INDIA Technical Engineering Educational Quality Improvement II

Transcription

INDIA
Technical Engineering Educational Quality
Improvement II (TEQIP-II)
Fourth Joint Review Mission
December 8-19, 2014
Aide Memoire
Page 1
I. INTRODUCTION
1.
The World Bank and Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) team carried
out the fourth Joint Review Mission (JRM) from December 8-19, 2014. The JRM team
(see Annex 1 for list of members) would like to extend its gratitude to Mr. Amarjeet
Sinha, Additional Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Human
Resource Development (MHRD) for his leadership of the TEQIP project and hisguidance
during the JRM. The JRMteam would also like to thank Ms. Tripti Gurha, Director
(MHRD) and officials at National Project Implementation Unit (NPIU) for overall
coordination of the JRM, especially in the preparation of various background materials,
organization of workshops (with Mentors and Performance Auditors, CFIs, SPFUs, IIMs
and IITs), informativepresentations and proactive participation in discussions.
2.
The objectives of the JRM were to review the overall progress of the project with
Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD), National Project Implementation
Unit (NPIU), State Project Implementation Units (SPFUs), and other implementing
partners. The mission reviewed actions taken by the project as proposed in the
Implementation Support Mission held in April 2014. The mission visited three
institutions each in the states of Andhra Pradesh, Haryana, Rajasthan and Telangana.
Half-day meetings were held with IITs and IIMs to evaluate the impact of their work on
pedagogical and management training, respectively, under the project as well as review
the plans for the project extension period. Meetings were held with a group of Mentors
and Performance Auditors to review the progress of their work; on the development of a
common evaluation template for review of Centres of Excellence; with low-performing
CFIs to review progress of project related activities; and with Infova Consultancy
Services Limited to report the progress/ findings from the Faculty/ Staff and Student
Satisfaction survey. The full schedule is inAnnex 2 --.
3.
This is the first Joint Review Mission since the project was formally extended to October
31st, 2016 and revised end-of-project indicator targets were set.
4.
This is a draft Aide-Memoire which needs to be approved by World Bank management.
Project Data
Board Approval
Effectiveness
Closing
date
Original
Credit
Revised
Credit
Amount disbursed
(Dec 12, 2014)
% Disbursed
(Dec 12, 2014)
Age of the Project
03/18/2010
08/6/2010
10/31/2016
SDR 186.4 m
SDR 134.6 m
SDR 52.4 m
US$ 289.5 m
US$ 197 m
US$ 76.6 m
38.9
Current Ratings*
Development
Implementation
Project Management
Procurement
Financial
Counterpart Funding
Monitoring
Evaluation
Last
S
MS
MS
MS
MS
MS
and S
Now
S
MS
MS
MS
MS
MS
S
4.7 years
* Ratings: HS=Highly Satisfactory; S=Satisfactory; MS= Moderately Satisfactory; MU= Moderately
Unsatisfactory; U=Unsatisfactory; HU=Highly Unsatisfactory; NA=Not Applicable; NR=Not Rated.
II. OVERALL FINDINGS
5.
There is no change in the ratings for this project.
6.
The progress against the Project Development Objective (PDO) is rated as Satisfactory.
Almost all indicators are on track (some indicator targetshave been revised for the
Page 2
extension period). In particular, the strengthening of the reform elements of the project
continues to be noticeable and striking. The project is providing many examples of good
practice which other engineering institutions (and indeed other higher education
institutions) institutions would do well to emulate. A number of reforms which have been
discussed for many years (such as a significant increase in the number of autonomous
institutions) have a concrete reality in the TEQIP project.
7.
Implementation Progress is rated as Moderately Satisfactory. Activities at institutional
level are proceeding well, with some very good performers though there is a minority of
institutions which are consistently performing poorly. The system-level activities (IIMs,
IITs, Good Governance) are accelerating and having a greater and greater impact. There
are concerns, however, that fund flow delays continue and spending is being maintained
but is no longer accelerating (and a number of the best performing institutions have spent
all their allocation).
III. INSTITUTIONAL PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
8.
The Mission is pleased to see that MHRD/NPIU has effectively carried out the third
institutional performance assessment of all TEQIP institutes (see Annex 3 for the full
performance assessment). The assessment process continues to have a clear impact on
project implementation, with state visits suggesting that institutions are taking the
indicators seriously and that project implementing agencies find them useful, objective
measures.
9.
In the most recent performance assessment (as of Dec 19, 2014), the majority of first
cycle institutions (143 of 167) are achieving 8-12 of the indicators, and institutions from
the second cycle have also shown marked improvement from the last JRM (with the
majority, 23 of 29, also meeting 8-12 of the indicators).
10.
The following shows institutional performance at three levels:
•
•
•
101 institutions reaching 11-12 indicators (high performers)
59 institutions reaching 8-10 indicators (middle performers)
30 institutions reaching below 7 indicators (low performers)
11.
The MHRD/NPIU has only released additional funds if an institution has met all the latest
set of performance indicators.
12.
There are 19 institutions that have consistently been unable to achieve at least 60% of the
indicators over the course of the past three institutional performance assessments (Dec
2013, April 2014 and Dec 2014). Those institutions are located in seven states (Andhra
Pradesh, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Haryana, Punjab, Rajasthan, and Tripura). In addition, the
state of Punjab has not released funds from MHRD for a long period; though institutions
in the state continue to spend money from their own resources in anticipation of future
releases.
Recommendations
•
MHRD/NPIU should continue the practice of only releasing funds to institutions
which have met all the performance indicators. However, participation in the AICTE-
Page 3
CII survey should be excluded since it is no longer possible for an institution to fulfil
this condition.
•
MHRD should take up the possibility of giving additional funds to high performing
institutions that could use the resources effectively, as previously discussed.
•
MHRD should consider removing those institutions from the projectthat have not
metall eleven of the October 2014 indicators by March 31, 2015. To help institutions
meet those benchmarks, MHRD and NPIU can call on the mentors and performance
auditors for additional support and guidance.
•
It is recommended to give all institutions a further set of performance indicators, to be
met by April 30, 2015. The parameters could include:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
viii.
ix.
Autonomy (obtained or applied to UGC with no objection from university and
state government)
Minutes of meeting of Board of Governors taking place in last 4
monthspublished on the institution’s website
NBA accreditation (55% accredited or applied for)
Statutory audit completed
Revised IDP for 2016 with updated target indicators and timeline for
completion of governance development plan and/or institutional governance
guidelines, approved by governing body and published on institutional website
Commitment of 100% of funds received
Expenditure of at least 50% of total funds received
Procurement plan to cover 100% of planned procurement expenditures
Completion of all data input into the MIS for 2013-14
IV. KEY ACTIVITIES
13.
This JRM investigated in detail six specific issues: Equity, Employability, Centres of
Excellence, Governance, Management and Faculty Development, and Mentoring and
Performance Auditing. The following sections take each issue in turn and examine the
current situation, outline the main issues and concerns, identify good practices that were
found, and make recommendations.
A. Equity
Current Status
14.
The third JRM held in April 2014 noted that TEQIP institutes had, in general, been
conducting remedial education classes,with the vast majority of non-CFI TEQIP institutes
having provisions for weaker and disadvantaged students as well as institute-level Equity
Action Plans. Further, it confirmed that the transition rates for all students, as well as for
students from disadvantaged backgrounds, had improved since the project became
effective. The most recent data on transition ratesreceived from NPIU during this JRM
continues to show a trend of improvement in transition rates.
Page 4
Transition rates of UG students from first year to second year (%)
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
All students
55.38
59.83
65.13
Disadvantaged students
53.13
56.97
59.99
Source: NPIU. Figures for 2013-14 are not available yet as institutes are entering the data.
Key Issues and Concerns
15.
A number of the issues and concerns identified in the previous JRM remain pertinent,
including (i) inadequate staff/teaching resources due to high vacancy rates; (ii) poor
academic background of students in core areas of mathematics and physics (iii) the
reluctance of students to attend remedial classes either because they are held over the
weekend or because they are worried about the stigma associated with being a remedial
student (noted only in the case of a handful of states); and (iv) weak ability to diagnose
student learning levels and weaknesses at the start of the program. On attendance, the
mission was informed that technical classes tend to suffer from low attendance (25-30
percent of those identified attend), whereas those focussing on personality development
and soft skills tend to attract more students.
16.
Three additional areas of concern need mention. First, almost all institutions administer
student aptitude or psychometric tests. But most of these tests are developed and
administered by institutions themselves, despite it being a complex and difficult task to
design and implement these tests which cover a range of academic, personal and culture
issues. Second, even where such tests are used, there is little diagnosis of the specific
problems or challenges faced by categories of students, such as rural or women students.
The follow-up action is a general set of remedial classes for all students. Further, a
student’s specific challenges, such as dyslexia or depression, are rarely addressed. While
teachers attend trainings, these trainings focus on technical areas, and not on addressing
the differential needs of students. Third, the absence of a standardized mechanism to
monitor the progress of students means there is little feedback on the effectiveness of
different strategies employed by institutes. Institutes are monitoring progress as per the
convenience and availability of resources.
17.
The Equity Action Plan guidelines should be updated to include the following: (i) an
expectation that diagnostic tests be administered before the semester starts in order to
identify what kinds of assistance different types of students need; (ii) a standard model for
tracking the progress of students at various stages of his/her academic tenure; and (iii)
faculty development programs should include sessions on helping students with special
needs achieve their learning goals.
Good Practices
18.
A significant effort was made toward sharing best policies and practices on improving
transition rates through four regional conferences (Pantnagar, Coimbatore, Aurangabad
and Bhubaneswar). These workshops discussed the methods used by institutes to identify
weaker students; how student progress is tracked; key constraints faced by weaker
students/those that drop out or do not pass exams; types of interventions conducted;
and lessons learned, future plans and areas for improvement.
Page 5
Recommendations
19.
The recommendations made in the April 2014 JRM remain important. Additionally:
•
Equity Action Plan guidelines should be revised by NPIU with World Bank guidance
by January 31, 2015.
B. Employability
20.
The yearly intake of engineering undergraduate students in India has grown substantial
from 660.000 students in 2006-07 to 1.635.000 in 2013-141. The growth in the intake has
however slowed substantially from a year-on-year rate of 32 per cent in 2009-10 to 4 per
cent in 2013-14.
21.
There are no official data on the number of graduates from engineering institutions (at
Bachelors, Masters and PhD levels). A calculated estimate for undergraduate students is
however available based on AICTE’s student intake data (please see the table below). The
estimated number of graduates with an under-graduate engineering degree entering the
job market in 2012-13 was 727.000. The number of graduates is calculated to increase to
962.000 students in 2014-15, corresponding to an increase of 31 per cent over the two
years. It is very likely that the number of engineering graduates will grow significantly
over the coming 3-5 years as an increasing number of enrolled engineer students will
finalize their studies.
Estimated Enrolment and Graduates Data for Engineering UG Students
Student
Level
Student
Student
Student
Graduates
Enrolment
Enrolment
Graduates
2012-132
2014-15 Est. 2014-15 Est.
2012-13
Undergraduate
2.909.000
727.000
3.848.000
962.000
Engineers
Source: http://www.dreducation.com/2014/06/graduate-data-india-student.html
22.
The trend in the growth in the intake of the post-graduate students has been different than
the UG students as can be seen from the table below. From the academic year 2006-2007
to 2009-2010 there was a growth in the number of post-graduate engineering institutions
of only 9 per cent. However, the intake of post-graduate students has more than doubled
from 2010-11 to 2013-2014. Again, though, it is not known how many places remain
unfilled.
1
It is estimated that the student intake is typically about 20-25 per cent higher than the actual student enrollment
in engineering institutions.
2
The number is the cumulated enrollment for B. Tech which average duration is four years.
Page 6
Growth of the Intake of Engineering Post-Graduate Students in India 2006-07 to
2013-14
Year
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
Engineering Post-graduate
23.000
23.000
23.000
25.000
30.000
33.000
51.000
63.000
Growth percentage
0%
0%
9%
20 %
10 %
55 %
24 %
23.
In 2014, the World Bank and FICCI conducted a follow-up study to the 2009 survey on
the employability of newly graduated engineers (please see Annex 7). The study showed
a dramatic improvement in employer satisfaction levels. In 2009, only 36 per cent of
employers were either very or extremely satisfied with newly graduated engineers. The
picture has changed considerably in 2014 as 80 per cent of the employers were either very
or extremely satisfied with the recent graduated engineers. Relative to 2009, there are far
more engineers available for companies to choose from. Ninety-six per cent of the
companies in the survey expressed little difficulty in hiring engineers.
24.
CII-AICTE Survey: A total of 92 TEQIP II institutions participated in the CII-AICTE
survey conducted in 2014. The survey focuses on industry-academia collaboration in
existence in the institutions. The results are reflect a somewhat disappointing picture, with
TEQIP results as follows:
Total GREEN (above standards): 3 (3 percent of institutions)
Total AMBER (meeting standards): 63 (69 percent)
Total RED (below standards): 26 (28 percent)
25.
At many of the visited engineering institutions, the placement rate for post-graduate
students is less than half of the placement rate for undergraduate students. A major effort
is therefore needed by the engineering institutions to improve the employability of their
post-graduate students.
26.
Only about half of TEQIP institutions participated in the CII-AICTE survey. This is a
very useful benchmarking tool for institutions. More should be persuaded to participate
next year. This would also allow over-time data to be gathered.
27.
It is noted that there are several ways that institutions are using to calculate placement
rates.
Good Practices
28.
Many engineering colleges seek to enhance the employability of students mainly through
the placement cell alone. However, it is good practice for institutions to pursue a broader
Page 7
strategy by continuously carrying out curriculum reforms; improving students’ soft and
English skills; extra-curriculum student experiences; and engaging students in Industry
Institute Interactions (IIIs). The IIIs need to have deeper engagements than guest lectures
and curriculum development to increasingly include internships, R&D collaboration,
entrepreneurship and consultancies that can result into better student experience. Further
initiatives to increase the employability of students that can be taken are to make student
internships mandatory and relate these to mainstream curriculum, give credit for courses
taught by industry, and involve students in R&D projects.
Recommendations
•
•
•
•
It is suggested that NPIU in collaboration with World Bank will organize a workshop
for institutions on good practices in enhancing students’ employability that would
inform institutional Action Plans on Improving Students’ Employability both for UG
and in particular for PG where placement rates are in general much lower.
It is suggested that NPIU in collaboration with the World Bank will carry out a tracer
study for TEQIP II.
NPIU will develop guidelines on how to calculate placement rates.
NPIU should discuss with CII and AICTE the participation of TEQIP institutions in
the 2015 survey and in particular ensure access to the dataset of TEQIP institutions.
C. Centres of Excellence
Current status
29.
Thirty Centres of Excellence (CoEs) among 27 TEQIP institutions have been selected to
carry out collaborative and multi-disciplinary Research and Development (R&D)
activities. Among the 27 selected institutions, seven are NITs, ten are government funded
institutions, seven are government aided institutions, and three are private un-aided
institutions. The selected institutions cover the following 13 research areas: 1) nanotechnology; 2) biotechnology; 3) biomedical engineering; 4) chemical engineering; 5)
environmental engineering; 6) water resources engineering; 7) disaster management; 8)
signal processing; 9) mechanical and material science; 10) process control; 11) data
mining and computer sciences; 12) electronics systems; and 13) energy systems.
30.
The 30 CoEs were peer reviewed in May and June 2014 by IIT professors to get
constructive suggestions from senior peers on how best to carry forward the establishment
of the CoEs which is new concept and activity to many of the TEQIP institutions. Three
out of the 30 CoEs were asked to resubmit a more comprehensive plan to the peer
reviewers for the development of their CoE. The JRM Team had the opportunity to meet
and discuss with some of the leaders of the CoEs. In many cases, the CoEs had energized
the faculty members and students around common R&D projects and also been able to
build partnerships both with national and international researchers as well as with
industry.
31.
The specialised nature of the work taking place in CoEs means that it should not be
expected that mentors (and performance auditors) would be able to support (evaluate) the
work of the CoEs.
Page 8
32.
There are two key challenges that all the CoEs are facing. Firstly, the CoEs are expected
to deliver research results that potentially can lead to new improved products or processes
and commercialization. The process from research results, to piloting and testing the
product or process, and to identify a potential market is challenging and not linear and it
entails close collaboration between the researchers and financial and industrial partners.
This process is new to many of the TEQIP institutions and evidence shows that in most
cases research results will not directly lead to a marketable product or process. Secondly,
it takes at least five years to build a good quality CoE. This implies that the CoEs should
systematically seek other funding resources to sustain their activities.
Good practices
33.
The peer-reviewers identified several good practices in the 30 CoE proposals. Each CoE
should be interdisciplinary, have a competent strong advisory board with leading
researchers and relevant industrial partners. The CoE should be designed to address
societal and technology problems that realistically can be addressed by the CoE and its
national and international partners within the financial and time frame given. The CoEs
should seek to develop new PG courses and programs with the field(s) of the CoE and do
outreach and disseminations activities of its results to a large number of new potential
research and industry partners.
Recommendations
•
•
•
It is suggested to have two additional on-site visits by the already identified peerreviewers undertaken during the remaining period of TEQIP II. The first one could
