The TrackFin initiative aims to develop a standardized methodology for tracking financing for water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) at the national level. Pilot projects in Brazil, Ghana, and Morocco found that comprehensive WASH financing data could be collected using this process. The methodology needs refinement based on lessons learned. Next steps include expanding the number of participating countries, providing training and support, and coordinating TrackFin with other global monitoring tools to better understand financing needs for achieving sector goals.

1. TRACKFIN INITIATIVE:
Key findings and
lessons learned from the process

2. INTRODUCTION
• Initial objectives for the TrackFin initiative
• Overall findings from the pilot phase
• Short-term: immediate next steps
• Defining a joint vision for TrackFin
Medium-term
Long-term
• Necessary conditions for this vision to take shape

3. INITIAL VISION (WHO WORKING PAPER – 2012)
Objectives
• Define and test a globally accepted methodology to track WASH financing at
national level
• Develop a methodology to build WASH Accounts, building upon governments’
statistical systems so as to mainstream data collection
• Encourage countries to adopt this common framework to track financing to WASH
either at national level or for a given geographical area
Approach- the methodology is developed:
• Jointly by leading sector institutions and other entities in charge of financial
tracking (such as the WB, OECD UNSTAT ) – to develop a “common language”
• Iteratively so as to start with simple objectives and develop more complex
approaches (to answer more questions) as we go along
• In a modular manner so that it can be adapted to different contexts and be
applicable to local/regional/national levels

4. OVERALL FINDINGS FROM THE PILOT PHASE
• Very strong interest in tracking financing to the sector
TF process provides a framework to track/report in a comparable format
• Information on WASH sector financing is available but fragmented and
requires significant effort to compile it
TF process maps out actors/data sources to draw a comprehensive picture
• When data is unavailable, estimates can be formulated to form an
overall vision of sector financing
TF process provides suggestions to overcome data gaps and ways to
improve data collection in future phases
• Initial results demonstrate that the methodology is applicable but some
aspects will be further developed

5. DATA AVAILABILITY
• Very strong interest in tracking financing to the sector
TF process provides a framework to track/report in a comparable format
• Information on WASH sector financing is available but fragmented and
requires significant effort to compile it
TF process maps out actors/data sources to draw a comprehensive picture
• When data is unavailable, estimates can be formulated to form an
overall vision of sector financing
TF process provides suggestions to overcome data gaps and ways to
improve data collection in future phases
• Initial results demonstrate that the methodology is applicable but some
aspects will be further developed

6. MAIN RESULTS AT COUNTRY LEVEL
All 3 countries were able to gather comprehensive financing data, inform
key indicators and answer four basic questions :
• What is the total expenditure in the WASH sector ?
Brazil (2012) Morocco (2011) Ghana (2012)
Total expenditure to WASH
(Mio USD)
26,911 2,219 521
Total expenditure to WASH per capita
(USD per capita)
137 69 21
Total expenditure to WASH per capita
as a % of GDP
1.2% 2.2% 1.3%
Total expenditure to health as a % of GDP
(source: Global Health Expenditure Database)
9.3% 6.3% 5.2%
WASH sector lags behind other sectors

7. MAIN RESULTS
• How are the funds distributed by WASH services ?
Water receives largest share
Less for rural (water and sanitation)

8. • Who pays for WASH services ?
MAIN RESULTS
Service users are the
main contributors

9. MAIN RESULTS
All 3 countries were able to gather comprehensive financing data, inform
key indicators and answer four basic questions :
• What is the total expenditure in the WASH sector ?
• How are the funds distributed by WASH services & expenditure types?
• Who pays for WASH services ?
• What are the main channels of funding?
i.e. In Brazil, WASH sector expenditure channeled
60% corporate service providers
17% local Governments/authorities
8.1% Federal Government (2012 compared to 5.5% in 2010)

10. IMMEDIATE NEXT STEPS
• At international level
• Update the TrackFin methodology and Guidance document based on the
recommendations and lessons learned of this first phase.
• Communicate around TrackFin through international fora and linkages with other
initiatives
 GLAAS process and High Level Meeting of Sanitation and Water for All
 WSUP/IRC/Tremolet initiative on the role of public finance for WASH
 World Water Forum 2015

11. MAIN POINTS TO CLARIFY IN METHODOLOGY
• Modify methodology based on lessons from country testing
• Clarify the scope of the exercise + explicitly include hygiene
• Refine the classifications: no major changes envisaged
• Clarify the use of “financing sources” (i.e. “financing types”) and “financing
units” – and recommend zooming in on the financing of specific financing units
that are channelling funding
• Clarify the approaches to “tracking financing”
• Cash-flow approach: track financial flows: coming vs. / outgoings
• Economic approach: sector revenue requirement vs. non-repayable
financing
• Balance sheet approach: focus on the “asset side” – where possible
• Other improvements
• Give advice on running the process (e.g. High-level Committee to drive
the process and secure buy-in at the highest level)
• Introduce “real-life” examples from the experience gained in WASH
sector in Brazil, Ghana and Morocco
• Organising surveys on specific areas (e.g. hh spending for self-supply)
• Make it “more user-friendly”: improve the structure, delete unnecessary material

12. AT COUNTRY LEVEL IN PILOT COUNTRIES
• Prepare Policy Briefs to communicate to decision-makers on how the data can
enable better policy-making
• Use the results for advocacy and improving transparency in the sector
• Identify areas where the approach needs to be strengthened / detailed to
produce more policy-relevant information
• Promote more regional disaggregation and focus on equity
• Support the development of country-level of information systems and surveys
• Organising surveys on specific areas (e.g. hh spending for self-supply) or feed into the design of
existing surveys led by Statistical Offices
• For future exercises:
• Identify ways to “institutionalise” the approach at country level, as this is more cost effective in the long-term
(based on “health sector” experience)
• Engage with sector stakeholders as data providers but also as “data users”
• Make the link with progress on access to water and sanitation

13. AT INTERNATIONAL LEVEL: DEFINING A JOINT VISION
More detail in 3
pilot countries
Horizontal expansion: reaching more countries
Vertical expansion: detailing the approach
20 countries before GLAAS 2016

14. MEDIUM TERM STEPS
• Organize a new phase of TrackFin with the initial pilot countries,
taking into account all national recommendations
• Extend the TrackFin initiative to as many countries as possible (in
the context of GLAAS), based on a revised Guidance document.
• Encourage / support other institutions that want to produce
WASH-Accounts in other countries (e.g. WSP / World Bank)
• Provide training and capacity building to roll out the methodology
• Identify “key indicators” that we can ask all countries to report on
• Develop a data collection tool to support countries to produce
national WASH-Accounts on a regular basis

15. • TrackFin is a data collection and analysis tool for the sector: it
needs to be developed in coordination with other global
monitoring tools
• Respond to sector’s current priorities:
 Understand how much is spent and how much is needed for meeting
SDGs (as a baseline for estimating investment requirements)
 Evaluate whether funding is best used to reduce inequalities
 Compare spending to service levels’ “markers” to understand the cost-effectiveness
of these investments
LONGER TERM

16. IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS
• Institutional hosting arrangements
• WHO could remain a driver for the initiative (due to the link with GLAAS and the
potential to learn and build upon health accounts development) but there would be
great advantages in developing a partnership approach to implementation
• A platform could be developed to share documents and results
• Financing requirements and funding sources
• Different visions have different funding implications
• Encourage countries to fund the exercise themselves where they can
• Identify international funders that may be interested in supporting next phases