What is the aim of the programme 'Unnat Bharat Abhiyan' ?

Describes the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan as based on collective community participation, showing a pattern where national campaigns enlist local communities to achieve social goals.

A student could infer that similar national programmes (like Unnat Bharat Abhiyan) might use local community collaboration to meet ambitious targets such as literacy.

The EEAT scheme lists encouraging NGOs and mobilizing people's participation as explicit objectives, demonstrating an established rule of involving voluntary organisations and community mobilization in government education/awareness programmes.

One could extend this pattern to suspect Unnat Bharat Abhiyan may also leverage NGOs and community participation to pursue educational outcomes.

Notes targeted educational measures (scholarships, hostels, coaching) used by government to raise literacy among marginalized groups, illustrating that state education systems implement interventions to improve literacy.

A student could combine this with the idea of community/NGO involvement to assess whether Unnat Bharat Abhiyan might blend government education interventions with local/voluntary support to aim for universal literacy.

Describes NITI Aayog initiatives and indices (e.g., 'School Education Quality Index') showing central bodies set education targets and monitor outcomes, indicating a framework for nationwide educational programs.

Using this, one could plausibly expect national programmes like Unnat Bharat Abhiyan to align with central monitoring and targets when pursuing literacy goals.

Mentions that MUDRA Yojana funds voluntary organizations involved in skill development, giving an example of government funding NGOs to deliver social objectives.

A student might generalize that government schemes sometimes fund voluntary organisations to achieve social targets, a model Unnat Bharat Abhiyan could follow for literacy efforts.

States that a central policy goal is to 'Integrate villages institutionally into the development process' and to increase the 'use of technology'.

A student could infer that programmes aiming to integrate villages + use technology plausibly involve institutions (like colleges) applying technologies to local problems and then check whether UBA is one such scheme.

Lists 'Higher Education' explicitly among sector-specific government priorities and grants.

Knowing higher education is a named sector, a student could reasonably look for schemes that operationalize higher-education involvement in local development (e.g., by connecting campuses with communities).

Notes that 'technology and institutions may hinder development' and highlights community/village level resource development with institutional help.

Combining this rule (institutions + technology affect local development) suggests a model where higher-education institutions apply appropriate technologies to assist village resource planning — a pattern consistent with the statement to be checked.

Describes examples of collective community participation (e.g., Swachh Bharat) as a mode of addressing local development issues.

A student could extend that many government programmes rely on community-institution partnerships, so a programme linking colleges and communities to tackle issues would fit this common pattern and merits verification.

Shows that NITI Aayog runs multiple initiatives and uses coordinated platforms to accelerate implementation of national development agendas.

Given NITI's role in launching/overseeing applied development initiatives, one might suspect a scheme connecting academic institutions and communities could be promoted under such institutional frameworks and then seek direct evidence of UBA's design.

Describes a national policy (Scientific Policy Resolution) and political leadership deliberately building science/technology institutions and placing leaders in charge (e.g., Nehru chairing CSIR).

A student could check whether Unnat Bharat Abhiyan is presented similarly in government policy documents or whether its mandate and leadership structures echo such institution‑building aims.

Gives a pattern: post‑Independence India set up national laboratories and institutes (NPL, IITs, Atomic Energy Dept.) as a route to technological power.

Compare Unnat Bharat Abhiyan's activities to this pattern—does it fund or network research labs/academic institutes, or create new institutional capacity?

Describes technology missions using targeted, scientific approaches to solve national problems—an example of using programmes to advance science/technology goals.

A student could examine whether Unnat Bharat Abhiyan uses similar mission‑style, target‑oriented scientific projects aimed at national advancement.

States the general historical pattern that India 'has made great strides in developing institutions of scientific research and technology.'

Use this background to ask whether Unnat Bharat Abhiyan is part of this continuing trend of programmes meant to develop institutional scientific capacity.

Shows an example (MAB) of an intergovernmental programme that sets a research agenda and builds capacity to address socio‑environmental issues.

Check if Unnat Bharat Abhiyan similarly defines a research agenda and includes capacity‑building components linking communities and scientific/academic institutions.