budget for children in jharkhand 2009

8/14/2019 Budget for Children in Jharkhand 2009

1/16

Budget for

in

Children

JharkhandKUMAR SANJAY & ABHIJEET NIRMAL

A Study byCREJ & H AQ

with support from CRY


2/16

Back of

Title PageBlank


3/16

Preface

We all have been experienced on Jharkhand Socio-economic and development opportunities andits challenges. The reconfiguration of this new state has brought a ray of hope among theresidents of the state as well as others for the prolonged dreams to come true. However, there aretremendous challenges ahead to lead the state to a desired and meaningful direction.

Budget merely not an economic document but it replicates government priorities andcommitments. The economic situation reflects its political circumstances and priorities of anygovernment, state as a nation whole. How much concern a government has for its children is also

reflected in the resources it is willing to dedicate to the realization of their basic needs. One ofmost effective tools to track the situation of children in any economy is Child Budget Analysis andalso an instrument for appraising the progress on child rights and advocating for transform.

This study would not have been drawn without the support of CRY (Child Rights & You) andHAQ- Centre for Child Rights. We will remain thankful to Saibal Baroi and Amit Pande (bothfrom CRY) who are in ours positive changes spirit, views and ideas.

We would like to acknowledge HAQ- Centre for Child Rights for technical support of this study.We would also like to thank Enakshi Ganguli Thukral and Bharti Ali (both from HAQ) forproviding us with insightful research techniques, vision and idea to finalize such study.

We would also like to acknowledge senior and other functionaries in various governmentdepartments for help with the data.

We would like to thank the eminent contributors for taking out their valuable time and sharingtheir thoughts about Jharkhand. We desire to thank all our associated organizations, campaignsand networks who will use our findings and corroborate our ideas in child budget being animportant monitoring tool for recognizing child rights.

Kumar Sanjay

1


4/16

1. Mr. Harivansh, Chief Editor, Prabhat Khabar

2. Mr. Saibal Baroi, CRY, Kolkata

3. Mr. Amit Pande, CRY, New Delhi

4. Ms. Enakshi Ganguli Thukral, HAQ, New Delhi

5. Ms. Bharti Ali, HAQ, New Delhi

6. Mr. Faisal Anurag, Senior Journalist cum Activist, Ranchi

7. Mr. Vinod Singh, MLA, Jharkhand

8. Mr. Ramkumar, Senior Journalist, Ranchi

9. Dr. Ramesh Sharan, Renowned Economist, Jharkhand

10. Dr. Harishwar Dayal, Director, IHD Eastern Regional Centre, Ranchi

11. Dr. Vijay Baraik, Scientist, JSAC, Ranchi

12. Mr. Madhukar Bhardwaj, Deputy Secretary, Jharkhand Vidhan Sabha, Ranchi

13. Mr. Sanjay Bosu Mullick, Save the Forest Movement, Jharkhand

14. Mr. Vinoy Bhushan, Prabhat Khabar, Ranchi

15. Ms. Manorama Ekka, HOPE

16. Mr. Manish Shandilya

17. Mr. Rudra Roopak

2

Contributions & Suggestions


5/16

3

Table of Contents

1. Rationale for the study of the Budget for Children (BfC) 4

1.1 Methodology 4

1.2 Constraints 6

2. Jharkhand Budget for Children 7

2.1 An Introduction 7

2.2 Status of Children in Jharkhand 9

3. Children and the Budget for Children (BfC) 10

4. Budget for Children in Jharkhand An Overview 11

5. Sectoral Allocation 146. Social Sector and Budget For Children 16

7. Child Development 17

7.1 BfC and Development xx

7.2 Programme and Schemes xx

8. Child Health xx

8.1 Institutional Delivery xx

8.2 Infrastructure Gaps : xx

8.3 Health Infrastructure of Jharkhand xx

9. BFC and Health xx

10. Child Protection xx

11. BFC and Protection xx

12. Child Education xx

12.1 Status of Education in Jharkhand xx

12.2 Comments of CAG xx

12.3 BfC and Education xx

12.4 Elementary Education vs. Secondary Education xx

12.5 Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan (SSA) xx

12.6 Mid Day Meal (MDM)/ Saraswati Vahini Scheme xx

13. Annexures xx


6/16

4

1. Rationale for the study of the Budget for Children (BfC)

1.1 MethodologyThe Child, in BfC

In accordance with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, and in consonance with thedefinition of a child in the Juvenile Justice Act 2000 of India, the child in this study is an individualup to the age of 18 years.

