Il:P/CWS/003 (UNDP No. RAS/Bl/024)
~;NGLISH
ONLY
REPORT ;rI-REGIONAL WORKSHOP ON PLANNING GUIDELINES '/ FOR THE WATER AND SANITATION DECADE Convened by the UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME and WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION REGIONAL OFFICES FOR THE WESTERN PACIFIC AND SOUTH-EAST ASIA Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 20 - 24 August 1984
Not for Sale Printed and distributed by the WHO Regional Office for the Western Pacific Manila, Philippines November 1984
NOTE The views expressed in this report are those of the partlclpants in the Workshop and do not necessarily reflect the policy of the World Health Organization.
This report was prepared by the World Health Organization Regional Offices for the Western Pacific and South East Asia for the Governments of Member States in the two Regions and for participants in the Bi-Regional Workshop on Planning Guidelines for the Water and Sanitation Decade, held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia from 20 to 24 August 1984.
CONTENTS
1.
INTRODUCTION 1.1
............................................................................... .
1 1 1
1.2 2.
IDWSSD Advisory Services Project ••••••••••••• First interregional workshop ••••.•••••••.....
THE BI-REGIONAL WORKSHOP ON PLANNING GUIDELINES FOR THE WATER AND SANITATION DECADE ....................................
2
2.1 2.2 2.3 3.
Opening ceremonies, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
•• ,
2
Participants •••••••••••••••••.•.••••••••••••• Workshop objectives ....••••..•.••....••••••..
2 2 2
ORGANIZATION OF THE WORKSHOP WORKSHOP OUTPUTS
.. .............................................. .
4.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 ....
3 3
4.1 4.2 4.3
Review of case studies .............................................. Slide-sound presentation on community education and participation guidelines •.••••••••••••••••
5 6 7
Draft planning and implementing ".......................... """ .................................. ..
5.
WORKSHOP FOLLOW-UP ACTIVITIES
.. ............................................ . .•••.••••••••••...•••••••••
5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5
National workshops Case studies
7 7
.. "" .... .. .. .. .... .. . •• . •• •.• .. . • . . • • . . . . • ..
Development of planning and implementation guidelines •..•.••••.•.••••••.••••..••••.•••.. 7 7 7 8 9
Additional slide-sound presentations, HRD, 1D, AT •••••••...•••••••••••••.••.••••••• Networking • • . • • . • • • .. • • . • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • . • . • • • • Workshop evaluation .••.••••••••.•••••••.•••••
5.6 ANNEX 1 ANNEX 2 ANNEX 3 ANNEX 4
.......................... AGENDA ....... . ............................ . WORKING GROUPS ....... ...................... . LIST OF PARTICIPANTS ,.
,. ,. ,.
13 17 19
,. ,.
DRAFT GUIDELINES FOR PROJECT PLANNING
.........
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
IDWSSD Advisory Services Project The UNDP project was developed to encourage countries in the Asia and Pacific regions to exchange experiences on the provision of water and sanitation projects. It was considered that while the Member States could benefit individually from one another's past efforts, it was also felt that such exchanges should form the basis for the preparation of training guidelines relating to the planning and implementation of Decade projects. In order to encourage the exchange of information, it was evident that the first step would have to be directed towards identifying and documenting the various country approaches which have been applied to achieve the goals of the International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade. Accordingly, WHO would collaborate with Member States in the WHO Western Pacific and South East Asia Regions in the evaluation of selected case studies so that a collective approach could identify those cornmon factors which have a favourable or adverse influence on the outcome of the project. It was considered that such an approach would encourage information exchange among countries, and would also enable them to detect inappropriate techniques so that changes could be made in future projects to facilitate and improve the implementation of Decade plans and programmes.
Another output of the project was to develop, on the basis of collective experiences, regional planning and implementation guidelines incorporating appropriate technology (AT), institutional development (10), community education and participation (CEP), and human resourCe development (HRD). Such documentation, it was considered, would serve as a guide to countries in the preparation of appropriate national guidelines on the same subject. Thus, the exchange of information and related documentation was envisaged as facilitating the development of technical cooperation between the countries. Accordingly, the project document also provided for further strengthening of collaboration among the countries by suggesting that a network of specialist institutions be developed to promote the free transfer and exchange of information. 1.2 First interregional workshop The first project workshop was held in Bangkok, Thailand, from 29 August to 2 September 1983. Twenty-one participants from 10 countries attended that workshop, which was held to inform participants about the scope of the project and to ensure that they had a cornmon understanding of: the project objectives, the methodologies and approaches to be used in carrying out the case studies, the criteria to be established for networking institutions in and between the countries, and the planning and implementation guidelines, criteria and procedures which would be prepared as a project output.
- 2 -
During the workshop, individual draft protocols based on the WHO minimum evaluation procedures (MEP) were prepared to ensure that a
common methodology was applied in carrying out the case studies. In addition, a common framework was identified for establishing a network of collaborating institutions. 2. THE BI-REGIONAL WORKSHOP ON PLANNING GUIDELINES FOR THE WATER AND SANITATION DECADE
2.1
Opening ceremonies, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Dr S. Endo, WHO Programme Coordinator in Malaysia in opening.,the workshop welcomed the participants on behalf of Dr H. Nakajima, i' Regional Director of the WHO Regional Office for the Western Pacific and Dr U. Ko Ko, Regional Director of the WHO Regional Office for South-East Asia. He pointed out that, in view of the current worldwide recession, it was more important than ever that countries should develop project methodologies which would ensure the most effective use of the available resources in Decade programmes. Mr Y.Y. Kim, Regional Representative of UNDP in Malaysia, Singapore, and Brunei, in his address described the UNDP-funded global projects in support of the Decade. He also stressed the need for planning and for encouraging countries to promote technical cooperation among developing countries.
2.2
Participants The workshop was attended by eighteen participants, two from Philippines, Malaysia, Tonga, Papua New Guinea, Nepal, Indonesia, Thailand, Maldives, three from Nepal, one from Sri Lanka and three observers - one from Papua New Guinea and two from Thailand. In addition to the project staff, WHO personnel from PEPAS and the UNOP Programme Officer responsible for the water sector in Malaysia, also participated. A list of the people who attended the workshop is attached as Annex 1.
2.3
Workshop objectives The specific objectives of the workshop were: (1) to review the case studies on experiences in human resource development, technology selection, community education and participation, and institutional development; (2) to develop planning guidelines, including criteria and procedures for implementing appropriate water and sanitation programmes and projects, and guidelines for holding national workshops; and (3) to explore approaches for developing a network for technical cooperation. The agenda for the workshop is attached as Annex 2.
- 3 -
3.
