The state of handpump water services in Ghana: findings from three districts

Full text

ADANK, KUMASI, CHIMBAR, ATENGDEM, AGBEMOR, DICKINSON & ABBEY
1
37th WEDC International Conference, Hanoi, Vietnam, 2014
SUSTAINABLE WATER AND SANITATION SERVICES
FOR ALL IN A FAST CHANGING WORLD
The state of handpump water services in Ghana: findings
from three districts
M. Adank, T. C. Kumasi, T. L. Chimbar, J. Atengdem, B.D. Agbemor, N. Dickinson, &
E. Abbey (The Netherlands)
REFEREED PAPER
This paper presents findings of water service monitoring in three districts in Ghana, using the national
water service monitoring framework, which has been developed, based on the norms and standards set
for rural water supply by the Community Water and Sanitation Agency. Only 21% of handpumps were
found to meet national norms and standards for water services in terms of reliability, accessibility,
quality and quantity. Service providers who operate and maintain these handpumps also scored low on
compliance with norms and guidelines related to governance, operations and financial management. The
monitoring data showed positive correlations between service provider and service authority
performance and service levels. Nevertheless, even service providers managing reliable handpumps were
found to often not meet the benchmark on certain service provider indicators, which raises the question
on whether the benchmarks on these indicators may have been set too high.
Background
Rural water supply is reported to cover 63% of the rural population of Ghana (CWSA, 2012), thereby
putting the country on track to achieving the MDG target for water. However, behind this apparent success
are a complex set of challenges.
A first challenge that needs to be considered is the relatively high level of non-functionality of water
facilities. Across much of Sub-Saharan Africa, a substantial proportion of water supply facilities is believed
to be either not-functioning or functioning sub-optimally, as illustrated by a study that found non-
functionality of rural water supply facilities to be between 30% and 40% (RWSN, 2009).
A second headline challenge is sub-standard service delivery. Even when water facilities are functional,
this does not mean that they are providing a service that meets all the national norms, in terms of reliability,
quality, quantity and accessibility of the service.
A third challenge is the lack of conditions which need to be in place to ensure sustainable service
provision over time. This includes the presence of well-performing service providers to operate and maintain
the facilities and to ensure sustainable service delivery over time, as well as well-performing service
authorities, responsible for monitoring, supporting and regulating these service providers.
Appreciating the degree of non-functionality and sub-standard service delivery and understanding the
underlying reasons, is crucial for defining appropriate actions to improve the situation. In Ghana, the exact
magnitude of non-functionality, sub-standard service delivery and challenges related to the performance of
service providers and service authorities, has for a long time been unclear, as data on these issues have not
been systematically collected, let alone regularly monitored.
Under the Triple-S initiative, the Community Water and Sanitation Agency (CWSA) and IRC have been
developing and testing water service monitoring. As part of this, monitoring data is being collected and
analysed on all improved water facilities in three districts on an annual basis. The concepts and methodology
for data collection and analysis are presented in the accompanying paper by Kumasi et al. (2014). The
objective of this paper is to provide insight into the handpumps service levels and performance of service

