the world bankdocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/...sectors amid a deceleration in the pace of...

Document of The World Bank

Report No: ICR2541

IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT (IBRD-80290)

ON A

LOAN

IN THE AMOUNT OF USD 150 MILLION

TO THE

REPUBLIC OF INDIA

FOR

E-DELIVERY OF PUBLIC SERVICES DEVELOPMENT POLICY LOAN

March 25, 2013

Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Sector Unit India Country Management Unit South Asia Region

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

(Exchange Rate Effective as of March 20, 2013) Currency Unit = Indian Rupees

Rs. 54.41 = US $1

INDIA GOVERNMENT FISCAL YEAR 1 April to 31 March

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

BPR Business Process Reengineering ISR Implementation Status and Results CAS Country Strategy IT Information Technology CPS Country Partnership Strategy MPR Monthly Progress Report CSCs Common Service Centers MMPs Mission Mode Projects DEA Department of Economic Affairs M&E Monitoring and Evaluation DeitY Department of Electronics and NeGP National e-Governance Plan Information Technology NeGD National e-Governance Division DIT Department of Information OPCS Operations Policy and Country Services Technology PDO Program Development Objectives DPL Development Policy Loan PMIS Program Management Information System DPR Detailed Project Report PPP Public Private Partnership ESD Electronic Service Delivery RBI Reserve Bank of India FY Fiscal Year RTI Right To Information GoI Government of India RTPS Right To Public Services GDP Gross Domestic Product SDCs State Data Centers IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction SeMTs State e-Governance Mission Teams and Development SIL Specific Investment Loan ICR Implementation Completion and SWANs State Wide Area Networks Results Report TA Technical Assistance ICT Information and Communication UID Unique Identification Technology UT Union Territory

Vice President: Isabel Guerrero, SARVP Country Director: Onno Ruhl, SACIN

Sector Manager: Antonius Verheijen, SASGP Task Team Leaders: Grace Morgan, SASGP and Shashank Ojha, TWICT

ICR Team Leader: Suresh Gummalam, EASPI

ICR Team Members: Erwin Ariadharma, EASPI; Farah Zahir, SASGP Satyendra Prasad, SASGP; Sapna John, SASGP

INDIA

E-DELIVERY OF PUBLIC SERVICES DEVELOPMENT POLICY LOAN

CONTENTS

Data Sheet A. Basic Information B. Key Dates C. Ratings Summary D. Sector and Theme Codes E. Bank Staff F. Results Framework Analysis G. Ratings of Program Performance in ISRs H. Restructuring 1. Program Context, Development Objectives and Design ............................................ 1

2. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes .............................................. 7

3. Assessment of Outcomes ............................................................................................ 9

4. Assessment of Risk to Development Outcome ......................................................... 15

5. Assessment of Bank and Borrower Performance ..................................................... 16

6. Lessons Learned........................................................................................................ 21

7. Comments on Issues Raised by Borrower/Implementing Agencies/Partners........... 22

Annex 1: Bank Lending and Implementation Support/Supervision Processes ................ 24 Annex 2: Examples of State Government MMPs ............................................................. 25 Annex 3: Policy Matrix ..................................................................................................... 26

Annex 4: Single Tranche DPL – Prior Actions/Conditions and Status ............................ 31 Annex 5: NeGP Monitoring Reports ................................................................................ 33 Annex 6: Results at a Glance ............................................................................................ 37 Annex 7: Overall Program Outcome Achievement .......................................................... 39

Annex 8: Summary of Findings ........................................................................................ 40 Annex 9: Policy and Technical Support ........................................................................... 42 Annex 10: Summary of Borrower's ICR and/or Comments on Draft ICR ....................... 43

i

A. Basic Information

Country: India Program Name: e-delivery of Public Services

Program ID: P108258 L/C/TF Number(s): IBRD-80290 ICR Date: 03/28/2013 ICR Type: Core ICR

Lending Instrument: DPL Borrower: GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

Original Total Commitment:

USD 150.00M Disbursed Amount: USD 150.00M

Revised Amount: USD 150.00M Implementing Agencies: Department of Electronics and Information Technology Cofinanciers and Other External Partners: B. Key Dates

Process Date Process Original Date Revised / Actual Date(s)

Concept Review: 01/19/2011 Effectiveness: Appraisal: 02/22/2011 Restructuring(s): Approval: 03/31/2011 Mid-term Review: Closing: 06/30/2012 06/30/2012 C. Ratings Summary C.1 Performance Rating by ICR Outcomes: Moderately Satisfactory Risk to Development Outcome: Moderate Bank Performance: Moderately Satisfactory Borrower Performance: Moderately Satisfactory

C.2 Detailed Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance (by ICR) Bank Ratings Borrower Ratings

Quality at Entry: Moderately Satisfactory Government: Moderately Satisfactory

Quality of Supervision: Moderately Satisfactory Implementing Agency/Agencies: Satisfactory

Overall Bank Performance: Moderately Satisfactory Overall Borrower

Performance: Moderately Satisfactory

C.3 Quality at Entry and Implementation Performance Indicators

Implementation Performance Indicators QAG Assessments

(if any) Rating:

Potential Problem No Quality at Entry None

ii

Program at any time (Yes/No):

(QEA):

Problem Program at any time (Yes/No):

No Quality of Supervision (QSA):

None

DO rating before Closing/Inactive status:

D. Sector and Theme Codes

Original Actual Sector Code (as % of total Bank financing) Banking 7 7 Central government administration 41 41 Information technology 33 33 Sub-national government administration 19 19

Theme Code (as % of total Bank financing) Managing for development results 70 70 Other accountability/anti-corruption 20 20 Other public sector governance 10 10 E. Bank Staff

Positions At ICR At Approval Vice President: Isabel M. Guerrero Isabel M. Guerrero Country Director: Onno Ruhl N. Roberto Zagha Sector Manager: Antonius Verheijen Joel Hellman Program Team Leader: Grace Porter Morgan Ranjana Mukherjee ICR Team Leader: Suresh Gummalam ICR Primary Author: Grace Porter Morgan Suresh Gummalam F. Results Framework Analysis Program Development Objectives (from Project Appraisal Document) The India e-Delivery of Public Services DPL supports the government's objective of increasing access to online services by citizens in their locality. It will do this through supporting policy and institutional actions that place higher emphasis on coordination and increase outreach to citizens.

iii

Revised Program Development Objectives (if any, as approved by original approving authority) There were no revised Program Development Objectives. (a) PDO Indicator(s)

Indicator Baseline Value

Original Target Values (from

approval documents)

Formally Revised Target Values

Actual Value Achieved at

Completion or Target Years

Indicator 1 : Strengthen state level institutions in e-governance

Value (quantitative or Qualitative)

200 e-services at state level (0 e-services in less advanced states) (11 e-services through PPP mode)

1000 services (90 e-services in less advanced states) (130 e-services through PPP mode)

1776 e-services at state level and 225 e-services through PPP mode

Date achieved 02/22/2011 06/30/2012 06/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement)

For details, please refer to Annexes 3, 6, and 7.

Indicator 2 : Development of technical standards for e-governance Value (quantitative or Qualitative)

0 e-services from certified systems

75 e-services from certified systems 143 e-services from

certified systems



Indicator 3 : Improve inter-agency coordination and monitoring e-governance Value (quantitative or Qualitative)

0 e-services monitored 124 e-services monitored 246 e-services

monitored



Indicator 4 : Improve access to services by using the mobile platform while increasing the pace of internet penetration


8.77 million (end March 2010); 80,000 Service Access Points; 0 services on mobile platform

15 million broadband connections; 125,000 Service Acces Points; 50 services on mobile platform

15.08 million broadband subscription (Sept 2012); 95,649 Common Services Center (CSC) rolled out with 80,733 connected CSCs (Sept 2012); 113 e-services operational

iv

under the PULL Services; 126 dep. integrated, services operational under PUSH SMS channel



Indicator 5 : Facilitate increased participation of users in design and evaluation of e-governance projects


0 e-services 100 e-services

50 services under 5 projects would have incorporated user participation in design and impact assessment in the financial year



Indicator 6 : Improve service orientation of government processes and officials


8 e-services delivered through re-engineered processes; 0 states whose officials have completed reorientation or leadership program

380 e-services delivered through re-engineered processes; 10 states whose officials have completed reorientation or leadership program

246 e-services delivered through re-engineered process; 200 more e-services to be accomplished by the end of the FY; Number of states participated in the Specialized Training on e-Governance program is 20



Indicator 7 : E-services Delivery Law


Second Administrative Reform Commission recommends developing full legal framework for e-governance

A draft ESD Bill has been formulated and submitted to the Union Cabinet

EDS Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 27th December 2011. The Bill was referred to the Parliament

v

Standing Committee on IT on 5th January 2012. The Committee has tabled its Report to Lok Shaba (laid in Rajya Sabha) on 30th August 2012



Indicator 8 : Uniform and predictable verification of e-service users Value (quantitative or Qualitative)

0 e-services verifying users

25 e-services verifying users 18 e-services



(b) Intermediate Outcome Indicator(s)

Indicator Baseline Value

Original Target Values (from

approval documents)

Formally Revised

Target Values

Actual Value Achieved at

Completion or Target Years

Indicator 1 : There were no Intermediate Outcome Indicators in the Operation Policy Matrix for e-Delivery of Public Services DPL.


Date achieved Comments (incl. % achievement)

G. Ratings of Program Performance in ISRs

No. Date ISR Archived DO IP

Actual Disbursements (USD millions)

vi

H. Restructuring (if any) Not Applicable

1

1. Program Context, Development Objectives and Design

1.1 Context at Appraisal

1. Globally, rapid economic growth over the past decade has been slowing down in the

context of a weak external environment and structural constraints. However, India grew faster than 92 percent of the world’s nations. Real GDP expanded at an average annual rate of 7.6 percent between FY2000/01 and FY2010/11, helping the country reduce poverty (at the official poverty line) by 1.5 percentage points per year between 2004 and 2009. India also weathered the 2008-09 global crisis relatively well, with GDP growth slowing somewhat to 6.7 percent in FY2008/09 and rebounding strongly to 8.4 percent in the two subsequent years. However, in FY2011/12 growth fell to a nine-year low of 6.5 percent, with the slowdown most pronounced in mining and manufacturing sectors amid a deceleration in the pace of investment activity. On the external side, the trade deficit in FY2011/12 widened to a historic high of 6.8 percent of GDP as continued weakness in the Euro zone translated into weak demand from India’s main export markets. As a result, and despite continued strong growth in remittances, the current account deficit also worsened to a record 4.2 percent of GDP in FY2011/12. Meanwhile, inflation remained persistently high at 8.9 percent in FY2011/12 (after averaging 5.6 percent during the previous decade) despite monetary tightening by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). 2. Electronics and Information Technology (IT) has been the fastest growing segment of

Indian industry and has consistently contributed to economic growth in India. The sector grew ten-fold in revenue terms from USD 4.8 billion in 1997/1998, to USD 47.8 billion in 2006/2007. Its contribution to GDP is estimated to have grown from 1.2 percent to 5.4 percent over the same period. The Indian IT and IT-enabled service industry continues to grow five times as fast as the global IT services industry. The industry is supported by a large skilled manpower base across the country and there is active and healthy competition amongst states to attract investments in infrastructure as well as to establish software parks.

3. Against this backdrop of a largely private sector-led expanding IT sector, the Bank made

an investment of $150 million in the Government of India’s $9 billion National e-Governance

Plan (“NeGP”) aimed at strengthening and deploying IT capacity to remedy deep-seated service

delivery failures. The NeGP initiative was, in fact, one of many central and state government strategies to improve the quality and efficiency of public service delivery. Other initiatives included: the Right to Information (“RTI”), the Right to Public Services (“RTPS”), Grievance Redress, Performance Management (through the use of Results Framework Documents), and other sector-specific initiatives. Underpinning many of these efforts was an interest in using e-governance platforms to create a more citizen-centered approach to public service delivery, to decrease leakages and corruption, and to address concerns of disaffection and disempowerment. The Government strengthened its commitment to this goal in mid-2012 by investing an additional $3.6 billion in the establishment of broadband connectivity to 250,000 villages. (NeGP funding only goes to the block level.) Currently, implementation of these efforts is converging at the state level. 4. The push for service delivery improvement has been spurred by India’s weak performance

on key human development indicators. This underperformance is attributed to a variety of factors including weaknesses in public management systems and capacities, rent-seeking, and a variety of other institutional constraints. Generally, it is the poor who suffer the most from poor quality service delivery. These core problems underscore the Bank’s commitment to improving service delivery, as reflected in both its 2008-2011 Country Assistance Strategy (“CAS”) and the Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) for 2013 - 2017 under preparation which focuses on poverty reduction and shared prosperity.

2

5. The National e-Governance Program is one key element of the Government of India’s

efforts to improve service delivery. Approved by the central government in May 2006, the National e-Governance Plan (“NeGP”) was introduced to replace an ad hoc array of e-governance initiatives across individual agencies and states that had developed throughout the 1980s and 1990s. The ambitious goal of the government-wide NeGP initiative is to make all government services accessible to the common citizen in his/her locality, through common service delivery outlets. In essence, the NeGP sought to increase the geographic reach of government service delivery and make it more accessible to citizens of all socio-economic strata. The initiative focused on increased efficiency, equity and transparency of services in order to promote a more citizen-friendly service environment – specifically by reducing the burden of physical visits to separate agencies for citizens, providing ready access to information about the availability of services, and reducing the discretion of officials in the delivery of public services.

6. More specifically, the NeGP has sought to transform service delivery across the country

through the following activities:

The introduction of a massive new IT infrastructure (including State Data Centers in all states / Union Territories (“UT”) and State Wide Area Networks (SWANs) which connect all levels of government down to the block level). Under NeGP, it is proposed to create State Data Centers for the States to consolidate services, applications and infrastructure to provide efficient electronic delivery of Government to Government, Government to Citizen, and Government to Business services.

The creation of IT-enabled Common Service Centers (CSCs) which provide one-stop access

to e-services at the doorstep of many Indian villages. Use of the mobile phone network to expand the access of citizens to various e-services.

Sectoral and other priority projects (Mission Mode Projects, “MMPs”) to be transformed

using e-delivery of services. "Mission Mode" projects are owned and spearheaded by various line Ministries concerned for Central, State, and Integrated MMPs. A full listing of MMPs can be found at: http://deity.gov.in/content/mission-mode-projects. Selected state MMPs are listed in Annex 2.

The establishment of common standards, specifications, and policies to ensure that individual e-services function effectively as part of a broader government-wide system, allowing sharing and cross-referencing of information across services.

A targeting of key points of interaction between citizens and the state including birth and death registration, tax filing, land records, driver’s licenses and vehicle registration, passports and visas, agricultural extension services, and a wide range of municipal and panchayat services. In addition, the NeGP has aimed to enable much wider access to a number of critical private sector services such as banking, insurance, and trade.

