plan 212Locally Integrated Water Management in the Andromba Plain - Madagascar

Summary

The project aims at satisfying basic water and sanitation needs of the rural population living on the Andromba plain within an integrated water management perspective whilst building capacity of local actors to ensure sustainable management of the water r

  • Thumb_example_new_school_latrine
  • Thumb_former_latrine_in_school
  • Thumb_example_phast_training_for_community
  • Thumb_ants_overview_antsahanadrisa_100_3413
  • Thumb_ants_example_reservoir__antsahanadrisa__100_3412
  • Thumb_ants_example_public_standpipe__antsahanadrisa__100_3420
  • Thumb_ants_example_planning_drinkwater_system__antsahanadrisa_
  • Thumb_ants_example_community_participation_spring_captation__antsahanadrisa_

Background

The proposed project is part of a program initiated by PROTOS and its local partner NGO FIKRIFAMA which started 01/01/2007.

At the start of this program baseline studies showed that:
• More than 50% of the population in the valley obtain their water from the river, swamps, or traditional shallow wells
• 25% have access to improved water supply sources but that in reality only 17% of the population have access to potable water as a significant proportion is in state of malfunction
• Rural sanitation infrastructures are quasi absent and traditional sanitary practices not very hygienic (ie open air defecation near water sources, drinking from open water sources,...)
• Water borne diseases are very common and have a significant impact on household productivity and expenditures and can be reduced by 70% through clean drinking water provision and improved hygiene and sanitation.
• Local authorities do not have sufficient know-how, capacity, and means to assume their responsibility of providing and managing public service delivery in the water sector.
• The agricultural sector has a need for a more sustainable and efficient use of water for rice production. There exists an expressed need by local governments and existing development and water user committees for the development of an integrated management plan for the Andromba valley in order to plan water use for consumption and for agricultural production and for developing an investment plan and viable management structures.

PROTOS and FIKRIFAMA formulated a development program with the following objectives and results:

General objectives:
1.Improve social economic situation of the rural population
2.Assure the sustainable management of water resources
3.Build water management capacity of local government and civil society

Specific objective:
The project aims at satisfying the basic water and sanitation needs of the rural population living on the Andromba plain within an integrated water management perspective whilst building capacity of local actors to ensure sustainable management of the water resources.

Expected Results:
1.Construction of gravitational flow schemes managed sustainably and equitably by community management structures to serve 30,000 people
2.Construction of school and household latrines accompanied by hygiene sensitization programs lead to changed attitudes and abandoning of unhygienic behavioral practices of more than 80% of the rural population.
3.Development and testing of integrated management mechanisms of water resources in the Andromba valley
4.Strengthening of local and regional government authorities and civil society organizations to effectively play their role in water and sanitation service delivery, decentralization and IWM processes
5.Strengthening of technical, methodological, and organizational capacities of the local partner NGO FIKRIFAMA

PROTOS and FIKRIFAMA obtained partial funding from the European Union for this program for the period 01/01/2007 to 31/01/2010. The following results have been attained up to date (01/01/2009):
1. 16,630 people have obtained access to clean drinking through the construction of 10 gravitational flow systems,
2. 639 schoolchildren have access to latrines at school, hygiene sensitization material for adults and for children has been developed, extension workers and teachers have been trained in their use, and the extension activities have started at schools and within communities.
3.A study has been conducted to map the region (ie land use types, inventory of water resources and infrastructures, …)
4.Reflections and meetings have been held with municipal and intermunicipal representatives to set up a communal monitoring and support cell for drinking water installations management.
5.The local partner has been trained in administrative and technical procedures and Manual has been developed

In this present proposal we ask for co-funding to be able to construct two additional drinking water systems; one in the Municipality of Alakamisy which will provide water to 4,340 people (this funding round) and one in the Antambolo Municipality which will provide water for approximately 3500 people (additional funding round).

Location

Antananarivo, Antananarivo, Madagascar

Attachments

  • Pdf DTF-GIRE...
  • Doc C2C_orig...
  • Docx Rapport_...
  • Xlsx Program_...

