You are on page 1of 129

PHILIPPINE SUSTAINABLE SANITATION ROADMAP

APRIL 2010

Copyright @ 2010 by the Department of Health All rights reserved. The use of this material is encouraged with appropriate credit given to the copyright owner. Published by: Department of Health San Lazaro Compound, Tayuman, Sta. Cruz, Manila, Philippines Tel no: 7438301 to 23

It is strongly recommended that all relevant agencies should follow suit by using the Roadmap as guide in preparing their respective sanitation related programs. The Department of Interior and Local Government have also adjusted their water and sanitation strategy to be aligned with the requirements of the Roadmap.PREFACE The preparation of the Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap comes at a time when the country is preparing to put in place a new government in 2010. 2010. We would also like to commend the active participants of the Technical Working Group that invested time and resources to produce this document that will lead the country in achieving our collective vision of “A clean and healthy Philippines through safe and adequate sustainable sanitation for All!” ESPERANZA CABRAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH RUBEN REINOSO JR. The DOH is currently preparing its National Sustainable Sanitation Plan based on this Roadmap. The Roadmap has recently been approved by the inter-agency Sub-Committee on Water Resources of the National Economic Development Authority last February 6.The Roadmap is expected to serve as a guide for the country to achieve universal sanitation coverage and shall be the basis for the formulation of sustainable sanitation programs for at least three Medium Term Philippine Development Plans (2010-2028) and its corresponding Medium Term Philippine Investment Plans. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR GENERAL NATIONAL ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND CHAIRPERSON OF THE NEDA INFRACOM SUB-COMMITTEE ON WATER RESOURCES ¤       ¥  ¢    ¢ ¥  § ¦ £   ¥ ¢   © ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¢ ¤ ¤ ¢ £ ¢ ¡   4 . The Department of Health (DOH). together with the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) took leadership in the preparation of this roadmap through a multi-stakeholder and inter-agency Technical Working Group that met and discussed the proposals and drafts prepared by the Project Study Team. The National Government is grateful to the World Health Organization (WHO) who provided financial and technical assistance by supporting the workshops and consultants behind this document. This document is one of the major milestones for the sanitation sector which has long been neglected.

communications for behavioral change. The economic losses due to poor sanitation can be felt not only in terms of health but also in livelihoods (such as from declining fish yields and declining tourist occupancy in areas with high levels of coliform). backed by effective management infrastructure and financing arrangements. It defines the outcomes and outputs of the five focus areas of the PSSR.The national government had deliberately agreed to separate the preparation of the sanitation roadmap to give sanitation the necessary focus that it deserves. monitoring. The PWSSR consultation process started in 2007 and one of its milestone achievement is the formalization of the NEDA Infracom Sub-committee on Water Resources (NEDA INFRACOM-SCWR) tasked with oversight and coordination functions over the water supply and sanitation sector. programs. FOURmula ONE for Health is the implementation framework for health sector reforms in the Philippines designed to implement critical health interventions as a single package. funding levels. development goals and logical framework of the PSSR. Different national and local agencies can find guidance from this document with regards to the development. This is an inter-agency body that monitors the implementation of the PWSSR and whose members were actively engaged as the Technical Working Group of the PSSR. sector planning. The PSSR outcomes are consistent with the DOH’s FOURmula One for Health.FOREWORD The formulation of the Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap (PSSR) has been facilitated by the recent publication of the Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap (PWSSR). These are significantly aligned with the four focus areas of the PWSSR. The rapid decline of the quality of our water resources due to poor sanitation and the alarming number of Filipinos who still have to resort to open defecation at this day and age is cause for urgent attention. The Roadmap is the basis for an inter-agency collaboration towards a common goal of safe and adequate sustainable sanitation for all Filipinos. Chapter 1 begins with an introduction. human resources. technology. wtih the exemption of the fifth concern on emergency sanitation. program implementers. Chapter 2 provides an overview of the sanitation sector including an assessment of current access to sanitary toilet facilities. health and economic impacts and gender issues. the scope and limitation of sanitation and guiding principles behind the preparation of this document. environment. The Department of Health (DOH) has agreed to be the lead sector driver to push the sanitation agenda of the country to contribute to the over-all vision of a clean and healthy Philippines. existing policies and legal frameworks and an analysis of gaps in terms of the policy environment. decisionmakers. knowledge managers and sanitation service providers at national and local levels. While the PSSR had very limited time for broad consultations among different stakeholders at different levels. the purpose of the document. the development framework. The PSSR document follows the basic structure of the PWSSR. 5 ! ( 3 2 ( 0 1 " 0  ' ( '  " ( $ # ) ( "  ( ' & % $ # "  ! !     . it is envisioned that this document will serve as a platform for engaging policy makers. evaluation. Chapter 3 presents the vision. sewerage systems. refinement and implementation of policy and programs relating to sustainable sanitation.

It also provides a list of on-going and pipeline programs that directly contribute to the priority programs. 8 E P I E G H 9 G 6 D E D 6 9 E A @ 7 F E 9 6 E D C B A @ 9 6 8 8 6 7 6 5 4 6 .Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap Outcomes Strenghtened Institutions Developed Capacities Strategic Alliances Adequate Infrastructure Provision Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap Outcomes Responsive Governance and Regulatory Strengthening Improved Service Delivery through Communications and Capacity Development Strengthened Strategic Alliances Financing and Adequate Infrastructure Investments Emergency Sanitation Response Chapter 4 tackles the policy directions that need to be pursued and the recommended priority programs to support the policy directive. Chapter 6 is about the results-based monitoring and evaluation system of the roadmap. Some of these projects prioritize water supply over sanitation but it nonetheless provides opportunities and entry points for sanitation projects. It also includes the investment priorities for the 2010-2016 Medium Term Philippines Development Plan. Chapter 5 focuses on the implementation arrangements including general oversight. More detailed annual plans and programs will be developed by the relevant agencies and stakeholders. It is sincerely hoped that the PSSR development framework will permeate all sanitation related plans and programs and that there will be more sanitation champions working together to achieve sustainable sanitation for all. management and supervision and the framework for collaboration. There will be a need to continually review progress of accomplishment vis-avis the PSSR.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Department of Health Environment and Occupational Health Office (DOH-EOHO) spearheaded the preparation of the Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap with the financial and technical support from the World Health Organization. The members of the Sanitation Roadmap Technical Working Group that participated in the different meetings and provided comments are the following: National Economic and Development Authority Department of Interior and Local Government Department of Public Works and Highways Local Water Utilites Administration Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System National Anti-Poverty Commission Department of Environment and Natural Resources-Environment Management Bureau National Water Resources Board National Housing Authority Department of Agrarian Reform Department of Education Department of Finance Local Government Academy Coffey International Philippine Society of Sanitary Engineers Solid Waste Association of the Philippines Philipine Sanitation Alliance Philippine Ecosan Network League of Municipalities League of Cities Philippine Water Partnership Philippine Center for Water and Sanitation National Water and Sanitation Association of the Philippines Philippine Association of Water Districts PLAN Philippines World Health Organization German Technical Cooperation Lacto Asia Pacific Life Habitat for Humanity 7 U b g f b d e V d S a b a S V b X W T c b V S b a ` Y X W V S U U S T S R Q . A Project Study Team headed by the Streams of Knowledge and the Center for Advanced Philippine Studies was commissioned by the DOH to prepare the document in consultation with the Sanitation Roadmap Technical Working Group.

ACRONYMS USED ADB ASEAN BEC BOD BOT BWSA CBMS CBO CDA CEDAW CHD CIIP CPSO CRC CSO CWA DAR DBM DBP DENR DepED DILG DPWH DO DOF DOH DOST DM DSWD DTI EASAN EMB EO FHSIs GAA GFI GTZ HLURB HUC IACEH ICESCR Asian Development Bank Association of Southeast Asian Nations Basic Education Curriculum Biochemical Oxygen Demand Build-Operate-Transfer Barangay Water and Sanitation Association Community-Based Monitoring System Community Based Organization Cooperative Development Authority Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women Center for Health Development Comprehensive and Integrated Infrastructure Program Central Planning for Sewerage Office Convention on the Rights of the Child Civil Society Organization Clean Water Act Department of Agrarian Reform Department of Budget and Management Development Bank of the Philippines Department of Environment and Natural Resources Department of Education Department of the Interior and Local Government Department of Public Works and Highways Department Order Department of Finance Department of Health Department of Science and Technology Department Memo Department of Social Welfare and Development Department of Trade and Industry East Asia Ministerial Conference on Sanitation Environmental Management Bureau Executive Order Field Health Service Information System General Appropriations Act Government Financing Institution German Technical Cooperation Agency Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board Highly-Urbanized City Inter-Agency Committee on Environmental Health International Covenant on Economic. Social and Cultural Rights r y „ ƒ y  ‚ s  p x y x p s y u t q € y s p y x w v u t s p r r p q p i h 8 .

Inc. Inc. Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System National Anti-Poverty Commission National Commission on Indigenous Peoples National Economic and Development Authority National Government Agency Non Government Organization National Statistical Coordination Board National Statistics Office National Sewerage and Septage Management Program National Water Resources Board National Solid Waste Management Plan Official Development Assistance Operations and Maintenance President’s Priority Program on Water Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry 9 ‰ – e d – ˜ ™  ˜ ‡ • – • ‡  – ’ ‘ ˆ — –  ‡ – • ” “ ’ ‘  ‡ ‰ ‰ ‡ ˆ ‡ † … . Maynilad Water Services.CIDSS LBP LCE LGA LGU LLDA LWUA MIPH MDFO MDG MMDA MOA MOU MTPIP MTPDP MWCI MWSI MWSS NAPC NCIP NEDA NGA NGO NSCB NSO NSSMP NWRB NSWMP ODA O&M P3W PCCI Information. Education and Communication Indigenous Peoples Internal Revenue Allocation Integrated Water Resource Management Japan Bank for International Cooperation Japan International Cooperation Agency WHO and UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation Kapit-Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan – Comprehensive Integrated Delivery of Social Services Land Bank of the Philippines Local Chief Executives Local Government Academy Local Government Unit Laguna Lake Development Authority Local Water Utilities Administration Municipal Investment Plan for Health Municipal Development Fund Office Millennium Development Goal Metropolitan Manila Development Authority Memorandum of Agreement Memorandum of Understanding Medium-Term Philippine Investment Plan Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan Manila Water Company.IEC IP IRA IWRM JBIC JICA JMP KALAHI.

Sewerage and Sanitation Sector Plan Philippine Water Revolving Fund Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap Research and Development Republic Act Results-based Monitoring and Evaluation Rural/Barangay Water and Sanitation Association Sub Committee on Water Resources Sanitary Engineering Sanitary Inspectors Small and Medium Enterprises Sanitation Service Provider Sustainable Sanitation in East Asia Program Sustainable Sanitation Education Program Technical Working Group United Nations United Nations Development Program United Nations Children’s Fund United States Agency for International Development Water. Sanitation and Hygiene Water supply and sanitation World Bank Water District World Health Organization Water Supply and Sanitation Performance Enhancement Project Water and Sanitation Program of the World Bank Water Supply and Sanitation Program Management Office j q v u q s t k s h p q p h k q m l i r q k h q p o n m l k h j j h i h g f 10 .PD PD-TF WSS PEM PEN PFSED PIPH PIME PMO PO PPA PPP PSR PW4SP PWRF PWSSR R&D RA RBME R/BWSA SCWR SE SI SME SSP SuSEA SuSEP TWG UN UNDP UNICEF USAID WASH WATSAN WB WD WHO WPEP WSP WSSPMO Presidential Decree Philippine Development Forum-Task Force on Water Supply and Sanitation Philippine Environment Monitor Philippine Ecosan Network Physical Facilities and Schools Engineering Division Provincial Investment Plans for Health Project Implementation. Projects and Activities Public Private Partnership Philippine Sanitation Roadmap Provincial Water Supply. Monitoring and Evaluation Program Management Office People’s Organization Programs.

.........2...................... 18 1.............................................................1 LOCAL AND NATIONAL AGENCIES WITH SANITATION RELATED MANDATES ........ 24 2................................................... 19 2...............................................................2....................................................................CONTENTS PREFACE ............................ 24 2.1........2 SCOPE OF THE SANITATION ROADMAP ..............................2.............................................2 SEWERAGE SYSTEMS.......................................................2 GOVERNANCE AND LEGAL FRAMEWORKS............................................... 19 1..............................................1...................................4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .....................................2 DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK AND PRINCIPLES .................................. 19 1...............1 THE POLICY ENVIRONMENT .....................................................................3 SANITATION CRISIS IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS ..... 27 2......................................................3....1 CURRENT SITUATION ..3 FOREWORD ...........7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................... 19 1............................................3 PROGRAMS ................................................1.............0 INTRODUCTION...................3 GUIDING PRINCIPLES ................1 DEFINITION OF SANITATION CONCEPTS ...........................2....................................3......................................................................................................................................................................................... 30 2.................................................................................... 33 11 { ‚ ‡ † ‚ „ … | „ y  ‚  y | ‚ ~ } z ƒ ‚ | y ‚  €  ~ } | y { { y z y x w ..................................................1 PURPOSE OF THE SUSTAINABLE SANITATION ROADMAP .. 27 2..................................... 24 2.......................................................................................1 SANITARY TOILET FACILITIES .................................................... 32 2...3...................... 28 2.................... 13 1...................................0 OVERVIEW OF THE SANITATION SECTOR ...........................................2 FUNDING LEVELS AND FINANCING OF SANITATION ..6 ACRONYMS USED ...............................................3 RELEVANT LAWS AND POLICIES IN THE SECTOR ......................................................... 18 1........... 30 2........................................................... 29 2.......2.......3 ANALYSIS OF GAPS ................ 29 2................2................................ 28 2............2 UPDATING AND MAINSTREAMING LOCAL AND NATIONALSANITATION PROGRAMS ............................................................................................

..............2 PROPOSED PRIORITY PROGRAMS IN THE SANITATION SECTOR ..................................................................................................2..............................0 VISION AND DEVELOPMENT GOALS ...................2 IMPROVED SERVICE DELIVERY THROUGH COMMUNICATIONS AND CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT ........ 92 Œ “ ˜ — “ • –  • Š ’ “ ’ Š  “  Ž ‹ ” “  Š “ ’ ‘   Ž  Š Œ Œ Š ‹ Š ‰ ˆ 12 .............................................................3.......6 SUMMARY OF EXPECTED OUTPUTS: .............................. 60 4..5 HUMAN RESOURCES.. 49 4............................... 42 3..............1RESPONSIVE SANITATION GOVERNANCE AND REGULATORY STRENGTHENING ..............3 STRENGTHENED STRATEGIC ALLIANCES..................................................6 COMMUNICATION FOR BEHAVIORAL CHANGE .............1 POLICY DIRECTIONS .. 34 2.......................................................3................................3...............3...7 SECTOR PLANNING ....... 66 4.. 72 4...........2 OUTCOMES AND OUTPUTS .................................. 44 3...................5 EMERGENCY SANITATION RESPONSE ........................... 44 3........2.................................3...............3........................................ 36 2............................4 TECHNOLOGY ...................................1 VISION STATEMENT.......................................................8 MONITORING AND EVALUATION (INCLUDING SECTOR BASELINE INDICATORS) ......................... 42 3..3. 36 2..........3 ONGOING AND PIPELINE PROGRAMS .........................9 ENVIRONMENT/HEALTH AND ECONOMIC IMPACT ....................................... 37 2..6 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE MTPDP 2010-2016 ..............10 GENDER ISSUES IN SANITATION ........................................ 49 3......................................5 INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS OF THE SANITATION SECTOR ...0 ROADMAP PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES ................................................................................4 MEDIUM TERM OPERATIONAL PLAN (2010-2016) .................................................................................... 47 3........................ 37 3......................................... 44 3...... 35 2...................2... 35 2...............................................................................3 ROADMAP LOGICAL FRAMEWORK ................0 IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS ...........2.... 89 4................................................................... 48 3.................................4 FINANCING AND ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS ...................................... 34 2............ 59 4................................................................. 81 4....2................................................................... 90 5.............2...2.........................................................................4 SUMMARY OF ISSUES AND CHALLENGES .............. 46 3....

.....0 RESULTS-BASED MONITORING AND EVALUATION .................................. SANITATION ROADMAP LOGFRAME TABLE 7. SUMMARY OF ISSUES IN THE PHILIPPINE SANITATION SECTOR TABLE 5..... FRAMEWORK OF COLLABORATION 13  ¤ © ¨ ¤ ¦ § ž ¦ › £ ¤ £ › ž ¤   Ÿ œ ¥ ¤ ž › ¤ £ ¢ ¡   Ÿ ž ›   › œ › š ™ ........ PROPORTION OF HOUSEHOLDS WITH SANITARY TOILETS.................. LIST OF EXISTING......................................................................... GOVERNMENT AGENCIES WITH SANITATION-RELATED RESPONSIBILITIES ANNEX 3.. SANITATION COVERAGE 1990 AND 2008 TABLE 3.......... SURVEYS USED FOR THE ANALYSIS OF SANITATION COVERAGE TABLE 2. RESULTS-BASED MONITORING PLAN MATRIX LIST OF FIGURES: FIGURE 1......107 ANNEXES ........ WATER QUALITY HOTSPOTS IN THE PHILIPPINES ANNEX 2...................109 REFERENCES ............................................... INVENTORY OF AVAILABLE SANITATION TECHNOLOGIES ANNEX 7...........5 MECHANISMS AND PROCESSES ........ AN OVERVIEW OF THE ECONOMIC COSTS OF NOT DOING SANITATION TABLE 4...... PROPOSED SANITATION SUB-SECTOR MEMBERS TABLE 11...100 ENDNOTES .. DETAILED EVALUATION PLAN MATRIX TABLE 12.................5........ 95 5.. SUMMARY OF EXPECTED OUTPUTS TABLE 6............... GUIDE TO DEVELOPING LOCAL SUSTAINABLE SANITATION PLANS ANNEX 4.......................4 FRAMEWORK OF COLLABORATION ...... SANITATION ROADMAP DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK FIGURE 5..........................................................................................126 ANNEXES: ANNEX 1........ MEETING THE MDG SANITATION TARGETS FIGURE 2.............................. RELEVANT SANITATION LAWS AND POLICIES ANNEX 5...................... PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION STRUCTURE FIGURE 6..................... SUSTAINABILITY CRITERIA FOR SANITATION LIST OF TABLES: TABLE 1....... SUMMARY OF INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR 2010-2016 TABLE 10..... POLICY DIRECTIONS AND PROGRAMS 2010-2028 TABLE 8............................. 96 6................................ SANITATION ROADMAP OPERATIONAL PLAN 2010-2016 TABLE 9......... 2008 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DATA FIGURE 4...... NATIONAL AGENCIES WITH CLEAR SANITATION RELATED MANDATES FIGURE 3. UNDER-CONSTRUCTION AND PLANNED SEWERAGE FACILITIES ANNEX 6..............

The World Health Organization (WHO) has provided financial and technical support for this activity. inadequate communication strategies and low investments in sanitation. Mandates on implementing and monitoring policy implementation remain vague. It builds on the collective analysis of the sector through a multi stakeholder process with active representation from government. outputs. goals. Sanitation regulation is a major issue that needs to be addressed. there are only about 15 LGUs who have initiated sanitation plans and programs. DOH’s National Objectives for Health (NOH) targets 91% in 2010. To date. SECTOR OVERVIEW While the WHO-UNICEF Joint Monitoring Program (JMP) reports that the Philippines is on track in meeting its MDG targets of halving the proportion of households with sanitary toilets. There are many institutions with sanitation related mandates but the leadership required to push efficient.8%. however. Clearly.7 Billion due to degradation of fisheries environment and Php 47 Billion in avoidable losses in tourism due to lack of sanitation. It is recommended that all pertinent national agencies and local government units develop their own sanitation plans and programs based on the proposals put forward in this roadmap and allocate the corresponding budgets required to implement the same. Achieving universal sanitation coverage may not happen unless there is a clear sanitation intervention program that will be supported on a national level. A team of experts from Streams of Knowledge and the Center for Advanced Philippine Studies served as consultants to this project. The result is an inter-agency sanitation roadmap framework and action plan. From the 1990 baseline of 67%. Furthermore. there is low LGU awareness and political will to improve sanitation . In 2008. Effective service delivery is hampered by lack of capacities. From the start of this activity. non-government and civil society using available information to come up with the agreed framework. A World Bank report estimated that the country is losing Php 3. a process of multi-stakeholder dialogues was organized with the Technical Working Group and other interested stakeholders to generate ideas. comments and buy-in from the agencies concerned. The recent calamities that affected the country also highlighted the need to address the sanitation crisis in emergency situations. Php 16. There are many laws and standards relating to sanitation and wastewater management but it needs to be integrated and updated. outcomes.3 Billion per year in avoidable health costs.EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap (PSSR) presents the vision. the Environmental Health Report says we have reached 76. indicated that coverage is actually declining. effective and sustainable sanitation programs is lacking. activities and inputs required to make sustainable sanitation a reality in the country. The development of the PSSR is spearheaded by the Department of Health (DOH) with the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) as co-chair. While the MDG goals are about access to sanitary toilets. It is clear that the country will not meet its NOH targets. sanitation governance is about institutional strengthening. ® µ º ¹ µ · ¸ ¯ · ¬ ´ µ ´ ¬ ¯ µ ± ° ­ ¶ µ ¯ ¬ µ ´ ³ ² ± ° ¯ ¬ ® ® ¬ ­ ¬ « ª 14 . the issue on the quality of toilets such as bottomless septic tanks and lack of adequate septage management still needs to be addressed. the MDG target is 84%. DOH Field Health Information Survey report.

plans and programs consistent with the sanitation roadmap. agriculture and environment with households and whole community working together for a common good. b) improved service delivery through communications and capacity development. DILG. DSWD. NHA. a strong and vibrant sanitation sector shall have achieved the MDG target of halving the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation • By 2016.SECTOR ISSUES AND CHALLENGES The Philippine sanitation sector remains a highly fragmented sector mainly due to a weak regulatory arrangements for sanitation and wastewater management. Meeting the universal coverage for sustainable sanitation is not likely to happen unless there is a clear national sanitation policy and program effectively manage by a lead institution ably supported by an alliance of champions for sanitation to facilitate demand creation and access to resources at national and local levels. DAR. that behavior change and proper hygiene practices are accepted norms within families and communities. DENR. This is further exacerbated by service delivery related issues such as the inadequacy of capacities to facilitate sustainable sanitation including low multi stakeholder involvement.Improved basic sanitation coverage in 92 priority cities/provinces by ensuring that at least 85% of population have sanitary toilets . By 2028. in particular responding to emergency situations.e. As there is no separate and distinct sanitation program. The Roadmap envisions that: • By 2015. adequate and sustainable sanitation for All!” The sector vision looks at universal access to safe and adequate sanitation as a human right. 15 ¿ Æ Ë Ê Æ È É À È ½ Å Æ Å ½ À Æ Â Á ¾ Ç Æ À ½ Æ Å Ä Ã Â Á À ½ ¿ ¿ ½ ¾ ½ ¼ » . The achievement of the sanitation sector vision is hinged on the following strategies: a) responsive sanitation governance and regulatory strengthening. VISION AND STRATEGIES The Sustainable Sanitation Sector vision is “A Clean and Healthy Philippines through safe. and e) emergency sanitation response. DA and DOT have clear sanitation policies. LWUA. there is very low investments for sanitation. linkage with health. that universal access (100%) to safe and adequate sanitary facilities have been provided. It is apparent that there is low awareness and political will to implement sanitation program at the local level. agriculture and environment) are institutionalized.Sewerage and/or septage management in 57 highly urbanized cities (NSSMP targets) . and that mechanisms for sustainable sanitation (i. d) financing and adequate infrastructure investments. sustainably linked with health. It is always considered an adjunct to water programs resulting in sanitation receiving merely 3% of total investment for water infrastructure.National agencies such as DOH.At least 70% of LGUs have local sanitation plans and budgets in place under their PIPH/ AIPH/CIPH plans . the following have been achieved: . The recent typhoons and the expected impact of climate change poses additional burden to sanitation. c) strengthened strategic alliances among multi stakeholder groups.

a national campaign for zero open defecation and national advocacy program on sanitation. the NWRB and the DOH.ROADMAP PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES Each of the five strategies developed to address the multi faceted challenges besetting the sanitation sector is translated into a cluster of related priority programs and activities directly supporting a specific policy directive. The NEDA INFRACOM-SCWR shall be assisted by a Secretariat composed of representatives from NEDA INFRACOM Staff. This includes both MDG requirements and the financing requirements for the NSSMP. These include. specifically. at least 15 of the households without access to their own latrines must be assisted annually for the next six years to achieve the MDG goals. capacity development of stakeholders including Research and Development. At the minimum. as well as a number of studies that would facilitate and ensure a comprehensive infrastructure and investment program on sanitation including sanitation for emergency situations. national government should invest more in communications and hygiene promotion targetting behavior change to motivate households to invest in constructing their own sanitary latrines. Access to innovative incentive schemes and financing strategies maybe utilized to encourage each of the 46. The Sanitation Roadmap priority programs and activities are planned for long term. pool resources and promote coordination and collaboration within a constrained institutional environment.000 barangays to eradicate open defecation and target to have 100% coverage. Monitoring activities and evaluation shall be decentralized to the national implementing agencies. The LGUs are expected to be the lead implementers of sanitation programs at local level. a total of 18 priority programs has been identified. The agencies of the Sectoral Task Force in Sanitation of the Inter-Agency committee on Environmental Health will be members of the sanitation committee of the SCWR. A sanitation committee under the NEDA INFRACOM-SCWR will be established to be led by the DOH. 2010 to 2028. These programs will pursue the much needed policy reforms to enable the sector institutions to perform their mandates effectively ensuring that sanitation sector goals are achieved. DOH will act as lead driver for the sanitation sector. This will be led by the Environmental and Occupational Health Office of National Center for Disease Prevention and Control of the DOH. INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS A total estimate of Php 87 Billion is required to support the 6 years action plan proposed by the roadmap. within the context of three (3) MTPDP period. civil society and the private sector engaged in sanitation-related activities in order to establish coherence. RESULTS-BASED MONITORING AND EVALUATION The implementation of the Philippine Sanitation Roadmap will be monitored and evaluated using the Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation (RBME) System which is integral to the sector institutions and its related activities that are integrated into the agency annual plans and other work plans of several institutions involved in the sector. the formulation of frameworks for sanitation at the different levels of governance. overall policy guidance and steering of the Roadmap shall be exercised by the NEDA Board through the Sub-Committee on Water Resources (SCWR) of the NEDA Infrastructure Committee (INFRACOM). local government units and sanitation service providers based on the central monitoring and evaluation Ð × Ü Û × Ù Ú Ñ Ù Î Ö × Ö Î Ñ × Ó Ò Ï Ø × Ñ Î × Ö Õ Ô Ó Ò Ñ Î Ð Ð Î Ï Î Í Ì 16 . That being the case. To meet the MDGs in a sustainable way. among others. IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS The Roadmap brings together institutions from government. the general oversight. For the short term period covering 2010 to 2013. The central RBME function will be lodged at the SCWR.

.

INTRODUCTION .

and private service providers/utilities) will develop to collect and treat wastewater from densely populated urban centers.1.1 PURPOSE OF THE SUSTAINABLE SANITATION ROADMAP This sanitation roadmap is expected to provide the framework to achieve the following: a) Identify priorities and targets for the MTPDP 2010-2016 targets b) Attainment of the 2015 MDG commitments c) Provide basis for adequate institutional arrangements d) Create demand and generate financing on sanitation e) Ensure sustainability of sanitation systems The Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap (PSSR) intends to consider the full spectrum of sanitation challenges relating to excreta management such as ending open defecation and managing sewage from markets. innovation and new insights over time.0 INTRODUCTION A roadmap is a living document that can capture and synthesize experience. It will specifically build on the following initiatives: a) The National Sewerage and Septage Management Program (NSSMP) The NSSMP’s primary focus is the larger infrastructure projects that local implementers (mainly LGUs. it was the intention of the water sector to formulate a separate sanitation sector roadmap as the key sector stakeholders understood the magnitude. This is not a master plan but is a source for inputs to the master plan. 19 á è í ì è ê ë â ê ß ç è ç ß â è ä ã à é è â ß è ç æ å ä ã â ß á á ß à ß Þ Ý . industry and other point sources and non-point sources of water pollution. From the beginning. Water Districts. Implementation of roadmaps should be properly monitored to maintain political commitment by national governments and the international community. b) The National Urban Development and Housing Plan ( NUDHP) The NUDHP housing plan is the development of low cost housing including the construction of household level toilets and community sanitation facilities. agriculture. The roadmap is also a process that includes dialogues with different stakeholders towards levelling of awareness and mobilization towards a concerted and collaborative action. 1. Roadmap development should integrate existing experience with other approaches which include general strategies for sector development. It will provide the umbrella framework that links all the other initiatives (such as solid waste. gravity and urgency to address the sanitation challenges separately from water supply. for instance) relating to the broader sustainable sanitation framework. The Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap has recently been published after three years of multistakeholder consultations.

Sanitation policies.2 Scope of the Sanitation Roadmap While sanitation would generally refer to all actions taken to protect humans from illness. it was agreed by the Technical Working Group to limit the purview of the roadmap to human excreta management ( both offsite and onsite) regardless of where it is generated. economically viable and socially acceptable. Moreover. the presence of disease transmitting insects or rodents. sanitation and sustainable sanitation are defined as follows: Sanitation 1 • Sanitation refers to a wide range of services and arrangements pertaining to the hygienic and proper management of human excreta (feces and urine) and community liquid wastes to safeguard the health of individuals and communities. details relating to this are reflected in the proposed National Sewerage and Septage Management Program (NSSMP) whose targets and investments are made part of this document.1 Definition Of Sanitation Concepts For purposes of this roadmap document. This usually involves the construction of adequate handling. While the collection and disposal of sewage is briefly covered. collection. this would not include industrial/hospital waste other than the human excreta generated in these settings.2. The PSSR builds on ten guiding principles that respond to the direction of sustainable sanitation: 1. include solid waste management as this is already fully developed and budgetted under the Solid Waste Management Act. 1. (Please refer to Annex 1 for details of the sustainability critiera).1.3 Guiding Principles The Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap supports the integrated water resources management framework 3 of the Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap. ò ù þ ý ù û ü ó û ð ø ù ø ð ó ù õ ô ñ ú ù ó ð ù ø ÷ ö õ ô ó ð ò ò ð ñ ð ï î 20 .2. • • Sustainable Sanitation 2 A sustainable sanitation refers to a system that protects and promotes human health.2 DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK AND PRINCIPLES 1. Sanitation is a human right. plans and programs must be localized and its management decentralized at the lowest level possible. or loss of life due to unclean surroundings. It is concerned with preventing diseases by hindering pathogens or disease-causing organisms found in excreta and sewage from entering in the environment and coming into contact with people and communities. It is also guided by the Philippine Integrated Water Resources Management Plan Framework 4. 1. treatment and disposal or reuse facilities and the promotion of proper hygiene behaviour so that facilities are effectively used at all times.2. is technically and institutionally appropriate. or the care of personal belongings. This would not however. 2. Sanitation is essential for basic health and dignity of the person. the transmission of disease. does not contribute to environmental degradation or depletion of the resource base. unhealthful conditions or practices in the preapration of food and beverage. 3. a social and economic good.

socially and culturally acceptable. The local governments are in the forefront of basic service delivery. including the International Covenant on Economic. Sanitation is a human right.4. rather than the private household. 5. 8. Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) ratified by 158 countries. Governments have an obligation to respect. Good sanitation contributes to environmental sustainability and penalizes polluters. government must promote the right through hygiene education and promotion. Sanitation systems must be financially sustainable.from households to communities to barangays to municipalities and cities. This includes consideration of appropriate technology and management options at various levels. recycle and recovery of sanitation byproducts will be considered. 6. Efficient water governance includes sanitation. wastewater facilities and other communal sanitation facilities that are for the general welfare of the people as it promotes the best interests of the community. 7. Local sanitation ordinances consistent with national policy guidelines must be the basis of plans and programs that are developed and implemented at various levels. 10. a social and an economic good. For instance. the UN Human Rights Council adopted a resolution emphasizing that international human rights laws. Sanitation is everybody’s business and different stakeholders must be involved in promoting good sanitation and hygiene practices. The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women ( CEDAW) entail obligations in relation to access to sanitation 5. Access to sanitation should be equitable and sensitive to gender differences. and where individuals or groups are unable to provide sanitation for themselves. protect and fulfil the right using the maximum of resources to progressively realize that right. Proper resource conservation. plans and programs must be localized and its management decentralized at the lowest level possible. re-use. Health safety is the primordial objective of sanitation. Cleanliness is a sign of a dignified and respectable person. Sanitation services must be demand responsive. in March 2008. economically affordable. Sanitation policies. These rights however. The hygienic means of preventing human contact from the hazards of wastes to promote health is linked to the dignity of the person and the community as a whole. does NOT require governments to provide free construction of household toilets. 1. 21 £       ¤  ¡ ©  © ¡ ¤  ¦ ¥ ¢   ¤ ¡  © ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ¡ £ £ ¡ ¢ ¡   ÿ . 9. including sanitation. 3. governments must provide the necessary assistance. Sanitation is essential for basic health and dignity of each citizen. 2. Government should facilitate sewerage systems. sewage or latrine desludging services and provide sewerage services for everyone. They must help facilitate access by ensuring appropriate standards regulations are in place to assist individuals in constructing and maintaining toilets. Addressing sanitation as a human right moves the focus from technical solutions to ensuring that the political and legislative frameworks are in place to ensure access to sanitation. There are a number of international agreements that form the legal basis of recognizing that sanitation is a human right.

built. In keeping with the Polluter’s pay principle. local government. land and human resources. Sanitation is everybody’s business and different stakeholders must be involved in promoting good sanitation and hygiene practices.g. availability of water supply. be it the household. 7. 6. implementing. polluters shall be responsible and held accountable for either the reparation of damages done or actions required to mitigate or prevent damages to the natural environment will be upheld. operated and maintained in the way that they do not adversely affect the integrity and ecology of the surrounding environment. The cost of construction. for instance. Facilities should be upgraded according to demand and local capacity to operate and maintain properly. It must be easy to construct. in workplaces. institution. operate and maintain by local manpower and expertise. Access to sanitation should be equitable and sensitive to gender differences. 8. Sanitation facilities must incorporate systems that use less energy. used. Sanitation facilities and services must also be suitable and acceptable to the different social and cultural groups with distinct beliefs and practices especially among the different indigenous peoples. Sanitation system designers must also consider the productive and hygienic recovery of resource. This includes consideration of appropriate technology and management options at various levels. monitoring and evaluating the programs. in planning. locally available materials are utilized. private sector and civil society have significant roles to play at home. It enables people to avoid polluting. Sanitation facilities must adapt well to local geo-physical characteristics. Good sanitation refers to improved facilities and infrastructures that are designed.4. Success is more likely if there is proper and informed participatory decision making processes at various levels. community. ' 2 1 ' ) 0 ! )  & ' &  ! ' # "  ( ' !  ' & % $ # " !       22 . water district or local government unit. Proper resource conservation. treated wastewater for irrigation. technologies need not be static. and treated sewage sludge as fertilizer or soil conditioner. However. recycling and recovery of sanitation by. water. As much as possible. 5. Sanitation services must be demand responsive.products will be considered. soil structure and variability among others. Sanitation systems must be financially sustainable and economically affordable. 9. Each household. Sensitivity to the different needs of women and men must be considered. Good sanitation contributes to environmental sustainability and penalizes polluters. Sanitation programs should consciously address the strategic and practical needs of poor men and women. Implementation of any sanitation related program should empower the poor and marginalized women and men in decision making.e. and in public places. operation and maintenance of sanitation facilities and infrastructures must be reasonably priced taking into consideration affordability and capacity to pay of the user/host/owner. in school. source-separated urine and faeces. groundwater table. subdivision. biogas production. It can start from informed choices of households and the communities. Sanitation is not the sole responsibility of the government. the community. socially and culturally acceptable.

It contributes to the volume of sewage that have to be treated. Regulation of water service delivery should consider appropriate tariffs for sanitation interventions. 23 7 D I H D F G 8 F 5 C D C 5 8 D @ 9 6 E D 8 5 D C B A @ 9 8 5 7 7 5 6 5 4 3 . Water service providers should work closely with the local governments in developing and maintaining community sanitation facilities such as sewerage systems. Efficient water governance includes sanitation. As water supply services improve. so should sanitation facilities be upgraded.10. Water supply provision generates wastewater. Tariffs and cost recovery for sanitation may be linked to water supply service delivery.

0 OVERVIEW OF THE SANITATION SECTOR .2.

” There are two agencies in the Philippines conducting household surveys systematically. An improved sanitation facility is “a facility that hygienically separates human waste from human contact 7. Both systems have advantages and disadvantages but this discussion is not within the scope of this document. service coverage. technology.g. sector planning monitoring/evaluation system including sector baseline indicators. programs. The methodologies used by both differ fundamentally in that while the NSO conducts different household surveys including the national census. etc) the DOH conducts its survey systematically to address health issues. a presentation of existing institutional and legal frameworks and the key institutional players and their mandates to better appreciate the main structure of sanitation governance in the country.2.1. It then proceeds to present the gaps in terms of policy environment. human resource. used exclusively by household. Water-sealed. Closed pit used exclusively by household.0 OVERVIEW OF THE SANITATION SECTOR This section provides a brief analysis of the sanitation sector based on the review of related literature. sewer/septic tank. communication for behavioural change. this document adopted the following approach to estimate coverage in the Philippines: Definition of sanitary facility Consistently with NSO and DOH definitions. the DOH uses LGU health personnel. funding levels. other depository. 25 T a f e a c d U c R ` a ` R U a W V S b a U R a ` Y X W V U R T T R S R Q P . demography and health. poverty. which include questions and response categories addressing sanitation coverage: the NSO and the DOH. Considering that no single survey would be able to provide absolute true numbers. urban and rural. the following types of sanitation facilities are considered as sanitary in this document: • • • Water-sealed. each designed to attain its own purposes (e. While the surveys of NSO are conducted through personnel trained on an ad hoc basis according to the requirements of each specific survey. who complete the DOH forms annually as one of their multiple health functions. environment/health/ economic impact. It starts with the most current available data 6 on sanitation in terms of access and coverage and over-all national situation.1 Sanitary Toilet Facilities The Millennium Development Goal and the Joint Monitoring Program of the WHO and UNICEF define access to basic sanitation as the proportion of population that uses an improved sanitation facility. national census. 2.1 CURRENT SITUATION 2. institutional set-up. used exclusively by household.

