Evaluation of the Sustainiblity of Rural Water Supply Schemes: a Case of Bambasi Woreda

EVALUATION OF THE SUSTAINIBLITY OF RURAL WATER SUPPLY SCHEMES: A CASE OF BAMBASI WOREDA

M.Sc. THESIS

TAREKEGN BIRHANU

ARBA MINCH, ETHIOPIA

NOVEMBER, 2017

Evaluation of The Sustainability of Rural Water Supply Schemes : A Case of Bambasi Woreda

MSc. Thesis

Tarekegn Birhanu

A Thesis Submitted to The Department of Water Supply and

Environmental Engineering

Institute of Technology, School of Graduate Studies,

Arba Minch University

In Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for The Degree of Master of Science in

Water Supply and Sanitation Engineering.

Arba Minch

November, 2017

SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES

ARBA MINCH UNIVERSITY

APPROVAL PAGE

This thesis entitled with “Evaluation of The Sustainability of Rural Water Supply Schemes: A Case of Bambasi Woreda” has been approved by the following advisor, examiners, department head and SGS coordination in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Irrigation Engineering and Management.

Date of Defense: November 3, 2017

Submitted by: -

Tarekegn Birhanu ______

Name Signature Date

Approved by: -

1. Mihiret Danto (PhD) ______

Name External Examiner Signature Date

2. Kinfe Kassa (Dr. Ing) ______

Name of Internal Examiner Signature Date

3. Mr. Mosisa Teferi (MSc.) ______

Name of Chairperson Signature Date

4. Beshah Mogesse (PhD) ______

Name of Principal advisor Signature Date

5. Mr. Mosisa Teferi (MSc.) ______

Department head Signature Date

6. Mr. Aschalew Cherie (MSc.) ______

Coordinator, SGS Signature Date

7. Abera Uncha (PhD) ______Director, SGS Signature Date DEDICATION

This thesis manuscript is dedicated to my mother, TSGIREDA BELAY, when she was in alive for their sacrifice in the success of my life. ______

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

With the help of "Almighty God", now everything comes to the end of the started journey and beginning of a new one. Next to God, I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to my advisor, Dr. Beshah Mogesse, for his invaluable assistance, advice, constructive comments and follow up throughout the research process. At this junction, I would also like to thank Dr. Mekonene Ayana supporting me during title identification and proposal formulation.

I would like to acknowledge the financial and material supports for my Master’s study and the research from my Bureau (Benishangul Gumuz Water, Mine and energy Bureau), and Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Electricity. I am gratefully to all Bambasi woreda water, mine and energy staffs and experts at the visited kebeles for providing me the available data for my study. Moreover, I express my deep indebtedness to Mr Addisu Temtem, WASH project planning expert at ministry of water, irrigation and electricity, who gave me necessary data for my study.

There are many friends and colleagues who have contributed to my work. Although I cannot mention all, it is compulsory to mention Mrs. Woderyelesh Moges, Mr. Endalkachew Birhanu, Mr. Dawit Tsegaye Mr. Tesfahiwot Mamo, Mr. Meresa Hdush and Mr Milkyas Adugna.

At last but not least, I want to thanks those who helped me directly or indirectly during the course work and research.

Acronyms

BeGu Benishangul Gumuz BeGuHB Benishangul Gumuz Health Bureau BeGuWMEB Benishangul Gumuz Water, mine and Energy Bureau BSc Bachelor of Since BWWO Bambasi Woreda Water, Office CSA Central Statics Authority FGDs Focus Group Desiccations GLAAS Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation GO Governmental Organization GTP-1 Growth and Transformation Plan-I GTP-2 Growth and Transformation Plan-II HDW Hand Dug Well IRC International Reference Center for community water MCA Multi- Criteria Approach MDG Millennium Development Goal MoWIE Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Electricity MSc Master of Since NAP National Accesses plan NGOs Non- Governmental Organizations O & M Operation and Maintenance RMBO Regional Meteorological Branch Office RWS Rural Water Supply SPSS Statistical Packages for Social Science SW Shallow Well UAP Universal Accesses Plane UN United Nation UNICEF United Nation Café the Children WASH Water Sanitation and Hygiene WHO World Health Organization WSSC Water Supply and Sanitation Collaboration Council

Table of content 1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1

1.1. Statement of the Problem ...... 2

1.2. General Objective ...... 3

1.2.1. Specific Objectives ...... 3

1.3. Research Questions ...... 3

1.4. Scope of the Study...... 4

2. Literature Review...... 5

2.1. Overview of Water ...... 5

2.2. Definition of Sustainability ...... 6

2.3. The Concept of Sustainability ...... 6

2.4. Existing Water Supply Situation In Ethiopia ...... 7

2.4.1. Status of Water Supply and Sanitation In Ethiopia ...... 8

2.5. Factor Affecting Sustainability of Rural Water Supply ...... 8

2.5.1. Financial Factors ...... 9

2.5.2. Technical Factors ...... 10

2.5.3. Legal and Institutional Issues...... 11

2.5.4. Community and Social Factors ...... 12

2.6. Overview of Multi Criteria Approach ...... 13

2.7. Conceptual Framework ...... 14

3. Materials and Methods ...... 16

3.1. The Study Area...... 16

3.1.1. Bambasi Woreda ...... 17

3.1.2. Population ...... 18

3.1.3. Water Demand ...... 18

3.2. Data Collection Methods ...... 18

3.3. Multi- Criteria Approach (MCA) ...... 19

iii

3.3.1. Selection of Sample Kebeles ...... 20

3.3.2. Selection of Sample water Point ...... 20

3.3.3. Selection of Sample Size ...... 21

3.4. Data Analysis ...... 21

4. Result and Discussion ...... 22

4.1. Overview of respondents profile ...... 22

4.2. Existing Water Supply Situation ...... 23

4.2.1. Public Awareness and Education...... 23

4.3. Sources of Water Supply ...... 23

4.4. Status of Water Supply Schemes ...... 26

4.4.1. Service Hours of Hand Dug Well ...... 27

4.4.2. Performance of Water Supply Schemes ...... 28

4.5. Challenge of Sustainability of RWS Schemes ...... 29

4.5.1. Site Selection and construction quality of RWS schemes ...... 29

4.5.2. Availability of local technicians and spare parts ...... 30

4.5.3. Technical aspects ...... 32

4.5.4. Availability of spare parts ...... 32

4.6. Ccommunity participation ...... 34

4.6.1. The role of water committees ...... 36

4.6.2. Challenges of water committee ...... 36

4.7. Water Tariff and Community Perception ...... 38

4.8. Water Shortage ...... 39

4.9. Water Quality ...... 40

4.9.1. Community perception about physical water quality ...... 40

4.9.2. Schemes related to construction and disinfection ...... 41

4.10. Water usage ...... 42

4.11. Multi-Criteria Analysis ...... 43

5. Conclusions and Recommendation ...... 47

5.1. Conclusions ...... 47

5.1.1. Recommendation ...... 48

REFERENCES ...... 50

ANNEX...... 55

List of Figures Page

Fig 2-1 Conceptual framework (Source: Water aid report, 2011) ...... 15 Fig 3-1 Depiction of research methodology ...... 16 Fig 3-2 Description of the study area ...... 17 Fig 4-1 Gender, Educational Background, Source of Income and Family Size ...... 22 Fig 4-2 Functional water supply schemes in keshemando 1 and Dabous kebeles...... 25 Fig 4-3 Non- functional water supply schemes...... 27 Fig 4-4 Service hours of hand dug well ...... 27 Fig 4-5 Different source of drinking water supply schemes in targeted kebeles ...... 30 Fig 4-6 HDW Spare parts that supported by NGOs and GO ...... 33 Fig 4-7 Focus group dissociation (FGDs) with all targeted kebeles water committee ...... 37 Fig 4-8 Percentage distribution household’s weekly water usage...... 42 Fig: 4-9 The Structure of Criteria, Factors, Sub-factors and their Weights ...... 44

List of Tables Page Table 2-1 Score for Sustainability Status Determination ...... 14 Table 3-1 Number of Household and sample size determination in each kebele...... 21 Table 4-1 Sources of drinking water supply in the study area ...... 24 Table 4-2 Total number of water supply and type of water schemes in Woreda ...... 26 Table 4-3 functional and non-functional water scheme in the study area ...... 26 Table 4-4 Challenge of water supply schemes in the study Kebeles ...... 28 Table 4-5 Availability of local technicians and their skills ...... 31 Table 4-6 community participation during pre-and post-construction ...... 34 Table 4-7 Number of water committee and their responsibility ...... 36 Table 4-8 Respondents view on role of water committees ...... 37 Table 4-9 Water tariff and communities perception on the tariff level...... 38 Table 4-10: Water shortage ...... 39 Table 4-11 Community perception on the quality of water ...... 41 Table 4-12. Variables score and sustainability score for Dabous Keble one water point ...... 45 Table 4-13: Evaluation of water point sustainability all targeted kebeles ...... 46

vii

List of Annexes Annex 1: List of water supply schemes in the sample kebeles by type, status and years of their construction Annex 2: Regional water supply coverage (2015 - 2016)

Annex 3: National water supply coverage (2016)

Annex 4: Summary of sustainability, partial sustainability and poor sustainability scores for sampled water schemes.

Annex 5: Questionnaire for Households

Part one, personal Background Information

Part two, water service level, users’ satisfaction, participation and community commitment

Annex 6: Interview from Government Officials (Regional, Zonal, and Woreda) water sectors Annex 7: Multi Criteria Decision Approach Questioner

viii

Glossary of Some Terms Winter: Kiremt Got: Village in the study area Jerican: Plastic container used to fetch water that can carry 20 liters of water supply Kebele: Smallest local governments’ administrative unit Summer: Bega Woreda: District level of administrative unit Zone Governments administrative structure next to region

ABSTRACT

Water is essential for all lives on earth and is a basic component of sustainable development and growth. Government and Non-governmental organizations have been implemented water projects to promote safe water supply to the rural communities. However, in most project areas, there is lack of sustainability of the water supply systems. The purpose of this study was to evaluate sustainability of rural water supply schemes in Bambasi Woreda along with triggering factors. Keshemando 1, Dabous, Village 48 and Village 16 Keble's were selected for the study. Due to, inaccessibility of infrastructure and poorly managed. The study employed descriptive survey design. The target population of this study is 1560 household. Random sampling was used in this study. Through random sampling, 122 households were selected for the study. Primary data for the study was collected using qualitative an quantitative (focus group dissection, key informant, field and observation structured questionnaires) that were administered to the respondents by the researcher. The findings of the study indicate that community participation, technical aspect, water point management practices and community training do influence sustainability of community water supply schemes. It was also found out that the sustainability of water supply scheme is assessed by using multi criteria analysis approach. Based on the general condition of the water supply scheme, technical, financial, social and institutional and there sub factor are weighted and evaluated by simple additive weighting method. Finally, the sustainability index value has been classified in three classes where, six water points belongs to poor sustainable class, four has partial sustainable and the remaining two has sustainable class. The study recommends that community participation in the whole project cycle should be enhanced, the involvement of donors have great importance to the local people and administration bodies, however it would be good if the users empowered to operate their own system and supplied water schemes maintenance tools within their own shop and maintenance center or provide the schemes spare parts with in the vicinity by assigning a revolving fund . Key words: Community participation, spare parts, Multi criteria approach, Community training.

1. INTRODUCTION Water is essential for all lives on earth and is a basic component of sustainable development and growth. In the contrary, water is the cause of various disastrous phenomena which are challenging the world such as, flooding and water borne diseases. In addition to these regarding domestic water supply the depletion of freshwater resources is a big challenge of the sustainability of water services. Moreover, fast population growth, climate change and lack of adequate system management are retarding efforts to address water for all (Behailu et al., 2016). Coupled with the water resources depletion and increasing demand make our future unpredictable. For example, by 2025 approximately 3.5 billion people will live in water-stressed countries and it also pose negative impact on sustainable development in Africa and Asia ( Kataoka, 2002).

To supply water for urban and rural communities, there are different forms of organization in different countries (Said., et al 2013).Which means, every minister and counter parts of water have a responsibility to insure equal distribution of water for all urban and rural community based on their interest. Accordingly the government of Ethiopia has established national water police since 1999 to enhance the development of water sector (MoWIE, 2016). Although Ethiopia has been referred as "a water tower of East Africa" and gifted with numerous surface and ground water resources, it has got little or no benefit from either of these resources (Rogers, 2007). Some of the reason of low utilization level could be the requirement of high capital investment and highly qualified skilled manpower. As a result, about a quarter or more of the citizens are getting water supply services from unprotected sources ( Atsebeha, 2014).

