UNICEF – ADB Regional Workshop on the Role of

Non-State Providers in Basic Service Delivery

ADB HQ, Manila, Philippines
19-20 April 2010

Non-State Delivery of
Water and Sanitation Services

Anupma Jain
Asian Development Bank

The views expressed in this presentation are the views of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Asian
Development Bank (ADB), or its Board of Directors or the governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee the source, originality,
accuracy, completeness or reliability of any statement, information, data, finding, interpretation, advice, opinion, or view presented, nor
does it make any representation concerning the same.
 Engaging NSPs
NSPs have specialist capacity and flexibility to
operate in different conditions and offer services
NSPs can help stimulate demand, and respond to
changes in demand.
Government and NSPs cannot do it alone: Gov’t can
enhance its roles as enabler while NSPs can fill the
gap in implementation.
Innovation is often driven by NSPs.
Cost sharing options can stimulate household
demand and financing, and leverage funding from
government and other sources.
Small-scale Water Providers
Types of small-scale water providers

Local governments
Cooperatives
Private sector
Subdivision/village developers
Rural waterworks and sanitation
association
 Key features of SSWP
Small-scale piped network
Operates with very minimal investment
Because of their number, they operate in a
competitive environment.
They operate in areas beyond the reach of formal
water service providers.
Their existence or viability is dependent on how
the formal service providers can efficiently
provide service in the same area in terms of
coverage and hours of operations.
Struggle with sustainability issues (low tariffs and
reduced services levels).
 The system
Source flow meter or
Utilities Bulk Meter

Mother meters for coordinators

Coordinators
Dist. Line

• Coordinators /collectors: appointed by the contracting party

• Flexible collection: depends on the source of income of the consumer
• Non revenue water: 5-10%
 Inpart Waterworks and Development
Corporation (IWADCO)

Profile
In 1986, Inpart Engineering started as a single
proprietorship engaged in steel manufacturing
In 1997, it ventured into water supply distribution
In 2005, it registered with Securities & Exchange
Commission (SEC) as a Corporation under the name
Inpart Waterworks and Development Corporation
From 2005 to present, IWADCO is into Water Service
Provision for the rural and urban poor.
 Operation Constraints
Need for recognition

Regulation

Political Intervention

Financing Issues

Other concerns
 Solution and Actions
Issue Solutions
Need for Establishment of National Water and Sanitation
recognition Association in the Philippines (August 2007)
New policy for non-Water District service
providers
Regulation Permits and annual fees
Government: light-handed regulation

Political Partnership with the communities, providing not

intervention only water but employment as well
Partnership with local governments
Financing Financing Institutions – provisions of alternative
models and financing windows
 Solution and Actions
Issue Solutions
Institutional Management contract
Feedback mechanism
Pricing Higher rates than utilities/concessionaires, but
lower than water delivered by tankers
Flexible payment terms based on consumption:
work with communities to determine rates and
billing period
No connection fees
Communities get share in the gross income of
the project
 IWADCO Project Sites

Pangarap Village, located at the northern part of Manila, has an

area of 156 acres, and population of ~4000 households. This is
one of the unserved areas of the concessionaire because of
the land ownership issue. At present, IWADCO serves more
than half of the population. Others get their water supply from
truck deliveries.

IWADCO
 IWADCO Project Sites
These are the informal settlers
of Erap Homes (named after the
former president who owns the
lot). They occupied the place
claiming they were supporters
of the former president.
Although supply from the
concessionaire is readily
available, they cannot connect
due to lack of documents (e.g.,
land titles).

IWADCO
 Conclusion
Consumers can experience improved
services at a cost.

The poor can pay for water – they

only need flexible terms.

