Summary of Evaluation Result (After Extension)
1. Outline of the ProjectCountry: The Republic of the Philippines

Project Title: The Small Water Districts Improvement
Project

Issue/ Sector: Water Resources, DisasterCooperation Scheme: Technical Cooperation Project

Risk Management
Division in Charge: JICA Philippine OfficeTotal Cost: 1,019 million Yen (including original andextended period)

Cooperation August 2005

Partner Country’s Implementation Organization:

Periodto Jul 2010 (original period)

Local Water Utilities Administration [LWUA]

and Aug 2010 to March

Supporting Organization in Japan: None2012 (extended period)

Other Supporting Organization: None

1-1 Background of the ProjectIn the Philippines, until the 1960s, water supply services were provided mainly by Local
Government Units (LGUs) but beginning in 1973, water districts (WDs) were created throughPresidential Decree 198. The act also established the Local Water Utilities Administration(LWUA), a national level, government-owned and controlled corporation to provide water districts
with financial and technical assistance and to serve as their regulator.
In 2004, Executive Order (EO) 279 was approved to provide for comprehensive reform of thefinancing policies of the water supply sector and to streamline LWUA’s organization structure.
EO 279 mandates that LWUA focus its lending operation and assistance on less creditworthy water
districts, with the aim of graduating them to more creditworthy and financially sustainable status.
However, capacities of many small WDs remained low due to such problems as lack of financial
resources, weaknesses in technical, institutional and managerial capabilities, as well as inadequate
water supply, poor water quality and high non-revenue water. Many small water districts were also
suffering from excessive debt needed for initial investment and inadequate capability of operationand maintenance and rehabilitation of facilities, resulting in decrease in number of customers.
Under this circumstance, the Government of the Philippines (GOP) requested the Government ofJapan (GOJ) for implementing “Small Water Districts Improvement Project (SWDIP)” to be
implemented under JICA’s Technical Cooperation Program (TCP) to financially and technicallysupport the small water districts. The SWDIP commenced in August 2005 and was originally
supposed to complete in July 2010. The project originally covered 54 WDs, 20 of which wereselected to receive technical assistance for the preparation of improvement plans with financial
grants for facilities improvement.
The Terminal Evaluation conducted in March 2010, however, recommended for the extension of the
project cooperation by pointing out that although the WDs are applying the skills and knowledge
learned from the Project, they need to improve their way of actual application. Additionally, 10
WDs were selected mainly for the formulation of Improvement Plans for services and financial
viability, two of which were selected from the target WDs covered by the Japan’s Grant Aid
program in 2002-2003 and eight selected from the remaining 34 of the 54 target WDs by the
project. The criteria of the selection included the availability of potential water sources and theapproval of a financial source. Following this recommendation, the GOP and GOJ authorities, as
represented by LWUA and JICA, signed the Minutes of Meeting (M/M) on June 15, 2010
concerning the project’s extension period from August 2010 to March 2012.

