers are ensuring better personal rights for children.


Lalitpu

rChi

trakoot

Mahoba

Hamirpu

r_UP

Baghpa

tJyot

iba Phu

le Naga

rFaiz

abad

Luckno

wRam

purSah

aranpur

Varana

siUnn

ao EtahCha

ndauli Mau

Sonbha

draMee

rutGha

ziabad

Banda

Sant Ra

vidas N

agar (B

..Rae

Bareli

Pilibhit

Pratapg

arh_UP

Auraiya Etaw

ahMo

radaba

dMu

zaffarna

garMir

zapur

Mahama

ya Naga

rBijn

orKan

shiram

Nagar

Bara Ba

nkiKan

pur Na

garGha

zipur

Bulands

hahr

Allahab

ad Ballia

Sant Ka

bir Nag

arMai

npuri

Deoria

Kausha

mbi

Bareilly

Sultanp

urFarr

uk haba

dFiro

zabad

Fatehpu

rHar

doiBud

aunJau

npur

Kannau

jSita

pur Basti

Siddhart

hnagar

Shahjah

anpur

Shrawa

sti Kheri

Gonda

Bahraic

hBalr

ampur

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20


-35.87 19.42

From Boundary wi..

Sum of From Boundary with Sign for each District. Color shows sum of From Boundary with Sign. The data is filtered on Indicator, which keeps Personal Rights. The view is filtered on sumof From Boundary with Sign, which keeps non-Null values only.

Scores

Amou

nt o

f Und

erpe

rfor

man

ce/O

verp

erfo

rman

ce


Shelter

Access to shelter is one of the most basic needs that is not just necessary for child progress but human development itself. It is, therefore, concerning that Uttar Pradesh has a low average score of 44.4. This is also another component that presents high levels of disparity among its district performance, with Ghaziabad scoring the highest at 89.95 and Sitapur scoring the lowest at 7.82. A range exceeding 82 points between the best and worst-performing districts shows the level of disparity that exists across these districts and is indicative of significant scope for improvement.

It will be difficult to ensure child progress when even basic requirements like shelter are left wanting in the state. This is a typical example of a low-hanging fruit for the state of Uttar Pradesh in achieving improved child progress. The lagging districts can draw significant learnings from regions like Ghaziabad and Gautam Buddha Nagar on their achievement of improved shelter facilities.

Like most components, the under-performing districts with respect to their peers far outweigh the over-performing ones. Only three districts – Saharanpur, Bulandshahr, and Varanasi – perform better than their peers. The majority of under-performers are such due to lack of improved housing, poor access to electricity and high levels of housing congestion. In the short-term, it is necessary that these districts at least catch up with their peer groups and then attempt to make further advancements. Child progress will remain an elusive endeavour until such basic needs such as shelter are met by the state.

Shelter

7.83 89.96

Pivot Field Values

Map based on Longitude (generated) and Latitude (generated). Color shows sum of Pivot Field Values. Details are shown for District. The data is filtered on Pivot FieldNames, which keeps Shelter.


Saharan

purBula

ndshah

rVar

anasi

Azamg

arhKan

pur Na

garMah

obaCha

ndauli

Gorakh

purEtaw

ahDeo

riaBan

daJau

npur

Sant Ra

vidas N

agar (B

..Alla

habad Ballia

Chitrak

ootMir

zapur

Firozab

adLali

tpur

Ghazipu

rPrat

apgarh_

UPSult

anpur

Ambed

kar Nag

arMai

npuri

Siddhart

hnagar Bas

tiFarr

ukhaba

dPilib

hitSan

t Kabir

Nagar

Faizaba

dAur

aiyaSon

bhadra Etah

Mahrajg

anjKan

nauj

Rae Bar

eliKus

hinagar

Kanshir

am Nag

arSha

hjahanp

urKau

shamb

iBalr

ampur

Kanpur

Dehat

Ba ra Ba

nkiFate

hpur

Gonda

Budaun Unnao Kheri

Hardoi

Shrawa

stiBah

raich

Sitapur

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10


-43.51 16.10

From Boundary wi..

Sum of From Boundary with Sign for each District. Color shows sum of From Boundary with Sign. The data is filtered on Indicator, which keeps Shelter. The view is filtered on sum of FromBoundary with Sign, which keeps non-Null values only.

Scores

Amou

nt o

f Und

erpe

rfor

man

ce/O

verp

erfo

rman

ce



Another basic need that is still in the intermediate stage of progressing components is that of water and sanitation. The provision of clean drinking water and proper sanitation facilities are crucial in ensuring improved child health and a low prevalence of diseases. The state, however, manages an average score of 40.4 on the component. The component also has the highest amount of variation among its district scores, with Gautam Buddha Nagar scoring 91.54 while Kaushambi scoring 4.36. Such a huge variation among district scores points to the immense scope for improvement that exists across these regions.

There exists a very significant north-south divide in the performance of the districts with the regions in close proximity to Delhi have better water and sanitation facilities than the rest of the state, with only the exception of Lucknow and Kanpur. The southern districts of the state like Kaushambi, Chitrakoot, and Lalitpur and the worst-performing districts on this component. The state government should, thus, give a disproportionate focus towards these regions for improvement in water and sanitation facilities.

The three aforementioned districts that perform poorly are also the ones that underperform with respect to their peers. Varanasi, on the other hand, is the highest over-performer due to access to treated water facilities and in the district. The experience of such districts can provide a vital road map for other lagging regions to improve their performance on this front, which is an indispensable component of child progress.

Water & Sanitation

4.36 91.54

Pivot Field Values

Map based on Longitude (generated) and Latitude (generated). Color shows sum of Pivot Field Values. Details are shown for District. The data is filtered on Pivot FieldNames, which keeps Water & Sanitation.


Saharan

purVar

anasi

Bulands

hahr

Pilibhit

Aligarh

Gorakh

purMat

hura

Jhansi

Budaun

Kanshir

am Nag

arAlla

habad

Jalaun Kheri

Deoria

Mahrajg

anjKus

hinagar

Sant Ka

bir Nag

arFaiz

abad

Mahama

ya Naga

rSidd

harthna

gar Ballia

Hamirpu

r_UP

Firozab

adHar

doiGon

daAm

bedkar

Nagar Mau Aur

aiyaShr

awasti Basti

Mainpu

riSita

pur Etah Etawah

Balramp

urBah

raich

Bara Ba

nkiAza

mgarh

Jaunpu

rFarr

ukhaba

dSult

anpur

Chanda

uliUnn

aoKan

pur De

hatRae

Bareli

Banda

Pratapg

arh_UP

Kannau

jGha

zipur

Sonbha

draSan

t Ravida

s Naga

r (B..

Fatehpu

rMah

obaMir

zapur

Chitrak

ootLali

tpur

Kausha

mbi-45

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15


-43.67 12.89

From Boundary wi..

Sum of From Boundary with Sign for each District. Color shows sum of From Boundary with Sign. The data is filtered on Indicator, which keeps Water and Sanitation. The view is filteredon sum of From Boundary with Sign, which keeps non-Null values only.

Scores

Amou

nt o

f Und

erpe

rfor

man

ce/O

verp

erfo

rman

ce


The following components are the most concerning set of areas that the state of Uttar Pradesh needs to work upon to improve child progress. These are aspects where state-wide policy action is the need of the hour since there are only a few positive outliers.


The districts of Uttar Pradesh have made significant progress in providing access to education to its children. However, the quality of educational institutes is not at par with the country in most of the districts. The mean score on this component is 38.95, which is one of the lowest achieved by the state in any component, so is the median score.

On an absolute basis, the scores of most of the districts are below 50. There are just nine districts – Gautam Buddha Nagar (88.5), Ghaziabad (65), Varanasi (59), Allahabad (56), Faizabad (53), Jaunpur (51), Saharanpur (51) and Meerut (51) that score above 50. It can also be seen that there a huge difference between the best and the second-best district.

This depicts that while most of the districts have managed to open up schools and have impacted enrolment rates using various schemes such as mid-day meals, they have not been able to provide basic services in these schools, such as professionally qualified teachers in-house training to teachers and computer facilities.

On a relative basis, there are five districts – Varanasi, Firozabad, Saharanpur, Aligarh, Bahraich - that overperform compared to their peers. And there are 51 districts that underperform compared to their peers with the range of underperformance as -0.21 to -36.70. Their performance is lower than their expected performance based on deviation from the median score of the peer group. This highlights the immense scope of improvement that exists in the provision of quality education.

Varanasi is one of the districts that not only performs well on an absolute basis but also on a relative basis. It can serve as a benchmark to its peers that can understand additional factors that played a role in Varanasi’s growth.

Challenging Components


5.25 88.55

Pivot Field Values

Map based on Longitude (generated) and Latitude (generated). Color shows sum of Pivot Field Values. Details are shown for District. The data is filtered on Pivot FieldNames, which keeps Access to Quality Education.


Varana

siFiro

zabad

Saharan

purAlig

arhBah

raich

Kanpur

Nagar

Gorakh

purKan

shiram

Nagar

Luckno

wMo

radaba

dUnn

aoFarr

ukhaba

dBula

ndshah

rKus

hinagar

Bareilly

Sant Ra

vidas N

agar (B

had..

Chitrako

otMir

zapur Etah Kheri

Etawah

Ghazipu

rMai

npuri Mau

Muzaff

arnagar

Sitapur Agr

aSult

anpur

Bara Ba

nki Basti

Kannau

jDeo

riaCha

ndauli

Lalitpu

rAur

aiyaBud

aunMat

hura

Gonda

Fatehpu

rAm

bedkar

Nagar

Mahama

ya Naga

rSha

hjahanp

urAza

mgarh

Hardoi

Mahoba Ball

iaKan

pur De

hatRae

Bareli

Banda

Shrawa

stiSan

t Kabir

Nagar

Siddhart

hnagar

Pratapg

arh_UP

Sonbha

draBalr

ampur

Pilibhit

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15


-36.70 15.54


Sum of From Boundary with Sign for each District. Color shows sum of From Boundary with Sign. The data is filtered on Indicator, which keeps Access to Quality Education. The view is filtered on sum of FromBoundary with Sign, which keeps non-Null values only.

Scores

Amou

nt o

f Und

erpe

rfor

man

ce/O

verp

erfo

rman

ce


Inclusion

With a mean score of 20 on a 0-100 scale and a median score 19 on the same scale, Inclusion is the most pressing issue for the districts of Uttar Pradesh. The creation of an inclusive society that takes into account the needs of disabled children and provides equal opportunities to its minorities is still a distant dream for the state. All the districts, barring Mahoba that has a score of 81, score less than 50.

Even the most progressive districts, socially as well as economically, are no exception. They also struggle to provide children with an environment that is inclusive. For instance, Gautam Buddha Nagar that is the best district on child progress and contributes the most to the state GDP,8 has a very low score on this aspect.

The relative analysis reveals that 20 districts perform within their expected range. There are five districts that overperform, one of them being Mahoba since its score is higher than the rest of the districts with a significantly high margin. This performance can be accounted by the high levels of SC, ST, and OBC enrolments as well as enrolments of disabled students.

Uttar Pradesh should strive for creating a society where every child has the right to pursue his or her dreams, and there should be no discrimination based on caste, creed or religion.

8 It has the highest per capita GDP in Uttar Pradesh, according to 2011-12 data.

Inclusion

0.00 81.09

Pivot Field Values

Map based on Longitude (generated) and Latitude (generated). Color shows sum of Pivot Field Values. Details are shown for District. The data is filtered on Pivot FieldNames, which keeps Inclusion.


