water supply and sanitation in vietnam...tation specialist, sing cho, urban specialist and lalit...

Water Supply and Sanitation in VietnamTurning Finance into Services for the Future

December 2014Service Delivery Assessment

This report is the product of extensive collaboration and information sharing between many government agencies at national and provincial level, and development partners in Vietnam. A core team drawn from the Ministry of Construction and Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development has been lead partners with the Water and Sanitation Program in this assessment sector. The authors acknowledge their valuable contribution as well as the information sharing and contributions during workshops by other sector stakeholders, including development partners.

The Task Team Leader for the Service Delivery Assessment (SDA) in East Asia and the Pacific is Susanna Smets. The fol-lowing World Bank staff and consultants have provided valuable contributions to the service delivery assessment process and report: Jeremy Colin, U-Prime Rodriguez, Vinh Quang Nguyen, Iain Menzies, Hang Diem Nguyen, Almud Weitz, Sandra Giltner, Nguyen Trong Duong and Nguyen Danh Soan. The report was peer reviewed by the following World Bank staff and sector colleagues: Parameswaran Iyer, Lead Water and Sanitation Specialist, Lilian Pena Pereira Weiss, Sr. Water and Sani-tation Specialist, Sing Cho, Urban Specialist and Lalit Patra, Chief WASH section, UNICEF Vietnam.

The SDA was carried out under the guidance of the World Bank’s Wa ter and Sanitation Program and local partners. This re-gional work, implemented through a country-led process, draws on the experience of water and sanitation SDAs conduct ed in more than 40 countries in Africa, Latin America, and South Asia. An SDA analysis has three main components: a review of past water and sanitation access, a costing model to as sess the ad-equacy of future investments, and a scorecard that allows diagnosis of bottlenecks along the service de livery pathways. SDA’s contribution is to answer not only whether past trends and future finance are sufficient to meet sector targets for infrastructure and hardware but also what specific issues need to be addressed to ensure that fi nance is effectively turned into accelerated and sustainable water supply and sanitation service delivery.

The Water and Sanitation Program is a multi-donor partnership, part of the World Bank Group’s Water Global Practice, sup-porting poor people in obtaining affordable, safe, and sustainable access to water and sanitation services. WSP’s donors include Australia, Austria, Denmark, Finland, France, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Nor-way, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United States, and the World Bank.

WSP reports are published to communicate the results of WSP’s work to the development community. Some sources cited may be informal documents that are not readily available.

The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed herein are entirely those of the author and should not be attributed to the World Bank or its affiliated organizations, or to members of the Board of Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The bound-aries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of the World Bank Group concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.The material in this publication is copyrighted. Requests for permission to reproduce portions of it should be sent to [email protected]. WSP encourages the dissemination of its work and will normally grant permission promptly. For more information, please visit www.wsp.org.

© 2014 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank

Water Supply and Sanitation in Vietnam

Turning Finance into Services for the Future

Water Supply and Sanitation in Vietnamiv

In the last two decades the Government of Vietnam has made considerable progress in improving water supply and sani-tation in both urban and rural areas and rates of access to improved services are now significantly higher than those in neighboring countries. Both the water supply and sanitation Millennium Development Goal (MDG) targets have been met, according to Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP) reports.1

These achievements are impressive. The reliability of the data on which JMP figures are based is, however, disputed and many stakeholders consider the access rates to be overestimated. Weak monitoring systems and a multiplic-ity of official data sources underlie widespread uncertainty over actual service coverage and functionality. A further complication is that the Government of Vietnam has adopt-ed targets and technical standards which are more ambi-tious than those adopted by the JMP. The targets are sum-marized below; meeting them will be difficult.

There are major disparities in water supply access between regions and between big cities, smaller urban centers and

Strategic Overview

peri-urban areas. Outside of the major cities, the quality and reliability of supply is a challenge while in rural areas, in-formal management arrangements rarely result in effective operation and maintenance in the long term. There are also significant inequalities in access between richer and poorer segments of the population. For example, while 95% of the richest urban quintile has a piped water connection in the yard, only 35% of the poorest have this level of service. In rural areas, just 3% of the poorest quintile has a house connection while for the richest quintile the figure is 43%.2

Progress in sanitation and hygiene is lagging behind water supply, and in urban areas the general absence of wastewa-ter treatment and fecal sludge management is a significant gap given the population density and the volume of waste-water produced. In rural areas, the sector does not yet have a coherent implementation strategy for taking sanitation and hygiene promotion to scale, though it benefits from a national target program funded with multi-donor support.

Although decentralization is quite advanced in Vietnam, there are instances where central control still inhibits the development of locally appropriate solutions, while gaps in the financial and human capacity of local service provid-ers are barriers to service improvement and expansion. In recent years, government has promoted the adoption of a commercial orientation in urban service provision, and some progress has been made in relation to water supply services but not for sanitation due to the limited scope for revenue generation. Provincial government still exercises significant control over utilities and, despite some promising policy initiatives, conditions are not yet attractive for large-scale

1 JMP (2013) 2 JMP-UNICEF special tabulation per wealth quintile, using MICS 2010/11 data

Subsector 2020 Target

Urban water supply (access to public piped network)

85%

Rural water supply (access to ‘clean’ water meeting Ministry of Health (MOH) standards)

75%

Urban sanitation (proportion of wastewater treated) 45%

Rural sanitation (use of ‘hygienic’ latrines meeting MOH standards)

85%

Service Delivery Assessment v

private sector participation. A more enabling environment is needed including, amongst other things, the establish-ment of a regulator and the introduction of commercially viable tariff levels and performance contracts. Recently, the government has also introduced a socialization policy and associated decisions to increase private sector participa-tion in the sector, both for urban and rural.3 This initiative is in its early stages and, while it could potentially deliver significant benefits to the sector, there are obstacles to be overcome in terms of commitment to policy implementa-tion, comprehensive legal framework, as well as public and private sector capacity for contracting.

In order to meet the government’s ambitious targets, some 3.7 million people per year will need to gain access to water supply sources that meet government standards, of which around half in rural and half in urban areas. In the case of sanitation, about 1.6 million people per year will need ac-cess to wastewater treatment (in urban areas) and about 2.0 million to latrines that meet national standards (in rural areas).

Average annual investments in the water supply and sanita-tion sector of the government and donors from 2009-2011 were equivalent to roughly 0.2% of 2011 GDP. While ex-pected to rise to about 0.4% of GDP in 2012 to 2014, an-ticipated investments are insufficient to put the sector on track to meet government targets for 2020. Meeting these would require capital expenditures of US$1.562 billion per year for water supply and US$1.142 billion per year for

sanitation (a total of estimated amount of 2.5% of GDP). A large proportion of the investment requirements are for urban areas (around 87%). Furthermore, in the case of wa-ter supply roughly 60% of the funding required is for the replacement of existing assets. The anticipated public (do-mestic and external) finance for 2012-2014 demonstrates the same direction towards high urban investments, with around 90% directed to urban areas for sanitation and around 70% to urban areas for water supply. This highlights an urgent need not only to increase overall sector funding but also to use public funding more effectively, by improving the implementation of cost recovery policies and manage-ment—and hence sustainability—of existing infrastructure and services. Crowding in private sector financing will be an important element to reduce the financing gap, and actions to improve the investment climate as mentioned above de-serve priority.

In summary, the sector faces the daunting task of expand-ing service provision to reach the poorer un-served popula-tion segments; keeping pace with growth; and at the same time putting measures in place to strengthen the effective-ness and sustainability of service provision, both technically and financially.

This Service Delivery Assessment has been conducted as a multi-stakeholder process under leadership of the Govern-ment of Vietnam. Agreed priority actions to tackle Vietnam’s water supply and sanitation challenges have been identified to ensure finance is effectively turned into services:

3 Ministry of Construction Summary report on encouragement of private sector participation in water and urban environmental sanitation sector, Oct 2013; and Vietnam Development Partner Forum – Working Group report on private sector participation in rural water supply and sanitation, Nov 2013

Water Supply and Sanitation in Vietnamvi

Sector-wide• Increase public funding for water supply and sanitation, especially for urban service provision outside of the major

cities and for remote, underserved rural areas • Improve the management – especially cost recovery – for existing infrastructure and services provision, to reduce

the financing gap for investment needed in infrastructure replacement• Conduct a public expenditure review for the water and sanitation sector, to identify critical obstacles to efficient

resource utilization• Prioritize the needs of the poor in sector investments and operational strategies, such as by expanding results-

based financing instruments and incentivize sustainable service delivery to poor and vulnerable communities• Streamline urban and rural access targets and monitoring frameworks, with greater attention to service functional-

ity and use, and agree on common points of reference for all institutional stakeholders in the sector• Improve the policy and enabling environment, such as with respect to tariff reform and regulation, for private sector

participation and develop capacities for private sector participation in both urban and rural services (on both public and private side)

Rural Water Supply• Develop a capacity building strategy and implementation plan for National Target Programme for Rural Water Sup-

ply and Sanitation phase 3 (NTP3), including developing a comprehensive technical support system to improve the functionality of schemes

• Carry out a comprehensive review of the effectiveness of existing and alternative scheme management (and owner-ship) models

• Develop and implement review recommendations to professionalize management and leverage private sector ca-pabilities

• Develop provincial level plans for managing water quality at scheme level

Urban Water Supply• Allow tariffs to reach commercially viable levels whereby utilities can achieve full cost recovery, through indepen-

dent economic regulation• Increase autonomy for utilities, allowing them to increase operation and maintenance budgets to levels that enable

adequate maintenance to be provided and sustained• Introduce incentives and obligations for utilities to improve the quality and reliability of service provision, by estab-

lishing an independent regulator• Enhance access to commercial finance for utilities by providing government guarantees for utilities

Service Delivery Assessment vii

Rural Sanitation and Hygiene• Identify effective operational strategies for sanitation and hygiene promotion that can be taken to scale under

NTP3, including demand-led approaches for community socialization• Increase “software” spending, including staffing and operational budgets for provincial and local health line imple-

mentation agencies• Facilitate increased private sector involvement in making desirable, low-cost toilets available for poor and under-

served communities• Set up a systematic national capacity building program for sanitation and hygiene for health sector staff and other

participating organizations including the Vietnam Women’s Union

Urban Sanitation and HygieneExpedite the adoption of the Draft Unified Sanitation Sector Strategy and Investment Pan (U3SAP). As part of this initiative:• Adopt a subsector investment plan and develop an urban sanitation financing strategy• Support the implementation of existing policy directives on the autonomy and commercial orientation of service

providers (including combined water and wastewater utilities)• Develop the capacity of service providers so that existing policy provisions – particularly on financial sustainability

– can be implemented and services improved• For new wastewater treatment plants, revise technical standards to adopt cost-effective technology and introduce

incentives to maximize direct household connections to network

Water Supply and Sanitation in Vietnamviii

Contents

Acknowledgment .................................................................................................................................................................iiStrategic Overview .............................................................................................................................................................ivContents ........................................................................................................................................................................... viiiAbbreviations and Acronyms ..............................................................................................................................................ix

1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................. 12. Sector Overview: Coverage and Trends....................................................................................................................... 33. Reform Context .......................................................................................................................................................... 104. Institutional Framework .............................................................................................................................................. 135. Financing and its Implementation .............................................................................................................................. 176. Sector Monitoring and Evaluation .............................................................................................................................. 207. Subsector: Rural Water Supply .................................................................................................................................. 228. Subsector: Urban Water Supply ................................................................................................................................ 259. Subsector: Rural Sanitation and Hygiene .................................................................................................................. 2810. Subsector: Urban Sanitation and Hygiene ................................................................................................................. 3211. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................................. 36

Annex 1: Scorecard and Explanation ............................................................................................................................... 39Annex 2: Assumptions and Inputs for Costing Model ...................................................................................................... 65

Service Delivery Assessment ix

ADB Asian Development BankAUSAID Australian AidCAPEX Capital ExpenditureCLTS Community-led Total Sanitation DANIDA Danish International Development Agency DFID Department for International Development (UK Aid)IBNET The International Benchmarking Network for Water and Sanitation JMP UNICEF-WHO Joint Monitoring ProgrammeMARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development MDG Millennium Development Goals MOC Ministry of ConstructionMOH Ministry of Health NCERWASS National Centre for Rural Water Supply and Sanitation NCRWSS National Clean Rural Water Supply and Sanitation NGO Non-Governmental Organization NTP National Target ProgrampCERWASS Provincial Centre for Rural Water Supply and SanitationpCPM Provincial Centre for Preventive MedicinePPC Provincial People’s Committee SDA Service Delivery Assessment U3SAP Unified Sanitation Sector Strategy and Action Plan VIHEMA Vietnam Health Environment Management AgencyVBSP Vietnam Bank for Social PolicyWSP World Bank’s Water and Sanitation Program

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Service Delivery Assessment 1

1. Introduction

Water and sanitation Service Delivery Assessments (SDAs) are taking place in seven countries in the East Asia and the Pacific region under the guidance of the World Bank’s Wa-ter and Sanitation Program (WSP) and local partners. This regional work, implemented through a country-led process, draws on experience of water and sanitation SDAs con-ducted in more than 40 countries in Africa, Latin America and South Asia.

The SDA analysis has three main components: a review of past water and sanitation coverage, a costing model to assess the adequacy of future investments, and a score-card that allows diagnosis of bottlenecks along the service delivery pathway. SDA’s contribution is to answer not only whether past trends and future finance are sufficient to meet sector targets for infrastructure and hardware but also what specific issues need to be addressed to ensure that finance is effectively turned into accelerated and sustainable wa-ter supply and sanitation service delivery. Bottlenecks can in fact occur throughout the service delivery pathway—all the institutions, processes, and actors that translate sec-tor funding into sustainable services. Where the pathway is well developed, sector funding should turn into services at the estimated unit costs. Where the pathway is not well developed, investment requirements may be gross under-estimates because additional investment may be needed to “unblock” the bottlenecks in the pathway.

The scorecard looks at nine building blocks of the service delivery pathway, which correspond to specific functions classified in three categories: three functions that refer to enabling conditions for putting services in place (policy de-velopment, planning new undertakings, budgeting), three actions that relate to developing the service (expenditure of funds, equity in the use of these funds, service output), and three functions that relate to sustaining these services (facility maintenance, expansion of infrastructure, use of the service). Each building block is assessed against specific indicators and is scored from 0 to 3 accordingly. The score-card uses a simple color code to indicate building blocks that are largely in place, acting as a driver for service de-livery (score >2, green); building blocks that are a drag on service delivery and that require attention (score 1–2, yel-low); and building blocks that are inadequate, constituting a barrier to service delivery and a priority for reform (score <1, red).

The SDA analysis relies on an intensive, facilitated consulta-tion process, with government ownership and self-assess-ment at its core. Through the SDA process, an evidence-based analysis has been conducted to better understand what undermines progress in water supply and sanitation and what the Government of Vietnam can do to accelerate progress. A series of meetings and urban and rural sub-sector workshops with core stakeholders from mid-2012

Water Supply and Sanitation in Vietnam2

to mid-2013, together with reviews of available data, bud-gets and reports, has provided the information on which the analysis in this report is based. Sources of evidence are ref-erenced in footnotes and at the end of this report; evidence on the scorecard and costing tool are found in the annexes.

The analysis aims to help the Government of Vietnam as-sess how it can strengthen pathways for turning finance into water supply and sanitation services in each of four subsectors. Specific priority actions were identified through

consultation with government and other sector stakehold-ers and confirmed in a workshop with government decision makers and other sector stakeholders in April 2013. This report evaluates the service delivery pathway for all four subsectors, locating the bottlenecks and presenting agreed priority actions to help address them.

The Water and Sanitation Program, in collaboration with the Government of Vietnam and other stakeholders, produced this SDA report.


Coverage: Assessing Past Progress

With a population now in excess of 88 million4, Vietnam is the world’s thirteenth most populous country. It has also experienced one of the world’s highest economic growth rates over the past two decades and recently graduated from low- to middle-income country status. This growth has been accompanied by a dramatic decline in the rate of poverty, which fell from 58% in the early 1990s to 14.5% by 2008.5 While living standards have improved for a large portion of the population, not every group has benefited in equal measure and by 2006, an average of 52% of ethnic minority group members continued to live in poverty.

Data from the Joint Monitoring Programme6 (JMP) suggest that Vietnam has taken great strides in terms of increasing access to improved water supply and sanitation (see Figure 2.1). In the case of urban water supply, the 1990 access rate to improved facilities was already high at 88%, and by 2011 had reached 99%, with 58% having a house connection. Nevertheless, there are significant disparities in access and service quality between big cities and smaller urban cen-ters.7 Regarding sanitation, access to improved facilities in urban areas rose from 64% to 93% over the same period, with near–universal use of flush toilets, the majority of them connected to a septic tank or pit with the overflow discharg-ing into open drains. Less than 10% of urban wastewater is treated, however, and most towns and cities do not have a functioning wastewater treatment plant, though drainage networks are generally extensive. Nearly all urban centers have combined stormwater/wastewater systems.

2. Sector Overview: Coverage Trends

In rural areas, access to improved water supply rose from 50% in 1990 to 94% by 2011, though only 9% have house connections. The most common types of improved source used are boreholes or tube wells, protected wells and rain-water collection—each accounting for roughly one quarter

4 Estimated from the 2009 population as reported in the 2009 Vietnam Population and Housing Census, applying annual population growth rates of 3.4% and 0.4% for urban and rural areas, respectively. Population growth rates were obtained from the General Statistics Office. See Table A2.1 of Annex 2 for further details.

5 Badiani (2012) 6 JMP (2013) 7 ADB (2010)


of improved facilities.8 Access to improved toilet facility rose from 30% to 67% over the same period, with open defecation dropping from 44% to just 5% by 2011. Of the improved toilets, the most common types are pour-flush to a pit or septic tank (60%) followed by composting toilets (21%) and pit latrines with slabs (17%). Of the unimproved facilities, 66% are hanging latrines (over water) and 30% pit latrines without slabs.

While the JMP data suggest that Vietnam has already met both its water and sanitation MDG targets, government monitoring data indicates significantly lower coverage rates. Comparisons with JMP are, however, complicated since gov-ernment reports do not categorize water and sanitation fa-cilities as ‘improved’ or ‘unimproved’ but use different, more stringent, criteria. Furthermore, a range of ‘official’ coverage figures can be found in various government reports, not all of which categorise facilities on the same basis. Against this somewhat confusing backdrop, stakeholders agreed on the baseline figures for 2011 shown in Table 2.1 for the purposes of this Service Delivery Assessment.

In the case of rural water supply, government documents have variously reported coverage, and set targets and mon-itoring indicators, in terms of ‘hygienic’, ‘clean’ and ‘safe’ water, and the definitions applied to these terms have been subject to change. For the purposes of the SDA analysis, the water supply baseline and target figures refer to ‘clean’ water, which is currently defined as water that meets the Ministry of Health quality standard QCVN 02-BYT, irrespec-tive of the technology used. This explains why government coverage figures for rural water supply are much lower than those of the JMP, though for the lesser standard of ‘hygien-ic’ water—which means, in short, water that would be safe for drinking after filtering or boiling—the gap between gov-ernment and JMP coverage data is much smaller.

In the case of household toilets, government records cover-age with ‘hygienic’ toilets, for which four acceptable tech-nology options are currently defined in government regula-tions9: composting latrines with sunken or raised vaults and pour-flush latrines connected to a septic tank or soakage pit(s).

Figure 2.1 Progress in water supply and sanitation coverage

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Imp

rove

d s

anita

tion

cove

rag

e

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 20200

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020Imp

rove

d w

ater

sup

ply

co

vera

ge

JMP improved estimates MDG target

Water Supply Sanitation

JMP improved estimates MDG target

8 General Statistics Office (2011a) 9 MOH (2011)


Cities in Vietnam are growing rapidly, with fast paced urban development occurring often without adequate planning for basic services. Low levels of wastewater treatment in both urban and rural areas present a significant and grow-ing challenge. Most households in urban areas rely on on-site services including a septic tank or soakage pit, with the overflow discharging into waterways or drains. It is estimat-ed that less than 10% of urban wastewater is treated, which results not only from the small number of operational treat-ment plants in place but also from the fact that the bulk of solid material is retained at household level in septic tanks or pits. Anecdotal evidence suggests that these are emp-tied only rarely, with septic sludge often dumped illegally in canals and waterways.10 Given the extensive reliance on on-site facilities, fecal sludge management needs much greater attention by municipal authorities. These challeng-es are not unique to Vietnam, however, but affect much of South and Southeast Asia.11,12

Access is affected by income level, ethnicity and location. Data from the Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS), for example, indicate that 99% of the richest quintile has ac-cess to an improved source of drinking water, with 63%

having a house connection, while for the lowest quintile, 75% uses an improved supply but only 3% has a house connection. Turning to sanitation, while 100% of the rich-est quintile has access to an improved toilet facility, for the lowest quintile the figure is just 42%.13 In the case of hand washing, almost all households have a place for hand washing across all income groups. However, while the MICS found that only 2% of households in the rich-est quintile had no soap available for hand washing, the figure was 30% for the poorest quintile. When zooming in on the rural population, there are even greater disparities for between the lowest and richest quintiles, as compared to national level data.

Investment Requirements: Testing the Sufficiency of Finance

Since Vietnam has already met the MDG targets, the analy-sis here focuses on the investments required to reach na-tional government targets set for 2020. Table 2.1 illustrates the baseline figures and targets used for each subsector in the SDA costing. For urban water supply and sanitation,

Table 2.1 Water supply and sanitation baselines and targets used in SDA costing

Sub sector Base year Baselinevalue (%)

Target2020 (%) Notes

Urban water supply (Access to public piped water supply network)

2011 76%a 85%b Target: 90% for cities (category IV or higher) and 70% for small towns (category V.)

Rural water supply (Access to clean water meeting MOH standards)

2011 37%c 75%d 2020 Target is still awaiting the approval of the Prime Minister.

Urban sanitation (Proportion of wastewater treated)

2009 10%e 45%e

U3SAP target: 60% for urban centers of category II and upwards (largest); 30% for urban centers of categories 3 and IV; 10% of urban centers of category V (smallest)

Rural sanitation (Use of hygienic latrines meeting MOH standard)

2011 55%f 85%g 2020 Target is still awaiting the approval of the Prime Minister.

Notes. a MOC and the World Bank (2013) Vietnam Urban Water Supply Database 2011, Hanoi, March . Hanoi; b MOC (2009) Development Orientation of Water Supply for Urban and Industrial Areas up to 2025, Vision to 2050; c MARD (2012a) National Target Program on Rural Water Supply and Sanitation, Phase 2012-2015. Hanoi; d MARD (2012b) National Rural Clean Water Supply and Sanitation Strategy up to 2020. MARD and NCERWASS, Hanoi; e MOC (2012) Unified Sanitation Sector Strategy and Action Plan (U3SAP) for Vietnam. Draft Final Report. Hanoi; f MARD (2011) Report on the Results of Implementing the National Target Program (NTP2) for Rural Water Supply and Sanitation 2006-2010 and Main Content of the Program for 2011-2015. Hanoi; g MARD (2012b) National Rural Clean Water Supply and Sanitation Strategy up to 2020. MARD and NCERWASS, Hanoi.

10 Corning et al (2012) 11 AECOM and SKAT (2010) 12 AusAid and World Bank (2013)13 General Statistics Office (2011a)


government has set targets according to the category of town or city, based on size. The single urban target figure used in each case for the analysis is derived from aggre-gating these targets for categories of cities. Other assump-tions and data used in the costing analysis are discussed in Annex 2, such as the technology mix, unit costs and user contributions, as well the method used to estimate recent and anticipated levels of investments.

Table 2.2 shows that, given the baseline and target cov-erage rates and an assumed annual population growth of 1.3%, about 3.7 million persons per year will need to gain access to water supply sources that meet government standards, of which slightly more than half in rural areas. In the case of sanitation, about 2.0 and 1.6 million people per year will need access to latrines that meet the national standards (rural areas) and wastewater treatment facilities (urban areas), respectively. This will be challenging not only financially but also in operational and technical terms, for two key reasons.

Firstly, rural sanitation promotion was somewhat marginal-ized under the previous phase of the National Target Pro-gram on Rural Water Supply and Sanitation that ended in 2011, and progress was considerably less than had been anticipated. While the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural De-velopment (MARD) and the Ministry of Health (MOH) are beginning to redress the balance, there is a long way to go in terms of developing effective implementation and promo-tional strategies and taking them to scale.

Secondly, increasing the percentage of urban wastewater treated requires more than the construction of treatment plants since most household toilets connect to the drain-age/sewerage network via a septic tank or other sort of soak pit; unless direct connections are made to the net-work, most excreta will continue to be stored at household level and will remain untreated. Not only regulation but also promotion and communication campaigns, possibly offer-ing incentives, may be needed to encourage households to make new, direct connections to the network, or to ensure

Table 2.2 Coverage and investment figuresa

Coverage (base year)

Target 2020

Population requiring access

Annual capital requirement

Anticipated public CAPEX2012-2014

Anticipated household

CAPEX

Annual surplus (deficit)Total Public Domestic External Total

% % ‘000/year US$ million/year

Rural water supply 37% 75% 1,919 520 211 29 36 65 95 (360)

Urban water supply 76% 85% 1,823 1,042 1,042 43 100 143 - (898)

Water supply total 49% 80% 3,742 1,562 1,252 72 136 208 95 (1,258)

Rural sanitation (on-site)

55% 85% 2,008 372 63 10 16 26 127 (219)

Urban sanitation (waste treatment)

10% 45% 1,546 771 771 41 164 205 - (565)

Sanitation total n.a b n.a b 3,553 1,142 834 51 181 231 127 (784)

Sources: SDA costing. JMP (2013) Progress on Drinking Water and Sanitation: 2013 Update. UNICEF and WHO.Notes: a Columns may not add up due to rounding; b National average was not computed because of differences in the indicators used.


that tanks and pits are periodically emptied by responsible contractors and the septage treated.

Combined with the assumptions on technology mix and unit costs, population growth and targets translate to capi-tal expenditure (CAPEX) requirements for water supply of US$1.562 billion per year and US$1.142 billion per year for sanitation. A large proportion of the investment require-ments are for urban areas. For example, CAPEX require-ments for urban water supply (U$1,042 billion per year) are almost double the requirement in rural areas (US$520 million per year). This is explained solely by the higher per capita costs of facilities in urban areas, such as piped household connection and wastewater treatment facilities.

Collecting information on anticipated investments and comparing the results to CAPEX requirements allows the costing tool to generate estimates of financing gaps (or sur-pluses). Anticipated investments represent the annual con-tributions of the public and households from 2012 to 2014. Anticipated public investments represent the planned ex-penditures of government and development partners, while anticipated household investments are calculated as a fixed share of total anticipated investments, representing the ex-pected user self-investment and/or contribution.

The process of collecting and compiling information on capital expenditures was difficult and subject to the fol-lowing issues and limitations. First, capital expenditures of provinces and utilities were excluded from the analysis, since these data are not available without doing large scale primary data collection. Second, there is some uncertainty surrounding the subsectoral data used in the analysis. Third, unlike anticipated investments of donors, there is uncertainty around the anticipated investment level of government in urban areas, as these were extrapolated based on a 20% contribution to donor investments, rather than derived directly from budgets. Annex 2 provides a more detailed discussion of the challenges in the data col-

lection, assumptions made and the sources of data used for this exercise.

Table 2.2 shows that anticipated annual CAPEX for water supply and sanitation were estimated to be US$208 million and US$231 million, respectively. The available information also indicates a strong bias in expenditures in favor of urban areas. In the case of sanitation, for example, the anticipated public CAPEX of US$205 million per year in urban areas is about 95% of the total for the sanitation sector, and for water supply, the urban share is around 70% of the total water spending.

Anticipated public and household investments for water sup-ply and sanitation are lower than required capital investments by US$1.258 billion per year and US$784 million per year, respectively. The absolute deficits in urban areas are also es-timated to be at least two times larger than in rural areas. It should be noted that while households are expected to be main contributors of rural services, especially for their on-site sanitation facilities, the expected upfront household contri-butions to wastewater treatment and collection infrastructure and piped water services are assumed to be zero (note: as per policy guidance, the tariffs are to recover full costs, which is not often the case, see section 8 and 10).

This means that the real deficits in the rural areas are likely to be higher than the estimates here because anticipated in-vestments are projected to come mostly from households. Unlike anticipated public CAPEX, which is mostly based on budgets and in many cases supported by project docu-ments, the anticipated household investment is an estimate and there is no assurance that it will actually materialize. Especially for rural sanitation, where there is only limited hardware subsidy for poor and near-poor households under NTP3, the anticipated household investment will depend to a large extent on the ability of government to elicit this self-investment through promotional, communications and mar-keting initiatives.


