Centrally Sponsored Schemes for child welfare often suffer from implementation gaps at the State level. Critically examine this in the context of Mission Vatsalya.

Q. Centrally Sponsored Schemes for child welfare often suffer from implementation gaps at the State level. Critically examine this in the context of Mission Vatsalya. (15 marks, 250-350 words)

Mission Vatsalya is a Centrally Sponsored Scheme of the Ministry of Women and Child Development, funded on a 60:40 basis with States (90:10 for North-Eastern and hilly States and J&K, 100% for UTs without legislature), delivering services to Children in Need of Care and Protection (CNCP) and Children in Conflict with Law (CCL) [2]. Its design is sound; the binding constraint lies in State-level execution.

Where State-level gaps arise - Fiscal dependence: as a CSS, releases hinge on the State's matching share and utilisation certificates, so delivery varies with State fiscal capacity and priority [2]. - Institutional thinness: the scheme runs through State Child Protection Societies, District Child Protection Units, Child Welfare Committees and Juvenile Justice Boards [1]; uneven staffing and vacancies in these statutory and administrative bodies dilute last-mile response. - Data fragmentation and duplication: separate portals — TrackChild, Khoya-Paya, CARINGS — meant grassroots functionaries entered overlapping data, a duplication the new unified portal is expressly designed to remove [1]. - Quality of institutional care: over 2,450 Child Care Institutions were supported in FY 2023-24 [3]; supervising standards across such a spread is an inherently State-capacity task.

Correctives that qualify the criticism - The integrated unified Mission Vatsalya Portal now merges TrackChild, Khoya-Paya and CARINGS into a single platform for SCPS, DCPU, CWC, JJB, SJPU and CCIs, with MIS dashboards enabling real-time Central monitoring of State performance [1][4]. - TrackChild's convergence with the Ministry of Home Affairs, Railways and NALSA shows cross-agency architecture already exists for missing-children cases [1]. - Non-institutional options — adoption, foster care, sponsorship, aftercare — give States flexibility to match local need [2].

Thus the criticism is valid but partial: gaps stem less from scheme design than from variable State administrative and fiscal capacity. Strengthening DCPU staffing, tying releases to dashboard-verified outcomes, and using the unified portal for concurrent monitoring can convert digital integration into real protection — advancing the constitutional promise of Article 39(f) and SDG 16.2.

(~330 words)

Sources: 1. Ministry of Women and Child Development has developed integrated unified Mission Vatsalya Portal (PIB, 2026) — portal integration of TrackChild/Khoya-Paya/CARINGS, stakeholder list, duplication removal, MIS dashboards, TrackChild's MHA/Railways/NALSA convergence 2. WCD Ministry implementing 'Mission Vatsalya' for CNCP and CCL (PIB) — CSS status, 60:40 / 90:10 / 100% fund-sharing, CNCP–CCL coverage, institutional and non-institutional care components 3. Under Mission Vatsalya, 2450 Child Care Institutions supported during FY 2023-24 (PIB) — number of CCIs supported 4. Revamped Mission Vatsalya Portal Launched (PIB) — upgraded digital platform for child protection stakeholders