Page 1 of 145

SLB Peer ReviewSteering Committee

“Measure and Compare for Effective Service Delivery”

Contents

Contents

Preface

Executive Summary

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

1.2 Objectives of Service Level Benchmarking

1.3SLB Methodology Adopted in Zimbabwe

1.3.1 Inception

1.3.2 Participatory development of indicators

1.3.3 Data collection

1.3.4 Data analysis, validation and benchmarks

2. Peer Review Process – Setup and Methodology

2.1 Definition

2.2 Objectives of the SLB Peer Review Process

2.3 Governance Structure

2.3.1 Government

2.3.2 Zimbabwe Local Government Association (ZILGA)

2.3.3 Peer Review Steering Committee (PRSC)

2.3.4 Peer Review Panels

2.4 Activities for 2014

2.4.1 Activities and Key Deliverables

2.4.2 Matrices for Visits to Different Towns

3. Results from the 2014 Peer Review Process

3.1 Trend Analysis of 2013 SLB indicators

3.1.1 Water Supply Indicators

3.1.2 Wastewater Management Indicators

3.1.3 Solid Waste Management Indicators

3.1.4 Summary of 2013 Indicators

3.2 Availability and Reliability of Data

3.3 Performance Ranking of Councils

3.4 SWOT Analysis

3.5 Key Challenges Faced by Councils

3.6 Best practices

3.7 Emerging Issues

3.8 Key Recommendations by Peer Reviewers

4. Lessons Learnt and Way Forward

4.1 Lessons Learnt

4.1.1 Process and Organisation

4.1.2 Understanding of Questionnaires

4.1.3 Documentation

4.2 Way forward

4.2.1 Format of Visits in 2015

4.2.2 Planned Workshops and Meetings

4.2.3 Capacity Development

4.2.4 Look and Learn Visits

4.2.5 Performance Improvement Plans

4.2.6 Handbooks and Documentation

Executive Summary

Performance management and improvement are an integral part of the national drive towards prosperity as enunciated in the Government of Zimbabwe’s current economic blueprint – the Zimbabwe Agenda for Sustainable Socio-Economic Transformation (ZIMASSET). In 2012, the Government of Zimbabwe (GoZ), through the Ministry of Local Government, Public Works and National Housing and the Ministry of Environment, Water and Climate, started a Service Level Benchmarking (SLB) project to monitor and improve service delivery in the urban water and sanitation sector. The GoZwas partnered by the World Bank Water and Sanitation Program, the Urban Councils Association of Zimbabwe (UCAZ). The project developed data collection instruments which were used to gather baseline data on the performance of councils in 2012. Thereafter, a participatory approach was used by the partners to develop and agree on target benchmarks to guide the sector between 2013 to 2018.

A second run of the SLB process was conducted in 2014 using a peer review system. This required the development of processes and procedures to guide benchmarking and ensure gradual translation of the process from central to local government. Peer Review Teams were formed in July 2014 and visited councils to collect data and scrutinise the operation of each council. The visits started end of July and lasted until mid-November 2014. In-between, the SLB Project was officially launched by the GoZin September 2014 in Mutare.

This report reviews the progress of the SLB process to date and gives a summary of the results of the Peer Review Process of 2014. As expected, the results did not show much change from the 2012 data as there were no meaningful injection of funds into the urban water and sanitation sector. However, it is evident that some councils did take steps to address some areas of concern, especially those that did not require a lot of funding. A change of systems and attitudes was also reflected in the movement of indicators. As this was a second round of data collection,some of the movements in indicators could also be due to a tightening of the data gathering systems as officials became more conscious of the need to keep proper and accurate records. Some councils carried out property surveys and this, in a way, helped them to improve revenue collection by identifying properties that were missing from their databases.

The results for water supply indicators are shown in the table below. The important findings are that non-revenue water and bill collection efficiency require urgent attention. Redressing customer complaints and making provisions for maintenance of ageing infrastructure are also key issues requiring equal attention. The testing of the quality of drinking water right from the treatment plant, intermediate points (reservoirs and pumping stations), and consumer end need to be tightened and guided by clear protocols.

