PhPot

o Cr

editit:

: wSw

appana

Muk

herje

e

2015-16

BUDGET FOR CHILDRENBUDGET FOR CHILDRENIN NAGALAND IN NAGALAND

STATUS OF CHILDREN IN NAGALAND

• According to Census 2011, the total child population up to the age of 18 years is 8.20 lakhs.

• There are 2.91 lakh children in the age group of 0-6 years.1

• Child sex ratio (0-6 years) in Nagaland is 943 according to 2011 census which is considerably higher than the national average of 919. 2

• The birth rate of the state is 16.6 which is much less than the national average of 21.6. 3

• The Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) of Nagaland is signifi cantly low at 18 per thousand as compared to national average of 40. 4

• Nearly 25.5 per cent children in the 0-5 years age group are underweight.5

• According to District level Household & Facility Survey, 2012-13, 51.2 adolescent girls between the age of 10-19 years are suffering from anaemia.6

• The Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) in the age group of 6-13 years was 85.4 during 2010-11 which was far less than the national average of 103.9. 7

• The drop-out rate from Classes I to X was recorded at 53.6 in 2011-12. The national drop-out rate is 50.3. 8

1 Census 20112 Ibid.3 Ibid. 4 SRS bulle n,20135 h ps://nrhm-mis.nic.in/DLHS4/State%20and%20District%20Factsheets/Nagaland/Nagaland.pdf6 h ps://nrhm-mis.nic.in/DLHS4/State%20and%20District%20Factsheets/Nagaland/Nagaland.pdf7 h p://mhrd.gov.in/sites/upload_fi les/mhrd/fi les/sta s cs/SES201011.pdf8 h p://www.educa onforallinindia.com/Sta s cs_of_School_Educa on_2011-12,%20MHRD.pdf

With a population of

19.79 lakhs, Nagaland

is one of the smallest

states in India. Home

to diverse indigenous

tribes, the state has 16

major tribes along with

some sub-tribes. There

are 8.20 lakh persons

below the age of 18

years which amounts

to 41.46 per cent of

state’s population.