preferable take place in the fall of 2015 and the second towards to end of TEQIP II
e.g., in June 2016.
It is suggested that a common evaluation template should be developed by the NPIU
in collaboration with the peer-reviewers that would use in their performance
assessment of the CoEs.
The 30 CoEs should seek additional funding sources beyond the end date of TEQIP
II. The peer reviewers should evaluate these plans for sustainability during their visits.
D. Governance
Current Situation
34.
The TEQIP Good Governance initiative was launched December 2012 as effective
governance at all levels is one of the most important keys to the improvement of the
quality of learning, teaching and research outcomes. There are three key outputs
expected: for institutions to undertake a ‘self-review’ of their current governance practice;
from the self-review identify governance development needs; and finally to set out
institutional governance guidelines that would be shared publicly and thereby
demonstrate a clear engagement with governance implementation and development.
35.
One hundred and seventy-six TEQIP institutions out of 190 institutions have completed
governance self-reviews by December 2014 up from 80 in December 2013. The number
of TEQIP institutions that have prepared their initial governance development plans has
Page 9
increased from one in December 2013 to 125 as of December 2014. There is not yet an
account of how many institutions have finalized their governance guidelines, but the
number is significantly fewer than the institutions have completed their Governance
Guidelines Document (GGD).
Number of self-reviews
Number of governance development
plans
Source: NPIU
December
2013
80
1
April 2014
162
15
December
2014
177
141
36.
A number of Good Governance capacity building activities occurred during 2014. A
TEQIP Good Governance web-site has been developed and is available on
http://www.teqipgoodgovernance.in/index.html. The updating of the website will be done by
NPIU as per the feedback from users. It has very rich material on good governance
including the Good Practice Guide for Governing Board (the ‘Green Book’) and the
Handbook for Mentors and Performance Auditors; as well as case studies of institutions
with good governance practices such as the College of Engineering in Pune and BVBCET
in Hubli. Three Good Governance Learning Forums for Head of Institutions and their
Chairs of Governing Bodiestook place in October 2014. Representatives of 90 TEQIP
institutions from 19 States and six SPFUs participated. The format was effective and the
discussions were lively and engaged. It was clear that institutions were still at very varied
stages in developing their governance and they faced substantial challenges in that task.
37.
Based on the Learning Workshops and the institutional visits during the TEQIP JRM, it is
estimated that possible around 20-25 percent of the TEQIP institutions have a good
understanding and are taking advantage of the good governance activities to improve their
governance performance. This is a significant improvement since the last JRM in April
2014.
38.
Efforts to build synergies between the Management Capacity Enhancement Programme
delivered by the seven IIMs and the Good Governance Programme under TEQIP should
continue. This would include the following initiatives: 1) the TEQIP Good Governance
web-site can be used as a common platform; 2) join effort to draft case students that
demonstrate how TEQIP institutions are seeking to improve institutional governance and
management; and 3) coordination between the mentor activities and the IIMs’ hands-on
institutional advisory services to increase the value-added for the institutions.
39.
The Expert Advisory Group Report on the Good Governance Programme highlights a
number of constraints for implementing good governance for especially government
engineering colleges that were illustrated during the October 2014 Learning Forums.
Many regulatory issues such as a lack of genuine academic, administrative and financial
autonomy make it a challenge for some institutions to significantly improve their
governance and management performance. The table below gives an overview over the
status of academic autonomy of TEQIP institutions. Currently, out of 190 institutions,
118 have obtained academic autonomy, while 72 institutions are at various stages of
Page 10
processing their application to become academic autonomous institutions.Progress has
overall been slow in terms of increasing the number of autonomous institutions from
December 2013 to December 2014. Only 6 additional TEQIP institutions have obtained
autonomous status from UGC over the last year.
Participating TEQIP institutions
Autonomous
Yet to apply for Autonomy (2nd cycle of TEQIP
II)
Pending applications for autonomy
• Applied to UGC for Autonomy, UGC
assessment
• Applied to University for Autonomy
but not granted yet
Source: NPIU
December
2013
190
112
14
April
2014
190
115
9
December
2014
190
118
3
78
33
75
47
72
44
31
19
25
40.
The mission met with the Chairman of UGC to discuss the autonomy applications from
TEQIP institutions. It was agreed that NPIU will work with UGC on “fast tracking” the
pending autonomy applications. UGC is also ready to receive suggestions from TEQIP
institutions of 5-6 possible members for the appointment of a UGC representative to their
Board of Governors (BoG). It was furthermore noted, that the State Government can
nominate someone other than the Director of Technical Education for the BoG as it is
very often difficult for the Director to join the BoG meetings of all the state engineering
colleges.
41.
During the Good Governance Learning Workshops, institutions expressed uncertainty
about how best to develop important institutional development functions such as:
strategic planning; institutional systems for monitoring quality; methods for
benchmarking against other comparable institutions; methods of monitoring the
performance of heads of institutions; creating a Register of Interests; and, approaches to
assessing the effectiveness of governing bodies.
42.
The Good Governance Programme has led to an important new set of conversations about
governance. Two issues that came up repeatedly during the JRM: first, conflicts of
interest of members of Governing Bodies, especially in the context of industry members
whose companies provide internships to students but for a fee; and, second, of
government or UGC nominees who do not participate actively in the Board.
Good Practices
43.
For all institutions the need to improve their governance and management practices will
be an on-going agenda. The case studies of the good institutions demonstrate that
institutional development takes time (often 6-8 years if the development needs are high),
and that this can only be achieved effectively if certain conditions are in place such as a
sufficient level of academic, administrative and financial autonomy as mention above.
44.
The case studies of COEPune and BVBCET Hubliused in the Governance Forums show
that good governance is inextricably linked to good leadership and efficient management.
Page 11
Recommendations
•
•
•
The Good Governance activities should be scaled up by using the high quality
learning material that has been developed through an on-line course version of the
material. This would encourage and support self-learning and completion of the Good
Governance Programme.
It is suggested that NPIU will work with UGC on “fast tracking” the pending
autonomy applications at UGC. For the appointment of UGC representatives to the
Board of Governors at TEQIP institutions, it is suggested that the TEQIP institutions
would make suggestions of 5-6 possible members for UGC’s consideration. NPIU
will inform TEQIP institutions about their possibility.
It is suggested that a specific Good Governance Learning Workshop will be organized
for the CFI institutions and other the remaining institutions by NPIU with support
from MHRD and the World Bank.
E. Management and Faculty Development (IITs/ IIMs)
Current Status
45.
There are 7 IIMs offering management and leadership development and 8 IITs offering a
variety of faculty development activities. These institutions have come into the TEQIP
project at various times, but have all now signed agreements with MHRD to participate in
the project. To date 994 people have been trained by IIMs and 1551 people (1466 faculty
and 85 students) by IITs. Participation is accelerating. Both IIMs and IITs are planning to
continue their activities for the period of the project extension.
46.
The IIMs are working well together and have developed a core curriculum which is used
by all the IIMs for the basic courses offered to institutions. Beyond these courses, IIMs
are developing a range of additional support activities for institutions on request. The
IIMs have envisaged separate offerings for heads of institutions, for other faculty and for
administrative officers. The links with the Good Governance Programme have become
strong.
47.
The IITs are offering a more diverse set of activities, centred on specific subject areas,
and driven by the availability of faculty in each IITs and the demand from TEQIP
institutions. The strongest demand is for pedagogical training of faculty for undergraduate
courses.
48.
Both IIMs and IITs have raised concerns about attendance. It has been a struggle to get
enough people to sign up and often those who register cancel at the last minute do not
show up or send a more junior substitute. This has led to quite diverse profiles of the
participants, which has made it harder to design effective programs catering to their
needs. IIMs have found it especially hard to attract heads of institutions and other senior
leaders: we would encourage the IIMs to be more rigorous about not accepting substitutes
for the programs aimed at institutional leaders.
Page 12
49.
Neither the IIMs nor IITs have developed a framework for assessing the progress and
impact of the work they are doing.
50.
The IITs report that it has been harder to attract faculty to think beyond the narrow
constraints of the existing curriculum, perhaps because of the lack of effective exercise of
academic autonomy in TEQIP institutions. Incentives for faculty to be innovative are low.
51.
The IIMs have started an important discussion about the sustainability of their activities.
During the project period, they will develop a number of case studies (each IIM would
commit to developing at least two so that the main institutional types can be covered).
Two IIMs have also made a proposal to the MHRD to establish a leadership centre.
Good Practices
52.
Both the IIMs and the IITs have spent considerable efforts to identify the needs and
interest of their respective institutions.
53.
IIT Kharagpur has asked institutions to pay the cost of the course fee up front, with the
promise that it will be reimbursed when the TEQIP participant completes the program.
They report that this has increased participation.
54.
Several IIMs have provided opportunities for TEQIP institutions to participate in
international visits (to National University of Singapore and to Indiana University). IIMs
have done a good job of ensuring these are meaningful events through intensive pre- and
post-visit sessions in India.
Recommendations
•
IIMs and IITs should develop a proposal for how to evaluate the effect of their
programs. In the case of IIMs, this proposal might be a single methodology for all
IIMs, while the IITs will develop separate indicators given the diversity of their
offerings. This would be done by 15thFebruary 2015.
•
The geographical allocation of TEQIP institutions to particular IIMs and IITs should
be removed, and individuals from any TEQIP institution should be able to participate
in any program offered as suits their interests and availability. Courses would be
placed on the IIMs’ and IITs’ websites, with a link from the NPIU and the Good
Governance websites. The IIMs and IITs should work with the NPIU to develop a
national database of those who have participated in order to more effectively advertise
their offerings. With immediate effect.
•
IITs and IIMs should be able to offer their programs to non-TEQIP institutions (and
charge an appropriate fee), subject to no TEQIP participant being turned away.With
immediate effect.
Page 13
F. Mentoring and Performance Auditing
Current Status
55.
Except for five institutes, every institute has completed at least the first round of
mentoring. 111 institutes have completed the second round, 26 the third round, while only
10 have completed the fourth round. The first round of performance and data audits has
been completed in 183 institutes, while the second round has been completed in 135
institutes. Only four institutes have completed the third round of performance and data
auditing.
56.
The mission is happy to note that the mentoring program is appreciated by institutes in
general. Mentors have been engaging with faculty, staff and students informally, and
providing advice on issues related to autonomy, accreditation, curriculum, industry
linkages, working with the board of governors and employability. With a handful of
exceptions, mentors were reported to interact regularly with the institute assigned to them.
Despite widespread satisfaction with the mentoring program, mission meetings, however,
indicate that the lack of exercise of autonomy and faculty shortages severely constrain
mentors’ ability to guide institutes in a number of areas, such as curriculum and
examinations reform. Mission meetings noted that participation in the mentoring program
was being seen by institutes as a compliance issue, whereas it should be more need-based
and demand driven.
57.
Unlike mentorship, the experience of institutes with regard to performance auditing has
been variable, with some performance audit reports being of high quality, but many not.
In addition, a significant number of institutions have had difficulty scheduling
performance audit visits. In order to ensure that performance audit reports were ofhigh
quality and provided useful information to institutes, a review of performance audit
reports was undertaken, beginning in July 2014. They were reviewed by experts on the
following criteria: completeness; consistency and relevance; details and specificity;
meticulousness; and feedback clarity. Ninety reports have been reviewed, with 32 reports
graded as “A”, 37 reports graded as “B” and 21 report graded as “C”. All reports graded
as “A” do not require revision, while reports graded as “B” require moderate revision, and
those graded a “C” require the performance audit visit be repeated. This lack of
consistency means that the public accountability of the performance audit (through
publication of the performance audit reports) has not been possible.
58.
The process of reviewing performance audit reports, including finding experts to review
these reports and submit reports in a timely manner, has been tedious. As a result, the
evaluation exercise was put on hold. Mission meetings discussed this issue and concluded
that in order to be effective, the performance audit system should: (i) ensure all audits are
undertaken within a narrow band of 1-2 months; (ii) allow for enough time to review the
audit reports; (iii)design follow-up action based on the reports; and, (iv) document
patterns in performance within and across institutes.
59.
It is intended that the performance audit reports be made public. Any issue related to the
disclosure of these reports, including those relating to confidentiality, should be resolved
to facilitate the disclosure.
Page 14
Good Practices
60.
Mentoring has been especially successful where mentors have built personal relations
with their institutes and faculty, and have interacted with institutes more frequently than
expected by the project (i.e., more than twice a year). This flexibility is encouraged in the
Handbook, but it appears to be practiced at present only in a minority of cases.
Recommendations
•
The mission recommends that the practice of mentoring continue in its current form.
It was decided that the current guidelines on the mentoring program continue without
modification.
•
The performance audit system needs to be made more robust. At a minimum, there
should be one performance audit conducted for each institute in 2016 to assess the
performance of institutions at the end of the project. In the interim, a strong cadre of
performance auditors should be built up by NPIU. NPIU should consider whether it is
possible to build up a robust system in sufficient time to carry out two more rounds of
performance audits.
•
Mentors and performance auditors who have not been able to meet their obligations to
TEQIP II should be released from these obligations by NPIU. MHRD should make an
effort to identify more people to serve of mentors and performance auditors by
approaching directors of the IITs to suggest appropriate names.
V. FACULTY/ STAFF AND STUDENT SATISFACTION SURVEY
61.
Infova Consultancy Services Limited was competitively selected in 2013 by MHRD for
the design and administration of the web-based satisfaction survey for Student, Faculty
and Staff members. Two rounds of web-based satisfaction survey for Student, Faculty and
Staff members was successfully administered in TEQIP II institutions in August and
October 2014, respectively. Both surveys received a high response rate. The mission
would like to commend the work of Infova on the overall survey methodology, including
design, administration, and collection of data and processing.
62.
Pilot Survey (August 2014) - The pilot survey was administered with the objective of
testing the overall functioning of survey including, compatibility with browsers,
connectivity issues, survey administration and support mechanisms. Eight TEQIP
institutions participated in this pilot from different regions. The selection of these eight
institutions was done by NPIU/MHRD. The pilot was initially planned to be administered
in the institutions for 2 weeks but was extended for an additional week upon request from
institutions. Adequate support was provided to the participants in the institutions prior to
the start of survey as well as during the administration of the survey in terms of
presentations to institutes and helplines. The total number of participants were 7878
(faculty – 725, Technical Staff – 174, Non-technical Staff – 209, Students UG – 5895,
Students PG – 731 and Students PhD.- 144). All technical observations reported by the
participants, including issues with regard to application speed, browser compatibility,
language setting, re-login for completion of survey etc. were successfully resolved before
Page 15
the full survey was launched. Infova has also prepared a detailed report on the results/
findings from the pilot survey and a brief presentation on survey administration and
results/ findings from the survey was presented to the mission members. Infova agreed to
document all procedures undertaken for data quality checks.
63.
A Student Satisfaction Index Score was also developed using the Principal Component
Analysis methodology. However, it was proposed during the mission that a simpler
calculation methodology will help institutions in understanding and interpreting the
survey results. Any headline figures must be understandable and have in mind that in the
longer run institutions themselves should be able to replicate the survey. It is proposed
that the institute report card identify areas that survey respondents in an institute identify
as important, and compare this with their satisfaction level in those areas. For the purpose
of benchmarking, the report card could include information on the results of similar
institutions (Govt/ Govt-aided, Private, CFIs), state, and national.
64.
First full survey (October-November 2014) – The first full survey was administered
between October 1 and November 15, 2014. The survey was initially planned for 30 days
but was extended for 15 days upon request of the institutions. A total of 184 institutions
(97%) participated in the survey. Of these, 157 institutions had a participation rate of 50%
or above and 126 institutions had a participation rate of 70% or above. Currently, the
validation of survey respondents is in progress after which the results will be analysed by
Infova.
Recommendations:
•
A report card should be produced for each institution, in addition to the national
picture, that presents some of the main messages to the institution in a graphically
attractive and useful manner.
•
It was recommended to include a separate question on “overall satisfaction” in each
survey. This can be included from next survey round. In addition, Infova should
analyse the survey instrument and responses to see if the survey can be shortened to
reduce the time it takes to fill in.
•
The mission recommends two additional rounds of survey until the end of project
(September 2015 and September 2016). This timeline will provide an opportunity to
the institutions to review results from the previous survey and take corrective actions
in important areas before the administration of the next survey round.
