Philippine Sanitation Roadmap

PHILIPPINE SUSTAINABLE
SANITATION ROADMAP
APRIL 2010
Copyright @ 2010
by the Department of Health
All rights reserved. The use of this material is encouraged with

appropriate credit given to the copyright owner.
Published by:
Department of Health
San Lazaro Compound, Tayuman, Sta. Cruz, Manila,

Philippines
Tel no: 7438301 to 23

PREFACE
The preparation of the Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap comes at a time when the country is
preparing to put in place a new government in 2010. This document is one of the major milestones for
the sanitation sector which has long been neglected.The Roadmap is expected to serve as a guide for the
country to achieve universal sanitation coverage and shall be the basis for the formulation of sustainable
sanitation programs for at least three Medium Term Philippine Development Plans (2010-2028) and its
corresponding Medium Term Philippine Investment Plans.
The Department of Health (DOH), together with the National Economic and Development Authority
(NEDA) took leadership in the preparation of this roadmap through a multi-stakeholder and inter-agency
Technical Working Group that met and discussed the proposals and drafts prepared by the Project Study
Team. The Roadmap has recently been approved by the inter-agency Sub-Committee on Water Resources of the
National Economic Development Authority last February 6, 2010. The DOH is currently preparing its National
Sustainable Sanitation Plan based on this Roadmap. The Department of Interior and Local Government have
also adjusted their water and sanitation strategy to be aligned with the requirements of the Roadmap. It is strongly
recommended that all relevant agencies should follow suit by using the Roadmap as guide in preparing their respective
sanitation related programs.
The National Government is grateful to the World Health Organization (WHO) who provided financial
and technical assistance by supporting the workshops and consultants behind this document. We would
also like to commend the active participants of the Technical Working Group that invested time and
resources to produce this document that will lead the country in achieving our collective vision of “A clean
and healthy Philippines through safe and adequate sustainable sanitation for All!”
ESPERANZA CABRAL RUBEN REINOSO JR.

SECRETARY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR GENERAL
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH NATIONAL ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
AND CHAIRPERSON OF THE NEDA INFRACOM
SUB-COMMITTEE ON WATER RESOURCES
4

FOREWORD
The formulation of the Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap (PSSR) has been facilitated by the re-
cent publication of the Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap (PWSSR).The national government had
deliberately agreed to separate the preparation of the sanitation roadmap to give sanitation the necessary
focus that it deserves.
The PWSSR consultation process started in 2007 and one of its milestone achievement is the formalization
of the NEDA Infracom Sub-committee on Water Resources (NEDA INFRACOM-SCWR) tasked with
oversight and coordination functions over the water supply and sanitation sector. This is an inter-agency
body that monitors the implementation of the PWSSR and whose members were actively engaged as the
Technical Working Group of the PSSR.
The rapid decline of the quality of our water resources due to poor sanitation and the alarming number of
Filipinos who still have to resort to open defecation at this day and age is cause for urgent attention. The
economic losses due to poor sanitation can be felt not only in terms of health but also in livelihoods (such
as from declining fish yields and declining tourist occupancy in areas with high levels of coliform).
The Department of Health (DOH) has agreed to be the lead sector driver to push the sanitation agenda
of the country to contribute to the over-all vision of a clean and healthy Philippines. The Roadmap is the
basis for an inter-agency collaboration towards a common goal of safe and adequate sustainable sanitation
for all Filipinos.
While the PSSR had very limited time for broad consultations among different stakeholders at different
levels, it is envisioned that this document will serve as a platform for engaging policy makers, decision-
makers, program implementers, knowledge managers and sanitation service providers at national and local
levels. Different national and local agencies can find guidance from this document with regards to the
development, refinement and implementation of policy and programs relating to sustainable sanitation.
The PSSR document follows the basic structure of the PWSSR. Chapter 1 begins with an introduction,
the purpose of the document, the development framework, the scope and limitation of sanitation and
guiding principles behind the preparation of this document. Chapter 2 provides an overview of the
sanitation sector including an assessment of current access to sanitary toilet facilities, sewerage systems,
existing policies and legal frameworks and an analysis of gaps in terms of the policy environment, funding
levels, programs, technology, human resources, communications for behavioral change, sector planning,
monitoring, evaluation, environment, health and economic impacts and gender issues.
Chapter 3 presents the vision, development goals and logical framework of the PSSR. It defines the outcomes
and outputs of the five focus areas of the PSSR. These are significantly aligned with the four focus areas
of the PWSSR, wtih the exemption of the fifth concern on emergency sanitation. The PSSR outcomes are
consistent with the DOH’s FOURmula One for Health. FOURmula ONE for Health is the implementation
framework for health sector reforms in the Philippines designed to implement critical health interventions
as a single package, backed by effective management infrastructure and financing arrangements.
5
!
Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap
Outcomes Outcomes
Strenghtened Institutions Responsive Governance and Regulatory Strengthening
Improved Service Delivery through Communications
Developed Capacities
and Capacity Development
Strategic Alliances Strengthened Strategic Alliances
Adequate Infrastructure Provision Financing and Adequate Infrastructure Investments
Emergency Sanitation Response
Chapter 4 tackles the policy directions that need to be pursued and the recommended priority programs
to support the policy directive. It also provides a list of on-going and pipeline programs that directly
contribute to the priority programs. Some of these projects prioritize water supply over sanitation but it
nonetheless provides opportunities and entry points for sanitation projects. It also includes the investment
priorities for the 2010-2016 Medium Term Philippines Development Plan. Chapter 5 focuses on the
implementation arrangements including general oversight, management and supervision and the framework
for collaboration. Chapter 6 is about the results-based monitoring and evaluation system of the roadmap.
There will be a need to continually review progress of accomplishment vis-avis the PSSR. More detailed
annual plans and programs will be developed by the relevant agencies and stakeholders. It is sincerely hoped
that the PSSR development framework will permeate all sanitation related plans and programs and that there
will be more sanitation champions working together to achieve sustainable sanitation for all.
6
" # $ % $ & & $ ' ( ) * + , - $ ' - . % ( ) - ' $ , - , $ / ' 0 / - 1 2 - &
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The Department of Health Environment and Occupational Health Office (DOH-EOHO) spearheaded
the preparation of the Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap with the financial and technical support
from the World Health Organization. A Project Study Team headed by the Streams of Knowledge and
the Center for Advanced Philippine Studies was commissioned by the DOH to prepare the document in
consultation with the Sanitation Roadmap Technical Working Group.
The members of the Sanitation Roadmap Technical Working Group that participated in the different
meetings and provided comments are the following:
National Economic and Development Authority Solid Waste Association of the Philippines
Department of Interior and Local Government Philipine Sanitation Alliance
Department of Public Works and Highways Philippine Ecosan Network
Local Water Utilites Administration League of Municipalities
Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System League of Cities
National Anti-Poverty Commission Philippine Water Partnership
Department of Environment and Natural
Philippine Center for Water and Sanitation
Resources-Environment Management Bureau
National Water and Sanitation Association of the
National Water Resources Board
Philippines
National Housing Authority
Philippine Association of Water Districts
Department of Agrarian Reform
PLAN Philippines
Department of Education
Department of Finance World Health Organization
Local Government Academy German Technical Cooperation
Coffey International Lacto Asia Pacific Life

Philippine Society of Sanitary Engineers Habitat for Humanity
7
3 4 5 6 5 7 7 5 8 9 : ; < = > 5 8 > ? 6 9 : > 8 5 = > = 5 @ 8 A @ > B C > 7
ACRONYMS USED
ADB Asian Development Bank
ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations
BEC Basic Education Curriculum
BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand
BOT Build-Operate-Transfer
BWSA Barangay Water and Sanitation Association
CBMS Community-Based Monitoring System
CBO Community Based Organization
CDA Cooperative Development Authority
CEDAW Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women
CHD Center for Health Development
CIIP Comprehensive and Integrated Infrastructure Program
CPSO Central Planning for Sewerage Office
CRC Convention on the Rights of the Child
CSO Civil Society Organization
CWA Clean Water Act
DAR Department of Agrarian Reform
DBM Department of Budget and Management
DBP Development Bank of the Philippines
DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources
DepED Department of Education
DILG Department of the Interior and Local Government
DPWH Department of Public Works and Highways
DO Department Order
DOF Department of Finance
DOH Department of Health
DOST Department of Science and Technology
DM Department Memo
DSWD Department of Social Welfare and Development
DTI Department of Trade and Industry
EASAN East Asia Ministerial Conference on Sanitation
EMB Environmental Management Bureau
EO Executive Order
FHSIs Field Health Service Information System
GAA General Appropriations Act
GFI Government Financing Institution
GTZ German Technical Cooperation Agency
HLURB Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board
HUC Highly-Urbanized City
IACEH Inter-Agency Committee on Environmental Health
ICESCR International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
8
D E F G F H H F I J K L M N O F I O P G J K O I F N O N F Q I R Q O S T O H
IEC Information, Education and Communication
IP Indigenous Peoples
IRA Internal Revenue Allocation
IWRM Integrated Water Resource Management
JBIC Japan Bank for International Cooperation
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
JMP WHO and UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and
Sanitation
KALAHI- CIDSS Kapit-Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan – Comprehensive Integrated Delivery of Social
Services
LBP Land Bank of the Philippines
LCE Local Chief Executives
LGA Local Government Academy
LGU Local Government Unit
LLDA Laguna Lake Development Authority
LWUA Local Water Utilities Administration
MIPH Municipal Investment Plan for Health
MDFO Municipal Development Fund Office
MDG Millennium Development Goal
MMDA Metropolitan Manila Development Authority
MOA Memorandum of Agreement
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
MTPIP Medium-Term Philippine Investment Plan
MTPDP Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan
MWCI Manila Water Company, Inc.
MWSI Maynilad Water Services, Inc.
MWSS Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System
NAPC National Anti-Poverty Commission
NCIP National Commission on Indigenous Peoples
NEDA National Economic and Development Authority
NGA National Government Agency
NGO Non Government Organization
NSCB National Statistical Coordination Board
NSO National Statistics Office
NSSMP National Sewerage and Septage Management Program
NWRB National Water Resources Board
NSWMP National Solid Waste Management Plan
ODA Official Development Assistance
O&M Operations and Maintenance
P3W President’s Priority Program on Water
PCCI Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry
9
U V W X W Y Y W Z [ \ ] ^ _ ` W Z ` a X [ \ ` Z W _ ` _ W b Z c b ` d e ` Y
PD Presidential Decree
PD-TF WSS Philippine Development Forum-Task Force on Water Supply and Sanitation
PEM Philippine Environment Monitor
PEN Philippine Ecosan Network
PFSED Physical Facilities and Schools Engineering Division
PIPH Provincial Investment Plans for Health
PIME Project Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation
PMO Program Management Office
PO People’s Organization
PPA Programs, Projects and Activities
PPP Public Private Partnership
PSR Philippine Sanitation Roadmap
PW4SP Provincial Water Supply, Sewerage and Sanitation Sector Plan
PWRF Philippine Water Revolving Fund
PWSSR Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap
R&D Research and Development
RA Republic Act
RBME Results-based Monitoring and Evaluation
R/BWSA Rural/Barangay Water and Sanitation Association
SCWR Sub Committee on Water Resources
SE Sanitary Engineering
SI Sanitary Inspectors
SME Small and Medium Enterprises
SSP Sanitation Service Provider
SuSEA Sustainable Sanitation in East Asia Program
SuSEP Sustainable Sanitation Education Program
TWG Technical Working Group
UN United Nations
UNDP United Nations Development Program
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
USAID United States Agency for International Development
WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene
WATSAN Water supply and sanitation
WB World Bank
WD Water District
WHO World Health Organization
WPEP Water Supply and Sanitation Performance Enhancement Project
WSP Water and Sanitation Program of the World Bank
WSSPMO Water Supply and Sanitation Program Management Office
10
f g h i h j j h k l m n o p q h k q r i l m q k h p q p h s k t s q u v q j
CONTENTS
PREFACE ........................................................................................................................................3
FOREWORD ..................................................................................................................................4
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...............................................................................................................6
ACRONYMS USED ........................................................................................................................7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 13
1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................ 18
1.1 PURPOSE OF THE SUSTAINABLE SANITATION ROADMAP .............................. 18
1.2 DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK AND PRINCIPLES ............................................... 19
1.2.1 DEFINITION OF SANITATION CONCEPTS .................................................... 19
1.2.2 SCOPE OF THE SANITATION ROADMAP ....................................................... 19
1.2.3 GUIDING PRINCIPLES ........................................................................................ 19
2.0 OVERVIEW OF THE SANITATION SECTOR ................................................................... 24
2.1 CURRENT SITUATION ................................................................................................ 24
2.1.1 SANITARY TOILET FACILITIES ......................................................................... 24
2.1.2 SEWERAGE SYSTEMS........................................................................................... 27
2.1.3 SANITATION CRISIS IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS .................................... 27
2.2 GOVERNANCE AND LEGAL FRAMEWORKS........................................................... 28
2.2.1 LOCAL AND NATIONAL AGENCIES WITH SANITATION RELATED

MANDATES ............................................................................................................ 28
2.2.2 UPDATING AND MAINSTREAMING LOCAL AND NATIONALSANITATION

PROGRAMS ............................................................................................................. 29
2.2.3 RELEVANT LAWS AND POLICIES IN THE SECTOR ..................................... 29
2.3 ANALYSIS OF GAPS ....................................................................................................... 30
2.3.1 THE POLICY ENVIRONMENT .......................................................................... 30
2.3.2 FUNDING LEVELS AND FINANCING OF SANITATION ............................. 32
2.3.3 PROGRAMS ............................................................................................................ 33
11
w x y z y { { y | } ~ y | z } ~ | y y | {
2.3.4 TECHNOLOGY ...................................................................................................... 34
2.3.5 HUMAN RESOURCES........................................................................................... 34
2.3.6 COMMUNICATION FOR BEHAVIORAL CHANGE ........................................ 35
2.3.7 SECTOR PLANNING ........................................................................................... 35
2.3.8 MONITORING AND EVALUATION (INCLUDING SECTOR BASELINE

INDICATORS) ...................................................................................................................... 36
2.3.9 ENVIRONMENT/HEALTH AND ECONOMIC IMPACT .............................. 36
2.3.10 GENDER ISSUES IN SANITATION ................................................................. 37
2.4 SUMMARY OF ISSUES AND CHALLENGES ............................................................. 37
3.0 VISION AND DEVELOPMENT GOALS ............................................................................. 42
3.1 VISION STATEMENT................................................................................................... 42
3.2 OUTCOMES AND OUTPUTS ....................................................................................... 44
3.2.1RESPONSIVE SANITATION GOVERNANCE AND REGULATORY

STRENGTHENING ............................................................................................................. 44
3.2.2 IMPROVED SERVICE DELIVERY THROUGH COMMUNICATIONS AND

CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................................. 44
3.2.3 STRENGTHENED STRATEGIC ALLIANCES................................................... 46
3.2.4 FINANCING AND ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS ........ 47
3.2.5 EMERGENCY SANITATION RESPONSE ......................................................... 48
3.2.6 SUMMARY OF EXPECTED OUTPUTS: ............................................................. 49
3.3 ROADMAP LOGICAL FRAMEWORK ......................................................................... 49
4.0 ROADMAP PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES ................................................... 59
4.1 POLICY DIRECTIONS ................................................................................................. 60
4.2 PROPOSED PRIORITY PROGRAMS IN THE SANITATION SECTOR .................. 66
4.3 ONGOING AND PIPELINE PROGRAMS ................................................................... 72
4.4 MEDIUM TERM OPERATIONAL PLAN (2010-2016) ............................................... 81
4.5 INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS OF THE SANITATION SECTOR .................... 89
4.6 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE MTPDP 2010-2016 ............................................... 90
5.0 IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS ......................................................................... 92
12

5.4 FRAMEWORK OF COLLABORATION ....................................................................... 95
5.5 MECHANISMS AND PROCESSES ............................................................................... 96
6.0 RESULTS-BASED MONITORING AND EVALUATION ................................................100
ENDNOTES ................................................................................................................................107
ANNEXES ...................................................................................................................................109
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................126
ANNEXES:
ANNEX 1. WATER QUALITY HOTSPOTS IN THE PHILIPPINES
ANNEX 2. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES WITH SANITATION-RELATED RESPONSIBILITIES
ANNEX 3. GUIDE TO DEVELOPING LOCAL SUSTAINABLE SANITATION PLANS
ANNEX 4. RELEVANT SANITATION LAWS AND POLICIES
ANNEX 5. LIST OF EXISTING, UNDER-CONSTRUCTION AND PLANNED SEWERAGE FACILITIES
ANNEX 6. INVENTORY OF AVAILABLE SANITATION TECHNOLOGIES
ANNEX 7. SUSTAINABILITY CRITERIA FOR SANITATION
LIST OF TABLES:
TABLE 1. SURVEYS USED FOR THE ANALYSIS OF SANITATION COVERAGE
TABLE 2. SANITATION COVERAGE 1990 AND 2008
TABLE 3. AN OVERVIEW OF THE ECONOMIC COSTS OF NOT DOING SANITATION
TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF ISSUES IN THE PHILIPPINE SANITATION SECTOR
TABLE 5. SUMMARY OF EXPECTED OUTPUTS
TABLE 6. SANITATION ROADMAP LOGFRAME
TABLE 7. POLICY DIRECTIONS AND PROGRAMS 2010-2028
TABLE 8. SANITATION ROADMAP OPERATIONAL PLAN 2010-2016
TABLE 9. SUMMARY OF INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR 2010-2016
TABLE 10. PROPOSED SANITATION SUB-SECTOR MEMBERS
TABLE 11. DETAILED EVALUATION PLAN MATRIX
TABLE 12. RESULTS-BASED MONITORING PLAN MATRIX
LIST OF FIGURES:
FIGURE 1. MEETING THE MDG SANITATION TARGETS
FIGURE 2. NATIONAL AGENCIES WITH CLEAR SANITATION RELATED MANDATES
FIGURE 3. PROPORTION OF HOUSEHOLDS WITH SANITARY TOILETS, 2008 ENVIRONMENTAL
HEALTH DATA
FIGURE 4. SANITATION ROADMAP DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK
FIGURE 5. PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION STRUCTURE
FIGURE 6. FRAMEWORK OF COLLABORATION
13
¡ ¢ £ ¤ ¤ ¥ ¤ £ ¤ £ ¦ § ¦ ¤ ¨ © ¤
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap (PSSR) presents the vision, goals, outcomes, outputs,
activities and inputs required to make sustainable sanitation a reality in the country. It builds on the collective
analysis of the sector through a multi stakeholder process with active representation from government,
non-government and civil society using available information to come up with the agreed framework.
From the start of this activity, a process of multi-stakeholder dialogues was organized with the Technical
Working Group and other interested stakeholders to generate ideas, comments and buy-in from the agencies
concerned.
The result is an inter-agency sanitation roadmap framework and action plan. It is recommended that all
pertinent national agencies and local government units develop their own sanitation plans and programs
based on the proposals put forward in this roadmap and allocate the corresponding budgets required to
implement the same.
The development of the PSSR is spearheaded by the Department of Health (DOH) with the National
Economic Development Authority (NEDA) as co-chair. The World Health Organization (WHO) has
provided financial and technical support for this activity. A team of experts from Streams of Knowledge
and the Center for Advanced Philippine Studies served as consultants to this project.
SECTOR OVERVIEW
While the WHO-UNICEF Joint Monitoring Program (JMP) reports that the Philippines is on track
in meeting its MDG targets of halving the proportion of households with sanitary toilets, DOH Field
Health Information Survey report, however, indicated that coverage is actually declining. From the 1990
baseline of 67%, the MDG target is 84%. In 2008, the Environmental Health Report says we have reached
76.8%. DOH’s National Objectives for Health (NOH) targets 91% in 2010. It is clear that the country
will not meet its NOH targets. While the MDG goals are about access to sanitary toilets, the issue on the
quality of toilets such as bottomless septic tanks and lack of adequate septage management still needs
to be addressed. Achieving universal sanitation coverage may not happen unless there is a clear sanitation
intervention program that will be supported on a national level.
A World Bank report estimated that the country is losing Php 3.3 Billion per year in avoidable health costs;
Php 16.7 Billion due to degradation of fisheries environment and Php 47 Billion in avoidable losses in
tourism due to lack of sanitation.
Clearly, sanitation governance is about institutional strengthening. There are many institutions with
sanitation related mandates but the leadership required to push efficient, effective and sustainable sanitation
programs is lacking. Sanitation regulation is a major issue that needs to be addressed. There are many laws
and standards relating to sanitation and wastewater management but it needs to be integrated and updated.
Mandates on implementing and monitoring policy implementation remain vague. Furthermore, there is
low LGU awareness and political will to improve sanitation . To date, there are only about 15 LGUs who
have initiated sanitation plans and programs. Effective service delivery is hampered by lack of capacities,
inadequate communication strategies and low investments in sanitation. The recent calamities that affected
the country also highlighted the need to address the sanitation crisis in emergency situations.
14
ª « ¬ ¬ ® ® ¬ ¯ ° ± ² ³ ´ µ ¬ ¯ µ ¶ ° ± µ ¯ ¬ ´ µ ´ ¬ · ¯ ¸ · µ ¹ º µ ®
SECTOR ISSUES AND CHALLENGES
The Philippine sanitation sector remains a highly fragmented sector mainly due to a weak regulatory
arrangements for sanitation and wastewater management. Meeting the universal coverage for
sustainable sanitation is not likely to happen unless there is a clear national sanitation policy and
program effectively manage by a lead institution ably supported by an alliance of champions for
sanitation to facilitate demand creation and access to resources at national and local levels. It is apparent
that there is low awareness and political will to implement sanitation program at the local level. This is
further exacerbated by service delivery related issues such as the inadequacy of capacities to facilitate
sustainable sanitation including low multi stakeholder involvement. As there is no separate and distinct
sanitation program, there is very low investments for sanitation. It is always considered an adjunct to
water programs resulting in sanitation receiving merely 3% of total investment for water infrastructure.
The recent typhoons and the expected impact of climate change poses additional burden to sanitation,
in particular responding to emergency situations.
VISION AND STRATEGIES
The Sustainable Sanitation Sector vision is “A Clean and Healthy Philippines through safe, adequate
and sustainable sanitation for All!”
The sector vision looks at universal access to safe and adequate sanitation as a human right, sustainably
linked with health, agriculture and environment with households and whole community working
together for a common good.
The Roadmap envisions that:

• By 2015, a strong and vibrant sanitation sector shall have achieved the MDG target of halving
the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic
sanitation
• By 2016, the following have been achieved:
- At least 70% of LGUs have local sanitation plans and budgets in place under their PIPH/
AIPH/CIPH plans
- Improved basic sanitation coverage in 92 priority cities/provinces by ensuring that at least 85%
of population have sanitary toilets
- Sewerage and/or septage management in 57 highly urbanized cities (NSSMP targets)
- National agencies such as DOH, DILG, DAR, DSWD, NHA, LWUA, DENR, DA and DOT
have clear sanitation policies, plans and programs consistent with the sanitation roadmap.
By 2028, that universal access (100%) to safe and adequate sanitary facilities have been provided, that
behavior change and proper hygiene practices are accepted norms within families and communities,
and that mechanisms for sustainable sanitation (i.e. linkage with health, agriculture and environment)
are institutionalized.
The achievement of the sanitation sector vision is hinged on the following strategies: a) responsive
sanitation governance and regulatory strengthening; b) improved service delivery through
communications and capacity development; c) strengthened strategic alliances among multi stakeholder
groups; d) financing and adequate infrastructure investments; and e) emergency sanitation response.
15
» ¼ ½ ¾ ½ ¿ ¿ ½ À Á Â Ã Ä Å Æ ½ À Æ Ç ¾ Á Â Æ À ½ Å Æ Å ½ È À É È Æ Ê Ë Æ ¿
ROADMAP PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES
Each of the five strategies developed to address the multi faceted challenges besetting the sanitation
sector is translated into a cluster of related priority programs and activities directly supporting a specific
policy directive. These programs will pursue the much needed policy reforms to enable the sector
institutions to perform their mandates effectively ensuring that sanitation sector goals are achieved.
The Sanitation Roadmap priority programs and activities are planned for long term, specifically, within
the context of three (3) MTPDP period, 2010 to 2028.
For the short term period covering 2010 to 2013, a total of 18 priority programs has been identified.
These include, among others, the formulation of frameworks for sanitation at the different levels of
governance; capacity development of stakeholders including Research and Development; a national
campaign for zero open defecation and national advocacy program on sanitation; as well as a number
of studies that would facilitate and ensure a comprehensive infrastructure and investment program on
sanitation including sanitation for emergency situations.
INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS
A total estimate of Php 87 Billion is required to support the 6 years action plan proposed by the
roadmap. This includes both MDG requirements and the financing requirements for the NSSMP. To
meet the MDGs in a sustainable way, national government should invest more in communications and
hygiene promotion targetting behavior change to motivate households to invest in constructing their
own sanitary latrines. Access to innovative incentive schemes and financing strategies maybe utilized
to encourage each of the 46,000 barangays to eradicate open defecation and target to have 100%
coverage. At the minimum, at least 15 of the households without access to their own latrines must be
assisted annually for the next six years to achieve the MDG goals.
IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS
The Roadmap brings together institutions from government, civil society and the private sector engaged
in sanitation-related activities in order to establish coherence, pool resources and promote coordination
and collaboration within a constrained institutional environment. That being the case, the general
oversight, overall policy guidance and steering of the Roadmap shall be exercised by the NEDA Board
through the Sub-Committee on Water Resources (SCWR) of the NEDA Infrastructure Committee
(INFRACOM). The NEDA INFRACOM-SCWR shall be assisted by a Secretariat composed of
representatives from NEDA INFRACOM Staff, the NWRB and the DOH. A sanitation committee
under the NEDA INFRACOM-SCWR will be established to be led by the DOH. The agencies of the
Sectoral Task Force in Sanitation of the Inter-Agency committee on Environmental Health will be
members of the sanitation committee of the SCWR.
DOH will act as lead driver for the sanitation sector. This will be led by the Environmental and
Occupational Health Office of National Center for Disease Prevention and Control of the DOH. The
LGUs are expected to be the lead implementers of sanitation programs at local level.
RESULTS-BASED MONITORING AND EVALUATION
The implementation of the Philippine Sanitation Roadmap will be monitored and evaluated using the
Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation (RBME) System which is integral to the sector institutions
and its related activities that are integrated into the agency annual plans and other work plans of
several institutions involved in the sector. The central RBME function will be lodged at the SCWR.
Monitoring activities and evaluation shall be decentralized to the national implementing agencies, local
government units and sanitation service providers based on the central monitoring and evaluation
16
Ì Í Î Ï Î Ð Ð Î Ñ Ò Ó Ô Õ Ö × Î Ñ × Ø Ï Ò Ó × Ñ Î Ö × Ö Î Ù Ñ Ú Ù × Û Ü × Ð
INTRODUCTION
1.0 INTRODUCTION
A roadmap is a living document that can capture and synthesize experience, innovation and new insights
over time. Roadmap development should integrate existing experience with other approaches which include
general strategies for sector development. Implementation of roadmaps should be properly monitored
to maintain political commitment by national governments and the international community. This is not
a master plan but is a source for inputs to the master plan. The roadmap is also a process that includes
dialogues with different stakeholders towards levelling of awareness and mobilization towards a concerted
and collaborative action.
The Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap has recently been published after three years of multi-
stakeholder consultations. From the beginning, it was the intention of the water sector to formulate a
separate sanitation sector roadmap as the key sector stakeholders understood the magnitude, gravity and
urgency to address the sanitation challenges separately from water supply.
1.1 PURPOSE OF THE SUSTAINABLE SANITATION ROADMAP
This sanitation roadmap is expected to provide the framework to achieve the following:
a) Identify priorities and targets for the MTPDP 2010-2016 targets
b) Attainment of the 2015 MDG commitments
c) Provide basis for adequate institutional arrangements
d) Create demand and generate financing on sanitation
e) Ensure sustainability of sanitation systems
The Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap (PSSR) intends to consider the full spectrum of
sanitation challenges relating to excreta management such as ending open defecation and managing
sewage from markets, agriculture, industry and other point sources and non-point sources of water
pollution. It will provide the umbrella framework that links all the other initiatives (such as solid
waste, for instance) relating to the broader sustainable sanitation framework. It will specifically
build on the following initiatives:
a) The National Sewerage and Septage Management Program (NSSMP)
The NSSMP’s primary focus is the larger infrastructure projects that local implementers (mainly
LGUs, Water Districts, and private service providers/utilities) will develop to collect and treat
wastewater from densely populated urban centers.
b) The National Urban Development and Housing Plan ( NUDHP)
The NUDHP housing plan is the development of low cost housing including the construction
of household level toilets and community sanitation facilities.
19
Ý Þ ß à ß á á ß â ã ä å æ ç è ß â è é à ã ä è â ß ç è ç ß ê â ë ê è ì í è á
1.2 DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK AND PRINCIPLES
1.2.1 Definition Of Sanitation Concepts
For purposes of this roadmap document, sanitation and sustainable sanitation are defined
as follows:
Sanitation 1
• Sanitation refers to a wide range of services and arrangements pertaining to the hygienic
and proper management of human excreta (feces and urine) and community liquid
wastes to safeguard the health of individuals and communities.
• It is concerned with preventing diseases by hindering pathogens or disease-causing
organisms found in excreta and sewage from entering in the environment and coming
into contact with people and communities.
• This usually involves the construction of adequate handling, collection, treatment and
disposal or reuse facilities and the promotion of proper hygiene behaviour so that
facilities are effectively used at all times.
Sustainable Sanitation 2
A sustainable sanitation refers to a system that protects and promotes human health, does
not contribute to environmental degradation or depletion of the resource base, is technically
and institutionally appropriate, economically viable and socially acceptable. (Please refer to
Annex 1 for details of the sustainability critiera).
1.2.2 Scope of the Sanitation Roadmap
While sanitation would generally refer to all actions taken to protect humans from illness,
the transmission of disease, or loss of life due to unclean surroundings, the presence of
disease transmitting insects or rodents, unhealthful conditions or practices in the preapration
of food and beverage, or the care of personal belongings, it was agreed by the Technical
Working Group to limit the purview of the roadmap to human excreta management ( both
offsite and onsite) regardless of where it is generated.
While the collection and disposal of sewage is briefly covered, details relating to this are
reflected in the proposed National Sewerage and Septage Management Program (NSSMP)
whose targets and investments are made part of this document. This would not however,
include solid waste management as this is already fully developed and budgetted under the
Solid Waste Management Act. Moreover, this would not include industrial/hospital waste
other than the human excreta generated in these settings.
1.2.3 Guiding Principles
The Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap supports the integrated water resources
management framework 3 of the Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap. It is also
guided by the Philippine Integrated Water Resources Management Plan Framework 4.
The PSSR builds on ten guiding principles that respond to the direction of
sustainable sanitation:
1. Sanitation is a human right, a social and economic good.
2. Sanitation is essential for basic health and dignity of the person.
3. Sanitation policies, plans and programs must be localized and its management
decentralized at the lowest level possible.
20
î ï ð ñ ð ò ò ð ó ô õ ö ÷ ø ù ð ó ù ú ñ ô õ ù ó ð ø ù ø ð û ó ü û ù ý þ ù ò
4. Sanitation is everybody’s business and different stakeholders must be involved
in promoting good sanitation and hygiene practices.
5. Sanitation systems must be financially sustainable, economically affordable,
socially and culturally acceptable.
6. Good sanitation contributes to environmental sustainability and penalizes
polluters.
7. Sanitation services must be demand responsive. This includes consideration
of appropriate technology and management options at various levels.
8. Proper resource conservation, re-use, recycle and recovery of sanitation by-
products will be considered.
9. Access to sanitation should be equitable and sensitive to gender differences.
10. Efficient water governance includes sanitation.
1. Sanitation is a human right, a social and an economic good.

There are a number of international agreements that form the legal basis of recognizing
that sanitation is a human right. For instance, in March 2008, the UN Human Rights
Council adopted a resolution emphasizing that international human rights laws, including
the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) ratified
by 158 countries, The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women ( CEDAW) entail
obligations in relation to access to sanitation 5.
Addressing sanitation as a human right moves the focus from technical solutions to
ensuring that the political and legislative frameworks are in place to ensure access to
sanitation. Governments have an obligation to respect, protect and fulfil the right using
the maximum of resources to progressively realize that right. They must help facilitate
access by ensuring appropriate standards regulations are in place to assist individuals
in constructing and maintaining toilets; government must promote the right through
hygiene education and promotion, and where individuals or groups are unable to
provide sanitation for themselves, governments must provide the necessary assistance.
These rights however, does NOT require governments to provide free construction of
household toilets, sewage or latrine desludging services and provide sewerage services
for everyone. Government should facilitate sewerage systems, wastewater facilities and
other communal sanitation facilities that are for the general welfare of the people as it
promotes the best interests of the community, rather than the private household.
2. Sanitation is essential for basic health and dignity of each citizen.
Health safety is the primordial objective of sanitation. The hygienic means of preventing
human contact from the hazards of wastes to promote health is linked to the dignity
of the person and the community as a whole. Cleanliness is a sign of a dignified and
respectable person.
3. Sanitation policies, plans and programs must be localized and its management
decentralized at the lowest level possible.
The local governments are in the forefront of basic service delivery, including sanitation.
Local sanitation ordinances consistent with national policy guidelines must be the basis
of plans and programs that are developed and implemented at various levels- from
households to communities to barangays to municipalities and cities.
21
ÿ

4. Sanitation is everybody’s business and different stakeholders must be involved
in promoting good sanitation and hygiene practices.
Sanitation is not the sole responsibility of the government. Each household, community,
local government, private sector and civil society have significant roles to play at home,
in school, in workplaces, and in public places. Success is more likely if there is proper
and informed participatory decision making processes at various levels.
5. Sanitation systems must be financially sustainable and economically affordable,
socially and culturally acceptable.
The cost of construction, operation and maintenance of sanitation facilities and
infrastructures must be reasonably priced taking into consideration affordability and
capacity to pay of the user/host/owner, be it the household, the community, subdivision,
institution, water district or local government unit.
Sanitation facilities and services must also be suitable and acceptable to the different social and
cultural groups with distinct beliefs and practices especially among the different indigenous
peoples.
6. Good sanitation contributes to environmental sustainability and penalizes
polluters.
Good sanitation refers to improved facilities and infrastructures that are designed, built,
used, operated and maintained in the way that they do not adversely affect the integrity
and ecology of the surrounding environment. It enables people to avoid polluting.
In keeping with the Polluter’s pay principle, polluters shall be responsible and held
accountable for either the reparation of damages done or actions required to mitigate
or prevent damages to the natural environment will be upheld.
7. Sanitation services must be demand responsive. This includes consideration of
appropriate technology and management options at various levels.
Sanitation facilities must adapt well to local geo-physical characteristics,e.g. availability
of water supply, groundwater table, soil structure and variability among others. It can
start from informed choices of households and the communities. It must be easy to
construct, operate and maintain by local manpower and expertise. As much as possible,
locally available materials are utilized.
However, technologies need not be static. Facilities should be upgraded according to
demand and local capacity to operate and maintain properly.
8. Proper resource conservation, recycling and recovery of sanitation by- products
will be considered.
Sanitation facilities must incorporate systems that use less energy, water, land and
human resources. Sanitation system designers must also consider the productive and
hygienic recovery of resource, for instance, biogas production; treated wastewater for
irrigation; source-separated urine and faeces, and treated sewage sludge as fertilizer or
soil conditioner.
9. Access to sanitation should be equitable and sensitive to gender differences.
Sanitation programs should consciously address the strategic and practical needs of
poor men and women. Sensitivity to the different needs of women and men must be
considered. Implementation of any sanitation related program should empower the
poor and marginalized women and men in decision making, in planning, implementing,
monitoring and evaluating the programs.
22

10. Efficient water governance includes sanitation.
Water supply provision generates wastewater. It contributes to the volume of sewage
that have to be treated. As water supply services improve, so should sanitation facilities
be upgraded. Water service providers should work closely with the local governments
in developing and maintaining community sanitation facilities such as sewerage systems.
Tariffs and cost recovery for sanitation may be linked to water supply service delivery.
Regulation of water service delivery should consider appropriate tariffs for sanitation
interventions.
23
! " # $ # % % # & ' ( ) * + , # & , - $ ' ( , & # + , + # . & / . , 0 1 , %
2.0 OVERVIEW OF THE SANITATION SECTOR
2.0 OVERVIEW OF THE SANITATION SECTOR
This section provides a brief analysis of the sanitation sector based on the review of related literature.
It starts with the most current available data 6 on sanitation in terms of access and coverage and over-all
national situation, a presentation of existing institutional and legal frameworks and the key institutional
players and their mandates to better appreciate the main structure of sanitation governance in the
country. It then proceeds to present the gaps in terms of policy environment, funding levels, programs,
service coverage, technology, communication for behavioural change, institutional set-up, sector planning
monitoring/evaluation system including sector baseline indicators, human resource, environment/health/
economic impact.
2.1 CURRENT SITUATION

2.1.1 Sanitary Toilet Facilities
The Millennium Development Goal and the Joint Monitoring Program of the WHO and
UNICEF define access to basic sanitation as the proportion of population that uses an
improved sanitation facility, urban and rural. An improved sanitation facility is “a facility
that hygienically separates human waste from human contact 7.”
There are two agencies in the Philippines conducting household surveys systematically,
which include questions and response categories addressing sanitation coverage: the NSO
and the DOH. The methodologies used by both differ fundamentally in that while the NSO
conducts different household surveys including the national census, each designed to attain
its own purposes (e.g. poverty, demography and health, national census, etc) the DOH
conducts its survey systematically to address health issues. While the surveys of NSO are
conducted through personnel trained on an ad hoc basis according to the requirements
of each specific survey, the DOH uses LGU health personnel, who complete the DOH
forms annually as one of their multiple health functions. Both systems have advantages and
disadvantages but this discussion is not within the scope of this document.
Considering that no single survey would be able to provide absolute true numbers, this
document adopted the following approach to estimate coverage in the Philippines:
Definition of sanitary facility
Consistently with NSO and DOH definitions, the following types of sanitation facilities are
considered as sanitary in this document:
• Water-sealed, sewer/septic tank, used exclusively by household;
• Water-sealed, other depository, used exclusively by household;
• Closed pit used exclusively by household.
25
2 3 4 5 4 6 6 4 7 8 9 : ; < = 4 7 = > 5 8 9 = 7 4 < = < 4 ? 7 @ ? = A B = 6
The following types of sanitation facilities/practises are considered as unsanitary:
• Water-sealed, sewer/septic tank, shared with other households;
• Water-sealed, other depository, shared with other households;
• Closed pit shared;
• Open pit;
• Hanging toilets;
• Other unsanitary types of practise;
• Open defecation.
Method of calculation
The surveys considered in this analysis are those that allow a disaggregation of urban and
rural areas. The results of the different surveys are converted into data points covering the
period of time from 1990 to 2008. A trend line obtained through linear regression provides
the coverage estimates for 1990 and 2008 for urban and rural areas. The surveys used for
this analysis were those conducted by the NSO as indicated in Table 1 below. The surveys
conducted by DOH (FHSIS) were not considered as they do not allow disaggregation of
urban and rural areas. However, the figures resulting from this analysis are mostly consistent
with those originated by the FHSIS.
Table 1. Surveys Used for the Analysis of Sanitation Coverage

National Census 1990
National Demographic and Health Survey 1993
Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 1996
World Health Survey 2003
Table 2 below includes the coverage estimates for the Philippines based on the
consolidated analysis of the above surveys:
Table 2: Sanitation Coverage 1990 and 2008
Total Urban Rural

Indicator
1990 2008 1990 2008 1990 2008
Population (thousands) 62,427 90,348 30,450 58,699 31,978 31,649
Proportion of population served with sanitary 58 76 70 80 46 69
types of facilities (not shared) (%)
Proportion of population served with sanitary 11 15 14 16 9 14
types of facilities (shared) (%)
Proportion of population not served with 31 9 16 4 45 17
sanitary types of facilities (%)
a) Served with unsanitary facilities (%) 15 1 8 0 22 3
b) Open defecation (%) 16 8 8 4 23 14
It is clear that there has been considerable progress in the Philippines over the last 18
years. However, it is also clear that a lot remains to be achieved. About one quarter of the
26
C D E F E G G E H I J K L M N E H N O F I J N H E M N M E P H Q P N R S N G
population is still not served with individual sanitary types of sanitation facilities. Open
defecation is still practised by 14% of the rural population and 4% of the urban population
respectively. This means that every single day probably 10 million Philippine citizens defecate
in the open, with serious consequences to the health, dignity and human development of
this equally important part of the national population.
Although the projections towards 2015, the year for which the MDG sanitation target is set,
indicate that the 79% target might be achieved for the Philippines (see Figure 1 below), local
experts are not confident that “sanitary” toilets necessarily refer to satisfactory sanitation
under a health and social standpoint. Many of the existing toilets do not have proper septic
tanks and drain to unsafe places. They may not be properly maintained and the cleanliness
may be dubious.
Figure 1. Meeting the MDG Sanitation Targets
100
90
83
80 76 79
70
60 58 Change in total coverage 1990-