Benishangul Gumuz (BeGu) is one of the administrative regions of Ethiopia and it is the focus of this study. This region also shares the status of low water supply coverage as other regions in the country. According to the Benishangul Gumuz Health Bureau (BeGuHB, 2017) and Water, Mine and Energy Bureau BeGuWMEB, (2017) reports the coverage of water supply in urban and rural areas are 45.8% and 54.4% respectably (BeGuHB, 2017). In agreement with the coverage, the majority of the health in the region problems are water related and water borne diseases in general the region and particularly in the target Woreda of this study. Apparently, the causes of these diseases are related to unsafe and inadequate water supplies, and poor sanitary practices. The poor situation of water supply and sanitation is further aggravated by inappropriate awareness, attitude and practices in uses of drinking

water and sanitation facilities by communities. Yet, campaigns of awareness creation and capacity building are challenged by financial incapability of the citizen and scattered settlements. This study was conducted in Bambasi District (Woreda) of BeGu Region. The woreda is selected as it was one of the vulnerable Woreda which has poor management of water system and accessibility of spare parts. Preliminary review of literature made on the same issue tend to indicate poor operation and maintenance, and lack of sufficient water supply as the major challenge in clean water supply to the community. Therefore, this study has addressed the sustainability of water supply system in the region, particularly Bambasi Woreda and pointed out on how to utilize the existing water supply scheme better in the study area. 1.1. Statement of the Problem The previous studies indicated that the coverage of Bambasi Woreda water supply is 32.4% urban and 51.5% rural ( Bambasi Woreda Water, Mine & Energy Office BWWMEO, 2016). However, the coverage of water supply is serving about half the Woreda’s population. Due to these some community travel to long distance to get another unprotected alternative water source. On the other hand, this low level of performance of the Woreda can be coupled with the developmental activities of the area. Now a days, the Woreda is in the track of expansion, growth and developmental activities, such as building, roads, and other related constructions. Apart from the mentioned developmental factors, climatic change, population growth and improvement of living standard have increased water demand and consumption. As a result, access to adequate potable water remained moving two steps forward and one back.

The stagnant development progress is not limited to implementation, but it also aggravated by malfunctioning of built systems. In general, the hindering factors can be discussed as sustainability challenges. According to Nyasetia, (2016), "lack of involvement of the community in selection of site and technology selection, operation and maintenance of the water system, lack of finances at the community level for operation and maintenance of water sources, use of complicated technology without proper capacity-building at community level and deep water table and poor quality of water. There are other factor affecting sustainability of water supply such as, awareness of users regarding to water use and system management (Behailu, et al., 2016). The factors pointed out by the authors are well studied and identified as a problem in the water supply system of Bambasi Woreda as well and forward a message.

On the other hand, water distribution systems are not continuous in the focus Woreda. Most of the time and the rural area population of the Woreda are getting water in average for less than half a day. In this regard, users have to travel long distance to get alternative water sources. This has been causing a lot of problems such as additional labor, wastage of productive time, and poor sanitation and hygiene (regarding this, a majority of community exposed by water borne diseases related to unsafe water in direct or another way especially, occur in developing countries (Howard,2003). Because of absence of adequate water. Behailu, et al., (2016) Investing on water is investing on everything, for instance, on education: by increasing school attendance, on Health: reducing water borne diseases (For example, Diarrhea, Typhoid, Typhus, Malaria and ameba) and so on. Hence, it is essential to evaluate existing water supply system to find root causes and thereby to find mitigation measures. Therefore, this study is essential to contribute ensuring access to potable water supply services for sustainable development of Bambasi Woreda and provide a clue on how to implement water supply projects.

1.2. General Objective The general objective of this study is to evaluate sustainability of rural water supply schemes in Bambasi Woreda. 1.2.1. Specific Objectives  To investigate the modality of community involvement in pre-implementation of rural water supply schemes,  To identify the main problems of rural water supply schemes in terms of technical and none technical aspects in Bambasi Woreda,  To enquire the status of sustainability of selected rural water supply scheme using multi-criteria decision approach. 1.3. Research Questions  What contributions or roles are made by communities in rural water supply schemes development?  What are the major factors that hinder sustainability of rural water supply schemes?  What are the condition of existing water supply schemes, are they functional all over the year since constructed?

1.4. Scope of the Study The researcher focus on the sustainability of Hand dug wells, and Shallow wells, which are the predominant improved sources of potable water supplies in rural parts of Bambasi Woreda. This is a limitation because sustainability of rural water supply may a gap rather than urban. because, in urban area relatively better water supply management and functionality. Moreover, though, rural area sanitation and water supply system are often addressed in an integrated manner for better health impacts, rural sanitation facilities has not been included in this study. This is because, if they need to be studied all together it requires additional time and money. In general, the study limited to assess the challenges of sustainable rural domestic water supply only. It did not include all water supply system and non-domestic consumptions.

2. Literature Review 2.1. Overview of Water "It is not a doubt and no need of witness that potable and adequate water is the basic and essential element for the existence of any sort of life in the world so, access to potable water is in fact considered as the 'right' of an individual living in a society" (Rogers, 2007). In general, improved water supply has a lot of merits but, the two important relevancies: it improves social and economic conditions, as well as improves the health of the community.

The social condition that could be improved by the development of a community water supply includes among others, reduction in the effort required to collect water. This could reduce the workload of children and women, as they are usually the collector of water, which in turn enables them to have time to engage in income generating ventures such as dry season vegetable farming thereby increasing their source of income and economic power, making women more confident to take up their political empowerment issues (Dankelman, & Davidson, 2013). The economic benefits of increasing the quantity of water that is available and bringing the water closer to the point of use can help productive activities such as crop growing and processing, small scale gardening, animal harvesting, and other income generating activities. Thus, water can be considered as the back bone of a healthy and productive communities. Provide assessable, quality and adequate water supply to rural communities are justified, not only a moral and political point of view but also for its functional /utilitarian impact on the overall development process of a country. The practice of this information, today, there exists a number of international as well as national efforts to expand the coverage of the service, and met the minimum daily requirement of a household, both in rural and urban areas of the developing nation. Among the many diversified and multi-purpose international initiatives, The International Reference Center for community water supply (IRC), The Water Supply and Sanitation Collaboration Council (WSSC), The Water Sanitation and Hygiene Campaign (WASH) are a few example. This international concern for water and sanitation is also manifested in the united nation's development agenda. Witte et al., (2003) water and sanitation rank first, followed by energy, health, and agriculture and bio diversity. It indicates water and sanitation how much give priority instead of others.

2.2. Definition of Sustainability "To ensure that it meets the needs of the present without compromise the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" Esrey, (1985) on the other hand human needs basic and essential for economic growth, not only fulfill the interest of human but also equity share of resource to high level and low-level community is required to sustain them. Lockwood, et al., (2003) noted that sustainability make reference to the continued flow of benefits, or services, after the withdrawal of external support or outside assistance. In fact, the ultimate goal of the complete project give serves to the community without external supporting up to end of design life. Benefits include health benefits through providing improved clean and adequate water from a protected source with good accessibility, it reduces time spent and works burden especially for women and children (Supply & Programme., 2005.)

Sustainability of Rural Water Supply (SRWS) is defined as one in which the water sources are not exposed to contamination but naturally replenished, facilities are keeping in a functional state which also ensures a reliable and safe water supply and also benefits of the supply continues to be realized by all users over a prolonged period of time. Enabling rural water supply scheme to sustain operational over the design period it needs avoid the major problems regarding technical, social, environmental, financial and managerial issues unless the problem leads to failure of the schemes (Shiva, 2016). The researcher has adapted this definition because it gives a better meaning of what is implied sustainability in this study. This definition has given a great emphasis on reliability, adequacy of water supply, and continued functionality of the water supply system in providing proper service for intended beneficiaries for long period of time. As it is indicated above, most of the definitions clearly indicate continuity through time or describe series of benefits resulting from implementation of water supply system.

2.3. The Concept of Sustainability Sustainability is a key issue in the rural water supply sector. It is one of an essential concerns in development efforts although it is sometimes abused. As Chowns, (2014) notes sustainability is one of the most over used and abused word in the development vocabulary. The concept of keeping a service or benefit over time is not new, and sustaining the results of any investment has been the focus of attention in a wide variety of disciplines over many years. Sustainability is a concept that has arisen from the debate on sustainable development, which became important from the 1970’s onwards. However, for many organizations in the

development sector, as per the United Nations document entitled “Our Common Future” Witte et al (2003), is probably the most widely quoted definition. This definition marks an important shift away from the idea of sustainability as a primarily concern of ecology to one that emphasizes the economic and social processes of development. A number of simple definitions for sustainable development have been developed by different organizations. Three aspects are found to be common elements in the definition of sustainability. Such elements are the scarcity of available resources, the interdependence of human activities of both the present and future generations, and issues of equity in the distribution of a benefit.

2.4. Existing Water Supply Situation In Ethiopia Improved water source; may not always indicate safe water. It is clear, (Hart, et al 1997) mention this, safe water express intermesh of quality, quantity, reliability and accessibility, this water is one of the basic necessities for human beings in the world. However, billions of people in the world have not beneficiary to it today. Lack of water supply and sanitation services are disturbing globally. "More than 884 million people do not have improved drinking water supply; almost all of them are from developing regions of this, a large number who can't get safe drinking water live in rural area." (WHO&UNICEF., 2010). In general, through the study area, particularly women and children are the most vulnerable segments of the society. According to WHO&UNICEF., (2010) "Worldwide and in Ethiopia significant number of children are dying each day in related by water born disease, lack of safe drinking water and appropriate sanitation and hygiene." Based on this the government of Ethiopia planned to reduce by half the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation by 2020. However, currently ministry of water, irrigation and electricity, to achieve the standard of Universal Accesses Plane UAP, (2011) proposed by GTP-2 to provide safe water in minimum 25 litter capita per day within a distance of 1 km for rural while in urban areas it is required to provide safe water in minimum 100 lcpd within a distance of 0.5 km for different category towns/cities and the total access of water supply coverage, 98%, 100% and 98.5% rural, urban and national respectively and reduce the malfunctioning schemes from 20% to 10% by 2020 (MoWIE, 2017). The last four GTP-1 years (2011-2015) different activities has been implemented.

Functionality: Functionality refers to the percentage of water points working at any given time and is normally measured by a one-time check on a water facility or water point to

determine whether the system is working at the time, and is normally a binary condition (yes/no), (Martinez, et al 2007).

2.4.1. Status of Water Supply and Sanitation In Ethiopia Even if the government of Ethiopia takes responsibility and makes work in order to achieve accesses water resource availability of the county, the status of water supply and sanitation coverage is still not sufficient in the country. According to (MoWIE, 2016). About 61% of the total population of the country who have access to safe water supply at the end of 2016 excluding Addis Ababa and South region. Service coverage is considerably higher in urban than rural areas where the coverage is 63.1% and 52.5%, respectively. However, still now the coverage doses not ensure the sustainability of water supply. To improve the poor status of water supply and sanitation, the government of Ethiopia is on the progress to implement universal Access Program during the (GTP-2) Growth and Transformation Plan-II. The program also aimed to achieve 100% sanitation coverage both in urban and rural areas through construction of sanitation facilities, sanitation and hygiene promotion education at the end of the program. Regarding Sanitation and Hygiene (WHO and UN., 2017) has discussed on its report "Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation(GLAAS) report " that in Ethiopia laws or policies formulation to participate service users and communities in planning water supply systems, and promotion of community participation on Sanitation and Hygiene evaluated to score above moderate. In fact, the progress is indicated that the country is on the truck of the development compared to other sub-Saharan countries. Ensuring access to safe sanitation and Hygiene is usually a responsibility of local governments. However, in order to implement and sustain the progress of Sanitation and Hygiene promotion both local government and community should stand together. The national sanitation coverage in the year 2016 couldn't get, but according to MoWIE sanitation coverage of the country still now its poor both urban and rural especially the risk is high in a rural area rather than urban area. 2.5. Factor Affecting Sustainability of Rural Water Supply The major challenge of rural water supply systems in sub-Saharan Africa, particularly those relying on hand pumps and shallow well, often demonstrate low levels of sustainability. The key causes for this include inappropriate policy or legislation; insufficient institutional support; unsustainable financing mechanisms; ineffective management systems; and lack of technical backstopping and other related things. The problem will only be solved by adopting

a holistic approach to planning and implementation in addition to participate the community rather than focusing on one issue (Gbadegesin, & Olorunfemi, 2007.) More of describing the negative impact of the sustainability of rural water supply schemes Post-implementation factors are a big problem instead of pre-implementation factors, because during pre-implementation the contribution of both beneficiaries and implementers are good, however, after handover the project to consumers both are isolated. Therefore, to sustainable the project the implementers should be practices both direction of contribution. The big challenge of pre implementation of rural water supply schemes is lack of demand responsiveness. In this context, ‘demand’ is defined as the interest of community related to quantity, quality and accessibility of water, where community members need to consume at a given price (Beyene, 2012). In a demand responsive approach, beneficiaries should feel the need for safe drinking water supply. Implementers are, somehow, paying attention to demand responsive approach to respect the choice of beneficiaries and deployed resources in support of users demand (Sara & Katz, 2004.) 2.5.1. Financial Factors According to (WHO & NU., 2014) "Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation (GLAAS) 2013/2014 cycle, during the MDG era, 80% of countries reported that financial resources were insufficient to meet national targets established for drinking-water and sanitation". Brikké, (2000) also support this idea, The community management of rural water supply systems in operation and maintenance (O & M) is not successful, if financing resources are not available and frequent supports are not provided. To enhance the performance of rural water supply, allocation of the appropriate budget is very essential. After implementation of one project the allocation of budget or finance not only the responsibility of the government but also the responsibility of the local community and other stake holders. Based on this the beneficiaries should be pay water tariff for the sake of O & M and other related works. Brikké, et al., (2003.) supported this idea, they said, a water supply service is sustainable if, among others, its operation, maintenance, rehabilitation, replacement and administrative costs are covered at the local level through user fees or through alternative sustainable financial mechanisms.

