consultancy services for unicef’s evaluation of …...solar pv for pumping is a proven technology...

Evaluation of solar powered water supply systems in Somalia | August | 2016 1

EED Advisory Limited

CONSULTANCY SERVICES FOR UNICEF’s EVALUATION OF

THE PERFORMANCE OF SOLAR POWERED WATER SYSTEMS

IN SOMALIA

This report is financed by the USAID-OFDA and is presented by EED Advisory Limited for UNICEF and the Commission of the

European Union. It does not necessarily reflect the opinion of UNICEF, USAID-OFDA or the EU.

EED Advisory Limited

6 Nas Court, Milimani Road, Nairobi - Kenya | P.O. Box 4050, Nairobi 00200

T: +254 (20) 2574927 / +254 (20)2376122

E: [email protected] |W: www.eedadvisory.com

SUBMITTED TO: United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.eedadvisory.com/

Evaluation of solar powered water supply systems in Somalia | August | 2016 i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ II

LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... II

LIST OF ACRONYMS .............................................................................................................. III

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... 1

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 5

1.1 Overview of SPWSS Program .............................................................................................................. 5

1.2 Objectives of this assignment............................................................................................................... 5

1.3 Somalia’s Water Access Context ........................................................................................................... 6

2. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................. 10

2.1 Evaluation Design ................................................................................................................................ 10

2.2 Data analysis......................................................................................................................................... 12

3. STUDY FINDINGS ........................................................................................................... 14

3.1 Demographic Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 14

3.2 Technical Review ................................................................................................................................. 18

3.3 Parameters Review ............................................................................................................................... 23

4. ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................... 28

4.1 Technical Review ................................................................................................................................. 28

4.2 Impact Evaluation ................................................................................................................................ 32

4.3 Sustainability and Management Structures Review ........................................................................ 37

5. CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................ 43

6. RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................. 45

6.1 Technical Recommendations .............................................................................................................. 45

6.2 Programming and Management Recommendations ........................................................................ 47

ANNEX 1: LIST OF KII AND FGD PARTICIPANTS ................................................. 50

ANNEX 2: LIST OF INSTITUTIONS AND BUSINESSES ........................................ 51

ANNEX 3: LIST OF SAMPLED WATERPOINTS ........................................................ 53

ANNEX 4: PUMP SPECIFICATIONS AND DISTRIBUTORS .................................. 55

Evaluation of solar powered water supply systems in Somalia | August | 2016 ii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Distribution of All Survey Respondents........................................................................................................ 11

Table 2: Summary of School Attendance and Facilities .............................................................................................. 17

Table 3: Summary of Health Facilities ........................................................................................................................ 18

Table 4: Average Water Prices ($/20L) ....................................................................................................................... 24

Table 5: Reliability of Alternatively Powered Water Sources ..................................................................................... 26

Table 6: Analysis of Willingness to Pay ...................................................................................................................... 35

Table 7: Elements Determinig Sustainability ............................................................................................................. 38

Table 8: North West Zone (# of Sampled Sites – 14; # of Households (HH) – 90; # of other tools- 37) ...................... 53

Table 9: North East Zone (# of Sampled Sites – 13; # of Households (HH) – 75; # of other tools - 25) ...................... 53

Table 10: South and Central Zone (# of Sampled Sites – 23; # of Households (HH) – 135; # of other tools - 57) ...... 53

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Climatic Zones in Somalia (Source: SWALIM) ............................................................................................ 7

Figure 2: Somalia Global Horizontal Solar Irradiation ................................................................................................. 7

Figure 3: Location of Sampled Sites ............................................................................................................................ 10

Figure 4: Gender of HH Respondents ......................................................................................................................... 14

Figure 5: Age group of respondents ............................................................................................................................ 14

Figure 6: Marital Status of Respondents ..................................................................................................................... 14

Figure 7: Type of household ......................................................................................................................................... 16

Figure 8: Household Location ...................................................................................................................................... 16

Figure 9: Gender of Business Respondents ................................................................................................................. 17

Figure 10: Water point functionality rate ................................................................................................................... 18

Figure 11: Appropriateness of System Sizing ............................................................................................................. 18

Figure 12: Water point head and flow rate .................................................................................................................. 19

Figure 13: Water Use Rates......................................................................................................................................... 19

Figure 14: Means of Water Collection ......................................................................................................................... 20

Figure 15: Water Collection Points ............................................................................................................................. 20

Figure 16: Average Cost of Water in Somalia per Source ........................................................................................... 23

Figure 17: Water Collection Times .............................................................................................................................. 25

Figure 18: Reasons for inaccessibility.......................................................................................................................... 27

Figure 19: Water point functionality rate over time ................................................................................................... 29

Figure 20: Oversized WSPSS Sites ............................................................................................................................. 31

Figure 21: Undersized SWPSS Sites ........................................................................................................................... 32

Figure 22: The F-diagram ............................................................................................................................................ 33

Figure 23: Factors influencing choice of water source ................................................................................................. 36

Figure 24: SPWSS Procurement Process .................................................................................................................... 40

Figure 25: Estimated value of support delivered through various agencies (Jan – Sep 2016) – Compiled with data

from OCHA FTS (Sep, 2016) ...................................................................................................................................... 42

Figure 26: SPWSS Pump Selection Tool..................................................................................................................... 48

Evaluation of solar powered water supply systems in Somalia | August | 2016 iii

LIST OF ACRONYMS

AS Al Shabaab

ASAL Arid and Semi-Arid Lands

CHC Centre for Humanitarian Change

EU European Union

FGD Focus Group Discussions

GPRS General Packet Radio Service

HASP Hydrogeological Survey and Assessment of Selected Areas in Somaliland and

Puntland

IGRAC International Groundwater Resources Assessment

JMP Joint Monitoring Programme

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

NEZ North East Zone

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NWZ North West Zone

PC Personal Computer

PSAWEN Puntland State Agency for Water, Energy and Natural Resources

PSH Peak sun-hours

PV Photovoltaic

PVC Polyvinyl Chloride

RAG Red-Amber-Green

SCZ South Central Zone

SMS Short Message Service

SPWSS Solar Powered Water Supply Systems

SWALIM Somalia Water and Land Information Management

SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats

TDH Total dynamic head

UN United Nations

UNICEF United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund

USAID-OFDA United States Agency for International Development/Office of Foreign Disaster

Assistance

WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene

WASH-MIS Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Management Information System

WSS Water Supply and Sanitation


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) has been promoting the installation of solar

powered water supply systems (SPWSS) in rural communities in Somalia since 2006. This is

aimed at realizing the Fund’s vision in Somalia of developing and scaling up sustainable

community-managed water supply systems governed by sound frameworks, and managed and

overseen by a capable and dynamic private and public sector. The choice of solar technology is

informed by i) solar pumps are suitable as most parts of Somalia enjoy up to 10-12 hours of

sunlight per day throughout the year, ii) solar pumping has minimal recurrent costs iii) solar-

powered systems have low operating and maintenance costs and iv) solar energy, being

renewable, is environmentally friendly. Working with its partners, UNICEF has installed over

100 SPWSS sites across Somalia in various regions including Bari, Nugaal, Sool, Sanaag, Awdal,

Togdheer, Woqooyi Galbbed, Hiraan, Gedo, Lower Shebelle, Benadir, Galgadud and Mudug.

UNICEF is looking to either reorient or enhance its efforts in water access in Somalia. The overall

objective of this assignment was to assess the progress towards achievement of sustainable

community water supply through solar powered systems and to evaluate the efficiency,

effectiveness and relevance of the technology to the local context with a goal of generating lessons

and recommendations on factors to consider going forward. The evaluation methodology applied

was three-tiered: (i) desk review, (ii) field work and (iii) synthesis. The desk review resulted in a

detailed evaluation plan (inception report), a total of four structured questionnaires, and a set of

focus group discussion and key informant interview questions. Inception stage site visits were

conducted in Somaliland, Puntland and Mogadishu. Questionnaire pre-testing was carried out in

Puntland before all 4 questionnaires were translated to Somali. Field data collection was carried

out over a 6-week period from 13th of June to the 22nd of July 2016 – enumerator training was

conducted sequentially with data collection starting immediately after training, starting in

Puntland, then Somaliland and finally the different regions in South Central Zone. Water points,

households, businesses and institutions were selected through a stratified – random sampling

approach. A total of 424 structured surveys were conducted: 300 households, 46 businesses, 42

institutions and 36 water point operators. A further 10 key informant interviews and 3 focus

group discussions (one per zone) were carried out. The key limitations to the data collection

exercise included i) the extensive coverage of sampled sites (14 sites in Somaliland, 13 sites in

Puntland and 23 sites across 6 regions of South Central Zone); ii) delayed introduction to relevant

officials and reception of key data needs caused a delay in start of data collection.

The evaluation adopts a 3-step approach: i) technical review; ii) impact evaluation and; iii)

sustainability and management structures review. The evaluation is largely qualitative, with

discussion built around data analysis and observations made in the field. A quantitative

evaluation could not be performed due to lack of baseline and needs assessment data and well

defined indicators of success to form a basis for analysis.


Technical Review

The technical review looks at the functionality rate of wells and the appropriateness of system

designs. The national functionality rate for SPWSS sites is at 77%, varying from 56% in Puntland,

77% in South Central Zone (SCZ) and 91% in Somaliland. It is, however, suspected that the

functionality rate of wells in South Central regions is lower than indicated by the data, as site

selection in the region was biased by accessibility and deliberate exclusion of non-functional wells

in some regions. Due to AS control over some regions the evaluation team, for example, did not

get access to wells in the Bakool region where five sites had been selected in the random sample.

These were replaced by alternative sites outside or adjacent to these regions. Similar challenges

were experienced in sections of Galgadud and Hiran. Pump breakdown rates and seasonality of

wells and boreholes were seen to affect the short term functionality of wells. At least 10 water

points in Somaliland and SCZ indicated having had downtime due to broken pumps within the

last year, but these were all repaired using funds from charges on water or community

contributions, an indication of community ownership. 21% of respondents indicated that drying

of wells limited their ability to access water from SPWSS sites, with the most affected area being

SCZ at 29%. An analysis of well functionality over time pointed to a ‘well mortality rate’ of two

years. Management and maintenance structures should be put in place to increase the probability

of longer term sustainability of SPWSS systems.

Solar PV for pumping is a proven technology for advancing water access, especially in rural arid

and semi-arid areas. The Grundfos pumps are a trusted brand in the solar PV pumping market

and the SQF 5A-7 pump is an appropriate choice as it functions within the limits of most of the

SPWSS sites. However, with regard to power sizing, a majority of SPWSS sites are oversized (57%

of functional sites) – having more solar panels than is needed. 30% of the sites are undersized.

Sizing calculations indicated that had all the sites been appropriately sized rather than adopting

an almost ‘one-size fits all’ approach, redistributing solar panels would have led to correct sizing

of all sites and therefore a more efficient use of resources. As it is, oversized systems have

underutilized resources and may lead to over-pumping from wells and therefore threatening the

well/borehole health. Undersize systems cannot meet their demand. The Technical Reports

attachment provides well-specific details.

Impact Evaluation

The impact evaluation looked at the effectiveness, relevance and efficiency of SPWSS

interventions. The criterion ‘Effectiveness’ assessed the progress in advancing water access for

target communities. Access was evaluated against the UN right to water and the Somalia WASH

cluster indicators. Somalia has a national water usage average rate of 19 liters per person per day,

against a recommended average of 15 liters per person per day. Further, the average distance

traveled by respondents to a water point is 380m against a recommendation of 500m. A majority

of respondents (88%) wait for less than 10 minutes to collect water from SPWSS sites – the

recommended maximum wait time is 30minutes. Only 11 of the 30 functional SPWSS sites visited


provide water at a fee. Water is most expensive in Somaliland at $3.1/m3 followed by Puntland

at $2.5/m3 and cheapest in SCZ at $1.2/m3. SPWSS sites are the cheapest sources of water for

sources that provide water at a fee1. Analysis of willingness to pay showed that a majority of

respondents in Somaliland and Puntland are willing to pay for improved quality of service from

their main water source while a majority of respondents in SCZ are not willing. However, the

average current prices of water are higher than most people are willing to pay. Perceptions of

quality and acceptability were seen to be of little consequence in choice of a water point, probably

due to lack of options.

Relevance evaluated water use behavior in adopting SPWSS sites. 92% of respondents using

SPWSS sites consider them their main water source while 84% solely rely on the sites to meet all

their water needs. At least 35% of those using SPWSS sites as their main water source indicate

that they’ve switched to this source within the last 3 years; at least 30 of these switches were from

unprotected water sources (open wells and rivers/streams). SPWSS sites have contributed to

efficiency in time usage: about 50% of respondents spend more than 10 minutes queuing at hand

pumps contrasted to 12% at SPWSS sites This is time that could be used for other economic

activities or for children in school. The poor power sizing of systems has contributed to low

efficiency of the SPWSS thereby limiting the benefits that could be gained from the interventions.

