WATERAID IN BANGLADESH
SYNOPSIS
on
“Baseline Study to Understand Service Providers’ Accountability for Provision of WaSH Services in Selected Pourashavas”
Submitted by
PARTICIPATORY MANAGEMENT INITIATIVE FOR DEVELOPMENT (PMID)
1/11 Iqbal Road (2nd Building, Ground Floor),
Block A, Mohammadpur, Dhaka 1207.
Tel: 880 2 9137432, 01711 731216 Fax: +88-02-9132318
Email: ,
Website:
Abbreviation and Acronyms
BMSL / : / Basic Minimum Service LevelCBN / : / Cost of Basic Needs
CBO / : / Community Based Organization
CHT / : / Chittagong Hill Tracts
CLTS / : / Community Led Total Sanitation
DPHE / : / Department of Public Health Engineering
FGD / : / Focus Group Discussion
GoB / : / Government of Bangladesh
HH / : / Household
ICDDR,B / : / International Center for Diarrheal Disease Research, Bangladesh
JMP / : / Joint Monitoring Program
KII / : / Key Informant Interview
LGI / : / Local Government Institution
MDG / : / Millennium Development Goal
N / : / Number
NGO / : / Non-Government Organization
NPSWSS / : / National Policy for Safe Water Supply and Sanitation
NSS / : / National Sanitation Strategy
O&M / : / Operation and Maintenance
PMID / : / Participatory Management Initiative for Development
PPR / : / Public Procurement Rules
PSF / : / Pond Sand Filter
RCC / : / Reinforced Cement Concrete
RWH / : / Rain Water Harvesting
SHEWAB / : / Sanitation and Hygiene Education and Water Supply in Bangladesh
ToR / : / Terms of Reference
UNICEF / : / United Nations Children's Fund
WAB / : / WaterAid in Bangladesh
WaSH / : / Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene
WHO / : / World Health Organization
WSS / : / Water Supply and Sanitation
PMID Page | 1
WAB / Synopsis of Baseline Study to Understand Service Providers’ Accountability for Provision of WaSH Services in Selected PourashavasIntroduction and Methodology
WaterAid Bangladesh has undertaken a program titled ‘Small Towns’ in line with its global initiative and WAB Country Program Plans. It is envisaged that this will also contribute towards achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the national targets in water supply and sanitation. This program particularly focuses on establishing rights of access to safe water, environmental sanitation, and hygiene (WaSH) of the poor living in the small towns, support municipal authorities to respond to demands of the poor and the disadvantaged, and influencing towards adopting pro-poor policy in service delivery.
The overall objective of the project is to contribute to the country program objectives through:
- achieving rights and access to WaSH of the poor and disadvantaged living in the small towns
- building capacity of the communities, Pourashavas and other service providers through developing a model of service delivery that promotes accountability;
- influencing toward pro-poor policy; and
- increasing investments for WSS in the small towns.
Before launching the full-scale operation of the project activities, WaterAid Bangladesh has assigned Participatory Management Initiative for Development (PMID) to conduct a baseline study to understand the current state of accountability of the service providers in five Pourashavas in relation to WaSH services particularly for the poor and disadvantaged.
The specific objectives were to assess the existing WaSH service provisions and standards, and affordability of the available services particularly of the poor and disadvantaged;assess the level of participation by the citizens particularly the poor, women and disadvantaged in planning, implementation and monitoring activities of the selected Pourashavas;assess responsiveness of the service providers in response to the demand of poor and disadvantaged for WaSH services;assess the capacity gaps of the WaSH service providers to deliver equitable services to its current clients and their preparation to manage future growth;identify the policy gaps and barriers for ensuring WaSH services for the poor and disadvantaged.
The Study Areawas five Pourashavas, namely, Ishwarganj (Mymensingh), Fulbaria (Mymensingh), Kolaroa (Satkhira), Paikgacha (Khulna) and Sakhipur (Tangail)
The sampling estimate was at 95% confidence interval. This had been achieved with reasonable estimates of key proportions, degree of precision, confidence interval, size of the population and with minimum difference one expects to find statistically significant.
