Introduction
A huge 5 years foreign funded project implemented covering the whole of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa aiming at provision of rural water supply and sanitation ended in 2009. The Project was designed to improve not only the existing water and sanitation services but also hygiene behavioral patterns amongst the beneficiaries. Active community participation including capital cost-sharing and full operation and maintenance (O&M) were the integral parts of participatory approach. A two months beneficiary assessment survey was conducted at the tail of the project attempting to assess the project’s progress against its objectives by visiting the different areas and meeting the actual beneficiaries in the remote locations to find out their view point about the services provided through this project. The main objective of the study was to assess the level of success of the project interventions against the set objectives laid down in the project document. I was the Principal Researcher of the survey and following is the gist from the same.
Limitation of the Survey
Principally, any sample should be the representative of the whole population or universe that a particular survey is concerned with. However, due to the security situation in the country, a reasonably large chunk of the population could not be included in the survey and shaped a major handicap for the same. Even in the field various UCs had to be replaced with others largely due to security concerns. Furthermore, not all the UCs in the sample could be covered and instead of 49 UCs the team could only reach 36 UCs; the main constraint in not being able to reach all UCs had to do with the security situation. Survey planning, staffing, training, implementation, etc, all need to be carefully crafted within a reasonably adequate time frame. Time constraint was another major hurdle in this exercise and the team had to abandon Chitral district and could cover only 9 TMAs out of sampled 10. Normally time constraint is covered through human resource but unfortunately this survey was planned at the tail of the project life line when large number of the human resource had either turned to other projects or was laid off for obvious reasons. Hence, literally this survey was conducted by three to four staff right from the designing stage to the final report writing.
Research Design
The research was primarily conducted through Assessment Survey Questionnaires (ASQs) while in-depth but informal interviews with the respondents were also used to extract relevant information. The main rationale of ASQs was to establish accurate and verifiable quantitative data on each of the target groups, in terms of the progress against the objectives mentioned in the Log Frame. Pertinent details of the survey herein are listed below.
Universe for Assessment Survey Questionnaires
The universe for the ASQs comprised of concerned 10 Regions covering all 54 TMAs with 986 UCs implementing some 8735 schemes. Our respondents comprised of TMA staff, Community Organizations and the communities themselves. For the survey purpose a four phase selection was carried out, first of all Regions were selected, followed by TMAs that followed selection of the Union Councils within TMAs and finally, selection of the concerned schemes to be visited.
Sampling Methodology
All 10 Regions were divided in two strata on the basis of the security situation. The security-wise relatively sound stratum was selected for further process, consisting of 6 regions i.e. Abbottabad, Chitral, Kohat, Mansehra, Mardan and Peshawar and 31 TMAs. For this purpose, 10 TMAs were randomly selected from this stratum. From each TMA 5 such Union Councils were randomly selected where the project had intervened. Using the database developed for the schemes data, maximum of 5 schemes from each UC were selected on random basis. Mastuj TMA in Chitral district had only 4 such UCs. According to the available database, not all the selected UCs had implemented 5 or more schemes. Hence the total schemes to be visited during the survey numbered 123 in 49 UCs of 10 TMAs in 6 Regions.
The study required collection of data on at least one ASQ from each TMA whereas it also required collecting data on one ASQ each from a member of the concerned community as well from a member of the concerned Community Organization.
A four-phase Random Sampling with Probability Proportional to Size (PPS) of stratum was employed for selection of respondents. At the first phase, Regions were selected on the basis of safe security and law & order situation. In the second phase, TMAs were selected at random with PPS and were considered the Outer-layered Sampling Units (OSUs). At the third phase, UCs were selected at random from the TMAs (OSU) with PPS and were referred to as Inner-layered Sampling Units (ISUs) and at the fourth phase the schemes from within the Union Councils (ISUs) were selected, again at random with PPS and were referred to as Primary Sampling Units (PSUs).