On wastewater management, the collection of sewage for treatment is still very low. It is evident that sewage is being collected from sources but most of it is not reaching wastewater treatment plants. This is revealed by a high treatment capacity in relation to the incoming sewage. It is also important that flows at sewage treatment plants are recorded and that the plants themselves are well-maintained. The testing of sewage seems to have improved and this needs to be encouraged for current and future decision making. Instead of discharging sewage directly into rivers, councils are encouraged to reuse it in neighbouring farms. However, a lot of work is needed to encourage local farmers to accept sewage effluent for crop irrigation.

Results for refuse collection show an appreciable effort by councils although the general impression in the country is that solid waste is not being properly managed. Councils have invested in the acquisition of refuse collection equipment, although a lot still needs to be done. The other problems in this area are to do with lack of recycling/reuse of solid waste materials and lack ofscientific refuse disposal systems. Councils are still a long way from developing compliant landfills as prescribed by the Environmental Management Agency(EMA) as these require appropriate land and adequate funds. What is urgent at this moment is to have a pilot demonstration of a compliant landfill in one or two councils so that everyone appreciates what is required.

Besides collecting data, the Peer Review Process has allowed councils to visit each other and evaluate/assess issues affecting service delivery in each council. Some of the issues that came out are that some councils do not have a sound economic base to sustain local economies and that some face serious manpower challenges. Although ICT is a strength in some councils, the lack of it in others is hindering effective service delivery. There are councils still using manual receipting and accounting. The prevailing economic situation is affecting council cash flows, resulting in some failing to pay their employees, maintain/service existing equipment, orpurchase critical new equipment. In terms of threats, councils are grappling with illegal/unplanned settlements and settlements being developed by rural district councils on their borders.

Going forward, the councils have identified the following as critical to improved service delivery:

  • Development of Master/Strategic Plans
  • Increased stakeholder participation and coordination
  • Expansion and rehabilitation of infrastructure
  • Improved revenue collection strategies
  • Reviewing of tariff structures to economic levels
  • Establishment of compliant landfills

The SLB Project will continue in 2015 by increasingly focusing on the domestication of the SLB process at council level. This will be anchored on the development and implementation of Information Systems Improvement Plans (ISIP) and Performance Improvement Plants (PIP). The two will entail the development of action plans which are linked to or feed into the council budgetary system.

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

In 2008/9 Zimbabwe experienced a seriousoutbreak of cholera resulting in over 4,000 deaths. WASH (Water, Sanitation and Hygiene) infrastructure in the country had deteriorated to unprecedented levels as evidenced by frequent breakdown of equipment.This resulted in highwater leakages,sewer over-flows, and shortage of potable water, which in turnresulted in urban residents resorting tothe use of unprotected shallow wells. On the other hand, there was a lot of uncollected refuse due to lack of requisite resources.This situation was linked to, and sustained by hyperinflation, lack of foreign currencyneeded to buy essential equipment and spares, skills flight, high rural-urban migration and eroded revenues. A need therefore arose for stakeholders to find a lasting solution to contain this situation. This called for definitive interventions aimed at addressing the challenges bedevilling the sector which included:

  • Rapid appraisal reports by engineering consultants to get a better understanding of the problems
  • Provision of water treatment chemicals to urban councils to ensure clean water reaches consumers
  • Emergency rehabilitation of water and sanitation infrastructure
  • Establishment of WASH clusters
  • Capacity building for water and wastewater operators
  • Transfer back of water and wastewater infrastructure management from ZINWA to local authorities
  • A number of studies were conducted to assess status and needs in WASH, these include water tariffs study, water sector investment framework, Greater Harare water supply and sanitation investment framework, dam safety study, etc
  • Development of National Water Policy of 2013, and the Sanitation and Hygiene Strategy of 2011
  • Service Level Benchmarking of water supply and sanitation services
  • Review of regulatory and coordination structures in WASH sector

Upon realising the needforwell-coordinated and sustainable WASH services, relevant Cabinet Ministers met in Nyanga in February 2010. The meeting agreed on WASH coordination frameworks which included the formation of the National Action Committee and its sub-committees. Following the Tariff Study conducted in 2011, the Ministry of Local Government, Public Works and National Housing (MLGPW&NH) in September 2012 requested the World Bank for technical and financial support for the establishment and implementation of a service level benchmarking (SLB) system forurban WASH services.

