UNICEF Report Anindya Dutta Gupta

SUMMER INTERNSHIP PROGRAMME 2008
UNICEF INDIA
Tracking System and Institutional Support for Out of
School Children in Krishnagiri
Anindya Dutta Gupta
Silvia Döhnert
Christy Hudson
Abinaya Rajan
Kulwindar Singh Parhar
Hosted by
SEARCH
Bangalore

2
Disclaimer
The views expressed in this case-study are those of the authors alone and do not
necessarily reflect the policies or the views of UNICEF and/or SEARCH.
Photographed by Kulwindar Singh Parhar

3
Table of Contents
List of Tables and Figures………………………………………………………………………5
Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………...………….6
List of Acronyms……………………………………………………………….…………………7
Executive Summary……………………………………………………………….……………..8
Introduction……………………………………………………………………...……………….11
Out of School Children and Child Labour in India…………………………………….…….11
The Educational Situation of Tamil Nadu……………………………………………………12
The Response to OOSC…………………………………………………………….…………13
Out of School Children Tracking and Monitoring System of Krishnagiri………….………14
History of OOSC Tracking and Monitoring System…………………………………….…..14
Functioning of OOSC System…………………………………………………………….…..16
Social Inclusion…………………………………………………………………………………19
Case Study Methodology…………………………………………………………...…………20
Limitations…………………………………………………………………………….…………23
Findings………………………………………………………………………………..…………24
Strengths……………………………………………………………………………..…………24
Data representation……………………………………………………………………24
Age inclusiveness………………………………………………………...……………25
Impact of individual commitment…………………………………….……………….26
Value of education……………………………………………………………………..27
Extension of the role of VVF/VVFF…………………………………………………..28
Challenges………………………………………………………………………………………29
The OOSC Tracking and Monitoring System as a product……………………….29
The OOSC Tracking and Monitoring System as an idea………………………….30
The OOSC Tracking and Monitoring System as implemented in the field...……32
The OOSC Tracking and Monitoring System and its implementation by the
different stakeholders…………………………………………………………………35
Recommendations………………………………………………………………………………39
Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………….…42
References…………………………………………………………………………………….….43

4
Appendix 1: Extracts of the questionnaires submitted to the stakeholders…………45
Appendix 2: List of persons interviewed and sites visited…………………..……….....47
Appendix 3: Table of schools…………………………………………………………………48
Appendix 4: Sample of OOSC registration forms…………………………………………49
Appendix 5: Child details print out……………………………………………………..……51
Appendix 6: Child Monitoring Details………………………………………………….……53

5
List of Tables and Figures
Tables
Table 1: System Stakeholders………………………………………………...……………...15
Charts
Chart 1: Gender………………………………………………………………………….…..…24
Chart 2: Caste……………………………………………………………………………..……24
Chart 3: Mother Language…………………………………………………………….………25
Chart 4: Ability………………………………………………………………..…………………25
Chart 5: Age…………………………………………………………………………….………25
Chart 6: Requested Help………………………………………………………………………33
Figures
Figure 1: Map of Tamil Nadu……………………………………………………….…………12
Figure 2: Intended Tracking and Monitoring System…………………………….…………18
Figure 3: Map of Krishnagiri………………………………………………………...…………21
Figure 4: Implementation and Monitoring Figures for OOSC Software……………..……22
Figure 5: Actual Tracking and Monitoring System…………………………………….……38
Boxes
Box 1: Research Question……………………………………………………………………19
Box 2: Social Inclusion……………………………………………………...…………...……20
Box 3: Shilpa………………………………………………………………………...…………27
Box 4: Kanappan & Mohanraj………………………………………..………………………28
Box 5: Vijayan………………………………………………………………………………….30
Box 6: Suseela…………………………………………………………………………………30
Box 7: NCLP School in Sesurajapuram……………………………………………………..31
Box 8: Kanappan………………………………………………………………………………31
Box 9: Registration…………………………………………………………………………….34
Box 10: Mohanraj……………………………………………………………………………….35

6
Acknowledgements
We would like to express our sincere thanks to Mr. Ganesh Moorthi, UNICEF Consultant
in Krishnagiri and Mr. Karthikeyan, SSA Krishnagiri District Project Coordinator for Out of
School Children, for the precious input they provided during our field work, and their
continuing cooperation and availability that were essential in understanding the
implementation of the intervention our team was to research. We would also like to thank
Dr. Aruna Rathnam, Project Officer - Education, UNICEF field office for Kerala and Tamil
Nadu, for the valuable background information and guidance she provided to our study, as
well as Dr. Jayaranjan for his intellectual and methodological direction and feedback.
We are very grateful to our host institution, SEARCH, whose very supportive attitude has
been essential in creating a positive and productive research environment. Our special
thanks go to Mr. Samson Wesley, who was a precious guide and translator during our field
research, sparing much time and effort to escort us during our visits.
Our team has been very appreciative of the welcoming and passionate mind-set of Dr.
Santosh Babu, the District Collector and Magistrate of Krishnagiri, who took time from his
busy schedule to discuss our project with us on several occasions.
Finally, we thank not only the children and the families of Krishnagiri who opened their
homes to us but also the teachers, volunteers and SSA staff who have willingly shared
their experiences with our team and have thus substantially fed and enriched our case
study.

7
List of Acronyms
ABL Activity Based Learning
ALM Active Learning Methodology
ADPC Assistant District Program Coordinator
ASSOCHAM Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India
BC Backward Caste
BRC Block Resource Centre
BRTE Block Resource Teacher Educator
CFVP Child Friendly Village Planning
CRC Cluster Resource Centre
DPC District Program Coordinator
GOI Government of India
ILO International Labour Organization
IVDP Integrated Village Development Project
KGBV Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya
MBC Most Backward Castes
MDG Millennium Development Goals
NCLP National Child Labour Project
OBC Other Backward Castes
OOSC Out of School Children
SC Scheduled Castes
SSA Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan
ST Scheduled Tribes
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
VLMC Village Level Management Committee
VVF Village Volunteer Force
VVFF Village Volunteer Force Facilitator

8
Executive Summary
Out of school children is a concern throughout India. Although Tamil Nadu has more
success in ensuring education for all as compared to the rest of the country, educational
inequalities still exist. This problem is of particular concern in Krishnagiri, a newly formed
district in the north western part of Tamil Nadu, where a higher percentage of children are
out of school as compared to the rest of the state. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) reported
that in the 2006-2007 academic year in Krishnagiri, 8,667 children were out of school. Of
all out of school children in Tamil Nadu, 7% are accounted for in Krishnagiri. In addition,
Krishnagiri accounts for 9% of all child labourers in Tamil Nadu (as cited in SSA, n.d.1).
There are many interventions that try to improve the level of enrolment in this area, one of
which is an internet based, Out of School Children Tracking and Monitoring System,
created and developed by the District Collector of Krishnagiri, Dr. Santosh Babu. The main
objective of the software is to link government schemes with eligible families, with the
assumption that if families are receiving help such as medical assistance, pensions or
financial loans, the barriers for keeping their child in school would be removed. The aim of
the case study was to evaluate whether or not this software is a socially inclusive tool for
keeping children in school.
Since its implementation in 2006, out of the 8,667 out of school children identified by SSA,
only 8,460 have been entered in the software, with only 557 being monitored. The
monitoring process in the context of the software denotes a quarterly physical follow-up,
verifying whether the child is in school and if the family has received the requested help.
Of the 557 that had been monitored, the research team received 138 forms for children
who had been monitored in the previous month, from which a sample of 12 children was
taken. The 12 cases were picked to represent the geographic distribution of the 138 cases
we received as the 138 forms were geographically concentrated in two areas, the Thally
and Krishnagiri Blocks. In addition to interviewing the identified children and his/her
parents, we also interviewed other stakeholders including teachers, headmasters, Village
Volunteers, Block Resource Teachers, SSA personal, the UNICEF consultant for

