South Sudan WASH Governance Report Analysis

WASH Governance Analysis Report – South Sudan
Alix LEREBOURS
ACF-USA
May 2015

ACF - Wash governance Study in South Sudan - Report – Alix Lerebours – May 2015 II
Acknowledgments
Thanks go to the people who launched and supported this project: ACF-mission in South Sudan,
including John Fitzgerald, WASH Coordinator. Then ACF WASH department in New York, and
especially Sunny Guidotti Pereira, WASH Technical Advisor. Finally, the Expertise and Advocacy
Department of ACF-France and Jean Lapègue, Senior WASH Advisor.

ACF - Wash governance Study in South Sudan - Report – Alix Lerebours – May 2015 III
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments............................................................................................................................................................... II
Table of Contents................................................................................................................................................................III
List of Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................................................V
List of Figures and Tables................................................................................................................................................VI
Executive Summary.............................................................................................................................................................7
I) Presentation of the study...........................................................................................................................................11
A – The context: South Sudan and Northern Bahr el Ghazar .................................................................11
B – Scope of the Study............................................................................................................................................15
C – Methodology of the Study..............................................................................................................................15
II) Findings ...........................................................................................................................................................................18
A – At National level................................................................................................................................................18
1) The Regulatory Framework .....................................................................................................18
2) Main findings and challenges identified at national level............................................26
B – At local level: the case of Northern Bahr el Ghazal.............................................................................31
1) Access to WASH, KAP survey findings..................................................................................31
2) WUC and behavior change: opportunities and challenges..........................................36
C – An urban insight................................................................................................................................................48
1) WASH services provision...........................................................................................................48
2) Urban Sanitation ...........................................................................................................................50
3) Lack of clear framework and standards..............................................................................51
III) Conclusions...................................................................................................................................................................53

ACF - Wash governance Study in South Sudan - Report – Alix Lerebours – May 2015 IV
IV) Recommendations .....................................................................................................................................................55
A – To ACF South Sudan Mission .......................................................................................................................55
1) Advocacy’s areas for engagement..........................................................................................55
2) Programmatic recommendations ..........................................................................................56
B – To other ACF-missions...................................................................................................................................61
Annex A – Water Governance.......................................................................................................................................62
Annex B – Water as a human right: the principles...............................................................................................63
Annex C – GLAAS important Figures for South Sudan .......................................................................................64
Annex D – Bibliography...................................................................................................................................................67
Annex E – List of Interviews..........................................................................................................................................69
Annex F – Introduction to WASH governance within ACF ...............................................................................71
Annex G – Map of Northern Bahr el Ghazal.............................................................................................................77
Annex H – Quantitative survey Questionnaire ......................................................................................................77
Annex I – Terms of Reference of the Study.............................................................................................................83

ACF - Wash governance Study in South Sudan - Report – Alix Lerebours – May 2015 V
List of Acronyms
ACF Action contre la Faim / Action against Hunger
CPA Comprehensive Peace Agreement
CSO Civil Society Organisation
CLTS Community-Led Total Sanitation
DRC Danish Refugee Council
FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation
FGD Focus Group Discussion
GAA / WHH German Agro Action / Welt Hunger Hilfe
GoSS Government of South Sudan
IWRM Integrated Water Resources Management
KAP Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices
MDGs Millennium Development Goals
MHPP Ministry of Housing and Physical Planning
MWCRD Ministry of Water, Cooperatives and Rural Development
MWRI Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation
NBeG Northern Bahr el Ghazal
NGO Non-governmental organisation
NRC Norwegian Refugee Council
ODF Open Defecation Free
RWSS Rural Water (and Sanitation) Supply
SDC Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation
SNV Netherlands Development Organization
SSP South Sudanese Pound
UWC Urban Water Corporation
UWSS Urban Water (and Sanitation) Supply
UN United Nation
UNICEF United Nations Children Fund
WASH Water Sanitation and Hygiene
WIMS Water Information Management System
WHO World Health Organization
WRM Water Resources Management
WUC Water Users Committee

ACF - Wash governance Study in South Sudan - Report – Alix Lerebours – May 2015 VI
List of Figures and Tables
Table 1: Key figures from the GLAAS report 2014...............................................................................................12
Table 2: Sample households and clusters for the KAP survey........................................................................17
Table 3: Estimation of access to improved water and sanitation in South Sudan..................................48
Table 4: The five pillars of ACF Advocacy strategy..............................................................................................75
Figure 1: Organization Chart of the division of power at national level in South Sudan.....................19
Figure 2: Organization Chart of the division of power at state level in South Sudan............................19
Figure 3: Organization Chart of executive power in South Sudan.................................................................20
Figure 4: Organization Chart of key national institutions involved in WASH in South Sudan ..........24
Figure 5: Organization Chart of key state and local institutions involved in WASH..............................25
Figure 6: Household income per month...................................................................................................................31
Figure 7: Time needed to fetch water (return time and queuing time)......................................................32
Figure 8: Time when people wash their hands.....................................................................................................33
Figure 9: Person who decided on the price of water..........................................................................................34
Figure 10: Possibility for respondents to complain about water-related issues....................................34
Figure 11: Community trust into water responsible people ...........................................................................35
Figure 12: Dimensions of water governance (OECD, 2014)............................................................................72

ACF - Wash governance Study in South Sudan - Report – Alix Lerebours – May 2015 7
Executive Summary
780 million people in the World lack access to an
improved water source. Unclean water is the
second biggest killer of children: 1.8 million
children die every year as a result of diarrhoea of
other diseases caused by unclean water and poor
sanitation. Health costs associated with poor water
and sanitation have a big impact on productivity
and economic growth, trapping vulnerable
households in cycles of poverty. It has been already
agreed, that this water-crisis is not, at least not
only, about scarcity, but mostly about water
resource mismanagement. In other terms, it is a
“governance crisis”. Governance systems
“determine who gets what water, when and how,
and decide who has the right to water and related
services.” Even if water governance is specific to
each context, some good governance principles
have been widely accepted, and agreed on by ACF:
it should be participatory, consensus oriented,
accountable, transparent, responsive, effective and
efficient, equitable and inclusive, follow the rule of
law and aim at sustainability.
The Republic of South Sudan has a population of
approximately 11.3 million people. After more than
20 years of civil war, the country is now facing
another violence outbreak. South Sudan is grossly
underdeveloped, experiences an acute lack of social
services, instability and insecurity. It has
substantial water resources, although they are
unevenly distributed across the territory and time.
According to the African Development Bank, 31%
have access to improved water, and 14% to
improved sanitation. Therefore, needs in the WASH
sector are high.
Northern Bahr el Ghazal is one of the 10 States of
South Sudan, located in the North-West and
bordered by Sudan to the North. Its population is
estimated to be over 721,000 people. NBeG has
remained relatively stable during the recent
outbreak of violence in South Sudan. It is
considered to be the most poverty-stricken state of
the country, with 76% living below the poverty
line. Global acute malnutrition (GAM) rates are also
very high in NBeG: above the 15 per cent
emergency threshold.
A study on water governance
To strengthen its work, ACF decided to conduct a
study on WASH governance. The objectives were to
get a clear, documented picture of the legal and
institutional framework in regards to the WASH
sector. This study aimed also at pointing out
hindrance in local governance that limits access to
water for the most vulnerable and gender issues
along with possible solutions/approaches. Finally,
the study looked at the sustainability of the
services, to identify gaps and opportunities, and
possible ways of improving it.
This study has been conducted within ACF during 2
months (March-May 2015), most of the time was
spent in South Sudan, including two weeks in
Northern Bahr el Ghazal (March 2015). Two
approaches were used: a qualitative one, through
interviews of stakeholders of the WASH sector at
national and local level, in Northern Bahr el Ghazal
and Juba, focus group discussions, and readings;
and a quantitative one, through a survey of 210
households in Northern Bahr el Ghazal (Aweil East
and North).
A fragmented national WASH sector
The Country gained independence in 2011, and
therefore is still in a transitory period. The current
Constitution is a transitional one. The national
government is responsible for the development of
policies, strategies, guidelines, regulations and
standards that will apply to the whole country.
They ensure the coordination of the development
of the country and support the states. The local
government, counties and state shall report to the
national level and send them relevant data, so that
they can take care of the national monitoring.
Regarding the WASH sector, a few regulatory
documents already exist and several institutions
are involved. A Water Policy was adopted in 2007.
Several other laws and policies are related to the
WASH sector, such as the Health policy and the
Local government act. There is no specific
legislation to guide the whole sector and define
roles and responsibilities of the different
institutions and levels of government. A new Water