Sustainability Review

Sustainability can be viewed as the ability of a water point to consistently provide water in

quantities and quality comparable to the levels experienced during project commissioning. This

can be seen as a function of the number of operational years, average supply quantities and

quality, and availability factor (proportionate number of times that the system functions when

needed). Information collected isolate three key elements that determine the sustainability of

SPWSS. These are (i) technical design, (ii) functionality and (iii) degree of local ownership. The

SPWSS development process varies across regions. A key shortcoming of the process is that the

equipment supplier (hardware) and the service provider are often two (or more) different entities

making it difficult to isolate and assign responsibility in cases of malfunctions. Ideally, procuring

an end-to-end contractor who takes responsibility of both the hardware and service should

address this problem (merging step 5,6 and 8). The reality remains that this may not be practical

in some of the AS controlled areas, or other areas in general due to clan dynamics that allow only

certain service providers to operate in specific regions. Providing regular after-installation

support should be a standard component of the process. The subcontractors, in part, should be

accountable to these local leaders and communities during the first six months to a year post-

1 Solar-diesel hybrid systems might provide a cheaper rate though the data lacked a representative

sample (n=1)


construction. It is during this initial period that most technical problems can easily be identified

and addressed before irreparable damages are caused.

Recommendations for Scaling-up SPWSS

In conclusion, UNICEF has demonstrated exceptional competence in project delivery and is

considered a sector leader in promoting water access in Somalia. The following are key

recommendations for taking the SPWSS project to scale in Somalia: i) Adopt a template approach

as opposed to a ‘one-size fits all’ approach to designing solar PV systems, that incorporates both

Grundfos and Lorentz pumps (a suggested pump selection decision tool is provided in this

evaluation); ii) Carry out well-specific power sizing calculations for efficient allocation of

resources and to avoid over-pumping of wells/boreholes; iii) Implement a WASH-MIS system –

a data collection and management system that allows targeted and synchronized data collection

across the three regions; iv) Phase II of the project should be time bound with a well-defined

logical framework that outlines the project’s specific objectives, inputs to realize these objectives,

expected outcomes and impacts and indicators of success; v) Carry out targeted baseline and

needs assessment studies that incorporate community engagement prior to implementation of

Phase II activities; vi) UNICEF should use its position as a WASH sector leader to form and run

a WASH-funds coordination body within the Somalia Development and Reconstruction Facility

and at regional levels.


1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Overview of SPWSS Program

UNICEF’s vision in Somalia is to develop and scale up sustainable community-managed water

supply systems governed by sound frameworks, and managed and overseen by a capable and

dynamic private and public sector. UNICEF envisages that more people in rural, urban and peri-

urban areas of Somalia, in particular those living in vulnerable areas, will have access to improved

water within considerations of the need to improve efficiency and increase revenue. This vision

is in the backdrop of a region that i) is mostly arid and semi-arid and therefore highly water

scarce; ii) has a threatened groundwater resource due to over-exploitation coupled with low

recharge rates; iii) has a poor public water supply system so that most of the population obtains

water from sources that are prone to drying up in the dry seasons and iv) most of these water

sources, such as unprotected shallow wells, springs and surface water are contaminated and

unsafe for human consumption. Further, water access technologies (e.g. hand pumps, diesel

powered pumps and solar powered pumps) affect the sustainability of water points (in particular

boreholes and shallow wells) and the affordability of water by consumers.

To realize its vision in Somalia, UNICEF has been promoting the installation of solar powered

water supply systems (SPWSS) in rural communities in Somalia since 2006. The choice of solar

technology is informed by i) solar pumps are suitable as most parts of Somalia enjoy upto 10-12

hours of sunlight per day throughout the year; ii) solar pumping has zero recurrent costs; iii)

solar-powered systems require low operation and maintenance costs and; iv) solar energy, being

renewable, is environmentally friendly. Working with its partners, UNICEF has installed over

100 SPWSS sites across Somalia in various regions including Bari, Nugaal, Sool, Sanaag, Awdal,

Togdheer, Woqooyi Galbbed, Hiraan, Gedo, Lover Shebelle, Benadir, Galgadud and Mudug.

1.2 Objectives of this assignment

UNICEF is looking to either re-orient or enhance sustainable development of community solar

powered water supply systems in Somalia. The overall objective of this assignment is to assess

progress towards achievement of sustainable community water supply through SPWSS with the

goal of generating lessons and recommendations from efforts implemented so far. The evaluation

assesses varied factors including: the efficiency, effectiveness and relevance of installed

technology to the local context; factors to be considered in scaling up installation of solar powered

supply systems; ability of communities to embrace and use the technology and; impact of

installed infrastructure among others. This evaluation is done through a three-step approach – i)

a technical evaluation looking at the appropriateness of the installed hardware including sizing

and installation; ii) sustainability and management structures evaluation assessing the systems

in place, within and beyond UNICEF, to ensure long term sustainability of installed systems and;

iii) impact evaluation looking at the relevance, effectiveness and efficiency impacts of the SPWSS

project to the local social context. Some of the specific parameters evaluated under this

assignment include i) comparison of price per barrel of water from varied sources; ii) water

collection times at alternatively powered water sources; iii) reliability of SPWSS systems


compared to other systems and; iv) impact of insecurity on SPWSS systems. Additionally, the

assignment seeks to analyze factors within and beyond UNICEF’s control that affect the

performance of SPWSS so as to advise on how to take SPWSS to scale in Somalia while ensuring

complementarities with other actors in the WASH sector.

1.3 Somalia’s Water Access Context

1.3.1 Climate and Solar Radiation

Climate

Somalia is mainly made up of arid and semi-arid lands (ASAL) making it a highly water scarce

country. Rainfall is mostly low and of erratic incidence: average total annual rainfall is about

300mm with the highest annual rainfall of about 700-800mm in the middle and lower Juba and

along the coastal areas of Middle Shabelle and the lowest rainfall seen along the northern

coastline at less than 100mm/year2. The country has two main rainy seasons: Gu from April to

June and Deyr from October to November; and two dry seasons: Jilaal from December to March

and Haggai from July to September. However, the rainfall seasons are highly variable and most

of the country remains vulnerable to weather and climatic shocks - Somalia experiences recurring

drought and flooding disasters that have displaced, killed and destroyed the livelihood of

millions of people. Somalia has average daily temperatures ranging between 25°C and 35°C with

temperatures highest in the inland areas – the cooling effect of cold ocean currents cools the

coastal regions. Error! Reference source not found. shows the climatic zones in Somalia.

Solar Radiation

Solar panels need direct sunlight to produce their maximum solar output. However, the amount

of solar radiation from the sun, varies throughout the day depending on the location of the sun

and cloud cover among other atmospheric conditions. Peak sun-hours (PSH) present an accepted

measure of the amount of energy that can be produced by solar panels: PSH is the average time

it takes for solar irradiance to average 1000W per square meter. Somalia’s annual global

horizontal irradiation3 ranges from 4.7-6.8 kWh/m2/day with the northern regions, on average,

receiving more irradiation than the South as shown in 4: the deeper the red coloration, the

higher the irradiation values. The high PSH levels throughout the year make solar power a highly

viable energy source for Somalia.

2 Somalia Water and Land Information Management (SWALIM), 2007, Climate of Somalia, Technical

Report No. W – 01 3 This is the total amount of radiation received per unit area from above by a surface horizontal to the

ground and it includes both direct normal irradiance and diffuse horizontal irradiance. 4 Maps are generated using irradiation averages for the period 1994 - 2010


Figure 2: Somalia Global Horizontal Solar Irradiation Figure 1: Climatic Zones in Somalia (Source: SWALIM)


1.3.2 Hydrogeology

With the exception of the communities living along the Juba and Shabelle Rivers, a majority of

the Somali people rely on ground water for domestic water supply and crop and livestock

farming. The main ground water sources include boreholes, shallow wells and springs, with

SWALIM5 estimating Somalia to have at least 1,695 dugwells, 823 boreholes and 352 springs. This

makes understanding Somalia’s hydrogeology (which deals with the distribution and movement

of groundwater in soil and rocks of the earth’s crust, commonly in aquifers) critical to sustainable

management of the groundwater resource. Unfortunately, the knowledge and availability of

information on quality and quantity of groundwater resources for the region is very limited, and

particularly so in the South and Central regions. Among the more comprehensive studies is the

HASP6: one of its main outputs is the first ever classification of the quality and quantity of local

aquifer systems and groundwater resources for specific areas of interest. The study found the

quality of groundwater in Somaliland and Puntland to be low to moderate with a majority of the

sources exhibiting excessive levels of salinity (only 40-50% being suitable for potable use).

Further, the study estimates the ground water yield at less than 0.5l/s/km2 classifying the region

as extremely poor in groundwater reserves. That said, the study does note that “drilling of

‘humanitarian’ wells should be extended, but only after feasibility assessment and under

professional supervision”. IGRAC7 identifies at least 3 transboundary aquifers in Somalia: i) Merti

Aquifer (whose depth from ground level to the top of the aquifer ranges from 100 to 250m8); ii)

Shabelle Aquifer whose average depth to the water table is 110m and; iii) Jubba aquifer whose

depth to the water table ranges from <5m-15m. Given the limited availability of aquifer

information, there is a need for coordinated efforts between drilling agencies within the country

to advance the understanding of the region’s ground water potential.

In general, boreholes (most of which have a depth ranging from 90m-250m, though some have

gone as deep as 450m in some areas) are seen as a more strategic water source in Somalia as they

have water throughout the year and a yield of 5-20m3/hr. Shallow wells on the other hand tend

to be less than 20m deep with yields varying from 2.5-10m3 /hr and are more prone to seasonality.

With regard to water quality, a majority of sources record conductivity levels higher than

2,000µS/cm, which is higher than the recommended 500 µS/cm for drinking water quality.

5 SWALIM – Somalia Water and Land Information Management; http://www.faoswalim.org/water/water-resources/ground-water 6 SWALIM, 2012, Hydrological Survey and Assessment of Selected Areas in Somaliland and Puntland 7 IGRAC – International Groundwater Resources Assessment: https://ggis.un-igrac.org/ggis-viewer/region_information 8 Acacia Water, 2015, Hydrogeological Assessment of the Merti Aquifer, Kenya, http://www.worldagroforestry.org/sites/default/files/TR1%20ARIGA-%20Hydrological%20Assessment%20of%20the%20Merti%20Aquifer%20Kenya.pdf

http://www.faoswalim.org/water/water-resources/ground-water

http://www.faoswalim.org/water/water-resources/ground-water

https://ggis.un-igrac.org/ggis-viewer/region_information

http://www.worldagroforestry.org/sites/default/files/TR1%20ARIGA-%20Hydrological%20Assessment%20of%20the%20Merti%20Aquifer%20Kenya.pdf

http://www.worldagroforestry.org/sites/default/files/TR1%20ARIGA-%20Hydrological%20Assessment%20of%20the%20Merti%20Aquifer%20Kenya.pdf


1.3.3 Socio-politics

Somalia’s complex socio-political landscape exacerbates the country’s poor water access

situation. This landscape contributes directly to water access with regard to i) installation,

operation and maintenance and long term sustainability of water infrastructure; ii) operation of

sector governance and regulation structures and; iii) availability of relevant skilled labour for

installation and maintenance of systems. There is therefore a very distinct disparity in water

access between the different regions with better access in the more stable areas (for instance in

Somaliland) as opposed to conflict areas like Lower Juba. Water access is further affected by

Somalis’ lifestyle patterns: the majority of Somalis live in rural areas (63%, JMP 2012) and are

mostly pastoralists or semi-sedentary agro-pastoralists9. As a consequence of its climatic

conditions and complex socio-political landscape, Somalia has a poor, relatively inexistent water

supply and sanitation (WSS) public sector especially outside Somaliland and Puntland regions.

The Ministry of Water in Somaliland, The Puntland State Authority of Water, Energy and Natural

Resources, and the Ministry of Energy and Water Resources – Federal Government of Somalia

are the entities mandated with public water supply. WSS needs, however, have a history of being

met mainly by entrepreneurs in the private sector and relief activities by varied humanitarian

and non-governmental agencies. These interventions have, however, been limited in scope and

population reach and are unsustainable in the long run.

9 Center for Humanitarian Change, 2014, Scoping Study for Improvement of Water and Sanitation in Somalia


2. METHODOLOGY

This chapter details the evaluation design including sampling, fieldwork instruments and the

data collection process. It also outlines the analysis process and assumptions and limitations

to consider in interpreting the data.

2.1 Evaluation Design

2.1.1 Sampling

Location Sampling

Field data collection was implemented

in at least 50% of regions where solar

powered systems were installed.

Project documents shared by UNICEF

divided Somalia into three regions:

North West Zone (NWZ), North East

Zone (NEZ) and South Central Zone

(SCZ). Data provided showed that

systems were installed in at least 6

regions in the NEZ, 8 regions in the

North West Zone (NWZ) and 6 regions

in the South and Central Zone (SCZ). A

total of 50 sites, proportionally

distributed across the three zones were

selected for evaluation: 13 sites in

Puntland, 14 sites in Somaliland and 23

sites in South and Central zone. Site

selection per region was random

though the final samples were

influenced by accessibility and

prevailing security. Of the 50 sites

distributes across the three zones, 40

sites were UNICEF funded while 10

sites were non-UNICEF funded; the

non-UNICEF funded sites functioned as a control group for the evaluation along with

providing data for technology comparison purposes. The 10 sites were selected with the input

of UNICEF officers and representatives of line ministries from the respective zones. The Non-

UNICEF funded sites were distributed as follows: 4 in SCZ, 3 in NEZ and 3 in NWZ. Figure 3

shows the distribution of sampled water points in the context of all water points while Tables

5, 6 and 7 in Annex 3 list sampled sites.

