Report of Joint UNICEF/WHO training on Water Safety Programming

Accelerating Water Safety in Rural and Small
Systems
Joint WHO-UNICEF Regional Training on Water Safety for
Anglophone Africa
28 May – 1 June 2018
Kigali, Rwanda

JointWHO-UNICEFRegional TrainingonWaterSafety – MeetingReport
28 May – 1 June 2018 | Kigali,Rwanda
1st
Draft
2
Background and Objectives 4
Workshop Overview 5
Implications on increased level of ambition in the SDG – the role of water safety 6
Mapping Actions,Gaps and Opportunities for Water Safety 7
Frameworks for Delivering Safe Drinking Water 7
WHO Framework for Safe Drinking-water ........................................................................................7
Risk Management Approaches to Water Safety ................................................................................8
Classical Water Safety Plansfor Small Community Water Supplies.....................................................8
Community-led Water Safety Planning ..........................................................................................10
Defining Different Risk Management Approaches...........................................................................11
Monitoring for Results: operational and surveillance monitoring 12
Roadmaps to Implementing and Scaling-Up the Water Safety Agenda 12
Follow-up from the Workshop 13
Lessons Learned for Future Workshops..........................................................................................13
Fine-Tuning Water Safety Roadmaps 14
Webinar 14
In-CountryPilots 14
Conclusion and Next Steps 14
Next Steps....................................................................................................................................15
Annex 1: Meeting agenda 16
Annex 2: List of Participants 19
Annex 3: Feedback to local operator of Kayonza district 21
Annex 4: Water Safety Self-Assessment 21
Annex 5: Water Safety Country Roadmap 21
Figure 1: Meeting participants draw a typical rural water system..........................................................5
Figure 2: Increased level of ambitionfor the SDGs................................................................................6
Figure 3: Water Safety self-assessment completed by Ghana................................................................7
Figure 4: WHO Framework for Safe Drinking-water...............................................................................7
Figure 5: Mappingof a typical rural watersysteminEritrea,withrisksandbarriersto watersafety
identified...........................................................................................................................................8
Figure 6: WHO Water Safety Plan cycle for small systems .....................................................................9
Figure 7: Water transport observed during field visit to Kayonza district................................................9
Figure 8: Observed storage tank lid not securely closed........................................................................9
Figure 9: Participant's mapping of water system during field visit..........................................................9
Figure 10: Community-led water safety planning cycle, modifiedfrom WHO cycle ...............................10
Figure 11: Workshop stimulation of triggering community-led water safety planning...........................11
Figure 12: Minimum criteria for water safe community.......................................................................11

1st
Draft
3
Figure 13: Types of intervention based on management type and source type.....................................12
Figure 14: Sierra Leone's roadmap for scaling-up water safety ............................................................13

1st
Draft
4
Background and Objectives
The developmentof thisworkshopwasacollaborative effortbetweenWHOandUNICEF on a critical
area of the Sustainable DevelopmentGoals(SDGs),anddemonstratesincreasedcollaborationand
alignmentof strategiesbetweenthe twoorganizationstoaddress watersafety.
Water safetyisthe unfinishedbusinessof the MillenniumDevelopmentGoal (MDG) target on water,
where a focuson increasedaccesstowaterservicesthroughimprovedinfrastructure didnotalways
resultinwaterfree fromharmful contaminants. Itisestimatedgloballythat10% of improveddrinking
watersourcesare at riskof contaminationand1.8 billionpeopleuse contaminatedwatersources.1
To
addressthe gap betweenimproveddrinkingwatersourcesanddrinkingwatersafety,the SDGsshifted
focusto service deliveryfrominfrastructure andincludedanadditionalrungof safely managed drinking
waterservices to the JMP service ladder. Undersafelymanageddrinkingwaterservices,watersafetyis
highlightedasa critical criterion toachieve the highestrankonthe drinkingwaterJMPladder. People
are saidto be usingsafelymanageddrinkingwaterserviceswhenthe waterconsumedisfroman
improvedsource whichislocatedonpremises,availablewhenneededandfree fromfecal and priority
chemical contamination.
RecentJMP resultsdemonstratedthatrural communitiesare strugglingtoreachthe top rung of the
service laddercomparedtourbancommunities. In 2015, the JMP estimatesthat2.1 billionpeoplelack
safelymanageddrinkingwaterservices,where55% of rural populationsuse adrinkingwatersource
whichisfree fromcontamination,comparedwith89% of urban populations.InSub-SaharanAfrica,159
millionpeoplestillusedsurface watersourcesand263 millionpeople hadaccesstoa limitedlevel of
service. 2
These estimatesdemonstratereal disparitiesinthe level of service betweenurban,peri-urban
and rural areas, socio-economicstatus andhighlighthow watersafetyisanissue formanyrural
communities.
To guide actionsonwatersafety,WHO has developedthe FrameworkforSafeDrinking-water,which
includessettinghealthbasedwaterqualitystandards/targets,implementingaproactive risk
managementapproach(watersafetyplans) anddevelopingindependentsurveillance systems. Water
safetyplanningisaproactive riskmanagementapproach,spanningthe entire waterchainwiththe
objective of minimizingriskstowaterquality. Tosupportthe implementationof watersafetyfrom
national tocommunitylevel,UNICEFhasdevelopedthe Six Pillarsof WaterSafetyProgrammingwhich
focusesonareas where the organizationcanaddvalue andleverage existingprogrammes.
The goal of the workshopwasforparticipantstobecome advocatesandspearheadpilotsforwater
safetyandprogrammeswhichreduce the riskof contaminationtodrinkingwater,especiallyin
rural/small systems.
The specificobjectivesof the workshopwereforparticipantsto:
1. Appreciate watersafetyinthe contextof the SDGs;
2. understandthe conceptandpractical applicationof WaterSafetyPlans(WSPs);
3. understandthe differentapproachestoWSPsand where these approachesmaybe applied;
4. developconcrete roadmapstoadvance the watersafetyagendaintheirnational context.
1 Progress on drinkingwater and sanitation –2014 update. Geneva: World Health Organization (WHO) and the
United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), 2014.License: ISBN 978 92 4 150724 0
2 Progress on drinkingwater, sanitation and hygiene: 2017 update and SDG baselines.Geneva: World Health
Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), 2017.License: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.

