UNITED NATIONS CHILDREN’S FUND REPUBLIQUE OF RWANDA

REPORT

OF

THE EVALUATION OF

THE GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA - UNICEF WATER AND

ENVIRONMENTAL SANITATION PROGRAMME

JANUARY 2001

R-CeDMaR

Requested by

UNICEF RWANDA CONTRY OFFICE P.O. BOX 381

KIGALI RWANDA

CONDUCTED BY:

Mr. PATRICK OSODO (Principal Consultant)

REGIONAL CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH Studio Building, Plums Lane Off Ojijo Road, Parklands P.O Box 70212, Nairobi, Kenya Email: CeDMaR@Hotmail.com

VOLUME ONE: FULL NARRATIVE REPORT PLUS ANNEXES

JANUARY 2001

AND

Mr. HENRY RWAMUGEMA

INNOVATION + CONSULT GROUP

INNOVATION

I C+IDUSTRIAL INNOVATION MAINTENANCE AND CONSULTING SERVICES P.O Box 4990 Kigali Rwanda Tel: 00-250-0851-7648 Fax: 00-250-750-10 Email: innovationgroup@yahoo.com

Table of Contents

List of Tables List of Boxes, Figures and Annexes Acronyms Executive Summary Section One: WES Project Context And Content 1 1.1 Project Background And Conception 1 1.2 Project Objectives And Targets 3 1.3 Programme Strategies And Activities 3 1.4 Project Implementation And Management Arrangements 4 1.4.1 Implementation 5 1.4.2 Management Arrangements 5 1.4.2.1 Planning, Coordination, And Management Structures 7 1.4.2.2 Timing And Scheduling Of Project Activities 7 1.4.2.3 Project Approval Contracting And Financing Arrangements 7 1.4.2.4 Project Monitoring Evaluation And Reporting 8 1.5 Programme Budget And Inputs 8 Section Two: Evaluation Terms Of Reference And Methodology 9 2.1 Terms Of Reference 9 2.2 Evaluation Methodology 9 Section Three: Findings And Assessment 11 3.1 Role Of Government Communes And WES Committees In Promoting Improved Access to Safe WES Services

11 3.1.1 The Role Of Government 11 3.1.2 The Role Of Communes 24 3.2 The Provision And Management Of WES Facilities 25 3.2.1 Policy Support to improve the Institutional And Organizational Framework For Effective WES

Delivery 25 3.2.2 The Provision Of Community-Based WES Facilities 39 3.2.3 The Management Of Community-Based WES Facilities 63 3.2.3.1 National level management 63 3.2.3.2 Regional level Management 72 3.3 Community Contribution Ownership And Management Of WES Facilities 86 3.4 Participation And Involvement Of Women In Project Planning, Implementation And

Management 91 3.5 Relevance Functioning And Effectiveness Of WES Committees 93 3.5.1 The National WES Project Coordination Committee (PCC) 93 3.5.2 The Community Water And Environment Sanitation Committees 94 3.6 Impact Of WES On The Status Of Women And Children 97 3.6.1 WES Programme Health Impact 97 3.6.2 WES Programme Social Impact 106 3.6.3 WES Programme Economic Impact 106 3.6.4 WES Programme Environmental Impact 107 Section Four: Conclusions And Recommendations 108 4.1 Role Of Government And Communes In Promoting Improved Access To WES Services 108 4.2 The Provision And Management Of WES Facilities And Services 114 4.3 Community Contribution Ownership And Management Of WES Facilities 133 4.4 Participation And Involvement Of Women In Project Planning Implementation And Management 137 4.5 Relevance Functioning And Effectiveness Of The WES Committees 138 4.6 The impact of the WES Programme on the status of women and children 139 4.7 The relevance of the WES Programme in the new Country Programme 2001-2006 141

4.8 A proposal for WES Programme MIS and Monitoring 145 List of tables Table 1: WES Programme Objectives, Strategies and activities 1998-2000 Table 2: WES Programme Budget and Inputs Table 3: Proposed Evaluation Communes by prefecture and status of project implementation Table 4: Trends in GOR Recurrent and Investment Expenditure in Water and Sanitation (1980-2000) Table5: Broad and specific Policy interventions Planned and Pursued by WES Programme Table 6: Establishment Status of the Regie Committees by Commune and Prefecture (as at Dec. 1999) Table 7: WES Programme Training Activities 1998-2000 Table 8: Key areas of capacity support towards the establishment and strengthening of the Regie

Associative Management System Table 9: Activity and Implementation for the PEC Component Table 10: Analysis of overall implementation and Management of the WES Programme M&E and MIS Table 11: WES Programme Implementation status in 49 active communes as at October 2000 Table 12: Project Implementation and Completion status by commune by 5.19.2000 Table 13: Facilities Completion and population served by Commune in the 10 evaluation communes Table 14: Water Infrastructure completion and population served in Five communes with Completed

WES projects Table 15: Total potable water stands and population served by two main supply sources in Muvumba

commune Table 16: Acceptability of selected Wes project sources (based on bacteriology analysis Table 17: Users comments on the benefits due to WES provided Water Infrastructure and services Table 18: Key findings and assessment of the provision of hygiene and environmental sanitation

services by the WES project Table 19: Three-week morbidity and household hygiene and sanitation status in selected 5 evaluation

communes Table 20: Result of source and Household Water samples analysis: WES programme evaluation

(November 2000) Table 21: Latrine situation on Kigarama Rusum0 and Nyarubuye communes Table 22: Analysis of latrine coverage results in Table21 Table 23: Situation of disposal of babies’ excreta in selected 6 project villages in Kigarama, Rusumo

and Nyarubuye Communes Table24: Situation of Hand washing with soap in selected 6 project villages in Kigarama Rusumo and

Nyarubuye Communes Table 25: cleanliness status of water collection and storage containers in selected 6 project villages

in Kigarama Rusumo and Nyarubuye Communes Table 26: Hygiene and Environmental sanitation Training Activities in 3 communes of Kibungo

Prefecture- September-dec.1999 Table 27 a: Programme budget and inputs Table 27 b: WES programme expenditure by activity line –1999 Table 27 c: WES programme budget status as of December 2000 Table 28 a: UNICEF-GoR WES programme; Budget and expenditure summary sheet Table 28 b: UNICEF-GoR WES programme: Budget and expenditure summary sheet 2 Table 29: Composition and Functions of the PMT and the CWESCs Table 30: PMT formation by commune and date of selction in 10 (ten) WES evaluation communes Table 31: Establishment status of the Regie associative system by communes and prefecture Table 32: Water tariffication Regimes for Rusumo and Kigarama Cost-recovery systems Table 33: Representation of women at various WES Committees as spelt out in the WES Programme

Design Table 34: Sector Regie Composition by position and sex Table 35: Cellule-level Water point committee composition by sex for Kanzenze commune Table 36: Water point committee composition by position and sex for 8 kiosks served by the

Kazabazana water supple system kayoza Table 37: Criteria for rating the functionality status of Regie Associative Table38: Establishment status of the Regie associative system by commune and prefecture (as of December 1999)

Table 39: Evaluation communes and respective morbidity data centres Table 40: Morbidity trends (general) for 11(eleven) most prevalent disease conditions in selected

9(nine) communes of Rwanda; 1998-2000, January to December Table 41: Morbidity trends (general) for 11(eleven) most prevalent disease conditions in selected

9(nine) communes of Rwanda; 1998-2000, January to August Table 42: Morbidity trends among under 5(five) year old children selected for selected 9(nine)

communes and 11(eleven) most prevalent disease conditions in Rwanda; 1998-2000, January to December

Table 43: Morbidity trends among under 5(five) year old children selected for selected 9(nine) communes and 11(eleven) most prevalent disease conditions in Rwanda; 1998-2000, January to August

Table 44: Morbidity trends and % change by age group and year for 11(eleven) most prevalent disease conditions and selected 9(nine) communes and in Rwanda; 1998-2000, January to December and January to August

Table 45: Morbidity trends and % change by age group for three main water and hygiene related disease conditions in selected 9(nine) WES communes ;1998-200, January to December

Table 46: Morbidity trends for selected key water / hygiene related disease conditions (general population and 0-4 year old) in 9 WES project communes of Rwanda; 1998-2000, January to August

Table 47: Morbidity trends for selected key water and hygiene related disease conditions (general population and 0-4 year old) in 4(four) communes with completed WES projects (not yet receiving portable water); 1998-2000, January to August

Table 48: Morbidity trends for selected key water / hygiene related disease conditions (general population and 0-4 year old) in 5(five) communes with incomplete WES projects (not yet receiving portable water); 1998-2000, January to August

Table 49: comparison of total morbidity (overall, % and weighted) between the 4(four) areas with completed WES projects (TS) with the 5 (five) those not yet completed (TNS)

Table 50: Comparisons of morbidity trends (total) between the 4(four) areas with completed WES projects (TS) and the total of any four of the five communes with incompletes WES projects (TNS)

Table 51: September to December morbidities for general and 0-4 year old population for 1998-1999 in the 9 evaluation

Table 52: Comparison of Morbidity trends among 0-4 year and over five year olds in complete and incomplete WES projects for the three main water and hygiene related disease conditions in the 9 evaluation communes

Table 53: General comments on the benefits of the project among the affected communities Table54: Organizational and institutional features of the proposed WES Implementation and

Management Scenarios List of Figures Fig 1: Planning Implementation and the Management Framework of the RWES Fig 2: National Institutional Framework for WES Development Fig 3: The Regie Associative Management System and Structure Fig 4: Recurrent and Investment Expenditure in Water and Sanitation Fig 5: WES Framework for technical logistical and financial support for Hygiene and

environmental sanitation education and promotion Fig 6: National WES Planning and Coordination Framework Fig 7: Framework for WES Project Screening, Approval and Funding Fig 8: A Micro-development Intervention model Fig 9: Steps for Selecting, Implementing and managing Community-based water supply systems Fig10: Proposed Consolidated framework for implementing and Managing Water and Environment

Sanitation activities Fig. 11: An organizational Capacity framework Fig. 12: An Organizational Capacity Framework Fig.13: Possible Institutional Scenarios for WES Programme Implementation and Management

Fig 14: WES framework for Technical logistical and financial support towards Hygiene and Environment Sanitation Promotion and development.

Fig. 15: A Micro-Development Intervention Model Fig 16: Steps for selecting implementing and managing a community-based water supply system Fig 17: Proposed Organizational and Institutional framework for WES MIS and M&E system List of Annexes Annex One : WES Programme Implementation Guideline Document Annex Two : WES M&E and MIS Data Formats Annex Three : Data and Information Tools used in the evaluation

List of persons met and interviewed Annex Four : Results of Water Sample Laboratory analysis Annex Five : Base Data on Morbidity Trends from the Evaluation Communes List of ACRONYMS UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund GOR Government of Rwanda WES Water and Environment Sanitation KAP Knowledge Aptitude and Practices MINISANTE Ministere de la Sante (Ministry of Health) MINITRAPE Ministere des Travaux Publics (Ministry of Public Works) WATSAN Water and Sanitation DEA Direction Eau & Assainissemement MINERENA Ministry of Energy, Water and Natural Resources CRC Convention on the right of the Child UN United Nations IEC Information Education and Communication LOU Letter of Understanding CWESC Community Water and Environment Sanitation Committee PMT Project Management Team SANPLATS Sanitary Plates PCC Project Coordination Committee PST Project support Team NGO Non-Governmental Organization SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats CDC Community Development Committees WPC Community Development Committees FRW Rwandese Franks CEPEX Central projects and External Finance Bureau TOR Terms of Reference MINALOC Ministry of Local Government REAP Responsible de l’ Eau et Assainissement en Prefecture M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MIS Management Information System ADRA Adventist Relief Association PVC Polivynyl Chloride ARC American Relief Committee O&M Operation and Maintenance DWES Department for Water and Environment Sanitation IAVR Upper and Lower Respiratory Infections OD Organizational Development PSC Project Steering Committee CWESMC Community Water and Environment Sanitation Committee

Executive Summary

This report presents the evaluation of the performance and impact of the Government of Rwanda–UNICEF Water and Environmental Sanitation (WES) Bridging Programme implemented in 66 of Rwanda’s 154 Communes during the period 1997-2000. The evaluation was conducted in 10 out of the 66 WES communes and represents an assessment of the Programme firstly in these 10 communes. The genesis of the Programme can be traced to a number of specific country events and situations:

The 1994 civil war and genocide which resulted in the destruction of most of the pre-existing Water and Sanitation Infrastructure in the country and a massive dislocation of needed human capacities, and a subsequent emergency restoration intervention which placed little emphasis on the sustainability of restored systems;

The new government policies of decentralization and group resettlement which respectively shifted the greater responsibility for development management to the regions and relocated populations on hill tops and along the roads and new schools, making access to existing water facilities, located at the valley bottoms very difficult, particularly for women and children

Assessed inadequate access to potable water and sanitation facilities and low levels of improved hygiene and environmental sanitation knowledge and practice in rural Rwanda Joint consultations to implement a more sustainable and community-based Programme begun in 1996 and a project document and implementation guideline were finalized the same year. Fundraising followed and the three-year Bridging Programme, seeking to improve access to Safe Water and Environment Sanitation Facilities in 66 Communes was formally launched in 1997. Overall this evaluation concludes that the goals and targets set for both the Provision and Management of Community-based WES facilities under the WES Bridging Programme were too ambitious to be accomplished over the designated three-year implementation period. The goals and targets were subsequently only partially realized. The Programme is assessed under-achieved in terms of the total number of WES Projects completed. However, a consideration of all implementation and management elements and factors leads to the conclusion that significant establishment and development achievements were realized. In the areas where the WES projects have been completed the objective of improving access to potable water is assessed well achieved. The greatest achievement of the WES Programme consists perhaps in the strengthening of the local capacity for operation, maintenance and management of water infrastructure and related services. The training and equipping of a wide range of government and community delegated personnel in nearly all designated WES Project areas, and the establishment and development of the local self-management system of the Regie Associative, and the associated cost-recovery system have not only had the immediate effect of improving the delivery of water services at the commune level, but also provided a needed capacity base whose further development and consolidation should greatly enhance the execution and impact of this service in future. While still nascent in many areas the establishment of the Regie Associative Management System is clearly a major success of the decentralized community self-management experience and the WES Bridging Programme in Rwanda. Over the short period of its existence, one can technically and in real terms talk of local self-management and people paying for water and receiving related services at the commune and community level. These developments offer hope for eventual complete local ownership and successful commercial management of rural WES infrastructure.

While these achievements speak well for the delivery of water services, examined evidence across all the 10 Communes evaluated lead to the conclusion that the hygiene and environment sanitation improvement component of the WES Programme was not effectively implemented and yielded little effective impact. The reasons behind the weak performance of this component consist in the lack of an effective organizational and institutional framework for implementing this component consistently and sustainably on the ground, the lack of a sound policy guide, and the weak technical and participatory education and extension capacities among implementing agencies. Consequently diarrhoeal and other water and hygiene related disease conditions rank among the major causes of morbidity and mortality in the ten WES communes evaluated, with children aged below five years particularly adversely affected. Broadly, three factors emerge as the major causes for the overall inadequate performance and impact of the WES Bridging Programme:

Weak overall coordination and stewardship by the WES Project Coordination Committee and the Project Coordination Office at national level:-this weakness resulted in systemic weakly evolved organizational and institutional arrangements and capacities among implementing agencies and institutions

A weak Funding base, at less than 50% of the envisaged funding level: the major causes for this weak base were threefold-the prevalent notion of adequate national WES coverage, which seems to have depressed donor interest in the sector, the unresolved question of “counterpart” funding to WES from Government, and the non-monitoring of implementing agencies to ascertain that they meet their financial and operational obligations as spelt out in the Protocols (contracts) of agreement with them.

Weak post-training and post-establishment monitoring and consolidative advisory support to implementing institutions on the ground Strengthening and consolidating the still nascent implementation and management bases, and critically addressing the above three issues are clearly the way forward in terms of improving both the delivery and impact of WES services in rural Rwanda. With respect to hygiene and environmental sanitation improvement, effective intervention is going to have to address both the question of ways to reduce morbidity among the under-five year old children and the improvement of the organizational and institutional foundations and mechanisms for effective implementation and management on the ground. Sharing and cross-fertilization of experiences and lessons of best practice is seen as an important element of the 2001-2006 Government-UNICEF Country Programme development. In this regard such tools as newsletters, electronic forums (a website or list-serve) and joint stakeholder workshops to share lessons and best development practices will clearly play a big part in enhancing overall WES Project performance and impact during the new country Programme.

Evaluation Itinerary and Personnel met and interviewed

Date of meeting /interview

Visited

Persons met and interviewed Designation

NATIONAL LEVEL

A Government Offices Visited and Personnel met and interviewed MINITERE Dr. Focus Ntayombya

Frank Rutabingwa Director of Environment, Ministry of Environment and Land settlement Deputy Director of Environment, Ministry of Environment and Land Settlement

19/10/2000 3/10/2000

MINERENA Mr. Bruno Mwanafunzi Mr. Kasire Cassean Mr. Kayitare Emmanuel Mr. Gerald Barahira Miss Betty Mbabazi

Director, Department of water and sanitation National WES coordinator Chief, Social Mobilization Section Gikondo WES Warehouse store-keeper Legal Secretary Minerena

31/8/2000 MINISANTE Dr. Veronica Mugisha Mr. John Ruziga Mr. Joseph Katabalwa

Director Hygiene Public and Epidemiology Department Head, Public Hygiene Section head, water and sanitation

29.8.2000 8/9/2000

MINALOC

Mr. Alexis Dukundane Calixte Kayihihura Vianney Karangwa

Director, planning, local development coordination and associations Coordinator De Projects Permanent Secretary WES

B Bilateral and Multilateral Organizations visited

12.10.2000

USAID

Miss Kay Adams Mr. Mervyn Farroe

Programme Officer, Demography and Governance Adjoint Charge des Programmes USAID

12.10.2000 UNDP

Suzanne Fafin Chief of Unit, UNDP Governance Programme

C Non-governmental Development Organizations visited and personnel interviewed

7.9.2000 Hydrautec Joseph Mutana Managing Director 5.9.2000 ADRA George Buzene Project Officer 4/9/2000 AFRICARE Carry Alan Johnson Country Director 18.9.2000 AAR John Munyurangabo Managing Director 27.9.2000 NTE Joseph Manzi Managing Director 14.9.2000 ZOA Mr. Jaat P. Debetf

Mr. Naftali Mbanda Financial Administrator Water and Sanitation Coordinator

5.10.2000 ARAMET Mr. Gatarayiha Triphon Field Manager (Technical) 2.10.2000 ARC Mr. Guy Branch Country Director

REGIONAL LEVEL MEETINGS AND INTERIEWS

11/9/2000-12/9/2000 Commune Rutongo Mr. Gadi Members of the CDC and the Communal Fontainier

Assistant Bourgemestre Technique

5-6/9/2000 & 6/10/2000 Commune Muvumba

Dr. Wilson Rutagira Members of Muvumba Regie Committee, Bureau and CDC

Prefect Umutara

14-15.9.2000 Commune Kanzenze Mr. Musonera Jaspard Members of the commune Regie and CDC

Assistant Bourgemestre Technique

27-28.9.2000 Commune Kibali Mr. Ngendahayo Sylvester Communal Fontainier & Members of Regie Bureau

Bourgemestre

7-8.92000 Commune Shyorongi Mr. Mujiji Noel Members of the CDCs + Communal Fontainier

Assistant Borgemestre Technique

29-30.9.2000 Commune Kinyami Mr. Kimenyi Everriste Members of the CDC, Regie Bureau and Communal Fontanier

Bourgemestre

18-19/9/2000 & 19/9/2000 Commune Kayonza Mr. Nyamutamba Gilbertin Members of the Kayonza sector Regie and CDC

Bourgemestre

5/10/2000 Commune Kiyombe Mr. Jules Mulinzi Members of the Commune CDC and Regie Bureau

Bourgemestre

20-21.9.2000; 9.10.2000 17/10/2000

Commune Kigarama Mr. Ntambara Damian Members of the Commune Regie Bureau and CDC

Bourgemestre

22-23.9.2000; 9.10.2000 17/10/2000

Commune Rusumo Mr. Mukuralinda Charles Members of the Commune Regie Bureau and the CDC

Bourgemestre

11

Section One: WES Project Context and Content 1.1 Project Background and Conception The genesis and elaboration of the UNICEF-GOR WES project can be traced to a number of specific country events and situations: • The Rwanda war and genocide of 1994: Before the war and the genocide Rwanda’s

water supply coverage was rated among the highest in Africa. Most of the water systems were however very old, having been implemented some 30 years before the war. During the war and the genocide the majority of the systems were destroyed. A major international humanitarian intervention following the war and the genocide resulted in a significant repair and rehabilitation of the pre-existing systems. The emergency nature of the intervention however meant that little or no attention was given to such issues as sustainability, community participation and future operation and maintenance of the rehabilitated systems. As a result, most of them soon fell into disrepair. A large population returning into the country after the war put a further strain on the systems. It thus became necessary that the systems not only be rehabilitated again, but that new ones be installed to meet the demands of an added population, particularly in the rural areas. It also became necessary that an appropriate framework (of systems, structures, mechanisms and procedures) be put in place to support future operation, maintenance and management of these facilities.

• The new government policies of Decentralization and Group Resettlement (the

Imidugudu): Consistent with the global shift towards greater popular empowerment and the ideology of shared governance, the government of Rwanda had as early as 1996 sought to pursue a political system of decentralized or devolved governance, shifting the greater responsibility for development management to the prefectures, communes and communities. This system, the policy of which was officially adopted this year, began to take form at regional level soon after the launch of the transitional government. A simultaneous development was the launch of a new policy of group resettlement, relocating populations on top of hills and along the roads or new schools. The devolution policy resulted in the prefectures, communes and respective local communities taking up the full responsibility for planning, implementing and managing local-level development, with the Central government retaining the role of enabler, guardian and guarantor of the state. The new resettlement policy on the other hand made access to existing water facilities, located at the valley bottoms very difficult. As a result, women and children, as the main drawers of water, had to carry water from capped springs in valley bottoms to their hilltop homes, covering distances often exceeding 1 kilometre. This resulted in a reduction in per capita water usage (as low as 5litres) for most households. The implication of both policies for WES Programme implementation was the need to respond through an approach that would empower local actors to implement and manage their own WES infrastructures, and promote technologies that would both broaden easy access and at the same time be easy to manage locally.

• Inadequate safe water and water sources: while Rwanda boasted an abundance of surface and sub-surface water sources, more than half of its population obtained water

12

from unprotected sources, 85% of which were believed to be contaminated. Further, water consumption in rural areas was estimated at only 8 litres/person/day1, far below the national recommendation of 20 litres. Consequently, Diarrhoea and other water related disease conditions remained a major cause of morbidity and mortality in Rwanda. The lack of adequate reliable data on water and sanitation coverage presented a further bottleneck in the efforts to fully understand and improve the water and sanitation situation. The impression of adequate coverage and a steady situational improvement created in official sector documents2 resulted in a lack of donor interest in the sector, making effective intervention difficult. The need to correct this situation and increase the levels of available safe water and water sources became another motivation for UNICEF’s involvement.

• Low levels of improved hygiene and environmental sanitation knowledge and

disposition (attitude and practices): the majority of the population of Rwanda lived amidst poor environmental conditions that fuelled a vicious cycle of malnutrition and infections. Children were particularly adversely affected. While the use of latrines was widespread amongst the population, neither latrines nor practices relating to water and sanitation usage among rural people were up to acceptable standards. For example, although 85% of urban and rural households had latrines, no more than 35% of them were septic in urban areas and only 0.8% were hygienic in rural areas. The 1995 KAP study referred to in the previous page concluded that Rwandan women had good knowledge of the subject matter but:

66% of them did not wash their hands after defecation 47% of them kept livestock in their houses, 58% of the rural homes were infested with parasites and almost 100% with rats 75% of water containers were dirty and 67% reservoirs were not covered.

It is this context and UNICEF’s own concerns with the rights of women and children to a good and fulfilling life that prompted the conception of the UNICEF-GOR Water and Environment Sanitation Programme (WES). Joint Consultations in 1996 resulted in a final project document and an implementation guideline the same year. The fundraising to implement the project began the same year.

1 UNICEF MINITRAPE, MINISANTE 1995 water supply and Hygiene and sanitation KAP study 2 For example the 1996 Draft Water and Sanitation Sector policy prepared by Minitrap/DEA/GTZ and the National inventory of water supply in Rwanda carried out by the same agencies in the same year, which indicated? a steady improvement in WATSAN coverage for Rwanda and gave the following coverage estimates: • 90% of the urban population-half through piped connection and half through public taps • 70% of rural population-24% by adduction and 46%by protected sources • of the 85% urban population with sanitation cover , 35% used septic tanks while 50% used dry pits • of the 85.4% rural population with latrines, 0.8%used improved latrines while 84.6%used traditional

latrines These accounts have been disputed and interpreted only as headcounts of all WATSAN points without consideration of their working status or accessibility. New estimates by the Ministry of Energy Water and natural Resources (MINIRENA) placed the real national coverage at between 45-50%.

13

1.2 Programme Goals and Objectives In view of the above context and consistent with UNICEF’s CRC article 24 (c&e)3, the WES Programme set itself the goal to: Contribute to child survival through the provision of improved access to safe water, hygiene, and environmental sanitation services especially in the rural areas. The specific deliverable objectives towards this goal were identified as follows:

To increase by 15% (from 45% to 60%) actual access to safe water in the rural areas To increase from 0.8% to 6% access to use of hygienic latrines in rural areas To ensure at least 25% 0f rural WES systems are community managed through Regies To ensure at least 25% of the rural population use more than 10 litres of safe water per

capita per day To ensure the provision and use of hand washing facilities at all hygienic latrines To ensure at least 25% of rural communes have functional community-based Primary

Environmental Care activities, such as catchment protections, disposal of solid and liquid waste and improved placement and design of latrines

To set up and institutionalize an effective monitoring and evaluation feed back system 1.3 Programme Strategies and activities To achieve the widest possible support and impact the Programme would be implemented at two levels: • At the National level, where implementation efforts would seek the overall aim of building

a comprehensive policy environment, political goodwill and skills necessary to support and strengthen community capacity to implement and manage WES projects, and

• Geographically, in 66 selected communes, where efforts would be aimed at assisting communities to install, maintain, manage and sustain WES facilities, and improve their hygiene and environmental sanitation practices and behavior.

Abroad range of strategies would be pursued to achieve the outlined objectives, among them capacity building, advocacy, social mobilization, intensive IEC activities, promotion of inter-sector linkages, research, development and promotion of appropriate and cost-effective technologies, community capacity building and empowerment, promotion of community cost-sharing, and the promotion of gender sensitive and child participation approaches. Table 1 below matches these strategies against proposed Programme components (projects) and activities. The table also presents specific objectives identified for each component and respective implementing partners.

3

14

Table 1: WES Programme Objectives, Strategies and activities 1998-2000

Programme components (projects)

Project objectives Project strategies Project activities Project partners

Support to policy development

• Support and advocate for the adoption of national

policies and strategies on appropriate technologies • Support the formalization of community institutions

and structures • Advocate for integration of water sanitation and

hygiene activities into holistic WES projects • Advocate for the allocation of greater resources to

the sector • Support the decentralization of decision-making

• Advocacy, IEC social

mobilization • Capacity building • Monitoring and

Evaluation

• Seminars, workshops, study tours, training in project management and development

• Research and development of appropriate technologies

• Support to set up and institutionalize a national monitoring Unit

• MICS surveys, studies • Environmental awareness • Support to multi-sectoral thearte, mass

media & other IEC activities

• National Policy-

makers at central and peripheral level

• Donors • UN and other

agencies • NGOs and • Communities

Commune level community-based WES project

• Promote a consultative environment which enables

communities to participate in WES project analysis, planning implementation, monitoring and evaluation

• Provide communities with knowledge, skills, materials and equipment to improve their WES services

• Create an awareness in communities of the dangers to their quality of life of poor WES and Hygiene conditions and seek the necessary behavior change

• Promote sustainability of WES services by ensuring community management through functional Regies

• Community

participation • Community self-

management • Capacity building • Awareness creation • Cost-sharing • Active participation of

women and children • Service delivery (tools

and material)

• Orientation of community, commune and prefecture representatives

• Training of WES technicians in each sector • Selection, training and equipping of sector

fontainiers • Rehabilitation and protection of natural springs

and small gravity-fed water systems • Upgrading of existing traditional latrines with

hygienic Sanplats • Intensive hygiene campaigns • Improved disposal of household liquid and solid

wastes and latrine placement • Institutionalized progress monitoring from cellule

upwards • Installation of WES stores in each commune • Water management in schools and health centers

• Communities • Sectoral Ministires of

works, energy, health, agriculture, interior and communal development, information

• Prefecture and Communal Authorities

• NGOs (both national and international)

Programme Support

- - -

15

1.4 Project Implementation and Management Arrangements 1.4.1 Implementation The implementation and management arrangements for the WES pilot project are articulated in the operational document UNICEF/MINITRAPE COMMUNE-LEVEL WATER, SANITATION & HYGIENE EDUCATION PILOT PROJECT IMPLENTATION GUIDELINES developed jointly between the government of Rwanda through the respective ministries and UNICEF. A copy of this document is attached in section I of the Annex. The document elaborates clear guidelines for a broad range of Programme implementation and management aspects and activities, including selection of communes, orientation of local leaders, project agreements (LOU) and acceptance conditions, selection and training of Project Management Teams, Baseline surveys, training and equipping of fontainiers, stores installation and management, election training and equipping of Community Water and Environment Sanitation Committees (CWESCs), Implementation, water analysis and project monitoring, evaluation and reporting. The primary locus of the implementation of the WES project would be 66 communes selected on the basis of 13 criteria set out in the project implementation guide. Key among these would be severity of need, determined through such considerations as levels of WES coverage in relation to user population, morbidity and mortality profiles, and existing local implementation and management capacity. The actual physical implementation and management of the projects would be carried out by the project beneficiaries assisted by local fontainiers and the Project Management Team (PMT). Where capacity is deemed inadequate, experienced NGOs or private enterprises would be called upon to provide technical, managerial and financial support. In each commune 40 community groups (water groups)4 would be selected and provided with the necessary support to install or rehabilitate identified water system (s) and upgrade at least 25 latrines. The key technologies options would be spring protections and gravity-flow systems, although boreholes and pumped systems would also be supported where considered appropriate. For hygiene and sanitation improvement the project would promote and build capacities to install the SANPLATS. Approximately 1 million people (13.3% of total national population) would benefit directly from water supplies and 400,000 from improved hygiene and environmental (5.3% of total national population). Some estimated 40% of the total estimated population of three million people would benefit indirectly from improved Regie management and IEC activities. 1.4.2 Management Arrangements 1.4.2.1 Planning, Coordination, and Management structures 4 A water group or community comprises the totality of users who share a water point and participate in every aspect of its operation and management.

16

Figure 1 below gives the proposed framework for project planning, coordination, implementation and management at National, Prefecture and commune level.

17

Fig. 1: Proposed Planning Implementation and Management Framework for the GOR-UNICEF WES Programme National-level Planning and Co-ordination

Project Co-ordination Committee

(PCC)

Comprising 1. Section Head UNICEF WES 2. Director Water and Sanitation 3. Director Epidemiology and Public

health 4. Director Community Development 5. Director Environment 6. A representative of Civil Society

Prefecture-level Planning and Co-ordination

Project Support Team (PST)

1. Prefect/Assistant Prefect

(Coordinator) 2. Hydrologist 3. Inspector of Hygiene 4. Community Development Advisor 5. Inspector of environment 6. Women’s representative 7. representative for CCDFP

Commune-level Planning implementation and Management

Project Management

Team (PMT)

Community Water and Environment Sanitation Committee (CWESC)

Fontainiers Project Beneficiaries

1. Assistant Bourgmestre 2. Fontainier Communal 3. Responsible for de Centres de Sante 4. Inspector of Schools 5. CCDFP 6. Commune-level Women’s rep 7. Women’s group rep. 8. NGO rep. 9. Regie Associative rep. 10. Health Animators rep 11. Water Users

• Supervision • Advise • Technical

support

• Planning • Coordination • Decision-

making

• Physical implementation

• O&M • Management of

cost-recovery system

Roles & Functions

18

At the national level a Project Coordination Committee (PCC) composed of directors from the focal Ministries, representatives from Civil Society and the UNICEF WES section head would constitute the highest organ of overall Programme decision-making, planning and coordination. At the prefecture level a Project Support Team (PST) comprising top government official at the prefecture level would provide supervision, advice and technical support. At the commune level, the Project Management Team, a 10-person team drawn from the community and the commune administration, would work with community members to identify, plan and implement commune-level WES projects. This team would eventually be replaced by a system of Community Water and Environment Sanitation Committees (CWESCs) elected at the commune, sector and cellule levels. The CWESCs would comprise an elected 8-member team of a President and a Treasurer, and six community members responsible for the Water, Sanitation and hygiene education components (two for each component), at each water point. These would be elected by the community of Users around each water point and would constitute the base units responsible for community level coordination, implementation and management of WES interventions and activities. Upwards the CWESCs would comprise representative committees and Bureaus of Presidents, Vice Presidents and Treasurers elected from the water point and sector level committees. The CWESCs would be part of the pre-existing government structure of the Regie Associative, an aggregated Supreme Association of all commune level water users, along with their elected leaders, convening once annually to discuss matters related to the use, development and management of water and related services within the commune. In areas with pre-existing Regie Associative structures use would be made of these, rather than form new ones. Where there are none, new ones would be formed. 1.4.2.2 Timing and scheduling of Project Activities The WES Programme would be a post-emergency bridging Programme covering three years from 1998 to 2000. Once orientated, implementing Communes and communities would come forward with project proposals. These would then be screened and either approved and funded or turned down following a careful review by UNICEF and the respective focal ministry. At the end of each project year UNICEF would sit with all partners to discuss the year’s performance and formulate plans and budgets for the following year. 1.4.2.3 Project approval Contracting and financing Arrangements The WES project would be a bilaterial undertaking between UNICEF and the government of Rwanda implemented at two levels – at the national level and at the commune level. NGO or private sector support would be sought where commune level capacity is assessed inadequate. The contracts would thus involve UNICEF in various implementation roles and agreements with these partners, spelling out the technical and administrative responsibilities of each partner, as well as the material, financial and accounting and reporting requirements and procedures considered necessary for effective project implementation and management. Implementing Communes assisted by the PMT and the PST would prepare detailed project proposals according to the guidelines provided in the project guide. First level analysis and screening would occur at this level, followed by a final screening and feasibility assessment by UNICEF and the focal Ministry. The final ratified proposal would then be endorsed and signed

19

by the implementing parties. Financial and material disbursements would then follow based on detailed approved requisitions and progress and performance reports. 1.4.2.4 Programme Monitoring evaluation and reporting The framework for project monitoring and evaluation is detailed in the project implementation guideline. Accordingly six different formats for monitoring and reporting were proposed. Section II of the annex presents these formats. The first format would provide initial data leading towards the development of a detailed project design and agreement. Resulting data would then be stored in a databank established at the national level. Formats 2-6 would be used as routine activity monitoring tools and would generate performance data and information at the five levels of project implementation, supervision and planning (CWESC, Secteur Fontainier, PMT, PST and PCC). All progress reports would be reported to the PCC for monitoring and evaluation of project goals and indicators. The regime for project monitoring and evaluation would comprise: • Monthly evaluation of progress at CWESC, Secteur and Commune levels • Monthly evaluation of management Capacity at Commune level • Quarterly evaluation of project coordination structures, progress and implementation

capacity at prefecture level. • Bi-annual evaluation of project coordination, planning and implementation at national

level. • A detailed mid-term evaluation after 18 months of project implementation • A final end of project evaluation in the third year of project implementation. 1.5 Programme Budget and Inputs Over the three years of the Bridging Programme an estimated US$ 5 million would be spent as shown in Tale 2 below. Table 2: Programme Budget and Inputs Project /year 1998 1999 2000 TOTAL

Project 01 Policy Development

145000

7%

145000

8.5%

140,000

13%

430000

8.5%

Project 02 Commune level Community-based WES project

1,755,000

80%

1,255,000

74%

710,000

64.5%

3,720,000

74.5%

Programme Support

300,000

13%

300,000

17.5%

250,000

22.5%

850,000

17%

Grand Total 2,200,000

100%

1700,000

17.5%

1,100,000

100%

5,000,000

100%

20

Section Two: Evaluation Terms of Reference and Methodology 2.1 Terms of Reference The terms of reference for the evaluation of the WES Programme were defined and elaborated as follows:

Taking into account the fact that access to safe water is a human right, analyze the role of government, communes and WES committees in promoting improved access to safe water, hygiene and environmental sanitation services

Analyze to what extent the provision, management and maintenance system of

community-based WES facilities were achieved

Assess the level of community contributions and ownership towards project management and sustainability

Assess the level of women participation in planning and management of WES project

Analyze the impact of the WES project on the status of children and women in targeted

areas

Assess the impact of the WES project on the status of Women and Children

Analyze the effectiveness, relevance and functioning of the WES Committees

Formulate recommendations on the relevance of WES project during the new country Programme 2001 to 2006

Propose the tools for internal monitoring of the project

Determine the relevance of WES in the new Country Programme 2001-2006

2.2 Evaluation methodology The evaluation entailed process and performance assessments in selected 10 communes of 4 Prefectures with completed and on-going WES Projects. Table 3 below presents the list of communes

Table 3: Proposed Evaluation Communes by Prefecture and current status of implementation

Commune Prefecture Implementation status Rutongo On-going Shyorongi On-going Kanzenze

Kigali Rural

Completed Kinyami On-going Kibali On-going Kiyombe

Byumba

On-going Kigarama Completed

21

Rusomo Completed Kayonza

Kibungo Completed

Muvumba Umutara Completed

In terms of Methodology, a broad range of methods and tools were applied. These included

National level interviews with departmental directors, staff of UNICEF, NGOs,

Bilateral and Multi-lateral Aid agencies Regional level interviews and discussions with prefecture authorities, commune

leaders and communities (users). Specific methods employed here included focus group and SWOT Analysis discussions, structured questionnaires and interviews with individual opinion leaders.

Observations Visits to and interviews with local health center staff Household and source Water sample tests Secondary data and information analysis

Section III of the annex presents the broad range of tools (indicators, questionnaires, data formats) developed and applied in carrying out the evaluation. The section also presents the names and designations of key personnel meet and interviewed, including participants in the SWOT analysis and Focus Group Discussions

23

Section Three: Findings and Assessment

3.1 The role of government communes and WES committees in promoting improved access to safe WES services

3.1.1 The Role of Government The devastation brought on Rwanda by the genocide and the war of 1994 resulted not only in extensive destruction of the majority of the Water and sanitation facilities in the country but also in a drastically diminished government capacity (technical, institutional, organizational and financial) to intervene effectively to restore and improve Water and Sanitation services. Following the war and the genocide an estimated 90% of Rwanda’s technical manpower disappeared. The resulting poor logistical framework (transport, communication systems, serviceable ware houses, office premises, cash payment for personnel and other services, water treatment, laboratory chemicals, fuel, pipes and fittings, pumps and other spares and equipment) made the restoration and delivery of essential WES and other services profoundly difficult. This context of destruction and diminished capacity prompted the government to launch a major multi-faceted global appeal for assistance to redress the situation. The response was massive, with many international governmental, multilateral and civil society organizations and individuals coming forward in all manners to assist Rwanda. The total humanitarian assistance to Rwanda in the four years following the genocide and the war has been estimated at more than US$ 100 Million (?).

On its own Rwanda has made tremendous efforts towards rehabilitation, reconstruction and

development. The thrust of these efforts, rightly, has been directed towards identified first order priorities such as strengthening national security, rehabilitating the judicial system, restoring property rights, repatriating refugees, consolidating the democratic process, building strategic capacities, and national reconciliation and peace building. The government however continues to emphasize the need to quickly achieve the restoration of basic services to meet the essential needs of the population, drawing heavily on international technical and financial support in this regard.

Within the WES sector, the massive post-war interagency action saw some 80% of the facilities and

services restored within the first year. The emergency nature of the intervention however resulted in little effective attention going to such issues as sustainability of the systems, community participation, and future operation and maintenance of the rehabilitated systems. Subsequently most of the systems soon fell into disrepair. The challenge for the government during the post emergency period therefore has been to put in place a framework of policies, along with the requisite strategies, institutional and organizational arrangements (systems, procedures, mechanisms) and resources, necessary to create an environment that would facilitate effective and sustainable Water and Environmental Sanitation management and development. Towards this a number of tangible milestones and achievements, as well as shortcomings can be identified:

24

3.1.1.1 The development of the national sector policy on water and sanitation 3.1.1.1.1 Policy content and thrust The biggest step in the efforts to put in place a framework for effective and sustainable Water and

Environmental Sanitation development and management is constituted perhaps in the formulation, promotion and development of the national sector policy on water and sanitation. In September 1997 a national sector policy on water and sanitation development and management was proposed at a meeting of stakeholders. Discussions and consultations on thrust and content followed and in October 1999, the national sector policy on water and sanitation development and management was adopted. A number of core principles, values, strategies and objectives can be discerned from the sector policy:

o Core policy values and principles:

Water is both a private and a social good. By this declaration the policy recognizes the

economic opportunity in water, but also the fundamental human right of access to it. Thus while provision is pillared on a principle of “user pays” the right of those without this ability is recognized and guaranteed.

Decentralized self-management. To the greatest extent possible communes and communities shall bear the onus of ownership, development and management of their respective water and sanitation infrastructure.

In the development and management of WES infrastructure due consideration shall be given to water quality and related environmental integrity.

International, regional and sub-regional agreements on the development and management of common-interest water resource shall be recognized and supported.

o Strategies and responsibilities

An integrated demand-driven approach with decentralized (commune and community

level) ownership, development and management. Social mobilization, sensitization and capacity building to enlist support for, establish, and

build institutional, organizational and technical capacities towards decentralized ownership, management and development. The role of government shall be to guarantee effective overall management of the nation’s water resources, ensure indivisible adequate access, and, promote a supportive and enabling environment for community based development and management. These roles entail policy development (elaboration, development of guidelines, standards, systems and mechanisms, etc.,), planning, coordination, development of local and institutional expertise, technical support to communes and self-management structures, legislation, oversight, progress audits and quality management, managing compliance with international and trans-boundary agreements and protocols, fundraising and financing, and development of major (particularly urban) and cross-border and inter-communal WES projects. The role of the local government is identified as being to facilitate effective technical, administrative, and financial management and to ensure full and comprehensive participation of communities in all aspects of local level WES infrastructure development and management. Existing rural piped water supplies and those to be constructed in future are the property of the communes. The communes can delegate the responsibility of management of these infrastructure

25

Self-financing/cost-recovery. The policy and strategy of the government is that WES activities are ultimately fully self-financing at local and regional level. The Commune system of the Regie Associative is the designated mechanism for realizing this strategy. The exception to this is where communities are not able to pay for basic WES services and in big projects (mostly sub-urban and inter-communal WES schemes) where greater and more specialized development (including financing) and management capacity and expertise would be required. Here the national Parastatal ELECTROGAZ would assume the responsibility for development and management.

o Policy objectives

Towards these ideals the policy pursues a number of interrelated objectives:

Increasing sector financing and fundraising to enhance quality and levels of water supply and sanitation services

Increasing participation in regional and sub-regional collaborative initiatives Increasing efforts towards further development of national water resource and

sanitation master plans Stimulating private sector interest in development and management of WES

infrastructure Improving sanitation and waste management through increased use of appropriate

modern technologies Adapting viable and feasible cost-recovery models Improving capacities through increased personnel training and deployment Intensifying public and industrial sector sensitization campaigns to improve hygiene

and environmental sanitation Stimulating greater community commitment to and participation in WES development

and management activities Improving collaboration with MINISANTE

3.1.1.1.2 Policy substance/integrity While wanting in coherency and content organization (English version), the policy document presents a

sober understanding of the realities and needs of Rwanda with respect to WES development and management. It is clear in terms of an overall development approach, which is pillared on the principles of indivisible access, decentralized ownership and self-management, self-financing and integrated development. The approach is consistent with the government strategy of decentralization, which is based on the ideology of people-driven change and the now widely accepted experience which confirms the view that the provision of basic services to poor communities will fail if the people themselves are not directly involved in all aspects of the provision process. Further the policy displays an appreciable balance in terms of investment priority between rural and urban areas, while recognizing that an initial urban bias will be strategically necessary.

There are aspects of the policy however, which are considered wanting and which would constitute areas of

need for further review and development. Some of these include:

Inadequately defined institutional framework-while identifying a broad range of roles, responsibilities and functions for Government (needs identification, planning, fundraising,

26

coordination of activities, developing local and institutional expertise, technical support to communes and self-management structures, sensitizing users to self-management monitoring on-going projects and water quality control) the policy fails to define a distinct role for the Prefecture administration in the development and management of water and sanitation infrastructure. Further while identifying institutional collaboration and cooperation as key to policy realization, the policy fails to incorporate within its institutional framework clearly distinguished linkage mechanisms or institutions, such as advisory councils, water boards and liaison committees which would be necessary for mediating such relationships and expediting collective decision-making and action among actors. Further, by not spelling out a time framework within which to realize its goals, the policy fails to project a distinct sense of commitment and urgency in a context, which arguably demands such precision. When is universal access to safe water and sanitation services to be achieved? What are the sector’s priorities in the intermediate, medium and long-term?

Sector policy and the new government ideology of group resettlement (the Imidugudu)-the new government policy of group resettlement represent a major institutional change in the rural landscape of Rwanda. The policy, seeking the relocation of populations on top of hills and along the roads and new schools, necessitates major changes in the location of rural development infrastructure and carries with it major financial, logistical, organizational and technical implications and challenges. The success of the Imidugudu ideology will depend very much on how fast and how much resources can be mobilized and directed to realize it. Any national policy affecting rural development, including the national sector policy on water and sanitation, must, per force, reflect this important aspect of the national emerging. With respect to the development of water and sanitation infrastructure, the policy necessitates massive new investments in new facilities, as most of the existing water supplies in rural areas have been located in the valley bottoms. While recognizing this reality the national policy shows inadequate explicit targeting

Basic adequate supply-while ensuring basic adequate supply is identified by the policy as the primary goal of government, nowhere in the policy is the meaning and constituting elements of “basic adequate provision” offered. What does it mean in terms of minimum per capita consumption per day, cartage distance, quality standards, availability, assurance of supply, or upgradability? These are fundamental stipulates of a national policy without which the promise of basic adequate supply would seem vague and undeterminable.

An excessive empathy with the popular inability to pay for water supply and sanitation services-the national policy seems somewhat resigned to the notion that a large number of rural households lack the ability to pay for safe water. It suggests alternative (to piped systems) drinking water supply systems for them. While reflecting a prevailing reality in rural Rwanda, this orientation negates efforts to evolve an effective and self-sustaining community-based water and sanitation development and management system. It perpetuates the traditional community sense of entitlement to government services and the reluctance to pay for water and sanitation services.

WES and Gender- the sector policy makes no mention of the role and participation of women in the development and management of Water and Environment Sanitation Infrastructure and activities.

