Evaluation of the Level of Service Rendered by Functioning Rural Water Supply Schemes: Case of Farta woreda, Amhara Region Ethiopia

Mebit Mitiku

MSc. Thesis

Community-led accelerated WaSH

(COWASH)

Presentation outline Presentation outline

Introduction

Problem statement

Research objective

Methodology

Findings

Conclusion and recommendation

Introduction Introduction

According to MoWE(2013): access to water supply in Ethiopia

reaches 61.6% at national level in 2012/13.

The revised UAP targets to achieve 98% access to rural water

supply at the end of 2015

COWASH project established to facilitate the implementation of

CMP to accelerate the achievement of UAP

CMP related researches confirm: the approach reach 98% rate of

functionality

Problem statementProblem statement

Based on early result of NWI: the non-functionality rate have been

improved from 33% to 24.47%

does it really due to the impact of a certain intervention or due to

addition of newly constructed water point?

Accelerated implementation of water supply schemes alone couldn’t

ensure water supply service in a given area

Evaluation of water supply service level by functional water supply

schemes had not been studied

Research objectiveResearch objective

To evaluate the level of service delivered by functioning water

supply points developed through CMP and other project

approaches implemented in Farta Woreda of Amhara Region.

Specific objectives:

Examine service level

Investigate determinant factors affecting functionality and service

level

Compare service quality (other project approaches against CMP)

Methodology Methodology

Conducted in Farta woreda:

RWSEP/COWASH implementing more water points using CMP

approach

CARE Ethiopia supported by donors implementing large number

of water supply schemes for long period in the woreda

The study used cross-sectional method with qualitative and

quantitative data collected using : questionnaire, focused group

discussion, key informant interview and observation.

Sampling method Sampling method

Water points (76WP)

A sample frame of 359 FCWP (2003/04 to 2009/10) were

established

Representative sampling techniques used

Household (442HH)

Number of HH/WP established as sample frame

20% (Gay and Diehl, 1992) of HH of each WP

Kebele (17)

Kebele having more than 10FCWP (2003/04 to 2009/10)

Map of visited water pointsMap of visited water points

Data entry and analysisData entry and analysis

After relevant data collected:

Quantitative data were coded and processed using SPSS

version 20

The result reported using tables and graphs

Qualitative data were analysed using MS-excel and word

and used for triangulation

Findings: Feature of implementers: RWSEP and CAREFindings: Feature of implementers: RWSEP and CARE

RWSEP-CMP approach

CARE-NGOMP approach

Procurement Community The project itself

Community participation High High

Contribution during constn Minimum 15% & upfront contribution

All construction materials except fabricated goods

WASHCO composition 5-6: including 1 care taker or pump attendant

7: including 2 pump attendant or care taker

Care taker or pump attendant WASHCO or community WASHCO members

O&MM Community + woreda Community +woreda

Supervision during constn Woreda staff Woreda staff + project staff

Institutional support Annual rehabilitation SW for clustered HDWs

Findings: Design variation of water pointsFindings: Design variation of water points

RWSEP: distribution point at the storage tank

Distribution point separate from storage tank

Hand dug wells: CARE: use vertical deformed bar but 4 quintals of cement for head workRWSEP: no vertical deformed bar but 7 to 8 quintals of cement for head work

Hand dug wells: CARE: use vertical deformed bar but 4 quintals of cement for head workRWSEP: no vertical deformed bar but 7 to 8 quintals of cement for head work

Findings: Water supply service qualityFindings: Water supply service quality

Water supply service quality

Quantity : water usage of sampled households

Quality : beneficiaries perception and sanitary inspection

Accessibility : Crowding, time spent to collect water and

users satisfaction on service operator

Reliability: water shortage and service interruption

Cont’…Cont’…

Day Mon Tues Wends Thurs Fri Sat Sun Total

Container

Clay pot

Jeri-can

10

20

25

Total (liters) Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 QTotal

Average daily collection of a household= QTotal /7= QAvg. (litres/HH)

Average per capita water usage = QAvg /family size=q (lpcd)

The same calculation done for time spent (round trip including time

of queue)

Findings: Summarised water supply service qualityFindings: Summarised water supply service quality

Indicators Beneficiaries (%)Sub-indicator (%) Indicator (%)

1. Quantity (15 lpcd) 25.6

2. Quality (users perception) 78.5

3. Accessibility 91.87

3.1. Time spent to collect water (30 mpcd) 79

3.2. Crowding (number of HH/wp) 100

3.3. Operator and users satisfaction 96.6

4. Reliability 57.35

4.1. Water supply shortage 60.4

4.2. water supply service interruption 54.3

Average water supply service quality 63.33

Findings: Comparison of water supply service quality: RWSEP and CAREFindings: Comparison of water supply service quality: RWSEP and CARE

Indicators CARE-NGOMP RWSEP-CMP

1. Quantity 28% 24%

2. Quality 75.8% 81%

3. Accessibility 91.05% 86.4%

4. Reliability 56.45% 57.95%

Average water supply service quality 62.83% 62.34%

Percentage of beneficiaries who met the national target of water

quantity small in RWSEP compared to CARE:

Woreda staffs not appropriately supervise during construction

Lack of cohesion b/n WASHCOs and beneficiaries

Conclusion and recommendationConclusion and recommendation

Only 1/4th of sampled HHs met the national target water quantity

Prevalent water shortage:

Design problems

Monitoring and supervision problem during construction

Provision of water point though it doesn’t yield sufficient water

Decrease in pump efficiency

Lack of community cohesion in CMP implementation kebeles

Environmental degradation and climate change

Recommendations Recommendations

There should be appropriate design consideration during

construction

Clear guidelines must be established on O&M responsibility

Government should solve problems with spare part supply chain

Consideration to alternative mechanisms of water fee collection

As per dime rate is motivation factor for woreda staffs all WASH

projects should use similar and reasonable per dime rate

Refreshment training for WASHCOs

Cont’d…Cont’d…

Further study

Communities economic characteristics and appropriate

financing mechanisms for O&M

Water supply service quality: across various Areas,

Approaches, Technology options, and socio-cultural

settings

Comparison of water consumption, need and service

criteria

Thank you for your attention Thank you for your attention

Communities collecting water from pond due to pipe failure that connect storage tank to distribution point to the right