Mahoba

Kausha

mbi

Deoria Agr

aKan

pur De

hatSan

t Kabir

Nagar Kheri

Bijnor

Jalaun

Firozab

adKan

nauj

Fatehpu

rVar

anasi

Chitrako

otJyot

iba Phu

le Naga

rMir

zapur Etah Banda

Sitapur

Pilibhit

Saharan

purFarr

ukhaba

dAur

aiyaSha

hjahanp

urKus

hinagar

Aligarh

Bulands

hahr

Pratapg

arh_UP

Morad

abad

Siddhart

hnagar

Unnao

Mahama

ya Naga

rSon

bhadra

Bara Ba

nki Jhansi

Bareilly Gon

daKan

shiram

Nagar

Mahrajg

anjMee

rutBag

hpat

Kanpur

Nagar

Hardoi

Budaun

Muzaff

arnagar

M athu

raRam

purShr

awasti

Balramp

urGau

tam Bud

dha Na

garGha

ziabad

Luckno

wBah

raich

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50


-22.37 54.16


Sum of From Boundary with Sign for each District. Color shows sum of From Boundary with Sign. The data is filtered on Indicator, which keeps Inclusion. The view is filtered on sum of From Boundary with Sign, whichkeeps non-Null values only.

Scores

Amou

nt o

f Und

erpe

rfor

man

ce/O

verp

erfo

rman

ce


Child Progress and Economic Development

The Child Progress Index model, by capturing only social

and environmental indicators, allows the examination of the

relationship between child progress and economic development. By

comparing the district per capita GDP levels with the performance

of districts on the Child Progress Index, we can recognize patterns

that can help to understand the effects of economic activity on

different facets of children’s lives. These can be guiding steps for

identifying priority areas and policy implementation.


The relationship between child progress and the level of economic development is depicted in Figure 2. It provides us two key insights:

First, there exists a positive relationship between child progress and per capita income. For instance, Balrampur with a per capita GDP of INR 29461 score 26 on child progress while Lucknow scores 57 on child progress with a GDP per capita of INR 102566.

Second, despite the correlation between the two ideas, there are districts that achieve divergent levels of child progress even at similar levels of per capita GDP. For instance, Mahoba and Agra, two districts with almost similar per capita GDP levels have significant difference in their child progress scores. Agra scores 55 while Mahoba scores just 48.

The results imply that although economic development is not the whole story but having a higher level of economic development unquestionably provides the districts with more resources to invest in areas of child development. However, the results also support that economic development alone cannot drive child progress, and districts need to have policies targeted towards the growth of children.

0K 20K 40K 60K 80K 100K 120K 140K 160K 180K 200K 220K 240K 260K

Per Capita GDP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Scor

es

Agra

Aligarh

Baghpat

Bulandshahr

Chitrakoot

Gautam Buddha Nagar

Ghaziabad

Gorakhpur

Hamirpur_UP

Kanpur Nagar

Lalitpur

Lucknow

Mahoba

MeerutVaranasi


Per Capita GDP vs. Pivot Field Values. The marks are labeled by District. The data is filtered on PivotField Names, which keeps Access to Information and Communication.


0K 20K 40K 60K 80K 100K 120K 140K 160K 180K 200K 220K 240K 260K

Per Capita GDP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Scor

es

Agra

Aligarh

Allahabad

BaghpatBahraich

Balrampur

Banda

Chitrakoot

Faizabad

Gautam Buddha Nagar

Ghaziabad

Jhansi

Kanpur Dehat

Kanpur Nagar

Mathura

Meerut

Pilibhit

Sonbhadra

Varanasi


Per Capita GDP vs. Pivot Field Values. The marks are labeled by District. The data is filtered on PivotField Names, which keeps Access to Quality Education.

0K 20K 40K 60K 80K 100K 120K 140K 160K 180K 200K 220K 240K 260K

Per Capita GDP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Scor

es

Agra

Aligarh

Auraiya

Baghpat

Balrampur

Bareilly

Chitrakoot

Deoria

Fatehpur

Gautam Buddha Nagar

Ghaziabad

Hamirpur_UP

Jhansi

Kanpur Dehat

Kanpur Nagar

Kushinagar

Moradabad

Saharanpur

Sant Kabir Nagar

Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi)

Sitapur


Per Capita GDP vs. Pivot Field Values. The marks are labeled by District. The data is filtered on PivotField Names, which keeps Environmental Quality.





0K 20K 40K 60K 80K 100K 120K 140K 160K 180K 200K 220K 240K 260K

Per Capita GDP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Scor

es

Agra

Auraiya

Baghpat

Bareilly

Bijnor

Budaun

Chitrakoot

Etawah

Fatehpur

Gautam Buddha Nagar

Ghaziabad

Gorakhpur

Jalaun

Jhansi

Kanpur Nagar

Kaushambi

LucknowMeerut

Moradabad

Pilibhit

Rampur

Sonbhadra

Unnao

Varanasi


Per Capita GDP vs. Pivot Field Values. The marks are labeled by District. The data is filtered on PivotField Names, which keeps Water and Sanitation.

0K 20K 40K 60K 80K 100K 120K 140K 160K 180K 200K 220K 240K 260K

Per Capita GDP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Scor

es

Agra

Allahabad

Auraiya

Baghpat

Bijnor

Budaun

Bulandshahr

ChitrakootDeoria

Etah

Gautam Buddha Nagar

Hamirpur_UP

Hardoi

Jhansi

Kanpur Dehat

Kanpur Nagar

Kanshiram Nagar

Kheri

LucknowMau

Meerut

Muzaffarnagar

Saharanpur

Shrawasti

Sitapur

Varanasi

Shelter

Per Capita GDP vs. Pivot Field Values. The marks are labeled by District. The data is filtered on PivotField Names, which keeps Shelter.


Shelter

0K 20K 40K 60K 80K 100K 120K 140K 160K 180K 200K 220K 240K 260K

Per Capita GDP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Scor

es

Agra

Allahabad

Auraiya

Baghpat

Balrampur

Bareilly

Basti

Chitrakoot

FaizabadGautam Buddha Nagar

Ghaziabad

GorakhpurHamirpur_UP

Jhansi

Kanpur Nagar

Kheri

Lalitpur

Lucknow

ShahjahanpurSitapur

Personal Rights

Per Capita GDP vs. Pivot Field Values. The marks are labeled by District. The data is filtered on PivotField Names, which keeps Personal Rights.

0K 20K 40K 60K 80K 100K 120K 140K 160K 180K 200K 220K 240K 260K

Per Capita GDP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Scor

es

Agra

Auraiya

Baghpat

Bahraich

Balrampur

BareillyBudaun

Chandauli

Farrukhabad

Fatehpur

Gautam Buddha Nagar

Ghaziabad

Gonda

Gorakhpur

Hardoi

Jhansi

Kanpur Nagar

Kanshiram Nagar

Lucknow

Mahoba

Meerut


Per Capita GDP vs. Pivot Field Values. The marks are labeled by District. The data is filtered on PivotField Names, which keeps Nutrition and Basic Medical Care.

Personal Rights




0K 20K 40K 60K 80K 100K 120K 140K 160K 180K 200K 220K 240K 260K

Per Capita GDP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Scor

es

Agra

Auraiya

Baghpat

Bahraich

Ballia

Balrampur

Budaun

Bulandshahr

Chandauli Chitrakoot

Etah

Gautam Buddha Nagar

Gonda

Hamirpur_UPJalaun

Kanpur Nagar

Kheri

Lucknow

Mathura

Mau

Meerut

MoradabadRampur

Shrawasti

Sitapur


Per Capita GDP vs. Pivot Field Values. The marks are labeled by District. The data is filtered on PivotField Names, which keeps Personal Freedom and Choice.

0K 20K 40K 60K 80K 100K 120K 140K 160K 180K 200K 220K 240K 260K

Per Capita GDP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Scor

es

Agra

Allahabad

Auraiya

Baghpat

Bahraich

Balrampur

Bareilly

Basti

Budaun

Bulandshahr

Gautam Buddha Nagar

Ghaziabad

Ghazipur

Kanpur Nagar

LucknowMahoba

Mathura

Mau

Sitapur


Per Capita GDP vs. Pivot Field Values. The marks are labeled by District. The data is filtered on PivotField Names, which keeps Access to Basic Knowledge.



0K 20K 40K 60K 80K 100K 120K 140K 160K 180K 200K 220K 240K 260K

Per Capita GDP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Scor

es

Agra

Aligarh

Auraiya

AzamgarhBaghpat

Bahraich

Ballia

Bareilly

Budaun

Chitrakoot

Deoria

Farrukhabad

Gautam Buddha NagarGhaziabad

Jalaun

Jaunpur

Jhansi

Kannauj

Kanpur Nagar

Kaushambi

Lalitpur

Lucknow

Mahoba

MainpuriMathura

Meerut

Muzaffarnagar

Shahjahanpur

Health and Wellness

Per Capita GDP vs. Pivot Field Values. The marks are labeled by District. The data is filtered on PivotField Names, which keeps Health and Wellness.

0K 20K 40K 60K 80K 100K 120K 140K 160K 180K 200K 220K 240K 260K

Per Capita GDP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Scor

es

Agra

Aligarh

Ambedkar Nagar

Baghpat

Banda Bijnor

Bulandshahr

Chitrakoot

Deoria

Etawah

Gautam Buddha Nagar

Ghaziabad

Hardoi

Jhansi

Kannauj

Kanpur Dehat

Mahoba

Personal Safety

Per Capita GDP vs. Pivot Field Values. The marks are labeled by District. The data is filtered on PivotField Names, which keeps Personal Safety.

Health and Wellness

Personal Safety



Figure 3 plots economic development against all the facets of child progress. The results from this analysis would be instrumental in identifying areas of child progress that are highly correlated with economic development. These are the areas that can be improved with marginal changes in economic development.

The first six areas – Access to Information and Communication, Access to Quality Education, Environmental Quality, Water and Sanitation, Shelter, and Personal Rights depicts a strong positive relationship with the level of development. These are the areas that can improve significantly with the level of economic development.

The next four areas – Nutrition and Basic Medical Care, Personal Freedom and Choice, Access to Basic Knowledge and Health and Wellness, show a very weak positive relationship with economic development. These are the areas that show developments with GDP per capita, but their relationship is highly variable. For instance, the improvements in per capita GDP levels can help in improving the access to education; however, these advancements are not as easily converted into tangible increases in the welfare of children.

The last two areas – Personal Safety and Inclusion have a negative relationship with the level of economic development. These are the areas of child wellbeing that pose a greater challenge to society since they require a lot of effort than just investments in economic development.

0K 20K 40K 60K 80K 100K 120K 140K 160K 180K 200K 220K 240K 260K

Per Capita GDP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Scor

es

Agra

Aligarh

Bahraich

Ballia

Balrampur

Bulandshahr

Etawah

Gautam Buddha Nagar

Hamirpur_UP

Hardoi

Jalaun

Kanpur Nagar

Lalitpur

Lucknow

Mahoba

Mau

Mirzapur

Inclusion

Per Capita GDP vs. Pivot Field Values. The marks are labeled by District. The data is filtered on PivotField Names, which keeps Inclusion.

Inclusion


The improvements in many of these areas would translate into considerable development in other areas of child progress also. For instance, better access to information and communication would help in advancing the learning outcomes of children.

Learnings and Recommendations

The Low Hanging Fruits

The Child Progress Index is a practical tool designed to improve

the state of children. It has identified six “Progressing Areas”

– they are the ones where some districts of Uttar Pradesh are

showing significant progress but still, there is immense scope for

improvement. These can be said to be the low-hanging fruits for the

state and can give the highest return with slightly more focused

policies and investment. These are:

l Access to Information and Communication

l Environmental Quality

l Health and Wellness

l Personal Rights

l Shelter

l Water and Sanitation

The toughest challenges are the aspects of child progress that are the pressing issues for the entire state. These are the areas where (barring one or two) the performance of all the districts is below average. These are aspects where state-wide policy action is the need of the hour since there are only a few positive outliers. It includes:


Inclusion

The Toughest Challenges

The results depict that while the state has made progress in providing education to its children, it has not paid much attention to the quality of education being imparted to them. There is a lack of professionally qualified teachers which can be compensated by investing in in-house trainings etc but that is also lacking.

Moreover, it is highly likely that children with disabilities and those belonging to minorities are left behind. These are the areas that would have a significant impact on the economy of Uttar Pradesh in the future. The lack of quality education would translate into productivity losses for individuals and would thus impact the overall economic status of Uttar Pradesh. Therefore, the government must focus on addressing these concerns.