ORGANIZATION OF THE WORKSHOP
The workshop was held from 20 to 24 August 1984. The main emphasis was placed on the presentation of case studies and the development of planning guidelines. Approximately 12 hours were spent in presenting and discussing the 12 case studies and further 12 hours in developing draft guidelines for incorporating the software components of appropriate technology, institutional development, human resource development and community education and participation into water and sanitation projects at the village level. A review of networking strategies was also conducted. 4. 4.1 Review of case studies The various case studies were presented and discussed in the
WORKSHOP OUTPUTS
workshop plenary sessions. Basically, the case studies evaluated the impact which some or all of the project software components of AT, CEP, HRD and ID had on the implementation of the project. These relevant experiences served to highlight the difficulties inherent in the implementation of Decade activities. The case study reports also helped to focus the discussions which took place in the small group sessions on the development of guidelines and procedures for project planning and implementation. The presentations indicated that there were more similarities than differences in the country experiences associated with the application of the software components. A short summary of the various case studies follows. (a) Maldives: "Community attitudes towards public and private latrines." This was a very well documented and thorough study of reasons for the failure of a community latrine programme with particular emphasis on the potential offered by the community education and participation process. The need for a CEP approach was well argued. (b) Tonga: "A case study describing and evaluating the water and sanitation sector in the Kingdom of Tonga"
The study presented an overall picture of the sector situation in Tonga and included a detailed analysis of two individual rural schemes and one urban system. The study revealed that, although there was a high level of community participation and decentralization, some problems had. been encountered in the maintenance of facilities. It appeared that the degree to which communities were informed of their responsibilities during the planning phase strongly influenced the long-term functioning of the system.
- 4 -
(c)
Nepal:
"Institutional development for rural water supply sanitation ft
Detailed evaluations had been carried out on two small urban supplies and four rural supplies by a mUltidisciplinary team from the Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu. Institutional problems, in particular, the interphase between the community organizations and the government institutions were highlighted. The technology chosen and the functioning of the facilities were analysed in detail for each scheme. (d) Philippines: "Institutional development of the water and sanitation sectors in the Philippines and an evaluation of the use of flow-restrictive devices used in water systems in the Barangay Water Program" The institutional study presented an overview of the organization of the water sector in the Philippines. It also described the specific role of the Barangay Water Program. The case study on the flow restrictive device gave information on twelve rural supplies where water was provided to individual homes each with a storage tank. Flow restrictors in the supply lines limited the supply of water to 1/10 gallon per minute. In each of the supplies, except the original pilot scheme, the design had been tampered with and the projects no longer functioned as intended. It should be noted that a considerable educational effort was included in the pilot scheme. (e) Thailand: "Provision of water supply and sanitation in the Integrated Rural Poverty Eradication Programme, Thailand" A programme for the construction of household water tanks, started in 1982, was evaluated. The intervention included (i) education of village committees about the programme, (ii) training of village craftsmen to build the tanks, and (iii) establishment of a revolving loan fund at the village level. The fund was limited to 3,000 baht per village but as the cost per tank amounted to 600 baht, it meant that only a small portion of the households in the sampled villages had constructed tanks. A taste test revealed that the majority of the people could differentiate between water from a dug well, rainwater stored in a ceramic jar and rainwater stored in a concrete jar.
(f)
Malaysia: Two case studies were presented. One concerned a description of the organization of the water and sanitation sectors but emphasized the involvement of the Ministry of Health in a very successful rural programme. The second concerned the "Integration of primary health care with rural water supply and sanitation in Lundu District." This case study included the development of a water and sanitation programme for the District which would ensure complete coverage by 1990. It was also concerned with involving communities in the maintenance and operation of the installed facilities.
- 5 -
(g)
Indonesia:
"Human resources development for water supply and sanitation field workers"
A study of installed well systems had indicated that approximately 30% to 40% were not functioning. As the plans for West Java water supply development included installation of an additional 60,000 handpumps within the period of the Decade, the case study was directed at improving the training of sanitation field workers through an evaluation of their field performance. (h) sri Lanka: "Potential and constraints for increasing the success of rural water supply/latrine construction projects through community participation"
Anthropological studies were undertaken in four village water supply areas. The researchers had stayed over a period of four months in the villages to obtain in-depth understanding of the institutional dynamics in the villages. The merits and disadvantages of free labour input were discussed and the role played by the elite analysed. The importance of monitoring and evaluation was stressed. (g)
Papua New Guinea "A study of Boera Village solar photovoltaic water supply system" A comparative analysis was made of teChnologies that had been used to serve the village. Technologies that had been used and failed included: windmill, diesel-driven pump and handpumps. The solar pump, which had been in use for two years, was the most expensive alternative from a capital cost point of view but was the most promising from a functional point of view. The second case study from Papua New Guinea "A review of the wa.ter and sanitation sectorll is an overall picture of the
programmes in Papua New Guinea including support programmes. 4.2 Slide-sound presentation on community education and participation A draft slide-sound presentation was reviewed by the participants as a prototype of training/discussion materials that could be used in future country workshops or in other Decade-related forums. The twenty-minute presentation was well received and the various advantages of such a presentation were pointed out by the participants in their completed evaluation forms. These involved its eye appeal and attractiveness to the audience, its usefulness as a good focal point for discussion groups, and a brief and informative format for communicating ideas, and the fact that the message was easier to understand and remember. A number of disadvantages were also pointed out, including the relatively high cost of developing such a presentation compared with the more conventional slide presentation
and the fact that the details of the CEP methodology had to be left out.
- 6 -
The presentation w~~ considered to be useful for a wide audience, from project planners to implementers and from programme administrators to manpower trainers provided it could be made available in the local language. Such presentations might also be useful to village level workers in settings where electricity was available. It was noted that the draft presentation would be revised, finalized and made available for dissemination by 30 November 1984. The participants enthusiastically supported the idea that other slide-tape presentations would also be useful in promoting the application of the remaining software areas of HRD, AT, and ID. 4.3 Draft planning and implementing guidelines The participants were divided into four groups, each covering one of the following subject areas: CEP, ID, HRD and AT. A list of the participants in the various groups is included at Annex 3. Group discussions were held to review the lessons learnt from the case studies with regard to each of the four subject areas. The groups then prepared training guidelines concerning: the choice of technology; the level and form of community participation; the institutional requirements; and the need for human resources development through the project cycle (planning , preparation, execution and operation and maintenance). The draft proposal is included at Annex 4. The need for such guidance at country level was strongly supported by the participants. However, it was noted that the following factors should also be considered in the final draft of the guidelines: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) A voluminous amount of written material was unlikely to be read. Acceptance of new ideas was facilitated more through personal contacts than through written material. External agencies such as WHO could playa catalytic role 1n ensuring acceptance of new ideas. National workshops could ,be a vehicle for sensitizing policy makers, planners and engineers to the need for change with regard to the use of CEP, ID, HRD and AT. Planning However, required physical guidelines needed to be count~-specific to be useful. even within a country, alternative approaches might be depending on the socioeconomic, cultur'al, religious and conditions.
