Upload
mdrakib-uddin
View
39
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Household Expenditure Analysis(using the LCCA Lenses)
Bagherpara
3.Feb.2014
Overview- Data collection process- Sample- Cost definitions refresher- 10 Key Messages
Data collection processJune’2013 : Developing methodology, pre-testing questionnaires, field trial round 1
September’2013 : Field staff training in HO, field trial round 2
November’2013 : Refresher training, sampling & data collection
Dec’2013 to Jan’2014 : Data entry & cleaning
Feb’2014 : Data analysis, presentation of preliminary results and feedback
Number of staff: 13 (Field 7, HO 4, Int. Cons. 2)
Location and sample
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
500
300
200
Hard core poor Poor Nonpoor
Cost definitions used for HH Expenditure
Capital expenditureOne off(CapEx)
Operation and minor maintenance
Regular and small(OpEx)
Capital maintenanceIrregular and larger
(CapManEx)
Materials (Rings, ring slabs, bricksm etc)Mason workTransport costsetc.
Brush, bucket, broom, liquid & powder cleaner, soap, siphon, latches etc
Superstructure, ring, ring slabs, pit emptying, roof, colouring, pan, pipe
10 Key Messages
• What is the data telling us?• What evidence do we have to back it up?
1. BRAC WASH programme had catalytic effect on latrine construction…
1. BRAC WASH programme had catalytic effect on latrine construction…. specifically for the hardcore
poor
2. Without BRAC WASH programme the hardcore poor would barely have access to sanitation
3. With the grant, HCP are spending almost as much as the Poor on latrine construction but BRAC WASH providing higher quality latrines
Hardco
re Poo
rPoo
r
Non-po
or0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
CapManEx HH/yearOpEX HH/yearCapEx HH (with grant)
Taka
(med
ian)
3. Without the grant, CapEx for twin pits and twin pit offset not affordable to HCP and borderline for the poor
Hardcore Poor
Poor Non-poor0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
Affordability ratio CapEx HH (without gr...
Prop
ortio
n of
Cap
Ex o
n HH
ann
ual
inco
me
International benchmark for wa-ter and sanitation = 5%
Cleaning products take up most of the operation and minor maintenance expenditure (OpEx)
4. Latrines provided to HCP can be maintained and be hygienic at lower costs (OpEx – minor
maintenance)
5. Direct support expenditure is paying off: the HCP have same hygiene pattern as the poor and the
non-poor
Overall, superstructure, upgrade and pit emptying take up most of the HH Capital Maintenance Expenditure
(averaged per year)
6. Capital Maintenance Expenditure different for each socio-economic group…
7. … and Capital Maintenance Expenditure different per latrine (averaged per year)
8. Anticipating requirements for capital maintenance expenditure critical for sustainability
Septic offset
Single pit offset
Twin pit Twin pit offset
Single pit0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14Timing CapManEx Superstructure
6th5th4th3rd2nd1st
Year
s af
ter c
onst
ruct
ion
whe
n C
apM
anEx
"ki
cks
in"
8. Anticipating requirements for capital maintenance expenditure critical for sustainability
(upgrade)
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th0
100
200
300
400
500
600
CapManEx Superstructure timeseries and costs
Twin pit offsetTwin pit
Ave
rage
taka
per
mai
nten
ance
su-
pers
tuct
ure
9. HCP and Poor spending almost as much on operational and maintenance expenditure…
Hardcore Poor
Poor Non-poor0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
OpEX HH/year#REF!
Taka
per
HH
per
yea
r
10. So far, recurrent maintenance (averaged per year) is affordable (< 1%)
Hardco
re Poo
rPoo
r
Non-po
or0.00%
0.20%
0.40%
0.60%
0.80%
1.00%
1.20%
Affordability ratio CapManEx HH yearAffordability ratio OpEX HH year
Prop
ortio
n of
OpE
x a
nd
Cap
Man
Ex o
f HH
ann
ual i
n-co
me
To conclude…Now:• Cost benchmarks for hygienic latrines allow to monitor sustainability
and affordability• Trade-off for the poor: lower CapEx for the single pit latrine, higher
OpEx but… lower “service” compared with HCP
For the future:• Poor are the largest proportion of the population in absolute
numbers. Will face higher CapManEx because of regular pit emptying => consider twin pit approach for lower maintenance costs, higher service and higher uptake
• CapManEx for twin-pit offset has not “kick-in” yet for the HCP => plan ahead, asset management component
Is behavior change burdening the poor?Can we increase value for money by targeting the poor?
Hardcore Poor
Poor Non-poor0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
Affordability ratio CapEx HH (without grant)
Prop
ortio
n of
Cap
Ex o
n HH
ann
ual
inco
me
International benchmark for wa-ter and sanitation = 5%
Thank you!!