Coverage (%)
2008
Projected change in total coverage
50
2008-2015
Change in total coverage required
40 to achieve the MDG
30
20
10
0
1990 2008 2015
Year (projected)
27
T U V W V X X V Y Z [ \ ] ^ _ V Y _ ` W Z [ _ Y V ^ _ ^ V a Y b a _ c d _ X
Moreover, achieving the target means that in 2015, one of five people in the Philippines
will still be unserved.
Achieving universal coverage figures (100% of households with sanitary toilets) is highly
uncertain. The analysis of the different surveys conducted in this country, indicated that in
urban areas, universal coverage will only be achieved 33 years from now, whereas in rural
areas it would be achieved 22 years from now if the current coverage trend continues. The
uncertainty is aggravated by the recent disasters that hit the country and probably damaged
substantively existing sanitation facilities.
2.1.2 Sewerage Systems
The country’s sewage generally discharges into open water bodies contributing heavily to
the pollution of our water sources. There are very few sewerage systems in the country with
less than 10% of the population having access to sewerage 8 system, the rest are assumed
to drain in open waters resulting to exposure of the general public to raw sewage. In Metro
Manila alone, only 7% has access to piped sewerage . There are reportedly a number of
villages and condominiums with small treatment plants, but no national agency have this
kind of information.
Many drainage systems that exist in town centers are usually open earth canals with few concrete
lined canals. All drainage canals discharge into rivers and creeks that traverse the towns.
The Philippine Environment Monitor (PEM) of 20039 has reported that up to 58% of the
country’s groundwater intended for drinking water is microbiologically contaminated with
coliform. About 64% of the rivers present Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) exceed
drinking water criteria. Nearly 2.2 million metric tons of organic pollution is produced
annually by domestic (48%), agricultural (37%), and industrial (15%) sectors. Untreated
wastewater affects health by spreading disease-causing bacteria, pathogens and viruses, and
makes water unfit for drinking and recreational use, threatens biodiversity, and deteriorates
overall quality of life. Furthermore, approximately 31 percent of illnesses monitored for a
five year period were caused by water-borne sources. Known diseases caused by poor water
quality, sanitation and hygiene practices include gastro-enteritis, diarrhea, typhoid, cholera,
dysentery, hepatitis A. The PEM has also identified the Water Quality hotspots of the
country (see Annex 1).
The MWSS 2009 reports that through its private concessionaires, it now has a total of 42
wastewater facilities covering 13 cities and 24 municipalities in Metro Manila, Rizal and
Cavite. The private concessionaires have expanded treatment capacity and sewerage coverage.
Manila Water ( MWCI) has a treatment capacity of over 90 MLD with an equivalent of
326,000 population sewered. Maynilad (MWSI) on the other hand has a treatment capacity
of over 470 MLD with about 552,000 population sewered. Due to the fact that most
households (HHs) use septic tanks, the concessionaires boosted its desludging operations.
Manila water reports that it has desludged almost 5 out of 10 HHs. They are now using a
combined sewer-drainage system linked to their wastewater treatment plants.
An inventory of existing sewerage facilities may be found in Annex 2. According to a WB
report 10 while these facilities and a couple of private facilities constructed by middle and
high end subdivision developers have increased sewerage coverage, the actual impact of
these facilities maybe negligible. Service coverage expansion in the past 30 years have been
overtaken by rapid urbanization and population growth, with increased deterioration and
degradation of receiving waters.
2.1.3 Sanitation Crisis in Emergency Situations
During the recent Typhoons Ondoy, Pepeng and Santi, one of the most problematic issue that
confronted the government was that of sanitation crisis in emergency situations. Sanitation
and hygiene promotion were identified as critical both during relief and rehabilitation
28
e f g h g i i g j k l m n o p g j p q h k l p j g o p o g r j s r p t u p i
phases due to increasing cases of water borne diseases, health risks due to open defecation,
ground water contamination and the generally unsanitary condition in evacuations centers
and resettlement areas. After almost 2 months of the typhoon, several towns continue to be
under water making it necessary for families to be moved to evacuation centers, relocation
areas as well as temporary or permanent resettlement areas. In some evacuation centers, the
toilet to population ratio is 1: 116 whereas the ideal is 1:20. In such cases, it is the women
and children that are most affected.
Clearly, there is a an urgent need to develop clear sanitation policies and programs for
emergency situations. As impacts of climate change in terms of frequent flooding, inundation
and other water induced calamities are expected to increase, it is of utmost importance that
sanitation for emergency situations be given high priority.
2.2 GOVERNANCE AND LEGAL FRAMEWORKS

2.2.1 Local and National Agencies with Sanitation Related Mandates
Under the Local Government Code (1991), LGUs at various levels have their sanitation
related mandates. For the provincial and city/municipal level, the LGU responsibilities
include water supply and sanitation planning, financing and implementation including 1)
preparation of water supply, sewerage and sanitation sector plans; 2) monitoring of local
water and sanitation coverage and updating of sector profile; and 3) provision of support
to WSPs such as R/BWSAs, cooperatives and water users’ group including funding from
their IRA. Barangay level-LGUs can initiate local ordinances and coordinates closely with
the municipal government in addressing the needs of their constituents.
The national government, despite the devolution of the health services in 1991 with the
passage of the Local Government Code, continues to play a major role in the sector in
terms of policy formulation, facilitating investments in the sector and building capacities of
LGUs in order to perform devolved functions efficiently. Similar to the water governance
of the country, there are several government agencies with diverse range of responsibilities
mandated by different laws that are involved generally in sanitation, including the delivery
of sewerage and sanitation infrastructure.
Below is a matrix of national agencies with clear sanitation related mandates and other
support agencies:
Figure 2. National Agencies with Clear Sanitation Related Mandates

| w | v | x | {

}
v

} }

v }

} } v

}
Other support agencies with possible roles

| z }

For a detailed list of agencies with mandates/functions related to sanitation, please see Annex 2.
29
v w x y x z z x { | } ~ x { y | } { x x { z
2.2.2 Updating and Mainstreaming Local and National Sanitation Programs
A number of Provincial Water Supply, Sewerage and Sanitation Sector Plans (PW4SPs)
have been developed in 79 provinces with technical assistance from DILG and various
donor agencies from 1989 to 2005. PW4SPs were expected to guide LGUs in prioritizing
their plans and accessing funds from ODA and local sources. However, these sector plans
have not been mainstreamed into the LGU development plans and continues to be absent
in the LGU Annual Investment and Development Plans. All of these plans needs to be
updated and the sanitation angle needs to be strengthened.
Several municipalities and cities have been assisted in developing their local sanitation plans
(Dagupan, Alabel, Guian, Bauko, San Fernando, Marikina City among others). The local
sanitation plans were developed through a participatory process of understanding the
current sanitation problems and issues, potential impact of the sanitation problems, an
assessment of current programs and actions addressing their sanitation problems. A typical
table of content of a local sanitation plan can be found in Annex 3.
The national strategy for the implementation of the National Policy on Urban Sewerage
and Sanitation as outlined in the NEDA Board Resolution No. 5 series of 1994 was not
fully implemented. LWUA, mandated as the lead agency to implement this strategic plan
as well as coordinate the subsector activities had exerted efforts to provide technical and
financing assistance in the development of urban sewerage plans and implementation of
sewerage facilities. Despite these efforts, the strategic plan was not fully realized.
In addition, only very recently, a National Sewerage and Septage Management Program
(NSSMP) that serves as a framework plan that will address large scale waste water and
sanitation issues has been formulated to promote viable, affordable, sustainable sewerage
systems and/or septage management programs to be implemented by LGUs, WDs or
WSPs. However, this program has yet to take off pending finalization of its institutional
arrangement and funding.
The Department of Interior and Local Government has recently prepared its Sanitation
Strategy. After careful assessment of the sanitation issues vis a vis the DILG mandate, it has
identified three focus areas: a) Increasing LGU awareness on sector policies and guidelines;
b) assistance in the preparation of proposals and investment packages and c) provision of
technical assistance/consultancy services to LGUs.
The Department of Health is also in the process of developing its National Sustainable
Sanitation Program which is now anchored in this roadmap process.
While initiatives have been launched by various institutions, there is still a need to push
further for the implementation and mainstreaming of all these efforts to achieve targets
effectively.
2.2.3 Relevant Laws and Policies in the Sector
The laws and policies governing sanitation and sewerage in the Philippines are based on
separate provisions contained in several legislations and policy pronouncements. The
National Plumbing Code provides guidelines, criteria and standards for the design and
construction of sanitation and sewerage facilities. The Sanitation Code of 1975 provides
guidelines on excreta disposal and drainage, sewerage collection and disposal. PD 1121 that
created the National Environmental Protection Council stated that Polluters are responsible
to contain, remove and clean up certain pollution incidents. The recent promulgation of
the Clean Water Act provided for the preparation of the National Sewerage and Septage
Management Plan, targeting highly urbanized cities.
Despite the numerous legislations and policies that focus on addressing sanitation issues,
sector goals are not fully met, policies not implemented, rules not fully enforced. For
30
¡ ¢ £ ¤ ¥ ¦ § ¡ § ¨ ¢ £ § ¡ ¦ § ¦ © ¡ ª © § « ¬ §
instance, implementation of the National Sector Plan for Water Supply, Sewerage and
Sanitation failed to gain local support. Specifically, LGUs are unable to provide regularly
updated sanitation situation and data. Moreover, LGU awareness on the sanitation issues
remains low as evidenced by the small budget allocated for their local sanitation programs
and projects.
The passage of the Local Government Code in 1991 has devolved the implementation of
health services to the LGUs. For instance, responsibility for data generation specifically
on water supply and sanitation service coverage as well as investment and financing has
been lodged to LGUs. On the other hand, the Department of Health (DOH) has focused
its mandate on policy formulation and monitoring of laws and policies. This arrangement
made LGUs reluctant to perform these functions due to their unpreparedness to assume
these emerging responsibilities.
Annex 4 provides the list of specific laws and policies adopted by the various sector
agencies.
2.3 ANALYSIS OF GAPS

2.3.1 The Policy Environment
Lack of Effective Sanitation Leadership
While NEDA is the over-all coordinating body for the preparation and monitoring of
investment plans, they do not have the manpower and budget or resources to address the
growing sanitation concerns. The newly created NEDA Sub Committee on Water Resources 1 1
which is jointly chaired by NEDA and the NWRB has been mandated to ensure the sector
direction is carried out in accordance with the sector plans defined in the Philippine Water
Supply Sector Roadmap, among others. However, it is not expected to carry a strong drive
to push sanitation targets and plans vis-a-vis the water supply agenda, among others. It is
not a regular implementing government agency with budgets and personnel to oversee
implementation and fast tracking of priorities. The Department of Health is playing a
key role due to the health impacts of poor sanitation. However, the only unit of DOH
dealing with sanitation is the Environment and Occupational Health Office (EOHO) of
the National Disease Control and Prevention Center whose mandate in sanitation is limited
to policy formulation
This situation causes significant gaps in policy implementation and enforcement, particularly
the inability to deliver the commitments set under existing laws and implement targets
within set timeframes.
Fragmented institutional arrangements with no strong administrative mechanisms to guide
policy implementation and coordinate local level program implementation, monitoring
(among others) shows inadequate attention accorded to sanitation.
At the minimum, a full time national sector driver must be in place. In the absence of a
national sanitation agency, the DOH can create a sanitation focused technical support unit
in the interim that will oversee the regular implementation, coordination, monitoring and
regular updating of the national plans and help facilitate the development and implementation
of local sanitation policies and sustainable sanitation improvement plans.
At a late stage it would be highly desirable if DOH can help facilitate the creation of a well
staffed and effective national sanitation agency responsible for overseeing the sector. It
should be basically normative but could also be extremely helpful in the different aspects of
sanitation development.
31
® ¯ ° ¯ ± ± ¯ ² ³ ´ µ ¶ · ¸ ¯ ² ¸ ¹ ° ³ ´ ¸ ² ¯ · ¸ · ¯ º ² » º ¸ ¼ ½ ¸ ±
Lack of Effective National Sanitation Policy
An effective national sanitation policy should specify institutional responsibilities taking
into account different levels of governance; be comprehensive and be transparent to
stakeholders. For a policy to be considered effective, it must ensure that a) the policy is in
place; b) it is being effectively implemented and c) the policy is achieving its objectives. It
should provide the framework for achieving its SMART 12 sanitation objectives.
While there is a sanitation code of 1975, it has to be revisited in light of the growing
concerns of the country including population stresses, water pollution and climate change.
The vulnerabilities caused by flooding and strong typhoons and sea level rise compound
the problem. This necessitates research, development and advocacy for different models
of approaches for more sustainable sanitation services. For example, the provision on
septic tank design allows an unsealed bottom in the second chamber, causing ground water
pollution. Moreover, the septic tanks are not attached to leaching fields and are not regularly
serviced, allowing effluent to directly pollute rivers, lakes and coastal waters. On the other
hand, the Clean Water Act, which is a relatively new law, is heavily biased toward conventional
centralized sewerage and septage treatment plants that are beyond the financing capacity
of most local governments. Clearly, this is a capacity issue involving policy makers that are
unaware of more sustainable systems for sanitation.
There is also insufficient budgetary and manpower resources both at the national and local
levels to address basic, priority concerns of the sector. Correspondingly, streamlined and
harmonized systems and procedures for monitoring and evaluation is lacking even at LGU
level resulting to poor generation of accurate and useful data for better regulation and
rational allocation of resources.
Regulation For Sanitation And Wastewater
There are many existing regulatory standards for sanitation and wastewater. However, it is
not integrated and updated. LGUs who are in the forefront of implementing, monitoring
and to some extent, regulating sanitation programs and projects are generally not informed
adequately about these standards.
For sanitation to progress, it is important to revisit the regulatory arrangements relating
to standards and tariffs. A standards-based regulatory framework will provide guidance to
interested groups (such as homeowners, businessmen, planners) on how to develop their
wastewater systems. On the other hand, it will also serve as a guide for the regulators on
how to review and approve applications for new sewage systems,
The regulatory framework defines the standard procedures, methods, processes for every
aspect of wastewater project development for every type of sanitation project- from a
single family house to a public facility such as hospitals, markets, etc.
The regulatory arrangement of the MWSS based on the concession agreement has effectively
defined standards, targets and tariffs for the sanitation and sewerage program of the two
private companies. These are closely monitored by the MWSS Regulatory Office. There is
no similar arrangement elsewhere. The water districts are not obligated by LWUA to plan
and implement sanitation and sewerage projects, inspite of the mandate they have under
PD 198. Some water districts who initiate sewerage projects increase their water tariffs by
a certain percentage ( running from 8% to 50% of the water bill) and this is not regulated
by LWUA nor the National Water Resources Board. There is no clear policy on sanitation
economic regulation.
At the minimum, the national policy on sanitation should include the following:
• National targets and strategy to eliminate open defecation
32
¾ ¿ À Á À Â Â À Ã Ä Å Æ Ç È É À Ã É Ê Á Ä Å É Ã À È É È À Ë Ã Ì Ë É Í Î É Â
• National targets and Strategy to facilitate localized sanitation improvement plans and
budgets
• National Investment Priorities and Plans for Sanitation
• National Sustainable Sanitation Communications Strategy
• References and integration to other sanitation related plans and programs of other
agencies (i.e. DILG, DAR, HLURB, National Solid Waste Commission, DWSD, LWUA,
NHA among others).
• Policies regarding improved governance, financing, regulation and service delivery
standards.
2.3.2 Funding Levels and Financing of Sanitation
There is very low priority given to sanitation at the national and local level, like in many
developing countries. In the WB study 13, since 1970, public investment in water supply
and sanitation infrastructure went mostly to the water sector (97%) and only a miniscule
3 percent went to sanitation. Investments in sanitation are mostly in the form of private
investments in household toilets, housing estate wastewater treatment and on-site treatments
among commercial, industrial and institutional establishments. The PEM estimates that that
over a 10-year period, the country will need to invest PhP 250 billion (nearly US$ 5 billion)
in physical infrastructure. While local government units recognize emerging water quality
problems, they are constrained by high investment and operating costs, limited willingness-
to-pay, and restricted space available in the low-income urban areas where sewage is disposed
of indiscriminately. More government budgets ( both from local and national) should be
invested in sewerage and sanitation.
A quick scan and review of the current Medium Term Philippine Development Plan
(MTPDP) for 2004-2010 indicated that sanitation per se was only mentioned in Chapter 3,
the chapter dealing with Environment and Natural Resources (Chapter 3.page 53) where
targets were being included. Considering that the Philippines is a signatory to the MDG and
has set targets for sanitation, it is quite surprising to note that sanitation is not prominently
addressed in the medium term development plan.
Consequently, as the MTPIP is the investment translation of the MTPDP, this meant that
sanitation is hardly allocated the necessary investments that it should be given. A review of
the current MTPIP showed only the following sanitation-related PAPs: Water Supply and
Sanitation Performance Project; Provincial Water Supply, Sewerage and Sanitation Sector
Project; and LGU Urban Water and Sanitation Project. It should be mentioned that for
sanitation programs and projects to qualify as part of foreign funded initiative, it should
first be part of the current MTPIP.
In terms of current General Appropriations Act (GAA), sanitation-related Program/
Projects/Activities of agencies deemed in-charge of sanitation, sewerage and septage such
as DPWH, DENR, DOH ,LWUA and DILG revealed that there is no clear and definite PAP
that addresses sanitation; in fact there is no mention of sanitation in any of the programs,
projects and activities of said agencies. Current ODA and financing available for water
supply and sanitation is not optimized by service providers. LGUs and Water Districts have
access to some resources but the priority remains to be expansion of water systems and not
for sewerage.
In the last 30 years, investments in urban sanitation allegedly totaled to only 1.5% of
capital expenditures on urban water supply. ODA capital investments for the sewerage and
sanitation sector are financed mostly by the World Bank, administered by the MWSS and
DENR and are channeled to Metro Manila. The concessionaires of MWSS spent Php 2
33
Ï Ð Ñ Ò Ñ Ó Ó Ñ Ô Õ Ö × Ø Ù Ú Ñ Ô Ú Û Ò Õ Ö Ú Ô Ñ Ù Ú Ù Ñ Ü Ô Ý Ü Ú Þ ß Ú Ó
Billion on sanitation and sewerage and is committed to spend a total of 13 Billion by 2011.
This investments are indicated in the rate rebasing and contract agreements of the two
private concessionaires with the MWSS.
2.3.3 Programs
There is no efficient national monitoring of sanitation programs going on in the country.
Data on initiatives done by local governments are not regularly collected. The regular toilet
bowl distribution approach ( started in the early 80s) is no longer effective, based on the
findings of the WSP- Sustainable Sanitation for East Asia project.
There are projects that address sanitation and sewerage at either municipality/city or
barangay levels, mostly implemented on a pilot or project basis at the LGU level. The only
large scale project going on are those of the MWSS which is planned and implemented by
the two private concessionaires under the concession agreement. The two concessionaires
are responsible for the 878,000 (equivalent population) of sewerage connections and
6,200,000 (equivalent population) of desludged septic tanks.
There are a few LGU initiated small wastewater treatment projects usually for slaughterhouses,
public markets, hospitals and a few Water District STP projects. There are also a few
private companies and developers who are operating, planning or constructing wastewater
facilities. (Pls. refer to Annex 5 List of Existing, under construction and planned sewerage
facilities.)
The DOH is currently working with the Water and Sanitation Program of the World Bank
under its Sustainable Sanitation for East Asia (SuSEA) project. The SuSEA program in
the Philippines is aimed at the following: a) testing and developing tools for scaling-up of
sanitation interventions; b) building the capacity of local government partners and other
stakeholders to implement practical sanitation solutions and c) guiding and refining the
formulation of national sanitation policy and programs, based on evidence from the field.
The SuSEA program has promoted a comprehensive approach to sanitation improvement,
involving diverse activities such as stopping open defecation, strengthening barriers to water-
washed diseases, improving septage management and reducing riverine pollution through
inter-LGU cooperation. The SuSEA project is working with the LGUs of the following
areas: Dagupan, Bauko, Alabel, General Santos City, Polomolok and Guiuan.
DWSD and DAR have supported some sanitation activities in relation with their water
supply projects. The DWSD through the Kalahi- CIDDS project have supported sanitation
projects (usually toilet construction). The Bureau of Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries
Development (BARBD) is currently working in pilot projects offering ecosan approaches
and have demonstrated the construction and use of bio-gas digester where methane fuel
is now harvested for cooking. This is a one year project in 10 project sites within ARC
communities.
Some civil society organizations are actively working in sanitation. Some are promoting the
use of urine diverting dry toilets ( popularly known as ecosan toilets), some are helping LGUs
develop their local sanitation plans. Some, like PLAN Philippines are promoting Community
Led Total Sanitation Campaigns. This is a program that addresses open defecation through
triggering approaches. They offer zero subsidies for household level toilets. However, many
of these projects are pilot in nature and have been initiated to respond to local needs.
However, there is a need to develop clear sanitation programs at local level to respond to
the existing problems and challenges such as open defecation, groundwater pollution and
others. Basic sanitation and hygiene education should still be a priority to develop demand
for improved sanitation services.
34
à á â ã â ä ä â å æ ç è é ê ë â å ë ì ã æ ç ë å â ê ë ê â í å î í ë ï ð ë ä
2.3.4 Technology
There is a menu of options that local decision makers and planners can select from based on
what they see as appropriate in their conditions. However, not all LGUs are well-informed
about available options so they do not know about these technologies. Other well meaning
LGUs also prescribe only one type of acceptable toilets for instance (water sealed) because
of lack of understanding of other possible alternative technologies.
Information about these technologies must be made available to planners, decision makers
and to the communities so that informed choices can be made. USAID has recently
prepared a Sanitation Technology Information Kit with materials on different sanitation and
sewerage technology options. The Water and Sanitation Program of the World Bank has
likewise prepared a Philippine Sanitation Sourcebook and Decision Aid aimed to stimulate
demand for sanitation services by presenting tools for strategic decision making around
a wider range of more affordable sanitation options. Decentralized wastewater treatment
technologies have also been piloted successfully in several slaughterhouses, public markets
and hospitals.
An inventory of sanitation technologies being utilized in the Philippines maybe found in Annex 6.
Technology standards are available but not comprehensive and readily available to the LGUs
implementers. This should include standards for the following:
• Wastewater collection and sewer systems
• Septic tanks and other anaerobic systems
• Soils based effluent disposal systems
• Composting and urine diversion toilet systems
• Media filtration systems
• Constructed wetlands systems
• Aerobic treatment systems
• Nutrient reduction systems
• Disinfection systems
• Wastewater reuse systems
• New and emerging technologies
2.3.5 Human Resources
Since there is no single sanitation agency, personnel from different agencies usually handle
both water and sanitation. However, there is realistically only a handful who are working
effectively on the issues of sanitation. The people working in sanitation come from different
backgrounds which has its advantages (being multi-disciplinary) and disadvantages (lack of
required skills and expertise).
Sanitation problems in the Philippines can be related to many causes, including insufficiency
in capacity within the field of sanitation. There are less than a handful of universities offering
Sanitary Engineering (SE) courses. Key educators in the sector are saying that the enrollment
in SE courses have continually declined through the years. Many reasons are cited. For
example, local government units at the city and municipal levels do not require a degree in
SE to be appointed as Sanitary Inspector. The Sanitary Inspectors are the frontline personnel
at the local level in charge of various tasks on sanitation. But hardly forty percent (40%) of
the Sanitary Inspectors have an SE degree; many of them come from various, often times
35
ñ ò ó ô ó õ õ ó ö ÷ ø ù ú û ü ó ö ü ý ô ÷ ø ü ö ó û ü û ó þ ö ÿ þ ü ü õ
unrelated, fields and about thirty percent (30%) are undergraduates. Only those occupying
positions at the provincial level have SE degrees. The officers of the Philippine Society of
Sanitary Engineers have clamored for years in many forums and public consultations to
professionalize the position of Sanitary Inspector so that those appointed to the position
have the proper training and education. Public Health courses also deal with sanitation but
the curriculum is limited to health issues.
2.3.6 Communication for Behavioral Change
The poor sanitation situation in the Philippines is to a great extent a product of the uncaring
and unaware social-political environment among the decision makers and ordinary citizens.
The basic health problem of high incidence of water borne related diseases, i.e., intestinal
parasite infection and diarrhea is caused invariably by poor sanitation and hygiene practices
coupled with poor implementation of existing sanitation laws and policies or lack of
political will. In many cases, sanitation is not a recognized community problem. It has a low
priority that is why there is negligible or no budget allocation for sanitation programs and
infrastructure. The ordinary citizens themselves do not demand better services. Protests
against high prices of basic commodities are common but protest over poor sanitation is
unheard of except during calamities like flooding, earthquakes and landslides when rescue
and rehabilitation organizations are on heightened alert.
The national celebration of the International Year of Sanitation in 2008 was an attempt to
call attention to sanitation and behavior change. Specifically, it aimed:
• To raise the profile of sanitation issues among Philippine politicians, decision makers
and media to catalyze investments in improved sanitation conditions and promote
improved hygiene practices nationwide.
• To change the existing paradigm of viewing sanitation as a luxury that the Philippines
cannot afford to a necessity that the Philippines cannot afford to delay any longer.
• To justify substantial investment in provision of toilets, treatment facilities and hand-
washing campaigns by determining economic losses covered by poor sanitation.
Outcomes of the national celebration have still to be assessed.
Strategic partnership arrangements with different stakeholders such as private companies
and civil society, local governments and water service providers must be organized to
promote sanitation and hygiene behavior change. Clear messages must be well developed
for targeted audiences.
2.3.7 Sector Planning
There is no separate and distinct sanitation sector. Sanitation has never been a separate
concern for planning and budgeting. Many of the sanitation systems are water based, hence
the practice of integrating water supply planning with sanitation. However, the reality is that
oftentimes, sanitation lags behind. There are no clear targets and plans relating to sanitation
as the priority is always water supply. The handful of LGUs that have developed local
sanitation plans have done so, but not as part of mainstream activity but because a support
group (mostly thru NGOs and special projects such as SuSEA) have assisted them to do
so. Pilot projects on Barangay Environmental Sanitation Planning have also been initiated
but did not take off at a large scale. The PW4SPs prepared from 1988 to 2005 have to be
revisited and updated within a new sustainable sanitation framework.
The NSSMP has recently been prepared for approval of the NEDA Sub-committee on
Water Resources. This plan is for large scale sewerage projects for the identified highly
urbanized cities as provided for by the Clean Water Act.
36

Given the urgency of mitigating impact of the negative effects caused by poor sanitation on
health, the environment and general welfare, it is recommended that sanitation be treated
as a separate but closely related sector with clear targets, budget lines and responsible body
that will coordinate planning, implementation and financing.
The possibility of using a sector-wide approach for sanitation was raised and should merit
further study given the current planing processes of the country.
2.3.8 Monitoring and Evaluation (including sector Baseline Indicators)
There is no reliable monitoring of sanitation indicators and targets in the country. DOH
is monitoring sanitary toilet coverage but it has not managed to get reliable data from all
municipalities and cities.. DENR is monitoring small wastewater treatment plants. But since
there is no national plans, programs and budgets, monitoring and evaluation of national
targets and plans are not happening at national and local levels.
Figure 3 below is from the 2008 Field Health Service Information System Annual Report
2008 of the Department of Health.
FIGURE 3. Proportion of Households with Sanitary Toilet, 2008 Environmental Health
As can be seen from Figure 3, ARMM and Region VII lag behind in terms of proportion
of households with sanitary toilet facilities. In the 2008 FHSIS, Sulu, Lanao del Sur and
Bohol are at the bottom of the list of places with sanitary toilet facilities.
The DILG is recently spearheading a national sector assessment and monitoring process
that will harmonize all the monitoring initiatives of the different national agencies in an
effort to institutionalize a reasonable national monitoring system for water and sanitation.
2.3.9 Environment/Health and Economic Impact
A 2008 joint USAID and WSP-World Bank study 14 showed that the economic costs of
poor sanitation are equivalent to as high as 1.5% of Gross Domestic Product in 2005 or
with an estimated overall economic loss amounting to about US $1.4 billion or PhP 77.8
billion per year and about two-thirds (72%) of the total economic costs was accounted
for the health impact. Sadly, these costs of poor sanitation are not evenly shared. A much
greater burden falls on poor people - in terms of their health, lost time for productive
work, and lost income. Poor people are those suffer the most and pay the highest economic
costs.
Outbreaks of water-borne diseases across the country for the last two years have increased.
Most cases were due to water contamination
),*85( arising from poor sanitation.
:6386$,'(FRQRPLF,PSDFWVRI6DQLWDWLRQLQWKH3KLOLSSLQHV-DNDUWD:RUOG%DQN

37
! " #

3+,/,33,1(6867$,1$%/(6$1,7$7,216(&72552$'0$3GUDIW2FW
Table 3. An Overview of the Economic Costs of Not Doing Sanitation15
Health In 1996-2000 approximately 31% of PhP3.3 billion per year in avoidable health
illnesses monitored were attributed to cost
waterborne sources
Aquatic ecosystem Fish yields reported to have declined by PhP16.7 billion lost due to degradation of
30%- 5% due to sedimentation and silt fisheries environment
pollution;
Tourism Decline in occupancy (e.g. Boracay island P47 billion for avoidable losses in tourism
in 1997 due to high levels of coliform);
Others Damage claims due to environmental

degradation (e.g. income and livelihood)
Source: Economic Impacts of Sanitation in the Philippines Summary, 2008, USAID and the Water and Sanitation Program ( WSP)
2.3.10 Gender Issues in Sanitation

Women and children are also adversely affected by poor sanitation. Many women’s
privacy are compromised when there is no sanitary toilet facilities around their houses.
Poorly constructed facilities expose women and children to harassment and danger. The
special circumstances of women ( like the monthly menstrual periods and reproductive
responsibilities) make them more vulnerable when there is lack of appropriate sanitation
facilities. Exposure to infant fecal wastes which are considered high risk can cause illness.
Further studies must be made to see how gender concerns can be mainstreamed in
sanitation interventions. For instance, gender considerations must be ensured in the choice
of technology, the design and siting of sanitation facilities ( including water supply). Some
of the questions one must ask include the following: How the sanitation programs (if any)
have empowered the marginalized women (and men) in the decision making processes?
Are the sanitation facilities responsive to the demand of women (and men) to have private,
convenient and secure facilities? Are the marginalized groups substantially involved and
committed to ensure optimal health benefits?
2.4 SUMMARY OF ISSUES AND CHALLENGES

While the official data shows that the MDG target for sanitation will be met by the country, the
sanitation gaps remain enormous. Having access to improved sanitation does not mean that the basic
conditions for good sanitation are met. There are many considerations that have to be considered (
quality of services, environmental concerns, sustainability concerns, health aspects, etc.).
Meeting universal coverage will not happen unless there is a clear national sanitation policy and
program managed by a lead institution ably supported by an alliance of champions for sanitation
to facilitate stimulation of demand and access to resources at the national and local levels.
The weak and fragmented regulatory arrangements for sanitation and wastewater management
have to be addressed. Sanitation service providers have to be regulated and professionalized to
improve service delivery.
Priority issues at the local level that need to be urgently recognized and addressed include the
low LGU awareness and political will, inadequate information dissemination and development
of human resources, low multi-stakeholder involvement, and inadequate financing schemes are
exacerbated by the lack of local policies and programs on sanitation.
These issues result in the low prioritization of sanitation-related programs and projects, an upsurge
in the incidence of diarrhea and other waterborne diseases at the community level, misallocation
and/or misuse of human resources especially in sanitary inspection, non-utilization of available
sanitation technologies and lack of information on the benefits vis-à-vis the costs of sanitation.
Priority issues at the national level include weak and fragmented institutional framework and policies,
38
$ % & ' & ( ( & ) * + , - . / & ) / 0 ' * + / ) & . / . & 1 ) 2 1 / 3 4 / (
inadequate information dissemination and development of human resources in sanitation, low multi-
stakeholder involvement, and low investment and infrastructure provision for the sanitation sector.
Table 4 summarizes and defines these issues based on the overall analysis of the sector by the
multi-stakeholder groups during the consultations conducted in preparing the Roadmap.
Table 4. Summary of Issues in the Philippine Sanitation Sector
Summary of Issues Defining the Issue
GOVERNANCE AND REGULATORY ISSUES
Low LGU awareness and political will to At the LGU level, local development plans do not prioritize sanitation. This is
improve sanitation gleaned particularly in the investment plan of the LGU where allocations for
sanitation are minimal or none at all. To date, there are only a few LGUs who
have demonstrated political will to improve their sanitation situation through the
development of local sanitation policies, plans and programs.
Weak, fragmented institutional framework The sector is beset with institutional fragmentation, a lack of an enabling policy
and policies on sanitation environment, and gaps in the regulatory framework. While policies and enabling
laws and national legislations have been formulated to set the directions for the
sanitation sector, policy implementation has not been ideal, thus, policy goals
have yet to be fully met. For instance, the National Sector Plan for Water
Supply, Sewerage and Sanitation failed to gain national and local support for
the implementation and updating despite the clear mandates of the institutions
involved.
Weak, fragmented regulatory framework on Regulation in sanitation is not clearly defined. While there are enabling laws,
sanitation. this have to be revisited and updated. Standards have to be clearly defined and
its implementation monitored by proper authorities. Economic Regulation in
sanitation and wastewater is non-existent at the moment.
SERVICE DELIVERY RELATED ISSUES
Inadequate capacity to facilitate sustainable A significant number of LGUs do not prioritize sanitation programs in their
sanitation. investment plans
A great number of people cannot associate unhygienic (open) defecation
practices with transmission of excreta-borne diseases leading to high morbidity
rates of these diseases.
Lack of sanitation focused human resources who specialize in planning,
implementing and evaluating sanitation programs, developing and improving
designs on sanitation technology, and coordinating sanitation projects/programs.
These include professionals and practitioners such as sanitary engineers,
sanitarians/sanitation inspectors, public health specialists, and teachers among
others.
There are no guidelines to develop or strengthen LGU initiatives on policy
formulation, planning and managing sanitation programs
There is lack of definition of a national policy on the management of sanitation
at the local government and household level translated in the forms of:
Guidelines or management models on technology options, social marketing/
advocacy strategies, coordination and linkages techniques which could guide local
governments and other interest groups in planning, implementing, monitoring
and evaluation of sanitation services/programs.
Front-liner Sanitary Inspectors, majority of them, lack adequate sanitation
education, training, knowledge and skills
Institutional guidelines on cooperation and coordination on approaches,
methodologies, and technology options to support local government units in
implementing sanitation programs.
39
5 6 7 8 7 9 9 7 : ; < = > ? @ 7 : @ A 8 ; < @ : 7 ? @ ? 7 B : C B @ D E @ 9
LACK OF COORDINATION AND SUPPORT FOR MULTI-STAKEHOLDER PLATFORMS
Low multi-stakeholder involvement in Low priority from key stakeholders, i.e., community, local and national levels.
sanitation Behavioural, “I don’t care” attitude from many stakeholders, from households,
community to local and national levels
Low private sector involvement on sanitation
Lack of champions to advocate sanitation for public awareness
Poor data availability. Poor knowledge sharing and dissemination
FINANCING RELATED ISSUES
Sanitation is considered a mere adjunct to Sanitation is not a priority of the government, and as a result, there is very
water programs, resulting in low investment limited to no investments at all. Identified government agencies with sanitation
in sanitation mandates such as DOH, DILG, NEDA have no program, activities nor project
distinctly included in the General Appropriations Act (GAA); nor there is any
clear sanitation program included in the MTPDP and the MTPIP
The current focus of sanitation program and projects, if any at all, is on large
scale infrastructure such as centralized treatment and sewerage facilities which
tend to be very costly making cost of recovery very difficult. This can be seen
from the few sanitation infrastructure being constructed and funded.
With very low recovery, sanitation projects tend to be not self sustaining making
it necessary to introduce sustainability in sanitation projects
While there might be a demand for the construction of toilets at the household
level, there are no clear financing schemes which families can access
There is a clear absence of national and local policies on investment for
sanitation, promotion of pro poor sanitation financing including promotion of
sanitation entrepreneurship.
There is no current law/program that mandates pro poor sanitation financing.
Private Sector hesitates to invest in sanitation due to insufficient incentives and
efficiency issues.
SANITATION CRISIS DURING CALAMITIES AND EMERGENCY SITUATIONS
Sanitation and hygiene promotion is not a Policy, practice and strong coordination for sanitation and hygiene promotion
priority in disaster preparedness and relief in different types of emergency situations ( i.e. floods, landslides, etc) are not
response. yet in place.
40
F G H I H J J H K L M N O P Q H K Q R I L M Q K H P Q P H S K T S Q U V Q J
3.0 VISION AND DEVELOPMENT GOALS
3.0 VISION AND DEVELOPMENT GOALS
3.1 VISION STATEMENT
A CLEAN AND HEALTHY PHILIPPINES: SAFE AND ADEQUATE

SUSTAINABLE SANITATION FOR ALL
This sector vision looks at universal access to safe and adequate sanitation as a human right,
sustainably linked with health, agriculture and environment with families, communities and
institutions working together for the common good.
The Roadmap envisions that:
• By 2015, a strong and vibrant sanitation sector shall have achieved the MDG target of
halving the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water
and basic sanitation
- Achieving 83.8% of total households provided with sanitary toilets (from a baseline of
67.6% NSO 1990 data)
• By 2016, the following have been achieved:
- At least 70% of LGUs have local sanitation plans and budgets in place under their
PIPH/AIPH/CIPH plans
- Improved basic sanitation coverage in 92 priority cities/province by achieiving at least
85% of population with sanitary toilets.
- Sewerage and or septage management in 57 highly urbanized cities (NSSMP targets)
- National agencies such as the DOH, DILG, DAR, DSWD, NHA, LWUA, would have
clear sanitation policies, plans and programs consistent with the PSR roadmap
• By 2028, that universal access (100%) to safe and adequate sanitary facilities have been
provided, that behavioural change and proper hygiene practices are accepted norms within
the families and communities, and that mechanisms for sustainable sanitation (i.e., linkage
with health, agriculture and environment) are institutionalized.
The achievement of the sector vision will use the following strategies of 1) governance and
regulatory strengthening; 2)strengthening service delivery through communication and capacity
development; 3) building strategic, broad-based, multi-stakeholder and multilevel alliances;
4)financing and infrastructure provision for priority areas for sustainable sanitation; and 5)
mainstremaing of adequate sanitation and hygiene promotion in emergency situations.
43
W X Y Z Y [ [ Y \ ] ^ _ ` a b Y \ b c Z ] ^ b \ Y a b a Y d \ e d b f g b [
FIGURE 4
SANITATION ROADMAP DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK
A CLEAN AND HEALTHY

PHILIPPINES
SAFE AND ADEQUATE SUSTAINABLE SANITATION

FOR ALL
y z { | } ~ y z { | } ~ y z { | } ~ y z { | } ~ y z { | } ~
} ~ } } | z {

