SFG2852 V2 Summary of consultation CONTENTS A. Project Description 1. Title of the project activity 2. Project eligibility under Gold Standard 3. Current project status B. Design of Stakeholder Consultation Process 1. Description of physical meeting(s) i. Agenda ii. Non-technical summary iii. Invitation tracking table iv. Text of individual invitations v. Text of public invitations 2. Description of other consultation methods used C. Consultation Process 1. Participants’ in physical meeting(s) i. List ii. Evaluation forms 2. Pictures from physical meeting(s) 3. Outcome of consultation process i. Minutes of physical meeting(s) ii. Minutes of other consultations iii. Assessment of all comments iv. Revisit sustainable development assessment v. Summary of changes to project design based on comments D. Sustainable Development Assessment 1. Own sustainable development assessment i. ‘Do no harm’ assessment ii. Sustainable development matrix 2. Stakeholders blind sustainable development matrix 3. Consolidated sustainable development matrix E. Sustainability Monitoring Plan 1. Discussion on Sustainability monitoring Plan 2. Discussion on continuous input / grievance mechanism F. Description of Stakeholder Feedback Round Annex 1. Original participants list Annex 2. Original feedback forms SECTION A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. 1. Title of the project activity Title: DelAgua Public Health Program in Eastern Africa Date: May 30, 2016 Version no.: 1 A. 2. Project eligibility under the Gold Standard [See Toolkit 1.2 and Annex C] Project activities implemented under this PoA qualify as End-Use Energy Efficiency projects, which is defined “as the reduction in the amount of energy required for delivering or producing non-energy physical goods or services”. The proposed project activity provides high-efficiency cook stoves that decrease the amount of fuel wood (and therefore energy) required for cooking. The proposed activity also provides water filters that eliminate fuel wood consumption associated with treating water. A. 3. Current project status A Phase I program of 2,000 households covering eleven (11) districts in the program boundary was carried out in October 2012. A total of 150 CHWs were trained across the 11 districts, who carried out distributions and household-level education in their respective villages. Subsequently, the PoA was registered under the CDM on 21 November 2013. Each CPA under the PoA involves the distribution of water filters and/or high-efficiency cook stoves within a specific district in Rwanda. 7 CPAs were registered on or before 15 September 2014. Phase 2 of the PoA involved technology distributions to 100,906 households to these 7 CPAs, as follows: District Total Households CPA001 - Rubavu 10582 CPA002 - Karongi 14548 CPA003 - 17912 Ngororero CPA004 - Nyabihu 10734 CPA005 - 13963 Nyamasheke CPA006 - Rutsiro 16867 CPA007 - Rusizi 16300 Total 100906 These 7 CPAs were successfully issued CERs 29 October 2015, for the monitoring period 15/9/2014 - 31/3/2015. A second request for issuance was submitted on 26 November 2015, for the monitoring period 1/4/2015 – 14/9/2015. Phase 3 of the PoA involved the expansion of the program to 9 additional districts/CPAs. These CPAs were registered on 19 April 2016. Technology distributions began on 15 January 2016, and are ongoing. SECTION B. DESIGN OF STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION PROCESS B. 1. Design of physical meeting(s) i. Agenda - Opening of the meeting Opening remarks by Mr. Abdou Nizeyimana, Director of Health, Karongi District Introductions of Participants and Presenters Review of the Agenda and Purpose of the Meeting - Explanation of the project Short video on ‘Carbon for Water’ Program in Kenya Background of DelAgua company and the DelAgua Health and Development Program Design Demonstration of the LifeStraw® Family 2.0 filter and EcoZoom cookstove and sharing of educational posters Testimonies from Community Health Workers and pilot end-users on the program technologies Overview of Climate Change and the Carbon Finance for LifeStraw® Family - Questions for clarification about the project Q&A session on project and its Sustainable Development (SD) - Sustainable Development (SD) exercise - Discussion on monitoring SD - Closure of the meeting Complete Individual Participant Evaluation Forms - Adjourn for Lunch ii. Non-technical summary Please be aware that carbon market specific terms may not be appropriate for the readers/ audience of this summary. [See Toolkit 2.6 and Annex J] In many regions of East Africa, including Rwanda, residents drink from water sources containing microbiological contamination, and cook on three stone wood fuel fires. This leads to diarrhea and other water-borne diseases and upper respiratory disease, and accounts for, according the World Health Organization, two of the leading causes of death in Rwanda. DelAgua has extensive international experience supplying water testing kits to 130 developing countries since 1985. It has Government Agencies, all the major NGOs and many global corporations among its clients. Through the application of carbon financing, the program will distribute household-scale water treatment and high efficiency cookstoves to approximately 3 million residents covering all 30 districts in Rwanda, roughly 600,000 households of the economically most disadvantaged residents (Ubudehe 1 & 2). The project development has been contracted to Manna Energy Limited, a company with extensive relevant experience. The household scale water treatment units address microbiological contamination and the high efficiency cookstoves address indoor air pollution. Both systems will require no electricity. The water treatment system complies with the US Environmental Protection Agency Guide Standard and Protocol for Testing Microbiological Water Purifiers, providing treated water that is as-good or better than boiling for microbiological contamination. These water treatment units will treat contaminated drinking water, and reduce the demand for conventional water treatment through boiling water with non- renewable biomass. The high efficiency cookstove will reduce indoor air pollution and fuelwood use. This effort will be part of a public health campaign with Ministry of Health targeting the most vulnerable populations. This program will address critical public health challenge (pneumonia and diarrhea) through the benefits of carbon financing. DelAgua will train several thousand Community Health Workers (CHW) in distribution and education activities across the 30 districts. The CHWs will then educate beneficiaries at household level and monitor activities over the 20 year program period. This non-technical presentation was provided in email and letter invitations: iii. Invitation tracking table [See Toolkit 2.6 and Annex J] Category Org. (if relevant) Name of invitee Way of Date of Confirma code invitatio invitatio tion n n received ? Y/N A Household in first pilot at Nyirahabayo Agathe Verbal 7/3/12 Y Runyinya village A Household in first pilot at Ndamage J Paul Verbal 7/3/12 Y Runyinya village B Chief of Runyinya Dikubwimana Evaliste Phone 7/3/12 Y village A EHO/Nyamagabe Kayitesi Jeannine Letter 7/3/12 Y A CHW/Nyamagabe Niyindorera Letter 7/3/12 Y Annonciata A EHO/Ruhango N.nzayisaba Bertine Letter 7/3/12 Y A CHW/Ryaruhanga Mukagatare Emina Phone 7/3/12 Y (karongi) A CHW/Nyaruguru Kamugwera Vestine Phone 7/3/12 Y A CHW/Mubuga-Karongi Rwanteri Jean Phone 7/3/12 Y D Winrock International Kelly Scott Email 7/3/12 Y D