Re: In 11 Years -11PDs : Should IAS Officers Rule SACS?

[Guest guest]

Dear FORUM,

Re: /message/10644

Read Mr. Hari Singh's posting. I have got opportunity to work in NACP in

different capacities and experience the contributions of different functionaries

at various levels. I have the following points to make in this regard

1. The head of SACS is an administrative position and the major skill required

is administrative. Lack of technical knowledge do not act as a major barrier in

this position as basic skills and protocol in administration is not linked with

technical knowledge

2. The aceess and rapport with top officials of different departments has a

major role to play in successful delivery of the responsibility of the role of

PD, SACS. This woud be better delivered by an IAS officer.

3. I have observed highest level of " administrative & management phobia " among

many techical professionals. This would be better administered if IAS officers

take up SACS head positions

4. The successful role of PD, SACS involve competane to give directives to key

officials in government system which is beter done by IAS oficers

But I agree with your concerns on frequent transfers. In the event some of the

officials who ae asigned based on the qualifications and skills prefer to get

retained in their respective work station, thee could be a transparent mechanism

to ovecome it

Regards

Harikumar

e-mail: <sk.harikumar@...>

[Guest guest]

Dear Forum,

Re: /message/10644

1. IF, as S. Harikumar suggests that the head of SACS is an administrative

position and the major skill required is administrative,

a. Why is it that smaller states have a technical person as the head?

b. When it comes to international conferences on HIV (which are not

administration-related), why is it that we often find administrators turning up

rather than the technical persons?

2. IF access and rapport with top officials of different departments is

advantageous for programme delivery, it would also be worth considering how much

ego problems and poor relationships between top officials of different

departments have marred programme delivery. Also, we have very little evidence

to say that where IAS officers were PDs of SACS there was better inter-sectoral

collaboration.

3. Adminstrative and management phobia is unjustified since, even in the case of

small states, it is often a senior medical officer who is appointed as the head

of SACS.

Such an officer, often in the rank of Joint-Director of Health Services or

higher, has more than adequate exposure to

administration.

IF administrative and management phobia is persistent among many technical

professionals who head SACS, it is indicative either or both of (a) a poor

recruitment process to the position and ( poor capacity building for the

programme's managers.

Also, in this case, the opposite of phobia could be arrogance!

The issue is about the right person for an adequate period of time for the job.

This calls for commitment at the level of the state governments to the epidemic

and the programme, reflected in the choice of person to head the programme.

At the national level, it calls for a strengthened co-ordination

with the state governments to ensure that the right persons are in place, and a

mechanism to orient/ build the capacity of the PDs as and when they are posted.

Peer mentoring is a viable option here.

With regards,

S

e-mail: <dheenabandhu@...>

[Guest guest]

Dear Forum,

Re: /message/10644

As for as my concern I feel that the IAS officers are the right choice in

TANSACS.  They fully committed to the cause and do the lot of bridge works

between other departments in order to eliminate stigma and discrimanation.

 

But they have to be allowed to work for a prescribed period of time to

understand the concept of SACS and try to contribute for that they need adequate

time if adequate time and liberty to work will be given they can bring lot of

changes during their tenure.

 

They know how to deal with the issues and they are the better people to

negotiate with Government to allocate funds to SACS with their counterparts. But

they have to be oriented about the objective of SACS as it is a society not a

part of department otherwise they will easily adopt the environment and do the

best of their service to the needy people.  They can smoothly handle with other

district collectors too it will bring better coordination between SACS and

district level activities.

 

We all must join together to work for change not only SACS or PDs responsiblity

in this regard.

 

 

Thanks and regards,

 

Gnanasekar.A

e-mail: <sekarmsw@...>

[Guest guest]

Dear FORUM,

Re: /message/10653

Mr Harikumars posting is the most nonsensical and rediculous posting that I have

read in a very long time.

If this is truly reflective of how the IAS lobby and the Prime Minister's task

force on HIV is looking at tackling the HIV crisis in

India, I am terrified about the prospects for the future.

Administrative decisions are not taken in a vaccum. It is based on the

technical merit of the program, and there are aspects of it that cannot be

decided merely on administrative parametres.

Its marriage with technicalities is close enough to demand that the ones at the

helm be technically sound.

I think if your proposition is to be belived, then all the various heads of SACS

who are seen jaunting in foreign countries at international 'Technical'

conferences, should be asked to pay back to the exchequer from their personal

salaries, for it was noting but a waste of the public's money.

Are you suggesting that these heads of SACS/Minstries should have no

decision making power over things like project allocation or inputs in CCMs for

Global Fund. If so then you should have a look at how the CCM actually works and

its composition.

It is bureaucratic majority in that body by far. Its well known that project

alocation is also largely influenced by the head of SACS. Why do you think they

are doing it? Is it just a power trip, or

is it because there is actual merit in the fact that the head of SACS a should

also be tectnically sound?

If you look at the history of the HIV movement, every time we have had

technically sound persons like JVR Prasada Rao or Sujata Rao at the helm of

affairs at national level, or someone like Suresh Kumar at state level, the HIV

movement has made progress, and every time we have had clueless bureaucrats like

Meenakshhi Dutta Ghosh, we have stagnated.

Does that point to anything of value as to why those at the helm should be

technically sound?

It is shameful that the states have seen SACS as some kind of a parking lot for

bureaucrats on the fallow. And it is the reason why no progress of a meaningfu

nature happens, sinceewither the bureaucrat is not-interested, knowing fully

well that he is passing time till the more appropriate post can be found to

accomodate him, or if s/he tries to get technically updated, s/he is pushed away

even as s/he was becoming more effective, for accomodating the next bureaucrat

in the great chess play of Indian bureaucratic postings.

I do not know your compulsion for defending this shameful record, but I hope the

next time on, you have some solid facts to back up your claims. In the meantime

I only pray that foreign jaunts are banned for SACS heads.

Best,

Aditya Bondyopadhyay

e-mail: <adit.bond@...>