Ministry of Water and Irrigation
The Pro-Poor Implementation Plan
for Water Supply and Sanitation
(PPIP - WSS)
2007
October 2007
1
Table of Content
Chapters
Page
Abbreviations and Acronyms
3
Executive Summary
4
1. Rational
6
2. Water Sector Reform – Paving the way for significant improvements
7
3. Situation on water supply in Kenya and key challenges
3.1. Progress on coverage
3.2. Information management
3.3. Poverty and water supply / sanitation in the urban and rural setting
3.4. Standards as minimum requirements to be enforced
3.5. Good Governance
3.6. Inequality in access due to under-performance of utilities
3.7. Investments
3.8. Urban and rural development planning
8
8
8
9
10
11
11
12
12
4. Benefit of a pro-poor approach fulfilling human rights criteria
13
5.
Objectives of the pro-poor approach
5.1 General objectives
5.2. Specific objectives
14
14
14
6.
Strategic areas of pro-poor approach
6.1. Access: Investment and long term financial and ecological
sustainability
6.2. Regulation and standards for services to the poor
6.3. Affordability, availability and non-discrimination
6.4. Governance: Participation, transparency and accountability
6.5. Alignment / Streamlining of donors, NGOs, etc.
15
15
7.
Actions to be undertaken for the implementation of the PPIP
7.1. MWI
7.2. WAB
7.3. WSTF
7.4. WASREB
7.5. WSBs
7.6. WSPs
7.7. Development partners (donors, NGOs, etc.)
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
22
8.
Implementation of the PPIP
22
9.
Monitoring and Evaluation of the PPIP
23
16
17
17
17
2
Abbreviations and Acronyms
ASALs
CPC
ERSWEC
GoK
HR
JMP
M+E
MDGs
MoLG
MWI
NGOs
NWSS
PPIP
PROMIS
SIP
SIS
SPAs
SWAp
WAB
WARIS
WASREB
WSBs
WSPs
WSTF
Arid and Semi-Arid Lands
Community Project Cycle
Economic Recovery Strategy for Wealth and Employment Creation
Government of Kenya
Human Rights
Joint Monitoring Program
Monitoring and Evaluation
Millennium Development Goals
Ministry of Local Government
Ministry of Water and Irrigation
Non-Governmental Organisations
National Water Services Strategy
Pro-Poor oriented Implementation Plan
Information System for Project Implementation
Sector Investment Planning
Sector Information System
Service Provision Agreements
Sector Wide Approach to planning
Water Appeals Board
Water Regulation Information System
Water Services Regulatory Board
Water Services Boards
Water Service Providers
Water Services Trust Fund
3
Executive Summary
Progress to reach the MDGs in Kenya is too slow. Huge investments, private sector
participation and commercialisation alone do not automatically lead to a significant
increase in water and sanitation coverage. A national pro-poor oriented systemic
approach fulfilling human rights based criteria to which all sector institutions and
development partners (donors, NGOs, etc.) are aligned is needed.
After the reform process has secured a new legal framework and established new and
more professionally working sector institutions national pro-poor sector policies and
strategies have been elaborated and adopted. The next step was to operationalize the
strategies by putting in place a pro-poor oriented implementation plan (PPIP) which is
derived from key sector documents and GoK general papers. Such an undertaking was
commissioned in 2006 by the first sector conference with the objective to submit it to the
sector conference in 2007.
The analysis of the situation and challenges faced geared towards the objectives produced
strategic areas for the pro-poor approach and key activities to be carried out in order to
reach rapidly the largest possible number of underserved with given funds.
The general and specific objectives are given by the key sector documents especially by
the NWSS from 2007.
General objective:
 Significantly contribute to the MDG (half by 2015 the proportion of people without
sustainable access to safe drinking water); and thereafter
 Move to universal coverage responding to minimum standards by 2030
by giving access to the poor the highest priority on all levels.
Specific objectives: To increase coverage to sustainable access to safe water and basic
sanitation (MDGs) according to human rights criteria annually by the following number
of additional people:
Year
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Total
water
rural
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
8 Mio
urban
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
8 Mio
sanitation
rural
0.8 Mio
0.8 Mio
0.8 Mio
0.8 Mio
0.8 Mio
0.8 Mio
0.8 Mio
0.8 Mio
6,4 Mio
urban
0.9 Mio
0.9 Mio
0.9 Mio
0.9 Mio
0.9 Mio
0.9 Mio
0.9 Mio
0.9 Mio
7.2 Mio
4
In order to achieve these ambitious objectives the PPIP need to focus on the following
areas of actions:
“Strategic directions for the pro-poor approach”
1. Pro-poor orientation of all sector institutions and service providers.
2. Up-scaling and fast-tracking actions for WSS coverage by concentrating on low
cost technology and settlements of the urban poor.
3. Implementation of a national concept for low cost technology embracing not only
adequate technology but also a management system ensuring sustainability and
compliance to minimum requirements.
4. Alignment of development partners to national policies, strategies and national
concepts of implementation.
5. Regulation of all providers for accountability which means that service provision
is formalized and complies with human rights standards.
6. Comprehensive baseline data factoring into information systems under
implementation.
7. Differentiation of urban and rural settings in information systems, definitions,
investment, management concepts, reporting, etc.
8. Sanitation receives higher priority on all level and sector institutions are involved
in accelerating coverage to sustainable basic sanitation.
9. Improvement of good governance, especially corporate governance.
10. Using comparative competition (publicizing widely performance improvements/
weaknesses) and tariff adjustment negotiation to the benefit of the poor
(sustainability of systems, cross-subsidization, extension of WSS systems to
underserved areas).