Winrock International Jean Claude Email 7/3/12 Y Nkurikiyinka A EHO/Kabgayi Kayitesi Antoinette Letter 7/3/12 Y D Bridge2Rwanda Phillip Mulau Email 7/3/12 Y A CHW/Muhanga Mihigo Chrysogone Phone 7/3/12 Y A CHW/Gakenke Urugombumugabo Phone 7/3/12 Y Phocas B Director of Maternal and Dr. Fidele Ngabo Letter, 7/1/12 N Child Health Email B Director of Alphonsine Letter, 7/1/12 N Environmental Health Mukamunana Email B MOH/EHO Minisante Ciza Philbert Letter, 7/1/12 Y Email B DHDKarongi Nizeyimana Abdou Phone 7/4/12 Y B Social affairs/ Mubuga Mukarugeta Dative Phone 7/4/12 Y sector B Executive secretary of Ndayisaba Francois Phone 7/4/12 Y Mubuga sector A EHO/Nemba hospital Mujawayezu Odette Letter 7/4/12 Y A EHO/Kibuye hospital Ntiguriwa Leandre Letter 7/4/12 Y C DNA/REMA Yves Tuyishime Letter, 7/1/12 Y Email C DNA Generic Email Email 7/1/12 Y C DG REMA Dr. Rose Letter, 7/1/12 N Mukankomeje Email B Ministry of Infrastructure, in 7/4/12 Y charge of ICS Vincent Bayingana Email B Gaspard 7/4/12 N EWSA NKURIKIYUMUKIZA Email B EWSA Issa Email 7/4/12 N B EWSA Viateur Mugiraneza Email 7/4/12 N D USAID Rural develoment 7/4/12 N specialist Aimee Mpamabara Email D Living Water International David Leatherwood Email 7/4/12 N D Global Waters (USAID) David Mutekanga Email 7/4/12 N D Great Lakes Energy Sam Dargan Email 7/4/12 N D ENEDOM/Save Jean Marie Vianney 7/4/12 N 80/Atmosfair Kayonga Email D Practical Action Hiwote Teshome Email 7/4/12 N D One Acre Fund Eric B. Pohlman Email 7/4/12 N D Paradigm Greg Email 7/4/12 N D CO2 Balance/FAPDR 7/4/12 N Kigali Clemens Weise Email D UpEnergy Eric Wurster Email 7/4/12 N D Impact Carbon John Gwillim Email 7/4/12 N D Burn Design Lab Boston Nyer Email 7/4/12 N D Innovative Poverty Action Jeremy Hand Email 7/4/12 N D EnviroFit Daniel Wald Email 7/4/12 N D Vicki Walker, Kelly 7/4/12 Y Winrock International, Scott, Jean-Claude REACH Nkurikinyinka Email D Uganda Carbon Bureau Bill Farmer Email 7/4/12 N D Rwanda Renewable Jean Bosco Rwiyamirira Email 7/4/12 N Energy Association D Inyenyeri Eric Reynolds Email 7/4/12 N Please explain how you decided that the above organisations/ individuals are relevant stakeholders to your project. Also, please discuss how your invitation methods seek to include a broad range of stakeholders (e.g. gender, age, ethnicity). The participants were invited from each of the project districts, including local people impacted by the project, local policy makers and representatives of local authorities. In selecting and compiling invitees, we considered several factors. We relied on our Rwandan local staff who have a better understanding of the individuals and relevant organizations in Rwanda that have an interest in offering input on this project. In addition to local leaders and relevant NGOs working in similar sectors, they selected relevant national and local governmental bodies that have jurisdiction over topics related to the project in the project districts. Since many of the appropriate governing bodies are men, we took special care to invite a number of women leaders and individuals from the districts. We felt that this was particularly important since the products featured in the project disproportionately affect women, since women are usually responsible for cooking and the gathering and treatment of water for the household. iv. Text of individual invitations Letter to Ministry of Health sent on July 1, 2012 Letter to DNA sent on July 1, 2012 v. Text of public invitations [See Toolkit 2.6 and Annex J] Advertisement in ‘Imvaho’ newspaper in Kinyarwanda on July 4, 2012 Advertisement in ‘New Times Rwanda’ Newspaper in English on July 4, 2012 B. 2. Description of other consultation methods used If individuals and/ or entities (e.g. NGOs) are unable to attend the physical meeting, please discuss other methods that were used to solicit their feedback/ comments (e.g. questionnaires, phone calls, interviews). In May 2012, prior to the stakeholder meeting, DelAgua organized a Working Group consisting of other Project Developers, NGOs and government officials developing similar programs. The main purpose for this working group is to have an open forum for the DelAgua Program and to have a good relationship with the other organizations doing water or cookstove programs. The Working Group was well received by participants who shared their program plans and contributed input for the DelAgua Program design. The participants agreed the meetings would be useful to keep up the information sharing and try to avoid duplication of program boundaries. DelAgua further held a stakeholder consultation meeting on 14 July, 2014, prior to the start of Phase 2 distributions. The objective of the meeting was to inform other practitioners of the results from DelAguas Phase 1 (pilot) program, and to make other stakeholders aware of the Phase 2 plans. SECTION C. CONSULTATION PROCESS C. 1. Participants’ in physical meeting(s) i. List of participants Please see attached original participants’ list (in original language) in Annex 1. Participants list Date and time: July 17, 2012 (9:30AM) Location: Western province conference room Categor Name of participant Male/ Signature Organisation (if Contact y Code Female relevant) details A Nyirahabayo Agathe Female See Annex 1 Household in first pilot at See Annex 1 Runyinya village A Ndamage J Paul Male See Annex 1 Household in first pilot at See Annex 1 Runyinya village B Dikubwimana Male See Annex 1 Chief of Runyinya village See Annex 1 Evaliste A Kayitesi Jeannine Female See Annex 1 EHO/Nyamagabe See Annex 1 A Niyindorera Female See Annex 1 CHW/Nyamagabe See Annex 1 Annonciata A Nzayisaba Bertine Female See Annex 1 EHO/Ruhango See Annex 1 A Mukagatare Emina Female See Annex 1 CHW/Ryaruhanga(karong See Annex 1 i) A Kamugwera Vestine Female See Annex 1 CHW/Nyaruguru See Annex 1 A Rwanteri Jean Male See Annex 1 CHW/Mubuga-Karongi See Annex 1 D Kelly Scott Female See Annex 1 Winrock International See Annex 1 D Jean Claude Male See Annex 1 Winrock International See Annex 1 Nkurikiyinka A Kayitesi Antoinette Female See Annex 1 EHO/Kabgayi See Annex 1 D Phillip Mulau Male See Annex 1 Bridge2Rwanda See Annex 1 A Mihigo Chrysogone Male See Annex 1 CHW/Muhanga See Annex 1 A Urugombumugabo Male See Annex 1 CHW/Gakenke See Annex 1 Phocas B Nizeyimana Abdou Male See Annex 1 DHDKarongi See Annex 1 B Mukarugeta Dative Female See Annex 1 Social affair/Mubuga See Annex 1 sector B Ndayisaba Francois Male See Annex 1 Executive secretary of See Annex 1 Mubuga sector A Mujawayezu Odette Female See Annex 1 EHO/Nemba hospital See Annex 1 A Ntiguriwa Leandre Male See Annex 1 EHO/Kibuye hospital See Annex 1 C Yves Tuyishime Male See Annex 1 DNA/REMA See Annex 1 B Ciza Philbert Male See Annex 1 MOH/EHO Minisante See Annex 1 Comments accompanying Annex 1 N/A ii. Evaluation forms Annex 2 includes the evaluation forms received from LSC participants. Comments received in the evaluation forms are summarized in the following table: What is your impression of the You explained very well about your project. meeting? The program is highly productive; a lot of work has been done since Kigali Working Group Meeting held on 23rd May 2012. We appreciated the variety of attendees at the stakeholder meeting (NGOs, Government, end-users, community health workers, etc). Well planned and well done Successful Good, well-articulated The project is important because it is going to create good health behavior for households. What do you like about the project? We liked the fact that it will supply the necessary needs of the family. Love