IWA Pi 2017 - Specialist Conference on Benchmarking and
Performance Assessment
Ana Vergara
Vienna, May 16, 2017
2
I. Introduction
II. The Sunass benchmarking pillars
III. The benchmarking developed by the Sunass until the year 2015
IV. The new benchmarking approach from 2016
V. Results and perspectives 2017
3
I. Introduction
Sunass
• Peruvian regulatory body
• Water and sanitation services
• Until 2016: urban area (Water and Sanitation Companies - WSCs).
• From December 2016: urban and rural area.
Supervisory function
• Performance assesment.
• Data collection from the WSCs.
• Benchmarking evolution from 1998 until now.
4
I. Introduction
II. The Sunass benchmarking pillars
III. The benchmarking developed by the Sunass until the year 2015
IV. The new benchmarking approach from 2016
V. Results and perspectives 2017
5
II. The Sunass benchmarking pillars
Benchmarking
Clear rules Data capture and transfer
system
Technical assistance
Institutionality
Legal framework SICAP-FTP Videoconferences
Benchmarking team
Coordinators in WSCs
6
I. Introduction
II. The Sunass benchmarking pillars
III. The benchmarking developed by the Sunass until the year 2015
IV. The new benchmarking approach from 2016
V. Results and perspectives 2017
7
III. The benchmarking developed by Sunass until
the year 2015
SEDAPAR
SEDAJULIACA
SEDALORETO
AYACUCHO
MOQUEGUA
ILO
MARAÑON
SEDACAJ
CHAVIN
EMAPISCO
MANTARO
SAN MARTIN
BARRANCA
EMAPAT
NOR PUNO
EMAPAY
ALTIPLANO ABANCAY
CHANKA
SEDAPAR SRL
MOYOBAMBA
SIERRA C
YAULI
EMAQ
EMPSSAPAL
CALCA
EMAPAB
EPSSMU
PASCO
EMUSAP
HUANCAVELICA
SEDAPAL
HUACHO
HUARAL
CAÑETE
GRAU
SEDALIB
EPSEL
ATUSA
EMAVIGS
EMAPICA
SEMAPACH
TACNA
EMAPACOP
SELVA C
HUANCAYO
HUANUCO
SEDACHIMBOTE
SEDACUSCO
EMSAPUNO
SUNASS
WSC Number of water connections administered
Number of WSCs
SEDAPAL More than 1 million 1
Large WSCs 1 More than 100 000 up to 1 million
4
Large WSCs 2 More than 40 000 up to 100 000
13
Medium WSCs More than 10 000 up to 40 000
14
Small WSCs Bethween 2 000 and 10 000 18
Total 50
The WSCs in Perú
8
III. The benchmarking developed by Sunass until the year 2015
The beginnings – First ranking 1998
•Coverage
•Content of free residual chlorine in netwroks
•Wastewater treatment
•Metering level
•Non revenue water
•Collection period
•Operating cost coverage ratio
•A score was given to the WSCs based on the KPIs average.
The improvements – Second ranking 2011
•Survey
•New KPI (Customer complains, customer satisfaction, working environment, energy cost, website information, installation time for new connections, pipe breaks).
•New ranking (weighted average) aligned to the National Sanitation Plan.
•A score was given to the WSCs based on the KIP weighted average).
Achievements 2015
•Clear directives, legal framework, continuos improvement, strategic allies in the WSCs, data capture software.
•Two reports: i) The WSCs and its development and ii) The regulatory benchmarking
Ranking with no context information, developed without the WSCs, no
improvements, no good
practices identified, no focrs.
9
I. Introduction
II. The Sunass benchmarking pillars
III. The benchmarking developed by the Sunass until the year 2015
IV. The new benchmarking approach from 2016
V. Results and perspectives 2017
10
IV. The new benchmarking approach from 2016
Acces
• Water coverage
• Sewerage coverage
• Water connections increasement
Sustainability
• Underground water use
• Operating cost coverage
• Wastewater treatment level
• Disasters management risk
Costumers
• Costumers satisfaction level
• Website information
• Installation time for new connections
Quality of service
• Metering level
• Continuity of service
• Pipe breaks
• Sewer system blockages
The new benchmarking KPIs
To stop performance assesment with a ranking.