Source: India: Child Rights Index. 2011. HAQ: Centre for Child Rights

Table 1: Child Rights Index

STATEOVERALL NATIONAL RANKING

OVER-ALL GDP

BIRTH REGISTRATION

SEX RATIO

EARLY CHILDHOOD

CHILD MARRIAGE

CHILD LABOUR

5-14EDUCATION HEALTH

CRIMES AGAINST

CHILDREN - INCIDENCES

CRIMES AGAINST

CHILDREN-VICTIMS

CRIME BY CHILDREN

Kerala 1 9 1 3 21 29 1 2 1 14 15 7

Karnataka 2 7 6 8 12 26 21 7 10 1 6 4

Maharashtra 3 1 8 27 14 19 7 4 7 4 11 3

Tamil Nadu 4 4 2 6 18 25 8 6 3 17 9 13

Andhra Pradesh

5 3 18 11 20 28 24 19 11 2 2 11

Gujarat 6 5 9 22 16 10 10 9 19 3 16 5

Rajasthan 7 8 10 26 24 24 26 18 22 5 5 2

Punjab 8 13 1 20 15 4 6 15 12 10 13 16

Himachal Pradesh

9 20 1 16 13 15 23 3 5 9 24 18

Haryana 10 12 7 28 26 17 12 12 16 7 8 15

Madhya Pradesh

11 11 17 21 8 23 20 17 23 6 3 8

Delhi 12 10 1 24 27 11 2 1 14 19 17 19

Uttaranchal 13 19 16 25 29 14 5 13 13 15 18 14

Orissa 14 15 4 17 7 21 13 20 18 21 20 10

West Bengal 15 6 3 9 23 27 14 26 15 12 7 17

Bihar 16 14 14 13 25 18 11 29 24 13 19 1

Jharkhand 17 17 21 15 9 16 16 28 27 11 1 6

Uttar Pradesh 18 2 19 23 10 13 9 24 28 16 10 9

Chhattisgarh 19 16 11 5 28 20 22 16 20 8 4 20

Goa 20 22 1 19 19 9 3 22 2 26 23 23

Tripura 21 23 1 10 5 22 4 11 17 24 27 21

Assam 22 18 12 7 11 12 15 25 29 20 22 12

Mizoram 23 28 1 1 4 2 29 5 6 22 28 28

Jammu & Kashmir

24 21 15 29 22 7 19 21 8 18 12 24

Sikkim 25 29 5 12 17 8 28 10 4 25 25 26

Meghalaya 26 24 1 2 6 3 25 23 21 23 21 22

Manipur 27 25 13 18 3 6 17 14 9 28 14 29

Nagaland 28 26 1 14 1 1 27 8 26 29 29 25

Arunachal Pradesh

29 27 20 4 2 5 18 27 25 27 26 27

UTOVERALL NATIONAL RANKING

OVER-ALL GDP

BIRTH REGIS-TRATION

SEX RATIO

EARLY CHILDHOOD

CHILD MARRIAGE

CHILD LABOUR

5-14EDUCATION HEALTH

CRIMES AGAINST

CHILDREN - INCIDENCES

CRIMES AGAINST

CHILDREN-VICTIMS

CRIME BY CHILDREN

A & N Islands3

NO DATA

5 1 5 4 5 4 NO DATA 4 4 2

Chandigarh 2 1 3 4 2 3 3 2 3 3

D & N Haveli 6 4 5 1 1 6 6 5 2 4

Daman & Diu 5 2 4 3 5 4 5 3 5 5

Lakshwadeep 4 3 6 2 3 1 2 6 5 6

Puducherry 1 1 2 6 6 2 1 1 1 1

Ranking 1-5 6-10 11-14 15-19 20-24 25-29

Ranking 1-2 3-4 5-6

Unfortunately, despite doing very well with respect to its ranking in indicators on sex ratio, birth registration and early childhood care, as can been seen from its ranking in the Index below (Table 1), Nagaland is faring badly in some other areas with respect to children. In fact, there is cause for alarm and attention:

• Children below the age of 14 years in different occupations have drastically risen in the last few years.9 As per child labour survey conducted in 14 major areas of Dimapur by Community Educational Centre Society in 2016, for the National Child labour Project, 5,354 children were found engaged in labour (this corroborates the ranking of Dimapur with the highest child labour in Table 2). Out of the total children found working, 3,032 were males and 2,311 were females. Within this, the age group between 6 to 9 years constituted 13 per cent and those between 10 to 14 years was 87 per cent.10

• The drop- out rate in the state at the primary level is 38.5 per cent for boys and 38.6 per cent for girls which is higher as compared to the national average of 23.4 per cent boys and 21 per cent girls.11

• There are reports of increasing number of missing children in the state. As per the director of CHILDLINE, as many as 77 cases of missing children were registered during April 2015-March 2016.12

• There are disparities across the 11 districts of the state. While the western region of Nagaland is more developed in terms of infrastructure, connectivity and accessibility as also indicators like education, eastern Nagaland still remains backward and underdeveloped. Table 2 provides a ranking of the districts according to certain indicators.

Table 2: Nagaland – District Index at a Glance

Best Performing Districts

(1-3)

Moderately Performing

Districts(4-6)

Districts Need

Attention (7-9)

Worst Performing Districts (10-11) The numbers corresponding to each districts are RANKINGS and not their

absolute values of sex ratio

District At Birth 0-6 Years 7-14 Years15 up to 18

YearsAll Ages

Child Labour

Child Marriage Males (0 to 17

Years)

Child Marriage (Females)

(0 to 17 Years)

Dimapur 8 (933) 2 (966) 4 (952) 2 (967) 8 (919) 11 3 1

Kiphire 2 (989) 5 (948) 9 (899) 3 (966) 3 (956) 9 4 3

Kohima 5 (982) 1 (985) 2 (962) 5 (961) 6 (928) 10 5 8

Longleng 11 (907) 11 (885) 8 (902) 4 (962) 10 (905) 2 1 4

Mokokchung 4 (986) 4 (949) 6 (909) 11 (888) 7 (925) 7 9 10

Mon 10 (915) 10 (912) 11 (882) 9 (914) 11 (899) 3 8 7

Peren 7 (949) 7 (935) 10 (894) 8 (936) 9 (915) 1 2 2

Phek 9 (933) 9 (913) 5 (921) 6 (956) 4 (951) 6 6 6

Tuensang 1 (1000) 8 (933) 7 (905) 10 (903) 5 (929) 5 7 5

Wokha 6 (979) 3 (956) 1 (969) 7 (936) 2 (938) 8 11 9

Zunheboto 3 (988) 6 (948) 3 (955) 1 (1002) 1 (976) 4 10 11

Source: HAQ: Centre for Child Rights

The status of children of a state is a refl ection of the efforts made by the government to address the issues related to children as also its prioritisation and distribution of resources to address these issues.