9
Krishnagiri and the District collector. We visited three villages in the Krishnagiri Block and
three villages in the Thally Block.
The research team found several strengths and limitations of the OOSC system. As for the
strengths, the team found that the value of education in Krishnagiri is high and children
identified in the software are going back to school. This may be linked to the fact that we
found many passionate individuals committed to the cause of out of school children.
Finally, from a demographic standpoint, the system seems to be inclusive of gender, age,
ability, caste and language.
Despite the strengths of the tracking and monitoring system, there are several limitations
which threaten its social inclusiveness. Firstly, language barriers constitute a major
problem since the forms and the software itself are only available in English. Secondly,
because village volunteers are not paid, they lack incentive to carry out their important role
of monitoring children who are enrolled in the software. In addition, because of unreliable
internet connectivity throughout the region, the aim of reducing paperwork and
streamlining the process by which children are enrolled in the system is lost, creating a
backlog of paperwork at the SSA district level office. Perhaps the most concerning finding
is that much of the information in the software was recorded incorrectly. This includes
simple examples such as incorrect birthdates and genders, in addition to more pressing
errors such as the request needed by the family being entered arbitrarily by the data
enterer. In the end, most families have not received the help for which they may or may
not have asked.
Based on the above findings, the research team would like to make the following
recommendations. Most importantly, for issue of sustainability, the Out of School Children
Tracking and Monitoring System should be made a governmental policy so that all
stakeholders will have reason to take ownership of the software and proper
implementation can commence. Secondly, at the most basic level, internet connectivity
throughout the district needs to be improved in order to properly implement the system at
the grassroots level. Also, the language barriers can be decreased by making enrolment
and monitoring forms available in all regional languages like Tamil, Telegu, Kannada and
Urdu. Economic incentive should be provided to village volunteers in order to encourage
them to properly carry out their work. In addition, financial and entrepreneurial guidance

10
should be provided to all loan recipients in order to ensure that the money provided is
used sustainably and in the best interest of the recipients. Finally, responsibility for the
implementation of the software functioning should be transferred from the SSA level to a
grassroots level, for example to Panchayats and village volunteers.

11
Introduction
Out of School Children and Child Labour in India
Nineteen percent of the world’s children live in India (UNICEF, 2004). More than 4 billion
citizens of India are defined as a child with 26 million infants being born each year
(UNICEF, 2004). When considering the potential human resource of educating these
young citizens, India is promised exponential growth. Unfortunately, the provision of even
basic primary education is not being made for too many of India’s children.
Over one third of potential students, or approximately 40 million children in India, are
estimated to be out of school at anytime (Mehortra, 2006). According to Singal in his 2008
paper, Working Towards Inclusion, India has the “highest absolute number of out-of-
school children” in the world, and is one of 35 countries most unlikely to meet the
educational goals as laid out by the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) (p.2). Even for
children who do attend school, there is high risk that they will drop out after only a few
years. According to the International Labour Organization (ILO), 68% of the world’s
children, many of them in India, will only complete primary education (as cited by Das &
Mukherjee, 2007). Perhaps most concerning is that every child who drops out of school,
even for a short period of time, becomes at grave risk for child labour.
The definition of child labour, according to the ILO and the Indian Census, includes
“children in the age group 5 – 14 years who are economically active – that is, those who
earn a wage or whose labour results in output for the market” (as cited in
Charmaabagwala, 2008, p. 238). Child labour is very difficult to track, mostly due to the
fact that almost 90% of these activities occur on an informal basis, for example agricultural
and domestic activities (Mattioli & Sapovadia, 2004). In actual numbers, approximately
115 million children, under the age of 14, are suspected to be working in some form of
labour at any time in India alone (Mathews, Reis, & Iacopino, 2003).
The explanation for out of school children and child labourers is one of confusion and
complexity. The perhaps most obvious answer for why children are out of school and sent
to work is poverty, however the quality of education also rises as an explanation when we
ask how a child can expect to excel in a school where they may experience discrimination

12
due to their caste, gender, religion or mother language. In Krishnagiri specifically, the two
main reasons cited by children for why they were out of school was due to migration and
because their wage was a necessity for the family (as cited in SSA, n.d.). In addition, for
many children who attend school, they may find their teacher regularly absent.
Sundararaman (2005) reported a teacher absentee rate of 21% in Tamil Nadu, just down
from a national average of 25%. Finally, many children work due to preference. This
evidence supports research by Charmabagwala (2008) who found that families will only
stop using child labour when they have economic incentive to do so. Simply put, many
parents see their children gaining more education and skill through labour than through
traditional schooling. This effect is compounded for the most excluded parts of society that
believe the likelihood of achieving a respectable career is based more on one’s caste and
economic status than their education (Charmabagwala, 2008).
The Educational Situation of Tamil Nadu
In Tamil Nadu, the state of interest in this particular case study, the education system is
more promising as compared to India as a whole. Ahuja (2008), a reporter for The
Economic Times, reported a ten year decrease in the national cumulative expenditure for
Figure 1: Map of Tamil Nadu1
educational services, although Tamil Nadu has
actually seen an overall increase in real public spending
(as cited by Sundararaman, 2005). In addition, they
report the lowest drop out rates in the country, thanks in
part to improved welfare schemes. UNICEF publications
also validated the success of Tamil Nadu’s education
reporting that at least 95% of primary school students and
80% to 89.9% of upper primary school students are
regularly attending school (as cited by UNICEF, 2004).
Unfortunately, pockets of educational inequality still exist,
especially in Krishnagiri, one of the least developed
districts of the state. The Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) Seventh Joint Review Mission
reported that 100,000 children remain out of school in the state (2008). For Krishnagiri
1
Source: Retrieved July 28, 2008 from http://www.indianetzone.com/3/images/tamilnadu-Map_1015.jpg

13
specifically, the abstract of out of school children reported that 8,667 and 8,342 children
were out of school in the 2006-07 and 2007-08 school years respectively (SSA, 2008).
With concern to child labour, the 2001 Census stated that in the state of Tamil Nadu,
418,801 children were counted as child labourers (down from 580,000 in 1991).
Specifically in Dharmapuri (the present borders of Krishnagiri and Dharmapuri were the
same district until 2004), there were 22,759 child labourers (13,448 male and 9,311
female) (Census, 2001). However, SSA of Tamil Nadu only reported 30,728 child
labourers in the entire state (2950 in Krishnagiri) (as cited in SSA, n.d.1).
The Response to OOSC
In response to the persistent problem of out of school children a number of initiatives have
been developed. National Child Labour Project (NCLP) schools were formed with the
purpose of providing education for children, ages nine to 14, who were previously placed
in employment. After completing a maximum of three years at an NCLP school, most
students are able to mainstream back into a primary or secondary school. Bridge schools
are a short term intervention, mainstreaming students after a maximum stay of ten
months. Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya (KGBV) schools only host young girls who
have dropped out of school or who were never enrolled. In Krishnagiri specifically, there
were 53 NCLP schools, 61 bridge courses and 3 KGBV schools functioning during the
2007 – 2008 school year (SSA, 2008).
Activity based learning (ABL) for primary levels and active learning methodology (ALM) for
upper primary levels should be given enormous credit for not only helping out of school
children quickly catch up in their lost education, but for also improving the quality of
education for all of Tamil Nadu’s students. Both ABL and ALM use learner centred
approaches to equalize and democratize the classroom experience, making school more
attractive for all types of learners. Rather than the teacher guiding the curriculum, each
student works at his/her own pace, dismantling the often debilitating competitiveness of
schools.
Out of School Children Tracking and Monitoring System of Krishnagiri

