Gujarat Databook, Part-1 [2012-13]

Annual Performance Assessment Report of Urban Water supply and Sanitation - Gujarat Databook, Part-1 [2012-13] CEPT University July 2014 DATABOOK PART - 1 State Profile Dhanera Tharad Palanpur Thara Radhanpur Idar Harij Rapar Mehsana Modasa Bhachau Bhuj Kadi Viramgam Gandhidham Maliyamiyana Jhalod Dhrangadhra Mandavi Dahod Dholka DevagadhBariya Dhrol Savri Halol Okha Chotila Sikka Dhandhuka Khambhat ChhotaUdaipur Rajkot Dwarka Khambhaliya Kalavad Baravala Dabhoi Karjan Jamraval Gondal Gadhda Rajpipla Upleta Jetpur Ankleshwar Visavadar Savarkundla Talaja Mahuva Tarsadi Jafrabad Kodinar Una Vapi Umargam About Tableau maps: www.tableausoftware.com/mapdata Overall Performance All Sectors State Level Aggregation of Indicator Values for 2012-13 Harij Gandhidham Mandavi Dhrol Chotila Dwarka Rajpipla Ankleshwar Tarsadi Kodinar About Tableau maps: www.tableausoftware.com/mapdata Umargam Water supply indicators Maximum Minimun Mean Median Mode Mean Count Coverage of water supply connections 100.0 0.0 73.0 74.5 75.9 165.0 Coverage of water supply connections in slums 100.0 0.0 53.1 59.9 0.0 143.0 Per capita available of water at consumer end 288.0 12.4 88.5 83.1 107.1 165.0 Extent of metering of water connections 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 166.0 Extent of Non Revenue Water 55.3 1.1 19.9 18.4 10.0 158.0 Continuity of water supply 9.0 0.1 1.3 1.0 1.0 165.0 Efficiency in redressal of customer complaints (WS) 100.0 39.4 92.5 98.2 100.0 165.0 Quality of water supplied 100.0 0.0 96.4 100.0 100.0 161.0 Cost recovery in water supply services 249.4 5.1 68.6 56.7 52.7 155.0 Efficieny in collection of water supply related charges 96.8 7.5 60.4 63.3 63.7 160.0 Wastewater indicators Maximum Minimun Mean Median Mode Mean Count Coverage of Toilets 100.0 34.2 75.1 75.6 80.0 166.0 Coverage of individual toilets in slums 100.0 0.0 59.3 67.1 0.0 147.0 Coverage of wastewater network services 100.0 0.0 15.5 0.0 0.0 166.0 Coverage of wastewater network services in slums 100.0 0.0 9.1 0.0 0.0 137.0 Collection efficiency of wastewater networks 100.0 0.0 8.5 0.0 0.0 163.0 Adequacy of wastewater treatment capacity 143.1 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 164.0 Quality of wastewater treatment 100.0 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 166.0 Extent of reuse and recycling of treated watsewater 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 166.0 Efficieny in redressal of customer complaints (WW) 100.0 0.0 81.5 97.8 100.0 165.0 Exetent of cost recovery in wastewater management 223.8 0.0 22.4 0.0 0.0 159.0 Efficiency in collection of sewerage charges 100.0 0.0 24.5 0.0 0.0 162.0 SWM indicators Maximum Minimun Mean Median Mode Mean Count Household level coverage of SWM services 100.0 0.0 84.9 89.7 100.0 166.0 HH level coverage of SWM services in slums 100.0 0.0 64.2 75.5 100.0 156.0 Extent of segregation of municipal solid waste 21.1 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 166.0 Extent of municipal solid waste recovered 100.0 0.0 19.8 0.0 0.0 166.0 Extent of scientific disposal of municipal solid waste 100.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 166.0 Efficiency in redressal of customer complaints (SWM) 100.0 5.0 96.2 100.0 100.0 162.0 Extent of cost recovery in solid waste management services 73.4 0.0 18.2 15.1 0.0 158.0 Efficiency in collection of solid waste management charges 97.0 0.0 54.9 58.0 0.0 160.0 Storm water drainage indicators Maximum Minimun Mean Median Mode Mean Count Coverage of Storm Water Drainage Network 89.8 0.0 12.5 5.6 0.0 167.0 Incidence of water logging/flooding 120.0 0.0 5.6 2.0 0.0 167.0 State Level Performance in Urban Water and Sanitation: 2012-13 Access and Coverage Coverage related indicators are measured at the smallest unit of a household (HH). For water and sanitation, the indicator measures households served by individual connection/ toilets, and for SWM, it measures households served by door to door collection of MSW. 2013 100 Benchmark Value = 100 % 80 e g 60 a t n e c r e P 40 20 0 Coverage of water supply Coverage of Toilets Coverage of WW network HH level coverage of SWM connections services services Equity in Service Delivery Equity in Service Delivery captures the variations in services provided within a city, across all sectors. Moreover, it measures the variations between poor and non-poor sections of the city. 2013 100 80 e g 60 a t n e c r e P 40 20 0 Coverage of water supply