• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
WASHCost Sierra Leone
 

WASHCost Sierra Leone

on

  • 755 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
755
Views on SlideShare
636
Embed Views
119

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0

6 Embeds 119

http://www.washcost.info 104
http://www.ircwash.org 8
http://irc.cowsystems.com 4
http://admin.washcost.info 1
http://unjobs.org 1
http://export.irc.cowsystems.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    WASHCost Sierra Leone WASHCost Sierra Leone Presentation Transcript

    • Water Directorate, MWRJanuary 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • Outline Introduction to LCCA Key findings of inception mission Proposed study district Activities and milestones Project management structure January 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • WASHCost projectJanuary 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • The cost of failure – 20 countries in sub-Saharan AfricaInvestment 36%loss insub- Sierra Leone today??Saharan -~40% of rural non-functionalAfrica of at time of visit (point sources)???betweenUS$ 1.2 to1.3 billionover 20years Information Collated by Peter Harvey, UNICEF Zambia, May 2007
    • Life-cycle costs approach The life-cycle costs is the cost of ensuring adequate water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) services to a specific population in a determined geographical area - not just for a few years but indefinitely.’The WASHCost methodology, Life-cycle cost approach (LCCA) has two components: - the cost of providing WASH services - WASH service received by the users January 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • Disaggregated Life Cycle CostsJanuary 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • Cost per technology CapEx per capita - WPS US $ 40 and Piped scheme US$ 80January 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • WATER –CapEx piped schemesJanuary 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • Direct Support cost modelling with DAsJanuary 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • ExpDS per capita at district levelJanuary 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • Water service levels Quantity Quality Accessibility Reliability Service (lpcd) distance and crowding (mpcd) levelHigh >= 60 Litres per Meets or exceeds Less than 10 minutes (Water Very reliable = capita per day national norms available in the compound or HH) works all the time based on regular testingIntermediat >= 40 Litres pere capita per day Acceptable user Between 10 and 30 minutes. Reliable/secure =Basic >= 20 Litres per perception and (Less than 500m AND <= works most of the(normative) capita per day meets/exceeds normative population per time national norms functioning water point) based on occasional testingSub- >=5 Litres per Negative user Between 30 and 60 minutes. Problematicstandard capita per day perception and/or (Between 500m and 1000 meters =Suffers no testing AND/OR more than normative significant population per functioning water breakdowns and point) slow repairsNo service <5 Litres per Fails to meet More than 60min Unreliable/insecu capita per day national norms (More than 1000m) re = completely Source: Moriarty et al., 2010 broken down January 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • Costing sanitation service levels Environmental ReliabilityService Accessibility Use protection (O&M)levels (pollution and density)Improved Each family dwelling has Facilities used Regular or routine Non problematicservice one or more toilets in by all members O&M (inc. pit environmental impact the compound of HH emptying) disposal and re-use of requiring minimal safe-by products user effortBasic Latrine with Facilities used Unreliable O&M Non problematicservice impermeable slab (hh or by some (inc. pit emptying) environmental impact shared) at national norm members of HH and requiring high and safe disposal distance from hh user effortLimited Platform without“service” (impermeable) slab No or No O&M (pit Significant separated faeces from insufficient use emptying) taking environmental users place and any pollution, increasingNo service No separation between user extremely dirty with increased and faeces, e.g. open toilet population density defecationJanuary 25, 2013 et al., 2011 (revised service levels) Source: Potter KNUST/IRC team
    • Reliability and use are important Environmental ReliabilityService Accessibility Use protection (O&M)levels (pollution and density)Improved Each family dwelling has Facilities used Regular or routine Non problematicservice one or more toilets in by all members O&M (inc. pit environmental impact the compound of HH emptying) disposal and re-use of requiring minimal safe-by products user effortBasic Latrine with Facilities used Unreliable O&M Non problematicservice impermeable slab (hh or by some (inc. pit emptying) environmental impact shared) at national norm members of HH and requiring high and safe disposal distance from hh user effortLimited Platform without“service” (impermeable) slab No or No O&M (pit Significant separated faeces from insufficient use emptying) taking environmental users place and any pollution, increasingNo service No separation between user extremely dirty with increased and faeces, e.g. open toilet population density defecationJanuary 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • Cost and Service Level by areaJanuary 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • Cost vrs water service levelsJanuary 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • Hygiene