Methodologies used to achieve both the overall and specific study objectives were Household survey,Focus Group Discussion (FGD), Key Informant Interview (KII), Observation, Secondary data collection, Literature review. The baseline survey in five pourashavas covered 866 households. In all 30 KIIs were conducted which covered mayors, officials, DPHE and LGED Engineers and other relevant stakeholders. Total 30 nos FGD were conducted with pourashava councilors, market committee, sweepers, slum dwellers, adult women and adolescent girls. Moreover, hand washing practice was observed in 25 households, five from each pourashavas. At the same time water points were also observed along with the condition of latrines. Besides, the cleanliness and hygienic status of the public toilets were also observed. The number of observed public toilets stood at 13. Besides 5 nos. of KII were conducted at the central level.
The above study methodologies were selected based on the specific objectives stated in the provided ToR and accordingly tools were designed for conducting the study.
Overall Background of Pourashava & Socio-economic status of the Pourashavas under Study
In Bangladesh, local Government Institutions (LGIs) are mandated to deliver services to the citizens in the water and sanitation sector. There are two types of local bodies for the urban areas, namely, the city corporations and municipalities or Pourashavas. The second one or the Pourashavas are designated for medium and small towns. These are again classified into three categories i.e. A, B and C depending on the size of their income. The sanctioned staff size depends on the category of the Paurashavas. Currently there are 308 pourashavas in Bangladesh.
Department and Sections:Pourashavas have three departments namely the Administrative Department, the Engineering Department and the Family Planning and the Conservancy Department. The Engineering Department comprises of two sections: the pourashava Water Supply Section (PWSS) and the Works, Electric and Mechanical Section (WEMS). Administrative Department has six sections i.e. General, Accounts, Assessment, Tax & License, Poura Market and Education per Culture per Library. Family Planning and Conservancy Department also has two sections i.e. pourashava Conservancy Section (PCS) and Pourashava Health Section (PHS).
According to the Local Government (Pourashava) Act 2009, pourashava has the following functions:
(a)Public Health Management ; (b)Water Supply, Sanitation and Drainage Management; (c) Food and beverage management; (d) Livestock management; (e) Urban planning; (f) Control of construction of building; (g) Development and maintenance of roads; (h) Public safety.
According to the Local Government (Pourashava) Act 2009, pourashava has the following WSS related functions:
(a)Sanitation of the municipalities and control of environment pollution; (b) Provision and regulation of water supply; (c) Regulation of unsanitary buildings; (d) Removal, collection and disposal of refuse from public places; (e) Provision and maintenance of public toilets and urinals; (f) Promotion of public health and health education; (g) Provision and maintenance of drainage systems.
Recruitment Policy of the Pourashava:It is often not easy for pourashava to fill vacant positions. Pourashava service rules are different from the government service rules but salary scale and other benefits are almost similar. Pourashavas need prior approval of the Local Government Division (LGD) of the Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development and Cooperatives (MLGRD&C) to fill vacancies. A pourashava must satisfy LGD that it can sustain the additional expenditure from its own resources. Instead of seeking government approval, it has therefore, become common for Mayor to recruit staff locally on contract or ad hoc basis.
Resources:The main sources of revenue for the pourashava include property tax, annual value of buildings and land, water tariff, conservancy rate, tax on trade, vehicles and animals, cinemas, dramas and entertainment, tolls and minor taxes, fees and fines, rents and profits from property. Pourashava receives Annual Development Grants from the central government for development work. But this allocation is very small compared to their demand. Because of fund constraints they cannot implement their development scheme as per people’s demand.
All pourashavas implement different development projects through different government agencies which are infrastructural in nature. It has been observed in the study area that a very few projects were taken for water and sanitation service followed by pro-poor strategies and community based approaches.
Socio-economic status of the Pourashavas under Study:Demographic and socio-economic profile of households under this study serves as important background variables for defining water use, sanitation and hygiene knowledge and practices of Pourashava population.
