By a Staff Reporter

Afternoon Despatch & Courier, March 29, 2000.

The civic strike has ended and the BMC sweepers have gone back to their brooms --- until the next strike call is blared out.

The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation which until recently was ranked as one of the finest (by Indian standards) and the richest, now finds itself sinking.  Frequent labour disputes (most of them generated by the union leader Sharad Rao) and fiscal mismanagement, besides corruption, have reduced the BMC to an unenvisable position.

Perhaps, one factor which the BMC has by and large ignored and stands to gain, is the citizen.  If the Corporation and well-meaning citizens get together, a lot more can be achieved in making Mumbai a more pleasant place to be enough pressure groups operating on this front which can compel action and can function as a monitoring boday.  One such body in the making is PRAJA, founded by Nitai Mehta and his group.  PRAJA was formed as a non-partisan, voluntary organisation with a vision to enhance acccountability and transparency in public governance through people’s participation.  Founded in 1998, the organisation set about disseminating information on public services.  The booklet came in the form of the Citizen’s Charter, which not only informed the public about public services offered by the BMC, but also sought to set standards and elicit public opinions/ complaints on services.  After establishing the standards for various services, PRAJA sought to measure the degree of variation between the benchmark and actual performance.  PRAJA’s Project Performance was thus conceived.

The Project Performance is a direct follow-up to the Citizen’s Charter,as it seeks to use opinion polls/surveys to provide the BMC with evaluation and feedback on its performance as per standards committed in the Citizen’s Charter.  Market research group ORG-MARG was commissioned for Project Performance and 23 wards across the city were surveyed.  The survey was conducted between December 1999 and January 2000.  At least 150 people above the age of 16 in each ward were interviewed keeping the male and female respondents in equal number.  In all,  3,500 citizens across the city were interviewed for Project Performance.

The survey revealed that almost all citizens seemed to be aware that the BMC is responsible for the basic facilities such as collection and disposal of garbage, maintenance of roads and footpaths, pro-vision of potable drinking water, checking encroachments on roads and the registration of births and deaths.  However, their level of awareness of the other services offered by the BMC was low, namely : medical facilities, food, sanitation, family planning and welfare, bus services, electricity supply and education facilities, These facilities, as per general public opinion, were regarded as the the state government’s responsibility.  However, citizens from the lower socio-economic groups (SECs) seemed to be more aware of the BMC’s responsibilities in matters like provision of potable drinking water, family planning and welfare services, medical facilities through hospitals and adequate education facilities.

Project Performance chose 10 of the most important civic departments for the survey besides doing a poll on the image of the BMC. The 10 functions are:

1. Solid waste/garbage management,
2. Waterworks,
3. Road Maintenance,
4. Traffic,
5. Environment,
6. Sewerage Operations,
7. License,
8. Public Health,
9. BEST Electricity and Transport,
10. Education.

But first, the image of the BMC.  Take a look at the citizens verdict…..

Image of  the BMC :  Most respondents surveyed agreed that the BMC must be better than the municipalities in other cities.  Over half agreed that the BMC strives to raise public utility standards.  But the BMC does not fare well on interaction with citizens.

Management :
The performance was found to be average Over one third of the respondents rated as “good” services such as collection and transportation of garbage, sweeping of public roads.  On maintenance of public toilets.  The rating was “pool”.  As for the staff of the garbage management department, they should do better on “approachability” and “prompt response”.
 

Table	%   Agree	% Disagree	% Don’t Know
The Municipality in Bombay in much better than that in other cities	69%	14%	8%
The BMC makes Bombay a better place  to live in	60%	29%	4%
The BMC strives to raise the standard of  public utilities	57%	27%	5%
The BMC keeps citizens well informed about  various reforms and public utilities	45%	42%	5%
The BMC invites interactions with the citizens  citizens to improve the services	22%	65%	6%

Various reforms and public utilities
Citizens to improve the services
 

Table 1
Services of the Garbage  Management Department	Good	Poor	Average	Don’t Know
Collection & transportation of garbage	41%	26%	32%	1%
Sweeping of public roads	38%	26%	35%	3%
Disposal of animal carcasses	36%	22%	41%	19%
Sanitary measures to keep the city clean	35%	24%	40%	6%
Disposal of solid wastes	34%	28%	37%	8%

Table 2
Services of the Garbage  Management Department	Good	Poor	Average	Don’t Know
Regularly supply of pure drinking water	70%	10%	19%	1%
Quality of drinking water	69%	9%	21%	1%
Collection of water tax	57%	7%	35%	18%
Maintenance of water works installations like  Waterlines	49%	19%	31%	8%
Distribution of water for private and public use	48%	12%	39%	15%

Table 3
Services of the Garbage  Management Department	Good	Poor	Average	Don’t Know
Beautification of major roads	46%	21%	26%	7%
Widening and improvement of existing roads	42%	25%	26%	6%
Construction of new roads	41%	28%	24%	5%
Resurfacing the roads	33%	34%	26%	4%
Repairs and maintenance of footpaths	32%	37%	24%	6%
Repairs of potholes and bad patches	29%	44%	24%	3%

Waterworks :
This department emerges as the one offering the “best” quality of services and most efficient staff.  The ‘pure’ and ‘regular’ quality of water supplied were highly rated, though the response was low in collection of water tax’ and ‘distribution of water for public and private use’.  The staff too got “good” ratings.
 