Focus

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

People Getting Safe Drinking Water: 7,840

Alakamisy – 1st round = 4,340 beneficiaries
Antambolo – 2nd additional round = 3,500 beneficiaries
Source: village survey

School Children Getting Water: 0

3,208 beneficiaries are less than 16 years

People Getting Sanitation: 1,000

7,840 people benefit from health education and public sanitation devices in the targeted villages
Some 1,000 people will build toilets at household level

People Getting Other Benefits: 51,500

51,500: the entire population of the Andromba plain will benefit from the increased management capacities of their local governments and the application of an integrated water resource management and investment plan for the region

30,000: approx 40% of the population will be reached by the training activities on hygiene and on operation & maintenance of the existing water schemes

The staff of the local governments, the partner NGO, and selected local private sector will benefit from training programs and employment

Application Type: Program Funding

Start Date: 2009-09-01

Completion Date: 2010-12-31

Technology Used:

Approach:

Our approach builds on more than 30 years experience in the water sector and is based on strengthening the legitimate roles of the different actors (local government, regional government, civil society, private sector, and water user associations) within an integrated water resource management framework. It is adapted to the Malagasy context and follows the Malagasy decentralization and water strategies.

This approach is characterized by progressively placing the responsibility for planning, coordinating, and monitoring water and sanitation interventions at the municipal level.

Our partner NGO, FIKRIFAMA, has also more than 20 years experience in the water sector and is responsible for the social engineering, the training of water user associations, and the extension work.

The private sector is involved: studies are executed by local engineering firms on the basis of detailed terms of reference and the works are carried out by local contractors through an open tender procedure.

PROTOS and FIKRIFAMA engineers provide technical expertise and monitor the studies and the works and assure quality control.

The water users elect a committee responsible for distribution, operation and maintenance. Each water user pays an annual fee to this committee which goes to an operation and maintenance fund.

Local technicians are trained in operation and maintenance and sign a contract with the water committee. The 6 municipalities of the valley set up a common “water unit” to provide assistance to the different water users committees. Each municipality signs a contract with the water committees operating on their territory that specifies rights and duties of water users, water committee and local government.

Technology:

Springs in the mountains are protected; main line is a gravity fed system in PVC pipes to a reservoir, gravitational distribution through HDPE pipes to public standpipes.
Attached photos show a similar system achieved in 2008 in the Andromba valley.(Antsanahadrisa system)

Phases:

The project for which we seek funding concerns 2 new water schemes; one to be build with the contribution of the 1st funding round – another one hopefully to be build with the contribution of the extra round.
Each of the subprojects will be done in one

Community Organization:

The community makes the request to the municipality.
The municipality looks at the requests, sets priorities, and decides (with advice from PROTOS and FIKRIFAMA) which villages to serve first with the available funds.
With the communities whose demands have been retained, FIKRIFAMA starts the “social engineering” which includes meetings with the community to explain the whole process, discuss community participation and responsibilities, explain technical studies, organize the election of water user committee members and train them in their roles and responsibilities.
The communities participate in the works with non specialized labor and a financial contribution. The municipality also puts a financial contribution.
After the works have been finished the municipality signs over the work to the water user committee which then become the “owners and managers” of the system but with an obligation to report to the municipality and assure good and transparent management. The municipality has the right to control and intervene if the water user organization does not play its role.
Each family member contributes between 2000 – 3600 Ar (1.00 – 1.80 USD) per year to make use of the system which goes to an operation and maintenance fund. This is usually paid after the rice harvest.

Government Interaction:

The project works closely with the government directions. PROTOS and FIKRIFAMA are both member of the national WASH platform that supports government in sector strategy development.
Main principles of this strategy include community organization, responsibility of municipalities and stimulate cooperation between municipalities, payment for water, IWRM.

Ancillary activities:

Training of local partners on Integrated Water Resources Management

Cartography of the area and establishing a natural resources management plan to guide future development interventions and assure sustainable water use.

Other Issues:

Although Madagascar politics is in a period of transition this should have no impact on the execution of the project. First stakeholders are the water committees and the local government – they are not directly concerned by the political instability.

This project is very innovative since it works on:
- translating IWRM-principles to the ground, by including all types of water users in a comprehensive planning process;
- cooperation between water users committees and local government, and also between different municipalities – defining roles and responsibilities at each level;
- contracting procedures between all local actors, inducing a shared goal of good governance.

Maintenance Revenue:

Water systems built earlier have shown that approximately 360-510 USD is spend per year by the water user committee on operation and maintenance.

Each system is used by approx 3.000 people which comes to 0.12 to 0.17 USD p/p/yr.

To be able to also face more important reparations or a rehabilitation of the system, the committees are being accompanied to set up and manage savings accounts.

