USAID/HAITI FINAL PERFOMANCE
EVALUATION OF USAID WATER AND 
SANITATION PROJECT
FINAL REPORT
Haiti Evaluation and Survey Services Project (ESS)
July 21, 2022
This publication was prepared independently by Social Impact, Inc. at the request of the United States
Agency for International Development.
PHOTO CREDIT: DAN O’NEILL, DAI HAITI
USAID/HAITI FINAL PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION OF USAID WATER AND
SANITATION (WATSAN) PROJECT
FINAL REPORT
Date: July 21, 2022
Submitted to USAID/Haiti
Contract Number: AID-521-C-17-00002
This publication was prepared independently by Social Impact, Inc. at the request of the United States
Agency for International Development.
Contact: Salima Mutima, Chief of Party
2300 Clarendon Blvd, Suite 1000
Arlington, VA 22201, USA
DISCLAIMER
The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States
Agency for International Development or the United States Government.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The evaluation team (ET) would like to thank the current and former staff at the prime implementer
Development Alternatives International (DAI) and select implementing partners mWater, V3
Engineering, Ayiti Nexus, Centre et Formation et d’Encadrement, and Zanmi Lasante for their
participation and provision of documentation and valuable feedback. The ET also appreciates Chase’s
provision of local data collection services. The ET also thanks the staff at USAID, including Raina
Zantout and Marcia Urquhart Glenn, for their support and feedback throughout the entire evaluation
process. Finally, the ET would like to thank the many stakeholders who spoke with us about the
WATSAN/USAID activity. The support and engagement of these organizations and stakeholders proved
invaluable during the evaluation process.
i | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS III
ABSTRACT VII
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VIII
INTRODUCTION 1
BACKGROUND 1
HAITI’S WATER AND SANITATION STATUS 1
USAID WATSAN ACTIVITY GOAL AND OBJECTIVES 2
USAID WATSAN ACTIVITY INTERVENTIONS AND PHASES 3
PROJECT PERFORMANCE SUMMARY 4
EVALUATION QUESTIONS 5
EVALUATION QUESTION 1 5
EVALUATION QUESTION 2 5
EVALUATION QUESTION 3. 5
METHODOLOGY 5
DATA COLLECTION 6
DATA ANALYSIS 9
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 12
EVALUATION QUESTION 1 (WATER SUPPLY). 12
EVALUATION QUESTION 1 (SANITATION). 24
EVALUATION QUESTION 2 29
EVALUATION QUESTION 3 35
CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES 38
RECOMMENDATIONS 42
USAID/HAITI 42
USAID IMPLEMENTERS 42
ANNEX A. SCOPE OF WORK 44
ANNEX B. DOCUMENTS REVIEWED 60
ANNEX C. KIIS/GIS/FGD EVENT LIST 63
ANNEX D. MWATER SECONDARY DATA REVIEW 67
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | ii
ANNEX E. CTE STAFF SURVEY RESULTS 82
ANNEX F. 2021 CTE CUSTOMER SURVEY SECONDARY DATA REVIEW 90
ANNEX G. LIST OF STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTED 97
ANNEX H. WATSAN PROJECT METHODOLOGY 101
ANNEX I. DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS 103
iii | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
TABLES AND FIGURES
TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FROM THE PROJECT 
RESULTS FRAMEWORK 4
TABLE 2: KIIS, GIS, AND FGDS 7
TABLE 3: CTE STAFF SURVEY DATA COLLECTION 8
TABLE 4: MWATER INDICATORS AND METRIC CATEGORIES 12
FIGURE 1: THE “SPIRAL OF DECLINE” LEADING TO POOR PERFORMANCE 
(AFTER GALAITSI 2016) 13
FIGURE 2. THE DATA VALUE CHAIN MODEL FOR TURNING DATA INTO 
USEFUL INFORMATION 14
FIGURE 3: CTE STAFF EXPERIENCE OF USING MWATER 15
FIGURE 4: CTE EXPENSES DATA FROM MWATER (6 MONTH MOVING 
AVERAGE) 16
FIGURE 5: CTE REVENUE DATA FROM MWATER (6 MONTH MOVING 
AVERAGE) 16
FIGURE 6: CTE OPERATING RATIO DATA FROM MWATER (6 MONTH 
MOVING AVERAGE) 17
FIGURE 7: CTE STAFF EXPERIENCES OF USING QUICKBOOKS 
ACCOUNTING SOFTWARE 18
FIGURE 8: SAEP WATER SUPPLY CONTINUITY (6-MONTH MOVING 
AVERAGE) 19
FIGURE 9: CTE RESIDUAL CHLORINE CONFORMITY 19
FIGURE 10: FUNCTIONALITY OF CTE MANAGED KIOSKS (6 MONTH 
MOVING AVERAGE) 20
FIGURE 11: HOUSEHOLD WATER ACCESS FROM HOUSEHOLD 
CONNECTIONS AND KIOSKS: COVERAGE BY CTE 20
FIGURE 12. CTE ACTIVE SUBSCRIBERS (6 MONTH MOVING AVERAGE) 21
FIGURE 13: CTE COLLECTION EFFICIENCIES (6 MONTH MOVING AVERAGE)
21
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | iv
FIGURE 14: CTE STAFF EXPERIENCES OF USING SIGA 22
TABLE 5: EAF GRANTS AND CURRENT STATUS 30
FIGURE 15: PROJECT ISSUES TIMELINE 38
FIGURE 16: SEXUAL HARRASSMENT TRAINING 39
FIGURE 17: CTE’S MANAGEMENT OF CTE’S GENDER ISSUES BY SEX 39
FIGURE 18: CTE’S MANAGEMENT OF COMMUNITY GENDER ISSUES 40
TABLE 6: DATA OUTLIERS 67
TABLE 7: AVAILABLE DATA 68
v | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
BSFL Black Solder Fly Larvae
CFET Centre de Formation et d’Encadrement Technique
COP Chief of Party
CTE Centre Technique d’Exploitation/Technical Centre of Exploitation
DAI Development Alternatives Incorporated
DCOP Deputy Chief of Party
DINEPA National Directorate of Potable Water and Sanitation
EAF Enterprise Acceleration Fund
EQ Evaluation Question
ESS Evaluation and Survey Services
ET Evaluation Team
ETS Ecole de Technologie Superieure
FCR Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations
FGD Focus Group Discussion
FSM Fecal Sludge Management
GI Group Interview
GOH Government of Haiti
HH Household
HTG Haitian Gourde
IDB Inter-American Development Bank
IP Implementing Partner
IQR Interquartile Range
IRB Internal Review Board
KII Key Informant Interview
LEA Latrine Emptier Association
LWI’S Living Water International 
LOP Life of Project
LSPV Projet de Lits de Séchage Plantés de Végétaux
MEL Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning
MFSN Mouvman Fanm Soléy Nó
MSME Micro, Small, or Medium-Sized Enterprises
MTF Mayoral Task Force
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
OFATMA Office d’Assurance Accidents du Travail, Maladie et Maternité
ONA Office National d’Assurance-Vieillesse
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | vi
ONEPA Observatoire National de l’Eau Potable et de l’Assainissement
OREPA Office Régional de l’Eau Potable et d’Assainissement
SAEP Système d’alimentation d’eau potable / drinking water supply system
SDG Sustainable Development Goal
SI Social Impact
SIEPA Système intégré d’Information sur l’Eau Potable et l’Assainissement
SIGA Système Intégré de Gestion des Abonnés / CTE customer database
SISKLOR Système de Surveillance du Chlore Residuel / Residual Chlorine Surveillance System
SME Small and Medium Sized Enterprises
TA Technical Assistance
TL Team Leader
USAID United States Agency for International Development
UEH State University of Haiti
UniQ University Quisqueya
USD US Dollars
WASH Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene
WATSAN Water and Sanitation
WBUTF World Bank Utility Turnaround Framework
vii | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
ABSTRACT
This evaluation used a mixed-methods methodology to examine the design, approaches, performance
and outcomes of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Water and 
Sanitation (WATSAN) Project between December 2017 and December 2021. Project objectives
included supporting access to sustainable water supply (target 250,000 people) and sanitation services
(target 75,000 people) and strengthening the foundational capacity of water and sanitation service 
providers for sustainable service delivery. Project targets were mostly met (see Table 1 in the 
background section).
Key findings for the water sector included that the Centres Technique d’Exploitation (CTEs) are better able
to manage their businesses using a data-driven approach via the Système intégré d’Information sur l’Eau
Potable et l’Assainissement and the mWater platform. Billing and customer service are improved,
though some challenges remain with continuity of CTE data. USAID’s approach and these achievements 
with the CTEs have provided a foundation for sustainable service delivery. Key findings for the sanitation
sector included two fecal sludge management sites now operating safely with business plans in place in
Les Cayes and Port-au-Prince. Moreover, the Project’s support to the Latrine Emptying Associations and
small and medium sized enterprises has empowered them to deliver improved sanitation services.
Coordination support to the Mayoral Task Forces on Sanitation has increased access to sanitation
services.
Recommendations are made on how to capitalize on the Project’s successes, including continued
capacity building, improved data management and integration of data platforms, setting service delivery
targets, and establishing regulatory frameworks with enforcement for the sanitation sector.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | viii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
OVERVIEW AND PURPOSE
United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Haiti requested that Social Impact’s (SI)
Evaluation and Survey Services (ESS) activity design and conduct an independent final performance
evaluation of the USAID Water and Sanitation (WATSAN) Project (the Project) implemented by
(Development Alternatives Incorporated (DAI) Global, LLC, with implementing partners (IPs) V3
Engineering, Ayiti Nexus, mWater, Centre et Formation et d’Encadrement, and Zanmi Lasante across
eight departments in Haiti. The purpose of this evaluation was to determine the effectiveness of the
Project in achieving its objectives in order to inform future USAID/Haiti programming similar in scope
or approach. The primary audience for the evaluation is USAID, with secondary audiences being Project 
implementing partners, the Haitian National Directorate of Potable Water and Sanitation (DINEPA), the
Government of Haiti (GOH), Haitian private sector entities and donors. This report presents the
evaluation methodology, findings, and conclusions for each evaluation question, followed by
recommendations.
EVALUATION SCOPE AND QUESTIONS
The evaluation focused on the ten communes targeted over the life of the Project. For the water sector,
the target communities for the evaluation were the customers and staff of the water utility management
structures (the Centre Technique d’Exploitation or CTEs) and the governmental and non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) supporting their service delivery at either the household or water kiosk level.
Additionally, two Enterprise Acceleration Fund (EAF) grants supported water projects (water quality
testing and water kiosks). For the sanitation sector, the target communities were the staff and users of
the two fecal sludge management (FSM) sites at Morne a Cabri and Fonfred, Latrine Emptying
Associations (LEAs), the Mayoral Task Force (MTF) on Sanitation, and small and medium sized 
enterprises (SMEs) involved in household latrine construction. Additionally, five EAF grants supported
sanitation projects. The target populations were 250,000 people for water supply and 75,000 for
sanitation.
This evaluation addressed the following evaluation questions (EQs):
1. To what extent has WATSAN met its Task Order objectives to build governance capacity at
multiple levels (national, regional, local) to improve sustainable water supply and sanitation
service delivery?
2. How was the Enterprise Acceleration Fund utilized, and to what extent did those grants support
WASH enterprises (such as micro, small, and medium sized enterprises or MSMEs, NGOs, and
Bayakous) to move toward sustainable service delivery?
3. How effective was WATSAN’s approach of targeting the end of the sanitation value chain in
improving the overall sanitation value chain?1
1 This may also be referred to as the sanitation service chain.
ix | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
METHODOLOGY
The evaluation used a mixed-methods approach consisting of a document review, 55 key informant 
interviews (KII) and group interviews (GI), six focus group discussions (FGDs), 74 CTE staff surveys and 
secondary data review of mWater CTE indicator data, DINEPA FSM sites operational data, EAF project 
performance data, and a CTE customer satisfaction survey conducted in 2021. The Evaluation
participants included CTE staff and managers, CTE liaison officers, CTE kiosk managers, members of the
LEAs and MTFs, Observatoire National de l’Eau Potable et de l’Assainissement (ONEPA) and Office Régional 
de l’Eau Potable et d’Assainissement (OREPA) staff, staff of SMEs, EAF grantees, FSM managers and users,
staff of implementing partners, and USAID staff.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
EQ1: To what extent has the Project met its Task Order to build governance capacity at 
multiple levels (national, regional, local) to improve sustainable water supply and 
sanitation service delivery?
FINDINGS (WATER)
Organization and Strategy
Multiple respondents from the CTEs and IPs reported that before the Project, all CTEs were insolvent
and unable to plan and monitor progress, revenues, and expenditures. The 11 mWater key performance 
indicators (see Table 4 on page 12) used by the Project CTEs have since been adopted by all 29 CTEs, 
including Pignon drinking water supply system (Système d’Alimentation d’Eau Potable or SAEP). The 
indicators have underpinned CTE business development across the five performance metrics of
Organization and Strategy, Technical Operations, Commercial Operations, Financial Operations and 
Human Resource (HR) Management, as outlined below.
Technical Operations
Water supply service continuity across the Project CTEs is at between five and 20 hours/week, with
Pignon at around 80 hours/week. An exception is Ouanaminthe, whose continuity in October 2020
leapt from five to 168 hours/week (24/7 supply), where it has remained since, as their management of 
the system improved. However, there are no established/defined water supply delivery standards for the 
CTEs, reference to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) or identified milestones to reach them. 
In Ouanaminthe, use of the mWater mobile app which the Project supported means monthly meter
readings were done in ten days instead of taking over a month. There remains variation in reporting
between mWater indicators and CTEs in terms of regularity e.g., conformity to residual chlorine levels
monitored through residual chlorine surveillance system (Système de Surveillance du Chlore Residuel or
SISKLOR) was reported very irregularly in some CTEs. Repairs to CTE-managed water supply 
infrastructure has been limited by a lack of comprehensive and accessible technical details sufficient to 
locate the affected water supply infrastructure, but mWater has recently launched a mapping program 
to address this issue. At the kiosk level, mWater data shows that CTE-managed kiosks have erratic and 
variable levels of functionality. There are challenges with the interconnectedness of the various software
packages the CTEs use.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | x
Commercial Operations
CTE revenues have increased, the largest being Mirebalais where revenue increased from 148,000
Haitian Gourdes (HTG) in July 2019 to 805,000 HTG in January 2022 while revenues doubled for
Hinche, Cap Haitien, and Belladere over the same period. CTE FGDs discussed how revenues have
increased2 as tariffs have been raised and there is now better billing, revenue collection, and customer
service using the Système Intégré de Gestion des Abonnés (SIGA, the CTE customer database) and
mWater. Key factors for CTE business sustainability and customer retention included the predictability 
of water supply and service continuity, together with enhanced billing and customer complaints handling.
Financial Operations
In 45 percent of cases, the operating ratio (expenses/revenue) was higher than 100 percent for the
Project’s CTEs, indicating that expenses were higher than the revenue for close to half of the reported
months. A number of interviews with both the donor and the prime contractor indicated that although
revenues have increased, “fear of success” was very real. CTEs are not audited, and they have concerns
around how they will manage their increased revenues and how to effectively manage expenditure of
those funds for future capital infrastructure projects/improvements. Some CTEs are relatively new to 
using QuickBooks accounting software and are not yet confident in using it. There is no network 
connection from QuickBooks to the SIEPA (Système Intégré d’Information sur l’Eau Potable et 
l’Assainissement) system. 
HR Management
The evaluation included a survey of 74 CTE staff (Annex E) with more than 50 percent of respondents 
having worked at the CTE for four to five years. The survey results, when triangulated with CTE staff
interviews and FGDs with a number of CTE stakeholders, found that although CTE staff capacity to use 
mWater and SIGA software improved over the Project period, enabling better service and billing, there 
was variation in that capacity i.e. not everyone can use the data for planning purposes. See Annex E and 
main report for full details.
CONCLUSIONS (WATER)
The Project has brought data-driven planning and decision-making to each CTE for the first time. The
Project enabled the CTEs to grow their customer bases and revenues and increase their business
capacity. The project has significantly contributed to the sustainability of the CTEs and reversed the
spiral of business decline seen before the Project started. There remains room for improvement in the 
areas of technical data management for operation and maintenance, consistent and timely reporting of 
mWater data, SISKLOR data reporting, effective management of future capital expenditure on 
infrastructure and for some CTEs their capacity to use QuickBooks confidently.
FINDINGS (SANITATION)
The Project worked with a number of stakeholders in the sanitation sector, including the FSM sites,
SMEs/pit emptiers, LEAs, and MTFs. The Project was able to help the SMEs increase capacity, especially
2 All figures relating to CTE performance in this report have come from the secondary data review of mWater data.
xi | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
regarding management of the business (marketing, human resources, contracts, and budgets) through
training and encouraged the construction of household toilets and latrines. The Project improved the
infrastructure and management capacity of the Fonfred FSM and the Morne a Cabri FSM sites and
supported better management practices. Both sites are currently accepting sludge from the surrounding
communities, which has reduced complaints about the sites, but there is concern regarding long-term
sustainability, especially regarding issues with transportation and not receiving enough sludge to be 
profitable. 
CONCLUSIONS (SANITATION)
The pit-emptiers were empowered by the work of the Project. This led to them marketing their
services, developing official associations, and working together. By working with multiple sanitation
stakeholders, the Project was able to assist in the construction of latrines and toilets at the household
level, increase the role of the MTFs in their awareness-raising activities regarding the importance and
impact of having a latrine, and increase the management and business capacities of the SMEs, LEAs, and
FSMs. Through this increased capacity, they are now better able to provide more sanitation services to
the communities. 
EQ 2: How was the enterprise acceleration fund utilized, and to what extent did those 
grants support WASH enterprises (such as MSME, NGOs, Bayakous) to move toward 
sustainable service delivery? 
FINDINGS (EAF)
DAI administered seven EAF grants during the Project, four in the sanitation sector and three in the
water sector. The grants included micro credit for toilet construction, construction of 14 kiosks, 
research activities by University Quisqueya (UniQ) on sludge drying and testing, purchase of equipment
to improve incineration services, pilot trials of black soldier fly larvae waste to value end products by 
SOIL and establishing a water testing laboratory at Limonade University. The kiosks provided access to
water to 24,000 people, while the micro grants for latrines and toilets provided access to credit for 100
people. About half of the grantees said they did not feel involved in the Project decision-making and use
of funds, and many grantees had issues with implementation timelines due to delays in the arrival and 
quality of equipment.
CONCLUSIONS (EAF)
The grants were successful in terms of increasing the number of clients for the organizations, both in
terms of access to markets and the range of services offered. In addition, the lab at Limonade University
can now provide water quality testing in addition to soil testing. The research activities for SOIL and
UniQ proved to be a success as activities have been able to finally start. Two of the grants have ongoing
issues due to delayed equipment, and one grant has an issue with equipment not functioning. The
grantees shared how they were able to expand their services both in terms of the number of clients and
types of services provided (but due to delays, this has not happened for all grantees). Due to delays and
some challenges, it is difficult to determine if grants improved the sustainability of the organizations.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | xii
EQ 3: How effective was the Project’s approach of targeting the end of the sanitation value 
chain in improving the overall sanitation value chain?
FINDINGS (SANITATION VALUE CHAIN)
Before the Project, the Fonfred FSM site in Les Cayes was not operational. The Morne a Cabri site for 
the Port-au-Prince area was open and accepting waste, but the treatment basins were full and the site 
was not properly managed. The Project has enabled both sites to now provide a safe and controlled 
disposal area for sludge waste and illegal sludge dumping has been reduced and the end of the sanitation 
value chain is now stronger. The FSM sites are now operating with a business model but they are not 
yet profitable and a key bottleneck is insufficient sludge transport capacity.
CONCLUSIONS (SANITATION VALUE CHAIN)
The Project focused on the end of the sanitation value chain with the work at the FSM sites; this has
ensured the communities of Les Cayes and Port-au-Prince now have a safe fecal sludge disposal facility
It is important to note that while the infrastructure and management capacity of the FSM sites improved
due to the Project’s activities, sustainability is still an issue as the sites have issues with transportation
and do not receive enough customers/sludge each month to be profitable. There are some ongoing 
concerns that the sites will close without further support from the Project. 
PRINCIPAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR USAID/HAITI:
1. Ensure future programming supports CTEs to establish milestones for reaching defined service
delivery standards that are linked to the SDGs and tracked in mWater.
2. Engage DINEPA/GOH to enable SIEPA to have better data connectivity between the various
software packages for the CTEs.
3. Continue to support FSM organizations in their efforts to reach profitability/sustainability by
expanding infrastructure in order to help them increase the amount of sludge they can process.
In particular, support greater sludge transportation capacity from FSM users to the FSM sites.
4. Continue to support coordination among sanitation sector stakeholders to build GOH capacity
in the development and enforcement of FSM regulations.
PRINCIPAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE USAID HAITI IMPLEMENTERS:
1. Undertake a needs assessment with CTEs on how they can grow their financial and asset
management capacity to support accountable capital expenditure on infrastructure.
2. Address data continuity/quality issues for data reported on mWater.
3. Support mWater’s capacity to map all water supply infrastructure to improve CTE technical
operations.
4. Develop a standardized approach for all CTE-managed kiosks that includes an indicator(s) for
kiosks to supplement the current single (technical) indicator of percentage functional kiosks e.g.,
the hours per day of operation metric used by CTEs for household connections.
5. Use EAF-type grants to support female-lead/owned organizations and projects.
1 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
INTRODUCTION
The USAID WATSAN Project is a $41.8 million, five-year activity (in total) implemented in collaboration
with Haiti’s DINEPA with the overall goal of improving sanitation and water for all Haitians. There was a
$4.9 million and six-month extension to the Project (which will now end in December 2022) to
primarily focus on helping rebuild the water systems in the South following the August 14, 2021,
earthquake.3
The Project reached its goals by focusing on its core values of self-reliance, resilience, and the private￾sector approach. In total, the Project focused on 12 areas: eight areas hard hit by Haiti’s cholera
outbreak (Cap-Haitien, Ouanaminthe, Pignon, Hinche, Mirebalais, Belladere, Lascahobas, and Croix des 
Bouquets), two areas hard hit by Hurricane Matthew in 2016 (Les Cayes and Jeremie), and now two
additional areas hit by the August 14, 2021, earthquake (Aquin and Miragoane). The first five areas that
were part of the Project were Cap-Haitien, Mirebalais, Les Cayes, Jeremie, and Croix des Bouquets.
This evaluation assesses the Project’s implementation in the first ten communes (Aquin and Miragoane 
are not part of the evaluation).
BACKGROUND
HAITI’S WATER AND SANITATION STATUS
Access to water and sanitation in Haiti is the worst of any country in the Western Hemisphere. Only
66.7 percent4 of the population has access to basic water sources, a slight increase since 1990, when the
rate was 62 percent.
5 Increases in services have not been able to keep pace with population growth.
However, actual access rates may be lower, as many water systems’ functionality is poor. Only 37.1
percent6 of the Haitian population has access to basic sanitation, a rate that has been relatively constant
since 1990. Safe collection, transport, and treatment of human excreta is practically non-existent
throughout Haiti. Surveys indicate that the use of improved sanitation facilities has increased from 18 to
28 percent, meaning that much of the population still relies on shared or unimproved sanitation
facilities.7
While basic sanitation access rates in urban areas are higher than the national average (37.1 percent),
they are still below 50 percent.
8 In informal or unplanned settlements, where the poorest and most
vulnerable urban populations generally live, urbanization and high localized population density may be
accompanied by an increased risk of infectious disease transmission, primarily affecting the poor. The
combination of a high fecal-related disease burden and inadequate infrastructure suggests that
investment in expanding sanitation access in densely populated urban slums can yield important public
health gains.
3 WATSAN Quarterly Report Oct-Dec 2021
4 UNICEF/WHO Joint Monitoring Programme (2020)
5 Ibid.
6 Ibid.
7 Ibid.
8 Ibid.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 2
It is also important to understand the impact of gender regarding access and use of water and sanitation
facilities. For example, women and girls have disproportionate labor and time burdens for household
water collection, management, and treatment; also, those who travel long distances to collect water are
particularly vulnerable to gender-based violence. This is discussed in detail in the USAID/Haiti Strategic
Framework Gender Analysis (November 2020).
9 In terms of water management and governance, which
the USAID WATSAN activity focuses on, women are often not in decision-making roles and are not
visible in both public and private sectors.
10
In addition, climate change and other natural and human-made disasters as well as unplanned
urbanization threaten water resources and gains made in the water supply and sanitation sector. Building
the capacity of utilities and private operators to anticipate needs, plan for and finance improvements,
and expand access to underserved communities on a sustainable basis is the strategy promoted by the
USAID Water and Development Plan.
USAID WATSAN ACTIVITY GOAL AND OBJECTIVES
The objective of the USAID WATSAN Project is to build a foundation for long-term, sustainable growth 
in access to safe drinking water and sanitation in Haiti, where many communities suffer from high 
incidences of diarrheal disease. The Project’s three primary goals are to:
• Help 250,000 people get access to basic or improved water;
• Help 75,000 people get access to basic or improved sanitation; and
• Lay the foundation for sustainable increases in access to water and sanitation across Haiti.
The Project was implemented in collaboration with DINEPA, the branch of the Haitian government 
tasked with ensuring water and sanitation services for its citizens. At the time of this evaluation, the
USAID WATSAN Project covered implementation in 10 communes, located in six departments: Nord,
Nord-Est, Centre, Sud, Grand’Anse, and Ouest.
USAID WATSAN initially focused on five areas: three areas hard hit by the cholera outbreak11 (Cap￾Haitien, Mirebalais, and Croix des Bouquets) and two areas hard hit by Hurricane Matthew in 2016 (Les
Cayes and Jeremie). During the last two years, it added five additional areas: Ouanaminthe and Hinche in
2020, and Pignon, Lascahobas, and Belladere in 2021.
USAID understands that the success of its USAID WATSAN Project rests on these prioritized values.
• Self-Reliance: The institutions must be able to generate enough revenue to fully cover their
operations without any subsidies.
• Resilience: Given the volatile climate in Haiti, the institutions need to design, build, operate,
maintain, and upgrade systems that can withstand disruptions and economic uncertainty.
9 USAID Haiti Strategic Framework Gender Analysis (November 2020) pg. 97
10 USAID Haiti Strategic Framework Gender Analysis (November 2020) pg. 98-100
11 The cholera outbreak started in October 2010. USAID provided support that helped in eliminating cholera from Haiti in 
2019.
3 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
• Private Sector Approach: The CTEs and fecal sludge managers must adopt a private sector,
customer-driven approach.
The theory of change is shown in Annex H.
USAID WATSAN ACTIVITY INTERVENTIONS AND PHASES
The Project’s activities are organized around three closely linked components, with specific tasks for
each, shown in Annex H.
Component 1: Increasing access to sustainable water services
• Task 1.1: Water infrastructure engineering services
• Task 1.2: Water infrastructure construction
• Task 1.3: Technical assistance for water service providers
Component 2: Increased access to sustainable sanitation services
• Task 2.1: Support for sanitation enterprises
• Task 2.2: Waste treatment and fecal sludge management engineering services
• Task 2.3: Wastewater treatment and fecal sludge management construction
Component 3: Improving the enabling environment for sustainable implementation, operations, and
maintenance of water and sanitation services
• Task 3.1: Technical assistance to national and sub-national government structures
• Task 3.2: Knowledge dissemination and learning
Initially, Component 1 activities focused on Quick Impact Projects and the tailored technical assistance
(TA) packaged for the CTEs, but that expanded throughout the Project to include software packages for
the CTEs, operation manuals, and support for performance management of directors. Training support
to the CTEs was further developed based around the five metrics of organization and strategy, human
resources management, financial management, technical operations, and commercial operations (Annex
H).
To help with implementation in the last quarter of Year Two, the Project moved some of its senior staff
into the CTEs as well. In Year Three, the Deputy Chief of Party (DCOP), worked directly with the Cap
Haitien CTE. The Senior Advisor and the Utility Specialist worked with the Les Cayes and Jeremie
CTEs. The Senior Engineer worked with Mirebalais. By having these senior staff working directly with
the CTEs on a daily basis, the Project was able to help the CTEs to implement the required management
changes.
USAID WATSAN worked with the CTEs to increase the amount of data collected, reported, and used
in mWater. DINEPA tracked 11 key indicators that were self-reported by the CTEs as part of the
monthly reports. Additional financial, client, and technical information is collected using SIGA, SISKLOR,
and Cadastre, and also stored in the mWater database for each CTE, including a limited amount of
infrastructure information.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 4
Throughout the Project, there was a focus on the institutional strengthening program for the Regional 
Offices for Potable Water and Sanitation (OREPAs) based on the needs identified in the water and
sanitation service roadmaps. Support to DINEPA focused on monitoring, especially collaboration with
the ONEPA and improving their collection, monitoring, analysis, and archiving portal. Learning activities
included developing a learning agenda with sector stakeholders, convening at least one learning event,
and completing preliminary design of an online learning platform.
Activities under the Project’s Enterprise Acceleration Fund were also essential to the Project’s activities.
Initial grants and other mechanisms helped build the capacity of private sector actors working in the
water and sanitation sector while also meeting their enterprise development goals and contributing to
the Project’s results and impacts.
PROJECT PERFORMANCE SUMMARY
The key objectives of the Project were to build the governance and financial management capacity of
targeted Haitian public utilities and private operators, enable 250,000 people to gain access to new or
improved water services, and enable 75,000 people to gain access to basic or safely managed sanitation
services. The USAID WATSAN Project supported sector institutions by implementing a combination of
targeted infrastructure improvements and technical assistance prescribed by the World Bank Utility
Turnaround Framework. The USAID WATSAN Project also supported sector MSMEs and supported
water and sanitation innovation projects through its Enterprise Acceleration Fund. The table below
summarizes Project achievements against Life of Project (LOP) targets.
TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FROM THE PROJECT RESULTS FRAMEWORK
OUTCOME INDICATORS LOP TARGET COMMENTS12
Number of people receiving improved service quality from an existing basic or
safely managed drinking water service
250,000 Exceeded by 
24,425
Number of service providers demonstrating at least a 10 percent increase in
cost recovery
9 2 Remaining
Number of people receiving improved sanitation service quality from an existing
“limited” or “basic” service
75,000 Exceeded by 1,298
Number of SMEs demonstrating increased sales of sanitation products and
services
15 0
Percentage of staff in target sector institutions self-reporting increased ability to
perform effectively in assigned job
50 percent Exceeded by 50
percent
Percentage of agreed strategies/plans for improved water and/or sanitation
service delivery being implemented at national, regional and/or commune level
9 0
Table 1 summarizes the performance outcome indicators from the Project results framework with 
information from March 2022. Please note that the data was not disaggregated by income group, age,
disability, or sex.
12 From the Q1FY22 and Q2FY22 quarterly reports
5 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
EVALUATION QUESTIONS
EVALUATION QUESTION 1. To what extent has USAID WATSAN met its Task Order
objectives to build governance capacity at multiple levels (national, regional, local) to
improve sustainable water supply and sanitation service delivery?
To answer this question, the Evaluation Team (ET) considered a number of sub-questions that looked at
the CTE water supply, the kiosk water supply, and the sanitation services supported by the USAID
WATSAN activity. These included: What is the impact and experience of the data management tools
(mWater, SIGA, QuickBooks and Sisklor)? Has CTE customer satisfaction improved? Has the TA
improved the service delivery and customer management capacity of the CTEs and led to improvement
across the five metrics? For the sanitation aspect, the ET considered if the capacity of the Fonfred and
Morne a Cabri FSM management teams has improved. The impact of the business support provided to
the SMEs and Latrine Emptier Associations was also examined.
EVALUATION QUESTION 2. How was the Enterprise Acceleration Fund utilized, and to
what extent did those grants support WASH enterprises (such as MSMEs, NGOs, and
Bayakous) to move toward sustainable service delivery?
To answer this question, the ET considered a number of sub-questions. Some of these looked at the
services and the results from the EAF, such as what success the grants achieved and if there were any
recommended modifications. The ET investigated how sustainability improved, if the business or
organization expanded (in terms of services and/or customers), and the overall successes and challenges
of the EAF grants.
EVALUATION QUESTION 3. How effective was WATSAN’s approach of targeting the
end of the sanitation value chain in improving the overall sanitation value chain?
The ET understood that DINEPA and the FSM management staff will continue the work started under
USAID WATSAN. When looking at the overall sanitation value chain, the ET focused on the services
the FSM provided to operators and the communities. Some of the sub questions used to investigate the
evaluation question included: Is the FSM operating as a business? Are clients using wastewater treatment
sites? Are they satisfied? How was the sanitation value chain affected by the Project activities? How does
the FSM serve the community and businesses? Has FSM improved and has there been improvement
regarding sustainability? And has the opening of the FSM improved disposal of waste and improved
businesses for the clients? The ET also investigated the challenges and success of the sanitation activities.
METHODOLOGY
As part of the evaluation, the ET reviewed USAID WATSAN annual work plans, annual reports,
monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) plans, and Activity descriptions and modifications.
Following the kick-off meeting on December 15, 2021, the ET continued its review of USAID WATSAN
Project documents, contacted DAI for additional documents and stakeholder contact information, and
prepared the Inception and Evaluation Design Report. The in-briefing presentation was held with USAID
on January 6, 2022, after which the ET made some adjustments to the methodology. The inception
report was submitted to USAID on January 31, 2022. The ET had an introductory meeting with mWater
and members of the DAI team to gain a better understanding of the Project and the mWater platform.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 6
DATA COLLECTION OVERVIEW
The ET used a mixed-methods evaluation design. The ET collected data on the perspectives and
experiences of key stakeholders involved in USAID WATSAN and/or in the sanitation value chain using
both purposeful and snowball sampling techniques. The table in Annex C shows all the data collection
events undertaken by the ET. Data collection started on February 21, 2022, and ended on April 15,
2022. The data collection tools included guiding questionnaires and associated protocols for KIIs (with
one person), for GIs (with two to five people), for FGDs (for six people or more), and a dedicated
survey tool for CTE staff. The tools were translated into French and Creole. The KII and GI
respondents and FGD participants were selected strategically from a list of key USAID, GOH, DAI,
CTE, and partner staff. Respondents likely to have the most information were selected first, balanced by
diversity, and supplemented with snowball sampling to fill in gaps in data sources and information
Primary data collection included 55 key informant interviews (KIIs) or group interviews (GIs) and six 
focus group discussions (FGDs) with stakeholders in all 10 communes to address EQs 1, 2, and 3, and a
survey of 74 CTE staff in seven communes to address EQ1. The ET also conducted an extensive
secondary data review of mWater CTE indicator data, DINEPA FSM sites operational data, EAF Project
performance data, and a CTE customer satisfaction survey conducted in 2021. The scope of this data
review was substantial for EQ1 (water) and looked at all mWater data collected from December 2017
to December 2021 across the Project communes for the 11 mWater indicators as well as the data from
a CTE customer satisfaction survey conducted in 2021. The scope of secondary data review for EQ1
(sanitation), EQ2, and EQ3 was limited to DINEPA FSM sites data and (limited) performance data for
the EAF Projects. There was substantially less data available for sanitation than for water supply. The
evaluation faced a number of challenges related to the country context and the remote nature of data
collection (see Methodological Limitations and Mitigation Strategy section below).
DATA COLLECTION METHODS
DOCUMENT REVIEW
The ET conducted an initial review of more than 50 USAID WATSAN documents, as well as other,
third-party resource material, to understand the Activity design and implementation, extract findings
relevant to the EQs, and inform the development of data collection questions and tools that
appropriately supplemented, or could be cross-checked with, information in the background documents.
Documents are listed and fully described in Annex D.
SECONDARY DATA COLLECTION AND REVIEW
The ET conducted secondary data analysis of the CTE indicators extracted for each CTE from mWater,
such as revenue information, subscriber information, kiosk information, and number of staff by gender
and contract type. The ET was also able to disaggregate the subscriber information and their satisfaction
rating of their CTE’s services by gender from DAI’s CTE Client Satisfaction Survey conducted in March￾April 2021.
There is a delay in the approval process by OREPA, which is needed for the CTE indicator data to be
publicly available. The ET followed up with the SAEPs to ensure information was available until
December 2021 at a minimum on the mWater platform. The ET had access to data from reports across
7 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
the 10 WATSAN SAEPs ranging between December 2018 and March 2022. The summary of available 
mWater data is listed in Annex D.
The Project completed a CTE customer satisfaction survey as part of a SIGA database update in March –
April 2021. The survey was conducted in six communes (Cap Haitien, Mirebalais, Croix des Bouquets,
Les Cayes, Jeremie, and Hinche). Using the SIGA client database, the survey attempted to reach all of its
active and passive client base and managed to collect responses from a total of 10,525 clients. In addition
to updating the client contact information (phone numbers, address, and GPS coordinates of the
connection), the survey asked questions on client’s status (active vs. passive) and satisfaction rating of
service quality. The ET used the data DAI provided to understand the client base of each CTE and their
satisfaction rating.
FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS
FGDs were undertaken to collect balanced opinions from small groups of key stakeholders, in particular
those groups of individuals personally and directly involved in water or sanitation service delivery. These
groups included CTE staff, kiosk managers, LEAs, and MTFs. Due to availability of interviewees and
connection issues, only six FGDs were conducted of the total 24 planned (all remaining events planned
as FGDs became instead KIIs or GIs.) The FGDs were conducted with the LEAs and the managers for
the kiosks in Cap Haitien (Living Water kiosks). Thirty-seven people participated in the FGDs, but only
six of them were female. Information gathered from FGDs respond to all three evaluation questions.
KEY INFORMANT AND GROUP INTERVIEWS
The KIIs and GIs allowed the ET to gather information for all three evaluation questions. The ET
conducted 55 KIIs and GIs with representatives of key stakeholder groups, including USAID, ONEPA,
DAI staff (CTE management staff, EAFs, FSM management teams), FSM users (this includes companies or
individual contractors that use the FSM sites but not SMEs), and other working partners. This was more
than was originally planned due to challenges faced with schedule and connectivity. The number of KIIs
and GIs increased while the number of planned FGDs decreased. Of the participants in the KIIs and GIs,
40 were female and 69 were male, for a total of 109 participants.
Table 2 shows the number of each primary data collection event and the type of event that was
conducted. A complete breakdown of the events including by gender is in Annex C.
TABLE 2: KIIS, GIS, AND FGDS
KIIS, GIS (2-5 PAX), FGDS (6 OR MORE PAX) EVENTS TYPE
CTE staff 7 GI
FSM staff and users 4 GI
EAF grants recipients 7 KII, GI
Kiosk managers 9 FGD, GI
ONEPA/OREPA staff 6 KII
DAI staff (COP + Project staff, CTE liaison staff) 11 KII, GI
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 8
KIIS, GIS (2-5 PAX), FGDS (6 OR MORE PAX) EVENTS TYPE
SMEs 4 FGD
Pit Emptier Associations and Mayoral Task Forces 4 GI, FGD
Working partners 5 KII
Others 1 KII
USAID 3 KII
Total KIIs/GIs 55 40F/69M
Total FGD 6 6F/31M
CTE staff surveys for 7 communes 74 13F/60M
CTE STAFF SURVEY
The ET conducted a survey of lower-level staff at seven CTEs (Cap Haitien, Mirebalais, Croix des 
Bouquets, Les Cayes, Jeremie, Ouanaminthe, and Hinche). These surveys were conducted by a local data
collection partner in Haitian Creole. The targeted sample size for the survey was 70, with 10
respondents per CTE. When conducting the survey, the team was short three people each in
Ouanaminthe and Croix des Bouquets. The local data firm then used staff from other cities to reach the
target. The survey was carried out via telephone, and an Excel database was shared with the ET. The
sampling for this survey was random, with the list of staff and those they were assigned to randomly
generated; if someone was not available or had issues with phone connection, the surveyor proceed to
the next person on the list. The plan was to have 30 percent of the surveys completed by women, but
due to more male staff and connection issues, this was not possible (11.2 percent of survey participants 
were female))
TABLE 3: CTE STAFF SURVEY DATA COLLECTION
DEPARTMENT CTE STAFF WOMEN
SURVEYED
MEN
SURVEYED
North Cap Haitien 22 4 9
North East Ouanaminthe 10 0 7
Center Hinche 16 1 11
West Mirebalais 14 2 8
Croix des Bouquets 8 1 6
South Les Cayes 25 3 12
Grande Anse Jeremie 21 2 8
Total 116 13 61
9 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
DATA ANALYSIS
The evaluation Team Lead (TL) oversaw and managed systematic analysis of qualitative and quantitative
data. The evaluation included several data collection methods (document review, KIIs, GIs, FGDs,
surveys, and secondary data collection) that enabled the ET to conduct triangulation across methods and
information sources.
DATA ANALYSIS METHODS
The ET employed several data analysis methods to identify key findings from the collected data, as well
as to draw conclusions and make recommendations for Project follow-up or future potential
programming. The ET captured findings, conclusions, and recommendations (FCRs) in an Excel-based
matrix that categorized analysis by EQ. The matrix: 1) ensured that the ET prepared a systematic and
thorough response to each EQ; 2) compared findings across data collection sources and methods to 
triangulate primary and secondary data; 3) verified that analysis accounted for gender and social
dimensions; 4) identified any gaps where additional clarification or analysis may be necessary; 5) clarified
connections between FCRs; and 6) served as the basis for developing the evaluation report. The
Encompass Gender Specialist also participated in analysis debriefs and in reviewing the FCR to validate
inclusion of sex-disaggregated data. The type of analysis depended on the data being assessed as
explained below.
QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS
The ET reviewed and analyzed quantitative data from mWater, the 2021 client satisfaction survey, and
the primary survey of CTE lower-level staff.
mWater Secondary Data Review
The ET undertook a review of all available CTE mWater data through December 2021and compared 
this with key information from primary data collection. The findings and conclusions are discussed in the
sections below for each of the five CTE performance metrics. The ET reviewed the secondary mWater
data for quality and consistency and used Stata 15.0 software for data cleaning. Outliers identified were
addressed for the 11 indicators for each CTE. The ET requested clarification on the outliers from the
respective CTEs. The ET received one response from a CTE. Details on the data cleaning process are
presented in Annex D. For the analysis, the ET examined trends over time across the 11 DINEPA key
indicators and other key outcome indicators for each Project SAEP (number of households served, city
coverage, SAEP coverage, and SAEP capacity). The analysis focused on the six-month moving averages of
the indicators in order to illustrate the overall trends despite the short-term volatility/discontinuity in
some of the data.
CTE Client Satisfaction Survey Secondary Data Review
Customer-related findings were limited to a review of the March-April 2021 SIGA database update
survey, which had included with it a customer satisfaction survey of 8,987 active and 1,225 passive CTE
customers across the CTEs of Cap Haitien, Les Cayes, Croix de Bouquets, Jeremie, Mirebalais, and
Hinche. For the secondary data analysis the ET used Excel to tabulate descriptive statistics for each
client satisfaction question asked, disaggregated by sex. The team also conducted gender analysis of the
secondary data and reviewed it for any statistically significant differences between male and female client
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 10
responses. There were more female clients than male clients, but no other survey responses were
significantly different between men and women.
CTE Staff Survey
For primary survey data (CTE lower-level staff survey), the ET conducted the analysis using Excel, with
each step documented to allow replicability of the results. Prior to analysis, the team undertook a data
cleaning process to label and format the data, verify data quality, and calculate variables required for the
analysis. The analysis consisted of tabulating descriptive statistics related to the sample characteristics
and key outcome indicators. The ET disaggregated descriptive statistics by CTE. In addition, the team
conducted gender analysis of the staff survey data to identify any statistically significant differences
between male and female staff.
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS (THEMATIC)
The ET undertook systematic coding, using a developed codebook, of KII, GI, and FGD transcripts.
Dedoose software was used to identify and highlight the existence of key themes and their frequencies
within the data. The Dedoose data was exported to Excel where coded, transcripted data could be
further analyzed to identify key themes and useful quotes.
METHODOLOGICAL LIMITATIONS AND MITIGATION STRATEGY
The evaluation needed to accommodate the limitations of remote data collection, and therefore the
evaluation relied significantly on secondary data sources, which were plentiful and triangulated with the
findings from primary data collection. Because of ongoing COVID-19 pandemic-related travel and
meeting restrictions, as well as concerns for evaluation participants’ health, the team conducted all of
the interviews via telephone or online conferencing. Communication was a challenge as some phone
numbers provided did not work and often the connection dropped. Other significant challenges included
security concerns and demonstrations that required events to be rescheduled (such as the
demonstrations in Les Cayes). Some of the participants became impatient during the calls, and in some
instances the event had to be stopped midway and rescheduled with smaller groups to reduce the time
needed for the event. The less-than-expected availability of some respondent groups meant that some
FGDs (defined as six or more participants) were undertaken with fewer people and thus are categorized
as GIs.
Specific limitations are discussed below.
Diminished communication quality resulting from the near exclusive use of remote
communication technology. The ET is aware of various challenges associated with remote data
collection, such as limited internet connectivity and poor cell phone network coverage, especially among
some stakeholder groups such as those working in the provinces. Poor audio quality, the effects of the
absence of visual contact on non-verbal communications, and limitations on group discussion size and
level of interaction were additional challenges for remotely conducted discussions. The ET mitigated
these limitations to the extent possible by testing various communication tools to identify which worked
best and have alternative communication technologies and sampling strategies as a back-up plan. In the
case of USAID WATSAN staff, a significant proportion of key stakeholders were relatively well
connected through internet and cell phone networks. The ET and the local data collection firm
conducted data collection in English, French, or Haitian Creole, according to which language was
11 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
preferred/most appropriate. The data collection tools compiled by the ET sought to be as pertinent as
possible for the respective stakeholders to optimize the ease and utility of data collection.
Diminished interest in participating in the evaluation by some stakeholders due to the
COVID-19 and political situations. The ET also anticipated that it might be more challenging to
mobilize some stakeholders during the public health emergency and poor political situation in Haiti. For
example, whereas in normal times, the team may have been able to find key informants by going to their
office or place of residence, this evaluation relied heavily on telephone and email. To mitigate this
limitation, the team requested assistance, when necessary, from the Project, USAID, and other key
informants (as appropriate) to contact some hard-to-reach stakeholders and allocated extra time to
schedule and conduct data collection, considering the challenging context and competing local priorities.
The USAID WATSAN Project covers many sites and institutional levels with many
different activities being examined across the three EQs. The ET sought to verify and triangulate
data collection sources and locations to best inform comprehensive and usable responses to each EQ.
The ET allocated time to review secondary data sources in detail prior to finalizing primary data 
collection audiences, tools and sampling lists.
Disruption/delay to data collection due to natural disaster and/or political unrest. The ET
faced issues with having to reschedule events and the unpredictable availability of personnel due to
demonstrations and other incidents of political unrest in the commune areas.
Response, gender, and selection bias. There were challenges to getting everyone to participate in
the survey and interviews due to connection issues and availability. Across all the FGDs, KIIs and GIs,
there were 100 male respondents and 46 female respondents (see Annex C). The ET sought wherever 
possible to maintain a balance between a wide range of water and sanitation stakeholders being 
represented in the data collection audiences and the reality that some of the service-providing 
stakeholders have a relative preponderance of men over women. Although 100:46 represents a 
relatively high degree of female participation, it is an average of all the data collection events. The CTE 
staff survey had just 11.2 percent of female respondents.
Availability of data. There were significantly fewer data available for the ET regarding the activities
and financial status for the FSMs and SMEs compared to the CTEs. There were limited data availability
regarding the EAF grants. The ET received only six of the seven proposals and DAI completed only two
evaluations as part the Project.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 12
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
EVALUATION QUESTION 1 (WATER SUPPLY). To what extent has WATSAN met its
Task Order objectives to build governance capacity at multiple levels (national, regional,
local13) to improve sustainable water supply and sanitation service delivery?
FINDINGS (WATER SUPPLY)
Respondents from USAID, DAI, DINEPA, and CTE stakeholders indicated that before the Project, all
CTEs were insolvent and unable to plan and monitor service delivery progress, revenues, and
expenditures. The Project brought data-driven planning and decision-making to each CTE. The Project 
supported change management processes at nine CTEs and Pignon SAEP, and saw seven of nine CTEs
move from Level One to Level Two on the WBUTF five-point scale.
14 This process was supported and
monitored using mWater’s11 key performance indicators, and this monitoring mechanism has been
adopted by all 29 CTEs in Haiti, including Pignon SAEP. The mWater monitoring platform, originally
intended to provide a basic monitoring framework for the 10 selected CTEs, developed substantially
with support from the Project and OREPA/DINEPA, to the extent that it now underpins CTE current
and future business development across the five WBUTF performance metrics:
1) Organization and Strategy, including CTE Annual Planning
2) HR Management, including CTE Staff Capacity Building
3) Financial Management, including CTE accounting and budget management tracked in mWater via
the three metrics (see Table 4) using QuickBooks accounting software
4) Technical Operations, tracked in mWater via four metrics (see Table 4) with chlorine
conformity data collected via SISKLOR
5) Commercial Operations, tracked in mWater via four metrics (see Table 4), which is connected
to the SIGA customer database
TABLE 4: MWATER INDICATORS AND METRIC CATEGORIES
INDICATOR
METRIC CATEGORY INDICATOR INDICATOR DEFINITION
1 Commercial Active subscribers The total number of active subscribers connected to the
water system (not disaggregated by gender)
2 Commercial Collection efficiency - Current
(%)
Amount collected for the current period / Amount billed for
charges incurred during the current period * 100
3 Commercial Collection efficiency - Arrears
(%)
Amount collected in arrears during the period / Amount of
arrears existing at the beginning of the period * 100
4 Commercial Collection efficiency - Overall
(%)
Total amount collected this period / Total amount billed this
period * 100
13 The evaluation data collection was naturally biased toward the local level, with a relatively greater number of local level
respondents than individuals representing regional and national levels.
14 https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/515931542315166330/pdf/Water-Utility-Turnaround-Framework-A-Guide-for￾Improving-Performance.pdf
13 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
INDICATOR
METRIC CATEGORY INDICATOR INDICATOR DEFINITION
5 Financial Revenue (HTG) The total amount of revenue generated by the water system
(not including subsidies)
6 Financial Expenses (HTG) The total of all expenses incurred by the water system during
the month
7 Financial Operating ratio (%) Total expenses / Total revenue * 100
8 Technical Total production (m3/month) The total amount of water produced by the water system
during the month
9 Technical Service continuity The average number of hours per week that customers
receive water service (168 hours in a week)
10 Technical Residual chlorine conformity
(%)
The percentage of residual chlorine tests that conform to
norms
11 Technical Functional kiosks (%) # of functional kiosks / Total # of kiosks * 100
In collaboration with DINEPA, the Project managed to reverse the “spiral of decline” seen in the Project
CTEs, which historically saw insolvency and chronic business underperformance by the CTEs. This
decline is illustrated schematically in Figure 1.
FIGURE 1: THE “SPIRAL OF DECLINE” 
LEADING TO POOR PERFORMANCE
(AFTER GALAITSI 2016)
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 14
The mWater platform contribution to creating an enabling
environment for the CTEs was a key contributor to the
Project’s water supply outputs. The mWater platform
enabled the establishment of a data value chain15 within the
CTE’s operational practices, which is summarized in the
Figure 2.
FIGURE 2. THE DATA VALUE CHAIN MODEL
FOR TURNING DATA INTO USEFUL 
INFORMATION
METRIC ONE | ORGANIZATION AND STRATEGY
According to CTE FGD participants, CTEs are now able to develop annual plans with monthly goals.
This planning exercise is done at the beginning of each fiscal year (October-November) with SAEPA and
is used to track progress on a monthly basis. The annual CTE workshop in 2021 included a competition
whereby CTEs were judged against their reported mWater metrics; this was popular and very
motivating for many CTEs. However, not all 11 mWater indicators are consistently reported. Indicators
on production, revenue, expenses, operating ratio, and active subscribers are reported in more than 90
percent of the monthly reports. Indicators on residual chlorine conformity (51 percent), functioning
kiosks (63 percent), and collection efficiency of current bills (71 percent) were presented in less than 80
percent of the monthly reports submitted for WATSAN CTEs. In total, 18 percent of data on 11
monthly indicators are either not reported or unavailable from the WATSAN CTE monthly report. The
Project focused on local level capacity building, but not on increasing regional or national capacity or
development of regulatory frameworks.
While generally consistent, some outliers (e.g., a ten-fold increase in one month) and data entry errors
(e.g., obvious addition of an extra “0” at the end of the reported value) were clearly observed from the
mWater data and these are documented in Annex D. CTEs that had started working with the Project
earlier (Cap Haitien, Les Cayes, Croix des Bouquets, Jeremie, and Mirebalais) submitted, reviewed, and
had their monthly reports approved by OREPA within two months, while the CTEs that joined the
Project later are taking longer to submit their data and have it approved.
From the CTE staff survey, a significant proportion indicated that they were unaware of whether their
CTE uses mWater (45 percent on average) or that their CTE does not use mWater (13 percent on
average across CTEs). This is especially prominent for Hinche and Jeremie, where more than 80 percent
of the surveyed staff noted that they do not know if their CTE uses mWater. Staff responses on their
experience of using mWater varied by CTE, with 42 percent positive rating from Mirebalais and no
positive ratings from Croix des Bouquets. Figure 3 summarizes the data.
15 Haiti WATSAN learning note - data driven management for water service providers
15 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
FIGURE 3: CTE STAFF EXPERIENCE OF USING MWATER
CTE FGDs reported that staff capacity to use software improved, enabling better service and billing,
although another stakeholder indicated that there is variation in that capacity—i.e., not everyone can
use the data to plan.
Multiple stakeholders confirmed that although CTEs can access SIGA data now via mWater, there
remains the challenge of not having easy access to all the data used by CTEs; there is no single
integrated system.
METRIC TWO | HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
The Project addressed this metric by having staffing plans, staff evaluations and training, and
performance-based compensation for CTE staff. The evaluation did not include a detailed assessment of
individual CTE staff roles, capacity, or a learning needs analysis, but it did include a CTE staff survey of 
74 staff (Annex E). More than 50 percent of staff interviewed for the CTE staff survey have worked at
the CTE for four to five years, and according to the FGDs with CTE staff, people only leave their CTE
for retirement or to move to different positions within DINEPA. At Jeremie CTE, 80 percent of the staff
interviewed had worked at the CTE for more than six years.
Almost 100 percent of CTE staff had a job description and were clear on their job expectations. The
majority of CTE staff had a performance evaluation in the last year, including 100 percent of Mirebalais
staff, although for Hinche the figure was just 44 percent of staff. The survey data, together with 
interviews and FGDs with a number of CTE stakeholders, also found that although CTE staff capacity to 
use mWater and SIGA software improved, enabling better service and billing, there is variation in that 
capacity - i.e. not everyone can use the data for planning purposes.
METRIC THREE | FINANCIAL OPERATIONS
The Project addressed this metric by focusing on reaching financial stability with strong accounting,
budgeting, and cash flow management, and developing capital budgets for new infrastructure. These
areas were tracked via three mWater indicators (revenue, expenses, operating ratio). Most CTEs
increased their revenue (Mirebalais seeing the biggest growth) while a minority (Pignon SAEP, Belladere,
Lascahobas) did not see a significant increase. Expenses broadly reflected revenue changes, with CTE
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 16
operating ratios mostly staying within the 50 to 150 percent range. A key Project achievement was
enabling the selected CTEs to track, via QuickBooks and mWater, their monthly expenses and
revenues, key indicator metrics that enable the CTEs to calculate their monthly operating ratio
(expenses/revenue). Figures 4 and 5 show six-month rolling average data for expenses and revenues
across the 10 CTEs.
FIGURE 4: CTE EXPENSES DATA FROM MWATER (6 MONTH MOVING AVERAGE)
FIGURE 5: CTE REVENUE DATA FROM MWATER (6 MONTH MOVING AVERAGE)
In 45 percent of cases, the operating ratio was higher than 100 percent for the WATSAN CTEs,
indicating that expenses were higher than the revenue for close to half of the reported months. Figure 6
shows a six-month rolling average operating ratio plot for the 10 CTEs.
17 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
FIGURE 6: CTE OPERATING RATIO DATA FROM MWATER (6 MONTH MOVING AVERAGE)
It should be noted that although this mWater data shows how revenues have increased, “fear of
success” is very real. This issue was mentioned in discussions with DAI and USAID. CTEs are not
currently audited and have concerns around how they will effectively manage their increased revenues
and expenditure of those funds for capital infrastructure projects and improvements in the future. It
appears the fear is related not to (revenue) success per se but rather to concerns CTEs have around the
additional financial responsibilities and risks that come with increasing revenues - and the need to have
staff capacity to manage them. The same interviews confirmed how the Project’s support to the CTEs 
has been a game-changer for fully decentralizing the functioning of the 10 CTEs.
QuickBooks is the accounting software CTEs use to manage and track their revenues, expenses, and
profits and create their financial reports. The CTE Staff Survey indicated that a large proportion of staff
did not know if their CTE used QuickBooks (see Figure 7). There is no network connection from
QuickBooks to the SIEPA system, and ONEPA does not yet have control over this information.
DINEPA sets limits on expenditure against revenue (e.g., for 1 million HTG revenue, the expenditure
limit is 70 percent). This monitored in QuickBooks, and some CTEs have only started using QuickBooks
recently. During the FGDs with the CTEs, they discussed the lack of training and support affected their
ability to use QuickBooks.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 18
FIGURE 7: CTE STAFF EXPERIENCES OF USING QUICKBOOKS ACCOUNTING SOFTWARE
Overall, FGDs and the CTE staff survey points to CTE financial operations being well informed by
revenue and expenses data, with CTE staff being generally aware of any financial management
shortcomings as applicable to their CTE.
Although the timeline per CTE is unknown, there is now the realistic prospect of CTEs becoming 
financially self-sustaining and no longer reliant on international donors. These institutional developments 
appear to have made a significant contribution to the sustainability of the CTEs.
METRIC FOUR | TECHNICAL OPERATIONS
This metric focused on the CTEs providing reliable metered water supplies to customers and minimizing
non-revenue water losses. The mWater indicators of total (cubic meters) production per month,
service continuity (average number of hours per week of water supply), residual chlorine conformity
(the percentage of residual chlorine tests that conform to norms), and the percentage of functioning
kiosks were used as metrics of CTE-managed kiosks.
Figure 8 shows service continuity remained almost unchanged across all CTEs at about 5-20 hours/week
with the notable exception of Pignon (around 80 hours/week), while Ouanaminthe’s continuity in
October 2020 leapt from 3 to 168 hrs/week (24/7 supply) where it remained since. There was no
specified hours/day water supply service delivery target for the CTEs. Interviews with implementing
partners indicated that the overarching customer service priority for the CTEs was to supply water,
albeit for a limited number of hours/day, based on a predictable schedule. The Ouanaminthe success was
largely due to new infrastructure funded by the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) coming into
operation. This figure clearly shows that all but two of the ten CTEs are supplying an average of less
than 20 hours of water per week to household connections.
19 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
FIGURE 8: SAEP WATER SUPPLY CONTINUITY (6-MONTH MOVING AVERAGE)
SISKLOR enables residual chlorine conformity to be monitored, but SISKLOR data is not regularly
reported and there is no one person responsible for SISKLOR data at the CTE level. Figure 9 shows a
significant variation in the amount of SISKLOR data being reported, with some CTEs’ reporting
regularity being much higher than others. Some CTEs do not have a SISKLOR focal point.16
FIGURE 9: CTE RESIDUAL CHLORINE CONFORMITY
The majority of CTE staff reported a positive experience with using SISKLOR (69 percent across CTEs),
but not Hinche and Ouanaminthe. Sixty-seven percent of surveyed staff at Hinche reported that they
were unaware of their CTE using SISKLOR. At Ouanaminthe, only 43 percent of surveyed staff shared
positive ratings of SISKLOR.
