1. Scaling-up Rural Sanitation in India
Positive Determinants of Success in Eight Indian States: Results of a Review for the Water and Sanitation Program
Presented by Clarissa Brocklehurst and Simon Mead

2. Problem Statement
Note WSP support did not begin supporting in Rajasthan until 2011

3. WSP Intervention Activities 2002-2013
WSP championed the introduction of demand-based sanitation through:
Advocacy with decision-makers:
Creating champions
Increasing awareness and willingness to act
Support to the enabling environment:
Building capacity
Documenting and promoting best practice
Bringing new and innovative implementation models to the sector
WSP found success varied between States – and wanted to know why
Advocacy with decision-makers:
Creating champions through study tours and the pro-active use of champions to create political commitment
Increasing awareness and willingness to act though targeted, high quality research and guidelines, such as the research on the economic cost of inadequate sanitation
Support to the enabling environment:
Building capacity through a series of interventions such as training and focused institutional support
Documenting and promoting best practice through development of handbooks and manuals
Bringing new and innovative implementation models to the sector, such as the introduction of outcome monitoring
Tried various types of intervention, not always successful, wanted to know why

4. Methodology of the Review
Undertaken between October 2014 and May 2015
Desk-based study of WSP activities in eight states and at national level
Worked with four Indian consultants, collecting data, conducting 138 structured interviews at State level
Timelines developed at State and National level documenting WSP activities alongside State and National milestones in the sector

5. WSP Interventions and Challenges
Creating champions was effective in some States but was highly resource intensive and results were unpredictable
Increasing awareness and willingness to act – some resources had significant impact in some States, but less so in “lagging” States
New and innovative implementation models – outcome monitoring for demand led sanitation particularly successful but challenges of scale and uptake
Hands–on training at State and district levels, often successful but not within WSP’s mandate to go to scale
Similar activities were undertaken in many States, but the results were mixed.
Creating champions was effective in some States but is highly resource intensive, can be short lived if champion is moved to another position, and does rely on good fortune
Increasing awareness and willingness to act – resources such as “ Economic Impacts of Inadequate Sanitation in India” had significant impact in some States – generally those not considered already “lagging”
New and innovative implementation models – outcome monitoring for demand led sanitation particularly successful
Hands–on training at State and district levels, often successful but impossible to go to scale

6. Findings- what were the determinants of WSP success?
Awareness of poor progress, resulting in decision makers willing to take action
An opportunity to initiate action in areas that are not the poorest
The presence of “local champions”
The presence of few other development actors
Enabling cultural factors

7. Presence of determinants in each State
Meghalaya
Rajasthan
Himachal Pradesh
Maharashtra
Haryana
Jharkhand
Madhya Pradesh
Bihar
Awareness of poor progress results in willingness to take action
Opportunity to start in areas that are not the poorest
Local champions willing to take action
Few actors working in the sector
Enabling cultural factors

8. An opportunity to initiate action in areas that are not the poorest
Willingness to take action as a result of awareness of poor progress in sanitation
Yes, can be influenced but need other approaches when progress lacking in general.
An opportunity to initiate action in areas that are not the poorest
Yes, programming may be phased to initiate work in less poor areas.
The presence of “local champions”
Yes, but study tours are resource intensive and unreliable – find other methods
There are 676 districts in India, all with numerous officials who could learn and benefit from study tours, but it would clearly be impossible for WSP to provide opportunities to all of them. It is also clear that participating in a study tour is not always sufficient to galvanise change – many study tour participants have taken little or no action upon their return, and often those who have been motivated through a study tour move to other positions unrelated to sanitation. However, the analysis shows that changing mindsets and creating champions is a key determinant of success so new and more scalable approaches must be found.
The presence of few other development actors
 No, but coordination with them can certainly be improved.
Enabling cultural factors
No, but other sanitation approaches can be used instead.

9. Way forward – how do WSP’s lessons help us?
Sanitation must now reach all Indians, in lagging States and in difficult cultural contexts
Agencies can’t work only where conditions are conducive to their success
New approaches are needed that harness the capacity of others, such as government training institutions, in order to deliver at scale
Development partners must innovate and find effective ways to influence decision- making

10. Way forward – how do WSP’s lessons help us?
Development partners must work together, and work to their comparative advantage
Improved coordination between development partners (i.e. each working on putting in place certain determinants)
Each can support a few key interventions that leverage, complement work of others

11. Thank you