Visit of Area Officers for Assessment of PMGSY
Part-A : Discussion with District Programme Implementation Units (DPIUs)
Area officers may hold a discussion with the officers of the DPIU for general assessment of the status of programme implementation in the district.As a part of this exercise, area officers should specifically check the status of implementation of the Online Management Monitoring and Accounting System (OMMAS).In particular, area officers may verify whether data is being regularly entered in the OMMAS and accuracy of the data is being verified by a dedicated officer in the PIU.For this purpose, area officers may log on to the website www.pmgsy.nic.in.After opening this website “District Reports” and “DP: District Profile” may be opened.This module provides complete information about the implementation of the programme in the selected district.Phasewise progress of works shown in the OMMAS may be compared with the information furnished by the PIU in the latest Monthly Progress Report (MPR) for assessing the accuracy of OMMAS.
Part-B : Field Inspection
Area officers may carry out visual inspection of a few ongoing/completed projects.During field inspection, area officers may pay specific attention to the following aspects:
During execution, the work is to be inspected regularly by the JEs & AEs and periodically inspected by EEs and SEs.Frequency of visits of the officers of PIU and Regional level may be assessed.
First tier of Quality Mechanism and Quality Control arrangements:In case of ongoing works, the operationalization of first tier of quality mechanism may be verified.As per provisions of the programme, every contractor is required to establish field laboratory for carrying out mandatory tests.Availability of the equipments in the field laboratory would depend on the nature of work.The field laboratory may be inspected and Quality Control registers may be checked.For recording the test results, Quality Control Register Part I is maintained.This register is to be countersigned by the JE and AE when the tests are conducted in their presence.The Quality Control Part II is record of issuance of non-confirmation reports.It may be seen by the Area Officers whether the field laboratory has been established and whether Quality Control registers are maintained.
Second Tier of Quality Control Mechanism:In case of ongoing works, the operationalization of second tier of quality mechanism may be verified. Independent State Quality Monitors (SQMs) are required to inspect the work at three stages - first when the work has just started or some earth work has been carried out, second inspection when the sub base or base course work is in progress and third inspection when work is nearing completion.The area officer may find out as to whether the work has been inspected by the SQMs at various stages.
General Quality of work
The assessment of general quality of on-going or completed work may be made by the Area Officer.General assessment about the quality of on-going or completed works may be recorded.While inspecting a complete road work assessment of general riding quality may be made by driving vehicle on the road. If it is comfortable to move on the roads at a speed of 40 km. per hour without jerks etc. the riding quality may be termed as reasonable.
In case of ongoing or completed works drainage is very essential item.It may be checked as to whether the road pavement has adequate cross slope (camber) to ensure that water does not stagnate on the road surface.Generally, it is possible to assess, through visual inspection, whether the road surface has depression etc. which may cause the water to stagnate.
In case of completed roads inspected, the overall arrangements for maintenance and upkeep may be assessed.Works of Phase I and Phase II of the programme were executed on the basis of Standard Bidding procedures of the State. Therefore, the routine maintenance of roads should be carried out by the State as per provisions in their respective contracts.However, from Phase III and onwards Standard Bidding documents have been prescribed, wherein, it is provided that the routine maintenance would be carried out by the same contractor for 5 years and payment for this routine maintenance would be madeby PIU.While assessing the quality of maintenance, following items may be seen:
- Whether the road slopes and shoulders is free from vegetation which may obstruct the traffic flow?
- Whether the rain cuts in the embankment have been repaired?
- Whether shoulders are in good condition?
- Whether the road has any pot holes/cracking or depressions etc? If so, whether these defects have been repaired?
As per programme guidelines Citizen Information Board and other informatory boards are required to be fixed.Information on all these boards is required to be displayed in local language.The area officer may see the compliance of this during the field visit.
A Standard Bidding document has been prescribed for procurement of work and contract management.A work programme has to be prepared for each project and progress of work has to be assessed regularly by the PIUs with reference to the approved work programme.In case of delay, the contract provides for levy of liquidated damages.Area Officers may verify whether progress of work is systematically monitored with reference to the approved work programme and liquidated damages have been levied/withheld for any delay in execution.