The Project supported CTE-managed kiosks by providing training in business management to the kiosk
managers. The functionality data for CTE-managed kiosks (Figure 10) shows erratic and variable levels of
functionality but FGDs with the kiosk managers indicated how the kiosks do nonetheless provide, when
working, service to those without HH connections (most kiosk users are women and children).
16 Despite best efforts, the ET was unable to successfully contact the SISKLOR Director for a KII.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 20
FIGURE 10: FUNCTIONALITY OF CTE MANAGED KIOSKS (6 MONTH MOVING AVERAGE)
The ET undertook an exercise to determine the proportionate coverage of CTE household connections
and kiosks across the ten communes, shown in Figure 11. It should be noted that all the data below is
Cadastre based, with the exception of residential connection data for Mirebalais (Jan 2022), Belladere
(Sep 2021), Lascahobas (Sep 2021), and Pignon (May 2020), which is from mWater. No data for Croix
de Bouquets is shown due to data quality issues. For Mirebalais and Ouanaminthe, the total access
figures are greater than the number of households in the CTE coverage area due to many households
being in the catchment of more than one kiosk.
FIGURE 11: HOUSEHOLD WATER ACCESS FROM HOUSEHOLD CONNECTIONS AND KIOSKS: COVERAGE BY CTE
METRIC FIVE | COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS
The Project supported the improvement of effective customer billing and optimizing revenue collection.
A lot of this support relied on day-to-day mentoring by CTE Liaison Officers rather than by bespoke
training programs alone. The mWater indicators of active subscribers and collection efficiencies
(current, arrears, and overall) were all used. All the CTEs showed increases in subscriber numbers, as
shown in Figure 12. The dramatic increase in subscriber numbers in Ouanaminthe coincided with the
start of 24/7 water supply becoming available. Other USAID and DAI staff reported how CTEs wanted
to emulate Ouanaminthe; they like the idea of having greater revenues and performance-linked salaries.
21 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
FIGURE 12. CTE ACTIVE SUBSCRIBERS (6 MONTH MOVING AVERAGE)
Revenue Development
Revenues increased for all the CTEs, the largest being Mirebalais, which rose from 148,000 HTG in July
2019 to 805,000 HTG in January 2022. According to CTE FGD, the Mirebalais success story was due to
a number of factors, including increased tariffs, increased collection, and establishing a reliable
distribution schedule. Revenues doubled for Hinche, Cap Haitien, and Belladere. For Les Cayes, the
post-earthquake recovery is clearly shown. The data is shown in Figure 5.
Collection efficiencies data is erratic and discontinuous in places, but the data below indicates that most
months, the overall collection efficiency runs between 50 and 130 percent.
17 CTE FGDs discussed how
revenues have increased as tariffs have been raised and there is now better collection of monthly tariffs.
Hinche, Jeremie, Croix des Bouquets, and Mirebalais show improved efficiency over time for collecting
current month charges, while CTEs’ arrears collection efficiencies (see Figure 13) have largely remained
the same.
FIGURE 13: CTE COLLECTION EFFICIENCIES (6 MONTH MOVING AVERAGE)
17 Collected arrears can inflate the monthly figure
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 22
Review of the 2021 Customer Survey data showed that less than 1 percent of CTE customers indicated
that the reason for no longer being an active customer is due to the high price of water, although 10 
percent indicated that they are no longer an active customer due to debt. Multiple stakeholders
indicated to the ET that the overarching factor affecting CTE customer retention was the reliability and
predictability of the water supply, not the price.
For CTE-managed kiosks in Ouanaminthe, Cap Haitien, and Jeremie, Cap Haitien was the most
profitable kiosk commune and the customer profile when determined using the EQUITY tool found that
kiosk customers were not among the lowest income demographic18.
Billing and Customer Relations
SIGA is the customer database CTEs used to manage their subscribers and was a key tool for managing
the commercial and financial aspects of the CTEs’ work. More than 80 percent of CTE staff surveyed
reported that their CTE uses SIGA, although their experience of using SIGA varied between CTEs, as
shown in Figure 15. While every staff surveyed at Croix de Bouquets gave a positive rating of SIGA, only
one staff member (8 percent) indicated a positive experience of using it.
FIGURE 14: CTE STAFF EXPERIENCES OF USING SIGA
WATSAN’s support included connecting SIGA to mWater, which means that SIGA customer data can
now be accessed directly via mWater. The majority of CTEs discussed in their FGDs how SIGA enables
individual subscribers and their payments to be tracked on a monthly basis, and invoicing can now be
done very much more quickly than before (e.g., 4,500 subscribers in a week now, rather taking more
than a month (GI CTE Ouanaminthe)). CTE staff now have the billing information with which to contact
any subscriber who has not paid in any given month. Customer-related data analysis was limited to a
secondary data review of the 2021 SIGA database update survey, which had included with it a customer
satisfaction survey of 8,987 active and 1,225 passive CTE customers across the CTEs of Cap Haitien, Les
Cayes, Croix de Bouquets, Jeremie, Mirebalais and Hinche. The secondary data review (SDR) results are
in Annex F. Additionally, the CTE Staff Survey also probed views on customers’ opinions on tariffs and
payments (see Tariffs and Collection Efficiency section below).
18 Profitability Survey by USAID Gender Specialist, FY21
23 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
The Client Satisfaction Survey secondary data review showed that 81 percent of customers were billed
in the last two months on average across the six CTEs surveyed. Over 90 percent of clients in Cap
Haitien (97 percent), Les Cayes (92 percent), and Croix de Bouquets (91 percent) CTEs reported
having received bills in the last two months, while Mirebalais (59 percent) and Jeremie (68 percent)
clients reported a lower level of billing. In addition, issues in billing did not rank highly for customers
being dissatisfied with their CTE. There was wide variation from Croix de Bouquets (58 percent) to
Hinche (11percent) in response to “Are you satisfied with the CTE service provided for you?”
The two main reasons for customers being passive were 1) not having water for over a year; and 2)
water not being distributed on time. The billing process was also not perfect (e.g., 41 percent of
Mirebalais customers had not received a bill in the last two months). The review also found that the 
majority of staff believe tariffs are appropriate and that clients are willing to pay for the services 
provided (except Hinche, where 56 percent of staff believe that the tariff is not appropriate).19
Tariffs and Collection Efficiency
The household connection tariff is currently 60 HTG/cubic meter per household (100 HTG/cubic meter
in Pignon) with each household typically consuming 10 cubic meters/month. A household monthly bill is
therefore approximately 600 HTG/5.5 USD (1,000 HTG/9 USD for Pignon). The majority of CTE staff
believe tariffs are appropriate and that clients are willing to pay for the services provided (except
Hinche, where 56 percent of staff believe that the tariff is not appropriate).
20
CONCLUSIONS (WATER)
At the beginning of the Project, many CTEs were not functioning, had no water services, no revenue,
and could not pay any bills, and some had debts. There was no system in place to reliably track revenues
and expenses. The WATSAN Project succeeded in reversing this spiral of decline at the local CTE level,
although there were significant variations in business performance and trajectory between CTEs. An
annual CTE planning cycle was successfully established, although there is variation between CTEs in how
often these plans are referenced for decision-making purposes. None of this progress would have been
possible without the enabling data-driven environment of the mWater platform. Better billing and
customer complaints handling means more information available for customer service, growth, and
retention. However, there is variation in CTE staff awareness of mWater and in the regularity/reliability
with which mWater data is collected and uploaded to the platform. This varies both between CTEs and
between the 11 mWater indicators, not all of which are consistently reported (in terms of regularity,
continuity, and timeliness). The implications of this are that CTEs will need to support staff capacity
development to optimally participate in data-driven decisions.
Overall, the USAID WATSAN Project support to the CTEs was a game-changer for fully decentralizing
the functioning of the 10 CTEs, and the same approach was also adopted by the other 17 CTEs that
were not formally part of the WATSAN Project. This means that the WATSAN Project, although
originally focusing on individual local CTEs, affected regional and national water utility practices. For 
19 Review of 2021 CTE Customer Survey conducted in parallel with a SIGA database customer update.
20 CTE Staff Survey
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 24
instance, it built governance capacity at local, regional, and national levels, although the Project did not
focus on developing the national or regional regulatory environment for water supply utilities.
The findings indicate that CTEs’ human resource management is a strong area. The majority of staff have
a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities, and CTE staff turnover is very low. Most CTEs
have increased their revenue and improved their financial management, which is now well informed by
revenue and expenses data, captured in QuickBooks. Some of the CTEs are relatively new to
QuickBooks. With these increased revenues has come a “fear of success,” which relates to the need for
greater financial management capacity to best manage future expenditure on capital infrastructure
projects. Although the timeline per CTE is unknown, there is now the realistic prospect of CTEs
becoming financially self-sustaining and no longer reliant on international donors. Many CTEs want to
emulate Ouanaminthe; they like the idea of having greater revenues and performance-linked salaries.
Maintaining and improving water supply standards is fundamental to CTE business sustainability. All but
two of the CTEs provide less than 20 hours of water supply access per week, and sometimes with
unpredictable regularity, which does not help retain customers. The future challenge is to achieve
consistent reliability, regularity, and predictability of supply while also increasing service continuity to the
(Ouanaminthe) level of 24/7 supply. Delivering on this will need a combination of capitalizing on the CTE
business development capacity that the Project achieved and sufficient investment in infrastructure to
make that level of service possible.
Recording of infrastructure technical details sufficient to locate and repair water supply systems and
networks at scale and at pace underpins the newly launched mWater infrastructure platform, which
should support a reliable increase in service continuity, essential for business growth and stability. For 
example, following the August 2021 earthquake, emergency water bladders were deployed to priority 
locations rapidly identified with a survey on mWater to evaluate the status of different water sources.
Although the SIGA customer database remains fundamental to CTE operation, revenue development,
and customer service, there remains a need to better link together all four software packages for
optimal functionality and performance.
EVALUATION QUESTION 1 (SANITATION). To what extent has WATSAN met its
Task Order objectives to build governance capacity at multiple levels (national,
21 regional,
local) to improve sustainable water supply and sanitation service delivery?
The Project activities focused on a variety of sanitation stakeholders, including Latrine Emptier
Associations, SMEs, Mayoral Task Forces on Sanitation, and FSM sites at Morne a Cabri and Fonfred.
The Project’s approach was driven by the fact that providing a family with a safe toilet does not give that
family safe sanitation unless there is also safely managed collection and transportation of the sludge and
that sludge is safely treated and disposed. The Project activities mainly focused on the FSM in terms of
addressing the issues of sludge treatment and disposal. There were some activities that supported
sanitation at the household level, such as supporting SMEs in the construction of toilets. DINEPA found
21 The Project’s activities in terms of sanitation focused on the local and regional levels.
25 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
that due to the absence of safe transport and treatment, the toilets would quickly fill and be abandoned.
For this reason, DINEPA has forbidden subsidizing toilet construction.22
LATRINE EMPTIER ASSOCIATIONS
The Project worked with latrine pit-emptiers and focused on training in business development,
marketing, safety measures, and knowledge regarding the importance of sludge management, including
visits to FSM sites in the area. In some instances, the LEAs were able to be promoted by the MTFs, and
they coordinated with the city hall especially regarding following standards for carrying out the pit
emptying services and responding to the needs of larger clients such as schools and churches. During
the FGDs with the LEAs, the participants shared how they felt prouder and more empowered with the
work they are doing; this aspect was also shared during the KIIs with the DAI staff. The Project staff are
able to see how the pit-emptiers took more pride in their work, which also allows them to provide
better service to a growing number of customers.
SMALL AND MEDIUM SIZED ENTERPRISES
The Project supported multiple SMEs throughout the Project areas. These SMEs participated both in
training to help develop business management skills and a program to promote and encourage the
construction of latrines at the household level. The latter was structed so that when 15 or more latrines
were constructed by the SMEs, they received the first tranche of funding, and with 25 additional toilets
they received the second tranche. This support included computers and office equipment. During GIs
and FGDs with the SMEs, the participants discussed how the training helped improve their capacity,
especially regarding management of the business, which improved marketing, human resource
management, contracting, and budget preparation.
INNOVATION DURING CHALLENGING TIMES
During the KIIs with the sanitation stakeholders, when talking about challenges, a success story 
emerged showing the innovation of some of the SMEs. “During Payi Lok (country lock down), it was 
difficult for the SMEs to reach their objectives because of travel problems. Nevertheless, they came up with a 
plan that surprised us; they carried out an activity called ‘Etrenne pour assainissement.’ In Haiti, ‘Etrenne’ is a 
time at the end of December when people share gifts. The activity ‘Etrenne assainissement’ launched in 
December was aimed at finding new clients and increasing business: they offered ‘specials’ for services and 
indeed found new clients. This initiative allowed us to see that these trainings allow them to fly on their own 
wings to reach their objectives despite the difficulties.”
22 Lessons Learned in Urban Sanitation
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 26
MAYORAL TASK FORCES
The MTF is composed of representatives of the different state authorities working in coordination with
OREPA. The Project worked closely with municipal officials at Les Cayes, Jeremie, Mirebalais, and Cap￾Haitien to raise awareness of the importance of basic sanitation. As per DINEPA’s sanitation strategy,
municipalities have a key role in managing sanitation in the communes. The Project helped the mayors
and OREPAs in these four areas to establish communal task forces to enable effective deliberation and
to map and execute strategies to address sanitation issues.23
To help provide context for the work of the MTFs, the aims for the MTF in Mirebalais or “Cellule de
coordination pour l’assinessment de Mirebalais” were to:
• Encourage owners living in the city center and its surroundings without toilets to build toilets,
especially in the areas of Pylon, Lot Bo Latem, Eau Chaude, La Toilette, and Fort Anglais;
• Encourage the people in charge of the markets and the city public schools to take over
management of the public sanitary structures;
• Take control of areas that facilitate open defecation; and
• Establish a system that can encourage the community to invest in the sanitation market and use
quality materials for toilet construction.
24
During the GIs, the MTF discussed how the Project worked with them to help conduct sanitation
surveys in order to get an understanding of the coverage of latrines/toilets in the town as well as public
knowledge regarding sanitation. This informed the sanitation zoning that was undertaken as part of the
Project. During GIs with the MTFs and with DAI staff, the issue of sustainability was raised, specifically 
how difficult it will be for the MTFs to continue with their activities once the support from the Project is
over, particularly paying for the office space and organizing events. One of the MTFs shared how they
carried out a survey that allowed them to learn how much of the population needs their latrine
construction services. The MTF’s activities have included a range of initiatives for its members including
an awareness session during the COVID-19 outbreak and a special session on World Sanitation Day
focusing on the importance of latrines and basic sanitation. The MTF also promulgated a communal
decree, in conjunction with the town hall, concerning open defecation. They also undertook a census on
the number of houses that do not have a latrine and that need the help of the MTF.
PROMOTING LOCAL FRAMEWORKS
One success story regarding the MTF coordination approach is in the city of Les Cayes. Like most
cities in Haiti, it did not have any legal framework for sanitation. The MTF led the effort to improve
sanitation in Les Cayes. However, they felt that their efforts have been hampered by a weak legal and
regulatory framework. The Project provided the MTF with a consultant to review the national laws
and municipal decrees governing sanitation. The consultant then worked with the MTF to develop a
new municipal decree to better regulate sanitation at the municipal level. The focus of the new decree
requires that a toilet be built for each house and that the type of toilet respects the sanitation zoning
23 WATSAN FY 2020 Annual Report
24 WATSAN Quarterly Report Oct-Dec FY 2022
27 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
specifying which types of sanitation solutions are acceptable and appropriate based on the soil type,
ground water table, and population density. Furthermore, the zoning specifies that all fecal sludge
must be brought to the Fonfred Fecal Sludge Management Site for safe treatment. The mayor signed
this decree at the end of January 2022 in a public ceremony.
25
FECAL SLUDGE MANAGEMENT
The majority of the Project’s activities focused on two FSM sites, both of which now have a business
plan as well as an operation manual. The Project also helped finalize an agreement protocol with OREPA
West and South and the Department of Sanitation to formally confirm the management structures of
the FSM sites.26 By addressing the management of the FSM sites, the Project was able to address the
issues at the discharge sites. For example, the GIs with the FSM staff and the FGD with MTFs discussed
that the area of the site was always considered a landfill site, either municipal landfill or dump discharge,
and people complained about flies, but since the work on site with the principles and techniques being
respected, people feel much safer in terms of their health.
As part of the Project and to help with overall management of the two FSM sites, in December 2021,
the Project signed an agreement for Fonfred through which the World Bank will finance the
infrastructure works, USAID will finance the operational costs, and OREPA-South will provide the
overall management.27 A particular quote from one the sanitation stakeholder highlights the issue with
the end of Project. “The end of the Project is a major concern. We will not have enough financial resources to
keep the Project alive. The site cannot pay the staff, and without the staff, without vehicles we cannot talk about
a site.’’ During the KIIs, multiple sanitation stakeholders raised the issue of transportation and the need
for both sites to have access to a greater capacity to transport fecal sludge to site.
MORNE A CABRI
The Project started working with the Morne a Cabri site in January 2020 and was able to increase the
infrastructure and management capacity of the site’s 15 employees. The KIIs discussed that the Project 
increased access to water at the site (which also helps reduce monthly costs for the site) and installed a
lighting system. Additional work included emptying the sludge from the two anaerobic ponds, which had
not been done since 2011. The site is now able to receive sludge from the Port-au-Prince area. During
the KIIs with the sanitation stakeholders, it was noted that the management training helped significantly
with accounting, invoicing, and customer relations. The staff shared that the site is designed to receive
around 500 cubic meters of sludge per day but currently receives about 1,500 cubic meters per month.
The FSM staff shared that the Project worked with OREPA West and the FSM site to organize an
increase in the tipping fee from 170 to 350 and then to 500 gourdes (1.70-3.50-5.00 USD) per cubic
meter and from 75 to 100 gourdes (0.75 to 1.00 USD) per drum. The Project also provided coaching to 
the senior staff on the importance of reaching out to the transport companies to encourage them to pay 
25 WATSAN Quarterly Report Jan-March 2022
26 Draft Operations Manual
27 FY 2022- Annual Report
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 28
their invoices. Taken together, these changes help increase the overall revenue for the site and improve 
the chance for long-term sustainability.
FONFRED
The Project started working with the Fonfred site in March 2020. It had been abandoned in 2012, but
became operational in March 2021 with nine employees. The site offers truck rental services and also
treats wastewater. Currently there is a shortage of trucks, so the site is not able to keep up with
consumer demand. In the KIIs and FGDs, multiple sanitation stakeholders shared their concern
regarding access to trucks needed to transport waste to the site. The users often have to delay services
to customers because they are waiting for a truck rental. A World Bank Project to supply ten
motorcycles with trailers for the site has been delayed, and FSM stakeholders shared that until this
situation is resolved, timely and sufficient fecal sludge management will undoubtedly remain a big
challenge. During the KIIs, the FSM staff and DAI staff discussed how the Project supported FSM staff
with training regarding business management and technical operations. They also shared that the site
currently receives around 93 cubic meters of sludge a month; it would need to receive around 600-700
cubic meters a month to break even.
MOUCHINETTE
The Mouchinette site was not a key focus of the Project, but starting in 2022 the Project started
working with Spanish Agency for International Development Cooperation (AECID) and USAID, in
partnership with OREPA-North, to create an agreement to enable OREPA-North to acquire the
necessary infrastructure and tools to commission and ensure the proper long-term operation of the
fecal sludge treatment site in Cap-Haitien (similar to what was done for Fonfred and Morne a Cabri in
terms of organizing the management of the site). The Mouchinette fecal sludge management site was
built in 2014 as an emergency measure to treat fecal sludge generated during the Cap-Haitien Carnival.
It operated for a few months and was then shut down. AECID is financing site reconstruction, two firms
(Geotechsol and OZO Construction) have already signed their contracts, and the launch of the
infrastructure work should start soon. The plant is a lagoon-based installation and is designed to receive
44 cubic meters/day of wastewater and sludge.28
CONCLUSIONS (SANITATION)
The pit-emptiers, with the support of the Project, were empowered to organize and develop official
associations, which allowed them to work together, raise their public visibility, and increase their access
to the sanitation market. The LEAs in the Les Cayes area are now able to use the FSM site in Fonfred.
The sustainability of the sludge disposal for the LEAs in Les Cayes will depend on how the FSM site
continues to operate and if the transportation issue is addressed.
Many of the SMEs became legal and registered companies with the support of the Project and were able
to set up offices, which helped increase their individual visibility and access to markets. In addition, many
of the SMEs were able to build a number of toilets as per the program. Having the SMEs increase their
28 WATSAN Quarterly Report Jan-March 2022
29 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
capacity in terms of business management and increase their knowledge in terms of toilet construction
allows the SMEs to continue this line of work without Project support.
The MTFs in Mirebalais and Les Cayes were particularly successful with coordination between the MTFs
and LEAs and in the case of Les Cayes with the FSM site at Fonfred. These associations have a more
developed level of organization and collaboration. The awareness campaigns that were organized with
the Project’s support helped connect service providers with customers and increased the visibility of the
MTFs. This helped increase knowledge and use of companies for sludge disposal, which had a particularly
high impact where an FSM site was available for use.
The infrastructure capacity and functionality increased for both sites. For Morne a Cabri in particular,
the Project helped increase access to water and electricity at the site as well as cleaning out the drying
basins. The management capacity at both sites was improved with training for the staff that addressed
issues and improved processes with payments, salaries, management of human resources, and technical
procedures. Although the technical and management capacity of the FSM sites was improved, there are
still issues regarding long term sustainability. One of the main issues regarding sustainability for the 
Fonfred site is the transportation issue: if businesses do not have access to trucks, they will not be able
to dispose of their waste at the FSM sites. Additionally, there remain challenges with getting FSM clients
to pay their bills on time and to recover payments in arrears.
Both FSM staff and users shared that people in the area feel safer, because with the presence of the
Project, the area is more visited. There was also an improvement in the area in terms of road
infrastructure to facilitate the passage of trucks using the site, which likewise benefited the community.
By working with multiple sanitation stakeholders, the Project was able to assist in the construction of
latrines and toilets at the household level, increase the role of the MTFs in their awareness-raising
activities regarding the importance and impact of having a latrine, and increase the management and
business capacities of the SMEs, LEAs, and FSM. With the increased capacity achieved by these
organizations, they are now better able to provide more sanitation services to the communities. A good
example of this is the work in Les Cayes, where the Project was able to combine work on all three
segments or areas of transportation (storage, emptying/transport, and treatment).
Overall, with the support of the different sanitation partners (LEAs, SMEs, MTFs, and FSM), the Project 
was able to increase capacity and governance, which in turn helps ensure more sustainable sanitation
services were available. This is particularly true for areas served by the Fonfred and Morne a Cabri sites.
EVALUATION QUESTION 2. How was the Enterprise Acceleration Fund utilized, and to
what extent did those grants support WASH enterprises (such as MSMEs, NGOs, and
Bayakous) to move toward sustainable service delivery?
The ET was able to interview all the organizations and companies that received an EAF grant and also
interviewed key personnel from the DAI team regarding the EAF grantee activities.
Seven grants were awarded during the Project: four had a focus on sanitation activities and three had a
focus on water activities. In the water sector, funds were used to build water kiosks with two partners
to increase access to water in the Cap Haitien area and to construct a water quality testing laboratory
within the University of Limonade. In the sanitation sector, funds supported research activities to test if
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 30
raising black soldier fly larvae was viable, to develop capacity regarding sludge testing and drying, to
provide access to and test a microloan concept regarding the construction of toilets and latrines, and
lastly to increase services for incineration of waste.29
As discussed before, gender was not an explicit focus of the Project and it was not a driving focus of the
EAF grants. The DAI staff shared that the application process did not target female-owned organizations
or other organizations that tend to have difficulty receiving funds. The staff also shared that many of the
proposals needed to be reviewed and updated to help meet the Project’s objectives.
During the KIIs with EAF grantees, some respondents said the application process for financing and
communication was not easy and the overall process took longer than expected. This affected the
overall timeline of the Project and what was able to be completed. There was often a lot of back and
forth to finalize the concept notes. For other grantees, the process was clear, especially with the
support provided by DAI staff members. As part of the funding process, many of the grantees
mentioned the gender mainstreaming training they had received.
During KIIs, it was revealed that due to delays with purchasing equipment, receiving funds, and receiving
the equipment, it is difficult to determine the impact of the grants to date. At the time of the evaluation,
the Projects have either not been completed or are only just finishing up. There were additional delays
due to political unrest, with the associated cancellations of visits by technical experts as well as delivery
of key technical training elements.
There are concerns among the grantees and the WATSAN Project team regarding sustainability. Two
grantees (Sanitation 509, University of Quisqueya) have not yet received equipment. A few of the
grantees also have concerns about how to undertake or fund any future repairs.
Although each grantee was interviewed for Evaluation Question 2, the ET received limited
documentation regarding the progress of the grants or evaluations of the grants by DAI, which created
an issue for the analysis for the question.
Table 5 gives a general overview of the EAF grants and their current status.
TABLE 5: EAF GRANTS AND CURRENT STATUS
ORGANIZATION SECTOR STATUS
Living Water Water - Kiosks Completed – not all kiosks function
MFSN Water - Kiosks Completed – issues with water supply/quality
Limonade University Water - Laboratory Delayed in receiving equipment, but the
laboratory is set up
Le Levier Sanitation – micro credit for toilet
construction
Only 120 of the planned 500 beneficiaries
reached
SOIL Sanitation – research on black fly
larvae
Completed; able to show black fly larvae can be
produced
29 FY 2020 Annual Report
31 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
ORGANIZATION SECTOR STATUS
University of Quisqueya Sanitation – research on drying of
fecal sludge
Delayed in receiving equipment, only one
deliverable received
Sanitation 509 Sanitation - Incineration Delayed in receiving equipment, not yet set up
LIVING WATER AND MOUVMAN FANM SOLÉY NÓ
Living Water International (LWI) is a local foundation that promotes sustainable water access, sanitation,
and hygiene. Living Water’s goal for the grant was to increase water access by extending existing water
supply services, giving water access to 25,050 people living in the urban area and periphery. The Project
also sought to strengthen the sustainable management of water services within the area by creating and
improving the management capacity and business skills of 12 water management bodies or water service
operators.
Mouvman Fanm Soléy Nó (MFSN) is a women’s organization that was created in 2005. MFSN received a
subcontractor from LWI as part of their EAF grant. The MFSN grant covered the cost of constructing
two boreholes to supply the kiosks already built under a grant agreement with the Living Water
Foundation as well as awareness and training activities for the kiosk management committees.
The LWI site visit/evaluation completed in July 2020 indicates that there were some changes in the
activities during project implementation, but according to LWI, all activities of the two main components
were carried out. Rehabilitation of the handpumps and construction kiosks was completed, but there
was no specific monitoring and evaluation plan for this Project. LWI was not able to generate detailed
information on beneficiaries. Additional follow-up was needed to understand the impact six months after
completion as well as a lessons learned workshop planned for August 2020. These additional reports
were not shared with the ET, so it is unclear if they were produced.
30
The KIIs discussed that COVID-19 made the implementation process long, and there was also an
increase in prices, especially fuel, that affected the Project overall. A renewable energy source and a
complete treatment system would have been a better option. The majority of the kiosks started
operating at the end of 2020.
The evaluation of the MFSN Project stated that the objective to provide water to 3,000 people was not
reached because of the near non-functionality of the kiosks; this was confirmed during the KIIs. Due to
these non-functioning kiosks, the management committees also never functioned. One kiosk never
functioned because the borehole could never supply it, and no investigation was done to determine why
(at the time of this evaluation). The MFSN evaluation states the second kiosk is only 10-20 percent
functional due to issues with the batteries. According to respondents, some members of the kiosk try to
run it with a 400-watt generator. The batteries were described as being overloaded by the population by
the MFSN evaluation; the KIIs described it as more of an issue with quality. The evaluation stated that
one of the biggest problems that led to the poor results of this grant is a lack of communication
between DAI, Living Water, and MFSN, and this was also reiterated during the KIIs. MFSN was brought
30 Evaluation of Living Water International July 2020
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 32
in to complete the Project as a sub to Living Water International (LWI’S but was not provided with all
the information upfront.31
EAF and DAI KII respondents shared that the LWIS and MFSN water kiosks did provide access to
24,000 people in areas that had previously struggled with access to clean water. A total of 14 kiosks
were constructed, but due to equipment and water quality issues many of these kiosks are not currently
functioning. During the fuel crises, many of the systems were not working; only those with solar panels
worked. It is clear that the two kiosks that MFSN and LWIS worked on together are not functional, but
to get a clear understanding of the issue a thorough investigation would be needed. There have been
complaints regarding water quality, either in relation to issues with turbidity and/or salinity. There were
also training workshops for 14 operators to help in small business management. However, the kiosks’ 
management committees/businesses currently have little savings for future maintenance and expenses,
which is concern for the kiosks’ long-term sustainability. Their sustainably will depend on their
functionality, and at the time of the ET some were not functioning and were unable to make repairs.
UNIVERSITY OF LIMONADE
The University of Limonade worked with Auburn University to 1) develop a water testing laboratory; 2)
train university students in water quality testing techniques; and 3) develop a database containing water
tests from providers in the region.
The proposal for the University of Limonade was not shared with the ET, but KII respondents 
confirmed that the objective of the grant was to continue the support of the university’s technical lab. A
previous grant by the USAID AVANSE (Appui a la Valorisation du potentiel Agricole du Nord, pour la 
Securite Economique et Environnementale) Project funded the development of a soil testing lab. This
grant was used to develop a water quality lab (testing equipment purchase and complete some training).
This additional support allows the University of Limonade to conduct both water and soil quality testing
for the North and Northeast departments, something that was not available in the area beforehand.
During the KIIs with the EAF, it was shared that the marketing of these new services was not very
effective but the lab was able to do some testing for kiosks. At the time of writing this evaluation, the
laboratory is unable to pay the technicians since they do not yet have very many clients but they agree
nonetheless that there was a positive impact on academic improvements for the university. Auburn
University developed the laboratory procedures for drinking water analysis. In addition, a study is being
prepared to ensure that water quality in Ouanaminthe meets drinking water standards.32 The KIIs also
discussed if requirements regarding water quality testing of kiosks would help the overall business of the
lab, but for now there is limited demand for the services. This is likely to improve once more people are
aware of the services offered.