Bill has been drafted (Water Bill 2013), which aims
at clarifying roles and responsibilities. It is still
being negotiated. There is no streamline sanitation
policy and no environmental policy yet at national
level, and that many states do not have a water
policy.
Several institutions are involved in the WASH
sector at national level: the Ministry of Water
Resources and Irrigation (water, rural sanitation,
and hygiene), the Ministry of Health (sanitation and
hygiene), the Ministry of Lands, Housing and
Physical Planning (urban sanitation), the Urban
Water Corporation (urban water), the Ministry of
Environment (sanitation), and the Ministry of
Gender, Child and Social Welfare (WASH).
At state level, the national ministries’ counterpart
are in charge. At local level, the most involved
people are: the County WASH department and the
County Health department at county level; the
Senior Pump Mechanic and the Payam Health
Committee at payam level; and the Boma health
committee at boma level. Obviously, the Payam and
the Boma administrators, and the County
commissioner
are also involved as WASH is often a key issue in
the communities.
Due to the number of stakeholders, the lack of
resources and of communication, the WASH sector
is experiencing a poor coordination at national
level. The responsibility chain between national,
state and county levels are not clear enough,
notably regarding sanitation and environment,
where there is no national policy.
South Sudan, as a new country, is facing big
challenges in capacity development. It is difficult to
find qualified staff in the country. An overall
strategy exists to develop and manage human
resources, however funds are lacking and this
strategy is not being brought at the state or local
level. There has been a large number of
institutional and governance projects implemented
for national and state level authorities in the WASH
Sector in the past 5 years, specifically by USAID,
JICA, GIZ and DFID. There is many to do on these
issues but the focus on institution building is
heading in the right direction.
The financial crises and small budgets allocated to
the WASH sector’s institutions, along with the lack
of clear general financing plans result in difficulties
to perform their duties and a competition among
the institutions to get the budgeted projects. It also
influences the lack of capacities and of
coordination. The lack of reliable data is an issue
for the WASH sector. It is caused by a lack of
resources and capacities to do monitoring for the
institutions responsible for it, a lack of political and
personal will, and the low prioritization of this
aspect. Therefore, the WASH sector in South Sudan
is facing several issues, such as poor coordination,
lack of capacity, low budget, unreliable data, and no
focus on water resources management.
At rural local level: the example of Northern
Bahr el Ghazal
A quantitative survey led in Aweil East and Aweil
North shows that access to WASH is very low. If
time, distance and quantity of water are
considered, only 6% of the respondents have access
to water, 14% have hand washing facilities and 1%
have latrines. Access to WASH is also influenced by
the governance structure. Communities who have a
WUC have better access to WASH. However, there
are many issues regarding governance indicators in
the villages surveyed: many people don’t pay for
water, most believe they cannot participate in
water related decisions, access information or
complain about water. Moreover, they do not really
trust their water responsible people.
In NBeG, the Water User Committee (WUC) model
is the most present. People are not used to pay for
water; they do not understand why it is needed.
There is certainly an existing willingness and ability
for communities to contribute to financing of water
but this has been negatively affected by years of
free handouts and high subsidies by NGOs. Low
accountability and transparency of the WUC is an
obstacle towards monthly payment. More
collaboration with the community, not just when
there is a problem would help the WUC to build
trust. This highlights the need for national or state
level legislation on WUCs that many other countries
have in place that gives them certain authority but
also regulates their activities. The community does
not always own the projects: more time and
awareness are needed, along with reducing the aid

dependency. Difficulties regarding operation and
maintenance threaten the sustainability of the
projects, along with need for refreshing training
and few links with the county institutions.
However, in most communities, there are already
WUC, who received training and who involve
women, which can be built upon.
So, access to hygiene and sanitation is very low in
Northern Bahr el Ghazal. It faces obstacles such as
culture, lack of awareness, low understanding of
the institutions’ staff, etc. Behavior change requires
time and trust with the communities. The culture
can affect the implementation of projects, especially
regarding sanitation. Talking about feces is unusual
in the communities and it may be touchy or even
taboo. Sensitization and education regarding
hygiene and sanitation is time-consuming and
demands access to the population. Interesting
initiatives have been taken to build awareness and
to reach further communities.
Most NGOs and institutions in NBeG use CLTS
approach in sanitation projects. However, staff of
the counties is not always trained. Here again,
women are key people for sanitation and hygiene
issues. Focus group discussions showed that they
are very interested by learning more about good
hygiene practices. Finally, ODF villages are a good
opportunity to organize training by peer and
improve awareness.
The WASH sector at local level is facing many issues
such as poor coordination, low accountability and
transparency, and weak monitoring and mapping
among the stakeholders. The state is no longer a
priority at national level, therefore less funds are
available even if the needs are still big. Northern
Bahr el Ghazal is now shifting from emergency to
recovery, so it has to build a good spare parts chain,
accountability mechanisms, and control
mechanisms. Pump mechanics are already working
quite well with the communities but availability of
spare part is a main issue. Gender sensitive
programs have not been yet prioritized, in spite of
contributing to the success and ownership of
projects. Finally, not considering water resources
and groundwater availability and quality could
bring unplanned water scarcity issues in the
coming years.
At urban local level: the example Aweil North
and Juba
ACF does not currently work in urban settings in
South Sudan. In-depth urban governance analysis
would require more information, but key points
have been highlighted.
The African Development Bank estimates that
access to improved water in urban areas is 17%.
The Urban Water Corporation was created in 2007.
Its mandate is to supply water to the cities. A big
share of the population relies on private water
sellers, either individual or companies. Almost all
urban water systems are dysfunctional and
majority of the population continue to rely on poor
quality and often intermittent services. The Urban
Water Corporation is not independent, and does
not have the capacity to serve all people, which
resulted in many private water vendors providing
people with water of unreliable quality. Price of
water does not cover the operation costs, which
means that such service provision is not
sustainable.
In towns, water provision looks more like a
conglomerate of small villages than like a
comprehensive system. Aweil town population is
using boreholes with hand pumps, and water yards.
People do not pay for water, therefore, there is no
selling of water in the town. It is not clear which
authorities should be responsible for public water
yards (tap stands), whereas most of the hand
pumps boreholes are managed by WUC.
Urban Sanitation services are low developed in
South Sudan. African Development Bank estimates
that access to improved sanitation is 38%1. Simple
pit latrines are the most used technology in urban
areas2. In Juba, to empty the latrines and sceptic
tanks, the private sector has answered most of the
demand. In Aweil town, on the contrary, there is
only a very low demand for such services,
therefore, no private company or entrepreneur has
taken such an initiative. As there is no policy
regarding urban sanitation, it is difficult to have the
means and legitimacy to manage the sector. Solid
waste management is not a priority, and neither are
drainage and sewerage.
Low coordination among stakeholders, lack of
1 AfDB
2 AfDB

quality and technical standards and few controls of
the actors hinder efficiency and quality in providing
people with a sustainable access to safe water,
sanitation and hygiene.
Conclusion:
In conclusion this study shows the link between
WASH governance issues and access to water and
sanitation. Each context and state have their own
challenges and specificities on which ACF needs to
build. The institutions and mechanisms are still
being structured, and learning how to perform. It
brings good opportunities of cooperation with local
actors and of improvement of the WASH situation
in the country. It will be important to liaise and
cooperate with the states and counties, to increase
the sustainability of WASH facilities in the country
and to address the increasing demand of the
population.
Recommendations:
As a result of this study, recommendations were
made to ACF-South Sudan mission in several areas.
Advocacy is key to ensure equitable access to water
and sanitation. ACF should strengthen its team and
advocate for the following subjects, integrating
them in its advocacy strategy: building standards
and control mechanisms, criteria for borehole
allocation, strengthening the WASH cluster and
focus on water resources management.
To improve rural programmes, key is to take more
time with the communities, to build a trust
relationship and ownership of the facilities.
Strengthening the WUC, working with women
representatives, developing strong links between
communities and counties, and contributing to
develop a spare parts chain will improve the
sustainability of the programmes. Building a strong
relationship with the state and the counties,
through developing clear MOUs, and including the
states in ACF programs. Finally, capacity building of
the county, a good mapping of facilities and
stakeholders and stronger resource management
will allow the counties to perform better.
Towns and urban areas call for collaboration with
both the city hall and the state, for a deep analysis
of stakeholders before starting a project, while
taking enough time to avoid failures of
programmes. As waste management systems and
sanitation markets are underdeveloped, ACF could
study the feasibility of their development to
prevent contamination of water resources and
diseases outbreaks.