Page | 1

1-2 Cooperation Overview（1）Overall Goal:
Water supply services and management of target water districts are improved.
（2）Project Purpose:[1] Water supply services and management of selected water districts are improved.
[2] Guideline for improvement of water supply services and financial viability of the target WDs(excluding 20 selected WDs) are prepared.
（3）Outputs:
1. Profiles of target WDs are prepared and the WDs to be improved by the Project are selected.
2. Improvement Plans for services and financial viability of selected WDs are prepared, updated andimplemented as scheduled.
3. Water supply facilities of selected WDs are improved.
4. Overall Management Capacity of Target WDs Personnel is strengthened.
5. LWUA’s technical support for target WDs is enhanced and this experience is disseminated toother water districts.
（4）Inputs:
1) Japanese Side (1,019 million yen in total including original and extended period)a) Dispatch of Experts: 2 Long-term Experts (original), 2 Long-term Experts (extension); 7
Short-term Experts (original), 2 Short-term Experts (extension)b) Training in Japan: 4 LWUA C/Ps (original), 1 LWUA C/P (extension)c) Provision of Equipment: 25 million yen (original)d) Local Cost (Facilities Improvement): 230 million yen (original); 2.291 million (Php, extension)e) Local Consultants: 10 (original), 2 (extension)f) Local Contractors: 3 (original), 1 (extension)2) Philippine Sidea) Project Counterparts: 11b) Local Cost: 4.5 million php (900 thousand php/year x 5 years)c) Land and Facilities: Lot for Reservoir/Pump Stations in each WDd) Others: Software & Installation (including training) of the Computerized Billing & Collection
System（4）Activities undertaken during the Extension Period;
Activities undertaken during the Extension Period were mainly focused on Outputs 2 and 5. The
following table summarizes the activities relevant to each Output.
OutputTarget and relevant Activities
Output 1 Formulating selection criteria to identify 10 WDs to be approved by LWUA
Output 2 Assisting for the newly selected 10 WDs in formulating and updating improvement
plans (also assisting the 20 WDs in updating their improvement plans by adjusting
financial projections, population coverage, among others)
Output 3 Providing managerial assistance to two WDs and on-the-job training on operation andmaintenance for Water Treatment Plant (WTP) to remaining 4 WDs, all of which werecovered under the Grant Aid Follow-Up cooperation. Assisting Abuyog WD inPage | 2

Output 4
Output 5

preparing procurement plans, detailed design and bidding documents etc.
No additional activities during the extension period
Formulating recommendations on transferring effective technologies to LWUA
counterparts for the improving services and management of the target WDs; and on
effective policy or program for the strengthening of the target WDs

The following table summarizes the original plan of activities:
Category of WDs

Planned Activities
OutputOutputOutputOutputOutputProject Purpose

1

2

3

4

5

20 Selected WDs

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Indicator 1-1 and 1-2

34 Target WDs

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Indicator 2-1

Note: “Y” indicates activities are planned in relation to each Output while “N“ shows no activity is targeted
under the SWDIP.

The following table summarizes the plan of activities during the extension period:
Category of WDs

Planned Activities

20 Selected WDs

Output1
F

26 target WDs(remaining out of 34
target WDs)
8
WDs
Newly
from
selected target 34
10 WDs WDs
2
WDs
from
Grant Aid
Follow-up
Remaining 4 WDs
under
Grant
Aid
Follow-up

34
target
WDs

6 WDs
under
Grant
Aid
Followup

Output 2

Output 3
F

F

Y
(only
updatingof
implement
ation plan)
N

N

F

Y

Y

Y

Y
(only
providingmanagerial
assistance
etc.)

F

Y

Y
(only
providing
O&M
training)

N

N

N

Outp
ut 4
F

Outp
ut 5
Y

Project
Purpose
Indicator 1-1
and 1-2

Indicator 2-1

NN

Note: “F” indicates the activity was finished in the original period. Also see above note.

2. Evaluation Team
(Japanese side)Team-Team Leader: Ms. Sachiko Takeda, Senior Representative, JICA Philippine OfficeMembers- Cooperation Planning: Ms. Etsuko Taneda, Representative, JICA Philippine Office- Cooperation Planning: Mr. Kessy A. Reyes, Program Officer, JICA Philippine Office- Evaluation Analysis and Report Writing: Mr. Rey Gerona, In-house Consultant, JICA
Philippine Office- Counselor: Mr. Katsuyoshi Tomono, NPO Terra corporation(Philippine side)- Mr. Oscar M. Jusi, Technical Specialist, Local Water Utilities Administration

Page | 3

Period- Ms. Myrra Montano, Financial Specialist, Local Water Utilities Administration
20 February, 2012 – 1 March, 2012
Type of Evaluation: Terminal Evaluation