Figure 3: Location of Sampled Sites


Respondent Sampling

Data collection points included households, institutions (schools, health facilities, mosques,

etc.), government (ranging from water ministry to village leadership), water utilities, and

small and large businesses in the sampled project sites. Most respondents were direct

beneficiaries of this program (241 Household respondents from 40 UNICEF-supported water

points) while a sample of non-beneficiaries of the program were selected from the 10 non-

UNICEF funded water points (59 Household respondents). At least one institution, one

business and the water operator were interviewed at each site, where applicable. The

distribution of households sampled was calculated in proportionality to the beneficiaries’

distribution per UNICEF documentation, for a total of 300 Household interviews. The sample

sizes per site are summarized in Tables 5, 6 and 7 in Annex 3. Table 2 summarizes the total

number of respondents.

Table 1: Distribution of All Survey Respondents

RESPONDENT TYPE MINIMUM NUMBER OF INTERVIEWS

Households 300

Institutions 42

Businesses 46

Water point operators 36

TOTAL 424

2.1.2 Data Collection Tools

Survey design and administration

Structured questionnaires were administered for the household, institution, business and

water point operator interviews. The questionnaires were developed based on a broad set of

thematic questions. Themes covered included respondents’ economic and demographic

details, water collection and use behavior, health and water quality aspects and operation and

maintenance of water systems. The questionnaires were developed iteratively, incorporating

comments from UNICEF and observations from the pre-test exercise which was conducted in

Garowe, Puntland. The final versions of all four structured questionnaires were approved by

UNICEF before being translated to Somali and being administered. Administration of

questionnaires was done by enumerators from the local communities who not only have

extensive experience in data collection, but were also familiar with the sampled areas and

were known within their allocated areas. Training of enumerators was conducted in each zone

prior to data collection.

Key Informant Interviews and Focus Group Discussions.

The key informant interviews sought to identify members at the institutional, sectoral and

macro level who are authorities on the specific issues covered in this engagement. The focus

group discussions, on the other hand, brought together community members to discuss the

impacts of water systems in their communities. Three FGDs were held, one in each zone. A

semi-structured questionnaire was designed to guide this process and outlined questions

acted as prompts and discussion facilitators. The interviews and discussions sought insights


on impact, viability, sustainability and security of solar powered water supply systems and

policy recommendations on how to create an enabling environment for upscaling the

adoption of these technologies. A list of persons interviewed and participants in the FGDs is

provided in Annex 1.

Water Quality Testing

UNICEF provided conductivity meters for water quality testing. NEZ and NWZ received

one meter each while 2 meters were used in SCZ. Real time water testing for temperature

and electrical conductivity was conducted in selected sites in each of the regions for a total

of 22 sites: 7 sites in NWZ, 5 sites in NEZ and 10 sites in SCZ.

2.2 Data analysis

Statistical analysis

Data entry, cleaning and analysis was performed using Microsoft Excel. Interpretation of

results presented in this report should be made in consideration of the following

assumptions and biases:

i. Population estimate values used in data analysis were as reported in UNICEF’s

documentation. However, observations made during the site visits point to an

overestimation of population in some villages, which may positively or negatively bias

calculations.

ii. Due to unavailability of well/borehole completion reports, the total depths of wells

provided in UNICEF documentation were used as the water pumping depth when

calculating the Total Dynamic Head (TDH). This assumption ignores the well’s water

column – assumes that due to seasonal fluctuations, the pump is places at the lowest

feasible point.

iii. The list of final sites visited was influenced by accessibility and prevailing security

conditions, and in some instances (especially in SCZ), non-functional wells were

deliberately excluded from the sample list for efficient use of the Consultant’s resources.

As such, data collected might be positively biased.

iv. The water point demand was based on water point operator’s estimations of volume of

water pumped per day. An attempt to triangulate these numbers against the reported

household consumption rates yielded unrealistically high demand levels. This is

partially because extrapolation was based on target populations reported in UNICEF

documents (see assumption (i)).

Limitation

i. Lack of baseline line data and borehole/well completion reports affected the impact and

technical evaluations respectively. SPWSS impact was evaluated based on observations

and respondent’s data but benefits gained on livelihoods over the duration of the project


could not be quantified. The evaluation is therefore largely qualitative. Data provided by

UNICEF was used for the technical evaluations.

ii. Distances and limited transport infrastructure: being a nationwide evaluation, large

distances had to be covered to sampled sites. Getting to the sampled sites was further

complicated by a limited road network. Data collection was, however, done at all 50

sampled sites.

iii. Security concerns: On-going conflicts, particularly in some regions in South Central Zone

limited the ability to sample and visit sites within those regions.

iv. Response rate: Feedback from UNICEF was often delayed, leading to an overall delay in

project completion.


3. STUDY FINDINGS

3.1 Demographic Analysis

3.1.1 Household Demographics

Gender of Household respondents

Majority of the respondents, at 65%, were female. In

general most households are headed by male heads

of households. Overall, 18% of respondents were

female and the head of their households: In

Puntland this was true for 20% of respondents, 6%

of respondents in South Central Somalia and 36% in

Somaliland.

Age group of respondents

Majority of the respondents interviewed were above 30

years of age and below or equal to 50 years of age. This

age group represented an average of 51% of all

respondent’s interviewed. Respondent’s that were

above 18 years of age and below or equal to 30 years of

age were 27% and those older than 50 years of age were

22% of total respondent’s interviewed. Only one

respondent interviewed, in Puntland, was below 18

years old. He was 17 years of age and the head of his

household.

Marital status of respondent

Over 80% of the respondents were married with

only 4% on average having never been married or

widowed. 5% of the respondents were divorced or

separated. South Central Somali had no respondent

that had never married. Somaliland had the highest

percent of never married and widowed

respondents with 8% and 7% respectively. Puntland

had the largest proportion of divorced or separated

respondents with 7% of interviewed respondents.

Puntland

Somaliland

South Central Somali

Male Female

Puntland

Somaliland


> 18 <18, ≥30 <30, ≥50 <50

Puntland

Somaliland

South

Never married Married

Figure 4: Gender of HH Respondents

Figure 5: Age group of respondents

Figure 6: Marital Status of Respondents


Income and Education Levels

The households’ main sources of income were agriculture, pastoralism, employment and business. Most respondents in Puntland

indicated employment as one of their sources of income (45%). Puntland in turn had the highest proportion of respondents that had a

university education and post-secondary education, 4% and 7% respectively, and the largest proportion - of the three zones- of formal

sector and informal sector employees, 7% and 12% respectively. Business was a major source of household income (43%) in Somaliland

with the largest proportion of respondent’s indicating self-employment as their main occupation (56%). In South Central Somali, most

respondents indicated agriculture activities as their main source of income (44%) and farm work as their main occupation (41%). In all

three zones, over 50% of respondents lived in households where the head had no formal education with South Central Somalia having

the largest proportion of this (79%).

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Households source of income

Agriculture

Pastrolism

Employment

Remittances

Business

Aid

Other

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Respondent's main occupation

Other

Herdsman/woman

Retired

Housewife

Student

Unemployed

Farmworker

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Formal education of head of household

Uni

post sec

CompletesecIncomplete secCompletepriIncomplete priNone


Average number of people, children and animals in the household

The households interviewed had an average house hold size of 8 people and 3 children of school

going age. Sheep and goats were the main animals owned by these households. Puntland

interviewees had the most animals with an average 22 goats and 17 sheep per household

compared to Somaliland at 10 and 8 and SCZ at 12 and 6 goats and sheep respectively. South

Central Somalia and Somaliland had on average one cow per household and very few households

reported owning cows and camels in Puntland. The average number of camels and donkeys in

all three zones is below 1.

Household type and location

Most respondents indicated that their

households had a permanent structure

and were located in urban areas. The

interpretation of rural vs urban was

seen to be fluid with respondent’s

living in small consolidated villages

considering themselves as urban dwellers. The

proportion of respondents from Puntland and South

Central Somalia who indicated their households were

located in rural areas were similar with 13% and 11%

respectively. However, it is the Consultant’s view that all

Rural, 10%

Urban, 89%

Camp, 1%

Permanent, 63%

Semi permanent,

17%

Temporary-2%

Traditional -19%

0

2

4

6

8

10

Puntland Somaliland SouthCentralSomali

Average No. of people per HH

Male adults in HH

Females adults in HH

Male children in HH

Female children in HH

Total pple in HH

0

2

4

6

8

10

Puntland Somaliland SouthCentralSomali

Average No. of school going age children per HH

Total male children

Male children in school

Total female children

Female children in school

Total children

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Average No. of animals per HH

Camels Cows Sheep

Goats Donkeys

Figure 7: Type of household

Figure 8: Household Location


sites visited in Somaliland and Puntland are rural. In South Central Zone, seven sites can be

considered urban: Hawa Tako, 21st October, Beletweyn Hospital, Hobyo, Sigalow, Luq MCH

and Luq Gedaweyn. Likewise, for traditional house structures in Puntland and South Central

Somali, their proportion was 8% and 9% respectively. Somaliland had the largest proportion of

traditional houses at 39% of the interviewed respondents. South Central Somali was the only zone

with households interviewed that were in camps and temporary structures (in Gosha iyo Gendiga

site) constituting approximately 5% of interviewed respondents in the area.

3.1.2 Business and Institution demographics

Businesses

The businesses interviewed were mainly micro-traders (1-2 employees) with permanent

premises. On average, all businesses had at least one full time employee with the largest number

of full time employees being 2 in Falaydh yale in Puntland and Fadhi Xun in Somaliland. Majority

of businesses also had between 1 to 2 part- time employees. All businesses operated at least six

days a week with most operating the maximum of seven

days. Only one business in Raqayle in South Central

Somali indicated to be operating only 5 days a week.

Unlike the household interviews, a larger proportion of

respondents were male compared to female

respondents in household interviews. In total, 27

respondents interviewed were male compared to the 19

female. The largest number of male respondents were

from South Central Somali – 15 out of the 22

respondents interviewed in the area.

Institutions

Institutions interviewed were schools, health facilities and mosques. Mosques in South Central

Zone had the highest membership at an average of 80 members compared to 23 and 61 in

Somaliland and Puntland respectively. There were 5 main types of schools interviewed; primary,

secondary, primary and secondary, intermediate and qur’anic schools. Majority of schools

interviewed were primary schools: representing 31 % of all institutions interviewed and 57% of

all schools interviewed. All the schools were Day schools: there were no boarding schools

interviewed in the three zones.

Table 2: Summary of School Attendance and Facilities

Area Average No.

of Classrooms

of offices

of male students

of female students

of teachers

of non-teaching staff

South Central Somali 5 0 139 86 6 2

Somaliland 5 1 118 99 6 3

Puntland 10 1 63 33 5 4

Puntland

Somalila

South Centr

Male Female

Figure 9: Gender of Business Respondents


Table 3 below summarized attributes of health facilities visited in the three regions. Baladweyn

district hospital was the only health institution interviewed in South Central Somalia. It had

additional facilities compared to other health centers such as 6 theater rooms and 2 laboratories.

Table 3: Summary of Health Facilities

Area Average No.

of beds of doctors of nurses of patients/week of clinical officers

maternity

South Central Somali 61 2 16 97 2 2

Somaliland 5 1 6 48 0 2

Puntland 21 0 2 65 2 1

3.2 Technical Review

3.2.1 Technical reports

Water point Functionality Rate

Functionality was defined as

whether water was available at the

water collection point at the time of

the field visits. The national

functionality rate for SPWSS

systems is at 77% with the highest

functionality rates seen in

Somaliland at 91% and the lowest in

Puntland at 56%.

Appropriateness of System Sizing

Appropriateness of system sizing was performed for

functional SPWSS water points only. The desired flow

rate was calculated based on average water volumes

pumped per day as reported by water point operators,

divided by the region’s average peak sunlight hours of 6

hours. The total dynamic head is calculated as a factor of

well depth and storage tank elevation. Figure 12 below

shows the head and desired flow rate for all functional

SPWSS sited visited. The sizing appropriateness was

performed by matching well characteristics to the

manufactures pump curve to determine the required

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Puntland Somaliland South CentralZone

NationalAverage

Functionality Rate

13%

30%57%

System Sizing

Correct sizing

Undersized

Oversized

Figure 11: Appropriateness of System Sizing

Figure 10: Water point functionality rate


amount of power. As seen in Figure 11 57% of the sites (N=30) are oversized while 30% are

undersized.

Figure 12: Water point head and flow rate

Water Demand

The average water use in

Somalia is 19.05L/person-

day: Puntland has the

highest rate at

20.11L/person-day, followed

by SCZ at 19.7L/person-day

and Somaliland at

17.35L/person-day. The

charts in Figure 13 show the

use rates in the different

zones. A base of 15L/person-

day is used as the minimum

scale, as this is the

recommended volume by

the Somali WASH Cluster

indicators for rural and

urban water schemes.

0

2

4

6

8

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

21

-Oct

Aw

Osm

an

Bal

atw

eyn

e H

osp

Cad

adle

y

Cam

aara

Car

abay

dh

ey

Do

on

laaw

e

Du

bu

r

Fad

hi X

un

Gar

acad

Gar

gaar

a

Gid

hay

s

Go

sha

Ho

byo

Hu

dis

a

Jaw

iil

Laal

ays

Lafa

ruu

g

Lasa

daw

aco

Luu

q G

ud

ey

Luu

q M

CH

Qaw

Rab

able

Raq

ayle

Shee

d D

he

er

Siig

alaw

War

gee

see

d

Xer

ta T

uka

raq

Xiin

daw

aco

Xu

mb

awe

yne

Flo

w R

ate

(m3 /

hr)

Hea

d (

m)

Head (m) Desired Flow Rate (m3)

48%

25%

27%

Puntland

<15 litres

15-20 litres

>20 litres

49%

26%

25%

South Central Zone

<15 litres

15-20 litres

>20 litres

47%

27%

26%

National Distribution

<15 litres

15-20 litres

>20 litres

44%

31%

25%

Somaliland

<15 litres

15-20 litres

>20 litres

Figure 13: Water Use Rates


Water Distribution and Collection

85% of respondents who rely on SPWSS sites as their main water source collect water from

public water collection points (water kiosks or standpipes) while the remaining have either

indoor or yard household connections. Water collection point responses are in agreement with

the 12% of respondents who indicate that they have piping to their households in response to

their means of water collection. A majority of the population carry water from the collection

point to their households on their heads or back as reflected in Figure 14.