Coverage of individual toilets Coverage of WW network HH level coverage of SWM connections in slums in slums services in slums services in slums State Level Performance in Urban Water and Sanitation: 2012-13 Financial Sustainability Financial sustainability is measured based on the extent of O&M cost recovery in each sector; recovery through local charges and taxes. Another important aspect of financial sustainability is determined by the collection efficieny of service charges for all the sectors. Extent of Cost Recovery 2013 100 Benchmark Value = 100 % 80 e g 60 a t n e c r e P 40 20 0 Cost recovery in water supply services Exetent of cost recovery in WW Extent of cost recovery in SWM services management Efficiency of Collection of Service Charges 2013 100 Benchmark Value = 90 % 80 e g 60 a t n e c r e P 40 20 0 Efficieny in collection of water supply Efficiency in collection of sewerage Efficiency in collection of SWM charges related charges charges State Profile Water Supply Summary of Water Supply Services: 2012-13 Water Supply Coverage Total number of households Households served by water 5220023 supply connections 5147710 4220119 4109454 Water Production Ground sources 832 MLD 829 MLD Bulk water Purchased Own surface Total water produced 2857 MLD 2764 MLD sources 3902 MLD 213 MLD 3885 MLD 293 MLD Service Levels ULBs supplying Avg. days Avg. duration Lpcd >= 100 of Supply of Supply 56 ULBs 23.1 days 1.33 hours 47 ULBs 23.3 days 1.32 hours State Level Performance in Water Supply Services: 2012-13 Coverage of water supply connections at HH level (%) Total households connected to the water supply network with a private (not shared) service connection, as percentage of total households in the ULB. 2013 Top Performing ULBs (2013) 100 Benchmark Value = 100 % Savri 100.0 Sojitra 100.0 ) Chanasma 99.2 % ( s 80 Bantawa 99.2 n o i t Karjan 99.0 c e Patan 99.0 n n o Manavadar 98.7 c y 60 l Santrampur 97.9 p p u Kapadvanj 97.5 s r Bhuj 97.3 e t a Khambhaliya 97.2 w 40 f o Mansa 97.2 e g Mandavi 97.1 a r e Amod 96.8 v o C 20 Kalavad 96.1 Amreli 95.4 Rajpipla 95.0 0 Balasinor 94.9 Gujarat Municipal Corporations Other Municipalities Jamjodhpur 94.2 Gandhinagar 93.3 Coverage of water supply connections in 'slum settlements' (%) Total households in slum settlements connected to water supply network with a private (not shared) service connection, as percentage of total households in all slum settlements in the ULB. 2013 Top Performing ULBs (2013) 100 Amod 100.0 ) % Sojitra 100.0 ( s Bhachau 99.5 m u l Mandavi s 80 99.2 n i Bantawa 97.1 s n o Valsad 96.8 i t c Deesa e 95.0 n 60 n Savri 92.1 o c y Boriyavi 91.8 l p p Kalol 91.0 u s r 40 Chalal 90.9 e t a Thara 90.0 w f Kalavad 89.6 o e Baravala 88.5 g a r 20 Talala e 87.5 v o Shahera 86.5 C Vijalpore 84.5 0 Palitana 83.4 Gujarat Municipal Corporations Other Municipalities Patan 83.1 Padra 82.8 Nadiad State Level Performance in Water Supply Services: 2012-13 Per capita supply of water (Lpcd) This indicator captures the quantity of water supplied to consumers daily. This considers only authorized billed and unbilled residential consumers. 2013 Top Performing ULBs (2013) 140 Benchmark Value = 135 lpcd Gandhinagar 288.0 Thara 225.2 120 Mandavi_S 223.9 ) Sojitra 167.7 d c Mehmadabad 157.5 p L 100 ( Bharuch 157.3 r e t a Vadodara 156.4 w f 80 Kheralu 154.5 o y l Umreth 154.0 p p u Ahmedabad 143.2 s 60 a Dabhoi 141.8 t i p a Kadi 137.3 c r Petlad 134.1 e 40 P Anklav 132.5 Padra 132.4 20 Dhrangadhra 131.7 Chanasma 129.2 0 Valsad 128.6 Gujarat Municipal Corporations Other Municipalities Karjan 128.3 Ankleshwar 128.0 Extent of metering of water connections (%) Total number of functional metered water connections expressed as a percentage of total number of water supply connections (including public stand post connections). 2013 Top Performing ULBs (2013) 10 Benchmark Value = 100% Vadodara 2.7 Surat 1.2 ) % Bhavnagar 0.1 ( s 8 Ahmedabad 0.0 n o i t Amod 0.0 c e n Amreli 0.0 n o c Anand 0.0 r 6 e t Anjar 0.0 a w Anklav 0.0 f o Ankleshwar 0.0 g n i r Babra 0.0 e 4 t e Bagasra 0.0 m f Balasinor o 0.0 t n Bantawa 0.0 e t x 2 Baravala 0.0 E Bardoli 0.0 Bareja 0.0 0 Bavla 0.0 Gujarat Municipal Corporations Other Municipalities Bayad 0.0 Bhabhar 0.0 Bhachau State Level Performance in Water Supply Services: 2012-13 Extent of Non Revenue Water (%) Difference between total water produced (ex-treatment plant) and total water sold expressed as a percentage of total water produced.

Load more