(v)
(vil
Planners and engineers, needed to be convinced that the appropriateness of a design from a social point of view was as important as its technical'and financial feasibility. To arrive at a socially appropriate design, a CEP approach was necessary. Resources would be needed in terms of time, manpower and money for constructing a project, training the people, building community institutions and strengthening government agencies.
- 7 -
(vii)
National workshops and the preparation of national guidelines must be based on case studies carried out at the community level in the respective countries and on the findings of the two interregional workshops. At least the senior planning and engineering staff from the ministries concerned, and the Ministry of Health, should be involved. The workshops should be held away from the participant's offices to facilitate the full participation of those involved. Audiovisual aids similar to the sound and slide show on CEP would also be useful in sensitizing planners and engineers to the problems and to the possible solutions for implementing water and supply sanitation projects. 5. WORKSHOP FOLLOW-UP ACTIVITIES
(viii)
5.1
National workshops As provided for in the project document, it was noted that Decade Advisory Services Project would support at least four or national workshops at the country level to further test and disseminate training materials developed as part of the project encourage the development of relevant guidelines and procedures project/programme planning and implementation which focused on incorporating software components such as CEP, HRD, 10 and AT. guidelines drafted during the current workshop would serve as a starting point. the five and to for The
5.2
Case studies Following receipt of the final report by the principal investigators, the WHO regional offices would edit and print the reports. Copies would be provided to the participants in accordance with the requests which they identified at the workshop.
5.3
Development of planning and implementation guidelines The guidelines drafted at the workshop would be reviewed and finalized by late 1984.
5.4
Additional slide-sound Presentations, HRD, 10, AT Slide-sound scripts would be developed by the regional offices (with possible input from WHO, Geneva) on three additional software components (HRD, 10, AT), and one general presentation would be prepared to show the interrelationship of all the software packages. Slides would be included from participating countries to illustrate the regional nature of the guidelines. Training workbooks would also be prepared to complement the slide-sound presentations.
- 8 5.5 Networking Owing to the limited time available, only a brief discussion on the mechanics of networking was possible. The potential role of PEPAS in information exchange was also discussed and the participants were very agreeable to its inclusion in the regional network. Other institutions identified for possible inclusion in the network were: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) Rural Waterworks Development Corporation, Quezon City, Philippines Well Drillers Association of the Philippines, Quezon City, Philippines Water Resources Information Center, Quezon City, Philippines Social Services National Coordination Committee, Bhrikuti Mandap, Kathmandu, Nepal Research Centre for Applied Science and Technology, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, Kathmandu, Nepal The Directorate of Building Research and UN Regional Centre for Research on Human Settlement, Directorate General of Housing, Building Planning and Urban Development of the Ministry of Public Works, Jakarta, Indonesia
It was noted that, subject to availability of funds, the project would support an interregional workshop to establish common procedures for distributing information with regard to AT, CEP, HRD and ID. 5.6 Workshop evaluation The participants completed the standard WPRO Workshop Evaluation Questionnaire. A summary of the replies indicated that the workshop objectives were achieved and that the methodologies used to stimulate discussions in the plenary and group sessions were satisfactory to the participants. While the group expressed its satisfaction with the working papers, it was noted that insufficient time had been provided for discussing and reviewing the various case studies. The
participants also indicated that the planning guidelines developed at the workshop should be introduced to senior government planners at national workshops so that the Decade approaches could be reviewed in the light of the experiences highlighted in the case studies; in this way the necessary changes to Decade plans and programmes could be authorized. Finally, the participants strongly endorsed the need for establishing a regional network so that experience and knowledge could be freely exchanged.
- 9 -
ANNEX 1
INFORMATION BULLETIN NO. 2 ~IST
OF PARTICIPANTS PARTICIPANTS
1.
INDONeSIA
Mr J. Soedarjanto Project Manager, RSMD and Head of Planning Programming Subdivision Centre for Education and Training
Ministry of Health Jakarta
Mr Dardjat Sukapradja Director SPPH Jalan Makmur No. 23 Bandung
NALAYSIA
Mr Rishyakaran Karthigasu Senior Public Health Engineer Division of Engineering Services Ministry of Health Malaysia Block 'C', 1st Floor, Office Complex Jalan Dungun Kuala Lumpur Mr Jerome Runggol Ac ting Hea 1 th Superintendent Ilirector of Medical Services' Office Kuching Sarawak
MALDIVES
Mr Mohamed Rasheed ~Ialdives Water and Sanitation Authority Male', Republic of Maldives Dr (Mrs) D. Narayan Parker Consultant
c/o UNDP Oakvilla Male', Republic of Maldives NEPAL Mr N.P. Bhusal Geography Instruction Committee 17/276 Mahara Gunj G.P.O. Kathmandu
_. 10 -
Mr C.Il. Karki Under Secretary Water Supply Section Ministry of Panchayat and Local Development Shree Mahal, Pulchauk, Lalitpur Kathmandu Mr R.K. Siddhi Superintending Engineer Ministry of Water Resources Uepartment of Water Supply & Sewerage Maharajgunj Paani Pokhari Kathmandu PAPUA NEW GUINEA Mr Joseph Pohory National Planning Office Post Office Ward Strip Waigani Port Moresby Mr Oreme Tipo Acting Assistant Secretary Division of Health F.M.B. Service Konedobu Department of Central Province Konedobu PHILIPPINES Mr Bonifacio M. Madarcos Head, Monitoring and Evaluation Division Barangay Water Programme Ministry of Local Government 2nd Floor, Merryland Building 1373 E. Rodriguez Sr. Avenue Quezon City Me t ro ManU a Mr Gaspar E. Nepomuceno Project Manager Barangay Water Programme Ministry of Local Government 2nd Floor, Merry1and Building 1373 E. Rodriguez Sr. Avenue Quezon City Metro Manila SRI LANKA Mr Sunimal Fernando Associate Director Micro-Level Socio-Economic Studies Division Marga Institute 61 Isipathana Mawatha Colombo 5
- 11 -
THAILAND
Mr Paisal Prigsang Director of Sanitation
Department of Health Ministry of Public Health Bangkok Dr (Miss) Nongluk Tunyavanich faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities Mahidol University Salaya, Nakorn Pathom 73170 TONGA Mr Salesi Finau Senior Health Inspector Ministry of Health Vaiola Hospital P.o. Box 59 Nuku'alofa
Dr Maika Kinahoi Acting Senior Medical Officer Public Health Division Ministry of Health Vaiola Hospital P.O. Box 59 Nuku'alofa 2.
REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME Mr Y.Y. Kim Regional Representative of the United Nations Development Programme in Malaysia, Bronei and Singapore
UNITED NATIONS DfWELOPMEN'f PROGRAMME
P.O. Box 12544 Kuala Lumpur 01-23 Malaysia Miss E. Okkersen Planning Officer Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia J.
