Ministry of Health and Family Welfare | Source: Lok Sabha question, date printed 31 July 2026 | UPSC / PCS Mains: GS-II (health, governance), GS-III (public finance, budget) | Prelims: PM-ABHIM, PMSSY, NHM, BE, RE, Actuals, Central Sector, Centrally Sponsored Scheme
Background and Context
While reading budget figures, three distinct numbers appear: the estimate at the year's start (BE), the revised estimate mid-year (RE) and the actual spending by the year's end (Actuals). None of these can be read in another's place. One more distinction is the category of schemes: a Central Sector scheme belongs entirely to the Centre, while states also participate in a Centrally Sponsored Scheme. This answer prints PM-ABHIM under both categories, so keeping the two rows separate is essential.
What Is the News?
Lok Sabha Unstarred Question 2255 carries the printed date of 31 July 2026. The MP had asked whether public health expenditure had remained below the target of 2.5% of GDP, what the scheme-wise and state-wise allocation and use of PM-ABHIM and PMSSY was in 2025-26, and what steps there are for the effective use of the 2026-27 budget. The answer does not give the GDP share. It contains the printed 114.79% rise in the department's budget allocation from 2017-18 (BE) to 2026-27 (BE), a BE, RE and Actuals table of 2025-26's three scheme heads (national level, up to 31.03.2026), and a list of steps for primary health and maternal-child health.
Key Facts and Figures
| The question and the answer | Lok Sabha Unstarred Question 2255 (title: HEALTHCARE FUNDING AND BUDGET UTILISATION), Ministry of Health and Family Welfare; printed date "31st JULY, 2026"; the questioner is Advocate Chandra Shekhar (as printed: ADV. CHANDRA SHEKHAR); the answer is by Minister of State Shri Prataprao Jadhav. All three parts, "(a) to (c)", have been given one shared answer. |
|---|---|
| The question's three parts | (a) whether it is a fact that India's public health expenditure has remained below the target of 2.5 per cent of GDP envisaged in the National Health Policy 2017, and if so the reasons; (b) the details of fund allocation and use under PM-ABHIM and PMSSY in 2025-26, scheme-wise and state/Union Territory-wise; (c) the steps for the effective use of the 2026-27 health budget, especially for the primary health infrastructure and maternal and child health services. |
| (a): what came in the answer | The GDP share is not given in this answer. The answer describes the National Health Policy (NHP) 2017's goals, that is, universal access to quality services and services without financial hardship. It then says that the Department of Health & Family Welfare's budget allocation rose from Rs. 47,353 crore in 2017-18 (BE) to Rs 1,01,709 crore in 2026-27 (BE), which is "an increase of 114.79%". This number is printed; the answer presents it as the department's allocation. |
|---|---|
| (b): the table's structure | The table is at the national level and is scheme-wise; a state/Union Territory-wise table is not in the answer. There are three rows: PM-ABHIM and PMSSY under Central Sector (CS), and PM-ABHIM under Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS). Each row gives BE 2025-26, RE 2025-26 and "Actuals as on 31.03.2026"; the answer calls the Actuals as per e-lekha. The unit is "in Crores". |
| (c): the answer's steps | The answer describes the approval "as per norms & available resources", through the Record of Proceedings (RoPs), of the states'/Union Territories' Programme Implementation Plans (PIPs) under the NHM. 1.86 lakh Ayushman Arogya Mandirs (AAMs) are said to have been made operational by strengthening SHCs and PHCs; they provide primary health services of 12 "packages", "across the country, including Bihar" (the answer's words). For maternal-child health, JSY, JSSK, PMSMA (the 9th of every month), SUMAN, post-delivery care, Anemia Mukt Bharat, MAA, Lactation Management Centres, Vitamin A, HBNC/HBYC and Mission Poshan 2.0 are listed. |
|---|---|
| PM-ABHIM and the Finance Commission | The answer: PM-ABHIM is in force to strengthen India's public health system through reforms, and the Fifteenth Finance Commission (FC-XV) had recommended grants through local governments for specific components of the health sector. The answer has no figures for this. |
| What is not printed in the answer | Public health expenditure's percentage of GDP and a comparison with the 2.5% target; a direct statement of the reason asked in (a); state/Union Territory-wise allocation and use; the reason for the difference between the Actuals and the RE; any separate new step or mechanism for using the 2026-27 budget. |
|---|
The 2025-26 Table (Printed in the Answer, ₹ crore)
| Scheme (head) | BE 2025-26 | RE 2025-26 | Actuals (up to 31.03.2026) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Central Sector (CS): PM-ABHIM | 558.45 | 402.50 | 429.30 |
| Central Sector (CS): PMSSY | 2200.00 | 1500.00 | 1383.53 |
| Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS): PM-ABHIM | 4200.00 | 2442.50 | 2442.48 |
Actuals: as per e-lekha, up to 31.03.2026. Numbers as printed.
