Leading with Sustainability: Laying the Groundwork for Lasting Services

Thursday, December 15, 2011

Leading With SustainabilityLaying The Groundwork For Lasting Services

The Donor Perspective

Braimah Apambire

Background

• The Foundation has granted approximately $85 million to the WASH sector

• Provided water to over 2 million people

• Target countries: Burkina Faso, Ghana, Mali, Niger, Ethiopia, Mexico and India

• 5-year strategy

Evaluating Potential Grantees and Partnerships

• Infrastructure on the ground

• Work long-term

• Ability to work with communities, government and key stakeholders

• Capacity building, training

• WASH+ including water-related livelihood activities for income that can be used for repair and maintenance

• Site visits with potential partners

Evaluating Proposals

General• Demand for project• Appropriate technologies• Staff• Budgets provide for M&E, capacity building• Proposal adequately demonstrates how the outputs

and outcomes are likely to be sustained• Exit strategy is well planned, feasible, and unlikely to

cause harm to beneficiaries• M&E and sustainability plans linked with country’s

system

Collaborative links• Collaboration and networking among stakeholders—

communities, government and local institutions—to ensure program sustainability.

• Sector-wide dialogue on sustainability• Strengthen community capacity to manage and fully

own the facilities.• Linkages to spare parts and technical support

Evaluating Proposals

Financial Sustainability• Community• District level

Environmental Sustainability• Protection of services• Long-term sustainability of water resources –

quantity and quality

New Projects

• Ensuring that grantees incorporate long-term monitoring and evaluation of programs using modern tools, life cycle costs, sharing data and lessons learned– CREPA, Water For People and MWA– Triple-S– WASHCost

• Foundation’s M&E plan

www.wsup.com

Partnering with Service Providers: the Urban Perspective

Andy Narracott, WSUP

www.wsup.com

Who are service providers?

Regulator

Municipality

Kiosk

Utility

RegulatorMinistry of Health

PitEmptier

DelegatedManagement

www.wsup.com

1. Create Incentives

www.wsup.com

2. Present The Facts

Sanitation zones,

critical areas, possible solutions

www.wsup.com

3. Listen To Them

Planning for service delivery - the rural perspective

Webinar 15th December 2011

14

Expectations and reality – a failure of planning?

Better understanding of life cycle costs

Planning for a rural water serviceDirect supportSupport for service providers – community management committees, private operators, associations:• Monitoring and oversight•Technical advice•Administrative and organisational support•Conflict resolution•(re-) Training•Information and resources

16

Arrangements for providing direct supportArrangement for

support agentExamples

Direct supportby local government

Burkina Faso, Ghana, Mozambiqueand Uganda

Central governmentor parastatal agencies

• In Honduras, the national utility SANAA runs aprogramme of support whereby circuit riders, called Operation and Maintenance Technicians (TOMs),• In Chile, regional private utilities are contracted by the Central Ministry to provide direct support to rural service providers

Association of Community -based Service providers

The Sistema Integrado de Saneamento Rural (SISAR) in north-eastern Brazil is a combination of an association of community-based service providers with support from a state-level utility

Local governmentsubcontracting a specialised agency orIndividuals

•In South Africa, municipalities can contract a Support Services Agency (SSA), which can be a private company or NGO .•In Uganda, individual entrepreneurs, particularly hand pump mechanics or area-based mechanics, provide support.

NGOs The Asociación Salvadoreña de Servicios de Agua (ASSA) offers direct support to 170 communities in rural El Salvador.

Example: Integrated System for Rural Sanitation (SISAR), Brazil

Source: A. Meleg (2011)

Costs of BBA SISAR based in Quixada, Ceará, Brazil

12 staff members:•3 technical staff, • 7 administrative/ commercial•1 social science background•1 responsible for general services

Financing: User tariff, based on metered connections and collection of bills

Coverage: 25 and 112 systems each, representing between 15,000 and 72,000 users.

Direct Support ~ US$3.60

• Costs of direct support are significant – accountingfor ~ 20 - 25% of all long-term expenditure• In (lower) middle income countries ~ US$2 – 3person/year appears to be sufficient order of magnitude

• < U$1 person/year appears too low to be effective

Planning for rural service delivery - implementers

• Who coordinates and provides long-term support to WASH service delivery?

• Can we make linkages with (local) authorities so that the projects we deliver are supported?

• How can we best prepare the communities we help with WASH projects to obtain long-term support?

• Can we contribute to existing support mechanisms?

19

Planning for rural service delivery - funders

• Who coordinates and provides long-term support to WASH service delivery?

• How is this currently financed and what are the gaps?

• Is it possible for us to contribute to maintaining such support structures?

• How can we work with our implementing partners to ensure that their interventions are supported in the long-term?

20

For further information:

21

‘Arrangements and cost of providing support to rural water service providers’http://www.waterservicesthatlast.org/Resources/Building-blocks/Post-construction-support

‘Life cycle cost approach for water and sanitation services that last’http://www.washcost.info/page/1310

Thank You!

www.SustainableWASH.org