Benchmarking of Utilities for Performance Improvement · PDF fileBenchmarking of Utilities for...

download Benchmarking of Utilities for Performance Improvement · PDF fileBenchmarking of Utilities for Performance Improvement ... System profile ... M M M M M M M M M M M M M 14 Total

If you can't read please download the document

Transcript of Benchmarking of Utilities for Performance Improvement · PDF fileBenchmarking of Utilities for...

  • 1

    Benchmarking of Utilities for Performance

    Improvement

    Dennis D. Mwanza,Water and Sanitation Program8th December 2006

    2

    CONTEXT

    Most public utilities not operating efficiently in Africa

    High Unaccounted for Water (NRW) Low Cost recovery Low Tarrif levels High staff per 1000 connections Availability of supply

  • 2

    3

    Context contd

    Problem of capacity to deliver.Decades of public investmentPoor sector and institutional arrangement choicesMany public sector management issues Problems of financial viability Accountability Autonomy Lack of regulatory framework Institutional organisation of water

    service delivery

    4

    Performance Indicators and Benchmarking

    Benchmarking is the search for industry best practices that lead to superior performance.

    - Robert C. CampIt is understood as the process foridentification, understanding andadaptation of remarkable practices andprocesses of other organizations to helpthe improvement of its own performance

    BENCHMARKING has been used as a toolby the water sector industry over the lasttwenty years

  • 3

    5

    CONCEPTS OF BM FOR Utility

    Better service qualityHigher resources productivityHigher satisfaction by ConsumersHigher general return for thecompanyEnvironment improvementBasically higher operationalefficiency

    6

    Humility to accept that there may be otherCompanies with a better performance butunder similar socio-economic environment

    Wisdom to learn the changes that may arisefrom comparison

    Ambition to introduce the necessary actions Effectiveness to accomplish the programmed

    goals

    The BENCHMARKING ProcessRequires:

  • 4

    7

    Benchmarking initiatives

    Global and other REgions:IWAIBNETSouth Asia Utility data bookBenchmarking of utilities in Brazil

    RegionalWater Utility Partnership Performance Indicators and Benchmarking Project

    8

    IWA Benchmarking initiative

    The objectives of the initiative was to: develop generally accepted procedures and methodologies able to provide decision makers with an overall perception of the utility performance as a sound basis for making strategic choices. Clear definition of a reference framework for Performance Indicators and Benchmarking methodologies, as well as adequate models of aggregation that fit the basic needs of the key types of user.

  • 5

    9

    IWAs motivation

    Demand from IWA members for guidelines on Performance Indicators

    the definition of a common reference for PI that fits the basic common needs of the key types of users in the Water Industry

    Main target users: the utilities themselves.

    10

    Output

    A standardised PI language, covering:

    syntax (structure)morphology/semantics (vocabulary and definitions)

    etymology (from data to PI)

  • 6

    11

    REGION

    Direct consumersDirect consumersIndirect consumersIndirect consumers

    ProPro--active consumersactive consumersFi

    nanc

    ial

    Fina

    ncia

    lre

    sour

    ces

    reso

    urce

    sService Service

    Technological assetsTechnological assets

    Human resourcesHuman resources

    Physical assetsPhysical assets

    WA

    TER

    UTI

    LITY

    WA

    TER

    UTI

    LITY

    Environmental Environmental resources:resources:-- Water Water -- EnergyEnergy

    12

    Structure of the final document

    Context informationUtility profileSystem profileRegion profile

    Performance indicatorsWater resources indicatorsPersonnel indicators Physical indicatorsOperational indicatorsQuality of serviceFinancial indicators

    Input data definition and Input data definition and processing rules processing rules

    Definition diagramsDefinition diagrams-- water balancewater balance-- water losseswater losses-- utility functionsutility functions-- financial definitionsfinancial definitions

    IntroductionIntroduction

    GlossaryGlossary

  • 7

    13

    AGLOMMERATIONAGLOMMERATION

    Definition of water balance terms

    catchcatch--mentment

    treattreat--mentment

    transtrans--missionmission storagestorage

    distridistri--butionbution

    transmistransmis..water useswater uses& losses& losses

    storagestoragewater useswater uses& losses& losses

    distributiondistributionwater useswater usesand lossesand losses

    treatmenttreatmentoperational operational

    usesuses

    AbstractedAbstractedmeteredmetered

    waterwater

    Produced Produced metered watermetered water

    DistrictDistrictmeteringmetering

    meteringmeteringapparentapparentlosseslosses

    Imported Imported treated watertreated water

    Exported Exported waterwater

    Imported Imported raw waterraw water

    Supplied Supplied waterwater

    Distribution Distribution inputinputTransmission

    Transmissioninputinput

    M watermeter

    MMMM

    M

    M

    M M M

    M

    M M M

    MMM

    M M M

    14

    Total Total authorised authorised

    consumptionconsumption[m[m3 3 /year]/year]