To identify the reason of non functionality of water points, a purposive survey was observed four kebeles water points in Bambasi Woreda (2017), and the time of filed survey finding indicated that poor financial management was the primary cause of non-functionality of the scheme. Similarly, Shaw, (2012) stated that communities collect insufficient water tariff not

affordable for the sake of repairs and maintenance of water supplies service. The financial sub-category of sustainability includes issues of community financing and the cost of operation, maintenance and repairs (Harvey & Reed, 2004). According to Harvey and Reed, if systems are to remain operational indefinitely, sustainable financing mechanisms need to consider Operation & Maintenance and longer-term rehabilitation needs. In other words emphasis must be shifted from paying for maintenance of a facility to paying for the provision of safe, adequate and accessible water. While contingence or reserved finance for operation and maintenance is a main part of the maintenance task, Shaw, (2012) states that community members are usually reluctant to pay when everything happen the time of working. Water tariffs should be collect for future system upgrade, rehabilitation and expansion costs as well as parally O&M costs, but currently, this event happens very rarely. in addition, Shaw,(2012) described in detail that lack of knowledge regarding maintenance costs, inadequate tariffs and high rates of defaulting combined with ineffective collections and poor financial management a big challenge of communities to establish and implement such financing mechanisms. According to Geremew (2008), in order to, for the community to meet the cost of maintenance, community members must be willing to pay for the service. However, not every community members are willing to pay for services. The reason of unwillingness to pay for the services is a major factor, such as weak awareness of the community about safe water, lack of since of owner ship and availability of unprotected surface water source near to protected hand dug well and alternative source of water in the community. 2.5.2. Technical Factors Availability of spare part: "Operation and maintenance agreements ensure the longevity and proper running of rural water infrastructure and this could be attained with the community" (Toyobo & Tanimowo, 2011). However, this practice is not in a position to implement in a rural area due to lack of appropriate tools to carrying out repairs. There is also a need access to spare parts for operation and maintenance, because at time of field survey most communities cannot afford the cost of spare parts (Mukemil, 2007). In addition to lack of spare parts, insufficiency water tariff in most rural water points has contributed for non- sustainability. Due to such reasons; the users are forced to alternative unprotected water sources. To insure sustainability of RWS schemes, spare parts and appropriate water tariff must be available. Brikké, et al., (2003) have stated that without access to reliable supply of

spare parts and adequate water tariff, water supply schemes cannot be sustained. Therefore, to sustain the project spear parts, and appropriate water tariff is available overtime. Based on this, the spare parts are found different wyes whether GOV or NGOs. Regard this, (Behailu, et al 2016). Stated, "The governmental organization (GOV) and Non- Governmental organization (NGOs) provision of spare parts influenced the business opportunities of privet suppliers". However, the factor touches not only the suppliers but also the beneficiaries, because the involvement of GOV and NGOs are great to the community by different angles such as regarding politics and good relationship with administration bodies. However, free spare part supporting is not sufficient to insure sustainability. This type of supporting method only uses to solve short term problems rather than long term problems. Therefore, the implementers or stakeholders should establish strong job network rather than free supporting. During pre implementation, and post implementation the participation of community has a big value rather than others. According to Jansz, (2011) users properly organized, contribute to the construction and rehabilitation of water sources and ensure the collection of fees that are sufficient to at least cover operating costs and maintenance. Means after completion of water point and hand over for the community the scheme administrate own self, regarding O & M and keep the sustainability of the scheme. Based on this, the consumers give attention related good management. Lack of technically skill capacity: Beside the availability of spare parts the role of well trained technical persons are very important. Geremew, (2008) indicated various reasons for schemes being out of operation. Poor maintenance is one of the most important contributors for schemes on functionality. On the other hand, if water schemes are repairing and maintain as well, it can operate a long period of time. 2.5.3. Legal and Institutional Issues

"Traditionally the water supply sector in sub-Saharan Africa has been heavily dependent on external support from international and bilateral donors" (Neumayer, 2004). However, from the perspective of researcher national and local government contribution have a big value to sustain the project rather than external bodies. To enhance one step the sustainability of Rural Water Supply Schemes, in fact, the involvement of institutional support is very important. However, mainly the institutional experts busy by other related professional works instead of own professionals (Nel, 2001).

Franks and Cleaver, (2007) strength more, they said "there is a risk that staff is appointed mainly on other professional grounds rather than based on their professional qualifications" these risks are generally high in developing countries." In addition, the researcher confirms it was widely agreed by Bambasi Woreda key informant interview. They said, during incase of high risk in water supply schemes the community addressed the problem to supporting agencies like regional and local governments and other concerned bodies. However, they did not respond immediately. Based on this, at a national level, there must establish clear policies and strategies that support to the good sustainability of urban and rural water supply schemes after implementation of the schemes. However, this might not practical implement. Henry, et al., (2006) stated that in the rural areas, the lack on the part of the government to setup an enabling environment for the development of a system and management of drinking water supply services through effective community participation is seen as the reasons for the failure as far as sustainability of the system is concerned. In fact to enhance the sustainability of rural water supply it needs strong water police through the whole country. 2.5.4. Community and Social Factors There are a number of factor affecting the community water scheme for example, in addition to natural hazards, such as floods and landslides, various social issues such as population growth, conflicts and disputes in the community can have a significant negative effect on the operation and maintenance of the systems. Yet, it is the community’s approach and response to these challenges which eventually determines whether the systems will be sustainable or not in the long run. Communities with social capital had more prerequisites to respond and prepare to the challenges and reach for external support. To ensure the sustainability of community water supply systems, adequate post-construction support for management capacity and conflict mediation especially for poorer performing users committees would be required, in addition to related water management system (Pesonen Venla ., 2016). Community water supply systems are managed mainly by the community itself, private operator or state owned utility Said, et al., (2013), because they know well the problem and the demand for water. Regard to this, Lockwood, et al. (2003) mentioned that demand- responsiveness (meaning that demand is expressed directly by householders) at the household level is a determinant of overall sustainability, as it promote consumer satisfaction and willingness to pay for the system. According to the beneficiaries, more likely to be satisfied with results such as quantity of water, quality of water, accessibility (distance from household), reliability and waiting time to fetch water when they initiate the project, are

involved in decision-making, and are informed about their responsibilities regard to Water fee collection for Operation & Maintenance and other related water scheme management. "To achieve a sustainable water supply there is a need for active community involvement, improved training and strong water point committees" (Harvey & Reed, 2006). It is expected that under such circumstances, consumers express a higher feeling of a sense of ownership, greater confidence in their ability to maintain and keep the sustainability of the water system, a better understanding of how the tariff is used, and a willingness to pay for improvements to the scheme. Regarding this, direct involvement, coordination and co-operation by the government, as well as developing a culture of empowering the local communities should bring better water services (Netshipale & Lidzani 2016.) Moreover, there is a good evidence to indicate that a more active participation of women can optimize the results and a positive impact on Rural Water Supply projects (Bryceson and Howe, 1993). The central role that women play in the water fee collection, well management and proper use of water, as well as with the general sanitation of the household is well acknowledged (Lockwood, 2003). Therefore, it is not surprising that the continued involvement of women could have a significant contribution to the performance of water supply systems, because most of the time women's are very close to water schemes rather than men. Accordingly, after project implementation, simply tell them that they are most important determinant to the sustainability of rural water supply. Yet, for a good sustainability of rural water supply, only the contribution of women's are not sufficient. To ensure sustainability of rural water supply the involvement of all concerned bodies is very important including the politicians. 2.6. Overview of Multi Criteria Approach Multi criteria making is a well known decision making tool with solving consider problem. Moreover, multi criteria can utilize multiple data types, such as qualitative and quantitative data. They entail systematic models of decision makers’ preference to explicitly solve a choice between options involving a number of often completing of objectives. It is a method of decision making has been applied in water resources planning and management (Hajkowicz and Collins 2007). Multi Criteria Analysis is a process of integrated assessment of projects, alternatives or options for ranking or selecting, priority setting among the finite set of projects, alternatives or options. MCA is a structured approach to determine overall preference among alternatives, where the alternatives accomplish several objectives. The advantage of the MCA processes is

that it enables an integrated assessment of subjective and objective information with stakeholders’ values in a single framework (Kamalesh and Shashi 2008). Recently, Multi Criteria Analysis (MCA) for identify the sustainability of rural water supply performance used quantitative data. Proposed the following questions that will answer four criteria such as social, Financial, Technical and Institutional; thirteen factors; and twenty six sub-factors .

List of steps in weight-rating score: 1. Weight was assigned to each water point (w) 2. Scores have been assigned and standardized to each water point 3. Index value was calculated using weight and score result. 4. Ranking index sustainability analysis values of each component calculated using Total Score / Index value = Σ n Wi Sj Wi = weight of ith water point Sj = score of class jth in the water point Table 2-1 Score for Sustainability Status Determination

Typical five point Score Distribution for different Sustainability grading nomenclature grading status Five point Four point Three point Excellent 80-100% 70-100% 70-100% Sustained Very Good 70-79% Good 50-69% 50-69% 30-69% Partially sustained Fair 30-49% 30-49% Poor <30% <30% <30% Not sustained

(Source Panthi and Bhattarai., 2008) Five points indicates the classification of grading system (excellent, very good, good, fair and poor), four points indicates (excellent, good, fair and poor) and three point (excellent, good, and poor).

2.7. Conceptual Framework For the sake of sustainability of RWS system, the support of local governments, regional and the community are very essential. Based on reviewed literature, there are four factors that affect the sustainability of RWS, such as community, technical, institutional and financial.

Thus, the researcher triad to show conceptual framework to identify the problem of sustainability of RWS scheme in Bambasi Woreda selected kebeles.

Fig 2-1 Conceptual framework (Source: Water aid report, 2011)

The four factors listed above are very important for ensure the sustainability of rural water supply, externally supported the community based management of water services (Montgomery et al., 2009). Without expression of demand, sustainability of services may be compromised (Costanza, et al., 1997). According to Rijsberman, (2006), if a community is satisfied with its current service then it may not understand the need for another water point and, as a result, not contribute sufficiently to maintaining the service . Users will not priorities and value a service that does not meet their needs. This pre- construction community mobilization and training is not always implemented in a poor quality (Fewings, 2013). Poor involvement, or not, of users in projects and programs will affect the sustainability of water schemes.

3. Materials and Methods This research methodology is comprised of three main phases as shown in Fig 3.1. At the beginning, the data is collect mainly from MoWIE, RWB and WWO. Household questioner, interview with key informant, focal group discussion and filed observation is taken to understand the existing situation of water supply system of targeted kebeles. Secondly deferent literature and documents that mainly regarding sustainability of rural water supply systems are reviewed. Finally the data was analyzed by using SPSS software.

Fig 3-1 Depiction of research methodology 3.1. The Study Area Ethiopia is a federal state divided into nine self-governing Regional States and two Administrative Cities. Each region is autonomous in terms of administrative matters, development planning, budget allocation and implementation, and preparation of regional policies based on the federal policies.

The Benishangul Gumuz is located in the north-western part of the country at 90 35" and11039" N and 340 20" to 360 30"E (See Fig 3.2). The neighboring regions are Amhara, Oromia and Gambella Regional States are bordering the region in the north-east, east, south-

east, and south respectively. The region administratively divided into three zones, nineteen wordas and one special Woreda. The capital city of the region is Assosa, which is 687 km far from Addis Ababa to the west direction.

Fig 3-2 Description of the study area The region is well known by its groundwater potential, also popular in having gold and marble resources. However, the main source of income of the majority is traditional farming and some are involved in trading. At present, the population of the region is estimated about 1.1 million of which 85 % is living in a rural areas (CSA, 2016). Even if the region has well potential of groundwater resources, it has got little or no benefit from the resources. Some of the reasons for under development of water projects are that water related works need high capital investment and qualified personnel. 3.1.1. Bambasi Woreda Bambasi woreda is found in Benishangul-Gumuz Regional State Assosa Zone. It is bordered, by Assosa city in the south, Mendi Woreda in the west, Tongo worda in the west-east, and Konjo Woreda in the east. This Woreda is one of the seven Woreda in Assosa zone, and it is

located at a driving distance of 628 km from Addis Ababa on Addis Ababa-Assosa asphalt road and 45 km from the Regional capital, Assosa. Its geographical location is 340 43’49”E and 90 05’18”N the average elevation for the area is 1500m.a.s.l. The maximum and minimum temperature of 35.2 C0 and 7.4 C0, respectively and the annual maximum and minimum rainfall is 329.6 mm and 12.4 mm, respectively. 3.1.2. Population According to CSA central statistical agency, (2016) the population of Bambasi Woreda is 81,690. The socio-economic situation of Bambasi community is dominated by traditional agriculture economic activity. Based on the field survey some are government employees, minority are involved in trading businesses. However, it is also identified in the survey that among many youth of Bambasi Woreda are unemployed. 3.1.3. Water Demand According to WWMEO (2016), the availability of safe water supply in the Woreda is estimated to be 47% (32% in town and 51% in rural). In fact many water schemes have been developed up to the end of 2016, yet, access to adequate potable water remains poor. Therefore, some of the population is still fetch additional water from unprotected sources, such as rivers, streams, ponds and springs. From sanitation point of view, it is not well habituated in the study areas, it is common to observe night-soil in open fields, but very few use a simple pit latrine. Hence, the overall sanitation of the Woreda is somehow unfortunate however, hygiene associated diseases are prevalent (according to the Bambasi Woreda health office, 2016).

3.2. Data Collection Methods Data used in this study are primary and secondary. By using Taro formula 122 households (HH) were randomly selected from the 1560 HH. Before data collection, the researcher communicated the sample HH about the main goal of the study and the required data. Then the collection was made only on targeted kebeles and all respondents were responded to the questionnaire. Moreover, various methods were used during data collection, such as household survey, FGDs, key informant interviews and filed observations.

