Overall, the document finds that while access to water supply sources is good, there is room for improvement in water quality, complaint resolution, and bill payment ease. Access is similar in slum and non-slum areas but slums have worse water quality and payment options. Most residents rely on individual connections but 1/3 experience seasonal scarcity, slightly higher in slums. While most get water daily, only a third find supply predictable and half find timings convenient. Adequacy meets family needs for most but only 2% of public access users. Half receive dirty water occasionally, more common for public access users. Complaint resolution takes about a week on average but longer for slums. Bill payment locations are convenient for

1. SLB Connect
Findings & Observations

2. Overall Findings
• Access and adequacy of supply (meeting the needs of the residents)
get top marks. Scope for improvement in Quality of water,
Complaint redressal and Ease of bill payments.
• Equity – service levels relatively similar in slum and non slum
areas. However, slums worse off in terms of water quality and
ease of bill payment.
• Wide variations in overall scores across zones, specially for
Access and Quality.

3. Specific Findings - Access
• Vast majority of residents (79%) depend exclusively on
municipal water supply sources. Individual connections most
prevalent source of supply. Lack of supply network is the single
most reported reason for not using a municipal source.
• About 1/3 residents experience seasonal scarcity; among these,
one in two are forced to shift to non-regular sources during
scarcity times. Slum residents report a slightly higher incidence
of scarcity.
• Access to municipal water points in slum is excellent with 84%
of residents reporting an access point within 300 meters from
their residence.

4. Specific Findings - Continuity
• Vast majority of residents (92%) report receiving water on all
the 7 days of the week; this proportion is noticeably lower in
slums (79%).
• Majority of residents (72%) report receiving 2-5 hours of supply
on the day they receive water.
• Only one-third (34%) of the respondents report that supply of
water is always predictable; slum residents report marginally
better on this count (37%).
• About half of the respondents (47%) report the timing of the
supply as very convenient . However, about 20% of standpost
and handpump users find the timings not at all convenient.

5. Specific Findings - Adequacy
• Majority of individual/ shared connection users (82%) report
adequate water supply to meet the needs of the family;
feedback from slum residents is lower (69%). Among users of
standposts / handpumps this is quite low at 2%.
• Very few respondents reported buying water from private
sources to meet their requirements (1%).
• One in ten respondents (11%) reported using water tankers for
emergency cases; a higher proportion of 20% in case of slums.
• Experience with water tankers was mixed with about 1/3 rating
it good and a similar proportion rating it bad. In slums, half of
the users reported the experience to be poor.

6. Specific Findings - Quality
• Just over half of the respondents (52%) reported that they
never received any dirty water from the municipal source
during the last 3 months. Figure even lower (45%) for slums
respondents.
• Variation across sources is more sharp. Vast majority (73%) of
respondents using standposts or handpumps have received
dirty water at least once during the last 3 months, compared to
48% for respondents using indiv or shared connections.

7. Specific Findings – Grievance Redress
• 15% of respondents lodged a formal complaint with PCMC
regarding water supply during last one year; slightly higher for
slum residents (19%).
• Institutional channels not the preferred medium to lodge
complaints; about three-fourths (74%) lodged complaint
through local corporator.
• Grievance response as well as resolution is reported at 65%
overall; figure for slum residents is much lower at 48%.
• Average time taken to solve the complaint is approx 6 days with
a slightly higher downtime for slum residents (7 days).

8. Specific Findings – Bill Payment
• A little under half the respondents (44%) either did not know
the billing frequency or reported no regular pattern in receiving
bills. Corresponding figure for slum residents at 93%.
• Municipal counter most preferred site for making payments
(82%). Very few use online payment facilities, but among those,
most (95%) found the process easy.
• While 43% found the location convenient, a slightly lesser
proportion (40%) reported the same on timing. On both counts,
slum residents gave a much higher rating (55% and 64%).
• Functional meters reported by 73% of respondents; significantly
lower among slum respondents (11%).