Water and Sewerage Services in Karachi Citizen Report Card ......Without Mr. Syed Farrukh Ansar’s...

December 2010

Report

The Water and Sanitation Program (www.wsp.org)is a multi-donor partnership administered by theWorld Bank to support poor people in obtainingaffordable, safe, and sustainable access to waterand sanitation services

Citizen Report Card:Sustainable Service

Delivery Improvements

Water and SewerageServices in Karachi

DISCLAIMER:

Water and Sanitation Program (WSP) reports are published to communicate the results of WSP’s work to the development community.Some sources cited may be informal documents that are not readily available.

The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed herein are entirely those of the author and should not be attributed to theWorld Bank or its affiliated organizations, or to members of the Board of Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments theyrepresent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations,and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of the World Bank Group concerning thelegal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.

The material in this publication is copyrighted. Requests for permission to reproduce portions of it should be sent [email protected]. WSP encourages the dissemination of its work and will normally grant permission promptly.

Citizen Report Card:Sustainable Service

Delivery Improvements

Water and SewerageServices in Karachi

Foreword 5

Acronyms and Abbreviations 6

Acknowledgments 7

Executive Summary 9

Introduction 13

Contextual Framework

Engagement for Reforms: Enabling the Utility to Ensure Social Accountability

The Citizen Report Card: A Viable Tool for Social Accountability

Why Prepare a Citizen Report Card?

Citizen Report Card: Process and Methodology

Process of Preparing the Citizen Report Card in Karachi

Methodology Followed

Selection of Respondents

Criteria for Town Selection

Interview Process

Substitution or Call Back

Water Services 23

Availability, Access, and Usage of Water Sources

Instances of Water Scarcity and Coping Mechanisms

Citizens’ Perceptions on Quality and Reliability of Services

Feedback from Users of Water Sources outside Residential Premises

Transparency in Service Provisions

Interaction with the KW&SB

Incidence of Waterborne Diseases

Satisfaction with Water Provision

Areas for Improvement

Sewerage Services 37

Access to Sewerage

Quality and Reliability of Sewerage Maintenance

Costs Incurred in Maintaining Sewerage Facilities

Contents

Water and Sewerage Servicesin Karachi: Citizen ReportCard—Sustainable ServiceDelivery Improvements

Problems Faced with Sewerage

Interactions with the KW&SB on Sewerage-Related Issues

Satisfaction with Sewerage System

Public Toilets 41

Availability and Usage of Public Toilets

Service Delivery Issues

Satisfaction with Public Toilets

General Perceptions and Opinions 43

Causal Factors for Complete Satisfaction 45

Explaining Complete Satisfaction with Water Suppliedthrough the Mains

Explaining Complete Satisfaction with Sewerage Connections

Explaining Complete Satisfaction with Public Toilets

Institutionalizing Citizen Report Cards in Karachi 49

Using CRC as an Internal Change Management Tool: The Premise

Using CRC for Internal Reforms: The Strategy

External Dissemination of CRC Findings

Mobilizing Demand for Reform 51

Communication and Advocacy Strategy in Support of CRC onWater and Sanitation Services in Karachi

Program Objectives

Phase I: Program Activities

Phase II: Program Activities

Phase III: Dissemination—Institutionalizing Reform and Mobilizing Citizens

Lessons Learnt: Challenges and Constraints

Appendixes 61

Appendix A: Mapping the Context for Citizen Report Card in Karachi

Appendix B: Demographic Profile of Respondents

Appendix C: Key Stages in a Citizen Report Card Study


Karachi is a city of over 18 million people, and the Karachi Water and Sewerage Board (KW&SB) is the only prime water utilityresponsible for providing water supply and sewerage services. Over a period of time, for a variety of reasons, the KW&SB’sperformance graph had been showing a steady decline in terms of both the level and quality of services. One of the maincontributing reasons for growing customer dissatisfaction was the lack of the institutional adjustments necessary to meet thegrowing challenges faced by rapid and uncontrolled population growth and urbanization. However, while the need for institutionalreforms can be felt in any kind of organization, public or private, reforming public sector institutions is a much more complicatedtask. Overcoming a public sector institution’s inertia to bring about systemic and fundamental reforms by redefining policies,operating practices, and customer relations requires careful navigation of a multisectoral landscape having sensitive political, social,and financial implications. The management of the KW&SB, under the dynamic leadership of the former City Nazim and ChairmanKW&SB, Mr. Mustafa Kamal, took up the challenge of institutional reforms. Through a series of interactive engagements thatincluded site visits, consultations, and dialog with relevant stakeholders (provincial and local governments, the utility agency, andcivil society), rapid assessment work, the Water and Sanitation Program (WSP) assisted the KW&SB in conceptualizing a processfor institutional reform. It was realized quickly that steps would have to be taken on an urgent basis to extend the outreach of theutility among its consumers, involve them meaningfully in the decision making process, and strengthen the social accountability ofthe utility. This, it was felt, was critical to giving sustainability to the process of institutional reforms.

In consultations with WSP, it was decided to select the Citizen Report Card (CRC) as the tool to collect, document, and analyzeuser feedback. This social accountability tool was selected as its scope was not only limited to a survey exercise but offered thespace for developing recommendations on sector policies, strategies, and programs to address institutional constraints andimprove service delivery. We are pleased that through this exercise, pioneering of CRC in Pakistan for any public sector utility wasinitiated and has now been successfully conducted in nine out of 18 towns in Karachi city. The process was kept fully transparentand participatory through measures taken to disseminate information and raise public awareness under the CommunicationStrategy specially designed for the CRC process. The process was also firmly anchored in civil society participation through theformation of an Advisory Committee that monitored progress and provided recommendations. It is also a matter of great pride andsatisfaction for us that we have now successfully institutionalized the process in the KW&SB by forming a special Cell, to bemanaged by a dedicated team of KW&SB officials. We can confidently recommend other utilities in Pakistan to utilize the tool ofCRC for performance improvement and strengthened social accountability.

We have been greatly inspired and facilitated by the motivational leadership and guidance of our Chairman, Mr. Mustafa Kamal. Itwould be appropriate at this stage to also acknowledge the efforts of four former Managing Directors of the KW&SB who kept themomentum of institutional reforms going, overcoming all challenges: Brig. (Retd.) Iftikhar Haider, Mr. Ghulam Arif, Mr. SulemanChandio, and Mr. Fazl-ur-Rehman. In the end, the KW&SB will remain greatly indebted to the commitment and professionalism ofthe team of WSP, Pakistan, under the wise leadership of Country Team Leader, Mr. Farhan Sami, and Ms. Maheen Zehra for theircontinued technical assistance, counsel and guidance and, above all, for keeping faith with the KW&SB in meeting the challengeof institutional reforms. We are hopeful and confident that this process of reform would continue and sustain and lead the KW&SBtowards becoming a technically and financially viable, socially accountable water utility, one which is capable of competing with thebest performing water utilities of the world.

Mr. Qutubuddin SheikhManaging Director, Karachi Water and Sewerage Board

Foreword

5

CDGK City District Government Karachi

CRC Citizen Report Card

CSO Civil society organization

FGD Focus group discussion

GoS Government of Sindh

IRC Interactive Resource Center

IUCN The World Conservation Union

KMC Karachi Metropolitan Corporation

KW&SB Karachi Water and Sewerage Board

PAC Public Affairs Center

SEC Socioeconomic Classification

SITE Sindh Industrial and Trading Estate

SLGO Sindh Local Government Ordinance

WSP Water and Sanitation Program

Acronyms and Abbreviations

6


Any reform of the water sector would need to consider ground realities. In Karachi, as in some other cities around the world,water is politically charged and sometimes contentious. To attempt any reform in the water sector for the city, the strategicimportance of the ‘creation of demand for reform’ was realized. The Water and Sanitation Program (WSP) identified CitizenReport Card (CRC), a simple yet powerful tool, as the way forward. The Karachi Water and Sewerage Board (KW&SB) not onlyagreed with using this tool to carry out an assessment but also fully owned the process. The utility’s staff and managementwanted to reform the KW&SB and make it a dynamic organization with the help of its clients—the utility saw this as anopportunity for improving its public image as well as an empirical way to influence the politics of the sector.

The CRC for the water sector in Karachi was launched with the technical support of WSP and the institutional backing andownership of the KW&SB to solicit user feedback on the utility’s services. Nearly 4,500 households in nine towns of Karachi citywere surveyed. A Communication and Advocacy Strategy was developed as an integral part of administering the CRC andmaximize the dissemination of information generated through this survey amongst the primary stakeholders—Karachi’s citizens.For ensuring ownership of the process by the key stakeholders, an Advisory Committee, comprising KW&SB officials andrepresentatives of credible civil society groups, was notified by the KW&SB to provide inputs and oversight to the whole process.The CRC process received a wide level of support from both the utility as well as consumer-based organizations andnongovernmental organizations. The general consensus was that it had the potential of introducing structured andinstitutionalized mechanisms of social accountability within urban utilities in Karachi and in other cities of the country.

As the Managing Director, KW&SB, stated, Karachi CRC is a joint initiative of the KW&SB, civil society of Karachi represented byKarachi Water Partnership, Shehri-Citizens for Better Environment, Consumer Right Association of Pakistan, Panos South Asia,and WSP. Within the city government and the KW&SB, key support was provided by Mr. Mustafa Kamal, City Nazim, Karachi;all managing directors of the KW&SB, starting from Brigadier Iftikhar Haider to Mr. Ghulam Arif, Mr. Suleman Chandio,Mr. Fazl-ur-Rehman, and Mr. Qutubuddin Sheikh. In addition, Mr. Mashkoor Husain, Mr. Ayub Sheikh, Mr. Ejaz Kazmi, andMr. Mahmood Kadir also provided technical inputs and critical institutional support.

From civil society groups, we would like to acknowledge Mr. Khateeb Shehri, Citizens for Better Environment, Ms. Simi Kamal,Raasta Development Foundation, Mr. Sohail Malik, IUCN (the World Conservation Union), and Mr. Kaukab Iqbal, ConsumerAssociation of Pakistan.

Data presented in this report were collected through a technical survey carried out by The Nielsen Company, Pakistan, under theguidance of Ms. Tehseena Rafi. The overall technical supervision of data collection and analysis was carried out by Dr. GopaKumar Thampi of the Public Affairs Foundation. Mr. Farhan Anwar coordinated the process in Karachi.

The encouragement and support given by WSP’s Ms. Catherine Revels and Mr. Chris Heymans is also acknowledged. Theconstant support provided by Mr. Farhan Sami, Country Team Leader, Pakistan, WSP, during this complex project is greatlyappreciated. Ms. Vandana Mehra, Regional Communications Specialist, WSP, provided critical support towards the planning anddelivery of overall communication processes that supported the CRC advocacy. We also acknowledge Ms. Sahar Ali of PanosSouth Asia, who led a successful communication campaign for the process. Without Mr. Syed Farrukh Ansar’s overall logisticalcoordination and support, it would not have been possible to carry out the arrangements required to implement a tool such as aCitizen Report Card.

Ms. Syeda Maheen Zehra

Acknowledgments

7


This report discusses the key findingsand recommendations emerging froma pilot Citizen Report Card (CRC) onwater, sanitation, and sewerageservices in Karachi. This initiativecomes, on one hand, in the wake ofdeteriorating services, weakenedcommunity interfaces andaccountability structures, poor revenuegeneration and dysfunctionalgovernance structures and, on theother, an emergent consensus to bringin far-reaching institutional reforms thatshould move beyond financial andtechnical imperatives.

The CRC, pioneered by the PublicAffairs Center (PAC), Bengaluru, is asimple but powerful tool to providepublic agencies with systematicfeedback from users of publicservices. CRC gains such feedbackthrough sample surveys on aspectsof service quality that users know best,and enable public agencies to identifystrengths and weaknesses intheir work.

A CRC on public services is not justone more opinion poll; it reflects theactual experiences of people with awide range of public services.The survey on which a report card isbased covers only those individualswho have had experiences in the useof specific services, and interactionswith the relevant public agencies.Users possess fairly accurateinformation, for example, on whether apublic agency actually solved theirproblems or whether they had to paybribes to officials.

Key Stages in a CitizenReport Card Study

1. Assess the applicability of CRCs.Conditions which affect the outcomesof CRCs include the relevance of thepolitical context, the extent ofdecentralization, the extent to whichcitizens can voice opinions freely, localcompetency to carry out surveys,and advocacy.

2. Determine the scope and plan theprocedures. The next step is toidentify key sectors or services to beincluded in the survey, map serviceprovision structures, and identify acredible agency to conduct the survey.

3. Design the questionnaire. Focusgroup discussions involving bothservice providers and users arenecessary to provide input for thedesign of the questionnaire. Providersof services may indicate not only whatthey have been mandated to provide,but also areas where feedback fromclients can improve their services.Users may give their initial impressionsof the service, so that areas that needattention can be determined.

4. Sampling. When carried outaccurately, sampling gathers feedbackfrom a sample group that isrepresentative of the larger population.It is, therefore, important to determinean appropriate type of sampling design.

5. Execute the survey. First, selectand train a cadre of survey personnel.Second, after a certain proportion ofinterviews are complete, performrandom spot monitoring of question

sessions to ensure that therecording of household informationis accurate. Third, upon completionof each interview, go over theinformation collected to identifyany inconsistencies.

6. Analyze the data. Typically,respondents give information onaspects of government services on anumeric scale (say, 1 to 10). Theseratings are then aggregated andaveraged, and percentage measuresare produced.

7. Disseminate the results. Thereare three important points to considerwhen disseminating CRC findings:

� The findings should beconstructively critical and should notaim to embarrass or laud a serviceprovider’s performance.

� The media is the biggest ally fordissemination. Prepare press kitswith small printable stories, media-friendly press releases, andtranslations of the main report intolocal languages.

