SAFE WATER FOR SCHOOL CHILD PROJECT

AT

ST. JOSEPH KACWAMPA PRIMARY SCHOOL,

KATIKAMU SUB-COUNTY IN LUWERO DISTRICT

EVALUATION REPORT

BY

WATERTECH CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD

March, 2023
Table of contents

ACRONYMS…………………………………….………………………………………….i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:…………………………………….…………………………..ii
1 INTRODUCTION: …………………………………………………………………1
1.1 Background: …………………………………………………………………...........1
1.1.1 The Evaluation Process……………………………………………………………...1
1.2 Methodology: ……………………………………………………………………….2
2 RESULTS…………………………………………………………………………...4
2.1 Effective Use of the Borehole: …………………………………………………….. 4
2.1.1 Accessibility of the Water Source: ……………………………………………….. 4
2.1.2 Water Consumption……………………………………………………………….. 4
2.1.3 Distance to the Water Source and Time spent in Water collection………………... 5
2.1.4 Water Collection - Who Collects Water…………………………………………… 5
2.1.5 Community Satisfaction…………………………………………………….……... 6
2.2 Sustainability: ……………………………………………………………………... 6
2.2.1 Functioning of the Boreholes……………………………………………………… 6
2.2.2 Hygienic Maintenance of the Boreholes…………………………………… ……... 7
2.3 Institutional, Operation and Maintenance Aspects………………………………… 7
2.4 Social Economic Factors………………………………………………………….. 8
2.5.1 Operation and Maintenance………………………………………………………... 8
3 FINDINGS BASED ON PARTICIPATORY APPRAISAL DISCUSSIONS……. 9
3.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………… 9
3.2 Aspects of investigation included: ………………………………………………… 9
3.3 Community Mapping: …………………………………………………………….. 9
3.4 Roles & Responsibilities Tool……………………………………………………... 10
3.5 Hygiene Behaviour Tool…………………………………………………………… 10
4. SUMMARY FINDINGS FROM PRA DISCUSSIONS…………………………... 11
5 CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………. 11
ACRONYMS

HPM: Hand Pump Mechanic

Km: Kilometre

L/h: Litres per hour

L/p/d: Litres per person per day

MoH: Ministry of Health

NWSC: National Water and Sewage Cooperation

O&M: Operation and Maintenance

PRA: Participatory Rural Appraisal

WUC: Water User Committee

i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

This evaluation study was conducted by WaterTech Consultancy Services Ltd, Luweero
District from 27th Feb. to 17th March, 2023. The objective of the project was to improve the
health, learning performance of pupils, and wellbeing of teachers of St. Joseph’s Primary
School Kacwampa, and surrounding community members through provision of safe water
source; the project was also aimed at improving access to potable water within 500 meters from
their homes. The goal was to construct a shallow well and install a hand-pump; the whole
project activities took three months. The Project involved the full participation of the local
community members who made a local contribution of the land where the well was constructed
and labor with some construction materials. Various local authorities were also involved at all
stages of planning, implementation and monitoring of the project.

The purpose of the evaluation was to:

1. To assess the degree of accomplishment of the stated objectives.

2. To review the project implementation and especially the extent to which the activities
as specified in the original agreement have been implemented.

3. To identify general areas and important strategies and modalities where further action
is required and if necessary recommend appropriate actions to be taken.

4. To assess the mode and effect of collaboration with local authorities

The study collected data by conducting household socio-economic survey, and interviews with
key informants (School management, water user committee members, Aziro Care Uganda
staff, etc.), Participatory Rural Appraisal meetings in the community and visit of the installed
water source.

In total the borehole was serving approximately 501 pupils, and 138 families. Average per
capita consumption was 9 liters per person per day, which is below the Ministry of Health
recommended consumption of 20 liters per person per day.