Our Calculation
The differences below are not printed in the answer; these are only subtractions of the printed numbers above, in ₹ crore. A negative number means the first number is smaller than the second. We have drawn no percentage, ratio or ranking, and the reasons for the differences are not in the answer.
| Scheme (head) | RE minus BE | Actuals minus RE | Actuals minus BE |
|---|---|---|---|
| CS: PM-ABHIM | -155.95 | 26.80 | -129.15 |
| CS: PMSSY | -700.00 | -116.47 | -816.47 |
| CSS: PM-ABHIM | -1757.50 | -0.02 | -1757.52 |
We rechecked the printed rise in the department's allocation: dividing 1,01,709 by 47,353 gives a rise of 114.79%, equal to the number printed in the answer. This is a comparison of two BEs, and it contains no GDP, prices or actual spending.
Analysis: Three Distinct Numbers and One Unanswered Question
The first thing, the answer to question (a). The question was about the GDP share. The answer has no number for that share; in its place are a description of the policy's goals and the rise in the department's budget. From these two, one cannot tell what percentage of GDP public health expenditure is, so neither the target's fulfilment nor lagging behind it follows. This article too gives no conclusion. Separate sources will have to be seen for estimates of spending on GDP.
The second thing, the BE-to-BE rise. 47,353 to 1,01,709 crore is a comparison of two estimated allocations. The budget's size growing and its share in GDP growing are two different things, and the allocation growing is not the actual spending growing either.
The third thing, BE, RE and Actuals. In PMSSY, BE 2200.00, RE 1500.00 and Actuals 1383.53 are printed; in our calculation the RE is 700.00 below the BE and the Actuals 116.47 below the RE. In CSS's PM-ABHIM, BE 4200.00, RE 2442.50 and Actuals 2442.48. In CS's PM-ABHIM, BE 558.45, RE 402.50 and Actuals 429.30. The answer gives no explanation of these differences, so they cannot be read as any scheme's success or failure.
The fourth thing, the Actuals going above the RE. In CS's PM-ABHIM the Actuals are printed 26.80 crore above the RE. The answer has no reason for this, and we have assumed none. On the other side, in CSS's PM-ABHIM there is a difference of 0.02 crore; this is a printed difference, which we have neither changed nor rounded.
The fifth thing, one scheme under two heads. PM-ABHIM is printed under both CS and CSS. The two rows have been kept separate and no sum has been made, because the answer does not say what the two heads' mutual relationship is.
The sixth thing, the answer to question (c). The list of steps mentions the NHM's approval process and 1.86 lakh Ayushman Arogya Mandirs, and the maternal-child health programmes are listed. No separate new step or mechanism for using the 2026-27 budget has been given in the answer.
Way Forward: the Unanswered Questions
- What percentage of GDP public health expenditure is, and how it connects to the National Health Policy's 2.5% target.
- What the state/Union Territory-wise allocation and use of PM-ABHIM and PMSSY was.
- Why the Actuals in CS's PM-ABHIM are higher than the RE.
- What the mutual relationship of PM-ABHIM's CS and CSS heads is.
- Which specific step or monitoring mechanism there is for using the 2026-27 budget.
Exam-Useful Points
Prelims: the meaning of BE, RE and Actuals; the distinction between Central Sector and Centrally Sponsored Scheme; PM-ABHIM and PMSSY; PIP and RoP under the NHM; Ayushman Arogya Mandir; JSY, JSSK, PMSMA, SUMAN, Anemia Mukt Bharat. Mains: the difference between budget estimates and actual spending; the distinction between a rise in allocation and the share in GDP; identifying every part asked in a parliamentary answer and the part left unanswered; not explaining a printed difference without knowing its reason.
Sources
- Lok Sabha Unstarred Question 2255, printed date 31 July 2026 (Ministry of Health and Family Welfare)
All facts are from this 3-page answer.
Remember: the GDP share is not given in this answer. The 114.79% rise in the department's BE is not a share in GDP. BE, RE and Actuals are distinct numbers, and PM-ABHIM's CS and CSS heads are separate. In CS's PM-ABHIM the Actuals are printed above the RE; the reason is not in the answer.
Download This Article: PDF