It highlights that achieving a comparable level of performance across different areas is not possible, and districts can draw learnings from their peers. For instance, Gautam Buddha Nagar outperforms both Ghaziabad and Baghpat on Access to Information and Communication and Access to Quality Education while Baghpat sets an example for the other two by performing well in Personal Freedom and Choice.

The same holds for the low performing districts as well. For instance, Etah, a district performing in the Low Child Progress tier, has an exceptional score of 79.28 in the component of Health and Wellness. With low numbers of cases regarding children being underweight and stunted, Etah can set an example for its peers to improve.

The best performing districts - Gautam Buddha Nagar, Ghaziabad and, Baghpat have similar scores on Child Progress Index, but the scores vary on different aspects of child progress.

There is room for improvement for each districtSc

ore

0

30

90

20

5060

10

40

7080

Nut

ritio

n an

dB

asic

Med

ical

Care

Wat

er a

ndSa

nita

tion

Pers

onal

Safe

ty

Bas

ic H

uman

Nee

ds

Acce

ss to

Bas

icKn

owle

dge

Acce

ss to

Info

.and

Com

mun

icat

ion

Hea

lth a

ndW

elln

ess

Envi

ronm

enta

lQ

ualit

y

Foun

datio

n of

Wel

lbei

ng

Pers

onal

Fre

edom

and

Choi

ce

Pers

onal

Righ

ts

Incl

usio

n

Acce

ss to

Qua

lity

Educ

atio

n

Opp

ortu

nity

Child

Pro

gres

sSc

ore

Shel

ter

Scor

e

0

80

40

20

100

60

Nut

ritio

n an

dB

asic

Med

ical

Care

Wat

er a

ndSa

nita

tion

Pers

onal

Safe

ty

Bas

ic H

uman

Nee

ds

Acce

ss to

Bas

icKn

owle

dge

Acce

ss to

Info

.and

Com

mun

icat

ion

Hea

lth a

ndW

elln

ess

Envi

ronm

enta

lQ

ualit

y

Foun

datio

n of

Wel

lbei

ng

Pers

onal

Fre

edom

and

Choi

ce

Pers

onal

Righ

ts

Incl

usio

n

Acce

ss to

Qua

lity

Educ

atio

n

Opp

ortu

nity

Shel

ter

Gautam Buddh Nagar Ghaziabad Baghpat

It can also help businesses in taking actions to improve child wellbeing in the communities where they operate. The Companies Act formally introduced Corporate Social Responsibility guidelines in 2013 that made it mandatory for companies having net worth of Rs 500 crore or more or turnover of Rs 1000 crore or more or net profit of Rs 5 crore or more to spend at least 2 percent of their average net profits9. However, reports indicate that more than 50 percent companies fail to comply with these norms as they don’t have enough knowledge about the areas where they can invest. Child Progress Index can help these businesses to identify key areas of intervention.

The index is about measuring progress to drive progress.

From Index to Action

The aim of the Child Progress Index is to go

beyond measurement; it is about how one

can use the insights from the index to make

real improvements in the life of children.

The Index can be used by state and district

level policymakers from crafting long term

strategies as it sheds light on the strengths

and weaknesses of the regions. Based on

their current position, the government can

set targets and track progress by using the

Child Progress Index tool. The uniqueness

of the tool is that it can provide locally-

tailored solutions to the changemakers that

can help in driving child progress.

9 Ministry of Corporate Affairs


Sco

reca

rds



Agra 5 5 .1 5

Basic Human Needs

Foundation of Well-Being

Opportunity63.62 58.86 42.96

Antenatal Care Drop-out Rates Pendency of Cases

Access to Electric Supply Anaemic Enrollment of Disabled Students

Kidnapping Drainage Facilities Access to Technology at School

Houses with treated tap water Access to Computer Access to Contraceptives

Child Mortality Gender Parity in Students Registered Birth

Bathing Facilities Diarrhea Scholarship for Minority

Murder Improved fuel for cooking Professionally Trained Teachers

Improved Drinking Water Access to Television Sets Adolescent Mothers

Financial Assistance to Mother Girl's Enrollment Sexual Offences

Housing Congestion Stunted Scholarship for SC/ST/OBC

Rape Crimes Respiratory Disease Teachers receiving in-service trainingTraditional Fuel for Energy

Improved Sanitation Households with Mobiles Child Marriages

Immunization Primary School Enrollment Sterilization

Improved Houses Underweight

Maternal Mortality Secondary Enrollment

Latrine Facilities Wasted Children

Public Facility Births Transition Rates

Vaccination

73.33 36 59.42

51.5458.9 60.12

58.19 69.8 22.05

71.42 70.74 30.27



Personal Rights

Water & SanitationAccess to Information & Communication


Shelter Health & Wellness Inclusion

Personal Security Environmental Quality Access to Quality Education

54.68 20.33 79.14

93.23 71.8 12.51

67.47 11.16 10.17

52.26 30.8 80.81

74.19 70.59 65.9

26.4 75.79 33.77

59.92 44.62 55.46

44.97 86 40.52

50.08 45.5 78.88

56.32 62.01 20.49

84.8 83.74 3.91

6.78

57.14 82.6 62.58

80.18 64.16 42.56

95.55 73.31

73.24 24.78

16.76 75.55

61.52 13.53

83.18

Strength and Weakness is relative to 10 districts with similar demographic structure

How to read the scorecard: All the values are scores on a scale of 0-100. So, higher score represents better performance. For instance, a score of 91 on access to contraceptives will depict high score of the indicator.

