BMAU/UNICEF POLICY BRIEFUNDERSTANDING DISTRICT LEVEL BOTTLENECKS IN THE PROVISION OF SAFE WATER

1

BMAU/UNICEF POLICY BRIEF NO. 2 / 16

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

UNDERSTANDING DISTRICT LEVEL BOTTLENECKS IN THE PROVISION OF SAFE WATERJANUARY 2016

INTRODUCTION According to the Situation Analysis of Children in Uganda (2015), notwithstanding a reduction in the proportion of children without access to safe water (from 39% in 2010 to 30% in 2013), access to improved water sources remains a significant challenge. WaterAid estimates that every year over 8,000 Ugandan children die from diarrhoeal diseases caused by unsafe water and poor sanitation. Nationally, the percentage of people within 1km of an improved water source stands at 65% (Water Sector Performance Report, 2015), which is significantly below the 2014/15 target of 77%, and close to two thirds of children live more than a 30-minute round trip from the nearest source of water. In addition, the El Niño episodes predicted to occur between October 2015 and February 2016 by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the Uganda National Meteorological Authority (UNMA) pose a real threat of contamination, further constraining access to safe water sources.

Whereas every other region in the country (including regions with similar or lower cumulative water releases per capita) witnessed an increase in access to improved water sources, between FY 2010/11 and FY 2013/14 the Western region experienced a marked decline. The remainder of this brief focuses on a case study of the Western region in order to provide a deeper understanding of district level bottlenecks in the provision of safe water.

BMAU/UNICEF POLICY BRIEF UNDERSTANDING DISTRICT LEVEL BOTTLENECKS IN THE PROVISION OF SAFE WATER

2

CASE STUDY: WESTERN REGION (FY 2010/11-FY 2013/14)Between FY 2010/11 and FY 2013/14, cumulative water release per capita in the Western region amounted to approximately UGX 86,000. Whereas during the same period every other region in the country (including regions with similar or lower cumulative water releases per capita such as South Western, East Central and West Nile) witnessed an increase in access to improved water sources, the Western region experienced a marked decline of 4.5 percentage points (Figure 1). This unexpected reduction in access to improved water sources was pervasive across all three sub-regions of the Western region (Figure 2).

Figure 1: Access to improved water sources vs. Cumulative water release per capita (2010/11-2013/14)

Figure 2: Access to improved water sources (2010/11-2013/14)

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

East

ern

Cent

ral

Noth

ern

Kara

moj

a

Sout

h W

este

rn

Wes

tern

East

Cen

tral

Wes

t Nile

-5%

-4%

-3%

-2%

-1%

0

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

release per capita

Access to impoved water sources

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

60%

65%

70%

75%

80%

85%

Bunyoro

Rwenzori

Tooro

BMAU/UNICEF POLICY BRIEFUNDERSTANDING DISTRICT LEVEL BOTTLENECKS IN THE PROVISION OF SAFE WATER

3

Figure 3: Access to improved water sources vs. Cumulative rural water and sanitation release per capita (FY 2010/11-2013/14)

Figure 4: Water sources (by type) vs. Rural water and sanitation release per capita (FY 2013/14)

Within the three Western sub-regions, with the exception of Kiryandongo all districts experienced a reduction in access to improved water sources (Figure 3). Most notably, in spite of receiving a cumulative rural water and sanitation release per capita four times higher than that of Kiryandongo (UGX 7,143), Buliisa (UGX 30,047) accounts for a 14% decline in access to improved water sources, compared to a 3% increase in Kiryandongo. This evidence raises some pertinent questions with regards to the efficiency of spending across and within districts. To elaborate further, Figure 4 focuses on rural water investments carried out in FY 2013/14 alone. Notably, whereas Buliisa received an allocation of approximately UGX 6,641 per capita for rural water and sanitation and successfully construct 7 deep boreholes, with a significantly lower allocation equivalent to UGX 2,360 per capita Kiryandongo constructed 8 deep boreholes, rehabilitated 22 water points, and dug 16 shallow wells.

EVIDENCE FROM THE FIELDField work in Kiryandongo and Buliisa districts consisted of interviews with District Water Officers (DWOs), Chief Administrative Officers (CAOs), as well as Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with communities in at least two parishes in each sub-county and town council in both districts. Discussants identified the lack of flexibility in district water and sanitation conditional grants (DWSCGs), poor water quality, long distances to improved water points, and data inaccuracies as key hurdles compromising access to safe water.