Water and Environment- an examination of the national sector policy reveals a lack of an explicit policy on the relationship between water, sanitation and the environment.

Monitoring and WES Management Information System-a number of disparate statements and words alluding to some sort of a monitoring and quality control function appear in the document. An explicit policy on monitoring and sector information management, spelling out specific elements of the monitoring and information management function, and defining a clear institutional and organizational framework for realizing it, is however lacking.

Enhancing private sector participation in the development and management of WES activities. While it identifies this as an important strategy for stimulating growth in the WES sector,

27

the policy does not articulate a clear policy on how this would be achieved in both urban and rural areas.

Overall the sector policy document provides an important conceptual and orientation guide for

development within the sector. Further clarity along the lines identified here should make it even more instrumental in this regard.

3.1.1.2 Policy realization

3.1.1.2.1 Policy elaboration and Development Policy development entails further refinement and translation of policy statements into specific

operational components and elaboration of the institutional and organizational framework and tools necessary for its realization and further development. The outputs of such development would include guideline documents, manuals, curricula, laws, statutes, studies, master plans and institutional, organizational and technical arrangements that guide implementation management and development. Examined guideline documents, training manuals and curricula, and study reports, along with the ongoing efforts to elaborate national WES master plans and the institutional and legal framework for WES development and management provide evidence of good achievement and continuing efforts in this development process. The quality and integrity of these efforts however, as with those of policy implementation, outcomes and impact, will hinge very much on the extent to which the policy is further improved to address the shortcomings identified above. For example the institutional and organizational framework for management and development, along with the necessary linkages and linkage mechanisms will have to be developed and clearly distinguished functionally if effective development and management is to be realized. Many of the existing manuals and guideline documents remain as unconsolidated drafts and will have to be further developed to constitute comprehensive official management and development documents.

3.1.1.2.2 Social mobilization and sensitization Social mobilization and sensitization campaigns constitute the key strategy employed by the government to

promote and institutionalize the sector’s policies and development plans. The campaigns have been targeted on local officials, community leaders and users countrywide and have sought to sensitize them on local self-management, particularly on their role in the operation, maintenance, management and development of WES infrastructure at local level. A particular attention has been directed towards achieving cost-recovery through water payments. Wide-ranging promotional techniques have been applied towards achieving this, including formal and informal public meetings at national and regional level, radio and TV broadcasts, mobile film shows and print materials. However the Regie associative system is perhaps the most important instrument employed in this regard. Established throughout the country by the government, the Regie Management system has evolved to become a particularly viable instrument for popular mobilization and sensitization and for realizing and institutionalizing the key elements of the sector policy. Discussions with commune leaders and the water management committees reveal an appreciable level of understanding and acceptance of the key elements of the policy, namely decentralized self-management

28

and cost-recovery. Evidence of this understanding and acceptance was seen for example in the appreciable realization of local self-management and the appreciable number of households paying for water. One can talk clearly and technically about payment for water services and about community-based operation, maintenance and management of WES infrastructure and facilities. A number of problems however undermine greater promotion and impact of this function, particularly the promotion of improved Hygiene and sanitation. The lack of adequate funds within government is one of them. For example the potential of the mobile-cine unit provided by UNICEF for the purpose of hygiene sensitization was not maximized beyond the initial runs in the test communes. At the commune level, the lack of skilled hygiene promoters, and an effective institutional and organizational framework to facilitate their work, has undermined hygiene promotion efforts. This explains the low levels of safe Hygiene and sanitation knowledge and practices and the related high levels of morbidity and mortalities being experienced at this level. Also undermining greater acceptance and impact of the sensitization campaigns is the traditional sense of entitlement to government services among the local population. This attitude, perhaps tacitly encouraged by past Rwanda governments and reinforced more recently by the massive post-war international relief intervention has not only deepened a dependency syndrome in the rural areas but also undermined households’ willingness to pay for improved water supply services.

3.1.2.2.3 The evolution of the institutional framework and environment for improved WES development and management

The role of government in promoting improved access to safe water and sanitation services is further seen

in this respect. Figure 2 below presents the key institutions evolved and charged with the responsibility for developing and managing the national water and sanitation resources and infrastructure, as well as what are regarded as possible institutional gaps. The ministerial rationalization and streamlining efforts represents a major initial and continuing effort in this evolution. This effort culminated in 1999, in the creation of the Ministry of Energy, Water and Natural Resources (MINERENA) and the Department of Water and Sanitation. MINERENA holds the overall responsibility for developing and managing Energy Water and Natural Resources and infrastructure in the country. The department of Water and sanitation is its main intervener, with responsibility for developing and applying the national water and sanitation policy. Its roles and functions include needs identification and planning, mobilization and allocation of funds, coordination of sector activities, development of local and institutional expertise, provision of technical support to communes and local self-management structures, sensitization of users on self-management, research and development, and monitoring and quality control in on-going WES projects. At the commune level, the commune is the designated owner of all major water resources and infrastructure within the commune jurisdiction and may delegate the responsibility for their management, as it deems appropriate. Its functions, reflecting those of the department, include local planning, community mobilization and sensitization on government policy, funds mobilization and allocation and monitoring and supervision of projects, Since 1998 the Department of Water and Environment Sanitation has been working with the communes and non-governmental organizations to facilitate the establishment and capacity building of the commune-level community self-management system called the Regie Associative. Figure 4 below presents the organizational structure of this Management System. Implemented in over 50% of the 154 communes country wide to date, and working through a system of local committees, the Regie system represents perhaps the most

29

important instrument for commune and community-level mobilization, sensitization and self-management. The policy document identifies its role as being to manage and facilitate the development of all small community level water and sanitation supply systems and to ensure full community participation in all aspects (technical, administrative and financial) of local level WES development and management. The development and management of big water supply and sanitation systems, for which community associations lack effective development capacity, has been entrusted to ELECTROGAZ, the national parastatal body responsible for distributing electricity, water and gas. New institutional arrangements are being considered and experimented for complex inter-communal supply systems.

While the basic institutional framework has been evolved and has clearly played an important facilitative

and development role, certain weaknesses, with potential to undermine overall effectiveness and development, and which subsequently constitute areas of need for further improvement and development can be identified: While the specific roles and responsibilities of the commune-level administration and

institutions are clearly defined and distinguished, those of the provincial administration, to government, and to communes, and vice versa, are not. It is not clear whether the role and responsibilities identified for the department are the same ones served by the provincial administration. This lack of clarity has resulted in a weak coordination and technical support framework on the ground. In addition it makes attribution for success and failure difficult.

Also weakly evolved are the institutional mechanisms of linkage such as advisory councils, water boards and liaison committees, which could serve to mediate relationships and decision-making among different institutions and management levels. At the national level, a National Water and Sanitation Users Council could play an important representative role, bringing into policy and related development activities the users views on the development and management of the sector. An Inter-agency Committee and a Special Commission at the same level could provide a useful strategic forum for partners (ministries, private sector and civil society) and knowledgeable parties, to deliberate and advise on issues of common national interest. At the regional level Liaison Committees and Water Boards could form key planning and coordination forums between and among institutions. Currently these institutional mechanisms are for the most part lacking or only informally instituted. The national parastatal, ELECTROGAZ is a technical unit with too many functions and without a clearly defined relationship with the communes.

Within the communes the Regie management system remains weakly linked with the other institutions of local management such as the Commune Development Committee (CDC) and the community based health and Hygiene promoters. This weakness harms overall coordination, harmonization and monitoring and the potential synergy and effectiveness possible through joint implementation.

30

Fig 2: NATIONAL INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR WES DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT

NATIONAL LEVEL PROVINCIAL LEVEL

DEPARTMENTOF

WATER AND SANITATION

ELECTROGAZ

Provincial

Government (Prefecture)

Consumer

MINERENA

OTHER MINISTRIES

Policy, Planning, support, financial allocations, monitoring

Water supply

Water allocation,

Coordination, Strategy Consultative Support

?

?

A ommune Authority Regie Associative NGOs

B Commune Authority Regie Associative NGOs

BUSINESS NGOs

?

? ?

Possible institutional gaps ?

31

Fig. 3: The Regie Associative Management System and Structure

3.1.1.2.4 Building and deepening human capacities towards effective WES implementation, management and development

The devastation brought on Rwanda by the genocide and the war of 1994 resulted not only in extensive

destruction of the majority of the Water and Sanitation facilities in the country, but also in a drastically diminished government capacity (technical, institutional, organizational and financial) to intervene effectively to restore and improve Water and Sanitation services. Following the war and the genocide an estimated 90% of Rwanda’s technical manpower disappeared. The resulting poor logistical framework and dearth of qualified human and institutional capacity made the restoration and delivery of essential WES and other services profoundly difficult. This context of destruction and diminished capacity prompted a major multi-faceted global appeal by government for assistance, which saw some estimated US$ 100 million flow into Rwanda over the subsequent first 4 years to redress the situation. Within the WES sector, the massive interagency intervention saw some 80% of the facilities and services restored to full functional status within the first year of the war and genocide. The emergency nature of the intervention however resulted in little or no attention going to such issues as sustainability of the systems, community participation, and future operation and maintenance of the rehabilitated systems. Subsequently most of the systems soon fell into disrepair. The challenge for the government during the post emergency period therefore has been to put in place a framework of policies, along with the requisite strategies, organizational arrangements (systems, procedures, mechanisms) and resources (both human and material), and to create an environment that would facilitate effective and sustainable Water and Environmental Sanitation management and development. Many aspects of these efforts have been discussed already. The development and deepening of an effective human capacity remains one of Rwanda’s biggest challenges. It is a key component

Regie’ Bureau Regie Committee

Sector Bureau Sector Committee

Sector Bureau Sector Committee

Sector Bureau Sector Committee

WPC WPC WPC WPC WPC WPC

Users Users Users Users Users Users

Auditors

32

among Rwanda’s identified first order priorities, which include the strengthening of national security, the evolution of a system of justice and national reconciliation and the consolidation of the democratic process. A major immediate intervention in this regard has consisted in the recalling of educated and experienced nationals who fled the country during and following the war. Many of these have returned and now occupy strategic positions within government. A wide range of other strategies, including scholarship schemes for overseas studies and an open door policy to qualified foreign experts has seen a growing number of qualified and experienced people come forward and participate in the country’s development. Internally a growing number of young University graduates are joining the ranks of employed technical staff in various sectors of government and private sector. Despite these developments the Capacity challenge remains a big one, with most government Ministries remaining poorly staffed both numerically and technically, particularly at the regional government level. This is clearly the case with the WES focal ministries of MINERENA, MINITERE and MINISANTE. The staffing structure of these ministries almost invariably end at the prefecture level. Below this there is no concrete structure, and staff comprise mostly unqualified, unpaid promoters, equipped with only basic WES knowledge and skills. The Ministry of health, one of the better-developed Ministries, serves as a good example to underline this capacity crunch. The ministry has only 5 graduate health officers countrywide, at the prefecture level. All the others are medical assistants. Of all the hygiene officers heading the ministry’s departments of public hygiene at the prefecture, only one is a graduate (diploma level). The communes are headed by unqualified and unpaid Health Animators, without clear job specifications and who must do everything. There is no department of Hygiene and Public Health at the commune level. In order to cope, at least in the immediate and medium term, the government has adopted a number of tactical strategies, among them, pegging its capacity building efforts on to those of international governmental and non-governmental development agencies, most of whom have identified capacity building and service delivery as key areas of need for intervention, and, promoting, jointly with these agencies, innovative and cost-effective capacity building approaches such as the TOT, which seeks to develop cadres of Trained Trainers at regional, commune and sector level, who in turn, are expected to train at respective lower levels. Other strategies adopted include tapping existing private sector expertise, by either enlisting their participation in sector development, or privatizing enterprises currently owned and managed by the state. The already launched efforts to privatize ELECTROGAZ, is a case in point.

3.1.1.2.5 Sector Financing and physical provision of Water and Sanitation facilities

Figure 4 and Table 4 below respectively present trends in government investment and recurrent

expenditure in the sector since 1980. Evidently government funding to the sector is insufficient and has been declining since 1980. Total expenditure for the period 1990 and 2000 (at 593,772,000 FRW) represents a decline of 50% from the period 1980-1990 (at 121,4654,000 FRW). Total investment funding during the period 1990-2000 (at 37,975,870 FRW) was a meager 13.7% of that for 1980-1990. Recurrent expenditure on rural water supply indicates a decline of 83% between 1986 (158,529,400FRW) and 1999 (27,574,400). The emergency period (1994-1997) saw the sharpest fall in both total recurrent and total statutory investment funding, at 106,857,800 FRW and 15888000 FRW) respectively. This situation of depressed funding is manifested in the attributable slow pace of improvement in cartage distance, safe water and sanitation coverage, and the relapse into deterioration and disrepair of many systems, including those rehabilitated and/or installed during the

33

emergency period and the early stages of the bridging Programme5. The evident slow but consistent improvements in investment funding since 1995 however reflects a growing commitment to increase investment to the sector and to improve the general water and sanitation situation in the country. Physically a number of new large water schemes (communal and inter-communal) are underway (for example the Bugesera Sudd drinking water scheme in commune Ngenda, the Region des Laves scheme in communes Ruhengeri and Gisenyi, and Muvumba-Nyagatare supply scheme from Kiyombe, Byumba). These schemes will provide reliable supplies to a growing urban and peri-urban population. Plans are also underway to investigate water potential and increase supplies in the drier areas of Umutara, Kibungo and Mayaga region.

Inadequate funding base however remains the major cause of the overall sub-optimal performance within

the water and Environment sanitation sector. Most of the mentioned developments have been possible largely through borrowed foreign funding. The low funding base, along with the identified inadequate organizational (technical, managerial and foundational) and institutional (linkages and relationships) capacities, is certainly the underlying cause of the weak public hygiene and environmental sanitation development and management framework at the commune level. The role of foreign funding for these developments will continue to be important. Similarly an explicit private sector inducement package will play an important role in drawing private sector financing, participation and support. At the local level, the strengthening of the Regie Management System constitutes a key strategy towards ensuring effective local cost recovery and financing of water infrastructure and supplies at this level. Similarly financial allocations to establish and maintain a fully functional hygiene and public health department at the commune level is key to ensuring effective hygiene and environmental sanitation promotion and development at the commune level.

Table 4: Trends in GOR Recurrent and Investment expenditure in Water and Sanitation (1980-2000)

t

5 Government investment in water and sanitation sector- official paper presentation at the

34

Planned Expenditure

35

Figure 4: Recurrent and Investment Expenditure in Water and Sanitation Sector

0.00

20,000.00

40,000.00

60,000.00

80,000.00

100,000.00

120,000.00

140,000.00

160,000.00

180,000.00

200,000.00

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Year

Expe

nditu

re (,

000

FRW

)

Recurrent Budget

Development Budget

36

3.1.1.2.6 Monitoring and evaluation Monitoring and evaluation is the most talk about, yet the least fulfilled component of the development intervention cycle. In its statements of intent, the national policy identifies monitoring as one of its activities. It does not however define a framework that would guide the establishment and development of a clear monitoring, evaluation and information management function within the sector. Practically, a clear institutional and organizational framework for monitoring and evaluation (as seen in the existence of a clear M&E concept, clear development indicators and tools for monitoring) is lacking. There is however some evidence of monitoring activities as well as a commitment towards establishing and deepening a monitoring and evaluation function. The national inventory of water supply in Rwanda completed in 1999, the various baseline and KAP studies conducted by the Ministries of Environment, Health and MINERENA are some of these. The WES division of Rural Hydraulics has recently completed an evaluation of the functioning of the Regies in selected communes. The ministry of health has evolved a satisfactory information system which involves Local Health Centre Personnel countrywide capturing monthly morbidity data in specially designed data sheets and forwarding the data to regional and ultimately national data centres, where they are stored in a computerised data system and used to provide information as required. While providing useful baselines and benchmarks against which improvements and future assessments may be made, these initiatives are however isolated, and for the most part not implemented against backgrounds of clearly determined and institutionalised sector/departmental objectives, achievement indicators, targets and standards. The case of the Ministry of Health’s information system can be cited. While clearly one of the best in the country in terms of institutionalisation and functionality, and already influencing wide-ranging decisions and policy interests within the sector, the Ministry of health’s information system is too “headquarter” oriented. There is little evidence to show that the locally mined data are analysed and used locally to affect local health decisions and actions. One gets the impression the data is only relevant at the national level. This is an unfortunate trend when viewed against the government’s decentralization policy, which emphasizes local self-management. More importantly the weakness points towards a weak conceptual framework for and understanding of the role of a management information system. A major reason for these problems has to do with the lack of financial resources to implement and institutionalise an effective monitoring and evaluation function. The other (related) reason is the prevailing lack of adequate effective human capacity, numerically and technically to serve an effective M&E function. The recently established Central Projects and External Finance Bureau (CEPEX) represents perhaps the strongest statement of the government’s concern over the prevailing weak monitoring and evaluation framework and its renewed commitment to correcting it and ensuring that that future development initiatives are effectively monitored and evaluated to ensure outputs and impacts which meet clearly identified national priorities, goals and needs. CEPEX is a semi-autonomous body of government, which will serve as a clearinghouse for development projects, and as a focal point for coordinating development aid and improving project performance and development management in the country. One of its main departments is that of monitoring and evaluation, which has been charged with the responsibility of helping improve the performance of all investment portfolios in the country by facilitating the establishment of systems and processes that will ensure efficient and effective monitoring, evaluation and auditing of projects.

37

3.1.2 The Role of the communes and communities The sector policy identifies the following roles for the commune administration and communities respectively in the implementation, management and development of WES infrastructure and services. Communes-Local planning, community sensitisation and Mobilization, Coordination, supervision and follow-up of activities (mobilizing, organizing, overseeing and monitoring community participation), Local Capacity building and Mobilization and allocation of funds Community: Local self-management through the Regie system-this entails sensitisation, water fees collection, operation and maintenance of infrastructure and the provision of labour and materials for installation of WES infrastructure. Analysis: There is ample evidence of efforts to fulfil these roles. Mobilization and sensitisation efforts are resulting in growing knowledge, acceptance and adoption of government policies. The greatest achievement in this respect is perhaps the establishment of the local self-management system of the Regie Associative and the related cost-recovery management system. Over 50% of the Communes (54% in Non-WES communes and 55% in the WES communes) had Regie committees established at cellule, sector and commune levels by the end of the second year of WES Bridging Programme. The bigger contribution in this endeavour is attributed to the commune administration, having played an active role mobilizing, sensitising and establishing these committees in both Non-WES and designated WES Project areas. Over the brief period of the decentralization experience, one can, technically and in real terms, talk of local self-management and a functional cost-recovery system within the rural WES sector. The Community Development Committees (the CDC), established at commune, sector, and cellule levels as the technical units responsible for identifying, analysing, prioritising, planning, coordinating, supervising and mobilizing resources for commune and community level development are slowly but progressively evolving in these roles. However the decentralization experience is new and fraught with many difficulties. There is still a great deal of reliance on the central government, in terms of decision-making, financing and service provision. The commune (the administration) and community (Regies and other local self-management groups) management structures, while evolving well in form and in terms of understanding their mandate, remain weak technically, financially and both institutionally and organizationally (in terms of linkages and linkage mechanisms and functional relationships, management systems, structures, processes, and procedures, and knowledge, attitudes, skills and leadership behaviour) and are not therefore able to play an effective, planning, coordination and follow-up role and to reap the full benefits (in terms of service provision) that would otherwise result from effective integration. The relationship between the Community Developed Committee (CDC) and the Regies system demonstrates this well. Most members of the CDC do not as yet have the range of technical and organizational skills required to effectively act out their roles or clearly distinguish them from those of the Regies, which are more technical and operational in nature. The latter problem results also from the fact that for the CDC, these roles and responsibilities and related functions are as yet not clearly elaborated and distinguished. One consequence of this capacity constrain is that for the most part, the responsibility for planning, decision-making and management remains in the hands of a few top commune executives. This problem clearly works against the community self-management and empowerment imperative. It is complicated further by Rwanda’s traditional authoritarian culture, which expects and demands obedience and acquiescence from below. The greatest hindrance and threat to the development of, and promotion of improved Access to WES infrastructure and facilities at the commune level however relates to the lack of a fully functional Hygiene and Public Health department with clear goals, programmes, and plans of action at this level. This issue discussed exhaustively in subsequent sections of this report is the major cause of the poor status of hygiene and sanitation at the community level.

38

3.2 The provision and management of Community-based WES

facilities and services

3.2.1 Policy support: improving the institutional and organizational environment for effective WES delivery

The overall objective pursued under this component was: Support for policy development to provide the necessary political environment and skills to support and strengthen community capacities to implement and manage WES projects and to support the development and adoption of national policies, strategies, guidelines, and standards necessary to create a positive environment for community management of the sector. Table 5 below presents the key activities planned/pursued to realize this objective. Table 5: Broad and specific policy interventions planned and pursued by the WES project

Broad areas of activity/subprojects Specific activities planned/pursued

Advocacy, IEC and Social Mobilization

WES sensitization and mobilization seminars at National and Regional level Orientation seminars for local leaders Development and pre-testing of WES training and promotional materials

Capacity Building

Prefecture level TOT training for Hygiene and water and sanitation personnel Commune/Sector level TOT training for Hygiene and water personnel

(fontainiers and health/hygiene promoters) Support ministry to coordinate and monitor sector activities Technical and financial support for central store management Orientation training for local leaders Sharing of WES experiences

Research and development

Sensitization on use of traditional three-stoned fireplace Promotion of the SANPLATS Technology in IMUDUGUDU Collection of baseline data to establish data base on environmental Material support for water quality testing/analysis Identify and match trees to be planted near water points, homes and

catchments Support for Primary Environmental Care (PEC)

National level environmental awareness campaigns Environmental awareness campaigns in schools Development of training materials (video, booklets, etc) for PEC activities

Monitoring and evaluation

WES field project monitoring M&E and MIS support to WES store managers Development and Pre-testing of commune-level project monitoring formats Strengthening ministerial and provincial capacities for Community-level

project monitoring Supervision and evaluation of hygiene education activities in the project areas Establishment of sound MIS within WES and Minerena Evaluation/impact measurement of WES activities in 4 prefectures Assessment of Hygiene education needs in selected communes

39

Assessment 3.2.1.2 Advocacy IEC and Social mobilization Activities This evaluation assesses this activity adequately achieved. Initial mobilization and sensitization efforts consisted in national level mobilization and sensitization activities with partner ministries (mainly MINISANTE, MINITERE and MINERENA), the development of sensitization materials, the promotion of hygiene and environmental sanitation awareness and orientation workshops for prefecture and commune-level (commune and sector) leaders. The early success of the project, seen through such achievements as the inter-ministerial collaboration in elaborating and developing the guidelines and the institutional framework for WES project implementation, the development of hygiene and environment awareness and training materials (awareness videos, pamphlets and posters), national environmental awareness seminars with policy makers and others, can be attributed to intensive advocacy, IEC and mobilization activities and the resulting understanding and acceptance of the project at all strategic levels. At the commune level the orientation workshops held with the commune leaders provided opportunities not only for creating awareness about the project, but also platforms for popularizing and deepening local understanding and acceptance of government policies, particularly those related to WES development and management. Intensive mobilization, sensitization and IEC activities also expedited the formation of the Regie Committees and enhanced community involvement and participation in the implementation of initial community-based WES infrastructures. Some specific Policy development achievements can be cited:

The development of hygiene and environmental awareness and educational materials such as videos, pamphlets/booklets, posters, film documentaries and flyers

Development and pre-testing of Hygiene and environmental education training guides, manuals and curricular

Training of MINERENA and MINISANTE staff in the development of Cine materials (specifically documentaries and video clips) and in the use and management of related CINE equipment

National level seminars to mobilize politicians and other decision makers on environmental issues. National level consultations aimed at reviewing progress, improving communication sharing and

reaching consensus on best practices Establishment of the Regie Management System in over 50% of the communes in the country (

55% in WES Communes and 54% in Non-WES Communes) by December of the third year of the WES project implementation

From a perspective of general IEC the WES project experience emerges as a major social experience whose

lessons have greatly informed and benefited many aspects of the government’s new decentralization policy. The Project’s commune and community level implementing institutions such as the Regie Committees and such initial design structures as the Project Management Team (PMT) and the PST have served as models and “springing boards” for the new institutions of the decentralized government and their leaders respectively. This picture of untainted success however falsifies a number of factors, which have acted to undermine the full impact potential of this component, and indeed the overall success of WES project implementation at commune level. Key among these has been the lack of adequate financial resources and capacities to carry out effective sensitization and training

40

campaigns. For example the initial plan and strategy for sensitizing communal leaders and communities and the establishing, training, supporting and continuous monitoring of sector and communal Regie Committees and their work in all 66 WES intervention communes, using a council of 15 trained animators (from the commune) and selected Subject Matter Specialists from the Prefectures and elsewhere, with funding from UNICEF, did not proceed as planned6 due to cost consideration. At an estimated cost of US$ 8400 per commune, this approach was found to be too costly and was changed after the completion of trials in 4 pilot communes. While the general strategy orientation remained, the specific strategy elements and plans changed. A new strategy was adopted which entailed the communes mobilizing and sensitizing commune leaders and communities, and facilitating the establishment of the Regie structures with their own resources, while the task of and the resources (much reduced) for building the capacities of the Regies through training, administrative and technical support went to NGOs and Private Enterprises. This change resulted in a subsequent slight shift of priority by the responsible department to Non-WES areas, acting only as a facilitator in the WES project areas. While the mobilization, sensitization and Regie establishment activities continued, and are assessed appreciably well achieved, these activities did not continue with the same intensity and level of completeness, and in the same organized manner as originally planned. Subsequently, the levels of achievement in terms of popular sensitization, and the establishment and training of the Regie management system have not been as high or as comprehensive as would have been achieved in the WES Project areas, if adequate funding had been allocated. Table 6 below (discussed in detail in part 3.5) shows the effect of the resulting inadequate formation base, on the establishment status of the Regies.

Table 6: Establishment status of the Regie Committees by commune and Prefecture (as of Dec. 1999)

No of Communes Status of the Regie Associative

tee formed med d ed

gory total

Non-WES status

e established mittee established

ished

6 This plan and strategy is set out in the document PLAN D’ ACTION DE LA MISE EN PLACE D’ UNE REGIE ASSOCIATIVE and contains a 19 stage process along with a budget estimated at FRW 3,609,500 (about US$ 8400 per commune- or some US$554,400 for all 66intervention communes). A copy of the plan is appended as fig X in section Y of the annex. 7 In this tabulation Kayonza is not included because it does not have a Regie Bureau

41

stablished blished bank account hment rate

Other effects can be seen in:

The low levels of water and sanitation hygiene Knowledge and practices and the related high levels of morbidity and mortalities being experienced at community level. This is attributed to inadequate community sensitization and education, attributed in turn to a weak institutional, organizational and technical base for realizing this component. Such a base would comprise a clearly articulated extension and education approach comprising clearly distinguished delivery institutions and organizational arrangements, with clear tasks, responsibilities, delivery targets and incentive structures and a system of performance audit.

The underutilized Mobile Cine Unit: for similar organizational and resource reasons (the lack or inadequate allocation of financial resources) at government level, the potential of the mobile-cine unit provided by UNICEF for the purposes of sensitization and education to promote water and sanitation hygiene knowledge and practices was not optimized.

A weak appreciation of both the concept and potential of the Regie Associative: both the idea and usefulness of the Regie Associative, as an institution which, strengthened and effectively consolidated, could serve as a key instrument for empowering water users and deepening their stake in the development and management of water and sanitation infrastructure locally and nationally is not really known or perceived in this respect.

Another factor, which has dealt a further blow to greater promotion and acceptance of the sector policy

particularly with regard to cost-recovery, is the traditional sense of entitlement to government services among the local population. This attitude, perhaps encouraged tacitly by past Rwanda regimes, and reinforced more recently by the massive post-war international relief intervention, has not only deepened a dependency syndrome in the rural areas but also undermined households’ willingness to pay for improved water supply services.

3.2.1.2.4 Capacity Building

This component sought the project’s objective of policy development support through a number of interrelated activities, namely: o Prefecture level TOT for Hygiene and water and sanitation personnel o Commune/Sector level TOT for Hygiene and Water personnel (fontainiers and hygiene

promoters) o Support ministry to coordinate and monitor sector activities o Technical and financial support for central store management o Orientation training for local leaders o Sharing of WES experiences 3.2.1.2.1 Assessment of output and impact achievement

42

This evaluation assesses this component of the WES Programme implementation the highest achieved among all the components. Table 6 below presents the key training activities and the resulting outputs/achievements by commune and prefecture. These can be summarized as follows: o Water and environmental hygiene and sanitation TOT training for prefecture level

Hydraulicians, Inspectors of Hygiene and sanitation, Environment protection/forestry officers, culture and social affairs officers, and ground NGOs. A total of 36 government and NGO personnel in 6 out of the 8 active WES prefectures received TOT training country-wide

o Technical and managerial training for Commune and sector level Fontainiers, Presidents of Regie Bureaus, and Assistant Burgomasters (technique). In total some 600 Communal and sector level fontainiers received TOT training. As part of the capacity building assistance, each Fontainier in every active intervention communes received the following equipment- protective clothing, a bicycle, and a plumber and mason tool kit.

o TOT training for commune level Hygiene Educators, targeting Communal health animators, fontainiers, inspectors of schools8 and women’s representatives. In total all 6 WES communes and some 140 Communal Hygiene educators received TOT training.

o TOT for sector level health and hygiene Animators (targeting Sector Health Animator and Women’s Representative)

o Training of 10 government in cine material production and in operation and management of a mobile cine unit)

o Training of 4 government staff at national level and all communal fontainiers in all intervention communes in store management. In addition each intervention commune received one 6m/20’container (about 50 in total) for stocking of WES materials and specially designed stock management cards for documenting stock movements.

o Completion of the MINERENA-UNICEF warehouse at the national and the training of 4 government staff at this level in store management

o Two National level seminars of stakeholders to discuss project progress and performance Other forms of support under this component have included the provision of such facilities as vehicles, bicycles and motorcycles to MINERENA to coordinate and monitor sector activities and such project financed activities as joint field monitoring missions and the development of an internal stock movements MIS for the national WES Warehouse. While these outputs clearly evince a good effort towards the realization of this component, some key activities planned under this component had either not been carried out at the time of this evaluation or not effectively accomplished. These included: o The training of sector level health and Hygiene Promoters. This activity, a key initial

step towards improving Water and Environmental Sanitation hygiene at community level was intended to train some 1500 sector level hygiene promoters in 515 sectors and 36 communes countrywide. The hygiene promoters would in turn train the promoters and the community at cellule level. At the time of this evaluation, this activity had not occurred.

o Management training and support for the Regie Committee System. The evident

appreciably high achievement in terms of the establishment of the Regie management structures has not been matched by a similar consistent, focused and comprehensive capacity building, through training of and management support for these structures.

8 The training of inspector of schools was done for Kibungo Prefecture only

43

Such focused training and support is evident in such communes as Rusumo and Kigarama. Their impact on the effectiveness and functioning of these institutions is analyzed under TOR 3.5 and reflected in the analysis and discussions that follow under the current TOR.

TABLE 7: WES PROGRAMME TRAINING ACTIVITIES 1998-2000

Target group (s) trained Type of training provided

No of trainings/ sessions held

Responsible/ executing Agencies

Communes Prefectures National level

Total numbers Trained /reached

TOT at Prefecture level (targeting prefecture Hydraulicians [REAP], Inspectors of Hygiene, Environment Officers, Culture and Social Affairs Officers, Inspectors of Sanitation, Forestry Officers and Ground NGOs)

6

Minerena and UNICEF

-

6

-

36

Training of Commune/Sector level fontainiers (targeting Assistant Bourgemestre technique, Communal Fontainier, Sector Fontainier, Regie President)

35

NGO & Minerena

35

8 -

596

TOT training for commune level Hygiene Educators (Targeting Communal health animator, Fontainier, inspector of schools9, women’s representative)

5

Minisante, NGOs, UNICEF

36

11 10

105

TOT for sector level health and hygiene Animators (targeting Sector Health Animator and Women’s Representative)

Planned

Minisante AMREF

36 and 515 sectors

5

-

Some 1030 hygiene animators to be trained

WES Orientation at commune level

Over 50

UNICEF & MINALOC

All WES Communes

8

-

Commune and sector level leaders in all active WES Communes

Management training for WES Committees (Regies)

?

MINERENA NGOs

?

?

?

?

Stock and Store Management training

-

UNICEF, NGOs MINERENA

All Fontainiers in active WES communes

8

4

About 50 Communal Fontainiers

Social Mobilization training

Training on development and use of Cine materials and equipment for environment and hygiene awareness and education

UNICEF MINITRAP MINISANTE

Kacyiru, Kicukiro, Nyarugenge (4 sectors in Kigali Urban and 3 rural communes)

Kigali Urban and Kigali rural

10

10

3.2.1.2.2 Assessment of effectiveness and impact The Training of Trainers at Prefecture level: while this activity has reached some 75% of the active WES prefectures, it does not seem to have yielded the kind of impact that was intended. The 9 The training of inspector of schools was done for Kibungo Prefecture only 10 Another TOT for of some 36 Hygiene Animator representatives is planned to take place beginning 4th Dec. 2000 for 6 prefectures (Gitarama, Butare, Gikongoro, Cyangugu, Kibuye and Ruhengeri) and 36 communes. The TOT training for Commune Hygiene animators will have reached all WES communes and some 140 Hygiene ToTs.

44

idea of providing TOT training at this level was to equip prefecture level staff (Hydraulicians [REAP], Inspectors of Hygiene, Environment Officers, Culture and Social Affairs Officers, Inspectors of Sanitation, Forestry Officers) and other Non-governmental actors (Ground NGOs and private enterprises) with adequate technical and organizational skills to be able to play an active advisory, supervisory and technical support role at the commune level. There is evidence of an appreciable supportive role in some prefectures (such as Kibungo [particularly in Kigarama and Rusumo] and Umutara). This is not the case with other prefectures, where these roles seem not to have been served as well. It does seem that even in the prefectures with some form of a functional collaboration, the drive and motivation stems more from individual rather than institutionalized initiative and relationships. Two major reasons are discernible for this. One is the lack of clearly defined institutional and task relationships (definition, specification, division and linkages) between the prefecture administration and WES project arrangements at commune level. This is the role that the PST was intended to serve. When it became moribund, an institutional and functional void was created. The prevailing direct operational relationship between the WES Project Coordinator and UNICEF and the Commune, by-passing the Prefecture administration is seen in this context. The other reason has to do with the lack of a budget allocation, as counterpart funding to WES projects by the government. Often the Prefecture level Hydraulicians blamed their weak/non-participation in WES projects to such logistical realities as lack of fuel or mechanical breakdowns of assigned WES transport modes. These two problems have quite clearly hampered the working relationship between the prefecture level staff and the Commune WES project implementers and the effectiveness and overall impact of the TOT training. The same argument can be advanced regarding the impact of the cine materials production training and the mobile cine unit The Training of trainers at Commune level (Fontainier and Hygiene Education training): the training has enhanced understanding at this level of the project and improved greatly the earnest and efficiency of participation in the implementation of project activities. The training of the assistant bourgmestres has enhanced and enriched the quality of the commune administration’s participation in project activities, as it has that of the Regie President. The training and equipping of the Communal and sector fontainiers is singularly responsible for the improved operation and maintenance activities in intervention communes. These fontainiers are playing a leading role, alongside the implementing NGOs and private enterprises, both in the establishment of the water and sanitation infrastructure and in their rehabilitation, operation and maintenance. The case of Muvumba is particularly noteworthy. The efficient operations in Muvumba are the product of a collective Communal management and operational synergy. This argument cannot however be extended to the functioning of the hygiene and environment sanitation component. Here the lack of both adequate skills and an enabling institutional and organizational environment (well integrated, with adequately trained promoters, clearly defined tasks, responsibilities, delivery targets, reward mechanisms, and reporting and monitoring requirements and mechanisms) has clearly undermined effective sensitization and impact.

The national and commune level training in store management has had a positive impact, particularly at the latter level on the general management of WES facilities and equipment. Most of the WES stores visited were clean and had records showing good inventory of stock movements and general good management. A more detailed analysis of this aspect of the project is presented under TOR 3.5.

Building the capacities of the Regie Committees: the establishment of the Regie management system emerges as one of the key successes of the WES project implementation and indeed the country’s rural community-based water and sanitation development and management approach. The development of Regie capacities, particularly through training, however, has proceeded with mixed results. The plan of action11 and the guideline document for operators and actors in

11 In the PLAN D’ ACTION DE LA MISE EN PLACE D’ UNE REGIE ASSOCIATIVE

45

sensitization on water infrastructure management in rural areas set out by the Social Mobilization section of the Division of Hydraulique Rurale elaborate three stages or components in the establishment and development of the Regies:

The establishment of the Regie committees Training of the established committees in administrative, financial and technical matters Administrative, financial/material, technical, follow-up and evaluation support to deepen

and consolidate established capacities Table 7 below presents these components along with the activities and proposed timeframes for each

component. Table 8: Key areas of capacity support towards the establishment and strengthening of the Regie Associative

Management system.

s Environmental appraisal Sensitization of the Councilors Recruitment of the animators

onth 8 of the Regie Committees Training of animators

Activities of animators Monitoring of the activities of the animators Collection of reports on the formation of

water point committees Collection of reports on the formation of the

sector committees Planning the training of the Regie

Committees Election of the Regie Bureau Training of the Regie Committee Training of the Regie bureau Training of the Regie Accounts Auditors

nth 16

building

Training Management support

(administrative, financial and technical)

Monitoring and evaluation support

Sensitization of the Communal Council Support with the elaboration of the budget

plans Support with elaboration of the constitution Support to Newly formed Regies Monitoring of existing Regies Evaluation of the functioning of the Regies

The establishment of the Regie committees has been assessed appreciably well achieved. However both the

training and the management support (including monitoring) functions are assessed only sub-optimally achieved. Field observations (office documents, records, filing systems, general office organization and management) and interviews in the ten evaluation communes reveal sub-standard management practices and tools, and training approaches and standards often either not in conformity with or short of those prescribed by the department of water and sanitation. While some communes and Regie Members spoke clearly about specific management training received, others did not and seemed unable to distinguish clearly between such training and the other forms of training given to them at the commune level (Fontainier training and the TOT training for hygiene promotion), which they recalled with appreciable clarity. Either the Management training was not given (the case of Shyorongi [Regie committees not formed yet], Kibali [formation of committees in progress] and Rutongo [WES project implementation stalled three months after commencement, following an unresolved dispute between implementing parties]), or was given inadequately, in terms of quality and reach (Kayonza, Kanzenze, Kiyombe and Kinyami). In some communes training was given to the Regie committee and not the Regie Bureau and Vise Versa. With the exception of Rusumo and Kigarama communes, neither the recruitment nor the training of the Regie Auditors had been done in the other evaluation Communes. The main focus it seems was on building the capacities at the commune

46

level (Regie Bureaus) and much of the training and post-training management and monitoring support seems to have been directed here, at the expense of the sector and the cellule. This explains the differences in capacities among these management levels, appreciably higher at the commune level and low, to almost non-existent at the sector and cellule level. The expectation had been that once capacities were developed at this level, they would in turn be transferred to the lower levels. There is little evidence showing that this is happening in any organized or qualitative manner and the whole management function remains centralized at the commune. The sector committees remain weak managerially, in terms of skills and management tools and equipment (receipt books, stationery, records of meetings and activities, etc). Most of them do not have adequately documented accounts of their work on the ground. At the cellule (User level) weak capacities are reflected in the general ignorance about the functioning of the Regie Associative and the management of the water activities. For example, most Users do not know their rights or entitlements as members of the Regie Associative, or its potential usefulness to them for that matter (they did not know that there is supposed to be an annual general meeting to discuss water management issues or that they are supposed to receive updates on financial matters of the Regie Associative). While this is the general situation, there are distinct exceptions. The communes of Rusumo and Kigarama, (and to a certain degree, Muvumba), the only communes (out of the ten evaluation communes) that seem to have followed the approach prescribed by the Department of water and sanitation for the establishment, training and capacity building of the Regies, provide good and exemplary evidence of effective formation and capacity. The combination of effective training, and effective follow-up management support, including monitoring and evaluation, has resulted in appreciable management capacities (administrative and financial) in these communes. Interviews and observations in these communes, as well as the review of relevant progress and evaluation reports revealed good overall management knowledge and capacities (working cost recovery, operation and maintenance, accounting and reporting systems, among others). But like the other communes, linkage with, and capacities at the sector and cellule levels remain weak.

A number of reasons can be brought forward to explain the general inadequate quality and status of

training and management support for, and subsequently inadequate capacities of the Regie Management System. These include:

As yet a standard official Regie Management training document has not been

developed. Guidelines and criteria for establishing the Regies exist but the specific scope and content of training is left very much to the discretion of the implementing Agency. Thus while NGOs with experience and effective capacity such as CARE are able to elaborate a clear training content and deliver quality training, the others, and in particular the private enterprises which lack these experiences and capacities are not able to elaborate and deliver similar training.

The lack of effective overall post establishment monitoring and follow-up by all parties concerned (MINIRENA, Implementing NGOs and UNICEF), to deepen established skills and capacities, and to ensure both quality training and compliance with the ministerial provisions for the establishment and capacity building of the Regie Committees set out in the plan of action and the establishment guide. The onus of this responsibility rests primarily with the National WES Project coordinator acting in Liaison with the prefecture administration. This function has not been effectively served.

The lack of effective managerial (administrative, financial and monitoring) and training capacities and a sound understanding of the concept of and requirements for effective community-based and community participatory development and management among implementing NGOs and Private Enterprises. Again with the exception of such NGOs as

47

CARE and perhaps ADRA and COFORWA, most NGOs and Private Agencies implementing WES projects lack these skills and have not been able both to provide effective post-establishment training and managerial follow-up. Lacking these capacities many of them have focused more attention on the technical and physical aspects of project implementation and management (the “hardware”) rather than the “soft” aspects of community organization, sensitization and education.

Lack of adequate funding – this problem especially has hindered effective post-establishment managerial build-up and monitoring. The problem is particularly acute at government (prefecture) level but was also identified by the Non Governmental Implementing Agencies. The lack of adequate funding also meant limited staff and time on the ground.

