
## Demand For Grants 2018-19 Analysis Drinking Water And Sanitation

The Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation is the nodal agency responsible for policy planning, funding and coordination of programs for safe drinking water and sanitation in rural areas.  The Ministry was previously a department under the Ministry of Rural Development, and was made an independent Ministry in 2011. 

## Overview Of Finances

In Union Budget 2018-19, the Ministry has been allocated Rs 22, 357 crore.  This is a decrease of Rs 1,654 crore (7%) over the revised estimates of 2017-18. 

Note: Values for 2017-18 are revised estimates and 2018-19 are budget estimates. Sources: Union Budgets 2009-10 to 2018-19; PRS. 

Over the past ten years, the allocation to the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation has seen an annual average increase of 9%.  The Ministry saw the highest increase of 49% in 2016-17, over the previous year.  This year the estimated expenditure has seen a decrease of 7%, over the revised expenditure estimates of 2017-18.  Figure 1 shows these trends. Table 1 provides the budgetary allocation trends to the two major schemes, the National Rural Drinking Water Program (NRDWP), and the Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin (SBM-G) of the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation in the last three years. SBM-G has seen a decrease 9.5% in its allocation in 2018-19, over the revised estimates of 2017-18. NRDWP has seen a decrease of 0.7% in its allocation in 2018-19, over the revised estimates of 2017-18.  The total budget of the Ministry has seen a decrease of 7% this year. 

Roopal Suhag roopal@prsindia.org Tel: (011) 43434035-36, 23234801-02  www.prsindia.org 

Drinking Water and Sanitation ( Rs crore) 
| Revised     | Budgeted    | %      | Major    |
|-------------|-------------|--------|----------|
| head        |             |        |          |
| Actual      |             |        |          |
| 16-17       | 17-18       | 18-19  | change   |
| SBM-G       | 10,484      | 16,948 | 15,343   |
| NRDWP       | 5,980       | 7,050  | 7,000    |
| Secretariat | 12          | 13     | 14       |
| Total       | 16,476      | 24,011 | 22,357   |

Sources: Demands for Grants 2018-19, Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation; PRS. 

Figure 2 represents the key expenditure heads of the Ministry.  In 2018-19, 69% of the Ministry's expenditure is estimated to be spent on SBM-G and 31% on NRDWP. 

Water and Sanitation; PRS. 

In the last ten years, the allocation to rural sanitation and drinking water programs under the Ministry's budget has seen a shift.  While the allocation to drinking water has reduced from 87% 
in 2009-10 to 31% in 2018-19, the allocation to rural sanitation has increased from 13% in 2009-10 to 69% in 2018-19. 

Note: Values for 2017-18 are revised estimates and 2018-19 are budget estimates. Sources: Union Budgets 2009-10 to 2018-19; PRS. 

February 26, 2018 

## Financial Allocations To Outcomes

In this section, we discuss issues regarding the implementation of the SBM-G and NRDWP. 

## Swachh Bharat Mission- Gramin

The Swachh Bharat Mission was launched on October 2, 2014 with an aim to achieve universal sanitation coverage, improve cleanliness and eliminate open defecation in the country by October 2, 2019.  The Swachh Bharat Mission- Gramin (SBM-G) is the rural component of the program. SBM-G was previously referred to as the Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan or the Total Sanitation Campaign. In 2018-19, it has been allocated Rs 15,343 crore, which is a decrease of 9.5% from the revised estimates of 2017-18. In 2017-18, the scheme was allocated Rs 13,948 crore, which was increased to Rs 16,948 crore at the revised estimates stage.  This implies that the revised estimates overshot the budget estimates. Figure 3 shows the expenditure on rural sanitation by the Ministry over the years. 

Note: Values for 2017-18 and 2018-19 are revised estimates and budget estimates respectively. Sources: Union Budgets 2009-10 to 2018-19; PRS. 

