Star Report: Zambia Compact | May 2020

Innovation Grant Program

As the final component of the Institutional Strengthening Activity, the compact made $6 million of competitive grant funding available through the Innovation Grant Program (IGP). The grants program sought to promote new and more effective ways to strengthen and expand water supply networks, create sanitation programs and infrastructure, improve drainage and solid waste management, and provide employment opportunities for the urban poor, women, and vulnerable and disadvantaged groups in Lusaka. The competitive grant application process also afforded the opportunity to solicit and identify partners that would enhance the sustainability of the compact’s overall investments.

MCC and the GOZ saw a unique opportunity to include the grants component as part of the compact design. A grants program provided flexibility and the ability to test creative approaches to the development of the water and sanitation sector that could then be replicated by the GOZ or private actors. The smaller size and independent nature of individual grants allowed the compact to address issues relating to water, sanitation, and solid waste management provision that could not be solved with large-scale infrastructure alone. Finally, small grants allowed MCA to support local business and NGOs that proposed locally developed solutions and had both the expertise and networks within the community to execute them successfully. The program also provided support to these organizations to help them to effectively manage and execute the grant. 

In total, the program launched two calls for grant proposals and ultimately financed 14 grants: two related to water supply ($2.4 million), five related to sanitation ($1.6 million), and seven related to solid waste ($1.9 million). MCC’s grant selection criteria included factors like the innovation and relevance of the proposal; expected benefits for poor/vulnerable populations and women; cost; risks; potential for sustainability beyond the end of the grant funding period; and potential for scalability. Grant funding also came with a requirement that grantees contribute certain percentages of funding (approximately 15-25 percent of the total grant amount). Cost benefit factors were included in the evaluation criteria, although a formal Economic Rate of Return calculation was not conducted prior to compact closure. The reason for this was the small size of the grants as well as the likelihood that, given the innovative nature of some of the approaches, evidence ex-ante was likely to be limited. Significant resources were put into ex-post monitoring and evaluation of the IGP overall as well as of several of the individual grants, and MCC is working to include the activities of the Jack Compound water supply grant in the closeout ERR given that it was the largest grant, totaling about $2.3 million.

Examples of grantees included:

  • The non-profit organization Peoples’ Process on Housing and Poverty in Zambia (PPHPZ) linked to the compact’s SCAP objective of supporting household connections to the sanitation network in Mtendere. The grant of $1 million supported (i) community mobilization and sensitization; (ii) the training of construction teams from the community; (iii) the planning, design, and construction of toilets with LWSC engagement; and (iv) the establishment of a revolving sanitation loan fund issued to households in the form of constructed toilets and paid back over time.
  • The Water and Sanitation Association of Zambia (WASAZA), citing poor sanitation conditions that affect students’ education, installed bio-latrines 65  that utilize biodigestion technology to process organic waste at ten schools in Lusaka. WASAZA was awarded two grants totaling $355,000 and their work included community engagement, construction of water supply systems, health and hygiene education, and business development training for community biogas entrepreneurs.
  • Through a total of $2.3 million of grant financing across the two rounds of grant selection, private sector company MECB Consulting Limited aimed to improve access to water in the Jack Compound neighborhood of Lusaka by drilling two boreholes, equipping them with energy-saving hybrid solar water pumps, installing a water transmission pipe and water tank, and constructing 30 water kiosks. The project also involved a shared management and operations approach between MECB and LWSC after the completion of construction. This project also tested the viability of a private sector water entity to engage in provision of public services at a community level.

Key output and outcome indicators (from the Indicator Tracking Table)

Institutional Strengthening Activity
Key Performance Indicators Baseline End of Compact Target Closeout Value Percent Compact Target Satisfied
Number of people trained in non-revenue water 0 80 11 14%
Operating cost coverage* 66  (%) 107 115 109 33%
Collection Efficiency* (%) 91 100 71.4 71%
Number of beneficiary individuals through the Innovation Grants Program 0 50,000 91,682 183%
Number of people trained in Social Inclusion and Gender Mainstreaming 0 210 320 152%

Explanation of Results

Gender and social mainstreaming work at both LWSC and LCC included development of Gender and Social Inclusion policies, and training of staff to operationalize those practices. The Number of people trained in Social Inclusion and Gender Mainstreaming was tracked as an indicator. The project team originally planned to train only headquarters staff at the implementing entities, and the target was set accordingly. However, it became clear during implementation that community mobilizers and officers in the peri-urban branches were critical to sustainability, so they were also included in the trainings, resulting in a completion rate of 152 percent.