1st
Draft
5
The programme Agendaisattachedin Annex 2.
The workshopwasstructuredaroundthree keyareas:
1. How can riskmanagementapproaches(WSPs) towatersafetycontributetoachievingthe SDGs?
2. The implicationof the greaterlevelof ambitioninthe SDGs.
3. The importance of monitoringresults;the distinctionbetweenoperational monitoringof
barriersand surveillance of waterqualitysystems.
Workshop Overview
The workshopran overfive days;startingwith
inspirationalspeechesfromUNICEF’sRepresentative
inRwanda (Mr. Ted Maly),the WHO Representativein
Rwanda(Dr. OluOlushayo) andthe State Ministerof
Health(Dr.Patrick Ndimubanzi). Onthe fifthday,the
workshopconcludeddaywithclosingremark
deliveredbythe Directorof Clinical Servicesof the
Ministryof Health of Rwanda(Dr. Zuberi Muvunyi).
The speakersdiscussedthe importance of water
qualitytoachievingSDGtarget6.1 and itsimpact on
achievingotherSDGtargets,such as the targetsfor
healthandclimate change.
The workshopbroughttogether15 Englishspeaking
countriesfromAfrica,withforty-nine (49) participants
fromnational governments,watersuppliers,international donors,WHOandUNICEF. The countries
whoparticipatedinthe meetingwere,Botswana,Eritrea,Gambia,Ghana,Kenya,Liberia,Malawi,
Mauritius,Mozambique,Rwanda(host),Seychelles,SierraLeone,SouthSudan,UgandaandZambia. A
listof participantsisattachedinAnnex 1. The overall aimof the workshopwasto supportcountriesto
realize theirSDGcommitments,particularlyGoal 6and target6.1, by advancingthe national water
safetyagenda.
Duringthe beginningof the workshop,participantsdiscussedthe increasedlevel of ambition of the SDG
target onwaterand if it was an achievable intheircountrycontexts. Theybecame familiarwiththe
WHO FrameworkforSafe Drinking-waterandanalyzedongoingactivities,gapsandopportunities
aroundwatersafetyintheircountry. Participantswere introducedtoriskmanagementapproachesto
watersafetyandsurveillance. Thisincludedthe WSPconcept,outliningboththe “classical”WSP
approach forsmall communitywatersupplies(i.e.the WHO6-stepsapproachshowninFig.5) and
Community-ledWaterSafetyPlans(CL-WSPs),whichisbeingdevelopedandadvocatedforbyUNICEF.
The benefitsof adoptingthe WSPapproachwere presented.The impactof climate change onwater
supplieswasintegratedthroughoutthe workshop,outlininghow WSPsare aneffective approachto
assessandmanage climate-relatedrisks. The workshopincludedacombinationof classroombased
theory,activitiesanddiscussions,alongsidepractical applicationof the learningsviaafieldvisitin
KayonzaDistrict,inEasternRwandato observe a watersupplysystem.
Figure 1: Meeting participants draw a typical rural water system