VI. MONITORING AND EVALUATION
65.
Some end-of-project targets in the Results Framework were adjusted upwards as part of
the restructuring (September 2014) to extend the closing date of project. The mission is
pleased to note that the project is continuing to make progress in all key performance
indicators. One-hundred and fifty six institutions are now reporting on at least 70% of the
indicators. NPIU should continue to follow-up and help institutions in completing the
data-entry.
66.
Intermediate Outcome Indicator on “Satisfaction Index of Student and Faculty”: It
was agreed that the satisfaction index from the first full round of survey will be calculated
Page 16
to compare to the baseline. This will be done once the data validation is completed and
will be reported in the next mission/ Implementation Status and Results Report.
67.
It is recommended that the data auditors should continue to verify the data that the
institutions have entered in the MIS and NPIU should continue to follow-up to ensure that
necessary corrections are made in the MIS.
Recommendations:
• NPIU uses the data audit report received to verify the data in the MIS (continuous)
• NPIU to freeze the data for 2010-11 and 2011-12 for the remaining 34 institutions (by
December 31, 2014) and also freeze the data for 2012-13 by March 31, 2015.
• NPIU continues to provide hands-on-support and training to institutes on MIS
(especially in institutions with high turn-over in staff designated for data-entry)
68.
The Results Framework Document is updated (as per Annex 4)
VII. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
69.
70.
The JRM’s primary focus area remained assessing the timeliness and effectiveness of
fund flows and expenditures. The JRM team would like to highlight that there still
remains instance of fund transfers taking inordinately long time, say more than 120 days.
This may have substantial impacts on project activities. In this regard, the mission would
like to suggest the following to facilitate timely budget allotments and fund releases at the
State and SPFU level:
•
timely communication of the indicative program budgets to states, so that these can be
reflected in the respective state budgets appropriately;
•
timely communication of the fund release by MHRD to the respective state and SPFU
counterparts;
•
active engagement of SPFUs in complying and following-up with the various State
procedural requirements involved in release of funds from respective treasuries;
•
proactive planning by SPFUs to enable speedy usage/transfers of funds, once received
in their Bank accounts.
•
Proactive steps by the institutes in complying with the various disbursement linked
performance/ financial benchmarks.
Certain steps have been taken by the project to respond to the recommendations made by
the last JRM [April-2014] have resulted in some improvements. However, significant
opportunities do remain for strengthening the financial management control framework,
including:
•
appropriate staffing and effective capacity building of finance and accounting staff;
•
enhancement of the computerized financial management system;
•
effective integration of External, Internal and Performance Audits;
Page 17
71.
•
timely follow-up of the audit observations;
•
effective monitoring and supervision support by NPIU;
•
improved internal control environment at SPFUs and at the institutes.
For more details, please refer Annex 9.
VIII. PROCUREMENT
72.
The status of procurement as planned for the entire project period was discussed during
the JRM and the agreed action plan from last mission was also reviewed. Procurement
team of NPIU provided a national summary of procurement status under TEQIP II
project.
73.
All the procurement under TEQIP II is being done through PMSS with very few
exceptions and as of end- Nov 14,the expenditure reported under procurement is Rs.
329.77 Cr as per PMSS and Rs. 437.27 cr as per FMS. The difference of Rs. 107 cr
between PMSS and FMS is due to some payments not updated in PMSS by the
participating institutions.At the end of November 2014, contracts worth Rs. 242.83 cr are
committed and for Rs. 135.5 cr worth of cases, the procurement is “in pipeline” i.e. at
various stages of procurement. Further at the end of November 2014, it is planned to
procure goods worth Rs. 286.98 Cr for which the procurement action is yet to be initiated.
Given that there is a limit on how much each institution can spend on procurement
activities, these figures mean that all funds for procurement have now been spent or
allocated to specific activities.
74.
Procurement Post Review (PPR) FY 15: For the PPR FY 14 the PPR report was shared
with NPIU and compliance to PPR comments are received from the institutes. JRM was
advised by the Project that GPCL, the authorized agency of World Bank has already
conducted the PPR for the current FY and they will be submitting their report shortly,
which will be shared with the institutions through NPIU for their compliance.
75.
Complaint Handling. The JRM informed the Procurement staff of NPIU about the
mandatory requirement of Bank’s review of the complaints and their resolution. Project
should submit the details of procurement complaints if any, with actions taken on it to
Bank for review and its closer.
76.
Project was explained about importance of submitting final contract copy with check list
for all prior review cases to Bank for getting WBR no.
77.
For more details, please refer Annex 8.
IX. ENVIRONMENT
78.
Four regional workshops were conducted between May 2014 and August 2014 to monitor
the compliance of Environment Management Framework in all project institutions and to
ensure implementation of corrective actions, as required. NPIU has prepared a report to
highlight the findings/ suggestions from these workshops.
Page 18
Name
Date
Western (Ahmedabad)
Northern (Chandigarh)
Eastern (Kolkata)
Southern (Coimbatore)
May 26-27, 2014
June 17-18, 2014
July3-4, 2014
August 20-21, 2014
No.
of No. of participating
participating institutions
states
5
45
8
39
6
50
3
56
X. SOCIAL
79.
Over the year, the NPIU conducted 4 workshops on the topic of ‘Improving transition
rates of students’ covering the regions of South, West, North and East. Following the
successful conduct of workshops, the NPIU now proposes to conduct a second round of
workshops during 2015, giving time and prominence to this very important issue and
allowing institutions that were not covered the opportunity to participate. Based on the
lessons learned, the Bank has undertaken to support NPIU in updating the Equity Action
Plan that was prepared before project approval.
Recommendations
•
The Equity Action Plan guidance should be updated before the second round of
regional workshops is held.
XI. PROJECT MANAGEMENT
80.
Since the last Joint Review Mission, the Central Project Advisor’s term has come to an
end. There are effective temporary arrangements in place while the position is being
advertised. Clearly securing an effective CPA is a high priority task.
81.
The NPIU/MHRD have recently recruited a number of new staff to the NPIU. By the end
of this recruitment, all consultant positions will have been filled with the exception of two
positions. These two positions need to be advertised. The NPIU also needs to move
forward on the recruitment of a statistician.
82.
Project Implementation Plan (PIP). The World Bank team reviewed a draft revision of
the PIP. The main issues discussed during the mission were:
•
Permissible and non-permissible activities: The underlying principle of the TEQIP
project is that institutions and their Board of Governors are responsible for making
decisions about which activities to carry out. This implies that while there needs to be
a list of proscribed (‘non-permissible’) activities, institutions should understand that
all other activities can be undertaken. The PIP provides some illustrative examples of
possible activities which institutions may wish to undertake, but these examples do
not exhaust all the activities which are permissible. The wording of the PIP should
make this clear.
Page 19
•
International travel: All institutions expressed concern that the current guidelines
require too many layers of approval, which have the effect of seriously reducing the
possibility that all the permissions will be obtained in time to participate in planned
travel. The Boards of Governors should be able to make effective choices about the
use of project funds on international travel, provided they have shown effective use of
existing funds. It therefore seems reasonable to empower those Boards of Governors
of institutions which have met all the required performance indicators; other
institutions would continue to need additional permissions from authorities outside the
institution.
•
Non-TEQIP institutions. The purpose of TEQIP is to provide models of effective
practices, which can be adopted by other engineering (indeed, all higher education)
institutions in India. Non-TEQIP institutions should therefore be encouraged to
participate in TEQIP-sponsored activities, including IIM and IIT activities (as noted
above) but also programs organised by SPFUs and institutions themselves. In this
way, good practices can spread more widely. The only restriction should be that no
TEQIP participant should be denied participation in these events on account of nonTEQIP participants filling the available spaces.
XII. SUSTAINABILITY AND WIDER ADOPTION OF TEQIP PROCEDURES AND PRACTICES
83.
The remaining project period is a key time to document the lessons learnt and disseminate
them widely. NPIU should, therefore, develop a plan of action to capture lessons across
the range of TEQIP activities and disseminate them to different audiences. It is especially
important the state governments are engaged.
Recommendations
•
The next JRM should discuss ways in which activities to promote the sustainability
and wider adoption of TEQIP procedures and practices can be planned during the
remaining project period
XIII. STATUS OF ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN REPORT FROM PREVIOUS JRM
84.
These are described in detail in Annex 5.
XIV. NEW ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN FROM THIS JRM
85.
These are listed in Annex 6.
Page 20
INDIA
Technical Engineering Educational Quality
Improvement II (TEQIP-II)
Fourth Joint Review Mission
December 8-19, 2014
Annexures
Page 1
Annex 1: People and Institutions participating in the Joint Review Mission
Joint Review Mission Team Members
Government Nominees for the JRM Team
•
•
•
•
•
•
Prof Anil D Sahasrabudhe, Director, College of Engg, Pune
Prof Ashok Shettar, Director, BVB College of Engg & Tech, Hubli
Prof R N Herkal, Director, Basaveshwar Engg College, Bagalkoat
Prof S Y Kulkarni, Director, M S Ramaiah Institute of Technology, Banglore
Dr Manoj Arora, Director, PEC University of Technology, Chandigarh
Prof S Mishra, Director, Govt College of Engg, Jalgaon
World Bank Nominees for the JRM Team:
• Mr. Toby Linden, Lead Education Specialist and Task Team Leader
• Mr. Kurt Larsen, Senior Education Specialist
• Ms. Tara Beteille, Economist
• Ms. Karthika Radhakrishnan, Operations Analyst
• Ms. Ling Jessica Diana Lee, Operations Officer
• Mr. Satyanarayan Panda, Procurement Specialist
• Ms. Supriti Dua, Financial Management Specialist
• Ms. Asha Bhagat, Consultant, Financial Management
• Ms Ritu Sharma, Program Assistant
Other people and institutions
MHRD/NPIU Officials:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Mr Amarjit Sinha, IAS, Additional Secreatry (T) & NPD, TEQIP
Ms Tripti Gurha Director (TC), MHRD
Dr Rita Goyal, Sr Consultant,
Dr Yogesh Srivastava, Sr Consultant,
Mr N S Agnihotri, Sr Consultant,
Mr Scahin Gupta, Consultant,
Mr Anup Mehrotra, Consultant,
Mr Bhanu Partap Singh, Consultant,
Dr Uma Bansal, Assoc. Consultant,
Dr Prakash Kumiyal, Assoc. Consultant,
Ms Rupali Jha, Assoc. Consultant
Page 2
List of Mentor & Performance Auditors
•
•
•
•
•
Prof. J. Srihari Rao, Former Professor & Dean, NIT Warangal
Prof. R. Natarajan, Former Director, IIT Madras, Former Chairman, AICTE
Prof. B.S. Sonde, Chairman, All India Board of UG Studies in E & T (AICTE)
Prof. N.C. Shivaprakash, Professor, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore
Prof. B.K. Raghu Prasad, Advisor, IISC, Bangalore
List of Programme Coordinators from IITs and IIMs
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Prof. Pradeep Yammiyaar, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati,
Prof. Pradeep Kumar, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee,
Prof. O.P.Sha, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Prof. Vikram M. Gadre, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai,
Prof. C.S.Upadhyay, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur
Prof. Mahim sagar, Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi
Prof. V. Gopal, Indian Institute of Management, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI
Mr Mandar Nayak, Indian Institute of Management, Udaipur
Prof. Saji Gopinath, Indian Institute of Management, Kozhikode
Prof. Poonam Sahgal, Indian Institute of Management, Lucknow
Prof. Sanjeev Prashar, Indian Institute of Management, Raipur
List of CFIs:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Assam University-TS School of Technology Silchar: Sudipta Roy, Sudipto Sarkar
NERIST Itanagar: PK Das
NIT Calicut: GRC Reddy, AT Mathew
NIT Hamirpur: Vijay Shankar, Amit Kaul
NIT Jalandhar: AK Choudhary
NIT Jamshedpur: YP Yadav
NIT Patna: AR Quaff
NIT Raipur: S Sanyal, Ajay Sharma
List Of States Participated in Wrap Up meeting:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Andhra Pradesh
Gujarat
Himachal Pradesh
Karnataka
Madhya Pradesh
NCT of Delhi
Rajasthan
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Chhatisgarh
Haryana
Jharkhand
Kerala
Maharashtra
Punjab
Telangana
Page 3
•
•
•
Tamil Nadu
UT-Chandigarh
Uttarakhand
•
•
•
West Bengal
UT-Puduchery
Uttar Pradesh
Page 4
Annex 2: Mission Schedule
Date
Meeting/Purpose
Venue
Monday
8th Dec 2014
2.00 PM
MHRD/Additional Secretary
‐ Orientation for mission members
‐ Agree main issues for review
MHRD
9.30 AM –
1.00 PM
1.00-1.30 PM
Project progress overview
‐ KPIs
‐ Institutional performance
assessment
‐ Procurement – including spending
projections
‐ FM – including fund flows/releases
‐ Action Taken Report
Lunch Break
Tuesday
9th Dec 2014
Travel to States (AP, Telangana, HR and
Rajasthan)
Silver Oak-II,
IHC, New Delhi
State visit
‐ Overview of state issues
‐ Interaction with institutions
Wednesday
10th Dec 2014
State visit
‐ Visit 2 institutions, including one
COE
Thursday
11th Dec 2014
State visit
‐ Visit one institution
Details as in
Appendix‐A‐D
Travel to Delhi/respective destination
Friday
12th Dec 2014
9.30 AM
1.00 PM
IIMs
‐ Plans for project extension period on
leadership, management and
governance
‐ Future of good governance program
‐ M&E of activities
IITs
‐ Plans for project extension period on
improving teaching and research
(including Quality Circles and
QEEE)
‐ M&E of activities
WB
WB
Page 5
Monday 15th
Dec 2014
9.30 AM
2.00 PM
Mentors and Performance Auditors
‐ Plans for extension period
Tuesday 16th
Dec 2014
Meeting with NBA
Seminar Hall – 3,
IIC, New Delhi
Centres of Excellence
‐ Review of progress
Faculty, staff and student surveys
‐ Report on progress/findings
Wrap up meeting with MHRD
MHRD
Wednesday
17th Dec 2014
Meeting with UGC
Preparation of Aide Memoire
Thursday
18th Dec 2014
Meeting with CFIs
3.00-5.00 PM
Friday 19th
Dec 2014
9.30 AM
Wrap up with State Governments
‐ Discussion of Aide Memoire
‐ Feedback on state progress
‐ Discussion of faculty transfers
Lecture Room - 2,
(Basement), IIC
Page 6
Appendix-A
S.No
1
Date
9th December 2014
State/Institute(s)
to be visited
Hyderabad,
Telangana
2
3
10th
December JNTU,
2014 (FN)
Hyderabad,
4
10th
December Osmania
2014 (AN)
University
College
Technology,
Hyderabad
5
11th December
2014 (FN)
6
11th December
2014 (AN)
Proposed activity
Presentation on Overview of
the State issues for 20 min
followed
by
10
min
discussion
Interaction with all 14
institutions – ppt for 10 min
on the progress of the Project
– issues therein - followed by
10 min discussion
Detailed presentation on all
aspects of the Project
(Academic, Procurement and
Financial) including CoE
aspects of the Project
of (Academic, Procurement and
Financial) including CoE
Venue
To
decided
be
Institute
Institute
VNR
Vignan Detailed presentation on all Institute
Jyothi Institute of aspects of the Project
Engg
& (Academic, Procurement and
Technology,
Financial)
Hyderabad
Travel back to Delhi
Appendix-B
S.No
1
2
3
Date
State/Institute(s) to be
Proposed activity
Venue
visited
Visit to Vishakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh
A
U
College
of Detailed presentation on all Institute
Engineering,
Andhra aspects of the Project (Academic,
9th December University,
Procurement
and
Financial)
2014
including CoE
Visakhapatnam
Gayatri Vidya Parishad Detailed presentation on all Institute
College of Engineering, aspects of the Project (Academic,
Madhurawada,
Procurement and Financial)
Visakhapatnam
Page 7
4
5
6
7
8
10th December Visit to Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh
2014
10th December JNTU
College
of Detailed presentation on all Institute
2014 (FN)
Engineering, Kakinada
aspects of the Project (Academic,
10th December Travel to Hyderabad
2014 (AN)
11th December Hyderabad,
Andhra Presentation on Overview of the To
be
2014 (AN)
Pradesh
State issues for 20 min followed decided
by 10 min discussion
11th December Interaction with all 11 Interaction with all 11 institutions
2014 (FN)
institutions – ppt for 10 – ppt for 10 min on the progress
min on the progress of of the Project – issues therein the Project – issues followed by 10 min discussion
therein - followed by 10
min discussion
11th December Travel back to Delhi
2014 (AN)
Appendix-C
S.No
1
2
3
4
5
6
Date
State/Institute(s) to
Proposed activity
be visited
9th Dec 2014
Visit to Chandigarh, Presentation on Overview of the
Haryana
State issues for 20 min followed
by 10 min discussion
Interaction with all 6 institutions –
ppt for 10 min on the progress of
the Project – issues therein followed by 10 min discussion
th
10 Dec 2014 Faculty of Science, Detailed presentation on all
(FN)
Kurukshetra
University,
Kurukshetra
10th Dec 2014 UIET, Kurukshetra
(AN)
University,
Kurukshetra
Procurement and Financial
11th Dec 2014 Faculty
of Detailed presentation on all
(FN)
Engineering
& aspects of the Project (Academic,
Technology,
Deenbandhu Chhotu
Ram University of
Science
&
Technology, Murthal
11th Dec(AN)
Travel back to Delhi
Venue
To
decided
be
Institute
Institute
Institute
Page 8
Appendix-D
S.No
1
2
3
4
5
Date
State/Institute(s) to
Proposed activity
be visited
9th
December Visit
to
Jaipur, Presentation on Overview of
2014
Rajasthan
the State issues for 20 min
followed by 10 min discussion
Interaction
with
all
9
institutions – ppt for 10 min on
the progress of the Project –
issues therein - followed by 10
min discussion
th
10
December Ajmer
aspects
of
the
Project
2014 (FN)
Government
Engineering College, (Academic, Procurement and
Financial)
Ajmer
10th December
Government Woman
aspects
of
the
Project
2014 (AN)
Engineering College,
(Academic, Procurement and
Ajmer
Financial
10th December
Travel to Alwar
2014
th
11
December
of
the
Project
2014 (FN)
Institute
of aspects
Engineering
& (Academic, Procurement and
Financial
Technology, Alwar
11th December
2014 (AN)
Venue
To
be
decided
Institute
Institute
Travel to Delhi
Page 9
Annex‐3 : 4th JRM: Performance Assessment Indicators of Institutions
1
S. N.
Name of the
State/UT
Category of
the
Name of the Institution
Institution
1
Andhra
Pradesh
Private
unaided
2
Andhra
Pradesh
Govt.
3
Andhra
Pradesh
Private
unaided
4
Andhra
Pradesh
Private
unaided
5
Andhra
Pradesh
Private
unaided
6
Andhra
Pradesh
Private
unaided
7
Andhra
Pradesh
Private
unaided
8
Andhra
Pradesh
Private
unaided
9
Andhra
Pradesh
Govt.
10
Andhra
Pradesh
Govt.
11
Andhra
Pradesh
Govt.
12
Bihar
Govt.
13
Bihar
Govt.
14
15
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Sree Vidyanikethan
Chittoor
A U College of
Engineering, Andhra
University,
VR Siddhartha
Kanuru, Vijaywada
Aditya Institute of
Technology &
Management, Tekkali,
Shri Vishnu Engineering
College for women,
Vishnupur, Bhimavaram
Gayatri Vidya Parishad
College of Engineering,
Madhurawada,
GITAM Institute of
Technology ‐ GITAM
University ,
Madanapalle Institute of
Technology & Science,
Madanapalle
3
2
MoM of BoG
Autonomy
(last 4 Months)
(Yes/No) Yes =
published on
obtained or
institution's
applied for
website (Yes/No)
Governance
Self Review
Submitted
(Yes/No)
4
5
6
7
8
9
Participation
NBA
Faculty, Staff &
Governance
Statutory 2nd Performance MIS Data Entry
Accreditation (%
Participation in
Students
development plan
Audit (2013‐ Auditing (Yes/No)
Status (Yes=
accredited +
CII‐AICTE Survey
satisfaction
Submitted
14)
Yes= Performance Adequate, No=
applied for)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
+ Data Auding
Inadequate)
Survey (≥ 50% =
(≥ 50% = Yes)
Yes)
10
Procurement
Plan to cover
100%
procurement
expenditure
(Yes/No)
11
12
% of
% of
Expenditure +
Expenditure
Committed
against total
expenditure
funds received against Total
