GovScheme Explorer

Navigating the Typology and Classification of Government Schemes in India

Start Exploring

1.2: Typology and Classification of Government Schemes

Introduction/Summary

Government schemes are a primary instrument through which the state implements its socio-economic objectives, addresses developmental challenges, and provides welfare to its citizens. Understanding the typology and classification of these schemes is crucial for aspirants as it helps in dissecting their intent, operational mechanisms, fiscal implications, and target beneficiaries. Schemes can be classified based on funding mechanisms (Central Sector, Centrally Sponsored, State), objectives (poverty alleviation, social security), sectors (health, education), target groups (women, SC/ST, farmers), and even through a life-cycle approach. This systematic understanding aids in analyzing federal fiscal relations, government budgeting, and the overall efficacy of public policy interventions.

1.2.1: Funding Mechanisms and Centre-State Fiscal Relations

Introduction/Summary

The funding mechanism is a critical differentiator for government schemes in India, determining the financial responsibilities of the Union and State governments. This classification—primarily into Central Sector Schemes (CS) and Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS)—has significant implications for fiscal federalism, influencing Centre-State financial relations, the autonomy of states in policy implementation, and the overall allocation of resources for development. The recommendations of Finance Commissions play a vital role in shaping these dynamics.

A. Central Sector Schemes (CS)

Definition: Schemes that are 100% funded and implemented by the Central Government through its machinery or central agencies. (Source: NITI Aayog, Ministry of Finance guidelines)

Characteristics:

  • Formulated on subjects mainly from the Union List (Schedule VII of the Constitution).
  • Implementation is typically carried out by central government departments or agencies directly, or sometimes through state governments but with full central funding and oversight.
  • Designed to address national priorities and often have a pan-India scope.

Examples:

PM-KISAN (Pradhan Mantri Kisan Samman Nidhi)
PM Jan Dhan Yojana (PMJDY)
BharatNet
Scheme for Formalisation of Micro food processing Enterprises (PMFME)
Urea Subsidy Scheme
National Saffron Mission
SVAMITVA Scheme
Vande Bharat Mission (COVID-19 related)

B. Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS)

Definition: Schemes that are funded jointly by the Centre and States, with a predetermined sharing pattern, and implemented by State governments. (Source: NITI Aayog, Ministry of Finance guidelines)

Characteristics:

  • Formulated on subjects often from the Concurrent List (Schedule VII), or sometimes even on State List subjects if there's a perceived national interest.
  • Implementation machinery is primarily that of the State governments.
  • Designed to encourage states to prioritize certain sectors/objectives deemed nationally important.

Funding Patterns (General):

  • General Category States: Typically 60:40 (Centre:State).
  • North-Eastern and Himalayan States: Typically 90:10 (Centre:State).
  • Union Territories (UTs):
    • UTs without legislature: 100% by Centre.
    • UTs with legislature: Usually 60:40 (Centre:State) for some schemes, or as specified.
  • Some schemes might have different or flexible funding patterns based on components.

Examples:

Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS)
National Health Mission (NHM)
Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan
Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY)
Jal Jeevan Mission (JJM)
Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY - Urban & Gramin)

C. Categorization of CSS

Following the recommendations of the 14th Finance Commission, CSS were restructured:

Core of the Core Schemes (~6 schemes):

Full central support may continue, essential for national development and social protection. Examples: MGNREGA, NSAP.

Core Schemes (~20-25 schemes):

Important for national development agenda. States have some flexibility. Funding typically 60:40 or 90:10. Examples: NHM, Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan.

Optional Schemes:

States can choose to implement. Central share lower. Largely phased out or merged; focus now on Core of Core and Core.

Recent Rationalization (as of FY 2023-24 updates): The government periodically reviews and rationalizes CSS. DMEO, NITI Aayog plays a key role in evaluation.

D. State Schemes

Definition: Schemes that are conceived, funded, and implemented entirely by State Governments.

Characteristics:

  • Address state-specific needs, priorities, and socio-economic conditions.
  • Funded from the state's own budget.
  • Reflect the political and developmental agenda of the ruling party in the state.

Examples:

Rythu Bandhu (Telangana)
KALIA (Odisha)
Amma Canteen (Tamil Nadu)
Mukhyamantri Kanya Utthan Yojana (Bihar)

Significance: Crucial for addressing local issues, fostering innovation, and complementing national efforts. Demonstrate fiscal autonomy.