Although several Indian laws, programmes and schemes at the national or state level addressthe needs of children up to the age of 14, this study includes all programmes related to children upto the age of 18.

Time-frame of the study

The Jharkhand Budget for Children analysis is based on five financial years 2003-2004 to 2007-2008. While Budget Estimates are available for all of the above years, Revised Estimates areavailable up till 2006-07 and Actual Expenditure till 2005-06. The comparison of BE, RE and AEtherefore is on the basis of the three years for which Actual Expenditure figures are available.

Sectors, Schemes and Programmes, and Departments

Survival, development, protection and participation are the four basic rights of children,according to CRC. While schemes and programmes directly related to the right of participationdo not yet form a part of GoI's budgetary exercise (or that of any Indian state), there are severalsocial sector schemes and programmes that can be categorized within the broad ambit of the

rights to survival, development and protection.

In keeping with the way in which schemes and programmes related to children are planned andimplemented at the national and state level in India, this study addresses its concerns through theidentification of four sectors development, education, health and protection in the analysis ofthe Budget for Children. Put together, these four sectors are directly linked to the rights ofsurvival, development and protection of CRC.

On the basis of the demand for grants prepared for the annual budget in Jharkhand during theperiod of the study, a total of 6 departments were identified with allocations related to children.These departments, from which programmes and schemes have been taken for analysis, coverfour sectors development, health, education and protection and include the following:

Development Department of Women and Child DevelopmentHealth Department of Health & Family Welfare

Department of Women and Child Development

Education Department of Human Resource DevelopmentDepartment of WelfareDepartment of Social Welfare, Women and Child DevelopmentDepartment of Sports, Youth Affairs and Art & CultureDepartment of Labour and Employment


7/16

5

Protection Department of Women and Child DevelopmentDepartment of Labour and Employment

For the purposes of the study, an overall attempt has been made to separate the programmes andschemes meant for children from the rest of the Jharkhand state budget, and which include bothplan and non-plan expenditure. However, as in the case of the certain programmes RCH forexample have been taken in entirety even though such programmes are meant to benefit bothwomen and children.

The Detailed Demands for Grants are, as the very namesuggests, details of budget allocation and expenditure under each head. The details of the BudgetEstimates (BE) and the Revised Estimates (RE) of the previous year, the Budget Estimates of the

Current financial year. The Actual Expenditure (AE) figures are available only in the alternateyears, and the Detailed Demands for Grants has the figures for the year preceding the lastfinancial year. For example the Detailed Demands for Grants for 2006-07 has AE for 2004-2005.

Estimates for expenditure in the states are presented to the Legislative Assembly as Demands forGrants. Generally, each ministry or department presents one Demands for Grants (DfG).However, large ministries or departments may present more than one Demand. Usually, eachDfG includes the total provisions required for a service, which is followed by the estimates forexpenditure under different major heads of account. These DfGs are submitted along with the

Annual Financial Statement. Detailed Demands for Grants (DDfGs) follow the DfGs afterthe

presentation of the Budget to the Legislative Assembly, but before the discussion on DfGs

begins. The Detailed Demands for Grants show further details of the provisions included inthe DfGs, and the actual expenditure during the previous year.

To understand budgets inIndia, one must look at three levels in the budgeting process Budget Estimates (BE), RevisedEstimates (RE) and Actual Expenditure (AE).

Budget Estimates are prepared by the estimating authorities in accordance with their assessmentof financial requirements for the forthcoming year, keeping in view the actuals of the past years,the overall trend of expenditure in the current year, and the arrears of previous years.

Revised Estimates are prepared during the current financial year,before the Budget Estimates of

the forthcoming year; Revised Estimates are therefore, a stage more complicated in the Indiancontext. The preparation of RE for the year 2006-07 for example (on the basis of expendituretrends in the first six to seven months of the year), precedes the preparation of BE for the year2007-08. To extend the example, RE for the year 2006-07 would be based on the latest figuresavailable of actual expenditure incurred during 2006-07, actual expenditure incurred during 2005-06 and also during the past few years. RE in this case would also be based on appropriations or re-appropriations already ordered or which are contemplated during the remaining part of the year,and any sanction to expenditure already issued or proposed to be issued during the remaining partof the year.