Population and Households: The catchments area of the Pourashavs varies from 2.52 sq. km (Paikgacha) to 15.80 sq. km (Fulbaria). Collected data revealed that:- Shakhipur pourashava covers 11.50 sq.km area and 8,370 households with a population of 35,279; Fulbaria covers 15.80 sq.km area and 7,177 households with a population of 32589; Paikgacha covers 2.52 sq.km area and 3,580 households with a population of 16,114; Kolaroa covers 15.07 sq.km area and 5,756 households with a population of 30,350 and Ishwarganj covers 12.41 sq.km area has 5,081 households with a population of 33496.
Average household size was 4.6, which was close to national household size of 4.4 (2011) (4.9 in Ishwarganj and Fulbaria, 4.4 in Kolaroa and Paikgacha, and 4.2 in Sakhipur).
Educational status: Most of the people (54.6%) are educated up to primary and secondary levels and 11% of them have higher education (Table annex 61). About 2% of them studied in NGO supported schools and about 23% of the respondents are either illiterate or have no formal education. The illiteracy rate is higher in Ishwarganj (30%) and Sakhipur (23%). The literacy rate is highest in Paikgacha (76%) which is followed by Kolaroa (72%).
Occupational pattern: It appears from the study findings that very little difference exists in occupational pattern of the respondents coming from five Pourashavas.
Among the all study areas, main occupations of the household members are business (30.7%), farming (14.3%), non-agricultural labor (13.6%), and agriculture labour is 4.6. Other occupations include service holder (9.8%), homemaker (8.3%), and rickshaw/ van puller (5.1%). They constitute together about 30% of the total number of household respondents. The rest 11% has other professions, e.g., skilled labor, driver, homeopath/ quack doctor, handicrafts, lawyers etc.
Income and expenditure:The mean average household monthly income of the surveyed households of the five Pourashavas is Tk. 12,212.00 with highest in Paikgacha.
Poverty Status:Poverty status was estimated using the Cost of Basic Needs (CBN) method. With this method, two poverty lines, lower poverty line and upper poverty line, were calculated that represented the level of per capita expenditure at which the members of a household could be expected to meet their basic needs (comprised of food and non-food consumption). In this report, households belonging to lower poverty line are denoted as hardcore poor, and households belonging to upper poverty line are denoted as absolute poor.
It was revealed that 17.8% households are hardcore poor, while another 22.5% are absolute poor (includes hardcore poor as well), and 59.7% are non-poor. Thus, 17.8% households belong to lower poverty line, and 40.3% households (17.8+22.5) to upper poverty line. By comparing with the national level poverty status (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, 2011), it can be inferred that the studied areas are more poverty-prone than the national standard.
Provisions, Standards, and Affordability for Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene
Provisions for water sources/facilities:It was revealed that among all the households, drinking and cooking water sources primarily are deep set tube-well (44.8%) and shallow tube-well (31.0%). For geo-hydrological reasons, most of the citizens of south-western region (Ishwarganj, Kolaroa, and Paikgacha) use Shallow Tube-well, where as the central region (Fulbaria and Sakhipur) use Deep-set tube-well. Some new technologies, such as, Rain Water Harvesting (preserved and unprotected) has been found in two Pourashavs (Shakkhipur and Paikgacha) which are being experimented by various NGOs.
Alternative Source of Water:It was further revealed that 9.1% households use alternative sources (more than one source) of drinking and cooking water in the project areas. This percentage was highest in Paikgacha (32.5%), and none at Fulbaria. Major reasons of using alternative sources for drinking and cooking water was to get safe water (44.9% Kolaroa, Paikgacha, and Shakhipur) and non-availability of water round the year (21.7% Ishwarganj). However, in Ishwarganj and Kolaria pourashavas previously piped water supply system was functional but at present it has been abandoned.
Number of user per water point:It was revealed that on an average, nine (9) households used one water facility/sources.
Standard of safe water used for drinking and cooking purposes:The study used two different definitions, improved sources and safe water sources. For improved sources, Joint Monitoring Program (WHO and UNICEF, 2003-2010) definition was followed, and for safe water sources, definition of WaterAid Bangladesh (which followed the national definition of Bangladesh Government) was followed.
Water usage as per improved water source:According to Joint Monitoring Program (JMP) of WHO and UNICEF, an improved drinking- water source is one that, by nature of its construction or through active intervention, is protected from outside contamination, in particular from contamination with fecal matter.