11. Mobilizing of more funds and use of the WSTF for improved aid efficiency.
From these strategic directions key activities are derived for the sector institutions such as
MWI, WAB, WSTF, WASREB, WSBs, WSPs and the development partners.
The implementation of the PPIP shall be ensured by factoring the proposed actions into
the working plan and appropriate indicators into the performance contracts of each sector
institution. These key actions shall also be factored into the business and investment
plans and be reflected in the budgets of the institutions.
Not only the sector institutions but also the development partners including the NGOs
shall be accountable for their contributions to the national pro-poor concept and PPIP.
Through the sector information systems and the annual sector review progress of
implementation and alignment to the PPIP shall be assessed and results reported during
the annual sector conference.
5
1.
Rationale
Coverage for water and especially for sanitation in Kenya is not progressing fast enough
and according to a desired standard in order to be certain that the MDGs for water and
sanitation (Target 7)1 will be reached in 2015. One of the lessons learned from the water
decade of the 80th was that important amounts of investments alone do not do the job:
Reducing the number of the non-served especially the poor on a large scale. Another
lesson learned in the water sector is that private sector involvement in WSS on
international and national scale (privatization) on one hand as well as commercialization
of service provision on the other hand does also not automatically reduce the number of
non- or under-served significantly. Both efforts do either not reach the poor with its
infrastructure or do not secure that the provided infrastructure for the poor is sustainable
and fulfils minimum criteria. The reason for insufficient sustainability or poor quality is
generally and among others that the design of the infrastructure and the management
approach does not respond to the set-up in the sector and the needs of the poor.
There are several challenges which need to be tackled in order to up-scale present efforts.
One of these is the concentration on the service provision to the poor, especially in the
settlements of the urban setting. Another challenge is to offer appropriate technology and
management concepts fulfilling human rights criteria2 on a long term (sustainability).
Many projects carried out by an important number of actors (donors, NGOs, etc. through
individual projects) use different approaches and follow different standards thereby still
ignoring recommendations from the Paris Declaration (March 2005) such as alignment to
national policies, ownership of government, etc. Over and over again non aligned
contributions try to reinvent the wheel ignoring lessons learned in the past, do not take
into consideration the changes the water sector reform have brought about and lack
comprehensiveness not responding adequately to the complexity of the situation and the
aims. NGO and donor contribution through projects might help to channel funds directly
to the underserved but as long as the sustainability of the investment and criteria of
human rights and water like water quality and affordability is not ensured on long term
the contribution cannot be regarded as efficient in the sense of the Paris Declaration. As
long as such contributions with poor quality in their approach do not follow national
policies and concepts based on pro-poor and human rights to water and sanitation criteria
the proportion of the non-served will not substantially decrease in a sustainable way over
time.
A pro-poor approach on all levels in a systemic context is needed. It will not only
improve access on a large scale but will be particularly beneficial to women and children
living in poverty and to many other vulnerable groups such as HIV/AIDS concerned.
1
Adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in its resolution 55/2 of 8 September 2000, refer to
http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration/
2 The most significant treaty is the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), which
has been ratified by 156 countries including Kenya. In 2002, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights adopted General Comment No. 15: The Right to Water (Twenty-ninth session, 2002), U.N. Doc.
E/C.12/2002/11 (2003), available at:
http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/a5458d1d1bbd713fc1256cc400389e94?Opendocument.
6
In order to overcome these challenges regarding insufficient access to WSS services and
infrastructure the MWI has adopted the NWSS in 2007 with a particular pro-poor
orientation. The sector policy and the NWSS give the direction and traces the way to the
sector goals. This is very helpful for the sector but need to be completed with an
implementation plan to change the situation on the ground with concrete actions.
This is the reason the Water Sector Conference in 2006 decided to proceed with a
specific pro-poor oriented undertaking: The elaboration of a PPIP for WSS as one of the
important steps to implement sector policies in the framework of the sector reform.
The PPIP is a crucial move to operationalize the pro-poor orientation of the water sector
policy and the relevant national strategy by translating strategic directions into concrete
actions which need to be undertaken by the new sector institutions, the providers of
service provision and the other players such as development partners, civil society, etc.
Thus, the PPIP for water and sanitation is focusing on servicing the poor according to
Human Rights (HR) to water and sanitation criteria. It should help the sector institutions
and all other actors to streamline their actions towards a national approach aiming to
achieve the MDGs for water and sanitation: “to half by 2015 the proportion of people
without sustainable access to safe drinking water and sanitation”.
2.
Water Sector Reform – Paving the way for significant
improvements
The Kenyan Government commenced a comprehensive and deep rooted reform in the
water sector with the introduction of a new legal and institutional framework. Among the
key principles of the reform is poverty orientation and human right to water and
sanitation. Guidance to the concept and implementation of the reform was and is given by
several initiatives and papers such as the MDG declaration, the Poverty Reductions
Strategy, the Economic Recovery Strategy for Wealth and Employment Creation (ERSWEC), the National Water Services Strategy (NWSS), lately the Vision 2030 of the GoK,
the Paris Declaration (March 2005) on aid effectiveness, etc.
Key mile stones of the reform are the Water Act 2002 and the establishment of the new
institutional framework in the sub-sector of water and sanitation service provision with
the establishment of the regulator (WASREB), the asset holders (WSBs) and the
commercialized water service providers (WSP), all in the sub-sector of WSS. In addition,
the Water Appeals Board (WAB) and the Water Services Trust Fund (WSTF) as “poverty
fund” was created. All these institutions are operational since 2004 whereby additional
WSP are being established over the years and operators of water and sanitation schemes
are joining together to obtain economies of scale to the benefit of the consumers.
