Management was strengthened by the Economic Management Plan (EMP), already started during Phase III. The EMP is a Business Plan with targets that had to be negotiated between Top Management and managers. Achievement of these targets was tied to incentives. It worked very well (refer for more details to the annex report EMP (1999-2004). Monitoring requires information and explains the need for an IT accounting system (achieved in 2001) with cost centres that could be linked to the EMP targets. Note, however, that it proved impossible to assign staff to cost centres.
Cost control was effective in reducing the costs of Water Production and was due by i.a. reduction of chemical dosing and of course the economies of scales of NEAT. It could have even better if the Management could bring itself to close the old obsolete plants. Too painful to dismiss staff that had been for many years with the company. Another major effort concerned the reduction of the Unaccounted-For Water (UFW) (some 70%) by creating 5 fully-equipped Unaccounted-For-Water (UFW) teams: these teams were highly successful in reducing water losses but remained an unfortunately a Consultants’ activity and were dismissed after the completion of the project. The activity also identified the need for accurate network information. An initial activity managed by a Bilateral Assistant Expert (not on the budget of this project) to investigate the possibility of a Geographic Information System evolved after the fullhearted embrace of the Company who agreed to finance 50% of its costs, in a full-fledged Asset Management System. Dataloggers enabled better network monitoring that were visualised in service-delivery maps (enclosed).
The second prong of our approach, revenue management, aimed to upgrade the existing billing system, developed in Phase II by another Bilateral Assistant Expert, and the ease the access of consumers by creating Branch Consumer Offices (BCOs). A Revolving Fund for Sewer Connections was established that was not very active during this Phase but proved to be very effective in the next Phase when Sanitation actually came to Fayoum. Replacement of the billing system proved to be very costly and was solved in a co-financing arrangement with USAID, with this Project supplying the hardware. Upgrading the software proved to be a very complicated process of long duration due to complications of the data migration. Network performance was further improved by removing bottlenecks in the network (budget provided for in the TA contract) and the commission of the Gabel Saad trunk line. A feasibility study concluded that the extension of NEAT was justified. A similar arrangement as with NEAT I, i.e. co-financing with the Netherlands (E/M Equipment) and construction management by the Alexandria Water Utility, was duly set up.
Implementation of this Project has been realised with major inputs of the Company staff. The Task Forces set up in Phase I evolved in special Task Teams that owned the activity. This was the case in Phase IV with the upgrading of the Old El Azab Treatment Plant (started up in Phase IV), starting-up of NEAT, and the UFW-Teams. A reason for concern was the understanding that incentives were paid with risks for sustainability. It even turned sour when the project entered in competition with USAID but that was fortunately sorted out. It was a landmark when the Supervisory Board approved performance-based incentives for the Production Department against opposition of the employees. It was therefore only fitting that the conclusion of this Phase was celebrated in an Open House at NEAT (April 2004) where all departments were given the opportunity to demonstrate their achievements.
Downloads