I) Presentation of the study
A – The context: South Sudan and Northern Bahr el Ghazar
1) Short overview of the WASH sector in South Sudan
South Sudan is a Sub-Saharan country, with a population of 11.3 Million people3
and a land surface of
about 640,000 square kilometers. After more than 20 years of civil war, a Comprehensive Peace
Agreement (CPA) was signed in January 2005, and set a timetable by which Southern Sudan would have a
referendum on its independence. In 2011, the Referendum led to the Declaration of Independence of the
9th of July 2011, and to the birth of the Republic of South Sudan. The Government of Southern Sudan was
established in October 2005. More recently, in December 2013, another violence outbreak happened,
between the current government and rebel forces, leaving the country in uncertainty.
The country is grossly underdeveloped, experiences an acute lack of social services, instability and
insecurity. Overall population density is low, with rapid growth of administrative centers. In rural areas,
population lives in dispersed settlements and depends mostly on rain fed agriculture and livestock
rearing.
Source Sudan has substantial water resources, although they are unevenly distributed across the territory
and time. Major floods and droughts happen throughout the year. Water resources are underdeveloped.
This can be seen through limited water infrastructures, rare irrigation, poor access to drinking water and
sanitation, poor hygienic practices…
Indeed, even though the country has recognized the right to water and sanitation, access to WASH services
remains low. 57% of the population use improved drinking water sources, and only 9% use improved
sanitation facilities4. Average consumption is around 6 Liters per capita per day5, which is below the
minimum standard recommended by the World Health Organization (20 Liters)6. The Ministry for Water
Resources and Irrigation (MWRI) identified approximately 10000 water points in the country, of which 30
to 50% are non-functional at any time. This translates in a “de-facto” low coverage rate of about 40%
among the rural population. This, added to the time needed to fetch water, which often exceed the 30
minutes recommended by the WHO, results in a drinking-water coverage of approximately 30-35%,
according to the African Development Bank and the Ministry of Water7. Other sources, such as the JMP,
state that access to improved drinking water sources is 57%8
. The difference is explained by the fact that
the JMP does not consider the distance needed to access water, whereas the AfDB and the ministry do.
This study will take into consideration the distance, as it is an indicator for the right to water.
3 World Bank, http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/southsudan (last visited 22.05.2015)
4 WHO/UNICEF, Progress on drinking water and sanitation, 2014 update, 2014
5 UNICEF-WES/Nutrition South Sudan (2009). Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices Survey on Water, Sanitation,
Hygiene and Nutrition South Sudan
6 WHO
7 Water, Sanitation & Hygiene (WASH) Sector Strategic Framework” by GoSS in 2011
8 JMP 2014

Access to sanitation and hygiene is even lower than the one to water. It causes diseases, such as acute
watery diarrhea, polio, guinea worm and cholera. A survey in 2009 showed that only 5.5% of the
respondents felt it was important to wash hands with soap before eating9. Use of improved sanitation
facilities is 9%10
.
According to the GLAAS report 2014, the WASH sector in the country is facing several issues. Policies exist,
but they are not fully implemented. The institutional roles are not clearly defined. Limited data are
available. Human resources of the sector are very limited, due to financial constraints, and lack of skilled
graduates. Financing plans and absorption of funds are lacking11. Supply chain for spare parts for water in
rural areas are non-existing or non-effective. Procedures to inform and consult the population are not
working well. Finally, cost recovery by water authorities is low in South Sudan: most people do not pay for
water in rural areas, and the user fees in urban, when existing, do not cover operation and maintenance12.
Although it remains little, pollution and contamination of water resources is a growing concern.
Indicator Status
Drinking-water quality surveillance
Testing of water quality against
national standards
No
Auditing against recommended
management procedures
No
Data availability for decision-making for
resource allocation
Sanitation No
Drinking-water No
Human right to water and sanitation
recognized in legislation
Sanitation Yes
Drinking-water Yes
Status of national policy development and
implementation
Sanitation
approved but not
implemented
Drinking-water
approved but not
implemented
Hygiene promotion
approved but not
implemented
Existence of an overall strategy to develop
and manage human resources
Sanitation Yes
Drinking-water Yes
Hygiene promotion Yes
Existence and level of implementation of a
government defined financing plan/budget
fr the WASH sector which is published and
agreed
Sanitation No
Drinking-water No
Hygiene promotion No
Absorption of external funds (% of official
donor capital commitments utilized)
Sanitation Between 50 and 75%
Drinking-water Between 50 and 75%
Absorption of domestic funds funds (% of
official donor capital commitments
utilized)
Sanitation Less than 50%
Drinking-water Less than 50%
Sufficiency of financing to meet MDG
targets
Sanitation No
Drinking-water No
Government budget specific to WASH Budget 33 Millions USD
Table 1: Key figures from the GLAAS report 2014
9 UNICEF-WES/Nutrition South Sudan (2009). Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices Survey on Water, Sanitation,
Hygiene and Nutrition South Sudan
10 WHO/UNICEF, Progress on drinking water and sanitation, 2014 update, 2014
11 GLAAS report 2014
12 GLAAS report 2012

2) Context of Northern Bahr el Ghazal
Northern Bahr el Ghazal (NBeG) is one of the 10 States of the Republic of South Sudan, located in the
North-West and bordered by Sudan to the North. Its population is estimated to be over 721,000 people,
with more than half of the population being below the age of eighteen13. NBeG has the highest number of
returnees out of all the states in South Sudan, with an estimated 400,000 returning from Sudan between
2005 and 2011. Many communities in the state are a mix of host and returnee populations. The population
is mostly rural (92%), with denser settlements to growth centers and towns such as Aweil14. There is a
wide variation in the size of population between counties: Aweil East is the most populated county (43%
of the population).
Literacy rate is at 21% of people over the age of 1515. While education is improving, with 40% of those
aged 15-40 literate, women continue to lag behind16. NBeG has remained relatively stable during the
recent outbreak of violence in South Sudan, and has a history of coordinated efforts to ensure integrated
basic services. 80% of households depend on crop farming or animal husbandry as their primary source of
livelihood17. People leaving in the state and inclined to move, due to security reasons (ongoing border
dispute with Sudan and rebel movements), cattle seasonal migrations, flooding…
It is considered to be the most poverty-stricken state of the country, with 76% living below the poverty
line. In 2009, average per capita consumption in the state was 60 South Sudanese Pounds (SSP) per
month, which was the lowest in South Sudan (average was 100SSP) 18. Global acture malnutrition (GAM)
rates are also very high in NBeG: above the 15 per cent emergency threshold. This is the only non-conflict
state with such a high rate, with Warrap state19
.
According to the National Baseline Household survey of 2009 (GoSS 2010) 66% of the population of
Northern Bahr el Ghazal State has access to improved sources of drinking water. This is higher than the
average for South Sudan where 57% have access to improved sources of drinking water. However, these
figures should be considered with caution as they differ depending on sources, and do not take into
account the time needed to fetch water. 92% of the population does not have access to any toilet facility.
31% of the population has to walk for more than 30 minutes one way to collect drinking water. 13% have
to walk more than one hour20. Infant Mortality Rate is 129 (per 1000 live births), and under 5 Mortality
Rate is 165 (per 1000 live births).
Currently, most of water supplies are provided by UN agencies, bilateral agencies and NGOs through
projects. The state, as with much of South Sudan over many decades, has had numerous boreholes drilled
and equipped with pumps. However, the reality is that due to operational and maintenance issues, much of
this water infrastructure failed prematurely and lie in varying states of disrepair. In many cases the repair
of broken water infrastructure has been instigated and funded by external actors (such as NGOs) or local
authorities, rather than by the communities themselves. This has created a dependency by local
communities on external actors, as well as an expectation that NGOs or the government will repair broken
water points, meaning that communities in NBeG do not always assume true ownership and responsibility
for their boreholes.
13 National Bureau of Statistics, Key indicators for Northern Bahr el Ghazal, 2011
16 Education Statistics for Northern Bahr-el-Ghazal, 2012
18 Poverty in South Sudan: Estimates from NBHS, 2010
19 UNICEF, South Sudan Situation Report, 7 May 2015
20 Source: National Baseline Household Survey (2009)

3) ACF intervention in South Sudan
ACF USA has been present in South Sudan since 2005 and has gained considerable understanding of the
needs and challenges of delivering humanitarian assistance in the country. ACF has been able to increase
the overall programmatic impact and reinforce its integrated approach by gaining valuable experiences
and strengthening technical capacity.
ACF has begun a 2 year WASH Program in Aweil East and Aweil North, the republic of South Sudan. The
program is geared towards long term impact by increasing communities’ access to the spare-parts market
and local pump mechanics that will build the capacity for a maket based approach for maintaining and
repairing their water supply. In addition ACF is working to strengthen the capacity of spare part vendors
and pump mechanics associations to increase their business services and customer service links with the
communities. The program goal is to sustainably meet the humanitarian WASH needs of vulnerable
communities for early recovery in Northern Bahr el Ghazal, while increasing resilience to shocks, through
participatory, market-based approaches, and capacity building in local institutions.

