Over the past decade, India’s skilling ecosystem has expanded through flagship state-level and central schemes, including the Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Gramin Kaushalya Yojana (DDU-GKY) and the Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojana (PMKVY). However, the proportion of youth with formal training has remained low, reaching 4.9 percent in 2023–24. This means that a vast majority, or nearly 353 million young people aged 15–29, have not received any formal training.
The spatial disparities are stark: While 7.1 percent of urban youth are formally trained, this figure falls to 3.9 percent for rural youth. Moreover, a much larger share of youth acquire skills informally—through on-the-job learning, self-learning, or even being confined to hereditary occupations—with 13.9 percent of young women and 28.2 percent of young men reporting such informal training. At the same time, while the unemployment rate for persons aged 15 years and above in rural India was 2.5 percent, these numbers were significantly higher among youth aged 15–29 years (8.5 percent), highlighting their particular vulnerability in rural labour markets.
These figures were published almost a decade after the DDU-GKY was launched in 2014. The scheme primarily targets 55 million out of India’s estimated 180 million rural youth, who are socio-economically marginalised and either unemployed or engaged in marginal employment. Despite its targeted coverage, persisting lags in formal training point to certain gaps in the DDU-GKY that must be addressed.
Strong on paper, weak in practice
The DDU-GKY is designed as a holistic, demand-driven skill development initiative that bridges the gap between training and employment. Implemented through a public–private partnership model, it offers short-term, industry-linked, residential training via accredited project implementation agencies (PIAs). Training is complemented by soft skills and digital literacy modules, and end-to-end support from outreach, identification, and enrolment of candidates to post-placement tracking.
Awareness and access often depend on a PIA’s outreach capacity and incentive to mobilise in a given area.
The scheme sets a minimum placement benchmark of 70 percent for each PIA and mandates a minimum wage of INR 6,000 per month for trainees. In a country where more than 90 percent of the workforce is part of the informal sector, the scheme seeks to facilitate a transition into formal sector employment and reduce dropout rates by incentivising job retention and career progression for candidates, especially marginalised rural youth.
In practice, however, it remains constrained by implementation challenges and structural barriers.
Between 2016 and 2024, 13.95 lakh people were trained and 68 percent were placed, short of the 70 percent minimum target. More concerning, however, is the data on infrastructure. Only 629 out of 2,369 training centres were operational as of July 2024, indicating massive underutilisation of established facilities.
To better understand these issues, and how they were impacting women’s participation in skill training in particular, JustJobs Network conducted a study in Odisha’s Rayagada district in August 2025. Rayagada is a predominantly tribal and economically vulnerable district, where livelihoods are largely confined to subsistence agriculture, forest-based activities, daily-wage work, and seasonal migration to southern states. Women in villages are typically engaged in teaching, farming, MGNREGA work, ASHA roles, or tailoring, with monthly earnings generally of INR 6,000–7,000.
Over the course of our study, we spoke to young women (15–29 years), their parents, trainers, and local officials. While various social and structural barriers are often cited as constraints for rural women, our interactions revealed how these challenges operate in concrete and everyday ways, shaping whether women can enrol, complete training, or remain in employment.
Why is uptake limited?
1. Low awareness and weak mobilisation
Rayagada has both DDU-GKY and state-level skilling initiatives, delivered largely through PIAs. However, a local government official told us that the unavailability of candidates had been a major challenge, with many rural youth, particularly women, being unaware of training opportunities. Under the DDU-GKY, PIAs are primarily responsible for mobilising candidates. One way of connecting with potential candidates is through coordination with gram panchayats and block-level officials. In some cases, PIAs also conduct direct village-level outreach. However, this approach results in uneven coverage and inherent biases.
