Bangalore

1,290 views

Published on

Published in: Business, News & Politics
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,290
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
45
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Bangalore

  1. 1. Service Level Benchmarking of…Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike Bangalore Two days results workshop on 14-15 Dec’09
  2. 2. City Profile2001 Census Population of BMP2001 Census Population of BMP 43.01 lakhs (58.92-BBMP) 43.01 lakhs (58.92-BBMP)Present estimated Population of BBMPPresent estimated Population of BBMP 78.07 lakhs 78.07 lakhsPresent estimated slum population ofPresent estimated slum population ofBBMPBBMP 10.9 lakhs 10.9 lakhsPresent AreaPresent Area 793.47 sq. kms 793.47 sq. kmsDeclared as one of the JnNURM CitiesDeclared as one of the JnNURM Cities Water Supply & & Sewerage – Water Supply & Sewerage – Water Supply Sewerage– Bangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Water Supply & Sewerage– Bangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Bangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Board (BWSSB) Bangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Board (BWSSB) ServiceService Providers Board (BWSSB) Board (BWSSB)Service Providers Providers Storm Water Drainage & Solid Waste Management – Bruhat Storm Water Drainage & Solid Waste Management – Storm Water Drainage & Solid Waste Management – Bruhat Storm Water Drainage & Solid Waste Management – Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) Bangalore Mahanagara Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) Bruhat Palike (BBMP) Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP)
  3. 3. Solid Waste Management Performance Indicator Benchmark Status Reliability 74.5Household Level Coverage 100% D 54Eff. in Collection of Solid Waste 100% B 30Extent of Segregation of MSW 100% B 77.3Extent of MSW Recovered 80% B 57.6Extent of Scientific Disposal of MSW 100% B Nil demand isExtent of Cost Recovery 100% not being maintained 80Eff. in Redressal of Customer Complaints 80% D NA demand isEff. In Collection of SWM Charges 90% not being maintained
  4. 4. SWM: Observations & Comments • In wake of merger of new areas to BMP and new delimitation of wards the ward wise precise data is not available. • Lack of record maintenance and updation at ward levels had a considerable impact on the indicators. Very basic data like ward wise households, commercial establishment etc. itself is not available. • Garbage weighing mechanism is yet to be set up at the dumpsites (3 nos.) • User fee is being collected from commercial establishments. The entire expenditure is met from municipal own revenue. • There is no demand being prepared for SWM Cess collected from commercial establishment. • Accounting part of SWM is being done except for O&M of vehicles which is accounted under general category.
  5. 5. SWM: Info Systems identified for improvement Indicators Reason for low reliability ISIPHH level Coverage Data base is not being Even though compliance maintained based on the reports are being maintained the compliance reports from same needs to be upgraded to wards capture HHs coverage detailsEfficiency of collection of No Weigh bridges at To install weighing machine atmunicipal solid waste dumpsite (3 nos.) dump sites GPS to be extended to 5 new zones.Segregation No segregation is being Involving Local Citizens followed thus no data is Development available Promoting source segregation
  6. 6. SWM: Timelines for ISIP Indicators ISIP Timeline Even though compliance 6 monthsHH level Coverage reports are being maintained the same needs to be upgraded to capture HHs coverage details To install weighing machine 3 monthsEfficiency of collection of at dump sitesmunicipal solid waste GPS to be extended to 5 6 months new zones 6 monthsSegregation Identification of sorting station Involving local community
  7. 7. SWM: Areas identified for improvement –Performance 1. Source Segregation • Source segregation of MSW to be promoted 2. Achieving zero garbage zones • On pilot basis this has been successfully implemented in 2 divisions & will be replicated in the other areas. • Establishment of decentralized composting units at selected CA parks, with the involvement of RWAs, SHGs and NGOs. 3. Recovery of waste • Extensive usage of plastic waste in development of city roads. • Development of sorting stations at ward levels for collection of materials that can be re-cycled. 4. Information improvement • Monthly Information System to be developed at ward levels to achieve effective administration and monitoring system. 5. Cost Recovery • Taking a policy decision on collection of user charges to attain self sustenance for the service delivery.
  8. 8. Storm Water DrainagePerformance Indicator Benchmark Status ReliabilityCoverage 100% 5 C 135Incidence of water logging 0 numbers B numbersObservations/Comments• Exact length of tertiary drains needs to be assessed.• Lack of regular updation of information on drains, water stagnation points etc.• No centralized monitoring system is in place.• Ward level road history is to be maintained. This is to be linked GIS.
  9. 9. SWD: Areas identified for improvement Indicators Reason for low reliability ISIPCoverage No comprehensive records Ward level road history register to be on drains. updated Developing a GIS based road database Maintenance of recordsIncidence of No records are being Identification of flood prone areasWater updated on occurrence of Integration of traffic data and GIS basedlogging flooding data Updation of records on occurrence of flooding Participatory reporting for flooding incidence Establishment of rain gauge recording system & integration of rain fall data