The Innovation Grants Program reached more beneficiaries than expected, 183 percent of the original target, largely due to the fact that it was necessary to estimate the target well before any of the grants projects had been identified. Ultimately, the specific projects selected resulted in more beneficiares than originally anticipated.

Footnotes
  • 1. CIA World Factbook. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/za.html
  • 2. 2010 Zambia Census, https://www.zamstats.gov.zm/phocadownload/2010_Census/2010%20Census%20of%20Population%20National%20Analytical%20Report.pdf
  • 3. Republic of Zambia, Central Statistical Office, http://www.zamstats.gov.zm/phocadownload/Dissemination/Zambia%20in%20Figure%202018.pdf
  • 4. CIA World Factbook. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/za.html
  • 5. Central Statistical Office, Republic of Zambia projected increase of population from 2011 to 2035 as reported on opendataforafrica.org
  • 6. Sanitation refers to both sewer services and on-site solutions (including pit latrines and septic tanks).
  • 7. MCC Zambia Threshold Program Final Status Report, https://assets.mcc.gov/content/uploads/2017/05/report-2010001048501-zambia-threshold-final-status.pdf
  • 8. The methodology is set forth in Elena Ianchovichina and Susanna Lundstrom (2008), “What are the Constraints to Inclusive Growth in Zambia?” (Policy Note; Report No. 44286-ZM).
  • 9. For example, following the approach in the source cited in note 9 above.
  • 10. The compact largely addressed peri-urban areas. Although urban water was not identified as binding during the constraints analysis, some urban investments were built into the project due to both (a) the connected nature of water, sewer, and drain networks that make it infeasible to totally isolate urban from peri-urban areas, and (b) the importance of urban areas to the utility’s revenue model.
  • 11. Under MCC’s country ownership model, governments receiving MCC assistance are responsible for implementing the MCC-funded programs. Partner governments establish units known as accountable entities referred to as MCAs to manage implementation for compact projects.
  • 12. For discussion of the ERR update at EIF, see the Explanation of Results subsection of the Project Results section.
  • 13. These figures are from https://assets.mcc.gov/content/uploads/2017/05/mcc-err-zambia.xlsx.
  • 14. The adoption rate is the percentage of eligible households who choose to connect to the new water supply and sewerage infrastructure.
  • 15. MCC has recently increased its focus on cost-benefit analysis of policy and institutional reform interventions and developed new methodologies for this work. For the Zambia closeout ERR developed a standalone estimate of the benefits associated with the compact’s Institutional Strengthening Activity.
  • 16. Alternative assumptions regarding the quality of maintenance and the evolution of benefits would change the Zambia Project ERR as follows:  If benefits fell linearly to zero over 30 years, the ERR decreases to 3.8%.  If benefits fell to zero over 20 years, the ERR decreases to -1.5%.
  • 17. Ministerial Statement on Water Resources Management by Honorable Dora Siliya, M.P., May 2016
  • 18. The Water Resources Management Authority’s objective is to promote and adopt a dynamic, gender-sensitive, integrated, interactive, participatory and multisector approach to water resource management and development that includes human, land, environmental and socio-economic considerations, especially poverty reduction and the elimination of waterborne diseases, including malaria. http://www.wrmtest.com/warma-about-us/
  • 19. Water Supply Investment Master Plan: Investment Strategy Report, Jan 2011. http://www.mcaz.gov.zm/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Lusaka-Water-Master-Plan-investment-strategy-report-summary-for-printing.pdf
  • 20. Ibid.
  • 21. Non-revenue water is treated water that goes unpaid for. There are two main categories of non-revenue water: (a) water that is lost through leaks and broken pipes (physical losses), and (b) water that goes unbilled or unpaid for due to issues such as inaccurate water meters, water theft, poor management of billing records, and the like (commercial losses).
  • 22. The idea of adequate water quality refers to delivering water to consumers that meets drinking water standards.
  • 23. Final Sanitation Master Plan, Lusaka, Zambia. June 24, 2011. http://www.mcaz.gov.zm/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Final-Sanitation-Master-Plan-for-Printing1.pdf
  • 24. Study on Comprehensive Urban Development Plan for the City of Lusaka in the Republic of Zambia, 25. http://www.mcaz.gov.zm/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Lusaka-Water-Master-Plan-investment-strategy-report-for-printing-V2.pdf
  • 26. http://www.mcaz.gov.zm/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Final-Sanitation-Master-Plan-for-Printing1.pdf
  • 27. LWSC is also responsible for the water supply in the towns of Kafue, Chongwe and Luanga. The Water Supply Investment Master Plan therefore also included an additional six projects spread across these three towns, bringing the estimated total costs of all the projects outlined in the Plan to $815 million.