( ≥ 50% = Yes) funds recieved
(100% = Yes)
Indicators
Met
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
SVU College of
Engineering, Tirupati
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
JNTU College of
Engineering, Kakinada
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
1
Muzaffarpur Institute of
Technology, Muzaffarpur
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
1
CFI
IIEST Shibpur
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
CFI
ISM Dhanbad
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
JNTU College of
Engineering, Pulivendula,
Kadapa District, Andhra
Pradesh
Bhagalpur College of
Engineering, Bhagalpur
1
S. N.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Name of the
State/UT
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Category of
the
Institution
3
2
MoM of BoG
Autonomy
(last 4 Months)
(Yes/No) Yes =
published on
obtained or
institution's
applied for
website (Yes/No)
Governance
Self Review
Submitted
(Yes/No)
4
5
6
7
8
9
Participation
NBA
Faculty, Staff &
Governance
Accreditation (%
Participation in
Students
development plan
Status (Yes=
accredited +
CII‐AICTE Survey
satisfaction
Submitted
14)
applied for)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
+ Data Auding
Inadequate)
Survey (≥ 50% =
(≥ 50% = Yes)
Yes)
10
Procurement
Plan to cover
100%
procurement
expenditure
(Yes/No)
11
12
% of
% of
Expenditure +
Expenditure
Committed
against total
expenditure
(100% = Yes)
Indicators
Met
CFI
NERIST Itanagar
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
6
CFI
NIT Agartala
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
CFI
NIT Allahabad
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
CFI
NIT Bhopal
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
CFI
NIT Calicut
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
7
CFI
NIT Durgapur
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
CFI
NIT Hamirpur
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
CFI
NIT Jaipur
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
CFI
NIT Jalandhar
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
7
CFI
NIT Jamshedpur
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
CFI
NIT Kurukshetra
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
8
CFI
NIT Nagpur
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
CFI
NIT Patna
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
5
CFI
NIT Raipur
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
7
CFI
NIT Rourkela
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
CFI
NIT Silchar
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
1
S. N.
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
Name of the
State/UT
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Centrally
Funded
Institutions
Category of
the
Institution
3
2
MoM of BoG
Autonomy
(last 4 Months)
(Yes/No) Yes =
published on
obtained or
institution's
applied for
website (Yes/No)
Governance
Self Review
Submitted
(Yes/No)
4
5
6
7
8
9
Participation
NBA
Faculty, Staff &
Governance
Accreditation (%
Participation in
Students
development plan
Status (Yes=
accredited +
CII‐AICTE Survey
satisfaction
Submitted
14)
applied for)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
+ Data Auding
Inadequate)
Survey (≥ 50% =
(≥ 50% = Yes)
Yes)
10
Procurement
Plan to cover
100%
procurement
expenditure
(Yes/No)
11
12
% of
% of
Expenditure +
Expenditure
Committed
against total
expenditure
(100% = Yes)
Indicators
Met
CFI
NIT Surat
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
CFI
NIT Surathkal
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
CFI
NIT Tiruchirapally
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
CFI
NIT Warangal
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
CFI
NITTTR Chandigarh
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
CFI
School of
Technology–Assam
University Silchar
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
5
CFI
SLIET Sangrur
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
CFI
ZH College of Engg &
Tech–AMU Aligarh
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
40
Chhattisgarh
Govt.
Government Engineering
College, Bilaspur
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
5
41
Chhattisgarh
Private
unaided
Rungta College of
Engineering &
Technology, Bhilai
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
1
42
Chhattisgarh
Govt.
College, Jagdalpur, Bastar
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
5
43
Chhattisgarh
Govt.
College, Raipur
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
2
44
Gujarat
Govt.
College, Bhavnagar
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
45
Gujarat
Birla Vishvakarma
Govt. aided Mahavidyalaya, Vallabh
Vidynagar
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
46
Gujarat
Govt.
College, Patan, Gujarat
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
47
Gujarat
Govt.
College, Rajkot, Gujarat
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
1
3
2
MoM of BoG
Autonomy
(last 4 Months)
(Yes/No) Yes =
published on
obtained or
institution's
applied for
website (Yes/No)
Governance
Self Review
Submitted
(Yes/No)
4
5
6
7
8
9
Participation
NBA
Faculty, Staff &
Governance
Accreditation (%
Participation in
Students
development plan
Status (Yes=
accredited +
CII‐AICTE Survey
satisfaction
Submitted
14)
applied for)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
+ Data Auding
Inadequate)
Survey (≥ 50% =
(≥ 50% = Yes)
Yes)
10
Procurement
Plan to cover
100%
procurement
expenditure
(Yes/No)
11
12
% of
% of
Expenditure +
Expenditure
Committed
against total
expenditure
(100% = Yes)
S. N.
Name of the
State/UT
Category of
the
Institution
48
Gujarat
Govt.
Shantilal Shah Engg.
College, Bhavnagar,
Gujarat
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
49
Gujarat
Govt.
Lukhidhirji Engg. College,
Morbi, Gujarat
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
50
Gujarat
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
51
Haryana
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
5
52
Haryana
Private
unaided
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
6
53
Haryana
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
6
54
Haryana
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
7
55
Haryana
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
6
56
Haryana
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
6
57
Himachal
Pradesh
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
58
Jharkhand
Govt. aided BIT, Mesra Ranchi
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
59
Jharkhand
Private
unaided
Cambridge Institute of
Technology, Ranchi
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
60
Karnataka
Private
unaided
Siddhaganga Institute of
Technology, Tumkur,
Karnataka
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
61
Karnataka
Govt. aided
Dr. Ambedkar Institute of
Technology, Bangalore
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
62
Karnataka
Private
unaided
Nitte Meenakshi Institute
of Technology (NMIT
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
College, Gandhinagar,
Gujarat
University Institute of
Engineering &
Technology, MDU, Rohtak
N.C College of
Engineering, Panipat
Faculty of Engineering &
Govt. aided Technology, Guru
Jambeshwar University of
Science & Technology
Faculty of Science,
Govt.
Kurukshetra University,
Kurukshetra
Engineering & Technology
Govt.
(UIET), Kurukshetra
University Kurukshetra
Faculty of Engineering &
Technology, Deenbandhu
Govt.
Chhotu Ram University of
Science & Technology,
Murthal Sonipat
Jawaharlal Nehru
Govt.
College, Sundernagar,
Indicators
Met
1
3
2
MoM of BoG
Autonomy
(last 4 Months)
(Yes/No) Yes =
published on
obtained or
institution's
applied for
website (Yes/No)
Governance
Self Review
Submitted
(Yes/No)
4
5
6
7
8
9
Participation
NBA
Faculty, Staff &
Governance
Accreditation (%
Participation in
Students
development plan
Status (Yes=
accredited +
CII‐AICTE Survey
satisfaction
Submitted
14)
applied for)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
+ Data Auding
Inadequate)
Survey (≥ 50% =
(≥ 50% = Yes)
Yes)
10
Procurement
Plan to cover
100%
procurement
expenditure
(Yes/No)
11
12
% of
% of
Expenditure +
Expenditure
Committed
against total
expenditure
(100% = Yes)
S. N.
Name of the
State/UT
Category of
the
Institution
63
Karnataka
Govt.
University Visvesvaraya
College of Engg.,
Bangalore
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
8
64
Karnataka
Govt. aided
BVB College of
Engineering & Technology
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
65
Karnataka
Govt. aided
National Institute of
Engineering, Mysore
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
66
Karnataka
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
67
Karnataka
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
68
Karnataka
Govt. aided
Sri Siddhartha Institute of
Technology, Tumkur
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
69
Karnataka
Basaveshwar Engineering
Govt. aided College (Autonomous)
Bagalkot
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
70
Karnataka
Govt. aided
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
71
Karnataka
Sri Jayachamarajendra
Govt. aided College of Engineering,
Mysore
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
72
Karnataka
Private
unaided
PES institute of
technology, Bangalore
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
73
Karnataka
Govt. aided
PDA College of
Engineering, Gulbarga
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
74
Karnataka
Private
unaided
MS Ramaiah Institute of
Technology, Bangalore
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
75
Karnataka
Private
unaided
76
Karnataka
Govt.
77
Karnataka
Private
unaided
78
Karnataka
Private
unaided
Malnad College of
Govt. aided Engineering, Hassan,
Karnataka
BMS College of
Govt. aided Engineering, Bangalore,
Karnataka
PES college of engineering
Mandya
Indicators
Met
SDM College of
Engineering and
Technology, Dhavalagiri,
Sri Krishnarajendra Silver
Jubilee Technological
Institute (SKSJTI)
R.V. College of
Engineering (RVCE),
Bangalore
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
8
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
NMAM Institute of
Technology, Nitte
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
1
3
2
MoM of BoG
Autonomy
(last 4 Months)
(Yes/No) Yes =
published on
obtained or
institution's
applied for
website (Yes/No)
Governance
Self Review
Submitted
(Yes/No)
4
5
6
7
8
9
Participation
NBA
Faculty, Staff &
Governance
Accreditation (%
Participation in
Students
development plan
Status (Yes=
accredited +
CII‐AICTE Survey
satisfaction
Submitted
14)
applied for)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
+ Data Auding
Inadequate)
Survey (≥ 50% =
(≥ 50% = Yes)
Yes)
10
Procurement
Plan to cover
100%
procurement
expenditure
(Yes/No)
11
12
% of
% of
Expenditure +
Expenditure
Committed
against total
expenditure
(100% = Yes)
S. N.
Name of the
State/UT
Category of
the
Institution
79
Kerala
Govt.
Rajiv Gandhi Institute of
Technology, Kottayam
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
80
Kerala
Govt.
Government College of
Engineering, Kannur
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
81
Kerala
Govt.
College, Thrissur
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
82
Kerala
Govt.
College, Kozhikode
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
83
Kerala
Govt.
College, Painavu, Idukki
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
84
Kerala
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
85
Kerala
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
86
Kerala
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
87
Kerala
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
88
Kerala
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
89
Kerala
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
90
Kerala
Govt.
College of Engineering
Thalassery, Kannur
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
91
Kerala
Govt.
Kidangoor, Kottayam
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
92
Kerala
Govt.
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
93
Kerala
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
School of Engineering,
Cochin University of
College, Bartonhill,
Thiruvananthapuram
LBS Institute of
Technology for Women,
Poojappura,
Perumon, Perinad, Kollam
Cooperative Institute of
Govt. aided Technology, Vadakara,
Kozhikode
Govt.
Trikaripur, Cheemeni,
Kasargod
Government Engineering.
College, wayanad
Thalappuzha, Kerala
Thangal Kunju Musaliar
College of
Engineering,Karicode,
Indicators
Met
1
3
2
MoM of BoG
Autonomy
(last 4 Months)
(Yes/No) Yes =
published on
obtained or
institution's
applied for
website (Yes/No)
Governance
Self Review
Submitted
(Yes/No)
4
5
6
7
8
9
Participation
NBA
Faculty, Staff &
Governance
Accreditation (%
Participation in
Students
development plan
Status (Yes=
accredited +
CII‐AICTE Survey
satisfaction
Submitted
14)
applied for)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
+ Data Auding
Inadequate)
Survey (≥ 50% =
(≥ 50% = Yes)
Yes)
10
Procurement
Plan to cover
100%
procurement
expenditure
(Yes/No)
11
12
% of
% of
Expenditure +
Expenditure
Committed
against total
expenditure
(100% = Yes)
S. N.
Name of the
State/UT
Category of
the
Institution
94
Kerala
Govt.
Government Engineering.
College,
Sreekrishnapuram, Kerala
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
95
Kerala
Govt.
Adoor, Manakkala, Kerala
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
96
Kerala
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
97
Kerala
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
98
Madhya
Pradesh
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
99
Madhya
Pradesh
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
100
Madhya
Pradesh
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
101
Madhya
Pradesh
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
6
102
Madhya
Pradesh
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
103 Maharashtra
Karunagappaly,
Thodiyoor, Kollam, Kerala
Govt.
Cherthala, Pallippuram,
Alappuzha, Kerala
Samrat Ashok
Govt. aided Technological Institute
(Engineering College),
Sagar Institute of
Private
Research & Technology,
unaided
Bhopal
Madhav Institute of
Govt. aided Technology & Science,
Gwalior
Govt.
Govt. aided
Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki
Vishwavidhyalaya, Bhopal
Shri GS Institute of
Govt. aided Technology & Science,
Indore
Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar
Govt. aided Technological University,
Lonere, Raigad
Shivajinagar, Pune
Indicators
Met
104 Maharashtra
Govt.
105 Maharashtra
Shri Guru Gobind Singhji
Govt. aided Institute of Engineering &
Technology, Nanded
106 Maharashtra
Govt. aided
Walchand College of
Engineering, Sangli
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
107 Maharashtra
Govt. aided
BVB's Sardar Patel College
of Engineering, Mumbai
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
108 Maharashtra
Govt.
Govt. College of
Engineering, Aurangabad
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
1
3
2
MoM of BoG
Autonomy
(last 4 Months)
(Yes/No) Yes =
published on
obtained or
institution's
applied for
website (Yes/No)
Governance
Self Review
Submitted
(Yes/No)
4
5
6
7
8
9
Participation
NBA
Faculty, Staff &
Governance
Accreditation (%
Participation in
Students
development plan
Status (Yes=
accredited +
CII‐AICTE Survey
satisfaction
Submitted
14)
applied for)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
+ Data Auding
Inadequate)
Survey (≥ 50% =
(≥ 50% = Yes)
Yes)
10
Procurement
Plan to cover
100%
procurement
expenditure
(Yes/No)
11
12
% of
% of
Expenditure +
Expenditure
Committed
against total
expenditure
(100% = Yes)
Name of the
State/UT
Category of
the
Institution
109 Maharashtra
Veermata Jijabai
Govt. aided Technological Institute,
Matunga, Mumbai
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
110 Maharashtra
Govt.
Engineering, Jalgaon
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
111 Maharashtra
Govt.
Govt. College of
Engineering, Amravati
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
112 Maharashtra
Govt.
Engineering, Karad
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
S. N.
113 Maharashtra
114 Maharashtra
115 Maharashtra
Rajarambapu Institute of
Technology, Islampur,
Sangli
Institute of Chemical
Govt. aided Technology, Matunga,
Mumbai
Bharati Vidyapeeth
Private
University, College of
unaided
Engineering, Pune
Private
unaided
Indicators
Met
116 Maharashtra
Private
unaided
GH Raisoni College of
Engineering, Nagpur
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
117 Maharashtra
Govt.
Enginering, Chandrapur
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
118 Maharashtra
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
119 Maharashtra
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
120 NCT‐Delhi
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
10
121 Odisha
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
122 Odisha
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
123 Punjab
Govt. aided
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
6
Department of
Technology, Shivaji
University, Kolhapur,
Maharashtra
Department of Chemical
Technology, North
Maharashtra University,
Jalgaon, Maharashtra
Delhi Technological
University, Delhi
College of Engineering &
Technology,
Bhubaneshwar
Veer Surendra Sai
University of Technology,
Burla, Sambalpur
Thapar University, Patiala,
Punjab
1
S. N.
Name of the
State/UT
124 Punjab
125 Punjab
126 Punjab
127 Punjab
128 Punjab
Category of
the
Institution
Guru Nanak Dev
Govt. aided Engineering College,
Ludhiana, Punjab
SBS College of
Govt. aided Engineering &
Technology, Ferozpur,
Private
Chandigarh Engineering
unaided
College, Mohali, Punjab
Beant College of
Govt. aided Engineering Technology,
Gurdaspur, Punjab
GZS‐PTU, Bhatinda,
Govt.
Punjab
129 Punjab
Govt.
130 Punjab
Govt.
131 Rajasthan
Govt.
132 Rajasthan
Govt.
133 Rajasthan
Private
unaided
134 Rajasthan
Govt.
135 Rajasthan
Govt.
136 Rajasthan
Govt.
137 Rajasthan
Govt.
138 Rajasthan
Govt.
College of Agriculture
Engineering and
Technology, Punjab
Agriculture University,
Guru Nanak Dev
University, Amritsar,
Punjab
Govt. Engineering College,
Bikaner, Rajasthan
University College of
Engineering, RTU, Kota,
Rajasthan
Institute of Engineering &
Technology, Alwar,
Rajasthan
M L V Textile &
Bhilwara, Rajasthan
College of Technology and
Engineering, Maharana
Pratap University of
Agriculture and
Govt Engineering College,
Ajmer, Rajasthan
and Technology, Bikaner,
Rajasthan
Government Women
Ajmer, Rajasthan
3
2
MoM of BoG
Autonomy
(last 4 Months)
(Yes/No) Yes =
published on
obtained or
institution's
applied for
website (Yes/No)
Governance
Self Review
Submitted
(Yes/No)
4
5
6
7
8
9
Participation
NBA
Faculty, Staff &
Governance
Accreditation (%
Participation in
Students
development plan
Status (Yes=
accredited +
CII‐AICTE Survey
satisfaction
Submitted
14)
applied for)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
+ Data Auding
Inadequate)
Survey (≥ 50% =
(≥ 50% = Yes)
Yes)
10
Procurement
Plan to cover
100%
procurement
expenditure
(Yes/No)
11
12
% of
% of
Expenditure +
Expenditure
Committed
against total
expenditure
(100% = Yes)
Indicators
Met
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
8
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
5
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
4
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
6
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
7
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
10
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
8
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
8
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
7
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
1
S. N.
Name of the
State/UT
Category of
the
Institution
139 Rajasthan
Govt.
140 Tamil Nadu
Govt.
141 Tamil Nadu
Govt.
142 Tamil Nadu
College, Jhalawar,
Rajasthan
Govt. College of
Engineering, Baragur,
Krishnagiri
3
2
MoM of BoG
Autonomy
(last 4 Months)
(Yes/No) Yes =
published on
obtained or
institution's
applied for
website (Yes/No)
Governance
Self Review
Submitted
(Yes/No)
4
5
6
7
8
9
Participation
NBA
Faculty, Staff &
Governance
Accreditation (%
Participation in
Students
development plan
Status (Yes=
accredited +
CII‐AICTE Survey
satisfaction
Submitted
14)
applied for)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
+ Data Auding
Inadequate)
Survey (≥ 50% =
(≥ 50% = Yes)
Yes)
10
Procurement
Plan to cover
100%
procurement
expenditure
(Yes/No)
11
12
% of
% of
Expenditure +
Expenditure
Committed
against total
expenditure
(100% = Yes)
Indicators
Met
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
Govt. College of
Technology, Coimbatore
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
Govt.
Alagappa Chettiar College
of Engineering and
Technology, Karaikudi
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
143 Tamil Nadu
Govt.
Engineering, Salem
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
144 Tamil Nadu
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
145 Tamil Nadu
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
146 Tamil Nadu
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