Data : Sources, Access and Analysis

Detailed Demands for Grants :

Budget Estimates, Revised Estimates and Actual Expenditure :


8/16

6

Actual Expenditure (AE) figures are available after the final accounts have been submitted tothe state government. AE for the year 2006-07, for example, will be available to the public only at

the end of the year 2008-09.

Seen as a whole, the presentation of BE, RE and AE reflect the government's announcement ofintent, the maintenance of this intent, and the implementation of this intent. An analysis of thechanges that occur from one level to another in terms of BE, RE and AE is quite revealing,and therefore necessary to understand in any particular annual budget.

An analysis of the difference between the Estimates and the Actual Expenditure shows howmuch of the budget has been spent in a given financial year. The reasons for under-utilization/ under-spending of the Budget Estimates or Revised Estimates can be many. Thisstudy does not go into the finer details of those reasons It concentrates only on the budget as acommitment to children and the trends arising thereof. Some attempt has been made to seek

reasons from the Comptroller and Auditor General's (CAG) Reports; the AppropriationAccounts of the Accountant General of India and the Performance Budgets brought out by theMinistries and Departments. However, it is not always possible to trace the reasons.

The terms Plan and Non-Plan refer to the five-year financial plan. Allexpenditure (estimated or actually spent) spelt out in a particular Plan (i.e. a five-year plan) is calledPlan Expenditure (PE), which is subsequently divided into yearly plans. In other words, PlanExpenditure is a part of the total expenditure meant to be utilized in the implementation of the

schemes and programmes framed in a given Five-year Plan. PE also includes the amount to beincurred on the unfinished tasks of previous Plans.

In addition, when a particular programme in a given Plan completes its duration, the recurringexpenses on the assets created and staff recruited in the future, are not regarded as PlanExpenditure. If such a programme continues beyond a given Plan, all expenses incurred for it areincluded in Non-Plan Expenditure. This study covers both Plan and Non-Plan E xpenditureof the Jharkhand government.

Jharkhand has been formed as a new state only before seven years and the differentgovernment departments were delayed in releasing state specific data and reports. As aresult, depending on the availability of the data the analysis has been done from 2003-04to 2007-08. The major indicators available are on the basis of nation wide research; very

few researches have been done by state departments.

To maintain consistency the data for this study has been taken from the 'demands forgrants' of relevant departments. The 'demands for grants' is the most authenticdocuments for analyzing budget because this is presented in the state legislativeassembly and state assembly authorize and pass it. It is possible that the data for someschemes/ programme analyzed in this study may differ from the figures mentioned inother government documents such as Performance Budget, Annual Report/ Note onDemand; however it will be a minor difference.

.

Plan and Non-Plan :

1.2 Constraints


9/16

7

2. JH AR KH AN D BU D GET FO R CH ILDR EN

2.1 An Introduction

Jharkhand has 24 districts spread over an area of 79714 Sq. Kms at present. The state is divided in5 administrative regions namely Santhal Parganas, Palamu, Kolhan, North Chhotanagpur andSouth Chhotanagpur. Each of these regions has its own distinct cultural identity. Jharkhand has apopulation density of 338 per square kilometer that is close to the national average of India.

Jharkhand is the richest state in mines andmineral resources availability in India. It isleader in mineral reserve of coal, mica, ironore, copper, china clay, fire clay, kyanite,bauxite, asbestos, feldspar, quartz, lac and

uranium. Jharkhand has almost 30 per centof total forest area in the state.

The population of the state is 2,69,45,829 outof which 1,38,85,037 are males and1,30,60,792 are females composing a sex ratioof 941. The sex ratio has improved from 922 in 1991 to 941 in 2001, which is also marginally (1.20per cent) higher than the national figure. The density has increased from 274 in 1991 to 338 in2001 above the country's average figure in both the periods.

The state has the intermingling population.The major languages spoken are Hindi,

Sadri/ Sadani/ Chotanagpuri, Kurukh,Mundari, Ho, Santhali and Kharia. In termsof religious composition, the Hindus formthe largest group with 77.15 per cent of totalpopulation followed by the Muslims (12.18per cent), Christian (3.72 per cent), and othersincluding Sarna (6.45 per cent).