E. Fiscal Federalism and Scheme Financing

Role of Finance Commissions (FC):

  • Article 280: Provides for FC to recommend distribution of net tax proceeds.
  • 14th FC (Y.V. Reddy): Increased states' share to 42%. Recommended reduction in CSS.
  • 15th FC (N.K. Singh): Maintained states' share at 41%. Recommended sectoral/state-specific grants. Concerns over cesses/surcharges.

Challenges in Financial Sharing:

  • Tied vs. Untied Funds: States prefer untied funds.
  • Fiscal Autonomy of States: Proliferation of CSS can reduce it.
  • Implementation Burden: States face challenges in contributing their share.
  • Delays in Fund Flow: SNA model (from July 2021) aims to streamline this.
  • Off-budget borrowings by states.

Prelims-ready Notes (1.2.1)

Central Sector (CS) Schemes

  • Funding: 100% by Union Govt.
  • Implementation: Central machinery/agencies.
  • List: Union List subjects.
  • Examples: PM-KISAN, PMJDY, BharatNet, SVAMITVA.

Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS)

  • Funding: Shared (e.g., 60:40 Gen; 90:10 NE/Himalayan).
  • Implementation: State Govts.
  • List: Concurrent/State List subjects (national interest).
  • Examples: MGNREGS, NHM, Samagra Shiksha, JJM, PMAY.

Categorization of CSS (Post 14th FC)

  • Core of the Core: ~6 schemes (e.g., MGNREGA, NSAP).
  • Core Schemes: ~20-25 schemes (e.g., NHM, Samagra Shiksha).
  • Optional Schemes: Largely phased out/merged.

State Schemes

  • Funding & Implementation: 100% by State Govt.
  • Purpose: Address state-specific needs.
  • Examples: Rythu Bandhu (Telangana), KALIA (Odisha).

Finance Commissions & Fiscal Federalism

  • 14th FC: Increased states' tax share to 42%.
  • 15th FC: Maintained states' share at 41%. Concerns over cesses/surcharges.
  • Single Nodal Agency (SNA) Model: For CSS fund flow, implemented from July 2021.

Table: CS vs. CSS - Key Differences

Feature Central Sector (CS) Schemes Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS)
Primary Funding 100% by Central Government Shared between Centre and States
Implementation Agency Central Government machinery/agencies State Governments
Constitutional List Primarily Union List Primarily Concurrent List (or State List if national interest)
Financial Burden Entirely on Centre Shared, States contribute their share
Flexibility for States Generally Low (centrally designed & monitored) Some flexibility, especially in Core schemes
Examples PM-KISAN, BharatNet, Urea Subsidy MGNREGS, NHM, Samagra Shiksha, PMAY

Mains-ready Analytical Notes (1.2.1)

Rationale for CSS
  • To address national priorities that require coordinated action across states (e.g., health, education, poverty).
  • To ensure minimum standards of public services across the country.
  • To incentivize states to invest in specific sectors where there might be underinvestment due to externalities or fiscal constraints.
Issues with CSS & Fiscal Federalism
  • Erosion of State Autonomy: CSS can dictate state spending priorities.
  • One-size-fits-all Approach: May not suit diverse needs of states.
  • Financial Burden on States: Poorer states may struggle with their share.
  • Conditionalities: Excessive conditionalities can be rigid.
  • Increasing Cess and Surcharge: Reduces divisible pool shared with states (concern by 15th FC).
Impact of Finance Commission Recommendations
  • 14th FC's increased tax devolution aimed for more untied funds and CSS rationalization. Some rationalization occurred, but CSS outlay remains significant.
  • 15th FC acknowledged concerns, suggested CSS framework, and outcome-linked grants.
Recent Developments
  • Single Nodal Agency (SNA) model (July 2021): For CSS fund flow. Aims for better fund management, transparency, monitoring. Significant reform.
  • Ongoing Review of CSS: NITI Aayog's DMEO evaluates for rationalization, convergence (e.g., Samagra Shiksha).
Continuity and Change
  • Continuity: CSS remain significant; basic CS/CSS structure persists.
  • Change: Shift towards CSS rationalization, outcome monitoring, fund flow reforms (SNA).