The establishment of State e-Governance Mission Teams (SeMTs) and central NeGD staff

to provide the required capacity to implement the NeGP across the country. 7. While headway has been made in a number of these areas, other areas (particularly the

MMPs and low-income states) have exhibited weaker performance. The implementation of the MMPs is the primary responsibility of line ministries and departments, yet, many of the state departments, in particular, have not made NeGP a high priority. Furthermore, low-income states have been slower to build the necessary capacity to implement the NeGP, creating a noticeable gap

http://deity.gov.in/content/mission-mode-projects

3

between these states and more advanced states which have pursued a more aggressive implementation strategy. The obstacles related to MMPs and low-income states were evident in the early phases of the NeGP program, and laid the foundation for the Bank engagement in 2010. In 2010, the Government recognized that the uneven progress of NeGP was not the result of funding constraints or the absence of specific investments, but rather challenges associated with cross-cutting policy and coordination at the program level. Some of the critical issues included underperformance of the MMPs, the lack of a clear policy framework to guide the disparate IT initiatives, and a growing gap between more advanced states and those with substantially lower capacity. Government policies were needed to provide a framework for the program and institutional actions in key areas such as government process re-engineering, the use of mobile phones in accessing services, citizen engagement in the design of e-services, and the framework for Public Private Partnerships in public service delivery. A comprehensive national program of capacity building and institutional strengthening was called for to address the uneven progress in specific states and agencies as well as to re-orient officials to new ways of interacting with citizens. A stronger methodology and implementation framework for monitoring and impact assessment was required to track progress, to ensure coordination, and to focus central assistance in areas requiring additional support including in states where e-governance has been much slower to take off. 8. In order to address these implementation constraints, GOI requested programmatic

support from the World Bank for NeGP in 2010. Given the background of its six year technical assistance engagement with the Department of Information Technology (DIT, subsequently renamed Department of Electronics and Information Technology or DeitY), the Bank was well positioned to respond to this request speedily. The request created a new opportunity for the Bank to restructure its e-governance engagement with the Government of India from a SIL to a DPL, and to ensure that citizen service delivery was placed at the center of the e-governance program. This approach was more consistent with both Bank and GoI priorities, and it recognized the findings of the 2008 Administrative Reforms Commission report which emphasized that governance reforms rather than ICT investments should be the focus to achieve maximum outcomes and benefits from NeGP. A programmatic DPL provided a focal point for the Government to convene departments and levels of government around a service delivery reform agenda that could leverage the efficiencies and access opportunities of IT. 9. The adopted programmatic Development Policy Loan (DPL) aligned well with the

Country Assistance Strategy (CAS). The DPL contributed to the CAS’ third pillar in which the World Bank commits to support improvements in the organization and delivery of publicly-financed services and its cross cutting focus on enhancing governance as a pre-requisite for inclusive growth and poverty reduction. 10. The investment was structured as a programmatic DPL so that the Bank could leverage a

longer-term engagement with the government. While the DPL had a 2-year programmatic design (as reflected in the policy matrix), the funding amount of $150 million was only for the first year. The second year of the operation, which was also intended to be for $150 million, required a separate negotiation. The program design provided some flexibility to the Government given potential complications related to the Single Borrower Limit (SBL). The concern about reaching the SBL developed as a result of the rapid commitment of IBRD resources to manage the impact of a global financial crisis.

1.2 Original Program Development Objectives (PDO) and Key Indicators (as approved)

11. The overarching development objective of the DPL series was to increase access to online

services by citizens in their localities. The DPL aimed to do this through supporting policy and institutional actions in two pillars:

4

Pillar I: Higher Emphasis on Coordination (involving 3 Reform Areas), and Pillar II: Increased Reach Out to Citizens (involving 5 Reform Areas).

The diagram below shows all 8 reform areas and their related indicators associated with

measuring performance.

1.3 Revised PDO (as approved by original approving authority) and Key Indicators, and

Reasons/Justification

12. The PDOs were not revised.

1.4 Original Policy Areas Supported by the Program

13. Each of the eight reform areas supported by the DPL is described below, accompanied by

its expected results.

Pillar 1. Higher emphasis on coordination

14. Policy Area 1.1: Strengthen states’ institutions in e-governance. The institutional strengthening program aimed to support more robust implementation of the NeGP in low-income states by:

increasing state capacity to prepare and implement e-governance initiatives, and laying the foundation for greater private sector participation through PPPs in e-governance

efforts (as private partners, financial institutions, and investors will be better informed about the business potential of e-services).

State-level institutional strengthening was intended to result in the implementation of a larger number of NeGP project proposals from states, decreasing the gap between the more and the low-

5

income states as well as enhancing e-service delivered through the PPP mode. Ultimately, the state level institutional strengthening aimed to increase the number of available services being offered online. 15. Policy Area 1.2: Development of technical standards. Standards for e-governance (including those related to hardware, software and websites) were critical to promote sharing of information and seamless interoperability of data across e-governance applications. Technical standards needed to be developed to ensure the transparency, efficiency, reliability and interoperability of all of government systems. Open standards would protect systems from becoming vendor–locked-in and allow technology neutrality. To track progress towards interoperability and reliability of services, compliance of e-services with technical standards for e-governance would be measured. 16. Policy Area 1.3: Improve Inter-Agency Coordination and Monitoring of e-governance.

The success of NeGP depended on the actions of many ministries and agencies at different levels of government, requiring an unusually high degree of coordination. A strong monitoring system was particularly important to generate accurate and up-to-date performance information on all Mission Mode Projects (MMPs). The DPL involved the systematic collection of information to contribute to improved decision making at the level of the Apex Committee. Better coordination would lead to faster implementation, less duplication and a more optimal allocation of resources. This in turn would lead to greater access and better quality of e-services.

Pillar 2. Increased outreach to citizens.

17. Policy Area 2.1: Improve access to services by using mobile platforms and increasing the

pace of internet penetration. The government's aim of providing web-enabled, anytime, anywhere access to information and e-services was constrained by limited access to broadband services, especially in rural areas. This limitation adversely affected the success of Common Services Center Scheme. Providing broadband to rural areas, setting up Common Services Centers, and making services available on the mobile platform aimed to increase citizen access to online services. 18. Policy Area 2.2: Facilitate increased participation of users in design and evaluation of e-

governance projects. The government sought to make e-services user-centric by altering the asymmetry in power between users and public officials in determining the design and evaluation of Mission Mode Projects (MMPs). To this end, guidelines would be developed to define how MMPs would: (i) conduct needs assessments, (ii) involve stakeholders, and (iii) measure performance on the basis of user satisfaction. The objective was to improve service delivery as a result of enhanced user feedback.

19. Policy Area 2.3: Improve service orientation of government processes and officials. User surveys revealed that computerization of existing manual processes through e-services was not having a substantial impact on customer convenience, cost reduction, waiting time, and corruption. Re-engineering of existing business processes was needed to make significant service delivery improvement. This would require mapping of existing processes, determination and elimination of duplicate and unnecessary steps, and monitoring of results. In addition, the successful design and implementation of e-governance would require a new orientation of public officials emphasizing customer service instead of control, knowledge sharing instead of knowledge hoarding, cooperation instead of competition, and transformation instead of computerization of processes. This policy area would focus on both business process e-engineering and re-orientation or leadership programs for officials.

6

20. Policy Area 2.4: Electronic Service Delivery law. The DPL aimed to support the adoption of legislation that made electronic delivery mandatory for priority public services, establishing a mandatory timeline for transforming public policies. Such legislation would define the institutional framework for e-service delivery and would address the role, functions and responsibilities of different government organizations, the mechanism for coordination across government, the definition of an oversight mechanism, and the relevant financial arrangements. The law would provide the legal framework for a gradual, nationwide improvement in computerization and online delivery of government services in all states and UTs. The common timetable set by the act would encourage low-income agencies to implement their MMPs. It would make public officials accountable for achieving benchmarks of e-service availability and quality. It would empower citizens to demand and receive quality services and to hold officials accountable for not doing so.

21. Policy Reform 2.5: Uniform and predictable verification of e-service users. To deliver electronic services, various types of identification need to be automated. Several electronic services have already developed systems to verify these identifications. A national verification framework is required to make sure of the identity of the online service user and to manage identity related risks. Verification is commonly done by providing a username and a password. The DPL aimed to put in place systems of verification which could be accessed anytime, anywhere associated with e-services.

1.5 Revised Policy Areas (if applicable) N/A

1.6 Other significant changes

22. The design of the original DPL reflected the request by the GoI for a series of two

single tranche DPLs, in IBRD’s FY11 (2010-2011) and FY 13 (2012-2013). FY12, or year 2011-2012, would allow for first year results to take hold and to prepare the second DPL. The DPL which is the focus of this ICR was the first operation of a broader programmatic series. In the Project Document the first operation is referred to as E-delivery of Public Services DPL I. The project design assumed that the first year operation would be accompanied by a second year operation, referred to as E-delivery of Public Services DPL II. Funding for DPL II would be secured through a separate funding process, culminating in FY13. Evidence of the programmatic design can be seen in the policy matrix, which includes policy action triggers and targets for 2 individual years, 2010-2011 and 2012-2013. 23. In the middle of the first year operation of DPL I, the Government of India expressed

reluctance about a second year operation. The GoI indicated it was considering whether other types of non-DPL Bank financing would be more appropriate than the originally designed DPL. The government also mentioned the possibility of refocusing the 2nd year operation to more state-oriented activities. The government’s deliberations were fundamentally linked to the IBRD Single Borrower Limit (“SBL”).

24. After months of discussion, these communications culminated in a formal communication

(dated May 4, 2012) from the Government of India DEA to DeitY stating that it would not proceed

with E-delivery of Public Services DPL II. The government later indicated that the World Bank should refocus its e-governance efforts to provide TA and capacity building. (Two months from closing, an Office Memorandum dated May 4, 2012 issued by the Ministry of Finance/DEA to the Ministry of Communications and IT stated that "while reviewing IBRD/IDA pipeline projects" the Government of India would "not go ahead with E-Delivery of Public Services DPL II" and, instead,

7

"may consider a small TA/Capacity Building project as a fresh project". The comment reflects an interest of the GoI in receiving TA, not additional financing as of May 2012.)

25. The cancellation of E-delivery of Public Services DPL II altered the program design of

the originally-approved programmatic E-delivery of Public Services DPL. Instead of supporting a programmatic DPL (one DPL with a series of two operations), the World Bank found itself supporting a single-tranche, single-year DPL. The rest of this ICR evaluates the single-tranche, single-year DPL, but acknowledges that the original design was a multi-year programmatic DPL.

2. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes

2.1 Program Performance

26. Actual performance data by indicator and reform area can be seen in the policy operation

matrix, which is provided in Annex 3. In addition, the tables in Annex 4 provide a list of each reform area and the prior actions/conditions required for release of funding, and a comment on the status of the reform area. As is reflected in these tables, all 7 first-year prior actions were met, and 6 of 7 second year triggers were achieved. Of the first year prior actions, all 7 prior actions were verified by the project team and confirmed by legal counsel prior to Board approval. As it relates to the second operation triggers, all were met and the remaining trigger is in process of being met. 27. While loan disbursement was delayed, the delay does not appear to have affected program

performance. The delay in disbursement was the result of SBL constraints and DEA efforts to ensure that DeitY was well-prepared to manage and spend the DPL funds. While it took some time for the Government to manage through these problems (six months in total), there is no indication that these financial problems had any relationship to the Government’s commitment to the NeGP. The table below provides information related to the amount and release date of funding, which reflects late disbursement of the loan.

Single Tranche DPL - Amount and Release Date

Tranche # Amount (USD) Expected Released

Date

Actual Released

Date

Release

Tranche 1 149,625,000 September 1, 2011 December 20, 2011 Regular Front-end Fee 375,000 60 days after loan

effectiveness date (July 1, 2011)

2.2 Major Factors Affecting Implementation

28. Despite the disbursement delay, the major factors affecting implementation have mostly

been positive, contributing to the progress of NeGP implementation. These include the following:

Extensive technical assistance and consultations provided by the Bank to the GoI prior

to DPL preparation and throughout the implementation of the loan. This technical assistance strengthened the program management and institutional framework of the NeGP. In addition, the Bank played an important role of convener by pulling together relevant departments and ministries to develop a needed consensus within the Government of India for the policy reform framework.

Awareness and commitment of the Government of India to build a positive enabling

environment for the NeGP. The success of the NeGP program was predicated on high-level commitment of central and state governments. Senior officials recognized that India’s

8

strong private sector IT capacity was a resource to be leveraged. Many of these visionary leaders provided stalwart support of the NeGP, helping the center and state governments to overcome major challenges related to cross-agency coordination, policy and institutional frameworks, budget support and PPP arrangements, and legal matters related to privacy and data security.

Well defined roles and responsibilities of central and state entities to support NeGP

implementation. In accordance with the NeGP, new institutions have been created, such as Apex Committees and SeMTs, which have resulted in central and state e-governance capacity that has depth and sustainability. A description of various organizations involved in NeGP implementation is available on the following websites: http://deity.gov.in/content/national-e-governance-plan and http://negp.gov.in/.

29. There have been challenges affecting program implementation. They include:

Insufficient user participation in the design and evaluation of projects, and weak MMP

performance. Both of these aspects of the NeGP were recognized as implementation challenges before and during the DPL, and they remain so today. Ineffective coordination between DIT and line ministries rests at the heart of the poor MMP performance. The Bank, as convener, lost an opportunity to support efforts to overcome these organizational barriers to move forward the MMP reforms.

Performance gaps between more advanced and low-income states continued to be a

challenge. The Program Document clearly recognized the NeGP performance gaps between various states in India. In fact, parts of the NeGP were designed to address these gaps, particularly in areas where performance was attributed to capacity issues. While progress is being made in this area, performance gaps between states continues to be an issue, reflected in the request that the Bank shift its focus to low-income states.