At the time of the study the borehole had broken down once; it is important to note that the
borehole was less three years old. Aziro Care Uganda has however put in place an institutional
framework for O&M comprising of Water User Committee which has overall responsible for
O&M including collection of O&M funds.

ii
The study established that to a great extent the intended distance reduction was achieved with
100% for the school children since the source is in the school compound, and at least 70% of
the community collecting water within the targeted 500metres this leaves out 30% who are
travelling beyond this targeted distance. Though good quality of the water is reported in
comparison to the situation before provision of borehole, 80% of the community spend more
than 30 minutes on water collection due to the reduction in the water yield and the long queues
at the source.

Majority of the respondents (95%) were satisfied with the quality of the source. The satisfaction
is further expressed through acknowledgement of benefits from Aziro Care Uganda, which
include improved health through use of clean safe water. However, the community expressed
concern of poor yield of water from the source due to the prolonged draught for the past two
years.

The project has promoted equal access and management by men, women girl, children and boy
children. 40% of the members of Water Users Committee were female which is in line with
the National gender Policy; the users are fully responsible for operation and maintenance of
the water source.

Findings revealed a high level of knowledge on hygiene behaviors but the practice was found
to be poor with 60% not observing the safe water chain, i.e. dirty water collection and storage
containers, while in 53% of the homestead, environments were dirty. Discussions with Aziro
Care Uganda official revealed that community training on sanitation and hygiene was not
conducted since the project did not provide budget for the community trainings. The sanitation
and hygiene practices at school were found to be good compared to the community.

Overall the project was well implemented (initial mobilization and training of Water User
Committee, and siting and construction of boreholes) but there was no mechanism put in place
for follow up after project was handed over.

iii
1.0.INTRODUCTION:
1.1 Background

Aziro Care Uganda implemented as safe water for school Child at St. Joseph Kacwampa
Primary school in Luwero District with funding support from Agura through Copera Spain.
The Project was budgeted at approximately Euros. 5,560 and was originally designed to run
for three months (Nov. 2020 to Jan. 2021). Actual implementation commenced in Jan. 2021;
the objective of the Project was to improve the health, learning performance of pupils, and
wellbeing of teachers of St. Joseph’s Primary School Kacwampa, and surrounding community
members through provision of safe water source; the project was also aimed at improving
access to potable water within 500 meters from their homes. The population to be served was
approximately 1,329 people. The Project area covered the village of Kacwampa comprising of
138 households (families).

The implementation strategy of the organization was that beneficiaries participate fully at all
stages of the Project cycle i.e. planning, implementation/construction, operation and
maintenance. In addition, both men and women were to equally participate in the decision-
making process hence the inclusion of gender promotion as part of project activities.

Community capacity building and empowerment was also a major component of the Project,
this is because experience in implementation of water and sanitation Projects has shown that
for maximization of benefits to the community, facilities put in place and hygiene behaviors
advocated for should be sustained. Furthermore, it has been established that for sustainability
to be achieved, users need to be empowered to take charge of the operation and maintenance
process especially those activities within their ability e.g. hygienic maintenance of sources,
funds for minor O&M activities including repairs and servicing.

1.1.1 The Evaluation Process

Evaluation of St. Joseph Kacwampa Primary School Project funded by Agura through Copera
Spain was instituted by Aziro Care Uganda in March 2023 and conducted by WaterTech
Consultancy Services Ltd. The Study lasted for three weeks from 27th Feb. to 17th March, 2023
in the project area (Kacwampa village).

1
The evaluation covered four major areas and these were:

• An assessment of the degree of accomplishment of the Project objective.

• A review of Project implementation with emphasis on the extent to which the activities
have been implemented.
• Identification of general areas and important strategies and modalities where further
action is required and where necessary, recommendations on appropriate action to be
taken.
• Role and effect of collaboration with local authorities.
The study tried to address the following questions:

Effective Use: Whether the school and communities are using the water as intended and if it
is hygienically handled from source to mouth (an assessment of the safe water chain and the
percentage of the population benefiting from the provided water sources).

Sustainability: The extent to which Project activities are sustainable, looking at the technical
operation of the boreholes, the organizational and institutional arrangements put in place.