the carbon credit component and also love the extensive plans to train communities of usage, nice graphics and I also like the use of smart phones data collection. Protection against diseases (respiratory and water borne), environmental protection, the creation of jobs. Community to get this technology for free The water filtering project. Very essential for the community. It is teaching people to drink clean water. What do you not like about the Nothing, we do not dislike anything about the project. project? N/A. one concern though; rate of replacement after 3 years. How much will the replacement cost? The program will cover few districts (11 of 30 that make Rwanda), it needs to cover the whole Rwanda. How it is not advisable to use soap while to cleaning the filter. We would wish to keep the pre-filter white colored which would not be the case without using soap. The look matters. The filter and stove are not locally produced Wood may burn children if the fire comes out of the chamber. What would you suggest to improve I suggest you put your keynotes in Kinyarwanda, French about the project? and English. On the “sustainable development” exercise, you consider “gender equity” but it may be important to measure impact on girls- are they spending less time collecting firewood? Is the school attendance and or performance improving? To work with many NGO’s already present in Rural areas. To come up with a way of cleaning the filter because telling villagers to clean with only water is not feasible. More sensitization. Make a bigger filter that can keep a lot of water. Make bigger stoves with two or three cooking surfaces. If possible start a factory here that will be manufacturing stoves here in Rwanda. To offer more than one stove per family. To put replacement services near end-users to make I easy for them and they do not have to go to look for them from far. To train more CHWs To find a way of covering the stick support so that children will not reach the fire area. Signature See Annex for original evaluation forms with signatures Comments accompanying Annex 2 We received a total of 21 participant feedback forms from the July 17, 2012 meeting. Though the majority were submitted in Kinyarwanda, several were submitted in English. Effort was made for the above summary to be reprehensive of language, gender and overall message of comments. See scanned copies of all evaluation forms in Annex 2. C. 2. Pictures from physical meeting(s) C. 3. Outcome of consultation process i. Minutes of physical meeting(s) Please ensure that you include a summary of the meeting as well as all comments received. Please also include discussion on Continuous Input / Grievance Expression methods; comments, agreement or modifications suggested by Stakeholders. [See Toolkit 2.6, 2.6.1, 2.6.2, Annex W and Annex J] DelAgua coordinated with the Ministry of Health and local government officials in the planning of the stakeholder consultation meeting held at the Western Province Conference Room on Tuesday, July 17, 2012. The venue was selected due to its central location in the geographic program boundary to allow end-user and local officials to easily participate. The Governor of Western Province facilitated the use of the meeting venue. In addition to submitting invitations by letter, email and phone several weeks in advance of the meeting, an advertisement was placed in several local newspapers in both English and Kinyarwanda languages. The meeting was attended by a variety of participants, including government officials, such as Ministry of Health and Rwanda Environment Management Authority (DNA), NGOs, Environment and Health Officers (EHO), Community Health Workers (CHWs) and project end-users. Representatives of local government authority were also present including Executive Secretary of Mubuga Sector and Chef the Umudugudu of Runyinya, the local community where the 100 household pilot project took place. Opening remarks were given by Mr. Adou NIZEYIMANA, Director of Health of Karongi District on behalf of the Karongi District Mayor. Testimony was given by several pilot end-users and CHWs who also stressed some already enjoyed benefits of the program. ii. Minutes of other consultations In May 2012, prior to the stakeholder meeting, DelAgua organized a Working Group consisting of representatives of other Project Developers, NGOs and government officials developing similar programs. The main purpose for this working group is to have an open forum for the DelAgua Program and to have a good relationship with the other organizations doing water or cookstove programs. The Working Group was well received by participants who shared their program plans and contributed input for the DelAgua Program design. The participants agreed the meetings would be useful to keep up the information sharing and try to avoid duplication of program boundaries. iii. Assessment of all comments Date: July 17, 2012 (09:00 – 14:00) Location: Western Province Conference Room, Karongi District Number of Participants: 28 (17 Male; 12 Female) General Comments The program is very meaningful for the Western Province as there are many cases of diseases related to dirty water and indoor air pollution. If the population doesn’t fully use the technologies to avoid related diseases it will be a great loss for the region and the program. I encourage your active participation; the goal is for the population to own the program! (Director of Health, Karongi District) Some people had no any other choice other than to drink dirty water when boiled water were not yet ready and consequently others would demonstrate less interest in drinking water. Most of them are discouraged by the time it takes to boil and cool water. But now thanks to the filter they take water freely and are drinking more water because it is available anytime. (from a pilot end-user) My family does not feel worms at all since we started drinking filtered water and the water in the safe container stays cool, it never gets warm. (from a pilot end-user) With this stove, people can use small sticks to cook instead of large pieces of wood and it takes less time to cook and helps to reduce smoke. (Executive Secretary, Mubuga District) One time during a follow up visit there was an end-user who is a grandmother, and she was scolding her grandchildren because they had not carried filtered water to school that day. I think this is good evidence that the DelAgua education program is working (from a community health worker) Filter related comments and questions Was comment Stakeholder comment taken into Explanation (Why? How?) account (Yes/ No)? This is why we carried out the first pilot to see what is needed before A participant was wondering if they distributing LifeStraw to all households, could be provided with a LifeStraw that Yes and carry out frequent follow up surveys has a bigger storage container to find out what are the various needs of because of the large number of LifeStraw end-users. For families of 8 household members. or more, we are planning to distribute 2 units. For clear water, the filter cleans fast, but Does it make a difference how long Yes if water is very dirty it may take longer the filter cleans water according to to filter and requires backwashing more how dirty it is? than one time a day. According to the WHO standard the We are concern about the life span of 18,000 liters will take approximately 3 the Lifestraw because you mention years for a family of 5 and that is when that it can treat 18,000 liters of water, Yes we are planning