147 Tamil Nadu
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
148 Tamil Nadu
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
149 Telangana
Private
unaided
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
150 Telangana
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
151 Telangana
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
152 Telangana
Govt.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
153 Telangana
Private
unaided
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
Manonmaniam
Sundaranar University,
Abishekapatti, Tirunelveli
Thiagaraja College of
Engineering, Madurai,
Tamil Nadu
P.S.G College of
Technology, Coimbatore,
Tamil Nadu
Bharathidasan Institute
of Technology Campus,
Trichirapalli, Tamil Nadu
Coimbatore Institute of
Technology, Coimbatore,
Tamil Nadu
Aurora's Scientific,
Technological & Research
Academy, Bandlaguda,
Hyderabad
JNTUH College of
Engineering, Hyderabad
Engineering, Osmania
University, Hyderabad
Technology, Osmania
University, Hyderabad
Anurag Engineering
College, Kodad, Nalgonda
1
S. N.
Name of the
State/UT
Category of
the
Institution
154 Telangana
Private
unaided
155 Telangana
Private
unaided
156 Telangana
Private
unaided
157 Telangana
Private
unaided
158 Telangana
Private
unaided
159 Telangana
Private
unaided
160 Telangana
Govt.
161 Telangana
Govt.
162 Tripura
Chaitanya Bharathi
Institute of Technology,
Gandipet, Hyderabad
Gokaraju Rangaraju
Technology, Kukatpally,
Vasavi College of
Engineering, Ibrahimbagh,
Hyderabad
Vallurupalli Nageswara
Rao Vignana Jyothi
Institute of Engg.
Malla Reddy Engineering
College, Medchal, R.R.
District, Hyderabad
Sreenidhi Institute of
Ghatkesar, Hyderabad
Engineering, Kakatiya
University, Kothagudem
3
2
MoM of BoG
Autonomy
(last 4 Months)
(Yes/No) Yes =
published on
obtained or
institution's
applied for
website (Yes/No)
Governance
Self Review
Submitted
(Yes/No)
4
5
6
7
8
9
Participation
NBA
Faculty, Staff &
Governance
Accreditation (%
Participation in
Students
development plan
Status (Yes=
accredited +
CII‐AICTE Survey
satisfaction
Submitted
14)
applied for)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
+ Data Auding
Inadequate)
Survey (≥ 50% =
(≥ 50% = Yes)
Yes)
10
Procurement
Plan to cover
100%
procurement
expenditure
(Yes/No)
11
12
% of
% of
Expenditure +
Expenditure
Committed
against total
expenditure
(100% = Yes)
Indicators
Met
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
11
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
10
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
4
JNTU Institute of Science
& Technolgy, Hyderabad
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
5
Govt.
Tripura Institute of
Technology, Narsingarh,
Tripura
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
7
PEC University of
Technology, Chandigarh
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
8
163
UT‐
Chandigarh
Govt.
164
UT‐
Chandigarh
Govt.
165
UT‐
Chandigarh
Govt.
166
UT‐
Puducherry
Govt.
167 Uttar Pradesh Govt.
168 Uttar Pradesh Govt.
Engineering &
Technology, Chandigarh
Dr. S.S. Bhatnagar
Chemical Engineering and
Technology UICET),
Punjab University,
Pondicherry Engineering
College, Puducherry
Technology, Lucknow,
Uttar Pradesh
Madan Mohan Malviya
Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh
1
S. N.
Name of the
State/UT
Category of
the
Institution
School of Engineering &
Technology, IFTM
University, Lodhipur
Moradabad, Uttar
Harcourt Butler
170 Uttar Pradesh Govt. aided Technological Institute,
(HBTI), Kanpur, Uttar
Faculty of Engineering
171 Uttar Pradesh Govt. aided and Technology, M.J.P.
Rohilkhand University,
Bareilly Uttar Pradesh
Bundelkhand Institute of
172 Uttar Pradesh Govt. aided Engg. & Technology,
Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh
169 Uttar Pradesh
Private
unaided
Kamla Nehru Institute of
173 Uttar Pradesh Govt. aided Technology, Sultanpur,
Uttar Pradesh
Govind Ballabh Pant
174 Uttarakhand Govt. aided Engineering College, Pauri
Garhwal
VCT Kumaon Engineering
175 Uttarakhand Govt.
College, Dwarahat, Dist‐
Almora
College of Technology ‐
176 Uttarakhand Govt. aided GB Pant University of
Agriculture & Technology,
Birbhum Institute of
177 West Bengal Govt. aided Engineering &
Technology, Birbhum
3
2
MoM of BoG
Autonomy
(last 4 Months)
(Yes/No) Yes =
published on
obtained or
institution's
applied for
website (Yes/No)
Governance
Self Review
Submitted
(Yes/No)
4
5
6
7
8
9
Participation
NBA
Faculty, Staff &
Governance
Accreditation (%
Participation in
Students
development plan
Status (Yes=
accredited +
CII‐AICTE Survey
satisfaction
Submitted
14)
applied for)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
+ Data Auding
Inadequate)
Survey (≥ 50% =
(≥ 50% = Yes)
Yes)
10
Procurement
Plan to cover
100%
procurement
expenditure
(Yes/No)
11
12
% of
% of
Expenditure +
Expenditure
Committed
against total
expenditure
(100% = Yes)
Indicators
Met
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
6
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
8
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
8
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
7
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
8
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
178 West Bengal
Private
unaided
JIS College of Engineering,
Nadia
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
179 West Bengal
Private
unaided
Heritage Institute of
Technology, Kolkata
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
180 West Bengal
Govt. aided
College of Engineering &
Management, Kolaghat
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
181 West Bengal
Private
unaided
M.C.K.V Institute of
Engineering, Howrah
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
11
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
182 West Bengal
183 West Bengal
Technology, The
University of Burdwan,
Bankura Unnayani
Govt. aided Institute of Engineering,
Bankura
Govt.
1
S. N.
Name of the
State/UT
184 West Bengal
185 West Bengal
186 West Bengal
187 West Bengal
188 West Bengal
189 West Bengal
190 West Bengal
Category of
the
Institution
Govt. aided
West Bengal University of
Technology, Kolkata
Technology ‐ University of
Calcutta, Kolkata
Faculty of Engineering
Govt. aided and Technology ‐
Jadavpur University,
Govt.
Private
unaided
Narula Institute of
Technology, Pargnas
RCC Institute of
Govt. aided Information Technology,
Kolkata
Govt College of
Govt. aided Engineering and Textile &
Technology, Berhampore,
Murshidabad College of
Govt. aided Engineering and
Technology, Berhampore,
Murshidabad West
Total no. of institutions that
achieved the particular indicator
3
2
MoM of BoG
Autonomy
(last 4 Months)
(Yes/No) Yes =
published on
obtained or
institution's
applied for
website (Yes/No)
Governance
Self Review
Submitted
(Yes/No)
4
5
6
7
8
9
Participation
NBA
Faculty, Staff &
Governance
Accreditation (%
Participation in
Students
development plan
Status (Yes=
accredited +
CII‐AICTE Survey
satisfaction
Submitted
14)
applied for)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
(Yes/No)
+ Data Auding
Inadequate)
Survey (≥ 50% =
(≥ 50% = Yes)
Yes)
10
Procurement
Plan to cover
100%
procurement
expenditure
(Yes/No)
11
12
% of
% of
Expenditure +
Expenditure
Committed
against total
expenditure
(100% = Yes)
Indicators
Met
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
12
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
9
187
163
177
141
127
167
138
156
120
157
175
173
177
Annex 4: Update on Results Framework
Indicator
2009-10
2010-2011
Target
Share of supported
programs that are
accredited or applied for
Percentage Faculty with at
least an M. Tech (regular
and contract)
30
45
35
45
Actual
22
2011-2012
2012-2013
2013-14
2014-15
Target
Actual
Target
Actual
Target
Actual
Target
Actual **
40
28
45
38
50
52
52
52
(Accredited:
8
Applied :14)
(Accredited: 12
Applied :16)
(Accredited:
10
Applied :28)
(Accredited: 14
Applied : 38)
(Accredited: 13
Applied : 39)
No. of total
eligible
programs:
2063
No. of
programs
accredited or
applied for:
447
No. of
institutions
reporting:
189
85.83
No. of total
eligible
programs:
2190
No. of
programs
accredited or
applied for:
608
No. of
institutions
reporting:
189
85.12
No. of total
eligible
programs:
2344
No. of
programs
accredited or
applied for:
885
No. of
institutions
reporting:
189
86.08
No. of total
eligible
programs: 2505
No. of total
eligible
programs:
2662
No. of
programs
accredited or
applied for:
1374
Total no. of
faculty:
17656
Contract‐
1361
No. of
faculty with
highest
qualification
MTech only:
9303
Contract‐564
No of faculty
with highest
qualification
PhD:5851
Contract‐118
50
Total no. of
faculty: 19369
Contract‐1780
No. of faculty
with highest
qualification
MTech
only:10312
Contract‐724
No of faculty
with highest
qualification
PhD: 6174
Contract‐130
55
Total no. of
faculty:
21488
Contract‐
2540
No. of faculty
with highest
qualification
MTech only:
11851
Contract‐
1219
No of faculty
with highest
qualification
PhD. 6645
Contract‐172
60
No. of
programs
accredited or
applied for:
1292
No. of
institutions
reporting:
189
87.42
86
87.86
Total no. of
faculty:22324
Contract‐3081
Total no. of
faculty:22473
Contract‐3220
No. of faculty
with highest
qualification
MTech
only:12536
Contract‐1783
No. of faculty
with highest
qualification
MTech
only:12717
Contract‐1978
No of faculty
with highest
qualification
PhD:6980
Contract‐179
No of faculty
with highest
qualification
PhD:7027
Contract‐185
Page 24
Indicator
Total number of Master
and PhD students
2009-10
30000
Number of publications in
refereed journals (within
the field of Engineering)
7032
Percentage of Faculty with
or pursuing M. Tech and
PhD (regular and contract)
63
2010-2011
Target
Actual
32000
No. of
institutions
reporting:
189
34900
7500
No. of
institutions
reporting:
189
10866
63
No. of
institutions
reporting:
187
86.79
Total no. of
faculty:
17656
No. of
faculty with
highest
qualification
MTech only:
9303
No of faculty
with highest
qualification
PhD:5851
No. of
faculty
enrolled in
M.Tech: 169
No. of
institutions
2011-2012
Target
Actual
2012-2013
Target
Actual
34000
No. of
institutions
reporting:
189
41573
No. of
institutions
reporting: 189
33000
36118
No. of
institutions
reporting: 188
8000
15409
8500
No. of
institutions
reporting: 187
64
86.26
68
2013-14
Target
Target
Actual **
40000
18870
14000
2897
88
89.45
No. of
institutions
reporting: 189
34000
No. of
institutions
reporting:
186
16801
No. of
institutions
reporting:
188
87.46
Actual
2014-15
44549
No. of
institutions
reporting: 181
9000
17946
No. of
institutions
reporting: 183
73
89.04
Total no. of
faculty:22324
Total no. of
faculty:22473
No. of faculty
with highest
qualification
MTech
only:10312
Total no. of
faculty:
21488
No. of faculty
with highest
qualification
MTech only:
11851
No. of faculty
with highest
qualification
MTech
only:12536
No. of faculty
with highest
qualification
MTech
only:12717
No of faculty
with highest
qualification
PhD: 6174
No. of faculty
enrolled in
M.Tech : 221
No of faculty
with highest
qualification
PhD. 6645
No. of faculty
enrolled in
M.Tech: 297
No of faculty
with highest
qualification
PhD:6980
No. of faculty
enrolled in
M.Tech: 361
No of faculty
with highest
qualification
PhD:7027
No. of faculty
enrolled in
M.Tech: 359
No. of
institutions
No. of
institutions
No. of
institutions
Total no. of
faculty: 19369
Page 25
Indicator
2009-10
2010-2011
Target
Actual
2011-2012
Target
reporting:
189
Percentage of externally
funded research and
development projects and
consultancies in total
revenue
Transition rate of all
students from the first year
to the second year of
under graduate study
6
--
7
48
9.5
Actual
2012-2013
Target
reporting: 189
8
9.94
Total
Revenue: Rs.
246536 lacs
Revenue
from
externally
funded
research and
development
projects and
consultancies
: Rs.23428
lacs
Total
Revenue:Rs.
259646 lacs
Revenue from
externally
funded
research and
development
projects and
consultancies:
Rs. 25813 lacs
No. of
institutions
reporting:
182
59.64
No. of
institutions
reporting: 180
51
65.61
Actual
2013-14
Target
reporting:
189
9
12.8
54
Total
Revenue: Rs.
185297 lacs
Revenue
from
externally
funded
research and
development
projects and
consultancies
:
Rs. 23722
lacs
No. of
institutions
reporting:
172
65.13
Actual
2014-15
Target
Actual **
reporting: 189
10
11.98
11
--
61
--
Total Revenue:
Rs. 204961 lacs
Revenue from
externally
funded
research and
development
projects and
consultancies:
Rs. 24546 lacs
No. of
institutions
reporting: 172
58
50.69
Total no. of
students in
the first year:
86772
Total no. of
students in the
first year:
87637
Total no. of
students in
the first year:
90512
Total no. of
students in the
first year:
88198
No. of
students who
transitioned
from the first
year to
second year:
51749
No. of students
who
transitioned
from the first
year to second
year: 57498
No. of
students who
transitioned
fro
m the first
year to
second year:
58947
No. of students
who
transitioned
from the first
year to second
year: 44706
Page 26
Indicator
2009-10
2010-2011
Target
Actual
2011-2012
Target
45
45
56.45
48
Total no. of
students
from
Direct Beneficiaries
(number)
300,000
300,000
Total no. of
student
beneficiaries:
349590
Total no. of
faculty
61.07
51
No. of students
from
disadvantaged
backgrounds
who
transitioned
from the first
year to second
year: 23161
No. of
institutions
reporting: 173
320,000
379,425
Total no. of
student
beneficiaries:3
56446
Total no. of
faculty
Actual
2013-14
Target
335,000
59.99
Actual
55
46.31
Total no. of
students from
disadvantage
d
backgrounds
in the first
year: 39292
No. of
students from
disadvantage
d
backgrounds
who
transitioned
from the first
year to
second
year:23570
Total no. of
students from
disadvantaged
backgrounds in
the first year:
39203
No. of
institutions
reporting:
171
401,514
No. of
institutions
reporting: 125
Total no. of
student
beneficiaries:
376023
Total no. of
faculty
2014-15
Target
Actual **
No. of
institutions
reporting: 125
No. of
institutions
reporting:
171
Total no. of
students from
disadvantaged
backgrounds in
the first year:
37926
disadvantaged
backgrounds
in the first
year: 38420
No of
students
from
disadvantage
d
backgrounds
who
transitioned
from the first
year to
second year:
21690
No. of
institutions
reporting:
170
370,581
Target
No. of
institutions
reporting: 173
No. of
institutions
reporting:
170
Transition rate of students
from disadvantaged
backgrounds from the first
year to second year of
undergraduate study
Actual
2012-2013
57
--
No. of students
from
disadvantaged
backgrounds
who
transitioned
from the first
year to second
year:18154
350,000
414,403
Total no. of
student
beneficiaries:3
87965
Total no. of
faculty
395,000
252,197
Total no. of
student
beneficiaries:2
25591
Total no. of
faculty
Page 27
Indicator
2009-10
2010-2011
Target
Actual
2011-2012
Target
beneficiaries:
20991
No. of
institutions
reporting:
189
of which female
(percentage)
Percentage of institutions
with academic autonomy
Number of faculty
members that have
benefitted from the
teaching effectiveness
training (under sub-
26
30
--
26
28
40
Total no. of
female
student
beneficiaries:
97505
Total no. of
female
faculty
beneficiaries
:6247
No. of
institutions
reporting :
189
51
--
Total no. of
institutions:
156
No. of
institutions
with
academic
autonomy:
80
--
2012-2013
Actual
Target
29
No. of
institutions
reporting: 189
28
No. of
institutions
reporting:
189
29
60
Total no. of
female
student
beneficiaries:
108606
Total no. of
female
faculty
beneficiaries:
7900
No. of
institutions
reporting:
189
58
--
Total no. of
institutions:
190
No. of
institutions
with
academic
autonomy:
111
187
Total no. of
female faculty
beneficiaries
:6958
No. of
institutions
reporting: 189
57
Total no. of
institutions:
156
No. of
institutions
with academic
autonomy: 89
--
--
Actual
beneficiaries:2
6438
Total no. of
female student
beneficiaries:1
02133
50
Target
beneficiaries:
25491
beneficiaries:2
2979
No. of
institutions
reporting: 189
27
Actual
2013-14
No. of
institutions:
70
30
29
2014-15
Target
Actual **
beneficiaries:2
6606
30
29
Total no. of
female student
beneficiaries:
113788
Total no. of
female student
beneficiaries:
65593
Total no. of
female faculty
beneficiaries:
8165
Total no. of
female faculty
beneficiaries:
8244
No. of
institutions
reporting: 189
65
61
66
Total no. of
institutions:
190
No. of
institutions
with academic
autonomy: 115
1000
1210 (c)
62
Total no. of
institutions:
190
No. of
institutions
with academic
autonomy: 118
1500
1373 (c)
No. of
institutions:
164
Page 28
Indicator
2009-10
2010-2011
2011-2012
2012-2013
2013-14
2014-15
Target
Actual
Target
Actual
Target
Actual
Target
Actual
Target
Actual **
20
--
20
--
20
19
20
19
20
19
component 1.3)
Share of TEQIP Supported
Engineering Institutions
from lagging states as
agreed by DEA and World
Bank (i.e. Bihar,
Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan,
Jharkhand, Orissa, Uttar
Pradesh, Madhya
Pradesh)1
Number of governance
self reviews received
Number of Governance
Development plans
received
Fully functional MIS Number of institutions
reporting at least 70% of
the indicators
17.7
--
--
--
--
--
--
65
80
162 (c)
180
177 (c)
--
--
--
--
--
--
1
20
38
120
136 (c)
--
--
--
--
--
--
43
150
156
155
--
1
At the time of project approval, the indicator on “States lagging in technical education” was defined as those that either have only one Engineering Institution or less than
one Engineering Institution per million population as per AICTE’s approved list of Engineering Degree Institutions in 2004. As per this definition, the following states are
identified as lagging states in technical education: Nagaland, A&N Islands, Dadra Nagar Haveli, Daman and Diu, Lakshadweep, Assam, Meghalaya, Manipur, J&K,
Arunachal Pradesh, Bihar, Chattisgarh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Rajasthan, Tripura, UP and West Bengal. As per this definition, the actual achievement of
“Share of TEQIP supported institutions from States lagging in technical education” is 25%.
Page 29
Annex 5: Status of Actions Taken from Previous Joint Review Mission
S.N.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
ACTIONS
COMPLIANCE
NPIU to send revised FMR for the remaining FMR for the period from July to Sept., 2014
balance that was not requested by CAAA.
submitted to CAAA and disbursement of Rs.
664,304,863 was received on 21.11.14
Institutions that have not met the performance Due intimation was given to the institutions
indicators to submit their plan of action for to meet the targets by June 30, 2014.
meeting the targets by May 15, 2014 to NPIU, As on 31st October 2014, 178 institutions
and are expected to meet these targets by June have met minimum of 8/10 indicators of
30,2014
previous Review Mission
Further fund releases are made only to those Being followed scrupulously
institutions which have met all 10 performance
parameters, as notified to institutions
previously.
No further fund releases to be made to Punjab No funds are being released to the State of
until the issues are resolved
Punjab. The State has not released even the
1st installment of funds to 2 Govt institutions
(2nd cycle) and 2nd installment to other
institutions. This has affected the overall
project momentum. A meeting was convened
by Education Secretary on 16th September
2014 at MHRD, New Delhi with Sh Rakesh
Verma, Principal Secretary, Deptt of
Technical Education & Industrial Training.
The status of the fund release, expenditure
and implementation issues were discussed.
It was assured in the meeting that the release
of funds will be made within one month i.e.
by mid October 2014. A letter from the then
Education Secretary was sent to the State
Chief Secretary.
However, no progress has been observed so
far.
MHRD to consider providing additional Proposal for the release of additional
resources to Institutions which are performing allotment is under consideration by MHRD
and could use these resources effectively.
A further set of parameters to be given to Institutions performance assessment was
institutions to be met by October 31, 2014
carried out on 12 parameters viz.:
I. Autonomy obtained or applied for
II. MoM of BoG (last 4 Months) published
on institution's website
III. (a) Governance Self Review Submitted
(b) Governance development plan
Submitted
IV. NBA Accreditation (≥ 50% accredited
+ applied for)
V. Statutory Audit (2013-14)
VI. 2nd
Performance
Auditing/Data
Auditing
VII. MIS Data Entry Status
VIII. Participation in CII-AICTE Survey
IX. Participation Faculty, Staff & Students
Page 30
S.N.
ACTIONS
COMPLIANCE
satisfaction Survey
X. Procurement Plan to cover 100%
procurement expenditure
XI. 50% of Expenditure against total funds
received
XII. 100% of Expenditure + Committed
expenditure against Total funds
received
7.
8
9.
10.
11
12.
13.
Review of institutional performance against The assessment analysis is as follows:
the set of parameters
12 indicators: 64
11 indicators: 37
10 indicators: 27
9 indicators: 22
< 9 indicators: 40
NPIU in coordination with UGC and NBA to • Share of institutions obtained autonomy
review case by case the status of autonomy
increased (from 60.5%) to 62.1%,
and accreditation with the TEQIP institutions
¾ Autonomous: 118
that have not obtained autonomy status and
¾ Applied to UGC: 44
NBA accreditation.
¾ Applied to Affiliating University:
25
¾ Not applied at all: 03
• Share of programmes NBA accredited /
applied-for increased from 44% to 53%
Contract faculty at TEQIP institutions should All TEQIP institutions were advised to
be able and encouraged to participate in encourage the participation of Contractual
activities in the same way as their colleagues faculty
on permanent appointments. In addition,
faculty at non-TEQIP institutions should be
able to participate, where space permits
IITs to develop an annual peer review IIT Mumbai has submitted a report in this
mechanism to assess and enhance the regard.
effectiveness of the quality circles. This
mechanism should be agreed within 2 months
IITs to capture evidence about the impact of
the examination system on teaching and
learning, with a view to feeding into the policy
discussions
NPIU to organize a workshop on internal
quality assurance mechanisms for improving
teaching, learning and research in TEQIP
institutions, with the view to reporting to the
next Mission
NPIU to conduct a review of faculty transfers
at a sample of government TEQIP institutions,
to provide some concrete evidence about the
scale of the problem which has been
highlighted in several Mission
NPIU, working with SPFUs, should organize a
review of various diagnostic tests conducted
by institutions these tests and identify those
that are most effective
NBA organized an World Summit on
Achieving Excellency through Accreditation
wherein all TEQIP institutions were invited
Of 53 institutions in 12 States (the entire
population
of
transferable
teachers)
communicated, reports received from 46
institutions. The entire set of the reports
shared with World Bank.
50 institutions sent the information on
supporting students need. Out of these,
details of 5 institutions sent to world bank.
Page 31
S.N.
14.
15
&
16
ACTIONS
COMPLIANCE
Institutions should consider using MOOCs and 82 Institutions participated in 1st phase of
distance learning techniques to compensate for QEEE online courses. And around 100
the lack of adequate faculty
institutions are participating in the 2nd phase
of QEEE
More sharing of good practices and challenges Workshops:
among TEQIP institutes
• 20th June 2014 - College of
Technology, Pantnagar, Uttarakhand
• 27th August, 2014 - Bhubaneswar,
Odisha
NPIU should prepare, with expert guidance as A summary report of the workshops on
necessary, guidelines for documenting good improving the transition rate of students is
practices.
prepared by NPIU.
Four regional workshops under the guidance
of World Bank were conducted to share the
experiences and good practices on improving
the transition rate of students in TEQIP-II
institutions.
Institutions shared the practices used for:
• diagnosing the academically weak
students;
• monitor their progress,
• how to improve the transition rate
and what key constraints are faced by
weak students.
17.
Regional Good Governance Workshops
should be organized to share experiences
across institutions as well as giving guidance
for how they can improve their governance
and
management
performance
with
participation of BoG members, senior
academics and staff from the TEQIP
institutions, IIMs involved the management
capacity building, and SPFUs.
Mentors and officials from the World Bank
and NPIU guided the institutions for using
the best practices for improving the transition
rate of students.
TEQIP-II Learning Fora - Good
Governance, Leadership and Management
Programmes were organized from 12-13th,
14th – 15th and 16th -17th October 2014 for all
categories of Project Institutions with the
objective of enhancing the capabilities of
Technical education institutions in India and
to support the implementation of good
governance practices.
Case studies of 2 pilot institutions (College
of Engg, Pune & BVB College of Engg, &
Tech, Hubli were shared with all institutions
for sharing best practices.
There was an overwhelming response from
the institutions. The participation in the three
Fora is as below:
12th -13th Oct 2014: 48 Participants from 27
Institutions + the World Bank Officials: 03,
Experts (IIMs) & Pilot Institutions: 13
14th -15th Oct 2014: 48 Participants from 24
Institutions + 7 SPFUs + the World Bank
Officials: 03, Experts (IIMs) & Pilot
Institutions: 13
Page 32
S.N.
ACTIONS
COMPLIANCE
th
18.
19.
16 -17 Oct 2014: 63 Participants from 40
Institutions + the World Bank Officials: 03,
Experts (IIMs) & Pilot Institutions: 13
All the presentations have been sent to the
World Bank officials. After receiving their
response, the Website will be updated.
IIMs have assured to capture the good
practices and governance issues through
organizing MCEPs at three levels:
¾ Training at Staff level
¾ Training at Faculty
¾ Training at
Governance/Administrators
The report on Case Studies shall be provided
by the IIMs
Gather governance and management case
studies to identify the regulatory challenges
that TEQIP institutions are facing in their
effort to improve their governance and
management capacity. The NPIU, with expert
help as necessary, should develop a
methodology for capturing good practice in a
consistent, reliable way, which is based on
evidence
To increase the impact of the leadership and
management training, it is encouraged that the
IIMs would follow-up with:
1) hands-on institutional capacity building, The Management Capacity Enhancement
Programmes (MCEPs) and Leadership
Development Programmes (LDPs) are
organized regularly by all 7 IIMs (Bangalore,
Indore, Lucknow, Kozhikode, Raipur, Trichy
and Udaipur). Till date, a total of 994
participants have been benefitted in the
training 40 batches (i.e. 36 MCEPs and 4
LDPSs). The details are attached.
2)
developing a standard questionnaire to The questionnaire is developed and attached.
participants e.g. 3 months after the
course to measure impact of the courses
and suggest possible follow-ups; and
IIMs and NPIU
3)
20.
ask the participants to share their
institution’s governance self-assessment
and governance development plan with
the IIM on a continuous basis as this can
form the basis for a dialog between the
institutions and the IIMs
A range of collaborative initiatives in the
Management
Capacity
Enhancement
Programme should be organized such as
The participants take a copy of governance
Self Review of their institution while in the
training and IIMs’ expert give their
suggestions on it.
The common curriculum on strengthening
governance and management at TEQIP
institutions has been developed and shared
with all IIMs, and also available on TEQIP
Good
Governance
website
(www.teqipgoodgovernance.org).
1)
the development of a joint core
curriculum on strengthening governance
and management at TEQIP institutions
across IIMs including through eLearning courses; and
2)
drafting case studies that demonstrate The MCEPs at IIMs are enabling the
how TEQIP institutions are seeking to participants to develop an integrated view of
Page 33
S.N.
ACTIONS
COMPLIANCE
improve institutional governance and management across functional areas,
management
optimize resources, make effective decisions
and enhance leadership skills and personal
effectiveness.
A few institutions have reported the benefits
from trainings to NPIU.
21.
Efforts to build synergies between the
Management
Capacity
Enhancement
Programme and the Good Governance
Programme under TEQIP should be pursued.
This should include the following initiatives:
1)
the
governance
self-assessment Being shared during the MCEPs.
questionnaire should be shared with
IIMs;
2)
the TEQIP Good Governance web-site All IIMs are taking important contents of
can be used as a common platform;
TEQIP Good Governance web-site and
delivers in the MCEPS.
the IIMs will be invited to join the IIMs’ TEQIP Coordinators were invited in
planned regional workshops on the the Workshops on Good Governance
TEQIP Good Governance Programme organized during October 2014.
where further synergies can be explored;
and
3)
4)
22.
23.
24.
Coordination between the mentor
activities and the IIMs’ hands-on
institutional advisory services to
increase the value-added for the
institutions.
Peer Review process in CoE to be given an
important role in guiding the CoEs in focusing
on a few research and technology problems
that they seek to find solutions to through a
well-designed research methodology.
1)
more emphasis for CoEs to work with
research partners from other research
institutions and companies.
2)
Development of a dissemination
strategy of the research results
delivered.
A Mentor workshop was organized in the
month of July 2014 in which IIMs
coordinators were invited for hands-on
institutional advisory services to increase the
value-added for the institutions.
An Academic Peer review of all the 30 CoEs
was undertaken on the basis of thematic areas
in 9 clusters by the IIT experts and comments
were communicated to the institutions.
Further, the status report on the progress
made by the Centre including the concerns
raised and the recommendations made by the
Reviewers has been compiled ad will be
reviewed during the Mission
The Centers are requested to initiate
Technology transfer through establishment of
Technology Transfer Cells in at least one
village in the vicinity for offering real life
solutions through technology transfer.
NPIU uses the data audit report received to Ongoing activity
verify the data in the MIS
NPIU to ensure that the remaining institutions A fresh review undertaken for adequacy of
(that have not completed the data entry for 4 MIS updated by all 190 institutions: 156
years) should complete the data entry.
institutions have updated MIS adequately for
all years.
Page 34
S.N.
25.
ACTIONS
COMPLIANCE
26.
NPIU to freeze the data in the MIS for 2010- Data (2010-11 and 2011-12) is freeze for 156
11, 2011-12 &2012-13
institutions; upon requests from 34
institutions they are given time upto 31December-2014 to complete the data entry
NPIU to ensure that the performance audit 100 PA reports were sent for review. 90/100
reports are reviewed by experts on a regular, reports are reviewed with grading as follows:
two week cycle.
Grade A: 32 Reports
Grade B : 37 Reports
Grade C : 21 Reports
27.
Budget and Flow of Funds:
a.
b.
c.
d.
28.
States which have not released funds The status of release of fund by States to
for more than 50 days to release the institutions have already been shared with the
same immediately and status to be World Bank on 2.12.14
shared with the Bank
NPIU have submitted monthly summary of
NPIU to share monthly summary of status of flow of funds to the World Bank by
status of flow of funds by on 2.12.14
MHRD/states with the Bank
FM
Indicators
Summary
for FM indicators have been received from 6
states/CFIs to be shared, including CFIs and 6 SPFUs only
information on flow of funds
Updated summary of Budget Provision
by States to be shared with the Bank
Statutory Audit
a. Response to Bank’s letter of review of
consolidated audit report of FY 201213
Updated summary of Budget Provisions by
States sent to the World Bank on 2.12.14
Response to bank’s letter has been shared
with the World Bank one on 14th Aug, 2014
and 2.12.14
b.
29.
30.
Submit consolidated audit report for The Auditor for Consolidation of Audit
FY 2013-14 to the Bank
Report for F.Y. 2013-14 have been appointed
by NPIU and the work of consolidation is
being undertaken. The Audit Reports from 4
CFIs and 7 SPFUs are still awaited and
expected to receive shortly.
Financial Reporting
FMR for the period from July to Sept., 2014
Submit FMR for Apr-June 2014, including submitted to CAAA and disbursement of Rs.
forecast for July-Sep to the Bank
664,304,863 was received on 21.11.14
FM Staffing: Vacancy of NPIU FM consultant Interviews are over and issue of appointment
to be filled
letter is under process.
Page 35
31.
32.
Training:
a. Implement training schedule
The new FMRs for IITs and IIMs and also for
CoEs have been approved by the World Bank
and MHRD and the same are being uploaded
in the FMR Software by the software
developer. The developer is facing some
problem in fitting data in MIS system and
assured to resolve the issue at the earliest.
Thereafter the training will be undertaken by
NPIU.
b. Hare module of online training with Submitted to the World Bank
the Bank
Internal Audit:
a.
Share status of internal audit in Internal Audit Report from 10 CFIs and 8
states/CFI for 2013-14
SPFUs have been received
b.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
Internal audit reports should be Internal Audit Report from 10 CFIs and 8
available for statutory audit of FY SPFUs have been received
2013-14
Disclosure: of FM information as per FM FMR and release of fund details have been
Manual on websites
kept on the website along with the audit
report of 2012-13
Institutions to take the required action to The action were taken but it seems difficult to
correct the expenditure gap between the PMSS match the figures of procurement and
and FMR
finance.
Institutions to complete the procurement 189 Institutions have updated their
planning for the remaining amount of Rs. 140 procurement plan. During the last review
cr.
mission the total planning of procurement
reported was 865 Cr and till date it is
increased to 995 Cr (including consultancy
services).
Institutions to take required action to initiate The above institutions have initiated
the procurement action for the remaining packages in PMSS covering an amount of
balance of Rs. 265cr.
Rs. 108 Cr.
Share the PPR report with NPIU
Already shared by the World Bank.
Project should submit the details of
procurement complaints, if any with actions
taken on it for Bank’s review and its closure.
Institutions/NPIU to submit the final contract
copy with check list for all prior review cases
to the Bank
NPIU will submit procurement complaints
data to World Bank reported till date.
Final contract copy for prior review cases has
been submitted to the World Bank as and
when requested by the World Bank
procurement specialist.
Four regional workshops have been
conducted by the NPIU & World Bank
officials and summary report is submitted to
the World Bank.
Four regional workshops to discuss the
implementation of EMF by the institutions
(NPIU to take advice from Bank’s
Environment Specialist for organizing the
Workshop).
Project Implementation Plan to be revised, PIP finalized and submitted to MHRD &
approved and placed on the NPIU website
World Bank for concurrence.
Page 36
Annex 6: New Actions to be taken from this Mission
S.No.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Action
By Whom
MHRD to contact 17 low performing institutions
that have consistently not met the performance
benchmarks.
Seventeen low performing institutions to meet
the 11 performance benchmarks
Mentors to provide additional support and
guidance to 17 low-performing institutions.
Decision on removing low-performing
institutions from the project if they are unable to
achieve eleven of the October 2014 benchmarks.
Pursue recommendation on providing additional
resources to well-performing institutions (cabinet
approval)
A further set of parameters to be given to
institutions to be met
Review of institutional performance against the
set of parameters
Conduct next JRM
Governance
Regularly monitor TEQIP institutions
engagement and outcomes of the online course
on Good Governance.
New Performance benchmark to be included on
Good Governance
Work with UGC in fast tracking the pending
applications
Inform institutions the possibility of suggesting
5-6 member’s for the appointment of UGC
representatives for the Board of Governors at
TEQIP institutions.
Good Governance Learning Workshop for CFIs
MHRD, NPIU
Low- performing
Institutions
MHRD and NPIU
To be Completed
by
Immediately
March 31, 2015
MHRD
January 2-31,
2015
April 15, 2015
MHRD, NPIU
Immediately
MHRD and NPIU
April 30, 2015
MHRD and NPIU
May 15, 2015
MHRD and NPIU
June 2015
NPIU
Regularly
MHRD, NPIU
MHRD, NPIU
December 31,
2015
Immediately
MHRD, NPIU
Immediately
MHRD, NPIU
February 28,
2015
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
Mentoring and Performance Auditing
Continue mentoring in its current form
MHRD and NPIU
Next Performance Audit
MHRD, NPIU
Publicly disclose the performance audits.
MHRD, NPIU
Release non-performing mentors and
performance auditors
Identify additional mentors/ performance
MHRD, NPIU
Regularly
January 2016
Before project
closure
Immediately
MHRD, NPIU
Immediately
Page 37
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
auditors by contacting IIT Directors
Centres of Excellence
Two additional on-site visits by the already
MHRD, NPIU
identified peer-reviewers undertaken during the
remaining period of TEQIP II
Common evaluation template should be
MHRD, NPIU
developed in collaboration with the peerreviewers that would be used in the performance
assessment of the CoEs
Management and Faculty Development
IIMs and IITs to develop a proposal to evaluate
IITs/ IIMs
their programs
Remove geographical allocation of TEQIP MHRD, NPIU
institutions to particular IIMs and IITs
IITs and IIMs to offer their programs to non- IITs, IIMs,
TEQIP institutions (and charge an appropriate MHRD
fee), subject to no TEQIP participant being
turned away
Equity
Equity Action Plan guidelines to be revised by NPIU
NPIU with World Bank guidance
Employability
NPIU in collaboration with World Bank will NPIU
organize a workshop for institutions on good
practices in enhancing students’ employability
that would inform institutional Action Plans on
Improving Students’ Employability both for UG
and in particular for PG where placement rates
are in general much lower
NPIU in collaboration with the World Bank will NPIU
carry out a tracer study for TEQIP II
Discuss ToRs
29.
30.
31.
32.
NPIU to develop
placement rates
January 15, 2015
Immediately
Immediately
January 31, 2015
March 2015
September 2015
January 2015
February 2015
Advertise
28.
First one in Fall
2015 and second
towards end-ofproject.
April 30, 2015
guidelines
to
calculate NPIU
Faculty/ Staff and Student Satisfaction Survey
Report card for each institution that presents
NPIU
some of the main messages to the institution in a
graphically attractive and useful manner
Next full round of Survey
NPIU
Include an additional question on “overall NPIU
satisfaction” in each survey
Monitoring and Evaluation
Use data audit report received to verify the data
NPIU, Data
in the MIS
Auditors
January 31, 2015
February 2015
September 2015
September 2015
Continuous
Page 38
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
Freeze the data for 2010-11 and 2011-12 for the NPIU
remaining 34 institutions
Freeze the data for 2012-13
NPIU
Provide hands-on-support and training to NPIU
institutes on MIS (especially in institutions with
high turn-over in staff designated for data-entry)
Project Management
Complete recruitment for the vacant positions, MHRD, NPIU
including the two positions that need to be
advertised
Recruit a statistician
MHRD, NPIU
Empower BoG of institutions that have met all MHRD. NPIU
the required performance benchmarks to make
effective choices about the use of project funds
on international travel
Non-TEQIP institutions to be allowed to MHRD, NPIU
participate in TEQIP-sponsored activities
provided no TEQIP participant is denied
participation on account of non-TEQIP
participants filling the available spaces.
Financial Management
40.
Budget and Flow of Funds:
41.
a) States which have not released funds for
more than 50 days to release the same
immediately and status to be shared with
the Bank
b) NPIU to share monthly summary of
status of flow of funds by MHRD/states
with the Bank
c) FM Indicators Summary for states/CFIs
to be shared, including information on
low of funds
Statutory Audit
a) Submit NPIU’s PFS
b) Submit consolidated audit report for FY
2013-14 to the Bank
December 31,
2014
March 31, 2015
Continuous
Immediately
Immediately
Immediately
Immediately
Concerned
States/MHRD
December 31,
2014
NPIU/SPFUs
Within 15 days
after every month
NPIU/States/CFIs
December 31,
2014
NPIU
NPIU/States/CFIs
December 31,
2014
January 15, 2015
42.
Monitoring by NPIU
43.
a) Share status of appointment of Internal
Auditor for SPFUs/ CFIs for FY 201415
b) Share draft format for quarterly
reporting by SPFUs/ CFIs to NPIU
c) Share draft audit observation compliance
mechanism to be followed in future.
FM Staffing:
NPIU/states/CFIs
January 15, 2015
NPIU/states/CFIs
January 31, 2015
NPIU/states/CFIs
January 31, 2015
Page 39
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
Vacancy of NPIU FM consultant to be filled
MHRD
January 31, 2015
Share Vacancy status at SPFUs/ CFIs
NPIU/States/CFIs
January 31, 2015
NPIU, SPFUs,
institutions
NPIU, SPFUs,
Institutions
Institutions
March 31, 2015
Procurement
Review and plan the procurement for the
remaining funds available (apprx Rs. 105 cr.)
Institutes to plan 20% additional procurement to
address materialization factor
Review all ongoing contracts and extensions
processed accordingly
PPR report to be shared with institutions
NPIU
Submit the details of procurement complaints if NPIU
any with actions taken on it to Bank for review
and its closer
March 31, 2015
Immediately
As soon as
available
Immediately
Page 40
Annex 7: World Bank-FICCI Survey on the Employability of
Newly Graduated Engineers