OverperformingPerforming within expected range

Underperforming


Aligarh 4 8 . 2 6

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity51.65 50.19 42.92


















Vaccination

63.6 37.22 53.15

49.0342.63 61.95

55.64 61.08 10.92

38.34 59.84 45.66



Personal Rights





31.45 15.77 75.73

79.84 39.05 9.41

0 7.44 26.61

35.68 19.64 77.89

45.16 47.06 61.9

34.2 59.28 10.1

66.24 36.99 83.47

66.71 53.38 43.97

44.24 35.83 51.94

44.83 48.63 12.74

55.2 87.8 2.71

54.34

49.38 81.54 65.88

90.61 33.17 98.46

88.38 60.53

60.56 51.15

26.01 84.95

44.19 40.88

84.3




Underperforming


Allahabad 5 3 . 5 3

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity55.25 56.35 49


















Vaccination

54.46 80.36 32.52

38.3545.82 76.48

46.06 53.23 30.55

82.12 46 56.45



Personal Rights





86.37 85.89 25.47

71.58 52.28 19.17

78.42 56.67 13.1

42.46 33.48 48.68

22.58 100 23.35

15.8 42.99 44.86

80.34 33.98 80.87

31.81 47.69 94.83

55.26 72.37 100

78.39 64.74 28.43

87.36 69.92 14.93

55.96

39.33 73.37 78.77

45.9 93.2 41.03

59.68 40.98

47.89 61.86

14.84 60.82

92.34 76.47

83.86




Underperforming


Ambedkar Nagar 4 9 .4 5

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity58.16 43.47 46.73


















Vaccination

64.93 66.06 51.15

29.8320.94 80.86

39.45 51.54 24.59

98.4 35.34 30.33



Personal Rights





20.85 51.87 54.98

63.6 49.46 4.47

100 54.81 6.55

26.13 3.12 45.76

58.06 82.35 81.57

11.2 86.2 31.41

100 9.25 71.76

48.05 12.77 95.69

55.26 28.64 66.22

57.7 67.17 35.08

95.47 75.61 0.7

78.18

16.58 79.27 89.62

80.63 69.78 90.77

58.81 50

83.1 80.93

11.56 55.8

21.32 58.24

5.83




Underperforming


Auraiya 4 2 . 5 7

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity44 42.37 41.35


















Vaccination

54.79 62.23 39.23

29.4826.12 76.88

36.79 30.56 15.99

54.92 50.56 33.31



Personal Rights





10.96 51.87 40.59

57.24 10.2 12.04

58.18 17.29 3.61

18.09 6.25 58.14

70.97 58.82 44.55

24.4 44.57 22.49

45.66 23.76 80.32

29.93 24 89.66

64.27 12.58 33.7

38.62 65.35 14.09

59.09 97.56 1.4

79.54

44.44 79.27 78.14

40.09 69.78 100

38.26 29.7

80.28 100

24.08 30.09

4.71 27.65

92.15




Underperforming


Azamgarh 5 1 .4 1

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity58.75 48.62 46.86


















Vaccination

68.12 57.87 50.62

25.2729.96 80.12

51.15 68.18 27.16

90.47 38.49 29.54



Personal Rights





100 62.24 49.73

77.54 49.89 21.03

96.32 47.81 2.84

8.54 11.16 47.84

96.77 82.35 70.97

23.2 42.08 21.11

91.25 20.22 63.8

47.92 24 89.66

44.91 65.95 89.52

78.16 76.29 36.62

83.81 67.48 3.31

77.64

25.22 86.99 91.04

41.88 69.78 98.97

67.23 80.08

78.87 48.28

17.15 69.28

56.48 33.53

72.2




Underperforming


Baghpat 6 2 . 0 5

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity75.86 57.83 52.47


















Vaccination

85.44 71.08 60.76

52.3133.46 92.14

84.55 62.93 10.94

81.13 63.87 46.04



Personal Rights





3.82 92.53 75.13

89.85 13.02 5.58

72.15 3.39 21.46

24.62 10.27 91.1

83.87 0 78.49

100 7.24 17.83

83.42 40.32 100

46.31 69.69 96.55

28.55 5.43 60.28

80.46 89.06 9.84

88.51 79.67 0.1

36.31

95.77 29.35 89.62

93.44 92.31 27.69

49.55 78.95

97.18 73.25

98.07 69.91

0 89.71

58.74




Underperforming


Bahraich 2 9 . 0 2

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity33.15 30.68 23.24


















Vaccination

20.01 39.7 21.66

26.7419.84 27.22

11.37 41.43 0

74.48 21.77 44.08



Personal Rights





65.53 56.02 43.38

7.71 24.51 0

69.84 91.36 5.6

20.6 4.91 11.13

22.58 29.41 18.59

4.4 95.93 0

80.44 0 52.75

57.32 5.23 14.66

55.43 47.62 79.63

26.67 0 0

74.42 73.98 15.73

95.53

4.41 82 44.81

3.43 85.69 94.87

19.63 38.72

98.59 21.22

5.01 76.18

87.55 0

28.48




Underperforming


Ballia 5 0 . 0 6

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity55.96 48.18 46.03


















Vaccination

66.73 57.05 43.53

31.6826.12 66.55

45.16 74.78 47.75

80.28 34.76 26.28



Personal Rights





48.41 63.49 12.73

59.81 53.36 34.53

73.11 39.39 5.98

9.8 6.25 42

87.1 100 72.81

18.4 16.74 72.9

90.08 19.78 58.06

68.72 23.54 70.69

47.08 31.07 62.81

66.21 77.51 38.73

79.73 43.9 1.6

80.89

24.16 80.03 77.04

54.69 90.37 100

62.3 87.22

100 41.36

27.55 76.18

35.72 14.12

47.53




Underperforming


Balrampur 2 6 . 5 8

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity33.58 27.81 18.36


















Vaccination

24.06 19.53 21.15

27.1716.3 35.23

24.68 51.19 3.37

58.4 24.24 13.68



Personal Rights





40.98 0 56.24

13.8 26.9 7.34

99.97 91.36 0.04

15.83 4.91 0

29.03 41.18 13.98

8 35.07 2.08

77.68 0 31.82

63.62 3.23 53.45

21.7 30.54 71.18

60.69 6.99 1.27

0 82.11 1.3

91.19

6 67.02 41.67

0 68.47 100

52.21 40.6

81.69 0

4.43 90.6

35.02 0

86.1




Underperforming


Banda 4 4 . 5 8

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity46.17 43.05 44.53


















Vaccination

57.32 51.56 51.36

17.5416.86 83.8

46.92 54.07 19.26

62.89 49.71 23.69



Personal Rights





20.54 69.29 46.82

56.43 47.94 8.93

85.24 17.29 4.87

12.56 4.46 71.91

48.39 35.29 65.44

10.6 44 20.64

65.5 23.76 40.51

11.68 11.69 100

84.14 14.14 17.36

89.2 55.93 26.27

37.78 98.37 4.71

84.28

30.16 56.58 78.93

53.2 69.78 100

72.8 48.12

88.73 54.96

23.31 63.01

31.81 27.65

89.69




Underperforming


Bara Banki 4 2 . 5 7

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity42.55 45.27 39.87


















Vaccination

41.02 53.7 45.56

25.9919.34 65.32

24.14 70.68 14.41

79.07 37.37 34.21



Personal Rights





48.75 64.32 51.12

32.61 88.72 23.19

93.39 29.65 14.7

17.34 5.36 48.96

6.45 76.47 72.96

18.4 13.57 5.9

71.44 24.41 53.89

46.17 18.31 68.97

55.59 30.58 57.7

22.07 41.34 14.09

70.51 49.59 5.81

88.75

17.46 55.98 71.7

49.18 64.39 98.46

35.66 53.01

50.7 36.57

10.21 81.19

53.68 46.76

80.72




Underperforming


Bareilly 5 1 . 0 6

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity63.24 46.98 42.96


















Vaccination

49.95 49.64 38.14

77.2236.69 81.95

51.86 45.4 13.02

73.9 56.18 38.72



Personal Rights





51.92 38.59 42.95

59.54 22.78 6.6

80.46 7.88 12.52

60.3 15.63 86.51

25.81 47.06 45.78

24 64.93 18.77

66.07 41.83 81.33

99.87 48.77 78.45

57.76 78.4 37.33

30.57 59.27 13.62

73.47 73.17 2.4

64.91

77.43 68.53 81.92

62 88.48 91.79

72.72 45.86

91.55 28.02

71.1 58.31

38.63 45

39.01




Underperforming


Basti 4 7. 2 7

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity53.21 49.97 38.63


















Vaccination

64.99 73.61 30.46

28.9529.19 63

37.8 64.23 27.05

81.12 32.83 34.02



Personal Rights





20.24 98.76 15.77

55.48 28.63 28.4

85.61 61.05 9.48

25.88 15.18 21.7

64.52 100 60.06

16.4 28.05 22.59

71.4 15.48 72.39

51.95 17.85 94.83

74.79 22.82 92.34

55.86 49.24 29.43

84.36 56.91 2.3

76.56

10.05 83.51 63.21

75.11 87.82 88.21

56.58 78.95

84.51 63.15

10.02 79.62

25.4 40.88

83.63




Underperforming


Bijnor 5 5 . 3 8

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity66.59 50.01 49.53


















Vaccination

68.73 58.4 45.79

67.8632.54 87.78

65.44 51.29 23.05

64.35 57.81 41.5



Personal Rights





41.5 38.59 59.17

73.07 26.9 27.79

79.02 10.07 25.93

45.23 5.8 69.96

35.48 94.12 62.98

71 0 23

36.49 30.54 71.13

78.12 50.46 85.34

22.54 40.3 26.36

25.98 68.39 19.38

71.81 92.68 3.21

56.91

88.18 68.53 99.21

93.89 67.33 100

61.2 46.99

73.24 47.71

81.89 58.62

35.78 71.18

92.6




Underperforming


Budaun 3 6 . 7 5

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity45.77 34.01 30.48


















Vaccination

46.74 34.41 35.94

39.8619.55 41.88

23.18 37.42 11.23

73.3 44.65 32.87



Personal Rights





50.21 50.62 58.29

36.27 57.48 17.22

75.34 17.29 8.68

14.07 2.23 68.01

6.45 41.18 46.54

8 57.01 9.68

71.15 23.76 67.52

78.93 19.69 13.79

71.79 34.78 74.34

16.78 30.4 7.75

72.94 78.86 3.01

90.65

35.63 62.48 47.33

66.17 37.65 100

28.41 2.63

73.24 20.01

25.24 56.74

61.29 27.65

69.51




Underperforming


Bulandshahr 5 4 . 6 8

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity66.4 53.66 43.97


















Vaccination

60.68 52.85 44.52

57.838.17 71.92

64.47 66.81 16.48

82.66 56.82 42.95



Personal Rights





46.22 56.43 42.5

84.3 41.21 10.34

87.52 3.83 30.34

29.9 11.16 76.63

45.16 82.35 59.45

56 9.05 20.52

64.17 28.6 67.16

87.52 53.85 62.07

45.58 42.23 69.52

52.18 66.57 18.18

92.64 91.06 4.01

62.87

65.78 78.67 76.26

74.81 70.89 96.92

78.75 77.07

80.28 33.84

44.32 71.47

40.09 40.29

89.01




Underperforming


Chandauli 5 0 . 6 6

Basic Human Needs




















Vaccination

79.11 62.96 52.7

21.5832.24 51.06

48.27 63.2 24.91

89.46 47.24 35.19



Personal Rights





18.33 72.2 34.18

61.16 39.91 15.87

86.32 45.08 22.81

8.04 10.71 49.51

96.77 70.59 62.98

27.2 35.97 30.65

100 60.86 58.33

30.6 44.15 50.86

62.94 14.12 68.69

70.57 66.26 27.55

84.16 37.4 3.01

68.97

30.86 65.51 52.04

76.6 92.79 97.95

68.91 73.31

92.96 59.11

21 69.28

12.77 35

95.07




Underperforming


Chitrakoot 4 1 . 3

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity43.26 33.68 46.95


















Vaccination

62.61 59.87 75.52

8.0918.99 51.57

45.11 22.67 21.48

57.24 33.18 39.24



Personal Rights





2.69 76.35 90.95

56.43 26.68 23.39

68.94 68.38 16.26

9.55 5.8 59.94

45.16 41.18 74.96

5 23.53 19.67

20.49 6.88 58.87

4.7 11.54 33.62

100 2.02 83.44

86.21 43.16 21.38

74.96 85.37 7.62

81.84

9.52 64.6 59.59

90.31 95.87 33.85

87.5 6.77

95.77 61.03

7.51 18.5

10.32 29.71

53.14




Underperforming


Deoria 5 1 . 74

Basic Human Needs




















Vaccination

82.15 60.53 41.18

34.9931.57 70.11

47.16 71.71 31.03

73.3 41.88 35.27



Personal Rights





25.18 58.92 0

60.76 35.79 31.58

74.09 44.53 16.33

22.36 9.82 41.17

100 100 84.79

25.4 11.54 44.88

73.36 33.44 72.08

61.61 26.62 88.79

74.96 32.5 52.82

64.14 72.64 19.96

72.44 55.28 1.3

72.22

25.4 94.25 72.8

84.5 65.96 100

74.3 85.34

95.77 47.55

16.96 81.5

47.13 58.53

84.98




Underperforming


Etah 4 3 . 6 9

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity36.94 53.22 40.91


















Vaccination

44.21 68.73 52.81

28.2628.73 51.95

35.23 79.28 19.74