3.2.1.3 Research and development The activities identified under this component included the following: 1. Sensitization on use of traditional three-stoned fireplace 2. Promotion of the SANPLATS Technology in IMUDUGUDU 3. Collection of baseline data to establish a data base on environmental 4. Material support for water quality testing/analysis 5. Identify and match trees to be planted near water points, homes and catchments This component is assessed overall only partially achieved. The study on the use of the traditional three-stoned fireplace was carried out, but little effective use was made of the findings resulting from it. Activity no. 5 was not carried out, while activity No. 4 was carried out only in a few water sources. Activity No. 3 was carried but the results, like most activities undertaken under the environment component, were not utilized during the bridging Programme. Part 3.2.1.4 below examines the environment component and gives the reasons for non-utilization. With regard to activity no 2, a number of trials were carried out throughout the country as part of the WES hygiene promotion campaign. In each implemented Water project, a SANPLATS component was included. The common practice entailed making a few SANPLATS samples around the water points, providing the communes with materials (SANPLATS moulds and cement) enough to make up to about 1500 SANPLATS moulds, and leaving them to scale up. In some communes, the SANPLATS component was implemented as an income-generating proposition for organized women groups. This was the case in Kigarama and Gachora communes, for example. In Gachora, a large SANPLATS Factory was constructed and all members of the women’s group trained in the making of SANPLATS. At the time of this evaluation, some 3000 Sanplats had been made of which only about 30% had been sold. During the project year 2000, the also project funded the Ministry of Health to carry out a Hygiene and sanitation baseline survey in 35 communes. This survey was accomplished and has served as a very useful basis for subsequent planning and programming within the department. Besides this activity and the research on the improved traditional stove however, a deliberate clearly focused research agenda and approach is not evident in all the other activities conducted under this component. In the case of the SANPLATS for example, there is no systematic collection and analysis of data on production and

48

supplies to understand and explain trends. It remains unclear, for example, whether the low adoption rate for SANPLATS technology is purely a factor of cost and ability to pay, or whether there are social and cultural elements involved. On the question of water sampling and analysis, it is noted that important as this aspect is as a determinant of water quality, a number capped sources have not been subjected to quality tests. Of concern also, is the fact that even the sources that have been developed, are not subjected to routine tests to ensure that they maintain accepted standards of quality. During this evaluation random samples of source and household water were collected and analyzed. The results of these analyses show that there is indeed a case for this activity to be supported, and monitored vigorously on a routine basis (see section 3.6 for a detailed analysis and assessment). The analysis revealed for example that the sample from the Rwakibirizi underground source in Kanzenze, supplying an estimated 15000 people contained bacterial counts beyond levels regarded as acceptable. A number of other sources (including tap stands) were also found to contain unsafe levels of bacterial counts. The highest degree of contamination however was found in the household water samples. Clearly, routine sampling, testing and corrective interventions will be necessary in order to guarantee the project’s goal of access to safe water for the targeted beneficiary groups. 3.2.1.4 Promotion of Primary Environmental Care Activities The activities identified under this component included the following: Collection of baseline data to establish a data base on environmental National level environmental awareness campaigns Environmental awareness campaigns in schools Development of training materials (video, booklets, etc) for PEC activities

Assessment Major ministerial and institutional re-organizations affecting the responsible ministry resulted in frequent shifts in mandate with subsequent changes in terms of strategy and focus. Between 1997 and 1999 the responsible ministry changed hands thrice, from the Ministry of Environment to Ministry of Agriculture and back again to the Ministry of Environment. These changes seem to have affected the pace of implementation of the activities set out under this component. Effective implementation of activities only began in 1999. The following activities, which are assessed as providing a good basis for subsequent intervention in line with the objectives set out for this component, are mostly accomplished or underway:

Table9: activity and implementation status for the PEC component

Planned Activity Implementation status (as of august 2000)

A study to gather baseline environmental data in selected communes to facilitate a focused environmental awareness education campaign

Draft completed

Preparation of a booklet on environmental awareness for primary and secondary schools

Draft completed and given over for printing

Production of a documentary film documentary on environment

Draft completed

49

Production of environmental videos for selected schools Completed, field testing pending Preparation of a training guide for elementary secondary and public schools

Underway

Production of posters, pamphlets and flyers on environment Pending Supply of material to schools Pending

At a more practical level the observations of this evaluation team, coupled with the expressions of concern from the communities and leaders interviewed during the field visits, indicate a growing environmental problem and a need to intervene through some practical measures. There is a growing trend of downhill erosion around most water catchments located in the high elevation areas north, north West and West of the country. The impact of this erosion is already manifesting in declining quantity and quality of water in some of these areas. It was observed and reported that a number of protected sources were without tree or grass cover, and were yielding turbid and unclean water particularly during the rainy season. Measures to control erosion around these catchments are clearly important elements of the WES environmental component. One way the project could play a role here is to support private commercial tree nurseries around protected catchments. Another could be to support soil erosion control campaigns at community level. Most implementing agencies and local leaders however did not quite understand what assistance was available from WES under this component, because this had not been specified in the guideline document. A need was thus expressed that this be done in the next document and that communities and implementing agencies be sufficiently informed. Another issue arising, and one which could clearly constitute a question for research, is that of the impact on the underground water sources, of concentrated settlement in the Imidugudu. There is going to be a need to continuously monitor and take appropriate remedial action to correct undesirable levels of Ecoli and general coliform pollution of existing and new water sources

3.2.1.5 Monitoring and evaluation

The activities defined under this component included the following:

WES field project monitoring M&E and MIS support to WES store managers Development and Pre-testing of commune-level project monitoring formats Strengthening ministerial and provincial capacities for Community-level project

monitoring Supervision and evaluation of hygiene education activities in the project areas Establishment of sound MIS within WES and Minerena Assessment of Hygiene education needs in selected communes Evaluation/impact measurement of WES activities in 4 prefectures

Assessment: This component of the capacity building objective is assessed overall sub-optimally achieved. Table 10 below presents a detailed analysis of the implementation of this component:

51

Specific monitoring activities Planned / undertaken

Overall assessment and comments

WES field project monitoring

WES project monitoring /evaluation was planned at 3 key levels: 1. PCC: o Maintenance of a national data bank on WES

project implementation o Periodic monitoring, analysis and evaluation

to establish the following aspects of project performance:

Economic sustainability of community management system,

Effectiveness of planning, coordination, implementation, management and evaluation structures

Integrity of coordination structures and implementing capacity at prefecture level

Project coordination, planning and implementation at national level

Access to potable water and improved sanitation facilities

Actual use of water per family Risks o Coordination of a detailed evaluation after the

first 18 months of project implementation 2. PST: - o Baseline Data analysis and project design o Monthly meetings and evaluation of projects o Monthly stores inspection o Evaluation and advice on water quality tests

conducted by NGO/Fontainier o Periodic reporting inspections and reporting

on commune activities o Technical advice to project team 3. PMT o Initial baseline assessment leading to the

development of the WES project proposal

This activity is assessed poorly achieved. There is no evidence of a systematic and objectives-based monitoring of the WES project/s performance at all levels. The institutional framework for collecting data from the commune level way up to the National level collapsed when the PST and PMT structures became moribund. The formats designed for this purpose were subsequently never put to effective use. The implementation of the project continued without these structures and without a revised framework for project data/information collection and monitoring. Its observed that even where a requirement for submission of monthly or quarterly progress reports has been specified in the contracts this requirement has not been observed strictly by most implementing agencies, or demanded by both UNICEF and MINERENA, particularly so for the physical progress reports. The usefulness from a monitoring point of view of a number of these reports is limited by the lack of a format purposely designed to ensure that key aspects of performance (related to WES Programme objectives) are reported. A related problem is that, as currently presented, most proposals, seemingly based on a pre-existing format, do not contain adequate information and data, which could serve as benchmarks for future monitoring and evaluation. For example nearly all the proposals examined did not contain such key benchmark data and information as prevailing levels of morbidity, water quality (source and household), cartage distances, per capita consumptions, levels of Hygiene KAP, etc. Further constraining the realization of an effective monitoring function is the lack of a detailed plan of action/operation by implementing agencies, stating what is to be achieved when. Again this is a planning and coordination shortcoming (UNICEF, PCC and project coordination). The development and submission of such a plan of action seems not to be a specific pre-funding requirement. Recent efforts to monitor projects within UNICEF and MINERENA, are noted, but are assessed not to be too useful since they are not based on clearly established performance benchmarks and determined specific objectives, targets and indicators(e.g how many households are being reached vis a vis the initial targets, what population of the target group are not obtaining water from protected sources and why, what is the adoption rate of the SANPLATS, are the objectives of access to portable water being met, etc,. ) Design and capacity problems have also hindered an effective monitoring function. Given their heavy responsibilities as Directors of ministerial departments, it was too presumptuous to expect that the members of the PCC would allocate adequate time for project monitoring in the manner prescribed in the guide document. In deed they have not found this time and the monitoring responsibility heavily vested in them has not been fulfilled. Within UNICEF, while some monitoring efforts are evident, the lack of effective internal capacity both in terms of personnel and the skills needed to elaborate clear performance indicators based on stipulated project goals and objectives, and to develop a framework which would subsequently result in effective data/information capture, storage analysis and consumption, has hindered the realization of an effective monitoring function. At the commune and prefecture levels, there is some evidence of monitoring efforts. These are however isolated and often pegged to implementing Agency (NGOs, private enterprises) plans, such that consistent and meaningful monitoring and consolidative support is only possible where the NGO and the prefecture staff enjoy a good and well-coordinated working relationship. This is the case with such prefectures as Kibungo where the effective involvement by CARE International of Prefecture staff in its activities has yielded a very positive and effective working relationship involving joint implementation, monitoring and follow-up. Otherwise a deliberate, clearly articulated monitoring and consolidative support role at the prefecture level is not evident. A number of commune-focused evaluations have been carried out by the department of Water and Environment Sanitation , often in conjunction with implementing NGOs. These evaluations have yielded useful and positive findings on project performance as well as good recommendations in terms of changes necessary to improve performance. These efforts however remain isolated and remedial action constrained by the lack of a clear, deliberate and well-coordinated follow-up and action plan at the prefecture level. Often the implementation agency has left the scene by this time, with little, if any residual linkages (of protection, advice, and exchange of experiences and learning). For the most part agency withdrawal from the project location is dictated by funding considerations rather than, by an assessment of the ability of the population to manage and sustain their own affairs and changes brought about by the project. The key problems underlying the lack of an effective monitoring and follow-up function at Prefecture and in deed all other levels of WES project implementation can thus be summarized as the lack of a clearly defined and articulated conceptual, institutional and

52

organization/operational framework for project monitoring and follow-up, coupled with the resources to effectively realize it.

Monitoring and Management Information Support to WES store managers

At national level – a computerized (in Microsoft access) database has been established and is being managed by trained government storekeepers at the National WES Warehouse in Gikondo (Kigali). The database is able at any point to give a full account of stock status and value for the entire warehouse. Its also able to give an update of commodities dispatched to the communes. As part of routine management, monthly stock update reports are generated and shared with UNICEF. At the Commune level- all WES stores in active WES communes have been supplied with specially designed stock cards to document and manage stock movements

Data base provides a useful basis for tracking stock movements Storekeepers do little else beyond releasing and documenting requisitioned materials. This is an understatement of their roles.

They do not have copies of the signed contracts with approved bills of quantities and are therefore not able to cross check supplies against balances to avoid over supply or under supply. In this regard the database, in not having a computerized listing of approved materials to the communes against which requisitions, supplies and balances would be easily compared to correct discrepancies, is assessed somewhat inadequate.

The computerized database managed by humans is not a guaranteed safeguard against theft or cheating and alone is inadequate as a security measure. Annual stock taking currently not done is a surer guarantee of stock security.

Once loaded materials are not tracked to their final destinations. An ill-intentioned worker has only to load excess materials and off-load them between the store and the final destination

These safeguards are necessary given the allegations and incidences of theft and missing of materials from the WES stores in the past.

53

Development and pre-testing of commune level project monitoring formats

A set of monitoring formats for baseline surveys and quarterly monitoring and reporting were developed and selectively pre-tested in a number of communes at the beginning of the project. As early as the first quarter of the first year of the project concerns were already emerging about the formats not being filled in or returned to PCC (national level) and the PMT (commune level). It seems this trend continued and the whole system collapsed all together. Currently there are no official WES formats in use and the whole monitoring function is haphazardly executed.

Its interesting to note that while the PST was the designated technical advisor and monitor to the commune, there was no provision to give copies of the reports on WES project implementation at commune level to the PST (the formats are made out in a triplicate -to CCP, PMT and Sector [Cellule]). It difficult to understand how they could have performed any meaningful monitoring and advisory function. At individual level Implementing Agencies as CARE International have well-established and utilized internal MIS. Most WES NGOs however lack both the organizational and technical capacities required to institute such systems.

Strengthening ministerial and provincial capacities for commune-level project monitoring

This activity has not been achieved to date. The collapse of the idea of a PST was clearly a major operational blow in this respect. The planned new monitoring initiative, which entails promoting and supporting a community monitoring system in 5 WES communes, has yet to be clearly defined and elaborated.

What ever system is put in place will have to satisfy a set of criteria: It will have to be decentralized [initially at the Prefecture level] in order to facilitate effective monitoring and consolidative management support at commune level. Towards this a strong and effective management capacity will have to be developed at the prefecture level. A structure similar to the one at the national level [but more functional/operational oriented] will have to be replicated at the Prefecture level. Like the structure at the national level overall coordination will be assigned to one of the departments [preferably the one representing Minaloc]. The pooling of the data and its management will be assigned either to Minaloc or to Minisante. Each department will be responsible for their part of the advisory, monitoring and supervisory role in line with their respective departmental goals and targets and will forward the necessary information and data (water, environment, health) to the centralized data pool/center. The latter will interface with the commune and the national level structures (parent ministries, UNICEF, PSC and the Project Coordination Office as necessary. At the commune level, a clear institutional framework (at commune, sector and cellule levels) will have to be defined and elaborated to facilitate effective capture, management, use, and forwarding of M&E data and information as needed

Supervision and evaluation of hygiene education activities in the project areas

The already completed TOT training of the Commune level Hygiene promoters and the planned similar training for sector level Hygiene promoters are key steps towards the realization of effective community training and the monitoring of the effectiveness and impact of this component at the commune level. In some communes, some hygiene education at community level is already taking place and some monitoring and assessment of impact has been carried out already (the CARE Kibungo communes). A concerted clearly focused project wide campaign however is yet to be realized.

Effective implementation, supervision, monitoring and evaluation of the hygiene component is dependent upon the elaboration of a focused and well-organized extension and education approach at the community level. Such an approach must comprise a clearly defined operational framework with clearly defined responsibility lines, skills, tasks, delivery targets, reporting and monitoring requirements, and an incentive structure, and working within a framework of effectively integrated institutions and community organizational arrangements. Such an approach and framework is currently not in place, The establishment and development of a fully functional department of hygiene and Public Health at the commune level, with a clear mandate and Programme of action is key to effective realization of this organizational and institutional base.

54

Establishment of a sound MIS within WES and Minerena

A MIS system was put in place within the UNICEF WES section at the beginning of the project and was managed for some three or four months. The responsible officer then left the section and has never been replaced to date. A systematic monitoring function, based on clearly identified indicators and performance targets has not been attained within the WES section. Within MINERENA, there is no evidence of concrete support given towards putting in place a MIS. Attempts and follow-up contacts by UNICEF at the beginning of the project to put in place such a system were not matched by a similar enthusiasm from the host ministry (then Minitrape). To date intentions to proceed with this function remain at the level of plans

While a consolidated centralized MIS will give an overall consolidated picture of overall WES project implementation and impact and is advised, greater impact of the monitoring function will be realized through a disaggregated approach with each focal ministry responsible for its own respective MIS and liaising with respective prefectural departments in the same regard. The centralized MIS would aggregate information and data from the prefectures and could be located within the Project coordination office with technical support from UNICEF. Each ministry will manage its own respective data and information in line with its own goals, objectives and targets. UNICEF on its part will have to work closely with the WES project coordination office, the PCC and all the actors to determine and ensure that its own goals, objectives and targets are being met.

Assessment of hygiene education needs in selected communes

A needs assessment survey has been completed by the ministry of Health (MINISANTE) covering 35 communes, and is serving as a key guide in the on-going development of the national curriculum for Community-based hygiene Educators

The assessment identifies useful institutional, organizational and technical gaps (discussed in part 3.2.2.2) which have hindered effective delivery of hygiene and sanitation education at the commune level and makes useful recommendations in terms of overcoming them. These recommendations hopefully will feed into the new phase of WES project implementation beginning next year.

Evaluation/impact measurement of WES activities in 4 prefectures

This activity is being achieved through this evaluation

The recommendations arising out of this evaluation will hopefully guide the future direction of WES project implementation. The good reception of the preliminary findings presented at the November 24th meeting of Bourgmestres and implementing partners is already a hopeful sign.

55

3.2.2 The provision of community-based WES facilities 3.2.2.2 The provision of Water

This component sought two deliverable objectives, namely: to increase by 15% (from 45% to 60%) actual access to safe water in the rural areas and, to ensure at least 25% of the rural population use more than 10 litres of safe water per capita per day. In order to achieve these objectives the following physical targets were identified and pursued: Implementation of the WES project in 66 selected communes Rehabilitation and Development of up to 15 Kms of piped water system per commune Protection of 35 spring protections

The key technology options prioritized were spring protections and gravity-flow systems. Hand dug wells and Boreholes were drilled in the drier areas, and where substantial yields were realized, pumps were installed to extend supplies to a wider population. The same was done with the gravity flow systems as well. Assessment of Achievement This evaluation has observed mixed results and impacts in all the 10 communes visited and evaluated. In terms of the number of projects completed the WES Programme is assessed underachieved. However a consideration of all the factors going into the development of water infrastructure and a reliable supply of potable water, and the unique situation of Rwanda described in the earlier parts of this document, leads to the conclusion that significant achievements were realized. Out of the 66 selected WES communes, the Project is underway in 49 communes (74%) as presented in the Table 11 and Summarized in table 10 below: Table 11:WES project implementation status in 49 active intervention communes at October 2000 Last Stage of implementation

Orientation done

Project studies submitted

Project proposal submitted

Physical construction

Construction completed

Total

Number of Communes in category

14

2

2

22

9

49

% 37% 43% 18 % 100% The construction of water infrastructure is complete in 9 (18%) communes and ongoing in another 22 (43%). In another 18 communes (37%) a wide range of preparatory and pre-construction stages are being pursued. The physical implementation or construction stage (usually the last stage in the infrastructure development) follows a wide range of pre-construction activities. These include orientation and sensitization of local leaders and communities, project studies, project proposal development, submission and appraisal and the election, training and equipping of the Regie Committees and communal fontainiers at communal and sector management levels. Tables 12, 13 and 14 below present these activities and the status of their accomplishment and achievement. Thus while only 9 communes have complete projects, a great many activities were accomplished.

57

Table 12: PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AND COMPLETION STATUS COMMUNE BY 5.10.2000

Prefecture

Commune

Planned/proposed WES Technology/intervention and quantities/numbers/length

Implementation status as of 10.10.2000

Commune/prefecture level Training Physical implementation

Beneficiary population

(HH) Training of Hydraulicians (REAP) and Fontainiers

Materials delivery Last stage

Total Commune Population

(HH)

Spring Rehab. (SR)

Spring Const. (SC)

Bore holes (BH)

Gravity System

(PS)

Pump &

Gravity system (PAGS)

San plats

Comm. level TOT

Pref. level TOT

Regie Mgt. Training

TOT training For hygiene Educators at Commune level

Orient. Done

Prop. Receiv.

Agree. Signed

Regie formed

Cont. Deliv. In

Prog. Compl

Targ. Act.

Ntyazo 17 Y Y Y Y Y*** Y Y Physical construction in progress Ruhashya 14 Y Y Y Y Y*** Y Y Physical construction in progress Maraba 16 Y Y Y Y Y*** Y Y Physical construction in progress Mugusa 19 Y Y Y Y Y*** Y Y Physical construction in progress Nyaruhengeri 13 Y Y Y Y Y*** Y Y Physical construction in progress Nyakizu 17 Y Y Y Y Y*** Y Y Orientation completed Runyinya 16 Y Y Y Y Y*** Y Y Physical construction in progress Muyira 13 Y Y Y Y Y*** Y Y Orientation completed

BUTARE

Nyabisindu 14

6

Y

(Planned )

Y Y Y Y*** Y Y Orientation completed Cyungo 16 ? 3 Y Y Y Y Y* Y Physical construction in progress Kiyombe 42 0 15Km –18BF 0 1200 14 Y 3 Y Y Y Y*** Y Y Physical construction in progress 10702 - - Buyoga - N - 3 Y Y N Y N - Project proposal submitted Kibali 0 40 0 9.6KM – 14BF - 1200 14 - 2 Y Y Y Y** Y Y Physical construction in progress 11120 2694 - Tumba 14 ? 3 Y Y Y Y*** Y Y Physical construction in progress Mukarange 12 ? 3 Y Y N N Y Y Physical construction in progress Kinyami 56 5 0 21-18 BF 1200 12 ? 3 Y Y Y Y*** Y Y Physical construction in progress 11502 11502? -

BYUMBA

Giti 15

6

Y 4 Y Y Y Y*** Y Y Physical construction in progress Gisuma 17 ? Y Y Y N Y Y Physical construction in progress Kirambo N - Y N N Y*** N N N Orientation completed

CYANGUGU Gishoma N

-

-

(Planned) Y N N N N Physical construction in progress Mudasomwa 17 - Y Y Y N V Y Project proposal submitted

GIKONGORO Rwamiko N - -

(planned) - N - Y*** N Y Physical construction in progress

Kayenzi 14 ? - Y Y N V Y Physical proposal in progress Masango N - Y N N N V N N Orientation completed Mukingi 14 - Y Y Y Y* V Y - Orientation completed Tambwe 12 ? Y Y Y Y*** N Y - Orientation completed Bulinga 12 ? Y Y Y Y** N Y - Orientation completed Nyakabanda 14 ? Y Y Y Y*** N Y - Orientation completed Musambira 12 - Y N N Y*** N N N Orientation completed

GITARAMA

Nyamabuye 17

6

-

(Planned)

Y Y Y N N Y - Orientation completed Kayonza 0 23 7 0 1 200 13 Y 4 Y Y Y Y** Y - Y Project completed 11,377 3000# 3000 Sake 17 - 5 Y Y Y Y Y - Y Project completed Kigarama 0 - - 11.5KM-12BF 1000 15 Y - Y Y Y Y*** Y - Y Project completed 17340 - 1069 Kabarondo 16 5 Y Y Y Y*** Y - Y Project completed 16014 - 693 Rusumo 0 39 3 24.5Km-22BF - 14 Y - Y Y Y Y*** Y - Y Project completed 25842 - 2238 Birenga 16 4 Y Y Y Y**** Y - Y Physical construction in progress

KIBUNGO

Mugesera 19

6

4 Y Y Y Y*** Y - Y Project completed Butamwa 12 - Y Y Y Y*** Y - Y Project completed Kanzenze 0 31 - - 8 Kms 1200 17 Y 2 Y Y Y Y*** Y - Y Project completed and a new one begun 9994 55876 2500 Gashora 8 14 2 Y Y Y Y*** Y - Y Physical construction in progress - 1342 - Shyorongi 0 28 0 ? 700 13 - 1 Y Y Y N Y - Y Physical construction in progress * 553HH - Mbogo 12 3 Y Y Y N Y N N Project studies submitted Gikoro 13 0 4 Y Y Y N Y N N Project agreement signed Tare 14 1 Y Y Y N Y N N Project studies completed

KIGALI RURAL

Rutongo 48 0 0 25.5KM 0 1200 13

6

- - Y Y Y Y** Y - Y Physical construction in progress*** 11618 6300 Muvumba 27 - - - 13 3 Y Y Y Y*** Y - Y Project completed 16994 - - Kahi N 3 Y N N Y*** N N N Orientation completed Murambi N 3 Y N N Y*** Y N N Orientation completed

UMUTARA

Rukara N

6

2 Y Y Y Y**** Y - Y Physical construction in progress

Total 49 594 36 70 Y13 Y26

Legend: Y*** Regie formed at commune, sector and Cellule Y** Regie formed at sector and Cellule Y* Regie formed at Cellule only

58

Table 13: Facilities completion and population served by commune in the 10 evaluation communes

Legend: IP- In Progress Co- Completed Pl-planned Ben Pop-Beneficiary Population Tar-Target Act-Actual BF-Borne Fontaine No-Number

12 Total refers only to the population of beneficiaries indicated for 10 sources selected for rehabilitation with a reservoir 13 The 250 number for the Borne Fontaine is inclusive of those for the Karenge system as well 14 This total includes the beneficiary population from the Karenge system as well 15 The 2500HH is a unconfirmed estimate given by ZOA field coordinator. According to him some 16000 households are benefiting from the Rwakibirizi system alone. The 2500HH is derived for a computation of 16000/ 6.5 persons per family (ZOA sources) 16 The Shyorongi Pump system is will deliver water to the hilltop in Shyorongi. From there the water will then be distributed by gravity to Kanyinya and Rusiga sectors 17 total based on the indicated 2841 and 3492 potential beneficiaries from the proposed gravity and pump systems in Rutongo 18 According to the commune Regie, ADRA only completed 6 springs. Some other five were not successfully. The project was subsequently not officially handed over to the commune because of this non-compliance with the terms of the contract.

Commune WES Water infrastructure planned and completed and respective beneficiary population by commune Spring protection Borehole Gravity system Pumped System Rehabilitation New Rehab New Rehab New Rehab New

Ben Pop. (HHs)

BenPop Pl Ben Pop. Ben Pop Pl Ben Pop Pl No/Km /BF

Ben Pop Pl Ben Pop Pl Ben. Pop

Pl Co

Targ Act

Pl Co

Targ Act

Co

Tar Act

Pl Co

targ Act

Co

Targ Act

Co

targ Act

Co

Targ Act

Co No/Km /BF

Targ Act.

Kiyombe - - - - 42 29 ? ? - - - - - - - - - - - - 7/13 /18

IP ? IP - - - - - - - -

Kibali - - - - 40 - 1664 IP - - - - - - - - - - 5/9.6 /13

IP 1030 IP - - - - - - - -

Kinyami 46 35 49912 ? 5 158 - - - - - - - - - 4/20 /55

2739 ? 3/21 /18

IP

520 IP 1/18/ 27

1722 ? - - - -

Kayonza - - - - 23 - 3500 - - - - - 7 4 436 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1/6/8 1/6/8 (Co)

2514 2514

Kigarama - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1/12 /12

1/12/12 (Co)

1437 1089 - - - - - - - -

Rusumo - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2/24.5 /22

2/24.5/ 22 (Co)

?

2238 - - - - - - - -

Kanzenze - - - - 32 ? ? ? - - - - 8 8 1342 ? - - - - - - - - 1 1/8/ 25013

1/8/ 250 (Co)

596614 250015

Shyorongi - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1/5 /?16

IP 553 IP

Rutongo - - - - ? 35 ? ? - - - - - - - - - - - - 2/25.5 /?

Stalled 6300 ?17

- - - - - - - - -

Muvumba - - - - 27 1118 ? ? - - - - - - - - ? 1119 - - ? 2/?/2520 (Co)

?

2011

- - - - - - - -

Total 46 35 499 ? 169 75 5322 ? - - - - 15 12 1778 ? 4/20 /55

- 2739 - 20/105 /83?

5/?/59 (3IP-3Co)

Appr. 9287

4761

1/18/ 27

- 1722

? 3/19/?

2/14/? (2C0-1IP)

9033

5014

59

Table14: Water infrastructure completion and population served in 5 completed Communes

Infrastructure completion status

Spring Protections Boreholes/Hand dug Wells(HDW) Gravity systems Pump Systems

Population served (HH)

Rehab New Rehab New Rehab New Rehab New (No/KM/BF)

% reached of of total target pop.

% reached of total commune population

Commune

Plan Comp Plan Comp Plan Comp Plan Comp Plan Comp Plan Comp Plan Comp Plan Comp

Total Commune pop. (HH)

Total targ. pop. (HH)

Total Actually reached (HH)

Kayonza - - 23 1 1 1 7 4 - - - - - - 1/9/8 1/9/8 11377 300021 3000 100 26

Kigarama - - - - - - - - - - 1/12/12 (?)

1/12/12 - - - - 17340 1437 106922 7423

6

Rusumo - - - - - 2/24.5/22 2/24.5/22 - - - - 25842 2238 1661 74% 6.4 Kanzenze - - 55 - - - 18 8 - - - - 1/8/? 1/8/26 999424 3200 320025 100 38

19 11 tap stands repaired by ADRA in Shonga (RDII source) 20 2 braches tapped by ADRA for Gachenyi off the Old China System from Cyondo. Has added 25 tap stands to Gachenyi 21 Kayonza sector population in 1996 was estimated to be 4500 persons. With large influx of returnees this population is estimated to have risen to about 3000 HHs by July 1997. The new calculations for the gravity extension from the Kazabazana system to supply 8 Kiosks within the Kayonza and Nyagatovu sectors was based on this new figure (2687 families for Kayonza sector and 250 families for the Nyagatvu sector) 22 This total does not include an additional 1300 pupils served by the Rain Water Harvesting system built/provided in Gaseta secondary school and Karama Communal college 23 The Kamushikuzi system has capacity for and is designed to reach some 1437 households by the year 2008.

60

Muvumba 2 27 11 - -

- - - 173BF26 2/?/2 2/?/2 - - - - 16,99427

16994 1182128

70%

70

Total - 2 105 12 1 1 25 12 - 173 5/3736 5/3736 - - 2/17/260

1/17/34 81547 26869 20,751 90% 25%

24 The Kanzenze population given in 1998 was 64966. The number of households given was 9994, giving a household size of 6.5 persons. 25 Total excludes 1342 households targeted to benefit from the drilled and hand-dug wells in Gachora. The wells were constructed as part of the Kanzenze WES project though. 26 ADRA undertook a broad range of rehabilitation works at the Karama sand filter, and RD1 and RD2. Under this objective rehabilitation was carried out on the Cyondo Sand filter, 11 water reservoirs were rehabilitated, and 173 old tap stands were replaced with auto stop brass taps. The rehabilitation work covered all 9 sectors making up the commune. 27 Figures furnished by the Regie Bureau of the population in the 9 sectors where ADRA carried out rehabilitation work. Computed at 5 persons per household this gives a total population of 85,000 persons 28 The Figures furnished by the Regie Bureau show that 11821 households are actually accessing potable water from the 173 ADRA improved/rehabilitated tap stands in the 9 operation sectors. The rehabilitation has greatly improved overall flow rates at the tap points. This figure therefore is a true reflection of actual beneficiary population. However new systems build completely with WES support account for only about 7% of the total communal grid.

61

3.2.2.1.1 Assessment of Access to safe drinking water The lack of adequate reliable and disaggregated data on both the physical facilities installed, and the beneficiary populations targeted and served by the projects prevents an accurate assessment of the degree of access to potable water. Tables 13 and 14 present an attempt to do this based on data and information drawn from a number of primary and secondary sources. Table 13 presents the Water infrastructure planned and completed and the respective beneficiary populations by commune in all the 10 evaluation communes. Table 14 presents the facilities completed and population served in the 5 communes (out of the ten evaluation communes) where projects have been completed. The tables reveal that overall the WES Programme may well have achieved (even exceeded) its target of increasing actual access to safe drinking water by 15% in the communities where the projects have been completed. Some indicative evidence is presented below: Rusumo and Kigarama communes: In these communes UNICEF provided financial and material support for the development of three gravity-flow systems. Gashanga II and Gashyuha gravity systems, both in Rusumo commune, were expected in total, to add 24.3Km and 12 tap stands to the communal grid, while the Kamshukuzi gravity system in Kigarama commune was planned to increase the communal grid by some 12 Km and 12 tap stands. The communes had been selected on the basis of water deficit and the prevalence of related morbidities. Data obtained from the commune Regie Bureaus and corroborated by the implementing agency (CARE International) show that these targets have been met. The Rusumo systems collectively are supplying some estimated 1660 households, more than 70% of the total targeted population and approximately 6% of the total communal population of 25842 households, while the Kamushikuzi system is serving some 1069 households (74%) of the intended 1437 households, approximately 6% of all 17340 households living in Kigarama commune. These systems represent the sole sources of potable water in the targeted areas. In Kanzenze, the Rwakibirizi system is reaching some 2500 households (16000) of the 10000 estimated households in the commune. This is 25% of the total commune population. A further 1342 households (of the total communal population of 31000 people, i.e. 28%) may be accessing improved water supplies from the 8 WES drilled wells in Gachora. The two communes represent the highest water deficit areas in the country. In Muvumba the WES Programme through ADRA has provided materials for and assisted in the rehabilitation of almost all water points in the 9 sectors of the commune. A total of 10 reservoirs were rehabilitated and 173 water taps removed and replaced with auto stop brass taps. In addition the project added some 14 (7%) new water points (12 spring protections and 2 gravity-supplied tap stands) to the communal grid. In total some 11821 (70%) of an estimated 17000 communal households are drawing potable water from the two main systems supported by ADDRA through WES Programme assistance. The rehabilitation work has increased the systems flow rates considerably and made more potable water available to the consumers. It is clear from these figures that the WES Programme has played a significant role in improving access to potable water in this commune. Table 15: total potable water stands and population served by two main supply sources in Muvumba Commune

Water points Non WES WES From Gravity system 183 2(branches tapped from the existing Chinese System) From protected springs 4 12 Total 187 (93) 14 (7%) Total commune population (HH) 16,994

Total overall population drawing clean water 11,821 (69.6%)

62

In Kayonza, data are inconclusive but some 3000 households are estimated to be accessing improved water supplies from the Kazabazana Pump/gravity supply system and the 4 functioning AFRIDEV hand pumps in Kayonza sector. This is nearly the entire population of Kayonza sector, which represents some 24% of the estimated total of 12,700 households in the Commune. Besides the populations reached and the physical facilities provided, other parameters of access considered in this evaluation included changes in water quality at source, quantities consumed and cartage distance29. It is a requirement of the law in Rwanda that all water sources be tested for chemical and bacteriological quality before they are protected. A number of implementing agencies, particularly those doing the springs and the small gravity systems have not observed this requirement and seem not to have been followed up closely by Minerena, Minisante or UNICEF to make sure they did so. This is increasingly a common occurrence! In order to determine the quality of the water at source, a number of water samples were taken from the sources and analyzed. The analysis was conducted at the Butare University. Table 16 below presents the results of the analysis. Section 4 of the annex presents the full details of the analysis of all 50 water samples (from the sources and the households) collected. Table 16: Acceptability of selected WES project water sources (based on bacteriological analysis)

Water Quality (bacteriological) rating Commune Location (sector and cellule

Name of water system or point source sampled Potable

Acceptable Satisfactory (Moins Potable)

Not satisfactory (non-potable)

Muvumba Cyondo Sand Filter (RD1) X Rwebare Rwebare stand point (from RD1)

X

Rutongo Jali Nyakibizi-Jali X Cyuga Ngiruwo nsenga X Rusumo Nyamugali (Kiyanzi) GahsangaII tap stand X Kigarama Nyarukurazo II Gashanga II

Tap stand X

Gasogororo (umudugudu)

Hand pump source X

Gasogororo (umudugudu) Kazabazana Kiosk no.8 X Kayonza Kazabazana Kiosk no. 1 X Kayonza Kazabazana Kiosk no. 2 X Kayonza

Hand pump (near the AAR Kazabazana bore source)

Kayonza

Kayonza The main AAR borehole source X Kigarama

Kamushikuzi source (tap stand) X

These results show that 9 (75%) out of the 12 source samples analyzed were of acceptable (6) or satisfactory (3) quality. This gives a general picture of an acceptable level of quality. However, the conclusion can also be drawn that 50% of the source samples analyzed are either just satisfactory or all together unacceptable! This latter conclusion seems more important from a health point of view, noting the importance of water in every facet of human health and the need therefore to ensure the highest standards of quality. It is important to note in this regard also that a significant number of protected spring sources were reported to show variation with season, becoming turbid and presenting abnormal particles, including worms during the rains.

29 Cartage distance refers to the minimum distance which a person should have to cart water to their dwelling

63

In terms of quantity, qualitative responses from the community indicate an overall increase in the amount of water used in all communes where the projects have been completed. In Rusumo, Kigarama, Kayonza and Muvumba, all the users interviewed (15) indicate having enough and using more water now than they did before the project. Indicatively the actual volume of water used had doubled in these communes, from one (sometimes less) 20 litre jerry-can a day to 2 and more. Distances to the collection points also reduced significantly, with most households in the areas with completed projects able to get water within 5 minutes of walk away from their homes. Table 16 below captures some of the qualitative responses from these communities/users. Table 17: Users comments on benefits due to WES provided Water infrastructure and Services “The water is nearer to us now and we have not to walk long distances to fetch it” “There is more water available after this project. We used to make 4-5 trips a day with small 10 litre “Jericans” to fetch water. This was because of the long distance to the source. There were also more people queuing for a limited supply of water. Now, with the 20 litre jericans, we make only two trips in a day and there is no congestion” “Our children have not to walk long distances now to get water” “Children are the main drawers of domestic water. We see a clear improvement in punctuality and attention since the water system was constructed. Before, they came late to school, and often dozed between lessons” From these figures one could draw the conclusion that the project’s objective of increasing access to potable (safe) water may have been achieved in the five communes where the project is completed. Some 25% out of an estimated total of 81,547 households may be drawing water from some additional 50 Km and 300 water points added or rehabilitated in the 5 completed evaluation communes. It is important to note that most of the areas supplied were serious deficit areas (100% in some cases) in terms of access to potable water. These however are only indicative figures. A determinative assessment of the actual access situation is only possible through a comprehensive count and inventory based on a reliable monitoring and Management Information System. Such a system is currently not in place. A key factor influencing effective access however is the consistency or reliability of supply. A service is considered reliable or consistent when it has a high probability of being available in the quality, quantity and time required. Reliability is a function of the type of technology in use and its appropriateness, but also of how the management applies itself to optimize the use of that technology. A number of situations observed in the field point towards the conclusion that access is being undermined by the choice of technology, but more importantly by management factors. For example at the time of the evaluation the Kazabazana pump system in Kayonza was operating at only 30% of its installed capacity because of the high cost of running fuel (diesel), at FRW52300 per month. In the Umudugusu Gacogororo served by an extension from the Kazabazana system users are resorting to alternative supplies for which they have not to pay anything or such a lot of money. The price of FRW 10 per one 20litre jerry-can was considered too high for the mostly poor households in this village. While cost is clearly an important factor hindering access, the bigger underlying factor in the case of the Kayonza system is the weak management system under the Sector Regie Bureau, unable to make effective decisions regarding

64

the efficient and effective running of the water service system. The Rwakibirizi system in Kanzenze is another case. At the start of this evaluation the Rwakibirizi supply system had been broken down for nearly two months before the evaluation, disrupting supplies to some 10,000 consumers. As a result of the breakdown some users had to travel well over 15 Km to reach the underground reservoir at Nyamata, journeys which the evaluation team was made to understand began as early as 4 o’clock in the morning. The reason was the breakdown of the two pumps pushing water to the two reservoir tanks from whence the water then flows to some 21 tap stands in the neighborhood of Nyamata. Apparently the WES Programme had supplied unsuitable pumps. In Muvumba the frequent breakages at the Kiyombe source are constantly disrupting access to the more than 6000 households who rely almost exclusively on the RDI and RDII supply system. The main reason behind these problems is located largely in weak management. A discussion of some of the management aspects is presented in part 3.5 of this section. 3.2.2.1.2 The WES technology options- appropriateness and related

development The following observations and analyses are made with respect to the choice, appropriateness and related development of WES project technologies: While the development of some of the WES water infrastructure follows comprehensive and well-

detailed studies, it is noted that some do not. The hurry to “get projects” is resulting in little effective feasibility studies of some of the projects and subsequently less effectively developed systems. There is a tendency by implementing agencies to just “capture and put cement over” any downward flowing water source without a proper determination of its full potential, in relation to the proposed financial and infrastructure investment. A number of cases can be cited. The evaluation has observed certain instances where sources with very low yields are capped and routed over very long distances of trenches dug by communities, often at great personal sacrifices and not too viable results. This is the case for example with the Mugomera system in Kinyami. The Mugomera source, flowing at the rate of 0.1l/s30, is designed to go over a community-constructed trench of 8 Kms, across a very difficult terrain. The ultimate viability of this system, on account of the very low yield is questionable. Proper pre-establishment studies should lead to better decision-making in relation to such projects. The same argument can be made about the 5 small gravity systems proposed and currently being developed by NTE in Kibali commune, and the 7 by Aramet in Kiyombe. The Nyakagezi system, one of the 5 systems currently being developed by NTE in Kibali for example has a flow rate of approximately 1.4l/s. Next to it are a number of small springs which could be tapped and added to it to increase the system’s yield. Yet this has not been done. There are also quality questions and concerns. The trenching is of poor quality and often done with little regard/respect for existing infrastructure such as roads. Passing delicate PVC pipes over shallow and uneven trenches, across motorways, as observed in Kiyombe (Rwagashande system) and Kibali certainly does not constitute good engineering practice. Neither does the seasonal variations in turbidity observed and reported for a number of protected springs in the evaluation communes. These issues point towards a number of important technical/financial and policy concerns and imperatives, among them the need to support/ensure proper pre-establishment and feasibility studies, the need to establish/enforce standards and norms of good practice with which implementing agencies must comply in developing water infrastructure, and the need to ensure and rigorously monitor to ensure quality in on-going physical works. These are currently weak areas in the development of WES infrastructure. Providing water in often very needy situations, important as it is, must not take away from the wider objective of a sustainable provision to the widest

30 This is the rate determined by the consultants at the site. It may have been due to the prevailing long drought at the time of the evaluation. Irrespective of the season however, it was considered too low to be viable in the long term.

65

possible population of beneficiaries, through properly studied, executed and managed WES projects.

The question of the appropriateness of or bias towards gravity flow systems, given the new government policy of group settlement which seeks to relocate populations on hill tops and along the roads and near schools. The gravity flow systems have been preferred by the WES project on cost, ease of management, and geographic expediency31considerations. The continued support for this system however seems to work counter to the new settlement ideology and may need to be reviewed. The preference for gravity systems has hindered the development of high yield sources for which viable proposals have been presented (the case of Buyoga for example). It has also discouraged the development of and experimentation with alternative technologies such as roof catchments, wind-based and mechanical turbine technologies evidently possible and more appropriate in some areas. It leads one to question the rationale for supporting 5 small systems supplying (unreliably and unsustainably) less than 600 families instead of one serving 5000 or more households reliably. The success of such projects in the Non-WES areas shows that this can be done and is well within the communes’ management abilities. More importantly it raises the issue of the need to expand the scope for participation within the WES sector at three levels: by encouraging more donors to join UNICEF in the rural water sector as alternative actors or as partners through joint funding schemes, to eliminate the prevailing “sector donor mentality”, make more funds available and allow for greater flexibility and thoroughness in the development of rural water infrastructure; by providing stimulants which would encourage private sector actors to become more interested in rural water infrastructure development, AND; by contracting out the different stages32 of rural water infrastructure development to different actors on the basis of their comparative strengths. NGOs cannot be good at everything!

3.2.2.3 The provision of Hygiene and Environmental Sanitation facilities

The objectives sought under this component were four-fold: Ensuring the provision and use of hand washing facilities at all hygienic latrines Ensuring at least 25% of rural communes have functional community-based PEC activities, such as catchment

protection, disposal of solid and liquid waste and improved placement and design of latrines Promoting and building capacities to install the SANPLATS sanitation technology. Sanitation education for some 400,000 households (5.3% of total national population).

3.2.2.3.4 Assessment of Component implementation and Management 31 Rwanda is a mountainous country with many rivers, making the development of gravity-flow systems an attractive and viable option. 32 Four development stages are identifiable in this respect- pre-entry:- entailing water potential and baseline, situational and feasibility studies; the entry stage entailing discussions and negotiations with all concerned parties or stakeholders to evolve a common concept of project and a clear participation basis; the flow and consolidation stage, entailing construction and distribution but also capacity building to develop future O&M and management needs, and; careful withdrawal based on accepted timing, withdrawal criteria and residual linkages ( of protection, advice and exchange of experiences and lessons)

66

This evaluation assesses this component the least achieved in all the ten evaluation communes. Physical evidence and remarks from respondents across all the evaluation Communes lead to the conclusion that this component of the WES Programme was not effectively implemented and yielded little effective impact. Table 18 below presents the key findings and assessment of the component under the respective activity areas.

67

Table 18: Key findings and assessment of the provision of Hygiene and Environmental Sanitation services by the WES project

Key activity areas of Component

Findings Analysis of cause and effect

Construction of 25 latrines around every water point and in selected institutions in active intervention Communes

The common approach here entailed training skilled community-identified artisans, followed by demonstration construction and installation around selected water points or settlements. Those trained were then expected to work with established community-level institutions (CWESCs/Regies and local authority) to coordinate and supervise further construction and training activities. For each water project, WES provided materials enough to complete about 1000 latrines. This evaluation found out that the implementation of this activity was for the most part a hurried “last minute” undertaking implemented following the completion of the water infrastructure and was not therefore given adequate quality time and attention particularly in terms of organizing. With the exception of a few cases where follow-up was maintained, in most cases work stopped soon after the demonstrations were completed. This was the case in Kayonza, where some 2 blocks of institutional latrines (with a total of 14 compartments) and about 100 improved (with Sanplats) family latrines were planned for selected institutions within the town (Commune headquarter and Kayonza modern School) and the group settlement village of Gacogororo respectively. While success was realized with the institutional latrines (a contractor was hired to construct the institutional latrines), the construction and installation of the Sanplats in the Umudugudu stopped soon after the demonstration construction and installation of about 12 Sanplats. Only about 15 additional Sanplats were fabricated and installed after the demonstrations. A similar situation obtained in Muvumba, Kigarama and Rusumo. In Muvumba ADRA fabricated and installed 4 Sanplats with the community and then left expecting that the community would continue on their own with this work. This did not happen. The evaluation team found many expired (unutilized) bags of cement in the communal stores. In Kigarama, despite the demonstrations by CARE, the adoption rate for the Sanplats has remained quite low. Out of some 2000 Sanplats planned, only about 700 were made and even fewer distributed (about 200 only). In Kanzenze demonstrations were carried out but again no effective diffusion occurred thereafter.

A number of reasons emerge as causes for the low post-demonstration implementation, adoption and diffusion of improved toilets in the evaluation Communes:

The lack of effective promotional follow-up and extension, internally, within the community, and externally by implementing agencies. There is no effective local organizational and institutional framework for ensuring effective consistent post-demonstration/implementation replication, management and follow-up of this activity and overall hygiene and Environment sanitation component. Neither the Regies, nor the designated hygiene/public health promoters at commune and community level are adequately equipped, organized and involved in carrying out effective hygiene education and promotional extension. In fact no functional continuing Programme for community level hygiene and environmental sanitation education and promotion was observed in all the 10 evaluation communes. Even within the health Centres, there is no Programme for continuing community outreach in this respect. With respect to the CWESCs/Regies, the water point committee, which was supposed to carry out this function, is for the most part, inactive in this respect. At higher management level, the Regies have concentrated on water issues, at the expense of hygiene and sanitation. A major reason for the weak Regie participation in the promotion of improved hygiene and environment sanitation relates to the way it is currently composed. This issue is discussed at length in part 3.2.3.2.2 and in other areas of this report. While the basic CWESC (Regie) structure adopted and used in Commune and community-level WES management is that presented in figure 2, the composition of this structure at the base (water point) level is different from that envisioned in the WES Project design. The WES Programme design envisioned a eight-member structure comprising a President, a Treasurer and 6 water, sanitation and Hygiene Education Responsibles. The structure eventually adopted at the water point however comprises a Responsable (Chairperson), a Fees Collector and a Caretaker. Upwards it comprises representative committees and Bureaus of Presidents, Vice Presidents and Treasurers elected from the water point and sector level committees as presented in figure 2. Other than the caretaker whose job it is to maintain order and cleanliness at the water point the structure of the CWESC, as currently constituted, does not have hygiene and environment sanitation representatives in it. It seems therefore ill-suited for this function. While intended to serve both WES functions, it seems to have concentrated its efforts on the development of the water infrastructure and the delivery of water and related services, rather than on the management of the entire WES framework. The other reason for this ill-fit relates to its weak integration with the Health Centres and the departments of hygiene and public health. The reason for this weak integration is discussed in part 3.2.3.2.2 of this report. The CWESCs or Regies are also weakly integrated with other structures and institutions of community organizing, such as the Social Affairs/women representatives within the CDC, the schools system, community welfare groups and the department of environment, institutions and groups who potentially and collectively would constitute and provide the needed entry points and vessels for effective Hygiene and Environmental Sanitation promotion and development. In summary, there is no structure or institution on the ground or at the commune level dealing clearly, specifically and effectively with Hygiene and sanitation issues. This is the main reason for the poor adoption of improved latrines and the overall poor performance of the hygiene and sanitation component

Among implementing agencies, the observed tendency to treat the hygiene component as a mere supplementary activity to be added on at the end of the project “as they are leaving”, rather than as an important and integral complementary WES component, is another reason for the weak performance of the hygiene and environment sanitation component. In most situations, including exemplary ones like those of CARE in Kigarama and Rusumo, this component was implemented towards the end of the project and was given very little quality time. In the case of CARE the implementation of the Hygiene and Sanitation component start 2 years behind the other WES Programs and was left to the government to implement, with CARE providing only didactic/’training materials (Sanplats publicity Posters) and monitoring tools and later an evaluation service. More could have been achieved with a more concerted involvement and more follow-up

The other reason given for the poor diffusion relates to the cost of Sanplats, which at FRW 1000 per piece is considered too high for most rural consumers. The unwillingness to pay for Sanplats however has cultural and “socialization” elements besides the cost and the weak extension/promotion framework. These elements are discussed variously in other parts of this report.

68

Ensuring the provision and use of hand washing facilities at all hygienic latrines

There is no evidence of achievement of this activity in all 10 communes visited. None of the households visited had a hand washing facility in the toilets while Less than 50% of the toilets observed would have met the general consideration of “satisfactory” as shown by the observation statistics presented in Table 19 below. Grimmer statistics have been revealed in other more comprehensive and concentrated studies, the examples of the study of hygiene and latrine situation in selected three communes in Kibungo by CARE33. The statistics of latrine coverage and hygiene status from this study are presented in Tables 21 and 22 below

Ensuring at least 25% of rural communes have functional community-based PEC activities, such as catchment protection, disposal of solid and liquid waste and improved placement and design of latrines,

The Project implementation guide and the PCC did not elaborate what activities would be implemented under the PEC component, particularly in respect of the environment component. As a result communes, communities and implementing agencies were often at loss in terms of specifically what assistance to seek under this component. Proposals and implemented activities related to this component seem to have been more focused on latrine construction and hygiene education. With regard to the elaboration and implementation of an environment (proper) component, frequent Ministerial and accompanying institutional and policy changes affecting the Environment Ministry naturally resulted in a situation of shifting policy orientations, which obviously both hindered and delayed the elaboration and implementation of a clear environmental action plan. When a framework was finally elaborated, it seems there was only enough time to lay the foundations for implementing it. This foundation now exists, as indicated in part 3.2.1.4 of this report. But discussions and consultations with stakeholders to articulate clear plans and intentions and to arrive at a clear participation basis with these stakeholders are yet to be held. Good planning and execution of the evidently well-conceived and implemented preparatory activities should yield good PEC impact during the 2001-2006 WES Programme Phase. The construction and use of latrines and the implementation of the Hygiene Education activities, and resulting effects and impact are discussed under activity 1 and 4 of this part and in part 3.2.2.2.2 below respectively.

A full discussion of the impact and general situation related to hygiene education, construction and use of latrines and related hygiene practices is presented in part 3.2.2.2.2. below.

Promoting and building capacities to install the SANPLATS sanitation technology.

