Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1697805533666.pdf (India)
Department of Higher Education Ministry of Human Resource Development RUSA 2.0 Guidelines Index CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO RUSA ................................................................................ 4 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 4 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................. 4 APPROVAL PROCESS OF RUSA (2012-TILL DATE) .............................................................................. 5 SALIENT FEATURES OF RUSA ......................................................................................................... 6 GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF RUSA ...................................................................................................... 8 OBJECTIVES OF RUSA ................................................................................................................ 10 SCOPE OF RUSA ....................................................................................................................... 12 FUNDING STRATEGY ................................................................................................................... 12 INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE OF RUSA............................................................................................ 12 NATIONAL LEVEL BODIES ............................................................................................................. 12 STATE LEVEL BODIES .................................................................................................................. 13 INSTITUTION LEVEL ARRANGEMENTS ............................................................................................. 13 FINANCIAL OUTLAY OF THE SCHEME .............................................................................................. 13 MOU BETWEEN MHRD AND STATE GOVERNMENTS
 ........................................................................ 14 RUSA 2.0 TARGETS .................................................................................................................. 14 CHAPTER 2 STRUCTURE OF RUSA .................................................................................... 16 CENTRAL LEVEL STRUCTURE ................................................................................................. 16 STATE LEVEL STRUCTURE ...................................................................................................... 18 INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL STRUCTURE ...................................................................................... 24 CHAPTER 3 PROCESS FLOW UNDER RUSA ....................................................................... 26 PREREQUISITES OF RUSA ............................................................................................................ 26 APPROVAL BY NATIONAL MISSION AUTHORITY FOR THE INCLUSION OF THE STATES ................................ 27 SUBMISSION OF SHEP ................................................................................................................ 28 APPRAISAL OF SHEP BY TSG ....................................................................................................... 29 APPROVAL OF PLANS BY THE PAB ................................................................................................. 29 DISBURSEMENT OF FUNDS TO THE STATES ...................................................................................... 30 CHAPTER 4 GENERAL NORMS UNDER RUSA .................................................................... 32 CHAPTER 5 COMPONENTS UNDER RUSA ......................................................................... 35 COMPONENT 1: CREATION OF UNIVERSITIES BY UPGRADATION OF EXISTING AUTONOMOUS COLLEGE ...................................................................................................................................
36 COMPONENT 2: CREATION OF UNIVERSITIES BY CONVERSION OF COLLEGES IN A CLUSTER 48 Page 2 of 147 COMPONENT 3: INFRASTRUCTURE GRANTS TO UNIVERSITIES ............................................... 59 COMPONENT 4: QUALITY AND EXCELLENCE IN SELECT STATE UNIVERSITIES (NEW) ............. 66 COMPONENT 5: NEW MODEL DEGREE COLLEGES .................................................................. 72 COMPONENT 6: UPGRADATION OF EXISTING DEGREE COLLEGES TO MODEL DEGREE COLLEGES ................................................................................................................................. 79 COMPONENT 7: NEW COLLEGES (PROFESSIONAL) ................................................................. 84 COMPONENT 8 ENHANCING QUALITY AND EXCELLENCE IN SELECT AUTONOMOUS COLLEGES ................................................................................................................................. 91 COMPONENT 9: INFRASTRUCTURE GRANTS TO COLLEGES .................................................... 96 COMPONENT 10: RESEARCH, INNOVATION & QUALITY IMPROVEMENT ............................. 102 COMPONENT 11: EQUITY INITIATIVES ................................................................................... 108 COMPONENT 12: FACULTY RECRUITMENT SUPPORT ........................................................... 111 COMPONENT 13: FACULTY IMPROVEMENT .......................................................................... 115 COMPONENT 14: INSTITUTIONAL RESTRUCTURING, CAPACITY BUILDING AND REFORMS .
119 CHAPTER 6 STATE HIGHER EDUCATION PLAN ...................................................................... 120 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ......................................................................... 144 Page 3 of 147 Chapter 1 Introduction to RUSA Introduction The success of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) and Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA) laid a strong foundation for primary and secondary education in India, which led to an increase in demand for higher education.
However, the sphere of higher education had yet not witnessed any concerted effort for improvement of access or quality.

Over the years, there has been an unprecedented expansion in number of institutions and volume of students in the country.

To take advantage of the demographic dividend, there was a need for a concerted effort which would improve the quality and relevance of higher education and result in an educated and productive workforce.
The XII Plan (2012-17) argued for a holistic approach to higher education with renewed focus on improving the Quality of State institutions, together with addressing the issue of Access & Equity.

A strategic shift was needed in several critical areas ranging from issues of access and equity to teaching-learning process, research, governance, funding and monitoring; which could connect funding streams to specific outcomes & desired impact.
Planning Commission recommended strategic utilization of central funds to ensure comprehensive and optimum planning at the State level.

In lieu of above, a new overarching Centrally Sponsored Scheme for funding State Level Institutions was proposed called Rashtriya Ucchatar Shiksha Abhiyan (RUSA).

It is an umbrella scheme to be operated in mission mode till March 2020, which seeks to mainly improve overall quality of existing State higher educational institutions.
The scheme is implemented through a set of bodies with clearly defined roles and functions at the National, State and Institutional level.

Background In a country with diverse higher education space, centrally funded institutions receive generous funding from the Centre but have a limited coverage in terms of enrolment.
On the other hand, 94% of the students who are enrolled in government funded or government controlled private institutions come under the ambit of State higher education system, but their funding is only a fraction of that provided to Central Institutions.

UGC mandate allows it to fund only a limited number of institutions that are UGC Section 12(B) and 2(f) compliant.
Out of the 286 State universities (now 384 state universities), only 182 State universities are eligible for central assistance, which leaves a significant number of colleges and universities not eligible for UGC grants.

Secondly, UGC is also not allowed to channelize funds through the Page 4 of 147 State Government or any other entity other than Institutions.
Thus, States often complained about being unaware of the development funds that come to the State Funded Institutions from Centre, making planning and funding very difficult for States.

Over the years, since the allocation to State Higher Education System was not enough, these meagre funds were thinly spread amongst many institutions, impacting the overall quality of infrastructure and teaching.
Hence, there was a need to establish a new institutional mechanism, which would make every stakeholder a partner in the process of higher education transformation.

The strategic intervention came through a Centrally Sponsored Scheme called RUSA, which has a completely new approach towards funding State higher education Institutions.
The allocation of funds under RUSA is based on well-defined norms & parameters and linked to academic, administrative and governance reforms, while future grants are performance based and outcome dependent.

The reforms initiated under RUSA aim to build a self-sustaining momentum to for greater accountability and autonomy of State institutions and impress upon them the need to improve the quality of education.
Approval Process of RUSA (2012-till date) The Planning Commission’s Approach Paper to 12th Plan had suggested formulation of a scheme in view of the need for comprehensive reforms in State higher education sector, which constituted the basis for formulation of RUSA.

The National Development Council (NDC) approved the Scheme as part of the 12th Plan.
RUSA had subsequently also been included in the list of 66 Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS) approved by Cabinet on 20.06.2013 for implementation in the 12th Plan.

The Central Advisory Board on Education (CABE), which is the highest advisory body of the Government of India in education on policy matters, constituted a Committee headed by the then Minister of State of HRD, which examined the issue of reforms in State higher education system.
The CABE Committee in its report dated 19.10.2012 recommended a new scheme called the Rashtriya Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan, which would subsume all existing schemes in the State Higher Education sector and bring reforms, especially with respect to academic, affiliation, autonomy and accountability in the universities to address such issues in a comprehensive and integrated fashion.

The CABE in its meeting dated 08.11.2012 accepted the recommendations and gave in-principle approval to the RUSA.
The Expenditure Finance Committee (EFC) in its meeting held on 11.09.2013 cleared the it meeting on 3rdOctober, Ministry’s proposal and the Cabinet approved RUSA 2013.Subsequent to the implementation of the 1st phase of RUSA, the Cabinet approved the in Page 5 of 147 continuation of RUSA 2.0 on 21stMarch, 2018.

The second phase of RUSA aims to focus on quality and also address concerns of access and equity in underserved, unserved and aspirational districts.
The salient features of RUSA 2.0 and the programmatic norms for the components approved are discussed at length in the following sections.

Salient Features of RUSA 1.

Coverage: The scheme covers only the Government and Government aided State Higher Education institutions.

Open universities and Institutions offering Medical, Agriculture, Vetnary, etc.

disciplines are not covered under the ambit of RUSA.

Also, uni-disciplinary institutions are given low priority under RUSA.

2.
2.

Prerequisites: In order to be eligible for funding under RUSA, States have to fulfil certain prerequisites, which include the academic, administrative and governance reforms.

The prerequisites are at two levels: commitments given by institutions to the States and commitments given by States to Center.

Unless these commitments are fulfilled, the States and institutions are not able to avail of grants under RUSA.

The pre-requisites are detailed in Chapter 8.

3.


Bottom-up Approach: RUSA follows a “bottom-up” approach for planning and budgeting to address multiple and graded inequalities and promote need-based planning.

States are encouraged to undertake strategic thinking and planning keeping future needs of the higher education in mind.

Both demand side and supply side challenges are required to be addressed by the SHEPs.

4.
4.

Subsuming existing schemes: Two Centrally Sponsored Schemes of Model Degree Colleges and the Sub-mission on Polytechnics were subsumed under RUSA in the first phase.

University Grants Commission (UGC) Schemes such as development grants for State universities and colleges, one-time catch up grants, etc.

are dovetailed in RUSA.

However, Individual oriented schemes (for teachers, students etc) would continue to be handled by UGC.
During the second phase of RUSA, the scheme on University with Potential for Excellence and Colleges with Potential for Excellence, administered by UGC have now been subsumed under RUSA 2.0, as Enhancing Quality and Excellence in select State Universities and Enhancing Quality and Excellence in select Autonomous Colleges.

5.
5.

Preparatory Grants (under Institutional restructuring, Capacity Building and Reform): Under the scheme, a preparatory amount is provided to the State Government to enable them to create/ strengthen necessary institutional framework for complying with the a- Page 6 of 147 priori requirements and -commitments under RUSA.
These funds can be utilized for setting up/ strengthening the SHECs, State Project Directorate and State Resource Centre; and undertake baseline surveys to help them in capacity building.

The details of preparatory grant are captured in Chapter 6.

6.

Resource Envelope: The resources allocated to a particular State for a given financial year is termed as the Resource Envelope.

The allocation is based on a Fund Equalization formula described in Chapter 8.
The resource envelope for a given financial year is based on a mix of base and performance-based funding, linked to conditionalities and adherence to reforms.

: 7.

IDPs & SHEPs: All institutions are required to prepare their Institutional Development Plan (IDPs) for all components with financial proposals on parameters that capture their respective need-based requirements.

The States aggregate the IDPs and integrate into State Higher Education Plan (SHEP) by superimposing the State relevant components.
It is imperative that each State undertakes base line surveys and stakeholder consultations to constitute the basis for preparing IDPs and SHEPs.

It is imperative that SHEPs are duly approved by the State Higher Education Councils before onward submission to MHRD.

8.

Appraisal of SHEPs: The funding to States is made on the basis of critical appraisal of State Higher Education Plans done by Technical Support Group (TSG) at the Centre.
The prioritization of components based on the resource envelope of the State is jointly done by the State and the TSG in a collaborative exercise, based on adherence to RUSA norms and State-specific needs.

The prioritized components are jointly presented before the Project Approval Board (PAB) for approval.

9.

Funding under RUSA: All funding under the RUSA is norm based and future grants are outcome dependent.
The central funding is strategic and based on SHEPs, which serve as a benchmark against which the performance of a State and its institutions are graded.

Centre-State funding is in the ratio of 90:10 for North-Eastern States, Sikkim, J&K, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand and 60:40for other States and Union Territories (UTs) with Legislature.

Also, the UTs without Legislature would be 100% centrally funded under this scheme.

10.
10.

Flow of Funds: The central funding flows from MHRD to institutions, through the State Governments.

The State Higher Education Council is responsible for transfer of central share along with the matching State share to the approved institutions.

11.

State Higher Education Councils: SHECs is the key institution at the State level to channelize resources to the institutions from the State budget.
They undertake the Page 7 of 147 process of planning and evaluation, in addition to other monitoring and capacity building functions.

Guiding Principles of RUSA RUSA is structured on certain inviolable guiding principles.

The States are expected to keep these principles as guiding posts while formulating their State Higher Education Plans and developing their strategies.

1.

Quality and Research Focus: RUSA focuses on better quality of State higher education Institutions.
The aim is to achieve mass access to higher education with high quality standards.

States must ensure that all its institutions adopt NAAC accreditation as mandatory quality assurance framework; and simultaneously seek to upgrade the overall academic quality by implementing reforms.

States will be encouraged to promote research and innovation in their institutions.
Since research focus can be judged both from input efforts and outcome indicators, the State Higher Education Plans are expected to have a rounded appreciation of both aspects.

States and institutions are expected to honestly declare their present status in this area and outline specific strategies for improvement, including the use of ICT.

There is a need to improve resource allocation for universities to enable good quality research & innovation.
Criteria such as the number of research publications, impact factors of journals in which papers are published, citations, the amount of research funding attracted, etc., should be considered for faculty promotions.

2.

Norm based and Outcome-dependent funding: The cornerstone around which RUSA is designed is that funding under the RUSA is norm based and future grants are outcome dependent.
The central funding is strategic and based on SHEPs, which serve as a benchmark against which the performance of a State and its institutions are graded.

The funding for the future is decided on the basis of level of past achievements and utilization of funds submitted to MHRD.

3.

Incentivizing and dis-incentivizing: RUSA incentivizes and dis-incentivizes the State actions.
Not only compliance to rules, regulations and fulfilment of norms are supported by incentives; non-performance or non- fulfilment of prerequisites and norms invite reduced allocations for States and institutions.

This is intended to make the scheme not only demand driven, but also competitive.

The States Page 8 of 147 and institutions are encouraged to compete with each other in order to reap benefits of competition based formulaic grants 4.
Apolitical decision-making: Another basic tenet of RUSA is that the decision-making is done in an unbiased, apolitical and professional manner, on the basis of the SHEPs and the performance of States on the predefined parameters.

The process of decision-making and its result are transparent and the methods of decision-making impartial.

It is expected that States would also be as unbiased, apolitical and professional while planning and ushering governance reforms at the State level.
In order to effectively implement these reforms, the selection of leadership positions in State universities should take into account the imperatives of merit and performance.

5.

Autonomy: Autonomy is an indispensable condition for quality and accountability.

RUSA envisages greater autonomy of institutions in terms of decision making.

The institutions will have full liberty to plan specific interventions depending on their special needs and requirements.
Some key concerns in enforcement of university autonomy are as follows: Revisiting the Acts: There is a need to revisit the acts of various State Universities to see if there are some clauses detrimental to their autonomy.

Streamlining the Recruitment Process: The universities must have the autonomy to recruit the most competent faculty as per the laid down procedures and purely on the basis of merit.
Membership of Governing Bodies: A university is administered by its senior functionaries under the guidance of its statutory bodies such as the executive committee, syndicate, senate, etc.

The persons to be nominated to these bodies must have specialized knowledge in the relevant disciplines and should not have conflict of interests in so far as decision making in the university is concerned.

These bodies should predominantly consist of members from academic background.
Institutional Leadership: It is the duty of the Vice-Chancellor to safeguard the university autonomy.

The increasing trend of appointing civil servants as heads of educational institutions needs to be reviewed.

Special Rashtriya Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan orientation programs or conferences on the management of universities should be organized to enable the Vice-Chancellors, Directors, Pro-Vice Chancellors, Deans, and Heads of Departments to hone their management skills.

Page 9 of 147 6.
Page 9 of 147 6.

Disclosure-based Governance: Disclosure based governance must be followed by institutions in terms of its decision and outcomes.

RUSA envisages greater participation of all stakeholders, where the institutions are responsible for their quality not just to the regulatory authorities but also to the students, parents and the society.

A policy of full disclosure and clean governance are the first steps towards establishing such a system of higher education.

7.
7.

Equity based development: Equity-based development initiatives must form an essential part of any development or expansion plans, both at State& institution level.

Any growth in the higher education sector must create equal opportunities for women, disadvantaged classes and the differently-abled.

Also, development must have a greater focus on serving the rural and tribal areas.

The plan appraisal process would take this aspect into account while deciding the allocations.
Well- calibrated equity strategies must be built into the entire State planning process.

Objectives of RUSA The major objective of RUSA is to enable and empower the States to develop sufficient capabilities to plan, implement and monitor initiatives for the higher education sector as a whole.
The scheme aims to improve the quality of State Universities and colleges and enhance their existing capacities so that they become dynamic, demand-driven, quality conscious, efficient and forward looking and responsive to rapid economic and technological developments occurring at the local, State, national and international levels.

The salient objectives of the scheme are enumerated as follows: 1.
Improve the overall quality of existing State institutions by ensuring that all institutions conform to prescribed norms & standards and adopt accreditation as a mandatory quality assurance framework.

This objective is a precondition for sanction of funds under all the components of RUSA.

2.

Enhancing quality into Universities or Model Degree Colleges to upgrade their academic infrastructure and provide better teaching-learning environment to students.
Component 1 provides for up gradation of an autonomous college in a university, Component 2 allows creation of a university by conversion of 4-5 colleges in a cluster, component 4 and 8 provide for Enhancing Quality and Excellence in select Page 10 of 147 State Universities and Autonomous Colleges, and component 10 on Research, innovation and quality improvement.

(subject to adherence to RUSA norms) 3.


Identify and fill critical infrastructure gaps in higher education by augmenting and supporting the efforts of the State Governments.

Components 3 and 9 pertaining to infrastructure grants to universities and colleges address this objective, where funds are sanctioned for upgrading the existing infrastructure by way of new construction, renovation or purchase of equipment.

4.

Ensure adequate availability of quality faculty in all higher educational institutions.
RUSA addressed this by way of component 12 on faculty recruitment, where the State is required to fill all the vacant sanctioned posts and claim funds under RUSA for additional posts to enable them to achieve the student-teacher ratio of 20:1.

5.

Facilitate research and innovation in the State higher educational institutions.

Component 10 provides for this objective where State is required to furnish a detailed research and innovation plan.

6.
6.

Improve Access and Equity in higher education by providing adequate opportunities of higher education to SC/STs and socially and educationally backward classes; promote inclusion of women, minorities, and differently abled persons.

Component 3, 5, 6, 9 &11 deals with this objective.

7.

Achieve the target of GER of 32% by expanding the institutional base of States by establishing new institutions, in order to achieve high enrolment targets.

8.
8.

Usher transformative reforms in the State higher education system by creating an institutional structure for planning and monitoring at the State level (SHEC), promoting autonomy in State Universities and improving governance in institutions.

9.

Correct regional imbalances in access to higher education by facilitating access to high quality institutions in urban, semi-urban and rural areas to get access to quality institutions.
This objective is a precondition while deciding allocations for different districts of the State.

10.

Commitment of States to undertake reforms: Academic (semester system, CBCS, curriculum development, etc.)

and Examination (internal evaluation, end of semester evaluation) in the higher educational institutions.

States can also undertake affiliation reforms by restricting the no.

of colleges affiliated to a university to 100.


Prerequisites, Page 11 of 147 a set of a priori commitments required from the States ensure timely implementation of reforms under RUSA.

11.

Clearly define the role of State Governments vis-à-vis State Higher Education Councils and Institutions.

The objective is covered in detail in chapter 2.