ADANK, KUMASI, CHIMBAR, ATENGDEM, AGBEMOR, DICKINSON & ABBEY
2
providers and the support they receive from service authorities (local government) and understand the
correlation between these, by presenting the findings from the collected monitoring data.
Methodology
A framework for monitoring water services
As described in the accompanying paper by Kumasi et al (2014), the water service monitoring framework
has been based on the national norms and standards set for rural water supply by the Community Water and
Sanitation Agency (CWSA, 2014). Below we present the main indicators from this framework, used in this
paper.
Service level indicators
Handpumps are considered ‘fully functional’ when water flows within 5 strokes and ‘partially functional’
when water flows, but not within 5 strokes. In both cases, handpumps are considered ‘functional’.
Service level indicators and minimum standard for handpumps have been defined as follows:
 Quantity: At least 20 litres per capita per day
 Quality: Ghana Standards Authority water quality standards (However, for practical reasons, the
minimum standard applied is set as ‘perceived as acceptable by users’)
 Coverage: The number of people per hand pump should not exceed 300 in case of boreholes and 150 in
case of hand dug wells.
 Distance: All users should be within 500 metres of the handpump
 Reliability: The handpump should provide water for at least 95% of the year, interpreted as at least 347
days of regular service without interruption.
A composite indicator for the overall water service levels is determined as follows:
 Level I: The handpump is not functioning or not used
 Level II: The handpump fails to meet the minimum standards on one or more service level indicators
 Level III: The handpump meets the minimum standard on all service level indicators
Service provider indicators
Service provider indicators describe the degree to which the service provider meets the norms and standards
for fulfilling its tasks in operation, maintenance and administration of the service. Table 1 gives an overview
of the service provider indicators and the benchmarks set for each indicator.
Table 1: Indicators and benchmarks for monitoring the performance of water service providers
Indicator
Benchmark
Management and governance indicators:
Small Community Water and Sanitation
Management Team (WSMT-SC) composition
There is a WSMT-SC, which has been composed in line with the CWSA
guidelines, and has received initial training
Record keeping
All records are kept and up-to-date
Political interference
Any change that had occurred in the WSMT-SC was not due to political or
chieftaincy interference
Operational indicators:
Spare parts
It takes 3 days or less to acquire spare part(s)
Area Mechanics
It takes 3 days or less to acquire the services of an area mechanic
Breakdown repairs
Breakdown repair is carried out within 3 days
Periodic maintenance
Routine maintenance is carried out
Water quality testing
Water quality sampling and analysis is done by certified institutions
Financial management indicators:
Revenue -expenditure balance
Annual revenues are higher than annual expenditure
Financial management
There is a bank account and a cash book is kept up-to-date
Tariffs
There is a tariff
Service authority performance indicators
As described in Kumasi et al (2014), the service monitoring framework includes a set of seven indicators for
monitoring the degree to which service authorities fulfil their functions of creating an enabling environment

ADANK, KUMASI, CHIMBAR, ATENGDEM, AGBEMOR, DICKINSON & ABBEY
3
at district level and supervising and supporting water service providers. Here we focus on the indicator
which is directly related to the direct support of the service authority to the service providers in the form of
monitoring. In Ghana, this is undertaken by members of the District Works Department and Environmental
Health Assistants. The benchmark for this indicator has been set as “The service authority monitors
operation and maintenance of water facilities and the performance of service providers in terms of financial,
technical and administrative performance on a regular basis and provides the direct support when needed.”
Data collection and analysis
Monitoring data is collected on an annual basis on all improved water facilities and water service providers
in three districts: Akatsi District in Volta Region, East Gonja in Nothern Region and Sunyani West in Brong
Ahafo Region. This paper focusses on the monitoring data collected at the beginning of 2013. It presents
similar findings to the ones presented in Adank et al (2013), based on the data collected in early 2012.
Local government staff responsible for monitoring and supporting water service providers collected the
monitoring data and were involved in data verification and analysis. AKVO FLOW (AKVO, 2013),
consisting of Android phone technology and online data storage, was used for data collection and storage.
Water facilities and service providers were scored and benchmarked using logical formulas (in MS
EXCEL), based on the collected data.
Levels of compliance of water service provision with national standards
Service levels
Of the 568 handpumps in the three focus districts, 81% were found to be functional. However, only around a
fifth of handpumps (21%) were found to provide a service Level III, meeting the minimum standard on all
five service level indicators. As shown in Table 2, handpumps are generally perceived by users as providing
water of acceptable quality, but many handpumps failed to meet the minimum standard on at least one of the
other service level indicators. Handpumps that failed to meet the minimum standard on only one service
level indicator, did so mostly (66%) on either the distance or coverage indicator.
In Sunyani West, only 7% of handpumps were found to meet the minimum standards on all five service
level indicators. This was to a large extent due to the fact that only 30% of handpumps in Sunyani West met
the minimum standard on the distance indicator, of having most of the user population within 500 metres of
the handpump. In East Gonja, only 35% of handpumps managed to meet the minimum level set on the
‘coverage’ indicator (which was not surprising, considering this district was found to have the least amount
of handpumps, while area and population-wise it is the largest of the three districts). This played an
important role in the low percentage of handpumps meeting the minimum standard on all five service level
indicators in this district (12%).
Table 2. Proportion of handpumps meeting the minimum standard on service level indicators
Service level indicator
Proportion of
handpumps
Functionality: Handpumps which provide water
81%
Service Level III: Handpumps which meet the minimum standard on all 5 service level indicators
21%
Reliability: Handpumps which provide water for at least 95% of the year
69%
Coverage: Handpumps used by less than the maximum number of people set per handpump
62%
Distance: Handpumps with all users within 500 metres
54%
Quality: Handpumps with water quality perceived as acceptable by users
92%
Quantity: Handpumps with estimated water use of at least 20 litres per capita per day
61%
Service provider and service authority performance
The majority of handpumps were found to be managed by Small Community Water and Sanitation
Management Teams (WSMT-SC), consisting of elected community members, taking care of the day-to-day
operation and maintenance of one or more handpumps.
Figure 1 gives an overview of the proportion of WSMTs-SC meeting the benchmarks on the different
service provider indicators. On only five of the 11 indicators, at least half of the WSMTs-SC manage to
meet the service provider indicator benchmark. None of the WSMTs-SCs met the benchmark on all 11
indicators. Only 20% of WSMTs-SC managed to meet the benchmark on all three financial management
indicators. The proportion of WSMTs-SC meeting all benchmarks on the governance and operational
indicators was even smaller, at 9% and 4% respectively.

