Over the 2011 to 2015 period, the UK government set itself the goal of providing 60 million people with clean water, improved sanitation or hygiene promotion interventions (a type of development assistance known collectively as WASH). In 2015 it reported that it had exceeded this target, reaching 62.9 million people. We conducted an impact review of DFID's WASH portfolio to identify whether its results claims were credible, and to explore whether programmes were doing all they could to maximise impact and value for money. The review concluded that UK aid has made a significant contribution to improving WASH access in low-income countries, and that its claim of reaching 62.9 million people is based on sound evidence. However, the review highlighted sustainability as an area of particular concern, with not enough being done to ensure that improved WASH access was becoming a permanent part of people's lives. It concluded that DFID needs to do more to address long-term problems like water security, maintenance of infrastructure, strengthening local institutions so they can manage services, and changing behaviour. It also found improvements are needed to ensure value for money – with a stronger focus on lifetime investment costs – and to target vulnerable people as well as hard-to-reach communities, in line with the Global Goals commitment to 'leave no one behind'. The review gave DFID a 'Green-Amber' rating, recognising the impressive results, but also underscoring the need to better maximise the impact and sustainability of UK aid in this important sector.
- The typical three to five years’ duration of DFID’s WASH programmes is often too short to put in place the conditions for sustainable impact. Furthermore, DFID does not monitor whether results are sustained beyond the life of its programmes.
- DFID does not apply a consistent approach for measuring value for money across its WASH portfolio, nor does it have credible benchmarks to help it to identify more or less efficient programmes. However, we saw specific examples where DFID had successfully improved value for money at the programme level.
- At the central level, DFID is a significant investor in WASH research and in improving data quality. At the programme level, lessons are captured through annual reviews and we saw good examples of programmes being adapted in response to lessons learned.
- DFID lacks strong mechanisms for collating and synthesizing lessons from its programmes and making them available to inform future investments. There could also be more shared learning between WASH and related areas such as health and education.
- The performance of DFID’s WASH portfolio warrants a Green-Amber rating. DFID has successfully achieved its WASH target and has made a substantial contribution to extending WASH access in low-income countries. However, it is not doing all it could to maximize impact or sustainability and the score reflects weaknesses in these areas.
WHAT TO READ NEXT
Published By
Copyright
- Copyright 2016 Crown. This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit www. nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government- licence/version/3