Transcript Slide 1

Water Dialogues
Chris Hani District Municipality
Case Study
Presentation to Local Dialogue
Queenstown
8 July 2009
Introduction
 The Water Dialogues – South Africa (WD-SA) wants to understand
best institutional models for SA to achieve universal access to water
and sanitation services.
 WD-SA invited key stakeholders from government, private
companies, civil society, and unions to discuss important issues and
challenges facing water and sanitation sector.
 Through research & discussions WD-SA seeks to understand the
process of choosing institutional approaches, as well as the impact
different approaches have on the quality and level of services
 WD-SA has been conducting research in DMs across the country
 Conducted interviews with municipal officials, SSAs and
participatory community workshops in four areas of each DM
 Research tries to understand the situation and challenges of both
the provider (government) and recipients (community members) of
the services.
Methodology
 Qualitative research using in-depth interviews and participatory
community workshops
 Desktop review
 Feedback to communities
 Local Dialogue
Choice of communities within CHDM
 Study specifically addresses the issue of Community Based
Organisations (CBOs) as WSPs.
 Decided to select one area where the local municipality is the WSP
and the other three where the CBO model is being implemented.
 Choice of communities was made using as many “points of
difference” as possible, i.e. type of scheme, access to services etc.
 Historical and current political and socio-economic realities within
the province have resulted in similar problems and challenges faced
by most communities.
Background




Case study investigates the approach taken by the Chris Hani
District Municipality (CHDM) to the provision of water services.
CHDM is the legislated WSA for its entire area of jurisdiction and
has completed a Section 78
The recommendations of the Section 78 were that the most
appropriate water service provision arrangement is a combination
of both internal and external mechanisms and this was accepted
by the Municipality. Recommended that the 4 western local
municipalities should be appointed as WSPs for their areas of
jurisdiction and that the DM should retain the WSP function for the
4 eastern municipalities in the short to medium term as they lack
the capacity to fulfil the WSP function.
Seen as interim solution and the DM is required to build the
capacity of these local municipalities so that they can eventually
be contracted as full WSPs.
Institutional time-line (2003-present)
2003
2005
Powers &
Section 78
Functions are completed
devolved to
local
government.
Funding made
available for
short term
SSA contracts
2005/2006 2007
2009
Short term
Amatola
SSA contracts Water Board
contracted as
SSA for 2
years
Contract ends
– Council to
decide on
future “model”
for CBOs
It is important to note that CBOs have been in place prior to 2003 and
have been continuously involved and increasingly formalised as CSPs at
local level.
History and institutional structures
 CHDM adopted Section 78 recommendations in December 2005.
 Steering Committee was established to drive process of formalising
the relationships between CHDM and the new WSPs.
 For the four eastern municipalities, where CHDM retained the WSP
function, a contract was entered into with an external service
provider (Amatola Water Board) to assist the Municipality with this
function.
 DM has encountered numerous challenges related to provision of
water services. One of the major difficulties was that numerous
water schemes had been implemented by NGOs in the district and
in some cases the DM did not even know where these schemes
were situated. A primary task was to engage communities who had
received water services and draft an asset register of all rural
schemes.
 Found that a number of the schemes were in bad condition and
some not operational – also established that in most areas the
communities had been paying for O&M costs themselves.
History and institutional structures
 The CBO WSP model already existed in many areas (more than 600
stand alone schemes), although in some instances this was by
default – where a CBO Project Steering Committee (PSC) became
the WSP once the project had been implemented and in the
absence of other institutional arrangements being put in place. Most
of the CBOs were doing a good job of ensuring ongoing water
services provision, particularly regarding quick turnaround time for
attending to breakdowns.
 The DM decided that it would be very complicated for them to
engage directly with large numbers of CBOs principally in terms of
labour and health and safety issues, and that it would be more
effective if they were to contract an SSA to fulfil this function.
 SSAs were appointed to focus on specific areas in the 4 identified
LMs and Tsolwana to a certain extent. Their brief was to focus on
rural areas and to ensure that CBOs were formed for all new water
schemes.
History and institutional structures
 Contract with Amatola Water ends in June 2009
 Given the challenge of accessing appropriate WSP
technical skills in the local municipalities which are
currently being assisted by the DM (SSAs) – the
proposed future model is as follows:
 CHDM would second a team to each of the designated
LMs to run water services.
 These teams would be accountable to the LM in order to
cut down on turnaround times and it is envisaged that
the CBOs already in place will remain but will take
instruction from the foremen and ISD officers.
Case Study Findings
Issues raised by Participating
Communities
Upper Woodhouse
Tsojana
Qoqodala
Tarkastad
Community participation
 In all 4 areas community members were not fully involved in the
implementation of water and sanitation projects. Community members
feel that they were taken advantage of - did not raise their concerns as
they thought that this might jeopardise the possibility of getting any
water.