B – Scope of the Study
1) Objectives of the Study
The aim of the study was to support ACF’s program, aiming at securing sustainable access to WASH for
communities. Looking at national, state, county and payam levels and stakeholders, the study seeks to
provide ACF team with:
 An understanding of the regulatory frameworks in the WASH sector in place at national and state
levels,
 The implementation, challenges and opportunities in the WASH sector at national, state and county
levels,
 The challenges, issues and opportunities in the WASH sector at community and payam levels,
 Document some good practices at community level, regarding ACF’s program, and good practices
with a gender lens,
 Provide the background to do relevant advocacy, if relevant:
o At national and state levels, towards institutional actors,
o Towards other WASH stakeholders at national and NBeG levels,
o At community level to move towards better ownership.
 Recommendations about using governance to improve program design and implementation, at
national and at local level,
 A first insight into urban WASH governance, in order to help future programming (difference with
rural areas, models in place…).
2) Outcomes of the Study
The study resulted in this report, and a presentation to the WASH team of ACF in South Sudan, and a
presentation at the ACF-International WASH-DRM Workshop in Spain (June 2015). The results of the KAP
survey have been compiled in a concise report that attached as an annex.
C – Methodology of the Study
To meet these objectives, this study has been conducted over 44 days of consultancy, including 25 working
days in South Sudan. The following methodology was used: a qualitative approach, through interviews of
stakeholders of the water supply sector at national, state, county and local level, and through readings; and
a quantitative approach, through a survey of 210 households.
1) Literature Review
 Reading and analysis key documents (see bibliography in Annex D):
o Review of existing institutional and governmental strategies, policies and laws to
understand the framework of the WASH sector
o Analysis of reports from ACF and other institutions and organization, to get more insights
on the situation

2) Key Stakeholders Interviews
28 interviews were held in South Sudan (see detailed list of interviews and meetings in Annex E):
- 13 in Juba: 6 Ministries, the Urban Water Corporation, one donor, 2 private sector companies, the
Juba City Council, the WASH Cluster, and one NGO
- 15 in Northern Bahr el Ghazal: 2 Ministries, 4 NGOs, a spare part vendor, the Mayor of Aweil town,
WASH and Health department in the counties of Aweil East and North, one Pump Mechanics, one
drilling company and the WASH cluster lead
This interviews allowed to get a perspective of the National level, along with the state (Northern Bahr el
Ghazal) and county levels (Aweil East and Aweil North), the rural level (several villages in Aweil East and
Aweil North) and the urban level (Juba and Aweil town).
3) Focus group
Four focus group discussions (FGDs) with community members were organized to explore the
understanding of WASH sector governance in the past, knowledge and expectations of the new system,
and possibilities of improvement. There was two FGDs with women only ; one with men only and one
mixed. Due to security and logistical reasons, all happened in the county of Aweil East and is therefore
only representative of this area.
In addition, two focus group discussions with water user committees were held in Aweil East.
4) Household survey
A household survey was conducted at local level, among 210 households, using KAP-survey methodology
(10% accuracy). This shows the real situation on the field (quality, access, tariffs, equity, participation…).
It will bring a quantitative input to the study. The objective of the survey was to understand the links
between different water governance indicators and the situation of access to water of the population. The
survey covered current or foreseen ACF projects areas in Northern Bhar el Ghazal. Indeed, the current
WASH project just started. Six villages were targeted in six different payams: 3 in Aweil East and 3 in Aweil
North. Data collectors and data entry officers were trained before the field data collection, in order for
them in understand the purpose of such questionnaire.
During the KAP survey and the FGDs, water points were visited (observe the state of the water point and
its use, but also of the village, its cleanliness, etc.)
a- Sampling
Cluster sampling was used as the total population of the village is too large for an exhaustive survey. A list
of villages in the area and their population was listed first. The principle consists of determining the
number of households that constitute a cluster by following a precise method21, and then choosing the
clusters to be sampled. The sample size was calculated using an accuracy level of 10%.
The following table provides breakdown of the sampled households and questionnaires administered.
21 ACF method on KAP survey

County Boma
Estimated
population
N° of
clusters
N° of
interviews
Aweil East Uyon 9146 7 49
Aweil East Cumcok 8217 6 42
Aweil East Amtehik 12931 10 70
Aweil
North
Nyangdit 2275 2 14
Aweil
North
Warchuei 1950 2 14
Aweil
North
Mathiangdit 4550 3 21
Total 39069 30 210
Table 2: Sample households and clusters for the KAP survey
b- Training of data collectors
Data collectors were members of the WASH team of ACF. Most of them had previous experience in survey
data collection, either with ACF or with other NGOs. Half a day of training was organized. The aim of the
survey was presented, along with the concept of WASH governance. The questions of the survey were
reviewed and explained one by one. Interviewing tips were given, selection of interviewees also. Finally, a
pre-test of the questionnaire was conducted to understand both the timing a questionnaire will take per
household and if the questionnaire fits the community. After pre-testing the tool, a few corrections were
made to refine the draft questionnaire before the final questionnaire was adopted.
c- Data analysis
Quantitative data has been analyzed using the excel program. Similar responses are aggregated and
presented as proportion of the whole sample.

II) Findings
A – At National level
1) The Regulatory Framework
a- Organization of the Federal State
The Republic of South Sudan is a Federal State. It is divided in 10 States, headed by Governors. The States
are composed of several counties, which are themselves subdivided into Payams and then into Bomas. The
Constitution recognizes the principles of decentralization and devolution. The Constitution states: “All
levels of government shall promote democratic principles and political pluralism, and shall be guided by
the principles of decentralization and devolution of power to the people through the appropriate levels of
government where they can best manage and direct their affairs”.
The Country gained independence in 2011, and therefore is still in a transitory period. The current
Constitution is a transitional one. The states have no all yet written and adopted their own constitutions.
Many policies and laws are still in development or as a project. The South Sudan National Development
Plan 2014-2018 details the priorities for the coming years. They are grouped in four pillars: Governance,
Economics, Security and Human social development (Gender, Human rights, Youth, Environment…).
During the last elections, which happened between the 11th and the 15th of April 2010, the President, the
national legislative assembly, the Governors and the States’ legislative assemblies were elected. The
Council of State, the second legislative chamber at national level, was appointed by the President in 2010,
and the Mayors were appointed by Governor. These positions should be elected during the next elections.
The national government is responsible for the development of policies, strategies, guidelines, regulations
and standards that will apply to the whole country. They should do so in collaboration with the relevant
national and state ministries, with the local government board and with any relevant actor at all levels.
They ensure the coordination of the development of the country. The national level is then supposed to
support the states, which should themselves support the counties and the local governments. This support
includes financial support, capacity building, technical advice, etc. On the other hand, the local
government, counties and state shall report to the national level and send them relevant data, so that they
can take care of the national monitoring. Before the financial crisis, the national level was also
implementing very big projects (cross-states). The following figures introduce the division of powers at
national level and at state level, along with the overview of the executive framework.

Figure 1: Organization Chart of the division of power at national level in South Sudan
Figure 2: Organization Chart of the division of power at state level in South Sudan

Figure 3: Organization Chart of executive power in South Sudan

b- WASH laws and policies
Regarding the WASH sector, a few regulatory documents already exist and several institutions are
involved. Indeed, a Water Policy was adopted in 2007, and a sector Strategic Framework in 2011. The
Water Policy 2007 explains the key issues and priorities for the water sector and sets a basic framework to
guide later implementation strategies22. The Strategic Framework is a step for putting into practice the
principles laid out in the Policy. It aims at operationalizing and implementing the Policy. It focuses on four
main sub-sectors: Water Resources Management (WRM), Sanitation and Hygiene (S&H), Rural Water
Supply (RWS) and Urban Water Supply (UWS).
Several other laws and policies are related to the WASH sector. First of all, regarding sanitation and
hygiene, they are not addressed as an entity by the Water Policy, but they are by the Strategic Framework.
It aims at: “Ensure progressive universal access to improved sanitation and hygienic practices for all
people living in South Sudan through effective community mobilization to address harmful current
practices, hygiene promotion and delivery of S&H products on a sustainable and equitable basis”. It
recommends a community based approach, with minimum subsidy levels for hardware inputs23.
The Health policy recognizes their importance and states that the Ministry of Health and the relevant
ministries shall raise awareness of risks due to lack of hygiene and sanitation. The Local Government Act
explains that local governments are expected to enact by-laws to regulate and standardize sanitation and
hygiene practices. However, there is no mention yet of sanitation and hygiene in either the Environment
Protection Bill or in the Education policy.
Then, rural water supply is, logically, mainly addressed by the Water Policy and the Regulatory
Framework. They aim at: “Sustainable access to safe water supply facilities for all people living in rural
areas, through construction, rehabilitation and maintenance of water facilities, and establishment of
community-based operation and maintenance structures”. The Framework recognizes the important role
of communities in water management, the value of combining water sanitation and hygiene projects, and
the necessity to ensure emergency preparedness24.
The Health Policy also relates to RWS. It states that the Ministry of Health, in collaboration with relevant
institutions, should raise awareness of potential health hazards caused by unsafe water supply. The Local
Government Act declares that the local government councils are expected to establish and maintain water
drainage systems and potable water facilities.
Urban water supply is also addressed by the Health policy and the Local government act, as previously
mentioned regarding RWS. However, the water policy and framework treat it differently than rural water
supply. The overall goal is to ensure efficient rehabilitation, expansion, development and management of
UWS services on a sustainable, equitable and cost recovery basis. The approach here is focused on the
technical aspects (through using and developing technical guidelines for example), on operation and
maintenance, on cost-recovery, governance, and planning25.
Water Resource Management is only addressed in the water documents. “The overall goal of WRM policy
is to promote sustainable management of quantity, quality and reliability of available water resources in
order to maximize social and economic benefits while ensuring long term environmental sustainability”. It
recommends using the IWRM approach, exploring the potential of trans-boundary water resources, and to
22 Government of South Sudan, Water Policy, 2007
23 Government of South Sudan, Water Sector Strategic Framework, 2011