OBSERVERS
Mr Mairi Mehutu Minister for Health Central Province
c/o Emu Rua Pty Ltd P.O. Box 2525 Soroko
- 12 -
THAILAND
Miss Putsatee Agamanon Mahidol University Salaya, Nakorn Pathom 73170 Miss Vanwipha Pasandhanatorn Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities Mahidol University Salaya, Nakorn Pathom 73170
4.
SECRETARIAT
•
Dr S. Endo The WHO Programme Coordinator, Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Mr J.C. Bradbury Sanitary Engineer IDWSSD Advisory Services Project WHO/WPRO, Hanila Philippines Dr C.G. Chandler Project Manager IDWSSD Advisory Services Project WHO/SEARO, New Delhi India Mr B. Fisher Sanitary Engineer, PEPAS Kuala Lumpur Mslaysia Dr M. Nakamura Systems Analyst PEPAS, Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Hr K.G. Schultzberg Sanitary Engineer Environmental Health Technology and Support WHO/HQ, Geneva Switzerland Dr K.M. Yao Officer-in-Charge, PEPAS Kuala Lumpur Halaysia
- 13 -
ANNEX 2
AGENDA Sunday, 19 August 1900
Informal Gathering
Monday, 20 August !l1l30
Opening Session -Regional Director's
Address
Dr E. Endo WHO Programme Coordinator,
Kuala LUlDpur -Statement by UNDP/RR Mr Y.Y. Kim Regional Representative of the United Nations Development Programme in Malaysia. Brunei and Singapore Dr C. Chandler Project Manager, SEARO ICP/CWS/003 Project Dr C. Chandler
-Introduction of
Participants
-Movie, Prescription for
Health 0930 - 1000 1000 1015
Coffee/Tea Break Decade programmes and their progress
Mr J.C. Bradbury Sanitary Engineer, WPRO ICP/CWS/003 Project Dr C. Chandler Mr J. C. Bradbury Mr K. G. Schultzberg Sanitary Engineer Environmental Health Techonolgy and Support WHO. Geneva Dr C. Chandler
1015 - 1030
Overview of the IDWSSD Advisory Services Project
1030 - 1045 1045 - 1130
Objectives of the workshop Principles for drafting planning guidelines
1130 - 1200 1200 - 1330
Slide/tape presentation of CEP in community water supply Lunch Break
- 14 -
1330 - 1340 1340 - 1430 1430 - 1500 1SOO - 1700 Tuesday, 21 August 0830 - 0930 0930 - 1000 1000 - 1200 1200 - 1330 1330 - 1430 1430 - 1500 1500 - 1700 Wednesday, 22 August 0830 - 0930 0930 - 1000
Guidelines for presentation of studies Presentation of caSe studies
Mr K. G. Schultzberg
Participants
Coffee/Tea Break Presentation of case studies
Part ic ipants
Presentation of case studies Coffee/Tea Break Development of guidelines Lunch Break Presentation of case studies Coffee/Tea Break Presentation of case studies
Participants
*Group work
Participants
Participants
Presentation of case studies Coffee/Tea Break Development of guidelines Lunch Break Presentation of case studies Coffee/Tea Break Presentation of case studies
Participants
!Ooo - 1200 1200 - 1330 1330 - 1430 1430 - 1500 1500 - 1700 Thursday, 23 August 0830 - 0930 0930 - 1000 1000 - 1200
Group work
Participants
Participants
Presentation of case studies Coffee/Tea Break Development of guidelines
Participants
Group work
*I'our small groups to meet concurrently to develop guidelines relating to HRD, AT, ID and CEP. All remaining activities will be carried out in plenary sessions.
- 15/16 -
1200 - 1330 1330 - 1430
Lunch Break Plenary to present preliminary guidelines developed during group sessions Coffee/Tea Break Committee to review and edit guidelines Collllllittee work Participants
1430 - 1500 1500 - 1700 Friday, 24 August 0830 - 0930 0930 - 1000 1000 - 1030 l030 - 1115
Plenary session - review and finalize draft guidelines Coffee/Tea Break Development of networking PEPAS and regional information systems Summary of workshop Concluding ceremonies RR/UNDP - Concluding statement RD Closing remarks Adjournment
Plenary
Mr J. C. Bradbury Dr M. Nakamura Systems Analyst, PEPAS ICP/RUD/OOI Project Dr C. Chandler Mr Y. Y. Kim Dr S. Endo
1115 - 1145 1145 1200
l200
- 17 -
ANNEX 3
WORKING GROUPS INSTITUTION School of Sanitation Technicians, Bandaung Ministry of Health, Jakarta Maldives Water and Sanitation Authority Ministry of Health, Tonga Mahidol University, Thailand UNDP, Malaysia
HRD Mr D. Sukapradja Mr J. Soedarjanto Mr M. Rasheed Dr M. Kinahoi Ms V. Pasandhanatorn Ms E. Okkersen AT Mr G. Nepomuceno Mr J. Runggol Mr R. Siddi Mr P. Prigsang Mr R. Karthigasu Dr (Mrs) N. Parker CEP Mr S. Fernando Dr (Miss) N. Tunyavanich Mr S. Finau Mr O. Tipo
Barangay Water Program Philippines Director of Medical Services' Office, Malaysia Ministry of Water Resources, Nepal Ministry of Public Health, Thailand Ministry of Health, Malaysia Consultant to Ministry of Health, Maldives
Marga Institute, Sri Lanka Mahidol University, Thailand Ministry of Health, Tonga Division of Health, Central Province, Papua New Guinea
- 18 -
INSTITUTION In
Mr B. Madarcos Mr J. Pohory Mr N.P. Bhusal Mr C. Karki Ms P. Agamanon Mr M. Mehutu
Barangay Water Programme, Philippines National Planning Office, Papua New Guinea Tribhuval University, Kirtipur Ministry of Panchayat and Local Development, Nepal Mahidol University, Thailand Minister for Health, Central Province, Papua New Guinea
I
- 19 -
ANNEX 4
INTERNATIONAL ORINKING WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION DECADE ADVISORY SERVICES PROJECT RAS/81/024
DPAFT GUIDELINES FOR INCORroRATIf'lj SCFlWAl£ CCl'RHNTS INTO CCJtfrttUlY WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATIGJ PmJECTS
----~.
--
- 20 GUIDELINES FOR INCORPORATING SOFTWARE COMPONENTS INTO COMMUNITY WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION PROJECTS Software Components: Community Education and Participation (CEP) Institutional Development (ID) Human Resources Development (HaD) Appropriate Technology (AT)
A five-step process is detailed as follows for planning a community water supply and/or sanitation project incorporating the necessary software components of CEP, ID, HaD, and AT: Step 1. 1.1 ASSESSING NEEDS
Assessing Needs, Objective:
to use CEP teChniques to create opportunltles for the community, both as individuals and as special interest groups, to voice their felt needs and to assess for themselves how a water supply or sanitation project might serve to meet some of the needs expressed. 1.2 Assessing Needs, Procedure: General: use community education and partlclpation techniques to help members of community verbalize their needs in small group discussions or in individual interviews use community education and participation techniques to allow individuals and members of special interest groups to assess how a water supply or sanitation project might meet some community needs Specific: implement software component strategies l.2a.(CEP), l.2.b (ID), 1.2.c (aRD) and l.2.d (AT) concurrently Software components are integrated into the process of "needs assessment as follows: 1.2.a.