It is in this context that an analysis of budget for children of a government becomes important. That is because the budget is the most solid expression of a government’s priorities, performance, decisions and intentions both at the national and state level.

Children are not a homogeneous group. Hence, their programme needs are determined by their age, gender, socio-economic status, physical and mental well-being and where they live. For example, nutrition and health inputs in the early childhood years are critical for the child’s growth and therefore, inputs and interventions on these aspects in the early years are critical. In the later years, enrolment and retention in schools becomes crucial, as does the issue of prevention of entry into the labour mar-ket. The programme interventions in the adolescent years need to target their educational, health and sexual needs as well as

9 h p://nagalandpost.com/Showstory.aspx?npoststoryiden=TkVXUzEwMDA5NzEyNg%3D%3D-0Vv1Kr36ZmU%3D10 Source: h p://nagalandpost.com/Showstory.aspx?npoststoryiden=TkVXUzEwMDA5NzEyNg%3D%3D-0Vv1Kr36ZmU%3D 11 h p://mhrd.gov.in/sites/upload_fi les/mhrd/fi les/sta s cs/SSE1112.pdf 12 h p://nagalandpost.com/Showstory.aspx?npoststoryiden=TkVXUzEwMDA5NzEyNg%3D%3D-0Vv1Kr36ZmU%3D

their transition into adulthood. Besides, children who are especially socio-economically vulnerable and children with disability need special attention. All these must be refl ected in the budget.

The disparity in the status of children in the different districts of Nagaland, as seen in Table 2, reveals that there is a need for realigning the fi nancial re-sources to address the existing gaps in the different areas, and the children in them, as per the need.

In an effort to address the issues confronting children in the state, on May 14, 2016, a state level consultation on child protection was held by the State Commission for Protection of Child Rights (SCPCR) in collabora-tion with CHILDLINE to constitute a Coordination Committee constituting civil societies, churches, village bodies and govern-ment departments. The committee appealed to the government to frame its own child protection policy. The Kohima Deputy Com-missioner, Rovilatuo Mor, urged various sections of the society to spare no effort in sensitizing the children on their rights and eliminate all abuses.

However, none of this will be possible without adequate and appropriate budget allocations and effi cient utilisation of the bud-get. It is in this context that budget for children analysis becomes important.

Following the government of India’s defi nition of child in its National Policy for Children, 2013 and that of the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), ratifi ed by India in 1992 any person up to the age of 18 years is defi ned as a child.

The Budget for Children (BfC) analysis in Nagaland attempts to understand the allocation and spending on children related is-sues in the state. This is the fi rst time that an attempt like this is being made, although similar studies based on the allocation and spending for children have been made both at national and as well in other states since 2000.

Budget for children (BfC) is not a separate budget. It is merely an attempt to disaggregate from the overall allocations made, those made specifically for children in order to assess how far the policy and programme meant for children is translated into action.

A note on Methodology…

15 (3) of the Constitution of India mandates that in recognition of the vulnerability of children and women, states must make special provi-sions for them. Allocation of resources for children in the budget is one such step. So while all budgetary provisions for the public at large also has an impact on children, there are still special provisions made for them in the budget. Article 4 of the UN Committee of the Rights of the Child that India has ratified in 1992, also requires allocation of adequate resources for children.

Child Budgeting or Budget for Children (BfC) monitoring can loosely be described as research that examines how well governments are using programme development, budget allocation and programme imple-mentation to respond to obligations BFC is not a separate budget. It is merely an attempt to disaggregate from the overall allocations made, those made specifically for children. The analysis of BfC in India – both at the level of the Union and a particular Indian state – entails a rather complex exercise at disaggregating from various heads of account in the overall union or state budget to arrive at a comprehensive under-standing of how financial allocation is impacting the lives of children. This enables us to assess how far the policy and programme commit-ments are translated into financial commitments.

This methodology and analysis was developed by HAQ in 2000 and has continued to be the same since then. This is the same method that has been adapted by most others undertaking similar analysis, in India and in other countries as well.