Considering a lifespan of 25 years and a depreciation of 4% per year, an average system needs to mobilize 4,000 USD per year, which comes down to between 1.3 USD p/p/yr. Overall cost is therefore close to 1.5 USD/yr while the tariff in the villages is between 2000 – 3600 Ar (1.00 – 1.80 USD)/yr.
Savings accounts for rehabilitation and depreciation will probably come under supervision of the common water unit, created by the 6 municipalities.

The municipality is the legal owner of the water systems but delegates operation & maintenance responsibility to the water user committee through a formal agreement. The water user committees organize the operation and maintenance of the system and assure that the water users pay their yearly contributions which are deposited in saving accounts. Locally trained technicians are contracted to carry out maintenance and repairs.

Experience so far has shown that the communities are willing and able to pay the contributions, for the systems already constructed within the program most have a 100% contribution rate, with the lowest percentage being around 70%.

Maintenance Cost: $4,000

Metrics:

Prior art before metrics

Cost: $335,676

335.676 USD (sept 2009 – dec 2010)

1 euro = 1,4150 dollar

Co Funding Amount: $300,676

149,987 USD European Union
111,364 USD Belgian government
39,325 USD Different private donors

1st funding round BPR = 20.000 USD
Extra funding round BPR = 15.000 USD

Community Contribution Amount: $14,120

Community contribution = 6,120 USD
Municipality contribution = 8,000 USD

Community contribution per system:

Contribution in cash: 180 USD
Provisions of local materials: 720 USD
Non specialized labor (ie digging trenches): 1760 USD
Food and lodging workers: 150 USD
Land for infrastructures: 250 USD

Fund Requested: $35,000

Implementing Organization:

Attachments

  • Pdf DTF-GIRE...
  • Doc C2C_orig...
  • Docx Rapport_...
  • Xlsx Program_...
  • 1 participant | show more

    FIKRIFAMA

    Gemma Bulos of Global Women's Water Initiative

    You have shared that FIKRIFAMA has over 20 years of experience in water sector work, can you tell us a bit more about them and what have been the highlights of working with them (especially in your vast experience working with other local organizations) and what have been the major challenges?

    You have shared that FIKRIFAMA has over 20 years of experience in water sector work, can you tell us a bit more about them and what have been the highlights of working with them (especially in your vast experience working with other local organizations) and what have been the major challenges?

  • 1 participant | show more

    Manual

    Gemma Bulos of Global Women's Water Initiative

    Is the manual that you use to train the local partner in "administrative and techinical procedures" available for others to see?

    Is the manual that you use to train the local partner in "administrative and techinical procedures" available for others to see?

  • 1 participant | show more

    Capacity of local engineering firms

    Gemma Bulos of Global Women's Water Initiative

    What has been your experience thus far with local engineering firms that you work with? Is their capacity sufficient or have you also helped to strengthen their skills and approaches?

    What has been your experience thus far with local engineering firms that you work with? Is their capacity sufficient or have you also helped to strengthen their skills and approaches?

  • 2 participants | show more

    Mid-Termin Evaluation

    Martin Strele of Kairos

    Dear Protos-Team, thanks for the interesting and well-designed project. As it is part of a larger operation co-funded by the EU, I guess there are some (mid-term) evaluation reports available. If this is so, it would be very valuable for us to read about the experiences so far. Thanks, Martin

    Dear Protos-Team,
    thanks for the interesting and well-designed project.
    As it is part of a larger operation co-funded by the EU, I guess there are some (mid-term) evaluation reports available. If this is so, it would be very valuable for us to read about the experiences so far.
    Thanks,
    Martin

    • Stef Lambrecht of Protos

      Hi Martin, As you know, Madagascar is a French speaking country. So, project files and reports are in French. I added the 2008 yearly report in our application file. We didn't have a MTR yet since the project started only 2 years ago and the first year - as you can imagine - was rather a start-up phase with limited field activities; Ho...

      Hi Martin,
      As you know, Madagascar is a French speaking country. So, project files and reports are in French. I added the 2008 yearly report in our application file.
      We didn't have a MTR yet since the project started only 2 years ago and the first year - as you can imagine - was rather a start-up phase with limited field activities;
      Hope you read some French to appreciate the 2008 report. Do you also want the whole Technical and Financial File (some 80 pages - also in French) ?

  • 2 participants | show more

    Major obstacles and challenges

    Gemma Bulos of Global Women's Water Initiative

    Your program seems as if everything has been set up for success and carefully planned out. What I am interested to know is what the major barriers are and the challenges that you have seen so far and foresee in the upcoming implementation phase? For example, you explained that most of the systems which are already constructed have a 100%...

