Institutionalising monitoring of rural water services in Latin America; Lessons from El Salvador, Honduras and ParaguayStef Smits, Erma Uytewaal and Germán Sturzenegger
Background• Monitoring is considered key in addressing sustainability of rural water
supplies– Corrective action by service providers– Earlier and better targeted post-construction support– Informing policies and strategies for rural water
• Monitoring systems themselves also fraught with coverage and sustainability problems
– Regulators focus on urban areas, not rural– External funding for initial mapping, but not for regular updating– Limited accessibility of data
• IDB, AECID and IRC have been supporting the development of monitoring systems in various countries
• Approach to their institutionalisation, seeking to make sustainability risks explicit and mitigate them - applied in Honduras, El Salvador and Paraguay
Monitoring Sustainable WASH Service Delivery Symposium
Developing monitoring systems• Set of procedures for carrying out monitoring:
– Objectives– Processes– Institutional arrangements– Information system
• Critically assess the capacity to use and maintain it:– Financing framework– Human resources to fulfil responsibilities– Institutional ownership and governance
• Multi-stakeholder process, with leadership by main government agency – even though not always clear who that is
Monitoring Sustainable WASH Service Delivery Symposium
Overview of the approach
Monitoring Sustainable WASH Service Delivery Symposium
Step 1: Analysis of current monitoring practices
• Even in absence of national monitoring system, much monitoring or information flows may be going on
• Analyse potential for building on these and avoiding pitfalls and limitations
• Tools: matrix with monitoring activities – broken down by steps – at different levels
Monitoring Sustainable WASH Service Delivery Symposium
Step
StakeholderData collection Processing Analysis Reporting
Identifying corrective actions
Service providersOn-going but unstructured
Without standard procedure or tool
Without standard procedure or tool
Annual reports to users
Some decision making tools for water quality and administration
Municipal Association of Water Committees
On-going but unstructured
Sometimes, but without standard procedure or tool
Without standard procedure or tool
Unknown Unknown
Operation and Maintenance Technician
Using standard tool. Demand-based and depending on resources
Using SIAR Using SIARTo the service provider and national utility
Based on standard set of typical corrective measures
Regulation and Control Technician
Using standard toolAs above, but using other information system
By national regulatorReports on website of national regulator
National regulator informs municipality to take action
Environmental Health Technicians
Using standard tool, but limited Resource
Data provided to Regional Health Secretariat
Unknown Unknown Unknown
NGOs and projectsDetailed assessments based on project needs
Based on own criteria Based on own criteria InternalFeasibility assessment of Project
Honduran Social Investment Fund (FHIS)
Detailed assessments for pre-feasibility
Based on own criteriaBased on own and funders’ criteria
To mayor and to fundersGo/no-go of the project
Step 2: Definition of the monitoring system
• Step 2a: set the purposes(s) of monitoring; post-construction support and investment planning
• Step 2b: identifying roles• Step 2c: defining the steps in the process• Step 2d: developing the information system, with specific
attention to:– Links to existing information system– Need for and ways of aggregating information– Information technology and corresponding resource requirements
Monitoring Sustainable WASH Service Delivery Symposium
Monitoring Sustainable WASH Service Delivery Symposium
Institution
Roles
System manager Data collector Validator
Information user
PAT
Technical assistance provider (SANAA)
Policy making body (CONASA)
Regulator (ERSAPS)
Implementing agency (FHIS)
Health Secretariat
Finance and Planning Secretariat
Association of Municipalities of Honduras
Municipalities
Associations of Water Committees
Water Committees
NGOs
Step 3: Defining the institutional arrangements • Dialogue to assign institutional responsibilities
– Broken down by steps in monitoring– Phases in the development of the monitoring system
• Tools: matrix with responsibilities
Monitoring Sustainable WASH Service Delivery Symposium
Data collection
Validation ProcessingPublishing of
resultsAnalysis
Identifying corrective measures
Self-reporting by service providers
In municipal Water Roundtables, bringing together municipal officials and water committees. ANDA (national utility) revises information to identity obvious errors and uploads to database
Automatized but under supervision of ANDA
ANDA makes national synthesis report. Municipalities make local reports based on the results from database, where needed supported by ANDA
Municipal Water Roundtables do this jointly
Municipal Water Roundtables do this jointly, supported by ANDA or other PATs
Step 3: Defining the institutional arrangements
Considerations from the 3 countries:•Data collection: by centralised agency initially, but eventually moving to self-reporting by service providers•Validation: spot checks to improve information system, and then by communities and municipalities•Processing and reporting: administrator through automated system•Interpretation and identifying corrective actions: facilitated analysis and tailor-made packaging
Monitoring Sustainable WASH Service Delivery Symposium
Step 4: Costing and responsibilities for financing• Detailed budgeting of all steps in monitoring
– Differentiated between baseline and regular monitoring– Quantifying all costs, including hidden costs, e.g. time of
communities and local government staff• Calibration through rounds of piloting• Based on this, agree on financial agreements• Check whether the costs can be met feasibly by different bodies• Iterations – to adjust budgets or ambitions• Continuous monitoring of the costs of monitoring in the roll-out
Monitoring Sustainable WASH Service Delivery Symposium
Step 4: Costing and responsibilities for financing
• Main costs are in data collection, but don’t underestimate costs of analysis
Monitoring Sustainable WASH Service Delivery Symposium
El Salvador Honduras Paraguay
Baseline 0.39 0.24-0.34(actual)
0.09
Regular updating
0.11 + 0.08 0.23
Conclusions• Monitoring considered important contribution to improve sustainability,
particularly through actions by service providers and post-construction support
• As many monitoring systems often suffer sustainability problems themselves, need to identify these risks and identify mitigation
• Structured approach for defining institutional arrangements through multi-stakeholder process
• Lessons from applications:– Build on existing monitoring practices even if they are incomplete or imperfect– Decentralise most of the steps in monitoring but ensure sufficient support to
local governments– Gradual approach to the comprehensiveness of the scope of the monitoring– Phased approach to reach country-wide scale, including pilots to adjust
information system and create ownership within sector– Costing is important tool in assigning responsibilities and assessing risks
Monitoring Sustainable WASH Service Delivery Symposium
Top Related