{ { } | | { z | z { { }
} | } ~ z { { ~ {

{ } z | { } } { } ~ } { }
z { } | } ~ ~ z ~ z { { { | ~ { ~

{ { | { } { } ~ |

{ {

| | { { { { } { { }
} ~ { | { }

44
h i j k j l l j m n o p q r s j m s t k n o s m j r s r j u m v u s w x s l
3.2 OUTCOMES AND OUTPUTS
The Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap focuses on five major strategic outcomes: (i)
Responsive sanitation governance and regulatory strengthening. (ii) Improved service delivery
through communications and capacity development, (iii) Broad-based alliance of multi-sectoral
and multi-level stakeholders strengthening the sanitation sector, (iv) Financing and Infrastructure
Investment in priority strategic areas, and (v) Adequate sanitation and hygiene promotion
mainstreamed in emergency relief and rehabilitation.
This section will discuss the development goals, outcomes, outputs for each of the focus areas.
3.2.1: Responsive sanitation governance and regulatory strengthening
Under this component, it is recognized that the LGUs are in the forefront of sanitation
at the local level. However, there is a need to formulate effective national policies that
will provide the framework for coherent strategies and mechanisms supported by adequate
resources leading to synergistic implementation of sanitation programs. National Agencies
with sanitation related programs should be able to develop their plans and programs within
the framework of the national policies on sanitation.
Specific outputs identified under this area are as follows:
1. A clear articulation and sustainable implementation of the national and local sanitation
policies;
2. Strengthening DOH as the lead sector driver providing technical assistance at local and
national levels;
3. 100% of the LGUs develop their policies, plans and programs and budgets within the
PIPH/AIPH/CIPH;
4. National government agencies with sanitation related mandates develop their own
sanitation strategy, plans and programs and mainstream these in their regular/existing
budgets;
5. Sanitation regulatory framework developed, approved and implemented by the relevant
agency including a possible creation of an independent regulatory body for the sanitation
sector.
3.2.2 Improved Service Delivery through Communications and Capacity Development
The sanitation roadmap aims to engage and capacitate national sector agencies and institutions
and other stakeholders to improve sanitation service delivery by enabling (1) barangay
or local communities to manage their own sanitation programs towards eliminating open
defecation practices and (2) sanitation service providers to manage wastes in a sustainable
fashion. To achieve this, it is fundamental that the people themselves must realize that the
consequences of their (un)hygienic behavior and practices result to demeaning quality of
life, and for them to actively demand for reforms on sanitation at the grass-roots level. The
choice of methods of intervention in finding meaningful solutions to sanitation problems
should be initiated by these same people who clamor for assistance and guidance so that
they are made responsible for setting up their own sanitation facilities and services.
The success of this agenda depends on how the target population would change their
behavior and practices by motivating them through effective education and information
programs (predisposing factors), by enabling them to have access to technology and other
resources with reinforcing factors such as collectively enhancing behavior and practices of
all community members.
Capacity development activities should aim at developing competencies at various levels:
45
¡ ¡ ¢ £ ¤ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¢ ¨ © £ ¤ ¨ ¢ § ¨ § ª ¢ « ª ¨ ¬ ¨ ¡
Grassroot/Community:
1. Skills to design and plan household-level sanitation facilities
2. Technical skills to operate and maintain sanitation facilities
3. Administrative skills to plan sanitation interventions on excreta/sewage management
and disposal.
4. Awareness to (ill) health implications of defecating in the open
5. Awareness of the benefits of sanitation solutions to socio-economic well-being
6. Awareness of accountability and responsibility to the rest of the communities on hygiene and
sanitation
7. Skills to mobilize resources in implementing household or community-based sanitation
facilities
8. Skill in social mobilization to develop team-effort in attaining sanitation solutions
9. Awareness on the importance of sustained activities on sanitation
10. Skill in demonstrating capacity to disseminate gained capacities to other members of the
community
Local Government Units
1. Planning and management of municipal or city-wide sanitation or sewerage facilities
2. Developing capacities of rural communities to construct and maintain decentralized,
communal or individual sanitation facilities
3. To have access to available national resources and mobilize local resources to implement
sanitation plans and programs.
4. Generate demands for sanitation services or facilities from communities through health
education and information dissemination activities.
5. Translate national guidelines on planning, implementing and evaluating sanitation
programs into local policies or ordinances on through:
a. Selection of appropriate technologies suitable to local conditions
b. Generation and utilization of information from local studies
c. Allocating resources to support the policy decisions
6. Develop and carry-out monitoring and evaluation schemes to determine the extent of
meeting sanitation sector standards and goals.
There are a number of entities that could be involved in framing a workable program
on capacity development: National agencies, water supply providers, sanitation contractors
(waste management), local government units, communities, civil society (development
non-governmental organizations, community groups, women’s organizations, bilateral and
multilateral financing institutions, faith-based organizations, professional associations, trades
unions, self-help groups, social movements, business associations, coalitions and advocacy
group, and the academe.
The local government‘s roles are (1) to cause the realization of the predisposing factors,
(2) to coordinate and facilitate the access to available resources, facilities, equipment and
information from various key players in enabling communities to achieve their own targets,
(3) to finance small scale community projects on sanitation, (4) to level information so as to
avoid mixed-signals on sanitation.
46 ® ¯ ° ± ° ² ² ° ³ ´ µ ¶ · ¸ ¹ ° ³ ¹ º ± ´ µ ¹ ³ ° ¸ ¹ ¸ ° » ³ ¼ » ¹ ½ ¾ ¹ ²
Other organizations and institutions should identify their own specific niches
within the sanitation labyrinth concentric to the goal of strengthening community’s
power to solve their own problems. The academe may introduce long term,
institutionalized capacity development program for professionals and practitioners.
They should cause the transfer of knowledge of technology, effective planning and
service delivery, and other competencies.
Element of Sustainability
Capacity development efforts should clearly fulfill the element of sustainability and
constancy of sanitation solutions. Experiences in the past taught implementing agencies
that cause of failure in attaining universal access to proper sanitation was due to the fact
that sanitation facilities which were intended to uplift the hygiene conditions of families and
to contribute to attaining national objectives of sanitation coverage were inappropriately
procured. Many of them were found to be too sophisticated to local circumstances or
too frail to withstand usual environmental stresses. Options to be offered by capacity
development providers should be limited to facilities that would conform to standards that
yield enduring solutions.
Element of Acceptability
The essence of sanitation solutions lies on how facilities and systems impede infectious
health hazards through direct access and utilization of these facilities by the community
members especially those have been at risk because of factors inherent to their socio-
economic status, cultural traits, or other constraints to practicing hygiene and sanitation.
Whether these are information disseminated to individuals, or a technology to recycle
human waste, or the design of the squatting plate each should conform to the environment
suitable to the intricate or simple preference of the users. Capacity development should,
therefore, be custom tailored.
Specific Outputs relating to this area are as follows:
1. An integrated and decentralized capacity development system for different types of
implementers and situations.
2. Benchmark standards on LGU performance and practice established.
3. Different stakeholders mobilized in promoting sustainable sanitation concepts, practice
and behaviour change.
4. Research and development agenda towards sustainable sanitation solutions and policy
reforms.
5. Institutionalized monitoring and evaluation of the sector.
6. A national and local communications plan for sustainable sanitation and hygiene in
place.
3.2.3 Strengthened Strategic Alliances

Broad-based alliance of multi-sectoral and multi-level stakeholders strengthening the sanitation sector.
Building strategic alliances for sanitation means inclusivisity, i.e., encouraging the participation
of multi-sectoral and multi-level stakeholders who would like to cooperate, collaborate and
bind themselves together as broad-based networks, partnerships, consortia, federation,
others to support sustainable sanitation and to strengthen the sanitation sector. Agreements
to form these alliances are social contracts that can be formal or non-formal, over long term
or short term, and for a particular or a variety of reasons and interests.
47
¿ À Á Â Á Ã Ã Á Ä Å Æ Ç È É Ê Á Ä Ê Ë Â Å Æ Ê Ä Á É Ê É Á Ì Ä Í Ì Ê Î Ï Ê Ã
Organizations or institutions that may form alliances would include government agencies,
national and local, executive and legislative, CBOs, NGOs, civic organizations, the academe,
service providers, business enterprises, corporations, professional associations, consulting
firms, bilateral or multilateral development aid agencies or programs, and all other groups
that would be interested to join forces with others to push or support sustainable sanitation
and the sanitation sector as a whole. It is also intended to facilitate the organization of
sanitation service providers as a platform to strengthen their role in sustainable sanitation
service delivery. Participating organizations may enter into Memoranda of Agreements or
Memoranda of Understanding or other forms of social contract to forge their alliances.
They may agree to contribute to the alliance in cash or in kind, such as, their expertise,
professional and executive time, office space, and other physical resources.
The vision of strategic alliances is a sanitation sector that is recognized as a social, economic
and environmental force advocating and working for a sustainable form of sanitation
as a human right and a public good. Its strength lies in the commitment of individual
participating organizations/ institutions to support the principles of sustainable sanitation
and, particularly, in pursuit of the Millennium Development Goal of ensuring sanitation for
the poor.
The following outputs are expected to result to strengthened strategic alliances:
1. Strong and active national and local multi-sector support group that will advocate, lead
and advance sustainable sanitation polices, plans, programs, activities.
2. Clear mechanisms for collaboration in knowledge sharing, education and human
resource pooling for awareness raising and knowledge building.
3. A strong alliance of sanitation service providers.
3.2.4 Financing and Adequate Infrastructure Investments
The provision of adequate and sustainable sanitation systems in priority strategic areas will
require political will and adequate financing. National and local governments should work
together to ensure that resources will be made available, specially to strategic approaches
and areas that have been identified as priority due to the magnitude of sanitation problems
affecting the community. In an environment of scarce resources, it is of utmost importance
to identify general principles for best possible allocation of these resources.
Financing for sustainable sanitation would include the following:
a) Supporting and developing an enabling environment
b) Hygiene behavior change activities
c) Sanitation marketing costs ( including training, market assessments, etc.)
d) Cost of public infrastructure and services (capital and operational costs)
e) Cost of private infrastructure and services (capital and operational costs)
Funds for the provision of sanitation may come from different sources:
a) National Government ( or public) funds
b) Local government funds
c) Private funds
d) Semi-public/charitable funds flowing in from NGOs, donors etc.
The negative economic impacts of poor sanitation have triggered agencies such as the
Philippine Tourism Authority( PTA) to invest in wastewater treatment facility in some
tourist areas. Gaps in sector financing are also filled by market-based instruments and
48 Ð Ñ Ò Ó Ò Ô Ô Ò Õ Ö × Ø Ù Ú Û Ò Õ Û Ü Ó Ö × Û Õ Ò Ú Û Ú Ò Ý Õ Þ Ý Û ß à Û Ô
financing through micro finance institutions, banks and commercial service providers.
However, this is not enough. Innovative financing schemes must be developed for sanitation
improvements.
Cognizant of the current situation where sanitation has been a much neglected aspect of
the development priorities, the proposed Philippine Sanitation Roadmap will address this
inadequacy by ensuring that a strong sanitation sector is recognized and given the appropriate
support in terms of priorities and corresponding investment.
Outputs:
1. Prioritized intervention in highly vulnerable areas that are seriously affected by the lack
of sanitation.
2. Financing strategies and incentive schemes for sustainable infrastructure development
developed.
3. Established and enhanced public-private partnerships and sanitation entrepreneurship.
4. A well established national account for sanitation.
5. Sanitation investment requirements identified and secured to meet the MTPDP and
MDG targets.
3.2.5: Emergency Sanitation Response
Adequate Sanitation and Hygiene promotion is mainstreamed in emergency relief and
rehabilitation efforts.
The Philippines is visited by at least 20 typhoons annually. This particular situations renders
the country highly vulnerable to water-induced natural calamity, foremost of this is flooding
and inundation of low lying areas which serves as home to millions of Filipinos. With the
spectre of climate change becoming more and more a reality, and with the anticipated
increase in flooding and inundations incidents, not to mention landslides and mudflows,
it is high time for a joint effort among national and local government, private sector and
NGOs to work together towards formulating an effective sanitation program for emergency
situations.
Outputs:
1. Sourcebook and toolkits on appropriate approaches for different situations.
2. Integration of emergency sanitation in disaster response and risk reduction plans at all
levels.
3. Building partnerships and strong coordination mechanisms at local municipal, provincial
and national levels for identifying priority areas of intervention, quick mobilization of
resources and immediate response in emergency situations.
49
á â ã ä ã å å ã æ ç è é ê ë ì ã æ ì í ä ç è ì æ ã ë ì ë ã î æ ï î ì ð ñ ì å
3.2.6 Summary of Expected Outputs:
Table 5. Summary of Expected Outputs
Outcome Outputs
Responsive sanitation governance 1. A clear articulation and sustainable implementation of the national and
and regulatory strengthening local sanitation policies
2. DOH strengthened as the lead sector driver providing technical
assistance at local and national levels.
3. 100% of the LGUs develop their policies, plans and programs and
budgets within the PIPH/AIPH/CIPH.
4. National government agencies with sanitation related mandates
develop their own sanitation strategy, plans and programs and
mainstream this in their instituion’s regular budgets.
5. Sanitation Regulatory Framework developed, approved and
implemented by the relevant agency.
Improved Service Delivery through 1. An integrated and decentralized capacity development system for
Communications and Capacity different types of implementers and situations developed.
Development 2. Benchmark standards on LGU performance and practice established.
3. Different stakeholders mobilized in promoting sustainable sanitation
concepts, practice and behaviour change.
4. Research and development agenda towards sustainable sanitation
solutions and policy reforms.
5. Institutionalized monitoring and evaluation of the sector.
6. A national and local communications plan for sustainable sanitation
and hygiene in place.
Strengthened Strategic Alliances 1. Strong and active national and local multi-sector support group that
will advocate, lead and advance sustainable sanitation polices, plans,
programs, activities.
2. Clear mechanisms for collaboration in knowledge sharing, education
and human resource pooling for awareness raising and knowledge
building.
3. A strong alliance of sanitation service providers organized.
Financing and Adequate 1. Prioritized intervention in highly vulnerable areas that are seriously
Infrastructure Investments affected by the lack of sanitation.
2. Financing strategies and incentive schemes for sustainable
infrastructure developed.
3. Established and enhanced public-private partnerships and sanitation
enterpreneurship.
4. A well-established national account for sanitation.
5. Sanitation investment requirements identified and secured to meet the
MTPDP and MDG targets.
Emergency Sanitation Response 1. Sourcebook and toolkits on appropriate approaches for different
situations developed.
2. Integration of emergency sanitation in disaster response and risk
reduction plans at all levels.
3. Building partnerships and strong coordination mechanisms at local
municipal, provincial and national levels for identifying priority areas
of intervention, quick mobilization of resources and immediate
response in emergency situations.
50

ò ó ô õ ô ö ö ô ÷ ø ù ú û ü ý ô ÷ ý þ õ ø ù ý ÷ ô ü ý ü ô ÿ ÷ ÿ ý ý ö
.3 ROADMAP LOGICAL FRAMEWORK
The following table provides a more detailed presentation of the linkages among the development
goals, outcomes with the corresponding activities, objectively verifiable indicators, means/sources of
verification, risks and assumptions and required inputs as determined by the multi-stakeholder technical
working group tasked with preparing the roadmap. This becomes the basis and guide for developing
detailed plans and programs and monitoring them during the implementation of the Roadmap.
TABLE 6.
SANITATION ROADMAP LOG FRAME
INTERVENTION LOGIC OBJECTIVELY MEANS/SOURCES OF RISK AND

VERIFIABLE INDICATOR VERIFICATION ASSUMPTIONS
Vision: A clean and healthy Philippines
Development Goal by 2015: MDG TARGETS
Halve the proportion of the Achieving 83.8% of the number Official government reports Sanitary toilets may not be
population without sustainable of total households provided good and sustainable due to
access to safe drinking water and with sanitary toilets improper design and poor
basic sanitation hygiene practices.
Outcome 1: Responsive Sanitation Governance and Strengthened Regulatory Mechanisms
Output 1.1
A clear articulation and Compendium of existing and Gap analysis matrix - Available resources
sustainable implementation of new laws, policies and support - Accessibility to relevant
the national sanitation policy programs information
Activities: Inputs:
1) Review and evaluate the relevance of existing sanitation policies, - Relevant reports, literatures and publications
mandates, guidelines and other regulatory frameworks as to their - Meetings and interviews with focal persons
effectiveness. - new approved policy, program packages,budget
2) Review systems for enforcement of existing policies and laws - guidelines for program/project development,
3) Identify applicable changes in the existing policies and frameworks implementation, monitoring and evaluation
4) Identify pending new and amended laws, policies and regulations
related to sanitation including monitoring and enforcement.
5) Develop sanitation programs at all levels to implement the new policy.
Output 1.2
Strengthening DOH as the lead National Sustainable Sanitation Document and Plans, Programs and Bud-
sector driver providing policy Program of DOH developed. Reports gets allocated for sanitation
support and technical assistance
at local and national levels.
Activities: Inputs:
1) Map out and review mandates and assess plans and programs of - Relevant reports, literatures and publications
the DOH that relate to sanitation. - Meetings and interviews with focal persons
2) Define the DOH strategy as the lead sanitation sector driver
Output 1.3
100% of LGUs develop their No. of provincial/city sanita- Reports and documents Available resources
policies, plans, programs and tion plans developed Accessibility to relevant
budgets within the PIPH/AIPH/ within the PIPH/CIPH/AIPH information
CIPH.
Activities: Inputs:
1) Capacitate LGUs in developing their local policies, plans and - Guidelines and tools for LGU policy and planning
programs within the PIPH/AIPH and CIPH (including baseline
assessments, indentification of priority interventions, necessary
ordinances, etc)
2) Establish monitoring and evaluation parameters for LGU level
plans and programs.
51

Output 1.4
National gov’t agencies with At least 7 national government Document and Available information on
sanitation related mandates agencies have their own Reports Plans, Programs and Budgets
develop their own sanitation sanitation strategy and programs. allocated for sanitation
strategy, plans, programs strongly is accessible.
coordinated.
Activities: Inputs:
1) Facilitate the development of agency santiation strategy and - Prepared templates to serve as a guide
programs within the national roadmap framework. - Relevant reports, literatures and publications
2) Identify appropriate inter-agency platforms to oversee streamlined - Meetings and interviews with focal persons
sector coordination mechanisms. - New approved policy, program and budgets
- Guidelines for program/project developemnt,
implementation, monitoring and evaluation.
Output 1.5
Sanitation regulatory framework Policy document on sanitation Enabling law for sanitation Organizing sanitation
developed, approved and regulation is approved by the NG regulation. regulation is a priority of the
implemented by relevant with clear responsibilities among national government.
agencies. NGA with sanitation related
mandates.
Activities Inputs:
1) Collate all existing regulations and standards on sanitation. - Existing laws and standards on sanitation.
2) Organize a study on the appropriate sanitation regulatory
arrangements and performance indicators.
3) Undertake policy studies on the proposed draft bill on Water
Economic Regulation to incorporate wastewater regulation.
4) Review and update the NEDA Board Resolution No. 4 sereis of
1994 and No. 6, series of 1996 to calrify roles and responsibilities
of sanitation related agencies.
SERVICE DELIVERY THROUGH COMMUNICATIONS AND CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT

Output 2.1
Develop an integrated - Manual on the guidelines and - Department Memorandum - Resources for publication,
and decentralized capacity management models; Order endorsing the manual dissemination and
development system for different - Medium term plans at various for the use of sector orientation of the contents
types of implementors and levels - Printed documents of the of the national policy
situations - Functional training/resource plans - The plans represent the
centers at all regions - Documents or reports actual requirements of the
- Web-based training programs on of capacity development sector and are executable
sustainable sanitation activities conducted at the - The centers are available for
- Electronic access to training centers use by other stakeholders for
plans - Websites containing the the same purpose
- Training materials available for training programs - Stakeholders, target audience
use have effective access to
internet
Available qualified trainers
Activities: Inputs:
1) Establish national policies to develop guidelines and management - Relevant reports, literatures and publications
models and technology options which could guide the local - Meetings and interviews with focal persons
government units in planning, implementing, monitoring and
evaluation of sanitation services/program.
2) Formulation of Medium-Term Plans on Capacity Development at
all levels, i.e. National, Institutional/ Agency, Regional/Local, and
Community
3) Strengthening the capacities of Training Centers ( formal/non-formal,
government/academe/etc) to integrate sanitation disciplines into their
programs.
4) Develop the training Plans, materials and e-learning applications
5) Training delivery
52
! " ! # $
Output 2.2
Establish benchmark standards Performance indicators for Monitoring and evaluation Capability to adhere or comply
on LGU performance and LGUs developed checklist utilizing the to standards depend on
practice. benchmark standards available resources
Activities
1) Establish the performance indicators
2) Comparison with Targets of Capacity Building
3) Finalize monitoring and evaluation parameters
Output 2.3
Empower different stakeholders Inventory of core-group: Printed list of target Turn-over of officials who are
towards active involvement trained and to-be-trained participants knowledgeable about the terms
for capacity development in Coordination Plans developed MOU/MOA among of coordination
sustainable sanitation participating agencies/
institutions/ organizations
Activities
1) Identify core-group representing various capacity development
providers and targets: Professional groups, Academe, national
agencies, civic societies and aligning sub-groups of similar
functions
2) Spatial inventory at various levels: national, local, grass-root
based
3) Mechanisms of coordination and communication in place
Output 2.4
Initiate research and Inventory of available database Documents and reports of Inventory is complete and
development towards on research studies consultations, surveys and exhaustive
sustainable sanitation solutions forums;
and policy reforms National Research Agenda on While conforming to effective
Sanitation Sector indicating Report on the analysis of in- and reliable academic design,
gaps and challenges formation gaps and challenges the challenges and gaps
in the sector should reflect practical needs
and solutions to sanitation
concerns
Activities: Inputs:
1) Diagnostics/ Initial Capacity Assessment - Relevant reports, literatures and publications
a. Resources: Existing functions of stakeholders, clarification - Meetings and interviews with focal persons
of functions, identification of gaps: need for institutions - new approved policy, program and budgets
to provide for capacity building or development compe- - guidelines for program/project developemnt, implementation,
tencies monitoring and evaluation.
b. Internal:Goals: redirection of goals of different institu-
tions, clarifying their particular function to reach their
goals Policies: directed towards the goals of zero open
defecation Strategies, Technology: each agency, institution
2) Evaluation: Identification of Challenges

a. Participative evaluation process of existing capacities
b. Assessment of the target community’s need for capacity
development
c. Equate: Limits of capacities and extent of need
3) Formulate the National Research Agenda on Sanitation Sector
indicating gaps and challenges
4) Document best practices on sustainable sanitation.
53
% & ' ( ' ) ) ' * + , - . / 0 ' * 0 1 ( + , 0 * ' / 0 / ' 2 * 3 2 0 4 5 0 )
Output 2.5
Institutionalize regular Monitoring and Assessment Printed documents of the sector Inventory is complete
monitoring and evaluation of integral part of national and local plans and exhaustive.
the sector medium term Sanitation Sector
Plans Printed reports While conforming to
effective and reliable
Monitoring and assessment E-copies of reports in the academic design, the
reports internet challenges and gaps
should reflect practical
Website of the Sanitation Sector needs and
Programs solutions.
Activities Inputs:
1) Develop a unified system to determine access to sanitation services - Existing monitoring and assessment reports on sanitation.
2) Prepare the recurrent water and sanitation sector assessment report
at regular period including the update of economic losses due to
lack of sanitation.
3) Establish a web-based database that includes the indicators
collected for the sector assessment
Output 2.6
National and local Plan is approved and is being reports, communciation materials DOH is leading the
communications plan for implemented at national and local communications strategy.
sanitation and hygiene is in place levels.
Activities: Inputs:
1) Develop the national communications strategy plan. Core messages and resources
2) Coordinate and facilitate the development of local communica- Local core messages and resources
tions strategy based on the local sanitation plans and programs Regular monitoring and evaluation.
3) Monitor and adjust plans based on need.
54
6 7 8 9 8 : : 8 ; < = > ? @ A 8 ; A B 9 < = A ; 8 @ A @ 8 C ; D C A E F A :
Outcome 3: Strengthened Strategic Alliances
Output 3.1
Strong and active national multi-sector Joint activities and programs - Directory of sanitation cham- - A strong sector driver
support group that will advocate, lead conducted pions and key stakeholders. - Availability of funds for
and advance sustainable sanitation
- Event proceedings. coordination and joint
policies, plans, programs and activities
- Minutes of meetings. activities, e.g., secretariat
- Other printed documents and conferences.
Activities: Inputs:
3.1.1 Support and strengthen existing networks such as the Philip- • Strong support from the lead sanitation institutional driver.
pine Ecosan Network (PEN) and the Philippine Development • Funding support for Secretariats for PEN and PDF-TF WSS
Forum-Sub-working Group on Water Supply and Sanitation • Network strengthening activities, like strategic visioning and
(PDF-SWG -WSS) and other networks so it can continue to planning
act as platform for policy and program advocacy, coordination, • Meeting and workshop venues
harmonization and greater synergy among the Champions and
partners. Note:
3.1.2 Identify and gather information on experts, champions, organi- The PEN will be the venue to, among others, discuss new
zations, institutions and stakeholder groups in sanitation at the trends, concepts approaches and technologies, and voice out
national and local levels regulatory and legislative initiatives towards sustainable sanita-
3.1.3 Conduct regular dialogues, fora and conventions among tion in all localities.
sustainable sanitation, champions, decision maker, legislators,
practitioners, advocates at different levels and sectors to pro-
mote sustainable sanitation
Output 3.2
Clear mechanisms for collaboration Establishment of training and educa- - MOU/MOA - A strong sector driver
in knowledge sharing, education, and tion consortia - Curricula - Availability of funds for
human resource pooling for awareness
- Printed Materials training, study tours, re-
and knowledge building
search and publication.
Risks: The Sanitary
Engineering is a dying
profession
Activities: Inputs:
3.2.1 Develop, support and strengthen consortia in the academic, • Directory of relevant organizations, e.g., universities, col-
research and training sectors to institutionalize dissemination of leges, training and research institutes
new knowledge on sustainable sanitation. • Information from relevant websites
3.2.2 Develop/enhance sustainable sanitation curricula and informa- • Funding support for knowledge building, i.e., research and
tion materials for publication and dissemination publication
3.2.3 Establish strong links with international knowledge centers, • Funding support for curriculum development, and informa-
knowledge exchange and training. tion, education and communication programs.
• Funding support for trainings, seminars, workshops, study
tours and other knowledge sharing programs
• Researches, vulnerability assessments and risk assessments
• Sustainable Sanitation technology sourcebooks and toolkits
Output 3.3
A strong alliance of sanitation service Sanitation projects proposed, funded, Project contracts A strong sector driver
providers at national and local levels. implemented and completed Project reports - Formulation and promulga-
MOU/MOA for emergency tion of enabling investment
sanitation policies and sustainable
financing mechanisms
Activities: Inputs:
3.3.1. Develop a database on all sanitation service providers • Directory of service providers
3.3.2 Organize regular fora, dialogues, seminars and workshops • Directory of financing institutions
among sanitation service providers for sustainable sanitation. • Strong policy support from the Executive and Legislative
3.3.3 Facilitate professionalizing and development of sanitation branches of government to make sanitation as an attractive
service providers. investment sector.
55
G H I J I K K I L M N O P Q R I L R S J M N R L I Q R Q I T L U T R V W R K
OUTCOME: FINANCING, INVESTMENTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PROVISION FOR SANITATION
DEVELOPED IN STRATEGIC PRIORITY AREAS.
Output 4.1
Prioritized intervention in List of highly vulnerable areas Vulnerability maps Risks:
highly vulnerable areas that are and corresponding maps Concerned agencies do not
seriously affected by the lack of have the information and maps
sanitation Operational database
Database system developed
Policy prioritizing sanitation Copy of the policy No funding is available to
investment in highly vulnerable undertake proposed project on
areas the inventory, identification and
Copy of the criteria and mapping of highly vulnerable
guideline areas
Investment priority criteria and
guidelines
Assumptions:
Concerned agencies willing
to share information and
resources are made available to
produce lacking info and maps
Activities Inputs:
1) Inventory, Identification and mapping of highly vulnerable List of available information and maps from concerned agencies
areas Relevant statistics on highly vulnerable areas
2) Creation of a database based on the results of the inventory Relevant statistics on school sanitation facilities
and mapping for use of planners and decisions makers
Relevant information on sanitation situation of priority tourist
3) Formulate policy ensuring that highly vulnerable areas be given areas Relevant information on sanitation situation of IP areas
high priority for investment for sanitation
4) Preparation of prioritization criteria and guidelines for invest-
ment allocation to highly vulnerable areas
Output 4.2
Financing strategies and incen- Sustainable sanitation financing Viable sanitation financing Risks:
tive schemes for sustainable models models Not a priority and no funding
infrastructure developed. Package of sanitation incentives available
Framework for the grant of
sanitation incentives Assumptions:
Government priority with
Sanitation incentive schem funding available
Activities: Inputs:
1) Develop clear national and local policy on investment for List of government existing funded programs involving sanitation
sanitation and its regular inclusion in the GAA, MTPDP and education, infrastructure and other capital investments
MTPIP Inventory and assessment of current models on sanitation
2) Undertake a study on sanitation tariff methodologies, cost financing
recovery schemes, subsidies and incentives Inventory of available incentive packages (if any)
3) Conduct study for the tracking of sanitation fees and funds,
penalties being collected and disbursed by the LGUs
4) Undertake study on costs of sustainable sanitation technol-
ogy approaches
5) Develop guidelines for pro poor sanitation.
6) Develop and implement a sustainable sanitation financing
framework
• Undertake a study on sustainable sanitation financing
• Develop guidelines for the development of local financing
policy on sanitation
• Explore the adoption of a sector-wide approach in
sanitation for ODA funds
7) Provide investment for the implementation of the National
Sewerage and Septage Program
8) Develop the policy for the participation of GFIs and PDAF
for large scale sanitation infrastructure development and
financing
56
X Y Z [ Z \ \ Z ] ^ _ ` a b c Z ] c d [ ^ _ c ] Z b c b Z e ] f e c g h c \
Output 4.3
Established/Enhanced PPPs and Sustainable sanitation program Approve SS program within the Risks:
sanitation entrepreneurship under PPP scheme framework of PPP No interest in PPP
SMEs dealing with sustainable Operational SMEs on sanitation for sanitation service
sanitation service provision provision provision
No interest in sanitation
business
Assumption:
Feasibility and
acceptability of PPP for
SS program
High interest from
interested parties for
sanitation business
ventures
Activities: Inputs:
1) Develop the policy for the promotion of sanitation Relevant information on sanitation-related enterprises both
entrepreneurship and PPP local and foreign
2) Undertake aggressive IEC and social marketing to private sector Round table discussion and meeting with relevant stakeholders
3) Conduct a study to document PPP in sanitation service provision
4) Develop standards for PPPs for sanitation service delivery Review laws, rules and regulations on PPP
5) Conduct R and D, Capacity Development and Institution Building Review and compilation of similar undertaking of countries
for sustainable sanitation in the region
Networking with the private sector
Formation of a loose network of sanitation service providers
Output 4.4
A well-established national Sanitation accounting system Accounting system reports Risks:
account for sanitation as part of the national account reflecting sanitation expenditure No interest in PPP
system in place and budget for sanitation service
All sanitation expenditures and provision
budgets effectively captured by No interest in sanitation
the system business
Assumption:
Feasibility and
acceptability of PPP for
SS program
High interest from
interested parties for
sanitation business
ventures
Activities: Inputs:
1) Conduct of the study on developing the sanitation accounting Relevant information on sanitation-related enterprises both
system to capture how much is being spent for sanitation. local and foreign
2) Development and operationalization of the sanitation accounting Round table discussion and meeting with relevant stakeholders
system Review laws, rules and regulations on PPP
3) Policies and guidelines for the adoption of the system developed Review and compilation of similar undertaking of countries
and implemented in the region
Networking with the private sector
Formation of a loose network of sanitation service providers
Output 4.5
Investment requirements to meet Concrete sanitation targets and MTPDP and MTPIP Risks:
the MDG and MTPDP targets budgets included in the MTPDP documents and reports Sanitation program still not
identified and secured. and MTPIP included in the MTPDP and
MTPIP but still considered
part of the water sector target
and budget
Assumption:
Recognition of the
importance of sanitation
making it part of the priority
agenda for the next medium
term planning
Activities: Inputs:
1) Strong advocacy and lobby for making sanitation part of the Coordination with concerned agencies
priority program of the government Networking with interest groups to help in the advocacy work
2) A distinct sanitation program, project, activities (PPA) for Issuance of national directives making sanitation a priority of
all agencies with sanitation mandate including LGUs with the local and national governments
corresponding targets and budgets
57
i j k l k m m k n o p q r s t k n t u l o p t n k s t s k v n w v t x y t m
OUTCOME 5: Emergency Sanitation Response in Place
Output 5.1
Sourcebook and tool kit Complete sourcebooks and Copy of the sourcebook and Risks:
appropriate approaches for toolkits for sanitation in toolkits Lack of support from the
different situations emergency situations Copy of translated government
Translation of sourcebooks and sourcebook and toolkit Lack of recognition of
toolkits in major Filipino dialects the importance of the
sourcebook and toolkit
Assumption:
Availability of budget to
develop the sourcebook and
toolkit
High interest from concerned
stakeholders
Activities: Inputs:
1) Review of related materials to develop the sourcebook and toolkit List of possible sources of materials for the development of
2) Survey of needs for the toolkit and sourcebooks on sanitation for sourcebook and toolkits
emergency situations List of websites where materials can be sourced
3) Develop the sourcebook and toolkits and pretest the use of the Lead organization to develop the sourcebook and toolkits
same
Output 5.2
Integration of emergency Guidelines for the integration Copy of the guidelines Risks:
sanitation in disaster and risk of sanitation in disaster risk Copy of the plan LGUs and national govt
reduction plans at all levels reduction plan not interested in integrating
Emergency sanitation plan emergency sanitation in DRR
Assumption:
Highly appreciated and
guidelines adopted by LGUs
and the national government
Activities: Inputs:
1) Review of current disaster risk reduction plans Copy of current DRR planning guidelines
2) Advocacy to include emergency sanitation in DRR planning at all Sample copy of current DRR plan of an LGU
levels Sufficient technical assistance from concerned agencies or
3) Pilot the preparation of emergency sanitation plan as an integral organizations to help LGUs
part of DRR planning Wiling LGUs to pilot the preparation of the emergency
sanitation plan
Output 5.3
Building a partnership for quick MOA or MOU among Copy of the MOA/MOU Risks:
mobilization of logistics for concerned agencies and LGUs Copy of the directory No interested party or
sanitation in emergency situations Directory of contact persons or organization
organizations at the local and No budget and resources
national levels who can provide available
technical and other needed
assistance during emergency Assumptions:
situations Budget is allocated and
made available to encourage
partnership building and
networking
Expertise and other
resources are available to
provide assistance in time of
emergencies
Activities: Inputs:
1) Identify potential partners and create a database for easy contacting Relevant list of organizations and agencies that may be
2) Conduct exploratory meetings with interested parties interested in networking and partnership building and their
profiles
3) Find a champion to help and actively advocate for building networks
and partnerships Funding support for the proposed initiative
4) Identify possible sources of resources to be pooled
5) Set up funds for the activity
58
z { | } | ~ ~ | | } | | ~
4.0 ROADMAP PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES
4.0 ROADMAP PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND
ACTIVITIES
Each of the five strategies developed to meet the challenges faced by the sanitation sector is translated into
a cluster of priority programs and activities supporting a specific policy directive. These programs will also
pursue policy reforms to enable the sector institutions to perform their mandates effectively and for the
sanitation sector to attain its goals. Note that while the timeframe of 2025 is consistent to the Water Supply
Roadmap, the Sanitation Roadmap has proposed to define its long term plans in the context of three (3)
MTPDPs.- 2010 to 2028.
4.1 POLICY DIRECTIONS

Responsive sanitation governance and regulatory strengthening programs are designed to
achieve desired policy, institutional transformations and regulatory arrangements by 2028 and will
focus on the following:
• Good sanitation governance through national and localized sanitation policy and programs
prioritizing the sanitation sector and creating clear, transparent and accountable coordination
mechanisms at all levels,
• Strengthening of the DOH as the institutional driver to lead sanitation-related plans and
programs;
• Amending and/or updating the Sanitation Code to comply with more recent laws with
provisions relating to Sanitation;
• Clear policies aimed at integrating and decentralizing implementation of sustainable sanitation
programs, including programs targeting behavioral change, support to multi-level stakeholder
platforms, and infrastructure and investment;
• Clear standards- based sanitation regulatory policies and arrangements at various levels.
• Policy on integrated water supply and sanitation oversight, regulation and tariffs.
Service delivery and capacity development programs are designed to generate results translated
into stronger capacities of NGAs, LGUs and SSPs in program planning, implementation, monitoring
and evaluation in sanitation. It will also focus communication planning aimed to change behavior
in proper hygiene. The policy directions will focus on the following:
• Establishing capacity development systems for different levels of implementors and
situations;
• Benchmarking standards and monitoring for LGU performance;
• Communication and behavior change campaigns for zero open defecation;
• Strengthening sector monitoring and evaluation system at different levels which will be
61

necessary to support fundamental planning and evaluation of sanitation programs and activities
Formulation of evidence-based policies and programs through the generation of information
from sector studies;
• Involving key stakeholders towards their active participation in capacity development;
• Encouraging advocacy and health education activities among heads of households to improve
awareness, and modify behavior and practices of people on hygiene and sanitation; and
• Institutionalizing the creation and development of barangay sanitation volunteers.
Strategic alliance building programs are designed to strengthen the sanitation sector through
clear and strong policies on advocacy, awareness raising, education and enabling investment
environment. The policy directions will focus on the following:
• Facilitating an enabling environment for multi-sectoral and broad-based stakeholder
participation at the national and local levels.
There must be a clear policy to engage all relevant stakeholders from the government, donor
community, academic and civil society to promote and advance a national sanitation agenda.
The Lead Sector Driver, the DOH, must consciously tap existing networks and alliances,
and cooperation, collaboration and harmonization of sanitation programs and projects.
The PEN and the PDF-TF WSS are existing platforms for this purpose. Likewise, the
Lead Sector Driver must find ways to strengthen local support groups engage in sanitation
programs.
• Enhancing institutional knowledge and understanding of sustainable sanitation.

• Involving the organized participation of service providers and private sector stakeholders.
Financing, investments and infrastructure programs are designed to provide for sanitation
as a development goal, prioritizing highly vulnerable areas, creating sanitation funds at local and
national levels. The policy directions will focus on the following:
• Creating the national account for sanitation and sewerage.
• Prioritizing access to sustainable sanitation especially for the poor.
• Developing and promoting innovative financing schemes to promote sanitation investments,
entrepreneurship and private sector involvement (e.g. revolving funds, micro-financing
strategies, leveraging of resources, etc).
Sanitation in disaster preparedness programs are designed to address sanitation concerns in

emergency situations, including the provision of appropriate relief and rehabilitation responses.
Policy directions will focus on the following:
• Defining minimum standards and emergency protocols for sanitation, hygiene and water
supply response for different types of emergency situations;
• Integrating sanitation and hygiene concerns in disaster and risk reduction plans at all levels;
and
• Harnessing the broad alliances and platforms along with other national agencies and local
government units for quick mobilization of logistics.
Table 7 provides a more detailed description of policy directions and programs.
62
¡ ¢ £ ¤ ¥ ¦ § ¡ § ¨ ¢ £ § ¡ ¦ § ¦ © ¡ ª © § « ¬ §
TABLE 7
POLICY DIRECTIONS AND PROGRAMS 2010 - 2028 ( 3 MTPDPS)
POLICY DIRECTION 2009 BASELINE SHORT-TERM PLAN MEDIUM TERM PLAN LONG TERM PLAN
AND PROGRAMS (2010-2013) (By 2016) (By 2028)
Outcome 1: Responsive Sanitation Governance and Regulatory Strengthening
1. A National Sanitation Sanitation Policy not a priority Sanitation declared a Sanitation Fund reflected Sanitation as a
Policy Expressed in the in the MTPDP & MTPIP (2004- priority policy in all in the regular GAA National Policy
MTPDP & MTPIP 2010) agencies concerned under the National Social consistently reflected
in sanitation with Fund (Pro-poor Fund) in all MTPDP and
corresponding budget line MTPIP
items proposed for GAA
Sanitation a priority in
the MTPDP & MTPIP
(2010-2016)
2. A National Sanitation Sanitation Programs mostly A National Sustainable Sanitation integrated in All LGUs shall
Program Implemented limited to advocacy and use, Sanitation Plan all LGU development invest in sanitation
harmoniously by all distribution of toilet bowl launched and rolled out plans (PPP, joint venture,
concerned agencies (with a decentralized outsourcing, BOT,
implementation) etc.)
SUSEA Project is tasked to A short to medium Communications Plan Communications Plan
develop DOH National Plan and term National implemented implemented
Communications Plan Sustainable Sanitation
MDGF is also developing a Communications Plan
communications plan.
SUSEP will conduct a demand A social marketing
study on sanitation professionals program for sanitation is
developed
3. Amended National DOH has started updating the Sanitation Code a priority An amended National All LGUs adopt
Sanitation Code with Sanitation Code in 1995 in the national legislative Sanitation Code passed their local sanitation
strong and effective The past three (3) Congresses agenda (Legislative and signed into law code and vigorously
regulatory framework has not acted on any amendment Executive Development implement it.
for sanitation on the Sanitation Code Advisory Council)
- Decentralization (LGC Less than 10 LGUs have local Amendment of the
1991) sanitation codes and these are all sanitation code filed in
- Updated Standards project driven both houses of congress
- Strong Sanctions Current sanitation code is not
- In harmony with culture sensitive to indigenous
Clean Water Act, peoples nor gender sensitive.
Solid Waste Mgt. Act,
Urban Development &
Housing Act
4. Integrated water and Integration of functions at local DOH providing interim The amended Sanitation A vibrant National
sanitation oversight level is limited to a few LGUs leadership Code includes the Water Supply and
function at national & and still project driven creation of a National Sanitation Authority
local levels Oversight function in water Water and Sanitation in place
NEDA SCWR to lead Authority
& sanitation of IACEH and the sector oversight and
NEDA InfraCom SCWR is not provides direction.
palpable
Existing Basic Education

