1. Aligning CSR
Strategy with the
Development
Agenda
Hyderabad, 14, July, 2014
Srinivas Chary, Dean of Research, ASCI
schary@asci.org.in

2. Session outline
 India’s development agenda – status, gaps
and priorities
 How to structure and align CSR
interventions for greater impact?
 Case study – Pune
 Video
 Lessons

3. Corporate Social Responsibility
 CSR was once confined as a part of corporate philanthropy, which
now has changed and defined as a
“Corporate social responsibility is the commitment of businesses to
contribute to sustainable economic development by working with
employees, their families, the local community and society at large,
to improve their lives in ways that are good for business and for
development”
Source: LOK SABHA SECRETARIAT; PARLIAMENT LIBRARY AND REFERENCE, RESEARCH, DOCUMENTATION
AND INFORMATION SERVICE (LARRDIS); Corporate Social Responsibility; REFERENCE Note No. 11/RN/Ref. 2013

4. The Private Sector is emerging as a development partner –
now on the threshold of a new phase: Core Business
Pro-poor business
models / inclusive
markets
Development
benefits
Business
benefits
Philanthropy
CSR / Social
investment
• Contribution of
financial or in-kind
resources to
development projects
• Social investment
that facilitates
business objectives
and the achievement
of the MDGs
• Enterprise solutions that
accelerate and sustain access
by the poor to needed goods
and services and to income
generating opportunities and
that contribute to economic
empowerment.
Risk

5. New Phase
 Private sector is a key development
partner
 Inclusive markets – access by the poor for
goods and services and to income
generating activities – e.g. Amul, HL

6. Defining Development
Priorities
 Discussions – 10-15 min

7. India’s Development
Challenges
MDG compliance

8. Millennium Development Goals
In the year 2000 a total of 189 members states(countries) of the United Nations
agreed upon to achieve 8 international development goals by the year 2015
India - 8 goals, 12 targets and 35 indicators
The two major goals - Goal 4 & Goal 7 are moderately off track and it is
forecasted that these goals will not achievable by India by 2015
Goals related to Children - Goal 2, Goal 4, Goal 5, Goal 7

9. Development Agenda
 Need for more focus
 Declining Poverty but increasing inequality
 Persisting malnutrition among children
 Improving survival rate in primary education
 Gender parity in wages
 Improving immunization coverage
 Child mortality
 Maternal mortality
 Access to safe sanitation (and water) and prevention of
open defecation
Source : National Statistical Commission

10. The day everyone of us gets a toilet to use, I shall know that
our country reached the pinnacle of progress….
Jawaharlal Nehru

11. Singapore
Gabon
Botsw ana
Mauritius
Romania
Panama
Kazakhstan
Ukraine
Namibia
China
Paraguay
Bolivia
Sri Lanka
Samoa
Tonga
Congo, Rep.
Philippines
Mongolia
India
Vietnam
Pakistan
Uzbekistan
Mauritania
Sudan
Nigeria
Tajikistan
Kenya
Zambia
Bangladesh
Tanzania
Mali
Nepal
Malaw i
Sierra Leone
Niger
Eritrea
Burundi
R2
= 0.649
0
20
40
60
80
100
100 1000 10000 100000
GDP per capita PPP (current international $) (Log Scale)
%ofpopulationwithaccesstoimprovedsanitation
Scatter-plot of % of population with access to improved sanitation and GDP per
capita PPP (current international $)
[
Source: World Development Indicators, 2006
India’s progress is
lower than some of
the other countries
with similar or lower
per capital GDP
India’s Relative Performance

12. Burden of Disease
In India, 80 % of Disease and Sickness are Due to
Water Borne and Water Related Diseases
- WHO

13. Open Defecation and Human Height
% of Households without toilets
India’s National Family
and health Surveys
Data from India’s National Family and health Surveys being compared with other Demographic and
Health Surveys of various developing countries. The three large circles in the graph depict the scale of
open defecation in comparison to other developing countries

14. Infant Child Mortality
Source: The Times of India, Hyderabad, 22nd February, 2008

15. NTPC
Rural Electrification
Corporation Limited
NHDC Limited Eastern Coal fields
Limited
Greater Impact
Development Goals
Existing CSR interventions