Lack of flexibility in district water and sanitation conditional grants (DWSCGs) stands as the primary culprit yielding unbalanced investments with a bias in favour of the construction of new water sources over adequate maintenance and

Access to improved water sources

5,000

15,000

25,000

35,000

-14%

-7%

0

7%

14%

Cummulative rural water and sanitationrelease per capita

Bulis

a

Ntor

oko

Kyeg

weg

wa

Mas

indi

Kiry

ando

ngo

Bund

ibug

yo

Kaba

role

Kyen

jojo

Kam

wen

ge

Hoim

a

Kaba

le

Kase

se

Bulis

a

Ntor

oko

Kyeg

weg

wa

Mas

indi

Kiry

ando

ngo

Bund

ibug

yo

Kaba

role

Kyen

jojo

Kam

wen

ge

Hoim

a

Kaba

le

Kase

se

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0

2,000

1,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

Shallow wells

Water point rehabs

Protected springs

Deep boreholes

Rural water andsanitation release per capita

BMAU/UNICEF POLICY BRIEF UNDERSTANDING DISTRICT LEVEL BOTTLENECKS IN THE PROVISION OF SAFE WATER

4

FOR ADDITIONALINFORMATION:

Margaret Kakande, Head / BMAU, Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic DevelopmentMargaret.Kakande@finance.go.ug

Diego Angemi, Chief / Social Policy and Advocacy, UNICEF, Ugandadangemi@unicef.org

i. Promote greater flexibility in the utilization of DWSCGs.

o MoWE to grant greater discretionary powers to district officials in the utilization of DWSCGs.

o Local Governments to prioritize maintenance and regular repairs of broken down boreholes or piped water systems.

ii. Improve access to services in ‘forgotten communities’.

o Local Governments to plan and implement temporary emergency measures to provide services to marginalised communities.

o Local Governments to facilitate dialogue and support the resettlement of “invisible” communities in areas where they can access basic services.

iii. Ensure data accuracy and reliability of population estimates.

o The Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) and the Ministry of Water and Environment (MoWE) to ensure that district-level population estimates are accurate and reliable.

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

rehabilitation of existing facilities (see Box 1). Evidence from the monitoring visits overwhelmingly validated the notion that on the basis of high proportions of the DWSCG being utilized for construction of new water sources (e.g. up to 90% in Kiryandongo), a very limited proportion of funds ends up being invested in rehabilitation of boreholes or piped water systems. At the time of the monitoring visits, most of the protected springs and shallow wells were broken down, and the DWO from Buliisa had filed a formal request to the Ministry of Water and Environment (MoWE) for greater flexibility in the district’s ability to allocate additional resources to rehabilitation of existing, broken down water sources.

Interviews with DWOs also identified water quality as a serious issue affecting water access. With five of the seven sub-counties in Buliisa district on the lower shelf of the escarpment at the bank of Lake Albert, most of the boreholes drilled in this lower shelf are very saline and have high concentrations of iron. Not only does this make the water unpalatable but this also means that boreholes break down much more often. FDG participants in Buliisa district admitted to shunning functional boreholes because of their saline water but rather preferred travelling long distances to access unsafe water in the swamp and the lake. Unsurprisingly, therefore, all communities in the five affected sub-counties reported travelling long distances from their homes to fetch water. Members of these communities (especially women and children) indicated walking 2-3km to fetch water in crocodile infested papyrus marshes by the lakeside. Many of the communities visited also reported incidents of deaths or severe injuries caused by crocodiles.

In terms of long distances, community members in Mbeija village, a so-called ‘forgotten community’ in Kiryandongo district, clearly voiced their concern with the lack of any type of improved water sources, as well as schools and health centres. According to the DWO from Kiryandongo, the village does not feature in the list of villages within the district. In other words, it does not exist as these communities illegally settled in an area gazetted by Government. The district has no plan of developing this area.

On a related note, the DWO also discussed data accuracy as a vital element to inform better planning and budgeting practices in the district. In this regard, he expressed concern with the provisional population census data on the basis that at approximately 270,000 the revised population estimate for Kiryandongo represents a marked decline from the 350,000 citizens previously estimated to have been living in the district. With per capita releases for WASH already constrained in Kiryandongo (Figure 3), this unexpected variation (i.e. reduction) in district population estimates poses a real threat to the district’s ability to secure adequate financial resources to ensure sustainable access to safe water sources.

“Our parents and grandparents used to drink the water in the river. We don’t want to drink water from the boreholes because it is salty and it also leaves a deposit in the cups, pots and other vessels. We think it is dangerous for our health”.

FGD participant, Kasenyi Village, Buliisa district

BOX 1: DWSCG Guidelinesa. Rural Water Supply Facilities not less than 70%.b. Software activities for rural water supply and

sanitation up to 8%.c. Rehabilitation of boreholes and Piped water

schemes up to 13%.d. Construction of sanitation facilities up to 3%e. Supervision, monitoring and DWO operational costs

up to 6%Sector Specific Schedules/Guidelines, 2013, MoWE