Curriculum (BEC) not updated
on sanitation development
Sanitation is absent in
agricultural development
5. Policy on sanitation No comprehensive sanitation Policy instruments and Sanitation fully Sanitation concerns
regulatory framework. standards specialy for informal communication plans of integrated in all policy mainstreamed and
and standards settlers, schools, gyms, potential other sectors on sanitation instruments and fully implemented by
evacuation centers and other reviewed communication plans of all sectors
public bldgs. Building Code is Specific areas that need other sectors
silent on exit of effluent from to be updated in the
septic tanks. sanitation code identified
Policy Study on sanitation
Weak implementation of regulation
water quality mgt. and septage NEDA Board Resolution
treatment clarifying mandate for
Sanitation not a priority in their sanitation regulation.
local development plan except
for a few LGUs.
63
® ¯ ° ¯ ± ± ¯ ² ³ ´ µ ¶ · ¸ ¯ ² ¸ ¹ ° ³ ´ ¸ ² ¯ · ¸ · ¯ º ² » º ¸ ¼ ½ ¸ ±
POLICY DIRECTION AND SHORT-TERM PLAN MEDIUM TERM PLAN LONG TERM PLAN
2009 BASELINE
PROGRAMS (2010-2013) (By 2016) (By 2028)
Outcome 2: Improved Service Delivery, Communications and Capacity Development
1. Policy is integrated LGUS operating different Assess the existing materials Develop LGU capacities LGUs capable of facilitating
and decentralized sanitation systems not on capacity development and to enforce national policies and overseeing local
implementation of necessarily sustainable update them if needed including drafting of specific sustainable sanitation
sustainable sanitation DILG Toolbox for decision Develop official guidelines local ordinance programs are in place.
programs makers and management models and Strengthen the capacities of at
technology options for LGUs least one Resource Center per Enforcement of policies by
on PIME region to integrate sanitation the LGUs.
Enhance package for LCEs disciplines into their programs
Develop/Improve training
2. Policy on capacity Established partnerships
Policy adopted and plans, materials and core
development system and capacities with other
implemented by the DILG trainers for capacity
for different levels agencies/institutions for
for LGUs. development
of implementers and exchange of information or
Develop E-learning program
situations training
on capacity development
3. Policy on LGU None Establish the performance Regular Monitoring and Regular Monitoring and
performance and indicators for LGUs and evaluation of the LGU and evaluation of the LGU
practice oriented thru service providers• service provider performance and service provider
benchmarking standards Establish benchmarks of performance
and monitoring LGU or service provider
performance
4. Policy on involving relevant SuSEP Program that is Identify core-group Engage the core-group as Capacity development
stakeholder towards active enhancing curriculum for representing various capacity initiators and resource persons program institutionalized
participation in sanitation engineers; non-formal development providers and for capacity development within the sector and within
capacity development component (trainings for targets: Professional groups, activities among the other individual organizations
sanitary inspectors); Academe, national agencies, members of their respective with continuous
Academe based consortium civic societies and aligning agencies/ institutions or improvement impetus to
on sanitation sub-groups of similar function organizations address specific concerns
5. Policy on barangay level Community-based sanitation Train at least one Barangay Engage and integrate the Barangay sanitation officers
volunteer workers for volunteers in SuSEA pilot sanitation volunteer per functions of barangay are formally recognized and
sanitation areas barangay sanitation volunteer into the employed at the grassroot
mainstream programs of the level while volunteerism is
sector still advocated
6. Programs increasing There are only 500 practicing Develop a social marketing Carry out social marketing Sanitary Engineering is
the number of sanitary out of 2,500 registered program for sanitary program for sanitary a recognized profession
engineering professionals Sanitary Engineers engineering professionals engineering professionals that is an authority on
and continuously Low effective demand for the Explore how to re-engineer Introduce improvement sustainable sanitation
improving the quality of practice of SE profession the sanitary engineering in sanitary engineering and is an attractive
education on sustainable SE institutions are closing(few curriculum involving the curriculum in higher education profession at par with the
sanitation and public health enrolees and recently, only principles and practices of institutions other professions in the
engineering 15% pass the board) sustainable sanitation country
A study on how to engage
better the skills of sanitary
engineers
7. Programs for sanitary Less than 2000 Sanitary Develop the program on Introduce formal curriculum All local government
inspectors/sanitarians Inspectors (law says one SI professionalizing sanitation for sanitarians to higher units employ sufficient
that would force per 20,000 popn); inspectors at a level with the education institutions professional sanitarians/
them to conform to Minimum requirement is HS rest of the RHU professionals: Carry out social marketing sanitation inspectors duly
the requirements of graduate; develop or strengthen formal program for sanitation responsive to the needs
sustainable sanitation DOH has ongoing project on curriculum for sanitarians and inspectors/sanitarians of sustainable sanitation
programs in terms of professionalizing Sanitation improve compensation programs
numbers and effective Inspectors Develop social marketing
performance program for sanitation
inspectors/ sanitarians
8. Formulation of evidence- Few studies are available Identification of gaps and Introduce and promote All policies and laws, plans
based policies and locally challenges on sector policies sustainable sanitation and programs, technology
programs on sustainable Poor link between and programs studies in higher education options, management
sanitation through information-generating sector Sector capacity assessment institutions strategies on sustainable
generation of information and policy decision makers and program development Carry out sector development sanitation are evidence-
from sector studies and program planners on research studies and programs among stakeholders based
development on research and development
Strengthen linkages among Institutionalize linkages with
information-generators and decision makers and program
policy decision makers and planners
program planners
9. Sanitation sector policies National Sector assessment Establish a regular monitoring Regular water and sanitation Institutionalize a national
and programs assessment Process has just started under and assessment system sector assessment and assessment, monitoring and
are institutionalized DILG including database generation reporting evaluation system for short
conducted regularly or Recurrent sector assessment and long term decision-
according to the need for reported regularly to policy making
information decision makers and program
planners
64
¾ ¿ À Á À Â Â À Ã Ä Å Æ Ç È É À Ã É Ê Á Ä Å É Ã À È É È À Ë Ã Ì Ë É Í Î É Â
POLICY DIRECTION SHORT-TERM PLAN MEDIUM TERM PLAN LONG TERM PLAN
2009 BASELINE
AND PROGRAMS (2010-2013) (By 2016) (By 2028)
Outcome 3: Strengthening Strategic Alliances
1. Policy on facilitating an Local Government Facilitate the creation Strong local sanitation Strong local sanitation
enabling environment Code provisions on local of local resource pools, platforms supportive of platforms supportive of
for multi-sectoral development boards (one- alliances or platforms for national sanitation policies national sanitation policies
and broad-based fourth representation sanitation (individuals/ established in selected established nationwide
stakeholder from the Civil Society) organization) to provide highly urbanized areas Institutionalize
participation, relevant Issues: the proper representation Institutionalize partnerships on sanitation
to sanitation at the a. No local Sanitation in the Sanitation body partnerships on sanitation among government
national and local levels body Promote partnerships among government and civil society, POs,
b. Accreditation rules on sanitation among and civil society, POs, academe, media, religious
are considered ob- government and civil academe, media, religious sector and private sector
stacle to participation society, POs, academe, sector and private nationwide
media, religious sector sector in selected highly
and private sector in urbanized areas
consonance with the
Local Government Code
and other relevant laws.
Support the development
of the Sanitation Alliance
Guidebook
2. Policy on organized Except for Metro Manila Encourage water and Facilitate the creation Strong local sanitation
participation of service where two private sanitation professionals of local sanitation professionals and service
providers and other concessionaires are and service providers into professionals and service providers established
relevant private sector involved in Sanitation, effective alliances providers to promote
stakeholders private sector involvement sustainable sanitation
in the other places are
unregulated, uncontrolled
and often times non-
existent. Most water
districts are remiss in their
mandate in providing
sanitation facilities and
services
3. Policy on Good No sanitation governance Through the various Sanitation Alliances or Platforms:
Governance, at national and local
Define a program to Advocate a legislative Implement the program
Transparency and level. Sanitation is not
operationalize how program to operationalize in localizing and
Accountability on recognized as a human
sanitation can be accepted how sanitation can be operationalizing sanitation
sanitation right and a public good
as a human right and as a accepted as a human right as a human right and as a
public good. and as a public good. public good.
At the local level, the Sanitation body will:
Develop indicators Monitor the indicators and progress of sanitation
and monitor progress related plans and programs and performances
of sanitation related
plans and programs and
performances
4. Policy to promote Present guidelines are Develop a strategy for Implement the strategy on participatory collaborative
informed choices on prescriptive and limited participatory collaborative mechanisms for active evidence-based knowledge
sanitation options in scope. New knowledge mechanisms for active sharing and policy advocacy
base (Sanitation evidence-based knowledge
Sourcebook and other sharing and policy
materials) is available but advocacy
not widely disseminated
and not institutionalized
65
Ï Ð Ñ Ò Ñ Ó Ó Ñ Ô Õ Ö × Ø Ù Ú Ñ Ô Ú Û Ò Õ Ö Ú Ô Ñ Ù Ú Ù Ñ Ü Ô Ý Ü Ú Þ ß Ú Ó
POLICY DIRECTION 2009 BASELINE SHORT-TERM PLAN MEDIUM TERM PLAN LONG TERM PLAN
AND PROGRAM (2010-2013) (By 2016) (By 2028)
Outcome 4: Financing, Infrastructure and Investments in Priority Strategic Areas
1. Policy for priority none Vulnerable areas identified; Investment requirements Investment requirements
investment towards highly Criteria set for prioritization; identified provided
vulnerable areas
Creation of a database
2. Clear national/local none Study on sanitation tariff Clear national policy on A distinct sanitation program
policy on vinvestment metholodies, cost recovery investments for sanitation regularly included in the
for sanitation and regular schemes, subsidies and MTPDP and MTPIP
inclusion in the MTPDP/ incentives
MTPIP
Tracking of sanitation funds Guidelines for the Regular budgets allocated for
being collected and disbursed development of local sanitation at LGU level
by the local governments financing policy for sanitation
Proposals for Funding Funding for research and Regular fund allocation
including Research and development made available for R and D and Capacity
Development and Capacity Development
Development
3. Policy promoting very limited grants/loans Study on cost of the Results of studies embodied Financing policies in place.
sanitation financing technology approaches in policies and is now in place.
options/strategies:
a) micro-finance none Develop and undertake study
on sustainable sanitation
b) loans/grants financing
4. Policy providing special none Develop guidelines for pro- Implementation in priority Zero subsidy for sanitation
pro-poor sanitation funds poor sanitation subsidies areas
5-10% of the 23% provided 20-30% of the 23% provided Remaining balance (of the
with sanitation facilities with sanitation facilities 23%) provided with sanitation
facilities
5. Policy on Sanitation National Sewerage and Metro Manila Septage Metro Manila Septage Metro Manila Septage
Infrastructure Septage Program Report treatment capacity of about treatment capacity of about treatment capacity of about
Development 1,800 cu. m. per day realized/ 2,000 cu. m. per day realized/ 3,100 cu. m. per day realized/
constructed; constructed; constructed;
Outside Metro Manila, 14 Outside Metro Manila, 57 Outside Metro Manila, more
sewerage/septage systems sewerage/septage systems than 76 sewerage/septage
built, operated and maintained built,operated and maintained management systems, built
and maintained
6. Policy for the limited Undertake aggressive IEC/ PPPs in place for sanitation Standards for PPPs in place
Promotion of sanitation social marketing service delivery for sanitation service delivery
entrepreneurship are developed
Facilitate access to financing
PPP in sanitation service
provision
Outcome 5: Adequate Sanitation and Hygiene Promotion Mainstreamed in Emergency Response
1. Clear policy on an Recurring problems and Develop a policy on broad- Facilitate the creation of Institutionalize national and
integrated water, sanitation challenges regarding lack based sanitation response to national and local broad- local broad-based sanitation
and hygiene approach in of sanitation in emergency emergency situations based sanitation alliances alliances to respond to
emergency situations. situations Toilets segregated 1:50 toilet to people ratio; to respond to emergency emergency situations
• Maximum no. of people by sex situations 1:20 toilet to people ratio
3: 1 female to male toilet ratio
/toilet ratio 1:1 female to male ratio of 1:20 toilet to people ratio (international standard for
toilets (international standard for humanitarian response)
• Acceptable, safe, humanitarian response)
No toilet to people ratio 3:1 female to male toilet ratio
hygienic toilet systems standard 3:1 female to male toilet ratio
• Handwashing facilities
2. Program to develop more Rental of portalets from Design of alternative eco- More mobile sanitation More mobile sanitation
and or alternative mobile private companies. friendly toilet systems facilities for immediate facilities for immediate
sanitation facilities for deployment when required. deployment when required.
quick deployment when
required.
3. Program to provide No WASH Program in place; Regularly carry out capacity Regularly carry out capacity Regularly carry out capacity
WASH orientation to many adhoc initiatives development for WASH in development for WASH in development for WASH in
disaster response groups Emergency situations Emergency situations Emergency situations
66
à á â ã â ä ä â å æ ç è é ê ë â å ë ì ã æ ç ë å â ê ë ê â í å î í ë ï ð ë ä
4.2 PROPOSED PRIORITY PROGRAMS IN THE SANITATION SECTOR
The PSR proposes at least 18 major programs or projects under the five outcomes to support the
sector:
A. Outcome 1: Responsive Sanitation Governance and Regulatory Strengthening
1. Strengthening of coordination mechanism at national level for sanitation
programs
This program aims to establish effective coordination mechanism among national
stakeholders on sanitation. It specifically aims to: 1)Map out existing government/
non-government institutions and their specific sanitation related functions/ mandates,
2) Review and rationalize these functions/ mandates of existing government/non-
government organizations/institutions, 3) For each agency to develop their sanitation
plans and programs and coordinate these at national level platforms, and 4) strengthen
the DOH as the lead sector driver.
2. Implementation of the National Sustainable Sanitation Planning Framework
and Processes
The national sustainable sanitation programs aim to be integrated with local development
plans through enhancement of LGU planning capacities. The programs specifically aim
to: (i) develop processes for preparing medium-term and long-term national sustainable
sanitation plans/programs that are updated according to the government’s medium term
planning cycle; (ii) develop the capacity of LGUs at all levels in planning, implementation,
monitoring and evaluation of sustainable sanitation programs; and (iii) update local level
(municipal and provincial) sanitation codes and ordinances based on the needs of local
communities. Such programs will be launched at the national level. However, similar
conferences and workshops will be carried out at the provincial and municipal levels to
raise the level of public consciousness on sanitation issues and programs.
Following are specific activities to effectively implement the NSSP:
• Advocate sanitation agenda to be included in the MTPDP and MTPIP as a line item
to ensure allocation of financial resources;
• Advocate for the provision of grants and/or technical assistance to the National
Government Agencies (NGAs)/Offices who are engaged in sanitation related
projects/facilities.
• Consolidate all recommendations for further amendment of the Sanitation Code to
comply with existing environmental laws such as Clean Water Act and Ecological
Solid Waste Management Act; and
• Establish and institutionalize regular monitoring mechanism on sanitation program
accomplishments at LGU level.
These activities will be facilitated by DOH as the interim leader in coordination and
consultation with the NEDA SCWR.
3. Strengthening of the LGU Institutional Framework and Advocacy for ensuring
provision of adequate sanitation services
This program primarily aims to achieve institutional reforms and coordination
mechanisms among LGU local chief executives to consider sanitation aspects as priority
program in addressing current problems on environment, community health and safety.
This will be achieved through regular advocacy dialogues, distribution of IEC materials,
organized campaign for zero open defecations, strengthening linkages with other
67
ñ ò ó ô ó õ õ ó ö ÷ ø ù ú û ü ó ö ü ý ô ÷ ø ü ö ó û ü û ó þ ö ÿ þ ü ü õ
stakeholders, etc. Review and revisiting of LGU sanitation codes and ordinance will be
carried out to identify proposed changes and integrate policies to prioritize sanitation
concerns.
4. Policy study for the appropriate and comprehensive regulatory framework for
sanitation.
This study is required to be the basis of formulating an appropriate and comprehensive
regulatory framework for sanitation. This includes the compilation of existing standards
and coming up with a clear standards-based regulation parameters. This study will be
a review of sanitation policy and legislation from 1976 to 2009 with the end view of
formulating recommendations on sanitation policies including how economic regulation
for sanitation services can also be put in place. The study will answer questions such as
should the NWRB and LWUA play a role in economic regulation for sewerage projects,
similar to what the MWSS Regulatory Office is now doing with its regulation by contract
arrangements with their private concessionaires.
B. Outcome 2: Improved Service Delivery Through Communications and Capacity
Development
5. Development of a Sanitation Human Resource Development Framework
The government shall develop a program that will formulate national guidelines that
shall integrate and direct all agencies, sectors and other stakeholders to align their
goals, strategies and courses of action on the overall aim of a national sustainable
sanitation program. This program shall design capacity development systems through
the formulation of guidelines or management models on technology options, social
marketing/advocacy strategies, and coordination and linkages techniques which could
guide any interested entity in planning, implementing, monitoring and evaluating
sustainable sanitation services or programs.
The components of this program include (a)an inventory and assessment of the
existing materials on capacity development from 1976 to 2009, (b)development/update
of official national guidelines and management models and technology options, and
(c)translating the national guidelines for key sector stakeholder requirements such as for
LCEs, PPDCs/MPDCs, and other entities.
6. Stakeholders Capacity Development and Empowerment
This program shall enhance the capacity of human resources and organizations in
planning, implementing and evaluating sanitation programs, developing and improving
designs on sanitation, technology and coordinating sustainable sanitation projects/
programs. These shall include national and local agencies, professionals and practitioners
such as sanitary engineers, sanitarians/sanitation inspectors, public health specialists,
academe, civil society, and other similar groups. There are two basic objectives under
this program (1)to increase the number of entities/organizations or human resources
to meet the desired workforce and (2)to improve the standard of performance or
quality of competencies needed to achieve high degree of compliance to acceptable
sustainable sanitation systems.
The program components include (1) Organization and mobilization of core-groups
representing various capacity development providers and targets (2)Development of
social marketing activities for sanitation professionals, (3) Enhancement of formal and
non-formal education programs, (4) Establishment of physical infrastructure support,
(5)Implementation of Training Activities.
68

7. Maintaining Quality of Training Programs
To ensure high quality of capacity development or training programs, the government
embarks on quality assurance programs. This shall entail the development of gold
standards, benchmarks, and performance indicators, assessment of training programs
and evaluation of trained individuals. Evaluation of training programs shall be conducted
by the government agencies and validated by independent assessment bodies.
The components of this program include: (1)development of standards, benchmarks,
performance indicators, (2)assessment of capacity development activities, (3)validation
by independent assessment bodies.
8. Research and Development
The program on research and development shall provide information in order to support
the formulation of evidence-based policies and decision making. It aims to strengthen
linkages between information-generating sector and policy decision makers and program
planners. The components of this program include: (1)Assessment of information
gaps and challenges of the sector, (2)Sector capacity assessment, (3)Formulating the
Research and Development Agenda (4) Coordination among information-generators
and policy decision makers under the sustainable sanitation program, and (5)Actual
specific research proposals developed.
9. Strengthening Water and Sanitation Monitoring and Evaluation
Sector Monitoring and Evaluation shall be strengthened at different levels to support
fundamental planning, implementation, and evaluation of sanitation programs and
activities. This program links with the PWSSR priority program on Sector Baseline
Assessment. Monitoring shall ensure proper alignment of activities with standards
while results of evaluation will confirm or negate assumptions on policies and plans.
The program intends to provide immediate and long-term corrective measures on
strategies that need to be rectified to conform to an optimal achievement of goals
and objectives of sustainable sanitation program. The components of this program
include: (1) Formulation of Water and Sanitation Monitoring and Evaluation Procedures
(2) Recurrent sector assessment and reporting, and (3) Establishment of web-based
database and information-exchange forums.
10. National Advocacy Program on Sustainable Sanitation
The sanitation roadmap aims to engage and capacitate national and sector agencies
and institutions and other stakeholders with the ultimate aim of enabling (1) village
or local communities to manage their own sanitation programs towards eliminating
open defecation practices and (2) sanitation service providers to manage wastes in a
sustainable fashion. To achieve this, it is fundamental that people themselves must
realize that the consequences of their (un)hygienic behavior and practices result to
demeaning quality of life, and for them to actively demand for reforms on sanitation
at the grass-roots level. The choice of methods of intervention in finding meaningful
solutions to sanitation problems should be initiated by these same people who clamor
for assistance and guidance so that they are made responsible for setting up their own
sanitation facilities and services.
The success of this agenda depends on how the target population would change their
behavior and practices by motivating them through effective education and information
programs (predisposing factors), by enabling them to have access to technology and
other resources with reinforcing factors such as collectively enhancing behavior and
practices of all community members.
69
! " #
The National Advocacy Program on Sustainable Sanitation shall have the following
components: (1) Development of a National Communication Plan, (b) Development of
Information, Education, Communication and Motivation materials, (c) Implementation
of the Communication Plan, (d) Monitoring and Evaluation of the communication plan.
11. National Campaign on Zero Open Defecation
This program aims to raise awareness on the need for sanitation and to use communication
and hygiene promotion to trigger behavior change. The strategy is to get barangays and
municipalities to declare themselves as Open Defecation Free (ODF Barangay/City/
Municipality) and to encourage local legislation on penalties against open defecators.
This local legislation will be supported by facilitating or enabling the construction of
basic sanitation facilities. This is a campaign that relates to the MDG based targets of
reducing the number of households without sanitary toilets. The program calls for
rewards and incentives for ODF communities. In addition to toilet construction at the
household level, the project will also cover hygiene promotion and capacity building.
To be implemented starting March 2010 to February 2013, the total project cost is
estimated to be P13.3 B. Designated lead project coordinator is the DOH and lead
implementers will be the LGUs with support from DILG, and GFIs.
11. A Study on pro poor sanitation technology approaches
This study aims to identify, document and evaluate available pro poor sanitation
approaches in order to provide affordable sanitation options to those in the bottom
of the pyramid. Implementation period is from January 2011 to December 2012 with
a total project cost of P1.5 M. The identified lead agency is DOH with support from
DILG, NAPC, LWUA, DENR, DPWH, NCIP NGOs, the academe and LGUs.
11. B Program on pro poor sanitation financing
This study is geared towards development of specific pro poor sanitation financing
models to help the poor secure access to sustainable sanitation facilities. It will include
the pre testing and piloting of the pro poor models in selected poor communities. Total
project cost is P1.5 M to be implemented from April 2010 to March 2011. Both NEDA
and DOH are designated lead agencies with the active participation of NAPC, DOf,
DBM, GFIs and LGUs.
C. Outcome 3: Broad-based Alliance of Multi-sectorial and Multi-level Stakeholders
Strengthening the Sanitation Sector
This program has three aims:
1. To promote good governance and institution strengthening by:
a. Mobilizing sanitation networks like PEN and Philippine Society of Sanitary
Engineers to rally behind identified sector champions at national and local
levels;
b. Harnessing, strengthening and mobilizing the resources and mandate of existing
inter agency bodies, e.g., IACEH Sub-Committee on Sanitation and PDF Task
Force on WSS for more effective coordination, cooperation and collaboration
towards policy promotion and implementation;
c. Creating strong Executive-Legislative linkages and alliances.
2. To vigorously pursue multi-stakeholder participation in capacity development for sanitation
a. Creating a consortia of committed and capable academic and training institutes
for capacity development on sustainable sanitation;
70
$ % & ' & ( ( & ) * + , - . / & ) / 0 ' * + / ) & . / . & 1 ) 2 1 / 3 4 / (
b. Providing affordable and sustainable training programs to all mandated agencies
and institutions like LGUs and Water Supply and Sanitation providers;
c. Capacity Development specially at the local level by stimulating local demands
for Sustainable Sanitation services, facilities and infrastructures.
d. Advocacy for sanitation investments and budget allocations at national and local
levels.
3. To promote Private Sector and small scale sanitation enterpreneurship involvement by:
a. Widening the playing field for sanitation service providers;
b. Organizing the association of sanitation service providers.
c. Developing investment strategies and investment/subsidy schemes for small,
medium and large sanitation infrastructure projects.
d. Promoting Public-Private-Partnerships.
D. Outcome 4: Financing and Infrastructure Investments in Priority Strategic Areas
13.A. Inventory, identification and mapping of vulnerable areas
This project is intended to carry out the inventory, identification and mapping
of vulnerable areas that are seriously affected by lack of sanitation. This will
include collection and compilation of existing data, information and maps
of “vulnerable areas” Vulnerable areas will include areas that are subject to
flooding, landslides, coastal areas, IP areas, public parks and playground as well
as schools, tourist areas and interisland shipping vessel lanes. Part of the study
is to come up with definition of “vulnerable areas. This is a one year study
with DILG as the lead agency with support to be provided by DENR, LLDA,
NSCB, DepEd, NAPC, NCIP, the different leagues as well as the academe and
NGO. Estimated cost of the study is P 25 M to cover priority areas nationwide.
Implementation period is Jan. 2010 to Dec., 2011.
13.B Development and operationalization of database of vulnerable areas.
A component of the inventory, identification and mapping of vulnerable areas,
this project aims to develop a database of the areas identified as vulnerable.
The idea is to facilitate the management of attribute and spatial information
in a GIs setting to help policy makers and planners in addressing the sanitation
needs of these areas thru the provision of timely data in support of policies and
programs.
To be implemented for one year the designated lead agency is DILG with
support to be provided by DOH, DENR, LLDA, NSCB, DepEd, NAPC, NCIP,
the different leagues as well as the academe and NGO. Estimated cost is P 10.5
M for the hardware and software including limited training of concerned staff
to handle the database. Implementation period is Jan. 2010 to Dec., 2011.
13.C Comprehensive Infrastructure Program for Sanitation
The NSSMP provides the program for Sewerage and Septage Management.
This program has to be approved, funded and implemented by the LGUs with
National government support. NEDA should incorporate the sanitation targets
in the CIIP updates that it regularly produces.
14. Development of the Investment and Financing Framework for sanitation
This project is intended for the development of appropriate policy for investment
71
5 6 7 8 7 9 9 7 : ; < = > ? @ 7 : @ A 8 ; < @ : 7 ? @ ? 7 B : C B @ D E @ 9
prioritization of areas defined as highly vulnerable heavily impacted by the lack of
sanitation. Part of the policy development is the formulation of investment priority
criteria and guidelines to serve as basis for investment priority programming. This will
also entail series of consultation with concerned stakeholders through focus group
discussions, round table discussions and meetings.
DILG is the designated lead agency with support to be provided by DOH, DENR,
LLDA, NSCB, DepEd, NAPC, NCIP, the different leagues as well as the academe and
NGO. Project cost is estimated to be P500,000. However, it will have to build on a
number of studies to inform the framework:
14.A. Study on sanitation tariff methodologies including sanitation incentives and
subsidies
This project is intended to develop a tariff methodology that would allow
sufficient level of recovery of sanitation investment and development of an
attractive package of sanitation incentives and subsidy schemes to encourage
investment into sanitation. Pilot implementation of the tariff methodology
covering priority provinces will also be conducted as part of the study.
Estimated cost of study is P 2.5 M to be implemented from July 2010 to July
2011. Designated lead agency is NEDA with the active involvement of DILG,
DOH, DOf and selected LGUs.
14.B. Tracking sanitation funds at the LGU levels
This project aims to determine collection levels, efficiency and track how
sanitation fees currently collected by LGUs are being spent and used. Based
on study results, recommendations will be formulated to improve collection
efficiency and use of sanitation fees. Implementation period is from march,
2010 to February, 2011. Total project cost is P 1.8 M. DILG is expected to
take the lead with the active participation of pilot LGUs down to the barangay
level.
14.C. Study on development of sanitation financing models
This study intends to develop innovative financing models that would help
provide the necessary funding support for the implementation of sanitation
programs, projects and activities. Part of the study is to pre test the models in
selected pilot areas, The designated lead implementing agency is NEDA with
support from DOH, DOF, DILG and development partners. Implementation
period is from July 2010 to June 2011. Project cost is P 2.5 M.
15. Expansion of the Metro Manila septage capacity and construction of sewerage
and/or septage facilities in highly urbanizing cities
This project is intended to support the construction of sewerage and sewage system for
highly urbanizing cities as indicated in the National Sewerage and Septage Management Plan.
Implementation period is from January 2010 to December 2016. Lead implementing agency
is the NSSMP secretariat/DPWH with support from LWUA, MWSS and its concessionaires,
DOH, DENR and LGUs including DepEd. Estimated project cost is P6.7 B.
NOTE: budget does not include the expansion of MM septage capacity
16. Development and promotion of sanitation entrepreneurship social marketing
plan
This project is intended to develop and implement a strategic social marketing /IEC plan to
promote and popularize sanitation entrepreneurship as an innovative business opportunity.
72
F G H I H J J H K L M N O P Q H K Q R I L M Q K H P Q P H S K T S Q U V Q J
Project coverage is nationwide. Total project cost is P2.5 M with DOH as lead implementing
agency and with active support from DTI, DILG, CDA, LGUs and NGOs.
16.A. Study on documentation of PPP sanitation service provision
This study aims to document current and existing projects on public-private
partnership for sanitation service delivery and provision. It will highlight good
practices that can be showcased and scaled up. Total project cost is P 1.5 M to
be implemented from January 2011 to December 2013. DOF is the lead agency
with support coming from NEDA, DOH, GFIs, NGOs,DTI and PCCI as well
as private sector representatives.
17. Study on development of sanitation national account system
This study is intended to assess the needs and feasibility of establishing an account
system for sanitation to be able to keep tract of the sanitation expenditure at the
household and national level. Based on results, policies will be developed and a separate
accounting system will be set up. Designated lead agency is NEDA, in particular NSCB
with support from DOH, NSO, DILG, DENR, DPWH , LGUs and the academe.
Project cost is P2.5 M to be implemented in July 2010 to Dec. 2011.
E. Outcome 5: Adequate Sanitation and Hygiene Promotion is Mainstreamed in
Emergency Relief and Rehabilitation
18. WASH in Emergency Situations
This program aims to develop further the policy guidelines, technologies and coordination
approaches in managing excreta disposal in evacuation centers. The program is expected
to result in a sourcebook for sanitation in different types of emergency situations and
a corresponding training support for disaster preparedness focusing on the WASH
aspects of disaster risk management.
4.3 ONGOING AND PIPELINE PROGRAMS

This section briefly presents on-going and pipeline projects in the sector under NGAs that directly
contributes to the priority programs discussed in the previous section. While some of these
projects prioritize water supply over sanitation, it nevertheless provides opportunities and entry
points for sanitation projects.
Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Project in Visayas and Mindanao (RW3SPVM)
The program aims to increase the level of commitment of LGUs to sustainable provision
of potable water by ensuring the inclusion of water and sanitation in their local development
plans and investment programs. The long-term objective is to upgrade Level I facilities based
on technical feasibility and people’s willingness-to-pay. It will promote sustainability through
community participation in planning, implementation, management and operation of completed
water systems. It will involve construction of approximately 800 Level II water systems with
technical provision for ready benefiting about 850,000 people plus construction of sanitation
facilities for about 150,000 households in 35 municipalities in Visayas and Mindanao classified as
waterless. This project directly contributes to the priority program on LGU capacity development
in planning, monitoring and regulation wherein DILG is the lead proponent of the project with
support from LWUA and NWRB targeting a 4-year implementation period starting 2009/2010
and possible funding support from ADB.
Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project Phase V – North Luzon (RWSSPV)
This project is funded by the JBIC and involves 1) construction of 289 level I water supply
facilities and 58 sanitation facilities; 2) organization and training of 231 BWSAs; and 3) conduct of
73
W X Y Z Y [ [ Y \ ] ^ _ ` a b Y \ b c Z ] ^ b \ Y a b a Y d \ e d b f g b [
capability building to 4 LGUs towards providing potable water supply and sanitation facilities and
promoting sustainability through community participation, i.e. BWSA formation. Although the
NG-JBIC loan had been closed in 2007, construction of the remaining works will be implemented
by the LGUs through their own funds. To date, only 2 project areas remain for completion by
December 2009.
Water District Development Sector Project (WDDSP)
The WDDSP is a sector loan which aims to provide improved livability and competitiveness in
urban areas outside Metro Manila due to enhanced water supply and sanitation infrastructure
like wastewater collection and treatment as well as the sustainable provision of safe water supply
and sanitation services. The project supports capacity development for both LWUA and water
districts. LWUA as the lead implementing agency is responsible for short-listing 5 water districts
for preparation of subproject appraisal reports. This sector loan from ADB contributes to the
priority program on capacity development of water service providers and LWUA as support
services provider of the water districts.
The project has the following components: (i) an investment program for urban water supply
and sanitation infrastructure, (ii) a capacity development program to improve the financial and
operating performance of water utilities, (iii) a program to increase awareness of sanitation and
public health issues, and (iv) reorganization of LWUA. The project is expected to (i) increase the
access of the population in the provincial cities to improved water supply and sanitation, (ii) reduce
the quantity of nonrevenue water and enhance asset management, and (iii) improve the operating
and financial performance of water utilities.
Philippine Water Revolving Fund (PWRF)
The PWRF is an innovative financing designed to support the long term investment requirements
of LGUs and Water Districts for water supply and sanitation. It has a unique feature of engaging
PFIs as co-lenders with the Development Bank of the Philippines using JICA funds and credit
guarantees from LGU Guarantee Corporation and the USAID Development Credit Authority.
Within this program is the Municipal Development Fund Office (MDFO) PWRF Standby
Credit Facility ( PWRF-SCF). The MDFO-Policy Governing Board (PGB) has initially allocated
P500 Million in February 2006 to lengthen the tenor of Private Financing Institutions( PFIs) loan
to LGUs. The PWRF-SCF is an MDFO standby loan financing window which can be accessed by
LGUs that are already participating under the PWRF program.
Millenium Development Goals Fund (MDG-Fund)
Apart from the PWRF SCF, the MDFO was also mandated by its PGB to establish and finance LGU
initiatives that directly contribute to the attainment of the MDGs parallel to the DILG’s “Guide
to LGUs in the Localization fo the MDGs”. Included in Component 1 (Investment Support) of
the facility are water supply and sanitation projects for 4th-6th income class municipalities. On
the other hand, provincial LGUs may also qualify for loan financing provided that their 4th-6th
income class municipalities will be benefitted.
Municipal Development Fund Project (MDFP)
This financing facility of the MDFO has an initial allocated amount of P500 Million in October
2006 to offer financing to cities, provinces, municipalities for revenue generating, social and
environmental projects as well as other Infrastructure Projects and Equipment. Included in the
environmental projects are solid waste management facilities such as materials recovery facility
(MRF), sanitary landfills, composting facility, waste management such as sewerage systems,
drainage systems, waste water treatment facilities, bio gas digesters, air quality management projects
(support to the Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999);and Land Conservation such as River/Seashore
Protection and Seawall.
74
h i j k j l l j m n o p q r s j m s t k n o s m j r s r j u m v u s w x s l
LGU Investment Programme
This is a financing facility for projects like sanitation, drainage and flood control, water supply and
other modes to be agreed among LBP as the implementing agency, Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau
(KfW) and concerned LGUs. The proposed interest shall be fixed for the duration of the loan,
based on the prevailing market rate at the time of availment but not to exceed 13%. A maximum
of 2 years grace period may be allowed on the principal depending on the nature of the project.
The facility would be available to LGUs in the Visayas and Mindanao to support the focus of the
German Development Cooperation Program. Programme duration is from 2006-2010.
Provincial Towns Water Supply and Sanitation Program (KfW III) - North Luzon
Improvement of water supply systems for 2 big and 10 small WDs towards Improved and expanded
water supply services. Implementing agency is LWUA. The design stage started in the 2nd quarter
of 2008, while the IAC clearance was issued on 30 June 2009.
Provincial Towns Water Supply and Sanitation Program (KfW III) - Metro Luzon
The project includes improvement of water supply systems for 1 big and 30 small water districts,
construction of storage facilities and drilling of new well sources etc., and supports the cooperation
between water districts and local administrations for sewage management towards enhanced water
supply and sanitation services provision within the water districts' franchise areas. Implemented by
LWUA, the project duration is from 2009 to 2012.
CEZA Upgrade of Sewage Treatment Plant
Upgrade of the existing Sewage Treatment Plant of the CEZA (Region 2 – Cagayan) to accommodate
a minimum of one thousand (1,000) users towards ensuring that wastewater produced by the
CEZA Complex can be safely released to any body of water. Implementing Agency: CEZA with
funding from the national government-GAA.
Kapit-Bisig sa Ilog Pasig
The “Kapit Bisig sa Ilog Pasig” (Arm-in-Arm for the Pasig River) program was launched by the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) in February 2009 through PRRC,
and ABS-CBN Foundation. The partnership’s goal is to turn the Pasig into a Clean River Zone in
7 years by ensuring zero toxic input into the river through solid waste management, household or
community septic tanks desludging, and septage treatment. It will also continue the rehabilitation
and resettlement work initiated by the PRRC. DENR-PRRC’s Pasig River Environmental
Management and Rehabilation Sector Program (PAREMAR-SDP) expects to improve the water
quality of the Pasig River and develop environmental preservation areas for urban renewal and is
funded by the national government-GAA and ADB.
Manila Third Sewerage Project
In 2007, the World Bank approved an investment grant of US$5 million. The objectives of the
project are to assist the Filipino Government in reforming institutions in order to attract private
investment in the wastewater sector, to improve the coordination of institutions responsible
for preventing water pollution, and to promote innovative wastewater treatment techniques.
The project, which runs from 2007 to 2012, provides technical assistance as well as support for
institutional coordination and private sector involvement . The project aims to increase the coverage
and effectiveness of sewerage service delivery through an integrated approach involving septage
management, sewage management, and heightened consumer awareness . The project follows the
Manila Second Sewerage Project, which was carried out from 1996 to 2005 .
Establishment of Wastewater Treatment Facilities for Marikina River Basin
This project aims to conduct feasibility studies and construct wastewater treatment plants towards
improved water quality in the Marikina River to class "C" or recreational level. The project is being
75
y z { | { } } { ~ { ~ | ~ { { ~ }
implemented by Manila WAter Company, Inc. in coordination with MMDA and Marikina LGU.
Provincial Urban Sewerage and Septage Management Programme
This project focuses on the development of sewerage and septage management projects in areas
covered by water districts (a total of 18 projects). Expected outcomes are to provide sewerage
facilities/septage management programs in various WD areas in line with the government's
sanitation/environment concern. Implemented by LWUA from 2009 to 2015, the project is
funded by the national government and is currently conducting feasibility studies for Dasmarinas
and Cavite WDs.
Millennium Challenge Corporation Water Supply and Sanitation Component
The Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) I is a United States Government corporation
designed to work with some of the poorest countries of the world. MCC funding may be between
$500 Million to $1 Billion disbursed over 5 years wherein WSS projects are in the priority list of
the proposed development program.
World Bank Strategic Local Development and Investment Project
This is a lending facility focusing on strategic investment support to infrastructure, utilities and
improvement of LGU finance and is made available to all eligible and qualified applicants comprising
of LGUs, public utilities and private operators providing local infrastructure services nationwide,
including solid waste management facilities, wastewater treatment, and housing. Implementation is
from 2007-2012, with LBP as the implementing agency.
World Bank LGU Urban Water and Sanitation Project (APL 2)
This is a lending facility whose sub-loan terms is 9% annual interest rate with 3 years grace period
and 15 years tenor with target program participants being LGUs and water districts. The second
Local Government Unit (LGU) urban water project aims to reach approximately 40 LGU-operated
water systems, which are given technical assistance and financial support. The four components of
the project are to: (i) finance civil works, equipment, and supervision for improved water supply
systems in LGUs, including private sector participation where feasible; (ii) finance improved
sanitation infrastructure; (iii) provide investment and assistance in micro-drainage infrastructure;
and (iv) provide funds for the hiring of a construction supervision consultant and specialized
consultants. The World Bank decided to contribute through a US$30 million loan to the project,
while the remaining US$5.2 million are financed by local institutions. The project began in 2001
and will end in 2008
Department of Education-Physical Facilities and Schools Engineering Division (PFSED)
projects
A. Schools’ Water and Electrical Facilities Assessment Project ( SWEFAP)
The DepED has initiated the SWEFAP to assess the water facilities of schools, identify
schools with poor or without water facilities and poor sanitation facilities and practices
in order to provide corrective measures and interventions. The project was undertaken
in partnership with private sector, cooperatives, water utilities and companies, soci-civic
organizations, foundations, health and nutrition centers, LGUs and the DOH. Series of
orientation and information dissemination was undertaken to launch the project, the
creation of SWEFAP Task Force in schools, followed by actual assessment and inspection
and provision of corrective measures. Two assessment manuals were prepared to guide
the SWEFAP Tsask Forces created in all schools to undertake assessment and inspection,
and a database on schools without water, sanitation and electrical facilities which are now
available and the Department’s basis in providing assistance and interventions to all schools
nationwide.
76

B. Construction/Repair/Rehabilitation of Classrooms and Schools’ Water and Sanitation
Facilities
The construction, repair/rehabilitation of classrooms and water and sanitation facilities in
schools is part of th epump priming projects of the President, considering that classroooms
and sanitation facilities are one of the requirements in building safe learning environment
for school children. In view of this, the Department of Education issued DO No. 4, s.2009
"Implementing Guidelines for the Construction/Repair/Rehabilitation of Classrooms
and Schools' Water and Sanitation Facilities" indicating budget appropriations for priority
projects including construction and/or repair/rehabilitation of toilet and water facilities in
high need areas. This project is covered in the loan agreement with the World-Bank under
BESRA-NPSBE. Single or clustered projects amounting to $100,000.00 or Php4,750,000.00
(using the current rate of $1=Php47.50) shall be implemented using the Principal-led SBP
Scheme. Special Allotment Release Order (SARO) shall only be released upon contract
award has been undertaken. Selection of priority schools prepared by the PFSED is based
on data on shortage of toilet and water facilities on the BEIS (SY 2008-2009) and the
SWEFAP.
Department of Education-Essential Health Care Program (EHCP)
The implementation of the “EHCP for Filipino Children” is a program which is readily available at
a cost of P 25.00 per child per year. This program advocates for school-based health interventions
particularly on the importance of handwashing with soap and water as the simplest, most effective
way of improving sanitation and hygiene. Exposure to school based daily handwashing, flouride
tooth brushing and twice a year de-worming will familiarize children with healthy habits and is
expected to have an impact on awareness concerning water and sanitation issues in the communities
and hygiene practices in family life. Department Orders Nos. 65, 55 and 76, s.2009 calls for the
institutionalization of EHCP in schools and ordering the immediate construction of water and
handwashing facilities. In addition,the Department issued Department Memo No. 450, s.2009
"Implementation of an Annual Global Handwashing Day every 15th of October" to conduct
activities with the DOH and PhilHealth every year.
KALAHI-CIDSS
The DSWD’s Kapit-Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan – Comprehensive Integrated Delivery of Social
Services (KALAHI-CIDSS) Project initiated in 2003 has a Municipal Allocation Fund of
PhP300,000 which LGUs can use for community subprojects including (but not limited to) basic
social services such as water system and tribal housing/shelter, (including sanitation facilities, if
required), and for sanitation and/or solid waste management facilities. It covers the 42 poorest
provinces including 4216 barangays in 183 municipalities. Aside from provision of grant funds,
KALAHI-CIDSS conducts social preparation, capability building and implementation support to
the communities, as well as multi-level assessment and impact evaluation. The WB-funded project
ends in May 2010, and additional financing for the next years has been proposed to the NEDA
for approval.
Community-Based Monitoring System (CBMS)
The CBMS is a tool for monitoring social indicators for health, nutrition, shelter, water and
sanitation, basic education, income, employment and peace and order. The system is an organized
process of data collection and processing at the local level. The data collected through CBMS
is then integrated into local planning, program implementation and impact-monitoring. The
NAPC Secretariat, in cooperation with CBMS Network Team, continues to instruct and guide
local governments on the use of the Community-Based Monitoring System (CBMS) and conducts
77
¡ ¢ £ ¤ ¥ ¦ ¦ § ¡ ¢ ¦ ¥ ¦ ¥ ¨ © ¨ ¦ ª « ¦
forums to familiarize NGAs on the concept and design of the CBMS National Repository; present
and explain the policies and procedures of accessing and using CBMS data in their own planning,
monitoring, and evaluation endeavors; and generate comments/suggestions to enhance CBMS
National Repository concept and operating policies.
President's Priority Program on Water (P3W)
Under this program, LGUs are assigned to implement water supply projects for waterless areas
without water districts. DOH serves as the funding agency while the Local Water Utilities
Administration (LWUA) is the designated implementing agency, while NAPC oversees the
monitoring and inspection of ongoing projects.
MDGF Project – Joint Programme Enhancing Access, and Provision of Water Services
with the Active Participation of the Poor (UNDP-Spain)
Launched April 2009, the program seeks to address the plight of about 432 local governments that
would have less than 50% water supply coverage in their localities. Thirty six (36) of these so-called
waterless municipalities located in 12 provinces, in 5 Regions of the country are targeted to benefit
from the MDGF UNDP-Spain joint programme.
DILG-GTZ Water Supply and Sanitation Capacity Development Program for LGUs
This program aims to provide technical assistance to help local institutions in the planning,
management and delivery of rural water supply systems. The program seeks to overcome the
institutional confusion and to strengthen governmental organizations at the national, provincial,
and municipal levels. In addition, the decentralization plan of the National Water Resources Board
is supported. The program, which runs from 2006 to 2009, has already achieved a successful
introduction of low-cost options for sanitation, the construction of dehydration toilets, and the
first Filipino constructed wetland, treating wastewater from about 700 households.
National Program Support for Environment and Natural Resources Management Project
The project aims to assist the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to
improve its service delivery through a better allocation of its limited financial resources. The
components of the projects include integrated ecosystem management and environmental and
natural resources management. The World Bank approved a US$50 million loan in 2007 for the
project which runs from 2007 to 2011.
Sanitation Action Week