Annual CAPEX requirements are composed of new and re-placement investments. Replacement investments, which represent expenditures for replacing worn-out capital, domi-nate annual CAPEX requirements in the case of water supply (Figure 2.2) due to the high level of existing services. This is not the case for sanitation, however, since the baseline rate of wastewater treatment in urban areas is low. Recognizing that provincial and utility spending could not be assessed, com-paring anticipated (average annual projected investments from 2012-2014) and recent investments (average annual investments from 2009-2011)14 against required investment underscores the point that spending has not been, and is un-likely to be, sufficient to meet the national targets for 2020.

Table 2.3 presents estimates of additional funding neces-sary for the annual operation and maintenance of water supply and sanitation facilities. It indicates that water sup-ply and sanitation require annual funds of US$256 million and US$176 million, respectively. Over three quarters are expected to be required for urban areas and there could be

Table 2.3 Annual operation and maintenance requirements

Subsector O&MUS$ million/year

Rural water supply 46

Urban water supply 210

Water supply total 256

Rural sanitation 52

Urban sanitation 124

Sanitation total 176

Source: SDA CostingNote: Totals may not add-up due to rounding

Figure 2.2 Required versus anticipated and recent expenditure

Source: SDA costing

pressure on household finances where spending is required on tariffs and household toilet facilities. This also provides a sense of the extent to which utilities need to generate income to support their day-to-day operational expenses, notwithstanding their need to generate sufficient income to prepare for replacement and expansion investments.

Total investmentrequirement

Anticipatedinvestment

Recentinvestment

Ann

ual i

nves

tmen

t in

mill

ion

US

D

Replacement

NewExternal

Household Domestic

-

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

Total water supply

Ann

ual i

nves

tmen

t in

mill

ion

US

D

Total sanitation



Recentinvestment

-

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

14 Recent investments exclude the contribution of households as no information is available to verify these investment levels.


3. Reform Context

The sector has undergone significant reform since doi moi economic reforms in 1986 (which sought to create a social-ist-oriented market economy) and, more recently, decen-tralization. Central agencies are now responsible for policy making, sector monitoring and coordination, with provin-cial governments owning and managing assets and pub-lic companies delivering networked water and sanitation services in urban areas. These arrangements, while logical, present coordination challenges and these are exacerbated by the large number of government agencies that have re-sponsibility for some aspect of water supply, sanitation or hygiene promotion.

Following decentralization, an important challenge for the sec-tor is how to strengthen the accountability of local government and service providers both upwards in terms of compliance to agreed regulations and standards (which to date have not been vigorously enforced) and downwards to service users. In the urban arena, the principal reform initiative in recent years has been a policy shift towards the commercialization of service provision, though there are some differences be-tween the provisions for water supply and for sanitation. In the case of water supply, Decree 117 issued in 2007 intro-duced a requirement for public service providers to achieve full cost recovery and today provincial water utilities—in principle—receive no operating subsidy from their Provin-cial People’s Committee (PPC), though they can still access capital grants for new investments. The bulk of these have been donor-funded in recent years, though the intention is that utilities will also, in due course, access commercial fi-nance. So far only a few have done this, but the pressure

to do so will increase as the trend in external support grad-uates from capital grants to soft loans, and from there to commercial rate loans.

One critical element missing from the commercialization of service provision has been the introduction of performance targets for utilities and their enforcement by an independent regulator. By 2010 most water supply companies were re-covering their operation and maintenance costs, but opera-tion and maintenance budgets are typically set so low that service quality suffers, contributing to widespread problems of poor water quality, low pressure and intermittent supply. To date few, if any, utilities have achieved full cost recovery. A critical obstacle here has been the reluctance of PPCs to raise tariffs to commercially viable levels.15

For urban sanitation (which here refers specifically to drain-age and sewerage), Decree 88 of 2008 signalled that public service providers should develop a commercial orientation and to this end should generate revenue via a wastewater tariff imposed on top of water bills. Implementing this policy has been problematic, for a number of reasons. Firstly, in towns and cities with a dedicated sanitation and drainage company, the company is in effect an operational unit of the provincial government and funded not from revenue but from annual budgets issued by the PPC. Secondly, dedi-cated sanitation and drainage companies cannot them-selves generate revenue since wastewater tariffs can be imposed only as a supplement to water supply charges. It is only combined water supply and sanitation companies, therefore, that can collect a wastewater tariff. Thirdly, while Decree 88 envisaged that the wastewater tariff should be

15 ADB (2010)


set at a minimum of 10% of water supply charges, sub-sequent directives have set 10% as the maximum level. This is grossly inadequate for the funding of drainage and sewerage operations and leaves service providers entirely dependent on government subsidies to cover their basic operational costs.

At the time of writing, a draft Unified Sanitation Sector Strat-egy and Action Plan (‘U3SAP’) is awaiting Prime Minister’s approval. Developed by the Ministry of Construction (MOC) with support from the World Bank’s Water and Sanitation Program (WSP), U3SAP sets out a strategy for progress in the subsector based on a streamlined policy, legal and in-stitutional framework (see Section10). If adopted and imple-mented, U3SAP could pave the way not only for increased investment but also for improvements in coverage, service levels and sustainability of urban sanitation services.

Turning to rural water supply, sanitation and hygiene promotion, the most significant policy initiative in recent years was the launch of a National Target Program (NTP) in 1999. The third phase (NTP3) was launched in 2012 and will continue up to 2015. The bulk of government activity and investment in the subsector occurs under the umbrel-la of the NTP which is supported by a multi-donor basket fund and by NGOs that operate to some extent within the NTP framework without providing funds directly to gov-ernment. The transition from NTP2 to NTP3 also marked the introduction of some significant policy changes, in-cluding measures to improve cost recovery and financial sustainability; greater scope for private sector manage-ment of rural water supply schemes; and a move away from the blanket use of hardware subsides for household toilet—subsidies should now be provided only to the poor and near-poor.

Table 3.1: Key dates in the reform of the sector in Vietnam

Year Event

1999 Introduction of National Target Program for Rural Water Supply and Sanitation (NTP I).

2000 Adoption of first National Strategy for Rural Water supply and Sanitation, to 2020. Made technical provisions and established institutional arrangements and targets for the subsector.

2006 Start of NTP II (2006-2010).

2007 Decree 117 signals a policy shift towards the commercialization of urban water supply service provision. Full cost recovery is now expected and commercial law applies.

2008 Decree 88 directs that urban wastewater services should adopt a commercial orientation, though public sanitation companies remain under the direct control of provincial government.

2009Orientation for the Development of Water Supply Services in Urban and Industrial Areas until 2025 and Vision to 2050 (including subsector targets). These reconfirmed a commercial orientation to water supply service provision, confirmed drainage and wastewater infrastructure as public goods, set targets for wastewater treatment for different categories of town/city and clarified institutional arrangements.

2009 Orientation for the Development of Drainage and Sewerage in Urban and Industrial Areas until 2025 and Vision to 2050 (including subsector targets).

2011 Draft revised National RWSS Strategy produced, currently awaiting formal adoption.

2012 Draft Unified Sanitation Sector Strategy and Action Plan produced, currently awaiting formal adoption.

2012 Launch of NTP3 with Ministry of Health taking lead role in sanitation promotion.


Another new development integral to NTP3 is that, for the first time, lead responsibility for sanitation promotion in rural areas has been assigned unambiguously to the Ministry of Health, specifically the Vietnam Health and Environmental Management Agency (VIHEMA) and the provincial Centers for Preventive Medicine (pCPMs), while MARD retains over-all responsibility for delivery of the program.

This recent history puts the service delivery pathway in context, which can then be explored in detail using the SDA scorecard, an assessment tool providing a snapshot of reform progress along the service delivery pathway. The

scorecard assesses the building blocks of service delivery in turn: three building blocks that relate to enabling servic-es, three that relate to developing new services, and three that relate to sustaining services. Each building block is as-sessed against specific indicators and scored from 1 to 3 accordingly.

Sections 4 to 6 highlight progress and challenges within the subsectors sector across three thematic areas: the institu-tional framework, finance, and monitoring and evaluation. The scorecards for each subsector are discussed in Sec-tions 7 to 10.


Decentralization has altered the role of central agencies, and national level ministries now focus on policy develop-ment and oversight of implementation rather than direct control of service delivery. At the sub-national level, provin-cial departments take on activities as defined by their corre-sponding national ministries, including the implementation of national directives and local investment planning, under the authority of Provincial People’s Committees (PPCs).

A critical challenge for the sector is for sub-national govern-ment to develop the capacity to fulfil its devolved role in the planning, development and management of services; and for effective instruments to be in place and mechanisms to hold sub-national governments accountable for doing so. Service providers, meanwhile, need greater operational and financial autonomy within an effective regulatory framework that defines performance targets, incentives and sanctions. Until these conditions are established, the sector will re-main largely unattractive to potential private sector inves-tors and operators.

4. Institutional Framework

Priority actions for institutional framework• Allow greater operational and financial autonomy for water and sanitation companies, within an effective regulatory

framework including performance targets, incentives and sanctions.• Adopt and implement the draft Unified Sanitation Sector Strategy and Action Plan including, amongst other things,

establishment of a national urban sanitation program and sector coordination and institutional framework.• Review the effectiveness of existing (and alternative) management models for rural water supply schemes and

develop policy guidance for management strategy, extended regulation of rural piped schemes and mechanisms to encourage private sector participation.

Urban Water Supply and Sanitation

The Ministry of Construction is the lead agency for both urban water supply and sanitation with the Ministries of Planning and Investment and Finance playing roles in coordinating investment, including managing the significant contribution of external support to the subsector.

Urban water supply service providers are typically state-owned enterprises with legally independent status and many are combined water and drainage companies. While they are officially independent, in practice the companies are subject to the authority of the PPCs, which control tariff levels but also investment decisions and senior staff appointments, while the ownership of physical assets is not always clear. Each utility operates on the basis of service orders (effec-tively contracts) issued by the provincial government.

A national policy initiative that has affected a range of pub-lic service providers including water utilities is referred to


as “equitization”, meaning the conversion of a state-owned enterprise into a public limited company or corporation. So far just five water companies have been equitized and are no longer state-owned. Equitization was introduced with-out establishing clearly defined and verifiable performance indicators, or providing incentives to improve service cov-erage and quality for all, and therefore has not yet deliv-ered efficiency gains or performance improvement. Some stakeholders also have expressed concern that equitized companies have diversified into non-core business areas. As water companies are not required to ring fence their wa-ter business accounts, this can expose them to high risks in case of bad investments, which then impact on the core business.16

Compared with urban water supply, institutional arrange-ments for urban sanitation are diverse. Services in larger towns and cities are variously provided by combined water supply and drainage companies and (in city centers) sani-tation and drainage companies operating as departments of the PPC. Urban sanitation services have suffered from a lack of financial resources (providers being largely de-pendent on operational grants from the PPC) and human resource capacity. Having said this, most towns in Vietnam have no wastewater treatment plants and the sewer net-works in place are in fact combined stormwater/wastewater systems. The amount of sanitation-related work undertaken by the companies is, therefore, quite limited and mostly in-volves dealing with blockages, overflows and drain repairs.

The term ‘sanitation’ is interpreted quite broadly in Viet-nam, encompassing the management not only of human waste but also of commercial, industrial and agricultural wastewater; solid waste management; and general pol-lution control. As a result there are many ministries and provincial departments that have a mandated role in some aspect of sanitation, and these tend to develop strategies and targets in isolation from one another, with no overall

lead institution for the sector. Even within the field of urban wastewater, leadership and coordination is weak, with in-vestment projects (most of them donor-funded) developed as stand-alone initiatives in the absence of a national strat-egy or program. The draft U3SAP proposes to resolve these constraints through a number of measures including the es-tablishment of a National Steering Committee for Sanita-tion under the Leadership of the Ministry of Construction, to improve coordination within government and between government agencies and development partners; and the introduction of national urban sanitation program to provide a comprehensive framework for government and external investment.17

The private sector plays a growing role in urban areas with four of the largest water supply companies moving towards fully commercialized status and small-scale providers es-timated to account for roughly one third of water servic-es for the country as a whole. Large-scale involvement of established private companies in service provision is still limited, however, and largely confined to bulk water supply provision. Government policy favors private investment but with government retaining ownership of assets and having significant control over operations via tariff controls and the operational funding of sanitation companies, the environ-ment is not yet conducive for a significant increase in pri-vate sector participation. For the same reasons it is difficult for most water and sanitation companies to access com-mercial finance, as the perceived risks to the lender remain too high.

Rural Water Supply and Sanitation

The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD) is the lead agency for rural water through the Water Re-sources Directorate. A Standing Office with the Directorate has responsibility for the overall coordination of NTP3 while the National Centre for Rural Water Supply and Environ-

16 ADB (2010) 17 MOC (2012)


mental Sanitation (NCERWASS) plays a technical support role for the Program that includes water quality monitoring, data collection and monitoring. The Ministry of Health is the lead agency for promoting household sanitation and hy-giene under NTP3 via the Health Environment Management Agency (VIHEMA). The Ministry of Education and Training is responsible for the provision of school WASH facilities and hygiene promotion. At provincial level, NTP3 activities are overseen by pCERWASS, with the Health Department managing sanitation promotion via the Provincial Centre for Preventive Medicine (pCPM).

Locally, mass organizations including the Vietnam Women’s Union undertake mobilization activities and coordinate community involvement in the financing, construction and management of facilities. The Vietnam Bank for Social Poli-cies (VBSP) is also a significant player, providing subsidized loans for sanitation and non-subsidized loans for water in rural areas.

The sustainability of many rural water supply schemes, especially smaller ones, is predicated on community man-agement. This has often proved to be ineffective, though detailed and reliable information on operation and mainte-nance outcomes is not available due to weaknesses in the sector monitoring system. The ownership of many small schemes is not clearly defined and, while Commune Peo-ple’s Committees are supposed to guide the establishment of management boards, the members—drawn from villages within communes—often lack the skills needed to carry out their tasks efficiently. The intention is for pCERWASS to provide technical backup support, but there is little ac-countability for fulfilling this function.

How the management and sustainability of rural schemes can best be improved is the subject of much discussion in the sector, though for larger piped schemes there is gen-eral consensus that formalized arrangements are needed whereby a service provider (possibly private) is appointed and held accountable for ensuring the quality and continu-ity of service.

The 2012 Joint Annual Review of NTP3 recommended that it should provide technical assistance to support small schemes managed by communities and cooperatives, as part of a comprehensive program of technical assistance for the program as a whole. There are other options, how-ever, and many village schemes developed under the recent World Bank-funded Mekong Water Resources Management Project are managed directly by pCERWASS with generally good outcomes reported.18 Similar formalized management approaches are developed for schemes implemented with ADB support in six central provinces. Meanwhile the es-tablishment of Joint Stock companies has been piloted in the World Bank-funded Red River Delta Rural Water Sup-ply and Sanitation Project. Four companies have been es-tablished, with government retaining an 82% share and the remainder owned by customers. A comprehensive review of the performance of the various management models cur-rently in operation could provide valuable insights to guide the development of strategies for the improved manage-ment and sustainability of rural water supply schemes. For the country as a whole, private sector organizations active in the rural market are typically micro, small and medium enterprises, ranging from individual operators of small schemes to utility-style companies providing piped water. Many of these have emerged informally and neither tariffs nor quality standards are regulated.

18 Naughton (2013)


RURAL SANITATION andHYGIENE PROMOTION URBAN WATER SUPPLY

URBAN SANITATION(WASTEWATER)

RURAL WATER SUPPLY

Ministry of Agriculture andRural Development Ministry of Health Ministry of Construction

Directorate of WaterResources VIHEMA

nCERWASS(for NTP3)

Provincial People’s Committee (PPC)

Department of Agricultureand Rural Development Department oh Health Department of Construction

Health Division

CPC and ServiceProviders

National

Provincial/City

District

Community

Figure 4.1 Water and sanitation service provision in Vietnam: a simplified institutional overview (overall state management)


Investment Planning

There is currently no medium or long-term sector invest-ment plan for urban water supply and instead, finance is organized on a project-by-project basis. Urban water utili-ties no longer receive direct operating subsidies from gov-ernment, but grants and loans for capital investments are still provided from time to time, both by government and donors. Recent investments have mostly been from domes-tic sources.

In the case of urban sanitation, most investments in the last decade have been donor-funded and provided via projects in a few selected locations, but sewerage remains large-ly undeveloped for the country as a whole. Instead, most households use on-site facilities built at their own expense. As with urban water supply there is no sector investment plan, but the formulation of one is proposed in the Draft Unified Sanitation Sector Strategy and Action Plan (U3SAP) 2013, currently awaiting government approval. Further-more, ADB has offered a US$1 billion investment program

5. Financing and its Implementation

in urban wastewater, which should make a substantial im-pact in selected cities if it goes ahead.

As Vietnam has acquired middle income country status, the nature of donor investment is changing and some European donors are likely to withdraw before 2015. Official Develop-ment Assistance will therefore become less widely available and be structured differently, with reduced levels of grant financing and concessional loans.

The Government of Vietnam is seeking increased invest-ment from the private sector in both urban and rural wa-ter supply and sanitation. A better enabling environment, especially for regulation of tariffs, and a better investment climate is needed for the sector to become viable and at-tractive to large scale commercial investors and operators. So far, few public utilities have been able to access com-mercial finance. A critical obstacle here is the difficulties for utilities to obtain government guarantees, as well as weak capabilities for public-private partnership contracting and management.

Priority actions for financing and its implementation• Develop long-term subsector investment plans, as the basis to gradually increase public funding, especially for

urban service provision outside the major cities and for remote, underserved rural areas.• Improve the monitoring of subsector investments expenditure, including investments at national and at provincial

level and through utilities.• Carry out a Public Expenditure Review for the water and sanitation sector to improve efficiency of public spending

(national and provincial).• Attracting private sector finance through facilitating access to (commercial) finance for utilities and addressing

investment climate barriers.


For rural areas, investment plans are defined in the NTP3 document for 2011-2015. NTP3 currently has an indicative budget of US$1.260 billion, with donor contributions ac-counting for roughly one-sixth. Supporting donors include AusAID, DANIDA and DFID, and the World Bank through its Program for Results (P4R) lending; a number of NGOs also participate, although off-budget. Sanitation and hygiene promotion was a direct MARD responsibility under NTP2 and funding was marginalized compared to water supply al-locations. With MOH now taking lead responsibility for sani-tation, it is possible that funding will increase under NTP3, though this has not happened so far.19

Medium-term investment plans for rural water and sanita-tion are made under the umbrella of NTP3 but, according to government stakeholders, tend to be ignored in program operations; instead the formulation of annual plans and budgets is often done in disconnect from the medium-term plan, resulting in under allocation of resources, as was ex-pected based on the medium-term plan.

Other challenges in the financing of rural water supply and sanitation include an over-emphasis on capital investment at the expense of ‘soft’ activities such as the establishment of viable operation and maintenance arrangements; ca-pacity building, and the implementation of promotion and communications campaigns and business development for sanitation. Other bottlenecks are delays in annual budget allocations plus allocations that do not meet requirements; and limited private sector investment.

Budget Transparency

Since urban utilities should now be operating on a commer-cial basis, government does not subsidize any operation and maintenance costs for urban water supply. Urban sani-

tation operations are fully subsidized and thus combined water and sanitation utilities receive subsidies for drainage and sewerage operations, but not for water supply servic-es. These subsidies are not explicitly identified, however, in provincial government budgets.

Under the Auditing Law, all water supply and sanitation companies are subject to annual audits. Rural water sup-ply and sanitation expenditure versus budget under NTP3 is also audited and reported on in a consolidated format for all sources of domestic and official donor expenditure.

It was also found that subsector budgets and expenditure, especially as pertaining to sub-national spending are not reported or consolidated in any way. Hence the financial flows, inefficiencies and effectiveness of overall sector spending remain difficult to assess, without conducting public expenditure reviews specifically for the sector.

Budget Adequacy

Figure 5.1 shows the different sources of finance for the four sectors. It indicates that households are expected to be the major source of funding for rural areas, and do-nors for urban areas, with domestic budgets being smaller in comparison. There are substantial anticipated deficits (shown in orange) for all sectors but especially in urban ar-eas. However, the actual size of the deficits in rural areas might be larger than the values presented here. The rea-son is the relatively large share of anticipated household investments (shown in light blue), which are estimates of how much household financing is leveraged through partial subsidies under NTP3. The chances of these investments materializing depend highly on the effectiveness of govern-ment social mobilization and promotion programs to elicit self-investment by rural households.

19 AusAID et al (2012)


Utilization of Budgets

For both urban and rural water supply and sanitation, de-spite delayed transfers, domestic budgets are said to be spent without severe bottlenecks. In urban areas, domestic water supply funds are mostly spent on land compensa-tion and pre-investment activities including technical assis-tance. In the case of external funds, urban water supply projects have been subject to extensive delays, hence dis-bursement has been slow. Fewer delays were reported in rural water and sanitation projects under NTP2.

In summary, given the deficits in public funding, and the current lack of fiscal space in the government budget, it is increasingly important for the Government of Vietnam to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of public spend-ing, which could be assessed through a sector specific Public Expenditure Review. Moreover, leveraging private

sector investment would deserve high priority to reduce the financing gap, as well as through increasing user financing through cost recovery tariffs and effective software activi-ties.

There is little evidence that domestic sources will be avail-able for urban and rural sanitation. Government expendi-ture on promotional activities will be essential in order to stimulate increased household investments in rural sanita-tion. This would be non-capital expenditure and is therefore not reflected in the pie charts. In the case of urban sanita-tion, coverage with on-site facilities is already high. Govern-ment has historically spent very little in this area and only modest investments are planned in the period up to 2020. Again, though, some level of government expenditure on promotional and regulatory activities may be required in or-der to encourage households to replace household facilities where necessary and to improve fecal sludge management.

Domestic anticipated investment

External anticipated investment

Household anticipated investment

Deficit

Urban water supplyTotal : $ 1,040,000,000Per capita (new): $ 244

Rural water supplyTotal : $ 520,000,000Per capita (new): $ 91

Urban sanitationTotal : $ 771,000,000Per capita (new): $ 375

Rural sanitationTotal : $ 372,000,000Per capita (new): $ 75

Figure 5.1. Total annual investment requirement and anticipated financing by source

Source: SDA costing. Note: the anticipated household investment in rural services are assumed


6. Sector Monitoring and Evaluation

Section 2 highlighted the difficulty in determining current lev-els of access to water and sanitation services in urban and rural areas, and the lack of detailed information on service quality and functionality. In part these problems arise from the lack of definitive reference points for both urban and rural monitoring data, as well as differences between government and JMP criteria used to define access. Widely differing of-ficial figures are quoted in a range of government documents and the same applies to some sector targets as there is a tendency for each ministry with an interest in water or sanita-tion to set their own objectives without reference to those already adopted by other government bodies.

Monitoring frameworks and systems for both the urban and rural subsectors are still in need of further development, al-though in the last few years government has taken steps to improve the relevance, reliability and regularity of monitoring.

For urban water supply, MOC has recently developed a mon-itoring framework that builds on an earlier World Bank utility

benchmarking project and is modelled on the global IBNET framework for water and sanitation utility benchmarking. This is not yet operational and for now, monitoring information is available from individual utilities but is not routinely collated to provide a sector overview. For urban sanitation there is no monitoring framework either for household facilities or city-wide wastewater collection and treatment, though new ar-rangements are proposed under U3SAP.

In the case of rural water and sanitation, the National Tar-get Program (NTP3) guides monitoring and reporting, and a suite of indicators was established in 2008 with the inten-tion to collate and manage information in a comprehensive database. The indicators have subsequently been stream-lined (the original list being very long) and a new monitoring system for rural water supply and sanitation monitoring was launched in 2012, including specific indicators on equity of service provision, and the roll-out is currently underway in selected provinces. Harmonization of the equity indicators of the nCERWASS monitoring system, with the list of poor

Priority actions for sector monitoring and evaluation• Streamline urban and rural access targets and monitoring frameworks, and agree on common points of reference

for all institutional stakeholders in the sector.• Ensure that monitoring systems track not only access to facilities but also performance of service levels, functional-

ity and sustainability, the effectiveness of implementation processes and equity in resource allocation. • Introduce annual urban water supply and sanitation sector reviews and joint annual sector review processes (as is

the case for rural).• Consider modifications of the rural sanitation monitoring systems to reflect commune-level indicators for eliminat-

ing open defecation and accessing universal access to hygienic sanitation.


households as regularly updated by the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, needs further attention. Lead responsibil-ity for the implementation of the monitoring lies with provin-cial offices of the Centre for Rural Water Supply and Sanita-tion, pCERWASS. It should be noted that as targets are set for household level access, community-wide indicators for sanitation are not yet routinely monitored. In addition to rou-tine monitoring, a Joint Annual Review is held for NTP, with government and development partners participating.

As explained in sections 2 and 5, financial monitoring of the sector is not yet comprehensive. A general concern is that government budgets and expenditure reports are not very detailed, making it very difficult to track what government and development partners are contributing to the four subsectors, and how the funds are utilized. Moreover, sub-national capital expenditure through provincial funds or utilities is not systematically reported and thus subsector funding is difficult to assess.


A National Rural Clean Water Supply and Sanitation Strat-egy was adopted in 2000 and a draft revised version, designed to support the implementation of NTP3, was finalized in 2012. This is currently awaiting government approval but its water supply and sanitation targets have been used for the purposes of the SDA analysis. Com-pared to the original strategy the new draft lays greater emphasis on the sustainability of water supply schemes (in financial, operational and environmental terms) and on improving access in hard-to-reach areas.

In sharp contrast to JMP reports indicating that the MDG target for rural water supply has already been met, MARD20 reports that in 2011 just 37% the rural population had ac-cess to ‘clean’ water; that is, water meeting quality stan-dards set by the Ministry of Health (see Figure 7.1). While there is not enough information from which to draw pro-jections based on past trends, it appears that the country, by its own standards, has a long way to go to meet the government target of 75% of the rural population using a minimum of 60 liters per capita per day of clean water by 2020.21 Despite a projected decline in rural population (see

7. Subsector: Rural Water Supply

Annex 2), existing and target coverage rates of the gov-ernment suggest that an additional 1.9 million people per year will require access to water supplies that meet MOH standards between 2011 and 2020.

Priority actions for rural water supply• Develop a capacity building strategy and implementation plan for NTP3, including developing a comprehensive

technical support system to improve the functionality of schemes.• Carry out a comprehensive review of the effectiveness of existing and alternative scheme management (and own-

ership) models.• Implement review recommendations to professionalize management and leverage private sector capabilities• Develop provincial level plans for managing water quality at scheme level.• Increase resources allocated for rural water supply, while operationalizing a focus on under-served poor and re-

mote communities.

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1990 1995 2000 2010

Rur

al w

ater

sup

ply

cove

rage

Government estimates Government target

JMP, improved JMP, piped

2015 2020

Source: SDA costing. JMP (2013) Progress on Drinking Water Sanitation: 2013 Update. UNICEF and WHO. MARD (2012a) National Target Program on Rural Water Supply and Sanitation, Phase 2012-2015. Hanoi MARD (2012b) National Rural Clean Water Supply and Sanitation Strategy up to 2020. MARD and NCERWASS, Hanoi.

Figure 7.1 Rural water supply coverage

20 MARD (2012a)21 MARD (2012b)


The country needs to raise an estimated US$520 million per year in order to meet its rural water supply targets for 2020 (Figure 7.2). Recent and anticipated investments have not been, and are unlikely to be, sufficient to meet required spending, and the need to identify additional government (and potentially the private sector) resources is becoming more urgent since funding from two of the three principal development partners will soon come to an end (DFID by end 2013, DANIDA by end 2014). Esti-mated investments from domestic (excluding households) and external sources from 2009 to 2011 were less than 10% of the requirement spending. Anticipated invest-ments from 2012-2014 seem close enough to meet needs for new investments but are only about three-tenths the total investment required. Estimates of anticipated invest-ments are actually optimistic since roughly US$95 million per year of this amount is expected to come from rural households, which are expected to mainly self-invest in either boreholes, wells and rainwater harvesting systems, and/or contribute to piped system connections. Whether households actually make these investments depends largely on the ability of government, development partners and other institutions to convince households of the ben-efits of doing so and to provide enabling support such as access to loans. The NCERWSS Strategy also seeks to encourage greater private sector participation by promot-ing greater involvement in rural scheme management and co-investments, and market-based delivery of rural water supply services.

The scorecard results show that the enabling and devel-oping services pillars are quite well developed, but critical challenges lie with the sustainability pillar. MARD noted in its review of NTP2 achievements that there were sig-nificant challenges with water point design, construction, functionality and management,22 and the 2012 Joint An-nual Review of NTP323 echoed similar concerns with op-eration and maintenance.