16. High impact CSR
 Align with development goals of the region
–metrics / development plan
 Use CSR investments as a catalyzing
agent for change – Low cost /high impact
 Capitalize existing GOI interventions
/schemes – facilitate convergence
 Capacity building
 Measuring results

17. 1. Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act
(MGNREGA)
2. Indra Awas Yojana (IAY)
3. National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM)
4. Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY)
5. National Social Assistance Programme
6. Mid Day Meal (MDM) Scheme
7. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA)
8. Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission
9. Accelerated Irrigation Benefit Programme (AIBP)
10. Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY)
11. Integrated Child Development Schemes (ICDS)
12. Backward Region Grant Fund (BRGF)
13. National Health Mission
14. Restructured – Accelerated Power Development Programme (R-
APDP)
15. Rajiv Gandhi Grameena Vidyuthikaran Yojana (RGGVY)
16. Rajeev Gandhi Drinking Water and sanitation Mission
Flagship Programmes of Govt.. Of India in 12th Five Year Plan (2012-17)

18. Key takeaways – High impact CSR
 Align CSR with development needs – eg. WinS
 Use CSR investment for catalyzing change and scaling up
impact – e.g handwashing /O&M/bechmarking/M&E
 Create neutral platform and advisory team
 Smart partnerships
 Capacity enhancement – training, study tours etc.
 Institute strong monitoring and measurement system for
results

19. Water, Sanitation and
Hygiene in Schools (WinS)
A compelling development need

20. Population Dynamics
In the year 2015, India is going to have about 29% of population between the age of 0-14, which
Is SCHOOL GOING AGE
Children

21. WinS in India
• 110 plus million school-going children who need
sustained access to safe drinking water and sanitation
facilities in over 1.5 million schools across 644 districts
• Considerable progress in recent years, but
• Many schools still do not have access to safe drinking
water, sanitation facilities and hygiene education.

22. Background
 In India, there are 14,12,178 schools across 644 districts.
 76.36% i.e. 10,78,407 schools are government schools.
 Almost half of the schools i.e. 51.6% are managed by Department of
Education.
 5.25 % are managed by Tribal/Social Welfare Department.
 Local bodies manage about 17.46% of schools.
 Around 12,14,282 schools are located in Rural India which is about
85.99% of total schools in the country
Source: DISE 2011-12: Flash Statistics

23. Acronyms & terms to know
 WASH Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene
 WinS WASH in Schools

24. What is WASH in schools?
 Access to sufficient quantities of safe water:
 Drinking
 Hand-washing and personal hygiene
 Sufficient water for:
 Cleaning
 Cooking, flushing toilets, school gardens, etc when appropriate
 Toilet facilities that are:
 Child-friendly, gender-specific, culturally and environmentally
appropriate, private, safe, and well maintained

25. WASH in schools (2)
 Personal hygiene materials
 Water for washing, soap, sanitary pads, etc
 Hygiene education
 Curriculum, lesson plans, role play, group activities, wall-paintings,
competitions, radio spots
 Safe disposal of solid waste
 Control measures to reduce transmission and
morbidity of WASH-related illnesses
 Approaches to control vector borne disease
 Diarrhoea prevention and management, De-worming campaigns,
nutritional supplements

26. WASH in Schools (3)
Human Resources:
 A system of capacity building in place for
Administrators and Teachers
 Teachers with WinS Orientation
 Lead Teachers trained in WinS implementation
 WinS on the agenda of the School Management
Committee
Monitoring:
 WinS embedded in the monitoring system of NBA
and SSA

27. Why WASH in Schools
?

28. Impacts related to WASH in schools
Health
 Diarrhea
 Soil transmitted helminths
 Trachoma, scabies
 Acute respiratory infection
Non-health
 Educational attainment
 Absenteeism
 Attrition
 Concentration
 Test scores
 Water availability
 Dehydration
 Privacy and safety
 Menstrual management
Equity:
• Gender
• Socio-economic status

29. • World Health Organization reports, children under three years old
experience on average three episodes of diarrhea and acting as an agent
for children to be extremely malnourished .
•Diarrhea caused an estimated 1,36,000 child deaths in 2012 alone. (UNICEF,
2013)
•Diarrhea is a leading cause of malnutrition in children under five years old
(WHO, 2013)
•1 in 3 of the world's malnourished children lives in India. ( WHO, 2013)
•47 % of children in India are underweight and at least 16 % are wasted.
(UNICEF)
Causes:
Diarrhoea is a symptom of infections caused by a host of
bacterial, viral and parasitic organisms, most of which are spread by
feces contaminated water
Diarrhea and its impacts in India