Scope of RUSA All State public universities and colleges (both 12B and 2(f) compliant and non-12B) from all States and Union Territories (UTs) across the country are eligible to be covered under RUSA.

Subject to eligibility, an estimated 384 State universities and 8500 colleges (only Government and Government aided) are covered under this initiative to improve the learning outcomes and scale-up research, development and innovations.
Funding Strategy RUSA is being funded through the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) with prescribed contribution from the State governments and Union Territories (UTs).

The project cost in the public funded institutions for all sub-components is shared between the Central Government and State governments in the ratio of 90:10 for North-Eastern States, J&K, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand and 60:40 for Other States and UTs with Legislature.
the UTs without Legislature would be 100% centrally funded under this scheme.

The funding strategy is described in Chapter 8 of this handbook.

Institutional Structure of RUSA RUSA is implemented and monitored through an institutional structure comprising of bodies with clearly defined roles and powers at the central, State and institutional levels.

National level bodies RUSA Mission Authority is the Apex body at the national level.
The Minister of Human Resource Development (MHRD) is the Chairperson of the Mission Authority.

The RUSA Mission Authority delineates overall policy and planning, reviews functioning of Project Approval Board (PAB) etc.

The Secretary (Higher Education) chairs the PAB which approves SHEPs, assesses performance of States and institutions and approve release of funds.
The Page 12 of 147 National Project Directorate, which is embedded in the Ministry, is headed by the Joint Secretary (Higher Education) in his capacity as the National Mission Director.

These two bodies are supported by the Technical Support Group (TSG)which examines and appraises SHEPs, monitors flow of funds and information and provides all operational, technical, logistical and managerial support.

State Level Bodies The scheme is steered in each State/UT through State Higher Education Councils (SHEC).
The SHECs are supported in turn by the Project Directorate (created by the State Government) and State TSGs.

These bodies are responsible for management, coordination, implementation and monitoring of the project at the State/UT levels.

The formation of SHEC forms the primary block towards building a sound planning and funding mechanism for higher education at State level.
Given the number of State universities and the large number of students they cater to, States are the unit of planning for higher education under RUSA and it is necessary to create SHEC as a body that is at an arm’s length from the State as well as centre, which synergizes their resources and fulfils these functions of planning, monitoring, quality control and co-ordination at the State level.
The State Project Directorate (SPD) consists of a State Project Director and such adequate support staff as may be required for the effective functioning of the State Project Directorate.

Institution Level Arrangements The project at the Institutional level is managed by two bodies; the Board of Governors (BoG) and a Project Monitoring Unit.
The BoG takes all policy decisions with regard to smooth, cost effective and timely implementation of the Institutional project and ensure overall faculty development etc.

A Project Monitoring Unit represented by academic officials, faculty, administrative officers and students is responsible for monitoring of the project at the institutional level in order to implement the governance reforms proposed under RUSA.

The institutional structure is described in chapter 2 of this handbook.
Financial Outlay of the Scheme The scheme has been accorded extension by the Cabinet till March 2020 with approved financial outlay of Rs.

9,604.58 cr (which includes state share).

Page 13 of 147 MoU between MHRD and State Governments State Governments will have to enter into an MoU with the Department of Higher Education (MHRD), in order to be eligible for the second phase of RUSA.

The draft MoU is in Chapter.

RUSA 2.0 Targets 1.


Increase the spending of States on higher education as a % of GSDP to 2% or above.

2.

Ensure all the State Institutions are NAAC Accredited by the end of March 2020 as a part of mandatory quality assurance framework.

3.

Reduce the student-teacher ratio to 15:1 in Institutions by the end of March 2020 Increasing the National GER to 32% by March 2022 4.
Ensure growth of GER with more inclusion of disadvantaged groups (SC/ST/Women) Ensure that all the States participate in AISHE and data pertaining to all State institutions is furnished.

5.

Ensure that the number of colleges affiliated to State Universities reduce to 200.

Page 14 of 147 Page 15 of 147 Chapter 2 Structure of RUSA RUSA, for its effective implementation has come up with a participative and inclusive institutional structure encompassing all the stake holders at central and State level.
The structure aims at in-depth involvement of the institutions at grass root level.

The structure as envisaged by RUSA is as mentioned.

1.

Central Level  National Mission Authority  Project Approval Board  National Project Directorate  Technical Support Group/ RUSA Resource Centre 2.

State Level  State Higher Education Council  State Project Directorate  State Technical Support Group 3.
Institutional Level  Universities  Board of Governors  Project Monitoring Units  Colleges  Board of Governors  Project Monitoring Units CENTRAL LEVEL STRUCTURE The central level structure comprises of 4 bodies namely  National Mission Authority  Project Approval Board  National Project Directorate Page 16 of 147  Technical Support Group/ RUSA Resource Centre.
The composition and function of the central bodies as mentioned above is for overall guidance for the policy decisions, project management, coordination with States and implementation of RUSA.

The detailed role and functioning of the above-mentioned bodies is elaborated as follows.

1.

National Mission Authority (NMA): NMA has been constituted by MHRD under the chairpersonship of Union minister of HRD.

Joint Secretary (JS-HE) is the Member Secretary of the Apex body.
Following are the other members of the NMA:  Member- Planning Commission (In-Charge- Higher Education)  Vice-Chairperson- Secretary, Dept.

of Higher Education, MHRD  Chairperson- UGC  Chairperson- AICTE  Chairperson of the SHEC’s of all States  Three experts in field of Higher Education  Financial advisor to MHRD  Chairperson-MCI  Chairperson-BCI  Secretary- Agriculture  Secretary-Culture  Secretary- Health  Secretary- S&T  Secretary- Sports  Representative of Ministry of Finance.
Functions: NMA provides guidance for overall policy and planning and reviews the functioning of PAB.

It also allocates funds to PAB.

It also commissions evaluation studies for policy reforms.

NMA meets once in six months.

2.
PROJECT APPROVAL BOARD (PAB): Under the chairmanship of Secretary, Higher Education the PAB is constitutes of the following members  Chairman UGC, Co-Chairman  Vice-Chairman UGC Page 17 of 147  Chairman AICTE  Secretary UGC  Chairman SHEC of concerned State  Two experts in Higher Education Sector  Financial Advisor in MHRD  Advisor (HE), Planning Commission  Joint Secretary (HE), Convener FUNCTIONS: PAB examines, appraises and approves State Higher Education Plans (SHEP) and approves the release of the funds to States and Institutions.
It also evaluates the performance of States and institutions in RUSA.

3.

NATIONAL PROJECT DIRECTORATE (NPD): Joint Secretary (HE) is the National Mission Director and heads the National Project Directorate.

NPD is part of the department of Higher Education in MHRD.
The other members in NPD are:  One deputy secretary/ director rank officer  Two undersecretary rank officer  Support FUNCTIONS: NPD conducts the National Mission Authority and PAB meetings, project fund management, project implementation (both centre and State level), policy inputs to Mission Authority, Maintaining of Statistical Data and Management Information System reports.

4.

TECHNICAL SUPPORT GROUP (TSG): is the secretariat of the NPD under the leadership of Chief Consultant appointed by the NMD.
The TSG is comprised of professional from academic and other relevant domains to provide the professional support to the NMA and NPD.

FUNCTION: TSG’s main function is to help States in making and appraisal of the State educational plans, monitoring fund flow and utilization certificates, manage MIS for central authority, providing all managerial, operational, logistic and professional support to NMA, PAB, NPD.
STATE LEVEL STRUCTURE State level structure comprised of three bodies namely  State Higher Education Council  State Project Directorate  State Technical Support Group Page 18 of 147 The project within the State will be steered through an institutions setup for the RUSA and will be responsible for management, co-ordination, implementation and monitoring of the project.

1.
1.

STATE HIGHER EDUCATION COUNCIL (SHEC) States require a supreme policy body for Higher Education to develop a comprehensive, long- term and inclusive educational plan.

RUSA requires formation of SHEC for planned and coordinated development of Higher education in State, sharing of resources between Universities, leads academic and governance reforms at institutional level, establish principles for funding institutions, maintain a data bank on Higher Education and conduct research and evaluation studies.
 In order for the State higher education system to function effectively States need to set up SHEC at an arm’s length from the State as well as centre.

 These Councils may be formed through an executive order to begin with but must be converted into statutory bodies by Acts of the State legislatures within two years 1.1.
NEED OF SHEC  State universities cannot be monitored fully through a central system  Centre has only partial funding these institutions while States provide the rest of funding  SHEC is required to be constituted by an Executive order initially but converted into a Statutory body through Acts of State legislature within 2 years 1.2.
INSTITUTIONAL ARCHITECTURE OF SHEC  Out of the total, 7 members of the council should be from the State and 3 members must be individuals of national eminence (outside the State)  SHEC should consist of 15-25 members, each with a term of 6 years.
 1/3rd of members will retire every 2 years and the existing council will nominate 3 new members every 2 years  The council must meet at least once every quarter; the quorum for the council meetings shall be 1/3rd of the strength, including the Chairman and Member Secretary 1.3.
COMPOSITION OF SHEC Page 19 of 147  Chairman: An eminent Academic/ Public Intellectual with proven leadership qualities  Vice Chairman: must be an eminent academic administrator (rank of professor) or a professional from industry with sufficient experience  Member Secretary: eminent academic of the rank of Professor-Chief Executive   State Project Director 10-15 Members: from field of arts, science and technology, culture, civil society, industry, vocational education & skill development 3 VC’s: of State Universities and 2 Principals: Autonomous/ Affiliated colleges 1 Nominee: Government of India   1.4.
FUNCTIONS OF SHEC i.

Strategy and Planning  Preparing the State Higher Education Plan (Perspective Plan, Annual Plan and Budget Plan)  Providing State Institutions inputs for creating their Plans and implementing them  Coordination between apex bodies, regulatory institutions and government ii.

Advisory Functions  Advising State government on strategic investments in higher education  Advising universities on statute and ordinance formulation iii.
Funding Functions  Funds managed by the SHEC will include funds from RUSA as well as State share, both of which will flow through the State government  Determine the methodology for timely transfer of State’s share of funds to institutions  Disburse funds to State universities and colleges on the basis of the State Higher Education Plan and transparent norms iv.
Monitoring & Evaluation  Monitoring the implementation of State Higher Education Plan  Creating and maintaining the Management Information Systems  Compiling and maintaining periodic statistics at State and Institutional Level  Evaluating State Institutions on the basis of norms and KPIs developed under RUSA Page 20 of 147  Ensuring timely submission of Utilization Certificates from Institutions v. Quality Assurance & Academic Functions  Faculty quality enhancement initiatives  Quality of examinations/ Examination reforms  Maintaining the Quality of Curriculum  Promoting Innovation in Research  Protecting the autonomy of State Institutions  Providing approval to set up new institutions/ colleges  Accreditation reforms The interface between the State government and State Higher Education Council (SHEC) can be gathered from the following functions for both.
State Government  Overall policy design for higher education in the State: The States must design their educational policies to bring out detailed State Higher Education Plans (SHEPs) keeping in mind the norms and indicators under RUSA.

These plans constitute the primary vehicle for the States to plan for accelerated growth and equitable development of the higher education sectors.
 Perspective and annual budgeting: Perspectives for higher education in the State are to be drawn up for a spread over a period of ten year with detailed planning and budgeting exercise to fix the annual targets for programme implementation and the required budget for them.

It is important that the action plan is realistic, practically implementable and correlates the physical outputs with cost estimates.
 Funding (central and State share) to SHEC/institutions: In addition to the State providing its share, it must also be ensured that the money is transferred to the State Higher Education Councils within the time stipulated by RUSA.
Funding is to be provided for government institutions subject to approvals for permitted activities based on certain norms and parameters  Provide operational costs for the SHEC: The State Higher Education Councils (SHECs) are supported by the project Directorate (created by the State Govt) and State Technical Support Group (TSGs) providing all operational, technical, logistical and managerial support.
Page 21 of 147  Decide on and support student support activities: The State governments shall take appropriate decisions to undertake activities related to student support services such as admissions, reservations, financial assistance etc.

in order to achieve the objectives for expansion, excellence and equity in Higher education.
State Higher Education Council (SHEC)  Strategy and planning within the overall policy design of the State Govt: The State Higher Education Council (SHECs) are responsible for planned and coordinated development of higher education in the State and to foster sharing of resources between universities, benefit from synergy across institutions.
 Monitoring and evaluation of RUSA: The primary responsibility of monitoring lies with State Higher Education Council (SHEC) It monitors the progress of institutional projects on a regular basis and shall provide guidance for improving the performance of the institutions in project implementation.

 Quality assurance and academic functions: State Higher Education Council (SHEC) advises the State governments on strategic investments in higher education.
It also advices universities on statues and ordinance formulation.

It includes faculty quality enhancements initiatives, quality of examinations, maintaining quality of curriculum, promoting innovations in research, protecting the autonomy of State institutions, providing approval to setting up of new institutions /colleges, and accreditation reforms etc.

 Impact assessment of schemes: Evaluating the State institutions on the basis of the norms and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) developed under RUSA.
The State Higher Education Councils (SHECs) may develop additional norms as they deem fit.

 Research and innovation funding: The funds managed by the State Higher Education Council (SHEC) include funds from RUSA as well as the State share-both of which flows through the State government.

It determines the appropriate methodology for timely transfer of the State share funds to the institutions.
The funds also get disbursed to the universities and colleges on the basis of the innovative and dynamic plans and transparent norms.

2.

STATE PROJECT DIRECTORATE (SPD) The SPD consists of State Project Director and such adequate support staff as may be required for the effective functioning of the Directorate.

The State Project Director must be a senior officer of the rank of Commissioner /Secretary of State Government Page 22 of 147 FUNCTIONS  Oversee project implementation at the State level.
 Maintain statistical data and MIS reports.

 Engage project auditors as required.

3.

TECHNICAL SUPPORT GROUP The State council appoint and decide the composition of TSG.

The TSG monitors the flow of funds and information, generic MIS report and provide all operational support through SHEC.
Advisory on Composition of State Technical Support Group Post Data Entry MIS Manager Consultant Communication Consultant Higher Education Minimum Qualification Recommended the and 10+2 additional diploma in relevant field Post Graduate in Statistics/ MCA with at least 2 years of relevant experience of data handling.

Graduate with PG Diploma in Mass Communication Masters’ Degree and / or M.Phil.

/ PhD in Social Sciences / Sciences / Engineering and Technology / Work Experience Recommended 3 yrs.
Job Description (Illustrative) No of Posts Data compilation, aggregation of IDPs at state level Depends on States’ requirements 5yrs 5 yrs.

5yrs Do Do Do Monitoring - fund flow, project implementation and managing MIS interface Inbound and out bound communication with stake holders at centre and state level Preparation of SHEP, research, monitoring, planning and administrative works for SHEC.

Page 23 of 147 Management / Law.

Experience in Social Development Sector preferred.


Masters in Statistic / Mathematics Consultant- Data Manager Chief Consultant MBA/ Economics/ PGDBM /Public Admn/Academic 5yrs 15yrs Do Do Data crunching for SHEP from primary / secondary data Management head of TSG at state level for SHEC General support staff in addition to above consultant as per the work requirement.
INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL STRUCTURE The project at institutional level is managed by two bodies: the board of Governors (BoG) and Project Monitoring Unit.

1.

BOARD OF GOVERNERS COMPOSITION  The BoG is a 10- 15-member body chaired by an eminent individual.

 The Chairman need not be an academic but must have prior experience in a similar capacity.

 The board members must comprise eminent individuals from the institutions itself, State government, society, industry as well as the academia.
FUNCTIONS: Form, supervise and -guide various Committees required for project implementation and internal project monitoring 2.

PROJECT MONITORING UNIT COMPOSITION Page 24 of 147  Representative from academic officials of the Institution, faculty, senior administrative officers, technical and non-technical support staff and students.

FUNCTIONS: Responsible for monitoring of the project at the institutional level in order to implement the governance reforms proposed under RUSA.
Page 25 of 147 Chapter 3 Process Flow under RUSA RUSA follows a bottom-up approach for planning and budgeting to address multiple and graded inequalities and promote need-based planning.

The process flow of RUSA is given below: States indicate willingness to participate in the scheme by signing of MoU with MHRD Approval by the National Mission Authority for the participation of the States.

Submission of components approved by SHEC through online challenge level funding portal.
Appraisal by the TSG online Approval of Plans by the PAB online Fund Allocation and Disbursement to the States through PFMS Monitoring and Evaluation through Fund & Reform Tracker and Bhuwan RUSA Prerequisites of RUSA In order to realize the intended outcomes, a set of commitments towards reform process have to be made by the States which must be fulfilled during the course of the Page 26 of 147 implementation of the RUSA.
These are non-negotiable and are at two levels; commitment given by the States to the Centre and the commitment given by institutions to the State.

Unless these commitments are fulfilled, the States and institutions would not be eligible to avail grants under the scheme.
The prerequisites of RUSA are listed below, and described in detail in chapter 6 of this handbook: PREREQUISITES Commitments of States to Centre Commitments of Institutions to States Setting up of SHEC Institutional governance reforms SHEP (including Perspective Plan, Annual Plan and Financial & Work Plan).

Expenditure on Higher Education as % of Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP).

Separate RUSA Bank Account.


State funding commitment – share and timeliness Filling up of faculty positions Academic and examination reforms Accreditation Commitments Project Management Teams Separate RUSA Bank Account Equity Commitments Commitments on research and innovation efforts Governance and administrative reforms Faculty recruitment and improvement Accreditation reforms Affiliation reforms Academic and Examination reforms To upload the information on AISHE regularly.
Establishment of MIS Regulatory compliance Registration on Know Your College Portal (KYC) Approval by National Mission Authority for the inclusion of the States Page 27 of 147 ● The National Mission Authority gives approval for inclusion of the States under RUSA based on the willingness submitted by the States and commitments given by them in conformity with the norms to bring in required reforms.
● After approval for inclusion of the States, preparatory grants are released to the States (refer to chapter 8 for heads under which preparatory grants can be used).

Submission of SHEP  A Perspective Plan (State Higher Education Plan) for higher education has to be drawn up for the 12th and 13th plan period by the State Higher Education Council and sent to the MHRD.
 The Perspective Plan is required to be broken down into annual plans with detailed planning and budgeting exercise to fix the annual targets for programme implementation.

 The SHEP would have mainly two components:  Institutional component: The bottom-up approach for planning and budgeting under RUSA begins at the institutional level with formation of “Institutional Development Plan” (IDP).

The IDP in the prescribed format (Annexure III) should be sent to the SHEC by the institutions.
These IDPs have to be aggregated by the State Higher Education Council.

 State component: The State component should address issues related to excellence, spatial and geographical gaps, access, governance etc.

The State has to identify un- served/under-served areas and make special provisions for the new institutions in those areas.

The plans must also address the problem of institutional congestion and have a strategy to deal with the same.
Similarly, State must also look at the State as a single entity to plan for affiliation reforms and creation of new universities etc.

 Excellence, Access and Equity must form the main thrust areas of the SHEP.

 The IDPs must be based on the inputs/ discussions with the multiple – stakeholders within the institution’s jurisdiction.

Also, SHEC should engage in consultation with multiple stakeholders across the State to address regional requirements.
Page 28 of 147  SHEPs serve as the benchmark against which the performance of a State and its institutions are graded.

 States should consider following points while including new proposals in the SHEP.

Are the proposals appropriate for inclusion under RUSA?

Are the proposals relevant in the context of the State?

Are the proposals in confirmity with the programmatic norms?