Allocation to SBM-G has seen an increase over the years.  The rural and urban component of the scheme together got the seventh highest allocation among all the centrally sponsored schemes in Union Budget 2018-19.  However, while the allocation to the rural component witnessed a decline of 9.5%, the urban component saw an increase of 9%. Note that the total funds allocated to the scheme is low, when compared to other centrally sponsored schemes.  Allocation to some other schemes in 2018-19 such as Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme is Rs 55,000 crore, 
 
National Health Mission is Rs 30,634 and Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan is Rs 26,129 crore. The required central government allocation to SBM-G for the five year period from 2014-15 to 
2018-19 is Rs 1,00,447 crore.1  Of this, so far Rs 
52,166 (52%) has been allocated to the scheme. This implies that 48% of the funds are still left to be released before October 2019. 

Budget estimates versus actual expenditure:  
Table 2 shows the trends in allocation and actual expenditure on rural sanitation over the past ten years. 

Table 2: Budgeted versus actual expenditure on rural sanitation (Rs crore)  
Year 
Budgeted 
Actuals 
% of Budgeted 
2007-08 
954 
954 
100% 
2008-09 
1,080 
1,080 
100% 
2009-10 
1,080 
1,200 
111% 
2010-11 
1,580 
1,580 
100% 
2011-12 
1,650 
1,500 
91% 
2012-13 
3,500 
2,474 
71% 
2013-14 
3,834 
2,244 
59% 
2014-15 
4,260 
2,841 
67% 
2015-16 
3,625 
6,703 
185% 
2016-17 
9,000 
10,484 
116% 
2017-18 
13,948 
16,948 
122% 

Note: The 'utilised' figure for 2017-18 is the revised estimate. Sources: Union Budgets 2007-08 to 2017-18; PRS. 

Note that in the past three years, actual expenditure on SBM-G has overshot the budget estimates significantly.  In 2016-17, it was 116% and is expected to be 122% in 2017-18.  This implies lack of adequate budgeting and planning in implementation of the scheme.  
Construction of Individual Household Latrines 
(IHHLs):  For construction of IHHLs, the funds are shared between the centre and the state in the ratio of 60:40.  Under SBM-G, the cost for constructing a household toilet has been increased from Rs 10,000 to Rs 12,000.  Construction of IHHLs account for the largest share of total expenditure under the scheme.  In 2014-15, it was 91%, and has been increased to 97% and 98% in 2015-16 and 2016-17, respectively.  In 2017-18, 98% of total expenditure has been on construction of IHHLs. Table 3 shows the construction of IHHLs since the inception of the scheme.  Although the number of toilets constructed each year has increased, a yearly % change indicates that the pace of construction of toilets has come down.  The increase in constructed toilets was 156% in 2015-16 over the previous year.  However, this reduced to 4% in 2017-18. 

of the scheme  
| Year    | Toilets Constructed    | Yearly % change    |
|---------|------------------------|--------------------|
| 2014-15 | 49,00,425              | -                  |
| 2015-16 | 1,25,64,312            | 156%               |
| 2016-17 | 2,18,27,531            | 74%                |
| 2017-18 | 2,26,92,777            | 4%                 |

Note: Data for 2017-18 is updated till February 19, 2018. Sources: Management Information System Reports of SBM; PRS.  
As on February 2018, 78.8% of households in India have a toilet.2  This implies that in the next 20 months (till October 2019), 21.2% of houses will have to be provided with toilets. 

Open Defecation Free (ODF) villages:  Under SBM-G, a village is ODF when: (i) there are no visible faeces in the village, and (ii) every household as well as public/community institution uses safe technology options for faecal disposal.3 After a village declares itself ODF, states are required to carry out verification of the ODF status of such a village.  Since sanitation is a state subject, the Ministry has set some broad guidelines for ODF verification.  This includes indicators that are in accordance with the ODF verification definition, such as access to a toilet facility and its usage, and safe disposal of faecal matter through septic tanks.3 Note that according to the National Family Health Survey-4, only 37% of households in rural areas are using improved sanitation facility.4  Such a facility implies that toilets have a faecal disposal system that could include flush to piped sewer system, or flush to septic tank, or flush to pit latrine, and is not shared with any other household. Table 4 presents data on the differences between villages that have declared themselves ODF free and that are verified ODF.  

