plan 101Rehabilitation & improving management water system

Summary

The project will assist 4 water user committees in the rehabilitation and extension of existing drinking water systems which were build between 1985 and 1995, and management will be improved on all systems.

Background

PROTOS and CIDRI have been collaborating in a number of projects in Ituri; this collaboration has resulted in the construction of gravity flow systems and protection of springs.

Location

Province Oriental, Ituri, DR Congo

Attachments

  • budget.xls
  • Kaart_It...
  • Pictures...
  • Budget_R...

Focus

Primary Focus: Drinking Water - Community
Secondary Focus: Capacity Building

People Getting Safe Drinking Water: 3,500

Sustainable access will be secured for about 40.000 people currently using 4 existing systems in Muhito, Mahagi, Logo and Aru. After protection of new springs and construction of additional tanks, at least 3.500 persons will be added to this number.
The capacity of existing management structures will be improved through a number of training activities which will be organised for technical staff on all the systems, as well as administrative staff. Also 7 water committees in charge of other systems in the area will be involved in these training activities and exchanges to promote best practices, harmonize management and stimulate collaboration between these systems.

School Children Getting Water: 800

At least 2 schools will be connected.

People Getting Sanitation: 2,000

The project will initially be focussing on behaviour change. In each of the water systems which will receive assistance, hygiene promoters will be trained in PHAST, all of them will receive materials which will be adapted to suit to local circumstances. This may also involve the construction of some demonstration latrines, depending on the findings of a survey planned for in the first month of the project.

People Getting Other Benefits:

Staff of the implementing NGO, technicians and administrators working in 11 existing water supply systems, supported by CIDRI will receive additional training.

Start Date: 2008-08-01

Completion Date: 2009-07-31

Technology Used:

CIDRI is experienced in the construction of gravity flow systems. Systems have both public taps and private connections, mainly for institutions such as schools and health units.

Phases:

The project will be followed by a second phase which will involve the construction of 2 new systems.

Community Organization:

Communities give a mandate to a management committee elected in a general assembly. Every household contributes in the maintenance and management of the system by paying a monthly contribution. The rehabilitations are partly financed with these community contributions.

Government Interaction:

Ancillary activities:

•On the job training of graduates in engineering.
•Training of local technicians on spring protection.
•Strengthening of local organised groups and health units in aspects of hygiene and sanitation promotion.
•Improve management and record keeping.
•Capitalisation of experiences.
•Exchange between CIDRI and other NGO’s active in water and sanitation sector in Eastern Congo.

Other Issues:

Throughout the projects by CIDRI, sustainability is being emphasised at all times. The setup of management committees has been written down in a manual, which is locally used to mainstream community based management systems on existing water supply systems. Throughout the proposed project this manual will be reviewed based on the lessons learnt over the years.

Maintenance Revenue:

Households contribute on a monthly basis, these contributions are collected by a committee established on each public water point, the contributions are recorded and paid to the administrator, who keeps records for the entire system. The results are annually being reported to the general assembly.
The collected fees are used to cover:
(1) salary for the administrator, 1 or more technicians and health promoters, depending on the size of the system
(2) spare parts, tools, various materials…
(3) building up a reserve
In most cases the collected fees have allowed the committees to keep the systems functioning up to a certain level and to create a modest reserve but this has not been enough to take care of more serious repairs. The existing tariffs furthermore do not take into account the depreciation of the facilities. During the project, we will assist the committees in recalculating costs and propose new tariffs based on cost and payment capacity of users.

Maintenance Cost:

Metrics:

Prior art before metrics

Cost: $82,000

See breakdown of costs in excel sheet.

Co Funding Amount: $73,800

See details costs sheet.

Community Contribution Amount:

Depending on the system, currently about 50% to 70% of the households pay the monthly contributions, with some months reaching nearly 100% and other months as low as 20% (depending on harvest season, school calendar, etc.). Most systems do keep records and have a modest amount in reserve which is used for maintenance and which will also be used to contribute in the rehabilitation.
Furthermore communities also offer labour in construction (up to 20%) and take part in maintaining the area near springs and public taps clean.