Do the proposals align with outcome and outputs proposed by the State?
It is imperative that the State Higher Education Plan must be approved by the State Higher Education Council, before submission to the MHRD.

Any additional proposals of the State for consideration in the subsequent PABs must be first incorporated in the SHEP.

Appraisal of SHEP by TSG TSG’s appraisal at the Centre-level is a systematic process to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the SHEP.
Although States are free to prioritize the proposals under various components for funding under RUSA, all the proposals would be assessed at Central level.

The appraisal assesses the relevance of the State’s proposals to receive funds (Refer to Chapter 6 for appraisal formats).

It ascertains the eligibility of the institutions to receive funds under RUSA.
A brief illustration of the appraisal process is given below: Approval of Plans by the PAB Page 29 of 147  The Project Approval Board (PAB) at the MHRD undertakes a detailed review of the SHEPs and the recommendations of the TSG on the SHEPs.

 It also assesses the performance of the State and look at the targets that have been set in the SHEPs.
 The PAB approves the funds under various components based on certain parameters like the proposals’ conformity with the programmatic norms, resource envelope available for a State, justification for the proposals, etc.

 The approval for disbursement of funds under various components by the PAB may be unconditional or conditional.

In case of conditional approval, States are required to submit a Detailed Project Report (DPR) for the approved proposals.
The DPR would again be assessed by the TSG at the Central level before release of funds.

(Refer to Chapter 7 for DPR templates)  The Project Approval Board reviews the progress periodically.

All the future approvals by the PAB takes into account outcomes and achievements against the targets set in the SHEPs.

The emphasis is not only on physical output, but also on the intended outcomes.
Disbursement of funds to the States  After the perspective Plan submitted by the State has been approved by the PAB, the Project Directorate, with the concurrence of the Integrated Finance Division (IFD) of the MHRD carries out sanctions on the Public Finance Management System (PFMS) portal and EAT Module of the Controller General of Accounts (CGA).

After this, funds are transferred online to the States/ UTs consolidated fund.
 The States contribute their share along with central share to the dedicated RUSA account (savings account only) of the SHEC within 15 days of receipt of the central share.

SHEC must ensure to transfer the funds to dedicated RUSA Bank Account of institutions within 15 days of the receipt of the combined pool of funds from State government.

 The releases made to institutions must be as per the approved Institutional Development Plans and after adjusting unspent balances from the previous year.
Non-compliance would affect further allocation of grants in the future.

Page 30 of 147  The funds with the SHEC/institutions do not lapse at the close of financial year.

SHEC/Institutions are empowered to utilize the unspent balance during the next financial year for the same purpose for which the funds were allocated.

The amount shall however be taken into account while releasing funds for the next year.
The States shall adhere to RUSA Guidelines and create enabling processes for expeditious implementation of the scheme.

It is assumed that after obtaining the due approval from the Project Approval Board (PAB) on the Plan, resources (Central Share + State Share) must be released in a timely manner to the beneficiary institutions.

Page 31 of 147 Chapter 4 General Norms under RUSA Following norms are overarching/universal norms under RUSA applicable for all components: 1.
All land must be provided free of cost by the State governments.

The States shall be the exclusive owner of the land required for any activity under RUSA.

2.

The State Government shall acquire and have undisputed possession of land in cases where a new institution is proposed to be set up or existing one is proposed to be expanded.

Any future legal disputes must also be handled by the State Government and the Centre shall not be a party to any such dispute.

3.
3.

In case any Government aided institution is to be supported, the State shall provide a clear undertaking that any legal disputes arising out of ownership of land or building shall be defended/litigated by the State at its own cost and such costs shall not be loaded on to RUSA.

4.

For all civil works, the cost estimates mentioned for RUSA components would constitute the upper limit, when deciding the central support under RUSA.
However, in case the State SSR (or SAR) is lower than the cost estimates of RUSA, it will be State SSR/SAR which shall apply for determining the Central share.

In other words, central share for civil works under any component shall be restricted to either RUSA estimate or of the State SSR/SAR, whichever is lower.

5.

However, States would be free to enhance its own share for any component.
It may also add new components, which are not mentioned under RUSA provided it is willing to bear the entire additional expenditure.

6.

States will be free to leverage resources or add extra components on to any of the RUSA targets.

They may also dovetail any of the existing schemes of the State or centre for fusion gains.
These schemes may be Member of Parliament Local Area Development Division (MPLAD), local body funds (panchayat or municipality by whatever name known), Jawaharlal Nehru Urban Renewal Mission (JNUrRM), National Mission on Page 32 of 147 Education through Education and Information Technology (NMEICT), Rural Infrastructural Development Fund (RIDF) etc.

(This list is only illustrative and not exhaustive).

7.
7.

States may engage any of the Central/State agencies such as the Central Public Works Department (CPWD), State Public Works Department (PWD) and State and Central PSUs for civil works.

In all cases States would be required to follow the relevant State Treasury rules and procedures.

8.

States would be required to procure all consumables, equipment, furniture, fixtures etc.

in accordance with the State procurement policy and relevant rules for government procurement applicable to the States.
In all such cases competitive bidding and e- procurement method should be adopted.

RUSA PAB shall have a right to question any of the procurement which appears on a higher side.

9.

Affiliation reforms and accreditation norms as elaborated in Section 4.8.7 in the RUSA document should be followed by States.

Accreditation shall be a pre-requisite for all the existing institutions which are more than six years old.

10.
10.

Commitment of the institutions and the States to academic and examination reforms would critically evaluated by the TSG and PAB before sanctioning plans.

11.

Wherever RUSA initiatives are to be supported by necessary legal instruments (like legislation or Rules or Orders), the same shall be binding on the State.

Any consequences arising out of delay in passing the legislation or litigation shall be fully discharged and defended by the State Governments.
RUSA shall be at liberty to stop grants, or even to recover the same in case of such an eventuality.

12.

SHECs and Institutions participating in the programme shall maintain a separate single account in the name of RUSA, to be operated by an authorized representative of the SHEC or institution as the case may be.

The account details will be shared with MHRD, and any subsequent change in account must be done in consultation with the Ministry.

13.
13.

All receipts and expenditure under RUSA shall be debited and credited to RUSA.

Interest accrued, if any on such an account shall be credited to RUSA.

Page 33 of 147 14.

States must ensure that the State machinery and the State institutions necessarily become a part of the MIS developed by the RUSA Mission Authority since a robust MIS only can ensure optimum gains from the project.

15.
15.

States would be entitled to 1% of the total State allocation as Management Monitoring Evaluation and Research (MMER) to be spent on maintaining the State TSG and other institutional structures and corollary expenses.

However, the salary of the government staff/officers deployed by the State shall be charged on to State exchequer only.

16.
16.

In respect of proposals from North-Eastern States, the PAB will consider prioritization in respect of certain components on a need-based approach, taking into account their geographical and other challenging circumstances under which institutions function.

17.

North eastern, Himalayan states (special category states) will be adequately considered in components, wherever applicable on the basis of their needs.

18.
18.

State Governments may review state higher education policies and work out measures to significantly ease hurdles in attracting private investment in education, especially in backward areas.

19.

All infrastructure constructed under the scheme shall be barrier free and accessible to persons with disability and follow Harmonised Guidelines and Space Standards for Barrier-Free Built Environment to persons with disability and elderly persons, published by CPWD in February 2016.
Page 34 of 147 Chapter 5 Components under RUSA Page 35 of 147 Component 1: Creation of Universities by Upgradation of Existing Autonomous College 1.1 Abstract: 3 autonomous colleges (University Grants Commission autonomous colleges regulation 2018 and compliance to the same) which have necessary infrastructural facilities, teaching strength and academic quality will be considered for up-gradation to Universities (public).

The grant is subject to a maximum of Rs 55 crores for each institution.
1.2 Funding Priority: Existing autonomous colleges which fulfil the following requirements will only be considered for upgradation: (a) Physical Infrastructure  Must have been in existence for at least 15 years.

 Must have autonomy status conferred by UGC  The land already available with the college must be enough to support the additional enrolments and capacity (at least 10 acres in mega cities, 15 acres in metro cities and 20 acres in rest of the country).
 Should have adequate library, hostel, laboratory, ICT and sports facilities.

(b) Academic Quality  Should have been accredited by NAAC and must have received 3.51 CGPA and above.

Page 36 of 147  For eligibility, such colleges should also have a healthy Student-teacher ratio, Post –Graduate Departments, and should have filled at least 70% of their sanctioned faculty positions etc.
 The minimum existing enrolment of the college must be 2000 and the proposed total enrolment of students must be enough to sustain the institution as a university with a minimum enrolment requirement of 4000 students.

 Should have teaching programmes both in undergraduate and postgraduate courses.

 It must also have credible research capacity as evidenced through research and publications of faculty members.
The college must be multi-faculty (at least two or more faculties such as Arts, Commerce, Science, Engineering, Law etc)  Should have inter-disciplinary programmes in teaching and research.

 Should have a healthy student–teacher ratio (25:1).
The ratio will be counted by dividing the total filled positions to total regular student intake (c) Governance Structure  Must have or commit to a robust internal governance structure: with Academic Council, Board of Studies/Research Councils and Finance Committees as per the guidelines of the regulatory body (UGC).

 Must have enough administrative and non-teaching staff and the capacity to function and be managed as a University.
States are required to sanction additional staff as soon as the approval of PAB is received to meet the desired ratio of 1:1.1.

1.3 Future Commitments: Apart from clearly specifying the need for university status, the college seeking university status should commit to the requirements and expectations listed below: Page 37 of 147 (a) Physical Infrastructure  Convert all the existing buildings into fully disabled friendly to improve access.

 Ensure special facilities/equipment for the disabled students.
 Adequate hostel and toilet facilities for girls.

 Per student availability: adequate classroom, lab and library space (b) Academic Quality  Inter-disciplinary and trans-disciplinary programmes should be encouraged; the upgraded institution should be a multi-disciplinary university.
 Commit to rigorous evaluation on the indicators under the Institutional Plan template with greater weightage on “Quality and Research index” after 3 years of its establishment as a University Commit to adequate library, laboratory and hostel facilities.

 The institution must commit to inclusion of ICT in teaching and learning processes in all its colleges and provide internet access (preferably Wi-Fi) to all students  Specify the innovations contemplated in academics and governance.
 Specify how to make innovations sustainable and scale-up.

 Should have a teaching to non-teaching ratio of 1:1.1 (c) Governance and related issues  Adherence to the provisions of the State Public Universities Act (if a single Act governs all Universities) or commit to a new Act (if separate Acts guides the functioning of institutions).
 The institution must be governed by a Board of Governors/governing body with a different nomenclature having representation from academia, industry, public intellectuals etc  The new university should be established as an affiliating university.

The State government should clearly mention the jurisdiction of the university.

Page 38 of 147  The institution must maintain a reasonable ratio of teaching to non-teaching staff asper UGC recommendations.
(d) Equity and Inclusion  Adherence to the reservation policy of State government in admission and faculty recruitment.

 Ensure that the campus is disabled friendly with all the requisite facilities Equipment, fixtures and furniture are part of the estimate and should not exceed 50% of the approved cost.

Laboratory equipment can also be purchased by the Institution, if needed.

Per sq.

Metre cost rate given is only relevant for New Construction, and not Renovation.
Cost of construction and Renovation should follow CPWD rates.

Short Listing Criteria- Indicators & Weights (Total 100 marks) A. NAAC Score (20 marks) S. No.

Indicator 1 2 3 4 CGPA Above 3.80 CGPA 3.7-3.79 CGPA 3.6-3.69 CGPA 3.51-3.59 B.

Faculty Positions filled in regular mode (20 marks) S. No.
Indicator 1 2 3 4 Above 85% of sanctioned faculty positions 80-84.9% 70-79.9% 60-69.9% Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 7 marks Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 5 marks Page 39 of 147 C. Student-Teacher Ratio (20 marks) S. No.

Indicator 1 2 3 4 Above 1:10 – 1:20 Above 1:20 – 1:30 Above 1:30 – 1:40 Above 1:40 – 1:60 D. Functional Governance Structure (20 marks) S. No.
Indicator Governing Council/ Board Yes No Academic Council/ Board Yes No Research Council Yes No Board of Studies Yes No Finance Committee Yes No E. Funding Priority (20 marks) S. No.

Parameter 1 institution have a vision-mission Does the statement?
Yes (Please upload) Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 5 marks Weights 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks Weights 3 marks Page 40 of 147 2 No the Does program Yes No institution offer inter-disciplinary 3 Does the institution offer: UG & PG Only UG 4 5 Does the institution have research program?

(Ph D) Yes No Has the institution been conferred CPE status by UGC?

Yes No 6 Does the institution have an Alumni Association?
Yes No 7 What is the percentage of students getting placed in the Institution?

Over 90% Over 75% Over 50% Below 50% 1.5Baseline Data 0 marks 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 1 mark 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 0 marks 2 marks 0 marks 3 marks 2 marks 1 mark 0 mark Page 41 of 147 1.Details of the College(s)proposed for Up-gradation Unit Autonomous College A Autonomous College B Autonomous College C & so on.

Whether Govt./ Aided/ Pvt.
Category Year of Establishment Year Year of Autonomous Status conferred by UGC Year Land Area of the College Acres Location of College University to which college is affiliated Whether College is conferred with Potential for Excellence (CPE) Accreditation Grade, Year and Cycle of Accreditation Yes/no Grade Total Students Enrolled Undergraduate programme in Number Total Students Enrolled Postgraduate programme in Number SC ST OBC Female Number Number Number Number Total existing enrolment of Institution Number Proposed enrolment after upgradation additional Number Page 42 of 147 Total Number of Teachers (sanctioned positions) number Total Number of Teachers (actual in position) Regular teachers Contractual or ad-hoc teachers Ratio Student Teacher Ratio (Filled position) Whether college faculty?
is multi- Yes/No Number of Departments Number If yes, no.

of courses offered presently Number Additional no.
of courses to be offered after upgradation Number number of Total Administrative and Support Staff Teaching Ratio to Non-Teaching number Ratio Number of Books in Library Number Number of Computers Number Total Student in Hostels Number SC Girls SC Boys ST Girls ST Boys OBC Girls % Page 43 of 147 OBC Boys Other Girls Other Boys Whether has separate Sports Complex college a Yes/no Board of Whether Studies/Research Councils in position Whether Finance Committees in position Yes/no Yes/no Adherence to financial norms for creation of infrastructure Yes/no Jurisdiction mentioned for the proposed university whether unitary or Affiliating?
Reservation for socially & economically weaker sections- existing Unitary/ Affiliating SC (in %) ST (in %) OBC (in %) 2.

Physical & Financial Proposal Autonomous College A Autonomous College B Autonomous College C & so on.

Whether New Constructi on/ Renovation / Equipment Physic al Value (Area in Sq.

Mt.)

Financi al Value (Rs.

lakhs) in Physic al Value (Area Sq.

Mt.)

Financi al Value (Rs.

lakhs) in Physic al Value (Area Sq.

Mt.)

Financi al Value (Rs.


lakhs) in Tier Category of proposed college (Tier-1/Tier-2/Tier-3) Details for the proposed college Administrative Area Page 44 of 147 School of Sciences School Sciences of Social of School Engineering, Technology & Computer Technology School of Teacher Education of School Humanities and Liberal Arts Classrooms (Common) Central library Auditorium Canteen/Cafeteria/T oilet Blocks/Misc.
Hostel Total The State needs to mention whether they would utilize the funds for Construction or Renovation in a particular item.

In case a certain item needs both, it should be explicitly mentioned within the same row.

3.

Commitments required to be furnished (Yes/ No) Commitment Autonomous College A Autonomous College B Autonomous College C & so on.

Page 45 of 147 Physical Infrastructure Convert all the existing buildings into fully disabled friendly to improve access.
Ensure special facilities/equipments for the disabled students.

Adequate hostel and toilet facilities for girls.

Per student availability: adequate classroom, lab and library space Academic Quality Inter-disciplinary and trans-disciplinary programmes should be encouraged; the upgraded institution should be a multi- disciplinary university.
Commit to rigorous evaluation on the indicators under the Institutional Plan template with greater weightage on “Quality and Research index” after 3 years of its establishment as a University Commit to facilitate research after up gradation to University Commit to adequate library, laboratory and hostel facilities.
The institution must commit to inclusion of ICT in teaching and learning processes in all its colleges and provide internet access (preferably Wi-Fi) to all students Should have a teaching to non-teaching ratio of 1:1.1 Governance and related issues Page 46 of 147 Adherence to the provisions of the State Public Universities Act (if a single Act.

governs all Universities) or commit to a new Act (if separate Acts guides the functioning of institutions).
The institution must be governed by a Board of Governors/governing body with a different nomenclature having representation from academia, industry, public intellectuals etc Equity and Inclusion Adherence to merit-based admission of students.

50% of hostel seats should be reserved for socially and economically weaker sections.

Adherence to the reservation policy of State government in admission and faculty recruitment.

4.
4.

5 vital reasons for Up gradation & justification of value addition to Institution if converted into a University S. No.

Name of College Reason 5.
Research publications of all the teachers of the proposed Autonomous colleges (Maximum 3 publications per teacher) Name of the department Name of the teacher Title of the paper Research journal (only referred) Page 47 of 147 Component 2: Creation of Universities by conversion of colleges in a Cluster 2.1 Abstract 3 new cluster universities (public) would be created during the current Plan period with an average allocation of Rs.55 crore per university through the clustering of existing affiliated government and government-aided colleges.
These universities will be created by pooling the resources of 3 to 5 existing colleges (2 to 3 colleges for NER States) that have adequate academic, physical and technical infrastructural facilities.

2.2 Funding Priority  Colleges with a NAAC grade of 3.51 and above will be eligible.

However, in case such a cluster is not possible, the Lead college has to have NAAC score of 3.51 and the participating colleges need to have NAAC score of at least 3.25.
 The purpose of such an intervention is to bring together 3-5 colleges which have the required academic and administrative autonomy (but do not have the power to award degree) and convert them into a university (which has the degree awarding power) through an Act of State Legislature.

 Colleges fulfilling conditions of autonomy under the UGC Autonomous College Regulations, 2018 of the UGC will be eligible.
 Colleges with high Teacher-Student Ratio, Post –Graduate Departments, and having filled 85% of their sanctioned faculty positions etc.

are eligible to be considered  These colleges selected should offer inter and multi-disciplinary programs.

 Colleges joining the cluster must have the capacity to function as a university when coalesced.
This would include, among other factors, the strength and experience of the administrative staff, the number of years that the individual colleges have been functioning, degree of autonomy they have enjoyed in the past, etc.

 The conversion plan for the creation of universities must include stage-wise planning with regard to expansion in infrastructure, number of students, schools and departments, administration, academic functions, research activities, etc.
It must also Page 48 of 147 cover the timelines and concrete steps that will be taken for the integration of all the concerned colleges as well as the expected end State of the new University.

 Agree to a Memorandum of Understanding which should clearly specify the nature and extent of relationship among partnering colleges and lay down the modalities for the functioning of the cluster.
Other requirements that needs to be fulfilled (a) Physical Infrastructure  At least two of the participating colleges should have been in existence for 15 years.

 Should have an existing combined enrolment of 2000 student and the proposed total enrolment of students must be enough to sustain the institution as a university with a minimum enrolment requirement of 4000 students.
 As the university would be a multi-campus university, the physical proximity of the institutions should be such that they are able to share physical and human resources and would be able to facilitate student and faculty mobility (ideally within a maximum radius of 15-20 kms from the lead institution (to take into account the special condition of North East Region States).