    Total water Total water losseslosses

    [m[m33 / year] / year]

    Billed waterBilled water

    [m[m3 3 /year]/year]

    NonNon--revenue revenue water water

    (unaccounted(unaccounted--for water)for water)

    [m[m3 3 / year]/ year]

    Billed authorised Billed authorised consumptionconsumption

    [m[m33 / year]/ year]

    Unbilled Unbilled authorised authorised

    consumptionconsumption[m[m33 / year]/ year]

    Billed metered consumptionBilled metered consumption(including exported water)(including exported water)

    Billed Billed unmeteredunmetered consumptionconsumption

    Unauthorised useUnauthorised use

    Metering inaccuraciesMetering inaccuracies

    Apparent lossesApparent losses[m[m33 / year]/ year]

    Real lossesReal losses[m[m33 / year]/ year]

    Unbilled metered consumptionUnbilled metered consumption

    Unbilled Unbilled unmeteredunmetered consumptionconsumption

    Leakage on service connections Leakage on service connections upstream the delivery pointupstream the delivery point

    Leakage and overflows of Leakage and overflows of storage tanksstorage tanks

    Leakage on transmission and Leakage on transmission and distribution systemdistribution system

    Leakage on raw water mains & Leakage on raw water mains & treatment real lossestreatment real losses

    TOTA

    L WAT

    ER IN

    PUT

  • 8

    15

    Water resources indicators

    Personnel indicators

    Physical indicators

    Operational indicators

    Quality of service indicators

    Financial indicators

    Number of PI proposed

    HighHighLevelLevel

    IntermedIntermed..LevelLevel

    LowerLowerLevelLevel

    11 101044 1515

    00 8855 1313

    88 16161313 3737

    88 331919 3030

    77 16161515 3838

    2626 53535656 135135

    22 0000 22

    16

    High level PI

    Water resources indicators (2 PI)Efficiency of water resources use (%)Resources availability ratio (%)

    Personnel indicators (1 PI)Employees per connection (No./1000

    connections)Physical indicators (0 PI)

  • 9

    17

    High level PI (cont.)

    Operational indicators (8 PI)Mains rehabilitation (% per year)Total water losses (l/connection/day)

    real losses per service connection (l/connection/day)

    apparent losses per service connection (l/connection/day)

    Mains failures (No./100 km/year)Service connection failures (No./1000 connections/

    year)Water quality - Samples tested (No. /106 m3/year)

    18

    High level PI (cont.)

    Quality of service indicators (8 PI)Buildings supply coverage (%)Public taps and standpipes

    distance to households (m) quantity of water consumed (%)

    Continuity of supply (%)Water interruptions (%)Quality of supplied water (%)Service complaints (complaints/connection/year)Billing complaints (complaints/connection/year)

  • 10

    19

    High level PI (cont.)

    Financial indicators (7 PI)Average water charges for direct consumption

    (US$/m3)Average water charges for exported water (US$/m3)Total cost coverage ratio (-)Operating cost ratio (-)Contribution of internal sources to investment (%)Current ratio (-)Non-revenue water (%)

    The output was in word files.Demonstration given below

  • 11

    21

    WR_Efficiency_of_water_resourcesA_Authorised_ConsumptionA_Water_AbstractedA_Imported_raw_waterA_Imported_treated_waterA_Authorised_Consumption

    22

    A_Billed_Authorised_Consumption

  • 12

    23

    International Benchmarking Network (IBNET)

    24

    WUP SERVICE PROVIDER BENCHMARKING NETWORK (SPBNET)

    Improvement of data collection and analysis of utilities in AfricaProvide a management tool for self evaluation for the operators, benchmarking for utilities with similar operating environments, Promoting experience sharing between the utilities and documenting and sharing information on emerging best practices and lessons on water supply and sanitation

  • 13

    25

    Project organisation and implementation

    Project funded by DfID, implemented by WUP with assistance from WRc as Benchmarking advisorsProject Manager (Consultant) assisted by 7 Regional Consultants interface with utilitiesRegional Consultants workshopConsultation workshops for Development of questionnaire, clear understanding of all the questions e.t.c.

    26

    Regional arrangements

  • 14

    27

    Development of questionnaire

    Questionnaire defines the data available and forms the basis upon which utilities can benchmark one with anotherBalance what is desirable with what is