Replicability: An assessment of other organizations/Projects (including government), which

are providing the same services as well as Aziro Care Uganda’s proposed future interventions.

1.2. Methodology

Sample Selection

Secondary data from Aziro Care Uganda showed that the project targeted 501 pupils and 12
staff of the school and 138 households in the village; hence, serving an estimated population
of about 1,341.

The study used purposive stratified random sampling to select participants for the survey; a
total of 21 households were recruited for the survey that is, 15% of the 138 households.

With regard to technical evaluation and hygienic maintenance of the borehole as well as
existence and activities of Water User Committee, the school was also assessed and the source
site.

2
Data collection procedure

The survey involved the following processes in collecting that

Document review: A review of existing documents which included reports from Aziro Care
Uganda about the project

Person to person interviews: Structured interviews using questionnaires were conducted at

the community level targeting water users and Water User Committees respectively.
Information collected using this method was of a quantitative nature; this was however
supplemented by open-ended questions whose information was qualitative.

Observation: This was used in areas where more accurate and reliable information could only
be obtained using observation e.g. hygienic maintenance of water sources, practiced hygiene
behaviors such as cleanliness of water collection and storage containers and cleanliness of
environments around the homesteads.

Physical inspection: An inspection of the borehole was also carried out to investigate some of
the technical aspects e.g. water discharge to measure the yield, lubricating of the chain and
handle, firmness of pump head, bolts/nuts and handle, positioning of the washers and the state
of the platform.

Focus group discussions: These were carried out with selected community members using
Participatory Rural Appraisal Methods. The methods used included:

Community mapping - the mapping exercise was used to assess location and accessibility to
the water source including the size of the village and the number of households which have
access, other existing water sources including traditional ones being used by the community,
distance travelled etc.

Hygiene behavior tool – was used to assess people’s knowledge on commonly perceived
positive and negative hygiene behaviors in the community, the most prevalent practices and
community’s perception/attitude towards both.

Roles and responsibility tool – This was used in the assessment of Operation and Maintenance
issues; identifying the different roles played by the different stake holders and the existing
situation in the community.

3
Discussions with Selected Key informants: Discussions were held with staff of the company
that carried out the work as well as community mobilization and training. Further discussions
were also held with staff of Aziro Care Uganda.

2 RESULTS

2.1 Effective Use of the Borehole:

In assessing effective use of the water, the review focused on the percentage of beneficiaries
accessing the water source, per capital consumption and the safe water chain.

2.1.1 Accessibility of the Water Source:

The survey revealed that not all households in the Project area were using the borehole. Out of
the 45 households interviewed, 36 (80%) were using the borehole, 5 (11%) were using borehole
from neighboring villages and 4 (9%) protected springs. Since average household size is 6
persons, the borehole was thus serving an estimated population of about 1,232 persons both
from the school and the community. 95% of those using the borehole said it was because of
good water quality and the 5% said it was the nearest source.

2.1.2 Water Consumption:

The Nation Water and Sewage Cooperation (NWSC) and Ministry of Health (MoH) guidelines
states that if health benefits are to be achieved in households, per capita water consumption
should be 20 l/p/d. this survey found that the average per capita was 9 l/p/d; this is 45% of the
recommended amount. There was no data to establish consumption pattern before the
implemented project. however, discussions during the PRA showed that it was lower than what
the survey found out since by then people would travel far distance to get safe water

Recommendations

In order to improve on the health of the community (use 20 liters per person per day) there is
need to increase the depth of the well such that high yields could be achieved hence promotion
of hygiene practices like washing of bodies and clothes, and washing of hands before eating
and after latrine use would be enhanced.

4
There is also a need to provide additional deep well borehole to supplement the existing one in
order to increase accessibility and utilization of safe water which will in turn lead to increased
consumption and promotion good health among the entire community.