Area Officers may, through local interaction, makean overallassessmentregardingtheimprovementintransportation servicesto thetargethabitations.They may also comment on any significant and feasible socio-economic impact brought about by provision of all whether connectivity.Area Officers may comment on any major implementation constraints observed during the field inspection.
Area Officers may record their observations in theen closed format on the basis of their inter action with the PIUs as well as visual in spection of projects.
Ministry of Rural Development
Format for Assessment of PMGSY by Area Officers
|1.||Name & Designation of Area Officer:|
|2.||Name of PIU :|
|5.||Date of Visit :|
|6.||Discussions held with :|
|7.||Observations on OMMAS:|
|(a)||Whether data in District Profile matches with data reported in monthly progress reports furnished by PIU.||Yes||No|
|(b)||Whether dedicated trained person is available for data entry?||Yes||No|
|(c)||Give reasons for data mismatch, if any.|
|8.||Road Level Assessment (Visual Inspection)|
|8.1||Details of inspected road:|
|(a)||Name of the Road|
|(c)||Date of clearance by the Ministry|
|(d)||Date of award of works|
|(e)||Completion/ stipulated completion date|
|8.2||Frequency of Supervision|
|(a)||How frequently JE inspects the road||……….inspections per week|
|(b)||How frequently AE inspects the road||……….inspections per week|
|(c)||How frequently EE inspects the road||……….inspections per month|
|(d)||How frequently SE inspects the road||……….inspections per quarter|
|8.3||General observation about the supervision of works by the officers of PIUs and SRRDA:|
|9||First tier of Quality Mechanism and Quality Control Arrangements|
|9.1||Whether Field Laboratory established by the contractor?||Yes||No|
|9.2||Whether Quality Control Registers are being maintained and countersigned by JEs/AEs?||Yes||No|
|10||Second Tier of Quality Control Mechanism:|
|(a)||Whether the State Quality Monitor has inspected the work||Yes||No|
|(b)||If yes, at what stage(s), i.e., initial stage, at base course/sub-base course stage or at completion Stage (Inspection expected at all three Stages)|
|11||Quality of work:|
|(a)||Whether riding quality of road is reasonable enough to drive a car at a speed of 40 kmph (for completed works).||Yes||No|
|(b)||Whether the road shows any potholes, cracking, depressions/ settlements in the pavement? (for completed works).||Yes||No|
|(c)||General observation about quality of works:|
|(a)||Whether the road has adequate cross slope (camber) to ensure that water does not accumulate on road pavement?||Yes||No|
|(b)||If side drains are required, whether the side drains have been provided?||Yes||No|
|(c)||General observation about drainage:|
|11.3||Maintenance (in case of work completed at least 1 year ago):|
|(a)||whether vegetation growth on the berms has been cleared?||Yes||No|
|(b)||Whether rain cuts have been repaired?||Yes||No|
|(c)||Whether shoulders are repaired and are in good condition?||Yes||No|
|(d)||Whether potholes, cracking or depressions have been repaired?||Yes||No|
|(e)||Whether road signage and markings have been maintained?||Yes||No|
|11.4||Citizen Information and Transparency:|
|(a)||Whether Citizen Information Board fixed with correct information in local language?||Yes||No|
|(b)||Whether Main Board containing information about work, contractor and PIU has been fixed?||Yes||No|
|(c)||Whether entry point logo Board fixed?||Yes||No|
|(d)||Whether Km stones have been fixed? (only in case of completed works).||Yes||No|
|12||Contract Management and time control:|
|(a)||Whether the work programme is available at site?||Yes||No|
|(b)||Whether the work is progressing as per approved work programme?||Yes||No|
|(c)||If work is delayed, whether the PIU has issued notices for delay and whether liquidated damages have been withheld or levied?||Yes||No|
|(d)||General observation about contract management:|
|13. General observations|
|13.1||Improvement in Transportation Services|
|(a)||Whether the number of Public or Private Passenger vehicles serving the habitation has increased?|
|(b)||Whether the number of Public or Private Goods Transport vehicles serving the habitation has increased?|
|13.2||General comments on any significant and visible Socio Economic Impact:|
|13.3||Comments on any implementation constraint:|
Name & Designation :