Considering the definition of improved sources, 96.4% households used improved water sources for drinking and cooking.
Water usage as per safe water source:WaterAid Bangladesh considers the term ‘safe water sources’ (WaterAid in Bangladesh, March 2009) instead of improved sources. Following the definition of safe water sources of WaterAid Bangladesh, only 62.3% of households use safe water sources in the project areas.
Ownership pattern of the water facilities/sources:As the study areas have no pipe water supply from the Pourashava authority, most of the water sources were owned by the individual households. The study reveals that: almost 96.4% households use some kind of water sources (according to JMP of WHO), but only 22,3% households use “Safe Water” , almost 58% have own water sources, but 23% depends on neighbor’s water sources, only 2% respondents stated that their water sources have been provided by Pourashavas
Detailed picture of ownership pattern of the water facilities is given in Figure 3-5. It revealed that 58% households use their own water facilities / sources in the project areas where as, only 2% water facilities have been provided by the Pourashavas while other government institution provided only 4% of water facilities.
Provider of the water facilities:The study revealed that 74.7% of the water facilities were installed by the owners themselves while pourashava provided 14.9%, NGO 1.5% and others 8.9%.
Pre-requisites to collect water from any source/ facilities:To get the water facilities from providers, most of the households (82.0%) did not need to fulfill any pre-conditions while 11% ‘had to apply’ who wanted to have this facilities.
Use of water per day per person: It was revealed that most of the households (48.3%) use less than 16 liters water/day/person while 30.0% households use 16 to 20 liters water/day/ person and 21.7% households use more than 20 liters water/day/person.
Division of labor status for collecting water:Mostly females and girls (87.0%) collect water for households from a distance less than 16 feet (34.4% households) and 16 to 30 feet (25.2%) by spending about 15 minutes (87.3% households) time for water collection.
Time for collecting water:Most of the households (74.9%) collect water three times or more.
Functioning of water facilities:It was known that most of the water facilities (99.1%) were functional in the project areas. All the water facilities were functional in Kolaroa and Shakhipur Pourashavas, and few at other Pourashavas. The reasons for non-functioning of the water facilities are:lack of money for repairing, lack of spare parts, lack of initiative etc.
Status of Pipe Water Supply:The study reveals that there is no piped water supply system in any of the five pourashavas. However, in Ishwarganj pourashava once, this system was available was abandoned before 1971. In Kolaroa pourashava, one Iron and Arsenic Removal Plant with approximately 4.50 km pipelines and one overhead tank were constructed which has been abandoned 4 years ago as the pump, motor and other accessories were lost.
According to govt. organogram of pourashava, there is provision of PWSS both in B and C category pourashavas. The requirement of man-power for B category pourashava is 09 while for C category the number is 6. Pourashava has limitation of its own resources in providing quality and sufficient services to the citizen. Pourashava has also lacks institutional skill ness with respect to management and maintenance. Moreover, there is a need to involve private/individual sector to increase the revenue of pourashava along with reduction of management cost.
Problems for collecting water:In project area, 36% households face problems while collecting water from the water facilities/sources. It was revealed the major three reasons for the problems to collect water are collection of water consumes much time (28.2%), dispute and altercation among the families during the collection of water from common water points (22.4%), and sometimes, non-availability of water (16.2%).
Water facility management:Water facility management in an environmental friendly manner is crucial for sustaining water facilities. The study shows that 3.1% water sources had management committee while 29.2% did not exist and 67.7% had no idea about management committee.
For maintaining functioning and sustainability of the water facilities existence of effective management committee for each of the facilities is essential. It was observed that management committees existed for only 3.1% major water facilities. Though the number of management committees was not significant, most of the management committees (88.9%) had taken initiatives for regular maintenance of water facilities.
Outlet of water facility:To ensure environment friendliness, placement of water facilities’ outlet play vital role, since wastewater of the facilities might pollute open places as well as natural sources. It was observed that around 81% water facilities’ outlet were placed to pond, open space and low land. So, in the project areas, possibility of pollution prevailed.
Management cost for water facility:To define the cost role for managing water facilities, four variables were considered which included installment cost, maintenance cost, and affordability of the households for collecting water, and source of money.