14
The intervention of concern for this case study is an additional response to OOSC. Within
the Government of India (GOI), there are many ways in which individuals can tap into
various government schemes and resources (pensions, medical benefits etc.). The OOSC
Tracking and Monitoring System of Krishnagiri is a unique method being piloted in the
district in an attempt to equally offer these benefits to eligible individuals through the
identification of out of school children. The ultimate hope of the OOSC system is that by
connecting families to the available schemes, the barriers for sending their child to school
will be relieved. For families where child labour is an economic necessity, for example, a
loan will help to subsidize the income that a working child would have made.
History of OOSC Tracking and Monitoring System
The idea for the OOSC tracking and monitoring system was originally created by Dr.
Santosh Babu, the current District Collector of Krishnagiri. Through collaboration with
UNICEF and SSA, an internet based software2
was developed with the help of Orbiter, a
Chennai-based Software Company. In addition to collecting basic demographic
information about children who are known to be out of school, every family and child is
asked what it is they need in order to continue school. The main objective of the software
is that by communicating this request with the local government authorities, the family will
receive the help needed, and the child will be able to return to school. With adequate help
from UNICEF, by September 2006 the system had been implemented with SSA and the
following stakeholders responsible for the functioning of the software.
Table 1: System Stakeholders
2
Available at www.back2school.in

15
Stakeholder Roles & Responsibilities
SSA
The goal of SSA is to ensure free and
compulsory education for school age children
between the ages of six and 14 (SSA, n.d.2)
SSA, a Government of India (GOI) initiative, is
responsible for carrying out district specific
educational needs, which in the case of
Krishnagiri district includes the overall
implementation of the software.
Block Resource Centres
(BRC) & Block Resource
Teacher Educators
(BRTEs)
There are 10 block resource centres (BRC) in
Krishnagiri. BRCs are responsible for
providing support to the teachers and schools
in the block. Each BRC is comprised of 10 to
20 teachers from area schools (depending on
the size of the block), formally known as Block
Resource Teacher Educators (BRTE), who
meet occasionally to provide support for one
another. The BRCs and BRTE fall under the
jurisdiction of SSA.
UNICEF and Integrated
Village Development
Project (IVDP)
UNICEF collaborates with the district
administration of Krishnagiri and NGOs, like
the Integrated Village Development Project, to
implement Child Friendly Village Planning
which is a UNICEF initiative to help
communities achieve the 18 development
objectives as defined by the MDGs. These
objectives ensure the holistic well being of the
child, which include implementation of health,
nutrition, anti-child labour, and safe drinking
water in each village level. Through this
process, every village has a Village Level
Management Committee, which implements
and monitors the village plan as created by
the community members.
Village Volunteer Force
(VVF) and Village
Volunteer Force
Facilitator (VVFF)
UNICEF, through IVDP, also provides training
to the village volunteer force (VVF) and village
volunteer force facilitators (VVFF). The VVFF
are experienced VVF who are elected as
supervisors and who train the VVF staff.
Families They are the recipients of the help provided.

16
Functioning of OOSC System
The stakeholders above are responsible for four main steps in the functioning of the
software: identification, registration, monitoring and receipt of support. Refer to figure 2
below for a visual explanation of each step that follows.
Identification of OOSC:
The identification of the OOSC is a combined effort of UNICEF, VVF, SSA, and BRTEs.
BRTEs learn about OOSC through students and teachers who identify children they know
are not enrolled in school. In addition, the VVF identifies OOSC through members of the
community and by visiting households.
Registration of the child:
Survey forms for the child details are printed by SSA and given to BRC, who then pass the
forms on to the BRTEs. In some circumstances, the BRTEs will also give the form to the
headmasters of schools. After the form is collected and a photo of the child (for purposes
of identification) has been taken, the BRTEs return the form to the BRC. Where available,
each BRC inputs the information in the software directly at the block level, or passes it on
to the SSA district office for input. The information that is updated in the software is
accessible by the SSA district office and the collector.
Monitoring of the child:
Initially, the BRTEs were to be responsible for monitoring the child. When this proved
difficult, the responsibility was given over to the VVFF and VVF, under the direct
supervision of UNICEF when IVDP disagreed about the role of VVFF and VVF in the
software (refer to page 27). Currently, every child is to be monitored every three months
by a VVF as to whether or not they are attending school and if the family has received the
requested help. The signed and dated monitoring form is then returned to the BRC and
SSA, if necessary, so that the information in the software may be updated.
Receipt of Support:

17
At the time of information input, the data enterer (at either the block or district level) sends
a brief email message to the department responsible for the appropriate government
scheme regarding the parent or child request as to what is needed in order to continue
school. The director of the government scheme will review the request online, and send a
decision to the district collector, who will make the final decision regarding the household
request. The OOSC software will be updated as to the decision of the government official
and the VVF will monitor whether the help has actually been received by the family.

18
SSA
District
Office
IVDP
BRC BRTE BRC
VVF/Facilitators
Families
S
U
P
P
O
R
T
Concerned
administrative gov't
authorities
OOSC
Tracking
and
Monitoring
System
Identification,
Registration &
OOSC
District Collector
E-mail
UNICEF
District
Office
Monitoring
Figure 2: Intended Tracking and Monitoring System

19
Social Inclusion
For the purposes of the current case study, social inclusion is the main focal point by
which the intervention at hand is to be evaluated. The task of the case study is to help
identify which aspects, if any, of this software are socially inclusive.
Box 1: Research Question
As a concept, social inclusion is not independent but adopted from the GOI, who, in their
11th
Five Year Plan, acknowledged that "even remarkable growth rates are not fast or
equitable enough to reach disadvantaged populations" (UNICEF, n.d., para. 1).
According to UNICEF the result was for the GOI to adopt National Development Targets
that fell in line with the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The underlying
commitment is for 'inclusive growth' that in turn improves the lives of all Indian children.
UNICEF, as the institutional partner and international organization for the welfare of
children, also developed a 2008-2012 Country Programme that seeks to complement GOI
programmes to achieve these development goals. (UNICEF, n.d.).
The definition of what is social exclusion or social inclusion is a fluid argument. Singal
(2008) states that inclusion is focused on “entry, engagement and empowerment” (p.12).
UNICEF’s working definition suggests that inclusion considers the individual and
institutional powers that prevent people from fully participating in their life. Factors to be
considered include gender, race, sexual orientation, religion, age, caste, language, ability,
income, ethnicity, geography and profession, in addition to the opportunity for every
individual to give voice to one’s life. This group’s working definition considered these
factors in addition to questioning whether the delivery of the software reached all groups
equally, and whether the voices of individuals affected by the system were heard.
More specifically, the research question is whether or not the OOSC tracking and
monitoring system of Krishnagiri is a socially inclusive tool for keeping children in
school.