The results of the different surveys are converted into data points covering the period of time from 1990 to 2008. Other unsanitary types of practise. Open pit. A trend line obtained through linear regression provides the coverage estimates for 1990 and 2008 for urban and rural areas. Hanging toilets. shared with other households.978 46 9 45 22 23 Rural 2008 31.348 76 15 9 1 8 1990 30. However. Closed pit shared. The surveys used for this analysis were those conducted by the NSO as indicated in Table 1 below. shared with other households. Method of calculation The surveys considered in this analysis are those that allow a disaggregation of urban and rural areas.427 58 11 31 15 16 Total 2008 90. The surveys conducted by DOH (FHSIS) were not considered as they do not allow disaggregation of urban and rural areas. it is also clear that a lot remains to be achieved. sewer/septic tank. Open defecation. Surveys Used for the Analysis of Sanitation Coverage National Census National Demographic and Health Survey Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey National Demographic and Health Survey World Health Survey National Demographic and Health Survey National Demographic and Health Survey 1990 1993 1996 1998 2003 2003 2008 Table 2 below includes the coverage estimates for the Philippines based on the consolidated analysis of the above surveys: Table 2: Sanitation Coverage 1990 and 2008 Indicator 1990 Population (thousands) Proportion of population served with sanitary types of facilities (not shared) (%) Proportion of population served with sanitary types of facilities (shared) (%) Proportion of population not served with sanitary types of facilities (%) a) Served with unsanitary facilities (%) b) Open defecation (%) 62.The following types of sanitation facilities/practises are considered as unsanitary: • • • • • • • Water-sealed. other depository. the figures resulting from this analysis are mostly consistent with those originated by the FHSIS. However.649 69 14 17 3 14 It is clear that there has been considerable progress in the Philippines over the last 18 years.699 80 16 4 0 4 1990 31.450 70 14 16 8 8 Urban 2008 58. About one quarter of the q x ƒ ‚ x €  r € i w x w i r x t s p y x r i x w v u t s r i q q i p i h g 26 . Table 1. Water-sealed.

This means that every single day probably 10 million Philippine citizens defecate in the open.population is still not served with individual sanitary types of sanitation facilities. Meeting the MDG Sanitation Targets 100 90 80 70 76 83 79 Coverage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 58 Change in total coverage 19902008 Projected change in total coverage 2008-2015 Change in total coverage required to achieve the MDG 0 1990 Year 2008 2015 (projected) 27 ˆ • d ™ • — ˜ ‰ — † ” • ” † ‰ • ‘  ‡ – • ‰ † • ” “ ’ ‘  ‰ † ˆ ˆ † ‡ † … „ . with serious consequences to the health. They may not be properly maintained and the cleanliness may be dubious. Many of the existing toilets do not have proper septic tanks and drain to unsafe places. the year for which the MDG sanitation target is set. indicate that the 79% target might be achieved for the Philippines (see Figure 1 below). dignity and human development of this equally important part of the national population. local experts are not confident that “sanitary” toilets necessarily refer to satisfactory sanitation under a health and social standpoint. Figure 1. Open defecation is still practised by 14% of the rural population and 4% of the urban population respectively. Although the projections towards 2015.

with increased deterioration and degradation of receiving waters. typhoid. threatens biodiversity. 2. but no national agency have this kind of information. Sanitation and hygiene promotion were identified as critical both during relief and rehabilitation i p u t p r s j r g o p o g j p l k h q p j g p o n m l k j g i i g h g f e 28 . Nearly 2. The Philippine Environment Monitor (PEM) of 20039 has reported that up to 58% of the country’s groundwater intended for drinking water is microbiologically contaminated with coliform. The analysis of the different surveys conducted in this country. only 7% has access to piped sewerage . Known diseases caused by poor water quality. whereas in rural areas it would be achieved 22 years from now if the current coverage trend continues. In Metro Manila alone.1. There are reportedly a number of villages and condominiums with small treatment plants. Untreated wastewater affects health by spreading disease-causing bacteria. cholera. one of the most problematic issue that confronted the government was that of sanitation crisis in emergency situations. The PEM has also identified the Water Quality hotspots of the country (see Annex 1). About 64% of the rivers present Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) exceed drinking water criteria. and makes water unfit for drinking and recreational use. Pepeng and Santi. the actual impact of these facilities maybe negligible. achieving the target means that in 2015. diarrhea. The private concessionaires have expanded treatment capacity and sewerage coverage.000 population sewered. the rest are assumed to drain in open waters resulting to exposure of the general public to raw sewage. Service coverage expansion in the past 30 years have been overtaken by rapid urbanization and population growth.1. Maynilad (MWSI) on the other hand has a treatment capacity of over 470 MLD with about 552. pathogens and viruses. Manila water reports that it has desludged almost 5 out of 10 HHs. it now has a total of 42 wastewater facilities covering 13 cities and 24 municipalities in Metro Manila. The uncertainty is aggravated by the recent disasters that hit the country and probably damaged substantively existing sanitation facilities.2 Sewerage Systems The country’s sewage generally discharges into open water bodies contributing heavily to the pollution of our water sources. Rizal and Cavite. There are very few sewerage systems in the country with less than 10% of the population having access to sewerage 8 system.3 Sanitation Crisis in Emergency Situations During the recent Typhoons Ondoy. Furthermore. and deteriorates overall quality of life. one of five people in the Philippines will still be unserved. hepatitis A. 2. indicated that in urban areas. They are now using a combined sewer-drainage system linked to their wastewater treatment plants.000 population sewered.2 million metric tons of organic pollution is produced annually by domestic (48%). Manila Water ( MWCI) has a treatment capacity of over 90 MLD with an equivalent of 326. agricultural (37%).Moreover. universal coverage will only be achieved 33 years from now. An inventory of existing sewerage facilities may be found in Annex 2. Achieving universal coverage figures (100% of households with sanitary toilets) is highly uncertain. dysentery. Due to the fact that most households (HHs) use septic tanks. According to a WB report 10 while these facilities and a couple of private facilities constructed by middle and high end subdivision developers have increased sewerage coverage. and industrial (15%) sectors. All drainage canals discharge into rivers and creeks that traverse the towns. sanitation and hygiene practices include gastro-enteritis. The MWSS 2009 reports that through its private concessionaires. Many drainage systems that exist in town centers are usually open earth canals with few concrete lined canals. the concessionaires boosted its desludging operations. approximately 31 percent of illnesses monitored for a five year period were caused by water-borne sources.

LGUs at various levels have their sanitation related mandates. The national government. In some evacuation centers. As impacts of climate change in terms of frequent flooding. there is a an urgent need to develop clear sanitation policies and programs for emergency situations. and 3) provision of support to WSPs such as R/BWSAs. sewerage and sanitation sector plans. cooperatives and water users’ group including funding from their IRA. ground water contamination and the generally unsanitary condition in evacuations centers and resettlement areas. including the delivery of sewerage and sanitation infrastructure.phases due to increasing cases of water borne diseases. several towns continue to be under water making it necessary for families to be moved to evacuation centers. Similar to the water governance of the country. continues to play a major role in the sector in terms of policy formulation. In such cases. After almost 2 months of the typhoon. inundation and other water induced calamities are expected to increase. there are several government agencies with diverse range of responsibilities mandated by different laws that are involved generally in sanitation. For the provincial and city/municipal level. 29 . Clearly. Barangay level-LGUs can initiate local ordinances and coordinates closely with the municipal government in addressing the needs of their constituents. Below is a matrix of national agencies with clear sanitation related mandates and other support agencies: Figure 2.1 Local and National Agencies with Sanitation Related Mandates Under the Local Government Code (1991). health risks due to open defecation. it is the women and children that are most affected.2 GOVERNANCE AND LEGAL FRAMEWORKS 2. facilitating investments in the sector and building capacities of LGUs in order to perform devolved functions efficiently. National Agencies with Clear Sanitation Related Mandates € Š ‰ “ “ “ • ‰ ‹ • ‹ „ Š • ’ ‰ › „ ™ ‡ › ’ ’ Œ ‡ z  ” } †  … } — ‰  ‰ ™ ˜ v ƒ ‰  „ „ { Š ‰ ƒ x „ Š € ‰ Œ  ˆ ‹ € x ‡ }  Š { ’ { › ’ | Š   ‰ …  x Œ ‰ ™ ˆ }  | ‘ | y v ‚ | w  € { Ž x ƒ š ‹ „  | • Š € ‡  ‰ Œ “  ˆ  ™ } Ž ˆ … ~ ‰ ™ ‡ ˆ  z } | ‰ | { x z ” z  x  –  ˜ y – ‰ x  – ‰ ‰ w — “ v ‰ ˆ ’ ‹ v ’ } “ } Œ } v Œ } ‰ “ ‡ Other support agencies with possible roles For a detailed list of agencies with mandates/functions related to sanitation. relocation areas as well as temporary or permanent resettlement areas.2. 2) monitoring of local water and sanitation coverage and updating of sector profile. financing and implementation including 1) preparation of water supply. the toilet to population ratio is 1: 116 whereas the ideal is 1:20. the LGU responsibilities include water supply and sanitation planning. 2. it is of utmost importance that sanitation for emergency situations be given high priority. please see Annex 2. despite the devolution of the health services in 1991 with the passage of the Local Government Code.

PW4SPs were expected to guide LGUs in prioritizing their plans and accessing funds from ODA and local sources. While initiatives have been launched by various institutions. it has identified three focus areas: a) Increasing LGU awareness on sector policies and guidelines. these sector plans have not been mainstreamed into the LGU development plans and continues to be absent in the LGU Annual Investment and Development Plans. 5 series of 1994 was not fully implemented. PD 1121 that created the National Environmental Protection Council stated that Polluters are responsible to contain. sewerage collection and disposal. A typical table of content of a local sanitation plan can be found in Annex 3.2 Updating and Mainstreaming Local and National Sanitation Programs A number of Provincial Water Supply. sector goals are not fully met. The Department of Interior and Local Government has recently prepared its Sanitation Strategy. The national strategy for the implementation of the National Policy on Urban Sewerage and Sanitation as outlined in the NEDA Board Resolution No. the strategic plan was not fully realized. WDs or WSPs. potential impact of the sanitation problems. only very recently. there is still a need to push further for the implementation and mainstreaming of all these efforts to achieve targets effectively. The Department of Health is also in the process of developing its National Sustainable Sanitation Program which is now anchored in this roadmap process. However. Sewerage and Sanitation Sector Plans (PW4SPs) have been developed in 79 provinces with technical assistance from DILG and various donor agencies from 1989 to 2005. Marikina City among others). affordable. After careful assessment of the sanitation issues vis a vis the DILG mandate. an assessment of current programs and actions addressing their sanitation problems. San Fernando. targeting highly urbanized cities.2. policies not implemented.3 Relevant Laws and Policies in the Sector The laws and policies governing sanitation and sewerage in the Philippines are based on separate provisions contained in several legislations and policy pronouncements. The local sanitation plans were developed through a participatory process of understanding the current sanitation problems and issues. The Sanitation Code of 1975 provides guidelines on excreta disposal and drainage. Despite these efforts. b) assistance in the preparation of proposals and investment packages and c) provision of technical assistance/consultancy services to LGUs. Several municipalities and cities have been assisted in developing their local sanitation plans (Dagupan. Alabel.2. LWUA. Despite the numerous legislations and policies that focus on addressing sanitation issues. All of these plans needs to be updated and the sanitation angle needs to be strengthened. In addition. The recent promulgation of the Clean Water Act provided for the preparation of the National Sewerage and Septage Management Plan. remove and clean up certain pollution incidents. For   § ¬ « § © ª ¡ © ž ¦ § ¦ ž ¡ § £ ¢ Ÿ ¨ § ¡ ž § ¦ ¥ ¤ £ ¢ ¡ ž     ž Ÿ ž  œ 30 . rules not fully enforced. Bauko. criteria and standards for the design and construction of sanitation and sewerage facilities. a National Sewerage and Septage Management Program (NSSMP) that serves as a framework plan that will address large scale waste water and sanitation issues has been formulated to promote viable. sustainable sewerage systems and/or septage management programs to be implemented by LGUs. Guian.2. However. mandated as the lead agency to implement this strategic plan as well as coordinate the subsector activities had exerted efforts to provide technical and financing assistance in the development of urban sewerage plans and implementation of sewerage facilities. 2. The National Plumbing Code provides guidelines. this program has yet to take off pending finalization of its institutional arrangement and funding.

responsibility for data generation specifically on water supply and sanitation service coverage as well as investment and financing has been lodged to LGUs.1 The Policy Environment Lack of Effective Sanitation Leadership While NEDA is the over-all coordinating body for the preparation and monitoring of investment plans. monitoring and regular updating of the national plans and help facilitate the development and implementation of local sanitation policies and sustainable sanitation improvement plans. the Department of Health (DOH) has focused its mandate on policy formulation and monitoring of laws and policies. implementation of the National Sector Plan for Water Supply. among others. 31 ± ¸ ½ ¼ ¸ º » ² º ¯ · ¸ · ¯ ² ¸ ´ ³ ° ¹ ¸ ² ¯ ¸ · ¶ µ ´ ³ ² ¯ ± ± ¯ ° ¯ ® ­ . In the absence of a national sanitation agency. On the other hand. 2. it is not expected to carry a strong drive to push sanitation targets and plans vis-a-vis the water supply agenda. Fragmented institutional arrangements with no strong administrative mechanisms to guide policy implementation and coordinate local level program implementation. At a late stage it would be highly desirable if DOH can help facilitate the creation of a well staffed and effective national sanitation agency responsible for overseeing the sector. It is not a regular implementing government agency with budgets and personnel to oversee implementation and fast tracking of priorities. However. LGU awareness on the sanitation issues remains low as evidenced by the small budget allocated for their local sanitation programs and projects.3. However. The newly created NEDA Sub Committee on Water Resources 1 1 which is jointly chaired by NEDA and the NWRB has been mandated to ensure the sector direction is carried out in accordance with the sector plans defined in the Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap. among others. This arrangement made LGUs reluctant to perform these functions due to their unpreparedness to assume these emerging responsibilities. a full time national sector driver must be in place. Sewerage and Sanitation failed to gain local support. they do not have the manpower and budget or resources to address the growing sanitation concerns. monitoring (among others) shows inadequate attention accorded to sanitation. coordination. Moreover. the only unit of DOH dealing with sanitation is the Environment and Occupational Health Office (EOHO) of the National Disease Control and Prevention Center whose mandate in sanitation is limited to policy formulation This situation causes significant gaps in policy implementation and enforcement. LGUs are unable to provide regularly updated sanitation situation and data.3 ANALYSIS OF GAPS 2. It should be basically normative but could also be extremely helpful in the different aspects of sanitation development. Specifically. At the minimum. The Department of Health is playing a key role due to the health impacts of poor sanitation. Annex 4 provides the list of specific laws and policies adopted by the various sector agencies. the DOH can create a sanitation focused technical support unit in the interim that will oversee the regular implementation. For instance. The passage of the Local Government Code in 1991 has devolved the implementation of health services to the LGUs. particularly the inability to deliver the commitments set under existing laws and implement targets within set timeframes.instance.

For sanitation to progress. Correspondingly. it is not integrated and updated. businessmen. regulating sanitation programs and projects are generally not informed adequately about these standards. the Clean Water Act.from a single family house to a public facility such as hospitals. methods. The regulatory arrangement of the MWSS based on the concession agreement has effectively defined standards. b) it is being effectively implemented and c) the policy is achieving its objectives. monitoring and to some extent. is heavily biased toward conventional centralized sewerage and septage treatment plants that are beyond the financing capacity of most local governments. it will also serve as a guide for the regulators on how to review and approve applications for new sewage systems. water pollution and climate change. the provision on septic tank design allows an unsealed bottom in the second chamber. There is no clear policy on sanitation economic regulation. The regulatory framework defines the standard procedures. For example. it is important to revisit the regulatory arrangements relating to standards and tariffs. this is a capacity issue involving policy makers that are unaware of more sustainable systems for sanitation. the national policy on sanitation should include the following: • National targets and strategy to eliminate open defecation Â É Î Í É Ë Ì Ã Ë À È É È À Ã É Å Ä Á Ê É Ã À É È Ç Æ Å Ä Ã À   À Á À ¿ ¾ 32 . There is no similar arrangement elsewhere. it has to be revisited in light of the growing concerns of the country including population stresses. planners) on how to develop their wastewater systems. allowing effluent to directly pollute rivers.Lack of Effective National Sanitation Policy An effective national sanitation policy should specify institutional responsibilities taking into account different levels of governance. At the minimum. While there is a sanitation code of 1975. Some water districts who initiate sewerage projects increase their water tariffs by a certain percentage ( running from 8% to 50% of the water bill) and this is not regulated by LWUA nor the National Water Resources Board. There is also insufficient budgetary and manpower resources both at the national and local levels to address basic. Clearly. lakes and coastal waters. development and advocacy for different models of approaches for more sustainable sanitation services. On the other hand. For a policy to be considered effective. The vulnerabilities caused by flooding and strong typhoons and sea level rise compound the problem. LGUs who are in the forefront of implementing. Regulation For Sanitation And Wastewater There are many existing regulatory standards for sanitation and wastewater. markets. The water districts are not obligated by LWUA to plan and implement sanitation and sewerage projects. the septic tanks are not attached to leaching fields and are not regularly serviced. it must ensure that a) the policy is in place. be comprehensive and be transparent to stakeholders. Moreover. It should provide the framework for achieving its SMART 12 sanitation objectives. targets and tariffs for the sanitation and sewerage program of the two private companies. inspite of the mandate they have under PD 198. processes for every aspect of wastewater project development for every type of sanitation project. streamlined and harmonized systems and procedures for monitoring and evaluation is lacking even at LGU level resulting to poor generation of accurate and useful data for better regulation and rational allocation of resources. which is a relatively new law. These are closely monitored by the MWSS Regulatory Office. causing ground water pollution. This necessitates research. On the other hand. A standards-based regulatory framework will provide guidance to interested groups (such as homeowners. However. etc. priority concerns of the sector.

Considering that the Philippines is a signatory to the MDG and has set targets for sanitation. the chapter dealing with Environment and Natural Resources (Chapter 3. Sewerage and Sanitation Sector Project. it should first be part of the current MTPIP. in fact there is no mention of sanitation in any of the programs. like in many developing countries. It should be mentioned that for sanitation programs and projects to qualify as part of foreign funded initiative. The concessionaires of MWSS spent Php 2 33 Ó Ú ß Þ Ú Ü Ý Ô Ü Ñ Ù Ú Ù Ñ Ô Ú Ö Õ Ò Û Ú Ô Ñ Ú Ù Ø × Ö Õ Ô Ñ Ó Ó Ñ Ò Ñ Ð Ï .3.2 Funding Levels and Financing of Sanitation There is very low priority given to sanitation at the national and local level. DOH . sewerage and septage such as DPWH. Provincial Water Supply. Current ODA and financing available for water supply and sanitation is not optimized by service providers. DENR. More government budgets ( both from local and national) should be invested in sewerage and sanitation. Policies regarding improved governance. DWSD. HLURB. as the MTPIP is the investment translation of the MTPDP. NHA among others). projects and activities of said agencies.page 53) where targets were being included. Investments in sanitation are mostly in the form of private investments in household toilets.• • • • National targets and Strategy to facilitate localized sanitation improvement plans and budgets National Investment Priorities and Plans for Sanitation National Sustainable Sanitation Communications Strategy References and integration to other sanitation related plans and programs of other agencies (i. this meant that sanitation is hardly allocated the necessary investments that it should be given. The PEM estimates that that over a 10-year period. A quick scan and review of the current Medium Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP) for 2004-2010 indicated that sanitation per se was only mentioned in Chapter 3. DILG. the country will need to invest PhP 250 billion (nearly US$ 5 billion) in physical infrastructure. investments in urban sanitation allegedly totaled to only 1. regulation and service delivery standards. it is quite surprising to note that sanitation is not prominently addressed in the medium term development plan. public investment in water supply and sanitation infrastructure went mostly to the water sector (97%) and only a miniscule 3 percent went to sanitation. and restricted space available in the low-income urban areas where sewage is disposed of indiscriminately. Consequently. since 1970. housing estate wastewater treatment and on-site treatments among commercial.5% of capital expenditures on urban water supply. sanitation-related Program/ Projects/Activities of agencies deemed in-charge of sanitation. National Solid Waste Commission. In terms of current General Appropriations Act (GAA). limited willingnessto-pay. they are constrained by high investment and operating costs. A review of the current MTPIP showed only the following sanitation-related PAPs: Water Supply and Sanitation Performance Project. LGUs and Water Districts have access to some resources but the priority remains to be expansion of water systems and not for sewerage. In the last 30 years. While local government units recognize emerging water quality problems. and LGU Urban Water and Sanitation Project.e. DAR. In the WB study 13. financing.LWUA and DILG revealed that there is no clear and definite PAP that addresses sanitation. LWUA. ODA capital investments for the sewerage and sanitation sector are financed mostly by the World Bank. administered by the MWSS and DENR and are channeled to Metro Manila. industrial and institutional establishments. • 2.

There are projects that address sanitation and sewerage at either municipality/city or barangay levels.) The DOH is currently working with the Water and Sanitation Program of the World Bank under its Sustainable Sanitation for East Asia (SuSEA) project.000 (equivalent population) of desludged septic tanks. However. some are helping LGUs develop their local sanitation plans. hospitals and a few Water District STP projects. The regular toilet bowl distribution approach ( started in the early 80s) is no longer effective.200. Some are promoting the use of urine diverting dry toilets ( popularly known as ecosan toilets). Bauko. like PLAN Philippines are promoting Community Led Total Sanitation Campaigns. Data on initiatives done by local governments are not regularly collected. based on the findings of the WSP. Alabel. planning or constructing wastewater facilities. (Pls. 2. groundwater pollution and others. involving diverse activities such as stopping open defecation. Basic sanitation and hygiene education should still be a priority to develop demand for improved sanitation services.3. many of these projects are pilot in nature and have been initiated to respond to local needs. The Bureau of Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Development (BARBD) is currently working in pilot projects offering ecosan approaches and have demonstrated the construction and use of bio-gas digester where methane fuel is now harvested for cooking. The two concessionaires are responsible for the 878. mostly implemented on a pilot or project basis at the LGU level. Some. b) building the capacity of local government partners and other stakeholders to implement practical sanitation solutions and c) guiding and refining the formulation of national sanitation policy and programs. strengthening barriers to waterwashed diseases. ä ë ð ï ë í î å í â ê ë ê â å ë ç æ ã ì ë å â ë ê é è ç æ å â ä ä â ã â á à 34 .3 Programs There is no efficient national monitoring of sanitation programs going on in the country. There are also a few private companies and developers who are operating.Sustainable Sanitation for East Asia project. Polomolok and Guiuan. The SuSEA project is working with the LGUs of the following areas: Dagupan. DWSD and DAR have supported some sanitation activities in relation with their water supply projects. under construction and planned sewerage facilities. However. This is a program that addresses open defecation through triggering approaches. This is a one year project in 10 project sites within ARC communities. based on evidence from the field. there is a need to develop clear sanitation programs at local level to respond to the existing problems and challenges such as open defecation. Some civil society organizations are actively working in sanitation. refer to Annex 5 List of Existing.CIDDS project have supported sanitation projects (usually toilet construction). public markets. The SuSEA program in the Philippines is aimed at the following: a) testing and developing tools for scaling-up of sanitation interventions. The SuSEA program has promoted a comprehensive approach to sanitation improvement. The DWSD through the Kalahi. General Santos City. They offer zero subsidies for household level toilets. This investments are indicated in the rate rebasing and contract agreements of the two private concessionaires with the MWSS.000 (equivalent population) of sewerage connections and 6. The only large scale project going on are those of the MWSS which is planned and implemented by the two private concessionaires under the concession agreement.Billion on sanitation and sewerage and is committed to spend a total of 13 Billion by 2011. improving septage management and reducing riverine pollution through inter-LGU cooperation. There are a few LGU initiated small wastewater treatment projects usually for slaughterhouses.

Information about these technologies must be made available to planners. There are less than a handful of universities offering Sanitary Engineering (SE) courses. However.5 Human Resources Since there is no single sanitation agency. Key educators in the sector are saying that the enrollment in SE courses have continually declined through the years. The Sanitary Inspectors are the frontline personnel at the local level in charge of various tasks on sanitation. there is realistically only a handful who are working effectively on the issues of sanitation. The people working in sanitation come from different backgrounds which has its advantages (being multi-disciplinary) and disadvantages (lack of required skills and expertise). including insufficiency in capacity within the field of sanitation. USAID has recently prepared a Sanitation Technology Information Kit with materials on different sanitation and sewerage technology options. local government units at the city and municipal levels do not require a degree in SE to be appointed as Sanitary Inspector. An inventory of sanitation technologies being utilized in the Philippines maybe found in Annex 6. Other well meaning LGUs also prescribe only one type of acceptable toilets for instance (water sealed) because of lack of understanding of other possible alternative technologies. many of them come from various. often times 35 õ ü ¡   ü þ ÿ ö þ ó û ü û ó ö ü ø ÷ ô ý ü ö ó ü û ú ù ø ÷ ö ó õ õ ó ô ó ò ñ . Decentralized wastewater treatment technologies have also been piloted successfully in several slaughterhouses.3.2. But hardly forty percent (40%) of the Sanitary Inspectors have an SE degree. Technology standards are available but not comprehensive and readily available to the LGUs implementers.3. However.4 Technology There is a menu of options that local decision makers and planners can select from based on what they see as appropriate in their conditions. decision makers and to the communities so that informed choices can be made. personnel from different agencies usually handle both water and sanitation. For example. Many reasons are cited. This should include standards for the following: • • • • • • • • • • • Wastewater collection and sewer systems Septic tanks and other anaerobic systems Soils based effluent disposal systems Composting and urine diversion toilet systems Media filtration systems Constructed wetlands systems Aerobic treatment systems Nutrient reduction systems Disinfection systems Wastewater reuse systems New and emerging technologies 2. not all LGUs are well-informed about available options so they do not know about these technologies. public markets and hospitals. The Water and Sanitation Program of the World Bank has likewise prepared a Philippine Sanitation Sourcebook and Decision Aid aimed to stimulate demand for sanitation services by presenting tools for strategic decision making around a wider range of more affordable sanitation options. Sanitation problems in the Philippines can be related to many causes.

e. sanitation is not a recognized community problem. Pilot projects on Barangay Environmental Sanitation Planning have also been initiated but did not take off at a large scale. However. Public Health courses also deal with sanitation but the curriculum is limited to health issues. Only those occupying positions at the provincial level have SE degrees.6 Communication for Behavioral Change The poor sanitation situation in the Philippines is to a great extent a product of the uncaring and unaware social-political environment among the decision makers and ordinary citizens.3. it aimed: • To raise the profile of sanitation issues among Philippine politicians. the reality is that oftentimes.3.unrelated. The NSSMP has recently been prepared for approval of the NEDA Sub-committee on Water Resources. sanitation lags behind. 2. In many cases.. intestinal parasite infection and diarrhea is caused invariably by poor sanitation and hygiene practices coupled with poor implementation of existing sanitation laws and policies or lack of political will. i. To justify substantial investment in provision of toilets. 2. hence the practice of integrating water supply planning with sanitation. It has a low priority that is why there is negligible or no budget allocation for sanitation programs and infrastructure.7 Sector Planning There is no separate and distinct sanitation sector. Clear messages must be well developed for targeted audiences. ¦       §  ¤    ¤ §  © ¨ ¥   § ¤     © ¨ § ¤ ¦ ¦ ¤ ¥ ¤ £ ¢ 36 . The handful of LGUs that have developed local sanitation plans have done so. local governments and water service providers must be organized to promote sanitation and hygiene behavior change. Specifically. This plan is for large scale sewerage projects for the identified highly urbanized cities as provided for by the Clean Water Act. The officers of the Philippine Society of Sanitary Engineers have clamored for years in many forums and public consultations to professionalize the position of Sanitary Inspector so that those appointed to the position have the proper training and education. The ordinary citizens themselves do not demand better services. fields and about thirty percent (30%) are undergraduates. There are no clear targets and plans relating to sanitation as the priority is always water supply. but not as part of mainstream activity but because a support group (mostly thru NGOs and special projects such as SuSEA) have assisted them to do so. The PW4SPs prepared from 1988 to 2005 have to be revisited and updated within a new sustainable sanitation framework. To change the existing paradigm of viewing sanitation as a luxury that the Philippines cannot afford to a necessity that the Philippines cannot afford to delay any longer. Protests against high prices of basic commodities are common but protest over poor sanitation is unheard of except during calamities like flooding. Sanitation has never been a separate concern for planning and budgeting. The basic health problem of high incidence of water borne related diseases. • • Outcomes of the national celebration have still to be assessed. treatment facilities and handwashing campaigns by determining economic losses covered by poor sanitation. Strategic partnership arrangements with different stakeholders such as private companies and civil society. Many of the sanitation systems are water based. earthquakes and landslides when rescue and rehabilitation organizations are on heightened alert. The national celebration of the International Year of Sanitation in 2008 was an attempt to call attention to sanitation and behavior change. decision makers and media to catalyze investments in improved sanitation conditions and promote improved hygiene practices nationwide.

2008 Environmental Health As can be seen from Figure 3. DOH is monitoring sanitary toilet coverage but it has not managed to get reliable data from all municipalities and cities. Figure 3 below is from the 2008 Field Health Service Information System Annual Report 2008 of the Department of Health. 2. But since there is no national plans.3. budget lines and responsible body that will coordinate planning. In the 2008 FHSIS. Proportion of Households with Sanitary Toilet. Sulu.8 billion per year and about two-thirds (72%) of the total economic costs was accounted for the health impact. 37 # 0 5 4 0 2 3 $ 2 ! ) 0 ) ! $ 0 & % " 1 0 $ ! 0 ) ( ' & % $ ! # # ! " !  . DENR is monitoring small wastewater treatment plants. The possibility of using a sector-wide approach for sanitation was raised and should merit further study given the current planing processes of the country. Most cases were due to water contamination arising from poor sanitation.4 billion or PhP 77. it is recommended that sanitation be treated as a separate but closely related sector with clear targets. FIGURE 3. the environment and general welfare. The DILG is recently spearheading a national sector assessment and monitoring process that will harmonize all the monitoring initiatives of the different national agencies in an effort to institutionalize a reasonable national monitoring system for water and sanitation.in terms of their health. Lanao del Sur and Bohol are at the bottom of the list of places with sanitary toilet facilities. monitoring and evaluation of national targets and plans are not happening at national and local levels.8 Monitoring and Evaluation (including sector Baseline Indicators) There is no reliable monitoring of sanitation indicators and targets in the country. Sadly. programs and budgets.5% of Gross Domestic Product in 2005 or with an estimated overall economic loss amounting to about US $1. A much greater burden falls on poor people . and lost income. ARMM and Region VII lag behind in terms of proportion of households with sanitary toilet facilities.Given the urgency of mitigating impact of the negative effects caused by poor sanitation on health. 2. Outbreaks of water-borne diseases across the country for the last two years have increased.3. these costs of poor sanitation are not evenly shared. Poor people are those suffer the most and pay the highest economic costs. implementation and financing.9 Environment/Health and Economic Impact A 2008 joint USAID and WSP-World Bank study 14 showed that the economic costs of poor sanitation are equivalent to as high as 1.. lost time for productive work.

gender considerations must be ensured in the choice of technology. Exposure to infant fecal wastes which are considered high risk can cause illness. etc. non-utilization of available sanitation technologies and lack of information on the benefits vis-à-vis the costs of sanitation.).3. income and livelihood) PhP3. Some of the questions one must ask include the following: How the sanitation programs (if any) have empowered the marginalized women (and men) in the decision making processes? Are the sanitation facilities responsive to the demand of women (and men) to have private. Priority issues at the local level that need to be urgently recognized and addressed include the low LGU awareness and political will. Damage claims due to environmental degradation (e. Further studies must be made to see how gender concerns can be mainstreamed in sanitation interventions. Having access to improved sanitation does not mean that the basic conditions for good sanitation are met. 2008. Many women’s privacy are compromised when there is no sanitary toilet facilities around their houses. An Overview of the Economic Costs of Not Doing Sanitation15 Health In 1996-2000 approximately 31% of illnesses monitored were attributed to waterborne sources Fish yields reported to have declined by 30%.5% due to sedimentation and silt pollution. health aspects. For instance. environmental concerns. Boracay island in 1997 due to high levels of coliform). an upsurge in the incidence of diarrhea and other waterborne diseases at the community level. sustainability concerns. convenient and secure facilities? Are the marginalized groups substantially involved and committed to ensure optimal health benefits? 2.10 Gender Issues in Sanitation Women and children are also adversely affected by poor sanitation. Priority issues at the national level include weak and fragmented institutional framework and policies.7 billion lost due to degradation of fisheries environment P47 billion for avoidable losses in tourism Aquatic ecosystem Tourism Others Source: Economic Impacts of Sanitation in the Philippines Summary. the sanitation gaps remain enormous. Poorly constructed facilities expose women and children to harassment and danger. Decline in occupancy (e. Meeting universal coverage will not happen unless there is a clear national sanitation policy and program managed by a lead institution ably supported by an alliance of champions for sanitation to facilitate stimulation of demand and access to resources at the national and local levels.4 SUMMARY OF ISSUES AND CHALLENGES While the official data shows that the MDG target for sanitation will be met by the country.Table 3.3 billion per year in avoidable health cost PhP16. misallocation and/or misuse of human resources especially in sanitary inspection. The special circumstances of women ( like the monthly menstrual periods and reproductive responsibilities) make them more vulnerable when there is lack of appropriate sanitation facilities. USAID and the Water and Sanitation Program ( WSP) 2. These issues result in the low prioritization of sanitation-related programs and projects. the design and siting of sanitation facilities ( including water supply). inadequate information dissemination and development of human resources. low multi-stakeholder involvement. and inadequate financing schemes are exacerbated by the lack of local policies and programs on sanitation.g. @ G R Q G I P A I 8 F G F 8 A G C B 9 H G A 8 G F E D C B A 8 @ @ 8 9 8 7 6 38 .g. The weak and fragmented regulatory arrangements for sanitation and wastewater management have to be addressed. Sanitation service providers have to be regulated and professionalized to improve service delivery. There are many considerations that have to be considered ( quality of services.

there are only a few LGUs who have demonstrated political will to improve their sanitation situation through the development of local sanitation policies. methodologies. Sewerage and Sanitation failed to gain national and local support for the implementation and updating despite the clear mandates of the institutions involved. social marketing/ advocacy strategies. There are no guidelines to develop or strengthen LGU initiatives on policy formulation. low multistakeholder involvement. 39 W d i h d f g X f U c d c U X d ` Y V e d X U d c b a ` Y X U W W U V U T S . A significant number of LGUs do not prioritize sanitation programs in their investment plans A great number of people cannot associate unhygienic (open) defecation practices with transmission of excreta-borne diseases leading to high morbidity rates of these diseases. While there are enabling laws. Lack of sanitation focused human resources who specialize in planning. local development plans do not prioritize sanitation. a lack of an enabling policy environment. plans and programs. planning and managing sanitation programs There is lack of definition of a national policy on the management of sanitation at the local government and household level translated in the forms of: Guidelines or management models on technology options. These include professionals and practitioners such as sanitary engineers. thus. For instance. implementing. The sector is beset with institutional fragmentation. SERVICE DELIVERY RELATED ISSUES Inadequate capacity to facilitate sustainable sanitation. public health specialists. and gaps in the regulatory framework. fragmented institutional framework and policies on sanitation Weak. Table 4. the National Sector Plan for Water Supply. Standards have to be clearly defined and its implementation monitored by proper authorities. and low investment and infrastructure provision for the sanitation sector. and teachers among others. Weak. policy goals have yet to be fully met. While policies and enabling laws and national legislations have been formulated to set the directions for the sanitation sector. Regulation in sanitation is not clearly defined. sanitarians/sanitation inspectors. training. Table 4 summarizes and defines these issues based on the overall analysis of the sector by the multi-stakeholder groups during the consultations conducted in preparing the Roadmap. coordination and linkages techniques which could guide local governments and other interest groups in planning. implementing and evaluating sanitation programs. knowledge and skills Institutional guidelines on cooperation and coordination on approaches. policy implementation has not been ideal. Economic Regulation in sanitation and wastewater is non-existent at the moment. and coordinating sanitation projects/programs. this have to be revisited and updated. lack adequate sanitation education. This is gleaned particularly in the investment plan of the LGU where allocations for sanitation are minimal or none at all. fragmented regulatory framework on sanitation. To date.inadequate information dissemination and development of human resources in sanitation. monitoring and evaluation of sanitation services/programs. developing and improving designs on sanitation technology. Front-liner Sanitary Inspectors. Summary of Issues in the Philippine Sanitation Sector Summary of Issues GOVERNANCE AND REGULATORY ISSUES Defining the Issue Low LGU awareness and political will to improve sanitation At the LGU level. and technology options to support local government units in implementing sanitation programs. majority of them.

This can be seen from the few sanitation infrastructure being constructed and funded. Poor knowledge sharing and dissemination FINANCING RELATED ISSUES Sanitation is considered a mere adjunct to water programs. sanitation projects tend to be not self sustaining making it necessary to introduce sustainability in sanitation projects While there might be a demand for the construction of toilets at the household level. Behavioural. there is very limited to no investments at all. With very low recovery. practice and strong coordination for sanitation and hygiene promotion in different types of emergency situations ( i. SANITATION CRISIS DURING CALAMITIES AND EMERGENCY SITUATIONS Sanitation and hygiene promotion is not a priority in disaster preparedness and relief response. etc) are not yet in place. nor there is any clear sanitation program included in the MTPDP and the MTPIP The current focus of sanitation program and projects. if any at all. there are no clear financing schemes which families can access There is a clear absence of national and local policies on investment for sanitation.e. Identified government agencies with sanitation mandates such as DOH. t  † …  ƒ „ u ƒ r €  € r u  w v s ‚  u r  € y x w v u r t t r s r q p 40 . from households. NEDA have no program. promotion of pro poor sanitation financing including promotion of sanitation entrepreneurship. DILG. is on large scale infrastructure such as centralized treatment and sewerage facilities which tend to be very costly making cost of recovery very difficult. landslides. activities nor project distinctly included in the General Appropriations Act (GAA). Private Sector hesitates to invest in sanitation due to insufficient incentives and efficiency issues. There is no current law/program that mandates pro poor sanitation financing. and as a result. resulting in low investment in sanitation Sanitation is not a priority of the government. community to local and national levels Low private sector involvement on sanitation Lack of champions to advocate sanitation for public awareness Poor data availability. local and national levels.e..LACK OF COORDINATION AND SUPPORT FOR MULTI-STAKEHOLDER PLATFORMS Low multi-stakeholder involvement in sanitation Low priority from key stakeholders. “I don’t care” attitude from many stakeholders. Policy. i. community. floods.

.

3.0 VISION AND DEVELOPMENT GOALS .

broad-based.0 VISION AND DEVELOPMENT GOALS 3.e.1 VISION STATEMENT A CLEAN AND HEALTHY PHILIPPINES: SAFE AND ADEQUATE SUSTAINABLE SANITATION FOR ALL This sector vision looks at universal access to safe and adequate sanitation as a human right. Sewerage and or septage management in 57 highly urbanized cities (NSSMP targets) National agencies such as the DOH. agriculture and environment) are institutionalized. The achievement of the sector vision will use the following strategies of 1) governance and regulatory strengthening. 2)strengthening service delivery through communication and capacity development.3. 3) building strategic. agriculture and environment with families. sustainably linked with health.. would have clear sanitation policies. a strong and vibrant sanitation sector shall have achieved the MDG target of halving the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation • Achieving 83. linkage with health. 43 ‘ ˜ g f ˜ d e ’ d ‰ — ˜ — ‰ ’ ˜ ” “  ™ ˜ ’ ‰ ˜ — – • ” “ ’ ‰ ‘ ‘ ‰  ‰ ˆ ‡ . NHA. and 5) mainstremaing of adequate sanitation and hygiene promotion in emergency situations. The Roadmap envisions that: • By 2015.8% of total households provided with sanitary toilets (from a baseline of 67. DSWD. LWUA.6% NSO 1990 data) By 2016. the following have been achieved: At least 70% of LGUs have local sanitation plans and budgets in place under their PIPH/AIPH/CIPH plans Improved basic sanitation coverage in 92 priority cities/province by achieiving at least 85% of population with sanitary toilets. and that mechanisms for sustainable sanitation (i. that universal access (100%) to safe and adequate sanitary facilities have been provided. multi-stakeholder and multilevel alliances. plans and programs consistent with the PSR roadmap • By 2028. DAR. DILG. that behavioural change and proper hygiene practices are accepted norms within the families and communities. 4)financing and infrastructure provision for priority areas for sustainable sanitation. communities and institutions working together for the common good.





