Some programmes are state-designed, some are Union schemes implemented by the state, and some combine components. Annadatha Sukhibhava-PM Kisan is a clear exam example: the annual amount described by AP includes the Union PM-Kisan share. Jal Jeevan Mission and PMAY involve national programme frameworks and state implementation. A state-funded pension or local canteen has a different fiscal and administrative route.

Funding source matters when calculating totals. If a state statement says “Rs 20,000 including Rs 6,000 from PM-Kisan,” adding Rs 6,000 again inflates the benefit. A Union approval is not automatically a state expenditure or a household payment. Centrally sponsored schemes can also have conditions, matching shares and reporting requirements. The budget may show the state share, central release or combined project cost in different places.

For the exam, classify the scheme, then ask who verifies the beneficiary and who sends the payment or runs the service. Shared funding does not mean shared execution at every step. A candidate should read the latest operational order rather than infer the split from the title.

Worked example: A programme can be Union-designed and state-implemented, fully state-financed, or jointly funded. The local official who delivers it does not by itself identify the funding source. A national logo does not erase state administrative work. For each scheme, create separate entries for policy authority, financing, implementation and grievance contact. The exam may test one of those four rather than the popular name.

Active recall: Give one combined-benefit example and one service implemented locally under a national framework. Identify a double-counting trap.