| Verified     | Verified ODF     |
|--------------|------------------|
| Year         |                  |
| Declared     |                  |
| ODF          | ODF              |
| 2015-16      | 47,101           |
| 2016-17      | 1,84,082         |
| 2017-18      | 3,22,546         |
| Total        | 5,53,729         |
| Verified     |                  |
| -            | ODF              |
| Verified ODF |                  |
| villages (%) |                  |
| Total        |                  |
| villages     |                  |
| (2011)       | villages         |
| 5,93,731     |                  |

Note: Data for 2017-18 is updated till February 19, 2018.  Total villages is from Census 2011. Sources: Management Information System Reports of SBM; PRS.  
Note that in 2017-18, number of villages verified as ODF has substantially come down. 

## Information, Education And Communication (Iec) Activities:  8% Of Funds Earmarked For

SBM-G in a year are to be utilised for IEC activities.5  These activities primarily aim to mobilise behavioural change towards the use of toilets among people.  However, this has not been met. In 2014-15, Rs 157 crore was spent on such activities, accounting for 4% of the total scheme expenditure.  This decreased to 1% in 2015-16 and 2016-17.  In 2017-18, Rs 229 crore has been spent, amounting to 2% of total expenditure.  Table 5 highlights these trends. 

## (Rs Crore)

| Year           | SBM-G funds spent on    |
|----------------|-------------------------|
| IEC activities |                         |
| SBM-G funds    |                         |
| spent on IEC   |                         |
| activities (%) |                         |
| 2014-15        | 157 (4%)                |
| 2015-16        | 147 (1%)                |
| 2016-17        | 124 (1%)                |
| 2017-18        | 229 (2%)                |

Note: Data for 2017-18 is updated till February 19, 2018. Sources: Management Information System Reports of SBM; PRS.  
 

## National Rural Drinking Water Programme

The National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) aims at assisting states in providing adequate and safe drinking water to the rural population in the country.6  Rural drinking water programs have existed in various forms since 1972- 73, starting with the Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme, followed by a Technology Mission in 1986.  Subsequently, the Sector Reform Project was initiated in 1999-2000, with an aim to involve the rural community in planning, implementation and management of drinking water schemes.  From 2009, it has been renamed as the National Rural Drinking Water Programme. 

Fund sharing pattern:  Rural water supply is a state subject.  The centre-state fund sharing pattern within the scheme for the components of coverage of habitations, quality of water and operation and maintenance of projects is: (i) 50:50 for all states, and (ii) 90:10 for north-east and Himalayan states. For the components of monitoring and surveillance of water quality, sustainability of water sources, and support activities like awareness generation, the centre-state fund sharing pattern within the scheme is: (i) 60:40 for all states, and (ii) 90:10 for north-east and Himalayan states.  The centre funds the scheme entirely for union territories. NRDWP accounts for 31% of the Ministry's finances this year.  In 2018-19 it has been allocated Rs 7,000 crore, which is a decrease of 0.7% from the revised estimates of 2017-18.  In 2017-18, the scheme was allocated Rs 6,050 crore, which was increased to Rs 7,050 crore at the revised estimates stage.  This implies that the revised estimates overshot the budget estimates.  Figure 4 shows the expenditure on NRDWP by the Ministry over the years. 

 
As can be noted from the figure above, from 2009- 10 to 2013-14, the expenditure on NRDWP accounted for about 80%-90% of the Ministry's budget.  However, from 2015-16 onwards, the allocation to the scheme has been reduced significantly. 

Budgeted versus actual expenditure:  Table 6 
shows the trends in allocation and actual expenditure on NRDWP over the past ten years. The actual expenditure saw a decline in 2014-15, which could be a reason for the reduction of funds at the budget estimates stage in 2015-16.  However, the actual expenditure in 2015-16 was 167% more than the budget estimates.  Note that in the past three years, actual expenditure on NRDWP has overshot the budget estimates significantly. 