Š

}

{

|



ƒ

{

…



~

„

}

Œ



‡



‹



…

}

†

{

ˆ

{

†

Œ

†

•

ˆ

Ž



Š

…

}

†

{

ˆ

{

†

…

ˆ

ƒ



Ž

{



{

†

|

ˆ

„

ˆ

|

‰

‰

‹

…

ˆ

–



†

Œ



Š

…

†

…



Ž

{

…



Š

{

ƒ

‹

…

ˆ

‰





‰

‰



|

…



Š



~



…

†

ƒ

ˆ



Š

ˆ

ƒ

Š



‹

Œ

}

Ž



—

ˆ

{

ƒ

ƒ

…

}

†

{

ˆ

|

†

…

…

†

…



Ž

{

…



Š

{

ƒ

‰

‰

‹



~

ˆ



Š

{

ƒ

…

†

ˆ

~

|

†



{

ˆ

Š

{

ƒ

Œ



‡



Œ

’

†

{

Œ

z

~

’

z

~

~

}

|



Š

}

{

ˆ

Œ

z



Š

‰

ƒ

†

…

}

†

{

}

~

}

Š

„



{

†

Š

}

†

Š

„

…

†

‹

…

ˆ

Œ

ˆ

Š

}

{

|



ƒ

Ž

z

}

Š

Ž

{

‹

…

ˆ

‰

‰



…



†



Ž

‹

…

ˆ

ƒ

{

…



~

{

ƒ



‡

…

†

’

†

{

Œ

z

~

–

}



Š



‡

†

Œ



‹



|

…

ˆ

…

Š



‡

}

…

}

†

{

ˆ

{

†

…

ˆ

ƒ



Š

z

|

z

Š

{

ƒ

ˆ

Š

–

…

†



|

…

ˆ

†

Œ

Œ

ˆ



|

†

‡

Š



ƒ

…

}

†

{

ˆ

{

†

…

ˆ

ƒ

‰



{

ˆ

z

œ



‹

›

‹

…

ˆ

…

†

|

…

ˆ

…

†

™

‹



ƒ

ˆ

•

’

‹

ˆ

}

Š

”

‹



‡

}

Š

„

~

‘



‡

†

ƒ

…

}

„

ƒ



‚



š



~

}

|

{

z

y



˜



~

}

|

{

z

y



“



~

}

|

{

z

y







~

}

|

{

z

y



€



~

}

|

{

z

y

44

l

s

x

w

s

u

v

m

u

j

r

s

r

j

m

s

o

n

k

t

s

m

j

s

r

q

p

o

n

m

j

l

l

j

k

j

i

h

SANITATION ROADMAP DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

SAFE AND ADEQUATE SUSTAINABLE SANITATION FOR ALL A CLEAN AND HEALTHY PHILIPPINES FIGURE 4

3.2 OUTCOMES AND OUTPUTS The Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap focuses on five major strategic outcomes: (i) Responsive sanitation governance and regulatory strengthening. (ii) Improved service delivery through communications and capacity development, (iii) Broad-based alliance of multi-sectoral and multi-level stakeholders strengthening the sanitation sector, (iv) Financing and Infrastructure Investment in priority strategic areas, and (v) Adequate sanitation and hygiene promotion mainstreamed in emergency relief and rehabilitation. This section will discuss the development goals, outcomes, outputs for each of the focus areas. 3.2.1: Responsive sanitation governance and regulatory strengthening Under this component, it is recognized that the LGUs are in the forefront of sanitation at the local level. However, there is a need to formulate effective national policies that will provide the framework for coherent strategies and mechanisms supported by adequate resources leading to synergistic implementation of sanitation programs. National Agencies with sanitation related programs should be able to develop their plans and programs within the framework of the national policies on sanitation. Specific outputs identified under this area are as follows: 1. A clear articulation and sustainable implementation of the national and local sanitation policies; 2. Strengthening DOH as the lead sector driver providing technical assistance at local and national levels; 3. 100% of the LGUs develop their policies, plans and programs and budgets within the PIPH/AIPH/CIPH; 4. National government agencies with sanitation related mandates develop their own sanitation strategy, plans and programs and mainstream these in their regular/existing budgets; 5. Sanitation regulatory framework developed, approved and implemented by the relevant agency including a possible creation of an independent regulatory body for the sanitation sector. 3.2.2 Improved Service Delivery through Communications and Capacity Development The sanitation roadmap aims to engage and capacitate national sector agencies and institutions and other stakeholders to improve sanitation service delivery by enabling (1) barangay or local communities to manage their own sanitation programs towards eliminating open defecation practices and (2) sanitation service providers to manage wastes in a sustainable fashion. To achieve this, it is fundamental that the people themselves must realize that the consequences of their (un)hygienic behavior and practices result to demeaning quality of life, and for them to actively demand for reforms on sanitation at the grass-roots level. The choice of methods of intervention in finding meaningful solutions to sanitation problems should be initiated by these same people who clamor for assistance and guidance so that they are made responsible for setting up their own sanitation facilities and services. The success of this agenda depends on how the target population would change their behavior and practices by motivating them through effective education and information programs (predisposing factors), by enabling them to have access to technology and other resources with reinforcing factors such as collectively enhancing behavior and practices of all community members. Capacity development activities should aim at developing competencies at various levels:

45

¡

¨

­

¬

¨

ª

«

¢

ª

Ÿ

§

¨

§

Ÿ

¢

¨

¤

£

 

©

¨

¢

Ÿ

¨

§

¦

¥

¤

£

¢

Ÿ

¡

¡

Ÿ

 

Ÿ

ž



Grassroot/Community: 1. Skills to design and plan household-level sanitation facilities 2. Technical skills to operate and maintain sanitation facilities 3. Administrative skills to plan sanitation interventions on excreta/sewage management and disposal. 4. Awareness to (ill) health implications of defecating in the open 5. Awareness of the benefits of sanitation solutions to socio-economic well-being 6. Awareness of accountability and responsibility to the rest of the communities on hygiene and sanitation 7. Skills to mobilize resources in implementing household or community-based sanitation facilities 8. Skill in social mobilization to develop team-effort in attaining sanitation solutions 9. Awareness on the importance of sustained activities on sanitation 10. Skill in demonstrating capacity to disseminate gained capacities to other members of the community Local Government Units 1. Planning and management of municipal or city-wide sanitation or sewerage facilities 2. Developing capacities of rural communities to construct and maintain decentralized, communal or individual sanitation facilities 3. To have access to available national resources and mobilize local resources to implement sanitation plans and programs. 4. Generate demands for sanitation services or facilities from communities through health education and information dissemination activities. 5. Translate national guidelines on planning, implementing and evaluating sanitation programs into local policies or ordinances on through: a. Selection of appropriate technologies suitable to local conditions b. Generation and utilization of information from local studies c. Allocating resources to support the policy decisions 6. Develop and carry-out monitoring and evaluation schemes to determine the extent of meeting sanitation sector standards and goals. There are a number of entities that could be involved in framing a workable program on capacity development: National agencies, water supply providers, sanitation contractors (waste management), local government units, communities, civil society (development non-governmental organizations, community groups, women’s organizations, bilateral and multilateral financing institutions, faith-based organizations, professional associations, trades unions, self-help groups, social movements, business associations, coalitions and advocacy group, and the academe. The local government‘s roles are (1) to cause the realization of the predisposing factors, (2) to coordinate and facilitate the access to available resources, facilities, equipment and information from various key players in enabling communities to achieve their own targets, (3) to finance small scale community projects on sanitation, (4) to level information so as to avoid mixed-signals on sanitation.

²

¹

¾

½

¹

»

¼

³

»

°

¸

¹

¸

°

³

¹

µ

´

±

º

¹

³

°

¹

¸

·

µ

´

³

°

²

²

°

±

°

¯

®

46

6. partnerships. Whether these are information disseminated to individuals.. Experiences in the past taught implementing agencies that cause of failure in attaining universal access to proper sanitation was due to the fact that sanitation facilities which were intended to uplift the hygiene conditions of families and to contribute to attaining national objectives of sanitation coverage were inappropriately procured. or the design of the squatting plate each should conform to the environment suitable to the intricate or simple preference of the users. They should cause the transfer of knowledge of technology. practice and behaviour change. and for a particular or a variety of reasons and interests.2. i. An integrated and decentralized capacity development system for different types of implementers and situations. The academe may introduce long term.e. Institutionalized monitoring and evaluation of the sector. others to support sustainable sanitation and to strengthen the sanitation sector. Building strategic alliances for sanitation means inclusivisity. and other competencies. Element of Sustainability Capacity development efforts should clearly fulfill the element of sustainability and constancy of sanitation solutions. consortia. Many of them were found to be too sophisticated to local circumstances or too frail to withstand usual environmental stresses. Element of Acceptability The essence of sanitation solutions lies on how facilities and systems impede infectious health hazards through direct access and utilization of these facilities by the community members especially those have been at risk because of factors inherent to their socioeconomic status.Other organizations and institutions should identify their own specific niches within the sanitation labyrinth concentric to the goal of strengthening community’s power to solve their own problems. institutionalized capacity development program for professionals and practitioners. be custom tailored. 47 Ã Ê Ï Î Ê Ì Í Ä Ì Á É Ê É Á Ä Ê Æ Å Â Ë Ê Ä Á Ê É È Ç Æ Å Ä Á Ã Ã Á Â Á À ¿ . 3. or a technology to recycle human waste. Benchmark standards on LGU performance and practice established. Different stakeholders mobilized in promoting sustainable sanitation concepts. A national and local communications plan for sustainable sanitation and hygiene in place. Capacity development should. cultural traits. over long term or short term. encouraging the participation of multi-sectoral and multi-level stakeholders who would like to cooperate. Specific Outputs relating to this area are as follows: 1. or other constraints to practicing hygiene and sanitation. 3. 2. Research and development agenda towards sustainable sanitation solutions and policy reforms. 5. 4. therefore. collaborate and bind themselves together as broad-based networks. Agreements to form these alliances are social contracts that can be formal or non-formal.3 Strengthened Strategic Alliances Broad-based alliance of multi-sectoral and multi-level stakeholders strengthening the sanitation sector. Options to be offered by capacity development providers should be limited to facilities that would conform to standards that yield enduring solutions. effective planning and service delivery. federation.

executive and legislative.4 Financing and Adequate Infrastructure Investments The provision of adequate and sustainable sanitation systems in priority strategic areas will require political will and adequate financing. 3. civic organizations. economic and environmental force advocating and working for a sustainable form of sanitation as a human right and a public good. They may agree to contribute to the alliance in cash or in kind. Clear mechanisms for collaboration in knowledge sharing. it is of utmost importance to identify general principles for best possible allocation of these resources. such as. Financing for sustainable sanitation would include the following: a) Supporting and developing an enabling environment b) Hygiene behavior change activities c) Sanitation marketing costs ( including training. In an environment of scarce resources. plans. their expertise. etc. donors etc.) d) Cost of public infrastructure and services (capital and operational costs) e) Cost of private infrastructure and services (capital and operational costs) Funds for the provision of sanitation may come from different sources: a) National Government ( or public) funds b) Local government funds c) Private funds d) Semi-public/charitable funds flowing in from NGOs. The negative economic impacts of poor sanitation have triggered agencies such as the Philippine Tourism Authority( PTA) to invest in wastewater treatment facility in some tourist areas. 2. professional associations. The following outputs are expected to result to strengthened strategic alliances: 1. specially to strategic approaches and areas that have been identified as priority due to the magnitude of sanitation problems affecting the community. national and local. A strong alliance of sanitation service providers. CBOs.Organizations or institutions that may form alliances would include government agencies. and all other groups that would be interested to join forces with others to push or support sustainable sanitation and the sanitation sector as a whole. Participating organizations may enter into Memoranda of Agreements or Memoranda of Understanding or other forms of social contract to forge their alliances. activities. programs. office space. consulting firms. It is also intended to facilitate the organization of sanitation service providers as a platform to strengthen their role in sustainable sanitation service delivery. National and local governments should work together to ensure that resources will be made available. Strong and active national and local multi-sector support group that will advocate.2. Gaps in sector financing are also filled by market-based instruments and Ô Û à ß Û Ý Þ Õ Ý Ò Ú Û Ú Ò Õ Û × Ö Ó Ü Û Õ Ò Û Ú Ù Ø × Ö Õ Ò Ô Ô Ò Ó Ò Ñ Ð 48 . and other physical resources. NGOs. The vision of strategic alliances is a sanitation sector that is recognized as a social. market assessments. the academe. professional and executive time. business enterprises. bilateral or multilateral development aid agencies or programs. in pursuit of the Millennium Development Goal of ensuring sanitation for the poor. education and human resource pooling for awareness raising and knowledge building. particularly. lead and advance sustainable sanitation polices. service providers. corporations. 3. Its strength lies in the commitment of individual participating organizations/ institutions to support the principles of sustainable sanitation and.

The Philippines is visited by at least 20 typhoons annually. Prioritized intervention in highly vulnerable areas that are seriously affected by the lack of sanitation. Sanitation investment requirements identified and secured to meet the MTPDP and MDG targets. and with the anticipated increase in flooding and inundations incidents. 49 å ì ñ ð ì î ï æ î ã ë ì ë ã æ ì è ç ä í ì æ ã ì ë ê é è ç æ ã å å ã ä ã â á . However. With the spectre of climate change becoming more and more a reality. private sector and NGOs to work together towards formulating an effective sanitation program for emergency situations.financing through micro finance institutions. Financing strategies and incentive schemes for sustainable infrastructure development developed. Cognizant of the current situation where sanitation has been a much neglected aspect of the development priorities.2. foremost of this is flooding and inundation of low lying areas which serves as home to millions of Filipinos. Established and enhanced public-private partnerships and sanitation entrepreneurship.5: Emergency Sanitation Response Adequate Sanitation and Hygiene promotion is mainstreamed in emergency relief and rehabilitation efforts. 4. Outputs: 1. 2. quick mobilization of resources and immediate response in emergency situations. Building partnerships and strong coordination mechanisms at local municipal. this is not enough. provincial and national levels for identifying priority areas of intervention. Outputs: 1. Innovative financing schemes must be developed for sanitation improvements. 2. it is high time for a joint effort among national and local government. This particular situations renders the country highly vulnerable to water-induced natural calamity. the proposed Philippine Sanitation Roadmap will address this inadequacy by ensuring that a strong sanitation sector is recognized and given the appropriate support in terms of priorities and corresponding investment. 5. Sourcebook and toolkits on appropriate approaches for different situations. 3. 3. not to mention landslides and mudflows. A well established national account for sanitation. Integration of emergency sanitation in disaster response and risk reduction plans at all levels. 3. banks and commercial service providers.

Established and enhanced public-private partnerships and sanitation enterpreneurship.2. Benchmark standards on LGU performance and practice established. Sanitation Regulatory Framework developed. approved and implemented by the relevant agency. 2. 4. provincial and national levels for identifying priority areas of intervention. National government agencies with sanitation related mandates develop their own sanitation strategy. education and human resource pooling for awareness raising and knowledge building. Sanitation investment requirements identified and secured to meet the MTPDP and MDG targets. Building partnerships and strong coordination mechanisms at local municipal. Clear mechanisms for collaboration in knowledge sharing. plans and programs and mainstream this in their instituion’s regular budgets. 5. Prioritized intervention in highly vulnerable areas that are seriously affected by the lack of sanitation. plans. 3. 1. Institutionalized monitoring and evaluation of the sector. Summary of Expected Outputs Outcome Responsive sanitation governance and regulatory strengthening Outputs 1. programs. A strong alliance of sanitation service providers organized. Improved Service Delivery through Communications and Capacity Development Strengthened Strategic Alliances Financing and Adequate Infrastructure Investments 1. 1. Different stakeholders mobilized in promoting sustainable sanitation concepts. 3. A national and local communications plan for sustainable sanitation and hygiene in place. 5. practice and behaviour change. activities. plans and programs and budgets within the PIPH/AIPH/CIPH. Strong and active national and local multi-sector support group that will advocate. 100% of the LGUs develop their policies. An integrated and decentralized capacity development system for different types of implementers and situations developed. 6. 2. 2. 3. Emergency Sanitation Response ö ý ¢ ¡ ý ÿ   ÷ ÿ ô ü ý ü ô ÷ ý ù ø õ þ ý ÷ ô ý ü û ú ù ø ÷ ô ö ö ô õ ô ó ò 50 . 4. Integration of emergency sanitation in disaster response and risk reduction plans at all levels. 4. Research and development agenda towards sustainable sanitation solutions and policy reforms. 5.6 Summary of Expected Outputs: Table 5. DOH strengthened as the lead sector driver providing technical assistance at local and national levels. Financing strategies and incentive schemes for sustainable infrastructure developed. 2. A well-established national account for sanitation. 3. 3. 1.3. A clear articulation and sustainable implementation of the national and local sanitation policies 2. quick mobilization of resources and immediate response in emergency situations. lead and advance sustainable sanitation polices. Sourcebook and toolkits on appropriate approaches for different situations developed.

Inputs: . etc) 2) Establish monitoring and evaluation parameters for LGU level plans and programs.2 Strengthening DOH as the lead National Sustainable Sanitation sector driver providing policy Program of DOH developed. means/sources of verification.8% of the number of total households provided with sanitary toilets Official government reports Sanitary toilets may not be good and sustainable due to improper design and poor hygiene practices. implementation. Activities: 1) Map out and review mandates and assess plans and programs of the DOH that relate to sanitation. plans and programs within the PIPH/AIPH and CIPH (including baseline assessments. programs and budgets within the PIPH/AIPH/ CIPH.Accessibility to relevant information Activities: 1) Review and evaluate the relevance of existing sanitation policies.1 A clear articulation and sustainable implementation of the national sanitation policy Compendium of existing and new laws. No.guidelines for program/project development. SANITATION ROADMAP LOG FRAME INTERVENTION LOGIC OBJECTIVELY VERIFIABLE INDICATOR MEANS/SOURCES OF VERIFICATION RISK AND ASSUMPTIONS Vision: A clean and healthy Philippines Development Goal by 2015: MDG TARGETS Halve the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation Achieving 83.Meetings and interviews with focal persons Reports and documents Available resources Accessibility to relevant information Activities: 1) Capacitate LGUs in developing their local policies. 2) Define the DOH strategy as the lead sanitation sector driver Output 1.Available resources . outcomes with the corresponding activities. risks and assumptions and required inputs as determined by the multi-stakeholder technical working group tasked with preparing the roadmap.Relevant reports. program packages. Output 1.Relevant reports. TABLE 6.budget . guidelines and other regulatory frameworks as to their effectiveness.. Programs and Budgets allocated for sanitation Inputs: . mandates.3 ROADMAP LOGICAL FRAMEWORK The following table provides a more detailed presentation of the linkages among the development goals. Outcome 1: Responsive Sanitation Governance and Strengthened Regulatory Mechanisms Output 1. necessary ordinances.Meetings and interviews with focal persons . monitoring and evaluation Document and Reports Plans. indentification of priority interventions. policies and regulations related to sanitation including monitoring and enforcement. literatures and publications . plans. objectively verifiable indicators. This becomes the basis and guide for developing detailed plans and programs and monitoring them during the implementation of the Roadmap. literatures and publications . policies and support programs Gap analysis matrix .new approved policy. support and technical assistance at local and national levels.3 100% of LGUs develop their policies. of provincial/city sanitation plans developed within the PIPH/CIPH/AIPH Inputs: .Guidelines and tools for LGU policy and planning 51 §       ¨  ¥    ¥ ¨   © ¦   ¨ ¥      © ¨ ¥ § § ¥ ¦ ¥ ¤ £ . 5) Develop sanitation programs at all levels to implement the new policy. 2) Review systems for enforcement of existing policies and laws 3) Identify applicable changes in the existing policies and frameworks 4) Identify pending new and amended laws.

Stakeholders.Electronic access to training plans . program and budgets .e. monitoring and evaluation of sanitation services/program. .The plans represent the actual requirements of the sector and are executable .Meetings and interviews with focal persons $ 1 6 5 1 3 4 % 3 " 0 1 0 " % 1 ' & # 2 1 % " 1 0 ) ( ' & % " $ $ " # " ! 52 .Medium term plans at various levels .Existing laws and standards on sanitation. Activities 1) Collate all existing regulations and standards on sanitation. National.Documents or reports of capacity development activities conducted at the centers . 2) Identify appropriate inter-agency platforms to oversee streamlined sector coordination mechanisms. materials and e-learning applications 5) Training delivery Inputs: .Relevant reports. and Community 3) Strengthening the capacities of Training Centers ( formal/non-formal.Prepared templates to serve as a guide .Department Memorandum Order endorsing the manual for the use of sector .Resources for publication.4 National gov’t agencies with sanitation related mandates develop their own sanitation strategy. 4 sereis of 1994 and No.Guidelines for program/project developemnt. Output 1. dissemination and orientation of the contents of the national policy .Meetings and interviews with focal persons .Web-based training programs on sustainable sanitation . implementation. Programs and Budgets allocated for sanitation is accessible. Inputs: . Activities: 1) Facilitate the development of agency santiation strategy and programs within the national roadmap framework.Training materials available for use . 6. 2) Organize a study on the appropriate sanitation regulatory arrangements and performance indicators.Printed documents of the plans . target audience have effective access to internet Available qualified trainers Activities: 1) Establish national policies to develop guidelines and management models and technology options which could guide the local government units in planning. implementing. 3) Undertake policy studies on the proposed draft bill on Water Economic Regulation to incorporate wastewater regulation. approved and implemented by relevant agencies. MEANS/SOURCES OF VERIFICATION Document and Reports RISK AND ASSUMPTIONS Available information on Plans. government/academe/etc) to integrate sanitation disciplines into their programs. literatures and publications . Organizing sanitation regulation is a priority of the national government. 4) Review and update the NEDA Board Resolution No. Regional/Local. programs strongly coordinated. series of 1996 to calrify roles and responsibilities of sanitation related agencies. SERVICE DELIVERY THROUGH COMMUNICATIONS AND CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT Output 2.Functional training/resource centers at all regions .The centers are available for use by other stakeholders for the same purpose .Relevant reports. Enabling law for sanitation regulation.New approved policy. 2) Formulation of Medium-Term Plans on Capacity Development at all levels.1 Develop an integrated and decentralized capacity development system for different types of implementors and situations . Policy document on sanitation regulation is approved by the NG with clear responsibilities among NGA with sanitation related mandates.Websites containing the training programs .INTERVENTION LOGIC Output 1.Manual on the guidelines and management models.5 Sanitation regulatory framework developed. i. 4) Develop the training Plans. monitoring and evaluation. Inputs: . literatures and publications . Institutional/ Agency. plans. OBJECTIVELY VERIFIABLE INDICATOR At least 7 national government agencies have their own sanitation strategy and programs.

3 Empower different stakeholders Inventory of core-group: towards active involvement trained and to-be-trained for capacity development in Coordination Plans developed sustainable sanitation Activities 1) Identify core-group representing various capacity development providers and targets: Professional groups. program and budgets . Participative evaluation process of existing capacities b. monitoring and evaluation. institution 2) Evaluation: Identification of Challenges a.Relevant reports.new approved policy. surveys and forums. Performance indicators for LGUs developed Monitoring and evaluation checklist utilizing the benchmark standards Capability to adhere or comply to standards depend on available resources Activities 1) Establish the performance indicators 2) Comparison with Targets of Capacity Building 3) Finalize monitoring and evaluation parameters Output 2. national agencies.2 Establish benchmark standards on LGU performance and practice.4 Initiate research and development towards sustainable sanitation solutions and policy reforms Inventory of available database on research studies National Research Agenda on Sanitation Sector indicating gaps and challenges Documents and reports of consultations. local. Resources: Existing functions of stakeholders. 53 A H S R H P Q B P 9 G H G 9 B H D C @ I H B 9 H G F E D C B 9 A A 9 @ 9 8 7 . clarification of functions. Inputs: .Output 2. grass-root based 3) Mechanisms of coordination and communication in place Output 2. civic societies and aligning sub-groups of similar functions 2) Spatial inventory at various levels: national. implementation. Equate: Limits of capacities and extent of need 3) Formulate the National Research Agenda on Sanitation Sector indicating gaps and challenges 4) Document best practices on sustainable sanitation.Meetings and interviews with focal persons . the challenges and gaps should reflect practical needs and solutions to sanitation concerns Printed list of target participants MOU/MOA among participating agencies/ institutions/ organizations Turn-over of officials who are knowledgeable about the terms of coordination Activities: 1) Diagnostics/ Initial Capacity Assessment a. clarifying their particular function to reach their goals Policies: directed towards the goals of zero open defecation Strategies. Assessment of the target community’s need for capacity development c. identification of gaps: need for institutions to provide for capacity building or development competencies b. Internal:Goals: redirection of goals of different institutions. Technology: each agency. Report on the analysis of information gaps and challenges in the sector Inventory is complete and exhaustive While conforming to effective and reliable academic design. literatures and publications .guidelines for program/project developemnt. Academe.

X e p i e g h Y g V d e d V Y e a ` W f e Y V e d c b a ` Y V X X V W V U T 54 .Existing monitoring and assessment reports on sanitation.5 Institutionalize regular monitoring and evaluation of the sector OBJECTIVELY VERIFIABLE INDICATOR Monitoring and Assessment integral part of national and local medium term Sanitation Sector Plans Monitoring and assessment reports Website of the Sanitation Sector Programs MEANS/SOURCES OF VERIFICATION Printed documents of the sector plans Printed reports E-copies of reports in the internet RISK AND ASSUMPTIONS Inventory is complete and exhaustive. the challenges and gaps should reflect practical needs and solutions. reports. communciation materials DOH is leading the communications strategy. 2) Coordinate and facilitate the development of local communications strategy based on the local sanitation plans and programs 3) Monitor and adjust plans based on need. Inputs: Core messages and resources Local core messages and resources Regular monitoring and evaluation. 3) Establish a web-based database that includes the indicators collected for the sector assessment Output 2. Activities: 1) Develop the national communications strategy plan.INTERVENTION LOGIC Output 2. While conforming to effective and reliable academic design.6 National and local communications plan for sanitation and hygiene is in place Plan is approved and is being implemented at national and local levels. Activities 1) Develop a unified system to determine access to sanitation services 2) Prepare the recurrent water and sanitation sector assessment report at regular period including the update of economic losses due to lack of sanitation. Inputs: .

.Availability of funds for coordination and joint activities. • Funding support for Secretariats for PEN and PDF-TF WSS • Network strengthening activities. research and training sectors to institutionalize dissemination of new knowledge on sustainable sanitation. plans. secretariat and conferences. harmonization and greater synergy among the Champions and partners. e. seminars. like strategic visioning and planning • Meeting and workshop venues Note: The PEN will be the venue to. lead and advance sustainable sanitation policies.Availability of funds for training. 3.Curricula . . fora and conventions among sustainable sanitation.1 Strong and active national multi-sector support group that will advocate. Sanitation projects proposed.. concepts approaches and technologies. discuss new trends.Other printed documents . Inputs: • Directory of service providers • Directory of financing institutions • Strong policy support from the Executive and Legislative branches of government to make sanitation as an attractive investment sector. and human resource pooling for awareness and knowledge building Establishment of training and education consortia Inputs: • Strong support from the lead sanitation institutional driver. legislators. and voice out regulatory and legislative initiatives towards sustainable sanitation in all localities.2 Clear mechanisms for collaboration in knowledge sharing. champions.3. funded. study tours and other knowledge sharing programs • Researches. 3. Inputs: • Directory of relevant organizations. Risks: The Sanitary Engineering is a dying profession Activities: 3.Printed Materials .A strong sector driver .INTERVENTION LOGIC OBJECTIVELY VERIFIABLE INDICATOR MEANS/SOURCES OF VERIFICATION RISK AND ASSUMPTIONS Outcome 3: Strengthened Strategic Alliances Output 3. i. organizations. implemented and completed Project contracts Project reports MOU/MOA for emergency sanitation A strong sector driver . decision maker. Activities: 3.2.Directory of sanitation champions and key stakeholders. seminars and workshops among sanitation service providers for sustainable sanitation.g. knowledge exchange and training.MOU/MOA .2 Develop/enhance sustainable sanitation curricula and information materials for publication and dissemination 3. • Funding support for trainings. champions.3. education and communication programs. workshops. study tours. programs and activities Joint activities and programs conducted .2 Identify and gather information on experts. dialogues. universities.3.1..1. coordination. 55 u ‚ ‡ † ‚ „ … v „ s  ‚  s v ‚ x w t ƒ ‚ v s ‚  € y x w v s u u s t s r q . e. among others.1.Minutes of meetings.g. research and publication.1. colleges.1 Develop. vulnerability assessments and risk assessments • Sustainable Sanitation technology sourcebooks and toolkits Output 3.Event proceedings. education.3 Facilitate professionalizing and development of sanitation service providers.2 Organize regular fora. training and research institutes • Information from relevant websites • Funding support for knowledge building.1 Support and strengthen existing networks such as the Philippine Ecosan Network (PEN) and the Philippine Development Forum-Sub-working Group on Water Supply and Sanitation (PDF-SWG -WSS) and other networks so it can continue to act as platform for policy and program advocacy.Formulation and promulgation of enabling investment policies and sustainable financing mechanisms Activities: 3. research and publication • Funding support for curriculum development. .. Develop a database on all sanitation service providers 3. support and strengthen consortia in the academic.3 A strong alliance of sanitation service providers at national and local levels. practitioners.2. .3 Conduct regular dialogues.A strong sector driver . advocates at different levels and sectors to promote sustainable sanitation Output 3.3 Establish strong links with international knowledge centers.2.e. and information. 3. institutions and stakeholder groups in sanitation at the national and local levels 3.

6) Develop and implement a sustainable sanitation financing framework • Undertake a study on sustainable sanitation financing • Develop guidelines for the development of local financing policy on sanitation • Explore the adoption of a sector-wide approach in sanitation for ODA funds 7) Provide investment for the implementation of the National Sewerage and Septage Program 8) Develop the policy for the participation of GFIs and PDAF for large scale sanitation infrastructure development and financing Viable sanitation financing models Package of sanitation incentives Risks: Not a priority and no funding available Assumptions: Government priority with funding available Inputs: List of government existing funded programs involving sanitation education.OUTCOME: FINANCING.1 Prioritized intervention in highly vulnerable areas that are seriously affected by the lack of sanitation List of highly vulnerable areas and corresponding maps Database system developed Policy prioritizing sanitation investment in highly vulnerable areas Investment priority criteria and guidelines Vulnerability maps Operational database Copy of the policy Copy of the criteria and guideline Risks: Concerned agencies do not have the information and maps No funding is available to undertake proposed project on the inventory. Identification and mapping of highly vulnerable areas 2) Creation of a database based on the results of the inventory and mapping for use of planners and decisions makers 3) Formulate policy ensuring that highly vulnerable areas be given high priority for investment for sanitation 4) Preparation of prioritization criteria and guidelines for investment allocation to highly vulnerable areas Output 4. Output 4. MTPDP and MTPIP 2) Undertake a study on sanitation tariff methodologies. penalties being collected and disbursed by the LGUs 4) Undertake study on costs of sustainable sanitation technology approaches 5) Develop guidelines for pro poor sanitation. identification and mapping of highly vulnerable areas Assumptions: Concerned agencies willing to share information and resources are made available to produce lacking info and maps Activities 1) Inventory. subsidies and incentives 3) Conduct study for the tracking of sanitation fees and funds. INVESTMENTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PROVISION FOR SANITATION DEVELOPED IN STRATEGIC PRIORITY AREAS. infrastructure and other capital investments Inventory and assessment of current models on sanitation financing Inventory of available incentive packages (if any) Inputs: List of available information and maps from concerned agencies Relevant statistics on highly vulnerable areas Relevant statistics on school sanitation facilities Relevant information on sanitation situation of priority tourist areas Relevant information on sanitation situation of IP areas ’ ™ h g ™ e f “ e  ˜ ™ ˜  “ ™ • ” ‘ d ™ “  ™ ˜ — – • ” “  ’ ’  ‘  ‰ ˆ 56 . cost recovery schemes. Sustainable sanitation financing models Framework for the grant of sanitation incentives Sanitation incentive schem Activities: 1) Develop clear national and local policy on investment for sanitation and its regular inclusion in the GAA.2 Financing strategies and incentive schemes for sustainable infrastructure developed.

rules and regulations on PPP Review and compilation of similar undertaking of countries in the region Networking with the private sector Formation of a loose network of sanitation service providers Output 4. rules and regulations on PPP Review and compilation of similar undertaking of countries in the region Networking with the private sector Formation of a loose network of sanitation service providers Output 4. 2) Development and operationalization of the sanitation accounting system 3) Policies and guidelines for the adoption of the system developed and implemented Inputs: Relevant information on sanitation-related enterprises both local and foreign Round table discussion and meeting with relevant stakeholders Review laws.5 Investment requirements to meet the MDG and MTPDP targets identified and secured.3 Established/Enhanced PPPs and sanitation entrepreneurship Sustainable sanitation program under PPP scheme SMEs dealing with sustainable sanitation service provision Approve SS program within the framework of PPP Operational SMEs on sanitation provision Risks: No interest in PPP for sanitation service provision No interest in sanitation business Assumption: Feasibility and acceptability of PPP for SS program High interest from interested parties for sanitation business ventures Activities: 1) Develop the policy for the promotion of sanitation entrepreneurship and PPP 2) Undertake aggressive IEC and social marketing to private sector 3) Conduct a study to document PPP in sanitation service provision 4) Develop standards for PPPs for sanitation service delivery 5) Conduct R and D. activities (PPA) for all agencies with sanitation mandate including LGUs with corresponding targets and budgets Inputs: Coordination with concerned agencies Networking with interest groups to help in the advocacy work Issuance of national directives making sanitation a priority of the local and national governments 57 m t y x t v w n v k s t s k n t p o l u t n k t s r q p o n k m m k l k j i .4 A well-established national account for sanitation Sanitation accounting system as part of the national account system in place All sanitation expenditures and budgets effectively captured by the system Accounting system reports reflecting sanitation expenditure and budget Risks: No interest in PPP for sanitation service provision No interest in sanitation business Assumption: Feasibility and acceptability of PPP for SS program High interest from interested parties for sanitation business ventures Activities: 1) Conduct of the study on developing the sanitation accounting system to capture how much is being spent for sanitation. project.Output 4. Concrete sanitation targets and budgets included in the MTPDP and MTPIP MTPDP and MTPIP documents and reports Risks: Sanitation program still not included in the MTPDP and MTPIP but still considered part of the water sector target and budget Assumption: Recognition of the importance of sanitation making it part of the priority agenda for the next medium term planning Activities: 1) Strong advocacy and lobby for making sanitation part of the priority program of the government 2) A distinct sanitation program. Capacity Development and Institution Building for sustainable sanitation Inputs: Relevant information on sanitation-related enterprises both local and foreign Round table discussion and meeting with relevant stakeholders Review laws.

2 Integration of emergency sanitation in disaster and risk reduction plans at all levels Guidelines for the integration of sanitation in disaster risk reduction plan Emergency sanitation plan Copy of the guidelines Copy of the plan Risks: LGUs and national govt not interested in integrating emergency sanitation in DRR Assumption: Highly appreciated and guidelines adopted by LGUs and the national government Activities: 1) Review of current disaster risk reduction plans Inputs: Copy of current DRR planning guidelines 2) Advocacy to include emergency sanitation in DRR planning at all Sample copy of current DRR plan of an LGU levels Sufficient technical assistance from concerned agencies or 3) Pilot the preparation of emergency sanitation plan as an integral organizations to help LGUs part of DRR planning Wiling LGUs to pilot the preparation of the emergency sanitation plan Output 5.3 Building a partnership for quick mobilization of logistics for sanitation in emergency situations MOA or MOU among concerned agencies and LGUs Directory of contact persons or organizations at the local and national levels who can provide technical and other needed assistance during emergency situations Copy of the MOA/MOU Copy of the directory Risks: No interested party or organization No budget and resources available Assumptions: Budget is allocated and made available to encourage partnership building and networking Expertise and other resources are available to provide assistance in time of emergencies Activities: 1) Identify potential partners and create a database for easy contacting 2) Conduct exploratory meetings with interested parties Inputs: Relevant list of organizations and agencies that may be interested in networking and partnership building and their profiles 3) Find a champion to help and actively advocate for building networks Funding support for the proposed initiative and partnerships 4) Identify possible sources of resources to be pooled 5) Set up funds for the activity ~ … Š ‰ … ‡ ˆ  ‡ | „ … „ |  …  € } † …  | … „ ƒ ‚  €  | ~ ~ | } | { z 58 .OUTCOME 5: Emergency Sanitation Response in Place Output 5.1 Sourcebook and tool kit appropriate approaches for different situations Complete sourcebooks and toolkits for sanitation in emergency situations Translation of sourcebooks and toolkits in major Filipino dialects Copy of the sourcebook and toolkits Copy of translated sourcebook and toolkit Risks: Lack of support from the government Lack of recognition of the importance of the sourcebook and toolkit Assumption: Availability of budget to develop the sourcebook and toolkit High interest from concerned stakeholders Activities: 1) Review of related materials to develop the sourcebook and toolkit Inputs: List of possible sources of materials for the development of 2) Survey of needs for the toolkit and sourcebooks on sanitation for sourcebook and toolkits List of websites where materials can be sourced emergency situations 3) Develop the sourcebook and toolkits and pretest the use of the Lead organization to develop the sourcebook and toolkits same Output 5.

.

0 ROADMAP PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES .4.

based sanitation regulatory policies and arrangements at various levels. Communication and behavior change campaigns for zero open defecation. Strengthening of the DOH as the institutional driver to lead sanitation-related plans and programs. including programs targeting behavioral change. These programs will also pursue policy reforms to enable the sector institutions to perform their mandates effectively and for the sanitation sector to attain its goals. The policy directions will focus on the following: • • • • Establishing capacity development systems for different levels of implementors and situations. regulation and tariffs. institutional transformations and regulatory arrangements by 2028 and will focus on the following: • Good sanitation governance through national and localized sanitation policy and programs prioritizing the sanitation sector and creating clear. Clear standards. Note that while the timeframe of 2025 is consistent to the Water Supply Roadmap.2010 to 2028.0 ROADMAP PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES Each of the five strategies developed to meet the challenges faced by the sanitation sector is translated into a cluster of priority programs and activities supporting a specific policy directive.. It will also focus communication planning aimed to change behavior in proper hygiene. Amending and/or updating the Sanitation Code to comply with more recent laws with provisions relating to Sanitation. support to multi-level stakeholder platforms. implementation. Benchmarking standards and monitoring for LGU performance. 4. LGUs and SSPs in program planning. Strengthening sector monitoring and evaluation system at different levels which will be 61  – › š – ˜ ™  ˜  • – •   – ’ ‘ Ž — –   – • ” “ ’ ‘      Ž  Œ ‹ .1 POLICY DIRECTIONS Responsive sanitation governance and regulatory strengthening programs are designed to achieve desired policy. and infrastructure and investment. • • • • • Service delivery and capacity development programs are designed to generate results translated into stronger capacities of NGAs. transparent and accountable coordination mechanisms at all levels. the Sanitation Roadmap has proposed to define its long term plans in the context of three (3) MTPDPs. monitoring and evaluation in sanitation. Policy on integrated water supply and sanitation oversight. Clear policies aimed at integrating and decentralizing implementation of sustainable sanitation programs.4.