a replacement phase. so if we treat that amount of water in However, in case the filter is not one year what will we do? working we are ready to replace it at any time because we will have a repair and replacement center in each district. We are worried if the filtered water is The filter meets U.S. standards and safe. WHO standard for ‘highly protective’. It Yes has also been approved by RBS (Rwanda Bureau of Standard) who certified that it is safe. The current filter is designed in a way I was wondering if the filter storage that the safe water storage cannot be could be opened to be cleaned; won’t Yes opened. However, the manufacturer is the storage get algae inside after a working on a new design so that the long time? safe water storage may be opened and cleaned after long period of use. Normally people were not drinking Witness from the user where the first water, especially water from the lake Yes pilot took place. but now they do even because they are sure that the water is clean. There is a problem of dirty water in This is why during the household schools and even though we drink Yes education we strongly advise parents to good water at home it is hard to get filter water for their children to take to clean water in schools. school everyday. Since the technology is provided free of During the pilot, why did you not Yes charge, rather than us providing a table, provide a table with the filter because we would ask those households to have some households do not have a table ownership in the program by investing or chair to place the filter? in their own table or chair for the filter. They may even use a traditional table made from sticks. Cookstove related comments and questions Normally we cook many kinds of food This is why the pilot and follow up is and so because one stove is not being done, so that we identify the enough so we need to use the old needs and figure out how to meet them. stove, is there a possibility of providing Yes The stove is designed to reduce more than just one stove per cooking time, so that you may cook household? more on one stove. However, for households larger than 8 people, we plan to provide 2 stoves. Won’t the clay stove lining break with The clay won’t break until because this time because of heat? Does the stove has a strong metal lining and is surrounding metal get hot? Yes designed to last for 5 years. The surrounding metal will get hot but the stove handles will not. Yes we do, on the poster there are What if the stoves get a problem, do numbers you call when you meet any you offer replacements? Yes problems with the stove or filter. We will have repair and replacement centers established in each district. Do we get phones to take pictures of End-users will not get phones, but, the the broken part of the equipment? Yes CHWs who will come to visit you will take the pictures themselves. If it rains, can I cook inside? In such a case you can cook inside but in general we recommend you to cook Yes outside so that the smoke from initial lighting of the fire does not come inside the house. The poster says we should not pour That is okay, we just recommend that liquid in the stove, what if the pot boils Yes you do NOT pour water inside the stove over and water drops in? when you want to put out the fire or clean the stove. Several participants asked about smoke from the stove: The combustion chamber is very hot I noticed there is no smoke from the and it turns smoke into energy. So EcoZoom stove, where does the because the stove is very efficient you smoke go when you are cooking? will not see smoke. When smoke (from pilot end-user) Yes comes out from the 3-stone fire, it means energy is being lost. I think it depends on the kind of wood you use, if it’s not dry enough it will Yes, it is advisable to use dry wood; it emit smoke but if it is dry enough, it cooks fast and reduces smoke will not have smoke and it will burn emission. easily. Is it possible to make a bigger stove We shall consider that with the stove with many cooking areas? Yes manufacturer, that’s why this follow up is being done. Since you import these stoves, Yes Yes, for the replacement phase, we are wouldn’t you think about opening a planning to set up an assembly and factory here that manufactures them? manufacturing plant. General questions Several participants asked about the cost of the products: We provide the products to households free or charge and are able to do so How do you distribute the products, through the benefits of carbon will you sell them? financing. Yes Will you give that family the equipment We will replace them when they get old first and when the products are old will or damaged during the program period. you provide new ones for free? We plan on charging a small ‘maintenance fee’ for repair that will help sustain the repair and replacement center operation. You want to give these equipment to The population must be within our 600,000 people, how do you Yes program boundary as described in the determine which households will presentation. We shall include only benefit? those households that do not have piped water or means of treating drinking water and families that do not use clean stoves and are using biomass to cook. What if someone wants to recycle your We are researching recycling products? companies in Rwanda that are able to Yes recycle such product because we do not want them to have a negative impact on the environment after they have been used. Each unit has a barcode number to help tracking of units for repair and recycling. iv. Revisit sustainability assessment Are you going to revisit the sustainable development assessment? Yes No Please note that this is necessary when there are indicators scored ‘negative’ or if there are stakeholder comments that can’t be X mitigated Give reasoning behind the decision There were no negative scored indicators or any stakeholder comments that could not be mitigated. The most significant comment provided during the stakeholder consultations was ensuring proper disposal of the expended filter and cookstove units during the replacement cycle. The project developer anticipated this concern and takes this point very seriously and intends to make available Repair Centers and trained personnel in each district to ensure proper disposal and those repairs and replacements are completed when necessary. v. Summary of alterations based on comments If stakeholder comments have been taken into account and any aspect of the project modified, then please discuss that here. Though the project developer has incorporated recycling into the program design, the stakeholder concerns surrounding replacement and recycling of expended filters and cookstoves reaffirmed the importance of monitoring the environmental effects and disposal over of the program period: • Repair and Replacement Centers will be established in the program areas accessible to people in every district. • Personnel will be trained at each center to ensure proper disposal and that repairs and replacements are completed when necessary. • In order to receive a replacement, end-users will be required to return their expended filter and cookstove units before a new one issued. • The project developer will then recycle or dispose of the expended units in accordance with local regulations. • Units will be tracked by a barcode system and central database to ensure all units are properly disposed. SECTION D. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT D. 1. Own sustainable development assessment i. ‘Do no harm’ assessment Safeguarding Description of Assessment of my Mitigation measure principles relevance to my project risks breaching project it (low, medium, high) 1 – Human rights NA low - 2 – Involuntary NA low - settlements 3 – Cultural heritage NA low - 4 – Labor – collective All our staff and low - bargaining and local partners are freedom of association pre-screened for labor standards prior to involving them in the project 5 – Forced labor All labor is low - voluntary. Our due diligence screens for this. 6 – Child labor Neither we nor our low - local partners employ children. We screen for this in our due diligence 7 – Labor Neither we nor our low - discrimination local partners are involved in labor discrimination. 8 – Labor safety Labor conditions low - are safe 9- Environmental harm The project is med Expended filter and positive for the cookstove units are environment, since retrieved upon it decreases replacement and unsustainable recycled harvesting of wood from forests. However, disposal of filter and cookstove units is being considered 10 – Degradation of The project protects low - habitats natural ecosystems and habitats by decreasing fuel wood harvesting. 11- Corruption All project low - participants are pre- screened for corruption and are not included if there is any sign of risk Additional relevant Description of Assessment of Mitigation measure critical issues for relevance to my relevance to my my project type project project (low, medium, high) N/A ii. Sustainable development matrix Chosen Mitigation Relevance to Preliminary Indicator parameter and measure achieving MDG score explanation Negative impact: score ‘-’ in case negative If relevant, impact is not copy mitigation Check fully mitigated, measure from www.undp.org/mdg score ‘0’ in Gold Standard ‘Do No Harm’ and case impact is indicators of assessment, www.mdgmonitor.org Parameter defined planned to be sustainable and include and rated by CME fully mitigated development mitigation Describe how your measure used indicator is related to No change in to neutralise a local MDG goals impact: score score of ‘-’ ‘0’ Positive impact: score ‘+’ Parameter: Relates to MDG 7 – Emissions using ensuring fuel consumption environmental as a proxy for total sustainability since Air quality N/A emissions. + clean air is an environmental Burning firewood resource on which we for cooking and all depend boiling water using traditional stove (three stone and Rondereza) releases more emissions than cooking food using EcoZoom stove and treating water with LifeStraw® Family Parameter: Number of people served with a Relates to MDG 7 – satisfactory level since clean water is of potable water an environmental according to the resource on which we WHO standard. all depend. It also Water quality and N/A relates to MDG 1,4,5 + quantity This indicator will related to health since be it provides clean overwhelmingly drinking water to help improved as a improve livelihoods result of clean and eradicate poverty water from LifeStraw® Family units Parameter: decreased non- renewable fuel wood as a proxy for decreased deforestation leading to decreased erosion. Relates to MDG 7 – ensure environmental Fuelwood sustainability and harvesting causes Soil condition N/A specifically to the goal + deforestation of changing the which in turn quantity of land area causes erosion. covered by forest. By reducing firewood consumption for cooking food and totally switch off boiling water, the project will contribute in scaling down deforestation. Consequently, soil conditions will be improved. This indicator will not be significantly impacted by the project. However, project developer See comments believes it is Other pollutants at the end of N/A necessary to 0 this table recycle expended filters and cookstoves and has included recycling in its program design. Parameter: decreased non- renewable fuel wood as a proxy for decreased deforestation. Fuel wood harvesting causes de-forestation which in turn Relates to MDG 7 – threatens specifically to the goal biodiversity. By Biodiversity N/A of changing the 0 reducing pressure quantity of land area on forests, the covered by forest project will contribute in preserving biodiversity. However, external factors could be powerful enough to neutralize the impact of the program against this indicator Community Health Workers and local stove cooperatives Quality of NA will be employed 0 employment during the program. However, impact on quality of employment is not expected to be a significant result of this program. Parameter: Money and time Relates to MDG 1 – saved by users eradicate extreme from reduced poverty and hunger. consumption of The project promotes firewood. Livelihood of the monetary savings + poor among users through Saved fuel costs saved fuel and time and time could be that and sustainably used for other provides clean water income generating for user families. activities to improve household welfare. Parameter: Number of households served Targeted end users are currently Energy is a cross- burning firewood cutting issue that using inefficiently pertains to MDG 1 stove such as eradication of poverty Access to three stone and and hunger; MDG 3, affordable and Rondereza. The promotion of gender + clean energy project aims at equality and services distributing filters empowerment of that remove the women; MDG 7 need to boil water ensuring environment with biomass and sustainability. improved cooking stove that don’t release smoke and reduce biomass consumption. Though the program may help Relates to MDG 3, promote gender Human and promotion of gender equality, project institutional equality and 0 developer judged capacity empowerment of this indicator not women enough to create impact. Quantitative Relates to MDG 1 Parameter: + employment and eradicating extreme Number of new income poverty and hunger. jobs created as a generation By generating new result of the jobs, increased project distribution employment will and monitoring. contribute. The program will employ roughly 2,500 Community Health Workers and some technical staff for during distribution, monitoring and replacement phases will a source of income for a good number of people which can be monitored. The project represents a direct investment in the public health and future of Rwanda and may vastly Balance of reduce health payments and NA 0 sector costs. investment Nevertheless, it is not easy to monitor the impact of this indicator. It is then attracted to neutral rate. By introducing the new technology to Rwanda, the project would improve capacity Technology of local transfer and NA manufacturers of + technological self- improved stoves reliance and would use acquired skills even after the program crediting period. Comments accompanying own sustainable development matrix: Other pollutants: The EcoZoom Stove and Water Filter (LifeStraw® Family 2) will be tracked using barcodes and GPS coordinates of end-user household so that collection of damaged stove and water filter. The project developer is committed to ensuring the units are properly collected and recycled according to environmental regulations and standards under control of Rwanda Environment Management Authority (REMA) to ensure environmental protection. Through controlled collection of the EcoZoom Stove and water filter, the project developer will establish a centre for both distribution and collection in every District under the program intervention area to ensure monitored distribution and proper collection of expended units. Plastic parts from damaged water