The departments/ministries that run the programmes for children are selected for calculating the BfC. Further, child-related expense heads in the detailed demands for grants (DDG) of the concerned departments are selected for the purpose of calculation. All three budget figures [Budget Estimate (BE), Revised Estimate (RE) and Actual Expenditure (AE)] pertaining to the selected heads are entered and tabulated for comparison and analysis.

For preparing the BfC report, the programmes/schemes are divided into four sectors specific to children, which are – health, development, education and protection. In other words, the total budget for children (BfC) is the sum total of the allocations made towards above mentioned four sectors. Then the sectoral totals and the BfC are compared with the total state budget. The share of BfC is calculated with the total state expenditure which is available in the Annual Financial Statement.

BUDGET FOR CHILDREN (BFC) IN NAGALAND 2015-2016

This analysis of BfC in Nagaland is in the backdrop of the recommendations of the 14th Finance Commission calling for greater fi scal devolution in the states. There is a growing concern among states regarding the impact of the changing fi nancial archi-tecture of the country following these recommendations and the dismantling of the Planning Commission. This apprehension is also evident in the Budget speech of the Honourable Chief Minister, Mr. T. R. Zeliang when he presented the budget for the year 2015-2016 on 23rd of July 2015 in the State Legislative Assembly.

“Despite the substantial increase in the devolutions from the 14th Finance Commission awards, the net loss on account

of discontinuation of Normal Central Assistance(NCA), Special Plan Assistance(SPA), and Special Central Assistance

(SCA) are resulting in an overall negative impact on many small States. I am hopeful that the Central Government will

give due consideration to the issues raised by us.

As a result of the changes initiated in the entire Plan Process and the NITI Aayog replacing the Planning Commission,

there was no Plan Discussion with the Central Government for the last fi nancial year (2014-2015). During 2014-2015,

except for CSS, fl agship schemes and SPA, there was hardly any untied fund made available to the State. This resulted

in our inability to provide State share to CSS and fl agship schemes and many departments had to suffer during this

transitional period. During the current fi nancial year, resources available for development activities continues to be mea-

gre due to the levels of Non-Plan revenue expenditure. Consequently, we are not in a position to fund new projects, and

shall have to concentrate on completion of ongoing projects only”.13

Major Highlights of BfC 2015-2016

• Children have been allocated 13.34 per cent share in the Nagaland state budget 2015-2016. This is much more than the other North Eastern states of Meghalaya (4.53 per cent), Assam (5.57 per cent) and Tripura (2.68 per cent). It is heartening to note that the state has allocated a substantial share of its budget to children.

• What is more, the share of BfC in the state budget has increased by 7.90 per cent, despite a decrease in the overall state budget by 3.08 per cent as compared to the previous year.

• In fact, from 2013-2014 till the current fi nancial year the BfC share in the state budget has observed an increasing trend. (See Table 3)

Table 3 Share of Children in the State Budget (in crore)

Year State Budget BfC Percentage of BfC

2013-14 9981.83 1113.07 11.15

2014-15 12127.59 1452.83 11.98

2015-16 11754.29 1567.67 13.34

• One of the major highlights is the overspending in many of the schemes against the allocations made. For example, the scheme for Prevention and Control of Juvenile Social Maladjustment observed 500 per cent over expenditure in 2013-14. Questions that are bound to be asked are – why this overspending? Where did this excess money come from? Was it diverted from other heads? And how will it be accounted for?

13 Budget Speech 2015-16, Government of Nagaland

02000400060008000

100001200014000

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

Figure 1: State Budget & BfC (in Crores)

Nagaland State Budget BfC

13.34%

86 66%

Figure 2: Share of BfC(BE) in Nagaland Budget2015-2016

BfC

Other than BfC

Sectoral Allocation in the State Budget & within BfC

The share of allocations for all the four sectors are calculated both as share of the state budget as well as within the share of overall BfC. As with the national budget and budgets of all other states, among all the four sectors, education sector has re-ceived a maximum share of 11.96 per cent in the state budget in 2015-2016, followed by development sector (1.14 per cent).

While both nationally as well as in other states protection sector receives the lowest share, in the case of Nagaland it is the health sector that is the least budgeted for (0.09 per cent). However, it is not as if protection sector has received a share of 0.15 per cent, which is still very small considering the protection related challenges that the state faces outlined above.