    Your program seems as if everything has been set up for success and carefully planned out. What I am interested to know is what the major barriers are and the challenges that you have seen so far and foresee in the upcoming implementation phase? For example, you explained that most of the systems which are already constructed have a 100% contribution rate from the community, with the lowest being 70%. So, what happened in the case of the 70%?
    What are the cultural, traditional, gender, education factors that affect how your projects are carried out and the adjustments you have to make here compared to other places you have worked?
    Thanks for your thoughtful answers that will surely help all of us to better understand working in Madagascar!

    • Stef Lambrecht of Protos

      Mariah, Just some answers in bulk: 1°) Strengthening capacities of local actors has three levels: - The water users committees (and the whole community) are trained in organisational and management capabilities and technical skills for a selected group of community caretakers. This is done by the local NGO FIKRIFAMA through some basic t...

      Mariah,
      Just some answers in bulk:
      1°) Strengthening capacities of local actors has three levels:
      - The water users committees (and the whole community) are trained in organisational and management capabilities and technical skills for a selected group of community caretakers. This is done by the local NGO FIKRIFAMA through some basic training tools in Malagassy. Training is on the field including workshops, exchange visits and sofort.
      - Local authorities are stimulated and backstopped in order to increase their planning capacities and involvement in local development. There are workshops on specific topics (viability of water systems, comprehensive planning of the water and sanitation sector, vulgarisation of the national water policy...). In the same time, the local authorities participate to meetings in the villages and have to take their responsability with respect to local contribution, water rights, contracting the management of the water systems to the WUC... Those practical exercices learns them how to organize themselves in the sector.
      - FIKRIFAMA is a "service providing" NGO. They have worked for more than 20 years on the technical stuff and on community mobilisation. They have to improve their approaches now and to shift from a social constructor to a facilitator of a local development process (in the water & sanitation sector). So we help them to introduce comprehensive approach and tools for health and sanitation, we help them to make a local development plan for the sector, we train them in more sophisticated technical skills (WaterCad, GIS, IWRM...). PROTOS and FIKRIFAMA are building up those capabilities together: e;g. we have experience in the PHAST-methodology, they know the Malagassy cultural and social context - so, together, we can adapt the existing PHAST-tools to an appropriate kit for their context.

      2) This kind of a partnership with a local "specialized" NGO is not so easy. They have a long experience - but living on an island, they are not really connected to the new developments we experience on the African continent. Bringing them together with partners in other countries helps a lot to see the challenges and way forward. Last October we have been together with 60 african and latin-american organisations in Mali to share experiences and insights with respect to IWRM, sustainability of water ressources and water services, local ownership in a decentralized context...
      I don't have an "administrative and financial" manual, and our team in Madagascar is on holidays. We have a lot of tools and help the local partners to understand them, use them and modify them for their own purposes (that have of course to be in line with our reporting needs).

      3) Untill now, FIKRIFAMA has been the constructor of the various water systems. We work together with local engineering firms for more complex studies (e.g. mapping of water ressources and needs) but they also need an intensive coaching during their job.

      Hope this helps you a bit. If you read enough French, I can still forward you some tools and manuals; just let me know.
      ys - Stef

  • 2 participants | show more

    Suggestions and questions regarding reporting + long term issues

    Rajesh Shah of Blue Planet Network

    This is a really great proposal, concise yet powerful. You have quickly showcased your earlier work and your plans to build on it. Your work and reputation is solid and it is reflected in the fact that you have secured a large fraction of the funding already. Your experience is deep so, its hard to provide any technical or social feedbac...

    This is a really great proposal, concise yet powerful.

    You have quickly showcased your earlier work and your plans to build on it.

    Your work and reputation is solid and it is reflected in the fact that you have secured a large fraction of the funding already. Your experience is deep so, its hard to provide any technical or social feedback.

    One area i feel that Protos can improve is to better connect with the supporters of Peer Water Exchange and Blue Planet Run. This large project could use a few stories and individual highlights to show its impact. An interview with a family or schoolkids to show life before and after would be great. With pictures, video, text one can see a project like this can not only transform the physical life of people, but empower them. This will help increase support for this type of work and the water sector in general from individuals and groups and smaller institutions.

    Regarding this project, i have a question about long-term issues:
    - how well are the sources protected now and future?
    - how fast is the population growing?
    - how is water demand estimated and managed?