� Following the publication of the CRCsurvey findings, service providersand users should meet and discussthe key issues. This not only allowsfor a constructive dialog, but alsoputs pressure on service providersto improve their performance for thenext round.

8. Advocacy and serviceimprovements. The findings of thepilot CRC survey can then be used inan advocacy program which seeks toincrease public pressure, build

Executive Summary

9

coalitions and partnerships, andinfluence key players.

The CRC methodology is primarilyrooted in quantitative research but isgreatly enhanced by qualitative findingsobtained through group discussionsand observations. Hence, in the light ofthe needs and objectives of this study,a two-pronged research methodologywas undertaken. In the first phase aseries of focus group discussions wereundertaken separately for men andwomen groups across differentsocioeconomic classes. This initialphase helped to:

� Gain insights in terms ofassociations, perceptions, and

attitudes of the respondentstowards services.

� Identify local issues pertaining towater and sanitation in Karachi.

� Refine the survey questionnaire forthe second phase of research—thequantitative phase.

Following this phase, a quantitative surveywas conducted in nine towns of Karachicovering the North, South, Central, NorthEast, and South West areas of the city,representing low-, middle-, and high-income groups.

The sample of 4,500 householdinterviews was spread across the ninetowns (Table 1).

Data analysis and presentation havebeen carried out across the followingeight themes:

� Availability, access, and useof services.

� Reliability of services.

� Perceptions on water quality.

� Costs incurred by customers.

� Interactions with Karachi Water andSewerage Board (KW&SB).

� Transparency in service provision.1

� Satisfaction with services.

� Priority areas for improvement.

Key Findings

The detailed data analysis was carriedout for water and sewerage servicesprovided by the KW&SB. While keyfindings are provided in the subsequentsections of this report, two overarchingfindings of this report card study arehighlighted here:

a) The KW&SB’s services were found tobe satisfactory and above average by6.5 percent of the users.

b) Both users and utility staff wantimprovement in systems and services.

This pilot CRC exercise in Karachi hasprovided an insightful feedback oncitizens’ experiences and priorities forservice improvements in water andsewerage. By assembling a set of

10

Towns Location Sample size

Gadap North Karachi 500

Bin Qasim South West 500

Gulshan Central 500

Orangi North West 500

Kemari South West 500

Saddar South 500

Gulberg Central 500

North Nazimabad North East 500

SITEa North East 500

a. SITE stands for Sindh Industrial and Trading Estate.Source: Data compiled during a pilot Citizen Report Card on water, sanitation,and sewerage services in Karachi.

Table 1: Spread of survey sample

1 Users of main connections were probed on how ‘transparent’their service provision was in terms of billing practices, andinstances of corruption.


11

credible and objective benchmarks, theCRC has provided a forum for differentstakeholders to converge aroundissues and explore solutions andreforms. The organizational buy-in fromKW&SB and the strong linkages built

between the media and civil societynetworks such as the Karachi WaterPartnership have created manyenablers for ensuring a healthyblend of ‘voice’ (demand sideadvocacy and pressures) and

‘responsiveness’ (supply sidewillingness to reform). To ensure themomentum created through thispioneering effort, CRCs need to bemore comprehensive in coverage (all18 towns) and carried out periodically.


Contextual Framework

In Pakistan, the devolution of theservice delivery function of municipalservices to local government, throughthe enactment of the Local GovernmentOrdinance 2001, had opened up newopportunities for reform in theinstitutions of water supply andsanitation service delivery. The creationof three tiers of local government(district, tehsil and union councils)offered the potential for a clearerallocation of responsibilities and thepotential to engender greater roleseparation in service delivery. Initially,the four provincial capitals (includingKarachi city) were designated as‘city districts’, with towns designatedas the equivalent of tehsils in theother districts. The devolutionprocess had established a supportivecontext for reforming the politicaland operational accountabilityprocesses that are at the heart ofinstitutional challenge.

Karachi, in particular, posed atremendous challenge. For many yearsnow, the Karachi Water and SewerageBoard (KW&SB), the major utilityagency, has remained simply as anexecuting agency for the city, withoutany significant powers to make its owninvestment and operational decisions.With KW&SB acting as the extendedarm of the state, there had been virtuallyno independent and robust monitoringof its performance and no mechanismby which the organization could be heldaccountable. As a result, the utility wasfaced with a deep-rooted crisis ofgovernance, of which some key areasof concern included:

� The KW&SB was faced with legalambiguities, a dysfunctionalgovernance structure, lack oftechnical support, tariff imbalances,and financial crisis. Thispredicament was compounded bylack of accountability, transparency,and operational autonomy. Lack ofproper planning and investmentstrategy contributed to inadequateutility performance. The KW&SB’sinvestments mostly augmentedproduction and transmission,sometimes neglecting efficiencyimprovements, rehabilitation, andmaintenance. Networks andfacilities therefore had deteriorated,and inefficiencies and losses madeoperations wasteful. In addition,financial capacity constraintsprevented investment planningbased on an integrated view of

Introduction

13

capital expenditures, operationand maintenance, and leastcost principles.

� The absence of a regulatoryframework made it difficult to holdthe KW&SB accountable for itsperformance—the utility wasmanaged in terms of the KW&SBAct of 1996 (Government ofSindh [GoS] control). It was alsofunctioning under the conditionsof the Sindh Local GovernmentOrdinance (SLGO) of 2001, CityDistrict Government Karachicontrol, which had markedimplications for its place withinthe broader devolution processand its relative relationships withthe provincial, city, and townlevel governments in its areaof jurisdiction.

Box 1: Karachi Water and Sewerage Board: A profile

14

The supply and distribution of water to Karachi has been undertaken by a variety of agencies in the past. The firstinstance of law regarding water supply functions in the post-independence period was the Karachi Joint Water BoardOrdinance 1949 that attempted to institutionalize the supply from Indus river, the source. Subsequently, the KarachiJoint Water Board, constituted in 1953, was the first entity to be assigned the task of executing the first majorexpansion of Karachi’s water supply system from the Indus river. Project execution was later entrusted to the KarachiDevelopment Authority (KDA) upon its establishment in 1957. Distribution and retailing of treated water remained theresponsibility of the erstwhile Karachi Metropolitan Corporation (KMC), some 22 other independent agencies, and bulkusers. In 1981, the Karachi Water Management Board (KWMB) was created and assigned responsibility for waterdistribution throughout the metropolitan area and was given enhanced powers of cost recovery. Subsequently, theGovernment of Sindh (GoS) enacted the Sindh Local Government (Amendment) Ordinance of January 1983, whichcreated the Karachi Water and Sewerage Board (KW&SB) within the KMC. The KW&SB was assigned to handle thewater supply and sanitation services in Karachi.

In 1996, the Karachi Water and Sewerage Board Act was enforced. Under this Act, the KW&SB was separated fromthe KMC and the annual budget was to be approved by the GoS. The legal framework, specification of functions aswell as relevant financial guidelines and delegation of powers were provided in the Karachi Water and Sewerage BoardAct 1996. In the most recent move, the SLGO 2001 directed the creation of a unified City District Government inKarachi. Civic agencies, including the KW&SB, were operationally merged into this new setup. It is to be noted thatfrom 1953 to 1996, the water sector was controlled by the various branches of the city government.

Two noteworthy changes took place at the policy and administrative levels in 1995 and 1996 that significantly alteredthe face of the official service providing agency. First, in 1995, direct military interference took place when a servingbrigadier was appointed as the managing director of the KW&SB. From 1995–2007, five KW&SB managing directors—all serving or retired officers with a rank of brigadier—came directly from the army. Only very recently, in March 2007,was a civilian officer nominated to head the KW&SB. Second, on April 15, 1996, the Sindh Assembly passed the Waterand Sewerage Board Bill 1996, that was assented to by the Governor of Sindh province on April 23, 1996, andsubsequently published as an ‘Act’ of the Sindh Legislature. The decision-making mandate was entirely separatedfrom the municipality after the approval and enforcement of the KW&SB Act 1996. The ‘Board’ became autonomousand was controlled directly by the provincial government. The chairman and vice chairman of the Board were directlyappointed by the GoS, which established its essential control, and the policy and decision-making roles were entirelyconfined to the provincial government. The managing director, however, continued to enjoy the status of chief executiveofficer of the Board, along with the usual administrative authority in running the organization.

This status persists even though the subsequently notified SLGO of 2001 devolves the roles and functions of theKW&SB, as assigned under the KW&SB Act 1996, to the City District Government Karachi and towns. The board ofdirectors of the KW&SB, as constituted in the KW&SB Act, remains in place, and was reconstituted with the city nazimas the chairman. The KW&SB Act 1996 remains in force until further notice but the GoS “may take necessary steps torepeal or amend the KW&SB Act 1996 to ensure smooth implementation of the SLGO 2001”.

(Government of Sindh Notification No. SOVIII/KW&SB/2(41)/2002.)


� The operational environmentwas fraught with systemicweaknesses—illegally organizedrouting of water to retailers wasperceived as pervasive. A largenumber of consumers could accesswater only by paying illicit fees to theKW&SB frontline staff working withorganized networks benefiting fromillegal connections.

� The KW&SB had almost noinfluence over tariffs and there wasno independent regulation of tariffseither. In the absence of an effectivetariff structure and a process oftariff setting that consideredeconomically rational operationalfactors, there was no incentive for

greater efficiency or for customersto pay.

� The KW&SB’s relationship withconsumers and larger civil societywas almost nonexistent. Inappropriateservices, lack of suitable response toconsumer priorities and complaints,and ineffective communication hadalienated consumers and the public ingeneral, thus making it difficult tomobilize public support for actionagainst illegal connections,encroachment of pipelines, and othermalpractices which underminedoperations. The KW&SB needed toregain control of its networks, withcustomers valuing, and paying for,its services.

Engagement for Reforms:Enabling the Utility to EnsureSocial Accountability

Through a series of interactiveengagements that included site visits,consultations, and dialog with relevantstakeholders (provincial and localgovernments, the utility agency, andcivil society), and rapid assessmentwork, in 2005–06 the Water andSanitation Program (WSP) assisted theKW&SB in conceptualizing a processfor institutional reform in the water andsanitation sector in Karachi. One of thekey conclusions was that the reform ofthe utility was dependent on the overallreform of the political and administrativesector in which it operates. While theKW&SB—as the single-largest publicservice agency in the water andsanitation sector in Karachi—demandsspecific attention in any reform process,it was considered that the technical,financial, and organizational reform ofthe utility has to occur within a widerframework of governance reform. Totackle such serious and deep-rootedinstitutional weaknesses, mobilizationand support for change was desirablenot only within the institutions itselfbut amongst the widest possible rangeof stakeholders. The KW&SB’srecovery needed to be locatedwithin wider sector reform and acommunitywide effort.

It was quickly realized that strongelements of community participationand consumer voice were central to theviability and sustainability of the reformprocess. In addition, given thepoliticized nature of water, it isimportant to develop ways for receiving

15

Box 2: Lack of consumer voice in the KW&SB

the voice of citizens without the ‘filter’of those with vested interests. Therewas, thus, a requirement for developingneutral, credible, and apoliticalinformation on consumer choices,preferences, and concerns to give thereform agenda much-neededobjectivity and focus, and move thefocus of consumer advocacy fromanecdote to an informed debate.

Though there is an interesting array ofparticipatory tools and approachessuch as participatory expendituretracking, community score cards,

public hearing and social audits, thesehave been mostly tested in the broaderarena of governance. There are fewertools that are specifically relevant to theutility sector and to the water sector inparticular. One promising tool is theCitizen Report Card (CRC). Anchoringon the concept of user feedback, CRCprovides a simple and widely replicabletool for improving transparency andpublic accountability, with usefuldiagnostic pointers to utility managersfor planning service improvements.The ‘report card’ can stimulatecollective citizen action and provide

organizational leaders with anopportunity to design reforms forstrategic reorientation. Experienceswith report cards, both national andinternational, have amply demonstratedtheir potential for demanding morepublic accountability and providing acredible database to facilitate proactivecivil society responses.

The Citizen Report Card: A ViableTool for Social Accountability

The CRC is a simple and credible toolto provide systematic feedback topublic agencies about variousquantitative and qualitative aspects oftheir performance.

CRC elicits information about users’awareness of, access to, use of, andsatisfaction with, public services. In thecontext of poverty reduction programs,it often complements the expertanalyses and conventional povertymonitoring indices with a ‘bottom-up’assessment of pro-poor services. CRCidentifies the key constraints thatcitizens, especially the poor and theunderserved populations, face inaccessing public services, theirappraisals of the quality and adequacyof public services, and the quality ofinteractions they have with theproviders of the services. The tooloffers several recommendations onsector policies, strategies andprograms to address these constraints,and improve service delivery.

CRC entails a random sample survey ofthe users of different public services(utilities), and the aggregation of theusers’ experiences as a basis for rating

Civil society groups, historically, have had little say in matters related withpolicy making, planning, and implementation of schemes and projects in thewater sector in Karachi. The sector is not supported by any kind of cohesiveregulatory framework. Issues that are crucial and important to the demandside, including tariffs and performance standards, are not adequatelyaddressed; there is no mechanism in place for registering and addressingpublic concerns either on such matters. At times, such as now, when localbodies have been administered by elected representatives, an indirectavenue for gauging public concerns has existed in the form of local councils.However, documented evidence in the form of ‘Council Resolutions’suggests that little priority has been given to this sector by locallyelected bodies.