30. Open Defecation and issues of Stunting in Children
 69.3% of rural India defecate in open.
 Research indicates that sanitation plays an important role on
child’s height (Dean Spears and Sen).
 Field experiments in Maharashtra have shown that children
exposed to sanitation motivation and better sanitation facilities grew
taller than children who have not received it.
 Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC) has reduced infant mortality
rate and has increased children's height.
 (Spears, 2012a)
 Long term impacts of Stunting (WHO) :
 cumulative effects of under nutrition
 chronic restriction of child's growth
 children's cognitive thinking procedure.

31. Why WASH in Schools
?

32. National Policy
• Right to Education: guarantees separate toilets for girls and
boys and safe and adequate drinking water in schools. Article
18 in 2009
 The Act also suggests a safe, clean and child friendly school
environment with child centric system that fosters overall development
of a child
• Supreme Court Order (2011) “It is imperative that all schools
must provide toilet facilities; empirical researches have
indicated that wherever toilet facilities are not provided in the
schools, parents do not send their children (particularly girls)
to schools’’.

34. What is the scale
of the problem?

35. WinS - The Indian Scenario (1)
 Huge number to reach - 1.4
million schools
 Monitoring – where, how, who
 Operation and maintenance –
funds, system, responsibility
 Sustainability
 Infrastructure quality
 Equitable access

36. Status of WinS in India: Drinking Water
 Number of schools
having drinking water
facility is increased
from 9.35 lakh
(83.2%) in 2005-06
to 13.33 lakh
(94.4%) in 2010-11
Source: Flash Statistics –DISE, 2005-06 to 2011-12 , NUEPA, New Delhi
935,356
1,015,801
1,085,033
1,128,299
1,219,574 1,263,008
1,333,793
83.2 84.9
86.7
87.8
92.6 92.7
94.4
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
1,600,000
2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12
i
n
%
N
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
s
c
h
o
o
l
s
Number of schools having drinking water facility
% of schools having drinking water facility

37. Coverage vs. Functionality – e.g water
28.24
32.75
37.42
42.58
50.55
53.60
58.82 60.28
84.48
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90

38. Number of states
13
08
14
National Average- 2.83%
Best- 0% 6 states (Delhi,
Tamil Nadu and 4 UTs
Worse- 31. 87 % Meghalaya
Percentage of children deprived from drinking water
facility to total enrolment 2011-12
•2.80 million boys and 2.83 million
girls , total 5.63 million children (2.83
% children of total enrolment) are
deprived from drinking water facility
in schools
Source: Calculation based on DISE, 2011-12,NUEPA, New Delhi

39. Availability of toilet facility (any type) by
management and area , 2011-12
 Out of 14.12 lakh schools only
2,35,010 Schools (17.64%) do not
have any type of toilet facility , out of
them 1,84,820 schools are Government
schools
 1,71,691 (17.19%) Government
schools in rural area do not have any
type of toilet facility
 24.32 million (12.36 million boys and
11.96 girls ) are deprived from any
type toilet facility
Source: Calculated from raw data
Rural Urban Total
Govt. 82.81 83.47 82.86
Pvt. 80.45 93.39 84.95
Total 82.39 89.40 83.36
Percentage of schools

40. In states like Bihar, West Bengal, Maharashtra, one toilet is used by more
than 100 students.
NGP Study, CMS, 2010
41.0
57.5
65.9 68.0
85.6 88.6
103.6
113.6
126.8
145.3 149.3
242.5
89.5
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0
160.0
180.0
200.0
220.0
240.0
260.0
Kerala
HimachalPradesh
AndhraPradesh
Haryana
Rajasthan
UttarPradesh
Maharashtra
Karnataka
Chhattisgarh
WestBengal
Tripura
Bihar
Total

41. National Average- 22.77%
Best- 0% Chandigarh
Worse- 57.15 % Meghalaya
Percentage of girls deprived from separate toilet
facility to total enrolment 2010-12
Source: Calculation based on DISE, 2011-12,NUEPA, New Delhi

42. Dysfunctional toilets

43. Dysfunctional toilets

44. Functionality
Source : Analytical Tables,2011-12, NUEPA
69.7
49.1
12.5
38.7
17.8
12.2
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
DISE ASER
Funtional girls toilet Toilet available but not functioning Not Available