Table 5
Services of the Environmental Department	Good	Poor	Average	Don’t Know
Water pollution control from industries	22%	36%	22%	20%
Control on noise pollution	21%	46%	13%	13%
Controlling air pollution	20%	44%	16%	14%
Control on polluting industries	18%	39%	23%	23%
Measurement of emission from air polluting sources	15%	37%	28%	26%

Road Maintenance :
Less than half the respondents opined that the BMC fares poorly on repairs of pothles and bad patches.  Services related to ‘repairs’ and ‘maintenance’ were rated the lowest.  Over a third felt that the staff does not take immediate action and are not approachable and efficient.
TABLE

Traffic :
This department got the second highest rating among all departments.  Over half the respondents felt that the ‘provision of traffic control measures’ and ‘vigilance over illegally parked vehicles’ was ‘good’.  The department however, got low ratings on ‘coordinating digging of roads/ footpaths’ and ‘refilling dug-up trenches’.  As for the staff takes immediate action in emergency situations’ and is very helpful and approachable’.  Almost half the respondents agreed that the department staff if ‘efficient’.
(TABLE 4)
 

Table 6
Services of the Sewerage Operations  Department	Good	Poor	Average	Don’t Know
Maintain sewerage infrastructure	27%	36%	25%	12%
Construction of new drains	23%	41%	24%	13%
Attendance to public drainage problems such as chokes, blockages etc.	23%	43%	22%	8%
Providing new sewerage connections	20%	38%	30%	18%

Environment :
This department fares the worst in all the seven BMC departments which come under the corporators in each ward.  Although one in five respondents claimed to be unaware about most services offered by the Environment department, those who commented opted to rate the services as ‘poor’.  Almost half felt that the BMC has been ineffective in controlling air-noise pollution.  Over a third said that the department failed to exercise control over polluting industries, measuring emission from air polluting sources and water pollution.  Only one in five respondents agreed to the ‘efficiency, immediate action and approachability’ qualities of the staff.
 

Table 7
Services of the Traffic Department	Good	Poor	Average	Don’t Know
Permitting the display of advertisements	26%	19%	22%	33%
Checking unauthorised hawkers and traders	25%	34%	8%	22%
Checking unauthorised construction of stalls on roads, footpaths and drains	25%	34%	8%	22%
Controlling trades & storage of hazardous articles	20%	28%	19%	32%

Swerage Operations :
This department has been rated as the second worst department, after the Environment department.  Almost half the respondents rated their ‘attendance to pubic drainage problems like choke/blockages and construction of new drains’ as ‘poor’.  The staff too got low ratings with about a third disaggreeing that the staff is efficient, takes quick action or is approachable/helpful.
(TABLE 6)

License :
Only a fourth of the respondents believed that the services of the department were “good”.  They do not think that the license department does a god job of checking unauthorised construction or unauthorised hawkers/traders with about a third of the respondents rating the services as ‘poor’.  Interestingly, about a fourth of respondents were unaware of the services offered by the department.  A third rated the staff while the rest remained dividend in opinion.
(TABLE 7)

Public Health :
This department got a wide range of scores ranging from 82 per cent “good” for immunisation’ to 44-50 percent “poor” for control of pests’ and stray cattle’.  Most respondents had a good opinion of the staff.

A survey was also conducted on the performance of the eight Municipal Hospitals in the city.  KEM and Kasturba emerged as the “best” hospitals and Bhagwati and Rajawadi were declared the “worst”.  ‘Insufficient beds’ were a negative attribute in all hospitals.  Around 15 per cent of the respondents had no idea about the ‘the number of beds in the hospital’ and ‘quality of equipment’.  It may be noted that only those who had visited these hospitals were surveyed as respondents.
 

Table 8i
Services of the Public Health Department	Good	Poor	Average	Don’t Know
Immunisation	82%	3%	10%	5%
Registration of births and deaths	57%	7%	31%	15%
Family planning and welfare	49%	10%	36%	18%
Medical relief through hospitals	41%	17%	37%	17%
Control of communicable diseases eg. Cholera, TB etc.	41%	17%	37%	17%
Ambulance and hearse services	36%	20	39%	22%
Food sanitation & control of adulteration	30%	28%	37%	16%
Control stray cattle	25%	44%	26%	10%
Insect/pest control eg. Mosquitoes rats etc.	24%	50%	21%	2%

Best Electricity and Transport :
Most respondents rated the Electricity department as “good”.  Restoration of electric supply on interruption got the highest score with over two thirds of the respondents rating the service as “good”.  Lower scores were recorded in ‘provision of new electrical connections’.  The staf rating was “good” and was seen as ‘efficient’ and ‘approachable’ by almost two thirds of the respondents.