20
Box 2: Social Inclusion
Case Study Methodology
Profile of Krishnagiri:
Krishnagiri, in the state of Tamil Nadu, is the area of focus in the case study. The present
day boundaries of Krishnagiri and Dharmapuri were of one district, known by Dharmapuri,
until 2004. The purpose of dividing the two districts was in hope of being able to provide
better administration. Krishnagiri is divided into five taluks3
, ten administrative blocks, and
is considered to be more industrialized than the neighbouring Dharmapuri. Krishnagiri is
considered to be prone to drought and has a high percentage of Scheduled Castes and
Schedule Tribes.
3
Administrative division
A focus on social inclusion, therefore, requires UNICEF to work in ways that respect
the dignity of socially excluded groups and strive to fulfil their rights, in order to a) reach
services to excluded groups b) involve them and empower them through creating
genuine opportunities for voice and choice, and c) ensure quality non-discriminatory
service delivery (UNICEF, 2008).

21
Figure 3: Map of Krishnagiri4
Methodology:
The research team was given 138 monitoring forms from SSA. These forms were taken
from a pool of 8,460 children who have been listed in the system since its implementation
in 2006, and recorded many details about the family including biographical details (birth
date, caste, parents name), details discussing the nature of labour in which the child was
involved, information about the drop out (last school, class, and drop out date), and
migration details (if the child has moved)5
. The forms were chosen solely based on the fact
that they were applications that had been recently monitored by a VVF (of the 8,460
children identified since the software was implemented, only 557 have been officially
monitored) (OOSC Tracking and Monitoring System, 2008). This was not a random
4
Source: Retrieved July 29, 2008 from http://krishnagiri.nic.in/maps.htm
5
See Appendix 5 for sample of form

22
sample and all of the 138 forms were either from the Thally or Krishnagiri blocks. See
figure 4 for visual depiction of cases identified and monitored in the system thus far.
Figure 4: Implementation and Monitoring Figures for OOSC Software
For field work, the team visited three villages in the Krishnagiri block and three villages in
the Thally block. Once the team arrived to a village, we first sought out the help of the
school as to the location of the children for which we had received cases. Many of the
children for which we had been given forms were found in school, but according to
headmasters and teachers at the schools we visited, many others had shifted to other
SSA Data
OOSC Tracking and Monitoring System
All school-age children in Krishnagiri (296,466)
Out of school children in Krishnagiri (8667)
Out of school children in system being actively monitored
(557)
Out of school children identified in system since implementation
(8460)
Out of school children in system who had been recently monitored
and were pulled for the purpose of the case study (138)

23
schools (from lower primary to upper primary or middle school), had gotten married, or had
aged out6
of school. In most circumstances, after finding a student who was present, the
team then accompanied him/her to their parents where the semi-structured interview7
was
conducted. In total, 12 children were interviewed (11 of which had a parent present at the
time of the interview). We chose these 12 children first based on our attempt to
proportionally reflect the geographic location of the surveys we were given. Secondly, we
chose children who were accessible in distance and time (we were able to find them at
school on the particular day we visited). In addition, we interviewed two village volunteers,
4 teachers, 2 headmasters, 2 Block Resource Teachers (BRT), the Assistant District
Program Coordinator (ADPC), the District Program Coordinator (DPC), one of the
Directors of SWORD8
, the Sub-collector of Hosur, the District Coordinator for OOSC, a
representative of Orbiter (the Chennai based IT software company who developed the
software), the UNICEF consultant for Krishnagiri, and the District Collector of Krishnagiri.
Limitations
A few limitations to the methodology of the case study should be mentioned. As
highlighted above, the sample of forms given to the team was not random. Secondly, only
one team member spoke Tamil fluently, thus almost all communication was dependent on
the interpreter. Finally, at the time the case study was conducted, the monitoring and
evaluation system had not been fully implemented. Thus, the research team was unable to
research the system in its full capacity.
6
SSA’s reenrolment efforts are primarily concerned with children under age 14.
7
See appendix 1 for sample questions
8
SWORD is an NGO, involved with the running of KGBV’s in Krishnagiri

24
Findings
In order to properly portray the software, the stakeholders and recipients of the OOSC
software were examined along with the processes that facilitate its implementation. The
findings are divided into the found strengths and challenges of the system, and the related
recommendations and subsequent conclusions will be exposed in the following section.
Strengths
Data representation:
The data in the following charts
(charts 1-5) shows that the software
is inclusive for the 138 cases we
received. We analyzed the forms we
received by various demographics
like caste, gender, language and
age. These indicators illustrated the
software is able to reach out to all
the sections of society without
emphasizing any one. In this it
appears that the tenants of the
software have ensured that
discrimination is not taking place on
any level. However, it is impossible
to draw any general conclusions
regarding the inclusiveness of the
entire system, but only to analyze
the degree of inclusiveness for the
forms we received.
Male
53%
Female
47%
Male
Female
BC
20%
MBC
33%
SC
20%
ST
27%
BC
MBC
SC
ST
Chart 1: Gender
Chart 2: Caste

25
Age inclusiveness:
Throughout our visits and interviews we learned that the OOSC system reached out to all
ages, including to boys and girls close and even above 14 years9
. We had the feeling that
the efforts raised to put these children back in school were particularly intense, since the
risk that a child under 14 would drop into child labour and never have an opportunity to
receive education again is particularly high. In fact, several people told us that they would
even change the birth date of a child over age 14 so that he/she could be benefited by the
system.
Chart 5: Age
1%
2% 3%
10%
15%
18%
15%
14%
10%
12%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Age
9
Indeed, some children over the age of 14 are still being monitored through the system, although they
reached the maximum age to which enrolment schemes of OOSC reach out. Furthermore, the automatic
function which should systematically shift children over age 14 to a separate folder in the software has not
yet been implemented in the software. Consequently, children up to 16 can actually be found in the
system. Officially, the software indicates that there are 2062 children above 14 years of age identified.
Tamil
56%Kannada
24%
Telugu
18%
Urdu
1%
Other
1%
Tamil
Kannada
Telugu
Urdu
Other
None
98%
Orthopedically
impaired
1%
Visually
impaired
1%
None
Orthopedically impaired
Visually impaired
Chart 3: Mother Language Chart 4: Ability

26
Impact of individual commitment:
A major finding of our study has been the importance of the commitment shown by specific
stakeholders in achieving the intended purpose of the software.
Teachers:
More involved than originally planned, teachers appear to play, in some specific cases, a
crucial role. This is what we found especially in Sesurajapuram, a village located in Thally
Block, where the local NCLP teacher played an essential role in raising awareness
amongst the population regarding the value of education. In this village, three out of four
families registered in the OOSC software had not received the help they requested, yet,
they had already enrolled their children in school. The families stated this was due to
several visits carried out by the teacher who convinced them to put their child back in
school as well as from general community pressure.
VVF/VVFF:
When visiting different villages in Krishnagiri and Thally Blocks, we experienced that the
presence and knowledge by the population about VVF/VVFF varied very much, depending
on the area. In three villages visited in Krishnagiri Block, VVF did not seem to be
implemented, whereas in Thally Block, a far more rural area, VVF/VVFF seemed to be
actively carrying out their mission, even though the local population would only know them
by their name, ignoring their actual role. This was especially the case in Sesurajapuram,
Jodukarai and Podur, where the VVFFs, Miss Sandhya and Mr Perumal, seemed to
thoroughly act in favour of enrollment and education in general. Throughout the three
villages we visited in Thally Block, both Sandhya and Perumal were well-known by name
and for their dedication. We sensed that together with local teachers, particularly in
Sesurajapuram, VVFF actions were critical in generating a positive and dynamic
environment for education.