Launched during the International Year of Sanitation 2008, priority agenda is the signing of a
Presidential Proclamation (Adopting 2008 as the International Year of Sanitation and declaring the
fourth week of June of every year as Sanitation Action Week)
Department of Health training for sanitary inspectors

In 2004, the DOH prepared the "Training Modules on Integrated Health and Environment for
Capacity Building of Sanitation Inspectors in LGUs" designed to enhance the sanitary inspectors'
roles at the LGUs. These modules can be used by the Center for Health Development in the
regions in the conduct of their training program for Sanitation Inspectors, and encourages strong
partnership between the CHD and LGUs in the use of the modules for capacity building for
effective protection and promotion of health and application of an integrated environmental
approach.
Zero Diarrhea awards for barangays

The Department of Health (DOH) Zero Diarrhea awards are for barangays with the best sanitation
practices. DOH conducted a nationwide search January to December 2008 with the help of
78
¬ ® ¯ ® ° ° ® ± ² ³ ´ µ ¶ · ® ± · ¸ ¯ ² ³ · ± ® ¶ · ¶ ® ¹ ± º ¹ · » ¼ · °
Centers for Health Development–Regional Technical Working Groups, Provincial Health Offices,
and Local Government Units. ADB joined the DOH in recognizing the 28 winning barangays
by hosting an awarding ceremony at ADB Headquarters. The initiative aimed to: 1) Disseminate
information on the importance of sanitation and its impact on people’s health; 2) Encourage local
governments to initiate and promote sanitation activities; 3) Recognize exemplary barangays and
showcase their best sanitation practices. DOH and ADB presented the Zero Diarrhea Award to
a total of 28 barangays, chosen from among 42,000 other Philippine barangays, for implementing
the best sanitation practices in the country. Each winning barangay was awarded a plaque and
PhP150,000 cash prize.
Sustainable Sanitation in East Asia Philippines Program (SuSEA)

The Sustainable Sanitation in East Asia (SuSEA) Philippines component supports in-country
mechanisms to help increase access, especially of the poor, to sustainable sanitation. The desired
program outcomes are: At the national level, sustainable sanitation program is initiated in the
Philippines to support increased access by poor Filipinos to sanitation services. In participating
localities, improvement of environmental health conditions by 2010.
SuSEA Philippines was conceived as a learning program to support the Government of the
Philippines update its approaches and interventions in sanitation and needs that were not present
or not addressed in traditional sanitation programs that focused on two extremes – 1) toilet-bowl
distribution and hygiene education and 2) centralized sewerage systems. The strategy of SUSEA
Philippines for increasing access of the poor to sustainable sanitation is by systematically responding
to the key causal factors that impede the demand for and supply of sanitation. SuSEA Philippines
would be a platform for a) testing, learning and developing tools for scaling-up interventions b)
capacity and institution building of local government units in implementing appropriate sanitation
solutions and c) improvement of national sanitation policy and programs as exemplified from the
best field-based results.
Six sites are participating in the main program sub-component of SuSEA. These are: Bauko
Municipality in the Mt. Province, Dagupan City in Pangasinan Province, Guian Municipality in
Eastern Samar Province, Gereral Santos City and Polomolok Municipality in South Cotabato, and
Alabel Municipality in Saranggani.
Under SuSEA there are a number of other sub-projects:
Developing Sustainable Sanitation Education Programs in the Philippines- SUSEP (US$ 200,000)
This sub-component was developed to address a key underlying factor for the sanitation sector
under performance, i.e. the quality and capacity of current cadre of sanitation practitioners
particularly those serving local governments. The activity will review the existing state of education
programs on sanitation (formal and informal) and will work with interested partner institutions to
develop and test sustainable sanitation education modules targeting existing practitioners as well as
potential future cadre of sanitation professionals. This work commenced in July 2008 and will be
included as a subject of the mid-term review.
National Sewerage and Septage Management Program – NSSMP (US$ 150,000)

The objective of this activity is to support the formulation of an implementation strategy for
a proposed NSSMP as mandated under the Clean Water Act (2004). The legislation calls for
the preparation of a national program and instructs highly urbanized cities (HUCs) to provide
sewerage and septage services to minimize the adverse impacts of domestic wastewater discharges
to the water quality of water resources in general. This sub-component will provide consultants
to work with the NSSMP technical working group formed by the Government to formulate the
79
½ ¾ ¿ À ¿ Á Á ¿ Â Ã Ä Å Æ Ç È ¿ Â È É À Ã Ä È Â ¿ Ç È Ç ¿ Ê Â Ë Ê È Ì Í È Á
program strategy (including making recommendations on the technical packages, institutional and
financing frameworks) and identify an initial list of 10 participating HUCs.
This National Sewerage and Septage Management Program (NSSMP) was prepared by the
Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), in coordination with other government
agencies, as required by the Clean Water Act (CWA). It will become a subsection of the National
Sustainable Sanitation Plan,1 which will be a broader, overarching framework that will include the
full spectrum of sanitation challenges. The primary focus of the NSSMP is sewerage and septage
infrastructure projects and the promotions and supporting environment needed to make them
successful.
The goal of the NSSMP is to improve water quality and public health in urban areas of the
Philippines by 2020. The objective is to enhance the ability of local implementers to build and
operate wastewater treatment systems for urban centers and promote the behavior change and
supporting environment needed for systems to be effective and sustainable.
The main strategy is to facilitate a bottom-up, demand-driven project development process by
providing national government support and incentives. DPWH and Department of Health (DOH)
will lead a nationwide training and promotions campaign and DPWH will create an information
office. Both DPWH and DOH will provide some funding for sewerage and septage project
development at the local level through their annual general appropriations budget. DENR will also
support project development through the creation of the National Water Quality Management
Fund (NWQMF). DENR regional offices will lead the establishment of Water Quality Management
Areas (WQMAs) and Area Water Quality Management Funds (AWQMFs) to support local project
development. Local implementers will use the NSSMP Guide to develop infrastructure and services
supported by effective promotion campaigns, policies, enforcement and user fees.
The program implementation plan will begin with the approval of the NSSMP in August 2009,
convening of the NEDA INFRACOM Subcommittee on Water Resources as the NSSMP
Committee, and designation of the NSSMP Office in DPWH by January 2010. A three-
part nationwide training and promotions campaign will be held from July to December 2010,
followed by development of projects by local implementers thereafter. The NSSMP Office with
gather data on the number of local sanitation plans developed, number of projects developed,
approximate number of people benefiting from the projects, amount of money spent nationwide,
and approximate amount of pollution diverted from the environment. The Office will report this
information to the NSSMP Committee every August starting in 2011.
Independent Study on Sanitation for Indigenous Communities (US$ 26,000)

This study aims to contribute to understanding the complexity of sanitation practices, particularly,
why people have specific sanitation habits and how these are shaped by the cultural context within
which these habits are situated as well as factors from without. Moreover, this study provides
guidelines for the development of a model for a more culturally sensitive, community-led sanitation
program. The study will illustrate a comprehensive scenario of sanitation habits by gathering data
from various sources and through different methods, namely, a review of literature that focused
on sanitation program implementation which was global in scope (on-going), a workshop among
sanitation program implementers that is national in scope (to be conducted in November, 2008),
and lastly, community studies in two barangays in Polomolok, South Cotabato.
Local Government Grants for Sanitation Pilots (US$ 320,000)

This is a recipient-executed sub-program that will assist local governments prepare and implement
sanitation projects on a matching grant basis. The aim is the reduction of sanitation-related disease
and water pollution in six program sites through the establishment of sanitation services/facilities.
At least four sanitation infrastructure projects implemented by participating local governments
within an overall local sanitation plan and program framework are expected as this sub-programs
80
Î Ï Ð Ñ Ð Ò Ò Ð Ó Ô Õ Ö × Ø Ù Ð Ó Ù Ú Ñ Ô Õ Ù Ó Ð Ø Ù Ø Ð Û Ó Ü Û Ù Ý Þ Ù Ò
outputs. This sub-program commenced preparations in August 2008 and is expected to start
implementing in early 2009.
Innovative Sanitation Intervention Projects- IsIP Grants (US$ 40,000)

A small innovation grant window was opened under SuSEA Philippines to provide funding support
on a competitive basis to non-government organizations for developing and trialling innovations in
sanitation interventions (including approaches to behaviour change or technical solutions) focused
on targeting the poor, vulnerable groups or those living in difficult environments. This sub-program
commenced calls for proposals in November 2008 but will not be implemented until 2009.
Municipal Development Fund (from various ODA sources)

The MDF is a revolving fund which uses proceeds of foreign loans, assistance or grants to finance
specific projects and activities of LGUs including water supply projects. The fund also provides
training to LGU loan borrowers. The Municipal Development Fund Office (MDFO) National
Government – LGU cost sharing policy, enacted in December 2002, states that cluster 3 “brown”
sub-projects (which include solid waste management, drainage, sewerage and sanitary support
facilities) require municipalities and provinces to provide 10%-20% in equity, obtain 20%-50% in
grant finance, and avail the remaining 40%-60% in loan finance. Fourth and fifth Class Cities are
eligible to use 20% grant finance supported by 20% equity and 60% in loan finance, but all other
cities are ineligible for grants.
Philippine Basic Urban Services Sector (PBUSS)

The ADB-funded sector project will (i) increase access by citizens and economic enterprises to
basic public infrastructure in urban and peri-urban areas; (ii) enhance the growth of the local
economies through infrastructure development, and better employment and income opportunities;
(iii) improve facilities for the financing of infrastructure investments, including public-private
partnerships in the financing and implementation of basic urban services programs; and (iv)
improve local government capacity, and empower local institutions and organizations. The PBUSSP
is expected to have three components, as follows:
• Component A (infrastructure investment plan) will finance subprojects of local government
units, possibly in association with private sector proponents, in these subsectors, among others:
local roads and bridges, water supply and sanitation, drainage and flood control, solid waste
management, bus terminals, public facilities (such as municipal buildings, public parks, and
public markets), sports facilities, slaughterhouses and ice plants, and economic infrastructure
(such as incubation centers for small and medium enterprises, area development projects, and
economic and cluster development zones). Preference will be given to revenue-generating
subprojects.
• Component B (institutional capacity development) will cover capacity development and
support for project management, subproject preparation, and implementation; assistance to
local governments in computerized financial resource management; assistance to field offices
of the Department of the Interior and Local Government in administering and managing
the performance measurement system; and cross-learning and governance knowledge
management.
• Component C: Sector reform initiatives for improved public-private partnership in financing,
implementing, and operating infrastructure facilities. This component will assist local
governments and private sector investors in developing regulatory frameworks and operational
guidelines for sector reforms, including those for public-private partnerships.
About 110 eligible local governments and provinces in Luzon (excluding the National Capital
Region), Visayas, and Mindanao are expected to invest in various basic urban service sectors. These
81
ß à á â á ã ã á ä å æ ç è é ê á ä ê ë â å æ ê ä á é ê é á ì ä í ì ê î ï ê ã
will include local government units that have expressed interest but were not accommodated in
the current Manila BUSS project. The investments and transactions can include lending for private
sector investments under build-operate–transfer, build-operate-own, or other arrangements for
public-private partnerships. The expansion of the area of urban service coverage will promote
equitable development across urban areas in the country. The sector project will help (i) reduce the
infrastructure backlog, (ii) increase the economic productivity of cities and municipalities, and (iii)
improve income and employment opportunities for the affected population.
Agusan Integrated Water Resources Management PPTA

The project aims to reduce poverty, and improve health and living conditions in the Agusan
River Basin. Expected outcomes of the ADB-funded project include the implementation of key
elements of the Agusan basin master plan in a coordinated and efficient series of investments.
Expected outputs are:
• Feasibility studies and project designs for communal irrigation, water supply and sanitation,
water quality management, watershed management, biodiversity and wetlands management,
flood control, and chemical spills management investments; and
• Strengthened management arrangements for coordinating development
Philippine Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Portal

The PhilWATSAN portal (www.philwatsan.org.ph) started as a project initiated by NWRB in
2006, in collaboration with other government agencies, with support from the German Technical
Cooperation Agency (GTZ)-Water Sanitation Program. The portal contains policies, projects/
programs, research/publications and statistics related to water supply and sanitation sector. Update
of information is done by member agencies through the internet.
Philippine Sanitation Alliance
The Philippine Sanitation Alliance (PSA) works with LGUs, water districts and private sector
partners to develop affordable ways to protect biodiversity and reduce public health risks through
improved sanitation. Projects include low-cost, low-maintenance treatment facilities for public
markets, slaughterhouses hospitals and low-cost housing; and city-wide programs to properly
maintain septic tanks (septage management). Cities are developing effective promotion campaigns
to increase willingness to pay for sanitation services and reduce the incidence of diarrhea through
proper hygienic practices, particularly handwashing. Governance is also being strengthened to
reduce threats to biodiversity as LGUs work to control wastewater discharges to coastal and
freshwater ecosystems. The PSA works with ten cities (Cagayan de Oro, Calbayog, Dumaguete,
Iloilo, Malaybalay, Meycauayan, Muntinlupa, Naga, Sta. Rosa, Zamboanga), and four water districts
(Calamba, Cebu, Davao and Laguna). The PSA is a 4-year program of the United States Agency for
International Development (USAID) being implemented by AECOM International Development
from 2007-2011.
4.4 MEDIUM TERM OPERATIONAL PLAN (2010-2016)
The Sanitation Sector Inter-Agency Operational Plans for 2010-2016 are shown below. These operational
plans are meant to guide the mobilization and implementation of the detailed plans and programs
among the national government and implementing agencies in the water supply and sanitation sector.
Each table summarizes the activities to be implemented with the corresponding milestones, timelines,
lead (implementing agency), support agencies and indicative budgets under the different outcomes
and outputs as outlined in the Roadmap’s Logical Framework.
These integrated plans and programs are useful tools for coordination among the sector agencies and
for monitoring the detailed implementation of the Roadmap on an annual basis.
82
ð ñ ò ó ò ô ô ò õ ö ÷ ø ù ú û ò õ û ü ó ö ÷ û õ ò ú û ú ò ý õ þ ý û ÿ û ô
TABLE 8
SANITATION ROADMAP OPERATIONAL PLAN 2010-2016
INVESTMENT
ACTIVITY MILESTONE TIMELINE DRIVER SUPPORT
REQUIREMENTS
Outcome 1: Responsive Governance and Regulatory Strengthening
OUTPUT 1.1 Strengthen the DOH as the lead sector agency supported by all the NGs and LGUs in implementing sustainable sanitation programs
1. Formulate strategy plans Sanitation plans and

per sector agency as basis programs included in
for budgeting agency OPB
(15pax*1,500)*
Inter-Agency TF
• Convene Inter-agency Sanitation programs of
Apr 2010, Apr 2011, members, DILG, 6 events)
task Force on sanitation agencies presented
Apr 2012, Apr 2013, DOH DENR, DPWH,
for a workshop =P 135,000.00
Apr 2014, Apr 2015 LWUA, DepED,
• Harmonize plans and Sanitation LEAGUES, DBM, OP
program of concerned implementation plans
national agencies of national agencies
synchronized
2. Consolidate Strategic Plans Consolidated National Apr 2010, Apr 2011, DOH
of National Agencies Strategic Plan on Apr 2012, Apr 2013,
Sanitation Apr 2014, Apr 2015
• Review and Finalize

Agency Strategic Plans
Output 1.2 A clear and sustainable sanitation policy and Program
1. Conduct Consultation Proposed policy changes Jan -Mar 2011 DOH Inter-Agency TF ((30pax*1,500) * 3
Conference with identified members, DILG, events)
concerned national DENR, DPWH, = P 135,000.00
agencies to review LWUA, DepED,
identified amendments in LEAGUES, DBM, OP
the Sanitation Code
2. Mainstream sanitation plan Sanitation plans, Aug 2010 – July 2015 DILG, DOH LCEs Facilitators:
in the Local Development programs and activities ((8,000RT+3,000DSA
Plans of LGUs integrated in the Local & Transpo.)*
Development Plans 5Facilitators)* 13
Regions)*6yrs
= P 4.49M
One Day Meeting:
((30pax*1,500)* 13
Regions)*6yrs
= P 3.50M
Total= P 7.99M
83

INVESTMENT
REQUIREMENT
OUTPUT 1.3 Rationalized/Strengthened sector coordination mechanisms
1. Conduct assessment IACEH and member May 2012 – Jan DOH Inter-Agency TF Consultant: P500,000 Contract
of existing IACEH agency assessed to 2013 members, DILG,
and member include its functionality, DENR, DPWH,
agencies to include membership and specific LWUA, DepED,
its membership, role in sanitation LEAGUES, DBM,
mandates and OP
functions
- Identify gaps
and weaknesses
and recommend
measures of
improvement
2. Conduct quarterly Resolution of sector Quarterly 2010-2015 DOH Inter-Agency TF (15pax*1,500)* 4qtrs)* 6 events
meetings of the issues and concerns members, DILG, = P540,000.00
IACEH to strengthen DENR, DPWH,
coordination LWUA, DepED,
mechansim LEAGUES, DBM,
OP
OUTPUT 1.4 Localized policies, plans and programs within the framework of the national policies
1. Conduct consultation Awareness of LGUs to 2010-2015 DOH Inter-Agency TF Facilitators:

workshops with new policy changes members, DILG, ((8,000RT+3,000DSA &
LGUs on new DENR, DPWH, Transpo.)* 5Facilitators)* 13
policies to enable LWUA, DepED, Regions)*6yrs
LGUs to formulate LEAGUES, DBM, = P 4.49M
and implement OP
local policies and One Day Meeting:
ordinances on ((30pax*1,500)* 13
sanitation related Regions)*6yrs
activities in line with = P 3.50M
the national policies. Total= P 7.99M
2. Conduct Sanitation National Sanitation Jan 2012, DOH, DILG LGUs Facilitators:
planning workshops programs integrated Jan 2013, ((8,000RT+3,000DSA &
at LGU level with LGU Jan 2014, Transpo.)* 5Facilitators)* 13
implementation plans Jan 2015 Regions)*6yrs
= P 4.49M
One Day Meeting:
((30pax*1,500)* 13
Regions)*6yrs
= P 3.50M
Total= P 7.99M
Total Investment Requirement for Outcome 1 for 6 years: P30,050,000
84
! "
ACTIVITY MILESTONE TIMELINE DRIVER SUPPORT INVESTMENT
REQUIREMENTS
Outcome 2: Improved Service Delivery through Communication and Capacity Development
OUTPUT 2.1 An integrated and decentralized Capacity Development System for different types of implementer and situations.
2.1.1 Assess the existing materials on Gather the guidelines, Mar-10 DILG DOH, DAR, DENR, Coordination
capacity development and update toolkits, other materials and MDFO, DSWD, NGOs, meetings: P300,000
them if needed 1 experiences avaialble on LGA Inventory and
sanitation communications, Assessment of
technology options, materials: P150,000
management models
2.1.2 Develop official guidelines and Guidelines, management Sep-10 DILG DOH, DAR, DENR, 3,500,000
management models and technology tools & techno options MDFO, DSWD, NGOs,
options for LGUs on PIME developed and approved LGA
2.1.3 Enhance package for LCEs 2 Briefing/orientation kits for Sep-10 DILG LCP, LMP,LPP 4,500,000
LCEs developed
LCE Briefing Commencing DILG/LGA
Oct-10
2.1.4 Enhance package for PPDCs/ Training of PPDCs (82)/ Commencing DILG/LGA DOH, DAR, DENR, 21,000,000
MPDCs MPDCs (?), 17 regional Nov 2010 MDFO, DSWD, NGOs,
trainings LGA
2.1.5 Formulate the Cap Dev Programa Cap Dev program Sep-10
developed
OUTPUT 2.2 Benchmarks on LGU performance and best practice established.
2.2.1 Establish the performance indicators Performance indicators Sep-10 DILG/DOH LCP, LMP,LPP 5,800,000
for LGUs and service providers 3 developed for LGUs
2.2.2 Establish benchmarks of LGU or Benchmarking system Dec 2010 DILG/DOH LCP, LMP,LPP 5,000,000
service provider performance developed (including - Aug 2016
questionnaire, pilot testing)
OUTPUT 2.3 Stakeholders mobilized in promoting sustainable sanitation concepts, practice and behavior. change.
2.3.1 Identify core-group representing Sanitation Cap Devt Jun-10 DOH, PEN DAR, DENR, MDFO, 1,500,000
various capacity development practitioners organized DSWD, NGOs, LGA
providers and targets: Professional
groups, Academe, national agencies,
civic societies and aligning sub- National Conference of CD Jun-10 DOH, PEN DAR, DENR, MDFO, 5,000,000
groups of similar function Practitioners DSWD, NGOs, LGA
2.3.2 Train at least one Barangay Program developed Commencing DILG DAR, DENR, MDFO, P500*40,000 =
sanitation volunteer per barangay for Barangay sanitation Sept 2010 DSWD, NGOs, LGA, 20,000,000
volunteers training:Target participants of National
from 40000 barangays Conference
2.3.3 Develop a social marketing program Social Marketing Plan Jan-10 PSSE/MIT Sanitary Inspector’s 150,000
for sanitation professionals; Association of
the Philippines
(SIAP),NGOs
2.3.4 Explore how to re-engineer thTe Open University for SEs, Jun-11 PSSE/MIT SIAP,NGOs 300,000
sanitary engineering curriculum Sanitarians
2.3.5 Support the proposed Institute of LGA has set up the Institute Jan 2011 LGA DOH, DILG,NGOs, 500,000
Water by LGA for Water and Sanitation.
OUTPUT 2.4 Research and Development Agenda towards sustainable sanitation solutions and policy reforms.
2.4.1 Develop research and development List of R and D priorities Sep-10 DILG DOH, DAR, DENR, 7,750,000
agenda MDFO, DSWD, NGOs,
LGA,DA,DOF
2.4.2 Prepare research and development R and D proposals
program developed
OUTPUT 2.5 Institutionalized Monitoring and Evaluation of the sector.
2.5.1 Develop Sanitation Monitoring and System developed Apr-10 DILG/DOH consultant 2,000,000
Evaluation System
2.5.2 Prepare recurrent water and 2009 Sector Report Apr-10 DILG/DOH NGOs,LGUs, 2,000,000
sanitation Sector Report LWUA,,NWRB,NEDA,
2.5.3 Establish a web-based database that web-based database Dec-11 DILG link to NWRB web-based 2,500,000
includes the indicators collected for portal/DILG KM portal
the sector assessment
85
# $ % & % ' ' % ( ) * + , - . % ( . / & ) * . ( % - . - % 0 ( 1 0 . 2 3 . '
INVESTMENT
REQUIREMENTS
OUTPUT 2.6 National and local communication plans for sustainable sanitation and hygiene in place.
2.6.1 Conduct workshops / National Communication 2010-2016 DOH 4,000,000
writeshops on awareness, Plan on sustainable sanitation
attitude and practices of developed
the people on health and
sustainable sanitation
2.6.2 Print multi-media materials to Information, Communication, September DOH 10,000,000
support the communication Education and Motivation – December
plan on sustainable sanitation materials developed
Total Indicative Investment requirements for Outcome 2 95,800,150

INVESTMENT
REQUIREMENTS
Outcome 3: Strengthened Strategic Alliances
Output 3.1 Strong and active national multi-sector support group that will advocate, lead and advance sustainable sanitation policies, plans,
programs and activities
3.1.1 Support and strengthen the Strategic planning for PEN Month 06 (June PEN DOH, PEN 500,000
Philippine Ecosan Network conducted 2010) members
(PEN) and the Philippine
Development Forum-Task (Back-to-Back with National
Force on Water Supply and Conference for Sanitation CD
Sanitation (PDF-TF WSS) so it Practitioners)
can continue to act as platform
for policy and program
advocacy, coordination,
harmonization and greater
synergy among the Champions
and partners.
3.1.2 Identify and gather information Inventory of experts and Month 12 (Dec PEN, DOH, DepEd, NCIP, 500,000
on experts, champions, champions in all relevant 2010) DILG Office of
organizations, institutions sectors Muslim Affairs,
and stakeholder groups in NGOs, Leagues
sanitation at the national and (B/M/C/P),
local levels Academe, media
3.1.3 Conduct regular dialogues, Annual Conference on Month 10 PEN, DOH, Donors and 1,000,000
fora and conventions among Sustainable Sanitation. DILG other agencies
sustainable sanitation, Month 22 1,100,000
champions, decision maker, Use the PEN website to
create a web-based National Month 34 1,300,000
legislators, practitioners,
advocates at different levels Sanitation Events Calendar
Month 46 1,500,000
and sectors to promote and data base of resource
sustainable sanitation materials Month 58 1,700,000
Month 70 2,000,000
OUTPUT 3.2 Clear mechanisms for collaboration in knowledge sharing, education, and human resource pooling for awareness and knowledge
building
3.2.1 Develop, support and Academic and Training Month 04 (April CAPS, PEN, DOH, DAP, 2,500,000
strengthen consortia in the consortium organized. 2010)
academic, research and training
sectors to institutionalize Campaign Alliance
dissemination of new established.
knowledge on sustainable
sanitation.
3.2.2 Develop/enhance sustainable Training modules developed. Month 06 (June CAPS, PEN, DOH, DAP, 2,500,000
sanitation curricula and 2010) Academic LGA, Academe,
information materials for Campaign/IEC materials/ consortium donors
publication and dissemination messages developed.
3.2.3 Conduct regular skills Training sessions conducted. Month 10 DOH, Academe, DOH, DAP, 10,000,000
upgrading training for Sanitary (October 2010) PSSE,PEN LGA, Academe,
Inspectors and Sanitary onward to 2016 donors
Engineers
Pool of experts, trainors,
presenters and other resource
person identified and
mobilized
86
4 5 6 7 6 8 8 6 9 : ; < = > ? 6 9 ? @ 7 : ; ? 9 6 > ? > 6 A 9 B A ? C D ? 8
3.2.4 Establish strong links with website links established; Month 1 PEN Secretariat
international knowledge network built onwards
centers, knowledge eschange
and training.
ACTIVITY MILESTONE TIMELINE DRIVER SUPPORT BUDGET (P,000)
Output 3.3: A strong alliance of sanitation service providers at the national and local levels
3.3.1. Develop a database on all Directory of service providers Month 06 (June DOH PEN, LWUA, P400,000
sanitation service providers 2010) MWSS, DTI
3.3.2 Organize regular fora, A program of action for Month 11 Philippine Water LWUA, MWSS, P600,000
dialogues, seminars and alliance building of sanitation (November Alliance and NAWASA DOH,
workshops among sanitation service providers 2010) other private DILG, PEN,
service providers for sector groups
sustainable sanitation. and cooperatives
3.3.3 Facilitate professionalizing and A program of action to Month 13 Philippine Water DOH, DILG, P1,000,000
development of sanitation professionalize and develop (January 2011) Alliance and PDF-TF WSS,
service provider sector the sanitation service provider other private DOf, PEN
sector sector groups
and cooperatives
Total Investment Requirements for Outcome 3 for six years 26,600,000
INVESTMENT
REQUIREMENT
Financing and Adequate Infrastructure Investments
OUTPUT 4.1 Prioritized intervention in highly vulnerable areas that are seriously affected by the lack of sanitation
4.1.1 Inventory, Identification and Vulnerable areas inventoried, January 2010 - DILG Leagues/ 25,000,000
mapping of vulnerable areas identified and mapped December 2011 NSCB/ DENR/
LLDA/ DOT/
DEPED/
Database developed NCIP/ NAPC/ 10,500,000
Prioritization guidelines Academe/ 500,000
developed NGOs
OUTPUT 4.2 Develop financing strategies and incentive schemes for sustainable infrastructure development
4.2.1 Study on sanitation tariff Sanitation tariff methodology July 2010 - June NEDA DILG/ DOH/ 2,500,000
methodologies, cost recovery developed 2011 DOf/ LGUs
schemes, subsidies and
incentives Cost recovery schemes
developed
Package of incentives
developed
4.2.2 Tracking of sanitation Tracking of sanitation funds March 2010 - DILG LGUs down to 1,800,000
funds and fees collected and and fees completed in pilot February 2011 barangay level
disbursed by LGUs areas
4.2.3 Study on development of Models developed and pre- July 2010 - June NEDA DOH/ DOf/ 2,500,000
proposed financing models tested in pilot areas 2011 DILG/ donors
4.2.4 Proposals for funding Initial discussions/dialogues January 2010 DOH or DILG/ GFIs/ 6,000,000
including research and with potential funders, i. - June 2016 identified lead NEDA/
development (i. e. low cost e. GFIs, foreign-funding agency LWUA/ DOST
sanitation solutions for the institutions, etc.
poor), capacity development
and institution building Proposals prepared and
submitted
Initial commitment from
potential funders obtained
4.2.5 Study on pro-poor cost Pro-poor technologies January 2011 - DOH DILG/ NAPC/ 1,500,000
of sanitation technology identified and evaluated December 2012 LWUA/
approaches LGUs/ NGOs/
Financial costings/project Academe/
feasibilities prepared NCIP/ DENR/
DPWH
4.2.6 Study on pro-poor sustainable Pro-poor sustainable financing April 2010 NEDA/ DOH NAPC/ LGUs/ 1,500,000
financing schemes models developed and pre- - March 2011 DOf/ DBM/
tested GFIs/ DFA
Guidelines developed and
disseminated to stakeholders
Identified LGUs with

commitment to implement
pro-poor sanitation projects
targetting 5-10% of the 23%
without access to sanitation
services
87
E F G H G I I G J K L M N O P G J P Q H K L P J G O P O G R J S R P T U P I
4.2.7 Provision of incentives for LGUs identified with pro- January 2010 to DOH/DILG LGUs/NAPC/ 26,163,000,000*
toilet construction including poor sanitation funding December 2016 NICP/PEN/
hygiene promotion and available DOF,DBM
capacity building in order to
meet the MDG on sanitation Trigger construction of
3.8 million toilets through
hygiene promotion and social
marketing and PPP
Capacity building modules
developed and implemented
INVESTMENT
ACTIVITY MILESTONE TIMELINE DRIVER SUPPORT REQUIREMENT
4.2.8 Push for the implementation 55 septage projects and January 2010 - NSSMP LWUA/ MWSS/ 8,996,684,000**
of the national sewerage and 6 sewerage projects December 2016 Secretariat/ Concessionaires/
septage program implemented** DPWH/MWSS MMDA/ DOH/
LGUs/ DENR/
Increase in sanitation coverage DEPED-CHED 52,000,000,000***
in Metro Manila of 56% in
2011 and 85% by 2016***
OUTPUT 4.3 Establish/Enhance PPPs and sanitation entrepreneurship
4.3.1 Develop IEC/social marketing Social marketing plan January 2011 - DOH or lead DTI/ CDA/ 2,500,000
plan for the promotion of developed/ promoted December 2013 agency NGOs/
sanitation entrepreneurship academe
4.3.2 Conduct a study to document PPP models documented and Dec 2013 DOF DOH/ LGU/ 1,500,000
PPP in sanitation service enhanced for implementation NEDA/ DTI/
provision NGOs/ PCCI/
private sector
representatives
OUTPUT 4.4 A well-established national account for sanitation
4.4.1 A study on the development Study commissioned Dec 2010 DOH DBM 2,500,000
of the national account for
sanitation
4.4.2 Advocacy work to Separate national account for Budget for 2011 DOH PEN,NGAs 500,000
institutionalize a national sanitation
account for sanitation.
OUTPUT 4.5 Identifying investment requirements to meet the MDG and MTPDP targets
4.5.1 Preparation f MDG Report prepared annually every DOH/NEDA PEN/NGAs 300,000
and MTPDP based March of each
sanitationplanning including its year from 2010
annual updating. to 2016
Total investment required for Outcome 4 for six years: 87,193,784,000
Explanatory note on the budget:

* for the targeting of toilet to be constructed, DOH 2008 data was used as basis for determining those without access to sanitary toilet; the average annual
estimated toilets to be constructed is 646,000; Unit cost used was P6,750 broken down as incentive of P5,000 for actual toilet construction; P750 for hygiene
promotion and P1,000 for capacity building. Of the estimated budget, NHA budget allocation of P1,541 B for construction of houses with sanitary toilets
is considered.
** All NSSMP data used were provided by the NSSMP secretariat and derived from the NSSMP draft document which is currently under review
*** data used were sourced from the 2 MWSS concessionnaires, CAPEX budget
88
V W X Y X Z Z X [ \ ] ^ _ ` a X [ a b Y \ ] a [ X ` a ` X c [ d c a e f a Z
INVESTMENT
REQUIREMENT
Outcome 5: Adequate sanitation and hygiene promotion is mainstreamed in emergency response
OUTPUT 5.1 Sourcebook and tool kit appropriate approaches for different situations
5.1.1 Inventory and identification Toolkits and January 2010 - June, DOH DILG, NDCC, 750,000
of appropriate sanitation sourcebooks on 2010 LGUs
approaches for emergency appropriate sanitation
situations approaches for
emergency situations
such as typhoon,
flooding, landslides,
earthquake and other
natural calamities
Production and Jan 2011 - Dec 2012 DOH DILG, LGUs 1,500,000
distribution of toolkits
to target benificairies
Piloting appropriate July 2010- Dec 2010 DOH NDCC.DILG, 2,000,000
sanitation approaches in LGU, NGO
resettlement areas and
evacuation camps
5.1.2 Capacity Development on Training conducted October 2010 to May DOH/PEN 5,000,000
use of toolkit 2016
5.1.3 Conduct of R and D on Design of WASH Jan 2012- Dec 2015 DOH NDCC.DILG, 6,500,000
approapriate design of facilities for emergency LGU, NGO
WASH for emergency situation and stockpiling
situation
OUTPUT 5.2 Integration of emergency sanitation in disaster and risk reduction plans at all levels
5.2.1 Review of disaster Recommendations October 2010 DOH/PEN/NDCC PEN/NGA/ 5,000,000

preparedness plans on how to integrate LGUs
sanitation in relief
and rehab operations
of government and
non-government
organizations
5.2.2 Development of Policy Policy guidelines December 2010 DOH/NDRC
guidelines approved
OUTPUT 5.3 Building partnerships for quick mobilization of logistics for sanitation in emergency situations
5.3.1 Coordination mechanisms A strong network December 2010 to June NDRC/DOH Wash LGUs/PEN/ 5,000,000
at national to municipal capable of emergency 2016 Cluster NGAs
level established including sanitatin repsonse
capacity building established
Total Investment Requirement for Outcome 5 for six years 25,750,000
89
g h i j i k k i l m n o p q r i l r s j m n r l i q r q i t l u t r v w r k
4.5 INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS OF THE SANITATION SECTOR
Table 9 shows that the most immediate needs of the sanitation sector for the 6 years action plan
requires an indicative estimated budget of about PhP 87 Billion The amount is allocated to the
following outcome areas:
Table 9: Summary of Investment Requirements for 2010-2016
Responsive Governance and Regulatory Strengthening for the sanitation sector 30,050,000
Improved Service Delivery through Communications and Capacity Development 95,800,150
Strengthening of strategic alliance 26,600,000
Financing Sanitation investments and infrastructure development 87,193,784,000
Adequate Sanitation for emergency situations 25,750,000
Grand Total for the 5 outcome areas:PHP 87,371,984,150
The budgetary needs for sanitation is quite substantial mainly because the country has to develop
more systems to address the infrastructure, human resource and communications requirements.
Sanitation budgets is traditionally non existing, thus, the need to provide budgets so that starting
2010 the country could implement a catch up plan to meet the MDG targets on a sustainable
manner.
PROVIDING SANITATION INFRASTRUCTURE AND INVESTMENT TO MEET
THE MDGS
Under the approved Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap, a strong and vibrant sanitation
sector is expected to emerge with strong investment and infrastructure support. For this purpose,
the national government is required to support the investment requirements to meet the MDG
commitment of ensuring that 84% of the total households have access to sanitation While
government may not have the total budget required to achieve this feat, it can embark on various
innovative strategies to trigger household level investments and private sector contribution.
From 2010 to 2016, it is estimated that 3,876,000 households need to be assisted to have their
own toilets. This is translated to about 646,000 toilets annually for the next 6 years. If each of the
46,000 barangays will target 15 households per year, then the objective is achievable. The estimate
of cost of a minimum amount of about P5,000 per toilet can be provided by the households
themselves. Funds can come from micro-financing schemes or attractive incentive packages.
Where should the sanitation fund come from? Clearly, there are three broad possible
sources for the provision of sanitation goods and services:
1. Public funds flowing through the national or local government and raised through general
taxation, public borrowing and overseas development assistance
2. Private funds flowing directly between beneficiary households and service providers
3. Semi public/ charitable funds flowing in the form of payments made to communities, households
or service providers by donors, foundations and other non government organizations.
This budget includes private sector contribution estimated at about 50% of financing investments.
This includes household level contribution for toilet construction. The NHA have allocated funds
to provide toilets for about 400,000 households. The private concessionaires of MWSS is expected
to collectively contribute about P 13.6 Billion by 2012. The LGUs are also expected to cover at
least 25% of the costs of infrastructure investments from their IRA and sanitation fees. National
government agencies like the DOH who have regular budgets for communication and health
advocacies is expected to contribute to the fund. ODA funds are expected to cover the costs of
90
x y z { z | | z } ~ z } { ~ } z z } |
the proposed studies and provide access to soft loans that LGUs, WDs and private providers can
access.
For the government to provide the much needed budgetary requirements for sanitation,
the following strategies and schemes are being proposed:
• National government financing – national government to provide a distinct line item budget
as part of the General Appropriation Act (GAA) for agencies with sanitation mandate such
as DOH, DILG, DPWH, and DENR
• Allocating part of the LGU Internal Revenue Allocation for local sanitation programs of the
LGU. Whenever applicable, these can also be used by LGU to leverage for sanitation funding
from the national government. This can be accessed for building wastewater treatment plant
sewerage plants and even toilets at the household levels
• Government and private sector partnership in financing sanitation - this can be in the form
of guaranteed financing where private sector may be encouraged to allocate part of their
Company Social Responsibility funds for sanitation to be matched by the national or local
government
• Microfinancing schemes wherein private and NGOs may jointly provide funding/loans for
household toilet construction with affordable interest rates.
• Congressional allocation for sanitation wherein portion of the pork barrel will be allocated for
sanitation infrastructure development ranging from septage and sewerage treatment plants,
communal and household toilets
4.6 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE MTPDP 2010-2016

The following specific recommendations are highlighted as proposals for inclusion in the
2010-2016 MTPDP:
Specific Recommendations for the MTPDP 2010-2016 include the following:
1. Preparation of the National Policy document on Sanitation
2. MDG Sanitation targets included in the 2010-2016 MTPDP and MTPIP
3. Local Sanitation targets integrated in all LGU development plans
4. Improved sanitation coverage in priority cities/province by 50% (from 14 areas having below
than 50% coverage to 7 cities/provinces)
• Safe and adequate sanitation solutions for the 23 million Filipinos without access to
improved sanitation facilities located in poor rural and peri-urban areas. Priority to the top
13 “Unsanitary Cities/Municipalities”
• Health and Hygiene Promotion in place in communities and schools.
5. Sanitation Investment Plans in the National and Local Investment Plans for Health
• Sewerage and or septage management in 57 highly urbanized cities in place
• Local Sustainable Sanitation Plans developed with budgets
6. Pro-poor Sanitation Fund reflected in the regular GAA under the National Social Fund
7. A national sustainable sanitation communications plan implemented
8. Sanitation fully integrated in all policy instruments and communications plans of other
sectors.
9. A national account for sanitation is established.
10. Enactment of the National Sanitation Act that supercedes the 1976 Sanitation Code of the
Philippines.
91

5.0 IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS
5.0 IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS
The Roadmap brings together institutions from government, civil society, and the private sector engaged
in sanitation-related activities in order to establish coherence, pool resources and promote coordination
and collaboration within a constrained institutional environment. The institutional arrangement represents
pooled coordination of various institutions in government that considers their existing mandates, roles and
functions in the development of the sector.
5.1 General Oversight and Guidance

The overarching policy parameters guiding the Roadmap implementation shall be the government’s
adoption of the MDGs and current strategic directions outlined in the 2004-2010 MTPDP and
the MTPIP.
The general oversight, overall policy guidance and steering of the Roadmap shall be exercised
by the NEDA Board through the Sub-Committee on Water Resources (SCWR) of the NEDA
Infrastructure Committee (INFRACOM). The INFRACOM-SCWR shall be assisted by a
Secretariat composed of representatives from NEDA INFRACOM Staff and the NWRB.
5.2 Management and Supervision
The implementation of the Sanitation Roadmap shall be managed and supervised by the SCWR
through a Sub- sub-committee on sanitation, which shall be created through a NEDA Board
Resolution. Figure 5.1 shows the Proposed Implementation Structure of the Roadmap.
The core members of the SCWR shall be composed of the following:
The Assistant Director-General, National Development Office – National Chairperson