In 2012, the World Bank Water and Sanitation Programme WSP), in partnership with the Ministry of Local Government, Public Works and National Housing,the Ministry of Environment, Water and Climate (MoEWC) andUrban Councils Association of Zimbabwe (UCAZ) identified water, wastewater and solid waste as key elements in service delivery. These three services formed the basis for SLB.

1.2Objectives of Service Level Benchmarking

The objectives of the Zimbabwean SLB process were defined as follows:

  1. To formulate and develop a local benchmarking framework in Zimbabwe based on regional and international best practises.
  2. To usethe developed framework to collect relevant and statistically valid data from the service providers in order to assess and develop local and practical benchmarks. The local benchmarks would be progressively adjusted to international levels.
  3. To prepare a citizenship feedback mechanism for periodically communicating service provider performance.
  4. To prepare, based on experiences from data collection and analysis, a manual or standard handbook on the benchmarking process in Zimbabwe.

1.3SLB Methodology Adopted in Zimbabwe

The SLB Project was divided into the following phases:

1.3.1 Inception

The SLB project started with an inception phase and an inception workshopwhich was held in September 2012. The purpose of the workshop was to refine the methodology and present the draft data collection instruments.

1.3.2 Participatory development of indicators

The draft data collection instruments were presented to town engineers and other officials from urban local authoritiesand Zimbabwe National Water Authority (ZINWA) officials at a workshop held in October 2012. Three questionnaires, on water supply, wastewater management, and solid waste management, anda reliability assessment framework were presented and thoroughly analysed. The process of finalising the data collection instruments continued after the workshop and lasted until the end of November 2012.

1.3.3 Data collection

The data collection was betweenJanuary and March 2013. It was carried out by a team comprising of members from WSP, UCAZ, MLGPW&NH, MEWC, staff and MSc students from the University of Zimbabwe. A capacity building element was incorporated into the project right from the start when data collection teams were formulated (Fig 1.1). Data for 2012, on water supply, wastewater and solid waste management,were collected from all the 32 urban local authorities in Zimbabwe.

Figure 1.1. Incorporation of the local capacity building element into the SLB Project by ensuring involvement of all key partners right from the beginning

1.3.4 Data analysis, validation and benchmarks

The data werecompiled in a master sheet and results presented to UCAZforum meetings, the Infrastructure Technical Reference Group (ITRG), Australian Embassy, Africa Development Bank, GIZ and UNICEF. A technical review workshop was held in Kadoma to validate the data, review data collection tools and set local benchmarks. The most important outcome of the Kadoma Workshop was the unanimous agreement that from 2014, the benchmarking exercise wouldbe led by UCAZ teams through a peer review mechanism with financial and technical support from the World Bank for three years.

2. Peer Review Process – Setup and Methodology

2.1 Definition

Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people of similar competence to the producers of the work (peers). It constitutes a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field. Peer review methods are employed to maintain standards of quality, improve performance, and provide credibility. Peer review in urban service level benchmarking can thus be described as the systematic examination and assessment of the performance of a council/utility by other councils/utilities. Peer reviews in Zimbabwean local authorities have therefore been designed to support and facilitate the drive for quality improvement using a process that responds to changes in national development and priorities.

2.2 Objectives of the SLB Peer Review Process

  1. To support and facilitate improvements in the delivery of water and sanitation services (water supply, wastewater management, and solid waste management) in Zimbabwe, against agreed national and international standards of performance.
  2. To carry out a thorough participatory review and report on the findings.
  3. To facilitate the delivery of recommended service improvements/changes in partnership with those using and delivering services.
  4. To provide opportunities for sharing/learning good practice and benchmarking services on a national basis.
  5. To provide an effective mechanism for council and residents involvement, thus ensuring two-way communication.

2.3 Governance Structure

The Peer Review process is carried out through agreed programme implementation structures, as shown in Fig 2.1. However, the structure is also supported by cooperating partners such as the World Bank, UNICEF, GIZ, AusAid and AfDB.