3. Summary of Evaluation
3-1 Result of Cooperation(1) Activities
Project activities were implemented almost as scheduled based on the Project Design Matrix (PDM).
(1) Achievement at the Output level
The states of achievements are summarized as follows.
Output 1: Profiles of target WDs are prepared and the WDs to be improved by the project are
selected.
 Indicator 1-1: Profiles of target WDs prepared by Jan. 2006
 Indicator 1-2: Selection criteria of WDs to be improved prepared by Feb. 2006
 Indicator 1-3: Final list of selected WDs agreed upon by LWUA by Mar. 2006
Output 1 was fully achieved. Profiles of all 60 WDs targeted for project coverage were prepared in
February 2006. The criteria for selecting the 20 WDs for facilities improvement were formulated in
March 2006 and the final list of the WDs for facilities improvement was agreed upon by LWUA
during the JCC Meeting in May 2006.
During the extension period, the project formulated the criteria for selecting the “additional” WDs (8WDs from the remaining 34 of the 54 WDs and two out of the Grant Aid Follow-up cooperation
project) in August 2010 and the final list of the 10 additional WDs were agreed upon with LWUA on
September 2010.
Output 2: Improvement plans for services and financial viability of selected WDs are prepared,
updated and implemented as scheduled.
 Indicator 2-1: Improvement plans of the first 10 WDs agreed upon with WDs by July 2006
and of the second 10 WDs by July 2007
Output 2 was fully achieved. Improvement plans of 20 WDs were prepared in July 2006 (for the first
10 WDs) and July 2007 (for the other 10 WDs). In addition, the project also assisted the preparationof improvement plans for the 4 WDs assisted by the Follow-up Cooperation of the Japan’s Grant Aid(Improvement of Water Quality in Local Areas).
During the extension period, improvement plans were prepared for 10 WDs, 8 of which belong to theremaining 34 of the 54 WDs, and 2 WDs from the 6 WDs covered by the F/U Cooperation.
Improvement plans were agreed upon by the respective WDs one at a time between 2010 and 2011.
Also during the extension period, the project monitored and visited the 20 WDs that received
facilities improvement during the original period and assisted them in updating their improvement
plans. As of the time of evaluation, 19 of the 20 WDs implement activities based on the updated
improvement plans.
Output 3: Water supply facilities selected WDs are improved.
 Indicator 3-1: Detailed design and tender documents for the facility improvement of the first
10 WDs prepared by Mar. 2007 and of the second 10 WDs prepared by Mar. 2008.
 Indicator 3-2: Facility improvement works of the first 10 WDs completed by Mar. 2008 and of
the second 10 WDs completed by Mar. 2009.
Output 3 was fully achieved. The detailed designs and tender documents for facility improvement ofPage | 4

20 WDs were prepared in 2006 for the first 10 WDs and in 2007 for the remaining 10 WDs. During
the extension period, the project likewise prepared the detailed design and tender documents for
Abuyog WD.
The construction works for the 20 WDs were completed at one time or another between 2008 and2009. During the extension period, the project started the rehabilitation of existing pumping stationof Abuyog WD (part of the 6 WDs covered by the F/U Cooperation of the Grant Aid Program) in
October 2011 and completed the works in December 2011.
Output 4: Overall management capacity of target WD personnel is strengthened.


Indicator 4-1: Knowledge on management and O/M of the personnel of target WDs arestrengthened.
Indicator 4-2: Knowledge and skills on management and O/M of the personnel of selected
WDs are strengthened.

