local government involvement

By Protos Posted on Mon 09 Aug 2010, over 13 years ago

Congratulations on what seems to be a well prepared project!

You stated that local governments are timidly becoming involved in the water sector and contribute financially and in logistics.

Are they involved in the planning process?

How will they be involved after completion of the works?

Thanks.

local government involvement

By Agua Para la Vida (APLV) Posted on Fri 13 Aug 2010, over 13 years ago

Yes the local (Alcaldias) goverrnments are becoming involved in several ways. Even financially, though that contribution is rarely major. Part of the reason is that the central government has been pressured (by foreign lenders to it as a condition to forget a part of their debt) into turning over some of the national income to the alcaldias and to let the alcaldias own and manage their water systems.
One way they are getting involved is by applying the law on the disposition of water.The springs we use generally belong to a private owner who is not even a member of the community (the spring may be as much as 12 kms away). It has to be ceded to the community legally and the trnsfer recorded in the alcaldia's office before we proceed. This is done thru a bargaining process in which the owner may be in a position to demand excessive compensation. But the law of water states that an owner may not deny a community acces to the water it needs so that an expropriation can take place and the compenstion for that is limited. The mayor may or may not want to get involved (especially if the owner of the spring is his son in law!) but when he does it is very helpful. Other ways: Lending a municipal truck, providing food for our workers when the village is too poor to provide it, giving an official status to the maintenance committee, arbitrating conflicts when they arise.
Are they involved in the planning? They are to some extent. For one thing the original demand for the project by the community often is directed at the mayor's office and then relayed to us. Then the mayor can choose to become active ( facilitating reunions for instance or even getting involved in the management of the financing) or may ignore the planning.

What about later? The water project is turned over officially to the community itself rather than to the alcaldia some six months or so after completion. The mayor;s office may intervene in case of internal community conflicts or conflicts with surrounding owners, or (in still rather rare cases) by providing help with some difficult maintenance problem. Our technicl school ETAP provides a surplus of technicians who can be hired by the alcaldias to deal with local water projects or even to initiate some.

Gilles

Water System Design

By Agua Para La Salud (APLS) Posted on Wed 04 Aug 2010, over 13 years ago

In checking the figures for flow, pipe size, tank size and longevity of the water system I find that they are all within reasonable limits according to the design factors that we normally use. It appears from the figures that the volumn of water and tank size will be good until about 2037 using 70 liters per person per day and 4% population increase per year. Is this what you anticipate?

The figures on pipe costs seem a bit high. The cost of 2" x 160 psi pipe in Guatemala depending on distance from source are from $7--$10 a 6 meter tube. In your figures for the BR#23 the cost estimate is $204 a tube (983 tubes @ $200,749.00) and in BR#1 they are $121 a tube (145 tubes @$17,673.00) . Am I missing something? Are you using primarily galvanized tubes or PVC? Can you send a cost break down of the different size tubes; cost per tube; and material type of tube?

The per latrine cost seems to be in line with our experience. Would you send pictures and individual materials list of the latrine design planned.

How will each of the 182 families deal with the grey water from having a faucet in their homes? If sumideros or seepage pits are planned would you send a design?

In your proposal you have several funding agencies involved in the project. How many of these agencies have contributed to date? Who will manage the funds from these agencies? The Mayor or APLV?

Water System Design

By Agua Para la Vida (APLV) Posted on Thu 05 Aug 2010, over 13 years ago

Hello Lynn:;
The general answer to your first paragraph is yes. In the case of Mongallo we did use a yearly growth rate of 4%. Ib our water allocation we allow for 10% of losses ( I personnally find this figure excessive) so that the daily allocation per person is 77l/day. The design is for a population expected in 2030.

On the pipe cost question: Underground we use PVC of varios diameters and adjust the chosen wall thickness to the local water pressure. I believe that the discrepancy that strikes you has a simple explanation. The prices that surprise you are in cordobas (c$) not in dollars . The dollar is worth about 20 cordobas. And the prices you quote for pipes in Guatemala are close to ours.

I am attaching a detail budget for the material of all units including the latrines..

on grey waters: We design a general grey water sewer system only in cases where the habitations are on flat ground sourrounded by rising terrain. This is not the case for Mongallo whee the habitations are on sufficient slopes. The waterstands are not inside the houses but on their sides. The cement apron surrounding the cement water stand is equipped with a drain that leads to a 2" drain pipe of varying length (12 to 24 meters generally) that leads to a small gravel-filled pit.