45. What are the
bottlenecks in
delivery of
WinS?

46. What are the key bottlenecks in
wins?
 Coverage gaps/inadequacy
 Functionality and poor O & M costs
 Equity – boys and girls, challenged
 Water availability
 Technical skills – construction, child friendly designs etc
 Capacity gaps
 Lack of Awareness - behaviour related concerns
 Water quality issues
 Lack of hand-washing facilities with soap
 Budgets – low unit cost
 Convergence
 Data gaps
 Monitoring

47. Development goal
WASH in Schools for ALL

48. Institutionalizing handwashing
with soap before the Mid Day
Meal

49. Source: Fewtrell et al., 2005

50. Handwashing with soap: Key evidences
 One-third of deaths in among children in India is due to diarrhoea and
respiratory infections.
 Handwashing with soap : one of the most cost‐effective interventions to
prevent diarrhoeal related deaths and disease (Cairncross and
Valdmanis 2006).
 Handwashing at critical times (before eating or preparing food and after
using the toilet ‐ can reduce diarrhoea rates by almost 40 per cent (3IE
2009).
 handwashing in institutions such as primary schools and daycare centers
reduce the incidence of diarrhoea by an average of 30 per cent
(Cochrane 2008).
 Handwashing promotion in schools: reducing absenteeism among
primary school children. In China, promotion and distribution of soap in
primary schools resulted in 54% fewer days of absence among students
compared to schools without such an intervention (Bowen et al 2007)

51. What is Fit For School
 Innovative school health concept.
 Simple and modular
 Focus on daily skill based activities rather than health
education.(tooth brushing, handwashing, deworming)
 Active involvement of non-health professionals
(teachers)
 Very cost effective

52. The concept (FIT FOR SCHOOL, Philippines)
• Children make eye contact, receive and share messages on the
importance of this practice (positive aspiration), which includes all peers
(equity)
• It is a fun activity
Health, attendance impact from this program

53. Simple designs and scalable approach

54. Part of school daily time
table

55. Institutionalizing mass handwashing with soap in India
What is required:
• Simple multiple handwashing stands in every school.
• Include mass handwashing with soap before MDM by all children,
teachers and cooks.
• Make soaps available on a sustained basis.
• Designated time before the MDM is served
• Make teachers monitor this practice and SMCs responsible for
oversight.
• Effective Monitoring(sms based or other methods) at the national
level - Child Cabinets can support in data validation.
Mid Day Meal provides an excellent platform to reach 110
million children in 1.4 million schools in India

56. Group Hand washing facility costs Rs. 8000/-

59. Institutionalising Child Cabinet

60. Key interventions
Training
Informat
ion
Support
Benchm
arking
Recogni
tion and
Award
Strengt
hening
supply
side
Converg
ence
through
DAP
Peer
learning

61. Service Level
Benchmarking to
Promote Universal
Access to Water and
Sanitation in Schools

62. What is benchmarking?
 Benchmarking is a process of
 Measuring performance and practices in key
areas,
 comparing them with best practice
 subsequent translation of this best practice into
use (by introducing infra, capacities, process);
 leading to superior performance – Performance
improvement

63. Benchmarking – Improving by Comparing
“BEST IN CLASS” -> TARGET
Performance at present ?
or is performance here?
or… here?

64. Water Supply
 Source of safe and reliable
drinking water
 Availability of safe and reliable
drinking water
 Availability of water for
personal hygiene
 Quality of water
Sanitation
 Separate toilet for boys and
girls
 Functional toilet facilities for
day schools and residential
schools
 Adequate number of functional
toilets for boys and girls and
children with special needs
Monitoring
 Maintenance of water storage
 Monitoring food preparation
 Cleaning of toilets and
classrooms
 Supervision and reporting
mechanisms for cleaning staff
 Cleaning and maintenance plan
 Clean and safe school
environment
 Safe disposal of waste water
 Hygiene promotion
Indicator GROUPS
Hygiene
 Separate hand wash facilities
for use after toilet and after
meals
 Provision for hand wash
(toilets)
 Provision for hand wash
(meals)
 Provision of soap
 Hygiene education
 Safe midday meal facilities
 Safe disposal of solid waste