  • 28. The Water Supply Investment Master Plan does not elaborate on the 20 percent of households with access to safe water but lacking a household connection to the municipal supply. Presumably this 20 percent includes (a) households who choose not to connect to the municipal water supply in their neighborhood (e.g., perhaps because they prefer their existing private borehole well, because of affordability considerations, etc.), as well as (b) households in neighborhoods that lack the option of household-level connections but are served by community water kiosks connected to the municipal supply.
  • 29. To contextualize these statistics on non-revenue water (NRW): Using performance data from the International Benchmarking Network for Water and Sanitation Utilities (IBNET, at www.ib-net.org), the World Bank reported that NRW averages around 35 percent for developing countries. However, underreporting and geographic coverage gaps in the IBNET database led the authors to estimate that the true overall NRW level for the developing world is closer to 40-50 percent. The report further suggested that cutting these losses in half is an attainable target; the best-performing developing world utilities achieve NRW levels below 25 percent. See Kingdom, B.; Roland, L.; and P. Marin. (2006) The challenge of reducing non-revenue water (NRW) in developing countries – how the private sector can help: a look at performance-based service contracting. Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Board discussion paper no. 8. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. According to the Water Supply Investment Master Plan referenced in footnote 26, the Zambian independent utility regulator (NWASCO) considers NRW levels above 25 percent to be “unacceptable,” 20-25 percent to be “acceptable,” and below 20 percent to be “good.”
  • 30. A “just-in-time redesign” is a last-minute change where technical details are adjusted shortly before construction begins. Ideally, plans and engineering designs are developed ahead of time, to allow for optimum planning, efficiency, and coordination of various project components.
  • 31. Resettlement refers both to physical displacement (relocation or loss of shelter) and to economic displacement (loss of assets or access to assets that leads to loss of income sources or other means of livelihood) as a result of project-related land acquisition or restrictions on land use. It can be either permanent or temporary depending on the circumstances. Resettlement is considered involuntary when affected persons or communities do not have the right to refuse land acquisition or restrictions on land use that result in physical or economic displacement. This occurs in cases of (i) lawful expropriation or temporary or permanent restrictions on land use and (ii) negotiated settlements in which the buyer can resort to expropriation or impose legal restrictions on land use if negotiations with the seller fail. See International Finance Corporation. (2012). Performance Standard 5 Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement, retrievable from: https://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/115482804a0255db96fbffd1a5d13d27/PS_English_2012_Full-Document.pdf?MOD=AJPERES
  • 32. A project-affected person (“PAP”) is an individual or a family (household) that loses a home, land, or business interests because of project-required land acquisition. Any given resettlement impact could affect one or more people depending on whether it is registered for an individual, a household, a business, or other entity (such as a church or other organization).
  • 33. Throughout the livelihood restoration process, gender expertise and targeted support were extended to mitigate the particular risks that female project-affected people faced retaining control of their compensation within their households and investing in new opportunities.
  • 34. The 30 percent target was drawn from a Southern African Development Community (SADC) protocol. That protocol is now outdated. However many countries use 30 percent as a target for women’s representation in politics, and a number of companies have followed suit for board and executive level representation.
  • 35. World Economic Forum, 2016. The Future of Jobs, Table 14. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Future_of_Jobs.pdf
  • 36. A borehole well is a narrow shaft drilled vertically into the ground. It allows for pumping (extraction) and/or sampling of groundwater.
  • 37. Water Supply Investment Master Plan: Investment Strategy Report, Jan 2011. http://www.mcaz.gov.zm/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Lusaka-Water-Master-Plan-investment-strategy-report-summary-for-printing.pdf
  • 38. The compact did not fund private plumbing. Property owners had to cover the expense of installing any necessary pipes and hardware to connect their building with the new water pipes at their plot, as well as paying the utility’s water connection fees.