For example, villages closer to the PIA office or with stronger ties to local officials are more likely to be targeted, while more remote or marginalised hamlets may be overlooked. Similarly, households perceived as ‘less likely to complete training’, or young women whose families are hesitant about them moving out, may not be prioritised. As a result, awareness and access often depend on a PIA’s outreach capacity and incentive to mobilise in a given area. These, in turn, are shaped by the availability of seats, recruitment targets, existing local networks, and a PIA’s immediate enrolment requirements. As a result, outreach becomes fragmented and contingent, rather than systematic.
2. Family resistance to residential training and preference for local employment
In many areas, families were unwilling to send young women to residential centres located in towns or district centres due to safety concerns, cultural norms, and household responsibilities. In some cases, reaching the nearest bus stop from villages in Rayagada requires walking for more than 5 km, reinforcing restrictions around mobility and perceived risks. This significantly restricted women’s participation in the scheme despite its residential design, which was intended to provide immersive, distraction-free training.
Lack of local employment opportunities and career counselling poses additional challenges for women, even in cases where training is otherwise accessible. Young women in the district typically enrol in tailoring, beauty and wellness, and handicraft-related courses. Employment and apprenticeships in sectors such as textiles and tailoring often require migration out of the district and even the state.
A 21-year-old woman, who had completed class 12 and was enrolled in a DDU-GKY programme, told us, “My parents won’t send me outside Odisha. Most jobs offered after training were in other states, so even if I complete the course, I may not be able to take the job.” Importantly, the women we spoke to reported that they had been offered jobs with monthly wages up to INR 10,000–12,000, much higher than the local standard of INR 6,000–7,000. However, most placements were in distant states such as Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, and Tamil Nadu. Some women who took up jobs in these faraway states reported that they found it difficult to adjust to local cultural and dietary practices.
The inaccessibility of distant, private-sector employment, coupled with a preference for either government or local jobs, also results in low skilling uptake among women. Due to this, many of them prefer self-employment post training as opposed to wage work outside the district.
3. Course structures not accounting for learning gaps among students
While minimum schooling requirements vary across courses, trainers noted that many participants arrived at training centres with low literacy, numeracy, and communication abilities, leading to a gap between students’ starting points and the curriculum’s expectations. “If students struggle to read instructions or do simple calculations, it’s very difficult to move quickly into sector skills in such short courses,” an instructor explained. Several trainers stated that they often had to slow down lessons, revisit foundational concepts, and devote time to remedial support, even though the course durations, which could be three to 12 months, were not designed to accommodate this.
This has implications not only for learning outcomes, but also contributes to lower confidence and higher dropout risks among trainees, instructors noted. They added that many women had experienced interrupted schooling due to household responsibilities or early marriage expectations, which also affected their classroom participation and willingness to speak up—particularly in mixed-gender settings.
4. Gaps in infrastructure and curricula
Even where minimum quality standards are met, a government official told us that training centres often faced challenges such as outdated equipment, limited digital resources, and poorly maintained practical labs. Combined with inadequate hostel facilities, limited internet access, and insufficient support staff, these systemic issues created an environment that made skill development inaccessible for many youth.
How can access to skill training be improved?
1. Localised and context-appropriate training options
As one trainer noted, enrolment among women would increase if programmes were available closer to their villages, since many are unable to commit to distant residential courses. Here, localised, non-residential, and flexible training models can be key to improving participation.
One approach that the DDU-GKY can adopt is the hub-and-spoke model, where well-equipped district or block-level training centres function as hubs, supported by smaller, local training units in surrounding villages. These centres could deliver basic modules such as foundational, soft skills, and modular training closer to home, with trainees accessing the hub only for advanced practical components or assessments. Similar hub-and-spoke models have been recommended under Samagra Shiksha to expand vocational education in schools, directing hub school infrastructure to support skill training in nearby spoke schools. This would reduce regular travel burdens, address safety concerns, and allow greater flexibility, while preserving training quality and placement outcomes.