2.1.3 Distance to the Water Source and Time spent in Water collection:

The water source is sited on the school compound, thus, distance to the source for the school
children is less than 10 meters. For the community distance to the source varies depending on
the side of the village the household is; those near the school where the source is, they move
between 100-500 meters; the far households traveling about 2km. At the time of the survey, it
was found that on average, households spend over 45 minutes. This has been as a result of long
queuing and reduction in the yield of the pump because of the prolonged draught which has
been there for the past two years.

Recommendations

The school needs to engage with the Water User Committee and give priority to the school
children such that they don’t spend a lot of time queuing for water since the primary beneficiary
of the project was the school.

For the community members that cover more than 500m to collect water with the maximum
travelling 2 Km. There is need to provide additional borehole in order to reduce the burden of
collecting water as well as contribute to higher consumption of water.

2.1.4 Water Collection - Who Collects Water:

The chief beneficiaries from the provided boreholes are the school pupils having easy access
to safe water; thus, both school boys and girls are engaged in collecting water for their meals
and sanitation purposes. The communities, water is collected by women and children, in the
study area, this responsibility was equally shared. In response to "who usually collects water
in this household" women were 47%, men 13%, boy children 20% and girl children 20%.

5
2.1.5 Community Satisfaction:

95% of the respondents who were using the provided borehole were satisfied with the quality
of water. However, about 80% of the community were unsatisfied with the yield of the source,
this was further confirmed by the technical information where yields for the borehole ranged
between 20 l/h for the lowest yielding and 100 l/h for the highest. This rate is below the national
standards which recommends a borehole with a handpump to yield 700m3/h and the minimum
permissible is 500l/h. Among the major benefits highlighted by the community during the PRA
discussions was provision of clean safe water, some families who cannot use the boreholes on
a regular basis could at least use them specifically for drinking water.

Recommendations

Since the borehole yield is below the national recommendation (500 l/hour), the well should
be considered for deepening.

2.2 Sustainability:

In assessing the sustainability of the provided facilities, emphasis was put on the functionality
of the source, institutional and management arrangements put in place, preventive maintenance
systems as well as mechanisms to handle future technical problems when they occur.

2.2.1 Functioning of the Boreholes:

The study found out that the borehole was functioning very well, although it broke down once
and the WUC got a local mechanic that repaired it. An inspection of the technical features of
boreholes revealed that they were all functioning properly.

Recommendation

Although the borehole is functioning very well, there is need to institute a monitoring system
to ensure the O&M system continues functioning and be strengthened where weaknesses are
detected by the monitoring system. It should be noted that the borehole is new, there is need to
be proactive, lessons could also be obtained from the old boreholes in the same
subcounty/parishes.

6
2.2.2 Hygienic Maintenance of the Boreholes:

Assessment was done on cleanliness of the surroundings, whether the drainage channel and
soak pits were working and the clearance of bush/grass in the area surrounding the borehole.
Findings indicate the borehole premise was hygienic and well maintained. However, discussion
with the school management indicated that the community is not proactive in maintaining the
cleanliness of the environment.

Recommendations

There is need to follow up with users so that they can improve on the environmental hygiene
around the water source.

As part of post construction activities Aziro Care Ug should put in place a monitoring system,
which will ensure continued information flow regarding the status of these source and follow
up actions to be taken.

2.3 Institutional, Operation and Maintenance Aspects:

2.3.1 Selection, Composition and Functioning of Water User Committees:

The Water User Committee set in place at the initial stage of the project is the one managing
the day-to-day maintenance of the water source which is fully in line with the National policy.
The committee was selected by the community members themselves. Though the majority of
the WUC members consented to the responsibilities given to them by the community that
selected them, the study found out that most of them are not committed.

Recommendations:

There is need for Aziro Care Uganda to design a mechanism for monitoring and support follow
up. During the follow ups emphasis should also be put on empowering community to take
decisions and effect change where necessary.

given to the community at the time of committee formation, regarding women representation,
however, active participation has been registered as indicated in the findings where 33% of the
membership on the WUCs comprises of women. In 34 of the cases women are in decision-
making positions either as Chairpersons Treasurers or Secretaries. Table 2.3.2 shows WUC
membership desegregated by gender.

