Interim evaluation of two projects — Basic Rural Health II and Shaba Refugee Water Supply — that support the installation of water and sanitation systems in Zaire and the development of a national institution, the Service National d”Hydraulique Rurale (SNHR), responsible for water supply activities. Internal evaluation covers the period 1985-5/90. While both projects have significant accomplishments to show, they differ in cost, in the replicability of their approaches, and in the sustainability of their operations. The Shaba project, designed to serve the local population and Zairian refugees returning from Angola, has supported the work of a full- time expatriate drilling team, whose primary concern has been to provide water as efficiently and cost-effectively as possible, but which has also contributed to the technical experience of SNHR staff. There is some question, however, as to whether drilling operations can be sustained after the contractor”s departure in 9/90. In the Basic Rural Health project, on the other hand, emphasis has been on fostering community responsibility for water systems; this effort has largely succeeded, although there are indications that operations and maintenance are inadequate at several sites. This project has also supported SNHR”s development. Of the types of water systems constructed under the projects, capped springs were the least expensive ($1,100 per system), compared with boreholes with handpumps (about $6,500 per system). Preliminary studies indicate that diarrheal incidence decreases in children under five as the number of improved water sources (e.g., capped-springs), the quantity of water, and access to a source of potable water increase. There is also some evidence that more accessible water sources free women to spend more time on other domestic or income-generating activities. Finally, there are indications that communities are better prepared and more motivated to implement other development activities after successfully completing and sustaining a water project. The projects have had less success with respect to SNHR, which is in a precarious position. It is almost totally dependent on donor funding and resources (which, however, when provided, increase performance only marginally) and lacks the skilled and motivated staff and the organizational solidarity needed to survive. It is imperative that SNHR consolidate its operations to increase their efficiency (not expand them, as USAID/Z has urged it to do). Donor patience is waning and donor resources are dwindling.
