ASSESSING SUSTAINABILITY IN WASH USAID SUSTAINABILITY INDEX TOOL

UNC Water and Health Conference

27/10/2015

Ryan Schweitzer

EMERGENCE OF SUSTAINABILITY TOOLS

2005 2015

2010

UNICEF

Sustainability

Check developed

RWSN meta review

60-80% functionality

Development /Pilot

application of SIT

Beginning of global

financial crisis

USAID Water

Strategy

DGIS sustainability

clause (ESARO)DGIS sustainability

compact (WCARO)

USAID/Rotary

Alliance pilot

starts

SIT

(Water II)

SIT

(GLOWS)

SIT

(CRS)

Comparative

analysis

Guiding

document

2012

IOB evaluation

European Court of

Auditors review

SIT

(UNICEF)

TOOLS MAPPING AND DEMAND ASSESSMENT

• Two mapping exercises, over

220 tools reviewed:

1. Sustainability assessment tools; 2013

2. Broader mapping of WASH sustainability tools; 2014

• On-line survey to assess use

of and demand for tools;

2014

AGUACONSULT/TRIPLE-S TOOLS MAPPING (2013)

Organisation Tool Intended frequency Country experience

AGUASAN (network) Sustainability Assessment

Tool

Initial detailed assessment

then 3-4 years

Kosovo, Haiti, Nepal, Mali

Dutch Water Alliance Sustainability Monitoring

Framework

Unspecified Ghana, Uganda, South Sudan

UNICEF Sustainability Check Annual during programme implementation

Mozambique, Zambia, Rwanda, Malawi, Madagascar (plus 6 other)

USAID–Rotary Int’l Sustainability Index Tool 3,5,and 10 years following implementation

Philippines, Ghana, DR, Kenya, Tanzania, Liberia, Ethiopia, Indonesia (plus replicated by CRS)

WSA ToPPES Annual Ghana

USAID – ROTARY SUSTAINABILITY INDEX TOOL EVOLUTION

• Demand driven – USAID and Rotary International

- take account of factors and drivers ‘beyond the

project’ (district, national)

- Combine qualitative and quantitative evidence

- Include significant ‘rigorous’ evidence base

• Pilot test – Rotary Intn’l and USAID partnership

(Dominican Republic, Philippines, Ghana)

• Developed tool/guiding document

• GLOWS

WASH SUSTAINABILITY INDEX TOOL

• Purpose: To assess the sustainability of the water,

sanitation, or hygiene services and to identify critical

constraints or drivers.

• Scope: the WASH services provided by or resulting from

the interventions implemented under a project or

programme.

• Process: outcomes of the SIT assessment to feed into

partner/mission/sector dialogue or planning processes

SIT METHODOLOGY

• Data collection and analysis is “siloed” by intervention type

• Indicators are derived from literature and best practice

• Indicators are grouped into 5 factors

• Indicators target sustainability issues at a particular level

(national, regional, district, village)

Institutional Management Financial

Technical Environmental

WHAT IS UNIQUE ABOUT SIT – LINKS OPERATIONAL WITH POLICY

Policy/

enabling

environment

Decentralised government/private sector at local level

Operational systems and interventions supported by

the programme

National/

Regional

District

Service Level

ADMINISTRATIVE LEVELS – EXAMPLE ETHIOPIAWASH SIT Level Level in Ethiopia Stakeholders

Centralized Service

Authority or Ministry (SA)Federal Steering Committee

Technical Team

Coordination Office

Regional States

(Killioch)

Steering Committee;

Technical Team;

Coordination Office

Zone Steering Committee;

Technical Team;

Coordination Office

Decentralized Service

Authority (SA)Woreda Woreda Cabinet

WASH Team

Health Extension Workers

Service Provider (SP) Kebele/Kushet Health Post-Health Extension Workers

WASH Committee Members

Handpump caretaker(s)

School Administrator(s)

Health Development Army

Service Users (SU) Kushet Household

SIT INTERVENTION FRAMEWORKS

1. CRS- community reticulated water systems

2. RWH- household rainwater harvesting

3. WPS- water pan system

4. WSP- water source protection

5. WWT- waste water treatment

6. HHS- household sanitation

7. HWT- household water treatment

8. HWP- hand washing promotion

9. SWM- solid waste management

10. WASH- WASH entrepreneur

CONCLUSIONS AND STRATEGIC REFLECTIONS – SIT AND OTHER SIMILAR TOOLS

Pros Cons • Can drive modification in programme

design and remedial actions

• Flexible design allows for contextualisation and is open source

• Provides ‘credible’ evidence base for sector dialogue

• Shifts focus of attention onto sustainability of services and not just delivery of outputs

• Leads to promising take up of principles and elements of checks in Rwanda, (potentially) Mozambique and Ethiopia (UNICEF)

• Relatively complex/heavy process

• Still confusion over purpose: ‘functionality

versus sustainability’?

• Perception as ‘project’ instrument; limited

relevance for (local) government

• Relies on DP engagement with sector

processes

• No clear trends – needs repeated

applications and analysis to validate

LOCATING THE SIT IN BROADER SECTORSECTOR MONITORING

SYSTEMS AND NATIONAL PROCESSES

UNICEF Bottleneck

assessment Tool

(BAT)

WSP Service

Delivery

Assessments (old

CSO)INTEGRATEDSUSTAINABILITY CHECK

STAND-ALONE PROJECT MONITORING

INSTRUMENTS

NARROW FUNCTIONALITY

CHECKSector M&E

systems

Global WPDX

data set

Donor and INGO

M&E systems

USAID –

Rotary

SIT