In exceptional cases with strong quality credentials, the circumference of such a cluster may extend up to 50 kms.
 The State government should identify a nucleus college or ensure the availability of necessary land required for the university in and around the nucleus college to build university super-structure.

The combined land availability should be at least 15 acres in mega cities, 20 acres in metro cities and 25 acres in rest of the country.
(b) Academic Quality  The new cluster university may be a combination of colleges with autonomous status/ Colleges with Excellence/ College with Potential for Excellence status.

 All participating colleges should have NAAC accreditation of 3.51 and above However, in case such a cluster is not possible, the Lead college has to have NAAC score of 3.51 and the participating colleges need to have NAAC score of at least 3.25.

 Should have teaching programmes in undergraduate and postgraduate courses.
 Must have a few faculty members with excellent research performance through publications, undertaking research projects and guiding research students.

 Should have demonstrated high academic performance in inter-disciplinary teaching and research programmes.
 Should have a Student–teacher ratio (25:1) (combined based on sanctioned strength) Page 49 of 147  The combined graduate and postgraduate departments proposed by the institutions must be able to lay the foundation for a multi-disciplinary institution and should have appropriate diversity in teaching and research.

(c) Governance and related issues The participating colleges should have:  A robust internal governance structure as per the guidelines of the regulatory body.
Also, it is advisable that such institutions should have an Academic Council/ Board of Studies/Research Councils and Finance Committees.

 Ability to raise /mobilize resources from sources other than public funding.
(d) Equity and Inclusion  Reservation as per State norms  Make all the buildings disabled friendly 2.3 Future Commitments The proposed university should commit to the requirements and expectations listed below: (a) Physical Infrastructure  Convert all the existing buildings into fully disabled friendly to improve access.

 Commit to hostels for boys and girls.


 Per student availability: adequate classroom, lab and library space (b) Academic Quality  Agree to share existing facilities in partner colleges and undertake common ventures in promoting access, equity and quality of education.
 Agree to academic reforms (c) Governance and related issues  Agree to certain principles of governance like equal status to participating institutions, collective decision-making, autonomy and accountability, independence and interdependence, physical proximity, optimal size, partnership of publicly funded institutions, etc.
 Agree to a governance structure which should ensure equal and adequate representation of partnering institutions for democratic decision-making and Page 50 of 147 effective implementation of academic programmes, financial autonomy and social accountability.

 An appropriate governance structure for cluster universities shall be detailed by respective States through a new Act or amendments to the existing Act within a year from the date of establishment.
(d) Equity and Inclusion  Due preference for hostel accommodation should be given to for socially and economically weaker sections.

 Convert existing buildings into fully disabled friendly ones.

2.4 Physical and Financial Estimates Note:  A detailed conversion plan must be submitted by the institution.

 Equipment, fixtures and furniture are part of the estimate and should not exceed 50% of the approved cost.
 Equipment, fixtures and furniture are part of the estimate  States ensure that the university would create at least three schools (including the existing schools) with at least two inter-related/inter-disciplinary departments and one centre in each school.

 Staff - (a) Non-teaching – The State Governments will fill/appoint additional non-teaching staff in order to achieve the ideal teaching to non-teaching ratio of 1:1.1.
(b) Teaching – State Governments will fill vacant positions and create additional positions.

Institutions with a Student Teacher ratio of 20:1 or below can approach RUSA for support of these additional positions in order to achieve the target of 15:1  Estimates need to clearly give details about existing land, buildings and facilities/ equipment and additional requirements for existing land, buildings and facilities/ equipment.

 Cost of construction and Renovation should follow CPWD rates.
Short Listing Criteria Indicators & Weights (Total 100 marks) A. NAAC Score for Lead College (20 marks) S. No.

Indicator 1 2 CGPA Above 3.80 CGPA 3.7-3.79 Weights 20 marks 15 marks Page 51 of 147 3 4 CGPA 3.6-3.69 CGPA 3.51-3.59 10 marks 7 marks B.

Faculty Positions filled in regular mode for Cluster as a whole (20 marks) S. No.

Indicator 1 2 3 4 Above 85% of sanctioned faculty positions 80-84.9% 70-79.9% 60-69.9% C. Student-Teacher Ratio for Cluster as a whole (20 marks) S. No.
Indicator 1 2 3 4 Above 1:10 – 1:20 Above 1:20 – 1:30 Above 1:30 – 1:40 Above 1:40 – 1:60 Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 5 marks Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 5 marks D. Functional Governance Structure for Cluster as a whole (20 marks) S. No.
Indicator 1 2 3 4 Governing Council/ Board Yes No Academic Council/ Board Yes No Research Council Yes No Board of Studies Yes Weights 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks Page 52 of 147 No 5 Finance Committee Yes No E. Funding Priority for Cluster as a whole (20 marks) S. No.

Parameter the inter-disciplinary institution offer institution have a vision-mission Does the statement?
Yes (Please upload) No Does program Yes No Does the institution offer: UG & PG Only UG Does the institution have research program?

(Ph D) Yes No Has the institution been conferred CPE status by UGC?

Yes No Does the institution have an Alumni Association?

Yes No What is the percentage of students getting placed in the Institution?
Over 90% Over 75% Over 50% Below 50% 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks Weights 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 1 mark 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 0 marks 2 marks 0 marks 3 marks 2 marks 1 mark 0 mark Page 53 of 147 1.5 Data Capture Format 1 Willingness to be up graded to the university status Details Lead College (Cluster College 1) Cluster college 2 Cluster college 3 Cluster college 4 Cluster college 5 Willing to upgrade to university by clustering with other colleges Willing to pool together all the academic, physical and technical infrastructural facilities/ resources as university.
Commit to adhere to the State norms/ including policies Reservation.

Elucidate five important reasons for clustering into a university 2 Details of the proposed institutions Details Unit Cluster college 2 a.
Cluster college 3 Cluster college 4 Cluster college 5 Lead College (Cluster College 1) to which Name of College and address with district name Whether Govt./ Aided University college is affiliated Distance College (KM) Available Land Area of the College Year of Establishment Whether Autonomous college from Lead Category Page 54 of 147 Accreditation Whether College with Potential for Excellence (CPE) NAAC Status/ Grade Whether college is multi- faculty?

If yes, no.
of courses offered presently Number of Departments Total Students Enrolled in undergraduate programme Total Students Enrolled in postgraduate programme SC ST OBC Female Total existing enrolment of Institution Total Teachers positions) Student Teacher Ratio (Filled up position) Number Total Teachers position) Total Administrative Support Staff Number of Books Library of (sanctioned of and Number number (actual of in in Number of Computers Yes/No Number Number Number Number Number Number Number of Books in Library Number of Computers % Student in Boys Hostels Number SC Girls SC Boys ST Girls ST Boys OBC Girls OBC Boys Page 55 of 147 Academic additional after Other Girls Other Boys Student in Girls Hostels % SC Girls SC Boys ST Girls ST Boys OBC Girls OBC Boys Other Girls Other Boys Proposed enrolment becoming a university Whether Council in position Board Whether Studies/Research Councils in position Whether Committees in position Adherence to financial norms for creation of infrastructure Jurisdiction mentioned proposed for the whether university unitary or Affiliating?
Reservation for socially & economically weaker sections- existing Finance of Number Yes/no Unitary/ Affiliating SC (in %) ST (in %) OBC (in %) 3.

Physical & Financial Proposal S. No Item 1 Administrative Area& Common Facilities College 1 (Tier 1/2/Hilly) Tier 1 Area (@ Rs.

(SM) 33371 per SM) Rs.

In Lakh College 2 (Tier 1/2/Hilly) Tier 2 Area (@ Rs.

(SM) 31622 per SM) Rs.

In Lakh College 3 (Tier 1/2/Hilly) Hilly Area (@ Rs.

(SM) 44650 per SM) Rs.


In Lakh Page 56 of 147 School of Sciences School of Social Sciences School of Engineering, Technology & Computer Technology School of Teacher Education School of Humanities & Liberal Arts Classrooms (Common) Central Computer centre Auditorium Canteen/ Cafeteria/ Toilet blocks/ Miscellaneous along with e-resource Centre/ Library Total 11 Hostel Grand Total Note: Details of New Construction/ Renovation/ Equipment needs to be furnished clearly.

4.
4.

5 vital reasons for Up gradation & justification of value addition to Institution if converted into a University Name of College Reason S. No.

5.

Research publications of all the teachers of the proposed colleges (Maximum 3 publications per teacher) Name of Department the Name Teacher of the Title of the Paper Research Journal (only refereed) 6.
Commitment Page 57 of 147 Yes/ No The State must commit to the following when proposing the new university S. No independence and Commitment Agree to a shared vision and principles of association Agree to certain principles of governance like equal status to participating institutions, collective decision-making, autonomy and accountability, interdependence, physical proximity, optimal size, partnership of publicly funded institutions, etc.
Agree to a Memorandum of Understanding which should clearly specify the nature and extent of relationship among partnering colleges and lay down the modalities for the functioning of the cluster.

Agree to a governance structure which should ensure equal and adequate representation of partnering institutions for democratic decision-making and effective implementation of academic programmes, financial autonomy and social accountability.
Agree to share existing facilities in partner colleges and undertake common ventures in promoting access, equity and quality of education.
Adequate hostels and toilets for boys and girls The university should not affiliate more than 100 colleges as per UGC norms Conversion of Existing buildings into disabled friendly buildings Adequate per student provisions for classrooms, library and laboratory facilities Inclusion of ICT in teaching-learning processes and provision of internet access to all students Implementation of all academic, examination and governance reforms Aim to achieve the Student teacher ratio of 1:15 Aim to achieve the Teaching to Non-Teaching ratio of 1:1.1 Bear the recurring expenditures of the university Page 58 of 147 Component 3: Infrastructure Grants to Universities 3.1 Abstract: Infrastructure grants shall be utilized for meeting critical infrastructural requirements in 50 public universities with a grant of Rs.20 crore each.
3.2 Funding Priorities Universities will be prioritized on the basis of following criteria:  Universities with valid NAAC accreditation of 2.5-3.25 will be eligible.

 Grant will be provided to support for strengthening of infrastructure facilities for new construction, renovation and purchase of equipment.

 Beneficiary Universities under RUSA 1.0 for the same component will not be considered.
Universities from north east and Himalayan region would be considered after taking into consideration universities which have not availed of this in the earlier phase.

 Universities would be further prioritized on basis of NAAC accreditation, enrolments & antiquity.

 The State can spend maximum 50% of the total cost in case of new construction, renovation/upgrade and equipment each.

For e.g., the expenditure ratios could be 40:50:10; or 50:30:20; or 45:45:10, etc.
3.3 Physical and Financial Outlay Creation of New Facilities Item Hostels (separate for boys and girls) Toilets (separate for boys and girls) Laboratories Computer Centre Classrooms (including technologically enabled classrooms) Canteen/Cafeteria Common room for Students Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Norms New construction New construction New construction New construction New construction New construction New construction Page 59 of 147 Item Norms Academic building Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Administrative buildings Campus development Hostels Toilets Library Classrooms Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Beautification, amenities, water harvesting, alternate energy sources, etc.
supply, drainage, water Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Renovation/Upgradation Digitisation of Existing Resources/Automations Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Buildings/ Facilities Existing Buildings/ of Facilities; Auditorium Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Buildings/ Facilities Canteen/Cafeteria Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Buildings/ Facilities Laboratory Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Buildings/ Facilities Computer Centre Up scaling of existing network to enable wi-fi Playground Upgradation of Existing Facilities New Equipments/ Facilities Item Norms Sports Facility Computers Books/ Journals E Resources Lab Equipment 3.4 a) Baseline Data New Equipments/ Facilities New Equipments/ Facilities Purchase of new books Subscription of new journals New Equipments/ Facilities Unit University1 University 2 University 3 Name of the University NAAC Accreditation (if none, status of application) Year of Accreditation & Cycle Grade Page 60 of 147 Whether included under 12B of UCG Act Year of Establishment Yes /no No.
of Students Total Sanctioned Post No.

of regular faculty Courses/ Dept.

Autonomous/ CPE Special Attributes, if any Future Commitments: a) University shall agree to abide by a Disclosure Management Framework b) University shall abide by the principle and assessment of mid-course evaluation b) Physical and Financial Detail Details University 1 University 2 University 3 Financi al Value (Rs.

in lakhs) Physic al Value (Area in Sq.

Mt.

)- Physic al Value (Area in Sq.

Mt.)

Financi al Value (Rs.


in lakhs) Physic al Value (Area in Sq.

Mt.)

Financi al Value (Rs.
In lakhs) Creation of New Facilities for for Hostels (separate boys and girls) Toilets (separate boys and girls) Laboratories Computer Centre Classrooms (including technologically enabled classrooms) Canteen/Cafete ria Common room for Students Page 61 of 147 Renovation / Up gradation of Existing Facilities Academic building Administrative buildings Campus development Hostels Toilets Library Classrooms Auditorium Canteen/Cafete ria Laboratory Computer Centre Playground Sports Facility Computers Books/ Journals E Resources Lab Equipment New Equipment s/ Facilities Any other item, that the State deems fit.
Short Listing Criteria Indicators & Weights (Total 100 marks) A. NAAC Score (20 marks) S. No.

Indicator Weights 1 2 3 4 CGPA 3.0-3.25 CGPA 2.75-2.99 CGPA 2.5-2.74 CGPA 0-2.49 B.

Faculty Positions filled in regular mode (20 marks) S. No.

Indicator 1 Above 85% of sanctioned faculty positions 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 0 marks Weights 20 marks Page 62 of 147 2 3 4 80-84.9% 70-79.9% 60-69.9% C. Student-Teacher Ratio (20 marks) S. No.
Indicator 1 2 3 4 Above 1:10 – 1:20 Above 1:20 – 1:30 Above 1:30 – 1:40 Above 1:40 – 1:60 D. Functional Governance Structure (20 marks) S. No.

1 2 3 4 5 Indicator Governing Council/ Board Yes No Academic Council/ Board Yes No Research Council Yes No Board of Studies Yes No Finance Committee Yes No E. Funding Priority (20 marks) institution have a vision-mission S. No.

1 2 Parameter Does the statement?


Yes (Please upload) No Does program the institution offer 15 marks 10 marks 5 marks Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 5 marks Weights 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks Weights 3 marks 0 marks inter-disciplinary Page 63 of 147 Yes No Does the institution offer: UG & PG Only UG Does the institution have research program?

(Ph D) Yes No Has the institution been conferred CPE status by UGC?
Yes No Does the institution have an Alumni Association?

Yes No What is the percentage of students getting placed in the Institution?

Over 90% Over 75% Over 50% Below 50% c) Proposed Plan Renovation/New Construction/Equipme nt New Construction Existing Infrastructur e 10 Proposed Infrastructur e 5 Item E.g.
Classroo m 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 1 mark 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 0 marks 2 marks 0 marks 3 marks 2 marks 1 mark 0 mark Financial s Justificatio n 10 lakhs per class More seats required for more classes required for additional courses d) A consolidated table may be given as follows in order of priority, highest to lowest Name of the university 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 Total cost (Rs.

lakhs) Page 64 of 147 1.

2.

....


Page 65 of 147 Component 4: Quality and Excellence in select State Universities (New) 4.1 Abstract: Universities with NAAC CGPA 3.51 and above under the UGC’s Graded Autonomy Regulations, 2018 will be supported to enhance quality, teaching and research.

10 high performing State Universities will be supported under this component at Rs.

100 crores each.
100 crores each.

4.2 Funding Priorities  State Universities which feature in UGC’s Graded Autonomy Regulations, 2018 (Grade 1) will be covered for support under this component.

 No more than 30% would be spent on construction and Equipment  Financial assistance will be given for quality enhancement and improvement in teaching and research Institutions approved under the component will need to mentor other institutions.
 4.3 Physical and Financial Outlay Creation of New Facilities Item Hostels (separate for boys and girls) Toilets (separate for boys and girls) Laboratories/ Virtual Labs Computer Centre (including Classrooms technologically enabled classrooms) Canteen/Cafeteria Common room for Students Norms New construction New construction New construction New construction New construction New construction New construction Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Item Academic building Administrative buildings Campus development Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Norms Beautification, amenities, water harvesting, alternate energy sources, etc.
supply, drainage, water Page 66 of 147 Hostels Toilets Library Classrooms Auditorium Canteen/Cafeteria Laboratory/Virtual Labs Computer Centre Playground Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities of Existing Buildings/ Renovation/Upgradation Digitisation of Existing Resources/Automations Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Buildings/ Facilities Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Buildings/ Facilities Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Buildings/ Facilities Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Buildings/ Facilities Facilities; Up scaling of existing network to enable wi-fi Upgradation of Existing Facilities New Equipments/ Facilities Item Norms Sports Facility Computers Books/ Journals E Resources Lab Equipment New Equipments/ Facilities New Equipments/ Facilities Purchase of new books Subscription of new journals New Equipments/ Facilities Short Listing Criteria Indicators & Weights (Total 100 marks) A. NAAC Score for Institution (20 marks) S. No.
Indicator 1 2 3 4 CGPA Above 3.80 CGPA 3.7-3.79 CGPA 3.6-3.69 CGPA 3.51-3.59 Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 7 marks B.

Faculty Positions filled in regular mode for Institution (20 marks) S. No.

Indicator 1 Above 85% of sanctioned faculty positions Weights 20 marks Page 67 of 147 2 3 4 80-84.9% 70-79.9% 60-69.9% C. Student-Teacher Ratio for Institution (20 marks) S. No.
Indicator 1 2 3 4 Above 1:10 – 1:20 Above 1:20 – 1:30 Above 1:30 – 1:40 Above 1:40 – 1:60 15 marks 10 marks 5 marks Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 5 marks D. Functional Governance Structure for Institution (20 marks) S. No.
Indicator Governing Council/ Board Yes No Academic Council/ Board Yes No Research Council Yes No Board of Studies Yes No Finance Committee Yes No Weights 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 1 marks E. Funding Priority for Institution (20 marks) Page 68 of 147 S. No.

1 inter-disciplinary institution offer institution have a vision-mission Parameter Does the statement?

Yes (Please upload) No Does the program?


Yes No Does the institution offer: UG & PG Only UG Does the institution have research program?

(Ph D) Yes No Has the institution been conferred CPE status by UGC?

Yes No Does the institution have an Alumni Association?

Yes No What is the percentage of students getting placed in the Institution?

Over 90% Over 75% Over 50% Below 50% 4.3 Baseline Data Particulars of the University: S N o a.

Information / details Details of the State University Address: i.
Name: ii .

ii i.

Location (Metropolitan / Non-metropolitan / Non-urban area): Weights 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 1 mark 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 0 marks 2 marks 0 marks 3 marks 2 marks 1 mark 0 mark Page 69 of 147 Contact details of the Vice Chancellor, Registrar and Nodal person identified for this purpose.

(Name, designation, landline, mobile, fax, email): i v .

III.

Vision of the University: S. No.


a. b. c. d. Information to be provided Fifteen-year Vision Plan including Mission Statement, Values, Institutional Goals & Vision to meet the objectives and Characteristics of an University with quantified milestones and timelines to achieve world class repute as expected in the Regulations.
How far is the Institution/ University from becoming an University, including the present status of the institution, the status which seek to achieve to become as world class and gap in each parameter.

Plan for becoming a University.

The plan should give the status of the Institution at the present stage on all relevant parameters, the status to which they seek to reach after ten years and fifteen years on each of the parameters, and how they target to reach the same on each of the parameters.
SWOT analysis of the institution focusing on its present status in the quality hierarchy and the proposed measures to address the shortcomings?