The Assessment Survey Sample consisted of 123 schemes randomly selected from randomly selected 49 UCs of again randomly selected 10 TMAs with PPS. All schemes were enlisted to be approached. However, some instant decisions were made on field based on the ground realities mainly concerning security and time constraint. Although Mastuj TMA in Chitral District could not be visited, one additional form was filled in Mansehra during the visit not intending to replace Chitral. Hence response rate for TMAs comes to 100% (10/10) if we consider the additional form. Similarly, response rate for community members was 75.6% (96/123) and for Community Organizations it was 38.2% (47/123). Hence, the overall response rate was 59.7% (153/256). To ensure that samples were best possible representative of the Population, and to make the estimates more reliable, sample to population ratios were kept considerably large.
Training
To prevent possible enumerators’ biases, an orientation session was conducted for enumerators followed up by pre-testing in the field. The training was imparted at Technical Assistance Team Office by MnE Consultant. The main focus of the session was the three different questionnaires used in the Assessment Survey, including pre-testing based on actual questionnaires, to improve their quality as well as to train the enumerators.
Themes and Survey Instruments
The data collection methodology primarily encompassed both quantitative as well qualitative research tools. The questionnaires were rigorously pre-tested and revised as necessary, to improve their reliability as well as validity. The Assessment Survey used the following sets of pre-coded close ended questionnaires, given in the Appendices.
1. Questionnaire for TMA Staff
2. Questionnaire for community member and
3. Questionnaire for Community Organization Member.
Data Collection
Trained enumerators collected data from the sampled audience using pre-coded questionnaires mentioned in the above section. Data were collected on personal information, place of work and current working status, benefits from the scheme, policy preference of the TMAs, concerned knowledge and capacity of the TMAs, status of the Community Organizations, Health and Hygiene behavioral change in the communities, and health issues using the above listed questionnaires. Due to the time constraint of the study, enumerators worked relentlessly, conducting survey and collecting data sometimes from 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM and spending days and nights in the field.
Data Cleaning and Creation of Pivotal Worksheets and Charts
After the questionnaires were completed in the field, on the spot quality checks were made. Data entry process was carried out at TA Office. Different key activities were simultaneously undertaken. The pre-coded responses were converted into an electronic database. An intensive data cleaning and data consistency checks were conducted by the concerned staff in order to assure the quality of the data. The missing data and other data entry problems were addressed in response to the initial data quality observations.
Data Analysis
Various data analysis techniques were employed in order to properly fuse the data. In addition to the descriptive frequency tables, bivariate, and in some cases multivariate level cross-tabulation was computed. The predominant data presentation technique used for reporting the findings has been graphs and charts, as they provide visual presentation in understanding the findings.
Lessons Learned
The required commitment level of the survey team and concerned stakeholders, sound action planning iteratively and continuous problem solving, training and motivated team work do bring results. Without the deep and continuous involvement of the senior management, it would not have been possible to satisfactorily complete such a multifaceted exercise. The joint exercise with the field staff worked out well, particularly the cooperation from the social mobilizers from TMAs was instrumental in completing this gigantic task in the given time frame.
It would be more practical in future to thoroughly review the project design in order to fix the sequence and priority of different activities which would be more helpful in bringing about the desired outcomes. Avoiding political Interference and implementation of project in letter and spirit can help bring true essence of the endeavors.
Findings of the Survey
Analysis of the survey is divided in four sections i.e. TMAs, Communities, Community Organizations, and General Observations.
Analysis of the TMAs
The TMA questionnaire contained 10 close ended questions. Data analysis of the responses reflects the following findings.
1. No TMA gives due importance to environmental issues while forming WatSant (Water and Sanitation) policies.
Ten percent (10%) TMAs give about 45% weight to the environmental issues while forming WatSan policies. Twenty percent (20%) TMAs give 30% weight while seventy percent (70%) TMAs give less than 15% weight to environmental issues while forming WatSan Policies.
2. Community participation in the TMA WatSant schemes is miserably missing.
In 10% TMAs, about 60% or more WatSant schemes enjoy full community participation. In 50% TMAs less than 15% schemes witness full community participation while in 40% TMAs no schemes include community participation.
3. 4. & 5. A reasonable number of TMAs claim that WatSant schemes are mostly implemented, largely maintained, and fractionally planned by COs/CCBs. However, the study notes that these CCBs are more often that not side line businesses mainly owned by the local representatives, TMA staff and different contractors. Hence true community representation is missing.