Fund Requested: $8,200

Implementing Organization: CIDRI - Comité d’Initiation pour le Dévélopement Rural en It

The implementing partner CIDRI (Comité d’Initiation pour le Dévélopement Rural en Ituri) has been active in the construction of water supply systems for more than 25 years. Despite instability and war in the region for the last 10 years, nine out of ten systems built are still operational.

Attachments

  • budget.xls
  • Kaart_It...
  • Pictures...
  • Budget_R...
  • 2 participants | show more

    Community Contribution

    Rob Bell of El Porvenir

    Marc, One question: you mention that the rehabilitations are partly financed with these community contributions. (under community organization). I don't see it mentioned in the budget perhaps there are different figures for each of the committees? I am interested to hear a bit more about this, how much they are contributing (money wise)...

    Marc,

    One question: you mention that the rehabilitations are partly financed with these community contributions. (under community organization). I don't see it mentioned in the budget perhaps there are different figures for each of the committees? I am interested to hear a bit more about this, how much they are contributing (money wise)? and how that process works are they purchasing materials, or who is managing the funds for the project?

    Thanks,
    Rob

    • Marc Despiegelaere of Protos

      With respect to rehabilitations and community participation, three basic principles have to be respected: 1°) In all cases, all non skilled labour is the responsability of the community; the WUC has to mobilise the water users, work out the working schemes, take care of an equity in the distribution of tasks and sofort. 2°) Alle rehabil...

      With respect to rehabilitations and community participation, three basic principles have to be respected:
      1°) In all cases, all non skilled labour is the responsability of the community; the WUC has to mobilise the water users, work out the working schemes, take care of an equity in the distribution of tasks and sofort.
      2°) Alle rehabilitations of the "non sophisticated" parts of the water scheme are the responsability of the WUC - since, after this externally supported overall rehabilitation, they have to do it themselves in the next years. This means that the WUC takes care of the financial, technical and organisational management of the rehabilitations in the distribution network (except for the reservoirs). These costs are not integrated in the budget since money is not managed by CIDRI.
      3°) Rehabilitations at the springs, on the main pipe and the reservoirs, together with the extensions are the responsability of CIDRI and will be funded through the project budget (except for the non skilled labour).
      Hope this is clear ? (Stef Lambrecht - Marc is on hollidays)

  • 2 participants | show more

    Status of past project(s)

    Meera Hira-Smith of Project Well

    Some of the questions may have been asked before: (1) what is the status report of the project that will be completed in august 2009? (2) the pictures are fab and in one it shows that the water from few taps were wasted, is there individual stop valve system or is there only one main valve to control the flow from all the taps? (3) Please ...

    Some of the questions may have been asked before: (1) what is the status report of the project that will be completed in august 2009? (2) the pictures are fab and in one it shows that the water from few taps were wasted, is there individual stop valve system or is there only one main valve to control the flow from all the taps? (3) Please enlighten me, is the gravity flow water system being treated at all? What about harmful contaminants collected on the way down, are they removed at the point of use? (4) Studies show that bacterial contamination occur after the point of use, the collecting buckets are seen to be new and clean, would it be the same after 3 years down the road? Is there any knowledge imparted to the users regarding maintaining proper practice of personal hygiene and how to keep the collecting vessel clean? I am sure with 30 years of experience you know what you are doing and it is important to have the system set up to be sustainable and does not lead to another problem in future. Thank you.

    • Marc Despiegelaere of Protos

      Just some comments and pieces of answers. One has to understand the context where this project is happening: - 10 years of war displaced more than 1 M people; 44% of the girls between 16 and 21 have been raped; ethnic genocide has been committed in great parts of the project zone. - DR Congo has no formel local authorities, no water pol...