27
UNICEF’s local consultant: Mr. Ganesh Moorthi:
Through our visits and interviews, we observed the very crucial role Mr. Ganesh Moorthi,
UNICEF’s local consultant, played in the implementation of the software. It seems that Mr.
Moorthi is the main liaison between the SSA administration, the local government, Dr.
Santosh Babu, and the software at the field level.
In general, Mr Moorthi appears to be the “driving force” of the software on the ground
level. He has a very extensive knowledge about all elements and stakeholders of the
software and the OOSC situation in Krishnagiri in general. Thus, he provides relevant
information to SSA on this issue, and with the help of the VVF/VVFF, he forwards forms
which have been filled-out by volunteers to SSA. This is mainly due to the fact that IVDP
withdrew from the system stating that the registration and monitoring of OOSC was the
responsibility of SSA and should not be carried out by VVF/VVFF, whose task is to
implement the CFVP. VVF/VVFF nevertheless chose to participate in this monitoring, and
shifted in this respect from supervision by IVDP to supervision under Mr. Moorthi.
Consequently, there is no obvious link connecting VVF/VVFF’s activities to SSA, so Mr.
Moorthi seems to have been filling this gap for the past months. Finally, Mr. Moorthi also
assists parents on Grievance Day10
, who directly approach him about educational
concerns. In this way, Mr. Moorthi supports families who, due to the dysfunction of the
OOSC system, are not able to access the governmental support through the software.
Box 3: Shilpa
10
Grievance Day is an acknowledged day of the week when individuals are able to lodge requests and
complaints at the District Collector’s office.
On several occasions Mr. Moorthi also intervened directly on the field, in order to
facilitate the enrolment of an OOSC. In the case of Shilpa, a 14 year old girl who we
met in a KGBV school, Mr. Moorthi intervened when her home was raided by the police
in order to bring her back to school, trying to convince her mother about the necessity
of schooling. At that time, Shilpa had been working as a cleaner at a local doctor’s
office.

28
The District Collector: Dr. Santosh Babu:
The very idea of launching the software initially came from Krishnagiri’s District Collector,
Dr. Santosh Babu. Today, the success of the OOSC tracking and monitoring system still
lies with Dr. Babu, and he provides constant strategic input aimed at strengthening the
software’s impact. During meetings he always showed great enthusiasm and sincere
concern about the loopholes of the OOSC tracking system, openly recognizing its
limitations. In some specific cases, Dr. Babu was also personally involved in the cases of
children who couldn’t attend school, mainly in medical circumstances.
Box 4: Kanappan and Mohanraj
Value of education:
The most interesting finding of our research undeniably lies in the fact that although all of
the children that we interviewed had previously been out of school, most were in school at
the time of our visit. The awareness of the value of education that the OOSC software has
raised in local communities can be considered as a potential benefit of this initiative.
Extension of the role of VVF/VVFF:
Initially, it was the responsibility of VVF/VVFF to only monitor re-enrolled OOSC, and to
report on this matter to IVDP. However, VVF/VVFF presently seems to intervene at the
stage of registration of OOSC as well. We found this is mainly because BRTEs failed to
carry out their mission as they were intended to do (see supra). However, VVF/VVFF also
This was the case of Kanappan, a 14 year old boy, living in Adivan Engura Boomboom
Maadu Karan community in Boganapalli, suffered from hydrocele, a disease impairing
him from sitting. After an appropriate medical intervention, motivated by Dr. Santosh
Babu, he returned to school. Similarly, Dr Babu took great initiative to make sure seven
year old Mohanraj of Giddampatty Village, who needed an urgent surgical intervention
on his right elbow, where a malformation prevented him from using his arm, received
surgery enabling the child to re-enrol.

29
appear to be the most drawn into daily life in their villages and best placed to learn about
new OOSC. Consequently, as soon as they identify such a child, it seems the VVF/VVFF
inform the local teacher about it. Hence, the teacher fills out the OOSC registration form
related to that child, and the VVF/ VVFF assist the teacher in counselling and convincing
the child’s parents to put him/her back in school. Teachers we met explained that parents
would in some cases be reluctant to interact with teachers on these issues, feeling
intimidated by their status. The presence of a VVF/VVFF appears to ease the
communication as parents feel more comfortable in talking to a well-known person from
the same village. Because of this finding, we felt that the ad hoc extension of the role of
VVF/VVFF has proved to be a benefit to the system.
Challenges
The OOSC software as a product:
Undependable internet connectivity:
Block level
Filled-out forms which reach BRC are supposed to be entered in the OOSC tracking and
monitoring system website directly, but due to connectivity problems, most forms are
returned to SSA as hard copies. This aggravates the already existing backlog of forms
which amass in the SSA Office, and is not consistent with the very idea of circumventing
paperwork. According to Mr. Ganesh Moorthi, there are 200 forms waiting to be digitized
alone for Krishnagiri Block.
District level
Once the forms are returned to SSA, due to their own staff and internet limitations, the
forms accumulate in the district office without being entered. The reliability of connectivity
is also an issue at the District level. During both our visits to the SSA District Office
accessing the software turned out to be impossible due to interruption in internet
connection. Only after a half an hour could the software be entered.

30
The OOSC software as an idea:
Interdependency of the software with the external educational system:
Need for accessible and free education
During our visits to both Krishnagiri and Thally Blocks, we experienced that major
problems occur in the effective implementation of free and accessible education for all
children. Generally speaking, these cases demonstrate that inclusive enrolment of all
children was granted from standards 1 to 5, but that from standard 6, equal access to
education is much less established. This is not only due to the fewer number of upper
primary schools11
, but also to the material conditions education is dependent upon.
Box 5: Vijayan
Box 6: Suseela
11
See Appendix 3 on number of schools
When visiting Vijayan in Murugal Koil, Krishnagiri Block, who is attending 8th
standard
in a government school, he reported that he hadn’t gone to school for two days at the
time of our visit. He and his mother explained that they couldn’t afford to buy notebooks
and pens for school, and that if Vijayan went to school without these items, he would be
beaten by the teacher. It was our understanding, based on our discussions with Mr.
Moorthi, that free books and uniforms were given to every child, but free pens and
notebooks are only given to children belonging to the Scheduled Tribe or Standard
Caste. Despite Vijayan belonging to the Backwards Caste1
, he couldn’t afford
stationery, creating a clear obstacle to education.
In Jodukurai, Suseela, 12 years old, told us that the local NCLP she should have been
attending this year closed down a week before, due to an insufficient number of
enrolled children. Out of the 30 children who were attending this school, only 10 were
mainstreamed, with 20 being given no alternative.

