Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
The WASHBottleneck Analysis Tool (BAT)IRC Symposium 2013Monitoring WASH Services DeliveryAddis Ababa, 9 April 2013Theme 6:...
Why ‘Bottleneck’ Analysis?• Analysis of ‘bottlenecks’ brings focus tocritical, priority issues to address• Multiple constr...
Why a Bottleneck Analysis Tool?• ‘So far’…?• Limited continuity over time (every 2-4 years)• Scoring systems do not captur...
Aim of WASH Bottleneck Analysis Tool• Increase WASH sector resources and efficiencyto achieve more sustainable and equitab...
The Intended Audiences of the BAT• Main user: line ministries responsible for WASH,with the support of external partners• ...
The Process of Tool DevelopmentTool (version 1.0) roll-out in priority countriesWorkshop for roll-out strategy (May 2013)S...
The Initial Vision (Nairobi)• Separate modules for Detailed assessment of sector enabling factors Identification of bott...
Scoring the enabling factors
Identifying bottlenecks, their causesand activities to remove them
Entering the costs and fundsavailable
Prioritizing the activities
Allocating additional funds
Assessing impact on sectorcoverage
Example of Tool Outputs• Enabling factor scores – e.g. national level, water
Example of Tool Outputs• Summary report – e.g. national level, water
Outputs of the Pilot tests• Brought together different stakeholders: timeto reflect - open atmosphere of honesty, notthe u...
What the BAT does not do• Provide key performance indicators - i.e.benchmarking of service• Estimate the funding gap to re...
Can the BAT meet country and globalmonitoring needs?• Issues for country monitoring– Regularity of tool application – coul...
With thanks to- Experts participating in Nairobi workshop- Sector stakeholders in Ghana- Sector stakeholders in Sierra Leo...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

The WASH Bottleneck Analysis Tool (BAT)

  • Be the first to comment

The WASH Bottleneck Analysis Tool (BAT)

  1. 1. The WASHBottleneck Analysis Tool (BAT)IRC Symposium 2013Monitoring WASH Services DeliveryAddis Ababa, 9 April 2013Theme 6: Building Coherence in Global-Regional-National MonitoringAndrew Trevett, Senior Adviser WASH, UNICEFGuy Hutton, UNICEF consultantPeter Harvey, Regional Adviser WASH, UNICEF
  2. 2. Why ‘Bottleneck’ Analysis?• Analysis of ‘bottlenecks’ brings focus tocritical, priority issues to address• Multiple constraints at several levels make ithard to explain lack of progress• Bottleneck: a factor constraining the deliveryof goods or services to a target population,and the sustained consumption of that service• Bottleneck analysis is not new – itforms the basis of CSOs, GLAAS, MAF• However, these tools only go ‘so far’
  3. 3. Why a Bottleneck Analysis Tool?• ‘So far’…?• Limited continuity over time (every 2-4 years)• Scoring systems do not capture marginal changes• Process of reaching consensus on scores• Scoring system does not proceed to identify abottleneck and how it will be removed• Costs of removing bottlenecks focus on infrastructurecosts, not enabling environment• No mechanism to agree priorities• Limited formal integration intosector review process
  4. 4. Aim of WASH Bottleneck Analysis Tool• Increase WASH sector resources and efficiencyto achieve more sustainable and equitableoutcomes, via:– Promoting dialogue, awareness and coordination– Providing rational, evidence-based approach forformulating an investment strategy andunderstanding impacts of investment choices– Facilitating dialogue with sector financiers, inparticular Ministries of Finance and donors– Tracking progress in bottleneck removal over time
  5. 5. The Intended Audiences of the BAT• Main user: line ministries responsible for WASH,with the support of external partners• Other major types of user expected are:– Ministries of Finance seeking to understandalternative ways in which additional funds can beutilized and the impact they have– External partners who want to separately make theirown analysis of how their funds should be best spent.– Sub-national levels, including service providers• Modular approach lends flexibility
  6. 6. The Process of Tool DevelopmentTool (version 1.0) roll-out in priority countriesWorkshop for roll-out strategy (May 2013)Second pilot: Sierra Leone case study (March 2013)Software developmentUrban tool developmentFirst pilot: Ghana case study (March 2012)Rural tool and manual developmentExpert Workshop, Nairobi (October 2011)Literature Review and Initial Concept Development
  7. 7. The Initial Vision (Nairobi)• Separate modules for Detailed assessment of sector enabling factors Identification of bottlenecks and activities for theirremoval Costing of activities and available funds allocation Prioritisation, planning and sequencing Impact of removing bottlenecksUrban Water Rural WaterUrbanSanitationRuralSanitationNational Sub-nationalServiceproviderCommunityHousehold
  8. 8. Scoring the enabling factors
  9. 9. Identifying bottlenecks, their causesand activities to remove them
  10. 10. Entering the costs and fundsavailable
  11. 11. Prioritizing the activities
  12. 12. Allocating additional funds
  13. 13. Assessing impact on sectorcoverage
  14. 14. Example of Tool Outputs• Enabling factor scores – e.g. national level, water
  15. 15. Example of Tool Outputs• Summary report – e.g. national level, water
  16. 16. Outputs of the Pilot tests• Brought together different stakeholders: timeto reflect - open atmosphere of honesty, notthe usual pressure - consensus emerging• Motivated participants to identify what theycould be doing better as institutions andindividually, and inspired them to go away andmake a greater difference• The BAT universally seen as a crucial resource• Tool developers given their homework
  17. 17. What the BAT does not do• Provide key performance indicators - i.e.benchmarking of service• Estimate the funding gap to reach coveragetargets• Advise on technology choice• Build a business strategy
  18. 18. Can the BAT meet country and globalmonitoring needs?• Issues for country monitoring– Regularity of tool application – could it be annual?– How can it feed in to official review processes?– Hundreds of indicators: need to select priority ones– Further flexibility to meet country-specific needs?• Additional issues for global monitoring– Can indicators selected be standardized? Which?– Reporting mechanism – who collects and compiles?– Number of countries – will take time to roll out; not allcountries reporting to GLAAS will wish to apply tool
  19. 19. With thanks to- Experts participating in Nairobi workshop- Sector stakeholders in Ghana- Sector stakeholders in Sierra Leone- UNICEF regional and country staffDevInfo: software tool developmentAndrew Trevett and Paul Edwards, UNICEF

×