2.3 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Design, Implementation and Utilization:

30. A stronger institutional framework was established to monitor the implementation of

NeGP. At the center, the Prime Minister’s Committee on NeGP was developed to provide leadership, prescribe deliverables and milestones, and monitor the overall implementation of NeGP. The Prime Minister’s Committee on NeGP included representation drawn from relevant ministries/departments, planning commission, industry experts, and others. The Department of Electronics and Information Technology as the implementing agency of NeGP, was tasked with the oversight function associated with monitoring and evaluation of NeGP implementation at state and central levels; this included infrastructure and technical components. In the states, an Apex Committee headed by Chief Secretary would provide implementation oversight and inter-departmental coordination. 31. The World Bank provided extensive input and technical assistance to the Government of

India to support the development of a Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) framework for the

NeGP. This was an important contribution to the program management of NeGP, reflected in the government’s adoption of the M & E framework to provide a base for a more extensive M&E system. The system has been further enhanced using an IT-based application called the Program Management Information System (PMIS). This monitoring system is now being used routinely to track performance of Mission Mode Projects, infrastructure development, and other critical aspects of the NeGP. Currently, there have been around 22 operational projects actively tracked through the system. PMIS can be viewed at www.egovpmis.gov.in. Monthly Progress Reports (MPR) include review and analysis of MMP performance using standardized templates. Similarly, the status of core

http://deity.gov.in/content/national-e-governance-plan

http://negp.gov.in/

http://www.egovpmis.gov.in/

9

infrastructure is also reported through the MPR. The Prime Minister has appointed a NeGP Expert Group which reviews each of the MMPs in order to identify critical operational, legal, financial and institutional issues and bottlenecks. See Annex 5 for examples of routine monitoring reports and evaluations. 32. The Department of Electronics and IT also monitors a number of electronic transactions

related to service delivery by states and UTs. Currently, there are more than 80 million electronic service transactions per month conducted under the NeGP by states/UTs. 2.4 Expected Next Phase/Follow-up Operation (if any):

33. While the Bank engagement with NeGP formally ended with the DPL, the Government of

India supports ongoing Bank engagement at the state level to facilitate NeGP implementation. In a May 2012 Office Memorandum from the Ministry of Finance/Department of Economic Affairs (DEA) to DeitY, the DEA suggests that the DeitY focus its e-governance efforts with the Bank in the areas of technical assistance and capacity building. Later the GoI clarified that it prefers that the Bank focus its’ e-governance efforts on NeGP implementation in low-income states. This suggestion is consistent with the Bank’s re-enforced emphasis on low-income states as reflected in the Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) for 2013 - 2017 under preparation. To this end, the Bank has engaged with several state governments – including the states of Assam, Mizoram and Madhya Pradesh – to support e-governance service delivery improvement. Non-lending technical assistance in this area is being provided to both Assam and Mizoram, and requests for investment lending are underway for all three. 3. Assessment of Outcomes

3.1 Relevance of Objectives, Design and Implementation

34. The objective of the E-delivery of Public Services Development Policy Loan was to

support the GoI in implementation of its National e-Governance Plan through supporting policy

and institutional actions that placed higher emphasis on coordination and increased outreach to

citizens. The goal of this government-wide initiative was to make all government services accessible to the citizen in his/her locality, through common service delivery outlets and to ensure efficiency, transparency and reliability of such services to realize basic needs at affordable costs. 35. The program objective was relevant to the Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) for India

covering Fiscal Years 2009 to 2012. The loan objective was pertinent to the CAS’ third pillar in which the Bank committed to support improvements in the organization and delivery of publicly-financed services as a means of addressing India’s weak performance on key human development indicators. The loan objective also contributed to the CAS’ cross cutting focus on enhancing governance as a pre-requisite for inclusive growth and poverty reduction. By making affordable public services available to citizens, the DPL was intended to contribute to the CAS’ first pillar of making growth inclusive.

36. DPL1 outcomes are highly relevant to the new 2013-2017 CPS (Engagement Area 3

“Inclusion”) and its focus on working in low-income states. Towards the end of DPL I, at the request of the GoI, the Bank refocused its e-governance efforts on low-income state implementation. This request is highly consistent with the Bank’s new strategy for engagement in India. The engagements with Assam, Mizoram, and Madhya Pradesh support this new direction.

37. The program objective complemented other Bank Operations in India – specifically the 19

e-governance initiatives in different sectors such as education, health, urban and rural

10

development, irrigation, and social welfare. These efforts and the NeGP initiative would benefit from common service delivery policies, a supporting legislative framework, citizen and stakeholder consultations, shared ICT infrastructure, technology standards, technical assistance, monitoring and organized knowledge sharing networks.

38. The objectives of the DPL were developed based on an assessment of policy constraints

and the overall progress of the implementation of e-governance at the central and state levels of

government. Prior to the introduction of the DPL, the NeGP lacked a broad national policy framework to support coordination between central ministries as well as between the center and state-level institutions. This was particularly problematic due to the large scale nature and complexity of the NeGP initiative. To this effect, a programmatic DPL was chosen and introduced as the appropriate lending instrument to support upstream, cross-cutting policy actions designed to leverage impact and improve results in delivery of public services. Given the need for a NeGP policy framework, the DPL appeared to be well-suited to supporting the needs of the Government of India.

39. The DPL supported the Government’s overall reform effort by developing a policy

framework which included the following components: policy standards and technical

frameworks; improving citizen participation; improving monitoring and evaluation; and

supporting broadband and mobile platforms for improving the reach, quality and transparency of

public services.

40. Despite the positive performance of the DPL, the GoI cancelled DPL II mainly because of

changing government priorities related to the Single Borrower Limit (SBL). A letter dated February 7, 2011 from the Ministry of Finance to the World Bank provided an early indication that the Government preferred to maintain flexibility as it relates to the second operation of the DPL, mainly because of the SBL issue. The letter stated “The triggers for the 2nd DPL will be flexible so that there may be easy exit option for the recipient in case GOI does not agree for the 2nd DPL.” Therefore, it was not a complete surprise when, early in the period of DPL effectiveness, the Government indicated it was near to reaching the IBRD SBL. This realization facilitated DPL II cancellation, shifting the Bank’s e-governance reform strategy away from central policy to one focused on implementation at state level, in particular in low-income states. As of January 2013, the Bank’s non-sectoral e-governance efforts reflect this shift, evidenced by e-governance engagements and discussions with Assam, Mizoram, and Madhya Pradesh.

3.2 Achievement of Program Development Objectives

41. The Program Document describes the Program Development Objectives as follows:

“DPL I supports the government’s objective of increasing access to online services by citizens in

their locality. It will do this through supporting policy and institutional actions that place higher

emphasis on coordination and increase outreach to citizens.” To this end, the policy matrix was developed to provide a framework for assessing achievement of objectives. The policy matrix defined the targeted reform areas, targets and outcomes to be achieved. Utilizing this policy matrix, and the related guidance in the Program Document, the ICR team assessed performance in achieving objectives. As it relates to the policy matrix, the team used the following assumptions in its assessment:

“Status 2010-2011” column reflects the status as of when the DPL was submitted to the board of the World Bank.

“Target 2012-2013” column reflects the targets to be used to measure the performance of the

first year operation of the DPL. The intent was to have the first year of the DPL operation

11

end in June 2012, and then to give a second year for reforms to take effect before measuring performance of the first operation in June 2013.

“End of Series Outcome and Indicator 2013-2014” reflects the outcome and targets for the end of the DPL programmatic series. The series would have ended in June 2014, and performance of the programmatic DPL would have been measured at this time.

Given the DPL closing date of June 2012, data reflecting June 2012 performance was

considered to reflect actual program performance. (While the data provided by the GoI for the ICR analysis were dated September 2012, the GOI indicated that the September data were not significantly different than June 2012 data.)

42. Based upon an analysis of performance indicators included in the policy operation

matrix, the DPL operation has demonstrated positive program performance in terms of achieving

objectives. Of the twelve performance targets, half met or exceeded the “End of Series Outcome and Indicator 2013/2014” targets, while the remaining six reflect a consistent and positive movement in the direction of outcome achievement and are related mainly to the scaling up of the activities started under the first year of the DPL. The positive results are particularly impressive given that these targets were designed to measure performance in June 2014, not 2012. See “Results at a Glance – Performance against End of Series” in Annex 6 for an overview of this performance. 43. Of the six end of series 2013-2014 outcomes and targets which are not fully met, positive

progress is evident in all areas as reflected below:

Broadband: The first year target of 15 million reflects the number of subscribers eligible to

receive Internet-based connectivity. This target has been met. The second year target of 40 million subscribers assumes an expansion of e-services using mobile-based 3G services. Given India’s 76% mobile penetration rate, relative to its 10% internet penetration rate, mobile-based Internet provides an enormous opportunity to connect directly with citizens. The 3G expansion was delayed due to irregularities in India’s 3G spectrum auction process. However, these problems have been addressed, allowing 3G services to be expanded across the country over the next 2 years. This expansion will provide the infrastructure for a massive increase in mobile-based e-services, which will result in meeting the 40 million target.

Service Access Points: In accordance with the National Telecom Policy, the Government of

India has changed its approach to providing village-level access to public services for citizens. The policy aims to provide high speed and high quality broadband access to all village panchayats through a combination of technologies by the year 2014 and progressively to all villages and habitations by 2020. Instead of continuing to expand Service Access Points, the Government has decided to establish 150,000 Government Access Points (GAP) in panchayats in every village. To this end, the procurement of cabling connectivity to the panchayats is underway. Both SAPs and GAPs will provide citizen access to public services at the village level, meeting the anticipated 250,000 target of SAP/GAPs.

User Participation: DIT has announced a new citizen engagement policy, and has recruited consultants to assess program impact in order to ensure that NeGP is having a positive impact on citizens.

BPR: DeitY has issued a new policy on Business Process Re-engineering which will

increase substantially the number of BPRs conducted under the NeGP. The policy (i)

12

requires all implementing agencies which are requesting NeGP funding to conduct BPRs for their e-services processes, and (ii) establishes a BPR cell to provide TA and guidance to central and state departments which are conducting BPRs as a part of NeGP modernization. The policy makes a critical link between funding and BPRs, and this will undoubtedly increase BPR activity associated with NeGP implementation.

Reorientation program: State e-Governance Mission Teams (SeMTs) have been established

in all states and one of the priorities of these teams is to plan and implement reorientation programs for public officials. In addition, DeitY has strengthened its efforts to coordinate and monitor state training efforts related to this objective.

Number of e-services verifying users: Two factors will dramatically increase the number of

e-services verifying users: (i) a National e-Authentication Framework which has now been approved and put in place, and (ii) the UID and NPR initiatives which are being roll-out across the country. The increase in the number of e-services verifying users is expected to be evident over the next year or two.

44. The positive performance reveals that the Government of India is highly engaged in

managing the growth of a complex national program which is broadening citizen access to public

services at the village level. The ICR Team believes that the achievement of half of the 2013-2014 end of series outcome targets, and the positive direction toward achieving the remaining targets, reflects a strong performance of the government to manage and implement the NeGP. See Annex 7 for a diagram displaying outcome achievement. 45. Performance is even stronger relative to first year 2012/2013 targets. In this case, nine of the twelve performance targets were exceeded and three were partially met. Since the effective target date is June 2013, and the actual program performance data provided by the government reflects a date of June 2012, it is quite possible that the three “partially unmet” targets will be met by June 2013, resulting in all first-year targets being met.

46. As is reflected in Results at a Glance for 2012-2013 in Annex 6, the 2012/2013 targets

were met in five of the eight reform areas by the time of loan closing in June 2012. It is possible that additional reform areas will meet the 2012/2013 target by June 2013 (the appropriate date of measurement). All reform areas under Pillar I (reform areas 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3) reflected strong performance in terms of achievement of the 2012-2013 targets. In fact, most of Pillar I reform areas have exceeded 2013-2014 targets, which were designed to measure performance at the end of the series in June 2014. Concerning reform areas under Pillar II (reform areas 2.1 to 2.5), over half of the reform areas exceeded the 2012-2013 targets, and the possibility remains that others will be added to this as the program continues to progress up to June 2013. 47. The ICR Team believes that an appropriate assessment of performance would focus on

both End of Series Outcomes and 2012-2013 first year targets for two reasons:

The first year indicators (“Target 2012-13”) were designed to measure progress of the first operation in June 2013. Given that the operation had only one year of effectiveness, use of the first year indicators would maintain consistency between actual operation and evaluation.

The cancellation of DPL II was not the result of a lack of commitment of the Government of India to governance or the National e-Governance Plan. Instead, DPL II was cancelled because of financial constraints related to the Single Borrower Limit, and the resulting decision by the Government to fund the NeGP on its own. In fact, after DPL II was

13

cancelled, the Government launched a massive initiative to strengthen the NeGP by accelerating the delivery of government services in villages – a $3.6 billion program to provide broadband connectivity to 250,000 villages. The investment clearly indicates that the GoI has a high level of commitment to the NeGP and the objectives of the DPL. In sum, the DPL II cancellation related to SBL complexities and Government decisions to manage this problem. In no way or form did the cancellation reflect weak government commitment to the e-governance national agenda.

3.3 Justification of Overall Outcome Rating

Rating: Moderately Satisfactory

48. Outcome measurement was challenging as the outcome targets were designed for a 2014

DPL closing. The challenge related to the discontinuation of the programmatic DPL series. The DPL closed in June 2012 after the first operation – a full two years ahead of the originally designed end of series. To address this complexity, the ICR team assessed performance against targets for both end of series 2013-2014 and 2012-2013. To secure a better understanding of NeGP outcomes, the ICR team also examined findings of third party impact assessments of NeGP. 49. While the entire program was not completed in a manner that was envisioned in the

Program Document, the evidence collected by the ICR team suggests that the direction in which

the reform areas are progressing for achieving the end of series outcomes is positive. An assessment of end of series 2013-2014 outcomes and targets and the first year 2012/13 performance targets reflects significant, ongoing achievement. Half of the performance indicators have exceeded the 2013-2014 targets –almost two years earlier than expected – and the remaining indicators reflect positive progress. Relative to the 2012-2013 indicators, nine of the twelve indicators have exceeded the target, and likelihood of all targets being achieved by the June 2013 measurement date remains a strong possibility. Performance is particularly strong under Pillar I, which relates to institutional and policy coordination.

50. The decision of the Government to fund the NeGP without the Bank’s second phase of

financing should not jeopardize the positive performance of the first year operation. While the Bank often views program cancellation as a lack of government commitment to a given development agenda, this is not the case with this DPL. In this case, the Government was managing Single Borrower Limit challenges.

51. It is important to recognize that the Government’s decision to cancel DPL II was

accompanied by a major government investment of $3.6 billion to expand the effectiveness and

reach of the NeGP. This investment is an important sign of the depth of government support for the NeGP.

52. Third party impact evaluations were sought to obtain additional evidence of the degree to

which the NeGP is achieving outcomes similar to those in the policy matrix; the evaluations

indicate that the NeGP is contributing to significant improvements in service quality. These evaluations provide objective evidence about the outcome performance of the NeGP. Based upon the national level “Impact Assessment on e-Governance Projects”, the evaluation found that significant improvements in service quality were evident with NeGP programs which have undertaken a thorough business process reengineering and automation reform. For the state level assessment, improvement in service quality was evident in a number of areas including the number of trips required to secure service, waiting time, frequency of bribe payments, amount of bribe, and citizen perception of service quality. While the evidence indicated that program outcomes vary between states, there was clear evidence related to service quality improvement in numerous states.