      Just some comments and pieces of answers.
      One has to understand the context where this project is happening:
      - 10 years of war displaced more than 1 M people; 44% of the girls between 16 and 21 have been raped; ethnic genocide has been committed in great parts of the project zone.
      - DR Congo has no formel local authorities, no water policy, no public service delivery outside the main cities.
      - In the rural areas (Muhito, Logo) there is no monetary economy, for the limited services they people have, they pay in kind - e.g. work on the field of the school teacher. In Aru and Mahagi - close to the Ugandan border, and more urban, there is some trade and monetary economy but no low, no rules.
      In this context, 10 of the 11 WUC and water schemes do still work. During the war, different ethnic groups continued to meet in the WUC - the only place where they met ! Water schemes, offices of the WUC or there stocks have never been attacked.
      More detailed answers on the questions raised by Meera:
      1°) We started on April 1st with a 3 year program for rehabilitation and organisational reconstruction of the 11 WUC and schemes. The 4 mentionned water schemes are prioritised for the first year.
      2°) One of the objectives of the rehabilitation is to reintroduce water meters, stop valves and sofort. The pictures you see are taken at the non-rehabilitated water scheme; I don't of course have no pictures of the rehabilitated water scheme. Water meters and valves have not been replaced in the recent years since they were not available in the region (remember the war).
      3°) There is no water treatment. Spring catchment is done through a sophisticated drainage system in the mountains and delivers safe water in the system. The decentralised reservoirs in each neighbourhood are regularly cleaned with a chloride solution. Water quality is monitored with the DelAqua-kit. Adding a chemical treatment is not an option since i) the costs, ii) problems with technology and availability of pieces.
      4°) There is a sensitisation on "water hygiene" in each neighbourhood with great succes; the project will try to build on this to integrate also sensitisation on hygiene, basic sanitation and so on.
      Stef

  • 2 participants | show more

    Description of current system plus some individual stories

    Rajesh Shah of Blue Planet Network

    This is an ambitious proposal in a very needy area.

    1) I would like some short description of the current system and what is the need for the new. You say 50-70% of people are paying monthly dues. What are they getting for that currently?

    2) You say you started April 1. What was the funding source for the past few months?

    3) Do

    ...

    This is an ambitious proposal in a very needy area.


    1) I would like some short description of the current system and what is the need for the new. You say 50-70% of people are paying monthly dues. What are they getting for that currently?


    2) You say you started April 1. What was the funding source for the past few months?


    3) Do you have any interviews recorded about the user's experiences and need? That along with some photographs (of the beneficiaries and current system) would really be powerful and also aid in documenting the project as we could get photos after the project completes.
    Your document with photos is nice, but it is confusing: some looks like new work (under construction), and you say the pictures of old system (the standpipes pictures could clearly be showing need, but the others?). Would be nice that it was clear what is old (that requires taps and meters) and other that showed progress since April 1. Please note that for some people lookin at the pictures, flowing standpipes does not show need - it looks like a solution - we need to clearly label and describe the situation.


    4) Any more details on the budget? there are some very large categories but i am sure you have good details. Some of them would be useful to others as future projects learn from you.


    Thanks, Rajesh

    • Stef Lambrecht of Protos

      Dear Peers, I was a bit disconnected last three days - sorry for the late answers. 1) I will add in a few moments a more detailed budget. There one can also see what kind of rehabilitations we plan for this periode. As mentionned before, the external contribution is focussing on the rather big rehabilitation interventions (and extension...

      Dear Peers,
      I was a bit disconnected last three days - sorry for the late answers.
      1) I will add in a few moments a more detailed budget. There one can also see what kind of rehabilitations we plan for this periode. As mentionned before, the external contribution is focussing on the rather big rehabilitation interventions (and extensions) while the smaller jobs in the different nieghbourhoods have to be financed by the water users' contributions.
      2) Financial architecture might be seen as a bit complicated. The cofunding by BPR is needed to cover 10% of the 2008 Action Plan (running from April 2008 to march 2008) we developed for an overall amount of 82.000 USD. Belgian Government promised us a 80% grant, under the condition that we can mobilize the other 20%. We already found 10%. In the maintime PROTOS prefinanced a first 30.000 USD in order to get works started. Belgian Government (yes we still have a government in this strange country!) transfered the first 40% last week; so works can go on. But of course, at the end of the year i) we have to pay back our bank and ii) we have to show the Belgian Government that the remaining 20% has been mobilized. That's why we count on BPR !
      3) Sorry for the confusion with the pictures. I don't have more pictures nor interviews and since people have no internet connexion, we have to live with the stuff we have. Nevertheless, we have to understand that this project is mainly focussing on a support to existing water systems in order i) to improve and sustain the water service people managed to maintain during the last 15 years of war and ii) to extend the existing water schemes to not served areas and iii) to integrate topics on hygiene and sanitation. This approach seems to be more relevant than waiting untill water system breaks down and then coming up with a complete new and externally driven reconstruction programme.
      Regards
      Stef

  • 2 participants | show more

    My comments sometimes overlap with some of those above.

