Review By (only shown to PWX members) over 3 years ago

The project is good but the amount of $25,000 for only 152 people is high. The final report on the application ID# 40 is impressive. It is on providing dug wells in Yemen. Excellent work! Decentralized system would be better for these 152 people of Batanes instead of channeling treated water from the spring. The O&M of dug wells as in Yemen and roof top or any other method of collected rain-water is comparatively cheaper than pipeline water. I would revise the technology.

Review By (only shown to PWX members)

Did not finish Review

Review By (only shown to PWX members) over 3 years ago

CARE has a very good reputation in providing rural water supply and sanitation services.
However, the $164 per capita cost of this proposed system (which is apparently just a pipeline extension of an existing gravity system) is exceedingly high.

Absent any specific justification for this high cost, it appears that other proposed projects would be more worthy of BPR support.

Review By (only shown to PWX members) over 3 years ago

(1) I would give this project a higher rating if I knew more about the hydraulics ( no response) of the system so as to evaluate the materials used such as pipe size ; and flow rates( no response). Cannot determine from material if the pipe size will provide water for this community into the future. To properly evaluate a water system one has to know the flow of the spring; population to be served; for how many years are they to be served; the hydraulic characteristics of the distribution system so as to maintain a constant pressure over all the homes served; and the pipe sizes planned in the project.

These water system criteria could be part of the initial proposal.

(2)The inclusion of national coordination salaries and expenses gives me some concern since they probably already have this core funding in place from CARE.

Some sort of initial criteria for including core salaries and funding should be considered for future projects so that this is clear to applicants. I can understand funding for direct support for in field supervision of skilled labor, skilled labor ; and educational staff.

Review By (only shown to PWX members) over 3 years ago

Cost per capita is too high and no answers have been given, despite all the questions. Tasks for the water board seem to be unrealistic for such a small and relatively isolated community.

Review By (only shown to PWX members) over 3 years ago

To begin with, it is clear that we need to enhance the rating system to be more multi-dimensional and i look forward to working with the PWX community on that.

The score is not reflective about it chances of success but based on the need for the project:
1. the cost per person is very high for BPR's goals
2. the need is not clearly demonstrated
3. the solution is one of dependency rather than one of organized community ownership

I understand the situation where CARE Ecuador needs a translator and Susan becomes a harassed in the middle between PWX requests and the implementer. Am sorry about that.

Review By (only shown to PWX members) over 3 years ago

CARE has a good model in general, tackling various aspects, like water, sanitation and education together. I like that approach.

I have to agree with the others though that it is fairly expensive and there is not much information explaining why it is so expensive... I can understand prices are going up sharply worldwide, but it seems like a lot...