", \1
Assessing Needs, Community Education and Participation (CEP)
1.2.a.l Objective: to create opportunities for the community, both as individuals and as special interest groups, to voice their felt needs and to assess for themselves how a water supply or sanitation project might serve to meet some of the needs expressed. 1.2.a.2. Procedure: Through community education and participation project planners begin a dialogue with the community. Local facilitators are often essential to carry out this process successfully. Facilitators can be recruited from among primary health care workers or other suitable persons who know the local
" " " " ~I
II
- 21 language and customs and are familiar with the principles of effective communication. The facilitator must be impartial when working with numerous community groups, thus someone from outside the target community may be more effective. Local facilitators create opportunities for individuals and small groups to express their views of the community's needs. The "felt needs" of the community are those desires that are most often voiced by community members without prompting from others. Both male and female facilitators will be needed, as the needs of men, women and children should be assessed separately. Other special interest groups should also be identified, and given an opportunity to express their needs individually. The concept of "needs assessment" is not confined here to the "needs" for water supply and sanitation. It is first necessary to understand how the community views their needs as a whole before the relevance of actions for water and sanitation can be understood. The results of the needs assessment should be presented to a meeting of the community for feedback and comments. Project planners should usc the principles of community education and participation to answer the following questions: what communication methods would be most effective in assessing the .needs of the community? e.g. house-to-house or random sample surveys, community meetings, discussions with special interest groups, or interviews with community leaders? other than men, women, and children, what other special interest groups can be identified in the community? what methods should be used to approach each special interest group to allow them to assess their own needs? By "assessing needs", project planners should be able to answer the following questions: why are the needs identified by members of the community more important than others that could be mentioned? are the expressed needs basic, or other than basic? have the opinions of all segments of the community been considered? how do the expressed needs of the community relate to the concerns of project planners for water supply and sanitation? how can the concerns of various groups within the community be prioritized and combined to represent the felt needs of the community? 1.2.a.3. Criteria for Success: community facilitators have been recruited and trained to carry out the community education and participation process the needs assessment has been made separately for men, women, and children, and other special interest groups that can be identified
- 22 a wide variety of needs has been expressed by various individuals and special interest groups the opinions of all segments of the community have been considered a variety of individuals and special interest groups has assessed, individually and in small groups, whether or not a water supply or sanitation project could meet some of the identified community needs project planners (or facilitators) have presented a summary of community needs as determined by the community in an open forum for feedback and comment l.2.b. Assessing Needs, Institutional Development (10)
1.2.b.l. Objective; to strengthen selected local institutions to the point where they can actively take part in the assessment of community needs and can serve as a focal point in efforts to meet some community needs
1.2.b.2. Procedure; Undertake discussions with leaders of local institutions to determine
if the institution's members are interested in helping with the community need. assessment. If they are, discuss the ways in which the institution might have an input to the process. These same institutions may later serve as a focal point for efforts designed to meet the community needs, whether they be for water supply and sanitation or something else. 1.2.b.3. Criteria for Success: leaders of local institutions have been asked whether or not the institution's members would be interested in assisting with the community needs assessment
interested institutions have been involved in the assessment of community needs institutions associated with special interest groups have been identified, and given an opportunity to express separately their view of the community's needs
1.2.c.
Assessing Needs, Human Resources Development (HRD)
1.2.c.l. Objective; to recruit and train community facilitators in the principles of CEP so that they can assist project planners in the assessment of community needs
1.2.c.2. Procedure; Local facilitators are often essential to carry out the CEP process successfully. Facilitators can be recruited from among primary health care workers or other suitable persons who know the local language and customs and are familiar with the principles of effective communication. The facilitator must be impartial when working with numerous community groups, thus someone from outside the target community may be most effective. Local facilitators create opportunities for individuals and small groups to express their views on the community's needs.
- 23 Both male and women and children groups should also express their view female facilitators will be needed, as the needs of men, should be assessed separately. Other special interest be identified, and given an opportunity to separately of the community's needs.
1.2.c.3. Criteria for Success: community facilitators have been recruited and trained to carry out the community education and participation process 1.2.d.
Assessing Needs, Appropriate Technology (AT)
l.2.d.l. Objective: to gather information on the traditions and habits of the people regarding the collection and storage of water for domestic use and the disposal of human wastes 1.2.d.2. Procedure: Sample surveys or observation techniques may be used to gather information on people's traditions, habits, and attitudes regarding the collection and storage of water for domestic use and the disposal of human wastes.
During these visits to the community, planners and facilitators should explain to the community that they are trying to find out about community needs, so that they can determine in conjunction with the communty if there is a way that the needs can be met. Planners and facilitators must avoid at this point the promotion of a specific technology or solution to the water supply or sanitation problems that may be observed. As part of technology selection, the following preliminary data will be useful for a later stage: what are the people's current habits regarding the collection and storage of water for domestic use and disposal of human wastes? what water supply and sanitation facilities currently exist? how adequate are the existing facilities? has an inventory of existing facilities (numbers, conditions) been made? how and to what extent are the existing facilities being u~ilized?
could the existing facilities be improved without much difficulty? l.2.d.3. Criteria for Success: data have been gathered on the habits and customs of the people in relation to the collection and storage of water for domestic use and the disposal of human wastes
- 24 -
community facilitators and planners have avoided promoting a specific technology to meet the needs expressed the existing water supply and sanitation facilities have been inspected and described for future reference 1.3 Assessing Needs, Criteria for Success:
CEP techniques have been used to bring out a wide variety of needs expressed by various individuals and special interest groups within the community the needs assessment has been made separately for men, women, and children, and other special interest groups that can be identified the needs of all segments of the community have been considered a variety of individuals and special interest groups have assessed, individually and in small groups, whether or not a water supply or sanitation project could meet some of the identified community needs 1.4 Assessing Needs, Decision Point: Proceed to step 2, "itemizing resources," if:
the criteria for successful implementation of each software component have been met, and
the above criteria for success (1.3) have been met, and the community believes that one or more of the felt needs identified could be met by a water supply or sanitation project. If all of the criteria for success have not been met, continue "assessing needs," or concentrate efforts on other communities that are more enthusiastic.