The Scheduled Tribes are one of theprominent social fabrics of the state and thatgives a separate identity to the state. The ST population was a special consideration duringformation of a new separate state; however the status of ST is very grim. Only 40.70 is the literacy

rdrate among ST and 1/ 3 of the total ST families' falls under below poverty line. The governmentestimates, 23.22 lakh ST families living below the poverty line in Jharkhand. Out of which 8.79lakh belong to schedule tribes (ST). The Scheduled Tribe population that was 27.23 per cent ofstate in 1991 census has come down to 26.3 per cent in 2001 census.

BOX 1 :

Source : Jharkhand, Addressing the Challenges of Inclusivedevelopment, 2007, World Bank, Poverty reduction and economicmanagement, India country management unit, South Asia, Page no.37

Jharkhand has vast mineral reserves, with 33 per cent ofIndia's coal deposits, 47 per cent of its Mica and 34 percent of copper. Creating a diverse and inclusive economicbase calls for harnessing not just its comparativeadvantage in mining, but also the untapped opportunities

for growth provided by tourism.

1Jharkhand Industrial Policy 2001, Department of Industry, Government of Jharkhand, Chapter No.1.0, Page No.022 Source: Jharkhand, Addressing the Challenges of Inclusive development, 2007, World Bank, Poverty reduction andeconomic management, India country management unit, South Asia, Page no. 603 Census of India 2001, Government of India4 Census of India 1991, Government of India


10/16

8

A cursory glance at the achievements in various socio-economic spheres reflects that after morethan half a century of independence, the state has achieved 53.6 per cent of literacy, while in rural

area it is only 45.7 per cent. The female literacy rate is only 38.9 per cent in urban areas and 29.0 percent in rural areas. The infant mortality rate (IMR) and Under-5 Mortality rate are still higher with58.3 and 78.3 per thousand children.

The reconfiguration of this new state has brought a ray of hope among the residents of thestate as well as others for the prolonged dreams to come true. However, there are tremendouschallenges ahead to lead the state to a desired and meaningful direction.

State Jharkhand

Area (sq. km.) 79,714Population 2001 26,945,829

Decadal Gwrowth (Census 2001) (%) 23.36

Density of Population per sq. km. 338

Average Annual growth rate of population 1991-2001 (%) 2.1

Sex Ratio (Census 2001) 941

Total Children 0-6 years (Census 2001) 4956827

Total Children 6-13 years (Census 2001) 5706442

Schedule Caste Population (in million) 3.19

Schedule Tribe Population (in million) 7.09

Per capita Income 2006-07 (Rs.) 23,591

Percentage of Urban Population (%) 22.25

Literacy Rate (%), 2004-05 58.82

Female Literacy Rate (Census 2001) (%) 39.38

Number of Districts 24

Number of Towns 152

Number of Villages 32,616

Principal Crops Maize, Rice, Wheat, Pulse

Major Industries Heavy Engineering, Coal Mining,

Tussar Silk, Steel, IT, Tourism

Table 2 : Key Indicators


11/16

9

Indicators Jharkhand India

Poverty Head-Count (Official Estimate) 44 26

Percentage Children Underweight 54 47

Percentage Children Stunted 49 46

Education

Literacy Rate (6 & above) 54 65

Male 68 75

Female 39 51

Net School Attendance (6-14) 64 77

Boys 71 80

Girls 56 74

Girls Education in Class 1 - 5 (in per cent)*** 37.45



Health

Infant Mortality Rate (2005 / 06) 69 57

Percentage Children Fully Immunized 9 42

Immunized against Measles 18 51

Immunized against DPT (3 doses) 22 55

Population Growth Rate (1991-2001) 2.3 1.7

Contraceptive Use (any modern method) 43 25

Sanitation Access 15 30

Maternal Vaccination (TT) 51 67

Births Attended by Skilled Attendants 18 42

Percent of Households with Access within 15 Minutes of Safe Water Supply 34 62

Source : NSS 55th round, NFHS-II< NFHS-III, and Population Census 2001.