In 40% TMAs about 60% or more WatSant schemes are implemented by COs/CCBs. In 10% TMAs about 30% schemes are implemented by COs/CCBs, in another 10% TMAs less than 15% schemes are implemented by COs/CCBs and in 40% TMAs no schemes are implemented by COs/CCBs.
In 30% TMAs, about 60% or more WatSan schemes are maintained by the COs/CCBs. In 20% TMAs, about 30% schemes are maintained by COs/CCBs, in 20% TMAs less than 15% schemes are maintained by COs/CCBs, and in 30% TMAs no schemes are maintained by COs/CCBs.
In every 10% TMAs, about 60% or more, about 45%, and about 30% respectively WatSan schemes are planned by COs/CCBs. In 20% TMAs, less than 15% schemes are planned by COs/CCBs while in 50% TMAs no schemes are planned by COs/CCBs.
6. However, majority of TMAs think they have improved quality of the WatSant services since the launch of project.
Fifty percent (50%) TMAs reported about 60% or more improvement in quality of TMA WatSant services since the launch of project. Thirty percent (30%) reported about 45% improvement, 10% reported less than 15% improvement while another 10% reported no improvement.
7. About half of the TMAs think sustainability of their WatSant services have improved reasonably.
Thirty percent (30%) TMAs reported that sustainability of their WatSant services have improved about 60% or more since the launch of project. Forty percent (40%) TMAs reported about 45% improvement, every other 10% TMAs reported about 30% improvement, less than 15% improvement and no improvement respectively.
8. Although majority of the TMAs reported they had established linkages with the CCBs, the fact that these CCBs are not true representatives of the communities, leave these linkages open to criticism.
Thirty percent (30%) TMAs reported established linkages between TMAs and about 60% or more COs/CCBs. Ten percent (10%) TMAs reported linkages with about 45% COs/CCBs, 30% TMAs reported about 30% linkages, 20% TMAs reported less than 15% linkages and 10% reported no linkages with COs/CCBs.
9. TMAs largely did not acknowledge any formal linkages between the CCBs and Works and Services Department.
Twenty percent (20%) TMAs reported established linkages between Works and Services Department and about 60% or more COs/CCBs. Ten percent (10%) reported less than 15% and 70% TMAs reported no linkages between the same.
10. Overwhelming majority of TMAs reported they received enough trainings regarding identification of priority areas and communities.
Fifty percent (50%) TMAs reported 8 or more trainings regarding identification of priority areas and communities. Ten percent (10%) TMAs reported less than 8 trainings, 20% TMAs reported less than 5 trainings, and 20% reported no trainings.
Analysis of the Communities
Community member questionnaire also contained 10 close ended questions. Data analysis of the responses reflects following findings.
1. Majority of the communities reported WatSan services could only help minimal increase in the income level.
Nineteen percent (19%) communities reported WatSan services help about 60% or more increase in their income level (directly or indirectly). Seven (7%) communities reported about 45% increase, 8% communities reported about 30% increase, 9% communities reported less than 15% increase while 56% communities reported no increase in income level.
2. Majority of the communities reported positive impact of the WatSan services in terms of decreased water borne diseases.
Twenty four (24%) communities reported about 60% or more decrease in WatSan borne diseases due to WatSan services provision. Fifteen percent (15%) communities reported about 45% decrease, similarly 8%, 11%, and 42% communities reported about 30% decrease, less than 15% decrease and no decrease respectively.
3 4 & 5. Overwhelming communities reported they neither received any promotional materials (posters, pamphlets, etc) nor any training on the use of such materials through the project. Hence they did not use any such promotional material.
One percent (1%) communities reported they received 5 or 6 promotional materials (posters, pamphlets, etc) through the project. Two percent (2%) reported they receive 3 or 4 promotional materials, 4% received 1 or 2 promotional materials while 93% communities did not receive any promotional materials through the project.
Three percent communities reported they received 3 or 4 trainings on the use of promotional materials, 5% reported 1 or 2 trainings and 92% reported no trainings.
One percent (1%) communities reported use of 3 or 4 promotional materials, 2% reported use of 1 or 2 and 97% reported no use of promotional materials.
6. About half of the communities admitted increased use of latrines after the WatSan service provision through the project.