focus on floods and drought monitoring and disaster mitigation26.
As we can see, there is no specific legislation to guide the whole sector and define roles and
responsibilities of the different institutions and levels of government. A new Water Bill has been drafted
(Water Bill 2013), which aims at clarifying roles and responsibilities. It is still being negotiated. It is also
worth noting that there is no streamline sanitation policy and no environmental policy yet at national
level, and that many states do not have a water policy. It is therefore important to understand who is
currently responsible for what.
c- WASH key institutions
Several institutions are involved in the WASH sector. Here will be presented the key ones.
When the Government of Southern Sudan was formed in October 2005, the Ministry of Water Resources
and Irrigation was created (MWRI). Its mandate it to safeguard and conserve freshwater systems, carry
out and supervise hydrological studies, ensure flood control works and irrigation and hydropower
developments, build water storage facilities. Since the Presidential Decree of July 2008, it is also in charge
of expansion of safe drinking water and improved sanitation services provision. Its slogan is “Water for
Life and Development; Sanitation and Hygiene for Healthy and Productive Citizens”. Regarding irrigation,
the MWRI allocates and delivers bulk water to irrigated agricultural schemes, and the Ministry of
Agriculture and Forestry distributes and manages the water on the farms. However, only few irrigation
schemes exist27.
The MWRI is composed of six directorates related to water. Other directorates within this Ministry are
dealing with electricity. These six directorates are: Rural Water Supply and Sanitation, Water Resource
Management, Hydrological survey, Irrigation and drainage, Planning and programs, and Finance. An
Investment and Action plan has been developed for urban water and another one for rural water and
sanitation. However, the one for water management and irrigation is still under development28.
The Ministry of Health has the mandate to promote health, protect communities, prevent diseases and
raise awareness about diseases. In the WASH sector, they are mandated to raise awareness about the
hazards linked to the absence or to poor sanitation, and to unsafe water. They have the responsibility to do
sensitization about water-related diseases such as cholera, malaria, Ebola… They should also promote
good hygiene practices29.
The Directorate of Urban Sanitation in the Ministry of Housing and Physical Planning (MHPP) is working
on urban sanitation. They are in charge of supporting the states, the counties and the cities, in charge of
provision of services. There is no policy on urban sanitation, therefore the roles and responsibility are not
legally defined. Currently the mayors and the states are collaborating on provision30.
The Urban Water Corporation is in charge of urban water services where it operates. It is active mostly in
Juba and in some urban centers. It however does not have the mandate to manage urban sanitation or
sewerage services31.
The Ministry of Environment aims at providing a clean environment for the people of South Sudan. WASH
27 Interview with, MWRI Directorate for RWS, 12/03/2015
29 Interview with national MoH, 11/03/2015
30 Interview with MHPP, 01/04/2015
31 Interview with UWC, 12/03/2015

is a crucial component of environment. If the environment is not clean, the water is not either. If there is
poor sanitation and hygiene, it impacts the environment and thus, the water. The ministry provides
policies, guidelines and standards. An environment policy was already developed but not launched. It is
now under revision. An Environmental Bill was also drafted and is currently at the Ministry of Justice. The
Ministry of Environment is not concerned by basic sanitation. However they are interested in water
resources quality and management, waste management and sensitization of hygienic practices (against
pollution)32.
The Ministry of Gender, Child and Social Welfare, like the Ministry of Environment, is a cross-cutting
institution. They work with all the ministries to ensure the respect of the gender policy and of gender-
sensitive activities. For example, the Constitution states that there should be 25% of women
representatives in all institutions, assemblies, etc. WASH is a key issue for the Ministry of Gender, as it is
very important for the women. Indeed, women are in charge of the water and of the hygiene of the house.
The Ministry is composed of three directorates: the Directorate of Gender and Child welfare, which is the
most involved in the WASH sector, the Directorate of Social Welfare, and the Directorate of Finance and
Administration. At state level, the Gender issues are taken care of by the Ministry of social development33.
The development partners are the donors, the UN agencies, the NGOs… They are active in many activities
of the WASH sector: rehabilitation, upgrading and construction of infrastructures, provision of safe water
and sanitation services, creation of an enabling environment through their assistance to policy making, to
strategy development and to capacity building34.
The WASH cluster ensures coordination of WASH intervention in emergencies. In actual fact, they also
participate to the coordination of broader NGO interventions, especially at state level35.
Operation and management of water facilities and service delivery are the responsibility of the State, the
Counties and of the local governments. The Local Government Act captures water supply and management
of local water resources as part of the concurrent powers shared between different levels of Government.
However, it provides the local Government councils with the mandate for establishment and maintenance
of water drainages and potable water facilities in their respective areas of jurisdiction. Likewise, sanitation
and waste management are the responsibility of local governments36.
To sum up, at national level, the institutions involved are:
- Rural Water: the MWRI and the Ministry of Gender, Child and Social Welfare
- Urban Water: the MWRI, the UWC, and the Ministry of Gender, Child and Social Welfare
- Rural Sanitation: the MWRI, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry
of Gender, Child and Social Welfare
- Urban Sanitation: the MWRI, the Ministry of Lands, Housing and Physical Planning, the Ministry of
Health, the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Gender, Child and Social Welfare
- Hygiene: the MWRI, the Ministry of Health, and the Ministry of Gender, Child and Social Welfare
At state level, the national ministries’ counterpart are in charge: the Ministry of Water, Cooperatives and
Rural Development, the Ministry of Social Development, the Ministry of Physical Infrastructure, and the
Ministry of Health. States being autonomous, the names of the ministries can differ from one to another.
32 Interview with Ministry of Environment, 31/03/2015
33 Interview with Ministry of Gender and Child Welfare, 01/04/2015
35 Interview with Awoda, 18/03/2015
36 Local Government Act

The ones in this report are the names used in Northern Bahr el Ghazal, as it is the state studied.
At local level, the most involved people are: the County WASH department and the County Health
department at county level; the Senior Pump Mechanic and the Payam Health Committee at payam level;
and the Boma health committee at boma level. Obviously, the Payam and the Boma administrators, and the
County commissioner are also involved as WASH is often a key issue in the communities.
There are many institutions working in the WASH sector, and not always clear legislation to define roles
and responsibilities. This results in a fragmented sector. Moreover, each of this institution faces challenges
and opportunities that foster or hinder the development of the sector.
The following charts present the key institutions involved in the WASH sector.
Figure 4: Organization Chart of key national institutions involved in WASH in South Sudan37
37 Source: interviews and meetings

Figure 5: Organization Chart of key state and local institutions involved in WASH in South Sudan38
38 Source: interviews and meetings

2) Main findings and challenges identified at national level
a- Poor coordination
As demonstrated above, there are five ministries involved at national level, and four at state level which is
many. It results in a fragmentation of the work and thus, in a lack of coordination. The Water supply and
sanitation working group was set up to address this issue. It included all the line ministries. They were
supposed to meet quarterly to coordinate their work. However, due to a lack of funding, this group does
not meet any more39.
Then, it all depends on the personal implications. If one manager decides to coordinate with his colleague
from another department or ministry, he will know what the others are working on. Likewise, the
participation of the institutions to the WASH cluster would allow them to understand better the
stakeholders of the sector and to coordinate with them. However, they often do not participate, partly
because they do not have enough employees, but also because they do not really see the added value of
it40. Therefore, in addition to a poor coordination among the institutions, the sector also experiences a
poor coordination between development partners and institutions, at national level.
Cross-cutting ministries are more aware of the others’ activities. The Ministry of Gender succeeded to
consult everyone before drafting its gender policy and has a focal point in all the ministries, who has been
trained and who is in charge, among others, of reporting and commenting on gender sensitive programs
and policies41. The Ministry of Environment has to be involved, by law, when another institution starts and
implements a project that might have an environmental impact42.
At national level, institutions often times attempt to appropriate another ministry’s’ mandate, in order to
increase their funding and influence power structures within the government. For example, regarding
waste management, both the Ministry of Environment and the MLHPP are involved, the first being more
competent for guidelines and strategies, the latter for implementation. They have been competing for
projects already in Juba43 and thus, do not collaborate when they do have a project because the other party
does not recognize the legitimacy of the project leader. The City Council could also get such projects.
Especially in Juba, there is a competition between the different levels of government.
The responsibility chain between national, state and county levels are not clear enough, notably regarding
sanitation and environment, where there is no national policy. The Environmental Bill declares that the
states will be the implementers of the Bill and that the counties and local governments will act under the
states’ directions. It explains that the local governments will have the power to write bylaws. This Bill,
along with the Environmental policy are expected to pass in 2015 but they are still being discussed44. In
the meantime, it causes poor collaboration between the different levels of government as they don’t know
clearly who is responsible for what.
Likewise, urban sanitation is not clearly dealt with by the laws and policies. There is a poor relation
between the states and the national level, especially concerning provision of services. For now, the
national level has difficulties monitoring and guiding what the states and what the other stakeholders are
doing. On the other side, the states and the local government rarely provide the national government with