Service The hygiene indictors cover:  Faecal containment and latrine use  Hand washing with soap/Substitute  Drinking water source and ManagementJanuary 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • KEY FINDINGSJanuary 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • General Findings High enthusiasm and feedback on “good timing” from stakeholders. Urgent need for annual recurrent costs after construction. Assumption that after construction Local Councils and communities will “take over” the management of the facilities. Lack of knowledge on the requirements for yearly maintenance and human resources contributing to rates of no-functionality as high as 40%, The strong capacity building focus in the project is seen as fundamental for supporting realistic WASH Council plans and budgets. Interest in the “service level” approach to measure sustainability and value for money.January 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • Challenges to project implementation Lack of personnel and logistics at the Ministry of Water Resources. No coordination platform to discuss sector priorities, which will limit the dissemination and uptake of project findings.  No sharing between key implementing development partners  No sharing between DPs and government There are limited programmes in rural water and sanitation which have been implemented more than three years ago, limiting the collection of real data on maintenance.January 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • Quick wins for WASHCost project Available capacity for institutional cost mapping , organising larger data collection in the initial three districts and physical hosting of the project High interest from health and sanitation department. In addition to the agreements with the MoWR, we will also seek an agreement with the MoH. Stakeholders seem to agree on study districts based on availability of cost information , diversity of water systems and sanitation/hygiene approaches, a mix of rural, small-town and peri-urban systems and geographical distribution. Availability and willingness to share cost and service level data and several ongoing complementary studies with which synergies can be achieved. January 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • Districts for study Availability/diversity ofDistrict Implementing information Other aspectsN/S/E agencies with costs Water SanitationKenema (E) R + PU R + PU GOAL, GIZ Mentioned by Gravity, HP CLTS WaterAid, UNICEF everyone + ASIBo (S) PU – gravity PU Through district Dynamic fed, HP leadershipBombali (N) Gravity, HP CLTS UNICEF Spare part study InterAidTonkolili (N) Rural part of CLTS UNICEF ASI BombaliPort Loko (N) X CLTS UNICEF, JICA, PLANKambia (N) 42 small X JICA ASI townsMoyamba (S) Water CLTS PLAN, UNICEF ASI programmePujehun (S) CLTS UNICEF Difficult area, not for pilotJanuary 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • ActivitiesGrouped into 5 areas:Capacity building  Study tour in Ghana  District training in LCCA  Training in Data Collection  National level LCCA trainingData Collection and Analysis  Institutional Cost mapping  Data Collection  Data Analysis January 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • Activities Learning and Sharing  Validation workshop on Institutional cost mapping  Validation workshop on cost and service level analysis  WASHCost Sierra Leone website  Presentation at national, regional and international conferences Embedding  Publication of briefing notes for the sector  Dedicated support for the use of WASHCost data in selected Project Management  Reporting  Management of consultants  Synergies with ongoing projectsJanuary 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • Mile stones Description of outcome based milestones Expected1 Agreements with MoWR and MoH on their roles, selection ofMarch 2013 focal persons and outcomes of study trip to Ghana2 Establishment of Steering Committee to guide the March implementation of WASHCost Sierra Leone 20133 Institutional cost mapping discussed and validated with sector May 2013 stakeholders4 Selected district staff is trained on the life-cycle cost approach June 20135 Data analysis discussed and validated with sector stakeholders August 20136 Case-studies, briefing notes and other advocacy materials Nov 2013 shared at national, regional and international level7 Evidence on the use of the life-cycle cost approach for planning February and budgeting 2014 January 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • Project Management structure Project Steering Committee KNUST/IRC ASI/WASH FACILITY Local consultants: Institutional Cost mapping Data collection Project hostingJanuary 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • What WASHCost can offer Compare the normative service indicators stated in the Sierra Leone policy with the real level of services delivered. Provide life-cycle cost benchmarks for rural and peri-urban services. Measure the costs of decentralisation (direct support expenditure). Quantify wasteful investments by measuring “slippage levels”. Define the levels of maintenance required and compare with existing funds to the sector. Quantify amount of capital expenditure budget that could be reserved for the maintenance, which users cannot pay for to ensure sustainability. Capacity building and training on budgeting, planning and monitoring costs and service levels and the cost implications for different implementation models. January 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team
    • January 25, 2013 KNUST/IRC team