Policy Update
Tanmyi Anthwal
Background
India’s developmental journey over the past decade has brought into sharp focus the need for better coordination between central and state schemes. While numerous programs are launched at national and state levels, their actual impact ultimately depends on district administration and local governance. It was in recognition of this reality that the Ministry of Rural Development constituted the District Development Coordination and Monitoring Committee (DISHA) in June 2016 to ensure better coordination and effective implementation of central government schemes at the district level. They replaced the earlier District Vigilance and Monitoring Committee. The core purpose of DISHA is to bridge the institutional and administrative gaps that often emerge as flagship schemes travel from conception to implementation.
DISHA was conceived to bring together elected representatives and district administration in a collaborative oversight framework. The Member of Parliament for the Lok Sabha constituency in a district serves as chairperson, with other members including Rajya Sabha MPs and Members of the Legislative Assembly from that district. The District Collector acts as the convenor. The geographical reach of DISHA spans all sectors in which citizens directly experience government programs: agriculture, health, education, welfare, rural development, and infrastructure.
The ambition behind DISHA is to create a unified platform at the district level. In theory, it enables parliamentarians to monitor schemes, coordinate between departments, identify implementation bottlenecks, and ensure that central and state programs operate in a coordinated manner, rather than in silos. Because the district is where policy translates into tangible lives, DISHA holds the promise of aligning top‑down aspirations with bottom‑up realities.
All the details regarding DISHA can be found on the website https://disha.gov.in/home.
Functioning
At its core, DISHA’s operational mode relies on a consistent and structured review process held quarterly. During these sessions:
- Committee members assess financial absorption, beneficiary coverage, and the quality of service delivery across various schemes.
- They identify roadblocks, such as delays in fund release, interdepartmental conflicts, or gaps in last‑mile delivery.
- Elected representatives raise questions and urge course corrections, while district administration responds with explanations or action plans.
- A data-driven platform, i.e., the Dashboard, designed to help elected representatives plan, monitor, and evaluate key parameters across schemes under DISHA for more effective governance.
Performance
In 2023‑24, DISHA recorded 934 district‑level meetings across states and Union Territories, marking a continued institutional footprint for the mechanism. The data reveals significant variations in commitment and execution at the subnational level. For example, Uttar Pradesh conducted 124 meetings, Madhya Pradesh 73, Gujarat 71, Kerala 33, Haryana 49, while some regions, such as West Bengal, registered zero meetings during the period. (sansad.in)
Notably, Jammu & Kashmir remains a laggard. In 2023‑24, the region held just 8 meetings, reflecting persistent underperformance relative to the quarterly requirement. Earlier, in 2022‑23, only 20 meetings were held against an expected 80, equating to a compliance rate of 25 percent. (lakecitytimes.com)
At the same time, the DISHA Dashboard has expanded substantially. As of the recent report, it now tracks 94 schemes across 34 ministries and departments, with provisions for uploading notices, agendas, proceedings, and action‑taken reports via a meeting reporting portal.
These developments point to a mixed but cautiously optimistic trajectory:
- The number of district meetings in 2023‑24 indicates that DISHA remains active and institutionally embedded in many regions.
- The growth in scheme coverage on the dashboard signals a stronger embrace of a data‑driven oversight model.
- However, the wide inter‑state disparity in compliance and the persistence of states registering no meetings underscore serious gaps in effective implementation.
- Regions such as J&K with chronically low meeting counts highlight structural or political constraints that hinder DISHA’s intended role.
In summary, DISHA’s performance in 2023‑24 shows signs of strengthening, particularly in digital capacity and district coverage. Yet, its impact remains uneven. Consistent enforcement, high state commitment, and closing the large performance gaps across districts are essential if DISHA is to fulfill its promise as a robust instrument for coordinated district governance.
Impact
Where DISHA is leveraged well, it has made a difference in local governance and citizen outcomes.
- DISHA grants MPs and MLAs a legitimate institutional role in local development beyond their electoral surface duties. Through committee mechanisms, they can raise constituency issues, monitor stalled works, or question implementation gaps.
- In several cases, DISHA meetings have helped untangle bureaucratic gridlock among departments. Projects stuck due to disagreements over responsibilities have regained momentum after joint scrutiny.
- Some DISHA initiatives have flagged exclusion error cases where intended beneficiaries were left out and pushed corrections. In a few districts, the committee catalyzed faster clearance of grievances or helped ensure inclusion of marginalized households.
However, the impact is not uniform, and many limits persist:
- DISHA has not significantly altered the balance of power. District Collectors and administrative agencies still hold the major decision‑making authority. DISHA can prompt, but not compel, action.
- Most citizens remain unaware of DISHA’s existence or how to engage with the committee. As a result, the bottom‑up accountability pressure is minimal.
- Evidence linking DISHA functioning to measurable improvements in welfare indicators such as health metrics, school outcomes, or poverty reduction is scarce. In many cases, the association is suggestive rather than causal.
Emerging Issues
- DISHA’s recommendations remain advisory, with no mechanism to ensure that departments act on committee directives.
- Many districts fail to hold the required quarterly meetings due to scheduling conflicts, political noncooperation, and administrative indifference.
- Committee members often receive only summary data. There is limited capacity to dig deeper, assess bottlenecks, or push for corrective action.
- Civil society, beneficiary groups, and frontline implementers are frequently excluded, weakening bottom-up accountability and ground-level feedback.
- While meeting proceedings may be recorded, there is poor public disclosure of recommendations, administrative responses, and the status of follow-up actions.
Way Forward & Conclusion
To make DISHA a stronger pillar of governance and ensure that it truly influences development outcomes, the following steps are vital:
First, legislative or regulatory backing should strengthen the authority of DISHA. Recommendations should carry timelines and escalation paths to higher levels when ignored. Doing so would shift DISHA from a review forum to a genuine accountability mechanism.
Second, build institutional and technical support at the district level. Every DISHA committee should be backed by a monitoring and evaluation cell—staffed with analysts, data experts, and domain specialists to prepare deeper briefings, scenario simulations, and evidence‑based interventions. Hybrid meeting formats (in-person + virtual) and delegation of work to subcommittees can resolve scheduling difficulties and promote continuity.
Third, embed transparency and participation in the design. Publicly publish agendas, minutes, recommendations, and action responses in accessible formats. Offer space to civil society, local beneficiaries, and social audit teams to present ground realities. Use uniform performance indicators to compare districts and spotlight laggards.
If these reforms are adopted, DISHA has the potential to evolve from a perfunctory oversight body into the heart of district‑level coordination. In that role, it can close the gap between promise and practice, ensuring that national and state schemes do not just exist on paper, but transform lives on the ground.
References
About the Contributor: Tanmyi Anthwal is a Research Intern at IMPRI
Acknowledgement: The author extends her sincere gratitude to the IMPRI team and Ms.
Asthana Jadeja for her invaluable guidance throughout the process.
Disclaimer: All views expressed in the article belong solely to the author and not
necessarily to the organisation.
Read more at:
How H1B Fee Hike Impact American Students More Than Indian IT
Why Easy Lending Won’t Spark an Investment Revival
