Evaluation Study MSE Cluster Development - Ministry of Micro ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chapter No: 6 – Hard Interventions in Sampled Clusters6.7 Implementation Profile of Hard Interventions in the SampledClustersWe have various important indicators related to hard interventions in Table 6.2. Theseindicators provide us with a convenient tabulation of the profile of the implementation ofhard interventions in the concerned clusters. First of all it is seen that only in 3 of the 11cases have the SPVs been formed and registered after the revised guidelines for theMSE-CDP were issued by the MSME. In the 9 other clusters the SPVs were formed muchearlier so it is clear that the concept of hard interventions and the SPV predates theMSE-CDP. In some cases it predates even the earlier version of the programme that wascalled the SICDP. This indicates that programme is still in its infancy and in the processof being structured. It is also therefore obvious that the development of clusters under ithave only started to bear an impact.It is also seen that a larger number of SPVs have preferred to be organized as registeredsocieties while only four are registered as Private Limited Companies. All the four SPVsadopting the company format are located in Kerala.It needs to be mentioned that since a lot of information particularly that related to thedate of DPR submission, the date of DPR approval and the date of receipt of funds werenot made available, we were unable to judge the pace of implementation in many of thecases. However wherever this information was provided we were on a case-by-casebasis, able to comment on the pace of implementation.It may also be stressed that the information provided are partial and incomplete in manycases and so we have not attempted any interpretation. We have however attempted toassess the pace of implementation in the case of 9 clusters for which some informationhas been provided and needs to be confirmed. So as a word of caution it may be statedthat the interpretation may not be entirely correct.There are five distinct processes involved during the different stages of implementationand these processes may take varying periods of time. The five distinct processes arethe formulation of DPR, the approval of DPR, the release of funds, the period ofconstruction, and the period of Functioning of the CFC.As seen in Table 6.2 the time taken for the formulation of the DPR has varied in therange of 3 to 24 month in the different cases. While in the case of 4 SPVs namely thoseof the Bell Metal Hazo, Foundry, Ahmadabad, Surgical Instruments, Baruipur, and theWet Grinder, Coimbatore the process of DPR formulation has been completed within 6months. In the case of the SPV of the Rice Milling Cluster Kalady the Formulation of DPRhas taken 9 months, while in the case of the Plywood and Leather Clusters SPVs inPerimbavorr and Shantiniketan it has taken up about 22 to 24 months. While in mostcases the time taken has been reasonable in two cases it has taken very long.The time taken for the approval has in general taken up to 6 months in the case of 4 ofthe 6 SPVs providing data while in the case of surgical Instruments SPV it has beendelayed over a period of 21 months. Overall the time taken by the authorities to110
Chapter No: 6 – Hard Interventions in Sampled Clustersapprove the DPR has been quite reasonable but their seems to be scope for improvingand speeding up this process and completing it within a period of 3 month at the most.Table No.-6.2: PROFILE OF IMPLEMENTATION OF HARD INTERVENTIONSSl Cluster Date of SPVRegistrationType ofSPV1. Rice Milling ClusterKalady2. Rubber ClusterChenganacherry3. Plywood ClusterPerambavoor4. Leather GoodsClusterShantiniketan5. Plastic ClusterAluva6. White WareCluster Khurza7. Brass UtensilCluster Pareo8. Bell Metal ClusterHazo9. Foundry ClusterAhmadabad10. SurgicalInstrumentsCluster Baruipur11. Wet Grinder ClusterCoimbatoreNote- NA- Information not made available as yet.∗ to be confirmedDPRSubmissionDateDPRApprovalDateDate ofReceipt offunds fromMSMEStage of CFC27.11.2004 Pvt. Ltd.Company09.08.2005 07.02.2007 21.03.2007 UnderConstruction2001 Pvt. Ltd. 2003 2003 NA CFC FunctionalCompany14.10.2003 Pvt. Ltd. 04.08.2005 07.02.2007∗ 15.03.2007 UnderCompanyConstructionJan 2006 Society Feb .2008 Yet to be NADPRApprovedsubmitted2.12.2006 Pvt. Ltd.CompanyNA 22.12.2006 20.03.2007 UnderConstruction27.07.2007 Society Not Yet to be NA No progressSubmitted Approved23.12.2004 Society NA NA NA UnderConstruction17.06.2007 Society 02.11.2007 15.02.2008 15.03.2008∗ UnderConstruction02.01.2006 Society 15.05.2006 26.03.2007 26.04.2007∗ CFC FunctionalNov 2005 Society 02.02.2006 Nov 2007 NA UnderConstruction19.08.2004∗ Society 28.01.2005 28.02.2005 15.03.2008 UnderConstructionThe third important process is the release of project funds (the first installment, thesubsequent releases depending on the utilization of funds and the submission ofutilization certificates). It is seen in Table 6.2 that in nearly all the cases for which datawas provided, the release of funds look a period of 1 to 3 months. Only in one case thatof the Wet Grinder SPV in Coimbatore was the fund reported to be released after a lapseof 37 months. This is an exceptional delay and needs to be probed further to unravel thereasons behind such a delay.The period of construction of the CFC has also varied considerably and since it has notbeen completed and is in progress, it is difficult to judge the time taken. Moreover sinceprojects vary considerably in nature and complexity it is possible to expect suchvariation. However it is expected that the SPVs would make all efforts to completeconstruction at the earliest so that themselves and the cluster actors can obtain theactual benefits of the project. The pace of construction should be also speeded up inorder to avoid the escalation in cost that would have to be met by the SPV.6.8 The Functioning and Impact of the CFCAs seen earlier there are only two clusters in the entire sample of 22 clusters covered bythis study where the CFC has been commissioned and has started functioning. The first111
Page 1 and 2:
EVALUATION STUDY OF MICRO & SMALLEN
Page 3 and 4:
2.12 PROGRESS AND PRESENT STATUS OF
Page 5:
INDEX OF TABLESTable No.- 1.1: CLUS
Page 9:
COMMONLY USED ABBREVIATIONSBDSBusin
Page 13 and 14:
31 million persons spread over 12.8
Page 15 and 16:
Nevertheless, it is expected that t
Page 17 and 18:
4. Role of the schemes in bringing
Page 19 and 20:
Table No. - 1.1 (contd.)East/ North
Page 21 and 22:
ANNEXURE - 1.1 Guidelines for Clust
Page 23 and 24:
• Approval of budget and leveragi
Page 25 and 26:
14. Contribution of the Ministry of
Page 27 and 28:
Chapter No:2 - The General Profile
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60: Chapter No:2 - The General Profile
Page 61 and 62: Chapter No:2 - The General Profile
Page 63 and 64: Chapter No: 3 - The Cluster Develop
Page 77 and 78: Chapter No: 4 - Soft Interventions
Page 91 and 92: Chapter No: 5- The Special Purpose
Page 105 and 106: Chapter No: 6 - Hard Interventions
Page 109: Chapter No: 6 - Hard Interventions
Page 115 and 116: Chapter No: 7 - Conclusions nd Reco
show all

Evaluation Study MSE Cluster Development - Ministry of Micro ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?