Strategic alliance building programs are designed to strengthen the sanitation sector through clear and strong policies on advocacy. Financing. including the provision of appropriate relief and rehabilitation responses. The policy directions will focus on the following: • Facilitating an enabling environment for multi-sectoral and broad-based stakeholder participation at the national and local levels. hygiene and water supply response for different types of emergency situations. entrepreneurship and private sector involvement (e. the DOH. Table 7 provides a more detailed description of policy directions and programs. awareness raising. Developing and promoting innovative financing schemes to promote sanitation investments. Policy directions will focus on the following: • • • Defining minimum standards and emergency protocols for sanitation. Encouraging advocacy and health education activities among heads of households to improve awareness. the Lead Sector Driver must find ways to strengthen local support groups engage in sanitation programs. academic and civil society to promote and advance a national sanitation agenda. • • Enhancing institutional knowledge and understanding of sustainable sanitation. prioritizing highly vulnerable areas. micro-financing strategies. etc). Prioritizing access to sustainable sanitation especially for the poor.   § ¬ « § © ª ¡ © ž ¦ § ¦ ž ¡ § £ ¢ Ÿ ¨ § ¡ ž § ¦ ¥ ¤ £ ¢ ¡ ž     ž Ÿ ž  œ 62 . Integrating sanitation and hygiene concerns in disaster and risk reduction plans at all levels. collaboration and harmonization of sanitation programs and projects. donor community. and Harnessing the broad alliances and platforms along with other national agencies and local government units for quick mobilization of logistics. must consciously tap existing networks and alliances. revolving funds. and Institutionalizing the creation and development of barangay sanitation volunteers. The PEN and the PDF-TF WSS are existing platforms for this purpose. and modify behavior and practices of people on hygiene and sanitation.g. and cooperation. leveraging of resources. The policy directions will focus on the following: • • • Creating the national account for sanitation and sewerage. Involving the organized participation of service providers and private sector stakeholders. creating sanitation funds at local and national levels.necessary to support fundamental planning and evaluation of sanitation programs and activities Formulation of evidence-based policies and programs through the generation of information from sector studies. • • • Involving key stakeholders towards their active participation in capacity development. Likewise. Sanitation in disaster preparedness programs are designed to address sanitation concerns in emergency situations. The Lead Sector Driver. education and enabling investment environment. There must be a clear policy to engage all relevant stakeholders from the government. investments and infrastructure programs are designed to provide for sanitation as a development goal.

Weak implementation of water quality mgt. BOT. Policy on sanitation regulatory framework. Urban Development & Housing Act 4. joint venture.Strong Sanctions . SUSEP will conduct a demand study on sanitation professionals 3.In harmony with Clean Water Act.2028 ( 3 MTPDPS) POLICY DIRECTION AND PROGRAMS 1. schools. and standards No comprehensive sanitation standards specialy for informal settlers. MEDIUM TERM PLAN (By 2016) Sanitation Fund reflected in the regular GAA under the National Social Fund (Pro-poor Fund) LONG TERM PLAN (By 2028) Sanitation as a National Policy consistently reflected in all MTPDP and MTPIP Outcome 1: Responsive Sanitation Governance and Regulatory Strengthening Sanitation Policy not a priority in the MTPDP & MTPIP (20042010) 2. Amended National Sanitation Code with strong and effective regulatory framework for sanitation . distribution of toilet bowl Sanitation integrated in all LGU development plans All LGUs shall invest in sanitation (PPP. outsourcing. Policy instruments and communication plans of other sectors on sanitation reviewed Specific areas that need to be updated in the sanitation code identified Policy Study on sanitation regulation NEDA Board Resolution clarifying mandate for sanitation regulation. Act. Sanitation fully integrated in all policy instruments and communication plans of other sectors Sanitation concerns mainstreamed and fully implemented by all sectors 63 ± ¸ ½ ¼ ¸ º » ² º ¯ · ¸ · ¯ ² ¸ ´ ³ ° ¹ ¸ ² ¯ ¸ · ¶ µ ´ ³ ² ¯ ± ± ¯ ° ¯ ® ­ . A National Sanitation Policy Expressed in the MTPDP & MTPIP 2009 BASELINE SHORT-TERM PLAN (2010-2013) Sanitation declared a priority policy in all agencies concerned in sanitation with corresponding budget line items proposed for GAA Sanitation a priority in the MTPDP & MTPIP (2010-2016) A National Sustainable Sanitation Plan launched and rolled out (with a decentralized implementation) A short to medium term National Sustainable Sanitation Communications Plan A social marketing program for sanitation is developed Sanitation Code a priority in the national legislative agenda (Legislative Executive Development Advisory Council) Amendment of the sanitation code filed in both houses of congress An amended National Sanitation Code passed and signed into law All LGUs adopt their local sanitation code and vigorously implement it.Updated Standards . A National Sanitation Program Implemented harmoniously by all concerned agencies Sanitation Programs mostly limited to advocacy and use.Decentralization (LGC 1991) . and septage treatment Sanitation not a priority in their local development plan except for a few LGUs. Solid Waste Mgt. etc.TABLE 7 POLICY DIRECTIONS AND PROGRAMS 2010 . potential evacuation centers and other public bldgs. The amended Sanitation Code includes the creation of a National Water and Sanitation Authority A vibrant National Water Supply and Sanitation Authority in place 5. Integrated water and sanitation oversight function at national & local levels DOH has started updating the Sanitation Code in 1995 The past three (3) Congresses has not acted on any amendment on the Sanitation Code Less than 10 LGUs have local sanitation codes and these are all project driven Current sanitation code is not culture sensitive to indigenous peoples nor gender sensitive.) Communications Plan implemented SUSEA Project is tasked to develop DOH National Plan and Communications Plan MDGF is also developing a communications plan. gyms. Building Code is silent on exit of effluent from septic tanks. Communications Plan implemented Integration of functions at local level is limited to a few LGUs and still project driven Oversight function in water & sanitation of IACEH and NEDA InfraCom SCWR is not palpable Existing Basic Education Curriculum (BEC) not updated on sanitation development Sanitation is absent in agricultural development DOH providing interim leadership NEDA SCWR to lead the sector oversight and provides direction.

Enforcement of policies by the LGUs.POLICY DIRECTION AND PROGRAMS 2009 BASELINE SHORT-TERM PLAN (2010-2013) MEDIUM TERM PLAN (By 2016) LONG TERM PLAN (By 2028) Outcome 2: Improved Service Delivery. Academe. national agencies. management strategies on sustainable sanitation are evidencebased 9.500 registered Sanitary Engineers Low effective demand for the practice of SE profession SE institutions are closing(few enrolees and recently. plans and programs. Academe based consortium on sanitation Community-based sanitation volunteers in SuSEA pilot areas Engage the core-group as initiators and resource persons for capacity development activities among the other members of their respective agencies/ institutions or organizations Engage and integrate the functions of barangay sanitation volunteer into the mainstream programs of the sector Carry out social marketing program for sanitary engineering professionals Introduce improvement in sanitary engineering curriculum in higher education institutions Capacity development program institutionalized within the sector and within individual organizations with continuous improvement impetus to address specific concerns Barangay sanitation officers are formally recognized and employed at the grassroot level while volunteerism is still advocated Sanitary Engineering is a recognized profession that is an authority on sustainable sanitation and is an attractive profession at par with the other professions in the country 5. Policy is integrated and decentralized implementation of sustainable sanitation programs LGUS operating different sanitation systems not necessarily sustainable DILG Toolbox for decision makers Assess the existing materials on capacity development and update them if needed Develop official guidelines and management models and technology options for LGUs on PIME Enhance package for LCEs Policy adopted and implemented by the DILG for LGUs. Policy on involving relevant stakeholder towards active participation in sanitation capacity development None Establish the performance indicators for LGUs and service providers• Establish benchmarks of LGU or service provider performance Identify core-group representing various capacity development providers and targets: Professional groups. Programs for sanitary inspectors/sanitarians that would force them to conform to the requirements of sustainable sanitation programs in terms of numbers and effective performance 8. DOH has ongoing project on professionalizing Sanitation Inspectors Introduce formal curriculum for sanitarians to higher education institutions Carry out social marketing program for sanitation inspectors/sanitarians All local government units employ sufficient professional sanitarians/ sanitation inspectors duly responsive to the needs of sustainable sanitation programs Few studies are available locally Poor link between information-generating sector and policy decision makers and program planners Introduce and promote sustainable sanitation studies in higher education institutions Carry out sector development programs among stakeholders on research and development Institutionalize linkages with decision makers and program planners Regular water and sanitation sector assessment and reporting All policies and laws. Established partnerships and capacities with other agencies/institutions for exchange of information or training 2. Policy on capacity development system for different levels of implementers and situations 3. Programs increasing the number of sanitary engineering professionals and continuously improving the quality of education on sustainable sanitation and public health engineering There are only 500 practicing out of 2. Communications and Capacity Development 1. Develop LGU capacities to enforce national policies including drafting of specific local ordinance Strengthen the capacities of at least one Resource Center per region to integrate sanitation disciplines into their programs Develop/Improve training plans. Formulation of evidencebased policies and programs on sustainable sanitation through generation of information from sector studies Less than 2000 Sanitary Inspectors (law says one SI per 20. materials and core trainers for capacity development Develop E-learning program on capacity development Regular Monitoring and evaluation of the LGU and service provider performance LGUs capable of facilitating and overseeing local sustainable sanitation programs are in place. Policy on LGU performance and practice oriented thru benchmarking standards and monitoring 4. Sanitation sector policies and programs assessment are institutionalized conducted regularly or according to the need for information National Sector assessment Process has just started under DILG Institutionalize a national assessment. Minimum requirement is HS graduate. non-formal component (trainings for sanitary inspectors). only 15% pass the board) Develop a social marketing program for sanitary engineering professionals Explore how to re-engineer the sanitary engineering curriculum involving the principles and practices of sustainable sanitation A study on how to engage better the skills of sanitary engineers Develop the program on professionalizing sanitation inspectors at a level with the rest of the RHU professionals: develop or strengthen formal curriculum for sanitarians and improve compensation Develop social marketing program for sanitation inspectors/ sanitarians Identification of gaps and challenges on sector policies and programs Sector capacity assessment and program development on research studies and development Strengthen linkages among information-generators and policy decision makers and program planners Establish a regular monitoring and assessment system including database generation Recurrent sector assessment reported regularly to policy decision makers and program planners 7. civic societies and aligning sub-groups of similar function Train at least one Barangay sanitation volunteer per barangay Regular Monitoring and evaluation of the LGU and service provider performance SuSEP Program that is enhancing curriculum for engineers. monitoring and evaluation system for short and long term decisionmaking Â É Î Í É Ë Ì Ã Ë À È É È À Ã É Å Ä Á Ê É Ã À É È Ç Æ Å Ä Ã À   À Á À ¿ ¾ 64 . Policy on barangay level volunteer workers for sanitation 6. technology options.000 popn).

POLICY DIRECTION AND PROGRAMS 1. Most water districts are remiss in their mandate in providing sanitation facilities and services No sanitation governance at national and local level. At the local level. POs. academe. Accreditation rules are considered obstacle to participation 2. Policy on facilitating an enabling environment for multi-sectoral and broad-based stakeholder participation. religious sector and private sector in selected highly urbanized areas LONG TERM PLAN (By 2028) Strong local sanitation platforms supportive of national sanitation policies established nationwide Institutionalize partnerships on sanitation among government and civil society. POs. religious sector and private sector nationwide Outcome 3: Strengthening Strategic Alliances Local Government Code provisions on local development boards (onefourth representation from the Civil Society) Issues: a. the Sanitation body will: Monitor the indicators and progress of sanitation related plans and programs and performances 4. relevant to sanitation at the national and local levels 2009 BASELINE SHORT-TERM PLAN (2010-2013) Facilitate the creation of local resource pools. Support the development of the Sanitation Alliance Guidebook MEDIUM TERM PLAN (By 2016) Strong local sanitation platforms supportive of national sanitation policies established in selected highly urbanized areas Institutionalize partnerships on sanitation among government and civil society. academe. Implement the program in localizing and operationalizing sanitation as a human right and as a public good. uncontrolled and often times nonexistent. Transparency and Accountability on sanitation Through the various Sanitation Alliances or Platforms: Define a program to operationalize how sanitation can be accepted as a human right and as a public good. media. Policy on organized participation of service providers and other relevant private sector stakeholders Except for Metro Manila where two private concessionaires are involved in Sanitation. academe. Policy to promote informed choices on sanitation options Present guidelines are prescriptive and limited in scope. Sanitation is not recognized as a human right and a public good Encourage water and sanitation professionals and service providers into effective alliances Facilitate the creation of local sanitation professionals and service providers to promote sustainable sanitation Strong local sanitation professionals and service providers established 3. New knowledge base (Sanitation Sourcebook and other materials) is available but not widely disseminated and not institutionalized Develop a strategy for Implement the strategy on participatory collaborative participatory collaborative mechanisms for active evidence-based knowledge mechanisms for active sharing and policy advocacy evidence-based knowledge sharing and policy advocacy 65 Ó Ú ß Þ Ú Ü Ý Ô Ü Ñ Ù Ú Ù Ñ Ô Ú Ö Õ Ò Û Ú Ô Ñ Ú Ù Ø × Ö Õ Ô Ñ Ó Ó Ñ Ò Ñ Ð Ï . religious sector and private sector in consonance with the Local Government Code and other relevant laws. media. Develop indicators and monitor progress of sanitation related plans and programs and performances Advocate a legislative program to operationalize how sanitation can be accepted as a human right and as a public good. private sector involvement in the other places are unregulated. Policy on Good Governance. alliances or platforms for sanitation (individuals/ organization) to provide the proper representation in the Sanitation body Promote partnerships on sanitation among government and civil society. POs. media. No local Sanitation body b.

Criteria set for prioritization. m. Clear policy on an integrated water. Creation of a database Study on sanitation tariff metholodies. m.000 cu.100 cu. Outside Metro Manila. Program to develop more and or alternative mobile sanitation facilities for quick deployment when required. more than 76 sewerage/septage management systems. subsidies and incentives Tracking of sanitation funds being collected and disbursed by the local governments Proposals for Funding including Research and Development and Capacity Development 3. operated and maintained Undertake aggressive IEC/ social marketing Facilitate access to financing PPP in sanitation service provision Metro Manila Septage treatment capacity of about 2. Program to provide WASH orientation to disaster response groups Recurring problems and challenges regarding lack of sanitation in emergency situations Toilets segregated by sex 1:1 female to male ratio of toilets No toilet to people ratio standard Rental of portalets from private companies. many adhoc initiatives Regularly carry out capacity development for WASH in Emergency situations Regularly carry out capacity development for WASH in Emergency situations Regularly carry out capacity development for WASH in Emergency situations ä ë ð ï ë í î å í â ê ë ê â å ë ç æ ã ì ë å â ë ê é è ç æ å â ä ä â ã â á à 66 .800 cu. per day realized/ constructed. No WASH Program in place. m. per day realized/ constructed. safe. Policy for priority investment towards highly vulnerable areas 2. of people /toilet ratio • Acceptable. Policy on Sanitation Infrastructure Development National Sewerage and Septage Program Report Metro Manila Septage treatment capacity of about 1. built and maintained Standards for PPPs in place for sanitation service delivery are developed 5. Develop a policy on broadbased sanitation response to emergency situations 1:50 toilet to people ratio. Outside Metro Manila.POLICY DIRECTION AND PROGRAM 2009 BASELINE SHORT-TERM PLAN (2010-2013) MEDIUM TERM PLAN (By 2016) LONG TERM PLAN (By 2028) Outcome 4: Financing. 3: 1 female to male toilet ratio Facilitate the creation of national and local broadbased sanitation alliances to respond to emergency situations 1:20 toilet to people ratio (international standard for humanitarian response) 3:1 female to male toilet ratio More mobile sanitation facilities for immediate deployment when required. Policy providing special pro-poor sanitation funds very limited grants/loans none Study on cost of the technology approaches Develop and undertake study on sustainable sanitation financing Develop guidelines for propoor sanitation subsidies Implementation in priority areas Zero subsidy for sanitation Investment requirements identified Investment requirements provided none Clear national policy on investments for sanitation A distinct sanitation program regularly included in the MTPDP and MTPIP Regular budgets allocated for sanitation at LGU level Guidelines for the development of local financing policy for sanitation Funding for research and development made available Regular fund allocation for R and D and Capacity Development Financing policies in place. • Maximum no. Outside Metro Manila. Clear national/local policy on vinvestment for sanitation and regular inclusion in the MTPDP/ MTPIP none Vulnerable areas identified.operated and maintained PPPs in place for sanitation service delivery 6. Institutionalize national and local broad-based sanitation alliances to respond to emergency situations 1:20 toilet to people ratio (international standard for humanitarian response) 3:1 female to male toilet ratio Design of alternative ecofriendly toilet systems More mobile sanitation facilities for immediate deployment when required. per day realized/ constructed. 14 sewerage/septage systems built. sanitation and hygiene approach in emergency situations. 3. hygienic toilet systems • Handwashing facilities 2. none 5-10% of the 23% provided with sanitation facilities 20-30% of the 23% provided with sanitation facilities Remaining balance (of the 23%) provided with sanitation facilities Metro Manila Septage treatment capacity of about 3. cost recovery schemes. Infrastructure and Investments in Priority Strategic Areas 1. Results of studies embodied in policies and is now in place. Policy promoting sanitation financing options/strategies: a) micro-finance b) loans/grants 4. Policy for the Promotion of sanitation entrepreneurship limited Outcome 5: Adequate Sanitation and Hygiene Promotion Mainstreamed in Emergency Response 1. 57 sewerage/septage systems built.

and Establish and institutionalize regular monitoring mechanism on sanitation program accomplishments at LGU level. The programs specifically aim to: (i) develop processes for preparing medium-term and long-term national sustainable sanitation plans/programs that are updated according to the government’s medium term planning cycle. Consolidate all recommendations for further amendment of the Sanitation Code to comply with existing environmental laws such as Clean Water Act and Ecological Solid Waste Management Act. implementation. It specifically aims to: 1)Map out existing government/ non-government institutions and their specific sanitation related functions/ mandates. Advocate for the provision of grants and/or technical assistance to the National Government Agencies (NGAs)/Offices who are engaged in sanitation related projects/facilities. strengthening linkages with other 67 õ ü ¡   ü þ ÿ ö þ ó û ü û ó ö ü ø ÷ ô ý ü ö ó ü û ú ù ø ÷ ö ó õ õ ó ô ó ò ñ . Following are specific activities to effectively implement the NSSP: • • Advocate sanitation agenda to be included in the MTPDP and MTPIP as a line item to ensure allocation of financial resources. and (iii) update local level (municipal and provincial) sanitation codes and ordinances based on the needs of local communities. 2. and 4) strengthen the DOH as the lead sector driver. organized campaign for zero open defecations. similar conferences and workshops will be carried out at the provincial and municipal levels to raise the level of public consciousness on sanitation issues and programs.2 PROPOSED PRIORITY PROGRAMS IN THE SANITATION SECTOR The PSR proposes at least 18 major programs or projects under the five outcomes to support the sector: A. community health and safety. 3) For each agency to develop their sanitation plans and programs and coordinate these at national level platforms. 2) Review and rationalize these functions/ mandates of existing government/nongovernment organizations/institutions.4. (ii) develop the capacity of LGUs at all levels in planning. Strengthening of the LGU Institutional Framework and Advocacy for ensuring provision of adequate sanitation services This program primarily aims to achieve institutional reforms and coordination mechanisms among LGU local chief executives to consider sanitation aspects as priority program in addressing current problems on environment. Implementation of the National Sustainable Sanitation Planning Framework and Processes The national sustainable sanitation programs aim to be integrated with local development plans through enhancement of LGU planning capacities. However. Outcome 1: Responsive Sanitation Governance and Regulatory Strengthening 1. Strengthening of coordination mechanism at national level for sanitation programs This program aims to establish effective coordination mechanism among national stakeholders on sanitation. 3. monitoring and evaluation of sustainable sanitation programs. This will be achieved through regular advocacy dialogues. distribution of IEC materials. Such programs will be launched at the national level. • • These activities will be facilitated by DOH as the interim leader in coordination and consultation with the NEDA SCWR.

(b)development/update of official national guidelines and management models and technology options. (3) Enhancement of formal and non-formal education programs. monitoring and evaluating sustainable sanitation services or programs. There are two basic objectives under this program (1)to increase the number of entities/organizations or human resources to meet the desired workforce and (2)to improve the standard of performance or quality of competencies needed to achieve high degree of compliance to acceptable sustainable sanitation systems. similar to what the MWSS Regulatory Office is now doing with its regulation by contract arrangements with their private concessionaires. sectors and other stakeholders to align their goals. and (c)translating the national guidelines for key sector stakeholder requirements such as for LCEs. The components of this program include (a)an inventory and assessment of the existing materials on capacity development from 1976 to 2009. and other similar groups. This study is required to be the basis of formulating an appropriate and comprehensive regulatory framework for sanitation. Review and revisiting of LGU sanitation codes and ordinance will be carried out to identify proposed changes and integrate policies to prioritize sanitation concerns. academe. sanitarians/sanitation inspectors. These shall include national and local agencies. strategies and courses of action on the overall aim of a national sustainable sanitation program. Outcome 2: Improved Service Delivery Through Communications and Capacity Development 5. The program components include (1) Organization and mobilization of core-groups representing various capacity development providers and targets (2)Development of social marketing activities for sanitation professionals. This study will be a review of sanitation policy and legislation from 1976 to 2009 with the end view of formulating recommendations on sanitation policies including how economic regulation for sanitation services can also be put in place. etc. This program shall design capacity development systems through the formulation of guidelines or management models on technology options. implementing. This includes the compilation of existing standards and coming up with a clear standards-based regulation parameters. The study will answer questions such as should the NWRB and LWUA play a role in economic regulation for sewerage projects. technology and coordinating sustainable sanitation projects/ programs. Stakeholders Capacity Development and Empowerment This program shall enhance the capacity of human resources and organizations in planning. (4) Establishment of physical infrastructure support.stakeholders. (5)Implementation of Training Activities. ¦       §  ¤    ¤ §  © ¨ ¥   § ¤     © ¨ § ¤ ¦ ¦ ¤ ¥ ¤ £ ¢ 68 . civil society. and coordination and linkages techniques which could guide any interested entity in planning. Development of a Sanitation Human Resource Development Framework The government shall develop a program that will formulate national guidelines that shall integrate and direct all agencies. Policy study for the appropriate and comprehensive regulatory framework for sanitation. 6. public health specialists. social marketing/advocacy strategies. 4. PPDCs/MPDCs. and other entities. professionals and practitioners such as sanitary engineers. B. developing and improving designs on sanitation. implementing and evaluating sanitation programs.

Maintaining Quality of Training Programs To ensure high quality of capacity development or training programs. (3)Formulating the Research and Development Agenda (4) Coordination among information-generators and policy decision makers under the sustainable sanitation program. The success of this agenda depends on how the target population would change their behavior and practices by motivating them through effective education and information programs (predisposing factors). (3)validation by independent assessment bodies. The program intends to provide immediate and long-term corrective measures on strategies that need to be rectified to conform to an optimal achievement of goals and objectives of sustainable sanitation program. The components of this program include: (1)development of standards. 8. (2)assessment of capacity development activities. 69 # 0 5 4 0 2 3 $ 2 ! ) 0 ) ! $ 0 & % " 1 0 $ ! 0 ) ( ' & % $ ! # # ! " !  . This program links with the PWSSR priority program on Sector Baseline Assessment. and performance indicators. and evaluation of sanitation programs and activities. The components of this program include: (1)Assessment of information gaps and challenges of the sector. It aims to strengthen linkages between information-generating sector and policy decision makers and program planners. by enabling them to have access to technology and other resources with reinforcing factors such as collectively enhancing behavior and practices of all community members. Strengthening Water and Sanitation Monitoring and Evaluation Sector Monitoring and Evaluation shall be strengthened at different levels to support fundamental planning. performance indicators. The choice of methods of intervention in finding meaningful solutions to sanitation problems should be initiated by these same people who clamor for assistance and guidance so that they are made responsible for setting up their own sanitation facilities and services. benchmarks. assessment of training programs and evaluation of trained individuals. Evaluation of training programs shall be conducted by the government agencies and validated by independent assessment bodies. To achieve this.7. 9. and (3) Establishment of web-based database and information-exchange forums. implementation. and (5)Actual specific research proposals developed. Monitoring shall ensure proper alignment of activities with standards while results of evaluation will confirm or negate assumptions on policies and plans. (2)Sector capacity assessment. This shall entail the development of gold standards. National Advocacy Program on Sustainable Sanitation The sanitation roadmap aims to engage and capacitate national and sector agencies and institutions and other stakeholders with the ultimate aim of enabling (1) village or local communities to manage their own sanitation programs towards eliminating open defecation practices and (2) sanitation service providers to manage wastes in a sustainable fashion. the government embarks on quality assurance programs. 10. The components of this program include: (1) Formulation of Water and Sanitation Monitoring and Evaluation Procedures (2) Recurrent sector assessment and reporting. benchmarks. and for them to actively demand for reforms on sanitation at the grass-roots level. it is fundamental that people themselves must realize that the consequences of their (un)hygienic behavior and practices result to demeaning quality of life. Research and Development The program on research and development shall provide information in order to support the formulation of evidence-based policies and decision making.

the project will also cover hygiene promotion and capacity building.. B Program on pro poor sanitation financing This study is geared towards development of specific pro poor sanitation financing models to help the poor secure access to sustainable sanitation facilities. Education.5 M to be implemented from April 2010 to March 2011. Total project cost is P1. NAPC. It will include the pre testing and piloting of the pro poor models in selected poor communities. The identified lead agency is DOH with support from DILG. This is a campaign that relates to the MDG based targets of reducing the number of households without sanitary toilets. To promote good governance and institution strengthening by: a. (d) Monitoring and Evaluation of the communication plan. 11. National Campaign on Zero Open Defecation This program aims to raise awareness on the need for sanitation and to use communication and hygiene promotion to trigger behavior change. In addition to toilet construction at the household level. Creating a consortia of committed and capable academic and training institutes for capacity development on sustainable sanitation. 2. DBM. The program calls for rewards and incentives for ODF communities. cooperation and collaboration towards policy promotion and implementation.5 M. Both NEDA and DOH are designated lead agencies with the active participation of NAPC.3 B. C. DPWH. To vigorously pursue multi-stakeholder participation in capacity development for sanitation a. the total project cost is estimated to be P13. Designated lead project coordinator is the DOH and lead implementers will be the LGUs with support from DILG. Implementation period is from January 2011 to December 2012 with a total project cost of P1. c. LWUA.The National Advocacy Program on Sustainable Sanitation shall have the following components: (1) Development of a National Communication Plan. strengthening and mobilizing the resources and mandate of existing inter agency bodies. Creating strong Executive-Legislative linkages and alliances. Communication and Motivation materials. Outcome 3: Broad-based Alliance of Multi-sectorial and Multi-level Stakeholders Strengthening the Sanitation Sector This program has three aims: 1. Mobilizing sanitation networks like PEN and Philippine Society of Sanitary Engineers to rally behind identified sector champions at national and local levels. (c) Implementation of the Communication Plan. Harnessing. 11. A Study on pro poor sanitation technology approaches This study aims to identify. the academe and LGUs. (b) Development of Information. @ G R Q G I P A I 8 F G F 8 A G C B 9 H G A 8 G F E D C B A 8 @ @ 8 9 8 7 6 70 .g. The strategy is to get barangays and municipalities to declare themselves as Open Defecation Free (ODF Barangay/City/ Municipality) and to encourage local legislation on penalties against open defecators. 11. e. and GFIs. b. This local legislation will be supported by facilitating or enabling the construction of basic sanitation facilities. IACEH Sub-Committee on Sanitation and PDF Task Force on WSS for more effective coordination. document and evaluate available pro poor sanitation approaches in order to provide affordable sanitation options to those in the bottom of the pyramid. GFIs and LGUs. To be implemented starting March 2010 to February 2013. NCIP NGOs. DENR. DOf.

13. To be implemented for one year the designated lead agency is DILG with support to be provided by DOH. DepEd. the different leagues as well as the academe and NGO. NEDA should incorporate the sanitation targets in the CIIP updates that it regularly produces. Part of the study is to come up with definition of “vulnerable areas. A component of the inventory. landslides. Estimated cost of the study is P 25 M to cover priority areas nationwide. The idea is to facilitate the management of attribute and spatial information in a GIs setting to help policy makers and planners in addressing the sanitation needs of these areas thru the provision of timely data in support of policies and programs. NCIP. 14. identification and mapping of vulnerable areas This project is intended to carry out the inventory. LLDA.5 M for the hardware and software including limited training of concerned staff to handle the database. Promoting Public-Private-Partnerships. tourist areas and interisland shipping vessel lanes. coastal areas. Advocacy for sanitation investments and budget allocations at national and local levels. facilities and infrastructures. Providing affordable and sustainable training programs to all mandated agencies and institutions like LGUs and Water Supply and Sanitation providers. DepEd. information and maps of “vulnerable areas” Vulnerable areas will include areas that are subject to flooding. the different leagues as well as the academe and NGO.. NCIP. d. This is a one year study with DILG as the lead agency with support to be provided by DENR. c. DENR. Estimated cost is P 10. 2011.A. IP areas. This program has to be approved. Implementation period is Jan. 2011. NSCB. this project aims to develop a database of the areas identified as vulnerable. Implementation period is Jan. LLDA. 2010 to Dec. Developing investment strategies and investment/subsidy schemes for small. 2010 to Dec.B Development and operationalization of database of vulnerable areas. c. This will include collection and compilation of existing data. NAPC. Outcome 4: Financing and Infrastructure Investments in Priority Strategic Areas 13. identification and mapping of vulnerable areas that are seriously affected by lack of sanitation. Capacity Development specially at the local level by stimulating local demands for Sustainable Sanitation services. NAPC. d. identification and mapping of vulnerable areas. Organizing the association of sanitation service providers. 13.C Comprehensive Infrastructure Program for Sanitation The NSSMP provides the program for Sewerage and Septage Management.. Development of the Investment and Financing Framework for sanitation This project is intended for the development of appropriate policy for investment 71 W d i h d f g X f U c d c U X d ` Y V e d X U d c b a ` Y X U W W U V U T S . b.b. public parks and playground as well as schools. 3. To promote Private Sector and small scale sanitation enterpreneurship involvement by: a. D. Widening the playing field for sanitation service providers. NSCB. medium and large sanitation infrastructure projects. funded and implemented by the LGUs with National government support. Inventory.

Study on sanitation tariff methodologies including sanitation incentives and subsidies This project is intended to develop a tariff methodology that would allow sufficient level of recovery of sanitation investment and development of an attractive package of sanitation incentives and subsidy schemes to encourage investment into sanitation. However. NOTE: budget does not include the expansion of MM septage capacity 16. Part of the policy development is the formulation of investment priority criteria and guidelines to serve as basis for investment priority programming.C. 14. LLDA. Project cost is estimated to be P500. DENR. The designated lead implementing agency is NEDA with support from DOH. Based on study results. 2010 to February. projects and activities. recommendations will be formulated to improve collection efficiency and use of sanitation fees. efficiency and track how sanitation fees currently collected by LGUs are being spent and used. DOH. Lead implementing agency is the NSSMP secretariat/DPWH with support from LWUA.5 M to be implemented from July 2010 to July 2011. Development and promotion of sanitation entrepreneurship social marketing plan This project is intended to develop and implement a strategic social marketing /IEC plan to promote and popularize sanitation entrepreneurship as an innovative business opportunity.5 M. Total project cost is P 1.prioritization of areas defined as highly vulnerable heavily impacted by the lack of sanitation. NAPC. NCIP. DILG is expected to take the lead with the active participation of pilot LGUs down to the barangay level. DOf and selected LGUs. 14. Study on development of sanitation financing models This study intends to develop innovative financing models that would help provide the necessary funding support for the implementation of sanitation programs. NSCB. Implementation period is from July 2010 to June 2011. the different leagues as well as the academe and NGO. 15. MWSS and its concessionaires. Implementation period is from January 2010 to December 2016. Pilot implementation of the tariff methodology covering priority provinces will also be conducted as part of the study. round table discussions and meetings. it will have to build on a number of studies to inform the framework: 14. DILG is the designated lead agency with support to be provided by DOH. DENR and LGUs including DepEd.A. Tracking sanitation funds at the LGU levels This project aims to determine collection levels. DOF. Project cost is P 2. Estimated cost of study is P 2. t  † …  ƒ „ u ƒ r €  € r u  w v s ‚  u r  € y x w v u r t t r s r q p 72 .7 B. Expansion of the Metro Manila septage capacity and construction of sewerage and/or septage facilities in highly urbanizing cities This project is intended to support the construction of sewerage and sewage system for highly urbanizing cities as indicated in the National Sewerage and Septage Management Plan. Part of the study is to pre test the models in selected pilot areas.8 M. 2011. Designated lead agency is NEDA with the active involvement of DILG. Implementation period is from march. This will also entail series of consultation with concerned stakeholders through focus group discussions. DepEd. DOH.000. Estimated project cost is P6.B. DILG and development partners.