To ensure community participation in the provision of water and sewerageand for close liaison with the civil society, the Karachi Water and SewerageBoard (KW&SB) has recently established a Civil Society Liaison Cell. The Cellprovides two-way communication between the utility and civil society.However, the Cell exists pretty much on paper and has rendered nosignificant contribution in facilitating any meaningful interactions between civilsociety or consumer groups and the service provider. Similarly, the KW&SBestablished a centralized Consumer Services Center at the head office of theKW&SB (100 such centers are planned for the whole city). This service,however, is only a complaint registry system and not an avenue forabsorbing any concrete or substantive consumer input in matters of policy,planning, and implementation.

16


the services. The tool also helps toconvert individual problems facingthe various programs into commonsectoral issues. It facilitates not onlyprioritization of reforms and correctiveactions by drawing attention tothe worst problems highlighted,but also the cross fertilization ofideas and approaches by identifyinggood practices.

A CRC thus provides a benchmarkon quality of public services asexperienced by citizens. Hence, itgoes beyond the specific problemsthat individual citizens may face. Itplaces each issue in the perspectiveof other elements of service designand delivery, and also drawscomparisons with other services, sothat a strategic set of actions canbe initiated.

CRC studies are not merely a meansof collecting feedback on existingsituations from citizens. They are alsoa means for testing out differentoptions that citizens wish to exercise,individually or collectively, to tacklecurrent problems. For example,whether citizens were willing to paymore or be part of citizens’ bodiesmade responsible for managing publicwater sources. CRC, thus, isalso a means for exploring citizens’alternatives for improvements inpublic services.

An important aspect of the CRC isthe credibility it has earned. Theconclusions in a report card are notopinions of a few persons who think ina particular manner, nor thecomplaints of a few aggrieved

citizens. The methodology involvessystematic sampling across allsubsections or segments of citizens—including those who are satisfied aswell as the aggrieved—and presents apicture that includes all opinions. Thisis possible because the methodologymakes use of advanced techniques ofsocial science research, for selectingsamples, designing questionnaires,conducting interviews, andinterpreting results. As a result, thereport cards provide reliable andcomprehensive representation ofcitizens’ feedback.

Why Prepare aCitizen Report Card?

The Citizen Report Card is not a fault-finding exercise. It is, rather, anopportunity to reflect and diagnoseservice quality issues and provide aplatform for various stakeholders toconverge and explore solutions. Inmore practical terms, CRC gives thefollowing strategic inputs:

a. Provides benchmarks on access,adequacy, and quality of publicservices as experienced by citizens:CRC goes beyond the specific

17

problems that individual citizens faceand places each issue in the perspectiveof other elements of service design anddelivery, as well as draws comparisonswith other services or across differentdomains of the same service, so that astrategic set of actions can be initiated.

b. Encapsulates citizen satisfactionto prioritize corrective actions: CRCcaptures users’ feedback in clear,simple, and unambiguous terms byindicating their level of satisfaction ordissatisfaction. When this measure ofcitizen satisfaction or dissatisfactionis viewed from a comparativeperspective, it gives very valuableinformation that helps prioritizecorrective actions.

c. Identifies indicators of problemareas in the delivery of publicservices: CRC enquires into specificaspects of interaction between theservice agency and the citizen, andseeks to identify issues experienced bycitizens in interfacing with the services.In more simple terms, it suggests thatdissatisfaction has causes that may berelated to the quality of services enjoyedby citizens (such as reliability of watersupply); difficulties encountered whiledealing with the agency to solve servicerelated issues such as excess billing orcomplaints of water supply breakdown.

d. Suggests reliable estimateson hidden costs and forcedinvestments: CRC provides reliable

estimates not only on extra-legal costsincurred by users but also on amountsspent on forced investments such asbuying water purifiers or installingstorage tanks to cope with unreliableand poor quality services.

e. Indicates a mechanism to explorecitizens’ alternatives for improvingpublic services: CRC goes beyondcollecting feedback on existingsituations from citizens. Instead, it alsoacts as a means of testing out differentoptions that citizens wish to exercise,individually or collectively, for tacklingvarious problems. For example, CRCscan provide information on whethercitizens are willing to pay more forbetter quality of services or be part ofcitizens’ bodies made responsiblefor managing garbage clearance inthe locality.

Citizen Report Card:Process and Methodology

A CRC on public services is not justone more opinion poll. A report cardreflects the actual experiences ofpeople with a wide range of publicservices. The survey on which a reportcard is based covers only thoseindividuals who have had experiences inthe use of specific services, and haveinteracted with the relevant publicagencies. Users possess fairly accurateinformation, for example, on whether apublic agency actually solved theirproblems or whether they had to paybribes to officials. The CRC methodologyis primarily rooted in quantitative researchbut is greatly enhanced by qualitativefindings obtained through groupdiscussions and observations.

What this exercise is about…

� Capturing credible, neutral, and objective feedback on citizens’experiences while accessing and using water, sanitation, andsewerage services.

� Enabling a comparison of performances among different towns andencourage sharing of best practices.

� Analyzing, organizing, and reporting findings, conclusions, and pointers.

� Facilitating opportunities for reforms and improvements.

What this exercise is not about…

� Finding fault or pointing fingers.

� Focusing only on the gaps in service delivery.

� Claiming that user feedback captures all dimensions of service delivery.

� Providing solutions (that is, feedback should be viewed as a‘thermometer reading’ and not as an ‘antibiotic’).

Box 3: Rationale for Citizen Report Cards

18


Process of Preparing theCitizen Report Card in Karachi

The CRC process in Karachicommenced with a series ofdiscussions and workshops to buildawareness among key stakeholderson the potential of the tool.Consultations were held with keystakeholders from city-based civilsociety organizations (CSOs),research and survey firms, media-support organizations, and theKW&SB. These key informantinterviews facilitated anunderstanding of the state of waterand sanitation services in Karachi,shed light on thematic work beingdone by city-based CSOs, theircapacity, vibrancy, and workingrelationships. It also provided anunderstanding of likely local anchorsand available resources for CRCimplementation. A collectiveassessment exercise was alsoconducted to ascertain the contextualfit of CRC to the local conditions inKarachi. Political receptivity, opennessof service providers to receivefeedback from users, vibrancy of localCSOs and media, and freedom tocollect information in an unbiasedmanner were some of the keyindicators that were assessed. (SeeAppendix A for a detailed feedbackon the assessment.)

Following this, a local survey firm—The Nielsen Company, Pakistan—was selected after a competitivebidding process. A multistakeholderCRC Advisory Committee wasalso set up to guide and reviewthe process.

Methodology Followed

The report card methodology isprimarily rooted in quantitativeresearch but is greatly enhanced byqualitative findings obtained throughgroup discussions and observations.Hence, keeping in mind the needsand objectives of this study, WSPplanned a two-pronged researchmethodology—qualitative researchwas done in Phase 1, and aquantitative household survey wasconducted in Phase 2.

Phase 1 was meant to:

� Gain insights in terms ofassociations, perceptions, andattitudes of the respondentstowards services.

� Identify local issues pertaining towater and sanitation in Karachi.

� Refine the survey questionnaire forthe second phase of research—the quantitative phase.

The qualitative phase was undertakenvia focus group discussions (FGDs).This methodology allowed theparticipants to build on each other’sviews and express their thoughtsand opinions in a friendly andnonthreatening manner.

Group Formation and Recruitment

Each group consisted of eight to 10respondents who were recruitedusing a Recruitment Questionnaireprepared by The Nielsen Company.They were selected from the sameareas in which the survey was to beconducted. The Recruitment

Questionnaire contained thefollowing predetermined criteria:

� Ages: 25–50 years

� Socioeconomic Class (SEC):A, BC, and DE

� Education: SEC A

SEC B and C

SEC D and E

� Men: The men recruited werethose who were the maindecision makers in householdswhen it came to basic amenitiessuch as water, sewerage,and electricity.

� Women: The women recruitedwere those who had moresay in the purchase ofhousehold goods and whowere more aware of householdissues pertaining to waterand sewerage.

In Phase 2, a quantitativehousehold survey wasconducted. The findings from theFGDs were used to refine andmould the draft questionnaireprovided by WSP. The survey wasconducted in nine Karachi townscovering North, South, Central;North was further fine-tunedinternally by the research team ofThe Nielsen Company, through itsfield and data processing serviceunits, contextualized thisquestionnaire in line with CRCsurvey objectives for Pakistan.Particular attention was paid to

19

length, content, and relevance. Thequestionnaire was reviewed by WSPbefore being translated into Urdu.

Selection of Respondents

The relevant respondents for thissurvey were filtered through a screeningquestionnaire which was developedby The Nielsen Company researchteam, and appended to the mainquestionnaire. Once the relevantrespondent was identified through thescreener, the interview was conductedusing the main questionnaire.

Socioeconomic status ofrespondents: The East and South

West areas of the city represent thelow-, middle-, and high-income groups.The sample of 4,500 householdinterviews was split as shown in Table 2.

The sample of 500 interviews (for eachtown) was statistically significant toprovide representative information forthe whole town.

Criteria for Town Selection

Each town had been chosen accordingto the following criteria:

� Land use status of the residents.

� Socioeconomic profile ofthe residents.

� General trends in waterresource use or availability(according to available data orsecondary research).

These criteria cover most of therepresentative features of the city ofKarachi. Most importantly, they fallunder the direct jurisdiction of theKW&SB, whose service provision ofwater and sewerage is the focal pointof this survey.

The sample of 500 was further splitequally over the number of unioncouncils in each town. For instance,the town of Bin Qasim has seven unioncouncils. In each union council,therefore, over 71 or 72 interviewswere conducted.

Interview Process

Each area in a union council wasallocated a certain number of ‘startingpoints’ depending on the sample for aparticular union council. The startingpoint in an area was any landmarksuch as a mosque or a shoppingplaza. A minimum of 10 interviewswere conducted around each startingpoint. The sample for a certain unioncouncil was thus divided by 10 toarrive at the required number ofstarting points in each area. Forinstance, the union council CattleColony of Bin Qasim town wasallocated 71 interviews. Therefore ineach area of the union council of CattleColony seven (71/10) starting pointswere allocated.

To avoid the problem of overlappingstarting points, the field supervisorsmade divisions of the target area

Towns Location Sample size

Gadap North Karachi 500

Bin Qasim South West Karachi 500

Gulshan Central Karachi 500

Orangi North West Karachi 500

Kemari South West Karachi 500

Saddar South Karachi 500

Gulberg Central Karachi 500

North Nazimabad North East 500

SITEa North East 500

Total sample size 4,500


Table 2: Sample of household interviews

20


(depending on the number of startingpoints) beforehand. If the number ofstarting points were more than thenumber of areas inside a union council,some areas were randomly dropped.The field team ensured that a maximumgeographical coverage of an area wasmade certain in such instances.

Once the surveyor was inside thesample area, he or she went to thechosen starting point and selected thefirst household using the ballotingtechnique to ensure randomness in the

2 ‘Three’ was chosen arbitrarily.

selection of the first household. Askipping of three2 households was doneafter each successful interview to avoidthe neighborhood bias. Theenumerators were instructed to givepreference to joint interviews with bothmen and women heads of households.If only one of them was available,interviews were conducted with theavailable and willing respondent. As inPhase 1, the men and womeninterviewed were those who were themain decision makers in the householdregarding matters and expenditurepertaining to household waterand sewerage.

Substitution or Call Back

No substitution or call back was tobe made in this survey. If both therespondents were either unwilling orunavailable, then the enumeratorsproceeded to the house on theright-hand side and asked permissionfor an interview from the neighboringhousehold. The enumerator wasrequired to keep moving to the nexthouse on the right-hand side untilhe or she conducted an interviewsuccessfully. The demographic profileof the respondents is given inAppendix B.

21


Availability, Access, and Usage ofWater Sources

What Sources of Water do Peoplehave Access To and Use in theNine Towns in Karachi?The sources of water most widelyavailable and used were obtainedbased on usage, such as drinking,washing, and bathing. Besidesidentifying some of these indicators,the qualitative phase of the studyalso helped to determine theassociated details.

The sources were divided intothree categories:

1. Sources located within thehousehold: These primarily includesources such as an individual orcommunity connection from the mainline, both legal and illegal. Othersources which fall within this categoryinclude individual or shared boreholesdug inside the household or thecommunity compound.

2. Sources located outside thehousehold: This category includeswater sources such as ponds, rivers,canals, and common wells situatedoutside the household or the communitypremises. Borewells operated by handor motor also fall within this grouping.

3. Sources which required water tobe purchased or delivered: Thiscategory includes water sold by tankers,

donkey or horse carts, and privateindividuals, as well as bottled orcanned water.

As Figure 1 reveals, connections from themains water supply sources account forthe largest available source forhouseholds in Karachi; this is followed byprivate vendors like water tankers. Thisdrives home the fact that the KarachiWater and Sewerage Board (KW&SB) is,by far, the most prominent provider ofwater to households in Karachi. However,what is disconcerting is that more thanone-third (37 percent) of all mains usersare reportedly using illegal means toaccess water. Illegal connection from themains line was found to be a frequentlyoccurring trend in Gadap (45 percent),Saddar (49 percent), and Sindh Industrialand Trading Estate (or SITE, with 51percent). Half of Saddar’s populationrelies on illegal connections from themains line, while the other half obtains itswater through vendors, boreholes, andlegal connection, from the mains.Orangi reports the maximum number oflegal connections.

Water Services

Source: Data compiled during a pilot Citizen Report Card on water, sanitation, andsewerage services in Karachi.

Figure 1: Overall access to water sources

23

The usage profiles also indicate thatlegal (36 percent) and illegal (34percent) forms of mains connectionsare the most commonly used sourcesof water for domestic use across all thetowns (see Table 4).