NRDWP (Rs crore) 
| Year    | Budgeted    | Actuals    | % of Budgeted    |
|---------|-------------|------------|------------------|
| 2007-08 | 6,606       | 6,506      | 98%              |
| 2008-09 | 7,420       | 7,420      | 100%             |
| 2009-10 | 8,120       | 7,996      | 98%              |
| 2010-11 | 9,000       | 8,985      | 100%             |
| 2011-12 | 9,350       | 8,493      | 91%              |
| 2012-13 | 10,500      | 10,489     | 100%             |
| 2013-14 | 11,426      | 9,691      | 85%              |
| 2014-15 | 11,000      | 9,243      | 84%              |
| 2015-16 | 2,611       | 4,369      | 167%             |
| 2016-17 | 5,000       | 5,980      | 120%             |
| 2017-18 | 6,050       | 7,050      | 117%             |

Note: The 'utilised' figure for 2017-18 is the revised estimate. Sources: Union Budgets 2007-08 to 2017-18; PRS. 

The Standing Committee examining the scheme had observed that reduction in budget for NRDWP 
will affect the coverage and tackling of water quality problems in rural areas.7,8 
Target versus achievements:  In 2011, the Ministry came out with a strategic plan for the period from 2011-22.9  It set out a goal that by 
2022, every person in rural areas in the country will have access to 70 Litres Per Capita Per Day (LPCD) of water within their household premises or at a distance of not more than 50 metres.  It identified three standards of service: 

i. 
Piped water supply with all metered, household connections (designed for 70 LPCD); 
ii. 
Basic piped water supply with a mix of household connections, public taps and handpumps (designed for 55 LPCD); and  
iii. 
Handpumps, protected open wells, protected ponds, etc. (designed for 40 LPCD). 
The revised guidelines of the NRDWP in 2015 raised the drinking water supply norms from 40 LPCD to 55 LPCD.10 Table 7 and Table 8 highlights the targets and achievements under the scheme for the past five years.  As of August 2017, 96% of rural habitations have access to safe drinking water11.  However, in term of coverage, 74% habitations are fully covered, and 22% habitations are partially covered.12 The Ministry aims to cover 90% rural households with piped water supply and 80% of rural households with household tap connections by 2022.  However, the Estimates Committee in its report in 2015 observed that piped water supply was available to only 47% of rural habitations, out of which only 15% had household tap connections.13   

|         |              | Number of partially covered habitations    |
|---------|--------------|--------------------------------------------|
|         | Target       | Achievement                                |
| 2009-10 | 1,10,721     | 99,312 (90%)                               |
| 2010-11 | 1,10,231     | 90,116 (82%)                               |
| 2011-12 | 94,257       | 83,713 (89%)                               |
| 2012-13 | 91,750       | 77,388 (84%)                               |
| 2013-14 | 83,805       | 91,496 (109%)                              |
| 2014-15 | 89,581       | 94,020 (105%)                              |
| 2015-16 | 52,061       | 64,487 (124%)                              |
| 2016-17 | 40,391       | 43,813 (108%)                              |
| 2017-18 |              |                                            |
| 27,414  | 24,417 (89%) |                                            |

Note: Habitations where water supply systems provide less than 55 LPCD to the population are treated as partially covered. Data pertain to habitations getting less than 55 LPCD of basic piped water supply with a mix of household connections, public taps and handpumps. Data for 2017-18 is updated till February 19, 2018. 

Souces: Integrated Management Information System Reports 2009-10 to 2017-18, National Rural Drinking Water Programme; PRS. 

## Habitations Fully Covered Under Nrdwp Number Of Fully Covered Habitations

|         | Target       | Achievement    |
|---------|--------------|----------------|
| 2009-10 | 51,106       | 49,567 (97%)   |
| 2010-11 | 33,247       | 29,267 (88%)   |
| 2011-12 | 36,837       | 32,533 (88%)   |
| 2012-13 | 38,403       | 58,916 (153%)  |
| 2013-14 | 38,454       | 45,277(118%)   |
| 2014-15 | 25,112       | 26,507 (106%)  |
| 2015-16 | 12,081       | 13,276 (110%)  |
| 2016-17 | 10,002       | 12,102 (121%)  |
| 2017-18 |              |                |
| 5,275   | 7,853 (149%) |                |

Note: Data pertain to habitations getting 55 LPCD of basic piped water supply with a mix of household connections, public taps and handpumps. Data for 2017-18 is updated till February 19, 2018. Souces: Integrated Management Information System Reports 2009-10 to 2017-18, National Rural Drinking Water Programme; PRS. 