FGDs: A focus group discussion held by random method and guided by the researcher. The aim is to collect available information through discussion by focusing on selected topics; the results are to indicate future achievement amendment direction of the water sector. The aim of the group discussion is to understand and interpret the feeling of the community who

cannot read and write. In order to make participants feel free to talk openly and give honest opinions. Due to this the discussion assigned by sample randomly selected three water committee, including one elder, one from kebele leaders and two women in each selected kebeles. The reason of selected those members is that their relevancy on water schemes. During the discussion, the agendas briefly explained to participants were briefed about the need and the aim the study. The time is taken to one kebele FGDs was an hour to one and half an hour and the raised question were four to six related to the challenge of water supply (availability of spare parts, community participation, water tariff collection, problems of water committee and the cause of poor administration management of the schemes). Participants were encouraged to reflect their view freely. Household survey: A cross-sectional descriptive study conducted in the four selected kebeles using prepared structural questionnaire to evaluate the existing water supply schemes and their use. The questionnaire was prepared in English language and translated to the Amharic language, as most community cannot understand English language. Thus, out of 1560 households a total 122 heads of households were interviewed for random selected households. The reason for this selected method was to in order to provide fair distribution and to give equal opportunities to participate for this survey analysis among the users. Key informant interview: As mention above in this section, there are different methods to gather data including key informant interview. Then, six office experts were interviewed, they were from GO, NGOs & Woreda water sector who working in regional and Woreda. From key informant interviewer essential information's gathered, as they had better information regarding water supply administration and management, budget allocation and availability of spare parts instead of beneficiaries. Field Observation: During field visit, the researcher assessed all selected water schemes to learn the existing water schemes operations and activities, and relevant to the sustainability of water schemes to develop a holistic perspective, i.e. an understanding of the context to identify functional and non-functional schemes and seasons behind. The data collection involved enumerators and voluntary water committees. 3.3. Multi- Criteria Approach (MCA) A Multi- Criteria Approach adopted from Nkambule & Peter., (2012) Inclusion (ethnic groups) was slightly modified, because this problem is not happen our country. Then prepared the questioner to fit the situation in Bamnasi Woreda and applied in this study. The sustainability monitoring framework consists of four criteria: financial, social, technical and

institutional. The four main criteria used were further separated into thirteen factors and twenty-five sub-factors based on water projects (see annex 7). Such as, to identify the water point whether sustainable or not, weight and rate was assigned to each water point and each water point questioner filled by five selected professionals and sum the whole experts result, finally divided in to five and got average weight of variable. The rate will be multiplied by the average weight of variables to obtain the overall score. Finally, in each water point the scores of all variables will be added to determine the sustainability index of the individual water point.

The standard questionnaire was used to identify the sustainability of existing water supply systems during data collection and , the questionnaire was filled by five GO experts. The selection of experts held purposely, because the questionnaire needs to be filled by well- qualified, highly trained experts. 3.3.1. Selection of Sample Kebeles From 44 Kebeles. Thus, the researcher selected purposely four of them with the consultation of Woreda administration and Woreda water office. Kebeles having recently constructed water points include in the samples. This help to identify the sustainability of water point’s relatively oldest water points. The other rationale of selecting the four kebeles (Keshmando 1, Dabous, Village 16 and Village 48) these kebeles are remote and inaccessible infrastructure and distance from Woreda and Regional. In general most kebeles in the woreda have problems of water supply management and absence of spare parts supplies. However, the problems are relatively serious in the targeted kebeles. 3.3.2. Selection of Sample water Point In general, in Bambasi Woreda there are a lot of water point which are constructed by different years through GO, NGOs and community contribution. According to the Regional water min and energy bureau, the total number of protected water supply schemes in the Woreda by the end of 2016 is about 239. As per the data obtained from Bambasi WWMIO, 26 schemes (15 Hand dug well, 10 Sallow boreholes and a spring) protected water supply schemes constructed in the study areas. Out of the total water supply schemes were purposely selected 12 functional protected water points. The selection was as follow, from all targeted Kebeles three protected water supply schemes selected in each Keble's which are constructed from (2012 to 2016). The reason is selected recently constructed schemes, these water schemes are good potential regard to source of water yield and functionality of the pump instead of aged schemes. On the

other hand, significant number of new water supply schemes that were constructed in the recent years found to be poorly managed, provides service with problems and even not properly working. 3.3.3. Selection of Sample Size The data obtained from WWMEO, (2017), the total number of beneficiary from protected HDWs and SWs are 1560 (one thousand five hundred sixty) households in selected kebeles. According to regional water bureau, (RWB) one HDW and SW served 250 and 350 people respectively. Based on this, used Michael Taro, (1967) formula to figure out what sample size need to take. n = N / 1 + N(e2) n = Number of samples, N = Total households and e = Error tolerance (0.05 - 0.09.) n = 1560 /1+1560 (0.0872 ) = 122 From the whole water users, sample of 122 HH were selected by random method. Moreover, six additional office experts used who work for GO,NGOs & Woreda level were considered in the study key informants. These experts assumed to have better information on various aspects of water supply system such as, management, budget allocation and availability of spare parts. See table 3.1. Table 3-1 Number of Household and sample size determination in each kebele.

Kebeles No of Household Sample size Dabous 300 24 Keshemando 1 400 31 Village 16 360 28 Village 48 500 39 Total 1560 122 3.4. Data Analysis All available data were gathered in Benishangul region Bambasi Woreda especially in selected Kebeles. Based on data, the data analysis interpreted by using quantitative and qualitative data analysis techniques. Presented in the form of a tables, graphs and figures. The survey data were analyzed using Statistical Packages for Social Science (SPSS), and Excel. The next chapter will discuss the results and desiccation findings of the study.

4. Result and Discussion 4.1. Overview of respondents profile The main objective of contacting respondents is to gain available data about the existing water supply schemes (weather the schemes are functional or not and related service challenges). Observing the profile of the respondents involved in the research will give a clue of the reliability of the information. Thus, in Fig 4.1 details their education background, economic activities, family size and gender. All the components will contribute for the management of water supply systems.

(a) Educational Background (b) Source of income

( c) Family Size ( d) Gender Fig 4-1 Gender, Educational Background, Source of Income and Family Size

Based on data collection almost half of the sampled populations are see fig 4.1(a) 34.4% who can read and write. Others 28.7% and 16.4% are primary schools and above high school respectively, while 20.5% are illiterate, that means who cannot read and write. See Fig 4.1(b) From those populations, 63.1% of them are leading their life by farming. That means their income is based on traditional agriculture. The rest of 12.3% and 16.4% depending on mini trade and government employee. But, from the total population of the studies areas, 8.2% are youngsters who lead their life by daily labor. In the studies areas, the member of households with the family size has the highest range. According to the result of collected data in this area, the households have a major role for the construction of water scheme. In this area, the highest family size ranging of households are 4 to 7 (65.6%) and the lowest families are 1 to 3 (16.4%) while from the household whose have above 8 families members are 18% fig 4.1(c). 4.2. Existing Water Supply Situation 4.2.1. Public Awareness and Education. Public awareness and educations are very critical for sustainable water supply services to protect water scheme. Beneficiaries, who are informed and involved in the construction of a water supply system, are closer to support the development effort both before and after implementation, and protect their schemes from harm. Although their role of treat water source is not difficult to estimate. Obviously, customers that are informed and involved in the source (who beneficiaries' and participate in the construction of the project as well as who too close) are more likely to support the water supply scheme development. Information and education measures can directly generate water consumption savings by persuading consumers to use less water, as well as support other conservation measures. For example, it is widely believed that education (awareness) plays a great role in how water consumers respond to changes. Public awareness is a means of informing and educating about the utilization of the water source and it is an effective tool for managing water and rationalize water consumption and encourage conservation at the household. (WSA., 2003). 4.3. Sources of Water Supply The result indicates from the household respondents, the water supply system which were constructed for them are mainly for the purpose of domestic use. As described in Table 4.2,about 33% of communities in the study area rely on shallow wells (SW) and approximately 25% fetch water from protected Hand Dug Well (HDW) which fitted by hand pumps for their domestic purpose. However, the rest are still obtaining water from

unprotected sources, such as river, traditional HDW, unprotected springs and sand dug sources (see Table 4.1).In general, about 57.4% the sampled population are depend on protected sources and 42.6% of the communities are rely on unprotected water sources. Table 4-1 Sources of drinking water supply in the study area Type of water source Respondents Frequency Percent (%) Protected water source Shallow well (SW) 40 32.8 Hand dug well (HDW) 30 24.6 Sub total 70 57.4 Unprotected water source Traditional HDW 10 8.2 River 14 11.5 Spring 11 9 Sand dug Well 17 13.9 Sub total 52 42.6 Total 122 100

Fortunately, the study area have protected water supply system. However, such systems have been facing shortage of water for different reasons. According to the respondents, the majority of the communities used protected HDW and Shallow well (SW) water sources as their main source of drinking water. Yet, due to inadequacy of yield from their sources and other reasons, the users obligated to look for other water sources, like traditional HDW, rivers and open springs for their consumption. Especially, Keshemando 1, Dabous, village 48 and village 16 Kebeles communities are getting additional water from rivers, unprotected spring and sand dug well for their domestic purpose, during interruptions of the water supply at the HDW and SW.

All respondents were asked if they have been beneficiaries of drinking water from developed schemes and the majority of the respondents reported that they have been served at the protected water sources in their vicinity. In fact, there could be other reasons for not using protected sources. As shown in Fig 4.2, different sources of drinking water Supply schemes during field observation and community reporting.

Fig 4-2 Functional water supply schemes in keshemando 1 and Dabous kebeles

In these areas some communities use alternative water sources during scheme failure. The main reason for this problem is poor sanitation of the schemes, poor fence, none fence around schemes and absence of guard. The absence of guard and fence at the schemes exposed schemes to breakdowns and further non-functionality. For instance, in the case of absence of guard in the schemes, animals can move over headwork and fall down their excreta which can make the scheme contaminated, as well as over pumping of well happened by pass byre and this leads to decrease well yield and the beneficiaries cannot collect enough water from the schemes. Once the schemes constructed, handed over and commissioned the service, the groundwater (particularly in HDW) should be left to recover to supply water reliable at high demand hours of a day.. To materialize this, there should be a gap between the time of recovery and its service. However, in the study areas, schemes give services continuously without gap, as a result the supply of schemes decrease substantially and lead users wait longer at sources.

When service failure happen in any of the above mentioned problems, the communities are forced to travel long distance in searching of water for their domestic use even from unprotected water source. According to WHO,(2010)" water must use some processes of screening, sedimentation, chlorination, purification, and other stages of treatment before it is acceptable for drinking water by community members.'' However, during field study, there is no effort of water treatment observed in the study area.

4.4. Status of Water Supply Schemes As the data obtained from the Woreda, Water, Mine and Energy Office WWMEO, (2017) and Regional water, mine and energy bureau, RWMEB(2017)in Bambasi woreda only 239water schemes have been developed until 2016 as shown in Table 4.2.

Table 4-2 Total number of water supply and type of water schemes in Woreda

No of kebeles Total number of water scheme Type of water scheme 113 Shallow well 44 239 113 Hand dug well 10 Spring development 3 Deep well

Table 4-3 functional and non-functional water scheme in the study area

Kebeles Schemes Pump Statues of the Schemes Keshemando No 1 HDW & SW Afraid eve 4 Functional 3 un functional Dabous HDW & SW Afraid eve 4 Functional 3 un functional Village 16 HDW & SW Afraid eve 4 functional 2 un functional Village 48 HDW &SW Afraid eve 4 functional 2 un functional

From the total numbers of developed schemes in the Woreda, the study area was only four Kebeles. So, in these Kebeles, there are 26 developed water scheme (10SWs, 15HDWs, and 1SP). However, during data collection getting available information and completing data of existing water scheme was difficult. The reasons were the absence of skilled workers at the time of field work and there was not well-organized data about the schemes in the offices. The data obtained indicates that from the total developed water scheme in the four Kebeles, 38.5% of the schemes (4SW and 6 HDW) are completely not-functional during the time of field visit. The other newly growing problem of system failures of the schemes in the area is the theft of hand pedestals. As shown in Fig 4.3, HDW remain non-functional after the hand pedestals stolen. This problem was also observed in different areas of Benishangul Region.

Fig 4-3 Non- functional water supply schemes. Even though, the rest functional water schemes were providing service with problems such as lack of spare parts and gap of skill of artesian, there is also limitation on technical capacity of caretakers in rural area to repair and maintain the water supply schemes. This challenge has caused delay of repair to the regular service and in some cases the schemes remain non-functional for a longer period. As a result of a failure in schemes, many of the rural communities were not served. This finding agree with Tacoli (2002) conclusion. He found out that, in sub-shara African,30-60% of the water supply systems serving rural communities are not operational as they have broken down and eventually abandoned.

4.4.1. Service Hours of Hand Dug Well The service hours of the hand dug well should be not more than eight hours recommended to keep the groundwater recharge to the well. Based on the respondents as illustrated in Fig 4.4, nearly half (62/122) of the respondents pointed out that water supply systems serve over eight hours.

Fig 4-4 Service hours of hand dug well 27

According to the survey, 42 respondents witnessed that their hand dug wells work for about10 hours continuously. Moreover, 20 of the respondents agreed that their hand dug wells have been working for eight hours. As mentioned in the previous paragraph (section 4.3), the hand dug well should give a service with some gap of time. But, in the study areas not implemented. Therefore, the extended service hours will bring its own negative impact on the scheme, that means the volume of hand dug well ground water cannot be recovered immediately. To use the scheme for eight hours properly the morning four and the evening four hours service are the better implementation plan.