14

Improvement in service quality is a critical outcome of the policy matrix. See Annex 8 for a summary of findings of the Impact Assessment. (The “Impact Assessment on e-Governance Projects” dated 2008 was conducted by the Indian Institute of Management for the DeitY. A synopsis of the assessment can be found at: http://deity.gov.in/content/impact-outcomes#AS68. The DeitY is currently finalizing a more recent impact assessment and e-readiness study of the NeGP. To our knowledge, these are the only comprehensive impact assessments which have been conducted on the NeGP.) 53. In overall terms, based upon the positive performance related to achievement of targets

for both end of series 2013-2014 and 2012-2013, and third party evidence of outcome achievement

in the impact evaluations, a Moderately Satisfactory rating seems appropriate.

3.4 Overarching Themes, Other Outcomes and Impacts

(a) Poverty Impacts, Gender Aspects, and Social Development

54. The implementation of e-services at the state level appears to be resulting in cost savings

and efficiency improvement, and the village level focus of the NeGP attempts to ensure that the

poor benefit from the program. Numerous examples were provided in a workshop with NeGP officials from Rajasthan, Assam, and Mizoram. A strong state example is the e-governance program in Madhya Pradesh (MP), one of the low-income states.

The MP government has implemented an e-procurement system for all government departments and state public service units. This system has engaged 90 departments and involved more than 38,812 online procurements totaling Rs. 7,645,600,000. The government of MP has documented the reduction in the number of procurement transactions, administrative processing, and other inefficiencies and leakages which were linked to manual processes often involving personal discretion. The system has improved transparency and governance processes, benefiting small business players.

MP has also established Common Service Centers, called “MP Online” and “Lok Seva

Kendra”, which are providing public services (related to social protection, pension, birth and caste, and others) and private financial services. CSCs aim to reduce costs of citizens associated with securing public services. These costs include transport costs as well as unofficial payments which may accompany service requests.

A final example of MP’s e-governance program is the computerization of service delivery associated with the Food and Supplies Department. MP’s “e-Upaarjan” (computerization of wheat procurement) provides farmers with a number of services like procurement forecasting, real time alerts, and other information tailored to specific needs of farmers. This system has resulted in economic and social improvements to registered farmers.

(b) Institutional Change/Strengthening

55. The NeGP has built significant capacity at the central and state levels of government to

coordinate and implement the e-governance initiative. The NeGP has created new organizations and strengthened existing ones, at both central and state levels. The Apex Committees, both at the central and state levels, have been strengthened to enhance their role in policy-making and cross-government coordination required to make NeGP sustainable and successful. State e-Governance Mission Teams (SeMTs) have been developed in all states, creating a capable and qualified group of e-governance professionals in the public workforce. The National e-Governance Division (NeGD) has been established to provide the program management of NeGP. In addition, the CIO program is

15

being implemented and aims to put in place a cadre of professionals who understand the use of IT for governance reforms and transformation across a federal/ state government.

Other efforts are underway to expand e-governance capacity at all levels. Some of these initiatives include:

a National Skills Development Corporation which has developed a specially designed curriculum for training of government officials on IT,

IT competency tests for civil service induction, and the establishment of an IT cadre in the civil services.

56. Many states are developing sustainable institutions needed to improve service delivery

using electronic means. Evidence in larger and more advanced states, like Andhra Pradesh, indicates that a number of these institutions are Public-Private Partnerships, designed to leverage private sector skills and entrepreneurial capacity in order to create a technically-savvy, service-oriented public sector 57. Institutional strengthening has also resulted in the creation of e-governance teams in all

35 states and UTs. These teams are developing the IT infrastructure and change management processes to improve efficiency and access associated with service delivery mechanisms, for sectors and functions. The growth and strengthening of these institutions is likely to continue for another 10 years, as horizontal and vertical connectivity improves, and as each government program at the state level undertakes a reform process associated with digital re-engineering. The NeGP has been a critical part of creating this state-level institutional infrastructure. (c) Other Unintended Outcomes and Impacts (positive or negative, if any) N/A

3.5 Summary of Findings of Beneficiary Survey and/or Stakeholder Workshops

N/A 4. Assessment of Risk to Development Outcome

Rating: Moderate

58. The risk of not achieving the development outcomes of increased coordination and

outreach to citizens is moderate. Multiple factors contribute to this rating.

59. There is substantial political commitment of the GoI to make NeGP implementation a

success. The $9 billion in federal funding provided for the program to date reflects the importance of the NeGP in terms of government priorities. The likelihood of a major change in budgetary support does not appear to be significant. (The NeGP budget supports policy development; establishment of IT core infrastructure such as SWAN, NICNET, SDCs, etc.; establishment of support infrastructure (including CSC, e-portal, e-district, and others); provision for technical assistance to support state level implementation; research and development; human resource development; training and change management, in particular in lagging states; and awareness, assessment, monitoring and evaluation of the overall NeGP implementation and e-services delivery programs.)

60. The governance structures which have been established at the central and state levels

through the NeGP appear to be firmly rooted, and cannot be dismantled easily. Many states are

16

using sophisticated PPP structures to manage various elements of their NeGP. These are evolving to have an extensive and deep-seeded presence in the service delivery landscape. The presence of the PPPs creates new and additional stakeholders which will support ongoing NeGP efforts. These state institutions are likely to continue to play a critical role in connecting the citizen with the state and in overcoming state-specific obstacles for service delivery improvement.

61. The Electronic Service Delivery (ESD) bill will provide an important legal umbrella for

the national delivery of e-services throughout the country. As is evident in the policy matrix, the progress of this bill is promising, with most policy experts providing a positive outlook for passage of the legislation in 2013. The Electronic Service Delivery bill will put in place more rigorous measures to implement e-services, including establishment of a 6-month timeframe for all departments to define a Citizens Charter which notifies citizens of services to be provided electronically. An additional timeframe is provided which requires that all services are to be provided electronically within 5 years. In sum, the ESD bill increases the requirements and commitment of the Government of India to promote e-governance implementation.

62. Nevertheless, Section F of the Program Document identified two key risk areas which

remain pertinent to achievement of outcomes:

Actions agreed under Pillar II, particularly related to increased participation of users and service orientation of public officials, could have results below what was expected in initial program design, as citizen-centric service delivery has not yet been mainstreamed in the public service and the benefits are perceived only after a few years.

NeGP’s decentralized implementation arrangements make it difficult for any one department, such as DeitY, to coordinate across such a wide range of central and state implementing agencies, contributing to the difficulty of MMP implementation, which remains one of the most important, but weakest, areas of NeGP progress. Annex 5 indicates that numerous MMPs are not yet operational, reflecting a continued lag in implementation. Comments provided to the Regional Operations Committee in February 2011 indicate that the 27 Mission Mode Projects were designed to be implemented from 2006-2014 yet, in 2011, it was clear that the MMPs were behind schedule. Numerous program stakeholders confirmed that the delays with MMP implementation remain one of the largest challenges of the program.

63. States are now faced with implementing at least five service delivery improvement

initiatives, adding to implementation complexity and risk. The wave of service delivery improvement hitting India cannot be understated. Extensive coordination will be needed at central and state levels to manage the integration of these efforts to ensure successful implementation. Additional capacity will be needed, and systems related to intra-government and inter-governmental coordination will require strengthening. Furthermore, the “change management” element of these initiatives includes long-term behavior change components, increasing rick associated with achieving outcomes. 64. On balance, a rating of Moderate was deemed to be an appropriate rating for the level of

risk to achieving outcomes.

5. Assessment of Bank and Borrower Performance

5.1 Bank Performance

(a) Bank Performance in Ensuring Quality at Entry

17


65. e-Delivery of Public Services was one of the first DPLs offered to the GoI for public sector

management and institutional reform. Following a six year SIL preparation engagement with GoI for the e-Bharat program, the Bank leveraged its relationships, knowledge and expertise to help the GoI design an e-governance investment centered on transforming the way ordinary citizens access public services. During the SIL preparation, extensive and in-depth technical and advisory inputs were provided by the Bank to DeitY. (See Annex 9). The e-Delivery of Public Services DPL, that replaced the e-Bharat SIL, was prepared with an emphasis on governance reforms – addressing issues in service delivery, process re-engineering and citizen participation in design to maximize outcomes and benefits from NeGP. The Bank’s prior engagement through the SIL, and its strength of relationships with the GoI, allowed the team to rapidly prepare and execute the DPL. 66. In preparing the DPL, which contributed US$ 150 million to the GoI’s US$ 9 billion

investment in the National e-Governance Plan (NeGP), the Bank brought to the table valuable

technical assistance to identify policy reform areas, institutional arrangements and program

implementation modalities. These modalities were then employed by the GoI to implement the broader NeGP program. DeitY indicated in a letter that the DPL preparation reflected a quality preparation process which involved the development of the eight policy reform areas which became the focus of assistance from the World Bank.

67. The Bank made important contributions to the NeGP’s monitoring and evaluation system,

which provides timely information about various aspects of the program. The Bank team elevated the importance of M&E, providing critical technical inputs to support the development of the system. M&E became a key reform area in the policy matrix. (See Annex 5 for reports generated by the M&E system.)

68. The Bank engagement provided an opportunity for the Bank to participate in national

policy related to the NeGP. Given that the NeGP’s focus is on improving the access, efficiency and quality of service delivery, it was important for the Bank to position itself so that it could contribute to this national initiative. The engagement also created an opportunity for the Bank to learn from India’s NeGP experiment and share relevant lessons with other countries which are modernizing their service delivery systems.

69. The Bank developed an in-depth options document for the Government of India to

determine the appropriate instrument for engagement. A document titled “Choice of Bank Instrument: Response to GoI’s Request for Support to India’s National e-Governance Plan” was prepared to serve as a basis for Government decision-making and instrument selection associated with this operation. This document provided a thorough basis for the government’s decision to secure Bank financing through a DPL. While most relevant government officials agreed that a DPL was the appropriate instrument for support, a discussion at DEA in January 2013 indicated that certain GoI senior officials continued to have questions about the effectiveness of development impact associated with the DPL instrument.

70. There were limitations with the project design process.

The brief preparation period may not have allowed enough time to vet questions and concerns about the suitability of the DPL instrument.

While the Bank played an important convening role in terms of framing central e-governance policy, additional efforts could have been made to enhance central coordination

18

of state implementation activities related to the numerous service delivery improvement initiatives. Integration of these efforts remains a challenge.

Citizen feedback mechanisms could have been used to strengthen the outcome measurement

methodology. Citizen feedback is an important means of measuring whether service access, efficiency and quality are being improved, yet this approach was not included in the policy matrix.

71. On balance, while improvement could have been made during the entry process, the

overall performance of the Bank at Entry was relatively positive, and merits a rating of

Moderately Satisfactory. (b) Quality of Supervision Rating: Moderately Satisfactory

72. The Bank’s supervision team managed a highly complex supervisory environment in a

manner which paved the way for long-term Bank e-governance engagement in low-income states. The combination of SBL restrictions, late disbursement, and DPL II cancellation created a challenging supervisory climate from the start. The Bank team should be credited with managing through these difficulties in a manner which resulted in a strategic shift from central level support to engagement in low-income states, a key element of the new Country Partnership Strategy. 73. While effort was made to retain DPL II, eventually the team refocused on substantive

objectives, laying the foundation for Bank engagements in service delivery reform in Assam,

Mizoram, and Madhya Pradesh. Many low-income states needed technical advice and guidance to implement NeGP, along with a range of other service delivery improvement efforts (such as RTPS, Performance Management, Grievance Redress, and RTI). To this end, supervision staff conducted 7 missions to low-income states of Assam, Tripura, Bihar, and Mizoram during the first half of 2012. These missions, and related consultations, resulted in the current e-Governance in the Northeast NLTA, which is providing an analytical basis for a $49 million investment lending request in Assam. Madhya Pradesh has also submitted a request for NLTA tied to a $55 million investment loan and Mizoram has submitted a $13 million investment lending request which is under review by DEA. 74. A January 2012 supervision mission provided a candid assessment of progress made in

meeting Phase 2 prior actions, as well as the challenges encountered during the implementation

of the policy reforms. A detailed, full-team supervision was undertaken in January, 2012 (Jan 16-27, 2012) which included visits to multiple states. As part of the supervision, each policy area was reviewed in detail for the current status, and recommendations were provided for corrective actions. The Bank mission identified the problems of implementation at state level and need for additional support. The supervisory mission concluded that two out of eight policy actions required additional attention: (i) facilitation of increased participation of users in design and evaluation of e-governance projects, and (ii) implementation of the process re-engineering guidelines and common platforms for e-governance projects. The mission was conducted at the appropriate six-month mark of the period of effectiveness.

75. Numerous policy inputs and technical supports were provided to the Government of India

during DPL effectiveness and many of these were incorporated into the operations of the NeGP.

Of the 29 policy and technical inputs, 13 were provided during the DPL period of effectiveness; many played a valuable role in developing the NeGP. DeitY looked to the Bank as a valued development partner, seeking policy advice and technical support to develop the program for

19

national implementation. One of the project TTLs played a critical support role to the client, providing ad hoc advice as needed. The policy inputs, which supported directly the DPL objectives, are listed below.

Policy Input/Support Reform Area Supported 1 WB's Policy Notes - on all the key policy areas All Reform Areas #1.1 - #2.5 2 Bank's Note on suggestions for ESD Bill Reform Area #2.4 3 Framework for Citizens Engagement Reform Area #2.2 4 Inputs on NeGP M&E Framework Reform Area #1.3 5 WB's workshop on m-Governance; first Draft on Mobile Governance Reform Area #2.1 6 Bank's review comments on the Capacity Building Scheme Reform Area #2.3 7 Communication and Awareness Strategy Reform Area # 2.2 8 Results Framework All Reform Areas #1.1 – 2.5 9 Review note on Standards for e-Government Reform Area#1.2 10 South -South e-Gov knowledge sharing All Reform Areas #1.1 – 2.5 11 e-Panchayati Raj initiative All Reform Areas #1.1 – 2.5 12 Discussions on the National IT Policy All Reform Areas #1.1 – 2.5 13 Meetings on UID / Aadhaar All Reform Areas #1.1 – 2.5

76. Supervision was affected by broader financial challenges related to the Government of

India’s portfolio with the World Bank, namely the possibility of reaching the Single Borrower

Limit. The SBL issue forced the supervisory dialogue into a concentrated discussion about continuation of DPL II, diminishing Bank attention to more substantive e-governance concerns. While the lack of substantive focus on DPL objectives was weak in this period, it is substantially explained by the complexities of the SBL pressures. 77. While the team made notable effort to supervise the DPL in this challenging environment,

the supervision could have been more proactive. Without the complexities of SBL pressures, a number of actions could have been taken to enhance program outcomes. They include: (i) convening DeitY and government ministries to advance MMP implementation and integration of service delivery improvement, (ii) supporting DeitY in the development of a targeted strategy for NeGP advancement in low-income states; and (iii) institutionalizing a system for tracking and reporting progress in achieving DPL targets and outcomes. In addition, while not required, an ISR might have provided additional avenues to engage with Government during this challenging time.