Step 2. 2.1
ITEMIZING RESOURCES
Itemizing Resources, Objective:
to itemi~e the community's resources that could be used to meet the needs for water supply and/or sanitation that were identified in step 1 2.2 Itemizing Resources, Procedure:
General: use community education and psrticipation techniques to help members of community itemize the resources that could be used to meet the identified needs for water supply and sanitation use community education and participation techniques to explain the role that project facilitators and planners can play in helping the community develop a water supply and sanitation project
- 25 -
explain to the community that they will have to meet certain requirements during the course of project development, but that many of the choices among alternatives will be left to them Speci fic: implement software component strategies 2.2.a. (CEP) , 2.2.b.(ID), 2.2.c. (RRD) , and 2.2.d. (AT) concurrently Softwarl! components are integrated into step 2, "itemizing resources," aa follows: 2.2.a. Itemizing Resources, Community Education and Participation (CEP)
2.2.a.l. Objective: to use communication techniques to assist the community to learn about and to itemize the resources that could be used to meet identified needs for water supply and/or sanitation 2.2.a.2. Procedure: Local facilitators continue to assist in the dialogue between project planners and the community as a whole, to identify resources that could be ·used to meet the identified needs. Several questions must be answered during this process: what is the level of community knowledge on health (literacy, educational background)? what has been the history (success or failure) of previous community development initiatives? what community groups or organizations should be involved in itemizing the resources?· what special efforts have been made previously to involve women or women's groups as resources in community projects? what customs/habits/taboos will playa role in determining the acceptability of the project to the community? 2.2.a.3. Criteria for Success: the community has itemized its own resources, in terms of local
institutions, local manpower, and traditional technology that can be used to meet the water supply and/or sanitation needs the community fully understands the role project facilitators and planners can provide in the development of a project the community understands that they will have to meet certain requirements as part of project development, but that many of the choices among alternatives will be left to them
- 26 planners understand values of the community and have identified institutions, manpower, and traditional technologies that may be used a. resources in the development of alternatives to meet identified water supply and sanitation needs
2.2.b.
Itemizing Resources, Institutional Development (10)
2.2.b.l Objective: to identify existing institutions that could be strengthened or new institutions that could be formed to undertake project implementation, selection of manpower for training, and eventual operation and maintenance of the water supply or sanitation project 2.2.b.2. Procedure: use CEP techniques to identify institutions that could undertake the job of project implementation, and/or operation and maintenance Several -questions must be answered during this process:
which existing institutions (or groups) could be involved? what previous attempts have been made to form new institutions in the community? who are the community leaders and what role could they play? are there community level workers (gov.ernmental or non-governmental) that could facilitate dialogue between the community and project planners? when voicing felt needs, do community members point out a need for additional institutions or strengthening of existing institutions? have any of the community's special interest groups formed their own local institution? 2.2.b.3 Criteria for Success:
the commun"ity has itemized the existing local institutions that can be strengthened to meet the water supply and/or sanitation needs local institutions have been involved in the above discussions and have expressed an interest to be involved in project planning 2.2.c.
Itemizing Resources, Human Resources Development (HRD)
2.2.c.l. Objective: to discuss with the community using CEP techniques, the available human resources and training facilities that could be used as part of the water supply or sanitation project 2.2.c.2. Procedure: use CEP techniques to discuss with the community the existing manpower and training resources that could be used as part of the project.
- 27 -
Several questions must be answered during this process: what skilled or semi-skilled persons are available (e.g. masons, carpenters, accountants) that might assist with the project? what tools or equipment are available within the community or the local area? what training programmes are available (at local, regional, or national levels) that may assist in training people to implement or maintain the project? what training periods would be most beneficial? what training methods would be most beneficial? what physical/environmental conditions are likely to affect training activities? what constraints may exist upon the availability of labor due to other activities (crop planting, harvesting, holidays, or other community .projects) 2.2.c.3. Criteria for Success: the community has itemized the existing skilled or semi-skilled manpower that can be recruited and trained to carry out the project and the training facilities that are available 2. 2.d. Itemizing Resources, Appropriate Technology (AT):
2.2.d.l. Objective: continue to discuss with the community the traditional technologies that have been used in the past to meet water supply and/or sanitation needs 2.2.d.2. Procedure: continue
to
use interview and observation to understand the
traditional resources that have been brought to bear to meet water supply and sanitation Several questions must be answered during this process: what traditional attitudes may affect the acceptability of the project to the community? how will the location/distribution of the population affect the choice of teChnology? how will level of service being considered affect the user charges that will be necessary to support operation and maintenance costs? how will environmental or physical constraints affect the project?
- 28 -
Data will also be needed as part of the process: user characteristics (generated by community worker through discussion with people) physical environment (may require a trained team to collect) e.g. sources of supply - physical constraints geology, climate infrastructure e.g. - transportation (roads, railways, etc.) - electricity, alternative fuel sources - communication network - construction, materials/equipment e.g. - availability of natural resources and building materials - availability of spare parts - logistics for spares/servicing
management/organizational aspects
e.g. - existing institutions and their potential role in the project - traditional methods of implementation and O&M - skilled/semi-skilled manpower - financial aspects e.g. - ability and willingness of community to pay and support services - financial resources, including local and other time constraints e.g. time-frame planning, mobilizing resource. and implementation
2.2.d.3. Criteria for Success: the community has itemized and discussed the traditional technologies that have been used in the past to meet the water supply and/or sanitation needs 2.3 Itemizing Resources, Criteria for Success:
the community has itemized its own resources, in terms of local institutions, local manpower, and traditional technology that can be used to meet the water supply and/or sanitation needs the community fully understands the role that project facilitators and planners can provide in the development of a project the community understands that they will have to meet certain requirements as part of project development, but that many of the choices among alternatives will be left to them /
- 29 2.4 Itemizing Resources, Decision Point: Proceed to step 3 ("laying out alternatives") if: the criteria for successful implementation of each software component in step 2 have been met, and the above criteria for success (2.3) have been met, and the community shows considerable enthusiasm for working with project facilitators and planners, and for going ahead with project planning. If all of the criteria for success have not been met, continue "itemizing r~source$lt, or concentrate effort on other communities that are more enthusiastic.
3. 3.1
LAYING OUT ALTERNATIVES Laying out Alternatives, Objective:
to layout a wide range of alternatives for meeting the identified water supply and/or sanitation needs, including technology, institutions, and manpower to be used, and the methods of implementation 3.2 Laying out Alternatives, Procedure: General: Working closely with the people, community facilitators and planners begin to formulate alternatives based upon suggesti09s received from the community. The planners' knowledge of technology and materials can be brought to bear to develop and adapt new ideas around the ideas expressed in group meetings. Of course, some alternatives to be considered may simply reflect planners' own preferences or those of government officials or ongoing programmes. The emphasis in step 3 is on building alternatives which reflect all of the diverse ideas of the community members. No effort should be made at this point to eliminate or criticize some alternatives, or to show why they may not be feasible. The facilitators job here is to draw out diverse views and to be sure that they are considered as part of the planning process. Subsequent steps will serve to eliminate some alternatives fr~ consideration for one reason or another. Specific: implement software component strategies 3.2.a. (CEP), 3.2.b. (ID), 3.2.c. (HRD) , and 3.2.d. (AT) concurrently Software components are integrated into the process of "laying out, alternatives" as follows:
3.2.a.