    What type of capacity building to continue the work till entire population of 50,000 is reached. I see the nice C2C materials for education and behaviour change; i am referring to skills required to keep building more systems, to manage them, and to raise resources for them.

    Finally, i would like you to consider putting this entire project including the previous 10 structures and all the following ones so that we can both see how the region will become 'water-served' but allow for long-term assessment and reporting (formal and informal).

    Thanks,
    Rajesh

    ps: do you feel that PWX should have a few pages in French (we have Spanish and Hindi now)?

    • Stef Lambrecht of Protos

      1) I do agree with you that the PROTOS staff in the field is not always very proactive in creating tools for mobilizing public support in the North. Most of our funds come from rather institutional partners and they are rather interested in figures, reports and that. But you're right that this should be extended also to more "speeking" too...

      1) I do agree with you that the PROTOS staff in the field is not always very proactive in creating tools for mobilizing public support in the North. Most of our funds come from rather institutional partners and they are rather interested in figures, reports and that. But you're right that this should be extended also to more "speeking" tools such as individual highlights.
      2) Water sources are badly protected now. The project works on protecting the spring areas. In the same time - but on a longer run - we also work on sensitization for a more sustainable management of all water ressources through the IWRM approach.
      3) Population growth. I don't have details of the technical design for the water schemes and our office in Madagascar is now closed for holidays. What I know is that we make a difference between water schemes in rural areas (2% population growth a year I presume and 40 l.p.c.) and semi-urban areas (3% a year I think and 60 l.p.c.).

  • 2 participants | show more

    From Gilles Corcos of Agua Para La Vida

    Gilles Corcos of Agua Para la Vida (APLV)

    I share some of your other reviewers' feelings that the number of persons impacted by the program you propose may be exaggerated or the impact should probably be viewed as rather small. Hygiene education takes a lot longer than a water project so I tend to think of it as a separate project. Also your presentation seems to deal with irri...

    I share some of your other reviewers' feelings that the number of persons impacted by the program you propose may be exaggerated or the impact should probably be viewed as rather small. Hygiene education takes a lot longer than a water project so I tend to think of it as a separate project.

    Also your presentation seems to deal with irrigation water as well as drinking water and it is not clear to me how these essentially different uses of water are dealt with and separated in your management scheme, ( it takes about a hundred times as much water to raise fundamentally the economic level of a family by providing irrigation as it does to provide clean water for its consumption needs).
    I am quite open to read the details (especially the technical details) of your project in French even if it is 80 pages long, as I am of French birth.

    • Stef Lambrecht of Protos

      Bonjour Gilles, I just added the Technical and Financial File written in 2007 (in French). I can garantee you that the number of persons impacted is not exagerated ! On the other hand, I do agree with you that the level of impact is not the same for all of them. The proposal submitted to the PWX is just for one year and just for two vill...

      Bonjour Gilles,
      I just added the Technical and Financial File written in 2007 (in French).
      I can garantee you that the number of persons impacted is not exagerated ! On the other hand, I do agree with you that the level of impact is not the same for all of them. The proposal submitted to the PWX is just for one year and just for two villages, but it's part of a larger program PROTOS is implementing together with FIKRIFAMA in the 6 municipalities. This program is designed for 4 years (and we have the objective to continue with a second phase of 3 years). So, if we are talking about the hygiene and sanitation component it's not limited to the one year or the time needed to build the water scheme !
      On the longer run, we are working on IWRM since we think that different water uses and water users have to be considered to garantee sustainability of water ressources and water services. In this 4 years program, we just make a mapping of water ressources and water uses/users and sensitize stakeholders on the importance of IWRM. So we are not building irrigation schemes. But the idea is to extend our activities in the second phase to other water services and needs (such as irrigation, may be also fish breeding, erosion protection, water recycling for agriculture...).

  • 2 participants | show more

    More clarification.

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

    In your proposal you are talking about the Staff, partner NGO, Selected local private sector and local government will benefit from training and employment. Can you clarify how the mentioned groups will benefit from employment? Advice: Show clearly in your budget , introduce another column showing exactly the amount requested f...

    In your proposal you are talking about the Staff, partner NGO, Selected local private sector and local government will benefit from training and employment. Can you clarify how the mentioned groups will benefit from employment?

    Advice:
    Show clearly in your budget , introduce another column showing exactly the amount requested from BPRF and other sources.