Output 4 is achieved to a large extent, but the achievement process found to be continuing as
evidence by testimonies of some staff of WDs visited by the evaluation team. Moreover, according
the End Line Survey Report (conducted by Local Consultant), most WD personnel are now able toprepare improvement plans, water demand, and financial projections that will guide the future
development programs of the WDs.
Also, based on the Terminal Evaluation conducted in March 2010, in terms of the performance of the
WDs in the training program, the WDs had an average of 70% rating from results of evaluation every
after each training conducted by the project. All 34 WDs (target WDs) sent their personnel toseminars and workshops organized and conducted by the project. Attending WD personnel learned
basic knowledge and acquired basic skills from seminars and workshops on such fields as financial
and organizational management, proper operations and maintenance (O&M) and planning. Personnelof target WDs who attended seminars and workshops were able to strengthen knowledge and skillsby actually applying such knowledge and skills in their preparation of improvement plans and in their
preparation of project proposals. In fact, 6 target WDs had their project proposals for Non-LWUA
Initiated Funds (NLIF) approved by LWUA and 6 more target WDs received regular LWUA loan.
The selected WDs (20 out of the 54 WDs) received various trainings and also participated inseminars and workshops conducted by the project. Through these trainings, seminars and workshops,
knowledge and skills related to various aspects of managing Water Districts (WDs) were acquired.
Japanese experts together with LWUA counterparts also conducted follow up visits and on-the-job
trainings (OJT) which paved the way for the WD personnel to strengthen management skills. 14 of
the 20 selected WDs were able to get their project proposals for NLIF funding approved by LWUA.
Output 5: LWUA’s technical support for target WDs is enhanced and this experience isdisseminated to other WDs.


Indicator 5-1: Knowledge of LWUA counterpart personnel on the financial and technicalcondition and on water supply system improvement of target WDs are strengthened.
Indicator 5-2: Knowledge of LWUA on the effective improvement methodology for target
WDs is enhanced.

Knowledge of LWUA counterpart personnel on the target WDs specified by Indicators 5-1 and 5-2
are enhanced as planned. But the process of achieving Output 5 is found to be continuing, sincedissemination of this project experience by LWUA personnel is to be done from now on by
aggressively implementing a set of advisory activities attempted by the Project in other WDs.
Accordingly, the evaluation team concludes that Output 5 is achieved to a large extent. The
Terminal Evaluation in March 2010 found out that LWUA counterparts had already sufficient

Page | 5knowledge and experience even before the project, but the project activities had given LWUA
counterparts the opportunity to gain more knowledge particularly on hydrological analysis and on
more practical approaches such community meetings. LWUA counterparts were involved in all
activities of Japanese experts such as conducting survey and profiling of WDs, formulation of
selection criteria, lectures and practical advice to WD personnel, formulation of improvement plans,
administration of procurement of services, inspection of construction works; and financial analysis,among others. In addition to LWUA counterparts assigned to the project, 37 other LWUA personnel
participated in seminars and workshops conducted by the project, which additionally, enhanced theirknowledge on methodologies for improving WDs.
(2) Achievement at the Project Purpose level
The project is expected to improve the water supply services and management of the 20 selected WDs.
It is also expected to prepare a guideline for the improvement of water supply services and financial
viability of the 34 WDs which did not receive facilities improvement from the project.
According to the PDM (June 2010), the achievement of the project purpose is evidenced by three
indicators. The achievement of each indicator is discussed below.
Indicator 1-1: Operation and financial indicators of all the selected WDs are improved
Each of the selected WDs has been faced with a different set of issues such as limitation of water
resources and problem in water quality, poor facility, financial difficulty, lack of technical andmanagerial capacity and knowledge, etc. Since the project could not solve all such issues at one time,prioritization of the issues to be tackled in this project was done for each of the selected WDs withassistance of the Project team. In fact, the project made several attempts to enable WDs learn how todevelop and implement a feasible improvement plan amidst various constraints. The projectsuccessfully improved operation and financial conditions in the prioritized areas. Some of the selected
WDs have been making continuous efforts for further facility improvement and expanding service areaby seeking for additional finance.
Improvement of operation and management of WDs are evidenced by operational and financial
indicators below. However, it is also important to note that the WDs have various issues which are noteasily solved. It is shown in indicators that WDs started the improvement, even though the speed of
improvement differs depending on the peculiarities of problems and situation of particular WD. At thetime of evaluation, the operational and financial indicators of 19 of the 20 selected WDs show ageneral trend towards improvement. Project records show significant improvements of the operationaland financial aspects of the selected WDs except for Balatan WD which ceased operating in 2010
because of the legal dispute concerning ownership of the water source.
Because of the facility improvement supported by the project, nineteen (19) of the 20 selected WDs
achieved increased service coverage and served population, increased number of active service
connections, reduction in non-revenue water (NRW), and increased gross receipts in water sales.
These improvements were realized immediately after the facilities of selected WDs were improved.
The significant improvements achieved by the 19 WDs were also attained by Balatan WD until it
halted its operations in 2010.
Operational Indicators
1) Number of Active Service Connections (ASC)Before the project started, WDs were facing decrease in the number of ASCs. However, after
implementation of the project, all WDs have successfully increased their number of ASCs and haveachieved their target additional ASCs. Average increase rate from 2005 to 2011 for 19 WDs (excluding
Balatan) is at 152%. Two WDs have successfully increased more than double (Metro Siargao: 255%
and Wao: 204%) and 7 more WDs reached more than 150%.
Facility improvement with the grant fund, NLIF and other sources, for improvement of facilities suchas expansion of distribution lines, water resources development and reduction of NRW, and active