In 2014, the World Bank and FICCI conducted a follow-up study to the 2009 survey on the
employability of newly graduated engineers. The study comprised surveys of 896 companies
(response rate of 82.5 percent) and detailed interviews with senior HR executives in leading
companies. For the surveys, sixteen main sectors were covered, led by infrastructure (17%),
power (14%), automobiles (8%) and oil & gas (7%).
The key findings are:
1. Dramatic improvement in employer satisfaction levels: In 2009, only 36 percent of
employers were either very or extremely satisfied with freshly graduated engineers. In
2014, 80 percent of employers were either very or extremely satisfied with freshly
graduated engineers
2. Improvement in soft skills between 2009 and 2014: The qualitative data reveal that
institutes are investing considerably in building the soft skills of their students. While
some institutes bring in industry speakers or guest lecturers, others hire behavior
coaches. Additionally, many institutes conduct mock interviews and a number of them
encourage their students to take the AMCAT to diagnose specific areas of weakness.
3. Other factors explaining the improvement in employability: Relative to 2009, there
are far more engineers available for companies to choose as a result of the market
slump. In the survey, 96 percent of companies reported no difficulty in hiring.
Additionally, companies invest considerably in training new employees, generally
through on-the-job methods.
4. Technical skills remain weak: The data indicate that recent graduates have not
improved much in terms of their technical skills and problem-solving abilities.
Page 41
Going forward
1. Important to keep the momentum on building soft skills. Students should not just be
evaluated on outcomes but also their ability to work in teams. Institutes should
continue building links with alumni
2. Important to reorient curriculum and assessment toward problem-solving and
team-work, with more emphasis on joint activities in the curriculum.
Page 42
Annex 8: Procurement
Status of Procurement in the project:The status of procurement as planned for the entire
period was discussed during the mission. Besides the agreed action plan of last mission was
also reviewed. Procurement team of NPIU furnished a current national summery of
procurement status under TEQIP II project.
All the procurement under TEQIP II is being done through PMSS with very few exceptions
and at the end of Nov 14,the expenditure happened under procurement: Rs. 329.77 Crores as
per PMSS and Rs. 437.27 cr as per FMS . This Rs. 107 cr difference in both the figures is due
to some of the payments are not updated in PMSS by the participating institutions.
At the end of Nov 14, contracts worth Rs. 242.83 cr are already committed and for Rs. 135.5
cr worth of cases, the procurement is “In pipeline” i.e at various stages of procurement.
Further at the end of Nov’14, it is planned to procure goods worth Rs. 286.98 Crores for
which procurement action is yet to be initiated.
Therefore total procurement expenditure estimated upto Nov 14 end is 329.77 + 242.83 +
135.5 + 286.98 = Rs. 995.08 Crores (say Rs. 995 Crores).
The mission noted that with request from client the project was restructured with reduction of
loan amount in project by USD 80 mn due to savings under the project as a result of
exchange rate shifts since project approval. Further the project period was also extended for a
period of 22 months with revised project end date as 30th Oct 2016. Now the revised loan
amount for this project is USD 220 mn.
As per project requirement, the maximum procurement allowed for Institutes under
component 1.1 and Centre of excellence is 55% of the outlay and that for 1.2 Institutes, the
cap is 45%. Taking avg cap of 50%, the total revised expenditure under procurement for the
project will be USD 110 mn. Taking US$ conversion rate as INR 60 and Bank reimburse
60% of eligible expenditure, the projected eligible expenditure in procurement will be (110x
6)/60%= INR 1100cr. Therefore there is a clear gap of INR 105cr, which may either be
compensated through additional planning of procurement of items by the Institutes or
increase in the expenditure under soft component ( i.e other than procurement). Further it is
recommended that the institutes should plan 20% additional procurement to take care of
materialization factor.
With extension in project period, the institutions will continue to do procurement for some
more time and for smooth procurement NPIU may plan for training on PMSS for the
institutions, where new officials have taken over the charge for the procurement activity.
The PMSS was designed to support a decentralized procurement process at the institutional
level, while promoting the uniformity, consistency and transparency in procurement process,
conducted at multiple institutions.
The PMSS is also being used by the SPFUs (State Project Facilitation Unit) and NPIU
(National Project Implementation Unit) for procurement as well as monitoring activities.
To take care of project extension period, NPIU may review all on going contracts and where
ever it is required suitable extension to the contract is processed immediately, so that there is
no disruption of activity during the extended period. Immediate attention of NPIU is drawn to
the contract with M/s Glodyne techno servo ltd Pune, who is managing the PMSS system.
Page 43
Suitable amendment to the contract is made to take care of project extension period. If the
amendment amount is more than 15% of the contract cost, then the proposal is required to be
submitted to the Bank for review and No Objection.
1) Procurement Post Review (PPR) FY 15: For the PPR FY 14 the PPR report was
shared with NPIU and compliance to PPR comments are received from the institutes.
Mission was advised by the Project that GPCL, the authorized agency of World Bank
has already conducted the PPR for the current FY and they will be submitting their
report shortly, which will be shared with the institutions through NPIU for their
compliance.
2) Complaint Handling: The mission informed the Procurement staff of NPIU about
the mandatory requirement of Bank’s review of the complaints and their resolution.
Project to submit the details of procurement complaints if any with actions taken on it
to Bank for review and its closer.Mission noted that there was a complaint by one of
the supplier regarding non payment of their bills by RTU Kota for several months.
During mission visit to Rajasthan, this issue was raised. It was clarified by the
institute that as there was no fund released for this activity, the payment could not be
made. However the SPFU Rajasthan informed that the fund from MHRD has since
been received and the payment is going to be made in a week time.
3) Project was explained about importance of submitting final contract copy with check
list for all prior review cases to Bank for getting WBR no.
4) Rating for Procurement: Though procurement activities are picked up in recent
past, the cumulative procurement is still less With 57.5% of planned procurement
committed, the project has to do a lot to complete all the planned procurement, hence
the procurement performance during the period of review has been retained as
moderately Satisfactory.
Page 44
Annex 9: Financial Management
The FM review included desk review of information presented by the NPIU and SPFUs on
key FM areas and State visit to Andhra Pradesh. The mission appreciates the comprehensive
information prepared by the NPIU on provision of budget, expenditure and status of release
of funds.
¾
BUDGETING, FUND FLOWS AND EXPENDITURES:
MHRD till date has released INR 2,439 million to the states for FY 2014-15 against budget
of INR 4,500 million. As on 4th December 2014, cumulative total of funds released by the
MHRD to states is INR 7,307 million, out of which the states have released INR 6,048
million i.e. 83% of the central share. For overall status, refer statement below showing release
upto 4th December 2014 and expenditure upto 31st Oct,2014:
Release of
fund
Central Share
Expected
Matching
State Share
Expected
Institution
Share
Expected
Availability of
Total Fund
Actual Fund
released by
State
1,0908.2
2529.7
133
1,3571.1
1,1808
(figures in INR million)
Cumulative
%age of
Expenditure
Utilization
8569
73%
Adequacy of State Share: The cumulative total of state share released to institutions till 4th
December 2014 is INR 1,954 million. During the State visit to AP mission observed that the
state has not yet released matching share of Rs. 20 lakhs and Rs. 214.12 lakhs respectively
for the last two releases by the MHRD. On the overall the mission is unable to assess the
adequacy of release of State and Institute’s respective shares and would request NPIU to
share the related data with the Bank.
Release of Funds by States: On analysis of the position of the release of funds by States,
during the period May to November 2014, it is observed that inordinate time is still being
taken by some states. Of the total amount of Central and State share of INR 1,644 million
pending to be released by the States, an amount equivalent to INR 747 million (i.e 45%)
pertains to releases made by MHRD prior to 30th July 2014, i.e more than 120 days. The
related states are namely, Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Jharkhand, Karnataka,
Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Punjab, UT-Chandigarh, Uttarakhand and West
Bengal. For details please refer to Annex 10.
Budget Provision: Review of information on budget provision for FY 2014-15 showed that,
in general, the states have provided sufficient funds to meet the forecast of expenditure for
this financial year. Information for Bihar, Odisha and NCT-Delhi was not made available.
¾
STAFFING AND CAPACITY BUILDING OF FINANCE AND ACCOUNTS STAFF
Staffing: Finance and Accounting Staffing remains an area of concern. At NPIU as against
the sanctioned post of 7 personals, there is only one Sr. consultant (finance) and one
Executive Assistant positioned at NPIU. It was shared with the mission that some of the
vacancies are likely to be filled up in the next two months.
During the State visit to AP it was shared with mission that after bifurcation of the state and
division of staff between the states of Telangana and AP, the post of Head FM Unit and 2
superintendents were allocated to Telangana.The Head of SPFU, therefore, has additional
charge of FM Unit, which comprises 1 Additional Director (Accounts) and 1 Superintendent.
Page 45
The mission was informed that a proposal for additional staffing was submitted to the state
government, but sanction of additional staff could take several months.
On the overall the mission is unable to assess the adequacy of finance and accounts staff
across project and would request NPIU to share the related data with the Bank. In addition,
the mission would like to re-iterate that substantial vacancies may have led to technically
enabled resources being engaged in administrative and accounting functions, thereby leading
to in-appropriate utilization of already scarce resources.
Staff capacity Building/ Training: It was shared with the mission that after May 2014 no
further trainings have been conducted. Moving forward in the quarter ending March 2015
NPIU is planning 3 training workshops on E-FMR and Financial Management. It was further
shared that the e-module for training has been shared with the states. However, NPIU was
unable to share the status of rolling out of E-training module.
¾
AUDITING AND OTHER ASSURANCE MECHANISMS
Effective integration of External, Internal and Performance Audits still remains a challenge. It
is re-iterated that any audit should not be seen as a stand-alone activity and the audit cycle
should be re-assessed to ensure that the internal audit reports are shared with the statutory
auditor in a timely manner. This will enable to maximize the synergistic effect and facilitate
effective financial management environment.
Statutory Audits: The Consolidated Audit Report for FY 2013-14 to the Bank is overdue for
submission to the Bank, due date September 30, 2013. The following table summarizes the
status of audit reports for FY 2013-14, as have been received by the NPIU:
Particulars
Reports Due
Reports Received by NPIU
Pending Reports
States/UTs
22*
15
7
CFIs
25
21
4
NPIU**
1
1
Nil
Total
48
37
11
*There are 23 states in the project, but report for Telangana is not due for FY 2013-14.
**NPIU: Audit of NPIU was conducted along with audit for Ed. CIL
Further, NPIU shared that the Auditor for Consolidation of Audit Report have already been
appointed by NPIU and work of consolidation is under way.
Internal Audits: Internal audit is the most effective system of internal control particularly for
assessing sound financial management system in a program like TEQUIP. Internal audit
requirements are still being partially fulfilled by some Sates only.
Compliance of Audit Observations: This remains an area of concern. Presently there is no
formal audit observation compliance mechanism in place to ensure timely follow-up of the
audit observations of each audit.
Monitoring by NPIU and SPFUs and FM Indicators: Regular monitoring of FM issues by
NPIU and SPFUs is crucial for improving the FM performance of the project. The mission reiterates that NPIU and the SPFUs should implement the system of quarterly submission of
information on important areas such as finance and accounts staffing; flow of funds; release
Page 46
of states and Institutes’s share of funds; status of resolution of audit observations, financial
performance indicators, e-training, interest amounts in project bank accounts; appointment
and progress of external and internal audit; etc. It has been agreed that NPIU shall prepare as
reporting format and share the same with bank for inputs before dissemination of the same.
Further, NPIU should also establish some formal system for addressing issues on account of
in-appropriate/ in-eligible expenditures declared by the auditors.
Financial Reporting: The mission was informed that E-FMR continues to be implemented
partially and IFR submitted to the Bank is based on the excel summaries sent by the institutes
and the SPFUs. Further, it was shared that the NPIU is also in discussion with the software
developer for MIS for developing a Financial Module integrated with the present MIS. The
mission suggested that while planning this module detailed attention should be given to the
envisaged information inputs and output requirement and it should be ensured that the present
E-FMR system also gets integrated at the time of up-gradation. In addition, it was agreed a
time bound road map should be developed on the way forward to ensure on-line transmission
of financial information.
¾ RECOMMENDATIONS:
The mission would like to suggest the following action points to facilitate strengthened
financial arrangements at each level:
i.
Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya
Pradesh, Maharashtra, Punjab, UT-Chandigarh, Uttarakhand and West Bengal to take
immediate action for long pending release of funds to institutes, and NPIU to inform
the Bank about the status of releases of all states by 25 May 2014 which have not
released funds for more than 50 days;
ii. Vacancy of consultant finance at NPIU should be filled at the earliest
iii. Pro-active involvement of NPIU, specifically in instances where there are in-ordinate
delays in release of funds. This may involve state visits by NPIU.
iv.
Effective Audit Cycle: Audit reports of each audit should be shared with the other
auditors to ensure that the audit issues are appropriately shared and impact fully
covered.
v.
Re-visit the ToR for internal and external audits in consultation with the SPFUs.
vi.
Formal audit observation compliance mechanism should be in place to ensure timely
follow-up of the audit observations of each audit. This may include setting up of
Audit Committee at SPFUs.
vii.
Internal Audit of SPFUs accounts should be conducted on a quarterly basis in such a
manner that all the institutes’ are also appropriately covered. NPIU should monitor
the status with the SPFUs on regular basis.
Page 47
9.10.14
20 days
Not released
27.02.14
64 days
26.05.14
26.05.14
64 days
27.02.14
23.12.13
Not released
18.09.14
23.12.13
150 days
Not released
150 days
150 days
7.11.13
20 days
7.11.13
7.11.13
34 days
20 days
34 days
34 days
10.06.13
7.05.13
213 days
7.6.13
9.10.14
10.06.13
10.06.13
2
Aditya Institute of
Technology &
Management,
Tekkali
9.10.14
7.05.13
7.05.13
JNTU College of
Engineering,
Pulivendula, Kadapa
18.09.14
213 days
Sree Vidyanikethan
Engineering
College, Chittur
213 days
1
18.09.14
7.6.13
4
7.6.13
ANDHRA
PRADESH
154 days
30.7.13
Days Consumed by State
Date of Release by State
Fund Released (5th
Installment)
Date of Release by MHRD
Days Consumed by MHRD
Fund Released (4th
Installment)
Request made by NPIU
Fund Released (3rd
Installment)
Name of the
Institution
28.02.13
Name of State
14.12.11
Sl.
No.
Fund Released (2nd
Installment)
90 days
Shri Vishnu
Engineering College
for Women,
Bhimavaram
14.12.11
Fund Released
(1st
Installment)
90 days
3
14.12.11
Annex 10: Summary of release of funds by States to Institutions
TECHNICAL EDUCATION QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME (TEQIP) PHASE-II
4.12.2014
Summary of Release of funds by States to Institutions
Release of (CoE)
Page 48
9
Gayathri Vidya
Parishad College of
Engineering
10
Gitam Institute of
TechbnologyGITAM University,
Vishakhapatnam
11
VR Siddhartha
Kanuru, Vijayawada
17.08.12
6.2.13
173 days
12.11.13
27.02.14
105 days
26.05.14
90 days
Anurag Engineering
College, Nalgonda
14.12.11
7.6.13
213 days
21.08.13
18.09.13
28 days
4.3.14
167 days
12
Telangana
150 days
7.11.13
34 days
10.06.13
7.05.13
173 days
6.2.13
167 days
4.3.14
28 days
18.09.13
21.8.13
173 days
6.2.13
9.10.14
20 days
Not released
16.08.13
04.02.14
141 days
9.10.14
20 days
Not released
28.03.13
30.7.13
133 days
167 days
4.3.14
28 days
18.09.13
21.08.13
213 days
7.6.13
18.09.14
90 days
26.05.14
105 days
27.02.14
12.11.13
163 days
15.10.12
18.09.14
90 days
26.05.14
105 days
27.02.14
12.11.13
144 days
16.7.13
Not released
15 days
10.07.14
25.06.14
90 days
26.05.14
64 days
27.02.14
23.12.13
150 days
7.11.13
34 days
10.06.13
7.05.13
213 days
7.6.13
14.12.11
SVU College of
Engineering,
Tirupati
14.12.11
8
01.05.12
JNTU College of
Engineering,
Kakinada
22.02.12
7
17.08.12
6
Andhra University
College of
Engineering,
Vishakhapatnam
17.08.12
5
Madanapalle
Institute of
Technology &
Science,
Madanapalli
Page 49
Nizam Instittue of
Engineering &
Technology,
Nalgonda
18
Vasavi College of
Engineering,
Hyderabad
150 days
23.12.13
27.02.14
64 days
26.05.14
90 days
19
VNR Vignana Jyothi
Institute of
Engineering &
Technology,
Hyderabad
01.05.12
15.10.12
163 days
7.05.13
10.06.13
34 days
7.11.13
150 days
23.12.13
27.02.14
64 days
26.05.14
90 days
20
JNTU College of
Engineering,
Hyderabad
14.12.11
7.6.13
213 days
21.08.13
18.09.13
28 days
4.3.14
167 days
20 days
not released
29 days
not released
90 days
26.05.14
64 days
27.02.14
23.12.13
150 days
7.11.13
34 days
10.06.13
7.05.13
213 days
7.6.13
9.10.14
90 days
26.05.14
64 days
27.02.14
23.12.13
150 days
7.11.13
34 days
10.06.13
7.05.13
213 days
7.6.13
9.10.14
90 days
26.05.14
64 days
27.02.14
23.12.13
150 days
7.11.13
34 days
10.06.13
7.05.13
144 days
16.7.12
18.09.14
213 days
7.6.13
10.09.14
7.11.13
34 days
10.06.13
7.05.13
213 days
7.6.13
90 days
26.05.14
64 days
27.02.14
23.12.13
150 days
7.11.13
34 days
10.06.13
7.05.13
213 days
7.6.13
14.12.11
17
14.12.11
Mallareddy
Hyderabad
14.12.11
16
22.02.12
15
Gokaraju Ranga Raju
Institute of
Engineering &
Technology,
Hyderabad
14.12.11
14
Chaitanya Bharthi
Institute of
Technology,
Gandipet
14.12.11
13
Aurora's Scientific
Technological &
Research Academy,
Hyderabad
13.06
.13
7.11.
13
147
days
Page 50
141 days
04.02.14
29 days
9.10.14
10.09.14
not released
16.08.13
90 days
90 days
90 days
26.05.14
26.05.14
26.05.14
105 days
105 days
105 days
27.02.14
27.02.14
27.02.14
12.11.13
12.11.13
12.11.13
106 days
213 days
213 days
173 days
154 days
17.01.13
232 days
Bhagalpur College of
Engineering,
Bhagalpur
17.01.13
232 days
100 days
26.05.14
7.6.13
7.6.13
6.2.13
Muzaffarpur Institute
of Technology,
Muzaffarpur
30.05.12
1
30.05.12
Release of SPFU
Andhra Pradesh
30.7.13
Engineering,
Kakatiya University,
Kothagudem
20.3.13
25
11.02.14
Sreenidhi Institute of
Science &
Technology,
Ghatkesar
14.12.11
24
14.12.11
Technology, Osmania
University,
Hyderabad
17.08.12
23
28.02.13
22
University College
of Engineering,
Osmania University,
Hyderabad
10.12.12
21
JNTU Institute of
Science &
Technology,
Hyderabad
BIHAR
2
Page 51
295 days
295 days
295 days
31.03.13
31.03.14
32 days
31.03.14
32 days
Not released
55 days
55 days
90 days
27.02.14
27.02.14
9.6.14
03.01.14
03.01.14
10.3.14
177 days
83 days
83 days
92 days
GUJARAT
22.1.13
22.1.13
Lukhdirji
Engineering
College, Morbi
Government
Bhavnagar
2
11.07.12
Birla Vishvakarma
Mahavidyalaya,
Vallabh Vidynagar
31.5.13
1
Delhi Technical
University, Delhi
01.11.12
NCT-Delhi
28.02.13
1
31.03.13 &
27.1.14
Rungta College of
Engineering &
Technology, Bhilai
31.03.13 &
27.01.14
4
Not released
Government
Raipur
6.03.14
3
11.07.12
CHHATTISGA
RH
11.07.12
Government