Promotional and capacity building attempts are evident in all communes with completed projects, namely Kigarama, Kayonza, Kanzenze (Gachora), Rusumo and Muvumba. The cases of Kayonza was described under activity one above. In Kigarama, the WES Programme and CARE provided technical, material and logistical support to the women group “Duteraninkunga” in Kabare II to produce and distribute (sell) Sanplats within the community. It was planned that some 2000 Sanplats would be produced and diffused by March 2000. By the end of this time, only about 720 Sanplats (36% of the anticipated target) had been made. Of these only 210 (i.e10%) had been sold. The reason given for the low production and sales was the cost of the Sanplats, which at 1000FRW was considered too high for most rural consumers. The low sales led to low motivation among the women who subsequently stopped further production. However the women’s collaboration with two local secondary schools (Gaseta and Karama) in Kigarama resulted in three blocks (of 7 latrines each) of latrines being constructed in these schools. In Kanzenze (Gachora), an elaborate Programme was launched to develop a yard for casting, curing and storing Sanplats, along with other products such as concrete rings for shallow wells and building blocks, and related tools and equipment. With respect to hygiene promotion, the plan (ZOA project proposal-1996) had been to produce and distribute some 11000 Sanplats throughout the commune by the year 2000. The amount required under the contract with the WES Programme however was only 1200 improved (with Sanplats) latrines around completed water points. Following its establishment a lot of Sanplats were fabricated. Again low adoption rates resulted in lee than 20 % of some estimated 3500 Sanplats made being distributed. Similar low replication and adoption rates obtained in Muvumba as explained under activity one and in Rusumo.

Again as in activity one cost, the lack of a clearly focused Programme of post-demonstration hygiene extension and follow-up, the lack of a functional hygiene promotion department at the community level with a distinct Programme dealing clearly and specifically with Hygiene and sanitation issues, and the weak overall institutional framework for this purpose at this level all emerge as the major causes for the low replication and adoption rates for improved latrines and the general low status of hygiene and environmental sanitation in the evaluation communes. The expectation that communities would self-organize and implement the activities on their own seems not to have worked. The traditional expectation that government and NGOs (used here broadly) will provide services has also worked against the diffusion of Sanplats, as communities have been generally unwilling to purchase the Sanplats, expecting, as has happened with other interventions in the past, that they

33 Rapport de L’Auto-Evaluation des Activites d;Education a l’Hygiene par la Communaute-February 2000

69

would be given to them free of charge.

Hygiene and Sanitation education for some 400,000 households (5.3% of total national population).

In the WES Programme design, the primary responsibility for organizing delivering and overseeing HE and related promotional activities was the collective responsibility of the members of the PMT and the Regies, with supervisory advisory and technical support from the Prefecture level PST. The composition of these teams included relevant technical personnel within and outside of government departments with the skills necessary to ensure an effective implementation and management of this function. With both the PST and the PMT becoming moribund, and the Regie committees lacking both the composition and the institutional integration that would have enabled an effective delivery of this function, and subsequently concentrating its focus on water, there was clearly a need for an appropriate alternative organizational and institutional arrangement to carry out the task of delivering an effective hygiene and environment sanitation component. Such an organizational and institutional arrangement seems not to have evolved. The common approach with regard to the implementation of this component, in the absence of these institutions has subsequently entailed technical, financial and logistical support to implementing agencies (relevant government Ministries and respective departments at National and Prefecture level; NGOs; Communal Authorities, and Regies) to plan, coordinate, implement, and monitor hygiene education at community level. Technical support has been in the form of both actual training and/or financial and intellectual support towards the development of training and didactic materials (such as curricular, training manuals, posters, awareness videos and booklets). With respect to training, two approaches are evident- TOT training targeting personnel within focal ministerial departments and sections at prefecture and commune level; and general sensitization and education targeting users or communities within the areas served by the projects. Figure 5 below summarizes this basic framework of support. Part 3.2.1.2

When both the PST and the PMT became moribund a key organizational and institutional framework for planning, coordinating, and advising the implementation and management of an effective Hygiene and Environment Sanitation component within the WES Programme at the regional was lost. As has been explained the institution of the Regie Associative never quite evolved to replace these institutions compositionally or in terms of function. The government’s hygiene and Public health structure at the commune level on the other hand was too weakly evolved to carry out effective management of this function. For the most part therefore there was no effective institution both at the commune level and on the ground planning coordinating and overseeing the implementation and management of Hygiene education and promotion activities (Figure 5). This is part of the reason why many WES targets in this respect remained unmet and why there are such low standards of water and sanitation hygiene and related high incidences of morbidity at the community level. This evaluation undertook a detailed observation of 20 households selected randomly in six of the 10 evaluation communes. The results presented in Table 19 below reveal widespread ownership and use of latrines ([distinct track to facility-85%] [dirt or feaces in the surrounding of the household-25%]), but inadequate to poor general standards of hygiene and sanitation within homes and in the quality and manner of use of latrines.([latrine has no cover-80%] [no hand washing facility-100] [ HH not boiling drinking water-95%]). A separate, more elaborate study conducted by CARE in three Communes of Kibungo Prefecture, including Kigarama and Rusumo project areas, presents similar findings. The study, involving some 468 households out of a total of 803 households in 6 villages (3 sectors) with WES Projects in these communes (two Kigarama and Rusumo) examined five hygiene parameters, namely latrine coverage and situation, disposal of babies excreta, hand washing with soap, situation of water collection and storage containers and, morbidity trends for five hygiene and water use-related disease conditions. Tables 21-25 present the findings from this study on four of these parameters. Table s21 and 22 show 94%, 77% and 95% ownership of Latrines Nyarubuye, Rusumo and Kigarama respectively, while table 23 reveals that a high proportion of the households dispose of babies’ excreta in the latrines. These findings confirm the evaluation’s findings regarding the status of ownership and use of latrines. However Table 22 also reveals that 85%, 30% and 81% of the latrines examined in Nyarubuye, Rusumo and Kigarama respectively were indecent34. Table 25 shows that only 22% of the containers used at the water point were clean. In a further investigation of the status of hygiene, the evaluation conducted bacteriological tests and analyses (E. coli and General coliform) of about 50 water samples taken from both households and WES water sources and tap stands. The findings of these analyses are summarized in Table 20 below and the full results and laboratory analysis for each sample presented in section IV of the Annex. The laboratory analyses reveal that out of the total of 35samples taken from the households and analyzed 77% of them had below acceptable levels of bacteriological quality and were reported either non-satisfactory or non-acceptable. These statistics indicate low standards of household hygiene and point towards a great need to intensify hygiene education campaigns. The figures can be compared to those of the 1995 National KAP survey presented in Section One (Page 2) of this document. While confirming most aspects of the 1995 survey (for example prevailing good knowledge among women about the importance and aspects of good household hygiene) and showing in some instances statistics higher than those in the KAP study (for example higher latrine hygiene status in rural areas), these findings show on the whole, general low standards of hygiene and sanitation practice. The statistics from the CARE Project areas are important because these are the areas where an appreciably more organized, more focused and more concentrated approach and thrust is evident. The other areas served by the Programme (of the 10 evaluation communes) do not show similar levels of organization and focus (even those with completed WES Projects) and many of them are still at the facilities construction stages and had not yet embarked on popular hygiene education at the time of the evaluation. The general low levels of improved hygiene practice reflect in the generally unsatisfactory status of related morbidities within the project areas. This aspect is revealed in the three-week morbidity trends in Table 19 and in CARE’s own findings in this respect (appended in section V of the Annex) and is analyzed and illustrated exhaustively under TOR 3.6 of this report.

34 In the CARE auto-evaluation latrines were considered clean and sound/decent if they had a roof, a door, walls, were covered, were clean and well maintained, and if 4 M or more deep. A slab in the trees covered by earth or cement/Sanplats was also considered in this category.

70

assessed the outputs and impact of the two forms of TOT training conducted at the Prefecture and commune level. The TOT training at the prefecture level is a general training covering wide-ranging technical and managerial aspects related to WES implementation and management, including hygiene and sanitation aspects. As shown in Table 6 it has targeted the inspectors of hygiene and sanitation as well as all the other departments relevant in WES implementation and management. The TOT Hygiene Training at the Commune level has targeted the commune Health Animator Representative, the communal Fontainier and the representative for women affairs (in the CDC), but not the members of the Regie or the school inspectors. More recently the TOT training conducted at the sector level has targeted the sector health animator and the representative for women affairs within the CDC. The idea in the TOT training has been that those trained in turn sensitize, train, and organize Hygiene education and promotion activities at respective lower levels. In doing this they are expected to work in close collaboration with other institutions, including NGOs, within and outside their communes and respective areas of jurisdiction who are involved or who may show an interest in promoting hygiene and sanitation.

The major underpinning explanation behind these low standards and little effective impact under this component seems to be the lack of an effective education and extension thrust, linked in turn to the lack of a focused, well thought through and well-organized extension and education approach at the commune and community level. It is a technical capacity problem but more importantly and more fundamentally an organizational and institutional integrity Problem- the lack of a clear framework of well coordinated and integrated institutions and community organizational arrangements working together with clearly defined and elaborated mandates (goals, objectives and responsibilities), tasks and delivery targets (including reporting on performance) and an appropriate incentives and monitoring structure and system. This is the organizational and institutional breakdown illustrated in Figure 5. Given the diversity of the project area, and the few NGOs on the ground, such a framework is difficult to engender without some semblance of organized governmental involvement at the commune level. This involvement may entail bringing the current commune hygiene and public health structure (comprising un-paid “Bare-foot” Coordinators and Promoters) into a full-status department with funding and a clear mandate and Programme of action. The existing loose system of Health/Hygiene promoters at commune, sector, and cellule levels, has not worked well during the WES Bridging Programme due to lack of adequate skills, coupled with the lack of a clear working framework (defined as above). Their operations and degree of effectiveness can be contrasted with he Regie-managed cost recovery system. Here, trained and in many cases paid (from the proceeds of water revenues) community technicians, Regie Committee members (at Commune Bureau level) and water fees collectors have worked with commitment and within some semblance of organization with good results. Even where they have received organizational support as in Rusumo and Kigarama, and where, as a result, some organized action and results are evident, the lack of adequate resources and effective institutional integration has resulted in only minimal effective impact. In Rusumo and Kigarama CARE, believing that only government had the needed long-term presence on the ground to ensure programmatic continuity and sustained impact of a hygiene education and promotion process, entered into a collaborative working relationship with Ministry of Health’s department of Hygiene and Public health where CARE would develop and provide didactic/’training materials (Sanplats publicity Posters) and monitoring tools and an evaluation service, while the latter, through its system of Voluntary Commune and Community Health Promoters(VHWs) would implement and coordinate hygiene education and sanitation activities on the ground. Table 26 below presents the training achievements of this collaboration. While some action and results are evident and while some of the improvements indicated earlier could well be attributed to these activities, more could have been achieved with better internal organization and funding and with better vertical and horizontal integration (with prefecture and with local institutions-health Centres, women groups, schools, church groups, other NGOs, etc,). A general problem cited at the commune level, which touches on resourcing for effective Hygiene awareness and extension education was the lack of adequate participatory skills and didactic materials for this purpose. Recent capacity building initiatives and the on-going discussions to invigorate MINISANTE ‘s department of Hygiene and Public health at the commune would lead one to think that a new organizational arrangement at the commune level is in the offing. The WES Programme has provided extensive support to the department in recent months to train hygiene Promotion teams at the commune and sector level. Currently discussions are on-going within the Ministry to recruit a permanent and paid staff to lead the government’s hygiene and public health team at the commune level. These are important developments which could be supported in an effort to set up an independent fully operational Hygiene and environment sanitation department at the commune level, with a clear mandate and Programme of operation in this respect, and working very closely with the Prefecture system, the Regie system at all levels, and with the various local level organizational arrangements and institutions (women groups, schools, youth associations, health Centres, religious groups, NGOs, etc). In this scenario the Regie committees, while maintaining close collaborative relationship with the department would retain a distinct function of managing the delivery of portable water to the communes. The bridging Programme Scenario with Regies in a dual management function seems not to have worked very well.

71

Figure5: WES Framework for Technical, Logistical and Financial Support for Hygiene and Environmental Sanitation Education and promotion

UNICEF GOR Minisante, Minerena, Mineduc,

Minitere, Minaloc

NGOs

Prefecture Prefect/Assistant Prefect, Inspector of hygiene, Hydraulician, Community

Development Advisor, Inspector of Environment, Women’s Representative CCDFP representative

Commune Assistant Bourgmestre, Health Animator, Regie Associative

representative, Fontainier Communal, responsible for health Centres, Inspector of Schools, Commune-level Women’s Representative,

Women’s groups representative, NGO representatives,

Sector Councilors, Regie, Health Animators

Beneficiaries Communities, Health Centres, Schools,

Monitoring and Evaluation

Technical Logistical and Financial M&E Support

Technical, logistical Financial

M&E Support

Monitoring & Evaluation

M&E

Technical Financial Logistical

M &E Support

Training, monitoring, Evaluation,

Mobilization, Sensitization Education, extension, Training, Coordination, Follow-up, monitoring, reporting, evaluation, Demonstrations

Technical, financial, logistical,

M&E Support

Coordination, Sensitization, Monitoring, Reporting,Training

Organizational and Institutional breakdown!

72

Table 19: Three- week morbidity and household hygiene and sanitation status in selected 5 evaluation Communes

Three- week morbidity prevalence

Latrine Coverage and use status

Status of Household Hygiene

Type, cleanliness and level of use and safety

Households

Presence of dirt and feaces in surrounding

Presence of dirt & feaces on the floor

Presence of flies and

smell

Covered Distinct track to facility

Structurally safe

Presence of hand washing

facility

Boiling Drinking

Water

With Rack

With rubbish

pit

Covering left-over

food

Covering drinking

water

Commune

Diarrhoea

Vomit

Skin infections Improve

d Traditional unimproved

Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No

Kibali 1 Y N Y - Y Y - Y - Y - - N Y - - N - N - N - N Y - Y - - N

Kibali2 N N Y Ys - - N - N - N - N Y - Y - - N - N - N - N Y - Y - Kibali3 N N Y Y - - N - N Y - - N Y - Y - - N - N - N Y - - N - N Kibali 4 N N Y - Y - N - N Y - Y - Y - Y - - N - N - N Y - Y - Y -

Kinyami1 Y N N - Y - N - N - N Y Y - Y - - N - N - N Y - - N - N

Kinyami2 N Y N Y - - N - N - N Y - Y - Y - - N Y - Y - - N - N Y - Kigarama1 Y N Y - Y - N Y - Y - - N Y - Y - - N - N - N Y - - N - N Kigarama2 Y N Y Y - - N - N - N - N Y - - N - N - N - N Y - - N - N Kigarama3 N N N - Y Y - Y - Y - - N Y - Y - - N - N - N Y - - N Y Kigarama4 N Y Y - Y - N - N Y - - N Y - - N - N - N - N Y - - N - N Kigarama5 Y N N - Y - N Y - Y - - N Y - - N - N - N - N Y - Y - Y -

Kibali 5 Y Y Y 0 0 Y - Y - Y - N - N Y - - N - N - N - N Y - Y - Kibali6 N N N - Y Y - Y - Y - - N - N - N - N - N - N Y - Y - - N

Kinyami3 N N N Y - - N - N - N N Y - Y - - N - N - N - N - N - N Rutongo1 Y N N - Y - N - N - N - N Y - Y - - N - N Y - - N Y - Y - Rutongo2 Y Y Y - Y - N Y - Y - - N - N Y - - N - N - N Y - Y - - N Rutongo3 N N N Y - N - N - N - N Y - Y - - N - N - N Y - - N - N Rutongo4 N Y Y - Y Y - Y - Y - - N Y - - N - N - N - N - N - N Y - Kayonza1 N N N Ys - - N - 1 N - N - N Y - Y - - N - N - N - N Y - - N Kigarama6 N N Y - Y - N Y 2 - Y - - N Y - - N - N - N - N - N Y - Y - Total Y 8 N

12 Y 5 N

15 Y 11 N 9 7 13 5 15 9 11 12 8 4 16 17 3 13 7 0 20 1 19 2 18 12 8 10 10 9 11

%

Y40 N60

Y25 N75

Y55 N45

35

65 25 75 45 55 60 40 20 80 85 15 65 35 0 100 5 95 10 90 60 40 50 50 45 55

Summary Analysis (N=20)

Three-week morbidity Latrine type, cleanliness and level of safety No an % of Households

Diarrhoea Vomiting Skin infections

Traditional and unimproved

Dirt and feaces present on floor

Dirt and feaces in surrounding

No cover

No distinct track to facility

Structurally unsafe

No hand washing facility

Not Boiling drinking water

Without dish racks

Without rubbish pit

Not covering left over food

Not covering drinking water

Cases 8 5 11 13 9 5 16 3 7 20 19 18 10 10 11 % of total

40 25 55 65 45 25 80 15 35 100 95 90 50 50 55

73

Table 20: RESULTS OF SOURCE AND HOUSEHOLD WATER SAMPLES ANALYSIS: WES PROGRAMME EVALUATION (NOVEMBER 2000)

Source of Water Sample Analysis Source

Commune

Sector and cellule surveyed

Sample Number

Protected Spring (PS)

Borehole (BH)

Stand Pipe or Kiosk (SP)(K)

Source/Reservoir (SR)

Household (HH)

Acceptable (A)

Satisfactory (S)

Non-satisfactory Not acceptable

1 PS S 2 PS NS 3 PS A 4 HH NS 5 HH S 6 HH NS

Rutongo

Cyuga

7 HH NS 1 HH A 2 HH S 3 K S 4 K NS 5 BH S

Kayonza Centre

6 HH NS Gasogororo 7 HH NS Gasogororo 8 HH NS Gasogororo 9 HH NS Gasogogoro 10 HH A Gasogororo 11 HH A Gasogororo 12 HH NS Gasogororo 13 HH NS Gasogogoro 14 K A

Kayonza

Gasogororo 15 BH S 1 HH NS 2 HH NS 3 HH NS 4 HH NS 5 HH NS 6 HH A 7 HH S 8 HH NS 9 HH NS 10 HH NS

Kigarama

Gitare Kabare II (Kamushukuzi water source)

11 SP NS 1 SP NS 2 HH NS 3 HH NS 4 HH NS 5 HH S 6 HH NS 7 SP A 8 HH NS 9 HH NS

Rusumo

Nyamugali And Kigarama Secteurs Gashanga II water source

10 HH NS

74

11 HH NS 12 HH NS

13 HH NS Total 46 3 2 6 35 7 8 31

Analysis of results in Table 20 above: Total water samples analyzed-46; Total source/reservoir/tap stand samples analyzed-11; Total Household samples analyzed-35; No. and % of source samples analyzed as acceptable-3(27%); No. and % of source samples analyzed as satisfactory- 4(36%); No. and % of total samples analyzed as satisfactory/acceptable-7(64%); No. and % of source samples analyzed as Non-satisfactory/non-acceptable- 4 (36%); No. and % of Household samples analyzed as satisfactory- 4 (11%); No. and % of household samples analyzed as acceptable- 4(11%); No. and % of household samples analyzed as acceptable/satisfactory-8(23%); No. and % of household water samples analyzed as non-satisfactory/non-acceptable-27 (77%)

Table 21: Latrine Situation in Kigarama Rusumo and Nyarubuye Communes

Commune Nyarubuye Rusumo Kigarama Sector Gisenyi Musaza Kaberangwe Cellule

Rushonga Kigufi Gasarabwayi Nganda Total Kajevuba Rugese

Village Rushonga1 Songa Mbele

Total Gasarabwayi Nganda Kajevuba Nyamigende

Total

Number of surveyed households 105 59 164 119 63 182 33 75 108 Number of households with decent latrines (solid and clean)

7 1 8 68 1 69 0 8 8

Number of households with passable latrines

6 7 7 14 2 16 1 6 7

Number of households with non-decent latrines

80 59 139 11 44 55 35 53 88

Number of households with no latrines

7 3 10 26 16 42 2 3 5

Total

164 182 108

Table22: Analysis of latrine coverage results presented in Table18

Nyarubuye Rusumo Kigarama

% Population with decent latrines

5

38 7

% Population with passable latrines

4 9 6

75

% Population with non-decent latrines

85 30 81

% Population with no latrines

6 23 5

Table 23: Situation of disposal of babies’ excreta in selected 6 project villages in Kigarama Rusumo and Nyarubuye Communes Theme Nyarubuye Rusumo Kigarama Average Presence of excreta near the house 11.8% 21.1% 19.7% 17.5% When baby defecates, excreta is disposed of in the latrine 89.1% 90.0% 50.0% 76.4% When baby defecates, excreta is disposed of and thrown elsewhere (bush, somewhere in the compound, in the compost)

5.5%

10.0%

28.8%

14.8%

Table 24: situation of hand washing with soap in selected 6 project villages in Kigarama, Rusumo and Nyarubuye Communes Theme Nyarubuye Rusumo Kigarama Average Number of people surveyed 165 181 110 Wash hands with soap or ashes after toilet 37.0% 47.0% 54.5% 46.2% Wash hands with soap or ashes after wiping babies’ bottom 21.2% 27.1% 18.2% 22.2 Wash hands with soap or ashes before preparing food 43.0% 56.4% 51.8% 50.4% Wash hands with soap or ashes before eating 63.0% 72.9% 88.2% 74.7% Table 25: situation of water collection and storage containers in selected six project villages in Kigarama Rusumo and Nyarubuye communes Theme Nyarubuye Rusumo Kigarama Average Number of People surveyed 166 182 109 Clean containers at water point

48.9% 12.7% 5.5% 22.4%

Clean water storage containers

51.1% 68.1% 70.6% 63.3%

Covered water storage containers

48.4% 57.8% 67.0% 57.7%

Clean covers 41.8% 52.4% 60.6% 51.6%

76

Table 26: Hygiene and Environment Sanitation Training Activities Conducted in 3 Communes of Kibungo Prefecture – September-December 1999 Activities Achieved Number of

Participants

Categories of Trainees Messages or themes developed/imparted Nos. Trained/Observations

Training of Trainers 30th August-3rd September 1999

18

• 2 District Heads; 2 Kibungo Region Health

agents • 2 Health workers at commune level • 3 Agents from Ministry of Social Affairs • 1 representative from the Ministry of Gender

and Women’s Development • 1 representative from Ministry of Youth,

culture and Sports • 1 representative from the ministry of Energy,

Water and Natural Resources • 1 representative from the Ministry of National

Education • 3 Agents from the ministry of Gender in three

Project Communes • 2 Assistant Bourgmestres

• Project goals and indicators • Participatory tools for hygiene education • Modalities and feasibility of Programme implementers training • 5F Diagram (Food, Fly, Fingers, Field, Fluid) • Behavior Change, participatory approaches • Communication Techniques and Barriers to effective

communication • 4 disease contamination routes • Activity planning for each trainer • Hygiene Education Programme Monitoring by Trainers • Film-(Nyamwanga Kumva ntiyanze Kubona(the person who

refuses to observe good hygiene suffers from bad consequences of his behavior)

• Role of the Voluntary Health Worker • Water and excreta related diseases

Training was conducted for 18 persons

Implementers training September-December 1999

1057

286 VHWs 348 Teachers, 221 Sector Leaders and literacy classes Centres 202 CDC members

• Hygiene practices (three pile sorting) • 5F Diagram • Behavior change • Participatory approaches in development

Programming • Communication Techniques and Barriers to effective

communication • 4 contamination routes • Hygiene education Programme monitoring • Film-(Nyamwanga kumva ntiyanze Kubona)

Training carried out by Partners who had received training under the CARE supervised TOT

77

78

3.2.2.3 WES Project Funding Tables 27-28 present WES budgets, funding and expenditure outlays for the 1998-2000 implementation years. Accordingly some US$ 5 million was proposed for the Programme over the three years. This amount included the estimated budget for materials for the construction of WES facilities. Table 28a and 28b reveal however that actual funding at approximately US$ 2.3 million fell short of the budgeted requirement by more than 50%. Obviously at this level of funding a lot of the activities planned under the WES Programme would never have been realized Table 28b reveals that such planned activities as research and development, M&E, capacity building, primary environmental care and Social mobilization were either under-funded or not funded at all during some of the years. This funding base is a key consideration in the weak performance of certain components of the project. Promotional and consolidative support activities such as social mobilization and sensitization, coordination and advisory follow-up and monitoring (household surveys, water quality analysis) clearly required higher levels of funding to be realized effectively. In its contracts with the NGO implementing agencies (the protocols of agreement) UNICEF was for the most part obligated only to providing construction materials and funding for training activities. In some cases funding was provided to support baseline and hydrological studies. More recently this framework was expanded to include fuel vouchers for transport of materials to communes. UNICEF was not obligated to providing operational funding (for routine implementation and post-implementation follow-up activities). The funding of the projects implemented directly with the Ministries (such as those implemented with the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Environment), being mostly projects of a training and capacity building nature, included money to secure or prepare the relevant materials and to facilitate the logistics for undertaking respective planned activities. Again there was no commitment to fund post-implementation advisory and monitoring follow-up. In both respects the understanding, enshrined in respective contracts was that these agencies would provide the needed additional funding for these operational activities. In the case of NGOs the amounts considered adequate for this purpose was specified in some contracts, as NGO contribution. A major concern raised during interviews with both the implementing NGOs and government partners is the lack of adequate funding for these activities, as a result of which they have not been effectively implemented, with serious consequences for WES project effectiveness and impact. Four issues are important in respect of these funding problems:

The need to increase the prevailing level of funding to the WES section cannot be

overemphasized. The section has obviously suffered from the prevailing wrong notion of adequate national WES coverage, which has clearly depressed donor interest in the sector. This notion needs to be corrected as matter of urgency so that adequate funding is availed to WES Programs and activities. This issue ties up with the other bigger issue of “sector donor mentality” raised elsewhere in this report. There is clearly a need to broaden the current scope of funding to the sector by encouraging more donors to join UNICEF in rural water financing as complementary or alternative actors. As yet adequate attention has not been focused on whether or not the implementing agencies are meeting their financial and operational obligations as spelt out in their contracts. The existing contractual and institutional frameworks have not been exploited to deliberate this issue. There is obviously inadequate preparation of the communities for projects, and inadequate follow-up both during and after implementation. A gain a weak project

79

monitoring and collaborative audit framework is preventing a proper insight into field activities and subsequent interventions to improve the situation. While some NGOs such as CARE are meeting their funding and operational obligations and are able to demonstrate these, the same cannot be said about the other agencies. The need to improve the overall coordination framework so that these issues would be discussed and resolved is clearly an important and urgent one.

As yet the question of “counterpart (government) funding” of WES activities remains unresolved. There is no agreed budget for implementation and post-implementation advisory and monitoring follow-up of WES Project activities within the government. The decision over this issue has been pending since 1998. As a result this function remains poorly executed in most if not all WES Project areas. There is a special case for the WES communes because the other communes where the WES project has not been quite active to date seem to receive greater attention from government and are showing indicators that suggest better performance in terms of delivery of services and general management efficiency. The case of the relative organization and efficiency of Regie Management between active WES communes and Non-WES communes discussed in part 3.5 of this report illustrates this.

The need to arrive at some decision over these issues quickly is made urgent by the declining status of operation and maintenance activities and hygiene conditions in most WES communes visited during this evaluation. Increasing and sustaining both access to potable water and levels of good hygiene and environmental sanitation will require increased contact with communities and increased funding. Table 27a: Programme Budget and Inputs (derived from the 1998 MPO document) Project/year 1998 1999 2000 TOTAL Project 01 Policy Development

145000

7%

145000

8.5%

140,000

13%

430000

8.5%

Project 02 Commune level Community-based WES project

1,755,000

80%

1,255,000

74%

710,000

64.5%

3,720,000

74.5%

Programme Support 300,000 13% 300,000 17.5% 250,000 22.5% 850,000 17%

Grand Total 2,200,000

100% 1700,000 17.5% 1,100,000

100% 5,000,000

100%

Actual WES Funding and Expenditure positions A: 1998 Budget Total expenditure based on 1998 UNICEF Annual Report: US$ 602,645 B: 1999 Budget (based on 1999 annual report) Table 27b: WES Programme expenditure by activity line (1999)

Activity Expenditure Policy and Human Resource Development 104262

Community-based WES Project 598266 Programme Support 200022

Total 902,550

80

C: WES PROGRAMME BUDGET STATUS AS OF DEC. 2000 (BASED ON 2000 ANNUAL REPORT) Table 27c: WES Programme Budget Status as of Dec. 2000

Programme Unit

Estimated Funded Unfunded

Requisitions Total estimated expenditure

Budget in CPR

Amount % Amount Amount %

Total 1,100,000 801841 73 298,159 791739 99 722,226

90

Table 28a: UNICEF-GOR WES Programme: Budget and expenditure Summary sheet35

Budget planned Total funded Total requisitioned Total expenditure

Project

Sub-project

1998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000

Advocacy IEC social mobilization

Research and development

Capacity building

Environmental awareness

Policy Developmen

t

Monitoring and evaluation

Sub-Total 214,800 195000 150000 72349 104691 150,000

73,918 104693 106688

71703 104262

14960

WES Construction

Monitoring and Evaluation

Capacity building

IEC social mobilization

Primary environmental care

Community-based WES

Assistance to NGOs

Sub-total 3,048,400

1,823,094

810807 475546 562919 510043 469,472

562691 513,267

153434

311171

181781

Salaries, allowances & other staff costs

Programme

Support Support to Programme implementation

Sub-total

495,200 437462 250000 209855 166054 144000 209854 161665 143263 106999

120452

57049

Year Total

3,758,400

2,455,556

1,210,807

757,750

833,664

804,043

753244 829,049

763218 332136

535885

253790

Grand Total

7,424,763 2,395,457 2,345,511 1,121,811

35 YW804 and YW814 budget line Figures derived from WES Programme accounts/Promes furnished by the Budgets Office.

81

Table 28b: UNICEF-GOR WES Programme: Budget and expenditure Summary sheet

Budget planned Total funded Total requisitioned Total expenditure Project

Sub-project

1998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000

Advocacy IEC social mobilization 2,216 +26,591

50,658+ 3280

11,717+0 582+ 26591

50658+ 3280

10217+0 582 + 26,591

50658+ 3280

8870+0 582 + 26591

50657+ 3279

7955+0

Research and development

-+10,493

0+0 5000+0 -+10493 0+0 0+0 -+10493 0+0 0+0 -+10493 0+0 0+0

Capacity building

34,619+

4033+ 11356

38,303+0 34619+0 4033+ 11356

44803+0 34619+0 4032+ 11354

10225+0 34619+0 4032+ 11094

10224+0

Environmental awareness

-+0 0+0 3000+0 -+0 0+0 3000+0 -+0 0+0 0+0 -+0 0+0 0+0

Policy Development

Monitoring and evaluation -+0 0+35364 91980+0 -+0 0+35364

91980+0 -+0 0+35371

88223+0 -+0 0+35202

9665+0

Sub-Total 214,800 195000 150000+0

72349 104691 150,000 73,918 104693 106688 71703 104262 14960+0

WES Construction 8262+ 454834

750,000+ 391,993

362,256+ 99671

8169+ 380744

9905+ 392229

360,335+ 89,806

81,69+376,211 9904+ 392182

377440+ 87502

0+79884 9904+ 141108

141524-4952

Monitoring and Evaluation -+11510 10,000+ 115

0+1136 -+11490 0+115 0+8135 -+11,490 0+115 0+7117 -+11490 0+115 0+4257

Capacity building 0+56862

150,000+ 46977

23916+- 0+56862 0+46467

23912+0 0+56,862 0+46462

21764+0 51,308 0+46458

20086+0

IEC social mobilization -+5,986

50000+0 1366+- -+5986 0+0 1366+0 -+5,986 0+0 1366+0 -+0 0+0 1366+0

Primary environmental care -+- 50,000+ 51852

0+- -+- 0+25138

0+0 -+- 0+25138

0+0 -+- 0+25138

0+0

Community-based WES

Assistance to NGOs 10754

11,996+ 79006

21703+- 10754 11873+ 77157

21703+0 10,754 11873+ 77154

25000+0 10754 11873+ 76580

21703+0

Sub-total 3,048,400 1,823,094

810807 475546 562919 510043 469,472 562691 513,267 153434 311171 181781

Salaries, allowances & other staff costs

18733+ 195132

23,354+ 44799

79,460+0 18733+ 177764

23354+ 43895

80453+0 18,733+177,764

23,353+ 43895

79,956+0

18733+ 74911

23,353+ 4126

39365+0 Programme Support

Support to Programme implementation

13336+21 6272+ 92663

64540+0 13336+21

6272+ 88445

63547+0 13336+21 6272+ 88236

63529+0 13336+21

6272+ 86703

26,597+0

Sub-total

495,200 437462 250000 209855 166054 144000 209854 161665 143263 106999 120452 57049

Year Total

3,758,400 2,455,556

1,210,807 757,750 833,664 804,043 753244 829,049 763218 332136 535885 253790

Grand Total

7,424,763 2,395,457 2,345,511 1,121,811

67

3.2.3 The Management of Community-based WES Facilities This function sought to ensure the effective implementation, functioning and management of the WES Programme facilities at two levels - the national (UNICEF/GOR) level and the regional (Prefecture, Commune and Community) level. 3.2.3.1 National Level Management

3.2.3.1.1 WES Project Planning, decision-making and Coordination

The national level management function was envisioned primarily as a planning, coordination and decision-making function involving all WES stakeholders at the national level to be executed at two principle levels: the planning and decision-making was to be executed by the National Project Coordination Committee (the PCC) while national coordination was to be the responsibility of the National WES Programme Coordination Office through a National Permanent WES Coordinator and an Accountant-Secretary. In design, the PCC was to comprise the following Ministerial and Non-governmental focal points: Director, Ministry of Water Development (MINERENA); Director, Epidemiology and Public Health; Director, Commune/local Development (MINALOC); Director, Minisante; UNICEF WES section Head; 2 prefects from the regions; 5 Bourgmestres; NGO representatives, and; a representative from ELECTROGAZ. The representatives from the regions, the NGOs and Electrogaz would be consulted and invited as and when required (at least every six months) for discussions and sectoral inputs: The overall coordination of the PCC functions would be managed rotationally among the focal ministries, beginning with the Ministry of Interior (MINALOC). Figure 6 below encapsulates this institutional management framework:

Figure 6: National WES Planning and Coordination Framework

National WES Secretariat with a Permanent

Coordinator and an Accountant Secretary

Focal Ministries

UNICEF

NGOs Private Enterprises

PCC Regional Level Planning Coordination implementation and management

National Level Planning and Coordination

68

Assessment: The initial scenario where the PCC served in a full-scale, near-secretariat capacity was necessary and possible, in view of the huge mandate that the WES Programme had set for itself and the fact that at the time the ministerial mandates had not been fully established and the WES mandate seemed very much in line with what the focal ministries would have been doing anyway. With time, as the Ministries began to evolve and become more functional, and as WES became more operational, a situation should have been envisaged where an “active” role of the PCC would become replaced by what it was intended to be in the first place, an interagency and inter-ministerial focal point for advice, stewardship, coordination and oversight to the WES Programme. Thus while appreciably successful in an initial role of paving the ground for the implementation of the WES Programme, it was presumptuous and too ambitious to expect that the PCC, comprising full-scale directors of departments of Ministries in a country emerging out of a devastating war and destruction and needing desperately to re-construct and re-invent itself, would continue in this role in 66 communes, in the manner specified in the Project implementation guideline and elaborated in initial planning and coordination meetings. The framework was fit for an emergency mode and should have been reviewed thereafter, at least functionally. Initial PCC efforts were focused on elaborating and establishing an institutional, organizational and technical framework for effective WES Programme implementation. A number of key achievements seem to have emerged out of these efforts:

Spirited early planning meetings, while not always successful, yielded the needed launching base (operational and budgetary plans, institutional and individual responsibility guidelines and terms of references, project MIS formats, and procedures) for WES Programme implementation, based on the established guidelines

Baring initial huddles of insecurity in some prefectures and the redefinition and reshuffling of the focal Ministries a launching was executed, with selective establishment and orientation of the key support and implementation institutions/structures of the Project, namely the Project Support Team (PST) and the Project Management Team (PMT) in seven (out of eleven) WES prefectures and 12 communes respectively (7 in Butare and 5 in Kibungo).

With direct support from members of the PCC and UNICEF staff, a few early project communes were able to determine, develop and present needed community projects for funding.

But this is probably as far as the PCC went in terms of fulfilling its mandate. While credited with determining such broad decisions as the general Programme direction and which prefectures and communes to prioritize, it does seem that the functioning and effective role of the PCC became less distinct and effectual with time. As early as the first half of the first year of its existence, diagnostic assessments were already revealing problems with its functioning. A mid 1997 M&E report 36observed that the meetings of the PCC were only partially attended and almost always did not have the full attendance of all representatives. There were also problems with operational procedures and the very structure of the PCC itself. Over time the meetings of the PCC became even more infrequent and without effective quorum. The last minutes of the PCC meetings on record are those of 1999. The participation of civil society (NGOs) and representatives from the prefectures and the communes was never realized. Often many of the directors of the focal ministries were not in attendance at the meetings. This should have been anticipated, considering that most of them were full-scale heads of nascent ministerial departments who needed time to forge and consolidate their respective departments and ministries and would therefore be unable to give full attention to the PCC in the initial form. Against this reality the role of the PCC should at this point have evolved from one of an “implementer” to one of policy advice and integrative support and oversight. This role change did not occur, at least not in an organized and systematic way. As the members became

36 Monitoring and Evaluation of WES Projects-Consultancy Report by Raul Tavani, January-April 1997

69

overwhelmed with their own ministerial and departmental responsibilities and obligations, their participation became erratic, less distinct and less focused. So did their coordination, integration and oversight roles. Quite clearly the goals and functions set out for the PCC were too ambitious and too elaborate for a policy body and the PCC was clearly the wrong structure for the kind of planning and coordination work envisaged. What the PCC was attempting to do ought to have been done by a PROJECT COORDINATION OFFICE OR SECRETARIAT OR UNIT! But the WES Project coordination Office did not evolve to fully and effectively assume this role. A number of reasons emerge as causes for this:

Lack of effective overall stewardship from the PCC: in design, the PCC was supposed to operate as a national level focal point where ministerial and sectoral WES interests would be deliberated within the context of the WES Programme and vice versa, and out of which collective and sectoral positions and inputs would evolve to influence relevant changes at lower implementation and management levels. Ministerial and Agency representatives to the PCC would be the focal points for their respective Ministries, articulating clear sectoral/ministerial goals, objectives and plans, in relation to those of WES, and ensuring that these were clearly understood and realized at all relevant implementation and management levels (WES and official government levels). This necessarily required careful and close planning, coordination, direction, follow-up and monitoring at all levels. The lead ministry (Minerena), the PCC and the National WES Coordination Office had to be the lead actors in terms of ensuring that this took place. Inadequate and non-proactive overall coordination by Minerena resulted in weak interagency synergy and ineffective functioning of the PCC, and ultimately in a “fuzzy” and weakly defined working environment from the National Coordination Office.

The lack of an effective organizational basis and capacity within the National Coordination Office: it would seem that not as much effort was invested in consolidating and making the National WES Coordination Office functional as was done for the PCC. While a strong PCC was necessary in the initial stages to get the WES project on a good footing conceptually and procedurally, the National WES Coordination Office, the PST and the PMT were fundamentally the engines for implementing and embedding a community-level and community-based Programme and should have been equally strengthened. To be effective, a good organizational basis (clearly defined goals, objectives, systems and structures, coupled with adequate resourcing) was necessary for these institutions. At the national level, the National WES Coordination Office especially had to be strong to fulfill two distinct roles; bridging the institutional and functional relationship between the National and Regional level structures to ensure effective definition, implementation and management of WES project activities, and; effectively monitoring and providing needed consolidative support to WES Implementation and management structures and institutions, based on an accurate understanding of the situation and realities on the ground. This later role necessitated establishing and managing an effective M&E and MIS function at this level. Thus two sets or levels of competencies were required within the Coordination Office, good planning and organizational management skills and good M&E and MIS skills. It appears that adequate consideration was not given to these organizational and human resource needs. The persons appointed to these positions have not demonstrated these competences, particularly so during the period under the MINERENA coordination.

A number of consequences ensured from these weaknesses:

Poor overall functioning of the National WES Coordination Office, manifested in the lack of a clear framework of institutions working synergetically and objectively together and bridging national level (ministerial and Non-government support agencies) goals, objectives and decisions with regional level realities and priorities. Both the PST and the PMT, designed as the players in this respect have not evolved to become accepted institutions with clear organizational identities (clear collective goal, mission, strategies systems and procedures of work, skills and abilities) and the

70

financial and material resources required to effectively act out their assigned technical, advisory, supervisory (for the PST) and implementation management (for the PMT) roles. This lack of identity and resources is blamed on a weak appreciation at the national level of the vital role that the PST potentially stood to play in terms of ensuring the overall effectiveness of the implementation and management of the WES Programme as a community-based project.

A systemic atrophy of these institutions and their replacement with less conceptually, institutionally and organizationally oriented ones. The poor logistical framework resulting from the financial strangulation caused by inadequate funding, linked in turn, to the non-resolution and definition of a clear funding framework for Programme support at the regional level has exacerbated these woes. The unresolved issue of counterpart contributions and counterpart funding has clearly hurt a strong and effective consolidative support function on the ground.

The inefficiencies outlined above saw UNICEF’s role increasingly change from one of a facilitator to that of an implementer. Following the lack of an effective planning and coordination framework (at PCC and Project Coordination levels) it seems that UNICEF assumed both responsibilities and began to interact and work directly with “ready and willing” institutions of government, community and civil society, often bypassing (conveniently) and further weakening the same instituted WES implementation and Management structures. Attempts in the last year of the project to involve the Prefecture and to re-visit their role as possible advisors supervisors and technocrats to the communes and the subsequent efforts to build their capacities in this regard, while good and reflective of the realization of the important role of these institutions in the overall success of regional level development interventions, remain weakly conceptualized and consolidated.

3.2.3.1.2 Screening and approval of Commune-level WES Projects Figure 7 below presents the initial (as planned) against the prevailing framework for WES project screening approval and support (material and financial). Fig.7: Framework for WES project screening, approval and funding

WES Baseline survey by PMT (Quantitative) Commune and cellule social and physical

profiles-sectors, cellules, area, population of adults, children by sex and age, topography, rivers, lakes,

schools, health facilities, morbidity trends, social groups, WES facilities coverage and functionality, community

mgt capacity (Regies existence) based on a pre-designed format

WES baseline survey and proposal development By NGO, Bourgemestre, Regie, CDC, consultants, community

Social physical and technical profiling usually much less elaborate and not based on a specific format

Analysis of Data Detailed Project proposal

by PMT MINITRAPE Hydraulician and UNICEF

Project agreement development and signing By

Commune, NGO, Minitrape and UNICEF

Disbursement of funds and Materials UNICEF

Receipt and Analysis of proposal by UNICEF

Project agreement development and signing by

Commune, NGO, MINERENA, and UNICEF

Disbursement of funds and materials by UNICEF and MINERENA

71

Assessment An initial precedence set with such communes as Cyungo and Rutongo with respect to the analysis, screening and approval of project proposals seems to have persisted throughout the project. Following the completion of the gathering of the baseline data, representatives (PMT) of the communes would approach and work directly with UNICEF and members of the PCC in developing and finalizing their proposals. As early as this time, it seems that the PST was being bypassed. While there were some notable exceptions, this trend seems to have persisted throughout the project, with the communes, through their representatives often either coming directly to UNICEF to seek assistance in preparing their proposals or preparing and then negotiating them directly with UNICEF. Sometimes the proposals were presented by and negotiated with the bourgmestres or NGOs. This bypassing of the Prefecture team resulted in the PST never really evolving to become an effective and legitimate support institution and “clearing house”. Eventually it collapsed and UNICEF officially assumed the responsibility for screening project proposals (with a little involvement sometimes of the National WES Project coordinator) but evidently without any clear framework of standard screening and approval criteria (guidelines, procedures, schedules and targets). The procedure set out in the guideline document for this purpose has therefore not followed, with a number of consequences: • The non-involvement of the prefecture level team and the lack of a formal clearing house with a

clear institutional presence (procedures and guidelines, proposal receiving, screening and approval criteria, schedules and deadlines, etc) has meant increased technical/advisory distance, increased cost and time wastage as commune representatives shuttle, often unsuccessfully, between their locations and the Kigali UNICEF WES and Coordination Offices, seeking advice or following up their proposals. The low completion rate and a lot of the delays in the implementation process is seen in this light. There is just too much time wasted between the orientation and the preparation of the proposals and the screening and final approval and support. It’s the result of weak coordination, but also and more fundamentally the consequence of lack of effective advisory support and a weakly defined framework for screening and approving project proposals

• As a result of not involving them effectively, the prefecture level personnel do not have enough information about the WES projects and are subsequently unable to play an effective advisory, supervisory and monitoring role.

• The weak advisory and “clearing” framework is also resulting in proposals that are not comprehensive enough to enable a sound definition and elaboration of benchmarks and performance indicators. Most of the proposals for instance lack vital data such as morbidity trends and prevailing levels of hygiene, and are not accompanied by clear work plans spelling out clear achievement targets and timeframes. The lack of benchmarks, indicators and specific timeframes for project activities is constraining effective monitoring efforts and resulting in a situation where a clear determination or assessment of the true effects and impact of the project becomes difficult. There is evidence of efforts and a desire to improve this framework within UNICEF, but the lack of adequate effective internal capacity is clearly undermining these efforts.

• The lack of a comprehensive framework for screening and approving incoming project proposals is also resulting in a situation where by those proposing are inflating their requirements, well aware that the proposals are not appraised critically. This is resulting in wastage of materials which could be used elsewhere, as was observed in some communes, but is also resulting in situations of possible abuse and misdirection of WES materials.

INITIAL PLAN PREVAILING

72

3.2.3.1.3 The Management of the National WES Stock (procurement, custody and

disbursements)

The construction work on the MINERENA-UNICEF National WES Warehouse at Gikondo (Kigali) began soon after the start of the project in 1997 and was completed in 1999. The national store, occupying an area of about 1 acre, is the main depository for all WES construction and related materials and equipment. Initially managed by UNICEF, the warehouse has now been handed over to the government, under the overall management of Minerena. Internally the warehouse is management by a team of UNICEF-trained personnel under the overall supervision of the National WES Project Coordinator. Additional oversight support is provided by UNICEF. The main routine management activities include the maintenance of the stock database, release of authorized and requisitioned materials; ensuring stock safety; and furnishing update reports on stock situation and needs to MINERENA and UNICEF as requested. Assessment:

Overall the management of the Gikondo Warehouse and stock is assessed satisfactory. The installed stock database has provided a useful basis for tracking and reporting on stock movements. A number of observations made during the interviews with the store personnel however point towards a need for improvement to ensure better overall management and increased safety of the WES materials and equipment:

It was observed that Storekeepers do little else beyond releasing and documenting requisitioned materials. This is an understatement of their roles. For example, they do not have copies of the signed contracts, which give details of materials and respective quantities for each approved project. They are therefore not able to relate the requisitions with the approved and actual suppliable materials for each situation to avoid over or under supply. This is a necessary control measure and a basic function of good store management. Currently requisitions are prepared by the WES Project Coordinator and endorsed by three officers who by any measure are too busy to give meticulous attention to such details.

