1. Performance Improvement through Benchmarking of Water Resources Projects in Maharashtra, India-A Case Study Dr. Sanjay Belsare Executive Engineer and Associate Professor Er.Ganesh Vyawahare, Executive Engineer, MWRDC Aurangabad 1

2. What Is Benchmarking ? 2 Benchmarking can be defined as a systematic process for securing continual improvement through comparison with relevant and achievable internal or external norms and standards.

3. Advantages of Benchmarking 3 1. Management a.Evaluation of performance b.Management of resources (water, manpower, finances) c.Policy decisions 2. Service provision a.Efficiency, transparency and accountability b.Commitment to excellence 3. Users a.Develop confidence about service b.Enhance Agricultural productivity c.Effective PIM

4. Benchmarking Involves 4 Internal assessment of project. Comparison with the best performing project. Determining performance gap between current practice and best practice. Selecting best practices and implementing them.

5. Stages of Benchmarking Process 5 6 Monitoring and Evaluation 1 Identification And Planning 2 Data Collection 3 Analysis 5 Action 4 Integration Benchmarking Process

6. Characteristics 6 Irrigation and drainage service providers operate in a natural monopoly environment. Irrigation and drainage entails complex and interacting physical, social, economic, political, technical and environmental processes. Performance of irrigation and drainage schemes is site specific.

7. Drivers for Benchmarking 7 Increasing water scarcity & competition between various sectors of water use. Need to improve the productivity of water in the agriculture sector (Rs/m 3 ) Need to achieve financial sustainability of irrigation schemes & phase out State subsidy. Need to promote participatory management of schemes by the users. Need to establish a basis of accountability of the service providers.

8. State Water Policy (2003) 8 The Maharashtra State Water Policy advocates use of benchmarking as a management tool for improving the efficiency, transparency and accountability of the personnel responsible for providing services & seeking participation of users.

9. Objectives 9 Evaluation and improvement in performance of Service Providers (Irrigation Circles) Irrigation projects Water Users’ Associations

10. Number of Projects Covered 10 YearMajorMediumMinorTotalIndicators 2000-016--615 2001-023026288410 2002-03491426125411 2003-04491446926212 2004-05491446926212 2008-09481456926212 2009-10501661052128812

11. Who is Managing 11 Government of Maharashtra Water Resources Department at various levels of organisation GOM has institutionalised the benchmarking process A State level core group is formed.

12. Stakeholder’s Participation 12 Some data required for various performance indicators is collected from the stakeholders. Benchmarking of WUAs is also being carried out.

13. Indicators 13 The indicators are for a) System Performance b) Financial Indicators c) Agricultural Productivity d) Environmental Aspects e) Social Aspects

14. Indicators Selected 14 Sr. No IndicatorObjective System Performance 1Annual Irrigation Water Supply per unit Irrigated Area To improve Water Use Efficiency 1aAnnual Area Irrigated per unit of Water Supplied -do- 2Potential Created and UtilisedTo improve utilisation of potential developed Agricultural Productivity 3Output per unit Irrigated AreaTo Improve irrigated agricultural production 4Output per unit Irrigation water supply To improve productivity of water.

15. Contd.. 15 Financial Indicators 5 Cost Recovery RatioTo make the system self sustainable. 6 O & M Cost per unit AreaTo minimise the O & M cost. 7 O & M Cost per unit water supplied To minimise cost of supply of water. 8 Revenue per unit of Water Supplied To Maximise the revenue. Every drop of water be used efficiently & economically. 9 Assessment Recovery Ratio a) Irrigation b) Non irrigation To check whether water charges for different uses are recovered fully or not.

16. Contd.. 16 Environmental Aspects 10Land Damage IndexTo monitor land damage due to excess use of water & to adopt measures for reclamation of land. Social Aspects 11Equity PerformanceTo ensure equity in distribution of water to head, middle & tail reach farmers.

17. Presentation of Results 17 ParticularsYear 2002 Year 2003 Year 2004 Year 2008 Year 2010 No.of Projects 6842542621288 ICA covered 2,88,00012,98,96024,71,37024,76,46126,98,050 Reporting Format Individual projects Individual projects grouped by type & region Grouped by type @ circle level Grouped by type & plan group of basin

18. Annual Irrigation Water Supply Per Unit Irrigated Area 18

19. Potential Created and Utilised 19

20. Output Per Unit Irrigated Area 20

21. Cost Recovery Ratio 21

22. Equity Performance 22

23. Assessment Recovery Ratio 23

24. 24

25. 9/23/2015 Performance Comparison 25 For individual indicators Comparison with -Self performance -Other projects in same sub-basin -Average performance of plan group -State Target

26. Targets IndicatorTypeTarget value I) Annual Irrigation Water Supply per unit Irrigated Area a) Annual Area Irrigated per unit of Water Supplied Major & Medium Minor 7692 6667 II) Potential Created and UtilisedAll1 III ) Output per unit Irrigated Area (@ price level 1998-99 ) Major Medium Minor 23000 to 32000 23000 to 40000 16000 to 36000 IV) Output per unit Irrigation water supply (@ price level 1998-99 ) Major Medium Minor 2.69 to 4.16 2.99 to 5.4 2.4 to 5.4 26

27. v) Cost Recovery RatioAll1 vi) O & M Cost per unit AreaMajor Medium Minor 1250 1200 1150 vii) O & M Cost per unit water supplied Major & Medium Minor 0.16 0.17 viii) Revenue per unit of Water Supplied Major & Medium Minor 0.18 0.19 27

28. IndicatorTypeTarget value ix) Assessment Recovery Ratio a) Irrigation b) Non irrigation MajorNo target X) Land Damage IndexAll1 XI) Equity PerformanceAll1 28

29. 29 Coupling of benchmarking with water auditing Water Audit Water accounting & audit for all projects is now compulsory. Profarmas are prescribed for maintaining water account Annual Water Account to be submitted to MWRDC Three Water Auditing Cells in MWRDC Manual for water auditing Annual inspection of divisions for verification

30. 30 Calendar of Activities ActivityScheduled Date Submission of Water Accounts14 th August Communication of Remarks31 st October Compliance of remarks30 th November Consolidation of data and Draft Report 15 th January Approval to Report20 th February Publication22 nd March

31. How Are the Results Shared ? 31 Annual benchmarking report and water audit reports are published Report is available on websites (www.mahawrd.org & www.mwrdc.org)www.mahawrd.orgwww.mwrdc.org Circle wise results are discussed in meetings among water providers. State, Regional seminars / workshops are conducted. Reports are circulated to NGOs working in the field of public awareness about water use.

32. Lessons Learned So Far 32 Useful management tool Improvement of Water Use Efficiency Increase in revenue. Improvement in overall performance Step towards self sustainability.

33. Water Use Efficiency 33

34. O & M Cost and Recovery 34

35. Way Forward 35 Extending it further to Division and section level Comparison with National and International schemes Increasing participation of users in benchmarking process Real time collection of data through ICIS

36. 36 THANKs web site:- www.mahawrd.org & www.mwrdc.orgwww.mahawrd.orgwww.mwrdc.org