  • 39. As mentioned in the context of water connections, the compact did not fund private plumbing. This policy also applied to sewer connections. Property owners had to cover the expense of installing toilets, water closets, and any necessary pipes and hardware to connect their building with the new sewer line at their plot, as well as paying the utility’s sewerage connection fees.  Through the Innovation Grant Program (see the Institutional Strengthening section, below), the compact did support the creation of a small revolving loan fund to help finance household connections to the sanitation network.
  • 40. After the new sewage treatment plan comes online, it is expected that Kaunda Square will provide additional treatment capacity for heavy flows during the wet season.
  • 41. In Lusaka, especially in the peri-urban areas, the toilet is often installed in a small outbuilding constructed for the purpose. Unless the toilet uses pour-flush, a water connection is necessary. In peri-urban areas that never had water or sewer lines before the compact, households required both water and sewer connection fees at the same time.
  • 42. These figures were calculated through compact-funded studies.
  • 43. The Public Health Act prohibits pit latrines and septic tanks within 200 feet of a sewer line. Residents must therefore connect to the sewer line.
  • 44. After one year with one of two planned trash traps in place, it became clear that LCC was not yet able to manage the operation of trash traps of this design. Rather than installing the second trash trap (of the same design, intended to work in concert with the first one to improve the environmental performance of the drainage system), the first trash trap was removed and the materials placed in storage. LCC will install both traps when they are prepared to manage them. The operationalization of an autonomous solid waste management company (discussed in the Assistance to Lusaka City Council subsection, below) is expected to reduce the trash load, which should make it easier for LCC to operate and maintain the trash traps.
  • 45. The drainage works were not fully completed due to performance problems with the contractor, which had significant cash flow problems and filed for protection from creditors in December 2018.
  • 46. Total length of transmission lines constructed and rehabilitated. This indicator is tied to strengthening Water Supply.
  • 47. Total number of connections with operating meter/ total number of connections, expressed in percentage
  • 48. In year four of compact implementation, after works were underway, consultants used billing and system input data from LWSC to estimate the total baseline NRW at 56.8 percent. In the same analysis, it was estimated that the total NRW could be reduced to 41.3 percent by the end of the project, suggesting that the original target of 34 percent may have been overly ambitious.
  • 49. This indicator includes estimates total quarterly water production from the Iolanda water treatment plant (40% production) and the 120+ boreholes around Lusaka (60% production). The indicator is also reported on by LWSC and per the data quality review this indicator is estimated because there are no bulk water meters at Iolanda or at most boreholes.
  • 50. A negative completion rate requires some explanation. The compact sought to increase water produced from 23.09 million cubic meters per quarter to 24.63 million cubic meters per quarter, an increase of 1.54 million cubic meters. However, water production at compact close sat at 18.85 million cubic meters, a decrease of 4.24 million cubic meters compared to the baseline.  Dividing the actual decrease (-4.24) by the targeted increase (1.54) and converting to percent generates a completion rate of -274 percent. 
  • 51. This indicator is reported by LWSC on a quarterly basis and has fluctuated throughout the compact. It is an average for all districts of Lusaka; the number of hours of water supply can vary dramatically by neighborhood and due to inconsistent availability of electricity (e.g., load shedding during the dry season) affects the continuity of service, but no data are available on the frequency and duration of power outages at baseline or over the course of the compact, so their impact on the performance measured by this indicator is unknown.
  • 52. A negative completion rate requires some explanation. The compact sought to increase the city-wide average availability of water service by 4 hours daily, from 18 to 22 hours per day. However, water service stood at 17 hours per day at compact close, a decrease of 1 hour daily.  Dividing the actual decrease (-1) by the targeted increase (4) and converting to percent yields a completion rate of -25 percent.
  • 53. Total number of new water supply connections in the project area. These are household connections and do not include kiosk connections. This indicator is a subset of Meters installed/replaced and should not be aggregated up for reporting
  • 54. The target should have been revised to reflect rescoping early in the compact, reflecting that the work was completed. However, the erroneous target cannot now be retroactively corrected due to internal policy for transparency and accountability.
