Monitoring, Mapping and
Institutionalising Data
Lamin K.S. Souma: Acting Chief Engineer,
Water Supply Division
Ministry of Energy and Water Resources
Summary
• The Water Point Mapping survey provides
Sierra Leone with a “baseline” of the status of
Water Points (WP’s)
• Functional sustainability in service delivery
remains a major challenge
• The Government of Sierra Leone (GoSL) must
address gaps in coverage
• GoSL and WASH organisations must contribute
to keeping mapping data updated
Outcomes of the WPM baseline survey
• 28,845 “improved” WP’s mapped
• 18,908 “improved” WP’s are used. [65%]
• However 40% are seasonal WP’s
Therefore………
• 11, 212 WP’s are classed as improved, in use
and functioning all year round [39%]
Observations on the WPM survey
• The impacts of our interventions “do not last”
• Services provided are not cost effective
• The need for continued extended support to
communities is visible
• The need to address basics and construct wells at
the "right time of year“
• The need to safeguard against environmental
degradation – monitoring groundwater resources
• The importance of monitoring and ensuring
functionality
Seasonal variation in access
Wet season
Dry season
Benefits of WPM
• Provides visually mapped data for monitoring
the status of water points
• Highlights issues of equity, inclusiveness and
targeting
• Underpins Sector Performance Monitoring
(SPM)
• Will influence national and local level planning
• WPM database can be integrated with
hydrogeological database and other studies
Water Point Mapping…..next steps
• Sierra Leone now has a baseline for water point
coverage – the easy part
• Updating maps and addressing non functionality
is the major challenge
• Need for a WASH sector strategy to deliver
permanent services at national, regional and local
levels
• Need to improve sector monitoring and mapping
so that WPM informs National Sector Learning
Review
Five important considerations for WPM
1. WPM evidence should form the basis for
national and local level planning
2. Ensure technology choices aligned to field
capacities
3. WPM data needs to be collected, assimilated,
verified, analysed and presented
4. Updating process needs to be sustainable
5. Requires dedicated staff to report on the
status of water points
Sustainability (1)
Issues to address
• Technological challenges
and the use of GIS
• Procedures for collecting,
reporting and updating
WPM data
• Accountability challenges –
“collective action” to keep
WPM data updated
Sustainability (2)
Recommendations
• Ensure technology choices
are adapted to national and
local capacities
• Build capacity of
government to make use of
the WPM tools
• Use visually mapped data to
improve coverage levels and
address issues of
functionality
Sustaining a regular updating mechanism
1. Baseline survey
2. Data base
3. Mapping
4. Analysis
5. On-going data
collection at water
points
6. Data assimilation +
verification
7. Update data base
8. Update Mapping
9. Analysis
10. Sector Learning
review
11. Repeat steps 5 10
MEWR next steps…….
• Engage with MFED and DP’s to address gaps in
coverage
• Pursue models for keeping data updated
• Ensure the WASH sector plans for permanent
services from the outset
• Undertake a second national baseline survey in
2014
• Encourage all WASH organisations to monitor
functional sustainability - outcomes
Concluding comments
• There are many important issues to address at
national, local and organisational levels
• Mapping data is important, but other
monitoring data is also required
• Need to establish strong links between
monitoring, mapping and sector learning
• Need to deliver permanent services at
national, regional and local levels. This
underpins the planning role of SPCT
Thank you for listening!
Lamin Souma: Chief Engineer: Water Directorate MEWR