Jagdalpur, Bastar
11.07.12
2
12.09.13
Government
Bilaspur
01.11.12
1
3
Page 52
2
Engineering &
Technology, MDU,
Rohtak
29.11.12
350 days
10.12.13
27.02.14
89 days
31.03.14
32 days
N.C College of
Engineering, Panipat
350 days
10.12.13
27.02.14
89 days
31.03.14
32 days
3
HARYANA
29.11.12
1
14.12.11
Engineering &
Technology (UIET),
Kurukshetra
University,
Kurukshetra
Not released
90 days
9.6.14
10.3.14
7
97 days
90 days
9.6.14
10.3.14
92 days
Not released
90 days
9.6.14
10.3.14
92 days
31.5.13
6
16.09.14
79 days
9.6.14
21.3.14
350 days
SPFU Expenses
31.5.13
28.02.13
Government
Engineering
College, Rajkot
30.3.13
28.02.13
Not released
90 days
9.6.14
10.3.14
92 days
31.5.13
28.02.13
Government
Engineering
College,
Gandhinagar
29.11.12
Government
Engineering
College, Patan
1.11.12 &
28.2.13
Not released
90 days
9.6.14
10.3.14
92 days
31.5.13
28.02.13
Shantilal Shah
Engineering
College, Bhavnagar
14.12.11
5
14.12.11
4
Page 53
1
10.06.13
55 days
19.02.14
252 days
25.2.14
9.6.14
105 days
Not released
BVB College of
Engineering &
Technology, Hubli
27.09.13
62 days
04.02.13
129 days
29.3.14
9.6.14
71 days
not released
42 days
08.05.13
2nd Instalment
Not Released
Cambridge Institute
of Technology,
Ranchi
Not released
138 days
9.6.14
21.1.14
128 days
07.05.12
72 days
20.09.14
143 days
9.6.14
2.1.14
117 days
07.10.13
22 days
13.06.13
22.05.13
326 days
14.01.13
22.02.12
Jawaharlal Nehru
Government
Sundernagar, Mandi
28.03.13 & 2nd
Inst. On 8.9.14
17.04.13
KARNATAKA
Birla Institute of
Technology, Mesra,
Ranchi
26.07.13
2
128 days
JHARKHAND
283 days
1
07.05.12
HIMACHAL
PRADESH
22.09.12
1
295 days
29.11.12
06.02.12
32 days
31.03.14
89 days
27.02.14
10.12.13
295 days
29.11.12
06.02.12
Faculty of
Engineering &
Technology,
Deenbandhu Chhotu
Ram University of
Science &
Technology, Murthal
Faculty of
Engineering &
Technology, Guru
Jambeshwar
University of Science
& Technology,
Hissar
30.12.11
6
30.12.11
5
14.12.11
4
97 days
16.09.14
52 days
9.6.14
18.4.14
295 days
29.11.12
06.02.12
Faculty of Science,
Kurukshetra
University,
Kurukshetra
Page 54
8
BMS College of
Engineering,
Bangalore
9
The National
Institute of
Engineering,
Mysore
30.12.11
22.09.12
267 days
26.07.13
27.09.13
62 days
04.02.13
129 days
29.3.14
9.6.14
71 days
10
Basaveshwar
Engineering
College, Bagalkot
30.12.11
22.09.12
267 days
20.06.13
10.07.13
20 days
09.10.13
91 days
26.2.14
9.6.14
114 days
not released not released
Malnad College of
Engineering, Hassan
237 days
08.04.14
16.8.13
not released
22 days
23.7.14
1.7.14
138 days
04.02.13
28 days
18.09.13
21.08.13
267 days
22.09.12
91 days
09.10.13
20 days
10.07.13
20.06.13
267 days
22.09.12
138 days
04.02.13
28 days
18.09.13
21.08.13
267 days
22.09.12
not released
22 days
23.7.14
1.7.14
86 days
3.06.2014
88 days
16.12.13
19.09.13
267 days
22.09.12
not released
70 days
9.6.14
28.3.14
91 days
09.10.13
20 days
10.07.13
20.06.13
283 days
22.09.12
not released
116 days
11.02.14
17.10.13
283 days
22.09.12
129 days
04.02.13
62 days
27.09.13
26.07.13
283 days
22.09.12
14.12.11
7
14.12.11
6
Sri
Jayachamarajendra
College of
Engineering, Mysore
14.12.11
5
University
Visvesvaraya
College of
Engineering
(Bangalore
University),
Bangalore
30.12.11
4
NITTE Meenakshi
Institute of
Technology,
Bangalore
30.12.11
3
Government Sri
Krishnarajendra
Silver Jublee
Technological
Institute, Bangalore
30.12.11
PES College of
Engineering, Mandya
30.12.11
2
Page 55
17
SDM College of
Engineering and
Technology,
Dhavalagiri,
Dharwad
18
RV College of
Engineering,
Bangalore
19
PES Institute of
Technology,
Bangalore
28.12.12
143 days
20.06.13
10.07.13
20 days
09.10.13
91 days
28.11.13
11.02.14
76 days
Government
Thrissur
14.3.12
74 days
09.04.13
21.05.13
42 days
23.8.13
94 days
19.09.13
27.11.13
69 days
1
58 days
6.08.14
143 days
9.6.14
16.1.14
24 days
21.12.13
KERALA
28.03.13
05.07.13
99 days
28.03.13
05.07.13
99 days
91 days
09.10.13
20 days
10.07.13
20.06.13
143 days
99 days
05.07.13
28.03.13
91 days
09.10.13
20 days
10.07.13
20.06.13
143 days
129 days
04.02.13
62 days
27.09.13
26.07.13
143 days
28.12.12
KARNATAKA
28.12.12
Sri Siddhartha
Institute of
Technology, Maralur,
Tumkur
28.12.12
15
129 days
04.02.13
62 days
27.09.13
26.07.13
143 days
28.12.12
129 days
04.02.13
62 days
27.09.13
26.07.13
143 days
28.12.12
138 days
04.02.13
28 days
18.09.13
21.08.13
143 days
28.12.12
not released
71 days
9.6.14
29.3.14
129 days
04.02.13
62 days
27.09.13
26.07.13
284 days
8.10.12
138 days
04.02.13
28 days
18.09.13
21.08.13
267 days
22.09.12
30.12.11
NMAM Institute of
Technology, Nitte,
Udupi
30.12.11
14
17.08.12
MS Ramaiah Institute
of Technology,
Bangalore
17.08.12
13
17.08.12
Dr. Ambedkar
Institute of
Technology,
Bangalore
17.08.12
12
17.08.12
Siddaganga Institute
of Technology,
Tumkur
17.08.12
H.K.E.S's PDA
College of
Engineering,
Gulbarga
17.08.12
16
30.12.11
11
Page 56
6
Government College
of Engineering,
Kannur
7
Government
Bartonhill,
Thiruvananthapuram
8
LBS Institute of
Technology for
Women, Poojappura,
Thiruvananthapuram
24 days
16.1.14
9.6.14
143 days
6.08.14
58 days
9
College of
Engineering
Perumon, Perinad,
Kollam
06.02.12
26.4.13
79 days
09.04.13
21.05.13
42 days
23.8.13
94 days
11.10.13
11.02.14
122 days
24.03.14
41 days
28.4.14
9.6.14
42 days
6.08.14
58 days
10
College of
Engineering,
Kidangoor, Kottayam
06.02.12
26.4.13
79 days
09.04.13
21.05.13
42 days
23.8.13
94 days
16.1.14
9.6.14
143 days
6.08.14
58 days
21.12.13
69 days
27.11.13
19.09.13
94 days
23.8.13
42 days
21.05.13
09.04.13
74 days
14.3.12
58 days
6.08.14
42 days
9.6.14
28.4.14
41 days
24.03.14
122 days
11.02.14
11.10.13
94 days
23.8.13
42 days
21.05.13
09.04.13
74 days
14.3.12
58 days
6.08.14
143 days
9.6.14
16.1.14
24 days
21.12.13
69 days
27.11.13
19.09.13
74 days
14.3.12
58 days
6.08.14
143 days
9.6.14
16.1.14
24 days
21.12.13
69 days
27.11.13
19.09.13
94 days
23.8.13
42 days
21.05.13
09.04.13
74 days
14.3.12
58 days
6.08.14
143 days
9.6.14
16.1.14
24 days
21.12.13
69 days
27.11.13
19.09.13
94 days
23.8.13
42 days
21.05.13
09.04.13
74 days
14.3.12
58 days
6.08.14
42 days
9.6.14
28.4.14
24 days
21.12.13
69 days
27.11.13
19.09.13
94 days
23.8.13
42 days
21.05.13
09.04.13
74 days
14.3.12
58 days
6.08.14
143 days
9.6.14
16.1.14
24 days
21.12.13
69 days
27.11.13
19.09.13
74 days
14.3.12
30.12.11
5
School of
Engineering, Cochin
University of Science
& Technology,
Cochin
30.12.11
Rajiv Gandhi
Institute of
Technology,
Kottayam
30.12.11
4
30.12.11
Government
Painavu, Idukki
30.12.11
3
30.12.11
Government
Kozhikode
30.12.11
2
Page 57
Government
Wayand
15
Government
Engineering
College,
Sreekrishnapur,
Palakkad
16
College of
Engineering, Adoor,
Manakkala
17
College of
Engineering,
Cherthala,
Pallippuram
18
College of
Engineering,
Karunagappally,
Kollam
28.02.13
18.4.13
49 days
28.4.14
9.6.14
42 days
6.08.14
58 days
19
Thangal Kunju
Musaliar College of
Engineering, Kollam
28.02.13
18.4.13
49 days
28.4.14
9.6.14
42 days
6.08.14
58 days
58 days
6.08.14
42 days
9.6.14
28.4.14
49 days
18.4.13
58 days
6.08.14
42 days
9.6.14
28.4.14
49 days
18.4.13
not released
34 days
10.7.14
6.06.14
49 days
18.4.13
58 days
6.08.14
42 days
9.6.14
28.4.14
49 days
18.4.13
24 days
16.1.14
9.6.14
143 days
6.08.14
58 days
16.1.14
9.6.14
143 days
6.08.14
58 days
21.12.13
69 days
27.11.13
19.09.13
79 days
26.4.13
129 days
17.10.13
32 days
10.06.13
9.5.13
79 days
26.4.13
58 days
6.08.14
143 days
9.6.14
16.1.14
24 days
21.12.13
69 days
27.11.13
19.09.13
94 days
23.8.13
42 days
21.05.13
09.04.13
79 days
26.4.13
06.02.12
14
06.02.12
College of
Engineering
Thalassery, Kannur
06.02.12
13
28.02.13
College of
Engineering
Trikaripur,
Cheemeni, Kasargod
28.02.13
12
28.02.13
Cooperative Institute
of Technology,
Vadakara, Kozhikode
28.02.13
11
Page 58
5
Shri GS Institute of
Technology &
Science, Indore
1
Government College
of Engineering,
Karad
28.06.12
163 days
21.08.13
18.09.13
28 days
03.12.13
78 days
28.07.14
2.09.14
36 days
not released
BVB's Sardar Patel
College of
Engineering,
Mumbai
163 days
4.12.13
11.02.14
68 days
13.05.14
91 days
21.10.14
7.11.14
17 days
not released
MAHARASHTR
A
2
26 days
25.03.14
78 days
27.02.14
11.12.13
107 days
107 days
30.03.12
28.09.12
Rajiv Gandhi
Proudyogiki
Vishwavidhyalaya,
Bhopal
30.03.12 &
28.09.12
4
28.06.12
MADHYA
PRADESH
partly released
29 days
17.10.14
18.09.14
4 days
20.12.13
84 days
16.12.13
23.09.13
107 days
30.03.12 &
28.09.12
14.12.11
partly released
27 days
26.9.14
29.8.14
26 days
25.03.14
78 days
27.02.14
11.12.13
107 days
30.03.12 &
28.09.12
14.12.11
partly released
15 days
30.07.14
15.7.14
26 days
25.03.14
78 days
27.02.14
11.12.13
107 days
30.03.12 &
28.09.12
14.12.11
2
Samrat Ashok
Technological
Institute
(Engineering
College), Vidisha
14.12.11
Sagar Institute of
Research &
Technology, Bhopal
17.01.12
Madhav Institute of
Technology &
Science, Gwalior
06.02.12
3
17.01.12
1
Page 59
Department of
Technology, Shivaji
University, Kolhapur
7
Bharati Vidyapeeth
University, College
of Engineering,
Pune
8
STES's Sinhgad
College of
Engineering, Pune
9
Institute of
Chemical
Technology,
Matunga, Mumbai
17.01.12
28.06.12
163 days
21.08.13
18.09.13
28 days
03.12.13
78 days
30.12.13
27.02.14
59 days
13.05.14
75 days
8.5.14
24.6.14
28 days
9.9.14
51 days
21.10.14
7.11.14
17 days
not released
28.03.13
04.09.13
159 days
10
College of
Engineering,
Shivajinagar, Pune
17.01.12
28.06.12
163 days
06.03.13
21.05.13
76 days
04.09.13
105 days
21.08.13
18.09.13
150 days
03.12.13
78 days
8.5.14
24.6.14
28 days
9.9.14
51 days
21.10.14
7.11.14
17 days
not released
28.03.13
04.09.13
159 days
163 days
28.06.12
not released
17 days
7.11.14
21.10.14
75 days
13.05.14
59 days
27.02.14
30.12.13
78 days
03.12.13
28 days
18.09.13
21.08.13
163 days
28.06.12
68 days
08.05.13
91 days
13.05.14
68 days
11.02.14
4.12.13
68 days
08.05.13
not released
36 days
2.09.14
28.07.14
78 days
03.12.13
28 days
18.09.13
21.08.13
163 days
28.06.12
not released
15 days
10.07.14
25.06.14
165 days
13.05.14
54 days
27.11.13
4.10.13
163 days
28.06.12
17.01.12
6
17.01.12
5
University
Department of
Chemical
Technology, North
Maharashtra
University, Jalgaon
28.02.13
Government College
of Engineering,
Jalgaon
28.02.13
4
17.01.12
Government College
of Enginering,
Chandrapur
17.01.12
3
Page 60
17
G H Raisoni College
of Engineering,
Nagpur.
17.08.12
11.12.12
116 days
06.03.13
21.05.13
76 days
04.09.13
105 days
21.08.13
18.09.13
150 days
03.12.13
18
Rajarambapu
Institute of
Technology,Sakhral
e, Islampur ,Sangli.
11.12.12
116 days
21.08.13
18.09.13
28 days
03.12.13
78 days
21.10.14
7.11.14
17 days
not released
75 days
8.5.14
24.6.14
28 days
9.9.14
51 days
21.10.14
7.11.14
17 days
not released
30.12.13
27.02.14
59 days
13.05.14
75 days
21.10.14
7.11.14
17 days
not released
13.05.14
59 days
27.02.14
30.12.13
78 days
03.12.13
28 days
18.09.13
21.08.13
163 days
28.06.12
78 days
not released
36 days
2.09.14
28.07.14
78 days
03.12.13
28 days
18.09.13
21.08.13
MAHARASHTR
A
163 days
Govt. College of
Engineering,
Aurangabad
28.06.12
15
not released
36 days
2.09.14
28.07.14
78 days
03.12.13
28 days
18.09.13
21.08.13
163 days
28.06.12
not released
17 days
7.11.14
21.10.14
51 days
9.9.14
28 days
24.6.14
8.5.14
75 days
13.05.14
59 days
27.02.14
30.12.13
78 days
03.12.13
28 days
18.09.13
21.08.13
163 days
28.06.12
28.03.13
16.08.13
159 days
04.09.13
not released
17 days
7.11.14
21.10.14
51 days
9.9.14
28 days
24.6.14
8.5.14
75 days
13.05.14
59 days
27.02.14
30.12.13
165 days
13.05.14
54 days
27.11.13
4.10.13
163 days
28.06.12
not released
17 days
7.11.14
21.10.14
51 days
9.9.14
28 days
24.6.14
8.5.14
75 days
13.05.14
59 days
27.02.14
30.12.13
78 days
03.12.13
28 days
18.09.13
21.08.13
163 days
28.06.12
17.01.12
Govt. College of
Engineering,
Amravati
17.01.12
14
17.01.12
Walchand College
of Engineering,
Sangli
17.01.12
13
17.01.12
12
Shri Guru Gobind
Singhji Institute of
Engineering &
Technology, Nanded
17.01.12
16
Dr. Babasaheb
Ambedkar
Technological
University, Lonere,
Raigad
17.08.12
11
Veermata Jijabai
Technological
Institute, Matunga,
Mumbai
Page 61
4.04.14
35 days
4.04.14
35 days
not released
not released
not released
55 days
55 days
95 days
30 days
30 days
27.02.14
27.02.14
26.09.13
3.1.14
3.1.14
27 days
27 days
367 days
27.8.13
11.02.14
not released
26.09.13
Guru Nanak Dev
University,
Amritsar
8.11.13
not released
6
27.8.13
28.02.13
294 days
294 days
12.04.12
16.03.12
5
College of
Agricultural
Engineering and
Technology, Punjab
Agriculture
University,
Ludhiana
22.02.12
4
SBS College of
Engineering &
Technology,
Ferozepur
28.02.13
PUNJAB
294 days
GZS College of
Engineering &
Technology,
Bhatinda
12.04.12
3
12.12.12
Beant College of
Engineering &
Technology,
Gurdaspur
12.12.12
2
12.12.12
Guru Nanak Dev
Engineering
College, Ludhiana
12.12.12
1
16.03.12
College of
Engineering &
Technology,
Bhubaneshwar
14.12.11
2
22.02.12
ODISHA
Veer Surendra Sai
University of
Technology, Burla,
Sambalpur
22.02.12
1
Page 62
College of
Technology &
Engineering, Udaipur
5
M L V Textile &
Bhilwara
30.12.11
30.09.12
272
6
Government
Jhalawar
01.08.13
152 days
3
Government
Bikaner
RAJASTHAN
272
Government
Engineering
College, Ajmer
30.09.12
2
272
13.08.14
10.09.14
27 days
12.12.14
65 days
10.12.13
27.02.14
78 days
30.07.14
155 days
30.09.12
272
30.09.12
65 days
12.12.14
27 days
10.09.14
13.08.14
272
30.09.12
not released
16.08.13
not released
27 days
04.11.13
8.10.13
367 days
12.12.12
not released
30 days
26.09.13
27.8.13
367 days
12.12.12
14.12.11
Engineering, Kota
14.12.11
1
30.12.11
Thapar University,
Patiala
30.12.11
8
30.12.11
Chandigarh
Engineering
College, Mohali
30.12.11
4
28.02.13
7
Page 63
27.02.14
72 days
2.4.14
37 days
14.3.14
9.6.14
86 days
1.8.14
9.6.14
86 days
1.8.14
52 days
28.8.14
26.9.14
28 days
not released
not released
28 days
26.9.14
28.8.14
52 days
1.8.14
86 days
9.6.14
14.3.14
1.8.14
86 days
9.6.14
14.3.14
37 days
2.4.14
72 days
27.02.14
17.12.13
108 days
not released
17.12.13
14.3.14
108 days
20.02.14
not released
108 days
37 days
20.02.14
34 days
28 days
20.02.14
2.4.14
34 days
04.11.13
01.10.13
140 days
28 days
34 days
72 days
04.11.13
01.10.13
140 days
08.07.13
26.9.14
04.11.13
27.02.14
PSG College of
Technology,
Coimbatore
26.9.14
01.10.13
17.12.13
TAMIL NADU
28.8.14
140 days
140 days
3
08.07.13
Thiagarajar College
of Engineering,
Madurai
28.8.14
08.07.13
5
Bharathidasan
Institute of
Technology
Campus,
Triuchirapalli
08.07.13
2
not released
28 days
26.9.14
28.8.14
52 days
1.8.14
86 days
9.6.14
14.3.14
59 days
25.11.13
38 days
26.09.13
19.08.13
97 days
26.08.13
76 days
21.05.13
06.03.13
56
11.05.12
141 days
10.01.14
48 days
22.08.13
05.07.13
272
30.09.12
65 days
12.12.14
27 days
10.09.14
13.08.14
152 days
01.08.13
65 days
12.12.14
27 days
10.09.14
13.08.14
152 days
01.08.13
28.02.13
Govt. College of
Engineering,
Baragur,
Krishnagiri
28.02.13
1
30.12.11
Institute of
Engineering &
Technology, Alwar
16.03.12
9
28.02.13
Government College
of Engineering &
Technology, Bikaner
28.02.13
8
52 days
Coimbatore
Institute of
Technology,
Coimbatore
28.02.13
Government Woman
Ajmer
52 days
4
28.02.13
7
Page 64
University Institute
of Engineering &
Technology,
Chandigarh
2
University Institute
of Chemical
Engineering and
Technology, Punjab
University,
Chandigarh
27.02.13
10.06.13
105 days
29.08.14
19.09.14
21 days
not released
PEC University of
Technology,
Chandigarh
9.5.12
73 days
24.06.13
23.08.13
60 days
4.12.13
24.7.14
21 days
not released
13.06.14
91 days
not released
98 days
4.12.13
27.08.13
3.7.14
14.03.14
7.12.13
58 days
25.10.13
27.08.13
44 days
UTCHANDIGARH
TR-II/G-1/1 Tripura
Institute of
Technology,
Narsingarh, Tripura
103 days
3
Tripura
73 days
1
09.05.12
88 days
13.09.13
Manomaniam
Sundarnar
University,Tirunelvel
i
52 days
1.8.14
86 days
9.6.14
14.3.14
56
11.05.12
2.4.14
52 days
14.3.14
9.6.14
86 days
1.8.14
52 days
28.8.14
26.9.14
28 days
not released
59 days
14.3.14
9.6.14
86 days
1.8.14
52 days
28.8.14
26.9.14
28 days
not released
95 days
11.02.14
8.11.13
60 days
25.11.13
38 days
26.09.13
19.08.13
56
11.05.12
25.11.13
38 days
26.09.13
19.08.13
97 days
26.08.13
76 days
21.05.13
06.03.13
44 days
11.05.12
not released
28 days
26.9.14
28.8.14
52 days
1.8.14
86 days
9.6.14
14.3.14
59 days
25.11.13
38 days
26.09.13
19.08.13
97 days
26.08.13
76 days
21.05.13
06.03.13
56
11.05.12
16.03.12
9
16.03.12
Government College
of Engineering,
Salem
28.03.12
8
16.03.12
7
Alagappa Chettiar
College of
Engineering and
Technology,Karaiku
di
17.06.13
Govt. College of
Technology,
Coimbatore
29.02.12
1
29.02.12
6
Page 65
147 days
92 days
209 days
28.03.13
not released
7.11.14
196 days
196 days
14.10.14
25.08.14
25.08.14
23.10.13
94 days
03.12.13
8.9.14
17.01.14
not released
27 days
157 days
45 days
78 days
78 days
24 days
09.07.13
9.6.14
14.10.13
7.11.14
12.06.13
12.2.14
11.02.14
196 days
196 days
26.09.12
11.02.14
25.08.14
25.08.14
23.03.12
25.11.13
11.02.14
7
Kamla Nehru
Institute of
Technology,
Sultanpur
25.11.13
Bundelkhand
Institute of Engg. &
Tech., Jhansi, UP
186 days
6
186 days
Madan Mohan
Malaviya
Engineering
College, Gorakhpur
26.09.12
5
30.08.13
123 days
186 days
186 days
02.07.12
26.09.12
01.03.12
Institute of
Engineering &
Technology,
Lucknow
23.03.12
4
11.02.14
UTTAR
PRADESH
Harcourt Butler
Technological
Institute, Kanpur
14.10.14
3
186 days
2
26.09.12
1
26.09.12
Faculty of
Engineering &
Technology, MJP
Rohilkhand
University, Bareilly
School of
Engineering &
Technology, IFTM
University,
Moradabad
(formerly known as
College of
Enginering &
Technology,
Moradabad)
23.03.12
Pondicherry
Puducherry
23.03.12
UTPUDUCHERRY
23.03.12
1
Page 66
4
Technology,
Burdwan University
22.02.12
19.7.12
145 days
09.10.13
08.01.14
91 days
26.02.14
49 days
14.3.14
9.6.14
87 days
30.07.14
50 days
5
West Bengal
University of
Technology, Kolkata
14.12.11
22.3.12
98 days
09.10.13
08.01.14
91 days
26.02.14
49 days
14.3.14
9.6.14
87 days
30.07.14
50 days
3
WEST
BENGAL
Bankura Unnajani
Institute of
Engineering,
Bankura
49 days
12.3.14
9.6.14
89 days
30.07.14
50 days
14.08.14
10.09.14
27 days
not released
11.4.14
9.6.14
59 days
30.07.14
50 days
14.08.14
10.09.14
27 days
not released
26.02.14
29 days
08.01.14
10.12.13
63 days
29.11.13
63 days
27.09.13
26.7.13
98 days
22.3.12
32 days
31.03.14
55 days
27.02.14
3.1.14
63 days
29.11.13
63 days
College of
Engineering &
Management,
Kolaghat
27.09.13
2
26.7.13
RCC Institute of
Information
Technology,
Kolkata
98 days
1
22.3.12
G.B.Pant
Engineering college,
Pauri Garhwal
not released
27 days
10.09.14
14.08.14
50 days
30.07.14
89 days
9.6.14
12.3.14
49 days
26.02.14
91 days
08.01.14
09.10.13
98 days
22.3.12
not released
42 days
24.6.14
12.5.14
48 days
31.03.14
104 days
11.02.14
1.11.13
180 days
25.09.12
23.03.12
3
14.12.11
109 days
03.12.13
16.8.13
not released
129 days
9.6.14
3.2.14
142 days
05.05.12
14.12.11
College of
Technology,
GBPUAT,
pantnagar
14.12.11
2
UTTARKHA
ND
14.12.11
1
not released
42 days
24.6.14
12.5.14
48 days
31.03.14
124 days
11.02.14
10.10.13
236 days
07.08.12
14.12.11
Bipin Chandra
Tripathi Kumaon
Institute of
Technology
Dwarahat
Page 67
Heritage Institute of
Technology
11
Narula Institute of
Technology
12
Technology-Calcutta
University
14.12.11
22.3.12
98 days
24.6.13
22.08.13
163 days
21.9.13
31 days
12.11.13
08.01.14
57 days
26.02.14
49 days
14.3.14
9.6.14
87 days
30.07.14
50 days
13
Faculty of
Engineering and
Technology Jadavpur
University,
Jadavpur
14.12.11
22.3.12
98 days
6.3.13
22.04.13
47 days
6.6.13
49 days
09.10.13
08.01.14
91 days
26.02.14
49 days
14.3.14
9.6.14
87 days
30.07.14
50 days
21.08.13
21.9.13
30 days
6.9.13
85 days
not released
not released
13.6.13
27 days
50 days
30.07.14
87 days
9.6.14
14.3.14
49 days
26.02.14
90 days
08.01.14
10.10.13
49 days
10.6.13
47 days
22.04.13
6.3.13
98 days
22.3.12
27 days
32 days
31.03.14
37 days
27.02.14
21.01.14
118 days
26.06.13
10.09.14
32 days
31.03.14
37 days
27.02.14
21.01.14
118 days
16.07.13
10.09.14
50 days
30.07.14
76 days
9.6.14
25.3.14
49 days
26.02.14
57 days
08.01.14
12.11.13
49 days
10.6.13
47 days
22.04.13
6.3.13
98 days
22.3.12
14.08.14
50 days
30.07.14
89 days
9.6.14
12.3.14
49 days
26.02.14
57 days
08.01.14
12.11.13
49 days
6.6.13
47 days
22.04.13
6.3.13
98 days
22.3.12
14.08.14
Not released
46 days
24.6.14
9.5.14
49 days
26.02.14
90 days
08.01.14
10.10.13
49 days
26.6.13
47 days
22.04.13
6.3.13
98 days
22.3.12
14.12.11
10
28.02.13
M.C.K.V. Institute of
Engineering
28.02.13
9
14.12.11
8
Murshidabad College
of Engineering and
Technology,
Berhampore,
Murshidabad
14.12.11
7
Government College
of Engineering and
Textile Technology,
Berahmpore,
Murshidabad
14.12.11
6
Birbhum Institute of
Engineering &
Technology,
Birbhum
Page 68
Bengal Engineering
and Science
University, Howrah
14.12.11
22.3.12
98 days
6.3.13
22.04.13
47 days
6.6.13
49 days
24.6.13
22.08.13
59 days
21.9.13
31 days
15
JIS College of
Engineering, Kalyani
17.08.12
22.11.12
97 days
24.6.13
22.08.13
59 days
21.9.13
31 days
12.11.13
08.01.14
57 days
26.02.14
49 days
85 days
6.9.13
13.6.13
not released
59 days
9.6.14
11.4.14
49 days
26.02.14
29 days
08.01.14
10.12.13
14
Page 69

INDIA Technical Engineering Educational Quality Improvement II

Transcription

Similar documents

CREATING DISTRICT PLAN MAPS USING ATLASMAPS

TEQIP-II

14-2/2015-CD-II

details.

4. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MARK PATCHETT MPCS

Advertisement for the post of Assistant Professor

2012-CD

Big birds lost forever

Printable Brochure

scnet presentation - Shanduka Black Umbrellas

SHC Corporate Profile