    • Stef Lambrecht of Protos

      What employment concerns, we consider three different levels: 1°) The project as such creates jobs : construction work while building the water scheme, the staff of Fikrifama payed by the project... 2°) A good management of the water schemes - introduced by the project - creates also a few sustainable jobs: the local technicians in each...

      What employment concerns, we consider three different levels:
      1°) The project as such creates jobs : construction work while building the water scheme, the staff of Fikrifama payed by the project...
      2°) A good management of the water schemes - introduced by the project - creates also a few sustainable jobs: the local technicians in each village that recieve a small contribution for their work and the supervising technician the different water committees and municipality have recruted recently - all of them payed by the water users' contributions.
      3°) The improved skills of the Fikrifama staff, some local enterpreneurs and municipalities gives them a better position in the "water market" and helpes them to find some other contracts and projects.
      These impacts are of course not the main objective of the water project, but we tought it to be interesting to mention it also.

      With respect to budget, it's hard to split things up. The BPR contribution doesn't have another colour than the EU or Belgian money (even if the first is in dollars and the latter in euros). If we want to realise the project we have to put together all those different contributions. One can not say EU is funding the spring and the main pipe while BPR funds the distribution scheme and standpipes - since it doesn't make sense to do the spring and main pipes if there are no funds for distribution and standpipes (or inversely).
      ys - Stef

  • 3 participants | show more

    Beneficiary Numbers and Increased Government Capacity

    Sam Moore of Lifewater International

    The number of people recieving other benefits is quite high, which is ascribed in part to increased government capacity with regard to water management in the project region. Even in consideration of the statement on government interaction, I am still not clear on how local government will be engaged or how capacity will necessarilly be bu...

    The number of people recieving other benefits is quite high, which is ascribed in part to increased government capacity with regard to water management in the project region. Even in consideration of the statement on government interaction, I am still not clear on how local government will be engaged or how capacity will necessarilly be built in a replicable, scalable way. Could you elaborate on that as well as on the beneficiary definitions applied here? How are beneficiaries, particularly those recieving other benefits, defined and counted?
    Thank you very much.
    Sam Moore and Kiera Emmons, Lifewater International

    • Stef Lambrecht of Protos

      The project submitted to BPR is a part of a 4 years program that works on four levels: 1°) New (or rehabilitated) water supply schemes for villages - the submitted project aims the construction of such a scheme in the village of Alakamisy (1st round - 4,340 beneficiaries) and of Antambolo (2nd additional round if funds are available - 3,5...

      The project submitted to BPR is a part of a 4 years program that works on four levels:
      1°) New (or rehabilitated) water supply schemes for villages - the submitted project aims the construction of such a scheme in the village of Alakamisy (1st round - 4,340 beneficiaries) and of Antambolo (2nd additional round if funds are available - 3,500 beneficiaries).
      2°) Training of water committees, sensitization of water users, hygiene training, improving management capacities of all local players in all the villages that already have a water system or those where a water scheme is build during the 4 years program (30,000 beneficiaries).
      3°) Strengthening of local government with respect to the water sector: planning capacities (mapping of water ressources and water supply schemes and needs, sectorial plan for the next years) and management skills. E.g. : the six local governments decided recently to start up a commun technical support service for the water users committees of the 6 municipalities; the individual WUC remain responsible for daily operation and maintenance while the intercommunal service assists them for more complex interventions. This component concerns the whole population of the 6 municipalities (51,500 people) since it contributes to an improved management of all water services and water ressources.
      4°) Implementing capacities at the level of the Malagassy NGO and this especially on innovative approaches and tools: PHAST, C2C, IWRM, social engineering tools...

      Capacity for scaling up is therefor build on three levels:
      - the 6 municipalities that can - together with the WUC - make water sector sustainable for the whole population;
      - the local NGO (they build 10 to 15 water schemes each year in different regions of the country);
      - innovative tools and approaches that are made available for all players in the national water sector - since PROTOS is an active member of the regional and national WASH-committee.

      • Gemma Bulos of Global Women's Water Initiative

        You have a very impressive comprehensive approach that really seems to have sustainability as a defining factor! Points 3 and 4 in your "Expected Results" section focus on strengthening local government and civil society organizations and strengthening the techinical, methodological and organizational capacities of FIKRIFAMA, will you ple...

        You have a very impressive comprehensive approach that really seems to have sustainability as a defining factor!
        Points 3 and 4 in your "Expected Results" section focus on strengthening local government and civil society organizations and strengthening the techinical, methodological and organizational capacities of FIKRIFAMA, will you plesase describe for us the actual, on the ground methodology for doing this (i.e. week long workshops, time frame and participation, etc.)?