7
Recommendation:

In the follow up mobilization/support, there is need to develop guidelines on committee

lifetime as well as procedures for change of membership. WUCs being voluntary it is being
recommended that each committee serves for a maximum of two years unless if the community
wants to retain it and the committee members are willing to serve for another term.

2.4 Social Economic Factors

2.4.1 Operation and Maintenance

At the final stages of the project, the established WUC set up a user fee (UGX. 1,000/=) for
O&M which the users were supposed to contribute on monthly basis by households; it was
established during the stage that most respondents contributed the initial amount, however, as
time when on, most of the community members started boycotting the contribution. During
discussion with the WUC, they said that some of these community members feel it is the
responsible of the school only to do repairs and maintenance since they were the primary
beneficiaries.

With regard to actual contributions, 75% of the households using the borehole said they do
contribute the required monthly contributions. There seems to be general lack of accountability
in the WUC, as none of the community members reported having ever been called for an
accountability meeting nor issued receipts for the moneys contributed

Recommendation:

If sustainability is to be achieved and benefits accruing from provided project maximized, it is

important that all community members take the borehole as their own and actively participate
in the O&M process including payment of O&M contributions.

The committee should also have accountability meetings with users in which contributions and
expenditures are discussed. It is very highly recommended that WUCs introduce issuing of
receipts for all moneys; this will build trust among the community members who use the water
source.

8
3 FINDINGS BASED ON PARTICIPATORY APPRAISAL DISCUSSIONS

3.1 Introduction:

PRA was used to supplement information collected using the household questionnaire. PRA
discussions were held in communities within the village using the following methods and tools:

• Community Mapping

• Roles & Responsibilities

• Hygiene Behavior (Three Pile Sorting)

3.2 Aspects of investigation included:

• Users’ satisfaction with the service provided

• Community’s rating of average distance during the process of water collection.

• Average time spent in water collection

• Percentage of households in the village accessing the water source

• Changes in water utilization

• Community participation and involvement in Project activities

• Operation and maintenance of provided source.

• Community capacity building

• Hygiene education (looking at Knowledge, Attitude and Practices)

3.3 Community Mapping:

During the survey community members were able to draw their village map indicating the
boundaries, road infrastructure, originally preferred borehole site, the existing sources (both
protected and unprotected), location of the different households including those of their leaders
and the WUC members in relation to the source location. They were also able to indicate the
location of other social service infrastructures such as schools, churches, mosques, clinics/drug
shops and essential commodities’ shops.

9
Based on the findings on the village map, further discussions were held to generate other
information which could not be indicated by the map such as people's hygiene habits, their
perception of benefits accrued from the project, role perceptions etc.

3.4 Roles & Responsibilities Tool:

Pictures of various activities concerning the use, management, and maintenance of borehole
was used within the communities to assess the level of understanding regarding operation and
maintenance of the borehole. These pictures were also used to assess the extent to which these
activities were being carried out and how they relate with the different stakeholders in the O&M
process.

It was revealed during the discussions that communities were able to identify the various
activities and could easily relate them with the different stakeholders. However, some of the
activities were not being carried out e.g. home visiting, WUC meetings, community
accountability meetings, payment of O&M fund, and maintenance of drainage channels.

3.5 Hygiene Behavior Tool:

A set of un-serialized pictures depicting different hygienic and un-hygienic practices were used
to assess the ability of the community to identify and analyze the activities into “good”, “bad”,
and “in-between” practices. They were also used to establish the common and uncommon
practices in the community.

During the group discussions, it was easy for the community to understand the different
practices and sort them into the various categories. This was enough evidence to indicate that
the community was well knowledgeable of what it is supposed to do. Unfortunately, most of
the common practices, were those that were unhygienic for example, children defecating in the
compound and behind the latrine, lack of bath shelters, sun tables and kitchens, and poor
domestic waste water drainage systems. When asked as to why they were still practicing such
unhygienic behaviors, they said that it was due to not paying serious attention to benefits of
good hygiene practices as well as laziness for those not having latrines.