31
Box 7: NCLP School in Sesurajapuram
Need for equal access to education:
Even though education may be free or accessible, other factors come into play that
prevent a child from enrolling in school.
Box 8: Kanappan
These findings on the interrelation of the software with external factors inherent to the
educational system lead us to the conclusion that the software alone cannot assure the
100% enrolment of OOSC. The achievement of this aim heavily relies on additional factors
which are independent from it.
Finally, we faced a noteworthy situation in Sesurajapuram, Thally Block, where all four
interviewed children had dropped out for three months (only one child dropped out for
six months, Jobin George) after having completed 5th
standard, and then enrolled in the
local NCLP school, based in the same village. The NCLP teacher explained that since
parents couldn’t afford to pay the fees of the local missionary school, families would
force their children to drop out for three months, in order to qualify for the NCLP school
that they could attend for three years without paying any fees. The NCLP school was
thus used as a means to compensate for the lack of a free government school to which
children from Sesurajapuram would attend after completing the 5th
Standard.
In the case of Kanappan who was out of school at the time of our visit, the upper
primary school he was supposed to attend refused to enrol the boy, stating that without
a valid community certificate he could not be registered in school for standard six. His
mother had been requesting the certificate for over 10 years. During a later meeting
with the District Collector and SSA, we were told that schools did not actually need to
request a community certificate for student enrolment, suggesting that there is major
miscommunication between SSA and the headmaster of this school, and preventing
equal access to education for children.

32
The OOSC software as implemented in the field:
Back-log in allocating the loans requested by families:
While attempts have been made to provide support to OOSC families, the reality of the
situation dictates that different agencies supervise the allocation of funding. Needs such
as pension payments and medical interventions seem to have reached the families and
have been addressed. It appears that Dr. Babu’s medical background is a reason for the
enthusiasm he shows in providing free access to health where it is a means to enable
children to receive inclusive school education. However, financial aid, notably the
requested loans have still not been assigned to any of the twelve interviewed families.
Out of the 2706 families (according to the OOSC tracking and monitoring system) who
requested help, as of July 8th
2008, only 133 have received it, mostly in the form of
pensions or medical assistance. Out of these 133, only 13 families have received help in
the form of a loan, according to Mr. Ganesh Moorthi. After later visits, we learned that only
individual families who personally visited the office were receiving a financial loan, due to
the fact that the automated email that was supposed to be sent to the appropriative
government scheme was not being delivered as initially planned.
Inaccurately filled-out forms:
Language barrier:
Registration and monitoring forms of OOSC are only available in English. However, we
were told by one of the VVFF that both teachers and VVF face serious difficulties in
understanding and filling out these forms, since they don’t feel comfortable working in a
foreign language. During our research we were shown several forms that had been
directly filled out in Tamil, suggesting that an easily fixable language barrier was
hampering accuracy.

33
Inadequate training:
Several stakeholders reported
that VVF/VVFF were not given
training in order to interpret the
questions asked on the
registration/monitoring forms.
More specifically, it seems that
VVF/VVFF were unable to
provide adequate counselling to
help families request appropriate
financial help. Therefore, most
families out of the 138 samples the team was given responded that nothing was needed to
keep the child in school (please refer to Chart 6). This finding supports the failure of
parents to request help in the software as a whole. Out of 8460 children identified, only
2706 requested help (32%). Although the creation of the whole system relies on the single
question of what is needed to keep a child in school, no specific emphasis is put in asking
this of the parents. This is an additional factor that seems to contribute to the inaccurate
filling out of the documents.
Lack of financial incentive:
Until December 2007, VVFF were paid a monthly stipend of Rs. 1000 by IVDP in order to
carry out activities related to the OOSC tracking and monitoring system. IVDP eventually
stopped paying this stipend when VVFF shifted under the responsibility of Mr. Moorthi.
However invested some VVF might be, one VVFF we interviewed told us that one of the
main challenges to the system was the lack of financial incentive VVF experience. We
were told that thus some volunteers would not take the required steps or time to duly and
accurately fill out these forms, which results in incorrect or incomplete information being
indicated and forwarded to SSA.
Chart 6: Requested help
4% 4%
4%
1%
2%
1%
4%
1%
79%
Wages/Employment
Other financial assistance
Medical intervention
Mid-day meal
Widow pension
Community Certificate
NCLP school
Closer school
Nothing requested

34
Time constraints:
Due to the mentioned obstacles faced by stakeholders in completing the procedure, in
many cases headmasters end up filling in the forms instead of BRTEs. In addition, it
seems that only the headmasters know the exact date of admission in school or the
duration of their absence in case of a drop-out. Consequently, it seems headmasters
aren’t consulting the parents of the child for the questionnaire details, including the precise
nature of the help needed. As a result, forms would reach SSA incomplete or filled out in
inaccurately.
These examples explain why in most cases we found forms indicating incorrect data
related to the age of the child, the standard in which the child dropped out, the number of
siblings, name, age and profession of the parents, and the nature and amount of the
requested help (see chart 6). SSA would in such case estimate lacking information,
including the requested help of the parents in order to process the forms.
Box 9: Registration at the SSA Office
During our last day of field work, we observed the entire procedure through which two
children were registered in the software when they went directly to the District Collector’s
and the SSA office. Known as the “grievance day”, every Monday the District Collector
and Mr. Moorthi receive children who come to their office in person to request help in
order to be able to attend school. Since the girls came without their parents, they were
unable to provide details as to their own birth date, the age or income of their parents,
and the amount of the requested help. The SSA Krishnagiri District Project Coordinator
thus arbitrarily filled in the form, simply estimating the missing information. Thus, we
found that parents do not have sufficient voice in expressing the nature of the help they
need, and are generally not consulted in the framework of the OOSC tracking and
monitoring system.

35
Incomplete structure of the monitoring forms:
A major loophole of the system’s implementation lays in the structure of the monitoring
forms, that do not provide for a column reporting if the requested help had actually been
received by the family. Thus, monitoring forms only indicate the child’s curriculum as well
as the nature of the help requested by his/her parents. Consequently, there is no provision
so far in the software reflecting which families are still waiting to be availed the needed
support, although the latter constitutes the cornerstone of the OOSC tracking and
monitoring system. For example, in the “Child Monitor Details” as viewed in Appendix 6, it
records that the “Child Benefit” is a Rs. 5,000 loan, but it is unclear whether this benefit
has been received or only requested. According to our field findings, it seems that, at it is
now, this column only indicates the requested help.
The OOSC software and its implementation by the different stakeholders:
Uncertain sustainability of the software:
Box 10: Mohanraj
We felt that the case of Mohanraj (also see supra Box 4), depicts the concern of
sustainability of the tracking and monitoring system very well. It exemplifies that sufficient
follow-up of single interventions is non sufficient, and where a single initiative, to which
officials repeatedly refer to as a success story, could not be sustained, the solidity of the
system as a whole can be questioned.
Indeed, as of June 2008, Mohanraj’s health condition had deteriorated again, and his
education is threatened once more. After a doctor at an SSA sponsored clinic
recommended an additional surgery, his mother brought him to a hospital in
Krishnagiri. Although she spent ten days at the hospital, the health care personnel
refused to perform surgery on the child and sent the child back home. At the time of our
visit, the assistant headmaster stated that he considered going to Mr. Ganesh Moorthi
to request his assistance since alternative ways of receiving public support had failed.