There is no computerized listing of approved materials for each project or commune against which outgoing supplies could be checked-off and the balances determined easily. This would facilitate better and faster control and eliminate possible discrepancies

Currently no annual stock inventory or audit is undertaken of the WES stock, either internally by the store staff and Minerena or by commissioned external auditors. There is therefore no foolproof guarantee of the safety of WES stock! Routine physical stock audits remain the surest way of ensuring probity in the Management of the National WES stock.

There is no system of follow-up to ensure that all the materials disbursed to the communes actually get there. An ill-willed worker has only to load excess materials and off-load them somewhere between the store and the final destination. Such follow-up was provided in the past (1998) by the Warehouse staff. A physical stock count was also carried out once the materials arrived in the communes, and the way bills appropriately signed. These safeguards are necessary given the allegations and past incidences of theft and misdirection of materials from the WES store. With regard to the procurement of WES materials it is observed that there are a lot of materials in the store that are not appropriate for most rural small-scale water delivery systems in the country and which are therefore not being used. A number of implementing agencies expressed the concern of having to either make do

73

with materials which do not quite meet their specific requirements, or having to buy them with their own often restricted resources and seek refund when the materials become available in the WES store. The background to this problem is that most of these materials were brought in during the emergency. The current procurement practice, which entails wholesale importation from Europe, through the Head Office in the Netherlands, has exacerbated this problem. There are clear cost advantages in such bulk purchase from Europe. However no national material needs survey has as yet been carried out as a guide for such bulk procurement. Local procurement is only allowed for goods valued up to US$ 50, 000. Above this national offices procurements must be secured from abroad or be approved from the UNICEF headquarters, a process that takes too long to mature. If the current practice of importing from Europe would continue, than perhaps such a survey may be necessary to direct future requisitions. Most of the country’s materials needs in the meantime continue to be met through local importation within the region, something that UNICEF could encourage, particularly where small amounts are involved. 3.2.3.1.4 Management of the WES MIS and Monitoring and Evaluation function

The M&E and MIS Function Monitoring is a continuous assessment both of the functioning of project activities in the context of implementation schedules and of the use of project inputs by targeted populations in the context of design expectations. Evaluation on the other hand is a periodic assessment to determine the effects and impact of an intervention in the context of planned and implemented activities. Participatory Management-oriented monitoring is an integrated function, an integral part of shared management, through which managers37 and other stakeholders gain first hand insights and updates on three key project questions: • Are the development activities (infrastructure, services, training, etc.) being implemented as

planned, on schedule and within budget? • Are these activities leading to expected results (utilization of infrastructure and services by

beneficiaries, increased capabilities through training, changes in behavior patterns, etc.)? • What is causing delays or unexpected results? Is there anything happening which would lead

the management to revise/modify the original plans?

To continuously provide stakeholders with up-to-date answers to these questions, a Management Information System (MIS) will be maintained throughout the life of the project. The MIS consists of a network of data to which all technical and administrative functionaries contribute. It covers regular updates on progress in physical and financial implementation of the project’s work program, the utilization by expected beneficiaries of the services and infrastructure provided by the project, and reasons why the beneficiaries do or do not use these services, as well as information on the changing socio/agro/economic environment within which the beneficiaries operate. An effective project MIS derives primarily from a clearly reasoned and set out Project Intervention Logic. The project intervention logic is the logical inter-linkage and fit among project goals, objectives, strategies, systems and structures of delivery and management and available human and non-human resources. Sound project intervention logic is a function of effective programming. Such programming demands, as a starting point, that once a project proposal is approved and funded, the executing agency embarks on the task of developing an operational document to guide implementation and management This entails further fine-tuning 37 Term used in a participatory context to mean both the project staff and the community people- their management committees, ToTs and the general user population.

74

and specifying the project logic (i.e. aligning the project’s goals with its objectives, strategies, systems, structures and now known available resources), and setting out specific achievable input, output, effect and impact targets for the project, consistent with the logic. These targets serve as the indicators against which project performance is subsequently measured. The logical framework approach is increasingly a popular and effective tool for achieving this alignment. The framework provides a way of viewing the goals, objectives and tasks of a project, and a logical structure for management to plan and execute them. It does this by helping managers to set a series of interrelated objectives, starting at the lowest level with the provision of necessary inputs at the right time and place, through to the highest level of achieving a certain impact in the project zone. At each level and for each component of the project, the management team, assisted by a monitoring officer, can define a minimum set of objectives and select an appropriate indicator (or indicators) for each objective, used to measure whether it is being reached or not. In the process of conducting this exercise, the management has of its own accord, virtually defined the contents of the project’s MIS and the needed monitoring and evaluation activities. In terms of process, the evolution of a use-orientated MIS is therefore seen as going through the following six stages:

i. Evolution of a clear intervention logic as a starting point ii. Generation of clear, specific and objectively verifiable project performance indicators

iii. Design and development of appropriate data generating and storage instruments iv. Generation, collation and systematic inventory of M&E data and information v. Processing and analysis of the data to generate management information

vi. Packaging and presentation of the information for use by managers and other stakeholders

From the framework of shared or participatory management an effective Management Information System and monitoring is perceived at two levels:

At the community level, the evolution of a community-based system of collecting, synthesizing, using and forwarding community-level input, output, effect and impact data and information

At the project coordination level, in addition to building and institutionalizing an effective M&E and MIS capacity, commissioning and/or carrying out actual M&E activities and maintaining and managing (or facilitating the maintenance and management of) a comprehensive system of data/information gathering, collation, storage and analysis, and presenting resulting information to managers and key stakeholders in joint forums.

The successful realization of such a framework weighs heavily on the availability of effective

M&E and MIS capacity within implementing institutions. Where such capacity is deemed inadequate, training and consistent follow-up to develop and deepen it becomes a core component of an effective M&E and MIS function. The framework for an effective MIS and M&E function thus entails:

The establishment of the MIS and the M&E system itself The management (including institutionalization) and use of the system to influence

development

75

Clearly the point of take off is sound project proposals and a framework of standards and criteria for their development, presentation and appraisal Assessment of the WES MIS and M&E Function Both the WES Programme logic as set out in the MPO and the WES project implementation guideline provided a good technical, organizational and institutional framework for establishing and maintaining a sound and effective MIS and M&E system. The framework entailed the following elements and steps:

A clear overall Project/Programme concept with clear goals, objectives, strategies, indicators and activities

A good system of proposal development (data generation, analysis, write-up and presentation) A system of monitoring, follow-up and evaluation involving the PMT (baseline assessment,

technical inspection, monitoring and reporting) the PST (monthly stores inspection, evaluation and advise on water quality tests by fontainiers and NGO, monthly meetings and evaluation of project reports, periodic inspection of commune activities and reporting) and the PCC (periodic analysis of monitoring data:-monthly to evaluate commune level progress and management capacity, quarterly evaluation of coordination structures and progress and implementation capacity at commune level; bi-annual evaluation of project co-ordination, planning, and implementation at national level and a detailed mid-term evaluation and a final end of Programme evaluation) An attempt was made to set up a system for WES Project Monitoring and Evaluation, in line with the specifications set out in the guideline document. At the start of the Programme, data instruments were developed and a database was installed within the UNICEF WES section. A piloting exercise was carried out in a few selected communes (Cyungo and Rutongo were among these) and resulting data and information used as base references for preparing project proposals and agreement documents for some of the communes. Following this the formats for baseline assessment and M&E were sent out to communes. The formats did not come back, nor the reasons why they were not filled in. Section II of the Annex presents samples of these formats. Internally within the WES section the maintenance of database continued for short while then stopped altogether. The person employed to execute this function had to leave to take up another appointment and no replacement for him was found. At the governmental level the proposed support to MINITRAPE to set up a MIS did not materialize due to a lack of effective demand from the ministry. It emerges again that a clear M&E and MIS management role for the prefecture and the commune was not elaborated and pursued. The expectation that the PCC would play an active role as an M&E actor represents a serious flaw in the design of the WES Project. Even with the creation of the Project Coordination Office, a clear role for this office in respect of M&E was not distinguished. With a dysfunctional PCC and Project Coordination Office it was not possible to crystallize and bring clear WES messages down to respective departments and levels at the regional and commune level. Most departments at the prefecture level did not therefore know exactly what to do or how to relate with the WES project in this respect. Further most of the proposals coming forward and being approved and funded did not and still do not have sufficient technical details to serve both as benchmarks and as bases against which adequate indicators could be elaborated, and subsequent effective M&E function executed. As has been stated in the introductory section of this analysis, the establishment and management of an

76

effective M&E and MIS system requires sound M&E Knowledge and capacity. Where this capacity is inadequate, providing it becomes a core element of an effective M&E and MIS function. The lack of adequate M&E and MIS capacity is crosscutting feature of most WES implementing institutions. There was and has been no effective and well-focused M&E and MIS capacity building training given to these institutions. This has been a major blow to any efforts to put in place a comprehensive M&E and MIS within the project. Other shortcomings in this respect have resulted from sheer managerial negligence. For example a mid-term review of the project, while in plan was not implemented. Clearly this would have provided a very important and needed basis for re-orienting the project during the remaining half of the project’s term. Overall the WES Programme has lacked the technical, organizational and institutional bases or prerequisites for establishing and managing an effective M&E and MIS. The concept of M&E and MIS remains little understood both among implementing institutions and internally within UNICEF. Despite these capacity problems, some notable achievements in this respect must be mentioned. Key among these is perhaps the country level “open-air” review seminars held in recent months where stakeholders from all 66 WES communes met and aired their views regarding the implementation, management and impact of the WES Programme. These seminars have provided excellent opportunities to put the project in perspective and to bring to light some of the issues that this evaluation has raised. At the individual level a number of implementing agencies notably CARE and ADDRA have commissioned their own evaluations which have proffered useful information in terms of project impact and changes necessary to improve the same. At the commune level again the work of organizations like CARE and ADRA, in terms of improving the managerial capacities of the Regies, is yielding good bases for Project monitoring, particularly in respect of the management of the accounting function. Within UNICEF recent efforts at monitoring are noted. These efforts however remain constrained by inadequate technical capacity and the organizational and institutional constraints raised here. The proposed idea to pilot a project monitoring and MIS function in a few communes for example needs to be looked within the perspective of some of the issues raised here. 3.2.3.2. Regional and Commune-level Management of WES Project Facilities and

Services

3.2.3.2.1 Prefecture level Planning coordination and Management

The WES Programme design envisaged a Programme Support Team at the Prefecture level composed and assigned responsibilities as follows:

WES PST Composition Responsibilities • Assistant Prefect (Minaloc)-Coordinator • Prefecture Hydraulician (Minerena) • Inspector of Hygiene (Minisante) • Responsible for CPDFP (Minaloc) • Inspector of Environment (Minitere) • Women’s Representative (MiniProfe)

• Baseline Data Analysis and design • Monthly stores inspection • Evaluate and advise on water quality pre-tests

conducted by NGO NGO/Fontainier • Monthly meetings and evaluation of project reports • Technical advice to Project team • Training of Project Team and Fontainers • Periodic Inspections of Commune activities • Reporting

Assessment Initial establishment activities of the PCC entailed field orientation and nomination of the PST at the Prefecture level. The orientation was carried out in seven out of the eleven prefectures involved in the

77

project and the respective PST Committees were installed. Later these activities were extended to include all 11 Prefectures. The nomination of the PST was very important for initial advocacy of the project at prefecture level. During the orientation and nominations a recommendation was made to include the Inspector of Environment and the Prefecture (Minaloc) Representative for Social Affairs. An organized and consistent involvement of the PST is seen mainly during this early stage of the evolution of the WES Programme. This involvement saw the PST work closely with the PCC in carrying out a successful orientation of the WES Programme at the commune level. While an active advisory, technical support and supervisory role is evident in the very initial stages of WES Programme implementation, and while members of the PST have been involved variously in the execution of the WES Project, a clear well-coordinated and consolidated framework of institutions working in synergy and objectively, with a clear focus, bridging national level (ministerial and Non-government support agencies) goals, objectives and decisions with regional level realities did not evolve at the regional level. Both the PST and the PMT, designed as the key movers in this respect did not evolve to become formal institutions with clear organizational mandates and identities (clear collective goals, missions, strategies, systems and procedures of work, skills and abilities) and the financial, material and technical resources required to effectively act out their assigned technical, advisory, supervisory (for the PST) and implementation management (for the PMT) roles. Later, involvement and participation was at individual level (not a consolidated affront) and therefore not very effective. The lack of a clear organizational and institutional presence of the PST is seen largely as a consequence of weak coordination, weak overall stewardship and inadequate technical and both financial and material resourcing. The overall disfunctionality of the PCC and the Project Coordination office at the national level seems to have affected a proper and well coordinated functioning of the PST at the Regional level. It would also seem that the vital role that the PST potentially stood to play in terms of ensuring the overall effectiveness of the implementation and management of the WES Programme as a community-based project was not sufficiently appreciated at the national level. A greater emphasis was placed on making the PCC effective and functional, and while this was clearly important and indeed necessary in the initial stages to get the project on a good footing conceptually and procedurally, the PST, the PMT and the CWESCs were fundamentally the engines for implementing and embedding a community based Programme. Adequate formation of these institutions through training and resourcing was thus equally, if not more important. However, besides the definition of their roles and responsibilities, and the hurried nominations and formative orientation given to them, there is little evidence on record which shows that sufficient investment (particularly in terms of establishing an effective technical and organizational base for them, and financing them) was put into preparing them for what was clearly a very demanding, mostly technical role. Further while the idea of an incentives structure for them was discussed, it was not consumated. Not consummated also was the idea of “counterpart” or “extra funds” the availability of which would have greatly “energized” their work and subsequently WES operations at the regional level. The problem of weak overall stewardship and coordination is seen particularly in respect of a lack of follow-up support form both the PCC and the Project Coordination Office to ensure that the vertical and horizontal functional relationships (including inter and intra-ministry relationships) clearly defined in the guideline documents and later elaborated by the PCC were observed. The overall effect in terms of functionality and impact was underutilized institutions, which became moribund with time, acting only when “nudged” or prodded by either the NGOs or parent Ministries. Because of their moribund state they were often by-passed by both UNICEF and WES implementing agencies who would often deal directly with the commune administration and with such functional community-level structures as the Regies, rather than the prefecture structure. There is evidence of efforts during the last one-third of the WES Project to re-invigorate and re-activate the role of the Prefecture. A number of capacity building initiatives are on-going and there is an attempt to use relevant Prefecture level departments in WES project implementation and management. A weak funding base and the lack of a well-coordinated institutional and organizational framework however continue and, unless reversed, will continue to undermine these efforts. Clearly a reduced distance between the Prefecture and the communes is key in realizing effective WES Programme implementation and management. In view of the dearth

78

of skills and abilities at the commune level, the evolution of the Prefecture team into some kind of a “technical think tank”, building, monitoring and consolidating technical, organizational and institutional capacities at the commune level, emerges as a needed, in fact a pre-requisite role for the prefecture in the immediate term and perhaps in future. This will call for sufficient investment at this level in terms of technical capacity building and financing.

3.2.3.2.2 Commune level planning coordination and management

The WES Programme design envisioned a commune and community level implementation and management system comprised initially of a Project Management Team, which would ultimately be phase out and be replaced by a system of elected Community Water and Environment Sanitation Committees (CWESCs) or Regies. The PMT was to be composed as presented in Figure 1 (in Section One) and in Table 24 below. The CWESCs on the other hand would comprise an elected 8-member team consisting of a President and a Treasurer, and six community members responsible for the Water, Sanitation and hygiene education components (two for each component) at each water point. The CWESC) would be elected by the community of Users around each water point and would constitute the base unit responsible for community level coordination, implementation and management of WES interventions and activities. It would be part of the pre-existing government structure of the Regie Associative, constituted as presented in figure 2 (section one). In areas with a pre-existing Regie system (and structure) the use of this system would be promoted, rather than form new ones. Where there are none, new ones would be formed. Table 29 below presents the composition and functions of both the PMT and the CWESCs as outlined in the WES Project implementation guideline.

Table 29: Composition and Functions of the PMT and the CWESCs

Institution Functions The Project Management Team (PMT) comprising Assistant Bourgmestre (Technique) as team leader, Fontainier communal, Responsible de Centres de Sante, Inspector of Schools, CCDFP Representative, Commune level women’s Representative, Women’s group representative, NGO Representative, Representative of the Regie Associative, Representative of the Health Animators

• Planning and Management of the project implementation at commune level

• Organizing and mobilizing the beneficiaries • Defining specific project goals • Coordinating monthly meetings • Elaboration of project reports • Coordination and 1st level analysis WES baseline surveys

The Community Water and Environment Sanitation Committee (The Regie Associative Management System), comprising a President and a Treasurer and 6 community members in charge of water, sanitation and hygiene education at the base (water point) level and elected bureaus at sector and commune level (fig. 2)

• Participation in all project activities • Facilitating Provision of local materials and labor • Collection and management of water fees • Carrying out operation and maintenance of WES infrastructure

and facilities • Planning and coordinating Hygiene promotion activities • Organizing and facilitating monthly meetings • Monitoring and reporting

Assessment The basic WES Planning, Coordination and Management Framework at commune and community level thus comprised (in design) a PMT working (through the Regie Structure) with the base level CWESC. Overall, this evaluation assesses this function inadequately or only partially achieved in the 10 WES Communes. Two aspects of achievement are distinguished in this respect:

79

The establishment of these structures, and The development (organizational and institutional) and use of these structures as

planning, coordination, implementation and Management entities With regard to the first aspect, official WES documents (1997-early98) show that orientation meetings and elections to form the PMTs were conducted initially in 12 communes and later in the other WES Communes. Table 30 below presents the 10 evaluation communes and the dates of establishment of their respective communes. Table 30: PMT formation by commune and date of in the 10 WES Evaluation Communes

Commune PMT selection date & (number of members) Rutongo 17/12/97 (10)

Kibali 18/6/97(?) Kinyami ? (?)

Muvumba 16/7/97(?) Kanzenze 9/7/97(?) Kayonza 6/12/96(?)

Kigarama 14/4/97(?) Rusumo ? (?)

Shyorongi OK? (?) Kiyombe 19/6/97 (?)

In terms of their use and development, there is evidence of an attempt to use the PMT structure for planning and coordination in the early years of the project. A number of early WES projects were formulated and implemented through the PMT structure. It is noted however that the usefulness of the PMT as defined in the guideline document was short lived and the structure did not evolve to become a key focal point or institution for community level project planning coordination implementation and management as had been intended. The “project imperative” (the need is greater than the preparation required to meet it effectively and successfully!) prevented adequate time and resource investment to “form” and consolidate the PMT into an effective commune level institution. Over time, like the PST, and for the same reasons, the PMT became moribund. Its collapse left an “institutional void” seen as the main reason why most communes were not able to put together and present sound proposals for funding to the WES Programme and why a comprehensive community-based WES implementation and management framework did not evolve at the community level. In reality, as a result of this void, it is difficult to talk about community generated WES Projects. Most of the projects were generated without effective collective consultation and participation. This has affected overall community knowledge and sense of ownership of WES projects. For the most part it seemed the projects were an affair between the Bourgmestre, the “Kanyamijezi” and the President of the Regie (with the community providing the needed labor and materials) on the one hand, and Implementing NGOs, UNICEF and MINERENA on the other. Through its composition the PMT presented a well grounded middle institution with the collective capacity to influence, guide and manage action and relationships and a focused common WES agenda both internally within the commune and among respective represented memberships, and externally, with other actors and WES project stakeholders. To date this institutional void remains unfilled. It cannot be filled effectively by the newly constituted Commune Development Committee (CDC), which once established and functional will have too much in its hands, being the body vested with the overall responsibility for planning and coordinating all Commune-level development activities, nor by the Regie Committees as currently constituted and operated (focusing almost exclusively on water activities).

80

With regard to the CWESCs or Regies the assessment reveals that these structures have been formed. Table 31 below presents the establishment status of the CWESCs in the 10 evaluation communes.

Table 31: Establishment Status of the Regie Associative System by Commune and Prefecture (as of Dec. 1999)

mentation Status Status of the Regie Associative

tees med/exists d unt opened

) ) )

for Kayonza Sector) r has an account)

The table shows that with the exception of Kayonza, all the communes with completed WES projects have CWESCs at all levels. While some of the committees were pr-existing, many of them have been formed during and through the logistical and financial support from the WES Programme. While the basic CWESC structure adopted and used is that presented in figure 2, the constitution at the base (water point) level is different from that envisioned in the WES Project design. Rather than the 8-member structure specified in the guideline document, the base level (water point) structure adopted in most communes comprises a three-member committee of a Responsible (Chairperson), a Fees Collector and a Caretaker. This deviation is important and is discussed in the analysis of the use of these committees.

In terms of their development and use, the CWESCs represent perhaps the most important institutional development in the overall execution of the WES Programme. According to the WES Programme design, the CWESCs were supposed to be established (where non-existent) alongside the PMTs as the base structures for WES Programme implementation and Management and to replace the latter eventually once they were fully established and functional. Compositionally and in terms of functions, the structure envisioned in the design was supposed to be one similar to the PMT at the base level. This did not happen. Further its evolution upwards seems not to have been carefully thought through and the CWESCs or Regies seem not to have evolved to become effective replacements for the PMT. The prevailing CWESC structure comprises a Responsible a Fees Collector and a Caretaker at the water point. At the sector level, all water point Responsables (Chairmen) come together to form the Sector Regie or Committee, who elect a Chair Person, a Vice Chair Person and a Treasurer. These form and manage the Sector Bureau. The Members of the Sector Bureau aggregate at the commune level to form the Commune Regie committee who similarly elect a three-person team to form and manage the Commune Regie Bureau, based in the Commune headquarters. The entirety comprising the user community, the elected Regie Committees and Regie Bureaus constitute what is known as the Regie Associative. In terms of their use these institutions collectively have played a key role both

81

in the establishment of the WES infrastructure and in the management of the cost recovery system and process at the commune level. Over the brief period of the Bridging Programme and the decentralization experience, one can, technically and in real terms, talk of local self-management and people paying for water and receiving related services at the community level. However while this has happened the Communal Regie System has not evolved sufficiently to become the effective Commune WES development and Management Institution that was envisioned, even in respect of the management of the delivery of water, where some success is evident. There are many reasons leading to this conclusion:

The Regie Management system as a general WES Manager rather than a water infrastructure development and water delivery manager-while intended to serve both functions, the management focus of the Regie management system has been on the development of the water infrastructure and the delivery of water and water related services, rather than on the management of the entire Water and Environment Sanitation framework. Besides the caretaker at the water point, the structure of the Regie management system constituted as presented above effectively does not have hygiene and sanitation representatives in it. In design, both the CWESC at the water point and the PMT were supposed to have these representatives. The PMT was intended to incorporate personnel from both the health and the hygiene departments of government, and, recognizing the important role and potential of women in Hygiene and sanitation management, a significant representation of women. As currently constituted, without these representations, the CWESCs or Regies are not well placed to deal effectively with Hygiene and sanitation issues and cannot be seen as replacements for the PMT. Effectively therefore there is no structure or institution on the ground or at the commune level dealing clearly and specifically with Hygiene and sanitation issues. The prevailing structure of the government’s department of hygiene and public health at the commune and sector levels, comprising unpaid, ill-trained and ill-equipped personnel/volunteers, poorly linked to the existing health Centres does not constitute an effective enough an institution to manage the Hygiene and Environmental sanitation function. This explains the failure of the hygiene and sanitation component commune-wide. While relatively successful in the management of the water delivery function, including the management of the cost-recovery component, the Regie management system has performed dismally in the management of the hygiene and sanitation component, to appoint where it would make good management sense to let it remain in its present role as a purveyor of water, while a new institution working very closely with it is evolved to deal with hygiene and sanitation issues. Recent capacity building initiatives and the on-going discussions to invigorate MINISANTE ‘s department of Hygiene and Public health at the commune would lead one to think that such a new arrangement would be possible. The WES Programme has provided extensive support to the department in recent months to train hygiene Promotion teams at the commune and sector level. Currently discussions are on-going within the Ministry to recruit a permanent and paid staff to lead the hygiene and public health team at the commune level. These are important developments which could be built upon in an effort to set up an independent fully operational Hygiene and environment sanitation department at the commune level, with a clear mandate and Programme of operation in this respect, and working very closely with the Prefecture system, the Regie system at all levels, and with the various organizational arrangements and institutions (women groups, schools, youth associations, health centres, etc) at community level. Reconstituted CWESCs would still be formed at Commune, Sector and Cellule level with all these representations, including members of the Regie, but Regie committees would retain a distinct function of managing the delivery of portable water to the communes. This is the option of choice. The other less favorable one would be to broaden the current Regie structure to include these representatives. This would mean having Regies with a

82

specific dual function, an arrangement which seems not to have worked very well during the bridging Programme.

Overall inadequately developed organizational and institutional Management capacities- while the establishment of the Regies and Training emerge as key areas of achievement of the WES Programme this evaluation has observed that training interventions directed specifically at forming and consolidating the organizational and institutional management capacities of the Regie system as an entire entity have not been adequately organized and executed. The clear framework developed and proposed by government for both purposes seem not to have been followed very strictly by many implementing agencies (an exhaustive discussion of this aspect was presented in part 3.2.1.2). With a few notable and due to it, more successful exceptions, the common practice among many of them, once the projects were approved entailed beginning with the technical implementation of the projects using a skeletal structure usually comprising senior Commune officials (Bourgmestre and Assistant Bourgemestre Technique), the President of the Regie and the Communal and sector Fontainiers. These normally would have received prior training under the general GOK-UNICEF coordinated training of the Fontainiers. For the mobilization and coordination of community participation, use was made of the local councilors. The software component of establishing the Regies and the Regie Bureaus and providing management training would then follow. The exceptions to this general practice were very few, seen in communes like Rusumo and Kigarama where a good amount of time seems to have been invested in establishing the Regies, preparing them and using them alongside government personnel in project implementation and management. This idea of putting together a skeletal structure and then using it to establish the infrastructure first, and then putting the Regie in place afterwards, resulted in a lack of active and effective involvement of the members of the Regies in the initial critical stages of project planning and implementation. It was clearly the practice in Kanzenze, Muvumba and to certain degree in Kayonza. At the start of this evaluation, while projects were on-going, there were no Regie structures in Shyorongi and Rutongo and the management function was being coordinated by members of the CDC and government officers at the commune and sector level. Unlike other forms of training such as the health and hygiene training or the training of the fontainiers, and with the exception of the work of CARE in Rusumo and Kigarama, there has been no clear specific and focused organizational development training (focused on building and consolidating organizational vision, mission, objectives, strategies, systems, structures, skills and abilities, resources, linkages, relationships, networks, organizational cultures, attitudes and leadership behaviour, processes and procedures, etc) given to the Regie Management system by the implementing agencies. Some on-the-job hands on and demonstration training may have been given but this does not constitute OD training! Even within CARE the management training was focused mainly on building the capacity of the Regie Bureau and the three individuals making up the sector bureaus. While clearly and conveniently necessary initial strategies, more remains and needs to be done in terms of depth considering the broad area of OD, and coverage. The reason given by many agencies for not providing effective training was the lack of adequate time on the ground and resources and resources. What is not mentioned, is the inherent inadequate capacities among implementing agencies in this area. Most agencies met and interviewed were found not to have adequate necessary OD capacities. The development of these capacities at both Regie level and implementing agency level is clearly important. More important however is how these capacities can be deepened, consolidated and sustained. In this regard the role of the Prefecture again comes up. As a long-term strategy, there is no substitute for effective TOT and Organizational and institutional capacities and competencies at the Prefecture level. The need to develop and use these capacities cannot be over emphasized.

83

Some of the consequences of this overall weak framework at the commune level are discussed:

The general tendency by implementing agencies to work through individuals rather than

through formalized institutions in delivering project services. This is clearly a consequence of the apparent institutional weakness. This weakness is also resulting in what could be termed as “the administrative shadow”, a situation where the responsibility for planning, decision-making and management remains for the most part, concentrated in the hands of a few top commune executives. While this oversight is necessary as a general hierarchical principal, it threatens institutional integrity and clearly works against the community self-management and empowerment imperative. In the context of Rwanda it is complicated by the traditional authoritarian culture, which expects and demands obedience and acquiescence from below.

Weak horizontal and vertical institutional linkages- the key horizontal linkages include those between the Regies and such institutions as the Community Development Committees (CDC); the health, hygiene and sanitation institutions; the schools; and such social groupings as the Women’s Associations. As a new institution whose role, functions and relationship with the other commune and community level institutions are only now being established elaborated and distinguished, the relationship between the CDC and the Regie was sometimes tenuous. In some situations there seemed to be a conflict of managerial interest around some of the functions currently being managed by the Regies. This was clearly the case in respect of the locus of the responsibility for the management of the Regie Finances. The other relationships are also not well established and pursued, beyond the delivery of water to some of them. The relationship with the local health centres, particularly in relation to collaboration to promote and improve hygiene and environmental sanitation practices is an important one which remains weakly developed. The vertical linkages are such as those with the Prefecture water and hygiene and public health departments, and those with the lower level structures such as the local women’s groups and associations. These also remain inadequately developed and consolidated.

The general inadequate capacity to develop and forward comprehensive proposals for funding and to play an effective role in project management and monitoring: In the absence of the PMT the Regie Committees naturally assumed the managerial role and functions that the PMT was meant to be play. These included the development of project proposals and monitoring and reporting on the implementation process. While they have been involved in the implementation process they are not participating in the development of the project proposals, done mostly by implementing agencies often without comprehensive participation of local communities and relevant government structures. Further an effective implementation process management, monitoring and reporting role by the Regies is not evident. To this can be added the problem of maintaining appropriate data and information on the projects. While appreciably well documented and maintained by some communes, particularly the financial and user population data (Rusumo, Muvumba, and Kigarama) other communes seemed either not to have the data and information or maintain it properly.

A weak Regie Associative System: The Regie Associative system can be seen as both an organizing principle and an empowering concept for communities. Like a cooperative or a company with shareholders, legitimate, registered appropriately constitutionalized Regie Associative systems can serve as instruments for effective local self-organizing and affirmation of institutional identity and presence, with numerous benefits to the community. For example against their institutional integrity the Regie Associative system could obtain credit facilities to improve their systems of water delivery. In Kayonza for example a bank loan to install a Transformer at the Kazabazana water system could greatly improve access to potable water and reduce the current high maintenance costs. In Kanzenze a new and appropriate pump for the

84

Rwakibirizi water supply system would result in greatly improved water services for the commune. Resulting reduced O&M costs in both systems could translate into reduced water tariffs, with clear gains to consumers. Resulting improved revenues could be used to establish or improve other systems or even initiate credit schemes for the local water artisans. This is clearly one way of developing entrepreneurship and a possible window towards a possible eventual privatization of existing public water supply systems with retained benefits to the community. A strong association of users could also be used to improved local services (repairs, maintenance, new sources, greater control over the use of systems financial resources, etc) through increased user pressure and public scrutiny. The prevailing problem of some influential water users in the community refusing to pay for the water they have consumed could also be solved through strong and effective people control. At regional and national level such an association could be used to mediate and lobby water relationships and services. These potentials remain largely unrecognized and untapped. In fact there is really no Water Users Association as such! A large power and relational distance remains between the communal Regie Bureaus and the sector bureaus and the communities. Many of the issues raised above reflect existing realities in the communes and are seen as consequences of overall inadequate or weak institutional capacities, integrity and authority.

3.2.3.2.3 The management of Operation and Maintenance and the cost-recovery process

The establishment and development of the cost recovery system stands out as a remarkable achievement of the community-based water management project and the WES Programme in Rwanda. Under the overall management of the Regie Associative and the direct administration of the Commune level Regie Bureau, the cost recovery process is now implemented and functional in no less than 50 % of all the communes in Rwanda. In the 10 communes evaluated it was found to exist in some form or another in all but 1 commune (Shyorongi). The system is based on the collection of revenue or water tariff from individual (households), commercial and institutional consumers, and use of this revenue on matters related to water infrastructure development in the commune (operation, maintenance, recurrent costs, development of new infrastructure). Three levels or criteria for water tariffication have been prescribed by MINERENA, namely:

Tariffication Level 1: Tariffication based on the system’s determined cost of Operation and Maintenance (O&M). This would include the system’s daily O&M costs of energy, chemicals, personnel (salaries for Regie Bureau personnel, pump attendant, water vendors, Fontainiers), service and repairs (spare parts and actual repair/service), and general administrative costs (stationery, office equipment maintenance, etc)

Tariffication level II: in addition to all items in level I, includes cost of systems rehabilitation (new pumps, equipment and treatments)

Tariffication Level III: in addition to all items in Level I and level II, includes the infrastructure establishment/installation costs. This includes the costs of the feasibility studies and actual sinking and development costs. Varying pricing regimes therefore exist based on type of technology (spring catchments, manual hand pumps, gravity and both fuel and electric energy powered systems, etc) nature and purpose of use and level of complexity of delivery mode adopted (whether for household, institutional or commercial use whether water is delivered through public tap stands (metered or otherwise), or through private connections [again metered or otherwise]). The mode of payment is predominantly cash, collectable daily at point of water collection, monthly, or annually (at once or staggered). The latter mode is applied mostly in rural areas where households may not be able to pay the full tariff at once. The following case presentations serve to show the point that over

85

the short period of its implementation, the idea of cost-recovery has gained recognition and acceptance in Rural Rwanda, and that one can now technically, and in real terms, talk of local self-management in respect of rural water infrastructure development and delivery, and people paying for water:

The Case of Commune Muvumba- In commune Muvumba, payment for water started in April 2000, following the establishment of the Regie Management System and the opening of the Regie account over the period October 1999-February 2000. By Septmber 2000, a total of FRW 5.599,310 had been collected in water revenue. This amount included 1million account opening and initial O&M donation given by the NGO American Refugee Committee (ARC). Some 4606 households out of 11,821Households estimated to be consuming potable water from the WES assisted supply system in Muvumba commune. The paid-up population represents 39% of the estimated total consuming population. There are 17000 potential consumer households in the whole area served by the project. This means a potential minimum annual income of not less than FRW 17 million at 100% payment rate. Households pay FRW 1000 annually for normal domestic consumption while those using the water for commercial purposes such as irrigation are required to pay FRW 10000. The income derived from the water system is the main source of revenue currently used to meet all recurrent costs of operation and maintenance activities, including the incentives/salaries for the three serving members of the Regie Bureau, at FRW 6000 each and the Communal Fontainier, at FRW 15000 per month. The task of Revenue collection is assigned to the water point fees collector, who receives a small percentage of the money collected as his incentive.

The Cases of Communes Kigarama and Rusumo-In both communes The Regie Management System was established over the period 1997-1999. Actual establishment of the Regie Structures at sector level was carried out in May 1999, following which the Sector Regie Committee and the Bureau members were elected. Elections of the Commune Regie Bureau Members were held in June 1999 for both Communes. Following these elections 3 Regie Auditors were appointed for each commune in January 2000. The auditors comprise one member nominated by the commune administration, and two members who are nominated by the Regie Committee. The training of the different Regie structures (Commune Regie Committees and Bureaus) took place over September and November 1999. The training covered a broad range of subject areas, technical and managerial38. The areas of specific relevance to the management of the cost-recovery system and process were those covering financial and administrative management aspects such as mail filing, reception and expedition, letter writing, financial management tools (including monitoring tools), budget elaboration and store management. Training was also conducted for the Auditors covering areas such as National WES policy, legal and cultural contexts governing the Regie Associative, pricing, elementary accountancy principles, financial management of Regies and the work of an auditor. For both communes this training took place over February 2000. Further support was given to define and elaborate a constitutional basis for Regie operations and to determine and an appropriate tariff structure and system. The training in this respect also included organized learning visits to communes with

38 MINERENA working jointly with Agencies such as CARE has developed an elaborate curriculum for technical, managerial and financial training of the Regie committees. The Curriculum, consistent with other Programs of training given to facilitate effective implementation and management of WES interventions and activities, covers specific elements of financial and administrative Management as well as other technical aspects related to WES infrastructure development and management. These include Water-health relations; communication skills; water supply system/technologies; technical management of water supply systems; and the establishment and management of the Regie Associative System

86

exemplary cost recovery systems in place. Table 32 below presents the tariffication regime adopted for both communes:

Table 32: Water Tariffication Regimes for Rusumo and Kigarama Cost-recovery Systems

Tariffication regime for Per household paying Public institutions Other categorizations

Water Capture System At one

time 2-3 times Religious

institutions Primary schools

Health Centres and Commune prisons

Trading centres

Secondary schools

Private connections Bovines

Protected Springs 300FRW - 2000FRW 1000FRW/school

5000 FRW - 50FRW/student

- -

Gravity Adductions Public water taps

-

600 FRW

-

-

-

5FRW/20l jerry-can

-

-

-

Public branching

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

100FRW per M3 for first 10M3 and 200 FRW per M3 for the supplementary quantity

-

Cow Pond - - - - -

-

-

-

600 FRW per bovine per year

Rain water Harvesting systems

200FRW

-

-

-

- -

-

-

-

With this preparation, the Regies were ready to carry out their management responsibilities, the bank accounts having been opened in November 1999. The actual collection and deposition of revenues began in January 2000. A review by CARE conducted in March 2000 revealed that the system was working appreciably well for both communes, in terms of process. After one month of fees collection, both communes had already reached amounts equal to 11% and 3% of their annual budgets (Rusumo and Kigarama respectively). These rose to 20% and 9% respectively by end of March. An audit conducted for Kigarama in October 2000 had the Regie Account at FRW 1,994,250 representing 36% of the total Regie budget. Over the same period (September) the Rusumo Regie Account had FRW 3,116,462 representing 41% of the Regie’s annual budget. These percentages are fairly indicative of the population that is paying for water to date and compare well with those for Muvumba. Thus over a period of 7 months some 41% and 36% of the consumer population was paying for water. The continued good functioning of these systems depend on a good incentives structure for those working within them. In both communes this has been ensured in a number of ways. In order to stimulate water point committees to collect water fees enthusiastically, the Regies decided to yield 10% of the amount collected to the water point to members of the committee who share it among themselves after defraying the amount spent by the collector during his travel to deposit the fees collected at Regie Bureau. Further, in order to ensure consistent supply of good quality water, each elected and trained water technician is paid a sum of 300FRW per month for each 1Km of working adduction system under his maintenance. For the kiosks in the trading centres, the income from each 20litres of water is divided 3:7 between the Vendor and the Regie.

The Case of Commune Kayonza- Commune Kayonza is one of the historically more important Communes (along with the other communes in Kibungo and Umutara Prefectures) in terms of the influx and resettlement of Rwandan Returnees following the war and the genocide. It is

87

therefore one of the communes with the longest history of involvement with UNICEF in terms of water and general WES infrastructure development, and one where the WES Programme seemed to have been implemented based on the initial institutional arrangements proposed in the WES Programme design. An active Prefecture, Commune and NGO (AAR) administration during the period 1995-1998 saw both the PST and the PMT effectively evolve and perform its designated functions with appreciable diligence and distinction. Work in Kayonza started in 1995 with the request from Government to AAR (Association to Aid Refugees) to supply water in the commune. There seems to have been a concentration in Kayonza Sector, the location of the Town and the Commune Headquarters, perhaps on account of the greater resettlement there and hence the greater demand for WES services. Geophysical surveys to drill 7 boreholes and rehabilitate one began in November 1995. Actual drilling began in April 1996. 8 sites were drilled and rehabilitated, of which 5, including the rehabilitated one yielded sufficient amounts of water. Pumping and water quality tests were then carried out on all five drilled sites. AAR then embarked on O&M training to impart skills on repair, maintenance and construction of this particular technology. A comprehensive 6-month training Programme was conducted for selected 8 members (1 from each sector) and 1 communal Fontainier. The training was a practical training, which entailed the installation of the Five Afridev Pumps in the drilled boreholes. A review of existing documents reveal that the training was focused more on Technical/mechanical aspects of O&M rather than on administrative and financial management aspects, although some little training was given on Methods for Organizing Water committees. In July 1997, a new supply proposal was made following a large influx of Returnees to Kayonza, which sought to pump water from one of the highest yielding boreholes to two reservoir tanks located at the highest altitude of the Kayonza area. From there the water would flow by gravity to 8 kiosks installed at various points within the sector. This new supply system was expected to increase the sector’s grid by some 9 Km and benefit an estimated 2900 new households. This proposal was approved and the construction work on the new system began in 1998. The work was completed and project inaugurated in May 1999. The establishment of the Regie Committees began in February 1998, with community sensitization and was completed around August of the same year. From the records it seems that there was a problem with the formation of water committees for the hand pumps. The records indicate that generalized community (including Councilors and Responsables) indifference resulted in only one water point committee being formed for the hand pumps. The mentioned establishment of the Regie Committees was more in relation to the new 8 Kiosks established from the now energy powered water system which necessarily needed to charge users in order to cover its costs of O&M. This new initiative however was seized to establish water committees in the Hand pump systems as well. Following this, a Sector Regie Committee was formed and a bureau comprising a President, a Vice President and a Treasurer elected. The election of the bureau was also based on an examination as well to determine the best candidates. At the communes level a Regie Committee and Bureau were never formed because the other sectors do not have potable water and therefore did not see the need to form Regies. In March 1999 the whole system was inaugurated and the water system began to operate. A Regie account was opened and by September (14th 2000) the account had an income of FRW 9,390,911, the highest collection among all the evaluation communes assessed. This was against an expenditure of about FRW 8,904,904. The tariffication regime adopted for Kayonza is 10 FRW per 20l jerry-can for the Kiosk water, of which FRW 7 goes to Regie and FRW 3 is retained by the Vendors. For the Hand pumps, an annual fee of 1000 FRW is charged per household. The revenue from the system provides the sole fund for all operation and maintenance activities. These include the cost of diesel used to power the system’s pump, the cost of routine service by Electrogaz, and the salaries of the Pump attendant and the Treasurer. Both the President and Vice President are not paid but receive compensation as Vendors in two of the System’s Kiosks. These examples clearly show that a cost-recovery system does indeed exist and functions appreciably well. A number of problems related to inadequate management capacity however threaten continued consistent supply from these systems, as well as their sustained growth and development. A nationwide survey conducted by the DWES’s Division of Rural Hydraulic revealed that only 20 out of

88

more than 100 Cost-recovery systems currently in place would qualify as properly functional. The department has developed a system of assessing and determining the functionality of the Regie Management System based on a set of functionality criteria. Table 33 in part 3.5 presents this system. Properly functional Regies would score 75-100% on the DWES Functionality scale. In the list of 20 successful Regies, 40% were WES Communes while 4 (40%) were among the 10 evaluation communes. These were Muvumba, Kigarama, Rusumo and Kinyami. Some selected communes among the 10 evaluation communes are discussed below in respect of the prevailing management problems observed during the evaluation:

The case of the Kazabazana supply system in Kayonza: The Kazabazana system is a motorized (diesel-driven) system supplying the whole town of Kayonza and its peri-urban neighborhood. A submersion pump draws water from a high output borehole to a 100m3 reservoir. From there the water is further pumped to two tanks at the highest point in Kayonza area, each with a capacity of 150m3.

The water then flows by gravity, supplying 8 Kiosks (tap stands) located in different parts of the Sector. The Kazabazana system is currently managed by the Kayonza Sector Regie Bureau on a self-financing /cost-recovery basis. The system’s management is beset by a number of problems, key among being the inability to supply at the full rated capacity. An analysis of the operation of the system reveals that this and other problems currently obtaining in the system are the results of weak Regie management. Currently, the whole system is operating at only 30% of its rated capacity because the current income cannot sustain operation at 100% level. The major factor behind this is the high cost of diesel fuel, at FRW17.500 per day and 523000FRW per month, as a result of which only 4 out of the 8 kiosks were delivering water at the time of this evaluation. The other 4 were dry and had been dry for a period spanning almost four months before September (2000). The system currently relies on diesel while a power line runs hardly 10 m from the pump house! One would only need to purchase a transformer and replace the current system from diesel to electricity. This has not been done to date. At the prevailing low level of operation the expenditure on diesel alone accounts for nearly 70% of the total systems revenue! Clearly the installation of a transformer, even if initially costly would greatly reduce operational costs and possibly transfer gains to consumers. This trend should not be allowed to continue. Also needing review is the practice of yielding 30% of the income from the Kiosks to the Vendors. The Kiosks, located in areas with relatively more income (town and market centres) are the major sources of revenue for the system. A typical kiosk in a good location such as a market center yields approximately FRW 100,000 per month. 30% of this amount is FRW 30,000. In a year this works out to FRW 360,000. To cede this amount to a vendor is giving away too much. It is interesting to note that the Kiosk Vendors are actually officials of the Regie Management system! As a cost reducing measure there is clearly a need to review this. One way would be to employ someone and pay him/her monthly for this work. It also noted that currently Electrogaz visits the Kazabazana system about 2 –3 times in a month and charges for each visit. This is costing the Regie some FRW 200,000 or so in a year. These visits could be reduced to once in a month or once in two months. In the villages (in the Umudugudu Gacogororo, for example), It is observed that community members prefer to go to the hand pumps where as yet they are not paying for the water. It was observed that some of the hand pumps had broken down and had not been repaired for a long time. The reason given by the Regie Official was that the concerned communities had not paid for the water. Currently the Regie management seems not too concerned about the Hand pumps, both in terms of obtaining revenue from them and in terms of repairing them. This needs to change. The current system of deducting the Vendors 30% straight at the Kiosk at the end of each working day also needs to be changed. All income should go to the bank, soon upon collection, and incomes and expenditures should be entered and receipted correctly. To date no audit has been done of the Kayonza accounts and operations and, contrary to the governments’ requirement for the Regie system to have 3 auditors, no such auditors have been appointed for the system. There are other fundamental questions such as the locus of accountability-who is the Regie accountable to and whether one can realistically talk of a Regie Associative in the context of Kayonza. On the whole the current management system, at 30% delivery level and 95% operational cost (leaving less than 5% as the reinvestible income at the end of the year) is not functioning optimally and clearly needs to be improved.

89

Kibali – The WES projects in Commune Kibali (implemented by NTE) are currently in the implementation stage. The estimated 1000 targeted beneficiary households are therefore not yet accessing potable water from the system. The Regies are only now being formed and no thoughts as yet have been given to cost-recovery issues. A Regie account was opened in March 200 as part of the efforts to revitalize the cost recovery system on the pre-existing system and the new ARC water supply system. The account had about FRW 56000 at the start of the evaluation in September. Part of the pre-existing system at Nyankenke had collapsed following an unsolicited/unilaterial decision by the Prison authority at Nyankenke to raise the cost of one 20l jerry-can from FRW 10 to FRW 15 on the Nyankenke 1 water supply system. This followed similar increases in the price of diesel fuel. When the community refused to comply the Prison severed connections to all five stand points supplying them. The Pump for the Nyankenke system had been supplied by PRI-EU at the request of the prison authority to supply the whole community, following the collapse of an older motor supplied by UNICEF in 1997. The community had been paying the FRW 10 until they were disconnected. This problem remains unresolved by the Regie committee. The community also registered complaints over the lack of accountability by the Regies, who apparently failed to remit back money contributed by them, to be used for fuel and O&M purposes. A visit to the Commune Regie office revealed general poor office and systems management. It would seem that the whole cost-recovery system is only just beginning to evolve and will need time and good consolidative support to become effectively functional. The Kibali system would seem to fall under the 40-50% level of the DWES system of functionality ranking

KINYAMI:- Like Kibali the WES system in Kinyami is currently in the process of implementation and has therefore not been joined to the communal grid. While rated in the 75-100% category, the Kinyami cost-recovery system was facing financial accountability problems at the time of this evaluation. In fact an appointment to meet the Regie Treasurer to gain some insights into the functioning of the system was unsuccessful. The existing management system was implemented by the American Refugee Committee in 1998.