SPWSS sites are within close proximity of users with the average distance from households

being 0.38km with a range of 3m and 6km.

3.2.2 Water quality

Data collection on water quality aspects focused on indicators of acceptability (smell, taste and

color), biological quality (indicated by incidence of diarrhea and cholera) and chemical quality

(evaluated through electrical conductivity tests and reported cases of teeth discoloration as an

indicator of fluoride concentration). The tables below summarize the responses that indicated

an unpalatable characteristic and/or reported cases of diarrhea and teeth discoloration.

Puntland

MAIN SOURCE: SPWSS SITE

Cases of Diarrhea Cases of discoloration

In the last month

In the last 6 months

# (6-10 years old)

# (>10 years old)

How long have you lived in village

Yalho - - 1 1 30

Xerta Tkaraq - - 1 - 18

Garacad - - 1 2 10

None of the respondents indicated that water from the functioning SPWSS sites in Puntland had

a noticeably unusual, smell or taste. The respondents using water from these sites also did not

experience any cases of diarrhea and reports on teeth discoloration are not significant enough to

raise concerns over high fluoride waters.

58%

5%

5%

4%

16%

12%

Self (Back/head)

Donkey

Animal Cart

Vehicle

Man-drawn cart

Piping to household

3%

12% 3%

82%

HH Indoor Connection

HH Yard Connection

Water Kiosk

Standpipe

Figure 15: Water Collection Points Figure 14: Means of Water Collection


MAIN SOURCE: NON - UNICEF SITE

Taste Cases of Diarrhea Cases of discoloration

In the last month


# (6-10 years old)

# (>10 years old)


Laaso Dawaco Tasteless 1 1 1 7

22 and Unpleasant taste

- - - - -

Falaydh yale Metallic taste & Unpleasant taste

2 2 - 1 10

Fardacune Tasteless - - - 1 5

Dhinooda Dhigdhigley

Tasteless - - - 1 22

Dheganlle Metallic taste 2 3 - - -

These villages relied on non-SPWSS water sources as their main source, either because the SPWSS

source was no longer functional, too far or it was part of the non-SPWSS sites sample. Falaydh

yale and Dheganlle sites stand out because respondents using water from these sites experienced

on average 2 episodes of diarrhea in their households within the last month and 2 within the last

six months. None of the respondents’ households using both UNICEF and non- UNICEF sites

suffered from cholera in the last year.


MAIN SOURCE: UNICEF SITE

Appearance Smell Taste


In the last

month

In the last 6

months

# (6-10 years old)

# (>10 years old)


Gosha and Gandi

Milky/cloudy Smelly (rotten eggs)

Metallic taste

1 1 - - -

Raqayle Milky/cloudy Odourless Metallic taste

- - - - -

Wargeesed Milky/cloudy Odourless Metallic taste

- - - - -

Doolawe Clear Smelly (rotten eggs)

Chlorine Metallic taste

- - - - -

21 Oct Clear Chlorine Chlorine 1 - - - -

Luuq Godey Clear Odourless Tasteless 1 1 - - -

Hobyo Clear Odourless Tasteless - - - 2 20

Cammaro Clear Odourless Tasteless - - 1 1 15

Gosha and Gandi site stands out because water from this site was unacceptable with regard to

appearance, smell and taste and occurrence of diarrhea within the last month and 6 months was

reported.

MAIN SOURCE: NON-UNICEF SITE

Appearance Smell taste


In the last

month

In the last 6

months

# (6-10

years old)

# (>10 years old)



Baladweyne Milky/Cloudy Odourless Tasteless - - - - -

Xawo tako Milky/Cloudy Unpleasant smell

Tasteless - - - - -

Luuq MCH Milky/Cloudy Odourless Tasteless 1 1 - - -

Timire Clear Odourless Tasteless 4 3 1 - 38

Sabuun Clear Odourless Tasteless 2 - - - -

Timire stands out with 4 respondents reporting diarrhea episodes in their households within

the last month. It is among the non-UNICEF sites sampled and is supported by the International

Organization for Migration. The reports on teeth discoloration are not significant enough to

raise concern over high fluoride waters.

Somaliland

MAIN SOURCE: UNICEF SITE



In the last

month

In the last 6

months

# (6-10 years old)

# (>10 years old)


Lafaruug Clear Odourless Metallic taste

- - 2 2 25

Laaleys Clear Odourless Metallic taste

- - - 1 6

Fadhi Xun

Clear Odourless Tasteless 1 1 4 18

Cadaadley Clear Odourless Tasteless 1 1 - - -

Xumbaweyne Clear Odourless Tasteless - - 1 2 18

Lasodawaco Clear Odourless Tasteless - - - 1 10

Dubur Clear Odourless Tasteless - - - 1 15

Water from Lafaruung and Laaleys sites was identified by respondents as having a metallic taste.

Somaliland has the highest number of reported cases of teeth discoloration raising concern over

potential risk of high fluoride concentration in ground water in the region.

MAIN SOURCE: NON - UNICEF SITE


Cases of Diarrhea

Cases of discoloration

In the last month


# (6-10 years old)

# (>10 years old)


Sheed dheer Tasteless Odourless Metallic taste

- - - - -

Gargaar Milky/Cloudy Smelly (rotten egg)

Unpleasant taste

- - - - -

Magalo Cad Tasteless Odourless Metallic taste

- 1 - - -

Lafaruug Tasteless Odourless Metallic taste

- - - - -


Four non- UNICEF sites in Somaliland were identified as having water with an unusual taste,

unpleasant or metallic. Gargaar stands out as water from this site was described by respondents

as being milky/cloudy, smelling like rotten eggs and having an unpleasant taste.

Electrical conductivity

Electrical conductivity is an indicator of the total inorganic mineral content of drinking water.

The lowest conductivity levels were recorded for sites in Puntland while some sites in SCZ and

Somaliland were as high as over 3000 µS/cm.

Puntland South Central Zone Somaliland

Village/site Electric Conductivity (µS/cm)



22aad 139.8 Hospitalka 301 Carabaydhey 360

Rabbaale 139.8 Jawiil 1156 Gargaara 520

Jiingadda 301.9 21-Oct 1399 Daraygodle 640

Qaw 309.2 Siigaalaw 2089 Hudisa 1440

Wargeesed 2900 Lafaruug 1510

Dowlawe 2900 Buulo Makiino 1560

Gosha/Gandi 3000 Laalay 2020

Aw Cisman 3990 Kalundi 2580

Xerta Tukaraq 3002

Magaalo Cad 5410

3.3 Parameters Review

3.3.1 Water prices

Water is provided for free at moat

SPWSS sites: only 11 of the 30

functioning sites provide water at a fee.

Error! Reference source not found.

summarizes the average cost of water

per 20L for different sources in the

three zones while Figure 16 gives

national averages as reported by

household respondents. Responses

from the institution and business

interviews align with the household

interview responses with a small

margin of error. UNICEF SPWSS is the

second cheapest source of water after

0 0.05 0.1 0.15

UNICEF

Solar powered (Govt/NGO)

Hand Pump

Diesel powered borehole

Solar+Diesel

Open well

Water vendors

Price in US$ per 20L water can

Figure 16: Average Cost of Water in Somalia per Source


hybrid (solar + diesel powered) pumps in Somalia, although N=1 for hybrid systems. A 20L jerry

can of water retails at, on average, US$ 0.045 at UNICEF supported sites compared to US$ 0.033

at hybrid powered water points. The most expensive water is sourced from hand pumps with

water retailing at US$ 0.141/20L. UNICEF SPWSS water points in Somaliland have the highest

priced water across the region at US$ 0.062/20L: SPWSS water points retail water at an average

of US$ 0.024/20L in South-Central Somalia and US$0.05/20L in Puntland.

Table 4: Average Water Prices ($/20L)

Main source of water Puntland price in US$ Somaliland price in US$ SCZ price in US$

UNICEF SPWSS 0.05 0.062 0.024

Solar powered (Govt/NGO) 0 0.071 0

Hand Pump 0 0.071 0.21

Diesel powered borehole 0.05 0.063 0.02

Solar+Diesel 0 0.033 0

Open well 0.02 0.07 0

Water vendors 0.2 0.073 0.01

3.3.2 Water collection times

The graphs shown in Figure 17 summarize waiting times for water collection, at alternatively

powered water sources, for household respondents. On average, a majority of respondents (88%)

spend less than 10 minutes waiting to collect water at UNICEF SPWSS sites: 44%, 42% and 35%

in SCZ, Somaliland and Puntland respectively reported to having no wait time at the SPWSS sites.

Significant similarities are observed in comparing wait times for mechanized water points as a

majority of respondents indicated wait times of less than 10 minutes: 88% at solar powered sites

run by either the government or other NGOs; 87% at diesel powered sites and; 100% at hybrid

(diesel + solar) sites. Manually operated water points (hand pumps and open wells) recorded

much higher wait times. 31% of respondents using hand pumps wait for between 10 and 30

minutes while 15% wait for more than 30 minutes. At least 11% of respondents using open wells

wait for 10-30 minutes while 6% wait for over 30 minutes.

Institutions and businesses reported a similar trend in waiting times for mechanized and manual

systems. 70% of institutions using SPWSS sites indicated that they do not wait in line to access

water whereas the remaining 30% wait in line for no more than 10 minutes. Equally, all users of

government or other NGO supported solar powered boreholes wait in line for no more than 10

minutes and users of diesel powered boreholes have no wait time at all. Hand operated pumps

had the highest average wait time, with 33% of the users having to wait for 30 minutes to 1 hour.

Similarly, 67% of businesses have no wait time at SPWSS sites while 23% have a wait time of less

than 10 minutes. The remaining 10% have to wait for 10 to 30 minutes. The longest times are

experienced at open wells with 14% of users having to wait between 10 and 30 minutes and 8%

having to wait for more than an hour to access water.


0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

UNICEF


Hand Pump


Solar+Diesel

Open well

Water vendors

Public water supply

National Wait-time Averages

No wait time Less than 10 minutes

Between 10-30 minutes Between 30 minutes-1hour

More than 1 hr No Response

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

UNICEF


Hand Pump


Solar+Diesel

Open well

Water vendors

Public water supply

% of users per waiting time

South Cental Zone Wait-time Averages

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

UNICEF


Hand Pump


Solar+Diesel

Open well

Water vendors

Public water supply

% of users per water source

Somaliland Wait-time Averages

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

UNICEF

Solar powered…

Hand Pump

Diesel powered…

Solar+Diesel

Open well

Water vendors

Public water supply

% of users per waiting time

Puntland Wait-time Averages

Figure 17: Water Collection Times


3.3.1 Security

Vandalism or theft of SPWSS systems is very isolated with only 4 sites (Hudisa, Lafarug and

Carabaydhey in Somaliland and Jawiil in SCZ) indicating insecurity events in the last year. The

component most prone to vandalism is solar panels. A majority of the functional SPWSS water

points indicated having a guard in place to ensure security of systems.

3.3.2 System reliability

Water source reliability was evaluated by asking respondents if there were times when they could

not access water from the various water points and enquiring on the reasons why water was

inaccessible. Accessibility was interpreted as the ability to collect water from the water point. The

table below summarizes the responses.

Table 5: Reliability of Alternatively Powered Water Sources

Source Puntland Somaliland South-Central Somalia Whole of Somalia

Accessible Inaccessible Accessible Inaccessible Accessible Inaccessible Accessible Inaccessible

UNICEF 85% 15% 83% 17% 66% 34% 77% 23%


89% 11% 100% 0% 60% 40% 84% 16%

Hand Pump - - 89% 11% 33% 67% 81% 19%


70% 30% 15% 85% 20% 80% 33% 67%

Solar+Diesel 100% 0% - - 80% 20% 83% 17%

Open well 60% 40% 95% 5% 70% 30% 74% 26%

Water vendors

60% 40% - - 100% 0% 67% 33%

For currently functional SPWSS sites, the national average reliability rate is at 77%: the least

reliable region is South-Central Somalia at 66% and the most reliable region is Puntland at 85%,

followed by Somaliland at 83%. The most reliable water source is the solar powered water pumps

run by the government or other NGOs while the least reliable water source is the diesel powered

borehole. As shown in Figure 18 below, the main reason for inaccessibility was cited as broken

pumps at 20%. The second reason was dry wells at 18%, followed by high prices at 16%. The

reasons cited the least for inaccessibility was vandalism or theft at 3% and lack of maintenance at

4%. The region that is most affected by dry wells is South-Central Somalia – this as cited by 29%

of the users there compared to only 5% in Puntland. Nationally, 21% of respondents indicated

being affected by dry wells. Of these, 88% cited that the wells dry yearly, 6% biannually, 3%

quarterly and another 3% at least once every month.