This project directly contributes to the priority program on LGU capacity development in planning. Total project cost is P2. LGUs and NGOs. policies will be developed and a separate accounting system will be set up. Study on development of sanitation national account system This study is intended to assess the needs and feasibility of establishing an account system for sanitation to be able to keep tract of the sanitation expenditure at the household and national level.A. DOH. LGUs and the academe. E.5 M with DOH as lead implementing agency and with active support from DTI. Based on results. NGOs. monitoring and regulation wherein DILG is the lead proponent of the project with support from LWUA and NWRB targeting a 4-year implementation period starting 2009/2010 and possible funding support from ADB. management and operation of completed water systems. and 3) conduct of 73 ‘ ˜ g f ˜ d e ’ d ‰ — ˜ — ‰ ’ ˜ ” “  ™ ˜ ’ ‰ ˜ — – • ” “ ’ ‰ ‘ ‘ ‰  ‰ ˆ ‡ .3 ONGOING AND PIPELINE PROGRAMS This section briefly presents on-going and pipeline projects in the sector under NGAs that directly contributes to the priority programs discussed in the previous section. The long-term objective is to upgrade Level I facilities based on technical feasibility and people’s willingness-to-pay. DILG.Project coverage is nationwide. Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project Phase V – North Luzon (RWSSPV) This project is funded by the JBIC and involves 1) construction of 289 level I water supply facilities and 58 sanitation facilities. DPWH . Project cost is P2. DENR. The program is expected to result in a sourcebook for sanitation in different types of emergency situations and a corresponding training support for disaster preparedness focusing on the WASH aspects of disaster risk management. DILG. 4. GFIs. Study on documentation of PPP sanitation service provision This study aims to document current and existing projects on public-private partnership for sanitation service delivery and provision. in particular NSCB with support from DOH.000 people plus construction of sanitation facilities for about 150.5 M to be implemented from January 2011 to December 2013. WASH in Emergency Situations This program aims to develop further the policy guidelines. Outcome 5: Adequate Sanitation and Hygiene Promotion is Mainstreamed in Emergency Relief and Rehabilitation 18. It will highlight good practices that can be showcased and scaled up. CDA. Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Project in Visayas and Mindanao (RW3SPVM) The program aims to increase the level of commitment of LGUs to sustainable provision of potable water by ensuring the inclusion of water and sanitation in their local development plans and investment programs. While some of these projects prioritize water supply over sanitation. It will involve construction of approximately 800 Level II water systems with technical provision for ready benefiting about 850. 2) organization and training of 231 BWSAs. 16. implementation.DTI and PCCI as well as private sector representatives. it nevertheless provides opportunities and entry points for sanitation projects. Total project cost is P 1. 2011.000 households in 35 municipalities in Visayas and Mindanao classified as waterless. Designated lead agency is NEDA.5 M to be implemented in July 2010 to Dec. It will promote sustainability through community participation in planning. technologies and coordination approaches in managing excreta disposal in evacuation centers. DOF is the lead agency with support coming from NEDA. NSO. 17.

and (iv) reorganization of LWUA. Water District Development Sector Project (WDDSP) The WDDSP is a sector loan which aims to provide improved livability and competitiveness in urban areas outside Metro Manila due to enhanced water supply and sanitation infrastructure like wastewater collection and treatment as well as the sustainable provision of safe water supply and sanitation services. (ii) reduce the quantity of nonrevenue water and enhance asset management.capability building to 4 LGUs towards providing potable water supply and sanitation facilities and promoting sustainability through community participation. (iii) a program to increase awareness of sanitation and public health issues. Philippine Water Revolving Fund (PWRF) The PWRF is an innovative financing designed to support the long term investment requirements of LGUs and Water Districts for water supply and sanitation. waste water treatment facilities. (ii) a capacity development program to improve the financial and operating performance of water utilities. i. Although the NG-JBIC loan had been closed in 2007. Within this program is the Municipal Development Fund Office (MDFO) PWRF Standby Credit Facility ( PWRF-SCF). bio gas digesters. only 2 project areas remain for completion by December 2009. Included in the environmental projects are solid waste management facilities such as materials recovery facility (MRF). sanitary landfills. and (iii) improve the operating and financial performance of water utilities.e. The project has the following components: (i) an investment program for urban water supply and sanitation infrastructure. BWSA formation. Millenium Development Goals Fund (MDG-Fund) Apart from the PWRF SCF. composting facility. LWUA as the lead implementing agency is responsible for short-listing 5 water districts for preparation of subproject appraisal reports. Municipal Development Fund Project (MDFP) This financing facility of the MDFO has an initial allocated amount of P500 Million in October 2006 to offer financing to cities. To date. This sector loan from ADB contributes to the priority program on capacity development of water service providers and LWUA as support services provider of the water districts. The project supports capacity development for both LWUA and water districts. the MDFO was also mandated by its PGB to establish and finance LGU initiatives that directly contribute to the attainment of the MDGs parallel to the DILG’s “Guide to LGUs in the Localization fo the MDGs”. It has a unique feature of engaging PFIs as co-lenders with the Development Bank of the Philippines using JICA funds and credit guarantees from LGU Guarantee Corporation and the USAID Development Credit Authority. The PWRF-SCF is an MDFO standby loan financing window which can be accessed by LGUs that are already participating under the PWRF program.and Land Conservation such as River/Seashore Protection and Seawall. construction of the remaining works will be implemented by the LGUs through their own funds. The project is expected to (i) increase the access of the population in the provincial cities to improved water supply and sanitation. social and environmental projects as well as other Infrastructure Projects and Equipment. provincial LGUs may also qualify for loan financing provided that their 4th-6th income class municipalities will be benefitted. municipalities for revenue generating. Included in Component 1 (Investment Support) of the facility are water supply and sanitation projects for 4th-6th income class municipalities. drainage systems. provinces. waste management such as sewerage systems. l s x w s u v m u j r s r j m s o n k t s m j s r q p o n m j l l j k j i h 74 . On the other hand. The MDFO-Policy Governing Board (PGB) has initially allocated P500 Million in February 2006 to lengthen the tenor of Private Financing Institutions( PFIs) loan to LGUs. air quality management projects (support to the Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999).

water supply and other modes to be agreed among LBP as the implementing agency. Provincial Towns Water Supply and Sanitation Program (KfW III) . which runs from 2007 to 2012. Manila Third Sewerage Project In 2007. The proposed interest shall be fixed for the duration of the loan. Programme duration is from 2006-2010. while the IAC clearance was issued on 30 June 2009. and to promote innovative wastewater treatment techniques. The partnership’s goal is to turn the Pasig into a Clean River Zone in 7 years by ensuring zero toxic input into the river through solid waste management. and heightened consumer awareness . Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau (KfW) and concerned LGUs. CEZA Upgrade of Sewage Treatment Plant Upgrade of the existing Sewage Treatment Plant of the CEZA (Region 2 – Cagayan) to accommodate a minimum of one thousand (1. The objectives of the project are to assist the Filipino Government in reforming institutions in order to attract private investment in the wastewater sector. drainage and flood control. Kapit-Bisig sa Ilog Pasig The “Kapit Bisig sa Ilog Pasig” (Arm-in-Arm for the Pasig River) program was launched by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) in February 2009 through PRRC. Implemented by LWUA. and supports the cooperation between water districts and local administrations for sewage management towards enhanced water supply and sanitation services provision within the water districts' franchise areas.000) users towards ensuring that wastewater produced by the CEZA Complex can be safely released to any body of water. and septage treatment. Implementing Agency: CEZA with funding from the national government-GAA. A maximum of 2 years grace period may be allowed on the principal depending on the nature of the project. which was carried out from 1996 to 2005 . and ABS-CBN Foundation. The project is being 75 } „ ‰ ˆ „ † ‡ ~ † { ƒ „ ƒ { ~ „ €  | … „ ~ { „ ƒ ‚  €  ~ { } } { | { z y . Implementing agency is LWUA. The project follows the Manila Second Sewerage Project. The project. The project aims to increase the coverage and effectiveness of sewerage service delivery through an integrated approach involving septage management. The facility would be available to LGUs in the Visayas and Mindanao to support the focus of the German Development Cooperation Program. The design stage started in the 2nd quarter of 2008.. DENR-PRRC’s Pasig River Environmental Management and Rehabilation Sector Program (PAREMAR-SDP) expects to improve the water quality of the Pasig River and develop environmental preservation areas for urban renewal and is funded by the national government-GAA and ADB.Metro Luzon The project includes improvement of water supply systems for 1 big and 30 small water districts. the project duration is from 2009 to 2012. based on the prevailing market rate at the time of availment but not to exceed 13%. It will also continue the rehabilitation and resettlement work initiated by the PRRC. Establishment of Wastewater Treatment Facilities for Marikina River Basin This project aims to conduct feasibility studies and construct wastewater treatment plants towards improved water quality in the Marikina River to class "C" or recreational level.North Luzon Improvement of water supply systems for 2 big and 10 small WDs towards Improved and expanded water supply services. provides technical assistance as well as support for institutional coordination and private sector involvement . construction of storage facilities and drilling of new well sources etc.LGU Investment Programme This is a financing facility for projects like sanitation. Provincial Towns Water Supply and Sanitation Program (KfW III) . the World Bank approved an investment grant of US$5 million. to improve the coordination of institutions responsible for preventing water pollution. household or community septic tanks desludging. sewage management.

followed by actual assessment and inspection and provision of corrective measures. Ž • š ™ • — ˜  — Œ ” • ” Œ  • ‘   – •  Œ • ” “ ’ ‘   Œ Ž Ž Œ  Œ ‹ Š 76 . while the remaining US$5. Millennium Challenge Corporation Water Supply and Sanitation Component The Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) I is a United States Government corporation designed to work with some of the poorest countries of the world. foundations. and a database on schools without water. which are given technical assistance and financial support. Implementation is from 2007-2012. The project was undertaken in partnership with private sector. public utilities and private operators providing local infrastructure services nationwide. the creation of SWEFAP Task Force in schools. Schools’ Water and Electrical Facilities Assessment Project ( SWEFAP) The DepED has initiated the SWEFAP to assess the water facilities of schools. identify schools with poor or without water facilities and poor sanitation facilities and practices in order to provide corrective measures and interventions. (ii) finance improved sanitation infrastructure. World Bank Strategic Local Development and Investment Project This is a lending facility focusing on strategic investment support to infrastructure. Series of orientation and information dissemination was undertaken to launch the project. cooperatives. and (iv) provide funds for the hiring of a construction supervision consultant and specialized consultants. including private sector participation where feasible. Provincial Urban Sewerage and Septage Management Programme This project focuses on the development of sewerage and septage management projects in areas covered by water districts (a total of 18 projects). MCC funding may be between $500 Million to $1 Billion disbursed over 5 years wherein WSS projects are in the priority list of the proposed development program. including solid waste management facilities. The World Bank decided to contribute through a US$30 million loan to the project. Expected outcomes are to provide sewerage facilities/septage management programs in various WD areas in line with the government's sanitation/environment concern. utilities and improvement of LGU finance and is made available to all eligible and qualified applicants comprising of LGUs. soci-civic organizations. health and nutrition centers. Inc. Implemented by LWUA from 2009 to 2015.implemented by Manila WAter Company. and supervision for improved water supply systems in LGUs. the project is funded by the national government and is currently conducting feasibility studies for Dasmarinas and Cavite WDs. The four components of the project are to: (i) finance civil works. wastewater treatment. LGUs and the DOH. (iii) provide investment and assistance in micro-drainage infrastructure. with LBP as the implementing agency. and housing. World Bank LGU Urban Water and Sanitation Project (APL 2) This is a lending facility whose sub-loan terms is 9% annual interest rate with 3 years grace period and 15 years tenor with target program participants being LGUs and water districts.2 million are financed by local institutions. equipment. water utilities and companies. The second Local Government Unit (LGU) urban water project aims to reach approximately 40 LGU-operated water systems. The project began in 2001 and will end in 2008 Department of Education-Physical Facilities and Schools Engineering Division (PFSED) projects A. Two assessment manuals were prepared to guide the SWEFAP Tsask Forces created in all schools to undertake assessment and inspection. sanitation and electrical facilities which are now available and the Department’s basis in providing assistance and interventions to all schools nationwide. in coordination with MMDA and Marikina LGU.

This project is covered in the loan agreement with the World-Bank under BESRA-NPSBE. KALAHI-CIDSS The DSWD’s Kapit-Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan – Comprehensive Integrated Delivery of Social Services (KALAHI-CIDSS) Project initiated in 2003 has a Municipal Allocation Fund of PhP300. 65. continues to instruct and guide local governments on the use of the Community-Based Monitoring System (CBMS) and conducts 77 Ÿ ¦ « ª ¦ ¨ ©   ¨  ¥ ¦ ¥    ¦ ¢ ¡ ž § ¦    ¦ ¥ ¤ £ ¢ ¡    Ÿ Ÿ  ž  œ › .000. The data collected through CBMS is then integrated into local planning. 55 and 76. water and sanitation. Special Allotment Release Order (SARO) shall only be released upon contract award has been undertaken. In addition. (including sanitation facilities. The WB-funded project ends in May 2010.2009 "Implementing Guidelines for the Construction/Repair/Rehabilitation of Classrooms and Schools' Water and Sanitation Facilities" indicating budget appropriations for priority projects including construction and/or repair/rehabilitation of toilet and water facilities in high need areas. Department of Education-Essential Health Care Program (EHCP) The implementation of the “EHCP for Filipino Children” is a program which is readily available at a cost of P 25. s.the Department issued Department Memo No. Selection of priority schools prepared by the PFSED is based on data on shortage of toilet and water facilities on the BEIS (SY 2008-2009) and the SWEFAP. income. basic education. This program advocates for school-based health interventions particularly on the importance of handwashing with soap and water as the simplest. as well as multi-level assessment and impact evaluation. Aside from provision of grant funds. capability building and implementation support to the communities. It covers the 42 poorest provinces including 4216 barangays in 183 municipalities. The NAPC Secretariat. most effective way of improving sanitation and hygiene. Exposure to school based daily handwashing. in cooperation with CBMS Network Team.000.750.2009 calls for the institutionalization of EHCP in schools and ordering the immediate construction of water and handwashing facilities. considering that classroooms and sanitation facilities are one of the requirements in building safe learning environment for school children. In view of this. s. and for sanitation and/or solid waste management facilities. Department Orders Nos. program implementation and impact-monitoring. s. KALAHI-CIDSS conducts social preparation.000 which LGUs can use for community subprojects including (but not limited to) basic social services such as water system and tribal housing/shelter. the Department of Education issued DO No.2009 "Implementation of an Annual Global Handwashing Day every 15th of October" to conduct activities with the DOH and PhilHealth every year. Single or clustered projects amounting to $100. Construction/Repair/Rehabilitation of Classrooms and Schools’ Water and Sanitation Facilities The construction. shelter. 4. Community-Based Monitoring System (CBMS) The CBMS is a tool for monitoring social indicators for health.00 or Php4. 450. nutrition. The system is an organized process of data collection and processing at the local level.00 per child per year. and additional financing for the next years has been proposed to the NEDA for approval.B.00 (using the current rate of $1=Php47. repair/rehabilitation of classrooms and water and sanitation facilities in schools is part of th epump priming projects of the President. if required).50) shall be implemented using the Principal-led SBP Scheme. employment and peace and order. flouride tooth brushing and twice a year de-worming will familiarize children with healthy habits and is expected to have an impact on awareness concerning water and sanitation issues in the communities and hygiene practices in family life.

The World Bank approved a US$50 million loan in 2007 for the project which runs from 2007 to 2011.forums to familiarize NGAs on the concept and design of the CBMS National Repository. These modules can be used by the Center for Health Development in the regions in the conduct of their training program for Sanitation Inspectors. has already achieved a successful introduction of low-cost options for sanitation. the construction of dehydration toilets. provincial. DILG-GTZ Water Supply and Sanitation Capacity Development Program for LGUs This program aims to provide technical assistance to help local institutions in the planning. management and delivery of rural water supply systems. in 5 Regions of the country are targeted to benefit from the MDGF UNDP-Spain joint programme. the program seeks to address the plight of about 432 local governments that would have less than 50% water supply coverage in their localities. present and explain the policies and procedures of accessing and using CBMS data in their own planning. while NAPC oversees the monitoring and inspection of ongoing projects. National Program Support for Environment and Natural Resources Management Project The project aims to assist the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to improve its service delivery through a better allocation of its limited financial resources. and encourages strong partnership between the CHD and LGUs in the use of the modules for capacity building for effective protection and promotion of health and application of an integrated environmental approach. and generate comments/suggestions to enhance CBMS National Repository concept and operating policies. DOH conducted a nationwide search January to December 2008 with the help of ° · ¼ » · ¹ º ± ¹ ® ¶ · ¶ ® ± · ³ ² ¯ ¸ · ± ® · ¶ µ ´ ³ ² ± ® ° ° ® ¯ ® ­ ¬ 78 . which runs from 2006 to 2009. MDGF Project – Joint Programme Enhancing Access. Zero Diarrhea awards for barangays The Department of Health (DOH) Zero Diarrhea awards are for barangays with the best sanitation practices. LGUs are assigned to implement water supply projects for waterless areas without water districts. and Provision of Water Services with the Active Participation of the Poor (UNDP-Spain) Launched April 2009. The program seeks to overcome the institutional confusion and to strengthen governmental organizations at the national. In addition. The program. and municipal levels. DOH serves as the funding agency while the Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA) is the designated implementing agency. monitoring. the decentralization plan of the National Water Resources Board is supported. Sanitation Action Week Launched during the International Year of Sanitation 2008. priority agenda is the signing of a Presidential Proclamation (Adopting 2008 as the International Year of Sanitation and declaring the fourth week of June of every year as Sanitation Action Week) Department of Health training for sanitary inspectors In 2004. Thirty six (36) of these so-called waterless municipalities located in 12 provinces. President's Priority Program on Water (P3W) Under this program. and the first Filipino constructed wetland. treating wastewater from about 700 households. The components of the projects include integrated ecosystem management and environmental and natural resources management. and evaluation endeavors. the DOH prepared the "Training Modules on Integrated Health and Environment for Capacity Building of Sanitation Inspectors in LGUs" designed to enhance the sanitary inspectors' roles at the LGUs.

chosen from among 42. The legislation calls for the preparation of a national program and instructs highly urbanized cities (HUCs) to provide sewerage and septage services to minimize the adverse impacts of domestic wastewater discharges to the water quality of water resources in general. In participating localities. These are: Bauko Municipality in the Mt. SuSEA Philippines would be a platform for a) testing. This sub-component will provide consultants to work with the NSSMP technical working group formed by the Government to formulate the 79 Á È Í Ì È Ê Ë Â Ê ¿ Ç È Ç ¿ Â È Ä Ã À É È Â ¿ È Ç Æ Å Ä Ã Â ¿ Á Á ¿ À ¿ ¾ ½ . Sustainable Sanitation in East Asia Philippines Program (SuSEA) The Sustainable Sanitation in East Asia (SuSEA) Philippines component supports in-country mechanisms to help increase access. The desired program outcomes are: At the national level. Provincial Health Offices.000 other Philippine barangays. Guian Municipality in Eastern Samar Province. National Sewerage and Septage Management Program – NSSMP (US$ 150. This work commenced in July 2008 and will be included as a subject of the mid-term review.000 cash prize. and Local Government Units. Six sites are participating in the main program sub-component of SuSEA.000) This sub-component was developed to address a key underlying factor for the sanitation sector under performance. The initiative aimed to: 1) Disseminate information on the importance of sanitation and its impact on people’s health. Under SuSEA there are a number of other sub-projects: Developing Sustainable Sanitation Education Programs in the Philippines. improvement of environmental health conditions by 2010. especially of the poor. 3) Recognize exemplary barangays and showcase their best sanitation practices. ADB joined the DOH in recognizing the 28 winning barangays by hosting an awarding ceremony at ADB Headquarters.000) The objective of this activity is to support the formulation of an implementation strategy for a proposed NSSMP as mandated under the Clean Water Act (2004).e. and Alabel Municipality in Saranggani. The activity will review the existing state of education programs on sanitation (formal and informal) and will work with interested partner institutions to develop and test sustainable sanitation education modules targeting existing practitioners as well as potential future cadre of sanitation professionals. SuSEA Philippines was conceived as a learning program to support the Government of the Philippines update its approaches and interventions in sanitation and needs that were not present or not addressed in traditional sanitation programs that focused on two extremes – 1) toilet-bowl distribution and hygiene education and 2) centralized sewerage systems. The strategy of SUSEA Philippines for increasing access of the poor to sustainable sanitation is by systematically responding to the key causal factors that impede the demand for and supply of sanitation. Province. Each winning barangay was awarded a plaque and PhP150. Gereral Santos City and Polomolok Municipality in South Cotabato. learning and developing tools for scaling-up interventions b) capacity and institution building of local government units in implementing appropriate sanitation solutions and c) improvement of national sanitation policy and programs as exemplified from the best field-based results. for implementing the best sanitation practices in the country. to sustainable sanitation. sustainable sanitation program is initiated in the Philippines to support increased access by poor Filipinos to sanitation services. i. DOH and ADB presented the Zero Diarrhea Award to a total of 28 barangays.Centers for Health Development–Regional Technical Working Groups. 2) Encourage local governments to initiate and promote sanitation activities. Dagupan City in Pangasinan Province. the quality and capacity of current cadre of sanitation practitioners particularly those serving local governments.SUSEP (US$ 200.

a review of literature that focused on sanitation program implementation which was global in scope (on-going). Local Government Grants for Sanitation Pilots (US$ 320. and lastly. DENR regional offices will lead the establishment of Water Quality Management Areas (WQMAs) and Area Water Quality Management Funds (AWQMFs) to support local project development. The primary focus of the NSSMP is sewerage and septage infrastructure projects and the promotions and supporting environment needed to make them successful. amount of money spent nationwide. namely.000) This is a recipient-executed sub-program that will assist local governments prepare and implement sanitation projects on a matching grant basis. demand-driven project development process by providing national government support and incentives. policies. this study provides guidelines for the development of a model for a more culturally sensitive. number of projects developed. Independent Study on Sanitation for Indigenous Communities (US$ 26.program strategy (including making recommendations on the technical packages. It will become a subsection of the National Sustainable Sanitation Plan. a workshop among sanitation program implementers that is national in scope (to be conducted in November. DENR will also support project development through the creation of the National Water Quality Management Fund (NWQMF). convening of the NEDA INFRACOM Subcommittee on Water Resources as the NSSMP Committee. Moreover. The study will illustrate a comprehensive scenario of sanitation habits by gathering data from various sources and through different methods. particularly. South Cotabato. The objective is to enhance the ability of local implementers to build and operate wastewater treatment systems for urban centers and promote the behavior change and supporting environment needed for systems to be effective and sustainable. 2008). why people have specific sanitation habits and how these are shaped by the cultural context within which these habits are situated as well as factors from without.000) This study aims to contribute to understanding the complexity of sanitation practices. The program implementation plan will begin with the approval of the NSSMP in August 2009. overarching framework that will include the full spectrum of sanitation challenges. institutional and financing frameworks) and identify an initial list of 10 participating HUCs. followed by development of projects by local implementers thereafter. The main strategy is to facilitate a bottom-up. The goal of the NSSMP is to improve water quality and public health in urban areas of the Philippines by 2020. in coordination with other government agencies. as required by the Clean Water Act (CWA). community studies in two barangays in Polomolok. DPWH and Department of Health (DOH) will lead a nationwide training and promotions campaign and DPWH will create an information office. A threepart nationwide training and promotions campaign will be held from July to December 2010. At least four sanitation infrastructure projects implemented by participating local governments within an overall local sanitation plan and program framework are expected as this sub-programs 80 Ò Ù Þ Ý Ù Û Ü Ó Û Ð Ø Ù Ø Ð Ó Ù Õ Ô Ñ Ú Ù Ó Ð Ù Ø × Ö Õ Ô Ó Ð Ò Ò Ð Ñ Ð Ï Î . Both DPWH and DOH will provide some funding for sewerage and septage project development at the local level through their annual general appropriations budget.1 which will be a broader. and designation of the NSSMP Office in DPWH by January 2010. enforcement and user fees. and approximate amount of pollution diverted from the environment. The aim is the reduction of sanitation-related disease and water pollution in six program sites through the establishment of sanitation services/facilities. This National Sewerage and Septage Management Program (NSSMP) was prepared by the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH). The Office will report this information to the NSSMP Committee every August starting in 2011. The NSSMP Office with gather data on the number of local sanitation plans developed. community-led sanitation program. Local implementers will use the NSSMP Guide to develop infrastructure and services supported by effective promotion campaigns. approximate number of people benefiting from the projects.

and economic infrastructure (such as incubation centers for small and medium enterprises. obtain 20%-50% in grant finance. Innovative Sanitation Intervention Projects. and implementation. • Component B (institutional capacity development) will cover capacity development and support for project management. Philippine Basic Urban Services Sector (PBUSS) The ADB-funded sector project will (i) increase access by citizens and economic enterprises to basic public infrastructure in urban and peri-urban areas. and Mindanao are expected to invest in various basic urban service sectors. drainage and flood control. About 110 eligible local governments and provinces in Luzon (excluding the National Capital Region). vulnerable groups or those living in difficult environments. sports facilities. The fund also provides training to LGU loan borrowers. public parks. slaughterhouses and ice plants. as follows: • Component A (infrastructure investment plan) will finance subprojects of local government units. These 81 ã ê ï î ê ì í ä ì á é ê é á ä ê æ å â ë ê ä á ê é è ç æ å ä á ã ã á â á à ß . area development projects.IsIP Grants (US$ 40. bus terminals. Fourth and fifth Class Cities are eligible to use 20% grant finance supported by 20% equity and 60% in loan finance. public facilities (such as municipal buildings. and better employment and income opportunities. but all other cities are ineligible for grants. assistance or grants to finance specific projects and activities of LGUs including water supply projects. possibly in association with private sector proponents. water supply and sanitation. states that cluster 3 “brown” sub-projects (which include solid waste management. sewerage and sanitary support facilities) require municipalities and provinces to provide 10%-20% in equity. This sub-program commenced preparations in August 2008 and is expected to start implementing in early 2009. including those for public-private partnerships. • Component C: Sector reform initiatives for improved public-private partnership in financing. (iii) improve facilities for the financing of infrastructure investments. Visayas. Municipal Development Fund (from various ODA sources) The MDF is a revolving fund which uses proceeds of foreign loans. This sub-program commenced calls for proposals in November 2008 but will not be implemented until 2009. assistance to local governments in computerized financial resource management. enacted in December 2002. implementing.000) A small innovation grant window was opened under SuSEA Philippines to provide funding support on a competitive basis to non-government organizations for developing and trialling innovations in sanitation interventions (including approaches to behaviour change or technical solutions) focused on targeting the poor. The PBUSSP is expected to have three components. The Municipal Development Fund Office (MDFO) National Government – LGU cost sharing policy. and operating infrastructure facilities. among others: local roads and bridges. and cross-learning and governance knowledge management.outputs. and (iv) improve local government capacity. assistance to field offices of the Department of the Interior and Local Government in administering and managing the performance measurement system. This component will assist local governments and private sector investors in developing regulatory frameworks and operational guidelines for sector reforms. (ii) enhance the growth of the local economies through infrastructure development. Preference will be given to revenue-generating subprojects. and economic and cluster development zones). drainage. and avail the remaining 40%-60% in loan finance. and empower local institutions and organizations. subproject preparation. including public-private partnerships in the financing and implementation of basic urban services programs. and public markets). solid waste management. in these subsectors.

The PSA works with ten cities (Cagayan de Oro. and chemical spills management investments. These integrated plans and programs are useful tools for coordination among the sector agencies and for monitoring the detailed implementation of the Roadmap on an annual basis. watershed management. Cities are developing effective promotion campaigns to increase willingness to pay for sanitation services and reduce the incidence of diarrhea through proper hygienic practices. and (iii) improve income and employment opportunities for the affected population.will include local government units that have expressed interest but were not accommodated in the current Manila BUSS project. (ii) increase the economic productivity of cities and municipalities. Calbayog. timelines. Expected outcomes of the ADB-funded project include the implementation of key elements of the Agusan basin master plan in a coordinated and efficient series of investments. Malaybalay. projects/ programs. The PSA is a 4-year program of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) being implemented by AECOM International Development from 2007-2011. ô û   ÿ û ý þ õ ý ò ú û ú ò õ û ÷ ö ó ü û õ ò û ú ù ø ÷ ö õ ò ô ô ò ó ò ñ ð 82 . Rosa. Expected outputs are: • Feasibility studies and project designs for communal irrigation. Muntinlupa. and four water districts (Calamba. support agencies and indicative budgets under the different outcomes and outputs as outlined in the Roadmap’s Logical Framework. Agusan Integrated Water Resources Management PPTA The project aims to reduce poverty.org. Iloilo. The sector project will help (i) reduce the infrastructure backlog. Philippine Sanitation Alliance The Philippine Sanitation Alliance (PSA) works with LGUs. The portal contains policies. lead (implementing agency). Meycauayan. low-maintenance treatment facilities for public markets. with support from the German Technical Cooperation Agency (GTZ)-Water Sanitation Program. These operational plans are meant to guide the mobilization and implementation of the detailed plans and programs among the national government and implementing agencies in the water supply and sanitation sector. The investments and transactions can include lending for private sector investments under build-operate–transfer. Sta. flood control. and city-wide programs to properly maintain septic tanks (septage management). Update of information is done by member agencies through the internet. Projects include low-cost. water districts and private sector partners to develop affordable ways to protect biodiversity and reduce public health risks through improved sanitation. in collaboration with other government agencies.philwatsan. Davao and Laguna).4 MEDIUM TERM OPERATIONAL PLAN (2010-2016) The Sanitation Sector Inter-Agency Operational Plans for 2010-2016 are shown below. and • Strengthened management arrangements for coordinating development Philippine Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Portal The PhilWATSAN portal (www. build-operate-own. research/publications and statistics related to water supply and sanitation sector. 4. water supply and sanitation. biodiversity and wetlands management. Dumaguete.ph) started as a project initiated by NWRB in 2006. Each table summarizes the activities to be implemented with the corresponding milestones. and improve health and living conditions in the Agusan River Basin. Naga. Governance is also being strengthened to reduce threats to biodiversity as LGUs work to control wastewater discharges to coastal and freshwater ecosystems. The expansion of the area of urban service coverage will promote equitable development across urban areas in the country. particularly handwashing. or other arrangements for public-private partnerships. Zamboanga). water quality management. slaughterhouses hospitals and low-cost housing. Cebu.

Formulate strategy plans per sector agency as basis for budgeting • Convene Inter-agency task Force on sanitation for a workshop • Harmonize plans and program of concerned national agencies 2. DepED.2 A clear and sustainable sanitation policy and Program 1. Apr 2013. OP (15pax*1. LEAGUES.50M Total= P 7.00 Sanitation plans and programs included in agency OPB Sanitation programs of agencies presented Sanitation implementation plans of national agencies synchronized Consolidated National Strategic Plan on Sanitation Apr 2010.000. DPWH. DOH LCEs Facilitators: ((8. LWUA. DILG. LWUA.500)* 6 events) =P 135. Apr 2013.1 Strengthen the DOH as the lead sector agency supported by all the NGs and LGUs in implementing sustainable sanitation programs 1. DBM.500)* 13 Regions)*6yrs = P 3. DepED.)* 5Facilitators)* 13 Regions)*6yrs = P 4. Apr 2014.TABLE 8 SANITATION ROADMAP OPERATIONAL PLAN 2010-2016 ACTIVITY MILESTONE TIMELINE DRIVER SUPPORT INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS Outcome 1: Responsive Governance and Regulatory Strengthening OUTPUT 1. DPWH. Conduct Consultation Conference with concerned national agencies to review identified amendments in the Sanitation Code Proposed policy changes Jan -Mar 2011 identified DOH Inter-Agency TF members. DENR. Apr 2012. Consolidate Strategic Plans of National Agencies • Review and Finalize Agency Strategic Plans Output 1. OP ((30pax*1. programs and activities integrated in the Local Development Plans Aug 2010 – July 2015 DILG.99M 83 ¥       ¦  £    £ ¦  ¨ § ¤   ¦ £    © ¨ § ¦ £ ¥ ¥ £ ¤ £ ¢ ¡ . DBM. Apr 2012. DENR. Apr 2011. Apr 2011.49M One Day Meeting: ((30pax*1. LEAGUES. Apr 2015 Inter-Agency TF members.000DSA & Transpo. Apr 2014.000RT+3. Apr 2015 DOH Apr 2010. Mainstream sanitation plan in the Local Development Plans of LGUs Sanitation plans.500) * 3 events) = P 135.000.00 DOH 2. DILG.

LEAGUES. DILG.49M One Day Meeting: ((30pax*1.000 Contract 2. Jan 2015 DOH.50M Total= P 7.00 IACEH and member agency assessed to include its functionality. DENR. OP Consultant: P500.99M 2.3 Rationalized/Strengthened sector coordination mechanisms 1.4 Localized policies. DILG. Conduct quarterly Resolution of sector meetings of the issues and concerns IACEH to strengthen coordination mechansim OUTPUT 1. DepED.)* 5Facilitators)* 13 Regions)*6yrs = P 4. DILG LGUs Facilitators: ((8. DPWH.050. Jan 2013.ACTIVITY MILESTONE TIMELINE DRIVER SUPPORT INVESTMENT REQUIREMENT OUTPUT 1. LWUA. DPWH. DBM. DepED. Conduct Sanitation planning workshops at LGU level Total Investment Requirement for Outcome 1 for 6 years: P30.000RT+3.000.)* 5Facilitators)* 13 Regions)*6yrs = P 4. DBM. DPWH.000 " ) 4 3 ) 1 2 # 1 ( ) ( # ) % $ ! 0 ) # ) ( ' & % $ # " " !   84 .49M One Day Meeting: ((30pax*1. DILG. DBM. DENR. DENR. OP (15pax*1. Conduct assessment of existing IACEH and member agencies to include its membership.000DSA & Transpo. plans and programs within the framework of the national policies 1. LEAGUES. membership and specific role in sanitation May 2012 – Jan 2013 DOH Inter-Agency TF members.000RT+3.500)* 13 Regions)*6yrs = P 3. OP Facilitators: ((8. DepED. LEAGUES.500)* 13 Regions)*6yrs = P 3. LWUA.500)* 4qtrs)* 6 events = P540. mandates and functions Identify gaps and weaknesses and recommend measures of improvement Quarterly 2010-2015 DOH Inter-Agency TF members.000DSA & Transpo. Jan 2014. LWUA. Conduct consultation workshops with LGUs on new policies to enable LGUs to formulate and implement local policies and ordinances on sanitation related activities in line with the national policies.99M National Sanitation programs integrated with LGU implementation plans Jan 2012. Awareness of LGUs to new policy changes 2010-2015 DOH Inter-Agency TF members.50M Total= P 7.

000 OUTPUT 2. Academe.LPP LCP. DAR. DAR.3 Develop a social marketing program for sanitation professionals.000 DOH.3 Performance indicators developed for LGUs Benchmarking system developed (including questionnaire. LGA LCP. MDFO. DSWD.500.2.1 Establish the performance indicators for LGUs and service providers 3 2. DAR.1. DENR.000 2.500. Sanitarians Jun-11 PSSE/MIT 300.000 2.000 Inventory and Assessment of materials: P150.LPP 5.000.DA.000. LMP. DENR. 500.000 2.500. MDFO.4 Explore how to re-engineer thTe sanitary engineering curriculum Open University for SEs.5.1 Assess the existing materials on capacity development and update them if needed 1 Gather the guidelines.000 OUTPUT 2. DENR.1 Identify core-group representing various capacity development providers and targets: Professional groups.4 Enhance package for PPDCs/ MPDCs 2.5 Support the proposed Institute of Water by LGA LGA has set up the Institute for Water and Sanitation.2 Train at least one Barangay sanitation volunteer per barangay National Conference of CD Practitioners Jun-10 DOH.000 = 20.ACTIVITY MILESTONE TIMELINE DRIVER SUPPORT INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS Outcome 2: Improved Service Delivery through Communication and Capacity Development OUTPUT 2. participants of National Conference Sanitary Inspector’s Association of the Philippines (SIAP). LGA Coordination meetings: P300. 2. NGOs. MDFO. MDFO.5. MDFO.2 Develop official guidelines and management models and technology options for LGUs on PIME 2.NGOs SIAP.DOF 7.3.1 An integrated and decentralized Capacity Development System for different types of implementer and situations. practice and behavior.3 Establish a web-based database that includes the indicators collected for the sector assessment System developed Apr-10 DILG/DOH consultant 2. NGOs. toolkits.4.4 Research and Development Agenda towards sustainable sanitation solutions and policy reforms. 2.000 5.4.500.NWRB.LPP Sep-10 Commencing Oct-10 Commencing Nov 2010 Sep-10 DILG DILG/LGA DILG/LGA 4. NGOs. management models Guidelines. 2.1 Develop research and development agenda 2.NGOs.000 2. LMP. technology options.000.1. LWUA.2.1 Develop Sanitation Monitoring and Evaluation System 2. link to NWRB web-based portal/DILG KM portal 2.000 2009 Sector Report web-based database Apr-10 Dec-11 DILG/DOH DILG NGOs.NGOs P500*40.1. PEN DAR. LGA 5..000. LGA. DSWD. DENR.5 Formulate the Cap Dev Programa Training of PPDCs (82)/ MPDCs (?).LGUs. DAR. LMP. Sanitation Cap Devt practitioners organized Jun-10 DOH.3.1.000.000 OUTPUT 2. DSWD. LGA 1. DSWD. other materials and experiences avaialble on sanitation communications. LGA. DENR. Jan-10 PSSE/MIT 150.2 Benchmarks on LGU performance and best practice established.5 Institutionalized Monitoring and Evaluation of the sector. NGOs.000 3. PEN DAR.5. national agencies. pilot testing) Sep-10 Dec 2010 .000 Program developed for Barangay sanitation volunteers training:Target from 40000 barangays Social Marketing Plan Commencing Sept 2010 DILG DAR. management tools & techno options developed and approved Briefing/orientation kits for LCEs developed LCE Briefing 2. MDFO. DENR.000 Stakeholders mobilized in promoting sustainable sanitation concepts. NGOs. civic societies and aligning subgroups of similar function 2.NEDA.000 85 9 F Q P F H I @ H 7 E F E 7 @ F B A 8 G F @ 7 F E D C B A @ 7 9 9 7 8 7 6 5 .2 Prepare research and development program List of R and D priorities R and D proposals developed Sep-10 DILG DOH.800.1. 17 regional trainings Cap Dev program developed Mar-10 DILG DOH. NGOs. DSWD. DENR. change. MDFO.3. Jan 2011 LGA DOH. DSWD. LGA 21.000 2.000.3.Aug 2016 DILG/DOH DILG/DOH LCP.750.2 Prepare recurrent water and sanitation Sector Report 2. DSWD.3 Enhance package for LCEs 2 Sep-10 DILG DOH.3. NGOs.000 2.2 Establish benchmarks of LGU or service provider performance OUTPUT 2. 2. DILG.

000. Academe.6 National and local communication plans for sustainable sanitation and hygiene in place.2. DOH. research and training sectors to institutionalize dissemination of new knowledge on sustainable sanitation. coordination. champions.1 Develop.6.150 ACTIVITY MILESTONE TIMELINE DRIVER SUPPORT INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS Outcome 3: Strengthened Strategic Alliances Output 3. Office of Muslim Affairs. presenters and other resource person identified and mobilized V c h g c e f W e T b c b T W c Y X U d c W T c b a ` Y X W T V V T U T S R 86 . advocates at different levels and sectors to promote sustainable sanitation Strategic planning for PEN conducted (Back-to-Back with National Conference for Sanitation CD Practitioners) Month 06 (June 2010) PEN DOH.2. PEN members 500.2 Develop/enhance sustainable sanitation curricula and information materials for publication and dissemination 3. DAP. Education and Motivation materials developed September – December DOH 10. Training sessions conducted. Academe.PEN DOH. DOH.1 Conduct workshops / writeshops on awareness. PSSE.300.000 Month 10 (October 2010) onward to 2016 10.100. NCIP.3 Conduct regular skills upgrading training for Sanitary Inspectors and Sanitary Engineers Academic and Training consortium organized.000 Pool of experts. NGOs. champions.000 2.000 Inventory of experts and champions in all relevant sectors Month 12 (Dec 2010) PEN. 2.000 Annual Conference on Sustainable Sanitation.ACTIVITY MILESTONE TIMELINE DRIVER SUPPORT INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS OUTPUT 2.1.000 Total Indicative Investment requirements for Outcome 2 95.2 Identify and gather information on experts.1. DILG DepEd. 3. LGA. 3. Month 06 (June 2010) CAPS. trainors.2.000.800.500. Leagues (B/M/C/P). Use the PEN website to create a web-based National Sanitation Events Calendar and data base of resource materials Month 10 Month 22 Month 34 Month 46 Month 58 Month 70 PEN.1 Support and strengthen the Philippine Ecosan Network (PEN) and the Philippine Development Forum-Task Force on Water Supply and Sanitation (PDF-TF WSS) so it can continue to act as platform for policy and program advocacy. plans. DAP. support and strengthen consortia in the academic.000 OUTPUT 3. harmonization and greater synergy among the Champions and partners. legislators. Academe. institutions and stakeholder groups in sanitation at the national and local levels 3.000.500. donors 2.700. and human resource pooling for awareness and knowledge building 3.3 Conduct regular dialogues.000 1.000 Information. PEN. donors DOH. 2.1. Academic consortium DOH. media Donors and other agencies 500. DAP. practitioners. programs and activities 3. education.6. DILG 1. decision maker. DOH. Campaign Alliance established.2 Clear mechanisms for collaboration in knowledge sharing. Communication.2 Print multi-media materials to support the communication plan on sustainable sanitation National Communication Plan on sustainable sanitation developed 2010-2016 DOH 4.000.000 1.000 1. lead and advance sustainable sanitation policies. attitude and practices of the people on health and sustainable sanitation 2.500. Academe.1 Strong and active national multi-sector support group that will advocate. Month 04 (April 2010) CAPS.000.000 Training modules developed.000 1. PEN. Campaign/IEC materials/ messages developed. organizations. LGA. fora and conventions among sustainable sanitation.

4 Establish strong links with international knowledge centers.000 P600. e.3. PDF-TF WSS.000 July 2010 .2 Organize regular fora.000. GFIs.000 500.000) Output 3.000 87 s € … „ € ‚ ƒ t ‚ q y € y q t € v u r  € t q € y x w v u t q s s q r q p i .800. 3.000. DOf.1.1 Prioritized intervention in highly vulnerable areas that are seriously affected by the lack of sanitation 4.000 March 2010 February 2011 July 2010 .June 2016 DILG LGUs down to barangay level DOH/ DOf/ DILG/ donors DILG/ GFIs/ NEDA/ LWUA/ DOST 1.6 Study on pro-poor sustainable financing schemes Pro-poor sustainable financing models developed and pretested Guidelines developed and disseminated to stakeholders Identified LGUs with commitment to implement pro-poor sanitation projects targetting 5-10% of the 23% without access to sanitation services April 2010 . seminars and workshops among sanitation service providers for sustainable sanitation. NAWASA DOH. cost recovery schemes.1 Study on sanitation tariff methodologies.March 2011 NEDA/ DOH January 2011 December 2012 DOH DILG/ NAPC/ LWUA/ LGUs/ NGOs/ Academe/ NCIP/ DENR/ DPWH NAPC/ LGUs/ DOf/ DBM/ GFIs/ DFA 1. DILG. DILG.June 2011 NEDA DILG/ DOH/ DOf/ LGUs 2.000 ACTIVITY MILESTONE TIMELINE DRIVER SUPPORT INVESTMENT REQUIREMENT Financing and Adequate Infrastructure Investments OUTPUT 4.500.2 Tracking of sanitation funds and fees collected and disbursed by LGUs 4. identified and mapped Database developed Prioritization guidelines developed January 2010 December 2011 DILG Leagues/ NSCB/ DENR/ LLDA/ DOT/ DEPED/ NCIP/ NAPC/ Academe/ NGOs 25.2.3.600.500.3.2 Develop financing strategies and incentive schemes for sustainable infrastructure development 4. dialogues.2.3 Facilitate professionalizing and development of sanitation service provider sector Directory of service providers A program of action for alliance building of sanitation service providers A program of action to professionalize and develop the sanitation service provider sector Month 06 (June 2010) Month 11 (November 2010) Month 13 (January 2011) DOH Philippine Water Alliance and other private sector groups and cooperatives Philippine Water Alliance and other private sector groups and cooperatives PEN.3.3 Study on development of proposed financing models 4. LWUA. DTI LWUA.1 Inventory. etc.June 2011 January 2010 . MWSS. DOH. Proposals prepared and submitted Initial commitment from potential funders obtained 4. network built Month 1 onwards PEN Secretariat MILESTONE TIMELINE DRIVER SUPPORT BUDGET (P.000 6. e. Develop a database on all sanitation service providers 3.2.000 Total Investment Requirements for Outcome 3 for six years 26.000.3: A strong alliance of sanitation service providers at the national and local levels 3.000 P1.4 Proposals for funding including research and development (i.000 1. MWSS. PEN. foreign-funding institutions. low cost sanitation solutions for the poor). Identification and mapping of vulnerable areas Vulnerable areas inventoried. subsidies and incentives Sanitation tariff methodology developed Cost recovery schemes developed Package of incentives developed 4.2.2.2.500.5 Study on pro-poor cost of sanitation technology approaches Pro-poor technologies identified and evaluated Financial costings/project feasibilities prepared 4.000 10. capacity development and institution building Tracking of sanitation funds and fees completed in pilot areas Models developed and pretested in pilot areas Initial discussions/dialogues with potential funders. PEN P400.500. i. ACTIVITY website links established. knowledge eschange and training.500.2.000 OUTPUT 4.000 NEDA DOH or identified lead agency 2.1.