ADANK, KUMASI, CHIMBAR, ATENGDEM, AGBEMOR, DICKINSON & ABBEY
4
Figure 1 also shows that a little less than half of handpumps were managed by WSMTs-SC that received
monitoring support from the service authority, the local government.
Figure 1. Proportion of WSMTs-SC meeting the benchmark
Source: Authors
Correlations between handpump water services and performance of service
providers and authorities
In this section of the paper correlations between handpump service levels and service provider performance
are examined. Figure 2 shows the level of service provided by handpumps under different management
arrangements. It shows that the proportion of non-functional or unused handpumps was found to be highest
for the ones without a management structure. It also shows that the proportion of handpumps which meet the
minimum standard on all 5 service level indicators was highest for handpumps managed by a Small
Community Water and Sanitation Management Team (WSMT-SC) and lowest for handpumps without
management structure.
Figure 2. Handpump management and reliability
Source: Authors
It is worth considering the particular case of handpumps managed by WSMTs-SC. In order to get better
insight into the correlations between the performance of WSMTs-SC and the level of service provided by
handpumps, the level of service provided by handpumps managed by WSMTs-SC that perform well (i.e.
they meet the benchmark on the service provider indicators) can be compared with the ones not performing
well (not meeting the service provider indicator benchmark). The strongest positive correlation between the
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
WSMT-SC
composition
Record keeping
Political
interferance
Spare part
supply
Area mechanics
Breakdown
repairs
Routine
maintenance
Water quality
testing
Revenue-expenditure
balance
Financial
management
Tariffs
Monitoring
support
Goverance Operatios Financial management
Service provider indicators service
authority
indicator
Proportion ofWSMTs-SC meeting the
benchmakr
Proportion of WSMTs-SC meeting the
benchmark
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
WSMT-SC
(n=459)
Private
management
(n=26)
Other
(n=20)
No management
structure
(n=56)
Proportion of handpumps
Management type
Service level I: Not
functional or not used
Service level II:
Minimum standard not
met on one or more
indicators
Service level III:
Minimum standards
met on all indicators