Contamination of drinking water:  It has been noted that NRDWP is over-dependant on ground 
                                                           
1 Review of Sanitation Programme in Rural Areas, Committee on Estimates 2014-15, Lok Sabha, http://164.100.47.193/lsscommittee/Estimates/16_Estimates_8.p df. 2 Swachh Bharat Mission- Gramin, http://sbm.gov.in/sbmdashboard/IHHL.aspx. 3 Guidelines for ODF Verification, Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, http://www.mdws.gov.in/sites/default/files/R_274_1441280478 318.pdf. 4 India Fact Sheet, National Family Health Survey - 4, 2015-16, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, http://rchiips.org/NFHS/pdf/NFHS4/India.pdf. 5 Swachh Bharat Mission- Gramin Guidelines http://www.mdws.gov.in/sites/default/files/SwachBharatGuidlin es.pdf. 6 National Rural Drinking Water Programme, Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, http://indiawater.gov.in/IMISReports/MenuItems/AboutSite.asp x. 7 Demand for Grants 2016-17, Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, Standing Committee on Rural Development 2015- 16, http://164.100.47.193/lsscommittee/Rural%20Development/16_ Rural_Development_23.pdf. 8 Demand for Grants 2017-18, Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, Standing Committee on Rural Development 2016- 17, http://164.100.47.193/lsscommittee/Rural%20Development/16_ Rural_Development_35.pdf.  
water.13  However, ground water is affected by high arsenic contamination in 68 districts in 10 states.13 These states are Haryana, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, West Bengal, Assam, Manipur and Karnataka.  Table 9 shows the number of states and districts where ground water is affected by various contaminants. 

## Contamination In Groundwater

| Contaminants    | Number of    |   Number of affected  |
|-----------------|--------------|-----------------------|
| affected        | districts    |                       |
| states          |              |                       |
| Arsenic         | 10           |                   68  |
| Fluoride        | 20           |                  276  |
| Nitrate         | 21           |                  387  |
| Iron            | 24           |                  297  |

Sources: Central Ground Water Board; PRS. 

Chemical contamnation of ground water has also been reported due to deeper drilling for drinking water sources.  It has been recommended that out of the total funds for NRDWP, allocation for water quality monitoring and surveillance should not be less than 5%.13  Presently, it is 3% of the total funds.10  It has also been suggested that water quality laboratories for water testing should be set up throughout the country.13 
9  "Ensuring Drinking Water Security in Rural India", Strategic Plan 2011-12, Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation, Ministry of Rural Development, http://mdws.gov.in/sites/default/files/StrategicPlan_2011_22_W ater.pdf. 10 National Rural Drinking Water Programme Guidelines 2013, http://www.mdws.gov.in/sites/default/files/NRDWP_Guidelines _2013_0.pdf. 11 Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 3016, Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, Answered on August 3, 2017, http://164.100.47.190/loksabhaquestions/annex/12/AU3016.pdf. 12 Rajya Sabha Unstarred Question No. 1477, Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, Answered on January 1, 2018. 13 Evaluation of Rural Drinking Water Programmes, Committee on Estimates 2014-15, Lok Sabha, http://164.100.47.193/lsscommittee/Estimates/16_Estimates_2.p df. DISCLAIMER: This document is being furnished to you for your information.  You may choose to reproduce or redistribute this report for non-commercial purposes in part or in full to any other person with due acknowledgement of PRS Legislative Research ("PRS").  The opinions expressed herein are entirely those of the author(s).  PRS makes every effort to use reliable and comprehensive information, but PRS does not represent that the contents of the report are accurate or complete.  PRS is an independent, not-for-profit group.  This document has been prepared without regard to the objectives or opinions of those who may receive it. 