Terminal Evaluation MDGF1919 Water Governance Project: Enhancing Access to and Provision of Water Services with the Active Participation of the Poor

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2012-2018, Philippines
Evaluation Type:
Final Project
Planned End Date:
06/2013
Completion Date:
06/2013
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
15,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document Final MDGF 1919 26 Aug.pdf report English 1876.10 KB Posted 1317
Download document TOR_Terminal Evaluation_MDGF 1919.pdf tor English 769.05 KB Posted 239
Title Terminal Evaluation MDGF1919 Water Governance Project: Enhancing Access to and Provision of Water Services with the Active Participation of the Poor
Atlas Project Number: 00071737
Evaluation Plan: 2012-2018, Philippines
Evaluation Type: Final Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 06/2013
Planned End Date: 06/2013
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Democratic Governance
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
  • 1. Civil society, including civil society organizations and voluntary associations, and the private sector contribute to the MDGs in support of national planning strategies and policies
  • 2. National, regional and local levels of governance expand their capacities to reduce conflict and manage the equitable delivery of public services
Evaluation Budget(US $): 15,000
Source of Funding: Project funds
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: Yes
  • Joint with UNICEF
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Nationality
Richard M. Chiwara
Socorro L. Reyes
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders: DILG, NEDA, NWRB, LGUs
Countries: PHILIPPINES
Lessons
1.

Policy advocacy did not get sufficient attention in the programme design and implementation. For example, there was no concerted advocacy for the establishment of a single lead agency to coordinate development in the water supply and sanitation sector. The advocacy could have focused on the consolidation of two bills in the House of Representatives (House Bills 1679 and 4282) and two bills in the Senate ( Senate Bills 2641and 611), all of which sought the establishment of a Water Regulatory Commission. House Bill 1679 and Senate Bill 611 were tabled in 2010, while House Bill 4282 and Senate Bill 2641 were tabled in 2011. All four bills “aimed to streamline organizational functions and responsibilities and the pertinent regulatory units of the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS), NWRB and LWUA.” 19 However, while the establishment of the NWRMO as an apex body would be a strategic outcome, more efforts towards developing capacity of LGUs on innovative resource mobilization such as private-public partnerships, and developing proposals could have enhanced the JP’s contribution to the overall programme objective through the work undertaken at policy level.


2.

At the local level, there were no mechanisms specifically established to monitor the implementation of the MW4SP and LCSCs. The municipalities targeted by the JP all developed their respective water sector plans and service codes. The MW4SPs identified the required investments, thus making them useful tools for resource mobilization while the LCSCs provided a binding social contract between the water service providers and consumers. However, to ensure effective and sustained implementation, a monitoring system would need to be established and institutionalized.


3.

The WATSAN regional hubs also constituted an innovative initiative with a potential to upscale and replicate the JP’s good practices to a broader coverage of waterless municipalities. However, presently the regional hubs were designed as a supply side mechanism to develop capacities of LGUs, providers and users, with services either offered free or funded by donors. While access to safe water is a right, the supply and service provision is not free. There is an opportunity for the regional hubs to move towards demand-driven programming where they are paid for their services as a sustainability mechanism and social responsibility for their clients.


4.

The JP provided demonstrable evidence that the poor were willing and able to pay for water supply services, as long as there is sufficient transparency and accountability in the governance system, as well effective community mobilisation. It is when the community actively participates in running their own water systems that accessibility is increased and collection of fees is enhanced. In addition, communities also demonstrated that they were capable of mentoring and transferring knowledge to other waterless communities through mentoring and ‘god-parenting. The regional hubs therefore need not be too technical where only “expert consultants” provide training services. Mentoring or god-parenting by CSOs such as IWAG or by experienced barangays such as Sibagat could also be quite effective.


5.

Without a doubt, the joint programme “Enhancing Access to and Provision of Water Services with the Active Participation of the Poor, (MDG-F 1919)” addressed a crosscutting issue which is central to the human security and development as well as the achievement of the MDGs in the Philippines. The JP’s interventions and outputs were very strongly aligned to the government’s priorities and strategies as reflected in the principles enshrined in the Philippines Water Supply Sector Roadmap.


Findings
1.

The most significant accomplishments of the JP were in raising awareness that water was not just an engineering concern for installation of pipes and faucets, but a basic human right and governance issue. Target 10 of MDG 7, aimed to cut in half the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water. At the Johannesburg World Summit for Sustainable Development, in 2002, this target was expanded to include basic sanitation, and water as a resource was recognized as a critical factor for meeting all the MDGs. In December 2003, the United Nations General Assembly, in resolution A/RES/58/217, proclaimed the period 2005-2015 International Decade for Action 'Water for Life'. The decade officially started on World Water Day, March 22, 2005.


2.

While the JP delivered very good outputs under both outcomes, there was an apparent lack of convergence of the outcomes. In fact, it was quite conceivable that each of them could have been implemented independently rather than as one programme. This was probably one of the factors that contributed to the lack of concrete results from the policy outputs. Given a carefully designed programme with horizontal linkages, the outputs of Outcome 1 could have served as the inputs to Outcome 2. For example, the policy paper on ‘Incentives Mechanisms and Partnership Modalities’ in Outcome 1 could have been a module in local capacity building on innovative resource mobilization and private-public partnerships.