feedbacks and updates, and they don’t have clear guidelines regarding technical aspects or management of
projects. A policy framework is needed, but there is no budget and no capacity within the MHPP to develop
it45.
Lack of budget, of laws and policies and of clear roles and responsibilities result, then, in a poor
coordination of the sector and in a fragmentation of WASH activities. This creates inefficiency,
redundancies and oversights in the sector.
b- Lack of capacity
South Sudan, as a new country, is facing big challenges in capacity development. Indeed, during the civil
war, most schools were closed, same for universities, therefore, people who could not go abroad or to the
northern part of Sudan did not attend school and university. It is thus difficult to find qualified staff in the
country. The few who have relevant training are recruited by private companies, by the UN agencies and
by NGOs, who provide them with a higher salary than the institutions. Moreover, there are good
employees who have the motivation and the ability to perform in qualified position, but they need
trainings and access to universities to obtain their bachelor or master’s degrees46. An overall strategy
exists to develop and manage human resources, however funds are lacking and this strategy is not being
brought at the state or local level.
It needs to implement creative solutions, to recruit the right staff, to provide them with appropriate
training and sound human resources management. The GLAAS report 2014 shows that what impacts
human resources capacity are mostly financial resources (moderate constraints) and lack of skilled
graduates (high constraints)47. At national level, in addition to issues to pay the salaries on time, the
institutions do not have performance appraisal and incentive policies. It is almost impossible to fire an
employee from the public sector.
The national level is responsible for improving the capacities of the states and of the counties. They are
facing a lack of financial and human capacities. Moreover, for environmental thematic, sometimes
trainings are available, but states do not all have staff dedicated to environment48.
A real need assessment is needed regarding capacities, in order to prepare trainings plans for all
institutions. Some have this plan, and it is easier for them to “sell” it to development partners. Special
expertise is also needed on specific subjects. For example, regarding urban sanitation, they want to draft a
policy but the MHPP do not have the right expertise to do it. For these special projects, money is needed to
hire a specialist and/or a trainer49.
There have been a large number of institutional and governance projects implemented for national and
state level authorities in the WASH Sector in the past 5 years, specifically by USAID, JICA, GIZ and DFID.
There is still a long way to go on these issues but the focus on institution building is heading in the right
direction. The SUWASA project (USAID)50
, for example, aims for 2011-2015 at ensuring “improved access
to safe, affordable, sustainable, and reliable urban water services. The project implementing partners are
the Government of South Sudan (GoSS), Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation (MWRI), and the South
47 GLAAS 2014
50 USAID, SUWASA project, http://usaid-suwasa.org/index.php/projects-and-activities/south-sudan (last consulted
20/05/2015)

Sudan Urban Water Corporation (SSUWC). SUWASA/SS aims to facilitate policy and institutional reforms
for improving the sustainability and quality of urban water supply services, which will move water
utilities along the pathway towards commercial viability”. The Multi-donor Trust Fund for South Sudan or
MDTF-SS51
, was created by the Government and 14 international partners to support reconstruction,
poverty reduction, governance and human development. Launched in 2005, it was the largest source of
funding for the newly independent nation. It focuses on democratic governance, improving health, private
sector development, strengthening basic education and emergency assistance. It provided water
institutions with capacity building.
Lack of capacities is not only about poor Human resources capacities, but also shortage in logistics
(computers, cars, cargo, etc.) and in finances as developed later52. Indeed, without the proper logistics, the
project will not reach the targeted population or will not be efficient. Reporting is very complicated to be
done without computers (and proper training to use it), follow-up of projects require fuel and cars,
running of offices call for electricity (and thus fuel for the generator), water, etc.
c- Lack of budget
The official budget chain is for the national level to allocate money to the states and to the counties, to
transfer it to the state Ministry of Finance, and then it distributes it to the counties and the ministries as
previously decided. Before, there were direct grants coming from national ministries to their counterparts
at state level. It was very complicated to monitor, as states are autonomous, so this process was
suspended53. Now the state parliament and the governor, in collaboration with all the ministries and
commissions, decide on the budget that is allocated through the Ministry of Finance. Both the states and
the national government can mobilize resources and raise taxes. It is however difficult to put in place for
the states. This is why most of the budget comes from the national government and from development
partners54.
However, as the country is currently going through a financial crisis, both the national level and the state
level have the tendency to not give the money away. Therefore, the national Ministry of Finance has
initiated a new process, the local service delivery, which should be the new tool to bring money directly to
the relevant level, without going through other level55.
As a result of these financial difficulties, there is only a small budget for operations, most of the ministries
being striking to pay the salaries of their employees and their bills. This is why the ministries at national
and state levels are highly dependent on the development partners for their operations and providing
capacity building56. For example, the Ministry of Gender has a very small annual budget, and runs thanks
to the support from the UN agencies, which provide them with finances and with technical expertise57.
It is then complicated for the institutions to perform their duties. For example, the Ministry of
Environment should raise awareness about pollution and littering. They have an environmental education
directorate, but they have never had a project on that subject because they do not have the necessary
budget58.
51 World Bank, MDTF-SS, http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2013/05/28/multi-donor-trust-fund-for-
south-sudan-improving-life-for-south-sudan-s-8-3-million-people (last consulted 20/05/2015)

Moreover, the current funding are unpredictable and insufficient to realize the MDGs. There is currently
no government defined financing plan covering the whole WASH sector. More resources have to be
mobilized, for example through revenue generation, increased and timely government funding, partner
financing support or targeted private sector investments. The financing plans available define that tariffs
and contribution do not cover all costs for operation and maintenance. Absorption of external and of
domestic funds are very low, being respectively between 50 and 75% and less than 50% for both water
and sanitation. Finally, there is no financial scheme to make WASH services affordable to disadvantaged
groups59.
For the year 2014, the crisis response plan estimated that 81.8 million USD were needed to cover needs in
WASH. Due to emergencies, it was later revised to 127 million USD. 92.6% of these needs were covered by
donors60
. All sector grouped together, 74% of the 1.8 billion USD needed were funded in 2014. South
Sudan is one of the most funded countries in 2013 and 2014 (137 USD per capita in 2013). The biggest
contributors were the United States (42.8%), the United Kingdom (12.0%) and the European Commission
(10.2%). 6.4 million people need assistance in 2015, according to OCHA, and 4.1 million are targeted by
the donors61
.
The Government of South Sudan, and the MWRI have highlighted the Public Private Partnerships as being
one of the key to ensure access to WASH to the population. The development of a sound urban water
sector could lead to a privatization of services, as Sudan has done over the past 20 years, quite
successfully.
The financial crises and small budgets allocated to the WASH sector’s institutions, along with the lack of
clear general financing plans result in difficulties to perform their duties and a competition among the
institutions to get the budgeted projects. It also influences the lack of capacities and of coordination
previously described.
d- Lack of reliable data
Another issue the WASH sector is experiencing is the lack of reliable data. Existence and sharing of reliable
data is key for the sector, as it allows a better targeting and planning of the projects, a more efficient
implementation, a better monitoring of the stakeholders’ activities. Moreover, in a country that often
experiences water-related disaster (floods, droughts, diseases, etc.), it hinders a good preparedness.
Likewise, as there is very little information regarding availability and quality of water resources, it is
complicated to allocate water in a fair and sustainable manner.
First of all, regarding water resources data, the hydro-geological mapping is outdated (from the 1980s) or
non-existent. There is no comprehensive assessment of water resource quality (both surface and
groundwater), and where it exists (very rarely for groundwater), the surveillance is not regular and
systematic62. There is also few information about flooding and droughts recurrence areas and risks, but it
has not been effectively captures and is therefore poorly used for planning, governing and legislative
purposes. It has to be noted that there are some interesting initiatives in that regards, such as the mapping
SDC has been conducting in Northern Bahr el Ghazal, which we will develop later.
Then, concerning the existing and functioning water facilities, data is also no reliable. Indicators exists
regarding functionality of systems and affordability but they are not tracked, both for sanitation and
59 GLAAS 2014
60 OCHA, Financial Tracking System
61 OCHA, Global Humanitarian Overview 2015, 2015
62 GLAAS 2014