    • Gemma Bulos of Global Women's Water Initiative

      You have a very impressive comprehensive approach that really seems to have sustainability as a defining factor! Points 3 and 4 in your "Expected Results" section focus on strengthening local government and civil society organizations and strengthening the techinical, methodological and organizational capacities of FIKRIFAMA, will you ple...

      You have a very impressive comprehensive approach that really seems to have sustainability as a defining factor!
      Points 3 and 4 in your "Expected Results" section focus on strengthening local government and civil society organizations and strengthening the techinical, methodological and organizational capacities of FIKRIFAMA, will you plesase describe for us the actual, on the ground methodology for doing this (i.e. week long workshops, time frame and participation, etc.)?

  • 4 participants | show more

    Capacity Building

    Beatrice Wamuhu of Boda Boda Initiatives

    You organization is well funded by various stakeholders and you have also contributed generously in cash and kind. You are a bit shaky on community mobilization leaving us unclear on whether the municipality to does it while you give directions or what. (You seem to be reporting from the perspective of a third person.) Please confirm who ...

    You organization is well funded by various stakeholders and you have also contributed generously in cash and kind.
    You are a bit shaky on community mobilization leaving us unclear on whether the municipality to does it while you give directions or what. (You seem to be reporting from the perspective of a third person.)
    Please confirm who carries out capacity building, community mobilization, monitoring and evaluation between you and water users committees, local government, or municipalities.
    Otherwise the program seems to be a success story because it is serving a lot of people.

    • Marc Despiegelaere of Protos

      The project is implemented through an alliance of PROTOS, the Malagasy NGO FIKRIFAMA and the 6 local governments (through their intercommunal umbrella organisation). With respect to the community mobilization, meetings are officially organised under the leadership of the local government (communal level); this contributes to their visibi...

      The project is implemented through an alliance of PROTOS, the Malagasy NGO FIKRIFAMA and the 6 local governments (through their intercommunal umbrella organisation).
      With respect to the community mobilization, meetings are officially organised under the leadership of the local government (communal level); this contributes to their visibility and responsability - providing safe water is a responsibility of local government ! The methodological support is provided by sensitization and mobilization officers of FIKRIFAMA - they facilitate the meetings and give training. PROTOS senior staff (expats and locals) works together with the FIKRIFAMA staff - introducing new sensitization tools and methodes (e.g. PHAST methode, C2C-tools).
      On the other hand, new concepts are progressively introduced (e.g. IWRM) and local authorities are strengthened in their role. These aspects are rather managed by the PROTOS senior staff - but always with a strong participation of FIKRIFAMA and the local authorities. This contributes to i) a better understanding of local context and opportunities and ii) an improved ownership of the new conceps by the Malagasy partners.

      • Gemma Bulos of Global Women's Water Initiative

        Can you elaboarte on the C2C-tools? Is PHAST your primary tool for teaching hygiene and sanitation and if so why have you chosen that as the model to use?

        Can you elaboarte on the C2C-tools?
        Is PHAST your primary tool for teaching hygiene and sanitation and if so why have you chosen that as the model to use?

        • Stef Lambrecht of Protos

          Hi Mariah, I just added an English version of a training manual on C2C approach in our application. We developped it also for French speeking countries, but I imagine you rather can be helped with the (original) manual in English. With respect to the PHAST-tool, some organisations in Madagascar are using it since a few years and it gi...

          Hi Mariah,
          I just added an English version of a training manual on C2C approach in our application. We developped it also for French speeking countries, but I imagine you rather can be helped with the (original) manual in English.

          With respect to the PHAST-tool, some organisations in Madagascar are using it since a few years and it gives good results. Advantages are the comprehensive approach with a lot of pictures and drawings so that men and women in the villages can see what happens. We also made a video (also in French of course) that illustrates the whole process. It brings some life in the villages and people can recognize their own situation - a first step to local conscience and initiatives.

      • Stef Lambrecht of Protos

        Hi Mariah, I just added an English version of a training manual on C2C approach in our application. We developped it also for French speeking countries, but I imagine you rather can be helped with the (original) manual in English. With respect to the PHAST-tool, some organisations in Madagascar are using it since a few years and it gi...

        Hi Mariah,
        I just added an English version of a training manual on C2C approach in our application. We developped it also for French speeking countries, but I imagine you rather can be helped with the (original) manual in English.