Figure 7.2 Rural water financing: required, anticipated (2012 - 2014) and recent (2009 - 2011) annual investments



Recentinvestment

An

nu

al in

vest

men

t in

mill

ion

US

D

-

100

200

300

400

500

New

ReplacementHousehold

External

Domestic

600

Household anticipated investmentDeficit

Domestic anticipated investmentExternal anticipated investment

Total : $ 520,000,000Per capita (new): $ 91

Source: SDA costing

22 MARD (2012a)23 AusAID et al (2012)


Scores under the sustainability pillar highlight a number of specific deficiencies in the areas of maintenance and ex-pansion, for example: that registers of infrastructure as-sets and their functionality are not regularly updated; spare parts supply chains are not well established in all locations; management entities are recognized but no public funds are made available to support them; and not sufficient is done to facilitate the expansion of existing piped schemes, though this is envisaged in the NTP3 program document.

Water quality and climate change

A further concern with sustainability relates to water qual-ity, which is central to the national target for 2020 and also subject to the impacts of climate change and rising sea levels. The Joint Annual Review (JAR) 2012 noted that in some parts of the country, water resources are increas-ingly affected by salinity and chemical pollution, while infrastructure is affected by extreme weather events and flooding. In the dry season, groundwater levels drop and contaminant loads rise. Provincial strategies for water quality management vary widely and are poor in some lo-cations. The JAR 2012 recommended that provincial plans for managing water quality at scheme level will need to be developed. In support of this, staff training in water qual-ity monitoring will be needed and all piped schemes will require equipment for testing key parameters.

Enabling Developing SustainingPlanning

2.25

Policy

2.5

Budget

1.5

Output

2.5

Expenditure

3

Maintenance

0.75

Equity

2

Expansion

0.5 1.5

Outcomes

Figure 7.3 Rural water supply scorecard

Monitoring

Weaknesses in sector monitoring were outlined in sec-tion 6. A particular concern with rural water supply is that, following an effort to streamline the monitoring protocol, only eight parameters are now monitored, of which seven are concerned with coverage and one relates to the man-agement model used. The system provides little informa-tion, however, on service functionality and use or on water quality. Furthermore, the national monitoring database is updated only annually and cannot, therefore, inform semi-annual NTP progress reports. This limits its usefulness as a management tool.

Poverty focus

The NTP3 document states that the program will give ‘high priority to poor areas and poor people, specifically 62 re-mote and poor districts. So far, however, this focus has not been operationalized and program allocations have been divided equally among the provinces, regardless of levels of access among the poor. As a result access to improved water source in the lowest quintile is 70% and highest quintile is 99%, however, access to piped house connec-tions is only 3% for lowest quintile, and 43% for highest quintile of the rural population, illustrating the disparities in service levels.24

24 JMP/UNICEF Equity trees, special tabulation based on MICS 2011


8. Subsector: Urban Water Supply

Priority actions for urban water supply• Allow tariffs to reach commercially viable levels whereby utilities can achieve full cost recovery through indepen-

dent economic regulation. • Increase autonomy for utilities, allowing them to increase operation and maintenance budgets to levels that enable

adequate maintenance to be provided and sustained. • Enhance access to commercial finance for utilities by providing government guarantees for utilities.• Introduce incentives and obligations to improve the quality and reliability of service provision by establishing an

independent regulator.

The latest JMP report25 indicates that 99% of the urban population had access to improved urban water supply by 2011, with 58% having water piped onto the premises. However, MOC figures used in the current analysis show that in 2011, only about 76% of the urban population had access to a public piped water supply network via a house connection or shared water point (see Figure 8.1). Evaluat-ed against a national target of 85% of the urban population having network access26 and a projected urban population of 43.4 million people in 2020, some 1.7 million people per year will need to gain access between the base and target years.

Apart from access to the piped network, the quality and reli-ability of services is also a concern. While most households in the central areas of major cities have a twenty-four hour supply service provision is much less reliable in other urban areas and a growing challenge lies in improving services in small urban centers and fast growing district towns. Anec-dotal reports of poor water quality are widespread though other performance indicators are reported as being within

a reasonable range, with non-revenue water at 20-25% for the majority of utilities and the operating ratio falling in the range 0.8 to 1.2, though declining due to the rising cost of power and chemical supplies.27 A related constraint is that most investment over the past two decades has gone into expanding production (intake, treatment and transmission) with less than 15% being directed at distribution improve-ment.28

The country needs to raise an estimated US$1.042 billion per year in order to meet its targets for 2020 (Figure 8.2). More than half (57%) of these requirements are for replacing facilities that are at the end of their economic life (replace-ment investment).29 Anticipated investments, which are also projected to come mostly from external sources, are esti-mated to be higher than recent investments. However, large deficits are expected because anticipated investments are only about 14% of investment requirements. Funding is-sues are compounded by the finding in Section 2 that an additional US$210 million per year needs to be generated for operation and maintenance expenditure.

25 JMP (2013) 26 GOV (2009a) 27 World Bank/MOC (2013) 28 ADB (2010)29 Replacement investment is expressed as an annual average to cover depreciation over the average lifetime of the overall technology for the scheme (see

annex 2).


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1990 1995 2000 2005

Urb

an w

ate

r su

pp

ly c

ove

rag

e


JMP, improved JMP, piped

2010 2015 2020

Figure 8.1 Urban Water Supply Coverage Figure 8.2 Urban water supply financing: required, anticipated (2012 - 2014) and recent annual invesments (2009 - 2011)

Source: SDA costing.



Recentinvestment

Ann

ual i

nves

tmen

t in

mill

ion

US

D

-

200

400

600

800

1,000

New

ReplacementHousehold

External

Domestic

1,200



Total : $ 1,040,000,000Per capita (new): $ 244

While recent policy directives call for cost recovery and the commercialization of service provision, tariffs for public wa-ter supply services remain too low in most provinces to en-able financially sustainable service provision—despite high collection rates and evidence that consumers are willing to pay more for good services. Instead, tariffs are held at ar-tificially low rates by PPCs, as a result there is little incen-tive for users to limit their consumption and no surpluses are generated to fund reserves for replacement costs and service expansion. Even operation and maintenance costs are a challenge; many utilities report that these are recov-ered, but operation and maintenance budgets are set at rates which are very low by international comparisons, and do not enable utilities to maintain acceptable levels of ser-vice.30

30 ADB (2010)


Figure 8.3 Urban water supply scorecard


1.125

Policy

3

Budget

0.5

Output

1

Expenditure

2.5

Maintenance

1.5

Equity

1

Expansion

1.5 3

Outcomes

The focus of subsector strategy is now shifting towards measuring and benchmarking the performance of water companies and improving coverage in small towns and peri-urban areas of the larger cities. The absence of reli-able monitoring data, weak regulation and a lack of prog-ress in implementing policy directives on service provider autonomy and commercialization are critical challenges. At present, conditions are not attractive for large scale private sector management or investment in urban water supply, and there is little pressure on urban water and sanitation companies to expand service provision or improve quality or cost-effectiveness.

Turning to the scorecard, the green score for policy under the enabling pillar highlights the fact the policy and insti-tutional framework for the subsector is fairly well defined, while the modest score for planning reflects the fact that the subsector does not have an investment plan, a national mechanism for coordinating multiple investments or an an-nual multi-stakeholder subsector review. Meanwhile the red score for budget tends to confirm the finding of the finan-cial analysis that the subsector is under-funded. However,

scores under budget also relate to the comprehensiveness and structure of the government budget, i.e. whether it clearly identifies investments and subsidies for urban wa-ter supply and whether it clearly identifies both domestic and official donor investment. In fact, urban water supply no longer features in national government budgets since service providers receive no operational subsidies and any capital grants are negotiated and administered at provincial level.

Further along the scorecard, green scores for expenditure and user outcomes are encouraging though the yellow scores for other headings point to challenges, particular-ly in the areas of equity, due to lack of special measures for targeting and meeting the needs of the poor, deliver-ing outputs, as progress towards national targets for piped water supply are not on track, maintenance, pointing to constraints on tariff levels and cost recovery, and expan-sion, due to limited autonomy and access to commercial finance so that utilities especially in secondary towns can fund service expansions.


The increase in rural sanitation coverage rates in Vietnam has been fairly rapid. Based on JMP data, access to im-proved sanitation rose from 30% of the rural population in 1990 to 67% in 2011 (Figure 9.1). Having already surpassed the MDG target of 65%, access to improved sanitation facilities is likely to reach around 75% by 2015 if current trends continue.

Government estimates, based on more stringent technical standards for household toilets, provide a less optimistic outlook. MARD31 reports that only about 55% of the 2011 rural population had access to ‘hygienic’ latrines as defined in government regulations. While there is not enough in-formation from which to draw projections based on past trends, the country clearly has a long way to go to meet the government target of 85% of the rural population us-ing a ‘hygienic’ latrine by 2020.32 Despite a projected de-cline in the rural population, existing coverage rates and

government targets suggest that an additional 2.0 million people per year will require access to hygienic latrines be-tween 2011 and 2020. A large proportion of these are in the poorest and hardest to reach parts of the country such as the mountainous northern and central regions as well as the Mekong Delta, where the use of unhygienic ‘hang-ing’ latrines is common. The scorecard reflects the current inequality in access, reporting that access among the top wealth quintile is considerably higher than in the lowest. The NTP3 document also recognizes this and indicates that subsidies and loans available under the program should be targeted at poor and under-served communities and house-holds.

An estimated US$372 million per year is needed to meet the government target for 2020 (Figure 9.2). About 60% of this amount (US$ 221 million per year) is meant for replac-ing facilities.

9. Subsector: Rural Sanitation and Hygiene

Priority actions for rural sanitation and hygiene• Identify effective operational strategies for sanitation and hygiene promotion that can be taken to scale under

NTP3, including demand-led approaches for promotion to achieve community-wide usage of hygienic sanitation.• Increase “software” spending, including staffing and operational budgets for provincial and local health line imple-

mentation agencies.• Facilitate increased private sector involvement in making desirable, low-cost toilets available for poor and under-

served communities. • Setup a systematic national capacity building program for sanitation and hygiene for health sector staff and other

participating organizations including the Vietnam Women’s Union. • Increase the use of performance-based incentives to reach poor households, achieve commune-wide sanitation

outcomes and incentivize provinces to increase spending on sanitation.

31 MARD (2012a) 32 MARD (2012b)


Current and anticipated investments fall far short of the amount needed. Estimated recent investments (US$15 mil-lion per year) from domestic (excluding households) and ex-ternal sources from 2009 to 2011 were less than 5% of the requirement for the same period. Anticipated investments (US$153 million per year) from 2012-2014 are also small and barely enough to meet requirements for new invest-ments. These estimates are in fact optimistic since about US$127 million per year of the investments are assumed to come from rural households, and whether this actually happens will depend strongly on the ability of government, development partners and other institutions to elicit house-hold investments in approved ‘hygienic’ facilities. Doing so will require intensive efforts on sanitation and hygiene promotion at scale using effective promotional approaches, while ensuring that facilities are affordable to poor house-holds. The NTP3 document indicates that the new program phase will pay much greater attention to sanitation and hy-giene promotion than was the case under NTP2 and will prioritize support to poor and remote under-served com-munities, although allocations both for software, hardware (targeted subsidies), and available resources for the Viet-nam Bank for Social Policy (VBSP) loans have thus far been lower as expected at the onset of NTP3.

Government has indicated that funding for sanitation and hygiene promotion will increase, and the decision to assign responsibility to the Ministry of Health should help to ensure that the subject is not neglected in favor of water supply. Progress will, however, depend on the support of provincial governments that control budget allocations; up to now few have favored allocations to sanitation. The ongoing World

Figure 9.1 Rural sanitation coverage

Source: JMP 2013; MARD (2012a); MARD (2012b); SDA costing

Figure 9.2 Rural sanitation financing: required, anticipated (2012 - 2014) and recent annual investment (2009 - 2011)


Recentinvestment

Ann

ual i

nves

tmen

t in

mill

ion

US

D

-

50

150

200

250

300


Other

Replacement

New

Household

External

Domestic

350

400

Rur

al im

prov

ed s

anita

tion

cove

rage


JMP, improved JMP, improved + shared

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020




Source: SDA costing


Bank-supported Programming for Results (P4R) operation in the Red River Delta uses performance-based payments from central government, which are released to provincial government subject to the achievement of agreed results for both water supply and sanitation. Linking the two sub-jects in this way has led to sanitation, a hitherto marginalized subject, being given much greater priority by the provin-cial government. There is, potentially, scope for extending the use of performance-based rewards to other provinces as a mechanism for accelerating progress towards NTP3 targets, as well as learning from other output-based pay-ments, such as incentives targeted at poor-households and communes, pioneered by East Meets West Foundation, in combination with output-based payments to local village motivators. As per the MICS 2011, improved access among rural lowest quintile is 34% and highest quintile is 98%.33

The use of hardware subsidies—direct or via subsidized loans—has featured strongly in the subsector to date and a weakness of NTP2 was that these subsidies were not targeted at the poor. Loans from VBSP were also available for household latrine construction and were instrumental in the progress achieved, but again were not targeted at the poorest households. Efforts are now underway (with DFID support) to ensure a poverty orientation to loan provision via VBSP and to secure increased availability of these low-interest loans to rural households.

In recent years, the international NGO SNV and a number of other development agencies have supported the introduc-tion of Community-led Total Sanitation (CLTS) and govern-ment has indicated support for its wider use in NTP3. As

a complement to CLTS, and to help households graduate from simple latrines to more durable and hygienic options, development agencies including (amongst others) SNV, IDE, UNICEF and WSP are supporting initiatives in sanita-tion marketing. These are relatively new developments and the previous neglect of sanitation and hygiene under NTP2 and the absence of a coherent strategy for at-scale pro-motion campaigns explains the low rating for markets and uptake in the ‘sustaining’ block of the scorecard.

In 2012, the Ministry of Health developed a Rural Sanita-tion and Hygiene Implementation Plan setting out practical steps and objectives for delivering this component of NTP3. These included: limiting the use of upfront and non-targeted sanitation subsidies; focusing on low-cost options to make sanitation more accessible to the poor; using targeted com-munication programs and more effective sanitation promo-tion methods; and collaborating with the Women’s Union and VBSP to target poor households. While this was a positive step, much remains to be done to identify effective operation-al strategies that can be taken to scale under NTP3. Further-more, provincial budget allocations for the first half of 2013 did not reflect increased priority for sanitation under NTP3 and the 2012 JAR highlighted a disconnect between central planning in the MOH and implementation on the ground, with limited understanding and capacities of local health depart-ments of approaches such as CLTS and sanitation marketing and the case for transforming generic hardware subsidies to targeted, partial incentives for the poor. This highlights the need for a national orientation and capacity building plan for health department staff at provincial and local levels.

33 JMP/UNICEF equity trees special tabulation based on MICS 2011


Figure 9.3 Rural sanitation scorecard


2.25

Policy

2.5

Budget

1

Output

2

Expenditure

3

Maintenance

0.75

Equity

1.5

Expansion

0.5

Use Outcomes

1.5


The JMP34 estimates that access to an improved toilet facility reached 93% in 2011 (Figure 10.1). While this figure seems encouraging, less than 10% of urban wastewater is treated and very few towns or cities have a wastewater treatment plant. The bulk of drainage networks are in fact combined drainage and sewage systems and often overflow in the rainy season, discharging pathogenic waste into the streets.

Where wastewater treatment plants exist, these tend to be under-utilized since most household toilets are connected to a septic tank or pit that retains the bulk of the solids—only the overflow discharges into the drainage network, and then mixes with storm water so that wastewater entering the treatment plant is fairly dilute, in some cases meeting discharge standards even before it is treated.35 This chal-lenges the current practice, when investments are made, of building relatively expensive plants that can treat wastewa-

10. Subsector: Urban Sanitation and Hygiene

Priority actions for urban sanitation and hygiene

Expedite the adoption of the Draft Unified Sanitation Sector Strategy and Investment Pan (U3SAP). As part of this initiative: • Adopt a subsector investment plan, develop an urban sanitation financing and establish a national urban sanitation

program, with clear sector coordination and institutional framework.• Support the implementation of existing policy directives on the autonomy and commercial orientation of service

providers (including combined water and wastewater utilities).• Develop the capacity of service providers so that existing policy provisions – particularly on financial sustainability

– can be implemented and services improved.• For new wastewater treatment plants, revise technical standards to adopt cost-effective technology and introduce

incentives to maximize direct household connections to network.• Develop and adopt viable strategies for the improved management and treatment of fecal sludge, inclusive of the

private sector.

ter to a very high standard. Household pits and septic tanks, meanwhile, tend to be emptied only rarely and hence func-tion inefficiently, and the removal of septic sludge is largely unregulated so that a considerable amount of the material is disposed of indiscriminately, without further treatment. All of the above highlights the need to introduce compre-hensive urban sanitation planning at town and city level that responds to local realities and needs, identifies appropriate technology options and plans for the delivery and mainte-nance of services, not simply hardware investments based on standard solutions. At the heart of this is the need for provincial authorities to recognize that improving urban sanitation requires far more than building wastewater treat-ment plants; maximizing the number of direct connections to sewers, and improving fecal sludge management, are also critical challenges.36

34 JMP (2013)35 Corning et al (2012) Vietnam Waste Water Review for Urban Areas36 With poor fecal sludge management being a widespread problem in the Southeast Asia region, WB and WSP are preparing a number of initiatives to

develop and test options for improved practices at household and city levels.


Government targets for the subsector focus not on house-hold facilities but on the percentage of wastewater treated. SDA calculations are based on the draft U3SAP targets37 for 2020 of 60% wastewater treatment for the largest cit-ies, 30% for medium towns and 10% for small towns—an

average of approximately 45% for all urban areas. With an urban population that is expected to grow rapidly between 2009 and 2020, an additional 1.5 million people per year will require access to wastewater treatment.

Figure 10.1 Urban sanitation coverage

Source: SDA costing. JMP (2013) Progress on Drinking Water and Sanitation: 2013 Update. UNICEF and WHO. General Statistics Office (2010a) The 2009 Vietnam Population and Housing Census: Major Findings, Hanoi 38

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Urb

an im

prov

ed s

anita

tion

cove

rage

Government estimates

JMP, improved

JMP, improved + shared

20201990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Urb

an a

cces

s to

was

tew

ater

trea

tmen

t


20201990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Figure 10.2 Urban sanitation financing: required, anticipated (2012 - 2014) and recent annual investment (2009 - 2011)



Recentinvestment

Ann

ual i

nves

tmen

t in

mill

ion

US

D

-

100

200

300

400

500

600

Other

Replacement

New

Household

External

Domestic

700

800




Source: SDA costing

37 MOC (2012)38 Figure 10.1 uses the Census 1999-2009 data due to larger sample size and longer time span; according to the Household Living Standard Surveys (HLSS

2008), slightly different progress data are found that refer to an increase in access to improved sanitation by urban population from 85% in 2002 to 91% by 2008.


The country needs to raise an estimated US$771 million per year in order to meet its 2020 targets for urban sanitation (Figure 10.2). With very few wastewater treatment plants, at least relative to the population, almost three-fourths (US$580 million per year) of this amount is needed for new treatment facilities. The estimated investment requirements are actually conservative because they focus on wastewa-ter treatment only and ignore replacement costs of exist-ing toilets and on-site treatment systems as well as the cost of making direct connections from household toilets to sewers. Annual anticipated investments are expected to cover only about 27% of the annual requirements. Addi-tional pressure on finances is also expected to come from the estimated US$124 million per year in maintenance and operating expenditures (Section 2).

The Draft U3SAP recognizes these challenges and, amongst other things, prioritizes the formulation of a sector invest-ment plan for urban wastewater.

The scorecard indicates that of all the four subsectors, ur-ban sanitation faces the greatest challenges, particularly in the ‘enabling’ and ‘developing’ pillars. Under ‘enabling,’ low scores for planning and budgeting highlight the fact that subsector coordination is weak: there are no mechanisms for coordination of government and donor inputs at national level, though coordination is better at project level, and unlike the rural subsector, there is no national strategy or program, only stand-alone projects. While investment in ur-ban sanitation has grown in recent years, almost all of this growth has been donor-funded; government expenditure – both capital and operational—has been quite limited. Accu-rate data are not available here, but an ADB39 study states that 80% of water supply and sanitation projects from 1993 to 2007 in Vietnam were financed by official development assistance.

Under the ‘developing’ pillar, scorecard questions confirm that government has not so far adopted any mechanisms for ensuring the equitable allocation of sector funding among service providers, which in turn do not normally ap-ply any special measures for involving or serving the poor, except in the case of donor-funded projects. Scores under this and the ‘sustaining’ pillar also confirm that there has been limited progress so far in increasing the proportion of urban wastewater treated or in improving fecal sludge man-agement, a subject which is largely neglected. Furthermore, no sector monitoring system is in place and therefore no overview of trends in access and service quality is readily available at national level.

The policy and institutional constraints on improving the op-erational effectiveness and financial viability of public water and sanitation companies were discussed in sections 3 and 4 above. Revenue generation presents a fundamental chal-lenge; the wastewater charge levied by water and sanitation companies is capped at 10% of water bills while stand-alone sanitation and drainage companies cannot impose any wastewater charge at all; instead they operate on the basis of annual budgets allocated by the PPC. Furthermore, de-spite the requirement to recover costs, water and sanitation companies are required to remit the bulk of the revenue from wastewater charges to the provincial government. There is a strong argument, therefore, for integrating the delivery of ur-ban water and sanitation services within combined utilities.40

The draft U3SAP sets out a raft of measures to address the constraints outlined above. Amongst other things it pro-poses the formulation of a Sector Investment Plan and es-tablishment of a national urban sanitation program whereby towns and cities can access capital finance and technical assistance, subject to the adoption of comprehensive ur-ban sanitation plans.

39 ADB (2009)40 World Bank (2013) Urban Sanitation Review East Asia


Figure 10.3 Urban sanitation and hygiene scorecard


0.375

Policy

3

Budget

0

Output

0

Expenditure

2.5

Maintenance

0.375

Equity

0.5

Expansion

1

Use Outcomes

1.5


As part of the Service Delivery Assessment process, gov-ernment stakeholders agreed on sector targets for 2020, namely 75% access to rural water and 85% for urban areas by 2020. This means that an estimated 3.7 million people per year need to gain access to water supply sources that meet government standards—of which slightly over half live in rural areas. In the case of sanitation, the rural tar-get is that 85% of the population will use hygienic toilets by 2020, equalling an estimated 2.0 million people annually that need to gain access to latrines according to the na-tional standards. For urban areas, an ambitious wastewater treatment target of 45% coverage by 2020 implies that 1.6 million people per year need to gain access to wastewa-ter treatment facilities. These targets translate to capital expenditure requirements of US$1.447 billion per year for water supply and US$1.142 billion for sanitation, with al-most 90% of these investment requirements being for ur-ban areas. Anticipated financing falls far short of these re-quirements and deficits are estimated to be US$797 million per year for water supply and US$490 million for sanitation. On top of this, approximately US$245 million per year is required for the operation and maintenance of water supply services and US$176 million for sanitation—again, much of it for urban areas.

Whichever data sources are used, it is clear that Vietnam is not yet investing enough in the water supply and sani-tation sector. The scale of investment needs could, how-ever, be reduced by improving the management, espe-

cially cost recovery—and hence sustainability—of existing infrastructure and services, so as to reduce replacement costs, which form over 40% of the total requirements. An-other element for reducing the financing gap is to create more favorable conditions for private sector participation in the development and operation of services—both urban and rural. This should be accompanied by the establish-ment of an appropriate regulatory framework to drive qual-ity, equity and efficiency in service provision. Moreover, result-based financing instruments could help to deliver on outcomes and incentivize sub-national governments to target underserved areas and households. Appropri-ate technology choice when making new investments, particularly for large capital projects such as wastewater treatment plants, is another factor to enable more efficient use of available funds. In addition, existing inefficiencies in resource use could be considered through conducting a public expenditure review for the sector, so as to enable government at national and sub-national level to use sec-tor funding more effectively in future.

An additional constraint facing the sector at present is that the difficulty of government to track progress towards its ambitious national targets, as well as monitoring financial flows. Consistent progress monitoring is hampered by dif-ferent systems, definitions, indicators and data sources. A harmonized monitoring framework could drastically im-prove sector diagnostics, planning as well as better steer-ing for results that emphasize sustainability and equity.

11. Conclusion


In summary, and in addition to specific subsector priority actions, cross-cutting actions for the sector to resolve the challenges highlighted by this Service Delivery Assessment are to:

• Increase public funding for water supply and sanita-tion, especially for urban service provision outside of the major cities and for remote, underserved rural areas

• Improve the management—especially cost recovery—for existing infrastructure and services provision, to re-duce the financing gap for investment needed in infra-structure replacement

• Conduct a public expenditure review for the water and sanitation sector, to identify critical obstacles to effi-cient resource utilization

• Prioritize the needs of the poor in sector investments

and operational strategies, such as by expanding re-sults-based financing instruments and incentivize sus-tainable service delivery to poor communities

• Streamline urban and rural access targets and monitor-ing frameworks, with due attention to service function-ality and use, and agree on common points of refer-ence for all institutional stakeholders in the sector

• Improve the policy and enabling environment, such as with respect to tariff reform and regulation, to acceler-ate private sector participation and develop capacities for private sector participation in both urban and rural services (on both public and private side)

The below depicted scorecards for each of the subsectors further emphasize the bottlenecks in the service delivery pathway to turn finance into sustainable services


RURAL WATER SUPPLY

URBAN WATER SUPPLY

RURAL SANITATION AND HYGIENE

URBAN SANITATION AND HYGIENE


2.25

Policy

2.5

Budget

1.5

Output

2.5

Expenditure

3

Maintenance

0.75

Equity

2

Expansion

0.5 1.5

Use Outcomes


1.125

Policy

3

Budget

0.5

Output

1

Expenditure

2.5

Maintenance

1.5

Equity

1

Expansion

1.5 3

Use Outcomes


2.25

Policy

2.5

Budget

1

Output

2

Expenditure

3

Maintenance

0.75

Equity

1.5

Expansion

0.5

Use Outcomes

1.5


0.375

Policy Budget

0

Output

0

Expenditure

2.5

Maintenance

0.375

Equity

0.5

Expansion

1

Use Outcomes

1.53

Figure 11.1 Subsector Scorecards

Wat

er S

upp

ly a

nd S

anita

tion

in V

ietn

am38

Ann

ex 1

: S

core

card

and

Exp

lana

tion

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

RURA

L SA

NITA

TION

ENAB

LING

Enab

ling

Polic

ySe

ctor

targ

ets

Are

ther

e RS

H ac

cess

targ

ets,

for

hous

ehol

ds a

nd/o

r com

mun

ities

, in

the

natio

nal l

evel

dev

elop

men

t pla

n?

Targ

ets

for

rura

l hou

seho

ld

acce

ss a

nd

com

mun

ities

be

com

ing

ODF

in

the

deve

lopm

ent

plan

Targ

ets

for

rura

l hou

seho

ld

acce

ss in

the

deve

lopm

ent

plan

No ru

ral

sani

tatio

n ta

rget

s in

the

deve

lopm

ent

plan

1Th

ere

are

acce

ss ta

rget

s in

SE

DP (n

atio

nal,

prov

inci

al)

but n

o OD

F ta

rget

.

SEDP

201

1-15

, Vi

etna

m D

evel

opm

ent G

oals

Enab

ling

Polic

ySe

ctor

Pol

icy

Is th

ere

a ru

ral s

anita

tion

polic

y th

at is

ag

reed

by

stak

ehol

ders

, app

rove

d by

go

vern

men

t, an

d pu

blic

ly av

aila

ble?

Polic

y of

ficia

lly

appr

oved

and

pu

blic

ly av

aila

ble

Polic

y dr

afte

d an

d ag

reed

but

no

t offi

cial

ly ap

prov

ed

No p

olic

y1

Polic

y is

effe

ctive

ly de

fined

NT

P 2,

3 Do

cum

ents

su

ppor

ted

by D

ecis

ion

No. 6

2 (a

cces

s to

cre

dit)

and

PM D

ecis

ion

730

(San

itatio

n Da

ys)

NRW

SS S

trate

gy u

p to

202

0

PM D

ecis

ion

366

/ MoH

Ru

ral S

anita

tion

Actio

n Pl

an/

TPBS

agr

eem

ent f

or N

TP3

Prog

ram

min

g fo

r Res

ults

(P4R

)/PM

Dec

isio

n No

.62

to s

uppo

rt im

plem

enta

tion

of N

RWSS

S.