All the funding agencies mentioned in the application have provided the funds indicated. Agua Para La Vida will manage the funds though the main contributor, the Japanese Ambassy monitors this management closely.
Gilles Corcos, APLV.

Water System Design

By Agua Para La Salud (APLS) Posted on Thu 05 Aug 2010, over 13 years ago

Thanks Gilles...The project looks like a very good mix of technologies to serve the residents and is well within the costs and design elements we are experiencing in the mountains of Guatemala.

There is a cultural tradition in the Mayan villages that each family will donate a given amount of work to the community each year and especially on projects such as this. Is this the case in your area?

Water System Design

By Agua Para la Vida (APLV) Posted on Fri 06 Aug 2010, over 13 years ago

Lynn:
I can't say this is a tradition with the villages we deal with. Usually the construction of the water system by the village residents is the first communal undertaking for these populations which have very loose community links and no real governance.
The job of "preparing" these villages for the project (that involves for its residents not only considerable work (.e.g 70 to 110 man-days of work per family) but a number of contractual obligations, is protracted because to start with there is no one really in fiduciary position to talk and act for the community. But after this organizational job is done and the experience of communal work has been gotten thru, in many cases the need for cooperative behaviour has been understood to some extent.
Aside from maintenance - which involves a degree of community participation ( monthly payments, for instance) there is the matter of cuenca preservation and reforestation which is in their charge. And the pattern has been set for other village undertakings ( school repair or extension, church, communal building, better road access,etc.)
Gilles

Ongoing local government support

By Team Blue Posted on Wed 11 Aug 2010, over 13 years ago

If "no one really in fiduciary position to talk and act for the community", how are you going to insure enthusiastic local users of the results of your efforts? Are there other "community building" activities underway that this effort supports? Without these efforts could even a well managed project and monitoring effort fall into disuse?

Ongoing local government support

By Agua Para La Salud (APLS) Posted on Wed 11 Aug 2010, over 13 years ago

I am concerned at the list of monitoring catagories that are being proposed here for NGOs to contemplate.
The topic of tracking water consumers on a semi annual basis would not be important since the initial stages of a water project would include this number in the design and survey of a water system. Information gathered before and would simple be census taking which is the function of the local government. Normally population increase from a general view can be gathered by the country birth rate such as Guatemala which doubles the population every 20 years at 3% rural growth. This is the work and responsibility of givernment and they should be encouraged to make the effort and share the information with NGOs.

Water consumption or available water resources are the ultimate goal of population information. Water consumption has been studied for years (WHO) and the information indicates that 60 - 80 liters per person per day is sufficient to activate learned hygiene habits and meet the normal human consumption needs. To task NGO staff members to gather data on this topic for multiple communities would not be efficient. APS, for intstance , would have to be studying 30 or more water system communities and if the entire region of our work were included this would be over 100 communities. Again this the responsibility of government.

Gathering water quality information is another dubious effort and would unltimately give false information since most studies indicate that nearly 100% of treated or non treated water is re-infected by bad hygiene habits. Re- infection is so wide spread that one can assume that all water is infected by the time it reaches the mouth. The real effort should be to continue efforts in hygiene training and encourage government and health districts to do the same and keep records on water quality.

To make this short the suggestion is put forward that NGOs should spend less time in generating paper and more time in the field doing the work of helping communities organize their efforts around these topics. If Peerwater would seriously fund long term projects for staff members to work with communities in governing and maintaining water and sanitation systems then we would see an improvement in the numbers sought in the monitoring process outlined above. This effort should be an effort in support of govenment programs to do the same and should not be initiated without their substancial support.

The topic of water tariffs is an issue filled with much emotion and can very easily turn violent. It is an area that NGOs should view with much caution. NGOs are not taxing agencies. This again is the fuction of government and their responsibility to manage and enforce. NGOs can encourage the effort in support of govenment programs, but will need national legislation to support the effort. Water is an primary need for humans and we have found that a non functioning water system is a hign priority and dealt with expediciously by communities. Meetings are held , fees collected, and the system repaired. In this fashion much needed family funds are not tied up in bank accounts for long periods of time. When you are living ion $1.00 to $2.00 a day you must make a decision daily as to how best to use these funds for your family to survive and not put it into a bank account under dubious control against what might happen in 6 months or a year with the water system.