4.4.2. Performance of Water Supply Schemes The majority (57.4%) of respondents are using protected sources, such as hand dug well (HDW) and Shallow well (SW).On these respondents further inquiry were made to investigate service failure and their resilience, and the result depicted in Table 4.3. About 82% of the total respondents were faced the non-functionality problem to their schemes, while 22(18.1%) did not faced the non-functionality problem since the time of construction. Approximately,97% of those who experience non-functionality was faced the same problem within a year during field work. Moreover, the incidence is very repetitive in a year. As shown in Table 4.3, over 80% of schemes with the said problem were suffered service breakdown twice or more in a year. Table 4-4 Challenge of water supply schemes in the study Kebeles Issues for sample respondents Respondents Have you face any non-functional Response Frequency Percentage problem since construction? Yes 100 81.9

No 22 18.1

Did your scheme failed with a year? Yes 97 97 No 3 3

How many times did your scheme failed Once 15 15.5 last year? Twice 34 35 Three times 20 20.6 Four times 18 18.6 >four times 10 10.3 Sub total 97 100 How long did your scheme remain 15day-1 Month 17 17

unmaintained after failure? 2 Month-2 1/2 Month 45 45 3 Month-5 Month 30 30 > 6 Month 8 8 Sub total 100 100 Total 122 100

This implies that the majority of the communities did not get proper service from developed schemes because of its frequent problem (about 84.2% have faced the problem at least two times a year). Respondents that have ever faced the non-functional problem were asked about the average time to repair failed schemes. The survey result shows that 17(17%) of the respondents estimated the repairs time is 15 days to one months, 45 % replied that 2 to 2.5 months, 30(30%) believes to last three to five months, and 8(8%) more than six months. The majority (83%) of the respondents reported their schemes were remain without service for more than two months per breakdown. Thus, it can be concluded that adequate attention was not given to operation of and maintenance of water supply schemes by concerned bodies. It means the sustainability of the schemes is questionable. 4.5. Challenge of Sustainability of RWS Schemes 4.5.1. Site Selection and construction quality of RWS schemes During the time of site selection in the study area, experts prefer to selected site near to surface water in order to get well aquifer that can be easily recharged from the pond water. The study found that the majority of the selected schemes in the Bambasi Woreda were constructed near to surface water. Water schemes that are constructed adjacent to surface water has various negative impact on beneficiaries such as, distance from home, unwillingness to pay for the services - as they can fetch water from the unprotected sources, and in some cases schemes might be contaminated due to human and animal interactions in the surrounding marshy area as shown in Fig 4.5.

Fig 4-5 Different source of drinking water supply schemes in targeted kebeles

The problems mentioned above in connection with surface water and nearby scheme have got acceptance form community health extension workers and community members who took part in focus group discussions. On the time being, mentioned the community members in Dabous kebele used to have the practice of drinking water from surface water without added value (i.e. filtration methods and chlorine). They mostly depend on surface water for their household consumption. During filed work, a protected spring constructed by government was observed in village 16 and even if spring developments have a higher yield compare to hand dug well, it was not used by beneficiaries due to lack of timely repair and maintenance. Moreover, the protected spring has technical faults such as lack of proper design and placing components in proper manner. For instance, a faucet is installed near to the ground surface which is not comfortable to use, and the surrounding of the sprig box was not filled by concrete or pavement (see Fig 4.5). As a result, the scheme easily exposed to contamination by the users, wild animals and cattle. Because of this, the communities forced to look for alternative source while the spring is there. 4.5.2. Availability of local technicians and spare parts For RWS schemes, availability of spare part and local technicians that can carry out O&M is very important. Because rural communities are located in far from towns as well as difficulty for local government to carry out such repairs as rural communities are wide and lack skilled staff and resources. During field observation, one technician is assigned with limited and outdated equipment, and tools to carry out the O&M.

Regard skills of local technicians, they have responsibility to carry out all types of repairs including major problems such as break downs of a hand pump, based on results of the household survey indicated in Table 4.4. The majority 105(86.1%) of the total respondents reported that local technicians did not have sufficient technical skills to carry out repairs. The remaining 17(13.9%) of the total have indicated that the ability of local technicians to carry out all types of repairs. The implication here is that the capability of technician technical is not satisfactory. To get more information on the above issue, the researchers held FGDs with water committees. As discussed with water committee the training given to committee members and local mechanics were not enough. Almost all of the discussants stated that since the time of their water supply schemes construction and the establishment of water committees, they have taken training only once the training is given during the initial period and after that no refreshment training was given to them. As a result, they reported that O&M of construction is beyond the capacity caretakers of technicians. This has been partly evidenced as all sample non-functional water supply schemes are in a state of disrepair for long period of time. Table 4-5 Availability of local technicians and their skills Issues Respondents Respondents Frequency Percent Do you think local technicians have Yes 17 13.9 Sufficient technical capacity to No 105 86.1 repairs/maintenance HDW? They have necessary spear parts to carry out Yes 12 9.8 repairs when needed? No 105 86.1 We don't know 5 4.1 Total 122 100

Briefly identify, whether the local technicians were equipped with the necessary materials to carry out repairs or not? (See Table 4.5). Majority 105 (86.1%) of the total respondents answered that local technicians were ill-equipped. Only 12 (9.8%) of them reported that local technicians were well equipped with the necessary spare parts and 5(4.1%) of the respondents they have no idea about the presence of spare parts. This shows that the existences of local technicians in each water supply scheme were not equipped with the availability of the necessary spare parts to repair the system failures. Even though some FGDs participants from water committees indicated the ability of local technicians to can carry out minor repair

works rarely, this is negatively impacted by the absence of the necessary spare parts. Similarly, key informant interview, NGOs, and government water sector office respond that majority of local technicians can carry out minor repairs due to inadequate spare parts. From the discussions above, one can draw a conclusion that absence of adequate spare parts to local technicians was one of the indicators for poor O&M of schemes, which in turn exposed to the non functionality of water supply systems.

4.5.3. Technical aspects For better performance and sustainability of water supply systems O&M is one of the crucial elements. Non-functionality or failure to provide service and lack of O&M are the common features of most developed water supply schemes in the study areas. Moreover, carrying out effective O&M of water supply schemes require reliable of spare parts supply and well experienced local technicians or artisan that have technical skills to carry out the O&M. 4.5.4. Availability of spare parts Availability of spare parts is a big challenge for the community in rural areas. The reliable spear parts supply is one of the key elements for sustainability of rural water supply (RWS) schemes. Even if the schemes are constructed the communities cannot get easily spear parts when it needed. This problem leads to the scarcities of spare parts and negative impact on the sustainability of water supply schemes. In addition to this, the communities have no knowledge about the spear parts required for the project. As the schemes are constructed without an adequate supply and accesses of spare parts, the communities are challenged to ensure sustainability of their water supply schemes. The time of field observation the researcher cheeked that the availability of spare parts at community level are how much essential, yet it is limited at kebeles level. All (100%) of the respondents have reported that the spare parts are not readily and easily available moreover, they do not have sufficient knowledge of the spear parts which are the capacity to replace them. This indicated that obviously availability of spare parts in the study areas is not accessed. Community representative reported that the cause of non-functional schemes is lack of spare parts. They further stated that even when they want to buy spare parts such as simple valves, rubbers, U-seals and bush-Bering are not easily available and even rarely available from the private sector or business man. Spare parts, which are available at private suppliers, are very expensive compared to GO and NGO supplied. As a result of these, some of the participants have indicated that their water supply schemes are remain without service for longer period of time. During the field

observation, the researcher got evidence the communities how to get the spare parts, by interview key informant interviewer, such as regional water bureau head, zonal water sector experts and Bambasi WWMED staff members. They indicated that all spare parts are not available at Woreda and even regional level. For the community water supply scheme, spare parts support from either of the regional water bureau or(WWMEO) by allocating budget for spare parts and to the ensured availability of spare parts to communities during at yearly budget allocating plan, in addition to the support from donors or NGOs.

The aid they get from NGOs and GOs have great importance to the local people and administration bodies, but it would be good if they have or get the ability to use properly and support and the water schemes tools with in their own shop and maintenance center or provide the schemes spear parts with in the vicinity of the Woreda or Kebeles by assigning revolving fund. It is good way rather than free supporting to solve their problems by themselves in order to insure the sustainability of their water supply and spare part scarcity. See Fig 4.6.

Fig 4-6 HDW Spare parts that supported by NGOs and GO All respondents were mentioned the existence of spare parts in their vicinity. This is another case that claim the supported from GO and NGOs for operation and maintenance of water supply schemes. Evidence shows that the existing spare parts were not equitably distributed to all water schemes. A few communities had successfully supply, and others complained

about travelling long distances to get spare part and the expenses incurred for transport and accommodation costs. 4.6. Ccommunity participation According to the data collected from the field, the communities were participated in the pre- and post-implementation of the project as much as possible. Yet, their participations at every phase of the projects are not sufficient. The nature of community participation and type of contributions to the water schemes are described in Table 4.6. Table 4-6 community participation during pre-and post-construction

Issue Respondents Have you participated in your water Response Frequency Percent supply project? Yes 100 81.9

No 22 18.1 Total 122 100 If ‘Yes’ on which phase did you During Planning 5 5 participated? During pre construction. 87 87 In all phases 8 8 Sub total 100 100 Total 122 100 Type of contribution made during Labor only 22 22 construction phase? In cash only 10 10 In kind ,selective local 65 65 material only In all 3 3 Sub total 100 100 Total 122 100

Among to the participation of the community at any phases of their water supply project construction, the survey result indicated that 100 (81.9%), of sample, respondents are participate in the construction of the project from the total sample participants of 122, while the remaining 22 (18.1%) respondent did not participated on project by different reason. Some of the reasons mentioned during data collection are lack of awareness, and absence of sense of ownership. However, the main issue to be considered here is 87% of the sample population had participated during pre-construction.

The challenges of the sustainability of RWS are categorized as pre-implementation and post- implementation factors (Gebrehiwot,2006). Community participation, during technology and site selection, demand responsiveness, construction quality, population and training are some of the pre-implementation factors, and post-implementation factors are technical support, ownership of the community, community satisfaction, institutional and financial management, training expert and willingness to pay and management of schemes.

According to the survey result, the contribution of communities during pre-implementation is dominated (65% of the sample contributed)by provision of construction materials whereas those who contribute only in labor are 22%. Such kind of contribution has a big value. However, only the highest contribution of labor and local construction do not sufficient for sustainability. While only 10(10%) contribution in cash. The contribution of all phase only 3(3%) See Table 4.6).

For development of rural water supply schemes and sustainability of services, sense of ownership and commitment are crucial. That means, the communities who participated in the construction of projects are closer and responsible for the scheme than the implementers and are more sensitive to respond for failure, as they are directly feeling the pain of living without protected water sources. The researcher also pointed out this during field observation, FGDs and key informant interviewers. The majority has agreed on the importance of community participation, although they admitted the lack to participation with full commitment.

The Findings have revealed that most communities are participated or involved in at pre- implementation 87 (87%) while 5% accounted for participation of during planning. This is, actually, insufficient to attain the desired sustainability. The problem is derived by weak relationship between implementers and communities. The representative said, before start the project the implementers should sort out the means of users’ involvement. Without the full involvement of community, it is unrealistic to expect long lasting service from projects. The involvement of the community in different phases of the project is widely accepted by GOs, NGs and other stakeholders although they are not acting accordingly to empower and enable communities take the responsibilities.

4.6.1. The role of water committees

Table 4-7 Number of water committee and their responsibility

Kebeles No of committee Duration Responsibility Dabous 3 Female 2 Male Five year Cher man, Secretary, Casher, Areal technician and Member Village 16 3 Female 2 Male Five year Cher man, Secretary, Casher, Areal technician and Member Keshmando 1 4 Female 3 Male Five year Cher man, Secretary, Casher, Areal technician and Member Village 48 3 Female 2 Male Five year Cher man, Secretary, Casher, Areal technician and Member Total 13 9

To select water committee and identify those groups community participation is preferable. However, in the study areas, this method dose not implement. Due to this, the contribution of water committee is very low (Table 4.7). One of the challenges of water committee is that taking responsibilities and keep their water supply schemes functionality on water scheme management without all community identification. According to the FGDs, , water committee of five to seven members is appointed to all water supply schemes . Every member of the committee has own role, such as a chairman, secretary, cashier, caretaker and member. However, from the study areas Keshmando-1 has different committee organization. This kebele assigned an additional caretaker and member. According to the information from the respondents, the duration of a committee member is five years. 4.6.2. Challenges of water committee The researcher described in (section 4.6.1) on the role of water committee are significant for good performance and the sustainability of RWS. During field observation, to identify the capacity of water committees performance among to administrated, the researcher asked the respondents did they think that the water committees had properly manage the water schemes. The household survey result indicates that 100 (82%) of the respondents, argue that the water committees are not capable to manage their of schemes, while the remaining 22 (18%) agree on their capability See Table 4.8.

Table 4-8 Respondents view on role of water committees Issues Respondents

Do you think water committee properly Replay Frequency Percentag manage their system? e

No 100 82

Yes 22 18

Do you think water committee present job and No 100 82 audit report on time for community? Yes 22 18

Total 122 100

The researcher additionally asked the respondents about performance and audit report for the communities on time. Accordingly, 82%of the respondents decline to accept the presence of such reports. As result, the majority of the respondents were not satisfied with the performance of water committees. As per the FGDs the poor performance of the committee could be linked with work loaded of the members and lack of capacity building. The performance problems of the committee are also reaffirmed by the interview with Bambasi woreda water supply head.

