Project: Illustrative Kenya Community WASH and Livelihoods Project

This proposal requests support to strengthen and scale the project into a consistent, fundable, well-governed programme delivering measurable outcomes.

PHC methodology is used to manage project Schedule, Concerns, Actions, Locations, People and Deliverables. With the use of Project Health Control, this project allows its stakeholders a snapshot into its activities and detailed overview of its financial ledger.

The Illustrative Kenya Community WASH and Livelihoods Project explores how safe water, sanitation, hygiene behaviour and household resilience can be sustained through legitimate, inclusive and evidence-led community governance. It has been created from a high-level professional discussion about a live WASH and livelihoods context in Kenya, but it is not yet attributed to or approved by the implementing organisation and contains no confidential project information.

The project begins from the proposition that infrastructure and programme activity alone do not guarantee lasting benefit. Water systems must remain safe and functional; sanitation facilities must be accessible, dignified and used; hygiene messages must become sustained practice; and livelihood support must create fair and credible economic value. Community committees are therefore treated not simply as structures that have been formed, but as working governance arrangements whose authority, representation, decisions, financial conduct and responsiveness need to be understood and trusted by the communities they serve.

PHC Service would provide a continuously maintained evidence base connecting the project's Schedule, Concerns, Actions, Locations, People, Events and Deliverables with stakeholder comments and supporting evidence. The proposed entry point is an authorised PHC 7-Day Review, leading to a Review report and a detailed proposal for the full six-month service. The project scope, locations, beneficiary population, implementing parties, costs and performance claims will remain provisional until authorised source material and stakeholder participation become available.

Participating community members would be the intended users, beneficiaries and co-governors of the WASH services, with accessible routes to question decisions, report problems and influence priorities.

Community governance committees would coordinate clearly defined responsibilities for water-system management, sanitation and hygiene leadership, local decisions, contributions, maintenance and feedback, while remaining answerable to the people they represent.

The implementing organisation and project leadership would retain responsibility for delivery, safeguarding, formal reporting, partnership management and compliance. The organisation and authorised project lead have not yet been identified within this illustrative proposal.

Technical WASH, public-health and maintenance specialists would protect water quality, infrastructure, sanitation and hygiene standards. Livelihood practitioners would help test whether proposed economic activities are viable, inclusive and responsive to local demand.

County and local administration would provide appropriate statutory, technical and service alignment without displacing community voice. Funders and development partners would support progressively evidenced activity and consider unresolved concerns as well as reported achievements.

Charles Karari is currently a professional discussion participant supporting implementation in the wider WASH context. He is not represented here as the project owner, organisational sponsor or authorised decision-maker.

Order Efficiency Ltd, led by David Winter with PHC analytical and administrative support, would conduct the 7-Day Review and, if commissioned, facilitate the continuing PHC governance and evidence service. Order Efficiency would not become the WASH implementer, funder or owner of community decisions.

Review and mobilisation outcomes

• An authorised and clearly bounded definition of the real project, its stakeholders, locations, information sources and governance responsibilities.
• A structured account of what is known, unknown, disputed and most important to investigate.
• An initial baseline covering community governance, WASH service functionality, inclusion, maintenance, finance, safeguarding, feedback and livelihood arrangements.
• Priority Concerns, Actions and Deliverables established within PHC, together with a practical decision on whether the proposed six-month service should proceed.

Six-month governance and operational outcomes

• Community committee authority, representation and accountability are better understood by both committee members and the people they serve.
• Significant community comments and concerns remain connected to relevant assets, locations, decisions and responsible parties until appropriately addressed.
• Maintenance, water-safety, financial, complaint and safeguarding responsibilities become clearer and more traceable.
• Women, young people, people with disabilities, poorer households and other groups liable to exclusion have credible ways to participate and challenge decisions.
• Implementers, technical actors, local administration and funders receive progressively maintained evidence rather than relying solely on retrospective reports.
• The project can make more defensible stop, continue, correct or scale decisions.

Desired longer-term outcomes

The intended human outcomes are safer and more dependable water, dignified sanitation, sustained hygiene practices, reduced burdens associated with obtaining water, stronger local capability and livelihoods that improve household resilience without excluding the poorest. These are intended outcomes rather than guaranteed claims. They must be tested through agreed baselines, continuing community feedback and evidence collected over an appropriate period.

Footnote - People Costs and PICS Eligibility: The people-related costs shown above relate to funded governance, delivery, leadership, and trainee roles agreed at the outset of the project. These paid hours are not eligible for PICS (Pro Bono Social Impact Credits). PICS applies only to unpaid or underpaid service contributed outside funded roles. PHC Service maintains a clear, auditable separation between funded work and any pro-bono contribution, preventing double recognition while ensuring transparency to funders.

• The Story of PHC
• Project Gap Analysis
• Rate Calculator (xlsx)
• Rate Calculator - 7-Day Review
• Rate Calculator - Setup Phase
• Rate Calculator - Continuation Phase
• Approach to Prospective Funder