LE LEVIER
Le Levier is a federation that has expertise in housing finance. The LEVIER Federation planned to use the
grant to pool non-financial services (awareness and training) and financial services (product
31 Evaluation Mouvman Fanm Soléy Nó August 2021
32 WATSAN Quarterly Report Jan-March 2022
33 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
development, savings advice, and credit financing) to stimulate the populations of the five zones the
Project is working in to create a healthier environment for both individual and collective well-being by
constructing household toilets and latrines.33
Le Levier planned to make sure that the credits disbursed will be effectively allocated to the
construction of toilets and/or bathrooms. The granted credits will be disbursed in installments; the first
disbursement will be made according to the estimate or arrangements made between the borrower and
the contractors hired, and subsequent disbursements will be made according to the level of progress of
the work validated by the credit officers of the various funds concerned.34
The EAF GIs revealed that the micro loan program for toilets and latrines was able to provide 120
credits and trained four people, but the target number 500 of beneficiaries was not reached. The KIIs
with the DAI staff and the EAFs grantees noted that the fund will be able to continue even after the
Project ends to provide access to credit for people who want to build a toilet. Le Levier feels this
Project was successful and was surprised with the demand for modern toilets instead of latrines. This
demand shows the financial products that have been designed can be adapted. This increase in demand
for modern toilets required more money to be invested per household credit than planned. This
additional information will help them plan and adjust for future projects. Each fund in the network had a
different experience in the implementation of the Project. In Plateau Central, the funds had a liquidity
problem that had hindered the implementation of the project, while Cap Haitien and Croix des 
Bouquets did not have the same difficulties. Le Levier hopes to continue the Project’s activities as the
funds are still available; the repayment of the micro credit keeps the funds available to be used with new
beneficiaries.
SOIL
SOIL is an NGO that provides household sanitation services where revenues are collected from toilet
users and through the sales of compost. For now, household service is only available because it is
subsidized by SOIL to the general public. The objective of the grant was to help with the diversification
of waste to value end products. The grant funded pilot trials on black solder fly larvae (BSFL)
production, which is used to break down waste and in turn transforms the larvae into protein rich
chicken feed. There were four objectives for this grant: 1) cultivate BSFL colony for continuous supply
of five-day old larvae (when the larvae are ready to be put on the biowaste); 2) achieve consistent and
optimized waste transformation into larval biomass; 3) ensure product safety and nutritional value; and
4) understand market demand and sales pricing for BSFL animal feed in Haiti.35
During the KIIs with EAF, SOIL was able to confirm that it was viable to produce the black fly larva and
that there was a market for this product as a feed for chicken and fish. SOIL is hopeful that they will be
able to start production of the product in the near future, which will help them make more money from
the composting toilet. This will in turn help the overall sustainability of SOIL and the composting toilet
service they offer.
33 Le Levier Proposal
34 Le Levier Proposal
35 SOIL Proposal
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 34
UNIVERSITY QUISQUEYA
This Project was carried out by the University Quisqueya (UniQ, Haiti) with other universities.
36
The grant’s main objective was to evaluate, on the basis of a full-scale or real demonstration trial, the
feasibility of implementing the Projet de Lits de Séchage Plantés de Végétaux (LSPV) technology for the
treatment and reclamation of latrine pit sludge in Haiti.
KII respondents discussed that due to the delays of materials, only one deliverable was produced at the
time of this evaluation. The materials purchased as part of the grant arrived in March 2020, meaning the
acquisition of this equipment took more than 12 months. Extensions on the other deliverables have
been given to UniQ, on which it will work once the equipment has been installed. This will allow UniQ
to continue the work and hopefully address some of the sustainably issues.
SANITATION 509
Sanitation 509 is a business that has 20 years’ experience working in waste management (including
collection and treatment of waste). This Project has already received funding from the USAID –
AVANSE project for the acquisition of equipment and materials. This EAF grant was to be used to
develop the physical and electrical infrastructure and will be used to purchase vehicles to start the
collection and treatment of the hazardous waste, including a waste storage unit, a processing unit, a
sterilization unit, an incineration unit, and a depot to store equipment and associated amenities.
GI participants said that due to delays the Project was not completed by the time of the evaluation.
Some of the work had finished, such as part of the perimeter fence and work on the electrical supply,
but the majority of the equipment had yet to arrive on site, so it is difficult to determine the success and
impact of the grant or look at the overall sustainability of the grant or business activities.
OVERALL EAF CONCLUSIONS
The grants were successful in terms of increasing the number of clients for the organizations both in
terms of access to markets and in terms of the range of services offered. For example, the kiosks
provided access to water to 24,000 people, the micro grants for latrines and toilets provided access to
credit for 100 people, and Le Levier will continue this service. In addition, the lab at the University of 
Limonade can now provide water quality and soil testing. The research activities for SOIL and UniQ
proved to be a success as activities have been able to get off the ground. Due to delays and some
challenges, it is difficult to determine if the sustainability of the organizations was improved by the
grants. In some instances, there have been issues with equipment and possible maintenance issues that
affect their overall sustainability.
Especially due to some of the delays and how some of the grants were not finished at the time of this
evaluation, the question regarding sustainability is difficult to answer at the moment; this will be clearer
as the grantees finalize the Projects and carry the activities into day-to-day production or operation—
36 UniQ worked in collaboration with the State University of Haiti (UEH) and the Ecole de Technologie Superieure (ETS) in
Montreal and the Institute national de recherche en sciences et technologies pour environment et agriculture (IRSTEA, France).
UEH, UniQ, and ETS have an MOU that was signed in January 2016.
35 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
and if evaluations from the Project were planned and carried out. In addition to the delays, there were
communication issues that affected the overall implementation of the grants, and the overall application
process was not always clear and straight forward.
EVALUATION QUESTION 3. How effective was WATSAN’s approach of targeting the
end of the sanitation value chain in improving the overall sanitation value chain?
The ET looked at a number of sub questions and interviewed many people who supported and worked
with the FSMs. The FSM management teams and users for Fonfred and Morne a Cabri were interviewed,
as well as key personnel from DAI that worked with the FSM teams.
Before the Project, the Fonfred site was not operational and there was no place in the area to safely
dispose of fecal waste. The Morne a Cabri site was open and accepting waste, but the treatment basins
were full and the site was not properly managed. During the Project, the overall management of the
sites was formalized, now under the supervision of OREPA and the Waste Water Treatment Plant
Coordinator.
37
The Project assisted in the coordination and involvement of different actors including the FSM sites,
SMES, LEAs, and MTFs. The interviews with the sanitation stakeholders indicated that these activities
encouraged improvement to the sanitation situation for the towns; there was knowledge-sharing about
the importance of latrines and the services available and information on the service providers. Some of
this work also dealt with the creation of sanitation zoning, but there are limited regulations being
implemented for toilet construction and emptying of toilets. According to the FGDs with the LEAs, the
Project increased their visibility due to the marketing support and coordination with the MTFs, so the
LEAs were able to build their businesses and increase their customer base. In FGDs, LEAs in the area of
the FSM sites shared that access to these sites means they no longer have to dump the sludge in a ravine
or dig a hole on the property of the client to relocate waste. Also, with the additional training, the LEAs
discussed that they are less likely to take on sludge removal work if there is nowhere to dispose of the
sludge.
Users for both sites and other sanitation stakeholders all mentioned the improvement to the general
cleanliness, smell, and environment in the surrounding areas as well as the MTF in Les Cayes. During the
interviews, there was a discussion of the perceived improvement to the surrounding areas in terms of
the smell and improvements to the health of the surrounding area.
The users of the sites shared during the GIs that they recommend the use of this site to other
businesses, but it was discussed that more informal businesses are not likely to use the site due to the
current level of tariffs. Some of the companies that use the sites to provide sludge removal and disposal
services shared they have a number of clients, ranging from 10 to 300, including households, NGOs,
state institutions, and private companies. Having an operational FSM allows the users to provide receipts
to clients and advertise that they properly dispose of waste as part of the services they provide. This is
particularly important to some clients such as international NGOs and the U.S. Embassy.
37 Draft Operations Manual pg. 17
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 36
This Project was able to focus management support for the FSM that addressed the end of the sanitation
value chain.
MORNE A CABRI
The Project was able to support the FSM both with infrastructure inputs and building the capacity of the
staff. The KIIs with DAI and the FSM staff noted that this site was able to implement Office National
d’Assurance-Vieillesse (ONA) and Office d’Assurance Accidents du Travail, Maladie et Maternité (OFTAMA)
insurance for their staff, which is a requirement for businesses in Haiti. Also, currently the site is running
on a cost recovery level, so it is making enough to cover salaries and general costs. The capacity building
activities included development of a business plan, help with accounting, software to manage invoices,
and training on conflict management, which the staff felt have really helped with human resources 
management and negotiating with clients to pay user fees.
The FSM staff shared that the site currently had 15 companies/users that dispose of waste on a
consistent basis. The ET was able to conduct a GI with some of the users and found that they are
generally satisfied with the FSM site and worry about if the site will close after the Project support ends.
The FSM users shared that there are some complaints regarding wait times, disposing of waste, receiving
and processing paperwork, and the tariff level. The site being open officially allows clients to advertise
and inform their clients of the proper disposal of the waste. This is particularly important for NGOs and
other organizations such as the U.S. Embassy that request documentation of proper disposal.
FONFRED
During the GIs with different sanitation actors in the area of Fonfred, it was noted that there is better
environmental management of the site and the surrounding area now than before the Project. The
sanitation actors said there are issues regarding sustainability since the amount of sludge received each
month is not enough to support the site and cover all costs. Right now, the site is paying salaries and
had an accountant but due to issues with transportation, it is not able to meet the demand in requests
for help with transport to dispose of waste, meaning they are missing out on revenue due to a lack of
transportation. A World Bank project was supposed to purchase ten motorcycles with trailers for the
site, but this was delayed, and it is unclear when this will be implemented.
The KIIs with sanitation stakeholders noted that the site currently had seven companies/users that
dispose of the waste on a consistent basis. The users are generally satisfied with the FSM site and
discussed how they have to explain the importance of the disposal of sludge at the site to their clients.
EMPOWERMENT OF SANITATION STAKEHOLDERS
The FSM teams really felt supported by the Project, and now there are two FSM sites operating in
Haiti.
The LEAs feel empowered with their work and have been able to improve their businesses and the
services they provide, and also increase their community profile, acceptance, and marketing, which in
turn gave them access to new clients such as churches, schools, and NGOs.
37 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
CHALLENGES AT FSM SITES
Some of the challenges in the sanitation sector come from the fact that the FSM sites in Morne a
Cabri and Fonfred are the only two functioning sites for all of Haiti, so some of the LEAs, SMEs, and
MTFs that worked with the Project do not have access to an FSM site (such as in Cap Haitien and
Mirebalais).
The sanitation stakeholders said that there were a number of challenges that the Project activities
faced, especially the coordination and delay in Project activities from the other donors that created
issues for the sanitation Project activities, such as the motorcycles with trailers from the World Bank
and the work with IDB for the FSM site at Mouchinette. The delay in Fonfred exacerbated the
transportation issues, which in turn may affect long term sustainability of the sites.
The challenge for companies is their inability to convince people to seek their toilet construction
services. There is a lack of knowledge at that level. It was difficult to change people’s behavior
regarding building toilets in the traditional way. The GOH should encourage people to build toilets in
their homes, which would increase the demand for businesses.
CONCLUSIONS
With the help of the Project, both sites are operational and are on the path to operating like a business.
They operate under a documented business model but were not yet profitable at the time of the
evaluation. These sites provide the communities around them in Port-au-Prince and Les Cayes a safe
place to dispose of waste. The opening of the FSM sites allows business to demonstrate proper disposal
to clients and this helped their businesses. It is important to note that while the infrastructure and
management capacity of the FSM sites improved due to the Project activities, sustainability is still an
issue as the sites having problems with transportation and those not receiving enough customers/sludge
each month to be profitable.
There have been perceived health and environmental improvements in the communities surrounding the
two FSM sites, as the waste is now disposed of in a controlled area and there is less disposal in the
surrounding ravines.
The coordination and involvement of different sanitation stakeholders encouraged improvement to the
overall sanitation situation in the Project areas. The coordination included knowledge sharing about the
importance of latrines and what services are available in the area as well as information on service
providers.
By targeting the FSM sites, the Project was able to focus on the end of the sanitation value chain, and
these improvements increased access and use of a safe disposal system for the sanitation stakeholders.
This also allowed the users of the sites to expand and market their businesses. The long-term impact
will depend on how the FSM sites can function without the support of the Project, as there are still
ongoing issues at the site including transportation and receiving enough sludge to cover costs.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 38
CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES
The ET considered some of the cross-cutting issues that affected all aspects of the Project. The main
events the Project had to navigate are summarized in Figure 15. Except for the first year, the Project 
faced a constant series of crises through implementation.
38FIGURE 15: PROJECT ISSUES TIMELINE 
GENDER
Although addressing gender-related issues was not the focus of the Project, as stated by many of the
participants, the Project did have a gender specialist present, and some trainings were offered to help
address sexual harassment and gender roles for the CTE staff, kiosks managers, and SME and LEA
workers. As part of the research on the Project’s approach to gender integration and gender equality
outcomes of activities, the ET asked the CTE staff a number of questions regarding gender issues,
integration, and related training activities. Each figure below shows the percentage of respondents for
each CTE.
38 Applying Adaptive Management for Results in a Fragile Environment, USAID Water and Sanitation Project Learning Note, 27
April 2022
39 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
+
FIGURE 16: PARTICIPATION IN SEXUAL HARRASSMENT TRAINING
Figure 16 demonstrates that for the majority of CTEs, 50 percent or more of the staff were able to
participate in sexual harassment training as part of the Project.
FIGURE 17: CTE’S MANAGEMENT OF CTE’S GENDER ISSUES BY SEX
Figure 17 shows while 93 percent of CTE staff noted a positive experience regarding the CTE
responsiveness to gender issues responses from male and female staff differed. Ninety-seven percent of
male staff noted a positive experience, while 77 percent of females expressed the same opinion. This
statistically significant difference between the two groups is due to the mixed responses from the Cap
Haitien CTE staff. Eighty nine percent of male staff indicated a positive experience regarding the CTE’s
responsiveness to gender issues, with only 25 percent of female staff responding that they have had a
positive experience. It is notable that half of the female staff from Cap Haitien chose to not rate their
experience.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 40
FIGURE 18: CTE’S MANAGEMENT OF COMMUNITY GENDER ISSUES
When discussing community gender issues, the CTE staff still rated the CTE’s overall management
experience as positive but there is more variation than when discussing the management of gender
issues internally (See Figure 18).
Overall, the data indicate that the CTE staff have positive experiences regarding gender issues. The
question in the survey was very general, so it is difficult to define or talk more in depth about the gender
issues faced by the CTE staff. The CTE management staff also shared during the FGDs that the “training
sessions raised awareness on the participation and respect of women in the workplace and in the management
of kiosks. The only obstacle to the participation of women in the execution of activities and jobs remains gender
stereotyping of gender roles. However, as clients, women receive the same service as men because the focus is
on households.” The CTE HR manual notes a 30 percent quota for the minimum proportion of women
working for the CTEs. Some of the CTEs have reached this goal.
During the FGDs with the kiosk managers, LEAs, and SMEs, the participants said they enjoyed the
trainings, which reenforced that woman are capable of doing the same jobs and activities as men. Some
of the focus groups with kiosk managers discussed how the increase in water access positively affects 
women more since they collect the water and they also benefit from the better-quality kiosk water in
terms of health (e.g., a reduced incidence of skin diseases).
HAITI POLITICAL/ECONOMIC SITUATION
All stakeholders discussed how the political situation in Haiti is very complicated and affects everyone’s 
daily life. It affects all aspects of the economic system: lack of suppliers and less competition, price
increases (especially fuel), associated delays in activities and Project implementation, difficulties with
monitoring activities in the field, and difficulties with access and travel due to a fluid security
environment, all of which affect WASH service delivery. There are demonstrations that affect how or if
people can get to work or to a planned activity. In particular, the CTEs said that fuel shortages have
affected transportation and the availability and cost of fuel for CTEs to pump and treat water. To help
mitigate fuel price fluctuations, the Project in some cases provided fuel subsidies to help with the cost of
purchasing fuel and funded construction of fuel storage facilities to ensure fuel availability and continuous
water supply.
The CTEs and OREPA South discussed how there are also increased security issues in the area of
Martissant, which affects the transport of people and equipment to this region and can cause delays and
increase the price of materials. The CTE in Croix de Bouquets and some of the implementing partners
41 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
in that area discussed the impact of security and gang warfare in the Croix de Bouquets area, which
affected the construction work on the water system and monitoring and follow up activities. CTE staff in
Croix de Bouquets are now working out of Delmas due to these security issues. The insecurities in the
Port-au-Prince area also affect the usage and access to the Morne a Cabri FSM site. For some
implementing partners, the biggest challenge was security. For example, during construction work in
Criox de Bouquets, workers there had to talk with and manage gang members on a daily basis to
negotiate access to work sites.
COVID-19
The COVID-19 outbreak hit in March 2020. At first Haiti was closed to international travel, and in
country there were many requirements regarding the organization of events. During the KIIs with DAI
and FGDs with the CTE staff, it was shared that because the Project already had support staff based in
the CTEs, this did not have a huge impact. The Project was able to be flexible and still move forward
with its objectives, especially the capacity building at the CTE and FSM level. Many of the participants in
the interviews and focus groups mentioned that COVID-19 did not really affects the Project, except
with some adjustment in how activities were planned.
EARTHQUAKE
The earthquake that hit the South of Haiti on August 14, 2021, was devastating, and had impacts on the
water and sanitation services in the area. The FGDs and KIIs with Les Cayes Project participants shared
that there were damages to some of the pipes of the Les Cayes water system, which triggered a
deterioration in the quality of water. Meanwhile, some of the LEAs in the South also had to change
office locations, which temporarily affected their visibility. ONEPE/OREPA shared that DINEPA and
OREPA were able to help organize and coordinate the NGO-supported earthquake response, which
was done by creating and using a survey on mWater to evaluate the current status of different water
sources, including kiosks. This helped determine where water trucking was needed and the best
locations for temporary water storage facilities.
LAND TENURE
Land tenure seemed to be an overarching theme, which was brought up during some of the higher level
KIIs, especially in relation to obtaining permission for household toilet construction. In Haiti, land tenure
issues affect all projects, including where kiosks could be constructed. Most people rent or do not have
titles for their land, so investing in a toilet or latrine is difficult or not a priority, or simply not viewed as
their responsibility.
CROSS-CUTTING CONCLUSIONS
Some Project stakeholders perceive that due to increased access to water, and the fact that women
tend to be the primary collectors of water, they have benefited more proportionally from the Project
than men. The Project was able to help with some of the impacts from insecurity (such as fuel shortage
and price increases), but it is impossible to mitigate all impacts of this issue. The Project was also able to
adapt to the COVID-19 situation. The earthquake had a negative impact on the Les Cayes water system,
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 42
but DINEPA and the Project were able to respond quickly and effectively, and USAID has extended the
Project by six months.
RECOMMENDATIONS
USAID/HAITI
1. Ensure future programming supports CTEs to establish milestones for reaching defined
service delivery standards that are linked to the SDGs and tracked consistently in mWater.
2. Engage DINEPA/GOH to enable SIEPA to have better data connectivity between the various
software packages for the CTEs.
3. Continue the collaboration between DINEPA/GOH and mWater to develop checklists, surveys 
and tools to be used by the CTEs to respond to climate-related weather emergencies. 
4. Continue to support the FSMs in their efforts to reach profitability/sustainability by
expanding infrastructure to help them increase the amount of sludge they can
process and, in particular, enable greater fecal sludge transportation capacity. A lot of
progress was made with the FSMs during the Project, but this support will need to continue to
ensure the progress is not lost.
5. Continue to support coordination among sanitation sector stakeholders to build
GOH capacity in the development and enforcement of FSM regulations. To help ensure
households have toilets and latrines and use FSM sites for disposal of waste, there will need to be
national regulations that are enforceable at the local level.
6. Engage DINEPA/GOH to make requirements for water testing for water suppliers to
ensure clean water is available to the communities (these suppliers could be clients of the water
quality lab at the University of Limonade).
7. Encourage the use of mWater for sanitation management as well. Take the successes
from the CTEs and apply them to the FSMs. Ensure via stakeholder consultation and engagement 
that relevant data is reliably collected and visualized to help with decision making and future
sanitation business development. Ensure training regarding use of mWater and other software are 
provided to the FSM management teams.
USAID IMPLEMENTERS
1. Undertake a needs assessment with CTEs on how they can grow their financial and
asset management capacity to support accountable capital expenditure on
infrastructure.
2. Address data continuity/quality issues for data reported on mWater.
3. Support mWater’s capacity to map all water supply infrastructure to improve CTE
technical operations.
4. Develop a standardized approach for all CTE-managed kiosks that includes an
indicator(s) for kiosks to supplement the current single (technical) indicator of percentage
functional kiosks (e.g., the hours per day of operation metric used by CTEs for household
connections).
43 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
5. Use EAF-type grants to support female-lead/owned organizations and projects.
These grants are a great opportunity to support organizations that struggle with access to
funding. With more attention given to gender issues and by providing the added support these
organizations might need, there could be a more focused impact on women and girls for local
water and sanitation services.
6. Ensure the activities supported by EAF grants are more strategically aligned with
WATSAN activities and goals. Both FSMs struggle with transportation of waste to the sites.
As the goal of the EAF is to support innovation, it would be advantageous to try to support
organizations and businesses that directly influence areas that are challenging for the Project.
7. Improve the organization of the EAF grants process to better manage grantee
expectations around the proposal steps and communication arrangements. The
overall organization of the grants could be improved, especially regarding communication with
grantees and other stakeholders on the application and implementation process (such as the
status of equipment purchases).
8. Ensure monitoring and evaluations are completed for the EAF grants. To ensure the
grants have the intended impact, it is important to discuss and agree upon indicators with the
grantees, so they are able to monitor and share with the implementing partner. It is also
important that evaluations of the different stages of the process are undertaken by the
implementor so improvements can be made. The extension of the Project provides DAI with
the opportunity to complete the evaluations for these EAF grants as they are finishing up.
44 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
ANNEX A. SCOPE OF WORK
STATEMENT OF WORK
FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
OF
USAID/HAITI’S WATER AND SANITATION (WATSAN) PROJECT
INTRODUCTION
SUMMARY INFORMATION
BACKGROUND
3.1 Description of the Problem and Context
3.2 Description of the Intervention to be Evaluated
3.2.1 Goal and Strategic Approach
3.2.2 Development Hypothesis and Theory of Change
3.2.3 Performance Information
EVALUATION PURPOSE
4.1 Evaluation Use and Users
EVALUATION QUESTIONS
DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
DELIVERABLES AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
7.1 Report quality criteria
TEAM COMPOSITION
SCHEDULE
FINAL REPORT FORMAT
OTHER REQUIREMENTS
45 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
STATEMENT OF WORK (SOW)
FINAL
FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
OF
USAID/HAITI’S WATER AND SANITATION (WATSAN) PROJECT
I. INTRODUCTION
USAID/Haiti’s Water and Sanitation (WATSAN) Project is a four-and-a-half-year Task Order 
awarded to DAI Global, LLC, with V3 Engineering, Ayiti Nexus, mWater, Centre et Formation 
et d’Encadrement, and Zanmi Lasante as sub-awardees. The activity started in December 2017 
and will be completed in June 2022.
WATSAN interventions aim to support access to sustainable water supply and sanitation services, 
and strengthen the enabling environment for sustainable delivery, operation, and maintenance of 
water and sanitation services. The project started by targeting the urban areas of five communes: 
Cap Haitien, Mirebalais, Croix des Bouquets (Canaan), Les Cayes, and Jeremie. Later, WATSAN 
added five more communes: Belladere, Hinche, Lascahobas, Ouanaminthe, and Pignon. 
The key objectives of the project are to build the governance and financial capability of targeted 
Haitian public utilities and private operators while enabling 250,000 people to gain access to new 
or improved water services and 75,000 people to gain access to basic or safely managed sanitation 
services. The WATSAN project supports sector institutions by implementing a combination of 
targeted infrastructure improvements and technical assistance prescribed by the “Utility 
Turnaround Framework”. WATSAN also supports sector MSMEs and promotes innovations 
through its Enterprise Acceleration Fund.
II. SUMMARY INFORMATION 
Strategy/Project/Activity Name USAID/Haiti Water and Sanitation Project (USAID WATSAN) 
Implementer DAI Global, LLC
Cooperative Agreement/Contract # AID-OAA-I-14-00049/720521
Total Estimated Ceiling of the Evaluated 
Project/Activity (TEC) 
$41,812,295
Life of Strategy, Project, or Activity 12/4/2017 to 06/5/2022
Active Geographic Regions Belladere, Cap-Haitien, Croix des Bouquets, Hinche, Jeremie, Lascahobas, Les Cayes, 
Mirebalais, Ouanaminthe, Pignon
Development Objective(s) (DOs) DO1, DO2, DO3 (cross-cutting) 
USAID Office Office of Infrastructure, Energy and Engineering (OIEE) 
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 46
III. BACKGROUND
3.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM AND CONTEXT
Access to water and sanitation in Haiti is the lowest in the Western Hemisphere. Only 65 percent of the 
population has access to improved water sources, a slight increase and slow progress since 1990, when 
the access rate was 62 percent, as increases in services were not able to keep pace with population 
growth. However, actual access rates may be lower, as many water systems’ functionality is poor. Only 
28 percent of the Haitian population has access to improved sanitation, a rate that has been relatively 
constant since 1990. Safe collection, transport, and treatment of human excreta are practically non￾existent throughout Haiti. The Government has focused on awareness and promotion campaigns to 
encourage households to build their own latrines while also addressing the need for sanitation facilities in 
public schools, health institutions, and other public spaces. These campaigns to reduce open defecation 
have been somewhat successful; open defecation rates have dropped from almost 50 percent in 1990 to 
about 20 percent in 2015. However, surveys indicate that the use of improved sanitation facilities has only 
increased from 18 to 28 percent, meaning that much of the population still relies on shared or unimproved 
sanitation facilities.
While sanitation access rates in urban areas are higher than the national average of 28 percent, they are 
still below 50 percent. In informal or unplanned settlements, where the poorest and most vulnerable 
urban populations generally live, urbanization and high localized population density may be accompanied 
by an increased risk of infectious disease transmission, primarily impacting the poor. The combination of 
a high fecal-related disease burden and inadequate infrastructure suggests that investment in expanding 
sanitation access in densely populated urban slums can yield important public health gains.
In addition, climate change and other natural and manmade disasters as well as rapid urbanization 
will threaten water resources and gains made in the water supply and sanitation sector. Building 
the capacity of utilities and private operators to anticipate needs, plan for and finance 
improvements and to expand access to underserved communities on a sustainable basis is the 
strategy promoted by the USAID Water and Development Plan.
3.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE INTERVENTION TO BE EVALUATED
The WATSAN project is in its last year of implementation covering 10 communes (see Figure 1). 
The project is working towards building a foundation for long-term, sustainable growth in access 
to safe drinking water and sanitation in Haiti, where many communities suffer from high 
incidences of cholera and diarrheal disease.
The Project is implemented in collaboration with Haiti’s National Directorate of Potable Water 
and Sanitation (DINEPA), the branch of the Haitian government tasked with ensuring water and 
sanitation services for its citizens with the overall goal of improving sanitation and water for all 
Haitians. WATSAN initially focused on five areas: three areas hard hit by the cholera outbreak 
(Cap-Haitien, Mirebalais, and Canaan) and two areas hard hit by Hurricane Matthew (Les Cayes 
47 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
and Jeremie). During the last two years, it added five additional areas: Ouanaminthe, Pignon, 
Lascahobas, Belladere, and Hinche. The WATSAN project’s three primary goals are to:
● Help 250,000 people get access to basic or improved water
● Help 75,000 people get access to basic or improved sanitation
● Lay the foundation for sustainable increases in access to water and sanitation across Haiti
The project is reaching these goals by focusing on its core values of self-reliance, resilience, and 
the private sector approach. 
Figure 1: Map of WATSAN intervention areas
3.2.1 GOAL AND STRATEGIC APPROACH
Component 1: Increasing Access to Sustainable Water Services
The Project activities under Component I are focused on providing basic water or improved 
water services to 250,000 people by building the capacity of the Technical Centres of Exploitation 
(CTEs) to provide water on a sustainable basis. While the main focus of the project is providing 
technical assistance to help the CTEs manage themselves on a cost recovery basis, WATSAN 
also funds infrastructure improvements that serve to make the systems more reliable and 
sustainable.
Task 1.1: Water Infrastructure Engineering Services
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 48
Deliverables under Task 1.1:
● Initial assessment report for all water systems to be supported, with prioritized list of 
proposed construction activities
● EMMP for all construction activities
● 100% design specifications for all construction activities
● Signed firm fixed price contract(s) with construction firm(s)
Task 1.2: Water Infrastructure Construction
Deliverables under Task 1.2
● Certificate of completion for all newly constructed infrastructure, signed by the QA firm
● Water quality test results from newly constructed water systems meet JMP standards.
Task 1.3: Technical Assistance for Water Service Providers
Deliverables under Task 1.3:
● 5 service providers demonstrating at least 10% increase in cost recovery over a baseline 
established in Year 1
● 5 service providers demonstrating improved management capacity, according to a 
Contractor proposed index
● 5 CTEs have plans to ensure water safety
Component 2: Increasing Access to Sustainable Sanitation Services
The project activities under Component 2 are focused on providing basic or improved sanitation 
to 75,000 people by strengthening the capacity of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to market 
sanitation products and by assisting DINEPA to reopen the fecal sludge management facilities in 
Les Cayes and near Canaan.