73% of the respondents indicated that water was inaccessible from the UNICEF sites for less than

7 days a month; 15% indicated that water was inaccessible between 7 -14 days, 6% between 14 –

21 days and 5% had no access to water from the UNICEF sites for more than 21 days.


Figure 18: Reasons for inaccessibility


4. ASSESSMENT

This discussion assumes a three-step approach: a technical review, impact evaluation and

sustainability and management systems review. The evaluation is largely qualitative with the

discussion built around the data analysis and observations in the field. Due to lack of baseline

data from which to measure change, a quantitative evaluation of the SPWSS project could not be

performed using the RAG (Red-Amber-Green) Rating method as proposed by the Consultant.

4.1 Technical Review

4.1.1 Analysis of Water Point Functionality Rate

The national functionality rate for SPWSS systems is at 77%;56% in Puntland, 77% in South

Central Zone and 91% in Somaliland. The functionality rate in South Central Zone is positively

biased due to site selection, influenced by accessibility and prevailing security conditions. For

instance, most of the sites in Middle Shabelle identified in the preliminary randomized sample

list were not functional and the Consultant deemed it uneconomical to invest resources and

time to visit non-functional wells. The alternative was a list of wells in Lower Shabelle, most of

which were functional. It is the consultant’s view that the functionality rates in South Central

Zone are lower than is presented in this data.

In addition to long term failure of systems, short term breakdown events affect the reliability of

SPWSS sites. Other factors affecting functionality include:

1. Pump Breakdown

At least 10 water points in Somaliland and SCZ indicated having had downtime due to broken

pumps. These sites were, however, all repaired using funds from charges on water or community

contributions, an indication of community ownership. The highest amount spent on repairs and

service of the systems at any of the SPWSS sites was USD$ 200 while the lowest was USD$10. In

contrast, it is observed that none of the wells in Puntland reported spending money on repairs

and maintenance. Conversations with different players revealed a heavy reliance on PSAWEN

for water point maintenance and repairs. This has led to little ownership of systems by the

communities so that in case of breakdown, they are quick to call the State Agency rather than find

a solution, leading to the long term failure of systems. Community engagement is thus needed in

Puntland to sensitize communities on their role in water point management to ensure long term

sustainability.

2. Dry Wells

A number of wells were said to dry at some point in the year. These included: Cadaadley,

Carobaydhay and Fadhi Xun in Somaliland and 21 October, Xindawaco, Wargaseed, Siigaalaw

and Jawiil in SCZ. Respondents in Dhiganle, Puntland indicated that the water point dries often

as it is too shallow: it needs deepening if the community is to benefit – although the solar system


is in place, the towns water collection points are not connected to the water tank in fear of

damaging the pump. Instead, the town gets its water from water tankers that bring water to the

central water tank that in turn supply the public water points, schools and health centers. It is

therefore critical to engage community members during the needs assessment process, especially

when fitting already existing water points with solar power, as community members are the most

knowledgeable on well/borehole quality and seasonal fluctuations in groundwater level.

System Age

Analysis of functionality rate over time reveals a ‘water point mortality rate’ of at least 2 years.

There is a 40% failure rate after the first year, after which the functionality rate increases. It is

therefore recommended that maintenance and management systems are put in place to monitor

the water points for the initial two years to increase the probability of long term sustainability.

4.1.2 Appropriateness of system design

Based on data provided by UNICEF, all but one of the 40 SPWSS sites visited are installed with

the Grundfos SQFlex 5A – 7 pump with a total wattage of between 960W – 1400W each. These

systems were all installed in or after the year 2010. Lamawaab in Middle Shabelle was installed

with a Grundfos SQFlex 2.5 – 2 pump with a total wattage of 700W in 2008. The choice of the solar

technology and pump brand is seen to be appropriate: conversations with sector stakeholders

with experience in solar water pumping point to solar PV technology being a tested and proven

technology, especially as a water access solution in arid and semi-arid regions. Lorentz and

Grundfos were the most quoted brands in terms of reliable quality. In scaling up the SPWSS

project, however, UNICEF should consider using both solar PV pump brands (Grundfos and

Lorentz) as each has its merits and demerits, with varied appropriateness for varied settings.

Recommendations on when to use different pumps are provided in Section 6.1.

The appropriateness each SPWSS system was determined by calculating the water point’s total

dynamic head (TDH) and desired flow rate (Q) and carrying out a systems parameter match

against the manufacturer’s pump performance curve. This was performed for functioning wells

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Fun

ctio

nal

ity

Rat

e

Figure 19: Water point functionality rate over time


only. Well specific calculations and comments on size appropriateness are provided in the

Technical Reports Attachment.

Total Dynamic Head

Based on the Terms of Reference recommended formula, the following slightly modified formula

was used to calculate the TDH:

𝑇𝐷𝐻 = (𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑙𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑙 + 𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡𝑜𝑝 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑡𝑜 𝑡𝑜𝑝 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘) ∗ 1.1

Following lack of well/borehole completion reports from UNICEF, a few assumptions had to be

made in applying this formula:

- Water pumping level was taken to be the well depth. This assumption ignores the length

of the water column and is made in consideration of seasonality of wells, assuming that

the pump is placed at the lowest possible point;

- The elevation assumes no gradient between the top of the well and the bottom of the

storage tank.

The average head was determined to be 23m with a range of 6.82m and 57.2m.

Flow Rate

The desired flow rate was determined as a function of the well/borehole demand and the average

peak sunlight hours for Somalia. The demand volumes were based on water point reports of

average water volumes pumped per day. Interpretation of the appropriateness analysis should

be made noting that these demand volumes may be an over or under estimation of the actual

demand. An attempt at triangulating the water operator estimations with self-reported

household water consumption rates was done: household data yielded much higher desired flow

rate values at an average of 2.24m3/hr higher than water point operator values (excluding 6 sites

that were outliers with desired flow rates above 13m3/hr). The lesson that can be drawn is in

scaling up the SPWSS project, UNICEF needs to carry out a thorough baseline and needs

assessment study in order to fully understand the water needs in target villages so as to

appropriately size systems.

An average of 6 peak sunlight hours was used: an analysis of the country’s irradiation data

showed a range of 4.7 – 6.9 PSH/day. The average desired flow rate was found to be 2.31m3/hr,

with a range of 0.3 m3/hr and 8 m3/hr.


Systems Parameter Match

The Grundfos SQF 5A-7 – 95027342 pump performance curve is available online10 and was used

to determine the appropriateness of the installed systems against their calculated parameters. The

performance curves are specified for the flow rate range of 0 – 9m3/hr and a head of 10 – 50 meters.

The curves also provide the pump and motor efficiency (eta%) at specified flow and head. Based

on Grundfos’ range of solar pumping systems11, the SQF 5A-7 is the most appropriate pump for

a majority of the SPWSS sites: the pump is recommended for a head of 10-50m and a flow rate of

less than 8m3/hr. Of the 40 SPWSS sites visited, 30 were functional, out of which 27 were within

these curve limits: two sites had a head of less than 10m, and the lower limit curve was used while

one site had a head of over 50 meters and the upper limit curve was used.

System appropriateness was further evaluated against power sizing. As a consequence of

adopting a ‘one-size fits all’ approach in the installing of SPWSS sites, 17 of the 30 sites are

oversized while 9 are undersized as shown in the graphs below (well specific calculations are

shown in the Technical Reports Attachment). The range of oversizing is between 310W and 810W

while the range of under-sizing is at 230W – 3120W. This has obvious financial and efficiency

implications. Undersized systems function at a lower flow rate than the desired rates, leading to

longer wait times at the water points or lack of adequate water to meet demand. From a financial

perspective, correctly sizing the systems would allow for more efficient use of resources.

10 Performance curve available at http://product-selection.grundfos.com/product-detail.product-detail.html?freq=50&lang=ENU&productnumber=95027342&qcid=138566327 11 SQFlex Solar Performance Curves: http://net.grundfos.com/doc/webnet/renewables/solar.html

Figure 20: Oversized WSPSS Sites

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Wat

tage

(W

)

Installed Wattage Required Wattage

http://product-selection.grundfos.com/product-detail.product-detail.html?freq=50&lang=ENU&productnumber=95027342&qcid=138566327

http://product-selection.grundfos.com/product-detail.product-detail.html?freq=50&lang=ENU&productnumber=95027342&qcid=138566327

http://net.grundfos.com/doc/webnet/renewables/solar.html


Assuming solar panels with a watt peak of 120W were installed at all water points12, oversized

systems result in an additional 75 panels (after truncating the number of additional panels per

site) while undersized systems lack 75 panels (after rounding up the required additional panels

per site). Had systems been appropriately sized, rather than having an almost uniform power

size, all systems would be appropriately sized. Further, all the oversized systems are a threat to

the well/borehole health: they present a risk of over-pumping the well/borehole.

4.2 Impact Evaluation

The impact review assesses the relevance, effectiveness and efficiency of SPWSS project

interventions.

4.2.1 Effectiveness

The evaluation criterion ‘effectiveness’ assesses the appropriateness and degree to which the

interventions meet the defined project objective of sustainable community water supply through

solar powered systems. This answers the question, “to what extent do the project interventions

adequately address the identified problem of water access.” To do this, the discussion is built

around the United Nation’s interpretation of the human right to water along with the Somalia

WASH Indicators for water access as specified in Somalia’s WASH Cluster Strategy and

Standards13. The human right to water is met when water is sufficient, safe, acceptable, physically

accessible and affordable. The Somalia WASH Cluster standards for water are i) access and water

12 Records show that this is the size used for Somaliland SPWSS sites 13 WASH Cluster Somalia, 2012, Strategic Operational Framework, https://docs.unocha.org/sites/dms/Somalia/120807%20Guide%20to%20WASH%20Cluster%20Strategy%20and%20Standards.pdf

0500

100015002000250030003500400045005000

Wat

tage

(W

)

Installed Wattage Required Wattage

Figure 21: Undersized SWPSS Sites

https://docs.unocha.org/sites/dms/Somalia/120807%20Guide%20to%20WASH%20Cluster%20Strategy%20and%20Standards.pdf

https://docs.unocha.org/sites/dms/Somalia/120807%20Guide%20to%20WASH%20Cluster%20Strategy%20and%20Standards.pdf


quantity, ii) water quality and iii) water facilities (adequate to collect, store and use sufficient

amounts of water).

Quantity and Accessibility

The WASH cluster indicators recommend a maximum distance of 500m from the water point to

the household, a maximum queuing time of 30 minutes and a minimum volume of 15 liters per

person per day in non-emergency settings. With 88% of respondents who use SPWSS sites

indicating a wait time of less than 10 minutes and 75% indicating that the site is within 500 meters

from their household, it can be argued that SPWSS are more often than not, within stipulated

indicators of water access. Further, based on self-reported water consumption rates, the average

water use from SPWSS sites is 19 liters per person per day with an evenly distributed

consumption curve: 58 respondents consume less than 15 liters/person-day; 53 respondents

consume between 15-20 liters/person-day and; 61 respondents consume over 20 liters/person-

day. The lowest consumption rate is at about 3.5 liters/person-day.

A few lessons on the siting of water points to ensure accessibility and adequate quantities can,

however, be draw. The first is ensuring considerations of the target village with respect to the

well and the storage tank for adequate flow of water by gravity. In Qaaw (NEZ) for instance, the

solar system and storage berkard are quite far from the village and the solar installation does not

provide enough power to pump water to the village. Consequently, the well’s water is mostly

used for irrigation and villagers resort to purchasing water from a diesel-powered well closer-by.

A similar limitation was observed in Garacad (NEZ) where 2 of 5 installed water collection points

are located at higher elevations than the SPWSS site and therefore do not receive water. The

second is putting measures to ensure that communities around SPWSS points installed within

institutions benefit from the systems. Communities around the health facilities visited, in Beled

Weyne and Luuq MCH, reported relying on river/stream water as their main water source, with

a few relying on a diesel operated water point. None of the respondents accessed water from the

health facilities. A third is that SPWSS project should include hygiene training to promote

increased water usage at the household level,

especially among households with very low

water use rates. The F-diagram, shown in

Figure 22, shows the different avenues of

fighting water borne (pathogen is ingested in

drinking water) and water washed (favored

by inadequate hygiene conditions and

practices and susceptible to control by

improvements in hygiene) diseases through

promotion of adequate water use. Hygiene

training will help realize the project’s health

benefits. Figure 22: The F-diagram


Quality and Acceptability

The WASH Cluster standard on water quality is “water is palatable and of sufficient quality to be

drunk and used for cooking and personal domestic hygiene without causing risk to health”.

Appearance, smell and taste of water were used as indicators of palatability. In general,

respondent’s perception of the palatability of water is seen to influence their use of the said water,

though this is limited by the availability of alternatives. For instance, the water in Gosha and

Gandi (SCZ) is described as being milky in appearance, has the smell of rotten eggs and a metallic

taste; four of the 6 respondents interviewed indicated that though they consider the SPWSS site

their main water source, they also buy water that is clear, odorless and tasteless from water

vendors and the purchased water is only used for drinking and cooking. This may be contrasted

to Raqayle (SCZ) where water has similar characteristics (milky and with metallic taste) yet all

respondents wholly rely on the SPWSS site with no other sources of water in the village.

With regard to biological and chemical quality, the incidence of diarrhea and cholera were used

as biological quality indicators while queries on teeth discoloration and electrical conductivity

test results helped infer chemical quality. No cases of cholera were reported in all sampled sites.