78. The operational environment was further challenged by staffing changes. Staffing changes, which are common procedures at the Bank, added to the complexity of remaining focused on the e-governance content of the DPL. (c) Justification of Rating for Overall Bank Performance


79. Given that the Quality at Entry is Moderately Satisfactory and the Quality of Supervision

is Moderately Satisfactory, the overall rating for the Bank’s Performance is Moderately

Satisfactory. 5.2 Borrower Performance

(a) Government Performance


20

80. Through the execution of the NeGP, the Government of India has set a benchmark for

other similarly large, diverse and populous emerging central governments seeking to deliver

decentralized public services to citizens in the digital era of governance. The GoI has marshaled unprecedented financial and institutional resources totaling $9 billion to scale up and implement the NeGP across the sub-continent, putting in place a critical enabling environment for rolling out reforms. Taking into account the additional $3.6 billion effort of the Government to establish broadband connectivity to 250,000 villages, the overall investment in creating a citizen-centered service delivery system exceeds $12.6 billion. The India experience, particularly related to NeGP governance arrangements, would be valuable to share with other countries, through knowledge exchanges and lessons learned. Due to the compelling progress of the NeGP, members of the ICR Team have already shared this experience with their respective counterparts in Indonesia, Pakistan, and Nepal. The NeGP governance structures ensure a remarkable level of quality and guidance to the project, as they are staffed by seasoned and knowledgeable officers. 81. Acting together, a host of central and local government institutions have given wings to a

fledgling national e-governance system, enabling a beneficial environment for achieving the

outcome of citizen centered e-delivery of public services. Numerous central and state entities have been created or expanded to support the commitment to achieve a citizen-centered service delivery system. With the Prime Minister’s office in the lead, APEX Committees, High Powered Committees, and Project Standing Committees all support a central decision-making structure which oversees policy for the initiative. The Planning Commission allocates funds for NeGP through Plan and Non-plan budgetary provisions. The Department of Administrative Reforms & Public Grievances (DAR&PG) is responsible for process re-engineering, change management and promoting initiatives for human resource development, as well as training and awareness building. Line ministries/departments have taken ownership of the MMP, conceptualizing and implementing the project. At the state level, the APEX structure has also been replicated, headed by the Chief Secretary. SeMTs have been created to provide tech-savvy skills and capacity to implementation. PPP partners and other stakeholders are playing a key role in ensuring that the NeGP model benefits from private sector entrepreneurialism and sustainability. 82. Nevertheless, the success of the NeGP lies in integrating service delivery improvement

initiatives across the country and in quickly bringing MMPs online. Integration to other reform initiatives such as RTI, RTPS, Grievance Redress, and Results Framework Documents will be a critical part of establishing an effective citizen centered e-delivery of public services. While efforts have been made to integrate NeGP with Grievance Redress and RTI, the integration effort needs enforcement and coordination at the state level. The central government is in a key position to provide guidance and support for this integration, but this would require a well-coordinated approach crossing multiple departments and functions, and an ambitious engagement across 35 states and UTs. In addition, MMP implementation continues to lag, requiring a reenergized effort to determine what is needed to make progress in this important area. On its own, the implementing agency (DeitY) cannot convene and coordinate institutions at such levels to resolve issues in a timely manner as the program matures.

21

(b) Implementing Agency or Agencies Performance Rating: Satisfactory

83. The implementing agency’s performance is rated as Satisfactory. DeitY has played a consistent and critical role as an enabler of change and in pressing for completion of actions in the DPL policy matrix. To reach its targets, DeitY deployed dedicated and competent staff to design, develop and accelerate the implementation of NeGP at the central level (including NeGD and NeGP consultants from the private sector) and the state level (SeMT). 84. Elevated commitment and the capacity of DeitY (at the center) and SeMT (at the state)

provided much needed impetus for service delivery transformation across the Indian

subcontinent. Although these institutions are relatively new, having been in existence a little over five years, they have introduced a new wave of talent and skills to the public sector across India. SeMTs are typically staffed by “tech savvy” and reform-minded professionals who are adept at managing the complexities of IT and governance reform. DeitY and the SeMTs have stepped up to the enormous challenge of modernizing government processes and they are doing so in a manner which puts citizens at the heart of service delivery. Over the next ten years, these institutions are likely to play a critical role in supply side efforts to ensure that the government meets citizen needs.

85. DeitY has established an adequate system for NeGP Monitoring and Evaluation (M/E).

This system monitors the implementation progress of State Data Centers, State Wide area Networks, Common Service Centers, National Service Delivery Gateway, E-District and Capacity Building at the State Level. Also, the system tracks the progress of MMP implementation at the central, state, and integrated levels (see Annex 5). While the ICR Team does not have information about whether the M&E reports have improved decision-making by the central government or DeitY, the reporting has provided DeitY with comprehensive and beneficial information about the status of NeGP implementation. (c) Justification of Rating for Overall Borrower Performance Rating: Moderately Satisfactory

86. Borrower’s performance is rated Moderately Satisfactory. The rating reflects: (i) a relatively good performance of the GoI in providing a supportive enabling environment and resources to enhance NeGP policy and implementation, and (ii) a positive performance of DeitY to ensure progress of DPL objectives, despite a slow disbursement of funds. 6. Lessons Learned

87. India’s NeGP is a useful governance-oriented model for countries modernizing their

service delivery processes. The citizen-centered approach of the NeGP is a vibrant and relevant model for countries or sub-national governments which are designing or implementing ICT reform programs. The approach is particularly valuable for governments also aiming to improve transparency and accountability and reduce corruption. India’s approach goes far beyond a narrow ICT orientation by placing citizen access and service delivery efficiency at the heart of the reform. This governance-oriented approach to ICT modernization is a strong model to share with other countries. In fact, almost all members of the ICR Team were so impressed by India’s NeGP that they have shared the model with other country counterparts in Indonesia, Pakistan, and Nepal. 88. An innovative and creative approach is needed for engaging with a sophisticated client

like the central Government of India. Traditional Bank instruments may not work well with a

22

highly advanced client which is managing enormous policy and programmatic complexity. Throughout the eight year engagement related to this DPL, there is evidence that all Bank instruments (SIL, DPL, and TA) were of limited interest to the central Government of India. One explanation for the extensive volatility of the 8-year engagement is the limited compatibility between Bank instruments and the complexity of the GoI operating environment. Some consideration should be given to alternative, more creative approaches and instruments for engaging with the central Government of India, particularly in sectors which evidence volatility with engagements. 89. Low-income state engagement is well-aligned with the Bank’s poverty and shared

prosperity mission; in the area of e-governance, it is also a strategy which reflects a “good fit”

between client needs and the Bank’s traditional products and services. The 8-year volatility associated with SIL and DPL engagements with the central GoI have led the Bank to shift its e-governance strategy to low-income states – a strategy which seems to be working given the smoothness in development of the e-Governance in the Northeast NLTA and the progression of multiple financing requests from Assam, Mizoram, and Madhya Pradesh. This new strategy recognizes the evident compatibility between the needs and practices of low-income state clients and traditional Bank practices and products. 90. Engagement with the Government is most beneficial when it remains focused on

substance and flexibility. In the context of this DPL, the Bank’s dialogue with Government was affected by SBL pressures, diminishing focus on the substance of the governance program. This resulted in a lost opportunity to leverage fully the one year DPL. Eventually, the Bank re-engaged appropriately with Government, shifting its governance strategy to one characterized by low-income state implementation. The Bank’s current e-governance engagements in low-income states reflect the benefits of remaining focused on substance and being adaptable in terms of strategy. 91. Due to the critical linkage between governance and citizens (in particular poor and

marginalized citizens), governance projects should adopt a standard practice of using outcome

indicators which are based on user/citizen feedback mechanisms to gauge progress. Design of strong outcome indicators for a DPL is challenging because of the long-term, conceptual nature of outcomes. Design of central level indicators is also complicated by long results chains and time lags. Nevertheless, in service delivery projects, citizens and users are often the best gauge of progress. E-governance projects which utilize ICT as a means of implementing reforms should be in the forefront of showcasing low-cost accessible technology usage to measure user satisfaction related to service delivery.

92. A structured and strategic approach to risk management should be considered when

programmatic interruption is a significant possibility. In the case of the DPL, the evident risk of program interruption could have been managed in a more comprehensive, timely, and strategic manner by both the project team and the CMU. In such cases, an intensive supervision process could be established to maintain focus on program content, to systematize dialogue with Government, and to promote flexibility as the engagement evolves. 7. Comments on Issues Raised by Borrower/Implementing Agencies/Partners

(a) Borrower/Implementing agencies 93. Comments received from DeitY. An updated policy matrix, which reflects reform area performance as of June 2012, and a narrative update for each reform area has been provided by DeitY. This information is included in Annex 10. No changes have been made to these documents.

23

(b) Cofinanciers

N/A (c) Other partners and stakeholders (e.g. NGOs/private sector/civil society)

N/A

24

Annex 1: Bank Lending and Implementation Support/Supervision Processes

(a) Task Team members

Names Title Unit Responsibility/

Specialty

Lending Ranjana Mukherjee Senior Public Sector Specialist SASGP TTL Shashank Ojha Senior e-Government Specialist TWICT Co-TTL Mohan Gopalakrishnan Senior Financial Management Specialist SARFM Team Member Muthukumara Mani Senior Environmental Economist SASDI Team Member Tenzin Norbhu Senior ICT Policy Specialist TWICT Team Member Ananya Basu Senior Economist SASEP Team Member Ulrich Bartsch Senior Economist SASEP Team Member Vikram Raghavan Senior Counsel LEGES Team Member Preeti Arora Senior Economist SARDE Team Member Guy Janssen Consultant SASGP Team Member Eduardo Talero Consultant SASGP Team Member Muhammad Shafiq Program Assistant SASGP Team Member Sapna John Program Assistant SASGP Team Member

Supervision Junghun Cho Senior Public Sector Specialist SASGP TTL Shashank Ojha Senior e-Government Specialist TWICT Co-TTL Tenzin Norbhu Senior ICT Policy Specialist TWICT Team Member Guy Janssen Consultant SASGP Team Member Eduardo Talero Consultant SASGP Team Member Sapna John Program Assistant SASGP Team Member (b) Staff Time and Cost

Stage

Staff Time and Cost (Bank Budget Only)

No. of staff weeks USD Thousands (including

travel and consultant costs)

Lending 55.08 397.67

Supervision/ICR 47.34 296.17

Total: 102.42 693.84

25

Annex 2: Examples of State Government MMPs

STATE MMPS

ANDHRA PRADESH

National Land Record Management Program

Road Transport Authority

Crime and Criminal Tracking Network System

Treasury

Municipality

E-District

Commercial Taxes

Gram Panchayat

Employment Exchange

RAJASTHAN

E-District

E-Job Application

E-Mitra

E-Procurement

Commercial Taxes

Municipality

National Land Record Management Program

Registration and Stamps

Treasury


Road Transport

Arogya Online

E-Sugam

E-Sanchar

RSRTC – online web based ticket

LITES – Monitoring of Government Court Cases

MADHYA PRADESH

E-District

E-Court

MP Online

E-Procurement/Tender

Land record

E-Upaarjan


E-Treasury

E-Jan Sunvai and E-Shiksha

E-Governance and Service Delivery

E-Correspondence and Management System

26

Annex 3: Policy Matrix

Reform Area

DPL 1 Supported

Reforms (Prior

Actions are bolded)

DPL 2 Supported

Reforms and

Indicative Triggers

(2012/13)

Indicator Baseline 2009 –

2010

Status 2010 -

2011

Target 2012 –

2013

Achievement or

Status

End-of-Series

Outcome and

Indicator 2013

- 2014

Pillar I. Higher emphasis on coordination

1.1 Strengthen state level institutions in e-governance

The government has

developed a

comprehensive policy

for institutional

strengthening

program and has

commenced its

implementation by

assisting state

governments in

preparing and

implementing e-

governance projects. Guidelines for PPPs in e-governance projects drafted and circulated for comments

DIT establishes project development support fund and Expert Cell on PPPs for e-governance projects. The government has

approved a policy for

PPPs in e-governance

projects and issued

templates for model

concession

agreements

Number of e-services at implementation stage at state level (including number of e-services under implementation in less advanced states and e-services in PPP mode at implementations stage)

200 e-services at state level (0 e-services in less advanced states) (11 e-services through PPP mode)

500 e-services (0 services in less advanced states) (56 e-services through PPP mode)

1000 services (90 e-services in less advanced states) (130 e-services through PPP mode)

1776 e-services at

state level and

225 e-services

through PPP

mode

Outcome: Gap between “leading and “less advanced” states reduced1 Indicator: 1500 e-

services (180

e-services in

less advanced

states) (227 e-

services

through PPP

mode)

1.2 Development of technical standards for e-governance

Government has

adopted a policy for

the use of open

standards in e-

governance.

In consultation with relevant stakeholders, the government is developing appropriate technical

Government has

adopted technology

standards including

for interoperability

and security.

Government has adopted a framework for certifying systems’ compliance with

Number of e-services offered through systems certified compliant with standards





Outcome: Raised reliability and interoperability of government systems as a result of certified compliance with technical standards for e-

1 At the time of the creation of the Policy matrix, the term "less advance states" was used. At the time of the ICR, both the Government of India and the Bank use the term "low-income states".

27

Reform Area

DPL 1 Supported

Reforms (Prior

Actions are bolded)

DPL 2 Supported

Reforms and

Indicative Triggers

(2012/13)


2010

Status 2010 -

2011

Target 2012 –

2013

Achievement or

Status

End-of-Series

Outcome and

Indicator 2013

- 2014

standards to implement the above-mentioned policy

approved technical standards.

governance. Indicator: 150 e-services

from certified

systems.

1.3 Improve inter agency coordination and monitoring e-governance

Inter-ministerial

committee of senior

officials has adopted a

comprehensive

framework for

monitoring the

implementation of the

National e-

Governance Plan

The government has begun utilizing the framework to improve monitoring and coordination of e-governance

Number of e-services from projects with updated information in the Project Monitoring Information System

0 e-services monitored




Outcome: Enhanced decision making as a result of systematic monitoring Indicator: 250 e-services

monitored.

