Bridging the gap between infrastructure and service delivery in rural India
Ministry of Jal Shakti
India’s rural water supply story has long been told through coverage numbers: handpumps installed, habitations covered, schemes commissioned. The Functionality Assessment of Household Tap Connection – National Report 2024, commissioned by the Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation (DDWS), Ministry of Jal Shakti, marks a decisive shift in that narrative. For decades, rural water supply in India was assessed using coverage indicators—number of handpumps installed, habitations covered, or schemes commissioned.
Conducted between July and October 2024, the study is the third national independent assessment under the Jal Jeevan Mission (JJM). Its core question is simple yet transformative: Are villages declared as “Har Ghar Jal” —villages declared as having 100% household tap connections on the JJM IMIS—are delivering functional services, not merely infrastructure?
In doing so, the report moves beyond infrastructure reporting to examine whether water is reaching rural households in adequate quantity, prescribed quality, and with regularity. This distinction is critical. Globally, water programmes often falter not in asset creation but in service delivery. By independently verifying administrative claims on the ground, the assessment introduces a layer of accountability into one of the world’s largest rural water missions.
The survey spans 19,812 Har Ghar Jal (HGJ) villages and 2.37 lakh households across 761 rural districts in 34 States and Union Territories, making it one of the largest WASH service delivery assessments globally. After field verification, the final analysis rests on 19,401 villages and 2.32 lakh households, excluding villages where tap connections were absent despite administrative reporting.
The study uses a cross-sectional, statistically representative design based on Population Proportionate to Size (PPS) sampling, ensuring district-level precision.
A Functional Household Tap Connection (FHTC) is defined through a three-part service standard aligned with JJM guidelines:
Adequate quantity: At least 55 litres per capita per day (LPCD)
Prescribed quality: Microbiologically safe at household level and chemically compliant at source
Regular supply: Water delivered as per declared schedule
If a connection fails on any one of these dimensions, it is classified as non-functional. This definition prevents partial achievement, such as a tap delivering unsafe waterfrom being counted as success. Data collection combines household interviews, village-level institutional interviews, flow-rate measurements, and laboratory-tested water quality analysis. Importantly, the 2024 round used third-party NABL-accredited private laboratories for water testing, strengthening methodological credibility. The assessment also includes public institutions (schools, Anganwadis, health centres) and focused chapters on JE–AES districts and Aspirational Districts.
Headline findings show that 76% of household tap connections nationally qualify as functional, though significant gaps persist in quality compliance, operation and maintenance (O&M), village institutions, and skilled manpower.
The report’s most significant contribution is conceptual. For decades, rural water supply was evaluated through asset creation metrics. This assessment operationalises what WASH practitioners have long argued: infrastructure is meaningful only when it delivers reliable service.
By insisting on simultaneous compliance with quantity, quality, and regularity, the framework aligns with global service-level approaches such as WHO’s laddered definitions. It reflects a maturation of JJM—from a construction mission to a service delivery programme.
Technically, the survey design is strong. District-level sampling, defined confidence intervals, stratification by village size, and transparent weighting procedures support credible national and state estimates.
Equally commendable is the triangulation of user perception data with objective testing. Flow-rate measurements and laboratory-based water quality analysis help distinguish between perceived and actual performance.
The report also explicitly notes that results are not directly comparable with earlier rounds due to seasonal differences (monsoon versus dry season), changes in laboratory testing arrangements, and evolving implementation contexts. Such transparency enhances analytical integrity.
At the aggregate level, the findings confirm that Jal Jeevan Mission has transformed rural water access. Nearly all surveyed households report having tap connections. Over 83% express satisfaction with quantity and pressure. Yet the deeper value of the report lies in identifying emerging cracks. At an aggregate level, the findings confirm that JJM has fundamentally altered rural water access.:
First, functionality drops sharply once quality is factored in. While over 92% of households report satisfaction with water quality, only 76% of household water samples pass laboratory microbiological tests. This divergence underscores a familiar WASH challenge: users often equate clarity and taste with safety, while microbial contamination remains invisible. The implication is clear—without sustained disinfection and monitoring, infrastructure gains risk being undermined by public health risks.