Twenty nine percent (29%) communities reported about 60% or more increase in the use of latrines after the WatSan service provision. Nine percent (9%) reported about 45% increase, while 7%, 6% and 48% respective communities reported about 30%, less than 15% and no increase in the use of latrines after the WatSan service provision.
7. Most communities reported about 75% or more of the targeted house holds benefited from the schemes.
Fifty three percent (53%) communities reported about 75% or more of the targeted house holds benefited from the schemes. Six percent (6%), 4%, and 10% communities reported about 60%, about 45% and about 30% of the targeted house holds benefited from the schemes respectively while 26% communities reported less than 20% of the targeted house holds benefited from the schemes.
8. Overwhelming majority of the communities reported they did not participate in the schemes. This again verifies that the CCBs do not actually represent the communities.
Five percent (5%) communities reported about 60% or more participation in the schemes. Similarly 2%, 10%, 15% and 68% of the communities reported about 40% or more, about 20% or more, less than 20% and no participation in the schemes respectively.
9. Almost no community reported any activity about identification and support of the poorest people by any government/non government groups.
One percent (1%) communities reported about 75% or more of the poorest people identified and supported by any government/non government groups. Similarly 2%, 3%, 2%, and 92% respectively reported about 50% identified and supported, about 25% identified and supported, identified but not supported and no concerned activity.
10. About half of the organizations reported that more than 50% of their respective villages benefited from the schemes.
Twenty eight percent (28%) communities reported 75% or more of the village benefited from the schemes. Similarly 20%, 6%, 11% and 34% communities reported about 60%, about 45%, about 30% and less than 15% of the village benefited from the schemes respectively.
Analysis of the Communities Organizations
Community Organization questionnaire was the lengthier part of the survey and it contained 32 close ended questions. Data analysis of the responses reflects following findings.
1. More than a quarter of the organizations reported they sustained more than 4 schemes. However, the survey team believes they might have implemented these schemes but their claim of sustaining is in conflict with the finding of serial number 58 which says only 15% of the organizations had any Operations and Maintenance Committees.
Twenty eight percent (28%) organizations reported they sustained more than 4 schemes. Similarly 11%, 21%, 28% and 2% organizations reported they sustained 3, 2, 1, and no schemes respectively.
2. Almost half of the organizations reported that their capacity deteriorated since launch of the project.
Eleven percent (11%) organizations reported about 75% or more improved capacity since launch of the project. Similarly 13%, 17%, and 11% organization reported 60% improvement, 30% improvement and no change in the capacity respectively while 49% organizations reported deteriorated capacity sine launch of the project.
3. About half of the organizations reported they had less than 25 members which is the minimum requirement to be registered as CCB. This vindicates the shallowness of the CBOs
Two percent (2%) organizations had more than 60 members. Similarly 4%, 51%, and 43% respectively had members from 41-50, 25-40, and less than 25.
4. About three quarters of the organizations visited reported they had contributed less than the minimum required 20% in cash in the project schemes. This was shown in documents but in practice this 20% was adjusted in the grant money.
Two percent (2%) organizations contributed about 45% in cash in the project scheme. Twenty three percent (23%) organizations contributed about 30% in cash while 74% contributed less than the minimum required 20% in cash in the project schemes.
5. About one third of the organizations reported their communities contributed in food for the labor but this contribution is largely a reflection of the cultural hospitality rather than the organizational norms or compulsions.
Thirty four percent (34%) organizations contributed about 75% or more in food in the project schemes. Similarly 15%, 11%, and 40% organizations contributed in food about 45%, about 30%, and less than 20%.
6. About one third of the organizations reported they contributed less than 20% in labor in the project schemes.
Every 9% organizations contributed about 75% or more, about 45%, and about 30% in labor in the project schemes while 74% organizations contributed less than 20% in labor in the project schemes.
7. Majority of the organizations did not properly supervise the project schemes’ implementation.
Every 15% organizations supervised about 75% or more, about 45%, and about 30% respectively of the total work done. Similarly 13% organizations supervised about 60% of total work done, and 43% organizations supervised less than 20% of the total work done.