The BEST’s Transport department was largely perceived as ‘punctual and reliable’ with the buses stopping at all stipulated stops.  Over a third of the respondents were unaware of the BEST’s handling of accident and claims cases.  Over half felt that the BEST drivers were rash in their driving.
(TABLES 9i and 9ii)
 

Table 8ii
Hospital	Base	Overall, it is  a good hospital	Medical equipment is of good quality	The quality of medical  facilities available are good	Helpfulnesss towards  patients -of Doctors/ nurses Wardboys
K.E.M.	1051	83%	72%	77%	72%
L.T.M.	536	77%	69%	71%	67%
Nair	510	78%	69%	76%	70%
Rajawadi	293	66%	61%	71%	62%
Cooper	235	78%	69%	59%	57%
Bhabha	223	77%	69%	71%	67%
Bhagwati	133	62%	47%	58%	51%
Kasturba	92	86%	71%	82%	75%

Table 9i
Services of the BEST Electricity Department	Good	Poor	Average	Don’t Know
Restoration of electrical supply on interruption	70%	7%	6%	17%
Resolving of complaints regarding supply	65%	9%	9%	19%
Maintenance of existing electrical connections	63%	9%	11%	7%
Providing new electric connections	59%	7%	17%	17%

Education :
When asked to rate the different services of the education department, over half the respondents said that the Education department was doing a “good job” of providing free education upto Class VII.  A large number of respondents were unaware or not able to answer questions on different aspects of municipal schools.  Only third were of the opinion the the department did a good job of maintaining municipal school buildings, providing teaching aids and basic facilities, assistance to balwadis and offering special education to disabled children.
 

Table 9 (ii)
Services of the BEST Transport Department	Good	Poor	Average	Don’t Know
Buses are punctual and reliable	76%	11%	8%	5%
The buses stop at all stipulated stops	75%	12%	8%	4%
The bus staff i.e. driver & conductor are cordial in their behaviour	66%	15%	14%	7%
The drivers are rash in their driving	56%	27%	12%	6%
The BEST handles accident and claim	39%	14%	42%	36%

In the evaluation of Municipal Schools, though 78 per cent of respondents had children only 18 per cent sent their children to municipal schools.  This 18 per cent was asked to rate a few aspects of the education being offered.  Almost two thirds felt that the quality of teaching in municipal schools was “good”.  And equal proportion thought that the teachers in the in the school were “committed.”  About three-fourths of the respondents who had children in municipal schools were satisfied with the education provided and were of the opinion that a municipal school provided useful education.
 

Table 10 (i)
Services of the Education Department	Good	Poor	Average	Don’t Know
Providing free education upto class VII in municipal schools	26%	19%	22%	33%
Providing extra curriculam activities in municipal schools	25%	34%	8%	22%
Providing assistance to balwadis	25%	34%	8%	22%
Providing classrooms with facilities like fans, lights, teaching aids...	20%	28%	19%	32%
Maintaining municipal schools and buildings	33%	19%	21%	29%
Providing special education to disable children	30%	12%	31%	44%

PRAJA’s Project Performance also asked citizens whether they had contacted the BMC on any issue and to rate the BMC response.  It was found that the most common issues were ‘garbage not being lifted, wrong/excessive billing and irregular water supply’.  One third of those who complained said that they were satisfied with the action taken by the BMC.
(TABLE 11)
 

Table 10 (ii)
Quality of teaching in Municipal Schools	Good	Poor	Average	Don’t Know
	61%	12%	26%	1%
Peception of teachers' commitment	Responsible	Irresponsible	8%	Don't Know
	61%	16%	22%	--
Satisfaction with education provided by	Satisfied	Dissatisfied		Don't Know
municipal schools	73%	16%	10%	1%
Perception of usefulness of a municipal	Useful	Useless	31%	Don't Know
education	77%	10%	12%	13%

Ward wise Department scores, Awareness and Performance of Corporators/elected representatives were evaluated.  When comparisons were made ward-wise, it was found that A, K/W and C were the “worst” with regard to public services.  One of the reasons for this, as analysed by the surveyors, was that citizens in thse areas probably had higher expectations.  Wards, L,G/S and F/S wre rated as the “best”.

In conclusion, what needs to be done to improve the services and performance of the BMC ? Half the citizens interviewed felt htat “imposing strict performance standards” may work.  One in four respondend that a “monitoring body” would be necessary.  One in four favoured “privatisation” of BMC.
 

Table 11
Issue	% Connected	% Satisfied with BMC action
Garbage notified from an authorised collection spot	13%	5%
Excessive / wrong billing by the BEST	13%	5%
Irregular water supply	11%	5%
Drainage chokes and blockages	9%	3%
Contaminated water supply	7%	3%
Public toilets not cleaned regularly	6%	2%
Nuisance of stray animals	4%	1%
Unrepaired potholes & bad patches	3%	1%
Delay in filling trenches	3%	1%
Rash driving by the BEST drives	2%	1%
Inadequate street lights	2%	1%
Noise pollution	2%	0.3%
Missing/ damaged manhole covers	2%	1%
Encoachment of footpaths & road by hawkers	2%	0.3%
Unlicenced shops in your area	2%	0.2%