66. 
• Daily routines
to promote
healthy habits

• Incremental
improvements

• Meeting
national
standards
THE THREE STAR APPROACH

67. INDICATOR GROUPS
Benchmarking
School
Sanitation
Water
Hygiene
Food
Safety
Monitoring
Sanitation
17 Indicators across 5 groups

68. Benchmarking - Process
Benchmarking indicators developed during the course being
tested in 305 schools of Unakoti district, Tripura

69. Results of Benchmarking Exercise in
East Godavari and Unakoti Districts
East Godavari Unakoti
No Star Schools 197 222
1 Star Schools 7 83
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350NoofSchoolstested
Source: ASCI, 2013

70. Agents of Change
Who are they ?
Where are they situated ?
What is their role?
What is their influence?

71. Needs assessment framework
STATE
DISTRICT
VILLAGE
MANDAL

72. LowPOWERHigh
•Director, Panchayati Raj Dept. •State/District Coordinator-NBA
•Executive Engineer, PHED •Additional Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad
•Secretary, MDWS •Director, WSSO
•Minister, MDWS •DRDA Consultant
•State Minister for school education (SE) •Director, RWS
•State Minister for school education (PE &SSA) •Child cabinet, Teachers, Headmaster, SMC, Parents,
•Secretaries - School education and Literacy,
Sanitation , Water Supply
•Village Education Committee, Gram Panchayat
Secretary
•District Education Officer •SE, RWS
•District Magistrate/District Collector •State/District Project Officer/s, SSA
•Deputy Education Officer •PD, CCDU
•MPS, MLAs •NGOs
•Minister, MHRD •PO, ICDS
•Media •PD, State Water and Sanitation Mission (SWSM)
•Municipal Commissioner •District Water and Sanitation Mission (DWSM)
KEEP SATISFIED MANAGE CLOSELY
MONITOR KEEP INFORMED
•Additional Chief Executive Officer, Zilla
Parishad
•Additional District Magistrate
•District Development Officer •Education Professionals
•District Project Coordinator, Education Dept •CEO, Zilla Parishad
•Mandal Parishad Development Officer •Project Director, DRDA
•Cluster Resource Person •Mandal Education Officer
Low INTEREST/CONCERN High

73. Certification Programme -
Illustration
 Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan – Sanitation
coordinators & motivators
 Potential change campaigns
 Need critical mass in each district
 Certification course
 Standardization
 Knowledge gain measured

74. ADDRESSING CAPACITY
NEEDS
 In response to the capacity needs for effective delivery of
WASH, UNICEF and ASCI with the support of Ministry of
Drinking Water and Sanitation (MDWS), Government of
India are launching :
 Leadership course for professionals in the field of Water,
Sanitation and Hygiene.

75.  The Course is aimed at enhancing skills and knowledge for
effective planning and management of WinS
 Adapted from the WASH in Schools e- course, developed by
the Centre for
Global Safe Water, Rollins School of Public
Health, Emory University and UNICEF New York.
 Certification Course
 Phase 1 – 3 days – Face to face training
 Phase 2 – 2 months – Field Project Report (FPR)
 Vision : Critical mass of change champions to achieve
WinS outcomes
WinS Leadership Course

76. THE LAUNCH – Aug 4, 2013

77. Other events and modes of
delivery
 Short term programmes for officers at the
state and district level, principals etc
 Sensitization workshops for Administrators
and Politicians
 Blended learning – Video Conference through
NIC
 E-learning models
 Study tours
 Peer learning

78. Achieving scale
 Retail to wholesale
 Partnerships
 LBSNAA – to reach out to administrators –
MOU
 State ATI – Field officers, school principals
 Key resource centres – 24 nos – TOT
Our short term mission : About 50 institutes are
ready to deliver WinS CB programmes

79. District Action Plan (DAP)
 District Action Plan (DAP) is a comprehensive medium
term plan
 Prepared in a consultative framework
 Aimed at achieving WinS vision and goals
 Assesses the current status of school
 Strategies for improving infrastructure, financing, capacity
building, and institutional framework

80. Schemes for financing WASH and Capacity
building
 Sarva Siksha Abhiyan (SSA)
 Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan (NBA)
 National Rural Health Mission (NRHM)
 Nirmal Gram Puraskar (NGP)
 NAREGA
 Rural Water Supply and Sanitation (RWS)
 Public Health Engineering Department (PHED)
 CSR