Fig 4-7 Focus group dissociation (FGDs) with all targeted kebeles water committee

He believes the encouragement and refreshing training is crucial to strengthen them. During the FGDs, the water committees also admitted that they were not able to play their roles properly due to lack of capacity building and work loaded. The reason is inadequate knowledge and the absence of refreshment training as well as no encourage from GO, privet and stakeholders. Moreover, there is absence of well organized job description and regular meeting to the members of the committee. On the other hand, the water committees blame the implementers for inappropriate election process. They stressed that the election was not in the presence of all users and just the members assigned only in the merit implementers interest even without considering willingness of individuals. So, this problem attributed to the low performance of the committee. In the study area, the committee members are busy of farming, mining and trade. Thus, most of the members have little time to work for the management of their water supply scheme. Moreover, skill gap is pointed as a key reason of performance of weak water committees. Which means, however, most of the members can read and write, but they do not have deep knowledge of good management in all visited areas. So, the implementers should give attention regarding capacity building for better water scheme management. 4.7. Water Tariff and Community Perception Every community has the right to access to water. However, in order to make that water scheme sustainable, it should be have proper operation and maintenance. For this, they need to collect money in the form of water charge. All over the surveyed kebeles there is a tariff system which was set by the user communities. The water fee is in a flat rate modality that is paid a constant amount (2 ETB in average) per month. As shown in Table 4.9, the perception of the users on the amount of tariff is similar; they (117/122) said it is cheap and very cheap. But for the remains of 5 (4.1%) the tariff is expensive. those communities are more of them are very old, disabilities and part of the communities which haven't any means of income. Table 4-9 Water tariff and communities perception on the tariff level.

Activity Options No of respondents Percentage Water tariff set Yes 122 100 No 0 0 Who is allocated water tariff Community 122 100 Water desk 0 0 Water committee 0 0 Payment system Monthly 122 100 Amount paid per month 2 birr 122 100 User perception on the tariff Cheap 10 8.2

Very cheap 107 87.7 Expensive 5 4.1 Total 122 100

As described the previous paragraph to be managed the water schemes properly and render the benefits sustainably, beneficiaries are expected to cover at least appropriate costs to O & M. Even if the users pay the water tariff, the fee collected from users, in general, is not adequate to cover all costs of O & M including other related work. Therefore, water committees and concerned bodies should encourage the users to update the water tariff

4.8. Water Shortage The finding of the study shows that there is the shortage of water supply at the water point. Moreover, agreed on the presence of water shortage confirmed by the 87.7% respondents. According to the respondents, this problem is happening by different causes, such as natural impact, seasonal climate change, geographical and hydrological factors. Due to this imbalance of demand and supply caused in communities. Especially, such incidents happened during the dry season. As the researcher got information from the key informants in those the study areas during construction of the water scheme, sometimes site selection and well drilling work is made in winter (keremt) season. This means at this season the volume of ground water table is high. In addition, the representative informed that the water point served frequently for three to four years after hand over from the implementers. But after these years service time, the ground water table is depleted. This enforced the users to look for another water sources for their domestic. See Table 4.10 Table 4-10: Water shortage Question for Shortage of water for the Options Respondents Percentage respondent. Do you have water shortage from the Yes 107 87.7 water point? No 15 12.3 When the shortage is happened? Winter (bega) (January, February 107 87.7 and March) What is the reason behind the Decreasing of water table 55 54.4 shortage of water at the scheme? Continence broken HDW 30 28

Limit their consumption 22 20.6 Where do you get alternative water Unimproved (unprotected) 63 58.8 source during the shortage period? wells (Sand well) traditional

HDW Unprotected River 24 22.4 Unprotected Spring 20 18.8

Besides on this, in the study area the cause of the limitation of the water source is related to design period. As founded the event from the study area the implementers do not consider the future situation of the population forecasting in the area. Even if the population forecasting has been done, the population growth rate over the year is over an expected. This is the main cause for the problem on water scheme supply. 4.9. Water Quality “An estimated 80% of all diseases and over one-third of deaths in developing countries are caused by the consumption of contaminated water and on average as much as one-tenth of each person’s productive time is sacrificed to water-related diseases”(WHO, 1997). One of the main aims of providing water supply is to improve the health of the communities by providing pure water that can in turn contribute productivity of communities as compared to traditional water sources. Therefore, if implemented water supply scheme is expected to be used by intended beneficiaries, the quality of water has to be acceptable by users or better than their traditional water sources. If the water supply scheme is not used and the benefits from that scheme do not last, the water supply scheme can be said non-functional or not sustainable. 4.9.1. Community perception about physical water quality WHO/UNICEF, (2010) cited as (Behailu et al., 2016). "An improved drinking water source is defined as one that, by nature of its construction or through active intervention, is protected from outside contamination, in particular from contamination with fecal matter. “Means after handover the schemes the beneficiaries take a responsibility to inspect the schemes. According to (Behailu et al., 2016). In sub-Saharan region, 75% of improved water supply system are not piped the dominant schemes are hand-dug wells and shallow wells fitted hand pumps are common, and this is true in the studies area. Similar to this, during field observation, the researcher asked the respondents if they have water quality problem. According to the respondents, 75 (61.5%) of them said that there is no problem regarding water quality. However, the remaining 47 (38%) of the respondents have "yes" or agree with the occurrence of the problem of water quality problem. According to the respondent, most of the time water quality problems happened during summer. See Table 4.11

Table 4-11 Community perception on the quality of water

Variables Options Respondents Percentage Is there water quality problem No 75 61.5 Yes 47 38.5 Season of water quality problem Summer 30 63.8 Occur Winter 10 21.3 Round the year 7 14.9 What type of water quality Turbidity 30 63.9 problem Color 5 10.6 Odor 4 8.5 Taste 8 17 What is the causes of water Construction/crack/ 20 42.5 quality problem Drainage problem 10 21.3 Disinfect problem 17 36.2 Total 122 100 4.9.2. Schemes related to construction and disinfection Basically, community needs quality, quantity, accessibility and reliability water. Based on this, the implementers should considered about safe water before implementing the project. Without the participation of all stakeholders, cannot keep the interest of the community. Therefore, not only the implementers but also the community has responsibility to follow and manage the project before and after implementation. According to the respondents the cause of water quality problem is due to poor construction of schemes, absence of drainage and lack of periodical water disinfection. Therefore to provide good water quality, scheme inspection, quality scheme constriction and periodical water disinfect should be given attention. Based on filed observation the majority of the schemes in Bambasi woreda have crack and no drainage. This problem easily exposed the water source for contamination. Similar to this some key informant respond there is no strong scheme inspection head work maintenance, means the beneficiaries not given attention related to scheme inspection and head work maintenance . The other issue of water quality problem is taste, color& turbidity. During, key informant interview with Bambasi woreda water quality expert said most protected hand dug well and shallow well are having hard water or salty. According to woreda water quality expert, related to hard water no effect if the community use for drinking purpose, the only

problem is high soap consumption. However, some communities are not willingness to use hard water and travel long distance for using surface water instead of protected well. 4.10. Water usage In addition to adequate, pure/clean from the source, the amount of water that the communities take for their consumption have a good value to ensure the project goal. Based on this, during data collection among collected information from respondents and measured the usage of water their general consumption of water described as follow. This describes is shows indicated how the estimation of the communities water consumption. So, these communities used a material that can help to fetched which is known as Jerican. This material have a capacity to contain 20 liters of water. Regarding this the weekly collected amount of water divided by number of days then multiplied by litter, So, based on national estimation from the ministry of water, irrigation and electricity (MoWIE), this estimation done by multiplying by a number of every individual. This means as mentioned on the researcher data and national estimation the minimum one household have five members of a family. For example 30 Jerican / 7 Days = 4.3 Jerican per household 4.3 jarican*20 litters/jarican/household = 85 Litter/household 85 litter/household/5person/household= 17 litter per person.

Fig 4-8: Percentage distribution household’s weekly water usage.

The First five years Growth and Transformation Plan period (GTP-1). The period from 2011 to 2015, five years Growth and Transformation Plan period (GTP-1) Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Electricity (MoWIE) planned to achieve water supply service level standard, with in the distance of 1.5 Km radius to the minimum 15 lcpd (liters per capita per day) safe water should require for the rural area According to Universal Accesses Plan (UAP, 2011). However, according to the data from the study areas, the mean average of the weekly communities water consumptions from the water points are from 7 up to 30 jerican per household. On the other hand the result indicated their consumptions are from 4 to 17 lcpd. Based on this, only 24.6 % of those study areas communities are beneficiary of the standard National Accesses plan (NAP) estimation (75 litters for 5 individual or household). While some of the communities are not satisfied from water point.

4.11. Multi-Criteria Analysis Multi Criteria Analysis (MCA) is a process of integrated assessment of projects, alternatives or options for ranking or selecting, priority setting among the finite set of projects, alternatives or options. MCA is a structured approach to determine overall preference among alternatives, where the alternatives accomplish several objectives (Kamalesh P & Shashi., 2008). Base on the result from four criteria Technical impact more weighted for the sustainability of water supply schemes and the others Financial, Social and Institutional are respectively show fig 4.9.

Fig: 4-9 The Structure of Criteria, Factors, Sub-factors and their Weights As described in section 4.4, there are 26 water supply schemes in the study area. From these scemes12 were selected to represent the water point situation in the area. As shown in Table 4.11, a single display of sustainability assessment of Dabous Keble water supply scheme. The other assessment of water supply schemes described See Annex 4 (summary of sustainability, partial sustainability and poor sustainability scores for sampled water schemes). Based on the results sustainability scores for the 12 water projects studied ranged from as a low as 23.8% (Village 48 got 5) to as high as 71.4 % (Dabous). Based on the framework used, sustainability index value range from zero to 100 percent. The lower the percentage indicate, the lower sustainability levels of the scheme and the higher percentage score indicate and vice-versa.

Table 4-12. Variables score and sustainability score for Dabous Keble one water point

Variables Weights Rating Rating × weight Score A 1.1.1: Reliability /adequacy 0.063 50 0.063 × 50 3.15 A 1.1.2: Water quality at source 0.01 45 0.01 × 55 0.45 A 1.1.3: Accessibility & chance of contamination 0.036 70 0.036 × 70 2.52 A 1.2.1: Design adequacy, site & technology 0.071 90 0.071× 90 6.39 A 1.2.2: Condition and functionality of System 0.062 88 0.062 × 90 5.55 A 1.2.3: Natural threat to physical system 0.054 75 0.054 × 75 4.05 A 1.3.1: Maintain design flow 0.034 70 0.034 × 60 2.38 A 1.3.2: Water quality 0.041 65 0.041×55 2.66 A 1.3.3: Surroundings/ drainage system 0.037 60 0.037 × 60 2.22 A 1.4.1: Water fetching time 0.065 90 0.065× 90 5.85 A 1.4.2: Status of meeting additional demand 0.048 88 0.048 × 88 4.22 A 2.1.1: Status of use by population 0.016 50 0.016 × 55 0.8 A 2.2.1:Decision making, operation & maintenance 0.038 75 0.038 × 75 2.85 A 2.3.1: Mitigation measures & drainage 0.033 65 0.033 × 65 2.15 A 2.4.2: Equity (men, women) 0.034 80 0.034 × 80 2.72 A 3.1.1: Establishment of O &M fund 0.044 70 0.044 × 70 3.08 A 3.1.2: Regularity and saving 0.05 68 0.05 × 40 3.4 A 3.2.1: Use of savings/surplus fund 0.094 75 0.094 × 75 7.05 A 4.1.1: Existence, functioning & meetings 0.014 85 0.014 × 85 1.19 A 4.1.2: Ownership of scheme & activities 0.013 90 0.013 × 90 1.17 A 4.1.3: Representation on committee 0.014 80 0.014 × 80 1.12 A 4.2.1: Existence of the committee 0.02 85 0.02 × 85 1.7 A 4.2.2: Functioning of the committee 0.025 85 0.025 × 85 2.13 A 4.3.1: Co- ordination with local leaders 0.018 55 0.018 × 55 0.99 A 4.3.2 Training & external support 0.024 75 0.022 × 50 1.8 Total 71.6% To identify the water point whether sustainable or not, weight and rate was assigned to each water point and each water point questioner filled by five assigned professionals and sum the whole experts result, finally divided in to five and got average weight of variable. The rates are multiple by the average weight of variables to obtain the overall score of the

corresponding variable. Finally, in each water point the scores of all variables will be added and got the sustainability index of the individual water point.

Based on this, the classification of sustainability scores attained by individual water project was arranged into three categories of sustainability levels: < 30 % (not sustainable); 30-69 % (partially sustainable) and 70-100 % (sustainable). Accordingly only two of the 12 water points (Dabous & Village 48 got 3)are sustainable. The reason of only two water points sustainable both water points are fulfillment the requirement of sustainability factors. While, four water points are partially sustainable and the remaining six water points are poor or not sustainable. This means, the water points in the study area are not on track of sustainability as shown in Table 4.12.

Table 4-13: Evaluation of water point sustainability all targeted kebeles According to the MoWIE (2016), the second Growth and Transformation Plan (GTP-2, 2016) proposed 25 lcpd in the radius of 1.0 km to reach pure water supply to the rural residences. Following this plan, the country has the vision of providing adequate, quality, and accessible water supply which equal to a middle-income country by the year of 2025. So, the message of the MoWIE encourages of ensuring the countries water supply development. That means, it indicates that the countries are on the right truck of insuring the coverage of water supply. Yet, only the coverage of water supply cannot insure the sustainability of water schemes. On the other hand, after completed and handed over projects could face breakdown due to one or more problems.