Other milestones are the adoptions of National Strategies for the implementation of the
sector policy such as the NWSS and the National Water Resource Management Strategy
(NWRMS) and the implementation of a Sector Wide Approach to planning (SWAp)
7
which includes the development of a Sector Investment Planning (SIP) and Sector
Information System (SIS) as well as an improvement of coordination, harmonization and
alignment in the sector facilitated by an annual sector conference.
3.
Situation on water supply in Kenya and key challenges
3.1. Progress on coverage
Situation: Without doubt, the sector reform has created huge potentials and helped to
unleash forces contributing to an increased dynamic in the sector. The first results of
significant improvements are visible. The negative trend of degrading service provision
felt all over Kenya has been reversed or at least came to a hold. The reform efforts have
helped to improve service provision for the already served consumers and attracted
increasing investments by government and the development partners.
Challenges: Despite the progress due to the reforms, the proportion of non-served people
remains more or less stagnant. This is due to the rapid population growth especially in the
settlements of the urban poor and insufficient focus of service provision to the poor to be
provided according to rules and minimum standards (regulated framework). Half way
down the timeline set by the MDG (declaration in 2000 and deadline 2015) there is the
urgent need to fast track coverage to water and basic sanitation wherever possible by
prioritizing investments and actions not only to geographical aims but also according to
value for money and leverage.
This means to select areas / options where each additional Kenyan shilling yields the
biggest benefit in terms of number of additional persons covered. In reality political and
other national constrains, development partner priorities to make fund available, etc. will
not allow following solely such a rational / economical pro-poor approach. Nevertheless,
an approach with a balanced mixture of such criteria will be acceptable to decision
makers in Kenya and to the development agencies and at the same time allow for fasttracking the relevant MDGs. Coverage for water in Kenya, presently estimated by the
MWI at 47% (overall) - in the urban setting at 60% and the rural 40% - and for sanitation
estimated at around 50% (overall) need to be significantly increased within a short time.
3.2. Information management
Situation: Data, data collection and information systems in the water sector still do not
permit to publish figures on coverage with a satisfying precision. Substantial information
insufficiencies exist particularly for the settlements of the urban poor and for the rural
areas. This is due to the fact that baseline data are missing or if existing in some pilot
areas, are outdated. Reporting based on such data can be easily challenged.
Comparison of data from the different information systems on the urban coverage for
instance demonstrates the existing information gap.
8
Coverage for water according to:
• MDG by JMP is 83% with 2.2 Mio underserved
• UN Habitat State of the World Cities Report combined with the WB Study on slums
in Nairobi (Nr. 36347-KE) 40% with 7.8 Mio underserved
• MWI (different estimations) 50-60% with 5.2 to 6.4 Mio underserved.
Such differences are due to multiple factors such as insufficient definition of criteria and
indicators, missing standards on data collection, data availability (absence of country
wide data for the settlements of the poor), origin of data, delimitation between rural and
urban areas etc.
It is also observed that WSPs report very high coverage figures due to the fact that
underserved areas within the towns are not included in the reporting. In such cases the
WSP feels free to determine their service area according to the existing network and not
according to the demand which includes the underserved poor. Leaving such decisions to
the discretion of commercialized or privatized service providers results into presenting
misleading pictures which are far from reality and consequently leads to little or no
progress in coverage.
Challenges: Efforts in the water sector reform aim at overcoming such challenges. The
introduction of WARIS by WASREB (information system for WSS by formal WSPs and
WSBs), PROMIS by the WSTF (information system for project implementation) and the
first step of defining golden indicators for the water sector to be gradually
improved/geared towards the criteria of the MDG declaration and human rights based
approach are positive steps which need to be gradually improved. The introduction of the
Waris – information system with data obtained from the WSP and the WSBs will
improve the situation on information but will not close the baseline gap for the
settlements of the urban poor and the rural areas.
3.3. Poverty and water supply / sanitation in the urban and rural setting
Situation: More than halve of the population in Kenya lives under or near the poverty
line. The proportion of the underserved population increases substantially with falling
household income / increasing poverty level. Thus, a specific focus on the poor is
imperative in order to increase water and basic sanitation coverage in Kenya on a
significant scale.
The rapid urbanization3 with its densification of population in the settlements has a
particular huge and negative impact on the living conditions of the population. Therefore,
although access in rural areas is lower and the proportion of the poor is higher than in the
urban areas, a particular focus on the settlements of the urban poor is important and
justified particularly for sanitation. In the settlement of the urban poor, investments have
a very big leverage.
3
The UN Habitat State of the World Cities Report 2006 indicates that urbanization in Kenya has reached 40% of the
population. The rapidly developing challenges in the urban setting is clearly lined out in the Vision 2030 of the GoK
indicating that in due time the proportion of urban dwellers will reach the threshold of 50% of the population.
9
Sustainability concerns are also more prominent and difficult to achieve in rural water
supply with its water points (e.g. hand pumps) and small scale systems than in urban
areas where water supply is now increasingly organized on larger scale with bigger
systems operated by commercially oriented WSPs and well trained professionals. Small
scale systems have difficulties to ensure standards such as sustainability, availability and
water quality because self-financing, cross-subsidization from big consumers to the poor
and long term engagement of highly trained professionals is almost impossible to secure.
Challenges: Because the situation in the rural and urban settings are different water
infrastructure and service delivery differ significantly too. Thus the definitions and data
to be collected regarding coverage (water sources) and the required investments and
management systems all have to take into account such differences. Distances to access
water also seems to be bigger challenges in the rural setting while raw water quality due
to environmental pollution, sewer flooding and water prices are more of concerns in the
urban setting. Missing sanitary installations and uncontrolled disposal of excreta in these
areas pollutes the water sources from which most of the informal providers draw water.