***Department of HRD, Government of Jharkhand, www.jharkhand.nic.in

Table 3 : Key MDG and Social Indicators 2000

2.2 Status of Children in Jharkhand


12/16

10

3. Children and the Budget for Children (BfC)

The Budget for Children (BfC) is not any different budget, it is an attempt to segregateallocation and expenditure made for the children in Jharkhand.

The budget is a priority of any state government and it shows how much government iscommitted for the promotion and protection of child rights in the state. This is an attempt to findthe priority of government towards xxx no. of children in the newly created state of Jharkhand.

thJharkhand state has been formed in the year 2000. Jharkhand state has a distinction of 4 largeststate in term of tribal population. The state itself was formed on the basis of least developmentafter a span of 50 years of independence and a state that has special provision for the

thdevelopment of tribal. The tribal population of Jharkhand is specially protected through the 5schedule of constitutional provision.

The scenario after the 8 years of formationreveals that the situation has changed at leastspeed and in some places new problems hasemerged. The child soldier is one amongthem. The civil society organization andMedia always have tried to bring this issue inattention of government; however it is notdocumented in any report of government.The per capita expenditure of a region gives aclear picture as to what is the per capita

amount spent by the residents of a particularregion and thus gives a clear picture about theconsumer patterns of the residents of a state.The annual per capita expenditure ofJharkhand is as low as Rs.495 per year.

The issues and priority of government can beanalyzed through the budget for childrenexercise in the state.

BOX 2 :

At present, the budget does not reflect arealistic picture of the financial position of thestate. While the overall level of debt is known,other disclosures such as large outstanding pensionliabilities and contingent liabilities (committedcontracts, guarantees, bad debts etc.) are not known.The government needs to prepare a medium-termexpenditure plan and place its annual budgetpreparation within the context of this plan. Thisplan should be prepared in consultation with the

line departments and be consistent with resourcemobilization efforts to ensure fiscal discipline in themedium to long term.

Source: Jharkhand, Addressing the Challenges ofInclusive development, 2007, World Bank, Poverty

reduction and economic management, India countrymanagement unit, South Asia, Page no. V

67Source : Jharkhand Development Report 2008, table C.8 (b)

Source : Primary Census Abstract : Census of India, 2001


13/16

11

4. Budget for Children in Jharkhand An Overview

Jharkhand state has developed at a mild pace during last 8 years of its formation. The budget trendshows an increasing trend in the budget allocation. The trend visible during the study period of2003-04 to 2007-08 shows that the state resources has increased from 9489 crore in 2003-04 to16603 crore in 2007-08. For the same period the budget for children has also increased from 1420to 2490 crore. This is a marginal increase of 0.40 per cent in allocation on children. Thegovernment has changed but the priority towards the children has not changed that is stillhovering around 15 per cent of the total state budget.

Out of total 100 rupee being allocated in the state only rupee 15.11have been provided for the children in the state budget of Jharkhandduring 2003-04 to 2007-08. In the year 2003-04 the BfC was 14.96 percent of the total state budget, it increased to 15.97 per cent in 2005-06but it could not sustain the growth and fallen to 15.07 in 2006-07 and15.00 per cent in 2007-08. Does it mean that the priority ofgovernment has reduced after 2005-06? Or the children needs havereduced?

Table : 4

YearState Budget

AllocationSocial Sector

AllocationBudget forChildren

BfC %age inState Budget

BfC % inSocial Sector

Budget

BE BE BE In per cent In per cent

Rs. Crore

2003-04 9489.32 2738.68 1419.79 14.96 51.84

2004-05 10976.01 3177.76 1616.78 14.73 50.88

2005-06 12423.33 5282.91 1960.36 15.97 37.11

2006-07 15394.85 5271.26 2320.81 15.07 44.03

2007-08 16603.80 5510.23 2490.93 15.00 45.21

Average 12977.46 4396.17 1961.73 15.11 44.62

Average Share of BfC in Jharkhand Budget (2003-04 to 2007-08)

84.89

15.11

Percentage allocation on BfC

Percentage allocation otherthan BfC

BOX 3 :

Only Rupee 15.11 havebeen provided for thechildren in the statebudget of Jharkhand

during 2003-04 to 2007-08


14/16

12

The comparison between allocation andexpenditure on children gives a very grim

picture. On an average 26 per cent of allocationwas under spent during 2003-04 to 2005-06. Itmeans out of total Rs.100 allocated in the stateonly Rs.11.18 was spent on children during2003-04 to 2005-06.