To show the indicators evolution with context information
To focus on a benchmarking area
Workshops
To identify good practices
To make periodic auditing
To make a single report
Benchmarking evaluation (Specialized consultancy)
11
IV. The new benchmarking approach from 2016
(privada/publica)
Pequeña
(si/no)
Sierra
AREAS INDICADOR UNIDAD VALOR 2014 POSICIÓN 2014 Δ 2013TENDENCIA
12-14
DISTRIBUCIÓN
2014
Cobertura de agua potable % 99,3 0,12
Δ Nro. de conexiones/Total conex.
Año anterior% 4,3 0,08
Cobertura de alcantarillado % 77,6 0,00
Densidad de atoros Atoros/km 0,69 -0,04
Continuidad hrs/día 13,8 -0,09
Micromedición % 53,44 0,015
Densidad de roturas Roturas/km 0,11 -0,62
AGUA POTABLEAguas subterraneas/aguas
superficiales% 100 0
ALCANTARILLADO Tratamiento de aguas residuales % 39,51 -0,24
Relación de trabajo % 99,99 -0,03
Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres % - - - -
Tiempo atención conexiones
nuevasdías hábiles - - - -
Información página web % 13,8 -0,09
Satisfacción del cliente % - - - -
EPS NOR PUNO S.A.Nombre oficial:
Mecanismo de retribución por
servicios ecosistémicos:
SO
ST
EN
IBIL
IDA
D
CLIENTES
INDICADORES DE DESEMPEÑO
SERVICIO
AMBIENTAL
AGUA POTABLE
ALCANTARILLADO
AGUA POTABLE
ALCANTARILLADO
FINANCIERA
CA
LID
AD
INFORMACIÓN DE CONTEXTO
AC
CS
ES
O
Tipo de empresa:
Categoría:
N° de localidades administradas:
Nro. de PTAR:
Región geográfica:
Draft report sent to
the WSCs before the
workshop
Workshop results
12
IV. The new benchmarking approach from 2016
13
I. Introduction
II. The Sunass benchmarking pillars
III. The benchmarking developed by the Sunass until the year 2015
IV. The new benchmarking approach from 2016
V. Results and perspectives 2017
14
V. Results and perspectives Results
• The WSCs have a data collection culture.
• Since 2016 the Sunass benchmarking seeks to promote performance improvement.
Approach for 2017
• Compliance with the MAV ( maximum admisible values) standard
• Non-domestic sewage
Why this approach?
• Only 17 WSCs meet the standard .
• We want to measure the indicator 6.3.1 (Proportion of wastewater treated safely) of the SDG 6 (Ensuring the availability and sustainable managment of water and sanitation for all)
Proportion of wastewater treated safely (indicator
6.3.1)
Part A (Proportion of the population whose
wastewater is safely treated)
Part B (Proportion of wastewater from
econocmic activities (non-domestic customers) that
are previously treated
Compliance with the MAV standard
15
V. Results and perspectives
Organization for the implementation
of the MVA standard
Proportion of non-domestic users
registered
Additional payment
application
Monitoring actions carried out
Attention of complains about
MVAs
Relevant aspects to evaluate in the MAVs standard
If someone has the
responsibily of the activity
Proportion of non-domestic users that have been
identified and registerded b the WSCs
If the the WSC applies the calculation for additional payment
in accordance to Sunass regulations
Unnanounced monitoring actions of the non-
domestic wastewater discharges
Application of a special complains handling
procedure First group: BOD,
COD, Total suspended solids,
oils and fats
Second group: Al, As, B, Cd, CN, Cu, Cr+6, Cr, Mn,
Hg, Ni, Pb, pH, T°,sulfates,
sulfures, sedimented
solids, amoniacal nitrogen
The WSC closes the sewage connection
The non-domestic user has an additional charge
The MAVs standard
IWA Pi 2017 - Specialist Conference on Benchmarking and
Performance Assessment
Ana Vergara
Vienna, May 16, 2017