Table 4: Sectoral Share in the State Budget (in per cent)

Year Health Development Education Protection

2013-14 0.14 1.28 8.00 0.06

2014-15 0.16 1.16 10.90 0.15

2015-16 0.09 1.14 11.96 0.15

• While the share of allocation for both education and protection have seen an increase over the last three years, allocations for initiatives for both health and development sector for children have seen cuts.

• In fact, it ought to be a major cause of concern to see 44.03 per cent drop in its allocation on health in the current fi nancial year. And this despite overspending in health sector schemes like Small Pox Eradication Programme in rural areas, BCG & TB control, Drug Control, National Iodine Defi ciency Control etc.

Table 5: Sectoral Share within BfC (in per cent)

Year Health Development Education Protection

2013-14 1.49 13.47 84.45 0.59

2014-15 1.26 9.41 88.16 1.18

2015-16 0.65 8.55 89.70 1.10

• The allocation for the development sector was cut by 2 per cent. At the same time there has been overspending on de-velopment sector schemes such as Organising Sports and Games, Youth welfare camps, Panchayat Yuva Krida Aur Khel Abhiyan (PYKKA).

• Many of the schemes like Prevention and Control of Juvenile, National Social Assistance programme, Sarva Shiksa Abhiyan (State share) witnessed almost 4 to 5 times over-spending of fund in the year 2013-14. At the same time, there has been under-spending in some of the schemes like Integrated Child Development Scheme, Sarva Shiksa Abhiyan (CSS), Mid-day Meal (MDM) scheme, State Council of Educational Research and Training (SCERT) etc. in 2013-14. (See Table 6)

• The funds allocated under School Health Scheme, Goitre & Nutrition Programme, Small Pox Eradication Programme in Urban areas and Universal Immunisation Programme was not spent at all during the year 2013-2014. What could be the reasons for that? One of the plausible explanations for zero spending in schemes such as goitre and small pox eradication could be the non-existence of such diseases in the state. However, given the high level of anaemia reported amongst ado-lescent girls in the state, the underspending for nutrition programme remains a question as does the under-spending under the Universal Immunisation Programme.

0.09 1.14

11.96 0.15

86.66

Figure 4: Sectoral Share in State Budget in2015-2016

Health

Development

other than BfC

0.658.55

89.70

1.10

Figure 3: Sectoral Share within BfC in 2015-2016

Health

Development

Table 6: BE and AE (in Crores) and underspending and over spending under different schemes in 2013-2014

Schemes BE (in crore) AE (in crore) Underspending (-)Overspending(+) (% )

School Health Scheme 0.65 0 -100

Drug De addiction clinic 0.88 0.62 28.86

Goitre & Nutrition Programme 0.15 0 -100

Smallpox eradication (Urban) 4.02 0 -100

Smallpox Eradication (Rural) 3.16 3.70 +17.01

Drug control 0.22 0.31 +40.25

BCG & TB control 5.48 6.38 +16.57

Universal Immunization Programme (District Level) 0.94 0 -100

National Iodine Deficiency Control 0.29 0.50 +75.07

Sports & Games 2.49 3.88 +55.93

Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS) CSS 80.86 49.60 -38.66

Prevention & Control of Juvenile 2.32 14.14 +510.03

National Social Assistance Programme 4.17 20.32 +387.89

Sarva Shiksa Abhiyan (state share) 3.00 14.72 +390.52

Sarva Shiksa Abhiyan (CSS) 96.73 74.13 -23.36

Mid-day Meal Scheme 56.58 18.41 -67.45

Panchayat Yuva Krida Aur Khel Abhiyan 3.03 5.99 +97.70

Khelhoshe Polytechnic 3.46 3.68 +6.60

CHILD HEALTH

Despite child health remaining a huge concern in Nagaland, no priority is being given to this sector. A meagre `10.24 crore is allocated for all the child health schemes in 2015. Is this allocation enough to provide the minimum of the health care facilities to 42 per cent of the state population? What is more disturbing, there are very limited health schemes meant specifi cally for children in the state.

• In 2015-16, allocation for child health has decreased by 44.03 per

cent as compared to the previous year. This share is lower both

within the overall state budget as well as within BfC. According

to DLHS 4 report 2012-2013, only 35.6 per cent children

of age between 12 to 23 months received full vaccination.14

61.3 per cent of Children (6-59 months) and 43.5 per cent

adolescents(15-19 years) are anaemic.15 Given such disturbing

health status of children in the state, one fi nds it diffi cult to explain

the under-spending of funds in programmes for nutrition and

immunisation as noted earlier.