I.

Proposed - year strategic Plan (for each year): a b c d An academic plan showing the courses proposed and a research plan focusing on current thrust / niche area(s) of expertise and proposed plan in pursuit of excellence in those areas.

A faculty recruitment policy and plan to meet the academic plan requirements and to achieve 1:10 faculty-students ratio.
Proposal, if any, to recruit faculty from industry, Government, Non-profit Organizations, etc.

Including foreign faculty.

Student admissions policy mentioning plan to select Indian and foreign students.

Page 70 of 147 e f g h i j k l m n o p q Plan to provide scholarship to meritorious Indian and foreign students.

A comprehensive plan to develop research laboratories with demonstrable progress towards it.
Plan for Teaching and Research Collaborations with Global Universities figuring in the most reputed global rankings.

Networking plan outlining the teaching and research collaborations and partnerships Infrastructure development plan.

(Existing and Proposed infrastructure with financial repercussion and time line for development) Administrative plan for getting accreditation from National and International Agencies as well as marketing and promotion.
Governance plan elaborating the proposed Institutional structure and how it overlaps with ownership, decision-making process and social engagement.

Clarify as to how Governance plan will be committed to the highest global standards of transparency, accountability and efficiency.

Plan for involving the alumni in the management of the Institution and leveraging alumni financial resources.

Intended target on possible world ranking after 5 years.
A research plan indicting the research laboratories and other facilities proposed to be established.

In case of humanities, social sciences and other interdisciplinary faculties, the research plan should indicate the broad areas and nature of field work and research sought to be done Sustainability plan for the period when the additional public funding ceases.

Plan for affiliating any other HEI, if act permits (please refer guidelines 6.4.3(e)(i) II.
Proposed two years implementation plan (for each year) a Mention the detailed and tangible action plan, milestones, and timelines by which it seeks to achieve high performing status, mentioning milestones to be achieved in two years with an annual work plan.

b Timeline to achieve the expectations for each of the parameters as proposed in two years.

c States are requested to submit the detailed annual financial plan of expenditure for two years with an annual break up, for total not exceeding Rs.
100 crores.

Page 71 of 147 Component 5: New Model Degree Colleges 5.1 Abstract: Support will be provided for creation of colleges with requisite infrastructure (class rooms, library, laboratory, faculty rooms, toilet blocks and other essential requirements with technological advanced facilities) in 70 Aspirational Districts and identified by the NITI Aayog and un-served and under-served areas in north east and Himalayan regions.
This component setting up of a new MDC by way of new construction the proposed college is eligible for a funding of Rs.

12 cr (max) for the plan period and any over and above amount is to be borne by the State Government.

Those aspirational districts which have received a model degree college under RUSA 1.0 will not be eligible for funding consideration.
5.2 Funding priorities:  Aspirational districts categorised into: o Category 1: with 0 Model Degree College o Category 2: High proportion of socially and economically backward population  Un-served and under-served areas in north east and Himalayan regions 5.3 Short Listing Criteria Indicators & Weights (Total 40 marks) A. Aspirational District/ Unserved Districts (20 marks) S. No.
Indicator 1 2 With zero Model Degree College Unserved & Underserved areas with zero Model Degree College and low Institutional Density B. Aspirational Districts with Institutional Density (20 marks) S. No.

Indicator 1 2 3 4 Less than 25 25-49 50-75 Above 75 Weights 20 Marks 15 marks Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 0 marks Page 72 of 147 Other Specifications: 1.

LOCATION OF MODEL DEGREE COLLEGE: The following criteria may be considered for identifying the location.
 The location of the college must be such that there exist no other college in the radius of 10 km.

 Predominantly rural population is preferred.

 A new college as an additional college in the vicinity may only be permitted only if the existing college has more than 1000 students; or there is no separate college for women in area of 10 Km radius.

 The location should be accessible and well connected by transport facilities.
 The population density in the proposed location must be higher in comparison with the contending locations.

2.

INFRASTRUCTURE 2.1.

PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE 2.1.1.

LAND: the minimum land requirement in a non-metropolitan urban area is 5 acres while in a Non-urban location is 10 acres.

2.1.2.
2.1.2.

BUILDING: the colleges proposed must have an administrative and academic building along with enough space to accommodate the academic requirement (as specified by the University for which the MDC may become the constituent college).

2.1.3.

CIVIC FACILITIES: essentials like water, electricity, ventilation, toilets in conformity with the norms lay down by State PWD.

2.1.4.

FURNITURES: appropriate furniture’s for student and staff based on the strength.

2.2.

ACADEMIC INFRASTRUCTURE 2.2.1.


FACULTY:  For a multi-Faculty co-education college- at least 50 Faculties.

Page 73 of 147  For a multi Faculty Women’s college- at least 25 faculty members.

2.2.2.

BOOKS IN LIBRARY: Availability of high quality online database 2.2.3.

LAB EQUIPMENT: Costing at least RS.

20 lakhs for basic courses and Rs.

10 Lakh for innovative courses.

2.2.4.

LANGUAGE / COMMUNICATION LABS: At least 20 computer stations with required software have and trained personals.

2.2.5.
2.2.5.

COMPUTER CENTRE: with internet and intranet facility and sufficient computers to provide for the available students.

2.2.6.

STUDENTS:   If college is in non-metro urban area- Min.

1000 students.

If college is in backward area-Min.

500 students  Women’s college in Non-Metropolitan urban area- min 300 students  Women college in a backward area- Min.

150 Students 2.2.7.

TEACHER STUDENTRATIO: preferably 1:20 2.2.8.

TEACHING-NONTEACHING RATIO: preferably 1:1.1 3.


NATURE OF MODEL DEGREE COLLEGE Preferred that the MDC be established as the constituent college of a University.

4.

PHYSICAL AND FINANCIAL LAYOUT (NON- RECURRING ITEMS) N O 1 2 M R O N L A C N A N I F I ITEM TIER 1 CITIES TIER 2 CITIES HILLY AREAS AREA (SM) COST PER SM= 33371 AREA (SM) COST PER SM= 31622 AREA (SM) TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL In Rs.

Lakh 266.96 800 In Rs.

Lakh 252.97 525 800 COST PER SM= 44600 In Rs.
Lakh 234.41 Administrati ve Buildings, Faculty rooms Laboratories 410 136.82 500 158.11 300 133.95 Page 74 of 147 Classrooms Library Computer Centre/E- campus Toilet Blocks separate for and boys girls Miscellaneo us N O TOTAL 2815 939.35 3015 953.37 2105 939.87 ITEM TIER 1 CITIES TIER 2 CITIES HILLY AREAS AREA (SM) COST PER SM= 33371 AREA (SM) COST PER SM= 31622 AREA (SM) COST PER SM= 44600 TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL In Rs.
Lakh 260.96 1000 1000 247.22 800 260.64 3815 1200.31 4015 1200.59 2905 1200.51 for Hostel 100 students separate for boys and on girls 60:40 ratio GRAND TOTAL A. BASELINE DATA Indicator/ Unit Model college 1 Model college 2 Model college 3 Page 75 of 147 District under which model college is proposed Is it Aspirational District Yes/No Number of colleges in the concerned district Number No of Colleges per 1,00,000 students of 18-23- year age group in the district (CPI) Number Percent of SC and ST population to total in the district Percent of Female students enrolled to18-23- year age group female population in the district (GER) Percent of SC and ST students enrolled to18-23- year age group SC and ST population in the district (GER) Does the State commit to bear recurring expenses does the State commit to provide girls hostel and toilet Ratio Ratio Ratio Yes/No Yes/No Reservation for socially & economically weaker section Yes/No does the State commit to provide disabled friendly campus Yes/No does the State commit to provide special facilities/equipment’s for disabled Whether college is constituent or govt.
Yes/No Whether a new MDC Sanctioned /Established after 01.01.2008 Available land area No of colleges within 10 Km radius Student Intake proposed Faculty Proposed Non-teaching staff proposed Yes/No Date in Acres Number Number Number Number Page 76 of 147 B.
FINANCIAL PROPOSAL Proposed College Falls under, (Tier- 1/Tier-2/Tier-3) including Details for proposed college Administrative Buildings faculty room Academic Building Laboratories Classrooms (Number) Library Computer Centre Toilet- Boys Toilet -Girls Hostel- Boys Hostel- Girls Auditorium Canteen/Cafeteria Fixing and fixtures Other TOTAL CIVIL COMPONENT Model College-1 Model College - 2 Model College - 3 Physical Value (Sq.

Mt) Financial Value (lakh) Physical Value (Sq.


Mt) Financial Value (lakh) Physical Value (Sq.

Mt) Financial Value (lakh) NON-CIVIL COMPONENT Model College-1 Model College - 3 Model College - 3 Physical Value Financial Value (lakh) Physical Value Financial Value (lakh) Physical Value) Financial Value (lakh) in computers (Including No.

of books Library proposed No.


of proposed in admin block) Cost of procuring lab equipment’s Sports equipment TOTAL GRAND TOTAL The cost for fixture and furniture for all headers may be written separately and only the construction cost may be mentioned against headers Page 77 of 147 C. CONSOLIDATED SHEET Model College Total cost (Rs.
lakhs) Reasons in support of model college A B C D E D. CONDITIONS FOR FUNDING The funding in this component is subject to submission of a Detailed Project Report (DPR) by the State.

E. SOME IMPORTANT POINTS 1.

Total number of classrooms in a MDC: Total area allocated for classroom= 810 Sq.

Mt.

Area per class = 80 Sq.

Mt.

Total classroom: 10 2.


Nature College: MDC may be set up as a constituent college which means that the funding of the new college will be routed through University or as an affiliated college which means that funding will be routed through the State government.

3.

The recurring expenditure to be borne by the State.

4.

Implementation of governance and institutional reforms.
F. Conditionality The State is required to submit a Detailed Project Report (DPR) for the approved proposal to MHRD for review and appraisal, to avail the fund release.

The DPR template is given in chapter 7 of this Handbook.

Page 78 of 147 Component 6: Upgradation of existing Degree Colleges to Model Degree Colleges 6.1 Abstract Under this component funds will be provided for upgrading existing government colleges into Model Degree Colleges, located in Aspirational Districts of the Country.
However, priority would be given to those districts that have not yet established anew ‘Model Degree College under the UGC/RUSA.

The support would be to a maximum of 75 Colleges with financial allocation of Rs.4 crores to each college.
Support will be provided to upgrade existing college in the Aspirational Districts and develop them into a Model Degree College with requisite infrastructure (class rooms, library, laboratory, faculty rooms, toilet blocks and other essential requirements with technological advanced facilities) 6.2 Priority for funding  College with NAAC Accreditation of 2.0-2.5 CGPA.
 Unserved and underserved areas in North eastern and Himalayan states  High proportion of socially and economically backward population in the district where the college is located.

 Low GER of SC/ST and female students in the district where the college is located.

 Colleges with large student population.

 The State can spend maximum 40% of the total cost in case of new construction, renovation/upgrade and equipment each.

For e.g., the expenditure ratios could be 40:40:20; or 40:30:30, etc.
6.3 Short Listing Criteria Indicators & Weights (Total 80 marks) A. Aspirational District (20 marks) S. No.

Indicator 1 2 3 With zero Model Degree College With 1 Model Degree College Other cases Weights 20 Marks 15 marks 0 marks Page 79 of 147 B. NAAC Score College (20 marks) S. No.

Indicator 1 2 3 CGPA 2.25-2.5 CGPA 2.0-2.24 Below 2 C. Faculty Positions filled in regular mode (20 marks) S. No.
Indicator 1 2 3 4 Above 85% of sanctioned faculty positions 80-84.9% 70-79.9% 60-69.9% D. Student-Teacher Ratio (20 marks) S. No.

Indicator 1 2 3 4 Above 1:10 – 1:20 Above 1:20 – 1:30 Above 1:30 – 1:40 Above 1:40 – 1:60 Weights 20 marks 15 marks 0 marks Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 4 marks Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 5 marks 3 Physical and Financial Proposal (each institution has the flexibility of choosing the appropriate items from below (based on the needs and supported by evidence).
For the physical & financial layout please refer to table in component 4: New Model Degree College.

Page 80 of 147 PHYSICAL AND FINANCIAL LAYOUT In order of priority.

  State is flexible to choose the item as per need Items Table 1.
New construction (maximum 40 %) Model college 1 Model college 2 Physical unit Financial unit Physical unit Financial unit Administrative building Seminar room Committee room Classrooms Library Laboratory Common room for students Toilet-boys Toilet- girls Hostel- girls Hostel- boys Other common facility In order of priority.

  State is flexible to choose the item as per need Items Table 2.
Upgradation/ renovation (maximum 40 %) Model college 1 Model college 2 Physical unit Financial unit Physical unit Financial unit Academic building Administrative building Library Classroom Laboratory Computer centre Wi-fi enabling Hostels Toilets Page 81 of 147 Auditorium Canteen/ cafeteria Campus development Playground upgradation Items Table 3.

New equipment/ facility (maximum 40 %) Model college 1 Model college 2 Physical unit Financial unit Physical unit Financial unit No.
Of computer Laboratory equipments Books & journals/e- resources Sports facility Any other  State is flexible to choose the item as per need 4 BASELINE DATA: Indicator/Unit College 1 (name) College 2 (name) College 3 (name) District where the college is located Number of colleges in the district Is it an EBD District No of Colleges per 1,00,000 students of 18-23-year age group in the district(CPI) District GER Percent of Female students enrolled to18-23-year age group female population in the district (Female GER) Percent of SC and ST students enrolled to18-23- year age group SC and ST Name Number Yes/No number % % % Page 82 of 147 population in the district (SC/ST GER) Percent of SC and ST population to total in the district Year of Establishment of the proposed college % Year Grade.
Year/ Cycle/ Application Status NAAC Accreditation Status (if the accreditation is not valid or the institution is not accredited please specify whether application has been submitted for reaccreditation or Letter of Intent for accreditation) yet, Total Number of Students Number Yes/No Whether the proposed college is a government – run institution?
Land area available to the college 5 Future Commitments Colleges that will be upgraded into Model Degree Colleges would have to fulfil the following requirements:  Girl’s hostels and girl’s toilets.

 50% of the capacity of new hostels would be used for socially and economically weaker sections.

 Ensure a disabled-friendly campus.

 Ensure special facilities/equipments for the disabled.
6 Conditions to be met before the release of funds The State is required to submit a Detailed Project Report (DPR) for the approved proposal to MHRD for review and appraisal, to avail the fund release.

The DPR template for this component is given in chapter 7 of this Handbook.
Page 83 of 147 Component 7: New Colleges (Professional) 7.1: Abstract  Support will be provided to create 8 new Professional Colleges in regions and districts in the country where the Institutional Density of Technical and Professional Education is below national average; with allocation of Rs.

26 cr each.

 Support under this component is to improve GER in engineering and professional education in regions where almost no such facility exists.
7.2: Funding Priorities Districts will be graded into category A and B on the basis of the following criteria: District with 0 -1 professional college (Government or Private) – Category A District with 2 or more professional colleges (Government or Private) – Category B Districts in category A will be given priority over B Priority would be given to Districts with following characteristics:  Central, eastern and north-eastern states  Without colleges  With low institutional density in technical and professional education  High proportion of socially and economically backward population  Low GER for female students  Low GER (SC/ST)  High Student Population Short Listing Criteria Indicators & Weights (Total 40 marks) A.
District Profile (20 marks) S. No.

1 2 3 Indicator District with 0 -1 professional college (Government or Private) District with 1 professional college (Government or Private) More than 2 professional colleges Weights 20 marks 10 marks 5 marks B.

Districts with Institutional Density (20 marks) Page 84 of 147 S. No.
1 2 3 4 Indicator Less than 25 25-49 50-75 Above 75 Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 0 marks 7.3 Commitments by the State Government State Governments will have to commit the following for getting grant under this component:  To provide separate hostels and toilets for girls.

 Reservation for socially and economically weaker section as per State Government policy.

 To ensure special facilities/ equipment for the disabled.

 To have student teacher ratio of 25:1.


 To have teaching to non-teaching ratio of 1:1.1.

Physical and Financial Outlay No Item s m r o N l a i c n a n F i 1 Administrative Building Seminar Room Library 2 3 4 Academic Block (classrooms etc) Electronics Lab IT Lab Electrical 5 6 7 CNC Lab 8 Mechatronics Lab 9 Chemical Lab 10 Civil Lab 11 12 Workshop 13 Computer Centre cum Instrumentation Lab Cyber Café Area (SM) Area (SM) TIER 1 Cities Total Cost Per SM 33371 Rs.
in lakh 400.45 1200 TIER 2 Cities Total Cost Per SM 31622 Rs.

in Lakh 379.46 1200 Area (SM) Hilly Areas Total Cost Per SM 44650 Rs.
in Lakh Page 85 of 147 14 Conference Room 15 Confidential Room 16 Committee/Syndicate 250 200 300 83.42 66.74 100.11 250 200 300 79.05 63.24 94.86 250 150 150 111.62 66.97 66.97 Room 17 Common Room for 150 50.05 150 47.43 150 66.97 students 18 Toilet Block 19 Cafeteria Total 200 90 6790 66.74 30.03 220 100 2265.82 7120 Rs.
26096 Per SM 69.56 28.45 150 50 2248.22 5200 24722 Per SM 66.97 22.32 2321.75 32581 Per SM 20 Hostel Grand Total 1280 8070 334.02 1420 2599.84 8540 351.05 855 2599.27 6055 278.56 2600.31 Note 1: Each institution has the flexibility of choosing the appropriate items based on their need (supported by evidence) in order for them to convert into a fully functional college.
Note 2: Equipment, fixtures and furniture are part of the estimate Note 3: Staff - (a) Non-teaching – The State Governments will fill/appoint additional non-teaching staff in order to achieve the ideal teaching to non-teaching ratio of 1:1.1.
(b) Teaching – State Governments will fill vacant positions and create additional positions with a Student Teacher ratio of 25:1 or below can approach RUSA for support of these additional positions in order to achieve the target of 15:1 7.4: Baseline Data The following information should be given: Table 7.1: Baseline data for new professional colleges Items Indicator /Unit Prof college A Prof college B Prof college C Prof college D Prof college E under college which is District professional proposed Institutional Density of the District Number of Government Professional or university in the concerned district colleges Name number Page 86 of 147 or Number Private colleges or university in the concerned district Total number of Professional universities colleges (Govt.
& Private) in the concerned district No of professional Colleges per 1,00,000 students of 18- 23-year age group in the district (CPI) No.

of Polytechnics in the District No.
of ITIs in the Districts Total population of 18-23 age group in the district Total SC and ST population in the district Percent of SC and ST population to total in the district Total Female population of 18-23 age group in the district Percent of Female students enrolled to 18-23-year age group female population in the district (Female GER) Total SC and ST population of 18-23 age group in the district Percent of SC and ST students enrolled to18-23- year age group SC and ST in the district population (SC/ST GER) Number of major industries in the District Number of major industries in the adjoining Districts number number Number Number % Number % Number % Heavy Industries MSME Small and micro Enterprises Page 87 of 147 Table 7.2: Commitments of the State Government Commitments Yes/No Does the State commit to provide separate hostels and toilets for girls Does the State commit for reservation of socially and economically weaker section as per State Government policy.
Does the State commit to ensure special facilities/ equipment for the disabled Does the State commit to have student teacher ratio of 20:1.