Enab

ling

Polic

y In

stitu

tiona

l Rol

esAr

e th

e in

stitu

tiona

l rol

es o

f rur

al

sani

tatio

n su

bsec

tor p

laye

rs (n

atio

nal/

stat

e an

d lo

cal g

over

nmen

t, se

rvic

e pr

ovid

er, r

egul

ator

etc

.) cl

early

defi

ned

and

oper

atio

naliz

ed?

Defin

ed a

nd

oper

atio

naliz

edDe

fined

but

not

op

erat

iona

lized

Not d

efine

d0.

5Ro

les

of li

ne m

inis

tries

ar

e de

fined

but

wer

e no

t fu

lly o

pera

tiona

lized

und

er

NTP2

– b

ette

r pro

spec

ts

unde

r NTP

3

NTP

2,3

docu

men

ts.

Inte

r-m

inis

teria

l circ

ular

27

/201

3/TT

LT/B

NNPT

NT-B

YT-

BGDD

T da

ted

31/5

/201

3 (re

vised

circ

ular

93

)./PM

Dec

isio

n 36

6-QD

-TTg

on

App

rova

l of N

TP3

Docu

men

t /R

ural

san

itatio

n co

mpo

nent

No

.3 u

nder

NTP

3.

Enab

ling

Plan

ning

Fund

flow

coo

rdin

atio

nDo

es g

over

nmen

t hav

e a

proc

ess

for

coor

dina

ting

mul

tiple

inve

stm

ents

in

the

subs

ecto

r (do

mes

tic o

r don

or, e

g.

natio

nal g

rant

s, s

tate

bud

gets

, don

or

loan

s an

d gr

ants

etc

)?

Coor

dina

tion

proc

ess

defin

ed a

nd

oper

atio

naliz

ed

Coor

dina

tion

proc

ess

defin

ed b

ut n

ot

oper

atio

naliz

ed

Not d

efine

d/ n

o pr

oces

s1

JARs

for N

TP 2

,3

Annu

al C

onsu

ltatio

n Gr

oup

Mee

ting

betw

een

GoV.

and

dono

rs /

JARs

.

Decr

ee 1

31 o

n OD

A Ut

ilisat

ion.

Docu

men

t of C

G Gr

oup

Mee

ting/

Viet

nam

Par

tner

ship

De

velo

pmen

t (VP

D), A

EF (A

id

Effe

ctive

foru

m).

Ser

vice

Del

iver

y A

sses

smen

t39

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

Enab

ling

Plan

ning

Inve

stm

ent P

lan

Is th

ere

a m

ediu

m te

rm in

vest

men

t pl

an fo

r rur

al s

anita

tion

base

d on

na

tiona

l tar

gets

that

is c

oste

d, p

riorit

izes

inve

stm

ent n

eeds

, is

publ

ishe

d an

d us

ed?

Inve

stm

ent p

lan

base

d on

prio

rity

need

s ex

ists

, is

publ

ishe

d an

d us

ed

Exis

ts b

ut n

ot

used

, or u

nder

pr

epar

atio

n

Does

not

exis

t0.

5M

ediu

m T

erm

pla

ns a

re

mad

e bu

t ten

d to

get

ig

nore

d –

annu

al p

lans

ta

ke p

refe

renc

e an

d ar

e no

t alw

ays

base

d on

the

med

ium

term

pla

n

NTP3

doc

umen

t, an

nual

M

ARD

circ

ular

s re

ques

ting

two

year

pla

ns. /

Rur

al S

anita

tion

Com

pone

nt N

o.3

/ MOH

Sa

nita

tion

Actio

n Pl

an (2

012-

2015

).

Enab

ling

Plan

ning

Annu

al re

view

Is th

ere

an a

nnua

l mul

ti-st

akeh

olde

r re

view

in p

lace

to m

onito

r sub

sect

or

perfo

rman

ce, t

o re

view

pro

gres

s an

d se

t co

rrect

ive a

ctio

ns?

Revie

w o

f pe

rform

ance

an

d se

tting

of

corre

ctive

act

ions

Revie

w o

f pe

rform

ance

but

no

cor

rect

ive

actio

ns

impl

emen

ted

No re

view

or

set

ting

of

corre

ctive

act

ions

1Jo

int A

nnua

l Sec

tor

Revie

ws

held

for N

TP 2

,3JA

Rs u

nder

NTP

2, N

TP3.

Decr

ee 1

31 o

n OD

A ut

ilisat

ion

Aide

-mem

oire

s of

JAR

s W

B,

UNIC

EF–

GoV

Repo

rts

Enab

ling

Plan

ning

HR C

apac

ityHa

s an

ass

essm

ent b

een

unde

rtake

n of

the

hum

an re

sour

ce n

eeds

in th

e su

bsec

tor t

o m

eet t

he s

ubse

ctor

ta

rget

and

is th

e ac

tion

plan

bei

ng

impl

emen

ted?

Asse

ssm

ent

unde

rtake

n an

d ac

tions

bei

ng

impl

emen

ted

Asse

ssm

ent

unde

rtake

n bu

t no

act

ion

bein

g ta

ken

No a

sses

smen

t un

derta

ken

0.5

Occa

sion

al s

mal

l stu

dies

un

derta

ken

by re

sear

ch

inst

itutio

ns o

r pro

fess

iona

l as

soci

atio

ns, b

ut n

o go

vern

men

t-le

d se

ctor

-wid

e as

sess

men

t. No

act

ion

resu

lted

from

the

stud

ies.

Enab

ling

Budg

etAd

eque

ncy

(of fi

nanc

ing)

Are

the

publ

ic fi

nanc

ial c

omm

itmen

ts to

th

e ru

ral s

anita

tion

subs

ecto

r suf

ficie

nt

to m

eet t

he n

atio

nal t

arge

ts fo

r the

su

bsec

tor?

Mor

e th

an

75%

of w

hat i

s ne

eded

Betw

een

50-

75%

of n

eeds

Less

than

50%

of

nee

ds0

Sani

tatio

n fu

ndin

g w

as

mar

gina

lised

und

er N

TP2.

Be

tter p

rosp

ects

und

er

NTP3

but

fund

ing

has

not

incr

ease

d so

far.;

NTP3

doc

umen

t, Ru

ral

Sani

tatio

n Ac

tion

Plan

2011

-15.

JA

R 20

12

Enab

ling

Budg

etSt

ruct

ure

Does

the

budg

et s

truct

ure

perm

it in

vest

men

ts a

nd s

ubsi

dies

(ope

ratio

nal

cost

s, a

dmin

istra

tion,

deb

t ser

vice,

et

c) fo

r the

rura

l san

itatio

n se

ctor

to b

e cl

early

iden

tified

?

Yes

for

inve

stm

ent a

nd

for s

ubsi

dies

Yes

for

inve

stm

ent b

ut

not s

ubsi

dies

No0.

5Na

tiona

l bud

get (

incl

udin

g do

nor s

uppo

rt) o

nly

show

s in

vest

men

ts, n

ot s

ubsi

dies

NTP3

doc

umen

tGo

V -

Dono

r Agr

eem

ent f

or

NTP3

201

1-15

.NT

P2 C

ompl

etio

n Re

port,

VI

HEM

A re

port

on s

anita

tion

Com

pone

nt.

Enab

ling

Budg

etCo

mpr

ehen

sive

Does

the

gove

rnm

ent b

udge

t co

mpr

ehen

sive

ly co

ver d

omes

tic a

nd

offic

ial d

onor

inve

stm

ent/

subs

idy

to

rura

l san

itatio

n?

Mor

e th

an 7

5%

of fu

nds

to

subs

ecto

r on

budg

et

Less

than

50%

of

fund

s to

su

bsec

tor o

n bu

dget

0.5

Budg

et te

nds

to g

et

incr

ease

d by

a fi

xed

amou

nt

of 1

0% w

ithou

t ref

eren

ce to

ac

tual

nee

ds. B

ut in

201

3 it

is to

be

redu

ced

~10

%

on in

stru

ctio

n of

NA.

Will

not b

e su

ffici

ent t

o co

ver

sani

tatio

n.

Reso

lutio

ns o

f Nat

iona

l As

sem

bly

for N

TP3

NTP3

Ann

ual P

lan

of a

ctivi

ties

for

2012

, 201

3 an

d 20

14.

Wat

er S

upp

ly a

nd S

anita

tion

in V

ietn

am40

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

DEVE

LOPI

NG

Deve

lopi

ngEx

pend

iture

Utiliz

atio

n of

dom

estic

fu

nds

Wha

t per

cent

age

of d

omes

tic fu

nds

budg

eted

for r

ural

san

itatio

n ar

e sp

ent

(3 y

ear a

vera

ge)?

Over

75%

Betw

een

50%

an

d 75

%Le

ss th

an 5

0%1

Dom

estic

allo

catio

ns a

re

low

and

eas

ily s

pent

(abo

ut

5% o

f NTP

3 to

tal e

xclu

ding

so

ft lo

ans

from

VBS

P).

Stat

e Au

dit R

epor

t,NT

P re

ports

VI

HEM

A re

port

on 2

012

and

6m

onth

s 20

13

Deve

lopi

ngEx

pend

iture

Utiliz

atio

n of

ext

erna

l fu

nds

Wha

t per

cent

age

of e

xter

nal f

unds

bu

dget

ed fo

r rur

al s

anita

tion

are

spen

t (3

yea

r ave

rage

)?

Over

75%

Betw

een

50%

an

d 75

%Le

ss th

an 5

0%1

Sani

tatio

n al

loca

tions

w

ere

smal

l und

er N

TP2

(som

e pr

ovin

ces

rece

ived

noth

ing)

. Inc

reas

ed fu

ndin

g an

ticip

ated

und

er N

TP3

Stat

e Au

dit R

epor

t,NT

P re

ports

Deve

lopi

ngEx

pend

iture

Repo

rting

Is ru

ral s

anita

tion

expe

nditu

re v

ersu

s bu

dget

aud

ited

and

repo

rted

on in

a

cons

olid

ated

form

at fo

r all

sour

ces

of

dom

estic

and

offi

cial

don

or e

xpen

ditu

re?

Yes

for d

omes

tic

and

dono

r ex

pend

iture

Yes

for d

omes

tic

expe

nditu

reNo

1Ye

s. A

ll fin

anci

al re

ports

fo

llow

form

ats

issu

ed b

y M

PI a

nd M

OF.

NTP

repo

rts, J

AR a

nd S

tate

Au

dit A

genc

y of

Vie

tnam

re

ports

.

Deve

lopi

ngEq

ulity

Loca

l par

ticip

atio

nAr

e th

ere

clea

rly d

efine

d pr

oced

ures

fo

r inf

orm

ing,

con

sulti

ng w

ith a

nd

supp

ortin

g lo

cal p

artic

ipat

ion

in

plan

ning

, bud

getin

g an

d im

plem

entin

g fo

r rur

al s

anita

tion

deve

lopm

ents

?

Yes

and

syst

emat

ical

ly ap

plie

d

Yes,

but

not

sy

stem

atic

ally

appl

ied

No0.

5Pr

oced

ures

defi

ned

in

Inte

r-M

inis

teria

l Circ

ular

be

twee

n M

ARD,

MoF

, M

oH a

nd M

oET,

and

PM

Deci

sion

135

, but

not

fully

pa

rtici

pato

ry.

NTPS

O/

MAR

D is

sue

annu

al b

udge

t pl

anni

ng g

uide

lines

.

Inte

r-M

inis

teria

l Circ

ular

be

twee

n M

ARD,

MOF

, MOH

and

M

oET

mad

e un

der P

M D

ecis

ion

135.

(New

upd

ate

Circ

ular

04

/201

3).

Decr

ee 1

31 (m

anag

emen

t and

ut

ilisat

ion

of O

DA.)

Deve

lopi

ngEq

ulity

Budg

et a

lloca

tion

crite

riaHa

ve c

riter

ia (o

r a fo

rmul

a) b

een

dete

rmin

ed to

allo

cate

rura

l san

itatio

n fu

ndin

g eq

uita

bly

acro

ss ru

ral

com

mun

ities

and

is it

bei

ng a

pplie

d co

nsis

tent

ly

Yes,

app

lied

cons

iste

ntly

Yes,

but

no

t app

lied

cons

iste

ntly

No0.

5In

ter-

Min

iste

rial C

ircul

ars

48 a

nd 8

0 de

fine

basi

s fo

r fun

ding

allo

catio

ns, a

s do

es N

TP. D

espi

te th

is,

som

e po

or c

omm

uniti

es

and

prov

ince

s re

ceive

d no

sa

nita

tion

fund

ing

unde

r NT

P2.

Inte

r-M

inis

teria

l Circ

ular

s 48

and

80

defin

e ba

sis

for

fund

ing

allo

catio

ns. N

TP3

also

ha

s cr

iteria

for a

lloca

tions

of

budg

et fo

r wat

er s

uppl

y an

d sa

nita

tion

with

invo

lvem

ent

of li

ne m

inis

tries

. / V

IHEM

A sa

nita

tion

repo

rt fo

r 201

2, 6

m

onth

s 20

13.

Deve

lopi

ngEq

ulity

Redu

cing

ineq

ualit

yIs

ther

e an

y (p

erio

dic)

ana

lysis

car

ried

out t

o as

sess

dis

parit

ies

in a

cces

s an

d ar

e m

easu

res

(pol

icy

or p

rogr

amm

atic

ac

tions

) to

redu

ce in

equa

litie

s ta

ken

as

a re

sult?

Yes

(per

iodi

c)

anal

ysis

un

derta

ken

and

acte

d up

on

Yes

(per

iodi

c)

anal

ysis

un

derta

ken

but

not a

cted

upo

n

No0.

5Eq

uity

ana

lysis

incl

uded

in

NTP

ann

ual r

epor

ts a

nd

Join

t Ann

ual R

evie

ws,

but

no

act

ion

take

n

NTP

and

JAR

repo

rts.

Dono

r-Go

V Te

chni

cal R

evie

w

repo

rts /

Aide

Mem

oire

s

Deve

lopi

ngOu

tput

Quan

tity

Is th

e an

nual

exp

ansi

on o

f rur

al

hous

ehol

ds g

aini

ng a

cces

s to

saf

e sa

nita

tion

suffi

cien

t to

mee

t the

su

bsec

tor t

arge

ts?

Over

75%

of t

hat

need

ed to

reac

h se

ctor

targ

ets

Betw

een

75%

an

d 50

% o

f th

at n

eede

d to

ac

hiev

e ta

rget

s

Less

than

50%

of

that

nee

ded

to

reac

h ta

rget

s

0.5

Sani

tatio

n ha

s no

t had

en

ough

atte

ntio

n un

der N

TP

until

rece

ntly.

NTP

3 se

ts

out t

arge

ts b

ut s

o fa

r lac

ks

fund

ing

to m

eet t

arge

ts.

NTP

repo

rts a

nd N

CERW

ASS

repo

rt on

M+

E sy

stem

. VI

HEM

A Sa

nita

tion

Actio

n Pl

an.

Ser

vice

Del

iver

y A

sses

smen

t41

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

Deve

lopi

ngOu

tput

Capa

city

for p

rom

otio

nIs

ther

e en

ough

cap

acity

- s

taff,

ex

perti

se, t

ools

, mat

eria

ls -

to d

elive

r a

sani

tatio

n pr

ogra

mm

e at

sca

le, u

sing

ta

ilore

d co

mm

unity

-bas

ed a

ppro

ache

s?

Yes,

cap

acity

ex

ists

and

ap

proa

ches

are

be

ing

used

at

scal

e

Gaps

in c

apac

ity

but a

ppro

ache

s ge

nera

lly b

eing

us

ed a

t sca

le

Defic

its in

ca

paci

ty a

nd

no c

omm

unity

-ba

sed

appr

oach

es a

t sc

ale

0.5

Hand

was

hing

pro

mot

ion

was

take

n to

sca

le b

ut n

ot

latri

ne p

rom

otio

n. L

ocal

ca

paci

ty fo

r pro

mot

ion

is

insu

ffici

ent f

or s

calin

g up

, bu

t fun

ding

is n

ot.

Repo

rt on

Impr

ovem

ent

of C

apac

ity B

uild

ing

for

Impl

emen

ting

NTP

by W

ater

Su

pply

and

Sani

tatio

n (W

ASA)

As

soci

atio

n, 2

011)

Deve

lopi

ngOu

tput

Repo

rting

Does

the

gove

rnm

ent r

egul

arly

mon

itor

and

repo

rt on

pro

gres

s an

d qu

ality

of

rura

l san

itatio

n ac

cess

, inc

ludi

ng

settl

emen

t-w

ide

sani

tatio

n, a

nd

diss

emin

ate

the

resu

lts?

Qual

ity,

quan

tity

and

diss

emin

ated

Qual

ity o

r qu

antit

yNe

ither

1St

atus

is re

porte

d an

nual

ly bu

t doe

s no

t cov

er O

DF

stat

us. U

nder

NTP

II,

mon

itorin

g w

as p

oorly

fu

nded

, but

bet

ter u

nder

NT

P3. O

DF m

onito

ring

now

at

pilo

t sta

ge (C

LTS)

.

NTP

Com

plet

ion

Repo

rtM

+E

Repo

rts b

y NC

ERW

ASS

VIHE

MA

impl

emen

tatio

n re

ports

. M

oET

scho

ol s

anita

tion

repo

rts.

SUST

AINI

NG

Sust

aini

ngM

arke

tsSu

pply-

chai

nDo

es th

e su

pply-

chai

n fo

r san

itatio

n pr

oduc

ts m

eet h

ouse

hold

nee

ds (r

eady

av

aila

bilit

y, qu

antit

y an

d co

st),

satis

fy

gove

rnm

ent s

tand

ards

and

reac

h to

un

-ser

ved

area

s?

Yes

for q

uant

ity,

cost

, sta

ndar

ds

and

reac

h

Yes,

but

not

for

all o

f qua

ntity

, co

st, s

tand

ards

an

d re

ach

No0.

5No

t all

loca

tions

are

re

ache

d th

roug

h lo

cal

supp

ly ch

ain,

esp

ecia

lly

rem

ote

and

mou

ntai

nous

ar

eas;

Sup

ply

chai

n is

be

tter i

n M

ekon

g re

gion

.

Repo

rt on

IDE

Wor

ksho

p on

Sa

nita

tion

Mar

ketin

g in

NTP

, 20

11.

Repo

rt on

pilo

ting

of s

ocia

l m

arke

ting

by V

IHEM

ASa

nita

tion

Hard

war

e Su

pply

Chai

n As

sess

men

t in

Rura

l ar

eas

of V

ietn

am-

Repo

rt 20

13

Sust

aini

ngM

arke

tsPr

ivate

sec

tor c

apac

ityIs

ther

e su

ffici

ent m

ason

/arti

san/

smal

l bu

sine

ss c

apac

ity to

mee

t hou

seho

ld

need

s (q

uant

ity, q

ualit

y an

d co

st)?

Yes

for q

uant

ity

and

cost

Yes,

for q

uant

ity

but n

ot fo

r cos

tNe

ither

1Pr

ivate

sec

tor c

apac

ity

and

invo

lvem

ent v

arie

s ac

cord

ing

to lo

catio

n.

Num

ber o

f mas

ons

avai

labl

e fo

r lat

rine

cons

truct

ion

incr

ease

s ye

arly

via p

rogr

amm

es.

Repo

rt on

IDE

Wor

ksho

p on

Sa

nita

tion

Mar

ketin

g in

NTP

, 20

11.

Stud

y on

Priv

ate

sect

or

parti

cipa

tion

in R

WSS

Sec

tor,

WSP

200

8.SN

V Bi

ogas

pro

gram

me

repo

rts.

Sust

aini

ngM

arke

tsPr

ivate

sec

tor

deve

lopm

ent

Does

the

gove

rnm

ent h

ave

prog

ram

s to

pr

omot

e an

d gu

ide

the

dom

estic

priv

ate

sect

or a

nd fa

cilit

ate

inno

vatio

n fo

r the

pr

ovis

ion

of s

anita

tion

serv

ices

in ru

ral

area

s?

Yes,

with

var

ious

co

mpo

nent

sYe

s, b

ut e

ither

be

ing

deve

lope

d or

has

gap

s

No p

rom

otio

n,

guid

ance

or

enco

urag

emen

t

0.5

Only

smal

l sca

le p

relim

inar

y w

ork

done

so

far o

n pr

ivate

se

ctor

invo

lvem

ent.

Mor

e w

ill be

don

e un

der N

TP3.

M

ARD

star

ting

to p

rom

ote

PPP

in R

WSS

thro

ugh

cons

ulta

tion

wor

ksho

ps/

dial

ogue

.

NTP3

Doc

umen

tDe

cisi

on 1

31 o

n pr

ivate

sec

tor

invo

lvem

ent i

n RW

SS.

PM D

ecis

ion

366

PM D

ecis

ion

No.7

1/20

10 o

n PP

P In

vest

men

t and

201

3 up

date

ver

sion

of D

ecis

ion

No.

71/2

010

on P

PP

Wat

er S

upp

ly a

nd S

anita

tion

in V

ietn

am42

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

Sust

aini

ngM

arke

tsM

anag

emen

t of D

isas

ter

Risk

and

Clim

ate

Chan

geDo

loca

l gov

ernm

ent o

r rur

al s

ervic

e pr

ovid

ers

have

pla

ns fo

r cop

ing

with

na

tura

l dis

aste

rs a

nd c

limat

e ch

ange

?

Yes,

the

maj

ority

of

rura

l ser

vice

prov

ider

s ha

ve a

pl

an fo

r dis

aste

r ris

k m

anag

emen

t an

d cl

imat

e ch

ange

No. O

nly

som

e se

rvic

e pr

ovid

ers

have

a p

lan

for

disa

ster

risk

m

anag

emen

t an

d cl

imat

e ch

ange

or m

ost

serv

ice

prov

ider

s ha

ve u

nder

take

n a

vuln

erab

ility

asse

ssm

ent.

No s

ervic

e pr

ovid

er h

as a

cl

imat

e ac

tion

plan

or h

as

unde

rtake

n a

vuln

erab

ility

asse

ssm

ent.

0.5

Littl

e do

ne o

n th

is to

dat

e.

Som

e pi

lot r

esea

rch

on

impa

ct o

f clim

ate

chan

ge

on R

WSS

in N

am D

inh

Prov

ince

.

Natio

nal S

trate

gy fo

r Clim

ate

chan

ge (P

M D

ecis

ion

No.2

319/

QD-T

Tg d

ated

05/

12/2

011.

MAR

D Ac

tion

Plan

Fra

mew

ork

for a

dapt

atio

n an

d m

itiga

tion

of

clim

ate

chan

ge o

f agr

icul

ture

an

d ru

ral d

evel

opm

ent s

ecto

r 20

08-2

0.

Sust

aini

ngUp

-tak

eSu

ppor

t for

exp

ansi

onAr

e ex

pend

iture

s at

the

loca

l lev

el in

line

w

ith th

e na

tiona

l san

itatio

n po

licy

and

are

they

suf

ficie

nt to

ach

ieve

nat

iona

l ta

rget

s?

In li

ne w

ith p

olic

y an

d su

ffici

ent t

o ac

hiev

e na

tiona

l ta

rget

s

In li

ne w

ith p

olic

y bu

t in

suffi

cien

t to

ach

ieve

na

tiona

l tar

gets

Not i

n lin

e w

ith

polic

y an

d in

suffi

cien

t to

achi

eve

natio

nal

obje

ctive

s

0PP

Cs d

id n

ot a

lloca

te

suffi

cien

t fun

ds to

san

itatio

n un

der N

TP II

.

NTP

repo

rts.

Sust

aini

ngUp

-tak

eIn

cent

ives

Has

gove

rnm

ent (

natio

nal o

r loc

al)

deve

lope

d an

y po

licie

s, p

roce

dure

s or

pr

ogra

ms

to s

timul

ate

upta

ke o

f rur

al

sani

tatio

n se

rvic

es a

nd b

ehav

iors

by

hous

ehol

ds?

Polic

ies

and

proc

edur

es

(inst

rum

ents

) de

velo

ped

and

bein

g im

plem

ente

d

Som

e po

licie

s an

d pr

oced

ures

(in

stru

men

ts)

deve

lope

d bu

t no

t im

plem

ente

d

No p

olic

ies

or

proc

edur

es

(inst

rum

ents

) ex

ist

0NT

P3 in

clud

es a

san

itatio

n co

mpo

nent

but

this

is y

et to

be

ope

ratio

nalis

ed a

t sca

le.

GoV

has

also

intro

duce

d an

an

nual

Nat

iona

l San

itatio

n Da

y fo

r whi

ch M

oH m

ust

mak

e ac

tion

plan

s.

Deci

sion

730

(San

itatio

n Da

y)

Sust

aini

ngUp

-tak

eBe

havio

rsIs

the

gove

rnm

ent g

ener

atin

g an

d us

ing

evid

ence

to m

onito

r and

an

alyz

e ho

useh

old

sani

tatio

n be

havio

r ch

ange

and

take

act

ion

to im

prov

e su

stai

nabi

lity?

Rese

arch

use

d to

und

erst

and

beha

vior a

nd

take

act

ion

acro

ss a

var

iety

of

beh

avio

rs

Rese

arch

use

d to

und

erst

and

beha

vior b

ut n

o ac

tion

Rese

arch

not

us

ed a

nd n

o ac

tion

0.5

Som

e re

sear

ch w

as d

one

(led

by M

oH) u

nder

the

Hand

Was

hing

Initi

ative

.

No fo

rmat

ive re

sear

ch

at-s

cale

don

e to

info

rm

sani

tatio

n be

havio

r

Repo

rts o

f the

Han

d W

ashi

ng

Initi

ative

.Qu

antit

ative

Ass

essm

ent o

f pr

ogra

mm

atic

app

roac

hes

to

sani

tatio

n in

Vie

tnam

. 201

3 Co

nsul

tant

Rep

ort

Sust

aini

ngUs

er

outc

omes

Subs

ecto

r pr

ogre

ssIs

the

subs

ecto

r on

track

to m

eet t

he

stat

ed ta

rget

?On

-tra

ckOf

f-tra

ck b

ut

keep

ing

up

with

pop

ulat

ion

grow

th

Off-

track

0.5

MDG

targ

et h

as b

een

met

but

GoV

has

a m

ore

ambi

tious

targ

et fo

r ‘h

ygie

nic’

latri

nes.

The

se

ctor

is n

ot y

et o

n tra

ck to

m

eet t

his

targ

et.

JMP,

NTP

and

VIHE

MA

repo

rts.

Sust

aini

ngUs

er

outc

omes

Equi

ty o

f use

Wha

t is

the

ratio

of i

mpr

oved

toile

t ac

cess

bet

wee

n th

e lo

wes

t and

hig

hest

qu

intil

e in

rura

l are

as?

Less

than

2

times

Betw

een

2 an

d 5

Mor

e th

an 5

tim

es0.

5im

prov

ed a

cces

s am

ong

rura

l low

est q

uint

ile is

34%

an

d hi

ghes

t qui

ntile

is 9

8%

UNI

CEF

spec

ial t

abul

atio

n ba

sed

for E

APRO

; usi

ng M

ICS

2010

-201

1

Sust

aini

ngUs

er

outc

omes

Hygi

enic

use

of q

ualit

y fa

cilit

ies

Wha

t per

cent

age

of p

eopl

e liv

ing

in

rura

l are

as u

se im

prov

ed to

ilet f

acilit

ies

(exc

ludi

ng s

hare

d fa

cilit

ies)

?

Mor

e th

an 7

5%

of p

eopl

e us

e to

ilets

Betw

een

50%

an

d 75

% o

f pe

ople

use

toile

ts

Less

than

50%

of

peo

ple

use

toile

ts

0.5

JMP

2013

say

s 67

% fo

r ru

ral s

anita

tion

JMP

2013

repo

rts

Ser

vice

Del

iver

y A

sses

smen

t43

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

URBA

N SA

NITA

TION

ENAB

LING

Enab

ling

Polic

ySe

ctor

Tar

gets

Are

ther

e US

H ac

cess

targ

ets

(hou

seho

ld le

vel a

nd s

ewer

age/

sep

tage

m

anag

emen

t) in

the

natio

nal l

evel

de

velo

pmen

t pla

n?

Yes,

tar

gets

for

urba

n ho

useh

old

acce

ss a

nd

sew

erag

e/se

ptag

e m

anag

emen

t in

clud

ed in

the

deve

lopm

ent

plan

Targ

ets

for

urba

n ho

useh

old

acce

ss

incl

uded

in

the

deve

lopm

ent

plan

but

no

sew

erag

e or

sep

tage

m

anag

emen

t ta

rget

s in

clud

ed

No u

rban

sa

nita

tion

targ

ets

in th

e

deve

lopm

ent

plan

1SE

DP h

as a

was

tew

ater

co

llect

ion

targ

et b

ut n

one

for h

ouse

hold

san

itatio

n.

