By Susan Davis, Improve International. Prepared for the Monitoring sustainable WASH service delivery symposium, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 9-11 April 2013.

1. Water for Life: Promoting Accountability
Monitoring WASH Services & the Enabling
Environment Long After Implementation
Susan Davis, Improve International
IRC Symposium on Monitoring Sustainable
WASH Service Delivery
April 2013

2. We will discuss…
• Why we need to promote accountability
• Outcomes of pilot ratings in Honduras
• How the evaluation has helped the
organizations
• What we learned about the process and the
criteria
• Barriers to implementation
• Plans to scale up and sustain initiative

3. WHY DO WE NEED A WATER & SANITATION
SUSTAINABILITY RATING?

4. 780 million+++
783 million people without access to improved source
of water (JMP)
3 billion without access to safe water (UNC)
4 billion without access to safe, permanent, in home
water (AquaFed)
2.5 billion+++
2.5 billion people without adequate sanitation (JMP)
4.1 billion lack access to improved sanitation (UNC)
35-50%
water and sanitation systems that fail within a few
years of construction
Less than 5%
water systems that are visited
at least once post-construction
Less than 1%
water systems that receive
ongoing long-term post construction monitoring
Our strategy of trust isn’t working.

5. 1981
USAID, 1981. The Role of Women as Participants &
Beneficiaries in Water Supply & Sanitation Programs

6. 10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
0%
Non-functioning water points in Africa
SOURCE: UNICEF, May 2007
2007

7. Water Points Now
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Failed Impaired Failed + Impaired
Sierra Leone
Swaziland
Ghana
Tanzania
Liberia

8. A need for different language: “Services
Monitoring & Services Evaluation”
• M&E usually means just during
the project timeframe
• Few incentives or resources to
pay attention over time
• We propose “services
monitoring” – several
governments are launching now
• And “services evaluation” which
is where this initiative falls –
regular evaluation at points
several years post-
implementation
• The only way to prove
sustainability

9. Who will a WASH Sustainability Rating help?
People lacking access to
water & sanitation
Will have services that last. Increased
accountability and better targeted
investments will ultimately result in
more effective and sustainable
programming for poor communities.
Governments, Banks &
Donors
Will be able to use project
sustainability ratings to target their
funds towards high performing
organizations
Implementing
organizations
Can learn from each other and be
rewarded for facilitating sustainable
WASH services

10. HOW DOES THE RATING SYSTEM
WORK?

11. The WASH Rating System:
Trust but Verify
Self-
Assessmen
t
Forum
Member
Desk
Review
Field
Visit
Rating/
Certificatio
n

12. The WASH Rating
• Currently voluntary
• Higher standards than nonprofits would
normally pursue
• Gives organizations an incentive to maintain
high standards
• Based on similar self-regulatory systems
implemented in other sectors (e.g., Fair Trade)

13. What is the rating based on?
Key Domain Variable Score
A. Organizational
structure
Collaboration or coordination with other water and sanitation organizations blue
Organization is concerned with improving water and sanitation program
quality
blue
Organization is sustainable and maintains solid business practices green
B. Water Services Water system after construction blue
Water fee payment green
Water board policy green
C. Sanitation Most people in the community have access to a sanitary toilet green
Toilets are well-used in a sanitary manner and users are satisfied with the
toilets
green
Users have replacement strategy for toilets not connected to sewage system blue
D. Hygiene
Education
All households in community have convenient access to a safe water supply green
Household water use is sufficient to meet all needs for consumption/hygiene blue
Households demonstrate increased health and hygiene awareness over time green
E. Project design
& construction
The community has legal authority for the water source and water system blue
Water quality is tested and treated appropriately green
Water system is appropriately designed and well-constructed blue
Toilets/sanitation system is appropriately designed and well-constructed blue
F. Water system
Long-term O&M
System is well-used and users are satisfied with the system green
Repairs are addressed quickly and system undergoes routine maintenance yellow
User fees are paid by beneficiaries & system is financially self-supporting blue
G. Water source
protection
An active water source protection or environmental education component
exists in the community
green
H. Community
commitment
Community makes a financial contribution to the capital cost of the project blue
A competent local water board is created and functions effectively

14. THE PILOT RATING
OF HONDURAN NGO

15. COCEPRADIL, an NGO in Lempira, Honduras
Independent experts
and peer evaluators
inspect a spring.
Video: https://improveinternational.wordpress.com/programs/accountabilityforum/

17. Community of San Francisco, Honduras
•20 year old system
•Regular tariff
payment by users
•Positive and
increasing bank
account balance

18. Extreme
Problems
Identified
Some
Expectations Met
All
Expectations
Met
High
Expectations
Met
WASH Sustainability Rating
Given to COCEPRADIL:

19. FUTURE PLANS

20. Overcome Barriers to Implementation
• Building knowledge and
confidence of this tool
with governments &
donors
• Concerns from
organizations
• Acceptance of standards
• Obtaining required
information
• Start up funds

21. DSK – Bangladesh April 2013
Participating peers: Water.org, WaterAid, Water For
People, CRS (invited)
Conduct More Ratings

22. Create incentives: online resource for
governments, banks & donors
washratings.org
WASH Ratings
South
America
West Africa East Africa
Southern Africa
Southeast Asia
providing independent ratings of international WASH projects
Central America

23. Create incentives: develop special fund to invest in
programs with green or blue rating
washratings.org/honduras
WASH Ratings: Honduras
1
3
2
4
5
1. COCEPRADIL
2. Agua Org A
3. Agua Org B
4. Agua Org C
5. Agua Org D

24. Establish Governing Board
Reviews
performance
standards
Permanent and
rotating
members Guides WASH
Rating/Forum
Operations
Governin
g
Board
Ensure
adequate
financial
resources
Secures
WASH sector
endorsements

25. Potential
Board
Composition
4 rotating WASH funding organizations
5 rotating certified
implementing
organizations
2 government (water ministry) and WASH research institution
representatives
1 independent evaluator representative
Governing Board Members

26. Discussion Questions
• Is the life span limited to the duration of a project?
No. In fact only considering 5 plus years after implementation
• Are they integrated in country-led monitoring systems?
Possibly can be, but this is evaluation vs. monitoring
• Who is the long term owner of the frameworks and the
information gathered with them?
We hope that ultimately this will be country-led initiative
(either by Government or National Water Network)
• What are the incentives beyond the project to use the
frameworks?
More funds to high performing organizations; more
confidence could lead to greater investment in the sector

27. For more information
Susan – sdavis@improveinternational.org
Marla – marlasmith@water1st.org
www.improveinternational.org/programs