Recommendations
1 Strengthen Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM)
2 National Ownership should be mainstreamed and reflected in programme governance and management mechanisms.
3 Strengthen LGU capacity to acquire resources for developing water supply infrastructure.
4 Strengthen policy advocacy towards lead agency for the water sector.
5 Strengthen rights-based approach to water governance.
6 Strengthen support to the Regional WATSAN Hubs.
7 Mainstream inclusive civil society participatory programmes for water governance.
1. Recommendation: Strengthen Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM)
Management Response: [Added: 2014/02/28] [Last Updated: 2014/02/28]

Management agrees to the recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Water sector reforms conducted at the national level with the creation of an Apex Body through the National Water Resources Management Office (NWRMO). Awaiting for the approval of the President of the Philippine Republic.
[Added: 2014/02/28] [Last Updated: 2018/11/25]
NEDA/DPWH 2014/02 Completed History
Adoption of IWRM in the following activities: (1) formulation of the Municipal Water Supply, Sewerage and Sanitation Sector Plans (MW4SPs), (2) expansion of membership in the WATSAN Councils and (3) inclusion of IWRM in the toolbox and as training module during Water Governance Training for LGUs for effective and efficient delivery of water services.
[Added: 2014/02/28] [Last Updated: 2018/09/16]
DILG/ Regional WASAN Hubs 2016/01 Completed Adopted in the National Water Program (SALINTUBIG and GPBP) History
Issuance of Memo Circulars to the LGUs to adopt IWRM as an approach to ensure sustainability of water supply and sanitation service delivery.
[Added: 2014/02/28] [Last Updated: 2018/09/16]
DILG 2014/01 Completed History
2. Recommendation: National Ownership should be mainstreamed and reflected in programme governance and management mechanisms.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/02/28]

Management agrees to the recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
As a delivery mechanism to ensure sustainability of water services provided by LGUs and Water Service Providers, a Regional WATSAN Hub has been established across the country and has been integrated in the updated Philippine Development Plan (2011-2016)
[Added: 2014/02/28]
NEDA 2013/01 Completed
3. Recommendation: Strengthen LGU capacity to acquire resources for developing water supply infrastructure.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/02/28]

Management agrees to the recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Capacity development funds have been provided by the National Government to complement the infrastructure provided to LGUs in the on-going National Water Program such as the Sagana at Ligtas na Tubig sa Lahat (SALINTUBIG) and the Grassroots Participatory Budgeting Process (GPBP)
[Added: 2014/02/28] [Last Updated: 2018/09/16]
DILG 2016/01 Completed History
Integrate or link with other toolboxes relative to water supply development both at the local, regional and global.
[Added: 2014/02/28] [Last Updated: 2018/09/16]
DILG 2015/01 Completed History
Engagement of the Regional WATSAN Hubs as Capacity Development Providers to strengthen LGUs? capacity to access financing to develop water supply infrastructure.
[Added: 2014/02/28]
DILG 2016/01 Completed
4. Recommendation: Strengthen policy advocacy towards lead agency for the water sector.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/02/28]

Management agrees to the recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Advocate to the House of Representative and House of Senate for the creation of an Apex Body in aid of legislation.
[Added: 2014/02/28] [Last Updated: 2018/09/16]
NEDA 2014/12 Completed History
Policy paper has been prepared in consultation with other stakeholders in the water sector to support the creation of the body.
[Added: 2014/02/28]
NEDA/DPWH 2013/12 Completed
5. Recommendation: Strengthen rights-based approach to water governance.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/02/28]

Management agrees to the recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Rights-based approach already mainstreamed in all water governance processes and being adopted in the on-going National Water Programs (SALINTUBIG and Grassroots Participatory Budgeting)
[Added: 2014/02/28]
DILG 2013/12 Completed Regular updating is also required
Integration of HRBA Module in the WATSAN Toolbox currently used by the Regional WATSAN Hubs in the conduct of capacity development for the LGUs and Water Service Providers.
[Added: 2014/02/28]
DILG 2013/12 Completed Regular updating is also required
Integration of HRBA as an approach in the Philippine Development Plan (2011-2016)
[Added: 2014/02/28]
DILG/NEDA 2013/12 Completed Regular updating is also required
6. Recommendation: Strengthen support to the Regional WATSAN Hubs.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/02/28]

Management agrees to the recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Continue seeking support from other donors to strengthen the Regional WATSAN Hubs especially during Philippine Development Forums (PDF)
[Added: 2014/02/28] [Last Updated: 2018/09/16]
NEDA/DILG/UNDP 2014/12 Completed Scaling-Up funds received from RBAP for additional Regional WATSAN hubs in 2013-2014 History
Develop business model to sustain the operations and to continue the provision of capacity development to other LGUs and WSPs in water governance by the Regional WATSAN Hubs
[Added: 2014/02/28] [Last Updated: 2018/09/16]
DILG/UNDP 2014/12 Completed The Hubs are also envisioned to be a One-stop-shop for capacity building on various aspects of service delivery & governance History
7. Recommendation: Mainstream inclusive civil society participatory programmes for water governance.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/02/28]

Management agrees to the recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Adoption of Human rights-based approach in all stages (from planning to O & M) of water supply and sanitation development to ensure active participation of the community specifically the vulnerable groups. It also encourages communities to be vigilant and active monitors to promote INTEGRITY in local water governance.
[Added: 2014/02/28] [Last Updated: 2018/09/16]
DILG 2013/12 Completed Pilot-tested creation of Citizens Watch groups for water integrity in a small town in Agusan del Sur History

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

1 UN Plaza
DC1-20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org