1st
Draft
6
UNICEF Six Pillars of Water Safety Programming:
UNICEF hasdevelopedthe Six Pillarsof WaterSafetyProgramming,whichfocusesonareasinwhich
UNICEF can add value andleverage existing programmes,rangingfromnational tocommunitylevel.
Pillar1: Increase political prioritizationforwatersafety
Pillar2: Shiftto riskmanagementapproach(e.g.WSPs) atnational level
Pillar3: Developdecentralizedcapacityforrural riskmanagement(e.g.WSPs)
Pillar4: Empower“rightsclaimers”toriskmanagement
o Behaviorchange programmesinsmall communities
o Needtofindthe rightbalance betweenwhatcommunitiescandoand how
governmentcansupportor upgrade infrastructure
Pillar5: Linkwatersafetyto the broaderwateragenda
o Leveragingof otherprogrammaticareasas entrypointsat communitylevel
Pillar6: Enhance monitoringforresultsatall levels
Operational monitoring,waterqualitysurveillance andnational outcomesmonitoring
At the conclusionof the workshop,participants
draftedcountry-levelroadmapstoimplementthe
watersafetyagendaandwater safetyplanning,
identifyingkeyentrypointstoleveragethe
adoptionof thisconcept.Participantscompileda
draft WSPreviewof the systemvisitedtopresent
as a signof courtesyto the local operatorfor their
due consideration.
Implications on increased level of
ambition in the SDG – the role of
water safety
The drinkingwaterSDG target(Target 6.1.1) ismore
ambitiouscomparedtothe MDG watertarget,withthe SDGs anotherservice level(of safelymanaged
drinkingwaterservices) hadbeenadded. The three criteriaforsafelymanageddrinkingwaterservices
potentiallyresultincountries’estimatesforsafelymanageddrinkingwaterservicestobe lowerthan
MDG estimatesforaccessto improvedsources. Inthe latestJMPreport,only96 countrieshad data
available onwaterquality.
Participantsdiscussedthe implicationsof the increasedlevelof ambitionfortheircountryandachieving
target 6.1.1. Forsome countries,realizingsafelymanageddrinkingwaterservicesforall people,
especiallyinrural areas,maynot be achievable by2030. Since the SDGs are global goalsthatapplyto all
countries,theyhave beenframedtoenableprogressiverealizationandforcountriestosettheirown
pace andlevel of ambition.Forexample,UNICEF’sorganizational responsewastoalignitsstrategywith
the ideaof progressiverealizationandisadvocatingforBasic+,whichisa drinkingwaterservice thatis
free fromcontamination,butnotonpremises. Participantsagreedthatachievingall the three criteria
of safelymanagedservicesmaybe achallenge,especiallyinrural/smallsystems. Itwasdiscussedthat
while Basic+wasa more attainable goal,forsome countriesitwouldstill be achallenge. The challenge
remainshowto increase watersafetyindifferentrungsof the ladderandhow can risksbe reducedeven
if upgradesininfrastructure are notrealistic?
Figure 2: Increased level of ambition for the SDGs

1st
Draft
7
Mapping Actions, Gaps and Opportunities for Water Safety
Participantsdiscussedthe importance of water
safetyonadvancingwaterservicesandanalyzedthe
currentactions,gaps and opportunitiesintheir
country. Each countrydelegation conductedaself-
assessmenton watersafetyusingatemplate based
on WHO’sFrameworkforSafe Drinking-waterand
UNICEF’s6 Pillarsof WaterSafetyProgramming,see
Annex 4.
For currentactions,several countries(SierraLeone,
Ghana, Gambia) reportedusingthe resultsof the
MICs to increase political prioritizationforwater
safety(Pillar1). Forenhancingmonitoringof results
(Pillar6),manycountriesidentifiedactivitiesaround
the use of laboratoriesforwaterqualitytesting.
Several themesemergedwhencountriesanalyzed
the watersafetygaps. A lack of coordination
amongdifferentlineministriesandpolitical will
was reportedbymultiplecountries(Pillar1). Lack of coordinationwasagainidentifiedasa gap to
developingdecentralizedcapacity(Pillar3). Low communityawarenesstothe importance of water
safetywasreportedbymultiple countriesasagap in empoweringrightsclaimers(Pillar4).
Whenidentifyingopportunities,JointSectorReviews(JSRs)were proposedtwice asbothaway to
increase politicalprioritization(Malawi,Pillar1) andas a tool to shifttowarda riskmanagement
approach at national level(Liberia,Pillar2). The use of donor agreementsandhigh-level platforms,for
example the SanitationandWaterforAll (SWA) partnershipwheresuggestedaspotentialwaysto
increase politicalprioritization. Toempowerrightsclaimers(Pillar4),twoopportunitiesidentifiedwere
to leverage consumerrightsgroups(Gambia) andtouse service chartersbetweenthe consumer
parliamentandservice providers(Malawi).
Frameworks for Delivering Safe Drinking Water
WHO Framework for Safe Drinking-water
The WHO Framework forSafe Drinking-
waterhas three keycomponentsto
ensure watersafetyandcombineswater
qualitysurveillance withaproactive risk
managementapproach(Fig.4). The
Framework’sthree componentsare 1)
the developmentof national healthbased
targets,2) watersafetyplans(WSPs) and
3) a systemof independentsurveillance.
Participantsagreedthatensuringwater
safetywasnot justthe responsibilityof
the governmentorservice provider,but
Figure 3: Water Safety self-assessment completed byGhana
Figure 4: WHO Frameworkfor Safe Drinking-water