Community Education and Participation (CEP)
3.2.a.l. Objective: to use communication techniques to work with the community to explore a wide range of alternatives for ~eeting the identified water supply and/or sanitation needs, including technology, institutions, and manpower to be used, and the methods of implementation
- 30 -
3.2.a.2. Procedure: Working closely with the people, community facilitators and planners begin to formulate alternatives based upon suggestions received from the community. The planners knowledge of technology and materials can be brought to bear to construct and adapt new ideas around the ideas expressed in group meetings. Of course, some alternatives may simply reflect planners' own preferences or those of government programmes. The emphasis is on building alternatives which reflect all of the diverse ideas of the community members. No effort should be made at this point to eliminate or criticize some alternatives, or to show why they may not be feasible. The facilitators job here is to draw out diverse views and to explain them and represent them in the planning process. Models can be constructed of the alternatives to explain the variations to the group as a whole. Subsequest steps will serve to eliminate some alternatives from consideration.
3.2.a.3. Criteria for Success: alternatives developed: represent a wide spectrum of viewpoints are numerous
have were were as a 3.2.b.
not had to meet a test of feasibility at this point presented to people in the form of models, when possible presented to the special interest groups and the community whole for feedback and modification
Institutional Development (10)
3.2.b.l. Objective: to explore with the community a wide range of alternatives for institutional development to meet the identified water supply and/or sanitation needs, including the methods and terms of implementation 3.2.b.2. Procedure: use CEP techniques to explore with the community a wide range of alternatives for in~titutional development Several questions must be answered during this process: what dif~erent types of institutional arrangements could be envisaged to deal with the necesssary operational and maintenance functions of the facilities? what support at the regional or national level may be necessary? how will the institutional support structures adapt to the technology being suggested? 3.2.b.3. Criteria for Success: alternatives developed: represent a wide spectrum of viewpoints have not had to meet a test of feasibility at this point were presented to the special interest groups and the community as a whole for feedback and modification
- 31 -
3.2.c.
Human Resources Development (HRD)
3.2.c.l. Objective: to explore with the community a wide range of alternatives for human resources development to meet the identified water supply and/or sanitation needs, including the methods and terms of implementation
3.2.c.2
Procedure:
use CEP techniques to explore with the community a range of alternatives for selecting, training, and supervising manpower to be used for construction or continued operation and maintenance of the project Several questions must be answered during this process:
for each technical option, what manpower needs and technical skills for construction, and operation and maintenance will be needed? what training methods and locations will be used?
what will be the related costs for training? what input could be provided by the private sector? 3.2.c.3. Criteria for Success: alternatives developed: represent a wide spectrum of viewpoints have not had to meet a test of feasibility at this point alternatives developed were presented to the special interest groups and the community as a whole for feedback and modification 3.2.d. Appropriate Technology (AT)
3.2.d.l. Objectives: to explore with the community a wide range of technology alternatives for meeting the identified water supply and/or sanitation needs, including the methods and terms of implementation 3.2.d.2. Procedure: use CEP techniques to explore with the community a wide range of technology alternatives for meeting the identified needs Several questions must be answered during this process:
what technical options should be considered, both from the community's viewpoint and from that of the planners? for each technology option to be considered, what are the expected differences in reliability, convenience and health impact? what are the total costs and expected benefits for each alternative?
- 32 3.2.d.3. Criteria for Success: alternatives developed: represent a wide spectrum of viewpoints have not had to meet a test of feasibility at this point were presented to the special interest groups and the community as a whole for feedback and modification 3.3 Laying out Alternatives, Criteria for Success:
planners have worked with the community through CEP to layout a wide range of alternatives for meeting the identified water supply and/or sanitation needs, including technology, institutions, and manpower to be used, and the methods of implementation special interest groups have had an opportunity to participate individually in the process of laying out alternatives alternatives developed: represent a wide spectrum of viewpoint are numerous
have not had to meet a te3t of feasibility at this point were presented to people in the form of models were presented to the special interest groups and to the community as a whole for feedback and modification 3.4 Laying out Alternatives, Decision Point: Proceed to step 4, "making choices," if~
- the criteria for successflll implementation of each software component in step 3 have been met, and
the criteria for success in section 3.3 have been met. If all of the criteria mentioned have not been met, continue "laying out alternatives," or concentrate effort on other communities that are more enthusiastic. Step 4. 4.1 MAKIN!; CHOICES
Making Choices, Objective:
to work with the community through CEP to make choices among the alternatives developed to meet identified needs for water supply and/or sanitation 4.2 Making Choices, Procedure: General : planner. give further consideration to the list of alternatives that have been developed earlier through meetings with individuals, special interest groups, and the community as a whole
- 33 some alternatives are eliminated as the result of a feasibility analysis, and the reasons for infeasibility are g1ven the most promising alternatives are developed further
choices among the most promising alternatives are presented to the community for their views and feedback choices can be presented in the form of portable models of proposed facilities; these can be handled easily by the people for quick understanding choices can revolve around the size, shape, or location of
facilities. or on the methods and terms of implementation choices need not be numerous, but planners must be flexible and
ready to modify a design if they see that the people do not readily agree choices are made regarding the preferred alternative the choices that have been made are presented to the community for review and to determine if they are satisfied with them Specific: implement software component strategies 4.2.a. (CEP). 4.2.b. (ID). 4.2.c. (HRD). and 4.2.d. (AT) concurrently Software components are integrated into "taking action" as follows:
4.2.a.
Community Education and Participation (CEP) to use communication techniques to work with the
4.2.a.l. Objective:
community to make choices among a variety of alternatives that have been
suggested to meet the identified needs for water supply and/or sanitation 4.2.a.2. Procedure: Planners continue to work with the community through meetings or other structured and non-structured situations to determine the preferred choices among alternatives
The following questions may be helpful in making decisions at this stage: what choices can be given to the community. particularly regarding the social or cultural acceptability of feasible technologies? how can the community be represented to the largest degree In the choice of technology, terms, or method of implementation? how can community institutions have an effect on the institutional arrangements to be made for operation and maintenance of the facilities?
how can the community select the persons to be trained and the method and location of training?