In Kanzenze: the two pumps serving the Rwakibilizi supply system had broken down for nearly two months at the time of the consultants visit to the commune in September. As a result people were forced to travel distances exceeding 15 Kms to access water at the Borehole in Nyamata town, journeys which began as early as 4 am in the morning! The observed lack of a basic provisional system of management at the source, which resulted in stampedes and fight among consumers attested to inadequate Regie commitment and capacity. Frequent breakages had resulted in most consumers not remitting their payments and the whole system of cost-recovery seemed not to work well at all. This was despite the presence of the implementing NGO (ZOA) on the ground. A similar situation of non-payment resulting from frequent systems breakdown was observed in Muvumba. Other observed problems which have implications for the proper functioning of the cost-recovery system and which constitute area of need for improvement can be outlined as follows:

The problem of institutions and powerful/influential individuals not willing or refusing to pay for water services rendered. This problem was reported in Muvumba, Rusumo and Kigarama and needs to be addressed seriously, perhaps at higher levels.

It seems likely that most communes are unlikely to meet their set annual budgets from the water revenues. There is clearly a need to intensify efforts to encourage communities to pay for water and to adopt measures that will result in reduced operational costs, which currently seem quite high in most cases.

Regie Autonomy-most Regies remain under undue control of the Commune Leadership and cannot make or effect any decisions without consulting the Bourgmestre. While som oversight role is necessary,greater effectiveness will be realized through a more hands off approach, and a shift in the

90

locus of accountability from individual to legitimate institutions. In this respect the role of CDC and the Users (Regie Associative) needs to be re-emphasized. The realization of the full potential of the Regie Associative will certainly go a long way in this regard. As said already, the full effect and potential of this institution is little understood and tapped. Of particular interest is the idea of the Regie Associative evolving to even acquire a company status.

Weak technical, administrative and financial management capacities continue to hinder effective Regie operations. The lack of well-conceived training packages and adequate agency capacities to develop and deliver such training is a particular problem in this regard. Refresher courses and training for both Regies and implementing agencies will be necessary. Communes currently experiencing difficulties or where appropriate systems have not been installed will constitute a particular immediate target. Overall, general consolidative support to improve and monitor management will clearly go along way in making Regies more efficient and more effective institutions.

3.3 Community contribution ownership and management of WES facilities Development experience the world over shows that the active all-round involvement and participation of communities and especially women in project initiatives targeted on them is key to the success of these projects. Community-level Projects, which have not ensured full and active engagement of communities as stakeholders at all levels have failed or succeeded only partially. In his seminal paper “ Non-governmental Organizations in Africa: Achieving Comparative Advantage in Relief and Micro-development” Alan Fowler (1988) has distinguished three phases or stages of an effective project-based Micro-development intervention, namely, the Entry, Flow and Consolidation and, Withdrawal phases or stages. Figure 7 below and the accompanying text present a summary of the specific elements of these phases. The Fowler model provides a useful way of viewing the implementation and management of a micro-development intervention such as the WES Project. Operationally and specifically within the context of the small-scale WES water schemes, this model could be interpreted as presented in figure 8 below. The selection, planning, implementation and management are participatory processes involving communities at all stages and at all levels. Assessment Overall this evaluation assesses community contribution to, ownership and management of WES Project facilities well but inadequately achieved. Compelled in most cases by a severe need for water, the communities’ desire to participate in the implementation and management of WES project activities was often unreserved and total. This was especially so where there was good planning, organization and involvement. There is evidence of appreciable community participation and contribution in cash and through the provision of labor and materials in organized and well-coordinated situations. Effective active involvement and participation in planning, coordination and management is however assessed inadequately achieved. Broadly three main forms of contribution and participation are evident: contribution of labor and materials towards WES infrastructure establishment and development; cash contributions in the form of payment of a Tariff for the use of water; and participation in planning and management through the Regie Associative System. The performance and achievement of the three areas of contribution are discussed below:

Contribution of Labor and materials towards WES infrastructure establishment and development: This seems to have been the dominant form of contribution from the communities. It took many forms:-provision and transporting of local materials such as sand, rocks, gravel, bricks and fencing poles to the construction sites; digging of trenches; laying of pipes in dug

91

trenches and soil back filling; assisting local fontainiers with wide-ranging rehabilitation chores; transporting project materials from commune stores to sectors/project sites and fencing and protecting of water points. In many areas particularly where the need for water was great and where communities were sufficiently prepared and organized, this form of participation was highly achieved. There were many situations however where both the entry into and the organization and involvement of the communities for participation was weakly executed by both the implementing agencies and the delegated communal authorities, and where communities did not therefore participate as fully and as effectively as they should have. This was the case in Kanzenze and Muvumba, and is clearly the prevailing case in Shyorongi, Kibali, Kiyombe and Kinyami. Individual and focus group discussions with members of the project community revealed that most of them had no knowledge of the projects in their respective areas. Where such knowledge was evident, it was inadequate and often confused. The weak entry into and involvement of communities in project execution has four principal and related causes: I. A weak appreciation by implementing agencies of the theoretical (concepts and foundations)

and the practical prerequisites for engendering effective community participation and community participatory development. Good preparation of communities through a well- planned and well-executed entry is key to realizing effective community contribution and participation in the development of a project. The key prerequisites or bases for achieving this effectively entail as outlined by Fowler a number of foundational and participatory demands, namely:

Seeking agreement with the population on the image/a common picture of the desired

future, that will guide the intervention Negotiating an agreement on what the population and the intervening agency have to

offer each other, that is, the participation basis and the respective roles of the agency and the community in achieving agreed outcomes.

Attaining a common analysis of the situation so that both parties understand not just problems, but the reasons for them. This often involves the incorporation of local and indigenous knowledge

This evaluation has observed that implementing agencies while appreciably well versed in the physical infrastructure development, were poor in the “soft” aspects of community mobilization and sensitization and creating a basis for an effective and viable eventual withdrawal. In other words, many of them lacked adequate skills, time and resources to execute a good entry and a good, effective eventual withdrawal. The dominant perception of community contribution and participation was one confined to the provision of labor, materials and financial contributions. Where good organization allowed, these forms of participation and contribution were appreciably adequately met. Such good organization was often problematic, and a number of situations were observed where participation was low or where communities had to be compensated in one form or another to participate in Project activities.

II. Cultural factors and impediments: cultural factors also played a role in undermining

effective preparation for and actual participation by communities in the implementation and management of WES Projects. The traditional culture of authority which demands obedience and acquiescence from the ruled seems to hamper the degree to which communities can assert their rights and demand services from higher authorities and the manner in which the structures of local leadership and authority appreciate and act to enable community empowerment and ownership. This culture off course clearly conflicts with the hallmarks of community participatory development, namely openness and equal engagement and

92

participation. At the commune level the idea of decentralized or devolved management, while espoused as the practice of choice under the decentralization framework, remains for the most part, for practical reasons (restricted capacities) and on account of this cultural reality, at the level of rhetoric, with a huge rhetoric-reality gap. Further complicating this situation is the deeply entrenched culture of the community’s sense of entitlement to social services from government and non-governmental Organizations, a legacy inherited from and entrenched by these agencies themselves in past situations, for practical operational and situational reasons or for reasons of political expediency.

III. The lack of effective institutional frameworks for guiding (planning coordinating) and

managing effective community participation–principally two commune-level institutions were delegated these task- the Project Management Team and the Regie or CWESCs. The problems with the Implementation and functioning of the PMT, as well as those of the Regies have been outlined in different areas of this document. These problems have meant a weak organizational basis for effectively and objectively harnessing and directing (planning, organizing, coordinating and managing) community energies and potentials towards a fuller participation in project implementation and management. This lack of an effective organizational basis resulted in inadequate organized forums for meaningful discussions and engagement between implementing agencies and communities on matters of project implementation and management. It also resulted in communities not being able to understand the projects fully and effectively make implementing agencies account for their performance. It was also perhaps the principle underlying cause for the frequent agency and coordinating institutions non-compliance with the delivery terms spelt out in the contracts. At a practical operational level, full and effective contribution and participation by communities was often undermined by frequent breakages of established infrastructure, the frustrating long delays in the delivery of materials and the subsequent development of the water infrastructure and actual delivery of water to the communities. Such statements and comments like “we cannot pay for water because we have no water” or “We do not see the need to establish the Regies because we have no water” attest to some of these frustrations resulting from sometimes un-met expectations. A point perhaps belabored now in relation to WES planning, development and management institutions is that of the potential of the Regie Associative as both an organizing principle and empowering concept. As already discussed this idea and concept remains largely unrecognized and untapped. A Powerful Regie Associative is perhaps the surest way of building, guiding and deepening project ownership at commune and community level.

The payment for the use of water (water tariff):-this component has been dealt with at length

under part 3.2.3.2.3 above. Suffice to repeat here that community acceptance of and response to cost recovery is a key aspect of the success of the Community-based Water management Project approach and the WES Programme in Rwanda. Greater encouragement, marched with efficient delivery of services, and overall improvements in the general status of peoples’ social and economic welfare will however remain key to improving and sustaining this initial positive response.

93

Fig. 8. A micro-development intervention model

In almost all cases development agencies intervene within an on-going community/organizational social and economic context. Entry into this flux is a critical affair with far reaching implications for the rest of the intervention and must be managed carefully. For example, false expectations from the community, wrong selection of intended beneficiaries, false expression of needs, the mirror effect39 can all occur due to incorrect entry and give distortions in definitions of activities and ownership of resulting processes. Entry is too often taken for granted by intervening agencies, some of whom feel their mere presence and motivation to help is enough and should be valued by the communities as such. As development agencies seek to extend their presence and influence into the on-going lives of the intended beneficiaries, securing their self-willed involvement in the intended change process is a crucial part of the entry phase. This can only be done on the basis of some mutual understanding, agreement, or contract. This gives the following functional demands, which are central to the entry phase of interventions: Agreement with the population on the image/a common picture of the desired future, that will guide the intervention Negotiating an agreement on what the population and the intervening agency have to offer each other, that is, the participation

basis and the respective roles of the agency and the community in achieving agreed outcomes. Attaining a common analysis of the situation so that both parties understand not just problems, but the reasons for them. This

often involves the incorporation of local and indigenous knowledge. The flow and consolidation phase is perhaps the most crucial part of an intervention, and makes substantial and varied demands on management and organization by intervening agencies. An important point to note in this period is that consolidation is not of the intervening agency/NGO itself but of the community’s own organization and capacity for self-management. The critical functions of this stage include those that enable the agency position itself to manage both its external environment as well as its own internal environment. External functions include: Managing uncertainty, through continual, broad environmental scanning of/sensitivity to changes likely to impact the

39 Within the aid system, it is not uncommon for the first response of a community to be to present a mirror. What the community appears to be in terms of its expressed needs and principles is a reflection of the agency itself. If the agency’s interest is in income, then this is the priority that expressed by the community, likewise with health-care, or water or agriculture. This mirror effect can be seen at many interfaces in the aid system. NGOs position themselves to reflect their donors’ priorities and reporting needs. Membership organizations move away from their membership to reflect the power structure in the system.

Entry ONGOING SOCIAL & ECONOMIC PROCESSESFlow and consolidation Sustained Benefits

Withdrawal

Intervention Contingency and adaptation Resource allocation Guiding ownership Inst./org/technical Capacity building Agreement maintenance Multiple accountabilities and translationsReconciling time scale Environmental scanning Reconciling the unintended Building linkages Monitoring and evaluation for learning Maintaining selection Protection POSDCORB

Situation analysis Negotiation Forming guiding image Mutual agreement Participation basis Selection

Timing Criteria Residual links

94

beneficiaries and the intervention; a responsive/adaptive rather than predictive approach to work, able to deal with contingencies; a recognition of unintended outcomes and ability to modify what is being done.

Managing informally, i.e. gaining supportive external relationships through appropriate interpersonal dynamics. Internally, the demands on management and organization include: Ownership and management of multiple accountabilities, Managing translations-for example translating each unique situation to general reporting terms, or standard procedures and

methods to different populations in different situations. Managing selection- deciding who to assist or exclude and having methods to identify and work with those chosen. Managing incompatible time scales of funding vis a vis the time needed for participatory micro-development.

The withdrawal phase is one of the least documented and discussed in micro-development. Often withdrawal is dictated by funding considerations rather than by an assessment of the ability of the community to manage their own affairs and the changes brought about by the intervention. It is treated as a residual, something that has to be done eventually, rather than an acknowledged period in the development of a maturing relationship. Correct withdrawal at the right time, in the right way with suitable residual linkages (for protection, advice, and exchange of experiences and learning) is an important part of an intervention and of attaining sustained benefits. Wrong, untimely withdrawal, particularly one involving inputs to an area or community can be and frequently is interpreted in a political (local) context and can result in negative influences on relationships among stakeholders.

Figure 9: Steps for selecting, implementing and managing a community-based water supply System

Needs assessment, information

gathering and analysis

With Community gather background information (including existing water usage situation and demands, community profile, e.g ability and willingness to pay, vulnerable groups, power structure, etc)

START

With Community examine the features of the source/s

(Excluding water quality) Consider the physical features including

the yield, legal and security issues

With Community examine the water quality

With Community consider all the requirements for development

Physical requirements o Technical requirements o Time of set up o O&M requirements o Costs o Supplementary activities Resources/logistics Impact of development o On populations o On the physical

environment

With Community, pre-select sources for further

investigation

With Community Consider options for water treatment

In consultation with the

community select the source/s

With community Design a training/skills

upgrading Programme Provide needed skills training

and upgrading for o WSC o TOTs (VRPs, VHP, CTs) o Community Artisans o Users

Selection

Action

95

3.3 The Participation and Involvement of Women in WES Project Planning Implementation and Management

The WES Project design provided for representation and involvement of women at various levels of implementation and management as presented below: Table 33: Representation of Women in various WES Committees (WES Programme Design) Institutional levels Women representation PST Women’s representative from the department of Social affairs PMT Commune-level Women’s representative

Women groups’ representative CWESCs Election of the CWESCs to promote the participation of women as committee

members Like all members of the community to contribute local materials, labor, and finances for WES facilities construction and maintenance

In addition, the Protocols of accord for Project Implementation signed with the implementing agencies required that women constitute at least 50% of the total composition of the Regies. These requirements seem not to have been observed for the most part. There is little evidence of effective affirmative involvement and use of the potential of women in the implementation and management of the WES Project. A good attempt was made to involve women in the commercial production of SANPLATS, with high initial enthusiasm, participation and success. In areas like Kigarama and Kanzenze (Gachora) women groups received training and Facilities for large-scale production of Sanplats. Initial response was very positive and the women produced large numbers of SANPLATs moulds. The sales of the Sanplats and the extension activities to promote a wide-scale adoption and use of the technology however were both poor, and the women subsequently lost enthusiasm and slowed down their efforts. With regard to the participation of women in WES Project decision-making and Management, their representation in the various decision-making and management committees suggests poor participation. Tables 34-36 present women’s composition by sex and position in the various CWES Committees for selected communes. The Tables reveal that with the exception of Rusumo and Kigarama, women’s representation in the various WES committees is very low. Even among the communes with appreciable

Continue discussions with the community to ensure planned scheme meets needs and priorities and available funds and skills

With Community Design the outline system

and O&M procedures Calculate the cost

With Community Mobilize resources Protect/construct source Design system of O&M Undertake O&M Continue education & extension Undertake supplementary

activities Monitor and evaluate

96

representation, women tended to be given the traditional positions of treasurer and caretaker, rather than Presidential or Vice Presidential. This has affected their ability to effectively participate in and influence material project decisions. The assessment revealed however that in almost all cases women were more involved in the provision of labor, gathering and transporting local materials and in preparing trenches for laying the water pipes, than the Men. The representation of women in the key decision-making institutions of the project would clearly have enhanced their voice and participation in project activities. The collapse of both the PST and the PMT clearly dealt a blow to any chance for a well-coordinated involvement. The poor compliance with both the contractual and the design requirements to broaden the participation of women in project activities is seen largely as a consequence of the institutional void thus created, a void which resulted in many of the assigned functions, such as compliance monitoring, not being effectively realized. An Examination of the constitution of most Regie Committees reveals that the participation and involvement of women is not recognized and affirmatively encouraged. This is a consequence of the lack of effective overall programming and consolidative stewardship. It was observed that there is a growing trend of women organizing at the community level. This presents a great opportunity for using women as entry points for WES project implementation and management at community level, particularly in respect of Hygiene promotion. This opportunity and potential remains largely underutilized. Table 34: Sector Regie Composition by position and Sex

Commune Sector Regie composition by position held and sex (total %) President Vice president Treasurer % Male

% Female

% Male

% Female

% Male

% Female

Kinyami 7 100(7) 0(0) 86(6) 14(1) 71(5) 29 (2) Kibali 7 92 8 77 23 90 10 Rusumo 7 100 (7) 0 (0) 86 (6) 14(1) 43(3) 57 (4) Kigarama 12 83(10) 17 (2) 83(10) 17(2) 50 (6) 50 (6) Muvumba 7 100 0 (0) 86 (6) 14 (1) 86 (6) 14 (1)

Table 35: Cellule –level Water point Committee composition by sex for Kanzenze Commune

Water point committee composition by sex Responsible Fees Collector Caretaker

Sectors

Cellule

Water points M F M F M F

7 60 141 127 12 117 24 96 43 % 91 8 83 17 69 31

Table 36: Water point committee composition by position and sex for the 8 Kiosks served by the Kazabazana water supply system (Kayonza)

President Vice president Treasurer

Kiosk No.

Male Female Male Female Male Female 1 M - - F M 2 M - M - M 3 M - - F M 4 M - M - F 5 - F M - M 6 M - M - M 7 M - - F M

97

8 M - M - M Total 7 1 5 3 7 1

3.5 The Relevance functioning and effectiveness of WES committees

3.5.1 The National WES Project Coordination Committee (the PCC) The relevance, functioning and effectiveness of both the PCC and the Project Coordination Office

were discussed at length under National level WES Management in part 3.2.3.1. As explained a greater involvement of the PCC was both necessary and possible at the start of the project in view of the evident great need to lay an effective institutional, organizational and technical foundation for the WES Programme implementation, the lack of adequate overall planning and coordination capacity within the project at the time of inception and the relatively light work loads within the Ministries at the time. The PCC became heavily involved in elaborating this framework and in making the preparations necessary to launch the project. Over time however it became less involved and active in the planning and coordination of WES Programme operations. Joint Planning and coordination meetings became infrequent and for the most part poorly attended. It is noted for example that during the year 2000 there was only one meeting of the PCC. It is also noted that there are no minutes of the meetings of the PCC since the middle of 1999. This draws attention to the fact that increasingly there was little collaboration, synergy and common approach in implementing the WES Programme. In this regard, the role of the coordinating ministry (MINERENA) comes to focus. Interviews with members of the PCC reveal a concern that the focal ministry was not sufficiently proactive in drawing members together and in bringing about the needed synergy and blend of goals and objectives, and in consolidating an effective role for the PCC. A notable observation regarding the malfunctioning of the PCC was the non-attendance of the PCC meetings by the designated members from civil society and prefecture and commune leaders. Besides their impact on overall effective strategic planning and direction at the national level, these weaknesses clearly had a huge negative impact on the role and functioning of the National WES Project Coordination office, which, lacking adequate stewardship, direction and control from the PCC and the overall coordinating Ministry, became un-decisive, weakly focused and unable to work effectively with the Project prefectures and communes. Some practical manifestations of the malfunctioning of the project coordination office included

98

proposals not being processed in good time, WES construction materials not being delivered in good time to the project sites and line with the actual listed or billed material types and quantities, project implementation and management processes not being monitored consistently and effectively, and poor communication with the Prefectures and the communes. These problems resulted in serious implementation delays and drew a lot of criticism from the implementing partners regarding the work of the National WES Project Coordinator and the overall functioning and capacity of the Project Coordination Office.

3.5.2 The Regie and the Community Water and Environmental Sanitation Committee System

Many aspects of the relevance functioning and effectiveness of the Regie Management Committees have been evaluated in this report. This section will therefore present only a summary of these aspects. Table 30 below presents the framework of criteria for assessing or determining the effective functioning of the CWESCs or Regies elaborated by the Department of Water and Environment Sanitation (DWES) of the MINERENA. Table 37: Criteria for the Rating the Functionality of one Regie Associative Levels of Assessment

Broad and specific elements of Assessment criteria

Percentage score awarded to each criterion

Actual score (%)

I Existence of Structure Water point committee Regie Committee Regie Bureau Auditors

10 2 2 2 4

II Received Training

Authorities Members of the water point

committee Members of the Regie Committee Members of the Regie Bureau Auditors Fontainiers

30 5 5 5 5 5 5

III Functionality 60

99

1. Administrative Management Statuts Tariffication Secretariat

2. Financial Management Taux de recette Mouvements de fonds

3. Management of Assets and Property

Entretien des Systemes Approvisionment et gestion du

stock Local et autres

10 2 3 5 20 14 6 30 20 5 5

SCORE RANKING Category RA absence

RA en voire de formation RA naissance RA progressive RA Fonctionnelle

0-0 0-40

40-50 50-75

75-100 The evaluation of the commune-level management of operation and maintenance and the cost-recovery Process (part 3.2.3.2.3) assessed wide-ranging aspects of the functioning and effectiveness of the Regie Management Committees applying many of the criteria set out within this framework. The important role played by them within the framework of Community-based management and development of the water infrastructure was highlighted, as were their weaknesses and areas of need for further consolidative strengthening and support. The analysis of the Hygiene and sanitation component revealed that the Regies on account of their good performance in relation to the Management and development of the water infrastructure were perhaps best suited to evolve along this line and that perhaps there was a need to define and develop a new organizational and institutional framework for promoting Hygiene and Environmental Sanitation, working closely with the Regies. In relation to the management and development of the water infrastructure the operational and managerial constraints identified pointed towards a need to intensify consolidative advisory, monitoring and technical capacity building support to these institutions. A nationwide survey conducted by the DWES’s division of Rural Hydraulics on the functioning and effectiveness of the Regie Committees based on the above framework (referred to already in this document) revealed that only 20 out of more than 100 Cost-recovery systems currently in place (i.e. about 20%) would have qualified as properly functional (with a score 75-100%) on the DWES Functionality scale. In the list 8 of the Communes (i.e. 40%) were active WES Communes. 4 of these (40%) (Muvumba, Kigarama, Rusumo, and Kinyami) were among the 10 evaluation communes. The important point about these statistics is that a great deal still remains to be done to develop the capacities of the Regies to acquire effective and fully functional status. This includes developing and deepening the appreciation of both the idea and potential of the Regie Associative, as an institution which, strengthened and effectively consolidated, could serve as a key instrument for empowering water users and deepening their stake in the development and management of water and sanitation infrastructure locally and nationally.This is particularly so in respect of the WES Communes. The task of capacity building (training and equipment) of the Regies in the WES intervention communes was seen “tacitly” as the assigned responsibility of

100

UNICEF, through the various implementing agencies. This view seems to have resulted in a slight shift of priority by government to Non-WES areas, acting only as a facilitator in the WES project areas. Lacking adequate staff, financing, time on the ground, and capacities in terms of sound knowledge and experience of community and participatory development approaches the agencies assigned these functions seem not to have carried them out effectively, often focusing more attention on the technical and physical aspects of project implementation and management (the “hardware”) rather than the “soft” aspects of community organization, sensitization and education. The effect of this “neglect” reflects in the general overall lower effectiveness status of the Regie committees in the WES Project areas Vis a Vis Non-WES areas. One area of comparison can be seen in the establishment status of the Regies in the WES communes vis a vis those in the Non-WES communes. Figures of the establishment status of Regies committees of some 149 Communes as of December 1999 supplied by the Division of Rural Hydraulic are analyzed in Table26 below. The analysis reveals a slightly better establishment status for the Non-WES Areas compared to the WES areas. The chief reason behind this difference would seem to be the collective energies of better funded and better experienced and grounded NGOs such as IRC, Oxfam, SCF and others working collaboratively with the government in the Non-WES areas. One of the key issues emerging as the cause for inadequate performance effectiveness among implementing Agencies in the WES areas was the lack of adequate technical and financial capacities.

Table 38: Establishment Status of the Regie Associative System by Commune and Prefecture (as of Dec. 1999)

No of Communes Status of the Regie Associative mittee formed formed med ened

tegory total

Summary of Table 38:

Non-WES nt status

gie established mmittee established

blished e established

40 In this tabulation Kayonza is not included because it does not have a Regie Bureau

101

ablished s bank account lishment rate

3.6 Impact of WES on the status of Women and Children

3.6.1 WES Programme Health Impact In order to get a sense of the impact of the WES Programme on overall health of the population affected and specifically on women and children the evaluation team obtained and analyzed morbidity data from 9 health Centres located in the areas served by the WES projects. Table 39 below presents these Centres and the respective communes. Tables 40-52 present different treatments of the resulting data in the effort to discern aspects of project effects and impact. Section VI of the annex presents the baseline data out of which the figures and tables were drawn. Table39: Evaluation Communes and respective Morbidity data Centres Commune WES Projectcompletion

status Morbidity Data Centre

Rutongo Incomplete Kabuye Health Centre Rusumo completed Nyarubuye Health Center Kigarama Completed Cyarubare Health Centre Kanzenze completed Nyamata Hospital Kayonza Completed Rutare Health Center Shyorongi Incomplete Catholic Health Center Kiyombe Incomplete Mulindi Health Center Kinyami Incomplete Munyinya Health Centre Kibali Incomplete Kigogo Health Centre Muvumba Completed (Data corrupted) In order to get a sense of the Project’s effects and impact the morbidity data were subjected to a number of different treatments:

102

Data were disaggregated to draw comparisons between communes with complete WES projects and those where the projects are incomplete.

To determine differential impact on children, data were disaggregated to show trends by age category (general population, population above 5 years and population below five years)

The evaluation commenced in September 2000. Key analyses and conclusions are therefore based on data up to August 2000, even where data was available beyond August. Comparisons with the other Years are based on data discounting September to December. To determine any material difference in trend during the discounted months, the September to December morbidity data for 1998 and 1999 are presented separately in Table 51

A further disaggregation was done for the key water use and hygiene related disease conditions (Diarrhea, skin, eye and mouth infections and intestinal parasites) to determine any material difference in terms of trends. Data on Malaria and Respiratory tract infections are presented but not considered core to the assessment.

Given the existing inadequate technical capacities at the health Centres, it is observed that complete and accurate diagnoses of disease conditions may not be achievable and that these data at best may only be indicative rather than conclusive of the disease conditions.

Analysis and assessment: The following analysis and assessment are drawn based on the morbidity data: Aside from Malaria and related conditions, and the respiratory tract infections (IAVR-upper

and lower) disease conditions resulting from the manner in which water is used or not used and related hygiene practices (Diarrheas, skin, eye and mouth infections, and intestinal parasites) collectively constitute the greatest cause of morbidity in the 10 evaluation communes.

The overall trend in terms of morbidity prevalence (11 most prevalent disease conditions) is one of a generalized drop (from 1998-2000) for the population above five years, and a drop followed by a rise (V-pattern) for the population aged below five years. The same trend obtains for the three main water use and hygiene related disease conditions. These analyses are drawn from the data presented in tables 40-43 and 44 and 45. In both cases children aged below 5 years are clearly the most afflicted, morbidities among them [for both categories of disease conditions] dropping by a lower margin in the second year and rising by a much higher margin in the third year.

Comparative data (January to August) between areas with completed WES projects, where communities are already drawing potable (WES) water and those where the projects have not yet been completed (presented in Tables 46-52 for the 5 main water use and hygiene related disease conditions reveal wide-ranging aspects of WES project impact. Table 46 presents morbidity trends for these conditions in 9 communes (4 with and 5 without WES water) disaggregated by general population and population under five. Tables 47 and 48 present the same data disaggregated between the two categories of WES communes. Table 49 compares the totals for both categories and presents their differences by % and relative weighting (NS/S). Table 50 compares the morbidity trends (total) between the 4 areas with completed WES projects (TS) and the total of any four of the 5 communes with incomplete WES projects (TNS). Table 52a and 52b compare morbidity trends in real and % terms for the

103

three main conditions (Diarrhea, intestinal parasites and skin infections) and the two categories of population. The tables reveal that for the five selected disease conditions, the areas already receiving clean water had on the whole fewer cases of related morbidity than those where the projects are not yet completed. On a parity (4 to 4) basis (Tables 49, 50 and 52 (a & b), the areas with clean water and where some hygiene education had reached recorded lower incidences of morbidity compared to those without. They start off (98) with a relatively higher prevalence (in relation to total population affected-table 52b), display a much steeper decline in the second year of the project (99) followed by a rise in the third year of the project (2000). The areas without clean water while showing a similar trend generally tend to show less fluctuation.

A number of broad conclusions and analyses can be drawn from this presentation:

There is clearly a difference in terms of impact, which favors areas already receiving WES water and where some hygiene education has been provided.

The sharp drop in the second year of the project for the areas served could be attributed to both the effect of the mere availability of clean water in itself and the enthusiastic first reception and adoption of the accompanying hygiene messages.

The rise/relapse in the third year of the project, particularly among the children may stem from a number of factors:

The lack of consistency in hygiene education, resulting in a relapse to old practices. It has been pointed out in previous analyses that one of the major setbacks to achieving greater WES effect and impact has been the lack of adequate project follow-up and monitoring, internally (within the communities themselves) and from the higher management levels (commune, Prefecture and PCC). It has also been pointed out that the hygiene component has not received as much emphasis as has the water provision component. Thirdly it has been shown that the greater achievement could not have been possible with the hygiene component given the prevailing context of weak institutional and organization framework for achieving it at the most important impact level, namely the community level. The relapse to old practices and resulting increase in morbidity is seen in this context. The increased availability of water in the households, in itself, in a context of overall dirty household conditions is likely to predispose to greater contamination and infection, with a greater effect on those most in contact with the dirt, the children. This is particularly so in hot environments such as the ones in the areas already enjoying WES water. The dirty household environment is a particularly serious predisposing factor in rural Rwanda. This evaluation has presented ample data that clearly link morbidity to poor environmental hygiene: the results of the water samples analysis, presented in Table 21; the three week morbidity and household hygiene and environmental sanitation status presented in Table 22; and the findings of CARE international’s survey of latrine coverage and hygiene status in three active WES communes (two of which are part of the 10 evaluation communes) presented in Tables 17-20. Large influxes of returnee population into the country with the attendant problems of poor housing, hygiene and sanitation conditions

Table 40. MORBIDITY TRENDS (general) FOR 11 MOST PREVALENT DISEASE CONDITIONS IN SELECTED 9 COMMUNES OF RWANDA 1998-2000 (JANUARY TO DECEMBER)

104

Disease Condition 1998 1999 2000 TOTAL Fievre d'origine inconnue + palu pres. 20029 10582 7277 37888 Paludisme confirme 9705 6880 4308 20893 IAVRS 3642 3109 5875 12626 IAVRI 4461 3543 3746 11750 Parasitose intestinale 3769 3113 3034 9916 Affections cutanees 1444 1532 1297 4273 Diarrhee non sanglante et Sanglante 1813 1291 1265 4369 Traumatisme physique 1429 1680 1458 4567 Affections bucco-dentaires 679 774 696 2149 Gastrite 748 554 472 1774 Affections gynecologies 514 666 381 1561 TOTAL 48233 33724 29809 111766 Table 41. MORBIDITY TRENDS (general) FOR 11 MOST PREVALENT DISEASE CONDITIONS IN 9 COMMUNES OF RWANDA 1998-2000 (JANUARY TO AUGUST) Disease Condition 1998 1999 2000 TOTAL Fievre d'origine inconnue + palu pres. 16912(53%) 7929(25%) 7146(22%) 31987 Paludisme confirme 7731(45%) 5198(30%) 4237(25%) 17166 IAVRI 2590(25%) 2133(20%) 5706(55%) 10429 IAVRS 3392(35%) 2629(27%) 3662(38%) 9683 Parasitose intestinale 2944(36%) 2260(28%) 2896(36%) 8100 Traumatisme physique 999(28%) 1207(34%) 1373(38%) 3579 Affections cutanees 1104(32%) 1068(31%) 1243(36%) 3415 Diarrhee non sanglante et Sanglante 1476(40%) 956(26%) 1220(33%) 3652 Affections bucco-dentaires 490(28%) 603(34%) 683(38%) 1776 Gastrite 609(40%) 455(30%) 451(30%) 1515 Affections gynecologiques 390(32%) 458(38%) 363(30%) 1211 TOTAL 38637(42%) 24896(27%) 28980(31%) 92513

Table 42. MORBIDITY TREND AMONG UNDER 5 YEAR-OLD CHILDREN FOR SELECTED 9 COMMUNES AND 11 MOST PREVALENT DISEASE CONDITIONS IN RWANDA (1998-2000:JANUARY TO DECEMBER)

Disease Condition 1998 1999 2000 TOTAL Fievre d'origine inconnue + palu pres. 3515 1990 1885 7390 IAVRS 2074 1338 1704 5116 Paludisme confirme 2092 1440 1127 4659 IAVRI 1594 1262 1471 4327 Affections cutanees 405 400 772 1577 Parasitose intestinale 1089 882 1363 3334 Diarrhee non sanglante et sanglante 749 612 810 2171 Malnutrition PE et carenses nut. 340 195 51 586 Affections des yeux 122 145 177 444 Traumatisme physique 99 138 108 345 Affections bucco-dentaires 106 106 123 335 TOTAL 12185 8508 9591 30284

Table 43. MORBIDITY TRENDS AMONG UNDER 5 YEAR-OLD CHILDREN FOR 11 MOST PREVALENT DISEASE CONDITIONS IN SELECTED 9 COMMUNES OF RWANDA -1998-2000(JANUARY-AUGUST)

Disease Conditions 1998 1999 2000 TOTAL Fievre d'origine inconnue + palu pres. 2858 (46%) 1478(24%) 1869(30%) 6205 IAVRS 1562(36%) 1046(24%) 1683(39%) 4291 Paludisme confirme 1591(43%) 1033(28%) 1105(30%) 3729

IAVRI 1171(34%) 898(26%) 1398(40%) 3467 Parasitose intestinale 822(29%) 684(24%) 1347((47%) 2853

Diarrhee non sanglante et Sanglante 596(31%) 467(25%) 774(42%) 1837 Affections cutanees 321(24%) 284(21%) 756(56%) 1361

Malnutrition PE et carence nut. 279(57%) 159(33%) 50(10%) 488 Affections des yeux 94(26%) 101(28%) 163(46%) 358

105

Affections bucco-dentaires 77(28%) 83(30%) 120(43%) 280 Traumatisme physique 74(27%) 98(36%) 104(38%) 276 TOTAL 9445(38%) 6331((25%) 9369(37%) 25145 Table 44. Morbidity trends and % change by age group and year for11 most prevalent disease conditions and selected 9 communes in Rwanda 1998-2000((January to December and January to August)

Five years and above Under five year old population

98 99 200 Total 98 99 2000 Total

January to December 36048 25219 20218 81482 12185 8508 9591 30284 111766 Trend (%) 44 31 25 100% 40 28 32 100 January to August 29192 18565 19611 67368 9445 6331 9369 25145 92513 Trend (%) 43 28 29 100 38 25 37 100 Difference (Sept-Dec) 6856 6654 607 14114 2740 2177 222 5139 19253 Trend (%) 49 47 4 100 53 42 4 100 % of overall total January to December

32 23 18 73 10.9 7.6 8.5 27 100

% of overall total January to August

32 20 21 73 10 7 10 27 100

106

Table 45. Morbidity trends and % change by age group for three main water and hygiene related disease conditions in selected 9 WES communes 1998-2000 (January to December and January to August)

Diarrheas Intestinal Parasites Skin Infections Over 5 years Under five years 5+ Under 5 Sum

Total Sum total

98 99 2000

Total

98 99 2000

Total

Sum total

98 99 2000

Total

98 99 2000

Total

98 99 2000 Total

98 99 2000

Total

Jan. to Dec.

1064

679

455 2198 749

612

810 2171 4369 2680

2231

1671

6582 1089

882

1363

3334 9916

1039 1132 525 2696 405 400 772 1577 4273

Trend %

48 30 20 (100) 50

35 28 37 (100) 50

100

41 34 25 (100) 66

33 26 41 (100) 34

39 42 19 (100) 63

26 25 49 (100) 37

Jan. to Aug.

880 489

446 1815 596

467

774 1837 3652 2122

1576

1549

5247 822 684

1347

2853 8100

783 784 487 2054 321 284 756 1361 3415

Trend % 48 27 25 (100) 50

32 25 42 (100) 50

40 30 30 (100) 65

29 24 47 (100) 35

38 38 24 (100) 60

24 21 56 (100) 40

Difference (Sept.-Dec)

184 190

9 383 153

145

36 334 717 558 655 122 1335 267 198

16 481 1816

256 348 38 642 84 116 16 216 858

Trend % 48 50 2 (100) 53

46 43 11 (100) 47

42 49 9 (100) 74

56 41 33 (100) 26

40 54 6 (100) 75

39 54 2 (100) 25

% of overall total Jan-Dec.

24

16

10

50

17

14

19

50

100

27

22

17

66

11

9

14

34

100

24

26

12

63

9

9

18

37

100

% of total Jan-Aug

24 13 12 50 16 13 21 50 100 26 19 19 65 10 8 17 35 100 23 23 14 60 9 8 22 40 100

107

Table 46. Morbidity trends for selected key water/hygiene related disease conditions (general population and 0-4 year-old) in 9 WES Project Communes of Rwanda 1998-2000 (January to August)

Disease Conditions Diarrheas combined (Diarrhee non-sanglante et sanglante)

Intestinal Parasites (Parasitose intestinale)

Eye infections (Affections des yeux)

Skin infections (Affections cutanees)

Mouth Infections (Affections Bucco-dentaires)

General Population

0-4years General population 0-4 years General population

0-4 years General population 0-4 years

General 0-4 years

Commune

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98

99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98

99

2000

Rusumo 369 77 174 111

28 107 491 102 112 144

39 230 43 8 23 25

3 13 267 70 18 63 13 7 38 6 18 18

0 5

Kigarama 47 64 142 18 33 100 30 97 196 7 30 442 4 23 48 3 14 32 16 46 39 4 19 17 0 15 18 3 3 5

Kayonza 197 56 112 120

38 101 170 388 302 70 193

219 17 11 16 9 4 9 114 59 51 47 16 27 43 44 24 1 3 3

Kinyami 164 80 128 79 53 64 795 319 402 276

104

166 42 49 58 16

26 16 89 80 111 40 26 33 34 33 83 3 2 12

Kibali 40 40 51 3 13 28 150 142 203 51 37 44 16 23 44 3 14 22 27 39 84 3 17 28 3 4 21 0 0 4

Kanzenze 67 65 77 18 21 22 160 236 440 24 33 55 42 78 91 11

6 9 127 191 424 20 20 241 61 91 150 3 10

15

Rutongo 105 74 148 66 50 79 129 48 123 44 18 33 29 15 30 2 5 7 136 115 115 47 36 310 52 64 95 27

34

38

Kiyombe 146 124

176 55 44 104 614 611 702 125

151

65 40 105

123 11

21 41 86 233 282 15 41 58 70 32 67 7 4 9

Shyorongi

341 376

212 126

187

169 405 317 416 81 79 93 57 42 31 14

8 14 242 235 119 82 96 35 189

314

207 18

27

29

Total 1476

956

1220

596

467

774 2944

2260

2896

822

684

1347

290

354

464 94

101

163 1104

1068

1243

321

284

756 490

603

683 77

83

120

Grand total

3652 1837 8100 2853 1108 358 3415 1361 1776 280

Table 47. Morbidity trends for selected key water/hygiene related disease conditions (general population and 0-4 year-old in 4 communes with completed WES projects 1998-2000 (January to August)

Disease Conditions Diarrheas combined (Diarrhee non-sanglante et sanglante)

Intestinal Parasites (Parasitose intestinale)

Eye infections (Affections des yeux)

Skin infections (Affections cutanees)

Mouth Infections (Affections Bucco-dentaires)

General population

0-4years General population

0-4 years General population

0-4 years General population

0-4 years General 0-4 years

Commune

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98

99

2000

98 99 2000

98 99

2000

98 99 2000

98

99

2000

Rusumo 369

77 174 111

28 107 491

102

112 144

39 230 43 8 23 25

3 13 267 70 18 63 13

7 38 6 18 18

0 5

Kigarama 47 64 142 18 33 100 30 97 196 7 30 442 4 23 48 3 1 32 16 46 39 4 1 17 0 15 18 3 3 5

108

4 9 Kayonza 19

7 56 112 12

0 38 101 17

0 388

302 70 193

219 17 11 16 9 4 9 114 59 51 47 16

27 43 44 24 1 3 3

Kanzenze 67 65 77 18 21 22 160

236

440 24 33 55 42 78 91 11

6 9 127 191 424 20 20

241 61 91 150 3 10

15

Total Served (TS)

680

262

505 267

120

330 851

823

1050

245

295

946 106 120 178 48

27

63 524 366 532 134

68

292 142

156

210 25

16

28

Grand total

1447 717 2724 1484 404 138 1422 494 508 69

Table 48. Morbidity trends for selected water/hygiene related disease conditions (general and 0-4 year-old pop.) in 5 communes with incomplete WES projects (not yet receiving potable water) 1998-2000 (Jan. to Aug.)