Economic and Development Authority (NEDA)
National Water Resources Board (NWRB) Co-Chair
Department of Finance (DOF) Member
Department of Budget and Management (DBM) Member
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) Member
Department of Health (DOH) Member
Department of Agriculture (DA) Member
Department of Energy (DOE) Member
Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Member
Department of Transportation and Communication (DOTC) Member
Department of Justice (DOJ) Member
Department of Tourism (DOT) Member
Office of the President – Executive Secretary (OP) Member
University of the Philippines – National Hydraulics Research Center (UP-NHRC) Member
Department of Interior and Local Governments ( DILG) Member
Philippine Water Partnership (PWP) Member
93
¡ ¢ £ ¤ ¥ ¥ ¦ ¡ ¥ ¤ ¥ ¤ § ¨ § ¥ © ª ¥
The membership of the SCWR Sub committee on sanitation may be expandable to include
representatives from the different sanitation-related agencies on the basis of sector focus such as:
Table 10. Sanitation Sub-sector Members
Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) Member
Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA) Member
National Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPC) Member
National Water and Sanitation Association of the Philippines (NAWASA) Member
Department of Social Work and Development (DSWD) Member
Cooperative Development Authority (CDA) Member
Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) Member
League of Provinces of the Philippines (LPP) Member
League of Cities of the Philippines (LCP) Member
League of Municipalities of the Philippines (LMP) Member
Department of Education ( DepED) Member
Department of Tourism (DOT)) Member
National Housing Authority (NHA)) Member
The DOH has agreed to be the lead driver for sanitation. In particular, the Environmental and
Occupational Health Office (EOHO) will lead the sub committee on sanitation of the NEDA
INFRACOM-SCWR. The EOHO is currently one of the offices under the National Center for
Disease Prevention and Control (NCDPC) which is coordinated under the Health Policy and
Service Delivery Team ( PSDT) of the DOH. Other DOH units expected to contribute are the
Health Policy Planing Bureau, The National Center for Health Promotion, the Bureau of Local
Health Development and the National Epidemiology Center.
The DOH is currently mobilizing inter-agency support for Environmental Health through the
Inter-agency Committee on Environmental Health ( IACEH). The members of the sectoral Task
Force on Sanitation of the IACEH will all be members of hte Sanitation Sub-sommittee of the
SCWR.
Duties and Functions
The SCWR shall have the following duties and functions:
a) Ensure that the direction set for the sector is carried out in accordance with the Roadmap;
b) Coordinate sector monitoring as well as the conduct of periodic review, evaluation and
assessment of the sector, e.g., extent and status of the implementation of programs/activities
identified in the Roadmap, deviation of actual performance from programmed targets, problem
areas encountered in program implementation;
c) Coordinate and/or advise the conduct of studies, researchers and policy analyses on various
aspects of the sector and make subsequent policy recommendations to the NEDA Board
through the INFRACOM;
d) Formulate areas of cooperation and coordination among the various agencies and
instrumentalities of the government involved in the sector programs and projects to avoid
duplication of efforts;
e) Serve as clearinghouse of sector information; and
94
« ¬ ® ¯ ¯ ° ± ² ³ ´ µ ¶ ° ¶ · ® ± ² ¶ ° µ ¶ µ ¸ ° ¹ ¸ ¶ º » ¶ ¯
f) Serve as a forum/platform for the discussion and resolution of arising issues in the sector.
Meetings
The SCWR shall hold quarterly meetings upon notice issued by the Chairperson. Special and/or
emergency meetings may be held at the motion of any member submitted to the Chairperson
provided that such is certified by a majority of the members through a referendum.
Decision-making
The Sub-Committee shall aim to build consensus in all its major decisions. In cases where divergence
of opinions regarding decision points would require a vote, the decision/s shall be made through
a simple majority (50%+1) of all members present. To facilitate decision-making, all the necessary
information shall be provided by the Secretariat to the SCWR members prior to the meeting.
Quorum
Quarterly meetings of the SCWR shall observe a quorum. Quorum shall be defined as majority
(i.e., 50%+1) f the core members including majority (i.e., 50%+1) of the agencies identified per
sub-sector (i.e., water supply, sewerage and sanitation, irrigation, flood and hazard mitigation and
water resources management).
Secretariat Services
The designated representatives of the NEDA-INFRACOM Staff and of the NWRB shall provide
the necessary secretariat services to the SCWR.
All heads of departments, bureaus, offices and instrumentalities of the government shall also be
requested to extend full cooperation and assistance to the SCWR to ensure the accomplishment
of its tasks.
The SCWR may also create technical working groups (TWGs) as may be necessary for the purpose
of discharging its functions.
Tenure
The NEDA Board Resolution shall determine the length of tenure of the SCWR and the level of
representation from each concerned agency or institution. It is proposed that each SCWR term
shall be for an initial period of six (6) years in line with duration of the MTPDP and its long-term
tenure shall be for a period until year 2025 in line with the Roadmap’s vision.
A mandatory review shall be conducted in year 2015.
95
¼ ½ ¾ ¿ ¾ À À ¾ Á Â Ã Ä Å Æ Ç ¾ Á Ç È ¿ Â Ã Ç Á ¾ Æ Ç Æ ¾ É Á Ê É Ç Ë Ì Ç À
FIGURE 5
PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION STRUCTURE
5.3 PROJECTS EXECUTION

The specific targets outlined in the medium-term plans and annual operational plans shall be executed
by the respective agencies and institutions according to their mandates, roles, functions, resources
and areas of competence. Where projects require stronger coordination and collaboration, inter-
agency arrangements or GO-NGO-PO mechanisms shall be established for the purpose. Sanitation
projects shall be implemented by sanitation service providers such as water districts, LGUs, local
water and/or sanitation associations and cooperatives, small sanitation service providers, private
concessionaires and NGOs through donor-funded programs.
Agencies and institutions involved in the provision of enabling environments (related to policy and
law, capacity development, financing, education, advocacy, public information et al) are expected
to align their individual projects to the medium-term strategies and annual operational plans of
the Roadmap.
5.4 FRAMEWORK OF COLLABORATION

The various stakeholders of the sanitation sector may be grouped according to their specific roles
as providers of an enabling environment, service providers and users as illustrated in Figure 6.
96
Í Î Ï Ð Ï Ñ Ñ Ï Ò Ó Ô Õ Ö × Ø Ï Ò Ø Ù Ð Ó Ô Ø Ò Ï × Ø × Ï Ú Ò Û Ú Ø Ü Ý Ø Ñ
FIGURE 6
FRAMEWORK OF COLLABORATION
ï ð ñ ò ó ô õ ö ÷ ø ù ú ð ö û
ü ý þ ÿ þ þ þ þ ý ü

ü ý þ ý ý þ
ý þ
' ( ) * + , -

. / 0 1 2 , , 2 , - 3 * + ) * + , -

, - 7 8 ( 9 + 8 + 9 0 (
4 5 6

7 2 / : 9 1 2 . / 0 : 9 ; 2 / , -
ü ý þ ÿ þ þ þ ý ü þ
ý þ ÿ þ ÿ þ þ þ ÿ þ ü ÿ
< 8 + 2 / = 9 , + / 9 1 + , - . / 9 : 8 + 2
ü ý þ ÿ ÿ
7 2 1 + 0 / - . / 0 : 9 ; 2 / ,
ü þ

ü
ý ý ÿ
ü ü
ÿ
ÿ þ ý ý ü ý ü
!

" # $

þ ü ÿ
ý ÿ % &
ý
þ ý ü
5.5 MECHANISMS AND PROCESSES

5.5.1. Oversight Mechanisms. The main oversight mechanisms of the sanitation sector and of
the Roadmap shall be the existing institutions mandated for the purpose as defined in the
SCWR Organizational Structure (Figure 5) and the Framework of Collaboration (Figure
6). The added value of the Roadmap is the recognition of the oversight role of non-state
bodies such as civil society and the media. In implementing the Roadmap, there may be
instances where collaborative mechanisms shall be established for specific functions.
5.5.2. Support Mechanisms. The Roadmap implementation shall utilize existing support
mechanisms through agencies such as the CDA, NAPC, DAR, NIA, MMDA, DSWD, PWP,
PEN, government and private financing institutions, donors, NGOs, research institutions
and the academe.
5.5.3. Legislative and Policy Development Mechanisms. While the Roadmap implementation shall
operate within existing legal and policy settings and mechanisms, it shall also propose policy
and legislative reforms through existing lawmaking institutions such as the Congress and
LGU-level legislative bodies as well as policymaking institutions such as the NEDA, NWRB,
DILG, LGU, DOF and DENR.
5.5.4. Regulatory Mechanisms. The regulation of various activities of sanitation service providers
and users in the sanitation sector is currently shared by the NWRB, LWUA, DOH, DENR,
MWSS-RO, contracted regulatory offices and the judiciary. The Roadmap implementation
shall seek policy and legal reforms leading to harmonization of the economic regulatory
framework. One major reform objective is the decentralization of sanitation regulatory
functions and the possible deputization of the regional offices and/or the LGUs for
undertaking regulatory functions at the local level.
97
Þ ß à á à â â à ã ä å æ ç è é à ã é ê á ä å é ã à è é è à ë ã ì ë é í î é â
5.5.5. Donor Coordination Mechanisms. The Paris Declaration of 2005 has advocated for
harmonization and closer coordination among donors. At the national level the Philippine
Development Forum (PDF) acts as a platform for policy dialogue among the government,
donor countries and agencies and other development partners. The SCWR can coordinate
and collaborate with relevant PDF Working Groups on topics and activities related to the
MDGs and Social Progress, Growth and Investments and Sustainable Rural Development
and Infrastructure.
5.5.6. Consultative Mechanisms. The Roadmap upholds the IWRM framework which promotes
multi-stakeholder consultations. Roadmap implementers shall establish consultative
mechanisms (e.g., annual exhibits and symposia) and shall promote the establishment of
local consultative mechanisms.
5.5.7. Monitoring and Evaluation. This Roadmap adopts the Results-Based Monitoring and
Evaluation Framework and its accompanying tools and mechanisms. The RBME results
shall feed into assessment and planning activities and public information. Periodically,
independent external evaluators shall be tapped by the SCWR by individual implementing
agencies.
5.5.8. Feedback. The SCWR shall maintain the KM Portal through a KM Portal Task Group
headed by the NWRB. The Portal shall serve as a platform for interactive feedback and
interaction between the various stakeholders of the sector. Individual implementing agencies
and service providers shall also establish appropriate platforms for feedback.
98 > ? @ A @ B B @ C D E F G H I @ C I J A D E I C @ H I H @ K C L K I M N I B
6.0 RESULTS-BASED MONITORING AND EVALUATION
6.0 RESULTS-BASED MONITORING AND
EVALUATION
The Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation (RBME) System is integral to the sector institutions
inasmuch as its related activities are integrated into the annual plans and other work plans of the
organizations involved in the sector.
The central RBME function shall be lodged at the SCWR. Monitoring activities and evaluations
shall be decentralized to the national implementing agencies, local government units and SSPs levels
based on the Roadmap’s central monitoring and evaluation plan. Each implementing agency, LGU
and SSPs shall be encouraged to set up RBME units or designate specialized RBME personnel.
The SCWR shall also create its own RBME TWG or unit.
The Roadmap Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for 2010-2013 are shown in Tables 11 and 12. The
Detailed Evaluation Plan Matrix in Table 11 outlines the requisite sector-wide summative evaluation,
optional ex-ante evaluation of selected projects, mid-term evaluation of selected projects and end-
program thematic evaluation on compelling policy issues to evaluate the achievement of 2016
goals. Although the matrix outlines only the indicators of goal attainment, the evaluation shall
examine the vertical logic and shall, therefore, cover an assessment of the outputs and outcomes
according to pre-agreed evaluation criteria and guidelines.
101
O P Q R Q S S Q T U V W X Y Z Q T Z [ R U V Z T Q Y Z Y Q \ T ] \ Z ^ _ Z S
TABLE 11
7$%/(
'(7$,/('(9$/8$7,213/$10$75,;
DETAILED EVALUATION PLAN MATRIX
q

r s t u s v w x y x z v s w t w v w x y x z s t w y s y s v s x u x s t w v s y y
{ | } ~
x s t y w s v x y w s v x s v s t u w w y x y w t

w r y v
{ | |
¤ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ª « ¬ ¬ · ° ® ¥ ° ¥ ¨ § © ¦ © ª ¨ ¶ ® ¸ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ¥ ¬ Á ¹ ¤ » Â Ã ¸ » Ä ´ ¨ § ¬ ¬ ¨ © Õ ¹ Å ¹ ¤ Ø É Æ À » ¤ Ä ¤ ® ³ ¨ © ° Ö Ò § ± ® Ú ¹ Å ¤ ¹ ¸ ¤ « º Ö
§ ¦ ¨ ® ¯ ° ¥ ¨ ® ± § ¦ ¥ ¬ ¬ · © ¬ § ³ ± © ³ « µ ® ¦ ¨ © ¦
º ® ® ´ ¨ ¥ º ¬ § ´ ¶ ® ±
´ « µ µ ¥ ¨ § Ì ® À © µ µ § ¨ ¨ ® ® © ª
© ¬ § ³ ¤ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ ¨ § © ¦
¹ ¦ ¦ « ¥ ¬ µ © ¦ § ¨ © ° § ¦ ¯
® Ì ¥ ¬ « ¥ ¨ § © ¦ § ¦ Ã ¸ × Æ ¹ À Ø Ð ¨ ©
§ ¦ ´ ¨ ° « µ ® ¦ ¨ ´ ¥ ¦ ±
° ® © ° ¨ ´
¹ ¦ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ¥ ¬ ´ « ´ ¨ ¥ § ¦ ¥ º ¬ ®
Þ ß ¼ à ³ © © ° ± § ¦ ¥ ¨ ® © °
³ © µ µ « ¦ § ³ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ´
´ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ³ © µ µ « ¦ § ³ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ´
Å ¹ Æ Ç » Å
¬ ¥ ¦ ´ © ª © ¨ ¶ ® °
³ © ¦ ¨ ° ¥ ³ ¨ © « ¨
Ð § ± Ö ¨ ® ° µ ° ® Ì § ® Ò
¬ ¥ ¦ § µ ¬ ® µ ® ¦ ¨ ® ±
² ²
· ° © Ë ® ³ ¨
´ ® ³ ¨ © ° ´
È ¹ Â É » ¤ Ä
´ « µ µ ¥ ¨ § Ì ®
° ® ´ « ¬ ¨ ´
® Ì ¥ ¬ « ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ´ § ¦
» ¦ ¥ ³ ¨ µ ® ¦ ¨ © ª ¨ ¶ ® ¸ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ¥ ¬
® Ì ¥ ¬ « ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ¥ ¦ ±
Ã ¦ ³ ° ® ¥ ´ ® § ¦ ¨ ¶ ®
¤ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ¹ ³ ¨ ¨ ¶ ¥ ¨
Þ ß ¼ Í
· ° © Ë ® ³ ¨ ® Ì ¥ ¬ « ¥ ¨ § © ¦
¦ « µ º ® ° ¥ ¦ ±
¨ ¶ ® µ ¥ ¨ § ³
´ « ® ° ´ ® ± ® ´ ¨ ¶ ® ¼ ½ ¾ ¿
ª ° ® Ê « ® ¦ ³ © ª
° ® ´ « ¬ ¨ ´
® Ì ¥ ¬ « ¥ ¨ § © ¦
¤ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ À © ± ® © ª ¨ ¶ ®
Å ¶ ® µ ¥ ¨ § ³
§ ¦ ¨ ® ° ´ ® ³ ¨ © ° ¥ ¬
· ¶ § ¬ § § ¦ ® ´
² ²
® Ì ¥ ¬ « ¥ ¨ § © ¦ § ¦
± § ¥ ¬ © ¯ « ® ´
¸ Ç ¹ Ù Â Ç É Ù Ú ¤ ·
Ã µ ¬ ® µ ® ¦ ¨ § ¦ ¯
¥ ¦ ± Ë © § ¦ ¨ ¥ ³ ¨ § Ì § ¨ § ® ´
Þ ß ¼ Í
± ¥ ¨ ¥ º ¥ ´ ® ´
¥ ¯ ® ¦ ³ § ® ´ ¨ ©
© ¦ ´ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ ¨ § © ¦
Â © ³ ¥ ¬ ¥ ¦ ± ¤ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ¨ ¥ ° ¯ ® ¨ ´
¦ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ¥ ¬ § ¦ ³ ¬ « ± ® ± § ¦ ¨ ¶ ® Þ ß ¼ ß Ö ³ © © ° ± § ¦ ¥ ¨ ® ° © Ë ® ³ ¨
Ð § ± Ö Å ® ° µ
· ¶ § ¬ Ú ¹ Å ¤ ¹ ¸ · © ° ¨ ¥ ¬
· ° § © ° § ¨ ¨ © ¨ ¶ ® ¨ ©
´ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ¬ ¥ ¦ ´ Þ ß ¼ ¿ Ð Å · Õ · ¥ ¦ ±
® Ì ¥ ¬ « ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ´
Æ ® Ì § ® Ò © ª
¼ Í Î É ¦ ´ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ °
¥ ¦ ± º « ± ¯ ® ¨ ´ § ¦ Ð Å · Ã ·
¸ ¤ Ø ± ¥ ¨ ¥
´ ® ¬ ® ³ ¨ ® ±
À § ¨ § ® ´ Ï Ð « ¦ § ³ § ¥ ¬ § ¨ §
¬ ¥ ³ ®
¸ Ç ¹ ´ Ù Â Ç É ´ Ù
Â © ³ ¥ ¬ ¤ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ ¨ § © ¦
® ´ Ñ
° © Ë ® ³ ¨ ´ § ¦ Þ ß ¼ ¼
Á ® ¦ ³ ¶ µ ¥ ° Û § ¦ ¯
Ú ¤ · ´ ¥ ¦ ± ¸ Ç Ø ´
¨ ¥ ° ¯ ® ¨ ´ § ¦ ¨ ® ¯ ° ¥ ¨ ® ± § ¦
ª © ° § ¦ ¨ ® ° § µ
¥ ¬ ¬ Â Ç É ± ® Ì ® ¬ © µ ® ¦ ¨
´ ¨ « ± § ® ´
¨ © ° © Ì § ± ®
¤ ® Ò ® ° ¥ ¯ ® ¥ ¦ ± Ï © ° ¥ ´ ´ ® ´ ´ µ ® ¦ ¨ © ª
¬ ¥ ¦ ´
µ © ¦ § ¨ © ° § ¦ ¯ ± ¥ ¨ ¥
´ ® ¨ ¥ ¯ ®
Æ ® ¬ ¥ ¨ ® ± ¬ § ¨ ® ° ¥ ¨ « ° ®
© « ¨ ³ © µ ® ´
· ° © Ö © © ° ¤ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ ¨ § © ¦
²
µ ¥ ¦ ¥ ¯ ® µ ® ¦ ¨ § ¦
× « ¦ ± ° ® ª ¬ ® ³ ¨ ® ± § ¦ ¨ ¶ ®
¾ ¶ § ¯ ¶ ¬
Ó
· ° § µ ¥ ° ± ¥ ¨ ¥ Ü ª ° © µ

Ø ¨ § © ¦ ¥ ¬ ® á Ö ¥ ¦ ¨ ®
° ® ¯ « ¬ ¥ ° Ç ¹ ¹ « ¦ ± ® °
« ° º ¥ ¦ § Ô ® ± ³ § ¨ § ® ´ § ¦

§ ¦ ¨ ® ° Ì § ® Ò ´ Ù ª © ³ « ´
® Ì ¥ ¬ « ¥ ¨ § © ¦ © ª

¨ ¶ ® ¸ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ¥ ¬ ¤ © ³ § ¥ ¬
¬ ¥ ³ ®
¯ ° © « ± § ´ ³ « ´ ´ § © ¦ ´ Ù
× « ¦ ±
² ´ ® ¬ ® ³ ¨ ® ±
© ³ « ¬ ¥ ° Ì § ´ § ¨ ´ Ý
° © Ë ® ³ ¨ ´ § ¦
¹ ¦ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ¥ ¬ ¥ ³ ³ © « ¦ ¨
Õ ® ³ ° ® ¥ ´ ® ±
ª © ° ´ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ § ´ Þ ß ¼ ¼ Ï Þ ß ¼ Þ
¦ « µ º ® °
® ´ ¨ ¥ º ¬ § ´ ¶ ® ±
¥ ¦ ± ª ° ® Ê « ® ¦ ³
© ª ´ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ Ö
° ® ¬ ¥ ¨ ® ± § ¬ ¬ ¦ ® ´ ´ ® ´
Ã µ ° © Ì ® ± ¤ ¥ ª ® ¥ ¦ ± ¥ ± ® Ê « ¥ ¨ ®
´ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ´ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ´ © ¬ « ¨ § © ¦ ´
× © ° µ « ¬ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ © ª
³ © Ì ® ° ¥ ¯ ® § ¦ ª © ° ¨ ¶ ® Þ Í µ § ¬ ¬ § © ¦
¤ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ © ¬ § ³ § ® ´
° § © ° § ¨ × § ¬ § § ¦ © ´ Ò § ¨ ¶ © « ¨
² ²
¥ ¦ ± ¬ ¥ ¦ ´ ¥ ¨ ¬ © ³ ¥ ¬
³ § ¨ § ® ´ Ï ° © Ì § ¦ ³ ® ¥ ³ ³ ® ´ ´ ¨ © § µ ° © Ì ® ±
² ²
¥ ¦ ± ¦ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ¥ ¬
º ß â Ü ª ° © µ ¼ à ´ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ª ¥ ³ § ¬ § ¨ § ® ´
Ó
¬ ® Ì ® ¬ ´
¥ ° ® ¥ ´ ¶ ¥ Ì § ¦ ¯ ¬ © ³ ¥ ¨ ® ± § ¦ © © ° ° « ° ¥ ¬
¬ ® ´ ´ ¨ ¶ ¥ ¦ ß â ¥ ¦ ± ® ° § Ö « ° º ¥ ¦
Ó
× © ° ¯ § ¦ ¯ © ª · · ·
³ © Ì ® ° ¥ ¯ ® ¨ © ¾ ¥ ° ® ¥ ´ ã
Ð Ø ¹ ´ ¥ ¦ ± Ð Ø É ´
³ § ¨ § ® ´ Ï ° © Ì § ¦ ³ ® ´ Ý
¥ ¨ ¬ © ³ ¥ ¬ ¥ ¦ ±
® ¥ ¬ ¨ ¶ ¥ ¦ ± ¯ § ® ¦ ®
ä ä
¦ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ¥ ¬ ¬ ® Ì ® ¬ ´
· ° © µ © ¨ § © ¦ § ¦ ¬ ¥ ³ ® § ¦
³ © µ µ « ¦ § ¨ § ® ´ ¥ ¦ ±
´ ³ ¶ © © ¬ ´
¤ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ Â © ³ ¥ ¬ ¤ « ´ ¨ ¥ § ¦ ¥ º ¬ ®
Ã ¦ Ì ® ´ ¨ µ ® ¦ ¨ ¤ ¥ ¦ § ¨ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ · ¬ ¥ ¦ ´
· ¬ ¥ ¦ ´ § ¦ ¨ ¶ ® ± ® Ì ® ¬ © ® ± Ò § ¨ ¶
¸ ¥ ¨ § © ¦ ¥ ¬ ¥ ¦ ± º « ± ¯ ® ¨ ´
Â © ³ ¥ ¬
Ã ¦ Ì ® ´ ¨ µ ® ¦ ¨
· ¬ ¥ ¦ ´ ª © ° ® ¥ ¬ ¨ ¶
The Results Monitoring Plan Matrix in Table 12 outlines progress monitoring of the five key result
areas and their corresponding indicators. Monitoring activities shall include monitoring of inputs,
outputs and other implementation issues (such as risks and problems encountered). This Roadmap
also suggests the integration of the monitoring plan into the existing work plans of NGAs, LGUs,
SSPs and related NGOs, installation of RBME systems, formulation of individual RBME plans
and designation and activation of M&E units and/or officers.
It should be mentioned here that the monitoring of the Roadmap component on the provision
of adequate infrastructure support is lodged in the annual updating of the CIIP done by NEDA
with inputs from the different national implementing agencies. Furthermore, other on-going and
pipeline infrastructure projects that are mentioned in the chapter on priority programs are likewise

monitored by the concerned oversight agencies for the projects and are reported to the SCWR for
information and guidance of the NEDA Board and other monitoring committees.
102 ` a b c b d d b e f g h i j k b e k l c f g k e b j k j b m e n m k o p k d
TABLE 12
RESULTS MONITORING PLAN MATRIX
DATA SOURCES:
OUTCOME DETAILED
AGREED BASELINE AND METHODS MODALITY AND AGENCY
PROGRESS DESCRIPTION Of
INDICATORS TARGET VALUE Of DATA TIMING RESPONSIBLE
MONITORING INDICATORS
COLLECTION
Strong local sanita- • Implementation Baseline: Data Sources: Series of Orienta- DOH, NEDA,
ö ÷ ø ù ú û ü ý þ
ÿ
ü ú ü ú ü
tion plans and pro- of the NSSP There is a need to NSSP tion Workshops to DILG, DENR,
ù ü
grams developed through orienta- review/revisit exist- be conducted per LWUA,LGUs

ü ÷
ø ú
and implemented tion workshops at ing Local Govern- Data Collection region from 2010-
ø ü ø ü
by LGUs within the the local level ment Ordinances to Methods: 2013
national sanitation ensure harmoniza- Consultation Con-
policy and sup- • Strengthen tion with the NSSP ferences
ported by the DOH enforcement sys- Desk Review
as the national sani- tems, mechanisms Target Value: Documentation
tation institutional and processes NSSP programs
driver. at the local level integrated with
through series Local Development
of planning work- Plans
shops
Strengthened DOH DOH Sanitation Baseline: Data Sources: Semi-Annual and DOH, DILG, LWUA,
to act as sector Strategy developed, Fragmented coordi- NSSP Annual Monitoring NEDA
lead driver; DOH approved and is nation mechanism Directory of Sanita- at INFRACOM
to develop its own being implemented for sanitation tion concerned NEDA SCWR
sanitation plans and across the countyr. Fragmented and agencies
programs. outdated policies Annual Reports &
Oversight function and legislations Accomplishment &
NEDA SCWR giving and policy direction Monitoring Reports
priority to sanitation of NEDA SCWR Target Value: Policy briefs
concerns. felt through regular Lead sector agency Senate & Lower
sanitation meetings and implementing House Bills
and policy docu- unit identified
ments. National Sanitation Data Collection
Code Amended Method:
Regular Monitoring
Documentation of
Lower House &
Senate Committee
Meetings
Coordinator Meet-
ing with LEDAC,
Congress and
Senate
A clear articulation Advocacy for Baseline: Data Sources: Bi-monthly monitor- DOH, NEDA, DILG,
and sustainable Sanitation to be Sanitation programs Existing National ing through consulta- DENR, DBM
implementation of declared a priority and projects are not Sanitation Code tions with NEDA
the national and local policy in all agen- included in the MT- LGU Sanitation Board and DBM
sanitation policies cies concerned PDP and MTPIP Codes
with corresponding Sanitation programs Local Government
budget line items do not have a Code
proposed for GAA budget item under New Environmen-
Amendment of the DOH tal Laws on Water
Sanitation Code to and Solid Waste)
comply with more Target Value:
recent laws with Position paper on Data Collection
provisions relating sanitation to be Methods:
to sanitation included in the Key Informant
Issuance of GAA. Interviews
policy statement Desk Review
by NEDA Board Documentation
on the inclusion of
sanitation programs
in the MTPDP
Rationalized/ Sanitation concerns Baseline: Data Source: Quarterly Consulta- DOH, NEDA, DILG,
strengthened sector mainstreamed and There is a need Sector plans and tive meetings with DENR, LWUA
coordination mecha- aligned with the to review/update programs concerned sector
nisms National Sanitation existing sanitation Policy briefs agencies for updates
Sector Plan instruments, com- on the status of inte-
munication plans Data Collection gration of sanitation
and programs in the Methods: concerns.
sector Interviews
Desk Review
Target Value: Stakeholders Con-
Integrated sanita- sultation
tion concerns on Documentation
environment, health
and safety aspects
103
å æ ç è ç é é ç ê ë ì í î ï ð ç ê ð ñ è ë ì ð ê ç ï ð ï ç ò ê ó ò ð ô õ ð é
DATA SOURCES:
OUTCOME DETAILED
INDICATORS TARGET VALUE Of DATA TIMING RESPONSIBLE
COLLECTION
Outcome 2: Institutions and Capacity Baseline: still to be Data Sources: Regular quarterly National Agency
Improved service Organizations development needs established based Annual and annual for Sustainable
delivery through capable of refer to NGAs, on compilation of accomplishment monitoring Sanitation (when
communications developing, LGUs/LCEs, inventory results, reports of NGAs, Regular training established)
and capacity communicating, MPDCs/PPDCs, TNA analysis and LGUs, PPDCs, assessments Collection by
development. implementing, Academe/Training KAP surveys MPDCs, NGOs M&E units/
Periodic training
monitoring and Institutions, Academe/Learning officers of NGAs,
conferences
evaluating their Sanitation Target values: Institutions, LGUs, PPDC/
medium term Professionals, and A national official Annual KAP
Sector Reports MPDC, NGO,
sanitation plans General Public guideline on surveys
KAP Surveys Academe/Training
It includes technology options, Institutions
the provision management Web-site log count
DILG/DOH
of required models, and PIME Training activity
competencies to on sustainable reports
develop a SMART sanitation programs Training evaluation
medium term reports
plan e.g. local Trainings per year:
Benchmarking
policy formulation • 82 LCEs
studies
on sustainable • 30 PPDCs
• 200 MPDCs Training
sanitation;
conferences
technology options;
Establish 10 New (proceedings)
social marketing
and advocacy; Higher Learning Related ODA
Institutions that reports from
research and
offer B.S. Sanitary NEDA
development;
Engineering and
benchmarking;
Training Course Data Collection
monitoring and
for Sanitation Methods:
evaluation and
Inspectors
information Compilation of
exchange Reports / Desktop
80 percent of
Responsive Review of Reports
LGUs have
interventions refer complied with Surveys, Cross-
to development responsive sectional studies
appropriate training training strategies Case studies
designs, conduct of using standard Observation
training activities, benchmarks methods
communication
and advocacy Training
80 percent of Conferences
plans for public’s LGUs actively
behavioral change, Training evaluation
utilizing web-
and efficient based information
information exchange
exchange
Heightened
awareness and
practices of the
general public
on sustainable
sanitation and
hygiene
104
DATA SOURCES:
OUTCOME DETAILED
INDICATORS TARGET VALUE OF DATA TIMING RESPONSIBLE
COLLECTION
Outcome 3: 3.1: Strong and active Joint activities and Baseline: Three Data Sources: • Quarterly and an- • Collection by Secre-
national multi-sector programs conducted national and some • Post activity/ con- nual monitoring. tariats of PEN and
Broad-based support groups that regional sanitation ference documenta- • Periodic workshops PDF-TF on SAB
alliance of multi- will advocate, lead and conferences held by tion and conferences • Coordination and
sectoral and multi- advance sustainable PEN since 2006 • PEN website compilation by
level stakeholders sanitation policies, plans, • PDF-TF on SAB Secretariats of
strengthening the programs and activities. Target values: minutes. PEN and PDF-TF
sanitation sector Annual national and • Flyers/Brochures on SAB
regional sustainable of events • Interim compilation
sanitation conferences by Secretariats of
held. Include sanita- Data Collection PEN and PDF-TF
tion governance and methods on SAB
emergency sanitation • Documentation
as major issues to • Key informant
address. interviews
3.2: Clear mechanisms Establishment of Baseline: One Data Sources: • Quarterly and an- • Collection indi-
for collaboration in training and education academic consortium • ACSuSan Consor- nual monitoring. vidual ACSuSan
knowledge sharing, consortia being organized. tium business plans, • Requisite post- members
education, and human reports and minutes training activity and • Coordination and
resource pooling for Target values: of meeting. evaluation compilation by
awareness and knowledge At least one active • Annual accomplish- • Periodic training DepEd, CHEd,
building. academic consortium ment reports of and conduct of and ACSuSan
providing relevant and ACSuSan members courses Secretariat
effective education on • ACSuSan Member • Interim compila-
sustainable sanitation. websites tion by ACSuSan
• Flyers/Brochures Secretariat
of trainings
Data Collection
methods:
• Documentation
• Key informant
interviews
• Course evaluations
and assessments
3.3: A strong alliance Formulation of clear Baseline: Weak Data Sources: • Quarterly and an- • Collection by M&E
of sanitation service programs of action for involvement, sup- • WSPs and NSSMP nual monitoring. units/officers of
providers at the national alliance building and port and regulation Offices • Periodic activities NGAs, LGUs,
and local levels professionalizing and of private sector • Proceedings of fora of WSPs. WSPs, and NGOs
developing the sanitation except in Metro conducted and ac- • Coordination and
service provider sector Manila. complishment reports compilation by
DOH, NSSMP Of-
Target values: Data Collection methods fice and water and
• A national policy • Documentation sanitation service
with correspond- • Key informant providers networks
ing guideline for interviews • Interim compilation
professionalizing by PDF-TF, PWRF,
sanitation service NSSMP Of-
providers. fices and water and
sanitation service
providers networks
105
! " " # $ % & ' ( ) # ) * ! $ % ) # ( ) ( + # , + ) - . ) "
DATA SOURCES:
OUTCOME DETAILED
COLLECTION
Outcome 4: Prioritized interven- Development of in- Baseline: Still to be Data Sources: Quarterly and annual DILG as lead
tion in highly vulner- terventions for highly developed DOH, DILG, monitoring of NGAs
Financing able areas seriously vulnerable areas DENR concerned
investments and affected by lack of seriously affected by Target value:
infrastructure sanitation the lack of sanitation Availability of inter- Data Collection
provision for incl. prioritization vention and priority Method:
sanitation guidelines guidelines Agency accomplish-
developed in ment and monitor-
strategic priority ing reports
areas
Financing strategies Sanitation tariff Baseline: Still to be Data Sources: Quarterly and an- NEDA
and incentive methodology that developed DOF. DOH, nual monitoring of
schemes for sus- allows full cost DILG, LGUs, NGAs concerned
tainable infrastruc- recovery Target value: DENR, MWSS,
ture developed. Innovative Adaption and DPWH, NEDA
sanitation financing implementation of
models the sanitation tariff Data Collection
Package of incen- methodology Method:
tives that will attract Pilot testing of Agency accomplish-
potential investors sanitation financing ment reports
R and D and capac- models
ity development At least 5 proposals
proposals packaged implemented in the
and submitted to short term period
interested funders of 3 years
Support to toilet Provision of sup-
construction. port to toilet con-
struction, hygiene
Expansion of MM promotion and
septage capacity capacity develop-
and construction of ment.
sewerage facilities in
HUCs
Pro poor financing At least 10 LGUs
model developed providing funds for
and implemented pro poor sanitation
in the short term
Increased capac-
ity for septage and
sewerage in MM
and in at least 14
HUCs
Established and Documentation Baseline: Still to be Data Sources: Quarterly and an- DOF
enhanced public- and enhancement developed DTI, DOF PCCI nual monitoring of
private partnerships of PPP models in NGAs concerned
and sanitation sanitation service Target value: Data Collection
entrepreneurship provision At least 3 PPP Method:
IEC/Social market- models documented Agency accomplish-
ing plan imple- and enhanced ment and monitor-
mented IEC/social marketing reports
Sanitation enterpris- ing plan actively
es developed pursued
At least 3 sanitation
enterprises imple-
mented
A well-established Distinct accounting Baseline: Still to be Data Sources: Quarterly and an- NEDA
national account for for sanitation in the developed HH surveys, DOH, nual monitoring of
sanitation National Account DILG, DPWH, NGAs concerned
System Target value: DepED, NSO HH survey every
Institutionaliza- 3-5 years
tion of a sanitation Data Collection
accounting as part Method:
of the National Ac- Agency accomplish-
count System ment and monitor-
ing reports
Result of HH
surveys
Investment require- Strong advo- Baseline: Sanitation Data Sources/Col- Regular monitoring NEDA
ments identified cacy and lobby for program still not lection Method
and secured to making sanitation included in the MT- MTPDP and MT-
meet the MDG and part of the prior- PDP and MTPIP PIP documents and
MTPDP targets ity program of the but still considered reports
government part of the water
A distinct sanitation sector target and
program, project, budget
activities (PPA) for
all agencies with Target value:
sanitation mandate Concrete sanitation
including LGUs targets and budgets
with corresponding included in the MT-
targets and budgets PDP and MTPIP
Develop sanitation
champions at local
and national levels
of governance
106 / 0 1 2 1 3 3 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 : 1 4 : ; 2 5 6 : 4 1 9 : 9 1 < 4 = < : > ? : 3

DATA SOURCES:
OUTCOME DETAILED
COLLECTION
Outcome 5: Appropriate Inventory and Baseline: still to be Data Sources: One-page survey DOH
approaches for identification of developed DND, DOH, questionnaire and/ National Agency
Adequate sanitation different situations appropriate sanitation DepED, DILG, or key informant for Sustainable
and hygiene identified and toolkits approaches for Target values: DBM interviews during Sanitation (when
promotion is and sourcebooks emergency situations Sourcebook and Local and start and end of established)
mainstreamed in developed Priority areas for toolkits published national disaster fiscal year NDCC
emergency relief intervention identified and disseminated coordinating DILG/
and rehabilitation Piloting appropriate to national and committees plans LGUs
efforts sanitation approaches local disaster LGU policies and
in existing evacuation coordinating plans
centers and committees and List of Evacuation
resettlement areas LGUs Centers
Sourcebook Translation of Local and national
and toolkits sourcebooks and allocations for
on appropriate toolkits in major calamity fund and
approaches for Filipino dialects other resources
different situations Training in
published sanitation Data Collection
Capacity building preparedness Methods:
on sanitation for emergency Survey
preparedness in situations for Questionnaire for
emergency situation local disaster local and national
coordinating policies and plans
committees Compilation of
Reports / Desktop
Review of Reports
Key Informant
Interviews
Emergency Development of Guidelines for
sanitation emergency sanitation the integration
integrated into plan component for of sanitation
disaster response integration into the in disaster risk
and risk reduction disaster and risk reduction plan
plans at all levels reduction plan at all Local and national
levels plans on disaster
Emergency preparedness
sanitation planning includes
institutionalized in • specific plans
development planning and provisions
and capacities built for sanitation
for short-,
medium- and
long-term relief/
rehabilitation
responses
• collaborative
mechanisms
between
public and
private sector
for logistical
support
Building Partnerships and MOA or MOU
partnership for strong coordination among concerned
quick mobilization mechanisms at local agencies, LGUs and
of logistics municipal, provincial private sector for
for sanitation and national levels instant and efficient
in emergency established for: delivery of services
situations • Identifying
priority areas of Directory of
intervention contact persons
• Quick or organizations
mobilization of at the local and
resources national levels
• Immediate who can provide
response in technical and other
emergency needed assistance
situations during emergency
situations
Information caravan
promoting sustainable
sanitation practices
conducted
107
@ A B C B D D B E F G H I J K B E K L C F G K E B J K J B M E N M K O P K D
ENDNOTES
1
Philippine Sanitation Sourcebook and Decision Aid, December 2005
2
Sustainable Sanitation Alliance, http://www.susana.org/lang-en/intro/156-intro/53-what-is-sustainable-sanitation
3
Integrated water resources management approach is a national policy that provides for the adoption of a more integrated and holistic
management of our water resources that involves the coordinated development and management of water, land and related resources
within hydrological boundaries, to optimize economic and social welfare without compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems.
4
NWRB 2007. The Philippine IWRM Plan Framework guides stakeholders to prepare IWRM plans and the government agencies in
ensuring that IWRM is mainstreamed in their respective plans and programs.
5
Sanitation : A Human Rights Imperative, 2008. UN Habitat, WATERAID, Swiss Agency for Development Cooperation, Center on
Housing Rights and Evictions
6
For purposes of accuracy and consistency, data used in this Roadmap is based on the NSO 2000 Census, Data from the Department of
Health’s Field Health Service Information System Annual 2007 provides more recent data and is also cited in this document.
7
Global Water Supply and Sanitation Assessment 2000 Report
8
Wilfredo, Jose. Asian Development Bank. “Wastes treat Wastes.” 2005.
9
Philippine Environment Monitor, 2003. Manila: DENR and the World Bank Group
10
Urban Sewerage and Sanitation: 30 years of Experiences and Lessons Learned
11
NEDA Board Committee on Infrastructure (INFRACOM) Resolution No. 2, Series of 2008.
12
Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic and Time Bound
13
Urban Sewerage and Sanitation: 30 years of Experience and Lessons

WSP, USAID, Economic Impacts of Sanitation in the Philippines, 2008, Jakarta: World Bank.

