Monitoring, Mapping and Institutionalising Data

Lamin K.S. Souma: Acting Chief Engineer, Water Supply Division

Ministry of Energy and Water Resources

Summary

• The Water Point Mapping survey provides Sierra Leone with a “baseline” of the status of Water Points (WP’s)

• Functional sustainability in service delivery remains a major challenge

• The Government of Sierra Leone (GoSL) must address gaps in coverage

• GoSL and WASH organisations must contribute to keeping mapping data updated

Outcomes of the WPM baseline survey

• 28,845 “improved” WP’s mapped• 18,908 “improved” WP’s are used. [65%]• However 40% are seasonal WP’s

Therefore………• 11, 212 WP’s are classed as improved, in use

and functioning all year round [39%]

Observations on the WPM survey

• The impacts of our interventions “do not last”• Services provided are not cost effective• The need for continued extended support to

communities is visible• The need to address basics and construct wells at the

"right time of year“ • The need to safeguard against environmental

degradation – monitoring groundwater resources• The importance of monitoring and ensuring

functionality

Seasonal variation in access

Wet season Dry season

Benefits of WPM

• Provides visually mapped data for monitoring the status of water points

• Highlights issues of equity, inclusiveness and targeting

• Underpins Sector Performance Monitoring (SPM)

• Will influence national and local level planning• WPM database can be integrated with

hydrogeological database and other studies

Water Point Mapping…..next steps

• Sierra Leone now has a baseline for water point coverage – the easy part

• Updating maps and addressing non functionality is the major challenge

• Need for a WASH sector strategy to deliver permanent services at national, regional and local levels

• Need to improve sector monitoring and mapping so that WPM informs National Sector Learning Review

Five important considerations for WPM

1. WPM evidence should form the basis for national and local level planning

2. Ensure technology choices aligned to field capacities

3. WPM data needs to be collected, assimilated, verified, analysed and presented

4. Updating process needs to be sustainable5. Requires dedicated staff to report on the

status of water points

Sustainability (1)

Issues to address• Technological challenges

and the use of GIS• Procedures for collecting,

reporting and updating WPM data

• Accountability challenges – “collective action” to keep WPM data updated

Sustainability (2)

• Ensure technology choices are adapted to national and local capacities

• Build capacity of government to make use of the WPM tools

• Use visually mapped data to improve coverage levels and address issues of functionality

Recommendations

Sustaining a regular updating mechanism

1. Baseline survey 2. Data base 3. Mapping 4. Analysis

5. On-going data collection at water

points

6. Data assimilation + verification 7. Update data base 8. Update Mapping

9. Analysis 10. Sector Learning review

11. Repeat steps 5 - 10

MEWR next steps…….

• Engage with MFED and DP’s to address gaps in coverage

• Pursue models for keeping data updated• Ensure the WASH sector plans for permanent

services from the outset• Undertake a second national baseline survey in

2014• Encourage all WASH organisations to monitor

functional sustainability - outcomes

Concluding comments

• There are many important issues to address at national, local and organisational levels

• Mapping data is important, but other monitoring data is also required

• Need to establish strong links between monitoring, mapping and sector learning

• Need to deliver permanent services at national, regional and local levels. This underpins the planning role of SPCT

Thank you for listening!

Lamin Souma: Chief Engineer: Water Directorate MEWR