But i

t is

no lo

nger

a

key

poin

t of r

efer

ence

. Or

ient

atio

n on

urb

an

drai

nage

is th

e m

ain

refe

renc

e.

PRSP

has

a d

iffer

ent

sani

tatio

n ta

rget

, but

it is

no

t wid

ely

used

.Se

e U3

SAP

Anne

x 2b

)

Viet

nam

Dev

elop

men

t Goa

ls

(VDG

s)So

cio-

Econ

omic

Dev

elop

men

t St

rate

gy 2

011-

2020

(SED

S)Na

tiona

l Stra

tegy

of

Envir

onm

enta

l Pro

tect

ion

up to

20

20, V

isio

n to

203

0.Or

ient

atio

n of

Vie

tnam

Dra

inag

e an

d Sa

nita

tion

for U

rban

and

In

dust

rial A

reas

up

to 2

025,

Vi

sion

to 2

050.

Com

preh

ensi

ve S

trate

gy o

f De

velo

pmen

t and

Pov

erty

Re

duct

ion

(200

2).

Unifi

ed S

trate

gy o

f San

itatio

n Se

ctor

and

Act

ion

Plan

(U3S

AP,

Draf

t, 20

12).

Enab

ling

Polic

ySe

ctor

Pol

icy

Is th

ere

an u

rban

san

itatio

n po

licy

that

is

agr

eed

by s

take

hold

ers,

app

rove

d by

go

vern

men

t, an

d pu

blic

ly av

aila

ble?

Polic

y of

ficia

lly

appr

oved

and

pu

blic

ly av

aila

ble

Polic

y dr

afte

d an

d ag

reed

but

no

t offi

cial

ly ap

prov

ed

No p

olic

y1

The

vario

us la

ws,

dec

rees

et

c. a

re e

quiva

lent

to a

po

licy

thou

gh th

ey a

re n

ot

fully

har

mon

ized.

Law

of E

nviro

nmen

t Pro

tect

ion

(200

5).

Law

of C

onst

ruct

ion

(200

3).

Law

of W

ater

Res

ourc

es (2

012)

.Or

ient

atio

n of

Vie

tnam

Dra

inag

e an

d Sa

nita

tion

for U

rban

and

In

dust

rial A

reas

up

to 2

025,

Vi

sion

to 2

050.

Decr

ee o

f Dra

inag

e an

d Sa

nita

tion

for U

rban

and

In

dust

rial A

reas

(No.

88/2

007/

ND-C

P).

Enab

ling

Polic

yIn

stitu

tiona

l Rol

esAr

e th

e in

stitu

tiona

l rol

es o

f urb

an

sani

tatio

n su

bsec

tor p

laye

rs (n

atio

nal/

stat

e an

d lo

cal g

over

nmen

t, se

rvic

e pr

ovid

er, r

egul

ator

etc

.) cl

early

defi

ned

and

oper

atio

naliz

ed?

Defin

ed a

nd

oper

atio

naliz

edDe

fined

but

not

op

erat

iona

lized

Not d

efine

d1

For S

DA p

urpo

ses

sani

tatio

n =

man

agem

ent

of h

uman

was

te o

nly.

Resp

onsi

bilit

y fo

r thi

s in

ur

ban

area

s is

cle

arly

defin

ed.

Orie

ntat

ion

of V

ietn

am D

rain

age

and

Sani

tatio

n fo

r Urb

an a

nd

Indu

stria

l Are

as u

p to

202

5,

Visi

on to

205

0.De

cree

of D

rain

age

and

Sani

tatio

n fo

r Urb

an a

nd

Indu

stria

l Are

as (N

o.88

/200

7/ND

-CP)

.

Wat

er S

upp

ly a

nd S

anita

tion

in V

ietn

am44

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

Enab

ling

Plan

ning

Fund

flow

coo

rdin

atio

nDo

es g

over

nmen

t hav

e a

proc

ess

for

coor

dina

ting

mul

tiple

inve

stm

ents

in

the

subs

ecto

r (do

mes

tic o

r don

or, e

.g.

natio

nal g

rant

s, s

tate

bud

gets

, don

or

loan

s an

d gr

ants

etc

.)?

Coor

dina

tion

proc

ess

defin

ed a

nd

oper

atio

naliz

ed

Coor

dina

tion

proc

ess

defin

ed b

ut n

ot

oper

atio

naliz

ed

Not d

efine

d/ n

o pr

oces

s0.

MPI

ann

ually

coo

rdin

ates

m

ultip

le in

vest

men

ts,

but t

his

is n

ot c

lear

ly co

mm

unic

ated

to p

rovin

ces

and

rela

ted

inst

itutio

ns

Decr

ee o

f Con

stru

ctio

n In

vest

men

t Man

agem

ent

(No.

12/2

009/

ND-C

P).

Decr

ee o

f ODA

Man

agem

ent

(No.

13/2

006/

ND-C

P).

Prim

e M

inis

ter’s

Dec

isio

n of

the

Regu

latio

n fo

r ODA

on-

lend

ing

(No.

181/

2007

/QD-

TTg)

.M

PI’s

Let

ter f

or G

uida

nce

on

usin

g Go

vern

men

t sta

te b

udge

t (N

o.90

05/2

012/

BKHD

T).

Enab

ling

Plan

ning

Inve

smen

t pla

nsIs

ther

e a

med

ium

term

inve

stm

ent

plan

for u

rban

san

itatio

n ba

sed

on

natio

nal t

arge

ts th

at is

cos

ted,

prio

ritize

s in

vest

men

t nee

ds, i

s pu

blis

hed

and

used

?

Inve

stm

ent p

lan

base

d on

prio

rity

need

s ex

ists

, is

publ

ishe

d an

d us

ed

Exis

ts b

ut n

ot

used

, or u

nder

pr

epar

atio

n

0No

ne y

et b

ut d

evel

opm

ent

of a

Sec

tor I

nves

tmen

t Pl

an fo

r urb

an s

anita

tion

is p

ropo

sed

in th

e Dr

aft

Unifi

ed S

anita

tion

Sect

or

Stra

tegy

and

Act

ion

Plan

(U

3SAP

) 201

3, c

urre

ntly

awai

ting

gove

rnm

ent

appr

oval

.

Law

of U

rban

pla

nnin

g (2

009)

.Or

ient

atio

n of

Vie

tnam

Dra

inag

e an

d Sa

nita

tion

for U

rban

and

In

dust

rial A

reas

up

to 2

025,

Vi

sion

to 2

050.

Decr

ee o

f Dra

inag

e an

d Sa

nita

tion

for U

rban

and

In

dust

rial A

reas

(No.

88/2

007/

ND-C

P).

Enab

ling

Plan

ning

Annu

al re

view

Is th

ere

an a

nnua

l mul

ti-st

akeh

olde

r re

view

in p

lace

to m

onito

r sub

sect

or

perfo

rman

ce, t

o re

view

pro

gres

s an

d se

t co

rrect

ive a

ctio

ns?

Revie

w o

f pe

rform

ance

an

d se

tting

of

corre

ctive

act

ions

Revie

w o

f pe

rform

ance

bu

t no

setti

ng o

f co

rrect

ive a

ctio

ns

No re

view

or

set

ting

of

corre

ctive

act

ions

0An

nual

revie

ws

are

cond

ucte

d fo

r ext

erna

lly-

assi

sted

pro

ject

s bu

t not

for

the

subs

ecto

r as

a w

hole

.

MPI

’s L

ette

r req

uest

ing

stat

us re

ports

of I

nves

tmen

t su

perv

isio

n an

d ev

alua

tion

(605

8/20

12/B

KHDT

)

Enab

ling

Plan

ning

HR C

apac

ityHa

s an

ass

essm

ent b

een

unde

rtake

n of

the

hum

an re

sour

ce n

eeds

in th

e su

bsec

tor t

o m

eet t

he s

ubse

ctor

ta

rget

and

is th

e ac

tion

plan

bei

ng

impl

emen

ted?

Asse

ssm

ent

unde

rtake

n an

d ac

tions

bei

ng

impl

emen

ted

Asse

ssm

ent

unde

rtake

n bu

t no

act

ion

bein

g ta

ken

No a

sses

smen

t un

derta

ken

0.5

A ba

sic

HR n

eeds

as

sess

men

t was

car

ried

out a

s pa

rt of

U3S

AP

form

ulat

ion

but n

o ac

tion

has

been

take

n to

dat

e.

Unifi

ed S

trate

gy o

f San

itatio

n Se

ctor

and

Act

ion

Plan

(U3S

AP,

Draf

t, 20

12).

Enab

ling

Budg

etAd

equa

cyAr

e th

e an

nual

pub

lic fi

nanc

ial

com

mitm

ents

to th

e ur

ban

sani

tatio

n su

bsec

tor s

uffic

ient

to m

eet n

atio

nal

targ

ets

for t

he s

ubse

ctor

?

Mor

e th

an

75%

of w

hat i

s ne

eded

Betw

een

50-

75%

of n

eeds

Less

than

50%

of

nee

ds0

Base

d on

SDA

fina

ncia

l an

alys

isVi

etna

m: U

rban

Ser

vices

and

W

ater

Sup

ply

and

Sani

tatio

n (A

DB,2

009)

.W

ater

Sup

ply

and

Sani

tatio

n St

rate

gy B

uild

ing

on a

Sol

id

Foun

datio

n (W

B, 2

006)

.

Ser

vice

Del

iver

y A

sses

smen

t45

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

Enab

ling

Budg

etSt

ruct

ure

Does

the

budg

et s

truct

ure

perm

it in

vest

men

ts a

nd s

ubsi

dies

(ope

ratio

nal

cost

s, a

dmin

istra

tion,

deb

t ser

vice,

etc

) fo

r the

urb

an s

anita

tion

sect

or to

be

clea

rly id

entifi

ed?

Yes

for

inve

stm

ent a

nd

for s

ubsi

dies

Yes

for

inve

stm

ent b

ut

not s

ubsi

dies

No0

Regu

lar b

udge

ting

only

cove

rs o

pera

tiona

l cos

ts

of g

over

nmen

t offi

ces,

sa

larie

s, n

ot fo

r ser

vice

prov

isio

n an

d m

aint

enan

ce

Law

of S

tate

Bud

get (

2002

).Pr

ime

Min

iste

r’s D

ecis

ion

- Al

loca

tion

of re

gula

r ann

ual

stat

e bu

dget

(No.

59/2

010/

QD-T

Tg).

Decr

ee o

f Dra

inag

e an

d Sa

nita

tion

for U

rban

and

In

dust

rial A

reas

(No.

88/2

007/

ND-C

P).

Enab

ling

Budg

etCo

mpr

ehen

sive

Does

the

gove

rnm

ent b

udge

t co

mpr

ehen

sive

ly co

ver d

omes

tic a

nd

offic

ial d

onor

inve

stm

ent/s

ubsi

dy to

ur

ban

sani

tatio

n?

Mor

e th

an 7

5%

of fu

nds

to

subs

ecto

r on

budg

et

Betw

een

50-

75%

of f

unds

to

sub

sect

or o

n bu

dget

Less

than

50%

of

fund

s to

su

bsec

tor o

n bu

dget

0Bu

dget

is v

ery

limite

d in

sc

ope

(see

abo

ve)

Unifi

ed S

trate

gy o

f San

itatio

n Se

ctor

and

Act

ion

Plan

(U3S

AP,

Draf

t, 20

12).

Viet

nam

: Urb

an S

ervic

es a

nd

Wat

er S

uppl

y an

d Sa

nita

tion

(ADB

,200

9).

Wat

er S

uppl

y an

d Sa

nita

tion

Stra

tegy

, Bui

ldin

g on

a S

olid

Fo

unda

tion

(WB,

200

6).

DEVE

LOPI

NG

Deve

lopi

ngEx

pend

iture

Utiliz

atio

n of

dom

estic

fu

nds

Wha

t per

cent

age

of d

omes

tic fu

nds

budg

eted

for u

rban

san

itatio

n ar

e sp

ent

(3 y

ear a

vera

ge)?

Over

75%

Betw

een

50%

an

d 75

%Le

ss th

an 5

0%1

Smal

l ann

ual a

lloca

tions

he

nce

high

util

isat

ion.

St

atis

tics

Data

Yea

rboo

k, 2

011

SDA’

s fin

anci

al a

nalys

is.

Deve

lopi

ngEx

pend

iture

Utiliz

atio

n of

ext

erna

l fu

nds

Wha

t per

cent

age

of e

xter

nal f

unds

bu

dget

ed fo

r urb

an s

anita

tion

are

spen

t (3

yea

r ave

rage

)?

Over

75%

Betw

een

50%

an

d 75

%Le

ss th

an 5

0%0.

5M

OC re

ports

con

firm

this

.Fi

fteen

yea

rs o

f ODA

usi

ng in

Vi

etna

m (M

PI re

port,

201

2)SD

A’s

finan

cial

ana

lysis

Deve

lopi

ngEx

pend

iture

Repo

rting

Is u

rban

san

itatio

n ex

pend

iture

ver

sus

budg

et a

udite

d an

d re

porte

d on

in a

co

nsol

idat

ed fo

rmat

for a

ll so

urce

s of

do

mes

tic a

nd o

ffici

al d

onor

exp

endi

ture

?

Yes

for d

omes

tic

and

dono

r ex

pend

iture

Yes

for d

omes

tic

expe

nditu

reNo

1Au

dits

do

not c

over

O&M

ex

pend

iture

.Se

ctor

fina

ncin

g re

port

of W

B,

ADB,

JIC

A et

c.La

w o

f Sta

te B

udge

t Law

(2

012)

.Go

v. De

cisi

on o

f Gov

ernm

ent

audi

ting

(No.

04/2

012/

QD-

KTNN

).Va

rious

util

ity re

ports

.

Deve

lopi

ngEq

uity

Loca

l par

ticip

atio

nAr

e th

ere

clea

rly d

efine

d pr

oced

ures

fo

r inf

orm

ing,

con

sulti

ng w

ith a

nd

supp

ortin

g lo

cal p

artic

ipat

ion

in

plan

ning

, bud

getin

g an

d im

plem

entin

g fo

r urb

an s

anita

tion

deve

lopm

ents

?

Yes

and

syst

emat

ical

ly ap

plie

d

Yes,

but

not

sy

stem

atic

ally

appl

ied

No0.

5Pa

rtici

patio

n of

loca

l co

mm

unity

ge

nera

lly

happ

ens

only

in O

DA-

fund

ed p

roje

cts.

MPI

’s /

MoF

’s a

gree

men

t le

tters

for i

ndivi

dual

inve

stm

ent

proj

ects

.Va

rious

PPC

’s S

ocio

-Eco

nom

ic

Annu

al P

lans

Wat

er S

upp

ly a

nd S

anita

tion

in V

ietn

am46

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

Deve

lopi

ngEq

uity

Budg

et a

lloca

tion

crite

riaHa

ve c

riter

ia (o

r a fo

rmul

a) b

een

dete

rmin

ed to

allo

cate

urb

an s

anita

tion

fund

ing

equi

tabl

y to

urb

an u

tiliti

es

or s

ervic

e pr

ovid

ers

and

amon

g m

unic

ipal

ities

and

is it

bei

ng c

onsi

sten

tly

appl

ied?

Yes,

app

lied

cons

iste

ntly

Yes,

but

no

t app

lied

cons

iste

ntly

No0

No fo

rmul

a ha

s be

en

deve

lope

d or

is p

ropo

sed

at

pres

ent.

Deve

lopi

ngEq

uity

Redu

cing

ineq

ualit

yDo

loca

l gov

ernm

ent o

r urb

an s

ervic

e pr

ovid

ers

(nat

iona

l or i

n 3

larg

est

citie

s) h

ave

spec

ific

plan

s or

mea

sure

s de

velo

ped

and

impl

emen

ted

for s

ervin

g th

e ur

ban

poor

?

Plan

s de

velo

ped

and

impl

emen

ted

Plan

s de

velo

ped

but n

ot

impl

emen

ted

No p

lans

do

cum

ente

d0

NoVa

rious

util

ity’s

bus

ines

s an

nual

pl

ans

Deve

lopi

ngOu

tput

Quan

tity

(acc

ess)

Is th

e an

nual

exp

ansi

on o

f urb

an

hous

ehol

ds g

aini

ng a

cces

s to

saf

e sa

nita

tion

suffi

cien

t to

mee

t the

su

bsec

tor t

arge

ts?

Over

75%

of t

hat

need

ed to

reac

h se

ctor

targ

ets

Betw

een

75%

an

d 50

% o

f th

at n

eede

d to

ac

hiev

e ta

rget

s

Less

than

50%

of

that

nee

ded

to

reac

h ta

rget

s

0Qu

estio

n is

not

ver

y re

leva

nt s

ince

the

grea

t maj

ority

of u

rban

ho

useh

olds

alre

ady

have

an

impr

oved

toile

t. Bu

t dire

ct

conn

ectio

ns to

sew

erag

e ne

twor

ks a

re in

crea

sing

ly on

ly sl

owly.

Unifi

ed S

trate

gy o

f San

itatio

n Se

ctor

and

Act

ion

Plan

(U3S

AP,

Draf

t, 20

12).

UNIC

EF /

WHO

JM

P re

ports

.

Deve

lopi

ngOu

tput

Quan

tity

(trea

tmen

t)Is

the

annu

al in

crea

se in

the

prop

ortio

n of

feca

l was

te th

at is

saf

ely

colle

cted

an

d tre

ated

gro

win

g at

the

pace

re

quire

d to

mee

t the

sub

sect

or ta

rget

s (fo

r bot

h on

-site

and

sew

erag

e)?

For c

olle

ctio

n an

d fo

r tre

atm

ent

For c

olle

ctio

n bu

t no

t for

trea

tmen

t.No

t for

col

lect

ion

or tr

eatm

ent (

or

if no

targ

et)

0An

nual

inve

stm

ents

in

was

tew

ater

trea

tmen

t are

sm

all f

or th

e co

untry

as

a w

hole

, and

littl

e is

bei

ng

done

to im

prov

e fe

cal

slud

ge m

anag

emen

t.

MOC

’s C

ircul

ar p

rom

ulga

ting

stat

istic

al a

nd m

onito

ring

indi

cato

rs in

Con

stru

ctio

n se

ctor

(N

o. 0

5/20

12/T

T-BX

D).

Prov

inci

al D

oC’s

ann

ual r

epor

ts.

The

Viet

nam

Wat

erw

ater

Rev

iew

in

Urb

an A

reas

(Dra

ft re

port,

W

B, 2

012)

.

Deve

lopi

ngOu

tput

Repo

rting

Are

ther

e pr

oced

ures

and

pro

cess

es

appl

ied

on a

regu

lar b

asis

to m

onito

r ur

ban

sani

tatio

n ac

cess

and

the

qual

ity

of s

ervic

es a

nd is

the

info

rmat

ion

diss

emin

ated

?

Qual

ity,

quan

tity

and

diss

emin

ated

Qual

ity o

r qu

antit

yNe

ither

0No

pro

cedu

res

in

plac

e th

ough

MOC

has

ac

know

ledg

ed th

e ne

ed.

Unifi

ed S

trate

gy o

f San

itatio

n Se

ctor

and

Act

ion

Plan

(U3S

AP,

Draf

t, 20

12).

The

Viet

nam

Was

tew

ater

Re

view

in U

rban

Are

as (D

raft

repo

rt, W

B, 2

012)

Wor

ksho

p Pr

ocee

ding

s –

Was

te w

ater

trea

tmen

t and

Sl

udge

man

agem

ent i

n Vi

etna

m

(MoC

, 201

3)

Ser

vice

Del

iver

y A

sses

smen

t47

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

SUST

AINI

NG

Sust

aini

ngM

aint

enan

ceCo

llect

ion

and

treat

men

tW

hat i

s th

e pr

opor

tion

of to

tal f

ecal

w

aste

gen

erat

ed th

at g

ets

safe

ly co

llect

ed a

nd tr

eate

d?

Over

75%

of

that

gen

erat

ed

is c

olle

cted

and

tre

ated

Over

50%

of

that

gen

erat

ed

is c

olle

cted

from

th

e HH

leve

l

Less

than

50%

of

that

gen

erat

ed0

Wid

ely

acce

pted

figu

re is

be

low

10%

. The

re a

re v

ery

few

was

tew

ater

trea

tmen

t pl

ants

in th

e co

untry

.

Decr

ees

on E

nviro

nmen

tal

Prot

ectio

n Fe

es (6

7/20

03/N

D-CP

& 5

9/20

13/N

D-CP

). De

cree

of D

rain

age

and

Sani

tatio

n fo

r Urb

an a

nd

Indu

stria

l Are

as (N

o.88

/200

7/ND

-CP)

.

Sust

aini

ngM

aint

enan

ceCo

st re

cove

ryAr

e O&

M c

osts

of t

reat

men

t sys

tem

s (b

eyon

d ho

useh

old

leve

l fac

ilitie

s)

asse

ssed

/kno

wn

and

fully

met

by

eith

er

cost

reco

very

thro

ugh

user

fees

and

/or

loca

l rev

enue

or t

rans

fers

?

O&M

cos

ts

know

n an

d >

75%

cov

ered

th

roug

h co

st

reco

very

O&M

cos

ts a

re

know

n an

d 50

%

cove

red

thro

ugh

cost

reco

very

O&M

cos

ts n

ot

know

n0

O&M

cos

ts n

ot m

et b

ut

draf

t U3S

AP p

ropo

ses

fee

revis

ions

.

Stan

dard

of d

omes

tic

was

tew

ater

dis

char

ge (T

CVN

14:2

008)

.

Sust

aini

ngM

aint

enan

ceDi

scha

rge

Are

ther

e no

rms

and

stan

dard

s fo

r w

aste

wat

er d

isch

arge

for s

epta

ge a

nd

sew

erag

e tre

atm

ent p

lant

s th

at a

re

syst

emat

ical

ly m

onito

red

unde

r a re

gim

e of

san

ctio

ns (p

enal

ties)

?

Exis

t and

are

m

onito

red

unde

r a

regi

me

of

sanc

tions

Exis

t and

maj

ority

ar

e m

onito

red,

bu

t the

re a

re n

o sa

nctio

ns

Stan

dard

s ex

ist

but m

ajor

ity

of p

lant

s ar

e no

t reg

ular

ly m

onito

red

0.5

Lega

l san

ctio

ns a

re

avai

labl

e bu

t not

gen

eral

ly en

forc

ed. A

nd th

ere

is

not y

et a

sta

ndar

d fo

r se

ptag

e m

anag

emen

t /

treat

men

t but

a s

epta

ge

man

agem

ent g

uide

line

is

unde

r pre

para

tion

by M

OC

The

Natio

nal S

trate

gy o

f Clim

ate

Chan

ge D

ealin

g (2

011)

Sust

aini

ngM

aint

enan

ceM

anag

emen

t of D

isas

ter

Risk

and

Clim

ate

Chan

geDo

loca

l gov

ernm

ent o

r ser

vice

prov

ider

s (n

atio

nal o

r in

3 la

rges

t citi

es) h

ave

plan

s fo

r cop

ing

with

nat

ural

dis

aste

rs

and

clim

ate

chan

ge?

Yes,

the

maj

ority

of

urb

an s

ervic

e pr

ovid

ers

have

a

plan

for d

isas

ter

risk

man

agem

ent

and

clim

ate

chan

ge

No. O

nly

som

e se

rvic

e pr

ovid

ers

have

a p

lan

for

disa

ster

risk

m

anag

emen

t an

d cl

imat

e ch

ange

or m

ost

serv

ice

prov

ider

s ha

ve u

nder

take

n a

vuln

erab

ility

asse

ssm

ent.

No s

ervic

e pr

ovid

er h

as a

cl

imat

e ac

tion

plan

or h

as

unde

rtake

n a

vuln

erab

ility

asse

ssm

ent.

0On

ly a

few

urb

an W

SS

proj

ects

hav

e co

nsid

ered

cl

imat

e ch

ange

impl

icat

ions

Unifi

ed S

trate

gy o

f San

itatio

n Se

ctor

and

Act

ion

Plan

(U3S

AP,

Draf

t, 20

12).

Wor

shop

Pro

ceed

ings

- P

rivat

e se

ctor

par

ticip

atio

n in

Vie

tnam

w

ater

and

san

itatio

n se

ctor

(W

B/ S

eaw

un, 2

008)

Wat

er a

nd s

anita

tion

sect

or o

f Vi

etna

m (W

HO/M

oH, 2

012)

.

Sust

aini

ngEx

pans

ion

Upta

keHa

s go

vern

men

t (na

tiona

l or l

ocal

) de

velo

ped

any

polic

ies,

pro

cedu

res

or

prog

ram

s to

stim

ulat

e up

take

of u

rban

sa

nita

tion

serv

ices

and

beh

avio

rs b

y ho

useh

olds

?

Polic

ies

and

proc

edur

es

(inst

rum

ents

) de

velo

ped

and

bein

g im

plem

ente

d

Som

e po

licie

s an

d pr

oced

ures

(in

stru

men

ts)

deve

lope

d bu

t no

t im

plem

ente

d

No p

olic

ies

or

proc

edur

es

(inst

rum

ents

) ex

ist

0.5

Littl

e is

bei

ng d

one

at

pres

ent e

xcep

t in

a fe

w

exte

rnal

ly-as

sist

ed p

roje

cts

Prov

inci

al D

oC’s

ann

ual r

epor

ts.

Vario

us u

tility

’s b

usin

ess

annu

al

plan

s

Wat

er S

upp

ly a

nd S

anita

tion

in V

ietn

am48

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

Sust

aini

ngEx

pans

ion

Plan

sDo

gov

ernm

ent/s

ervic

e pr

ovid

ers

have

bus

ines

s pl

ans

for e

xpan

ding

the

prop

ortio

n of

city

wid

e fe

cal w

aste

that

is

safe

ly co

llect

ed a

nd tr

eate

d?

Busi

ness

pla

ns

for e

xpan

sion

of

col

lect

ion

& tre

atm

ent b

eing

im

plem

ente

d

Busi

ness

pla

ns

for e

xpan

sion

of

col

lect

ion

& tre

atm

ent u

nder

pr

epar

atio

n

No B

usin

ess

Plan

s0

Sign

ifica

nt n

ew in

vest

men

ts

in o

nly

a fe

w lo

catio

ns. V

ery

little

bei

ng d

one

to im

prov

e fe

cal s

ludg

e m

anag

emen

t

Deci

sion

s pr

omul

gate

d by

in

dvid

ual p

rovin

ces

on th

e sa

nita

ton

inve

stm

ent s

uppo

rt an

d so

cial

isat

ion

Wor

shop

Pro

ceed

ings

- P

rivat

e se

ctor

par

ticip

atio

n in

Vie

tnam

w

ater

and

san

itatio

n se

ctor

(W

B/ S

eaw

un, 2

008)

Inve

stm

ent f

or th

e in

frast

ruct

ure

proj

ects

in V

ietn

am (M

PI’s

W

orks

hop

pres

enta

tion,

201

1)

Sust

aini

ngEx

pans

ion

Priva

te s

ecto

r de

velo

pmen

tDo

es th

e go

vern

men

t hav

e on

goin

g pr

ogra

ms

and

mea

sure

s to

stre

ngth

en

the

dom

estic

priv

ate

sect

or fo

r the

pr

ovis

ion

of s

anita

tion

serv

ices

in u

rban

or

per

i-urb

an a

reas

?

Yes,

var

ious

co

mpo

nent

sIn

dev

elop

men

t, fe

w c

ompo

nent

sNo

0.5

Lim

ited

activ

ity in

this

are

a,

for e

xam

ple

a BO

T w

aste

w

ater

trea

tmen

t pla

nt in

Ye

n So

, Han

oi. A

ssoc

iate

d fin

anci

al m

echa

nism

and

co

st re

cove

ry is

sues

are

ch

alle

ngin

g.

Unifi

ed S

trate

gy o

f San

itatio

n Se

ctor

and

Act

ion

Plan

(U3S

AP,

Draf

t, 20

12).

Sust

aini

ngUs

er

Outc

omes

Is th

e su

bsec

tor o

n tra

ck to

mee

t the

st

ated

targ

et?

On-t

rack

Off-

track

but

ke

epin

g up

w

ith p

opul

atio

n gr

owth

Off-

track

0Th

ere

is a

maj

or fu

ndin

g ga

p, n

o in

vest

men

t pla

n an

d dr

aft n

atio

nal s

trate

gy

(U3S

AP) i

s ye

t to

be

appr

oved

and

ado

pted

. Ta

rget

for w

aste

wat

er

treat

men

t is

still

far o

ff

Feas

ibilit

y st

udie

s fo

r new

in

vest

men

t / re

habi

litat

ion

/ ext

entio

n of

dra

inag

e an

d sa

nita

tion

syst

ems;

Soc

io-

econ

omic

sur

vey

repo

rts a

s w

ell a

s W

illing

ness

to c

onne

ct

repo

rts in

var

ious

citi

es a

nd

tow

ns.