  • 55. The drainage works were not fully completed due to performance problems with the contractor, which had significant cash flow problems and filed for protection from creditors in December 2018.
  • 56. Cogswell, Lynne. 2008. Development of Sanitation Marketing Strategy and Hygiene Promotion Program for Peri-Urban Settlements of Lusaka, Zambia. Market Analysis report prepared for the World Bank Water and Sanitation Program / Africa Ministry of Local Government and Housing, Lusaka Water and Sewerage Company. The definition of “extreme poverty” used here was defined by Zambia’s Central Statistics Office in 2003 using local currency: K32,861 per month per adult (equivalent to $7/month per adult in 2003 dollars).
  • 57. In rotational staffing, employees are reassigned or “rotated” to a new position every few years. In organizations like the civil service with staffing needs across a wide geography, these rotations often involve a move from one city or region to another. Assignments typically have different job specifications and build flexibility rather than specialization or a linear progression of skills.
  • 58. It was not possible to estimate the relative proportion of physical and commercial losses when targets for non-revenue water (NRW) reduction were set early in the compact. As reported above under the explanation of results for the Infrastructure Activity, the final overall NRW reduction fell short of the target due to combination of implementation challenges and data quality issues.
  • 59. The National Water and Sanitation Council (NWASCO) is the independent utility regulator.
  • 60. Including the $11 million paid to clear arrears that were outstanding at the start of the compact, as required by a condition precedent.
  • 61. The outstanding arrears at the end of the compact reflected unpaid arrears identified in the last internal audit in October of 2017. The Government’s dependence on audits to trigger arears payments and comply with the ongoing condition precendent was the driver behind the move to legally empower LWSC to collect arrears directly.
  • 62. This assessment considered capacity for operations, maintenance, and capital improvement.
  • 63. Drainage Investment Plan for Priority Areas in Lusaka, Zambia, 2011, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. http://www.mcaz.gov.zm/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Lusaka-Drainage-Investment-Plan_Final_18-Mar-2011.pdf
  • 64. A compact-funded Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report from May 2015 indicated that the total population in this area was 188,000 people.
  • 65. Bio-latrines are latrines connected to a biogas digester. The design minimizes blockage risks and the challenges of emptying the pit under the latrine, while providing primary treatment for sanitary waste and producing biogas that can be sold to nearby street vendors and businesses.
  • 66. Total annual operational revenues divided by total annual operating costs. This indicator helps assess the financial health and stability of the utility.
  • 67. Ultimately this contribution was paid by the Ministry of Finance due to budget constraints by LCC. As previously mentioned this condition was revised to also provide for solid waste management expenses in addition to drainage maintenance and repair given the decoupling of solid waste management from the LCC and establishment of a new Solid Waste Management Company.
  • 68. In neighborhoods that do not yet have sewer lines, suitably designed on-site sanitation options exist that can replace unlined pit latrines.
  • 69. Since groundwater is an unseen resource, it is harder to measure and easier to over-exploit than surface water. But if an accurate estimate of the natural recharge rate is available and the political will is there, it’s possible to balance withdrawals against recharge so as to avoid depleting the aquifer and compromising the future viability of the groundwater supply.
  • 70. Provided that LWSC maintains effective chlorination of the treated water supply, as enabled by MCC investments, there will be a measure of protection against microbial contamination of the groundwater. However, LWSC is unable to treat for nitrate contamination, which also comes from pit latrines. Prevention is the best option, and in the case of Lusaka this would entail eliminating unlined pit latrines and digging out decommissioned ones to remove the human waste that is the nitrate source.
  • 71. In February 2012, an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) noted elevated levels of nitrate in the groundwater from several borehole wells that are part of LWSC’s supply network. These wells also had microbiological contamination. The ESIA concluded that the nitrate source was pollution from pit latrines and other waste disposal activities. Due to coordination shortcomings at MCC, awareness of potential nitrate contamination challenges was lost until 2017 when an external evaluator, CDC, reported that they had measured elevated levels of nitrate in water supplied by LWSC to some areas of the city.