5. Conclusions and Recommendation 5.1. Conclusions The overall aim of this thesis is to assess, evaluate and identify the existing problem of rural water supply schemes in Benishangul region, Bamabasi Woreda and forwarding mitigation measures. The study indicates based on criteria (economical, financial, social and technical), factors and some factors. The result indicated the sustainability of water schemes on the study area is mostly categorized in the range of poor sustainable, the remaining partially sustainable and sustainable respectively. The study indicated that the cause of sustainability, all over the study areas most of rural water supply is managed by the community itself related this, the management is not strong compare to the community water consumption. The other reason for poor performance of the systems is, managements are free services and led by uneducated water committee members. The study areas water supply is mostly dominated by shallow well and hand dug well, these schemes are direct or indirect managed by non-skilled or semi-skilled rural people through community management. Therefore, to improve the management of the schemes and to give better services strong and a responsible body are very important. The results indicates that the provision of water in the study areas good. This means the coverage of water supply on the track of the development. In fact, the participation of the community during pre and post construction has a good value for the development of water project. However, the participation of pre- and post- construction alone is not sufficient to keep the sustainability. On the other hand, the participation of the community during planning and other related works are is remain poor. The study reveals that operation and maintenance have relatively good initiation. However, affordability of O&M and cost recovery are still weak in the study areas. From the angle of spare parts supply, the involvement of donors can significantly contribute to local community. Yet, free supporting should be given attention not to discourage the capacity of the community to do things by themselves, means establish spear parts shop in the vicinity of the Woreda or Kebeles by assigning revolving fund rather than free supporting as a good way to alleviate the challenge. So, the main success of water supply systems in the study area is establish strong water committee, because this is one of the base for the long term sustainability of water scheme. Generally, the study result indicated the majority of the study area water points, poor design water scheme construction, adjacent to surface water

constructed of water schemes and during pos-implementation limited community participation on water schemes are the negative impact of sustainability.

5.1.1. Recommendation The coverage of water supply in the study area is well. However, the coverage alone is not sufficient condition to keep the sustainability of water supply systems. On the other hand, the sustainability of water supply systems is still remains poor. The role of government to provide water supply systems and making operational is indispensable. However, to achieve the goal and insure the sustainability of project the participation of the community and stakeholder are very important. Based on the results, it is recommended that attention is given to donors of free supporting system, well experience professional experts and capacity building. To facilitate this, national and regional governments proposes to establish a sustainability competition between the Woreda and Kebles.  Update the donors of free supporting work system: The support they get from GOV and NGOs has great importance to the local people and administrative bodies. However, it would be great if get the skills, ability and maintain the water scheme tools with in their own workshop and maintenance center or provide water scheme spear parts with the vicinity of the Woreda's or Keble's.  Regarding professional experts: During the time of site selection, the implementers should assign well experience professionals rather than new professionals. As well as, the drilling well should implement winter time instead of summer because, most of the time the ground water table rise up in the summer season and decrease winter season.  Capacity building: Well train community members especially those responsible for operation and maintenance of water schemes are very important for the sake of sustainability of water schemes. So, untrained community members should not be entrusted to manage water facilities as this could lead to mismanagement and unwarranted system breakdowns. Regarding this, the study areas water supply is managed by non-skilled or semi-skilled rural people through community management. Therefore, to keep the performance of the schemes and to give better services capacity building is very important. Because well train operators are more efficient in working the water scheme the result minimizes any breakdowns by maintenance or operation. In cases of breakdowns, availability of trained technicians ensures the life of water point.

 From the result of the study, it can be seen that most of the selected projects are in the poor sustainable range and the remaining are partially sustainable and sustainable. The utility of the framework can be improved by carrying out the sensitivity analysis to see the effects of changes in weights of different sub-factors to the overall sustainability score.  The sustainability criteria and indicators selected in this study are based on the literature review, but those criteria and indicators are recommended to be select depending on the local context.

REFERENCES Atsbeha N., (2014) Prediction of Compaction Characterstics from Atterberg Limits for Fine Graened Soils. Atsebeha-2014, etd.aau.edu.et Page 27.

Behailu, B.M. et al., (2016). Comparison of community managed projects and conventional approaches in rural water supply of Ethiopia. African Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 10(9), pp.292–306.

Beyene, H. A. (2012). Factors Affecting the Sustainability of Rural Water Supply Systems: The Case of Mecha Woreda, Amhara Region, Ethiopia.

Brikké, F. (2000). Operation and Maintenance of rural water supply and sanitation systems. IRC, Delft, Netherlands, prepared for WHO.

Brikké, F. et al., (2003). Linking technology choice with operation and maintenance in the context of community water supply and sanitation: A reference document for planners and project staff.

Bryceson, D. F. & Howe, J. (1993). Rural household transport in Africa: Reducing the burden on women? World development, 21(11), 1715–1728. Elsevier.

Casey, Vincent; MacDonald, Alan; Wilson, Paul.,(2016) UPGro (Unloking Poteintioal of Ground Water For the Poor) Initial project approach for assessing rural water supply functionality and levels of performance.,(2016) Article.

Chambers, R. & Conway, G. (1992). Sustainable rural livelihoods: practical concepts for the 21st century. Institute of Development Studies (UK).

Chowns, E. E. (2014). The political economy of community management: a study of factors influencing sustainability in Malawi’s rural water supply sector.

Costanza, R., d’ Arge, R., De Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., et al. (1997). The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. nature, 387(6630), 253–260. Nature publishing group.

Dankelman, I. & Davidson, J., (2013). Women and the Environment in the Third World: Alliance for the Future, Routledge.

Economic, U.N.D. & Information, U.N.D. of P., (2009). Millennium Development Goals Report 2009 (Includes the 2009 Progress Chart), United Nations Publications.

Esrey, S. A., Feachem, R. G. & Hughes, J. M. (1985). Interventions for the control of diarrhoeal diseases among young children: improving water supplies and excreta disposal facilities. Bulletin of the World Health organization, 63(4), 757. World Health Organization.

Factors Affecting the Sustainability of Rural Water Supply Systems: The Case of Mecha Woreda, Amhara Region, Ethiopia. (Doctoral dissertation, Cornell University).

Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Electricity GTP (2016) Second Growth and Transformation National Plan (GTP-2)for the Water Supply and Sanitation Sub-sector.

Fewings, P. (2013). Construction project management: an integrated approach. Routledge.

Gbadegesin, A. & Olorunfemi, F. (2007). Assessment of rural water supply management in selected rural areas of Oyo State, Nigeria. African Technology Policy Studies Network.

Geremew, B., (2008). Assessment of problems to sustainability of rural water supply schemes: The case of menge woreda, Benishangul Gumuz regional state.

Gleitsmann, B. A., Kroma, M. M. & Steenhuis, T. (2007). Analysis of a rural water supply project in three communities in Mali: Participation and sustainability. Natural Resources Forum (Vol. 31, pp. 142–150).

Hajkowicz S, Collins K (2007) A review of multiple criteria analysis for water resource planning and management. Water Resour Manage 21(9):1553–1566 .

Hart, S. L. & others, (1997). Beyond greening: strategies for a sustainable world. Harvard businessreview,75(1),pp.66–77.

Harvey, P. & Reed, B. (2004). Rural water supply in Africa: Building blocks for handpump sustainability. WEDC, Loughborough University.

Harvey, P.A. & Reed, R.A., (2006). Community-managed water supplies in Africa: sustainable dispensable? Community Development Journal, 42(3), pp.365–378

Henry, R. K., Yongsheng, Z. & Jun, D. (2006). Municipal solid waste management challenges in developing countries-Kenyan case study. Waste management, 26(1), 92–100. Elsevier.

Howard,G.,(2003). Domestic water quantity, service level and health.

Jansz, S. (2011). A study into rural water supply sustainability in Niassa province, Mozambique. Water Aid.

Jaya Shukla., (2016). Evaluation of Factors Influencing Sustainability of Water Projects in Gahondo: A case of Water Projects in Muhanga District, Rwanda. Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, Kigali, Rwanda European Journal of Business and Social Sciences, Vol. 5, No. 01, April 2016. P.P. 129 - 145 URL: http://www.ejbss.com/recent.aspx-/ ISSN: 2235 -767X

Kamalesh Panthi & Shashi Bhattarai., (2008). A Framework to Assess Sustainability of Community-based Water Projects Using Multi-Criteria Analysis First International Conference on Construction In Developing Countries (ICCIDC “Advancing and Integrating Construction Education, Research & Practice” August 4-5, 2008, Karachi,, Pakistan

Lockwood, H., Bakalian, A. & Wakeman, W. (2003). Assessing sustainability in rural water supply: the role of follow-up support to communities. Literature review and desk review of rural water supply and sanitation project documents.

Martinez, F., Hernández, V., Alonso, J. M., Rao, Z. & Alvisi, S. (2007). Optimizing the operation of the Valencia water-distribution network. Journal of Hydroinformatics, 9(1), 65–78. IWA Publishing.

Montgomery, M. A., Bartram, J. & Elimelech, M. (2009). Increasing functional sustainability of water and sanitation supplies in rural sub-Saharan Africa. Environmental Engineering Science, 26(5), 1017–1023. Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. 140 Huguenot Street, 3rd Floor New Rochelle, NY 10801 USA.

Mukemil, k., (2007). environmental cost benefit analysis of waste to energy recovery in nifas silk lafto subcity addis ababa.

Netshipale, Lidzani Lucas(2016). Water services delivery in Mukondeni Village in Limpopo Province, South Africa University of Limpopo ULSpace Repository Institutional Repository

Neumayer, E. (2004). Arab-related Bilateral and Multilateral Sources of Development Finance: Issues, Trends, and the Way Forward. The World Economy, 27(2), 281–300. Wiley Online Library.

Nyasetia, N. F., Mbabazi, M., Jaya, S., & Ephantus, N. W. (2016). Institutional Factors Influencing Timely Completion of Road Projects in Rwanda: Case of Government Externally Financed Projects. European Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 5(01), 146-159.

Organization, W. H. (2015). Progress on sanitation and drinking water: 2015 update and MDG assessment. World Health Organization, Book.

Organization, World Health Organization & others. (2017). UN-Water global analysis and assessment of sanitation and drinking-water (GLAAS) 2017 report: financing universal water, sanitation and hygiene under the sustainable development goals.

Pesonen Venla .,( 2016).Towards Sustainable Water Management in Rural Nepal – A Case Study of the Finnish Supported Water Supply Schemes in Nawalparasi DistrictUniversity of Jyväskylä

Rijsberman, F. R. (2006). Water scarcity: fact or fiction? Agricultural water management, 80(1), 5–22. Elsevier.

Rogers, C.R., (2007). The necessary and sufficient conditions of therapeutic personality change.

Said, I., Osman, O. & others. (2013). Overview on management patterns in community, private and hybrid management in rural water supply. Journal of Sustainable Development, 6(5), 26.

Sara, J. & Katz, T. (2004). Making rural water supply sustainable. World Bank (WB), Water and Sanitation Program, Washington, DC.

SHAW, D. (2012). An assessment of rural water supply sustainability in Monze District, Zambia.

Shiva, V. (2016). Water wars: Privatization, pollution, and profit. North Atlantic Books.

Sizwe Nkambule and Graciana Peter., (2012) Sustainability of Rural Water Schemes in Swaziland Eco-Green Environmental and Research Consulting, Manzini,

Tacoli, C. (2002). Changing rural-urban interactions in the Sub-Saharan Africa and their impact on livelihoods: a summary (Vol. 4). IIED

Taro, Y.(1967). Statistics, an introudactary analysis (2ed.). Newyourk.

Toyobo, A. & Tanimowo, N. (2011). Evaluation of rural water supply schemes in selected communities in Oke-Ogun Area, Oyo State, Nigeria. Global Journal of Science Frontier Research, 11(9), 1–6.

UAP (2011). Revised rural water supply- UAP, Ethiopia Ministry of Water irrigation and Electricity Addis Ababa Ethiopia, (13 September 2015).

WHO&UNICEF.,(2010). Progress on Sanitation and Driniking-water (2010) update WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation. ISBN 978 92 4 156395 6 (NLM classification: WA 670)

WHO/UNICEF Joint Water Supply and Sanitation Programme, (2005). Water for life: making it happen. World health organization.

Witte, J.M., Streck, C. & Benner, T., (2003). The road from Johannesburg: What future for partnerships in global environmental governance?