Pillar II. Increased reach out to citizens

2.1 Improve access to services by using the mobile platform while increasing the pace of internet penetration

The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India has submitted recommendations on National Broadband Plan to the government The government has formulated a policy to facilitate setting-up of 150,000 additional broadband-enabled service access points in panchayats

The Government has

The government has

approved the

National Broadband

Plan to establish

broadband in all

panchayats

The government has

adopted a policy to

facilitate the setting

up of additional

150,000 broadband-

enabled service

access points in

panchayats

The government has

Number of broadband connections Number of Service Access Points

8.77 million (end March 2010) 80,000

9.47 million (end of June 2010) 90,000

15 million broadband connections 125,000

15.08 million broadband subscription (Sept 2012) 95,649 Common Services Center (CSC) rolled out with 80,733 connected CSCs (Sept 2012)

Outcome: Broadband-enabled service access points available in all panchayats and mobile platform used for effective delivery of e-services Indicator: 40 million

broadband-

enabled

connections

nationwide

28

Reform Area

DPL 1 Supported

Reforms (Prior

Actions are bolded)

DPL 2 Supported

Reforms and

Indicative Triggers

(2012/13)


2010

Status 2010 -

2011

Target 2012 –

2013

Achievement or

Status

End-of-Series

Outcome and

Indicator 2013

- 2014

adopted a policy

framework for the

delivery of basic

financial services

using mobile phones

adopted a policy for delivery of services on the mobile platform

Number of services delivered using mobile platform

0 services on mobile platform

25 service on mobile platform

50 services on mobile platform

113 e-services operational under the PULL Services; 126 departments integrated and their services operational under the PUSH SMS channel

250,000

broadband-

enabled

service access

points

established in

panchayats

100 services

are delivered

using the

mobile

platform

2.2 Facilitate increased participation of users in design and evaluation of e-governance projects

Government has

strengthened its e-

governance impact

assessment strategy

and has begun its

implementation

The government has circulated guidelines for social audit for e-governance projects to central government ministries/ departments, state governments, and DIT

The government has

adopted

administrative

guidelines that

incorporate

comprehensive

stakeholder

involvement and

performance

measurement.

Number of e-services that have incorporated user participation in design and impact assessments

0 e-services 6 e-services 100 e-services 50 services under 5 projects would have incorporated user participation in design and impact assessment in the financial year

Outcome: Services improved in response to users’ feedback Indicator: 200 e-services

2.3 Improve service orientation of government processes and officials

The government has finalized process re-engineering guidelines, and identified common platforms and components for enabling uniformity in delivery of public

The government has

begun project level

implementation of

the process re-

engineering

guidelines and

common platforms

and components.

Number of e-services delivered through re-engineered processes

8 e-services

83 e-services

380 e-services

246 e-services delivered through re-engineered process; 200 more e-services to be accomplished by the end of the FY

Outcome: Many government processes re-engineered, and appointed and elected officials’

29

Reform Area

DPL 1 Supported

Reforms (Prior

Actions are bolded)

DPL 2 Supported

Reforms and

Indicative Triggers

(2012/13)


2010

Status 2010 -

2011

Target 2012 –

2013

Achievement or

Status

End-of-Series

Outcome and

Indicator 2013

- 2014

services. The government has

developed and begun

implementation of a

reorientation program

for state government

policy makers and

officials in e-

governance

Empowered committee has approved an e-governance leadership program for State Government and Central Government CIOs

Number of state whose officials have completed reorientation or leadership program

None

3 States

10 states

Number of states participated in the Specialized Training on e-Governance program is 20

behavior oriented towards service delivery. Indicator: 752 e-services

Outcome:

Users can be verified by service delivery systems anywhere and anytime Indicator: 35 States/UTs

2.4 E-services Delivery Law

Pursuant to Apex Committee’s instructions, the DIT has begun formulating a draft ESD Bill and undertaken preliminary consultations with stakeholders

A draft ESD Bill has

been formulated and

submitted to the

Union Cabinet

Stages toward approval of ESD Bill

Second Administrative Reform Commission recommends developing full legal framework for e-governance

Apex Committee of NeGP approves preparation of legal framework and tasks DIT with this responsibility


EDS Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 27th December 2011. The Bill was referred to the Parliament Standing Committee on IT on 5th January 2012. The Committee has tabled its Report to Lok Shaba (laid in Rajya Sabha) on 30th August 2012

2.5 Uniform and predictable

The government has

issued guidelines for

Government has begun verifying users of e-

Number of e-services verifying

None 13 e-services 25 e-services 18 services Outcome: Users can be

30

Reform Area

DPL 1 Supported

Reforms (Prior

Actions are bolded)

DPL 2 Supported

Reforms and

Indicative Triggers

(2012/13)


2010

Status 2010 -

2011

Target 2012 –

2013

Achievement or

Status

End-of-Series

Outcome and

Indicator 2013

- 2014

verification of e-service users

use of digital signature

in e-governance

services users verified by service delivery systems anywhere and anytime Indicator: 50 e-services

are verifying

users.

31

Annex 4: Single Tranche DPL – Prior Actions/Conditions and Status

(1st Operation)

Reform Area Prior Actions/Conditions Status Reform Area #1.1 Strengthen state level institutions in e-governance

The government has developed a comprehensive policy for institutional strengthening program and has commenced its implementation by assisting state governments in preparing and implementing e-governance projects

The Government has developed a comprehensive policy for institutional strengthening program. As part of the initiative, three core areas have been addressed: Establishment of an Institutional Framework for State Level Strategic

decision- making including setting-up of State e-Governance Mission Teams (SeMT)

Specialized Training Orientation Program for SeMTs and decision makers Establishment of a Central Capacity Building Management Cell for

coordination and implementation of the Capacity Building Scheme Reform Area #1.2 Development of technical standards for e-governance

Government has adopted a policy for the use of open standards in e-governance

Policy on Open Standards in e-governance has been adopted

Reform Area #1.3 Improve Inter-agency coordination and monitoring of e-governance

Inter-ministerial committee of senior officials has adopted a comprehensive framework for monitoring the implementation of the National e-Governance Plan

The Government has begun utilizing the M&E framework to improve monitoring and coordination of e-governance. This is being done through the following initiatives: Program Management Information System (PMIS); Monthly Progress Report; and

Prime Minister Appointed Expert Group on NeGP

Reform Area #2.1 Improve access to services by using mobile platforms and increasing the pace of internet penetration

The Government has adopted a policy framework for the delivery of basic financial services using mobile phones

A Framework for Mobile Governance (http://deity.gov.in/content/framework-mobile-governance) has been developed and notified in the Gazette of India to facilitate use of the reach of mobile phones and related mobile-applications for easier and anytime access to public services, especially in rural areas

Reform Area #2.2 Facilitate increased participation of users in design and evaluation of e-governance projects

Government has strengthened its e-governance impact assessment strategy and has begun its implementation

DeitY has commissioned impact assessment studies of nearly 50 mature e-Governance projects. These studies underscore the importance of conducting baseline surveys of users of the existing system before conceptualising a new system to replace it. The impact is assessed on the following parameters: Service Outreach Cost of Accessing the Service Quality of service rendered; and Overall impact on governance

Reform Area #2.3 Improve service orientation of government processes and officials

The government has developed and begun implementation of a reorientation program for state government policy makers and officials in e-governance

Reorientation for State Government Policy Makers and Officials in e-governance: Chief Information Officer (CIO) training program for State Governments and

Central Government ministries and departments’ e-Governance champions - Two Pilot batches with 46 programmes completed and a National roll out with 8 batches has been proposed.

A roadmap for future capacity building scheme has been initiated HR Policy: Prime Minister’s Committee on NeGP approved the preparation

of an HR Policy for taking NeGP forward which could become a part of the NeGP

Reform Area #2.5 Uniform and predictable verification of e-service users

The government has issued guidelines for use of digital signature in e-governance

DeitY has conceptualized the “e-Pramaan: Framework for e-Authentication” that is intended to serve as the guiding document for all central and state ministries and departments for implementing an appropriate authentication model for delivery of their services while maintaining uniformity and consistency across various authentication mechanisms

http://deity.gov.in/content/framework-mobile-governance


32

Annex 4: Single Tranche DPL – Triggers and Status (2nd

Operation)

Reform Area Prior Actions/Conditions Status Reform Area #1.1 Strengthen state level institutions in e-governance

The government has approved a policy for PPPs in e-governance projects and issued templates for model concession agreements

The government has issued a PPP policy in e-governance project. The policy has been approved. Templates for model concession agreements have also been issued and are available on the DeitY website.

Reform Area #1.2 Development of technical standards for e-governance

Government has adopted technology standards including for interoperability and security.

Policy on interoperability and security in e-governance is in DeitY’s Action Plan which is in the process of being adopted.

Reform Area #2.1 Improve access to services by using mobile platforms and increasing the pace of internet penetration

The government has approved the National Broadband Plan to establish broadband in all panchayats The government has adopted a policy to facilitate the setting up of additional 150,000 broadband-enabled service access points in panchayats

The National Telecom Policy 2012 was issued in 2012 which promotes broadband connectivity to all panchayats by 2014 and to all villages and habitations by 2020. In addition, the Prime Minister’s office has set up a $3.6 billion US project to provide broadband connectivity to 250,000 villages.

Reform Area #2.2 Facilitate increased participation of users in design and evaluation of e-governance projects

The government has adopted administrative guidelines that incorporate comprehensive stakeholder involvement and performance measurement.

The government has adopted administrative guidelines that incorporate comprehensive stakeholder involvement and performance measurement. These guidelines have been issued and are available on DeitY’s website.

Reform Area #2.3 Improve service orientation of government processes and officials

The government has begun project level implementation of the process re-engineering guidelines and common platforms and components.

The government has issued BPR It has been started and been included in the operational Guidelines, and is under implementation.

Reform Area #2.4 E-service Delivery Law


The bill has been approved by the Cabinet and has gone to Parliament for discussion and passage. It is currently under revision in Parliament.

33

Annex 5: NeGP Monitoring Reports

34

Evaluation Table

*Three new MMPs (PDS, Health and Education) and Land Records (NLRMP) have not been categorized.

** Core Infrastructure Projects (SDC, SWAN and CSC) have not been categorized.

MC

A 2

1

Inco

me

Tax

Cen

tral E

xcis

e &

Ban

king

Insu

ranc

e

Pas

spor

t,

Imm

igra

tion

& V

isa

NP

R

UID

Pen

sion

s

Indi

a P

ost

e-O

ffice

(Pilo

t)

e-Tr

ade

(ED

I)

e-C

ourts

Indi

a P

orta

l

NS

DG

e-B

iz(P

ilot)

e-P

rocu

rem

ent

Pol

ice

CC

TNS

Com

mer

cial

Tax

es

e-D

istri

ct (P

ilot)

e-M

unic

ipal

ity

Roa

d Tr

ansp

ort

Trea

surie

s

NLR

MP

Land

Rec

ords

(Ph-

I)

Agr

icul

ture

e-P

anch

ayat

Em

ploy

men

t

Exc

hang

e

1 Conformity

Stake holder Consultation

Services &SL NR

BPR NR NR

Negp Guidelines (Dedicated Project Team,

Strategic Control, Business Continuity etc.) NR NA

Integration, Scope

Business Model NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR

Continous enhancement NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR

Common Infrastucture NA NA NA NA NA NR NR NA NA NA NA NR NA NR NR

2 Timelines

Milestone planning & Monitoring NR

Physical Targets NR NR

Financial Targets NR NR NR NR NR

3 Operations

Services

%age online

Coverage/Accessibility

Off-take

Satisfaction Index NR NR NA NR

Feedback Mechanism NA NR

Extent of Transformation NR

Interoperability NR NR NR NR NR

Sustainability NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR

NR

NR

NANeeds Attention

Not Rated

Not Applicable

Not

Ope

ratio

nal -

NR

NA

NR

Post Implementation

NR

Ade

quat

e in

form

atio

n is

not

ava

labl

e - N

R

MMPs ---->

Evaluation Criteria Central Integrated

NA

NA

Not

Ope

ratio

nal -

NR

Legend

Indu

stry

Initi

ativ

e

Indu

stry

Initi

ativ

e

Rep

orts

not

rece

ived

NA

Overall

Not

Ope

ratio

nal -

NR

B - Satisfactory

Design & Development

Not

Ope

ratio

nal -

NR

State

Not

Ope

ratio

nal -

NR

Implementation

A - Good

Not

Ope

ratio

nal -

NR

35

MMP Name Central MMP

Project Status Timelines

Financial Progress

( INR Crores) Conformity to NeGP

Approval Status Approved Start Date 31.03.2005 Approved Amount 599.00 Dedicated Project Team Yes

Approving Authority Cabinet Approval Date 06.12.2007

Budgeted Amount (2011-2012) 2.82

Quality/Security Audit Yes

Project Phase Post Implementation Target Date 31.12.2009 Released Amount (2011-2012) 0.26 Strategic Control

Project Status Operational Time Period 2 Years

Financial Provision in XI Five Year Plan Business Continuity Yes

No of Services G2C G2B G2G Total

e-Governance Standards No 00 08 00 08

No of Operational Services 00 08 00 08

Integration with NSDG/SSDG Not at present

KEY OBJECTIVES

The MMP aims at improving tax-payer services, transparency, accountability and efficiency in the indirect tax administration in India. The project has automated all major processes in Central Excise and Service Tax through a web-based and workflow-based system. Facilitating the process of indirect taxation for the industry and service providers

PRESENT STATUS (May 31, 2012)

Wef 01.10.2011 all registrations are mandatorily to be done through ACES. Wef 01.10.2011 all Service tax and Excise returns are to mandatorily be filed through ACES. Data pertaining to the use of registration and return module in ACES is as under:

o Central Excise Registration Applications – 86166 o Central Excise Returns – 2145773 o Service Tax Registration Applications – 623996 o Service Tax Returns – 1531980 o Claims and Intimations – 136256

The usage of ACES website (www.aces.gov.in), as on 31.05.2012 are as under o Number of Unique visitors to ACES Website – 1.13 Crores

36

o No. of visits to ACES website – 1.79 Crores o No. of Pages opened in ACES Website – 31.55 Crores o No. of hits to ACES Website – 138.81 Crores

Approx. 20 lakhs Registered assesses and approx. 24,000 Departmental officers are covered by these services.

SERVICES Service Type Delivery Mode Status

1. e- Registration of Service Tax and Central Excise Assesses

G2B Online Operational

2. Facility for e-filing of all Returns (including Central Excise Returns and Service Tax Returns) G2B Online Operational

3. Risk Management System to reduce turnaround time and cost for Cargo handling


4. Electronic messaging with custodians and other agencies concerned with cargo clearance G2B Online Operational

5. Electronic messaging with banks for collection of duties and disbursal of duty drawbacks G2B Online Operational

6. Electronic Processing of Declarations (ON FCFS Basis) G2B Online Operational

7. Automated Clearance of Courier Consignments


8. e-Payment of Customs Duties


37

Annex 6: Results at a Glance

Performance against End of Series

38

Annex 6: Results at a Glance

Performance against First Year Targets (2012/2013)

39

REFORM AREA 1.1: REDUCE THE GAP BETWEEN LEADING AND LESS ADVANCED STATES

ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME: With 1776 total e-services, 237 of which are in less advanced states, targets for 2012/2013 and End of Series 2013/2014 have been met. Good progress is being made in reducing the gap between advanced and less advanced states.

REFORM AREA 1.2: RAISE RELIABILITY & INTEROPERABILITY OF GOVT SYSTEMS AS A RESULT OF CERTIFIED COMPLIANCE

ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME: Actual performance data for June 2012 indicated that over 143 e-services were provided using certified systems, exceeding 2012-2013 targets ( 75 eservices) and End of Series 2013/2014 targets (159 eservices) , reflecting a marked improvement in achieving the outcome of raising reliability and interoperability of government systems.