Disease Conditions

Diarrheas combined (Diarrhee non-sanglante et sanglante)

Intestinal Parasites (Parasitose intestinale)

Eye infections (Affections des yeux)

Skin infections (Affections cutanees)

Mouth Infections (Affections Bucco-dentaires)

Commune

TGeneral population

0-4years General population 0-4 years General population

0-4 years General population

0-4 years General 0-4 years

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98

99

2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98

99

2000

Kinyami 164

80 128 79 53 64 795 319 402 276

104

166 42 49 58 16

26

16 89 80 111 40 26 33 34 33 83 3 2 12

Kibali 40 40 51 3 13 28 150 142 203 51 37 44 16 23 44 3 14

22 27 39 84 3 17 28 3 4 21 0 0 4

Rutongo 105

74 148 66 50 79 129 48 123 44 18 33 29 15 30 2 5 7 136

115

115 47 36 310 52 64 95 27

34

38

Kiyombe 146

124

176 55 44 104 614 611 702 125

151

65 40 105

123 11

21

41 86 233

282 15 41 58 70 32 67 7 4 9

Shyorongi

341

376

212 126

187

169 405 317 416 81 79 93 57 42 31 14

8 14 242

235

119 82 96 35 189

314

207 18

27

29

796

694

715 329

347

444 2093

1437

1846

577

389

401 184

234

286 46

74

100 580

702

711 187

216

464 348

447

473 55

67

92 Total not Served

2204 1120 5376 1367 704 220 1993 867 1268 214

Table 49: Comparisons of total morbidity (overall, % and weighted) between the 4 areas with completed WES projects (TS) with the 5 those not yet completed (TNS)

Disease Conditions Diarrheas combined (Diarrhee non-sanglante et sanglante)

Intestinal Parasites (Parasitose intestinale)

Eye infections (Affections des yeux)

Skin infections (Affections cutanees)

Mouth Infections (Affections Bucco-dentaires)

General population 0-4years General population 0-4 years General population

0-4 years General population 0-4 years General 0-4 years

Commune

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

109

TS 680 262

505 267

120

330 851 823 1050

245

295

946 106

120

178 48 27 63 524 366 532 134

68 292 142

156

210 25 16 28

TNS 796 694

715 329

347

444 2093

1437

1846

577

389

401 184

234

286 46 74 100 580 702 711 187

216

464 348

447

473 55 67 92

Grand total (GT)

1476

956

1220

596

467

774 2944

2260

2896

822

684

1347

290

354

464 94 101

163 1104

1068

1243

321

284

756 490

603

683 80 83 120

%TS/GT 46 27 41 45 26 43 29 36 36 30 43 70 37 34 38 51 27 39 47 31 43 42 24 39 29 26 31 31 19 23 %TNS/GT

54 73 59 55 74 57 71 64 64 70 57 30 63 66 62 49 73 61 53 69 57 58 76 61 71 74 69 69 81 77

TNS/TS 1.2 2.6 1.4 1.2 3 1.3 1.7 1.7 1.8 2.3 1.3 0.4 1.7 1.9 1.6 1.0

2.7 1.6 1.1 1.9 1.3 1.4 3.1 1.6 2.5 2.9 2.3 2.2

4.2

3.3

Table 50: Comparisons of morbidity trends (total) between the 4 areas with completed WES projects (TS) and the total of any four of the 5 communes with incomplete WES projects (TNS)

Disease Conditions

Diarrheas combined (Diarrhee non-sanglante et sanglante)

Intestinal Parasites (Parasitose intestinale)

Eye infections (Affections des yeux)

Skin infections (Affections cutanees)

Mouth Infections (Affections Bucco-dentaires)

General population

0-4years General population 0-4 years General population

0-4 years General population

0-4 years General 0-4 years

Commune

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98

99

2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99 2000

98 99

2000

Total served (TS)

680

262

505 267

120

330 851 823 1050

245

295

946 106

120

178 48

27

63 524

366

532 134

68 292 142

156

210 25 16

28

Total not served (TNS)

796

694

715 329

347

444 2093

1437

1846

577

389

401 184

234

286 46

74

100 580

702

711 187

216

464 348

447

473 55 67

92

TNS less Kinyami

632

614

587 250

294

380 1298

1118

1444

922

285

235 142

185

228 30

48

84 491

702

600 147

190

431 314

414

390 52 65

80

TNS less Kibali

756

654

664 326

334

416 1943

1295

1643

526

352

357 164

211

242 43

60

78 553

663

627 184

199

436 345

443

452 55 67

88

TNS less Rutongo

691

620

567 263

297

365 1964

1389

1723

533

371

368 155

219

256 44

69

93 444

587

596 140

180

154 296

383

378 28 33

54

TNS less Kiyombe

650

570

539 274

303

340 1479

826 1144

452

238

336 144

129

163 35

53

59 494

469

429 172

175

406 278

415

406 4863

63

83

TNS less Shyorongi

455

318

503 203

160

275 1688

1120

1430

496

310

308 127

192

255 32

66

86 338

516

592 105

120

429 159

133

266 37 40

63

Table51. September to December morbidities for general and 0-4 year-old population for 1998-1999 in 8 communes of Rwanda

110

Diarrhea combined Intestinal parasites Skin infections Communes General 0-4 General 0-4 General 0-4

98 99 98 99 98 99 98 99 98 99 98 99 Rusumo 21 43 25 16 84 44 35 16 62 17 75 20 Kigarama 27 36 6 6 39 28 17 9 13 12 7 25 Kayonza 23 39 19 28 168 136 19 47 27 10 61 27 Kanzenze 20 40 6 6 104 174 12 26 77 148 33 42 Kinyami 68 45 43 36 168 105 55 30 39 55 52 42 Kibali 10 42 2 19 42 84 38 23 12 46 5 30 Rutongo 37 45 25 16 34 59 10 15 43 61 65 58 Kiyombe 44 45 12 16 186 223 38 42 67 113 25 60 Shyorongi - - - - - - - - - - - - Grand Total 250 335 138 143 825 853 224 208 340 462 323 304 Total served (S) 91 158 56 56 395 382 83 98 179 187 176 114 Total not served (NS)

159 177 82 82 430 471 141 110 161 275 147 190

Table 52. Comparisons of Morbidity trends among 0-4 year and over five year olds in complete and incomplete WES project for the three main water and hygiene related disease conditions in the 9 evaluation communes

Diarrhea combined Intestinal Parasites Skin infections 5 years + 0-4 years 5 years + 0-4 years 5 years + 0-4 years

98 99 2000 98 99 2000 98 99 2000 98 99 2000 98 99 2000 98 99 2000 TS 413 142 175 267 120 330 606 528 104 245 295 946 390 298 240 134 68 292 TNS 467 347 271 329 347 444 577 389 401 393 486 247 187 216 464 TNS less Kinyami 382 320 207 250 294 380 376 833 1209 922 285 235 344 512 169 147 190 431 TNS less Kibali 430 320 248 326 334 416 1417 943 1286 526 352 357 369 464 191 184 199 436 TNS less Rutongo 428 323 202 263 297 365 1431 1918 1355 533 371 368 304 407 442 140 180 154 TNS less Kiyombe 376 267 199 274 303 340 1027 588 808 452 238 336 322 294 23 172 175 406 TNS less Shyorongi 252 158 158 203 160 275 1192 810 1122 496 310 308 283 396 163 105 120 426 Table 39b. Percentage change by age group 1998-2000 (January to August)

Diarrhea Combined Intestinal Parasites Skin Infections 5 years + 0-4 5 years + 0-4 years 5 years + 0-4 years

98 99 2000 98 99 2000 98 99 2000 98 99 2000 98 99 2000 98 99 2000

111

TS

57%

19%

24%

37%

17%

46%

49%

43%

8%

16%

20%

64%

42%

32%

26%

27%

14%

59%

TNS less Kinyami

42%

35%

23%

27%

32%

41%

16%

34%

50%

64%

20%

16%

34%

50%

16%

19%

25%

56%

TNS less Kibali

43%

32%

25%

30%

31%

39%

39%

26%

35%

42%

29%

29%

36%

45%

19%

22%

24%

53%

TNS less Rutongo

45%

34%

21%

28%

32%

39%

30%

41%

29%

42%

29%

29%

26%

35%

38%

30%

38%

32%

TNS less Kiyombe

44%

32%

24%

30%

33%

37%

42%

24%

33%

44%

23%

33%

50%

46%

4%

23%

23%

54%

TNS less Shorongi

44%

28%

28%

32%

25%

43%

38%

26%

36%

45%

28%

27%

34%

47%

19%

16%

18%

65%

112

3.6.2 WES Programme Social Impact The social impact of the WES project on women and children can be discerned from the following comments and responses made by the communities in areas where the WES projects had delivered water already. The greatest benefits are the increase in the amounts of water available and actually used, and the reductions in cartage time and distance, i.e. the time and distances taken to obtain water. Since women and children are the main carriers of water it is clear that the WES Project has eased their burdens in this respect. The reaction from the school teachers regarding the increased level of attention in class and increased punctuality, while difficult to quantify indicates a gain in terms of impact in school attendance. Table 53: general comments on the benefits of the project among affected communities “The water is nearer to us now and we have not to walk long distances to fetch it” There is more water available after this project. We used to make 4-5 trips a day with small 10 litre “Jericans” to fetch water. This was because of the long distance to the source. Now, with the 20 litre jericans, we make only two trips in a day” “We are now able to wash our clothes and bathe more frequently than we did before” “Our children have not to walk long distances now to get water” “The river water is terrible – we use it only when the kiosk is dry – even then we boil it” “In the past we paid a lot of money to the Bicycle boys to bring us water now we do that only when there is a crisis, like when the pump is broken down” “Children mostly are the ones who go to collect water, usually during their lunch break. This makes then late and tired in the afternoon. They are more punctual and attentive now because even though they still go to fetch water, they do not have to go long distances to get it”

3.6.3 WES Programme economic Impact Clearly discernible economic impacts of the WES project on women and children will require time and more accurate and comprehensive data and studies to establish. The reduction in morbidity clearly has economic implications, as does the freeing of time for other social and economic activities. The reduction in the cost of water is one area where the economic gain of the WES project has clearly been felt. The prevailing cost of stand point water, at 10FRW per Jerry-can (20 litres), represents a five times reduction from 100 FRW charged by the “bicycle boys” where there is no water nearby or when the gravity and pump systems break down. But even at this reduced rate many households, particularly those in the rural areas still find it difficult to pay for potable water. In many areas households resorted to alternative, including less potable sources for their water, as a result of not being able to pay the 10 FRW required per jerry-can. This issue of paying for water is discussed in greater detail in parts 3.5 and 3.2 of this report. Suffice to say here that if not dealt with properly it will continue to deny potable water to those who need it most in the rural and peri-urban locations. Another aspect of economic benefit related the improvement in access to water seems to be the impact its having on the local banana-based brewing industry. There are clearly many more of these industries as result of having water nearer the households. The mushrooming of local brewing “dens” however is also evidence of diminished income opportunities and growing levels of poverty in most parts of rural Rwanda.

113

3.6.4 WES Programme Environmental Impact. This evaluation has not observed any tangible positive environmental impact resulting due to the WES project. The main reason as explained already in part 3.2.1.4 has to do with the fact that this component of the project was not adequately developed during the bridging Programme. A number of observations made during the field visits and interviews however raise issues and concerns of an environmental nature which the project may need to address itself to in future operations under this component:

Impact of soil erosion on quantity and quality of water: there is clearly a growing trend of downhill erosion around most water catchments particularly those located in the higher mountainous areas north, north West and West of the country. The impact of this erosion is already manifesting in declining quantity and quality of water in some of these areas. It was observed that a number of the protected sources were left without tree or grass cover, resulting in the underground water turning brown particularly during the rainy season. Measures to control erosion around these catchments are clearly important elements of the WES environmental component. One way the project could play a role here is to support commercial tree nursery initiatives around protected catchments.

The Impact of the new group settlement policy on the quality of underground water:- the location of settlements on top of hills and along the roads clearly has implications for the quality of the underground water. It can be expected, as is the case already in some areas that increased concentration of latrines in the higher elevations will affect the quality of underground water sources negatively. Technologies that minimize this pollution, such as the composting of fecal waste/latrines, will have to be considered as measures to protect the environment and the watersheds. Already NGOs such as the ARC are considering this option.

114

Section four: Conclusions and recommendations 4.1 The Role of government and communes in promoting improved access to

safe Water and Environment Sanitation Services 4.1.1 Role of Government Conclusion Viewed within the context of the destruction brought on the country by the 1994 civil war and genocide, this evaluation commends the remarkable expedition to recovery realized by the government over the short period of its existence. The restoration to appreciable levels of functionality of the National WES infrastructure and services and a host of evident new initiatives and plans form an important part of this nation’s re-emerging. Some broad areas of achievement can be highlighted:

The successful global humanitarian appeal that resulted in the restoration to functionality of some 80% of the destroyed national (pre-war) water supply and sanitation infrastructure within one year of the war and the genocide.

The successful re-establishment of the Institutional Framework and Environment for improved National WES infrastructure and services management and development. Particularly note-worthy in this regard include the rationalization of focal Ministries leading to the creation of the Ministry of Energy Water and Natural Resources (MINERENA) and its respective departments, including the department of Water and Environment Sanitation; the development of the national Policy on water and Sanitation; the elaboration of institutional, organizational and technical frameworks for actual WES implementation and Management; the country-wide establishment of the Commune and community-based water management and cost recovery system of the Regie Associative, and; the nationwide social mobilization and sensitization campaigns to promote and institutionalize sector policies and plans;

A slow but consistent improvement in the levels of recurrent and investment funding to the sector since 1995 While these achievements show a growing commitment by the government towards improving the general water and sanitation situation in the country, a number of shortcomings, which threaten to undermine this commitment, are also evident. The following observations, conclusions and recommendations are made with respect to specific aspects of the role and performance of the government in these respects. 4.1.1.1 The Development of the National WES Policy 4.1.1.1.1 Policy thrust and integrity

Conclusions The National WES Policy is assessed sound in terms of an overall development approach and thrust and in

terms of its understanding of the realities and needs of the country. Fundamentally the policy underlines the value of water as both a private and a social good, recognizing the economic opportunity in it, but also the fundamental human right of access to it. Thus while provision is pillared on a principle of “user pays” the right of those without this ability is recognized.

The Policy is however assessed wanting in terms of substance in the following respects:

115

The policy document identifies a broad range of roles, responsibilities and functions for government, the Water and Sanitation Department and the Communes, but fails to define a distinct role for the Prefecture. Its prescribed institutional framework is assessed inadequate in not defining and clearly distinguishing the linkage mechanisms and institutions necessary for mediating relationships and expediting collective decision-making and action among sector actors. Further, by not setting out some form of broad timeframes within which to realize identified goals, the policy fails to project a needed distinct sense of commitment and urgency.

While recognizing the development (WES) implications and needs posed by the new government policy of group resettlement the policy comes out vague in terms of an explicitly targeted policy

The policy document does not define a framework within which adequate basic supply would be understood or interpreted

The evident excessive empathy with the popular inability to pay for water, while cognizant of the prevailing reality in the countryside carries the danger of negating efforts to promote and deepen local self-management and cost-recovery

The policy document lacks an explicit gender policy defining a clear role for Women in water resource management and development

An examination of the sector policy reveals a lack of an explicit environmental policy An explicit policy on sector monitoring and Management information System, spelling out

specific M&E and MIS elements and defining a clear institutional and organizational framework for realizing an effective M&E and MIS function is lacking in the policy document.

The policy document does not define an explicit financing policy for the sector. While identifying the enhancement of private sector participation as a key strategy for stimulating growth within the sector, it does not articulate a clear policy on how this would be achieved in both rural and urban areas. Recommendations: This evaluation recommends support towards further review and development of the sector policy in line with the assessed gaps. The evaluation recommends similar support towards the development of the national hygiene policy, currently lacking. A Policy serves as a guide to action within a particular milieu of needs and realities. It embodies the best-judged interpretation of and response within that milieu. At the national level, it is the official statement of the vision and intention of the government, informed by the prevailing needs and realities. Inadequately defined and elaborated, policy may lend itself to misinterpretation, and may even precipitate conflict among different interest groups. Its clarity and integrity is therefore important, not only as a guide to effective resource mobilization and direction, but also as an instrument for peace building. In respect of rural WES development it is now widely accepted that service provision should, to the greatest extent possible be locally rooted. For this to occur a clear policy is needed which enables rural people and their institutions to play a full and effective role in their own development and in the stewardship of their resources for this purpose, with full knowledge of what support they can give to and expect from government and other support systems. Since policy guides action, it is important that the policy defines a clear framework for monitoring and evaluating resulting development outputs and impact. Only in this way can problems be identified and resolved in good time and effective development engendered. In line with the policy gaps identified above, a number of now widely accepted experiences serve as useful bases for continuing reflection and review: The question of poor people’s inability to pay for water services: the insistence that poor people should pay for improved water services may seem harsh but evidence indicates that the

116

worst possible approach is to regard poor people as having no resources. This leads to people being treated as the objects rather than the subjects of development; it generates proposals for unaffordable subsidies, which tend to reach only those with influence, leaving the situation of the majority unchanged. Promises of free services for all have in practice usually resulted in some services for a few and little or none for most. A key element influencing a household’s willingness to pay for improved water supply is the household’s sense of entitlement to government services and their attitude toward government policy regarding water supply and sanitation. In general communities are reluctant to involve themselves in situations where the perception prevails that it is the government’s responsibility to provide services. The question of policy and gender: development experience worldwide shows that the active participation of women is key to the success of most water and sanitation projects targeting rural communities. Policies that have not called for and ensured an active participation of women in decisions and actions related to water and environment sanitation development and management have failed or only partially succeeded. The point of the sector policy and the environment: the relationship between water sanitation and the environment is well established. Sustainable development and management of water necessarily entails ensuring that the environment from which water is derived is protected and sustained. The concept of water as having an intrinsic value must therefore be extended to it also as having an intrinsic environmental value. A sound national water and sanitation policy must therefore also incorporate a clearly thought out environmental policy. 4.1.1.2 Policy elaboration and development Conclusion Examined guideline documents (manuals, curricular and study reports) and ongoing efforts to elaborate the national WES master plan and related legal frameworks provide evidence of achievements and continuing efforts in this development process. Many of these documents however remain as unconsolidated drafts and do not as yet constitute ratified official documents. Recommendations Continuing support is necessary to improve and make official these instruments of WES policy realization. A case in point is the need to consolidate a standard National document on Community Management of Water Supply projects, with comprehensive guidelines, modalities, selection criteria and prerequisites for handing over water supply schemes to Communities. There is also a need for a comprehensive consolidated manual for Regie Management Training. Overall effectiveness of efforts in this area will however remain contingent upon further reviews and development of relevant sector policies along the lines identified here. This is particularly so in respect of the Hygiene and Public health sector where the lack of an explicit policy has clearly resulted in a countrywide weak institutional and organizational framework for implementing and managing interventions within the sector. 4.1.1.2 Social mobilization and sensitization

117

Conclusions Appreciable mobilization and sensitization efforts by government have yielded a good understanding and acceptance of the key elements of the sector policy, namely decentralized self-management and cost-recovery. This is seen for example in the appreciable and growing number of rural people paying for potable water. Similar efforts and encouraging responses are however not evident in the other key WES area of Hygiene and Environment Sanitation. The lack of adequate skills, funding and overall commitment have yielded weak, technical, organizational and institutional bases for implementation and management, unable to deliver adequate and effective Hygiene and environment sanitation education and services. The effects and impact of these weak bases are evident in the low levels of improved Hygiene and sanitation knowledge and practices and the related high levels of morbidity and mortality at the local level. Recommendation This evaluation recommends continued support towards further mobilization, sensitization and training in order to deepen the understanding and acceptance of the key policy prescriptions related to WES development and management. The formulation and elaboration of the national Policy on Hygiene and Public health and the related establishment and development of the institutional and organizational bases for improving and promoting this component at commune and community level represent key areas on need for support. 4.1.1.3 Evolution of the institutional framework for management and development Conclusion A basic all-round national institutional framework for WES development and management has been established and has played an important facilitative and development role, particularly in relation to Water Development and management. The following noted weaknesses however threaten overall sector effectiveness.

While the specific roles and responsibilities of the commune-level administration are clearly defined and distinguished, those of the prefecture to government, and to communes, and vice versa are not. This lack of clarity has resulted in a weak coordination and technical support framework on the ground.

Key institutional mechanisms of linkage and consolidated engagement and bargain at different decision-making and management levels, specifically within the water sector, such as advisory councils, water boards and liaison committees, and the Regie Associative System remain either weakly evolved or not evolved at all. This is harming overall coordination, harmony, monitoring and potential synergy and effectiveness possible through joint implementation and management. Recommendation The identified institutional weaknesses clearly constitute areas of need for continued improvement, development and policy support. 4.1.1.4 Building and deepening human Capacities towards effective WES development and

Management

118

Conclusion The restoration to appreciable levels of functionality of some 80% of the national WES facilities and services, and other tangible interventions and plans provide useful indicators of growing national WES development and management capacity. The evident threat of a relapse to dysfunction of many of these facilities, and the organizational and institutional weaknesses noted within the Regie Management System however reveal inadequate overall management capacity. This capacity deficit is perhaps nowhere more evident than in the Public Hygiene Sector. There is no functional Hygiene and Public health department at the Commune level and consequently no effective organizational and institutional framework for ensuring the coordination and management of an effective Hygiene and Public Health function at this level. This organizational and institutional void is the primary cause of the grim hygiene and environment sanitation situation in the rural areas. Recommendation Further development and deepening of management capacities within the WES sector is clearly an important area of need for continued intervention and support. With respect to water infrastructure and services, continued support is needed to further develop and consolidate the organizational (technical, managerial and foundational) and institutional (linkages and relationships) bases of the National Regie Associative Management System. Within the Hygiene and Environment Sanitation sector, urgent support is necessary to establish and develop a fully functional department of Public Hygiene at the commune level, with a clear mandate defined by clear goals, objectives and relationships, and a clear executable Programme of action. The establishment of this department and the elaboration of a sound national hygiene policy are seen as prerequisite initial steps towards effective intervention within this sector. 4.1.1.5 Government financing and provision of WES infrastructure and facilities Conclusion While the evident improvement in both recurrent and investment funding to the WES sector since 1995 reflects a growing commitment by government towards improving the general water and sanitation situation in the country, this improvement is far unmatched with the prevailing demand and need for adequate and consistent provision of these facilities and services. A weak financial base complements the already mentioned inadequate technical, managerial and institutional capacity constraints as the key causes of sub-optimal performance within the sector. They are certainly the underlying causes for the weak hygiene and environmental sanitation development and management framework. Recommendation Increased financial allocations to the WES sector will be key to ensuring effective overall sector development. The allocation of funds to establish and maintain a fully functional hygiene and public health department at the commune level represents a particular urgent need in view of the observed weaknesses within this component. Similar support to the Prefecture level will be necessary to support an effective coordination, advisory and supervisory role.

119

4.1.1.6 Monitoring and Evaluation Conclusions Evident sector monitoring and MIS activities and plans show a commitment by government towards establishing and deepening a monitoring and evaluation function and provide useful baselines and benchmarks against which improvements and future assessments may be made. Many of these initiatives however remain isolated and, for the most part, not implemented against backgrounds of clearly determined and institutionalised sector/departmental goals performance indicators, targets and standards. The lack of adequate financial resources, along with inadequate human capacities are seen as the major causes for the prevailing inadequate capacity to develop, implement, manage and institutionalise an effective M&E and MIS function. Recommendations This evaluation recommends further support to establish and institutionalise an effective WES M&E and MIS function within government. The issue of institutionalising the M&E and MIS function is particularly relevant for Rwanda in view of the new government policy of decentralization under which the regions, and more specifically the communes, are now the epicentres of development. Decentralization will require that government development goals, policies, objectives and targets are translated and implemented locally. Factors affecting their delivery and impact potential will need, firstly, to be understood and influenced locally. This understanding and influencing will call for sound systems of data and Information management, effectively institutionalised and routinely analysed to generate accurate information on local and commune-wide performance and impact. These will then be viewed against set regional and national development goals and targets. The implication in terms of monitoring can be seen at three level:

At the community level, the evolution of an appropriate community-based system of collecting, storing, analysing, and using and forwarding commune and community level input, output and impact data and information

At regional and national level, the evolution of a system that will receive, collate, store, analyse, and use the same as bases for decision-making and further support.

The evolution of relevant capacities (skills, tools, systems, structures, etc ) at all relevant levels 4.1.2 The Role of Communes and communities in the development and provision of

Safe WES facilities Conclusion This role is assessed appreciably well executed and well achieved. Mobilization and sensitization efforts at commune level have yielded appreciable knowledge, acceptance and adoption of government policies, particularly in relation to water infrastructure development and management. The greatest achievement in this regard is seen in the establishment and use of the Regie Management System in local self-management of the water infrastructure. Over the brief period of the decentralization experience, one can, technically and in real terms, talk of local self-management and a functional cost-recovery system within the rural WES sector. A number of largely capacity-related factors however are undermining these efforts and achievements. Key among these is the inadequately developed technical, organizational and institutional (particularly relational) capacities of the Regies and the weakly evolved Hygiene and sanitation component.

120

Recommendation This evaluation recommends continued support to develop the identified organizational and institutional capacity gaps within the Regie Management System. As has been reiterated in earlier recommendations, support to establish and develop a functional, well integrated department of Hygiene at the commune level offers a key foundation and avenue towards improving and sustaining hygiene and environment sanitation conditions at the commune level. 4.2 The provision and management of Community-based WES Project

facilities and services Overall Conclusion This evaluation concludes that the goals and targets set for both the Provision and Management of Community-based WES facilities under the WES Bridging Programme were too ambitious to be accomplished over the designated three-year implementation period and were therefore only partially realized. While some achievements are evident, inadequately developed organizational and institutional frameworks and mechanisms for implementation and management, coupled with inadequate implementation and management capacities, and an overall weak financial base resulted in a weakening of an evident high impact potential. These constraints notwithstanding the evident achievements provide a base the further development and consolidation of which would greatly enhance future WES implementation and management functions and impact. The following conclusions and recommendations are made with respect to specific WES provision and management aspects: 4.2.1 Policy Support to improve the Institutional And Organizational Framework For

Effective WES Delivery 4.2.1.1 Achievement of advocacy IEC and Social Mobilization activities Conclusion This component is evaluated appreciably well achieved. The enthusiastic initial reception of and participation in project activities by potential beneficiary communities, and the appreciable success in the establishment of the Regie Management committees and development and pre-testing of IEC materials can be attributed to intensive IEC and social mobilization and sensitization activities, particularly in the early years of the project. The lack of adequate funding and effective capacities to carry out wider and more intensive and well focused mobilization and sensitization campaigns however resulted both in reduced effective outreach and in most of the materials developed or provided for IEC purposes not being effectively utilized. The greatest casualty again seems to be the hygiene and environment sanitation component for which most of the IEC were intended. While a growing number of beneficiaries are paying for water services, the levels of hygiene and environmental sanitation remain low, indicating both inadequate relevant knowledge and attitude, and inadequate behavior change. The traditional sense of entitlement to governmental services has also resulted in low beneficiary participation in some situations.

121

Recommendation This evaluation recommends increased advocacy/IEC activities to improve Hygiene and environment sanitation Knowledge, attitude and practices. The provision of potable water needs to go hand in hand with efforts to keep that water clean and safe. Improved organizational and institutional presence on the ground, coupled with effective IEC methodologies and approaches will be necessary both to maximize the use of the IEC materials and equipment developed/provided during the bridging Programme, and to ensure effective delivery of KAP improving messages. The recommendation made earlier regarding the need to improve the existing organizational and institutional framework for hygiene and environment sanitation promotion is reiterated again here. This evaluation also recommends training of all personnel and institutions involved in hygiene and environment sanitation education in participatory methodologies and approaches particularly in relation to hygiene and environment sanitation improvement. 4.2.1.2 Capacity building Conclusion This evaluation assesses this activity or component perhaps the highest achieved both in terms of outreach (numbers of people and sectors affected) and initial impact, among all WES Programme activities. The training and equipping of a wide range of government and community personnel at prefecture, commune and sector level, has not only improved the delivery of WES services in affected areas, but also provided a needed capacity base, the development and consolidation of which should result in further improved delivery of WES services and impact. Inadequately developed training content and capacities (particularly in relation to managerial training for the Regies and the application of participatory techniques, tools and methodologies in hygiene training), coupled with weak post-training and post-establishment monitoring and advisory support, and the lack of adequate funding have however acted to undermine the full impact of this component. Recommendation This evaluation recommends the following measures to enhance the effectiveness and impact of the capacity building component:

A clear Programme of capacity consolidation to strengthen and effectively direct the capacities developed during the Bridging Programme. This Programme should have two elements, namely the consolidation of technical skills and, the consolidation of the institutional framework for implementation and management. The first element would entail a combination of refresher training, build-up workshops and exchange visits to exemplary projects in other communes. The specific areas of need for skills upgrading, identified in this evaluation as mostly managerial (financial, administrative and M&E) will need to be clearly elaborated and appropriate resource person deployed to provide them. A new area of skills training identified in this evaluation is that of participatory methodologies and techniques for effective hygiene promotion and education. This evaluation recommends that focal implementation and management agencies/institutions and personnel be trained in these participatory techniques, to equip them with the range of participatory skills needed to effectively interact with and impart hygiene messages to communities. It further recommends that a national core team of Participatory Health and Sanitation Education Trainers be trained as trainers to impart Participatory WATSAN education and promotion skills at the commune and community level. Regarding the second element, this evaluation again reiterates the recommendation on the need to establish and strengthen the commune department of hygiene

122

and environment sanitation as the overall custodian of Hygiene and sanitation issues at the commune level. The department would work with other actors in this area, such as the health Centres, the schools, the women groups, NGOs, and the Regie Committee, through some form of Integrated Management Committees constituted at cellule, sector and Commune level (Cellule, Sector and Commune Water and Environment Sanitation Management Committees-WESMCs). At the Sector and Commune level the CWESMCs would be responsible to the CDC, serving as technical arms or committees to it, advising it on Water and Environment sanitation Issues. The Functions of the Committees would be mostly technical and Managemental - planning, coordination, advisory, monitoring and supervision. The important point to note in this arrangement is that the water and Hygiene components would be handled as two functionally distinct but inseparable components. The envisaged institutional framework for realizing this can be depicted schematically as presented in figure 10 below:

Figure10: Proposed Consolidated framework for implementing and Managing Water and Environment Sanitation

Activities

Increased funding to support the proposed consolidative capacity building framework. The funds would be needed to support training activities and to facilitate follow-up and monitoring activities. In this respect, the question of counterpart funding is revisited. As part of the preparation for the next phase of WES project implementation bilateral discussions between the government and UNICEF will be necessary to define and elaborate a clear participation and funding basis. 4.2.1.3 Research and Development Conclusion This component is assessed only partially achieved. While a number of investigative activities were carried out under this component, a deliberate clearly focused research-learning and development agenda is evident in only a few of them.

Commune Development Committee CDC

Commune Water and Environment Sanitation Management Committee

Sector Water and Environment Sanitation Management Committee

Commune level

Sector Level

Regie Committee

Regie Committee

Community of Users

Department of Hygiene and Public Health

Regie Associative

Management

Cellule Level Cellule Water and Sanitation Management

CommitteeWater Point Committee

123

Recommendation The mixed experience of the WES Bridging Programme calls for a careful learning-action-learning management approach underpinned by sound investigations, studies and evaluations. This evaluation therefore recommends continued research and evaluation efforts as bases for effective management and development. A number of issues emerging from the bridging Programme, and others likely to impact WES Programme goals and objectives are worth investigating during the next country Programme. These include:

The impact of concentrated settlements on the quality of underground water and the general watershed

Factors underlying the low adoption rates of improved (Sanplats) latrines and the general poor adoption of improved Hygiene and environment sanitation messages.

The impact of the national pattern of concentrated settlement on the use and status of environmental and specifically forestry resources. Concentrated settlements carry the possible danger of concentrated exploitation of forest resources for cooking and building purposes. A study of how the new patterns of settlement are affecting the use of forestry and other natural resources may be necessary to shed some light in this respect.

Factors influencing morbidity and mortality trends among under five year-old children in rural Rwanda In addition to these, the evaluation recommends

Frequent analysis of source and household water to determine changes in quality and provide necessary treatment as measures of guaranteeing the project’s goal of improving access to safe water

Continuous monitoring and evaluation and mining and use of key lessons learnt.

4.2.1.4 Promotion of Primary Environmental Care Activities Conclusion Major ministerial and institutional re-organizations affecting the focal Ministry resulted in frequent shifts in mandate, focus and strategies and subsequent delay in the implementation of most of the activities under this component. This evaluation notes that most of the planned activities, mostly of a preparatory nature, are successfully accomplished and are assessed as good bases for subsequent interventions. Recommendation Accomplished preparatory activities under this component provide a good base for subsequent planning and intervention in the new country Programme. This evaluation recommends the use of the materials generated under this component in this respect. In view of the high levels of downhill erosion around most of the springs and catchments currently capped by the project, this evaluation recommends practical conservation and protection measures including tree nurseries establishment, tree planting and soil erosion control activities.

124

4.2.1.5 Monitoring and evaluation activities Conclusion While some attempts to monitor the WES Projects are evident, a sound and systematic M&E and MIS function, based on specific, clearly determined indicators and performance targets has not been attained for the WES Programme. There is no comprehensive, consolidated MIS framework for the Programme. The proposed new idea to pilot a monitoring and Evaluation function in 5 WES Communes has yet to be defined and clearly articulated. At individual level most implementing agencies lack the skills necessary to put in place an effective M&E and MIS framework and do not therefore have one. The requirement to submit quarterly progress reports has not been observed strictly by most implementing agencies and communes, further weakening this function. Recommendations The recommendations for this component are presented in part 4.7of this section 4.2.2 The Provision of Community-Based WES Facilities 4.2.2.1 The provision of potable water This evaluation has observed mixed results and impacts in the 10 Communes evaluated. In terms of the number of completed projects, the WES Programme is assessed under-achieved. A consideration of all analyzed factors and data however leads to the conclusion that significant establishment and development achievements were realized. The Programme has achieved its objective of improving access to potable water in areas where the Projects are competed. The following problems and concerns however are factors undermining continued improved access:

The lack of adequate reliable data on both the numbers and functionality status of the WES facilities installed and the populations targeted and actually served

Non-compliance by a number of implementing agencies with the statutory requirement to conduct chemical and bacteriological analysis of water from prospective sources as a pre-capping safety measure, and the lack of supervision and routine quality monitoring by the focal Ministry to ensure observance and maintenance of stipulated quality standards respectively.

Inconsistent supplies resulting from systems breakages and the high operation and maintenance costs, linked in turn to overall inadequate management skills within the Regie Management System

Inadequate pre-establishment and development studies, resulting from the lack of adequate funding and technical capacities for these studies, and the hurry among implementing agencies to “acquire projects” is leading to poor exploitation and development

The over-emphasis on and preference for gravity flow systems (based on ease/cost of establishment and management considerations) is not complementing the government’s new group re-settlement policy which is relocating people on top of hills and along mainline infrastructures such as schools and roads. This preference is also hindering experimentation with

125

and development of circumstantially more appropriate and more viable alternative technologies such as roof, wind and mechanical turbine-based technologies Recommendations The provision problems and concerns raised above raise important technical, financial and policy concerns and imperatives. Among these include the need to support/ensure proper pre-establishment and feasibility studies, the need to establish/enforce standards and ethics of good engineering and infrastructure development practices, and the need to rigorously monitor to ensure quality in on-going infrastructure developments. More importantly, they raise the question of the need to broaden the current scope of participation within the WES sector at three levels:

By encouraging (through donor round-table meetings and other forums) more donors to join UNICEF in rural water financing, as complementary (through joint funding schemes) or alternative actors, in order to eliminate the prevailing “sector donor mentality” and make more funds available to enable more comprehensive pre-establishment studies and greater flexibility in infrastructure development.

By providing stimulants to encourage private sector actors to become more interested in rural water development and financing

By contracting out the different stages of rural water development to different actors on the basis of comparative advantage and strength. 4.2.2.2 The provision of improved hygiene and environment sanitation activities Conclusion This evaluation assesses this component sub-optimally achieved in the ten communes evaluated. Accumulated evidence across all the 10 Communes evaluated lead to the conclusion that this component of the WES Programme was not effectively implemented and yielded little effective impact. The key factors underpinning the weak performance can be summarized as follows:

A tendency by implementing agency to focus more on the water component at the expense of the Hygiene component

A weak and ineffective field Monitoring regime The failure of the Regie management system to give adequate attention to Hygiene and

sanitation issues The lack of a national policy on Hygiene and public health to give direction to the sector in

terms of interventions A weak organizational and institutional framework for implementing, Managing and

institutionalizing this component at commune and community level The lack of adequate technical and participatory skills in this area among implementing

agencies An overall weak funding framework

Recommendations Effective WES intervention is going to have to address the question of how to get households to adopt and maintain practices that keep themselves, their water and their immediate and surrounding environments clean. A particular focus is going to have to be directed towards reducing morbidity among the under five children through approaches that target both the parents

126

directly, and through some form of child-to-child intervention. The school system is clearly the most important entry point for implementing the child-to-child-based intervention. This evaluation recommends the adoption of successful child-to-child intervention models from other countries and project situations. Improving the organizational and institutional framework for Project implementation and management however is going to be the key determinant of effective intervention and impact at commune and community level. Towards this two options are proffered:

Evolution of a new institutional framework to deal with hygiene and sanitation issues: Given the poor performance of the Regie System in the management of the hygiene and sanitation component, it would make good management sense to let it remain in its present role as a purveyor of water, while a new institution working very closely with it is evolved to deal with hygiene and sanitation issues. Recent capacity building initiatives and the on-going discussions to invigorate MINISANTE ‘s department of Hygiene and Public health at the commune would lead one to think that such a new arrangement is possible. The WES Programme has provided extensive support to the department in recent months to train hygiene Promotion teams at the commune and sector level. Currently discussions are on-going within the Ministry to recruit permanent paid staff to lead the hygiene and public health team at the commune level. These developments could be built upon to establish an independent fully operational Hygiene and environment sanitation department at the commune level, with a clear mandate and well articulated Programme of action. The Department would be the custodian and entry point for all hygiene and sanitation issues in the commune and would work very closely with the Prefecture system, the Regie system at all levels, and with the various organizational arrangements and institutions (women groups, schools, youth associations, health Centres, etc) at community level. In terms of integration and institutionalization, the framework presented in figure 10 in this section would apply-reconstituted CWESCs at Commune, Sector and Cellule levels working very closely with (or as technical arms of) the CDC and the Regie Committees, and with all actors within the sector, both within and outside the commune. The overall aim and thrust would be to overcome the existing organizational and institutional void, which is hindering effective intervention at commune and community level (see figure 5 in the text and 12 below). The Regie committees would retain a distinct function of managing the development of the infrastructure for and delivering potable water to communities. This is the option of choice.

The other less favorable option would be to broaden the current Regie structure to include the other sector stakeholders. This would mean the Regies retaining their dual function as purveyors of water and promoters of Hygiene. This arrangement has not worked very well during the bridging Programme. The recommendations made in part 4.2.1.2 form part of the needed interventions to improve the implementation and management of this component. A major shortcoming during the bridging Programme in this regard was the weak monitoring framework, which resulted in many of the implementation and management weaknesses not being detected and corrected in time. The need to improve the monitoring framework cannot therefore be overemphasized. Key areas in this regard include frequent sampling and analysis of source and household water to determine trends in chemical and bacteriological pollution, examination of data from the health Centres located within the areas covered by the project to determine causes of and trends in morbidity and mortality and regular routine monitoring of process and effects. All these recommendations however are going to have to be underpinned by a sound National Hygiene and Public Health policy giving a clear overall direction to the sector. It has been noted

127

that such a policy is not yet promulgated. From a policy support perspective therefore, technical and financial support (if sought) could be provided towards the development of the Hygiene and Public health policy. 4.2.2.3 The funding of WES Project activities Conclusion At less than 50% of the proposed funding level, the activities planned under the WES Bridging Programme could not have been implemented and managed as envisaged in the Programme design. Such planned activities as research and development, M&E, Capacity Building and social mobilization were subsequently either under-funded or not funded at all during some of the years. This weak funding base is considered a key factor in the overall inadequate performance of the WES Programme. The underlying causes for the weak funding base include the prevalent notion of adequate national WES coverage, which has resulted in a depressed donor interest in the sector, the never resolved question of “counterpart” funding to WES from Government, and the non-monitoring of implementing agencies to ascertain that they meet their financial and operational obligations towards Project implementation and management as spelt out in the Protocols (contracts) of agreement with them. Recommendation Increasing and sustaining access to both potable water and safe levels of hygiene and environmental sanitation is going to require increased contact with communities and increased funding. The completion of the on-going national inventory of existing water and sanitation infrastructure should provide accurate official data on numbers and functionality status of WES facilities in the Country and a good basis for lobbying increased investment funding to the sector. This evaluation recommends support to this activity so that it can be accomplished quickly and successfully. As part of the effort to broaden the scope of funding to the sector, it is recommended that more donors be encouraged to join UNICEF in rural water financing as complementary or alternative actors. A quick decision over the issue of counterpart funding will need to be arrived at and both government and Non-government implementing agencies monitored to ensure that they honor their contractual pledges and obligations in this respect. 4.2.3 The Management Of Community-Based WES Facilities 4.2.3.1 National level management of WES facilities and Services 4.2.3.1.1 WES Project Planning decision-making and Coordination This evaluation assesses this role inadequately fulfilled. The following specific conclusions are drawn with respect to both the planning and decision-making and the coordination functions:

While appreciably successful in the initial role of laying the foundation for the implementation of the WES Programme, and while credited with making such broad decisions as the general Programme direction and priorities, it was too presumptuous to expect that the Project Coordination Committee (PCC), comprising full-scale directors of nascent departments, in a country emerging out of war and needing desperately to re-establish and re-invent itself would continue on the initial operational mode and in the manner specified in the guideline document.

128

Available evidence indicates that the failure to recognize and review the role of the PCC in light of emerging functional realities (high ministerial workloads and weak performance) resulted in its role of providing overall project stewardship gradually becoming less distinct, less focused and overall ineffectual.

Inadequately conceived, constituted and stewarded, the Project Coordination Office failed to evolve into an effective coordination and planning entity with a clear mandate, operational objectives and procedures, effectively bridging the institutional and operational relationship between the national and regional level structures, to ensure effective definition, implementation management of WES Project Activities; and effectively monitoring and providing needed consolidative support to WES implementation and Management structures, based on an accurate understanding of the situation and realities on the ground. The poor stewardship from the PCC, coupled with inadequate staffing and technical competencies emerge as the key causes of the failure of the Project coordination office. Key consequences ensuing from these weaknesses, which became aggravated by weak overall coordination from MINERENA included the following:

Poor inter-ministerial and inter-agency planning, coordination and collaboration framework Poor overall functioning of the Project Coordination Office, manifested in the lack of a clear

framework of institutions working objectively together and bridging national level goals, objectives and realities with regional and local level realities and priorities.

A systematic atrophy of the institutions initially designed to implement and manage WES Projects on the ground, and their replacement with less conceptually, institutionally and organizationally oriented ones

Following the institutional and organizational inefficiencies and ineffectiveness, UNICEF taking over many of the management and coordination functions assigned to these institutions and its role becoming more operational and less facilitative Recommendations The issues raised above provide important lesions in terms of the constitution of both the PCC and the Project Coordination structures, and overall Coordination during the next WES Project. The following recommendations are made in both respects:

While an intense role for the Project Steering Committee (the use of the term Steering implies giving overall strategic coordination and direction, and removes the more functional role implied in coordination) may be necessary in the initial stages, this role should be reviewed in light of emerging realities.

The failure of the PCC coordination function could be overcome through a rotational system where one focal ministry serves for a year and is replaced by another upon a review of its performance.

The Project Coordination Office serves two distinct functions which require two distinct sets of skills and competencies, namely, bridging the institutional and operational relationship between the national and regional level structures to ensure effective definition, implementation management of WES Project Activities; and monitoring and providing needed consolidative support to WES implementation and Management structures on the ground, based on a sound understanding of situational realities and needs. The office therefore needs good planning, programming and organizational management skills, and good M&E and MIS skills. These skill needs should be considered in the constituting of this office in the next WES Project Phase.

129

4.2.3.1.2 Screening and Approval of Commune-level WES Projects Conclusion The collapse of both the PST and the PMT resulted in the criteria and Procedures set out in the guideline document for the development and screening of Project proposals not being strictly observed. Following the institutional collapse, UNICEF assumed the role of screening and guiding the proposals, with some assistance from the National WES Project Coordinator. This function was however carried out without a clear, formal framework of qualifying and guiding standards, criteria and procedures. A number of consequences ensued from the institutional collapse and the lack of clear guidelines:

The non-involvement of the prefecture level team and the lack of a formal decentralized “clearinghouse” with an institutional presence of persons convening and making decisions regularly, guided by established guidelines, standards and criteria for proposal development, approval and forwarding, has meant increased technical/’advisory distance and subsequent time wastage and expense as commune representatives shuttle between their locations and the National WES Office in Kigali seeking advice on and approval for their proposals.

The lack of adequate prefecture involvement has resulted in inadequate information about WES Projects and a subsequent diminished ability to play an effective advisory, supervisory and monitoring role

The weak advisory and clearing framework has resulted in proposals that are not comprehensive enough to enable a sound definition and elaboration of performance indicators and benchmarks against which subsequent monitoring and evaluation can be made.

The lack of a comprehensive screening and approval framework has resulting in inflated requirements for materials in the proposals with leads to wastage and possible abuse and misdirection Recommendation Figure 13 and the accompanying explanation in Table 54 present the proposed general framework within which an effective project screening and approval function could be realized. Two proposals are proffered: a decentralized screening and approval framework within an invigorated Project Support Unit (PSU) at the Prefecture level. Under this framework, the PSU would serve as the clearing house, receiving, screening and forwarding approved proposals to the PSC for final approval and contract signing. This is the option of choice. It is consistent with the government’s decentralization policy and serves the purpose of deepening regional knowledge and ownership and subsequent close supervision and monitoring of resulting projects. The other less favored option entails screening and approval by an independent centralized (at National) Project Coordination Unit (PCU) based at the National level. The institutional features of both scenarios are presented and outlined in figure 13 and Table 54 respectively. 4.2.3.1.3 The Management of the National level WES Stock The management of the Gikondo National level WES store and Stock appears apparently satisfactory. The following observations made during the evaluation of the store’s operations however constitute areas of concern and need for improvement:

130

The store managers are not furnished with copies of the contract with the Communes and the

implementing agencies and are therefore not able to reconcile requisitions with actual suppliable balances as an additional control measure. This is necessary in view of the fact that currently requisitions are made by only one person (the National WES Coordinator) and endorsed by three Senior Officers who are often too busy to give meticulous attention to what they sign

The computerization of the stock management system and the security checks at the warehouse gate offer no absolute guarantees that the materials are safe or will not be taken illegally out of the stores. The lack of an annual warehouse audit is worrying, as is the lack of adequate follow-up of materials to their destinations. One has only to load excess materials into the lorry and offload them somewhere between the store and their final destination!

The bulk acquisition of materials from abroad (Europe) is resulting in a growing number of materials that are not well suited to small-scale water delivery systems in rural Rwanda. Most implementing agencies were concerned about having to either buy some of the WES Construction materials specified in the contracts because the materials were not available in the WES store, or having to make do with materials which do not quite meet the prescribed construction specifications. A number of observed breakdowns in the established WES infrastructure resulted from the inappropriateness of some of the materials supplied. Recommendation This evaluation recommends additional control measures to ensure full safety of WES Construction materials. The following specific measures are recommended:

The store to have copies of the contracts with implementing agencies so that they are able to reconcile requisitions against suppliable balances

Improvement of the current Store database to include a system that automatically checks off materials supplied and displays the balances for each WES project

An annual warehouse audit as the surest guarantee of stock safety A national WES material needs survey as guide for future bulk purchases and procurements. Financial allocations to implementing agencies to enable then purchase materials not

available in the WES Store. 4.2.3.1.4 The Management of the WES MIS and M&E Function The conclusions and recommendations made in part 4.2.1.5 and 4.7 of this section regarding the performance of this function apply here. Suffice to say here that a clear overall M&E and MIS development and management role while defined in the guideline document was not sufficiently elaborated and pursued for the WES Project. There is therefore a need to develop and pursue one. 4.2.3.2 Regional Level Management of WES Facilities and Services 4.2.3.2.1 Prefecture level planning, coordination and management Conclusion Constituted and evidently successfully involved in some areas initially, the Project Support Team (PST), designed as the key advisor, supervisor, monitor and manager of the WES Programme at Prefecture level did not evolve to become a formal institution with a clear organizational and

131

institutional identity and mandate, and the resources (financial, material and technical) needed to effectively pursue these roles and functions. Over time the PST became effectively institutionally moribund and was often by-passed by implementing agencies, with its constituting members acting mostly individually and only at the prompting of these agencies and respective parent Ministries. An advisory, supervisory and monitoring service desperately needed at the commune and community level in respect of WES implementation and Management has subsequently not evolved at the Prefecture level. The lack of effective stewardship from both the project Coordination Office and the PCC, the weak formation and the weak funding base emerge as the major causes of the failure of the idea of the PST. Recommendation Whatever name is given to it, some form of a “techno-management think tank” is necessary at the Prefecture level to advise and guide commune-level development implementation and management activities and to build, monitor, and consolidate nascent organizational and institutional capacities at this level. Theoretically and Pragmatically the CDC, the Regies and the myriad of emerging commune and community-level organizational and institutional arrangements are fundamentally the engines for managing and embedding decentralized and community-based and community participatory development approaches. The development and consolidation of the capacities of these institutions is therefore crucial to the success of the WES Programme and the overall decentralized development approach adopted by the government. A competent capacity developing team at the Prefecture level is crucially important in this respect. The development of the capacity of this team therefore becomes a key development management function for government and all interested parties. The key area of need for skills development, besides the professional technical areas, must be constituted within the broad area of Planning and Organizational Development (OD). This evaluation recommends continued specific support in this area. 4.2.3.2.2 Commune level planning coordination and Management Conclusion The basic WES Planning, Coordination Implementation and Management framework comprised (in design) a Project Management Team (PMT) working with and eventually giving way to established base level structures of the Regie Management System, government, implementing agencies and communities This evaluation assesses as satisfactory the evident effort put into the service of this function. The establishment, development and use of the Regie Management System, emerges as one of the major institutional successes of the decentralization and local self-management experience in Rwanda. Collectively, the institutions making up the Regie Associative Management System have played a key role in both the establishment and development of the Water Infrastructure, and in the management of the cost recovery system. Over the short period of the Bridging Programme and the decentralization experience, one can, technically and in real terms, talk of local self-management and people paying for water and receiving related services at the commune and community level. However, the Regie System has not evolved sufficiently to become the effective Commune WES development and Management institution, and the replacement for the PMT (which like the PST became institutionally moribund) that it was envisaged to become, even in the delivery of water where some success is evident. A number of reasons, weaknesses and consequences can be broadly summarized:

132

Compositionally and in terms of function, the Regie has become a water infrastructure development and delivery manager rather than a general WES manager: In design, the PMT and the CWESCs represented wholesome multi-sector and multi-stakeholder institutions with potential collective capacity to influence, guide and manage WES interventions and relationships both internally within the commune and externally among other actors and stakeholders. As currently composed and operated however, without this mix of stakeholders, the Regie system lacks the representation needed to effectively intervene organizationally and institutionally on Hygiene and sanitation matters. Thus while appreciably successful in the management of the water component, the Regie Associative Management System has performed poorly in regard of the management of the hygiene and sanitation component

Inadequately developed organizational and institutional capacities: While the establishment of the Regie Committees and Training emerge as key areas of the WES Programme achievement, this evaluation concludes that training interventions directed specifically towards developing and consolidating the organizational and institutional management capacities of the Regie Management System have not been adequately conceived, organized and executed. Unlike other forms of training given by the Programme, such as the hygiene and sanitation training, and the technical training of the fontainiers, and baring exceptions like CARE, a needed well developed and clearly focused Organizational Development (OD) training (focused on building/consolidating the organizational elements of vision, mission, objectives, strategies, systems, structures, skills and abilities, resources, linkages, relationships, networks, culture, attitudes, leadership behavior, processes, procedures, etc) is not evident. The lack of adequate capacities among implementing agencies in this area emerges as the major cause for this weak OD focus. A number of consequences have ensued from the two road areas of weakness, among them;

A tendency by implementing agencies to work through individuals rather than through formally constituted institutions. This has resulted in a weakening of the institutional integrity, strength and legitimacy of the Regies and a weak sense of and framework for collective community organizing, involvement and participation.