World Health Organization Geneva (1997) Guidelines for drinking-water quality Surveillanc and control of community supplies Second Edition Volume 3

ANNEX Annex 1: List of water supply schemes in the sample kebeles by type, status and year of Construction Kebeles Schemes Pump Statues of the Schemes Year of Constructed by Construction Keshemando HDW & SW Afraid eve 4 Functional 3 un functional 2012-2016 GOV & No 1 UNICEF Dabous HDW & SW Afraid eve 4 Functional 3 un functional 2013-2015 GOV& World Vision Village 16 HDW & SW Afraid eve 4 functional 2 un functional 2014-2016 GOV& World Vision Village 48 HDW &SW Afraid eve 4 functional 2 un functional 2013-2016 GOV&MDG

(Source: Woreda Water Office, 2017)

Annex 2: Regional water supply coverage (2015 - 2016)

No Name Total No Regional, Zone and Woreda Water beneficiary and of percentage population Urban Rural Total Urban% Rural% Total % 1 Regional 1,093,871 68,182 470,327 538,509 36.00 52.00 49.2 2 Assosa zone 473,170 29,511 193,804 223,681 38.7 48.8 47.3 3 Metekel zone 393,174 30,529 171,279 203,158 38.97 54.4 51.7 4 Kemash zone 159,348 6,295 74,529 79,775 22.1 56.9 50.1 5 Assosa Woreda 186,955 19,946 73,612 95,707 43.2 52.3 51.2 6 Bambasi Woreda 81,690 5,651 33,096 38,946 32.4 51.5 47.7 7 Mao komo Special 68,179 1,863 31,912 31,912 28.8 49.6 46.8 Woreda 8 Homesha Woreda 28,236 801 13,550 14,081 48.00 51.00 49.9 9 Mengi Woreda 50,524 873 23,982 24,251 41.6 49.5 48.00 10 Sherkole Woreda 31,586 - 12,921 12,487 - 43.3 39.5 11 Kurmuk Woreda 21,260 324 10,792 10,792 30.7 53.2 50.8 12 Oda Woreda 72,919 1,940 25,894 27,409 32.2 38.7 37.7 13 Guba Woreda 19,000 1,440 7,021 8,558 36.9 46.5 45.00 14 Dangur Woreda 64,721 3,402 28,080 31,326 27.1 53.8 48.4 15 Pawi Woreda 62,270 7,752 27,368 35,997 48.00 59.3 57.8 16 Mandura Woreda 61,501 5,920 26,548 32,947 41.3 56.3 53.6 17 Debati Woreda 69,078 2,496 33,070 35,032 21.6 57.5 50.7 18 Bulen Woreda 54,165 4,558 24,322 29,118 48.00 54.5 53.8 19 Wombera Woreda 62,469 4,963 24,870 30,148 48.00 47.7 48.3 20 Kemash Woreda 36,726 2,568 14,209 16,895 22.8 55.8 46.00 21 Sedal Woreda 28,463 1,008 13,199 14,544 19.4 56.7 51.1 22 Agalu Woreda 32,407 656 15,966 16,239 16.6 56.1 50.1 23 Yaso Woreda 18,817 764 9,177 9,810 28.3 56.9 52.1 24 Belew Woreda 42,935 1,299 21,411 22,292 24.7 56.8 51.9 (Source: Regional Water Bureau, 2017)

Annex 3: National water supply coverage (2016)

No Name Number of water supply beneficiary and percentage Urban users Rural users Total Urban% Rural% Total %

1 Tigray 29,574 101,884 131,458 56.0 54.0 54.2

2 Afar - 53,175 53,175 39.0 34.0 36.0

3 Amhara 173,796 1,473,594 1,647,390 59.9 65.8 53.3

4 Oromia 307,536 1,619,467 1,927,003 51.2 45.6 46.4

5 SNNP - 1,053,553 1,053,553 - - -

6 Somali 110,181 112,636 222,817 51.2 45.6 46.4

7 BG 38,966 470,327 509,293 45.8 54.4 52.6

8 Gambela 1,555 11,035 12,590 34.5 63.2 55.9

9 Harare 79,770 67,684 147,454 60.0 67.0 63.3

10 Dire Dawa - 8,289 8,289 - 43.3 39.5

11 Addis Ababa ------12 Total 702,412 4,540,283 6,183,348 63.1 52.5 61.0

(Source MoWIE., 2017)

Annex 4: Summary of sustainability, partial sustainability and poor sustainability scores for sampled water schemes. Sampled Water Schemes (No 1-12) Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 A1.1.1 1.1 3.15 1.3 2.3 0.9 1.7 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.7 A1.1.2 2 0.45 2.6 2.6 2 0.9 2.4 3.8 1.6 0.6 2.7 1.6 A1.1.3 0.8 2.5 0.9 0 1.9 0.8 0.7 0.5 1.2 0.3 0.6 1.6 A1.2.1 0.3 6.4 0.5 0 2.2 1.4 1 0.1 1.7 1.8 0.7 0.7 A1.2.2 0.8 5.6 0.6 1.8 7.8 6 1 2.5 2.4 2.8 1.2 1 A1.2.3 1.4 4 0.5 4.4 1.6 2 2 0.8 2.1 0.8 1.4 0.4 A1.3.1 1.1 2.4 1.8 2 0.2 0.5 0.8 0.2 0.3 0.8 0.6 2.4 A1.3.2 1.2 2.6 1.9 2.1 2.2 1.8 1.1 0.6 0.9 0 1 2.1 A1.3.3 1.6 2.2 1.3 0.7 2.2 0.3 0.2 0.8 2.1 2.4 1.4 2.3 A1.4.1 1.3 5.9 0.3 1.6 1.4 0.6 0.6 0.9 2.7 0.8 1.9 1.4 A1.4.2 3 4.2 2.1 1.5 1.7 2.5 1.8 0.2 0.6 0.4 1.1 1 A2.1.1 0 0.8 0.2 2.1 2.3 0.4 2 4.2 1.4 0 1.2 1.6 A2.2.1 2.3 2.9 1.6 2.6 2.4 3.2 4.8 0 0 0 0 0 A2.3.1 3.6 2.2 1.9 0 1.3 2.5 2 0.7 0.6 1.4 4.9 1.5 A2.4.2 2.3 2.7 1.8 3 5 3 0.5 2.2 0.4 2.1 1.9 2.4 A3.1.1 3.5 3.1 3.4 2.3 1.4 2.8 0.5 0.3 1 1.8 0.9 0.5 A3.1.2 0.5 3.4 1.4 2.7 0.2 1.4 1 0.1 0.3 3.2 0.5 1.5 A3.2.1 0.2 7.1 0.8 3.6 0.6 8 1.4 0.3 0.5 0.4 1 1 A4.1.1 0.1 1.2 0.4 3.9 1.6 0.4 0 0.8 0.8 0.1 0.2 3 A4.1.2 5.3 1.2 3.6 2.9 6 10 1 0.9 1.1 4 0.8 0.4 A4.1.3 1.6 1.1 9.6 2.6 1.1 11 0.3 0.6 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.2 A4.2.1 2.8 1.7 2.8 0.4 0.7 2.8 1.8 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.2 A4.2.2 3.2 2.1 3.5 3.6 2.1 3.7 1.8 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.9 0.3 A4.3.1 1.7 0.99 1.9 2.8 2.7 2.2 0.7 1.1 1.8 2.4 1.1 0.2 A4.3.2 1.3 1.8 2.5 2.1 0.8 0.7 0.1 0.9 1 0.4 0.9 0.1 Total (%) 43 71.6 49.2 53.6 52.3 70.6 29.9 23.8 26.9 27.9 27.9 28.1

Annex 5: Questionnaire for Households Arba Minch University School of Graduate Studies Department of water supply and environmental engineering Dear respondents! Objective: The purpose of this questionnaire is to gather relevant information on problems to sustainability of rural water supply schemes in the region in general and in Bambasi woreda in particular. The study is conducted for M.Sc Degree in department of water supply and sanitation engineering Studies at Arba Minch University. It is expected that the study will come up with viable findings on problems to sustainability and will contribute to the socio- economic development efforts by supporting governments’ attempt to increase the coverage of water supply to all community in the long-run. The study is conducted only for the academic /development/ purpose and the respondents and response is not deployed for other purpose. The information you will provide is very essential for the success of the study. Therefore you are kindly requested to answer all questions and give reliable and complete information on the issues. Instruction for Interviewer: 1. Introduce your self 2. Make a choice or circle your answer for questionnaires that has given an alternative choice that reflects your filling.

3. Give relevant information for questionnaires because your information have big value Name of interviewer______Date of interview______Interview conducted: Woreda______Kebele______‘Got’____ Questionnaire identification no.______Thank you in Advance!

1) Personal Background

1. Gender, 1. Male ______2. Female______

2. Educational Level? a) Unable to read and write (Illiterate) d) Junior school (5-8) b) Primary school (1-6) complete e) College diploma c) Secondary school (9-12) Complete 3. Size of the household (family)?. ______4. What is your source of income? a) Farming c) Mini tread b) Government employee d) day labor 5. What is your main source of water supply? a) protected HDW d) Unprotected Spring b) Protected SW e) Unprotected sand dug well 6. Traditional HDW c) Unprotected river 2) Water service level, users’ satisfaction, participation and community commitment 1) Have you participate in the Construction of the water supply scheme? 1. Yes 2. No 1.1) If ‘Yes’ on which phase the participation has done? a) Planning b) Construction phase c) In all phases 2. Type of contribution made during construction phase? a) Labor only c) In cash only d) material only b) In kind, selective local e) in all 3. If your answer for ‘Q1’ is ‘No, what is your reason for not participating? a) Not asked b) Lack of awareness c) Not lived here before 4. What is your contribution during the construction of Water scheme? a) Financial b) In kind c) Selective local materials 5. How much jerican water fetch from water point per week per household? a) 7 jerican b) 10 jerican c) 20 jerican d) 30 jerican 6. What purpose using water points in addition to drinking purpose? a) Close washing b) Animal drinking c) Vegetable growing 7. Have you face any non-functional problem since construction? 1. Yes 2. No 8. If yes,

8.1 is there happen the problem of no functional scheme since the last one year?

a) Yes b) No 8.2 How much it is the frequency of schemes non- functionality or fails to provide service since the last one year? a) Once b) Twice d) Three times d) Four times e) > Four times 8.3 Average time spent of schemes in state of maintenance once the problem of non- functionality will happen? a) 15day-1 Month b) Month-2 1/2 Month c) Month-5 Month d) > 6 Month 9. How many hours operate the pump per day? a) 2hour b) 4 hour c) 6 hour d) 8hour e) 10 hour 10. Is there water quality problem? a) Yes, b) No 10.1. If yes, Season of water quality problem Occur a) Summer b) Winter c) Round the year 10.2. What type of water quality problem? a) Turbidity b) Color c) Odor d) Taste 11.3. What is the causes of water quality problem? a) Construction/crack b) Disinfection problem c) Drainage problem 11. Do you have water shortage from the water point? a) Yes b) No 11.1 If yes, when the shortage is happened? a) Summer b) Winter 11.2 What is the reason behind the shortage of water? a) Decreasing of water table b) Continence broken HDW c) Limit their consumption 11.3. Where do you get another source of water during the shortage time? a) Unimproved (unprotected) wells, (Sand well), traditional HDW b) Unprotected River c) Unprotected Spring 12. Where do you get spare parts when needed? ______13. Do you have water tariff set? a) Yes b) No 14.1. If yes, who is allocated water tariff? a) Community b) Water desk c) Water committee 13.2. Payment system ______13.3. Amount paid per month ______13.3. What is perception on the tariff? a) Cheep b) Very cheap c) Expensive 14. Do you have water committee? a) Yes b) No 14.1 If yes, How much members of water committee?

a) 5 Members b) 7 Members c) 9 Members 15. Do you think water committee properly administrate the schemes? a) Yes b) No 16. Do you think water committee provide job and audit report on time for community? a) Yes b) No 17. Do you think local technicians have sufficient capacity technical skills to repairs / maintenance HDW? a) Yes b) No 18. They have necessary spear parts to carry out repairs when needed? a) Yes b) No c) We don't know

Annex 6: Interview from Government Officials (Regional, Zonal, and Woreda) water sectors Date of interview______. Name of the organization represented ______. Position of the respondent ______. 1. What are the major goals or objectives of the establishment of your organization in relation to rural water supply? 2. What the policy stipulates about costs of water supply, cost recovery of O and M as well as recurrent expenses? 3. What technologies do you provide mainly? Why? 4. Did the government agency adequately prepared the community to manage and sustain their water supply schemes? (Yes/No), if `No`, what is the reasons? 5. What types of institutional supports are given to the lower governments/community in sustaining the functionality of the schemes? And how frequent are the supports? 6. Are spare parts and toolkits readily available, affordable at regional/Zonal/woreda and Are there spare part store at regional/Zonal /Woreda and Community level? If “No”, why?

8. Are there competent private sectors who provide spare parts and able to do water supply construction in the region? 9. What problems are faced by your organization/office to support the rural water supply service functional for long period of time (sustainable)? 10. How do you see the coordination of your organization/office with the lower governments and stake holders to support the service? 11. What requests are mainly reported to your office from the lower government offices/Community in relation to water supply? 12. How do you evaluate the status of the schemes implemented by your office and others? 13. Are there well trained technicians who can carry out major repairs that are beyond the financial Thank you!

Annex 7: Multi Criteria Decision Approach Questioner

Criteria Factors Sub-factors A1.1:Source yield & quality A1.1.1: Reliability, adequacy, depletion A1.1.2: Water quality at source A1.1.3: Accessibility, chance of contamination & conflict A1.2: Physical condition of A1.2.1: Design adequacy, site & technology A1: Technical system A1.2.2: Condition and functionality of system A1.2.3: Natural threat to physical system A 1.3: Water point A1.3.1: Maintain design flow functioning A1.3.2: Water quality A1.3.3: Maintaining design flow A1.4: Meeting demand A1.4.1: Water fetching time A1.4.2: Status of meeting additional demand A2.1: Use of water facility A2.1.1: Status of use by population A2.2: Community A2.2.1: Decision making, operation & participation maintenance A2: Social A2. 3: Environmental A2.3.1: Mitigation measures & drainage A2.4: Social inclusion & A2.4.2: Equity (men, women) equity

A3.1: Availability of fund A3.1.1: Establishment of O & M fund A3: Financial A3.1.2: Regularity and saving A3.2: Use of fund A3.2.1: Use of savings/surplus fund A4.1: Users’ committee A4.1.1: Existence, functioning & meetings A4.1.2: Ownership of scheme & activities A4.1.3: Representation on committee

A4: Institutional A4.2: Maintenance A4.2.1: Existence of the committee committee/caretaker A4.2.2: Functioning of the committee A4.3: Coordination & A4.3.1: Co- ordination with local leaders linkage A4.3.2 Training & external support

(Source: Kamalesh Panthi & Shashi Bhattarie 2008)