Task 2.1: Support to Sanitation Enterprises
Deliverables under Task 2.1:
● 10 FSMs entrepreneurs and/or SMEs supported with capacity and business model 
assistance
● 15 SMEs demonstrating increased sale of latrine products
Task 2.2: Waste Treatment & Fecal Sludge Management Engineering Services
Deliverables under Task 2.2:
49 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
● Initial assessment report for all proposed wastewater treatment systems to be 
constructed, with prioritized list of proposed construction activities
● 611(e) analysis for all construction activities
● EMMP or EA for all construction activities
● 100% design specifications for all construction activities
● Signed firm fixed price contract(s) with construction firm
Task 2.3: Wastewater Treatment & Fecal Sludge Management Construction
Minimum Deliverables under Sub-task 2.3:
● Certificate of completion for all newly constructed infrastructure, signed by the QA firm
● Wastewater and/or byproduct quality test results from newly constructed treatment 
systems meet WHO/GOH standards.
● 3 communes have waste treatment capacity
Component 3: Improving the Enabling Environment for Sustainable Implementation, Operation, and 
Maintenance of Water and Sanitation Services
The project’s third goal is to lay the foundation for sustainable increases in access to safe water 
and sanitation. It is meeting this goal by building successes at the local level and then working 
through DINEPA (and other institutions) to share these on a larger scale, for instance by holding
national events and publishing the lessons learned.
Task 3.1: Technical Assistance to National and Sub-National Governments
Deliverables under Task 3.1
● 5 national and/or sub-national institutions successfully received training
● Strategies/plans for improved water and sanitation service delivery in place for all 
supported geographies
Task 3.2: Knowledge Dissemination & Learning
Deliverables under Task 3.2
● Three national or regional events on activity learning involving government, civil society, 
private sector and donor partners
● Five published knowledge products spanning all three activity components
3.2.2 DEVELOPMENT HYPOTHESIS AND THEORY OF CHANGE
The WATSAN development hypothesis is that reducing the prevalence of waterborne diseases 
in priority geographic areas is achievable - if the project:
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 50
● Strengthens the ability of the Technical Centres of Exploitation (CTEs), Regional Offices 
for Potable Water and Sanitation (OREPAs), and the National Directorate for Potable 
Water and Sanitation (DINEPA) to provide water on a cost recovery basis; 
● Develops Fecal Sludge Management (FSM) facilities that can operate on a cost recovery 
basis; and
● Strengthens the ability of the private sector to offer water and sanitation services.
Effective implementation of WATSAN programming leading to reduced waterborne diseases can 
be achieved if the following conditions are met: 
● Self-reliance: The institutions are able to generate enough revenue to fully cover their 
operations without any subsidies to cover their operating costs.
● Resilience: Given the volatile climate in Haiti, the institutions can design, build, operate, 
maintain, and upgrade systems that can withstand disruptions and economic uncertainty.
● Private Sector Approach: The CTEs and Fecal Sludge managers are adopting a private 
sector, customer-driven approach. 
Figure 2: WATSAN Theory of Change
3.2.3 PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
USAID/Haiti expects that the evaluation team will review key strategy and project documents while 
carrying out this evaluation, which contain valuable performance information to involve in and help inform 
the evaluation design and analysis plan. Key internal sources of data and information include the following:
• mWater data: mWater is a digital platform that serves as a tool for national/local water 
utility/operator uploads, monitoring and reporting
• WATSAN baseline survey data and reports (completed in 2020 by SI/ESS)
51 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
• WATSAN project design documents, Theory of Change, and Monitoring, Evaluation and 
Learning (MEL) plans including all available performance indicator data and information
• Annual work plans
• All available progress and quarterly reports
• USAID/Haiti 2020-2022 country strategy (public version), Water and Development Plan, and 
other strategy documents
• Other documents and datasets, such as project success stories, case studies, presentations, 
snapshots, and other communication materials such as videos
• Other MEL data, including GIS information, cartography, and knowledge products
IV. EVALUATION PURPOSE
The primary purpose of the WATSAN final performance evaluation is to determine the 
effectiveness of the project in achieving its objectives (USAID Water and Development progress 
indicators). The evaluation will assess the project’s design and approaches used to achieve its 
objectives in order to inform future USAID/Haiti programming similar in scope or approach. 
Considering the Theory of Change components, this analysis will consider factors related to 
partnerships, capacity building, and sustainability. For instance, as a key component of the project, 
the evaluation will measure whether WATSAN interventions in the 10 communes of 
implementation have resulted in improved capacity of local utilities and local actors to provide 
households and communities with sustainable, improved access to water and sanitation services 
and to what extent the interventions have contributed to improved institutional capacity in the 
sector.
A baseline study conducted at the start of the project assessed access to basic water and 
sanitation, and found that there are considerable opportunities to expand access to potable water 
and improve service delivery. The study also concluded that there was potential opportunity to 
reduce open defecation by willingness to pay for sanitation services and making improvements to 
sanitation facilities. The baseline study helped inform pivots in the WATSAN activity, and it is 
notable that the focus of this final performance evaluation extends beyond the initial objectives 
outlined in the baseline study. For a few reasons associated with WATSAN activity adaptations 
and achievements, this final performance evaluation will refer to but not build on this baseline 
data, largely because those baseline indicator measurements have changed. For this final 
evaluation, data and information to measure changes in outcomes from before and after the 
project implementation will be derived from other sources, such as the mWater data platform 
and key stakeholders. Hence, this evaluation will assess the final WATSAN activity indicators and
will include a significant focus on outcomes related to capacity building of local actors and service 
providers, as the WATSAN actions aim to promote sustainable water and sanitation access in 
the target areas.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 52
4.1 EVALUATION USE AND USERS
The primary stakeholders for this evaluation include USAID/Haiti, WATSAN implementing 
partners including DAI and its partners Ayiti Nexus (communications/BCC), Centre de 
Formation et d’Encadrement Technique (CFET) (capacity development), Zanmi Lasante (health 
and advocacy), V3 (engineering) and mWater (digital monitoring and reporting), and the National 
Directorate of Potable Water and Sanitation (DINEPA). Other key stakeholders who will benefit 
from the evaluation include other donors and entities active in Haiti’s WASH sector (IDB, Spanish 
Aid, World Bank, etc.) as well as a variety of private entrepreneurs, NGOs, and Faith-based 
organizations devoted to improving the status of Haiti’s water and sanitation service provision. 
Furthermore, this evaluation will help inform USAID/Haiti’s broader learning questions regarding its 
strategic approach to engaging both central and local government as well as local actors as key avenues 
for bolstering capacity to deliver quality services.
V. EVALUATION QUESTIONS
In line with the stated purpose of this final evaluation, the following evaluation questions have 
been designed to help USAID/Haiti and partners better understand the WATSAN project’s 
approach and Theory of Change:
1. To what extent has WATSAN met its Task Order objectives to build 
governance capacity at multiple levels (national, regional, local) to improve 
sustainable water supply and sanitation service delivery? Criteria that inform 
sustainability in this context are the ability to consistently generate revenue and grow 
the customer base, and the ability to retain and develop technically competent staff (of 
water and sanitation utilities). This question should investigate the resiliency of WASH 
institutions (e.g., DINEPA, CTEs, OREPAs, and water and sanitation related MSMEs), 
and how the activity supported water and sanitation utilities at multiple levels to 
effectively manage crises in different geographical areas, such as in the South department 
after the recent August 2021 earthquake and tropical storm Grace, and in the North 
when handling droughts. Answering this question should also look at how using the 
Utility Turnaround Framework at multiple levels supported sustainable service delivery 
by water and sanitation utilities.
2. How was the Enterprise Acceleration Fund utilized and to what extent did 
those grants support WASH enterprises (such as MSMEs, NGOs, and 
Bayakous) to move towards sustainable service delivery? In answering this 
question, USAID/Haiti would like to know to what extent this Fund should be utilized 
or adapted in future programming similar in scope. 
3. How effective was WATSAN’s approach of targeting the end of the 
sanitation value chain in improving the overall sanitation value chain? The end 
of the value chain includes components like excrement pick up, delivery, and treatment. 
Answering this question should investigate to what extent this approach has supported 
progress towards Haiti’s 2030 goal of ending open defecation.
53 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
In answering the above evaluation questions, the evaluation team should provide ample evidence, 
identifying areas to improve as well as lessons learned and best practices. The recommendations 
should guide future USAID/Haiti WATSAN programming, and the results will also be used by the 
wider WASH sector in Haiti for learning and adaptations. The evaluators will review and confirm 
a shared understanding of the evaluation questions in collaboration with USAID/Haiti prior to 
finalizing the evaluation design.
VI. DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
The evaluation team is expected to propose an evaluation methodology and analysis plan that 
guarantees the highest degree of rigor so as to ensure credible findings and recommendations. 
A mixed method approach is possible, including but not limited to the following methods:
● Utilization of the mWater performance data to determine how the activity has reached 
its beneficiary targets for access to water and sanitation (using the final WATSAN 
indicator definitions)
● Utilization of the mWater performance data on revenue collection, operations and 
maintenance, financial performance, and asset management to assess and quantify 
WATSAN’s capacity building and systems strengthening efforts
● Detailed desk review of relevant project documents and reports
● Detailed desk review of external documents, such as GOH documents, DINEPA 
operating agreements, other donor-funded programs/reports, and published WASH 
literature
● Interviews and/or assessments and/or group discussions with key players and 
stakeholders, including USAID/Haiti staff, relevant GOH staff at national and regional 
levels, WATSAN staff, private sector actors, civil society organizations, and 
knowledgeable beneficiaries. A list of proposed interviewees will be submitted with the 
inception / design report.
● Other qualitative and/or quantitative data collection methods, as appropriate to the 
evaluation questions
The evaluation team is expected to describe which methods can best achieve which evaluation 
questions, and why, providing analysis plans and disaggregation methods in the evaluation design 
document(s). The methodology proposed should have a suitable representation and analysis of 
the geographic areas targeted (including considering contextual challenges faced in the different 
communes), population groups targeted (e.g., women, youth), and partners engaged (such as the 
private sector, local authorities, service providers, etc.). The data collection, analysis and 
reporting should provide data disaggregation by these (and other) markers where useful and 
necessary (such as by age, gender, location, activity approach, contextual changes, type of utility, 
etc.). Finally, the methodology will include triangulation of primary data with secondary data 
sources to produce robust and verifiable evaluation results.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 54
VII. DELIVERABLES AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
This section lists the expected deliverables and reporting requirements for this evaluation. This 
information complies with the reporting requirements already agreed upon with Social Impact 
(SI) through their Evaluation and Survey Services (ESS) contract with USAID/Haiti as well as the 
revised September 2021 Process Map (v5) that outlines the entire evaluation process in greater 
detail. Key deliverables and their schedule include:
1. Work plan: Upon receipt of the final SOW, ESS shall submit, within twenty (20) business 
days, a draft work plan to the ESS Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) at 
USAID/Haiti. The work plan will include: (1) the anticipated schedule and logistical 
arrangements; (2) a list of the members of the evaluation team, delineated by roles and 
responsibilities with their level of effort (LOE); (3) the identification of other required 
personnel and relevant local subcontractors, their LOE, roles and responsibilities, and 
qualifications; and (4) the deliverable schedule. 
2. Evaluation Inception / Design combined report: Within five weeks of approval of all 
evaluation team members, ESS must submit to the COR a combined Inception / Design 
Report, which will document: (1) a summary of what the team learned from its review of 
Activity background documents and other relevant literature; (2) a brief summary of the 
information gaps to be filled through the primary data collection; (3) a detailed evaluation 
design, including key stakeholder groups to be participants, sampling approaches, data 
collection and analysis methods, and an evaluation matrix linking each evaluation question in 
the SOW to the data sources, methods, and data analysis plan that will facilitate completely 
addressing the questions; (4) draft questionnaires and other data collection instruments or 
their main features; (4) the list of potential interviewees and sites to be visited; (5) known 
limitations to the design; and (6) a dissemination plan. 
Throughout this process, alongside the document review, the evaluation team (ET) will use 
information from a Kickoff meeting as well as an In-briefing presentation (see below), both 
held virtually. USAID/Haiti will take up to 10 business days to review and consolidate 
comments on the report through the COR or other designated evaluation representative in 
the USAID/Haiti MEL team. Once the ET receives the consolidated comments on the 
combined Inception / Design Report, they are expected to return a revised report within 
five (5) business days. 
3. In-briefing/Presentation: While developing the detailed evaluation design, the evaluation 
team is expected to hold an In-briefing presentation with key USAID/Haiti staff and the 
(main) Implementing Partner (IP) to discuss having a shared understanding of the design 
approach and proposed methodology, etc. This is an opportunity to clarify assumptions and 
make sure that data collection tools, sampling, and analysis plans will capture the 
information needed to answer the evaluation questions thoroughly and with the highest 
quality.
Also serving to provide quality control of the evaluation, ESS, the ET, and USAID/Haiti key 
staff will meet bi-weekly, or as possible at key moments, starting after submission of the 
55 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
combined Inception / Design Report. Hence, the first bi-weekly call will offer an opportunity 
to discuss USAID’s feedback on the draft report.
4. Out-briefing/Presentation: Within 20 business days after the fieldwork concludes, the 
evaluation team is expected to hold at least the first of two Out-briefing presentations to 
discuss the evaluation findings, conclusions and recommendations. The first Out-briefing will 
include key staff from the USAID/Haiti Program and Technical Offices (including the activity 
staff); this session will be prioritized, while the second Out-briefing will be open to the 
entire Mission and can occur at a later date. These sessions will spark deeper discussions 
within USAID/Haiti, and the Program Office expects to use the Out-briefings as launching 
points for its post-evaluation management plan.
5. Draft Report: The draft report should be consistent with the guidance provided in Section 
X: Final Report Format. The report will address each of the questions identified in the 
SOW and any other issues the team considers bearing on the evaluation objectives. Any 
such issues can be included in the report only after consultation with USAID. The draft 
report will be submitted fifteen (15) business days after the first Out-brief presentation.
Once the draft evaluation report is submitted, USAID will have 10 business days in which to 
review, comment on the draft, and submit the consolidated comments to the evaluation 
team. The ET will then be asked to submit a revised final report 10 business days hence, and 
again USAID/Haiti will review and send additional comments or approve the final evaluation 
report within 10 business days of its submission.
6. Final Report: The evaluation team will be asked to take no more than 10 business days to 
respond to and incorporate USAID/Haiti’s comments on the draft report. ESS will then 
submit the final report to its COR. All activity data and records shall be submitted in full 
and should be in electronic form in easily readable format, organized, and documented for 
use by those not fully familiar with the intervention or evaluation, and owned by USAID.
7. Collected data: ESS will then upload the final report and all evaluation data, respectively, to 
the USAID Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC) and Development Data Library 
(DDL). ESS will also provide USAID/Haiti a full Close-out file of the evaluation by May 2022.
7.1 REPORT QUALITY CRITERIA
To help ensure a high-quality evaluation report, these quality criteria (as described in ADS 
201maa,
Criteria to Ensure the Quality of the Evaluation Report) must underline all work under this 
SOW:
● Evaluation reports should represent a thoughtful, well-researched, and well-organized 
effort to objectively evaluate the strategy, project or activity.
● Evaluation reports should be readily understood and should identify key points clearly, 
distinctly, and succinctly.
● The Executive Summary of an evaluation report should present a concise and accurate 
statement of the most critical elements of the report.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 56
● Evaluation reports should adequately address all evaluation questions included in the 
SOW, or the evaluation questions subsequently revised and documented in consultation 
and agreement with USAID.
● Evaluation methodology should be explained in detail and sources of information 
properly identified.
● Limitations to the evaluation should be adequately disclosed in the report, with 
particular attention to the limitations associated with the evaluation methodology 
(selection bias, recall bias, unobservable differences between comparator groups, etc.).
● Evaluation findings should be presented as analyzed facts, evidence, and data and not 
based on anecdotes, hearsay, or simply the compilation of people’s opinions.
● Findings and conclusions should be specific, concise, and supported by strong 
quantitative or qualitative evidence.
● If evaluation findings assess person-level outcomes or impact, they should also be 
separately assessed for both males and females.
● If recommendations are included, they should be supported by a specific set of findings 
and should be action-oriented, practical, and specific.
VIII. TEAM COMPOSITION
Selection of the evaluation team will be done in close collaboration with USAID/Haiti and 
according to the minimum standards described in this section. The evaluation team must have an 
appropriate mix of technical skills to successfully conduct this evaluation. The evaluation team 
shall include a Team Leader (TL) and a Sector Specialist/Assistant Team Leader (ATL). The two 
positions are considered key personnel and essential to the work being performed.
The TL is ultimately responsible for the overall management of the evaluation team and final 
products, in conformity with the added layer of quality control provided by SI. Given this SOW, 
we anticipate that the TL should meet the following minimum standards:
● The TL must be an experienced evaluation expert, with a documented track record of 
at least 10 years of experience conducting evaluations.
● The TL shall have demonstrated experience in evaluating WASH activities. Familiarity 
with urban utility reform approaches and market-based approaches to service delivery is 
highly preferred. A demonstrated background conducting analyses of WASH 
infrastructure design, functionality, and sustainability will be an asset.
● The TL shall have at least a master’s degree in social science (population and 
demography), public health or other related WASH field, and will possess excellent 
writing and interpersonal skills.
● S/he must be fluent in English and French. 
● Work experience with USAID will be an asset.
● Deep familiarity with the local context will also be an asset.
The Sector Specialist/ATL shall complement the role of the TL; we anticipate that the ATL should 
meet the following minimum standards:
57 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
● The ATL must be an experienced evaluation or sector expert, with a documented track 
record of at least 7 years of experience coordinating and designing performance 
evaluations.
● The ATL shall have demonstrated experience in evaluating or working in WASH 
activities. Familiarity with urban utility reform approaches and market-based approaches 
to service delivery will be an asset.
● The ATL shall have at least a master’s degree in social science (population and 
demography), public health or other related field, and will possess excellent writing and 
interpersonal skills.
● S/he must be fluent in English and French.
● Work experience with USAID will be an asset.
● Deep familiarity with the local context will also be an asset.
ESS is strongly encouraged to sub-partner with one local Haitian firm for data collection purposes 
or to include additional researchers as part of the evaluation team, as needed. If planning to 
partner with a local data collection firm, the selected Haitian firm should demonstrate proven 
capacity in collecting performance evaluation-related data and should have data analysis 
capabilities to perform all related data management functions. This approach is encouraged to 
build the local firm capacity and will also provide a Haitian perspective for the data collection and 
analysis.
IX. SCHEDULE
The estimated period of performance for this evaluation is September 2021 to April/May 2022. 
Following the information provided in Section VII: Deliverables and Reporting Requirements, 
USAID/Haiti has outlined the illustrative evaluation timeline below in Table 1: Tentative Schedule 
with Key Tasks. SI will work closely with USAID/Haiti to expedite the timeline when possible, 
and to avoid and overcome delays and challenges while maintaining the integrity of the evaluation 
data, results, and use. As the below schedule is illustrative, some dates may change (e.g., tasks 
completed earlier or pushed back). It is expected that SI will keep the schedule updated regularly, 
and SI or the ET may add additional tasks or more details as needed.
Table 1: Tentative Schedule with Key Tasks
TASKS TENTATIVE TIMELINE
Final evaluation SOW Sept. 22, 2021
Evaluation Work Plan draft submitted October 18
USAID Work Plan and Team approval Oct. 25
ET onboarding and training Oct. 25-29
Kickoff with USAID and IP November 1
In-briefing presentation with USAID and IP Nov. 15
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 58
TASKS TENTATIVE TIMELINE
Inception/Design combined Report draft submitted, with Budget and Narrative, and 
IRB processes/other approvals commenced
Nov. 29
USAID provides feedback on Inception/Design Report and Budget/Narrative December 13
Incorporate USAID comments and submit final Inception/Design combined Report Dec. 20
USAID approval of combined Inception/Design Report and Budget/Narrative Dec. 31
Team planning meeting / Field work Planning Likely early January 2022, or 
starting in December if/as possible
Evaluation Data collection and Fieldwork January (or December if/as 
possible)
Data Analysis and Report writing Jan-Feb.
Prepare and conduct evaluation debriefing presentations February 2022
Draft report submitted to USAID April 1
Incorporate USAID comments and submit Evaluation Final Report May 2
Upload collected data to DDL, upload the evaluation report to the DEC, and share a 
Closeout Folder with USAID/Haiti
May 2022
X. FINAL REPORT FORMAT
The evaluation final report should include an abstract of no more than 250 words; executive 
summary of no more than 5 pages; background on the local context and 
strategies/projects/activities being evaluated; the evaluation purpose and questions; the 
methodology or methodologies; study limitations; findings, conclusions, and recommendations. 
The executive summary should be 2–5 pages in length and summarize the purpose, background 
of the activity being evaluated, main evaluation questions, methods, findings, conclusions, and 
recommendations and lessons learned (if applicable). 
The evaluation methodology shall be explained in detail in the report. Limitations to the 
evaluation shall be disclosed in the report, with attention to the limitations associated with the 
evaluation methodology (e.g., selection bias, recall bias, unobservable differences between 
comparator groups, etc.).
The final report format should be as follows:
- Abstract
- Executive Summary
- Evaluation Purpose 
- Background on the Context and the Strategies/Projects/Activities being Evaluated
- Evaluation Questions
- Methodology
59 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
- Limitations to the Evaluation
- Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations
- Annexes
The annexes to the report shall include:
- The Evaluation SOW
- All data collection and analysis tools used in conducting the evaluation, such as 
questionnaires, checklists, and discussion guides
- All sources of information properly identified and listed
- Signed disclosure of conflict of interest forms for all evaluation team members, either 
attesting to a lack of conflicts of interest or describing existing conflicts of interest
- Any “statements of difference” regarding significant unresolved differences of opinion by 
funders, implementers, and/or members of the evaluation team
XI. OTHER REQUIREMENTS
All quantitative data collected by the evaluation team must be provided in machine-readable, non￾proprietary formats as required by USAID’s Open Data policy (see ADS 579). The data should 
be organized and fully documented for use by those not fully familiar with the activity or the 
evaluation. USAID will retain ownership of the survey and all datasets developed.
All modifications to the required elements of the SOW of the contract/agreement, whether in 
technical requirements, evaluation questions, team composition, methodology, or timeline, need 
to be agreed upon in writing by the COR. Any revisions should be updated in the SOW that is 
included as an annex to the final report.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 60
ANNEX B. DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
ANNUAL REPORTS
USAID Water and Sanitation Project FY 18 Annual Report
USAID WATSAN FY 19 Annual Report
USAID WATSAN FY 20 Annual Report
USAID WATSAN FY 21 Annual Report
EMMR – FY2020 Water and Sanitation Project
WORK PLANS
USAID Water and Sanitation Project Y3 Revised Work Plan
USAID Water and Sanitation Project Y4 Work Plan
USAID Water and Sanitation Project Y5 Work Plan
QUARTERLY REPORTS
Q1 and Q2 FY 18 Quarterly Report
Q3 FY 18 Quarterly Report
Q1 FY 19 Quarterly Report
Q2 FY 19 Quarterly Report
Q3 FY 19 Quarterly Report
Q1 FY 20 Quarterly Report
Q2 FY 20 Quarterly Report
Q3 FY 20 Quarterly Report
Q1 FY 21 Quarterly Report
Q2 FY 21 Quarterly Report
Q3 FY 21 Quarterly Report
Q1 FY 22 Quarterly Report
Q2 FY 22 Quarterly Report
PUBLICATIONS
Catalogue de toilette USAID
WB Water Utility Turnaround Framework
61 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
USAID-Haiti-Strategic-Framework-Gender-Analysis
EAF PROPOSALS AND DOCUMENTS
LWI Proposal
MFSN Proposal
Proposal 509 Sanitation
Proposal UniQ
FECAH Le LEVIER Proposal
SOIL USAID BSF Application
MFSN Proposal
Proposal 509 Sanitation
Proposal UniQ
LWI Proposal
USAID BSFL Concept Note – from SOIL
Rapport d’evaluation de LWI
Rapport preliminaire d’evaluation MFSN
OTHER RELEVANT DOCUMENTS
Haiti WATSAN learning note - data driven management for water service providers
Haiti WATSAN Learning Note – Adaptive Management for Results in a Fragile Environment
Lessons Learned in Urban Sanitation
CTE Evaluation under USAID Water and Sanitation Project
CTE Performance Evaluation under USAID Water and Sanitation Project
MEL Plan FY 21 May Revision
MEL Plan FY 22 Final October 2021
Manual Pit Emptier visit Morne-á-Cabri
Opening the Fonfred FSM
Public Kiosks in Jeremie
Presentation Result CTE Survey
Monthly Reports for the CTEs from mWater
Zonage de l’assainissement_Formatté
Annexe A - Guide d’Utilisation de QuickBooks DINEPA - CTE V2
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 62
HR Manual DRAFT-3
Les expériences en assainissement urbain (Twelve years of Sanitation Learning in Haiti)
63 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
ANNEX C. KIIS/GIS/FGD EVENT LIST
DATE EVENT TOOL USED STAKEHOLDER # OF PARTICIPANTS # COMMUNES MALE FEMALE
3/10/2022 KII FGD CTE Pignon Manager 1 1 1 0
3/28/2022 FGD FGD CTE CTE Cap Haitien 3 1 0 3
3/29/2022 FGD FGD CTE CTE Ouanaminthe 2 1 2 0
3/31/2022 GI FGD CTE CTE Mirebalais 3 1 2 1
4/1/2022 GI FGD CTE CTE Croix des Bouquets 2 1 1 1
4/5/2022 GI FGD CTE CTE Cayes 2 1 0 2
4/6/2022 FGD FGD CTE CTE Hinche 3 1 1 2
4/6/2022 GI FGD CTE CTE Jeremie 4 1 3 1
4/1/2022 FGD FGD Kiosk Kiosk Managers Cap Haitien 7 1 5 2
4/1/2022 FGD FGD Kiosk Kiosks Mangers Cap Haitien 6 1 5 1
4/1/2022 FGD FGD Kiosk Kiosk Managers Ouanaminthe 6 1 5 1
4/1/2022 FGD FGD Kiosk Kiosk Managers Ouanaminthe 6 1 5 1
4/2/2022 FGD FGD Kiosk Kiosk Managers Ouanaminthe 6 1 5 1
4/6/2022 GI FGD Kiosk Kiosk Managers Cayes 2 1 1 1
4/6/2022 GI FGD Kiosk Kiosk Managers Mirebalais 1 1 0 1
4/8/2022 GI FGD Kiosk Kiosk Managers Croix des bouquets 1 1 0 1
4/15/2022 KII FGD Kiosk Kiosk Managers Jeremie 3 1 2 1
3/30/2022 FGD FGD LEA LEA Nord 5 3 5 0
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 64
DATE EVENT TOOL USED STAKEHOLDER # OF PARTICIPANTS # COMMUNES MALE FEMALE
3/31/2022 GI FGD LEA LEA 6 - 6 0
4/5/2022 GI FGD MTF MTF Sud 3 1 2 1
4/7/2022 GI FGD MTF MTF Mirebalais 3 1 3 0
4/8/2022 GI FGD OREPA OREPA Nord 1 1 1 0
4/8/2022 GI FGD OREPA OREPA Centre 1 1 1 0
4/15/2022 KII FGD OREPA OREPA Sud 1 1 1 0
4/15/2022 KII FGD OREPA OREPA Ouest 1 1 1 0
3/29/2022 GI FGD SME SME 5 1 5 0
4/4/2022 GI FGD SME SME Croix des Bouquets 5 2 5 0
4/5/2022 GI FGD SME SME Cap Haitien 4 1 4 0
4/28/2022 GI FGD SME SME 5 1 4 1
3/25/2022 GI GI CTE Liason CTE Liaison 2 2 0 2
3/25/2022 GI GI CTE Liason CTE Liaison 2 2 1 1
3/25/2022 KII GI CTE Liason CTE Liaison 1 1 1 0
3/28/2022 GI GI EAF EAF Limonade Henry Campus 3 1 3 0
4/1/2022 KII GI EAF EAF Le Levier 1 4 1 0
4/1/2022 GI GI EAF EAF Living Water 2 1 2 0
4/6/2022 KII GI EAF EAF UniQ 1 1 1 0
4/7/2022 GI GI EAF EAF Incinerator 509 2 1 1 1
4/7/2022 GI GI EAF EAF MFSN 3 1 0 3
65 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
DATE EVENT TOOL USED STAKEHOLDER # OF PARTICIPANTS # COMMUNES MALE FEMALE
4/12/2022 KII GI EAF EAF SOIL 1 1 0 1
3/30/2022 GI GI FSM Staff FSM Morne a Cabri 2 1 1 1
3/30/2022 GI GI FSM Staff FSM Fon Fred 2 1 2 0
3/29/2022 GI GI FSM Users FSM Users Morne Cabris 2 1 0 2
3/30/2022 GI GI FSM Users FSM Users Fon Fred 2 1 1 1
2/28/2022 KII GI IP Ayiti Nexus 1 All 7 0 1
3/2/2022 GI GI IP mWater 3 All 7 2 1
3/7/2022 KII GI IP V3 1 All 7 1 0
3/30/2022 KII GI IP ZL 1 - 0 1
3/30/2022 GI GI IP CFET 2 All 7 0 2
2/21/2022 KII KII DAI DAI 1 All 7 1 0
2/24/2022 KII KII DAI DAI 1 All 7 1 0
2/24/2022 KII KII DAI DAI 1 All 7 0 1
2/25/2022 KII KII DAI DAI 1 All 7 1 0
3/2/2022 KII KII DAI DAI 1 All 7 0 1
3/10/2022 KII KII DAI DAI 1 All 7 1 0
3/14/2022 KII KII DAI DAI 1 All 7 1 0
3/24/2022 KII KII DAI DAI 1 All 7 0 1
2/22/2022 KII KII ONEPA ONEPA 1 All 7 0 1
4/1/2022 KII KII ONEPA ONEPA 1 All 7 1 0
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 66
DATE EVENT TOOL USED STAKEHOLDER # OF PARTICIPANTS # COMMUNES MALE FEMALE
2/21/2022 KII KII USAID USAID 1 All 7 0 1
3/3/2022 GI KII USAID USAID 2 All 7 1 1
3/7/2022 KII KII USAID USAID 1 All 7 0 1
Total 146 100 46
67 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
ANNEX D. MWATER SECONDARY DATA REVIEW
SUMMARY OF DATA CLEANING PROCESS
For the monthly report data on mWater, the ET downloaded the data from the mWater platform’s
Suivi-SAEP link on May 4, 2022. The data was then imported to Stata and adjusted to be suitable for
Stata analysis (variable labels, string variables). Data cleaning process mainly included two steps: 1)
identifying and addressing duplicates in Monthly Reports; and 2) identifying and addressing outliers of
variables used for the 11 key indicators.