- 34 4.2.a.3. Criteria for Success: the community has made choices among the alternatives that were
developed community members dnd special interest groups have reviewed the choices that were made and are satisfied with them
4.2.b. 4.2.b.l
Institutional Development (10) Objective: to work with the community to make choices among the
alternatives for institutional d.evelopment that have been suggested to meet
the identified needs fur water supply and/or sanitation 4.2.b.2. Procedure: use CEP techniques to present choices to the community regarding alternative institutional arrangements to meet the identified needs the community indicates the preferred alternative As part of this process, a number of concerns will be important: how can existing community institutions be strengthned to meet community and project needs?
what techniques can be developed for collection and accounting of user fees to maintain the system on a continuing basis choices for institutional development at this stage may include: election of board members identifying user fees to cover operating costs establishing collection periods and methods identifying policies for non-payment committees to manage day to day activities eSlablishing levels of compensation for operation and maintenance workers
be sure that all manpower to be trained to carry out operation and maintenance activities will be selected and supervised by the institution responsible for continued operation of the project 4.2.b.3. Criteria for Success: the community has made choices regarding the institutions that will implement, operate, and maintain the community water supply and sanitation facilities community members and special interest groups have reviewed the institutional choices that were made and are satisfied with them all manpower to be trained to carry out operation and maintenance activities will be selected and supervised by the institution responsible for continued operation of the project
- 35 the institution selected for supervision of operation and maintenance activities has the necessary authority to collect user fees and to supervise personnel carrying out operation and maintenance activities
4.2.c.
Human Resources Development (HRD)
4.2.c.l. Objective: to work with the community through CEP to make choices among the manpower alternatives that have been suggested to meet the identified needs for water supply and/or sanitation 4.2.c.2. Procedure use CEP techniques to present choices to the community regarding alternative manpower arrangements to meet the identified needs the community indicates the preferred alternative As part of this process, a number of concernS may be important: institutional development options which will have a bearing on the way in which manpower is selected, trained, and supervised as part of the project additional choices for HRD may include: establishing the qualifications and training for operation and maintenance workers
establishing procedures, methods to encourage women to apply for the operation and maintenance tasks 4.2.c.3 Criteria for Success:
the community has decided how manpower will be selected, trained, and supported by the local institution responsible for the water supply and/or sanitation facility community members and special interest groups have reviewed the HRD choices that were made and are satisfied with them 4.2.d. Appropriate Technology (AT)
4.2.d.l. Objective: to work with the community to make choices among the technological alternatives that have been developed to meet the identified needs for water supply and/or sanitation 4.2.d.2. Procedure: the community is presented choices among the most promising alternatives community selects the preferred technology options after consideration of the advantages and disadvantages of each
- 36 -
various factors may playa part in the selection, including feasibility cost
social/cultural acceptability HRD and ID options considered most promising 4.2.d.3. Criteria for Succesc: choices have been presented to the community regarding various aspects of the most promising technologies under consideration the community has made choices among the technological options suggested community members and special interest groups have reviewed the technological choices that were made and are satisfied with them 4.3 Making Choices, Criteria for Success:
the community has made choices among the alternatives that were developed community members and special interest groups have reviewed the choices that were made and are satisfied with them 4.4 Making Choices, Decision Point: Go on to step 5, "taking action,11 if:
the criteria for successful implementation of each software component have been met, and the above criteria for success (4.3) have been met. If all of the above criteria have not been met, continue "making choices," or concentrate effort on other communities that are more enthusiastic.
5.1
Taking Action, Objective:
to implement the project as agreed with the community and to continue to keep the community informed on the progress of project implementation
5.2
Taking Action, Procedure: General:
identify community tasks - assign construction coordinator arrange for community labor, construction arrange for community materials and equipment arrange for local storage of materials continue to keep the community informed on the progress of project implementation and to work with the community to determine any problems that develop during the construction phase
II ,
,
II , , j
,
,
i I I
- 37 -
~pecific.
:
implement software component strategies S.2.a. (CEP) , S.2.D. (ID), 5.2.c. (HRD), and 5.2.d. (AT) concurrently Software components are integrated into "taking action" as follows;
5.2.a.
Community Educatio.l and Participation (CEP)
5.2.a.1. Objective; to implement the project as agreed with the community and to continue to keep the community informed on the progress of project implementa.tion
5.2.a.2. Procedure; identify community tasks - assign construction coordinator
arrange for community labor, construction
arrange for community materials and equipment arrange for local storage of materials continue to keep the community informed on the progress of the project implementation and to work with the community to determine any problems that develop during the construction phase 5.2.a.3. Criteria for Success: the community met their obligations as agreed before construction began the community was kept informed regarding progress during project implementation the project was implemented as agreed with the community S.2.b. Institutional Development (ID)
5.2.b.l. Objective: to implement the IV choices as agreed with the community and to continue to keep the community informed on the progress of implementation 5.2.b.2. Procedure: coordinate community input as per construction schedule identify community workers for various training needs arrange for community meetings to review progress periodically 5.2.b.3 Criteria for Success: local institutions met their obligations as agreed before construction began the local institution responsible for operation and maintenance was
kept informed regarding progress during project implementation
- 38 the project was implemented as agreed with the community the institutions responsible for operation and maintenance are carrying out their responsibilities 5.2.c.
Human Resources Development (HRD)
S.2.c.l. Objective: to imple~ent the HRD choices of the project as agreed with the community and to continue to keep the community informed on the progress of implementation S.2.c.2. Procedure: prepare training programme for construction, operation, and maintenance
identify agency inputs and responsibilities identify training objectives and priorities identify tasks identify methods to be used and possible equipment or material needs prepare training schedules (consider harvest times, climactic conditions, holidays) S.2.c.3. Criteria for Success: the community met their obligations for labor to be supplied during construction
the community was kept informed regarding progress during project implementation the project was implemented as agreed with the community a local institution is responsible for selection, and supervision of the manpower required for operation and maintenance the persons responsible for operation and maintenance have been trained and are carrying out their obligations S.2.d. Appropriate Technology (AT)
S.2.d.l. Objective: to implement the technology chosen by the community and to keep the community informed if any changes in design are necessary 5.2.d.2. Procedure: finalize design identify funds order materials, arrange contracts begin on-site storage of materials finalize implementation schedule identify construction supervisor
project construction begins after
- 39 all the necessary choices have been made by the community the community have fulfilled all of their commitments the community is satisfied that the project is worthwhile and will meet their needs provisions for operation and maintenance have been made 5.2.d.3. Criteria for Success: the community has met their obligations for materials to be supplied before or during construction the community was kept informed regarding progress during project implementation the project was implemented and completed as agreed with the community the completed project is functioning and being utilized 5.3 began the community was kept informed regarding progress during project implementation the project was implemented and completed as agreed with the community the completed project is functioning and is being utilized the community is satisfied with the completed project 5.4 Taking Action, Decision Point: You have completed the 5-step process if: the criteria for successful implementation of each software component have been met, and the above criteria for success (5.3) have been met. Congratulations, the community water supply and sanitation project has an excellent chance for success. If all of the above criteria for success have not been met, continue "taking action. 1I
Taking Action, Criteria for Success: the community met their obligations as agreed before construction