25 of the 300 respondents interviewed indicated occurrence of diarrhea disease in their

households within the last year: 12 in Puntland; 10 in SCZ and; 3 in Somaliland. With the

exception of the 3 Somaliland households and 1 household in Garacad (Puntland), the diarrhea

occurrence correlated to two factors: 1) the respondents were from villages whose SPWSS systems

were no longer functional and they relied on other water sources and; 2) the SPWSS well was at

risk of contamination due to a cracked or partial concrete slab covering (e.g. Luuq Godey and

Gosha and Gandi). While the reported occurrence of diarrhea among respondents at functional

SPWSS sites may be low, communities remain at risk of disease. Most respondents indicated

using multiple sources of water including unprotected water sources such as rivers/streams, open

wells and water vendors. Sanitation and hygiene training should therefore be a critical

component of SPWSS interventions to ensure health benefits.

Somaliland had the highest reports of teeth discoloration and it waters recorded some of the

highest electrical conductivity rates: 12 of the 14 sites had rates higher than the recommended

500(µS/cm). Regions in SCZ also recorded high electrical conductivity rates while site in Puntland

were all within limit. Further tests are needed to understand the water’s chemical composition

and ensure that it is within health guidelines, and especially with regard to fluoride and arsenic.

Affordability

Water is mostly provided free of charge at the SPWSS sites: only 11 of the 30 functional SPWSS

sites that were sampled provide water at a fee, of which 8 sites are in Somaliland. The two sites

charging for water in SCZ are Hobyo in Mudug region and Jawiil in Hiraan Region; Only Garacad

charges for water in Puntland. Water is most expensive in Somaliland at $3.1/m3 followed by

Puntland at $2.5/m3 and cheapest in SCZ at $1.2/m3. Due to lack of monetary quantification of

household incomes for use in estimating the proportion of income used for water access,


affordability of water is inferred from willingness to pay. A majority of respondents in

Somaliland and Puntland are willing to pay for improved quality of service from their main water

source while a majority of respondents in SCZ are not willing to start paying or pay more for

improved service as summarized in Table 6 below.

Table 6: Analysis of Willingness to Pay

N = Respondents Currently Paying Puntland (N = 19)

Somaliland (N=71)

South-Central Somalia (N=22)

Whole of Somalia (N=112)

% Willing to pay more 57.9% 59% 41% 55%

Average WTP in US$ per month 10 7.7 2.41 6.7

Highest WTP in US$ per month 20 15 15 16.7

Lowest WTP in US$ per month 5 1 1 2.3

% Not willing to pay more 42.1% 41% 59% 45%

N = Respondents not Paying Puntland (N = 56)

Somaliland (N=19)

South-Central Somalia (N=113)

Whole of Somalia (N=188)

% Willing to pay more 41% 42% 18% 27%

Average WTP in US$ per month 5.17 10 6.6 7.3

Highest WTP in US$ per month 30 10 12 17.3

Lowest WTP in US$ per month 2 10 2 4.7

% Not willing to pay more 59% 58% 82% 73%

The average willingness to pay values in Puntland and Somaliland are lower than the current

costs of water (summarized in table below) suggesting that the cost of water is currently

unaffordable to most consumers. The current cost of water per month is estimated using

19l/person/household and an average of 8 people per household.

Region Current Cost of Water ($/month) Willingness to Pay ($/month)

Puntland 9.00 7.60

Somaliland 11.16 8.85

South Central Zone 4.32 4.51

4.2.2 Relevance

The ‘relevance’ criterion evaluates the extent to which the project’s results satisfied the target

beneficiary needs for water access. Due to a lack of baseline data and documented needs

assessments14 to use as a basis for evaluation, this discussion looks at respondent’s water use

behavior. It is recommended that in scaling up the SPWSS project, UNICEF should develop a

well-defined data collection and management framework: targeted baseline data should be

collected before rolling out the project and indicators of success (for water access and other related

14 If these documents exist, they were not shared with the Consultant, even after multiple requests.


benefits like health and education) should be clearly defined. These may be housed in a “Project

Logical Framework” that outlines the reasoning behind the interventions.

Figure 23 below represents respondents’ views on factors that affect their choice of a water source.

It should be noted that the percentages on the pie chart are values showing the proportion of

respondents (N=300) who identified a specific factor, and not percent distribution within the chart

(hence they don’t add up to 100%). Distance and quality are seen to be the main factors

influencing choice of a water source. As discussed in the above section, a majority of SPWSS sites

are within close proximity of users, making them

a preferred water source by target users.

Perceptions of water quality are seen to be of little

consequence in choice, probably due to lack of

alternatives.

155 respondents in villages with functional

SPWSS sites indicated relying on the sites as a

water source, 143 of whom use the site as their

main water source. At least 35% of those using

SPWSS sites as their main water source indicate

that they’ve switched to this source within the last

3 years; at least 30 of these switches were from unprotected water sources (open wells and

rivers/streams). SPWSS sites are used to meet all domestic water needs: drinking and cooking,

household cleaning, feeding livestock and to a limited extent, crop farming. 84% of the 155

depend solely on the SPWSS sites to meet all their water needs. The remaining 25 are seen to use

a combination of water sources in addition to the SPWSS sites: water vendors, open wells, berkads

and rivers and streams. With the exception of water vendors whose water is used for drinking

and cooking, there is no obvious pattern in water use behavior as these other sources are used for

consumption, cleaning and livestock purposes. It is worth noting that all respondents who rely

on multiple water sources do not pay for water at the SPWSS sites (i.e. all respondents who pay

for water at SPWSS sites rely solely on the sites for their water needs). The high adoption rate of

the SPWSS sites indicates a high relevance of the systems among target beneficiaries.

4.2.3 Efficiency

The ‘efficiency’ criterion evaluates how well various activities transformed the available

resources into the intended results. Due to a lack of project records, it is unclear what specific

project activities have been carried out in the lifetime of the project. The Consultant recognizes

that this project has been running since 2006 and changes in management and institutional

structures may have led to unclear data flow channels. In implementing SPWSS phase II, it is

recommended that the project is time bound with specific objectives and inputs to feed into these

objectives along with expected outcomes and impacts.

29%

51%

50%

39%

23%Cost

Distance

Quality

Reliability

Security

Figure 23: Factors influencing choice of water source


This discussion looks at efficiency from two perspectives: time efficiency, and the efficiency of

UNICEF investments.

Time Efficiency

As presented in Section 0 on Water Collection Times, the choice of solar technology for water

points has delivered time savings for communities. At least 88% of respondents spend less than

10 minutes waiting to collect water from these sites, compared to 50% at hand pumps and 44% at

open wells who spend more than 10 minutes: 19% wait for more than 30 minutes waiting at hand

pumps. The saved time may be used for other activities including economic activities or children

being in school.

Efficiency of UNICEF investments

As presented in Section 4.1.2, 57% of SPWSS systems are oversized while 30% are undersized, yet

with a redistribution of solar panels, all systems can be correctly sized. This is an inefficient use

of resources as some systems lay under-utilized while others cannot meet their full demand. In

implementing phase II of the SPWSS project, UNICEF needs to be very deliberate in the sizing of

its systems, and especially in determining the amount of power required per site.

Recommendations are provided in Section 6.1 on a template approach to sizing systems.

In addition to system sizing, there are systems that do not realize their intended benefit of

advancing water access: For instance, in Qaw, the system is too far from the target village and its

water is mostly used for irrigation rather than water consumption; In Dhignale, while all the

system components are intact, the system is not used as the well is perceived to be too shallow

and might therefore damage the pump. With this regard, intensive community engagement is

required at the needs and assessment stage so as to establish the right wells and specifications to

fit with solar systems to ensure that targeted communities benefit.

4.3 Sustainability and Management Structures Review

4.3.1 Social-economic appropriateness of the SPWSS

The concept of “sustainability” was popularized by the UN World Commission on Environment

and Development Bruntland Report of 1987. In the context of WASH, and specifically for the

UNICEF supported SPWSS in Somalia, sustainability can be viewed as the ability of a water point

to consistently provide water in quantities and quality comparable to the levels experienced

during project commissioning. Sustainability can be measured as a function of number of

operational years, average supply quantities and quality, and availability factor (proportionate

number of times that the system functions when needed). This evaluation has largely been

implemented without proper baseline information that would provide metrics to measure

progress or transformation. Information collected isolate three key elements that determine the

sustainability of SPWSS. These are (i) technical design, (ii) functionality and (iii) degree of local

ownership. These three elements contribute to the most common causes of failure which include


under-sizing of the pumping system, drying up of the wells, vandalism/theft of the system,

control box malfunctioning and pump breakdown.

Table 7: Elements Determining Sustainability

Element Definition Common Oversights

1 Technical design Selection of the type, size, model of water pumping equipment and location considerations

Oversizing pumps and undersizing power generation systems

Over-engineering design creating highly sophisticated systems that are difficult to maintain

Design flaws (e.g. ground mounting of water storage vulnerable to contamination)

Use of inappropriate material (e.g. metallic piping in coastal areas with saline water)

2 Functionality

Ability to consistently discharge water in sufficient quantities and quality

Seasonality of wells (drying up during droughts)

Little to no after sales/installation support

Lack of access to spare parts

Lack of local technical expertise to perform regular maintenance or basic repairs

3 Local Ownership Perception towards, and involvement of, the user communities in managing the systems

Lack of interest or misaligned priorities

Inappropriate designs or location making the systems difficult to use

Conflicting interests e.g. local leader with a diesel water pumping system

Threats from militia groups

Lack of training on the system

Minimal incentives to manage or use the system

Appropriateness of all future UNICEF intervention plans should be reviewed based on such

parameters. Under the current implementation framework, it is unclear what the key

characteristics a “successful SPWSS” are which complicates any type of evaluation.

Additionally, we propose four basic measures of success with quantitative parameters as

follows: (i) expected operational years – X years, (ii) expected average supply – X m3 per month,

(iii) expected availability factor – X% minimum uptime and (iv) number of people/households

utilizing the site – X people/households as regular users. Such parameters provide an objective

measure of SPWSS across and within regions.

SPWSS are appropriate in most of the Somalia due to the relatively high horizontal irradiation

ranging between 4.7 – 6.8 kWh/m2/day as discussed above. This is supported by a general

consensus at the community level as evidenced by information collected through focus group

discussions. From these discussion it is clear that SPWSS are widely preferred to diesel based

system or manual systems. A recurrent theme informing this preference is the ease of operation,

as these systems have minimum operational requirements, and cost competitiveness of water

generated using solar technology. Cultivating community ownership should start at the pre-

implementation stages. The needs assessment and the baseline surveys should consistently

ensure that local leadership and social management structures are identified and engaged

meaningfully. Strong community ownership also reduces incidences of vandalism and theft.


This was a concern noted on some sites. For example, Lama Waab originally supported by

UNICEF was not functional because the solar panels and wiring had been stolen. A non-

UNICEF supported site in Timire which is adjacent to this site was also not functioning.

Generally, the team was constrained in trying to understand the details that led to complete

failure of systems because no water operator was present at the non-functioning sites, leaving

the team to interview the adjacent communities. Strong community ownership contributes to

longevity of the system. For example, one focus group in Puntland mentioned that spare parts

were readily accessible in Garowe. With local contributions, they have been able to find and

replace basic parts of the system. This is perceived to be a common benefit in sites that are close

to large towns like Mogadishu, Hargeisa, Berbera, Garowe and Galkayo.The functionality rate

of SPWSS in NEZ (56%) was significantly less compared to the NWZ (91%) and SCZ (77%).

Based on discussion with communities through focus group there appears to a high

dependency on the government agency (PWASEN) for after-installation support and consistent

charging of water services appears to be limited with only 25% of the functioning systems

charging for water.

4.3.2 Management Structures and Procurement Process

Identification, procurement and design of SPWSS under UNICEF has been on-going for over 10

years. The general mode of procurement has varied over this period and also differs across the

three regions. Through interviews with the WASH team, procurement team and the field based

staff, the process typically starts with a needs assessment commissioned by UNICEF and/or a

UNICEF partner as illustrated in Error! Reference source not found. below. The first and most

important shortcoming of the SPWSS site development process is that the equipment supplier

(hardware) and the service provider are often two (or more) different entities making it difficult

to isolate and assignment responsibility in cases of malfunctions. Ideally, procuring an end-to-

end contractor who takes responsibility of both the hardware and service should address this

problem (merging step 5,6 and 8). The reality remains that this may not be practical in some of

the AS controlled areas, or other areas in general due to clan dynamics that allow only certain

service providers to operate in specific regions. To that extent, most regions cannot be

considered free markets which inevitably passes on certain inefficiencies in the delivery process.

This includes weaknesses in enforcing warranties because while the community interacts with

the local contractor and may know how to contact them, they have no direct contact with the

equipment supplier, and even if they do, it will still be difficult for the supplier to access their

areas. Warranties commonly apply only in geographic areas covered by the manufacturers’

retailers or distributors which excludes most of the sites in Somalia. The subcontractors, in

part, should be accountable to these local leaders and communities during the first six months

to a year post-construction. It is during this initial period that most technical problems can be

easily identified and addressed before irreparable damages are caused. This accountability can

be structured based on a maintenance contract or requiring a warranty period in the service


delivery agreement. Subcontractors should schedule regular visits during this period even if no

problems or challenges are raised by the users.

The second shortcoming with this process is that procurement of all pumping equipment is

from one manufacturer – Grundfos, which limits the flexibility of using specialized options

from other manufacturers. Factors to consider when selecting a water pumping system are

discussed further in the recommendations section.