Weak horizontal and vertical linkages and working relationships within the different levels and structures of the Regie Management System itself, and between the Regie system and other structures of commune and community self-organizing, such as the Community Development Committees.

Weak understanding and use of the potential of the Regie Associative System as both an organizing concept and an empowering institution: The various constituting structures and levels of the Regie system remain weakly integrated and separated by large power distances. The inherent potential of the system as a vehicle for leveraging assistance, collective bargain and compliance is thus little understood, developed and pursued.

Inadequate technical, administrative and financial management capacities, manifested for example in weak financial management systems, inadequate capacities to develop and present comprehensive project proposals, weak involvement in the management of project implementation processes, and weak capacities to elaborate, pursue and effectively monitor sound infrastructure development/investment plans

133

Recommendations In view of the weaknesses identified above, this evaluation recommends:

An intensification of efforts towards a review and improvement of the current implementation and management framework for Hygiene and environmental sanitation improvement: The failure of the Regie Management System to intervene effectively in the management of the hygiene and sanitation clearly calls for a review of the current framework for managing this function. In this regard the recommendation made in earlier sections regarding the need to support the evolution of an independent fully functional department of Hygiene and Public Health, building on the capacities developed during the bridging Programme and the on-going discussions to invigorate MINISANTE ‘s department of Hygiene and Public health at the commune level is reiterated. The department would be the custodian of and entry point for all Hygiene and sanitation issues in the commune, taking over this function from the Regies. The Regie committees would retain a distinct function of managing the delivery of potable water in the commune, working very closely with the department. This is the option of choice. The other less favorable option is to broaden the current Regie structure to include these representatives. In this framework the Regie would retain its dual function as Overall WES Manager, an arrangement that seems not to have worked very well during the Bridging Programme.

Development of a comprehensive framework for Organizational Capacity development: Current uses of the term Organizational Capacity imply that the term can be understood as areas of an organization’s core abilities, together with the means and relationships through which to express them. The International NGO Training and Research Centre (INTRAC) has advanced a model of organizational capacity which recognizes three principal areas of ability, namely the ability to “BE”, “DO” and “RELATE”. The ability to “be” relates to internal organizational factors, which enable it to maintain its specific identity, values and mission. The ability to “do” relates to performance in terms of impact at micro and macro level, consistent with stakeholder expectations. The ability to “relate” concentrates on the nature of relationships with external actors and puts the organization within its wider context. When combined these three areas of ability determine an organization’s overall performance as well as its role and institutional position as an actor within its particular context. Figures 11 and 12 below encapsulate this capacity model. Figure 12 shows a downward progression from the top to give weighting to the different components.

134

Figure 11: An organizational capacity framework

SustainableDevelopment

Improving Life

CultureLeadershipLearning

Systems and Structures

ResourcesHumanPhysicalFinancial

PurposeIdentityValuesStrategy

Accountability legal

Target group

External Relationships

Within sectorOutside sector

DonorsComm. leaders

Other NGOsGovt..

PrivateTrade Unions

EXTERNAL LINKAGES“TO RELATE”

INTERNAL ORGANIZATION“TO BE”

PROGRAMME PERFORMANCE“TO DO”

PERFORMANCE

IMPACTEFFECTIVENESS

Community levelPolicy Level

Identityattitudevalues

VisionMissionStrategy

Systems and Structures

Skills and Abilities

Material and Financial Resources

External Relations(donor, NGOs, Public)

Internal organization

Programme performanceEffectiveness and impact)

CONTEXT

Figure 12: An Organizational capacity Framework

135

According to these models the first principles for a healthy organization is to be clear about its identity and its attitude to the world. This in turn shapes its vision of society and purpose in it, which in turn shapes its strategies to be adopted and the tasks to be carried out, which in turn defines the systems and Structures that need to be in place and the skills and abilities to be employed and developed. The whole system is then supported by adequate resourcing. Put differently, form follows function. This framework for Organizational and institutional capacity development underpins a lot of the recommendations made here in respect of organizational and institutional capacity development. It is the recommended framework for developing the capacities of WES implementing and managing organizations and institutions, as well as those working with them, including the implementing agencies. This evaluation recommends that a clear Programme of capacity growth in this regard be developed and supported. 4.2.3.2.3 The Management of operation and maintenance and the Cost recovery system Conclusion The establishment and implementation of the cost-recovery system and process within the rural water sector stands out as a remarkable achievement of the community-based self-management concept in Rwanda. The appreciable acceptance of the idea of paying for water in the rural areas and the evident satisfactory efforts towards the management of it, are seen as developments that offer hope for eventual complete local ownership and commercial management of rural WES infrastructure. The following organizational and institutional problems constitute obstacles towards the realization of this prospect and hence, areas of need for further improvement and development:

Overall below average cost-recovery rates and high operational costs: most of the Systems evaluated were able to recover on average between 35 and 40% of their annual budget outlays. This rate is considered still low. In terms of expenditure, it is noted that nearly all the money generated in revenues is spent, leaving very little to almost no income for further investment and development. Inadequate recovery efforts, coupled with the unwillingness of some big consumers (institutions and farmers) to pay for water are among the major causes for the low recovery rate.

Inadequate Regie Autonomy: a number of Regie Committees and Bureaus are under undue control and pressure from the Commune authorities and are not able to manage and direct Regie resources effectively, independently and accountably. While some oversight role is necessary, greater effectiveness will be realized through a more hands-off approach and a shift in the locus of control from individuals to legitimate institutions. In this respect the role of the CDC and the Water Users (Regie Associative) in directing management function needs to be re-emphasized and re-focused.

Overall inadequate technical, administrative and financial management capacities are clearly hampering effective, decision-making, planning and action towards improved systems’ performance. Recommendations The weaknesses presented above are in a large measure linked to inadequate Regie capacities. The development and consolidation of this capacity therefore constitutes a key component of the effort to improve and ensure overall effective Management of the cost-recovery process and the whole framework for the management of the rural water infrastructure. The recommendations of other assessments and studies in this regard, for example, the recommendations of the evaluation of the functioning of the Regies in Rusumo Kigarama and Nyarubuye by CARE and the Division of Rural Hydraulics of the Department of Water and sanitation41 are clearly worth considering in this regard.

Overall Recommendation with respect to the Implementation and Management of the WES Programme In view of the assessment presented in this evaluation, and the conclusions and recommendations drawn above, two implementation and management scenarios, pillared on the assessed need to decentralize WES Project implementation, management and ownership are proposed: 41 EVALUATION DE LA FONCTIONNALITE DES REGIES: Experience De CARE A RUSUMO, KIGARAMA ET NYARUBUYE – Mars 2000

136

Implementation and Management Scenario One A Project Steering Committee working with a restructured Project coordination office and a restructured fully functional decentralized Project Support Unit comprising personnel from government, and reconstituted implementation and management teams at commune level. The thrust of this revised framework will be on ensuring full local involvement, management and ownership through a decentralized implementation and management structure. Implementation and Management Scenario Two A Project Steering Committee working with an independent fully established PROJECT Coordination and Support UNIT (PCSU) at the National level with a functional Project support team at Prefecture level and fully restructured implementation and management units at commune and community level. While also enhancing and deepening decentralized WES implementation, management and ownership, the core advantage of this option is seen in guaranteed effective management of both the processes of and the impact due to development and improvement interventions and activities. Figure 13 and Table 54 below present the framework and organizational and institutional features of the two proposed implementation and management frameworks or scenarios.

137

UNICEF WES Programme

Officers GOR- Relevant Directorates of Minerena, Minisante, Minitere, Minaloc, Mineduc

Project Support Unit (PSU)

National WES Coordination Office (PRIVATE OR SECONDED)

PSC

Community Development Committees

Regie Management Committee

Sector CDC CWESMC Sector Regie

PMT CWESMC

UNICEF Coordinator Programme Officers

Project SteeringCommittee

(PSC)

GOR - Minerena Minisante Minitere Minaloc, Mineduc Departmental Directors

National Project Coordination & Support Unit

Project Support Team

Community Development Management Committees

Regie CommitteePMT/CWESMC

Scenario 1

NATIONAL

LEVEL

RREGIONAL LEVEL

Prefecture

Commune

Scenario 2

NATIONAL LEVEL

REGIONAL LEVEL Prefecture

Commune

Key institutional features of Scenario 1

A Project Steering Committee (PSC) composed of UNICEF head of section, Directors of Partner Ministries, NGO Representatives A National WES Coordination office with a professional Coordinator and MIS Specialist (from Market or seconded from Government) A fully empowered Project Support Unit at the prefecture level (drawn from represented ministerial departments and civil society) Reconstituted CWESCs at commune, sector and cellule level

ADVANTAGES

Decentralized decision-making and management Greater government and local ownership Enhanced Prefecture Support Role Improved all-round coordination, monitoring and quality control Reduced management and overhead costs, more so if National Coordination office comprises government seconded personnel Independent and more professional coordination, especially if national WES Coordinator is recruited from the market Greater consolidative support and institutional linkages

DISADVANTAGES

Overall effectiveness hinges on functioning PSC, NPCO and the Decentralized regional PSU

PSU success hinges on a good incentives framework

Key institutional features of Scenario II

A PCSC composed same as 1 above An independent Project Support Unit at National level with full planning, coordination and management functions Active ministerial departments at prefecture level A Project Management Team/Committee (PMT/CWESMC) at commune level Reconstituted CWESCs at commune, sector and Cellule levels

ADVANTAGES Independent and more professional Coordination Professional and improved overall coordination and management leads to improved inertia and capacities at regional and local level Enhanced performance audit Greater impact Independence allows for greater innovation and learning

DISADVANTAGES System may be administratively costly s Management tends to be top-heavy and vulnerable to Ministerial and departmental moods. System actually depends on active and cooperative departments at regional level and success is often pegged to motivations (incentives) at regional level There is a possible danger of alienation resulting from a reduced sense of

t

USERS (CWESC)

Sector CDCs CWESC Sector Regie

USERS CWESC

Fig 13: POSSIBLE INSTITUTIONAL SCENARIOS FOR WES PROGRAMME IMPLEMENTATION AND MANAGEMENT

138

Table 54: organizational and institutional features of the proposed WES Implementation and Management Scenarios

Implementation and Management Scenario

Implementation and Management Teams or Committees

Team/Committee Composition

Responsibilities and Functions

A Project Steering Committee

UNICEF Head of Section/Project; Heads of relevant Directorates of the Ministries responsible for Water, Hygiene and Health, Environment, Education, Local Government; NGO/Civil Society Representatives; Representative from National Water Board/Elecrogaz; Representatives from Prefecture and Commune (Prefect/Bourgmestres)

Policy support

Overall strategic planning and coordination, oversight and stewardship

Final Projects approval and funding

Planning of National level evaluations and Studies

Fundraising National Project Coordination Office

National Project Coordinator; National Secretary/ M&E/ MIS Expert

Planning and coordination

Maintaining the National WES M&E/MIS Database

M&E

Attending monthly regional planning and coordination meetings

Project Support Unit (PSU) at sector level

Head/s of Commune Administration; Representatives of Inspectorates/departments of Environment, water and sanitation; Hygiene & Public Health, district Health system, Local Government, Social affairs/women and gender, Education, NGOs, Prefecture Regional Water Board

Capacity-building (technical and managerial) at commune level

Supervision, monitoring and evaluation

Screening, Approval and forwarding of Project Proposals

Maintenance and Management of a centralized regional WES M&E and MIS and related functions

Overall regional planning, coordination and liaison Commune Water and Environment Sanitation Management Committee

Head/s of commune administration; Representatives from Hygiene and Public Health Department; Representatives from Commune Regie Committee; Respective CDC focal points; Local NGOs; Representative of women/women groups; Inspector of Schools

Technical advise/support to CDC on WES issues

Integrated WES planning and coordination

Development, consolidation and forwarding of project proposals

Project monitoring and Supervision

Liaison and reporting Regie Committees

As currently structured Routine Technical and administrative Functions in relation to

implementation and management of Commune water infrastructure and facilities

Sector Level Water and Environment Sanitation Management Committee

Sector Administration head/s; sector Hygiene and Public Health representatives; relevant CDC representatives; sector Schools representative; representative of women’s groups, youth groups, etc.

Planning, coordination, supervision, monitoring and forwarding of sector Level WES Implementation and Management activities and plans

Scenario 1.

Implementation and Management through a revitalized National Project Coordination Office and Prefecture Level Project Support Team (PST)

Cellule and Water Point Water and Environment Sanitation and Management Committee

Cellule head plus appointed WESM chairperson, Vice chair, Secretary, and Treasurer; three persons representing the water, hygiene and sanitation, and environment components; representatives from schools, youth and women groups

Planning, coordination, supervision, monitoring and forwarding of Cellule Level WES Implementation and Management activities and plans

139

A project Steering Committee

UNICEF Head of Section/Project; Heads of relevant Directorates of the Ministries responsible for Water, Hygiene and Health, Environment, Education, Local Government; NGO/Civil Society Representatives; Representative from National Water Board/Elecrogaz; Representatives from Prefecture and Commune (Prefect/Bourgmestres)

Overall Policy and Strategic support

Final projects approval and funding

Planning of National Evaluations and studies

Fundraising

Liaison National Project Coordination and Support Unit

1. A project Coordinator 2. Section/departmental Heads 3. M&E &MIS specialist 4. Secretarial pool

Planning and coordination

Maintaining the National WES M&E/MIS Database

Monitoring &Evaluation

Attending monthly regional planning and coordination meetings

Screening approval and forwarding of Project Proposals for funding

Project Support team (PST)

Head/s of Commune Administration; Representatives of Inspectorates/departments of Environment, water and sanitation; Hygiene & Public Health, district Health system, Local Government, Social affairs/women and gender, Education, NGOs, Prefecture Regional Water Board

Capacity Building

Support the activities of the PCSU at national level as directed

Regular WES Review/monitoring functions

Carry out routine liaison and related ministerial/departmental duties

Commune-level Water and Environment Sanitation Committee

Head/s of commune administration; Representatives from Hygiene and Public Health Department; Representatives from Commune Regie Committee; Respective CDC focal points; Local NGOs; Representative of women/women groups; Inspector of Schools

Technical advise/support to CDC on WES issues

Integrated WES planning and coordination

Development, consolidation and forwarding of project proposals

Project monitoring and Supervision

Liaison and reporting Regie Committees As Currently Constituted

Routine Technical and administrative Functions in relation to implementation and management of Commune water infrastructure and facilities

Sector level Water and Environment Sanitation Committee

Sector Administration head/s; sector Hygiene and Public Health representatives; relevant CDC representatives; sector Schools representative; representative of women’s groups, youth groups, etc.

Planning, coordination, supervision, monitoring and forwarding of sector Level WES Implementation and Management activities and plans

Scenario 2.

Implementation and Management based on an independent Project Support Unit based at the National headquarters working with Prefecture and District Support and Management Teams/Committees

Cellule and Water point Environment Sanitation Management Committees

Cellule head plus appointed WESM chairperson, Vice chair, Secretary, and Treasurer; three persons representing the water, hygiene and sanitation, and environment components; representatives from schools, youth and women groups

Planning, coordination, supervision, monitoring and forwarding of Cellule Level WES Implementation and Management activities and plans

140

Fig. 14: WES Framework for Technical, Logistical and Financial Support for Hygiene and Environmental Sanitation Education and promotion

UNICEF (WES Project)

GOR Minisante, Minerena, Mineduc, Minitere, Minaloc

NGOs Religious organizations

Private Companies

Prefecture Water and Environmental Sanitation Steering Committee (PST)

Representatives of Water and Sanitation, Hygiene and Public Health, Environment, Social Affairs, Community Development, Women and Gender Departments

Prefecture Provincial Medical Office, Provincial water Board

Commune Department of Hygiene and public health and Commune level

WESC comprising Representatives from CDC, Regie Associative, Fontainiers, Health Centres,

Schools, Commune-level Women’s Department, Women’s groups, NGOs

Sector Sector level WESCs (Voluntary Health Animators/workers, Members of CDC, Members of Regie committee, Women’s

representatives Schools Representatives)

Cellule and water Point Water and Environment Sanitation Committees and Beneficiaries Representatives from Communities, Health Centres, Schools,

Monitoring and Evaluation

Technical Logistical Financial And M&E Support

Technical, logistical Financial

M&E Support

Monitoring & Evaluation

M&E

Technical Financial Logistical

M &E Support

Training (TOT) monitoring, Evaluation,

Mobilization, Sensitization Education, extension, Training, Demonstrations Coordination, Follow-up, monitoring, evaluation,, reporting

Technical, financial, logistical,

M&E Support

Coordination, Sensitization, Monitoring, Reporting,Training

Mind the Gap! Mind the Gap! Mind the Gap! Mind the Gap! Mind the Gap! Mind the Gap! Mind the Gap! Mind the Gap!

Extension, TOT, financing, monitoring, Evaluation

141

142

4.3 Community contribution ownership and management of WES facilities Conclusion: This evaluation assesses community contribution, ownership and management overall inadequately realized. While there is ample evidence of appreciable community participation through the provision of labor and the payment of water tariff, a truly participatory framework involving communities in WES Project Planning and management was not achieved. A number of factors created this situation:

Inadequate knowledge and appreciation among implementing agencies and commune authorities of both the theoretical underpinnings (concepts and foundations) and the practical prerequisites for engendering effective community participation and community participatory development

The lack of effective institutional and organizational bases or frameworks for guiding (Planning and coordinating) and managing effective community participation at commune and community level, following the collapse of the PMT and the assessed weak evolution and tapping of the potential of the Regie Associative

Cultural impediments, particularly the traditional culture of authority which demands obedience and acquiescence from subjects and the deeply entrenched culture of community’s sense of entitlement to services from government and non-governmental organization, inherited from and entrenched by these agencies themselves while dealing with communities in the past.

Recommendations Building and deepening an understanding among stakeholders of the project approach and the theoretical and practical bases (concepts, principles, foundations, approaches and tools) for engendering effective community-based and community participatory development is a prerequisites to realizing effective community participation within the WES Programme. The Fowler model and the accompanying text and the framework for planning, implementing and managing a community-based water supply system presented in Figures 14 and 15 respectively provide useful ways of viewing an effective implementation and management framework for community-based Projects such as the WES Projects. This evaluation recommends the adoption of these frameworks as basic guides for building and deepening community participation within the WES Programme at commune and community level. Towards this the evaluation recommends:

Training of implementing agencies and government partners in both the project approach and community-based and community participatory development approaches. On account of their vast experience in this area such NGOs as CARE International could be used on a pilot basis to provide training and expertise. The outsourcing of qualified expertise from established training institutions within the region in this area is highly recommended. The thrust of the training would be to seek to develop a cadre of local experts and expertise in this area. Funding agencies such as UNICEF could support and popularize this role.

Best practices seminars, workshops, newsletters, and websites and inter-project visits as ways to deepen a conceptual and practical understanding of the principles and approaches to realizing effective management of community-based Projects using community participatory principles and approaches.

143

Fig.15. A micro-development intervention model

In almost all cases development agencies intervene within an on-going community/organizational social and economic context. Entry into this flux is a critical affair with far reaching implications for the rest of the intervention and must be managed carefully. For example, false expectations from the community, wrong selection of intended beneficiaries, false expression of needs, the mirror effect42 can all occur due to incorrect entry and give distortions in definitions of activities and ownership of resulting processes. Entry is too often taken for granted by intervening agencies, some of whom feel their mere presence and motivation to help is enough and should be valued by the communities as such. As development agencies seek to extend their presence and influence into the on-going lives of the intended beneficiaries, securing their self-willed involvement in the intended change process is a crucial part of the entry phase. This can only be done on the basis of some mutual understanding, agreement, or contract. This gives the following functional demands, which are central to the entry phase of interventions: Agreement with the population on the image/a common picture of the desired future, that will guide the intervention Negotiating an agreement on what the population and the intervening agency have to offer each other, that is, the participation

basis and the respective roles of the agency and the community in achieving agreed outcomes. Attaining a common analysis of the situation so that both parties understand not just problems, but the reasons for them. This

often involves the incorporation of local and indigenous knowledge. The flow and consolidation phase is perhaps the most crucial part of an intervention, and makes substantial and varied demands on management and organization by intervening agencies. An important point to note in this period is that consolidation is not of the intervening agency/NGO itself but of the community’s own organization and capacity for self-management. The critical functions of this stage include those that enable the agency position itself to manage both its external environment as well as its own internal environment. External functions include: Managing uncertainty, through continual, broad environmental scanning of/sensitivity to changes likely to impact the

beneficiaries and the intervention; a responsive/adaptive rather than predictive approach to work, able to deal with contingencies; a recognition of unintended outcomes and ability to modify what is being done.

Managing informally, i.e. gaining supportive external relationships through appropriate interpersonal dynamics. Internally, the demands on management and organization include: Ownership and management of multiple accountabilities, Managing translations-for example translating each unique situation to general reporting terms, or standard procedures and

methods to different populations in different situations. Managing selection- deciding who to assist or exclude and having methods to identify and work with those chosen. Managing incompatible time scales of funding vis a vis the time needed for participatory micro-development.

The withdrawal phase is one of the least documented and discussed in micro-development. Often withdrawal is dictated by funding considerations rather than by an assessment of the ability of the community to manage their own affairs and the changes brought about by the intervention. It is treated as a residual, something that has to be done eventually, rather than an acknowledged period in the development of a maturing relationship. Correct withdrawal at the right time, in the right way with suitable residual linkages (for protection, advice, and exchange of experiences and learning) is an important part of an intervention and of attaining sustained benefits. Wrong, untimely withdrawal, particularly one involving inputs to an area or community can be and frequently is interpreted in a political (local) context and can result in negative influences on relationships among stakeholders.

42 Within the aid system, it is not uncommon for the first response of a community to be to present a mirror. What the community appears to be in terms of its expressed needs and principles is a reflection of the agency itself. If the agency’s interest is in income, then this is the priority that expressed by the community, likewise with health-care, or water or agriculture. This mirror effect can be seen at many interfaces in the aid system. NGOs position themselves to reflect their donors’ priorities and reporting needs. Membership organizations move away from their membership to reflect the power structure in the system.

Entry Flow and consolidation Sustained Benefits

Withdrawal

Intervention Contingency and adaptation Resource allocation Guiding ownership Inst./org/technical Capacity building Agreement maintenance Multiple accountabilities and translationsReconciling time scale Environmental scanning Reconciling the unintended Building linkages Monitoring and evaluation for learning Maintaining selection Protection POSDCORB

Situation analysis Negotiation Forming guiding image Mutual agreement Participation basis Selection

Timing Criteria Residual links

ON-GOING SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC PROCESSES

144

Figure 16: Steps for selecting, implementing and managing a community-based water supply System

Needs assessment, information gathering and analysis

With Community gather background information (Including existing water usage situation and demands, community profile, e.g. organization, institutions, ability and willingness to pay, vulnerable groups, power structure, morbidity profiles, etc)

START

With Community examine the features of the source/s

(Excluding water quality) Consider the physical features including

the yield, legal and security issues

With Community examine the water quality

With Community consider all the requirements for development

Physical requirements o Technical requirements o Time of set up o O&M requirements o Costs o Supplementary activities Resources/logistics Impact of development o On populations o On the physical

environment

With Community pre-select sources for further

investigation

With Community Consider water treatment

In consultation with the

community select the source/s

Continue discussions with the community to ensure planned scheme meets needs and priorities and available funds and skills

With community Design a training/skills

upgrading Programme Provide needed skills training

and upgrading for o WSC o TOTs (VRPs, VHP, CTs) o Community Artisans o Users

With Community Design the outline system

and O&M procedures Calculate the cost

With Community Mobilize resources Protect/construct source Design system of O&M Undertake O&M Continue education & extension Undertake supplementary

activities Monitor and evaluate

Selection Action

145

4.4 Participation and involvement of women in project planning implementation and management

Conclusion While ensured in the project design and in the protocols of agreement with implementing agencies, an effective involvement and participation of Women in WES Project implementation and Management was not realized during the Bridging Programme. There is little evidence of adequate affirmative involvement of women in WES Project management and decision-making. For the most part the role of women was confined to providing labor and materials for the development of WES infrastructure and facilities. Recommendations: The following recommendations are made with respect to ensuring and promoting the participation and involvement of women in WES Project Planning Implementation and Management

Within WES, ensuring that implementing agencies have clearly defined and elaborated gender inclusive elements in their project proposals, and increasing follow-up and monitoring measures to ensure observance with clauses in the contracts which obligate implementing agencies to ensure that women are included and actually participate in WES project implementation and Management activities.

Policy support towards the inclusion and institutionalization of a gender policy within the

WES sector- this would include support to include a gender policy in the national WES Policy document and in the constitutions governing the operations of the Regie Committees.

Promoting the use of women groups and women’s associations as key entry-points for WES

Projects implementation and management

146

4.5 The Relevance functioning and effectiveness of the WES committees 4.5.1 The relevance functioning and effectiveness of the Project Coordination

Committee-PCC Conclusion The conclusions and recommendations drawn in section 4.2.3.1.1 regarding WES Project planning decision-making and coordination, and the role of the PCC in this respect apply here as well. Suffice to say here that a lot of the coordination, planning management and implementation weaknesses that have beset the WES Programme can be placed squarely at the door of the PCC and by extension, the Project Coordination Office. While appreciably successful in the initial role of laying the foundation for the implementation of the WES Programme, and while credited with making such broad decisions as the general Programme direction and priorities, the failure to recognize and review the role of the PCC in light of emerging functional realities (high ministerial workloads and weak performance) resulted in its role as the overall custodian and steward of the WES Programme nationally gradually becoming less distinct, less focused and overall ineffectual. The systemic consequences and implications of this malfunctioning have been summarized as follows:

Poor inter-ministerial and inter-agency planning, coordination and collaboration in respect of WES Project implementation, Management and development

Poor overall functioning of the Project Coordination Office, manifested in the lack of a sound and well integrated framework of institutions working objectively and in synergy and bridging national level goals, objectives and realities with regional and local level realities and priorities.

A systematic atrophy of the institutions initially designed to implement and manage WES Projects on the ground, and their replacement with less conceptually, institutionally and organizationally oriented ones

The consequent systemic institutional and organizational malfunctioning of the PCC and Project Coordination Office saw UNICEF assume a lot of the WES Project planning, decision-making and coordination functions, and its role shift from facilitator to coordinator, manager, even implementer in some situations. Recommendations Based on the experiences of the Bridging Programme, the following recommendations are made:

A PSC that is less operationally oriented and more policy and strategy focused Better overall coordination and stewardship of the project at national level, through greater

inclusion and greater inter-ministerial coordination, collaboration and linkage. Towards this a more serious PSC coordination framework, based on an annually reviewed rotational coordination system, beginning with MINALOC .is recommended

An all-inclusive PSC comprising all key stakeholders at the National level A strengthened project Coordination/support role through the adoption of either one of the two

scenarios proposed and presented in Figure 13 and Table 54 4.5.2 The relevance functioning and effectiveness of the Regie Committees

147

The conclusions and recommendations drawn in section 4.2.3.2 in respect of commune-level planning, coordination and management apply here. 4.6 The Impact of the WES Programme on the status of women and children 4.6.1 WES Programme Health Impact Conclusion A careful analysis of morbidity trends from 9 out of the 10 evaluation communes reveals evidence of a positive attributable health impact on affected populations. The evidence is found in the drop in morbidity prevalence during the second year of the project in areas where the WES projects have been completed and where communities are now enjoying potable water. These impacts are however unstable and vulnerable to implementation and management vacillations or fluctuations. This is evidenced by an apparent rise/relapse in morbidity incidence during the third year of the project. The relapse/rise is particularly heavy among the under-five year old children The lack of consistency in hygiene education, resulting in relapses to old practices and the poor household hygiene conditions are seen as the major causes of the fluctuations. Recommendations The following recommendations are made in respect of ways and changes necessary to further improve the health impact of the WES Projects on the affected populations:

Intensified and Sustained Hygiene and Environment Sanitation sensitization and education campaigns at community level - this implies a consistent well-integrated and sustained action on the ground and necessitates improving the current organizational and institutional framework for implementation, management and monitoring of this component. The recommendations made in this document regarding the need to establish a fully functional Hygiene and public health as the custodian and focal point for Hygiene and sanitation issues at the commune level therefore finds greater credence again. .

Inclusion of Morbidity and mortality data in every WES project proposal presented and approved for funding

Studies to analyze and understand causes of non-adoption of improvement practices, the evident fluctuations in morbidity trends, particularly among the under-five year old children and the impact of concentrated settlements on the quality of underground water and the general watershed Overall effective intervention is going to have to address both the question of use of clean water, as well as that of general personal and household hygiene. A particular focus is going to have to be directed towards reducing morbidity among the under-five year old children through approaches that target both the parents (Mothers) directly, and through some form of child-to child intervention. Improving both the organizational and institutional base for implementation and management on the ground, and the system of trends monitoring are going to be the key determinants of effective promotion and impact

148

4.6.2 WES Programme Social Impact Conclusions and recommendations The social impact of the WES Programme on women and children is seen in the increase in the amount of water available to the households for all purposes and in the reduced cartage distances. Increased attention and attendance in schools, while not proven, is also reported in affected areas. These improvements will however need time and careful studies to establish and authenticate. 4.6.3 WES Programme Economic Impact Conclusion and Recommendations Clearly discernible economic impacts of the WES Programme on women and children will require time and more accurate and comprehensive data and studies to establish. The basis for realizing this is the establishment and maintenance of a comprehensive MIS and M&E system within the Project. The recommendations for realizing this are presented in the appropriate section of this report. The reduction in morbidity and mortality clearly has economic implications, as does the freeing of time for other social and economic activities. The most apparent area of economic impact and gain is clearly in the savings made from the reduced cost of water. Households in the areas affected have only to pay 10FRW for water that cost them ten times this amount previously. 4.6.4 WES Programme Environmental Impact Conclusion and recommendations This evaluation has not observed any tangible positive environmental impact resulting due to the WES project. The main reason for this has to do with the fact that this component of the WES Programme was not adequately developed during the Bridging Programme. There is evidence however of growing environmental quality deterioration through soil erosion on the hill slopes and water sheds supplying many of the developed and potential Water sources. Interventions through specific soil erosion control/management measures such as tree planting and the construction of gabions are seen as necessary areas of activity during the next WES Project phase. Increased monitoring and studies to determine the possible impact of concentrated settlements on the quality of underground water and the general watershed is another area where attention needs to be focused during the Next project/Programme Phase.

149

4.6 The relevance of the WES Programme in the new country Programme

2001-2006 The relevance of the WES Programme in the new country Programme can be seen both in its achievements and potential, as well as in the key lessons learnt during its implementation. The Key aspects of both are discussed below. 4.6.1 The key highlights of WES Programme achievements and potential A number of issues emerge from this evaluation regarding the achievements of the UNICEF-GOR Bridging Programme and the justification, not only to continue the Work started by the Programme but also to retain it as an independent unit within UNICEF, even if only to enable it accomplish the tasks it set out to accomplish:

As the first and only nationwide project based on a community participatory approach, the WES project has generated important benefits and lessons at a critical point in this country’s social and political emerging. Water, in particular, can easily become a focus for conflict within and between communities. The development of an effective delivery mechanism is therefore a key element of a principle of achieving peace and security at community level. The very establishment of the goal of assuring that all citizens have access to the basic services needed to ensure their health is a contribution to the process of reconstruction and nation building. The WES Programme’s support in this line cannot be overemphasized. Directly through the provision of water, the Programme has brought relief to scores of households in all affected areas. Indirectly through its organizing institutions, it has greatly influenced and benefited many aspects of the government’s unity and peace building initiatives and the new decentralization policy. The commune and community level implementing institutions such as the Regie Committees and such initial design structures as the Project Management Team (PMT) and the PST have served as models and “nurseries” for the new decentralized institutions and their leaders respectively. Continued support to and consolidation of the Programme, along with its embodying institutions, particularly those at the regional level, hold important lessons for democracy and people-centered development management and governance for Rwanda.

As presented in the earlier parts of this section, most of the initiated WES Projects are currently in their physical construction stages. More time and resources will be needed to complete and consolidate them. Further resources will be needed to initiate projects in the17 or so communes still remaining. Even then, the clarion call of universal access for all will no doubt remain only partially fulfilled. Misleading statistics about high and steadily improving water and sanitation coverage in Rwanda have resulted in a general false impression of adequate coverage and subsequently a depressed donor interest in the sector. This trend needs to be corrected as a matter of urgency. The “lofty” statistics, citing coverage levels of 90% in urban areas and 70% in rural areas (MINTRAPE/DEA/GTZ, 1996 and 1996a)43 have not considered the actual operational state of existing water supply facilities. The generous statistics are based on physical “counts” of infrastructure, rather than on actual level of functionality, or state of repair of these systems. Current MINERENA estimates place real national coverage at between 44-50% (1999). Water usage in rural areas is estimated at only 8 litres/person/day instead of the recommended 20 litres/person/day. Some 85% of the existing water sources are believed to contain coliform

43 These figures are based on the Government standard of “less than one hour’s walk to and from a potable water point.” Urban coverage is cited at 50% by private connection, 50% by public taps.

150

contamination levels beyond the recommended limits, while only about 0.8% of population use hygienic latrines. This evaluation has assessed the performance and achievement of the WES hygiene and environmental sanitation component as sub-optimal. However strategic and operational improvements evident during the 2000 implementation year show a clear and well-directed focus in the manner that this component is being implemented. This renewed focus, coupled with the grim reality of the hygiene and environmental sanitation situation presented in this and other status documents, provide compelling grounds and impetus for continued support to this component. It remains an enormous task that merits significant levels of funding, comprehensive programming and effective management and follow-up.

Another reason to justify continued support for the WES Programme is found in the assessed weak technical organizational and institutional capacities of the Regie and other WES Project Management Systems and structures. This evaluation has lauded the role played by the Regie Management system in the provision of water, but also highlighted key constraints, which undermine its continued service of this role. It has also pointed out strong shortcomings in terms of organization, functioning and relationships within implementing and managing government and Non-government institutions. Continued improvement of access to water and hygiene and environmental sanitation conditions, is contingent upon the effective functioning of these institutions and organizational arrangements. This calls for continued well-targeted consolidative support to improve their technical, managerial, organizational and institutional capacities and relationships. It is inconceivable that these activities would be realized effectively without a loss of focus, with WES Section subsumed under another Section. The strategic, organizational and operational imperatives for realizing these activities most certainly merit an independent organizational setting. The words of one respondent perhaps encapsulates this need best.

“ The WES Programme presents an enormous depository of social experience for Rwanda. Balkanizing it with something else will result both in a lessening of its effects, impact potential, and focus, but also in the loss of this cumulative experience”.

The planned merging of the WES section into the Child Protection Section therefore is an idea that needs to be reconsidered. 4.6.2 Key lessons learnt from the WES Bridging Programme

The WES Programme was too ambitious: the expectation that the Project would be accomplished in the manner specified in the guideline document in 66 communes was too ambitious. A common problem with project implementation, observed also in the manner in which the WES Programme was implemented, is the fact that once projects are approved and the levels of available funding are known, most implementing agencies do not review their plans and design expectations in light of the new funding reality, to determine what is realistically achievable with the available funding. This is the essence of effective programming. Some attempt at WES Programme rationalization is evident, but it was not a serious attempt and certainly did not entail a serious re-programming effort. Talk and pressure remained to implement the project in 66 WES communes! With only 9 communes effectively delivering water to communities under WES Proper, the Programme can hardly be said to have realized its mandate according to the design expectations! This is an important lesion, which must be carried into the new country Programme 2001-2006. It is important to broaden coverage, but equally and more importantly, to do it right! In view of this experience a geographic area approach, with limited area targeting and careful scaling up, might perhaps be a better programming and intervention approach in future, than the nationwide do-it-all approach of the WES Bridging Programme. Whatever approach is adopted, there can be no excuse for not staying focused on well-determined Programme/Project goals and objectives! Project goals and

151

objectives provide the beacons for guiding implementation and management. Good effective management entails constantly referring to these beacons. To not do this is to Programme poorly and to manage ineffectively!

The foundations and integrity of WES implementation and management institutions were not sufficiently evolved and managed: the key WES implementing institutions, namely the PCC, the Project Coordination Office, the PST, the PMT and the CWESCs were not sufficiently conceptualized, formed, used and consolidated. The problems with these institutions have been elaborated in detail in this document. The Problem of WES implementation and management has been, fundamentally, an organizational and institutional integrity problem, from a dysfunctional PCC, to a poorly conceptualized and development Project Coordination Office, to moribund advisory, supervisory and technical support structures, to weakly constituted and integrated local-level implementation and management institutions and structures, to weak agency programming, implementation and management capacities, to communities not able to participate effectively to influence project direction and impact. As a community-based intervention, clearly the greatest Programming thrust should have been directed to ensure the highest possible levels and standards of institutional, organizational and technical capacity, efficiency and integrity at the regional level. Many of the activities such as those subsequently taken over by UNICEF should have been decentralized to the regional level, even if this would mean traveling frequently to the prefectures for this purpose. A clear focus on the development, use and management of identified strategic institutions and organizations is a lesson sourly learnt but one that must be carried into the next phase of UNICEF country Programming, implementation and Management. This is the only way to manage and consolidate a Commune and Community-based and Community participatory development Process!

The Level of funding to the WES Programme was inadequate: at less than 50% of the envisaged level of funding, many of the planned WES activities could not have been implemented. Rwanda may have sufficient water, but of greater importance is the quality of that water and the improvements made to it. The prevailing notions of adequacy are going to have to be placed in a proper context. This should be a key challenge for the next country Programme.

The mechanisms for ensuring and deepening the government’s involvement in and ownership of the WES Programme were inadequately developed and utilized- the government is the custodian of all development projects implemented in the country on behalf of the people. This aspect of custody and ownership must manifest itself effectively in the way that the government organizes itself, contributes to, and directs services to yield the highest possible stream of benefits to its people. Section one noted the efforts made by government over the short period of its evolution given the context that has informed that evolution. This section has pointed out wide-ranging technical, institutional and organizational shortcomings of specific components of the governmental support to the WES Bridging Programme. Government participation through the instruments of the PCC, the PST and the PMT has been assessed inadequate. The need to develop the capacity of the communes to intervene effectively in the area of hygiene and environment sanitation has been raised as a key element impacting overall effective WES implementation, Management and development. Also specifically identified is the whole question of counterpart funding from government, to support WES development activities. The impact of low levels of funding on regional level Programs, has been discussed in detain in this evaluation report. Strong, effective and visible implementation, management and development institutions and organizational arrangements, coupled with tangible financial commitments towards development and development support services, are perhaps the strongest expressions of the government’s commitment to and ownership of development projects and processes directed at delivering services to its people. The shortcomings experienced during the

152

bridging Programme in these respects must be borne in mind and dealt with appropriately in the new country Programme.

The organizational and institutional capacities of the Non-Governmental Organizations were in many respects, inadequate. While a few NGOs such as CARE, stood out both in terms of their abilities to plan, coordinate, execute and report on their projects, and in terms of the impact of their work, others were found wanting in these respects. The question of inadequate Organizational Capacity among implementing agencies is one that needs to be addressed if Projects have to be effective and yield the desired effects and impact. This calls for a need to create opportunities for implementing agencies to learn and improve their skills and overall Programme Performance. Key areas of need for improvement identified in this evaluation are those relating to overall Organizational Development (OD), the Project Approach, and a sound appreciation of the concepts and perquisites towards engendering effective community-based and community participatory development. Agency training to improve these foundational and operational skill areas should help effective implementation and management during the next GOR-UNICEF Country Programme Phase. Such training should be viewed within the broader context of building overall national capacities for effective management, and should be extended to governmental institutions as well. Both internal and external expertise will be necessary to carry out this capacity building function. In this respect, the use of such experienced NGOs as CARE could be made on an experimental basis and scaled up upon a comprehensive assessment of their effectiveness.

Forums for experience sharing and lessons were few and narrowly focused- the national

forum of Bourgemestres emerges as the only worthwhile experience sharing opportunity that was created by the WES Programme. The benefits of this sharing have been profound in terms of orienting the general direction of the WES Project. Internally among implementing agencies, such opportunities were not created. Such sharing must constitute an important component of WES Project programming in the next Country Phase in order to enable learning and cross-fertilization of ideas, particularly in relation to what works best. Such instruments as newsletters on Lessons and Best Practices, Electronic forums (a website or a list serve) and open lessons sharing workshops are useful learning forums that could enrich performance and impact in the next phase. “Effective organizations are learning Organizations, understanding and improving their contexts, rather than merely exploiting them”

153

4.7 A proposal for WES project MIS and monitoring

Monitoring is a continuous assessment both of the functioning of project activities in the context of implementation schedules and of the use of project inputs by targeted populations in the context of design expectations. Management-oriented participatory monitoring is an integrated function, an integral part of shared management, through which managers44 and other stakeholders gain first hand insights and updates on three key questions:

• Are the development activities (infrastructure, services, training, etc.) being implemented as planned, on schedule and within budget?

• Are these activities leading to expected results (utilization of infrastructure and services by beneficiaries, increased capabilities through training, changes in behavior patterns, etc.)?

• What is causing delays or unexpected results? Is there anything happening which would lead the management to revise/modify the original plans?

To continuously provide stakeholders with up-to-date answers to these questions, a Management Information System (MIS) will be maintained throughout the life of the project. The MIS consists of a network of data to which all technical and administrative functionaries contribute. It covers regular updates on progress in physical and financial implementation of the project’s work program, the utilization by expected beneficiaries of the services and infrastructure provided by the project, and reasons why the beneficiaries do or do not use these services, as well as information on the changing socio/agro/economic environment within which the beneficiaries operate. An effective project MIS derives primarily from a clearly reasoned and set out Project Intervention Logic. The project intervention logic is the logical inter-linkage and fit among project goals, objectives, strategies, systems and structures of delivery and management and available human and non-human resources. A sound project intervention logic is a function of effective programming. Such programming demands, as a starting point, that once a project proposal is funded, the executing agency embarks on the task of developing an operational document as a guide implementation and management This entails further fine-tuning and specifying the project's intervention logic (i.e. aligning the project’s goals with its objectives, strategies, systems, structures and now known available resources), and setting out specific achievable input, output, effect and impact targets for the project, consistent with the chosen logic. These targets serve as the indicators against which project performance would subsequently be measured. The logical framework approach has become an increasingly popular and effective tool for achieving the above alignment. The framework provides a way of viewing the goals, objectives and tasks of a project, and a logical structure for management to plan and execute them. It does this by helping managers to set a series of interrelated objectives, starting at the lowest level with the provision of necessary inputs at the right time and place, through to the highest level of achieving a certain impact in the project zone. At each level and for each component of the project, the management team, assisted by a monitoring officer, can define a minimum set of objectives and select an appropriate indicator (or indicators) for each objective,

44 Term used in a participatory context to mean both the project staff and the community people- their management committees, ToTs and the general user population.

154

used to measure whether it is being reached or not. In the process of conducting this exercise, the management has of its own accord, virtually defined the contents of the project’s MIS and the needed monitoring and evaluation activities. In terms of process, the evolution of a use-orientated MIS is therefore seen as going through the following six stages Evolution of a clear intervention logic as a starting point Generation of clear, specific and objectively verifiable project performance indicators Design and development of appropriate data generating and storage instruments Generation, collation and systematic inventory of M&E data and information Processing and analysis of the data to generate management information Packaging and presentation of the information for use by managers and other

stakeholders From the framework of shared or participatory management an effective Management Information System and monitoring is perceived at two levels: • At the community level, the evolution of a community-based system of collecting,

synthesizing and using community-level input, output, effect and impact data and information, and forwarding the same to higher level management units

• At the project coordination level, a careful aggregation, collation, storage and analysis of the same and other relevant data and information, and presentation of resulting information to relevant stakeholders in joint forums.

The successful realization of the above weighs heavily on a careful (participatory) selection of

appropriate and objectively verifiable indicators consistent with the project’s intervention logic and the subsequent use of these indicators to generate and apply appropriate data instruments and data respectively. Where capacity to realize this effectively is deemed inadequate, training and consistent follow-up to develop and deepen the needed capacity becomes a key component of an effective M&E and MIS function. This evaluation has assessed the entire M&E and MIS function of the WES Programme poorly executed. Viewed as presented here, the general framework for an overall effective participatory M&E and MIS within the context of the WES Programme could be perceived and summarized as follows:

Carefully identified and organized teams of actors at community level are assisted to evolve simplified community-based systems of collecting, keeping, using and forwarding relevant community-level input, output, effect and impact data and information. The regional and national level actors, in a addition to maintaining, using and forwarding their own individual and centralized data bases, play a key role in coordinating and ensuring the effective functioning and use of this system. The Figure below presents the institutional and organizational framework towards the effective realization of this system. The role of UNICEF is one of building capacities, providing consolidative support, learning and improving in the context of prevailing capacity realities and new emerging information. Initially a piloting of and an agreed MIS in a few communes may be necessary to provide an informed basis for replication. Key to the success of any MIS is strict observance of stipulated reporting requirements.

155

Fig.17: Proposed organizational and institutional framework for WES MIS and M&E system

Programme Execution level Programme M and E and MIS Levels M&E and MIS actors and Functions

Cellule Level data collection & Mgt

Communities/users

Sector level Monitoring &MIS

Commune level Monitoring &MIS

National WES Coordination Office

PCC

PSU

National planning and coordination level

Regional Implementation and management level

Sous Prefet Hydraulicien de Prefecture Inspecture de hygiene Responsible de CPDFP Inspecteur de l’environnement

Responsable des femmes

*Management of a comprehensive centralized regional level database *Monthly M&E/review meetings *By-monthly review meetings with commune *Coordination of departmental data *M&E &Capacity building at commune level * Information reporting and liaison

Management of a centralized national level WES MIS and data bank; Advising and coordinating regional level MIS and M&E functions, information and liaison

o Overall advice and stewardship o Commissioning/Panning /overseeing Monitoring

and evaluation functions o Information and liaison

o National WES Programme coordinator

o Permanent Secretary/MIS Manager

Heads of relevant ministerial, NGO and UNICEF departments and sections,

CWESCs Cellule Regie; Community health personnel; Special interest groups & committees-women, youth, PTAs, social welfare committees

PMT CDC; Regie; health and Hygiene personnel; NGOs; Schools

o Coordination of local MIS functions o Maintenance of commune–level databank o Information/reporting and liaison o M&E o Capacity building o Synthesis and planning

Management of a simple community-level system of information and data collection, collation, storage, analysis, use and forwarding (information/reporting)

o Managing respective departmental MIS o National and regional planning and coordination o Information and liaison

Delegated departments & personnel

156

ANNEXES

Annex One: WES Programme Implementation and Management Guideline Document

157

Annex Two: WES M&E and MIS Data Formats

158

Annex Three: WES Evaluation Data and Information Tools and List of persons met and interviewed

159

Annex Four: Results of Water Sample Laboratory analysis

160

Annex Five: Base Data on Morbidity Trends from the Evaluation Communes

161