FW: Background Info re NC Proposal for Potential Programming
Nigel Lowe
Shared for information
From: Nigel Lowe
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2013 7:02 AM
Subject: Background Info re NC Proposal for Potential Programming
Hi Tom, (and also Mark, Leon, and Jan)
Only for own reference please. I confirm there IS nothing committing anyone or anything to this at this stage. This is all merely for some ‘internal personal consultation’. But my hopes ARE frankly high….
Here-with some primary inputs for Tuesday afternoon. See all attached and then please review them in the context of what follows;
- Why? – MuSSA info – confidential – PLEASE do not compromise our relationship with DWA by spreading this.
- What content? – NRW-IAM ‘Scoping Graphic’ – rather management than merely more infra capital…
- In What form? In order to ‘deliver’ improved WSA management – 2 Flip pictures
- How? – ‘Car metaphor’ – Slowly, incrementally, wisely with lots of help…
Jan (and for others here for background – Leon is most informed at this stage) – My assumption is that while you cannot join us on Tuesday afternoon – you and I can at least speak on Skype, hopefully next week by specific arrangement. (Let us fix that soon). Your contribution is I hope, to be a lead person on ‘our behalf’ much “closer to the ground” than anyone from outside the province. “Getting to the ground here” is ALWAYS the real issue and then being led by actual reality. Ultimately ‘we’ would like to see you and others (like Andre, Michelle, etc) as more local partners in implementation if and when ‘we’ can get to that – i.e source of funds. Short-term I further confirm that we need to also understand, as and as best as possible, ‘associated implementation’ BEFORE we might come down to visit this JTG District (see attached MuSSA info for 3 WSA’s and Munics within this District) and then hope to secure funds.
There are at least two (or 3?) expected areas of management support intervention which will probably lead to at least 2 “WSA management intervention support” tenders. In all instances, we are confident that what ‘we’ can offer can ADDITIONAL value above and beyond such tenders but at the same time do not have much confidence in either the scope of the TOR and whether our value-add will be properly understood or appreciated – it actually needs practical demonstration and tender processes do not easily accommodate that. Our contribution is notably to assure and deepen internal WSA alignment AND incorporation (e.g. outcomes, not more mere inputs / outputs) because of the systemic nature of what NRW-IAM offers. Ours is intentionally an extended multi-year normalizing process. These statements go rather far. The issue many here will probably agree with is – the GAP between (esp individual) Districts and National is ‘rather large’ and actually, close to government, “un-accommadating”. This is where most of the attached graphics come in – notably SYSTEMIC and STRUCTURE. The levels of challenge are in this way ‘rather startling’ but then require both graciousness and judicious wise attention, like from some here. But let ‘us’ talk these through – it cannot be done on email and anyway warrants its own re-interpretation to the ACTUAL local realities. That is where the real value lies – not even with us - but the real individual WSA situation.
The other management support interventions are;
1) How National DWA intends NC to provide Municipal Action Plans (MAP’s – usually consultant-based) to get Municipal leadership commitment to deal with these shortfalls. DWA National (Allestair W esp and soon I trust, Jenny Evans) was already indicating that they hoped we could become specialist management consultants to for instance ‘augment such roll-out’….. I tentatively explored this NC implementation with Sabelo M at DWA and he says that DCoGTA (most probably JJ Botha) is to take the lead. I have no problem is taking this further with Sabelo as you might desire. But like I side on the phone I lack confidence as soon as anything comes from DCoGTA, esp NC, even if JJB is a nice person. The point is that what we want to offer must augment, strengthen and support such implementation and their available capacity – whether available or insourced. Please take this further and let us ensure we get any such thing as execution plans and or especially TOR’s, or tender documents.
2) Anglo appointment of DBSA to issue tenders for Electrical and Water Loss Reduction as well as Revenue Enhancement. Mark and I had this explained to us from within DBSA. But the approach is not only closed to our innovation and external advice but seems inherently flawed as it will probably be too transactional and neither underpinned by either understanding or adequate processes.
3) Evolving SIP 6 further implementation also led by DBSA. My sense of this will be that similar traits will follow. Like too much one-size-fits-all, top down prescription and too little local adaptation and support. However at this level we are getting some traction and our innovation might be at least heard in ‘Innovative platforms’, like involving the CSIR.
PLEASE DO NOT get lost in all this. Hit us with the hard questions. Actually the “real magic” is that what JTG MAY require is two Project-type SPV’s and that graphic especially refers.
Further please note that what is on offer is already linked to a potential WRC Research grant and now something similar like even from NW University and potentially UCT / UK sources. Y-up – we are getting some traction BUT is is practical demonstrated implementation that is really needed. This is where Anglo National becomes so key….
Regards,
Nigel Lowe
Infrastructure Management & Development Services
(Now trading as “SAIMIC” for Service, Support, Integrity)
287 31st Avenue, Villieria, 0186, Pretoria, Gauteng
Personal Profile: za.linkedin.com/pub/nigel-lowe/5/84/92a
Skype Userid: nigel.lowe