2.DBM 26.000 Separate national account for sanitation Budget for 2011 DOH PEN. DOH 2008 data was used as basis for determining those without access to sanitary toilet.000 OUTPUT 4.3 Establish/Enhance PPPs and sanitation entrepreneurship 4.2. Of the estimated budget. Study commissioned Dec 2010 DOH DBM 2. NHA budget allocation of P1.5.8 million toilets through hygiene promotion and social marketing and PPP Capacity building modules developed and implemented January 2010 to December 2016 DOH/DILG LGUs/NAPC/ NICP/PEN/ DOF. Unit cost used was P6.000.163.500.1 A study on the development of the national account for sanitation 4. P750 for hygiene promotion and P1.1 Preparation f MDG Report prepared and MTPDP based sanitationplanning including its annual updating.4.4.000 for capacity building. CAPEX budget  — f e — ™ d ‘ ™ ˆ – — – ˆ ‘ — “ ’ ‰ ˜ — ‘ ˆ — – • ” “ ’ ‘ ˆ   ˆ ‰ ˆ ‡ † 88 .2 Conduct a study to document PPP in sanitation service provision Social marketing plan developed/ promoted PPP models documented and enhanced for implementation January 2011 December 2013 Dec 2013 DOH or lead agency DOF DTI/ CDA/ NGOs/ academe DOH/ LGU/ NEDA/ DTI/ NGOs/ PCCI/ private sector representatives 2.3.541 B for construction of houses with sanitary toilets is considered.000.NGAs 500.750 broken down as incentive of P5.000** 52.000 Explanatory note on the budget: * for the targeting of toilet to be constructed. annually every March of each year from 2010 to 2016 DOH/NEDA PEN/NGAs 300. the average annual estimated toilets to be constructed is 646.4.000* ACTIVITY 4.193.000 Total investment required for Outcome 4 for six years: 87.5 Identifying investment requirements to meet the MDG and MTPDP targets 4.1 Develop IEC/social marketing plan for the promotion of sanitation entrepreneurship 4. ** All NSSMP data used were provided by the NSSMP secretariat and derived from the NSSMP draft document which is currently under review *** data used were sourced from the 2 MWSS concessionnaires.8 Push for the implementation of the national sewerage and septage program MILESTONE 55 septage projects and 6 sewerage projects implemented** Increase in sanitation coverage in Metro Manila of 56% in 2011 and 85% by 2016*** TIMELINE January 2010 December 2016 DRIVER NSSMP Secretariat/ DPWH/MWSS SUPPORT LWUA/ MWSS/ Concessionaires/ MMDA/ DOH/ LGUs/ DENR/ DEPED-CHED INVESTMENT REQUIREMENT 8.500.4 A well-established national account for sanitation 4.000.000 1.2 Advocacy work to institutionalize a national account for sanitation.7 Provision of incentives for toilet construction including hygiene promotion and capacity building in order to meet the MDG on sanitation LGUs identified with propoor sanitation funding available Trigger construction of 3.3.684.000 OUTPUT 4.996.500.000*** OUTPUT 4.784.000.000 for actual toilet construction.

1 Sourcebook and tool kit appropriate approaches for different situations 5. flooding.000.3 Building partnerships for quick mobilization of logistics for sanitation in emergency situations December 2010 to June 2016 NDRC/DOH Wash Cluster LGUs/PEN/ NGAs 5.3. LGU.1.500.000 89 k r w v r t u l t i q r q i l r n m j s r l i r q p o n m l i k k i j i h g .1.2.3 Conduct of R and D on approapriate design of WASH for emergency situation Training conducted Design of WASH facilities for emergency situation and stockpiling January 2010 .1 Inventory and identification of appropriate sanitation approaches for emergency situations Toolkits and sourcebooks on appropriate sanitation approaches for emergency situations such as typhoon.500.000 OUTPUT 5. LGUs 750.2 Development of Policy guidelines 5.Dec 2012 DOH DILG.000.ACTIVITY MILESTONE TIMELINE DRIVER SUPPORT INVESTMENT REQUIREMENT Outcome 5: Adequate sanitation and hygiene promotion is mainstreamed in emergency response OUTPUT 5.000 6.000.Dec 2015 DOH/PEN DOH NDCC. NGO 2.June.000 Total Investment Requirement for Outcome 5 for six years 25. 2010 DOH DILG.DILG.1. NGO 5. NDCC.1 Coordination mechanisms at national to municipal level established including capacity building December 2010 DOH/NDRC OUTPUT 5.750. landslides. LGU.Dec 2010 DOH NDCC.000 July 2010.DILG. earthquake and other natural calamities Production and distribution of toolkits to target benificairies Piloting appropriate sanitation approaches in resettlement areas and evacuation camps 5.2 Capacity Development on use of toolkit 5.2.000 Jan 2011 .000 October 2010 to May 2016 Jan 2012.000. LGUs 1.1 Review of disaster preparedness plans Recommendations on how to integrate sanitation in relief and rehab operations of government and non-government organizations Policy guidelines approved A strong network capable of emergency sanitatin repsonse established October 2010 DOH/PEN/NDCC PEN/NGA/ LGUs 5.000 5.2 Integration of emergency sanitation in disaster and risk reduction plans at all levels 5.

PROVIDING SANITATION INFRASTRUCTURE AND INVESTMENT TO MEET THE MDGS Under the approved Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap. This is translated to about 646.876. Semi public/ charitable funds flowing in the form of payments made to communities. a strong and vibrant sanitation sector is expected to emerge with strong investment and infrastructure support. Public funds flowing through the national or local government and raised through general taxation. Private funds flowing directly between beneficiary households and service providers 3.050.000 barangays will target 15 households per year. then the objective is achievable.600.000 95.000 toilets annually for the next 6 years.6 Billion by 2012. ODA funds are expected to cover the costs of | ƒ ˆ ‡ ƒ … † } … z ‚ ƒ ‚ z } ƒ  ~ { „ ƒ } z ƒ ‚  €  ~ } z | | z { z y x 90 . it can embark on various innovative strategies to trigger household level investments and private sector contribution.000 25. thus.000 households. This budget includes private sector contribution estimated at about 50% of financing investments. For this purpose.750. The estimate of cost of a minimum amount of about P5. households or service providers by donors.784. public borrowing and overseas development assistance 2. The NHA have allocated funds to provide toilets for about 400.4. Sanitation budgets is traditionally non existing. the national government is required to support the investment requirements to meet the MDG commitment of ensuring that 84% of the total households have access to sanitation While government may not have the total budget required to achieve this feat.984. there are three broad possible sources for the provision of sanitation goods and services: 1. Funds can come from micro-financing schemes or attractive incentive packages.371.5 INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS OF THE SANITATION SECTOR Table 9 shows that the most immediate needs of the sanitation sector for the 6 years action plan requires an indicative estimated budget of about PhP 87 Billion The amount is allocated to the following outcome areas: Table 9: Summary of Investment Requirements for 2010-2016 Responsive Governance and Regulatory Strengthening for the sanitation sector Improved Service Delivery through Communications and Capacity Development Strengthening of strategic alliance Financing Sanitation investments and infrastructure development Adequate Sanitation for emergency situations 30. Where should the sanitation fund come from? Clearly. The LGUs are also expected to cover at least 25% of the costs of infrastructure investments from their IRA and sanitation fees.000 87.000 per toilet can be provided by the households themselves.800. foundations and other non government organizations. This includes household level contribution for toilet construction. If each of the 46.000 Grand Total for the 5 outcome areas:PHP 87. the need to provide budgets so that starting 2010 the country could implement a catch up plan to meet the MDG targets on a sustainable manner. The private concessionaires of MWSS is expected to collectively contribute about P 13. human resource and communications requirements.150 The budgetary needs for sanitation is quite substantial mainly because the country has to develop more systems to address the infrastructure.150 26.000 households need to be assisted to have their own toilets. From 2010 to 2016. National government agencies like the DOH who have regular budgets for communication and health advocacies is expected to contribute to the fund.193. it is estimated that 3.

6 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE MTPDP 2010-2016 The following specific recommendations are highlighted as proposals for inclusion in the 2010-2016 MTPDP: Specific Recommendations for the MTPDP 2010-2016 include the following: 1. For the government to provide the much needed budgetary requirements for sanitation. Sewerage and or septage management in 57 highly urbanized cities in place Local Sustainable Sanitation Plans developed with budgets • • • 5. MDG Sanitation targets included in the 2010-2016 MTPDP and MTPIP 3.this can be in the form of guaranteed financing where private sector may be encouraged to allocate part of their Company Social Responsibility funds for sanitation to be matched by the national or local government Microfinancing schemes wherein private and NGOs may jointly provide funding/loans for household toilet construction with affordable interest rates. Pro-poor Sanitation Fund reflected in the regular GAA under the National Social Fund 7. Sanitation Investment Plans in the National and Local Investment Plans for Health 6. DPWH. communal and household toilets • • • • 4. Congressional allocation for sanitation wherein portion of the pork barrel will be allocated for sanitation infrastructure development ranging from septage and sewerage treatment plants. the following strategies and schemes are being proposed: • National government financing – national government to provide a distinct line item budget as part of the General Appropriation Act (GAA) for agencies with sanitation mandate such as DOH. Enactment of the National Sanitation Act that supercedes the 1976 Sanitation Code of the Philippines. these can also be used by LGU to leverage for sanitation funding from the national government. 10. 91  ” ™ ˜ ” – — Ž – ‹ “ ” “ ‹ Ž ”   Œ • ” Ž ‹ ” “ ’ ‘   Ž ‹   ‹ Œ ‹ Š ‰ . A national sustainable sanitation communications plan implemented 8.the proposed studies and provide access to soft loans that LGUs. WDs and private providers can access. and DENR Allocating part of the LGU Internal Revenue Allocation for local sanitation programs of the LGU. Preparation of the National Policy document on Sanitation 2. Local Sanitation targets integrated in all LGU development plans 4. Sanitation fully integrated in all policy instruments and communications plans of other sectors. Whenever applicable. This can be accessed for building wastewater treatment plant sewerage plants and even toilets at the household levels Government and private sector partnership in financing sanitation . DILG. Priority to the top 13 “Unsanitary Cities/Municipalities” Health and Hygiene Promotion in place in communities and schools. 9. A national account for sanitation is established. Improved sanitation coverage in priority cities/province by 50% (from 14 areas having below than 50% coverage to 7 cities/provinces) • Safe and adequate sanitation solutions for the 23 million Filipinos without access to improved sanitation facilities located in poor rural and peri-urban areas.

5.0 IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS .

The INFRACOM-SCWR shall be assisted by a Secretariat composed of representatives from NEDA INFRACOM Staff and the NWRB.2 Management and Supervision The implementation of the Sanitation Roadmap shall be managed and supervised by the SCWR through a Sub. The general oversight. overall policy guidance and steering of the Roadmap shall be exercised by the NEDA Board through the Sub-Committee on Water Resources (SCWR) of the NEDA Infrastructure Committee (INFRACOM).0 IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS The Roadmap brings together institutions from government. pool resources and promote coordination and collaboration within a constrained institutional environment. Figure 5.1 shows the Proposed Implementation Structure of the Roadmap. 5.sub-committee on sanitation. 5.1 General Oversight and Guidance The overarching policy parameters guiding the Roadmap implementation shall be the government’s adoption of the MDGs and current strategic directions outlined in the 2004-2010 MTPDP and the MTPIP. which shall be created through a NEDA Board Resolution. and the private sector engaged in sanitation-related activities in order to establish coherence. The institutional arrangement represents pooled coordination of various institutions in government that considers their existing mandates. The core members of the SCWR shall be composed of the following: The Assistant Director-General.5. civil society. roles and functions in the development of the sector. National Development Office – National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) National Water Resources Board (NWRB) Department of Finance (DOF) Department of Budget and Management (DBM) Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) Department of Health (DOH) Department of Agriculture (DA) Department of Energy (DOE) Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Department of Transportation and Communication (DOTC) Department of Justice (DOJ) Department of Tourism (DOT) Office of the President – Executive Secretary (OP) University of the Philippines – National Hydraulics Research Center (UP-NHRC) Department of Interior and Local Governments ( DILG) Philippine Water Partnership (PWP) Chairperson Co-Chair Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member 93 ž ¥ ª © ¥ § ¨ Ÿ § œ ¤ ¥ ¤ œ Ÿ ¥ ¡    ¦ ¥ Ÿ œ ¥ ¤ £ ¢ ¡   Ÿ œ ž ž œ  œ › š .

The National Center for Health Promotion.The membership of the SCWR Sub committee on sanitation may be expandable to include representatives from the different sanitation-related agencies on the basis of sector focus such as: Table 10. In particular. researchers and policy analyses on various aspects of the sector and make subsequent policy recommendations to the NEDA Board through the INFRACOM. and ¯ ¶ » º ¶ ¸ ¹ ° ¸ ­ µ ¶ µ ­ ° ¶ ² ± ® · ¶ ° ­ ¶ µ ´ ³ ² ± ° ­ ¯ ¯ ­ ® ­ ¬ « 94 . evaluation and assessment of the sector. the Bureau of Local Health Development and the National Epidemiology Center. The DOH is currently mobilizing inter-agency support for Environmental Health through the Inter-agency Committee on Environmental Health ( IACEH). Other DOH units expected to contribute are the Health Policy Planing Bureau. Sanitation Sub-sector Members Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA) National Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPC) National Water and Sanitation Association of the Philippines (NAWASA) Department of Social Work and Development (DSWD) Cooperative Development Authority (CDA) Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) League of Provinces of the Philippines (LPP) League of Cities of the Philippines (LCP) League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP) Department of Education ( DepED) Department of Tourism (DOT)) National Housing Authority (NHA)) Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member The DOH has agreed to be the lead driver for sanitation. extent and status of the implementation of programs/activities identified in the Roadmap. deviation of actual performance from programmed targets. Duties and Functions The SCWR shall have the following duties and functions: a) Ensure that the direction set for the sector is carried out in accordance with the Roadmap.. problem areas encountered in program implementation. The members of the sectoral Task Force on Sanitation of the IACEH will all be members of hte Sanitation Sub-sommittee of the SCWR. The EOHO is currently one of the offices under the National Center for Disease Prevention and Control (NCDPC) which is coordinated under the Health Policy and Service Delivery Team ( PSDT) of the DOH. c) Coordinate and/or advise the conduct of studies.g. the Environmental and Occupational Health Office (EOHO) will lead the sub committee on sanitation of the NEDA INFRACOM-SCWR. d) Formulate areas of cooperation and coordination among the various agencies and instrumentalities of the government involved in the sector programs and projects to avoid duplication of efforts. b) Coordinate sector monitoring as well as the conduct of periodic review. e. e) Serve as clearinghouse of sector information.

Meetings The SCWR shall hold quarterly meetings upon notice issued by the Chairperson..e. bureaus. Decision-making The Sub-Committee shall aim to build consensus in all its major decisions. The SCWR may also create technical working groups (TWGs) as may be necessary for the purpose of discharging its functions. A mandatory review shall be conducted in year 2015. 50%+1) of the agencies identified per sub-sector (i. Special and/or emergency meetings may be held at the motion of any member submitted to the Chairperson provided that such is certified by a majority of the members through a referendum. flood and hazard mitigation and water resources management). In cases where divergence of opinions regarding decision points would require a vote.. To facilitate decision-making. 50%+1) f the core members including majority (i. 95 À Ç Ì Ë Ç É Ê Á É ¾ Æ Ç Æ ¾ Á Ç Ã Â ¿ È Ç Á ¾ Ç Æ Å Ä Ã Â Á ¾ À À ¾ ¿ ¾ ½ ¼ . the decision/s shall be made through a simple majority (50%+1) of all members present. Quorum shall be defined as majority (i.e. All heads of departments. irrigation. It is proposed that each SCWR term shall be for an initial period of six (6) years in line with duration of the MTPDP and its long-term tenure shall be for a period until year 2025 in line with the Roadmap’s vision. water supply. all the necessary information shall be provided by the Secretariat to the SCWR members prior to the meeting.e.f) Serve as a forum/platform for the discussion and resolution of arising issues in the sector. Secretariat Services The designated representatives of the NEDA-INFRACOM Staff and of the NWRB shall provide the necessary secretariat services to the SCWR.. Tenure The NEDA Board Resolution shall determine the length of tenure of the SCWR and the level of representation from each concerned agency or institution. offices and instrumentalities of the government shall also be requested to extend full cooperation and assistance to the SCWR to ensure the accomplishment of its tasks. sewerage and sanitation. Quorum Quarterly meetings of the SCWR shall observe a quorum.

LGUs. Where projects require stronger coordination and collaboration. public information et al) are expected to align their individual projects to the medium-term strategies and annual operational plans of the Roadmap. functions. Sanitation projects shall be implemented by sanitation service providers such as water districts.FIGURE 5 PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION STRUCTURE 5.4 FRAMEWORK OF COLLABORATION The various stakeholders of the sanitation sector may be grouped according to their specific roles as providers of an enabling environment. roles. private concessionaires and NGOs through donor-funded programs. resources and areas of competence.3 PROJECTS EXECUTION The specific targets outlined in the medium-term plans and annual operational plans shall be executed by the respective agencies and institutions according to their mandates. service providers and users as illustrated in Figure 6. capacity development. 5. small sanitation service providers. financing. Ñ Ø Ý Ü Ø Ú Û Ò Ú Ï × Ø × Ï Ò Ø Ô Ó Ð Ù Ø Ò Ï Ø × Ö Õ Ô Ó Ò Ï Ñ Ñ Ï Ð Ï Î Í 96 . Agencies and institutions involved in the provision of enabling environments (related to policy and law. education. interagency arrangements or GO-NGO-PO mechanisms shall be established for the purpose. advocacy. local water and/or sanitation associations and cooperatives.

there may be instances where collaborative mechanisms shall be established for specific functions. DILG.5 MECHANISMS AND PROCESSES 5. PWP. Oversight Mechanisms. 5. DSWD. DOF and DENR. LWUA. Legislative and Policy Development Mechanisms. ÿ & ¦ % ' þ ¤      ©  § # ü § ý   ' þ   §   &   ¨   ¡  ¡ ¥ ÿ £ þ  ü þ $   ý ¢  # & ¡   þ %  "   © ÿ !  þ ' ý ü ü â é 3 î    í © é  ü ö ë ý P þ   C E ð þ ì ý ý   V 1 E ¢  D ¨ D £ 6 X @ C 0 ã  G W ú ¡   ¨ D 8 H G   B P þ G W  ÿ ù ë ¡ þ " C   A F à Y ¦ P C ý W § V è § 7 Y ø C   E ' B X ¦ W ©  E W ¦ ¤ é ý ¥ H X   ¡ Q ¥ @ D è ÷ þ  D G ¤ à C ) % 5 ¤ H C V     ö E   G I F ÿ © ã §  B W U ¥  ¤ © § F G õ D ¤ ' A E ¦ é C ü £ ý E ü P ¥ @ P 4 ý þ G D 2 © å   9 W D   ý ô þ D I H ¥ ¢ W ¢ D © C a 1 # ü T ä ¡ ó X P ¡ I á ò § G G þ ¡  S þ I P § 1 ê P P  ñ   C R H U ! ' U é G ÿ V 0 ð & þ ã F ý à ` ï 1 ü é è  ç  æ 0 å ä ã à â â à   á ÿ à ¢   ß ü §    Þ ) ü ü ý ¡ ¡ #   £  þ   ) %   § ¦  © ÿ   ) ¡ þ ¦ £   ¤ ¥ )  þ ¢ § ü     ü " ( £ '  ý §  ¢ & ( þ  þ  ý   ü © þ © " ÿ ÿ ÿ ý   þ  §   ÿ ý # ÿ £  © þ ý & 97 .1. NWRB. The added value of the Roadmap is the recognition of the oversight role of non-state bodies such as civil society and the media. DAR. NAPC. One major reform objective is the decentralization of sanitation regulatory functions and the possible deputization of the regional offices and/or the LGUs for undertaking regulatory functions at the local level. LGU. The Roadmap implementation shall seek policy and legal reforms leading to harmonization of the economic regulatory framework. NGOs.5. Support Mechanisms.5. DENR.5. contracted regulatory offices and the judiciary. 5. DOH. government and private financing institutions. The Roadmap implementation shall utilize existing support mechanisms through agencies such as the CDA. research institutions and the academe. In implementing the Roadmap. MMDA.4. While the Roadmap implementation shall operate within existing legal and policy settings and mechanisms. Regulatory Mechanisms. MWSS-RO. The regulation of various activities of sanitation service providers and users in the sanitation sector is currently shared by the NWRB. PEN.2.3. The main oversight mechanisms of the sanitation sector and of the Roadmap shall be the existing institutions mandated for the purpose as defined in the SCWR Organizational Structure (Figure 5) and the Framework of Collaboration (Figure 6).5. donors. NIA. 5. it shall also propose policy and legislative reforms through existing lawmaking institutions such as the Congress and LGU-level legislative bodies as well as policymaking institutions such as the NEDA.FIGURE 6 FRAMEWORK OF COLLABORATION û     5.

annual exhibits and symposia) and shall promote the establishment of local consultative mechanisms.g. donor countries and agencies and other development partners.5. The Portal shall serve as a platform for interactive feedback and interaction between the various stakeholders of the sector. The RBME results shall feed into assessment and planning activities and public information.8. Growth and Investments and Sustainable Rural Development and Infrastructure. Donor Coordination Mechanisms. Periodically. The SCWR can coordinate and collaborate with relevant PDF Working Groups on topics and activities related to the MDGs and Social Progress. The Paris Declaration of 2005 has advocated for harmonization and closer coordination among donors.6.5. Consultative Mechanisms.5. f s x w s u v g u d r s r d g s i h e t s g d s r q p i h g d f f d e d c b 98 . At the national level the Philippine Development Forum (PDF) acts as a platform for policy dialogue among the government. Individual implementing agencies and service providers shall also establish appropriate platforms for feedback.5.7. Feedback. The Roadmap upholds the IWRM framework which promotes multi-stakeholder consultations.. 5. 5. Monitoring and Evaluation.5. Roadmap implementers shall establish consultative mechanisms (e. 5. This Roadmap adopts the Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation Framework and its accompanying tools and mechanisms. independent external evaluators shall be tapped by the SCWR by individual implementing agencies.5. The SCWR shall maintain the KM Portal through a KM Portal Task Group headed by the NWRB.

6.0 RESULTS-BASED MONITORING AND EVALUATION

6.0 RESULTS-BASED MONITORING AND EVALUATION
The Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation (RBME) System is integral to the sector institutions inasmuch as its related activities are integrated into the annual plans and other work plans of the organizations involved in the sector. The central RBME function shall be lodged at the SCWR. Monitoring activities and evaluations shall be decentralized to the national implementing agencies, local government units and SSPs levels based on the Roadmap’s central monitoring and evaluation plan. Each implementing agency, LGU and SSPs shall be encouraged to set up RBME units or designate specialized RBME personnel. The SCWR shall also create its own RBME TWG or unit. The Roadmap Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for 2010-2013 are shown in Tables 11 and 12. The Detailed Evaluation Plan Matrix in Table 11 outlines the requisite sector-wide summative evaluation, optional ex-ante evaluation of selected projects, mid-term evaluation of selected projects and endprogram thematic evaluation on compelling policy issues to evaluate the achievement of 2016 goals. Although the matrix outlines only the indicators of goal attainment, the evaluation shall examine the vertical logic and shall, therefore, cover an assessment of the outputs and outcomes according to pre-agreed evaluation criteria and guidelines.

101

ƒ



•

”



’

“

„

’



‰



‰



„



†

…

‚

‘



„





‰

ˆ

‡

†

…

„



ƒ

ƒ



‚



€

y

Furthermore. This Roadmap also suggests the integration of the monitoring plan into the existing work plans of NGAs. ƒ ƒ ƒ TABLE 11 . other on-going and pipeline infrastructure projects that are mentioned in the chapter on priority programs are likewise monitored by the concerned oversight agencies for the projects and are reported to the SCWR for information and guidance of the NEDA Board and other monitoring committees. SSPs and related NGOs. Monitoring activities shall include monitoring of inputs. installation of RBME systems. LGUs. formulation of individual RBME plans and designation and activation of M&E units and/or officers. The Results Monitoring Plan Matrix in Table 12 outlines progress monitoring of the five key result areas and their corresponding indicators.ä ¶ ¨ ¬ ¥ ® ° © ª ´ ¦ ¥ ¬ · ¨ ¦ ® µ ¨ ´ ® Ì ¦ à ¬ ¥ ³ ©  ´ ¨ ® ¯ ± « º ± ¦ ¥ ¬ ¥ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¸ ² ¶ ¨ § Ò ± ® © ¬ ® Ì ® ± ® ¶ ¨ ¦ § ´ ¦ ¥ ¬ · ´ ¦ ¥ ¬ · ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ¨ ¦ ® µ ¨ ´ ® Ì ¦ à ® ¬ º ¥ ¦ § ¥ ¨ ´ « ¤ ¬ ¥ ³ ©  ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ´ ¬ © © ¶ ³ ´ ± ¦ ¥ ´ ® § ¨ § ¦ « µ µ © ³ ² ¦ § ® ³ ¥ ¬ ¦ § ¦ © § ¨ © µ © ° · ´ ¬ ® Ì ® ¬ ¬ ¥ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¦ ä ä ± ¦ ¥ ¬ ¥ ³ © ¬ ¨ ¥ ´ É Ø Ð ± ¦ ¥ ´ ¹ Ø Ð ã ´ ¥ ® ° ¥ · · · ª © ¯ ¦ § ¯ ° © × ² ¦ ¥ º ° « Ö § ° ® ± ¦ ¥ ² ¬ ¥ ° « ° ° © © ¦ § ± ® ¨ ¥ ³ © ¬ ´ ¬ ® Ì ® ¬ ´ ® § ¨ § ¬ § ³ ¥ ª ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ´ ¬ ¥ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¦ ± ¦ ¥ ² ± ® Ì © ° µ § © ¨ ´ ´ ® ³ ³ ¥ ² ¬ ¥ ³ © ¬ ¨ ¥ ´ ¦ ¥ ¬ ± ¦ ¥ ² ¨ « © ¶ ¨ § Ò ´ © ¦ § § ¬ § × ² ˜ ´ ® § ³ § ¬ © ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ¦ © § ¬ ¬ § µ Í Þ ® ¶ ¨ ° © ª ª © ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¬ « µ ° © × ´ ¦ © § ¨ « ¬ © ´ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ´ ® ¨ ¥ « Ê ® ± ¥ ± ¦ ¥ ® ª ¥ ¤ ´ ® ´ ´ ® ¦ ¬ ¬ § ± ® ¨ ¥ ¬ ® ° Ö ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ´ ª © ­ ³ ¦ ® « Ê ® ° ª ± ¦ ¥ ± ® ¶ ´ § ¬ º ¥ ¨ ´ ® ° ® º µ « ¦ Þ ¼ ß Þ Ï ¼ ¼ ß Þ ´ § ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ´ ° © ª ± ® ´ ¥ ® ° ³ ® Õ ² ¦ § ´ ¨ ³ ® Ë © ° Ý ´ ¨ § ´ § Ì ° ¥ ¬ « ³ © ± ® ¨ ³ ® ¬ ® ´ ² ± Ù ´ ¦ © § ´ ´ « ³ ´ § ± « © ° ¯ ¦ « × ² ® ³ ¥ ¬ ¬ ¥ § ³ © ¤ ¬ ¥ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¸ ® ¶ ¨ ª © ¦ © § ¨ ¥ « ¬ ¥ Ì ® ´ « ³ © ª Ù ´ Ò ® § Ì ° ® ¨ ¦ § ¦ § ´ ® § ¨ § ³ ± ® Ô § ¦ ¥ º ° « ° ® ± ¦ « ¹ ¹ Ç ° ¥ ¬ « ¯ ® ° ² ® ¨ ¦ ¥ Ö á ® ¬ ¥ ¦ © § ¨ Ø µ © ° ª Ü ¥ ¨ ¥ ± ­ ° ¥ µ § ° · Ó ­ ¬ ¶ ¯ § ¶ ¾ ® ¶ ¨ ¦ § ± ® ¨ ³ ® ¬ ª ® ° ± ¦ « × ¦ § ¨ ¦ ® µ ® ¯ ¥ ¦ ¥ µ ² ´ ® µ © ³ ¨ « © ² ® ° « ¨ ¥ ° ® ¨ § ¬ ± ® ¨ ¥ ¬ ® Æ ® ¯ ¥ ¨ ® ´ ¥ ¨ ¥ ± ¯ ¦ § ° © ¨ § ¦ © µ ² ´ ¦ ¥ ¬ ª © ¨ ¦ ® µ ´ ´ ® ´ ´ ¥ ° © Ï ± ¦ ¥ ® ¯ ¥ ° ® Ò ® ¤ œ ² ® ± § Ì © ° © ¨ ² ´ ® § ± « ¨ ´ ¨ ¦ ® µ © ¬ ® Ì ® ± É Ç Â ¬ ¬ ¥ µ § ° ® ¨ ¦ § ° © ª ¦ § ± ® ¨ ¥ ° ¯ ® ¨ ¦ § ´ ¨ ® ¯ ° ¥ ¨ ´ Ø Ç ¸ ± ¦ ¥ ´ · ¤ Ú ¯ ¦ § Û ° ¥ µ ¶ ³ ¦ ® Á ² ¼ ¼ ß Þ ¦ § ´ ¨ ³ ® Ë © ° Ñ ´ ® Ù ´ É Ç Â Ù ´ ¹ Ç ¸ ² § ¨ § ¬ ¥ § ³ § ¦ « Ð Ï ´ ® § ¨ § À ± ® ¨ ³ ® ¬ ® ´ ¥ ¨ ¥ ± Ø ¤ ¸ · à · Å Ð ­ ° ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ´ ¦ É Î Í ¼ ª © Ò ® § Ì ® Æ ´ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ « ¬ ¥ Ì ® ² ± ¦ ¥ · Õ · Å Ð ¿ ¼ ß Þ © ¨ ® ¶ ¨ © ¨ ­ ¨ § ° © § ° · ¬ ¥ ¨ ° © · ¸ ¹ ¤ Å ¹ Ú ¬ § ¶ · µ ² ° ® Å Ö ± § Ð ¨ ³ ® Ë © ° ® ¨ ¥ ¦ § ± ° © © ³ Ö ß ¼ ß Þ ® ¶ ¨ ¦ § ± ® ± « ¬ ³ ¦ § ´ ¨ ® ¯ ° ¥ ¨ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ´ ¦ © © ¨ ´ ® § ³ ¦ ® ¯ ¥ ´ ® ´ ¥ º ¥ ¨ ¥ ± Í ¼ ß Þ ´ ® § ¨ § Ì § ¨ ³ ¥ ¨ ¦ § © Ë ± ¦ ¥ ² ¯ ¦ § ¨ ¦ ® µ ® ¬ µ à · ¤ Ú Ù É Ç Â Ù ¹ Ç ¸ ´ ® « ¯ © ¬ ¥ § ± ¦ § ¦ © § ¨ ¥ « ¬ ¥ Ì ® ² ² ´ ® ¦ § § ¬ § ¶ ¬ ¥ ° © ¨ ³ ® ´ ° ® ¨ ¦ § ³ § ¨ ¥ µ ® ¶ Å ® ¶ ¨ ª © ® ± © À ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ « ¬ ¥ Ì ® ´ ¨ ¬ « ´ ® ° ª © ­ ³ ¦ ® « Ê ® ° ª ² ¿ ¾ ½ ¼ ® ¶ ¨ ´ ® ± ® ´ ° ® « ³ § ¨ ¥ µ ® ¶ ¨ ± ¦ ¥ ° ® º µ « ¦ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ « ¬ ¥ Ì ® ¨ ³ ® Ë © ° · Í ¼ ß Þ ¨ ¥ ¶ ¨ ¨ ³ ¹ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ® ¶ ¨ ¦ § ® ´ ¥ ® ° ³ ¦ à ± ¦ ¥ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ « ¬ ¥ Ì ® ¬ ¥ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¸ ® ¶ ¨ ª © ¨ ¦ ® µ ¨ ³ ¥ ¦ ¦ § ´ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ « ¬ ¥ Ì ® ´ ¨ ¬ « ´ ® ° ® Ì § ¨ ¥ µ µ « ´ Ä ¤ » É Â ¹ È ¨ ³ ® Ë © ° · ² ² ± ® ¨ ¦ ® µ ® ¬ µ § ¦ ¥ ¬ Ò ® § Ì ® ° µ ° ® ¨ Ö ± § Ð ¨ « © ¨ ³ ¥ ° ¨ ¦ © ³ ² Å » Ç Æ ¹ Å ´ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ³ § ¦ « µ µ © ³ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ° © ® ¨ ¥ ¦ § ± ° © © ³ à ¼ ß Þ ® ¬ º ¥ ¦ § ¥ ¨ ´ « ´ ¬ ¥ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¦ ² ´ ¨ ° © ® ° © ¨ Ð Ø À ¹ Æ × ¸ à ¦ § ¦ © § ¨ ¥ « ¬ ¥ Ì ® ¯ ¦ § ° © ¨ § ¦ © µ ¬ ¥ « ¦ ¦ ¹ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ª © ® ® ¨ ¨ § µ µ © À ® Ì § ¨ ¥ µ µ « ´ ± ® ¶ ´ § ¬ º ¥ ¨ ´ ® ® º ¦ © ¨ ¦ ® µ « ³ © ± ­ ³ § ¬ © ² Ö º « ¤ ¸ ¹ ¤ Å ¹ Ú ® ± § Ò Ö ° © ¨ ³ ® ¤ Ä ¤ » À Æ É Ø ¤ ¹ Å ¹ Õ © ¨ ¬ ¬ § ¨ ´ Ä » ¸ à  » ¤ ¹ Á ¬ ¥ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¸ ® ¶ ¨ ª © ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ° ¥ ® ° ‘  | | {  ƒ t – w y x ‹ ƒ y w „ w ƒ u t s Ž v ƒ s x v s w ‡ y ‰ ‰ • …  Š … †  Œ ‰ †  Š ˆ Š ” y ƒ ‡ y s ” v w t s ‡ x ƒ u x ’ s v s ‡ y s ƒ y w t ƒ s z x y x w v ‹ w ƒ ‡ ƒ t w s v ƒ  … € “ ‰  † ‰ †  ‰ DETAILED EVALUATION PLAN MATRIX ƒ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ¬ ¥ ³ ©  ƒ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ° © © Ö © ° · ƒ ¨ ¦ « © ³ ³ ¥ ¬ ¥ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¦ ¹ ƒ ® ¦ ® § ¯ ­ ± ¦ ¥ ¶ ¨ ¬ ¥ ® ² Ý ´ ® ³ ¦ § Ì © ° Ï ´ ® § ¨ § ³ ¾ © ¨ ® ¯ ¥ ° ® Ì © ³ Ó â ß ¦ ¥ ¶ ¨ ´ ´ ® ¬ ¯ ¦ § Ì ¥ ¶ ´ ¥ ® ° ¥ Ó à ¼ µ © ° ª Ü â ß ­ º ² ® ³ ¦ § Ì © ° Ï ´ ® § ¨ § ³ — ² ­ ¨ § ° © § ° ™ ¦ § ® ¯ ¥ ° ® Ì © ³ š ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ´ › œ ² ± ® Ì © ° µ à  — œ ž Ÿ   ¡ š — œ ™ ˜ — œ   ™ — ™   › ˜ ¢ £ ™ › ² ® ³ ¥ ¬ š ¦ § ´ ¨ ® ¯ ± « º ± ¦ ¥ ² ´ ¦ ¥ ¬ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ´ ¬ ¥ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¦ ± ¦ ¥ ¬ ¥ ³ ©  · ¤ ´ ¤ » ´ ° © ¨ ³ ® ´ ° ® ¶ ¨ © ª © ´ ¦ ¥ ¬ ´ ´ ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ³ § ¦ « µ µ © ³ ¹ ± ¦ ¥ ´ ¨ ¦ ® µ « ° ¨ ´ ¦ § ² ¤ ­ ³ § ¬ © · ¬ ¬ ¥ ¦ § ± ® ¨ ¥ ° ¯ ® ¨ ¦ § · ­ ¬ ¬ « ª ¦ © § ¨ ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ v y ƒ „ ƒ r ƒ w ‚  € x v s w ‡ y t s x ‰ †  ˆ  ~ } | { ‡ ƒ ƒ z x y x w v s u t s r † … € q 102 d k p o k m n e m ˜ j k j ˜ e k g f ™ l k e ˜ k j i h g f e ˜ d d ˜ ™ ˜ — – It should be mentioned here that the monitoring of the Roadmap component on the provision of adequate infrastructure support is lodged in the annual updating of the CIIP done by NEDA with inputs from the different national implementing agencies. outputs and other implementation issues (such as risks and problems encountered).