filters will be recycled inside country while the high ultra- filter membrane will be sent back to the filter manufacturer abroad. Additionally, spent units will no longer allow water to pass through the filter, thereby reducing the chance that these units will be re- used. Expired EcoZoom Stoves will be collected and recycled at District repair and replacement centres. D. 2. Stakeholders Blind sustainable development matrix Chosen Mitigation Relevance to Preliminary Indicator parameter and measure achieving MDG score explanation Negative impact: score ‘-’ in case negative If relevant, impact is not copy mitigation Parameter fully mitigated, Check measure from defined by score ‘0’ in www.undp.org/mdg and Gold Standard ‘Do No Harm’ Coordinating and case impact is www.mdgmonitor.org indicators of assessment, Managing Entity planned to be sustainable and include fully mitigated Describe how your development mitigation Rated by indicator is related to measure used Stakeholder No change in local MDG goals to neutralise a participants impact: score score of ‘-’ ‘0’ Positive impact: score ‘+’ Relates to MDG 7 – Parameter: ensuring environmental Emissions using Air quality sustainability since fuel consumption clean air is an as a proxy for environmental resource total emissions. on which we all depend Stakeholder participants + N/A agree that burning firewood for cooking and boiling water using traditional stove (three stone and Rondereza) releases more emissions than cooking food using EcoZoom stove and treating water with LifeStraw® Family Parameter: Number of people served with a Relates to MDG 7 – satisfactory level since clean water is an of potable water environmental resource according to the on which we all WHO standard. depend. It also relates Water quality and N/A to MDG 1,4,5 related to Stakeholder + quantity health since it provides participants clean drinking water to agreed that this help improve indicator will be livelihoods and overwhelmingly eradicate poverty improved as a result of clean water from LifeStraw® Family units Parameter: decreased non- Relates to MDG 7 – renewable fuel N/A ensure environmental wood as a proxy sustainability and for decreased Soil condition specifically to the goal deforestation + of changing the quantity leading to of land area covered by decreased forest. erosion. Stakeholder participants agreed that fuelwood harvesting causes deforestation which in turn causes erosion. By reducing firewood consumption for cooking food and totally switch off boiling water, the project will contribute in scaling down deforestation. Consequently, soil conditions will be improved. Stakeholder participants agree that this indicator will not be significantly Other pollutants N/A N/A impacted by the 0 project and that a recycling plan is a critical component of the program. Parameter: decreased non- renewable fuel wood as a proxy for decreased deforestation. Relates to MDG 7 – Participants specifically to the goal agree that fuel Biodiversity N/A of changing the quantity 0 wood harvesting of land area covered by causes de- forest forestation which in turn threatens biodiversity. By reducing pressure on forests, the project will contribute in preserving biodiversity. However, external factors could be powerful enough to neutralize the impact of the program against this indicator Stakeholders in the meetings appreciated that CHWs and local stove Quality of manufacturers N/A NA 0 employment will be employed. However, quality of employment is not expected to be a direct result of this program Parameter: Money and time saved by users from reduced consumption of Relates to MDG 1 – firewood. eradicate extreme poverty and hunger. Stakeholder The project promotes participants Livelihood of the monetary savings N/A agree that saved + poor among users through fuel costs and saved fuel and time that time could be and sustainably used for other provides clean water for income user families. generating activities to improve household welfare. Energy is a cross- Parameter: cutting issue that Number of Access to pertains to MDG 1 households affordable and eradication of poverty served N/A + clean energy and hunger; MDG 3, services promotion of gender Participants equality and confirmed that empowerment of targeted end women; MDG 7 users are ensuring environment currently burning sustainability. firewood using inefficiently stove such as three stone and Rondereza. By distributing filters that remove the need to boil water with biomass and improved cooking stove that don’t release smoke and reduce biomass consumption this indicator will be positively impacted. Stakeholders felt that this indicator was particularly important since the products featured in the Relates to MDG 3, project Human and promotion of gender disproportionatel institutional N/A equality and y affect women, + capacity empowerment of since women are women usually responsible for cooking and the gathering and treatment of water for the household. Parameter: Number of new jobs created as a Relates to MDG 1 result of the Quantitative eradicating extreme project employment and poverty and hunger. By distribution and + income generating new jobs, monitoring. generation increased employment will contribute. Participants N/A agreed that the fact the program will employ roughly 2500 Community Health Workers and some technical staff during distribution, monitoring and replacement phases will a source of income for a good number of people which can be monitored. Participants felt that the project represents a direct investment Balance of in the public payments and N/A N/A + health and future investment of Rwanda and may vastly reduce health sector costs. Participants agreed that by introducing the new technology to Rwanda, the project would Technology improve capacity transfer and of local + technological self- N/A N/A manufacturers of reliance improved stoves and would use acquired skills even after the program crediting period. Comments resulting from the stakeholders blind sustainable development matrix: The stakeholders’ blind assessment was overwhelmingly positive, with the one caveat that there was concern among several about the disposal of the water filter and cookstove units during the replacement phase. This concern was anticipated by the project developer and has been incorporated into the program design. Give analysis of difference between own sustainable development matrix and the one resulting from the blind exercise with stakeholders. Explain how both were consolidated. The project developer anticipated positive effects from the project related to the following: air quality, water quality and quantity, soil conditions, livelihood of the poor, access to affordable and clean energy services, quantitative employment and income generation and technology transfer. Similarly, participants in the stakeholder consultations found all the above will be positively impacted by the project, in addition to human and institutional capacity (gender) and balance of payment indicators, which participants felt would also be directly impacted by the project and therefore gave a score of positive. D. 3. Consolidated sustainable development matrix Mitigation Relevance to Chosen parameter Preliminary Indicator measure achieving MDG and explanation score Negative impact: score ‘-’ in case negative If relevant, Check impact is not copy mitigation www.undp.org/md fully mitigated, Parameter defined by measure from g and score ‘0’ in Coordinating and Gold Standard ‘Do No Harm’ www.mdgmonitor. case impact