Conclusion for 1.2.1

The classification of schemes based on funding mechanisms is central to understanding India's fiscal federalism. While Central Sector schemes address direct national mandates, Centrally Sponsored Schemes represent a collaborative yet often contested space between the Centre and States. Recommendations of Finance Commissions and ongoing reforms like the SNA model aim to strike a better balance, promoting efficiency, transparency, and cooperative federalism in the pursuit of national development goals while respecting state autonomy.

1.2.2: Classification by Objective, Sector, and Target Group

Introduction/Summary

Beyond funding mechanisms, government schemes are also classified based on their primary objectives, the socio-economic sectors they address, and the specific demographic groups they target. This multi-dimensional classification helps in understanding the policy focus of the government, allocating resources effectively, and evaluating the reach and impact of interventions. It allows for a nuanced analysis of how different schemes contribute to broader national goals like poverty reduction, human capital development, or social inclusion.

A. Classification by Objective

Poverty Alleviation

Examples: MGNREGS, DAY-NRLM, NSAP.

Social Security

Examples: PMJJBY, PMSBY, APY, PM-JAY.

Human Resource Development (HRD)

Examples: Samagra Shiksha, NHM, Skill India.

Infrastructure Development

Examples: PMGSY, BharatNet, Sagarmala.

Environmental Protection

Examples: NCAP, Namami Gange, Swachh Bharat.

Economic Development

Examples: Make in India, PLI Scheme, PMMSY.

Financial Inclusion

Examples: PMJDY, PMMY (Mudra).

B. Classification by Sector

Agriculture & Allied

Examples: PM-KISAN, PMFBY, RKVY.

Education

Examples: Samagra Shiksha, PM POSHAN.

Health & Family Welfare

Examples: NHM, Ayushman Bharat, Mission Indradhanush.

Women & Child Development

Examples: Mission Shakti, Mission Vatsalya, Poshan 2.0.

Social Justice & Empowerment

Examples: PMAGY, SC/ST/OBC/PwD welfare schemes.

Urban Development

Examples: PMAY-U, AMRUT, Smart Cities Mission.

Rural Development

Examples: MGNREGS, PMAY-G, PMGSY.

Energy

Examples: PM Ujjwala Yojana, DDUGJY, PM-KUSUM.

Digital Governance / IT

Examples: Digital India, BharatNet.

C. Classification by Target Group

Women

Beti Bachao Beti Padhao, PMMVY.

Children

Poshan 2.0, Samagra Shiksha.

Scheduled Castes (SC)

PM-AJAY, Post Matric Scholarship.

Scheduled Tribes (ST)

EMRS, PMAAGY.

Persons with Disabilities (PwDs)

ADIP Scheme, Accessible India.

Elderly

NSAP, PMVVY, RVY.

Farmers

PM-KISAN, PMFBY.

Artisans

PM Vishwakarma Scheme.

Migrants

ONORC, ARHCs.

Inter-linkages: A single scheme can often be classified under multiple categories. (e.g., PMAY).

Prelims-ready Notes (1.2.2)

By Objective

  • Poverty Alleviation: MGNREGS, DAY-NRLM/NULM.
  • Social Security: PMJJBY, PMSBY, APY, PM-JAY.
  • Financial Inclusion: PMJDY, Mudra.

By Sector

  • Agriculture: PM-KISAN, PMFBY.
  • Education: Samagra Shiksha, PM POSHAN.
  • WCD: Mission Shakti, Poshan 2.0.

By Target Group

  • Women: PMMVY, Stand-Up India.
  • Children: Poshan 2.0, Mission Vatsalya.
  • SC/ST: PM-AJAY (SC), EMRS (ST).
  • Artisans: PM Vishwakarma Scheme (New: Sept 2023).

Illustrative Scheme Classification (Multi-dimensional)

Scheme Name Primary Objective Sector(s) Key Target Group(s) Funding Type
MGNREGSPoverty AlleviationRural DevelopmentRural Poor, UnemployedCSS
Ayushman Bharat (PM-JAY)Social Security (Health)HealthPoor & VulnerableCSS
Samagra Shiksha AbhiyanHuman Resource Dev.EducationSchool ChildrenCSS
PM-KISANEconomic Dev/Income Sup.AgricultureFarmersCS
PM Vishwakarma SchemeEconomic Dev/Skill Dev.MSME/Traditional CraftsArtisansCS

Mains-ready Analytical Notes (1.2.2)