water. The WIMS (water information management system) has been started as a national reporting
mechanisms. WIMS officers were appointed, even if not enough, and they sent information from the local
level to the national. However, data entry at national level was not completely done and reports are piling
up in Juba. Not all state sent data. The ones who did rarely received feedbacks and could not use the
system while planning and allocating projects63. Thus they do not see the advantage of contributing to a
system that is time consuming and not yet effective. The system could become effective but is now lacking
resources and political will.
Finally, other data, which have an influence on the WASH sector, cannot be fully trusted. The most
important one is the population data. The last census was in 2008, and since then, there has been major
changes. Indeed, since 2008, many people who fled during the civil war returned. After the events in 2013,
the conflict-affected areas were not the same as before. Thus, new people have found refuge in other
regions of the country or abroad. The population is also growing fast, like in most African countries. It is
estimated that the growth rate is of 4.3% per year64. According to the Constitution, “the National
Government shall during the Transitional Period conduct a population census the outcome of which shall,
inter alia, determine the number of electoral constituencies for the next general elections”65. It is still to be
done. Because of this lack of reliable population data, the states, counties and payams are only working on
estimated information. It is then difficult to assess properly the needs and to allocate resources fairly.
This lack of reliable data is then an issue for the WASH sector. It is caused by a lack of resources and
capacities to do monitoring for the institutions responsible for it, a lack of political and personal will, and
the low prioritization of this aspect. Reporting mostly happens when something serious is happening such
as a disease outbreak66. It causes issues in targeting, assessing and allocating projects in a fair and efficient
manner.
e- No focus on resource
Even is water resource management is a part of the Water Policy 2007 and the Strategic Framework 2011,
it is not a priority. The focus is on water supply, both for the institutions and for the donors. Water policy
advocates for an integrated approach but management and coordination institutions are not fully
developed to undertake the task. There is no regular monitoring mechanisms regarding water levels, and
flow in surface water, and precipitation measurements. Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM)
is considered as the relevant approach by the Strategic Framework but it has not been put in place. Indeed,
resource management is quite political and is the cause of tensions between states and between
institutions67.
Likewise, environment is not a priority for the states, neither for the ministries. There is very few water
quality control. Pollution of water resources is also not act upon as if it was a priority. Pollution is due to
oil exploration and extraction, inappropriate solid waste disposal in urban areas, leaching of chemicals
and toxic materials, adjacent to large town, and risks related to legacy of war (unexploded ordinance
stockpiles)68.
Therefore, the WASH sector in South Sudan is facing several issues, such as poor coordination, lack of
capacity, low budget, unreliable data, and no focus on water resources management. The institutions face
the absence of sound policies and regulations. However, several policies and laws are in progress
63 Interview with SDC, 27/03/2015
64 http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.GROW
65 Government of South Sudan, The transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan, 2011
66 Interview with national MoH, 11/03/2015
68 GLAAS 2014

(Environmental Bill, Water Bill 2013…) and some already exists (Water Policy 2007, Water Sector
Strategic Framework 2011, Gender policy…). Institutions are working and, even if their relationship
should be clearer, they were collaborating until the financial crises. This issues seem to reflect the fact that
South Sudan is still a new country and needs to structure more. They are mirrored by the situation at local
level, both at urban and rural level, which we will study later.
B – At local level: the case of Northern Bahr el Ghazal
1) Access to WASH, KAP survey findings
In order to support the qualitative inputs of this study, a statistically robust survey was conducted. 214
households were interviewed, following the KAP survey methodology. This section will present the
results, both regarding access to WASH and governance indicators.
a- Population information
First of all, the survey gives us interesting information regarding the population of Aweil East and Aweil
North. They are not directly related to WASH, but they have an influence.
Out of the 214 respondents, 55% stated that the head of their household is a woman. High majority of the
respondents have not been to school (74%).
Around 45% have a source of income, and 45% do not. When they have a source of income, it is often
cutting of firewood (12%), fixed employment (8%) or other petty work (29%) such as cutting grass,
making grass mats, or growing plants (vegetables, tobacco…). No respondent reports selling or raising
animals to earn money. Most of the people have a low income, under 100 SSP.
Figure 6: Household income per month

b- Access to WASH related results
Access to WASH is quite low in the villages studied.
Regarding access to safe drinking-water, 70% say they use protected water sources (being mostly
boreholes). However, out of this 70%, only 27% need less than 45 minutes to fetch water (return trip and
queuing time). The WHO recommends that fetching time does not exceed 30 minutes. Therefore, only 19%
of the respondents qualify. Moreover, most households use less than 80 Liters per day. Considering that
the average household is composed of 6 people, it means that there is
less than 15 Liters available per day per capita. The WHO recommends a
minimum of 15 Liters during emergencies and 20 Liters in normal times,
to ensure basic hygiene needs and basic food hygiene69. Out of the 214
respondents, only 14 people say they use protected water, and need less
than 45 minutes to fetch water, and use more than 80 Liters a day,
which means only 6% of the respondents have really access to safe
drinking water.
Figure 7: Time needed to fetch
water (return time and queuing time)
Access to drinking-water is influenced by the income of the household: 75% of households with an income
use protected source of water, when only 65% of households without income. Likewise households with
income have a shorter fetching time (44% under 45 minutes) than the ones without an income (22%
under 45 minutes).
It is interesting to note that using protected water sources is more demanding: it takes more times to fetch
water and people usually use less water. 72% of people using protected source have a fetching time over
45 minutes, whereas it is the case of 51% of people using unprotected sources.
Water is not only used for normal household use (drinking, cooking, bathing, cleaning, and washing). Most
household use it also for their animals (53%) and few for farming or growing trees (8%), or for
construction (6%).
Access to hygiene is very low in the villages surveyed: only 14% have a hand washing facility with soap. It
is again influenced by the income of the family: 19% of households who have an income have a hand
washing facility, whereas 8% of household with no income do. Access to protected water also has an
effect: 17% of people using protected water sources have a hand washing facility, when only 7% of the
people using unprotected water sources do.
Low access to hand washing facilities is reflected on by the practices. Respondents do not wash their
hands after using the toilets (91% don’t), after cleaning their baby (82%) or before cooking (54%). On the
other hand, most of the respondents wash their hands before eating (71%). Since most of them do not
have hand washing facility with soap, there are high chances that they just use water to do so. But it is a
good practice that can be built upon.
69 http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/emergencies/qa/emergencies_qa5/en/

Figure 8: Time when people wash their hands
Access to sanitation is also extremely low: only 1% of the respondents have latrines. This 1% is only
composed of household who have an income and who use protected sources of water. Some households,
on the other hand, may be using public facilities sometimes.
So access to WASH is very low in the communities interviewed. It is influence by the income of the
household. Finally, using protected water sources requires more efforts than the unprotected ones.
c- Governance related results
This survey was the opportunity to analyze several WASH local indicators: efficiency (payment for water),
trust and engagement (knowledge of responsible people, transparency and access to information,
understanding of the sector, participation to decisions, gender, trust in WASH responsible people), and
effectiveness (capacity of responsible people and of population). Among these three categories of
indicators, compiled by the OECD, the focus was given to trust and engagement of the population, as the
survey was among communities. Focus group discussions and interviews allowed to focus more on the
other two.
56% of the people report paying for water. Household with an income are more likely to pay for water that
the ones who do not have an income (respectively 59% and 51%). The biggest difference is logical: people
who use protected sources of water pay more often than the ones using unprotected sources (respectively
73% and 12%). When they pay, it is usually a very small amount and when the well breaks down (71%
pay 5 or 10 SSP). People who pay for water seem to have a good idea of what the money is used for: 83%
say it is used for repairs, and 10% do not know. However, no one mentioned operation of the well.
It seems that the respondents are not very clear about who decided on the amount of money to pay for
water. In the six villages, respondents gave a mix of answer: it is sometimes the WUC (22%), the WUC with
the community (18%), the community alone (30%), or the head of village (22%). 9% of the respondents
do not know.

Figure 9: Person who decided on the price of water
75% of the respondents think they cannot participate in water related decisions or don’t know if they can.
If people don’t know if they can participate, they end up not participating either. If they can participate, it
is mostly through public consultation and the WUC. According to the respondents, the people participating
in water related decisions are mostly the head of villages. If they don’t participate to decisions, they say
that there is no form of participation.
31% of the respondents say that there is a WUC in charge of their water. For them, the role of the WUC is
to clean the well (56%), to collect money (23%) and to repair the well (8%). Only 12% of the respondents
do not know the role of the WUC. Most of the times, the WUC was appointed (65%) and they meet with the
community when needed.
Having a WUC improves the access to WASH of the people: 92% of people who say they have a WUC use
protected water sources, 21% have a hand washing facility with soap, and the two people who have
latrines are one of them. 77% of them pay for water. However, it does not influence the ability to
participate to decisions.
56% of the respondents cannot complain about water related issues or don’t know if they can. This figure
is a bit better when there is a WUC (48%). To
complain, this people go to the local chief (70%) or
to the WUC (17%). The people who cannot
complain say it is because no one will listen (18%),
or that they don’t know whom to contact (54%).
Figure 10: Possibility for respondents to
complain about water-related issues
Most people believe they cannot access information about water (52%) or don’t know (18%). The
proportion is reversed when there is a WUC: 52% can access information. Main sources of information are

the WUC and the local chief.
44% of the respondents believe that there is someone responsible for the maintenance of the borehole.
Still 56% do not know, did not answer or said that there is not. It means that even if there is someone in
charge, these people will not be able to contact him or her. Most of the respondent who said someone is in
charge of maintenance, believe that the community is responsible (71%), then the head of village (17%),
or the Pump Mechanics (12%). The WUC is not mentioned by the respondents. Only 29% of them believe
that these people have been trained. Therefore, it is hard to see how they could trust the person in charge
of maintenance.
People surveyed do not really trust their water responsible people. 60% think they are not accessible,
60% that they don’t have the knowledge to answer to their questions, and 65% that if they promise to do
something by a certain time, they do so. This lack of trust is less present among respondents when there is
a WUC (respectively 44%, 49%, and 61%).
Figure 11: Community trust into water responsible people
In conclusion, access to WASH is also influenced by the governance structure. Communities who have a
WUC have better access to WASH. However, there are many issues regarding governance indicators in the
villages surveyed: many people don’t pay for water, most believe they cannot participate in water related
decisions, access information or complain about water. Moreover, they do not really trust their water
responsible people. However, some interesting trends can be built upon.