Sust

aini

ngUs

er

Outc

omes

Equi

ty o

f use

Wha

t is

the

ratio

of i

mpr

oved

toile

t ac

cess

bet

wee

n th

e lo

wes

t and

hig

hest

qu

intil

e in

urb

an a

reas

?

Less

than

2

times

Betw

een

2 an

d 5

Mor

e th

an 5

tim

es1

Low

est q

uint

ile h

as 6

2%

acce

ss to

impr

oved

sa

nita

tion;

hig

hest

qui

ntile

10

0% a

cces

s to

impr

oved

sa

nita

tion;

so

fact

or is

1.6

JMP

spec

ial t

abul

atio

n us

ing

MIC

s 20

10/2

011

Sust

aini

ngUs

er

Outc

omes

Use

of fa

cilit

ies

Wha

t per

cent

age

of p

eopl

e liv

ing

in

urba

n ar

eas

use

impr

oved

toile

t fac

ilitie

s (e

xclu

ding

sha

red

faci

litie

s)?

Mor

e th

an 9

0%

of p

eopl

eM

ore

than

75%

of

peo

ple

Less

than

75%

of

peo

ple

0.5

94%

repo

rted

by J

MP

2012

(for

201

0). H

owev

er,

mos

t hou

seho

lds

have

se

ptic

tank

s an

d se

ptag

e m

anag

emen

t is

poor

, hen

ce

the

med

ium

sco

re a

war

ded

MOC

’s C

ircul

ar p

rom

ulga

ting

stat

istic

al a

nd m

onito

ring

indi

cato

rs in

Con

stru

ctio

n se

ctor

(N

o 05

/201

2/TT

-BXD

).Pr

ovin

cial

DOC

’s a

nnua

l rep

orts

.Th

e Vi

etna

m W

aste

wat

er

Revie

w in

Urb

an A

reas

(Dra

ft re

port,

WB,

201

2)JA

R Ai

de M

emoi

re, 2

012.

Ser

vice

Del

iver

y A

sses

smen

t49

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

RURA

L W

ATER

SUP

PLY

ENAB

LING

Enab

ling

Polic

ySe

ctor

targ

ets

Are

ther

e RW

S ac

cess

targ

ets

in th

e na

tiona

l lev

el d

evel

opm

ent p

lan?

Yes,

ther

e ar

e ta

rget

s fo

r rur

al

wat

er s

uppl

y in

th

e de

velo

pmen

t pl

an

Ther

e ar

e na

tiona

l ta

rget

s in

the

deve

lopm

ent

plan

but

non

e fo

r ru

ral w

ater

.

No ta

rget

s in

the

deve

lopm

ent

plan

1Ta

rget

s in

SED

P an

d VD

Gs.

(Als

o in

upd

ated

NRW

SS

Stra

tegy

to 2

020,

and

NT

P3.

SEDP

, Vie

tnam

Dev

elop

men

t Go

als,

Nat

iona

l Tar

get

Prog

ram

me

for N

ew R

ural

De

velo

pmen

t 201

0-20

incl

udes

2

RWSS

indi

cato

rs

Enab

ling

Polic

ySe

ctor

pol

icy

Is th

ere

a ru

ral w

ater

pol

icy

that

is

agre

ed b

y st

akeh

olde

rs, a

ppro

ved

by

gove

rnm

ent,

and

is p

ublic

ly av

aila

ble?

Polic

y of

ficia

lly

appr

oved

and

pu

blic

ly av

aila

ble

Polic

y dr

afte

d an

d ag

reed

but

no

t offi

cial

ly ap

prov

ed

No p

olic

y1

Polic

y is

effe

ctive

ly de

fined

by

: NTP

2,3

doc

umen

ts

/ D

ecre

e 62

(acc

ess

to

cred

it) a

nd P

M D

ecis

ion

31/2

009/

QD-

TTg

on R

WS

to e

ncou

rage

Inve

stm

ent

and

man

agem

ent o

f W

SS s

yste

ms

/ Nat

iona

l Fr

amew

ork

on H

H w

ater

tre

atm

ent a

nd s

tora

ge

appr

oved

by

MAR

D

NRW

SS S

trate

gy u

p to

202

0,

with

vis

ion

to 2

030

PM D

ecis

ion

366

appr

oved

NT

P3 /

Prog

ram

for r

esul

ts-

base

d (P

4R) P

M D

ecis

ion

No.6

2 to

sup

port

impl

e-m

enta

tion

of

NRW

SSS

(upd

ated

in 2

013)

/De

cisi

on 1

31/Q

D-TT

g, P

M

Deci

sion

71/

2010

on

PPP.

Enab

ling

Polic

yIn

stut

tiona

l Rol

esAr

e th

e in

stitu

tiona

l rol

es o

f rur

al w

ater

su

bsec

tor p

laye

rs (n

atio

nal/s

tate

& lo

cal

gove

rnm

ent,

serv

ice

prov

ider

, reg

ulat

or

etc.

) cle

arly

defin

ed a

nd o

pera

tiona

lized

?

Defin

ed a

nd

oper

atio

naliz

edDe

fined

but

not

op

erat

iona

lized

Not d

efine

d0.

5Ro

les

wel

l defi

ned

but n

ot

fully

ope

ratio

naliz

ed, f

or

exam

ple

MoE

T no

t ful

ly in

volve

d in

sch

ool w

ater

su

pply.

MoH

/DoH

in s

ome

prov

ince

s no

t inv

olve

d in

NTP

docu

men

ts, I

nter

-M

inis

teria

l Circ

ular

s TT

No

.80/

2007

/TTL

T-BT

C-NN

and

TT

48/

2008

and

TT

93/2

007/

TTLT

/BNN

-BYT

-BGD

DT u

nder

PM

Dec

isio

n 27

7(no

w re

plac

ed

by In

ter-

min

iste

rial C

ircul

ars

No.0

4/20

13/T

TLT/

BNNP

TNT-

BYT-

BGDD

T an

d No

.27/

2013

/ TT

LT/B

NN-B

YT-B

GDDT

und

er

PM D

ecis

ion

366.

Enab

ling

Plan

ning

Fund

flow

coo

rdin

atio

nDo

es g

over

nmen

t hav

e a

proc

ess

for

coor

dina

ting

mul

tiple

inve

stm

ents

in

the

subs

ecto

r (do

mes

tic o

r don

or, e

g.

Natio

nal g

rant

s, s

tate

bud

gets

, don

or

loan

s an

d gr

ants

etc

.)?

Coor

dina

tion

proc

ess

defin

ed a

nd

oper

atio

naliz

ed

Coor

dina

tion

proc

ess

defin

ed b

ut n

ot

oper

atio

naliz

ed

Not d

efine

d/ n

o pr

oces

s1

JARs

hel

d fo

r NTP

2,3

.Ai

d Ef

fect

ivene

ss F

orum

ha

s tw

ice-

year

ly m

eetin

g (g

over

nmen

t and

don

ors)

.

Decr

ee 1

31 o

n OD

A ut

ilisat

ion.

An

nual

CG

Mee

ting

repo

rt (M

PI

is in

cha

rge

on b

ehal

f of G

oV.

JAR

repo

rts a

nd A

ide

Mem

oire

s.

Enab

ling

Plan

ning

Inve

smen

t pla

nIs

ther

e a

med

ium

term

inve

stm

ent p

lan

for r

ural

wat

er b

ased

on

natio

nal t

arge

ts

that

is c

oste

d, p

riorit

izes

inve

stm

ent

need

s, is

pub

lishe

d an

d us

ed?

Inve

stm

ent p

lan

base

d on

prio

rity

need

s ex

ists

, is

publ

ishe

d an

d us

ed

Exis

ts b

ut n

ot

used

, or u

nder

pr

epar

atio

n

Does

not

exis

t0.

5M

ediu

m T

erm

pla

ns a

re

mad

e bu

t ten

d to

get

ig

nore

d –

annu

al p

lans

ta

ke p

refe

renc

e an

d ar

e no

t alw

ays

base

d on

the

med

ium

term

pla

n.

NTP3

doc

umen

t, an

nual

MAR

D ci

rcul

ars

requ

estin

g tw

o ye

ar

plan

s.

NTP

Activ

ity P

lan

2013

-20

15.

MPI

Circ

ular

on

prep

arat

ion

of

annu

al p

lan.

Wat

er S

upp

ly a

nd S

anita

tion

in V

ietn

am50

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

Enab

ling

Plan

ning

Annu

al re

view

Wha

t per

cent

age

of d

omes

tic fu

nds

budg

eted

for r

ural

wat

er a

re s

pent

(3

year

ave

rage

)?

Revie

w o

f pe

rform

ance

an

d se

tting

of

corre

ctive

act

ions

Revie

w o

f pe

rform

ance

bu

t no

setti

ng o

f co

rrect

ive a

ctio

ns

No re

view

or

set

ting

of

corre

ctive

act

ions

1JA

RS fo

r NTP

2,3.

The

re a

re

in fa

ct s

ix m

onth

ly ev

ents

: (o

ne re

view

mis

sion

and

on

e te

chni

cal r

evie

w) w

ith

invo

lvem

ent o

f MAR

D, M

oH,

MoE

T, M

PI, M

oF, d

onor

s.

Decr

ee 1

31 o

n OD

A ut

ilisat

ion.

Tech

nica

l Rev

iew

repo

rts.

Agre

emen

ts b

etw

een

GoV

and

dono

rs.

Repo

rts o

n Go

V.-

dono

rs

asse

ssm

ent (

UNIC

EF-M

oH,

WB-

GoV)

.

Enab

ling

Plan

ning

HR C

apac

ityHa

s an

ass

essm

ent b

een

unde

rtake

n of

the

hum

an re

sour

ce n

eeds

in th

e su

bsec

tor t

o m

eet t

he s

ubse

ctor

ta

rget

and

is th

e ac

tion

plan

bei

ng

impl

emen

ted?

Asse

ssm

ent

unde

rtake

n an

d ac

tions

bei

ng

impl

emen

ted

Asse

ssm

ent

unde

rtake

n bu

t no

act

ion

bein

g ta

ken

No a

sses

smen

t un

derta

ken

0.5

Occa

sion

al s

mal

l stu

dies

un

derta

ken

by re

sear

ch

inst

itutio

ns o

r pro

fess

iona

l as

soci

atio

ns, b

ut n

o go

vern

men

t-le

d se

ctor

-wid

e as

sess

men

t. No

act

ion

resu

lted

from

the

smal

l st

udie

s

Enab

ling

Budg

etAd

quen

cyAr

e th

e pu

blic

fina

ncia

l com

mitm

ents

to

the

rura

l wat

er s

ubse

ctor

suf

ficie

nt

to m

eet t

he n

atio

nal t

arge

ts fo

r the

su

bsec

tor?

Mor

e th

an

75%

of w

hat i

s ne

eded

Betw

een

50-

75%

of n

eeds

Less

than

50%

of

nee

ds0

Confi

rmed

by

finan

cial

m

odel

. Dem

and

is h

igh

and

fund

ing

insu

ffici

ent.

Mos

t fun

ds fo

r mee

ting

targ

ets

com

e fro

m d

onor

s an

d so

ft lo

ans

take

n by

us

ers,

not

pub

lic fi

nanc

ial

com

mitm

ent.

NTP

2, 3

doc

s.

Outp

ut o

f SDA

fina

ncia

l mod

el.

/ Rep

orts

of N

TPSO

on

annu

al

impl

emen

tatio

n of

pla

n of

ac

tiviti

es.

Enab

ling

Budg

etSt

ruct

ure

Does

the

budg

et s

truct

ure

perm

it th

e in

vest

men

ts a

nd s

ubsi

dies

(ope

ratio

nal

cost

s, a

dmin

istra

tion,

deb

t ser

vice,

etc

.) fo

r the

rura

l wat

er s

ecto

r to

be c

lear

ly id

entifi

ed?

Yes

for

inve

stm

ent a

nd

for s

ubsi

dies

Yes

for

inve

stm

ent b

ut

not s

ubsi

dies

No1

Natio

nal b

udge

t (in

clud

ing

dono

r sup

port)

onl

y sh

ows

inve

stm

ents

, not

sub

sidi

es.

Subs

idie

s ar

e ap

plie

d di

ffere

ntly

in d

iffer

ent

prog

ram

s.

NTP3

doc

umen

tGo

V –

dono

r agr

eem

ent f

or

NTP3

201

1-15

NTP2

com

plet

ion

repo

rt,sa

nita

tion

com

pone

nt (V

IHEM

A).

Enab

ling

Budg

etCo

mpr

ehen

sive

Does

the

gove

rnm

ent b

udge

t co

mpr

ehen

sive

ly co

ver d

omes

tic a

nd

offic

ial d

onor

inve

stm

ent/

subs

idy

to

rura

l wat

er?

Mor

e th

an 7

5%

of fu

nds

to

subs

ecto

r on

budg

et

Betw

een

50-

75%

of f

unds

to

sub

sect

or o

n bu

dget

Less

than

50%

of

fund

s to

su

bsec

tor o

n bu

dget

0.5

Budg

et is

nor

mal

ly in

crea

sed

by 1

0% p

.a.

with

out r

efer

ence

to a

ctua

l ne

eds.

But

for 2

013

it w

ill re

duce

d ab

out 1

0% o

n NA

requ

est.

Wat

er s

uppl

y ac

coun

ts fo

r 70-

80%

of

tota

l RW

SS b

udge

t.

Reso

lutio

ns o

f Nat

iona

l As

sem

bly

for N

TP3.

NTP3

Ann

ual P

lan

of a

ctivi

ties

for

2012

, 201

3 an

d 20

14

Ser

vice

Del

iver

y A

sses

smen

t51

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

DEVE

LOPI

NG

Deve

lopi

ngEx

pend

iture

Utiliz

atio

n of

dom

estic

fu

nds

Wha

t per

cent

age

of d

omes

tic fu

nds

budg

eted

for r

ural

wat

er a

re s

pent

(3

year

ave

rage

)?

Over

75%

Betw

een

50%

an

d 75

%Le

ss th

an 5

0%1

Dom

estic

fund

ing

is s

mal

l an

d th

eref

ore

easi

ly sp

ent.

Stat

e Au

dit R

epor

t,An

nual

Bud

get a

lloca

tion

info

rmat

ion

anno

unce

men

t by

MPI

to p

rovin

ces

and

NTP

SONT

P re

ports

on

annu

al

impl

emen

tatio

n an

d bu

dget

di

sbur

sem

ent.

Deve

lopi

ngEx

pend

iture

Utiliz

atio

n of

ext

erna

l fu

nds

Wha

t per

cent

age

of e

xter

nal f

unds

bu

dget

ed fo

r rur

al w

ater

are

spe

nt (3

ye

ar a

vera

ge)?

Over

75%

Betw

een

50%

an

d 75

%Le

ss th

an 5

0%1

Dono

rs a

nd g

over

nmen

t ha

ve p

riorit

ized

wat

er

supp

ly w

ithin

NTP

. Few

er

dela

ys in

rura

l wat

er

proj

ects

com

pare

d to

ur

ban.

Rep

orts

sho

w th

at

exte

rnal

bud

get

acco

unts

fo

r 14-

16%

and

80-

90%

of

allo

cate

d sp

ent

mai

nly

gran

t ODA

, loa

n fro

m W

B,

ADB

spen

t per

cent

age

is a

sl

ight

ly lo

wer

Stat

e au

dit r

epor

ts.

Annu

al

Join

t GoV

-Don

ors

Rev

iew

Repo

rts. /

Agr

eem

ent b

etw

een

GoV.

and

Don

ors

on a

nnua

l bu

dget

allo

catio

n. /

NTP

Repo

rt on

impl

emen

tatio

n of

Ann

ual

Wor

kpla

n.

Deve

lopi

ngEx

pend

iture

Repo

rting

Is ru

ral w

ater

exp

endi

ture

ver

sus

budg

et a

udite

d an

d re

porte

d on

in a

co

nsol

idat

ed fo

rmat

for a

ll so

urce

s of

do

mes

tic a

nd o

ffici

al d

onor

exp

endi

ture

?

Yes,

for d

omes

tic

and

dono

r ex

pend

iture

Yes,

for d

omes

tic

expe

nditu

reNo

1Ye

s. A

ll fin

anci

al re

ports

fo

llow

form

ats

issu

ed b

y M

PI a

nd M

OF.

NTP,

JAR

and

Stat

e Au

ditin

g Ag

ency

of V

ietn

am re

ports

.

Deve

lopi

ngEq

uity

Loca

l par

ticip

atio

nAr

e th

ere

clea

rly d

efine

d pr

oced

ures

fo

r inf

orm

ing,

con

sulti

ng w

ith a

nd

supp

ortin

g lo

cal p

artic

ipat

ion

in

plan

ning

, bud

getin

g an

d im

plem

entin

g fo

r rur

al w

ater

dev

elop

men

ts?

Yes

and

syst

emat

ical

ly ap

plie

d

Yes,

but

not

sy

stem

atic

ally

appl

ied

No0.

5Pr

oced

ures

defi

ned

in

Inte

r-M

inis

teria

l Circ

ular

(0

4/20

13 a

nd 2

7/20

13)

betw

een

MAR

D, M

OF,

MPI

and

bet

wee

n M

ARD,

M

OH a

nd M

oET,

and

PM

Deci

sion

135

, Dire

ctive

s of

Re

leva

nt M

inis

tries

to lo

cal

prov

ince

s fo

r pre

para

tion

of p

lan,

bud

get a

lloca

tion

and

impl

emen

tatio

n. B

ut

in p

ract

ice

was

not

fully

pa

rtici

pato

ry.

Inte

r-M

inis

teria

l Circ

ular

be

twee

n M

ARD,

MOF

, MOH

an

d M

oET

and

Inte

r-m

inis

teria

l Ci

rcul

ar b

etw

een

Mar

d, M

PI

and

MoF

mad

e un

der P

M

Deci

sion

135

/200

9/QD

-TTg

on

Man

agem

ent a

nd D

irect

ion

of

NTP;

Dec

ree

131

(man

agem

ent

and

utilis

atio

n of

ODA

.).

Wat

er S

upp

ly a

nd S

anita

tion

in V

ietn

am52

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

Deve

lopi

ngEq

uity

Budg

et a

lloca

tion

crite

riaHa

ve c

riter

ia (o

r a fo

rmul

a) b

een

dete

rmin

ed to

allo

cate

rura

l wat

er

fund

ing

equi

tabl

y to

rura

l com

mun

ities

an

d is

it b

eing

app

lied

cons

iste

ntly?

Yes,

app

lied

cons

iste

ntly

Yes,

but

no

t app

lied

cons

iste

ntly

No1

Inte

r-M

inis

teria

l Circ

ular

s 48

and

80

defin

e ba

sis

for f

undi

ng a

lloca

tions

, as

doe

s NT

P. Cr

iteria

are

be

ing

appl

ied.

The

crit

eria

fo

r bud

get a

lloca

tion

base

d on

sco

res

(wat

er s

uppl

y-bu

dget

for i

nves

tmen

t an

d re

curre

nt b

udge

t for

sa

nita

tion)

are

revis

ed

and

agre

ed b

y th

e 3

line

min

istri

es.

Inte

r-M

inis

teria

l Circ

ular

s 48

an

d 80

defi

ne b

asis

for f

undi

ng

allo

catio

ns. N

TP3

also

has

cr

iteria

for a

lloca

tions

(now

re

vised

by

Inte

r-m

inis

teria

l Ci

rcul

ars

03/2

013

and

27/2

013)

Deve

lopi

ngEq

uity

Redu

cing

ineq

ualit

yIs

ther

e pe

riodi

c an

alys

is to

ass

ess

whe

ther

allo

catio

n cr

iteria

and

loca

l pa

rtici

patio

n pr

oced

ures

set

by

gove

rnm

ent h

ave

been

adh

ered

to a

nd

are

redu

cing

dis

parit

ies

in a

cces

s?

Yes,

per

iodi

c an

alys

is

publ

ishe

d an

d ac

ted

upon

Yes,

per

iodi

c an

alys

is

publ

ishe

d bu

t not

ac

ted

upon

No0.

5Eq

uity

ana

lysis

incl

uded

in

NTP

ann

ual r

epor

ts a

nd

JARs

, but

no

actio

n ta

ken.

Re

cent

ly lin

e m

inis

tries

ag

reed

on

crite

ria fo

r NTP

3 bu

dget

allo

catio

ns to

eac

h co

mpo

nent

, but

MPI

did

not

fo

llow

this

.

NTP

and

JAR

repo

rts.

MPI

lette

r sta

ting

annu

al b

udge

t al

loca

tion

for e

ach

prov

ince

.

Deve

lopi

ngOu

tput

Qu

antit

yIs

the

annu

al n

umbe

r of n

ew s

yste

ms

built

(and

sys

tem

s re

plac

ed) s

uffic

ient

to

mee

t sec

tor t

arge

ts?

(incl

udin

g ou

tput

by

gove

rnm

ent d

irect

ly as

wel

l as

thro

ugh

cont

ract

ors

and

NGOs

)

Over

75%

of t

hat

need

ed to

reac

h se

ctor

targ

ets

Over

50%

of t

hat

need

ed to

reac

h se

ctor

targ

ets

Less

than

50%

of

that

nee

ded

to re

ach

sect

or

targ

ets

0.5

Fund

s ar

e in

adeq

uate

to

mee

t dem

and

for n

ew

syst

ems

and

upgr

adin

g.

NTP

repo

rts a

nd N

CERW

ASS

repo

rt on

M+

E sy

stem

.In

divid

ual a

sses

smen

t rep

orts

on

sta

tus

of p

iped

wat

er

syst

ems.

Deve

lopi

ngOu

tput

Qu

ality

of w

ater

Are

ther

e dr

inki

ng w

ater

qua

lity

stan

dard

s fo

r rur

al w

ater

and

are

all

new

in

stal

latio

ns te

sted

?

Stan

dard

s ex

ist a

nd n

ew

inst

alla

tions

te

sted

Stan

dard

s ex

ist b

ut n

ew

inst

alla

tions

not

te

sted

No1

Yes.

Don

e by

CPM

s ex

cept

fo

r priv

ate

sect

or s

chem

es.

A sp

ecifi

c re

quire

men

t for

ne

wly

built

sch

emes

.

NTP

repo

rts.

MoH

Rep

ort o

n w

ater

qua

lity

man

agem

ent o

f WSS

.

Deve

lopi

ngOu

tput

Re

porti

ngIs

the

num

ber o

f new

sch

emes

and

thei

r lo

catio

ns re

porte

d in

a c

onso

lidat

ed

form

at e

ach

year

?

Yes,

with

fu

ll lis

ting

of

loca

tions

Yes,

but

with

out

a fu

ll lis

ting

of

loca

tions

No1

Yes,

but

loca

tion

incl

udin

g th

e tit

le a

nd lo

catio

n na

me,

bu

t not

GPS

co-

ordi

nate

s.

Annu

al N

TP P

rogr

amm

e re

port.

/ N

atio

nal M

+E

Indi

cato

rs

Repo

rt.

SUST

AINI

NG

Sust

aini

ngM

aint

enan

ceFu

nctio

nalit

yAr

e th

ere

regu

lar a

sset

regi

ster

upd

ates

of

rura

l wat

er in

frast

ruct

ure

incl

udin

g th

eir f

unct

iona

l sta

tus?

Asse

t reg

iste

r an

d re

gula

r up

datin

g of

fu

nctio

nalit

y

Asse

t reg

iste

r bu

t no

upda

ting

of fu

nctio

nalit

y

Neith

er0

No.

Upda

te o

f rur

al

wat

er a

sset

regi

ster

and

fu

nctio

nalit

y on

ly ca

rried

ou

t in

the

prov

ince

s w

here

se

rvic

e pr

ovid

ers

oper

ate

as

priva

te c

ompa

nies

.

Stat

us re

port

on p

iped

w

ater

sup

ply

syst

ems.

/ NT

P2 C

ompl

etio

n Re

port

on

Man

agem

ent m

odel

s (p

.45

–P5

1 Vi

etna

mes

e Ve

rsio

n Ha

noi

2011

)

Ser

vice

Del

iver

y A

sses

smen

t53

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

Sust

aini

ngM

aint

enan

ceCo

st re

cove

ryIs

ther

e a

natio

nal p

olic

y on

O&M

cos

ts

and

are

O&M

cos

ts k

now

n an

d co

vere

d fro

m s

ubsi

dies

and

/or u

ser f

ees?

O&M

pol

icy

exis

ts, c

osts

are

as

sess

ed a

nd

>75

% c

over

ed

O&M

pol

icy

exis

ts, c

osts

are

es

timat

ed a

nd

>50

% c

over

ed

No O

&M p

olic

y, co

sts

not k

now

n0.

5Po

licy

exis

ts b

ut fu

ll co

st

reco

very

not

ach

ieve

d -

PPC

sets

tarif

f and

pay

s op

erat

ing

subs

idy

whe

re

nece

ssar

y.

PM D

ecis

ion

131

Circ

ular

s 95

and

100

.Ci

rcul

ar 5

4/20

13 is

sued

by

the

MoF

on

man

agem

ent,

use

and

expl

oita

tion

of p

iped

wat

er

supp

ly sy

stem

s.

Sust

aini

ngM

aint

enan

ceSp

are

parts

cha

inIs

ther

e a

syst

em d

efine

d fo

r spa

re

parts

sup

ply

chai

n th

at is

effe

ctive

in a

ll pl

aces

?

Syst

ems

defin

ed

and

spar

es

avai

labl

e in

>

50%

of v

illage

s

Syst

ems

defin

ed

but s

pare

s no

t av

aila

ble

up to

50

% o

f villa

ges

Syst

ems

not

defin

ed0.

5No

t est

ablis

hed

in a

ll lo

catio

ns. B

ette

r in

delta

ar

eas

than

mou

ntai

ns.

NTP

2 Co

mpl

etio

n Re

port.

Repo

rt on

Ope

ratio

nal S

tatu

s of

Wat

er S

uppl

y Sc

hem

es b

y Na

tiona

l Wat

er R

esou

rces

In

stitu

te, 2

011.

Sust

aini

ngM

aint

enan

ceM

anag

emen

t of D

isas

ter

Risk

and

Clim

ate

Chan

geDo

rura

l ser

vice

prov

ider

s ha

ve p

lans

fo

r cop

ing

with

nat

ural

dis

aste

rs a

nd

clim

ate

chan

ge?

Yes,

the

maj

ority

of

rura

l ser

vice

prov

ider

s ha

ve a

pl

an fo

r dis

aste

r ris

k m

anag

emen

t an

d cl

imat

e ch

ange

No. O

nly

som

e se

rvic

e pr

ovid

ers

have

a p

lan

for

disa

ster

risk

m

anag

emen

t an

d cl

imat

e ch

ange

or m

ost

serv

ice

prov

ider

s ha

ve u

nder

take

n a

vuln

erab

ility

asse

ssm

ent.

No s

ervic

e pr

ovid

er h

as a

cl

imat

e ac

tion

plan

or h

as

unde

rtake

n a

vuln

erab

ility

asse

ssm

ent.

0Li

ttle

done

on

this

to d

ate

beyo

nd d

onor

-fun

ded

rese

arch

stu

dy o

n cl

imat

e ch

ange

ada

ptio

n. N

othi

ng

impl

emen

ted

yet.

EMW

F Re

port

on s

tudy

of

clim

ate

chan

ge a

dapt

atio

n in

Ce

ntra

l Sou

th p

rovin

ces.

Stud

y Re

port

on Im

pact

of S

ea

Leve

l rai

se o

n W

SS in

Nam

Di

nh.

Sust

aini

ngEx

pans

ion

(o

f exis

ting

serv

ices

)

Inve

stm

ent s

uppo

rtAr

e pi

ped

syst

ems

in ru

ral a

reas

re

cogn

ized

as m

anag

emen

t ent

ities

and

gi

ven

tech

nica

l and

fina

ncia

l sup

port

to e

xpan

d th

eir s

yste

ms

eith

er b

y lo

cal

gove

rnm

ent o

r lar

ger u

tiliti

es?

Reco

gnize

d an

d su

ppor

ted

Reco

gnize

d bu

t no

t sup

porte

dNe

ither

0.5

Man

agem

ent e

ntiti

es fo

r sc

hem

es a

re o

ffici

ally

reco

gnize

d bu

t no

fund

s ar

e of

fere

d to

sup

port

them

.

Repo

rt on

ope

ratio

nal s

tatu

s of

wat

er s

uppl

y sc

hem

es b

y Na

tiona

l Wat

er R

esou

rces

In

stitu

te, 2

011.

