Development and use of service delivery indicators for monitoring rural water services in Ghana, Uganda, Burkina Faso, Colombia, Honduras, Paraguay, El Salvador
Download as PPTX, PDF1 like769 views
The document discusses the development and use of service delivery indicators for monitoring rural water services across several countries, emphasizing criteria such as service level, provider performance, and authority performance. It details the scoring of indicators based on reliability, accessibility, and quality, and highlights the importance of aligning indicators with national norms and standards. Additionally, it underscores the necessity for ongoing data collection and the balance between data accuracy and collection efforts to inform policy and assess service delivery outcomes.
Development and use of service delivery indicators for monitoring rural water services in Ghana, Uganda, Burkina Faso, Colombia, Honduras, Paraguay, El Salvador
- 1. Development and use of service delivery indicators for monitoring rural water services in Ghana, Uganda, Burkina Faso, Colombia, Honduras, Paraguay, El Salvador Monitoring Sustainable WASH Service Delivery Symposium Addis Ababa, 10 April 2013 By: Marieke Adank, Stef Smits, Valérie Bey, Jeske Verhoeven and Christelle Pezon
- 2. What are service delivery indicators? • Set of indicators for assessing and monitoring rural water service delivery: – the level of water service provided – the performance of service providers – the performance of service authorities Monitoring Sustainable WASH service Delivery Symposium April 2013
- 3. Service level Criterion, measured through the following indicators: • Reliability • Accessibility • Water quantity • Water quality • User satisfaction • Affordability Monitoring Sustainable WASH service Delivery Symposium April 2013
- 4. Example of service level indicator scores Akatsi district, Volta region, Ghana Functionality Reliability Crowding Service level Quantity Distance Quality Number of point sources: 249 Functional: 67% Reliable: 69% Distance: 83% Non-crowding: 72% Quality: 94% Quantity: 51% Service level Basic services: 34% Sub-standard services: 38% Not providing services: 29% Monitoring Sustainable WASH service Delivery Symposium April 2013
- 5. Service provider indicators Indicators related to the following criteria: • Organisation and governance • Administration and accountability of the service provider • Financial management • Technical and operational management Monitoring Sustainable WASH service Delivery Symposium April 2013
- 6. Service authority indicators Indicators related to the following criteria: • Capacity of service authority • Strategic planning Authority functions • Coordination • Pre-construction support • Monitoring Support functions • Technical assistance to service provider Monitoring Sustainable WASH service Delivery Symposium April 2013
- 7. Scoring of indicators • Use of narrative scoring tables, to convert data on parameters into quantitative indicator scores • Benchmark set at minimum normative level Score Narrative description Example: There is a WSMT. Its composition is in line with the CWSA 100 guidelines and its members have received refresher training Indicator: A well qualified and on at least bi-annual basis trained gender balanced WSMT is in 75 There is a WSMT. Its composition is in line with the CWSA guidelines and its members have received refresher training place on an irregular basis Benchmark: There is a WSMT. Its composition is in line with Parameters: 50 the CWSA guidelines (Gender Balance; separated cashiering • Number of male and female function and caretaking function; Vendors are engaged at each water point) and it has received initial training members There is a WSMT, which has been composed in line with the CWSA guidelines (Gender Balance , separated cashiering • Separate cashier and caretaker 25 function and caretaking function, vendors engaged at each water point), but the WATSAN has not received initial functions training • Number of vendors The composition of the WSMT is not in line with the CWSA guidelines (Gender Balance and / or no separated cashiering • Training of WSMT 0 function and caretaking function and / or vendors are not engaged at each water point) Monitoring Sustainable WASH service Delivery Symposium April 2013
- 8. Aggregation of scoring • Proportion of units (systems, service providers, service authorities) meeting the benchmark • Sum of scores on indicators or criteria • Averages of scores on indicators or criteria Monitoring Sustainable WASH service Delivery Symposium April 2013
- 9. Example of aggregated scores per area (district) 100% % of WATSANs meeting the 90% 80% 70% 60% benchmark 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Akatsi 0% East Gonja Periodic maintenance maintenance interference Record keeping and Water quality testing Financial management Area mechanic services Spare part supply Composition of expenditure balance Tariff setting No political Corrective accountability Sunyani West WATSAN Revenue and 100 90 80 Average score 70 60 50 Akatsi 40 30 East Gonja 20 10 Sunyani West - Average governance indicators Average of operationalAverage of financial management indicators indicators Monitoring Sustainable WASH service Delivery Symposium April 2013 Source: Adank et al, 2013
- 10. Use and data requirements • To enforce regulation and inform asset Regular overview of all service management and post construction level and service provider indicator activities at decentralised level scores on (ideally) all units • To inform service regulation and macro Annual overview of differences in level planning at national level scores on indicator sets between areas • To monitor progress against planned ‘Before’ and ‘after’ assessment in outcomes of interventions intervention area • To inform policy dialogue and debate Analysis of correlations between different indicators Monitoring Sustainable WASH service Delivery Symposium April 2013
- 11. SDIs in national monitoring systems • SDIs have been developed based on national norms and standards • Development and testing has taken place in close collaboration with stakeholders, led by government • Interest by national and local governments to scale up and institutionalize the use of SDIs Monitoring Sustainable WASH service Delivery Symposium April 2013
- 12. Lessons learnt • Service delivery indicators are essential for assessing and monitoring water service delivery • Service delivery indicators need to follow government’s norms and standards. • Developing and using indicators may spark further development of these norms and standards. • More indicators means more data collection efforts and possibly resources needed. – However, resources related to monitoring mostly related to travel and transport • Need to find a balance between the amount and accuracy of data required at different levels, and the efforts it takes to collect this data Monitoring Sustainable WASH service Delivery Symposium April 2013
- 13. Thank you! For further information, please visit: • www.irc.nl • www.washcost.info • www.waterservicesthatlast.org Monitoring Sustainable WASH service Delivery Symposium April 2013
Editor's Notes
- #2: Over the last years, IRC has been involved in the development and use of service delivery indicators in a range of countries. This includes ourinvolvement in (i) assessing service levels in relation to life-cycle costs in Ghana, Burkina Faso, Mozambique and India (WASHCost) (ii) monitoring water services in Ghana and Uganda (as part of the Triple-S initiative) and in Burkina Faso (under the WA-WASH / Triple-S initiative); (iii) monitoring the sustainability of service delivery in Latin America (Smits et al., 2013 forthcoming); and (v) studying the impact of post-construction support in Colombia (Smits et al., 2012). In this presentation, I will go into how service delivery indicators were generally conceptualized, defined and used in these countries.
- #3: Let me start with giving you a better idea of what we are talking about, when we mentioned “service delivery indicators”. Service delivery indicators are a set…. It generally consists of 3 groups of indicators:…. We will
- #4: Give examples of parameters. E.g. tine spend. Country specific. And
- #10: At different levels there may be an interest in different ways of aggregation of indicator scores. Districts may be more interested in the details on each indicator, as that may inform corrective action they can undertake, while national gov may be ore interested in average scores per indicator group, to inform regulation and allocation of funds.
- #11: So there are different uses of the service delivery indicators at different levels.
- #12: Ghana: district taking initiative to do repeat data collection. CWSA committed to scale up use of SDIs and integrate them in national monitoring system