why do we need sanitation facilities

As a water, sanitation and environmental specialist working in Vietnam for the East Meets West Foundation (EMWF), I have worked with Blue Planet Run and their Peer Water Exchange Program, both in the capacity of a reviewer of numerous water system proposals in Asia and Africa, and also as a NGO beneficiary of BPR funding awarded through the PWX program. I think that the Peer Water Exchange program is a novel and very useful program to assess the utility of water and sanitation program proposals that are submitted by a wide variety of people and organizations, with a very wide variety of skills and experience, from the very basic to the very experienced.
The PWX approach has several benefits. First, it is an efficient, effective and very low cost (e.g., I‘m writing this assessment for free) mechanism for assessing a wide variety of proposals submitted by some people with relatively limited experience, as well as by some others who are very experienced in the planning, development, construction, and operation, maintenance, repair and expansion of (mainly rural) water supply and sanitation facilities.
Second, the PWX approach provides an opportunity for less experienced practitioners to have their proposals reviewed by very experienced people, who are t able to provide constructive criticism of both high quality and low quality proposals, so as to help to improve the quality, utility and cost-effectiveness of a wide range of proposals. Thus, the PWX process provides useful and sometimes quite detailed suggestions for how to improve proposals (both good ones, and some not so god ones), clarifying objectives and anticipated benefits, and considering various options for appropriate engineering designs and costs that can be better tailored to fit the situation under consideration.
Thus, the PWX process is a very useful learning process that helps all proposers and reviewers to better develop and implement practical, efficient, and cost effective solutions that carefully take into account the particular conditions of the proposed site (i.e., technical design, system cost, willingness and ability to pay, operation, maintenance and repairs requirements, and costs. These are quite important to consider from the very beginning of the design and implementation process.
This learning process is particularly useful to prospective project designers and managers whose experience is currently limited. They can learn how to improve their planning and development approach, not only for the benefit of the facility beneficiaries, but also to improve the proposer’s own skills and experience in consultation with proposed beneficiary groups, local authorities, planners, designers, cost estimators, construction managers and inspectors. The PWX process also can significantly improve the planning, accounting, and O&M skills of the managers of the water and sanitation facilities over the long term.
Too many rural water and sanitation programs in the past have focused mainly upon engineering design, without carefully considering the long-term financing, water tariffs, O&M and expansion requirements, and the beneficial impacts of the water and or sanitation facilities they plan to build. This can (and unfortunately has) often led to early failure of water and sanitation systems, much to the disappointment of the planers, builders, operators, and particularly the beneficiaries.
This briefly summarizes why the PWX process is such a useful approach to allocating funding among the numerous proposals soliciting funding. After careful and objective reviews of the numerous proposals submitted, the limited available funding can then be most effectively and efficiently allocated to the best-qualified proposals.
Rick McGowan
Colorado State University (MSc. Mechanical Engineering)

As a water, sanitation and environmental specialist working in Vietnam for the East Meets West Foundation (EMWF), I have worked with Blue Planet Run and their Peer Water Exchange Program, both in the capacity of a reviewer of numerous water system proposals in Asia and Africa, and also as a NGO beneficiary of BPR funding awarded through the PWX program. I think that the Peer Water Exchange program is a novel and very useful program to assess the utility of water and sanitation program proposals that are submitted by a wide variety of people and organizations, with a very wide variety of skills and experience, from the very basic to the very experienced.
The PWX approach has several benefits. First, it is an efficient, effective and very low cost (e.g., I‘m writing this assessment for free) mechanism for assessing a wide variety of proposals submitted by some people with relatively limited experience, as well as by some others who are very experienced in the planning, development, construction, and operation, maintenance, repair and expansion of (mainly rural) water supply and sanitation facilities.
Second, the PWX approach provides an opportunity for less experienced practitioners to have their proposals reviewed by very experienced people, who are t able to provide constructive criticism of both high quality and low quality proposals, so as to help to improve the quality, utility and cost-effectiveness of a wide range of proposals. Thus, the PWX process provides useful and sometimes quite detailed suggestions for how to improve proposals (both good ones, and some not so god ones), clarifying objectives and anticipated benefits, and considering various options for appropriate engineering designs and costs that can be better tailored to fit the situation under consideration.
Thus, the PWX process is a very useful learning process that helps all proposers and reviewers to better develop and implement practical, efficient, and cost effective solutions that carefully take into account the particular conditions of the proposed site (i.e., technical design, system cost, willingness and ability to pay, operation, maintenance and repairs requirements, and costs. These are quite important to consider from the very beginning of the design and implementation process.
This learning process is particularly useful to prospective project designers and managers whose experience is currently limited. They can learn how to improve their planning and development approach, not only for the benefit of the facility beneficiaries, but also to improve the proposer’s own skills and experience in consultation with proposed beneficiary groups, local authorities, planners, designers, cost estimators, construction managers and inspectors. The PWX process also can significantly improve the planning, accounting, and O&M skills of the managers of the water and sanitation facilities over the long term.
Too many rural water and sanitation programs in the past have focused mainly upon engineering design, without carefully considering the long-term financing, water tariffs, O&M and expansion requirements, and the beneficial impacts of the water and or sanitation facilities they plan to build. This can (and unfortunately has) often led to early failure of water and sanitation systems, much to the disappointment of the planers, builders, operators, and particularly the beneficiaries.
This briefly summarizes why the PWX process is such a useful approach to allocating funding among the numerous proposals soliciting funding. After careful and objective reviews of the numerous proposals submitted, the limited available funding can then be most effectively and efficiently allocated to the best-qualified proposals.
Rick McGowan
Colorado State University (MSc. Mechanical Engineering)

Dear Rajesh,

having been a member of Peer Water Exchange for quite a long time now, we appreciate the approach of various partner organizations coming together on to PWX to discuss on implemented projects or new ideas of members and even the approval of each others proposals. In addition to that we also profit from the possibility to exchange knowledge and experiences with the other members. Knowing that other members will review our project proposals and reports, this approach also adds more competition to our field, which motivates us to try as hard as possible.

As the staff turnover and bureaucracy in general is reduced by the method used by PWX, the impact achieved by funding projects is even greater. The Safer Future Youth Development Project is one of the smallest partners of the PWX, but still has the same rights and advantages as all the other members.

Kind regards,
Shuiab S. Kamara

Dear Rajesh

I really like this model of engaging grassroots implementers who have hands on experience in joining a discussion on best practices. It gives a voice to the most important stakeholders who not only can relay their experiences, but of those beneficiaries they are serving. I would like to see more of this highlighted in your proposal as I believe that it supports the multi-lateral approach to making the attitude shifts that are required to have a sustainable project.

Good luck
Gemma

Hi Rajesh-ji,

It is good to see your entry and website.

I would think that there are many ways for funding to flow to your organization and provide the financial support necessary to expand awareness and participation.

Best wishes,

Brian

Rajesh
You commented" The challenge of scaling up diverse small scale rural projects has been solved!"
I ask: How?
Peace

Ron Rivera
International Coordinator
Ceramic Water Filter Program
Potters For Peace www.pottersforpeace.org
Managua, Nicaragua
tel: 505 277 3807
pottersforpeace@yahoo.com