2) WUC and behavior change: opportunities and challenges
a- Main opportunities and challenges of WUC
In Northern Bahr el Ghazal, the Water User Committee (WUC) model is the most present. Thanks to visits
and discussions with these committees, with the population, and to readings, the following challenges and
opportunities of this model have been identified. They will help improve this model. Indeed, in most
places, this management model doesn’t ensure the sustainability of water points.
One of the main challenges is the payment of water. It is very difficult to make sure that people pay for
water, and when they do, it is often a very low price and only when the well breaks down. Most of the
communities visited, if they pay, pay 5 to 10 SSP per household, when there is a problem. This means that
when there is a problem with the borehole, the WUC must first collect money before hiring help.
Therefore, boreholes stay non-functioning for a longer time (the focus group discussions show
communities need at least around 3-4 months average). There are several reasons for this. First of all,
some people are not used to pay. This is particularly true in remote rural areas. Near the towns, it is easier.
Likewise, for the returnees, coming back from Sudan or Uganda, they were used to pay before so they
could get used to it again. In Northern Bahr el Ghazal, “there is no outcry against paying for water, people
just need to understand”70.
Paying very little is a way for the NGOs implementing programs to develop the culture of payment, so the
people realize the value of water. The aim is that, with time, they realize that they need to pay more to
improve the sustainability of their access to water, and will revise the tariffs. Moreover, most water points
visited are borehole with hand pumps. The cost of maintenance of such a point is very low. For example,
the NGO International Aid Services (IAS) is advising their beneficiaries to collect 2SSP per household per
month, which is very little71.
In the communities visited, people are willing to pay, even if they say that they are poor and can’t pay. The
ones without a borehole are ready to start paying as long as they have access to good water72. However, as
shown by the survey, most people do not really trust the people they identify as being water responsible
for their communities, do not know who they are, how to contact them and what to do in case of a water
related issue. Moreover, some communities have doubts about the use of the money, and there have been
cases already, where the WUC members “drink the money” or “loose it”73. Even when no issue have
happened in the community, there are often no proper receipts in exchange of payment, few explanation
from the WUC about management of the money… People need to understand what they pay for, how the
money is handled and whom to hold accountable (and how). As there is no bank available in the rural
areas, the money has to be kept in the village, often by the treasurer. Such responsibility should mean good
accountability. For example, SDC gives its beneficiaries a cash box opening with two keys kept by the
treasurer and the chairman, so that at least they need to be two, to open the box74. More transparency on
the work of the WUC will help building trust and convince people of the right use of their money.
Many WUC committees do not work, and do not collaborate with the community. The survey shows that
they are often appointed. Interviews confirm that most of the time, the selection is not participative. Some
NGOs prefer to include the local leaders, elders and/or head of villages, and to make sure that members
stick around and do not shift regularly. However, communication between committees and communities is
key for the success of a project and its accountability. Having elections is a way to bring more
71 Interview with IAS, 18/03/2015
72 Focus Group Discussion in Amothic, 25/03/2015
73 Interview with Awoda, 18/03/2015

accountability. This could be addressed by a training of the community about the role of the WUC and the
kind of people who should be members, before running elections.
However, this low payment, added to the people who refuse to pay and who suffer no consequences for it,
does not provide the community with enough money to face big breakdowns of the well, or even to cover
the daily operation and maintenance operations. This threatens the functionality of the water points. Many
boreholes are now broken, and the communities do not have the will or the means to repair them,
sometimes for the umpteenth time.
This is also linked with a problem of ownership: if the community feels that the infrastructure in their
village belongs to an NGO, the government, or to no one, they won’t take responsibility for it. They rely on
the NGOs or the government to maintain and most of the time to come rehabilitate it. If they really believe
it’s theirs, and it’s essential to their life, they will take care of it. For example, only very few community
fence their well, even though all NGOs interviewed recommend them to do so75. Building ownership is a
long process that requires more than the six months or one year allowed to a NGO project. Key is to
involve the community and the institutions from the beginning, even in the design of the project, the
choice of the technology used...
The dependency of the communities on humanitarian assistance is a brake to ownership. The
communities now know how to talk to such stakeholders and what to say to obtain a water point, what
each NGO is offering, etc. They are expecting them to resolve their water issues, and thus do not act on
their own as they know NGOs are susceptible to come. Therefore, years of assistance have created a
dependency cycle rather that strengthening the capacities of the communities to ensure sustainable
projects. Now that Northern Bahr el Ghazal is shifting toward early-recovery, communities have to adapt
to that new paradigm. Now, considering the new “non-subsidy policy” applied within the state (see later),
NGOs explain to their beneficiaries that they will not be able to come back to repair the borehole, but still,
it often happens that NGOs receive phone calls or visits in order to get help76.
The sustainability of the projects is also threatened by difficulties regarding operation and maintenance.
As mentioned above, the WUC often lack the money to cover this expense. Furthermore, the spare parts
are not easy to access in Northern Bahr el Ghazal (see later). In the same line, it is important that the WUC
and the communities are trained regularly so they know how to undertake regular preventative
maintenance and conduct minor repairs. Currently, WUC are trained only during the project
implementation phase. Refreshing trainings could be very useful77.
In the future, WUC members might also be replaced by new ones, who have never been trained on the
work of the committee, financial management, bookkeeping, repairs... It would be interesting to conduct
capacity assessment at the beginning of projects, to see where the WUC members are at. Moreover,
trainings of the community is also needed, at least on what is their rights and duties, on how to hold the
WUC accountable, on whom to contact if there is an issue… this is rarely done. When doing so, one should
remember that most people did not go to school and thus cannot read account books or bylaws. Multiple
meetings can be necessary to build capacities, ownership and trust of the community, and same with the
WUC.
The link with the counties is very important. Indeed, the committees have currently little information
about the water sector in general, and don’t know whom to contact in case of a major breakdown, except
for the organization who constructed the infrastructure. Although most know one pump mechanics and
where the county offices are, it might be difficult for them to contact officials if they don’t know them, if
77 Interview with UMCOR, 18/03/2015

they don’t have their phone numbers… Thus they cannot ask the county for help. This means that the
information pathways is not functioning: information does not flow regularly and efficiently to the
relevant stakeholder.
Although the WUCs face important challenges, that will need to be addressed, there are also opportunities
on which we can build to improve the governance and thus the sustainability of the projects. Most
communities have one or several people who have been trained for minor repairs. Building on these
existing capacities will allow to limit major breakdowns and to be more sustainable.
Regarding equity and inclusiveness of the committee, women are present in all the committees met, most
of the times as treasurer. Other NGOs confirmed this fact78
. It is important as they are in charge of water
collection for households, while the men are more concerned with water for livestock. In some committees
met, there is a good gender balance. Focus group discussions showed that the women are involved in
water related decisions. They are usually consulted, even if informally, and everyone seems to recognize
their key role in WASH issues. Women said they feel listen to by the men on these topics. However, men
are usually the ones taking the final decision. The vulnerable people rarely pay for water, as they have
someone to take care of them.
Finally, there are some strong committees and communities that could be used as models. They still face
some challenges, but are a good example for other committees.
In conclusion, WUC face many issues in Northern Bahr el Ghazal. People are not used to pay for water;
they do not understand why it is needed. There is certainly an existing willingness and ability for
communities to contribute to financing of water but this has been negatively affected by years of free
handouts and high subsidies by NGOs. Low accountability and transparency of the WUC is an obstacle
towards monthly payment. More collaboration with the community, not just when there is a problem
would help the WUC to build trust. This highlights the need for national or state level legislation on WUCs
that many other countries have in place that gives them certain authority but also regulates their
activities. The community does not always own the projects: more time and awareness are needed, along
with reducing the aid dependency. Difficulties regarding operation and maintenance threaten the
sustainability of the projects, along with need for refreshing training and few links with the county
institutions. However, in most communities, there are already WUC, who received training and who
involve women, which can be built upon.
b- Hygiene and Sanitation within communities: challenges and opportunities
Access to hygiene and sanitation, even more than access to water, requires behavior change. This often
takes time and contains many challenges. Indeed, there is a big ignorance on these topics, and of why it is
needed.
The culture can affect the implementation of projects, especially regarding sanitation. Talking about feces
is unusual in the communities and it may be touchy or even taboo. Moreover, some men refuse to share
latrines with their wife(s), therefore a household would need to have two latrines79. This is not the case in
all communities, but it needs to be looked at when starting a sanitation project. Another hindrance
towards improving access to sanitation is the fact that people don’t want others to know when they are
going to the toilet. As long as they go to the bush, no one will know. But if they have a latrine, there are
higher chances that someone will see them enter the facility.
Behavior change takes time. NGOs need to build trust with the communities they are working with,
78 Interview with SDC

South Sudan WASH Governance Report Analysis

South Sudan WASH Governance Report Analysis

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (17)

Ähnlich wie South Sudan WASH Governance Report Analysis

Ähnlich wie South Sudan WASH Governance Report Analysis (20)

South Sudan WASH Governance Report Analysis