However, significant spatial variationshave been observed. A large proportion(14 percent) of Kemari residents usesbottled or canned water for drinking.Many households in Saddar (15percent), Gulshan (21 percent), andNorth Nazimabad (17 percent) useshared connections from the mainslines. This type of connection wasfound to be used mostly in communityliving environments wherebyhouseholds share a common storagetank which is supplied water througha mains line connection. Gadap

Source Gadap Bin Qasim Gulshan Orangi Kemari Saddar Gulberg Nazimabad SITEa

Mains connection (legal)—personal storage 35 46 22 63 25 12 58 55 26

Mains connection—shared storage 0 9 25 1 3 15 11 20 2

Mains connection (illegal)—personal storage 45 29 30 35 37 49 23 30 51

Boreholes, personal storage 1 4 6 3 14 4 23 14 3

Boreholes, shared storage 0 0 5 0 1 15 5 3 10

Vendors—donkey carts or bicycles 5 16 3 1 16 8 0 0 3

Vendors—private tankers 20 18 22 34 16 16 7 16 28

Bottled or canned water 2 6 13 2 30 20 14 16 13

Note: Figures aggregated across columns exceed 100 due to multiple responses.a. SITE stands for Sindh Industrial and Trading Estate.Source: Data compiled during a pilot Citizen Report Card on water, sanitation, and sewerage services in Karachi.

Table 3: Water source profiles across towns (in %)

Table 4: Sources of water for domestic use and drinking

Usage (%)

Source Domestic use Drinking

Borewell with motor or handpump 2 3

Borehole—personal storage 7 3

Bottled or canned water 4 4

Mains connection—personal storage 36 34

Mains connection—shared storage 9 8

Mains connection (illegal)—personal storage 34 34

Vendor—bicycles or donkey carts 4 3

Water delivered by private tankers 11 7

Borehole—shared storage 4 1

Source: Data compiled during a pilot Citizen Report Card on water, sanitation, and sewerageservices in Karachi.

24


(12 percent), Gulshan (12 percent), andOrangi (15 percent) purchase a significantportion of their drinking water fromwater tankers.

Almost similar trends were found in theprofiles for water for domestic use; all thetowns rely heavily on legal and illegalconnections from the mains line fordomestic use. However, at least 10percent of the households in Gadap,Bin Qasim, Gulshan, Orangi, Kemari, andSITE use tankers as their main source ofdomestic water.

How Regular is the Supply of Waterfrom the Mains Connection?Almost 45 percent of respondents aresupplied drinking water seven days aweek from the mains connections duringnormal times. In Bin Qasim, nearly 81percent of households are supplied waterevery day. Yet, there was wide variation inthe frequency of water supply across

Days Gadap Bin Qasim Gulshan Orangi Kemari Saddar Gulberg North Nazimabad SITEa

One 0.5 1.0 0.3 22.1 4.4 0.5 0.3 2.8 5.5

Two 2.9 0.3 27.9 6.1 0.5 2.8 10.8 25.1

Three 5.5 2.4 5.6 29.5 15.6 4.1 16.2 21.6 22.5

Four 5.0 4.6 13.4 7.9 11.2 8.4 12.6 13.1 12.8

Five 8.1 5.3 9.0 5.9 6.8 19.6 11.6 6.7 14.4

Six 23.4 1.9 12.0 2.3 9.8 5.4 6.7 3.0 6.8

Seven 53.4 81.4 59.4 3.6 41.7 61.3 49.4 41.1 12.8

Don’t know 4.0 0.5 0.8 4.4 0.5 1.1 0.3

a. SITE stands for Sindh Industrial and Trading Estate.Source: Data compiled during a pilot Citizen Report Card on water, sanitation, and sewerage services in Karachi.

Table 5: Weekly supply of water from the mains connection (in %)

25

geography. For example, only4 percent of respondents in Orangiand 13 percent in SITE weresupplied water every day. In fact,50 percent of households in Orangiare supplied water for two days orless in a week. During times ofwater scarcity, frequency of waterdistribution falls—53 percent ofhouseholds are supplied water forthree days or less in a week.

Instances of Water Scarcity andCoping Mechanisms

To What Extent did HouseholdsExperience Water Scarcity Duringthe Last One Year?Respondents were asked about theirexperiences during the last year whenthey faced low or lack of water supplylasting for a long duration (five days orlonger). It was clearly explained to therespondents that this was different from

Overall Gadap Bin Qasim Gulshan Orangi Kemari Saddar Gulberg Nazimabad SITEa

(N = 2010) (N = 187) (N = 183) (N = 166) (N = 283) (N = 221) (N = 286) (N = 162) (N = 219) (N = 303)

44.6 37.4 36.6 33.2 56.6 44.2 57.2 32.4 43.8 60.6

a. SITE stands for Sindh Industrial and Trading Estate.

Source: Data compiled during a pilot Citizen Report Card on water, sanitation, and sewerage services in Karachi.

Table 6: Proportion of households experiencing water scarcity across towns

short term stoppages andbreakdowns. As Table 5 shows,seasonal water scarcity is experiencedby a significant numbers of households(45 percent) of the population in thenine towns surveyed.

Wide variations are again observedacross the different towns. Instancesof scarcity are quite intense forhouseholds in SITE (61 percent) andSaddar (57 percent).

In Which Months do HouseholdsExperience Scarcity of Water?As expected, summer months are themost stressful for households whoreported scarcity, the peak being themonth of June.

How do People Cope During Timesof Scarcity?During periods of scarcity, people areforced to resort to expensive sourcesof water. As Table 7 shows, vendors inthe form of tankers (31.3 percent),illegal connections from the mains(16.3 percent), and bottled or cannedwater (15 percent) were the mostwidely availed sources of water duringthe months of water scarcity. Asignificant number of households inGadap (10 percent), Bin Qasim (19percent), Kemari (24 percent), and

Figure 2: Months in which scarcity is experienced


26


Source Overall Gadap Bin Qasim Gulshan Orangi Kemari Saddar Gulberg Nazimabad SITEa

(N = 2010) (N = 187) (N = 183) (N = 166) (N = 283) (N = 221) (N = 286) (N = 162) (N = 219) (N = 303)

Vendors—tankers 31.3 24.6 36.6 50.6 47.0 18.1 19.6 12.3 26.5 35.6

Mains connection (illegal) 16.3 50.3 12.6 3.6 15.9 15.4 16.8 15.4 8.2 11.6—personal storage

Bottled or canned water 15.0 2.7 9.8 13.3 2.1 23.1 22.0 19.1 23.7 17.5

Vendors—bicycles or 8.1 10.2 19.1 3.0 1.8 24.4 11.9 – – 3.6donkey carts

From relatives or 7.5 7.5 3.8 3.6 11.7 3.6 4.9 7.4 4.6 15.2neighbors

Mains connection— 6.7 1.6 3.8 5.4 9.9 2.7 4.2 16.7 15.1 3.0personal storage

Mains connection— 3.2 – 4.4 13.9 – – 7.0 3.7 3.7 –shared storage

Borewell motors or 2.6 1.6 0.5 1.2 3.5 5.4 4.2 3.1 0.5 2.3handpumps

Boreholes dug using 2.6 – 4.9 2.4 – 1.4 0.7 10.5 7.3 0.3a drill or machinery—personal

Standposts or public 1.7 – – 1.8 3.5 0.5 2.1 1.2 5.0 0.7taps managed bymunicipality

Water sold by private 1.2 1.6 0.5 – – 2.3 0.7 – – 4.6individuals fromother residences


Table 7: Sources used during periods of scarcity

27

Saddar (12 percent) also purchasewater from vendors on donkey cartsand bicycles. Moreover, during monthsof scarcity, households supplementtheir water supply from the mainsconnection and boreholes by borrowingfrom neighbors, using a communitytap, and also by buying from otherhouseholds in some instances.

Data were also analyzed on source-wise migration between times ofnormalcy and scarcity for the subsetof respondents who said theyexperienced scarcity. In general, it wasobserved that households that obtain

water from the mains (legally or illegally)tend to obtain water from privatesources during water scarcities. Incomparison, households that primarilyobtain water from private or bottledsources tend to keep using the samesource during water scarcities.

Citizens’ Perceptions on Qualityand Reliability of Services

What do Citizens Think of theTaste, Color, and Smell ofWater They Use?The data show that the vast majority ofcitizens find the taste, color, and smell

of water acceptable, and that the waterwas clear; 14 percent of respondents,however, said that they found the watermuddy. There was not much of adifference between sources on thesecounts. However, a relatively largeproportion of respondents in Kemari(20 percent), Orangi (19 percent), andSITE (19 percent) found the water to bepartly muddy.

How Frequent are Breakdownsand Stoppages?Feedback from households usingthe mains shows very few cases(15 percent) of major stoppages or

Sources during Sources during normal supply (%)scarcity (%) Mains (illegal) Mains (individual) Mains (shared) Water tankers Bottled or canned

Mains (illegal) 37 1 0 0 0

Water tankers 24 33 32 83 2

Bottled or canned 15 8 19 13 96

Donkey carts or bicycles 7 7 8 1 0

Relatives or neighbors 6 10 4 0 0

Boreholes (individual) 2 6 0 0 0

Private vendors 1 1 1 2 0

Boreholes (shared) 1 1 0 0 0

Mains (shared) 0 0 29 0 0

Mains (individual) 0 24 0 0 2

Note: This table displays the source of water that respondents turn to during water scarcity by their source of water under normal conditions. For example,37 percent of respondents who obtain water from illegal connections to the mains obtain water from the same source during scarcities. Respondents may obtainwater from multiple sources during scarcities and under normal conditions.Source: Data compiled during a pilot Citizen Report Card on water, sanitation, and sewerage services in Karachi.

Table 8: Shift in acquisition of drinking water (under normal conditions and duringwater scarcity, by source of water)

28


breakdowns during the last one year.However, a relatively larger proportionfrom SITE (29 percent) and Saddar(20 percent) reported in the affirmativeon this count. The two most popularalternative sources of water duringsuch stoppages from the mains areprivate tankers (38 percent) and watercans (26 percent), both of whichare purchased.

What are the Coping MeasuresAdopted by Citizens to MeetIssues of Adequacy and Qualityof Water?Though the majority of respondentsexpressed satisfaction with the taste,smell, and color of water they use,large numbers of households (45percent) using the mains water report

Characteristics Perception Number (%) Reasons for unacceptability of taste Number (%)

Taste Acceptable 96

Unacceptable 4 Brackish or salty 73.2

Mixed with sewage water 23.9

Sweet 98 It is contaminated 0.7

Hard 2 Don’t know 2.9

Color Clear 84

Partly muddy 13.8

Muddy (brownish) 2.1

Smell Acceptable 94.5

Unacceptable 5.5


Table 9: Perceptions in quality of water (all sources taken together)

29

median value was found to beRs. 7,0003). It was also found thatover 93.8 percent of households withstorage tanks reside in a pucca (thatis, stronger) household structure.

Feedback from Users ofWater Sources outsideResidential Premises

How Accessible and Convenientare Sources Located outsideResidential Premises?As could be expected, mostrespondents reporting use of sourceslocated outside residences belong tothe lower socioeconomic strata. Thedata show that in most cases, thesesources are usually located at adistance of around 10 minutes fromthe residences of the users, coveredmostly by foot in times of bothnormalcy and scarcity. The majority ofthe users (70 percent) report that thesources are accessible 24 hours aday. On an average day of collectionof water, users have to wait for 30minutes. The water is fetched bymostly adult men. The complaintsrelated to this source included longqueues, heckling, and quarrellingamongst the users.

Transparency inService Provisions

Users of mains connections werequeried about how transparent theirservice providers were in terms ofbilling practices and petty corruption.

How Often do Customers GetWater Bills?A worrying finding from this survey isthat large numbers of the KW&SB’s

treating the water, probably due tothe worry of contamination. Boilingthe water was found to be the mostpopular form of treating water.Households were also asked whetherthey had storage tanks at home tocope with unreliable supply. Almostone-fourth of those with a mainsconnection reported having investedin storage facilities. The presence of astorage mechanism indicates theuncertainty in water supply. As canbe discerned from Figure 3, except

a. SITE stands for Sindh Industrial and Trading Estate.Source: Data compiled during a pilot Citizen Report Card on water, sanitation, andsewerage services in Karachi.

Figure 3: Percentage of mains water users reportingstorage facilities

respondents in Bin Qasim, all othersreport high proportions of use ofstorage facilities. Further analysisshows that the presence of astorage tank is positively correlatedwith a household’s socio-economicclassification (SEC). The higher thehousehold’s SEC, the higher thechances of the presence of astorage tank.

This can be explained by the highcost of constructing such a tank (the

30

3 UD$1 = PKR 85 (approximately), as of August 2010. Conversion rates are from www.coinmill.com; all conversionsin the text are approximations.


legal customers (38 percent) reportnot receiving any bills for theirconsumption of water. Wide spatialvariations were noticed in this context.Over 82 percent of the householdswith a mains connection in Bin Qasim,50 percent in Saddar, and 58 percentin SITE reported not receiving a bill forwater consumption. On the otherextreme, most users (97 percent) inGulberg reported receiving awater bill.

For those receiving water bills, thefrequency of receipt is mostly on amonthly basis (87 percent); a fewcases of quarterly and annual bills arealso quoted. Almost one-third of theusers (31 percent) in Bin Qasim whoreceived bills report receivingannual bills.

The awareness of the KW&SB as abilling authority is quite high on an

overall basis (87 percent). Extremelylow awareness regarding the statusof KW&SB as a billing authority wasfound among the households ofGadap, where a high percentage ofbill recipients either quoted anincorrect agency (37 percent) orwere not aware of the KW&SB at all(8 percent).

The billing charges are neitherperceived to be too high or too low inmost towns except SITE. In SITE,38 percent believe that the chargesfor water supply from the mainsare somewhat high. Most of theresidents did not offer any conclusivecomments as to whether the billingshould be based on consumption intheir opinion.

Those who firmly believed that billingshould be based on consumptionoffered the following reasons:

� People will not waste water.