1st
Draft
8
everyone’s. While watersafetymaybe everyone’sresponsibility,differentstakeholdersinvolved have
specificrolestoplay. Regulatorshave arole to playinboththe settingof national health
standards/targetsandinthe ongoingsurveillance. The implementationandoperationalmonitoringof
WSPswouldbe the responsibilityof the service providerorcommunity,whereassurveillance isthe
responsibilityof the surveillance agencyorregulator,butmayalsobe supportedbythe watersupplier
or community. ParticipantsalsodiscussedUNICEF’sSix Pillarsof WaterSafetyPlanning,whichwere
presentedasanextensionof WHO’sFrameworkforSafe Drinking-water,andsupportadvocacyfor
watersafetyprogrammingfromnational tocommunitylevel.
Risk Management Approaches to Water Safety
Participantsdiscussedthe benefitsanddriversof aproactive
riskmanagementapproachfordiverse typesof management
modelsandhow everyactor involvedwillbe motivatedby
differentoutcomes. One of the challengesdiscussedwashow
to engage withmultiple stakeholderswho,onthe surface,do
not have a relationshiptowatersafety. Forlarge operatorsin
urban settings,implementingariskmanagementapproachcan
leadto manybeneficialoutcomes,includingcostsavingsanda
reducednumberof waterqualitytestsbeingconducted. WSPs
can preventcontaminationfromhappening,whichcanleadto
an increasedconfidence inthe overallsystem. Forsmaller
systems,implementingariskmanagementapproach,suchas
WSPs,can potentiallyresultinincreasedconsumerconfidence
inthe safetyof the service beingprovided. Forcommunity
managedschemes,there are potential healthandavailability
benefits. During the presentationbyUNICEFNigeria,they
sharedhow WSPs can create an awarenessof the linkbetween
waterqualityissuesandwaterborne diseasesinrural
communities.Additionally,UNICEFNigeriasharedhow facilitycaretakerscollectafee forwatersales
whichisthenusedto carry out operational monitoringand
maintenance.
Withouta riskmanagementapproach,suppliersmustrelyonwaterqualitytesting,while beingan
importantaspectof watersupplymanagement,ithassome limitations. Forexample,awaterquality
testdoesnot provide informationonwhere the contaminationisoccurringandtestingresultsmay
come too late to triggerstoppingof the systemafterunsafe waterhasalreadybeensuppliedleadingto
a cohort of adverse impacts.
Classical Water Safety Plans for Small Community Water Supplies
The classical approachto water safetyplansforsmall systemsis a 6-step risk management approach. It
is flexible and proactive, and the WSP should be fully tailored to the local context. The six-steps are
designed to identify and manage risks from catchment to consumer. Risks are ranked based on their
likelihoodtohappenandtheirpotential consequences on the supply of water. For priority risks where
additional control is needed, corresponding control measures (or barriers) are identified and
documented in an improvement plan. Like the SDGs, WSPs aim to be an incremental and progressive
Figure 5: Mapping of a typical rural water
system in Eritrea, with risks and barriers to
water safety identified

1st
Draft
9
Figure 7: Water transport
observed during field visit to
Kayonza district
improvementwiththe philosophyof starting simple. During the workshop, participants drew a typical
rural system in their country and identified the hazards and potential barriers.
WSPscan helptomanage waterresourcesina more systematicwayversusreactingtoa waterquality
issue orcrisis. Most importantly,the completedWSPisnotthe end,but justthe beginningof improved
watersupplysystemmanagement,whichneedstobe implemented,reviewedandrevisedregularly.
The impact of climate change wasalsodiscussed,particularlyimpactsonthe water
supplyfromclimate change andvariability. Climatechange canalterthe risks
associatedwithexistinghazards/hazardouseventsandcanintroduce new hazards
withinthe watersupplysystem. The applicationof the WSPapproachto manage
climate-relatedrisksandimprove the resilienceof small watersupplysystemswas
discussed,highlightinghowclimate considerationscanbe integratedintoeachof the
relevantsteps.
Duringthe workshop,participantsbecame familiarwiththe six stepsandcompleteda
numberof exercisesandactivitiestoappreciate the theory.Participantsalsohadthe opportunityto
applytheirlearningduringthe fieldtriptoKayonzadistrictof Rwanda. Duringthe
fieldvisitparticipantsmappedthe watersupplysystemandidentifiedpotential
hazards,assessedandprioritizedthe risks,anddevelopedanimprovementplan.
Back in Kigali,the keyfindingsfromthe fieldvisitwere discussedinplenary,andparticipants
consolidatedtheirfeedbacktoshare withthe watersupplierto
supportsystem improvements(see
Annex 3).
Figure 6: WHO Water Safety Plan cycle for small systems
Figure 8: Observed storage tank lid not securely closedFigure 9: Participant's mapping of water system during field visit

1st
Draft
10
Tools for Triggering the Community:
 Mapping of OD – Use the traditional CLTS poop mapping exercise, duringthe CL-WSP mapping, the
community adds water points in rainy and dry season,as well as animal poop.
 Walk of Shame – the community visits OD fields,as well as,water catchment and collection points. This
allows thecommunity to break down barriers to talkingaboutpoop and to visually inspecttheir water
points.
 Shit & Water – The facilitator mixes a small amountof shitinto water and then has the community reflect
on the fact that they cannot visually detect the shit,but have been drinkingitall along.
 H2S Test – The facilitatorsdiscuss with the community the results of water quality tests at household level.
Community-led Water Safety Planning
WHO and UNICEF discussedhowthe classical approachtowatersafetyplansforsmall systemshas
proventobe successful insmall systemswhichare operated underamore formal management
structure withhigherfinancial andpersonnel capacity. However,the classical approachhasbeenless
successful forcommunitymanagedwaterpointsorforsmall systemswithlow capacitymanagement. In
systemsthatare primarilymanagedbycommunitiesorinsystemswhere the risksresidedprimarilyin
consumerpractices,anapproach focusingonbehaviorchange isneeded. Asanintroductionto
Community-ledWaterSafetyPlanning(CL-WSP)participantsdiscussedthe importance of usingthe
appropriate methodologyandtoolswhichmatchthe needsof community. ForCL-WSPboth the process
and toolswere adaptedtoinduce behaviorchange andfocusedonoutcomes,notjustplanning. Where
behaviorchange isneeded,CL-WSPleverages the strengthsof Community-ledTotal Sanitation(CLTS).
Thisinclude toolstotriggeremotions,suchasshockand disgust,changingsocial norms,ratherthan
individualbehaviors,prioritizingthe mostimportantrisksandactions,andcelebratingsuccess. The
goal is to builduponexistingprogrammeswithinthe community,suchasreachingODF status.
The cycle forCL-WSPhas been simplifiedandrepackagedtoresemble the CLTScycle;1) Pre-triggering,
2) Triggering,3) Post-Triggering,4) WaterSafetyCertificationand5) PostWater Safety. The focusison
collective outcomeswiththe communityidentifyingasmall numberof priorityactionswhichare
achievable giventheircurrentlevel of resources,bothfinancial andtechnical. Aswiththe classical WSP
approach forsmall systems,CL-WSPisflexible andshouldbe adaptedtotheirspecificcontext. For
example,CLTScommunities canfine tune theirowndefinitionforbeingopendefecationfree,basedon
minimumcriteria. Tobetterunderstandthe CL-WSPcycle,participantsengagedinamocktriggering
and completionof entireCL-WSPprocess.
Figure 10: Community-led water safetyplanning cycle, modified from WHO cycle