Significance of Classification
  • Policy Analysis: Understands government priorities.
  • Evaluation: Allows targeted assessment.
  • Avoiding Overlap: Facilitates convergence.
  • Targeting Efficiency: Ensures benefits reach intended groups.
Challenges in Classification and Targeting
  • Multi-objective Schemes: Difficult strict categorization.
  • Identification of Beneficiaries: Inclusion/exclusion errors (SECC 2011 limitations).
  • Intersectionality: Need for sensitivity to multiple vulnerabilities.
Trends in Scheme Focus
  • Universalization for Basic Needs: PMJDY, Ujjwala, PMAY.
  • Emphasis on 'Antyodaya': Reaching the most marginalized.
  • Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT): Leveraging JAM trinity.
Recent Developments/Examples
  • PM Vishwakarma Scheme (Sept 2023): Targets traditional artisans.
  • Mission Shakti, Vatsalya, Poshan 2.0: WCD scheme rationalization.
  • Focus on Migrant Welfare: ONORC, ARHCs.

Conclusion for 1.2.2

Classifying government schemes by objective, sector, and target group provides a vital analytical framework. It helps in strategizing interventions, ensuring equitable resource distribution, and maximizing impact. While challenges persist, the trend is towards more focused, outcome-oriented schemes, often leveraging technology.

1.2.3: Life-Cycle Approach to Welfare Provision

Introduction/Summary

The life-cycle approach recognizes varying needs at different life stages. A comprehensive welfare system aims to provide a continuum of support, addressing evolving needs from infancy to old age. This ensures holistic development, social protection, and dignity.

A. Conceptual Framework

Views welfare as an integrated system ("womb to tomb"). Emphasizes:

  • Early Investment
  • Continuity of Support
  • Preventive and Protective Measures
  • Empowerment and Capability Building

B. Schemes Across Life Stages

Pre-Natal & Early Childhood (Womb to ~6 years)

Focus: Maternal health, nutrition, ECCE. Schemes: JSY, PMMVY, Saksham Anganwadi & Poshan 2.0, Mission Indradhanush, Mission Vatsalya.

School Age (Childhood & Adolescence, ~6 to 18 years)

Focus: Quality education, nutrition, adolescent health. Schemes: Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan, PM POSHAN, RBSK, Scheme for Adolescent Girls (SAG).

Working Age (Youth & Adulthood, ~18 to 60 years)

Focus: Skills, employment, social security. Schemes: Skill India (PMKVY), MGNREGS, DAY-NRLM/NULM, APY, PMJJBY, PMSBY, PM-SYM, PMAY, PM Vishwakarma.

Elderly (Post-Working Age, 60+ years)

Focus: Financial security, health, social support. Schemes: NSAP (IGNOAPS, etc.), PMVVY, RVY, IPSrC.

Prelims-ready Notes (1.2.3)

Early Childhood (0-6 yrs)

PMMVY, Saksham Anganwadi & Poshan 2.0, Mission Indradhanush.

School Age (6-18 yrs)

Samagra Shiksha, PM POSHAN, RBSK.

Working Age (18-60 yrs)

Skill India, MGNREGS, APY, PMAY, PM Vishwakarma.

Elderly (60+ yrs)

NSAP, PMVVY, RVY.

Table: Life-Cycle Welfare – Key Scheme Examples

Life Stage Age Group (Approx.) Key Needs Example Schemes
Early Childhood0-6 yearsNutrition, Immunization, ECCESaksham Anganwadi & Poshan 2.0, PMMVY
School Age6-18 yearsEducation, Nutrition, HealthSamagra Shiksha, PM POSHAN
Working Age18-60 yearsLivelihood, Skills, Social SecuritySkill India, MGNREGS, APY, PMAY, PM-JAY
Elderly60+ yearsFinancial Security, Health CareNSAP, PMVVY, RVY

Mains-ready Analytical Notes (1.2.3)

Significance of Life-Cycle Approach
  • Holistic Development: Prevents compounding vulnerabilities.
  • Human Capital Formation: Long-term benefits from early investments.
  • Breaking Inter-generational Poverty Cycles.
  • Social Cohesion & Equity.
Gaps and Challenges in India
  • Coverage and Quality: Universal access and service quality issues.
  • Fragmentation and Convergence: Need for better inter-ministerial coordination.
  • Unorganized Sector Focus: Adequacy and uptake of schemes debated.
  • Adolescent Focus: Often overlooked group.
  • Elderly Care: Growing need beyond pensions (geriatric care).
Integrating Current Developments
  • NEP 2020: Emphasizes ECCE.
  • Mission Saksham Anganwadi & Poshan 2.0: Nutritional outcome focus.
  • Mental Health: Tele MANAS programme.
  • Gig Economy Workers: Code on Social Security, 2020.
Way Forward
  • Strengthen convergence mechanisms.
  • Leverage technology (integrated beneficiary databases).
  • Increase public investment in social infrastructure.
  • Develop frameworks for long-term care.