Thus, investments in sanitation need to be particularly focused on the settlements of the
urban poor in order to improve nation wide indicators not only on sanitation but also on
health, environment, etc. and technology must help to protect the environment.
In addition, support to establish acceptable sanitation facilities must not only focus on
households but also on all public places such as markets, bus terminals, schools, prisons,
etc.
3.4. Standards as minimum requirements to be enforced
Situation: In general, the poor representing 50% and more of the urban population pay for
water which quality is not regularly or not at all verified up to 100% (and more) than the
consumers with a household connection served by water utilities (providers operating
under regulation). Not only that socially unjustified tariffs for the poor cements poverty
in its present form and size the consequence is a very high incident of water borne
diseases weighing heavily on the economy and development of the country.
While formal service provision under regulation is obliged to follow specific rules and
standards informal service provision can hardly be controlled. In addition, informal
service provision is often not reliable in terms of availability and physical accessibility. It
is discriminatory to the poor when services in kind are demanded, artificial shortages are
created, etc. meaning that services and access to vital and basic goods are at the
discretion of the vendors or left at “market forces”. Sustainable access to safe water and
basic sanitation as human right, holding such an importance for the development of the
country, cannot be left to such discretion and arbitrary setting of standards. Furthermore,
informal service provision in the urban setting is generally not sustainable when
compelled to operate according to standards set by regulation. But shall the poor be
forced to accept a lower water quality than the connected consumers served by a utility
just because the informal providers do not have the capacity to test regularly the water
10
distributed and ensure proper treatment if the raw water used is impure? Accepting
service standards for certain provider categories breaching minimum standards is
accepting discrimination of the concerned consumer groups.
Challenges: To make operators of water and sanitation facilities (bore holes, networks,
outlets) comply with minimum standards (be formalized) and to ensure that underserved
areas are covered gradually by formal service provision. WASREB and the WSBs need
to enforce minimum standards fulfilling human rights by making operators to register
(signing of SPAs according to the legislation) and bring them into the sector M+E
system.
3.5. Good Governance
Situation: Participation / empowerment as well as transparency / accountability have
greatly improved during the water sector reform with the:
 creation of Boards (supervising management of sector institutions) with members
being chosen from government institutions, private sector and civil society
 obligations of such institutions to carry out annual independent audits and report in
fixed sequences to the MWI and the public
 introduction of sector information systems
 improvement of customer orientation by the utilities in the urban setting
 introduction of performance contracts at all sector institutions
Good examples in the water sector are surveys on corruption commissioned by service
providers, introduction of the WARIS information system, citizen reports cards,
introduction of service charters and codes of conduct, etc.
Nevertheless, spending for the Boards in the different institutions is very high compared
to other sectors and countries, Board members often overstep the line in decision making
thereby interfering unduly with management functions and compromising transparency,
Boards and management making decisions which are not in the interests and therefore to
the benefit of the institutions, etc.
Challenges: Further improvements particularly in corporate governance are still needed.
This could be reached by a representation of the poor in the different control and decision
making bodies, closer monitoring of the conduct of the Boards and management of the
sector institutions and providers, enhanced information dissemination and sensitization
by sector institutions to the MWI and public and better access of consumers to complaint
mechanism.
3.6.
Inequality in access due to under-performance of utilities
Situation: Performance of many water utilities is still insufficient and management of
WSPs does often not follow approaches which lead to substantial increased coverage of
the poor and at the same time to cost recovery. Management insufficiencies of WSP lead
to unacceptable inequalities in access and make the average consumer and the poor
11
subsidize the consumption of the big consumers (private and public not paying their bills
or not paying according to consumption). In addition, insufficient management of utilities
enabling informal service providers to access water from their system without paying at
all or paying a justified price (e.g. water tankers being provided by water kiosks at
subsidized/social water prices). Thus such informal providers generate substantial profit
from social tariffs to the detriment of the poor. But this also undermines the financial
base of the WSPs and hampers extension of services to the settlements of the urban poor.
Challenges: Insufficient water metering is an obstacle to make big consumers pay
according to consumption and inadequate billing, collection and disconnection of service
delivery leads to huge amounts of outstanding payments for water bills particularly by
government institutions. This penalizes the average consumer and particularly the poor.
Improved metering reduces water losses and wastage by the well off consumers which in
return creates the potential to improve service provision to the poor and reduces costs of
production. In addition to such challenges of management insuficiencies, the WSP need
to accept that performance is also measured by the extent to which coverage is increased.
Therefore, the systematic identification and the following integration of underserved
areas into the providers’ service area are needed as well as the adoption of the pro-poor
approach through the implementation of the national concept for low-cost technology and
its management.
3.7. Investments
Situation: Although the water sector reform has helped to gain back the confidence of
many development partners demonstrated in the spectacular increase of contribution to
the sector (the donor budget allocation to the MWI doubled with in one year from Kshs
3.4 Billion in 2006/2007 to Kshs 6.8 Billion in 2007/2008) the level of investment is still
insufficient to increase coverage significantly within an acceptable time.
Challenges: There is a need to target the poor with investment more than in the past by
following the strategic approach of the GoK concerning technology, management
approach etc. which will help to increase the speed of reaching the population and to raise
the numbers of people covered by sustainable supply of safe water and basic sanitation.
Such investment should be channeled trough the WSTF (poverty fund) in order to ensure
higher aid efficiency. In addition, more important amounts of investments should be
mobilized and channeled trough the WSBs for new water and sewerage systems as well
as for their rehabilitation and upgrading.