36
In addition, a high number of cases identified by VVF/VVFF are still pending to be entered
in the system, and the monitoring of these re-enrolled children does not seem to be
systematically carried out as it is supposed to be. This explains the extension that
occurred in Mr. Moorthi's role, who at present not only coordinates the gathering of OOSC
related data by VVF/VVFF but also steps in trying to ensure information is entered in the
software.
We also felt that from the viewpoint of the local institution’s empowerment, Mr. Ganesh
Moorthi’s role was possibly too paramount, since the success of the OOSC software is not
sustainable in the long term if it almost entirely relies on the shoulders of a person whose
presence is meant to generate local capacity-building, and not to embody it.
Undefined task distribution:
The exact tasks attributed to each stakeholder are not clearly defined and overlap on
several occasions. Thus, there is neither clear structure nor distribution of responsibility for
SSA, BRCs, BRTEs, schools, headmasters, teachers, VVF/VVFF, UNICEF or the District
Collector. We felt that the BRTEs who were supposed to supervise the OOSC situation in
the area covered by their school did not have thorough knowledge about the villages
falling under their competence. Another serious issue is the question of identifying who
exactly is responsible for filling-out the registration and monitoring forms, and which is the
channel through which these forms were forwarded back to SSA. This partly explains the
extension of the role VVF plays in the system, an evolution which as such might be
considered as a positive consequence of the system in the long term, but which actually
originated in VVF/VVFF carrying out BRTEs role. In this blurred picture, the efficacy of the
tracking system gets lost, and stakeholders tend to shift the responsibilities of the system
on each other. As a result, the 3rd
quarter monitoring and evaluation activities that were
supposed to be carried out since January were only begun this summer.
Communication gap between the different stakeholders:
We felt that the communication between the different levels intervening in the
identification, registration, and monitoring of OOSC is somewhat deficient. OOSC related
forms seem to be distributed to all stakeholders, making it difficult to gather all the

37
information in the software, and ensuring a consistent overview of the drop out situation.
These forms are indeed in the possession of SSA, BRTEs, teachers, Mr. Moorthi, VVF
and VVFF.
Limited ownership from SSA:
SSA’s interventions in the framework of the OOSC tracking and monitoring system only
represent one out of 19 components which are assigned to SSA at the district level. The
State SSA headquarters in Chennai are still reluctant to own this system since officials
regard it as Dr. Babu’s individual perspective of improving the OOSC situation in the
District. They believe SSA should not fully commit to these activities that are very time
consuming, but should rather focus on their own priorities, such as ABL or ALM. Finally,
due to lack of adequate technical training, SSA personal are unable to accurately utilize
the software.
All these factors taken as a whole explain a more general finding of our research, that is
that out of 8,460 children identified since 2006 as being OOSC, only 557 have been
officially monitored. In other words, only 6.6% of the total OOSC population identified by
the software thus far actually appears to be followed-up. However, the 557 cases do not
reflect the hundreds of additional monitoring forms that are simply waiting to be entered in
the system, raising the total number of actually monitored children. Concerning the
remaining thousands of children not being monitored, we felt that all elements described
above affect the overall effectiveness of the tracking and monitoring system. Undefined
task distribution, communication difficulties, lack of financial incentive, time constraints,
unreliable internet connectivity etc. are all factors that interfere with a smooth
implementation of the OOSC tracking and monitoring system, leaving most identified
OOSC out of systematized supervision and support. Figure 5 illustrates the system as it
currently functions including the challenges and barriers that we observed.

38
Figure 5: Actual Tracking and Monitoring System
SSA
District
Office
Grievance Day at
District Collector’s
Office
BRC Headmasters/
Teachers
BRC
VVF/Facilitators
UNICEF
Mr. Ganesh
Moorthi
Challenges:
- No financial
incentive
- Language barrier
- No material
support
- Unreliable internet
connectivity
Challenges:
- No data
processing
Families
S
U
P
P
O
R
T
Challenge:
Delay
District Collector
Concerned
administrative govt
authorities
SSA
District
Office
Identifying
Registering
OOSC
OOSC
Software
Monitoring
re-enrolment
& support

39
Recommendations
Stakeholder Ownership:
The local SSA office is reluctant in taking full responsibility of the OOSC software because
of their other responsibilities. There is no push from the State Government. Thus, it is
recommended that the system become a government policy for state wide
implementation. With financial, technological and staff resources, SSA would be able to
dedicate adequate energy to the implementation of the software.
Improving Accuracy:
Overall, the data found in the software was inaccurate. Fortunately, there are several
solutions to help improve the accuracy.
Firstly, it is recommended that both the monitoring forms and software be more clear as to
whether the parents have been served what was promised to them, and whether the help
was delivered in a timely manner so that the main purpose of the system wasn’t lost. As
the forms are now, the software gives a very vague picture of what has actually happened
with the family’s request.
In addition, the language barrier can be easily fixed by providing forms in all languages
found in Krishnagiri: Telugu, Kannada, Tamil and Urdu in addition to English.
Furthermore, providing financial incentive and field work training for volunteers will help
them to be capable of providing sensitive information and appropriate counselling for the
families they encounter.
Finally, the information gathered for the software is already gathered for the ration card. If
such information can be used for the software, then the repetitive action of collecting the
same information can be avoided.

40
Youth Volunteer Force:
In many villages we visited, the children themselves seemed very interested and
passionate about making sure their peers were attending school. Due to this finding, it is
encouraged that the idea of Dr. Santosh Babu, to create a youth volunteer force, be
implemented. The goal of such a youth force would be to encourage children to motivate
their peers on the importance of attending school in addition to providing leadership
training and experience for the youth involved.
Increased Panchayat Responsibility:
More responsibility should be transferred to the Panchayat level, an untapped resource.
Thus far, Panchayats are mainly only concerned with water and irrigation issues. Matters
of education and sanitation have not yet managed to be addressed at this level. We
support Dr. Babu’s vision which aims at decentralising responsibility of the software to the
Panchayat level. If training can be given to the concerned Panchayat authorities about
administering the whole process of the functioning of the software, then, the feedback from
these Panchayats will be very helpful and correct as they have direct access to the
children in their respective villages. In this way, not only are time and resources saved, but
there will be an efficient division of labour.
Internet connectivity:
The success of the software is very much dependent on the availability of internet. It is
therefore advised to improve connectivity at both the block and the district level by using a
more reliable network, in order to extend the connection to the block level. Then, the
software will be able to function as designed, with data input occurring at the block level,
and the backlog at the district level SSA office will be relieved.
Micro-finance:
With the potential of a family to receive a substantially sized loan, there is concern about
the capacity of the family to use the sum of money in a sustainable way. Therefore it is
advised, that the district level government collaborate with a local NGO involved in micro-

41
finance in order to provide adequate counselling and support to recipients of such financial
loans. For example, if a family is approved for a loan, they would be required to attend
regular classes on entrepreneurship, budgeting and management in order to access the
loan.
Aging out of system:
The software and the educational policies of India in general only seem to be concerned
with children who are between the ages of six and fourteen. In order to achieve the
promise of a entirely literate, educated population, the GOI should extend the reenrolment
efforts to children above 14 years of age.
Inclusion of other family members:
As it is now, the software only centres around a single child. When we acknowledge the
fact that if one child in a family has been out of school, then other children in the family
face the same risk, it is recommended that the software be organized by family instead of
individual child. Therefore, all children in one family will be of concern to the software and
easily monitored.
Marketing of software:
In order to increase the overall knowledge of community members about the existence of
the software and its potential benefits, it is recommended that posters and radio
advertisements be used as a means of communication. Posters should be very pictorial
and printed in many languages as to reach out to the illiterate and to all communities.
Improvements to education:
As many of our findings pertain to the external education system as a whole, it is finally
recommended that SSA truly work towards their goal of compulsory education by
considering all factors related to education. This includes, but is not limited to, making
education compulsory for all children below age 18, providing free and regular access to
school, and to make classrooms a safe learning environment for all children.

