So in part two we're gong to look at a little bit more about the content of the program or what was actually done, and in particular focusing on our systematic sanitation cycle that was developed for the cities. Developed within the program and has since been scaled up nationally. Also about the importance and how high-level national support was secured, and the importance and the role that played in moving the program forward. And a bit about budgets and mainstreaming them and how that has worked out since then. Let's have a look at slide number three. The sanitation city cycle. This cycle was very fundamental to developing a model that could be scaled up, so we started in the six cities and then went to twelve, and as we did the twelve, we had to simplify it a great deal. The vision became that this would be rolled out nationally. There were at the time around 100 cities in the country. Although the vision has been that the approach is applied in a similar way in districts as well, - there are around 300 of them altogether - , so we're looking at very large scaling up. The cycle incorporated, first of all, advocacy. Now, the advocacy depended on which stage the city was at. Initially the program was looking for cities which were willing to throw their hat in the ring and have a go, and to become those first six cities. Those cities then became advocates for the next cycle and gradually, the cities began to advocate to the national level and then the national level became the main hub of the advocacy to the cities that were a little further behind. So having the city committed itself come onboard, it was very much a voluntary, demand-driven program. No one had to do anything. Cities volunteered, put their hands up and became part of it. They then established a working group and some institutional structures through which they would work. The first activity that the working group undertook was to establish what was called a white book, and it was really a sanitation situation assessment and sanitation mapping. It involved quite a bit of survey work and bringing together existing data, local knowledge and some primary research, looking at what the situation was in the city. And from that white book, which was quite transformational because the working groups were working together for the first time, they began to see things that their departmental silos had not seen before. They developed a sanitation strategy. And from that strategy would become what was called "a program memorandum" which is really a project shopping list, or a plan, and applications to put in for particular projects to national level or to donors. So this was it, the name "project memorandum", was how it was coined. Then, finally, there would be a process of monitoring and evaluation during implementation, and that would be an ongoing cycle. So, this cycle was perceived at the city level and what we tried out. If we can move on to slide four now, we find is that the center of this program, as I mentioned in part one, was the city. And the cities had an impact at the national level. At the national level we had the buy-in of the planning department, and to some extent, the health department. The other departments that should have been involved, the ministry of public works and local government were a little bit more ambivalent about it. So we went down to the cities that were interested, where there was commitment and where there was very strong ownership, they established their groups, they did their assessments, and then they started holding. This idea came from one particular city: a sanitation summit, in which the project cities would get together and they would, to some extent, show off, share what they'd done, and try and hold each other accountable for what they were doing. We call this friendly peer review, and a bit of competition. But this process evolved over a couple of years. The national government was invited and the very first time, they were called to come and join one of these sanitation summits. We managed to secure a director general from the ministry of public works to come, and I remember the look on his face when he heard the man talking about his sanitation budget and his sanitation strategy. He looked shocked, and he said, "I never expected to hear this coming from a city. "I had no idea cities were taking this so seriously. "I need to go back now to Jakarta, and I need to look at what our national department is doing" I can say this was in April 2009, I think. Everything changed from then on. He went back to Jakarta. He talked to the minister, and a national program began to formulate quite soon after that. But someone articulated this as, "the cities produced the wake-up call to the national government." The national government responded. They increased their attention, they got a national program in place called "the national acceleration of sanitation development in settlements program" commonly called PPSP, and they used that sanitation cycle and what the cities had done during this ISSTP program as the basis for rolling out a national program. So moving on to slide five, we call this one, the high-level support for the unmentionable. If you get your, in this case it's the vice-president, you get them talking about sanitation at the national level, this is something that had been unthinkable even two years earlier. And it had been very much triggered by vocal articulate mayors at the national level showing that they had done something, and if we can do it, why can't you? The national government got on board when there was something there that they could copy, they could scale up. I think it's quite an important lesson for this, that if you want to motivate at the national level, they need to have something to roll out. The peer pressure and competition among cities had been very instrumental. It increased the motivation, mayors increasingly, the city became embarrassed to come to the summit without their mayor, so more mayors started attending. Sanitation was seen as a good public interest platform. It became mentioned in elections, one mayor actually said to us "I was reelected through my sanitation mandate." Very satisfying