plan 44Chikwawa Water and Sanitation Project

Summary

Six Community Shallow Wells, 330 Household Latrines, Community Hygiene Improvement

  • Thumb_aida_trying_to_get_clean_water_close_to_the_fence._men_made_this_fence_to_protect_women_and_girls_from_crocodiles
  • Thumb_a_woman_carrying_a__35_to_40_l_bucket_of_water
  • Thumb_2_sisters_nankhoni_and_chewi_coming_back_from_the_shire_river

Background

Water and sanitation coverage is particularly low in Chikwawa. The statistics are as follows:
• Access to safe water = 45% (lowest in Southern Region of Malawi)
• Functionality of existing water points = 49%
• Level of investment in the water sector from 1998 to 2003/2004 = 1.54 water points/1,000 people which is the lowest in the Southern Region of Malawi
• Access to improved sanitation = uncertain at this stage but likely to be less than the national average

Water For People has not worked in Chikwawa up until this point. Because of the severe need for water and sanitation in Chikwawa, and the lack of funding and work being done in this area, Water For People has committed to working in Chikwawa over the next five years.

Location

Chikwawa, Southern, Malawi

Attachments

  • Xls Chikwawa...

Focus

Primary Focus: Drinking Water - Community
Secondary Focus: Sanitation - Households

People Getting Safe Drinking Water: 1,500

Six community shallow wells will provide water for 1500 people in the following communities: Mphango, Walimba, Nyaulomba, Jeke Ndombo and Nyalugwe with 250 users per water point.

School Children Getting Water: 750

Out of the 1500 people getting water, at least half of them will be school-age children, for a total of 750.

People Getting Sanitation: 1,650

In each of the six communities (listed above), 55 household latrines will be constructed, for a total of 330 latrines. Each latrine will serve five people on average for a total of 1650 beneficiaries.

People Getting Other Benefits: 6,300

A hygiene improvement program is integral to this project and focuses on improving key hygiene behaviors, especially ensuring safe household drinking water, proper hand-washing hygiene, and effective use of sanitation/safe disposal of feces.

Application Type: Program Funding

Start Date: 2006-01-01

Completion Date: 2006-12-31

Technology Used:

The communities in Chikwawa will be presented with a menu of technology options for both the shallow wells and the latrines. The menu will consist of the following:
Latrines: EcoSan, SanPlat slabs, and VIP.
Shallow wells: Mark V, Rope Pump and Malda.

Phases:

These six communities will be reached in one phase.

Community Organization:

The community members are the ones who demanded the project from the District Assembly and Water For People--Malawi. They have been involved in the planning process from the very beginning. As such, they know their needs and are committed to seeing them through. They 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 and throughout the life of the project. The project will be located in a public area of the community and owned by all of the contributing members.

Government Interaction:

Ancillary activities:

Hygiene improvement, capacity building, jobs and skill enhancement are all integral pieces of this program.
• Hygiene improvement will consist of targeting three key behaviors: handwashing at critical times with proper technique, sanitary disposal of feces, and protection of drinking water aand food from fecal contamination.
• Capacity building is another primary focus of all Water For People programs. This will be done by partnering directly with the Chikwawa District Assembly, the local private sector and local NGOs over time to enhance their skills, and thereby strengthen the District capacity as a whole to effectively contribute to development work and increase overall project sustainability.
• This project includes provision for training and hiring local private sector sanitation promoters and masons thus contributing to the overall economic development of the District.

Other Issues:

Chikwawa is located 50 km (30 miles) south of Blantyre, the commercial capital of Malawi. According to the 1998 Population and Housing Census, Chikwawa District has a total population of 356,682 people, which is about 3.4% of the national population. Of the 74.1% of the population in Chikwawa that are economically active, the majority of them are subsistence farmers. Prone to flooding as well as drought, Chikwawa District is among the worst affected areas by famine. Floods in Chikwawa have destroyed the livelihoods of thousands of farming families by wiping out much-needed maize crops and livestock. The crocodile-infested Shire River runs through the District posing serious danger for women as they collect water. As mentioned above, the area has the lowest water and sanitation coverage rates in the entire Southern Region of Malawi.

To address these challenges, the 2007-2011 Water For People—Malawi Country Strategy proposes the following goals for the first year of the Country Strategy (2007) with regard to the Chikwawa Program:
• Develop a long-term Memorandum of Understanding with the Chikwawa District Assembly that leads to increased water and sanitation coverage in the District and an increase in the functionality of systems in the District over time.
• Develop a long-term Memorandum of Understanding with a local NGO and a local private sector company that clarifies roles and responsibilities of all parties and indicates how Water For People—Malawi will enhance their capacity to support sustainable community-based water supply and sanitation.
• Provision of water services for 4,340 people in line with government policy.
• Increased coverage of improved sanitation for 8,860 people in line with government policy.
• Rehabilitation of failed water systems.
• Initiate steps to address the spare parts gaps in Chikwawa and have a plan of action for increasing access to spares in the District by the end of the year.