Figure 2.1. Governance Structure for SLB Peer Review Adopted in Zimbabwe

2.3.1 Government

The government membership will comprise the WASH Cluster, namely;

  1. Ministry of Local Government, Public Works and National Housing
  2. Ministry of Environment, Water and Climate,
  3. Ministry of Health and Child Care,
  4. Ministry of Finance,
  5. Ministry of Economic Development,
  6. Ministry of Energy and Power Development,
  7. Ministry of Agriculture, Mechanisation and Irrigation Development,
  8. National Action Committee on Water, and
  9. National Coordination Unit (Secretariat).

2.3.2 Urban Councils Association of Zimbabwe (UCAZ)

This will comprise all urban local authorities and the attendant structures of the Association, namely;

  1. Executive Committee,
  2. Presidential Committee,
  3. Finance and Audit Subcommittee,
  4. Technical Services Subcommittee,
  5. Health Services Subcommittee,
  6. Management, Manpower and Legal Subcommittee
  7. Housing and Social Services Subcommittee, and
  8. Women in Local Government Forum.

The above committees are serviced by Council Officials’ Fora.

2.3.3 Peer Review Coordinating Committee (PRCC)

a) Membership of PRCC

  1. Chairperson of Town Clerks Forum (Chair)
  2. Secretary of Town Clerks Forum
  3. Chairperson of Town Engineers Forum
  4. Chairperson of Directors of Finance Forum
  5. Chairperson of Housing Officers Forum
  6. Chairperson of Health Officers Forum
  7. Representative from Ministry of Local Government, Public Works and National Housing
  8. Representative from Ministry of Environment, Water and Climate
  9. Representative from Ministry of Health and Child Care
  10. Representative from Ministry of Energy and Power Development
  11. Representative from Ministry of Finance
  12. Representative from the Zimbabwe National Water Authority (ZINWA)
  13. Representative from UCAZ Secretariat

b) Terms of Reference of PRSC

  1. Devise and maintain a schedule of peer reviews of urban water and sanitation services, ensuring that the performance of each utility is reviewed every year or more frequently as necessary.
  2. Revise and circulate a template for Peer Review Reports for each year, depending on agreed areas of focus.
  3. Organise and hold at least one general meeting of stakeholders each calendar year.
  4. Prepare and submit an annual report of Peer Reviews to stakeholders, including the Urban WASH Sub-Committee.
  5. Oversee the peer review process, to ensure that reviews are carried out in a timely and objectively, and to ensure that peer review is an appropriate and effective process.
  6. Provide final sign-off of each of the peer review reports within four weeks of peer review date.
  7. Develop and implement a capacity building or training programme to support the peer review process.
  8. Act as an honest broker for appeals and complaints against individual peer reviews.

2.3.4 Peer Review Panels

a) Membership of Peer Review Panels

Each peer review team comprises the following officials:

  1. Representative of Town Clerks Forum (Chair)
  2. Representative of Chamber Secretaries Forum
  3. Representative of Town Engineers Forum
  4. Representative of Directors of Finance Forum
  5. Representative of Housing Officers Forum
  6. Representative of Health Officers Forum
  7. One representative from Ministry of Local Government, Public Works and National Housing and/or from Ministry of Environment, Water and Climate
  8. Representative from ZINWA
  9. UCAZ Peer Review Project Coordinator
  10. Representative of World Bank WSP

b) Terms of Reference of Peer Review Panels

  1. Analyse peer review data in accordance with agreed benchmarks, SLB Data Collection Handbook and reliability scoring, and SLB Peer Review Handbook.
  2. Be prepared to communicate with relevant staff from the council/utility under review for purposes of data clarification.
  3. As independent reviewers of the service, communicate with the rest of the peer review panel members by email, teleconference, or any other means.
  4. Attend the peer review meeting.
  5. Contribute to the peer review report in a timeous manner.

2.4Activities for 2014

2.4.1 Activities and Key Deliverables

The timelines for activities and key deliverables in 2014 are shown in Fig 2.2 and described briefly below.