DILG. DENR. NEDA. BASELINE AND TARGET VALUE Baseline: There is a need to review/revisit existing Local Government Ordinances to ensure harmonization with the NSSP Target Value: NSSP programs integrated with Local Development Plans Baseline: Fragmented coordination mechanism for sanitation Fragmented and outdated policies and legislations Target Value: Lead sector agency and implementing unit identified National Sanitation Code Amended DATA SOURCES: METHODS Of DATA COLLECTION Data Sources: NSSP Data Collection Methods: Consultation Conferences Desk Review Documentation MODALITY AND TIMING Series of Orientation Workshops to be conducted per region from 20102013 AGENCY RESPONSIBLE DOH. DILG. NEDA. NEDA SCWR giving priority to sanitation concerns. Data Sources: NSSP Directory of Sanitation concerned agencies Annual Reports & Accomplishment & Monitoring Reports Policy briefs Senate & Lower House Bills Data Collection Method: Regular Monitoring Documentation of Lower House & Senate Committee Meetings Coordinator Meeting with LEDAC. LWUA 103 . DILG. DBM Rationalized/ strengthened sector coordination mechanisms Baseline: There is a need to review/update existing sanitation instruments. mechanisms and processes at the local level through series of planning workshops DOH Sanitation Strategy developed. communication plans and programs in the sector Target Value: Integrated sanitation concerns on environment. Congress and Senate Data Sources: Existing National Sanitation Code LGU Sanitation Codes Local Government Code New Environmental Laws on Water and Solid Waste) Data Collection Methods: Key Informant Interviews Desk Review Documentation Semi-Annual and Annual Monitoring at INFRACOM NEDA SCWR DOH. DOH to develop its own sanitation plans and programs. DETAILED DESCRIPTION Of INDICATORS • Implementation of the NSSP through orientation workshops at the local level • Strengthen enforcement systems. Oversight function and policy direction of NEDA SCWR felt through regular sanitation meetings and policy documents. DILG. DENR. health and safety aspects Data Source: Sector plans and programs Policy briefs Data Collection Methods: Interviews Desk Review Stakeholders Consultation Documentation Quarterly Consultative meetings with concerned sector agencies for updates on the status of integration of sanitation concerns. LWUA.TABLE 12 RESULTS MONITORING PLAN MATRIX OUTCOME PROGRESS MONITORING þ ý ü û ú ù ø ÷ ö AGREED INDICATORS Strong local sanitation plans and programs developed and implemented by LGUs within the national sanitation policy and supported by the DOH as the national sanitation institutional driver.LGUs é ð õ ô ð ò ó ê ò ç ï ð ï ç ê ð ì ë è ñ ð ê ç ð ï î í ì ë ê ç é é ç è ç æ å § ¦ ü ¤ ú  ¥ ¥ ¦ ú ¢ ü £ ø ¨ ¤ ¢  £ ü   ÷  ¥ ¢ ø ü ú ¥ ü ¦ ù ¡ ¢   ü © ¢ ü ¦ ¨ ¢ ø ¨   ÿ ¢ Strengthened DOH to act as sector lead driver. DOH. NEDA. NEDA A clear articulation and sustainable implementation of the national and local sanitation policies Advocacy for Sanitation to be declared a priority policy in all agencies concerned with corresponding budget line items proposed for GAA Amendment of the Sanitation Code to comply with more recent laws with provisions relating to sanitation Issuance of policy statement by NEDA Board on the inclusion of sanitation programs in the MTPDP Sanitation concerns mainstreamed and aligned with the National Sanitation Sector Plan Baseline: Sanitation programs and projects are not included in the MTPDP and MTPIP Sanitation programs do not have a budget item under DOH Target Value: Position paper on sanitation to be included in the GAA. Bi-monthly monitoring through consultations with NEDA Board and DBM DOH. LWUA. DENR. approved and is being implemented across the countyr.

social marketing and advocacy. PPDCs. NGOs Academe/Learning Institutions. MPDCs/PPDCs. LGUs.OUTCOME PROGRESS MONITORING Outcome 2: Improved service delivery through communications and capacity development. and PIME on sustainable sanitation programs Trainings per year: • 82 LCEs • 30 PPDCs • 200 MPDCs Establish 10 New Higher Learning Institutions that offer B. research and development.S. communication and advocacy plans for public’s behavioral change. NGO. monitoring and evaluating their medium term sanitation plans DETAILED DESCRIPTION Of INDICATORS Capacity development needs refer to NGAs. PPDC/ MPDC. implementing. communicating. benchmarking. Sanitation Professionals. AGREED INDICATORS Institutions and Organizations capable of developing. conduct of training activities. TNA analysis and KAP surveys Target values: A national official guideline on technology options. and General Public It includes the provision of required competencies to develop a SMART medium term plan e. monitoring and evaluation and information exchange Responsive interventions refer to development appropriate training designs. LGUs/LCEs. LGUs. management models.g. Sector Reports KAP Surveys Web-site log count Training activity reports Training evaluation reports Benchmarking studies Training conferences (proceedings) Related ODA reports from NEDA Data Collection Methods: Compilation of Reports / Desktop Review of Reports Surveys. Sanitary Engineering and Training Course for Sanitation Inspectors 80 percent of LGUs have complied with responsive training strategies using standard benchmarks 80 percent of LGUs actively utilizing webbased information exchange Heightened awareness and practices of the general public on sustainable sanitation and hygiene DATA SOURCES: METHODS Of DATA COLLECTION Data Sources: Annual accomplishment reports of NGAs. Crosssectional studies Case studies Observation methods Training Conferences Training evaluation MODALITY AND TIMING Regular quarterly and annual monitoring Regular training assessments Periodic training conferences Annual KAP surveys AGENCY RESPONSIBLE National Agency for Sustainable Sanitation (when established) Collection by M&E units/ officers of NGAs. local policy formulation on sustainable sanitation. and efficient information exchange BASELINE AND TARGET VALUE Baseline: still to be established based on compilation of inventory results. technology options. Academe/Training Institutions. MPDCs. Academe/Training Institutions DILG/DOH  $ ) ( $ & '  &  # $ #   $   % $   $ # " !           104 .

LGUs. PWRF. NSSMP Offices and water and sanitation service providers networks 105 4 A F E A C D 5 C 2 @ A @ 2 5 A 7 6 3 B A 5 2 A @ 9 8 7 6 5 2 4 4 2 3 2 1 0 . Target values: • A national policy with corresponding guideline for professionalizing sanitation service providers.OUTCOME PROGRESS MONITORING Outcome 3: AGREED INDICATORS 3. Data Sources: • WSPs and NSSMP Offices • Proceedings of fora conducted and accomplishment reports Data Collection methods • Documentation • Key informant interviews • Quarterly and annual monitoring. • Periodic workshops and conferences AGENCY RESPONSIBLE • Collection by Secretariats of PEN and PDF-TF on SAB • Coordination and compilation by Secretariats of PEN and PDF-TF on SAB • Interim compilation by Secretariats of PEN and PDF-TF on SAB Broad-based alliance of multisectoral and multilevel stakeholders strengthening the sanitation sector 3. plans. and ACSuSan Secretariat • Interim compilation by ACSuSan Secretariat 3. NSSMP Office and water and sanitation service providers networks • Interim compilation by PDF-TF. DETAILED DESCRIPTION Of INDICATORS Joint activities and programs conducted BASELINE AND TARGET VALUE Baseline: Three national and some regional sanitation conferences held by PEN since 2006 Target values: Annual national and regional sustainable sanitation conferences held. CHEd. WSPs. DATA SOURCES: METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION Data Sources: • Post activity/ conference documentation • PEN website • PDF-TF on SAB minutes. Include sanitation governance and emergency sanitation as major issues to address. lead and advance sustainable sanitation policies. education. support and regulation of private sector except in Metro Manila. • Quarterly and annual monitoring. and NGOs • Coordination and compilation by DOH. • Annual accomplishment reports of ACSuSan members • ACSuSan Member websites • Flyers/Brochures of trainings Data Collection methods: • Documentation • Key informant interviews • Course evaluations and assessments MODALITY AND TIMING • Quarterly and annual monitoring. programs and activities. and human resource pooling for awareness and knowledge building. • Periodic activities of WSPs. reports and minutes of meeting. Establishment of training and education consortia Baseline: One academic consortium being organized. Target values: At least one active academic consortium providing relevant and effective education on sustainable sanitation.1: Strong and active national multi-sector support groups that will advocate.3: A strong alliance of sanitation service providers at the national and local levels Formulation of clear programs of action for alliance building and professionalizing and developing the sanitation service provider sector Baseline: Weak involvement.2: Clear mechanisms for collaboration in knowledge sharing. • Requisite posttraining activity and evaluation • Periodic training and conduct of courses • Collection individual ACSuSan members • Coordination and compilation by DepEd. • Collection by M&E units/officers of NGAs. • Flyers/Brochures of events Data Collection methods • Documentation • Key informant interviews Data Sources: • ACSuSan Consortium business plans.

LGUs. DENR Data Collection Method: Agency accomplishment and monitoring reports Data Sources: DOF. activities (PPA) for all agencies with sanitation mandate including LGUs with corresponding targets and budgets Develop sanitation champions at local and national levels of governance Baseline: Sanitation program still not included in the MTPDP and MTPIP but still considered part of the water sector target and budget Target value: Concrete sanitation targets and budgets included in the MTPDP and MTPIP Regular monitoring NEDA Q X c b X ` a R ` I W X W I R X T S P Y X R I X W V U T S R I Q Q I P I H G 106 . DPWH. DOH. DOH. MWSS. DOF PCCI Data Collection Method: Agency accomplishment and monitoring reports Quarterly and annual monitoring of NGAs concerned DOF A well-established national account for sanitation Distinct accounting for sanitation in the National Account System Data Sources: HH surveys. Sanitation tariff methodology that allows full cost recovery Innovative sanitation financing models Package of incentives that will attract potential investors R and D and capacity development proposals packaged and submitted to interested funders Support to toilet construction. NSO Data Collection Method: Agency accomplishment and monitoring reports Result of HH surveys Data Sources/Collection Method MTPDP and MTPIP documents and reports Quarterly and annual monitoring of NGAs concerned HH survey every 3-5 years NEDA Investment requirements identified and secured to meet the MDG and MTPDP targets Strong advocacy and lobby for making sanitation part of the priority program of the government A distinct sanitation program. prioritization guidelines BASELINE AND TARGET VALUE Baseline: Still to be developed Target value: Availability of intervention and priority guidelines DATA SOURCES: METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION Data Sources: DOH. DILG. DILG.OUTCOME PROGRESS MONITORING Outcome 4: AGREED INDICATORS Prioritized intervention in highly vulnerable areas seriously affected by lack of sanitation DETAILED DESCRIPTION Of INDICATORS Development of interventions for highly vulnerable areas seriously affected by the lack of sanitation incl. Expansion of MM septage capacity and construction of sewerage facilities in HUCs Pro poor financing model developed and implemented Baseline: Still to be developed Target value: Adaption and implementation of the sanitation tariff methodology Pilot testing of sanitation financing models At least 5 proposals implemented in the short term period of 3 years Provision of support to toilet construction. DILG. NEDA Data Collection Method: Agency accomplishment reports MODALITY AND TIMING Quarterly and annual monitoring of NGAs concerned AGENCY RESPONSIBLE DILG as lead Financing investments and infrastructure provision for sanitation developed in strategic priority areas Financing strategies and incentive schemes for sustainable infrastructure developed. hygiene promotion and capacity development. DENR. At least 10 LGUs providing funds for pro poor sanitation in the short term Increased capacity for septage and sewerage in MM and in at least 14 HUCs Baseline: Still to be developed Target value: At least 3 PPP models documented and enhanced IEC/social marketing plan actively pursued At least 3 sanitation enterprises implemented Baseline: Still to be developed Target value: Institutionalization of a sanitation accounting as part of the National Account System Quarterly and annual monitoring of NGAs concerned NEDA Established and enhanced publicprivate partnerships and sanitation entrepreneurship Documentation and enhancement of PPP models in sanitation service provision IEC/Social marketing plan implemented Sanitation enterprises developed Data Sources: DTI. DPWH. project. DepED.

OUTCOME PROGRESS MONITORING Outcome 5: Adequate sanitation and hygiene promotion is mainstreamed in emergency relief and rehabilitation efforts

AGREED INDICATORS Appropriate approaches for different situations identified and toolkits and sourcebooks developed

DETAILED DESCRIPTION Of INDICATORS Inventory and identification of appropriate sanitation approaches for emergency situations Priority areas for intervention identified Piloting appropriate sanitation approaches in existing evacuation centers and resettlement areas Sourcebook and toolkits on appropriate approaches for different situations published Capacity building on sanitation preparedness in emergency situation

BASELINE AND TARGET VALUE Baseline: still to be developed Target values: Sourcebook and toolkits published and disseminated to national and local disaster coordinating committees and LGUs Translation of sourcebooks and toolkits in major Filipino dialects Training in sanitation preparedness for emergency situations for local disaster coordinating committees

DATA SOURCES: METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION Data Sources: DND, DOH, DepED, DILG, DBM Local and national disaster coordinating committees plans LGU policies and plans List of Evacuation Centers Local and national allocations for calamity fund and other resources Data Collection Methods: Survey Questionnaire for local and national policies and plans Compilation of Reports / Desktop Review of Reports Key Informant Interviews

MODALITY AND TIMING One-page survey questionnaire and/ or key informant interviews during start and end of fiscal year

AGENCY RESPONSIBLE DOH National Agency for Sustainable Sanitation (when established) NDCC DILG/ LGUs

Emergency sanitation integrated into disaster response and risk reduction plans at all levels

Development of emergency sanitation plan component for integration into the disaster and risk reduction plan at all levels Emergency sanitation planning institutionalized in development planning and capacities built

Guidelines for the integration of sanitation in disaster risk reduction plan Local and national plans on disaster preparedness includes • specific plans and provisions for sanitation for short-, medium- and long-term relief/ rehabilitation responses • collaborative mechanisms between public and private sector for logistical support MOA or MOU among concerned agencies, LGUs and private sector for instant and efficient delivery of services Directory of contact persons or organizations at the local and national levels who can provide technical and other needed assistance during emergency situations

Building partnership for quick mobilization of logistics for sanitation in emergency situations

Partnerships and strong coordination mechanisms at local municipal, provincial and national levels established for: • Identifying priority areas of intervention • Quick mobilization of resources • Immediate response in emergency situations Information caravan promoting sustainable sanitation practices conducted

107

h

u

€

y

u

w

x

i

w

f

t

u

t

f

i

u

q

p

g

v

u

i

f

u

t

s

r

q

p

i

f

h

h

f

g

f

e

d

ENDNOTES
1

Philippine Sanitation Sourcebook and Decision Aid, December 2005 Sustainable Sanitation Alliance, http://www.susana.org/lang-en/intro/156-intro/53-what-is-sustainable-sanitation Integrated water resources management approach is a national policy that provides for the adoption of a more integrated and holistic management of our water resources that involves the coordinated development and management of water, land and related resources within hydrological boundaries, to optimize economic and social welfare without compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems. NWRB 2007. e Philippine IWRM Plan Framework guides stakeholders to prepare IWRM plans and the government agencies in ensuring that IWRM is mainstreamed in their respective plans and programs. Sanitation : A Human Rights Imperative, 2008. UN Habitat, WATERAID, Swiss Agency for Development Cooperation, Center on Housing Rights and Evictions For purposes of accuracy and consistency, data used in this Roadmap is based on the NSO 2000 Census, Data from the Department of Health’s Field Health Service Information System Annual 2007 provides more recent data and is also cited in this document. Global Water Supply and Sanitation Assessment 2000 Report Wilfredo, Jose. Asian Development Bank. “Wastes treat Wastes.” 2005. Philippine Environment Monitor, 2003. Manila: DENR and the World Bank Group Urban Sewerage and Sanitation: 30 years of Experiences and Lessons Learned NEDA Board Committee on Infrastructure (INFRACOM) Resolution No. 2, Series of 2008. Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic and Time Bound Urban Sewerage and Sanitation: 30 years of Experience and Lessons WSP, USAID, Economic Impacts of Sanitation in the Philippines, 2008, Jakarta: World Bank. Data in the presentation were sourced from an Asian Development Bank (ADB) study titled “Water in Asian Cities: Utilities Performance and Society Views,” and also included in a WB study in 2005 titled “Philippines: Meeting Infrastructure Challenges.”

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

…

’

—

–

’

”

•

†

”

ƒ

‘

’

‘

ƒ

†

’

ˆ

‡

„

“

’

†

ƒ

’

‘



‰

ˆ

‡

†

ƒ

…

…

ƒ

„

ƒ

‚



108

ANNEXES .

f m r q m o p g o d l m l d g m i h e n m g d m l k j i h g d f f d e d ™ ˜ ANNEXES 111 š ™ ˜ ˜ — – Š • ” “ ‰  Ž ’ ‘  Ž  ˆ Š Ž   Š ‹  Š Ž  ˆ Œ Š ‹ ‹ Š ˆ † † ˆ ‰ ˆ ‡ † … ƒ z ‚ „ ƒ z ‚  € z  ~ s } | { u z s y x w v u t t s .

GOVERNMENT AGENCIES WITH SANITATION-RELATED RESPONSIBILITIES .Ó Ð Ï Æ Ô Î Ä Î Ï Å Ð Ç Ð Ô Ã Æ Î Ù Ø É È Ç Ù Æ Ï Ã Ð É Ã È Å Î ß Ã ¿ Ó Ð Ë Ó Ó Î Ö Ã Æ Ó Ï Ã Ð É Ð Ï Æ Ï Ó Ï Ô Æ Ø É Î Ù Æ Ï Ã Ð É Ã È Å Î ß Ã Ð Ó Ð ß È Å Ø Ø Á Ü æ é ¿ Ú Ë Æ Ð Å Ë æ Ý Ã È Î Ï Æ Î Ö Æ Å Ö Ã Æ Ð Ó Î È Ã Ï Ã Ð É Ð Þ Æ Ã Æ é à Å Î Æ à Ö Ã Æ Ù à Å Ð Ï Æ × Å È Ä Ó Ö Å Æ Ö Ã Æ Ï Ó ã Ï Î Ù Æ Ë å Ï Ã Ð É Ã È Å Î ß Ã Ð Ó Ð Ï Æ Ù Ë É Å È ç Ù Æ Ï Ã Ð É Ã È Å Î ß Ã ¿ Ò ¾ ¿ À Ü ð Ò Á Ç â æ î Ç Ú É Å È Ä Ð Ò Ã Æ Î Å Æ Å Þ Á Ð ß Î Ó Ã Ð Õ Ð Å Ø É È Ç Ü ð é Ê Ê ¾ Ú Ã Æ Ù ð Ï Ã Ð É Ð Þ Æ Ã Æ é Ð Þ Æ Ï Ø Ð Ê Ö Ã Æ â Ö Ð Ó Æ æ Ð Þ Æ Å Ð × Ð Ê Ù Æ Ã È Î Ï Æ ¾ Ð Õ Ï Þ Ã Î Å Æ Ø Ð Å Ø Ã Î Ø Î Õ Ó Å Ð Ö Æ Ð Ù Ð Õ Ï Å Ð ß È ä È È ñ Å È Ì Æ î Ù Æ Å Ï Ã Ð Ç Ü Ê Ê Ñ é Ú É Ð Ï Ó ã Ê Ð Þ Æ Å Ð × Ð Ê Û Ó Ð Î Ï Î Ô Ï Ã Ð Ô Æ ê Ö Æ Ö Ã Æ Æ Ù Î Ã Æ é È Å Ï Ð é Ã Î Ó Ï Ô Ð ê È Å Ø Ð Þ Æ Å Ð × Ð Ó Ö Ã Æ ã Ù Ø Ø Ë Ó Ö Ã Æ Ó ä Å È × Å Ð Ï Æ Ñ Å Ð Ï Æ × Ù Æ Ø Î Ô Î Ã Ë É â Ô Î Ï Ó Ð É È Ö Ó Ð Ï Æ Å Ð Ø È Ö Ã Æ Ó Ã Î Æ Ï Ã Î Æ É à Ó Ï Ô Ë Å Ï Ó Ã È Ç Ã Æ Ï Î Ù È Ø È Å Ï Ð é ë Ñ ð À Ü Á ï Ñ î Ú Æ Ù Î Ã Æ é È Å Ï Ð é Ð Ö Î Ó Ï Ë È Ó Ï Ô Î Å Ï Ó Î Ö Å Ð Ï Æ × Ä È Þ Ã Î Ô Ã Æ Ã Î Ä Ö Ã Æ Ã È Î Ï Æ Ù Ë Þ Ð Å Ã È Î Ï Æ Å Ï Ó Î Ã Î É Ö Á à Ï Ã Ð É Ø È Ù Ð ß Ð Ö Ð Õ Ï Ó Ð Ï È É È Å Ø Ï Æ Õ Ï Ã È Î Ï Ë Ï Î Ï Ó Ã Î Þ Ã Î Ö Ã Ð Ù Ö Ð í Î Ù Æ Î Ô Ð Ø Ê Ó Ð Î Ï Î Ù Î Ï ï Å Ð Ï Æ Ñ Ù Æ Ô È î Ó Å È Ï Ô Æ Ä Ö Ð Ï Æ Ù Ð Å Ð Ô Î Ä Ä è ä Å È × Ö Ã Æ Ù Æ Ï Ã Ð É Ã È Å Î ß Ã Ð Õ Ï Î × Ö Ð Ï Æ Î Ô È Ó Ó Æ Ó ä Ó Î Å Ö Ã Æ Ó Ö Å Æ í Æ Õ Õ Ï Ù Æ Ð Õ Õ Ï Ù Æ Ð ë Ù Æ Ã È Î Ï Æ Ø Ë Ô Ô è Ð Þ Æ Ã Æ É È Ï Ó Ð Î Þ Ð Ï Æ Å Ï Ó Ö Ã Æ Ó É Æ Å Þ È Å Ø à Ó Ð Î Ô Î Ù È Ø à Ó Ã Æ Ù Ø Ó Ø È Ù Ð ß Ð À ì Ù Æ Ï Ã Ð É Ã È Å Î ß Ã ¿ ë è À Û Å È Ï Ô Ð Ó Ð Õ Ï Ã Î Ó Ð Ë Ó Ó Î Þ Ã Î Ó Î Å Æ Ä È Ã È Î Ï Ë Ù È Ó Ð Å Ö Ã Æ Ã È Î Ó Ó Ë Ô Ó Î Ö Ð Õ Ï Å È Ä Ð Ë Ã Ð ß Ö Ã Æ Ý Ã È Î Ï Æ É Å È Ä Ã Î Å È Ï Ô Ð Ó Ä È Ð Ó Ë È Õ Þ Ã Î Å Æ Ð Ù Ô Ó Æ Ó Ð ß Å Ð Ê Ý Ó Ï Å È Ä Ä Ð Ä È Ã È Î Ï Æ Ô Î Ù Ø Ë Ö Ö Î È ß Æ È Ï Ó Ï Ô Ð ê È Å Ø Ö Ã Æ Ó É Æ Å Þ È Å Ø Å È Ï Ô Ð Ó Ð Õ Ï Ã Î Ö Ð ß Ù È ß Ã Î Ï Ã Ð É Ã Å Ð ß È Þ Ð Õ Ï Ä È Ó Ð Î Ï Î Ù Æ Ï Ã Ð É Ë Å Ï Ó Ã Î Ö Ã Æ Ó Ð Î Ô Ã Ð Þ Æ Ó Ë È Î Å Æ ß Ð Õ Ï Þ Ã È É Æ Ã È Î Ï Æ Ã Î Ö Å È È Ô Ö Ã Æ Ã È Î Ï Æ Å Ð Ø È È Ô Ä È Ó Æ Ð Å Æ Ó Ð Ï Æ Ù Ë É Å È ç Ý é è Ç Á Ò ç ¾ Â Ð Õ Ï Õ Þ Ë È Å Õ Ï Ö Å Æ È æ Á À ¿ ¾ Ð Õ Ï È Ï Ó Ã È Î Ï Æ Ö Ã Ð É É È Ô Ð Å ã Ô Î Ù È Ø Ï Ã Ð Ë å Ð Ó Ì Ë Ó Ð ä Æ É Ö Ã Æ Å È Ï Ô Ð Ó Ð Õ Ï Ä È Ó Ï Ô Ð Ø Ó Æ Ó Ë È Î Å Æ ß Ã È Ó Î Ó ã Ù Æ Ã Æ ã Ô Î Ù È Ø Ö Ã Æ à Ó Ð Õ Ô Å Æ Ð Ó Ð Å à Ó Ð Î Ö Ë Ï Ó Ä È Ï Ô Ë Ö Ã È Ô Ð Õ Ï Ó Ð Ó Î ß Ö Æ Å È â Ö Ã Æ Ó Ð Ï Æ Ã Î Ö Å È È Ç Ý Ü Ã È Î Ï Æ Ï Ã Ð É Ð Ù Ø É Î É Æ Å Þ È Å Ø Ð Õ Ï Ã Î Ö Ð Å Ð Ï Ã Ë È Ô Ã Ð Ó Æ Ð Å Æ É Ð Ù Ì È Å Ø à Ó Ï Ð Þ Å Æ Ï Ö Ð É É Æ Å Þ È Å Ø É È Å Ä Ð Ô Ã Æ É Å È Ä Å Ð Ø Ù Æ Ë Ï Ô Æ Ä È Ã È Î Ï Æ Î ß Ð Ö à Ø Æ É Ö Æ È Ò Ð Õ Ï Ã Î Ö Ð Î Ä Î Ï Ã Ð Ö Î Ó Ð Î Ï Î ß Î Ï Ô Æ â Ó É Æ Å Þ È Å Ø Ä È Ã È Î Ï Æ Ï Ã Ð É Ð Ù Ø É Î Ð Õ Ï Ä È Ó Ë Ï Æ Ï Ó Ö Ã Æ Ï Ã Ð Ï á Ð à Û Þ Û Ð Ú Å È Ï Ô Ð Ó Ð Õ Ï Ä È Ï Ã Ð É Ó Ó Ð Ó Ó Æ Ö Ã Æ Ã È Î Ï Æ Ë Ù Æ ß Ð à × Ð Î ß Ð Å Ô Î Ö È Î Å Ð Ø Ä È Ï Ô Ë Ö Ã È Ô Ð Õ Ï Ó Æ Ù Ù Ð × Ó Æ Þ Ã Î Å È Ï Î Ã È É Å È Ï Ô Ð Ó Ó Ð Ï Æ Ã Î Ö Å È È Ç Ý Ü Ø Æ É Ö Æ È Ò Û Ð Û Î Ú Ã Æ Ù Ø Å È Ï Ô Ð Ó Ð Õ Ï Õ Ï Î × Ð Ô Ã Æ Ö Å È Ô Ô Æ Ó Ð Ô Å Ë È Ó Ð Ò Å Ð Ï Æ Ñ Ã Î Ï Ë È Í Ö Ð Î Å Å Æ Ô Ó Î Å È Ï Ô Ð Ó Ð Õ Ï Å È Ä Ï Ð Ó Ã È Î Ï Ô Ð Å Î Ö Ð Õ Ï Ï Æ Õ Ï Ó Ð Å Ë Ó Ã ¿ Ã È Ð Ð Ï Ï Î É É È Ç Í Ì Ë Ê É È Ç Æ Å Ä Ã Â Á À ¿ ¾ » ® ³ ° ¯ ® ­ ¬ » ¯ ½ ³ ¸ ° ¯ µ ¼ º ® ¹ ° ¬ ¸ ¸ ¬ ± ° ¯ ® ­ ¬ · µ ¬ ® ¶ µ ´ ® ¯ ³ ² 112 Ÿ ¦ « ª ¦ ¨ ©   ¨  ¥ ¦ ¥    ¦ ¢ ¡ ž § ¦    ¦ ¥ ¤ £ ¢ ¡    Ÿ Ÿ  ž  œ › ANNEX 2.

ö ý ¢ ¡ ý ÿ   ÷ ÿ ô ü ý ü ô ÷ ý ù ø õ þ ý ÷ ô ý ü û ú ù ø ÷ ô ö ö ô õ ô ó ò $ 2  (  ¨ ¤ D ( D &  C ¦ ©  ' B ) ! §  % ¨ ¤   § !          § B A &  ' B )  § ¥ %   ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ¥ ¦ ¨ ¤   ¨ ¤ 1 © 0    ¥ ¤ 9  § ! ¥  § 0  # ¨ ¦ % ¨ ¤ ¨ ¦  ¥ %  @ §  ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ¥ ¦ ¨ ¤   ¨ ¤ 1 © 0    ¥ ¤ 9 ! § # ¨ ¦ % ¨ ¤ ¨ ¦ ! § ¥    % % ¤ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ¥ ¦ © ¦ % ¤ !  ¨ ¤ ¨ § ¦  ¦  §   ¨ § ¦ ¥ § 1 # § © § ¨  %  ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ¥ ¦ ¨ ¤   © 7 ¤ © ¦ ¤  ¤ # ¨ ¦  0 © % ¨ ¦ # ¨ ¦ % ¨ ¤ ¨ ¦ !  ¨ ¤   ¤  # §   § ¥ %    © 7 ¤ © ¦ ¤  ¤ ¨ §  2 ) ( § ¥ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤   § ! ¨ ¦ ! § ¨ § ¦  ¦  §   ¨ ¤ ©  § ¥ %   ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ¥ ¦ ¨ ¤   ¨ ¤ 8 1 © 0    ¥ ¤ 9   ¥ ! § ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤  ¤     ¥ ¨ ¦  % ¨ ¤ ¥  ¦   ¤ © ¤ % ¦ ¨  %   2 ) (  § !   ¤  # §  # ¨ ¦  © ¦ 0 7 1 ¥ ¦ % ¤ ¤ % ! § ¨ § ¦  ¦  §  5   ¥   ¤    ¤  ¥ % $ ¥ ¨    # ¤ ¨ ¤ "  ¥  ¤  ¦ © §  © ¤ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ £   ¥ ! § ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ¥ ¨    ©  ¦   ¥       § § ¥   ¥ ¤   x x 6 x 6 x 6 x x 113 P  ¥  ¤ 9  ¦ © §   © %   ¤  # §    ¦ ¥ ¤ ¨   ¥ © ¤    ¥ §   ¥ ¤ ©    ¨ ¤ © © ¦ !  ¨ ¤ © 1  ¤ ¥ ¦   ¥   0 © % ¨ ¦   ¦ 9  C ¦ © © © ¤   ¥ ' P © ¤  E  ¥ %  @ §   ¨ ¤   ¤  # §     ¤  ¨ E ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ © 0   § !   0 © % ¨ ¦  % ¦  9 ¥ ¨  P ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ¦ % ¦ ¥  ¤  ¥ ¤  ¦   ¨ ¤ ¥ ¨   ¨ E ! §      %   ¨ ¤   %  0 §  ¥ E # ¨ ¦  0 §      ¥ § # ¨ §  ¤  % ¤  7  ¨ ¤   ¦  ¨      § % ¤ ¥ ¨   5 ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ # ¦   '  § ! ¥ ¨    # ¤ ¨ ¤ P  ¨ § ¦ 1 % ¦ © §  # 0 §   ¥ 1    ¦ ©    ¥ © ¤ # ¨ ¦  0 §  1  C   ¥ ! §  ¨  % ¦ ¥  0 @ © ¤ ¦ %  % ¨ ¤ © ¤ 7 ¤     % §  ¥ ¨   § ©       ¥ ¨ ¦  © © ¤ ! § ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ¦ % ¦ ¥  ¤   ¦ ¥ % ¤  ¨ ¥ ¤  ¥ ¥ ¨   ¨ §  ¦  ¨  ¨ ¤  ¨ ¤ % ¦  § ¨ § %  § ¦ % §  © ¤ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ¨ ! E 4 © ¤ ¦ % ¨ ¤ ¨ ¦ !  ¨ ¤ © ¤ % ¦  1    9 § ¥ ¨   ¨    § # ! § ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ X ¦ © ¦ ¥ 0  ¨ ¤ ¥ E  ¨ 0 §    ¥  ¥ §  §  § ¥   % ¨ ¤ E E    ¨ 0   ¥ ¤  ¨ ¤   ¦ V U T R S Q © E    ¨ 0   ¥ ¤   % ¥ ¨    # ¤ ¨ 6   ¤  # §   6   ¤  # §    ¨ ¤  2 ) ( ! §  ¥ ¨   ¥    ¨ ¦ 6 E 6 E 1 %    ¨ ¤   0    % 0    § ¥    ¨  ¥ ¨ ¦ ! § ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ¥ ¨    ©  ¦   ¥  ¨ ¤   ¦ ¥ ¦ © ¦ % ¤ ! ¨ ¤  ! § ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤   §  ¨ ¤ ¥ ¨     ¦ © 7 ¤ ¥   §  ¦   ¥  ¤ 9 1  ¤ ¥ ¦ ¨ ¤   ¨ ¤   §   § ! E ¤ ¥    ¦ % ¦ © § ! § ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ¥ ¨    ©  ¦  ¨ ¤ $ & " "   # ¤ ¨ ¤   ¨ ¤ © ¤  §  ¦   ¥  ¤ 9  ¦ © §  E    § # ! § ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤  ¨ ¦ ©    ¨ ¤ # ¨ ¦ % ¨ ¤ ¨ ¦ ! ¨    © ¥ ¥      ¨ ¤ ¥ ¨   § ©       § ¥  ¤  # §  # ¨ ¦  0 §    ¥ ¤  #  ¥ ¨ ¦ 8  ©  ¦  ¨ ¤ § ©     § ¥   C  ¤ $ G £ "   ¥ ¤ 9  ¥  ¤  ¨ §   ¨ ¦ ©   ¦ 0 )   0   ' $ & E ¥ ¤ © 0 #    ¨ ¤ # ¨ ¦ ¨ ¨ ¤ © ¥ ¨   § ©     ¤ ¥   © ¤    ¨ ¤ # ¨ ¦  0 §   ¨ ¤   0  ¨ ¤ © E ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤    % ¨ ¤  ¨  D Y 2 ( G   ¦ % ¨  # ¤ §  $ P ¨ § ¦ ¥ %  ¥ §  © ¤ ¥ ¨   ¨ §  ¦  ¨   ¨ ¤ E §  ¥ ¨    % ¨ ¤   ¤ % ¦  § ¨ § %  # ¨ §  ¤ ¨ ¦ ¤ ¥  0  § ¥  ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ © 0 #   # ¨ ¦  0 §   ¨ ¤ 6 D Y 2 ( G  0  ¨ ¤ ©   %  § ! ¨   ¨ ¤   ¥ ¤ # © 0  §  E  X ¦ © ¤ ¨ ¦ #  ¤    ¥ 1 © © ¤ ¦ %      § ¥ %   ¤ © © 0 !   ¥   ¥ ¤ ¥ ¦ © ¦ % ¤ !  ¨ ¤   # ¤  0 § % ¨   ¥ ¤   % ©   § ¥ ¥ ¨   § ©     © ¤ % ¦ ¥ ¦ © § § ¥ ¨      ¦  % ¤   ¥ ¨ ¦ ¥ ¨   0  ¥  ¨ ¦  ¤ E E ¨ ¤  © ¤ % ¦ # § © § ¨  %  ¥ P  P ¦ 3   %  0 §    ¨    # ¤ ¨ ¤    ¦ ¥ %  ! !   ¨ ¤ ¥ ¨  ¦ % ¦ ! !  0   ¦ ¥ ¨  0 W   7 0  1 7  ¨ ¤     A  ¦  ¥ ¦  $   ¥ ¤  R Q P § £     A   ¦ ¥ 0 %  I H 8 ¤ "  ¨ ¤ ¥  #  0 D ! § ¥ ¨   ¥  ¤  &   " D & 6 H ' # ¨ ¦ § ©     ¨ ¦  % ¨ ¤ ¥  ¦   ¤   ¦  §   H  & 6 H ' # ¨ ¦ § ©     ¨ ¦  % ¨ ¤ ¥  ¦   ¤   ¦  §  & H G  F 8   ¦ # § © § ¨  %  ¥   ¦ ! ¦    A & 6    © ¤ ¥ ¦ ¤ %  § ! # ¨ ¦  ¨ 0 !   ¦  §   ' B ) B A B & " B A & 4 2    3 ¥ ¦ ¨ 2 ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ¥ ¦ ¨ ¤    ¨ ¤ 1 © 0    ¥ ¤  ) ( ' &  ¨ § ¦   ¦   §   ¥  ¤    ¦ © §  © ¤ ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ £ .

‡ m y s  } y r y m s p t o r  † y … p m w   s  † y  s r m m  o w w u s r y s  „ s o  q p  v u ~ r t r s } „  † y † y r ƒ z v  m p v t m  y u s r w o p p t w s u m  t s u s r w o p v  q  v ’ m z u  s u o u ‘  v u t p v  y u r y r s r s u x v  q  j z u  s u o u Œ €   o r  † y „ p o …  s r w s } …  s r w } v t s r ~ } p o  Ž m o  m } o  y u ƒ w s u m  q r y u o  ~ p p t ‚ m  ‹ Š Œ { m u † t } m m n ‹ Š p y y o p ~ ~ } m … p s p r m r q p o n ‰  v r … p o ~ o p y t  m … p  s r y u w ~ } w s u   u o  q p t s p r y u y r s u m w s u o  y u ƒ v u t p v … p  s r o p y r s p | ‰ m s u v ~ o p y t  m s p r y u y r s u m w s u   u o  ƒ  m ‚ z v ~ ~ } m o  y u ƒ … p s p r y u o u ~  o n ˆ  s r w } v t s r m „ u o  p o ~ s p r y u y r w s u z v ~ ~ } m o  y u ƒ … p s p r y u y s  „  v ~ „ r w s u  s r t s ‚  s r s s u v n ‡ m  r y r v r y } o r  † y … p s p r y u v }   o t r „ p s w s u s p r y u y r s u m w s u z v ~ ~ } m o  y u ƒ ‚ s p r y u v }   o  t o } p m  § ¤ – ˜  • ”  ¡ • – ˜  ž – — ” › ¥ ˜  ˜ ¥ ”  ¤ — ¥ – ™ ˜ –    ™ ¤ ž –   – ž ¤ ¦ › ¥ —    ˜  ™ ‚ y ’ ƒ “ x x y • x … ƒ ‚ ‡  ‚ y „ ’ g ‚ ‡ ” y ƒ ‚ ‡  ‡ ƒ … e … € ‚ … x y „ ƒ ‚ – ‚ y ’ ƒ ‚ ‡ g ‡ „ • ‡ ‘ ƒ € ‚ … ‡  ‚ … x … e x …  ’ ‰ y x y  ‡ ” y ƒ ‚ ‡  ‡  ‚ … ‘ ‚ ‡ „ y ” € ‚ … ‚ y ’ ‰ ‡ „ ‡ ‘ ƒ ” y ‚ y ’ ƒ … ƒ ’ ‚ … † € ‚ … ‘ ƒ x … ‡ ‘ ‡ ‘ ƒ ” y ‰ ‚ ’ € „ … “ ‰ ‡ ” … † € ‚ y ’ ƒ y  y „ • ‡ ‘ ƒ „ y ” † ƒ  ‡ — y „ • € ‚ … †  … „ ‰ y „ • – † € „ … € ‚ … ƒ † – † ‚ y ’ ƒ … x “ € ‚ … † ‡ x “ „ – † ‡ ’  ’ x y • ” y ‚ y ’ ƒ … ƒ ‚ ‡  ‡ x •  ’ € ‚ … ‚ y ’ ƒ … x “  „ y ” ‡ ‘ ƒ † ‡ € “ x ‘  ’ ‘ ˆ x y „ ƒ ‚ y  ‚ y ’ ƒ “ x x y • € ‚ … ‚ y ’ ƒ  ‡ ƒ y „ • ‚ … e „ “ – ‚ y ’ ƒ … ƒ ’ ‚ … † € ‚ … ‘ ƒ x … ™ ” y ‡ „ ‡ ‘ ƒ † ‡  ’ g „ ‡ † x … ’  y † ˜ „ … † † ‡  ” y ‚ y ’ † ’ g y „ • ‡ ‘ ƒ € ‚ … † ‡ ’ ƒ ’ x ’  … ” ‰ ‚ ’ † “ y ‘ € ‚ … „ ‡ ƒ x ‡ ‘ † ” y ƒ ‚ ‡  • y x ‡ g ‡ ‘ ƒ – † … ‡ „ … € ‡ ƒ ‘ ‰ ’ x e € ‚ …  “ x † ” y ƒ ‚ ‡  • y x ‡ g ‡ € € ‚ … ‚ y ’ ƒ … ƒ ’ x ’ e … ‡ ‘ ƒ – ‚ y ’ † ‚ … • h ‡ € ‚ … ‘ ƒ ˆ y „ ‰ ‚ … e „ “ y ƒ ‚ y ’ ƒ  ‡ „ ’ € ‡ € ’ g y „ • € ‡ † “ € ‚ … x ‚ … e „ “ ‡ f ’  ’ ƒ • y € ‚ … ‡ f ’ x … ‚ y ’ ƒ … „ y ƒ † ƒ  ‡ — y „ • € ‚ … †  … „ ‰ – † ‚ y ’ ƒ … x “ ‰ ‡ „ € ‚ … † ‡ x “ „ – † € „ … € ‚ … ƒ † – † ‡ ’  ’ x y • ” y ‚ y ’ ƒ … ƒ ‚ ‡  ‡ x • € ‚ … ‚ y ’ ƒ • y € … – ‚ y ’ ƒ … x “  „ y ” ‡ ‘ ƒ † ‡ € “ x  ‚ ’ ‘  ’ ‘ ˆ † ‡  ’ g „ „ ‡ ƒ x ‡ ‘ † € ‚ … – ‰ ‚ ’ ‚ ‚ … x • ‡ † “ € ‚ … x € ‚ … ‰ ‚ ’ ‚ y f – x … ˆ ‡ ‚ ‡ „ ‚ … e ™  ‡ ƒ † ˜ † ‡ ‰ … „ ‡ ˆ € ‚ … ‡ ‰ … ‚ ’ … „ € – x y „ ƒ ‚ y  € y y x ” € ‡ ƒ … „ ‰ ‡ ƒ ‚ ’ ‚ … „ y ” † ƒ  ‡ — y „ • € †  … „ ‰ y „ • – † € „ … € ‚ … ƒ † – † ‡ ’  ’ x y • ” y ‚ y ’ ƒ … ƒ ‚ ‡  ‡ x •  ’ € ‚ … ‚ y ’ ƒ … x “  ‡ ‘ ƒ † ‡ € “ x  ‚ ’ ‘  ’ ‘ ˆ ƒ ‚ ‡  ‡ ‰ … ‚ …  ‡ ‰ … „ ‡ ˆ ‡ † € ‚ … x y „ ƒ ‚ y  € y x x € s u m u s r … v  q  j v u ~ r t r s } | { z y r x p t  € w s u v u r t s r q p o n m l k j ¤ “ Ÿ š £ – • › ¢ ˜ ” – ¡ ” — –   › Ÿ ž  œ › š – ™ ˜ — – • ” “ y  ‡ ‘ ƒ ‚ … ‰ ‡ „  ‚ ’ ‡ i ‡ ‚ ‡ € ‘ ‡ „ ‚ … y „ •  ’ ‡ † „ d ‡ † ‚ … „ y ” y x w 114 d q v u q s t e s b p q p b e q g f c r q e b q p i h g f e b d d b c b a ` x x .