� Billing is not proportionate to thewater consumption. The chargeswere more than what was beingsupplied or consumed.

� Budgeting of water bill willbe possible.

Did Respondents Bribe AnyOfficial to Get the Work Done?

No cases of bribes paid werereported in this survey, though asmall proportion reported witnessingsomeone else paying a bribe toan official.

Did Respondents Receive AnyAdvance Notice from the KW&SBRegarding Stoppages?

Most respondents who reportedbeing affected by major stoppages inwater supply could not recollectseeing any advance notice about thisissue from the KW&SB.

Figure 4: Percentage of users of mains water source that reported receiving a water bill


31

32

Interaction with the KW&SB

Respondents who were users of themains connection were asked a seriesof questions regarding their nature ofinteraction with the KW&SB.

Over one-third (39 percent) of thehouseholds reportedly faced problemsin water supply over the past year. Theincidence of problems was relativelyhigher in SITE (54 percent), Saddar(46 percent), Kemari (46 percent), andOrangi (42 percent).

However, over 40 percent of thehouseholds who faced some kind of a

problem with water supply neverinteracted with the authorities; instead,political representatives like unioncouncilors and town nazims were mostcommonly approached. A distressingfinding from this survey was that60 percent of the lowest SEC group(E2) never complained.

The mode of interaction also differedacross different towns. The residents ofGadap (88 percent), Gulshan (82percent), Bin Qasim (80 percent),Gulberg (77 percent), and Saddar (66percent) strongly preferred interactingwith the authorities at an individual level

while those of SITE (77 percent),Orangi (76 percent), North Nazimabad(72 percent), and Kemari (58 percent)preferred interacting with theauthorities collectively.

The issue in most towns was resolvedamicably except in Bin Qasim (47percent) and Gulshan (58 percent),where dialog was supplemented withsome kind of pressure by the people.

Interactions with KW&SB officials wereextremely low in most towns. Over 26percent of the households in the ninetowns did not think it would make anydifference, while over 19 percent didnot know where and with whom theywere supposed to interact. The issueswere related mostly to water stoppages(79 percent), and a majority preferredcomplaining in person. Over 47 percentof the households who hadapproached the KW&SB found itsofficials very inaccessible.

Incidence of Waterborne Diseases

Contamination of water has a majorimpact on the health of people. Thissurvey attempted to find out instancesof waterborne diseases affectingsample households in the nine towns.Respondents were asked about themost common waterborne diseasesthey contracted. Information wascollected about the number of personsaffected in the household, the averagenumber of days of the illness (perperson), and the cost incurred(per person) for the treatment of thatparticular disease. On an average, twopersons in the households wereaffected by typhoid, hepatitis, cholera


33

or dysentery. Over 23 percent of thehouseholds were affected by cholera,which had affected all the nine townssurveyed. This is so despite the fact thatmost households thought that the waterquality (in terms of its color, taste, andsmell) was acceptable (see Table 9). BinQasim (19.4 percent) was the townwhich was most affected by thisdisease; incidentally, Bin Qasimhad reported significant usage ofwater purchased from small-timestreet vendors.

Hepatitis is the most expensive diseaseto treat at Rs. 4,250 followed by typhoid(Rs. 2,000). Median values were used tocalculate the costs to exclude theinfluence of outliers.

Satisfaction with Water Provision

Citizens’ satisfaction is a direct measureof the overall effectiveness of a service.The households were asked to rate theirsatisfaction with various aspects ofservice delivery according to twomeasures—along a scale ranging fromcomplete satisfaction and

dissatisfaction; and along a numericalscale of 1–10 with 1 being the lowestand 10 being the highest. The mainsource of drinking water has beenbroken down into two distinctcategories: users of mains line (illegaland legal connections) and thosehouseholds who obtained water fromoutside sources.

The average satisfaction with drinkingwater distribution among householdsacross Karachi that primarily obtained

Illness No. of persons Days of Costs incurred/affected illness person (Rs.)

Typhoid (N = 227) 2 22 2,000

Hepatitis (N = 119) 2 68 4,250

Cholera (N = 1144) 2 8 500

Dysentery (N = 182) 2 9 500

Source: Data compiled during a pilot Citizen Report Card on water, sanitation,and sewerage services in Karachi.

Table 10: Incidence of waterborne diseases and costs incurred

water through mains lines (both legallyand illegally) was 6.74 out of 10. Thosewho obtained water primarily fromsources outside their domicile, such asthrough private water tankers, weremarkedly less satisfied—the averagesatisfaction rate with water distributionamong households that obtained waterprimarily from outside the householdwas an abysmal 3.93. Gulberg reports

City/town Source

Main Outside domicile

Karachi 6.74 3.93

Gulberg 7.36 3.60

North Nazimabad 7.13 5.23

Saddar 6.99 6.50

Bin Qasim 6.96 5.93

Kemari 6.90 3.57

Gulshan 6.49 4.06

Gadap 6.35 3.09

Orangi 6.29 2.80

SITE 6.20 3.33

Source: Data compiled during a pilot Citizen Report Card on water, sanitation, and sewerageservices in Karachi.

Table 11: Average satisfaction levels with drinkingwater distribution by source of water

the highest satisfaction (7.36)amongst the nine towns and SITE thelowest (6.20) with regard to waterfrom the mains. For sources outsideresidences, Saddar reports thehighest satisfaction (6.05) and Orangithe lowest (2.80)

The KW&SB can take credit for thisverdict, as the users of the mainsconnection for drinking water report a

34


Table 12: Areas for improvement

higher satisfaction on an overall basis,with their coefficient of variance beingon a lower side as compared tothe ratings provided by users ofother sources.

This finding is further reiterated by thetown level analysis which shows thatall the households of the nine townsrate the satisfaction with mains waterhigher than their counterparts whodepend on outside sources.

Areas for Improvement

Most households cite the need forregular availability of water as thearea the KW&SB could improve themost. When asked about the areasin which the KW&SB should prioritizeany reforms, a majority ofhouseholds suggested that theagency should first concentrate onproviding a frequent and steadysource of water. Residents of most

Firstpriority

Secondpriority

Gadap

Regularlyavailablewater

Clean water/strongpressure

SITE


Cleanwater

Saddar


Cleanwater

Kemari


Cleanwater

Orangi


Strongpressurefrom mains

Bin Qasim


Adequatewater forhousehold

Gulshan

Time takento attend toproblems


Gulberg

Cleanwater


North Nazimabad

Cleanwater


towns suggested that the KW&SB

should first prioritize water availability

and then address water cleanliness.

However, residents of Gulshan felt

that the KW&SB should first prioritize

the improvement of its grievance

redress system, and households in

Gulberg and North Nazimabad

suggest that the KW&SB first

improve the cleanliness of water in

those towns.

35



Access to Sewerage

Where Does the Waste from theToilet Go?Most households surveyed (93percent) had a sewerage connectionfor disposal of toilet waste. However,variations across towns arereported. Over 32 percent of thehouseholds in Bin Qasim town werereportedly using the drain outsidetheir house for waste disposal.Some households in Kemari(7 percent) and Gadap (8 percent)were also using drains in theabsence of a sewerage connection.In most instances, the absence of asewerage connection was found ininformal settlements (69 percent).Sewerage connections were alsoabsent in newly established localitieswhere pipelines had not been laid asyet (10 percent).

Quality and Reliability ofSewerage Maintenance

How Frequently are SewerageFacilities Cleaned?Almost 83 percent of householdsreport that sewers are only cleanedwhen blocked. Barring Gulshan, where15 percent of households report thatsewers are generally cleaned once amonth, respondents in most localitiesreport that sewers are not cleanedregularly. When sewers are cleaned,55 percent of households report thatthe work is done by official cleanerswhile 34 percent of households admitto hiring private cleaners. The latterpractice is the most prevalent inGulshan and Bin Qasim, where 56percent and 47 percent of households,respectively, reported hiring aprivate cleaner.

Sewerage Services


Figure 5: Profiles of toilet waste disposal

37

Table 13: Redress of complaints with different authorities

Costs Incurred in MaintainingSewerage Facilities

Did Households Incur AnyExpense for Cleaningand Maintenance?Respondents also have stated thatofficial cleaners charge householdsto clean gutters—67 percent ofrespondents in Sindh Industrial andTrading Estate (SITE) and 62percent of respondents inNazimabad reported that officialcleaners charged to clear sewers.

On average, official cleanerscharged between Rs. 20 to Rs. 50.Nearly 51 percent of householdshave used their own funds tomaintain sewers.

On average, a household spendsRs. 500 per year to maintain itsconnection. Almost 12 percent ofhouseholds that did spend theirown funds to maintain theirsewerage connections spent overRs. 1,000 per year.

Interactions with the KW&SB onSewerage-Related Issues

As observed in the case of water,households generally approachedthe officials of the City DistrictGovernment Karachi; unioncounselors (43 percent) or the nazim(37 percent). Most complaints werecommunicated in person (81percent). Other methods includedtelephone calls (10 percent), letters(5 percent), and complaint registers(3 percent).

However, as can be discerned fromTable 13, problem resolution was

Yes Yes, partially No Total

Union counselor 37.8 28.1 34.1 100

Town nazim 64.7 17.6 17.6 100

Union council nazim 31.7 30.4 37.9 100

Water board (N = 33) 6.1 12.1 81.8 100


Problems Faced with Sewerage

How Many RespondentsFaced a Problem with theSewerage System?

A little under one-fourth of thehouseholds (21 percent) hadexperienced major sewerage problemsin the past year. A high percentage ofproblem incidences were reported fromSITE (37 percent), Saddar (29 percent),and North Nazimabad (27 percent).

Most of the major sewerage problemswere related to blocked gutter lines(65 percent). Households alsocomplained about rain water thatwas stagnant and had no properdrainage outlet.

Over 51 percent of the householdswho reported being affected by majorsewerage problems had complainedto the authorities. Most of these werein SITE (29 percent), Saddar(14 percent), and North Nazimabad(14 percent).

38


Table 14: Average satisfaction with sewerage

City/town Score (maximum: 10)

Gadap 7.23

Gulberg 7.05

Kemari 6.95

Gulshan 6.65

Orangi 6.44

Saddar 5.9

North Nazimabad 5.85

Bin Qasim 5.7

SITEa 5.24

Total (for Karachi) 6.35


unfortunately quite low, with over80 percent of the households’complaints to the Water Boardstill pending redress. Only thetown nazim seems to takeimmediate action on thecomplaints received.

Satisfaction withSewerage System

The average satisfaction amonghouseholds across Karachitowards sewerage services was6.35 out of 10. There were,however, variations in thesatisfaction of householdstowards sewerage services indifferent towns. For example,households in Gadap had anaverage satisfaction of 7.23 onthe high end, while households inSITE had an average satisfactionof 5.24.

39


Public Toilets

41

Availability and Usage ofPublic Toilets

Public toilets are found in parks, shops,plazas, and mosques. About 1 percentof respondents categorize themselvesas highly frequent users of public toiletsand 10 percent of respondentscategorize themselves as rare users.Over 19 percent of households inKarachi have used a public toilet. Mostof the users are found in Gadap (17.7percent), Bin Qasim (16 percent), andKemari (16.6 percent).

Service Delivery Issues

Almost 70 percent of households foundthe location of toilets to be convenient

and 72 percent reported that publictoilets are generally safe. Sixty-fivepercent of respondents felt that toiletswere clean either most of the time oralways. Only 14 percent of respondentsfound that water was rarely or neveravailable in toilets.

Forty percent of households reportedthat queues were present only rarelywhile 33 percent reported that queueswere present either most of the timeor always.

Satisfaction with Public Toilets

The average satisfaction amonghouseholds across Karachi towardspublic toilets was 6.64 out of 10. Again,

there was great variation in satisfactionrates across towns—the averagesatisfaction level in Gulshan was 8.69on the high end, while the averagesatisfaction in North Nazimabad was5.70 on the low end.

Public toilets Mean score (out of 10)

Gulshan 8.69

Gadap 6.97

Saddar 6.83

Orangi 6.75

SITEa 6.41

Bin Qasim 6.38

Gulberg 6.21

Kemari 5.88

North Nazimabad 5.70

Total (for Karachi) 6.64


Table 15: Average satisfaction with public toilets


General Perceptions and Opinions

Nearly 37 percent of respondents feltthat water and sewerage services haveimproved over the last two years. Closeto 29 percent felt that water andsewerage services have greatlyimproved while 22 percent wereindifferent. Almost 49 percent ofrespondents were against the notion ofprivate sector involvement in public

service delivery. Those in favor ofprivate sector involvement citedpotential improvements in servicedelivery, such as fewer water shortagesand frequently cleaned sewers inaddition to greater transparency andresponsiveness. Those against theprivate sector’s involvement in publicservice delivery felt that prices would

increase as a result of market forces andthat government employees would losetheir jobs. Over 80 percent ofhouseholds felt that information shouldbe disseminated through television.Some also wanted such information tobe made public through neighborhoodmeetings (8 percent), newspapers(9 percent), and radio (1 percent).

43


The satisfaction ratings discussed inthis survey are based on self-assessment by the utility, of someselected services by various users.Since user satisfaction feedback is animportant component of theassessment of public services carriedout, it may be useful to explore thesignificance of the relationship betweensatisfaction levels and some criticalparameters or indicators of theservice. With this objective, an effortwas made to identify critical parametersof services that influence completesatisfaction as expressed byrelevant users.

