1. A two-day workshop was held in June 2013 to commence development of Uganda's Guidelines for Technology Introduction (GTI) with participation from various government agencies and organizations. 2. An initial drafting committee and wider steering committee were formed to develop the GTI, with the ATC coordinator as team leader. 3. Key issues discussed included scenarios for water and sanitation technologies, roles and costs of different parties, and a proposed process for introducing new technologies. However, concerns were raised about budget, timing, stakeholder engagement and dissemination.

1. Paul Kimera
27th-28th June 2013

2. 




At commencement stage- Held a 2 day GTI workshop at
the ATC in June
Representation and participation from academia, MOH,
MWE, TSUs, ATC, UWASNET, MOF. DLG
Agreed to have a ‘Drafting Committee’/secretariat
comprising of the ATC, NETWAS, WaterAid Uganda and
to draft the GTIP
ATC Coordinator will be the team Leader
Agreed to have a wider steering committee to be chaired
by the Commissioner RWSD.

3. Organizations- Steering committee










MWE
MOH
UWASNET
UNBS
UIRI
UNICEF
T4T
MTI
IRC
AMREF

4. Scenarios
 Water
 Sanitation
 Cost models not specifically explored
Level of detail
 Guidelines will identify ‘who should do what’ regardless
of whether they are doing it presently
 Guidelines will be applied by host when there is a
technology MWE/MOH/producer seek to introduce
 Guidelines will spell out roles and allocate costs to
specific parties

5. 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Introduction of new technology/ introduction of modified
technology (formal communication to MWE/MOH)
MWE introduces product owner to ATC
Product owner explains key features, purpose & benefits of
product to ATC
ATC explains GTI process to product owner and documents
information
Product tests carried out. UNBS certification acquired (where
necessary)
Formation of GTI core group for product
Identification of pilot area in consultation with core group,
MWE,ATC
Piloting technology, documentation of process by ATC, etc.

6. 



TAF Application
Core group meeting on way forward w.r.t pilot
and TAF findings
Stakeholder workshop to disseminate findings
Decision on next phase of introduction process

7. 
Unresolved. Producer pays for tests

Producer pays for pilot hardware (partially)

MWE/ donor pays for pilot study and
documentation

Producer handles marketing costs

8.  Monitoring
tool to gauge technology
performance and gaps
 Team composition will be smaller to
make it more affordable

9. Targeting 5 fora
 1 Inter District meeting
 WfP learning platform on Sanmat
 WASHtech Core group meeting
 Functionality working group meeting
 UWASNET Technologies working group
meeting
 Embedding & advocacy should go on into the
next year.

10. 




TAF is well received in the 3 countries
Global WASH professionals confirm value
of processes & tools for evaluating &
monitoring
Agreed TAF hosts; Burkina Faso- (DEIE),
Ghana (CWSA) &, Uganda- (ATC)
Training Institutes to consider processes &
TAF in their syllabi
TAF recommended for adaptation in other
countries for sustainable WASH services

11. 





Should start with a preamble on introduction of technologies in the
past, shortcomings and therefore need for a formal TIP
A process of phasing out failed & obsolete technologies should be
part of the GTI process.
Should include a road map towards its development
Budget provisions and timing of the GTI inadequate. Internal
resource mobilization of key organizations involved required to
ensure success
Challenge to map out, capture, interest and bring aboard
stakeholders (steering committee)
Dissemination work including policy formulation & advocacy will
require more than the 6 months left