        With respect to the PHAST-tool, some organisations in Madagascar are using it since a few years and it gives good results. Advantages are the comprehensive approach with a lot of pictures and drawings so that men and women in the villages can see what happens. We also made a video (also in French of course) that illustrates the whole process. It brings some life in the villages and people can recognize their own situation - a first step to local conscience and initiatives.

    • Gemma Bulos of Global Women's Water Initiative

      Can you elaboarte on the C2C-tools? Is PHAST your primary tool for teaching hygiene and sanitation and if so why have you chosen that as the model to use?

      Can you elaboarte on the C2C-tools?
      Is PHAST your primary tool for teaching hygiene and sanitation and if so why have you chosen that as the model to use?

      • Stef Lambrecht of Protos

        Hi Mariah, I just added an English version of a training manual on C2C approach in our application. We developped it also for French speeking countries, but I imagine you rather can be helped with the (original) manual in English. With respect to the PHAST-tool, some organisations in Madagascar are using it since a few years and it gi...

        Hi Mariah,
        I just added an English version of a training manual on C2C approach in our application. We developped it also for French speeking countries, but I imagine you rather can be helped with the (original) manual in English.

        With respect to the PHAST-tool, some organisations in Madagascar are using it since a few years and it gives good results. Advantages are the comprehensive approach with a lot of pictures and drawings so that men and women in the villages can see what happens. We also made a video (also in French of course) that illustrates the whole process. It brings some life in the villages and people can recognize their own situation - a first step to local conscience and initiatives.

    • Stef Lambrecht of Protos

      Hi Mariah, I just added an English version of a training manual on C2C approach in our application. We developped it also for French speeking countries, but I imagine you rather can be helped with the (original) manual in English. With respect to the PHAST-tool, some organisations in Madagascar are using it since a few years and it gi...

      Hi Mariah,
      I just added an English version of a training manual on C2C approach in our application. We developped it also for French speeking countries, but I imagine you rather can be helped with the (original) manual in English.

      With respect to the PHAST-tool, some organisations in Madagascar are using it since a few years and it gives good results. Advantages are the comprehensive approach with a lot of pictures and drawings so that men and women in the villages can see what happens. We also made a video (also in French of course) that illustrates the whole process. It brings some life in the villages and people can recognize their own situation - a first step to local conscience and initiatives.

  • Rating: 7

    review by (only shown to members)

    They have wealth of experience and the project cost is relatively high. I will advice that they ensure the maintenance cost of USD 4000 is ensured for any major repairs/maintenance or else sustainability of the project in the long run might be a problem.

  • Rating: 9

    review by (only shown to members)

    I have no personal first hand experience with PROTOS or working in Madagascar but they have a very comprehensive and sustainability-minded program that is exciting to study and inquire about.
    The scope of the project is impressive and what a great model if it is in fact effective because that should be our ultimate goal is to have a large impact!
    I hope they will share more on this forum about the specific successes and challenges of their implementation as time goes on.

  • Rating: 7

    review by (only shown to members)

    Tre project is real targeting needy people

  • Rating: 8

    review by (only shown to members)

    It appears the project will have very strong management with a definite and measurable capacity building component. I am still not sure about beneficiary counting procedures, but I do not think that materially diminishes the merit of the application. I would like to see a more community-based approach in general, but feel that the project as described does in fact require a sufficient community contribution.

  • Rating: 8

    review by (only shown to members)

    The project is viable and obviously the other finders had considered all the variables to be abvle to fund them so generously.

  • Rating: 8

    review by (only shown to members)

    A very ambitious proposal by someone who likes large projects.

    Hope the reporting can be more frequent, informal, to show progress and human impact.

  • Rating: 8

    review by (only shown to members)

    I think the application is well-designed and moreover Protos has a good track-record of doing things on that scale right. I'm sure the project will turn out to be successful. Regards, Martin

  • Rating: 7

    review by (only shown to members)

    An important program carried out by two seasoned NGOs . Protos seems to be the one that provides the up to date technical support and Fikrifama seems to be the one that is familiar with the terrain and the population. The gravity systems contemplated are of considerable size and as an adept of such systems I am eager to learn more about the details of the techniques used and to compare them with our own.
    The cost per beneficiary appears to be high but so it is for gravity systems in general- and one needs to take into account the superior service and other advantages which they provide.

Name Status Completion Date Amount Assigned
Locally integrated water management in the Andromba plain Madagascar Complete - Partial Success Dec 2010 $35,000