1st
Draft
11
Defining Different Risk Management Approaches
Once participantswere familiarwiththe twodifferentapproachestowatersafetyplanningfor
small/rural systems,theydiscussedthe suitabilityof one approachoverthe otheraccordingto diverse
typesof management,watersources andcontext. Since the SDGs are forall countries,eventhosewith
relativelyhighlevelsof accesstobasic servicescanstill face issuesof watersafetyandapproachesto
improvingwatersafetyshouldfitfordifferenttypesof watersourcesandtypesof managementsystems
for a specificsystem. Participantsdiscussedthe three differenttypesof WSPs,1) 11 module approach
for urbancontexts(notdiscussedindetail duringthisworkshop),2) Classical WSPapproachforsmall
communitywatersuppliesand3) Community-ledWSP. Fordifferentapproaches,there are areasof
overlapof whichapproachto use,and the optimal approachmustbe considereddependingonthe local
context. Forurban contexts,WHO’soriginal 11 module approachisappropriate. Forrural areas
experiencinggrowthandsmall pipednetworks,the Classical WSPapproachforsmall systemsmaybe
optimal. Thisapproachhas provenmosteffective wherethere isaformal managemententity(e.g.
communityor usersgroup).
For pointsources managedbythe
community, UNICEF has
developed Community-led
WSPs,which leverage
learningfromCLTS and focuseson
collective behavior change.
Whicheverrisk management
approach selected will be basedon
the watersystem’s specificcontext
and shouldbe adaptedand
modifiedas needed.
Figure 12: Minimum criteria for water safe community
Figure 11: Workshop stimulation of triggering
community-led water safetyplanning

1st
Draft
12
Figure 13: Types of intervention based on management type and source type
Monitoring for Results: operational and surveillance monitoring
Throughoutthe workshopthere wasa recurringtheme onthe importantdistinctionbetween
operational andsurveillance monitoring. Insome rural communities,the rolesof regulatorandservice
providerare performedbythe same entity. Tostrengthenoperational andsurveillance monitoring,the
twofunctionsneedtobe separated,andthe rolesof regulatorversusservice providerneedtobe
formalized. Onthe surface the operational andsurveillancemonitoringcanappeartobe similarsince
theybothcheck waterquality,butthe purpose andscope are different. Operationalmonitoringisthe
routine andongoingmonitoringperformedtoconfirmthatcontrol measures(barriers) are workingto
protectthe water supplyfromcontaminationandisusuallyconducted bythe watersupplieror
community. Thiscan include waterqualitytesting,butthisismore frequentlyavisual inspectionof
physical barriers,whichismore costeffectivethanwaterqualitytesting. Surveillancemonitoringasks
the questionif the WSP,as a whole,workingeffectivelytodeliversafe drinkingwater. Surveillance is
conductedlessfrequentlyandusuallyconductedbyregulatororgovernmentministry. If the supplieris
trustedbythe regulator,thenthe regulatorcouldreview results providedbythe supplier. If surveillance
monitoringisconductedinacontextof a riskmanagementapproach,ittoobecomesmore cost
effective.
The example presentedbyNigeriademonstratedhow the communityandsub-national government
workedtogetheronthe monitoringandsurveillance of riskmanagementapproach(WSPs). InNigeria,
communitiesare responsible formonitoringbarriersandinitiatingcompliance monitoringthrough
waterqualitytest. These resultsare thenverifiedbythe local government(LGA) andif resultsare above
acceptable healthtargetsthenthe local governmentwill administerashockchlorinationandthencheck
residual chlorinelevels.
Multiple countriesare conductingnational waterqualitysurveys,aspartof MICs, DHS and other
national multisectorsurveys. Itwasdiscussedhow the surveyresultscouldbe usedasadvocacyfor
watersafety. Additionally,participantsdiscussedhow the capacityandtools/equipmentobtained
duringthe national surveycanbe usedto launch or strengthensurveillance systems.
Roadmaps to Implementing and Scaling-Up the Water Safety Agenda