The study also found out that the community had not received any training in hygiene education
nor had there been any support follow up regarding hygiene promotion to the WUC.

10
Recommendation

There is need for a training on hygiene promotion for the community and serious follow up on
the WUC to ensure they disseminate to the community, the messages passed on to them.

There is need to promote behavior change using various social marketing techniques apart from
linking to health benefits.

4. SUMMARY FINDINGS FROM PRA DISCUSSIONS:

Total Participants in the PRA discussion 88

Female participants 60 (68%)

Protected sources in the village (Number) 3

Aziro Care provided borehole (Number) 1

Borehole provided by other agencies 1

Traditional Sources (Number) 2

Households in the village 138

Households in the village accessing the Aziro Care provided source 110

Distance of farthest household using the source 2 Km

Average time taken in water collection when there is no queue 45 Minutes

Average time taken in water collection (including waiting time) 2 Hrs

Agreed O&M contributions per household per month 1,000/=

4. CONCLUSIONS

The purpose of the survey was to evaluate the Safe water for school Child project at St. Joseph
Kacwampa Village in Luweero District which was carried out with support from Aziro Care
Uganda with funding from Aquara through Copera Spain.

11
The project was designed to have a shallow well hand pump borehole constructed to improve
the easy access to safe and clean water for the school pupils and also improve the health and
hygiene practices among the school children. The community was also involved from the initial
stages of the project since the school belongs to them hence, they (community) were the
secondary beneficiaries of the project. The study found that the project was implemented as
planed and handed over to the intended beneficiaries on compilation.

12
ANNEX. 1.

QUESTIONNAIRES AND TABLES FROM COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL

INTERVIEWS

Community Questionnaire:

Identification Information

1. Subcounty …………………………………………………..

2. Parish. …………………………………………………………

3. L.C. 1 Name …..…………………………………………………

Demographic Characteristics

4. No. household members

a) 0-5 Years (Girls)---------------------- (Boys) ------------------

b) 6-13 Years (Girls)------------------------ (Boys) -------------------

c) 14-18 Years

(Girls) ---------------------

(Boys)--------------------

d) Above 18 (Women)-------------------- (Men)---------------------

Water Supply (Source)

5. Where do you usually collect your water from?

a) Borehole

b) Protected Spring

c) Piped Water (Tap)

d) Traditional Well/River/Lake/ Unprotected Spring/Dam

6. What is the distance in meters to the water source from your house?

a) Less than 500m

b) 500

c) 501- 1000m

d) 1001-1500m

e) 1501-2000m

f) More than 2000m

7. How long does it take the household to collect water from this source including
waiting time per day?

a) Under 30 mins

b) 31- 60 mins

c) 1 hour - 1.5 hours

d) 1.5-2 hours

e) 2-3 hours

f) Over 3 hours

8. If More than 30 Minutes - what is the problem

a) There is along at the source

b) The source is far

c) Children spend time playing on the way

d) Others (Specify)...............................................................................

9. Why do you use this source of water? (You may circle more than one answer)

a) Water is free

b) Near to house

c) Water is of good quality

d) Cheaper than other sources

e) No other source

f) Other (Specify) …………………………………………………………………………

10. What is the total amount of water used by household per day on average in liters?
(Enumerator ask for number of jerricans and compute total) Liters

11. Are you satisfied with the quantity of water you collect? Yes/No

12. Are you satisfied with the quality of water you collect? Yes/No

13. If No What is the Problem

a) Water is salty

b) Water has particles

c) Water is Muddy

d) Others (Specify)………...………………………………….

