r - part - usaid

stretegy, WDA support for these activities did not continue.
Tba result is that the water coraittees organized at the start
of the ~rojsct, are not now significantly involved in the
nanagemant a£ the facilities, Many cumittee menbers believe
*that WDA failed ta faLLow through on agraemenxs to consult with
them an nanagement decisions, such as water fees, fuel supplies,
and the use of revenues generated by well operations, Several
leaders nentioned that they thought the weLl was to be a
=owr?nity well, bxt now wic-ut it as a=tother WDA well and outside
their contr02.
(ii) Camunity participation and c~r;trZbxti~~s,
Villagers ~ ade substanria;
the project, ?key LncTude:
during stages
Xnfomation on sozf osco~o~ic eondf tXons, well opcrat f ons
a2d pralect effects.
Labor and sateriafs for drilling, canstructfon and some
maintenance operat ims,
food and cash coztribctions during drilling and
c~2stxuct
io~.
Papent of user fees on a regular basis after p!;mp
operatians begiz,
Coordinaticn and supervisisn of villager contributions.
tontr~l of animals arouzd the civil wcuks afid cleaning of
khe storage tank,
Contributions kc drilling crews are presented in the Table
2*3,23, These cantrFSx- .ions include labcr inputs, and qiSt=i of
cash, animals, and staples, Zo work cxews during drilling, pump
testizg and constrzction of civil uorks.
T&le 2.3.23, belcv, shows tha? cornunities where there was
soEe effort by social scientists znd/or technical staff trained
rc prozote partic'-rtion, -Y tke. level of contrib~tians were more
than three ~Fxes higher th22 in those where the CAPP approach
uzs noz used. Data available fcr Eazr villages in which civil
works sere constrzcte5 reveals a similar pattern and level of
c~zrributions. Table 2,3.24 shsvs cozmunity labor inputs during
drillizg, pump zesting, and cczsrr3~~tion af civil works.