ADANK, KUMASI, CHIMBAR, ATENGDEM, AGBEMOR, DICKINSON & ABBEY
5
performance of the service provider and the level of service, was found for the indicators related to record
keeping, revenue expenditure balance and tariffs, as shown in Figure 3.
The figure also shows a positive correlation between monitoring of WSMTs-SC and the level of service
provided by handpumps. When comparing the handpumps which are monitored by the District Assembly
(the service authority) with handpumps which were not, we see that the ones that did receive monitoring
support, have a higher percentage of handpumps meeting all service level indicator benchmarks and a lower
percentage of non-functional or unused handpumps.
Figure 3. Service provider and authority performance and service levels
Source: Authors
Of the five service level indicators, we expected that reliability would have a positive correlation with the
performance of service provider and authority. Figure 4 shows the service provider indicators and, as
expected, there is a positive correlation between reliability and service provider performance on 9 of the
eleven service provider indicators1. The proportion of handpumps managed by WSMTs-SC meeting the
benchmark on the nine service provider indicators, is higher for reliable than for unreliable handpumps. The
indicators were ranked from weakest to strongest correlation between reliability and service provider
performance, in terms of difference in percentage points. The strongest positive correlation was found
between reliability and service provider performance on the following indicators: 1) revenue-expenditure
balance, 2) area mechanics, and 3) spare part supply. For these indicators, the proportion of handpumps
managed by WSMTs-SC that met the benchmark was more than 20 percentage points higher for reliable
handpumps than for unreliable handpumps.
Conclusions
This paper has brought to light shocking levels of non-compliance of handpump water service with national
norms and standards. Only one out of five handpumps was found to meet the minimum standard set on all
five service level indicators and not one service provider was found to meet the benchmark on all eleven
service provider indicators. Especially on the indicators related to record keeping, water quality testing and
financial management, less than a quarter of WSMTs-SC managed to meet the service provider indicator
benchmark. This raises the question of whether the benchmarks on these indicators may have been set too
high, and maybe even whether there is a need to rethink certain ideas behind the community ownership and
management model in Ghana.
Positive correlations were found between service provider performance and service levels and between
reliability and service provider performance. Also a positive correlation was found between monitoring by
the service authorities and service levels. However, even for reliable handpumps, the proportion managed by
WSMTs-SC meeting the service provider indicators, was found to be low on indicators like financial
1 No positive correlation was found between reliability and political interference and between reliability and water quality
testing. Therefore these indicators are not shown in figure 4.
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
not
met
met not
met
met not
met
met not
met
met
Record
keeping
Revenue-
expenditure
balance
Tariffs Monitoring
support
Service provider indicators Service
authority
indicator
Proportion of handpumps
Service level I: Not functional or
not used
Service level II: Minimum
standards not met on one or
more indicators
Service level III: Minimum
standards met on all indicators

ADANK, KUMASI, CHIMBAR, ATENGDEM, AGBEMOR, DICKINSON & ABBEY
6
management, WSMT composition and record keeping. This reaffirms the question on whether or not the
benchmarks on certain indicators may have been set too high.
Figure 4. Service provider performance and reliability
Source: Authors
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to extend thanks to CWSA in providing leadership in the development of the
framework for monitoring rural and small town water services in Ghana. Furthermore, the authors are
grateful to the local government staff of the three Triple-S focus districts and other WASH sector
stakeholders, whose support and feedback have been invaluable throughout the process.
References
ADANK, M., KUMASI, T.C., ABBEY, E., DICKINSON, N., DZANSI, ATENGDEM, J. A.,
CHIMBAR, T. L. AND EFFAH-APPIAH, E. 2013 The status of rural water supply services in Ghana:
A synthesis of findings from 3 districts (Akatsi, Sunyani West and East Gonja Districts). IRC Ghana:
Accra.
AKVO 2013. FLOW 1.5.0 documentation. AKVO: Amsterdam. Available at:
<www.flow.readthedocs.org/en/latest/#>
CWSA-COMMUNITY WATER AND SANITATION AGENCY. 2013. Annual report 2012. CWSA:
Accra
CWSA-COMMUNITY WATER AND SANITATION AGENCY. 2014. Framework for assessing and
monitoring rural and small town water supply services in Ghana. CWSA: Accra
KUMASI, T.C. ADANK, M. DICKINSON, N. ABBEY, E. CHIMBAR, T. L. ATENGDEM J. &
AGBEMOR B.D. 2014. Monitoring water services in Ghana: the why, the what, the how and the cost.
Paper presented at 27th WEDC Conference, September 2014, Hanoi, Vietnam.
RURAL WATER SUPPLY NETWORK (RWSN), 2009. Myths of the Rural Water Supply Sector,
Perspectives No. 4, RWSN Executive Steering Committee, July 2009. Rural Water Supply Network: St
Gallen. Available at <http://www.rwsn.ch>
Contact details
Marieke Adank
Address: P.O. Box 82327
2508 EH The Hague
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 70 3044032
Fax:+31 70 3044044
Email: adank@ircwash.org
www.ircwash.org
Tyhra Carolyn Kumasi
Address: Triple-S Ghana, CWSA Head Office,
PMB-KIA, Accra
Ghana
Tel: +233 244 386231
Fax: +23321518402/5
Email: kumasi@ircwash.org
www.waterservicesthatlast.com
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Proportion of handpumps managed by
WSMT-SC meeting the service provider
indicator benchmark
Service provider indictors
Unreliable handpumps Reliable handpumps

ADANK, KUMASI, CHIMBAR, ATENGDEM, AGBEMOR, DICKINSON & ABBEY
7