40.04 36.13 39.12



Personal Rights





20.87 67.22 86.18

54.53 96.75 6.3

64.49 51.86 14.23

24.37 9.38 72.04

38.71 52.94 40.86

12.2 100 28.42

15.29 23.76 85.1

39.19 28.62 19.83

19.37 19.43 0

32.87 42.86 23..58

34.92 57.72 1.2

81.44

22.57 77.16 63.52

60.95 100 54.87

72.82 83.08

57.75 58.98

2.5 89.03

12.4 78.82

35.65




Underperforming


Etawah 4 9 .4 4

Basic Human Needs




















Vaccination

62.51 65.23 47.65

27.6826.8 62.84

47.76 78.59 32.69

57.92 45.55 38



Personal Rights





14.23 76.35 55.9

88.9 97.18 33.73

45.97 18.38 12.6

23.62 6.7 67.73

83.87 70.59 66.51

22.4 66.29 47.25

65.56 23.33 78.57

28.59 34 44.83

72.12 16.2 100

36.55 36.17 20.67

64.04 50.41 2.61

59.35

32.28 64.6 72.8

69.6 69.78 100

60.76 81.58

67.61 69.7

22.93 84.33

22.11 52.35

52.47




Underperforming


Faizabad 4 8 .1 2

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity48.57 44.33 51.46


















Vaccination

52.3 59.82 55.79

33.0227.92 69.74

36.8 49.1 26.79

72.18 40.48 53.53



Personal Rights





25.23 38.59 53.84

53.86 46.2 24.54

75.64 39.17 28.91

21.36 14.73 57.16

48.39 64.71 90.17

18 40.05 25.11

78.51 20.75 84.24

57.45 23.38 81.9

79.63 24.69 42.7

56.55 46.2 29.84

63.49 64.23 7.41

73.71

24.34 68.53 68.08

61.7 97.17 56.41

48.49 35.34

35.21 59.62

12.72 63.01

23.08 53.53

38.79




Underperforming


Farrukhabad 4 5 . 3 4

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity43.64 53.36 39.04


















Vaccination

40.93 63.75 37.25

23.7424.3 58.63

37.7 88.17 18.77

72.2 37.2 41.5



Personal Rights





17.96 76.35 47.93

50.07 100 20.85

84.36 61.05 29.37

10.05 4.02 59.94

48.39 70.59 53.92

19.6 42.31 18.31

51.54 15.48 77.99

30.87 30.31 39.66

51.09 20.41 83.17

28.05 48.63 17.51

76.43 78.86 0.4

75.61

35.1 64.6 71.23

46.94 98.9 72.31

58 86.09

84.51 49.18

30.83 100

8.36 40.88

22.42




Underperforming


Fatehpur 4 6 . 8 3

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity38.96 57.15 44.38


















Vaccination

54.43 71.13 36.67

14.1621.53 83.56

24.07 65 23.37

63.18 70.94 33.92



Personal Rights





26.76 100 44.9

26.79 88.5 19.35

74.91 0 12.09

7.54 4.91 53.82

35.48 64.71 47.47

21 72.4 33.12

63.94 100 63.57

8.72 18.62 98.28

65.11 23.56 100

65.29 38.6 19.01

50.5 83.74 3.81

93.5

28.57 67.93 89.47

61.55 83.34 77.95

0 52.26

88.73 47.79

20.04 75.24

32.5 78.24

91.03




Underperforming


Firozabad 4 8 .1 8

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity47.34 52.38 44.83


















Vaccination

61.33 51.97 36.97

31.3324.7 66.4

44.37 83.73 24.02

52.34 49.12 51.92



Personal Rights





31.57 59.34 44.25

81.06 81.56 19.72

39.29 12.25 21.25

26.38 9.38 62.03

54.84 58.82 41.17

15 45.7 18.03

79.59 33.44 75.74

28.46 50 68.97

63.77 23.88 100

30.11 64.13 31.98

43.7 36.59 10.72

49.73

40.92 19.67 66.98

77.05 60.71 85.64

81.78 99.25

95.77 39.54

6.74 82.45

33.48 57.06

64.8




Underperforming


Gautam Buddha Nagar 6 9 .1

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity74.46 78.91 53.93


















Vaccination

75.02 62.19 58.02

91.5497.09 63.87

88.43 75.3 5.29

42.84 81.07 88.55



Personal Rights





22.35 81.74 75.09

98.78 35.79 7.21

38.83 4.49 100

97.74 100 100

83.87 17.65 61.9

98.6 72.4 6.34

29.28 76.45 92.78

96.91 100 23.28

0 21.23 14.55

50.8 100 2.99

57.95 78.86 9.52

4.34

77.78 84.87 72.64

87.03 69.78 87.69

93.57 97.37

95.77 78.54

84.39 83.07

10.69 49.12

54.26




Underperforming


Ghaziabad 6 3 . 9 8

Basic Human Needs




















Vaccination

69.32 35.45 51.53

85.5269.38 82.27

89.96 78.08 4.46

76.3 59.9 65.57



Personal Rights





39.74 85.06 54.44

97.16 48.16 7.96

60.3 54.27 71.11

71.86 52.68 87.9

70.97 47.06 69.89

94.2 54.07 1.02

90.21 36.13 85.35

93.56 96.62 80.17

7.68 33.2 57.67

57.93 92.4 4.36

81.48 74.8 3.51

0

95.94 64.45 80.66

80.48 0 87.18

88.77 92.86

81.69 13.76

100 86.52

9.04 39.12

63.45




Underperforming


Ghazipur 4 7. 9 8

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity49.85 49.85 44.24


















Vaccination

57.27 74.27 44.96

17.0525.96 63.43

43.94 65.2 31.43

81.14 33.96 37.14



Personal Rights





35.6 76.35 35.89

57.24 35.14 17.65

76.44 47.59 10.08

2.51 9.38 45.76

54.84 88.24 62.06

17.8 42.53 43.35

82.66 14.09 84.7

38.39 27.54 68.97

73.62 51.08 68.1

71.49 72.04 33.03

84.75 64.23 1.1

87.67

15.34 64.6 69.18

49.33 69.78 90.77

62.86 84.96

56.34 81.58

20.62 67.4

43.86 63.53

92.38




Underperforming


Gonda 3 8 . 7

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity45.03 44.16 26.91


















Vaccination

47.98 62.71 23.59

30.4219.96 36.23

23.95 57.63 13.83

77.76 36.36 33.99



Personal Rights





53.78 85.48 28.05

18.94 26.46 23.74

65.95 57 15.83

33.17 16.07 15.44

61.29 70.59 30.88

14.8 52.94 8.38

97.09 45.05 60.05

55.84 9.23 60.34

38.4 45.72 67.27

52.18 24.92 10.27

74.27 39.02 3.71

89.02

1.23 47.96 30.66

44.26 95.21 100

44.29 59.02

97.18 38.3

0 91.22

65.99 35.29

62.56




Underperforming


Gorakhpur 5 3 . 3 7

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity59.85 48.94 51.31


















Vaccination

73.13 60.16 65.8

46.2137.37 71.6

47.89 63.02 26.09

72.17 35.22 41.74



Personal Rights





61.36 64.32 44.68

66.58 54.01 23.14

58.83 74.07 20.55

39.7 25.89 58.83

90.32 100 100

22.6 67.42 32.26

90.27 18.06 84.1

59.06 43.23 88.79

52.59 45.04 51.35

57.93 69.91 23.65

71.22 56.91 1.5

57.45

42.15 55.98 66.51

86.89 85.67 97.95

75.21 71.8

60.56 43.93

20.62 64.26

66.15 28.24

44.17




Underperforming


Hamirpur 5 2 . 5 3

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity60.79 45.64 51.15


















Vaccination

68.38 63.83 61.49

31.5922.37 68.4

64.62 52.55 31.12

78.55 43.8 43.6



Personal Rights





0 100 50.07

100 63.56 6.08

98.87 28.67 26.85

22.86 4.02 56.05

70.97 35.29 79.26

23.4 44 46.5

79.84 15.59 78.81

13.83 22.46 61.21

93.82 2.35 100

100 80.85 38.87

56.61 85.37 2.4

79

61.2 67.93 80.19

57.82 69.78 51.79

78.08 54.51

92.96 67.17

32.95 32.92

8.91 47.65

100




Underperforming


Hardoi 4 1 . 3

Basic Human Needs




















Vaccination

43.19 50.89 36.57

30.815.95 64.85

16.37 65.01 12.93

90.9 37.71 30.46



Personal Rights





68.27 68.46 50.97

22.46 87.2 0.97

89.64 28.34 8.73

14.57 5.36 32.96

9.68 41.18 46.85

9 66.29 20.97

92.53 19.35 61.73

51.95 15.69 75.86

72.62 51.76 67.86

15.4 44.38 16.09

90.86 65.85 2.81

95.8

31.57 42.81 74.53

47.69 69.78 92.82

16.82 54.14

80.28 53.38

18.3 71.47

77.86 9.71

88.57




Underperforming


Jalaun 5 0 . 5 7

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity64.23 39.39 48.08


















Vaccination

75.33 54.51 58.07

37.8126.43 65.19

62.96 20.35 26.1

80.84 56.28 42.96



Personal Rights





15.2 65.56 39.57

85.79 0 2.38

99.73 14.99 14.7

19.35 3.57 62.17

100 58.82 70.97

37 44 30.4

38.2 30.22 68.7

34.09 35.23 67.24

76.63 5.67 57.08

93.33 59.27 41.35

95.93 100 8.12

65.85

66.49 68.38 65.41

70.94 66.92 88.21

68.73 19.17

78.87 58.36

39.31 16.93

13.84 34.41

89.01




Underperforming


Jaunpur 4 8 . 3 7

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity56.62 41.32 47.18


















Vaccination

58.45 66.47 34.74

24.0225.95 74.63

46.33 35.65 27.66

97.69 37.21 51.67



Personal Rights





63.16 68.46 24.01

71.31 58.13 6.74

93.62 64.11 62.04

18.34 12.5 49.24

67.74 94.12 38.25

19.8 37.1 36.01

100 17.53 69.67

31.54 35.69 85.34

55.26 52.61 82.32

65.52 51.98 37.59

100 81.3 0.4

77.91

24.16 42.81 80.97

68.55 69.78 95.38

65.73 6.02

59.15 66.91

14.45 36.99

64.31 44.71

41.03




Underperforming


Jhansi 5 4 . 7 0

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity62.82 49.75 51.52


















Vaccination

76.34 62.5 78.92

44.4335.38 62.25

60.42 45.39 15

70.09 55.75 49.91



Personal Rights





9.92 68.46 60.15

85.66 15.18 3.82

70.45 59.08 23.62

38.44 17.41 87.9

83.87 29.41 88.17

33.6 12.67 5.32

69.24 54.95 79.17

34.36 57.23 46.55

82.14 15.64 17.97

83.45 88.15 31.19

70.42 78.86 7.72

45.39

62.61 42.81 59.28

82.86 69.78 47.69

80.91 55.64

94.37 78.34

24.66 36.05

18.75 61.76

88.12




Underperforming


Jyotiba Phule Nagar 5 3 . 3 3

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity62.18 46.81 51.02


















Vaccination

63.1 65.68 56.25

61.7924.17 77.96

55.47 44.71 22.2

68.35 52.66 47.65



Personal Rights





18.08 84.23 100

66.58 20.61 15.34

76.49 16.85 41.24

35.68 4.46 78.86

41.94 94.12 59.91

50.6 5.88 26.03

36.01 28.39 80.06

91.14 36.77 63.79

41.24 21.1 20.01

31.95 62.01 24.63

86.18 95.93 0.8

75.07

67.72 51.74 87.42

100 74.77 93.85

57.73 44.74

57.75 49.96

62.43 47.65

5.69 51.76

89.69




Underperforming


Kannauj 4 3 . 8 2

Basic Human Needs




















Vaccination

51.11 75.66 33.67

17.0618.51 67.84

33.61 78.93 25.93

53.78 34.41 35.38



Personal Rights





12.44 68.46 67.92

61.03 93.93 31.62

51.59 10.07 11.06

13.57 6.25 47.01

54.84 100 28.88

17.4 56.79 13.55

14.28 30.54 78.5

18.39 22.15 64.66

61.1 15.29 26.02

24.6 44.68 31.01

88.01 0 1.2

84.15

20.46 42.81 81.45

62 96.14 82.56

33.44 80.45

85.92 71.99

26.59 84.33

18.41 71.18

46.64




Underperforming


Kanpur Dehat 4 7.1 8

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity51.32 44.09 46.14


















Vaccination

67.55 64.48 59.87

20.0216.71 70.59

24.15 64.07 28.22

93.57 31.08 25.89



Personal Rights





26.88 88.38 67.28

26.93 41.21 26.06

89.65 70.02 6.12

12.06 5.36 62.59

61.29 88.24 89.25

26 14.93 34.17

100 25.38 46.99

18.52 17.38 63.79

55.09 4.98 100

37.7 58.36 25.34

92.4 60.98 4.21

94.44

32.28 43.87 79.72

81.97 46.82 100

4.6 68.42

97.18 52.4

29.09 74.61

10.04 77.06

100




Underperforming


Kanpur Nagar 5 7. 9 6

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity68.95 57.97 46.97


















Vaccination

81.11 66.65 45.27

65.9949.68 85.93

52.33 41.41 12.95

76.37 74.13 43.74



Personal Rights





67.29 58.09 42.65

81.6 24.3 11.4

72.14 13.13 35.03

54.02 23.21 79.42

80.65 52.94 62.37

33.6 50.9 7.96

83.14 70.54 75.19

51.54 74.77 87.07

66.28 41.21 82.43

51.72 65.35 18.01

75.25 87.8 1.1

29.13

96.65 72.77 88.68

65.28 69.78 33.33