• Identifying and addressing duplicates in Monthly Reports: Two Monthly Reports were available
for the same month in three instances. The ET reviewed the data and kept the report with
more data points and removed the other duplicate (removed the CTE Belladere report
submitted on “2020-10-20 22:42:48,” CTE Lascahobas report submitted on “2021-07-15
18:53:23,” and Pignon report submitted on “2020-06-01 15:57:26”).
• Identifying and addressing outliers of variables used for the 11 key indicators: Outliers are
identified for each variable contributing to the 11 key indicators using IQR method39 at each
SAEP level, which are addressed by: 1) keeping the data as is; 2) replacing the data as missing
value; and 3) adjusting the data to correct apparent errors. All edits made to the dataset are 
listed in Table 6.
TABLE 6: DATA OUTLIERS
# SAEP MONTHLY
REPORT INDICATOR VARIABLE ORIGINAL
DATA
REVISED
DATA RATIONALE
1 CTE Belladere July 2020 Active
subscribers
Active subscribers
(Total abonnes actifs
debut du mois)
15,000 1,500
Likely a typo because
other months are around
1,500
2 CTE Jeremie December
2018
Service
continuity
Average hours of
service/week (Moyen
heures / semaine de
service)
25
.
(dropped)
Likely an entry error
because other data are
all less than 10 and this is
the first Monthly Report
3 CTE Jeremie January 2021
Collection
efficiency –
arrears
Arrears at the
beginning of the month
(RECETTES: Arriérés
début mois)
1,031,962,425
.
(dropped)
Likely an entry error
because average of other
months was around
10,000,000
4
CTE
Lascahobas July 2020 Active
subscribers
Active subscribers
(Total abonnes actifs
debut du mois)
9,058 908
Likely a typo and
previous two months
were ‘908’ 
5
CTE
Lascahobas March 2021 Collection
efficiency – total Total monthly recovery
(RECETTES:
762,120
.
(dropped)
Likely an entry error
because average other
39 Interquartile range (IQR) method refers to identifying values that fall outside of a range of minimum and maximum value
determined by IQR, which is Quartile 1 (Q1) value subtracted from Quartile 3 (Q3) value. The minimum value range is
determined by Q1 – 1.5IQR and the maximum value range is determined by Q3 + 1.5IQR. Any observations that are more
than 1.5 IQR below Q1 or more than 1.5 IQR above Q3 are considered outliers.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 68
# SAEP MONTHLY
REPORT INDICATOR VARIABLE ORIGINAL
DATA
REVISED
DATA RATIONALE
Recouvrement total mois
- Montant)
months were below
‘150,000’ 
6
CTE
Mirebalais
February
2021
Collection
efficiency –
arrears
Arrears at the
beginning of the month
(RECETTES: Arriérés
début mois)
259,486.7
.
(dropped)
Likely an entry error
because second lowest
value other than this was
‘1,689,456’ 
7
CTE
Mirebalais
December
2019
Collection
efficiency – total
Total monthly recovery
(RECETTES:
Recouvrement total mois
- Montant)
1,542,552.4
.
(dropped)
Likely an entry error
because average other
months were around
‘150,000’ 
8
CTE
Mirebalais July 2019 Total production
Quantity of water
produced (Quantité
d’eau produite)
285,120
.
(dropped)
Likely an entry error
because other months
were all below 100,000,
and this was the first
Monthly Report
9
CTE
Mirebalais June 2020 Total production
Quantity of water
produced (Quantité
d’eau produite)
336,000 33,600
Likely a typo, and other
months were all below
100,000
10 CTE
Ouanminthe July 2020 Collection
efficiency – total
Billing during months
(RECETTES: Facturation
durant mois)
1,300
.
(dropped)
Likely an entry error
because other months
were all above 14,550
11 CTE de Cayes September
20201
Functioning
kiosks
Kiosk - Total Qty
(PATRIMOINE: Kiosque -
Total Qté)
0
.
(dropped)
Likely an entry error
because other months
were all above 13
12 Pignon June 2020 Total production
Quantity of water
produced (Quantité
d’eau produite)
237,300
.
(dropped)
Likely an entry error
because other months
were all below 3,000
SUMMARY OF AVAILABLE DATA
In total, 294 reports were reviewed by the ET for the 10 WATSAN SAEPs (CTE Cap Haitien, CTE des
Cayes, CTE Croix des Bouquets, CTE Jeremie, CTE Mirebalais, CTE Hinche, CTE Ouanaminthe, CTE
Belladere, CTE Lascahobas, Pignon Centre Ville). Table 7 summarizes the reports that were available on
mWater as of May 4, 2022 for the 11 SAEPs.
TABLE 7: AVAILABLE DATA
SAEP FIRST AVAILABLE
REPORT
LAST AVAILABLE
REPORT
NUMBER OF
AVAILABLE
MONTHLY REPORTS
CTE Cap Haitien 12/1/2018 3/1/2022 40
CTE des Cayes 12/1/2018 3/1/2022 40
CTE Croix des Bouquets 5/1/2019 3/1/2022 35
CTE Jeremie 12/1/2018 2/1/2022 39
CTE Mirebalais 7/1/2019 1/1/2022 31
69 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
SAEP FIRST AVAILABLE
REPORT
LAST AVAILABLE
REPORT
NUMBER OF
AVAILABLE
MONTHLY REPORTS
CTE Hinche 6/1/2019 1/1/2022 32
CTE Ouanaminthe 5/1/2020 3/1/2022 23
CTE Belladere 5/1/2020 9/1/2021 17
CTE Lascahobas 1/1/2020 9/1/2021 21
Pignon Centre Ville 5/1/2020 8/1/2021 16
Total 294
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 70
INDICATOR 1. ACTIVE SUBSCRIBERS
Definition: Subscribers that are not: 1) passive subscribers (subscribers disconnected for debt; 2)
subscribers that are connected but do not have water because of a problem in the network; and 3)
subscribers that paid their connection fee but are not yet connected.
71 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
INDICATOR 2. COLLECTION EFFICIENCY (CURRENT)
Definition: Percentage of the amount collected for charges for the month over the amount billed for
the current month.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 72
INDICATOR 3. COLLECTION EFFICIENCY (ARREARS)
Definition: Percentage of the arrears recovered over the arrears at the beginning of the month.
73 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
INDICATOR 4. COLLECTION EFFICIENCY (OVERALL)
Definition: Percentage of total amount collected over the total amount billed.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 74
INDICATOR 5. REVENUE
Definition: Amount of subscriber payments this month + arrears recovered + subscribers paid in
advance + reconnection fees + quotes/connection fees + meter installation fees + penalties + kiosk
water sales + used materials sales + TCA collected. (Note: Does not include subsidies)
75 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
INDICATOR 6. EXPENSES
Definition: Bank account balance of expenses.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 76
INDICATOR 7. OPERATING RATIO
Definition: Total expenses over total revenue.
77 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
INDICATOR 8. TOTAL WATER PRODUCTION
Definition: Amount of water that was produced from the springs and wells to be delivered to the
reservoir.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 78
INDICATOR 9. SERVICE CONTINUITY
Definition: Average number of hours per day of service multiplied by the average number of days per
week of service (average for all sectors in the system).
79 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
INDICATOR 10. RESIDUAL CHLORINE CONFORMITY
Definition: Proportion of residual chlorine tests that conform to norms calculated by the number of
residual chlorine tests that conform to norms over the number of residual chlorine tests conducted.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 80
INDICATOR 11. FUNCTIONING KIOSKS
Definition: Number of functional kiosks over the number of total kiosks.
81 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
HOUSEHOLD WATER ACCESS COVERAGE BY CTE
Source:
• Residential connection: mWater Monthly reports for Mirebalais (Jan 2022), Belladere (Sep
2021), Lascahobas (Sep 2021), and Pignon (May 2020), all other data from Cadastre (date
unspecified)
• Commercial connections: Cadastre (date unspecified)
• Institutional connections: Cadastre (date unspecified)
• Functional kiosk: Cadastre (date unspecified)
• Household in the CTE coverage area: Cadastre (date unspecified)
*Data for Croix des Bouquets are not presented other than the households served because available
data on their functional kiosks are inaccurate.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 82
ANNEX E. CTE STAFF SURVEY RESULTS
SUMMARY OF DATA CLEANING PROCESS
CTE staff survey data were reviewed for consistency and checked for any duplicates and outliers. No
data issues were found during the data quality review. Data presented below, therefore, is the analysis of
the original data received from the Haitian data collection firm.
STAFF MANAGEMENT
92%
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des
Bouquets
Les Cayes Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
Formal job descriptions
Has a formal job description Doesn't have a formal job description
85%
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des
Bouquets
Les Cayes Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
Job expectation
Clear job expectations Unclear job expectations
83 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
38% 50% 43%
60%
80%
56%
29%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des
Bouquets
Les Cayes Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
Number of years working at CTE
Less than a year 1-2 years 2-3 years 3-4 years 4-5 years 6 or more years
69%
100%
71% 73%
90%
44%
71%
31% 29% 20%
10%
44%
29%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des
Bouquets
Les Cayes Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
Performance evaluation
Had a performance evaluation Didn't have a performance evaluation Don't know
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 84
EXPERIENCE USING TOOLS
67%
86% 73%
100%
56% 43%
43%
54%
8% 25% 13%
56%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des
Bouquets
Les Cayes Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
Experience using SIGA
Positive experience Neutral experience Experience rating N/A
Don't use SIGA Don't know if CTE uses SIGA
15%
42% 40%
10% 11%
29% 14%
57%
31%
17%
43%
27%
38% 33% 43%
20%
80% 89%
14%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des
Bouquets
Les Cayes Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
Experience using mWater
Positive experience Neutral experience Experience rating N/A
Don't use mWater Don't know if CTE uses mWater
54%
83% 86% 87% 100%
33% 43%
29%
31% 14%
14% 13%
67%
14%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des
Bouquets
Les Cayes Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
Experience using SISKLOR
Positive experience Neutral experience Experience rating N/A Don't know if CTE uses SISKLOR
85 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
25% 13% 11% 0%
14% 14%
31%
17%
14%
43%
62% 50% 43%
67%
90% 89%
71%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des
Bouquets
Les Cayes Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
Experience using QuickBooks
Positive experience Neutral experience
Negative experience Experience rating N/A
Don't use Quickbooks Don't know if CTE uses Quickbooks
MANAGEMENT OF GENDER ISSUES AND TRAINING
77% 67%
29%
60% 50%
78% 71%
23% 33%
71%
40% 50%
22% 29%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des
Bouquets
Les Cayes Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
Sexual harrassment training
Participated in a sexual harrassment training Did not participate in a sexual harrassment training
69%
100% 100% 100% 100% 89% 100%
15% 11%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des
Bouquets
Les Cayes Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
CTE’s management of CTE’s gender issues
Positive experience Neutral experience Negative experience Experience rating N/A
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 86
89%
25%
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
88%
100% 100%
25%
11%
50%
13%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des
Bouquets
Les Cayes Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
CTE’s management of CTE’s gender issues by sex
Positive experience Neutral experience Negative experience Experience rating N/A
69%
92% 86%
60%
80% 78% 71%
23%
14%
40% 10% 29%
8% 10%
11%
11%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des
Bouquets
Les Cayes Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
CTE’s management of community gender issues
Positive experience Neutral experience Negative experience Experience rating N/A
69%
100%
86% 87% 90% 89% 86%
15%
15% 14% 13% 10% 11% 14%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des
Bouquets
Les Cayes Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
DAI’s management of gender issues
Positive experience Neutral experience Negative experience Experience rating N/A
87 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
VIEWS ON SERVICE QUALITY
92% 92% 86% 93% 80% 89% 100%
20% 14% 11%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des
Bouquets
Les Cayes Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
View on CTE’s service for the community
Positive experience Neutral experience Negative experience
100% 100% 100% 93% 100% 100% 100%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des
Bouquets
Les Cayes Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
Service improvement in the last two years
CTE services improved CTE services did not improve
VIEWS ON WILLINGNESS TO PAY
92% 83%
100% 100% 90%
33%
100%
8% 17% 10%
56%
11%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des
Bouquets
Les Cayes Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
Tariff level
Tariff is appropriate for the services Tariff is not appropriate Don't know
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 88
100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
78%
100%
22%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des
Bouquets
Les Cayes Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
Clients’ willingness to pay
Clients are willing to pay for the services Clients are not willing to pay
VIEWS ON THE FUTURE FOCUS OF CTES
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Capacity building
Staff gender equality
Better use of mWater data
Compliant management &
response
Customer communications
Promoting water supply
services
Expansion of water supply
services to new areas
Reducing downtime
Better prioritization of
repairs
Developing pricing structure
Other
CTE’s Future Focus Area
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des Bouquets Les Cayes
Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
89 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
24%
14% 14% 14%
25%
4%
24%
2%
7% 8%
14%
7%
13%
20%
20%
11% 10%
12%
13%
27%
14%
14%
6%
28%
12%
9% 11%
43% 16%
22%
20%
24%
7% 11% 7%
16%
3%
12%
8%
11%
11%
7% 13%
22%
8%
2%
3%
2%
3%
4%
4% 7% 3%
19%
8% 8%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Cap Haitien Mirebalais Croix des
Bouquets
Les Cayes Jeremie Hinche Ouanaminthe
CTE’s Future Focus Area
Other
Developing pricing structure
Better prioritization of repairs
Reducing downtime
Expansion of water supply services to new areas
Promoting water supply services
Customer communications
Compliant management & response
Better use of mWater data
Staff gender equality
Capacity building
90 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
ANNEX F. 2021 CTE CUSTOMER SURVEY SECONDARY DATA
REVIEW
SUMMARY OF DATA CLEANING PROCESS
For the CTE customer survey data, the ET imported the data into Stata and adjusted it to be suitable for
Stata analysis (variable labels, string variables). Data cleaning process mainly included three steps: 1)
identifying and addressing duplicates; 2) identifying and addressing outliers; and 3) re-categorizing “other”
options.
• Identifying and addressing duplicates: The ET reviewed the data for duplicates, and each entry
was assigned a unique ID for the analysis.
• Identifying and addressing outliers: Outliers are identified for each numeric variable using IQR
method, and they are addressed by: 1) keeping the data as is where data was plausible: 2)
replacing the data as missing value if deemed unplausible: and 3) adjusting the data to correct
apparent errors. Two variables (how long have you been a customer and birthdate) were
reviewed and corrected.
• Re-categorizing “other” options: Upon reviewing the categorical responses, a large portion of
the respondents chose the “other” options where available and described responses that could
have been classified as one of the response options already provided. These were reviewed and
re-categorized to correct the large portion of “other” responses.
CUSTOMER CHARACTERISTICS
1,439
2,935
425 1,291 1,798 2,340
2,035
4,264
942
2,056
2,911
3,666
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
Cap Haitien Les Cayes Croix des
Bouquets
Jeremie Mirebalais Hinche
Number of surveys completed
(active & passive customers)
Survey completed Number of clients (SIGA)
91 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
98% 95% 90%
56%
94% 86%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Les Cayes Croix des
Bouquets
Jeremie Mirebalais Hinche
Active vs. passive customer
Active client Passive client
61% 62% 63% 71% 67% 71%
39% 38% 37% 29% 33% 29%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Les Cayes Croix des
Bouquets
Jeremie Mirebalais Hinche
Customer gender
(active & passive customers)
Female Male
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 92
51
57
52
57
49
53
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Cap Haitien Les Cayes Croix des
Bouquets
Jeremie Mirebalais Hinche
Average customer age 
(active & passive customers)
48
15
124
42
63
92
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Cap Haitien Les Cayes Croix des
Bouquets
Jeremie Mirebalais Hinche
Average time as a CTE customer
(active & passive customers)
93 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
PASSIVE CUSTOMERS
4
16
19
315
31 100
11
13
6
196
47
192
76
4
13
20
8
34
7
7
20
14
15
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Les Cayes Croix des
Bouquets
Jeremie Mirebalais Hinche
Reasons for being a passive customer
(passive customers)
I haven't had water in over a year Water is not distributed on time I have too much debt
 I buy water from water truck I have a well Water is too expensive
I get water from kiosks Water is still dirty
88%
57%
100% 100%
50%
68%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Les Cayes Croix des
Bouquets
Jeremie Mirebalais Hinche
Willingness to become an active customer again 
(passive customers)
Yes No
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 94
CTE SERVICE
83%
36%
97%
79%
93% 96% 16%
62%
16%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Cap Haitien Les Cayes Croix des
Bouquets
Jeremie Mirebalais Hinche
Water distribution frequency
(active customers) 
At least once a day Everyday Less than 3 times a week More than 3 times a week
97% 92% 91%
68% 59%
78%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Les Cayes Croix des
Bouquets
Jeremie Mirebalais Hinche
Water bill received in the last 2 months
(active customers)
Yes No
95 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
99%
Payment mode 
(active customer)
Bureau CTE
Bureau CTE/MonCash
Other
Collection agent
MonCash
Check
New subscriber
Bureau CTE/Bank
Bureau CTE/Other
Bureau CTE/MonCash/Credit Card
Bank
Bureau CTE/Credit Card
SATISFACTION LEVEL
41% 46%
58%
40% 17%
11%
59% 54% 42%
60%
83% 89%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Cap Haitien Les Cayes Croix des
Bouquets
Jeremie Mirebalais Hinche
Satisfaction with CTE service
(active customers)
Yes No
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 96
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
Most satisfied services
(active customers)
Cap Haitien Les Cayes Croix des Bouquets Jeremie Mirebalais Hinche
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
Most dissatisfied services
(active customers)
Cap Haitien Les Cayes Croix des Bouquets Jeremie Mirebalais Hinche
97 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
ANNEX G. LIST OF STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTED
EAF
SOIL
Mouvman Fanm Solèy
No FECAPH – Le Levier
Henry Christophe Campus in Limonade Water Quality Testing
Quisqueya University (plant-based FS drying)
Living Water
Incinerator 509 Sanitation
WORKING PARTNERS
V3 Engineering
mWater (Brain Jensen and John and Annie Feighery)
SIGA
Ayiti Nexus
SISKLOR
Centre et Formation et d’Encadrement
Zanmi Lasante Management
SMALL BUSINESSES AND ASSOCIATIONS
SMEs
• OJPMBTPA
• OMEKVIGS
• ETCNH/FISAJ Construction
• ATTA-EL ROI Construction
• ASDA
• ATA
• RTMC
• RETCOM
• REVDO
• ASTIAS
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 98
• RECCHAC
• ATESCA
• APGA
• BEAUGAZ
• SANI-PREFAB
• ACM
• ESSAM-Plus
• AVIE
LEAs
• Boucard Pest Control
• SANCO
• ADVNN
• SANI BON SEVIS
• LAVABLECO
• ECLAT SERVICE TOTAL
• DENSCO
• TOP VIDANGE
• PA FE FO
• Tet Ansanm
• LAVI PA FASIL
Mayoral/municipal task forces on sanitation
• CCAM - Mirebalais
• CERAAC - Les Cayes
FSM
Fonfred FSM Management
Morne-à-Cabri FSM Management
Users of Fonfred FSM
Users of Morne-à-Cabri FSM
99 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
CTE STAFF FOR FGD
Cap Haitien
Mirebalais
Croix des Bouquets
Les Cayes
Jeremie
Ouanaminthe
Hinche
CTE STAFF FOR SURVEYS
Cap Haitien
Mirebalais
Croix des Bouquets
Les Cayes
Jeremie
Ouanaminthe
Hinche
KIOSKS
CTE kiosk managers (Ouanaminthe, Les Cayes, Jeremie, Croix des Bouquets)
Living Water kiosk managers (Cap Haitien)
ONEPA/OREPA
Myriame Dorfeuille, Director, ONEPA
Neud Pharo Joseph, Systems Specialist, ONEPA
Gabriel Tondreau, ONEPA-SISKLOR
OREPA directors (Sud, Centre, Ouest, Nord)
DAI
COP Daniel O’Neil
DCOP Samuel Diery Mondestin
MEL Officer Nina Bernard
Jean Fenzie
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 100
Celestin Valdes
Milner St Fluer
Ana-Flore Leroy
Papa Diop
CTE Liasons
• Lovitha Baptiste - Cap Haitien
• Nadine Rene - Hinche
• Zacharie Popote - Mirebalais
• Ruffine Astremon - Cayes
• Karl-Henry Olias - Ouanaminthe
• Camelot Junior - Croix des Bouquets
USAID
WASH Program Officer/USAID WATSAN Contracting Officer’s Representative Marcia Urquhart Glenn
Environmental Officer Abdel Abellard
Assistant Environmental Officer Cynthia Figaro
WASH Advisor Carmelita Francois
OTHER
Neil Van Dine - Pignon
101 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
ANNEX H. WATSAN PROJECT METHODOLOGY
USAID WATSAN THEORY OF CHANGE
FIGURE 1: THEORY OF CHANGE
USAID WATSAN ACTIVITY INTERVENTIONS AND PHASES
The Project’s activities are organized around three closely linked components with specific tasks for
each.
FIGURE 2: WATER MILESTONES
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 102
FIGURE 3: SANITATION MILESTONES
FIGURE 4: USAID WATER AND SANITATION PROJECT
103 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
ANNEX I. DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS
INFORMED CONSENT AGREEMENT
A - DAI, USAID AND DAI IMPLEMENTING PARTNERS
Introduction and Purpose: Thank you for taking the time to speak with us today. My name is 
[NAME]. I am a researcher from Social Impact, a company that is based in the United States. Our team 
is conducting an evaluation study of the USAID WATSAN Project. USAID WATSAN is a project to help 
improve access to water and sanitation services in Haiti.
The purpose of the study is to understand the extent to which USAID WATSAN was successful meeting 
its objectives, to know what were the most important challenges it faced, and to identify lessons learned 
and good practices to help future water and sanitation initiatives in Haiti or elsewhere. We are speaking 
to you today in your capacity as the donor/prime/implementing partner (DELETE AS APPROPRIATE) 
with/for the USAID WATSAN Project. 
Request: We would like your honest impressions, opinions and thoughts about various issues related to 
this project’s implementation and outcomes. We are independent consultants who have no affiliation 
with the firms and institutions that implemented USAID WATSAN, nor do we represent any other 
private sector firm in the water/sanitation sector, nor are we from or represent the Government of 
Haiti. 
Voluntary Participation: Participation in this interview is completely voluntary. You do not have to 
agree to be in this study. You are free to end the interview at any time or to decline to answer any 
question which you do not wish to answer. If you decline to participate in the interview, no one will be 
informed of this. If you choose to participate you will be 1 of 35 interviews that are being conducted. 
You can opt out at a later time if you wish by informing by speaking or private message the facilitator at 
any time during the course of the discussion.
Risks/Benefits: There are no significant risks to your participation in this study. You will not receive 
any direct benefit or compensation for participating in this study. Although this study will not benefit you 
personally, we hope that our results will help improve potential future programs to increase access to 
water and sanitation services in Haiti.
Procedures: If you agree to participate, we will ask you to discuss your experience and opinion of the 
activities and services implemented under the USAID WATSAN Project. The interview will take about 
one and half hours of your time. As part of the evaluation, we may share our notes from this interview 
with USAID for posting to a public database. However, the notes we may share will not contain your 
name, title, organization or any details that could identify you as a source of information. 
Contacts:
If you have any questions or concerns about your rights as a participant, you may contact [name and 
affiliation of local contact] at [number and/or email] or the Social Impact Institutional Review Board at 
irb@socialimpact.com or +1 703 465 1884 or at kfelizor@socialimpact.com or +509 3198 6328. I will 
leave a copy of this form with you.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 104
If you accept, we would like to record our conversation. The purpose of the recording is to help us with 
our notetaking. Only the evaluation team will have access to the recording, and we will destroy it once 
we have completed our notes.
Do you have any questions? [Interviewer should answer any questions]
Permission to Proceed 
I understand the purpose of the interview as outlined above and understand that I can withdraw from 
the interview at any time and for any reason. I agree to participate in the interview (Evaluator records).
Yes / No
Are you willing to be recorded?
Yes / No
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be interviewed:
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be recorded: 
Date _________________________
B –ONEPA AND IPS 
Introduction and Purpose: Thank you for taking the time to speak with us today. My name is 
[NAME]. I am a researcher representing s [Name of TBD local data collection firm based in Haiti] and
Social Impact, from Social Impact, a company that is based in the United States. Our team is conducting 
an evaluation study of the USAID/HAITI WATSAN Project. USAID WATSAN is a project to help 
improve access to water and sanitation services in Haiti.
The purpose of the study is to understand the extent to which USAID WATSAN was successful meeting 
its objectives, to know what were the most important challenges it faced, and to identify lessons learned 
and good practices that might help future water and sanitation initiatives in Haiti or elsewhere. We are 
speaking to you today because you collaborated directly with USAID WATSAN as a key stakeholder 
and/or with USAID WATSAN partners that are involved in the water/sanitation sector.
Request: We would like your honest impressions, opinions and thoughts about various issues related to 
this project’s implementation and outcomes. We are independent consultants who have no affiliation 
with the firms and institutions that implemented USAID WATSAN, nor do we represent any other 
private sector firm in the water/sanitation sector, nor are we from or represent the Government of 
Haiti. 
Voluntary Participation: Your participation in this interview is voluntary and will not impact the 
services you have received or may receive in the future. You do not have to agree to be in this study. 
You are free to end the interview at any time or to decline to answer any question which you do not 
wish to answer. If you decline to participate in the interview, no one will be informed of this. You can 
opt out at a later time if you wish by informing by speaking or private message the facilitator at any time 
105 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
during the course of the discussion. If you choose to participate you will be 1 of 35 interviews that are 
being conducted. 
Risks/Benefits: There are no significant risks to your participation in this study. You will not receive 
any direct benefit or compensation for participating in this study. Although this study will not benefit you 
personally, we hope that our results will help improve potential future programs to increase access to 
water and sanitation services in Haiti.
Procedures: If you agree to participate, we will ask you to discuss your experience and opinion of the 
activities and services implemented under the USAID WATSAN Project. The interview will take about 
one and half hours of your time. As part of the evaluation, we may share our notes from this interview 
with USAID for posting to a public database. However, the notes we may share will not contain your 
name, title, organization or any details that could identify you as a source of information.
Contacts:
If you have any questions or concerns about your rights as a participant, you may contact [name and 
affiliation of local contact] at [number and/or email] or the Social Impact Institutional Review Board at 
irb@socialimpact.com or +1 703 465 1884 or at kfelizor@socialimpact.com or +509 3198 6328. I will 
leave a copy of this form with you.
If you accept, we would like to record our conversation. The purpose of the recording is to help us with 
our notetaking. Only the evaluation team will have access to the recording, and we will destroy it once 
we have completed our notes.
Do you have any questions? [Interviewer should answer any questions]
Permission to Proceed 
I understand the purpose of the interview as outlined above and understand that I can withdraw from 
the interview at any time and for any reason. I agree to participate in the interview (Evaluator records).
Yes / No
Are you willing to be recorded?
Yes / No
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be interviewed:
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be recorded: 
Date _________________________
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 106
C – EAF GRANTEES
Introduction and Purpose: Thank you for taking the time to speak with us today. My name is 
[NAME]. I am a researcher representing s [Name of TBD local data collection firm based in Haiti] and
Social Impact, from Social Impact, a company that is based in the United States. Our team is conducting 
an evaluation study of the USAID/HAITI WATSAN Project. USAID WATSAN is a project to help 
improve access to water and sanitation services in Haiti.
The purpose of the study is to understand the extent to which USAID WATSAN was successful meeting 
its objectives, to know what were the most important challenges it faced, and to identify lessons learned 
and good practices that might help future water and sanitation initiatives in Haiti or elsewhere. We are 
speaking to you today because you as a USAID WATSAN grantee and collaborator involved in the 
water/sanitation sector.
Request: We would like your honest impressions, opinions and thoughts about various issues related to 
this project’s implementation and outcomes. We are independent consultants who have no affiliation 
with the firms and institutions that implemented USAID WATSAN, nor do we represent any other 
private sector firm in the water/sanitation sector, nor are we from or represent the Government of 
Haiti. 
Voluntary Participation: Participation in this interview is completely voluntary. You do not have to 
agree to be in this study. You are free to end the interview at any time or to decline to answer any 
question which you do not wish to answer. If you decline to participate in the interview, no one will be 
informed of this. You can opt out at a later time if you wish by informing the facilitator by speaking or 
private message at any time during the course of the discussion. If you choose to participate you will be 
1 of 35 interviews that are being conducted. 
Risks/Benefits: There are no significant risks to your participation in this study. You will not receive 
any direct benefit or compensation for participating in this study. Although this study will not benefit you 
personally, we hope that our results will help improve potential future programs to increase access to 
water and sanitation services in Haiti.
Procedures: If you agree to participate, we will ask you to discuss your experience and opinion of the 
activities and services implemented under the USAID WATSAN Project. The interview will take about 
one and half hours of your time. As part of the evaluation, we may share our notes from this interview 
with USAID for posting to a public database. However, the notes we may share will not contain your 
name, title, organization or any details that could identify you as a source of information 
Contacts:
If you have any questions or concerns about your rights as a participant, you may contact [name and 
affiliation of local contact] at [number and/or email] or the Social Impact Institutional Review Board at 
irb@socialimpact.com or +1 703 465 1884 or at kfelizor@socialimpact.com or +509 3198 6328. I will 
leave a copy of this form with you.