Page | 6

marketing schemes including community meetings with stakeholders have contributed to theremarkable increase in the number of ASCs. However, some WDs show relatively slow increase
because of limitation in areas such as water resources, water quality, area of further expansion, etc.
Even the increase rate is rather small, the indicator shows slow but steady growth in the number ofASCs. However still some WDs face disconnections due to poor water quality during the rainy season,
non-payment of concessionaires, etc. that has resulted to decrease in number of ASCs.
2) Non-Revenue Water (NRW)In general, as water mains become defective over time, NRW tends to increase every year especiallywithout rehabilitation interventions. Therefore, the only means of significantly reducing NRW is toreplace old mains, which requires a big investment especially for those WDs which have high NRW.
In this Project, some WDs with limited water resources chose to invest in facility improvement mainly
to reduce NRW. Decreasing NRW is an effective measure to ensure expansion of the service area.
At the start of the Project in 2005, although the average NRW of 19 WDs was 41%, it wassignificantly reduced to 34% in 2011. Out of 12 WDs whose NRW were more than 25% in 2005, 10
WDs have reduced the NRW by 2011. Especially for those WDs that focused its facility improvement
mainly for the reduction of NRW such as Masinloc and Hinatuan WDs, significant decrease in NRW
was achieved. In Masinloc WD, NRW was reduced from 70% to 23% while NRW was reduced from
49% to 25% in Hinatuan WD.
From 2005 to 2011, improvement is shown as the number of WDs with high NRW decreased and thenumber of WDs with lower NRW (less than 45% which is at credit and semi-credit worthy level)
increased from 10 WDs (50%) to 15WDs (79%).
Financial Indicators
Towards the end of 2011, the Project Team conducted a survey on financial performance of selected 19
WDs for the period from end 2005 to end 2011based on 3 financial indicators set by the project.
1) Gross Receipt from Water Sales
All WDs have increased gross receipts from 2005 up to 2011. The increase in gross receipts can be
attributed to the increase of additional ASCs generated after the completion of physical improvementin each WD.
Note: The Evaluation Team also observed some improvement in other operational and financial
indicators, however, more time is needed to conclude such improvements. Moreover, the team also
made assessments using LWUA’s credit-worthiness indicators on other financial parameters to further
identify significant changes and important points. However, data gathered is only limited at the time ofevaluation.
Indicator 1-2: Satisfaction of the selected WDs’ water users are elevated…
At the time of evaluation, majority of the water users in 19 of the selected WDs are found to besatisfied with the water supply quality and services of WDs. The results of the focus group discussions(FGD) with water users conducted by the evaluation team in four WDs reveal that water users’satisfaction of the overall services of WDs is changed from dissatisfied to satisfied. Only 3 of the 25
FGD participants in different WD areas expressed dissatisfaction of WD services.
Moreover, results of the End-line Survey conducted by the project in January-February 2012 also
revealed the same facts in 19 WDs. The survey covered 50 households which were connected to the
WDs a long time ago (old concessioners) and another 50 households which are newly connected toWDs (direct ASCs gained by project intervention).
The findings of the End-line Survey for old concessioners reveal that in average, 85% are satisfied
with water availability, 86% are satisfied with accessibility to water, 81% are satisfied with water