  10. 10. SWD - Timelines for ISIP Indicators ISIP TimelineCoverage Ward level road history register to 6 months be updated Developing a GIS based road database Maintenance of recordsIncidence of Water logging Identification of flood prone areas 12 months Integration of traffic data and GIS based data Updation of records on occurrence of flooding Participatory reporting for flooding incidence Establishment of rain gauge recording system & integration of rain fall data
  11. 11. SWD: Areas identified for improvement –Performance• Identification of critical flood prone areas and constructing diversion drains to prevent upstream water entering into the low lying areas• Recreation of temporary retention points• Remodeling and Desilting all storm water drains where necessary• Use of public spaces for storage of water• Incorporate effective drain management practices. Removal of all encroachments and conservation of the same Encouraging implementation of RWH at households
  12. 12. Service Level Benchmarking ofBangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Board Bangalore Two days results workshop on 14-15 Dec’09
  13. 13. Water Supply IndicatorsPerformance Indicator Benchmark Status ReliabilityCoverage 100% 50.8 BPer Capita Supply of Water 135 lpcd 88 AExtent of Metering 100% 97.6 AContinuity of supply 24X7 3 DExtent of Non-revenue Water 15% 51 A 86.7Eff. in redressal of customer complaints 80% CQuality of Water Supplied 100% 82.7 ACost Recovery 100% 92.2 BEff. In Collection of Water Charges 90% 97.1 A
  14. 14. Water: Observations & Comments BWSSB has a well maintained data base on connections, user charges, demand and collection, quantity of water supplied, water quality etc. Jurisdictional overlaps (8 ULBs & BWSSB were responsible for Water Supply in their respective areas, prior to merger of ULBs as BBMP). This had significant impact on the availability of disaggregated data, as transition is still going on. Total No. of HHs and Population is not available in terms of Division- wise jurisdiction.
  15. 15. Water: Areas identified forimprovement – Info Systems Indicators Reason for low reliability ISIPHH level Coverage of Jurisdictional overlaps Survey to be conducted toDirect Water Supply verify the BBMP Data baseConnections with BWSSB Data base.Continuity of Water Supply No data base maintained on Developing a data base and a regular basis. a monitoring mechanism for hr. of supply and pressure at customer end.Efficiency in redressal of No data base is maintained Developing a data base andcustomer complaints on a regular basis. a monitoring mechanism for registering complaints at customer end.
  16. 16. Water Supply: Timelines for ISIP Indicators ISIP TimelineHH level Coverage of Survey to be conducted toDirect Water Supply verify the BBMP Database 2 yearsConnections with BWSSB Database.Continuity of Water Supply Developing a database and a monitoring mechanism 2 years for hours of supply and pressure at customer end.Efficiency in redressal of Developing a databasecustomer complaints and a monitoring mechanism 1 year for registering complaints at customer end.
  17. 17. Water: Areas identified forimprovement – Performance New connection application shall incorporate a data element indicating number of households serviced by the connection. Addressing NRW Metering of Slum HHs HRD Accountability – training programmes
  18. 18. Sewerage IndicatorsPerformance Indicator Benchmark Status ReliabilityCoverage of Toilets 100% 100 DCoverage of Sewerage Network 100% 38 B AColl. Eff. of Sewerage Network 100% 55Adequacy of Sewage Treatment 106 A 100%CapacityQuality of Sewage Treatment 100% 100 BExtent of Reuse and Recycling of 20% 36 ASewageExtent of cost recovery in waste water 100% 110 Bmanagement CEff. in redressal of customer complaints 80% 94Eff. In Collection of Sewage Water 90% 97 ACharges
  19. 19. Sewerage: Observations &Comments BWSSB has a well maintained data base on connections, user charges, demand and collection, quantity of water supplied, water quality etc. Jurisdictional overlaps (8 ULBs & BWSSB were responsible for Water Supply in their respective areas, prior to merger of ULBs as BBMP). This had significant impact on the availability of disaggregated data, as transition is still going on.
  20. 20. Sewerage: Areas identified forimprovement – Info Systems Indicators Reason for low ISIP reliabilityCoverage of Waste water Jurisdictional overlaps Updating Sewerage networkNetwork connection database.
  21. 21. Sewerage: Timelines for ISIP Indicators ISIP TimelineCoverage of Waste water Updating Sewerage network 2 yearsNetwork connection database.
  22. 22. Sewerage: Areas identified forimprovement – Performance Sewerage Network Coverage (Improvement)
  23. 23. Recommendations SLB Projectregarding up-scaling Technical assistance should be strengthen for up scaling this initiative Orientation and rapid training program should be conducted before the up scaling programme Exposure visit
  24. 24. Learnings SLB implementation on a sustainable basis will help in decision making process. Need time for aggregation of disaggregated data( especially for reconciliation) Continuous technical support is very much essential at least for the initial few years of implementation Orientation a must at all levels of officials periodically preferably in local language Need for SLB manuals in local language Need for exposure visits to understand PIPs and ISIPs Developing sense of ownership among the officials down the line is very challenging yet important. SLB process helped to discuss& debate on various issues related to service level performance
  25. 25. Way forward Orientation programme on SLB framework for all officials and elected representatives Identification & implementation of ISIPs program should be organized Identification & implementation of PIP program should be organized
  26. 26. THANK YOU

×