Maintenance Revenue:

In order to support and sustain the water project over time, each community will be responsible for collecting a total of $100 annually from water users, totaling $600 for all 6 communities. Each community management committee will determine the amount that each user must pay and when that will be collected in order to have adequate spare parts available. Furthermore, each community will have a trained committee in operation and maintenance, both pieces ensuring technological viability over time.

Lastly, Water For People will have a team of volunteers who will conduct monitoring of the projects every year to determine functionality, use, quantity and quality of the water systems, latrines and household hygiene. This will allow for transparency, accountability and follow-up on all Water For People projects.

Maintenance Cost: $600

Metrics:

Prior art before metrics

Cost: $21,186

It will cost a total of $21,186 to implement 6 shallow wells and 330 latrines in six different communities.

Co Funding Amount: $0

These seven villages are part of a much larger program that involves work in 29 communities with a total project budget of $163,320. Funding for the other communities will be contributed by supporters in North America (Rotary, AWWA, foundations).

Community Contribution Amount: $1,000

In order to initiate the project, the six communities will contribute $1000 up front. They will also contribute materials for building the shallow wells and will contribute in kind time and labor to help plan and build and maintain the wells.

Fund Requested: $20,086

Implementing Organization: Chikwawa District Assembly and Local Private Sector Masons

It is Water For People's goal to partner directly with local government bodies in all of its projects. As such, Water For People--Malawi is working to finalize a working strategy with the Chikwawa District Assembly that will clarify capacity building initiatives that will strengthen the ability of the District Assembly to plan, manage and supervise work in their area of jurisdiction, and establish a series of clear and measurable field-based and institutional targets for Water For People--Malawi's five-year strategy.

Now that there is decentralization in Malawi, most development projects are being managed by the District Assemblies. Chikwawa's District Assembly has a water and sanitation department that receives support from the national government for water and sanitation projects within the District. Additionally, the Chikwawa District Assembly has received funds from the EU and MASAF (Malawi Social Action Fund).

Currently, the DA has water technicians, a Director of Planning and additional planners, a monitoring and evaluation officer, administrative staff and a Director of Finance.

Although the Chikwawa District Assembly will be the primary partner in this initiative, Water For People--Malawi will also partner with the local private sector through a mason training program as well as an NGO called Eagle Relief for additional support with planning, project development and implementation.

Attachments

  • Xls Chikwawa...
  • 1 participant | show more

    Proposal Review

    Rick McGowan of East Meets West Foundation

    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 co...

    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.

  • 2 participants | show more

    Failed water systems

    Susan Davis of CARE

    Ned, I see that you have included rehabilitation of failed water systems in this program. I'm curious whether Water for People has done an analysis of why these systems failed so that these issues can be addressed or avoided in the current project? If so, was the community involved in the analysis? Thanks, Susan

    Ned, I see that you have included rehabilitation of failed water systems in this program. I'm curious whether Water for People has done an analysis of why these systems failed so that these issues can be addressed or avoided in the current project? If so, was the community involved in the analysis? Thanks, Susan

    • Ned Breslin of Water for People

      Great question Susan and thanks for this. Yes, we have done that, based on some work I did in Mozambique. I will forward it to you, but the point you make is spot on - we need to understand why a project fails and what will be done differently to ensure this does not happen again. Community involvement is key and they are central to t...

      Great question Susan and thanks for this. Yes, we have done that, based on some work I did in Mozambique. I will forward it to you, but the point you make is spot on - we need to understand why a project fails and what will be done differently to ensure this does not happen again.

      Community involvement is key and they are central to this analysis

      Thanks for the question and I hope you are well

      ned

  • 2 participants | show more

    latrine options

    Patricia Dandonoli of WaterAid

    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 determ...

    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?

    • Ned Breslin of Water for People

      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, ...

      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

      • Ned Breslin of Water for People

        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 t...

        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

    • Ned Breslin of Water for People

      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 t...

      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

  • Rating: 8

    review by (only shown to members)

  • Not Reviewed

    by (only shown to members)

  • Rating: 6

    review by (only shown to members)

    Why so fast in costing the project when the communities have not yet chosen the technology to be used ?

  • Rating: 10

    review by (only shown to members)

    Fund it.

  • Rating: 7

    review by (only shown to members)

    Strength: Element of technological choice and community-drive demand
    Weakness: Volunteer monitoring & evaluation

  • Rating: 9

    review by (only shown to members)

    Nicely written proposal

  • Rating: 10

    review by (only shown to members)

    The proposal is carefully planned, comprehensive and has a high probability for success.

Name Status Completion Date Amount Assigned
Chikwawa Water and Sanitation Project Complete - Successful Dec 2007 $20,086