61.57 46.99

100 96.74

30.25 39.18

36.68 45.59

89.01




Underperforming


Kanshiram Nagar 4 3 . 9 3

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity42.43 48.95 40.41


















Vaccination

36.69 61.56 45.62

38.9618.78 60.57

27.56 79.81 13.78

66.51 35.66 41.65



Personal Rights





18.45 75.1 78.81

38.84 95.23 14.11

52.45 8.21 14.72

28.39 3.57 79.69

16.13 52.94 53

7.8 52.71 17.49

86.49 14.52 85.68

73.83 21.85 32.76

46.74 12.26 62.02

14.94 41.34 10.68

64.81 31.71 2.71

85.77

18.34 51.44 69.65

59.76 92.08 100

66.85 80.83

87.32 51.07

6.36 86.21

14.28 49.41

0




Underperforming


Kaushambi 4 0 . 0 3

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity38.67 33.87 47.55


















Vaccination

45.61 49.33 38.32

4.3617.43 72.38

26.26 28.37 35.43

78.45 40.36 44.07



Personal Rights





20.11 48.55 29.25

31.66 37.74 69.89

70.18 56.56 19.71

0 1.34 45.34

6.45 70.59 51.77

11.4 44 19.72

87.8 26.34 81.03

0 16.31 77.59

82.64 12.93 100

78.39 45.59 20.56

79.38 94.31 4.21

93.77

14.64 59.46 83.49

44.71 59.53 63.59

16.03 5.64

85.92 24.08

11.37 32.29

34.72 75.88

68.39




Underperforming


Kheri 3 9 . 5 9

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity41.82 42.75 34.19


















Vaccination

44.34 52.61 25.15

35.0416.58 48.53

16.78 62.78 24.64

71.11 39.04 38.45



Personal Rights





40.59 68.88 14.4

21.38 75.92 32.04

65.84 60.72 8.8

22.61 4.46 39.08

16.13 41.18 26.42

9 20.36 24.6

69.99 28.06 64.15

65.5 17.38 44.83

77.46 39.17 47.9

0 34.04 18.88

77.45 86.18 7.82

91.46

21.34 45.39 56.29

68.55 90.49 96.41

29.13 50.75

90.14 41.62

20.04 71.16

56.68 18.82

63.45




Underperforming


Kushinagar 4 5 . 0 9

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity50.07 40.51 44.07


















Vaccination

59.76 59.55 57.87

33.7712.84 59.15

28.93 68.28 18.31

80.33 21.39 40.95



Personal Rights





78.22 89.21 69.93

30.72 56.4 19.43

75.3 66.3 7.79

26.63 6.25 37

38.71 100 66.67

19 31.9 18.88

79.88 20.11 78.81

56.51 15.08 73.28

68.95 67.49 74.25

62.53 61.09 17

85.87 3.25 6.01

84.28

20.63 25.42 61.32

54.55 69.78 93.85

30.53 72.18

83.1 30.3

13.29 75.55

82.03 24.41

87.67




Underperforming


Lalitpur 4 3 . 6 9

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity51.33 31.41 48.34


















Vaccination

65.75 69.76 78.49

7.9310.23 35.16

44.04 21.25 44.7

87.6 24.39 34.99



Personal Rights





5.28 80.08 48.86

70.91 19.52 5.95

90.38 100 12.19

2.51 4.46 91.93

32.26 47.06 78.96

7 46.83 100

83.2 2.26 50.48

6.44 24.62 19.83

95.66 6.69 40.49

60 74.16 32.47

88.31 60.16 5.11

66.4

16.75 0 14.94

80.48 95.6 72.82

80.18 20.68

92.96 76.26

7.9 0

22.31 55.29

93.05




Underperforming


Lucknow 5 7. 2 3

Basic Human Needs




















Vaccination

77.29 68.05 55.59

89.6758.97 83.04

56.6 35.46 4.43

69.77 46.32 41.57



Personal Rights





57.4 88.38 59.11

91.88 27.77 2.59

73.8 84.35 32.33

100 49.55 68.01

90.32 94.12 78.19

25.8 47.51 11.19

59.18 12.8 57.86

65.77 81.54 90.52

67.11 100 33.67

59.54 83.89 0.68

74.2 90.24 4.91

18.56

99.65 43.87 86.01

77.05 69.78 0

78.71 36.84

0 49.18

26.2 20.69

61.65 40

92.83




Underperforming


Mahamaya Nagar 4 5 . 8 2

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity47.73 52.85 36.88


















Vaccination

69.34 59.33 46.45

32.4730.18 53.78

54.8 79.95 15.67

34.3 41.96 31.6



Personal Rights





12.73 67.63 60.88

82.14 77.87 8.53

73.11 61.05 11.39

20.6 7.14 79.83

77.42 94.12 46.24

31.4 61.31 18.56

14.91 15.48 48.97

45.5 58.77 25

55.09 10.75 35.23

48.51 63.53 19.04

10.07 69.11 0

44.44

35.45 38.73 59.75

80.63 66.99 80

91.2 84.96

100 53.9

16.57 89.34

18.31 40.88

41.7




Underperforming


Mahoba 4 8 . 2 4

Basic Human Needs




















Vaccination

65.77 68.48 67.15

14.0116.98 57.71

51.93 48.08 81.09

52.86 25.24 29.54



Personal Rights





13.42 88.38 77.38

72.53 15.62 100

37.21 100 19.15

2.01 4.02 85.26

61.29 58.82 54.38

16.6 19 37.28

87.49 2.26 46.36

0 20.15 73.28

80.8 35.5 100

89.2 62.31 100

40.93 78.86 3.21

79.13

44.27 43.87 31.76

85.54 69.78 87.18

75.65 24.81

100 71.57

19.08 82.45

3.57 55.29

91.93




Underperforming


Mahrajganj 4 7. 3 5

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity54.15 43.46 44.44


















Vaccination

67.59 67.95 61.88

34.3616.39 58.67

33.81 56.87 13.56

80.82 32.62 43.66



Personal Rights





34.57 88.38 53.01

35.32 56.4 13.04

68.12 64.44 16.74

38.69 4.46 34.63

32.26 100 92.01

13.8 12.9 24.61

80.96 33.55 75.94

46.98 17.69 65.52

80.13 0 69.85

51.26 35.87 5.48

93.78 40.65 6.11

85.37

15.87 43.87 66.98

51.56 69.78 95.9

60.18 64.66

77.46 39.05

16.96 51.72

31.54 86.18

95.74




Underperforming


Mainpuri 4 9 .1 4

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity50.63 54.12 42.68


















Vaccination

50.04 64.01 41.94

28.6623.77 66.1

39 83.15 25.53

84.84 45.54 37.14



Personal Rights





17.28 87.55 56.71

76.18 93.49 11.09

88.38 17.72 16.29

20.1 6.7 52.57

29.03 52.94 57.14

14.8 18.1 36.65

89 20.65 76.77

39.06 24.77 54.31

55.26 19.22 77.08

33.56 56.53 28.27

77.82 77.24 1.4

80.22

29.81 64.6 81.76

72.43 92.36 92.82

54.56 81.95

90.14 53.15

10.79 85.89

12.95 42.35

69.06




Underperforming


Mathura 5 1 . 9 7

Basic Human Needs




















Vaccination

54.79 58.2 59.51

45.0539.46 44.12

61.45 83.15 11.93

76.63 55.33 34.04



Personal Rights





29.3 88.38 78.54

94.72 61.39 10.8

85.04 78.01 23.91

34.42 16.96 75.66

45.16 94.12 51.61

32.8 26.47 14.45

87.59 42.69 63.91

46.98 69.69 0

9.85 38.48 80.18

51.95 73.86 10.87

59.09 88.62 0.4

22.22

57.5 43.87 57.86

66.17 69.78 30.77

100 100

80.28 50.55

22.54 87.77

17.12 0

64.8




Underperforming


Mau 5 0 . 6 5

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity55.17 44.56 52.23


















Vaccination

61.19 47.27 52.72

29.6325.4 77.68

51.88 61.99 41.63

77.98 43.57 36.91



Personal Rights





16.56 29.46 30.02

77.54 50.98 10.95

76.34 37.2 27.41

6.53 2.23 44.65

64.52 100 95.08

19.6 57.24 67.1

77.04 16.67 68.56

61.88 26.15 82.76

45.91 22.87 93.31

79.54 73.56 46.04

80.41 60.16 0.2

51.49

28.57 81.85 92.14

58.57 15.1 100

72.82 72.18

76.06 49.18

18.69 59.87

11.71 74.71

34.98




Underperforming


Meerut 6 0 . 9 5

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity74.35 57.14 51.37


















Vaccination

73.83 41.01 51.98

87.8655.63 89.19

82.27 61.81 13.51

53.43 70.12 50.79



Personal Rights





35.8 41.91 71.88

95.13 27.98 21.97

63.79 44.31 37.57

73.87 26.79 87.07

80.65 35.29 56.22

84.6 34.16 6.9

0 70.32 95.54

94.63 82.62 86.21

25.71 28 9.95

60.69 90.58 11.98

86.04 79.67 0

13.01

100 81.39 92.45

83.01 43.85 81.54

74.44 71.8

61.97 43.05

87.09 66.46

16.08 42.06

54.48




Underperforming


Mirzapur 4 5 . 5 4

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity52.87 41.75 42.01


















Vaccination

60.86 51.64 46.88

13.9834.57 60.17

44.42 44.21 21.78

92.21 36.56 39.22



Personal Rights





36.08 43.57 46.44

57.78 47.29 17.86

97.16 65.86 22.3

5.03 12.95 63.84

29.03 58.82 23.35

15 67.87 23.32

95.87 13.44 71.62

17.32 40.31 59.48

86.48 20.41 92.25

62.53 48.63 23.66

84.15 70.73 2.51

64.23

22.75 78.67 58.65

58.72 86.79 83.08

73.09 29.32

91.55 58.13

21.77 56.43

46.16 17.65

97.31




Underperforming


Moradabad 5 1 . 6 2

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity62.99 43.08 48.78


















Vaccination

50.8 37.25 47.63

68.9520.64 88.79

54.83 47.86 17.12

77.37 66.56 41.57



Personal Rights





35.64 62.24 65.7

72.26 21.69 19.11

92.25 4.49 15.66

46.98 11.16 81.08

32.26 52.94 58.53

46.2 34.39 14.2

52.7 76.45 90.89

94.9 42.31 86.21

29.55 43.67 44.74

33.1 60.79 17.8

82.04 69.11 1

63.96

72.66 7.26 94.81

63.79 17.7 59.49

38.53 41.73

92.96 14.98

76.88 64.89

21.56 49.12

53.81




Underperforming


Muzaffarnagar 5 3 . 8 8

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity70.01 46.07 45.56


















Vaccination

65.79 32.06 46.9

62.9538.94 86.24

74.26 51.77 12.18

77.03 61.5 36.9



Personal Rights





34.78 50.83 50.33

91.75 13.23 7.66

62.04 3.83 20.9

40.95 9.82 83.17

54.84 41.18 62.67

79 53.29 15

80.09 28.6 72.61

77.85 61.69 73.28

46.74 28.42 58

51.95 73.86 13.55

89.98 91.06 1

40.79

77.78 72.62 97.01

84.35 9.35 96.41

47.6 65.41

91.55 10.03

90.56 60.19

23.72 63.24

50.45




Underperforming


Pilibhit 4 3 . 9 3

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity54.42 39.21 38.15


















Vaccination

64.6 54.52 48.85

52.2415.01 79.57

37.15 40.99 18.92

63.7 46.34 5.25



Personal Rights





17.07 62.24 49.43

35.32 15.84 23.84

71.54 23.09 12.93

24.87 6.25 83.73

25.81 35.29 73.73

21.6 19.91 12.13

55.2 19.57 0

94.5 32.31 68.97

61.1 12.95 19.12

10.57 41.34 20.3

62.51 91.87 0

83.33

46.91 7.26 84.75

95.23 86.61 94.87

61.16 38.35

69.01 56.16

53.18 54.55

15.23 33.82

82.51




Underperforming


Pratapgarh 4 6 . 8

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity53.86 44.09 42.45


















Vaccination

68.1 66.3 48.04

17.4122.44 82.83

41.61 50.03 17.25

88.33 37.58 21.68



Personal Rights





43.24 88.38 37.88

67.25 50.33 9.88

95.81 61.05 4.39

19.35 11.61 49.51

61.29 100 63.59

14.6 44 24.53

90.28 15.48 51.99

22.68 25.69 95.69

67.78 55.56 100

74.25 72.34 17.42

79.04 85.37 0.4

79.67

9.52 43.87 91.98

88.23 69.78 100

54.59 43.98

98.59 49.18

6.55 47.02

42.49 40.88

66.82




Underperforming


Rae Bareli 4 3 . 9 6

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity49.89 38 43.99


















Vaccination

71.25 31.74 49.05

17.7725.89 75.15

30.66 45.84 26.21

79.88 48.53 25.56



Personal Rights





22.4 50.83 49.52

62.25 53.36 14.69

81.35 78.01 6.06

17.84 11.61 34.91

41.94 88.24 73.73

14.8 43.67 38.24

87.52 42.69 57.57

21.34 19.38 84.48

81.3 19.97 56.45

41.15 87.84 25.95

72.17 95.93 1.2

60.84

14.11 72.62 90.57

81.52 24.3 100

24.1 48.87

94.37 18.91

10.6 21.94

38.19 0

97.31




Underperforming


Rampur 5 2 . 3 3

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity65.23 41.69 50.07


















Vaccination

59.69 52.06 55.1

69.8823.46 87.91