• Reproductive and child health remains a big worry as per the

Central Bureau of Health Intelligence (CBHI). The percentage

of pregnant women (15-49) receiving antenatal (healthcare by

professionals during pregnancy) check-up was recorded abysmally low at 41.1 per cent as against the national average of 75.1 per

cent.16

• Only few Schemes like School Health Scheme, BCG & TB Control and National Iodine defi ciency scheme received higher alloca-

tion in 2015-2016 as compared to 2014-2015. Such an increase is also noted, in the National Iodine Defi ciency Programme which

received 133 per cent higher allocation in 2015-16 in comparison with the previous year. Allocation under schemes like Drug–de-

addiction Clinic, Goitre & Nutrition Programme, Drug Control and Universal Immunisation Programme remained same as in 2014-

2015.

14 h p://rchiips.org/pdf/dlhs4/report/NG.pdf15 h p://rchiips.org/pdf/dlhs4/report/NG.pdf 16 h p://morungexpress.com/the-paradox-of-nagaland-health-sector/

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016

Figure 5: BE, RE & AE in Health Sector(in crore)

BE RE AE

Table 7: Allocation under Major Schemes in Health Sector (in crore)

Schemes 2014-15 (BE) 2015-16 (BE) Increase/ decrease (in per cent)

School Health Scheme 0.72 0.94 +30.74

Drug de-addiction Clinic 0.97 0.97 0

National Smallpox Eradication Programme(Urban) 4.32 0 0

National Smallpox Eradication Programme(Rural) 3.46 0 0

Drug control 0.19 0.19 0

BCG & TB control 6.07 6.08 +0.1

Universal Immunization Programme 1.14 1.14 0

National Iodine deficiency 0.32 0.74 +133.08

CHILD DEVELOPMENT

All the initiatives of the state government for the young child and those that are more general in nature, including those for pre-school education, nutritional support and development of adolescent girls, sports basically those that contribute to the all-round development of children, have been included under the generic child development sector.

• Unfortunately, this sector failed to receive an increased allocation this year with a reduction of 2 per cent in its allocations (from `136.66 in the previous year to `133.97 crore in the current year). Although there are some increases in schemes like nutrition, registration of births and deaths,

sports and games etc, but this cut back was due to decreased allocation in schemes like Integrated Child

Development Scheme, Youth Welfare Camps etc. (See Table 8).

Table 8: Allocation under Major Schemes in Development Sector (in crore)

Schemes 2014-15 (BE) 2015-16 (BE) Increase/ decrease (in per cent)

National Cadet Corps 3.47 3.24 -6.62

Youth Welfare Camps 0.90 0.50 -44.44

Sports and Games 2.55 3.35 +31.60

Establishment of Children’s Parks and Children’s Wards 0.63 0.57 -9.49

Integrated Child Development Scheme(ICDS) CSS 80.86 66.76 -17.43

Registration of Births and Deaths 1.76 3.28 +86.16

Nutrition 45.28 55.23 +21.98

• The allocation of the fl agship Integrated Child Development Scheme(ICDS) was reduced by 17.43 per cent from `80.86 crore in 2014-15 to `66.76 crore in 2015-16. This is the most obvious impact of the 14th Finance Commission recom-mendations and a major setback as at present there are 56 ICDS projects covering more than 3.75 lakh benefi ciaries in 3035 Anganwadi centres that are operating in the state. However, following a lot of protest, in most states there has been a reinstatement of the cut back budgets. It is possible that this has happened in Nagaland too, and will be refl ected in the next budget.

• Despite 50 per cent adolescent girls being anaemic in the state, the most important scheme, which seeks to improve the nutritional, health and development status of adolescent girls of 11-18 years of age, the Kishori Shakti Yojana (KSY), has not received any fund in the current year.

0.00

50.00

100.00

150.00

200.00

250.00

2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016

Figure 6: BE, RE & AE in Developmentsector (in Crore)

BE RE AE

CHILD EDUCATION

As it is a common practice at both the national level as well as the states, education sector received the highest allocation of `1406.23 crore in current year’s budget.

• The share of education sector has also increased by 9.79 per cent as compared to previous year. This increase is due to enhanced allocation in Sarva Shik-sha Abhiyan (state Share), Scholarship and stipends under Middle Schools, State Council of Educational Research and Training (SCERT), Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA) etc. in 2015-2016 budget.