SSWP’s can be viable partners of

formal utilities, either on an interim
basis or permanently, based on clear
terms of engagement.
SSWP’s can fill the gap and reach
the unserved segments of the
population.
IWADCO
Sanitation for the Poor
 Gram Vikas
Gram Vikas, literally means “village development”, is
an NGO working in Orissa, India.
By the end of March 2009, 44,697 families were
assisted in 698 villages, reaching a population of
over 240,000.
Most of the families are tribal and ‘dalit’
(untouchables) – poorest of the poor.
Under its Rural Health and Environment Programme,
every household is provided with a toilet and
bathroom, along with running water supply via an
overhead water tank (at least 3 taps per household
and 24 water supply).
Core Values
100% Inclusion
All households must be involved in
the development process and must
benefit equitably.
Social Equity
Representation of all sections of
the community in decision-making
processes across caste, economic
status and other barriers to ensure
that a level playing field is created.
 Core Values
Gender Equity
Equal representation and participation of men and
women in community-level planning, decision-
making and control.
Sustainability
Development processes have built-in institutional
and financial mechanisms for sustainability, and are
based on sound environmental values.
Collaborative action and cost sharing
Poor people can and will pay for beneficial
development services, but there are some social
costs which society at large must meet.
 Actions Taken
Issues Solutions

Negative public perception Use of initial subsidy by Gram Vikas and

(local government and communities) government (Rs.3000) to provide access
to all households. Each HH builds the same
type of toilet and bathroom, irrespective of
economic, social and caste considerations.
All O&M costs were borne by the
households

Willingness of households to Allow time for villagers to sort out their

contribute to the corpus (village)
fund
Unrecognized role of women in
WSS
Lack of knowledge about WSS
technology
internal conflicts
Allow time for villagers to accept women’s
role in WSS service provisions (separate
meetings).
Demystify the technology for rural
households to increase confidence in use
and management of it.
 Actions Taken
Issues
Low priority given by
governments to rural water
supply and sanitation
No strategy to address the
poorest of the poor; lack of
participation of the poor in
planning, designing and
implementing projects
Solutions
Importance of WSS recognized
(RHEP). Toilets with WS decreased
burden on women to transport water
from distant sources.
Use of corpus (village) fund to
leverage additional resources from
donors and government’s water and
sanitation program
Strong awareness and motivation for
whole community to collectively
address the need for 100% coverage.
Numerous village consultations, and
community strategy developed for
present and future needs.
 Actions Taken
Issues addressed Solutions

Low access to resources; Corpus (village) fund is invested in an

Cashless societies interest-earning account.
The fund is utilized to enable all 100%
coverage, and used as collateral for
bank loans for community business.

Poor operation and A common fund, managed by women,

maintenance from the income generated by fish
culture and horticulture – is used for
O&M and repairs.
Training on masonry, construction and
maintenance of facilities is given. It
provides job opportunities.
 Key factors for success
Strong awareness building and motivation for the
community to transcend their personal, caste and
gender differences and work together to achieve
100% sanitation and piped water coverage.
Participation of all households is a non-negotiable
condition of the program.
Integrated approach to development
support for community mobilization, education,
community health management, small-scale
income generation activities and rural industries,
disaster-proof housing, and community
infrastructure, such as construction of access
roads, biogas plants and compost tanks, check
dams and diversion weirs.
 Key factors for success
Sustainable and affordable financing
Collective decision of the village: 100% contribution of
the community to the corpus fund on the basis of an
average Rs1000 per HH.
Socialized structure: The poorest sectors of the
community end up paying only what they can afford, and
instead contribute in other ways – such as collecting raw
materials or providing labor. Those who can afford pay
more, and the rest of the community members organize
ways to cover deficits.
The corpus fund is put in a local bank account, with the
interest reserved for new families for the construction of
toilet, bathroom and piped water supply.
Key factors for success
Mechanisms for continued operation and
maintenance and repairs are in place:
Comprehensive 60-day training on masonry
and operation and maintenance of facilities is
required and given especially to the unskilled.
The village (mostly the women) manages a
common fund from the income generated from
fish culture and horticulture.
Capacity development for self-reliant and
self-governing village institutions
Comprehensive hygiene and health
education program
UNICEF – ADB Regional Workshop on the Role of
Non-State Providers in Basic Service Delivery
ADB HQ, Manila, Philippines
19-20 April 2010

THANK YOU

www.adb.org