Conclusion for 1.2.3

The life-cycle approach provides a valuable framework. India has schemes for various life stages, but strengthening convergence, ensuring quality, and adapting to new challenges are crucial for a comprehensive welfare system.

Overall Conclusion, Way Forward & Significance (for 1.2)

Significance

  • Informed Policy Discourse: Structured analysis of government priorities.
  • Fiscal Management: Understanding Centre-State fiscal relations.
  • Targeted Delivery: Designing effective schemes.
  • Accountability & Evaluation: Basis for monitoring performance.

Way Forward

  1. Rationalization and Convergence: Continue efforts to reduce overlaps (e.g., WCD umbrella schemes).
  2. Outcome-Based Monitoring: Shift from outlays to outcomes (DMEO's framework).
  3. Strengthening Fiscal Federalism: Ensure adequate untied funds for states, address cess/surcharge concerns, SNA model is a step.
  4. Adaptive Targeting: Refine mechanisms with updated data (dynamic SECC).
  5. Capacity Building: Invest in implementing agencies.
  6. Citizen-Centric Approach: Beneficiary feedback, grievance redressal, transparency.

Effective design, classification, and implementation of schemes are pivotal for India's journey towards sustainable development goals.

UPSC Previous Year Questions (PYQs)

Prelims MCQs

2019 Consider the following statements about Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTGs) in India:
  1. PVTGs reside in 18 States and one Union Territory.
  2. A stagnant or declining population is one of the criteria for determining PVTG status.
  3. There are 95 PVTGs officially notified in the country so far.
  4. Irular and Konda Reddi tribes are included in the list of PVTGs.
Which of the statements given above are correct?

(a) 1, 2 and 3

(b) 2, 3 and 4

(c) 1, 2 and 4

(d) 1, 3 and 4

Answer: (c)

Hint/Explanation: Statement 3 is incorrect. There are 75 PVTGs. Relates to classification by target group. PM-JANMAN mission (late 2023) focuses on PVTGs. (Source: Ministry of Tribal Affairs).

2016 Pradhan Mantri MUDRA Yojana is aimed at

(a) bringing the small entrepreneurs into formal financial system

(b) providing loans to poor farmers for cultivating particular crops

(c) providing pensions to old and destitute persons

(d) funding the voluntary organizations involved in the promotion of skill development and employment generation

Answer: (a)

Hint/Explanation: Tests objective and target group (MUDRA targets micro/small entrepreneurs for financial inclusion and economic development).

2017 The main objective of the ‘National Social Assistance Programme’ is to provide

(a) financial assistance to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

(b) old age pension to very poor persons

(c) social security to unorganized sector workers

(d) None of the above

Answer: (b) (More accurately, it provides social assistance to destitute elderly, widows, and disabled persons. "Old age pension to very poor persons" is its most prominent component.)

Hint/Explanation: NSAP is a Core of the Core CSS targeting specific vulnerable groups for social security.

Mains Questions

2016 "The Dindayal Antyodaya Yojana-NULM and DAY-NRLM are two important schemes...for poverty alleviation." Discuss their objectives and achievements.

Direction/Value Points:

  • Objectives of DAY-NULM: Mobilizing urban poor into SHGs, skill development, credit access, etc.
  • Objectives of DAY-NRLM: Mobilizing rural poor women into SHGs, capacity building, financial inclusion, etc.
  • Achievements: Cite data (SHGs formed, skilled individuals, credit disbursed), women empowerment.
  • Challenges: Quality of SHGs, market linkages, sustainability.
  • Conclude with overall impact and suggestions.
2019 Performance of welfare schemes...is not so effective due to absence of their awareness and active involvement...– Discuss.