• Assistance provided to Non-Government Primary schools in this year remained same as previous year.

• Although, there has been a 4 times increase in the state share, the fl agship Centrally Sponsored Schemes like Sarva Siksha Abhiyan (SSA), the share of the central government has been reduced. The same is true of the Mid-Day-Meal scheme. The in-crease in the state’s commitment to education refl ected in its increased allocation is very welcome and refl ects the state’s recognition of the high percentage of out-of-school children as well as dropout rate (53.6%).

Table 9 : Allocation Under Major Schemes in Education Sector (in crore)

Schemes 2014-15 (BE) 2015-16 (BE) Increase/ decrease (in per cent)

Primary School 262.73 260.73 -0.76

Middle school 145.99 141.84 -2.84

Non-govt primary 0.85 0.85 0

Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA) 21 21.41 +1.95

Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) (state share) 110.34 424.01 +284.27

Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) (CSS) 153.19 0 -100

Mid-day Meal (MDM) (CSS) 56.58 0 0

CHILD PROTECTION

Despite a small increase in the allocation for the initiatives that constitute the protection sector for children in Nagaland, the share in the allocation as share of the state budget (0.15 per cent) as well as within BfC (1.10 per cent) is very small. Nagaland is not alone in this. Protection of children remains the least prioritised nationally as well as in the states in spite of the recognition it has received over the last fi ve years through the introduction of the Integrated Child Protection Scheme.

According to the data of the National Crime Record Bureau (NCRB) 2014, there are only 25 crimes recorded against children in Nagaland that year, of which 11 were child rape cases. The state registered only 1 case of child murder. But it must be remem-bered that these are based only on reported cases.

0.00

500.00

1000.00

1500.00

2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016

Figure 7: BE, RE & AE in Education sector(in Crore)

BE RE AE

It is commendable that Nagaland has pioneered the Communitisation of the education sector, which is a partnership between Government and the

community, involving transfer of ownership of school facilities, control over service delivery, empowerment, decentralization, and delegation of re-

sponsibilities. It has been observed that communitisation has led to increase in school enrolment, reduction in school drop-outs, better attendance of

teachers and improved school facilities which are the primary cause of concern especially Government managed schools both in the rural and urban

areas. Communitisation of education has also given an opportunity to the community in the management, in investment and in owning the delivery

of education. It has helped in reducing dropout rate and increasing enrolment ratio considerably in primary education. Communitisation of health

sector too has resulted in better working of health centres in the villages.

Source: https://nagalandjournal.wordpress.com/2013/04/16/communitisation-of-education-in-nagaland/

Other reports however, give cause for concern. A survey data reveals that there are more than 9 thousand child labourers engaged in various occupations including household help across the 11 district headquarters in Nagaland.17 Since there is an increasing demand for domestic help the problem of Child labour is increasing too and this has also resulted in increasing cases of child traffi cking cases in the state.

There are reports of young boys and girls traffi cked from Nagaland, rescued from different parts of the country. The number of human traffi cking cases reported in Nagaland between 2005 and June 2011 is 24. But the actual fi gures are feared to be much higher.18 These children were lured by agents with promises of job opportunities and education. Minor girls were traffi cked to other cities of India on the pretext of training and job opportunities, but most of them have landed up at brothels of Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata.19

As per offi cial reports, 106 persons were reported missing in the state from January to May 2011 and the number of persons traced were only 36.20

• Despite the increase of 0.7 per cent in allocation that is refl ected in the analysis, the `17.24 crore allocated for protection sector in 2015-2016 seems inadequate.

• The fl agship scheme Integrated Child Protection

Scheme(ICPS) received an amount of `16.09 crore and `0.20 crore was allocated for State Commission for Protection of Child Rights (SCPCR) in 2015-16, while no fund was provided under these schemes in the previous year.

• The recognition received by ICPS in the state with a 100 per cent increase in allocation is indeed commendable as it is through this scheme that the human resources and the infrastructure for child protection can be created. The attention received by the State Commission for Protection of Child Rights in terms of the increase in percentage of allocation is also important, although the amount of money involved is very small.

• It is a matter of concern that there are no schemes or allocation meant to address the problem of child labour and child traf-fi cking in the state.

It is important that the budget allocations of the state take note of the increasing instances of child vulnerability in the state so that they can be addressed immediately. Without the necessary resources invested in this, the situation will worsen and then get out of control. It is critical to stem the problem before it exacerbates.