56.48 42.72 10.03

74.87 48.52 47.24



Personal Rights





21.89 88.38 67.28

74.7 16.92 11.7

94.31 10.83 19.99

44.22 4.46 83.17

48.39 58.82 75.58

50.8 29.86 2.95

51 28.49 87.34

100 39.23 85.34

38.73 31.56 93.19

21.84 58.05 14.18

74.19 60.98 4.71

68.7

74.43 43.87 92.3

91.21 69.78 100

30.36 37.22

78.87 38.61

93.45 56.43

10.44 9.12

78.92




Underperforming


Saharanpur 5 7. 9

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity69.11 50.24 54.35


















Vaccination

61.66 69.43 54.74

62.9227.9 92.72

69.43 55.81 18.82

82.42 47.81 51.1



Personal Rights





47.22 90.46 63.9

91.75 20.17 17.13

88.31 61.05 29.31

46.23 12.5 86.65

51.61 82.35 78.49

71.2 41.86 18.53

78.67 15.48 77.29

76.78 63.69 87.07

55.59 35.57 38.42

37.47 85.71 20.37

79.4 74.8 7.41

21.95

71.6 5.14 100

82.71 64.07 96.41

64.69 68.42

59.15 76.24

67.44 59.25

44.53 40.88

76.23




Underperforming


Shahjahanpur 3 8 . 5 6

Basic Human Needs




















Vaccination

52.84 50.76 27.01

48.4721.63 61.32

26.74 27.69 18.34

50.74 45.93 31.24



Personal Rights





36.4 87.97 69.78

37.35 17.14 26.02

58.42 21.77 1.58

31.66 4.91 66.62

25.81 29.41 0

14 25.34 16.24

67.14 22.37 72.03

79.06 27.08 60.34

70.95 34.04 15.79

5.98 48.02 13.96

29.57 85.37 2.71

84.55

40.56 54.01 59.12

86.74 69.78 96.92

34.23 0

98.59 45.77

36.8 46.08

36.79 10.59

77.58




Underperforming


Shrawasti 3 0 . 2 4

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity38.93 33.51 18.28


















Vaccination

24.14 42.55 27.01

28.9810.01 15.11

12.42 54.97 6.4

90.17 26.53 24.58



Personal Rights





10.91 80.91 61.65

0 32.32 18.12

92.89 69.8 2.83

32.41 0 7.93

16.13 0 19.66

2.6 71.27 0.17

82.24 21.18 58.46

53.29 0 42.24

60.1 4.81 83.35

45.75 4.86 2.03

93.78 49.59 1.2

100

0 52.04 0

15.2 88.8 72.82

23.29 56.77

67.61 29.64

4.82 90.6

18.72 4.71

38.34




Underperforming


Siddharthnagar 3 8 .1

Basic Human Needs




















Vaccination

38.46 50.44 27.16

31.911.16 44.53

37.98 49.97 17.09

87.5 38.16 22.83



Personal Rights





28.35 92.53 31.44

49.12 42.73 45.91

86.11 57.77 0

39.45 3.57 34.91

45.16 100 38.56

10 80.54 5.83

92.59 24.52 58.37

45.64 10 71.55

45.58 28.6 79.94

61.15 21.88 3.22

84.81 73.17 0.8

81.57

7.94 32.07 30.82

42.03 59.39 92.31

74.07 40.6

73.24 21.14

4.82 78.37

40.24 5

51.12




Underperforming


Sitapur 3 5 . 8

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity36.31 36.76 34.34


















Vaccination

39.44 53.45 31.92

28.516.23 49.94

7.83 50.33 19.01

69.46 27.04 36.5



Personal Rights





80.88 87.97 29.51

5.82 69.85 31.85

58.81 78.01 7.4

30.65 4.91 55.77

0 70.59 69.12

8 60.86 14.94

88.74 42.69 52.82

42.95 10.62 37.93

55.26 64.64 37.6

2.07 26.44 12.1

64.79 23.58 100

97.29

11.11 54.01 55.19

56.18 69.78 97.44

14.08 21.43

26.76 37.39

7.71 73.04

100 0

82.51




Underperforming


Sant Kabir Nagar 4 4 .4 8

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity53.12 41.86 38.45


















Vaccination

57.35 64.06 42.92

33.0324.72 61.57

36.91 62.56 24.84

85.17 16.1 24.47



Personal Rights





17.91 61 50.1

50.74 34.06 8.88

90.32 98.47 4.11

37.69 5.36 26.7

74.19 100 65.28

15.6 59.73 25.95

94.24 2.37 56.38

51.28 16.15 93.97

76.79 14.69 61.63

53.33 44.38 36.46

72.53 22.76 1.3

73.44

8.47 87.59 57.86

53.95 85.24 100

61.88 66.92

84.51 43.43

8.48 88.71

27.59 67.94

45.29




Underperforming


Sonbhadra 4 1 . 8 8

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity46.17 44.51 34.95


















Vaccination

54.42 67.72 52.25

16.3933.2 51.05

35.89 45.88 15.56

78 31.25 20.93



Personal Rights





12.69 86.72 46.72

36.27 57.92 4.11

95.32 79.21 11.34

13.57 24.55 58.14

58.06 64.71 45.01

0 63.8 25.74

67.57 16.24 30.99

13.15 24.77 51.72

90.48 15.12 96.62

84.6 58.36 16.69

68.63 61.79 3.41

73.44

23.46 69.14 46.7

34.58 97.65 100

68.68 29.7

77.46 56.88

11.18 49.84

20.12 47.06

91.7




Underperforming


Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi) 4 6 . 2 9

Basic Human Needs




















Vaccination

60.47 60.02 49.51

15.3933.15 64.62

46.27 38.88 26.44

82.68 38.74 39.36



Personal Rights





12.55 98.76 43.08

73.75 48.81 12.49

88.65 61.05 30.54

9.55 9.82 56.05

32.26 70.59 58.37

18.2 97.96 29.5

74.7 15.48 72.49

20.67 37.69 72.41

41.4 8.92 86.82

58.85 41.64 34.99

83 73.17 0

63.28

17.99 83.51 63.84

53.65 60.6 89.74

74.17 19.55

84.51 47

9.06 55.17

17.17 40.88

47.76




Underperforming


Sultanpur 4 7. 8 4

Basic Human Needs


Opportunity54.27 45.26 44


















Vaccination

63.94 49.57 37.79

22.6635.43 69.81

40.35 54.02 32.15

90.14 42.03 36.24



Personal Rights





21.71 89.21 25.19

66.85 38.83 46.32

89.89 47.59 7.84

24.12 20.09 41.17

67.74 82.35 62.52

16.8 33.48 20.03

86.3 14.09 76.74

32.21 20 84.48

62.77 19.34 82.88

65.98 58.36 30.39

93.51 81.3 3.21

64.91

11.11 100 75.16

62.3 13.1 100

48.45 54.51

92.96 26.84

10.02 60.82

43.56 63.53

81.39




Underperforming


Unnao 4 4 .4 5

Basic Human Needs




















Vaccination

56.17 65.02 54.28

21.0120.37 72.18

21.54 77.92 16.55

55.73 31.11 41.55



Personal Rights





24.69 87.97 58.63

26.25 89.37 15.86

42.71 23.19 19.64

4.02 4.91 54.38

35.48 82.35 79.57

20 19.91 14.1

58.09 19.03 73.57

33.42 23.23 62.07

60.1 29.56 2.51

40.46 56.53 18.98

67.22 21.14 4.41

90.92

31.57 54.01 88.99

74.96 83.55 97.95

10.79 75.19

74.65 40.48

15.22 79

40.87 53.24

100




Underperforming


Varanasi 5 8 .4 5

Basic Human Needs




















Vaccination

77.75 69.47 54.64

60.5252.39 67.79

60.96 47.14 23.29

78.68 49.24 59.49



Personal Rights





29.99 94.65 46.89

84.98 57.05 14.06

84.83 49.56 45.17

61.06 24.55 77.61

74.19 58.82 57.3

29.4 20.81 12.11

72.62 21.08 75.3

52.62 74.77 58.62

59.6 26.87 50.56

67.13 62.01 39.1

77.27 72.36 9.32

31.03

67.72 83.51 68.87

77.35 51.56 90.26

89.02 33.46

83.1 56.88

36.99 42.32

26.43 100

73.54




Underperforming


ReferencesAtnic, T. M., & Wright, E. G. (2014). Brookings. Retrieved from Brookings.

Claeson, M., Bos, E. R., Mawji, T., & Pathmanathan, I. (n.d.). Reducing child mortality in India in the new millennium. Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is the co-efficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of applied psychology, 78(1),98.

Devercelli, A., & Saavedra, J. (2019, April 10). World Bank Blogs. Retrieved from World Bank Group US: https://blogs.worldbank.org/education/world-bank-s-unwavering-commitment-early-childhood

Gertler, P., Heckman, J., Pinto, R., Zanolini, A., Vermeersch, C., Walker, S., . . . Grantham-McGregor, S. (2014). Labor Market returns to an early childhood stimulation intervention in Jamaica.

H, A., & Williams, L. J. (2010). Principle Component Analysis. Wiley Interdisciplinary reviews: computational statistics, 2(4), 433-459.

Hart, M., Costanza, R., Posner, S., & Talberth, J. (2009). Beyond GDP: The Need for New Measures of Progress. The Pardee Papers.

Kapoor, A., & Duttaa, A. (2019, August Wednesday). India's female literacy has gone up but still 22% points behind world average; Education among young women rising. FirstPost.

Kapoor, M., Kapoor, A., & Krylova, P. (2017). 2017 Social Progress Index. Social Progress Imperative.

Marwaha, P. (2017, January 7). Times of India Blog. Retrieved from Times of India: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/blogs/toi-edit-page/bridge-gaps-in-childrens-schemes-with-adequate-financing-they-are-the-future-and-39-of-the-indian-population/

(2018). Progress for Every Child in the SDG Era. UNICEF.

Stern, S., Porter, M. E., & Green, M. (2017). Social Progress Index 2017. Social Progres Imperative.

SyamRoy, B. (2016). India's Journey Towards Sustainable Population. Springer International Publishing.

UNICEF. (2013, July 16). UNICEF. Retrieved from UNICEF: https://www.unicef.org/earlychildhood/index_69851.html

(2018). Youth Progress Imperative. Deloitte.

Fleurbaey, M. and D. Blanchet. Beyond GDP: Measuring Welfare and Assessing Sustainability, Oxford University Press, 2013.

Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. International journal of medical education, 2, 53.

Vyas, S., & Kumaranayake, L. (2006). Constructing socio-economic status indices: how to use principal components analysis. Health policy and planning, 21(6), 459-468.

Williams, B., Onsman, A., & Brown, T. (2010). Exploratory factor analysis: A five-step guide for novices. Australasian Journal of Paramedicine, 8(3).

Yong, A. G., & Pearce, S. (2013). A beginner’s guide to factor analysis: Focusing on exploratory factor analysis. Tutorials in quantitative methods for psychology, 9(2), 79-94.


Appen

dix

1: D

istr

ict

Wis

e

Sco

res

on C

hil

d P

rogre

ss, i

ts

dim

en

sion

s an

d c

ompon

en

ts

DIS

TRIC

TSN

utri

tion

&

Basi

c M

edi-

cal C

are

Wat

er &

Sa

nita

tion

Shel

ter

Pers

onal

Se

curi

tyBa

sic

Hum

an

Nee

ds

Acce

ss to

Ba

sic

Know

l-ed

ge

Acce

ss to

In

form

atio

n &

Com

mun

i-ca

tion

Hea

lth &

W

elln

ess

Envi

ronm

en-

tal Q

ualit

y

Foun

da-

tions

of

Wel

l-Bei

ng

Pers

onal

fr

eedo

m &

Ch

oice

Pers

on-

al R

ight

sIn

clus

ion

Acce

ss to

Q

ualit

y Ed

ucat

ion

Opp

ortu

nity

Agra

73.3

51.5

58.2

71.4

63.6

3658

.969

.870

.758

.960

.159

.422

30.3

43

Alig

arh

63.6

4955

.638

.351

.737

.242

.661

.159

.850

.262

53.1

10.9

45.7

42.9

Alla

haba

d54

.538

.346

.182

.155

.280

.445

.853

.246

56.4

76.5

32.5

30.5

56.4

49

Ambe

dkar

N

agar

64.9

29.8

39.5

98.4

58.2

66.1

20.9

51.5

35.3

43.5

80.9

51.2

24.6

30.3

46.7

Aura

iya

54.8

29.5

36.8

54.9

4462

.226

.130

.650

.642

.476

.939

.216

33.3

41.4

Azam

garh

68.1

25.3

51.1

90.5

58.8

57.9

3068

.238

.548

.680

.150

.627

.229

.546

.9

Bagh

pat

85.4

52.3

84.5

81.1

75.9

71.1

33.5

62.9

63.9

57.8

92.1

60.8

10.9

4652

.5

Bahr

aich

2026

.711

.474

.533

.139

.719

.841

.421

.830

.727

.221

.70

44.1

23.2

Balli

a66

.731

.745

.280

.356

5726

.174

.834

.848

.266

.643

.547

.726

.346

Balr

ampu

r24

.127

.224

.758

.433

.619

.516

.351

.224

.227

.835

.221

.23.