Page | 7

quality, 89% are satisfied with adequacy of water pressure, 81% are satisfied with water fees
affordability, and 87% are satisfied with the WDs’ customer service and response. The overallsatisfaction rating given by old concessionaires for the WDs is 86%.
On the other hand, findings of the End-line Survey for new concessionaires in average reveal that 94%
are satisfied with water availability, 92% are satisfied with accessibility to water, 89% are satisfied
with water quality, 93% are satisfied with adequacy of water pressure, 88% are satisfied with water
fees affordability and 93 % are satisfied with WDs’ customer service and response. The overallsatisfaction rating given by new concessionaires for the WDs is 93%.
With above, Indicator 1-2 has been successfully achieved by the Project.
Indicator 2-1: Improvement plans of the target WDs (34 WDs) are preparedThis indicator is achieved. All the remaining 34 WDs which did not receive project assistance forfacilities improvement had prepared their improvement plans. In addition, the project also facilitatedthe preparation of improvement plans for 6 WDs covered by the F/U Grant Aid cooperation.
3-2 Summary of Evaluation Results(1) Relevance:
The project is highly relevant. With the growing Philippine population, the need to access potablewater, especially in the provinces, need not be overemphasized. Roughly, four of every 10 families in
the Philippines do not have access to drinking water. Under this circumstance, the Government of thePhilippines accorded priority status to the water sector, particularly access to drinking water by
Filipino families in the countryside, in its current Philippine Development Plan (PDP) 2010-2016.
Along this line, the present Aquino administration bravely announced last year its national target ofachieving 86% of Filipino families having access to potable water by the end of its term in 2016.
The water sector and the project fall under the second pillar of JICA’s Country Assistance Strategy for
the Philippines, which pertains to poverty alleviation and basic human development. This pillar will
likely remain as one of the priorities of the Japan’s ODA policy for the Philippines in themedium-term.
As such, the project remains valid and consistent with the needs of the target beneficiaries particularlyin the countryside, with the water sector policy and national development priorities of the Philippine
government consistent with the development aid policy of the Japanese government.
(2) Effectiveness:
The project produced its expected outputs that effectively resulted to the project’s achievement of its
purpose. It can be said that the provision of facilities to 20 selected WDs contributed to theimprovement operations thru the increase of number of service connections resulting to increase ingross sales; and the transfer of technologies on operations and management of WDs to WD personnel
from the project team through trainings, workshops, seminars and problem-solving type advices. With
the improved water service delivery, satisfaction level of water users is elevated in a majority of the
WDs interviewed by the terminal evaluation team.
There are several aspects in this project which contributed to enhancement of the effectiveness.
Firstly, direct assistance to the 20 small WDs by hands-on and problem solving approach was very
effective to improve the technical, operational, managerial and financial capacity of small and weak
WDs which were in difficult condition having limited capacity and resources. In addition to providing
knowledge and skills, the project also helped enhance the confidence and willingness of the people in
WDs.
Secondly, the selection process of WDs has ensured commitment of WDs and potential for
improvement.