Out of total allocation of 1419 crore in 2003-04on BfC only 970 crore was actually spent. Theunder utilization of allocation is not only forone year but is common for 2004-05 and 2005-06. In 2004-05 1283 crore against 1616 crore

allocation and in 2005-06 1482 crore against 1960 crore was actually spent.This shows an under spending of 32 per cent in 2003-04, 20 per cent in 2004-05 and 25 per cent in2005-06. It is an under utilization of 1259 crore during 3 years on children programme. Theaverage under utilization per year is about 420 crores alone on children programme and schemes.It shows that state is spending much less than what it promises to the children, during budgetpresentation in the state legislative assembly.

Difference in BE, RE and AE in Jharkhand BfC

BE, RE and AE in Jharkhand BfC

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

2003- 04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08

Year

Rs.

Crore

BE

RE

AE

-500

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

100

2003-04 2004-05 2005-06

Year

BE RE

RE AE

BE AERs.

Crore


15/16

13

In all year the revised estimate (RE) is closer to the budget estimates (BE), however the actualexpenditure (AE) is less than the RE. The analysis of BE, RE and AE in Jharkhand BfC reflects

that after the end of year also departments doesn't realizes that they have not utilized a hugeresources made for children. The under utilization clearly reflects that the target could not beachieved in the particular years. If the target was not achieved in 2003-04, 2004-05 or 2005-06than it is important to see if the government took any major initiative to bring down the underspending? Or whether the government have allocated additional amount in next year?

In the year 2003-04 the under spending was for 449 crore but the next year budget allocation onBfC shows an increase of only 197 crore. In 2004-05 under spending was 333 crore and increase inallocation was 343 crore and in 2005-06 the under spending was 478 crore but the increase wasonly of 360 crore. It is surprising to find that in year 2003-04 government of Jharkhand hadpromised an expenditure of 1419.79 crore but this mark of expenditure only crossed in 2005-06.

It shows that the allocation towards children has increased but the expenditure in real has notincreased as was promised by the Government of Jharkhand.


16/16

5. SECTORAL ALLOCATION

It is important to observe the sectoralallocation within the BfC. The BfC can beobserved in four parts, i.e. development,health, protection and education. Thiswill show us the micro perspective ofgovernment priority towards children.The government priorities are generallydecided according to the politicalimportance of certain sector. In case ofBfC also this is not isolated. The stategovernment has allocated maximum onthe education sector of child and least onthe protection of children. The childeducation involves schools in villages andteachers employment. It serves thepurpose of any elected government that wanted to reach to the villages through newinfrastructure and giving jobs to the unemployed youth. The priority can also be decided after theavailabilities of funds. In case of education and development, more than 75 per cent of the fundsare available through the centrally sponsored schemes, however the state government has framedthese schemes and programmes in such way that it looks like the effort of state government andalso benefits the political party in ruling during the next election.

The Sectoral analysis clearly reflects

that the priority of state governmentis totally centered towards the childeducation with an average allocationof 87 per cent in total BfC. Thedevelopment follow the educationwith 11.44 per cent of the total BfC,however the child health and childprotection is the most neglectedsector with less than 1 per cent of thetotal allocation. The allocation onhealth and protection together is only 1.1 per cent of the total BfC in Jharkhand.

Out of every Rs.100 allocated in the state budget, Rs.15.11 goes to BfC. Out of that Rs.15.11(BfC) the share of education is 13.26, development 1.68, health 0.11 and protection only 0.05.The protection is the most neglected sector and the allocation on protection has gone down fromRs.0.12 in 2003-04 to 0.04 in 2007-08. It means that in 2003-04 government has allocated 12 paisaon protection and gradually it came down to 4 paisa in 2007-08 in the total state budget.Surprisingly the allocation on education has also gone down during the span of 5 years, thehighest allocation on education was in 2003-04 with Rs.13.62 and it came down to 13.05 in 2007-08. The allocation on development and health has marginally increased. The allocation ondevelopment hover around Rs.2 and health around 19 paisa.

14

Education Development Health Protection

Sectoral Share in Jharkhand BfC

11.44

0.77 0.33

87.46

budget for children in jharkhand 2009

Documents