Direction/Value Points:

  • Agree with premise: Explain how lack of awareness/involvement leads to poor outcomes.
  • Reasons: Illiteracy, remoteness, complex procedures.
  • Consequences: Underutilization, leakages, exclusion errors.
  • How active involvement helps: Better need assessment, accountability, empowerment.
  • Measures: IEC campaigns, leveraging PRIs/CSOs, social audits.
2017 ‘Rashtriya Mahila Kosh (RMK) could be an important instrument for socio-economic empowerment of women if it is properly implemented.’ Discuss.

Direction/Value Points:

  • RMK's mandate: Micro-credit to poor women.
  • Potential for empowerment: Economic (income, assets), Social (status, decision-making).
  • Challenges: Reach, adequacy of credit, market linkages.
  • Suggestions: Better targeting, skill training, linkages.

Trend Analysis (Past 10 Years)

Prelims Trends

  • Specific Scheme Details: High frequency (objectives, beneficiaries, features).
  • Funding Patterns: CS vs. CSS distinctions.
  • Target Groups: Focus on vulnerable sections.
  • Conceptual Understanding: Less frequent, but possible.
  • Current Affairs Driven: Schemes in news are key.

Mains Trends

  • GS-II: Critical evaluation of schemes, federalism aspects, implementation issues, vulnerable sections.
  • GS-III: Economic impact, subsidies, financial inclusion.
  • Shift: Increasing demand for analytical depth, critical evaluation with data, practical solutions. Connecting schemes to broader issues.

Original MCQs for Prelims

1. Which of the following accurately describes a 'Central Sector Scheme'?

(a) It is implemented by State Governments with 100% funding from the Centre.

(b) It is funded and implemented primarily by State Governments with some financial assistance from the Centre.

(c) It is 100% funded by the Union Government and implemented by the Central Government machinery or central agencies.

(d) It is funded on a shared basis (e.g., 60:40) between the Centre and States and implemented by State Governments.

Answer: (c)

Explanation: Central Sector Schemes are characterized by 100% funding by the Union Government and implementation through central machinery.

2. Consider the following schemes:
  1. Pradhan Mantri Kisan Samman Nidhi (PM-KISAN)
  2. Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS)
  3. Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan
  4. Pradhan Mantri Vaya Vandana Yojana (PMVVY)
Which of the above are classified as Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS)?

(a) 1 and 4 only

(b) 2 and 3 only

(c) 1, 2 and 3 only

(d) 2, 3 and 4 only

Answer: (b)

Explanation: PM-KISAN is CS. MGNREGS & Samagra Shiksha are CSS. PMVVY is effectively CS.

3. The recently launched PM Vishwakarma Scheme (2023) primarily targets which of the following groups for skill upgradation and financial support?

(a) Migrant laborers in urban areas

(b) Farmers engaged in organic farming

(c) Traditional artisans and craftspeople

(d) Street vendors in metropolitan cities

Answer: (c)

Explanation: PM Vishwakarma Scheme (Sept 2023) is for traditional artisans and craftspeople.

Original Descriptive Questions for Mains

1. "The rationalization and categorization of CSS...was a step towards cooperative federalism...However, challenges persist." Critically evaluate...

Key Points/Structure:

  • Intro: Rationale behind CSS categorization.
  • Arguments for: Increased untied funds (14th FC), aim for flexibility, focus on national priorities.
  • Challenges: Fiscal autonomy concerns, number of CSS, fund flow issues (pre-SNA), state share burden.
  • 15th FC Observations: Acknowledged concerns, cesses/surcharges, outcome-linked grants.
  • Role of SNA Model: Streamline fund flow, enhance transparency.
  • Critical Evaluation: Impact on cooperative federalism, outcome focus, SNA's effectiveness.
  • Conclusion: Positive steps, but continuous dialogue needed.
2. Using the life-cycle approach, illustrate how government schemes...provide a continuum of welfare...Identify critical gaps and suggest measures...

Key Points/Structure:

  • Intro: Explain life-cycle approach.
  • Illustration of Continuum: Scheme examples for Early Childhood, School Age, Working Age, Elderly.
  • Critical Gaps: Transitions between schemes, adolescent needs, unorganized sector coverage, quality vs. quantity, urban poor challenges, long-term care.
  • Measures: Integrated beneficiary databases, strengthening local governance, focus on 'missing middle', capacity building of frontline workers.
  • Conclusion: Schemes exist, but integration, quality, and addressing gaps are key.