    Rick McGowan of East Meets West Foundation

    This proposal is a little confusing to me, as there are several different components in the proposal that seem to overlap. Under details, you mentioned that “sustainable access will be secured for 40,000 people using four existing systems”, and an additional 3,500 people four existing systems providing coverage for. Then you mention seve...

    This proposal is a little confusing to me, as there are several different components in the proposal that seem to overlap. Under details, you mentioned that “sustainable access will be secured for 40,000 people using four existing systems”, and an additional 3,500 people four existing systems providing coverage for. Then you mention seven other water committees (in charge of other nearby systems) that will involved in training activities.

    What exactly are you planning on doing to sustain access for 40,000 people? Spring protection and tank construction? How much will that cost? Surely more than $8,200. You should specify exactly what that $8,200 will be spent on. It is not clear in your attached budget.

    Your spreadsheet doesn’t seem to include any community co-financing for water or sanitation. Aren’t they required to pay at last some of the cost of the facilities and services? Your spreadsheet needs to be broken out into all the relevant components, including parts and materials (separated for water supply, sanitation construction, training, hygiene promotion, etc.

    For example, if 2,000 people will get sanitation, how much will that cost? Typical pour-flush family latrines run about $100 each. At five people per family (just my guess) that’s 400 latrines or a total of $40,000 to the project, unless there is a household contribution (which there should be) to reduce the cost to the project and to demonstrate ownership. Typically, individual families should pay at least 75% of the construction cost, leaving 25% for the project subsidy (if any).

    • Stef Lambrecht of Protos

      OK Ricky, let me try to clarify. CIDRI - our Congolese partner - assists 11 water users committees managing each their own system - constructed with support from PROTOS in the last 25 years and serving more than 200.000 people. This proposal will: - rehabilitate the main constructions of 4 water schemes - serving 40.000 people; the re...

      OK Ricky, let me try to clarify.
      CIDRI - our Congolese partner - assists 11 water users committees managing each their own system - constructed with support from PROTOS in the last 25 years and serving more than 200.000 people.
      This proposal will:
      - rehabilitate the main constructions of 4 water schemes - serving 40.000 people; the rehabilitation of their distribution network is the responsibility of the water committee and is fully financed by the water users;
      - extend these 4 water schemes so that 3.500 additional persons can be served;
      - provide training to all of the 11 water committees on hygiene education and management tools.
      Details of the budget are shown in the additional file I added two hours ago.
      No budget is asked for construction of sanitation facilities. If the social studies in the villages show needs and interest for these facilities, after the hygiene education, PROTOS will provide additional funds for the construction of some demonstration latrines.
      We don't see the added value of detailing the specific interventions covered by the eventual 8.200 USD grant of BPR since this is a cofinancing mechanism. For CIDRI, they need 82.000 USD for their program and we need the 8.200 USD as a leverage to get the other 72.800 USD. CIDRI does't work with 8.200 USD for work A and 72.800 USD for the rest. We are talking about an integrated program where BPR is one of the cofunding partners.
      Best regards,
      Stef

  • 3 participants | show more

    More clarification is needed

    Iskaka Msigwa of Tanzania Mission to the Poor and Disabled (PADI)

    To have proper decision during reviewing your proposal the following issues need more clarification: 1. In you proposal you have stated that Community contribution ( which do not have specific amount) will help to cover salaries for Administrator and other workers, spear parts, tools, various materials……and building up reserve. Can y...