42
Conclusion
It seems that there cannot be a straight forward answer to the question of whether or not
the OOSC software is a socially inclusive tool for keeping children in school. It cannot be
denied that the software is socially inclusive in the sense that the software does not
appear to discriminate against children or their families on the basis of caste, gender,
mother language, or ability. Indeed, the overall objective of the software is to provide
government assistance in an equal manner.
Unfortunately however, we cannot say that the way in which the software has been
implemented thus far is achieving social inclusion. Although the software does seem to be
reaching the most excluded groups, families are for the most part not being given voice
nor choice. Ultimately, there was much evidence that the software was not yet functioning
properly as a whole. We feel that this has to be addressed before the software can be
qualified as socially inclusive. In a nutshell, we can say that the software aims at social
inclusion, with committed individuals trying to make it work, but how far the software will be
able to achieve its goal in a socially inclusive way, only time will tell.

43
References
Ahuja, S. (2008, May 28). Falling education spending in states. The Economic Times.
(Electronic Version) Retrieved July 2, 2008 from
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/Guest_Writer/Falling_education_spending_in_s
tates/articleshow/3077785.cms
Charmabagwala, R. (2008). Regional returns to education, child labour and schooling in
India. Journal of Development Studies, 44 (2), 233 – 257.
Das, S. & Mukherjee, D. (2007). Role of women in schooling and child labour decision:
The case of urban boys in India. Social Indicators Research 82, 463 – 486.
Government of India. (2001). Census 2001.
Mathews, R., Reis, C., & Iacopino, V. (2003). Child labour: A matter of health and human
rights. Journal of Ambulatory Care Management, 26 (2), 181-182.
Mattioli, M.C. & Sapovadia, V.K. (2004). Laws of labour: Core labour standards and global
trade. Harvard International Review, 60 – 64.
Mehortra, S. (2006). Reforming elementary education in India: A menu of options.
International Journal of Educational Development 26, 261-277.
OOSC Tracking and Monitoring System (8 July, 2008).
SSA (2008). Abstract of out of school children. Intervention for Out of School Children.
SSA (2008). Tamil Nadu state report. Seventh Joint Review Mission
SSA (n.d.1) General Education Statistics of Tamil Nadu. Retrieved July 30, 2008 from
http://www.ssa.tn.nic.in/Docu/GenEduStat.pdf

44
SSA (n.d.2) National Mission: SSA Mission Statement. Retrieved July 17, 2008 from
http://ssa.nic.in/ssamissionstat.asp
Singal, N. (2008) Working towards inclusion; Reflections from the classroom. Teaching
and Teacher Education. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2008.01.008
Sundararaman, V. (2005). Human development in Tamil Nadu: A look at the education
centre. [Electronic Version]. Retrieved on July 2, 2008 from
www.tn.gov.in/spc/workshop/9--Look%20Education-Venkatesh.PPT.
UNICEF (n.d.) Overview. [Electronic Version]. Retrieved June 3, 2008 from
http://www.unicef.org/india/overview_4075.htm
UNICEF (2004). Mapping India’s Children: UNICEF in Action
UNICEF (2008). Social Inclusion Framework (draft).

45
Appendix 1: Extracts of the questionnaires submitted to the
stakeholders
Questions for the children
Are you in school?
If not, why and when will you return?
If yes, since when?
Do you like school? Why or why not?
How many days a week do you usually attend?
On days you do not attend, what is usually the reason?
Questions for the parents
Are you receiving any governmental/institutional help?
Have you asked for government help?
If no, why have you not asked for help?
If yes, what have you asked for?
Did you receive all the help that you expected?
Are you aware of a group or person called VVF?
Has this person visited your home in the last year?
If yes, when was the last time they visited you?
Did they clearly explain what their purpose was?
How did you feel about the visit?
What made you send your child back to school?
Are you happy about your child being in school?
Is there anything else you want us to know about these topics?
Questions for the teachers
Are you aware of a group called VVF?
When you hear of an out of school child, what actions are taken by you to ensure a child
goes back to school?
Is there anything else about your work that you would like to tell us?

46
Questions for the Volunteers/ Facilitators
What was your motivation to work as a village volunteer?
For how long have you been serving in this position?
What are your other responsibilities in this position besides the monitoring for the OOSC?
What kind of training did you receive as a village volunteer?
How many other volunteers are in your village?
How often do you communicate with them about the project?
How do you distribute the work amongst yourselves?
How do you carry out the monitoring?
Frequency
Date of last visit
Who accompanies you
How long does the survey take to complete
What villages do you visit
How many households do you visit?
What do you when no one is home on the day you visit?
When you identify an out of school child, what steps do you take?
How do you specifically pose the question of the parents needing help?
When a family denies help, what kind of counseling/guidance do you give to the families?
What do you see are the major challenges of the system?
What are the strengths of the system?
How do people react to you when you come to monitor?
What changes in the enrollment, if any, have you noticed in the past year?
Is there anything else you’d like us to know about OOSC?
Questions for the District Collector
Do you feel that the software is socially inclusive?
What steps have been taken to make it easier for families to access their aid?
What are the strengths and weakness of the system?
Questions for Mr Ganesh Moorthi (UNICEF Consultant)
What do you see are the major challenges of the system?
What are the strengths of the system?

47
Appendix 2: List of persons interviewed and sites visited in
Krishnagiri and Thally Blocks
Stakeholders
Mr. Anbu, Assistant District Program Coordinator (ADPC) for SSA
Dr. Santosh Babu, District Collector of Krishnagiri.
Mr. Karthikeyan, SSA District Coordinator for OOSC
Mr. Ganesh Moorthi, UNICEF consultant for Krishnagiri
Mr. Moorthy, District Program Coordinator (DPC) for SSA
Mr. S. Nagarajan, Sub-collector of Hosur, Krishnagiri District
Mr Perumal, VVF Facilitator
Miss Sandhya, VVF Facilitator
Mr. Veeraputhiram of Orbiter (the Chennai based IT software company that developed the
software)
Mr. Samson Wesley, co-Director of SWORD12
4 teachers
2 headmasters
2 Block Resource Teachers (BRT)
Children
Kannappan from Krishnagiri
Vijayan from Krishnagiri
Vadivelu from Krishnagiri
Mohanraj from Krishnagiri
Santhana Mary from Sesurajapuram
Jobin George from Sesurajapuram
Madubala from Sesurajapuram
Shilpa from Krishnagiri
Mari from Krishnagiri
Thimmi from Sesurajapuram
Suseela from Jodukarai
Murugan from Podur
Kavitha from Jodukarai
12
SWORD is an NGO involved in running KGBV schools in Krishnagiri

48
Appendix 3: Table of schools13
13
Chief Educational Officer. (2007). Schools for general education, students and teachers – Year 2006-2007.

49
Appendix 4: Sample of OOSC registration form (as worded in
2007)

51
Appendix 5: Child details print out
~
6/6/2008

53
Appendix 6: Child monitoring details

UNICEF Report Anindya Dutta Gupta

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to UNICEF Report Anindya Dutta Gupta

Similar to UNICEF Report Anindya Dutta Gupta (20)

UNICEF Report Anindya Dutta Gupta