The concept of Citizens' Charter enshrines the trust between the service provider and its users. The concept was first articulated and implemented in the United Kingdom by the Conservative Government of John Major in 1991 as a national Programme with a simple aim: to continuously improve the quality of public services for the people of the country so that these services respond to the needs and wishes of the users. The Programme was re-launched in 1998 by the Labour Government of Tony Blair which rechristened it Services First.

The basic objective of the Citizens Charter is to empower the citizen in relation to public service delivery. Six principles of the Citizens Charter movement as originally framed, were:

(i) Quality: Improving the quality of services

(ii) Choice: Wherever possible

(iii) Standards: Specify what to expect and how to act if standards are not met

(iv) Value: For the taxpayers money

(v) Accountability: Individuals and Organisations

(vi) Transparency: Rules/ Procedures/ Schemes/Grievances

Over the years, in India, significant progress has been made in the field of economic development. This, along with a substantial increase in the literacy rate, (from 51.63% to 65.38% in the last decade) has made Indian citizens increasingly aware of their rights. Citizens have become more articulate and expect the administration not merely to respond to their demands but also to anticipate them.

Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances in Government of India (DARPG) initiated the task of coordinating, formulating and operationalising Citizens' Charters. Guidelines for formulating the Charters as well as a list of do's and don'ts were communicated to various government departments/organisations to enable them to bring out focused and effective charters.

The Charters are expected to incorporate the following elements:

(i) Vision and Mission Statement

(ii) Details of business transacted by the organisation

(iii) Details of clients

(iv) Details of services provided to each client group

(v) Details of grievance redress mechanism and how to access it

(vi) Expectations from the clients

During the Year 2002-03, DARPG engaged a professional agency to develop a standardised model for internal and external evaluation of Citizens' Charters in a more effective, quantifiable and objective manner. This agency also carried out evaluation of implementation of Charters in 5 Central Government Organisations and 15 Departments/ Organisations of States of Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh. This Agency was also required to suggest methods for increasing awareness, both within the organisation and among the users, and to suggest possible methods for orientation of management and the staff in the task of formulating and deploying Charters.

As per the report of evaluation carried out by the Agency, major findings were:

(i) In majority of cases Charters were not formulated through a consultative process

(ii) By and large service providers are not familiar with the philosophy, goals and main features of the Charter

(iii) Adequate publicity to the Charters had not been given in any of the Departments evaluated. In most Departments, the Charters are only in the initial or middle stage of implementation

(iv) No funds have been specifically earmarked for awareness generation of Citizens' Charter or for orientation of staff on various components of the Charter

(i) Need for citizens and staff to be consulted at every stage of formulation of the Charter

(ii) Orientation of staff about the salient features and goals/ objectives of the Charter; vision and mission statement of the department; and skills such as team building, problem solving, handling of grievances and communication skills

(iii) Need for creation of database on consumer grievances and redress

(iv) Need for wider publicity of the Charter through print media, posters, banners, leaflets, handbills, brochures, local newspapers etc. and also through electronic media

(v) Earmarking of specific budgets for awareness generation and orientation of staff

(vi) Replication of best practices in this field

The first key component of a meaningful Citizen’s Charter is a clear statement of vision. Vision implies the ultimate direction in which the organisation seeks to move. Clarity of vision enables the organisation to plan and prepare itself to deliver specific outcomes. Every organisation has to be clear within as well as to the citizens as regards its vision. Vision statement may emanate from an open and consultative process, involving multiple points in the organisation as well as citizens, client groups or stakeholders. The broadening of processes for defining vision through an active interface with citizens is likely to lend way to a vision which has far greater degree of acceptability and active support in fulfillment than would otherwise be possible.

The ‘mission’ statement provides the specific objectives which drive the organization in tune with its vision. Specificity of ‘mission’ is significant to enable the organisation to move towards its vision. Organisation needs to think of the manner in which the vision is to be realized. This should help it frame its mission in more concrete rather than ambiguous terms.

The Charter should clearly identify the services, which would be provided by the organisation to attain its mission and vision. This should list all the services, which would be made available through its various agencies. Some Charters give information about ‘Details of business transacted by the organization’. The expression is not sacrosanct, one can always use different expressions like ‘Our Function’, or ‘Our Duties and Responsibilities’ or even ‘The services being provided by us’. Regardless of the expression used, all services should be clearly mentioned in the Charter.

Since organisations operate at multiple levels and within each organisation, allocation of responsibilities and authority defines their commitment to specific client groups/ users/ stakeholders. Irrespective of whether the organizations mention ‘details of business’, ‘commitments’, ‘functions’ or ‘services’ in its Charter, it is necessary to indicate the specific levels of the services or functions etc., in the Charter, there should be a clear identification of the levels at which specific services would be provided. This would enable the citizens/ clients to know the levels at which they can access a specific service and not waste their time and energy in approaching the wrong levels. It should also be mentioned if the Charter applies to all the agencies that come under the Ministry or Department or the agencies have their own specific Charters.

A clear understanding of the client groups/ stakeholders/ users by the organisations would be necessary for an increased interface with these in matter of policy and administration. This will also enable the organisation to cater to the needs of these groups better. It is a matter of concern that most of the Charters of Union Ministries/ Departments do not identify the client groups/ stakeholders/ users with reference to the services offered. This is a serious deficiency, which should be rectified urgently. True, there may be some confusion about the relevance of these categories in case of some organizations, which do not have clearly identifiable client groups with whom organizations have a regular dealing. Some organizations may have direct clients, who pay for the service accessed. But others may have users who may access the service by virtue of being citizens. In some cases, despite not being the users of a service, citizens or groups may feel concerned about the organizational decisions as they have to bear the fall-outs of the decisions, as in case of many decisions related to industrial or mining projects, which affect the local people even if they are not users or clients. Likewise, some organizations may prefer to use the term citizens rather than users/ clients/ stakeholders as all citizens are their potential users. However, in case of some others, the term citizen may seem to carry limited value as they also have foreign clients and stakeholders. It is therefore important for the organizations to use any of these terms while they indicate their commitments.

Big organizations having a number of client groups may have different services for different client groups. In such a situation, it is obvious that the Charter should list out the services for each client group and the ‘commitments’ for each of such services. This can be fine tuned further by listing out the specific ‘commitments’ at each level and the ‘commitments’ in terms of the special client groups like the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, religious minorities and other weaker sections. Steps taken by the organization to implement the commitments and listing out such steps in the Charter is desirable.

There should be a clear commitment about the time-frame for delivery of specific services in the Charter. This would save the organisation from undue expectations as also enable it to project its capacity to commit delivery of service as well as to work towards it in its own organisational plans. Awareness of time-lines will also enable the citizen to opt for specific providers where options are available and better understand the capacity of organisation to deliver a service in a specific time-frame. True, some organisations provide certain services of perennial nature. For example, there may not be any timeframe for certain services provided by Department of Telecommunications, Indian Railways, Department of Posts, Department of Drinking Water Supply etc. However, in such cases also there can be specific time-frames, as, for instance, for redemption/final payment of postal deposits, installation of telephone connections, reservation/cancellation of reservation of Railway tickets etc.

It is important that time-frames for service delivery are provided for each level at which specific services are delivered. Adherence to these needs to be ensured too. This may require an obligation to provide reports on the extent of adherence to time-frames at each level. Public sharing of a comparative picture of various levels in the organisation may introduce competition to improve performance.