    To have proper decision during reviewing your proposal the following issues need more clarification:
    1. In you proposal you have stated that Community contribution ( which do not have specific amount) will help to cover salaries for Administrator and other workers, spear parts, tools, various materials……and building up reserve. Can you help me to know how much money the community can contribute per month and how much of the money can be spend to pay the above listed item?
    2. In order to get clear relationship between the narrative and budget of you proposal, budget break down for the fund requested from BPRF instead of just putting USD 8,200.
    3. To have actual picture on the project you plan to implement , some photos relating to the same activity done in the past project is important. May you provide us some of the photos?

    • Marc Despiegelaere of Protos

      Question 1. Each of the water users committees (WUC) has his own bylaws and contributions may be very different from one place to another. Distances between the different waterschemes are important; of course, the monthly contribution is the same for all users from the same waterscheme, but the ones in Aru or Mahagi for instance (more urba...

      Question 1. Each of the water users committees (WUC) has his own bylaws and contributions may be very different from one place to another. Distances between the different waterschemes are important; of course, the monthly contribution is the same for all users from the same waterscheme, but the ones in Aru or Mahagi for instance (more urban) don't pay the same price as the ones in Logo or Muhito (more rural). Contributions for users of public stand pipes go from two eggs per person and per month to 2 USD/family/month. Institutions and household connexions have water meters and pay per quantity.
      In general, contributions can cover day to day running costs and normal repairs. Small amounts are saved (up to some 2 or 4.000 USD) for bigger problems but one has to admit that WUC decrease tariffs when they have some 2-4.000 USD in cash - afraid they are for devaluation, robbery or losses.

      Question 2. Breakdown of budget has been added in separate document. The 8.200 USD contribution of BPR is just 10% of the overall budget since we have a sponsor offering 80% of the overall budget under the condition that we can find the other 20%.

      Question 3. Photos will be added under "Other Documents" in a moment.

      • Rajesh Shah of Peer Water Exchange

        A message to all peers: PWX has a fairly sophisticated photo handling system with the following features:

        1. storing and showing the small thumbnail sizes with text labels in the application or project report 2. allowing viewers to see med and full size 3. ability to through all of them.

        Some of these are useful for people with slo

        ...

        A message to all peers: PWX has a fairly sophisticated photo handling system with the following features:


        1. storing and showing the small thumbnail sizes with text labels in the application or project report
        2. allowing viewers to see med and full size
        3. ability to through all of them.


        Some of these are useful for people with slow speed connections. So please use these features instead of taking trouble and effort to put them inside documents.


        Thanks, rajesh

    • Rajesh Shah of Peer Water Exchange

      A message to all peers: PWX has a fairly sophisticated photo handling system with the following features:

      1. storing and showing the small thumbnail sizes with text labels in the application or project report 2. allowing viewers to see med and full size 3. ability to through all of them.

      Some of these are useful for people with slo

      ...

      A message to all peers: PWX has a fairly sophisticated photo handling system with the following features:


      1. storing and showing the small thumbnail sizes with text labels in the application or project report
      2. allowing viewers to see med and full size
      3. ability to through all of them.


      Some of these are useful for people with slow speed connections. So please use these features instead of taking trouble and effort to put them inside documents.


      Thanks, rajesh

  • 2 participants | show more

    money transfer and water analysis

    Meera Hira-Smith of Project Well

    Hi Stef, thanks for your response and explanation. This project is indeed a real challenging one and one should not step back no matter what constraints they have to face because somebody need to start somewhere to alleviate peoples' living conditions in the war torn areas. 1. I am interestested to know that last week some money has been '...

    Hi Stef, thanks for your response and explanation. This project is indeed a real challenging one and one should not step back no matter what constraints they have to face because somebody need to start somewhere to alleviate peoples' living conditions in the war torn areas. 1. I am interestested to know that last week some money has been 'transferred', where has it been transferred to, I mean to whose account? govt or ngo's?. If it is to the govt. account would you face any delay in getting the money out as happens in most developing countries? 2. Kindly specify the contaminants that are monitored by the DelAqua kit and how often? Can you put up or send some reports of the analysis? 3. regarding 'no pictures are available' because of the prevailing conditions my advice is that just get them a digital camera so that when you or somebody who has access to the computer can get the pictures and put up on the web. Recently we bought a camera for Aqua Welfare Society that is kept in a member's house and used by the group whenever needed. But they are not using as much as I would but learning to document main events. It is important for authenticity and public awareness. Wish you and your team the very best with the challenge ahead.