Data in the presentation were sourced from an Asian Development Bank (ADB) study titled “Water in Asian Cities: Utilities Performance
and Society Views,” and also included in a WB study in 2005 titled “Philippines: Meeting Infrastructure Challenges.”
108 Q R S T S U U S V W X Y Z [ \ S V \ ] T W X \ V S [ \ [ S ^ V _ ^ \ ` a \ U
ANNEXES
ANNEXES
$11(;:$7(548$/,7<+2763276
s t t u v w x y s z u { | } s ~ z z z

3KLOLSSLQH(QYLURQPHQW0RQLWRU:RUOG%DQN

111
b c d e d f f d g h i j k l m d g m n e h i m g d l m l d o g p o m q r m f
$11(;*29(510(17$*(1&,(6:,7+6$1,7$7,215(/$7('5(63216,%,/,7,(6
ANNEX 2. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES WITH SANITATION-RELATED RESPONSIBILITIES

¯ ® ´ µ ¶ ® ¬ µ ·
² ³
¬ ® ¯ ° ± ¬ ¸ ¸ ¬ ° ¹ ® º ¼ µ ¯ ° ¸ ¯ »
³ ½
¬ ® ¯ ° ® »
³
¾ ¿ À Á Â Ã Ä Å Æ Ç È É Ê Ë Ì Í Ç È É É Î Ï Ï Ð Ð È Ã ¿ Ã Ó Ë Å Ð Ó Ï Õ Æ Ï Ï Õ Ð Ö Î Å Ð Ô Ï Î È Ã Ó Ð Ï Ä È Å Ï Õ Ð Ó Ð Ô Ï È Å Î Ó Ô Æ Å Å Î Ð Ö Í È Ë Ï Î Ã
Ñ Æ Ï Ð Å Ò Ð Ó È Ë Å Ô Ð Ó Æ Ô Ô È Å Ö Æ Ã Ô Ð × Î Ï Õ Ï Õ Ð Ó Ð Ô Ï È Å Ø Ù Æ Ã Ú Î Û Ð Û Ò È Æ Ö É Æ Ø Ü Ý
Ç È È Å Ö Î Ã Æ Ï Ð Ó Ó Ð Ô Ï È Å É È Ã Î Ï È Å Î Ã Þ Æ Ó × Ð Ù Ù Æ Ó Ï Õ Ð Ô È Ã Ö Ë Ô Ï È Ä Ø Ð Å Î È Ö Î Ô
Å Ð ß Î Ð × à Ð ß Æ Ù Ë Æ Ï Î È Ã Æ Ã Ö Æ Ó Ó Ð Ó Ó É Ð Ã Ï È Ä Ï Õ Ð Ó Ð Ô Ï È Å Ú Ð Û Þ Û à Ð á Ï Ð Ã Ï Æ Ã Ö
Ó Ï Æ Ï Ë Ó È Ä Ï Õ Ð Î É Ø Ù Ð É Ð Ã Ï Æ Ï Î È Ã È Ä Ø Å È Þ Å Æ É Ó â Æ Ô Ï Î ß Î Ï Î Ð Ó Î Ö Ð Ã Ï Î Ä Î Ð Ö Î Ã Ï Õ Ð
Ò È Æ Ö É Æ Ø à Ö Ð ß Î Æ Ï Î È Ã È Ä Æ Ô Ï Ë Æ Ù Ø Ð Å Ä È Å É Æ Ã Ô Ð Ä Å È É Ø Å È Þ Å Æ É É Ð Ö
Ï Æ Å Þ Ð Ï Ó à Ø Å È Ì Ù Ð É Æ Å Ð Æ Ó Ð Ã Ô È Ë Ã Ï Ð Å Ð Ö Î Ã Ï Õ Ð Ø Å È Þ Å Æ É
Î É Ø Ù Ð É Ð Ã Ï Æ Ï Î È Ã Ü Ý
Ç È È Å Ö Î Ã Æ Ï Ð Ó Æ Ã Ö â È Å Æ Ö ß Î Ó Ð Ó Ï Õ Ð Ô È Ã Ö Ë Ô Ï È Ä Ó Ï Ë Ö Î Ð Ó à Å Ð Ó Ð Æ Å Ô Õ Ð Ó à
Æ Ã Ö Ø È Ù Î Ô ã Æ Ã Æ Ù ã Ó Î Ó È Ã ß Æ Å Î È Ë Ó Æ Ó Ø Ð Ô Ï Ó È Ä Ï Õ Ð Ó Ð Ô Ï È Å Æ Ã Ö É Æ ä Ð
Ó Ë Ì Ó Ð å Ë Ð Ã Ï Ø È Ù Î Ô ã Å Ð Ô È É É Ð Ã Ö Æ Ï Î È Ã Ó Ï È Ï Õ Ð ¾ ¿ À Á æ È Æ Å Ö Ï Õ Å È Ë Þ Õ
Ï Õ Ð Â ¾ ç Ò Á Ç è é Ý
ç È Å É Ë Ù Æ Ï Ð Ó Æ Å Ð Æ Ó È Ä Ô È È Ø Ð Å Æ Ï Î È Ã Æ Ã Ö Ô È È Å Ö Î Ã Æ Ï Î È Ã Æ É È Ã Þ Ï Õ Ð
ß Æ Å Î È Ë Ó Æ Þ Ð Ã Ô Î Ð Ó Æ Ã Ö Î Ã Ó Ï Å Ë É Ð Ã Ï Æ Ù Î Ï Î Ð Ó È Ä Ï Õ Ð Þ È ß Ð Å Ã É Ð Ã Ï Î Ã ß È Ù ß Ð Ö
Î Ã Ï Õ Ð Ó Ð Ô Ï È Å Ø Å È Þ Å Æ É Ó Æ Ã Ö Ø Å È ê Ð Ô Ï Ó Ï È Æ ß È Î Ö Ö Ë Ø Ù Î Ô Æ Ï Î È Ã È Ä Ð Ä Ä È Å Ï Ó Ý
Ê Ð Å ß Ð Ó Æ Ó Ô Ù Ð Æ Å Î Ã Þ Õ È Ë Ó Ð È Ä Ó Ð Ô Ï È Å Î Ã Ä È Å É Æ Ï Î È Ã Ý Æ Ã Ö ß Ð Ã Ë Ð Ä È Å Ï Õ Ð
Ö Î Ó Ô Ë Ó Ó Î È Ã Æ Ã Ö Å Ð Ó È Ù Ë Ï Î È Ã È Ä Æ Å Î Ó Î Ã Þ Î Ó Ó Ë Ð Ó Î Ã Ï Õ Ð Ó Ð Ô Ï È Å Û
À è ë ¿ Ã ß Î Å È Ã É Ð Ã Ï Æ Ù ì À Ð ß Ð Ù È Ø Ó Ø Ù Æ Ã Ó à Ø È Ù Î Ô Î Ð Ó à Ø Å È Þ Å Æ É Ó Æ Ã Ö Ó Ï Å Æ Ï Ð Þ Î Ð Ó Ï È É Æ Ã Æ Þ Ð
è Ô Ô Ë Ø Æ Ï Î È Ã Æ Ù ë Ð Æ Ù Ï Õ Õ Ð Æ Ù Ï Õ Õ Æ í Æ Å Ö Ó Æ Ã Ö Å Î Ó ä Ó Æ Ó Ó È Ô Î Æ Ï Ð Ö × Î Ï Õ Ð Ã ß Î Å È Ã É Ð Ã Ï Æ Ù Æ Ã Ö × È Å ä
è Ä Ä Î Ô Ð Å Ð Ù Æ Ï Ð Ö Ä Æ Ô Ï È Å Ó
î È Ô Æ Ù Ñ Æ Ï Ð Å ï Ï Î Ù Î Ï Î Ð Ó Ê Ø Ð Ô Î Æ Ù Î í Ð Ö Ù Ð Ã Ö Î Ã Þ Î Ã Ó Ï Î Ï Ë Ï Î È Ã Ï Õ Æ Ï Ø Å È É È Ï Ð Ó Ï Õ Ð Ö Ð ß Ð Ù È Ø É Ð Ã Ï à
Á Ö É Î Ã Î Ó Ï Å Æ Ï Î È Ã Å Ð Þ Ë Ù Æ Ï Î È Ã Æ Ã Ö Ä Î Ã Æ Ã Ô Î Ã Þ È Ä × Æ Ï Ð Å Ö Î Ó Ï Å Î Ô Ï Ó È Ë Ï Ó Î Ö Ð é Ð Ï Å È é Æ Ã Î Ù Æ
Ú î Ñ ï Á Ü
À ð Ñ ë é Ð Ï Å È Ø È Ù Î Ï Æ Ã Ç È Ã Ó Ï Å Ë Ô Ï Ó à É Æ Î Ã Ï Æ Î Ã Ó Æ Ã Ö È Ø Ð Å Æ Ï Ð Ó Ö È É Ð Ó Ï Î Ô â É Ë Ã Î Ô Î Ø Æ Ù × Æ Ï Ð Å
Ñ Æ Ï Ð Å × È Å ä Ó Æ Ã Ö Ó Ë Ø Ø Ù ã Æ Ã Ö Ó Ð × Ð Å Æ Þ Ð Ø Å È ê Ð Ô Ï Ó Î Ã é Ð Ï Å È é Æ Ã Î Ù Æ Æ Ã Ö Æ Ö ê Æ Ô Ð Ã Ï Ô Î Ï Î Ð Ó Û
Ê Ð × Ð Å Æ Þ Ð Ê ã Ó Ï Ð É
Ú é Ñ Ê Ê Ü
Ç Ð Ã Ï Å Æ Ù î Æ Ì È Å ñ È È ä È ß Ð Å Ï Õ Ð Ù Ð Æ Ö Ð Å Ó Õ Î Ø Î Ã Ø Å Ð Ø Æ Å Î Ã Þ Ï Õ Ð ¾ Æ Ï Î È Ã Æ Ù Ê Ð × Ð Å Æ Þ Ð
æ Æ Ó Ð Ö â Æ Ã Ö Ê Ð Ø Ï Æ Þ Ð é Æ Ã Æ Þ Ð É Ð Ã Ï ð Ù Æ Ã Ú ¾ Ê Ê é ð Ü
Ç È É Ø Å Ð Õ Ð Ã Ó Î ß Ð
Á Þ Å Æ Å Î Æ Ã Ò Ð Ä È Å É
Ú Ç î æ â Ç Á Ò ð Ü
À ¿ ¾ Ò ¿ Ã ß Î Å È Ã É Ð Ã Ï Æ Ù ç È Å É Ë Ù Æ Ï Ð Ó Ð Ã ß Î Å È Ã É Ð Ã Ï å Ë Æ Ù Î Ï ã Ó Ï Æ Ã Ö Æ Å Ö Ó Ä È Å × Æ Ï Ð Å à Ù Æ Ã Ö à Æ Î Å à
é Æ Ã Æ Þ Ð É Ð Ã Ï Ã È Î Ó Ð Æ Ã Ö Å Æ Ö Î Æ Ï Î È Ã Ý
æ Ë Å Ð Æ Ë Ú ¿ é æ Ü
Á Ø Ø Å È ß Ð Ó Ð Ã ß Î Å È Ã É Ð Ã Ï Æ Ù Î É Ø Æ Ô Ï Ó Ï Æ Ï Ð É Ð Ã Ï Ó Æ Ã Ö Î Ó Ó Ë Ð Ó
¿ Ã ß Î Å È Ã É Ð Ã Ï Æ Ù Ç È É Ø Ù Î Æ Ã Ô Ð Ç Ð Å Ï Î Ä Î Ô Æ Ï Ð Ó
112 ¡ ¢ £ ¤ ¥ ¦ ¦ § ¡ ¢ ¦ ¥ ¦ ¥ ¨ © ¨ ¦ ª « ¦

#

%
!

"
'
&

%
%
'
(
) * * ) * '
*
) * * + , ,
$ - $
*
)

& .
/ 0 0
$ $
0 0
$ $
, ,
& -
0 1 ) 2 3 4 3 5 4 6 7 8
- -
) % % 9
:
!
2 2 ' "
- - -

:

/ ; ,
%
(
2 +
/ ; ,

2
' #
/ +
&
%

2

' '

(
- -
' 2 + '
%

' 2
113
ò ó ô õ ô ö ö ô ÷ ø ù ú û ü ý ô ÷ ý þ õ ø ù ý ÷ ô ü ý ü ô ÿ ÷ ÿ ý ý ö
M N O O P Q O R S T O N U R P V W X W T U Y W Z U R U Y W Z W R S X [ \ Q [ \ R Q N ] P W V S [ W
^ ^
O T Z ] N U S \ O R U R P \ Z _ N W Z W R S U S \ O R O _ O N \ Q \ W V ` V S U R P U T P V ` _ T O Y T U Z V
^ ^
U R P _ T O a W Q S V O T U R \ R S W Y T U S W P N O O P Q O R S T O N ` P T U \ R U Y W U R P
V W X W T U Y W V b V S W Z c
d T e U R T W R W X U N ` f O R \ R Y U R P N U R P ] V W _ N U R R \ R Y ` U R P V [ W N S W T
^
V W T g \ Q W V X [ \ Q [ \ R Q N ] P W V S [ W O T Z ] N U S \ O R ` U P O _ S \ O R U R P
^
\ Z _ N W Z W R S U S \ O R O _ O N \ Q \ W V ` V S U R P U T P V ` T ] N W V U R P T W Y ] N U S \ O R V `
_ T O Y T U Z V U R P _ T O a W Q S V S O T U S \ O R U N \ f W U R P O _ S \ Z \ f W ] T e U R N U R P ] V W
U R P _ T O g \ P W P \ T W Q S \ O R S O ] T e U R Y T O X S [ U R P W h _ U R V \ O R ` S [ W
^
T W [ U e \ N \ S U S \ O R U R P P W g W N O _ Z W R S O V N ] Z U R P e N \ Y [ S W P U T W U V ` S [ W
^ ^ ^
P W g W N O _ Z W R S O V [ W N S W T U R P [ O ] V \ R Y U Q \ N \ S \ W V U R P S [ W _ T O g \ V \ O R O
^
R W Q W V V U T b V O Q \ U N V W T g \ Q W V S [ W T W O c
i W U N S [ U R P V U R \ S U S \ O R ` ] T e U R _ T O S W Q S \ O R U R P _ O N N ] S \ O R Q O R S T O N X [ \ Q [
^ ^
\ R Q N ] P W V S [ W O T Z ] N U S \ O R U R P \ Z _ N W Z W R S U S \ O R O _ O N \ Q \ W V ` T ] N W V U R P
^
T W Y ] N U S \ O R V ` V S U R P U T P V ` _ T O Y T U Z V U R P _ T O a W Q S V O T S [ W _ T O Z O S \ O R
^ ^ ^ ^
U R P V U W Y ] U T P \ R Y O S [ W [ W U N S [ U R P V U R \ S U S \ O R O S [ W T W Y \ O R U R P O T
^
S [ W W R [ U R Q W Z W R S O W Q O N O Y \ Q U N e U N U R Q W U R P S [ W _ T W g W R S \ O R `
^
Q O R S T O N U R P U e U S W Z W R S O W R g \ T O R Z W R S U N _ O N N ] S \ O R c
¡ ¢ £ ¤ ¥ ¦ ¤ ¤ ¥ ¤ ¥ ¥ ¡ ¤ §
m p } o t o } v u y r p s u y o m } ~ ~ v z u s w m u s r y u y r p s u s w
j k l m n o p q r s t r u v u s w
t p s p r t o } v u y r p s p y r o } y r v r y r m n v u s s r s
x
r y z { | } s r t r ~ u v j q v
r s u s t r s u s w r ~ v s y u y r p s p u y o m } ~ ~ v z u s w
m u s r y u y r p s ~ o p o u m r s t v } w r s
n o ~ u o u y r p s p u y o m } ~ ~ v z m o u u s w
m u s r y u y r p s m t y p o ~ v u s m
| p s r y p o r s p v p t u v u y o u s w m u s r y u y r p s t p q o u
u s w } ~ w u y r s p m t y p o ~ o p r v
n o p q r m r p s p m } ~ ~ p o y y p n m m } t u m { m
t p p ~ o u y r q m u s w u y o } m o m o p } ~ r s t v } w r s
} s w r s o p y r o
x
u o u s u z j q v u s r s r y r u y v p t u v u o u s u z m v q v p o w r s u s t m u s w
t p p o w r s u y m t v p m v z r y y } s r t r ~ u v p q o s s y r s
u w w o m m r s y s w m p y r o t p s m y r y } s y m

114 < = > ? > @ @ > A B C D E F G > A G H ? B C G A > F G F > I A J I G K L G @

¹ º º » ¼ ½ ¾ ¿ À Á Â » Ã Ä Â » Å » Æ Ä Ç Á º ¿ Æ Ä È ¹ Æ É À É Ã ¹ Á º ¹ Ê Æ » É ¹ º Á Ã ¹ Ã Á Ä º Ç Æ ¹ º
Ë Ì Í Î Ï Ð Ñ Ò Ð Ó Ô Õ Ì Ð Ò Ñ Ï Ð Ï Ñ Ö Ò Ñ Ò × Ð Î Ï Ø Î Ñ Ð Ë Ì Í Ì × Ø Ù Ú Û Ñ Ô Ñ Ü Ü Ñ Ò Õ Î Ú Ý Ö Þ Ý Ð ß Ì Õ Ü Ï Õ ß Ó Õ Ý à á á â Ù
¹ ¾ Á ã ä å æ ç è é ä ê æ ã
Ê ¾ Ê å ê ë ì ç ë í é å ê î ä ê æ ã æ ì ï ð ä ë å ð ã ç í ð ã ê ä ð ä ê æ ã í ä ð ä è í æ ì ä ñ ë é æ ò ò è ã ê ä ó
È ¾ É ð ã ê ä ð ä ê æ ã î å æ ô õ ë ò í ð ã ç ê í í è ë í
Â ¾ Ç æ ä ë ã ä ê ð õ ê ò î ð é ä æ ì í ð ã ê ä ð ä ê æ ã î å æ ô õ ë ò í
» ¾ È è å å ë ã ä î å æ ö å ð ò í ð ã ç ð é ä ê æ ã í ð ç ç å ë í í ê ã ö í ð ã ê ä ð ä ê æ ã î å æ ô õ ë ò í
÷ ¾ É è í ä ð ê ã ð ô õ ë í ð ã ê ä ð ä ê æ ã î å æ ö å ð ò
ø ù ú û ü û ý þ ü ÿ ÿ þ ÿ
ù ÿ ÿ þ ÿ ý ý ü þ ý
ÿ û ü
ù ý ý þ þ ÿ ü ý ÿ þ
ù þ ÿ ÿ û ý þ ü ÿ ÿ û ü þ ÿ û ý þ ü
ù ý ÿ ü ü û þ ÿ û þ ü ÿ ÿ û ü

ù ÿ ü þ ÿ û û ÿ û ü
ù û þ ý ý ÿ û ý þ þ û ü ü ü û þ

ù ÿ ü ý ÿ ÿ ü ü þ ÿ û û ÿ û ü
ù þ û ÿ ÿ û ý þ ÿ þ ý ý û ü
ø ù ! û þ þ û " û þ ÿ þ û þ ü ÿ þ ÿ þ
ø ø ù þ û # ÿ û ý þ $ þ þ ÿ $ û þ ü ÿ û ÿ ÿ û ý þ þ þ ÿ ü
ø ù û
ø ù % ý þ û ÿ ý û þ þ ÿ û ý þ
ø ù þ ü ÿ û ÿ ÿ û ý þ û # û þ ÿ ý ü ü ÿ û þ ü þ û ÿ ÿ û ý þ þ
ø ù & ý þ ý þ û ÿ û þ ÿ þ

ø ù ' û ü ü ü ü ü þ ÿ
115
¨ © ª « ª ¬ ¬ ª ® ¯ ° ± ² ³ ª ³ ´ « ® ¯ ³ ª ² ³ ² ª µ ¶ µ ³ · ¸ ³ ¬
$11(;5(/(9$17/$:6$1'32/,&,(6
ANNEX 4. RELEVANT SANITATION LAWS AND POLICIES

1$7,21$//$:6 32/,&,(6 6$/,(173529,6,216
&RPPRQZHDOWK$FW$QWL 3URKLELWLQJGXPSLQJRIUHIXVHZDVWHPDWWHURURWKHUVXEVWDQFHVLQWRULYHUV
'XPSLQJ/DZ
5HSXEOLF$FWFUHDWLRQ 5HJXODWLRQDQGSROOXWLRQFRQWURORI/DJXQDGHED\UHJLRQLQFOXGLQJVHZDJH

RI/DJXQD/DNH'HYHORSPHQW ZRUNVDQGLQGXVWULDOZDVWHGLVSRVDOV\VWHPV
$XWKRULW\DVDPHQGHGE\
3UHVLGHQWLDO'HFUHH
5HSXEOLF$FW1RRI &RQVWUXFWLRQRSHUDWLRQDQGPDLQWHQDQFHRIZDWHUVXSSO\V\VWHPVVHZHUDJH
FUHDWLRQRI0HWURSROLWDQDQG DQGVDQLWDWLRQIDFLOLWLHVLQ0HWUR0DQLOD$UHD
6HZHUDJH6\VWHP ,Q0:66RSHUDWLRQVZDVSULYDWL]HGDQGWUDQVIHUUHGWRFRQFHVVLRQDLUHV
0DQLOD:DWHUDQG0D\QLODGXQGHUD\HDUFRQFHVVLRQDOFRQWUDFW
3UHVLGHQWLDO'HFUHH1RRI &UHDWLRQRI/:8$DQGWKH/RFDO:DWHU'LVWULFWV(VWDEOLVKPHQWRI/:8$DVWKH
3URYLQFLDO:DWHU8WLOLWLHV$FW JRYHUQPHQWUHVRXUFHVSURYLGHUDQGVSHFLDOL]HGOHQGLQJLQVWLWXWLRQ:'VDVORFDO
DV$PHQGHG ZDWHUVHUYLFHSURYLGHUVWRRSHUDWHDQGDGPLQLVWHUZDWHUVXSSO\V\VWHPVDQG
ZDVWHZDWHUGLVSRVDOV\VWHPVLQSURYLQFLDODUHDV
$XWKRUL]DWLRQRI/:8$WRSURYLGHWHFKQLFDODVVLVWDQFHWR:'V7REHPDLQO\
UHVSRQVLEOHLQSURYLGLQJVHZHUDJHIDFLOLWLHVLQWKHLUUHVSHFWLYHIUDQFKLVHDUHDV
UHODWLYHWRVHZHUDJHDQGVDQLWDWLRQVHUYLFHVWKURXJKSROLFLHVDVHVSRXVHGLQWKH
&OHDQ:DWHU$FW
3UHVLGHQWLDO'HFUHH 5HJXODWLRQDQGSROOXWLRQFRQWURORIWKH3DVLJ5LYHU

&UHDWLRQRI3DVLJ5LYHU
'HYHORSPHQW&RXQFLO
3UHVLGHQWLDO'HFUHH1RRI (QIRUFHPHQWRIYDULRXVVDQLWDWLRQJRYHUQPHQWSROLFLHVLQFOXGLQJVWDQGDUGVIRU
DOVRNQRZQDV6DQLWDWLRQ ZDWHUVXSSO\IRRGSURFHVVLQJDQGVHUYLFLQJVDQLWDU\IDFLOLWLHVVHZHUDJHDQG
&RGHRIWKH3KLOLSSLQHV VHZDJHPDQDJHPHQWPDUNHWVDQGDEDWWRLUVLQGXVWULDOK\JLHQHDQGIXQHUDO
SDUORUV
3UHVLGHQWLDO'HFUHH1RRI 3URYLVLRQRIDFRPSUHKHQVLYHSURJUDPRQHQYLURQPHQWDOSURWHFWLRQDQG
7KH3KLOLSSLQH PDQDJHPHQWFRYHULQJDLUZDWHUTXDOLW\ODQGXVHQDWXUDOUHVRXUFHVDQGZDVWH
(QYLURQPHQWDO&RGH PDQDJHPHQWIRUILVKHULHVDQGDTXDWLFUHVRXUFHVZLOGOLIHIRUHVWU\DQGHWF
3UHVLGHQWLDO'HFUHH1R 5HTXLULQJVHSDUDWHV\VWHPVIRUVHZDJHDQGVWRUPZDWHUVWDWLQJWKDWVDQLWDU\
1DWLRQDO%XLOGLQJ&RGH VHZDJHLVWREHGLVFKDUJHGWRWKHQHDUHVWVWUHHWVDQLWDU\VHZHUPDLQZKHQ
&KDSWHU DYDLODEOHDQGZKHUHVDQLWDU\VHZHUDJHLVQRWDYDLODEOHVHZDJHVKDOOEH
GLVSRVHGLQWRVHSWLFWDQNVDQGVXEVXUIDFHDEVRUSWLRQILHOG
116 ( ) * + * , , * - . / 0 1 2 3 * - 3 4 + . / 3 - * 2 3 2 * 5 - 6 5 3 7 8 3 ,
(2RI'HSDUWPHQWRI 3URYLVLRQIRUWKHRUJDQL]DWLRQRIWKH'(15DVWKHOHDGDJHQF\LQDPRQJRWKHUV
(QYLURQPHQWDQG1DWXUDO SURPXOJDWLQJWKHDODZVDQGUHJXODWLRQIRUWKHFRQWURORIZDWHUDLUDQGODQG
5HVRXUFHV'(15&KDUWHU SROOXWLRQDQGEDPELHQWDQGHIIOXHQWVWDQGDUGVIRUZDWHUDQGDLUTXDOLW\
6SHFLILFDOO\(0%VPDQGDWHLVQDWLRQDOLQVFRSHDQGPDLQO\UHJXODWRU\$PRQJ
(0%ಬVIXQFWLRQVZLWKUHVSHFWWRZDWHUTXDOLW\PDQDJHPHQWDUHWKHIROORZLQJV
&ODVVLILFDWLRQRI3KLOLSSLQH:DWHUVDFFRUGLQJWRXVDJH
5HFODVVLILFDWLRQRI3KLOLSSLQHZDWHUVEDVHGRQWKHLQWHQGHGEHQHILFLDOXVH
)RUPXODWLRQRIZDWHUTXDOLW\VWDQGDUGV
6HWWLQJXSDQGSURPXOJDWLRQRIUXOHVRQHIIOXHQWVWUHDPDPELHQWDQG
HPLVVLRQVWDQGDUGV
$VVLVWDQFHLQWKHFRQGXFWRIKHDULQJVLQSROOXWLRQFDVHV
3URPXOJDWLRQRIQDWLRQDOUXOHVDQGSROLFLHVJRYHUQLQJPDULQHSROOXWLRQ
LQFOXGLQJGLVFKDUJHRIHIIOXHQWIURPDQ\RXWIDOOVWUXFWXUHLQGXVWULDODQG
PDQXIDFWXULQJHVWDEOLVKPHQWVDQG
,VVXDQFHRIUXOHVDQGUHJXODWLRQVRQPDULQHSROOXWLRQXSRQFRQVXOWDWLRQ
ZLWKWKH3KLOLSSLQH&RDVW*XDUG
5HSXEOLF$FW1RRI 'HILQLWLRQRIWKHIXQFWLRQVDQGSRZHUVRI/*8VSURYLQFHVFLWLHVPXQLFLSDOLWLHV

/RFDO*RYHUQPHQW&RGH DQGEDUDQJD\VRQHQYLURQPHQWDOSURWHFWLRQ5$1RPDQGDWHV/*8VWR
XQGHUWDNHZDWHUVKHGUHODWHGDFWLYLWLHVLQLWLDOO\FRQILQHGWRFRPPXQLW\EDVHG
PDQDJHPHQW&%)0VRFLDOIRUHVWU\DQGZDWHUVKHGSURMHFWV6LQFHWKHQD
QXPEHURIHQYLURQPHQWDOIXQFWLRQVRIYDULRXV1*$VKDYHEHHQGHYROYHGWR
/*8V
5HSXEOLF$FW1RRI$SULO $PHQGPHQWRIFHUWDLQVHFWLRQVRIWKH5HSXEOLF$FW1RHQWLWOHGಯ$Q
7KH3KLOLSSLQH%27/DZ $FW$XWKRUL]LQJWKH)LQDQFLQJ&RQVWUXFWLRQ2SHUDWLRQDQG0DLQWHQDQFHRI
,QIUDVWUXFWXUH3URMHFWVE\WKH3ULYDWH6HFWRUDQGIRURWKHU3XUSRVHVರ
1DWLRQDO:DWHU&ULVLV$FWRI 3URYLVLRQIRUWKHOHJDOEDVLVIRUWKHSULYDWL]DWLRQRIWKH0:66LQ
5HSXEOLF$FW1R7R[LFDQG 3URYLVLRQIRUWKHPDQGDWHRQHQYLURQPHQWDOUHJXODWLRQPRQLWRULQJDQG
KD]DUGRXV:DVWHV/DZDQGLWV HQIRUFHPHQWFRYHULQJQXPHURXVHFRQRPLFDFWLYLWLHVVXFKDVLPSRUWDWLRQ
,PSOHPHQWLQJ5XOHVDQG PDQXIDFWXUHSURFHVVLQJKDQGOLQJGLVSRVDORIDOOXQUHJXODWHG
5HJXODWLRQV FKHPLFDOVXEVWDQFHVDQGPL[WXUHVLQWKH3KLOLSSLQHVDVZHOODVHQWU\DQGLQ
WUDQVLWVWRUDJHDQGGLVSRVDORIKD]DUGRXVDQGQXFOHDUZDVWHVLQWRWKH
FRXQWU\IRUZKDWHYHUSXUSRVHV7KHVHIXQFWLRQVKDYHEHHQHQWUXVWHGWRWKH
'(15DQGLWV,55LPSOHPHQWHGE\(0%
5HSXEOLF$FW1R 3URYLVLRQIRUWKHSROLF\IUDPHZRUNRQVROLGZDVWHPDQDJHPHQW7KLVDFWVHHNV

NQRZQDV(FRORJLFDO6ROLG:DVWH WRSURPRWHWKHXWLOL]DWLRQRIHQYLURQPHQWDOO\VRXQGPHWKRGVWKDWPD[LPL]HWKH
0DQDJHPHQW$FW XVHRIYDOXDEOHUHVRXUFHVDQGHQFRXUDJHUHVRXUFHFRQVHUYDWLRQDQGUHFRYHU\
117
9 : ; < ; = = ; > ? @ A B C D ; > D E < ? @ D > ; C D C ; F > G F D H I D =
5HSXEOLF$FW1RRI 3URYLVLRQIRUWKHFRPSUHKHQVLYHZDWHUTXDOLW\PDQDJHPHQW,WDOVRSURYLGHVWKH
NQRZQDVWKH3KLOLSSLQH&OHDQ IUDPHZRUNIRUVXVWDLQDEOHGHYHORSPHQWWRDFKLHYHDSROLF\RIHFRQRPLFJURZWK
:DWHU$FW LQDPDQQHUFRQVLVWHQWZLWKWKHSURWHFWLRQSUHVHUYDWLRQDQGUHYLYDORIWKHTXDOLW\
RIIUHVKEUDFNLVKDQGPDULQHZDWHUV7KHSDVVDJHRI5$LVDOVRWKHILUVW
DWWHPSWWRFRQVROLGDWHGLIIHUHQWIUDJPHQWHGODZVRIWKH3KLOLSSLQHVRQZDWHU
UHVRXUFHVPDQDJHPHQWDQGVDQLWDWLRQ
([HFXWLYH2UGHU1RRI 7UDQVIHURI/:8$IURPWKH2IILFHRIWKH3UHVLGHQWWR'3:+
1RYHPEHU
([HFXWLYH2UGHU1RRI$SULO 5HIRFXVLQJ/:8$ಬVIXQFWLRQVDQGRUJDQL]DWLRQDOVWUXFWXUHDVHQYLVLRQHGLQ(2
ZKLFKUDWLRQDOL]HGIXUWKHUWKHIXQFWLRQVRI/:8$DVDVSHFLDOL]HGOHQGLQJ
LQVWLWXWLRQ
([HFXWLYH2UGHU1RRI0DUFK &UHDWLRQRIWKH5LYHU%DVLQ&RQWURO2IILFH5%&2LQ'(155%&2KDVSRZHU

&UHDWLQJWKH5LYHU%DVLQ DQGIXQFWLRQWRJHWKHUZLWK'3:+WRUDWLRQDOL]HWKHYDULRXVH[LVWLQJULYHUEDVLQ
&RQWURO2IILFH SURMHFWVVXFKDV0W3LQDWXER+D]DUG8UJHQW0LWLJDWLRQ,ORLOR)ORRG&RQWURO
/RZHU$JXVDQ)ORRG&RQWURO%LFRO5LYHU%DVLQDQG:DWHUVKHG0DQDJHPHQWWR
GHYHORSDQDWLRQDOPDVWHUSODQIRUIORRGFRQWUROWRJHWKHUZLWK'3:+DQG
1DWLRQDO'LVDVWHU&RRUGLQDWLQJ&RXQFLOWRUDWLRQDOL]HDQGSULRULWL]HUHIRUHVWDWLRQ
LQZDWHUVKHGVDQGWRSHUIRUPRWKHUIXQFWLRQVDV3UHVLGHQWDQG'(156HFUHWDU\
PD\GLUHFW
'$$2*XLGHOLQHVRQ *XLGHOLQHVRQWKH3URFHGXUHVDQG7HFKQLFDO5HTXLUHPHQWVIRUWKHLVVXDQFHRID

:DVWHZDWHU &HUWLILFDWLRQDOORZLQJWKHVDIHUHXVHRIZDVWHZDWHUIRUSXUSRVHVRILUULJDWLRQDQG
RWKHUDJULFXOWXUDOXVHV7KLVFHUWLILFDWLRQEHFRPHVRQHRIWKHVHYHUDO
UHTXLUHPHQWVIRUOLYHVWRFNUDLVHUVLQDSSO\LQJDGLVFKDUJHSHUPLW
1('$%RDUG5HVROXWLRQ 5HVROXWLRQFUHDWLQJWKH6XEFRPPLWWHHRQ:DWHU5HVRXUFHVXQGHUWKH

,1)5$&20PDQGDWHGWRFRRUGLQDWHDOODFWLYLWLHVSHUWDLQLQJWRWKHZDWHU
UHVRXUFHVVHFWRULQFOXGLQJDPRQJRWKHUVVDQLWDWLRQDQGVHZHUDJH
:+2*XLGHOLQHVRQ([FUHWD *XLGHOLQHVIRUWKHVDIHXVHRIZDVWHZDWHUH[FUHWDDQGJUH\ZDWHUKDVEHHQ

)HEUXDU\ H[WHQVLYHO\XSGDWHGWRWDNHDFFRXQWRIQHZVFLHQWLILFHYLGHQFHDQG
FRQWHPSRUDU\DSSURDFKHVWRULVNPDQDJHPHQW7KHUHYLVHGJXLGHOLQHVUHIOHFWD
VWURQJIRFXVRQGLVHDVHSUHYHQWLRQDQGSXEOLFKHDOWKSULQFLSOHV
%DWDVDQ3DPEDQVD $QDFWDXWKRUL]LQJWKH0LQLVWU\RI+XPDQ6HWWOHPHQWVWRHVWDEOLVKDQG
SURPXOJDWHGLIIHUHQWOHYHORIVWDQGDUGVDQGWHFKQLFDOUHTXLUHPHQWVIRUHFRQRPLF
DQGVRFLDOL]HGKRXVLQJSURMHFWVLQXUEDQDQGUXUDODUHDVIURPWKRVHSURYLGHG
XQGHUSUHVLGHQWLDOGHFUHHVQXPEHUVQLQHKXQGUHGILIW\VHYHQWZHOYHKXQGUHG
VL[WHHQWHQKXQGUHGQLQHW\VL[DQGHOHYHQKXQGUHGHLJKW\ILYH
3'6XEGLYLVLRQ/DZ 5HJXODWLRQRIWKHUHDOHVWDWHWUDGHEXVLQHVVDQGLPSRVLWLRQRISHQDOWLHVRQ
IUDXGXOHQWSUDFWLFHV
7KHODZHQVXUHVWKDWWKHVXEGLYLVLRQORWKRXVLQJXQLWPHHWVWKHPLQLPXPGHVLJQ
VWDQGDUGVKDVYDOLGWLWOHVDQGWKDWWKHVXEGLYLVLRQFRQGRPLQLXPGHYHORSHUKDV
WKHILQDQFLDOFDSDFLW\WRFRPSOHWHWKHSURMHFW/LNHZLVHLWUHTXLUHVWKDWWKH
VXEGLYLVLRQGHYHORSHUVKRXOGLQLWLDWHWKHRUJDQL]DWLRQRI+RPHRZQHUV
$VVRFLDWLRQ+2$DPRQJWKHEX\HUVDQGUHVLGHQWVRIWKHKRXVLQJSURMHFWWR
SURPRWHDQGSURWHFWWKHLUPXWXDOLQWHUHVWDQGDVVLVWLQWKHLUFRPPXQLW\
GHYHORSPHQW
118 J K L M L N N L O P Q R S T U L O U V M P Q U O L T U T L W O X W U Y Z U N
$11(;/,672)(;,67,1*81'(5&216758&7,21$1'3/$11('6(:(5$*()$&,/,7,(6
8UEDQ6HZHUDJHDQG6DQLWDWLRQ<HDUVRI([SHULHQFHDQG/HVVRQV:DWHU6XSSO\DQG6DQLWDWLRQ3HUIRUPDQFH
(QKDQFHPHQW3URMHFW
ANNEX 5. LIST OF EXISTING, UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND PLANNED SEWERAGE FACILITIES
/2&$7,2123(5$725 '$7(&216758&7(' 7<3('(6&5,37,21 ++&211(&7(' ,668(6DQG

352-(&7&267 2))$&,/,7,(6 92/80( 2%6(59$7,216/*8
',6&+$5*( ,19(670(17
&XUUHQW2SHUDWLQJ([LVWLQJ)DFLOLWLHV
=DPERDQJD&LW\ 1RW$YDLODEOH 673

6ODXJKWHUKRXVH
=DPERDQJD&LW\ 1RW$YDLODEOH 673

6ODXJKWHUKRXVH
%DJXLR&LW\ ದ86$ 6HZHUOLQHVNP RXWRIEUJ\V 2QO\RIWKHVHUYLFH
/*8 ದ-,&$JUDQW FRQYHQWLRQDOFROOHFWLRQ FXPGD\ DUHDLVFRQQHFWHGWRWKH

ZLWKLQVSHFWLRQ FDSDFLW\ VHZHUV\VWHP
PDQKROHV
LQWHUFRQQHFWLRQSRLQWV
IURPROGVHZHUOLQHV
673R[LGDWLRQGLWFK
5LYHURXWIDOO
&HEX&LW\ 673DHUDWHGODJRRQ FXPGD\ %XLOWWRVHUYHWKHZKROH
/*8 NPFRQYHQWLRQDO FDSDFLW\ UHFODPDWLRQDUHDEXW
VHZHUSLSHOLQHVZLWK VHUYHVRQO\DERWWOLQJSODQW
VHUYLFHFRQQHFWLRQV DQGDPDMRU
PDOOVXSHUPDUNHW
)XQGLQJLVLQDGHTXDWHIRU
RSHUDWLRQDQG
PDLQWHQDQFH
/LPLWHGVHZHUOLQHOHQJWK
FDQQRWDFFRPPRGDWH
PDQ\XVHUV
&DXD\DQ,VDEHOD ದ:% :DVWH6WDELOL]DWLRQ FXPGD\ &RYHUVDIUDFWLRQRIWKH
/*8 )5:663 3RQG7UHDWPHQW FDSDFLW\ DUHD
NPRIVPDOOERUH 1RH[SDQVLRQGXHWRKLJK
VHZHUSLSHOLQHVZLWK FRQQHFWLRQV FRVWRILQYHVWPHQW
IOXVKLQJSRLQWV

PDQKROHV
0HWUR0DQLOD 673 6HUYLFHVRQO\RI
0:66 &RQYHQWLRQDOVHZHU 0:66FRQFHVVLRQDUHD
SLSHOLQHVZLWK 3RRUPDLQWHQDQFHPRVW
VHZDJHERRVWHUV VHZHUOLQHVOHDN
SXPSVOLIWVWDWLRQV
DQGFRQQHFWLRQVDVRI

&DOED\RJ 1RW$YDLODEOH $%5VIRUFRPPHUFLDO FXP

HVWDEOLVKPHQWV
&DOED\RJ 1RW$YDLODEOH *UHHQODQGUHORFDWLRQ FXP
119
[ \ ] ^ ] _ _ ] ` a b c d e f ] ` f g ^ a b f ` ] e f e ] h ` i h f j k f _
/2&$7,2123(5$725 '$7(&216758&7(' 7<3('(6&5,37,21 ++&211(&7(' ,668(6DQG
352-(&7&267 2))$&,/,7,(6 92/80( 2%6(59$7,216/*8
',6&+$5*( ,19(670(17
&RPPXQLW\
&DOED\RJ+HDOWK&OLQLF 1RW$YDLODEOH 673
0DQMX\RG3XEOLF0DUNHW 1RW$YDLODEOH 673 FXP 3URYLQFLDODVVLVWDQFH
%RKRO&DSLWRO&RPSRXQG 1RW$YDLODEOH 673 FXP ,5$
'XPDJXHWH&LW\3XEOLF 1RW$YDLODEOH 673 FXP ,5$

0DUNHW
0XQWLQOXSD&LW\3XEOLF 1RW$YDLODEOH $%58$6%673 FXP

0DUNHW
6DQ)HUQDQGR3XEOLF 1RW$YDLODEOH $%58$6%673 FXP

0DUNHW/D8QLRQ
,ORLOR&LW\6ODXJKWHUKRXVH 1RW$YDLODEOH 673 FXP ,5$
,ORLOR'RFWRUVಬ+RVSLWDO 1RW$YDLODEOH $%56%5 FXP
SULYDWH
/RUPD0HGLFDO&HQWHU 1RW$YDLODEOH 673 FXP
SULYDWH
+RJZDVWHSURMHFWVದ36 1RW$YDLODEOH 673

)DUPV'RGUDP%KDSL
:HOOLQJWRQ)DUPV
SULYDWH
95$EEDWRLU 1RW$YDLODEOH 673 FXP

6ODXJKWHUKRXVH$QWLSROR
SULYDWH
9DOHQ]XHOD&LW\%XUHDXRI 1RW$YDLODEOH '(:$76 FXP WKURXJK*7=

$QLPDO,QGXVWU\
6RUVRJRQ3XEOLF0DUNHW 1RW$YDLODEOH 673 FXP ,5$
,ORLOR0LVVLRQ+RVSLWDO 1RW$YDLODEOH 673 FXP
SULYDWH
8QGHU&RQVWUXFWLRQ
6DQWD5RVD&RPPXQLW\ 1RW$YDLODEOH 673 FXP