If you accept, we would like to record our conversation. The purpose of the recording is to help us with 
our notetaking. Only the evaluation team will have access to the recording, and we will destroy it once 
we have completed our notes.
Do you have any questions? [Interviewer should answer any questions]
Permission to Proceed 
I understand the purpose of the interview as outlined above and understand that I can withdraw from 
the interview at any time and for any reason. I agree to participate in the interview (Evaluator records).
Yes / No
107 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
Are you willing to be recorded?
Yes / No
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be interviewed:
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be recorded: 
Date _________________________
D – FSM MANAGEMENT AND FSM USERS
Introduction and Purpose: Thank you for taking the time to speak with us today. My name is 
[NAME]. I am a researcher representing s [Name of TBD local data collection firm based in Haiti] and
Social Impact, from Social Impact, a company that is based in the United States. Our team is conducting 
an evaluation study of the USAID/HAITI WATSAN Project. USAID WATSAN is a project to help 
improve access to water and sanitation services in Haiti.
The purpose of the study is to understand the extent to which USAID WATSAN was successful meeting 
its objectives, to know what were the most important challenges it faced, and to identify lessons learned 
and good practices that might help future water and sanitation initiatives in Haiti or elsewhere. We are 
speaking to you today as a key stakeholder and implementing partner with the USAID WATSAN project 
at this FSM site OR because you have been directly affected by the USAID WATSAN project 
intervention at this FSM site (delete as applicable).
Request: We would like your honest impressions, opinions and thoughts about various issues related to 
this project’s implementation and outcomes. We are independent consultants who have no affiliation 
with the firms and institutions that implemented USAID WATSAN, nor do we represent any other 
private sector firm in the water/sanitation sector, nor are we from or represent the Government of 
Haiti. 
Voluntary Participation: Participation in this interview is completely voluntary. You do not have to 
agree to be in this study. You are free to end the interview at any time or to decline to answer any 
question which you do not wish to answer. If you decline to participate in the interview, no one will be 
informed of this. You can opt out at a later time if you wish by informing the facilitator by speaking or 
private message at any time during the course of the discussion. If you choose to participate you will be 
1 of 35 interviews that are being conducted.
Risks/Benefits: There are no significant risks to your participation in this study. You will not receive 
any direct benefit or compensation for participating in this study. Although this study will not benefit you 
personally, we hope that our results will help improve potential future programs to increase access to 
water and sanitation services in Haiti.
Procedures: If you agree to participate, we will ask you to discuss your experience and opinion of the 
activities and services implemented under the USAID WATSAN Project. The interview will take about 
one and half hours of your time. As part of the evaluation, we may share our notes from this interview 
with USAID for posting to a public database. However, the notes we may share will not contain your 
name, title, organization or any details that could identify you as a source of information.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 108
Contacts:
If you have any questions or concerns about your rights as a participant, you may contact [name and 
affiliation of local contact] at [number and/or email] or the Social Impact Institutional Review Board at 
irb@socialimpact.com or +1 703 465 1884 or at kfelizor@socialimpact.com or +509 3198 6328. I will 
leave a copy of this form with you.
If you accept, we would like to record our conversation. The purpose of the recording is to help us with 
our notetaking. Only the evaluation team will have access to the recording, and we will destroy it once 
we have completed our notes.
Do you have any questions? [Interviewer should answer any questions]
Permission to Proceed 
I understand the purpose of the interview as outlined above and understand that I can withdraw from 
the interview at any time and for any reason. I agree to participate in the interview (Evaluator records).
Yes / No
Are you willing to be recorded?
Yes / No
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be interviewed:
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be recorded: 
Date _________________________
E- SMES, LEAS, MFTS, KIOSK MANAGERS
Date:
Facilitator:
Primary Notetaker Name:
Respondent Summary:
FOCUS GROUP CONTACT SCRIPT
Introduction and Purpose: My name is [NAME]. I am a researcher representing s [Name of TBD 
local data collection firm based in Haiti] and Social Impact, a company that is based in the United States. 
Our team is conducting an evaluation study of the USAID/HAITI WATSAN Project. USAID WATSAN is 
a project to help improve access to water and sanitation services in Haiti.
The purpose of the study is to understand the extent to which USAID WATSAN was successful meeting 
its objectives, to assess what were the most important challenges it faces, and to identify lessons learned 
109 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
and good practices that might help future water and sanitation initiatives in Haiti or elsewhere I was 
given your contact information by DAI. We are conducting focus group discussions with small businesses 
and organizations that are USAID WATSAN stakeholders to learn about their participation and 
perception of the project. These organizations will include but are not limited to Small and Medium Sized 
Enterprises, Latrine Emptying Associations, Mayoral Task Forces on Sanitation and water kiosk managers.
Request
Your organization received technical assistance from USAID/Haiti project to improve their water and 
sanitation services. Your experiences with DAI and the USAID WATSAN Project will help us to assess 
whether the assistance was effective or not. We would like, with the help of this Focus Group, to learn 
about your impressions, opinions and thoughts about various issues related to the USAID WATSAN 
project’s implementation and outcomes. We are independent consultants who have no affiliation with 
the firms and institutions that implemented USAID WATSAN, nor do we represent any other private 
sector firm in the water/sanitation sector, nor are we from or represent the Government of Haiti. Your 
participation in this focus group discussion is voluntary and will not impact the services you have 
received or may receive in the future. You will be taking part in 1 of 24 focus groups that are being 
organized. 
Procedures: If you agree to participate in the Focus Group Discussion, we will ask the group members 
to talk about their experience and opinion of the activities and services implemented under the USAID
WATSAN Project. You can opt out at a later time if you wish by informing the facilitator at any time by 
speaking or private message. The discussion will take about 90 minutes of your time. 
Because of the current public health situation, the focus group discussion will be conducted online using 
WhatsApp and/or Zoom. If you agree to participate, we will provide you the details about the date and 
time of the call and provide you with credit to allow you to access the Internet for the call.
You are under no obligation to participate. 
Do you agree to participate?
Yes No
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be interviewed:
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be recorded: 
Date _________________________
If they agree to participate:
Thank you. We will share more information about the date and time of the call and provide you with 
credit to allow you to access the Internet for the call. Prior to the call, we have just a few questions 
about you and your household:
1. Which best describes your situation?
• Married, living with spouse
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 110
• Married, not living with spouse
• Female-headed household
• Single 
• Widow
• Other (please describe)
2. What organization do you work for and what is your job title?
INFORMED CONSENT AGREEMENT – FGD
Thank you all for agreeing to participate in todays’ call.
Introduction and Purpose: My name is [NAME]. I am a researcher representing s [Name of TBD 
local data collection firm based in Haiti] and Social Impact, a company that is based in the United States. 
Our team is conducting an evaluation study of the USAID/HAITI WATSAN Project. USAID WATSAN is 
a project to help improve access to water and sanitation services in Haiti.
The purpose of the study is to understand the extent to which USAID WATSAN was successful meeting 
its objectives, to assess what were the most important challenges it faces, and to identify lessons learned 
and good practices that might help future water and sanitation initiatives in Haiti or elsewhere I was 
given your contact I information by DAI. We are conducting focus group discussions with small 
businesses and organization that are USAID WATSAN stakeholders to learn about their participation 
and perception of the project. 
Request
Your organization received technical assistance from USAID/Haiti project to improve their water and 
sanitation services. Your experiences with DAI and the USAID WATSAN project will help us to assess 
whether the assistance was effective or not. We would like, with the help of this Focus Group, to learn 
about your impressions, opinions and thoughts about various issues related to the USAID WATSAN 
project’s implementation and outcomes. We are independent consultants who have no affiliation with 
the firms and institutions that implemented USAID WATSAN, nor do we represent any other private 
sector firm in the water/sanitation sector, nor are we from or represent the Government of Haiti. You 
will be taking part in 1 of 24 focus groups that are being organized.
Procedures: Today we are going to discuss your experience and opinion of the support received and 
the activities you participated in as part of the USAID WATSAN project. The discussion with last about 
an hour and a half. Your answers will be kept confidential. DAI has shared your information with us but 
will not know whether you chose to participate or any details of your response. As part of the 
evaluation, we may share our notes from this interview with USAID for posting to a public database. 
However, the notes we may share will not contain your name, title, organization or any details that 
could identify you as a source of information. Due to the private nature of this research, we ask that all 
focus group participants agree not to share anything that is discussed with anyone outside of this group 
once this conversation ends. Nonetheless, there is a risk that other discussion participants will repeat 
what is shared here today. Remember that you are free to refuse to answer any question.
111 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
Risks/Benefits: You will not receive any direct benefit or compensation for participating in this 
discussion group, either from Social Impact or from [XXX]. If you have not already, you will be provided 
with a credit stipend of [amount] to cover the data costs of participating.
Voluntary Participation: Participation in this discussion group is completely voluntary. Your 
participation in this focus group discussion is voluntary and will not impact the services you have 
received or may receive in the future. I You can opt out at a later time if you wish by informing the 
facilitator by speaking or private message at any time during the course of the discussion. If you choose 
to participate you will be 1 of 24 focus groups that are being conducted.
Do you have any questions? [Interviewer should answer any questions]
Contacts: If you have any questions or concerns about your rights as a participant, you may contact 
[name and affiliation of local contact] at [number and/or email] or the Social Impact Institutional Review 
Board at irb@socialimpact.com or +1 703 465 1884 or at kfelizor@socialimpact.com or +509 3198 
6328. I will leave a copy of this form with you.
Permission to Proceed
If you accept, we would like to record our conversation. The purpose of the recording is to help us with 
our notetaking. Only the evaluation team will have access to the recording, and we will destroy it once 
we have completed our notes
I understand the purpose of the interview as outlined above and understand that I can withdraw from 
the interview at any time and for any reason. I agree to participate in the interview (Evaluator records).
Yes No
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be interviewed:
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be recorded: 
Date _________________________
Brief Description of FGD Process
This will be conducted as a focus group. I will ask a series of questions to the group and facilitate some 
discussion. We want everyone to feel free to express themselves and participate, especially if you have a 
different opinion than what is being shared by others. Not everybody needs to respond to each question, 
though we hope you to speak up if you have something to share. Because we are having this discussion 
over Zoom/WhatsApp instead of in person, I may call on individuals to make sure everyone has an 
opportunity to contribute. If at any point you do not wish to respond you can say so.
F – CTE MANAGEMENT
Date:
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 112
Facilitator:
Primary Notetaker Name:
Respondent Summary:
FOCUS GROUP CONTACT SCRIPT
Introduction and Purpose: My name is [NAME]. I am a researcher representing s [Name of TBD 
local data collection firm based in Haiti] and Social Impact, a company that is based in the United States. 
Our team is conducting an evaluation study of the USAID/HAITI WATSAN Project. USAID WATSAN is 
a project to help improve access to water and sanitation services in Haiti.
The purpose of the study is to understand the extent to which USAID WATSAN was successful meeting 
its objectives, to assess what were the most important challenges it faces, and to identify lessons learned 
and good practices that might help future water and sanitation initiatives in Haiti or elsewhere I was 
given your contact information by DAI. We are conducting focus group discussions with USAID
WATSAN stakeholders including CTE Management staff to learn about their participation and 
perception of the project. 
Request
Your organization received technical assistance from USAID/Haiti project to improve their water and 
sanitation services. Your experiences with DAI and the USAID WATSAN Project will help us to assess 
whether the assistance was effective or not. We would like, with the help of this Focus Group, to learn 
about your impressions, opinions and thoughts about various issues related to the USAID WATSAN 
project’s implementation and outcomes. We are independent consultants who have no affiliation with 
the firms and institutions that implemented USAID WATSAN, nor do we represent any other private 
sector firm in the water/sanitation sector, nor are we from or represent the Government of Haiti. You 
will be taking part in 1 of 24 focus groups that are being organized. 
Procedures: If you agree to participate in the Focus Group Discussion, we will ask the group members 
to talk about their experience and opinion of the activities and services implemented under the USAID
WATSAN Project. You can opt out at a later time if you wish by informing the facilitator at any time. 
The discussion will take about 90 minutes of your time. 
Because of the current public health situation, the focus group discussion will be conducted online using 
WhatsApp and/or Zoom. If you agree to participate, we will provide you the details about the date and 
time of the call and provide you with credit to allow you to access the Internet for the call.
You are under no obligation to participate. 
Do you agree to participate?
Yes No
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be interviewed:
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be recorded: 
113 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
Date _________________________
INFORMED CONSENT AGREEMENT – FGD
Thank you all for agreeing to participate in todays’ call.
Introduction and Purpose: My name is [NAME]. I am a researcher representing s [Name of TBD 
local data collection firm based in Haiti] and Social Impact, a company that is based in the United States. 
Our team is conducting an evaluation study of the USAID/HAITI WATSAN Activity. USAID WATSAN is 
a project to help improve access to water and sanitation services in Haiti.
The purpose of the study is to understand the extent to which USAID WATSAN was successful meeting 
its objectives, to assess what were the most important challenges it faces, and to identify lessons learned 
and good practices that might help future water and sanitation initiatives in Haiti or elsewhere I was 
given your contact information by DAI. We are conducting focus group discussions with CTE 
Management Staff to learn about their participation and perception of the project. 
Request
Your organization received technical assistance from USAID/Haiti project to improve their water and 
sanitation services. Your experiences with DAI and the USAID WATSAN project will help us to assess 
whether the assistance was effective or not. We would like, with the help of this Focus Group, to learn 
about your impressions, opinions and thoughts about various issues related to the USAID WATSAN 
project’s implementation and outcomes. We are independent consultants who have no affiliation with 
the firms and institutions that implemented USAID WATSAN, nor do we represent any other private 
sector firm in the water/sanitation sector, nor are we from or represent the Government of Haiti. You 
will be taking part in 1 of 24 focus groups that are being organized.
Procedures: Today we are going to discuss your experience and opinion of the support received and 
the activities you participated in as part of the USAID WATSAN project. The discussion with last about 
an hour and a half. Your answers will be kept confidential. DAI has shared your information with us but 
will not know whether you chose to participate or any details of your response. As part of the 
evaluation, we may share our notes from this interview with USAID for posting to a public database. 
However, the notes we may share will not contain your name, title, organization or any details that 
could identify you as a source of information Due to the private nature of this research, we ask that all 
focus group participants agree not to share anything that is discussed with anyone outside of this group 
once this conversation ends. Nonetheless, there is a risk that other discussion participants will repeat 
what is shared here today. Remember that you are free to refuse to answer any question.
Risks/Benefits: You will not receive any direct benefit or compensation for participating in this 
discussion group, either from Social Impact or from [XXX]. If you have not already, you will be provided 
with a credit stipend of [amount] to cover the data costs of participating.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 114
Voluntary Participation: Participation in this discussion group is completely voluntary. Your 
participation in this focus group discussion is voluntary and will not impact the services you have 
received or may receive in the future. If at any point, any of you don’t want to continue, please let me 
know. You can opt out at a later time if you wish by informing by speaking or private message the 
facilitator at any time during the course of the discussion.
Do you have any questions? [Interviewer should answer any questions]
Contacts: If you have any questions or concerns about your rights as a participant, you may contact 
[name and affiliation of local contact] at [number and/or email] or the Social Impact Institutional Review 
Board at irb@socialimpact.com or +1 703 465 1884 or at kfelizor@socialimpact.com or +509 3198 
6328. I will leave a copy of this form with you.
Permission to Proceed
If you accept, we would like to record our conversation. The purpose of the recording is to help us with 
our notetaking. Only the evaluation team will have access to the recording, and we will destroy it once 
we have completed our notes
I understand the purpose of the interview as outlined above and understand that I can withdraw from 
the interview at any time and for any reason. I agree to participate in the interview (Evaluator records).
Yes No
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be interviewed:
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be recorded: 
Date _________________________
Brief Description of FGD Process
This will be conducted as a focus group. I will ask a series of questions to the group and facilitate some 
discussion. We want everyone to feel free to express themselves and participate, especially if you have a 
different opinion than what is being shared by others. Not everybody needs to respond to each question, 
though we hope you to speak up if you have something to share. Because we are having this discussion 
over Zoom/WhatsApp instead of in person, I may call on individuals to make sure everyone has an 
opportunity to contribute. If at any point you do not wish to respond you can say so.
G – OREPA 
Date:
Facilitator:
Primary Notetaker Name:
115 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
Respondent Summary:
FOCUS GROUP CONTACT SCRIPT
Introduction and Purpose: My name is [NAME]. I am a researcher representing s [Name of TBD 
local data collection firm based in Haiti] and Social Impact, a company that is based in the United States. 
Our team is conducting an evaluation study of the USAID/HAITI WATSAN Project. USAID WATSAN is 
a project to help improve access to water and sanitation services in Haiti.
The purpose of the study is to understand the extent to which USAID WATSAN was successful meeting 
its objectives, to assess what were the most important challenges it faces, and to identify lessons learned 
and good practices that might help future water and sanitation initiatives in Haiti or elsewhere I was 
given your contact information by DAI. We are conducting focus group discussions with OREPA Reginal 
Directors to learn about their participation and perception of the project. 
Request
Your organization received technical assistance from USAID/Haiti project to improve their water and 
sanitation services. Your experiences with DAI and the USAID WATSAN Project will help us to assess 
whether the assistance was effective or not. We would like, with the help of this Focus Group, to learn 
about your impressions, opinions and thoughts about various issues related to the USAID WATSAN 
project’s implementation and outcomes. We are independent consultants who have no affiliation with 
the firms and institutions that implemented USAID WATSAN, nor do we represent any other private 
sector firm in the water/sanitation sector, nor are we from or represent the Government of Haiti. You 
will be taking part in 1 of 24 focus groups that are being organized. 
Procedures: If you agree to participate in the Focus Group Discussion, we will ask the group members 
to talk about their experience and opinion of the activities and services implemented under the USAID
WATSAN Project. The discussion will take about 90 minutes of your time. 
Because of the current public health situation, the focus group discussion will be conducted online using 
WhatsApp and/or Zoom. If you agree to participate, we will provide you the details about the date and 
time of the call and provide you with credit to allow you to access the Internet for the call.
You are under no obligation to participate. 
Do you agree to participate?
Yes No
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be interviewed:
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be recorded: 
Date _________________________
INFORMED CONSENT AGREEMENT – FGD
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 116
Thank you all for agreeing to participate in todays’ call.
Introduction and Purpose: My name is [NAME]. I am a researcher representing s [Name of TBD 
local data collection firm based in Haiti] and Social Impact, a company that is based in the United States. 
Our team is conducting an evaluation study of the USAID/HAITI WATSAN Activity. USAID WATSAN is 
a project to help improve access to water and sanitation services in Haiti.
The purpose of the study is to understand the extent to which USAID WATSAN was successful meeting 
its objectives, to assess what were the most important challenges it faces, and to identify lessons learned 
and good practices that might help future water and sanitation initiatives in Haiti or elsewhere I was 
given your contact information by DAI. We are conducting focus group discussions USAID WATSAN 
Stakeholders including OREPA directors to learn about their participation and perception of the project. 
Request
Your organization received technical assistance from USAID/Haiti project to improve their water and 
sanitation services. Your experiences with DAI and the USAID WATSAN project will help us to assess 
whether the assistance was effective or not. We would like, with the help of this Focus Group, to learn 
about your impressions, opinions and thoughts about various issues related to the USAID WATSAN 
project’s implementation and outcomes. We are independent consultants who have no affiliation with 
the firms and institutions that implemented USAID WATSAN, nor do we represent any other private 
sector firm in the water/sanitation sector, nor are we from or represent the Government of Haiti. You 
will be taking part in 1 of 24 focus groups that are being organized.
Procedures: Today we are going to discuss your experience and opinion of the support received and 
the activities you participated in as part of the USAID WATSAN project. The discussion with last about 
an hour and a half. Your answers will be kept confidential. DAI has shared your information with us but 
will not know whether you chose to participate or any details of your response. As part of the 
evaluation, we may share our notes from this interview with USAID for posting to a public database. 
However, the notes we may share will not contain your name, title, organization or any details that 
could identify you as a source of information. Due to the private nature of this research, we ask that all 
focus group participants agree not to share anything that is discussed with anyone outside of this group 
once this conversation ends. Nonetheless, there is a risk that other discussion participants will repeat 
what is shared here today. Remember that you are free to refuse to answer any 
question. Risks/Benefits: You will not receive any direct benefit or compensation for participating in 
this discussion group, either from Social Impact or from [XXX]. If you have not already, you will be 
provided with a credit stipend of [amount] to cover the data costs of participating.
Voluntary Participation: Participation in this discussion group is completely voluntary. Your 
participation in this focus group discussion is voluntary and will not impact the services you have 
received or may receive in the future. If at any point, any of you don’t want to continue, please let me 
know. If you wish to stop the survey at any point please tell the data enumerator by speaking or private 
message.
Do you have any questions? [Interviewer should answer any questions]
Contacts: If you have any questions or concerns about your rights as a participant, you may contact 
[name and affiliation of local contact] at [number and/or email] or the Social Impact Institutional Review 
Board at irb@socialimpact.com or +1 703 465 1884 or at kfelizor@socialimpact.com or +509 3198 
6328. I will leave a copy of this form with you.
117 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
Permission to Proceed
If you accept, we would like to record our conversation. The purpose of the recording is to help us with 
our notetaking. Only the evaluation team will have access to the recording, and we will destroy it once 
we have completed our notes
I understand the purpose of the interview as outlined above and understand that I can withdraw from 
the interview at any time and for any reason. I agree to participate in the interview (Evaluator records).
Yes No
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be interviewed:
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent to be recorded: 
Date _________________________
Brief Description of FGD Process
This will be conducted as a focus group. I will ask a series of questions to the group and facilitate some 
discussion. We want everyone to feel free to express themselves and participate, especially if you have a 
different opinion than what is being shared by others. Not everybody needs to respond to each question, 
though we hope you to speak up if you have something to share. Because we are having this discussion 
over Zoom/WhatsApp instead of in person, I may call on individuals to make sure everyone has an 
opportunity to contribute. If at any point you do not wish to respond you can say so.
H- CTE STAFF SURVEY
INFORMED CONSENT AGREEMENT
Introduction and Purpose: Thank you for taking the time to speak with us today. My name is 
[NAME]. I am a researcher representing s [Name of TBD local data collection firm based in Haiti] I and 
Social Impact, a company that is based in the United States. Our team is conducting an evaluation study 
of the USAID/HAITI WATSAN Project. USAID WATSAN is a project to help improve access to water 
and sanitation services in Haiti.
The purpose of the study is to understand the extent to which USAID WATSAN was successful meeting 
its objectives, to assess what were the most important challenges it faces, and to identify lessons learned 
and good practices that might help future water and sanitation initiatives in Haiti or elsewhere. We are 
speaking to you today because you collaborated directly with USAID WATSAN or with USAID
WATSAN partners, are involved in the water/sanitation sector, or because you may have been directly 
or indirectly affected by the USAID WATSAN Project interventions.
The objective of this CTE staff survey is to see how the WATSAN CTE capacity building and support 
affected CTE staff capacity and how the changes in management affected CTE staff in their day-to-day 
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 118
work with the CTE. Request: We would like your opinions about various issues related to this project’s 
implementation and outcomes. We are independent consultants who have no affiliation with the firms 
and institutions that implemented USAID WATSAN, nor do we represent any other private sector firm 
in the water/sanitation sector, nor are we from or represent the Government of Haiti. Approximately 
70 people will be surveyed. 
Voluntary Participation: Your participation in this survey is voluntary and will not impact the services 
you have received or may receive in the future. You do not have to agree to participate in this study. 
You are free to end the survey at any time or to decline to answer any question which you do not wish 
to answer. If you decline to participate in the survey, no one will be informed of this. If you wish to stop 
the survey at any point please tell the data enumerator by voice or private message.
Risks/Benefits: There are no significant risks to your participation in this study. You will not receive 
any direct benefit or compensation for participating in this study. Although this study will not benefit you 
personally, we hope that our results will help improve potential future programs to increase access to 
water and sanitation services in Haiti.
Procedures: If you agree to participate, we will ask you to ask you a series of questions about your 
experience and opinion of the activities and services implemented under the USAID WATSAN Project 
and your role with the CTE. The survey will take about 30 minutes of your time. As part of the 
evaluation, we may share our notes from this interview with USAID for posting to a public database. 
However, the notes we may share will not contain your name, title, organization or any details that 
could identify you as a source of information.
Contacts: If you have any questions or concerns about your rights as a participant, you may contact 
[name and affiliation of local contact] at [number and/or email] or the Social Impact Institutional Review 
Board at irb@socialimpact.com or +1 703 465 1884 or at kfelizor@socialimpact.com or +509 3198 
6328. I will leave a copy of this form with you.
Do you have any questions? [Interviewer should answer any questions]
Permission to Proceed
I understand the purpose of the survey as outlined above and understand that I can withdraw from the 
survey at any time and for any reason. 
I agree to participate in the survey (evaluator records).
Yes / No
Initials of evaluator to indicate receipt of verbal consent: _____________________
Date ________________________
119 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE QUESTIONNAIRES 
USAID KII
1. Date: 
2. Start time:
3. End time:
4. Modality: in person/remote
5. Interviewer Name: 
6. Primary Notetaker Name: 
7. Respondent(s)Name(s)
8. Respondent(s) Title(s): 
9. Respondent Organization: 
10. [Separate: Respondent contact information]
11. Anyone else present:
12. # Months Respondent has worked with the organization: 
13. Sex of respondent:
Questions
1. What is your role in your organization and how does it relate to the WATSAN activity?
2. How long have you been in this role?
3. What was your experience of working with DAI and other Implementing Partners?
a. Probe for details, successes, challenges.
4. What was your experience working with and including the GOH in the WATSAN activities?
5. How was your experience/understanding of implementation, regarding star- up of the 
project, mid-point and close out?
6. Please describe your experience of using the Water Utility Turnaround Framework? 
7. Probe for successes and probe for challenges.
8. What do you think were the biggest successes of the WATSAN project?
a. Probe Water, HH sanitation, FSM, governance, sustainability
9. What do you think were the biggest challenges of the WATSAN project? 
a. Probe Water, HH sanitation, FSM, governance, sustainability
10. Do you think there were any gaps in the support by the WATSAN project? 
a. Probe regarding water supply services, support to CTEs, sanitation services, support to 
SMEs?.
11. In terms of project outcomes were these what you expected? 
a. If yes - probe details If no - probe details 
12. Were there any project outcomes you did not expect? 
a. If yes - probe details
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 120
13. Please describe any impact on project implementation due to Natural Disasters, COVID, 
Political unrest, if so what and how have they impacted WATSAN?
14. What was your experience of monitoring the WATSAN activity? 
a. Were data quality assessments completed
b. Probe details regarding specific indicator tracking, reporting issues?
15. Can you share any lessons learned, pros or cons of the monitoring process?
16. Did DAI and/or the IP bring Gender/GESI into the implementation, if so how?
17. Do you feel the WATSAN project addressed sustainability? if so how? 
18. What are your thoughts on EQ1
19. What are your thoughts on EQ2
20. What are your thoughts on EQ3
21. Is there anything else you would like to mention or discuss about the WATSAN activity?
ENTERPRISE ACCELERATION FUND (EAF) GI | 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES DURATION
EAF Project Name: 
1. Date: 
2. Start time:
3. End time:
4. Modality: in person/remote
5. Interviewer name:
6. Primary notetaker name:
7. Respondent(s) title(s): 
8. Respondent organization:
9. # months respondent has worked with the organization: 
10. Sex of respondent: 
[Separate: Respondent contact information]
11. Respondent(s) name(s)
12. Anyone else present:
QUESTIONS 
1. What is your role at your organization and how long have you been in this role? 
2. How does your role relate to the USAID WATSAN Project?
 What are your thoughts about the EAF funding application process? 
a. Probe: what went well?
b. Probe: what could have gone better?
3. How long did the EAF funding application process take? [please tick one]
▪ Less than a month
▪ Between 1 month and 2 months
▪ Between 2 months and 4 months
▪ Between 4 and 6 months
121 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
▪ More than 6 months
▪ DK
4. What support did USAID WATSAN project provide during the EAF funding application process? 
5. Would you recommend any modifications to the EAF funding application process?
Probe: if yes, what and why?
6. Please describe how EAF funds were used on the project?
7. Where the funds sufficient or not?
Probe: if not, please explain
8. Did your use of the EAF funding change over time?
Probe: if yes, please explain.
9. What was your experience of the EAF project implementation process? 
Probe: positive experiences
Probe: challenges, including the Payment By Results modality
10. Apart from funding, what support did USAID WATSAN project provide during the EAF project 
implementation process? 
Probe: technical support/training for your particular field of work?
Probe: non-technical support/training relevant to your particular business activity?
Probe: how was the support/training delivered (face to face, online, other) and by who?
11. Can you describe the EAF project outputs and their current status? 
Probe: details of achievements
Probe: details of challenges/difficulties with delivering outputs 
12. What were the overall results from using the EAF funding? 
Probe: unexpected project impacts? Details?
13. Please describe how your business and client base has or has not developed/increased compared 
to before the implementation of the EAF grant. 
Probe: if yes, in what ways and how? Success factors?
Probe: if no, why not? Factors negatively affecting your business?
14. On reflection, what are the strengths of your business and client base now? 
15. On reflection, what are the weaknesses of your business and client base now? 
16. Looking forward into the future, what are the opportunities for your business and client base?
17. Looking forward into the future, what threats are there to your business and client base? 
18. Where do you see your business and client base in six months’ time?
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 122
19. How was the progress of you EAF project monitored?
Probe: positive and negative aspects of monitoring process
Probe: from the monitoring process could you please share any lessons learned about the project? Do 
you take sustainability into account for your businesses and services? If so, how?
Probe if so, what if any impacts has/does the EAF project have on sustainability? 
Have there been impacts on the project due to natural disasters, COVID-19 or political unrest (including 
fuel issues)? 
Probe: If yes, please describe them 
20. Please describe the communication between you and your team with DAI during the application 
process and implement?
Probe: issues, recommendations for improvement
21. In what ways, if any, were gender (both women and men) considered as a part of activity
implementation?