 Almost all Service Providers involved dealt almost exclusively with
influential people in the community and took decisions that affected
the whole community without involving them.
 In Qoqodala - people claimed that the material that was delivered for
the building of toilets was insufficient and the builders used the
material for themselves. The community members never reported this
as they were not informed about the channels to use for complaints.
 Ward Councillors have also failed to inform community members
about their role in the project.
 Also complaints that youth are not participating in projects as they
should.
Sanitation service provision
 Workshop participants voiced a high level of
dissatisfaction with the way that the municipality
deals with their complaints when they reported
spillages and failure of bucket collection when
they are full (Tsojana).
 Clearly a problem with communication between
the LMs and the communities regarding roles
and responsibilities - community members
expect the LM to empty full VIPs while the
municipality says that it not their responsibility
and that the community should do it themselves.
Interruption of water supply
 In Tsojana and Upper Woodhouse community
members reported that they are always informed
when there will be an interruption in supply and
that this is very infrequent and does not last for
long.
 In Qoqodala there are constant interruptions in
supply without notice and response times are
very slow
 This problem is significantly worse in Tarkastad.
Affordability
 In Upper Woodhouse, Tsojana and Qoqodala
people do not pay for water. There are no yard
connections and they get their water from
communal standpipes located in the streets. In
these areas, people have full access to Free
Basic Water.
 In Tarkastad, although there are yard
connections, residents pay very little for water
and there were no reports of cut-offs due to nonpayment
Transparency
Although community members generally
claimed to have not been informed about
Free Basic Water – this was principally the
case in Tarkastad.
Number of complaints from community
members regarding the process followed
in deciding where to site communal
standpipes and who should be responsible
for the emptying of VIP latrines.
Key issues identified
 Complex structure of contracts and their oversight and
management creates a web of responsibilities that are difficult to
sustain and likely to result in reduced accountability.
 Contractual arrangements between CHDM and the AWB are
cumbersome and do not appear to have added significant value to water
services provision. It has, in some cases, delayed procurement
processes, making rapid response times more difficult to maintain.
 Lack of clarity regarding contractual agreements, and roles and
responsibilities with regard to CHDM, AWB and LMs and it is
recommended that this is clarified in detail in any future WSA-WSP
contracts and that contracts with internal or external WSPs need to be
monitored and regulated effectively
 Current institutional and management arrangements are not optimal and
come at a significant ‘premium’ to the DM. Current WSP arrangements
are extremely expensive due to the multi-layered system that has been
put in place - the longer the management chain, the more expensive it is,
and the less cost efficient it becomes.
Key issues identified
 Institutional arrangements within CHDM and the local
municipalities weaken the organisational fabric required for
delivery
 Substantial lack of capacity within CHDM in terms of technical
services and contractual management. CHDM as WSA also lacks
capacity to regulate and monitor quality of service and affordability
and enforcement as outlined in policy documents.
 Lack of institutional memory within CHDM, which can partly be
ascribed to high staff turnover - need to critically engage with issues
of capacity within CHDM, at the level of the CSPs and at LM level.
 Weak division between the WSA and WSP functions in some LMs
as the municipality plays both roles, which makes real monitoring or
regulation of provision problematic.
 Ongoing changes in national policy and institutional responsibilities
has undermined delivery and made regulation difficult.
 Clear that CHDM is committed to providing high quality water
services in rural areas – two key issues that might assist with
improvement in this regard are for the municipality to conduct
regular satisfaction surveys and to embark on a process of
formulating a higher level of service policy.
Key issues identified
Community participation in policy processes and oversight of
delivery performance as well as participation of community
service entities in such activities is limited and requires
attention
 Clear from findings that more optimal mechanisms need
to be established for participation in IDP and WSDP
processes
 Recommended that a clear communication strategy be
developed to deal with policy formulation, planning and
service delivery as well as monitoring actual delivery
 Perspectives of community level service providers could
be more actively sought in the development of
approaches to avoid excessive top-down decision
making and the disempowerment that accompanies it
Key issues identified
 The level and form of financing and the capabilities
required to secure and utilise it place enormous
strain on the WSS entities and reduce the impact of
programmes.
 The social and economic context of CHDM and the
cross-cutting poverty in the area, results in difficulties
with cost recovery for basic services in rural areas, but nobody is using more than 6kl in rural areas.
 In terms of financial management - there are currently no
indigent registers in rural areas, therefore everyone is
viewed as indigent and receives services accordingly.
 Substantial lack of funds to cover operations and
maintenance costs which puts increasing pressure on
water and sanitation systems in CHDM.
Key issues identified
 MIG allocation and Equitable Share insufficient, but this should
improve with future ring fencing.
