MID-TERM REVIEW of Plan Uganda Country Strategic Plan and Country Programs (FY 2004 – 2009, FINAL SYNTHESIS REPORT

Background

The Water and Sanitation Project is part of Plan Uganda's country program on Health that aims at improving the health status of girls and boys in Plan-supported communities. The NORAD supported component of Water and Sanitation directly supports the objective on "Improving the communities' access to potable water from 60% to 75%" and "Increasing the adoption of effective hygiene and sanitation practices from 10% to 70%." The project aims at improving poor people's health through improved, integrated, and sustainable access to safe water, sanitation and good hygiene from the perspective of fulfilment of the poor people's basic right to health, water and sanitation. The project further focuses on enabling children and their families take lead in management of their water resources and sanitation practices. The overarching long-term development goal of this project is to build capacities of families, community organizations, local governance structures and other duty bearers to ensure the fulfillment of people's right to improved health associated with reduced incidences of diseases caused by unsafe drinking water & poor hygiene and sanitation practices

Purpose/objective

The mid-term review of Plan Uganda's country programs was carried out in June 2006 to assess performance and progress towards achieving CPO objectives, to determine if the related strategies and program approaches are relevant, appropriate and effective, and to identify obstacles to implementation of these programs, and areas for improvement. This evaluation summary will only focus on review findings that directly relate to the water and sanitation interventions.

Methodology

Participatory evaluation methods were used to analyze the viability of the processes used in implementing planned activities. Stakeholder participation was key method used for measuring program performance. Data collection used both primary and secondary sources (document review) providing both quantitative and qualitative data and information. Consultative meetings with program beneficiaries and key informant interviews (included program staff from Plan and partner organizations were involved) were employed on primary data sources. A household survey was also conducted as a means of corroborating the qualitative information with quantitative data.
A total of six consultants were engaged in the review. Each Country Program Outline (CPO) was assigned a consultant to critically review the CPO activities in the period (FY 2004-2006). Country Program on Health, within which the Water and Sanitation sub program is located, was subdivided into two themes namely: Strengthening Girls, Boys and their family's health; and Water and Sanitation. Dr Apollo Kangabe was responsible for the Health Program review.

Key findings

1. The project has managed to achieve the result of drilled and installed boreholes, developed water springs and water harvesting through tanks. Access to water in Plan areas has increased to 99%.
2. Most of the communities (81%Households) reported having a trained Water User Committee (WUC), however the effectiveness of these committees is yet to be assessed as at the time of this review some of the committees were relatively new.
3. WUCs face the challenge of effectively instituting water user fees to be able to effect timely maintenance of water resources as some of the households only pay when need arises.
4. Rainwater tanks in schools have proved to be difficult to manage and maintain as nearby communities contribute to their overuse and not to their maintenance.
5. There is recognizable increase in latrine coverage in Plan areas (75% coverage) even though a number of them are traditional types.
6. Provision of latrines and separate cleaning and changing room for girls is reported to have contributed to increase in girls' school attendance.
7. Hand washing facility coverage and practice in the communities, is still low.
8. Cleanliness in home surroundings has improved and more households have drying racks for utensils (66%), 66% house animals away from their dwelling home/space (63%).

Recommendations

1. Community Mobilization
a. There is need to continue sensitizing communities to ensure that funds for repairs and maintenance are readily available when require
b. WUCs should be encouraged to open separate bank accounts and ensure accountability of funds collected and spent to larger community members
2. Preventive Maintenance
a. Plan Uganda should support training for community WUCs and water source care takers in preventive maintenance.
b. At least one man and one woman per sub-county should be trained as pump mechanics and they should also be provided with basic tools for maintenance.
c. Plan should work with district water authorities to improve community access to supplies and spare parts.
3. Water, Hygiene and Sanitation in Schools
a. There is need for continued sensitization of school heads and school management committees to take full charge of the maintenance of the school water and sanitation facilities.
b. There is need to lobby school authorities to enhance security and safeguard from vandalism of the water and sanitation facilities in schools
c. There is need to include the other non science teachers in water and sanitation training for schools. Students should also be encouraged to disseminate the learnings and good practices to their homes.
4. Water, Hygiene and Sanitation at Household Level
a. Village Health teams should be supported further to promote positive hygiene behaviours and messages at community level
5. Opportunities for integration
a. There is need to strengthen integration with other programs like livelihood i.e. exploiting multiple uses of water as well as integration with the health component in the same country program.
b. There is also need to strengthen Plan Uganda capacity in Child to Child and Rights Based Approaches (RBA)

Comments from the organisation

Plan will take up the recommendations of the review and will ensure that they are factored in the final year of implementation of this program viz CY2007. However, the following points are noted with respect to this evaluation report:
1. While the Evaluation noted some challenges with respect to user fees it on the other hand points in the same report that user fees do not however act as hindrance to access even for the vulnerable groups like the elderly and the child headed households. This is largely attributed to the fact that in-kind contribution like sweeping of the water source is a recognized and acceptable community modality that ensures participation by all. Again it is mentioned in the report that most of the Water User Committees were relatively new, which might have been the reason why there were still challenges with fee collection in some communities. It is expected that with time the WUCs will be able to build the confidence of their communities. This will be achieved through regular feed back of the WUC to their respective communities.
2. The report recommends the need to integrate this project with the Health Program. The Evaluation team however failed to acknowledge the positive strides made in integrating useful components of water, sanitation and health e.g. the following was reported within the same evaluation: that at least 70% of households reported having a separate clean container for storage of drinking water, that most of the households now keep their animals away from the dwelling space (houses), that there is visible improvements with regard to cleanliness of the home like the compounds and that the project had also supported training of VHT s who are key to sensitizing communities on good hygiene and sanitation practices for behaviour change.
3. The Evaluation failed to recognize the role of Plan Uganda in networking with the respective district and national institutions working in water and sanitation like District Water Offices and the National Sanitation Working Group respectively. As such the lesson learnt should have been presented in a manner that recognizes the positive efforts made to date, mechanisms already in place and the need to continue to strengthen such linkages. It is therefore important when presenting lessons learned to specify if it is a lesson learned out of good practice or if it arises from a situation that needs to be improved.