Finally I would like to thank Roger for his comment concerning "insure enthusiastic local users". If you are the head of a house hold in a developing country and you are unemployed; have sick children or wife at home or ill yourself; your family is hungry and has not eaten well for several months; and a hurricane has just destroyed your crop will you be interested in or have the energy for a meeting to listen to a politician( maybe honest) about organizing the water committee or vote to pay water tariffs?

One Guy Criteria

By Team Blue Posted on Wed 11 Aug 2010, over 13 years ago

I have been working on rural water supply (and to a lesser sanitation) projects since 1983 (so 27 years now) in 15 or so countries, and I have noticed what I call the "One Guy Theory" of successful water supply and sanitation projects.

The short version of this theory is that in 99% in my experience of working on successful and unsuccessful rural water (and to a lesser extent sanitation) development projects are dependent largely upon the dedication and knowledge of (at least) one primary person who lives in the beneficiary community, and has a vested interest in supporting the project.

The "One Guy" is a person who may or may not necessarily have the full range of technical, financial and planning skills, but nonetheless has the respect and broad support of his resident community, and is thereby better able to mobilize the various support functions (technical, organizational, financial and other skills) required of the community to work with external financial, planning and technical resources to successfully plan, finance, construct, operate and maintain the water (and less often sanitation) facilities that the community requires.

Most often, the "One Guy" also has good political contacts who are willing to help support the One Guy's project to mobilize the required resources (people, land, labor, and cash contributions) which are often so difficult for the formal authorities to mobilize. Without the active support of this critical person, projects often fail to flourish.

One Guy Criteria

By Agua Para La Salud (APLS) Posted on Wed 11 Aug 2010, over 13 years ago

Yes, I agree, but the problems is who supports the The Guy and his family while he does this for his community, and what if there are 30-100 communities?
This is where the government needs to step in. In the USA we do this with our taxes and turn all the work over to water and sewer districts and pay staff to do the work. Can we expect and impoverished village to do the same?

Who supports "The One Guy" for the rest of his life-- the NGO or the government?

One Guy Criteria

By Team Blue Posted on Thu 12 Aug 2010, over 13 years ago

Sorry, but without "The One Guy" I believe unrealistic expectations will be set which always end in disappointment or worse. With limited resources we must support proposals that achieve results wherever possible. Before supporting critically needed programs, PWX leadership should insure that these six steps in Change Leadership addressed. 1.) What's the crises? 2.)_Who are collation of leaders in addition to The One Guy? 3.) What's the vision? 4.) Communications responsibility? 5.) Barrier removal responsibility and 6.) Short term priorities. The One Guy fits into each of these items all essential to success from my 50 years of private sector and military supply chain change experience. Further, water projects are among the toughest I've seen.

Roger

One Guy Criteria

By Agua Para la Vida (APLV) Posted on Fri 13 Aug 2010, over 13 years ago

Gilles Corcos, APLV.
True enough the special "one guy " turns out to be very important. But sometimes he or she does not exist and often his or her existence is revealed during the construction of the project. So I don't see how that should be made a condition for carrying out the project.
I would rather honestly advance that maintenance, no matter how much attention is given to it remains an iffy proposition, never totally secure. Which implies that systems that require least maintenance should be favored.

Gilles

One Guy Criteria

By Agua Para La Salud (APLS) Posted on Wed 18 Aug 2010, over 13 years ago

Our experience has been that most of the communities we work with have a serious need for a positive experience in community development during the project. Most of Latin American countries are emerging democracies having recently come our of civil war situations. Many of the leaders and older people were killed and many young individuals with no mentors are trying to manage their communities. The one guy ( commander) was the form of control the military used in Guatemala to control the villages. Developing a water system using the democratic process by working with water and village committees is a very important opportunity to give these villages an example of democratic government and community building. I agree that this should be an essential part of projects be they water or otherwise to promote long term stability in maintaining the projects. Individuals come and go but once a village has a strong community structure then so will the projects have long term structure and the one strong guy may be in place of authority by village approval and removable if needed.

Ongoing local government support

By Agua Para la Vida (APLV) Posted on Fri 13 Aug 2010, over 13 years ago

Perhaps you mistook the meaning of that sentence by forgetting what came before:

. That is most often the situation when we first meet the community. That is not the situation when we finally decide to do the project In the meanwhile (sometimes as much as two years) the community has been obliged to organize itself and choose representatives and act communally When that does not take place we don't do the project.

Gilles