to hear that. The mayors have a lot of clout at the national level. The cities' strategies became a very tangible outcome for local government planning, and it fitted into the government's cycle. We had worked entirely within the government planning and budgeting cycle, which had a lot of limitations, quite a few frustrations, but that was the way to institutionalize what was happening. I'll show you later a picture of some products. We used a lot of very high quality media communications. A very inspired local company who had wonderful, wacky ideas to appeal to people, and there was a lot of video images, a lot of posters, and visual images that the media could pick up, that people could catch on to. By 2009, this became quite a big national issue. And the program, which was due to finish in early 2010, then helped the government to develop their national acceleration of sanitation program and this is slide six, sort of a summary of what they intended to do from 2010 to 2014. So they have almost come to the end of this first five-year plan and they are now developing their second five-year plan. What you'll see here is that this is an integrated wastewater, solid waste, and drainage plan. That was very much the demand of the cities and what was required, and it has very specific targets for each of those subsectors. I forgot to mention in part one that actually the city focus had all three of these areas because this was what the government wanted to do. We went with what they wanted. We ended up getting two sets of funding to enable us to do that. We'd initially gone in only on wastewater, but when it became clear that wastewater probably wouldn't fly on its own, we managed to get co-funding to add the solid waste and drainage sectors. There was a great deal of government support for an integrated approach. If you look at the five year acceleration program on slide seven, you will see some very large numbers. The government was very ambitious, and again on the left hand side, you see that cycle. They want you to work through that cycle systematically in the number of cities that they were working in, so even to go from the twelve cities to 41 cities in 2009 was already very ambitious. The roles and responsibilities for who would be implementing these different parts of the cycle varied depending on what needed to be done, so you can see that on the right hand side of the slide. So if we look now at slide eight, what actually has happened, what is very clear, investment has gone up enormously. Slide nine will give you a graph of what this looks like in practice, but we've gone from a miniscule national proportion of the national budget to a third of one percent. In a country the size of Indonesia, a third of one percent of the national budget is a lot of money. A 1000% increase from $50 million a year to $540 million a year over the seven years in terms of the national budget. This has included not only national commitment, but an even greater increase in the spending of local governments on sanitation so it's very much a co-funded initiative between central government and local government. The PPSP program which was to scale up those figures you saw in the previous slide was not fully funded, but it went a very long way and given how ambitious the targets were, there's a big question about whether the capacity to spend all that money was there. Slide nine, you just briefly see that scale. I would like to point out again that the program finished in early 2010, so if you can look at the escalation in funding since the program finished, you can see how much funds were leveraged by that $10,000 investment over five years. Finally, I just want to focus on a few lessons learned along the way. There are many, but here are a few. First of all, to get the national government or to get the high level leaders, whether it's the mayor of the city or the vice president or the ministers prioritizing sanitation, is an essential step to going to scale. It is not enough, but it is necessary, but not sufficient. Talking about money to decision makers is more effective than talking about infant mortality or health or anything else, really. We had done this economics of sanitation work. The first results had come out in Indonesia about 2008, so we could use those figures as part of the advocacy campaign, and there's no question that they were the most effective element of that campaign and we built that in at that time. Local government capacity varied a great deal, so although we had this sanitation cycle, this city sanitation cycle, the way it worked in different cities varied a great deal. Some cities could almost run on their own quite early, others needed a great deal more technical support, hand-holding and capacity building. We had to find a balance between technical facilitation without compromising ownership. Now, this is a really tricky one. Do you get the consultants to go in and do a very high quality city sanitation strategy, or do you let the city do it on its own, and it's perhaps a little bit lower quality. Do you take over, and this is a balance that all the time we had to work out, and I think to some extent that balance is going on. The city needs support from a technical assistance team or from local consultants, but how do they do it? Keep the decision making at the local government level, don't let any project or program take over that decision making. And a real lesson learned, we had worked with local government and at national level, and we'd kind of forgotten about the provincial government, and that was a role that we began to see was very important and towards the end of the program we began to realize that we needed to strengthen that program and use the national government more significantly and at that stage, they began to see what was happening and they were interested, began to work out quite well. So this is a very brief overview. There's a couple of publications available that Sandec will let you know about and you'll be able to read a bit more about this. Well, I've very much enjoyed sharing this program. It was five years of my life, and I hope you found it inspiring. And thank you for listening.