The chi-square test is an importanttest among the several tests ofsignificance developed by statisticians.The chi-square (symbolically writtenas χ2) is a measure of the degree towhich observed frequencies deviate

Parameters Chi-square Rankvalues

Costs associated with it 1205.04 1

Adequacy of water during normal times of supply 867.22 2(that is, water available from this source is enoughto meet the needs of the family)

Quality of maintenance (for example, of water pipes, 866.72 3wells, pumps, and so on)

Other aspects of water quality (that is, whether water 798.85 4is clear, has acceptable taste and smell, and so forth)

Regularity of water supply during normal periods of 790.33 5water supply

Behavior of staff 513.32 6


Table 16: Factors of complete satisfaction with watersupplied through the mains

Causal Factors for Complete Satisfactionfrom the corresponding expectedfrequencies. In other words, chi-square measures the magnitude ofthe discrepancy between expectationand observation. This test can beapplied to test the goodness of fit;test the homogeneity or thesignificance of population variance;and test the significance ofassociation between two attributes.

A chi-square test of association wascarried out for the services probed inthis Citizen Report Card to explorethe strength of linkages between aset of independent variables (serviceparameters or attributes) and adependent variable (completesatisfaction). The chi-square testsresulted in an interesting order ofvariables that impact completesatisfaction. Consolidated findings arediscussed here.

Explaining Complete Satisfactionwith Water Supplied throughthe Mains

While variations across towns aredepicted in Table 17, Table 16 showsthe chi-square values and the relativeranks based on their values. Costs (tothe household) associated withaccessing water, followed byadequacy of water to meet householdrequirements and quality ofmaintenance are the first three majordeterminants of overall satisfaction.

45

Table 17: Satisfaction with water supply from the mains(top three causal factors across towns)

Towns Rank 1 Rank 2 Rank 3

Gadap Billing system Associated costs Other aspects of water quality

Bin Qasim Regularity of water supply Regularity of water supply during Adequacy ofduring normal times scarcity times water supply

Gulshan Associated costs Quality of maintenance Adequacy of water supply

Orangi Adequacy of water supply Regularity of water supply during Quality of maintenancenormal times

Kemari Associated costs Billing system Adequacy of water

Saddar Regularity of water supply Associated costs Billing systems

Gulberg Regularity of water supply Adequacy of water supply Associated costs

Nazimabad Associated costs Adequacy of water supply Quality of maintenance

SITEa Billing system Quality of maintenance Adequacy of water supply


46


Table 18: Factors of complete satisfaction withsewerage connections

Parameters

Chi-square Rank

Cleaning of sewers 6279 1

Problem resolution 6020 2

Condition of sewers 6016 3


Table 19: Satisfaction with sewerage connections (top three causal factors across towns)

Towns Rank 1 Rank 2 Rank 3

Gadap Condition of sewers Problem resolution Cleaning of sewers

Bin Qasim Problem resolution Cleaning of sewers Condition of sewers

Gulshan Cleaning of sewers Problem resolution Condition of sewers

Orangi Condition of sewers Problem resolution Cleaning of sewers

Kemari Condition of sewers Cleaning of sewers Problem resolution

Saddar Cleaning of sewers Condition of sewers Problem resolution

Gulberg Problem resolution Cleaning of sewers Condition of sewers

Nazimabad Problem resolution Condition of sewers Cleaning of sewers

SITEa Condition of sewers Problem resolution Cleaning of sewers


Explaining Complete Satisfactionwith Sewerage Connections

Variations across towns are depicted inTable 19.

Thus, regular cleaning and maintenance

of sewers and speedier grievance

redress will improve satisfaction with

sewerage connections.

47

Table 21: Roadmap for service improvement

Service Areas of improvement

Water supply • Rationalizing cost of water

• Ensuring adequacy of supply

• Ensuring timely maintenance

Sewerage • Regular cleaning and maintenance of sewers

• Speedy grievance redress

Public toilets • Setting up more facilities in convenient locations

• Ensuring cleanliness


Table 20: Factors of complete satisfaction with public toilets

Public toilets Chi-square Rank

Adequacy of public toilets 898 1

Location of public toilets 808 2

Cleanliness of public toilets 780 3

Water availability in public toilets 626 4


Explaining Complete Satisfactionwith Public Toilets

Increasing the number of public toiletsin the towns, putting them atconvenient locations, and ensuringcleanliness are indicated as thekey determinants of (current)user satisfaction.

48


There are three specific possibilitiesthat this exploratory Citizen ReportCard (CRC) exercise opens up withinthe existing institutional frameworkof water and sewerage servicesin Karachi.

Using CRC as an Internal ChangeManagement Tool: The Premise

The patterns of ratings and problemshighlighted in the CRC can be used todiagnose the weak links in the KarachiWater and Sewerage Board’s (KW&SB)operations. The objective scores andmeasures offer a clear indication of theseverity of these weaknesses. Forinstance, a slightly worrying findingensuing from this exercise is the widevariation in service quality acrossdifferent towns. This clearly signalsinequity in service provision. Yetanother issue is that of the lowresolution of complaints. Furtherassessment of the feedback given by

� Support the creation of local foraand opportunities for increasedconsultation and participationfrom customers.

� Mobilize additional resourcesto change polices orimprove implementation ofexisting policies.

� Implement spatial uniformity.

Using CRC for Internal Reforms:The Strategy

“When a physician checks thetemperature and blood pressure of apatient, she is looking for thesymptoms of the illness. She thenuses the test results to do an expertdiagnosis of the patient’s condition.The remedies she prescribes areguided by the findings of herdiagnosis. She will consider differentoptions and dosages before decidingon her prescriptions.”

Institutionalizing CitizenReport Cards in Karachi

Table 22: Exploring future possibilities

Key driver Menu of actions Desired outcomes


Internal review and assessment(Diagnosis)

• Performance monitoring

• Strategizing reforms or responses

• Public dissemination of findings

• Regular customer interfaces

• Consultations on specific issues

• Identifying service benchmarks

• Reviewing benchmarks

• Identifying service gaps

• Improved service quality

• Enhanced transparency

• Better customer relations

• Space for participation

• Tracking progress over time

• Pressure on poor performers

Periodic/Repeat CRC(Benchmarking)

External sharing of findings(Accountability)

users, regarding the courtesy shown bythe staff or motivation of the staff, maypoint to specific aspects of personnelmanagement and development thatneed attention.

There are multiple ways that the KW&SBcan utilize the CRC findings to facilitateimprovements in services. In manyways, what distinguishes a CRC from aregular survey is the postsurvey strategyto build upon the ‘symptoms’ providedby the CRC, and design effective andfocused responses. Some of theresponses that the KW&SB canconsider are:

� Redesign service delivery processes.

� Respond to the unique needs ofvarious customer strata (poor versusrich localities).

� Design back-end improvements(computerization for billing, training ofstaff, and so on).

49

This medical analogy is helpful inunderstanding the link between a CRCand the responses or reforms requiredfrom the KW&SB. The informationprovided by the CRC can be a useful aidto diagnosis and a springboard forfurther probes into the problemsidentified in the service ratings. Forexample, the ratings of the differentdimensions of a service are very similarto the symptoms that a doctor is able toread from the test results. If the KW&SBgets a low rating on ‘problem resolution’,it means that people are either leftdissatisfied with the services or forced toexplore other informal options. Here, thereport card has merely signaled some‘symptoms’ based on feedback from thepeople. But whether they reflect genuineproblems or what their underlyingcauses are cannot be inferred from thesymptoms alone. What is required is adeeper probe into the phenomenaidentified by the people and the factorsthat might have contributed to them.

The sequence of steps that can lead theKW&SB to a set of focused responsesand reform options can be described as:

(1) The starting point is the CRC’sratings of the different dimensions of theKW&SB’s. They provide an array of thesymptoms that act as impediments toeffective service delivery. An assessmentof these symptoms and their severity

offers the basis for moving on to thenext step.

(2) Probing the causal factors underlyingthe symptoms is the next step. Thosewho engage in this diagnostic exerciseneed to have good domain knowledgeto be able to identify these factors andtheir relative importance in a givencontext. The diagnosis should result inthe identification of the gaps that needto be filled in order that the services maybe improved

(3) The search for reform options thatcan effectively fill these gaps is the finalstep in this sequence. Often, acombination of reforms may be required.Domain knowledge and expertise arecritical to the identification, choice, andsequencing of reforms.

Since reforms can upset the status quoand go against the interests of influentialgroups, it is also important to strike abalance between the ideal and thepractical. Broad-based internaldiscussions could help to identify the setof practical reforms or responses. Amodel template to capture the ideas andreflections is presented in Table 23.

External Dissemination ofCRC Findings

Dissemination of the CRC findings withvarious stakeholders is an essential step

to enhance the credibility of the entireexercise. Proactive initiatives such asorganizing customer meetings andopen houses can be tried out in thenine towns to bring the KW&SB closerto the people. It is recommended thatfollowing the dissemination of theCRC, two rounds of public (customer)meetings be organized at each townlevel. The first one can be to discussthe findings from the CRC and also topublicly state the responses that theKW&SB is planning to address someof the emergent issues. Followingthis, a mid-year review should beorganized to not only discussprogress in the reforms or responsesbut also to get public perceptions onthe issue.

Yet another possibility is to use thefeedback to realign and review existingstandards and norms of services. Theinstitutional spaces created throughregular customer interfaces can alsobe used for customer educationcampaigns and programs.

It may also be worthwhile to sharethe critical processes and findings fromthis pilot initiative with other utilitiessuch as power, and sectors such ashealth and education. A ‘DonorRoundtable’ can also be organizedto disseminate the learningamong partners.

Key finding Possible reasons Suggested measures Expected risks or barriers Timeline

Table 23: From symptoms to reforms: Options generated to respond to specific CRC findings

50


Communication and AdvocacyStrategy in Support of CRC onWater and Sanitation Servicesin Karachi

The information generated through aCitizen Report Card (CRC) is credible,objective, and provides useful insightsinto, and indicators of, citizens’ viewsand concerns, which have been usedto initiate wide-ranging processes ofreform and transformation. Crucial tothe success of such initiatives has beencitizen participation in the reformprocess, not just through responses in

the survey but also by using thefeedback and information on gaps inservice delivery to demand forqualitative improvements in services.

In this age of communication,information is the fuel that drives themedia engine. Where a tool such as theCRC generates information on howcitizens perceive and use public utilities,media becomes a key ally in thedissemination of this information to thelarger population of citizens using theseservices. This dissemination helps buildawareness of civic rights and

responsibilities, highlights the need forreform while also identifying whatreforms are required and, mostimportantly, helps create a constituencydemanding reform and improvement.

But CRC data are typically statistical,and survey-based research is generallyreplete with technical terms not easilyunderstood by a general audience.Statistical data need to be translatedinto action-oriented information thatcan create a constituency demandingreform on the one hand, and aninstitution committed to undertaking thereforms demanded on the other.

So, for the CRC process to becometruly participatory, a need was felt tomotivate the ‘demand’ side—byencouraging citizens to becomeinvolved and coalesce into aconstituency demanding that reform bean ongoing process of improvement,of water and sanitation as well asother civic services, rather than aone-off exercise.

A strategy was developed to sensitizethe media to a citizen-driven reformagenda. Through a competitive biddingprocess, the media advisory firm ofPanos International was selectedto design and implement acommunication strategy, to be wovenaround the whole CRC process. Panosidentified the participating media‘partners’ through a series ofengagement activities. It proposedworking closely with a smaller group ofprint, radio, and television journalistsand professionals—a core group thatcould be guided in developing keymessages that bring about desired

Mobilizing Demand for Reform

51

outcomes in terms of awareness,knowledge, and action. By involvingthe media as a key stakeholder in thisway, it was felt that the CRC wouldthen become a ‘breaking story’,reported by the media as it unfolds,to create mass awareness amongcitizens and accountability inservice providers. In the historicalperspective of the CRC, this was apioneering initiative.

The objectives were to be achievedprimarily through the private,independent media—a combinationof mainstream media such as print,television, and radio, as well astheater—through a range of activities.The activities unfolded in threephases—presurvey, survey, anddissemination—linked with thephase-wise planning of the CRCprocess itself.

Program Objectives

� Sensitize the media.

� Build media capacity forinformed and action-orientedCRC reporting.

� CRC advocacy.

Phase I: Program Activities

Presurvey—Media Engagementand Media VisitsThe first step was to build an enablingenvironment for the coverage of theCRC by the media. Panos conducteda series of introductory engagementsand activities aimed at sensitizing thecity’s key media houses. Panosidentified editors of newspapers and

publications, news directors oftelevision channels, as well asproprietors of publishing houses. Thesemedia persons would then meet andinteract with a CRC team comprising,where possible and available, the leadconsultant Dr. Gopa Kumar Thampi,WSP CRC Coordinator Mr. FarhanAnwar, WSP Institutional DevelopmentSpecialist Ms. Maheen Zehra, andPanos Country RepresentativeMs. Sahar Ali.

The CRC was ‘sold’ at these meetingslike a breaking story in Karachi. Mediapersons were encouraged to link theCRC to other major stories—theupcoming elections, for example, or themonsoons and its impact on water andsanitation services.

This introductory round of meetings,while creating a supportive environmentfor CRC coverage, also helped Panosidentify the key journalists (beatreporters, anchors, radio broadcasters,news editors, and so on) with whom toliaise for subsequent activities, such asthe Media Mission to Bengaluru, MediaRoundtables, and fellowships, amongothers. During most meetings witheditors, they were asked to identify, andwhere possible introduce, the relevantbeat reporters to the CRC team.