    • Stef Lambrecht of Protos

      Mira, 1) Thanks for your encouragement. 2) The money we recieved last week is the first part of the Belgian Government Grant. It comes on the account of PROTOS in Belgium. PROTOS is an NGO with HQ in Belgium and subsidiaries in different countries - also in Uganda, our office in charge of this project. 3) DelAgua is used for tests on ...

      Mira,
      1) Thanks for your encouragement.
      2) The money we recieved last week is the first part of the Belgian Government Grant. It comes on the account of PROTOS in Belgium. PROTOS is an NGO with HQ in Belgium and subsidiaries in different countries - also in Uganda, our office in charge of this project.
      3) DelAgua is used for tests on Chlorine, E-coli, pH and turbidity. Tests are done when the springs are protected and then three or four times a year at the distribution network.
      Regards,
      Stef

      • Meera Hira-Smith of Project Well

        Hi Stef, Thanks for the response. Did you cross check the report of DelAqua for e-coli with any reliable laboratory located close to the sites? In the last few months was there any incidence of diarhhea that may have been caused by the well water? I know it is hard to assess the cause of diarhea, if any, since you are using the kit so ofte...

        Hi Stef, Thanks for the response. Did you cross check the report of DelAqua for e-coli with any reliable laboratory located close to the sites? In the last few months was there any incidence of diarhhea that may have been caused by the well water? I know it is hard to assess the cause of diarhea, if any, since you are using the kit so often you would probably have some data right? Meera

    • Meera Hira-Smith of Project Well

      Hi Stef, Thanks for the response. Did you cross check the report of DelAqua for e-coli with any reliable laboratory located close to the sites? In the last few months was there any incidence of diarhhea that may have been caused by the well water? I know it is hard to assess the cause of diarhea, if any, since you are using the kit so ofte...

      Hi Stef, Thanks for the response. Did you cross check the report of DelAqua for e-coli with any reliable laboratory located close to the sites? In the last few months was there any incidence of diarhhea that may have been caused by the well water? I know it is hard to assess the cause of diarhea, if any, since you are using the kit so often you would probably have some data right? Meera

  • Rating: 6

    review by Project Well

    No progress report of the last year's funding. Need information on water analysis. Hoping to see tracking system in future since GPS ($600) has been added to the budget.

  • Rating: 6

    review by Water for People

    This is a big undertaking in a really needy area. The rehabilitation will benefit many but the proposal was a little confusing at first - thanks for the clarification through the forum.

  • Rating: 7

    review by East Meets West Foundation

    One significant advantage of this proposal is that they have a sponsor offering 80% of the overall budget under the condition that we can find the other 20%. I assume that this refers only to capital investment cost, not necessarily O&M and repair funds necessary to ensure system sustainability. The apparent fact that the WUC decrease tariffs when they have some 2-4.000 USD in cash - afraid they are for devaluation, robbery or losses is of concern.

  • Rating: 7

    review by Tanzania Mission to the Poor and Disabled (PADI)

    I rank this project to be the first out of six (1/6) project I have accessed due to the following reasons:
    i) The project background and budget are well detailed,
    ii) The project is seen to be manageable,
    iii) Sustainability element is seen,
    iv) Budget is realistic and
    v) Shows that they have enough personnel to implement
    the Project.
    There fore I recommend the project to be funded.

  • Rating: 9

    review by Blue Planet Network

    Good project: with a preventative aspect that is very good. The only worry i have about success is the political situation. But i don't want that to stop us.

  • Rating: 8

    review by El Porvenir

    I like this model for a project. I would like to see a more concrete plan for sanitation included in the future though. I like the emphasis on education, that is key.

Name Status Completion Date Final Cost
Rehabilitation & improving management water system completed Jul 2009 89,859