Stud

y of

the

Man

agem

ent

and

Oper

atio

n of

Pip

ed W

ater

Su

pply

Sche

mes

, 201

0.

Sust

aini

ngEx

pans

ion

(o

f exis

ting

serv

ices

)

Plan

sAr

e th

ere

sche

me-

leve

l pla

ns fo

r the

ex

pans

ion

of p

iped

sys

tem

s in

rura

l ar

eas?

Yes

in m

ost r

ural

ar

eas

Yes

in a

roun

d ha

lf of

rura

l ar

eas

In a

sm

all

prop

ortio

n, o

r no

rura

l are

as

0Li

ttle

or n

othi

ng d

one

by g

over

nmen

t tho

ugh

info

rmal

exp

ansi

on b

y in

form

al p

rivat

e se

ctor

so

met

imes

hap

pens

.

NTP

repo

rts.

Sust

aini

ngEx

pans

ion

(o

f exis

ting

serv

ices

)

Inve

stm

ent fi

nanc

eAr

e ex

pans

ion

cost

s fo

r rur

al w

ater

be

ing

cove

red

by u

ser f

ees

and/

or p

ublic

gr

ants

?

Yes

in m

ost r

ural

ar

eas

Yes

in a

roun

d ha

lf of

rura

l ar

eas

In a

sm

all

prop

ortio

n, o

r no

rura

l are

as

0No

(as

for 2

5). T

here

is a

po

licy

dire

ctive

ena

blin

g m

anag

emen

t ent

ities

to

borro

w b

ut te

nds

to b

e us

ed o

nly

for b

uild

ing

new

sc

hem

es.

NTP

repo

rts.

Circ

ular

54/

2013

/BTC

dat

ed

04/M

ay, 2

013

on M

anag

emen

t, Ut

ilizat

ion

and

Expl

oita

tion

of

Pipe

d w

ater

sup

ply

syst

ems.

Wat

er S

upp

ly a

nd S

anita

tion

in V

ietn

am54

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

Sust

aini

ngUs

er

outc

omes

Subs

ecto

r pr

ogre

ssIs

the

subs

ecto

r on

track

to m

eet t

he

stat

ed ta

rget

?On

-tra

ckOf

f-tra

ck b

ut

keep

ing

up

with

pop

ulat

ion

grow

th

Off-

track

0.5

Rate

of p

rogr

ess

is n

ot h

igh

enou

gh to

reac

h na

tiona

l ta

rget

NTPI

, NTP

II co

mpl

etio

n Re

ports

; An

nual

201

1. 2

012

NTP

Repo

rtsUN

Sum

mit

Repo

rts.

WB

Repo

rt on

Pov

erty

Re

duct

ion.

Sust

aini

ngUs

er

outc

omes

Equi

ty o

f use

Wha

t is

the

ratio

of i

mpr

oved

drin

king

w

ater

acc

ess

betw

een

the

low

est a

nd

high

est q

uint

ile in

rura

l are

as?

Less

than

2

times

Betw

een

2 an

d 5

Mor

e th

an 5

tim

es1

Acce

ss to

impr

oved

wat

er

sour

ce lo

wes

t qui

ntile

is

70%

and

hig

hest

qui

ntile

is

99%

; so

fact

or is

1.4

; ho

wev

er, a

cces

s to

hou

se

conn

ectio

ns is

onl

y 3%

for

low

est q

uint

ile, a

nd 4

3% fo

r hi

ghes

t qui

ntile

.

JMP

UNIC

EF s

peci

al ta

bula

tion

base

d on

MIC

S 20

10/2

011

Sust

aini

ngUs

er

outc

omes

Qual

ity o

f use

r ex

perie

nce

Of th

e ho

useh

olds

usi

ng a

n im

prov

ed

drin

king

wat

er s

ourc

e, w

hat p

ropo

rtion

ar

e us

ing

pipe

d dr

inki

ng w

ater

in th

e dw

ellin

g an

d ya

rd /

plot

?

Mor

e th

an 5

0%

of h

ouse

hold

sM

ore

than

25%

of

hou

seho

lds

Less

than

25%

of

hou

seho

lds

0Ve

ry fe

w ru

ral h

ouse

hold

s ha

ve a

priv

ate

tap

fed

by a

pi

ped

netw

ork;

acc

ordi

ng

to J

MP

2013

this

is 9

% fo

r ru

ral p

opul

atio

n

NTP

2 co

mpl

etio

n re

port.

JMP

2013

URBA

N W

ATER

SUP

PLY

ENAB

LING

Enab

ling

Polic

ySe

ctor

targ

ets

Are

ther

e UW

S ac

cess

targ

ets

in th

e na

tiona

l lev

el d

evel

opm

ent p

lan?

Ye

s, th

ere

are

urba

n w

ater

su

pply

targ

ets

in

the

deve

lopm

ent

plan

Ther

e ar

e na

tiona

l ta

rget

s in

the

deve

lopm

ent

plan

but

non

e fo

r ur

ban

wat

er.

No ta

rget

s in

the

deve

lopm

ent

plan

1Th

ere

is a

targ

et in

the

SEDP

. Vi

etna

m D

evel

opm

ent G

oals

(V

DGs)

Soci

o-Ec

onom

ic D

evel

opm

ent

Stra

tegy

201

1-20

20 (S

EDS)

Orie

ntat

ion

of V

ietn

am W

ater

Su

pply

in U

rban

and

Indu

stria

l Ar

eas

up to

202

5, V

isio

n to

20

50.

Enab

ling

Polic

ySe

ctor

pol

icy

Is th

ere

an u

rban

wat

er p

olic

y th

at is

ag

reed

by

stak

ehol

ders

, app

rove

d by

go

vern

men

t, an

d pu

blic

ly av

aila

ble?

Polic

y of

ficia

lly

appr

oved

, and

pu

blic

ly av

aila

ble

Polic

y dr

afte

d an

d ag

reed

but

no

t offi

cial

ly ap

prov

ed

No p

olic

y1

The

vario

us la

ws,

dec

rees

et

c. a

re e

quiva

lent

to a

po

licy

thou

gh th

ey a

re n

ot

fully

har

mon

ized.

Decr

ees

of P

rodu

ctio

n an

d Co

nsum

ptio

n of

Cle

an

Wat

er (1

77/2

006/

ND-C

P &

124/

2011

/ND-

CP)

Natio

nal P

rogr

amm

e of

No

n-re

venu

e W

ater

Red

uctio

n (2

010)

.

Ser

vice

Del

iver

y A

sses

smen

t55

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

Enab

ling

Polic

yIn

stitu

tiona

l Rol

esAr

e th

e in

stitu

tiona

l rol

es o

f urb

an w

ater

su

bsec

tor p

laye

rs (n

atio

nal/s

tate

and

lo

cal g

over

nmen

t, se

rvic

e pr

ovid

er,

regu

lato

r etc

.) cl

early

defi

ned

and

oper

atio

naliz

ed?

Defin

ed a

nd

oper

atio

naliz

edDe

fined

but

not

op

erat

iona

lized

Not d

efine

d1

Decr

ee N

o.17

7 co

nfirm

ed

key

inst

itutio

nal r

oles

(g

over

nmen

t, se

rvic

e pr

ovid

er a

nd c

onsu

mer

) but

la

cked

ope

ratio

nal d

etai

l. Ad

ditio

nal c

larifi

catio

n is

du

e to

be

prov

ided

by

MOC

(e

.g.a

circ

ular

)

Decr

ees

of P

rodu

ctio

n an

d Co

nsum

ptio

n of

Cle

an

Wat

er (1

77/2

006/

ND-C

P &

124/

2011

/ND-

CP)

Enab

ling

Plan

ning

Fund

flow

coo

rdin

atio

nDo

es g

over

nmen

t hav

e a

proc

ess

for

coor

dina

ting

mul

tiple

inve

stm

ents

in

the

subs

ecto

r (do

mes

tic o

r don

or e

.g.

natio

nal g

rant

s, s

tate

bud

gets

, don

or

loan

s an

d gr

ants

etc

.)?

Coor

dina

tion

proc

ess

defin

ed a

nd

oper

atio

naliz

ed

Coor

dina

tion

proc

ess

defin

ed b

ut n

ot

oper

atio

naliz

ed

Not d

efine

d/ n

o pr

oces

s0

MPI

ann

ually

coo

rdin

ates

m

ultip

le in

vest

men

ts,

but t

his

is n

ot c

lear

ly co

mm

unic

ated

to p

rovin

ces

and

rela

ted

inst

itutio

ns

Decr

ee o

f Con

stru

ctio

n In

vest

men

t Man

agem

ent

(No.

12/2

009/

ND-C

P).

Decr

ee o

f ODA

Man

agem

ent

(No.

13/2

006/

ND-C

P).

Prim

e M

inis

ter’s

Dec

isio

n of

the

Regu

latio

n fo

r ODA

on-

lend

ing

(No.

181/

2007

/QD-

TTg)

.M

PI’s

Let

ter f

or G

uida

nce

on

usin

g Go

vern

men

t sta

te b

udge

t (N

o.90

05/2

012/

BKHD

T).

Circ

ular

on

Fina

ncia

l M

anag

emen

t Mec

hani

sm o

f OD

A Pr

ogra

mm

es a

nd P

roje

cts

(No.

108/

2007

/BTC

)De

cree

of M

anag

emen

t of

Publ

ic F

und

Debi

t (No

.77/

2010

/ND

-CP)

Enab

ling

Plan

ning

Inve

stm

ent p

lan

Is th

ere

a m

ediu

m te

rm in

vest

men

t pl

an fo

r urb

an w

ater

bas

ed o

n na

tiona

l ta

rget

s th

at is

cos

ted,

prio

ritize

s in

vest

men

t nee

ds, i

s pu

blis

hed

and

used

?

Inve

stm

ent p

lan

base

d on

prio

rity

need

s ex

ists

, is

publ

ishe

d an

d us

ed

Exis

ts b

ut n

ot

used

, or u

nder

pr

epar

atio

n

Does

not

exis

t0.

5Th

ere

is n

o se

ctor

in

vest

men

t pla

n, o

nly

plan

s fo

r ind

ividu

al p

roje

cts

and

prog

ram

s.

Law

of U

rban

pla

nnin

g (2

009)

.Do

cum

ents

of w

ater

sup

ply

prog

ram

s fo

r Han

oi, H

ai P

hong

, Ho

Chi

Min

h, D

a Na

ng a

nd

othe

r citi

es in

Red

Rive

r Del

ta

and

Mek

ong

Delta

.

Enab

ling

Plan

ning

Annu

al re

view

Is th

ere

an a

nnua

l mul

ti-st

akeh

olde

r re

view

in p

lace

to m

onito

r sub

sect

or

perfo

rman

ce, t

o re

view

pro

gres

s an

d se

t co

rrect

ive a

ctio

ns?

Annu

al re

view

of

per

form

ance

an

d se

tting

of

corre

ctive

act

ions

Annu

al re

view

of

per

form

ance

bu

t no

setti

ng o

f co

rrect

ive a

ctio

ns

No re

view

or

set

ting

of

corre

ctive

act

ions

0.5

Revie

ws

held

by

MPI

, onl

y fo

r don

or-f

unde

d pr

ojec

ts,

not f

or w

hole

sec

tor.

And

no

corre

ctive

act

ions

set

.

MPI

’s L

ette

r req

uest

ing

stat

us re

ports

of I

nves

tmen

t su

perv

isio

n an

d ev

alua

tion

(605

8/20

12/B

KHDT

)M

oC’s

ann

ual r

epor

ts

Wat

er S

upp

ly a

nd S

anita

tion

in V

ietn

am56

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

Enab

ling

Plan

ning

HR C

apac

ityHa

s an

ass

essm

ent b

een

unde

rtake

n of

the

hum

an re

sour

ce n

eeds

in th

e su

bsec

tor t

o m

eet t

he s

ubse

ctor

ta

rget

and

is th

e ac

tion

plan

bei

ng

impl

emen

ted?

Asse

ssm

ent

unde

rtake

n an

d ac

tions

bei

ng

impl

emen

ted

Asse

ssm

ent

unde

rtake

n bu

t no

act

ion

bein

g ta

ken

No a

sses

smen

t un

derta

ken

0.5

No c

ompr

ehen

sive

as

sess

men

t has

bee

n un

derta

ken

– on

ly oc

casi

onal

sm

all s

tudi

es

rela

ting

to d

onor

-fun

ded

proj

ects

. WB/

MOC

be

nchm

arki

ng p

roje

ct

repo

rts o

n th

e hu

man

re

sour

ces

in p

lace

in

utilit

ies,

but

doe

s no

t as

sess

nee

ds.

Benc

hmar

king

of V

ietn

am w

ater

su

pply

utilit

ies,

incl

udin

g HR

as

sess

men

t (W

B/ V

WSA

. 201

0)

Enab

ling

Budg

etAd

equa

cyAr

e th

e pu

blic

fina

ncia

l com

mitm

ents

to

the

urba

n w

ater

sub

sect

or s

uffic

ient

to

mee

t the

nat

iona

l tar

gets

for t

he

subs

ecto

r?

Mor

e th

an

75%

of w

hat i

s ne

eded

Betw

een

50 a

nd

75%

of n

eeds

Less

than

50%

of

nee

ds0

SDA

finan

cial

ana

lysis

fo

und

that

ant

icip

ated

ar

e le

ss th

an 5

0% o

f the

re

quire

men

t.

SDA’

s fin

anci

al a

nalys

is.

Enab

ling

Budg

etSt

ruct

ure

Does

the

budg

et s

truct

ure

perm

it in

vest

men

ts a

nd s

ubsi

dies

(ope

ratio

nal

cost

s, a

dmin

istra

tion,

deb

t ser

vice,

etc

.) fo

r the

urb

an w

ater

sec

tor t

o be

cle

arly

iden

tified

?

Yes

for

inve

stm

ent a

nd

for s

ubsi

dies

Yes

for

inve

stm

ent b

ut

not s

ubsi

dies

No0.

5Ur

ban

wat

er s

uppl

y is

bei

ng

deve

lope

d on

a c

omm

erci

al

basi

s. S

ervic

e pr

ovid

ers

have

to b

orro

w/m

obiliz

e bu

dget

for i

nves

tmen

t. Go

vt

does

not

sub

sidi

ze a

ny

O&M

cos

t. In

fact

urb

an

wat

er s

uppl

y no

long

er

feat

ures

in g

ovt b

udge

ts a

s it

is e

ntire

ly au

tono

mou

s.

Law

of S

tate

Bud

get (

2002

)Pr

ime

Min

iste

r’s d

ecis

ion

of

the

allo

catio

n of

regu

lar s

tate

an

nual

bud

get (

no.5

9/20

10/

QD-T

T)De

cree

s of

Pro

duct

ion

and

Cons

umpt

ion

of C

lean

W

ater

(177

/200

6/ND

-CP

& 12

4/20

11/N

D-CP

)

Enab

ling

Budg

etCo

mpr

ehen

sive

Does

the

gove

rnm

ent b

udge

t co

mpr

ehen

sive

ly co

ver d

omes

tic a

nd

offic

ial d

onor

inve

stm

ent/

subs

idy

to

urba

n w

ater

?

Mor

e th

an 7

5%

of fu

nds

to

subs

ecto

r on

budg

et

Betw

een

50-

75%

of f

unds

to

sub

sect

or o

n bu

dget

Less

than

50%

of

fund

s to

su

bsec

tor o

n bu

dget

0Se

e ab

ove

; the

re is

no

cons

olid

ated

nat

iona

l bu

dget

that

reco

rds

capi

tal

spen

ding

at t

he p

rovin

cial

an

d ut

ility

leve

l

Viet

nam

: Urb

an S

ervic

es a

nd

Wat

er S

uppl

y an

d Sa

nita

tion

(ADB

,200

9).

SDA’

s fin

anci

al a

nalys

is.

Urba

n w

ater

sup

ply

vers

us

clim

ate

chan

ge (M

oC’s

arti

cle

in th

e Co

nstru

ctio

n As

soci

atio

n W

ebsi

te, 2

011)

Inve

stm

ent f

or th

e in

frast

ruct

ure

proj

ects

in V

ietn

am (M

PI’s

W

orks

hop

pres

enta

tion,

201

1)

Ser

vice

Del

iver

y A

sses

smen

t57

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

DEVE

LOPI

NG

Deve

lopi

ngEx

pend

iture

Utiliz

atio

n of

dom

estic

fu

nds

Wha

t per

cent

age

of d

omes

tic fu

nds

budg

eted

for u

rban

wat

er a

re s

pent

(3

year

ave

rage

)?

Over

75%

Betw

een

50%

an

d 75

%Le

ss th

an 5

0%1

Gove

rnm

ent f

unds

are

sm

all a

nd e

asily

spe

nt

- us

ed m

ainl

y fo

r lan

d co

mpe

nsat

ion

and

pre-

inve

stm

ent a

ctivi

ties

(TA

etc.

)

Viet

nam

: Urb

an S

ervic

es a

nd

Wat

er S

uppl

y an

d Sa

nita

tion

(ADB

,200

9).

SDA’

s fin

anci

al a

nalys

is.

Urba

n w

ater

sup

ply

vers

us

clim

ate

chan

ge (M

oC’s

arti

cle

in th

e Co

nstru

ctio

n As

soci

atio

n W

ebsi

te, 2

011)

Deve

lopi

ngEx

pend

iture

Utiliz

atio

n of

ext

erna

l fu

nds

Wha

t per

cent

age

of e

xter

nal f

unds

bu

dget

ed fo

r urb

an w

ater

are

spe

nt (3

ye

ar a

vera

ge)?

Over

75%

Betw

een

50%

an

d 75

%Le

ss th

an 5

0%0.

5Di

sbur

sem

ent i

s re

lativ

ely

slow

– p

roje

cts

are

subj

ect

to e

xten

sive

del

ays

Viet

nam

: Urb

an S

ervic

es a

nd

Wat

er S

uppl

y an

d Sa

nita

tion

(ADB

,200

9).

SDA’

s fin

anci

al a

nalys

is.

Urba

n w

ater

sup

ply

vers

us

clim

ate

chan

ge (M

oC’s

arti

cle

in th

e Co

nstru

ctio

n As

soci

atio

n W

ebsi

te, 2

011)

Deve

lopi

ngEx

pend

iture

Repo

rting

Do u

rban

util

ities

(nat

iona

l or 3

larg

est

utilit

ies)

hav

e au

dite

d ac

coun

ts a

nd

bala

nce

shee

t?

Audi

ted

acco

unts

an

d ba

lanc

e sh

eet

Bala

nce

shee

t bu

t not

aud

ited

No b

alan

ce s

heet

1Un

der t

he A

uditi

ng L

aw, a

ll w

ater

sup

ply

com

pani

es a

re

subj

ect t

o an

nual

aud

its.

Law

of S

tate

Bud

get (

2002

)Go

v. De

cisi

on o

n th

e au

ditin

g pr

oced

ure

of w

ater

sup

ply

utilit

ies

(No.

04/2

012/

QD-K

TNN)

Wat

er s

uppl

y co

mpa

ny a

nnua

l re

ports

Deve

lopi

ngEq

uity

Loca

l par

ticip

atio

nAr

e th

ere

clea

rly d

efine

d pr

oced

ures

fo

r inf

orm

ing,

con

sulti

ng w

ith a

nd

supp

ortin

g lo

cal p

artic

ipat

ion

in

plan

ning

, bud

getin

g an

d im

plem

entin

g fo

r urb

an w

ater

dev

elop

men

ts?

Yes

and

syst

emat

ical

ly ap

plie

d

Yes,

but

not

sy

stem

atic

ally

appl

ied

No0.

5Pa

rtici

patio

n of

loca

l co

mm

unity

ge

nera

lly

happ

ens

only

in O

DA-

fund

ed p

roje

cts

MPI

’s le

tters

to p

rovin

ces

/ citi

es

for

the

invid

ual a

gree

men

ts o

n w

ater

sup

ply

proj

ects

.Fe

asib

ility

stud

ies

for n

ew

inve

stm

ent /

reha

bilit

atio

n / e

xten

tion

of w

ater

sup

ply

syst

ems;

Soc

io-e

cono

mic

su

rvey

repo

rts a

s w

ell a

s W

illing

ness

to c

onne

ct re

ports

in

var

ious

citi

es a

nd to

wns

Deve

lopi

ngEq

uity

Budg

et a

lloca

tion

crite

riaHa

ve c

riter

ia (o

r a fo

rmul

a) b

een

dete

rmin

ed to

allo

cate

urb

an w

ater

fu

ndin

g eq

uita

bly

to u

rban

util

ities

or

ser

vice

prov

ider

s an

d am

ong

mun

icip

aliti

es a

nd is

it b

eing

con

sist

ently

ap

plie

d?

Yes,

app

lied

cons

iste

ntly

Yes,

but

no

t app

lied

cons

iste

ntly

No0

No lo

nger

rele

vant

– u

tiliti

es

are

auto

nom

ous

Wat

er S

upp

ly a

nd S

anita

tion

in V

ietn

am58

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

Deve

lopi

ngEq

uity

Redu

cing

ineq

ualit

ies

Have

urb

an u

tiliti

es o

r ser

vice

prov

ider

s (n

atio

nal o

r in

3 la

rges

t citi

es) d

evel

oped

an

d im

plem

ente

d sp

ecifi

c pl

ans

for

serv

ing

the

urba

n po

or?

Plan

s de

velo

ped

and

impl

emen

ted

Plan

s de

velo

ped

but n

ot

impl

emen

ted

No p

lans

do

cum

ente

d0.

5Th

ere

are

clea

r re

quire

men

ts o

n th

is w

ithin

do

nor-

fund

ed p

roje

cts

only.

But

onl

y ab

out 1

0%

of u

tiliti

es a

re m

obilis

ing

com

mer

cial

fund

so

far,

so m

ost i

nves

tmen

ts a

re

dono

r-fu

nded

. Priv

ate

sect

or in

vest

men

t not

at

tract

ive.

177

requ

ires

full

cost

re

cove

ry b

ut th

is ru

ns

agai

nst i

ncen

tive

to s

erve

po

or w

ho li

ve fa

r fro

m c

ity

cent

re. N

o st

rong

pre

ssur

e to

ser

ve th

e po

or.

Tarif

fs a

re lo

w d

espi

te re

qt

for C

R si

nce

Prov

doe

sn’t

appr

ove

nece

ssar

y pr

ice

hike

s

Feas

ibilit

y st

udie

s fo

r new

in

vest

men

t / re

habi

litat

ion

/ ext

ensi

on o

f wat

er s

uppl

y sy

stem

s; S

ocio

-eco

nom

ic

surv

ey re

ports

as

wel

l as

Willi

ngne

ss to

con

nect

repo

rts

in v

ario

us c

ities

and

tow

nsUt

ility

Busi

ness

Pla

ns

Deve

lopi

ngOu

tput

Quan

tity

Is th

e an

nual

exp

ansi

on o

f HH

conn

ectio

ns a

nd s

tand

pos

ts in

urb

an

area

s su

ffici

ent t

o m

eet t

he s

ubse

ctor

ta

rget

s?

Over

75%

of t

hat

need

ed to

reac

h se

ctor

targ

ets

Over

50%

of t

hat

need

ed to

reac

h se

ctor

targ

ets

Less

than

50%

of

that

nee

ded

to re

ach

sect

or

targ

ets

0.5

Leve

l of h

ouse

con

nect

ions

is

alre

ady

very

hig

h.

No n

atio

nal t

arge

ts o

n co

nnec

tions

or s

tand

post

s.

Feas

ibilit

y st

udie

s fo

r new

in

vest

men

t / re

habi

litat

ion

/ ext

entio

n of

wat

er s

uppl

y sy

stem

s; S

ocio

-eco

nom

ic

surv

ey re

ports

as

wel

l as

Willi

ngne

ss to

con

nect

repo

rts

in v

ario

us c

ities

and

tow

nsUt

ility

Busi

ness

Pla

ns

Deve

lopi

ngOu

tput

Qual

ity o

f wat

erAr

e th

ere

drin

king

wat

er q

ualit

y st

anda

rds

for u

rban

wat

er th

at a

re

regu

larly

mon

itore

d an

d th

e re

sults

pu

blis

hed?

Stan

dard

s ex

ist,

ther

e is

a

surv

eilla

nce

prog

ram

, and

re

sults

are

pu

blis

hed

Stan

dard

s ex

ist

and

ther

e is

a

surv

eilla

nce

prog

ram

but

th

ere

is n

o pu

blic

atio

n of

re

sults

No s

tand

ards

, or

sta

ndar

ds

exis

t but

are

not

m

onito

red

0.5

Qual

ity s

tand

ards

and

re

gula

r mon

itorin

g re

quire

men

ts o

bser

ved

but m

ost u

tiliti

es la

ck

auto

mat

ed q

ualit

y m

onito

ring

syst

ems.

Natio

nal S

tand

ard

of D

rinki

ng

Wat

er Q

ualit

y (N

o.01

/200

9/BY

T)Na

tiona

l Sta

ndar

d of

Dom

estic

(n

on d

inki

ng) W

ater

Qua

lity

(No.

02/2

009/

BYT)

Deve

lopi

ngOu

tput

Repo

rting

Is th

e nu

mbe

r of a

dditi

onal

hou

seho

ld

conn

ectio

ns m

ade

and

stan

d po

sts

cons

truct

ed re

porte

d on

in a

co

nsol

idat

ed fo

rmat

for t

he n

atio

n ea

ch

year

?

Yes

with

full

listin

g of

co

nnec

tions

Yes

but w

ithou

t a

full

listin

g of

co

nnec

tions

No0

Not y

et in

corp

orat

ed in

to

the

sect

or m

onito

ring

syst

em.

Ser

vice

Del

iver

y A

sses

smen

t59

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

SUST

AINI

NG

Sust

aini

ngM

aint

enan

ceFu

nctio

nalit

yW

hat i

s th

e w

eigh

ted

aver

age

perc

enta

ge o

f non

- re

venu

e w

ater

ac

ross

urb

an u

tiliti

es (n

atio

nal o

r 3

larg

est u

tiliti

es) (

last

3 y

ears

ave

rage

)?

Less

than

20%

20%

to 4

0%M

ore

than

40%

0.5

Late

st re

ports

from

68

wat

er s

uppl

y co

mpa

nies

in

dica

te

10-1

5% N

RW in

5 w

ell-

man

aged

sch

emes

; 20-

25%

in o

ther

com

pani

es.

Benc

hmar

king

of V

ietn

am w

ater

ut

ilitie

s (W

B/M

oC, 2

013)

Benc

hmar

king

of V

ietn

am w

ater

ut

ilitie

s (W

B/VW

SA, 2

010)

Utilit

y Bu

sine

ss P

lans

Sust

aini

ngM

aint

enan

ceCo

st re

cove

ryAr

e al

l O&M

cos

ts fo

r util

ities

(nat

iona

l or

3 la

rges

t util

ities

) bei

ng c

over

ed b

y re

venu

es (u

ser f

ees

and/

subs

idie

s) (l

ast

3 ye

ars

aver

age)

?

Oper

atin

g ra

tio

grea

ter t

han

1.2

Oper

atin

g ra

tio

betw

een

0.8

and

1.2

Oper

atin

g ra

tio

belo

w 0

.80.

5Av

erag

e OR

for t

he 3

la

rges

t util

ities

is 0

.8 –

1.2

bu

t is

tend

ing

to re

duce

due

to

the

risin

g co

st o

f pow

er

and

chem

ical

s.

Benc

hmar

king

of V

ietn

am w

ater

ut

ilitie

s (W

B/M

oC, 2

013)

Benc

hmar

king

of V

ietn

am w

ater

ut

ilitie

s (W

B/VW

SA, 2

010)

Utilit

y Bu

sine

ss P

lans

Sust

aini

ngM

aint

enan

ceTa

riff r

evie

ws

Are

tarif

f rev

iew

s re

gula

rly c

ondu

cted

us

ing

a pr

oces

s an

d ta

riffs

adj

uste

d ac

cord

ingl

y an

d pu

blis

hed?

Cond

ucte

d,

adju

sted

and

pu

blis

hed

Cond

ucte

d bu

t no

t adj

uste

dNo

t con

duct

ed0.

5W

ater

tarif

fs a

re q

uite

di

fficu

lt to

be

adju

sted

an

nual

ly, b

ecau

se s

ever

al

proc

edur

es a

re re

quire

d.