CRC Introductory WorkshopsBased on the meetings with editors,Panos prepared a list of beat reporterswho would be assigned any storiesabout the Karachi Water and SewerageBoard (KW&SB). Two informal sessions

Box 4: Media organizations and persons visited

Print media

� Mr. Mudassir Mirza, Deputy Editor, Jang newspaper, Karachi

� Mr. Kamal Siddiqi, Editor Reporting, The News, Karachi

� Mr. Bahzad Alam, News Editor/City Editor, Dawn

� Mr. Fazal Qureshi, Chief Editor, Pakistan Press International news agency

Electronic media (including radio)

� Mr. Azhar Abbas, Director, News and Current Affairs, Dawn News

� Mr. Rasheed Channa, Vice President, ARY One World, Karachi

� Mr. Masoom Rizvi, Editor, News, Aaj TV, Karachi

� Mr. Mehdi Raza, Chief Executive, Karachi 107

52


were then held in the preparatoryphase of the CRC Communication andAdvocacy Strategy. Informal meetingswere organized with the media. Thesesessions took place on October 8 and27, 2007. WSP’s CRC coordinator,Mr. Farhan Anwar, spoke to theparticipants on the role of the media.He also expressed the expectation thatthe media would not just report theCRC but popularize it among citizensand help in creating a constituencydemanding reform in the KW&SB’swater and sanitation services.Mr. Anwar also shared with theparticipants some of the developmentsin the project, that is, the formation ofan Advisory Committee at the CityDistrict Government Karachi, whichincluded high-ranking officials of theKW&SB and representatives fromprominent civil society organizations.

Phase II: Program Activities

Survey—Mobilizing the MediaMedia Mission to Bengaluru: The nextstep was to shortlist, from this coregroup of journalists, four reporters whowould travel to Bengaluru and studymedia coverage of the CRC. WhyBengaluru? Because this was thebirthplace of the CRC, where theReport Card methodology has beendeveloped, tested, and refined over thepast decade, during which time threeCRCs have also been conducted.

In Bengaluru, the CRC was initiated bycitizens as a campaign demanding animprovement in civic services. In orderto ‘institutionalize’ citizen demand forreform in Karachi, it was felt necessaryto study how the city’s residents and

advocacy organizations have kept thepressure on utility companies and othercity government institutions, particularlythe role the media has played inthis effort.

The Media Mission was held fromFebruary 25 to March 1, 2008, and anintensive agenda was prepared inconsultation with The Public AffairsCenter in Bengaluru. The group visitedthe offices of leading daily newspapersin the city (The Times of India andBangalore Mirror), met with a theatertroupe engaged in socially relevanttheater, interacted with a politician whowas dedicated to solving the civic

Box 5: Media representatives for the Bengaluru Mission

� Mr. Zeeshan Azmat, Reporter, The News

� Mr. Danish Saeed, Commercial Manager, Apna Karachi FM 107

� Mr. Aamir Ahmed Khan, Reporter, Geo News

� Mr. Ishtiaq Hussain, Theater Trainer, Interactive Resource Center

problems of his constituents, learntabout community radio, anddiscovered how sting journalism isbeing carried out by a local televisionchannel, TV9.

Orientation Workshop IStakeholder consultative dialog: Withthe survey under way, Panosorganized a context-setting activity forjournalists to understand the widerurban context which impacts waterand sanitation issues in a burgeoningmetropolis such as Karachi. Theworkshop, titled ‘Profiling the Waterand Sanitation Sector in Karachi: AStakeholder Consultative Dialog’, was

53

held on April 18, 2008. Subjectspecialists from the public andprivate sectors made presentationson various aspects of the city’s waterand sanitation issues. Questions ofwater quantity and availability,sources, supply versus demand,water quality, the politics ofdistribution, pricing, conservationpractices, institutional challengessuch as leakage, and many otherswere addressed and attempted to beanswered by representatives ofgovernment institutions such as theKW&SB, private organizations suchas Urban Resource Center, Shehri-Citizens for Better Environment,Karachi Water Partnership, OrangiPilot Project, TransparencyInternational, consumer rightsorganizations such as The HelplineTrust and Consumers Association ofPakistan, and water experts fromWater and Sanitation Program (WSP).The role of the media in reportingcivic issues and the challenge ofkeeping citizens’ concerns on themedia agenda were also discussedby senior journalist and renownedcolumnist, Mr. Ghazi Salahuddin.

CRC Media FellowshipsIn addition to a workshop for beatreporters, Panos offered fellowshipsto journalists from English andUrdu newspapers reporting on civicissues to produce a series of articles

on water and sanitation. Freelancejournalists were also included inthis activity.

Fellowships were offered to fivejournalists to write two articles each,covering different aspects of waterand sanitation. The fellowshipprovided a training opportunityfor journalists to report more incisivelyon urban development. The fellowsworked closely with Panos andexperts on water and sanitationissues who helped refine their stories.

“We got to know everything about water and sanitation at the workshopheld by Panos. It was extremely informative.”Mr. Saif Khan, Reporter, Pakistan Press International news agency

Prior to the commencement ofthe fellowship, an orientationworkshop was organized wherestory ideas were deliberated uponand refined with inputs fromMr. Farhan Anwar, CRC Coordinator,WSP, and Mr. Shahid Saleem(ex-Deputy Managing Director,Planning, KW&SB).

This activity generated a series ofvigorously researched and well-written newspaper reports andfeatures related to water andsanitation issues, while alsostrengthening general journalismskills. The exercise also developedan ‘elite force’ of reporters on waterand sanitation, who can becommissioned to write on suchissues in the future.

54


Table 24: Citizen Report Card media fellows’ published stories

Journalist

Mr. Jamil Khan

Mr. Saif Ali Khan

Mr. Jan Khaskheli

Ms. Zofeen T. Ebrahim

Mr. Shabina Faraz


Newspaper

The Daily Times

The Nation

Business Recorder

The News

Dawn

IPS, Dawn

Jang MidweekMagazine

Jang SundayMagazine

Dates of publication

Monday, May 12, 2008

Saturday, May 24, 2008


Monday, June 2, 2008


Saturday, June 7, 2008

Tuesday, May 20, 2008


Wednesday, May 28, 2008

Sunday, June 1, 2008

Headline

‘KW&SB to strengthen supplynetwork and crackdown on illegalwater connections’

‘KW&SB bill scheme goes downthe drain’

‘Clean drinking water a distantdream for Karachiites’

‘Civic experts fear flooding ofKarachi this monsoon’

‘Narrowing of storm water drainscausing alarm’

‘Displaced communities awaitprovision of water’

‘Water conservation: Case for achange of lifestyle’

‘Piped water still anunfulfilled dream’

‘Halqa-e-fikr se maindain-e-amaltak… Rah dushwaar sahi magar na-mumkin nahin’4

‘Barrhti hui abaadi aur sehatke masaa’il’5

4 This can be translated as: ‘From realm of thinking to action on the ground: The path is difficult but not impossible’.5 This can be translated as: ‘Issues of increasing population and health’.

55

Media ToolkitA media toolkit titled ‘Water Wisdomon Tap: A Journalist’s Guide to theCitizens’ Report Card on Water andSanitation Services in Karachi’, wascompiled, designed, and publishedby Panos for dissemination on theday the CRC survey findings weremade public in Karachi. The toolkitcontained background informationdeveloped by the Public AffairsCenter on CRCs. It also includedprofiles of the organizations involvedin the CRC survey and associatedactivities. A list of organizations andindividuals whom the media couldcontact for further information onwater and sanitation issues was

compiled and included in thetoolkit. Samples of bestjournalism practices inreporting water andsanitation issues were alsoincluded in the form ofarticles culled from printmedia, both national andinternational. A summary ofthe final report and a copy ofthe documentary, ‘WaterWisdom’ were also includedin the toolkit.

Key documents such as CRCbackground material and theExecutive Summary of thesurvey report were translated

into Urdu. A book on Karachi’s urbanissues, Understanding Karachi, byrenowned architect and urban plannerMr. Arif Hassan was included in thetoolkit. Both Urdu and Englishversions of the book were distributed.

CRC DocumentaryPanos commissioned a 15-minutefilm, ‘Water Wisdom: HearingCitizens’ Voices on Water andSewerage Services’, documenting theCRC process and building a case forthe need for citizen engagement withthe state on civic services. Thedocumentary also highlighted theneed for greater civic responsibility onthe part of citizens.

The documentary contextualized theneed for reform of water andsanitation services in Karachi—ithighlighted the lack of accountabilityand opportunities for citizens toimpact public policy, while presentingthe CRC as a tool to generateinformation from users of publicservices in order to improve them.

Finally, the documentary provided avisual record of the CRC process,which can also be used for advocacypurposes. It could be particularlybeneficial in the long term toadvocate for institutionalizing theprocess in the KW&SB, and alsoamong other civic agencies inKarachi and elsewhere.

From conception to completion, thepreparation of the documentary tookseveral months. Detailed briefingsessions with the film-maker,Ms. Maheen Zia, were followed byconstant facilitation in securinginterviews with key stakeholders. ThePanos team and the WSP CRCcoordinator assisted the film-makerwith questions for the interviews.Once filming was complete, thescript underwent several revisions.The commentary was also editedseveral times and rewritten by Panosto achieve clarity, simplify language,and reduce length.

Urdu and English versions of thedocumentary were prepared. TheEnglish version of the documentarywas screened at the CRC surveydissemination workshop, and itscopies were enclosed in themedia toolkit.

“The list of water and sanitation contacts in the toolkit is extremelyuseful—a great idea!”Mr. Waqar-ul-Hassan, Assistant News Producer, FM 107

56

Please give cover of Toolkit


Phase III: Dissemination—Institutionalizing Reform andMobilizing Citizens

CRC Findings:Public DisseminationOnce the survey was completed, thefindings were disseminated tostakeholders, including the media,through a public event held in Karachiin collaboration with the Karachi WaterPartnership (Member, CRC AdvisoryCommittee) on June 5, 2008, whichcoincided with World Environment Day.The event was a one-day consultativeseminar and partners’ meeting to sharethe findings of the CRC and the KarachiWater Partnership. The survey resultswere analyzed and an executivesummary of the report, as well as acopy of Dr. Gopa Kumar Thampi'sanalysis, were released to the media atthis event in printed form, as part of themedia toolkit (that is, ‘Water Wisdomon Tap: A Journalists’ Guide to theCitizens’ Report Card on Water andSanitation Services’) as well as througha multimedia presentation summarizingthe context of the survey, itsmethodology, and key findings.

Orientation Workshop IIThe second orientation workshop,‘Understanding Citizens’ Report Card:Workshop to Interpret CRC Data’, washeld on June 6, 2008, the day after thesurvey findings were made public. Itfocused on demystifying CRC statistics.After an initial introduction to CRC withthe screening of the documentary,‘Water Wisdom: Hearing Citizens’Voices on Water and Sewerage Issuesin Karachi’ (which many journalists hadmissed seeing the previous day),

Dr. Thampi made his analyticalpresentation of the survey. Then thejournalists were asked to share anystory ideas they may have identified.These were fleshed out, and other storyideas added on to generate a list ofideas for further investigation andreporting. Stories were assigned tojournalists based on their interest.

Interactive Theater PresentationsFollowing his participation in the MediaMission to Bengaluru, Mr. IshtiaqHussain of the Lahore-based InteractiveResource Center (IRC) worked with aHyderabad-based theater group, Murk,to develop a 15-minute theaterpresentation on Karachi’s water andsanitation issues. Other sources ofinformation for developing thepresentation were citizen interviewsrecorded for the documentary, storyideas prepared for media fellowships,the CRC Survey Report, and thecontent of focus group discussions heldduring the questionnaire’s development.

A series of eight theater performanceswere organized by Panos’s partner inthis activity, the IRC. Performances wereheld in all of the surveyed towns ofKarachi, except in Kemari.

The theater presentations helpeddisseminate CRC findings amongcitizens in a creative, entertaining,and participatory manner. TheCRC’s statistical data were broughtto life on stage in a series ofreal-life situations highlightingcitizens’ problems and concernsabout water supply andsanitation services.

This reminded citizens of their civicrights, helped stimulate debateamong them on critical civic issues,and underscored that theirinvolvement is necessary toimprove the water supply andsanitation services they receive.A key objective of the theaterpresentations was to help build aconstituency for demanding reformamong the citizens of Karachi. Thiswas evident in the interactions afterthe presentations, when a numberof participants took to the stage toshare their specific water andsanitation problems, and demandof local government officials(wherever they were present) tosolve them. The IRC carried out thevideo documentation of theperformances and interactions.

57

Table 25: Program objectives, outputs, and outcomes by activity


58

Proposed activity

Presurvey phase

Media visits and CRCintroductory workshops

Survey phase

Media Mission toBengaluru

Orientation workshop I:Profiling the water andsanitation sector in Karachi

Media fellowships

Media toolkit

CRC documentary

Dissemination phase

CRC findings and theirpublic dissemination

Orientation workshop II:Understanding CRC

Theater presentations

Objective

Sensitize the media

Sensitize the media

Sensitize the media

Build media capacity forinformed and action-oriented CRC reporting


CRC advocacy

Build media capacity forinformed and action-oriented CRC reportingand CRC advocacy


CRC advocacy

Output

Introductory write-ups,curtain-raiser articleson CRC

Mission report

Orientation workshop

Series of reports inprint and electronicmedia

Media toolkit

15-minute CRCdocumentary

Coverage of CRCsurvey key findings

Orientation workshop

Theater performances

Expected outcome

Media is sensitized

Media understands CRC objectivesand what it can achieve

Media understands CRC context

Media reporting on CRC is in-depth, accurateand investigative; advocacy for citizen-ledreform and accountability mechanisms to beincluded in political party manifestos

Media reporting on CRC is in-depth, accurate,and investigative

Documentation of CRC process

A high-profile event which brought togethercivil society, citizens, the city’s mayor, andKW&SB management in a constructivesession where the CRC survey findings werecritiqued and Karachi’s water and sanitationservices discussed

Statistical data demystified; media's capacitybuilt to interpret statistical data into insightfulmedia outputs (reports and features)

CRC data disseminated among citizens; CRCadvocacy; citizen mobilization for reform ofpublic utilities


Lessons Learnt: Challengesand Constraints

� Competing for mediaattention during a period ofheightened political activity.