¬ ³ ¸ · ³ µ ¶ ­ µ ª ² ³ ² ª ­ ³ ¯ ® « ´ ³ ­ ª ³ ² ± ° ¯ ® ­ ª ¬ ¬ ª « ª © ¨ 115 þ ü ÿ þ í ò ë õ ô æ å î ã ó ä ê ã è ò ò æ é ë ñ Ù â á á à Ý Õ Ó ß Õ Ï Ü Õ Ì ß º ¹ Æ Ç º Ä Á Ã ¹ Ã Á º ¹ ÿ þ ¡ ¢ ü ü ¡ ü ü   0 ü û 9 ù # ø þ   §  ¡  ÿ ¦ þ û ÿ    û þ ! ¢ ¢ ý  ¨ þ   '     ý  ¨ 8 ù ø   §  þ ý û ÿ   ÿ û þ   ü ¡ § ©   þ û   ÿ ü ! ü §    ý § ¡  ÿ ¦ þ û 5 û §   þ ý û ÿ ! ÿ û ÿ ü þ  ù  ø þ ý û ÿ   ! §    ¡ ¨ þ   ¦ þ û  ý ÿ û þ ý 7 ù  ø ¡ ¢    ¥ ¡ ¢ û $ ù £ ø ¡ ¢ ¡ ¦ þ       §   þ ý û ÿ ! ÿ û ÿ ü þ û 6 ÿ þ ¡ ¢ ¡ ¦   þ   ¢ 6 þ ý û ÿ   5 û þ   ¦  ) ù ø ø þ   §  ÿ þ ¡ ¢ ÿ ü ¡  þ û ¨ þ   ÿ þ ¡ ¢ ¡  û ! 4 ¡  §   û  þ   þ û 3 ù 2 ø ü ¡ û ¦ ý § ý þ   ¡ ÿ þ ý û ÿ   ÿ û þ   ¤ ù 1 ü ¡ û ÿ û  û ÿ    ¨ þ   ü 0 ü   ÿ ÿ  ý   ! ü  ¡  ÿ ) ù ( ¡  þ   § § û ¡   ! ü ¡ ü   ¡ ü û ¨ ¨ þ   þ ý û ÿ ý ¢ ý   ¡ þ ¡ û ¦ ' & ù % ü ¡ û ÿ û  û ÿ    ¨ þ   ü ÿ ¡ ¦    $ ù # ü ¡ û ¦ ¡ ÿ    ÿ ü ¦ þ û ÿ þ ¡ ¢ ¡ §  ¢ û " ü ¡  ! ü   ¡ ¢ ÿ  ý   ! ¤ ù ü þ ý û ÿ    ¨ þ   ü ¡ û ¦ ¡ ÿ    ÿ ü þ ý û ÿ   ÿ þ ¡ ¢ ¡ §  ¢  ù  þ   §  ¡  ÿ ¥ ý ü ÿ þ ¡ þ ý  ¢ ý  ù  ü ¡  û ÿ  ¡  © ý ¨ þ   ü §   ý ¦ ¥ ý ÿ þ ¡ ¢ ¡ ÿ   ÿ ¤ ù £ ÿ þ ¡ ¢ ¡ ÿ   ÿ ü þ ý û ü û ú ù ø ò ð å ö æ å î ã æ ê ä ð ä ê ã ð í ë õ ô ð ã ê ð ä í è É ¾ ÷ æ ê ä ð ä ê ã ð í ö ã ê í í ë å ç ç ð í ã æ ê ä é ð ç ã ð í ò ð å ö æ å î ä ã ë å å è È ¾ » í ò ë õ ô æ å î ã æ ê ä ð ä ê ã ð í ì æ ä é ð î ò ê õ ð ê ä ã ë ä æ Ç ¾ Â í ë è í í ê ç ã ð í ò ë õ ô æ å î ã æ ê ä ð ä ê ã ð É ¾ È ä ì æ í è ä ð ä í ã æ ê ä ð ä ê ã ð í ç ã ð å ë ä ð ï ì æ ã æ ê ä î ê å é í ë ç ì ë ê å Ê ¾ Ê ã æ ê ä é è ç æ å ä ã Á ¾ ¹ Ð Ý Þ Ö Ý Ú Î Õ Ò Ñ Ü Ü Ñ Ô Ñ Û Ú Ù Ø × Ì Í Ì Ë Ð Ñ Î Ø Ï Î Ð × Ò Ñ Ò Ö Ñ Ï Ð Ï Ñ Ò Ð Ì Õ Ô Ó Ð Ò Ñ Ð Ï Î Í Ì Ë É » Æ Ê ¹ º Á ¹ Ã É À É Æ ¹ È Ä Æ ¿ º Á Ç Ä Æ » Å » Â Ä Ã » Â Á À ¿ ¾ ½ ¼ » º º ¹ .

RELEVANT SANITATION LAWS AND POLICIES D Q V U Q S T E S B P Q P B E Q G F C R Q E B Q P I H G F E B D D B C B A @ 116 .ANNEX 4.

a h s r h p q b p Y g h g Y b h d c ` i h b Y h g f e d c b Y a a Y ` Y X W ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ 117 .

118 x …  ‰ … ‡ ˆ y ‡ v „ … „ v y …  € w † … y v … „ ƒ ‚  € y v x x v w v u t .

ANNEX 5. LIST OF EXISTING. UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND PLANNED SEWERAGE FACILITIES 119 • f k j f h i – h “ e f e “ – f ˜ — ” g f – “ f e d ™ ˜ — – “ • • “ ” “ ’ ‘ .

120 p w | { w y z q y n v w v n q w s r o x w q n w v u t s r q n p p n o n m l .

 ˆ  Œ ˆ Š ‹ ‚ Š  ‡ ˆ ‡  ‚ ˆ „ ƒ € ‰ ˆ ‚  ˆ ‡ † … „ ƒ ‚     €  ~ } 121 .

ANNEX 6. INVENTORY OF AVAILABLE SANITATION TECHNOLOGIES Urine Diverting Dry Toilets ’ ™ ž  ™ › œ “ ›  ˜ ™ ˜  “ ™ • ” ‘ š ™ “  ™ ˜ — – • ” “  ’ ’  ‘   Ž 122 .

£ ª ¯ ® ª ¬ ­ ¤ ¬ ¡ © ª © ¡ ¤ ª ¦ ¥ ¢ « ª ¤ ¡ ª © ¨ § ¦ ¥ ¤ ¡ £ £ ¡ ¢ ¡   Ÿ 123 .

Ú Æ Ø È Å Ä Ä Ë Æ Ê Ã È Ì Å Ä Ç Ä Å Ä Æ È Å Ä È Ë Å Ñ ì Ó Ë × È Ã Ë Ê É Ã Ä Æ × È Ã Ù Ö Ì ß Ë Ï Ã Ö Ó Ê Ã Ø Ë Ê Ë Â Ä Â Ä Å ß Ë Ñ È Ã Å Ê Õ Ï Ì Ñ Ü Ô Ä Å Ö Ç Ñ Ë Æ × Ì Ì Ó Ì Ä È Ì Å Ä Ç É Å Ö Ä È Ì Ñ Ë Â Ä Ü Ô Ä Å È Ø Å × È Ã Ï Ç Â È Ì Æ Ä Ñ Ã Õ Ï Å × È Ã Æ Ë Ç Æ Æ Å Ö Ë × È Ë Ø Ü Æ È Ì Å Ä Õ Ë Ñ Ö Ë Õ Ï Ë Ä Æ Ô Æ Ü Ë Ñ È Ë Å È Ë Ò È Ì Ñ Ü Ï Ë Ä Æ Ô Æ Ë Â Ä Ó Ì Æ Æ Ë È Ë Ä Ã Å Ö Õ Ì Ö Õ Õ Ã × È Ã Ë Ñ È Ã Ä Õ Ë Ñ Ñ Ã Ê Ã Ö Ç Ä Ê Ç Ñ ê Ì Å Ñ Ì Æ Ë Â Ä Ì Ä Ö Ë Ó Ë Ö Ô Ö Ì Ø Ë Ä Ã Ñ Æ Å Â Ä È Å Ã Å Ö Ë Ä Å Ö Ñ Ë Â Ä à Æ Ä Ñ Ë Õ Æ Ã Ê Ã È Ì Å Ä Ç Ä Å Ä Æ È Å × È Ã Ê Ã Ö Ç Ä Ê Ç Ñ ê Ì Å Ñ Ì ñ Ú ò Ú Æ Ù Æ Å Ö Ê Ã Ä È Ë Ï È Ì Ö Å Ò È Ë × Ë Ñ Ç × Ë Ö × È Ã Â Ä Ê Ã Ë Â × Ë Ò Ì Ö Õ Ï Å Ü È Ì Å Ä Ã Ë Ö Ñ Ä È Ë Ï Ô Ì Ê Õ Ï Ë Ü Ô Ï Ì È Ì Ñ Ë Ë Ñ È Ë Ä Æ Å Æ É Ç Æ × È Ã Ô Ä Å Ò Å Ä Ñ Ç × Ì Ö Õ Ê Ã Ö Ç Ä Ê Ç Ñ Å Ö Ø Ã × Ë Æ Ã Ë Ö Ñ È Å Ë × Ç Ê Ñ È Å Æ Ä ì Ë È Ë É Ë Ê Å Â ß Ü Æ × Ö Ã ã Ã Â Â Ä Ê Ã Ë Â × È Ã È Ì Å Ä Ç Ê Ê Ì Õ Ê Ã Ä È Ë Ï È Ì Ö Å Ò È Ë Ú Ø Ú Ë Ë Ö Ã Æ Ä Æ Ì Ñ Ê Ã È Ö Ë Ä Ý Ë Â Ñ Ç ñ Ú Ä È Ç Ì Ñ Ñ Ã Ì Ä È Å È Ë Ù Ã Ä Ë É Ì Ä Ë Ò Ã Â Æ Ä ì Ë È Ë É × È Ã Æ Ä Æ Ì Ñ Ê Ã È Ö Ë Ä Ý Ë × È Ã é Ö Ë Ä Ã ß × Ë Ï Å Ã Ê Ñ Ë Ö × È Ã Ô Ø Ö Ë È Ë Ü Ö Ë Æ Å Ê Å Ä Ö Ë Ó Ü Ö Ë È Ì Å Ä Å × È Ì Ñ Ê Å Ì Æ ç Æ Ä Ñ Ç × Ì Ö Õ × Ë Ê Ñ Ô Ñ Ë Ö Ï Ì Ö Ó Ú Ø Ú Ë Æ Ä ì Ë È Ë É Ä Ñ Ë Ö Å × Ì Æ Ê Ã Æ Ä Æ Ì Ñ Ä Ñ Ë Ö Å × Ë Æ Ë Â Ä Ó Ì È Ì Å Ä Ã Ç Ê Ã Ò Ë Ë Â Ä Æ Ë × Å Æ Ë ð Ú Ï Ë Ä Æ Ô Æ Ë Â Ä È Å Æ Ä È Ë Ï Ä Æ Ë Ò È Å Ë Ö Ô Ö Ã Æ Æ Ë Ñ Ë È × È Ã Ë Ñ È Ã È Ë Ä È Å Ã Ï Ü È Ì Å Ä Ã Ö Ë Õ Ì Ü È Ì Å Ä Ñ Ç Ö Ä Æ È Ì Ñ Ë Â Ä Ø È Å × Ç Ê Ñ È Å Ü È Ì Å Ä Ã Ä Å È Ã Æ Ö Ì Ó Ô Ã Õ Ì Ä Æ Ë Å Ä Å È Ç Ï Ï Ì Ñ × È Ã Æ × Ê Ì Â Ë Æ Ç Ì Â Ó Ì Ô Ä Å Ñ Ã Õ Ã Ñ Ë Â Ä Ì Ä Ë Ä Ã Ê Ë Ö à Æ Ë Ç Æ Æ Å Ñ Å Ï Ì È Ì Ñ Ë × È Ã Ê Ã Å Ñ È Ã È Å í Ú ï Ú Æ Ä Ñ Ë Õ Æ Ã Ä È Ã Ä Ö Ì Õ Ï Å Ë Ö Ã Æ Ä È Ë Ï Õ Ì Ê Ë Ò Ë × Ñ Å Ï Ì È Ì Ñ Ë ê Ì Å Ñ Ì Æ × È Ã Ñ Å Â Õ Ã Ö Ø Ì Ï Ë × Ì Ä × È Ã Ë Ö Ç Ä Ñ Ç Ö Ä Æ Ã Ö Ó È Å Ø È Å Ä Æ Å Ý Ë Ë Â Ä Ì Ä Æ Ä È Ë Ï Ë Ê Ë Ê Ã Ñ Å È Â Ñ Ë Ä Æ Ä Å Ó Ì Ô Ä Å Ê Å É Ã Ä Õ Ã × Ã × È Ã Ô Ä Å Ê Å É Å Ý Ë î Ë Â Ä × È Ã Ú Ñ Ä Ë Æ Ë Ù Ã Ç æ Â Ä Ö Ã Ë Ü Æ × Ì Ì î Ü Æ Ë Ø Ã Ä Ö Ì Â Æ Ö Ë Ä Ã ß Ü Æ Ä Ç Ñ Ö Ë ß Ì Õ Æ × Ö Ã ß Ì Ä Ô Ä Å Ê Å É Ã Ö Ë È Ê Ç Ò Æ Ä Å Ü Ï Ë Ä Æ Ô Æ Ë Â Ä Ó Ì Æ Æ Ë È Ä Æ Ç É Ì Ö Ë Â Ä Ü Ë Ö Ì Ï Ö Ë Â Ä Ö Ç í Ú Æ Ë Å Ä Å Ê Å Ä Ç Ê Ã Ñ Ì Ê Ë Â Ä Ó Ì Æ Ï Ã Ë Ä Ê Ã Ñ Å È Â Ñ Ë Ä Ë Â Ä Ö Ì Þ × È Ã Ô Ä Å È Ç Ï Ï Ì Ñ Ê Ã Ñ Ì Ê Ë Â Ä Ô É × Ë Ö Ì Ä Å È Ì Ï × È Ã × Ë Ä Ã Ö Ë Õ Ì Ü × Ë Ä Ñ Ç Ö Ä Æ È Ì Ñ Ë É È Ã Ñ Ê Ã Æ Ì Õ Æ Å × Ê Ã È ì Ö Ì Þ × È Ã Ë Æ Ç Ë Ö × È Ã Ä È Ë Ï Ä Ã Ë Ö Ä Ü Ä Ö Ì Õ Æ È Ã Ö Ä Ü È Ì Å Ä Ñ Ë Ê Ê Ì Ñ Ë Â Ä Ø È Å × Ç Ê Ñ È Å Ï Ë Ä Æ Ô Æ Ë Ö Å Ä È Ë Ë Â Ä Â Ñ Å Â ß Â Ä Å ß Ë Æ Ã Ë Ë Â Ä × È Ã Ô Ä Å Ê Ã È Ì Å Ä Ñ È Ç Ó Ë Â Ä Æ Ë Ä Ã Ö Ì Õ Ö Ì Ñ È Å à È Ì Å Ä Ã Ö Ë Õ Ì × È Ã Ô Ø Ì Ê Ì È Â Ñ Ë Î Ú ë Ú é Æ Ã Ø Ì Å É Æ Ã Â Ñ Ç Æ ç Æ Ë Å Ø Ö Ë È Ë Ë Ê É Ã ß Ë È Ë Ö Ó Ì È Ì Å Ä Ñ Ç × Ì Ö Õ Ë Â Ä Â Ø Ç Ì Ö Â Ä Ú Ø Ú Ë Ü Æ Ë Ñ Ö Ç Ì Æ Ë Ö Ë Ê É Ã ß Ë È Ë Ö ê È Ì È Ö Ë Â Ä Ì Ó Ì È Ì Å Ä Ñ Ë Ä Ì Ö Õ Ë Â Ä × È Ã Ü é Ë Ö Ç Ä Ê Ç Ñ Å Ö Ø Ã Ì Ä Ê Ã Å Ö Ë Ä Ã Ï Ñ Å È Ã Ø Ö Ì × È Ã Æ Ä È Ë Å Ö Ä Ç È Ø È Å È Ö Ç Ä Ë Ö è Ö Ë Ä Ã ß Ë Ä Æ Ã ß Ø È Å Æ Ç Ë Ö Ú Ø Ú Ë ç Ë Æ Ë Â Ä Ó Ì Æ Ä Ñ Ë Ó Ó Ë Ë Â Ä × È Ã × Ë Ñ Å Ä Ñ Ã Ö Õ Ë Æ Ç Ë Ö × È Ã Ø È Å Ê Ñ Ô Ñ Ë Ö Ó Ì Ë Ë Ö Ø Ë × Ë Â Ä Æ Ë × Ç Ê Ñ È Å Ì Æ Ê Ã Ä Û Ú Ë Æ Ç Æ Ä Å Ï Ì Ö Ó Ø È Å Ä Ê Ç Æ Ë Ö Ä È Ë Ï È Ì Ö Å Ò È Ë Ë Â Ä Ì Ä Æ È Ì Å Æ Æ Å Ï Ë Ê Ã Å Ä È Ë Ä Ì Õ Ë Â Ä Æ Ã Ê Ê Ë ß Æ Ã Ü Ï Ë Ä Æ Ô Æ Ë Â Ä Ó Ì Ë Ñ È Ã È Ë Ä È Å Ã Ï × È Ã È Ì Å Ä Ã Ö Ë Õ Ì Ü È Ì Å Ä Ñ Ç Ö Ä Æ È Ì Ñ Ö Ì Ó Æ Ë Ñ Ö Ç Ì Æ Ë Ö Ê Ã Ö Ç Ä Ã È Ö Ë Â Ä Ì × È Ã Ö Ë Ä Ã ß Ü Ô Ø Ö Ë È Ë × Ë Ö Å Ç æ Ë Ö Ë Â Ä Æ Ë Ò Ê Ì Ò È Å à Æ Ë Ñ Ö Ç Ì Æ Ë Ö Ê Ã Ö Ç Ä Ã È × È Ã Ä È Ë Ï È Ì Ö Å Ò È å Ú ä Ú Æ Ä Ñ Ë Ó Ó Ë Ï Ã Ë Ö Ä Æ È ß Ì × Æ Ã Ê Ê Ë ß Æ Ã Ü Ï Ë Ä Æ Ô Æ È Ì Å Ä Ã Ä Å È Ã Æ È Å Ã Ä Ö Ë Ñ Ã Ó Ì È Ì Å Ä Ã Ñ Å Ê Õ Õ Ã Ë Â Ä Ô É × Ë Ò Ë Å Â Ñ Ã × Ì Ì Â Å Ê Ë Ò Å Ê Ó Ì Ä È Ë Ï Ë Ò Ì Ö Õ Ï Å × È Ã È Ì Å Ä Å Ö Ä Ç È Ü Ë È Ë Å Ø Ô Â Æ Ã Â Ñ Ç Æ Æ Ä Ñ Ë Õ Æ Ã Æ Ö Ë Ò Ì Ñ Ì Æ Ê Ã Ñ Å Õ Ì Ä Æ Å Â Î Ú Æ È Ì Å Ä Ã Ê Ç Õ Ì Õ Ï Ã Ë Ö Ä Æ È ß Ì × × È Ã Ê Ã Æ Ì Õ Æ Å × Ö Ì Ë Æ Ç Ë Ö Ó Ì Ä È Å Ì Õ Ë Â Ä Ì Ä Ï Ë Ä Æ Ô Æ Ä È Ë Ï Ä Ã Ë Ö Ä × È Ã È Ì Å Ä Ñ Ë Ê Ê Ì Ñ Ë Â Ä Ã Å Ò Ä Ë Ê Å Ì Ä Ë Â Ä Ï Ì Ö Ó Ï Ë Ä Æ Ô Æ È Ì Å Ä Ã Ä Å È Ã Æ Ë Â Ä Ó Ì Æ Ä È Å Ì Õ Ê Ê Ã Ä Ã Â Ä Ê Ã Ë Â Ñ Å Ê É Ç Õ Ä Ñ Ë Ó Ó Ã × Ê Ç Ì Ñ Ä Ã Â Ä Æ Ë Ñ È Ã Ä Æ É Ç Æ Æ Ç Ì × Ö Ã ã Ã Â × È Ã Æ È Ë Ø Ì Â Ä Ã Õ Ì Ä Ë Ö Ç Æ Ì Õ Ý Ë Ó Ì Ù Æ Å Ö Ë Â Ä Æ Ë × Ç Ê Ñ È Å à Ë È Ë Å Ø Ô Â × È Ã Â Ä Ê Ã Ë â Ú á à × Ë Ö Ë × Å Æ È Ì Ñ Ë É × Ê Ç Ì Â Æ Æ Ä Ñ Ë Õ Æ Ã Ø È Å ß Ì Ê Ê Ì Ó Ë Â Ä Ì Ä × Ë Ä Ã Ê Ë Ö Ã Å Ö Ë Ä Å Ö Ñ Ô Ä Å Ê Å É Ã È Å Ã Ä Æ Ç Æ Ü Ï Ë Ä Æ Ô Æ È Ì Å Ä Ã Ä Å È Ã Æ ß Ë È Ã Ø È Å È Ø Å Æ Ë × Ö Ì Þ × È Ã Ø È Å Ä Æ Å Ý Ë È Ã Ø È Å Ò Ì Ö Õ Ï Å È Ë Â Á Ú Æ Ë Ñ Ö Ç Ì Æ Ë Ö Ê Ã Ö Ç Ä Ã È Ë Â Ä × È Ã Ä È Ë Ï È Ì Ö Å Ò È Ë Ë Â Ä Ä Ñ Ë Ä Ì Ö Õ Ì Æ Ê Ã × Ê Ç Ì Â Æ Ä Å Ü Ë Ä Ã Å Ö Õ Ì Ö Õ Õ Ã Ô Ê Ê Ã È Ì Å Ä Ç Ä Å Ä Æ È Å × È Ã Ô Ê Ê Ã Ñ Å È Â Ñ Ë Ä × È Ã Ü Ë Ê É Ã Ä Õ Ë Ñ Ñ Ã Ô Ê Ê Ã Å Ñ Ì Æ Ü Ë Ê É Ã Å Ò Ô Ê Ê Ã Ñ Å Ï Ì È Ì Ñ Ë Ô Ê È Ì Ä Ì È Ë É Ì Ä Æ Ã Â Ï Ë Ä Æ Ô Æ È Ì Å Ä Ã Ä Å È Ã Æ Ã Ü Ë Ê É Ã È Å Ã Ä Æ Ç Æ Ë É Ì Ä Ö Ë × Ö Ì È Û Ú Ë Æ Ã Ë Æ Å × Ó Ì Ë Ê Ñ Ô Ñ Ë Â Ä Ø È Å Ù Ã Ë Ö É × È Ã Ä È Ë Ï È Ì Ö Å Ò È Ë È Ã Ë Ê Ñ Ã Ø È Å × Å Ò Ì Ö Õ Ô É Â Ä Ê Ã Ë Â È Ã Ï Ç Â Ë Ä Ì Ï Ì Ö Õ × È Ã Ä Ñ Ë Ä Ì Ö Õ Ì Ä Æ Å Ï Ë Ä Æ Ô Æ È Ì Å Ä Ã Ä Å È Ã Æ Ã Ó Ì Ë Ò Å Ä Ñ Ë Ð É Ì È Å Ã Ï Ë Â Î Í È Ì Å Ä Ã Ä Å È Ã Æ Ë Ê É Ã È Å Ã Ä Æ Ç Æ Æ Å Ä Ã Â Á 124 ´ » À ¿ » ½ ¾ µ ½ ² º » º ² µ » · ¶ ³ ¼ » µ ² » º ¹ ¸ · ¶ µ ² ´ ´ ² ³ ² ± ° ANNEX 7: SUSTAINABILITY CRITERIA FOR SANITATION .

÷ þ £ ¢ þ   ¡ ø   õ ý þ ý õ ø þ ú ù ö ÿ þ ø õ þ ý ü û ú ù ø õ ÷ ÷ õ ö õ ô ó 125 U © ¥  § ¨ §  © ¨ ¦ 2  &  ¨ ©  ¨ § ¦ # " § !  $ § ¦   " ©  ¥ § "  §  © #  §  5    & # ¥  ¦    & ¥ ¦ ' ¦  ¦ ¦  ! ¥ $ § ©     ¨  $ ¥ %  © ¨ !  § ¦  & ¥     & # ' ¦  !  % ¥ © ¥  § ¨  !  § $ ¨   & ¥  ©     & # ¥  ¦ &    &  & ¥   ¦ F E E E D $      ¥ 0 ¥   ¨ & &  9 8   § ¦ ¨ &  ! © # ¥   ¦ $ ¥  ©   $    © ¨ ¦ § $ '   § ¦  ¦ © ¥  § ¨ §  © ¨ ¦ ¨  § © ¨ § $ ¥   ¦  §  " ¨  $  §  $ !  !   ¥ © ¥ !   © ¨ & ¨ $ # § & # ! ¦ ¨   © ¨ 5 $ ¥    ¨ $ % & ¨ ¦  ! © ¨ § ¦  # ! $  ! § ©  $  % %  2  © ¥ ¥ © ¦   $   §  ! ©  1  $ ¨ ¦   § ¦  ¦ © ¥  § ¨ §  © ¨ © ¥  § !  $   ¨ % ¥  $ ¥  ¦   ¥ ©  &  ¨  ¥ $ ¦   $   § " § !  !  § ! ¨ $ ©  § #  "  ©   © ¦ 2 ¦  2 § ¨   2 P A V ¥ $ § ©  2 W A G V ¥ $ § ©  V ©  2  © ¨ & V  $ ¥ ' ¨ © ¨ ¦ # ¦ '    V V F § §  F  ! $ # ¥ ¦ T ' U  §  ! " § ©    ! § ¨ !  ¥ ! "  ¥ ¥  $ # ¥      © "  & ¥   ¦ # ¥  T  S  ¦  &  ¨ !  § ! ¨ $  #   ©     § ¥ §  $  $ ¨ ¦   &  ¥ $ © ¥  § ¨ §  © ¨ ¦ & ¨ § ©   © ¥ $   ©   !    ©  ©  ¨  ¥    ) ' R © ¨   § ¦ ¨   © ¨  ¥ Q § ©   $ § # © " ¦  ! $ # ¥ ¦  $ $  § ¨    § ¨ $   § ©  % ¥ § $ ¨ ¥  ¦ § ©     ¨ © ¨  ¦ §   © ¨ "  ! $ # ¥ ¦  $ ¨   $    ¦ © ¥ !    & # ¥  ¦  § ¦ ¨ 6 ' P  $  ¦ % ¥ ¦ $     ¥ $  © ¨ ¦ $   # ¦ © ¥ !   §  & & ¨  !  ¦  " ¦ $   & ¥   5 ¨ § ¦ & & ¨  & # ¥  ¦  ©  5 ¨  © ¥  ¦  !   " ¦  &  ! ©  $  ! © ¨ © $   ¥   ¥ ¥   §    ©  & © ( ' D '  ! ¨ ¥ $ ¨ © ¥  § ¨ §  © ¨ ¦  © ¨ % ¥  $ § ©  !   § § ¨ # ¥  § ¨  §  $ # !  ¦ & ¨ § ©   © ¥ $   ©   © ¨  %  & % ¥  §  & ¨ # I "  §  ©    © ¨  # H ' G ©   # $ ¥ C & ¨  ¥ & B  § A ¦ §   ©  $ #  8 © ¥  § ¨ §  © ¨ 1  &  ¨ ©  ¨ § ¦ # 1 $ ¥ % ¦  &  ! ©  $ @ 7    § ¨ $ ¥  ¨ & & ¥ 7 © ¥  § ¨ §  © ¨ 1  © ¨  & # 1 $  § ¨ 6   § % ¥ ¦ $        §    4  % ¥ # ¥ $  ¨   ¥  ¨ ¦ $ ¨     ¥ ¦   ¥ &       ¨  $ & ¨  $    ¦   ) ©  § ©    &    © ¨  ©  © © ¨ & ©    ¦  &  ! ©  $ !  ¦ ¨    ¥ ¦   $  ¦  ¥ ¥ § §  &   ¨ ©  ¨ § ¦ # ¦ % ¥   © ¨ $  $  § ©    § © ¥  § ¨ $    ¦ © ¥ ! ¥ § ©   ©  5 ¨ ) ' ¦ © ¥  §   © ¥ ! 2 ¥  ! ¥ ¦ " & ¨ !  ©  !  § " & ¨ § ©   © ¥ $   ©   ©  § ¦  4  © ¥  § ¨ $    ¦ © ¥ ! ¥ § ©   5 ¨ § ¥ § ! ¥ &   § © ¥  ©    & &   © ¥  § ¨ # & ¨     § ¦  ¦ ¦   § " § ©  § 4    ¨ ¦   § ¥ §  ©  ¨  $  §  $ !  §  &   ¨ ©  ¨ § ¦ # ¦   § ¦ & 3 & # %  !    © ¥  § # & ¥ ¦ © ¥  § ¨ §  © ¨ ¦ & & ¨ 2 $ ¥ % '  §  &   ¨ ©  ¨ § ¦ # ¦ % ¥ ¦ © ¥  ¦ ©     & & ¨ ¥ §  $ ¨   $  §    & & # %  $ ¨ !   § ¨ # & ¨   ¦ § ¨  § " & ¨  ! # $ ! ¦  §  " ¦ ¦  &   § $    0 '  ! ¨  $ ¥ §   ¨ § ¦ ¨ © ¨  § $   § ¨ $ §  &   ¨ ©  ¨ § ¦ # ¦ % ¥ §  ! © ¥ !   ) '  &  ¨ ©  ¨ § ¦ # ¦  &  § # & ¥ ¦  ¨ ¦   !      § ¦  ¦ ¨ % © ( ' §   § ¥ ©  $ ¨ ¨  $  §  $ !   § % ¥   ¥ ¦  ¦ # ¨ !   ©  § % ¥ ¥ ¥ § $ ¨ % &  ¨ %    §  ¦ § !  ¦ ¨  ¦   §  §     ©   ¦   ©      ¨  ¦   § ¦  ¦ © ¥  § ¨ §  © ¨ ¦ § ¦ ¥ ¤ .

Protection from chemicals 3. Potential for income generation 1. Compliance to DOH standards 1. Adaptability to local context 1. Compliance to DENR standards 2. Convenience 2. Potential reuse of treated sludge 1. Potential reuse of treated wastewater 3. Simple construction and O & M 3. Protection from pathogens 2. Safety 3.Sustainability Criteria Scorecard Sanitation system to be evaluated: __________________________ Criteria Health Indicators Rating (Passed/Failed) 1. User’s capacity to pay for O & M 3. Appropriateness to local cultural context Remarks Environment Economy Technology Socio-cultural b i t s i q r c q ` h i h ` c i e d a p i c ` i h g f e d c ` b b ` a ` Y X 126 . User’s capacity to pay for costrecovery 2. Durability 2.

Disease and Dollars: Asia’s Urgent Sanitation Challenge. Discussion Note: Dignity. And Lewis. UNICEF Engaging Sanitation Entrepreneurs: Supporting private entrepreneurs to deliver public goods. Compiled by Bonifacio Magtibay. UN WATER. Volume II: Sanitation Sector Plan Study Report. 2005. NEDA. UN Millenium Project Task Force on Water and Sanitation Health. Quezon City: PCWS. Wright. Stockholm: ADB DOH National Epidemiology Center. National Sewerage and Septage Management Program (NSSMP) Full Report. 2007. Lenton. 2002. 2005. 2009. 2009. Earthscan and UNDP. Universal Sanitation in East Asia: Mission Possible? 2007. dignity and Development: what will it take. 2008. Planning Urban Sanitation and Wastewater Management Improvements. 2009. Environmental Health Project Strategic Report 2: Guidelines for the Assessment of National Sanitation Policies. National Strategy and Action Plan for the Water Supply and Sanitation Sector. Manila: DPWH National Census Report. WSP. WHO. Kristen. National Strategy and Action Plan for the Water Supply and Sanitation Sector. National Statistics Office. Robert. ITN Foundation Center for Advanced Philippine Studies. 2009. Medium Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP) for 2004-2010 Medium Term Public Investment Program (MTPIP) 2005-2010 Model PPTA TOR: Project Preparation Technical Assistance: Terms of Reference for Consulting Services. Volume III: Policy and 127 y † ‘  † ˆ ‰ € ˆ w … † … w € † ‚  x ‡ † € w † … „ ƒ ‚  € w y y w x w v u . Albert M. Manila: DPWH National Sewerage and Septage Management Program (NSSMP) Full Report. Policies and Guidelines on Wastewater Disposal Systems. National Statistics Office National Demographic and Health Survey.REFERENCES Publications Biosphere Environment and Health Systems Series Volume 2. 2009. SEI-ESR2 Knowledge Node in the Philippines: A Project Document. 1999. Field Heath Service Information System (FHSIS) Annual Report 2008 EASAN. Annexes. Building Partnerships for Development. Washington: USAID Institutional Changes for Sanitation: Discussion Paper. Quezon City. Bangkok: UN ESCAP International Year of Sanitation 2008 Kit.

James and Robinson. Manila. NEDA NEDA Board Resolution No. UNICEF. Nairobi. Synthesis Report on the Sanitation and Water Conference. Volume IV: Sanitation Sector Plan Case Studies and Models. Manila: DOH Water and Sanitation Program: Sustainable Sanitation in East Asia (SuSEA) Mid-term Review: Philippines Component. Volume II: Appendices. WEDC 2007 Sanitation Technology Information Kit. Prepared by the Philippine Water Revolving Fund Support Program for the PDF Sub-WG on WSS Philippine Environment Monitor. From Burden To Communal Responsibility: A Sanitation Success Story from Southern Region in Ethiopia. Makati: Philippine Sanitation Alliance.” 2005. Nairobi. TWG Working Document. Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Plan Study Review. Volume II: Appendices. 2005. Manila: NEDA Social Marketing of Sanitation. 2009. Meeting the Sanitation and Water Challenge in SouthEast Asia and the Pacific. Clean Water Act 2004 Sanitation Policy Guidelines. DILG and WSP Republic Act 9279. Asian Development Bank. 2006. Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Plan Study Review. Nairobi: UN Habitat Tayler. Wilfredo. WHO. 2007. Jose. Water and Sanitation. 2005 The Code on Sanitation of the Philippines (Presidential Decree NO. NEDA ODA Resources for the Water Supply and Sanitation Sector. Series of 2008. SEPTEMBER 4. APPROVING THE COMMON DEFINITION OF TERMS RELATIVE TO WATER SUPPLY. NEDA National Strategy and Action Plan for the Water Supply and Sanitation Sector. 5 series of 1994. SEWERAGE AND SANITATION. Resolution No. Melbourne: International Water Centre WSP Sanitation and Hygiene Series. CREATING A SUB-COMMITTEE ON WATER RESOURCES NEDA Board Resolution No. Kenya: Water and Sanitation Program – Africa – g l k g i j — i ” f g f ” — g ™ ˜ • h g — ” g f e d ™ ˜ — ” – – ” • ” “ ’ 128 . 2009. Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap. WEDC. Kevin and Scott. 856). Wicken. 2. Manila: DENR and the World Bank Group Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap Action Plan. 1998. Secretariat’s Report: Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap. (UN Habitat) Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Assessments: A Guide For Country-Level Action. Rebecca. NEDA NEDA Board Committee on Infrastructure (INFRACOM). 2003. Strategy and Action Plan: Mainstreaming Gender. 2009. Application of tools to support national sanitation policies. Juliet. 2006. Kenya: United Nations Human Settlements Programme. 12 (s. Willetts. Andy. 2008 UPDATE. 2009: Water for Asian Cities Programme. Manila: NEDA Philippines Sanitation Sourcebook and Decision Aid. 2008. 2008. 1995). 1976.Strategy Papers. 1998. “Wastes treat Wastes.

Water. Cavite City Technical Working Group meeting November 27. 2009. Project Documents Center for Advanced Philippine Studies. SEI. The Forgotten Sector: Sanitation and Sewerage in the Philippines. Economic Impacts of Sanitation in the Philippines. 2009. 2009 Island Cove. April. February 7. Sanitation and Hygiene for All – Solutions and Actions. Local and National. DOH Manila NEDA Infracom Sub-committee on Water Resources. 2006 Manila. Dakar. 2008 July. 2009. ADB Headquarters. San Mateo Rizal. December 3. Public Funding for Sanitation.WSP. WSP-EAC. 2010 129 q x } | x z { r z o w x w o r x t s p y x r o x w v u t s r o q q o p o n m . 2009. 2008. 2004 Powerpoint Presentations Ben Eijbergen. World Bank Office (powerpoint presentation Workshop and Meetings 2nd National Sanitation Summit. Local Government Academy office DOH Cluster Meeting. Local Government Academy office Technical Working Group Writeshop October 7-9. 2004. Manila. USAID. The Many faces of Sanitation Subsidies. Senegal: WSSCC Technical Working Group meeting August 14. National Workshop on the Philippine Water and Sanitation Sector Assessment Process.ESR2 Knowledge Node in the Philippines: A project document. 2008. January 2009 Streams of Knowledge. Guidelines for Developing Sanitation Policies. Economic Impacts of Sanitation in the Philippines: Summary. Jakarta: World Bank East Asia and the Pacific Region WSSCC. Jakarta: World Bank. USAID. 2009.