1st
Draft
13
Figure 14: Sierra Leone's roadmap for scaling-up water safety
Afterparticipantshaddiscussedthe different
approachesand tools,theyreviewedthe gapsand
opportunitiesidentifiedduringthe watersafetyself-
assessments. BasedonWHO experiences
introducingandscalingupWSPsin rural settings,
the followingapproachhasbeenfoundtobe
optimal:1) Learn WSP principles2) Prepare and
pilotona numberof systems,3) Adaptto local
contextandestablishmodelsand4) Planand begin
scale-up. UNICEFsharedan alternativeroute to
scalingupbasedon the organization’sexperience
withsanitationprogramming. Highlightinghow
resultsandchampionscanbe driversforbottom-up
scalingup. Creatinghealthycompetitionamong
championsandhorizontal learningare waysto
increase the rate of scaling-up.
For scaling-upitwasstressedthatsince the watersectorisverylarge,theycouldengage inactivitiesat
boththe national level andatthe water supplierlevel. Toinfluence policyandbudgetingatthe national
level,there needtobe championsthatdrive the conversation. Whenstartingfromthe bottom-up,
existingentrypointsshouldbe leveragedandresultsneedtobe demonstratedanddocumented. For
scalingup,it wasdiscussedhowtoleverage existingfundingandtoaccessnew sourcesof funds. A
possible existingfundingavenue isintegratingWSPsintopostODFandCLTS programmes. A large
amountof fundingisavailableforclimate change/resilience anditwasdiscussedhow WSPscanbe
includedinnational adaptationplans.
By countrygroups,participantsprioritizedandplacedatentative time frame fornextstepsbasedona
roadmaptemplate. For many countries,the highestprioritizedactivitieswere increasingpolitical
prioritization(Pillar1),shiftingtoa riskmanagementapproachtowatersafety(Pillar2) and
empoweringrightsclaimers(Pillar 4). For Pillar1,many countrieslistedthe keyactivitiesaround
advocacy andengagingthe relevantstakeholders. ForPillar2,the mostpopularactivitieswere the
draftingof national policies,includingstandardsettingandguidelinesforimplementingWSPs. Drafting
of national WSPimplementationguidelineswasafrequentlylistedactivityforbothincreasingpolitical
prioritization(Pillar2) anddevelopingdecentralizedcapacityforriskmanagement(Pillar3). Many
countriesidentifiedCLTSprogrammingasa potential entrypointforWSPs(Eritrea,Gambia,Zambia),
otherentrypointsincludedcholerataskforces(ZambiaandSouthSudan),emergencysettingsand
wateruserassociations(Malawi,SierraLeone,Uganda). Many countrieshave seensuccesswith
pilotingWSPsfirstandthendraftingnational guidance. All participantswere encouragedtodocument
the processand the impactof theiractivitiestostrengthenthe evidencebase forwatersafety
programming.
Follow-up from the Workshop
Lessons Learned for Future Workshops
Overall,participants’expectationswereeitherfullyorpartiallymetbasedonanonline evaluation
surveyconductedatthe end of the workshop. There waspositive feedbackonthe pace,facilitationand
balance of theoryversuspractical applicationof the concepts. There were requestsfromparticipantsto

1st
Draft
14
have increasedtime fordiscussion,sharingexperiencesandmore practical case studiesfromthe region.
Movingforward,the facilitatorswill worktostreamline the presentationstoallow formore discussion
and experience sharing. The facilitatorsare activelylookingformore case studiesfromthe African
regiontoinclude infuture workshops. Some participantscommentedthatmore time shouldbe
permittedduringthe groupexercisestoallow groupstothinkandhave in-depthdiscussions. Many
participantscommentedonthe planningandexecutionof the fieldvisitasthere were some accessibility
issuesasa resultof poor road conditions - inthe future the organizers will ensure thatsomeonein-
countryvisitsthe site duringthe pre-workshopperiodtomake sure itis effectivelyaccessibleandcould
be bearable forparticipantshavingsome notveryconstraininghealthconditions.
Fine-Tuning Water Safety Roadmaps
Followingthe workshop,countrieswere encouragedtohave multi-stakeholdermeetingstodebrief from
the workshopandto discussthe draft roadmapsdevelopedonthe final day.These roadmapswill be
sharedwithWHO and UNICEFprior to a follow-upwebinar,duringwhichcountrieswill presenttheir
roadmapsand receive constructivefeedback.
Webinar
Countrieswill receiveinvitationstoanupcomingwebinartakingplace inthe latterpartof 2018
(expectedDecember2018; TBC). Invitationswillbe sentout inmid-Novembertoallow countriestime
to convene meetingsandprepare theirroadmaps. There will be three sessionsof the same webinar,
withcountriesgroupedbysimilartypology. Duringthe webinar,there will be abrief introductiononthe
overall conceptsforparticipantswhodidnotattendthe workshop. Countrieswill thenpresenttheir
roadmaps,afterthe roadmapshave beenpresentedtheywill the opportunitytoaskquestionsand
receive feedbackfromwebinarattendees.
In-Country Pilots
Giventhatthe initiationof WSPpilotingprogrammeswasacommonnextstepidentifiedbycountriesin
theirdraftroadmaps,it isanticipatedthatrequestsforsupporttoestablishpilotsmaybe initiated
throughthe WHO and/orUNICEF countryofficesfollowingthe workshop.All these requestsshouldbe
made throughtheirrespective agencies.Inordertomove thisagenda,UNICEFcountry officesmust
formallyrequesttechnical supportduring2019 annual workplanprocess.
Conclusion and Next Steps
Duringthe workshop,WHO andUNICEF presentedalignedandcomplimentaryapproachestoaddressing
the issue of watersafety. The two organizationswill continue tocollaborate tofurtherstrengthenthe
riskmanagementapproacheswatersafety. The workshopwas successfullyconductedaccordingto
participantswhoall mostlymettheirexpectationsfromtheirparticipationtothe event.
Duringthe training,participantsdiscussedthe multipleactions,fromnationaltocommunitylevel,
neededtoaddressissuesof watersafety,suchaslinkingtoariskmanagementapproachandimproved
surveillance systems. The discussionincluded,the importance of addressingwatersafetytoachieve
SDG target 6.1, the twoapproaches,entrypointsandpotential programmaticsequencing.
For UNICEF,feedbackfromparticipantsconfirmedthere isaneedforadaptationof the current
approaches,especiallyforcommunitieswhichmanage theirownwatersystemsorinsystemswhere
risksprimarilyreside inconsumerbehavior. CL-WSPhasthe potential toaddresssome of these needs
because itfocusesoncollective behaviorchange andoutcomes. Duringthe CL-WSPtriggering