Table 10: Allocation Under Major Schemes in Protection (in crore)

Schemes 2014-15 (BE) 2015-16 (BE) Increase(+)/ decrease(-)(in per cent)

World-Day Against Child Labour 0.06 0 -100

Integrated Child Protection scheme (ICPS) 0 16.09 +100

State Commission for the Protection of Child Rights (SCPCR) 0 0.20 +100

Prevention and Control of Juvenile 2.71 0.95 -65.05

National Social Assistance (NSA) 14.35 0 -100

17 h p://thot.in/nmfp/ar cle/child-labor-reaches-new-heights-in-nagaland/ 18 h p://www.fs ndia.org/blog/lost-children-nagaland 19 h p://www.fs ndia.org/blog/lost-children-nagaland20 h p://www.fs ndia.org/blog/lost-children-nagaland

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016

Figure 8: BE, RE & AE under Protection sector (inCrore)

BE RE AE

Government authority’s comment on child trafficking:

Expressing concern over the rise in human trafficking cases the Additional Director General of Police, Nagaland said Police alone cannot tackle the problem unless churches, NGO, the Social Welfare Department, Juvenile Department etc. work together to curb the menace.

CONCLUSION

Much improvement has been noticed in the allocation under BfC in Nagaland over the years, refl ected in the increasing share for children in 2014-15 and 2015-16. In fact, it has the highest share of the children’s budget among all the north- eastern states that have been studied (Assam, Meghalaya and Tripura being the others). And this is indeed commendable as it refl ects a growing attention to children and the need for investing in them. This increase can be traced mostly to the education sector that receives the largest share of the children’s budget (almost 90 per cent within BfC and 11.96 per cent in the state budget 2015-2016). This leaves very little resources (only about 10 per cent of the total budget for children) to be shared by the other three sectors. Given the health and protection related challenges faced by children, the very small share of allocation for child health and protection initiatives cannot be fl agged as areas that need attention.

So while Nagaland is doing much better than other states in Northeast India in terms of its share of budget for children, it needs to re-examine its prioritisation, expenditure and implementation.

RECOMMENDATION

• While presenting the budget,2015-16 Nagaland chief Minister quoted “unlike other states we are resource constrained

state with a limited revenue base contributing revenue of only 8 to 9 per cent of total expenditure”. This affects the development needs of the state, which continues to be weak in critical infrastructure due to scarce resources. This also affects the situation of children and must be addressed in a tangible manner.

• The fi nancial resources must translate into proper infrastructure which caters to the need of children and address their needs and rights.

• While compared to other states, the share of BfC is at a satisfactory level, proper utilisation of the allocated resources must be addressed.

• A lot has been written on the successful implementation of communitisation of education in Nagaland. The success of such an initiative should have resulted in decreasing dropout rate. However dropout rate in Nagaland is 38.5 per cent at primary school level, 47.7 per cent at upper primary school level and 53.6 per cent at secondary school level.21 These disturbing statistics reveal the poor implementation of communitisation initiative. Efforts need to be made to closely monitor the implementation of communitisation programme.

• Looking at the increasing trend of child labour and traffi cking in the state it is necessary to increase the allocation of funds under protection sector to address the issue.

• As mentioned by the Chief Minister of Nagaland in the ‘Chief Minister’s Sub Group on Rationalization of CSS’ (consti-tuted by NITI Ayog), the state of Nagaland was born out of political compulsion. It has been thus stated in its 16-point Agreement “To supplement the revenue of Nagaland, there will be need for the Government of India to pay out of the consolidate fund of India: Lump sum towards meeting the cost of development in Nagaland, and the grant–in–aid to-wards meeting the cost of administration’. As such, Nagaland deserves a special dispensation even among the Special Category States. This further implies that the fund fl ow from Central Government to State must be made according to the Special Status category and Nagaland should not be burdened with implementing the Centrally Sponsored Schemes on their own.

• The process of follow-up action with regard to the proper implementation of the schemes needs to be geared up.

21 h p://www.educa onforallinindia.com/Sta s cs_of_School_Educa on_2011-12,%20MHRD.pdf

Prepared By: North Eastern Social Research Centre (NESRC) in partnership with HAQ: Centre for Child Rights

Supported Byterre des hommes, Germany(India Programme)