Third, and based on feedback received during focus group discussion, there is widespread need

for continuous training on simple repairs and maintenance procedures. The water operators

and communities need to be informed on who to call when in need. There seems to be a lack of

clarity on who to call from the list of implementing partners who include the local NGO,

Government agency, subcontractor and UNICEF. This important detail should be readily

available at the site or even on sticker that will be easily visible to anyone who accesses the site.

4.3.3 Related interventions

Water, sanitation (WASH) and related services is a main focus of development assistance in

Somali. According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA)

Figure 24: SPWSS Procurement Process


Financial Tracking Service (FTS) latest statistics15, about one dollar in every ten delivered

through development assistance was allocated to WASH. Development agencies had

committed and contributed US$ 406 million by September 2016 in support of interventions

across sectors including water and sanitation, health, economic recovery, agriculture, food and

human rights among others in Somalia. A significant portion of this support had not been

allocated to specific sectors. Out of this total support, about 9% was allocated to water and

sanitation interventions (equivalent to US$ 36.5 million). UNICEF is the leading implementing

agency by size of support accounting for 34% of total allocations to WASH - equivalent to US$

12.4 million. Other leading agencies supporting WASH and water access interventions include

the International Organization for Migration (IOM), UN Food and Agricultural Organization

(FAO), ACTED delivering support equivalent to US$ 3.5 million, US$ 3.0 million and US$ 2.1

million respectively. The level of coordination within the WASH sector in Somalia varies across

the three regions. In NWZ, for example, the Ministry of Planning and National Development

(MoPND) is in-charge of overall donor coordination with high level regional coordination

meeting held semi-annually and sector coordination meetings held monthly. UNICEF is the

lead agency in the water sector together with the European Commission, CARE Somalia, UN-

Habitat. The coordination structure is less clear in the SCZ which is further fragmented into

sub-regions. An obvious barrier to successful and widespread implementation of water projects

is political instability, especially in the SCZ. Considerable number of sites in SCZ were not

accessibly due to security reasons. Territories under the control of AS and other non-

government aligned continues to be a main challenge in providing support and monitoring. The

evaluation team did not get access to wells in the Bakol region where five sites had been

selected in the random sample. Similar challenges were experienced in sections of Galgadud

and Hiran.

15 OCHA FTS (2016) Sources of humanitarian funding for Somalia up to September 2016


Figure 25: Estimated value of support delivered through various agencies (Jan – Sep 2016) – Compiled with data

from OCHA FTS (Sep, 2016)

An obvious barrier to successful and widespread implementation of water projects is political

instability, especially in the SCZ. Considerable number of sites in SCZ were not accessibly due

to security reasons. Territories under the control of AS and other non-government aligned

continues to be a main challenge in providing support and monitoring. The evaluation team did

not get access to wells in the Bakol region where five sites had been selected in the random

sample. Similar challenges were experienced in sections of Galgadud and Hiran.

World Vision- $0.8m ACTED - $2.1m

ACF - France -$1.7m

Others - $8.6m

CARE Somalia -$1.6m

FAO - $3.0mIOM - $3.5

NRC - $0.9

PAH - $1.1m

Rescue International -

$0.7m

UNICEF -$12.4m


5. CONCLUSIONS

As a general conclusion, UNICEF has made significant progress towards its goal of achieving

sustainable community water access through solar powered water supply systems. SPWSS sites

have a functionality rate of 77%, with the highest functionality rate in Somaliland at 91% and

lowest in Puntland at 56%. A large majority of those who use SPWSS sites (84%) depend solely

on the sites for all their water needs.

This section summarizes the specific parameter and activity outcomes requested in the Terms of

Reference.

Parameters

Price per barrel16 of water: Water is provided at a fee at 11 SPWSS sites. The national average cost

of water at these sites is US$ 0.36/barrel. SPWSS sites are the second cheapest source of water after

hybrid (solar + diesel powered) pumps in Somalia (selling at US$0.26/barrel), for all sources that

provide water at a fee.

Waiting time: 88% of respondents that use SPWSS sites wait for less than 10 minutes at the water

collection point; 42% have no wait time. SPWSS sites compare to other mechanized water points:

88% at solar powered sites run by either the government or other NGOs, 87% at diesel powered

sites and 100% at hybrid (diesel + solar) sites wait for less than 10 minutes. Manually operated

water points (hand pumps and open wells) record much higher wait times: 31% of respondents

using hand pumps wait for between 10 and 30 minutes while 15% wait for more than 30 minutes.

At least 11% of respondents using open wells wait for 10-30 minutes while 6% wait for over 30

minutes.

Reliability: the reliability of SPWSS sites is mostly a function of pump breakdown rates and

seasonality of wells. The overall functionality of wells is 77% with the lowest functionality seen

in Puntland at 56%. Nationally, 21% of respondents indicated being affected by dry wells with

the region that is most affected being South-Central Somalia. In instances of non-functionality,

most respondents are seen to turn handpumps, open wells and/or streams and rivers.

Downtime and maintenance costs: At functional SPWSS sites, 73% of the respondents indicated

that water was inaccessible from the sites for less than 7 days a month; only 5% had no access to

water from the SPWSS sites for more than 21 days in a month. A range of US$ 10 – 200 was

recorded as the maintenance costs borne by sites.

16 1 barrel = 159 liters


Security: Vandalism and theft events are isolated with only 4 incidents reported for the last year.

Solar panels are most prone to insecurity concerns. A majority of the functional water points

mentioned having a guard (most were night guards).

Activities

Acceptability and Socio-Economic Factors to Consider in Scaling up: No socio-economic factors that

threaten the viability and sustainability of solar powered systems were picked up during the

site visits. In contrast, a general acceptability of SPWSS systems was observed, with all FGDs

revealing a willingness to embrace the technology and use it. Socio-economic factors to consider

in scaling up include:

i. Conduct wide consultations with community members and the local government during

the needs assessment, prior to identification of sites to fit with solar powered systems.

Community members showed a desire to be involved in project implementation. They

have knowledge on wells’ water quality and seasonality and are best placed to advise on

appropriate sites that can provide reliable water. For instance, the Focus group

discussions in Dhiganle indicated that the well was non-functional as it was too shallow

hence prone to drying up: the wells is 4 meters and should have been sunk to at least 8m.

ii. A significant proportion of the community is willing to pay for water, though the current

cost at sites that charge is higher than what most people are willing to pay. A majority of

SPWSS site users (82%) believe that charges paid for water and community contributions

should be the main source of funds for maintenance and repairs.

A detailed list of factors to consider is provided in Chapter 6: Recommendations.

Actions to ensure security of SolarPV systems – the presence of security guards was reported at a

majority of the functional water points. Further, one water point operator noted that

community members had been sensitized to protect the property. In Gedheys (SCZ), FGD

participants noted that children had caused minor damages to taps while playing; warnings of

disciplinary action against the children has yielded positive results as no further damage has

been reported.

Pump Appropriateness: The manufacturer’s pump performance curve for the Grundfos 5A-7

pump, used at all but 1 of the sites visited, covers a pumping range of 10 – 50m head and 0 –

8m3/hr flow. All but 3 of the 30 functional sites were within these curve limits. Appropriateness

was further evaluated based on power sizing: 17 sites were oversized, 9 were under sized and 4

were correctly sized.


6. RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Technical Recommendations

6.1.1 System/Site Design

i. Careful considerations of distance and elevation should be made with regard location

of the well, storage tank and target population so that the solar system can provide

enough energy to pump water to the tank and the tank is at the highest location to allow

water to flow by gravity. A few water collection points were at a higher elevation than the

storage tank, limiting flow by gravity. Consequently, water cannot be accessed from these

point.

ii. Enhance the design feature of the SPWSS sites by welding the solar panels in place to

ensure security and constructing them at an elevation that allows for cleaning. The solar

panels were placed on top of the elevated tanks in a majority of sites visited: while this

ensures security, it makes cleaning of the panels difficult leading to accumulation of dust

on the panels and therefore reduction in their efficiency. Additionally, ensure that all

pipes are adequately buried to protect them from vandalism or accidental breakages.

iii. Increase longevity of piping network through use of PVC pipes, especially in coastal

areas. PVC pipes do not rust and are less susceptible to calcification.

iv. Protect the water point, especially hand-dug wells, from contamination using completely

sealed concreate slabs. A few of the wells visited were either left open, covered with a

mesh or had cracked slabs risking well contamination.

v. Adopt remote monitoring of wells/boreholes. The remote monitoring platform should

be shared between UNICEF and the relevant line ministries to allow real time monitoring

of functionality status of water points.

Remote Monitoring: Grundfos

o The CIU 273 SQFlex GRM control unit is designed to work directly with the Grundfos

SQFlex pump enabling monitoring of the system’s operation anywhere in the world

through Grundfos Remote Monitoring. The control unit communicates via GPRS or SMS

and enables monitoring of the SQFlex’s performance, alarms and historical data among

others. This control unit may be installed in place of the more basic CU 200 SQFlex control

unit which has similar functions without the remote monitoring component.

o The CIU 273 unit works hand in hand with Grundfos Remote Management, a secure,

internet-based system for monitoring and managing pump installations. “Pumps,

sensors, meters and Grundfos pump controllers are connected to the [GPRS Datalogger].

Data can be accessed from an Internet connected PC, providing a unique overview of the


system. If sensor thresholds are crossed or a pump or controller reports an alarm, an SMS

[is] instantly dispatched to the person on duty]”.

o In addition to the additional cost of choosing the CIU 273 control unit over the CU 200

control unit, a fixed low fee is charged for data traffic, hosting costs and system support,

including back-up of all data.

Remote Monitoring: Lorentz

o Lorentz pumps offer two monitoring options. The first is the PS DataModule and

PumpSnanner. The DataModule is an integral data logger and remote control device for

all Lorentz pumps that collects performance data from the pump system and stores it

for periodic collection. The DataModule communicates with the PumpScanner via

Bluetooth allowing real time data viewing and historic data collection. The

PumpScanner for Android App is free to use for approved Lorentz partners, with a one-

off lifetime fee payable to activate the data logging service.

o This option offers a low-cost and simple monitoring solution. As this system is

Bluetooth reliant, its use is recommended for use by water point operators or M&E

officers who get to close proximity of the pumping system.

o The second option is the PS Communicator and pumpManager, a service that offers full

remote management and monitoring of the pumping system. The PS communicator

transmits data via cellular networks to the secure, cloud based, central web server

application, pumpManager. This enables access to information and control of the pump

remotely. Lorentz offers this service at an inclusive monthly fee for cellular data access,

application updates and web service.

o Assuming monthly costs for the lifetime of a water point, this is a more expensive

option. Its use is recommended for high value water points: High value water

points may be seen as i) wells whose installation costs are high so that this

additional component of lifetime M&E is no more than 10% of the total project cost

or ii) critical water points with regard to target population, so that water point

downtime is minimized.

vi. Incorporate groundwater monitoring sensors (that can be monitored remotely) to pumps

for the additional benefit of ground water monitoring. While there are ongoing efforts in

data collection to understand Somalia’s ground water potential, little data exists currently.

With its water access projects across the country, UNICEF stands at a unique place to

advance these efforts.


6.1.2 Sizing Systems

i. Adopt a template approach to selection of water pumps so that pump sizing is based on

need rather than a ‘one-size fits all’ approach. A template is key as a lot of the systems are

very small making individual customized designs expensive. The template in Figure 26 is

recommended. This decision tool template is based on the pump specifications, head (H)

and flow (Q), given by Lorentz and Grundfos on their products. This data is referenced in

Annex 4. Submersible solar water pumps are divided into 2 main categories; i) Helical

Rotor pumps and ii) Centrifugal pumps. As a general rule of thumb, helical rotor pumps

are applied for systems with high heads and small flows and centrifugal for systems with

low heads and large flows. While this template provides recommendations for pumps,

detailed borehole completion reports and demand studies are required for all systems to

ensure that systems are correctly sized with regard to power: oversizing systems by

installing more solar panels than is needed threatens the health of the borehole.

6.2 Programming and Management Recommendations

6.2.1 Recommendations within UNICEF

i. Develop a WASH-MIS (Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Management Information

System), a centralized data collection and management system within UNICEF to

supplement the public sector partner efforts. This assignment revealed significant data

gaps and uncoordinated data management systems across the three regions (Somaliland,

Puntland and South Central Zone). The WASH-MIS should, at the least, i) develop a

system of capturing the baseline realities (i.e. # of people to be served, existing water

sources (quality, reliability, distance, cost etc.), incidences of disease among others); ii)

track interventions, including log of systems installed; iii) track key information (such as

needs assessments and well/borehole completion reports, among other data) and; ii)

define indicators of success.

ii. Facilitate service agreements between contractors and communities: the first year after

installation is critical to system sustainability: data collected showed a 40% failure rate

within the first year. UNICEF should work with its partners to establish service contracts

that last at least 2-years after commissioning. The contracts should, at a minimum, include

i) system monitoring, either remotely or in person, ii) biannual site visits for trouble

shooting and routine technical maintenance and iii) training of water point operators on

basic troubleshooting, maintenance and repairs.