3.8.
Urban and rural development planning
Urban and rural development planning is insufficient. Where it exists, the link of WSBs
and WSP to the department of physical planning (MoL) and municipalities is not
sufficiently established. This makes provision of water and sanitation services expensive
and often ineffective. Therefore, linking-up with MoL and its substructure is for the
sector institutions very important.
12
4.
Benefit of a pro-poor approach fulfilling human rights criteria
The MDs declaration gives a clear indication that sustainability, access and safe water
(water quality) and basic sanitation are part of basic criteria to be fulfilled in order to
acknowledge people to be covered. The human rights based approach add to these criteria
availability, affordability, non-discrimination, participation / empowerment and
transparency / accountability.
Availability is very much linked to access, long term financial sustainability and
continuity of services. Good governance embraces participation, empowerment,
transparency and accountability. Non discrimination includes issues such as offering
minimum standards to all consumer groups, being binding for all service providers
regardless of their status, a pro-poor focus on rationing supply taking for instance the
limit capacity for storage of water among the poor in consideration, etc.
The Water Act 2002 and the NWSS are legal and guiding frameworks which provide a
solid base for fulfilling all of these criteria. It allows for a comprehensive / holistic
approach such as recognizing that sustainability of systems with cost recovery is an
integral part or a prerequisite of a pro-poor approach. Nevertheless, implementation
following these criteria is more difficult to achieve as the number of players in the sector
are important and many of them are still not aligned to a national implementation
framework. The PPIP for water supply shall help to guide all stakeholders in the sector to
align to sector policies and strategies and integrate their multiple supports in a combined
effort for reaching the Kenyan goals.
Other important criteria are time and scale expressed by the MDGs (half the proportion
by 2015). Recognizing this and the facts that financial funds and implementation capacity
has its limits, it is obvious that the sector cannot wait until existing systems are upgraded
or new systems are built before the poor can be served. Fast tracking of MDGs with low
cost technologies is needed to increase the number of beneficiaries of given funds and
shorten the time of implementation. It also optimizes the use of existing infrastructure to
the benefit of the poor. Such a concept should be followed wherever possible and without
compromising the criteria lined out by the MDG declaration and human rights based
approach.
Increased water and sanitation coverage has a very high impact on the economic growth
of a country. According to estimations by the United Nations (UN) countries in SubSaharan Africa loose 5% of their national product annually due to insufficient sustainable
access to safe water and basic sanitation. This means that Kenya could save up to Kshs
145 Billion annually (GDP 41.36 Billion USD for 2006, World Fact Book) if coverage of
the population with WSS is ensured. According to estimates by the UN every Kenya
Shilling invested in water supply and sanitation will yield benefits of 3 - 34 Kenya
Shillings depending on the technology and specific conditions on the ground.
Improving water supply and basic sanitation to the poor generates huge benefits for the
individuals. Spending for medical care could be reduced drastically as it is estimated that
13
around 60% of deceases are waterborne. Children especially girls will be freed from
laborious and time consuming search of water and able to attend school. This will
increase productivity of present and future generations.
With the water sector reform the GoK through its MWI is committed to move as
expeditiously and effectively as possible towards the MDGs and the fulfillment of the
human rights to water and sanitation. Therefore, all the above mentioned key principles
stemming from a pro-poor and human right based approach were integrated in the various
targets and topics of the NWSS and the PPIP.
A pro-poor approach in the sector will also help to direct investments where the benefits
are the highest. This will increase aid effectiveness aimed at with the Paris Declaration
from March 2005.
5.
Objectives of the pro-poor approach
5.1. General objectives
The medium and long term objectives of the pro-poor approach are:
 significantly contribute to the MDG (half by 2015 the proportion of people without
sustainable access to safe drinking water); and thereafter
 move to universal coverage responding to minimum standards by 2030
by giving access to the poor the highest priority on all levels.
This includes the objective for the urban and rural setting with network bound supply
systems to gradually organize service provision in such a way that all water service
providers can be held accountable to the sector institutions and the public in complying
with minimum standards (formalized service provision) offering access to water for any
consumers within a reach of 30 minutes in urban and within a range of 2,000 m in rural
areas (NWSS).
The medium and long term goals also include the objective that the water quality at all
single water sources / points in rural areas (e.g. hand pumps and protected wells) are
controlled regularly.
It also includes that all development agencies/partners (donors, NGOs, etc.) align their
support to these objectives and abstain from counterproductive and non-harmonized
activities.
5.2. Specific objectives
The additional numbers of poor having sustainable access to safe water and basic
sanitation according to human rights criteria increases annually by:
Year
2008
water
rural
1 Mio
urban
1 Mio
sanitation
rural
0.8 Mio
urban
0.9 Mio
14
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Total
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
8 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
1 Mio
8 Mio
0.8 Mio
0.8 Mio
0.8 Mio
0.8 Mio
0.8 Mio
0.8 Mio
0.8 Mio
6,4 Mio
0.9 Mio
0.9 Mio
0.9 Mio
0.9 Mio
0.9 Mio
0.9 Mio
0.9 Mio
7.2 Mio
5.3. National Implementation Concepts
In order to reach these very ambitious objectives through large scale actions the sector
institutions and the development partners need to follow pro-poor national concepts. The
national concepts take care of the existing legal and institutional framework and the
criteria to be fulfilled (MDG and Human Rights and water) with service provision and
infrastructure. The MWI with the help of the development partners has elaborated such
national concepts for water and is presently preparing to make them available through
publications in an easy to read form.