8. Almost no organization contributed in transportation for the project schemes.
Four percent (4%) organizations contributed about 75% or more in transportation in the project schemes. Two percent (2%) organizations contributed about 30% and 94% contributed less than 20%.
9. Majority of the organizations reported poor health and hygiene practices in their respective communities.
Thirteen percent (13%) organizations reported 75% or more of the targeted communities practicing improved hygiene behavior since the provision of WatSan schemes. Similarly 19%, 11%, 15%, and 43% organizations reported about 60% improvement, about 45%, about 30%, and less than 20% improvement in the health and hygiene practices.
10. More than half schemes consisted on sanitation schemes.
Of the total visited schemes, 57% organizations implemented sanitation schemes, 34% organizations implemented Hand Pumps, 6% organizations implemented gravity schemes, and 2% organization implemented open well schemes.
11. About one third of the organizations reported decrease in their membership since their establishment.
Every 2% organizations reported about 75% or more, about 50% respective increases in their membership since their establishment. Similarly 17% witnessed about 30% increase whereas 43% organizations maintained their membership and 36% organizations witnessed decrease in the membership.
12. Reasonably high number of organizations is representative of a very small chunk of their respective communities.
Nineteen percent (19%) organizations reported they covered 75% or more of the concerned village. Similarly, 21%, 17%, 6%, and 36% organizations reported they covered about 60%, about 45%, about 30% and less than 15% of the concerned village respectively.
13. Majority of the organizations reported that their office bearers were appointed by a group of people.
Two percent (2%) organizations reported that their office bearers were elected by some people on a set criterion. Sixty eight percent (68%) organizations reported that their office bearers were appointed by a group of people on a set criterion. Six percent (6%) organization’s office bearers were appointed by a sole person on a set criterion while 23% organizations’ office bearers were appointed by a sole person without any set criterion.
14. About half of the organizations never held any meetings.
Four percent (4%) organizations reported regular fortnightly meetings. Twenty three percent (23%) organizations reported monthly meetings while 21% organizations held ‘need based’ meetings. Similarly 51% organizations never held any meetings.
15. Among those organizations which somehow held any meetings, majority reported reasonably acceptable attendance rate.
Thirty four percent (34%) organizations reported that their meetings were attended by about 60% or more members. Similarly 11%, 4%, 51% organizations reported that their meetings were attended by about 45%, about 30%, and less than 15% members.
16. About two third of the organizations had no available records.
Twenty one percent (21%) organizations maintained proper record of their respective organizations. Six percent (6%) organizations reflected that record of their respective organizations was available but not in order. Six percent (6%) organizations said they rarely recorded any thing while 66% organizations said they did not have any available record.
17. Similarly about two third of the organizations reported they did not record any decisions taken in the meetings and about 15% organizations reported proper recording and implementation of the decisions taken in the meetings.
Fifteen percent (15%) organizations reflected that the decisions taken in the meetings were recorded in detail and implemented as well. Thirteen percent (13%) organizations recorded decisions in details but did not implement them. Six percent (6%) organizations recorded the decisions but not in details while 66% organizations did not record any decisions.
18. About one third of the villages where the project schemes were implemented had active and functional Women Organizations while about two third of them did not have any Women Organizations.
Thirty two percent (32%) villages where the project schemes were implemented had active and functional Women Organizations. Nine percent (9%) villages had functional Women Organizations but were depended on Male Organizations while 60% villages did not have any Women Organizations.
19. Almost half of the organizations had converted to Citizens Community Boards.
Thirty eight percent (38%) Community Organizations had been converted into Citizens Community Boards. Fifteen percent (15%) COs had been converted but were not functional. Two percent (2%) COs were under process of conversion. Forty five percent (45%) COs did not convert.
20. Seventy percent (70%) organizations had implemented and completed any scheme within stipulated time while 30% organizations reported they had not implemented any schemes. This is again an eye brow raising response as schemes were only implemented through community organizations. Thus, the respondents introduced as representatives of the COs were either very ill informed or were not the true representatives. This again gives strength to the realization that majority of the organizations were just product of paper work.
21 & 22. Majority of the communities neither had any Operations and Maintenance Committees nor any developed mechanism for O&M Committees.