Second, the findings expose weaknesses in village-level institutions. Only 55% of villages report having a VWSC/Paani Samiti, just 58% have skilled manpower for O&M, and a mere 27% possess Field Testing Kits (FTKs). These are not peripheral indicators; they are the backbone of sustainability. The data suggest that while capital expenditure has surged, institutional capacity-building has lagged behind.
Third, public institutions emerge as a blind spot. Only 68% of schools, Anganwadis, and health centres have tap connections, and just 73% of tested samples meet microbiological standards. From a WASH-in-schools and nutrition perspective, this is concerning. Safe water at public institutions is essential for infection control, child nutrition, and dignity—yet it appears less assured than household supply in many states.
O&M and finance: The unresolved question
The report repeatedly points—implicitly and explicitly—to the operation and maintenance challenge. Non-functionality is frequently linked to damaged pipelines, pump failures, and electricity issues, all of which are predictable lifecycle problems rather than exceptional shocks.
The assessment repeatedly links non-functionality to predictable lifecycle issues: pipeline damage, pump failure, electricity disruptions. However, it stops short of interrogating the financial architecture of O&M. While it records whether villages levy water charges, it does not analyse tariff adequacy, collection efficiency, or expenditure patterns.
For a mission increasingly framed in utility-style language, this represents a missed opportunity. Without financially viable O&M systems, particularly for multi-village schemes, functionality may decline over time.
Equity and differentiation: still underdeveloped
Another limitation is the relatively thin treatment of equity. The survey design ensures geographic representativeness, but the analysis does not sufficiently disaggregate outcomes by social groups, remoteness, or source vulnerability. Given India’s long history of intra-village inequities in water access, future rounds would benefit from explicitly tracking whether Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, hamlet peripheries, and water-scarce zones experience lower functionality.
The focused chapters on JE–AES districts and Aspirational Districts are a step in the right direction, signalling that service delivery challenges are context-specific. However, these insights remain largely descriptive rather than diagnostic.
What the report gets right
Despite these gaps, the report succeeds in one critical respect: it reframes accountability. By independently verifying IMIS-reported HGJ status on the ground—and excluding villages where taps were found absent—it sends a strong signal that administrative declarations must withstand empirical scrutiny.
For policymakers, this matters enormously. JJM is entering a phase where maintenance, quality assurance, and climate resilience will determine long-term success. This report provides the empirical baseline needed to design that transition.
Policy-relevant recommendations emerging from the review
Drawing on the report’s findings, four policy directions stand out:
Make water quality management non-negotiable: Chlorination systems, FTKs, and laboratory testing must move from “recommended” to “mandatory” elements of scheme functionality, with clear accountability at district level.
Re-center village institutions as service providers: VWSCs require sustained handholding, not just formation. This includes bookkeeping support, technical training, and formal recognition as local utilities.
Address O&M financing explicitly: Future assessments should integrate indicators on tariff levels, cost recovery, and fund flows, enabling evidence-based decisions on state and central support for O&M.
Strengthen public institutions as WASH anchors: Schools, Anganwadis, and health centres should be treated as priority service nodes, with dedicated monitoring of both availability and quality.
Conclusion
The Functionality Assessment of Household Tap Connection – National Report 2024 is more than a monitoring document; it is a mirror held up to India’s rural water transition. It confirms that Jal Jeevan Mission has achieved what once seemed improbable—near-universal tap coverage. At the same time, it warns that functionality is fragile, contingent on institutions, skills, and systems that are still uneven.
For India’s WASH sector, the message is clear: the next phase is not about pipes and pumps, but about governance, finance, and public health protection. This report provides a solid foundation for that shift—provided its findings are acted upon with the same urgency that once drove coverage.