These concepts are:
CPC – Community Project Cycle for rural water supply
UPC – Urban Poor Concept for urban water supply
In addition to these pro-poor national concepts for water the MWI will start to draft a propoor concept for sanitation for the water sector which integrates the standards set by the
MoH and which is aligned to the NWSS and sanitation position paper of the MWI.
6.
Strategic areas of pro-poor approach
The Kenyan pro-poor concept for WSS is oriented towards the achievement of the MDG
and the fulfillment of the criteria outlined by the human rights to water approach. It
focuses not only on the establishment of infrastructure (e.g. networks, onsite sanitation),
etc.) but also on the concepts of managing such infrastructure (e.g. public outlets such as
water kiosk and public sanitation facilities) and on its anchorage into the sector institution
framework (e.g. formal service providers, WSBs) in order to ensure that all Kenyans have
access to services fulfilling minimum standards and in a sustainable way.
The Kenyan pro-poor approach for WSS shall be implemented by streamlining all sector
institutions and development partners to a basic systemic concept of water supply and
sanitation of the MWI. This concept shall include in the following fields:
6.1. Access: Investment and long term financial and ecological sustainability
 Aiming to proceed simultaneously towards the goals of sustainability of the systems
(cost recovery, efficiency of service provision) and increased access of the poor
(extension of systems, cross-subsidization). The poor shall benefit from economies of
scale.
15









Greater emphasis in investments towards the settlements of the urban poor and the
rural poor in the arid and semi-arid areas (ASALs).
Concentrating on promoting low cost installation such as water kiosks and basic
onsite sanitation.
Moving to large scale impact, reaching millions in medium terms - fast-tracking
access.
Concentrating (prioritizing investments) on the underserved urban and rural areas
wherever networks of utilities and other formal providers are available in close range
(improving value for money - investment needs are lowest for each additional person
to be covered and where the biggest impact on poverty reduction as well as on public
health is expected).
Service provision to the poor shall no longer be considered as by-product of large
rehabilitation and extension investments.
Specific pro-poor investment plans as part of the SIP.
Sustainability concerns in rural water supply through single water points shall receive
a higher priority than in the past.
Basic sanitation shall be environmental compatible.
Special programs for enhancing basic sanitation at public places / installations.
6.2. Regulation and standards for services to the poor
 Formal service provision to replace gradually informal
 Concentration on expanding services of utilities / formal service providers to the
underserved areas.
 Enforcement of minimum standards (technical and managerial) for service provision
with low cost technologies (WASREB, WSTF and WSBs) and enforcement of
minimum standards (monitoring such as water quality, compulsory reporting, etc.).
 Use of regulatory instruments such as tariff negotiations, reporting, guidelines, etc. to
enforce (incentives to the WSP) improved service provision to the poor.
 Use of comparative competition to increase performance of service providers.
 Guidelines on service provision to the poor for WSPs, WSBs, NGOs and other
development agencies.
 Service provision to the poor shall be one of the key performance indicators for all
sector institutions.
 All WSP shall nominate focal senior staff or establish separate structure (bigger
utilities) responsible to for the extension and monitoring of coverage to the urban
poor.
 Underserved areas become gradually part of the agreed service areas of formal WSPs.
 WSP to move to 100% metering, billing according to consumption and rising block
tariffs for increased cross-subsidization from bigger consumers to the poor and for
reducing UFW. The water resources made available trough reducing UFW and
wastage shall be with preference channeled to the settlement of the poor.
 Linking sector investments to performance of the WSBs and the WSPs regarding
service provision to the poor.
16
6.3. Affordability, availability and non-discrimination
 Tariffs for basic (lifeline) consumption shall be affordable not only at household
connections but also at public outlets (shall be comparable at different supply points
and nation wide – national trash hold for minimum consumption and tariffs for the
poor).
 Cross-sector cooperation in order to find solutions to serve the poorest of the poor
(e.g. subsidies through local authority systems).
 Rationing program and disaster management (emergency situation) designed and
carried out to pro-poor requirements.
6.4. Governance: Participation, transparency and accountability
 Representation of the underserved at the Boards of sector institutions / WSP and
ensure gender balance.
 Specific customer strategies for the poor on operational level.
 Management of operation of public water points by the poor and women.
 Enhanced participatory processes and good governance in the rural areas.
 Regular publication of performance of service provision (WSPs and WSBs) for
serving the poor.
 Gearing sector indicators gradually to the criteria given by the MDGs and the human
rights approach.
 Establishment of baselines for the settlements of the urban poor.
 Use WARIS information system to monitor progress in settlements of the urban poor
and ASALs.
 Reporting of WSBs and WSPs focusing especially on progress in coverage for the
poor.
 WSP to integrate the underserved poor into their information, communication and
complaint system.
 Design and use public water points for information dissemination including
HIV/AIDS sensitization and prevention.
 Use best practices in serving the poor for sensitization.
 SIS geared towards monitoring development in regards to the pro-poor and human
rights to water and sanitation.
6.5. Alignment / Streamlining of donors, NGOs, etc.
 Integration of all development partners such as donor agencies and NGOs into a
comprehensive national concept to streamline pro-poor approaches and make their
contribution align to national standards (accountability of external and local agency to
the sector institutions and the public).
 Maximizing use of the WSTF as financing mechanism for reaching the poor.
 Harmonize sector data about service provision to the poor with national surveys
carried out by the Central Bureau of Statistics.
In order to implement this pro-poor concept of the MWI all water sector institutions will
undertake streamlined activities embedded in annual activity plans to reach the pro-poor
objectives.
17
7.
Actions to be undertaken for the implementation of the PPIP
The following actions shall become part of the long, medium and annual actions
programs and translated into indicators for the performance contracts of the sector
institutions.