is Managing Entity indicators of assessment, org planned to be sustainable and include fully mitigated Consolidated CME development mitigation Describe how your and Stakeholder measure used indicator is related No change in scoring to neutralise a to local MDG impact: score score of ‘-’ goals ‘0’ Positive impact: score ‘+’ Relates to MDG 7 Parameter: – ensuring Emissions using fuel Air quality N/A environmental consumption as a + sustainability proxy for total since clean air is emissions. an environmental resource on which Stakeholder we all depend participants agree that burning firewood for cooking and boiling water using traditional stove (three stone and Rondereza) releases more emissions than cooking food using EcoZoom stove and treating water with LifeStraw® Family Parameter: Number Relates to MDG 7 of people served with – since clean a satisfactory level of water is an potable water environmental according to the WHO resource on which standard. we all depend. It Water quality also relates to N/A Stakeholder and quantity MDG 1,4,5 related participants agree that to health since it this indicator will be + provides clean overwhelmingly drinking water to improved as a result help improve of clean water from livelihoods and LifeStraw® Family eradicate poverty units Stakeholder participants agree that fuelwood harvesting causes deforestation which in turn causes erosion. By reducing firewood consumption Relates to MDG 7 for cooking food and – ensure totally switch off environmental boiling water, the sustainability and project will contribute Soil condition N/A specifically to the 0 in scaling down goal of changing deforestation. the quantity of Consequently, soil land area covered conditions will be by forest. improved. However long term improvements depend on several other external factors (anthropogenic and environmental) that cannot be influenced by the project. Therefore an overall score of neutral was assigned. Expended filter and cookstove units will be retrieved upon replacement Stakeholder and recycled. participants agree that Project this indicator will not proponent is be significantly committed to impacted by the Other pollutants N/A ensuring that project, but suggested the units are close monitoring of properly recycling of expended 0 collected and units during recycled and replacement phase. will work closely with REMA to ensure it. Parameter: decreased non- renewable fuel wood as a proxy for decreased deforestation. CME and participants agree that fuel wood harvesting causes de- Relates to MDG 7 forestation which in Biodiversity – specifically to turn threatens 0 the goal of biodiversity. By changing the reducing pressure on N/A quantity of land forests, the project will area covered by contribute in forest preserving biodiversity. However, external factors could be powerful enough to neutralize the impact of the program against this indicator Quality of Though there will be employment job creation during the deployment and monitoring of the project, the quality of employment is not 0 expected to be N/A N/A impacted as a result of this project. It is beyond the scope of the project to monitor the quality of employment and hence neutral score has been given. Parameter: Money Relates to MDG 1 and time saved by – eradicate users from reduced extreme poverty consumption of and hunger. The firewood. project promotes monetary savings Livelihood of the CME and stakeholder N/A among users + poor participants agree that through saved fuel saved fuel costs and and time that and time could be used for sustainably other income provides clean generating activities to water for user improve household families. welfare. Parameter: Number of households served CME and participants agreed that targeted Energy is a cross- end users are cutting issue that currently burning pertains to MDG 1 firewood using eradication of inefficiently stove such poverty and Access to as three stone and hunger; MDG 3, affordable and Rondereza. By N/A promotion of + clean energy distributing filters that gender equality services remove the need to and empowerment boil water with of women; MDG 7 biomass and ensuring improved cooking environment stove that don’t sustainability. release smoke and reduce biomass consumption this indicator will be positively impacted. Human and N/A Relates to MDG 3, Stakeholders felt that 0 institutional promotion of this indicator was capacity gender equality particularly important and empowerment since the products of women featured in the project disproportionately affect women, since women are usually responsible for cooking and the gathering and treatment of water for the household. Though CME will incorporate gender related indicators into its monitoring plan, an overall score of neutral was assigned due to the external factors contributing to this indicator. Parameter: Number of new jobs created as a result of the project distribution and monitoring. Relates to MDG 1 CME and stakeholder eradicating participants agreed Quantitative extreme poverty that the program will employment and hunger. By employ significant + and income generating new number of staff during generation jobs, increased distribution, employment will monitoring and N/A contribute. replacement phases will a source of income for a good number of people which can be monitored. CME and participants agreed that the project represents a direct investment in the Balance of public health and payments and N/A N/A 0 future of Rwanda and investment may vastly reduce health sector costs. Nevertheless, a number of external factors may influence improvements in balance of payments and therefore impact monitoring of this indicator will not be undertaken. It is then attracted to neutral rate. CME and participants agreed that by introducing the new technology to Rwanda, the project Technology would improve transfer and capacity of local + technological N/A N/A manufacturers of self-reliance improved stoves and would use acquired skills even after the program crediting period. Justification choices, data source and provision of references A justification paragraph and reference source is required for each indicator, regardless of score Air quality Project beneficiaries will be exposed to fewer hazardous air pollutants through reduced emissions of carbon monoxide and total suspended particulate matter. Air pollution from cooking food and boiling water with firewood is a key risk factor for developing acute lower respiratory infections as well as many other respiratory, cardiovascular, and ocular diseases. In Rwanda, exposure to indoor air pollution (commonly measured by the pollutants carbon monoxide and fine particles) is responsible for the annual loss of 48,100 disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) per year1. The DALY is a standard metric used by the World Health Organization (WHO) to indicate the burden of death and illness due to a specific risk factor. The WHO also estimates that exposure to indoor air pollution is responsible for 12,500 deaths per year in Rwanda. Water quality and quantity Forty-nine (49) percent of Rwanda population have no water treatment method2, which is the cause of many waterborne diseases. The water filter (LifeStraw® Family 2) high quality ultra-filtration mechanism has been proven to be 99.99% effective in reduction of protozoa, bacteria and viruses and complies with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1 World Health Organization; Indoor Air Pollution: National Burden of Disease Estimates: http://www.who.int/indoorair/publications/indoor_air_national_burden_estimate_revised.pdf 2 Rwanda Demographic Health Survey 2010 guidelines for microbiological water quality. Stakeholder participants agreed that this indicator will be overwhelmingly improved as a result of clean water from LifeStraw® Family. Soil condition The project will contribute to the preservation of woody vegetation cover by reduced fuel wood consumption which prevents soil erosion. However long term improvements depend on several other external factors (anthropogenic and environmental) that cannot be influenced by the project. Similarly the project activity does not directly contribute to any changes in the pollution level of soil. So neutral scoring was assigned and consequently impact monitoring of this parameter will not be undertaken. Other pollutants The project activity does not produce any noise or light pollutants that are harmful and are disturbing to the project area households3. Biodiversity Reduction in fuel wood consumption reduces the pressure on preferred species for fuel wood thereby conserving habitats. The major source of the energy consumed in Rwanda today still comes from wood (94 percent).4 However, these changes are long term and any improvements depend on a large number of external factors (anthropogenic and environmental) which cannot be significantly influenced by the project so neutral scoring is assigned. Consequently impact monitoring of this parameter will not be undertaken. Quality of employment Though there will be job creation during the deployment and monitoring of the project, the quality of employment is not expected to be impacted as a result of this project. It is beyond the scope of the project to monitor the quality of employment and hence neutral score has been given. Livelihood of the poor Decreased firewood and charcoal consumption for cooking food and boiling water will save time and money for end users. Families can use these saved resources to meet other basic household needs, more productive works, education and better child care. Fuel saving, time saving and better health due to improved water quality and decreased level of indoor air pollution are indicators for better livelihood. Access to affordable and clean Users of EcoZoom stove and water filter (LifeStraw® Family energy services 2) will have access to clean water and improved cooking stove, both of which are more efficient than cooking food and boiling water by the traditional method of using firewood. Human and institutional capacity No direct change is anticipated with respect to improved primary education, or empowerment of discriminated parts of the population can be identified for the project. However, here may be an effect on gender dynamics and awareness on ecologic issues. This is very difficult to measure due to external factors. However, the CME will incorporate gender related indicators into the program monitoring plan. 3 DelAgua CDM Local Stakeholder Consultations. July 17, 2012 4 www.rema.gov.rw/soe/chap8.php. Quantitative employment and There will be several thousand jobs created during the income generation deployment and monitoring and replacement phases of the project, which will directly benefit a number of families. Balance of payments and The project represents a direct investment in the public investment health and future of Rwanda and may vastly reduce health sector costs. However, a number of external factors may influence improvements in balance of payments and therefore impact monitoring of this indicator will not be undertaken. Technology transfer and By introducing the new technology to Rwanda, the project technological self-reliance would improve capacity of local manufacturers who will be trained on repair and replacement of improved stoves and would use acquired skills even after the program crediting period. In addition, the program intends to expand to domestic manufacturing of improved cookstoves. References can be an academic or non-academic source, such as a university research document, a feasibility study report, EIA, relevant website, etc. SECTION E. SUSTAINABILITY MONITORING PLAN E. 1. Discussion on Sustainability monitoring Plan Discuss stakeholders’ ideas on monitoring sustainable development indicators. Do people have ideas on how this could be done in a cost effective way? Are there ways in which stakeholders can participate in monitoring? Several of the points highlighted by comments during the stakeholder consultation could be monitored by stakeholders. During the stakeholder consultations and field performance trials (pilot), DelAgua discussed the need for people to use the EcoZoom stoves and LifeStraw® units not only for their own health and the environment, but for the project to be sustained by carbon financing over the 20-year period. DelAgua also discussed how Community Health Workers could help by encouraging their neighbors to use the product and serving as ambassadors for the project in their respective communities and helping to monitor the use of the product and its replacement. E. 2. Discussion on continuous input / grievance mechanism Stakeholders felt that the input mechanisms described below were sufficient. No additional comments were received, and the methods were not revised. [See Annex W] Discuss the Continuous input / grievance mechanism expression method and details, as discussed with local stakeholders. Method Chosen (include Justification all known details e.g. location of book, phone, number, identity of mediator) Continuous Input / PP will provide process Village Chiefs hold regular Grievance Expression books with Village community meetings (called Process Book (Umudugudu) Chiefs in Umuganda) where input on the Phase I sites program may be provided by end- users. PP will provide a notebook to record input/grievance from these meetings. Telephone access PP has provided Each poster contains phone number educational posters for for local DelAgua staff to ask Phase I end-user questions on the technologies or households containing provide feedback. End-users are phone numbers of encouraged to “beep” (call and hang DelAgua staff: Innocent: up) and DelAgua staff will call back so 0788661002; Jean- that they don’t need to use airtime. Pierre: Internet/email access DelAgua website: www.delaguahealth.com will have a forum for input/grievance expression Nominated Independent Mediator (optional) All issues identified during the crediting period through any of the Methods shall have a mitigation measure in place. The identified issue should be discussed in the revised Passport and the corresponding mitigation measure should be added to sustainability monitoring plan SECTION F. DESCRPTION OF THE DESIGN OF THE STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK ROUND [See Toolkit 2.11] A summary of this report will be translated into Kinyarwanda and provided to the attendants of the meeting and to the stakeholders that were invited but who did not attend the meeting. Most of the attendees left some contact data and many of them have access to the internet, so the general way of providing the report will be to provide it on the DelAgua Health and Development Program website (www.delaguahealth.com) and inform the stakeholders how to download it. In cases that a download is impossible, printed versions will be available at the DelAgua office in Kigali. These documents will be shared prior to validation and any comments will be incorporated based on this feedback round. ANNEX 1. ORIGINAL PARTICIPANTS LIST ANNEX 2. ORIGINAL EVALUATION FORMS