Page | 8

Thirdly, the project’s strategy of combining technical assistance and physical development of WDs
was effective as the physical development provided incentive and encouraged WDs in achieving the
project’s objectives. The selection of facility improvement was made in the course of developing
improvement plans. Necessary equipment were selected to meet the needs of each WD. Moreover,
the transfer of knowledge and skills was made easier and expeditious because there was opportunity
for hands-on and experiential on-the-job-trainings through the actual physical improvement offacilities of the 20 WDs.
However, at the time of evaluation, the evaluation team could not ascertain whether all selected WDs
could solve operational and financial problems on their own in the future. This should be assessed at
the time of ex-post evaluation. Nonetheless, it can be assumed that the level of knowledge of LWUA
counterparts is improved through their frequent exposure in delivering lectures during trainings andworkshops as well as on providing direct practical advice to WD personnel.
(3) Efficiency:
The inputs were generally implemented as planned.
According to the Terminal Evaluation Report conducted in March 2010, the provision of officemanagement equipment to WDs had efficiently contributed to the improvement in managerial
operations of the target WDs.
(4) Impact:
The project’s achievement in improving the operational and financial status of 20 selected WDs seems
to have encouraged the other 34 WDs to mobilize resource organizations using their improvement
plans as basis for asking assistance. The Rosario WD is one of the many WDs that utilized theimprovement plans for making and presenting project proposals to LWUA, local government units andother resource agencies for assistance.
The project had also positively made impact on the awareness level of community residents onhygiene and sanitation matters. This was observed by the project team during community meetings
and was confirmed by the evaluation team through the results of the focus group discussions (FGD)
with concessionaires and non-concessionaires in four WDs visited during the evaluation. With
potable water flowing into the house, clean food preparation is better done, time is saved from fetchingwater and money is likewise saved from buying and boiling water. The results of the FGDs reveal thatwomen family members benefit most from having clean water connected to the house such thatwomen family members have more time to rest because they do not have to spend time fetching water
for drinking and washing.
(5) Sustainability:
The sustainability of the project is primarily challenged by the LWUA-WD corporate relationships
such that LWUA could not provide WDs free trainings, seminars or workshops like what the project
did. Small WDs are financially, technically, and institutionally unstable and therefore require a
combined technical and financial assistance. The present disposition of LWUA however does notguarantee that grant funding be provided to small WDs for improving their facilities as well as theirtechnical and managerial capacity.
However, the project had successfully laid down the foundation for sustainability. These are discussed
in details below:
Technically, the utilization of knowledge and skills transferred to LWUA counterparts is likely tocontinue because most of the counterparts are still working with LWUA on matters concerning theimprovement of small WDs. At the level of WDs, based on test results, 70% of the trained managers
and O&M staff acquired basic skills and techniques that effectively improved self-confidence levels.
As such, the likelihood of utilizing learned skills and techniques in the daily work by both LWUA andPage | 9

WD personnel is high.
Organizationally, basic management techniques are already in place in most of the WDs assisted by
the project, such as financial recording and computerization of some of the aspects of the WD
operations, among others. With the improvement plans, WDs can be guided in implementing
improvement measures not only on the financial aspect but human resource management as well.
Institutionally, the project was able to strengthen the relationship between WDs and LWUA, not only
through the project team, but also through the existing consultation mechanism between WDs and
LWUA Area Advisers. At least 2 LWUA Area Advisers are assigned to the project as counterparts.
Through community meetings and improvement plan formulation processes, relationship between
WDs and most of the municipal governments in the project areas were strengthened. Goodrelationship allows cooperative undertakings, which in many instances municipal governments
provide funding to WDs. This is very evident in San Marcelino and Masinloc WDs where theevaluation team visited and had interviews.
Financially, the project had successfully led 19 selected WDs to improve the financial situations byproviding grant assistance even though the level of improvement differs from one WD to another.
Sustaining these situations however also partly lies on the sustained utilization and upgrading of theskills and techniques by WD personnel learned from the project and availability of funds. As such,continued technical and managerial assistance to WDs is deemed indispensable.
Policy-wise, the guidelines prepared by the project for improving small WDs can be utilized by
LWUA to advance policies and regulations concerning government’s support to small WDs.
3-3 Facilitation Factors
Security risk conditions in project areas were low, paving the way for the timely execution of project
activities, such as conducting survey and making profiles of WDs; and in conducting on-the job
trainings to formulate the improvement plans, among others. Accessibility and proximity of selected
WDs to construction equipment and materials were factors that also contributed to the completion ofcivil works of the facility improvement generally as scheduled.
The results of the meetings and interviews conducted by the evaluation team with WD officers in San
Marcelino, Masinloc, Binmaley and Rosario gave an impression that cooperative local politicians arealso keys to achieving the project objectives. This is evident in San Marcelino and Masinloc WDs
where the municipal governments give priority status in its local development plans the improvementof the water supply services of WDs such that provision of grant funding to WDs are actuallyprogrammed by the municipal governments.
3-4 Impeding Factors
Although the case of Balatan WD can be considered isolated, it may be worth learning to mention thatownership of the water source is an important factor that planning process should not miss to examine
and analyze. Because the water source ownership was overlooked, the operations of Balatan WD had
been stopped after the project invested some 5.6 million pesos for improving its facilities. Meanwhile,
LWUA and Balatan WD spent some more funds looking for other water sources in the locality.
With a government-owned and controlled corporation (GOCC) status, LWUA is expected by thegovernment to generate incomes through trainings and other similar services. As such, LWUA could
not provide free trainings to WDs neither give grants to improve WD facilities. Access to LWUA’sservices therefore may not be easy for small WDs. Had it not for the project, LWUA could not haveprovided facility improvement to 20 selected WDs as well as continued technical assistance to all 54
small WDs.
3-5 Results