413

.718

.4

Band

a57

.317

.546

.962

.946

.251

.616

.954

.149

.743

.183

.851

.419

.323

.744

.5

Bara

Ban

ki41

2624

.179

.142

.653

.719

.370

.737

.445

.365

.345

.614

.434

.239

.9


Bare

illy

5077

.251

.973

.963

.249

.636

.745

.456

.247

81.9

38.1

1338

.743

Bast

i65

28.9

37.8

81.1

53.2

73.6

29.2

64.2

32.8

5063

30.5

27.1

3438

.6

Bijn

or68

.767

.965

.464

.366

.658

.432

.551

.357

.850

87.8

45.8

2341

.549

.5

Buda

un46

.739

.923

.273

.345

.834

.419

.637

.444

.734

41.9

35.9

11.2

32.9

30.5

Bula

ndsh

ahr

60.7

57.8

64.5

82.7

66.4

52.9

38.2

66.8

56.8

53.7

71.9

44.5

16.5

4344

Chan

daul

i79

.121

.648

.389

.559

.663

32.2

63.2

47.2

51.4

51.1

52.7

24.9

35.2

41

Chitr

akoo

t62

.68.

145

.157

.243

.359

.919

22.7

33.2

33.7

51.6

75.5

21.5

39.2

47

Deo

ria

82.1

3547

.273

.359

.460

.531

.671

.741

.951

.470

.141

.231

35.3

44.4

Etah

44.2

28.3

35.2

4036

.968

.728

.779

.336

.153

.251

.952

.819

.739

.140

.9

Etaw

ah62

.527

.747

.857

.949

65.2

26.8

78.6

45.6

5462

.847

.732

.738

45.3

Faiz

abad

52.3

3336

.872

.248

.659

.827

.949

.140

.544

.369

.755

.826

.853

.551

.5

Farr

ukha

bad

40.9

23.7

37.7

72.2

43.6

63.8

24.3

88.2

37.2

53.4

58.6

37.2

18.8

41.5

39

Fate

hpur

54.4

14.2

24.1

63.2

3971

.121

.565

70.9

57.2

83.6

36.7

23.4

33.9

44.4

Firo

zaba

d61

.331

.344

.452

.347

.352

24.7

83.7

49.1

52.4

66.4

3724

51.9

44.8

Gau

tam

Bud

-dh

a N

agar

7591

.588

.442

.874

.562

.297

.175

.381

.178

.963

.958

5.3

88.6

53.9

Gha

ziab

ad69

.385

.590

76.3

80.3

35.5

69.4

78.1

59.9

60.7

82.3

51.5

4.5

65.6

51

Gha

zipu

r57

.317

.143

.981

.149

.874

.326

65.2

3449

.863

.445

31.4

37.1

44.2

Gon

da48

30.4

2477

.845

62.7

2057

.636

.444

.236

.223

.613

.834

26.9

Gor

akhp

ur73

.146

.247

.972

.259

.860

.237

.463

35.2

48.9

71.6

65.8

26.1

41.7

51.3

Ham

irpu

r68

.431

.664

.678

.660

.863

.822

.452

.643

.845

.668

.461

.531

.143

.651

.2

Har

doi

43.2

30.8

16.4

90.9

45.3

50.9

1665

37.7

42.4

64.9

36.6

12.9

30.5

36.2

Jala

un75

.337

.863

80.8

64.2

54.5

26.4

20.3

56.3

39.4

65.2

58.1

26.1

4348

.1

Jaun

pur

58.4

2446

.397

.756

.666

.525

.935

.737

.241

.374

.634

.727

.751

.747

.2

Jhan

si76

.344

.460

.470

.162

.862

.535

.445

.455

.849

.862

.378

.915

49.9

51.5

DIS

TRIC

TSN

utri

tion

&

Basi

c M

edi-

cal C

are

Wat

er &

Sa

nita

tion

Shel

ter

Pers

onal

Se

curi

tyBa

sic

Hum

an

Nee

ds

Acce

ss to

Ba

sic

Know

l-ed

ge

Acce

ss to

In

form

atio

n &

Com

mun

i-ca

tion

Hea

lth &

W

elln

ess

Envi

ronm

en-

tal Q

ualit

y

Foun

da-

tions

of

Wel

l-Bei

ng

Pers

onal

fr

eedo

m &

Ch

oice

Pers

on-

al R

ight

sIn

clus

ion

Acce

ss to

Q

ualit

y Ed

ucat

ion

Opp

ortu

nity


Jyot

iba

Phul

e N

agar

63.1

61.8

55.5

68.4

62.2

65.7

24.2

44.7

52.7

46.8

7856

.322

.247

.751

Kann

auj

51.1

17.1

33.6

53.8

38.9

75.7

18.5

78.9

34.4

51.9

67.8

33.7

25.9

35.4

40.7

Kanp

ur

Deh

at67

.620

24.2

93.6

51.3

64.5

16.7

64.1

31.1

44.1

70.6

59.9

28.2

25.9

46.1

Kanp

ur

Nag

ar81

.166

52.3

76.4

6966

.649

.741

.474

.158

85.9

45.3

1343

.747

Kans

hira

m

Nag

ar36

.739

27.6

66.5

42.4

61.6

18.8

79.8

35.7

4960

.645

.613

.841

.740

.4

Kaus

ham

bi45

.64.

426

.378

.438

.749

.317

.428

.440

.433

.972

.438

.335

.444

.147

.5

Kher

i44

.335

16.8

71.1

41.8

52.6

16.6

62.8

3942

.848

.525

.224

.638

.534

.2

Kush

inag

ar59

.833

.828

.980

.350

.759

.612

.868

.321

.440

.559

.157

.918

.340

.944

.1

Lalit

pur

65.8

7.9

4487

.651

.369

.810

.221

.324

.431

.435

.278

.544

.735

48.3

Luck

now

77.3

89.7

56.6

69.8

73.3

6859

35.5

46.3

52.2

8355

.64.

441

.646

.2

Mah

amay

a N

agar

69.3

32.5

54.8

34.3

47.7

59.3

30.2

8042

52.9

53.8

46.5

15.7

31.6

36.9

Mah

oba

65.8

1451

.952

.946

.168

.517

48.1

25.2

39.7

57.7

67.2

81.1

29.5

58.9

Mah

rajg

anj

67.6

34.4

33.8

80.8

54.1

6816

.456

.932

.643

.558

.761

.913

.643

.744

.4

Mai

npur

i50

28.7

3984

.850

.664

23.8

83.1

45.5

54.1

66.1

41.9

25.5

37.1

42.7

Mat

hura

54.8

45.1

61.5

76.6

59.5

58.2

39.5

83.1

55.3

5944

.159

.511

.934

37.4

Mau

61.2

29.6

51.9

7855

.247

.325

.462

43.6

44.6

77.7

52.7

41.6

36.9

52.2

Mee

rut

73.8

87.9

82.3

53.4

74.3

4155

.661

.870

.157

.189

.252

13.5

50.8

51.4

Mir

zapu

r60

.914

44.4

92.2

52.9

51.6

34.6

44.2

36.6

41.7

60.2

46.9

21.8

39.2

42

Mor

adab

ad50

.868

.954

.877

.463

37.3

20.6

47.9

66.6

43.1

88.8

47.6

17.1

41.6

48.8

Muz

affar

-na

gar

65.8

6374

.377

7032

.138

.951

.861

.546

.186

.246

.912

.236

.945

.6

Pilib

hit

64.6

52.2

37.2

63.7

54.4

54.5

1541

46.3

39.2

79.6

48.8

18.9

5.3

38.1

DIS

TRIC

TSN

utri

tion

&

Basi

c M

edi-

cal C

are

Wat

er &

Sa

nita

tion

Shel

ter

Pers

onal

Se

curi

tyBa

sic

Hum

an

Nee

ds

Acce

ss to

Ba

sic

Know

l-ed

ge

Acce

ss to

In

form

atio

n &

Com

mun

i-ca

tion

Hea

lth &

W

elln

ess

Envi

ronm

en-

tal Q

ualit

y

Foun

da-

tions

of

Wel

l-Bei

ng

Pers

onal

fr

eedo

m &

Ch

oice

Pers

on-

al R

ight

sIn

clus

ion

Acce

ss to

Q

ualit

y Ed

ucat

ion

Opp

ortu

nity


Prat

apga

rh68

.117

.441

.688

.353

.966

.322

.450

37.6

44.1

82.8

4817

.321

.742

.4

Rae

Bare

li71

.217

.830

.779

.949

.931

.725

.945

.848

.538

75.2

4926

.225

.644

Ram

pur

59.7

69.9

56.5

74.9

65.2

52.1

23.5

42.7

48.5

41.7

87.9

55.1

1047

.250

.1

Saha

ranp

ur61

.762

.969

.482

.469

.169

.427

.955

.847

.850

.292

.754

.718

.851

.154

.3

Sant

Kab

ir

Nag

ar57

.433

36.9

85.2

53.1

64.1

24.7

62.6

16.1

41.9

61.6

42.9

24.8

24.5

38.5

Sant

Rav

idas

N

agar

60.5

15.4

46.3

82.7

51.2

6033

.138

.938

.742

.764

.649

.526

.439

.445

Shah

jaha

n-pu

r52

.848

.526

.750

.744

.750

.821

.627

.745

.936

.561

.327

18.3

31.2

34.5

Shra

was

ti24

.129

12.4

90.2

38.9

42.5

1055

26.5

33.5

15.1

276.

424

.618

.3

Sidd

hart

h-na

gar

38.5

31.9

3887

.549

50.4

11.2

5038

.237

.444

.527

.217

.122

.827

.9

Sita

pur

39.4

28.5

7.8

69.5

36.3

53.5

16.2

50.3

2736

.849

.931

.919

36.5

34.3

Sonb

hadr

a54

.416

.435

.978

46.2

67.7

33.2

45.9

31.3

44.5

5152

.315

.620

.934

.9

Sulta

npur

63.9

22.7

40.3

90.1

54.3

49.6

35.4

5442

45.3

69.8

37.8

32.1

36.2

44

Unn

ao56

.221

21.5

55.7

38.6

6520

.477

.931

.148

.672

.254

.316

.641

.646

.1

Vara

nasi

77.8

60.5

6178

.769

.569

.552

.447

.149

.254

.667

.854

.623

.359

.551

.3

DIS

TRIC

TSN

utri

tion

&

Basi

c M

edi-

cal C

are

Wat

er &

Sa

nita

tion

Shel

ter

Pers

onal

Se

curi

tyBa

sic

Hum

an

Nee

ds

Acce

ss to

Ba

sic

Know

l-ed

ge

Acce

ss to

In

form

atio

n &

Com

mun

i-ca

tion

Hea

lth &

W

elln

ess

Envi

ronm

en-

tal Q

ualit

y

Foun

da-

tions

of

Wel

l-Bei

ng

Pers

onal

fr

eedo

m &

Ch

oice

Pers

on-

al R

ight

sIn

clus

ion

Acce

ss to

Q

ualit

y Ed

ucat

ion

Opp

ortu

nity

Institute for Competitiveness, India is the Indian knot in the global network of the Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness at Harvard Business School.

Institute for Competitiveness, India is an international initiative centered in India, dedicated to enlarging and purposeful disseminating of the body of

research and knowledge on competition and strategy, as pioneered over the last 25 years by Professor Michael Porter of the Institute for Strategy and

Competitiveness at Harvard Business School. Institute for Competitiveness, India conducts & supports indigenous research; offers academic & executive courses; provides advisory services to the Corporate & the Governments and

organises events. The institute studies competition and its implications for company strategy; the competitiveness of nations, regions & cities and thus generate guidelines for businesses and those in governance; and suggests &

provides solutions for socio-economic problems.

The Institute for CompetitivenessU24/8, U-24 Road, U Block, DLF Phase 3, Sector 24, Gurugram, Haryana 122022

[email protected] | www.competitiveness.in

child progress index - iasmantra.com

Documents