+RVSLWDO
/*8
'XPDJXHWH&LW\ 1RW$YDLODEOH 6HSWDJH7UHDWPHQW
/*8 )DFLOLW\ODJRRQV
6DQWD5RVD%DOLJDER 1RW$YDLODEOH

3RO\FOLQLF
SULYDWH
*./XFHQD 1RW$YDLODEOH
SULYDWH
*.6LWLR3DMR 1RW$YDLODEOH
SULYDWH
*.3DJELODR4XH]RQ 1RW$YDLODEOH
SULYDWH
120 l m n o n p p n q r s t u v w n q w x o r s w q n v w v n y q z y w { | w p
/2&$7,2123(5$725 '$7(&216758&7(' 7<3('(6&5,37,21 ++&211(&7(' ,668(6DQG
352-(&7&267 2))$&,/,7,(6 92/80( 2%6(59$7,216/*8
',6&+$5*( ,19(670(17
OLQHVDQG673VHUYHV
++LQWZRUHVLGHQWLDO
VXEGLYLVLRQVRQO\
0HWUR&HEX6HSWDJH 3ODQQLQJ6WDJH 6HSWDJH0DQDJHPHQW

0DQDJHPHQW
:'
0HWUR1DJD6HSWDJH 3ODQQLQJ6WDJH 6HSWDJH0DQDJHPHQW

0DQDJHPHQW
:'
/DJXQD6HSWDJH 3ODQQLQJ6WDJH 6HSWDJH0DQDJHPHQW

0DQDJHPHQW
:'
&DODPED6HSWDJH 3ODQQLQJ6WDJH 6HSWDJH0DQDJHPHQW

0DQDJHPHQW
:'
6DQWD5RVD&LW\6HSWDJH 3ODQQLQJ6WDJH 6HSWDJH0DQDJHPHQW

0DQDJHPHQW
:'DQGSULYDWHVHFWRU
&DJD\DQGH2UR6HSWDJH 3ODQQLQJ6WDJH 6HSWDJH0DQDJHPHQW

0DQDJHPHQW
:'DQGSULYDWHVHFWRU
,ORLOR&LW\6HSWDJH 3ODQQLQJ6WDJH 6HSWDJH0DQDJHPHQW

0DQDJHPHQW
:'DQGSULYDWHVHFWRU
121
} ~
$11(;,19(1725<2)$9$,/$%/(6$1,7$7,217(&+12/2*,(6
ANNEX 6. INVENTORY OF AVAILABLE SANITATION TECHNOLOGIES
$11(;,19(1725<2)$9$,/$%/(6$1,7$7,217(&+12/2*,(6
(QKDQFHPHQW3URMHFW
(QKDQFHPHQW3URMHFW
7HFKQRORJ\ 'HVFULSWLRQ $GYDQWDJHV 'LVDGYDQWDJHV
$TXDSULY\ 6TXDWWLQJSODWHVLWXDWHG (DV\WRFRQVWUXFWZLWK &DQFDXVHLQWHQVHRGRU

7HFKQRORJ\ 'HVFULSWLRQ
LPPHGLDWHO\DERYHD $GYDQWDJHV
PD[LPXPXVHRI 'LVDGYDQWDJHV
UHOHDVHIO\DQGPRVTXLWR
$TXDSULY\ 6TXDWWLQJSODWHVLWXDWHG
VPDOOVHSWLFWDQNWKDW (DV\WRFRQVWUXFWZLWK
LQGLJHQRXVPDWHULDOV &DQFDXVHLQWHQVHRGRU
QXLVDQFH:DWHUWLJKW
LPPHGLDWHO\DERYHD
GLVFKDUJHVLWVHIIOXHQWWR PD[LPXPXVHRI UHOHDVHIO\DQGPRVTXLWR
IHDWXUHPDNHVLW
VPDOOVHSWLFWDQNWKDW
DQDGMDFHQWVRDNZD\ LQGLJHQRXVPDWHULDOV QXLVDQFH:DWHUWLJKW
H[SHQVLYH
9HQWLODWHGLPSURYHGSLW GLVFKDUJHVLWVHIIOXHQWWR
6\VWHPLQFOXGHVSLWYHQW /RZFRQVWUXFWLRQDQG IHDWXUHPDNHVLW
8QVXLWDEOHIRUKLJK
ODWULQH DQDGMDFHQWVRDNZD\
SLSHODWULQHSHGHVWDORU RSHUDWLRQFRVWVVLPSOH H[SHQVLYH
GHQVLW\XUEDQDUHDVLQ
9HQWLODWHGLPSURYHGSLW 6\VWHPLQFOXGHVSLWYHQW
VTXDWWLQJSODWHDQG /RZFRQVWUXFWLRQDQG
DQGHDV\WRFRQVWUXFW 8QVXLWDEOHIRUKLJK
H[FHVVRIKD0D\
ODWULQH SLSHODWULQHSHGHVWDORU
HQFORVLQJVKHG RSHUDWLRQFRVWVVLPSOH
ZLWKPD[LPXPXVHRI GHQVLW\XUEDQDUHDVLQ
SROOXWHJURXQGZDWHU
VTXDWWLQJSODWHDQG DQGHDV\WRFRQVWUXFW
LQGLJHQRXVPDWHULDOV H[FHVVRIKD0D\
HQFORVLQJVKHG ZLWKPD[LPXPXVHRI
0LQLPDOQXLVDQFHORZ SROOXWHJURXQGZDWHU
LQGLJHQRXVPDWHULDOV
ZDWHUUHTXLUHPHQWDQG
0LQLPDOQXLVDQFHORZ
JRRGSRWHQWLDOIRU
ZDWHUUHTXLUHPHQWDQG
XSJUDGLQJ
&RPSRVWLQJWRLOHW :DWHUOHVVSLWV\VWHP JRRGSRWHQWLDOIRU

0LQLPDOZDWHU 6XLWDEOHRQO\IRUORZ
VLPLODUWRVDQLWDWLRQSLW XSJUDGLQJ
UHTXLUHPHQWFDQEHXVHG GHQVLW\DUHDVPXVWKDYH
&RPSRVWLQJWRLOHW :DWHUOHVVSLWV\VWHP
$VKDQGELRGHJUDGDEOH 0LQLPDOZDWHU
LQDUHDVZKHUHZDWHU 6XLWDEOHRQO\IRUORZ
VXIILFLHQWDVKDQG
Urine Diverting Dry Toilets VLPLODUWRVDQLWDWLRQSLW
RUJDQLFPDWWHUVDGGHGWR UHTXLUHPHQWFDQEHXVHG
VXSSO\LVOLPLWHGKXPXV GHQVLW\DUHDVPXVWKDYH
ELRGHJUDGDEOHPDWHULDOV
$VKDQGELRGHJUDGDEOH
SLWWRDEVRUERGRUDQG LQDUHDVZKHUHZDWHU
SURGXFHGLVVDIHVWDEOH VXIILFLHQWDVKDQG
KLJKGHJUHHRIXVHUFDUH
RUJDQLFPDWWHUVDGGHGWR
PRLVWXUH VXSSO\LVOLPLWHGKXPXV
DQGFDQEHUHF\FOHGDV ELRGHJUDGDEOHPDWHULDOV
DQGPRWLYDWLRQLV
SLWWRDEVRUERGRUDQG SURGXFHGLVVDIHVWDEOH
IHUWLOL]HU KLJKGHJUHHRIXVHUFDUH
UHTXLUHGIRUVDWLVIDFWRU\
PRLVWXUH DQGFDQEHUHF\FOHGDV DQGPRWLYDWLRQLV
RSHUDWLRQ
6DQLWDWLRQSULY\ (DUWKHQSLWRIDWOHDVW IHUWLOL]HU

/RZFRQVWUXFWLRQDQG UHTXLUHGIRUVDWLVIDFWRU\
&DQFDXVHLQWHQVHRGRU
FXP RSHUDWLRQFRVWVVLPSOH RSHUDWLRQ
UHOHDVHIO\DQGPRVTXLWR
6DQLWDWLRQSULY\ (DUWKHQSLWRIDWOHDVW
FRQFUHWHLPSHUYLRXV /RZFRQVWUXFWLRQDQG
DQGHDV\WRFRQVWUXFW &DQFDXVHLQWHQVHRGRU
QXLVDQFH
FXP
IORRUZDWHUVHDOHGERZO RSHUDWLRQFRVWVVLPSOH
ZLWKPD[LPXPXVHRI UHOHDVHIO\DQGPRVTXLWR
FRQFUHWHLPSHUYLRXV
DQGVXLWDEOHHQFORVXUH DQGHDV\WRFRQVWUXFW
LQGLJHQRXVPDWHULDOV QXLVDQFH
:DWHUVHDOHGWRLOHWERZO IORRUZDWHUVHDOHGERZO
6LPLODUWRSLWRUVHSWLF ZLWKPD[LPXPXVHRI
/RZZDWHUUHTXLUHPHQW 'LIILFXOWWRFRQVWUXFWFDQ
DQGVXLWDEOHHQFORVXUH
WDQNWRLOHWV\VWHPVEXW LQGLJHQRXVPDWHULDOV
PLQLPDOQXLVDQFHDQG EHH[SHQVLYHLQUXUDO
:DWHUVHDOHGWRLOHWERZO HTXLSSHGZLWKD3WUDSRU /RZZDWHUUHTXLUHPHQW
6LPLODUWRSLWRUVHSWLF ULVNWRSXEOLFKHDOWK 'LIILFXOWWRFRQVWUXFWFDQ
DUHDV
ZDWHUVHDOWRUHGXFHRGRU PLQLPDOQXLVDQFHDQG
WDQNWRLOHWV\VWHPVEXW EHH[SHQVLYHLQUXUDO
HTXLSSHGZLWKD3WUDSRU
HVFDSLQJIURPWKHSLW ULVNWRSXEOLFKHDOWK DUHDV
ZDWHUVHDOWRUHGXFHRGRU
$OVRSUHYHQWVLQVHFWDQG
HVFDSLQJIURPWKHSLW
URGHQWLQIHVWDWLRQ
$OVRSUHYHQWVLQVHFWDQG
URGHQWLQIHVWDWLRQ
122
3DLOV\VWHPYDXOWWRLOHW 3RUWDEOHFRQWDLQHUVXFK /RZFRQVWUXFWLRQFRVW +LJKRSHUDWLQJFRVWGXH
DVDSDLOLVXVHGWRVWRUH FDQXVHDQ\DYDLODEOH WRFROOHFWLRQDQGGLVSRVDO
ZDVWHDQGSHULRGLFDOO\ VXLWDEOHFRQWDLQHU RIQLJKWVRLOFDQFDXVH
GLVSRVHGRISURSHUO\ SXEOLFKHDOWKGDQJHULI
QLJKWVRLOLVQRWFROOHFWHG
UHJXODUO\DQGGLVSRVHG
SURSHUO\
6HSWLFWDQNV 0RVWFRPPRQRIIVLWH &DQDFKLHYH%2' 3UDFWLFHRIGLVFKDUJLQJ

VDQLWDWLRQIDFLOLW\LQWKH UHGXFWLRQDQG HIIOXHQWLQWRRSHQGUDLQV
3KLOLSSLQHV8VHVZDWHU VXVSHQGHGVROLGV VLJQLILFDQWO\FRQWULEXWHV
WRWUDQVSRUWWKHZDVWHWR UHPRYHDOLISURSHUO\ WRHQYLURQPHQWDO
DWDQNZKHUHVROLGVVHWWOH GHVLJQHG SROOXWLRQDQG
DQGGLJHVWDQGWKHOLTXLG GHJUDGDWLRQ1HHGVDORW
SDVVHVWRDVRDNZD\ RIVSDFHIRUVRLO
DEVRUSWLRQILHOGUHVXOWLQJ
LQKLJKFRQVWUXFWLRQFRVW
123
¡ ¢ ¡ £ £ ¡ ¤ ¥ ¦ § ¨ © ª ¡ ¤ ª « ¢ ¥ ¦ ª ¤ ¡ © ª © ¡ ¬ ¤ ¬ ª ® ¯ ª £
ANNEX 7: SUSTAINABILITY CRITERIA FOR SANITATION
Á Â Ã Ä Å Æ Æ Ç Æ Ä Ã Å È Ã É Ê Ë Æ Ã È Å Ä Ã Ä Å Ì È Í
Î Â Ë Ï Ã Å È Ì É Ð Ë Ñ Ä Å Ò Ë Ì Ó Ã Æ Ã È Å Ä Ã Ä Å Ì È Æ Ô Æ Ä Ë Ï Å Æ Ä Ì Õ Ö Ì Ä Ë Ñ Ä Ã È × Õ Ö Ì Ï Ì Ä Ë Â Ç Ï Ã È Â Ë Ã Ê Ä Â É Ô
Õ Ö Ì Ò Å × Å È Ø Ã Ñ Ê Ë Ã È Ë È Ò Å Ö Ì È Ï Ë È Ä Ã È × É Ö Ë Ã Ù Å È Ø Ä Â Ë Ñ Ô Ñ Ê Ë Ì Ó × Å Æ Ë Ã Æ Ë Ú Û È Ì Ö × Ë Ö Ä Ì É Ë Æ Ç Æ Ä Ã Å È Ã É Ê Ë Ü
Ã Æ Ã È Å Ä Ã Ä Å Ì È Æ Ô Æ Ä Ë Ï Â Ã Æ Ä Ì É Ë È Ì Ä Ì È Ê Ô Ë Ñ Ì È Ì Ï Å Ñ Ã Ê Ê Ô Ò Å Ã É Ê Ë Ü Æ Ì Ñ Å Ã Ê Ê Ô Ã Ñ Ñ Ë Õ Ä Ã É Ê Ë Ü Ã È ×
Ä Ë Ñ Â È Å Ñ Ã Ê Ê Ô Ã È × Å È Æ Ä Å Ä Ç Ä Å Ì È Ã Ê Ê Ô Ã Õ Õ Ö Ì Õ Ö Å Ã Ä Ë Ü Å Ä Æ Â Ì Ç Ê × Ã Ê Æ Ì Õ Ö Ì Ä Ë Ñ Ä Ä Â Ë Ë È Ò Å Ö Ì È Ï Ë È Ä Ã È × Ä Â Ë
È Ã Ä Ç Ö Ã Ê Ö Ë Æ Ì Ç Ö Ñ Ë Æ Ú
Á Â Ë È Å Ï Õ Ö Ì Ò Å È Ø Ã È Ë Ý Å Æ Ä Å È Ø Ã È × Þ Ì Ö × Ë Æ Å Ø È Å È Ø Ã È Ë ß Æ Ã È Å Ä Ã Ä Å Ì È Æ Ô Æ Ä Ë Ï Ü Æ Ç Æ Ä Ã Å È Ã É Å Ê Å Ä Ô
Ñ Ö Å Ä Ë Ö Å Ã Ö Ë Ê Ã Ä Ë × Ä Ì Ä Â Ë Ó Ì Ê Ê Ì ß Å È Ø Ã Æ Õ Ë Ñ Ä Æ Æ Â Ì Ç Ê × É Ë Ñ Ì È Æ Å × Ë Ö Ë × à
á Ú â Ë Ã Ê Ä Â Ã È × Â Ô Ø Å Ë È Ë à Å È Ñ Ê Ç × Ë Æ Ä Â Ë Ö Å Æ Ù Ì Ó Ë Ý Õ Ì Æ Ç Ö Ë Ä Ì Õ Ã Ä Â Ì Ø Ë È Æ Ã È × Â Ã ã Ã Ö × Ì Ç Æ
Æ Ç É Æ Ä Ã È Ñ Ë Æ Ä Â Ã Ä Ñ Ì Ç Ê × Ã Ó Ó Ë Ñ Ä Õ Ç É Ê Å Ñ Â Ë Ã Ê Ä Â Ã Ä Ã Ê Ê Õ Ì Å È Ä Æ Ì Ó Ä Â Ë Æ Ã È Å Ä Ã Ä Å Ì È Æ Ô Æ Ä Ë Ï Ó Ö Ì Ï
Ä Â Ë Ä Ì Å Ê Ë Ä Ò Å Ã Ä Â Ë Ñ Ì Ê Ê Ë Ñ Ä Å Ì È Ã È × Ä Ö Ë Ã Ä Ï Ë È Ä Æ Ô Æ Ä Ë Ï Ä Ì Ä Â Ë Õ Ì Å È Ä Ì Ó Ö Ë Ç Æ Ë Ì Ö × Å Æ Õ Ì Æ Ã Ê Ã È ×
× Ì ß È Æ Ä Ö Ë Ã Ï Õ Ì Õ Ç Ê Ã Ä Å Ì È Æ Ú Î Â Å Æ Ä Ì Õ Å Ñ Ã Ê Æ Ì Ñ Ì Ò Ë Ö Æ Ã Æ Õ Ë Ñ Ä Æ Æ Ç Ñ Â Ã Æ Â Ô Ø Å Ë È Ë Ü È Ç Ä Ö Å Ä Å Ì È Ã È ×
Å Ï Õ Ö Ì Ò Ë Ï Ë È Ä Ì Ó Ê Å Ò Ë Ê Å Â Ì Ì × Ã Ñ Â Å Ë Ò Ë × É Ô Ä Â Ë Ã Õ Õ Ê Å Ñ Ã Ä Å Ì È Ì Ó Ã Ñ Ë Ö Ä Ã Å È Æ Ã È Å Ä Ã Ä Å Ì È Æ Ô Æ Ä Ë Ï Ü Ã Æ
ß Ë Ê Ê Ã Æ × Ì ß È Æ Ä Ö Ë Ã Ï Ë Ó Ó Ë Ñ Ä Æ Ú
ä Ú å È Ò Å Ö Ì È Ï Ë È Ä Ã È × È Ã Ä Ç Ö Ã Ê Ö Ë Æ Ì Ç Ö Ñ Ë Æ à Å È Ò Ì Ê Ò Ë Æ Ä Â Ë Ö Ë æ Ç Å Ö Ë × Ë È Ë Ö Ø Ô Ü ß Ã Ä Ë Ö Ã È × Ì Ä Â Ë Ö
È Ã Ä Ç Ö Ã Ê Ö Ë Æ Ì Ç Ö Ñ Ë Æ Ó Ì Ö Ñ Ì È Æ Ä Ö Ç Ñ Ä Å Ì È Ü Ì Õ Ë Ö Ã Ä Å Ì È Ã È × Ï Ã Å È Ä Ë È Ã È Ñ Ë Ì Ó Ä Â Ë Æ Ô Æ Ä Ë Ï Ü Ã Æ ß Ë Ê Ê
Ã Æ Ä Â Ë Õ Ì Ä Ë È Ä Å Ã Ê Ë Ï Å Æ Æ Å Ì È Æ Ä Ì Ä Â Ë Ë È Ò Å Ö Ì È Ï Ë È Ä Ö Ë Æ Ç Ê Ä Å È Ø Ó Ö Ì Ï Å Ä Æ Ç Æ Ë Ú Û Ä Ã Ê Æ Ì Å È Ñ Ê Ç × Ë Æ
Ä Â Ë × Ë Ø Ö Ë Ë Ì Ó Ö Ë Ñ Ô Ñ Ê Å È Ø Ã È × Ö Ë Ç Æ Ë Õ Ö Ã Ñ Ä Å Ñ Ë × Ã È × Ä Â Ë Ë Ó Ó Ë Ñ Ä Æ Ì Ó Ä Â Ë Æ Ë ç Ë Ú Ø Ú Ö Ë Ç Æ Å È Ø
ß Ã Æ Ä Ë ß Ã Ä Ë Ö è Ö Ë Ä Ç Ö È Å È Ø È Ç Ä Ö Å Ë È Ä Æ Ã È × Ì Ö Ø Ã È Å Ñ Ï Ã Ä Ë Ö Å Ã Ê Ä Ì Ã Ø Ö Å Ñ Ç Ê Ä Ç Ö Ë é Ü Ã È × Ä Â Ë Õ Ö Ì Ä Ë Ñ Ä Å Ì È
Ì Ó Ì Ä Â Ë Ö È Ì È ê Ö Ë È Ë ß Ã É Ê Ë Ö Ë Æ Ì Ç Ö Ñ Ë Æ Ü Ë Ú Ø Ú Ä Â Ö Ì Ç Ø Â Ä Â Ë Õ Ö Ì × Ç Ñ Ä Å Ì È Ì Ó Ö Ë È Ë ß Ã É Ê Ë Ë È Ë Ö Ø Å Ë Æ
ç Æ Ç Ñ Â Ã Æ É Å Ì Ø Ã Æ é Ú
ë Ú Î Ë Ñ Â È Ì Ê Ì Ø Ô Ã È × Ì Õ Ë Ö Ã Ä Å Ì È à Å È Ñ Ì Ö Õ Ì Ö Ã Ä Ë Æ Ä Â Ë Ó Ç È Ñ Ä Å Ì È Ã Ê Å Ä Ô Ã È × Ä Â Ë Ë Ã Æ Ë ß Å Ä Â ß Â Å Ñ Â
Ä Â Ë Ë È Ä Å Ö Ë Æ Ô Æ Ä Ë Ï Å È Ñ Ê Ç × Å È Ø Ä Â Ë Ñ Ì Ê Ê Ë Ñ Ä Å Ì È Ü Ä Ö Ã È Æ Õ Ì Ö Ä Ü Ä Ö Ë Ã Ä Ï Ë È Ä Ã È × Ö Ë Ç Æ Ë Ã È × Þ Ì Ö ì È Ã Ê
× Å Æ Õ Ì Æ Ã Ê Ñ Ã È É Ë Ñ Ì È Æ Ä Ö Ç Ñ Ä Ë × Ü Ì Õ Ë Ö Ã Ä Ë × Ã È × Ï Ì È Å Ä Ì Ö Ë × É Ô Ä Â Ë Ê Ì Ñ Ã Ê Ñ Ì Ï Ï Ç È Å Ä Ô Ã È × Þ Ì Ö
Ä Â Ë Ä Ë Ñ Â È Å Ñ Ã Ê Ä Ë Ã Ï Æ Ì Ó Ä Â Ë Ê Ì Ñ Ã Ê Ç Ä Å Ê Å Ä Å Ë Æ Ú í Ç Ö Ä Â Ë Ö Ï Ì Ö Ë Ü Ä Â Ë Ö Ì É Ç Æ Ä È Ë Æ Æ Ì Ó Ä Â Ë Æ Ô Æ Ä Ë Ï Ü
Å Ä Æ Ò Ç Ê È Ë Ö Ã É Å Ê Å Ä Ô Ä Ì ß Ã Ö × Æ Õ Ì ß Ë Ö Ñ Ç Ä Æ Ü ß Ã Ä Ë Ö Æ Â Ì Ö Ä Ã Ø Ë Æ Ü î Ì Ì × Æ Ü Ë Ã Ö Ä Â æ Ç Ã Ù Ë Æ Ë Ä Ñ Ú Ã È × Ä Â Ë
î Ë Ý Å É Å Ê Å Ä Ô Ã È × Ã × Ã Õ Ä Ã É Å Ê Å Ä Ô Ì Ó Å Ä Æ Ä Ë Ñ Â È Å Ñ Ã Ê Ë Ê Ë Ï Ë È Ä Æ Ä Ì Ä Â Ë Ë Ý Å Æ Ä Å È Ø Å È Ó Ö Ã Æ Ä Ö Ç Ñ Ä Ç Ö Ë Ã È × Ä Ì
× Ë Ï Ì Ø Ö Ã Õ Â Å Ñ Ã È × Æ Ì Ñ Å Ì ê Ë Ñ Ì È Ì Ï Å Ñ × Ë Ò Ë Ê Ì Õ Ï Ë È Ä Æ Ã Ö Ë Å Ï Õ Ì Ö Ä Ã È Ä Ã Æ Õ Ë Ñ Ä Æ Ú
ï Ú í Å È Ã È Ñ Å Ã Ê Ã È × Ë Ñ Ì È Ì Ï Å Ñ Å Æ Æ Ç Ë Æ à Ö Ë Ê Ã Ä Ë Ä Ì Ä Â Ë Ñ Ã Õ Ã Ñ Å Ä Ô Ì Ó Â Ì Ç Æ Ë Â Ì Ê × Æ Ã È × Ñ Ì Ï Ï Ç È Å Ä Å Ë Æ
Ä Ì Õ Ã Ô Ó Ì Ö Æ Ã È Å Ä Ã Ä Å Ì È Ü Å È Ñ Ê Ç × Å È Ø Ä Â Ë Ñ Ì È Æ Ä Ö Ç Ñ Ä Å Ì È Ü Ì Õ Ë Ö Ã Ä Å Ì È Ü Ï Ã Å È Ä Ë È Ã È Ñ Ë Ã È × È Ë Ñ Ë Æ Æ Ã Ö Ô
Ö Ë Å È Ò Ë Æ Ä Ï Ë È Ä Æ Å È Ä Â Ë Æ Ô Æ Ä Ë Ï Ú ð Ë Æ Å × Ë Æ Ä Â Ë Ë Ò Ã Ê Ç Ã Ä Å Ì È Ì Ó Ä Â Ë Æ Ë × Å Ö Ë Ñ Ä Ñ Ì Æ Ä Æ Ã Ê Æ Ì × Å Ö Ë Ñ Ä
É Ë È Ë ì Ä Æ Ë Ú Ø Ú Ó Ö Ì Ï Ö Ë Ñ Ô Ñ Ê Ë × Õ Ö Ì × Ç Ñ Ä Æ ç Æ Ì Å Ê Ñ Ì È × Å Ä Å Ì È Ë Ö Ü Ó Ë Ö Ä Å Ê Å Æ Ë Ö Ü Ë È Ë Ö Ø Ô Ã È × Ö Ë Ñ Ê Ã Å Ï Ë ×
ß Ã Ä Ë Ö é Ã È × Ë Ý Ä Ë Ö È Ã Ê Ñ Ì Æ Ä Æ Ã È × É Ë È Ë ì Ä Æ Â Ã Ò Ë Ä Ì É Ë Ä Ã Ù Ë È Å È Ä Ì Ã Ñ Ñ Ì Ç È Ä Ú ñ Ç Ñ Â Ë Ý Ä Ë Ö È Ã Ê
Ñ Ì Æ Ä Æ Ã Ö Ë Ë Ú Ø Ú Ë È Ò Å Ö Ì È Ï Ë È Ä Ã Ê Õ Ì Ê Ê Ç Ä Å Ì È Ã È × Â Ë Ã Ê Ä Â Â Ã ã Ã Ö × Æ Ü ß Â Å Ê Ë É Ë È Ë ì Ä Æ Å È Ñ Ê Ç × Ë
Å È Ñ Ö Ë Ã Æ Ë × Ã Ø Ö Å Ñ Ç Ê Ä Ç Ö Ã Ê Õ Ö Ì × Ç Ñ Ä Å Ò Å Ä Ô Ã È × Æ Ç É Æ Å Æ Ä Ë È Ñ Ë Ë Ñ Ì È Ì Ï Ô Ü Ë Ï Õ Ê Ì Ô Ï Ë È Ä Ñ Ö Ë Ã Ä Å Ì È Ü
Å Ï Õ Ö Ì Ò Ë × Â Ë Ã Ê Ä Â Ã È × Ö Ë × Ç Ñ Ë × Ë È Ò Å Ö Ì È Ï Ë È Ä Ã Ê Ö Å Æ Ù Æ Ú
Ú ñ Ì Ñ Å Ì ê Ñ Ç Ê Ä Ç Ö Ã Ê Ã È × Å È Æ Ä Å Ä Ç Ä Å Ì È Ã Ê Ã Æ Õ Ë Ñ Ä Æ à Ä Â Ë Ñ Ö Å Ä Ë Ö Å Ã Å È Ä Â Å Æ Ñ Ã Ä Ë Ø Ì Ö Ô Ö Ë Ó Ë Ö Ä Ì Ä Â Ë
ò
Æ Ì Ñ Å Ì ê Ñ Ç Ê Ä Ç Ö Ã Ê Ã Ñ Ñ Ë Õ Ä Ã È Ñ Ë Ã È × Ã Õ Õ Ö Ì Õ Ö Å Ã Ä Ë È Ë Æ Æ Ì Ó Ä Â Ë Æ Ô Æ Ä Ë Ï Ü Ñ Ì È Ò Ë È Å Ë È Ñ Ë Ü Æ Ô Æ Ä Ë Ï
Õ Ë Ö Ñ Ë Õ Ä Å Ì È Æ Ü Ø Ë È × Ë Ö Å Æ Æ Ç Ë Æ Ã È × Å Ï Õ Ã Ñ Ä Æ Ì È Â Ç Ï Ã È × Å Ø È Å Ä Ô Ü Ä Â Ë Ñ Ì È Ä Ö Å É Ç Ä Å Ì È Ä Ì Ó Ì Ì ×
Æ Ë Ñ Ç Ö Å Ä Ô Ü Ñ Ì Ï Õ Ê Å Ã È Ñ Ë ß Å Ä Â Ä Â Ë Ê Ë Ø Ã Ê Ó Ö Ã Ï Ë ß Ì Ö Ù Ã È × Æ Ä Ã É Ê Ë Ã È × Ë Ó ì Ñ Å Ë È Ä Å È Æ Ä Å Ä Ç Ä Å Ì È Ã Ê
Æ Ë Ä Ä Å È Ø Æ Ú
124 ° ± ² ³ ² ´ ´ ² µ ¶ · ¸ ¹ º » ² µ » ¼ ³ ¶ · » µ ² º » º ² ½ µ ¾ ½ » ¿ À » ´

!

"

#
#

"

#

"
$

%
%
& '

(

&

) * +
, - - - .
/ 0

1

,

#

#

2 $

3
4

#

5 6

7
6 . . 8 8 8 8
8 / ) 9
8 ) 2

7
125
ó ô õ ö õ ÷ ÷ õ ø ù ú û ü ý þ õ ø þ ÿ ö ù ú þ ø õ ý þ ý õ ø þ þ ÷
Sustainability Criteria Scorecard
Sanitation system to be evaluated: __________________________
Criteria Indicators Rating (Passed/Failed) Remarks

Health 1. Protection from pathogens
2. Protection from chemicals
3. Compliance to DOH standards
Environment 1. Compliance to DENR

standards
2. Potential reuse of treated
wastewater
3. Potential reuse of treated
sludge
Economy 1. User’s capacity to pay for cost-

recovery
2. User’s capacity to pay for O &
M
3. Potential for income generation
Technology 1. Durability
2. Simple construction and O &
M
3. Adaptability to local context
Socio-cultural 1. Convenience
2. Safety
3. Appropriateness to local
cultural context
126 : ; < = < > > < ? @ A B C D E < ? E F = @ A E ? < D E D < G ? H G E I J E >
REFERENCES
Publications
Biosphere Environment and Health Systems Series Volume 2. Policies and Guidelines on Wastewater
Disposal Systems. Compiled by Bonifacio Magtibay. 1999. Quezon City: PCWS, ITN Foundation
Center for Advanced Philippine Studies. SEI-ESR2 Knowledge Node in the Philippines: A Project Docu-
ment. 2009. Quezon City.
Discussion Note: Dignity, Disease and Dollars: Asia’s Urgent Sanitation Challenge. 2007. Stockholm:
ADB
DOH National Epidemiology Center, Field Heath Service Information System (FHSIS) Annual Report
2008
EASAN, Universal Sanitation in East Asia: Mission Possible? 2007, WHO, WSP, UNICEF
Engaging Sanitation Entrepreneurs: Supporting private entrepreneurs to deliver public goods. 2008.
Building Partnerships for Development.
Environmental Health Project Strategic Report 2: Guidelines for the Assessment of National Sanitation
Policies. 2002, Washington: USAID
Institutional Changes for Sanitation: Discussion Paper. 2009, Bangkok: UN ESCAP
International Year of Sanitation 2008 Kit. UN WATER.
Lenton, Robert, Wright, Albert M. And Lewis, Kristen. UN Millenium Project Task Force on Water and
Sanitation Health, dignity and Development: what will it take. 2005. Earthscan and UNDP.
Medium Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP) for 2004-2010
Medium Term Public Investment Program (MTPIP) 2005-2010
Model PPTA TOR: Project Preparation Technical Assistance: Terms of Reference for Consulting Ser-
vices, Planning Urban Sanitation and Wastewater Management Improvements.
National Sewerage and Septage Management Program (NSSMP) Full Report. 2009. Manila: DPWH
National Sewerage and Septage Management Program (NSSMP) Full Report. Annexes. 2009. Manila:
DPWH
National Census Report, 2009. National Statistics Office
National Demographic and Health Survey, 2005. National Statistics Office.
National Strategy and Action Plan for the Water Supply and Sanitation Sector. Volume II: Sanitation Sec-
tor Plan Study Report. NEDA.
National Strategy and Action Plan for the Water Supply and Sanitation Sector. Volume III: Policy and
127
K L M N M O O M P Q R S T U V M P V W N Q R V P M U V U M X P Y X V Z [ V O
Strategy Papers. NEDA
National Strategy and Action Plan for the Water Supply and Sanitation Sector. Volume IV: Sanitation Sec-
tor Plan Case Studies and Models. NEDA
NEDA Board Committee on Infrastructure (INFRACOM), Resolution No. 2, Series of 2008, CREAT-
ING A SUB-COMMITTEE ON WATER RESOURCES
NEDA Board Resolution No. 12 (s. 1995), APPROVING THE COMMON DEFINITION OF TERMS
RELATIVE TO WATER SUPPLY, SEWERAGE AND SANITATION. Water Supply and Sanitation
Sector Plan Study Review. Volume II: Appendices. 1998. NEDA
NEDA Board Resolution No. 5 series of 1994. Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Plan Study Review.
Volume II: Appendices. 1998. NEDA
ODA Resources for the Water Supply and Sanitation Sector, SEPTEMBER 4, 2008 UPDATE, Prepared
by the Philippine Water Revolving Fund Support Program for the PDF Sub-WG on WSS
Philippine Environment Monitor, 2003. Manila: DENR and the World Bank Group
Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap Action Plan. TWG Working Document. 2008.
Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap. 2009. Manila: NEDA
Philippines Sanitation Sourcebook and Decision Aid. 2005. Manila, DILG and WSP
Republic Act 9279, Clean Water Act 2004
Sanitation Policy Guidelines, WEDC 2007
Sanitation Technology Information Kit. 2009. Makati: Philippine Sanitation Alliance.
Secretariat’s Report: Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap. 2009. Manila: NEDA
Social Marketing of Sanitation. 2006, Nairobi: UN Habitat
Tayler, Kevin and Scott, Rebecca. Application of tools to support national sanitation policies. WEDC,
2005
The Code on Sanitation of the Philippines (Presidential Decree NO. 856). 1976. Manila: DOH
Water and Sanitation Program: Sustainable Sanitation in East Asia (SuSEA) Mid-term Review: Philippines
Component. 2009:
Water for Asian Cities Programme, Strategy and Action Plan: Mainstreaming Gender, Water and Sanita-
tion. 2006, Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Human Settlements Programme, (UN Habitat)
Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Assessments: A Guide For Country-Level Action. WHO, UNICEF.
Wilfredo, Jose. Asian Development Bank. “Wastes treat Wastes.” 2005.
Willetts, Juliet, Wicken, James and Robinson, Andy. Meeting the Sanitation and Water Challenge in South-
East Asia and the Pacific. Synthesis Report on the Sanitation and Water Conference. 2008, Melbourne:
International Water Centre
WSP Sanitation and Hygiene Series. From Burden To Communal Responsibility: A Sanitation Success
Story from Southern Region in Ethiopia. 2007. Nairobi, Kenya: Water and Sanitation Program – Africa
128 \ ] ^ _ ^ ` ` ^ a b c d e f g ^ a g h _ b c g a ^ f g f ^ i a j i g k l g `
WSP, USAID, Economic Impacts of Sanitation in the Philippines, 2008, Jakarta: World Bank.
WSP-EAC, USAID, Economic Impacts of Sanitation in the Philippines: Summary. 2008, Jakarta: World
Bank East Asia and the Pacific Region
WSSCC, Public Funding for Sanitation, The Many faces of Sanitation Subsidies, 2009.
Project Documents
Center for Advanced Philippine Studies, SEI- ESR2 Knowledge Node in the Philippines: A project docu-
ment, January 2009
Streams of Knowledge, Guidelines for Developing Sanitation Policies, 2004
Powerpoint Presentations
Ben Eijbergen, The Forgotten Sector: Sanitation and Sewerage in the Philippines. 2006 Manila, World
Bank Office (powerpoint presentation
Workshop and Meetings

2nd National Sanitation Summit. 2008 July. ADB Headquarters, Manila.
National Workshop on the Philippine Water and Sanitation Sector Assessment Process. 2009, April, San
Mateo Rizal.
Water, Sanitation and Hygiene for All – Solutions and Actions, Local and National. 2004. Dakar, Senegal:
WSSCC
Technical Working Group meeting August 14, 2009, Local Government Academy office
Technical Working Group Writeshop October 7-9, 2009 Island Cove, Cavite City
Technical Working Group meeting November 27, 2009, Local Government Academy office
DOH Cluster Meeting, December 3, 2009, DOH Manila
NEDA Infracom Sub-committee on Water Resources, February 7, 2010
129
m n o p o q q o r s t u v w x o r x y p s t x r o w x w o z r { z x | } x q

Philippine Sanitation Roadmap

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Philippine Sanitation Roadmap

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PHILIPPINE SUSTAINABLE

by the Department of Health

All rights reserved. The use of this material is encouraged with

San Lazaro Compound, Tayuman, Sta. Cruz, Manila,

Tel no: 7438301 to 23

ESPERANZA CABRAL RUBEN REINOSO JR.

Adequate Infrastructure Provision Financing and Adequate Infrastructure Investments

Emergency Sanitation Response

Local Government Academy German Technical Cooperation

Coffey International Lacto Asia Pacific Life

ACRONYMS USED ........................................................................................................................7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 13

1.1 PURPOSE OF THE SUSTAINABLE SANITATION ROADMAP .............................. 18

1.2 DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK AND PRINCIPLES ............................................... 19

1.2.1 DEFINITION OF SANITATION CONCEPTS .................................................... 19

1.2.2 SCOPE OF THE SANITATION ROADMAP ....................................................... 19

1.2.3 GUIDING PRINCIPLES ........................................................................................ 19

2.0 OVERVIEW OF THE SANITATION SECTOR ................................................................... 24

2.1 CURRENT SITUATION ................................................................................................ 24

2.1.1 SANITARY TOILET FACILITIES ......................................................................... 24

2.1.2 SEWERAGE SYSTEMS........................................................................................... 27

2.1.3 SANITATION CRISIS IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS .................................... 27

2.2 GOVERNANCE AND LEGAL FRAMEWORKS........................................................... 28

2.2.1 LOCAL AND NATIONAL AGENCIES WITH SANITATION RELATED

2.2.2 UPDATING AND MAINSTREAMING LOCAL AND NATIONALSANITATION

2.2.3 RELEVANT LAWS AND POLICIES IN THE SECTOR ..................................... 29

2.3 ANALYSIS OF GAPS ....................................................................................................... 30

2.3.1 THE POLICY ENVIRONMENT .......................................................................... 30

2.3.2 FUNDING LEVELS AND FINANCING OF SANITATION ............................. 32

2.3.3 PROGRAMS ............................................................................................................ 33

2.3.5 HUMAN RESOURCES........................................................................................... 34

2.3.6 COMMUNICATION FOR BEHAVIORAL CHANGE ........................................ 35

2.3.7 SECTOR PLANNING ........................................................................................... 35

2.3.8 MONITORING AND EVALUATION (INCLUDING SECTOR BASELINE

2.3.9 ENVIRONMENT/HEALTH AND ECONOMIC IMPACT .............................. 36

2.3.10 GENDER ISSUES IN SANITATION ................................................................. 37

2.4 SUMMARY OF ISSUES AND CHALLENGES ............................................................. 37

3.0 VISION AND DEVELOPMENT GOALS ............................................................................. 42

3.1 VISION STATEMENT................................................................................................... 42

3.2 OUTCOMES AND OUTPUTS ....................................................................................... 44

3.2.1RESPONSIVE SANITATION GOVERNANCE AND REGULATORY

3.2.2 IMPROVED SERVICE DELIVERY THROUGH COMMUNICATIONS AND

3.2.3 STRENGTHENED STRATEGIC ALLIANCES................................................... 46

3.2.4 FINANCING AND ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS ........ 47

3.2.5 EMERGENCY SANITATION RESPONSE ......................................................... 48

3.2.6 SUMMARY OF EXPECTED OUTPUTS: ............................................................. 49

3.3 ROADMAP LOGICAL FRAMEWORK ......................................................................... 49

4.0 ROADMAP PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES ................................................... 59

4.1 POLICY DIRECTIONS ................................................................................................. 60

4.2 PROPOSED PRIORITY PROGRAMS IN THE SANITATION SECTOR .................. 66

4.3 ONGOING AND PIPELINE PROGRAMS ................................................................... 72

4.4 MEDIUM TERM OPERATIONAL PLAN (2010-2016) ............................................... 81

4.5 INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS OF THE SANITATION SECTOR .................... 89

4.6 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE MTPDP 2010-2016 ............................................... 90

5.0 IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS ......................................................................... 92

5.5 MECHANISMS AND PROCESSES ............................................................................... 96

6.0 RESULTS-BASED MONITORING AND EVALUATION ................................................100

VISION AND STRATEGIES

The Roadmap envisions that:

RESULTS-BASED MONITORING AND EVALUATION

1.1 PURPOSE OF THE SUSTAINABLE SANITATION ROADMAP

1. Sanitation is a human right, a social and an economic good.