1st
Draft
15
simulationitwasdiscussedhowhigh-qualityCLTSfacilitatorsmightbe able totransitiontoCL-WSPwith
nominal additionaltraining.
Entry pointsforwatersafetyprogramminginclude ongoingworkonCLTSand in emergencysettings. It
was discussedif CL-WSPshouldbe imbeddedduringthe post-ODFphase of if CL-WSPcouldbe included
as part of the initial CLTStriggering. Duringthe discussion,itwasrecognizedthatthe sequencingof
interventionswasstillinthe experimental phaseandthatbothoptionsshouldbe tested. UNICEFHQ
will make themselvesavailabletosupportin-countrypilots. The facilitatorsstronglyencouraged
participantstodocumentthe processandto conduct impactassessments.
Next Steps
WHO and UNICEF will continue toalignstrategiesandcollaborateonwatersafetytrainings.
The two organizationswillrefine the trainingpackage toinclude feedbackfromparticipantsand
facilitators.
UNICEF andWHO incollaborationwithresearchpartnerswill continuestodocumentthe processand
impactassessmentsof implementingriskmanagementapproachestowatersafety. Participantswere
encouragedtodo the same and use the resultsforadvocacy.
For CL-WSP,UNICEFHQ isavailable toprovide technical assistancetocountriesforhands-onpilots.

1st
Draft
16
Annex 1: Meeting agenda
Day 1:Monday 28 May
Time Item Resource person(s)
08h30-10h00 Welcome, Objectives, Introductions
08h30-09h15 1. Welcome address Ministry of Health, Rwanda
Ministry of Infrastructure,Rwanda
WHO WR, Rwanda
UNICEF Eastern and Southern Africa Regional
Office
09h15-09h30 2. Workshop objectives & overview Guy Mbayo (WHO AFRO)
09h30-10h00 3. Self-introductions All
10h00-10h20 Break
10h20-12h30 Water Safety in the Context of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
10h20-10h40 4. SDGs: Challenges & opportunities Fiorella Polo (UNICEF HQ)
Bernard Keraita (UNICEF ESARO)
10h40-11h15 5. Country assessmenton water safety Lead Facilitator:Fiorella Polo (UNICEF HQ)
Co-Facilitators:Bernard Keraita (UNICEF
ESARO), Guy Mbayo (WHO AFRO), Rory
McKeown (WHO HQ)11h15-11h45 6. Frameworks for the delivery of safe
drinking-water
Rory McKeown (WHO HQ)
Fiorella Polo (UNICEF HQ)
11h45-12h30 7. Priority and entry points in each country Lead Facilitator:Fiorella Polo (UNICEF HQ)
McKeown (WHO HQ)12h30-13h30 Lunch break
13h30-17h00 Water safety planning for attainment of SDGs
13h30-13h40 8. Exercise: water safety risks and barriers Lead Facilitator:Fiorella Polo (UNICEF HQ)
McKeown (WHO HQ)
13h40-14h05 9. Water safety planning in the context of
SDGs
Guy Mbayo (WHO AFRO)
14h05-14h30 10. Why adopt the water safety planning
approach?
14h30-14h50 11. Plenary discussion and Q&A Lead Facilitator:Fiorella Polo (UNICEF HQ)
McKeown (WHO HQ)14h50-15h10 Break
15h10-15h30 12. Introduction to water safety planning Rory McKeown (WHO HQ)

1st
Draft
17
15h30-16h45 13. Activity: Develop a simplified WSP Lead Facilitator:Fiorella Polo (UNICEF HQ)
McKeown (WHO HQ)16h45-17h00 Discussion and Close of Day 1
Reporting back from note-taking team
Fiona Baker (UNICEF HQ)
Day 2:Tuesday 29 May
08h30-17h00 Water safety planning for small (rural) water supplies (including climate considerations)
08h30-08h40 14. Recap from Day 1
15. Overview of Day 2
08h40-10h30 16. Task 1: Engage the community and
assemblea Water Safety Plan team
17. Task 2: Describethe community water
supply
10h30-10h50 Break
10h50-13h00 18. Task 3: Identify and assess hazards,
hazardous events, existingcontrol measures
and assess risks
13h00-14h00 Lunch break
14h00-15h15 19. Task 4: Develop and implement an
incremental improvement plan
15h15-15h45 Break
15h45-16h45 20. Task 5: Monitor control measures and
verify the effectiveness of the Water Safety
Plan
21. Task 6: Document, review and improve
all aspects of Water Safety Plan
implementation
16h45-17h00 Discussion and Close of Day 2
Day 3:Wednesday 30 May
07h00-07h15 Introduction to Day 3
07h00-07h15 22. Recap of Day 2 Overview of Day 3 field
trip activities

