Centralized Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS) does not effectively address local level issues. Give your opinion.

The assertion that the Centralized Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS) does not effectively address local-level issues holds considerable merit, despite the system's overall success in streamlining grievance redressal at higher administrative echelons. While CPGRAMS is a significant step towards good governance, its centralized nature presents challenges when dealing with highly localized and context-specific problems.

Challenges Faced by CPGRAMS in Addressing Local-Level Issues

• Centralized Structure and Multi-layered Process: Grievances filed through CPGRAMS are initially routed to central ministries or state departments, which then forward them to district or local authorities. This multi-layered process often leads to significant delays, miscommunication, and a dilution of the original issue. Central authorities may lack a nuanced understanding of local power dynamics, ground realities, and specific cultural contexts required for effective resolution.
• Lack of Local Contextual Understanding: Issues such as village road repairs, local water supply problems, or community-specific land disputes require immediate, on-site investigation and context-sensitive interventions. A centralized platform struggles to provide this localized understanding, often leading to generic responses that do not address the root cause of the problem.
• Digital Divide and Accessibility: Despite efforts to integrate with Common Service Centres (CSCs) and mobile apps, a significant portion of the rural population, particularly those in remote areas or with limited digital literacy, still face challenges in accessing and effectively using the CPGRAMS platform. This limits the reach of the system to the very communities that often experience the most pressing local issues.
• Accountability and Enforcement: While CPGRAMS tracks the status of grievances, the ultimate resolution depends on the willingness, resources, and authority of local officials. The centralized monitoring may emphasize procedural compliance rather than genuine problem-solving, leading to grievances being marked as "resolved" without satisfactory outcomes for the complainant.
• Lengthy Chain of Command: The extended chain of command can lead to frustration among citizens as their complaints take considerable time to reach the implementing authority, eroding trust in the system. The lack of direct engagement with local authorities at the initial stage can be a deterrent.
• Focus on Systemic vs. Local: CPGRAMS is arguably more effective for systemic or central-level complaints that require policy interventions or redressal by higher authorities. Local issues often demand quick, direct intervention from Gram Sabhas, Panchayats, or ward committees, which may not be adequately integrated into the CPGRAMS framework.
• Exclusion of Certain Grievances: CPGRAMS has specific exclusions, such as sub-judice cases, personal and family disputes, and RTI matters, which may sometimes overlap with broader local administrative issues.

Measures for Improvement and Way Forward

To enhance CPGRAMS's efficacy at the local level, a more decentralized and integrated approach is essential. The government has already undertaken several reforms, and further steps can be considered:

Technological Enhancements and Accessibility

• Universalisation of CPGRAMS 7.0 and NextGen CPGRAMS: The universal adoption of CPGRAMS 7.0 and the upcoming NextGen CPGRAMS platform (expected July 2025) aims to land grievances directly at the "last-mile grievance officer" level. This, along with features like WhatsApp/Chatbot filing and voice-to-text lodging, can significantly improve accessibility and speed.
• Integration with State and Local Grievance Portals: The "One Nation – One Portal" initiative, which involves integrating CPGRAMS with state grievance portals and facilitating reverse integration, is crucial. This ensures a seamless flow of information and avoids duplication.
• AI/ML for Better Categorization and Routing: Utilizing AI and Machine Learning, as already being explored with the Intelligent Grievance Management System (IGMS) in collaboration with IIT Kanpur, can help in better categorization and intelligent routing of local grievances to the most appropriate local authority.
• Multilingual Support and Outreach: Operationalizing CPGRAMS in all scheduled languages and enhancing outreach through Common Service Centers (CSCs) and All India Radio jingles, particularly in rural areas, can bridge the digital literacy gap.

Decentralization and Capacity Building

• Empowering Local Bodies: Directly integrating Gram Sabhas, Panchayats, and Ward Committees with dedicated access and authority to address grievances within their jurisdiction would empower local governance.
• Designated Grievance Redressal Officers (GROs) at Last Mile: Ensuring that competent and well-trained Grievance Redressal Officers (GROs) are designated at the last-mile level, with clear guidelines and accountability, is paramount. The number of mapped GROs has increased significantly (over 1 lakh GROs by October 2024), but their capacity and authority at the local level need further strengthening.
• Capacity Building under SEVOTTAM: Continuing and expanding capacity-building programs for GROs under the SEVOTTAM framework will equip them with the necessary skills for effective grievance resolution.

Monitoring and Feedback Mechanisms

• Senior Officer Reviews: Regular senior-level reviews of grievance redressal, as mandated by the Cabinet Secretary in January 2025, can ensure top-down accountability and focus on qualitative redressal.
• Feedback Call Centres and Grievance Redressal Assessment Index (GRAI): The operational feedback call centres and the Grievance Redressal Assessment Index (GRAI) are vital for gathering citizen satisfaction data and identifying areas for improvement, especially concerning local issues.
• Root Cause Analysis: Emphasizing root cause analysis of grievances can help identify systemic issues at the local level and inform policy interventions, rather than merely addressing individual complaints.

The CPGRAMS, through its 10-step reforms, has undeniably brought down the average redressal timeline to 13 days in 2024 and resolved over 70 lakh grievances between 2022-2024. However, for truly effective local-level grievance redressal, the system needs to evolve into a more decentralized, context-aware, and locally empowered mechanism, leveraging its technological strengths to bridge the gap with grassroots administration.