Does the State commit to have teaching to non-teaching ratio of 1:1.1.
Table 7.3: Physical and Financial proposal Items Professional college – A Professional college – B Professional college – C Professional College -D Professional College-E The proposed college falls under, please specify (Tier- 1/Tier-2/Tier- 3) Details for the proposed college Administrative Building Seminar room Library Academic Block (classrooms etc) Electronics Lab IT Lab Electrical CNC Lab Mechatronics Lab Chemical Lab Civil Lab Instrumentatio n Physica l Value (Area in Sq.

Mt) Financ ial Value (Rs.


in lakhs) Physica l Value (Area in Sq.

Mt.)

Financi al Value (Rs.

in lakhs) Physica l Value (Area in Sq.

Mt.)

Financ ial Value (Rs.

in lakhs) Physica l Value (Area in Sq.

Mt.)

Financi al Value (Rs.

in lakhs) Physica l Value (Area in Sq.

Mt.)

Financ ial Value (Rs.


in lakhs) Page 88 of 147 Lab Workshop Computer Centre cum Cyber Café Conference Room Confidential Room Committee/Sy ndicate Room Common Room for students Toilet Block Cafeteria Hostel Total Note 1: Each institution has the flexibility of choosing the appropriate items based on their need.

Note 2: Equipment, fixtures and furniture are part of the estimate Table 7.4: Cost of Equipment, fixtures and furniture.
Items Professional college – A Professional college – B Professional college – C Professional College -D Professional College-E No.

of comput er Physi cal unit Physi cal unit Finan cial Value (Rs.

in lakhs) Finan cial Value (Rs.

in lakhs) Physi cal unit Physi cal unit Finan cial Value (Rs.

in lakhs) Physi cal unit Finan cial Value (Rs.

in lakhs) Finan cial Value (Rs.


in lakhs) Laborat ory equipm ent Books & journal s/e- resourc es Sports facility Page 89 of 147 Any other Table 7.5: Consolidated table of proposed new professional colleges in order of priority: Justification professional college in support of new Professional College Total cost (Rs.
lakhs) College A College B College C College D College E 7.5: Conditionality The State Governments would be required to submit the Detailed Project Report (DPR) for each approved college as per the DPR template given in Chapter 7.

Page 90 of 147 Component 8 Enhancing Quality and Excellence in select Autonomous Colleges 8.1 Abstract: Colleges with NAAC CGPA 3.51 and above under the UGC’s Autonomy Regulations, 2018 will be supported to enhance quality, teaching and research.
70 high performing Autonomous Colleges will be supported under this component.

8.2 Funding Priorities  State Colleges which feature in UGC’s Autonomy Regulations, 2018 will be covered for support under this component.

 No more than 30% would be spent on construction and Equipment.

 Financial assistance will be given for quality enhancement and improvement in teaching and research Institutions approved under the component will need to mentor other institutions.
 8.3 Physical and Financial Outlay Creation of New Facilities Item Hostels (separate for boys and girls)/ Toilets (separate for boys and girls) Laboratories Computer Centre (including Classrooms technologically enabled classrooms) Canteen/Cafeteria Common room for Students Norms New construction New construction New construction New construction New construction New construction New construction Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Item Norms Academic building Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Administrative buildings Campus development Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Beautification, amenities, water harvesting, alternate energy sources, etc.
supply, drainage, water Page 91 of 147 Hostels Toilets Library Classrooms Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Renovation/Upgradation Digitisation of Existing Resources/Automations Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Buildings/ Facilities Existing Buildings/ of Facilities; Auditorium Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Buildings/ Facilities Canteen/Cafeteria Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Buildings/ Facilities Laboratory Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Buildings/ Facilities Computer Centre Up scaling of existing network to enable wi-fi Playground Upgradation of Existing Facilities New Equipments/ Facilities Item Norms Sports Facility Computers Books/ Journals E Resources Lab Equipment New Equipments/ Facilities New Equipments/ Facilities Purchase of new books Subscription of new journals New Equipments/ Facilities Short Listing Criteria Indicators & Weights (Total 100 marks) A. NAAC Score for Institution (20 marks) S. No.
Indicator 1 2 3 4 CGPA Above 3.80 CGPA 3.7-3.79 CGPA 3.6-3.69 CGPA 3.51-3.59 Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 7 Marks B.

Faculty Positions filled in regular mode for Institution (20 marks) Page 92 of 147 S. No.

Indicator 1 2 3 4 Above 85% of sanctioned faculty positions 80-84.9% 70-79.9% 60-69.9% C. Student-Teacher Ratio for Institution (20 marks) S. No.
Indicator 1 2 3 4 Above 1:10 – 1:20 Above 1:20 – 1:30 Above 1:30 – 1:40 Above 1:40 – 1:60 D. Functional Governance Structure for Institution (20 marks) S. No.
Indicator Governing Council/ Board Yes No Academic Council/ Board Yes No Research Council Yes No Board of Studies Yes No Finance Committee Yes No Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 6 marks Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 6 marks Weights 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 2 marks E. Funding Priority for Cluster as a whole (20 marks) Page 93 of 147 S. No.
inter-disciplinary institution offer institution have a vision-mission Parameter Does the statement?

Yes (Please upload) No the Does program?

Yes No Does the institution offer: UG & PG Only UG Does the institution have research program?

(Ph D) Yes No Has the institution been conferred CPE status by UGC?

Yes No Does the institution have an Alumni Association?

Yes No What is the percentage of students getting placed in the Institution?
Over 90% Over 75% Over 50% Below 50% Weights 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 1 mark 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 0 marks 2 marks 0 marks 3 marks 2 marks 1 mark 0 mark 8.4 Baseline Data Particulars of the College: S No a.

Information / details Details of the Autonomous College i. ii.

iii.

iv.

Name: Address: Location (Metropolitan / Non-metropolitan / Non-urban area): Contact details of the Principal, Registrar and Nodal person identified for this purpose.
(Name, designation, landline, mobile, fax, email): Page 94 of 147 Proposed five-ten year strategic Plan (for each year): a.

An academic plan showing the courses proposed and a research plan focusing on current thrust / niche area(s) of expertise and proposed plan in pursuit of excellence in those areas.

b.

A faculty recruitment policy and plan to meet the academic plan requirements and to c. achieve 1:10 faculty-students ratio.
Proposal, if any, to recruit faculty from industry, Government, Non-profit Organizations, etc.

Including foreign faculty.

d. Student admissions policy mentioning plan to select Indian and foreign students.

e. Does the college have a plan to provide scholarship to meritorious Indian and foreign f. students.

A comprehensive plan to develop research laboratories with demonstrable progress towards it.
g. Plan for Teaching and Research Collaborations with Global Universities figuring in the most reputed global rankings.

h. Networking plan outlining the teaching and research collaborations and partnerships Infrastructure development plan.

(Existing and Proposed infrastructure with financial i. repercussion and time line for development) Administrative plan for getting accreditation from National and International Agencies as well as marketing and promotion.
j. k. Governance plan elaborating the proposed Institutional structure and how it overlaps l. with ownership, decision-making process and social engagement.

Clarify as to how Governance plan will be committed to the highest global standards of transparency, accountability and efficiency.

m. Plan for involving the alumni in the management of the Institution and leveraging alumni financial resources.

Intended target on possible world ranking after five, eight, ten, thirteen and fifteen years.

n. o.
n. o.

A research plan indicting the research laboratories and other facilities proposed to be established.

In case of humanities, social sciences and other interdisciplinary faculties, the research plan should indicate the broad areas and nature of field work and research sought to be done Sustainability plan for the period when the additional public funding ceases.

p. Proposed two-year implementation plan (for each year) a. b.
Mention the detailed and tangible action plan, milestones, and timelines by which it seeks to achieve high performing status, mentioning milestones to be achieved in two years.

Timeline to achieve the expectations for each of the parameters as proposed in the two-year strategic plan.

Page 95 of 147 Component 9: Infrastructure Grants to Colleges 9.1 Abstract: Infrastructure grants shall be utilized for meeting critical infrastructural in 750 colleges with a grant of Rs.2 crore each.
9.2 Funding Priorities  Colleges with valid NAAC/NBA accreditation of over 2.5 and above out of 4, or appropriate grade in NBA will be eligible to apply.

Adequate consideration would be given to the North eastern and Himalayan states (special category states) under this component.

Institutions from special category states who have received grants under this component in RUSA 1.0 won’t be allowed to spend the funds under the same items covered in RUSA 1.0.
  Grant will be provided to support strengthening infrastructure facilities for new construction, renovation and purchase of equipment.

 Colleges which have been covered in the same component in RUSA 1.0 will not be eligible to apply for funding under this component.

 The State can spend maximum 50% of the total cost in case of new construction, renovation/upgrade and equipment each.

For e.g., the expenditure ratios could be 40:50:10; or 50:30:20; or 45:45:10, etc.
Colleges will be prioritized on the basis of following criteria:  No of Students  Year of Establishment  % of SC/ST/OBC and Women students 9.3 Physical and Financial Outlay Creation of New Facilities Item Hostels (separate for boys and girls) Toilets (separate for boys and girls) Laboratories/ Virtual labs Computer Centre Norms New construction New construction New construction New construction Page 96 of 147 Classrooms (including technologically enabled classrooms) Canteen/Cafeteria Common room for Students New construction New construction New construction Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Item Norms Academic building Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Administrative buildings Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Campus development Hostels Toilets Library Beautification, amenities, water supply, drainage, water harvesting, alternate energy sources, etc.
Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Facilities Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Buildings/ Digitisation of Existing Resources/Automations Facilities; Classrooms Auditorium Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Buildings/ Facilities Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Buildings/ Facilities Canteen/Cafeteria Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Buildings/ Facilities Laboratory Renovation/Upgradation of Existing Buildings/ Facilities Computer Centre Up scaling of existing network to enable wi-fi New Equipment/ Facilities Item Norms Sports Facility New Equipment/ Facilities Computers Laboratory New Equipment/ Facilities New Equipment/ Facilities Books/ Journals Purchase of new books E Resources Subscription of new journals Note 1: The institution may choose from the components above for upgrading the existing facilities.
Page 97 of 147 Note 2: Repairs and maintenance cost shall not exceed 20% of total cost Note 3: Each institution has the flexibility of choosing the appropriate items based on their need (supported by evidence) 9.4 Short Listing Criteria Indicators & Weights (Total 80 marks) A. NAAC Score (20 marks) S. No.

Indicator CGPA Above 3.5 CGPA 3.25-3.49 CGPA 3.0-3.24 CGPA 2.75-2.99 CGPA 2.5-2.74 B.

Faculty Positions filled in regular mode (20 marks) S. No.
Indicator 1 2 3 4 Above 85% of sanctioned faculty positions 80-84.9% 70-79.9% 60-69.9% C. Student-Teacher Ratio (20 marks) S. No.

Indicator 1 2 3 4 Above 1:10 – 1:20 Above 1:20 – 1:30 Above 1:30 – 1:40 Above 1:40 – 1:60 Weights 20 marks 18 marks 16 marks 15 marks 14 marks Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 5 marks Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 5 marks D. Funding Priority (20 marks) S. No.
Parameter Weights Page 98 of 147 the inter-disciplinary institution offer institution have a vision-mission Does the statement?

Yes No Does program Yes No Does the institution offer: UG & PG Only UG Does the institution have research program?

(Ph D) Yes No Does the institution have an Alumni Association?

Yes No What is the percentage of students getting placed in the Institution?
Over 90% Over 75% Over 50% Below 50% 3 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 3 marks- 1 mark 3 marks 0 marks 2 marks 0 marks 3 marks 2 marks 1 mark 0 mark 9.5 a) Baseline Data Name of the College Year of establishment Category (Govt./Aided) NAAC Accreditation (if none, of application) status Year of Accreditation & Cycle Whether included under 12B of UCG Act Indicator Unit College 1 College 2 College 3 Year Category Grade Yes /no Area of the proposed College fall under Pls.
Specify Category Page 99 of 147 (Tier- 1/Tier- 2/Tier-3) Number of students enrolled Number SC ST OBC Number/ total Number/ total Number/ total Ratio Ratio Ratio Women students Number/ Ratio total Special Attributes, any if b) Physical and Financial Details: Details of existing college New Constru ction /Renova tion (Pls.

Specify) College – 1 Physi cal Valu e (Are a in Sq.

Mt)) Finan cial Value (Rs.

in lakhs ) New Constru ction /Renova tion College - 2 Physi cal Valu e (Are a in Sq.

Mt.)
Mt.)

Finan cial Value (Rs.

in lakhs ) New Constru ction /Renova tion College - 3 Physi cal Valu e (Are a Sq.

Mt.)

Finan cial Value (Rs.
in lakhs ) boys boys Hostels (Separate for and girls) Toilets (Separate for and girls) Laboratory Computer Centre Classrooms (including technologic ally enabled classrooms) Common room students for Page 100 of 147 Canteen/Ca feteria Academic Buildings Administrat ive buildings Campus developme nt Library Auditorium Sports facility Books/Jour nals/e- Resources a) A consolidated table may be given as follows in order of priority, highest to lowest 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 Total Name of the College descending importance 1 order in of 2 .... d) Details of Proposals with Justification Item Renovation/New Construction/Equipment Existing Infrastructure Proposed Infrastructure Financials Justification Classroom as example New Construction 10 5 10 lakhs per class More seats required for more classes required for additional courses Page 101 of 147 Component 10: Research, Innovation & Quality Improvement 10.1 Abstract: During the current plan period, 20 State Universities who have demonstrated excellence in two or three thematic areas will be supported up to an amount of Rs.
50 crores each through a project-based funding mode with focus on theoretical/empirical and applied R&D to foster innovation and evidence-based policy in certain areas of national priorities.

10.2 Eligibility Criteria  Only Grade I and II State Universities qualifying under the UGC Graded Autonomy Regulations, 2018 will be considered for support.

 Research, Innovation and Quality Improvement will focus on fostering Innovation, entrepreneurship and employability.
States will be encouraged to prepare a Research and Innovation Plan (RIP).

 Selection of Universities will be on challenge /competitive mode and will largely emerge from Universities in collaboration with the DST/DBT, National Laboratories/ leading humanities and social science research centres and industry.
 Universities having undertaken curriculum reforms in one of their flagship department in the last one year 10.3 Short Listing Criteria Indicators & Weights (Total 100 marks) F. NAAC Score for Institution (20 marks) S. No.

Indicator 1 2 3 4 CGPA Above 3.80 CGPA 3.7-3.79 CGPA 3.6-3.69 CGPA 3.51-3.59 Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 9 marks G. Faculty Positions filled in regular mode for Institution (20 marks) S. No.
Indicator Weights Page 102 of 147 1 2 3 4 Above 85% of sanctioned faculty positions 80-84.9% 70-79.9% 60-69.9% H. Student-Teacher Ratio for Institution (20 marks) S. No.

Indicator 1 2 3 4 Above 1:10 – 1:20 Above 1:20 – 1:30 Above 1:30 – 1:40 Above 1:40 – 1:60 I. Functional Governance Structure for Institution (20 marks) S. No.
Indicator Governing Council/ Board Yes No Academic Council/ Board Yes No Research Council Yes No Board of Studies Yes No Finance Committee Yes No 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 9 marks Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 6 marks Weights 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks J.

Funding Priority for Cluster as a whole (20 marks) Page 103 of 147 S. No.
inter-disciplinary institution offer institution have a vision-mission Parameter Does the statement?

Yes (Please upload) No the Does program?

Yes No Does the institution offer: UG & PG Only UG Does the institution have research program?

(Ph D) Yes No Has the institution been conferred CPE status by UGC?

Yes No Does the institution have an Alumni Association?

Yes No What is the percentage of students getting placed in the Institution?
Over 90% Over 75% Over 50% Below 50% Weights 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 1 mark 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 0 marks 2 marks 0 marks 3 marks 2 marks 1 mark 0 mark Baseline Data Particulars of the University: S No a.

Information / details Details of the State University i. ii.

iii.

Name: Address: Location (Metropolitan / Non- metropolitan / Non-urban area): Page 104 of 147 iv.

Contact details of the Vice Chancellor, Registrar and Nodal person identified for this purpose.
(Name, designation, landline, mobile, fax, email): III.

Vision of the University: S. No.

a. b. c. d. Information to be provided Fifteen-year Vision Plan including Mission Statement, Values, Institutional Goals & Vision to meet the objectives and Characteristics of an University with quantified milestones and timelines to achieve world class repute as expected in the Regulations.
How far is the Institution/ University from becoming an University, including the present status of the institution, the status which seek to achieve to become as world class and gap in each parameter.

Plan for becoming a University.

The plan should give the status of the Institution at the present stage on all relevant parameters, the status to which they seek to reach after ten years and fifteen years on each of the parameters, and how they target to reach the same on each of the parameters.
SWOT analysis of the institution focusing on its present status in the quality hierarchy and the proposed measures to address the shortcomings?

III.

Proposed five-ten-year strategic Plan (for each year): a. b. c. An academic plan showing the courses proposed and a research plan focusing on current thrust / niche area(s) of expertise and proposed plan in pursuit of excellence in those areas.
A faculty recruitment policy and plan to meet the academic plan requirements and to achieve 1:10 faculty-students ratio.

Proposal, if any, to recruit faculty from industry, Government, Non-profit Organizations, etc.

Including foreign faculty.

Page 105 of 147 d. e. f. g. h. i. j. k. l. m. n. o. p. Student admissions policy mentioning plan to select Indian and foreign students.

Plan to provide scholarship to meritorious Indian and foreign students.
A comprehensive plan to develop research laboratories with demonstrable progress towards it.

Plan for Teaching and Research Collaborations with Global Universities figuring in the most reputed global rankings.

Networking plan outlining the teaching and research collaborations and partnerships Infrastructure development plan.
(Existing and Proposed infrastructure with financial repercussion and time line for development) Administrative plan for getting accreditation from National and International Agencies as well as marketing and promotion.

Governance plan elaborating the proposed Institutional structure and how it overlaps with ownership, decision-making process and social engagement.

Clarify as to how Governance plan will be committed to the highest global standards of transparency, accountability and efficiency.
Plan for involving the alumni in the management of the Institution and leveraging alumni financial resources.

Intended target on possible world ranking after five, eight, ten, thirteen and fifteen years.

A research plan indicting the research laboratories and other facilities proposed to be established.
In case of humanities, social sciences and other interdisciplinary faculties, the research plan should indicate the broad areas and nature of field work and research sought to be done Sustainability plan for the period when the additional public funding ceases.

VI.

Proposed two years implementation plan (for each year) a. b.
Mention the detailed and tangible action plan, milestones, and timelines by which it seeks to achieve high performing status, mentioning milestones to be achieved in two years with an annual work plan.

Timeline to achieve the expectations for each of the parameters as proposed in the two-year strategic plan.

States are requested to submit the detailed annual financial plan of expenditure for two years with an annual break up, for total not exceeding Rs.

50 crores.
50 crores.

Page 106 of 147 Other Specifications:  States that have either already implemented reforms or given the commitment to the earliest implementation of reforms that would facilitate research and innovation at institutional level.

 Plans for providing facilities that support research hubs/parks etc.
 Adoption of meta-university concept that offer cross university education and credit transfer facility to students  Procure high quality e-resources  Upgrade library and laboratory facilities  Facilities like incubation centers, innovation hubs, etc.
 Initiatives to attract top-rated international faculty  Competitive compensation for faculty   Initiatives to attract high quality researchers and students Institutions that offer merit-based scholarships, fully-funded doctoral fellowships, post-doctoral fellowships  Hiring of Doctoral and Post-Doctoral Fellows, Visiting Fellows and Professor Emeritius.
 Faculty and students exchange programmes with world-class institutions  Initiatives to scale up industry-academia partnership  Promotion of inter-disciplinary and trans-disciplinary research centers  Promotion of research and entrepreneurial activities  Support for the setting up of science parks and cutting-edge technology and instrumentation facility  Support different types of research programs – Base Research, Key Technology (R&D), High end (R&D), etc.
 Develop a network of top quality University – Convergence model  Outreach and public engagement facility  Staff Excellence and organizational Stewardship  Support in bifurcating undergraduate, postgraduate and research programmes  Identify a few departments or fields of critical importance and move them into a position of world leadership while striving to prevent others from losing such stature.