Fifteen percent (15%) organizations had functional and active Operations and Maintenance Committees. Two percent (2%) organizations had functional but not active O&M Committees while 17% organizations had O&M Committees but they were not active. Sixty six percent (66%) organizations had no O&M Committees.
Nine percent (9%) organizations had developed mechanism for O&M involving about 50% of the membership. Four percent (4%) organizations had developed mechanism for O&M Committees with about 10% of the membership while 87% organizations did not develop any such mechanism.
23. About two third of the organizations had no trained membership.
Six percent (6%) organizations had all its members trained. Another 6% organizations had more than 5 trained members. Similarly 9%, 17%, and 62% organizations had 3 to 5, 1 or 2, and no trained members respectively.
24. Similarly, about two third of the organizations had no linkages with other organizations at any level, i.e. village, UC, TMA, or District level.
Six percent (6%) organizations had developed linkages with other COs on district level. Similarly 2%, 11%, and 17% organizations had linkages with other COs on TMA level, UC level, and village level respectively. Whereas, 64% organizations had no linkages with other COs.
25. About four fifth of the organizations had not joined any network on any level.
Six percent (6%) organizations reported they were part of a district level network. Similarly 2%, 2%, and 9% organizations were part of a network on TMA, UC, and village level respectively while 81% organization did not join or form any network.
26. About one fifth of the visited areas where the project intervened had both Male and Women Organizations and they were cooperating with each other while another 6% areas had both type of organizations but were not cooperating with each other. Similarly about two third of the organizations either had only Women Organizations or only Male Organizations.
Nineteen percent (19%) areas where the project intervened had both Male and Women Organizations and were cooperating with each other while another 6% areas had both type of organizations but were not cooperating with each other. In 2% areas, Women Organizations were in the process of formation. Similarly in 9% and 64% areas only Women organizations and only Male Organizations existed respectively.
27. About two third of the organization did not organized any event on health and hygiene in their respective communities while others mostly reported one or two such events.
Eleven percent (11%) organizations had organized more than 7 events on Health and Hygiene in their respective areas. Similarly 4%, 2%, and 15% organizations had organized 5-7, 3-5, and 1 or 2 events on H&H respectively.
28. Very small number of organizations had conveyed Health and Hygiene messages to reasonable number of families in their respective communities.
Nineteen percent (19%) organizations had conveyed H&H messages to about 60% or more families of their respective boundaries. Similarly 6%, 13%, and 6% organizations had reached out to about 45%, 30%, and less than 15% families while 55% organizations did not convey any H&H messages to any families in their respective boundaries.
29. Majority of the organizations reported reduction in WatSan borne diseases as a result of H&H practices while about one fourth of the organizations reported ‘No Impact’ while about on-tenth organizations reported deteriorated impact as a result of the H&H practices or as impact of the project schemes.
Seventeen percent (17%) organizations reported 75% or more reduction in WatSan borne diseases as a result of H&H practices. Similarly 19% and 28% organizations reported about 50% and about 30% reduction respectively. Another 28% organizations reported ‘No Impact’ while 9% organizations reported deteriorated impact as a result of the H&H practices or as impact of the project schemes.
30.31. & 32. While two third of the organizations reported decrease in Morbidity Rate, Mortality Rate and diarrheal and other WatSan borne diseases especially in the poor communities as result of WatSan schemes, about one third of the organizations reported no decrease.
Thirteen percent (13%) organizations reported about 60% or more decrease in Morbidity Rate as result of WatSan services. Similarly 15%, 11%, and 26% organizations reported about 45%, about 30%, and less than 15% decrease respectively while 36% organizations reported no decrease.
Fifteen percent (15%) organizations reported about 60% or more decrease in Mortality Rate as result of WatSan services. Similarly 11%, 15%, and 21% organizations reported about 45%, about 30%, and less than 15% decrease respectively while 38% organizations reported no decrease.
Twenty three percent (23%) organizations reported about 60% or more decrease in diarrheal and other WatSan borne diseases especially in the poor communities as result of WatSan scheme. Every 15% organizations reported about 45% and 30% decrease while 9% organizations reported less than 15% decrease. Thirty eight percent (38%) organizations reported no decrease as result of the project schemes.