REFORM AREA 1.3: ENHANCE DECISION-MAKING AS A RESULT OF SYSTEMATIC MONITORING

ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME: The number of monitored systems increased dramatically from baseline 2010-2011 to June 2012, from 0 to 246 monitored services, exceeding the 2012-1013 target of 124 services monitored and essentially meeting the End of Series 2013/2014 target of 250 services .

ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME: Broadband subscriptions exceeded 2012-2013 targets and partially met 2013/14 targets, number of service access points have partially met both 2012/13 and 2013/14 targets, and the number of services delivered using mobile platforms has exceeded both.

REFORM AREA 2.1: BROADBAND ACCESS SERVICE POINTS IN ALL PANCHAYATS & MOBILE PLATFORM FOR E-SERVICES DEL.

ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME: 50 services have incorporated user participation in the design and impact assessment, partially meeting the 2012-2013 target of 100 e-services and the End of Series 2013/2014 target of 200 e-services. It is possible this number may increase by June 2013, the appropriate date of measuring performance using the 2012-2013 target.

REFORM AREA 2.2: SERVICES IMPROVED IN RESPONSE TO CITIZEN FEEDBACK

ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME: Actual performance for BPR will exceed targets for 2012/13 and partially meet targets for 2013/14. In addition, the number of states which have implemented targeted governance training (20) is twice that of the 2012-2013 target, and partially meets 2013/14 target of 35 states.

REFORM AREA 2.3: BPR PROCESSES, IMPROVE BEHAVIOR OF OFFICIALS RE: SERVICE DELIVERY, RAISE SERVICE QUALITY

ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME: The ESD bill has been referred to the appropriate Standing Committee in Parliament and third party policy experts indicate that the ESD bill is likely to become law by the end of calendar year 2013. Targets for 2012/13 and 2013/14 have been met.

REFORM AREA 2.4: THE ESD BILL IS BEING CONSULTED AND DEBATED IN PARLIAMENT

ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME: By June 2012, 18 e-services were verifying users. This level of performance is positive, and partially meets the 2012-2013 target of 25 e-services. It is quite possible that the 2012-2013 targets will be met by June 2013, but an additional verification would be needed to make this determination. This does not meet the 2013/14 target of 50 e-services

REFORM AREA 2.5: USERS CAN BE VERIFIED BY SERVICE DELIVERY SYSTEMS ANYWHERE, ANYTIME

Annex 7: Overall Program Outcome Achievement

40

Annex 8: Summary of Findings

from Impact Assessment of NeGP State and National Level Projects

The impact assessment study results indicate an abysmal state of delivery of services in the

earlier or in some cases, existing manual system in all the three types of projects (land

records, property registration and transport). Users need to make 3-4 trips (and up to seven trips in some cases) to government offices on an average, wait for two hours or more (and up to 6 hours in some cases) in each trip, and pay bribes frequently (20 to 50 percent of all transactions) to get services. Even a simple service such as obtaining a copy of land record can take as many as 21 days (although it takes six or less days in seven states), while property registration and issue of a driver’s license take an average of 33 and 24 days respectively. In some states, the elapsed time (days elapsed from application to final registration) for the latter two services can be as high as 2-3 months. Citizens indicated an overwhelming preference for computerized service delivery. Their preference was supported by specific areas where concrete benefits have accrued to them. For instance, in all three services, the number of trips to offices reduced by 1-2 trips after computerization whereas waiting time has been reduced by 20-40 percent. Direct cost savings to citizens averaged rupees 60-110 across all states. Although the outcome in reducing corruption is mixed, e-Government seems to have the

potential for significant reduction in corruption. This is indicated by the fact that bribes have either been eliminated or significantly reduced in five out of the ten states after land record computerization. In property registration and transport, there has hardly been any impact on bribery and a large number of users continue to go through agents to get the service. Amongst the three projects, land record computerization seems to have resulted in the most

positive impact. A significant reduction was seen in the number trips and waiting time in all states. However, in most states users reported an increase in travel costs (in spite of a reduction in number of trips) because in the computerized mode, delivery of Record of Rights (RoRs) has been centralized to taluka level from the village level. Perception on quality of service and quality of governance showed an improvement in all

projects. In overall citizen perception, Himachal Pradesh (HP), Rajasthan, Uttarakhand and Tamil Nadu rank high while Haryana, Orissa and West Bengal rank low based on a composite score (computed on the basis of improvements on twenty dimensions of service delivery) in all three projects. The study reveals that there is a great deal of difference in the performance of the best and

the worst state in case of each of the three computerized applications. Given the fact that the processing steps in the delivery of the three services can be very similar across states, there is no explanation for the variation in performance, other than the varying quality of process reform and design of these systems. This indicates that each state has chosen to design its application without learning from best practices elsewhere. Among the three central government projects, MCA21 appears to have had the most

positive impact on the users on key dimensions covered in this study. The passport project has had virtually no impact. Results of the Income Tax survey indicate that whereas corporate users, individual users have not benefitted significantly.

41

In order for a system to deliver significant value to all stakeholders, it is important to

involve them in the design of the application. In the case of MCA21, design and implementation was done through a consultative approach with internal and external stakeholders participating at every stage. Corruption level, accuracy of transactions and cost of availing service as the three most

important attributes. Other important attributes are the queuing system, Accessibility to data, Speed and efficiency of query handling, Clarity and simplicity of processes and procedures and Time and effort required to avail services.

42

Annex 9: Policy and Technical Support

*

Connotes policy and technical support provided during e-Bharat SIL preparation, prior to e-Delivery of Public Services DPL

Policy and Technical Support

Provided by the World Bank for NeGP Development

1 WB's Policy Notes - on all the key policy areas 2 Bank's Note on suggestions for ESD Bill 3 Framework for Citizens Engagement 4 Inputs on NeGP M&E Framework 5 WB's workshop on m-Governance and Ist Draft paper on Mobile Governance 6 Guidelines on Strategic Control of Outsourced e-Governance projects * 7 Bank's review comments on the Capacity Building Scheme 8 Communication and Awareness Strategy 9 Grant in Aid Template * 10 Results Framework 11 DPR Template * 12 DPR Appraisal framework * 13 WB's Impact assessment report of e-Government projects in India and Chile * 14 Program Management Manual * 15 Program Financial Management Manual * 16 Program Procurement Manual * 17 Targeting Criteria * 18 Review note on Standards for e-Government 19 Model RFP Toolkit and Guidance Note for preparation of RFPs * 20 MOUs Template for support to states * 21 Review of State and Central MMP proposals * 22 Capacity assessment of NICSI, NISG and NeGD * 23 Review of Rate Contract procedures for NICSI * 24 Review of Enterprise Architecture Framework * 25 DPR Cost Tables * 26 South-South eGov knowledge sharing 27 e-Panchayati Raj initiative 28 Discussions on the National IT Policy 29 Meetings on UID / Aadhaar

43

Annex 10: Summary of Borrower's ICR and/or Comments on Draft ICR

The Borrower’s ICR consists of the following documents:

1. A cover letter from the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology 2. An updated policy matrix providing actual data as noted in the column labeled

“Status as of 30th June, 2012” 3. An update of each reform area under the e-Delivery of Public Services DPL

(“Action Taken Update”). 4. Comments on the draft ICR

48

Action Taken Update

Policy Action 1.1 - Strengthen states’ institutions in e-governance

Status update: 1. The Government has developed a comprehensive policy for institutional strengthening program.

As part of the initiative, three core areas have been addressed: Establishment of an Institutional Framework for State Level Strategic decision- making

including setting-up of State e-Governance Mission Teams (SeMT) - Total SeMTs as on 23rd June 2012 – 262;

Specialized Training Orientation Program for SeMTs and decision makers: Leadership Meet : 20 Programmes completed; Orientation Training for SeMT: 205 SeMT members from 34 States/ UT’s and 8

NeGD Central Team members Specialized Training for eGovernance Programme for Government Officers:

- No. of STeP Training Completed -77 - Total Participants - 2082 - No. of States participated - 20.

Establishment of a Central Capacity Building Management Cell for coordination and implementation of the Capacity Building Scheme.

2. Further, dedicated institutions have also been established at the Apex , Program and Project levels as detailed below: Apex Level - Apex Committees have been set up both at the Central as well as at State

levels to providing leadership, direction and vision for e-Governance. Program (i.e. at State) level - State e-Governance Mission Teams (SeMTs) with expert

resources in the areas of project management, change management, technology and finance management etc. are being set up in all States/UTs.

Project (i.e. at Department) level - Project teams to oversee project execution, manage implementation and to deal with technology, process and change management issues are proposed to be established at the implementing department / agency level for each MMP Project.

3. National level program management: The Government has designated the National e-Governance Division (NeGD) as the Central agency for overall program management and implementation of the Capacity Building Scheme under the Cabinet approved Capacity Building Scheme.

4. PPP Policy Guidelines for PPP in e-Governance projects have been drafted and circulated for comments

by DeitY. The Government has also setup several inter-ministerial committees that will have direct

impact on the National PPP Policy, namely National PPP Policy, Allocation of Natural Resources Committee and Public Procurement Committee.

DeitY has also taken the initiative to formulate Model RFP Templates, Guideline Notes and an interactive web-based Toolkit to support the formulation of e-governance projects.

49

Policy Action 1.2 - Development of Technical Standards for e-Governance

Standards and Guidelines Published/Notified:

Areas of Standardization Status

1. Policy on Open Standards Policy notified. Selection of Single Royalty Free Open Standards to avoid vendor/technology lock-in.

2. Biometrics Face Image, Fingerprint & Minutiae Standards; IRIS Image data standard notified.

3. Metadata and Data Standards (MDDS) - Demographic

MDDS for Person Identification and Land Codification

4. Network and Information Security 9 guidelines to aid an ISO 27001 implementation for secure e-Governance systems; Security guidelines for e procurement systems.

5. Digital Signature Interoperability Guidelines for Digital Signatures; Guidelines for Digital Signature usage.

6. Localization Encoding (Unicode 5.1.0), Font (ISO/IEC14496-22).

7. Quality Assurance Quality Assurance Framework (QAF) & Conformity Assessment Requirements document (CARE) guidelines.

8. Technical standards under IFEG Phase I and Phase II report

Technical standards in 47 areas notified.

Standards and guidelines work under progress


1. MDDS – MoPR Domain Draft document circulated for review by closed group of stakeholders

2. Interoperability Framework for E-Governance (IFEG)

Draft document submitted by Expert committee

3. Guidelines for Localization of eGovernance systems

Draft document revised by Localization expert committee to be put up for public review

4. XML Signature Public review completed. Feedback being incorporated.

5.Digital Preservation Best practices and Standard document for preservation of e records under review.

50


6. Institutional mechanism for domain MDDS

Institutional mechanism approved and circulated to 12 MMP’s for formulation of domain MDDS.

7. Mobile standards and guidelines Draft under revision

8. National Institute for Standards Draft Approach Paper on Indian Institute for Standards and Technology under review.

9. Mechanism for Version control, Standards Compliance and guidelines for Reference Implementation

Committee/Groups proposed for formulation.

8 States/UTs have been certified by STQC under reforms, SSDG and State Portal for compliance

w.r.t MDDS – Demographic Standards and the GIGW guidelines certification. This totals to 143

eservices.

Policy Action 1.3 - Improve inter-agency coordination and monitoring of e-governance

The Government has begun utilizing the M&E framework to improve monitoring and coordination of e-governance. This is being done through the following initiatives:

a. Program Management Information System (PMIS): PMIS has been conceived as an online tool to drive implementation of financially and technically massive and geographically diverse MMPs. As on date 22 operational projects are being actively tracked through the system. The second phase of the PMIS involves ambitious modules for workflow management, role-based system access, and service tracking. In addition, comprehensive performance indicators and dashboards have been taken up and are being refined to meet stakeholder needs. PMIS can be reached at www.egovpmis.gov.in.

b. Monthly Progress Reports (MPR): MPRs are being regularly forwarded to Cabinet Secretary

wherein information received from PMIS is critically analyzed and MMPs’ performance is reviewed and graded on standardized templates, on a monthly basis. Similarly, status of core infrastructure is also reported through the MPR.

c. Prime Minister Appointed Expert Group on NeGP: The Prime Minister’s Committee on NeGP

mandated formation of an Expert Group to review each of the MMPs and to identify critical operational, legal, financial and institutional issues and bottlenecks in each of them.

Following this mandate, a detailed evaluation of the performance of most of the MMPs has been carried out. The report of the Expert Group is under finalization and is likely to be placed in the public domain soon.

d. State Action Plans: Based on the funds’ allocation to States/UTs for various e-Governance initiatives, individual States/UTs have been requested to come up with a plan to utilize the same within the financial year 2012-13. A standard template has been prepared wherein the states

http://www.egovpmis.gov.in/

51

report their individual implementation plan for the various e-Governance initiatives. These plans are being monitored on a quarterly basis. The performance of the States/UTs are being monitored and graded as per their present status and the implementation of their action plans.

e. e-Transaction Monitoring: As part of the State Action Plan Initiative, DeitY is also monitoring number of electronic transactions being delivered by various states and UTs. As on date, more than 8 crore transactions/month are taking place under various electronic services provided by the States/UTs.

Policy Action 2.1 - Improve access to services by using the mobile platform while increasing

the pace of internet penetration.

1. A Framework for Mobile Governance (http://deity.gov.in/content/framework-mobile-governance) has been developed and notified in the Gazette of India to facilitate use of the reach of mobile phones and related mobile-applications for easier and anytime access to public services, especially in rural areas.

2. Drawing on TRAI recommendations on National Broadband Plan, a revised Telecommunications Policy is under preparation.

3. The Cabinet has approved development of a National Optical Fiber Network to provide broadband connectivity in Panchayats.

4. Good progress is being made towards development of a Mobile Services Delivery Gateway

(MSDG). 5. SMS Gateway has been launched in different departments:

a. PUSH SMS (Messages sent by Departments to users/ citizens): 82 Department offering their services using PUSH SMS and more than 5600000 SMSs pushed as of 30-June-2012.

b. PULL SMS (Messages received by Departments from users/ citizens): 98 unique services operationalized for integrating Departments as of 30-June-2012.

6. Mobile App Store has been launched. 4 live and 31 generic mobile applications are currently

hosted on the Govt. m-Appstore mgov.gov.in. Generic Apps can be integrated with the backend databases.