Page | 10

The project overall produced its expected outputs that effectively resulted to the achievement of its
project purpose. It was shown by the project that the provision of facilities to the 20 selected WDs
contributed to the improvement operations thru the increase of number of service connections
resulting to increase in gross sales; and the transfer of technologies on operations and management of
WDs to WD personnel from the project team through trainings, workshops, seminars andproblem-solving type advices was very effective. Then, satisfaction level of water users was elevatedin a majority of the WDs. As the project overall achieved its project’s outputs and project purpose
throughout the project period (original and extension periods), no further extension of the project
would not be recommended.
However, the sustainability of the project is primarily challenged by the LWUA-WD corporate
relationships such that LWUA could not provide WDs free trainings, seminars or workshops like what
the project did. Although the present disposition of LWUA however does not guarantee that grantfunding be provided to small WDs for improving their facilities as well as their technical andmanagerial capacity, small WDs require a continuous assistance from LWUA as they are still
financially, technically, and institutionally unstable and therefore require a combined technical andfinancial assistance.
3-6 Recommendations(1) In order to enhance prospects for project sustainability, the evaluation team recommends that
LWUA strengthens the existing consultation mechanism between WDs and LWUA through theManagement Advisors. Through this mechanism, technology transfer process is continued through theservices of Management Advisors free of charge. The two Management Advisors assigned ascounterparts in this project may initiate organizational discussions to develop a framework forstrengthening such mechanism.
(2) It is also recommended that LWUA studies possibilities of establishing a guide for “bigbrother-small brother” or “sisterhood” relationships among small WDs.
(3) For the purpose of disseminating further the good practices produced by the project, it is likewise
recommended that LWUA studies the possibilities of inviting “improved” WD managers and O&M
staff to deliver lectures during training and seminars organized by LWUA.
(4) In line with LWUA’s social responsibility, it is suggested that LWUA continue providing mixed
grant and loan assistance to small WDs and study the possibility of giving incentives and institutional
advices to small WDs with demonstrated commitment to achieve better services and more efficientand effective management. Also in relation to this, it is recommended that LWUA study the possibilityof providing missionary or concessional loans with lower interest rates and more liberal terms e.g.,longer period of repayment.
3-7 Lessons Learned(1) For planning similar projects in the future
It is important that ownership of water sources be studied carefully in formulating improvement plans

Page | 11

of small WDs. In this project, a WD was forced to cease operations because of legal disputes over theownership of the only main water source the WD largely depend on for its water supply services.
(2) For implementing similar projects in the future
It is likewise important that indicators for “improved capability” of project counterparts andinstitutions be defined jointly at the inception stage of the project in order to objectively measureoutcomes of project interventions in later stages of project implementation. Along this line, it isnecessary to incorporate the “graduation strategy” (e.g., the “hows” of handing over the tasks of theJapanese experts to LWUA) and the envisaged policy recommendations in reviewing the project
design at the beginning and at the middle of project implementation. Dialogues between JICA and the
Implementing Agency (e.g., LWUA, and when necessary with oversight agencies) on such policy
recommendations can be conducted continuously in the course of project implementation.

Page | 12