Proposal Review

By East Meets West Foundation Posted on Mon 18 Dec 2006, over 19 years ago

This proposal appears to be thoroughly conceived and adequately detailed so that reviewers can make a credible assessment of its priority in the competition for limited funding.

From the community side, it is reassuring that the prospective beneficiaries are ready to form committees for the management of the project, and are willing to contribute to the project in cash and in-kind at the project inception to support the initial capital investment cost, and for recurrent O&M costs throughout the life of the project.

It is also good to see that you are proposing a properly funded hygiene and sanitation behavioral change program.

One small point on your cost estimate spreadsheet. The last column “Cost Per Beneficiary” shows a value of $15 on the sanitation subcomponent. In fact, the “330” in D11 appears to be the number of latrines, not the number of beneficiaries (1,650), so the $15 is actually the cost per latrine for 5 people. That seems a bit on the low side, even if you're financing basic VIPs and not pour flush latrines. Or maybe you can build a good quality double vault, pour-flush latrine for $15 x 5 = $75 in Malawi? Unless I am mistaken, this correction dramatically changes your cost per person for water and sanitation from $11.58 to $6.73.

Another small point - In the cost section “Co-Funding From”, you mentioned seven communities, not the six mentioned above.

It is good that you intend to provide three options each for both the water and sanitation technology choices. People always appreciate having the opportunity to make some choices, especially when they are up-fronting cash of $1,000 (per community, or in total?) as part of the capital investment, and $100 per community for anticipated O&M costs. I'm not sure how long that would last, compared to the lifetime of the wells. I gather that this would cover buckets, ropes, pulleys, and any re-plastering of the wells over time.

You also provide a solid practical rationale for this project in this particular area in terms of its existing relatively coverage of improved water supply and sanitation, in comparison with other parts of the country. You also provided a policy and and institutional rationale noting the attention paid to the Country Strategy, efforts made to cooperate with the government, and having developed an MOU clarifying the roles and responsibilities of all stakeholders, including not only the communities, but also the local authorities and the private sector.

Overall, your proposal (with perhaps some minor modifications) would serve as a good template for other organizations to use when preparing their proposals for the peer review process.

latrine options

By WaterAid Posted on Fri 08 Dec 2006, over 19 years ago

Your project covers the three integral components which WaterAid subscribes to: water, sanitation, and hygiene education. Our question involves the choice of latrines. Certainly the advantages of the latrines differ: EcoSan provides soil-fertilizer, while VIP obstructs the fecal-oral transmission route through flies. What factors determine who gets what?

latrine options

By Water for People Posted on Fri 08 Dec 2006, over 19 years ago

Great question Pat and thank you for this.

Households will choose which option they want. We,like WaterAid, believe that choice matters because households differ in what they want. Some families may see the advantage of compost for agricultural purposes while others will not want to ever handle their composted faeces/urine. As such, households will be able to explore both options and decide which one they like for their particular circumstances.

Great question and thanks

Ned

Finance

By Water for People Posted on Fri 08 Dec 2006, over 19 years ago

I see that Safer Water had a good question in the review section - how can we cost the latriens when households have not decided what option they want. That is a good question - the budget is based on an estimate of 50% VIP and 50% EcoSan and we accept that this will undoubtedly be wrong but it is the best way we could estimate costs at this stage.

Thansk for the comment

Ned