General Observations and Recommendations
The survey team also observed some aspects which were not included in the questionnaires but were obviously prevalent. The findings above explain the strengths and weaknesses of the project. Following are general observations along with relative recommendations.
1. Throughout the survey almost all TMAs acknowledged the positive contributions the project made in their stability and reputation. This acknowledgement was obviously heartfelt for the reason that the project brought huge funds to these TMAs which generally had financial constraints and the project funds allowed them to print their mark in the local communities. This contribution was also well acknowledged by the local representatives. Whatever awareness level about environmental issues and gender sensitivity these TMAs might have, the project definitely played a positive role in spreading awareness and improving capacity.
2. Communities throughout appreciated the interventions and had positive feelings about the developments. They were cognizant of the fact that these interventions brought improved and relatively healthy environment to them to live in and also contributed in increase in their direct or indirect income. The team had a fear before going to the field that it might not find a reasonable number of schemes on ground. However, this fear did not convert in reality as most of the schemes existed, only in TMA Banda Daud Shah the team could not see two schemes on ground and smelled something fishy. Furthermore, these schemes were granted to the project staff who was supposed to implement them through local organization.
However, the team also observed some grey areas which would need special attention in future endeavors if we want to materialize core and visionary concept of the development i.e. socially uplift the communities.
3. Planning is an important factor in any project and we should devote more time to optimize our planning. For instance, water quality testing equipment reached TMA Karak in last year of the project while all the hand pumps had been installed lot earlier. When tested almost all 64 hand pumps failed the test, implicating the project provided unhealthy and unhygienic water to the communities which goes against the objective of the project. Similar findings were observed in other TMAs as well so much so that some TMAs did not receive the facility at all hence the project cannot claim drinking water schemes safe for drinking.
4. Majority of the schemes did not have any sign board on them hence the survey team could not say for sure the visited schemes were really carried out under the concerned project. The same schemes may have been shown to other teams as theirs.
5. Theory and practice should go hand in hand and sequence of the activities should be followed in letter and spirit. Only then we can analyze pros and cons of the project. The project by design required to carry out social mobilization prior to launching any schemes whereas in most cases, schemes were given on political basis and social mobilization was started afterwards, resulting in emergence of bulk of paper COs which only existed during the schemes and vanished afterwards. Most of the schemes were found to be contract based rather then the community initiatives. No CO/CCB throughout the survey could provide the activity register except the last visited scheme in Karak. This was the reason that in most cases there were no O&M committees which could take care of the schemes.
6. Future endeavors would also require stringent and hyper-active monitoring mechanism. Although most of the schemes existed on ground but they miserably failed to benefit the target beneficiaries i.e. most sanitation schemes could only benefit less than 20 households whereas the project required about 250 households to benefit from the sanitation schemes. However, situation in case of Hand Pumps was relatively better although no way near the desired target. It was also observed that some schemes were personalized by some families and not all the intended households were benefiting from it. It was also observed that water schemes were carried out in personal properties and others were barred access. Furthermore, a few schemes were carried out in reasonably well off communities. Absence or at least lack of proper reporting formats and data collection tools etc draw attention towards the seriousness of all concerned stakeholders including the implementing and funding organizations.
7. An appropriate use of modern technologies i.e. IT can help hold together the hugely scattered data. It is observed that data consolidation was a constant problem throughout the project and data anomalies were in abundance, so was the case with data redundancies. This problem could have been easily sorted out with a simple web page backed up by a comprehensive data base and relative checks.
8. Scheme Selection Committee was literally hijacked by the Nazimeen and Senior TMA staff and the project role was minimal so was the case with the communities. Resultantly, a majority of the schemes were awarded to paper COs/CCBs established by the Nazimeen, etc for side business. In some cases even designs were changed and instead of the standard hand pump, very ordinary and cheap hand pumps were installed. Quality of the schemes would also need improvement.
9. Last but a very important point was that in almost every TMA corruption charges were levied against government officials which were normally not denied by the TMA staff and the same charges were further levied against other project staff involved in the project, from top to bottom. The team also felt that the Technical Assistance Office must maintain cordial relations with the government counterparts; however such relations should be for the benefit of the communities and should not seem to be silent partner in crime.