One of the greatest challenges tothe program was securing mediaattention and interest during aperiod of heightened political activityand turmoil in Pakistan. Thetransition from quasi-democratic,military-led rule to a democracythrough a general election andthe tensions created by theassassination of a leading politicalpersonality, created an environmentwhere the CRC story faced stiffcompetition. Securing space forcitizens’ concerns continues topose a challenge for organizationspursuing development activitiesin Pakistan.

A political event-obsessed mediaoften ignores the wood for thetrees—obsessively pursuingpoliticians for their statements andpaying little heed to citizens’ views.Keeping Karachi’s water andsanitation issues on the mediaagenda was a constant challenge.

Recommendation: Greaterengagement with editors andpolicy-makers of television channelsis required to create space for civicissues. Panos proposed a snappycontent survey followed by a seriesof media dialogs with editors toshare the findings, building a casefor prioritizing issues that affect thelives of citizens.

� Lack of interest of TV media.

Perhaps the biggest offender inconnection with the above point wastelevision. A disappointing lack ofinitiative, consistency, and interest wasobserved among television journalistsand the channels they represented, indevelopment stories. They were foundtrailing and tailing politicians and otherpolitical personalities and makingreports based on their statements,without any inclination to widen thescope and horizon of media coverageby giving space to issues of publicinterest and relevance. Unfortunately,television channels seem to be settingthe media agenda, with newspaperreporters following the lead.

Recommendation: See previousrecommendation.

� Fragmented communitymobilization in a megacity withmultiple political affiliations.

The theater component faced problemsrelated to community mobilization. In acity of 16 million, it was perhaps anunrealistic expectation from a singlecommunity-based organization tomobilize people from diversecommunities across the city. Moreover,in a city like Karachi where a multiplicityof political affiliations are to be foundwithin a community or locality,mobilization is often a feat only thepolitically well-connected and savvy

59

can achieve. In many places,witnessing a theater presentation—nomatter how entertaining—was not apriority for the community that had achoice of other types of entertainmentor other demands on their time andattention. To a lesser extent, the issueof suitable venues that were centrallylocated and accessible while alsobeing away from the din of traffic,was another challenge for thetheater component.

Recommendation: There is no‘one size fits all’ in the case ofcommunity mobilization. A strategyfor mobilization of communitiessuited to specific environmentsmust be developed. Panoswill communicate observationsand experiences from this programto the IRC and possibly assistin devising a mobilizationstrategy which is suited to themegacity environment.

� Managing Karachi Water andSewerage Board’s sensitivity tomedia criticism while refrainingfrom ‘media management’.

Consideration of the Board’s sensitivityto critical media coverage was achallenge. An understanding of howmedia functions, and of the nature andpsyche of its reporters and desk editorsis uncommon among people outsidethe media industry. Building bridgesbetween these two universes—toenable outsiders to respect the media’srole and responsibility—was a constantchallenge in the program. It is importantto point out that the concept of ‘mediamanagement’ is condescending. PanosPakistan’s strategy was to ensure thatthe media had the necessaryinformation and tools at hand to reportaccurately without trying to impose aparticular bias in the reporting. It mustbe understood that such attemptsoften backfire leading to unnecessarilynegative reporting if one is perceivedto be trying to influence the objectivityof the media.

Recommendation: There is a needto sensitize and educate institutionsoutside the media in the workingsof the media in order to builda relationship of mutual respectand understanding.

60


Appendixes


Table 26: Scores from the stakeholders

Criterion Government Civil society Media Research Averageorganizations firms

Political setting 7 4 5 6 5.5

Decentralization 8 8 8 3 6.8

Ability to seek feedback 5 8 8 7 7.0

Ability to voice experience 7 8 10 8 8.3

Activism of civil society organizations 4 6 6 4 5.0

Survey/analysis competency 5 5 4 8 5.5

Quality of media 5 6 8 5 6.0

Responsiveness of providers 7 4 2 6 4.8


Appendix A: Mapping the Context forCitizen Report Card in Karachi

In considering whether to adapt oradopt the Citizen Report Card (CRC)methodology, it is important to assesswhether the local context is suitable.The Public Affairs Foundation hasidentified eight factors that arecritical to the success of theCRC methodology.

� Political context—How wouldpolitical institutions in Karachi reactto methodologies such as CRC?

� Decentralization—Do utilities likethe Karachi Water and SewerageBoard have reasonably highdegrees of financial andpolicymaking power?

� Ability to seek feedback—Wouldresearch or survey organizations

feel safe conducting publicfeedback exercises likethe CRC?

� Citizens’ ability to voiceexperience—Do citizens feelfree to give honest feedbackabout government services?

� Presence and activism of civilsociety organizations—Arethere active nongovernmentalorganizations or community-based organizations in Karachi?Are they independent andnonpartisan?

� Survey and researchcompetency—Are theredemonstrated local skills forsurvey and analysis?

� Quality of media—Is the mediaindependent? Do media personscover issues related to publicservices? Will they cover CRCfindings and present them in anunbiased manner?

� Responsiveness of serviceproviders—Do service providersseek consumer or user feedback?How open would they be toindependent assessments ontheir performance?

These indicators were assessed bydifferent sets of stakeholders at a jointevaluation workshop organized on April18, 2007. Participants were asked toscore each criterion on a scale of 1 to10, with ‘1’ being least favorable and‘10’ being most enabling (see Table 26).

63

The sample of the survey aimed to coverthe vast diversity that existed among theresidents of Karachi. The respondents ofthe survey were profiled into:

� Socioeconomic Classification (SEC);

� Household ownership profile;

� Household structure;

� Education; and

� Gender.

Each household interview was classifiedinto a socioeconomic category based on

the education and occupation of thechief wage earner of the household(the chief wage earner is the personwho contributes most to thehousehold budget). These SECs havebeen determined through naturalincidence occurring from following apredetermined sample methodology.Table 27 demonstrates the methodof determining the SEC ofeach household.

The survey has been able to capturethe diversity in the socioeconomiccategories quite successfully,

obtaining a minimum of 4 percentfrom each category.

Figure 6 illustrates that most of therespondents fall in the SEC Dcategory. This type includes relativelywell-educated skilled workers; not sowell-educated small retailers; andnonexecutive staff members. OtherSECs with high frequencies in thesurvey were categories E2, C, and B.

Household Ownership ProfilesOver 80 percent of the respondentsresided in self-owned houses while

Table 27: Determining the socioeconomic classification for households

Occupation of chief earner Education of chief earner

Illiterate Less than School (5-9 Matric Intermediate Graduate Post-Primary years) graduate

Unskilled worker E-2 E-2 E-1 E-1 D D C

Petty trader E-2 E-2 E-1 E-1 D C C

Skilled worker E-2 E-2 E-1 D D C C

Nonexecutive staff E-2 E-2 D D D C C

Supervisory level D D C C B B B

Small shopkeeper/businessmen D D C C B B A-2

Lower/middle executive, officer D C C C B B A-2

Self employed/employed/professional B B A-2 A-2 A-2 A-1 A-1

Medium businessman B A-2 A-2 A-2 A-2 A-1 A-1

Senior executive/officer B A-2 A-2 A-2 A-1 A-1 A-1

Large businessman/factory owner A-2 A-2 A-2 A-1 A-1 A-1 A-1

Source: Based on survey conducted by AC Nielsen Pakistan (now The Nielsen Company, Pakistan) for PAS 1998.

Appendix B: Demographic Profileof Respondents

64


the remaining 20 percent were living onrent. Figure 7 delineates the overall andtown-wise household ownership status.The trend of living in self-ownedhouses was consistently observed

Figure 6: Socioeconomic classification of the respondents


Household StructureHousehold structure is a very importantdemographic in research studies onwater and sewerage. It is an essentialvariable in obtaining service provisiontrends. Figure 8 provides details of thehousehold structure of respondents.

Most of the population resides in pucca(or stronger) houses, that is, where theroofs and walls of the houses are madeof concrete and there is a toilet andkitchen in most cases.

In Bin Qasim and Gadap, a significantpopulation of these towns is living inhouses made of semi kutcha (temporary)or pucca material, where either the wallor the roof is constructed from concrete.

GenderLike other data in the demographicprofile, gender count has resulted from anatural incidence through a set andpredefined sampling methodology.Table 28 gives the gender mix coveredin the survey.

across almost all the chosensample areas. A minimum of 78percent of residents in every townwere reported to be living in self-owned houses.


Figure 7: Household ownership profile

65

Educational ProfilesAn analysis of the educational profilesof the respondents (see Table 29)reveals that most have never attendedschool. Another significant portion ofthe population falls in the Matriculationlevel category.

Figure 8: Structure of households

Note: ‘Kutcha’ means temporary; ‘pucca’ means more strongly built houses.a. SITE stands for Sindh Industrial and Trading Estate.Source: Data compiled during a pilot Citizen Report Card on water, sanitation, and sewerage services in Karachi.

Table 28: Gender mix

Gender %

Men 87

Women 10

Joint interview 3

Source: Data compiled during a pilot CitizenReport Card on water, sanitation, andsewerage services in Karachi.

Level of education %

Never attended school 23

Primary level 12

Middle level 12

Matric 21

Intermediate (F.Sc./F.A.) 14

Graduate (B.A./B.Sc.) 14

Postgraduate (M.A./M.Sc.) 4

Source: Data compiled during a pilot CitizenReport Card on water, sanitation, andsewerage services in Karachi.

Table 29: Educational profiles

66


� Assess the applicability ofCitizen Report Cards (CRCs).Conditions which affect theoutcomes of CRCs include thereceptiveness of the politicalcontext, the extent ofdecentralization, the extent to whichcitizens can voice opinions freely,local competency to carry outsurveys, and advocacy.

� Determine the scope and planthe procedures. Next, identify keysectors or services to be included inthe survey, map service provisionstructures, and identify a credibleagency to conduct the survey.

� Design the questionnaire. Focusgroup discussions, involving bothservice providers and users, arenecessary to provide input for thedesign of the questionnaire.Providers of services may indicatenot only what they have beenmandated to provide, but also areaswhere feedback from clients canimprove their services. Users maygive their initial impressions of theservice, so that areas that needattention can be determined.

� Sampling. To collect feedbackfrom the entire population wouldrequire too much time andresources. Sampling, when carriedout accurately, gathers feedbackfrom a sample group that isrepresentative of the largerpopulation. The appropriatetype of sampling design mustbe determined.

� Execute the survey. First, selectand train a cadre of surveypersonnel. Second, after a certainproportion of interviews arecomplete, perform random spotmonitoring of question sessions toensure that the recording ofhousehold information is accurate.Third, upon completion of eachinterview, go over the informationcollected to identify theinconsistencies, if any.

� Analyze the data. Typically,respondents give information onaspects of government services ona numeric scale (say, 1 to 10).These ratings are then aggregatedand averaged, and percentagemeasures are produced.

� Disseminate the results. There arethree important points to consider withregard to the dissemination ofCRC findings:

� The findings should be constructivelycritical and should not aim toembarrass or laud a serviceprovider’s performance.

� The media is the biggest ally fordissemination. Prepare press kits withsmall printable stories, media-friendlypress releases, and translations of themain report into local languages.

� Following the publication of the CRCsurvey findings, service providers andusers should meet and discuss the keyissues. This not only allows for aconstructive dialog, but also putspressure on service providers toimprove their performance for thenext round.

� Advocacy and serviceimprovements. The findings of the pilotCRC survey can then be used in anadvocacy program which seeks toincrease public pressure, build coalitionsand partnerships, and influencekey players.

Appendix C: Key Stages in aCitizen Report Card Study

67

Media Clippings

Water and Sanitation Program20 A Shahrah-e-JamhuriatRamna 5, G-5/1Islamabad, PakistanPhone: (92-51) 2279641-46Fax: (92-51) 2826362Email: [email protected] site: www.wsp.org

December 2010

WSP MISSION:WSP’s mission is to support poor people inobtaining affordable, safe, and sustainable accessto water and sanitation services.

WSP FUNDING PARTNERS:The Water and Sanitation Program (WSP) is amulti-donor partnership created in 1978 andadministered by the World Bank to support poorpeople in obtaining affordable, safe, andsustainable access to water and sanitationservices. WSP provides technical assistance,facilitates knowledge exchange, and promotesevidence-based advancements in sector dialog.WSP has offices in 25 countries across Africa,East Asia and the Pacific, Latin America and theCaribbean, South Asia, and in Washington, DC.WSP’s donors include Australia, Austria, Canada,Denmark, Finland, France, the Bill and MelindaGates Foundation, Ireland, Luxembourg,Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, theUnited Kingdom, the United States, and the WorldBank. For more information, please visitwww.wsp.org.

AusAID provides WSP-SAprogrammatic support.

Editor: Anjali Sen GuptaPhotographs by: Asad Zaidi, Panos, and Guy Stubbs/WSPCreated by: Write MediaPrinted by: PS Press Services Pvt. Ltd.

TECHNICAL INPUTS:

Dr. Gopa Kumar Thampi, Ayub Sheikh, Tehseena Rafi, Vandana Mehra, and

Sahar Ali

PEER REVIEWERS:

Ayub Sheikh, Superintending Engineer, KW&SB; Javed Shamim,

Head of Internal Reform Program, KW&SB; Simi Kamal, Pakistan Water

Partnership; and Farhan Anwar and Farhan Sami

FIELD COORDINATION OF THE PROJECT:

Farhan Anwar

OVERALL TASK MANAGEMENT AND SYNTHESIS OF REPORT:

Syeda Maheen Zehra, Senior Institutional Development Specialist

Water and Sewerage Services in Karachi Citizen Report Card ......Without Mr. Syed Farrukh Ansar’s...

Documents

Transcript of Water and Sewerage Services in Karachi Citizen Report Card ......Without Mr. Syed Farrukh Ansar’s...