7.1.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
MWI
Action
Ensure that all institutions integrate the pro-poor actions of the
PPIP into their strategic plan, performance contracts and annual
activity plan.
Ensure that the institutions have adequate resources for the pro-poor
actions through self-financing or allocations by the MWI or donors.
Establish and monitor achievements of pro-poor indicators derived
from the PPIP and factored into the performance contracts of all
sector institutions.
Ensure that sanitation is given a higher priority on all levels in the
water sector and that a sector concept on sanitation is available.
Ensure that increasingly representatives of the underserved poor are
integrated (nominated) on the Boards of the sector institutions.
Verify annually and improve the definition of the sector indicators
as information improves.
Issue minimum requirement for the data collection by any
stakeholder in the sector and ensure compliance. Harmonize these
requirements with the Bureau of Statistics.
Promote the large scale implementation of low-cost technologies in
the framework of formal service provision and according to given
standards (water kiosks, onsite basic sanitation) as a first step of
service level for the poor (fast tracking MDGs).
Have the areas with the most pressing needs identified and give
these areas priority for low-cost investments in the SIP.
Ensure that the WASREB and WSTF integrate progress on propoor in their annual reports.
Report at the annual water sector conference progress on coverage
for poor and the alignment of stakeholders to the pro-poor strategy /
approach.
Ensure that all water and sanitation projects funded internally and
by donors, NGOs etc. include a strong pro-poor component (e.g.
pro-poor technology such as water kiosks and onsite sanitation,
priority areas) and that these components comply with standards /
criteria and regulation set by WSTF and WASREB (alignment to
pro-poor strategy).
Complement the SIP with investment programming for low-cost
technology.
Promote the publication and presentation of best pro-poor practices
Timeframe
2008/2009
2008/2009
2008/2009
2008
2009/2010
Annually
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2009
2008
18
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
at occasions such as annual sector conferences, regional and
international conferences, workshops, etc.
Ensure in the framework of inter-sector coordination that cartels for
water and sanitation are brought under regulation or are replaced by
formal service provision.
Establish emergency planning to respond to epidemics (cholera)
outbreak linked to water and sanitation and instruct the relevant
institutions for action.
Have regularly sensitization campaigns for NGOs carried out to
adopt national standards (WSTF and WASREB) on low-cost
technology for the poor.
Ensure sustainability of the WSS systems by monitoring the
activities of WASREB concerning regular tariff negotiations.
Have areas with substantial ground and surface water pollution
identified and impose environmental friendly sanitation for such
areas.
Ensure that training for the implementation of the PPIP is carried
out and includes all sector institutions and development partners
(NGOs, donors, etc.).
Enforce national standards for project implementation and service
provision in the rural (CPC) and urban setting (UPC).
7.2.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
2008
2008
2008
2009
2008
2008
WAB
Action
Timeframe
Consider in judgments standards and criteria of human rights to Continuously
water derived from the different conventions signed by Kenya.
Consider in judgments the pro-poor approach of the GoK in the Continuously
water sector proposed in the sector policy and strategies.
7.3.
•
permanently
WSTF
Action
Carry out a baseline study for the settlements of the urban poor and
rural areas.
Design and implement a projects (UPC) for the urban poor for
disbursement of Kshs 320 Mio annually.
Ensure project realization for the rural poor (CPC) of a value of
Ksh 320 Mio annually.
Ensure that project yielding the highest benefits for the poor are
given priority (efficiency and effectiveness of investments).
Establish and publish an annual report with results on pro-poor
indicators and progress in the sub-sector relevant to the poor.
Elaborate a specific program on the development of basic sanitation
(improving coverage).
Timeframe
2008/2009
2008
2008
Annually
2008
2008
19
7.4.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Action
Ensure identification (list) and updating of underserved areas nation
wide and make sure that these areas are integrated wherever
possible into the targets of SPAs during tariff adjustment
negotiations.
Issue and enforce guidelines on water quality control.
Monitor how the WSB and the WSP improve coverage for the poor
(improved services, increasing number and settlements of poor,
access, affordability, etc.).
Increase the number of SPAs by bringing informal systems under
regulation.
Issue guidelines on complaint mechanism for the underserved poor.
Verify regularly compliance to minimum standards by WSBs and
WSP with WARIS and during all tariff negotiations.
Issue guidelines on the establishment and management of low-cost
technologies with minimum requirements / standards.
Use comparative competition (report on performance of providers)
with a particular attention to coverage of the poor.
Define and enforce pro-poor tariff systems for the sector.
7.5.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
WASREB
Timeframe
2008
2008
2009
Annually
2008
Annually
2008
2009
2008
WSBs
Action
Instruct and monitor the WSP to establish lists of underserved areas
within the service areas and in the surroundings.
Aim with priority the underserved areas close to the networks of the
providers for low-cost investment by encouraging the WSP to
forward proposals to the WSTF.
Adjust annually the investment plan to integrate underserved areas
and ensure that the WSP forward proposals to the WSTF for
financing low-cost technology investments in rural and urban areas
(an average of Kshs. 100 Million annually per WSB).
Use WARIS information system to monitor progress in the
settlements of the urban poor and ASALs.
Establish or support the establishment of proposals for projects to
be financed by the WSTF in the rural areas.
Ensure that all providers have nominated a focal person or
established a structure focusing on the service provision to the poor.
Ensure that providers collect complaints from the areas of the
underserved and make analysis of such information available to
WASREB and the public.
Ensure that progress of formal service provision is also achieved by
linking informal service providers (kiosk operator, independent
small scale system, etc.) to the formal system.