Figure 26: SPWSS Pump Selection Tool


6.2.2 Recommendations Beyond UNICEF

i. Water should be provided at a fee: in a region that is highly water scarce, water is treated

as a valuable commodity, with a majority of respondents (especially in Puntland and

Somaliland) indicating a willingness to pay for it. In scaling up SPWSS, especially where

solar systems are installed at water points that were previously diesel powered, water

should continue to be provided at a fee, though cheaper. The charges should meet the

systems operating costs including wages for the water point operator and a security guard

and the savings needed for maintenance and repairs costs.

ii. Coordinated WASH efforts: Duplication of efforts was seen in multiple villages with

multiple water points installed by aid agencies or NGOs existing within a 500m radius of

each other. Following the creation of The Somalia Development and Reconstruction

Facility, the body through which Somalia receives support from development partners,

UNICEF should use its position as a WASH sector leader (according to conversations with

various sector stakeholders) to influence the formation of a national committee and

regional bodies that work with the federal and regional governments to coordinate

implementation activities. The national committee should include representatives of the

line ministries from the different regions and the key sector implementers and funders.

The regional bodies should be a consortium of all WASH sector players: funding partners,

implementing organizations and the line ministry.


ANNEX 1: LIST OF KII AND FGD PARTICIPANTS

KII Participants

# Name Organization Date Format

1 Mark Muinde Harmonic Systems June 17th 2016 Meeting

2 Caroline Makenzi Africa Solar Designs June 30th 2016 Meeting

3 Olufunso Somorin Africa Development Bank July 1st 2016 Meeting

4 Paul Muchiri Davis & Shirtliff Ltd – Meru Branch

July 8th 2016 Phone call

5 Carolyne Kwakha UNICEF – Procurement July 12th 2016 Meeting

6 Abderahman Issack UNICEF – SCZ July 18th 2016 Skype call

7 Mohamed Suleiman Saed UNICEF – NEZ Written response

8 Mary Njue Epicenter Africa July 22nd 2016 Meeting

9 Omar Ahmed Ali WASH July 24th 2016

10 Ibrahim Omar Mohamud Government July 25th 2016 Phone call

FGD Participants

# Zone Site Name Date

1 Puntland Dhiganle Shukri Hassan Abdalle June 22nd 2016

2 Puntland Dhiganle Hashi Ahmed Elmi June 22nd 2016

3 Puntland Dhiganle Awil Yusuf Farah June 22nd 2016

4 Puntland Dhiganle Ahmed Mohamed Farah June 22nd 2016

5 Puntland Dhiganle Abdiaziiz Abdillaahi Ali June 22nd 2016

6 Puntland Dhiganle Abdilqadir Mohamed Ahmed June 22nd 2016

7 South Central Gedheys Mohamed Hassan Salad June 28th 2016

8 South Central Gedheys Abdillahi Jamac Mohamed June 28th 2016

9 South Central Gedheys Nuur Ahmed Ibraahim June 28th 2016

10 South Central Gedheys Xade Hassan Maxamed June 28th 2016

11 South Central Gedheys Sheikh Muuse Mahamed June 28th 2016

12 Somaliland Cadaadley Mr. Cumar nuur July 10th 2016

13 Somaliland Cadaadley Mr. Abdirisak Aw Abdi Xandule July 10th 2016

14 Somaliland Cadaadley Mr. Abdi Hassan Wacays July 10th 2016

15 Somaliland Cadaadley Mr. Xariir Saeed July 10th 2016

16 Somaliland Cadaadley Mr. Abdi Ismail Dualle July 10th 2016

17 Somaliland Cadaadley Mrs. Bahsan Ismail July 10th 2016

18 Somaliland Cadaadley Mrs. Habiiba Ibrahim Ali July 10th 2016


ANNEX 2: LIST OF INSTITUTIONS AND BUSINESSES

Somaliland

Puntland

Region Village Institution Business

Awdal Sheed Dheer Primary School Tea/coffee shop

Awdal Gargara Primary School Restaurant

Awdal Magalo cad Primary School Tea/coffee shop

Awdal Fadhi Xun Primary School Micro trader

Maroodi jeex Carobeydho Mosque Micro trader

Maroodi jeex Xumbaweyne Mosque Micro trader

Maroodi jeex Caddaadley Primary School Micro trader

Maroodi jeex Dhaboolaq Mosque Micro trader

Sahil Lafaruug Primary School Micro trader

Sahil LasoDawaco Health Centre Micro trader

Sahil Dubur Primary School Micro trader

Sahil Huduse Primary School Medium trader

Sahil Lalleys Tea/coffee shop


Nugal Dhaganle Mosque Micro trader

Nugal Dhinawda Dhigdhigley Mosque Restaurant

Mudug Gobsho Quranic School Small trader

Mudug Garacad Mosque Hotel/Guest houses

Mudug Fardacune Medium trader

Nugal Rabbable Mosque Tea/coffee shop

Nugal Falaydhyal Micro trader

Bari Jiingadda Health centre Micro trader

Bari Lasodacawo Health centre Micro trader

Bari Yalho Health centre Micro trader

Bari Qaw Secondary school Micro trader


South Central Zone


Mudug Camaro Mosque Technical (e.g. electrician, plumbing etc.)

Mudug Xin dawaco Mosque Small trader

Galgadud Wad Mosque Small trader

Mudug Hobyo Mosque Micro trader

Hiran Hospital Hospital Micro trader

Hiran Siigaalow School Small trader

Galgadud Gedheys Mosque Small trader

Hiran Jawiil School Micro trader

Sh Hoose Xawo Tako Secondary School Micro trader

Sh Hoose Twenty-one October Primary school Micro trader

Sh Hoose Gosha iyo Gandiga Secondary School Garage (motorbikes and cars)

Sh Hoose Raqeyle Secondary School Micro trader

Sh. Hoose Wargeesed Micro trader

Sh dhexe Timire Primary school Micro trader

Sh dhexe Kulundi Quranic school Micro trader

Sh dhexe Buulo Makiino Quranic school Micro trader

Sh dhexe Sabuun Primary school Micro trader

Sh dhexe Lamawaab Primary school Micro trader

Goedo Luuq Godey Quranic school Micro trader

Goedo Geedweyne Health centre Micro trader

Goedo Luuq MCH Primary school Tea/coffee shop

Sh Hoose Dowlawe Health centre Garage (motorbikes and cars)


ANNEX 3: LIST OF SAMPLED WATERPOINTS

Table 8: North West Zone (# of Sampled Sites – 14; # of Households (HH) – 90; # of other tools- 37)

MORODI JEEX SAHIL/SAXIL AWDAL

Site HH Sample Other Tools Site HH Sample Other Tools Site HH Sample Other Tools

Carobaydhay 4 3 Laalayska 6 2 Fadhi Hun 7 3

Cadadley 8 3 Dubur 6 3 Sheed Dheer 5 2

Dhaboolaq 4 2 Lasodawaco 11 3 Gargaara 6 3

Xumba Weyne 4 3 Daraygodle 5 1 Magaalocad (Non-UNICEF)

7 3

Hudisa 5 3

Lafarug 12 3

Total 20 11 Total 45 15 Total 25 11

Table 9: North East Zone (# of Sampled Sites – 13; # of Households (HH) – 75; # of other tools - 25)

MUDUG BARI NUGAL

Site HH Sample Other Tools Site HH Sample Other tools Site HH Sample Other Tools

Garacad 12 3 Qaaw 4 3 Falidhyale 5 1

Dhinowda 5 1 laasadawaco 6 2 Rabable 4 3

Gobsho 5 2 Yalho 4 2 Dhiganle 9 1

Fardacune (Non Unicef )

5 2 Jingada (Non Unicef)

6 3 Herta Tukaraq 5 1

22aad (Non Unicef) 5 1


Table 10: South and Central Zone (# of Sampled Sites – 23; # of Households (HH) – 135; # of other tools - 57)

HIRAAN MIDDLE SHABELLE* LOWER SHABELLE

Site HH Sample Other Tools Site HH Sample

Other Tools Site HH Sample Other Tools

Jawiil 6 3 Lamo Waab 6 2 Twenty-one October 6 3

Siigaalow (Gaarane) 4 3 Saabuun (Non-UNICEF)

5 2 Xaawo Taako 6 2


Beled Weyne Hospital

8 3 Timire (Non-UNICEF)

5 2 Raqayle 6 2

Kalundi (Non-UNICEF)

5 3 Gosha 6 3

Bulo Makiino (Non-UNICEF)

5 3 Doonlaawe 6 3

Aw Cusmaan 6 1

War Garseed 6 2


GAL-MUDUG GEDO

Site HH Sample Other Tools Site HH Sample Other Tools

Wad 5 2 Luuq Gudey 5 3

Gidhays 6 3 Ged Weyne 8 1

Hobyo 8 3 Luuq MCH 6 2

Xin Dawaco 4 3

Camaara 7 3

Total 30 14 Total 19 6


ANNEX 4: PUMP SPECIFICATIONS AND DISTRIBUTORS

Grunfos SQ FLEX pumps17 Pump model Motor type Max height (m) Max flow (m3/h)

SQFO,6-2 Helical Rotor 120 0.6

SQFO,6-3 Helical Rotor 200 0.6

SQF1,2-2 Helical Rotor 120 1.2



SQF3A-10 Centrifugal 70 4.5

SQF5A-3 Centrifugal 15 8





Lorentz PS models181920 Pump model Motor type Max height (m) Max flow (m3/h)

PS200HR Helical Rotor 50 2.6





PS150C Centrifugal 20 4





PS9k Centrifugal 180 136



# Contacts: Grundfos Solar PV Distributors in Eastern Africa21

Contacts: Lorentz Solar PV Distributors in Eastern Africa22

17 SQFlex Pumps– Grunfos http://advancepower.net/pdf/SQFlexBrochure.pdf 18 PS Pumps-Lorentz http://www.kgelectric.co.za/assets/product_docs/lorentz/overviews_1013/lorentz_psk_general_en-en.pdf 19 PS Pumps -Lorentz http://www.kgelectric.co.za/assets/product_docs/lorentz/overviews_1013/lorentz_ps_c_general_en-en.pdf 20 PS Pumps – Lorentz http://www.kgelectric.co.za/assets/product_docs/lorentz/overviews_1013/lorentz_ps_hr_general_en-en.pdf 21 Contacts provided by Grundfos Area Manager for Eastern Africa 22 Contacts from the Lorentz Website

http://advancepower.net/pdf/SQFlexBrochure.pdf

http://www.kgelectric.co.za/assets/product_docs/lorentz/overviews_1013/lorentz_psk_general_en-en.pdf

http://www.kgelectric.co.za/assets/product_docs/lorentz/overviews_1013/lorentz_ps_c_general_en-en.pdf

http://www.kgelectric.co.za/assets/product_docs/lorentz/overviews_1013/lorentz_ps_c_general_en-en.pdf

http://www.kgelectric.co.za/assets/product_docs/lorentz/overviews_1013/lorentz_ps_hr_general_en-en.pdf

http://www.kgelectric.co.za/assets/product_docs/lorentz/overviews_1013/lorentz_ps_hr_general_en-en.pdf


1 Asenath Ndegwa NGO Sales Manager DAVIS & SHIRTLIFF LTD PO Box 41762 - 00100 Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +254 020 6968000 / 0711 079 000 Fax: +254 020 557617 Direct Line: +254 020 6968218 / 0711 079 218 Mobile: +254 721 548 881 Email: [email protected] Website: Www.davisandshirtliff.com

CENTER FOR ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES LTD (Distribution partner) PO Box 64921- 00620 Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +254 20 8000 175 / +25420 8000 176/ +254 20 856 1253 Fax: +254 20 856 2310 Mobile: +254 7 2251 2004 / +254 7 3351 2004 E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://cat.co.ke/

2 Bernard Cherugut Sales Manager TRANSAFRICA WATER SYSTEMS LIMITED Mombasa Road, Charan Center PO Box 1179 00502, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +254 020 2632203/+254 20 2632204 Mobile : +254 718 725151/+ 254 724 616749 Fax : (+ 254 20) 2632200 Email : [email protected] Website: Www.transafricawater.com

DAVIS & SHIRTLIFF LTD (Distribution partner) PO Box 41762 - 00100 Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +254 020 6968000 / 0711 079 000 Fax: +254 020 557617 E-mail: [email protected] Website: https://www.dayliff.com/

3 Mahesh Halai AGRO IRRIGATION & PUMP SERVICES LIMITED Old Airport Road, Embakasi, Nairobi P.O. Box 32111-00600, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +254-20-2313151/2, 2513106/7/8/9/10 Mobile: +254-735888000 / +254-726991991 Fax: +254-20-2513152 E-Mail: [email protected] , [email protected] Website: Www.agroirrigation.com

SOLARGEN TECHNOLOGIES (Distribution partner) Address: House No. 2, Behind Safari Hotel

Zobe, Mogadishu, Somalia Tel: +252 618 515 416 / +252 698 515 416 / +252 616 100 174 Mobile: +254 721 163 334 E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://solargentechnologies.com/

4 Mary Njue EPICENTER AFRICA LTD Prime Carton Industrial Park, Mombasa Road, Nairobi, Kenya. Tel: +254 20 2346431 Mobile: +254 72 2432061 Sales: +254 70 1617833 E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.epicenterafrica.com/

EPICENTER AFRICA LTD (Premier – Sales and Service Partner) Prime Carton Industrial Park, Mombasa Road, Nairobi, Kenya. Tel: +254 20 2346431 Mobile: +254 72 2432061 Sales: +254 70 1617833 E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.epicenterafrica.com/


http://www.davisandshirtliff.com/

http://cat.co.ke/


http://www.transafricawater.com/

https://www.dayliff.com/

tel:-



http://www.agroirrigation.com/

http://solargentechnologies.com/


http://www.epicenterafrica.com/


http://www.epicenterafrica.com/

consultancy services for unicef’s evaluation of …...solar pv for pumping is a proven technology...

Documents