Policy Action 2.2 - Facilitate increased participation of users in design and evaluation of e-

governance projects

1. Citizen Engagement Framework (CEF) for e-Governance Projects and a Framework and Guidelines for Use of Social Media have been conceptualized. These Frameworks include both online as well as offline methods of Citizen Engagement. Keeping in view the challenges of online engagement, Framework and Guidelines for Use of Social Media have also been drafted separately. The following is proposed to be undertaken as part of the Scheme to achieve institutionalization of citizen engagement in e-Governance projects in India: Preparation of an Engagement Toolkit: To implement the framework, a comprehensive toolkit

is proposed which will act as a guide for undertaking the engagement. This toolkit would



52

enable implementers identify potential methodologies and mechanisms for undertaking the desired engagements at different stages of the project.

Development of Citizen Engagement Platform: A platform is proposed to be developed by DeitY which will enable both internet as well mobile based engagements with citizens.

Pilot Citizen Engagement Framework in MMPs: In order to demonstrate the effectiveness of the framework, the framework will be piloted for select MMPs at different stages of implementation. This would ensure testing of the framework as well as designing of appropriate methodologies for citizen engagement

Citizen Engagement Fund: Citizen Engagement is an integral part of stakeholder consultation for ensuring wider acceptance, appropriate planning and long term sustainability of e-Governance Projects. As such, it involves allocation of funds that are earmarked for this activity alone. Since the engagement needs to be undertaken throughout the entire project life cycle, any associated costs need to be planned for at the beginning of all the new e-Governance Projects. For existing projects, DeitY shall take the initiative in creating the required fund. This Fund will enable the various Central Ministries/Departments to undertake Citizen Engagement for current e-Governance Projects.

2. Rural Outreach As part of deepening Citizen Engagement and to spread awareness about e-governance in villages, DeitY is undertaking a nationwide Outreach Campaign through Common Services Centres (CSCs) across the country. A total of 2843 CSCs across 25 states are being covered during the outreach campaign touching almost 300,000 people in villages. A fully furbished Exhibition Van will provide opportunity for hands on experience about various public services available through these Centers. Other interesting elements of the Exhibition are Street Plays, audio visual experience and VLE assistance is educating people about convenience and transparency of services available through CSCs. 3. Government Outreach DeitY is undertaking a comprehensive exercise in States to reach out to all levels of government. This is being done through State, division, and district level workshops. Till date 5 regional and 21 state workshops have been organized. In addition, district level workshops have also been held in select States with nearly 5000 government officials having participated and benefitted from these workshops.

4. Academia Outreach DeitY is supporting NeGP awareness workshops in 41 Central and State Universities with 20 such workshops having been held and nearly 3000 students reached through this effort. 5. Virtual Outreach The NeGP portal is being enhanced and a dynamic version of the portal is expected to be launched by Dec 15 2012. In addition, presence on Social media platform has been created on a pilot basis. Currently NeGP has presence on FaceBook & YouTube. To encourage exchange and cross pollination of ideas a collaboration portal for e-governance practitioners has been created on which nearly 600 practitioners – both from within and outside government - from across the country participate.

53

6. Creating Audio Visual Repository While on ground activities are being undertaken, it is equally essential to create record of such activities as well as opinions of service providers as well as service seekers. Towards this end, two films each on NeGP and CSC are being produced that incorporate on ground reality from 10 different state and MMPs. In addition, a series of VLE experience is also being created. One of the critical element of good project management is incorporation of learning from successful projects especially those that demonstrate how active and effective stakeholder engagement has contributed to the success of the project. Towards this end, a special e-Champion series is being created where conversations with e-Champions will provide insights into how stakeholder consultation has contributed towards success of the project. 7. Impact Assessment DeitY has commissioned impact assessment studies of nearly 50 mature e-Governance projects. These studies underscore the importance of conducting baseline surveys of users of the existing system before conceptualising a new system to replace it. The impact is assessed on the following parameters:

i. Service Outreach ii. Cost of Accessing the Service

iii. Quality of service rendered; and iv. Overall impact on governance

8. e-Readiness Assessment DeitY has also been conducting e-Readiness Assessment Studies successfully. The findings of these studies help identify gaps, strengths and the level of disparity within and across the States. The e-Readiness study includes the following:

i. e-Readiness Assessment of states ii. e-Readiness Assessment of central line ministries

iii. Case studies of successful e-governance projects iv. State wise policy recommendations

Policy Action 2.3 - Improve service orientation of government processes and officials.

1. Process re-engineering: Following recommendations as contained in DPAR’s Report on BPR for e-Governance, DeitY has issued ‘Guidelines for Operational Model for implementation of Mission Mode Projects’ which are to be implemented by all Line Ministries and State Departments implementing MMP projects. These guidelines require setting of a Process Advisory Committee (PAC) under each Project Management Team (PeMT) in the implementing agency. The GPR is the responsibility of the Project Management Team and the PAC in the concerned PeMT is responsible to provide process level inputs for the MMP Project. As Standards for GPR are not well established, DARPG in consultation with DeitY and CSIR is working on formulation of standards for GPR.

54

2. Reorientation for State Government Policy Makers and Officials in E-governance:

i. Chief Information Officer (CIO) training program for State Governments and Central Government ministries and departments’ e-Governance champions - Two Pilot batches with 46 programmes completed and a National roll out with 8 batches has been proposed.

ii. A roadmap for future capacity building scheme has been initiated. iii. HR Policy: Prime Minister’s Committee on NeGP approved the preparation of an HR Policy

for taking NeGP forward which could become a part of the NeGP. Following these directions, an Expert Committee has been constituted to recommend the HR framework and policy for e-Governance which would address the need for harnessing talent from the Government as well as from the open market. Deliberations of this Committee are at an advanced stage of formalization.

Policy Action 2.4 Electronic Service Delivery (ESD) Act

DIT was able to far exceed progress expectations in this area. DIT prepared a draft ESD Bill in extensive consultations with states, central government and civil society. The Electronic Delivery of Services (EDS) Bill 2011 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 27th December 2011. The Bill was referred to the Parliament Standing Committee on Information Technology on 5th January 2012. The Committee has tabled its Report to Lok Sabha (laid in Rajya Sabha) on 30th August 2012. The Department of Electronics and Information Technology is working on the recommendations made by the Committee. Recently DeitY has formulated and circulated Model State Electronic Service (ESD) Rules for adoption by various States under the Information Technology Act, 2000. On the basis of these Model Rules, the State of Manipur has recently notified Manipur State IT Electronic Service Delivery (ESD) Rules. Other States/UTs are also in the process of notifying/adopting these rules. Policy Action 2.5 - Uniform and Predictable Verification of e-Service Users

DeitY has conceptualized the “e-Pramaan: Framework for e-Authentication” that is intended to serve as the guiding document for all central and state ministries and departments for implementing an appropriate authentication model for delivery of their services while maintaining uniformity and consistency across various authentication mechanisms. Under this Framework, the key implementation strategy is to develop e-Pramaan Gateway (a central hub for all e-Authentication transactions) and Identity Directories. e-Pramaan Gateway will provide a convenient and secure way for users to access government services via internet/mobile as well as for the government to assess the authenticity of the users. e-Pramaan Gateway is proposed to be integrated with NSDG (National Service Delivery Gateway), SSDG (State Service Delivery Gateway) and MSDG (Mobile Service Delivery Gateway) and shall act as a standard authentication mechanism between service access providers and corresponding messaging middleware (NSDG, SSDG or MSDG). A PoC with ePASS application of Andhra Pradesh Social Welfare Department has been successfully completed, while a pilot project has also been initiated in Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

55

Comments of Department of Electronics and Information Technology (DeitY) on ICR

for “e-delivery of Public Services Development Policy Loan” (DeitY has, vide its D.O. no. 2(1)/05-EGD (Vol. IV) dt. 11.03.13 provided detailed comments on the

subject draft Report. The comments below are summarized and based on the revised ICR received by email on 14-3-2013)

(1) Despite excellent performance in six out of eight reform areas and nine out of twelve performance indicators, the rating of Moderately Satisfactory‟ seems to be misplaced and not based on facts available in the ICR. Moreover, achievements and the outcomes in reform areas have been evaluated mid-year while there still remains time up to June 2013 for meeting the targets. Therefore, the rating deserves to be much higher. (2) At a few places in the ICR, unsubstantiated and generic statements leading to somewhat sweeping conclusions have been made. These need to be reviewed and revised. (3) DeitY has, at a few places in draft ICR, been referred to as the implementing agency for National e-Governance Plan (NeGP). It is clarified that while DeitY drives and monitors NeGP while Mission Mode Projects under NeGP are implemented by the respective Ministries/States. (4) Reference to ‘less advanced States’ has been made at various paragraphs in the ICR. As it is not a widely recognized terminology, it would be appropriate to place this phrase within quotes. Specific revisions to the ICR are attached.

Paragraph 7: The modified paragraph is modified as below:

While considerable headway has been made in a number of these areas, few other areas

(particularly a few MMPs and “less advanced states”) have exhibited weaker performance. The implementation of the MMPs is the primary responsibility of line ministries and departments, yet, many of the state departments, in particular, have not made MMPs a high priority. Furthermore, “less advanced states” have been slower to build the necessary capacity to implement the NeGP, creating a noticeable gap between these states and more advanced states which have pursued a more aggressive implementation strategy. The obstacles related to MMPs and “less advanced states” were evident in the early phases of the NeGP program. In 2010, the Government recognized that the uneven progress of NeGP was not the result of funding constraints or the absence of specific investments, but rather challenges associated with cross-cutting policy and coordination at the program level. Some of the critical issues included underperformance of certain MMPs, the lack of coordination between disparate IT initiatives, and a growing gap between advanced states and those with substantially lower capacity. Government policies were needed to provide a framework for the program and institutional actions in key areas such as government process re-engineering, the use of mobile phones in accessing services, citizen engagement in the design of e-services, and the framework for Public Private Partnerships in public service delivery. A comprehensive national program of capacity building and institutional strengthening was called for to address the uneven progress in specific states and agencies as well as to re-orient officials to new ways of interacting with citizens. A stronger methodology and implementation framework for monitoring and impact assessment was required to track progress, to ensure coordination, and to focus central assistance in areas requiring additional support including in states where e-governance has been much slower to take off.

56

Paragraph 28: Reform Area 2.1, 2 out of 3 indicators have achieved target, hence the 2.1

should be considered as target achieved. Therefore the header of the paragraph is modified

given below:

When assessing performance by the eight reform areas, six areas involve targets which have been fully met; the other two have one or more indicators which have partially met their relevant target, and actual achievement of the target remains a possibility before June 2013. Paragraph 30: The highlighted section in the below statement is unsubstantiated by the ICR

Team: Both of these aspects of the NeGP were recognized as implementation challenges before and during the DPL, and they remain so today. Ineffective coordination between DIT and line ministries rests at the heart of the poor MMP performance. Hence it is suggested to remove the same. Paragraph 31: DeitY is the monitoring agency of NeGP, hence 2

nd line of paragraph should

mention:

“The Department of Electronics and Information Technology as the monitoring agency of NeGP, was tasked with the oversight function associated with monitoring and evaluation of NeGP implementation at state and central levels; this included infrastructure and technical components. Paragraph 32: The header of the paragraph is modified given below:

The World Bank provided some technical assistance to the Government of India to support the development of a Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) framework for the NeGP Paragraph 34: 2nd line of paragraph should be modified as below: Later the DEA clarified that it prefers that these efforts focus on NeGP implementation in “less advanced states”. Paragraph 38: The content of paragraph should be modified as below:

Prior to the introduction of the DPL, coordination between central ministries as well as between the center and state-level institutions was particularly problematic due to the large scale nature and complexity of the NeGP initiative. To this effect, a programmatic DPL was chosen and introduced as the appropriate lending instrument to support upstream, cross-cutting policy actions designed to leverage impact and improve results in delivery of public services. Given the need for a NeGP policy framework, the DPL appeared to be well-suited to supporting the needs of the Government of India. Section 3.3 & 5.2:

The Overall Outcome Rating is given as Moderately Satisfactory

Borrower Performance has been rated as Moderately Satisfactory

The ratings do not seems justified considering six out of the eight reform areas and nine out of the twelve performance indicators target were exceeded. Moreover, achievements and the outcomes in reform areas have been evaluated mid-year while there still remains time up to June 2013 for meeting the targets. Paragraph 42: The header of the paragraph is modified given below:

The evaluation revealed that targets were exceeded in six reform areas by the time of loan closing in June 2012.

57

Paragraph 45: As 6 out of 8 reforms has already achieved the 2012-2013 targets, the

paragraph should mention as below: Half of the reform areas have already exceeded the 2012-2013 targets and additional reform areas may also achieve their target by June 2013, the final target date. Paragraph 53: The content of paragraph should be modified as below: The $9 billion in GoI and Public Private Partnership (PPP) funding provided for the program to date reflects the importance of the NeGP in terms of government priorities. It is in all likelihood that similar budgetary support would be provided in future. Paragraph 56: The highlighted section in the below statement is unsubstantiated by the ICR

Team, Actions agreed under Pillar II, and particularly increased participation of users and service

orientation of public officials, could have results below what was expected in initial program design, as citizen-centric service delivery has not yet been mainstreamed in the public service and the benefits are perceived only after a few years.

Hence it is suggested to remove the same. Content of second section of Paragraph 56 is as modified below: NeGP’s decentralized implementation arrangements make it difficult for any one department,

such as DeitY, to coordinate across such a wide range of central and state implementing agencies, contributing to the difficulty of MMP implementation, which remains one of the most critical areas of NeGP progress.

Paragraph 70(Page 22): The content of paragraph should be modified as below:

The GoI has marshaled unprecedented financial and institutional resources to scale up and implement the NeGP across the sub-continent, putting in place a critical enabling environment for rolling out reforms. The India experience, particularly related to NeGP governance arrangements, would be valuable to share with other countries, through knowledge exchanges and lessons learned. The NeGP governance structures ensure a remarkable level of quality and guidance to the project, as they are staffed by seasoned and knowledgeable officers. These structures are designed to monitor the implementation of NeGP, which affords the ability to take stock of the macro picture and provide appropriate guidance to field-level implementation teams. Acting together, a host of central and local government institutions have given wings to a fledgling national e-governance system, enabling a beneficial environment for achieving the outcome of citizen centered e-delivery of public services. Paragraph 71(Page 22): The content of paragraph should be modified as below: For instance, it does not appear that NeGP is integrated fully with certain other reform initiatives such as RTI, RTPS, Grievance Redress, and Results Framework Documents. While efforts have been made, in particular, to integrate NeGP with Grievance Redress and RTI, at the state level the integrate effort needs enforcement and co-ordination. The central government is in a key position to provide guidance and support on integrating these efforts, but this would require a well-coordinated approach crossing multiple Departments and functions, and an ambitious engagement with across 35 states and UTs. In addition, implementation of a few MMPs continues to lag, requiring a reenergized effort to determine what is needed to make progress in this important area. On its own, the monitoring agency (DeitY) tries to convene and coordinate institutions at such levels to resolve issues in a timely manner as the program matures. As regards MMPs implementation, GoI has provided for an appropriate oversight mechanism as part of which NeGP implementation is regularly monitored and overseen at the highest level within Government hierarchy.