 Recommended that capacity created in CHDM for effective planning
on extension of services, O&M, bulk water and reticulation as well
as communication and consultation processes with users
 Although rural communities do not pay for water, the FBW policy has
not been adequately explained to them. In addition, billing and
revenue collection in Tsolwana (peri-urban) is sporadic and neither
efficient nor effective. Recommended that this confusion is
addressed through transparent policies and communication
processes with communities.
 Currently no stepped tariff policy and some LMs still use a flat rate.
Current financial management arrangements allocate collection of
revenue responsibility to LMs, only some of which have revenue
collection policies.
 Huge service backlogs, both in terms of water and sanitation and an
estimated R2.4 billion is needed to serve the unserved. This is
clearly the development priority before higher levels of service in
rural areas can be addressed.
Key issues identified
 “Delivery” performance remains substantially short of targets but the
particular arrangements with community level service provision at least
ensure a level of service in areas that otherwise might have nothing.
 Substantial delivery challenges in Tsolwana - significant backlogs & low levels of
service - even a basic service level remains out of reach for many, particularly
those living in rural areas.
 Gender implications - places additional burdens on women, who have main
responsibility for fetching water and caring for family & community, particularly
those living with HIV.
 Clear that service provision (particularly in rural areas) is better if WSP locally
based but need to address the best way of structuring CBO-WSP relations.
 Communities have expressed dissatisfaction regarding lack of information &
assistance with the bucket system (Tsolwana) & the emptying of full VIP latrines
in rural areas. No policy in place to address this.
 Communities and CSPs in Upper Woodhouse, Tsojana and Qoqodala appear to
have good working relationship with the SSAs. Question - given close working
relationship between SSAs and communities, what will happen to the system if
SSAs are removed and the less experienced and under resourced CHDM or
LMs are working directly with CSPs?
 CHDM IDP makes reference to relationship between HIV and AIDS and access
to water and sanitation - recommended that implications of mainstreaming of HIV
and AIDS at LG level is addressed as a matter of priority, given the prevalence of
HIV in South Africa, as well as the impact on key service delivery issues.
Key issues identified
 The conversion, over time of civil society partners in water
delivery into commercial suppliers potentially threatens key
elements of the existing system and the responsiveness that it
has demonstrated.
 Objective of current programme is to involve CSPs in local level
O&M and case study shows that service provision (particularly in
rural areas) is enhanced if the WSP is locally based and that water
delivery and turn-around times for repairs is improved and there are
minimal service interruptions.
 There is a need to address the best way of structuring community
WSPs, define their roles and responsibilities, their financial viability
and contractual relationships with the municipality.
 Many of the CSPs meet with each other on a regular basis to share
knowledge and experiences but there are presently no mechanisms
in place for the CSPs to engage directly with either the District or
relevant Local Municipality. They do, however, engage with local
residents and respond to water services related problems either
directly or by contacting the relevant SSA.
Way Forward
Number of options:
1. Upgrade skills of CSP members, employ them and become formally part of
municipal delivery. Option rejected by municipality - says work required is not full
time and not feasible to employ such large numbers of staff in light of labour
regulations
2. Establish current CSPs as SMMEs and pay them for work done - will be much
less expensive for CHDM than current contract with AWB. Assumes that CHDM
able to deploy number of skilled and experienced staff to each of the LMs – the
SMMEs will be procured by LM to perform specific tasks. This increases
procurement problems and could lead to various other SMMEs being established
and demanding to also be considered in tendering processes etc
3. Transform CSPs into classic CBOs empowered to make decisions related to
water services delivery, strong management and governance capacity,
accountable to communities, increased knowledge of water and sanitation
planning and delivery frameworks and sufficient skills to operate and maintain
their systems and obtain access to technical and institutional support when
necessary. Payment and reporting mechanisms would need to be carefully
considered.
4. Continue with current model but streamline contractual arrangements and
consider appointing an Employers Representative - as DM has serious capacity
constraints in this regard. Need to rationalise reporting mechanisms and critically
engage with issues of capacity that would be required to make the current
organisations into fully functioning WSPs
Community questions
Qoqodala
 What is the municipality’s policy on damaged and full toilets?
 What are the procedures for awarding construction tenders?
 How will the municipality make sure that people are consulted about
development issues taking place in their community?
 How will CHDM address the problem of undertaking both the WSA and
WSP functions?
Tarkastad
 Why is it taking too long for their flush toilets to be finished?
 What is the municipality’s plan for addressing the problem of water cut-offs?
 The eradication of the bucket system?
Tsojana
 The criteria that is used to select contractors?
 Who is responsible for inspecting the work of the contractor?
 How the problem of communal tap shortages will be addressed?
Upper Woodhouse
 Who is responsible for fixing broken toilets and empty full ones?
 What can be done to improve the quality of water?
Thank you