Timeframe
2008
Annually
Annually
Annually
Continuously
2008
Continuously
Continuously
20
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Establish list of informal water supply and sewerage systems and
forward it to WASREB (include in the annual report).
Complement the investment plan with investment programming for
low-cost technology (water kiosk and onsite sanitation as fast
tracking of coverage – first step to reach the poor).
Enforce and monitor water quality control of WSP and publishing
of test results.
Ensure that water testing is carried out in rural areas according to
guidelines.
Establish an exchange mechanism with municipalities and MoLG
in order to harmonize planning of investments for water and
sanitation with urban and rural development planning.
Carry out programs to enhance participation and good governance
in the rural areas.
Ensure that all projects (government, donor, NGO funded) Follow
the national concepts such as CPC, UPC, etc.
7.6.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
2008
Annually
2008
Continuously
2008
Continuously
2008
WSPs
Action
Establish list of underserved areas within the service areas and in
the surroundings.
Nominate a focal person or establish a structure to be responsible
for enlarging and maintaining service provision to the poor in the
underserved areas.
Establish proposals for projects to be financed by the WSTF in the
urban areas.
Collect complains from the underserved areas (integration in the
complaint system).
Identify public places for sanitation installations such as market
places, bus terminals, etc. and prepare project proposals for the
WSTF.
Carry out water testing according to water testing guideline and
make result public.
Implement a pro-poor tariff system which also ensures that water
sales (subsidized tariffs for the poor) at the kiosks are not used by
informal providers to make profit (limit subsidized water sales to
one client to 200lt/day for instance).
Ensure gender balance by management of water kiosks and other
low cost technologies where operation is contracted out.
Use water points (Kiosks) for sensitization and information
including HIV/AIDS.
Ensure that rationing of water supply does not discriminate the
poor.
Implement a metering program in order to move to 100% metering.
Timeframe
2008
2008
Annually
Continuously
Annually
Continuously
2008/2009
Continuously
Continuously
Continuously
2008
21
7.7.
•
•
•
•
•
•
8.
Development partners (donors, NGOs, etc.)
Action
Ensure registration of providers which receive support with the
WSBs and WASREB in order to formalize service provision.
Ensure that the standards for quality, sustainability, management,
etc. are complied with on long term by the supported provider.
Ensure that national concepts for low-cost technology (CPC, UPC,
basic sanitation) are implemented by the supported providers.
Channel increasingly funds through the WSTF (reduce project
approach) in order to strengthen ownership of national institutions
for sustainable development.
Support providers to use water kiosks for information dissemination
including HIV/AIDS.
Follow the minimum requirements on data collection issued by the
MWI.
Timeframe
From 2008 on
From 2008 on
From 2008 on
Annually
From 2008 on
Continuously
Implementation of the PPIP
The PPIP shall guide the sector institutions and the development partners in their
contribution to the sector. In addition, the sector institutions and the development partners
shall integrate the actions proposed by the PPIP into their annual planning and projects. It
is important that the relevant pro-poor indicators are also inserted into the performance
agreement with the MWI and progress on these indicators is reported regularly.
As proposed by the NWSS the institutions and providers shall update their action plan
with a horizon of 3 years annually. This action plans shall be linked to the business and
investment plans. Introducing the PPIP in the annual planning it might be necessary for
the institutions and providers to revise their business and investment plans in order to
ensure the introduction of the proposed pro-poor actions by the PPIP in their strategic
approach. The annual budget at the institutions shall reflect their updated (pro-poor)
action plan.
In addition, pro-poor undertakings agreed upon during the sector conferences might
enlarge the proposed actions by the present PPIP. Consequently, not only the action plans
of the institutions and providers will have to be updated but the PPIP as well.
All development partners shall be accountable for pro-poor activities by reporting
specifically of the impact of their actions on the underserved and the compliance with the
criteria set out by human rights and water.
The MWI shall ensure that capacity building in form of training and monitoring takes
place for the implementation of the PPIP.
22
9.
Monitoring and Evaluation of the PPIP
The MWI will ensure that the actions proposed by the PPIP are inserted into the strategic
and action plans of the sector institutions. Regulation will ensure that the service
providers holding an SPA follow pro-poor planning according to the PPIP. In addition,
WASREB and the WSTF will use their information systems and regulatory instruments
such as tariff negotiations, comparative performance reports, etc. to enforce pro-poor
orientation and monitor progress of the activities and their impact. Performance reports
issued by WASREB and WSTF shall dedicate separate chapters on pro-poor service
provision and progress on pro-poor actions.
From such reports the MWI will be able to assess development on pro-poor issues and
conduct further research in assessing specific contributions by the different sector
institutions and development partners.
The success of the PPIP shall be made public with the annual sector reports and at the
sector conferences.
Monitoring and Evaluation of the PPIP shall not be seen isolated from monitoring and
evaluation of the NWSS.
Monitoring actions and frequencies
Action
Institution
Inserting PPIP actions MWI/DWSS;
WSTF;
and indicators into the WASREB; WSBs; WSPs
strategic and action plan
Integration
and
monitoring of PPIP
indicators
in
performance contracts
Monitoring of pro-poor
approach of WSP
MWI/DWSS;
WASREB; WSBs
Frequencies
Remarks
Every updating of
strategic
plan;
Annually
in
activity plan
WSTF; Every July
WSBs yearly in reporting
(WARIS);
WASREB
annually and at tariff
adjustments
Sub sector report of MWI monitor
pro-poor
WASREB and WSTF
reporting
and
relevant
chapter
is
present
in
WASREB and WSTF report
Publish development on MWI at sector conference
coverage for the poor
Reporting annual,
Every
tariff
adjustment
negotiations
Annual,
beginning of year
Annual October /
November
23