1st
Draft
18
07h30-15h00 23. Visitof Kayonza water supply system
- Presentation of overview information on
the system
- Visit to small piped network systems –
catchment, treatment,
storage/distribution, users
- Visit to boreholes (in same location or in
any other) – users
catchment/distribution, users
TBC
Lead Facilitator:Rory McKeown (WHO HQ)
ESARO), Guy Mbayo (WHO AFRO), Fiorella
Polo (UNICEF HQ)
16h30-16h50 Return to hotel and health break
17h00 Close of Day 3
Day 4:Thursday 31 May
08h30-10h00 Debrief on WSO for small systems
08h30-10h00 24. Debrief from previous day Lead Facilitator:Fiorella Polo (UNICEF HQ)
10h20-12h30 Community-led Water safety planning
10h20-10h30 25. Different small systemtypes Rory McKeown (WHO HQ)
10h30-11h00 26. Introduction to Community Led
Water Safety Programming
11h00-12h30 27. Cycleand tools of CLWSP Bernard Keraita (UNICEF ESARO)
13h30-17h00 Practical application of CL-WSPs
13h30-15h15 28. Practiceof community-led WSP Lead Facilitator:Fiorella Polo (UNICEF HQ)
15h30-16h45 29. Debrief on exercise Lead Facilitator:Fiorella Polo (UNICEF HQ)
McKeown (WHO HQ)16h45-17h00 Discussion and Close of Day 4
Day 5:Friday 1 June
08h30-13h45 Development of country roadmaps
08h30-08h45 30. Recap from previous day Rory McKeown (WHO HQ)

1st
Draft
19
09h45-10h45 31. Buildingup roadmaps’components:
priority areas
10h45-11h00 Break
11h00-12h00 32. Buildingup roadmaps continued Guy Mbayo (WHO AFRO)
12h30-13h45 33. Roadmaps by clusters of country Rory McKeown (WHO HQ)
13h45-15h00 Closing ceremony
13h45-14h30 34. Open floor (review and evaluation of
the 5-days workshop)
14h30-15h00 35. Closingremarks includingawarding
of certificates
TBC
Annex 2: List of Participants
1
South-Sudan
Kuorwel Kuai Kuorwel MoH
2 Alex Yao Sokemawu Freeman WHO
3 Samuel Valentino Omanis MoWI
4
Mozambique
Ms. Sonia Casimiro Trigo WHO
5 Ms. Teresa Antonio Miguel Pedro Antonio MPI
6
Eritrea
Tedros Tekeste WHO
7 Zemuy Alemu MoH
8 Efrem Teferi MoLWE
9 Ms. Hannah Berhe UNICEF
10
Liberia
Morris Gono Jr. NPHIL
11 Quincy Trisoh Goll WHO
12
Gambia
Alpha Jallow WHO
13 Dembo Fatty MoH
14 Lamin Saidyleigh DWR
15
Sierra-Leone
Charles A.J. Ngombu MoHS
16 Sebora Kamara WHO
17 Salieu Bundu MoWR
18 Jesee W. Kinyanjui UNICEF
19
Kenya
Solomon Nzioka WHO
20 Richard Kipkorir Cheruiyot
21 Benjamin Kaino Murkomen
22 Malawi Charles Kachingwe MWB

1st
Draft
20
23 Holystone Kafanikhale MoH
24 Blessius Tauzie UNICEF
25
Bibo Yatina
Dept of Water
Development
26 Humphrey Masuku WHO
27
Uganda
Collins Mwesigye WHO
28 Simon Etimu MoWE
29 Julian Kyomuhangi MoH
30 Stephen Wandera UNICEF
31
Ghana
Ms. Akosua Kwakye WHO
32 Ms. Theodora Adomako-Adjei CWSA
33 Ms. Suzy Abaidoo MSWR
34
Rwanda
Habimana Innocent WHO
35 Ms. Alphonsine Mukumuanana MoH
36 Mr Donatien Nkurikiyumukiza FEPEAR
37 Ms. Yvette Carine Kasine WASAC
38 Ms. Nicole Mukunzi USAID
39 Ms. Cindy Kushner UNICEF
40 Gedeon Musabyimana UNICEF
41 Venuste Mpimbazimana
42
Zambia
Ms. Precious Chisale Kalubula WHO
43 Ms. Selenia Mbewe Matimelo MWDSEP
44 Bernard Mwansa MoH
45
Botswana
Teddy Ditsabatho WUC
46 Ms. Golebaone Senai MoHW
47
Mauritius
Gunness THANDRAYEN MoH
48 Selvon APPASAMY MEPU
49
Seychelles
Ms. Eulalie Sabury
50 Lewis Marius Bristol
51 WHO AFRO Guy Mbayo Congo Brazza
52 WHO HQ Rory McKeown Ireland
53
UNICEF HQ
Fiorella Polo USA
54 Fiona Baker USA
55 UNICEF ESARO Bernard Keraita Kenya

1st
Draft
21
Annex 3: Feedback to local operator of Kayonza district
Annex 4: Water Safety Self-Assessment
Annex 5: Water Safety Country Roadmap

Report of Joint UNICEF/WHO training on Water Safety Programming

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Report of Joint UNICEF/WHO training on Water Safety Programming

Similar to Report of Joint UNICEF/WHO training on Water Safety Programming (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Report of Joint UNICEF/WHO training on Water Safety Programming