Note: Expenditure on soft components would be restricted to 60% of the total cost of the estimate.
40% would be towards expenditure on hard components.

Hard components include buildings, furniture, fixtures, equipment etc.

However, computers and ICT infrastructure, books and consumables would not be treated as hard components.

Page 107 of 147 Component 11: Equity Initiatives 11.1 Abstract Assistance should be provided for construction of hostels for SC, ST and Girl students.

15 States will receive funds under this component.


All State universities and colleges will be eligible to receive grants for equity initiatives.

Innovative approach/schemes to ensure greater inclusion will be considered on priority.

Each State would be funded an amount of Rs.

5 crores.

11.2 Funding Priorities  Girls’ Hostels and related support will be given priority  To improve education of the most vulnerable and marginalized sections, this initiative will address State as a Unit.
 Financial assistance will be provided in addressing gender disparities, education through language labs and remedial coaching for socially-economically marginalised groups  The component would be conditionally approved with release of funds subject to submission of DPR by State.

 Institutions which have received support under RUSA 1.0 for construction/ renovation of hostels in other components will not be eligible for consideration under this component.
 North eastern and Himalayan States will be considered favourably under this component.

11.3 Future Commitments  Adherence to need-based admission of students.

 50% of hostel seats should be reserved for socially and economically weaker sections.

 Adherence to the reservation policy of State government in admission and faculty recruitment.

11.4 Financial Outlay Each State would be given an amount of Rs.

5 crore.

The State 11.5 Short Listing Criteria Indicators & Weights (Total 40 marks) A.
State Profile (20 marks) S. No.

1 Indicator Whether the State has been considered under this component in RUSA 1.0?

Weights Page 108 of 147 2 No Yes States with GER Below 10 10-14.9 15-19.9 20-25 Above 25 11.6 Baseline Data 20 marks 0 marks 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 5 marks 0 marks 1.

Details of the College(s) proposed to undertake Equity Initiatives Scrutiny at the State level should carefully examine the funding priority given in the RUSA guideline.
The information is given in the institutional plan of college and PG Departments.

Based on Institutional Development Plan of a college, Prioritize the college in descending order of importance with respect to Equity Initiatives grant to college with a maximum limit of Rs.

3 lakhs for each college and present the information in the following table: Has the State prioritized colleges for funding Colleges prioritized for funding Yes/No Number Basic Information 2.
Physical and Financial Proposal Details University-1 University-2 University-3 &C Details - University & College wise Physical (Number) Financial (Rs.

In lakhs) Physical (Number) Financial (Rs.

In lakhs) Physical (Number) Financial (Rs.

In lakhs) Hostels (Females& Marginalised communities) Page 109 of 147 Institution A: Priority Order of Colleges for Equity Initiatives (Rs.

lakhs) Name of the College in descending order of importance 2018-19 2019-20 Total 3.
Commitments required to be furnished (Yes/ No) Commitment College A College B College C & so on.

Equity and Inclusion Adherence to merit-based admission of students.

50% of hostel seats should be reserved for socially and economically weaker sections.

Adherence to the reservation policy of State government in admission and faculty recruitment.

4.

5 vital reasons for prioritization & justification of grants to Institution for Equity Initiatives S. No.

Name of College Reason 5.
Outcome-Output Targets for Equity Initiatives Outcome Better equity Output SC ST OBC Women Indicator Estimated increase in GER for these categories Unit In % 2018-19 2019-20 Page 110 of 147 Component 12: Faculty Recruitment Support 12.1 Abstract (i) (ii) Name of the Component: -Faculty Recruitment Support Eligible amount under RUSA: - The faculty salary as per the seventh pay commission recommendations for Assistant Professor/ Lecturer will be provided to 200 faculty positions in regular and permanent mode for a period of two years.
(iii) Total No.

of faculty position to be supported: - 200 faculty position to be supported till March 2020.

(iv) Timeline: -State must commit to take over the liability of faculty positions at the end of the scheme.

12.2 Priority for funding: (i) Priority will be given to those States which have filled all their vacant sanctioned positions.

After filling the positions, RUSA would assist the States in hiring additional faculty to bring the Student-Teacher Ratio to 20:1.
(ii) For new Institutions created under RUSA: RUSA may support faculty positions in New Institutions created under RUSA, only after the State fills all the vacant positions (up to 85%) through regular recruitment and brings the STR to 25:1.

12.3 Short Listing Criteria Indicators & Weights (Total 100 marks) A. NAAC Score for Institution (20 marks) S. No.

Indicator 1 2 CGPA Above 3.80 CGPA 3.7-3.79 Weights 20 marks 15 marks Page 111 of 147 3 4 CGPA 3.6-3.69 CGPA 3.51-3.59 10 marks 7 marks B.
Faculty Positions filled in regular mode for Institution (20 marks) S. No.

Indicator 1 2 3 4 Above 85% of sanctioned faculty positions 80-84.9% 70-79.9% 60-69.9% C. Student-Teacher Ratio for Institution (20 marks) S. No.

Indicator 1 2 3 4 Above 1:10 – 1:20 Above 1:20 – 1:30 Above 1:30 – 1:40 Above 1:40 – 1:60 D. Functional Governance Structure for Institution (20 marks) S. No.
Indicator 1 2 3 4 Governing Council/ Board Yes No Academic Council/ Board Yes No Research Council Yes No Board of Studies Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 9 marks Weights 20 marks 15 marks 10 marks 6 marks Weights 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 0 marks Page 112 of 147 Yes No 5 Finance Committee Yes No E. Other Indicators (20 marks) S. No.

1 inter-disciplinary institution offer institution have a vision-mission Parameter Does the statement?

Yes (Please upload) No Does the program?


Yes No Does the institution offer: UG & PG Only UG Does the institution have research program?

(Ph D) Yes No Has the institution been conferred CPE status by UGC?

Yes No Does the institution have an Alumni Association?

Yes No What is the percentage of students getting placed in the Institution?
Over 90% Over 75% Over 50% Below 50% 5 marks 0 marks 5 marks 3 marks Weights 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 1 mark 3 marks 0 marks 3 marks 0 marks 2 marks 0 marks 3 marks 2 marks 1 mark 0 mark 12.4 Baseline Data: Page 113 of 147 Faculty Recruitment Support grant to college with a maximum limit of 3 (Ministry to decide) teachers per subject for each college and present the information in the following table: State Information (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) Has the State /UT committed to or is committing to take over liability of faculty positions till March 2020.
Commitment for recruiting only regular faculty Sanctioned Posts: a. filled b. vacant Timeline for filling vacant positions Commitment to filling sanctioned position to reach STR of 20% Recruitment in last 3years (Regular) Details Institution wise Details Indicator Unit University -1 University -2 College -1 College- 2 Total Assistant Professors permanent (proposed) Existing or new If existing sanctioned posts STR FRS Grants proposed Student teacher ratio FRS grants Proposed Number Yes/No Ratio Ratio Ratio Ratio In lakhs Faculty Recruitment Support Grant to Colleges (Rs.
lakhs) Name of Institution the descending order of importance in 2018-19 2019-20 Total Grand Total Page 114 of 147 Component 13: Faculty Improvement 13.1 Abstract: HRDCs (Human Resource Development Centre) will be given funds to improve infrastructure and resources for training and capacity-building activities.

In RUSA 2.0, a total of 8 States will be funded Rs 7 cr each.
13.2 Funding Priorities  Funding would be provided to those Academic Staff Colleges which are categorized as ‘Performers’ in the UGC review process.

 Support will be provided to Academic Staff College (now called Human Resource Development Centres) for Capacity Building of faculty in Colleges and Universities.
 Financial assistance will be provided to improve pedagogy, instructional design, refresher, orientation and teacher training programs for faculty  The performing HRDCs who have not received funding under RUSA 1.0 will be prioritized.

 Those HRDCs who have received funding under RUSA 1.0 will also be eligible for funding, provided they are able to show demonstrable quality outcomes- no.
of training programs conducted, >75% utilisation of total resources disbursed, innovative programs for teachers and in-service training of teachers, etc.

Funding would be provided for the facilities which are not supported by UGC for enhancing the skills and domain knowledge of faculty in State Universities and Colleges.

Short Listing Criteria Indicators & Weights (Total marks) A. HRDCs Profile (30 marks) S. No.
1 2 3 4 Indicator HRDCs (Performing) not received funds under RUSA 1.0 HRDCs (Performing) having received funds under RUSA 1.0 HRDCs (Performing) having received funds under RUSA and whose absorption is more than 75% HRDCs (Performing) having received funds under RUSA and which have measurable outcomes (no.

of orientation programs conducted, teacher training programs, new pedagogical innovations, in-service training, etc.)
Weights 30 marks 10 marks 5 marks 5 marks Page 115 of 147 13.3 Base line Data Faculty of No.

Positions No.

of Non- Teaching Positions Approved Filled Vacant 13.4 Physical and Financial Outlay (The list given is illustrative and States will be at liberty to design State specific details) Activity Norms Indicator Training Institute University Academic Staff college Construction Building Academic & Area (In Sq.

M) Administrative Hostel (Sq.


M.) Network Room Classroom Laboratory Building Academic & Administrative Up- gradation, renovation and repairs Hostel (Sq.

M.) Classroom Amount (In lakhs) Area Amount (In lakhs) Area (In Sq.

M) Amount (In lakhs) Area (In Sq.

M) Amount (In lakhs) Area Amount (In lakhs) Area (In Sq.

M) Amount (In lakhs) Area (In Sq.

M) Amount (In lakhs) Area (In Sq.

M) Amount (In lakhs) Page 116 of 147 Laboratory Area (In Sq.
M) Equipment Funds required for Books / e-resources Amount (In lakhs) Amount (In lakhs) Funds required for repairs and renovation Amount (In lakhs) Courses Amount (In lakhs) Amount (In lakhs) Amount (In lakhs) Amount (In lakhs) Amount (In lakhs) Amount (In lakhs) Amount (In lakhs) Amount (In lakhs) Academic faculty Other Administrative & Support Staff Furniture/Equipment Others No of refresher courses organised Academic faculty Administrative & Support Staff Programme cost % of Vacancy in permanent faculty position Financial support planned by the State Funds for training / other faculty improvements Details of UGC funds for ASC Other* Total (in INR Lac) *Other may include the following but not be limited to: Library Digitization, Computer Lab (including equipment like chair, table, software, server etc), Wi-Fi, Projectors, Visual Presenters, Interactive Boards, Movie and Digital Cameras, Sound systems etc.
Page 117 of 147 Infrastructure Human Resources Training Program Item Funds received from UGC Funds received from other sources Funds under RUSA required 13.4 Conditionality The State is required to submit a Detailed Project Report (DPR) for the approved proposal to MHRD for review and appraisal, to avail the fund release.
Page 118 of 147 Component 14: Institutional Restructuring, Capacity Building and Reforms 14.1 Abstract Funds will be provided to 30 States and Union Territories (depending on the size of the States) to enable them to create/strengthen necessary institutional framework for efficient and effective sectoral reforms, to the tune of Rs.

3 crores.

These funds can be utilized for setting up/strengthening State Higher Educational Councils, State Resource Centers and State Project Directorate.
Large State- 5 crores Medium States- 4 crores Small States- 3 crores 14.2 Funding Priorities Funding under this component will be provided to states who have been able to utilise over 75% of the earlier allocation on a first-cum-first basis.
 The States can utilize these resources in Undertake baseline surveys, Data collection and compilation,  Organise meetings, consultations, workshops, trainings, Hire consultants, Preparation of State perspective plans/strategy report, organizing meetings, consultations, workshops, trainings, hiring consultants and other preparatory work to prepare the State for the reforms and for setting up/strengthening State Higher Educational Councils, State Resource Centers and State Project Directorate.
14.3 Funding Priority  Those States will be preferred who submit the utilisation certificate of 2nd instalment of preparatory grants disbursed under RUSA 1.0.

 Second priority would be given to States who submit utilisation certificate for 1st instalment of preparatory grants under RUSA 1.0.
Page 119 of 147 Chapter 6 State Higher Education Plan A. Prerequisites A cornerstone of RUSA will be the stipulation of a set of a priori prerequisites, or commitments that must be made by the State governments as well as institutions in order to be eligible for receiving grants under RUSA.

These conditions are in the nature of categorical policy imperatives that would ensure that the higher education in the country is guided on desirable paths by all the States.
The prerequisites are at two levels, commitments given by States to center and the commitments given by institutions to the States.

Unless these commitments are fulfilled, the States and institutions will not be able to avail of grants under RUSA.

The States are expected to fulfil the a-priori requirements and also honour the commitments made towards certain conditions which must be fulfilled during the course of RUSA implementation.
a) State Higher Education Council: In order for the State Higher Education system to function effectively, States need to set up State Higher Education Councils (SHECs).

These councils may be formed through an executive order to begin with but must be converted into statutory bodies by Acts of the State legislature within two years.

The councils will perform multiple roles such as strategy and planning, monitoring and evaluation etc.
b) State Higher Education Plan: Under RUSA, a perspective plan -State Higher Education Plan (SHEP) for Higher education in the States is to be drawn up for a spread over a period of ten years which would be reviewed after five years.

The States must make a detailed State Higher Education Plan in the prescribed format keeping in mind the norms and indicators under RUSA.

The detailed format for the State Higher Education Plan is provided in the chapter six.
The States may elaborate the same with additional information.

c) Financial Contribution to Higher Education as a % of GSDP The State is required to increase the expenditure on Higher Education as % of GSDP to 2% by the end of XII Plan and also elaborate on how it is planning to increase it over the years.

Page 120 of 147 d) State funding- commitment and timelines: The State government must gradually increase to spend on the State higher education sector 2% its GSDP during the course of implementation.
Any State which was spending more than 2% of GSDP on higher education is expected to maintain the same level.

In addition to the State providing its share, it must also ensure that the funds are transferred to the State Higher Education Councils (SHECs) within the stipulated time period of 15 days failing which they would be liable for payment of interest.

e) Agreement to create separate fund for RUSA: To facilitate transfer of funds, proper banking arrangements at all levels is crucial.
The SHECs and beneficiary institutions should open a dedicated RUSA account in a scheduled commercial bank, preferably a nationalised bank.

The account details will be mapped on PFMS portal of CGA to facilitate on line fund transfer and monitoring purpose f) Filling Faculty Positions: The States must ensure that the faculty positions are filled in a phased manner.
If any State has imposed a ban on regular recruitment of faculty, the State must ensure lifting of all such ban, and requisite proof must be produced.

States must also present a coherent action plan to fill up all the vacant positions in a time bound manner.

RUSA seeks to support only a limited number of existing regular faculty positions are to be supported for the entire duration of the scheme.

At all times, the % of filled faculty positions should remain at 85%.
g) Accreditation reforms: Accreditation is a mandatory quality assurance framework for funding under RUSA for all the existing institutions which are six years old.

h) Academic and Examination reforms: Academic reforms: Academic reforms are a key towards imparting better quality education that is oriented towards employability and innovation.
In addition to changes in the existing system, new policies, that would make higher education more flexible to the needs of the students and the society, have to be introduced.

Following are some of the details regarding the academic reforms that may be undertaken by the State: (i) Semester System: Page 121 of 147 Deliberation and Decisions regarding student faculty contact hours (for class room work, fieldwork, laboratory work, workshop practice and other curricular work in various subjects.)
during a semester in different programmes at all levels (ii)Choice Based Credit System (CBCS) in higher education worldwide learning environment which clearly It is an instructional package developed to suit the needs of students to keep pace with the isolated developments compartmentalized level of certification learning effort required on the part of the student in terms of credits to be earned as well as participation in instructional hours to be spent through either regular mode or through distance education mode.
The student in this system has considerable freedom in choosing courses and so making his / her own personalized programme/ bouquet in a cafeteria mode keeping in mind necessary requirements of a major course.

taking him/her out of indicates for each Review of curricular contents for all the courses at all levels with relative weight age of the core and elective credits.
(iii)Curriculum Development: The hall mark of vibrant educational institutions and disciplines is their curricular content, which evolves continuously and comprehensively.

Curricular revision should be an ongoing academic activity involving all the faculty members.
All curricular updates are to be reviewed and endorsed by concerned Departmental, schools, committee and other university and college authorities.at regular intervals (iv)Admission reforms: As a part of academic reforms, institutions of higher education in the country need to pay very serious attention to the procedures for merit based admission to the all the courses at all levels .Institutions and universities need to make maximum use of all media for keeping the details with respect to the seats available, eligibility calendar of dates etc.
for all the courses in the public domain to maintain transparency, fair selection etc.

Examination reforms: Higher education in India has thus far been largely examination-centered.

Examination only at the end of academic session or year, more often than not, insulates students from the quest of knowledge, the excitement of discovery and the joy of learning.

Often the annual examination, along with marks, percentages and divisions, leads to insensitive cramming up of superficial information.
it may be more prudent that the assessment of the student performance be carried out through a combination of continuous internal and external evaluation.

(i) Continuous Internal Evaluation: Page 122 of 147 Aiming to assess values, skills and knowledge imbibed by students, internal assessment is to be done by the concerned faculty member, department, school or the centre at all the levels in all the courses on a continuous basis.
(ii) End of Semester Evaluation: This is to be carried out at the end of each semester and will aim to assess skills and knowledge acquired by the students through classroom instruction, field work, and laboratory work and/or workshop practice.

The evaluation can be in form of written examination, laboratory work and/or workshop assignment.

The evaluation process should be verified and transparent.

Towards this end, the following steps may be adopted: i.
All the students pursuing certificate, diploma, undergraduate, postgraduate and research courses have to undergo external evaluation at the end of each semester as per syllabi or credit schedule.

ii.

With regard to practical and workshop assignment, the internal faculty may associate iii.

iv.

themselves with external examiners in the examination process.

In case of written examination, whatever the format (objective type, essay type etc.
), test paper could be moderated by committees proficient in the concerned subjects.

Answer books or -sheets are to be ‘encoded’ (before being passed onto the examiner/evaluator and decoded before tabulation).

(iii) Integration of Continuous and End of Semester Evaluation: The following points need to be considered for effecting the integration of continuous and end-of- semester evaluation: i.
The integration procedure should be applicable to all the students pursuing various courses at all the levels ii.

University committees on the recommendations of Department committees and concerned faculty should discuss and decide on the relative weightage of continuous and end-of- semester evaluations.

This weightage could be flexible and could vary from institution to institution.

The weightage assigned to internal evaluation may range from 25 to 40 percent.

iii.
iii.

(i) Governance and Administrative reforms: There are in particular two strands of governance viz sectoral (with a strategic framework and appropriate accountability) and institutional (with autonomy in the structures and processes within institutions) that must be improved.
The State may have to carry out legislation/amendments ensuing autonomy to the institutions for the detailed policy, planning and supervision functions in the sector or to provide sector wide services Page 123 of 147  Affiliation reforms: i.

Limit the number of colleges to be affiliated to any university to 100.However it would mean establishing more affiliating universities than the present numbers.