Acco

rdin

g to

Dec

ree

No.1

17, i

t mus

t be

agre

ed

by th

e Pr

ovin

cial

/ Ci

ty

Peop

le’s

Cou

ncil’

2 is

sues

are

pol

itica

l pr

essu

re to

dep

ress

tarif

fs

and

long

pro

cess

if g

oing

to

chan

ge th

em

Inte

r-m

inis

teria

l Circ

ular

-

Guid

ance

on

the

Prin

cipl

e,

Met

hods

and

Dec

isio

n Co

mpe

tenc

e of

Cle

an W

ater

Ta

riffs

for U

rban

, Ind

ustri

al a

nd

Rura

l Are

as (N

o. 9

5/20

09/B

TC-

BXD-

BNN)

Circ

ular

– G

uida

nce

on th

e do

mes

tic w

ater

tarif

f var

iatio

n (N

o.88

/201

2/TT

-BTC

)

Sust

aini

ngM

aint

enan

ceM

anag

emen

t of D

isas

ter

Risk

and

Clim

ate

Chan

geDo

util

ities

(nat

iona

l or 3

larg

est u

tiliti

es)

have

pla

ns fo

r cop

ing

with

nat

ural

di

sast

ers

and

clim

ate

chan

ge?

Yes,

the

maj

ority

of

urb

an s

ervic

e pr

ovid

ers

have

a

plan

for d

isas

ter

risk

man

agem

ent

and

clim

ate

chan

ge

No. O

nly

som

e se

rvic

e pr

ovid

ers

have

a p

lan

for

disa

ster

risk

m

anag

emen

t an

d cl

imat

e ch

ange

or m

ost

serv

ice

prov

ider

s ha

ve u

nder

take

n a

vuln

erab

ility

asse

ssm

ent.

No s

ervic

e pr

ovid

er h

as a

cl

imat

e ac

tion

plan

or h

as

unde

rtake

n a

vuln

erab

ility

asse

ssm

ent.

0.5

10%

of t

he c

ount

ry’s

68

publ

ic w

ater

com

pani

es

are

impl

emen

ting

wat

er

safe

ty p

lans

but

thes

e do

not

gen

eral

ly ad

dres

s cl

imat

e ch

ange

. and

are

im

plem

entin

g th

em.

Natio

nal T

arge

t Pro

gram

me

for

Clim

ate

Chan

ge D

ealin

g (2

008)

.Ci

rcul

ar –

Gui

danc

e on

th

e w

ater

saf

ery

plan

s (N

o.08

/201

2/TT

-BXD

).Pr

ogra

mm

e do

cum

ents

of

Wat

er S

afet

y Pl

an u

nder

WHO

/M

oC/ M

oH/ V

WSA

Sust

aini

ngEx

pans

iont

Auto

nom

yDo

util

ities

or s

ervic

e pr

ovid

ers

(nat

iona

l or

3 la

rges

t) ha

ve o

pera

tiona

l dec

isio

n-m

akin

g au

tono

my

in in

vest

men

t pl

anni

ng, H

R, fi

nanc

e (s

epar

ate

bala

nce

shee

t) an

d pr

ocur

emen

t man

agem

ent?

Yes

in a

ll as

pect

sIn

all

aspe

cts

exce

pt

inve

stm

ent

plan

ning

No0.

5Ut

ilitie

s ar

e fin

anci

ally

auto

nom

ous

but I

nves

tmen

t / M

aste

r pla

ns m

ust b

e ap

prov

ed b

y th

e Lo

cal

Gove

rnm

ent a

utho

ritie

s.

Decr

ees

of P

rodu

ctio

n an

d Co

nsum

ptio

n of

Cle

an

Wat

er (1

77/2

006/

ND-C

P &

124/

2011

/ND-

CP)

Wat

er S

upp

ly a

nd S

anita

tion

in V

ietn

am60

Serv

ice

Deliv

ery

Cycl

eBu

ildin

g Bl

ock

Area

s of

evi

denc

e fo

r as

sess

men

tQu

estio

nHi

gh (1

)M

ediu

m (0

,5)

Low

(0)

Scor

eEx

plan

atio

n fo

r sco

reSo

urce

of e

vide

nce

Sust

aini

ngEx

pans

iont

Plan

sDo

ser

vice

prov

ider

s (n

atio

nal/s

tate

or 3

la

rges

t util

ities

) hav

e bu

sine

ss p

lans

for

expa

ndin

g ac

cess

to u

rban

wat

er?

Busi

ness

pla

ns

for i

ncre

asin

g ac

cess

bei

ng

impl

emen

ted

Busi

ness

pla

ns

for i

ncre

asin

g ac

cess

bei

ng

prep

ared

No b

usin

ess

plan

s0.

5Ac

cess

is a

lread

y hi

gh

and

appr

oval

of P

rovin

cial

Pe

ople

’s C

omm

ittee

is

need

ed fo

r pla

ns a

nd

budg

ets,

hen

ce u

tility

has

on

ly lim

ited

freed

om to

m

ake

them

.

Feas

ibilit

y st

udie

s fo

r new

in

vest

men

t / re

habi

litat

ion

/ ext

entio

n of

wat

er s

uppl

y sy

stem

s; S

ocio

econ

omic

sur

vey

repo

rts a

s w

ell a

s W

illing

ness

to c

onne

ct

repo

rts in

var

ious

citi

es a

nd

tow

nsUt

ility

Busi

ness

Pla

ns

Sust

aini

ngEx

pans

iont

Borro

win

gAr

e ut

ilitie

s al

low

ed b

y la

w to

acc

ess,

an

d ar

e th

ey a

cces

sing

, com

mer

cial

fin

ance

for e

xpan

sion

?

Allo

wed

and

ac

cess

ing

Allo

wed

but

not

ac

cess

ing

Not a

llow

ed0.

5Ye

s th

ey a

re a

llow

ed a

nd

som

e se

rvic

e pr

ovid

ers

are

star

ting

to a

cces

s so

ft [d

onor

] or c

omm

erci

al

loan

s. B

ut le

nder

s ar

e he

sita

nt a

s ris

ks a

re

perc

eive

d as

hig

h,

espe

cial

ly fo

r mai

n su

pply

lines

and

trea

tmen

t pla

nts,

w

hich

do

not g

ener

ate

reve

nue.

Decr

ees

of P

rodu

ctio

n an

d Co

nsum

ptio

n of

Cle

an

Wat

er (1

77/2

006/

ND-C

P &

124/

2011

/ND-

CP)

Prim

e M

inis

ter’s

Dec

isio

n of

the

Regu

latio

n fo

r ODA

on-

lend

ing

(No.

181/

2007

/QD-

TTg)

.

Sust

aini

ngUs

er

outc

omes

Subs

ecto

r pr

ogre

ssIs

the

subs

ecto

r on

track

to m

eet t

he

stat

ed ta

rget

?On

-tra

ckOf

f-tra

ck b

ut

keep

ing

up

with

pop

ulat

ion

grow

th

Off-

track

1M

DG ta

rget

has

bee

n m

et.

MOC

repo

rts c

over

age

with

ho

use

conn

ectio

ns a

s 69

%

in 2

009

whi

le ta

rget

is 8

5%

for 2

020.

Orie

ntat

ion

of V

ietn

am W

ater

Su

pply

in U

rban

and

Indu

stria

l Ar

eas

up to

202

5, V

isio

n to

20

50.

Situ

atio

n of

urb

an w

ater

sup

ply

sect

or (I

nstit

ute

of U

rban

and

in

frast

ruct

ure

Deve

lopm

ent,

2013

).

Sust

aini

ngUs

er

outc

omes

Equi

ty o

f use

Wha

t is

the

ratio

of i

mpr

oved

drin

king

w

ater

acc

ess

betw

een

the

low

est a

nd

high

est q

uint

ile in

urb

an a

reas

?

Less

than

2

times

Betw

een

2 an

d 5

Mor

e th

an 5

tim

es1

Impr

oved

acc

ess

in lo

wes

t qu

intil

e is

94%

and

hig

hest

qu

intil

e is

100

% fo

r urb

an

popu

latio

n; a

cces

s to

ho

use

conn

ectio

ns is

mor

e un

equa

l with

35%

for

poor

est q

uint

ile a

nd 9

4%

for h

ighe

st q

uint

ile

JMP

UNIC

EF s

peci

al ta

bula

tion

base

d on

MIC

S 20

10/2

011

Sust

aini

ngUs

er

outc

omes

Qual

ity o

f use

r ex

perie

nce

Wha

t is

the

aver

age

num

ber o

f hou

rs o

f se

rvic

e pe

r day

acr

oss

urba

n ut

ilitie

s?

(Wei

ghte

d by

num

ber o

f HH

conn

ectio

ns

per u

tility

)?

Mor

e th

an 1

2 ho

urs

per d

ay6

to 1

2 ho

urs

per d

ayLe

ss th

an 6

ho

urs

per d

ay1

Mos

t wat

er s

uppl

y sy

stem

s in

big

citi

es /

tow

ns h

ave

24/7

ser

vice

– ch

alle

nge

is in

oth

er lo

catio

ns. [

ADB

and

AusA

id re

ports

iden

tify

prob

lem

s of

ser

vice

qual

ity

and

relia

bilit

y].

Benc

hmar

king

of V

ietn

am w

ater

ut

ilitie

s (W

B/M

oC, 2

013)

Benc

hmar

king

of V

ietn

am w

ater

ut

ilitie

s (W

B/VW

SA, 2

010)


Annex 2: Assumptions and Inputs for Financial Model

This annex describes the key inputs that were used to gen-erate estimates of required, recent and anticipated capital expenditures. It discusses the sources, adjustments and assumptions of the following information: exchange rates, demographic variables, sector-specific technologies and spending plans.

Exchange Rates

Amounts in Vietnamese Dong (VND) were converted into US Dollars using exchange rates from the ADB Key Indicators. The 2012 exchange rate was used for the 2013 and onwards.

Demographic Variables

The model requires two sets of demographic variables. The first set captures rural and urban population estimates/pro-jections for 2009, 2011 and the target year (2020). These data are combined with existing and target coverage rates for water and sanitation in order to calculate of the number of people that will be requiring access to improved facilities during the period of analysis. The other set of information refers to the average size of households. This is used to convert costs of facilities, which are generally in expressed on a per household basis, into per capita terms.

Table A2.1 shows the key demographic variables used in the analysis. Population data for 2009 were sourced from the population and housing census while values for 2010 and 2011 were projected by applying the appropriate population growth rates. Projections for 2020 were obtained through a three-step process. First, population projections at the na-tional level were obtained from the Government Statistics Office. Second, the urban population was obtained by mul-tiplying the national population by 45%, which is the esti-mated share of the urban population in the total provided in the Prime Minister’s Decision No. 445. Third, projections of the rural population were calculated as a residual.

Sector-Specific Technologies: Water

The calculation of investment needs requires information on sector-specific technologies, unit costs, and expected life. Table A2.2 presents information on the variables mentioned

Table A2.1 Demographic Variables

Region Population (million persons)

Average household size

(persons/household)d

2009a 2010b 2011b 2020c 2011

Rural 60.4 60.7 60.9 53.1 3.9

Urban 25.4 26.2 27.1 43.4 3.7

National 85.8 86.9 88.0 96.5 3.8

a General Statistics Office (2010a) The 2009 Vietnam Population and Housing Census: Major Findings, Hanoi. b Estimated from the 2009 population by applying annual population growth rates of 3.4% and 0.4% for urban and rural areas, respectively. These represent the growth rates of the rural and urban populations between 1999 and 2009. The population growth rates were obtained from the General Statistics Office (2010b) Vietnam’s Population Reaches 85.487 Million People, http://www.gso.gov.vn/default_en.aspx?tabid=515&idmid=5&ItemID=9813. c Computed using information from Government of Vietnam (2009c) Prime Minister’s Decision No. 445/QD-TTg: On Approval of the Revised Orientation for Vietnam Urban System Development Master Plan Towards 2025 and Vision to the Year 2050, Hanoi; and General Statistics Office (2011) Statistics Data Yearbook of 2011, Publishing House of the Statistics Department, Hanoi. d Nguyen, T. (2011) The Trend in Vietnamese Household Size in Recent Years, 2011 International Conference on Humanities, Society and Culture, IPEDR, 20(2011), Singapore.


Table A2.2 Selected information on water supply sources

Option Distribution of facilities (base year, %)a

Projected distribution of facilities

(2020, %)a

Unit capital cost (per capita at 2012 prices)

Lifespan (in years)

Rural

Tap water: piped into premises 9% 20% 140 20

Tap water: public tap, standpipe 1% 5% 100 20

Tubewell: borehole (drilled well) 38% 32% 72 10

Protected (dug) well 29% 24% 53 5

Protected spring (protected slot water) 6% 5% 19 5

Rain water 17% 14% 50 5

Urban

Tap water: piped into premises 100% 100% 244b 23

a As a share of households with access to improved facilities. b Average of values provided by stakeholders at the SDA validation workshop in Hanoi on April 2013.

above for water supply. The options included were based on the technologies reported in the 2009 National Census, which was presented in JMP.41

The distribution of water supply technologies across house-holds for 2009 was based on the shares indicated in the 2009 National Census. However, given the absence of doc-uments, the distribution of water supply technologies for 2020 was based on the informed judgement of stakehold-ers at the SDA validation workshop in Hanoi on April 2013.

Unit capital costs represent expenditures for materials and labor used in the construction of the different facilities. The information in Table A2.2 was initially drawn from a consul-tation with experts and subsequently revised on the basis of the opinions of stakeholders who were present at the SDA

validation workshop in Hanoi on April 2013. In the case of tap water that is piped into premises, the unit cost ($140 per person) used in the analysis is quite close to the es-timated unit cost ($132 per person at 2012 prices) for the Red River Delta Water Supply and Sanitation project of the World Bank.42 On the other hand, the estimate for urban areas of $244 per person is higher than the estimated unit costs ($177 per person at 2012 prices) for the Vietnam Ur-ban Water Supply Development Project.43

Lifespan represents the projected number of years before a facility is fully replaced. The information in Table A2.2 was initially drawn from a consultation with experts and subse-quently revised on the basis of the opinions of stakeholders who were present at the SDA validation workshop in Hanoi on April 2013.

41 JMP (2012b)42 Unit costs for water supply facilities estimated from a project document is about $113 per person (see World Bank, 2010, Project Paper on a Proposed Additional Financing Credit in the Amount of SDR 42 million to the Socialist Republic of Vietnam for the River Delta Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project, March). This was scaled to units comparable with those used in the current analysis using the consumer price index and exchange rate.43 Feasibility studies conducted for the Vietnam Urban Water Supply Development Project indicate an investment budget of US$135 million and is expected to benefit 0.9 million persons (See Poyry Environment Oy, 2009, Vietnam Urban Water Supply Development Project: Sub-project of Phase 2 Competition Route in Bac Ninh Province, Feasibilty Study Report, September). The values suggest a unit cost of about $150 per person at 2008 prices. This was scaled to units comparable with those used in the current analysis using the consumer price index and exchange rate.


Table A2.3 Selected information on sanitation technologies

Option Distribution of facilities (base year, %)a

Projected distribution of facilities

(2020, %)a

Unit capital cost (per capita at 2012 prices)

Lifespan (in years)

Rural

Flush toilet: Private total 27% 60% 75 20

Flush toilet: public/shared total 32% 15% 25 10

Improved pit latrines 42% 25% 25 5

Urban

Drainage, wastewater treatment & collection 100% 100% 375 30

a As a share of households with access to improved facilities.

Sector-specific technologies: Sanitation

Table A2.3 presents information on the expected household distribution, costs and lifespans of key sanitation technolo-gies. The options included were based on the technologies reported in the 2009 National Census, which was presented in JMP.44

The distribution of sanitation options across households for 2009 was based on the shares indicated in the 2009 Na-tional Census. Given the absence of documents however, the distribution of sanitation options for 2020 was based on the opinions that stakeholders provided at the SDA valida-tion workshop in Hanoi on April 2013.

Unit capital costs and the lifespan of facilities were initially drawn from a consultation with experts. Assumptions were adjusted based on the opinions of stakeholders at the SDA validation workshop in Hanoi on April 2013. The unit cost of drainage, wastewater treatment and collection in urban ar-

eas was the average of the values suggested by stakehold-ers. However, these estimates are quite close to the values reported for urban areas in Vietnam (US$377 per person at 2010 prices) in Hydroconseil and PEMconsult (2011).45 It is also important to note that the per capita cost of shared pour-flush toilets is assumed to be a third of private pour-flush toilets. This was implemented after the validation workshop and works on the assumption that three house-holds share a toilet.46

Spending plans

Collecting information on recent and anticipated invest-ments and comparing the results to CAPEX requirements allows the costing tool to generate estimates of financing gaps (or surpluses). Recent and anticipated investments in the analysis represent the average annual expenditures of government, development partners and users from 2009 to 2011 and 2012 to 2014, respectively. Funds from de-velopment partners represent the investments/loans com-

44 JMP (2012c)45 Hydroconseil and PEMconsult (2011)46 In the validation workshop, stakeholders suggested a price of US$72 per person for shared pour-flush toilets. This was deemed too high given the unit cost of a private pour-flush toilet (US$75 per person) used in the analysis.


The process of the collecting and compiling the information for capital expenditures encountered further difficulties and is subject to the following issues/limitations. First, capital expenditures of provinces and utilities were excluded in the analysis. The reason for this omission is the absence of summary documents on the investments of these insti-tutions. Collecting such information would therefore have required visiting the numerous provinces for which time and resources are not available in this exercise.

Second, there is also some uncertainty surrounding the subsectoral data used in the analysis. In some instances, information was only available for water supply and sanita-tion as a whole but not separately. Quite often, the data also do not make a clear distinction by location (rural or urban), annual disbursements for multi-year projects, actual expen-ditures and allocations, and nature (hardware and software). In all these cases, the approach used in the analysis was to ask the concerned stakeholders for their best guess of how the data might be suitably disaggregated.

ing from the Agence Francaise de Developpement (AFD), Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID), Department for International Development (DFID) of the United Kingdom, Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), World Bank, Finland, the Netherlands and Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark (DANIDA). Information from the above development partners was drawn from project documents and/or interviews with key staff. In the case of the Netherlands and DANIDA, investment data were drawn exclusively from AusAID et al. (2011)47

Investments of government for rural water supply and sani-tation were obtained from the MARD48 and Government of Vietnam.49 However, there was difficulty in obtaining esti-mates of government investments for urban water supply and sanitation. Initial estimates were drawn the General Statistics Office.50 On further inspection however, it was re-alized that it is not possible to disaggregate government investments for urban water supply and sanitation between funds coming from donor agencies (which would be clas-sified as coming from external sources in the analysis) and internal government funds. Information on expenditures from 2012 to 2014 was also not yet available during the preparation of this report. In the end, it was decided to use an approximation whereby government investments are as-sumed to be 20% of total investments in the sector.51 This proportion is based on an ADB52 study which states that 80% of water supply and sanitation projects from 1993 to 2007 in Vietnam were financed by official development as-sistance.

There is little evidence of capital spending for household rural sanitation and hygiene, except for some from Poverty Health Action, but several partners provide software sup-port or have been active in funding school latrines and hy-gine education (not counted in SDA financing). These part-ners include CAWST, Child Fund, Helvetas, JICA, PLAN, SNV, UNICEF, and WHO.

Table A2.4 Public investments (million US$, annual average)

Sector Government Donors Total

Recent Investments (2009-2011)

Rural water supply 24 15 39

Urban water supply 18 43 61

Rural sanitation 8 7 15

Urban sanitation 18 70 88

Pit latrine with slab 89 24 86

Anticipated Investments (2012-2014)

Rural water supply 29 36 65

Urban water supply 43 100 143

Rural sanitation 10 16 26

Urban sanitation 41 164 205

47 AusAID et al (2011)48 MARD (2011)49 GOV (2012a)50 General Statistics Office (2011)51 In other words, it is one-fourth of the total investments for urban water supply and sanitation that comes from donors.52 ADB (2009).


Table A2.5 Share of users in capital/development costs, %

Option Rural Urban

Water

Tap water: piped into premises 10% 0%

Tap water: public tap, standpipe 0% n.a

Tubewell: borehole (drilled well) 87% n.a

Protected (dug) well 87% n.a

Protected spring (protected slot water) 0% n.a

Rain water 87% n.a

Sanitation

Drainage, wastewater treatment & collection n.a. 0%

Flush toilet: Private total 90% n.a

Flush toilet: public/shared total 10% n.a

Improved pit latrines 90% n.a

subsidies of 75% for household water supply facilities and 60% for sanitation facilities for the rural poor.54 In calculating the user shares, rural poverty was assumed to be 17.4%.55 The user share for tap water is urban water supply was set to zero in the analysis. This is based on Government Decree 117/2007/ND-CP, which states that costumers do not have to pay connection costs (i.e., water meter or connecting pipes) because these expenses will be accounted for in the water tariff.

Given the available information, estimates of anticipated (2012-2014) and recent (2009-2011) CAPEX that come from government and development partners are shown in Table A2.4. To ensure comparability with the investment require-ments, estimates of anticipated and recent CAPEX are lim-ited to hardware expenditures only.

Table A2.4 indicates that government was the major source of funding for the rural water supply and sanitation sec-tors from 2009 to 2011. However, development partners are expected to be dominant from 2012 to 2014. The do-nor contributions that were counted in the analysis include those made by the World Bank, DFID, AFD (rural water sup-ply only), ADB, AusAID, DANIDA and The Netherlands. For reasons that were discussed earlier, investments of devel-opment partners were and are expected to be the major source of funds for the urban water supply and sanitation sectors. Donor contributions represent projects supported by the World Bank, AFD, ADB, JICA, Finland and AusAID.

The planned spending of users is computed by specifying the share of investments that the authorities expect households to contribute. Table A2.5 shows the proportion of investments that households are expected to contribute. User shares for tap water into premises, public taps and public flush toilets in rural areas were based on the informed judgment of the stakeholders who participated in the April 2013 workshop in Hanoi. For the remainder of rural facilities, user shares were specified by exploiting information on subsidies for the rural poor. In particular, the MARD53 states

53 MARD (2010)54 There are a few other subsidies, e.g. for ethnic minorities, which were no longer included in the analysis.55 General Statistics Office (undated)


References

Asian Development Bank [ADB] (2009) Viet Nam: Urban Services and Water Supply and Sanitation Sector, Evalu-ation Study, Independent Evaluation Department, Manila.

ADB (2010) Vietnam Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Assessment, Strategy and Roadmap, Southeast Asia De-partment Working Paper, Manila.

ADB (2012) Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2012. Downloaded from www.adb.org/statistics

AECOM and SKAT (2010) A rapid assessment of Septage Management in Asia, Policies and Practices in India, Indo-nesia, Malaysia, The Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam, USAID.

AusAID, DANIDA, and DFID (2011) Program Support Docu-ment for National Target Program on Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Phase 3, 2011-2015, Vietnam. Mimeo. 26 September

AusAID, DANIDA, and DFID (2012) Aide Memoire, Vietnam Rural Water Supply and Sanitation National Target Program Phase 3 Joint Annual Review, 31 July - 10 August 2012. Hanoi

AusAid and World Bank (2013) Urban Sanitation Review: A Call for Action, Draft Report

Badiani, R. et al (2012) 2012 Vietnam poverty assessment - Well begun, not yet done: Vietnam's remarkable progress on poverty reduction and the emerging challenges. Hanoi,

Vietnam: World Bank. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2012/01/17207159/2012-vietnam-poverty-as-sessment-well-begun-not-yet-done-vietnams-remarkable-progress-poverty-reduction-emerging-challenges

Corning, J., V.A. Nguyen, V.N. Tran and D.H. Le (2012) The Vietnam Wastewater Review of Urban Areas. World Bank, Hanoi.

General Statistics Office (2011a) Vietnam Multiple Indica-tor Cluster Survey 2011, Monitoring the situation of women and children. Hanoi.

General Statistics Office (2011b) Statistics Data Yearbook of 2011. Publishing House of the Statistics Department, Hanoi

General Statistics Office (2010a) The 2009 Vietnam Popula-tion and Housing Census: Major Findings, Hanoi

General Statistics Office (2010b) Vietnam’s Population Reaches 85.487 Million People, http://www.gso.gov.vn/de-fault_en.aspx?tabid=515&idmid=5&ItemID=9813

General Statistics Office (undated) Results of the Viet Nam Household Living Standards Survey 2010, Statistical Pub-lishing House, Hanoi

Government of Vietnam [GOV] (2009a) Prime Minister’s De-cision No. 1929/OD-TTg: Government Orientation of Urban Water Supply to 2025 and Vision for 2050, Hanoi.


GOV (2009b) Prime Minister’s Decision No. 1930/OD-TTg. Government Orientation of Drainage and Sanitation for Ur-ban and Industrial Areas to 2025 and Vision for 2050, Hanoi.

GOV (2009c) Prime Minister’s Decision No. 445/QD-TTg: On Approval of the Revised Orientation for Vietnam Urban System Development Master Plan Towards 2025 and Vision to the Year 2050, Hanoi.

GOV (2010) National Rural Clean Water Supply and Sanita-tion Strategy up to 2020. MOC/MARD, Hanoi.

GOV (2012a) National Target Program on Rural Water Sup-ply and Sanitation Phase 2012-2015, Hanoi.

Hydroconseil and PEMconsult (2011) Sanitation Manage-ment for Urban Areas in Vietnam, final report submitted to the World Bank and AusAID, April.

Institute for Sustainable Futures – University of Technol-ogy Sydney (2011) Vietnam Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Sector Brief, report prepared for AusAID. Sydney: October 2011.http://www.isf.uts.edu.au/pdfs/ISF_VietnamWASH.pdf

JMP [Joint Monitoring Program] (2013) Progress on Drink-ing Water and Sanitation: 2013 Update. UNICEF and WHO.

JMP (2012a) Progress on Drinking Water and Sanitation: 2012 Update. UNICEF and WHO.

JMP (2012b) Estimates for the Use of Improved Drinking Water Sources. Downloaded from wss.info.org.

JMP (2012c) Estimates for the Use of Improved Sanitation. Downloaded from wss.info.org.

Kellogg, Brown and Root (2009) Water – Vital for Vietnam’s Future. Hanoi, Asian Development Bank.

MARD [Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development] (2010) National Rural Clean Water Supply and Sanitation Strategy up to Year 2020, Third Updated Version, November

MARD (2011) Report on the Results of Implementing the National Target Program (NTP2) for Rural Water Supply and Sanitation 2006-2010 and Main Content of the Program for 2011-2015. Hanoi.

MARD (2012a) National Target Program on Rural Water Supply and Sanitation, Phase 2012-2015. Hanoi.

MARD (2012b) National Rural Clean Water Supply and San-itation Strategy up to 2020. MARD and NCERWASS, Hanoi.

Ministry of Construction [MOC] (2009) Status of Urban Wa-ter Supply. Hanoi.

MOC (2012) Unified Sanitation Sector Strategy and Action Plan (U3SAP) for Vietnam. Draft Final Report. Hanoi.

Ministry of Construction Summary report on encourage-ment of private sector participation in water and urban en-vironmental sanitation sector, Oct 2013;

Ministry of Health [MOH] (2011) Circular on the Issuance of National Technical Regulation on Hygienic Conditions for Latrines, No. 27/2011/TT-BYT.

Naughton, M. (2013) Operations and Maintenance for Rural Water Supply in the Mekong Delta, Lessons learnt from the Mekong Water Resources Management project (WB2) and options for improving sustainability under component 3 of the Mekong Delta Water Management for Rural Develop-ment, unpublished report to World Bank, Hanoi.

Nguyen, T. (2011) The Trend in Vietnamese Household Size in Recent Years, 2011 International Conference on Humani-ties, Society and Culture, IPEDR, 20(2011), Singapore.


Poyry Environment Oy (2009) Vietnam Urban Water Supply Development Project: Sub-project of Phase 2 Competition Route in Bac Ninh Province, Feasibility Study Report, Sep-tember.

United Nations (2012) UNData: Vietnam. Downloaded from http://data.un.org/CountryProfile.aspx?crname=Viet%20Nam.

United Nations (2010) Millennium Development Goal 7 Fact-sheet for Vietnam, downloaded from http://www.un.org.vn/images/stories/MDGs/MDG7_Eng.pdf

Vietnam Development Partner Forum – Working Group re-port on private sector participation in rural water supply and sanitation, Nov 2013

WSP [Water and Sanitation Program] (2012) Scaling up Rural Sanitation in Vietnam, Project Implementation Plan, FY13 – FY17 (Draft). Hanoi: World Bank.

World Bank (2013) Urban Sanitation Review: A Call for Ac-tion, East Asia and Pacific. Jakarta: World Bank.

World Bank and Ministry of Construction (2013) Bench-marking of Vietnam Water Utilities. Hanoi.

Water Supply and Sanitation in VietnamTurning Finance into Services for the Future

December 2014Service Delivery Assessment

water supply and sanitation in vietnam...tation specialist, sing cho, urban specialist and lalit...

Documents