Moreover, transport arrangements, travel stipends, or safe group commuting options should be built into non-residential training designs, particularly for women commuting from remote villages. In addition, mobile training units, weekend training programmes, and modular course structures could make training more accessible to rural women. While these approaches would require significant design modifications, they have the potential to markedly expand the scheme’s reach and effectiveness. Importantly, the DDU-GKY implementation structure allows for such adaptations. While the Ministry of Rural Development sets overall guidelines and funding norms, State Skill Development Missions (SSDMs) and district authorities play a key role in implementation and work closely with PIAs. This creates space at the state and district levels to adopt more context-appropriate training approaches.
2. Stronger community engagement
While the scheme’s outreach currently involves coordination with panchayat and block-level officials, this engagement is largely instrumental and short-term, aimed at identifying candidates and filling seats rather than building trust or removing social barriers to participation. There is a need to shift from one-time, enrolment-focused outreach to structured and sustained engagement at the family and community level. This can include mobilising panchayat representatives, self-help groups, religious and community leaders, and women’s collectives. These local networks should function not merely as referral points but also as partners in building trust, addressing concerns around safety and migration and supporting household-level decision-making.
Parallelly, gender-sensitive approaches should be embedded within mobilisation and training design. This includes creating women-only training environments, recruiting female instructors and support staff, and implementing adequate safety protocols to address family concerns.
3. Local job creation and entrepreneurship support
While the DDU-GKY focuses on formal sector wage employment, the scheme can complement its core modules with optional exposure to local economic opportunities during the training period. This could include basic entrepreneurship awareness, linkages with micro- or small-enterprise clusters, and cooperative models. Such initiatives could provide supplementary guidance and resources, including access to credit and markets, or technical support services, in collaboration with local livelihood programmes such as the National and State Rural Livelihood Missions.
4. Updated curricula and better infrastructure
Curriculum modernisation must go beyond updating technical content to place greater emphasis on foundational skills, digital literacy, and soft skills training—which trainers frequently identified as a weakness among incoming trainees. Curriculum design should also be cognizant of developments in industry, ensuring relevance of skills and employment outcomes after training.
Moreover, infrastructure development should prioritise proper technology integration, practical learning facilities, and support services.
5. Clear post-training job pathways
Career guidance and support should be embedded into every stage of the scheme’s implementation. Trainees should have clarity about employment prospects, job roles, wages, locations, and career progression possibilities before committing to training. This is necessary to build trust and sustained engagement.
Participation in skilling programmes is shaped not only by training availability but also by mobility constraints, societal and familial norms, and the accessibility and perceived acceptability of post-training jobs.
Moreover, current payment and incentive structures—where training partners are primarily rewarded based on candidates completing six months of post-placement retention—can inadvertently encourage a short-term placement mindset among PIAs and even the trainees. During counselling, the emphasis often shifts towards ‘staying for six months’ to secure certification or to fulfil programme requirements, rather than focusing on long-term employment, skills, or career progression. Once the minimum retention period is completed, many people exit employment due to working conditions, location, wages, or family pressures—contributing to high dropout rates that are not fully captured by short-term metrics.
To address this, incentive designs should be recalibrated to prioritise longer-term retention, job quality, and progression; for example, by linking payments to 12-month retention milestones, wage growth, or continued engagement in the labour market.
While this can shift the focus towards sustainable employment, it may also incentivise the prioritisation of trainees perceived to be easier to retain in jobs. This highlights the need to strengthen the skilling ecosystem beyond incentive design alone.
Trainees’ experiences in places such as Rayagada underscore that participation in skilling programmes is shaped not only by training availability but also by mobility constraints, societal and familial norms, and the accessibility and perceived acceptability of post-training jobs. For skilling programmes to succeed, it is essential to go beyond well-intentioned policies to address these intersecting social, economic, and cultural factors.
—
Know more
- Read about the structural factors that have shaped rising youth unemployment in India.
- Understand how a lack of vocational training impacts women’s employment opportunities.
- Learn about the overrepresentation of young people in India’s increasingly complex gig economy.