Probe: Did USAID WATSAN project provide you (or your organization) any training, 
guidance, or other resources related to gender? If yes – please describe.
Probe: Were there any gender differences in how activities were implemented? If yes, 
please share any observations related to enabling factors, or barriers, to reaching both 
women and men.
Probe: Do you take gender into account regarding the services you provide, if yes, 
how?Probe: are there any differences in the number of men and women using your 
services and/or the way they access your services?
22. Is there anything else you would like to mention or discuss about your use of and experience 
with the EAF grant for your business?
ONEPA KII | 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES DURATION
1. Date: 
2. Start time:
3. End time:
4. Modality: in person/remote
5. Interviewer name:
6. Primary notetaker name:
7. Respondent(s) name(s):
8. Respondent(s) title(s):
9. Respondent organization: 
[Separate: Respondent contact information]
10. Anyone else present:
123 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
11. # months respondent has worked with the organization: 
12. Sex of respondent:
QUESTIONS
1. What is your role in ONEPA, and how long have you been in this role?
2. How does it relate to the USAID WATSAN Project?
3. What activities have you individually taken part in as part of the USAID WATSAN Project?
4. How do you or others at ONEPA use mWater data?
5. Please discuss your experience/understanding regarding how the CTEs manage and upload the 
mWater data?
6. What decisions does mWater data enable and how?
7. How do you or others at ONEPA use SIGA data?
8. Please discuss your experience/understanding regarding how the CTEs manage and use SIGA 
data. What decisions does SIGA data enable and how?
9. How do you or others at ONEPA use SISKLOR data? What decisions does SIGA data enable 
and how?
10. Please discuss your experience/understanding regarding how the CTEs manage and use SISKLOR 
data. What decisions does the SISKLOR data enable?
11. How do you or others at ONEPA use QuickBooks information? What decisions does the 
QuickBooks information enable?
12. Please discuss your experience/understanding regarding how the CTEs manage and use 
QuickBooks. 
--
13. What is ONEPA’s experience of managing all this data?
Probe: successes
Probe: challenges
Probe: gaps in data collection/analysis management capacity
Probe: data usage opportunities
Probe: data usage constraints
14. How is all this data influencing decision-making and planning on a day-to-day and month-to￾month basis?
15. How do you think this data/information management does or does not affect the capacity of the 
CTEs to grow their businesses?
16. Please describe your experience of using the Water Utility Turnaround Framework. 
Probe: successes and challenges
17. Do you feel there is a difference between the CTEs that had direct USAID WATSAN support 
and the other CTEs in the country who were not directly supported by USAID WATSAN? 
18. In terms of project outcomes, were these what you expected? 
Probe: details for all responses
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 124
19. Were there any project impacts you did not expect? 
Probe: for details
20. Have you had any opportunities to share your knowledge and skills with colleagues/CTEs? 
Probe: for details on how knowledge sharing is managed/encouraged
21. What is your experience regarding the USAID WATSAN activities in the sanitation sector?
Probe: for details, success and challenges for different project activities
22. Has the USAID WATSAN Project addressed the sustainability of the CTEs and the water supply 
service delivery and sanitation service delivery? 
23. How, if at all, does this relate to ONEPAs longer-termsustainability?
24. Please share your thoughts on the success and challenges of the USAID WATSAN project. In 
the sanitation and water sector
25. What do you think should be the ONEPA’s main area of focus in 2022?
26. Looking into the future, what you do you feel ONEPA is doing regarding increasing access to 
water and sanitation services in Haiti?
27. Have there been impacts on the project due to natural disasters, COVID-19, or political unrest? 
If so, what and how?
28. In what ways, if any, were gender (both women and men) considered as a part of activity
implementation?
Probe: Did USAID WATSAN provide you (or your organization) any training, guidance, 
or other resources related to gender? If yes – please describe.
Probe: Were there any gender differences in how activities were implemented? If yes, 
please share any observations related to enabling factors, or barriers, to reaching both 
women and men.
Probe: Do you take gender into account regarding the services you provide, if yes, how?
Probe: are there any differences in the number of men and women using your services 
and/or the way they access your services?
29. Did DAI or the CTEs take the needs of marginalized populations and how best to support them 
into account when implementing project activities? 
Probe: If yes, how
Probe: if no, why not?
30. Is there anything else you would like to mention or discuss about the USAID WATSAN Project?
125 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
IMPLEMENTING PARTNER GI | 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES DURATION
Centre et Formation d’Encadrement, Zanmi Lasante
1. Date: 
2. Start time:
3. End time:
4. Modality: in person/remote
5. Interviewer name:
6. Primary notetaker name:
7. Respondent(s) name(s):
8. Respondent(s) title(s):
9. Respondent organization: 
[Separate: Respondent contact information]
10. Anyone else present:
11. # months respondent has worked with the organization: 
12. Sex of respondent:
QUESTIONS
1. What is your role in [NAME OF IP], and how long have you been in this role?
2. How does your role relate to the USAID WATSAN activity?
3. What activities have you individually taken part in as part of the USAID WATSAN project?
4. What, if any, support did USAID WATSAN provide during the USAID WATSAN contracting 
process? 
5. Would you recommend any modifications to the USAID WATSAN contracting process? 
Probe: if yes, what and why 
6. How were USAID WATSAN funds used? 
Probe: sufficient or not? Please explain.
Did your use of the USAID WATSAN funding change over time?
Probe: if yes, record details
7. What was your experience of the USAID WATSAN Project implementation process? 
Probe: positive experiences and challenges. 
8. Apart from funding, what support did USAID WATSAN provide during the project 
implementation process? 
Probe: technical support/training for your particular field of work?
Probe: non-technical support/training relevant to your particular business activity?
Probe: how was the support/training delivered (face to face, online, other) and by who?
9. Can you describe the USAID WATSAN Project outputs and their current status? 
Probe: achievements, details; if no, probe for details.
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 126
10. Overall, what were the results from your organization using the USAID WATSAN funding? 
Probe: unexpected project impacts?
Did you or DAI monitor the USAID WATSAN Project? Probe: positive and negative 
aspects of monitoring process
Probe: from the monitoring process could you please share any lessons learned about 
the project?
23. Do you take sustainability into account for your businesses and services? If so, how?
Probe if so, what if any impacts has/does the project have on sustainability? 
24. Have there been impacts on your project due to natural disasters, COVID-19 or political unrest 
(including fuel issues)? 
Probe: if yes, please describe them 
25. In what ways, if any, were gender (both women and men) considered as a part of activity
implementation?
Probe: Did USAID WATSAN provide you (or your organization) any training, guidance, 
or other resources related to gender? If yes – please describe.
Probe: Were there any gender differences in how activities were implemented? If yes, 
please share any observations related to enabling factors, or barriers, to reaching both 
women and men.
Probe: Do you take gender into account regarding the services you provide, if yes, how?
Probe: are there any differences in the number of men and women using your services 
and/or the way they access your services?
26. Did DAI or the [name of IP] take needs of marginalized populations and how best to support
them to them into account when implementing project activities? 
Probe: If yes, how
Probe: if no, why not?
27. Is there anything else you would like to mention or discuss about your use of and experience 
with the USAID WATSAN project and/or DAI?
127 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
DAI GI CTE LIAISON OFFICERS | 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES DURATION
1. Date: 
2. Start time:
3. End time:
4. Modality: in person/remote
5. Interviewer name:
6. Primary notetaker name:
7. Respondent(s) name(s):
8. Respondent(s) title(s):
9. Respondent organization: 
[Separate: Respondent contact information]
10. Anyone else present:
11. # months respondent has worked with the organization: 
12. Sex of respondent:
QUESTIONS 
1. For which CTE(s) are you the Liaison Officer for and how long have you been in this role?
2. What is your role as CTE Liaison Officer and how does it relate to supporting the work of the 
CTE?
Probe: for successes and challenges.
3. What support were you involved in providing for CTE staff? 
Probe: technical support/training for your CTE water supply functions?
Probe: non-technical support/training relevant to CTE business development?
Probe: how was the support/training delivered (face to face, online, other) and by who?
We are now going to talk with you about the various water utility management software packages used by the 
CTE/CTEs in their day-to-day operations.
4. Please describe your experience with the CTEs of using the Water Utility Turnaround 
Framework? 
Probe: for successes and challenges.
5. How is the Operational Manual useful to the CTEs?
Probe: for successes and challenges
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 128
6. What has been the impact/experience of using mWater for the CTEs and DINEPA/ONEPA?
Probe: for successes and challenges
Probe: what decisions has mWater data enabled for your CTE?
7. What has been the impact/experience of QuickBooks for the CTEs and DINEPA/ONEPA? 
Probe: for successes and challenges
Probe: what decisions has QuickBooks enabled for your CTE?
8. What has been the experience of SIGA for the CTEs and DINEPA/ONEPA? 
Probe: for successes and challenges
Probe: what decisions has SIGA enabled for your CTE?
9. What has been the experience of SISKLOR for the CTEs and DINEPA/ONEPA? 
Probe: for successes and challenges
Probe: what decisions has SISKLOR enabled for your CTE?
10. How did DAI and the CTE use the budget for operational and planning, and has this changed 
over the course of the project? If so, how? Please describe the impacts.
11. How do the CTEs manage collection of tariffs, and has this changed over the course of the 
project? If so, how? Please describe the impacts.
12. Do you feel the tariff is appropriate for the services provided? 
Probe: Are clients willing to pay for the services?
13. How do you think the CTEs can continue to grow and increase their revenue? 
14. What is the approach of the CTE to non-revenue water losses? 
15. How does the CTE retain current subscribers?
16. How does the CTE recruit and manage new subscribers? 
Probe: subscribers’ goal, how does the CTE meet those goals?
17. What has been the impact/experience of the kiosks (if any) in your system, and how has this 
effected the client base?
18. What do you think attracts people to work at the CTE?
19. What do you think are the reasons why staff leave the CTE?
Pause here, if necessary.
129 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
20. In terms of project impacts for CTEs, were these what you expected? 
Probe: if yes for details
Probe: if no for details
21. Were there any project impacts for CTEs you did not expect? If yes, probe for details.
22.
23. Have there been impacts on the project due to natural disasters, COVID-19 or political unrest 
(including fuel issues)? 
Probe: If yes, please describe them 
24. What are your thoughts on how USAID WATSAN activities will continue after the USAID
WATSAN Project ends? 
25. What are or should be the future business development priorities for the CTEs regarding water 
supply services? 
26. In what ways, if any, were gender (both women and men) considered as a part of activity
implementation?
Probe: Did USAID WATSAN provide you (or your organization) any training, guidance, 
or other resources related to gender? If yes – please describe.
Probe: Were there any gender differences in how activities were implemented? If yes, 
please share any observations related to enabling factors, or barriers, to reaching both 
women and men.
Probe: Do you take gender into account regarding the services you provide, if yes, how?
Probe: are there any differences in the number of men and women using your services 
and/or the way they access your services?
27. Did DAI and your CTEs take the needs of marginalized populations and how best to support 
them into account when implementing project activities? 
Probe: If yes, how, if no, why not?
28. Is there anything else you would like to discuss about your experience of working with the 
CTEs?
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 130
OREPA FGD | 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES DURATION
1. Date: 
2. Start time
3. End time
4. Interviewer name: 
5. Primary notetaker name: 
PARTICIPANT NAME SEX JOB TITLE COMMUNE
QUESTIONS 
1. What was the experience of OREPA working with USAID WATSAN? 
Probe: for details.
2. Please describe OREPA’s experience of using the Water Utility Turnaround Framework? 
Probe: for successes and challenges. 
3. What is your opinion of the capacity of the CTEs to manage data (mWater, SIGA, SISKLOR, 
Quickbooks) and how has this changed over the course of the project?How is this data enabling 
decision-making and planning on a day-to-day and month-to-month basis? 
4. If so, how and please describe the impacts. 
Probe: mWater.
Probe: SIGA.
Probe: SISKLOR.
Probe: Quickbooks.
5. How do you all think this data/information management is affecting the capacity of the CTEs to 
grow their businesses?
6. Does OREPA have a knowledge-sharing program? If so, how is knowledge sharing encouraged 
and managed? 
Probe: is there knowledge sharing between CTEs?
7. Has the USAID WATSAN Project addressed the sustainability of the CTE to deliver water 
supply services and sanitation services?
131 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
Probe: to new customers?
Probe: to existing customers in terms of service quality?
8. Have there been impacts on the project due to natural disasters, COVID-19, or political unrest? 
If so, what and how have they affected the project?
9. In what ways, if any, were gender (both women and men) considered as a part of activity
implementation?
Probe: Did USAID WATSAN provide you (or your organization) any training, guidance, 
or other resources related to gender? If yes – please describe.
Probe: Were there any gender differences in how activities were implemented? If yes, 
please share any observations related to enabling factors, or barriers, to reaching both 
women and men.
Probe: Do you take gender into account regarding the services you provide, if yes, how?
10. Probe: are there any differences in the number of men and women using your services and/or 
the way they access your services?
11. What activities did you support or were in your region regarding sanitation activities for the 
WATSAN USAID project
Probe: success, challenges, details on activities undertaken. 
12. What do you think should be OREPA’s main area of focus this year?
13. Is there anything else you would like to mention or discuss about the USAID WATSAN activity 
and its support to CTEs?
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 132
SMALL MEDIUM ENTERPRISE FGD | 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES DURATION
1. Date: 
2. Start time
3. End time
4. Interviewer name: 
5. Primary notetaker name: 
PARTICIPANT NAME SEX JOB TITLE COMMUNE
QUESTIONS 
1. What did your SME accomplish with support from USAID WATSAN? 
2. What activities did you participate in as part of the USAID WATSAN project?
Probe: details, thoughts on trainings, information/materials provided, success, challenges
3. What are some success and/or challenges you faced when working with USAID WATSAN? 
4. Please explain/describe how or how not your organization’s capacity changed during your 
participation in the USAID WATSAN project? 
a. Probe for capacity building.
5. As a group, what do you think about the sustainability of the services you provide?
6. Has there been a trend in the change in the number of customers? If so, please explain?
7. Has there been a trend in the change of your SME’s revenue? If so, please explain.
8. Has there been a trend in the change in the number of services you provide? If so, please explain.
9. Will you or any of your customers use an FSM site for fecal sludge disposal?
a. Probe why or why not.
10. How do clients transport material to the FSM, what are the challenges with transportation for 
the FSMs and/or for the users/clients?
11. What FSM activities are being funded by other organizations (WB, IDB etc) and what have been 
the successes and challenges of this collaboration?
12. What are the strengths of your business and client base now? 
13. What are the weaknesses of your business and client base now? 
14. What are the opportunities for your business and client base now/in the future? 
15. What are the threats to your business and client base now/in the future? 
16. Where do you see your business and client base in six months’ time?
133 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
17. Have there been impacts on your activities/business due to natural disasters, COVID-19, or 
political unrest? If so, what and how have they affected the project?
18. In what ways, if any, were gender (both women and men) considered as a part of activity
implementation?
Probe: Did USAID WATSAN provide you (or your organization) any training, guidance, 
or other resources related to gender? If yes – please describe.
Probe: Were there any gender differences in how activities were implemented? If yes, 
please share any observations related to enabling factors, or barriers, to reaching both 
women and men.
Probe: Do you take gender into account regarding the services you provide, if yes, how?
Probe: are there any differences in the number of men and women using your services 
and/or the way they access your services?
19. Did DAI or the SME take the needs of marginalized populations and how to support them into 
account regarding the project activities? If so, how and why?
20. Is there anything else you would like to mention or discuss about the USAID WATSAN activity?
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 134
LATRINE EMPTIER ASSOCIATION FGD | 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES DURATION
1. Date: 
2. Start time
3. End time
4. Interviewer name: 
5. Primary notetaker name: 
PARTICIPANT NAME SEX JOB TITLE COMMUNE
QUESTIONS 
1. What activities did you participate in as LEA members, and what are your thoughts about 
USAID WATSAN implementation?
2. What were you able to do with support from USAID WATSAN with your LEA?
3. Can you please share the advantages and disadvantages of these activities?
4. Will you use an FSM site? 
Probe: why/why not. 
5. What are some successes and/or challenges you faced when working with USAID WATSAN?
6. Please explain/describe how or how not your organization’s capacity changed during your 
participation in the USAID WATSAN Project? 
Probe: for capacity building
7. How do clients transport material to the FSM, what are the challenges with transportation for 
the FSMs and/or for the users/clients?
8. What FSM activities are being funded by other organizations (WB, IDB etc) and what have been 
the successes and challenges of this collaboration?
9. Do you consider sustainability regarding the services you provide? If so, how? Please explain the 
importance.
10. Has there been a trend in the change in the number of customers? If so, please explain.
11. Has there been a trend in the change of revenue? If so, please explain.
12. Has there been a trend in the change in the number of services you provide? If so, please 
explain.
13. What are the strengths of your business and client base now? 
14. What are the weaknesses of your business and client base now? 
135 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
15. What are the opportunities for your business and client base now? 
16. What are the threats to your business and client base now?
17. Where do you see your business and client base in six months’ time?
18. Have there been impacts on your activities/business due to natural disasters, COVID-19, or 
political unrest? If so, what and how have they affected the project?
19. In what ways, if any, were gender (both women and men) considered as a part of activity
implementation?
Probe: Did USAID WATSAN provide you (or your organization) any training, guidance, 
or other resources related to gender? If yes – please describe.
Probe: Were there any gender differences in how activities were implemented? If yes, 
please share any observations related to enabling factors, or barriers, to reaching both 
women and men.
Probe: Do you take gender into account regarding the services you provide, if yes, how?
Probe: are there any differences in the number of men and women using your services 
and/or the way they access your services?
20. How do you take the needs of marginalized populations and how to support them into account 
regarding the work of the LEA? If so, how and why?
21. Is there anything else you would like to mention or discuss about the USAID WATSAN Project
and its work with you?
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 136
MAYORAL TASK FORCE FGD | 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES DURATION
• Date: 
• Start time
• End time
• Interviewer name: 
• Primary notetaker name: 
PARTICIPANT NAME SEX JOB TITLE COMMUNE
QUESTIONS 
1. What activities does the MTFparticipate in, and what are your thoughts about USAID WATSAN 
Project ?
2. What did you accomplish with support from USAID WATSAN?
3. Can you please share the advantages and disadvantages of these activities?
4. What are some of the successes you encountered when working with USAID WATSAN
Project?
5. What are some of the challenges you encountered when working with the USAID WATSAN
project?
6. Please explain/describe how or how not your organization’s capacity changed during your 
participation in the USAID WATSAN Project? 
Probe: for capacity building.
7. Do you consider sustainability regarding the services you provide? If so, how? Please explain the 
importance.
8. How do clients transport material to the FSM, what are the challenges with transportation for 
the FSMs and/or for the users/clients?
9. What FSM activities are being funded by other organizations (WB, IDB etc) and what have been 
the successes and challenges of this collaboration?
10. Has there been a trend in the change in the number of customers? If so, please explain.
11. Has there been a trend in the change of revenue? If so, please explain.
12. Has there been a trend in the change in the number of services you provide? If so, please 
explain.
13. Have there been impacts on your activities due to natural disasters, COVID-19, or political 
unrest? If so, what and how have they affected the project?
137 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
14. In what ways, if any, were gender (both women and men) considered as a part of activity
implementation?
Probe: Did USAID WATSAN provide you (or your organization) any training, guidance, 
or other resources related to gender? If yes – please describe.
Probe: Were there any gender differences in how activities were implemented? If yes, 
please share any observations related to enabling factors, or barriers, to reaching both 
women and men.
Probe: Do you take gender into account regarding the services you provide, if yes, how?
Probe: are there any differences in the number of men and women using your services 
and/or the way they access your services?
15. Did the MTF take the needs of marginalized populations and how to support them into account 
when planning and implementing their work?
Probe: examples If so, how and why?
16. Is there anything else you would like to mention or discuss about the USAID WATSAN Project 
and the work you are doing with the MTF?
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 138
CTE STAFF FGD | 2 HOURS DURATION
1. Date: 
2. Start time
3. End time
4. How many staff work at this CTE?
5. Interviewer name: 
6. Primary notetaker name: 
PARTICIPANT NAME SEX JOB TITLE COMMUNE
QUESTIONS 
1. When did your CTE start working with the USAID WATSAN Project?
2. What was your experience working with USAID WATSAN? 
a. Probe for details. 
3. Please describe your experience of using the Water Utility Turnaround Framework? 
a. Probe for successes and challenges.
4. How does the CTE manage data (mWater, SIGA, SISKLOR, Quick Books), and has this changed 
over the course of the project? If so, how? Please describe the impacts.
5. How is this data influencing decision-making, planning, and business development on a day-to￾day and month-to-month basis? 
6. How do your staff manage collection of tariffs? Has this change over the course of the project? If 
so, can you describe how and the impacts?
7. How can the CTE continue to grow and increase revenue? 
8. What is the approach towards minimising non-revenue water financial losses?
9. Do you feel the tariff is appropriate for the services provided? 
Please provide details, if clients are willing to pay and/or if complaints are received 
regarding costs.
10. How does the CTE recruit and manage new subscribers? 
Probe for subscribers’ goals and how the CTE meets those goals.
11. How does the CTE retain current subscribers?
12. Has the USAID WATSAN Project addressed the sustainability of the CTE and the water 
services? If so, please explain. 
139 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
13. How do you feel this CTE and ONEPA/OREPA is moving toward the future regarding managing 
water and increasing access in Haiti?
Pause if needed
14. What has been the impact/experience of the kiosks (if any) in your system, and how has this 
effected the client base? 
15. What attracts people to work at the CTE?
16. What are the reasons why staff leave the CTE?
17. Have you received any training? 
Probe: for details of the training, opinion about the utility of the training, advantages and 
disadvantages of trainings.
18. Does this CTE/OREPA/ONEPA have a knowledge sharing program? If so, how is knowledge 
sharing encouraged and managed? 
Probe: is there knowledge sharing between CTEs?
19. Have there been impacts on the project due to natural disasters, COVID-19, or political unrest? 
If so, what and how have they affected the project?
20. What are the business development priorities for your CTE?
21. What do you think should be the main area of focus for your CTE this year? 
22. In what ways, if any, were gender (both women and men) considered as a part of activity
implementation?
Probe: Did USAID WATSAN provide you (or your organization) any training, guidance, 
or other resources related to gender? If yes – please describe.
Probe: Were there any gender differences in how activities were implemented? If yes, 
please share any observations related to enabling factors, or barriers, to reaching both 
women and men.
Probe: Do you take gender into account regarding the services you provide, if yes, how?
Probe: are there any differences in the number of men and women using your services 
and/or the way they access your services?
23. Did your CTE take the needs of marginalized populations and how to support them into 
account when planning and implementing your work?
Probe: examples If so, how and why?
24. Is this CTE involved in any sanitation activities, please explain, do you feel this is an area of 
growth?
25. Is there anything else you would like to mention or discuss about the USAID WATSAN Project 
and its support to your CTE?
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 140
KIOSK MANAGERS FGD | 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES DURATION
1. Date: 
2. Start time
3. End time
4. Interviewer name: 
5. Primary notetaker name: 
PARTICIPANT NAME SEX JOB TITLE COMMUNE
QUESTIONS 
1. Can you please explain the kiosk services you provide to the community?
2. How many users visit the kiosk each day?
3. What are the hours of operation, and what are the peak hours? (Use the table below to provide 
answers.)
KIOSK NUMBER OF USERS HOURS OF 
OPERATION
PEAK HOURS
4. What support do you receive from the CTE/Living Water (delete as applicable)?
141 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
5. Has there been a trend in the change in the number of customers? If so, please explain.
6. Are users willing to pay for water? If not, please explain the issues clients face.
7. How do you manage the money for the kiosk and ensure money is available for repairs and bills 
(from CTE)?
8. Are you making a profit? If not, can you please provide details on the issues affecting this?
9. Has there been a trend in the change of revenue? If so, please explain.
10. Has there been a trend in the change in the number of services you provide? If so, please 
explain. (e.g., secondary distributes for household delivery)
11. What are the strengths of your business and client base now? 
12. What are the weaknesses of your business and client base now?
13. What are the opportunities for your business and client base now? 
14. What are the threats to your business and client base now? 
15. Where do you see your business and client base in six months’ time?
16. Do you consider sustainability regarding the services you provide? If so, how? Please explain the 
importance.
17. Have there been impacts on the project due to natural disasters, COVID-19, or political unrest?
If so, what and how have they affected the project?
18. Have you observed any changes in how women, men or children are using your services? If so, 
how, and why?
19. Is there anything else you would like to mention or discuss?
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 142
FECAL SLUDGE MANAGEMENT USER GI | 1 HOUR 30 MINUTES DURATION
1. Date: 
2. Start time:
3. End time:
4. Modality: in person/remote
5. Interviewer name:
6. Primary notetaker name:
7. Respondent(s) name(s):
8. Respondent(s) title(s): 
9. Respondent organization: 
[Separate: Respondent contact information]
10. Anyone else present:
11. # months respondent has worked with the organization: 
12. Sex of respondent:
QUESTIONS
1. How long have you been moving Fecal Sludge?
2. How much Fecal Sludge do you move per week?
3. Before the FSM site opened, where did you dispose of your fecal sludge?
4. How many clients do you have? 
5. Do you only use the FSM site now for disposal? if not where else do you empty your Fecal 
Sludge?
6. Why do you bring your FS to the FSM site?
7. What kind of clients do you serve? Probe regarding private household, business, institutions 
(schools, hospitals, etc.)
8. How do clients transport material to the FSM, what are the challenges with transportation for 
the FSMs and/or for the users/clients?
9. What FSM activities are being funded by other organizations (WB, IDB etc) and what have been 
the successes and challenges of this collaboration?
10. Has there been a change in your business since bring the FS to this FSM? If so, please explain? 
Probe regarding costs, ease of disposal, attractive to clients?
11. Do you recommend this site to other FS transporters, if so why?
12. What is your experience and opinion with the charges you levy to your customers for collecting 
their FS? What is your experience and opinion with the charges you pay the FSM for disposal?
13. What is your experience and opinion with the management of the FSM?
14. What is your experience and opinion with the FSM customer service?
15. What is your experience and opinion with the ease of use of the FSM site?
16. What is your experience and opinion with the wait times for disposal?
17. What is your experience and opinion with the treatment of the FS?
18. Looking back, what are the strengths of your business/bringing your FS to the FSM site?
143 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
19. Looking back, what are some of the weaknesses of your business/bringing your FS to the FSM 
site?
20. Looking forward, what are some of the opportunities you have bringing your FS to the FSM site?
21. Looking forward what are some of the threats your work faces bringing your FS to the FSM 
site?
22. What personal protection equipment do you use? And why?
23. Is there anything else you would like to mention or discuss about your use of the FSM site?
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 144
CTE STAFF SURVEY
1. Date: 
2. Surveyor name: 
3. Respondent name: 
4. Respondent job title: 
5. Respondent’s CTE: 
6. Commune: 
7. Sex of respondent: 
a. Male
b. Female
c. Other 
8. Do you have a formal written job description? 
a. Yes 
b. No 
c. Don’t know 
9. Are the expectations clear in your job description?
a. Yes 
b. No 
c. Not sure
10. How long have you worked at the CTE?
a. 0 - 1 year
b. 1- 2 years
c. 2 - 3 years 
d. 3 - 4 years
e. 4 - 5 years 
f. 6 or more years
11. Have you had a performance evaluation in the past year?
a. Yes 
b. No 
c. Don’t know
12. Is SIGA used at this CTE?
a. Yes 
b. No 
c. Don’t know
13. How would you rate the experience of using SIGA?
a. Positive
b. Neutral 
c. Negative 
d. NA
14. Is mWater used at this CTE?
a. Yes 
b. No 
c. Don’t know
145 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
15. How would you rate the experience of using mWater?
a. Positive
b. Neutral 
c. Negative 
d. NA
16. Is SISKLOR used at this CTE?
a. Yes 
b. No 
c. Don’t know
17. How would you rate the experience using Sisklor?
a. Positive 
b. Neutral 
c. Negative 
d. NA
18. Is QuickBooks used at this CTE?
a. Yes 
b. No 
c. Don’t know
19. How would you rate the experience using Quick Books?
a. Positive 
b. Neutral 
c. Negative 
d. NA
20. How do you feel about the services your organization provides to the community?
a. Positive
b. Neutral
c. Negative
d. NA
21. How do you feel about how the CTE manages gender issues within the CTE?
a. Positive
b. Neutral
c. Negative
d. NA
22. Have you participated in a sexual harassment training in the past 2 years?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Don't know
23. How do you feel about how DAI manages gender issues in its work with the CTEs?
a. Positive
b. Neutral
c. Negative
d. NA
24. How do you feel about how the CTE manages gender issues in the community?
a. Positive
USAID.GOV USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | 146
b. Neutral
c. Negative
d. NA
25. Would you agree that the capacity of the CTE has improved over the past two years? 
a. Yes 
b. No 
c. Don’t know
26. Do you agree that the services that the CTE provides have been improved in the past two 
years? 
a. Yes 
b. No 
c. Don’t know
27. Are you familiar with the operations manual? 
a. Yes 
b. No 
c. Don’t know
28. What improvements do you think the CTE should focus on next? (rate your top three)
a. Training/capacity building of CTE staff (water engineering,plumbing, repairs)
b. Training/capacity building of CTE staff (information management, e.g. use of mWater
c. Gender equality among staff
d. Promoting CTE water supply services
e. Reducing downtime
f. Customer communications
g. Compliant management and response
h. Better prioritization of repairs
i. Developing pricing structure
j. Making better use of mWater data
k. Making better use of SIGA data?
l. Making better use of SISKLOR data?
m. Making better use of QuickBooks data?
n. Expansion of water supply services to new areas
o. Getting involved in providing sanitation services
p. Other (please state)
29. Do you feel the tariff is appropriate for the water supply services provided? 
a. Yes 
b. No 
c. Neutral
30. Are clients willing to pay for the services? 
a. Yes 
b. No
c. Neutral
31. Is the service valued in the community
a. Yes 
b. No
147 | USAID WATSAN FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID.GOV
c. Neutral