14. Do you pay for the water you use Yes/No

15. If Yes how much do you pay per jerrican

a) 25/=

b) 50/=

c) 100/=

d) 150/=

e) 200/=

f) 500/=

g) Others (Specify)………………………

16. Who usually collects water in this household?

a) Boy Children (below 13 years)

b) Girl Children (below 13 years)

c) Women

d) Men
17. Does the household pay any money for operation and maintenance Yes/ No

18. If yes - How much do you pay per month Shs? …………Per Breakdown Sh.-----------

Health Education

19. Has this household been visited by a Health Worker in the last three months?
Yes/No

20. If yes - where was the Health Worker from? (You can circle more than one answer).

a. Local health authorities

b. Other organizations

c. Do not Know

d. Others (Specify) ……………………………………………………

21. What did the Health Worker/s talk about? (You can circle more than one answer).

a. Clean water storage

b. Drinking clean water

c. Proper garbage disposal

d. Immunization

e. Advantages of using safe clean water

f. HIV/IDS

g. Others (Specify) ………………………

22. Have you received any hygiene messages through other means other than the health
workers? Yes/No.

23. If yes through what means?

a. Radio

b. Posters

c. Booklets

d. Others (specify) ………………………………………

24. What was the message about? (You can circle more than one answer)

a. Keeping the household and the environment clean

b. Drinking clean, safe water

c. Cleaning of the water container

d. Proper use and maintenance of pit latrine

e. Washing hands after using latrine and or before touching food

f. Proper garbage disposal

g. Domestic waste-water disposal

h. Construction of drying racks

i. Immunization

j. HIV/Aids

k. Others (specify) ………………………………….

Observation Checklist for Water Transport

25. Is the container for collecting water clean? Yes/No

26. Is the container covered? Yes/No

Observation checklist for water storage

27. Does family have a separate container for storing drinking water? Yes/No

28. Is container clean? Yes/No

29. Is container covered? Yes/No

30. Is there a separate scooping cup? Yes/No

31. Is the environment around the house clean Yes/No

Borehole Technical and Community Management Information

1. Subcounty …………………………………………………..

2. Parish . …………………………………………………………

3. L.C. 1 Name …..…………………………………………………

4. Source Name ……………………………………………………

5. Source Number…………………………………………………..

6. Condition of water Source

1) Clean Surroundings Yes/No

2) Drainage Channel Working Yes/No

3) Cleared grass Yes/No

4) Soak Pit Available Yes/No

7. Is the borehole functioning Yes/ No

8. If Yes to 7 has it ever broken down Yes/No

9. If Yes to 8 who carries out the repairs

1) Local Handpump Mechanic

2) Do not Know

10. On Average how long does it take to repair a broken down borehole

1) Less than a week

2) 1 Week

3) 2 Weeks

4) 4 Weeks

5) 8 Weeks

6) More than 8 Weeks

11. If No to 8 above how long has it been broken down?

1) Less than a week

2) 1 Week

3) 2 Weeks

4) 4 Weeks

5) 8 Weeks

6) More than 8 Weeks

12. Does the borehole have Water User Committee Yes/No

13. Is the committee Functioning Yes/No

14. What are the roles and responsibilities of the Water User Committee?

15. How was the committee formed?

1. Elected by Users

2. Selected by Aziro Care Officials

3. Selected by Local Council

4. Others (Specify)……………………………………………………………

16. Has the committee changed membership since it was instituted Yes/ No

17. If Yes Why……………………………………………………………………….

18. According to the guidelines how often is the membership to be changed?

19. Has the committee undergone any training? Yes/ No

20. List areas of training covered

21. Problems encountered by WUC members and their work

22. Other Areas of investigation by the Team

23. Is the handle lubricated

24. Is handle firm

25. Check whether the bolts nuts and pump head are not loose

26. Check whether all nuts and washers are in position

27. Is water discharge satisfactory (measure discharge into jerrican)

28. Check if plat form is ok or cracked

29. Check if soak way is working

ANNEX. 2. CURRENT PHOTOS OF THE WATER SOURCE

A community female member and children fetching water from the source

School children queueing at the borehole to fetch water from the source