Establish campuses of existing universities to better serve colleges in their physical proximity.
Large autonomous colleges may be encouraged to develop into universities.

ii.

iii.

(j) Participation in AISHE: It is mandated under RUSA that all the State Institutions participate in the AISHE and institutions provide requisite data top help prepare a robust database at the National level.

Baseline Data: S. No.
Prerequisite Key Questionnaire State's response (YES/NO)/ Commitment as per a set timeline State Higher Education Council Does the State agree to Create the State Higher Education Council according to the suggestion made under RUSA State Perspective Plan Does the State agree to create and submit the State Higher Education Plan according to prescribed guidelines Financial Contribution to Higher Education as a % of GSDP Does the State agree to scale up to and maintain prescribed levels of funding to higher education as a % of State Gross Domestic Product (GSD) Adherence to timelines for fund release Agreement to create separate fund for RUSA Does the State agree to share the project cost of the Government funded and aided institutions with MHrD in the applicable ration (10:90, 40:60) Does the State agree to create separate fund for RUSA Page 124 of 147 6 Filling Faculty Vacancies Does the State agree to fill up vacant faculty positions 7 Accreditation reforms Does the State commit for all State HEIs to apply for accreditation 8 9 Academic, Affiliation and examination reforms Does the State agree to implement all reforms mentioned under RUSA Governance and Administrative reforms at State Level Does the State agree to implement all the sectoral governance reforms mentioned under RUSA 10 Institutional governance (Administrative) reforms Does the State agree to implement all the Institutional governance/Administrative reforms mentioned under RUSA 11 Participation in AISHE Does the State agree for all institutions to participate in AISHE survey and provide requisite data yearly?
B.

State Plan at a Glance I.

Brief State Profile 1.

Geographic, Demographic and Special Features a. Geographical Map of the State outlining all the Districts b.

Brief Narrative on State Geographical Profile: Page 125 of 147 Total Rural Urban Tribal Hilly Indicator Area (in sq.

kms) Number of Districts Indicator Special Location Features (Sharing of border, etc.)
Special Problems of the State* Any other State Details *Special Problems may be difficult terrain, Naxalite effected area, Remote Tribal /Hilly Areas, Areas which are prone to Vagaries of nature, etc.

c. State Demographic Profile Total Population (in Lakhs) as per Census 2011 OBC M SC M ST M F F General M F Total M F F Urban Rural Total Population 18-23 years (In Lakhs) as per the Census 2011 ST M OBC M SC M F F F General M Total M F F Urban Rural Total 2.
State Education Profile (School and Higher Education) a.

School Transition Rate Board State Board Schools CBSE Schools Other Board Schools Total 2015 2016 2017 Average of 3 Years b.

Student Enrolment (2011 Census) across socio-economic categories Page 126 of 147 SC M ST M F OBC M F General M F Total M F F Enrolments Urban Rural Total c. State Higher Education Data Indicator Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) Gender Parity Index (GPI) Overall (2011) Male Female SC ST S. No.
1 2 3 4 Indicator Institutional Density (ID) College Population Index (CPI) State’s Expenditure on HE as a % of GSDP Student-Teacher Ratio Data d. District Qualitative Profile d.1 No.

of Aspirational Districts in the State: _____________ d.2 Identification of weakest and strongest districts (max.
5) in State based on their Education profile Weakest 5 districts Reasons Dist 1 Dist 2 Dist 3 Dist 4 Dist 5 Strongest 5 Districts Dist 1 Dist 2 Dist 3 Dist 4 Dist 5 Districts with special Needs Dist 1 Dist 2 Dist 3 Dist 4 Reasons Reasons Page 127 of 147 Dist 5 3.

Analysis of State’s Performance against specific indicators and future targets under RUSA S. No.

Goals under RUSA Existing Deficiencies 3.1 Excellence (Quality) 3.2 Equity 3.3 Access 3.4 Others in State HE system 1.
Poor academic quality, less NAAC Institutions 2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

1.

Low GER 2.

3.

Strategy to overcome deficiencies Upgrade academic facilities, new schools Proposed targets under RUSA Upgradation to MDC, University Increase capacity intake Additional Greenfield Institutions II.

District Higher Education Profile 1.

District wise Education Profile (Overall) (Baseline Data 2015-16) S. No.
District Name Total Population (In lakh) Total 18- 23-year age Population (In lakh) School Passouts (+2) (In lakh) GER CPI ID Overall SC ST Female 1 2 3.. Total Page 128 of 147 2.

District wise Institution Profile (Baseline Data 2015-16) S. No.

District Name State Universities Constituent Colleges Affiliated Govt.

Colleges Affiliated Govt.

Aided Colleges Affiliated Private colleges (unaided) Polytechnics Private Universities (No.)

(No.)

(No.)

General Prof. General Prof. General Prof. Govt.

Pvt.
Pvt.

Institutions of National Importance (INIs) Govt.

approved Institutions that offer Diploma (e.g.

ITIs, etc.)

1 2 3.. Total III.

State Institutional Data 1.

University Data (State Overall) State Public University Central University State Private University Deemed University Institutions of National Importance Others (IITs, IIMs, NITs, etc.

not declared as INI) Total No.

Page 129 of 147 2.

College Data (State Overall) Affiliated Govt.

Colleges Affiliated Govt.


Aided Colleges Affiliated Private colleges (unaided) Polytechnics Total General Professional General Professional General Professional Govt.

Pvt.

No.

3.

University wise College Data S. N o.

Name of State Univers ity Distric t (wher e it is locate d) Type of University (Govt/Pvt/Dee med) Whethe r Multi- disciplin ary or Unitary Nature of University (General/ Technical / Agr/Medi cal, etc.)

Whethe r Affiliati ng/ Non- Affiliati ng No.


of Constitu ent Colleges Affiliate d Govt.

College s Affiliate d Govt.

Aided College s Affiliate d Private colleges (unaide d) Polytechn ics Othe rs Tot al Ge n Pro f. Ge n Pro f. Ge n Pro f. Govt .

Pvt.

1 2 3.. Total Page 130 of 147 4.

NAAC and UGC 12(B) Status of Institutions (Overall) Institutions Category Total 2f (No.)

12B (No.)

No.
12B (No.)

No.

of institutions with valid NAAC Accreditation Universities Colleges Total State Universities State Private Universities Deemed Universities Government Colleges Aided Colleges Private Colleges Academic Staff Colleges Any Other (Mention) 5.

NAAC and UGC 12(B) Status of Institutions (Breakup) a.
University wise details NA NA S. No Name of Univers ity Year of Establis hment Type of Univers ity (Govt/ Pvt/De emed) Status (whet her UGC 2f/No n 2f)) Status (wheth er UGC 12(B)/ Non 12(B)) Accredi tation Grade Accredi tation Year and Cycle Total Teachers in position (All categories ) Total Student Strength Student- Teacher Ratio (Filled positions) % Women students % SC Stud ents % ST Stud ents % OBC Stud ents Total % Minority Students 1 2 3 Page 131 of 147 4.. Total b.
College wise details S. No Name of College Year of Establis hment Affiliat ed Univers ity Status (whet her UGC 2f/No n 2f)) Status (wheth er UGC 12(B)/ Non 12(B)) Category (Govt./ Govt.

Aided/Pvt /Constitue nt/ Auto) Accredi tation Grade, Year and Cycle Total Teachers in position (All categories ) Total Studen t Strengt h Student- Teacher Ratio (Filled positions) % Wome n student s % SC Stud ents % ST Stud ents % OBC Stud ents Total % Minority Students 1 2 3 4.. Total 6.
Student-Teacher Ratio in University’s Constituent and Affiliated Colleges Category University Dept.

& Constituent Colleges Number of Colleges Number of Students (All Levels) Number of Teachers in Position Number of Colleges Student Teacher Ratio (Filled Positions) Affiliated Colleges Number of Students (All Levels) Number of Teachers in Position Student Teacher Ratio (Filled Positions) State Public Universities 1 2 Page 132 of 147 3..
Deemed University 1 2 3.. State Private University 1 2 3.. Total Page 133 of 147 7.

Autonomous Colleges S. No.

Name 1 2 3.. Total Affiliating University District where it is Located Funding (Private/ Govt./ Govt.

Aided Accreditation Grade, Year &Cycle Enrolment (in Thousands) Number of Teachers in Position Student Teacher Ratio (Filled Positions) 8.
College with Potential for Excellence Status (Baseline Data 2015-16) Name of College University District Funding ( Govt./ Govt Aided/ Pvt) Cycle of Extension S. No.

1 2 3.. Total Page 134 of 147 IV.
Faculty-wise Baseline & Perspective Data Faculty – 2015-16Baseline data Professors Readers & Associate Professors A/S/C Prof Others Total A/S/C Prof Others Total A/S/C Prof Others Total Lecturers & Assistant Professors Sanctioned Filled Vacant Ad-hoc/ Contract Applies only to faculty that is employed by/paid for directly or indirectly by the Government A/S/C – Arts/Science/Commerce Prof – Professional courses such as Engineering, BBA, MBA etc Others – Any other courses that do not fall in the above categories Faculty – 2015-16Baseline Data Professors Readers & Associate Professors A/S/C Prof Others Total A/S/C Prof Others Total A/S/C Prof Others Total Lecturers & Assistant Professors Sanctioned Filled Vacant Ad-hoc/ Contract Applies only to faculty that is employed by/paid for directly or indirectly by the Government A/S/C – Arts/Science/Commerce Prof – Professional courses such as Engineering, BBA, MBA etc Others – Any other courses that do not fall in the above categories Faculty – 2018-19 Perspective data Readers & Associate Professors A/S/C Prof Others Total A/S/C Prof Others Total A/S/C Prof Others Total Lecturers & Assistant Professors Professors Sanctioned Filled Vacant Ad-hoc/ Contract Applies only to faculty that is employed by/paid for directly or indirectly by the Government A/S/C – Arts/Science/Commerce Prof – Professional courses such as Engineering, BBA, MBA etc Others – Any other courses that do not fall in the above categories Faculty – 2019-20 – Perspective data Readers & Associate Professors A/S/C Prof Others Total A/S/C Prof Others Total A/S/C Prof Others Total Lecturers & Assistant Professors Professors Sanctioned Filled Vacant Ad-hoc/ Contract Applies only to faculty that is employed by/paid for directly or indirectly by the Government A/S/C – Arts/Science/Commerce Prof – Professional courses such as Engineering, BBA, MBA etc Others – Any other courses that do not fall in the above categories V. Research Studies Baseline Data (2015-16) Faculty/Disciplines Total Enrolment (in Hundreds) % of
 Total Enrolment Average Annual Enrolment (in Hundreds) % Annual Average Enrolment M F M F M F M F Arts Humanities Languages Sciences Commerce Management Agriculture Medicine & Allied Health Science Engineering Technology Law Veterinary Science Others Total VI.
Financial Details (Baseline & Perspective) Year Financial Outlays (Baseline Data) Total State Expenditure GDP (in Total Expenditure on Total Expenditure on HE as % Total Expenditure on Technical Total Expenditure on Tech.

Edn Page 136 of 147 Rs.

Crore) Education (in Rs.


Crore) on HE as % of GSDP Education as % of GSDP of Total Expenditure on Education as % of Total Expenditure on Education 2015-16 2016-17 Financial Outlays (Perspective Plan Data) Total Year Expenditure on HE as % of GSDP State GDP (in Rs.

Crore) Total Expenditure on Education (in Rs.

Crore) Total Expenditure on HE as % of Total Expenditure on Education Total Expenditure on Technical Education as % of GSDP Total Expenditure on Tech.
Edn as % of Total Expenditure on Education 2018- 19 2019- 20 VII.

Preparation of State Plan 1.

Methodology a.

Methodology adopted in preparation of State Plan b.

Has the State conducted a baseline survey?

If yes, details 2.

Stakeholder Consultation Page 137 of 147 a.

Has the State Higher Education Plan been prepared by the State Higher Education Council?

If yes, details b.

Details of Stakeholder Consultation S. No.


Date of Meeting/ Workshop Venue of Meeting/ Workshop Chairman of Meeting Participants (VCs, Principals, Faculty, Administrators/ Industry/ Alumni) Outcome VIII.

Source of Funds & Financial Outlays under RUSA Funds Received 2017-18 (In Rs.

crores) Funds Expected 2018-19 (In Rs.

crores) Funds Expected 2019-20 (In Rs.

crores) Total 1.

Source of Funds Source 1.

Rashtriya Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan 2.

Grants from UGC 3.
Grants from UGC 3.

Grants from State Higher Education Department 4.

Grants from other State departments 5.

Grants from Central Departments 6.

Raised from private sector, foundations institutions, and organizations Page 138 of 147 7.

Resources raised by higher education institutions from internal like student fees, examination fees etc.

sources Total 2.
Major Targets and Financial Outlays under RUSA Component Number/ target Financial Outlay Adherence to Programmatic Norms and future commitments 2018- 19 2019- 20 Total 2018- 19 2019- 20 Total Creation of Universities by way of upgradation of existing autonomous college Creation of Universities by conversion of colleges in a cluster Infrastructure grants to Universities Enhancing Quality and Excellence in select State Universities (New) New Model Colleges (General) Upgradation of existing degree colleges to model degree colleges Page 139 of 147 New Colleges (Professional) Enhancing Quality and Excellence in Autonomous colleges (New) Infrastructure grants to Colleges Research, innovation and quality improvement (State as Unit) Equity initiatives (State as Unit) Faculty Recruitment Support (Posts) Faculty Improvements Institutional Restructuring, Capacity Building and Reforms Total Outcome S. N o.
1.

Quality IX.

Outcome and Output Targets Output Indicator Unit 201 5-16 201 6-17 201 7-18 201 8-19 201 9-20 Higher no.

of Institutions accredited (NAAC) Faculty No.

No.

No.

Ratio Universiti es Colleges No.

of Teachers Improved Student- Teacher Ratio Page 140 of 147 Academic reforms CBCS Autonomy CPE Increase in resource allocation at State Level Increased number of students from secondary to higher education Number of HEIs 2.

Greater investmen t in higher education 3.

Better transition 4.


Higher GER Semester system Increase in no.

of autonom ous colleges Upgradati on of Autonom ous colleges to universiti es More institution s of higher quality investme nt as a% of GSDP Increased number Higher percentag e Creation of new Universiti es (Cluster) Creation of new Colleges (MDC, New % of institutio ns covered % of institutio ns covered No.

No.

No.

% lakhs % No.

No.

Page 141 of 147 No.

No.

No.

% % In lakhs Professio nal) Upgradati on of Auto.


colleges to Universiti es Upgradati on of Colleges to MDC Total SC ST OBC Female Higher GER Increased GER for these categories Greater pool of trained manpowe r Enrolments 5.

Better Equity GER SC ST Women 6.

Better Employabi lity Vocationalisa tion Polytechnics New No.

polytechn ics Upgradati on of polytechn ics No.

7.

Better PhDs research yields M Phils Increase in number produced Increase in number produced No.

of PhDs per year No.
of M.Phils per year Page 142 of 147 Investment % Percentag e of GSDP spent on R&D Page 143 of 147 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) is made on this day between Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD), Government of India having its office at Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi and The State government/UT Administration/Government of _____________(hereinafter referred to as the State/UT) having its office at_______________________________________ PURPOSE The purpose of this MoU is to agreement MHRD and the State/UT as to what action and responsibilities are expected to be undertaken by the State/UT for the better implementation of the scheme of Rashtriya Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan (RUSA).
BACKGROUND RUSA is an overarching scheme, operated in a mission mode for funding the state universities and colleges in order to achieve the aims of equity, access and excellence.
It seeks to improve the overall quality of existing State higher educational institutions by ensuring their conformity to prescribed norms and standards and adoption of accreditation as a mandatory quality assurance framework; correcting regional imbalances by facilitating access to high quality institutions in rural & semi-urban areas; and providing adequate opportunities of higher education to socially deprived communities; promoting inclusion of women, minorities, SC/ST/OBCs and differently abled persons to ensure equity.
Transformative reforms such as governance, academic, affiliation and accreditation reforms are pre-requisites in the implementation of the scheme in State higher educational institutions.

These reforms include creation of State Higher Education Councils (SHECs), Search-cum-Select Committee for selection of Vice-Chancellors, implementation of Choice Based Credit System (CBCS), reduction in the number of colleges affiliated per university, mandatory accreditation etc.
Page 144 of 147 Expectations from State/UT I.

Creation of a State Higher Education Council (SHEC) through an Act.

II.

Regular meetings of the SHEC III.

Preparation and submission of a State Higher Education Plan (SHEP) after following a bottom-up approach and analysing the critical needs of the State/UT in terms of access, equity and quality in higher education IV.

V. VI.
V. VI.

Preparation of the SHEP within the guidelines and norms of the scheme Providing updated and correct information to the MHRD as and when requested Participation in Project Approval Board (PAB) meetings, RUSA Mission Authority meetings, workshops, video conferences etc as informed by MHRD VII.

Fulfilment of conditions laid down by the PAB in its approval of the components VIII.

Timely contribution and utilisation of corresponding State Share IX.
Timely utilisation and submission of utilisation certificate (UC) for released central share X.

Timely completion of projects XI.

Regular updation of data in monitoring mechanisms such as EAT-PFMS, Bhuvan- RUSA, Fund tracker, Reform Tracker, online portals etc XII.

Filling up faculty vacancies and ensuring that there is no ban on recruitment and that faculty positions in universities should not be less than 85% of sanctioned faculty strength.

XIII.
XIII.

Ensuring that infrastructural facilities created will be barrier free and follow Harmonised Guidelines and Space Standards for Barrier-free Built Environment for persons with Disability and Elderly Persons Page 145 of 147 XIV.

Ensure that their spending on Higher Education as a percentage of GSDP is at least 2% of GSDP by March 2020 XV.

Undertaking administrative, academic, accreditation, governance reforms etc at State level and institutional level including and not limited to: a.
Governance Reforms i.

To revisit and ensure that Universities are given significant amount of autonomy.

ii.

Decision making bodies of the Universities should be faculty driven iii.

Merit based, transparent appointments to key University leadership positions.

iv.

v. Formation of State Higher Education Council through an Act of State Legislature State Higher Education Council to be chaired by an academician of repute.

SHECs chaired by non-academics should comply to the above by December 2018 b.
Affiliation Reforms To right size existing universities and limit the number of colleges affiliated to one university c. Accreditation Reforms Mandatory Accreditation of all Universities and Colleges Expectations from MHRD I.

Prior intimation to States/UT regarding PAB meetings, Mission Authority meetings, II.

III.
III.

workshops, conferences etc Timely release of instalments of central share Regular monitoring of the implementation of the scheme through mechanisms such as PFMS, Bhuvan-RUSA, Fund tracker, Reform Tracker, online portals, Project Monitoring Unit etc Page 146 of 148 IV.

V. VI.

Resolving existing committed liabilities Creation of portal for online submission of SHEPs and inventory management system Providing guidance to State/UT Period of MoU The MoU shall be valid initially till 31stMarch 2020.
However, this can be extended by mutual consent subject to the scheme and its provisions being approved by the Cabinet or any other Competent Authority Termination of MoU MHRD shall have the right to terminate the agreement with the State/UT in case it either fails to fulfil the expectations successfully as mentioned in the agreement or violates any of the clause mentioned in the MOU or misuses the partnership with MHRD in any way.
Arbitration Any disagreements arising with regard to any aspect of this MoU shall be settled through the Project Approval Board (PAB).

Signature of Head of Higher Signature of RUSA National Mission Director Education Department of State/UT Page 147 of 147