RUSA: Advancing Quality and Equity in Higher Education 

Policy Update
Gauri Khanna

Background 

India’s higher education system saw a sharp increase in both the number of institutions and students. All of these, though, did not improve the quality of higher education. The Rashtriya Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan programme was started to raise the standard of higher education. Rashtriya Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan was a centrally sponsored scheme for upgrading state and union territory colleges. It covers government and government-aided institutions of the States and Union Territories. RUSA’s part one was launched in 2013, and RUSA 2.0 was launched in 2018. With the National Education Policy being introduced in 2020, the RUSA scheme has been renamed and transformed to Pradhan Mantri Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan (PM-USHA). 

Objectives 

The key objectives of RUSA 

  • To improve the quality of state higher education institutions by following set rules and standards, and encouraging accreditation to ensure quality.
  • To reduce regional gaps by establishing colleges in areas that are socially and economically disadvantaged.
  • To ensure reforms in academic, administrative, and evaluation systems.
  • To create a good environment in colleges and universities where students and teachers can focus on research and innovation. 

Functioning 

RUSA wants to create new universities by consolidating nearby colleges and improving independent ones. It focuses on improving infrastructure, creating new professional colleges, and supporting leadership development and faculty training. The programme enhances skill development through the central polytechnic scheme and connects vocational education with higher education while helping states strengthen their institutions.

Institutional Structure for RUSA Implementation and Monitoring 

AD 4nXfrG9QOqeE7wG1NqS80xTIqhLIkTo4TB6m B4n2ItbIMSPWupFU LV1g8rH0f0GLOHYLMdQN8ixwuuTpop4LKfuBtXhKrmsU4H8AifqIe6acV3Z3Hi3rMMsHMrArrcR5
Source- Ministry of Education

The RUSA Mission Authority (RMA) is responsible for managing RUSA on a national level and developing plans and policies. The Project Approval Board (PAB) reviews State Higher Education Plans (SHEPS) and approves funding based on how well the plans perform.

RUSA’s Digital Monitoring and Accountability Framework

To effectively meet the goals of access, equity, and quality in higher education, RUSA uses a multi-layered evaluation and monitoring system. They use a web-based management information system (MIS), through which institutions are required to regularly report their progress on various project components. This data submission promotes transparency at the grassroots level. 

Academic Reforms

RUSA promotes mandatory accreditation to ensure quality in higher education. Now, accreditation is neither voluntary nor optional. RUSA requires all institutions seeking funding to either be accredited or to be working towards accreditation. This promotes clarity and assists students in making informed decisions about their future. RUSA introduced the Semester System and the Choice-Based Credit System (CBCS) to encourage uniformity and promote critical thinking in higher education.

RUSA’s Support for Research Universities

RUSA aims to help states develop research-focused universities by improving infrastructure, creating supportive governance, and encouraging partnerships with industry and academia. 

Performance

During the first phase of RUSA, the Ministry of Human Resource Development decided to distribute funds to states based on the population in the 18–23 age group according to the norm-based performance criterion. To ensure equitable distribution of resources, states that have poor socioeconomic and health indicators will be given additional weightage. 90:10 for northeastern states, J&K, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, and Sikkim; 65:35 for other states; and 50:50 for private-aided institutions (for permitted activities). States can also attract private donations (up to 50% of their share) to boost investments in higher education. During the 12th and 13th Five-Year Plans, RUSA received a total central contribution of ₹69,675 crore. Additionally, it received ₹28,459 crore from the states.

Under RUSA 2.0, project costs are shared as follows: 90:10 for Northeastern states, Jammu and Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh, and Uttarakhand; 60:40 for other states and UTS with legislatures; and 100% central funding for UTS without legislatures. In the second phase of the Rashtriya Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan (RUSA), the central government provides funding to set up new Model Degree Colleges in districts identified as Aspirational Districts by NITI Aayog, as well as in unserved and underserved neighbourhoods of the North Eastern and Himalayan regions. RUSA’s Project Approval Board (PAB) has approved support for establishing one MDC in each of 70 such districts, including 6 districts in Odisha.

Impact 

RUSA has played a vital role in higher education across India by improving state institutions’ access, infrastructure, quality, and equity.  RUSA 1.0 and 2.0 supported around 2,500 institutions through 2,972 approved projects under 16 components, with 1,000 projects completed. Evaluation reports conclude it’s a significant and targeted impact on access, equity, and quality in higher education.

 A third-party evaluation of RUSA by NITI Aayog was held on 13th April 2019 at the RUSA Resource Centre in New Delhi. A six-member team from NITI Aayog later visited various states to interact with colleges, students to get on-the-spot feedback. States were also requested to address the delays in project reports, inspections, and utilisation certificates. Several states, like Maharashtra, Bihar, Karnataka, and Tripura, were highlighted for pending documents or underutilised funds. To properly review and support the achievements of the scheme going forward, all states were asked to cooperate fully and update their systems.

Emerging Issues 

Underutilisation of Funds – The Committee noted that states and Union Territories have unutilized funds due to revised instructions from the Ministry of Finance regarding Centrally Sponsored Schemes and the Single Nodal Account (SNA). It recommends that the department enhance coordination with states and UTS and monitor these funds to ensure better utilisation of RUSA 3.0 and prevent unspent amounts.

Administrative Delays – Several projects (cluster universities, upgrading colleges) have yet to be completed due to slow infrastructure development or approvals (e.g., in Maharashtra, Bihar). Many states had not passed the necessary legislation for the new institutions.

Digital Infrastructure Gaps—  Institutions in isolated and remote areas lacked proper IT infrastructure and digital teaching tools. This undermined key RUSA goals like promoting e-learning and smart classrooms.

Way Forward

RUSA was continued because it successfully improved infrastructure, access, and quality in state higher education institutions. Over 27 States showed effective fund utilisation, and the scheme helped uplift institutions in backwards and aspirational districts. 

As discussed in the 2nd Project Approval Board (PAB) meeting held in February 2024, the scheme now emphasises two key components: Grants to Strengthen Colleges (GSC) and Gender Inclusion and Equity Initiatives (GIEI). A total of 29 states and union territories submitted 2,402 proposals, prioritising districts with low female Gross Enrolment Ratios (GER) and limited gender-inclusive infrastructure. 2% of the total funds (1% each for the Centre and States/Union Territories) have been allocated for Monitoring, Evaluation, and Research (MMER). Infrastructure development in 28 more colleges in the State has been completed under the Centrally sponsored Rashtriya Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan (RUSA).

Conclusion 

RUSA has successfully improved infrastructure, development, and institutional reforms. However, to achieve long-term goals, it is essential to maintain a strong focus on enhancing faculty quality, promoting research, and ensuring equitable access for marginalised communities.

References

About the Contributor— Gauri Khanna is a research intern at IMPRI.

Acknowledgement: The author sincerely thanks Ms. Aasthaba Jadeja and the IMPRI fellows for their valuable contributions.

Disclaimer: All views expressed in the article belong solely to the author and not necessarily to the organisation.

Read more at IMPRI:

Peace Left Hanging: The Missing Factor

The Indo-Pacific in the Age of Multipolarity: India’s Strategic Imperatives

Author

Related Posts

Talk to Us